The Book of J 
by 

Harold Bloom (Interpreter), 

 

David Rosenberg (Translator), 

 

Jahwist

Literary Chutzpah

Biblical scholars have been arguing for two and a half centuries about who wrote the Pentateuch, the first five books of the Bible. Several things are agreed upon: it wasn’t Moses. It wasn’t a single individual. And it wasn’t written over a single lifetime. Beyond that things get sticky.

One of the hypothetical writers (four, or more if one counts all the editors) recognised by scholars is known as the Yahwist, or J for short. But no one is sure if J’s was the core around which others added. Nor is there agreement about which parts of the Pentateuch are firmly attributable to J. And there are alternative views that range over as much as 500 years about when J wrote. In fact, it is apparently impossible to determine if J is one person or many people writing in a similar style. Despite intense academic scrutiny there has been increasing divergence rather than growing expert consensus in recent years.



Given all this fundamental uncertainty about J, from his (or her) existence to his contribution, one might suppose that a modern literary critic who is not an expert in the subtleties of ancient Middle Eastern language, history and religious culture might be hesitant to express a professional opinion about him. But that’s only because they don’t know Harold Bloom. 

Bloom believes he knows precisely who J is: an educated woman of standing in Judaic society. He knows when she wrote: during the reign of King Solomon as a participant in his court. And he knows why she wrote: to establish a particular view about dynastic legitimacy. He also detects other things generations of scholars have failed to see: most importantly a pervasive irony in J’s writing which is the key to her real intention.

There can be little doubt that Bloom has a justified confidence in his skill in the interpretation of literary texts. It is unlikely that anyone has had a greater impact on the understanding of most of the major texts in the English language. But the jump he makes from the world of modern English to the ancient world of Hebrew and Greek texts in his conclusions about J seem more than a bridge too far. 

Bloom wrote the book in collaboration with David Rosenberg, a scholar who selected what he believes are the fragments of J scattered in the Pentateuch (mainly in the book of Genesis). This he translated and included in Bloom's book. As a critique of this translation, Blooms observations are perhaps warranted. However, as an interpretation of key parts of the Pentateuch, Bloom's is simply a pretence.

Bloom’s conclusions can’t be considered as anything more than poetic but unschooled fancy. He argument is an interesting narrative, but it ignores the mass of information that has been assembled by dedicated professional people for over two hundred years. He uses this information selectively and, often tendentiously, where he uses it at all. 

Although the Pentateuch is certainly a literary document it is unlike any work of modern literature. It has been worked and re-worked, cut and pasted, edited (often badly) and more or less forced into the form we have received. Its purposes, political as well as theological, style and language are so heterogeneous that it is unlikely that the scholarly project to unravel its original bits will ever be completed. Bloom hasn't changed that situation in the least.