fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

February 13, 2003

The Match Game

Leave a Comment / Entertainment /

When B’nai B’rith International needs a headliner to attract
people to a fundraising dinner, it knows where to turn.

Los Angeles-based Celebrity Connection, founded 20 years ago
by Barry Greenberg, is the exclusive coordinator for all of B’nai B’rith’s fundraising
dinners in the United States.

Greenberg, 51, is a pioneer in the celebrity brokering
business, which involves finding, matching and hiring celebrities to make
appearances on behalf of organizations.

While celebrity brokering is still a small industry, it’s
growing fast as America becomes ever more obsessed with celebrity. Curiously,
virtually all the major players in the field are Jewish.

“Initially, Celebrity Connection was conceived as a
clearinghouse for celebrity participation in charity,” recalled Greenberg, who
previously worked for Jewish nonprofit organizations, including B’nai B’rith
and the Jewish National Fund, and currently is vice president of Temple Israel
of Hollywood. Greenberg teaches a course titled “The Role of Celebrity in
Public Relations” at the USC Annenberg School of Communications.

Celebrity Connections brokers deals for celebrities and
receives 10 percent on top of the contracted price. The company has experienced
dramatic growth, especially in the last six years, with satellite offices in Germany
and Spain in addition to its Los Angeles headquarters.

“We spend a lot of time educating prospective clients not
only about the specialized service we provide, but about the entire process of
matching the right celebrity with the right client,” he said.

For example, efforts to fight Parkinson’s disease saw
funding increase after actor Michael J. Fox got involved, while AIDS awareness
benefited from the advocacy of actress Elizabeth Taylor. Some actors,
musicians, comedians and sports stars may appear for charities for a nominal
fee, while others charge tens of thousands of dollars for commercials or
endorsements.

While Celebrity Connection is the oldest and biggest firm in
the industry, another key player is Celebrity Source in Los Angeles.
Established in 1988 by Rita Tateel, who has a background in Jewish communal
service, Celebrity Source also is a full-service firm, which often arranges
video or satellite celebrity if celebrities can’t attend an event in person.

Another player in the field is Mark Goldman, founder and
principal of the Oxnard-based Damon Brooks, a boutique firm in the niche market
of celebrities and athletes who have overcome disabilities. Goldman books them
for charitable appearances, public relations promotions and motivational
speaking engagements.

Celebrities’ managers and agents appreciate the role
celebrity brokers play in pairing their clients with worthy causes — and
earning their clients some publicity to boot.

Movie producer Larry Brezner, who also manages Billy Crystal
and Robin Williams, lifts a stack of letters, invitations and requests that
clutters the desk of his Beverly Hills office.

“This is just one day’s mail,” Brezner said, shaking his
head as he fanned the solicitations from charitable organizations that range in
size from local medical clinics to well-known national associations.

For the most part, however, Brezner already knows his stars’
predilections and preferences. He also estimates that if celebrities agreed to
support every worthy cause that came their way, “they would spend 90 percent of
their time doing nothing else.”

Crystal, for example, “throws his energy into big projects,
like the planned Performing Arts Peace Center at the Hebrew University, to
which he has personally donated $1.5 million,” Brezner said. “He is the
recipient of the Scopus Award, and was also the guest of honor this [month] at
the Simon Wiesenthal [Center’s] Museum of Tolerance annual dinner, which was
attended by every major studio head in the business.”

He added: “Virtually every celebrity with whom we work has a
big heart. Most of them are very grateful for the good fortune they have had in
their careers, and for getting paid to do what they love to do anyway. So they feel
an obligation to give back to the community.” Â

The Match Game Read More »

Not a Day Over 39

Leave a Comment / Entertainment, United States /

In one of his most famous bits, comic Jack Benny was held upby a thug who demanded, “Your money or your life.” His response was silence.And more silence. Then, desperately, “I’m thinking, I’m thinking!”

The fiddle-playing Jewish comedian (1894-1974) dominatedradio and TV for decades with his persona of a put-upon, miserly fellow whoinsisted he was 39. He’ll be honored this weekend at a convention, “39Forever,” sponsored by the International Jack Benny Fan Club and the NationalComedy Hall of Fame. Events will include Museum of TV and Radio screenings,trivia games, a Friars Club banquet and panel discussions with experts such asBenny’s daughter, Joan; his manager, Irving Fein; satirist Harry Shearer; andEddie Carroll of the Benny tribute “Laughter in Bloom.”

If the comic was America’s best-known cheapskate, he avoidedthe anti-Semitic stereotype.

“Benny secularized cheapness,” cultural historian NealGabler told The Forward in 1999. “People didn’t go around saying, ‘Boy, thatcheap Jew, Benny.'”

Despite his riffs on stinginess, most listeners never knewthe Midwesterner (ne Benjamin Kubelsky) was Jewish. Unlike comics such as EddieCantor and George Jessel, he sounded less “like a Catskill refugee” than a”middle American, middle-class everyman,” Gerald Nachman wrote in his book,”Raised on Radio” (Pantheon, 1998).

Yet by creating his lovable cheapskate character during theDepression, this son of a Russian immigrant drew “on the Eastern EuropeanJewish condition and [applied] it to his American audiences,” Lawrence Epsteinwrote in “The Haunted Smile” (PublicAffairs, 2002), his book on Jews andcomedy.

In Benny’s private life, the tightwad image came with aprice.

 “He’d always tip extra, just to prove he wasn’t cheap,”Fein told The Journal.

At her Beverly Hills home on a recent Friday afternoon, JoanBenny, who is in her 60s, sat in a book-lined living room decorated with herfather’s memorabilia and described how dad grew up in an Orthodox home inWaukegan, Ill., the son of a haberdasher. When he was 8, his father gave him a$100 violin; his parents were appalled when he asked to take his fiddle on thevaudeville circuit a decade later. Permission came only when his pianistpromised to shield him from treif and loose women.

According to Benny’s unpublished autobiography, he met hisfuture wife, Sadie Marks, when fellow vaudevillian Zeppo Marx took him to adistant relative’s Passover seder around 1921. After Benny broke into radio 11years later, Marks eventually joined the cast as his on-again, off-againgirlfriend, Mary Livingstone (thereafter, Marks used that name in her privatelife).

By the time the Bennys segued into television in 1950, theyhad adopted Joan from a Jewish agency and moved into a Beverly Hills two-storywhite brick Georgian next door to Lucy and Desi. Their lavish Hollywood partiesincluded guests such as Frank Sinatra and Barbara Stanwyck, Joan said.

She described her father as an irreligious man who attendedHillcrest country club and had a Canter’s sandwich named for him, but rarelyset foot in synagogue. Each December, a 10-foot-tall Christmas tree graced thebay window in their first-floor library, where dad presided over scriptwritingsessions in his Queen Anne winged leather chair. On Friday nights, the familyate gribenes and other Jewish delicacies at the grandparents’ duplex on ThirdStreet near Fairfax Avenue, “which was about as religious as we got,” she said.

She felt the butler needed roller skates when the familydined at the home of dad’s best friend, Jewish comic George Burns.

“The two of them ate so fast, I think, because of theiryears in vaudeville trying to wolf down meals in between eight shows a day,”she said.

Her father’s relationship with Burns revealed much aboutBenny’s on-air persona. “Minus the stinginess, he was exactly like hischaracter,” she said. “He played a kind of mild-mannered patsy, the butt of thejoke, and he was like that with George and in real life. For example, my fathercould never make George laugh, but all George had to do was lift a finger andmy father would fall down on the floor.”

Joan recalled her dad wearing crazy outfits when greetingthe cigar-puffing Burns (Burns didn’t crack a smile) and his mock exasperationwhen his pal hung up on him in the middle of a telephone conversation.

“At dinner with the two of them, you were just waiting forsomething to happen,” she said.

The American public did the same throughout Benny’s weeklyradio and TV shows.

Fan club President Laura Leff, 33, hopes the convention willintroduce a whole new generation to his work. Leff, who founded the club at age10 after viewing Benny reruns, isn’t alone.

“It’s meaningful to me that younger people will discoverJack,” Fein said.

For information about the convention, which runs fromFeb. 14-16,  visit www.jackbenny.org.

Not a Day Over 39 Read More »

‘Image’ Is Everything

Leave a Comment / Entertainment /

Dara Horn wrote an exuberant scene in her stunning debutnovel, “In the Image,” upon returning to her dreary garret flat during a yearabroad in 1999. “I’d been to this dismal British market in which an entireaisle was devoted to butter and fats,” the ebullient Horn, 25, said animatedly.”I recall a product called ‘beef drippings.’ The produce was wilting. All themilk was expired yesterday.  I was very homesick.”

So the New Jersey native did what any red-blooded Americanauthor would do: she sat down and wrote a scene about Costco. In the sequence,which parodies Emma Lazarus’ immigrant poem, “The New Colossus,” the youngheroine embarks “on a journey to the promised land of groceries … wherehuddled masses yearning to breathe free of halitosis went to stock theirshelves with mouthwash.”

It’s a frivolous but spirited moment in Horn’s richlydetailed novel, which places her within the same circle of Jewish rookie authorsensations as Jonathan Safran Foer. The story opens as Leora, reeling from thedeath of her best friend, stops speaking and instead simply examines “hersurroundings as if she were a visitor, someone passing through on a longjourney.” Then a very different kind of tourist, her late friend’s grandfather,Wilhelm “Bill” Landsmann, invites her to view his slide collection of Jewishcommunities abroad. Subsequent chapters travel back and forth in time toexplore the archetypal journey of 20th-century Jews, describing Leora’s doomedromance with Jake, a college jock turned ba’al teshuva, and Bill’s wretchedchildhood in Nazi-occupied Amsterdam.

While the literary novel is chock full of illusions to theBible and to Yiddish literature, it isn’t above a trek (or two) to Costco.”Some might look at this as silly materialism, but there’s something sort ofexuberant about it,” said Horn, a Harvard doctoral student in Yiddish andHebrew literature. “It’s not just because you can get anything you want, butbecause you have the imagination to want more than you have. It’s theinspiration to decide what you want and who you want to be, which is reallywhat it means to be an American. So in my novel, Wilhelm becomes Bill, but Jakealso becomes Yehuda.”

Horn began thinking about American Jewish choices when shefirst read Philip Roth’s short story, “Good-bye Columbus,” set in her hometownof Short Hills, N.J., some years ago. The year is 1959, when Jewish quotasstill abounded.

By the time young Dara was growing up in Short Hills in the1980s, the quotas were gone and so was the need for plastic surgery. Hornproudly led junior congregation Torah readings at her Conservative synagogue,traveled to distant Jewish communities with her parents. At 14, she publishedher first magazine article, about Jewish historical sites in Spain, in Hadassahmagazine. She says she set her novel in Short Hills as a nod to “how much thesuburb has changed and how much the American Jewish community has changed in 40years.”

The setting and time frame also allowed Horn to explore thephenomenon of “people becoming more religious than their parents, whichintrigues me,” she said. “In order to make the decision to become morereligious, someone back in your family had to make the opposite decision.Neither choice is made frivolously, and I was fascinated by what makes peopledecide either way.”

Horn never intended to explore those issues in a novel; infact, she did not intend to write fiction until another fateful day abroad in1999. Bored during a train ride back to her Cambridge University flat, she saysshe began flipping through the spiral notebook in which she jotted ideas fornon-fiction articles and “suddenly began seeing how all these topics could belinked.”

While her classmates frequented pubs, Horn holed up in hergarret and started writing what she thought might be a series of short stories.Eventually, she linked them into a seamless, sprawling narrative that, in thetradition of Yiddish authors, frequently alludes to Jewish texts. A passage inwhich Bill and Leora visit a gravesite uses the structure of the Genesischapter on the binding of Isaac. The book of Job is retold starring Bill. Andthen there’s Costco as “The New Colossus” — the veritable opposite of thatpathetic British market Horn visited in Britain.

During a recent interview at a private home in Westwood, thefresh-faced New York author gleefully opens her novel and reads from the Costcopassage, clearly one of her favorites. “[There are] Waspy families whisperingto each other over piles of vegetables…. Trailer trash families brandishingtheir rattailed hair behind carts filled with fish sticks, Chasidic familiessweating in their long sleeves,” she read with relish. “[All] loading up theirshopping carts like Oregon Trail pioneers supplying their covered wagons asthey prepare to conquer the frontier, the parents gazing up at the toweringceilings of low-low prices, bewildered and captivated forever by this placethey call America.”

‘Image’ Is Everything Read More »

Love in the Afterlife

Leave a Comment / Entertainment /

Neil Simon has always laced his plays with aspects of hisown life and, at age 75, he takes on mortality — specifically the mortality ofa creative writer — in “Rose and Walsh.”

In the world premiere of his 33rd play, now at the GeffenPlayhouse in Westwood, Simon examines death, and if the subject might not behilarious at first blush, trust Simon to make the shuffling off the mortal coilan entertaining experience.

The title characters are Rose Steiner, a legendary writer,winner of two Pulitzer Prizes and a self-described “Jewess from Atlanta”(that’s the play’s only Jewish reference, so it’s better to get it in upfront), and Walsh McLaren, a “Mick from Hoboken” and the master of thehard-boiled mystery novel.

The pair has been stormy and profligate lovers and politicalleftists for decades, and if that description brings to mind Lillian Hellmanand Dashiel Hammett, you’re in the right ballpark. (Hellman, who died in 1984,is currently also recreated on Broadway in “Imaginary Friends,” focusing on herbitter rivalry with writer Mary McCarthy.)

There is one damper on their relationship: the fact thatWalsh died five years ago, but continues to visit Rose, in her mind and at herEast Hampton cottage; a more acerbic ghost would be hard to find, even in thevicinity of New York.

Rose, in her mid-60s, is suffering from a massive case offailing creative juices, eyesight and bank balance, but Walsh, during hisfrequent nocturnal visits, suggests a remedy, at least for the last problem.

Dust off a manuscript left unfinished at his death, writethe last 40 pages, and make a killing in the book market.

Rose can’t do the job herself, but Walsh suggests Clancy, adeservedly obscure, one-book author (“Die in Pieces”) as the — ahem — ghostwriter.

Rounding out the quartet is Rose’s young companion, Arlene,who has her own unfinished confrontation with Rose, and if you think that thereserved Arlene and the uncouth Casey are going to fall in love, score one foryour perceptiveness.

“Rose and Walsh” is not prime Simon (and he must be sick andtired of hearing that comparison). The play’s beginning is rather slow, theending a bit soggy, and, given that Simon kept rewriting scenes up to curtaintime, the actors stumble occasionally.

That said, Simon not in top form is probably still the bestAmerican playwright-craftsman around. He handles so devastating an experienceas the loss of a cherished lifetime companion with empathy and considerablewit, and applies the same qualities to a mother-daughter relationship and, ofcourse, the tribulations of a blocked writer.

While the play is hardly a sidesplitter, there are some finecomedic bits in the fractured conversation between Rose and Walsh, while Clancyand Arlene can neither hear nor see the ghost.

In the single funniest scene, Walsh reports on the weddingup yonder of Charles Dickens, with a full complement of 19th century novelistsin attendance.

Credit foremost the work of two of our most skillful senioractors, Jane Alexander as Rose and Len Cariou as Walsh, playing off each otherlike Serena and Venus Williams in a doubles match. That’s tough competition forMarin Hinkle as Arlene and David Aaron Baker as Clancy, but they more than holdtheir own, under the direction of David Esbjornson.

“Rose and Walsh” runs through March 22 at the GeffenPlayhouse, 10866 Le Conte Ave., Westwood. For tickets, call (310) 208-5454, orvisit www.geffenplayhouse.com .

Love in the Afterlife Read More »

Ask Wendy

Leave a Comment / Community /

An Unreasonable
Invite?

Dear Wendy,

My wife and I recently had a falling out with very close
friends whom we’ve known for over 40 years. When their daughter became engaged,
they told us early on that, for budgetary reasons, our children would not be
invited to the wedding. We said, at that time, that unless our youngest was
invited, we would not be able to attend. That child, age 10, was born after we
lost our 17-year-old daughter in a car accident. He is therefore very special
to us and everyone in our family knows as much. We have also never left him
with a babysitter. Our son was not invited to the wedding. My wife believes
that if our friends valued our friendship they would have granted our request.
Our friends explained that they were not comfortable inviting our son given
that no other children were being included. They called three times the month
before the wedding, and have called several times since, to say that they did
not want the friendship to suffer. Who is in the wrong?

Friend in Need

Dear Friend,

I don’t know how anyone survives the loss of a child. But
people do. And somehow you have. By your own admission, your youngest child is
dearer to you for having been born after a tragic loss, but the rest of the
world cannot be expected to grant your son similar special status. I would add
that your son would probably be bored senseless at an event where he is the
only child. You have jeopardized a valuable and longstanding relationship
because your friends failed to play by your rules at a time when the only
people who really mattered were the bride and groom. Friendships are not
predicated on unwavering submission; disagreements, no matter how serious or
hurtful, are not grounds for termination. Your feelings were hurt; your friends
have acknowledged this by calling numerous times. Call them back today. If you
feel the need to rehash the issue one more time then do so and put it behind
you. Your friendship survived the loss of your daughter. Don’t let it fall
apart over a simcha.

To Kosher or Not to
Kosher?

Dear Wendy,

I am getting married and would like to accommodate my
fiancé’s family. They are insisting on a strictly kosher wedding reception. If
we serve a dairy meal, several of my relatives with dietary restrictions who
are not Jewish or observant will have little to eat; if we serve both meat and
dairy, many of his relatives will be very upset. I am desperate to find a
compromise.

Blushing Bride

Dear Blushing,

Strict adherence to the laws of kashrut does not allow for
compromise. This is just one of the many things you will learn if you marry
into a religious family — and it is one of the easier lessons. When it comes to
the do’s and don’ts of Sabbath observance, your learning curve will be much
steeper. As long as you and your fiancé are on the same page, and his family is
patient and tolerant, you will find your way. The good news is that a gifted
Jewish caterer can deliver a delicious meal that speaks to all of your
concerns: would you believe velvety chocolate cake with nondairy whipped cream?
Your in-laws will be able to attend; your guests will never know. As for the
main course, why not a rare filet with (nondairy) hollandaise sauce? For those
vegetarians among your guests, I have yet to meet a caterer who does not offer
an alternative meal for those with dietary restrictions.

Where Do We Go From
Here?

Dear Wendy,

I have been dating the same man for two years. Three months
into our relationship he started talking about getting married. We decided then
that we were moving too quickly. Now, I find that we are “stuck” in the dating
phase and that my boyfriend refuses to discuss marriage. My best friend tells
me to be patient. Should I move on?

Lady in Waiting

Dear Lady,

I’d say that your aim is closer to the mark. Two years is a
respectable amount of time for any two people to decide if they are meant for
each other. Especially if you had discussed marriage in the early days of the
relationship, it is all the more bizarre that your boyfriend can’t stomach the
issue now. Time to tell your boyfriend that you need to know if the
relationship is heading in the direction of the altar. Do give him a chance to
defend himself before you flatten him on your way out the door.

Ask Wendy Read More »

Shut Up, I Love You!

Leave a Comment / David Suissa, Opinion /

What is it about the mitzvah of loving our fellow Jew thatis so complicated?

This question was on my mind recently when I witnessed anextraordinary event. A group of Sephardic, Chasidic, Reform, Orthodox,Conservative, Reconstructionist, unaffiliated, atheist, right- and left-wingJews were gathered at a private dinner  — and no one had to call security. Weall sat at a large table, and shared our thoughts with each other. What struckme was how intently everyone listened. There was a holy glow to the evening, asense that something special was unfolding.

So I thought: Wow, that was a piece of cake. What happenedthat created this little miracle of Jewish unity? How could we bottle it so wedon’t have to wait for private dinners to bring out, in the words of AbrahamLincoln, the “better angels of our nature”? And then I mused: If I was a rabbi(scary thought), what kind of sermon would I give to describe the specialmindset that promotes true ahavat Yisrael (love of the Jewish people)?

So here, my friends, in the spirit of Valentine’s Day, is alayman’s sermon and contribution to this mysterious subject of ahavat Yisrael:

Good Shabbos, and to our Sephardic friends, Shabbat shalom.

Today, I want to challenge you to see love in a differentway. For years now, you have heard about the importance of ahavat Yisrael. Butnow I will stick my neck out and tell you how I think we can live out thisgreat mitzvah of love: We should stop giving to each other and start takingfrom each other.

Let me explain. It’s easy to love in the abstract, when yourlove is never tested. It’s easy to say “I love every Jew” when you are doingall the talking (shut up, I love you!). It’s easy because you’re the one incontrol.

But easy is not the Jewish way, and ahavat Yisrael iscertainly not easy. You see, life gives us a choice. We can spend the rest ofour days with people we always agree with, people who laugh and live and thinkthe way we do. In this cubicle of isolation, we feel safe and comfortable. That’seasy love.

Our other choice is to jump the walls and engage the world.While staying true to our own beliefs and traditions, we can meet Jews we’renot used to meeting, sing songs we’re not used to singing, hear views we’re notused to hearing. In other words, we can take from our fellow Jew, even if itmakes us uncomfortable. That’s hard love, and it’s the true test of ahavatYisrael. Easy love keeps us apart, but hard love bonds us.

Feeling sorry for another Jew because he or she does nothave your truth is easy love (even if your truth is that there is only onetruth). Trying to save that person is easy love. Loving a million people fromafar is easy love. Hard love is when you recognize that your fellow Jews arealso created in God’s image, and you honor them by letting them give yousomething. Like Heschel said, the greatest need we have is to feel needed.

When you take from a fellow Jew (and I don’t mean money) youallow the person to give a part of himself, and that is the greatest gift. Byshowing genuine interest, you create a vessel for his giving to enter yourheart. You’re telling that person: “You’re worth a lot to me — I need you. I’msecure inside, so your differences don’t threaten me; they interest me. Show meyour mitzvahs; sing me your songs. I’m not tolerating, I am engaging. If wedisagree, we’ll do so with dignity, but we’ll never stop seeing each other.You’re family, and I am more than my ideology. I’m also curious, so tell memore. You’re enriching me.”

And guess what? Something miraculous happens at that moment:that person who you’re listening to and taking from, well, they’re now morelikely to listen to you and take from you. To take your views, your songs, yourmitzvahs. That is the climax of ahavat Yisrael: when the desire to receivebecomes our strongest link; when we stop competing with each other and startcompleting each other; when we open our eyes and realize that we each own apiece of the truth, and together we own the whole truth.

After 2,000 years of living apart, we are now face to face,Jews of all stripes and colors in virtually the same neighborhoods. If we cantake little steps and walk from the same neighborhood to the same table, andshare what we’ve learned and accumulated over those 2,000 years, we can transformthis moment in history into the ultimate family reunion. Yes, it’s a utopianvision, but so was the dream of returning to Israel, and God knows we rose tothat challenge.

So my friends, I’m inviting you this Shabbat to begin ourfamily reunion by taking from your fellow Jew. Instead of, “I’ll give to youso you can see what you’ve been missing,” let’s try, “I’ll take from you so Ican see what I’ve been missing.”

The path to true love is not through change, but throughexchange. And if this means that you’ll occasionally be taking from anothershul or another rabbi, you should know that I’ll be doing the same.

Happy Valentine’s Day.

Shut Up, I Love You! Read More »

American Jews and Saddam: A Lesson from the 1930s?

Leave a Comment / Opinion /

Should American Jews support U.S. military action to remove
Saddam Hussein from power? This question, which is the focus of so much
discussion in the Jewish community today, echoes a dilemma
that wracked American Jewry during the 1930s.

American public opinion during the 1930s strongly opposed
any U.S. action against Nazi Germany. A 1937 poll found that 71 percent of
Americans thought America was wrong to have entered World War I; many believed
the United States had been tricked into the conflict by greedy weapons
manufacturers. The hardships of the Great Depression further intensified the
view that domestic concerns required America’s full attention, and that the
country could not spare any resources for overseas matters.

  While most Americans found Hitler’s totalitarian ways
distasteful, they could not yet see any compelling reason to consider going to
war against Nazi Germany, which seemed to be just one in a vast and
ever-increasing array of unsavory regimes. Gallup polls during 1940-41 found
only about one-tenth of Americans willing to go to war for any other reason
than to fend off an invasion of the United States itself.

Many American Jews felt differently. They hoped the United
States would take action against Hitler, not only because of the Nazis’
persecution of the Jews, but because they realized that Hitler was a threat to
the entire free world. But they feared being perceived as warmongers. Thus a
leading Jewish organization, the American Jewish Committee (AJCommittee),
declined to sponsor a U.S. speaking tour by Winston Churchill in 1937, fearing
that its involvement might be seen as evidence of a plot “to involve the United
States in the European mess,” as one AJCommittee official put it.

Palestine Labor Zionist leader David Ben-Gurion, visiting
the United States in 1940, was disappointed to find Jewish leaders reluctant to
speak out. One told him: “If I stand up and demand American aid for Britain,
people will say after the war that the dirty Jews got us into it, that it was a
Jewish war, that it was for their sakes that our sons died in battle.”
Ben-Gurion recalled: “This fear I found in almost all [American] Zionist
circles.”

Trying to dispel the impression that Jews favored U.S.
military action against Nazi Germany, Rabbi Stephen S. Wise, the foremost
American Jewish leader of that era, wrote to a non-Jewish colleague in 1941:
“[N]o Jew on earth has asked any nation to take up arms against Hitler.”

Wise’s statement was something of an exaggeration. While
Jewish organizations, such as Wise’s American Jewish Congress, refrained from
urging U.S. military action against the Nazis, a number of prominent Jewish
individuals did speak out.

While the America First movement campaigned for
isolationism, those favoring action against Hitler established the Fight for
Freedom committee, which soon attracted the support of numerous prominent
Americans. Fight for Freedom’s supporters included many Hollywood figures, such
as Tallulah Bankhead, Helen Hayes, Burgess Meredith, Douglas Fairbanks Jr. —
and such prominent Jews as Irving Berlin, Ethel Merman, Jack Benny, Eddie
Cantor, Oscar Hammerstein (of Rodgers and Hammerstein fame), George Jessel and
Ben Hecht. New York governor Herbert Lehmann, one of the most prominent Jews in
American politics, backed Fight for Freedom, as did James Warburg and Edward
Warburg, of the famous banking family.

In fact, James Warburg was Fight for Freedom’s spokesman in
a public debate in 1941 with the arch-isolationist Charles Lindbergh, which was
held at Madison Square Garden and broadcast on radio nationwide. Refusing to be
intimidated by accusations that Jews were dragging America into a conflict with
Germany, Warburg bluntly told the aviation hero: “Jew or Gentile, an American
can say only this to Charles Lindbergh: Your second nonstop flight has taken
you to a strange destination.”

Still, Warburg and the other Jewish supporters of Fight for
Freedom were a minority in the Jewish community. While many Jews privately
sympathized with Fight for Freedom, not many were willing to do so publicly.

Perhaps it is not surprising that in the 1930s and early
1940s, many American Jews were unwilling to call for U.S. action against
Hitler. It was a generation comprised largely of immigrants or children of
immigrants. They were not yet fully comfortable in American society, and the
prevalence of anti-Semitism during those years naturally intensified Jewish
fears.

But much has changed in the past 60 years. The degree to
which Jews and Judaism have become an accepted part of American culture and
society is exemplified by the nomination of a Jew — and a self-described
practicing Jew, at that — as the Democratic candidate for vice-president three
years ago. Given this reality, one would not expect American Jews in 2003 to be
cowed into silence by the fear of provoking accusations of “Jewish
warmongering.”

It remains to be seen to what extent American Jews will
publicly support U.S. action to oust Saddam Hussein. Their decision will be
colored, in part, by powerful historical memories — memories of how an earlier
generation allowed itself to be intimidated, and how the world’s reluctance to
confront Hitler helped pave the way for Nazi aggression, World War II and the
Holocaust. Â

Dr. Rafael Medoff is visiting scholar in the Jewish studies
program at the State University of New York-Purchase College. His latest book
is “A Race Against Death: Peter Bergson, America and the Holocaust” (New Press,
2002), coauthored with David S. Wyman.

American Jews and Saddam: A Lesson from the 1930s? Read More »

7 Days In Arts

Leave a Comment / Picks and Clicks /

Saturday

Nora Maccoby comes from a long line of rabbis on her father’s side and a Celtic heritage on her mother’s. She also tells us that her paternal grandfather was best friends with Mark Rothko; that her sister studied with De Kooning; and that her mother, once a champion figure skater, now does portrait painting. All of this helps explain her own foray into painting, and, more specifically, her admitted influence of kabbalah and Druidism in her latest series “Ether Field,” now showing at The Living Room Gallery. catch today’s open house.1-5 p.m. Runs through March 28. 524 Hoover St., Los Angeles. (323) 662-2932.

Sunday

Not reserved for peaceniks, environmentalists and self-help types alone, the Los Angeles Conscious Living Expo offers something for anyone interested in health and fitness, sustainable living, world peace, spirituality, ecology and green living or personal growth. True, you’ll probably need to prep yourself for the overwhelming musk of patchouli and incense. But it may just be worth it to hear lectures by the likes of Arianna Huffington and Rabbi Michael Lerner and musical performances by Rabbi Moshe Halfon and Melissa Manchester.Feb. 14-16. $5-$15 (general), $10-$30 (workshops), free (children under 12). LAX Hilton, 5711 W. Century Blvd., Los Angeles. For times and more information, call (888) 721-3976.

Monday

Also taking the “love not war” route this week, Judith Margolis shows her latest series of paintings at the USC Hillel Gallery titled “Making a Place for Peace: An Artist’s Response to the Crisis in Israel.” Israel-based Margolis responds to the terror and growing tension felt in the country daily in some 20 paintings, journal sketches and collaged images.9 a.m.-5 p.m. (Monday-Friday). Runs through March 14. 3300 S. Hoover St., Los Angeles. (213) 747-9135.

Tuesday

Spy game expert Tom Moon shares his wealth of knowledge with the folks of Temple Ner Tamid’s Ezra Center for Mature Adults this morning. But for nonmembers interested in attending, they’re quite the welcoming crowd. The program includes a lecture by Moon on “Untold Stories of the Mossad, ‘Israel’s Secret Service,'” followed by a catered kosher lunch. Moon has written six books on espionage and is a former covert operations officer in the Office of Strategic Services during World War II, so we’d guess the guy knows what he’s talking about.10 a.m.-noon. $6 (lunch, members), $7 (lunch, nonmembers). 10629 Lakewood Blvd., Downey. (562) 861-9276.

Wednesday

Aaron Bensoussan, Gerard Edery and Alberto Mizrahi, akaThe Sons of Sepharad, have taken songs in Ladino, Greek, Turkish, Arabic andHebrew from Sephardic Spanish tradition and created a self-titled album. Therenown singers have already been lauded by Yedi’ot Aharonot, The Boston Globeand The New York Times. You can buy the album online for a spicy taste of theold country. $17. www.gerardedery.com

.

Thursday

Today, LACMA presents a screening of the next in their “In Glorious Black-and-White Scope” series, “The Diary of Anne Frank.” Most likely, it’s been a while since you’ve seen the film at all, let alone on the big screen. Directed by George Stevens, and starring Millie Perkins as Anne and Shelley Winters (in an Oscar-winning performance) as Mrs. Van Daan, the film garnered William C. Mellor an Oscar for Best Black-and-White Cinematography. Tonight’s your chance to see it in a venue that does it justice.7:30 p.m. $8 (general), $6 (members, seniors and students). 5905 Wilshire Blvd., Los Angeles. (323) 857-6010.

Friday

Faith can be a tough enough concept when you’re straight. But for the gay/lesbian/bisexual/transgender community, things get even stickier. “Body of Faith,” written by Luis Alfaro, examines these issues through four characters: a gay, ex-Christian fundamentalist; a bisexual woman and recent Jewish convert; a transgender woman who finds a less-defined spiritual identity; and a gay Muslim man seeking answers in the Koran. You can catch a preview at the L.A. Gay and Lesbian Center’s Renberg Theatre tonight.8 p.m. (Thursday-Saturday), 3 p.m. (Sundays). “Pay What You Can Preview.” Opening night: March 1. Runs through March 16. $20. The Village at Ed Gould Plaza, 1125 N. McCadden Place, Los Angeles. (323) 860-7300.

7 Days In Arts Read More »

Don’t Judge aBook by Its Cover

Leave a Comment / Opinion /

The media has been busy for months with “One People, Two
Worlds” (Schocken Books, 2002), the book I co-authored with Ammie
Hirsch, and the promotional tour from which I withdrew after
two appearances in deference to the Council of Torah Sages. Now that the dust
has settled somewhat, I would like to add a few remarks and observations of my
own.

A few weeks ago, upon his return from his now-solo
appearances on the tour, Ammi wrote an article (“Two Authors, One Book Tour,”
Jan. 3) in which he lamented the missed opportunity for the Orthodox. He had
met “thousands of Jews. Precisely the people Rabbi Reinman wanted to reach —
mostly non-Orthodox Jews eager to learn more about Torah and the Orthodox world.”

It was indeed a missed opportunity. My message resonated
well with the people during the first two appearances — in the “State of World
Jewry” forum at the 92nd Street Y and at a book fair in Indianapolis —
despite my long caftan, beard and peyot. After the presentations, many people
approached me with comments, questions and an overwhelming curiosity. We also
connected on a personal level, and I loved it and them. By withdrawing from the
tour, I had to forego meeting hundreds of people under similar circumstances. A
great loss.

So why did I withdraw? And even more important, why was this
opportunity for an Orthodox rabbi to meet non-Orthodox people such a rare
phenomenon?

Ammi offers the answer. “The Jewish world needs you,” he
calls out to the Orthodox, “to bring your love of Torah, discipline,
commitment, knowledge and passion to the Jewish world…. The enemy is not
Reform Judaism. The enemy is apathy, assimilation and ignorance. We should see
ourselves as allies in our common struggle to sustain and ensure Jewish
continuity.”

You see? There are strings attached to these wonderful
opportunities. So Reform laypeople want to hear and learn from Orthodox rabbis?
Fine, but only if those Orthodox rabbis acknowledge Reform rabbis as allies. It
is like a parent using the children as pawns in a marital struggle. If the
Orthodox rabbi stands on the stage side by side with a Reform rabbi, then he
can speak to the people. Otherwise, no visitation.

But Reform rabbis are not our colleagues in the work of
perpetuating Jewish continuity. Reform ideology embraces moral relativism,
denies the divine authorship of the Torah, denies the divine covenant, denies
the binding nature of halacha and, by doing so, rejects the Judaism of our
ancestors. Reform laypeople know this full well, and that is why they are so
eager to learn about Orthodoxy, the religion of their ancestors. They don’t
display the same interest in Conservatism and Reconstructionism, which are just
different flavors of the liberal stream.

During these last few months, I have met and heard from
numerous non-Orthodox people yearning for a stronger Jewish identity, and I
wondered what motivated them to set themselves apart from American society.
Then it struck me that the laypeople have never let go of the religion of their
ancestors, that the national memory of Sinai is still etched into their
chromosomes, that deep down they know the divine covenant between the Creator
and His people is real.

Fifty years ago, a group of leading Orthodox sages erected a
firewall between the Orthodox rabbinate and the Reform rabbinate, forbidding
any official contact whatsoever between the two. The sages felt that sharing
common platforms with movements so antithetical to the religion of our
ancestors would give them an aura of legitimacy they did not deserve. They
placed no restrictions, however, on contact with Reform Jews as individuals.

Since then, Orthodoxy has flourished, but the lines of
communication with our non-Orthodox brothers and sisters have been shut down.
Their rabbis have told them that the Orthodox hate them and do not consider
them authentic Jews — absolute lies — and they have stood guard over the people
to make sure that no Orthodox rabbi speaks to them unattended.

So why did I co-write the book when I knew that our revered
sages disapproved of sharing platforms with Reform rabbis? Was I breaking away
and setting out in a new direction? Heaven forbid.

There is a deep sense of desperation in the Orthodox
community at the disintegration of the non-Orthodox world. There is a feeling
that time is running out and something must be done. The rabbis who authorized
and supported this project decided, based on several fine distinctions, that it
was an exception to the rule. To mention just one of these distinctions, since
I am an independent scholar and writer rather than a member of the rabbinate,
my participation was considered “individual” rather than “official” contact; I
mention this distinction in the book several times. We felt we could thus
circumvent the rabbinate and speak directly to the people.

We were wrong. The media completely ignored my explicit
distinctions and depicted the exchange as a breakthrough, a breach in the
Orthodox wall of rejection, which it was never meant to be. Most did not even
bother to read the book. They just looked at the cover and, to my horror,
painted me as the Rosa Parks of interdenominational dialogue. I have yet to see
one serious, in-depth review of the book.

The declaration of the Council of Sages simply reaffirmed
what we already knew — that the distinctions had failed to register with all
those people eager to portray the book in a light that suited them better.
Under these circumstances, the tour would just compound the error.

What could I say? They were right. And so, I withdrew.
Unfortunately, the media ridiculed the Council of Sages as beady-eyed
ayatollahs issuing fatwas against me and my family and bans of excommunication
against anyone who dared pick up the book. This was all nonsense.

The members of the council are wise, intelligent, highly
principled people, most of whom I have known for years. Two of them paid their
respects when I was sitting shiva for my father recently. The sages just set
policy; they never tell individuals what to do, and they certainly never threatened
me in any way whatsoever. Their declaration treated me with kindness and
respect, and when I issued my brief statement of acceptance and withdrew from
the tour, they were surprised and responded with a nice complimentary
statement. I have only good things to say about them.

In retrospect, the premise of the book was a mistake, but
what is done is done. The book has taken on a life of its own, and I hope and
pray that it does only good and no harm. Ultimately, the book will stand as
convincing evidence that Orthodoxy is intellectually sophisticated and
compelling, that our rejection of dialogue does not stem from fear and that our
expressions of love for all Jews are genuine and sincere.

In the meantime, I urge all my Jewish brothers and sisters not
to allow your rabbis to hold you hostage. If they do not allow you to meet
Orthodox rabbis, read the books I mention in the afterword. If you need more
guidance, write to me at the e-mail address that appears there.

As Ammi mentioned, when we were at the 92nd Street Y, the
moderator asked me, “If someone has a choice between watching ‘The Sopranos’
and learning Talmud with a Reform rabbi, what would you advise him to do?”

Things had been going so well, and now this bomb. I tried to
wiggle out, but the moderator pinned me down. What could I do?

So I took a deep breath and said, “He should watch ‘The
Sopranos.'”

There was an audible gasp from the audience.

I was mortified.

Afterward, Richard Curtis, my wise friend and agent, told
me, “Don’t worry. People will respect your intellectual honesty. And besides,
many people will go home wondering, ‘What is so bad about learning Talmud with
a Reform rabbi? Why would he say something like that?'”

Why, indeed.

Article reprinted courtesy The New York Jewish Week. Â


Yosef Reinman is an Orthodox writer, historian and scholar living in Lakewood, N.J.

Don’t Judge aBook by Its Cover Read More »

How Not to Date

Leave a Comment / Singles /

Look, I’m not going to tell you how to find “the one,” how
to radiate that “I’m available” light, how to register for wine tasting
seminars and join networking groups.

I have no dating advice. None. I won’t suggest clever phrasing
for your personal ad or how to choose a photo to post on JDate. I’m not an
expert on any of these things, but without bragging, I will admit I’m truly
excellent at one thing: how not to date. I’m aware this skill won’t get me a
book deal or a segment on “Good Morning America.” But it would be selfish of me
not to share the wisdom I’ve garnered in the past year of cutting myself off
from all romantic possibilities. With a subtle yet unswerving dedication, I’ve
raised being single to an art. Just in case you’re interested — say you’ve been
hurt, maybe you haven’t dealt with anger at one or both of your parents,
perhaps you just fear intimacy — I’m here for you.

If you’re horrified by the image of yourself huddled in the
corner of some singles event, clutching a plastic cup full of cheap Merlot,
staring at the “Hello, my name is Dave” sticker on the pressed lapel of a
dentist from Canoga Park, listen up girls.

Let’s start with the small stuff. First, you really want to
make sure your daily life doesn’t bring you in contact with any new single men.
Avoid gender-neutral coffee shops in favor of places that serve CarboLite and
sell bags of Pirate’s Booty. Frozen yogurt is your friend. It has magical
men-repellent powers that I could never explain.

If you must go to the gym, steer clear of the weight room
and instead opt for classes heavy in choreography. Look for names like Latin
Grooves, Booty Ballet, Abs Abs Abs and Cardio Funk Attack. At this point in
American culture, yoga is no longer safe. I repeat, yoga is strictly off-limits
— straight men have found it and they know you’re in there with your low-slung
sweats and no bra. If you must go to yoga, let’s say you just can’t make it to
Burn & Grind, get there late, leave early and don’t look around. Keep your
hair dirty and your eyes on your mat.

The evenings become a little more complicated. If you crave
male attention, maintain a coterie of ex-boyfriends with whom you can go to the
movies from time to time. You will look and feel “taken.”

Eschew invitations to parties in favor of dinner with
married girlfriends. Better yet, make sure you have several married friends
with newborn babies you can visit on Saturday nights.

At this point, the only attractive single men you will meet
are deliverymen: the mail man, the pizza guy, whatnot. Without being rude, you
want to adhere to a strict sign-and-slam policy.

When friends and family offer to fix you up with their
“incredibly attractive neighbor they can’t believe is still single” — believe
it. With the understanding that these offers come from a place of true
generosity, you must reject them in such a way that no more fix-ups come along.
Sometimes a nonverbal response is best. What I do, but please feel free to
improvise here, is wince, let my chest cave in until the flow of air is
constricted and look around at the ceiling. I allow this to go on for an
uncomfortable amount of time before mumbling a non sequitur such as: “Does
anyone really know why Reagonomics failed?”

All of the above may be obvious, and I owe you more than
that.

The need for emotional connection is a cunning foe. Keep it
in check by having some sort of e-mail/phone relationship with someone totally
inappropriate for you who lives far away. What’s working for me right now is a
25-year-old man-child who lives in New York City. You can freestyle here, as
long as you make sure that some part of your soul is tethered to a person who
will never, ever be a real boyfriend.

You may wonder how I put these principles together,
airtight, succinct, elegant. Like most great discoveries, it was accidental.
One day there was moldy cheese, next thing I knew: alone-a-cillin. The turning
point came when, after resisting it for years, I actually peeked at an Internet
dating site. I saw pixilated despair, a need so plain and terrible that I
wanted to slam the door on it like a particularly fetching FedEx guy. It was a
scary discovery. Necessity may be the mother of invention, but fear is its
abusive foster parent.

True wanting, openness, availability, those are scary
things. Those take courage. I however, take a chocolate-vanilla swirl with
sprinkles.

Look, you can put yourself out there, I’m not saying it’s a
bad idea. However, this is just a slice of what I’ve learned about how not to
do so. Because when chance comes, he ain’t serving frozen yogurt. 

Teresa Strasser can be seen Saturdays at noon and 10 p.m. on
The Learning Channel’s “While You Were Out” and is on the Web at www.teresastrasser.com.

How Not to Date Read More »