Kelber thought that what he was doing was a correction of the overly literary models of the form critics. Dunn claims to be returning to the interests of the “early” form critics, before they lost their way, but with a better “default setting”.
Nah, I don’t think Le Donne actually hates Rudi B., but that title will get a rise out of Jim West.
I have to admit that I’ve read both of Dr. Le Donne’s books and they are both important. I’m not going anywhere here, I just wanted to point that out and say that if you have not, you should.
Anyway, I hope that this is where my work will come in at. I like the word of the Form Critics as well as the Social Memory Critics, such as Le Donne and Keith. If you place these two together, you can began to give rhyme to the madness of how the Evangelists did what they did. They used and then manipulated memory. I will still contend that the exorcism in Mark 9 is perhaps the only reality-based exorcism in Mark’s Gospel and comes from an early tradition directly related to Jesus who was known to perform some sort of ritual in exorcising demons, as I hint at in my upcoming work on Mark’s Gospel.
Anyway, his answer and post — as always — is well worth the read and consideration.
I do not much care for redaction critics, as a side note, and rhetorical critics are starting to get on my nerves (unless they are working under form critics), but form critics… oh yes… they know what makes me happy.