During the 1970s, there was a good deal of experimentation by North American biblical scholars with approaches developed out of the work of Saussure, Lévi-Strauss, Propp, Greimas, and Roland Barthes (e.g., Crossan, 1973, 1975; Funk, 1982; Patte, 1976a [the papers of the important 1973 Vanderbilt Conference]); Polzin, 1977; Via; Hugh White, 1979). It was in the context of this movement that the journal Semeia was generated, and a number of its early issues were devoted to such work (1, 2 [1974], 6 [1976], 18 [1980], 26 [1983]). During this time, the Structuralism and Exegesis Group in the Society of Biblical Literature became established under Patte's leadership. Of particular interest among the structural work emerging from this group is Semeia 18, a large collection of alternative structural exegeses of a single text (Genesis 2-3). 

Since 1980, aside from Patte, there has been a decline in North American work along these lines. We may mention Elizabeth Struthers Malbon (1986b), whose work on the "geographical code" in Mark remains close to Lévi-Strauss; Hendrickus Boers, who uses the developed Greimasian theory; David Jobling, who in his work on the Hebrew Bible (1986a, b, 1991a, 1992) pursues a line more loosely adapted from Lévi-Strauss and Greimas and tending toward deconstructive and ideological analysis; Robert Culley, who provides interesting readings with a rather slight theoretical base in structural folklore studies (1976; mcf. the Proppian approach of Culley, 1992); and Terry Prewitt, who takes a Lévi-Straussian anthropological approach. The structuralist impulse, particularly from Lévi-Strauss, has had other important impacts on biblical studies outside of any specific literary theory, and they should be briefly noted here. Structural understandings of kinship have been applied to the Bible by Leach (esp.1969:25-83), Leach and Aycock, and Mara Donaldson (as well as Prewitt). Indeed, Leach's was the first direct application of structural analysis to the Bible (1969:7-23, orig.1961), and it has important implications for literary study. But Leach treats the Bible as a cluster of Lévi-Straussian mythic fragments, without regard for sequential narrative. Of at least as great importance, but further from our concerns, is Mary Douglas's application of structural anthropology to the Levitical prohibitions. In a quite different direction, Eugene Nida and his associates have developed the semantic aspects of structural linguistics, particularly for translation purposes (Nida, Nida et al., Louw). 

Mieke Bal is the active participant in the narratology debate who most insistently presses the issue of the relation of structuralism to current critical discourse. It is a "self-critical narratology ... which alone can save a discipline grown sterile, by placing it in the service of a general critical theory" (1991:208-9, cf. 226). Her contribution to "Narratology Revisited" (1990) develops this critical narratology in several of the specific directions that Caws has indicated, keeping a balance between structuralism's critical potential and the need to critique existing structuralisms. Noting that "binarism itself is an ideologeme," she insists that theories based on binarism, like that of Greimas, "must be stripped of the positivistic truth claims often attached to them" before they can be critically useful (1990:740). She pursues the issue of subjectivity, drawing on Evelyn Fox Keller's demonstration, through a reading of scientists' accounts of their work, of how decisive is the presence of the subject in "objective" research (737-43). Against structuralism's ahistoricism, Bal argues that a rigorous "analysis of narrative structure," by countering "interpretations based on prejudice, convention, or ideology," actually "helps to position the object within history" (750). Bal's most far-reaching point is that if narratological discourse is to be truly critical, there can be nothing like a one-one fit between narrative as object and narratology as method. "The very discipline that tends to rigidify its own traditional object is able to de-rigidify other objects" (730). Narratology, in other words, can find new life in being applied to other fields, as Bal herself demonstrates by applying its methods to anthropology, visual art, and natural sciences. But conversely, narratology cannot be a privileged approach to narrative, which must open itself up to critical methods derived from elsewhere (750). Neither the object nor the method can serve a useful critical purpose outside of a radically interdisciplinary framework. 

In view of the existence of such critical political impulses throughout the history of structuralism, it seems fair to suggest that the view of structuralism now accepted in much poststructuralist discussion does not correspond to anything that ever was, but is in fact a retrojection by means of which the various poststructuralisms want to indicate what they are not. This "structuralism" is created by, for example, taking at face value the claim that there is an early (structuralist) and a late (poststructuralist) Roland Barthes, a claim that finds little basis in Barthes's own work,[15] or again by accepting Michael Foucault's protestation that he was not a structuralist (1970:xiv), when it is perfectly clear, for example, that his historical epistemes are best understood as structural transformations of each other (Caws, 152-3). Such a straw-man structuralism can be posited only by taking a very limited view of structuralist phenomena. It is simply not possible to do justice to the history of structuralism without coming to terms with all the recent critical currents in the social and human sciences. 

Barthes's reading of Genesis 32 (1974a), which by any reckoning must be ascribed to his structuralist phase, is one biblical example in poststructuralist readings. An even more celebrated early work of Barthes, S/Z (1974b), likewise points the way to poststructuralist trajectory within structuralism.   

We return to the question with which we began this section: how are biblical structuralism and narratology related to the radical currents in literary criticism? Are these approaches part of the problem or part of the solution? Our survey has suggested both. The general tendency has been for the approaches we have dealt with here to avoid radical critique of the Bible, to fall into Bal's "critical escapism" and encourage conservative programs, whether with obvious ideological enthusiasm (Sternberg), through the inherent conservatism of New Testament studies (the Gospel narratologists), or, in Patte's case, perhaps malgré lui. The Bible's status as a foundational document in both religious and secular institutions puts a powerful pressure on all methods applied to its interpretation, of course, to confirm it in its privileged position. But are such foundational tendencies inherent also in structuralism as such? 

This is a question that divides even those who collaborate on postmodern anthologies. Some perceive structuralism as indeed locked into positivist paradigms, as needing to be, along with other positivisms, the object of the radical critique we intend. Others, perceiving radical tendencies in the development of structuralism and in their own experience of it, would suggest that the structuralist turn was the turn in recent critical consciousness, and that the structuralist impulse not only can, but to be true to itself must, be developed into critical paradigms, be the subject as well as the object of critique. 

Baal, Mieke. Narratology: An Introduction to the Theory of Narrative.  Toronto; Buffalo: University of Toronto Press, 1997. 
Bal's work is an introduction to the major elements of a comprehensive theory of narrative texts. In this revision of the 1985 edition, Bal broadens the spectrum of her theoretical model, updating the chapters on literary narrative and adding new examples from outside the field of literary studies. Some specific additions include discussions on dialogue in narrative, translation as transformation (including translation between different media), intertextuality, interdiscursivity, and the place of the subject in narratology. Two new sections, one on visualization and visual narrative with examples from art and film and the other an examination of anthropological views of narrative, lead Bal to conclude with a re-evaluation of narratology in light of its applications outside the realm of the literary.  Book cover image from Amazon. 
PN212. B323 1997 

Bridges, James. Structure and History in John II: A Methodological Study Camparing Structuralist and Historical Critical Approaches. San Francisco: Mellen Research University Press, 1991. 
Examines two methods of interpreting scriptural text, the historical critical method and the French structuralist method. The former looks beyond the text to explore issues of reference and authorial intentionality, while the latter focuses on the inner world of the text. 
BS 2615.2 .B735 1991 

Callound, Jean. "A Few Comments on Structural Semiotics: A Brief Review of a Method and Some Explanation of Procedures." Semeia 15 (1979): 51-83. 
Presents a brief outline of the Greimasian method and gives helpful insights on how to apply the method to the biblical text. Technical terminology is simplified. 
BS410 .S45 v. 15 

Champagne, Roland A. The Structuralists on Myth: An Introduction. New York: Garland, 1992. 
GR 161 .G425 1992 

Greenwood, David. Structuralism and the Biblical Text. Religion and Reason Series, 32. New York: Mouton Publishers, 1985. 
Deals with theoretical aspects of the method, laying emphasis on the work of Levi-Strauss and of Erhardt Guttgemanns. Has an exegesis of Lk.15:11-32. His basic presupposition is that the Bible is a "divinely inspired book". 
B841.4 .G67 1985 

Greimas, A. J., and Courtes, J. Semiotics and Language: An Analytical Dictionary. Trans. by Larry Crist, et al. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 1982. 
Important tool for students who wish to understand and communicate in structuralist language. 
P99 .G6913 1982 

Johnson, Alfred M. A Bibliography of Semiological and Structural Studies of Religion. Bibliographia Tripotampolitan, 11. Pittsburgh: The Clifford E. Barbour Library of Pittsburgh Theological Seminary, 1979. 
Although dated, it lists, without annotations, over 1900 books and articles on the subject. Journals on semiotics are also listed at the end. 
Z7751 .J65 

________, ed. and trans. The New Testament and Structuralism. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series, 11. Pittsburgh: The Pickwick Press, 1976. 
This is a translation of Langages 22 (1971) with a fine synopsis of the earlier Greimasian approach by Corina Galland. Method is to the Passion Narratives. 
BS2325 .N48 

Kodjak, Andreij.  A Structural Analysis of the Sermon on the Mount. Berlin; New York: M. de Gruyter, 1986. 
BT 380.2 .K63 1986 

Moore, Stephen D. Mark and Luke in poststructuralist perspectives: Jesus begins to write. New Heaven: Yale University Press, 1992. 
The author is critical of what he calls "standard academese" or "colorless academese" in biblical scholarship. Intended to be an experiment in "local theology," Moore's deconstructionist methodology emphasizes puns and wordplay. Applying the poststructuralist techniques, the author offers a new way of reading Mark and Luke. Without a doubt, the author shows how the techniques of deconstruction permit a different reading of the Gospels. 
BS 2585.2 .M66 1992 

Pahk, Sung Sang.  Structural Analysis of John VI: 1-58: Meaning of the Symbol "Bread of Life." Thesis (Ph.D. in Religion)--Vanderbilt University, 1984. 
BS 2615.2 .P245 1984 

Patte, Daniel. What Is Structural Exegesis? Guides to Biblical Scholarship, New Testament Series. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1976. 
The author has the beginner in mind and introduces the student to a method which has in view less historical concerns for the biblical text. 
BS2361.2 .P36 

________, ed. Semiology and Parables Exploration of the Possibilities Offered by Structuralism for Exegesis. Pittsburgh Theological Monograph Series, 9. Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1976. 
These essays are the result of papers presented at a conference held at Vanderbilt. They show the relationship between semiology and exegesis in parable interpretation. 
BT375.2 .S45 

________and Patte, Aline. Structural Exegesis: From Theory to Practice. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1978. 
After laying out the theories which underlie the method, the authors proceed to demonstrate how to exegete a passage, using part of the Passion Narrative in Mk 15. 
BS476 .P33 

________. Paul's Faith and the Power of the Gospel: A Structural Introduction to the Pauline Letters. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1983. 
Patte uses structural analysis to locate the center of Paul's faith as expressed in his letters. 
BS2650.2 .P37 

________. The Gospel According to Matthew: A Structural Commentary of Matthew's Faith. Philadelphia: Fortress Press, 1986. 
A fine commentary on the Gospel using the structuralist approach. Much easier to follow than the intricacies of the method. Book cover image from Barnes and Noble's paperback edition. 
BS2575.3 .P37 1987 

________. The Religious Dimensions of Biblical Texts: Greimas's Structural Semiotics and Biblical Exegesis. Semeia Studies 19. Atlanta: Scholars Press, 1990. 
P85 .G73 P37 1990 

________. Structural Exegesis for New Testament Critics. Guides to Biblical Scholarship, NT Series. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1990. 
The author intends this to update and replace the earlier work in the Guides NT Series. Exegetical examples are taken from the Fourth Gospel.  Book cover image from Barnes and Noble's paperback edition. 
BS 2377.5 .P38 1990 

Ostenstad, Gunnar H. Patterns of Redemption in the Fourth Gospel: An Experiment in Structural Analysis.  Lewiston, N.Y.: E. Mellen Press, 1998. 
BS 615.6 .R36 O77 1998 

Segal, Robert A., ed. Structuralism in Myth: Levi-Strauss, Barthes, Dumezil, and Propp. Theories of Myth, 6. New York: Garland, 1996. 
BL 304 .T475 1996 v.6 

Semeia. 

This journal has been the major forum in North America for discussion of structuralist approaches to the biblical text. The following issues have relevant articles: 

1 (1974) "A Structuralist Approach to the Parables." 

2 (1974) "The Good Samaritan." 

4 (1975) "Paul Ricoeur on Biblical Hermeneutics." 

6 (1976) "Erhardt Guttgemanns' Generative Poetics." 

9 (1977) "Polyvalent Narration." 

11 (1978) "Early Christian Miracle Stories." 

16 (1979) "Perspectives on Mark's Gospel." 

26 (1983) "Narrative and Discourse in Structural Exegesis: John 6 and 1 Thessalonians." 

29 (1983) "Kingdom and Children: Aphorism, Chreia, Structure." 

34 (1985) "Biblical Hermeneutics in Jewish Moral Discourse."