It seems to me this idea (which has been discussed at book length in "This Tragic Gospel" and which has fast becoming a cliche of liberal postmodern theology) is the sort of thing Unitarian Universalists would get excited about, but it stands in opposition to the tradition of the early church and has the effect of isolating and devaluing Mark.
What is more, it also attempts to evaluate Mark using contemporary methods of literary criticism that are quite inapplicable to the first century. The first known work of fiction identifiable as a novel dates from the first century, the rather obscene Satyricon of Petronius the Arbiter (which has the effect of confirming thr worst fears about the rampant sexual immorality of Rome during the early Empire). So it seems to me silly to even attempt to apply modern literary criticism to a society which had only just invented the novel, and then primarilynas a form of inappropriate contentography. Our concept of a tragic hero depends on a knowledge of Shakespeare, Milton and other writers working with a sophistication unimaginable to the ancient Romans, who did have Virgil and Greek tragedy, but these works were simplistic, whereas the literary sophistication required to conceive of Jesus Christ as a tragic hero I think was simply unavailable to someone like Mark, considering that even the accounts of the death of Socrates fall short of the critical standard such a conception of Mark requires.
My contention is that if Plato and Xenophon were unable to intentionally render a historic event with the sort of tragic pathos that Mark would imply if we subscribed to the theory advocated in "This Tragic Gospel" or the OP, then such narrative technique would be entirely unavailable to someone like St. Mark the Evangelist, living as he did outside of the rarified world of Roman literature.
Lastly, despite enormous efforts on the part of the author of "This Tragic Gospel" to discredit it, the Gospel of John remains highly regarded as the apex, narratively and stylistically, of the New Testament, and this has the effect of disrupting the position of the OP regarding Mark, in that if one adopts a view of the Gospels as fictionalized accounts of the life of Christ, then John comes out ahead narratively, whereas if one piously recognizes their accuracy, then the superior prose of John coupled with the intense doctrinal content suggests that Mark was simply a less developed precursor, an initial attempt if you will of conveying the life of Christ in a written form, and this tends to invalidate the idea that Mark was intentionally styling our Lord asma tragic figure on the basis of Greek drama et cetera.
My interpretation of the Passion Narrative (PN), which I find in Mark 14:1-15:39, appears to have been authored by one a literate Roman who provided an assessment of who and what Jesus was and was not in terms that his fellow Romans would understand. He wholly rejects the Jewish Messianism that both Jesus and the Sanhedrin share. Jesus' tragic fatal flaw was that he thought himself to be a mythological figure of Jewish prophesy, the Son of Man/the Messiah.
A pressing question is whether this is a fictional Jesus, portrayed according to Greek theatre and described in Aristotle's Poetics or did a real Jesus actually embody a tragic hero, or does the truth lie somewhere in between? My analysis of the genre of the piece finds it somewhat surprisingly to be a Report, an account intended to give the facts regarding this Jesus of Nazareth. The evidence that moves me to this rather rare conclusion is that I find that Jesus' last words in 15:34 satisfy two criteria used to identify an authentic saying of Jesus, namely Embarrassment and Orality.
Jesus as a Messianic Pretender who came to embody a Tragic is not likely to be embraced by many. Maybe a Secular Humanist, perhaps a Unitarian. I do my best to provide an critical and academic interpretation and let the chips fall as they may.
And no, there is nothing anachronistic or unrealistic about my interpretation, or at least you have not stated anything to make me think so.
Upvote
0