Back to previous page. Page 33
An author at writers.net has raised a question regarding ambiguous sentences.
Regarding ambiguity:
A professor once pointed out to me that the phrase "the love of God" might mean a love which God feels or it might me the love which people feel towards God and there is even a third possibility which is rather difficult to explain, but a kind of disembodied love, like an energy or force, in the sense of the verse "God IS love" (i.e. this sort of love as an energy or force or field in it's own right, and perhaps as distinguished from other sorts of love.
The above is an example of a phrase which is ambiguous. I suppose there are words which are ambiguous, or perhaps we might say multi-valent.
There are statements which are ambivalent. A very famous example from antiquity is when a king inquired of the Delphic oracle regarding a war which he was hoping to wage. The oracle answered, "If you go to battle, a great nation will fall." The king foolishly assumed that the great nation to fall would be his enemy's nation and not his own.
Ambiguity and multivalence and vagueness are energies if you will, waiting to be harnessed towards some end. But you must have some end or purpose in mind, obviously. It is not sufficient to simply "sprinkle" one's writing with ambiguities as one might sprinkle an ice-cream cone with chocolate.
Leo Strauss wrote "Persecution and the Art of Writing" to explore the notion that a writer, for political or moral reasons, might write a work which has an outer, explicit meaning for the commonfolk, but a hidden inner esoteric meaning meant only for those equipped to discern it.
In the Book of Proverbs, King Solomon says, "A word of wisdom, fitly spoken, is like an apple of gold in fittings of silver." In those ancient times, an artisan would fashion an apple of gold, and then create a fine silver screen casing, with the tiniest of holes. From a distance, it appears to be a silver apple. As one approaches closer and studies more carefully, a glint of gold is seen from certain angles and one's curiousity and suspicions are aroused. Finally, after careful study, one realizes the true, hidden nature of the work, namely, that a golden apple is concealed inside the silver casing.
One might consider the Rubaiyat of Omar Khayam, a poem written in Persia in a society strictly governed by Islamic laws. If one were to write an explicit treatise on philosophical or spiritual ideas which conflict with Islam, then one might face persecution. If one can say, "well, this is simply a poem" then perhaps more may be "gotten away with" and certain teachings may escape the attention of the government censors.
The ancient Greek word "kosmos" has a wonderful ambiguity, in that it may mean "adornment" or it may mean "universe." We derive both "cosmetic" and "cosmic" from "kosmos." The ancient Greek word for "poetry" is from the word "poiesis," meaning "to create." The artist assumes the role of God and creates a world which is ornamental.
But that world created has its own laws and seasons and physics, and things are taking place in that world, changing, evolving, approaching some final state or estate. The Greek word "teleiology" denotes some end or final estate which involves purpose or intention or perfection, e.g. the teleiology of an acorn is to become an oak tree. The Greek word "eschatos" simply means "last" or perhaps "latest." If our entire universe, through the third law of thermodynamics, winds down to some lukewarm stew of randomness, and stops there, well that is its eschatology, but there is no teleiology from our perspective, since nothing was achieved or gained.
One finds a wonderful ambiguity in the New Testament in the Book of Revelation. The last sentence of the 6th verse of the tenth chapter, in Greek, reads "kai xronos ouketi estai" which is literally saying "that there should be time no longer." The King James version give an accurate translation. Many modern translations will render this verse, "and there shall be no more DELAY." The King James translation (and the original Greek) imply that TIME ITSELF SHALL CEASE, in the sense that an Albert Einstein or a Steven Hawking might speak of the end of a time-space continuum, or time at the speed of light, or time at the first moment of the big bang. If we look earlier in the Book of Revelation, at chapter 6, verse 14, we see, "And the heaven departed as a scroll when it is rolled together." So there is actually some basis for saying that some quantum-relativistic time-space phenomenon is being described.
For those who prefer the translation "no more delay," then time and space continue, and the new heaven and new earth and kingdom of God are very much like business as usual, but perhaps minus various undesirable things like sin, death, war.
A second marvellously ambiguous word in the Bible is "faith." The word "faith" (or belief) is referenced only THREE times in the old Testament, and its first appearance is in the NEGATIVE, in Deuteronomy, Ch. 32, "Because of your FAITHLESSNESS, my anger has been kindled like a fire, and like a fire it shall burn from the highest mountain tops to the base of the mountains and down to the lowest Sheol (Hell) and shall wither the fruitfulness of the earth." By the way, this first mention of FAITH-lessness is also the first mention of Hell (Sheol) and of Fire, but the fire is not causally related to the hell.
The second occurance of "faith" is in Habbakuk, ch. 3 I think, the famous verse which Martin Luther of the sixteenth century uses to base his entire theology of "sola fides" (salvation by faith alone). It reads in the King James translation, "For the just man shall live by HIS faith."
But the Greek Septuagint is very different, reading, "For the just shall live by MY (God's) faith." Now in Hebrew, the word for faith means "faithfulness to a binding agreement or testament" (i.e. one is true to one's word.) This meaning of faith is VERY different from the Greek word "pistis" which Paul uses in Hebrews ch. 11, verse 1, "Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen."
The Old Testament stresses the importance of obeying or abiding by an agreement or promise. In Habbakuk, God is saying that the JUST person who honestly fulfills the contractual agreement will LIVE (and not be destroyed) precisely because of GOD'S faithfulness to His part of the agreement. This is a legal quid-pro-quo, something in exchange for or expectation of something else. In the New Testament, faith is a hope or confidence that everything will be "alright" which INCLUDES forgiveness for shortcomings in the observance of commandments or contractual agreements. AND, furthermore, we see that the Septuagint version of Habbakuk includes a verse which is absent from the King James translation from the Masoretic texts, namely "BUT if he turn back, THEN my heart shall take no delight in him" (i.e. if the human being renigs on his part of the contractual agreement or Testament, then God will likewise renig, and the agreement will be null and void.)
So, we see that the ambiguity of one or two words can lead to two entirely different worlds or ways of life.
But, for the writer, here is a problem. The average reader does not care to immerse themselves in such complexity and speculation. I see one woman every day who always has a popular paperback romance in her hands. I once asked her if she had ever read "The Painted Bird" by Jersy Kosinsky, and she let out a gaffaw and said, "Oh, a million years ago I read such books."
Perhaps the best audience to write for is oneself, and if others tag along, well, thats ok too.
The world is transformed with words, one person at a time.
Back to previous page. Page 33
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons License.