Leonard Cohen’s Jewish Theodicy: We Are Waiting for Godot, But It Is We Who May Never Arrive

IF 0.1 0 RELIGION
Marcia Pally
{"title":"Leonard Cohen’s Jewish Theodicy: We Are Waiting for Godot, But It Is We Who May Never Arrive","authors":"Marcia Pally","doi":"10.3138/jrpc.2018-0033","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract:The work of Leonard Cohen, called the “black romantic” by Stephen Scobie, has been explored for its sex, politics, darkness, and struggle with faith. Cohen’s imagery has also been widely interrogated in critical and popular studies. The present article builds on this literature to explore a consistent theology and theodicy in Cohen’s writings. The theology is grounded in the covenant of Cohen’s Jewish tradition. It is Cohen’s reckoning with humanity’s failure to act covenantally with God and persons—though we are made as covenantal creatures, dependent on these bonds to survive and flourish. The easy theodicy says our suffering is self-inflicted: a fallen humanity breaks covenant for the possibility of gain and so injures itself. Cohen saw the tougher reality of many theodical inquiries: if we wound ourselves, the God who made us, made us so. We breach covenant because breaching is easy for us. Thus, the question and anguish that prod much of Cohen’s work is not only “Why does humanity fail covenant?” but also “Why did an omnipotent God create humanity so prone to fail it?” The article begins with a discussion of covenant in the Jewish tradition. Cohen’s theodicy is then traced through his verse. Attention is given to several topoi, including the use of doubled images to refer at once to divine and human persons; Cohen’s use of Jewish and Christian imagery; and theodicy as a way to understand Cohen’s relations with women.","PeriodicalId":38290,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Religion and Popular Culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.1000,"publicationDate":"2020-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Religion and Popular Culture","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3138/jrpc.2018-0033","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"0","JCRName":"RELIGION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Abstract:The work of Leonard Cohen, called the “black romantic” by Stephen Scobie, has been explored for its sex, politics, darkness, and struggle with faith. Cohen’s imagery has also been widely interrogated in critical and popular studies. The present article builds on this literature to explore a consistent theology and theodicy in Cohen’s writings. The theology is grounded in the covenant of Cohen’s Jewish tradition. It is Cohen’s reckoning with humanity’s failure to act covenantally with God and persons—though we are made as covenantal creatures, dependent on these bonds to survive and flourish. The easy theodicy says our suffering is self-inflicted: a fallen humanity breaks covenant for the possibility of gain and so injures itself. Cohen saw the tougher reality of many theodical inquiries: if we wound ourselves, the God who made us, made us so. We breach covenant because breaching is easy for us. Thus, the question and anguish that prod much of Cohen’s work is not only “Why does humanity fail covenant?” but also “Why did an omnipotent God create humanity so prone to fail it?” The article begins with a discussion of covenant in the Jewish tradition. Cohen’s theodicy is then traced through his verse. Attention is given to several topoi, including the use of doubled images to refer at once to divine and human persons; Cohen’s use of Jewish and Christian imagery; and theodicy as a way to understand Cohen’s relations with women.
莱昂纳德·科恩的犹太狄奥多西:我们在等待戈多,但我们可能永远不会到达
摘要:伦纳德·科恩的作品被斯蒂芬·斯考比称为“黑人浪漫主义”,其内容涉及性、政治、黑暗以及与信仰的斗争。科恩的意象也在评论界和大众研究中受到广泛质疑。本文以这些文献为基础,探索科恩著作中一致的神学和神正论。神学是基于科恩的犹太传统的契约。这是科恩对人类未能与上帝和人立约的判断——尽管我们被造为立约的生物,依赖这些纽带来生存和繁荣。简单的神正论说,我们的痛苦是自己造成的:堕落的人类为了可能获得的利益而违背了契约,因此伤害了自己。科恩看到了许多神学探究中更为严峻的现实:如果我们伤害了自己,那么创造我们的上帝就是这样造我们的。我们违背契约,因为违背契约对我们来说很容易。因此,推动科恩大部分作品的问题和痛苦不仅仅是“为什么人类不能遵守圣约?”也是“为什么全能的上帝创造的人类如此容易失败?”这篇文章首先讨论了犹太传统中的契约。科恩的神正论在他的诗中得以追溯。注意到几个主题,包括使用双重图像,指一次神和人的人;科恩对犹太教和基督教意象的运用;以及神正论作为理解科恩与女性关系的一种方式。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Religion and Popular Culture
Journal of Religion and Popular Culture Arts and Humanities-Religious Studies
CiteScore
0.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
27
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信