fbpx

November 19, 1998

‘Very’ Difficult Choices

The word “m’od,” which means “very” or “much,” is a very common biblical word. At the end of the sixth day of creation, for example, when God assesses the world He has created, He proclaims it to be “tov m’od,” very good. In the Torah reading this week, though, we find a very uncommon usage of this very common word. In fact, we find it twice in successive verses.

The context of these verses is the story in which Jacob steals the blessing that had been intended for his older brother, Esau. Moments after Jacob leaves the presence of his father, Isaac, with blessing in hand, Esau enters. Isaac, upon realizing that he has been deceived, and that he bestowed God’s blessing upon the “wrong” son, begins to shake violently. And it is here that the first unusual usage of “m’od” appears. Isaac is described as trembling not just “m’od” (very much), but as trembling “ad m’od” (beyond very much). The picture the verse conveys is that of a trembling which is beyond anything that a person experiences over the normal course of life’s events.

In the very next verse, it is Esau’s turn to have an “ad m’od” experience. Esau infers from his father’s state of horror and shock that something has gone terribly wrong. And when Isaac asks, “Who then was the one who brought me venison and whom I blessed?” Esau knows instantly that Jacob has struck again. “And Esau cried bitterly ‘ad m’od,'” the verse reads. The power and anguish of his cry were beyond “very much.” They exceeded that which is heard under ordinary circumstances of crying.

Based on these two verses, how would we then define an “ad m’od” experience, one that evokes “ad m’od” trembling and crying? An “ad m’od” experience would seem to be one that occurs completely unexpectedly, and that thoroughly shakes the foundations of our lives, violently throwing what we had believed to be a secure and happy future into a state of utter confusion and deepest uncertainty.

There are many people who are blessed to live their entire lives without such an experience. And then there are the rest of us — those of us who have unexpectedly lost “secure” jobs, or who have discovered our marriages to be in serious trouble, or who have been struck by a life-threatening illness completely out of the blue. Yesterday all seemed well, and today our entire world is in upheaval. This is an “ad m’od” experience. And too many of us know the feeling of trembling and crying “ad m’od.”

Interestingly, both Isaac and Esau find ways to cope with, and ultimately accept, the overturning of their worlds. Isaac throws himself into the hands of God, in the belief that God’s wisdom is greater than his own and that God’s plan is ultimately for the good. Esau (see his words to Jacob in Chapter 33, verse 9) comes to the conclusion that, to begin with, his receipt of the blessing was “never meant to be.” In the end, he is not crushed by the fact that the future he had envisioned for himself was snatched away. That vision of the future was, all along, the product of self-delusion. Esau’s way, as well as Isaac’s, is familiar to many of us.

There is, however, a third approach presented in scripture as well. And it may be that this is ultimately the most important and useful one of all. In Psalm 119, verse 5, David expresses the fear that the day might come when he would no longer enjoy the close support and proximate presence of God, which have been responsible for his spectacular personal success. David reflects on the sins of his past and dreads the possibility that God could one day decide to abandon him “ad m’od.”

Remarkably, though, David declares that regardless of what the future may bring, even should his world suddenly collapse before his eyes, he would respond by tenaciously maintaining his personal commitment to walk along God’s path of righteousness. For “Your word is a lamp unto my feet, and a light unto my path (verse 105).” The pursuit of the path of meaning — meaning that could only be obtained through his asking, even in the midst of fright and tears, “what does God want me to do now?” — is the only response to “ad m’od” that David can imagine. Personal crisis intensifies the need for meaning, and the dogged pursuit of meaning is the ultimate mechanism for survival. From a certain perspective, this is undoubtedly the most daunting method of response. But, in the end, it is the most powerful.

In our parasha, and in our scriptures, we have models for responding to “ad m’od.” And in their own ways, they can help us to reach the day when God and we together will proclaim this world to be “tov ad m’od.”


Yosef Kanefsky is rabbi at B’nai David Judea in Los Angeles.

‘Very’ Difficult Choices Read More »

A Historic Yes on Wye

Israel’s ratification of the Wye agreement, calling for another 13-percent West Bank withdrawal in return for Palestinian security measures, was completed on Tuesday night when the Knesset endorsed the American-brokered deal by a vote of 75 to 19, with nine abstentions.

The Cabinet was meeting on Thursday to give the go-ahead for the first of three stages of implementation: a 2-percent withdrawal, transfer of 7 percent from joint control to full Palestinian rule, and the release of 250 Palestinian prisoners. Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu postponed the Cabinet session from Wednesday so that Israel could confirm that the Palestinians had honored their side of the bargain by arresting 10 suspected murderers, banning anti-Israel incitement and ordering the confiscation of illegal weapons.

Despite the overwhelming Knesset majority, Tuesday’s vote was an embarrassing reminder for Netanyahu of his precarious hold on the ruling coalition of seven right-wing and religious parties. Without the support of Labor and other opposition parties, the Wye agreement would not have gone through — and they have made it clear that their “safety net” will not stretch beyond the three months during which the redeployment is due to be completed.

Although the prime minister had defined it as a confidence vote, only eight out of 17 ministers backed the ratification. Two National Religious Party ministers — Yitzhak Levy and Shaul Yahalom — voted against. Seven other ministers abstained. Five of them were drawn from Netanyahu’s own Likud — Limor Livnat, Moshe Katzav, Tzachi Hanegbi, Yehoshua Matza and Silvan Shalom. The other abstainers were the former army commander Rafael Eitan (Tsomet) and Yuli Edelstein of the Russian immigrants’ Yisrael Ba’Aliyah.

The NRP’s seven backbenchers voted against, reasserting their role as standard-bearer of the West Bank and Gaza settlers. So did eight other coalition deputies. These included disaffected former Likud Science Minister Benny Begin and the chairman of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Uzi Landau.

The redeployment is expected to begin immediately. It will be the first time that a Likud-led government has voluntarily ceded part of the biblical Land of Israel. The Hebron withdrawal in January 1997 was inherited from Netanyahu’s Labor predecessor, Shimon Peres.

Israeli commentators see Wye as the end of the road for the ideology the Likud imbibed from its nationalist mentor, Ze’ev Jabotinsky. The “no” votes by Begin and Landau represented a last stand on behalf of the Greater Israel doctrine preached by their late fathers, former Prime Minister Menachem Begin and his loyal lieutenant, Haim Landau.

Winding up Tuesday’s debate, Netanyahu defended the redeployment as a least bad alternative. “We need a political agreement with our neighbors,” he said, “to bring peace for ourselves and for our children.”

But a confrontation earlier in the week between the prime minister and his Palestinian partner, Yasser Arafat, demonstrated how little trust there is between them or their peoples.

Arafat threatened again to declare a Palestinian state unilaterally in May 1999, and talked of liberating East Jerusalem with rifles raised as its capital. On the Israeli side, Foreign Minister Ariel Sharon urged West Bank settlers to seize new hilltops to stop them falling into Arab hands. Only frantic American mediation persuaded Arafat to reaffirm his strategic commitment to peace and negotiation and Netanyahu to continue along the Wye road.

A Historic Yes on Wye Read More »

Opportunity Missed

As U.N. weapons inspectors returned to Iraq this week and U.S. forces in the Persian Gulf stood down from high alert, the world breathed a sigh of relief after yet another race to the brink with Saddam Hussein.

But many Jewish leaders were fuming about what they saw as one more retreat by Washington in the face of the Iraqi leader’s skillful maneuvers.

Few expect Saddam to live up to his last-minute promise to allow U.N. weapons inspectors to resume their search for his well- concealed weapons of mass destruction. The latest U.S. military bluff, they say, can only increase the Iraqi threat to Israel and to American forces in the region.

“It’s so obvious, it’s almost comical,” said Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League. “We know exactly what Saddam’s doing, but we continue to play his game.”

Each new cycle of threat and retreat “tarnishes our leadership role and gives Saddam new ways and means to protect the weapons we’ve pledged to destroy,” he said. “I’m very saddened by what happened.”

President Clinton, several Jewish leaders said, had meticulously lined up support for strong American action, but then squandered the opportunity, which is unlikely to be repeated. That will make the inevitable showdown with Saddam costlier and more difficult — and, they say, potentially more dangerous for Israel.

The U.S. action also reinforces the impression among allies that Washington will do almost anything to avoid the use of force, Jewish officials say. They point to reports that National Security Adviser Sandy Berger was instrumental in convincing the President to recall the bombers that were already en route to Iraq in order to test Saddam’s latest promise to cooperate.

“The administration and Berger, in particular, have an inexplicable fear of using force as an instrument of policy — and, as a result, they were once again outmaneuvered,” said a leading Jewish activist here. “You have to look at the bottom line, and the bottom line is that he’s a bigger danger today than he was yesterday.”

This week’s dramatic developments produced claims of victory from both sides. Over the weekend, Saddam Hussein agreed to resume cooperation with weapons inspectors, whose access he limited in August, and who were barred from inspections entirely earlier this month.

Saddam’s promise came just minutes before a U.S. strike that officials here said would be strong and sustained.

Israeli officials, living under Saddam’s gun, were skeptical of the agreement. On Monday, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said that he had “no illusions” about the Iraqi leader’s desire to continue hiding his weapons program, and warned again that Israel was prepared to defend itself.

American Jewish leaders were blunter.

“This has to be one of the least wise foreign policy moves of the Clinton administration,” said Robert O. Freedman, president of Baltimore Hebrew University.

Freedman, a strong supporter of U.S. efforts in the Mideast peace process, said that the Clinton administration missed a unique opportunity.

“The president was stronger politically because of the election; the Arabs were angry at Saddam because he thumbed his nose at the weapons inspectors; Russia, desperate for American aid, wasn’t going to intervene. Everything was lined up for a decisive strike — and he frittered it away. He even had [U.N. Secretary General] Kofi Annan on our side.”

Even if Washington fulfills its promise to strike quickly if Iraq violates its new promises, Freedman said, “our position will never be as good as it was this week. If Clinton was reluctant to attack under the most favorable circumstances, Saddam will have every reason to believe he can get away with even more evasion.”

U.S. policy is more and more out of sync with reality, said Shoshana Bryen, special projects director for the Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs (JINSA).

“The goal this weekend was to get UNSCOM weapons inspectors back in,” she said. “But it was understood a long time ago that the inspectors couldn’t discover everything, even with unfettered access. And it’s doubtful we’ll get even that access, despite this week’s promises.”

The Clinton administration crossed an important line last week when he announced support for efforts to topple Saddam, she said. But the quick acceptance of Saddam’s latest last-minute promises in the wake of impending U.S. military action suggested that officials here continue to pursue the same policy of trying to marshal international pressure and using non-credible threats of military force to change the Iraqi leader’s behavior.

“The problem is that his goal isn’t the lifting of sanctions, but to keep his weapons of mass destruction,” she said. “It’s to be the regional power, using these weapons. He has shown no interest in being president of a peaceful, prosperous Iraq. So our threats and our economic pressure have very little impact.”

“It may simply be that the administration is afraid of failure in removing Saddam from power, just like the Bush administration,” said Foxman. “If you don’t try, you can’t fail.”

The inconsistent U.S. effort may also send a dangerous signal to other countries that are pursuing nonconventional weapons programs — including Syria, which is reportedly mating VX nerve gas with ever-bigger missiles.

“The entire world is watching this charade with disbelief,” said the leader of a major Jewish group. “We talk the talk about proliferation, but things like this show we’re not ready to walk the walk. That’s very bad news for all of us, not just for Israel.”

Opportunity Missed Read More »

Pitch-Black

Peter Berg’s “Very Bad Things,” the tale of a Las Vegas bachelor party gone terribly wrong, is the season’s most twisted black comedy: What else can you say about a film in which a boychik cites Jewish law to justify unscrambling hacked-up corpse parts?

Edgy, intense Berg, 34, who plays the volatile Dr. Billy Kronk on CBS’ “Chicago Hope,” temporarily left his day job to shoot his debut film. It is, he insists, a morality tale inspired by his own trips to Vegas several years ago.

“I was constantly aware of these packs of white suburban males roaming around with a look of real trouble in their eyes,” the writer-director told The Journal. “It seemed that Vegas opened the cages within men where various beasts lurked. These guys were looking for trouble, and I wondered what would happen if they found it?”

Pitch-Black Read More »

Life Imitating Art

“Of Thee I Sing” is a show for the ages. It reminds old timers that even the Depression year of 1931 had its fun side. For more recent arrivals, it’s an uncanny allegory on presidential high jinx in the year 1998. And for everybody who has a toe to tap and a shower to sing in, it brings back the songs and lyrics of the Gershwin brothers at the top of their incredible form.

The first musical to ever win a Pulitzer Prize, “Of Thee I Sing” features President Wintergreen, who runs on a platform of “Love is Sweeping the Country,” is being sued by a jilted Southern belle, and is threatened with impeachment by Congress.

Life waited 67 years after the show’s premiere to imitate art, but when it finally caught up, such a 1931 throwaway line as “This is the Oval Office, where the president discharges his official duties” brings down the house (House?) in 1998.

As the final offering in the current “Reprise!” season, the slimmed-down version of “Of Thee I Sing” at UCLA’s Freud Playhouse retains its glorious melodies and biting satire, performed with appropriate gusto and straight face by a talented company.

Even for the tone-deaf, there is Charlie Dell as Vice President Alexander Throttlebottom, the ultimate nebbish of the American stage; Heather Lee is the jilted blonde; and Jason Graae as the parody incarnate of a French ambassador. Gregory Harrison and Maureen McGovern essay the lead roles of Wintergreen and his chosen first lady.

The show runs until Nov. 22 and tickets are scarce. Call (310) 825-2101 or any Ticketmaster outlet.

Life Imitating Art Read More »

A Weekend of Art

It was a dream come true for devotees of revered cartoonist Art Spiegelman last weekend, as the chain-smoking New Yorker flew into town to speak before capacity crowds at Second Generation and Skirball Cultural Center programs.

For those unfamiliar with his “Maus” graphic novels, Spiegelman uses the comics medium to weave a frank, layered narrative anchored by two central explorations — the Auschwitz survival story of Spiegel-man’s parents, as told by his father, Vladek; and the psychological ramifications of the Holocaust, which begot the tortured, complex relationship Spiegelman shared with his father and was a direct factor in the suicide of his mother, Anja.

Last Saturday, the 49-year-old Pulitzer Prize winner lectured on “Representations of the Shoah in Maus” at a seminar sponsored by Second Generation, the nonprofit affiliation of children of Holocaust survivors. Spiegelman, himself the son of Holocaust survivors, concentrated his discussion on the circuitous evolution of his “Maus” concept since the early ’70s (following the death of his mother and the birth of the underground comics movement) and its 13-year execution, which originated in 1978 as serialized installments in his RAW anthologies.

Along the way, Spiegelman shared his distrust for historians, explored the creative process behind “Maus'” complex graphic compositions and juxtapositions, and addressed accusations by those who feel he has trivialized the Holocaust by using animals to symbolize Jews, Poles and Germans.

Spiegelman shot down any notions of “Maus” as catharsis, quipping, “One mustn’t confuse art with therapy. I’ve done both. It’s cheaper to do art.” The cartoonist expressed his wariness for well-intentioned works like “Life is Beautiful” and “Schindler’s List” that oversentimentalize the Holocaust and seek to extract optimistic, life-affirming lessons from its chaos. He also discussed his resistance to interest in turning “Maus” into a Hollywood motion picture and closed his talk with a humorous take on the uproar over his controversial New Yorker covers.

Alluding to the African-American woman he painted being kissed by a Chasidic Jew, Spiegelman joked, “She might be Sephardic.”

A Weekend of Art Read More »

Out of the Shadow

Life is strange. Death makes better material.

Look at the best-seller list. Leon Wieseltier’s “Kaddish” and Naomi Levy’s “To Begin Again” are selling thousands. “Tuesdays with Morrie,” No. 1 for more than a year, is now a classic: Nice Jewish professor teaches student about dying.

I know this territory well. Without death, this space might have emptied long ago.

When I began this column 12 years ago, my family was young, my daughter was still in preschool, and my husband played tennis. I hesitate to wonder how long I could have kept at it, had we stayed in one piece. Happiness makes poor copy.

But I had no time to worry. After the first year of writing, my husband died and the column I thought I was writing — about women’s spirituality and baby boom family issues — dramatically changed course. In a flash, I was indoctrinated into a new discipline of tragedy, with its own vocabulary of regret, bitterness and self-loathing.

Although many of the subjects I have written about these dozen years — Middle East peace and American politics; women’s issues and Jewish spirituality; raising a child through the teen-age years and coping with aging parents — could have been handled by anyone, the fact is, they were written by me, a young woman shocked by loss, filtering life from within the shadow of death. The crepe and the kriah are in my signature and stamp.

The shadow transformed everything, colored every story, from the developments in the former Soviet Union to events at hearth and home. Death, the great teacher, had its own ideas of what course was best for me.

Without my husband’s death, I might not have needed to make peace with my parents and brother, to build the structures of love and joy into my home; Samantha and I would not have clung so earnestly to Shabbat; her bat mitzvah would have been less a victory for me if not for her; I would not have found meaning in Torah, pleasure in baking challah, joy in the full-moon picnic of Sukkah; I would not have savored homemade gefilte fish and boasted that my mother’s mandelbread is the best in the world. Vulnerability has become my beat, family my headquarters, and, through my specialty, I have come to know what I think of as “the real” Jewish community, a place where national history and personal tragedy converge, as we dance and struggle through our years.

Last month, I felt the change. The shadow, finally, was gone.

What made it lift? Three things: First, I compiled my columns into a book. It is my bat mitzvah year writing “A Woman’s Voice,” and I wanted it all bound, for my daughter and for those who care. My anthology recalls a journey into sadness — the shiva and “Kaddish,” the mourning and community — and out again into the life passages and recipes, of dating and loving, of holidays and simchas, celebrated with and by my parents, my family, my readers, my friends. Through it, I see the arc of change and the deep grooves that have been my trail from defeat back to life. Reading my own story makes me see how writing has become as necessary as breathing, and how much this column, and my readers, have meant to me.

Second, I met Sandy Banks, the Los Angeles Times columnist who has somehow taken up where I left off. Banks is a wonderful writer, and we are like sisters in our pride, experience and pain. Yet I admit: It’s eerie to read, in her twice-weekly entries, the echo of what I, too, have endured — especially the tensions and pleasures she experiences while raising her own three young daughters after the death of her husband five years ago. When Banks describes the scent of her husband coming off her daughter’s skin, I know I’ve been there, but long ago. And if her loss is so present, that suggests it is time, indeed, to let other subjects call to me.

Finally, I attended the fund-raising dinner for Our House, a bereavement center for young families who have suffered the loss of parent or spouse. At that dinner, I met scores of women and men whose losses replicate mine — unique, sad and solitary, even when shared with 300. For them, the shock, so fresh and overheated, is still palpable. And my loss, by comparison, seems gilded and cool.

I want to say this to those whose loss seems endless: Feel it all. Take life’s measure. Find friendship. Hold nothing back. In due time, and not a minute before, the shadow will be gone.


Marlene Adler Marks, senior columnist of The Jewish Journal. Her e-mail address is wmnsvoice@aol.comHer book, “A Woman’s Voice” is available through Amazon.com.

Out of the Shadow Read More »

Linking Up Our Community

For much of their history, Jews have been the masters of networking. Even before the destruction of the Second Temple, far-flung Jewish communities, usually through itinerant traders traveling precariously across the Mediterranean and land routes, maintained sophisticated communications networks with each other in a diaspora that extended from Palestine to Spain, in the West, and Persia, in the East.

Today, the handwritten letters have been replaced by telephone lines and high-speed jets, which connect Jewish communities around the world. But entrepreneur Steve Koltai, president of Culver City-based Cyberstudios, sees in the development of the Internet perhaps the most profound opportunity for intercommunication between Jews around the nation, the world and even Los Angeles.

Like the early Jewish merchants, the 46-year-old Koltai is using the network primarily to make money. His brainchild — a site called BarMitzvah.411 — provides logistic advice, a gift registry, access to vendors, as well as helpful suggestions to those who are going through the bar or bat mitzvah process. “We are doing something that’s useful,” the former Warner Bros. executive says. “Planning bar mitzvahs has become a pain in the neck. Everyone’s so busy now, and people need help with the logistics.”

Making money on the site is not as outrageous as it may seem. The average bar mitzvah, according to Koltai’s research, runs about $20,000; the value of gifts is another $20,000. In total, the whole bar and bat mitzvah “industry” makes up a $2.5 billion market segment. Roughly 10 percent of these events take place in the Los Angeles area, a third in New York and another 6 percent in Florida.

The site includes step-by-step instructions for planning the event, as well as suggestions for customizing everything from food to flowers. It includes detailed descriptions of such options as having the event held in Israel and a tzedakah page dedicated to charity giving as an alternative to the traditional gelt. There’s even a Jewish Joke Exchange to lighten the often arduous process of planning.

By providing Internet links to a national network that consists of thousands of stores, caterers, flower shops and other vendors, and taking a small cut, BarMitzvah.411 hopes to provide its creators with a healthy profit.

Koltai’s earlier Internet site — Wedding.411 — has already gained more than 3,000 subscribers, a number that is growing by 30 a day. That site has already rapidly become profitable, which is still a rarity in the Internet commerce sector. Similar sites are being developed for special events such as reunions, anniversaries and Quinceanera, a traditional event for Latinas when they turn 15.

“We are moving to an era where there will be a Web site for each of these major points in life,” Koltai says. “I think there is a profit to be made, customizing things, providing information which, perhaps in the past, was passed down by friends and family, but now people need to find elsewhere.”

But for Koltai and Cyberstudios editor, Susan Gordon, the BarMitzvah.411 site has a deeper significance. Formerly an editor at such publications as Buzz, California, Seventeen and Glamour, Gordon was bat mitzvahed herself last May. Having been brought up in New Jersey as a highly secularized Reform Jew, she found the experience of preparing for her bat mitzvah a thoroughly uplifting experience, and, now, with her 9-year-old approaching the magical 13-year milestone, she’s been thinking about planning another such event.

“I feel like this is very meaningful for me,” says Gordon, a member of Wilshire Boulevard Temple. “And with my own children getting to that age, I have a reason to develop this kind of material.”

Although BarMitzvah.411 is a commercial venture, Koltai has also been proselytizing about the net to his rabbi, John Rosove at Temple Israel in Hollywood. Some might see the Internet as yet another way to break down the traditional ways of contact between congregants. But Rosove disagrees. He sees the net as providing a new tool for promoting communication with his own far-flung, time-pressed congregants.

Just as Jews in the past had to deal with often difficult communication routes, Rosove suggests, today’s Jews now function in a world that works against the very essence of community. “The nature of life in a big city is so fragmented that to find a place to make decisions is very difficult. A lot of people don’t have time to drive across town,” the rabbi says. “The amount of time saved by using e-mail is extraordinary.”

Over time, Rosove sees the Internet as becoming one critical element in holding together not only congregations but far-flung Jewish communities as well. Already it has become a vital resource in connecting the often beleaguered Reform and Conservative communities in Israel with their more numerous brethren here in the United States. It has also become a central factor in maintaining links between the various members of the Southern California Board of Rabbis.

“We discuss everything, from how to deal with the Clinton scandals to what to do about seeing-eye dogs in the synagogue when people have allergies,” Rosove says. “I see it as a great communication device; it can really facilitate the further development of the community.”

Of course, Rosove knows that the Internet cannot become a substitute for the real community. But it can provide a new and important tool in knitting together the all-too-often frayed web of Jewish community life.


Bar Mitzvah.Com

These web sites will help you understand and plan a bar and bat mitvah.

www.BarMitzvah411.com:

Steve Koltai’s Culver City-based user-friendly planner

www.barmitzvahguide.com/:

good commercial links and sound advice.

www.BarMitzvahFindit.com/ :

a fast-growing nationwide guide

www.geocities.com/SouthBeach/Lights/2949/ :

Terry of Bellevue, Neb. provides an example of the new wave in bar mitzvah celebration– the online announcement

mazeltov.org/ jewish family and life:

a fine, thoughtful and less commercial resource for making bar mitzvah meaningful


Joel Kotkin is a senior fellow with the Pepperdine Institute for Public Policy and the Reason Foundation.

Linking Up Our Community Read More »

Picture Imperfect

“A Dream No More,” an ambitious documentary on Israel’s first 50 years, intended originally as a highlight of the nation’s anniversary jubilee, is, indeed, a dream no more. Nearly completed, the film has been permanently shelved by the producing Simon Wiesenthal Center, to the considerable dismay of the documentary’s chief creators.

There are two different diagnoses for “Dream’s” demise, one advanced by the film’s director-writer Mark Jonathan Harris and his co-writer Stuart Schoffman, the other by Rabbi Marvin Hier, the Wiesenthal Center’s dean and founder, joined by Richard Trank, executive producer for the center’s Moriah Films division.

Harris and Schoffman believe that the project was scuttled because American Jews — and by extension the Wiesenthal Center — are unwilling to accept a realistic representation of Israeli life and history, depicting the shadows along with the light.

To Hier and Trank, it’s a simpler matter of creative and conceptual differences between producer and director, a familiar Hollywood story, and they are now working on a new version of the film.

The Hier-Trank team, as co-producers, have won Oscars for two documentaries, “Genocide” in 1981 and this year’s “The Long Way Home.”

Schoffman, an American-born Israeli, went public with the controversy this month in the Jerusalem Report magazine through his regular column.

Schoffman writes that he and Harris decided to encapsulate the story of Israel’s statehood through a “mosaic” of different voices, “precisely because there are so many vigorously competing versions of the development, present-day priorities and future prospects of the Jewish state.”

After initial script approval, various revisions and extensive filming in Israel, Moriah “shut down production in June 1998, on the grounds that the film wasn’t working,” writes Schoffman.

At that point, the dates for a series of “world premieres” of the film, in such prestigious venues as Washington’s Kennedy Center and New York’s Radio City Music Hall had already passed.

In the end, Schoffman writes, and confirms in an interview, “‘A Dream No More’ was unacceptable as the official, feel-good Diaspora jubilee film… What this confirms, I think, is that on the occasion of Israel’s 50th birthday, the relationship between Israel and the Diaspora is in serious need of re-examination.

“It would seem that a great many American Jews find Israel too complex, disturbing and problematic to confront head-on, leaving them with a set of flawed alternatives: they can tune Israel out; or else cling to the pristine picture of Israel that no Israeli, whatever his or her political coloration, can take seriously.”

Harris largely agrees with his co-writer and brings considerable authority to the discussion as a veteran filmmaker and teacher. A professor at the USC School of Cinema-Television, he has won an Academy Award in his own right and was also the director-writer for the Wiesenthal Center’s Oscar-winning “The Long Way Home.”

“We worked very hard on this film for 14 to 15 months, and I am very disheartened that it will not be shown,” says Harris. “We tried to give a positive, but also accurate, portrayal of Israel, and I think we gave a very balanced picture, of which I am very proud.”

Harris says he tried to present a cross-section of Israeli opinions in the film, including the voices of writers, settlers, kibbutzniks, businessmen, Orthodox leaders, philosophers and ordinary people of various ethnic backgrounds.

“These are very articulate, passionate and attractive people, who express the dynamism of Israel and grapple honestly with the country’s problems,” he says.

Harris says that Hier and Trank did not see their final cut of the film, but acknowledges that it was in trouble from the first cut early this year.

He believes the Wiesenthal Center was concerned that the film, in its planned format, might offend the center’s influential supporters. In a deeper sense, he adds, the film’s problems reflected the political and artistic controversies that plagued Israel’s entire 50th anniversary celebration.

To Hier and Trank, the subtleties of Diaspora attitudes had nothing to do with axing the film.

Hier acknowledges that when the filmmakers first presented their basic concept, he was willing to give it a try, “But when I saw the first cut, I was 100 percent convinced it wouldn’t work,” he says.

“The film was full of talking heads, of people who had played no major roles in the actual historical events, debating in cafes,” he maintains.

“We wanted a film that would excite young people, who knew little about Israel’s past,” he adds. “In our previous documentaries, we had real historical depth, and we did that by showing great archival footage of the leading figures who actually shaped the events.”

The other major problem was that “Dream” did not have a narrator, who would provide continuity and historical background, says Trank.

“Without a narrative or coherent timeline, what we got was a film that kept jumping from one topic to another, and two hours of different scenes strung together — some worked and some didn’t,” he says.

When numerous attempts to fix the film didn’t work out, Trank said he made the artistic and fiscal decision in June to shut down production.

Hier vigorously denies that fear of offending supporters, or officials in Jerusalem, where the Wiesenthal Center hopes to erect a Museum of Tolerance, played a part in scuttling the project.

He says that before making the final decision, he consulted with colleagues, trustees and “intellectuals and journalists in Israel. They all agreed it was a non-starter,” he says.

Trank says the film was budgeted at about $1 million. Of this amount, some $300,000 to $400,000 was for the purchase of historical and archival footage, which will be salvaged and incorporated in the new documentary, covering the same five decades in Israel’s history.

Out-of-pocket losses come to about $250,000, says Hier, and some $300,000 will have to be added to complete the new, as yet untitled, version.

Wiesenthal Center trustee Merv Adelson, who exercises oversight of Moriah Films, could not be reached for comment. But the veteran Hollywood and media executive, say Hier and Trank, was fully supportive of their decision, even at the cost of $250,000.

Another trustee, Rosalie Zalis, says that funds for the film division come from specified individual contributors, and are separate from the general Wiesenthal Center operations.

“When I was in Israel last May, I was told that the film was in trouble,” she says. “Nobody likes to lose money, but given the reputation and track record of Moriah Films, it would be stupid to risk that by coming out with a bad film.”

The script for the new film is being written by noted Oxford historian Martin Gilbert, based largely on his book “Israel: A History,” in collaboration with Hier and Emmy award-winner Scott Goldstein. Trank is the director.

It is hoped that one of Hollywood’s most distinguished actors will serve as narrator.

The new documentary will not prettify Israel’s history or current problems, insists Hier. “We won’t produce a feel-good Jewish National Fund film,” he says. “That wouldn’t have any credibility.”

The documentary, to be completed in four to five months, will be, if anything, “more honest and hard-hitting” than the aborted project, promises Trank.


Picture Imperfect Read More »

Community Briefs

Even for an international film producer and inveterate traveler, Arthur Cohn has covered a lot of territory recently.

During the last week in October, the winner of a record five Oscars and producer of “The Garden of the Finzi-Continis” and “Central Station” was feted in Shanghai at his very own “Arthur Cohn Day” by the Chinese government and film industry.

He used the occasion of a retrospective of his works at the Shanghai International Film Festival to premiere his latest documentary, “Children of the Night.”

Conceived as a cinematic memorial to the 1.3 million Jewish children who perished in the Holocaust — and their rescue from the anonymity of statistics — the film resurrects the faces of its subjects, sometimes at play, more often ragged and starving.

Although the film is only 18-minutes long, Cohn spent three years scouring archives across the world for material, of which only six yielded scraps of usable footage.

For the feature film to follow the documentary at the Shanghai festival, Cohn had originally selected his 1995 movie “Two Bits” with Al Pacino. However, government officials in Beijing insisted on “The Garden of the Finzi-Continis,” the 1971 classic about an aristocratic Italian-Jewish family that is ultimately destroyed by the fascists.

Cohn says that he took the Beijing fiat as a signal that “the theme of the Holocaust has been openly recognized by the Chinese government for the first time.”

His reception in Shanghai was remarkable, as press and public mobbed him like some rock star. More than 130 journalists covered his press conference, during which a giant banner above his head proclaimed “World Famous Producer Arthur Cohn” in Chinese and English.

For the screening itself, Chinese fans fought for tickets to the 2,000-seat theater. When the two films ended, the audience sat, as if stunned, for three-minutes, before quietly leaving.

For most Chinese, it was their initial introduction to a Holocaust theme. Said a young hotel manager, “Six million dead … that’s as if they murdered every bicyclist in this city.”

A reporter for the Shanghai Star perceived that “Cohn seems to cherish a special feeling for the Jews.” Indeed, the producer’s next release will be “One Day in September,” referring to the terrorist attack on Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich.

The production will be a “thriller with documentary footage,” says Cohn, with Michael Douglas in the central role of the commentator.

“One Day in September” will have its world premiere on Jan. 18 in Los Angeles, under the auspices of the American Film Institute.

A couple of days later Cohn arrived in Hollywood to report on his Shanghai triumph and participate in the first annual International Jewish Film Festival here.

He officiated at the American premiere of “Children of the Night” and presented an award to veteran actor Gregory Peck.

Cohn, who stands a rangy six-foot, three inches, is a third generation Swiss citizen and resident of Basel.

His father, Marcus, was a respected lawyer and a leader of the Swiss religious Zionist movement. He settled in Israel in 1949, helped to write many of the basic laws of the new state, and served as Israel’s assistant attorney general until his death in 1953.

The family’s Zionist roots go even deeper. The producer’s grandfather and namesake, Rabbi Arthur Cohn, was the chief rabbi of Basel. He was a friend of Theodor Herzl and one of the few leaders in the Orthodox rabbinate to support the founder of modern Zionism.

It was because of this support, says Cohn, that Herzl chose Basel, rather than one of Europe’s more glittering capitals, as the site of the first Zionist Congress in 1897.

Of the filmmaker’s three children, two sons have served in the Israeli army and studied at Israeli universities.

Community Briefs Read More »