|
550 - Tragic Posture and Tragic Vision: Against the Modern Failure of Nerve |
Tragic Posture and Tragic Vision: Against the
Modern Failure of Nerve
By Louis A. Ruprecht, Jr.
New York, Continuum, 1994. 288 pp. $29.95.
Louis A. Ruprecht, Jr., who teaches in the Department of Religion at Emory University, has written this book to argue for the thesis that "the gospels, at least some of them, are Christian tragedies." This thesis is, of course, contrary to conventional wisdom. We are accustomed to thinking of the Gospels as good news, not bad news, despite the passion narratives they contain. Ever since Dante, we have believed that the Christian story is a comedy rather than a tragedy because it ends well. So, Ruprecht's thesis may initially seem shocking.
The book consists of an introduction, four chapters, an afterword, and two appendices. In the introduction, Ruprecht draws a distinction between tragic posture and tragic vision. He associates the tragic posture with such contemporary thinkers as George Steiner and Alasdair MacIntyre, who view modernity in terms of a narrative of decline and fall toward
|
552 - Tragic Posture and Tragic Vision: Against the Modern Failure of Nerve |
an apocalyptic ending. Against such thinkers, Ruprecht wants to insist that "tragedies do not necessarily end badly. " In a genuine tragic vision, he urges, we encounter redemptive suffering. The book's four chapters present four such tragic visions.
Chapter one, which is called "Sophocles' Tragic Vision: Antigone; or, The Niece Was Not," presents a careful reading of the text of Sophocles' Antigone. Chapter two, "Hegel's Tragic Vision: Athens and Jerusalem," defends a view of Hegel according to which he tried to achieve a synthesis of Greek philosophy and Christianity. Chapter three, "Nietzsche's Tragic Vision: Dionysus against the Crucified," attacks Nietzsche's view that we must choose between Greek culture and Christian culture, a view neatly encapsulated in Nietzsche's aphorism that if a temple is to be created, then a temple must be destroyed. Chapter four, "Mark's Tragic Vision: Gethsemane," presents an exegesis of Mark 14:32-52 that portrays the betrayal of Jesus as a tragedy.
The afterword contains some concluding reflections on the tragic vision. Appendix one, called "The Athenian Parthenon: On Building and Destroying Temples," uses a brief history of the Parthenon to provide a witty refutation of a literal version of the Nietzschean saying if a temple is to be created, then a temple must be destroyed. Appendix two, "The Problematic Ending of Mark's Gospel," discusses the- scholarly controversy about whether Mark ends, without any resurrection appearances, at Mark 16:8.
It is impossible in a brief review to do justice to Ruprecht's richly detailed examinations of the visions of the human condition to be found in the writings of Sophocles, Hegel, Nietzsche, and Mark. It is worth noting that he takes controversial stands on a large number of questions of textual interpretation, and, so, specialist scholars are likely to dispute his conclusions on many points of detail. However, it seems to me that Ruprecht is right about one big point. He draws a distinction between passively accepting suffering as a fate that befalls one and actively using suffering to forge for oneself a destiny. The latter response to suffering can, I think, be redemptive, and it is to be found in both Greek tragedies and Christian stories. Thus, I am persuaded that there can be Christian tragedies; indeed, I have elsewhere argued that Shusaku Endo's novel Silence is a distinctively Christian tragedy. I also find attractive the prospect of interpreting some episodes in the Gospel narratives in tragic terms. But I do not think that Ruprecht always succeeds in avoiding the danger of trying to make too much thought tragic in nature. At one point, he says that "feminism is to my mind, along with the theologies of liberation in a third world context, one of the most exciting areas of authentically tragic thought today." Such a remark suggests that the category of tragedy is being expanded to such an extent that it threatens to become vacuous.
Ruprecht's book seems intended for an audience consisting chiefly of his fellow scholars. It is dense with complex arguments and by no means easy to read. However, it would be a pity if it were read only by scholars,
|
553 - Tragic Posture and Tragic Vision: Against the Modern Failure of Nerve |
for it addresses questions that should interest anyone concerned about the future of our culture. In his discussion of Nietzsche, Ruprecht puts one of them this way: "Can we have our Greeks and our Christians, too?" Aquinas and then Hegel tried to show that we could have both. Following in their footsteps, Ruprecht aspires to argue for a positive answer to the question in a way that will convince the readers of our own postmodern era.
Philip L. Quinn
University of Notre Dame
Notre Dame, IN