Richard Bauckham on Ruth

Richard Bauckham has published essentially the same discussion of Ruth in different contexts:

Is the Bible Male? The Book of Ruth and Biblical Narrative, Grove Biblical Series 2 (Cambridge: Grove Books, 1996).

‘The Book of Ruth and the Possibility of a Feminist Canonical Hermeneutic, Biblical Interpretation 5, 1 (1997), 29-45.

Gospel Women: Studies of the Named Women in the Gospels (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2002), 1-16 (‘The Book of Ruth as a Key to Gynocentric Reading of Scripture’).

In short, Bauckham suggests that an otherwise androcentric text (Ruth, in this case) essentially authorises a gynocentric reading of that text.

The book of Ruth, he avers, can play a crucial role in forming a feminist hermeneutic that accepts the normative function of the canon even while resisting much of its androcentricity. Seen from a gynocentric perspective, the social structures evident in Ruth are made to work to the advantage of women and are not as patriarchal as they may first appear.

He agrees with recent studies on Ruth which hold that the story speaks with a female voice, providing a woman’s perspective on ancient Israelite society, making visible what would otherwise remain invisible. This is true throughout Ruth, he holds – except for the genealogy at the end, which speaks with a male voice. But the male voice does not undermine the female perspective of the rest of the book; rather, it is ‘exposed by the female voice of the narrative as pitifully inadequate in its androcentric selectivity’ (Gospel Women, 11).

According to Bauckham, set against the rest of the book, the genealogy in 4:18-22 effectively says:

‘This is how the usual men’s perspective views the history of this period of David’s ancestors. This is the way you readers are accustomed to thinking of this period. Everything the narrative you have just read has taught you to see as important is here left out’ (Is the Bible Male?, 17).

He concludes:

‘In effect this gives Ruth an important canonical function, that is a function in relation to the rest of the contents of the canon of Scripture… By revealing the Israelite women’s world which is elsewhere invisible in biblical narrative it makes readers aware of the lack of this women’s perspective elsewhere, expanding the hints and filling in the gaps which they can now see to be left by the narratives written purely or largely from a male perspective’ (Is the Bible Male?, 17).

According to Bauckham, such a gynocentric perspective may be found in other biblical texts, including the gospels, in which the dominant perspective is more or less androcentric.

This does not result in establishing a canon with the canon, he holds. Rather, it means that gynocentric texts have the role of relativising the androcentrism of texts, not in overturning androcentric texts in every respect… so that the canon itself can be seen as ‘correcting’ or subverting androcentrism in Jewish and Christian thought and practice, instead of promoting such androcentrism.