Вы находитесь на странице: 1из 13

Christianity and Literature Vol. 50, No.

4 (Summer 2001)

DIALOGUE A Biblical Encounter with Magic in Literature

Emmett H. Carroll, SJ.

Although Ernest Hemingway considered it one of his best stories, I avoid reading "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" and never assign it to students. Granted, it does hold a reader's attention, and students would enjoy its quick pace. When I read the story's climactic passage, however, I experience a religious revulsion, and I have no desire to afflict students with such revulsion. Hemingway's Old Waiter feels a dreadful ennui, a pervasive sense that life is a nothingness. He blasphemously reformulates the Lord's Prayer and a portion of the Hail Mary: Our nada who art in nada, nada be thy name thy kingdom nada thy will be nada in nada as it is in nada. Give us this nada our daily nada and nada us our nada as we nada our nadas and nada us not into nada but deliver us from nadar, pues nada. Hail nothing full of nothing, nothing is with thee. (383) Why do I react so strongly to this passage? The answer lies, at least in part, with my biblical acculturation. The effect of the passage depends upon my knowing the allusion. Furthermore, were I not imbued with the sense of the holiness both of the Lord's Prayer and of the Hail Mary, I would not feel shocked by the Old Waiter's corruption of them. This recognition led me to examine my reaction to other literary passages whose power to provoke stands on a biblical basis. Sometimes the Bible employs the term "magic" when referring to various practices that invoke occult powers. Magic in this sense appears in a number of biblical texts and is consistently condemned as antithetical to faith in God (Bushinski and Imschoot 1417). Such magic implies automatic, supernatural forces that give to the human who knows how to manipulate themthat is, to the magiciana power over people and nature. The magician depends not on God but only on his or her own manipulation of su703



pernatural forces, employing them for some anti-religious or evil purpose. Biblically acculturated readers consider magic in all its manifestations not only as deficient in scientific validity but also as false in appeal. Those who believe in Scripture as inspired view magic as morally evil, demonic, and offensive to God. Because the Bible condemns occult practices, a believer feels an emotional abhorrence when experiencing them in literature. Moses inveighed against magic in these terms: There shall not be found among you any one who burns his son or his daughter as an offering, any one who practices divination, a soothsayer, or an augur, or a sorcerer, or a charmer, or a medium, or a wizard, or a necromancer. For whoever does these things is an abomination to the Lord For these nations, which you are about to dispossess, give heed to soothsayers and to diviners; but as for you, the Lord your God has not allowed you so to do. (Deut. 18:10-14) In his authoritative commentary on this passage, Jeffrey H. Tigay treats child sacrifice as a separate issue, further noting that "the precise differences between some of [these practices] are not clear" (173). I follow Tigay's lead in ascribing these eight practices to three types of magicians: the diviner, the necromancer, and the caster of spells. About each I will describe the biblically forbidden practice, consider literary examples, and reflect on a reader's possible response. The Diviner Some ancients endeavored to discover secret knowledge, especially knowledge of the future. For example, Ezekiel describes the king of Babylon as standing at a fork in the road and employing divination to decide which path to take: "He shakes the arrows, he consults the teraphim, he looks at the liver" (21:21). The king here employs three methods to obtain knowledge, and he eventually chooses the road to Jerusalem on the basis of this divination. Just as Sophocles' Creon in Oedipus Tyrannus goes to Delphi to consult the Pythian oracle, so the people of the biblical world consulted the oracular oak trees at Dodona or the Memnon of Thebes. They also considered the flight of birds and the organs of sacrificed animals. Some Israelites "forsook all the commandments of the Lord their God and made for themselves molten images And they burned their sons and daughters as offerings and used divination and sorcery and sold themselves to do evil in the sight of the Lord, provoking him to anger" (2 Kings 17:16-17). When following Sophocles' character to Delphi, a Christian reader recognizes the cultural attitude of a pagan civilization. A text involving a biblical culture, however, affects the same reader in a different fashion, for divi-



nation then appears just as evil as idolatry and human sacrificeabominable practices that the Bible condemns in Deuteronomy 18:13. The passage also asserts that God directs prophets to speak about the future and to provide such knowledge about the future as God wants His people to have. Between magical divination of the future arid inspired prophecy a sharp contrast exists: "For these nations which ycyu are about to dispossess give heed to soothsayers and to diviners; but as for you, the Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet...fromamong you,fromyour brethrenhim you shall heed" (Deut. 18:14-15). Under penalty of death these prophets must heed what God tells them, must speak in God's name, must speak no other word, and must speak in the name of no other god (Deut. 18:19-20). The implication is that Israel must rely only on God; to depend for knowing the future on any other person or ritual would be interpreted as relying on a false god. The Lord "frustrates the omens of liars, and makes fools of diviners," but the Lord "confirms the word of his servant and performs the counsel of his messengers" (Isa. 45:25-26; cf. Jer. 14:14, Deut. 18:21-22). William Shakespeare's Macbeth offers an example of the evil that comes with seeking predictionsfromunholy diviners. Macbeth, having murdered Duncan, fears that his crime may be exposed by divination: "Augures and understood relations have / By maggot-pies and choughs and rooks brought forth / The secret'st man of blood" (3.4.123-25). He thus will use unholy means in order to know his own future:
I will to-morrow (And betimes I will) to the weird sisters. More shall they speak; for now I am bent to know, By the worst means, the worst. (3.4.131-34)

Hecate, the queen of hell, is the mistress of the three witches (3.5.1-36), who bring forth fantastic appearances to predict future inheritors of the crown (4.1.1-135). Receiving assurance that he "shall never vanquish'd be until / Great Birnam wood to high Dunsinane hill / Shall come against him" (4.1.9294), Macbeth immediately concludes: "That will never be" (4.1.94). Hecate has already succeeded in her plot to mislead him and thus to destroy him by overconfidence. Asidefromhis other crimes, Macbeth relies on witches to divine the future"By the worst means, the worst." He does evil in going to the evil sisters, in believing their prediction, and he will suffer for such belief. Like some Israelites in the Bible, Macbeth sought knowledge neitherfromGod nor from God's prophets. God's condemnation is on such people: "You shall not practice augury or witchcraft" (Lev. 19:26). Ezekiel condemns false prophets who are "no better than jackals that hunt for food among the ruins of the city"



(13:14), for such prophets "convince the wicked to keep sinning and ruin their lives" (13:22). The tradition of the English language carries with it a biblical culture. Consequently, we tend to be shocked by the scene of Macbeth's associating with Hecate's witches. Macbeth's action has about it all the evil of Eve's plucking the fateful fruit from the Tree of Knowledge. From a biblically forbidden source Macbeth seeks to obtain biblically forbidden knowledge. In Nathaniel Hawthorne's "The Hollow of the Three Hills" a woman petitioner seeks knowledge from an evil old crone. The petitioner lays her face in the lap of the witch, plighted to a "Power of Evil." The woman receives visions of the shame and affliction she caused her parents, of the insanity to which her adultery drove her husband, and of the death she caused her daughter when she deserted the child. This ill-gotten knowledge causes the petitioner to die on the spot. Knowledge derived from divination again results in the triumph of evil and the destruction of the seeker. Given my responses to the Shakespeare and Hawthorne texts, I have developed in C. G. Jung's terms an emotional attachment to biblical commands. Around this core of emotion are ideas, attitudes, opinions, and beliefs, all of which form a feeling-toned train of thought or complex. And the feelings grow as the complex increases in strength: "The constellating power of the nuclear element corresponds to its value intensity, i.e., to its energy" ("On Psychic Energy" 12). When a literary scene gives me the experience of evil magic, I react with psychological shock, its intensity dependent on the depth of my religious outlook. Jung stressed the emotional core of a complex; a literary scene plays upon that complex and so achieves its emotional effect. Depictions of evil divination succeed in stirring my emotion because my Christian belief makes me an apt reactor. Contradictory ideas and emotions exist simultaneously in the psyche. Thus, when experiencing forbidden action in a literary text, the biblically acculturated reader will also experience emotionally the religious command to avoid such an action. The emotional strength of the original action is matched by the emotional strength of the reaction. The stronger the scene of evil, the stronger the reaction to it. The Necromancer Literature offers numerous examples of the living speaking to the dead, most famously in Dante's Inferno. Necromancy, however, requires that a living person conjure forth into the land of the living the spirit of a deceased person who communicates with and counsels the living about future actions. Isaiah depicts the Lord leading the Egyptians to their destruction by having them consult mediums and wizards (19:3). "Do not turn to mediums



or wizards," the Lord tells Moses; "do not seek them out, to be defiled by them: I am the Lord your God" (Lev. 19:31; Deut. 18:11). Those who engage in necromancy open themselves to the death penalty (Lev. 20:6,27). The practice of going to mediums who conjure forth the dead is condemned because people consult such spirits just as they consult Yahweh. The necromancer seeks knowledge that Yahweh does not grant. Furthermore, people may even prefer a replyfromthe underworld to Yahweh's word. Isaiah urges the Israelites to consult the Lord and the traditional testimony of His prophets: "And when they say to you, 'Consult the mediums and the wizards who chirp and mutter,' should not a people consult their God? Should they consult the dead on behalf of the living? [Go] to the teaching and to the testimony!" (8:19-20). The prohibition against necromancy stems from a fear that the conjured spirits will detractfroma person's reliance on God. The outstanding case of necromancy in the Bible is King Saul's seeking out a medium, the Witch of Endor, in 1 Samuel 28. Here we see the terrible condemnation of necromancy. As the Philistine army in all its military superiority prepared to attack the Israelites, Saul "was afraid, and his heart trembled greatly. And when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord did not answer him, either by dreams, or by Urim, or by prophets" (5-6). Saul "had put the mediums and the wizards out of the land" (3), but now in desperation he backslides. In disguise and at night, Saul goes to a medium at Endor and commands this witch to summon the spirit of Samuelfromthe dead. This long-dead prophet then tells Saul that on the morrow the Philistines will overrun Israel and that Saul will die because he "did not obey the voice of the Lord" ( 18). On the following day the Philistines sweep over Israel's army, and Saul commits suicide. A later writer comments: "So Saul died for his unfaithfulness; he was unfaithful to the Lord in that he did not keep the command of the Lord, and also consulted a medium, seeking guidance, and did not seek guidancefromthe Lord. Therefore the Lord slew him, and turned the kingdom over to David the son of Jesse" (1 Chron. 11:13-14). In Henry James's The Turn of the Screw wefinda somewhat comparable situation. Peter Quint and Miss Jessel, both dead, comefromhell unbidden; Miles, age ten, and Flora, age eight, look for them, seek them out, and welcome them. In the beginning the children appear like "Raphael's holy infants" (8), "something divine" ( 12), knowing "nothing in the world but love" (13), and so on. However, Quint brings to Miles a knowledge of evil that he imparts to other children, and Jessel conveys to Flora knowledge that makes the child an "old woman" (71). The demons instill a "secret precocity" (63), making Miles and Flora "still cleverer even than nature did" (75). The children, in short, become possessed. A biblically invested reader empathizes with the governess, a parson's



daughter, who will do anything to save the children. Like her a Christian experiences the evil to which the children expose themselves. Christian faith grants a reality to the religious suggestions throughout the story and acknowledges a frightful validity to hell and its demons. The same reader does not experience a similar emotion in reading of Odysseus' visit with the shades of the underworld, for that is fantasy in a pagan culture and does not call on the reader's biblical acculturation. By way of contrast, I briefly mention Pietro di Donato's 1939 novel about Italian immigrants, Christ in Concrete. This narrative shows widow Annunziata and son Paul visiting a spiritualist in order to know something about Geremio, husband and father, who recently died in the collapse of a building. The spiritualist, obviously a fraud, pretends to conjure up the spirit of Geremio and to speak with him. Marcel Mauss in A General Theory ofMagic describes the imposture: "The magician falls into a state of ecstasy, often naturally induced but more usually feigned. Then he often believes, and it seems to the onlookers that he has been transported out of this world" (27). Here the necromancer puts on a poor act, although it is enough to fool the two petitioners. The supernatural world does not pervade this novel, and the reader experiences no shock, only scorn for the fraudulent necromancer and pity for the gullible widow and son. The Caster of Spells A third type of magus pretends to work marvels by preternatural means. In contrast with coming to proscribed knowledge through divination or with conjuring of the dead in necromancy, the magus achieves an effect by employing sorcery. One effect is a spell brought on by a curse. The Old Testament, of course, offers numerous examples of curses that constitute a type of spell. An entry in a standard reference source describes the cultural background of this practice: Curse and blessing were originally magic words and actions which were thought to cause evil or good, and were customary among all primitive men for their powerful efficacy as means of defence and sanction [The Israelites] attributed the effect of the curse or blessing to the power of the divinity who was named in the formula used The curse was commonly considered to produce its effect (Num. 22:6; Zech. 5:3; Ps. 109:18; Sir. 3:9); once it was uttered, it would be fulfilled even after many years. ( Vawter and Imschoot 470) The people of the biblical world believed that, once a blessing or a curse was properly issued, the person or object to which it applied would be affected for better or worse. Both blessing and curse work in this context solely by



God's power. In one of his visions the prophet Zechariah thus invokes by divine sanction a representative curse: This is the curse that goes out over the face of the whole land; for every one who steals shall be cut off henceforth according to it, and everyone who swears falsely shall be cut off henceforth according to it. I will send it forth, says the Lord of hosts, and it shall enter the house of the thief, and the house of him who swears falsely by my name; and it shall abide in his house and consume it, both timber and stones. (5:3-4) Moreover, in the Bible the greatest offense occurs when a person blasphemes the name of God and thereby curses. Mosaic law recognizes the gravity of this sin by requiring that such a person be stoned to death (Lev. 24:10-16). Perhaps now we can revisit the passage from Hemingway's "A Clean, Well-Lighted Place" that I quoted at the beginning. The parody so corrupts Christ's words as to invert a prayer of faith to a mocking of the divine. Besides offending a devout Christian reader, the passage commits blasphemy by reducing God to nada and thereby cursing all that is holy. The specific effect is that, guided by the story's persona, one feels the self denying and reviling God. Exploring this kind of problem in aesthetic reception, Jung comments on the person who approaches art with empathy: Since his activity, his life, is empathized into the [art] object, he himself gets into the [art] object because the empathized content is an essential part of himself. He becomes the object. He identifies himself with it and in this way gets outside himself. By turning himself into an object he desubjectivizes himself. {Psychological Types 297) I experience nausea in putting myself, even imaginatively, into such a relation to God's wrath that I feel divine condemnation. Consider further that in the second part of the Hemingway passage the Old Waiter seeks curses on his own head: let his daily bread become nada; let forgiveness for his sin become nada; let his deliverance from evil become nada. Such imprecation achieves its effect. One is reminded of the fate that Jezebel brings upon herself when she sends this message to Elijah: "So may the gods do to me, and more also, if I do not make your life as the life of one of [Jezebel's own slain prophets] by this time tomorrow" ( 1 Kings 19:2). Her own terrible death as recorded in Scripture attests to the efficacy of pronouncing this curse. My desire as a reader to empathize with the Old Waiter conflicts with my Christian fear of divine condemnation. In his article "Phenomenology of Reading," Georges Poulet describes how a reader takes on the thoughts of the printed passage: "Because of the strange



invasion of my person by the thoughts of another, I am a self who is granted the experience of thinking thoughts foreign to him. I am the subject of thoughts other than my own" (56). My revulsion from the Hemingway passage flows from my religiously established fear of the curse. If I were not a Christian reverently attached to the Lord's Prayer, the text would not so affect me. Upon hearing the Old Waiter's invocation, however, I shudder at the perversion of God's name, and I fear that the biblical curse attached to this blasphemy and to self-cursing may redound upon me. The Bible records other ways besides curses to cast spells and to bring about marvels through occult powers. One example is found in Exodus 7:88:19. When Moses and Aaron go to Pharaoh to demand freedom for the Israelites, Aaron, in order to prove that their demand comes from God, throws down his staff, which then metamorphoses into a serpent. Pharaoh's magicians match the miracle, though Aaron's staff-turned-serpent consumes theirs. Also, when Moses and Aaron turn the waters of Egypt to blood, "the magicians of Egypt did the same by their secret arts" (7:22), as happens too with the ensuing plague offrogs(8:7). Although the sorcerers atfirstaccomplish the same result as Moses and Aaron, they do so by "secret arts," whereas Moses and Aaron act in the power of God. If the magicians have early success, they arefinallyoverwhelmed by the continuing feats of God that eventually force Pharaoh tofreethe Israelites. The point is clear: God's will shall prevail over any occult power. We see another example of seeking results through magic in 1 Kings 18 when Jezebel's 450 prophets clash with Elijah in a dramatic contest atop Mount Carmel. Taunted by Elijah, the prophets of Baal fail to summon fire from heaven to consume a sacrificed bull despite their frenzied prayers and self-mutilation. When Elijah prays to Yahweh, however, "thefireof the Lord" strikes the bull (18:38). Thus the spells of Baal's prophets prove fraudulent, and Jezebel, user of sorceries (2 Kings 9:22), dies a terrible death: her own eunuchs throw her out the palace window, and horses so trample her body that it is torn asunder (2 Kings 9:7-10,30-37). Jezebel is the foremost model of a sorceress in the Old Testament, typifying the evil associated with the casting of spells. Homer's Circe, by way of comparison, is simply an enchantress who inspires wonder, awe, and, perhaps, a smile when she changes men into pigs. A minor goddess, Circe acts without moral delinquency. When Odysseus confronts her, she promptly undoes her enchantment. She is not bound by biblical circumstance; she does not act against Yahweh; and readers do not feel repulsed by her actions. In The Sun Also Rises Hemingway develops a modern version of the sorceress in his portrayal of Lady Brett Ashley. During the Pamplona festival Brett cannot understand the sacrament of confession (151); thefigureof the



god Pan pipes to the children (154); and Brett, lacking a head covering, is denied entrance into a chapel. Some dancers then encircle Brett, wearing wreaths of white garlic as talismanic protection against evil, because she is "an image to dance around" (155). Brett becomes a sorceress, enchanting those around her. As Jezebel's Baal prophets contended with Elijah for the allegiance of the people, so Brett contends with the Church for the attention and allegiance of the men who dance in drunkenness and "hard-voiced singing." Brett's sorcery succeeds, for the revelers in the shop reject the religious procession passing by outside: '"Nada,' some one said. 'It's nothing. Drink up. Lift the bottle'" (158). Because a Christian reader recognizes Brett's likeness to Jezebel, his emotional response includes a fear of and antipathy for Brett. Let us consider one more ritualistic form, the casting of lots. When the Israelites surround Jericho, the walls of the city come tumbling down as God had promised. On the Lord's command the Israelites kill all the inhabitants and devote the precious metals to the Lord. One person, however, takes gold, silver, and a precious mantle for himself. Tofindthe culprit, Joshua declares a ritual trial by the casting of lots. First the tribe is selected, then the family within the tribe, next the household within the family, and finally the man within the selected family. Achan is found guilty, and he confesses. We are to understand that God brings about the selection through this casting of lots. All of Israel stones Achan, his sons, and his daughters, as well as all of his livestock. And Israel burns Achan's tent and other possessions: "They burned them with fire, and they stoned them with stones" (Josh. 7:25). The entire event in Joshua's account, terrible as Achan's punishment is, proceeds under God's explicit command. In fact, the expression sometimes translated as "the casting of lots" more literally means "the Lord takes"that is, the Lord through the prophet's casting of lots selects the guilty person. We thus read: In the morning therefore you shall be brought near by your tribes; and the tribe which the Lord takes shall come near by families; and the family which the Lord takes shall come near by households; and the household which the Lord takes shall come near man by man. (Josh. 7:14) God commands the search for the thief, the manner of the trial, and the punishment to be inflicted. God selects by the casting of lots the guilty man who confesses and reveals where he has hidden the forbidden gold, silver, and mantle. Messengers following Achan's directions discover the treasure and return with these items stolen from dedication to the Lord. All of this suggests a method, not magic. The means are appropriate to the end; the cause fits the result. By means of a casting of lots, God works His purpose and



accomplishes His end. No magic exists in the Joshua account. A twentieth-century story, Shirley Jackson's "The Lottery," replicates the casting of lots and brings its effect with sorcery. One of Jackson's characters, Old Man Warner, prophesies portentously that without the lottery there will be "trouble"a return to "living in caves" and "eating stewed chickweed and acorns." Warner implies that the lottery brings a good crop: "Used to be a saying about 'Lottery in June, corn be heavy soon'" (230). Whereas in Joshua's account the casting of lots results in discovery of the guilty Achan, in Jackson's story the ritual produces the innocent Tessie Hutchinson as scapegoat of communal violence. "Magic" here consists of bringing about a successful harvest by means of killing an arbitrarily chosen victim. The lottery and resultant stoning lack sufficient connection of means to end; such a cause, the lottery and the stoning of Tessie Hutchinson, cannot bring about the intended result. The entire proceeding manifests an underlying belief in appealing to some occult power through sorcery. Knowledgeable readers of "The Lottery" will recall its biblical base and recognize the perversion from religious faith to credence in magic, the stoning of a human being, not as divinely sanctioned retribution but as savage sacrifice to effect a magical result. Conclusion The Bible offers a code for interpreting and evaluating texts. Shakespeare, Hawthorne, Hemingway, and Jackson created their characters and stories for readers who would recognize biblical allusions. These authors set their characters against the illuminating background of specific passages in the Bible. Readers grasp their works intellectually and emotionally in recognizing the implied background. Writing about reception theory, Terry Eagleton comments that, in seeking the meaning of a text, "the reader makes implicit connections,fillsin gaps, draws inferences and tests out hunches; to do this means drawing on a tacit knowledge of the world in general and of literary conventions in particular" (76). He goes on to observe that "Shakespeare's 'secret black and midnight hags' in one sense narrows down what kind of hags are in question, makes them more determinate, but because all three adjectives are richly suggestive, evoking different responses in different readers, the text has also rendered itself less determinate in the act of trying to become more so" (77). The biblically acculturated reader will draw on knowledge of the Bible, and not just on one passage describing demons but on the whole aura associated with itan aura of reverence, of associated passages, of faith practice. Eagleton further remarks of reception theorist Wolfgang Iser: "The most effective literary work for Iser is one which forces the reader into a new crit-



ical awareness of his or her customary codes and expectations. The work in terrogates and transforms the implicit beliefs we bring to it, 'disconfirms' our routine habits of perception and so forces us to acknowledge them for the first time for what they are" (79). We thus find our faith newly applied, crit ically active in the reading process. References to Scripture mark the implied reader as a person for whom the Bible has fundamental cultural and critical value. In reading, I correlate the text on my lap with texts previously read and with events in my life. When I read of Hemingway's Old Waiter cursing, I come to a new and stronger embrace of the Lord's Prayer as a cherished and sacred text, even as I reject the Old Waiter's profanity. Reader-response crit icism gives a logically articulated explanation for my reaction to certain works. A reader with biblical values finds in reader-response theory a sys tem by which to account for his or her experience of literary passages that evoke the Bible. Seattle University

WORKS CITED Bushinski, Leonard ., and R van Imschoot. "Magic." Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible. Ed. Louis F. Hartman. New York: McGraw, 1963. 1417-18. Donato, Pietro di. Christ in Concrete. New York: Bobbs-Merrill, 1939. Eagleton, Terry. Literary Theory: An Introduction. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1983. Hawthorne, Nathaniel. "The Hollow of the Three Hills." Vol. 9 of The Centenary Edition of the WorL ofNathaniel Hawthorne. Gen. ed. William Charvat. 23 vols. Columbus: Ohio State UP, 1974. 199-204. Hemingway, Ernest. The Short Stories of Ernest Hemingway. New York: Scribner's, 1938. . The Sun Abo Rises. New York: Scribner's, 1970. Homer. The Odyssey. Trans. E. V. Rieu. Rev. D. C. H. Rieu and Peter Jones. New York: Penguin, 1991. Jackson, Shirley. Come Along with Me: Part of a Novel, Sixteen Stories, and Three Lectures. Ed. Stanley Edgar Hyman. New York: Viking, 1968. James, Henry. The Turn of the Screw. Ed. Robert Kimbrough. New York: Norton, 1966. Jung, CG. "On Psychic Energy." The Structure and Dynamics of the Psyche. 2nd ed. Trans. R. E C. Hull. Ed. Herbert Read. Vol. 8 of The Collected WorL ofC. G. Jung. 20 vols. Bollingen Series 20. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1969. 3-66. . Psychological Types. Trans. H. G. Baynes. Ed. R. E C. Hull. Rev. ed. Vol. 6 of The Collected WorL ofC. G. Jung. 20 vols. Bollingen Series 20. Princeton:



Princeton UP, 1971. Mauss, Marcel. A General Theory ofMagic. Trans. Robert Brain. New York: Norton 1975. Oxford Annotated Bible with the Apocrypha: Revised Standard Version. Ed. Herbert G. May and Bruce M. Metzger. New York: Oxford UP, 1965. Poulet, Georges. "Phenomenology of Reading." New Literary History 1.1 (1969): 5668. Shakespeare, William. The Riverside Shakespeare. Ed. G. Blakemore Evans, et al. Boston: Houghton, 1974. Sophocles. Oedipus Tyrannus. Trans, and ed. Luci Berkowitz and Theodore F. Brunner. New York: Norton, 1970. Tigay, Jeffrey H. The JPS Torah Commentary: Deuteronomy. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society, 1996. Vawter, Bruce, and P. van Imschoot. "Curse." Encyclopedic Dictionary of the Bible. Ed. Louis F. Hartman. New York: McGraw, 1963. 470-72.

^ s
Copyright and Use: As an ATLAS user, you may print, download, or send articles for individual use according to fair use as defined by U.S. and international copyright law and as otherwise authorized under your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. No content may be copied or emailed to multiple sites or publicly posted without the copyright holder(s)' express written permission. Any use, decompiling, reproduction, or distribution of this journal in excess of fair use provisions may be a violation of copyright law. This journal is made available to you through the ATLAS collection with permission from the copyright holder(s). The copyright holder for an entire issue of a journal typically is the journal owner, who also may own the copyright in each article. However, for certain articles, the author of the article may maintain the copyright in the article. Please contact the copyright holder(s) to request permission to use an article or specific work for any use not covered by the fair use provisions of the copyright laws or covered by your respective ATLAS subscriber agreement. For information regarding the copyright holder(s), please refer to the copyright information in the journal, if available, or contact ATLA to request contact information for the copyright holder(s). About ATLAS: The ATLA Serials (ATLAS) collection contains electronic versions of previously published religion and theology journals reproduced with permission. The ATLAS collection is owned and managed by the American Theological Library Association (ATLA) and received initial funding from Lilly Endowment Inc. The design and final form of this electronic document is the property of the American Theological Library Association.

Похожие интересы