Collegeville: Liturgical Press, 1999. Pp. xxv + 90; pp. xxii + 130, Cloth, $34.95, ISBN 0814650457. Series Editor: David W. Cotter Timothy S. Laniak Gordon-Conwell Theological Seminary Charlotte, NC 28104 This double commentary begins with Tod Linafelt’s discussion of Ruth, a stimulating, well-written journey along the contours of the received text. It is a close reading of the story’s details with a perceptive eye open to key words and word play, intertextuality, chiasm, parallelism, rhythm, reversal, and, above all, ambiguity in the narrative. The commentary is a treat to read. Although the author is generally irenic in relation to other scholars, the analysis begins with a critical assertion that most readings of the book of Ruth “betray a view of the narrative as fundamentally facile” (p. xiii). Linafelt’s reading, in contrast, is one which seeks to avoid such reductionism by appreciating the “exceedingly complex and ambiguous” nature of the story. “In this commentary,” he continues, “I intend to highlight that which is most unresolved and even perplexing about the narrative” (ibid.). It is likely that this willingness to re-read Ruth with a sense for the subtle, the multivalent, the indirect, and the ambiguous has primed Linafelt for his best insights. It is also likely, however, that a fully consistent embracing of such features in the text would have changed the outcome of the commentary in one very important instance. The evidence for ambiguity and double entendre is well-documented throughout the commentary. Perhaps it is at its best in the analysis of subtle references to sexuality detected in Ruth 2 & 3. A well-argued case is made for a thoroughgoing double meaning of the verb to know throughout chapter 3. Linafelt’s case for a subversive Ruth is suggestive when noting slight changes in Ruth’s recollection of her superiors’ words (p. [Full Review]