David J. A. Clines has for some time been considered a prominent
figure in studies of masculinities in the Bible but had not yet
devoted an entire publication to this theme. Play the Man! offers
a helpful and comprehensive posthumous collection of Clines’
scholarly offerings in this area of research. By not ‘setting out to
write a systematic account of masculinity in the Bible’ (ix), but
instead gathering a rolling collection of reflections and thoughts,
Clines offers a work that is true to the enduring but elastic and
eclectic nature of masculinities.
In the Introduction, Clines sets out his overarching argument
that masculinity can be considered a script, defined and negotiated
through social construction. Importantly, Clines concentrates on
how masculinity is interpreted through a conversation between
ancient context, text, and the modern world: each is projected onto
the other and can often conflict. Uniquely, however, he concludes
that there is nothing but a hegemonic ideal of masculinity proposed
and promoted in the Bible, which has influenced masculinities ever
since. He sees the Bible, then, as ‘a problematic text for anyone in
the modern world who has some sense of the social injustice of
gender inequality’ (16). Needless to say, however, many religious
followers manage to find consistency between a commitment to
gender justice and scripture.
Much of Clines’ analysis of themes and ideals are trait-based.
For example, he argues in Chapter 2 that David as a character, on
the whole, promotes an ideal masculinity found in the Hebrew Bible
through aggression, persuasion, beauty, male bonding, womanlessness,
and musicality. Clines uses a similar approach to characters
in other chapters including Moses and the exiled (Chapter 4), Job
(Chapter 5), the Psalmists (Chapter 6), the Prophets (Chapter 7),
Jesus (Chapter 8), and Paul (Chapter 9). But Clines is also aware of
‘other texts and practices’ for a script of masculinity, recognising in
Chapter 3 that the Book of Covenant will not have been the only
influence on gendered practice for its original readers. In all these
chapters, Clines is not afraid to tackle thorny issues of gendered
humanness: for example, in Chapter 6 he argues that killing is at the heart of masculine piety in the Psalms and should be acknowledged
as such in any honest theology of them.
Although Clines recognises that the book is best read in
‘small doses’ as independent essays (ix), the book does at times
feel scattered and overly repetitive due to the fact that Clines is
fundamentally proposing the same argument in each chapter
but with a new text or character. This sense of fragmentation
may demonstrate the different ways text, reader, and context are
in conversation, yet some more careful redaction of the essays
as a larger body of work may have helped alleviate much of this
replication.
Worth noting is Clines’ argument that the Jesus of all four
Gospels is unequivocally a ‘traditional male, indefeasibly and
unmistakably male; he is unaware of his masculinity, and he is
unaware that masculinity is only one way of being human’ (131).
In contrast to most leading scholars in this area, rather than
recognising variance between each Gospel account Clines suggests
the four evangelists all decide to present the same hegemonic Jesus.
I am unconvinced by such a broad and generalising conclusion, as
there is much difference in each evangelist’s portrayal of Jesus for
their audience, and therefore of his gender. Nevertheless, in this
same chapter, Clines’ attention to the violence of Jesus’ actions,
in language and imagery, is a fascinating Gospel feature often
overlooked.
In the latter parts of the book, looking to do justice to feminist
scholarship, Clines changes the rhythm of previous chapters and
debunks what he sees as the myths of the liberative Magnificat
(Chapter 10) and the claims to a feminine God in the Hebrew Bible
(Chapter 11). In both these cases, Clines sees the language for God
and speaker, even those thought to be feminine, as awash with
‘oppressive masculinity’ (176) that cannot be ignored. The final
chapters of the book establish a ‘moral duty’ (209) to expose the
‘problem’, ‘outrage’, and ‘crime’ (208) of masculinity in the Bible.
Clines’ book is helpful in recognising what he calls the ‘scandal
of the male Bible’, that the Bible is firstly an encoding of masculine
values and secondly that it is almost entirely invisible, even to the
modern reader. Yet Clines fails to quench any thirst for answers or
offer responses to the ethical issues his damning conclusions raise,
especially for those of faith. He concludes: ‘Even if we don’t quite