Essay Questions

What does the Book of Job have in common with William Goldman’s novel The Princess Bride?

At first glance, these two texts would appear to have absolutely nothing in common. And, indeed, when it comes to the basics of narrative and the specifics of storytelling, that is true. But a comparison and contrast of these two works would be an interesting choice for a writing assignment as a way of demonstrating how two literary works that differ in every imaginable way come together to join in perfect thematic cohesion. Although the film adaptation pushes it down into the subtext, Goldman explicitly states his thematic intention in the book: “Life isn’t fair. It’s just fairer than death, that’s all.” Keep in mind the terms of the deal God makes with Satan in their little wager over the faith of Job. It is not hard to remember since the contractual terms amounts to a single line: do to him whatever you want, but don’t kill him. And from that moment on, Job learns that lesson well. Being good, faithful, charitable, loving, decent and kind is not enough to protect you from bad things. Life is cruelly unfair to Job in this story, but at least he doesn’t die in the end.

What is the purpose of telling a story with such a hopelessly despondent theme?

If the story of Job’s suffering was all about that suffering and it was told in a such a way that merely reinforced the obvious, it would raise questions about purpose and placement in the Biblical canon. What makes actually reading the text rather than merely relying upon the severely stripped down version of its highlights so vital is that the real lesson to taken away from its theme is situated in those parts which don’t make the highlights. Job is in a constant state of suffering and, naturally enough, spends a great deal of the text bemoaning his fate. This much is usually known even by those who have never read it. Job has a few close friends, however, who reach out in sympathy to his suffering and, naturally, are quick to offer advice.

This advice essentially boils down to what seems glaringly obvious: Job has committed wickedness and is being punished. Implicit and explicit in this advice is a view of religious faith adopted by many: strive to commit acts of good while acquitting oneself of giving into the temptation of wickedness and instead of being punished, you will be rewarded. The purpose of the story of Job, therefore, is to disabuse people of the irrational illogic of this mode of thinking since it is made clear right from the start that Job is not being punished for his wickedness and, furthermore, should be rewarded for his goodness under such an ideology of faith.

How does Job’s suffering reveal the irrationality of a faith which rewards goodness and punishes wickedness?

What Job’s companions propose is a vision of faith in God as humans would like it to be: fortune smiles on those who do good while it is taken away or denied to those who do evil. The fundamental logic in this thinking is clear enough: the human instinct toward selfishness can best be indulged simply by being good. Since the world existing under this purview would be substantially different from the one we live in, there would be no upside to being wicked as wickedness would always be punished, regardless of circumstances.

A world controlled by such a theology would inevitably fall into chaos because true virtue would become meaningless. Virtue is supposed to be a character trait, not a transactional stratagem. A moral universe run by a God who rewards goodness simply for the act of committing a good deed rather than for the motivating factor behind committing the good deed has basically created a system in which goodness and wickedness are indistinguishable. Many people will now be committing seemingly selfless good deeds with wickedly selfish intent. The end result would be a theology without a moral foundation.