The Book of J
In The Book of J, the youngest son in a family of shepherds is pushed into a well by his stepbrothers after the boy tells them and his father of the dreams he had had. The dreams are the result of him being his father's favorite, shown by the gift of a beautiful coat that his father makes for him. In his dreams, Joseph is praised by his bothers, the Sun, Moon, and eleven stars (Bloom, and Rosenberg 118). This dream is a premonition of the respectful bowing his brothers and Egypt's citizens perform many years later (Bloom, and Rosenberg 130). When Joseph becomes governor of Egypt, a famine strikes the Earth and his brothers arrive at his feet seeking food. Joseph's identity is kept secret when his dream is recalled (Bloom, and Rosenberg 130). His dream is the inverse of his premonition years earlier; this is important because the events caused by his brothers changed his life and made both of his dreams come true.
When Joseph glimpses into his future, he tells his family his dreams. His brothers hate him for admitting that he thinks he is superior to them and so they throw him into an empty well to die. They cover his coat in a goat's blood and present it to Jacob. Jacob is hit strongly, emotionally, with the great loss he faces; consequently, the loss of his favorite son causes Jacob grief for the rest of his life. Both intentionally and secretly, Joseph's stepbrothers cause their father's view of catastrophe as well as Joseph's hardships. The vengeful acts against Joseph do not teach the reader any lessons until his former family needs the resources of the governor of Egypt to survive the famine. Joseph grants his brothers the food they request on behalf of his father and biological brother, Benjamin (Bloom, and Rosenberg 130). After all that he had been through, Joseph knew how painful the catastrophe of their separation must have been for his father; Jacob's emotional hardships make him a counterpart to the physical dilemmas that Joseph encountered because of his stepbrothers. Joseph was written as a stronger example of a role model even after everything his brothers had caused; hence, he did not have them put to death as they had done to him.
The meaning behind Joseph's stepbrothers' fortune shows the reader that even after great pain is inflicted by trusted siblings, the connections between the members of one's family, who are loved, overcome the need for a revengeful act against the other members for their actions. Indeed, the connections that keep a family complete produce a value that is greater than the sum of the family's individual parts. Joseph's thoughtfulness of his father, and the effect that such an execution would cause, prevent him from taking revenge. An execution would be only a greater loss to their innocent father considering that Jacob would have believed that their executioner, Joseph, had been dead. In Jacob's eyes, Joseph had died years ago, and the reuniting with the past would not be meeting his long lost son, but rather a meeting with the dead. Had Joseph's guilty brothers never left Egypt, there would be no messengers to convey much needed food or reason-of-execution to Jacob.
The story would not have proven to be a guide of good acts had Joseph put his brothers to death. The concept of letting the punishment fit the crime teaches a strong lesson only when the punishment leaves the perpetrator alive to experience his lesson. Today, capital punishment raises the same issues concerning death not teaching a valuable enough lesson, but rather giving the guilty party an escape from having to pay for their crime. The story suggests the idea of coming to terms with the actions of ones self; hence, rather than forgetting what was done in the past, each of the brothers must live with themselves knowing fully what they had done.
After meeting with the Egyptian Joseph, the eight brothers found their money in the food sacks that were filled during their trade (Bloom, and Rosenberg 130). Joseph did not want his family's money, so he had their money returned both secretly and confusingly. It was considered a catastrophe when the brothers found their money because if the Pharaoh came to the conclusion that they were stealing from him the result could be the slavery of Jacob's entire family. When the brothers returned to trade for food again, they brought Joseph's biological brother, Benjamin (Bloom, and Rosenberg 132). Joseph plots to send his stepbrothers home without Benjamin, knowing he shares the same mother; however, the fact that they are essentially both Jacob's youngest son is only apparent to a reader who knows of Joseph's outcome. A sense of family is presented when the connection between Benjamin and his stepbrothers, through their father, is too strong for them to leave Benjamin in Egypt. Though not said explicitly, Benjamin became Jacob's favorite son and the other brothers respect their fathers preference. Perhaps the effect that the loss of Joseph had on Jacob caused the vicious brothers to reconsider the dislike they had for the new favored son with consideration to their loved father's mental health.
Today, abandoned wells are commonly used for tossing coins into, so it seems ironic that the brothers would throw one of their own into a well to eventually get coins back (in their food sacks). Had The Book of J been the documented events of thousands of years ago there would have been no connection of coins, unused water wells and superstitious fortune. The connection between the well and the coins would be based on the moral that even after his brothers abandoned him for dead, Joseph would not do the same. This was written as an example of how one should act with clarity in mind rather than rage no matter what life may present.
Assuming that the bible is a true reflection into the history of the world, the Egyptian Joseph is more of what we think of as a biblical leader than the people who would become Israel. Joseph appears as a teacher to future Israel, but represents the Egyptians, who do not believe in Yahweh. The meaning behind this could be anything from listening to outsiders, to emphasizing the adolescence of religion, but most probably meant that even though Joseph had been estranged from his people, he had not assimilated into Egypt after being born into the true faith. The catastrophe that his brothers forced onto him eventually allowed for the opportunity to be in the situation where he could teach his own people by example. Joseph ultimately turned his bad fortune into good fortune by way of teaching lessons to his own people.
When Jacob learns of his son's death he grasps the bloody coat and says "My son's coat. Eaten by a wild animal. Torn limb from limb-Joseph!" (Bloom, and Rosenberg 120). His emotions become so out of control that he wishes to spend the rest of his life mourning for his favorite son, a frame of mind that reappears when he considers not sending Benjamin to Egypt (Bloom, and Rosenberg 131) due to his biological similarity to his dead brother. Joseph's brothers react differently than their father when they face the possibility of a lifetime of slavery. The eight guilty brothers selfishly think of themselves rather than dedicating themselves to what is inevitable, as their father did. Jacob should be a role model to his sons but does not seem to be; their actions are based on the evil ideas they perpetuate amongst themselves.
Jacob is an innocent victim both when his sons brought home false news about what they had done to Joseph and again when his sons brought news of the possibility they all might be enslaved. Jacob is continually punished by his eight sons' actions. They put themselves innocently into their predicament of possibly being enslaved when the brothers intentionally pushed Joseph into the well; had the guilty brothers not caused Jacob's original grief, they would not face grief themselves. The moral presented by the author is parallel to what we refer to today as, "what goes around comes around." This lesson was intended to teach anyone who read the story if bad things are done, their actions would come back to haunt them; strangely enough, karma is a Buddhist way of thinking.
Jacob's attitude after catastrophe is to abandon hope and everything else in life that matters to him, where on the other hand his sons refuse to face the future and deny that one day's event would be worth abandoning everything else they know. These two ways of reacting to similar situations reflect on their different attitudes towards life. Only a person who thought that a single day's events could not make a difference in life would seriously consider the murder of his own stepbrother. Likewise, only a man who truly cared for someone could consider abandoning everything he had as a result of the loss of his favorite son. The amount that Jacob favors each of his sons is apparent when he can choose to care for a single son to such an extreme.
Another interpretation of the money appearing in the brothers' bags would be that the money was symbolic for Joseph's return into his family's life. The brother's traded money reappeared just as their abandoned brother reappeared to them the next time they visited the governor of Egypt. Only the writer would have intended the money to be a precursor to their brother's return because Joseph did not plan to reveal his identity to anyone but Benjamin. In the mind of the writer, Joseph's identity had to be revealed to all his brothers because the memory of his abandonment should effect his would-be murderers and not solely his biological brother. It is part of the moral of the story that Joseph's stepbrothers know that their actions long ago did not go unnoticed, for Joseph knew first hand of the evil acts they had performed, and possibly Yahweh as well.
The money that was placed into the sacks of food was an early and subtle way of Joseph telling his brothers he knew of the murder they had committed. The brothers could not see the Governor for who he really was so they consider their possible punishment to be without cause. In the eyes of Joseph, the fear of punishment was actually a fear of paying for the acts they had committed long ago. The brothers each fear that the Pharaoh will learn of their thievery just as they fear that their father will learn of the murder of Joseph and the lies they orchestrated to cover up the truth. In the situation with the returned money, the story attempts to state that lies are never an exit to a situation. The fear of exposure increases when the brothers return to the governor and are surprisingly invited in for dinner before stating who they were (Bloom, and Rosenberg 133). Being in familiar surroundings always brings the bad memories of the past; likewise, the brothers fear slavery for their sins when they reach Egypt. By the same token, Jacob's grief may have been prolonged by having to live in the presence of the individuals who gave the news of Joseph's death.
Much pain was caused unnecessarily when eight brothers decided to turn on one of their own. Family is the most basic unit of a relationship that most people will have in their lives, so the act of spoiling ones own foundation proves early in life the type of a person that has been brought into the world. Starting at the first sign of though, each person decides right from wrong; each choice being based on past experience and future opportunities. Assuming that individuals do not make bad decisions only at specific times in their lives, it is clear that the eight brothers had made bad choices in the past which they were able to execute without being discovered. It is also clear that they would have continued to do occasional evil acts until they understood the reason what they were doing was wrong. It takes a moment of regret for an individual to realize the evil habits that have been living within them.
Works Cited:
The Book of J. Ed. Harold Bloom and David Rosenberg. New York: Vintage Books, 1991. 61-172.
