Baker Academic

Tuesday, November 27, 2012

The Day the Wheels Came Off at New College—Chris Keith

Academics is a funny business, and every once in a while it’s useful to laugh at ourselves, or others as the case may be. Along those lines, I want to share one of the funniest moments that I’ve ever been part of in New Testament scholarship. Before getting too far, though, I want to preface this by saying that the research seminars during my PhD were some of the highlights of the experience. There were always big names presenting on cutting edge work. Well, there was almost always big names presenting on cutting edge work. . . .

In the final year of my doctoral work at New College, University of Edinburgh, our Friday research seminar had a surprise guest one day. Apparently someone at the School of Law had made a request of someone at the School of Divinity that a visiting emeritus law professor (British-born, but had been teaching in the USA) present in our seminar, since this professor had an interest in NT studies (and had actually been one of David Daube’s students I later found out). They hesitatingly permitted it.

...more...
I was actually a bit excited because the guest speaker’s lecture concerned the Pericope Adulterae (John 7.53–8.11), upon which I was writing my PhD thesis. As anyone who is beyond four or five years removed from their PhD days will tell you, that time period is a kind of a golden era because it’s one of the few times in your life where you have read everything worth reading on a given narrow topic. Once you move on and have to join the working world and squeeze research into the cracks of time that are available (and don’t get me started on the ungodly amount of time that kids take away from research—of course worth it, but still, at least a book or two’s worth of research), it’s just nearly impossible to have canvassed a field of research in the way that you did when you were a PhD student.

At any rate, I was there at the time, and so immediately recognized that something was wrong with this presenter’s lecture—I knew it already. I recognized it immediately as an article published in Biblica. Sure enough, I looked down and the presenter wasn’t reading his notes on A4. Instead, he was reading from the library’s bound copy of Biblica volumes. He had literally gone down in the New College library, pulled out their copy of his article from almost ten years ago and was reading word-for-word in a research seminar full of about 35 or 40 people! I leaned over to my friend Dieter Roth and said, “He’s reading from the library’s copy of his own article.” Dieter looked at me like, “Surely not,” then looked up to see that, in fact, he was.

At this point, I started getting giddy the way schoolchildren do when they know recess is right around the corner because I knew that part of this article included a pretty sexually-explicit metaphorical reading of Jesus’ encounter with the woman at the well in John 4. Right on cue, he turned to Helen Bond, who was presiding, and announces, “I’d now like to go a different direction.” Helen said, “Would you like to disclose where that might be?” He indicated that he was pushing right ahead and launched into the second section of the article—his crazy interpretation of John 4. I can’t remember exactly how he got there, but he read Jesus’ request for water as some type of sexual innuendo. Not getting the reaction of affirmation he sought, he then decided to make it easier for us dunces who could not quite understand the sexualized nature of wells in first-century Samaria. “Do you get it? The bucket goes down, and then back up...it goes in, and then out.”

Yes, he said that. There are three further features about this presentation that deserve mentioning, though. Once I was clued in to the fact that this was not a normal presentation, I started really paying attention, not just formulating a question for response time. Once I did, I noticed that his speech was pretty slurred for a formal presentation and that his face was pretty red. “Does he look drunk to you?” I asked Dieter in hushed tones.

Even better than the possibility that this speaker was presenting-under-the-influence, or more accurately reading-aloud-previously-published-research-under-the-influence, he stopped several times to tell us that he might just be too radical for us. We might, he insisted, be too conservative to get what he was proposing. I don’t know if he thought conservative people don’t have sex or what, but I can assure you that there was no shortage of people who fell way outside the bounds of conservative Christianity.

Not satisfied to leave these assumed conservatives in a field of ignorance, though, he—I kid you not—engaged in hand motions to explain the sexual nature of the bucket going into and out of the well. He extended a hand with finger pointed, then retracted it, all the while saying, “The bucket goes in and out, and she said Jesus had no bucket.” If this wasn’t enough, he then turned to Helen Bond and gestured with his head like, “Get it?”

That feeling of barely-constrained laughter is one of the best feelings in the world, and that’s precisely how I felt at this moment. I kept thinking over and over, “Is this really happening?” and nudging Dieter in the ribs. Just in case he, too, was barely constraining his laughter, I wanted to make him laugh first. I cannot possibly put into words the level of absurdity involved with this presenter beckoning Helen, one of the few women in the room, to agree with him about buckets going down and up and making hand gestures all the while in front of a room full of established scholars and PhD students. I looked over at one point and Larry Hurtado was just covering his face.

The question-and-answer time held even more tragically comedic gold. Paul Foster, a highly-esteemed NT specialist at New College, outright asked the man why we should be listening to him at all. The man’s retort was, “You remind me of anti-Semitic New Testament scholars in the 1970s.” At this Paul’s eyes about popped out of his head, as they should have and as did all of our eyes. Before any of us could follow-up on this and make explicit just what a faux pas he had committed, or even get control of the situation unfolding before us, a student in the back asked what must be the most hilarious question I’ve ever heard at a formal academic paper. It wasn’t a question, it was a statement: “I’m surprised that someone your age is even having these types of thoughts.” That’s right, when faced with a seemingly crazy, likely drunk, guest lecturer making inappropriate hand motions and comparing excellent scholars to racists, apparently the right plan of attack is to make a thinly-veiled reference to his potential impotence. I could not possibly look at Dieter or anyone else for fear that I would lose it right then and there.

I have often wondered if all this actually happened in the scope of about one hour. But I swear it did, and there are many witnesses. Perhaps some will comment on this post. I’ve often wondered if anyone else was so lucky as to have something that crazy happen in a formal research venue. This is an official challenge to the readers of this blog to story-top.

28 comments:

  1. I can't top it, but I can say that it epitomizes why I find most conferences and seminars to be time-wasting bores.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Biblica... where no idea goes unpublished.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Great story! Thanks for the laughs. I have nothing to come close to topping it, so I'll not even offer an attempt.

    ReplyDelete
  4. To the contrary, SWNID, this was anything but a time-wasting bore. You can't pay enough money for that kind of entertainment!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I only wish SBL 2012 had been this good!

      Delete
  5. I am laughing out loud here in my office. No such fun at Durham, but there was an exchange between Kyle Wells and Francis Watson that will go down in the history books. But it doesn't even hold a stick to this.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Not as outrageous as your story, but true nonetheless: A friend of mine once asked, during the Q & A time at an academic conference, from the front row, in an attention-commanding voice, "So, does God have a penis or not?" Actually, he was not my friend at the time, but he became so minutes later when the session had ended.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ooh... I like this story a whole lot. It absolutely needs to be told.

      -anthony

      Delete
    2. Loose lips sink ships, and loose blogs sink jobs, or at least waterlog them. Perhaps the as-of-yet unnamed friend will choose to tell the story. If he does, I'll trust his skills of obfuscation.

      Delete
    3. Luckily neither of us are in danger of losing our jobs; Chris, because he has diplomatic immunity and me because there are no trials in Gitmo.

      -anthony

      Delete
    4. I've heard this story before. I think it's important to note that the person who said that was defending someone who was being bullied by another person in the audience.

      Delete
  7. Ben Blackwell, I'm intrigued by this Durham event!

    ReplyDelete
  8. Was this Calum Carmichael? I remember reading his treatment of the well and bucket...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. No, James, not Carmichael. But I'll say no more about who it was.

      Delete
  9. That's hilarious. I don't have a better story, but I'll add that the first regional SBL I ever went to I unfortunately sat next to a semi-famous scholar who, at the end of the first paper, stood up and in some kind of sad/wacky rhetorical-Greek fashion lamented the state of his career, how ignored he was by SBL and other conferences, and by the end of the 10 min diatribe rattled off his CV for good measure. The moderator could not control him. Being it was the very first session I had ever attended ... well, it was nothing short of crazy. But now I just have to laugh at it when I hear his ranting in the echoes of my mind.

    ReplyDelete
  10. you should name names. anyone who uses hand gestures deserves to be famous.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. How about googling it ;)

      If you think about it, not many discussions about Jesus and the Samaritan woman include sexual organs, so "samaritan woman well vagina bucket penis" (without quotation marks) leads you to the source in no time.

      ps. check chapter 3 of this preview: www.alanwatson.org/law_reality_society.pdf

      Delete
  11. I came across a fitting German proverb after reading this, "Gelehrt Narren sind die besten."

    ReplyDelete
  12. Great story. NB. Alan Watson, «Jesus and the Adulteress», Biblica Vol. 80 (1999) 100-108 (fits the bill on most counts) does not appear to contain any comments on John 4. Memory can be constructed in a variety of ways of course.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Just so you know, it takes all of 5 seconds on Google to identify the speaker in question. You might want to consider redacting the publication and/or year involved.

    ReplyDelete
  14. I was there as one of the few women. This is the first time I heard the phrase "over-sexing the text". I believe it was Foster who said it. Also, Helen Bond and I kept catching each others' eyes and cringing. The speaker said something like "as we all know...women are flirtatious by nature" while turning to Helen (that is when she and I widened our eyes simultaneously). Rainy Hall was buzzing with people saying, "Get it?"

    ReplyDelete
  15. 'If we return now to John, we may suspect a subtext. The woman, perhaps flirtatiously as an opening gambit to more conversation, asks why Jesus requests water from her. Jesus responds by saying he could give her living water. However this may be intended, the woman covertly takes this as a hint of a sexual advance. She takes “living water” in the sense of semen. What liquid could be more alive? She responds: “You have no bucket and this well is deep,” or “You have no dick and this (my) cunt is deep.” The
    woman uses well with the meaning we saw in Proverbs. In a different context, bucket might also we used of a vagina, but with respect to the well it means a penis: that enters the well and goes up and down. [I imagine the hand gestures here] Sexual innuendo by a willing woman implying that she is too much woman for the male who comes too close is a common come-on trick.[...] When Jesus says whoever drinks the water that he can give will never thirst again, she demands it. She takes his words as hinting that he will give her such a stupendous orgasm that she will never need sex again. She wants such good sex. It is on this basis that she wants Jesus’ “living water” so that she will never need it again. Nor to have to come so far to draw! From her very first words she has been testing Jesus out.'

    *slow clap*

    ReplyDelete
  16. Isn't that the thesis of about 75% of the papers at any given SBL meeting?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Well, after all that I ain't gonna fret much about the propriety of my comments on this here blog, lol.

    ReplyDelete
  18. Funny as hell. I wish my ph.d. seminars were half as interesting!

    ReplyDelete
  19. thanks for sharing.

    ReplyDelete