Pages

12 August 2013

A Review of “Spirit of Talk Talk” (Various Artists)

Posted by at 10:39 PM
Unlike most other musical groups of the period, I can actually recall my first experience of Talk Talk. It was the video for their song, “Life’s What You Make It” from their 1986 album, The Colour of Spring. In it, footage of the band playing the song in the middle of the woods at night is interspersed with fleeting images of various forest animals all scurrying or slithering about —spiders, centipedes, foxes, frogs—a celebration of life in the shadows. The metaphor made an impression on me for some reason. The deceptively simple three-note bassline, obstinately repeating under a shifting harmonic context. I dug it.
Unbeknownst to me, they had already released a series of records before that one. In fact,  The Colour of Spring was a turning point in their artistic trajectory, the sign of things to come. The artistic growth spurt would last for half a decade. Both of the band’s subsequent albums: The Spirit of Eden (1988) and Laughing Stock (1991), would turn out to be among the most beautiful albums of the rock era (in my opinion). This was my point of entry, though. I would eventually go on to retroactively seek out their pre-Colour work, but it didn’t quite measure up to these two albums, which for me still hold up as some of the most sublime music ever recorded. Their earlier albums seemed to me to adhere much too closely to new wave pop formulae. I think that their label had been trying to ride in the wake of the then-supremely-popular Duran Duran (who they opened for in a 1982 tour). Their music was thus fairly derivative.
That gravy train wasn’t meant to last, however. Spring was a commercial success, but then came came Spirit of Eden. This album was a complete departure, bearing very little resemblance to anything they had previously done. In fact, it bore very little resemblance even to pop music itself. It was such a radical anomaly that the label had no idea what to do with it. Owing as much to modern jazz and avant garde chamber music as to rock music, it was an album which defied categorization (it still does). Naturally, their label was less than happy, even after (or, rather, because) Spirit was followed by Laughing Stock, which was even bolder in its iconoclastic conception. It was even starker than its predecessor. The record label by this point protested the group’s artistic liberation every step of the way. Lawsuits and much public rancor ensued, hastening the group’s demise. They officially disbanded in 1992.

. . . . . . . . . . . .


Now here we are more than twenty years later and a tribute album has now been released. It went completely unnoticed by me until very recently. It features many artists that the band has inspired over the years.
I doubt that I am the only person that cringes a bit when he hears about a new tribute album. I generally try to avoid tribute albums. The artist being celebrated almost doesn’t matter. Almost. But, of course, just because it is a Talk Talk tribute album, though, I had to listen to this one at least once, but I have to confess that my expectations were very low. Granted, a tribute album is an enormous expression of love and respect by definition, I realize that, but a tribute album always risks becoming a mere maudlin emulation of something, a facsimile of an object of adoration. They usually seem forced and cold to me. Some ambitious executive producer farms out individual songs to contemporary groups, and inspiration winds up taking a back seat to production. There have been exceptions to this tendency, of course. The series of tribute albums by Hal Willner to Nino Rota (Amarcord - '81), to Thelonious Monk (That's the Way I Feel Now - '84), to Kurt Weill (Lost in the Stars - '85), to Disney film music (Stay Awake - '88), and to Charles Mingus (Weird Nightmare - '92) stand out for me as tribute albums that were exceptional musical productions, they are examples of the genre at its best, and I think that they succeeded as standalone works largely because they celebrated the pioneering/experimental spirit of their respective subjects more than their individual styles. In Hal Willner’s records, the notes on the staff paper are almost (but not quite …) an afterthought. In the passionate fumblings and stumblings, in the audacity of experimentation, in the plottings of all the possible vectors of exploration in real-time, once-or-twice-removed from their original form and function … in that moment lies the deeper beauty and mystery of music for a musician. That’s where the essence is, in the spirit of the process of making music out of thin air. It is a wise producer who pays more attention to the sympathetic “magic” aspects of a performance than to the technical recreation of any planned idea.
As listeners and lovers of songs, we are privy to the eventual results of the methods that musicians use, but not to all of the calculus involved, those hermetic negotiations that songs are subjected to on the way to becoming finished songs, way before tape starts rolling. As listeners we experience songs already framed into forms. We may vicariously feel some of that overflowing spirit that willed a song to exist in the first place, of course, but a song is more than the sum of the notes comprising it.
In the case of arranging Talk Talk music for a tribute, one may as well try to arrange for wind chimes. That is to say, you gotta let the music just be, in a Cageian sense. Talk Talk's music is an uncaged, serendipitous beauty. It is the simple beauty of animals in a forest, a beauty ultimately beyond method—beyond will. Could a tribute album do this band justice? I kind of expected a Talk Talk tribute to consist of over-produced, No-Doubt-y “It’s My Life”s.
Thankfully, this is not the case. This may be no Hal Willner tribute album  (which are generally more cohesive and unified works), but, in fact, I was quite pleasantly surprised at how much I actually wound up liking this record. The collection is titled “The Spirit of Talk Talk,” which is an allusion to Talk Talk’s Spirit of Eden album title, obviously, but it is aptly named on yet another level. As in the Hal Willner productions I mentioned above, it is the spirit of the music that is being celebrated here, rather than a rock band. It’s the spirit within the songcraft that comes through on almost every performance. That's the essential point. “Spirit” thus makes a perfect working title, a pretty good metaphor to use for this anthology.
This spiritual aspect is evident from the first acapella phrase of “Wealth,” which opens the first disc (performed by Lone Wolf). It is an invitation, a direct appeal to Spirit to come and …

“Create upon my flesh …”

Nice.
This version of the song evokes the talcum-suspended-in-midair approach to arrangement that late Talk Talk originally did so beautifully, without trying to emulate it overtly. It takes a certain amount of restraint to cull such beauty from such simplicity: an organ note here; a guitar counterpoint there. This minimalist approach is taken by most of the artists featured, resulting at times in very evocative and beautiful music in its own right.
Zero 7 adds a hint of a pulse and some subtle electronic treatments to Mark Hollis’ “The Colour of Spring” (the song from his solo album), both of which add an exotic flavor to the originally sparse solo-piano accompaniment.
Dum Dum Girl,” one of my favorite early-period Talk Talk songs, is still recognizable as a pop tune almost thirty years after the original, but listening to Recoil’s version made me realize one of the reasons that Talk Talk’s work probably had to metamorphose in the way that it did from new wave synth-heavy music to all-acoustic tone poems. The electronic technology available to musicians in the early eighties was very crude. MIDI was still relatively new and unexplored ground. Nuance and any sense of timbral control was therefore hard to achieve in real-time on those old electronic instruments. Consequently, there was a certain monotone homogeneity to the overall sound and style of most new wave artists. They were handicapped, so to speak, by the tools that were available at the time. I’m almost certain that this limitation is one of the primary reasons for the transformation the band experienced. Hollis’ songs began to become more introspective. They required intimacy, and instead of trying to make synthesizers sound more human, it was a lot easier (and infinitely more musical) to simply use traditional orchestral textures in new contexts. Had early-80s synths been capable of this requisite nuance, Talk Talk might have stayed rooted in them. It’s just a speculation, but the 2012 synth sounds on Recoil’s version of “Dum Dum Girl” on this album make me wonder how much warmer those early tunes might have sounded if Talk Talk (and many other new wave bands) had had modern touch-sensitive instruments and personal computers at hand.
After Duncan Sheik’s laid back version of “Life’s What You Make It,” an understated interpretation of the song which uses a hammer dulcimer in place of the original guitar riff to good effect, we come to one of the album’s most elaborate and original arrangements, Fyfe Dangerfield‘s version of “The Rainbow.” Sharing almost nothing but the melodic outline and general form with the original rendition, his performance is rich in orchestral and choral textures. Dangerfield retains the song’s urgency and feeling of desolation despite it being completely different clay in his hands.  I swear there's a ghost in that track somewhere. It is quite a lovely and unique expression. Curiously, this same song appears unexpectedly just a few songs later (on the same disc, even, which is surely intentional), this time a very loose and stark plodding performance by Zelienople. The repetition makes for an interesting synoptic contrast. Personally, I find the former to be more musically satisfying, but that's just me.  
I won’t go on describing each tune in this album. Get it. There are two CD's worth of gorgeous interpretations here. It would take thousands of words. I might as well try to describe a sunset (as one reviewer of Talk Talk's Laughing Stock once poetically put it).  Suffice it to say that it was an unexpected joy to come across this tribute all these years after Talk Talk had an enormous effect on me. Apparently, they had a similar effect on many other musicians. This is a great tribute to one of the most underrated yet most creative bands of the late twentieth century. Spirit of Talk Talk is infused with spirit from beginning to end.


Rating: ★ ★ ★ ★ ☆ (4 of 5 stars)

27 May 2013

GºMark as Midrash and Mimesis

Posted by at 2:31 PM
During the course of a recent discussion regarding my review of Ehrman's book on mythicism, I made the following comment, "Every single episode of the narrative of Jesus' life in the gospels has a counterpart (i.e. is a re-run) in the O.T."

A recent commenter who seems to be pretty convinced of Jesus' historicity responded with the proverbial raised eyebrow, "Really? I know that a lot of the stories are indeed copied from (or built upon) the OT but every single episode?"

Like most people, I'm prone to exaggerate now and then in the heat of discourse. But in this case, although it is a slight exaggeration, it's really not far from the actual truth of the matter, and I think that this is fairly easy to demonstrable.  But lest this become too gargantuan a task to tackle in a blog, however, I'm going to limit the discussion to only the Gospel of Mark, the shortest gospel, for the sake of coherency and brevity (and my sanity).  The contents of the Markan narrative are to a great extent determined, both materially and verbally, by a desire to show fulfillment. As with Mark, so with the others, though. If it can be shown that Mark, the primary model for all the subsequent gospels is but a midrash on the Jewish Bible, then it follows that this aspect is inherited by the rest.  After all, 85% of GMark is embedded in GMatthew practically word for word. (Even GJohn follows its basic narrative/chronological structure.)

So … after almost a week of bible-geeking, I present the following outline.  It is basically a pericope-by-pericope analysis of the Gospel of Mark, outlining and highlighting the tendentious nature of the author's sculpting the  story of Jesus out of Old Testament clay—with a good sprinkling of Cynic ideology for spice. It will be by no means a complete or exhaustive analysis— just a mere outline, in fact— but I think that even my cursory reading will suffice for the intended purpose.

So here we go …
Let us open our Bibles to the Gospel of Mark

The Gospel of Mark(its use of the Old Testament and other mythic sources)

For the sake of  space and organization, I formatted the scrollable window with an accompanying color code legend right next to it, so that it will be easy to reference my notation at any time.   
.
Mark  1

•  1:1–8  • John the Baptist announces the coming of Jesus
          :2    - -   Isa 40:9,  Exo 23:20, Mal 3:1 (reference to Elijah - see parallel in Mal 4:5)
          :3    - -   Isa 40:3
          :5           - -   The Jordan continues the typology of the Elijah-Elisha cycle from 2 Kings 2 and 2 Kings 5
          :6    - -    John ß as an Elijah figure … Zech 13:4, 2Kings 1:8,
- -    Reflects Exodus typology … Hosea 2:14?, 12:9?, and Isaiah 40–51?
          :8           - -    Isa 61:1

II  •  1:9–11  • John Baptizes Jesus
         :10   - -    Isa 64:1?
         :11   - -    Psalm 2:7, Isa 42:1, Gen 22:12, 2 Sam 7:14, Eze 1:1
         :11         - -    The voice from the skies was a traditional Jewish  way to describe public communication from God.

III  •  1:12–13  • Satan tempts Jesus in the wilderness
          :12–13    - -    A period of forty days was traditional in O.T. biblical stories to mark significant transitions (e.g. Noah’s rain in Genesis 7, Elijah’s flight in 1 Kings 19, and cf. the forty years of Israel’s wondering in the Exodus).
         :13   - -    Elijah type continues … 1Kings 19:5–8, … Isa 11:6–9?,  Exo 23:20?

IV •   1:14–15  • Gospel of the kingdom …         
- -    A vivid summary of the main themes in the story of Jesus he is telling. 
         :14   - -    Mark usually begins a new episode with a brief mention of place or time (other examples from this chapter: 1:16, 1:21, 1:29, 1:32, 1:35). With brief comments such as these, the narrator skillfully moves from one scene to another, which suggests that the author used the technique as a way to combine stories that earlier had been told separately.

V •   1:16–20  • Jesus calls Peter, Andrew, James, and John    µ
         :16   - -    Jer 16:16
         :16–20    - -    1Kings 19:19–21
         :17    - -    "fishing" was a common symbolic theme in the well-known mysteries of Orpheus.
:16–20 - -    there is also the problem of verisimilitude here: They simply dropped what they were doing —working—(oh …and dropped their families too!) because Jesus—a total stranger!— said   “follow me“?  This is a hero myth, not a biography. Of these, only three disciples out of “the twelve” have any significant role in the story at all. Well … make that four … Judas.

VI •  1:21–28  • Jesus exorcises demons in a synagogue in Galilee µ
         :22   - -    Jer 8:8–9
         :24   - -    1 Kings17:18 (Elijah’s first appearance in Writ)
:21–28 - -    The fact that there is a dearth of evidence of Pharisaim and/or synagogues in Galilee region until after 70 C.E. brings up problems with historical verisimilitude 
- -    All three exorcisms in Mark (cf. 5:1–20, and 9:25–27) have the same formal pattern … suggesting  a compositional doubling rather than historical basis. 

VII •   1:29–34  • Jesus heals Peter’s mother-in-law     µ
         :29–34   - -    Hellenic Asclepius features
- -    Likewise (see previous pericope), all healings in Mark have the same tri-partite formal pattern … suggesting  a compositional rather than historical basis. 

VIII    1:35–39  • Tour of Galilee                
- -    transitional narrative

IX •   1:40–45  • Jesus heals a leper      µ
         :40   - -    2Kings 5
- -    enter the theme of the “Messianic Secret” (Dan 12:4?, 12:10?)
 :40–45 - -    the writer of Mark uses the messianic secret to explain why nobody knew who Jesus was. Such a position amounts to a confession that no one had ever heard of Jesus in the writer's own time. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Mark  2
X • 2:1–12  • Jesus heals a paralytic lowered through the roof  µX
         :1–12   - -    2Kings 1:2–17
         :5–10   - -    cynic Chreia?
- -    the idea of illness as punishment for sin traces back to Job
- -    this passage introduces the title “Son of Man" (Son of Adam, more precisely), a title which Paul never uses, and so is likely a Markan borrowing of Daniel 7 and/or 1 Enoch for the sake of messianic thematic development

XI •   2:13–17  • Jesus calls Levi the tax collector          X
         :13–17   - -    doublet of the calling of Peter, Andrew, James, and John … 1Kings 19:19–21
                 - -    Jesus in this passage is prone to interactions with sundry impure people, sinners and undesirables, calling into question his religious observance, which is a skillful segue  into the next pericope …
         :17              - -    Jesus uses a well-known proverb to compare his action to the work of a doctor. This is an example in Mark of how Jesus closes off debate with a striking word or pithy statement. His opponents are given no further chance to respond (this makes historicity questionable). Indeed the whole scene seems to have the function of setting up the punch line.   The next two episodes—2:18–22, and 2:23–28—are further instances of this formal type, which scholars have variously labeled “chreia” or “pronouncement story” or “apophthegm.” 

XII •   2:18–22  • Fasting/bridegroom saying          X
         :19–20         - -    Isa 61:10?, Isa 62:5?,
         :22   - -    two parallels from the Mishnah  (Aboth 4:20)*
- -    Job 32:18–19

XIII •   2:23–28  • Conflict about plucking grain on the Sabbath  X
          - -    the theme of carelessness regarding Sabbath observances is introduced …
        :23–26   - -    1 Sam 21:3 (from this cited passage comes also the “five loaves” used in a later pericope … the hypertextual relations throughout the Gospel of Mark is strong evidence of an advanced literary mind at work)
- -    Jesus gets the name of the High Priest wrong

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  3
XIV •   3:1–6  •  Jesus heals a man with a withered hand  µ
         :2   - -    1Enoch?
         :1–5   - -    1Kings 13:4–6

XV •   3:7–12  • Crowds follow Jesus      
         :7–12   - -    transitional passage  - - huge multitudes? - -  if he attracted this many people, why did no one mention ever meeting him? Problem with verisimilitude

XVI •   3:13–19  • Jesus appoints the twelve
         :13–19   - -    Exodus 18:2–26
- -    Joshua 4:1–8

XVII  •  3:20–30 • Beelzebub/house divided/strong man bound X
         :21   - -    Zech 13:3
         :22   - -    2 Kings 1 (a passage Mark has already paralleled twice, in the opening account of John the Baptist, who resembled Elijah, and in the story of the paralytic in Mark 2)

XVIII • 3:31–35  • Who is my family?        X
         :31–32   - -    Psalm 39:9 (LXX)
         :35  - -    This is also a Cynic citationFor example, when Alexander, the king of Macedonians, was asked by someone where he kept his treasure, he said: "In these!" pointing to his friends.  Theon of Alexandria, Progymnasmata: Chreia 158-161

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  4
XIX •   4:1–2  • Teaching in parables
        - -    transitional passage
        :2   - -    Ezekiel 17:2, 20:49; 24:3

XX •   4:3–9  •  Parable of the sower (the first parable) 
        :3–8                 - -    Isa 40:24 (same metaphor, different context), 61:11?
 :3–9 - -    Seneca - "Words should be scattered like seed; no matter how small the seed may be, if it once has found favorable ground, it unfolds its strength, and from an insignificant thing spreads to its greatest growth."(Epistles, 38:2, cited in Mack 1988,p159) (cf. the mustard seed parable - Mark 4:31)
        :9   - -    Isa 32:3, Psalm 135:17?, Proverbs 20:12?, Isa 30:21?

XXI •    4:10–12  • Purpose of parables
        :11–12   - -    Isa 6:9 (LXX) a favorite early Christian quote to explain why Jews didn’t convert … in other words, only the insiders got the teachings regarding the kingdom of God … but then, which insider left any kind of record? 

XXII •   4:13–20  • Parable of the sower explained …   
- -    … to “insiders” who still don’t get it 
- -    transitional passage to keep the reader up to speed 

XXIII •   4:21–25  • Lamp sayings
        :21                    - -    2Kings 8:19?, 2Chron 21:7?
        :23                   - -    Isa 32:3

XXIV •    4:26–29  • The kingdom is like seed scattered     X
        :26–29   - -    Hosea 2:21–23
- -    Psalm 125:5–6?
        :29   - -    Joel 3:13
- -    the passage highlights the common contrast between unpromising beginnings and great endings. It is a literary construct.

XXV •    4:30–32  • Parable of the mustard seed
        :30   - -    Isa 40:18
      :31   - -    Seneca again   … **see above - Mark 4:3–8
        :31–32              - -    Ezekiel 17:23, Daniel 4:12, 20–22
       :32   - -    Ezekiel 17:23 … Ezek 17 in general talks about a tree that represents the kingdom - v. 24
- -    Daniel 4:19–21

XXVI •    4:33–34  • Use of parables                  
- -    echo of  Mark 10:12 to transition from the parable cluster  to the nature-miracle.

XXVII •    4:35–41  • Jesus stills a storm    µ
      :37   - -    Jonah 1:4?
     :38   - -    Jonah 1:5 … (like Jonah, Jesus is sleeping) … the frightened disciples awaken him with words reserved for God in Psalm 44:23
- -    Mark, who is careless with the geography of Judea, erroneously refers to the Galilee as a “the sea” (Luke correctly calls it a lake) … this makes historicity questionable 
        :39   - -    supernatural stilling of wind, as if wind were the product of a demon
- -    This miracle is based on Jonah, which is in turn based on Psalm 107:25–30
:35–41 - -    Dennis McDonald argues in “The Homeric Epics and the Gospel of Mark” that this passage is originally based on Odysseus' experience with the bag of winds, with which it has several parallels.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  5
XXVIII •    5:1–20  •  The Gerasene demoniac   µ
- -    problem with Mark’s sense of the geography of Judea
         :2–5   
                               - -    Isa 65:1–7
:1–20 - -    Macdonald argues that this scene is based on the story of Polyphemus the one-eyed giant from the Odyssey … and the story of Circe, who turns Odysseus' men into pigs.

XXIX •    5:21–43  • Jarius’ daughter and the bleeding woman   µ
- -    The dearth of evidence regarding synagogues in the Galilee before 70 raises the question of verisimilitude.
         :22  - -    Jarius’ name means “he will awaken” or “he will enlighten”, both of which would be appropriate for a leader of a synagogue, and which also suggests a literary maneuver
         :25   - -    Lev 12:7?
         :27   - -    Ezek 44:19
         :21–43          - -    2Kings 4:8–37


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  6
XXX •    6:1–6  •  Jesus is rejected at home 
         :4 - -    rejected prophets in the OT are paralleled in Hellenistic culture as well …Dio Chrysostom, in Discourses (47.6), says "it is the opinion of all philosophers that life is difficult in their native land."  The Suffering Servant in Isaiah 53:3 (LXXis also “without honor” (atimos)

XXXI •    6:7–13  • Jesus sends out apostles
         :7   - -    Deut 19:15?, Num 35:30?
- -    1Cor 9:2–6?
- -    The later rabbinical tradition is full of itinerant rabbis operating in pairs as well
         :8–10   - -    This is textbook Cynicism
- -    The stress on poverty and simplicity is also reminiscent of Socrates’ trial.
         :13   - -    Disciples effectively use the power bestowed on them by Jesus, but a little while later they doubt and don’t understand his power? They were just using it!  Verisimilitude?

XXXII •    6:14–29  • Herod executes John the Baptist
         :22   - -    a parody of Esther
         :23   - -    Herod, as Roman client, has no power to subdivide his kingdom. Verisimilitude?
         :14–29             - -    parallels story of Elijah, Ahab, and Jezebel in 2 Kings 17:22
:14–29 - -  this scene is punctuated with the typical motifs of folktale: (the comely dancing girl, the extravagant oath, the scheming wife). 

XXXIII •    6:30–44  • Feeding of the 5000    µ
         :34   - -    Num 27:15–18
             - -    Ezek 34:1–10 (note “son of man”)
- -  Zech 10:2
         :38   - -    Num 21:17
         :30–44   - -    2Kings 4:38–44
- -    The scene evokes God’s care for the starving Israelites during the Exodus.  The allusion is strengthened by Jesus’ command to have the people arranged in groups of hundreds and fifties, reminiscent of the wanderings of the people of God in the desert. 

XXXIV •    6:45–56  • Jesus walks on water   µ
         :48   - -    “fourth watch” - The Romans divided the night into four watches; the Jews into three. Verisimilitude?
         :51–52   - -    They are astonished even though they’ve already seen this miracle before— the pericope is a doublet of Mark 4:35–51, which is in turn based on Jonah

XXXV •    6:53–56  • Sick healed in Genneraset      µ     
- -    transitional passage describing healings in very general terms, reminds me of old-time movies where a map appears on the screen and there's a thick line representing the traveling protagonist moving across it …

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -


Mark  7
XXXVI •    7:1–23  •  Pharisees criticize disciples for eating with   unclean hands
           :1   - -    Evidence of any Pharisaic presence in Galilee prior to 70 C.E. is scant.  
         :2–3                   - -    Anachronism: such  purity was only required for holy things during this period.
         :3–4   - -    This is clear evidence that Mark was writing for an audience that had very little knowledge of standard Judaisms. 
         :6–8   - -    Isa 29:13–18 (Paul cites 29:14 in 1Cor1:19… this text was of import to early Christians)
         :6, 19, 21   - -    the word for “heart” derives from this same Isaiah passage.
         :10   - -    Exod 22:12, 21:17 (LXX)
         :13   - -    Rabbinic texts suggest that vows may be broken for issues like Korban
         :14   - -    2Sam 20:16?, Isa 6:9?, Macc 2:65?
         :19   - -    Anachronism: food issues were still extremely divisive later - see 1Cor - Why, if Jesus had already ruled on this?
- -    verisimilitude?

XXXVII •    7:24–30  • The Syro-Phoenician woman    µ
         :27   - -    This saying is likely anachronistic, dating to a time after the “parting of the ways.”
         :28   - -    Tendentious wordplay, betrays compositional, rather than verbal/anecdotal aspect.
         :25–30   - -    Elijah/Elisha narrative cycle 1Kings 17: 8–24
- -  2 Kings 4:18–37
         :31   - -    Mark’s sense of geography is confused again.

XXXVIII  •    7:31–37  • Stammering deaf man healed    µ
         :32   - -    Isa 35:3–6
         :37   - -    Isa 42:18–19
:31–37 - -    techniques of magical or folk healing in antiquity: touching the ailing part, use of spit, command in an exotic language (exotic to Mark’s audience, at least, who were demonstrably not Jews).  


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  8
XXXIX •    8:1–10  • Feeding of the 4000 (this time)    µ
         :10   - -    Dalmanoutha - no one knows what this is.
         :1–13             - -    2Kings 4:38–44 (again, the Elijah/Elisha cycle)
- -  a doublet of Mark 6:30–44

XL •    8:11–13  • Refusal to give a sign     
- -  a transitional passage that closes the second feeding story and sets up the warning that follows
         :11–13           - -    No signs! - except signs are given all along (!) Verisimilitude?
         :12   - -    compare with 1 Cor 1:22–23

XLI •    8:14–21  • Leaven of Herod and the Pharisees
         :15   - -    Exod 12:18, compare with 1 Cor 5:8
         :17–18   - -    Isa 6:10
- -    Deut 29:2–4
- -    compare with 1 Cor 2:9?
         :18   - -    Jeremiah 5:21
- -    this pericope is based on fictional events in Mark 6

XLII  •    8:22–26  • Jesus heals the blind man   µ
         :22–26   - -    parallels Mark 7:31–37, which parallels, Isa 35:5–6
:22–26 - -  there exists an inscription to the Greek healing god Asclepius at Epidarus which says that after a certain Alcetas of Halice was cured of blindness the first thing he saw were trees.  

XLIII •    8:27–30  • Jesus fesses up
         :27–33   - -    parallels the Sanhedrin trial at Mark 14:53–65
 :27–33             - -  the scene has elements of Greek drama (the recognition motif) … literary device

XLIV •    8:31–32a  • Predicts resurrection 8:31-32    µ   •?
- -  supernatural foresight 
- -  this is the middle meat in a "markan sandwich" structure, or chiasmus … if pericopes 43–45 are recombined into a single pericope (as scholars like to do—pericope and even verse numbers are arbitrary to begin with—… hell, early manuscripts didn't even separate words!), then the parallels with Mark 14 is the link to the O.T.

XLV •    8:32b–33  • Get thee behind me Satan!          
         :33  - -    compositional relation to Mark 4:14–15 (it closes out the supernatural prediction)

XLVI  •   8:34–38  •  “Deny self and take up your cross!”
         :34  - -    Epictetus the Cynic philosopher (50-125): "If you want to be crucified, just wait. The cross will come. If it seems reasonable to comply, and the circumstances are right, then it's to be carried through, and your integrity maintained." 
:34–38 - -  classic Cynicand Stoic positions
 :34–38 - -  echoes of the death of Socrates as well
- -  2 Mac 6:18-31?, 4 Mac 5:4? 2 Mac 6:19, 23, 28?
- -  Lev 16:29
         :35–37   - -    Epictetus: "Socrates cannot be preserved by an act that is shameful...It is dying that preserves him, not fleeing."
         :38   - -    Deut 32:5
         :38   - -    Rebuking God’s people as adulterous and sinful is a theme of biblical prophets going back to Hosea, who charged that Israel’s “going after other gods” was tantamount to committing adultery. 

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mark  9
XLVII •    9:1–4  • Transfiguration (w/Moses & Elijah)    µ
         :2    - -    Exodus 24:13-18
         :4 - -  Moses and Elijah appear, one or both of whom some people expected to return at the end of days (Moses’ burial place was never found and Elijah ascended to heaven without dying, so they were both, in a sense, still alive).

XLVIII  •     9:5–8  • Peter’s mistake
         :4–13 - -  2Kings 1

XLIX •    9:9–13  • Question about Elijah
         :9 - -  supernatural prediction of resurrection 
         :11–13 - -  Mal 4: 5–6
         :11–12 - -  compare with Romans 11:2–3

L •    9:14–29  • Jesus heals epileptic that disciples had failed to heal   µ
         :14 - -  Where do the scribes suddenly disappear off to?
         :17                           - -    2Kings 4
         :19                            - -    Deut 32:5

LI •     9:30–32  • Jesus’ second passion prediction    µ
         :30–32   - -    Isaiah 53 (LXX)
- -  Dan 7:25, 12:2
- -  supernatural

LII  •     9:33–37  • Be like children          
- -  contradicts Paul? — response to Paul? … Compare to  1 Cor 13:11

LIII •     9:38–41  • Whoever is not against us is with us …      X
         :38–40                     - -    Numbers 11:26–29
         :40   - -    Cicero Speeches 41: "For us, all are opponents except for those who are with us; for Caesar, all are his own in so far as they are not against him."
         :41  - -    anachronism - refers to future Christians

LIV •     9:42–50  • If your hand offends you, cut it off; salted with fire  …  X
         :44, 46  - -    spurious
         :43–47   - -    compare with 1Cor 12:48
         :48   - -    Isa 66:24
         :50  - -    Lev 2:13?, Numbers 18:19?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mark  10
LV  •     10:1–12  • Teaching on divorce
         :1  - -    geographical error - also … verisimilitude? (huge crowds)
         :3                              - -     Moses didn't leave any explicit command regarding divorce; in Deut 24:1-4 the right of divorce is already recognized by that time.
         :4  - -    Deut 24:3
         :6  - -    Genesis 2
         :7  - -    ("and be joined to be his wife" is missing from many manuscripts)
         :12                           - -    anachronism 
- -  no one challenges Jesus’ extreme (mis)-Judaism(!) here. Historicity is doubtful. 

LVI •    10:13–16  • Kingdom belongs to children  …     X   
:13–16 - -  Chreia within Markan forms is maintained.
- -  compare to Mark 9:33–37

LVII •    10:17–31  • fat man through the eye of a needle …       X
         :19  - -    “Do not defraud” is not a commandment. Again, the fact that no one challenges him indicates ahistoricity.
         :27  - -    Zechariah 8:6 (LXX)
         :28–31                     - -    parallels Mark 3:31–35

LVIII •    10:32–34  • Jesus’ third passion prediction    µ
- -  this enigmatic transitional passage, a supernatural prediction, is obviously not historical. 

LIX •     10:35–45  • James and John wish to be on Jesus’ right hand side
         :35–37  - -    Psalm 110:1–2?
          - -    compare with 1Cor 6:1–3
         :38                           - -    with its reference to the later martyrdom of James, is clearly unhistorical, for it is either an anachronism or supernatural prophecy.
          - -    Psalm 11:5–7
         :42–45  - -    Isaiah 11:10 (LXX)
         :45 - -    Dio Cassius attributed a similar saying to Otho: "I shall free myself [that is, take my own life], that all may learn from the deed that you chose for your emperor one who would not give you up to save himself, but rather himself to save you."
:35–45 - -  The Roman armies are said to have had a practice called devotio in which a single individual offered up their life to the gods during a battle. The sacrifice was made to both friendly and enemy gods, in the hope of impressing them and gaining their favor. Decius Mus was the most famous example. Examples of life-offerings as ransom from Jewish history are also known.
:35–45 - -  Cynic overtones throughout. 
- -  anachronism: there is an awareness of subsequent traditions of persecution here which signals that there is no support for historicity in this pericope

LX •     10:46–52  • Healing blind Bar-Timaeus the beggar    µ
- -  Bar-Timaeus  means “son of poverty” or “son of  the unclean”  . . . compare to Jarius’ daughter’s pericope.
         :47  - -    Testament of Solomon 20:1
         :51  - -    Isa 29:18?, 35:5–6?, 61:1? (LXX)
         :52  - -    parallels Mark 5:21–43
         :46–52  - -    Timaeus is the title of a well known dialogue of Plato, in which a discourse on vision is featured.  There’s a clear parallel here.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mark  11
LXI •     11:1–11  • Jesus enters Jerusalem as Messiah
         :1–6  - -    Mark 11:1-6 is a doublet of Mark 14:13-16
         :1   - -    Zech 14:4
         :2–7               - -    Zech 9:9
         :2   - -    1 Kings 1:33-48
         :3   - -    Targum Onqelos speaks of the Messiah and of his people's building the Temple, with righteousness round about him and doers of the Law through his doctrine. The pseudo-Jonathan Targum speaks of the Messiah who girds his loins and arrays the battle against his adversaries. Improbably the ass is his war-horse, as it were. He cannot look at anything unclean... The Neofiti Targum is similarly un-Christian. The fragmentary Targum says the king Messiah will bind his loins and go forth to war against those that hate him. The targumic evidence is no doubt the most impressive: that is what the Synagogue heard on the Sabbath. From ancient times the "colt tied to the vine" symbolized the Messiah's style of warfare, and we can surmise that anyone tying up a colt, if he is addicted to messianism, hopes that the Messiah's outriders will come and untie it -no casual event for them, as Burkitt and Lightfoot imagined"(J. Duncan and M. Derrett [2001] p128-9).
         :8   - -    The scene as presented is historically implausible.
         :8                     - -    1 Macc 13:51–52
         :9   - -    Psalm 117:25 (LXX), 148 (Masoretic)
         :7–10 - -    2 Kings 9:13
         :11      - -    2 Kings 9:14-21
         :1–11    - -    1 Sam 9:3–6, 1 Sam 10:2–7
         :1–11    - -    The scene may also represent a common convention of Greek drama, the hyporcheme, as proposed by Bilezekian (1977): "The hyporcheme was a well-known dramatic convention practiced especially by Sophocles. It consisted of a joyful scene that involves the chorus and sometimes other characters; takes the form of a dance, procession, or lyrics expressing confidence and happiness; and occurs just before the catastrophic climax of the play. The hyporcheme emphasizes, by way of contrast, the crushing impact of the tragic incident."(p127)

LXII  •     11:12–14  • Jesus curses the fig tree
         :13     - -    Micah 7:1, Psalm 37:35-6?, Hosea 9:15-6?, Jeremiah 8:13?, 29:14?, Joel 1:7?
         :12–1  - -    The most venerated object in Rome was a huge fig tree that, according to tradition, was as old as the city itself, having sheltered its founder Romulus and his brother Remus when they were infants. Tacitus reports that in 58 A.D. this tree suddenly began to wither (Annals XIII.58), causing widespread consternation.

LXIII •     11:15–19  • Jesus cleanses the temple      X
         :15       - -    Nehemiah 13:8-9, Mal 3:1, Hosea 9:15?
         :16       - -    Nehemiah 13:8-9
         :16       - -    This story also has an interesting parallel in 2 Maccabees. There the story is told of the high priest Onias III, revered by the Jews for his righteousness. In 2 Macc 4:32-4 Onias attempts to prevent Menelaus from stealing vessels from the Temple. Later Onias is killed after being tricked into leaving his sanctuary near Antioch. After his death, in 2 Macc 15:11-16, he visits the Jewish leader Judas Maccabeaus in a dream. Like Jesus, he saved the Temple vessels from being plundered, was betrayed and killed, and then appeared to his followers after his death. Strangely, Josephus informs us that his brother's name was Jesus (later Jason). Daniel 9:26, the famous passage where the messiah is "cut off," is generally held to refer to Onias III.
         :16        - -    Josephus (Against Apion, 2.8.106) writes:  “Lastly, it is not so much as lawful to carry any vessel into the holy house; nor is there any thing therein, but the altar [of incense], the table [of shew-bread], the censer, and the candlestick, which are all written in the law; for there is nothing further there, nor are there any mysteries performed that may not be spoken of; nor is there any feasting within the place.”
         :17        - -    Isa 56, Jeremiah 7:11
         :17       - -    historically untenable … chreia form 
         :17        - -    Malachi 3:1, Hosea 9:15, Zechariah 14:21
               - -    The story parallels the Elijah-Elisha cycle in Kings

LXIV •     11:20–25  • Fig tree reprise   µ
         :23        - -    compare with 1 Cor 13:2
                - -    The idea of forgiveness of trespasses was a common one in antiquity. 

LXV •     11:27–28  • Objections raised by the Sanhedrin 
         :27        - -    How plausible is it to be walking the temple right after one has  trashed it? 
                - -    The anecdote is literary in form.

LXVI • 11:29–33  • Sources of authority/baptism from God?  
                   - -    Socratic method employed by Jesus. The analysis of the two choices: “authority from heaven” versus “authority from man” in his opponents' minds (first-person style), reflects the passage’s literary character.   


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  12
LXVII •     12:1–12  • Parable of the tenants
         :1        - -    Isaiah 5:1–2
         :6        - -    A supernatural prophecy of Jesus' death.
         :10–11    - -    Psalm 118
         :12       - -    2 Kings 9:22-10:27
                - -    parallel to the Eljah-Elisha Cycle: the Markan narrative makes the chief priests and scribes the equal of the priests of Ba'al or the 70 sons of Ahab.

LXVIII •     12:13–17  • Render unto Caesar what is Caesar’s
         :13–17   - -    In the usual Markan fashion, Jesus' adversaries do not press him for an elaboration, nor, despite being experienced quibblers and wits themselves, do they take a quill from their own quiver and direct it at Jesus. The depiction of the Pharisees in Mark is historically implausible.
         :17       - -    compare with Romans 13:1-7
         :17       - -    Eccl 8:2?

LXIX •     12:18–27  • Sadducees ask about marriage after resurrection
         :20–21      - -    Sarah in the Book of Tobit, who also had seven husbands who had died
         :25       - -    compare with 1 Cor 15:35-50
         :26       - -    Jesus quotes  Exodus 3:6

LXX •     12:28–34  • What is the greatest commandment?
         :29–30 - -    Deut 6:4
         :31       - -    Lev 19:18
         :31       - -    this was a thought common in antiquity in many cultures. The followers of Pythagoras, who transmitted dozens of sayings, some of which resemble those of early Christianity, had perhaps the most beautiful formulation:  "What is a friend? Another I."
         :33       - -    Hosea 6:6, 1 Sam 15:22

LXXI •     12:35–37  • David’s son
         :35       - -    Jesus just trashed the Temple, and now he is sitting in it, teaching, surrounded by a great throng. Yeah, right.
         :36–37     - -    Psalm 110 (109 LXX)  … no one thinks to correct or question Jesus’ audacious assertion
                - -    Mark does not agree with the tradition that Jesus was a son of David

LXXII •     12:38–40  • Denouncing the scribes
                - -    Jeremiah-like exortation
         :39       - -    anachronism

LXXIII •     12:41–44  • Poor widow gives all to the temple
         :42–44      - -    Elijah-Elisha Cycle in 2 Kings … 2 Kings 12:5-17
         :42       - -    this story has parallels in the rabbinic literature, ancient Greek writings, and Buddhist tradition


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  13
LXXIV •     13:1–2  • Temple destruction predicted      µ?
         :2       - -    Micah 3:13?, Jeremiah 26:18?
         :2–14         - -    2 Kings 10:26-28 (Elijah/Elisha cycle)

LXXV •     13:3–27  • Sign O’ the Times
         :3       - -    on a mount facing the Temple mount … this opposition recalls Zechariah 14, Joel 3, and Ezekiel 38-9
         :4       - -    Daniel 12:6
         :7       - -    Daniel 2:28
         :8       - -    Isa 19:2 and/or 2 Chronicles 15:6
         :8       - -    Zech 114:5
         :12       - -    Micah 7:6, or 4 Ezra 6:24
         :14       - -    Daniel 9:7, 12:11, Genesis 19:17, 1 Macc 1:54, 1 Macc 6:7, 1 Macc 2:28
         :19       - -    Daniel 12:1
         :22       - -    Deut 13:2–4
         :24       - -    Isa. 13:10
         :25       - -    Isaiah 34:4
         :26       - -    Daniel 7:13
         :27       - -    Zech 2:10, Deut 30:4, Zech 2:6

LXXVI •     13:28–31  • Lesson of the fig tree
         :28       - -    Isaiah 34:4
         :31       - -    combines Isaiah 51:6 and 40:8

LXXVII  •     13:32–37  • Parable of the watcher
         :32       - -    Zech 14:7
         :35—37   - -    the Watchers from 1Enoch?
      - -    literary construct.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - 

Mark  14
LXXVIII •     14:1–2  • Plot of the Sanhedrin        
            - -    transitional passage "meanwhile, back at the ranch"…

LXXIX •     14:3–9  • Jesus is anointed
         :3       - -    Psalm 133:2
         :7       - -    Deut:15:1-11
         :1–10   - -    2 Kings 9:1-13 

LXXX •     14:10–11  • Judas agrees to betray Jesus
         :10–11        - -    (Judas’ betrayal is likely to be a fictional markan construct for many reasons to be detailed on request. It's a fascinating complex having to do with the role of a scapegoat in atonement. This is very much an ancient concept in Judea and in the neighboring tribes.)

LXXXI •     14:12–16  • Last supper preparation         µ
         :12 - -    confused understanding of Jewish practices.
         :13–16         - -    doublet of Mark 11:1-6
         :12 –25 - -    1 Samuel 10:1-7
            - -    supernatural foreknowledge
LXXXII •     14:17–21  • Prediction of betrayal     µ
         :17–31 - -    supernatural prophecy / not historical
         :20       - -    Psalm 41:9 (LXX 40:5), Psalm 55?

LXXXIII •     14:22–26  • Institution of Lord’s supper
         :22–24 - -    compare with  1 Cor 11:23-25
        - -    Mark's use of this cultic tradition is strong evidence of his acquaintance with Hellenistic Christianity (aka Pauline)
         :24       - -    Exodus 24:8, Zech 9:11, Jeremiah 31:31 Psalm 23:5?
         :24       - -    “has been poured out”?  … Even though he hasn’t been killed yet?
         :25      - -    Isaiah 25:6
         :26       - -    Zech 14:4

LXXXIV •     14:27–31  • Jesus predicts Peter’s betrayal    µ
         :27       - -    Zech 13:7
         :28       - -    This prediction of an appearance in Galilee is a strong indicator that the current ending of Mark is truncated.
         - -    supernatural foreknowledge surrounds all three prophecies 

LXXXV •     14:32–42  • Garden of Gethsemane
         :33       - -    Psalm 55?
         :33       - -    Parallels the transfiguration
         :34       - -    Jonah 4:9 (LXX) , Ps 42:6,12;  Psalm 42:50 (LXX)
         :34       - -    “interior monologue” literary technique often employed by Greeks and Romans
                            - -    Mark lets us in on Jesus’ inner thoughts … verisimilitude?
         :37       - -    Jonah 1:6
         :38       - -    Psalm 51:12?
         :38       - -    parallel with Mark 13:34-37
         :32–42 - -    Once again the Elijah/Elisha cycle forms the skeleton of this narrative - 1 Kings 19:1-5
       
LXXXVI •     14:43–50  • Jesus is arrested
         :43–44           - -    2 Sam 20: 9-10
         :32–52 - -    2 Sam 15-16
            - -    another possible parallel is a first century Jewish document, the Wisdom of Solomon 2:12–24. Even if the writer of Mark did not use it as a source, it illustrates some of the currents in Jewish traditions at the time.

LXXXVII •  14:51–52  • The young man who fled naked   
            - -    will be echoed at the empty tomb in Mark 16 … is it just a setup for that punch line? … this scene continues to confound readers, who are given no information about this enigmatic symbol ('Secret Mark' notwithstanding)

LXXXVIII •    14:53–65  • Jesus is tried before the Sanhedrin
         :53       - -    many historical verisimilitude problems here
         :53       - -    Psalm 22
         :54       - -    Psalm 38:11
         :55       - -    Daniel 6:4
         :56       - -    Psalm 27:12
         :57       - -    Psalm 35:11
         :58       - -    Isaiah 40-60, Ezekiel 40-48
         :58       - -    compare with 1 Cor 3:16-7
         :61–62  - -    Daniel 7:14 and Psalm 110:1
         :61       - -    Psalm 38:13-4?, 39:9? … doubled in Mark 15:5. May also be influenced by Lam 3:28-30
         :61       - -    Jesus’ death also fulfills Cynic and Stoic ideals and models of the proper way to die
         :62       - -    Book of Watchers (3rd century BCE)
         :62       - -    Psalm 110:1,  also cited in Mk 12:36
         :63       - -    2 Kings 11:14, 18:37, 19:1 … There is no question that the writer of Mark is intimately familiar with the text of Kings and has used it throughout his gospel. 
         :64       - -    anachronistic  misunderstanding of the concept of blasphemy?
         :64       - -    parallels between the trial of Zachariah, son of Baruch, described in Josephus' The Jewish War
         :65       - -    Isaiah 50:6, 1 Kings 22
         :53–65          - -    doublet of the interrogation by Pilate in Mark 15:1-20
                - -  It is difficult to reconcile Mark’s picture (i.e. secret court sessions, at night, with trumped-up and contradictory evidence) with known Jewish judicial procedures.  

LXXXIX •     14:66–72  • Peter’s denial          •?
         :66–72 - -    The scene represents supernatural prophecy fulfillment. Note the beautifully ironic touch of Jesus' prophecy of Peter's denial coming true even at the very moment when Jesus is being mocked for being a false prophet. This is literary, not historical.   Also … Paul makes no mention of this event in his epistles, despite his clashes with Peter.  As the “bread part” of a chiasmus, this scene’s form is just literary (and is tied to the O.T. if the pericope is recombined as a single chiasmus).

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  15
XC •     15:1  • Jesus before Sanhedrin
         :1       - -    Isaiah 3:10 (LXX), Isaiah 53:6, 12 (LXX), Psalm 27:12 (LXX)

XCI  •     15:2–15  • Jesus before Pilate
         :2–15       - -    the Pilate interrogation is necessarily fictional - due to the fact that it appears to be a private affair, and Jesus would die soon after . . . giving no interviews in the interim in which to describe the banter they may have shared
         :5       - -    Isaiah 53:7
         :5       - -    Psalm 38:11–14
         :5       - -    Pilate functions as an effective double of King Herod in Mark 6:14-29
         :6–7          - -    Barabbas story … very likely fictional … many historical verisimilitude problems
         :6–7              - -    thematically linked to Esther (Jesus and BarAbbas in the roles of Mordecai and Haman)
         :7       - -    "who had committed murder in the insurrection." — What murder? What insurrection? Knowing which insurrection the writer referred to would also enable exegetes to refine their estimates of the dating of these events.  … that potentially useful bit appears to have been cut from the script, however
         :10       - -    Wis 2:24 (pthonos)
         :14       - -    echoing Isaiah 53:9
         :2–15 - -    Josephus, Book VI of Wars

XCII  •     15:16–20  • Mockery of the soldiers
         :1–20 - -    Mark 15:1-20 is essentially a doublet of Mark 14:53-65
         :17       - -    problems with historical verisimilitude
         :19       - -    Isaiah 50:6 … fulfillment of the supernatural prophecy given in Mark 10:33-4
         :19       - -    1 Kings 22:24-27?
                - -   the overall frame of this chapter and the next (15 & 16) is Daniel 6
                - -   The trial before Pilate was necessary simply because historical credibility demanded it. The Romans, rather than the Jews, executed criminals by means of Crucifixion, which was the specific method cited by Paul earlier, so being stoned by the Jews themselves for some ambiguous blasphemies at the novel’s climax wasn’t really an option.  It would have made no sense.
    :16–20    - -   Philo's Flaccus, Book VI:36–39
    :16–20    - -   folk Rei Momo motif (the “mock” king is dead)

XCIII •     15:21  • Simon of Cyrene        
         :21        - -    problems with historical verisimilitude: would soldiers really force someone to do this on a sabbath/holiday?

XCIV  •     15:22–23  • Wine refused
         :23        - -    Proverbs 31:6-7?
         :23        - -    Psalm 69:22

XCV  •     15:24  • Dividing Jesus’ garments
         :24        - -    Psalm 22:18
         :24        - -    Zech 12:10

XCVI •     15:25–26  • INRI           
         :25         - -    compare to 1 Cor 5:7
         :25         - -    a not-so-oblique reference to Jesus 'messiahship' (Davidic or otherwise) 

XCVII •     15:27–28  • Two thieves
         :27         - -    a chiasmic echo of Mark 10:40

XCVIII •     15:29–32  • Mockery
         :29–32        - -    Psalm 22:8
         :30         - -    this mockery completes a tryptich in which Jesus is mocked by Jewish guards as a prophet (14:65), Roman guards as a King (15:16-20), and Jewish onlookers as Messiah. It is therefore a deliberate literary tactic.

XCIX •     15:33–37  • Jesus dies
         :33         - -    Amos 8:9, Exodus 10:21-23?, Jeremiah 15:9?
         :33         - -    Darkness is frequently associated with the deaths of heroes in antiquity. Even certain famous rabbis had their deaths embellished in this way
                - -   consistent three-hour segments throughout the passion narrative suggest literary intention
         :34         - -    Psalm 22:1
         :36         - -    Psalm 69:21
         :37         - -    This verse is most probably theological in origin, since breath and spirit were associated across the ancient world … Judea too
         :37         - -    Psalm 18?

C •        15:38  • Temple veil torn        µ?
         :38         - -    echo of Mark 1 baptism scene … literary device
         :38         - -    not historical; Josephus would have mentioned it

CI •       15:39  • Centurion’s declaration      µ?
         :39         - -    this recognition is most probably fictional, for it completes a doublet that may well be the highest level framework for the Gospel of Mark, and it occurs at the crucifixion scene, which no disciples attended, and could not report on

CII •      15:40–41  • Women Watched
                - -   why do these women suddenly appear out of nowhere? Like Joseph of Arimathea, were they edited out of the story until the very end? As with Joseph, what was Jesus’ relation to them?
         :40         - -    Psalm 38.11 LXX
         :40–41 - -    In The Iliad three women lament from the walls of Troy as Hector is slain, watching from afar.

CIII •      15:42–47  • Jesus’ Burial
         :42         - -    the writer makes a basic error of Jewish tradition at this point
         :43        - -    Josephus, Life 76 ?
         :43         - -    2 Chronicles
         :46         - -    Isaiah 22:16
         :47         - -    redactional, since it is necessary for the women to know where Jesus is laid so they can visit him to anoint him
         :47         - -    Isaiah 53:9
        - -   In this scene Mark skillfully establishes: 1)that Jesus really died, 2) that he died a quick death ,and 3) that the women knew where he was buried, all three of which could otherwise have been  questioned by those doubting the reports of Jesus’ crucifixion.  Very skillful literary feature.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

Mark  16
CIV •     16:1–8  • Angelic appearance to Mary Magdalen      µ
         :1         - -    problems with historical verisimilitude  … e.g. “bought” spices? On Passover weekend? Before dawn?
         :2         - -    Hosea 6:1-2?, 2 Kings 2:17, and Jonah
         :3         - -    Gen 29:3
         :5         - -    Tobit 5:14
         :5         - -    2 Macc 3:26?
         :5         - -    Empty tomb and resurrection stories abound in the Hellenistic milieu: Chaereas and Callirhoe, Xenophon's Ephesian Tale, Leucippe and Clitophon, Daphnis and Chloe, Heliodorus' Ethiopian Story, The Story of Apollonius, King of Tyre, Iamblichus' Babylonian Story, and in places in Apuleius' The Golden Ass.
         :7         - -    doubles Mark 14:28
         :7       - -    Gold Leaf of Hipparion
         :8         - -    The Satyricon by Petronius - section 140.frg2
         :8         - -    Similarly, Plutarch relates a spoof of the motif in popular theatre, where a performing dog acts out its death and resurrection on stage to the delight of the emperor Vespasian ("On the Cleverness of Animals," Moralia 973e-974a). In order to have something to spoof, the motif must predate the year 80.
         :6–8        - -    2 Kgs 13: 20-1 … the Elijah/Elisha cycle
         entire passion    - -    Daniel 6


                      -fin-

Legend:
.
µ = miracle story
.
X = chreia
.
Pagan or apocryphal precedent 
.
 = no O.T. and/or  Pagan precedent
.
Incongruity
.

Whew!
O.K. … in addition to noting the places that have no literary/folkloric precedent, I also mapped out some places where miracle stories, apophthegms, and incongruities occur in the narrative. These serve as a reminder of the very literary character of the Gospel of Mark. The higher criticism has revealed that this gospel, rather than being a haphazard collection of remembered sayings and deeds of Jesus transmitted orally (per James Dunn) or the written down memoirs of a companion of Cephas (per Papias), is actually a carefully constructed composition, one which employs many detectable strategic literary techniques (inclusio, chiasmus, cliff-hangers, etc) to tell its story.   This is no memoir, this is an aretology. The gospels are myth historicied, not the other way around.

But I digress …

Anyway  …
I divided the gospel of Mark into 104 pericopes (although this numbering is arbitrary, it is a convention I'll use for the  sake of convenience), marked by large ascending Roman numerals on the left hand side, at the start of each pericope.  When this symbol () appears, it means that I could not link any O.T. or other literary precedent in antiquity to that particular pericope.
Out of the 104 pericopes, fifteen are 's.

'Aha!'   — The shrewd reader will say.
'There you go … not "every single episode", like you said,  is such a counterpart.

Not so fast, though … I invite the reader to look closely at those pericopes.
They are pericopes 4, 8, 15, 22, 26, 35, 40, 44*, 52†, 56†, 66, 78, 87, 89*, and 93†. You'll notice that these pericopes are transitional in nature. That is, though not entirely tangential, they serve merely to facilitate the flow of the story as interludes and segues from one episode to the next.

Notable exceptions to this trend are pericopes 52 & 56 (which deal with a single theme: i.e. children), and pericope 93, which is part of the crucifixion scene (where Simon the Cyrene carries Jesus' cross for him—a single verse). This last incongruous bit is more likely a sign of the author's creative invention than a historical report, however.  Mark's is in fact the earliest narrative there is about the crucifixion of Jesus. I think it is a Markan fabrication (prompted by Paul's virtual silence on the matter?).   The children-themed bits are kind of a novelty, though.  Regardless, this essentially leaves us with about 2% of the pericopes which have no O.T. or other literary or folkloric precedent.  This demands some sober reflection.

And so, while I may be slightly exaggerating when I say that "every single episode" in the gospels (please note that a pericope is not necessarily an "episode," btw) is derived from the sort of 'quote-mining' that I described …  the person who would claim that this practice is found only "here and there" in the gospel … that is, the person that thinks that this practice is not normative …

that person is just wrong.

Given the above outlined analysis, certain truths and patterns regarding GMark are clearly discernable:
  1. The events of Jesus' life in Mark are drawn primarily from the Old Testament, but also from Jewish writings, popular philosophies of the Roman empire, and similar sources. 
  2. From this O.T. typological perspective, the writer has Jesus cross Palestine as Elijah, and then get arrested and crucified as David and Daniel. 
I'll close with a quote from Robert Price which puts the matter quite succinctly:
"Earlier scholars (e.g., John Wick Bowman), as many today (e.g., J. Duncan M. Derrett), saw gospel echoes of the ancient scriptures in secondary coloring here or redactional juxtaposition of traditional Jesus stories there. But the more recent scrutiny of John Dominic Crossan, Randel Helms, Dale and Patricia Miller, and Thomas L. Brodie has made it inescapably clear that virtually the entirety of the gospel narratives and much of the Acts are wholly the product of haggadic midrash upon previous scripture."   


Ó
.

postscript:
— Add to all of the above the author's copious use of hypertextual formatting and cross referencing within its scriptural matrix, and there's just no denying that Mark is not a loose collection of oral traditions, but a tendentious and ambitious literary creation.
© quixotic infidel (the) is powered by Blogger - Template designed by Stramaxon - Best SEO Template