I have been absent from web discussions for some time now and may be the last one to notice Dennis MacDonald’s reply to critics of “mimesis criticism” — his work arguing that the Gospel of Mark is as much an imitation and transvaluation of Homeric characters as it is of those from the Jewish scriptures.
It is well worth reading. Not least his concluding pages suggesting a more subtle reason for many of the objections raised against his work.
If anyone else apart from me is also late to this reply, check it out at DRM’s website — look for the article there titled My Turn.
(I’ve discussed aspects of MacDonald’s work elsewhere on this blog some time back.)
Latest posts by Neil Godfrey (see all)
- Another Angle on Paul - 2023-03-20 05:40:12 GMT+0000
- Jesus’ Unheroic Moment in Gethsemane – and a return to Vridar/Vardis Fisher - 2023-03-17 09:12:36 GMT+0000
- From Humble Beginnings: A Tale of Two Divinities — Jesus and Apollo - 2023-03-15 09:09:56 GMT+0000
If you enjoyed this post, please consider donating to Vridar. Thanks!
One thought on “Dennis MacDonald’s ‘Turn’ to reply to critics of his Mark-Homer work”
I also still hold to Francesco Carotta’s hypothesis that GMark is an imitation and transvaluation of the life and career of Julius Caesar as well as those of Homeric characters and the Jewish Bible. It’s just that his proposed method of diegetic transposition by accident is, to me, dubious.