Archibald MacLeish’s J.B. (1958) is a modern retelling of the biblical Book of Job, transforming the ancient story of suffering into a contemporary existential drama. The play presents J.B., a wealthy and successful man, whose life is shattered by a series of devastating losses. As he struggles to understand why he has been chosen for such suffering, J.B. explores themes of faith, justice, and the search for meaning in an indifferent universe.
The Book of Job Reimagined
The play follows the structure of the biblical story, where Job, a righteous man, is tested by extreme suffering. In the original text, Job is a faithful servant of God, but Satan challenges his righteousness, arguing that his faith exists only because of his prosperity. God allows Satan to strip Job of everything—his wealth, health, and family—to test whether he will remain faithful.
In J.B., the story is transposed into a modern setting. J.B. is a successful businessman with a loving wife, Sarah, and a comfortable life. However, his world collapses as he loses his children in a tragic accident, his wealth vanishes, and he is afflicted with disease. Instead of biblical figures, his trials are observed by two characters—Mr. Zuss and Nickles—who act as stand-ins for God and Satan, debating the meaning of human suffering from the sidelines.
The shift from a biblical to a contemporary framework highlights the universality of Job’s story. In MacLeish’s version, faith is not a simple acceptance of divine will, but a painful and deeply human struggle against despair. J.B. must decide whether suffering proves the absence of God, or whether faith can exist without reward or certainty.
The Role of Suffering in Spiritual Traditions
The question of why innocent people suffer is central to many religious and philosophical traditions. In Buddhism, suffering is understood as an inherent part of existence, with enlightenment offering a path to transcend it. In Christianity, suffering is often linked to redemption and sacrifice, seen in the figure of Christ. In existentialist philosophy, suffering is not explained by divine justice, but is an inevitable part of a chaotic and indifferent universe.
MacLeish’s J.B. does not provide a simple answer. Instead, the play forces its characters—and its audience—to confront suffering without reassurance. Unlike the biblical Job, who is ultimately rewarded by God, J.B. does not receive divine restoration. Instead, he is left with only human love and the possibility of finding meaning in the resilience of the human spirit.
Doubt, Faith, and the Modern Condition
In many ways, J.B. reflects the spiritual crisis of the modern world. The play was written in the wake of World War II, a period marked by immense suffering and existential doubt. The Holocaust, the atomic bomb, and the horrors of war had shattered many people’s faith in traditional religious explanations of suffering. Like Job, the world was left asking: why does God allow such devastation?
J.B. and Sarah offer two different responses to this question. Sarah, overcome by grief, rejects faith entirely, believing that God is cruel and indifferent. J.B., though broken, chooses to continue, not because he has found answers, but because he refuses to give up on the possibility of meaning. This reflects a more existentialist approach to faith—where belief is not dependent on divine reward, but on the human choice to persist in the face of suffering.
The Enduring Power of J.B.
MacLeish’s J.B. is more than a retelling of Job’s suffering; it is a profound meditation on faith in an age of doubt. It challenges audiences to consider whether belief can survive without proof, whether suffering destroys meaning or deepens it, and whether love and human resilience can offer hope even when divine justice seems absent.
By stripping away the supernatural elements of the original story, J.B. forces the audience to confront suffering not as a theological debate, but as a lived human experience. It remains one of the most powerful spiritual dramas of the 20th century, offering no easy answers, but instead challenging us to wrestle with the eternal question: how do we find meaning in suffering?
