Euphemism and Counter- Euphemism in The Story of Ruth

As part of last nights' Through the Bible in Five and a Half Years session on Ruth we looked at 3 different film portrayals of Ruth, the version that was part of the Testament series, Henry Koster's The Story of Ruth and Amos Gitai's Golem:Spirit of Exile which I hope to write about shortly.

One subject that we dwelt on perhaps a little more than was ideal was the issue of euphemism in Ruth 3. I've long heard it said that when Naomi tells Ruth to uncover Boaz's "feet", she actually means his genitals. There's debate about it, but it remains a possibility. Some of the discussion last night revolved around whether or not, if true, this act would necessarily be sexual. In our culture it's hard not to read it that way, but it's possible that in other cultures, this may not be so. For example in some cultures today it is the norm to walk around with genitals exposed.

Against this backdrop, the closing segment of The Story of Ruth is particularly interesting. Given it was made in 1960, it's no surprise that it doesn't offer the euphemistic interpretation, but even more surprising is that rather than playing it entirely literally, any hint of sexual behaviour is purged. So, in fact, Ruth doesn't even lie down, or touch his garment. Instead they sit together very briefly before Boaz sends he on her way.In the closing sequence, this episode is referred to again, and it is this, rather than issues of inheritance, which settles the issue of who will marry Ruth, Boaz or Tob (the closer kinsman). As part of his wedding speech Tob gives Ruth the chance to speak. Whilst she vocalises her agreement to the marriage she also declares that she doesn't love Tob, and in the spirit of "truthfulness" tells him that he should know that she "sought out Boaz on the threshing room floor".

Tob takes this as evidence that she has been unfaithful, and calls the wedding off leaving Boaz to claim her hand in marriage before explaining to the elders that "nothing passed between us on that night except spoken words of love". This is all very interesting, both in terms of what it says about the sexual standards of America in 1960, and about the way euphemism is treated.

Firstly, putting the feet euphemism aside, the film clearly considers it's heroine too chaste to have her lie down with a man. Societies standards may have been based on the Bible, but at that stage they had clearly advanced such that the implicitly commended behaviour of its heroines was still not good enough.The second point is more interesting. In saying "I sought out Boaz" and nothing more, Ruth's deliberate ambiguity acts as a kind of counter euphemism. Certainly Tob takes her phrase euphemistically (as an admission of an inappropriate act that compromises their proposed marriage) whereas the truth is that the phrase should be taken literally. Ruth use of this phrase seems to be to deliberately send out the wrong message as a last ditch attempt to marry Boaz. This contrasts strongly with the biblical account whereby the original may have suggested (what we would consider?) a sexual act, but then introduces a euphemism to cover up that particular meaning, leaving readers today to understand the description literally.

Two short additional point of interest. When Boaz seeks to clear things up with the elders his insistence that "nothing passed between us" is somewhat economical with the truth, because Ruth and Boaz did kiss at that point. Secondly, I can't help wondering when watching this scene what Tob's reaction would have been to this final revelation. Did he feel tricked, or was he still glad to have let Boaz marry Ruth?

Story of Ruth - Scene Guide

I reviewed Henry Koster's 1960 film The Story of Ruth last week, and, as usual wanted to follow it up with some scene analysis.

[extra-biblical episodes]
Death of Kilion and Elimelech - (Ruth 1:1-5)
[extra-biblical episode]
Mahlon dies - (Ruth 1:5)
Orpah returns Ruth stays - (Ruth 1:6-18)
[extra-biblical episode]
Return to Bethlehem - (Ruth 1:19-22)
Ruth Gleans Boaz's field - (Ruth 2:1-23)
[extra-biblical episodes]
Ruth and Boaz at the Threshing Floor - (Ruth 3:1-18)
[extra-biblical episode]
Boaz buys off his kinsman - (Ruth 4:1-8)
Ruth marries Boaz - (Ruth 4:9-13)
Genealogy - (Ruth 4:17-22)

Notes
The film's runtime is just over 2 hours, and it's interesting how the biblical material is spread over those 130 minutes. The first thing to note is that the halfway point of the film occurs before Naomi even gets to return to Nazareth. So, as is often the case with biblical films, the film is particularly interested to set up the background story and the characters. As I noted in my review the film is particularly interested in the character of Mahlon, and the role he has in revealing his God to Ruth.

Because the book of Ruth is 4 chapters, it's all too easy to divide up a two hour film into four sections and see how the map to one another. So 90 minutes through lands in the middle of Ruth and Boaz's greatly embellished courtship (middle of chapter 2), and the two hour mark arrives whilst Ruth and Boaz are still at the threshing room floor. The action packed last ten or so minutes wraps up the end of chapter 3, and deals with chapter 4, which is admittedly fairly brief.

The appearance of an mystery figure who may simply be a holy prophet, or may be just an angel is imported from a number of other biblical stories, in particular the prediction of Abraham's son (Genesis 18), Jacob wrestling (32), Gideon's call (Judges 6), prediction of Samson's birth (Judges 13). The latter two examples are fairly contemporary with the story of Ruth, and so such an import is not so far fetched. The first two examples it is unclear exactly whether the person(s) in question are men angels or even God himself.

The famous scene where Ruth decides to stay with Naomi was a little weak. Orpah offered very little resistance (despite the fact she had been an established part of the family for quite some time), and Naomi doesn't seem to try too hard to dissuade Ruth from joining her (despite her previous antagonism).

Likewise the scene of Ruth and Boaz at the threshing room floor was very restrained. The biblical account clearly has Ruth lying somewhere in the vicinity of Boaz. If taken literally "at his feet" seems fairly subservient (and is she pointing in the same direction as Boaz, or at 90^o)? Some scholars, however, have suggested that feet is a euphemism for male genitals.

The American film industry was still under the Hays Production Code at the time so that, at least, would have been far too racy for them to show. However, the film uses subtle distinctions here to explain why Tob (the closer kinsman) relinquishes his claim, but also is able to stress that Ruth is still upright and that therefore Boaz has not compromised himself.

The Story of Ruth - Review

Many scholars see Ruth as a relatively late addition to the Hebrew bible, brought in (along with Jonah) around the time of Ezra either to balance, or directly rebuke the rise of anti-gentile sentiment amongst the Israelites. Interestingly then, Henry Koster's 1960 film The Story of Ruth could be argued to be fulfilling the same function in mid-twentieth century America.

In many ways Koster's film is a rebuff to DeMile's The Ten Commandments. There, DeMille pitched the Israelites as proto-Americans who God delivered from the dictator led Egyptians in a prefiguring of the cold war. Norman Corwin's script frequently inserts references to the Israelite laws regarding care for aliens as if throwing out the challenge to an increasingly paranoid America. If the US wanted to see itself as the new Israel, then it had better start acting like it.

One of the by-products of McCarthyism was that many screen writers with leftist sympathies had to leave Hollywood and head for pastures new. Naomi's return to Bethlehem also perhaps mirrors the return home of a number of writers as a decade of paranoia and suspicion subsided.

The other contribution The Story of Ruth has to make is it's midrashic extrapolation of the biblical text. The book of Ruth is just four short chapters long, and some of the most pivotal figures are dead almost before the story has begun. Naomi and Ruth's husbands, Elimelech and Mahlon, make unusual yet significant decisions Elimelech moves his family to a foreign land, and Mahlon takes a foreign wife.

The Story of Ruth takes its time over this pre-story, at least as far as Mahlon is concerned. Of all the figures in the film, he is the one who is the most readily identifiable with a biblical epic archetype. Whilst his character is far more fleshed out than in the scriptures, he is certainly far simpler than Boaz turns out to be. On the one hand, Mahlon is good, upright and moral, particular in contrast to the child sacrificing Moabites he lives amongst. But come the odd bit of injustice, he is perfectly willing to fight with a sword, and set fire to a vast set in order to make his escape.

The focus of these early scenes is Ruth, and her metamorphosis from a idol worshipping pagan to a God fearing one. Indoctrinated from childhood, it is only when she meets with someone from another faith that she questions her own. It turns out that she was good at heart all along. All of which raises two questions – why if such good people existed in non-Israelite tribes were those tribes so indiscriminately slaughtered on occasion. Secondly, if that situation was the case then, it surely must have something to say about those pockets of contemporary Christianity which see all members of other religions as destined for damnation.

Once Ruth's transformation is complete, however, she gradually becomes less of the focus, and Naomi and Boaz move to centre stage. The two are not on good terms. Boaz is much changed from his youth, and torn between politics, the law and soon his love for Ruth. In contrast to the biblical accounts Boaz is brutish with Ruth when he first meets her and remains distant for some time. This is contrasted with the reaction of his kinsman, Tob, who's first meeting with Ruth results in him forsaking opportunities to claim property, and being overly helpful to Ruth and her mother-in-law.

Portraying these two male leads in such a fashion allows the film to try and negotiate some of the strangest customs mentioned in the bible. The gleaning laws have been preserved in the text of Leviticus (23:22), but what exactly the story was with the exchange of the sandal and the subtleties of the inheritance laws are far less clear. Some of these are brought to prominence others sidelined. Indeed it could be argued that Tob refusing the wealth Boaz offers him demonstrates that his motives are the very opposite of his biblical counterpart.

In the end, however, Tob's attitude to women is that which would have been standard in biblical times – they were seen as property. Whilst Tob's last gasp change of heart is muddled and unconvincing, it does highlight that Boaz actually loves her. In fact, even in the bible that appears to be the case. The film dilutes this observation, however, by portraying the norm as marriage for love rather than possession / survival. It is fairly likely that the person Ruth would have loved the most would have been Naomi.

The film also touches on the role of both Naomi and Ruth in the ancestry of King David. It cleverly gets around the book's inserting a narrator by inserting an angel / holy man / prophet into a couple of scenes. He not only predicts their role in David's line, but also that of one "who some say will be the messiah". The phrasing is sufficiently ambiguous to avoid offending either Christians or Jews. Biblical scholars, however, cannot fail to spot the anachronism of talking about a messiah long before anyone in Israel had any concept of what one might be.

The greatest weakness of The Story of Ruth, however, is that it is twenty minutes too long. There is much unnecessary material inserted into the story when really the film should be wrapping up. A sub-plot concerning two Moabite soldiers trying to track Ruth down, and their attempt to stir up trouble for her with the townsfolk is muddled, cheesy and banal. Whilst it serves to deepen Boaz's complexity a little, overall it detracts from much of the good work elsewhere. Likewise Mahlon's rescue scene seems to have been added largely to increase the entertainment factor, which studio exces may have been concerned about given the absence of orgy scenes and scantily clad women.

Without those two excesses the film would have been brave indeed. Without battle scenes and overly demonstrative love affairs typical of epic films of the period, the film is able to take a far more serious look at some of the real issues behind the story. An early miracle makes it clear that this is a film that recognises God in all that will go on, but that will be concentrating on the other issues that surround this unusual story.

The Story of Ruth comes to DVD

I mentioned a couple of weeks ago how several Hebrew Bible films have been released on DVD in the run up to Easter. In particular, the boxed set of both Ten Commandments films marking the latter film's 50th Anniversary, and David and Bathsheba (1951). (I should really get one of those Amazon commission deals set up!). There are details about the DVD at DVDBeaver including some nice screen shots of the film. There are, however, few online reviews of the film, other than "customer reviews" the only review of any depth that seems to be around is the original New York Times review from 1960.

The Story of Ruth is another Old Testament Film that I have never seen. It is also quite surprising that although there have been numerous films about Esther this is the only feature length film that I am aware of that is directly about Ruth. There is half hour claymation film Ruth (right) from the 1994 "Testament" series. This series covered nine biblical stories in a range of different animation styles from plasticine / claymation through to more traditional hand drawn animation. It was a collaboration between Russian and Welsh animators. The other entries in the series were: Creation/The Flood, Abraham, Joseph, Moses, David and Saul, Elijah, Daniel, and Jonah. All 9 were fairly standard re-tellings of the story, which never captured much excitement. That said the animation was superb and in many cases, particularly Ruth the result was quite moving.

The only other film I know of which has examined this material is Amos Gitai's 1992 film Golem, l'esprit de l'exil (Golem, Spirit of the Exile) which makes the story into a modern day allegory about the Jewish mythical creature who personifies exile, with Ruth, Orpah and Naomi living in 1990s Paris. I'm only familiar with Gitai's Esther, but I've found a brief review of the film, and a pre-beard Peter Chattaway briefly mentions both Ruth films at the end of this page at Canadian Christianity and discusses it a bit more here.

UPDATE: Another film about Ruth is the 1958 films Ruth: A Faithful Woman which I've now reviewed