但係好搞笑, 剛才喺Society of Biblical Literature見到有一篇書評, 由Andover Newton Theological School的Gregory Mobley寫, 佢對呢本書鬧到一文不值, 直指本書根本就唔合格, 不值得出版, 亦不值得俾個博士學位呢篇論文, 措辭既嚴厲, 又搞笑, 比我把口更毒.
I took no pleasure in reading this book, nor do I take any in cataloguing its flaws. The title itself with its initial, indecisive participle hamstrings progress toward coherence. (Note: all italics below are mine.) The publication history page, with its reference to the “british Library” damages the credibility before we even reach page i. There is frequent subject-verb disagreement (“The speech-complex … point out to us,” 114; “But none of the characters are named for us,” 199). There is careless editing (“If we had not been told enough that is [it?] had been night,” 97, “Mark Brettler,” 151 n. 101). There is clumsy sentence construction (“Since the woman [in Judg 19] leaves the Levite ‘not in order to live with another man in either a marital or sexual sense, as we might expect if sexual fidelity was the issue’ but rather returns to her father’s house in Bethlehem it is odd,” 86), inanely repetitive diction (“This [i.e., ‘king’] is a new title for our narrative for the tribes of Israel,” 114; “focal attention,” 113, and “narrative story,” 118)... These lapses render the book virtually unreadable.
Who is to blame for what constitutes the most poorly written work of published “scholarship” I have ever read? The author, for sure, but what of the publisher and of the dissertation committee that granted a Doctor of Philosophy from the University of Manchester on the basis of an earlier form of this “work”? We should not blame Professor Girard for this tortured misapplication of his ideas.
Unfortunately, I cannot recommend this book to anyone. Neither its ideas nor its writing meet any standard I recognize for publishable biblical scholarship.