NTRS3510: Apocalyptic Then and Now

Pacific School of Religion – Graduate Theological Union

Spring 2008, PSR Mudd 101, Thursdays, 9:40am-12:30pm

Courtney Gulden cbgulden@yahoo.com

Tat-siong Benny Liew bliew@psr.edu

Office Hours: by appointment

Syllabus

Course Description: This course will survey ancient Jewish and Christian apocalyptic literature (then), and investigate the place of the apocalyptic in contemporary U.S. society (now). We will consider apocalyptic not only as a literary genre restricted to religious texts, but also as a social phenomenon steeped in various cultures. Through lectures, discussion, reading, and writing, we will explore the rhetoric of apocalyptic, as well as the relations between apocalyptic and body, dis-ease, violence, and the environment. At the end of the semester, we will try to evaluate apocalyptic as horror and/or hope.

Learning Outcomes: Students who complete this class with a grade of B or higher will:

1. Gain a basic knowledge of selected primary texts concerned with Jewish and Christian apocalyptic;

2. Have some understanding of the diverse theories about the origin of apocalyptic;

3. Acquire certain skills to analyze and evaluate apocalyptic as a genre, a structure of thought and logic, as well as a social phenomenon;

4. Develop and enhance their capacity to read critically, write critically and think critically (evidenced by their ability to identify a thesis, as well as the threads of its argument and to critique—positively and negatively—the argument); and

5. Be able to identify cultural expressions and representations of apocalyptic, as well as recognize apocalyptic as a pervasive, malleable, and ubiquitous discourse operating in many arenas of society.

Required Texts:

Carey, Greg. Ultimate Things: An Introduction to Jewish and Christian Apocalyptic Literature. St. Louis: Chalice Press, 2005.

Johnson Frykholm, Amy. Rapture Culture: Left Behind in Evangelical America. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2004.

Lieb, Michael. Children of Ezekiel: Aliens, UFOs, the Crisis of Race, and the Advent of the End Time. Durham: Duke University Press, 1998.

Long, Thomas L. AIDS and American Apocalypticism: The Cultural Semiotics of an Epidemic. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press, 2005.

Morrison, Toni. Paradise. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997.

Course Reader – Available at Instant Copy 2138 University Ave @ Shattuck 704-9700.

Readings not included in the reader will be available on Blackboard in pdf format.

Course Requirements and Evaluation:

1. Students must attend every class, unless otherwise excused. Please speak to me as soon as you know you have a conflict, or email me if you are too sick to come to class. There will only be one “excused” absence—a lack of attendance beyond this will be reflected in your grade.
2. As this course is designed to incorporate both lectures and seminar style participation, students are expected to read all assigned texts (with RARE exception, there will not be more than 125 pgs/wk) and to come prepared to discuss these texts. Please take time in your reading to identify the author’s thesis and construction of her/his argument before you move to critique. Please remember as well to be attentive to opposing viewpoints and to discuss with a hermeneutic of generosity. Class Participation is 34% of your grade.
3. Students will complete short weekly writing assignments (1-4 pages) with the option to opt out of one. The 11 writing assignments are the remaining 66% of your grade.
4. NO late papers will be accepted! If you will not be in class, email me and attach your work before the start of class.

Course Calendar and Assignments:

(Texts from the Course Reader are marked w/an *)

February 7^th

Introduction to the Course

• Frontline on Apocalypticism

February 14^th

Ancient Jewish Apocalyptic I

Readings:

• 1 & II Enoch (aka The Book of the Watchers)
• Daniel 1-6
• Carey, 1-50
• Cook, “Encountering Apocalyptic Worlds,” and “The Danger of Domesticating the Apocalyptic Texts,” 19-61*

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 1-2 page critical, academic reflection on the readings.

February 21^st

Ancient Jewish Apocalyptic II

Readings:

• Daniel 7-12
• Jubilees
• The Community Rule
• 4Q Wiles of the Wicked Woman
• Carey, 69-101

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 2 page outline of how they would exegete a specific passage or chapter from the book of Daniel. It is your responsibility to choose one small part of Daniel. Also, please be sure to include which methodological approach you would take in your exegesis.

February 28^th

Early Jewish/Christian Apocalyptic I

Readings:

• 4 Ezra 4-9
• 2 Baruch
• Carey, 102-124 & 147-178
• Jacobsen “Introduction,” 1-52*
• DeSilva, “Fourth Ezra: Reaffirming Jewish Cultural Values through Apocalyptic Rhetoric,” 123-139*

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 2 page outline of a sermon/talk/study they might give on any of the apocalyptic literature we have engaged with thus far, including within this week’s readings.

March 6^th

Early Jewish/Christian Apocalyptic II

Readings:

• Revelation
• Carey, 179-206
• Rowland, “The Apocalypse in History: The Place of the Book of Revelation in Christian Theology and Life,” 151-171*
• Blount, “The Rap Against Rome: The Spiritual-Blues Impulse and the Hymns of Revelation,” 91-117*

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 2-3 page analysis of one aspect/one symbol within the book of Revelation contrasting two divergent views of this symbol. Views may be divergent because of philosophical differences, theological differences and/or differences in the social location/context of the writers. For example, you may look to commentaries from the church fathers, or statements of faith from a particular denomination, to contrast with a post/modern day scholarly read of this symbol.

March 13^th

Theories of Apocalyptic Origins

Readings:

• Ezekiel 1-8 & 33-48
• Joel
• Carey, 51-68
• Nickelsburg, “Wisdom and Apocalypticism in Early Judaim,” 17-38*
• Tanzer, “Response to Nickelsburg,” 39-51*
• Nickelsburg, “Response to Tanzer,” 51-56*
• Freund, “The Apocalypse According to the Rabbis: Divergent Rabbinic Views on the End of Days,” 115-133*

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 1-2 page summary of the dialogue between Nickelsburg and Tanzer OR the Freund article.

March 20^th

Apocalypse and the Environment

Readings:

• Buell, “Preface and The Politics of Denial,” 3-38 & “Representing Crisis: Environmental Crisis in Popular Fiction and Film,” 247-284*
• Pearce, “When the Rivers Run Dry: The Crops Fail,” 3-34 & “When the Rivers Run Dry: Civilizations Fall,” 185-218*

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 1-2 page reflection on the readings, as well as 3 discussion questions.

March 27^th (spring break)

NO CLASS – But please look ahead for reading – we do not have class but you have readings!!

April 3^rd

Apocalypse and Waco

Readings:

• Newport, The Branch Davidians of Waco, Chapter 1, & Chapters 11-17*
• Gallagher, “ ‘All I am is Religion’: David Koresh’s Christian Millenarianism,” 196-208*

Assignment:

Students will write a 3-4 pg summary & critique of the readings engaging both authors as well as their own scholarly opinions informed by our work in the course thus far.

April 10^th

Postmodern Transformations

Reading:

• Morrison

Assignment:

Students will write a 4-5 page book review of Paradise making explicit the type of publication/audience the student is engaging; for example, is this review intended for a secular magazine or an academic journal?

April 17^th

Our Technological New Age

Reading:

• Lieb

April 24^th

Film Forum

• Gattaca

Students will enjoy their week, catch up on any readings they have been neglecting for other classes due to the fascinating nature of our work/texts, and come prepared for post-movie discussion engaging both the film and any materials we have read until this point.

May 1^st

Apocalypse and the Body: Dis-ease, Death and Sexuality

Reading:

• Long

Assignment:

Students will hand in a 3-4 page presentation paper on Long’s book.

May 8^th

Left Behind: Rapture and Remnant

Reading:

• Johnson Frykholm

Assignment:

Each student will take one or two chapters of the book to present.

Students will hand in an outline of their presentation.

May 15^th

Representing Apocalypse: September 11 & the War on Iraq

Readings:

• Mamdani, “Culture Talk; or, How Not to Talk About Islam and Politics,” 17-62 & “Beyond Impunity and Collective Punishment,” 229-260*
• Strawson, “Holy War in the Media: Images of Jihad,” 17-28*
• Brown, Fuzesi, Kitch, & Spivey, “Internet News Representations of 9/11: Archival Impulse in the Age of Information,” 104-117*
• Wykes, “Reporting Remembering and Reconstructing September 11, 2001,” 118-134*

NOTE: Readings will be split up between students and we will hear from each student on their specific article.

Assignment:

Students will locate an artistic, photographic, film clip, poetic or musical representation of Apocalypse and write a 1-2 page analysis/commentary on this piece noting ways in which the rhetoric of apocalyptic is reflected in their object/text.

May 22^nd

Appraising Apocalyptic

Readings:

• Brodhead, “Millenium, Prophecy and the Energies of Social Transformation: The Case of Nat Turner,” 212-234*
• Northcott, “The Warrior Ethos and the Politics of Jesus,” 134-179*
• Tao Lin, “I am ‘I Don’t Know What I Am’ and You are Afraid of Me and So Am I,” 204-206*
• Gish Jen, “The Water Faucet Vision,” 37-48*

Assignment:

Students will write a 2-3 page fictional piece incorporating apocalypse, or show a video/power point presentation you have produced, or compose an original piece of music and/or lyrics, or present a piece of artwork.

Critical Information on Assignments

• All assignments must be typed, double spaced, Times New Roman, 12 pt font, with 1 inch margins all around

• Format must not be justified. You must not put two spaces between sentences, nor must you place an extra space between paragraphs.

• You are encouraged to email papers to me. They must be emailed at least ten minutes prior to the start of class, even if you will not be in class that day. I will return papers emailed to me, by email with typed comments attached.

• Please follow Kate Turabian’s Style Manual (available on line as well as in the GTU bookstore) for all footnotes and bibliographic entries. You are required to provide formal footnotes and bibliographic entries for all works cited. This includes required texts and texts in the reader.

• For class purposes, a summary should be a restatement of the author’s argument/thesis in your own words in two or three sentences for articles and/or book chapters and five or six sentences for a full length book. A summary should not include your explicit opinion of the work.

• A Critical Academic Reflection should include an identification of the author’s thesis/argument, a brief summary (2-3 sentences) of the work (this does not require you to critique and/or support the argument), and your analysis (this does requires you to critique and/or support the argument). You may reflect upon the readings based upon a personal and/or life experience, but you must specifically relate that concisely stated experience to your analysis.

• Discussion Questions should be concise inquiries of the readings. You may ask about a point of argument you do not understand, or would like further clarification on; and you may also consider some piece of the reading(s) and ask the class what we think of your observation and/or analysis of the reading(s). Lastly, you may use the reading(s) as a jumping off point and ask the class to think with you about consequences of an argument and/or how one might relate that argument to life in ministry (of any sort).

• Presentation Paper: (May 1^st) So, imagine you will be part of a panel which includes Long: your presentation will be about 5 mins and you should engage his work w/o using the whole time for summary and open up points for discussion or invite Long to answer a critique you may have of him/his work.

• With regard to the final creative assignment (May 22^nd); whatever creative media you choose, you should incorporate one of the themes of the course (see weekly titles).

PLAGIARISM POLICY FOR PSR (Taken Directly from PSR Student Handbook)

In the United States and many other countries, one of the important markers of high academic standards is proper attribution (giving credit) for someone else’s ideas, thoughts, words, or methods of scholarship. Proper credit should be given in both oral and written contexts.

Proper credit is:

• When you use an actual sentence from a published article or unpublished essay, you must put the sentence in quote marks and give a footnote or citation to indicate who said it. The citation should include full bibliographic information. (For further information about correct citation form, see Kate Turabian, A Manual for Writers of Term Papers, Theses and Dissertations.)

• When you paraphrase or summarize another person’s ideas, you must give a footnote or citation to indicate whose ideas they are and where you got them. (Or, in lecturing, make clear from whose ideas you are drawing.)

• When you adopt a significant idea from someone else’s work, you must give a footnote or citation to indicate where you got the idea.

• When you use a method developed by someone else, you must give a footnote or citation to indicate the source of the method.

When you fail to do this, it is considered plagiarism. Plagiarism can apply both to students and to faculty. Plagiarism is using someone else’s ideas, thoughts, words, or methods of scholarship as if they were your own and without giving proper credit to that person. Plagiarism is considered wrong because (1) it is ‘stealing’ another person’s ideas, methods, etc., and (2) it is ‘lying’ – representing something as your own when it is not yours. At PSR, as at many comparable graduate-level institutions, plagiarism is considered a serious offense.

• Plagiarism includes failing to give citations in the examples above.

• Plagiarism also includes copying another student’s exam or part of an exam or essay.

It is not plagiarism when you indicate clearly that you are summarizing someone else’s views in order to provide the context for an assessment or critique of those views, or to incorporate them into a larger project. In this case, you must indicate clearly that you are giving the views of someone else – e.g. by starting with “so-and-so argues that…..” It is also not plagiarism to use a well-established idea that has been developed in multiple sources – e.g. to claim that God can be called “woman” as well as man is now sufficiently well established that it needs no attribution. Some phrases – e. g. “the personal is political” – are in such wide usage that sometimes we do not know where they originated; in such cases, it is acceptable to use them without attribution. However, the best scholarship will make every effort to give attribution where possible (e.g. to note that this phrase came from Robin Morgan).

Procedures and Penalties For Plagiarism:

Please find these described in detail in the student handbook or on the PSR website at: http://www.psr.edu/docs/PSR_MTS_manual_05-06.pdf.

PSR GRADING GUIDELINES

Grades are pedagogical tools to help students understand two things: (1) where they stand on any one assignment in relation to others in the class (since grading is mainly a comparative matter); and (2) whether they have fully mastered a particular assignment or need to do further work on it before moving on to the other issues. Thus, assigned grades should communicate the following:

A+ Publishable work; superb work, far beyond the level of excellence generally found in student work.

A Excellent work; work that shows a level of mastery consistently beyond the expected scope of the assignment.

A- Excellent work: work that shows a level of mastery usually beyond the expected scope of the assignment, but also indicates a few instances of only adequate levels of mastery.

B+ Very good work; work that indicates a consistently adequate mastery of the assignment at the expected level.

B Good work; work that indicates a basically adequate level of understanding but where improvements are clearly possible.

B- Work that shows a beginning grasp of the assignment but that needs improvement and additional study to reach a level of adequate mastery.

C+ Work that indicates significant lacunae in understanding, execution, or critical engagement; much additional study is needed.

C Poor work: work that shows a lack of overall understanding.

C- through D-

Levels of extremely poor work; work that indicates varying degrees of severe weakness in understanding, execution, and critical engagement.

F Failure - Consistent inability to understand, execute and critically engage the material; student receives no credit for assignment or class.