The voice of each [parable] makes the characters present to the maximum degree possible in the narrative. Each is real in that sense. Moreover, each addresses a situation in which his previously closed temporal sequence has been brought into contiguity with another temporal sequence and so opened up. In place of closure, ending, or finality, at the end of these stories we have opening and complexity, a sudden revelation of the genuine ambiguity that occurs when the consequences of actions are seen in terms of the way they penetrate lives of others.
James Breech, Jesus and Postmodernism (Fortress Press: Minnesota, 1989), 74.
I dimly perceived the major parables as double paradigms…The first paradigm brings the logic of everydayness to the surface and confirms that logic as self-evident or self-validating. The first paradigm is shattered on the second, which disrupts the order of everydayness by reversing certainties or turning things upside down.
Robert Funk, Parables and Presence: Forms of the New Testament Tradition (Fortress Press: Philadelphia, 1982), 52.
What happens has been called [by Paul Ricouer] reorientation by disorientation. First, hearers have their ways of seeing the moral and spiritual order challenged or disrupted. They are made to see their blindness in order that there can be the possibility of new vision. Or, as is more appropriate to the hearing of parables, they are made to hear dissonance in order that they can discover a new way of hearing.
Frederick Borsch, Many Things in Parables (Fortress: Philadelphia, 1988) 13-14.