About book Lion's Honey: The Myth Of Samson (2006)
"Important, but not quite loved." -Thoughts on Lion's Honey by David Grossman (translated from Hebrew by Scott Schoffman)I am no stranger to the story of Samson; I studied in a private, religious school for 13 years, during which I was - for lack of a better, or nicer, word - force-fed the Bible and its stories*. Samson's feats of strength (the only one I was ever able to remember was the one at the end, really - collapsing the two pillars and killing three thousand Philistines in one blow) and his treacherous, short-lived romance with Delilah ("you are my sweetest downfall," so sings Regina Spektor) made a mark on me early on, if only because a) every child remembers stories of superhuman feats, b) Samson and Delilah was my first fatalist love story - I was yet to be introduced to Romeo and Juliet, and c) I was, at a very young age, wondering why Samson had to die together with the Philistines - sure, he had his eyes gouged out and was weak from his recent haircut, but if God really loved Samson, shouldn't He have saved him? Enveloped Samson in a force field while the arena tumbled down around him, perhaps?I didn't find the answer to that question in Lion's Honey, David Grossman's interpretation (or maybe it's called an analysis?) of the story of Samson (the Book of Judges, chapter 13-16, in case you want to brush up on biblical history). However, Grossman did shed quite the new light on Samson that made me go "why didn't I think of that?" and "oh my ... goodness, he's right!": that Samson was - and these are my words, not Grossman's - a misunderstood freak who never realized that he was exploited (nationalised was Grossman's term) by God, and that his womanizing (which really is too big a word in his case; does being with three women - not even simultaneously, no - count as womanizing? Then again it was the biblical times) was in truth a need for intimate connection which he'd lacked his entire life, beginning with his miraculous conception (they say his mother was barren, but hey, the patriarch should be under suspicion for infertility, too), ending with his first love Delilah's treachery (the three times she tried to harm him should have been enough of a warning - but, alas, the poor guy was in love) and ultimately leading to his demise under the two pillars with the Philistines (which in any case looked like a suicide but since it's in the Bible, it counts as a sacrifice).Grossman wasn't as blunt, though.The exploration of Samson's life is so detailed, so intricate, that Grossman even had footnotes; his discussion alone of how an angel informed Samson's mother of her impending divine pregnancy ate up the first 30 pages of the book. That Samson was a misunderstood person "who has been planted in the world and operated as a lethal weapon of divine will," at the same time clueless as to his purpose in life - "He goes through life like a walking enigma, marvelling over his secret, his riddle." - and his greatest struggle being pre-destined for such greatness as God's instrument (or puppet, depending on how one views it), a destiny which has made him different, an outcast, when all he ever wanted was to fit in. His story is littered with allusions to his great disconnect - with his parents, his people, even to himself; Samson was larger than life, yet despite his great strength, he was emotionally inadequate for the job. "How astonishing and poignant, this gulf between enormous physical strength and an immature, childlike soul."Grossman's interpretation of the story of Samson is so far, far removed from what I've grown up with; Scott Schoffman's translation is delicious in its simplicity - what could have turned out to be a boring, seemingly academic book became vivid in giving a new (albeit quite the eccentric) definition of one of the Bible's greatest heroes. I was honestly expecting a work of fiction when I picked up the book, but I'm glad I was wrong.Samson's story, though full of great feats of strength, ended sadly with his death; Lion's Honey, however, has made me even more melancholic, sadder for a man whose greatest wish was "that one person love him simply, wholly, naturally, not because of his miraculous quality, but in spite of it."I hope he didn't die in vain.PS. A thought, in retrospect: everyone's trying to be different, "but maybe it is not a weakness, an illness, to be like everyone else."* I have nothing against the Bible, though. In fact, my copy is quite the confidante (I hide small notes and the occasional rainy-day bill between its pages) and great giver of advice (the occasional Bible-dipping, as introduced by Augusten Burroughs' Running with Scissors). I'm not trying to be blasphemous, I swear.Originally posted here.
Samson on the analyst’s couchtInstead of offering biblical exegesis, Lion’s Honey is a literary and psychoanalytical reading of the Samson story, as told in The Book of Judges. An Israeli novelist, Grossman starts with the original text and proceeds in 150 pages to interpret Samson as an uncommonly lonely figure. Samson is chosen – as an angel informs his mother – to help liberate Israel from the Philistines, but he seems to spend his life as often acting on impulse as serving God. Desire for female companionship and craving for revenge steer his will.tGrossman (or his translator) grounds the story in the King James’ Version, whose archaic prose doubles our sense of the mythic and the strange in the Samson tale. As well as the angelic visitation, there is Samson’s bare-handed killing of a lion, his burning of Philistine cornfields and vineyards using 300 flaming-tailed foxes, his slaughter of 1,000 Philistines armed only with a donkey’s jawbone, his night with an enemy whore in Gaza and his theft of that city’s gates, and his self-blinding after Delilah’s betrayal. Suicidally, he kills 3,000 Philistine nobles and their wives when he topples the pillars of a mansion and brings the roof down upon them all. There is so much action in these four Old Testament chapters, yet so little attention to thought and feelings. Samson’s story cries out for an imaginative filling in of character and motive, and Grossman does a brilliant job, drawing judicious support from the work of Jewish rabbis, archaeologists and psychologists.tBy taking a secular tack, Grossman frees himself from the demands of a holistic understanding of the Bible as a source of divine teaching, so he can regard Samson as a psychologically complex man in his own right, not part of a continuum of leaders of Israel. This is not to say that Grossman ignores biblical interpretation, but what comes before or after Samson is not considered, even Samson’s legacy in initiating Israel’s defeat of the Philistines. Grossman’s Samson is to be pitied as much as admired, and we come to understand his excesses.tIn another sense, the focus on Samson-the-man is confining. For example, when likening Samson’s mother to Samuel’s, Grossman talks of “the uncomfortable notion that God has somehow exploited the despair of these mothers, who thirst so avidly to conceive,” in giving them sons destined to live apart from their families (16). However, “reading with faith” can produce very a different interpretation. Taken as literature alone, Judges arguably shows God to be an exploitative deity. But to take the passage as the Word of God does not allow such an interpretation; it prompts the reader to seek alternate explanations that follow from belief that God is wholly just and loving, explanations that enrich understanding of the Bible as a whole. tAnd then there’s the thorny issue of free will. Grossman claims that while the modern reader may well view the Samson tale as one in which predestination and character collide, the Bible presents the story wholly as a “drama of fate.” But does it? Or is there evidence of free will in the text itself? The fact that God, through his angel, announces that Samson will begin to deliver Israel from the Philistines does not preclude exercise of free will. God endows his servants with talents, and gives some of them special and specific tasks, but they may misuse those talents and refuse to follow his desires; even King David errs and strays, for which he later begs God for forgiveness. tGrossman shows how Samson exercises free will on various key occasions, if often acting on his impulses rather than in a considered manner. His analysis is convincing in most cases, but I see Samson’s free will as entirely compatible with a reading-by-faith, not limited to a the secular analysis of the Bible as literature. As such, Grossman’s book could prove quite handy to pastors preparing a fresh-look sermon on Samson.
Do You like book Lion's Honey: The Myth Of Samson (2006)?
I have been reading through the Canongate Myth Series, and enjoying the modern day retellings of familiar myths. David Grossman's Lion's Honey is more an essay and analysis of the Samson story and although it was fascinating and well written, this was disappointing. It brought back to me the confusions trying to explain to elementary age students why they would find their favorite fairy tales and myths in the non-fiction section of the library. They struggle with the concept that something that is obviously not "fact" is shelved in that way. It was engaging reading none the less and I especially enjoyed parts of the analysis that Grossman related to current day conflicts in Israel. It is not for everyone, but is recommended for anyone interested in Jewish issues and/or Biblical studies.
—Karen Michele
I have been trying to make my way through the Canongate Myth series - so naturally I picked this up with the same expectations I've so far had with other books in the series. These are books which explore popular myths with the hindsight of modern day understanding.So 'Lion's Honey' is a little different to the other Canongate Myth books I've read in that while they were modern "retellings" this was a more academic analysis of the myth. At times it was a little dense (despite its short length) and you do need to bear in mind that it has been translated - however it was still intriguing. The book begins with just the passages relating to Samson as they appear in the Bible - which was useful as I must admit it's been a little while since I've read the actual Biblical version of Samson (and not the various depictions and redepictions since) - before going into an analysis of the story bit by bit.I feel that given the more academic path this could have had more footnotes/references - I actually read all the footnotes in one go to stop interrupting the flow by checking up on them - however I felt some of the conjectures might have needed more support - or at least, it would have been good to better understand which disciplinary background Grossman was taking his inspiration from.I was a little disappointed it hadn't been a "retelling" of the story - the other books in the Canongate series still do engage with the intellectual questions of their myth, albeit within their own fictional storyline (such as Margaret Atwood's "Penelopiad."I have also read the excellent "Book of Samson" by David Maine (who also wrote "The Flood" - also called "The Preservationist" - and "Fallen") which I highly recommend as a retelling and revisioning that forces you to reassess the Biblical story.
—Caitlin
I have no time for the biblical Samson, who seemed like a thug of the first order, a feeling only reconfirmed by re-reading the passage from Judges included at the start of the book. And then the book proper begins and it's .. an essay, which is not what I was expecting. And it's a very detailed one at that - almost a line by line analysis, pulling in material from other sources, psychoanalysis - and initially it seems quite a stretch, rather too much from too little. But by the end, and this was even less expected, it's quite gripping, and convincing even, to the extent that I feel I have not only a whole new understanding of Samson but also a new awareness of the care required when approaching these ancient texts.
—Tom Dale
