| Description |
Consider the difference between text and speech. Of these, only text occupies material space. Text expresses as a durable manifestation of language and speech and must exist in a physical form. Speech may be transformed into text through transcription, but it exists in the now, mostly phonologically, and is transient. It is impossible for contemporaries to experience the speech of history. Historical speech can be grounded in text through transcription, and potentially performed by contemporaries; however, such a performance is the creation of contemporary speech and, at best, only an emulation of historical speech. Such an emulation would result in the creation of contemporary speech grounded in contemporary culture. The material nature of text allows for the analysis of the interactions between narratives within the text and their relationship to culture through an approximation of speech. As artifacts of material culture provide insights into Antiquity, artifacts found in texts have a similar utility. By means of their narratives, stories, and discourses, they provide insights into the expression of social and cultural constructs. These textual artifacts can illuminate constructs of human relations such as power relations. Reaching back into the early definitions of anti-Semitic tropes and attempting to unearth expressions of power relations that function within the narrative provides insight into the enduring and recurring nature of this discourse. Is the resurgence of an anti-Semitic discourse the product of its relationship between other narratives to which it has been bound through a binary opposition expressed in power relations? This analysis posits--yes. It is power relations that root narratives within the social body. The Legend of Theophilus of Adana is a story important to the development of two prominent narratives in Western Culture: 1) the intercessory salvation, and 2) the intercessory damnation. The expression of these two narratives in binary opposition fuses them into a single anti-Semitic discourse. The comparison of three versions of The Legend of Theophilus of Adana and their narratives across time and language tests the idea that this recurring anti-Semitic discourse is expressed by power relations fusing narratives through binary opposition. |
