At some time in the future I would like to start a blog (or a web site) explaining how the Gospel of Mark may be viewed as chiasmus.
At the moment I’m considering a number of titles:
A) “Beautiful Mark – The Gospel of Mark as Chiasmus“
*This title is an A, B, B’, A’ chiasmus (“Beautiful” and “Chiasmus” forming the A/A’ match (because chiasmi are beautiful); “Mark” and “Gospel of Mark”, the B/B’ match).
B) “The Gospel of Mark as Chiasmus – Structure and Meaning in Mark“
*This title is also an A, B, B’, A’ chiasmus (“Chiasmus” and “Structure and Meaning” forming the B/B’ match).
C) “Seeing Mark”
*I’m not sure about this title. I think it’s probably a bit too bold. It’s meant as a reference to Jesus’ two-step healing of a blind man in Mk. 8:22-26. Just as the blind man needed a second touch in order to see clearly, so the reader of Mark, in my opinion, needs a 2nd touch in order to see (or read, or understand) Mark clearly.
Not only can Mark be read linearly (the normal way of reading – left to right; from beginning to end), it can also be read helically (i.e., reading the matches in order: A to A’ to B to B’ to C to C’, etc … until you arrive at the center, which produces a twirling left to right (a specific match), outside to inside (as you read additional matches, moving towards the middle) read.
To see Mark clearly we need to understand Mark both linearly and helically – as a chiasmus.
We need ‘a 2nd touch’.
Anyway, I hope to get to the ‘Markan Chiasmus’ blog (web site) some day …
_____
I’ve included a number of smaller chiasmi from the Gospel of Mark within this blog. Admittedly, they vary in quality. … Have a look if you wish
:
How about calling it “‘A Second Touch’: seeing Mark through chiasmus”
I’ve come across your blog as I was putting the finishing touches on an academic paper arguing for Mk 1:8 as Mark’s solution to the Discipleship problem. I found this through noting the chiastic structure of the prologue which rests on this verse (and 7) as its centre.
Blessings!
Gabi Markusse-Overduin
Nice suggestion for the title. Thank you. I wouldn’t mind seeing your paper some time.