Normas de la actividad musical en público (como interprete o como oyente) 9.4 Desarrollo de la memoria

For more than a century, scholars were accustomed to the historical critical method of interpreting Scripture. This method of interpreting Scripture argues that a Biblical text is generally read and understood based on its historical context. Until the mid-1900’s, Biblical studies was characterized by attempts at the historical construction of the biblical world and historical criticism was the central methodological tool used in this pursuit (Mapfeka, 2016:51-52). Scholars started using other approaches and methodologies for interpreting Scripture as time passed and these approaches succeeded in ending the century-long monopoly of historicism on biblical interpretation. Fernando Segovia (1995:276-282) exposed the weaknesses of the claims of historical criticism which led to its swift demise in the last quarter of the 20th century as follows: first, its inability to analyse a text as text until towards the end of the process. Secondly, its blindness in seeing biblical texts as of a literary, rhetorical and ideological production. Third, its ignorant understanding of a text of Scripture as

66 univocal and objective in meaning. Fourthly, its presumption of a universal, inform reader or critic. The third and fourth presuppositions led to the underlying stance that the word of God is the judge, standard and guide for Christian life and doctrine. Lastly, is the exaltation of its pedagogical model of interpretation above everything else. All these factors consequently led to the unavoidable fall of historical criticism.

One of the methods of interpretation which emerged after the displacement of the stranglehold that historicism had on biblical interpretation, was socio-rhetorical criticism. Vernon K. Robbins in 1984 was said to be the first person to apply the term “socio-rhetoric” as an interpretive approach in New Testament studies (Harold, 2011:51). Socio-rhetorical criticism is a methodological approach which brings an interdisciplinary interpretive analysis to a text. Robbins (1996:1) used the term “socio” as a reference to the wealth of materials in modern anthropology and the study of sociology, which the application of socio-rhetorical criticism enriches a text with. Socio- rhetorical criticism incorporates the insights acquired from social-scientific approach into its interpretation of a text. In addition, its “rhetorical” aspect studies the way the language in a text is used to achieve the aim of the author. According to David Gowler (2010:194) “rhetorical approaches include a concern for the social nature of reality, the interrelationship between language and human actions and how language attempts to create effects on an audience.” Rhetorical criticism therefore combines an intellectual curiosity to examine the motivation of a speaker, the responses of an audience and the manner the discourse is structured in as well as the environment where communication takes place (Goodwin, 1993:177). This in turn helps readers get a better understanding of a text and its reception (Harold, 2011:50). Huizing (2011:14) is of the same opinion as he acknowledged the discipline of socio-rhetorical criticism as helping in the interpretive measure of making sense of the message of a given text. According to Robbins (1996:21), there are five arenas of textures in a text which socio- rhetorical criticism indulges and examines. The first is known as the ‘inner texture’, this is the study of what the text consists of. It has to do with the meaning and internal aspects of words within a given text. Secondly, socio-rhetorical criticism looks at the “intertext” - the intertext examines the text in relation to other texts and what lies

67 outside the text itself, also known as the interactive world of the text. The third aspect of socio-rhetorical criticism is comprised of the social and cultural textures. This is an examination of the world in which the language of the text is brought into being. In the fourth texture, socio-rhetorical criticism investigates the ideological texture of texts. The ideological texture has to do with the interests pushed to the fore in the texts and how commentaries and interpreters have interpreted it and then positioned themselves and other groups in relation to the text. Finally, the fifth texture is the sacred texture which figures out the relationship between the divine and the human. This fifth texture is related to the ideological texture and it includes divine beings, divine history, human redemption, ethics and religious community.

An attempt to unravel ideology could be a daunting task as the word is said to have accrued to itself a host of meanings and variety of uses (Eagleton, 2007:13). Ideology is considered a subtle concept in the sense that it involves ideas that people subscribe to in their daily lives yet in several instances they remained unaware that they were playing into the ideas and interests of rulers or other powerful groups (McKenzie, 2013:435). Williams (1987:24) claimed that the generality of texts are in some sort of way ideological and all have relationship with some kinds of vested interests. Also, it is common for a text to be interpreted in light and in favour of a current struggle going on probably between different classes (McKenzie, 2013:435) as each class tries to present its view as the norm. McKenzie (2013:436) considers ideological texture as having its roots in historicism but as a result of its social and political interests it goes as far as taking on the actualities of history. Ideology is reflected in the reciprocity of meaning between the author/narrator and the real reader of a text, and it is an arena where the reader (both implied and real) receive and empower what a text is trying to convey (Robbins, 1996:36, 37). In the realm of socio-rhetorical criticism, an interpretation is not complete until it has an interrelation which must include the author, the reader and the text because language is a product of social interaction among people. Ideological texture therefore, in an effort to bring the author, the text, and the reader into the arena of textual interpretation with presuppositions both explicit and implicit about the author, the text, and the reader.

68 Finally, a more theologically tailored definition of the ideology of text which is more specific to the early Christian texts and not broad and general as in the case of Marxism was presented by John Elliot. Also, he explained ideology in relation to the Second Testament text as an intertwined system of ideas, beliefs, values or even assumptions which should not necessarily be categorised as true or false but which portray the interests, desires, or needs of a particular group or class at a specific point in history (1990:268). So, the methodology this chapter embarks on seeks to find out the intersection of ideas and also the constellation of such religious ideas.