BS2615-1-WI10

An interesting aticle on feminisn in religion by Gerda Lerner (found in a Harvard Divinity Shool Bulletin). It mentions feminist biblical criticism.

Ahhh, the woman's Bible!

an academic writing, but useful for its discussion on using literary approaches to biblical narratives. Comprehensive Bibiliography helpful.

Discusses how the author has used things like rhetorical devices, setting, characterization, point of view and plot as ways of conveying a message and shaping readers.

Nice example of redaction applied to Mark 8:27-33 and Luke 9: 18-22

This book is highly regarded as the formative text on Redaction Criticism. Unfortunately, it is unavailable on Google Books. ISBN: 1579105459

Interesting examples of redaction in Samuel-Kings

A nice introduction to the history and use of Redaction Criticism.

Looks promising

This also looks very helpful, and the book looks good too!

This is a very complete source on Canonical Criticism. It is informative for my description and looks like a book worth buying.

Looks like this could be a good book on this type of criticism in a community context.

Straight from the words of Derrida in an interview. Came across this quote which does a good job of describing a deconstructionist approach: Derrida says, "There is the general structure of Messianicity as the structure of experience, and on this groundless ground there have been revelations, a history which one calls Judaism or Christianity and so on. That is a possibility and then you would have a Heideggerian gesture, in style. You would have to go back from these religions to the fundamental ontological conditions of possibilities of religions, to describe the structure of messianicity on the groundless ground on which religions have been made possible (23)".

Right off of Wikipedia: Theory Derrida began speaking and writing publicly at a time when the French intellectual scene was experiencing an increasing rift between what could broadly be called "phenomenological" and "structural" approaches to understanding individual and collective life. For those with a more phenomenological bent the goal was to understand experience by comprehending and describing its genesis, the process of its emergence from an origin or event. For the structuralists, this was precisely the false problem, and the "depth" of experience could in fact only be an effect of structures which are not themselves experiential. It is in this context that in 1959 Derrida asks the question: Must not structure have a genesis, and must not the origin, the point of genesis, be already structured, in order to be the genesis of something?[3] In other words, every structural or "synchronic" phenomenon has a history, and the structure cannot be understood without understanding its genesis.[4] At the same time, in order that there be movement, or potential, the origin cannot be some pure unity or simplicity, but must already be articulated-complex-such that from it a "diachronic" process can emerge. This originary complexity must not be understood as an original positing, but more like a default of origin, which Derrida refers to as iterability, inscription, or textuality.[5] It is this thought of originary complexity, rather than original purity, which destabilises the thought of both genesis and structure, that sets Derrida's work in motion, and from which derive all of its terms, including deconstruction.[6] Derrida's method consisted in demonstrating all the forms and varieties of this originary complexity, and their multiple consequences in many fields. His way of achieving this was by conducting thorough, careful, sensitive, and yet transformational readings of philosophical and literary texts, with an ear to what in those texts runs counter

A sound critique of deconstruction, mostly using Wittgenstein as the example. Does not necessarily rip deconstruction apart just simply present the difficulties in the deconstructionist ideas.