Genesis: New Translation of the Classic Bible Stories, A (Paperback)

by Stephen Mitchell (Author)

Editorial Reviews

Amazon.com Review
Stephen Mitchell, author of The Gospel According to Jesus and a participant in Bill Moyer's PBS television series on Genesis, has produced a new translation of the Bible's first book. Mitchell's sensitivity to the original Hebrew language and the history of biblical scholarship is evident in his carefully written work. But it is his overwhelming concern with contemporary relevance that marks this translation. Those interested in new means of situating the spiritual message of Genesis will likely welcome Mitchell's phrasings and interpretations. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

From Library Journal
Alter and Mitchell have each made new English translations of the book of Genesis, the first book of the Hebrew Bible. Alter (Hebrew and comparative literature, Univ. of California, Berkeley) who has written extensively on the literary aspects of the Hebrew Bible, seeks here to honor the meaning and the literary strategies of the ancient Hebrew text. He appends a lengthy scholarly commentary on the problems of making such a translation (which will appeal to specialists); detailed footnotes; and a discussion of the narrative of Genesis as a powerful literary expression (which will appeal to all readers). The writing is fluid and graceful. Mitchell (a translator of poetry and spiritual writings) strives to convey the simplicity, dignity, and power of the original Hebrew. In his introductory essay, he puts the historical Genesis in context. Mitchell contends that his translation differs from others in that he has pieced together a text from the best version of each of the stories of Genesis from what modern scholarship has identified as at least four sources of the original Hebrew text. In doing so, he believes that he has contributed to the clarity and power of the narrative and created a document of significance and beauty. His writing is clear and direct. Readers who know the best-known English translation, the King James version of the early 17th century, will find that both Alter's and Mitchell's renditions are like breaths of fresh air rustling through that version's musty pages. Both are highly recommended for all libraries.?Harry Frumerman, formerly with Hunter Coll., New York
Copyright 1996 Reed Business Information, Inc. --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.

See all Editorial Reviews

Product Details

• Paperback: 224 pages
• Publisher: Harper Perennial (September 9, 1997)
• Language: English
• ISBN-10: 0060928565
• ISBN-13: 978-0060928568
• Product Dimensions: 8.8 x 5.6 x 0.7 inches
• Shipping Weight: 12.8 ounces
• Average Customer Review: 3.3 out of 5 stars See all reviews (3 customer reviews)
• Amazon.com Sales Rank: #1,225,193 in Books (See Bestsellers in Books)

  Popular in these categories: (What's this?)

  #35 in	Books > Religion & Spirituality > Christianity > Reference > Old Testament > Stories
  #35 in	Books > Religion & Spirituality > Bible & Other Sacred Texts > Sacred Writings > Hebrew Bible (Old Testament) > Stories
  #64 in	Books > Religion & Spirituality > Authors, A-Z > ( M ) > Mitchell, Stephen

Customer Reviews

Most Helpful Customer Reviews

10 of 10 people found the following review helpful:

5.0 out of 5 stars Very necessary, August 30, 1999

By A Customer

As someone who has recently been fascinated with new translations of the book of Genesis, I found Mitchell's to be one of the best. I call it 'very necessary' because I believe that whether or not one reads the Bible as literature or religious truth, this translation does a superb job in recovering the text from centuries of doctrinal interpretation and positioning the reader for an honest assessment of Genesis. The God of these stories is a complex, capricious, and ultimately unpredicatable character. The Lord is not a likeable deity. And, in my opinion, for a Christian or Jew who has problems with this portrayal of the Lord, read the older versions again. They more or less can reveal the same interpretation to an intelligent reader, and even provoke an interest in how these stories have been read and misread through the discourse of doctrine, of everyday media, and why. This is how I find Mitchell's translation and interpretation valuable, because it questions this Lord. Mitchell looks at the stories of the rejected Cain, the slighted Esau, the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, and others and reevaluates them with a critical but fully appreciative approach.

11 of 14 people found the following review helpful:

3.0 out of 5 stars Wildly uneven, May 28, 2001

By	John S. Ryan "Scott Ryan" (Silver Lake, OH) - See all my reviews (TOP 500 REVIEWER)    (REAL NAME)

If you asked Stephen Mitchell to translate the telephone book, he'd probably come up with a brilliantly lucid work bristling with insights into the nature of spiritual reality. But you'd have to wade through an introduction that reads: "I found that the entirety of K-N was a later interpolation by a talented but spiritually inferior redactor, and moreover J is clearly a doublet of I just as V is a doublet of U. I have therefore taken the liberty of rearranging the alphabet in a way that felt authentic to me, following the spirit rather than the letter."

_Genesis_ is probably the clearest example of this tendency, as it's one of very few Mitchell works that's _supposed_ to be a complete and literal translation rather than a poetic rendering. And the translation, as always, is very, very good -- and very, very clear.

Unfortunately he chops the text to bits -- relegating the allegedly inauthentic bits to the appendices and notes, and explaining in the introduction all the things he thinks are wrong with the "redacted" version of Genesis. It's almost as though there's a conservation law at work: when Mitchell can't mess with the translation itself, his editorial views emerge somewhere else, with a vengeance.

I do not at all mean to imply that he has nothing important to say. On the contrary, some of his commentary is most helpful. He explains some very nice touches in his translation, and he does offer what seem to me to be some deep and genuine insights. (And he also does a nice job of showing how his translation is different from those of others.)

But I do find myself almost gasping for breath when I see the credulity with which he buys into the JEDP "documentary hypothesis" -- and, for that matter, the sheer chutzpah with which he determines just which bits of the text are later additions by "second- and third-rate writers" [p. xxxv] and even "dullard[s]" [p. xl]. I'm not terribly impressed with the usual arguments that the text is full of contradictions and awkward "doublets" in the first place; nor does Mitchell even pretend to make any effort to resolve them. (And neither have I found two authors who would divide the texts in the same way based on these features.) But as I noted long ago in my review of Kikawada and Quinn's _Before Abraham Was_ (which see), if all these alleged problems didn't bother the alleged "redactor," why do we think they would have bothered a single original author? Why not assume they are there for pedagogical reasons rather than inadvertently left there through mistake or stupidity?

Mitchell is also inclined to make little "arguments from moral indignation," in some cases even based on the _silence_ of the text on certain points. For example, he is properly repulsed by the manner in which the supposedly virtuous Lot offers his virgin daughters to the crowd beating on his door. But it is beyond me why he imagines -- for it must be imagination he uses here -- that the biblical author did _not_ object to this action.

But the reader interested primarily in Mitchell's own spiritual progress will be happy to hear that the "stories took on a stunning clarity" for him after he had removed "coat after coat of lacquer" [p. xxxv]. In other words: as usual, when Mitchell removes the parts he doesn't agree with, he is quite unaccountably stunned and amazed to find that he likes what's left.

On the whole, his translation is well worth reading. But be sure to keep the aspirin handy, and to put any breakable objects somewhere out of reach.

6 of 11 people found the following review helpful:

2.0 out of 5 stars If there is a translation in this, I missed it, July 21, 1998

By A Customer

This review is from: Genesis: New Translation of the Classic Bible Stories, A (Hardcover)

I really tried to finish this book, but there is only so much preaching one can take. The feeling reading this is that there is less of a translation being presented than the author's interpretation of the work. After being told several times what God thinks, or must have thought, or what God really meant but was misstated as the stories were passed along and re-written, the entire basis for a "new translation" seemed suspect. Most people will be better served by reading mainstream translations (with study notes for in-depth analysis). Many of these are written by scores of biblical scholars collaborating together and working with original texts. NIV, NASV, or other respected translations should be baseline reading...then interpretations such as this one can be read critically.