Song-Mi Suzie PARK. 2 Kings: Wisdom Commentary, Volume 12, Collegeville, MN: Liturgical Press (Michael Glazier Book), 2019. Pp 358, $39.95. ISBN 978008-1461114 (hardcover); ISBN 9780814681 (ebook). Reviewed by James ZEITZ, Our Lady of the Lake University, San Antonio, Texas 48207.

Korean-American author Song-Mi Suzie Park (in her author’s introduction) mentions her social location as “the product of a patriarchal, religiously conservative immigrant community, but trained in mostly white colleges in the Northeastern U.S. Her doctoral studies in the Hebrew Bible were an act of rebellion: “against a context that favored men.” As a scholar she was taught important tools in classical historical-critical approaches.

Her main “themes’ in studying 2 Kings are, first, the fact that the “few female characters whose stories are narrated in detail” are frequently “more unlucky than those who are merely ignored” and “rarely allowed a voice of their own;” secondly, that 2 Kings is not a ‘history’ of a people as such, and certainly not of women, but of kings—male monarchs…recorded…imbued with theological meaning by groups of elite male scribes;” finally the “undeniable androcentrism (of 2 Kings) which cannot help but convey illuminating (and biased) views and visions of women and other people whom the biblical writer regarded as the Other.

Her main “feminist” theme, repeated throughout, is the “Masculinity of YHWH:” the “construction and assertion of the masculinity of Israel’s god, YHWH.” The Deuteronomist author defends and asserts YHWH facing various “challenges”—such as the contest between YHWH and other gods (Baal) for the religious fidelity of Israel/Judah…portrayed as women… although, in the end, the author deconstructs and upends this assertion at the conclusion of the book (2 Kgs 24-25: the final verses on Jehoiachin released from prison reflect “theological unease” and an ambiguity: the androcentric vision of God might be ultimately unsustainable. The “text compels the reader to begin the process of decolonizing the images of God so forcibly asserted in the preceding account of Israel and Judah’s history in 2 Kings.” (p.315)

In commenting on 2 Kings 1 (King Ahaziah’s fall), Park notes several masculine rivalries in this narrative: (a) between YHWH and the human king; (b) between YHWH’s messengers and those of the monarch. (when Ahaziah’s messengers return to the king after their aborted mission to Ekron and news about Elijah’s message, Ahaziah is able to identify the prophet…because of their description of Elijah as a hairy man: which is significant, which indicates his status as Nazirite and his religious affiliation as a true prophet of YHWH, and (c) finally, the main rivalry between YHWH and Baal as the ultimate deity of life and healing.

Park summarizes her “purpose” as a feminist—to uncover the underlying visions of the narrators (some unfavorable and some sympathetic) so as to elucidate and, at points, deconstruct and interrogate them.” She follows Elisabeth Schuessler-Fiorenza in exploring liberating or oppressive values and visions…by identifying the androcentric patriarchal character and dynamics of the text.” Her work “attempts to mitigate …the absent and missing voices of women and other marginalized figures.”     

 Some samples of comments (in connection with women) in the Elisha “legends” (2 Kgs 4-8): a very different take on The Shunamite woman (“The Great Woman of Shunem” in 2 Kgs 4:3-37). 2 Kings 4 (which has “four narratives…on the themes of fecundity, reproduction, and life”) starts with a poor widow’s miraculous salvation and the rescue of her children—by Elijah (4:1-7). After summarizing the narrative—how Elijah resurrects her dead child, she cites Gerson Hepner’s view ”that Elisha might have been the father of the Shunamite woman’s son!”

Her commentary on the important narrative about Naaman the Syrian in 2 Kings 5 is entitled “The Israelite Slave Girl…and Leprous General” to emphasize the Israelite slave girl who first advised Naaman to consult Elisha.

In commenting on 2 Kings 9 (The Murder of Queen Jezebel) is her most shocking commentary—yet consistent with her goal of “uncovering ways in which women…were portrayed...is her long presentation of Queen Jezebel. This narrative is “of special interest to feminist scholars” and “is (an) exegetically loaded depiction of the grisly demise of Queen Jezebel.” Within these comments is an Excursus (by Mary Joan Leith) which compares her to “Other First Ladies” – such as Eleanor Roosevelt or Nancy Reagan. (119f.) Park notes that the biblical writer’s “charge against her utilizes the comparison that connects idolatry and apostasy with sexual offenses. Hence, Jezebel’s piety and dedication to her own god, Baal, …pejoratively revamped and denounced by the DH as harlotry” …will have lasting consequences…e.g. similar sexist and now racist connotations …of the word “jezebel” to designate a “sexually dangerous African American slave woman.” (Cites Tina Pippin).