While I was in my synagogue’s office one morning, the phone rang, and I answered. The lady on the other end said, “Hello, may I please speak to the owner?”
I answered, “Certainly, it will be our pleasure to let you talk to him. You have reached The House of God, and the Owner is available at either 6:15 or 7:45 every morning, or during this coming week He can also be reached at 7:45 in the evening.”
“Well in that case I will call back at one of those times,” the lady said.
I responded, “Oh no, you can’t do that because the Owner doesn’t take any telephone calls. You must come in person to see Him if you wish to talk to Him.”
By now the lady was getting a bit frustrated and said, “Excuse me, but why can’t Mr. Gad come to the phone?”
I told her, “Because He only likes a face-to-face conversation.”
It was then she must have realized she hadn’t reached a typical business. “Sir, may I ask what kind of business have I reached?”
“Madam, you have reached a synagogue.”
Her response was most telling. “Oh, in that case I can’t sell you anything. Nothing that I am selling will impress your boss,” she said before hanging up.
This lady’s observation is the theme of a story recounted in this week’s Torah portion.
In Chapter 32, the Torah recounts how the tribes of Reuven and Gad negotiated with Moses to let them settle the Trans-Jordan. Reuven and Gad argued coherently and logically for the land. They noted that this land was originally owned by the defeated Kings of Bashan and the Emorites and was therefore not inhabited by anyone. What were they to do with it? Just let it go unused? It was fertile and well watered, more so than the territory on the other side of the Jordan.
With these facts, they came to Moses and offered what they thought was a reasonable proposition. They had a multitude of cattle, and the Trans-Jordan land was perfect for raising cattle. If they would take possession of it, everyone would benefit. It would enlarge the boundaries of the Jewish state, and it would give more room for the other 10 tribes to divide the land west of the Jordan, creating more prosperity for all involved.
Moses bitterly opposed this idea. He was so incensed with their proposal that he compared their idea to the sin of the scouts who caused the people to be punished with 40 years of wandering in the desert. He was concerned that their proposal would sabotage the entire enterprise of settling the Land of Israel, making the other tribes lose interest in fighting for the land. The argument between Moses and the two tribes only ended when they entered into an agreement that the two tribes would act as the vanguard in capturing the Land of Israel.
But the question remains, what justification did Moses have that allowed him to denounce them so fiercely? How could he compare them to the scouts? Our sages noted that the answer lay in the wording of their proposal. They told Moses, “We will build sheepfolds here for our cattle, and cities for our little ones” (Numbers 32:16). Rashi, the classical medieval commentator, considered this wording and came to the conclusion: “They were concerned for their property more than they were for their sons and daughters, for they put the mention of their livestock ahead of their children.”
What came first in their request? It was the sheepfolds and not the children. It was making money and not building schools and synagogues that took priority. For that reason Moses was upset. He responded by changing the order when he told the two tribes, “Build you cities for your little ones, and folds for your flock; and do that which has gone out of your mouth” (Numbers 32:24).
Rashi explains, “Moses said to them: This is not right. Make that which is essential essential and that which is secondary secondary. First build cities for your children and afterward enclosures for your penning.”
Moses challenged them to realize that their values needed adjusting.
It would be wrong for us to just interpret this story as a moment in biblical history without realizing it resonates with modern man just as it did some 3,500 years ago.
How many of us place our work before our families and all other concerns? One modern ethicist captured the entire issue when he said, “No tombstone ever read, ‘He spent extra hours in the office.'”
At the end of the day the Almighty is impressed with us only when we know how to organize our priorities correctly.
Elazar Muskin is rabbi of Young Israel of Century City.
If I have to blame anyone for my fate, I suppose it would be the late Peter Boyarsky, who put out a Yiddish newspaper in Chicago.
Peter, my father’s uncle, was an
influential Chicago journalist in the early part of the last century. “Printers’ ink in his blood,” they used to say of newspaper people in the old days. I guess my dose of ink came from Uncle Peter, and here I am today, just like him, pounding out words for a Jewish newspaper.
I learned just how influential Peter Boyarsky was years ago, when my editor at the Los Angeles Times, Ed Guthman, suggested I stop in Chicago on my way to Washington and talk to Jake Arvey, a once-famous boss of the Chicago machine who was then in semiretirement. Guthman was always trying to broaden my political knowledge, and he figured I could learn something from the old boss.
Arvey, seated behind his desk, looked at me closely.
“Boyarsky,” he said. “Boyarsky,” he said again, pondering the name. “Are you related to a Yiddish newspaper editor named Boyarsky?”
I replied that he was my father’s uncle.
Arvey smiled. When he first ran for office, Arvey said, Boyarsky agreed to have his paper endorse him, assuring him of victory in the solidly Jewish district.
After that, Arvey and I got along just fine.
I thought of Peter Boyarsky when I returned from a vacation that included a visit to the ” target=”_blank”>Forward, still published today as an influential weekly on the Web and in print, with a Yiddish-language edition that, as the paper says, is experiencing “a modest revival, benefiting from the renewed interest in Yiddish on college campuses…. .”
Such a revival is happening in Los Angeles, too.
In Chicago, Peter Boyarsky edited the Idisher Kuryer, the Daily Jewish Courier, with editions in Yiddish and English. Like the better-known Forward and other Yiddish papers, it covered the common problems of Chicago’s immigrant Jews and familiarized them with the customs, rules, traditions and politics of their new city and country
When Arvey was rising to power in the 24th Ward in the heart of Jewish Chicago, it was logical that he would call upon the Idisher Kuryer and its editor for help. The paper was probably as important to Arvey as a good precinct captain in getting out the vote.
All that seems a bit old fashioned today. Sophisticated Los Angeles Jews don’t have to turn to a Jewish newspaper for political advice or for guidance through the pitfalls of American society. Assimilated Jews can find that information on their own.
But one of the basic tasks of Jewish community newspapers remains. It is the same task that faces Lansky at the National Yiddish Book Center —building and maintaining a sense of community and Jewish identity among a people now scattered and often secularized. Rachel Levin, program officer of Steven Spielberg’s Righteous Persons Foundation, put it this way in discussing the foundation’s grant to the Yiddish Book Center for digitizing Yiddish literature:
“Over 50 years after the war, a new generation is beginning to realize how cut off we are from our recent history, as we try to piece together fragments of what life was like in towns, shtetls and cities throughout Europe. Often these fragments seem to be only hints and shadows of what was, and therefore, we look to literature, albeit fiction, to find the color and life of the marketplace, the intense struggles between different ideological factions, the misery of factory life and the joy of communal celebrations.”
Newspapers aren’t literature, but that’s what my great uncle, Peter Boyarsky, did at the Idisher Kuryer, and that remains one of our tasks at The Jewish Journal today.
Until leaving the Los Angeles Times in 2001, Bill Boyarsky worked as a political correspondent, a Metro columnist for nine years and as city editor for three years. You can reach him at bw.boyarsky@verizon.net. His column appears here monthly.
I’m pleased Rob Eshman plans to get involved in making local transportation better (“Take Back L.A.,” July 11).
This is prime time for action, with the push for a new half-cent sales tax that would fund a subway extension and many other transit and highway projects in the county.
The last time The Journal wrote about transportation was to fault the Metro Orange Line, now a huge success for the Valley and the region. Since then, thousands of Angelenos, fed up with traffic and high gas prices, have helped guide development of Metro’s new Long Range Transportation Plan that looks ahead to the year 2030 and recommends dozens of new transportation projects to keep pace with the county’s population and job growth.
Extending the subway is an important part of that plan. Last fall, Metro kicked off the Westside Extension Transit Corridor Alternatives Analysis Study. More than 1,000 people have participated in 13 formal meetings so far. The Jewish Journal has received meeting notices but hasn’t responded.
It’s not too late. That study is nearing its conclusion, and there will be another round of community meetings before staff presents its recommendation to the Metro board this fall and requests authorization to enter into a full environmental study.
Eshman should go to www.metro.net for details about this and other planning studies. Then maybe he can put his frustration to work and, in the future when tourists ask him how to get to the beach via Metro, he’ll be able to give them positive directions.
Jody Feerst Litvak Metro Community Relations Manager
Rob Eshman responds:
I want to believe that the proposed half-cent sales tax will solve Los Angeles’ traffic problem.
But Ms. Litvak and the MTA will have to convince me that MTA will use the increased revenue in a wise and timely manner. A track record of cost overruns and poor management make me skeptical, but I invite her to make the case in these pages that the MTA will do its job well.
Meanwhile, Ms. Litvak criticizes The Jewish Journal for doing our job well. We didn’t fault the Orange Line system, we wrote a cover story that reported on the concerns of adjacent neighborhoods. Those concerns were addressed, and the line is a success — several of our employees take the Orange Line to the office.
Since then, we have run other stories and opinion pieces on L.A. traffic — an issue that deeply affects the ability of all communities, including the Jewish one, to prosper, connect and flourish.
As for attending meetings, guilty as charged. But as long as Ms. Litvak continues to read The Jewish Journal, she’ll have all the input from us she could ever want.
The American Jewish Committee (AJC) is proud of the leadership position we have taken on a range of civic issues, including transportation. AJC is actively working in Los Angeles, Sacramento and Washington, D.C., to advocate for a world-class transportation system in Los Angeles, with the goal of reducing our dependence on foreign oil that threatens our security, environment and economy.
For example, AJC worked with the L.A. County Board of Supervisors to implement a landmark “Green Car Incentive Program” that provides fleet car pricing for hybrid vehicles for the county’s over 100,000 employees. AJC is working with L.A. City Councilwoman Wendy Greuel to create a similar program for city employees. AJC is also participating in Metro’s Long Range Transportation Plan and a range of mass transit improvements, including, but not limited too, the Gold Line and Expo Line light-rail extensions, as well as the “Subway to the Sea” Purple Line.
AJC’s award-winning Energy Security Program is advancing Los Angeles.
Allan Alexander and Nadine Gerson Co-Chairs AJC Los Angeles Energy Security Program
Hollywood Q&A
I read the “Q&A: Hollywood Insider” of July 18 about Irv Weintraub and came away with the impression that he lives in high style and can’t quite defend why wealthy Jewish entertainment executives and celebrities are not more active in acts of tzedakah (charitable giving). He seemed to be very defensive.
However, I know Irv and have been fortunate to work with him on the both the executive committee and the board of directors of Valley Beth Shalom (VBS) in Encino.
Irv is the ultimate mensch. He can daven up a storm and chant a mean haftarah, is more than generous with his checkbook and his time and was a fabulous vice president at VBS — showing great leadership, dedication, compassion and creativity. He is so well respected by VBS that we honored him a few years ago as our Man of the Year.
I am a better person for knowing Irv Weintraub; VBS and the Los Angeles Jewish community are enriched by having him as one of the menschen in our lives.
Michael A. Waterman Pegasus Investments
New Yorker Cover
Congratulations for the brilliant article by Mona Eltahawy (“Fear of an Obama Planet Grips Some Americans,” July 18). It puts The Journal a cut above. However, The New Yorker magazine’s Barry Blitt had overestimated the intellectual insight of many of the readers.
I don’t believe that the satirical aspect of the cartoon reached everyone. Eltahawy’s article should go a long way toward clearing up the confusion.
Paulette Mansfield Canoga Park
Beyond Sicko
I had trouble keeping my lunch down after reading Marty Kaplan’s “Beyond Sicko” (July 18). In the field of education, we already have a monstrous, corrupt, money-squandering, dysfunctional bureaucracy known as the public school system, which robs parents of control over their children’s education and leaves them powerless and defenseless against the colossus of the state. The last thing we need is to create a similar monstrous bureaucracy to deliver health care.
No sane person would deny that we have serious problems with our health care system and that it needs to be reformed. However, any reforms in health care must seek to: 1) empower the individual patient, 2) maximize choice, 3) encourage competition, 4) allow health care practioners to do their jobs without fear of devastating lawsuits.
Edward H. Crane, president of the Cato Institute, beautifully stated, “The essence of America is a respect for the dignity of the individual. It should be axiomatic that such dignity is enhanced to the extent one has control over one’s own life.”
An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth and now $50 for a racial slur. That’s the policy that the Laugh Factory owner Jamie Masada endorses.
Ever since Michael Richards’ racial outburst at the Sunset Strip comedy club in November 2006, Masada has decided to impose a $50 fine, payable to the Museum of Tolerance, for anyone who utters the n-word during a performance.
Masada, an Iranian Jew, has fined hundreds of comics who have used derogatory words or phrases, and the latest violator is no exception to the rule. Civil rights leader the Rev. Jesse Jackson will be the next target of Masada’s fine. Fox News recently captured Jackson using the n-word in reference to presumed democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama. Though Jackson didn’t intend for anyone to hear the comments, Masada has decided it’s time for Jackson to pay up.
“It doesn’t make any difference if the mic is on or off, you can’t use that word,” Masada said.
Though he is not a performer at the club, Jackson, who has yet to respond to Masada’s policing, is a unique target due to his involvement with the rule’s creation. Masada explained that just after the Michael Richards debacle, “Jesse told me I couldn’t use the n-word in my club,” adding that Jackson even publicly threatened to march in front of Masada’s clubs in protest.
“He’s a civil rights leader, and now he’s using the n-word himself,” said Masada, justifying his fine. “It’s a double standard. It’s hypocritical.”
Masada said the $50 is imposed on anyone who uses any word with hatred behind it, not just the n-word.
Since its enactment, Masada has fined comedians like Dave Chappelle and Carlos Mencia, whenever they use the n-word in his club.Though most are quick to pay up, Masada said he has seen a reduction in the word’s usage since his rule came into effect, though he has already issued more than 1,000 fines.
Madasa, who described himself as the enforcer among comedians stated, “somebody’s got to stand up for it, and I’m standing up for it!”
Apparent from his reaction to Jackson’s slip, it’s not just club performers who potentially face the penalty. Whoopi Goldberg used the n-word several times during a recent broadcast of “The View,” which fueled an on-air argument, eventually leaving co-host Elisabeth Hasselbeck in tears. Masada said Goldberg should expect her demand for payment in the near future.
However, according to Masada, just paying the fine isn’t enough to completely redeem a figure like Jackson. In addition to paying the $50, Masada wants Jackson to publicly apologize to all African Americans (not just Barack Obama) and then come to the Laugh Factory for The Supreme Court of Comedy, a weekly comedy show where comedians play judges and lawyers while trying real cases. Paul Mooney, Tom Arnold, Bob Saget and Jon Lovitz have all participated in this comedic judicial system, where real issues are discussed and often satirized. Masada is hoping The Supreme Court of Comedy will give Jackson a chance to justify his actions and apologize in front of the people he once condemned.
Sue Lynn Alexander died July 1 at 74. She is survived by her husband, Joel; sons, Glenn and Marc; daughter, Stacy; and two grandchildren. Groman
Samson Asch died July 4 at 100. He is survived by his daughters, Hella (Charles) Hershson and Basia (Larry) Frank; son, Morris (Linda); and three grandchildren. Mount Sinai
Leslie Eckerling died July 6 at 54. She is survived by her daughters, Elizabeth (Ian) Crossley, Rachel (Ralph Capasso) and Samantha; son, Aaron (Cristina); father, William Turf; and brother, Robert (Barbara) Turf. Malinow and Silverman
Gary William Ferenstein died July 6 at 67. He is survived by his son Greg (Teresa); daughter, Rachael; and granddaughter, Macy. Hillside
Gloria Bard George died July 6 at 87. She is survived by her grandchildren, Brian (Patricia), Jeffrey and Victoria; and brother, Robert (Myrna) Bard. Mount Sinai
Dorothy Grossman died June 6 at 92. She is survived by her daughter, Melissa; sons, Neal, Alan, David, Marc and Joel; and brother, Jerry Pauker. Malinow and Silverman
Larry Harmon died July 3 at 83. He is survived by his wife, Susan; son, Jeff; daughters, Ellen (Ira) Kosberg, Marci (Armie) Carabet, Leslie Breth and Lori (David Schwarzman); and four grandchildren. Mount Sinai
Milton Jack died July 3 at 90. He is survived by his son, Michael David (Betty Ann), three grandchildren; and two great-grandchildren. Hillside
Esther Kaiserman died July 2 at 90. She is survived by her sons, Mark and Alan (Phyllis). Malinow and Silverman
Henry Kurland died July 3 at 83. He is survived by his wife, Beatrice; sons, Scott, and Dr. Jeffrey. Malinow and Silverman
Eric Lieber died July 2 at 71. He is survived by his wife, Peggy Lieber; daughter, Christine; and one grandchild. Malinow and Silverman
Sylvia Liebman died July 4 at 81. She is survived by her daughter, Zelda Dan. Mount Sinai
Germaine Lovental died July 1 at 88. She is survived by her son, Alex; sister, Judith; and one grandchild. Groman
Leonard Muskin died July 5 at 88. He is survived by his brother, Stuart (Bettie); nephews, Brule (Mary-Beth), Alan (Linda) and Michael (Diane Murada); and friend, Judy (Mort Kolbe) Fishman. Mount Sinai
Meir Nunberg died July 5 at 90. He is survived by his daughters, Yaffa (Martin Nienstedt) Kaplan and Alice (Steve Treistaru; and grandsons, Joshua and Alex Kaplan. Mount Sinai
Mary Port died July 3 at 92. She is survived by her son, Robert (Anne); daughter, Susan (Ron) Timpson; three grandchildren; one great-grandchild, Logan; and sister, Rhea (Werner) Wolff. Mount Sinai
Moshe Ronen died June 28 at 79. He is survived by his wife, Ela; daughter, Dina Brown; and sister, Bita Hucker (Alon). Chevra Kadisha
Vernon Rusheen died July 6 at 83. He is survived by his sons, Dr Jeffrey (Grisel), and Dr Larry (Dana); daughters, Lisa (Dr. Douglas) Gardner and Patricia (Dr. Michael) Kupfer; and nine grandchildren. Mount Sinai
Bertha Sacks died July 6 at 89. She is survived by her daughter, Ronney (Fred) Johnson. Malinow and Silverman
Joan Ward died July 3 at 55. She is survived by her daughters, Wendy (Sasha) Kottmeier and Lisa (Jimi); son, Patrick (Priscilla); four grandchildren; mother, Claire Bennett; and brother, Richard (Debbie) Bennett. Mount Sinai
Beverly Auerbach Pressman, Singer and Teacher, Dies at 59
Beverly Auerbach Pressman died July 18 in San Jose at 59, after a valiant two-year struggle with uterine cancer. Her husband, Rabbi Daniel Pressman of Congregation Beth David in Saratoga, was at her bedside. She was also the beloved daughter-in-law of Marjorie and Rabbi Jacob Pressman of Beverly Hills.
She was a person of great integrity, who taught those who knew her about being consistent in everything you do.
One of her rules for living was to never show up anywhere empty-handed. In addition to her love of cooking, her passions were music and teaching. She was married for 40 years, after meeting her husband when they were teenagers at a United Synagogue encampment at Camp Ramah in Ojai.
After growing up in the San Fernando Valley, Beverly attended UCLA and Barnard in New York, from which she was graduated cum laude with a bachelor’s degree in American studies. She earned a master’s degree from Cal State University and later a bachelor’s in vocal music from San Jose State University.
The Pressmans spent some years at Congregation Ner Tamid in Palos Verdes, before settling in San Jose 27 years ago. Rabbi Pressman has served at Beth David ever since.
She taught elementary school for 15 years, but also found time to sing with Schola Cantorum, a community choral group. She had a beautiful soprano voice and was an upbeat, selfless person with unusual spirit until the day she passed away.
She is survived by her husband, Rabbi Daniel Pressman; children Aliza (Craig Chosiad), Benjamin and Rebecca; father, Louis Auerbach; siblings, Melvin Auerbach and Jeffrey Auerbach; and in-laws, Rabbi Jacob and Marjorie Pressman.
Aug. 8 is the start of the XXIX Olympiad (just a fancy way of saying the 29th Summer Olympics) in Beijing, China. The games bring together athletes from more than 200 countries to compete for national glory and gold, silver and bronze medals — in a variety of sports (no, shopping is not one of them — I checked).
The opening ceremony will be shown on ” target=”_blank”>23rd annual Children’s Festival of the Arts. Kids of all ages will have the chance to enjoy music from Russia, Korea and India; eat yummy food; get their faces painted, and make really cute crafts they can take home. The folks at Paramount are playing host, which means you never know which famous faces will show up to play.
Free. Noon to 4:30. On the lot of Paramount Pictures, 5555 Melrose Ave., Hollywood (free parking at Bronson Gate). For more information, call (323) 871-2787.
Have We Got a Story for You
kids@jewishjournal.com with your first name, age and city — along with your opinion about gossip. One winner will be selected at random — but the runners-up will have their essays printed on an upcoming YeLAdim page.
Polls consistently find that Americans harbor strong animosity toward atheists, and that Americans would be less likely to vote for an atheist than for a woman, African American, Latino, Catholic, Jew, Muslim or Mormon. (What these polls don’t state, but what I, as a God-fearing Christian, will say, is that the fear, loathing and general suspicion of the godless is not only unwarranted but ungodly.)
“This kind of thing tends to leave Britons either bewildered or terrified,” Nick Spencer wrote on his blog for the London Telegraph. “The US and the UK are two nations divided not so much by a common language as by a common religion. In the former, Christianity is officially absent but unofficially everywhere; in the latter it underpins the entire structure of state but usually dares not speak its name.”
That is an astute, and poetic, observation. Spencer goes on to detail just how intertwined Christianity is with the Amerrican presidency, using as his launching pad the new book by David Domke and Kevin Coe, “The God Strategy: How Religion Became a Political Weapon in America.”
Spencer’s lamentations continue:
Domke and Coe’s analysis suggests that the current climate of theo-political rhetoric means would-be presidents do not, in fact, have that many “different ways” open before them now. It is simply inconceivable that Americans would elect a president who refused to genuflect energetically before the altar, any more than they would elect one who failed to do so before the idea of liberty.
But Domke and Coe also sense (as does the political activist Jim Wallis who was in UK last month) that the tide is turning. They put this down to a new evangelical conscience, which is noticing people trafficking, climate change, the AIDS pandemic, and other issues that had somehow slipped their minds before. And they see Rick Warren (see above) as a key mover in all this.
If that is so, those Britons who fear the mixing of God and Caesar might have reason to be a little less panic-stricken today than they were four years ago. And those who actually like to see God get down and dirty with Caesar, but have been depressed by the narrow and ugly way that has happened over recent years, have reason to be cautiously optimistic.
This perspective is essentially a mirror image of how religious American feel when they look at godless Europe. I looked closely at this issue of atheism and the future of religion in America two years ago in this story. Despite what Domke and Coe say about the tide turning, about religion leading the revolution, I find that Christian rhetoric is now more dangerously interwoven with politics than any time during the past eight years, or in American history.
Daniel Radosh, author of “Rapture Ready!”, has the skinny on tennis player Ashley Harkleroad, who made headlines recently, not for her play on the court but her agreement to pose for Playboy. She has, and Radosh spotted an odd inking in one of the photos.
It’s a tattoo of the Jesus fish, just above her waistline, and I sure hope this is a first for the magazine.
“In the word-things that accompany the pictures,” Radosh writes on his blog. “Ashley says she got the tat when she was younger, but stands by it. ‘I still believe in God, but God made female athletes beautiful and sexy, and I want to represent that.’”
Oh brother. And I thought putting the Ichthys on your bumper was bad because, as Ben Folds sharply sang, “See that a—hole with the peace sign on his license plate/ Giving me the finger and running me out of his lane.” God is definitely not happy.
The movie, “Elegy,” which opens Aug. 8 and stars Ben Kingsley as David
Kepesh and Penelope Cruz as the object of his desire, is the latest
film to be adapted from the writings of Philip Roth. This one is based
on his novella, “The Dying Animal.”
Despite Roth’s long,
successful career in American letters, his track record on film has
been far spottier. Yet “Elegy,” directed by Isabel Coixet, who is
Spanish, has created a certain buzz: Could it be that a woman, a
European — albeit working in English — is what it takes to
successfully translate Roth’s work to film?
Let me get back to you on that. First, to set “Elegy” in context, I decided to watch every film adapted from Roth’s work.
My mission started simply enough: a quick search on imdb.com turned up a succinct list of eight works on film and TV, stretching back to the 1950s.
Some
had never been released on video, some are only in VHS,
some were available at the local video store, some had to be tracked
down in specialty shops or in university or museum archives. My quest
led me across Los Angeles and afforded me the pleasure of visiting some
of the city’s most beautiful libraries and research facilities, as well
as some of its best-stocked video stores.
In
1960, Roger Corman produced “The Battle of Blood Island,” which was
adapted from a 1958 short story that ran in Esquire titled, “Expect the
Vandals.” Shot in black and white and only 64 minutes long, “Blood
Island” is part of a trilogy of films Corman made in Puerto Rico.
Netflix
carries this film as a DVD double feature, paired with a non-Roth film
called, “Shell Shock” (that has nothing to do with Roth). Locally,
“Blood Island” can’t be found at Blockbuster, the Santa Monica or Los
Angeles public libraries or such local rare video sources as CineFile or Vidiots.
So, I turned to my video store of last resort, Eddie Brandt’s Saturday Matinee on Tujunga Avenue in North Hollywood, a shop whose eccentric and extensive film collection rarely disappoints.
It was there that I found one lonely DVD of the film. The story is set on an island in the South Pacific,
where two American soldiers, Moe and Ken, are the only survivors of an
attack on Japanese forces and are forced to hide out and get along. Moe
is a 35-year-old Jewish accountant, with a wife and kids back home, who
sprinkles his conversation with Yiddish expressions. Ken, who was
injured in the
attack and whom Moe must take care of (but resents doing so) is a
younger, more naive, all-American kid. Moe is not very likeable, but we
understand his predicament. At one point, Ken, pushed to the end of his
rope, makes an anti-Semitic jab at Moe. We know Ken didn’t really mean
it, but Moe feels Ken’s comment justifies his worldview.
In
the end, the two are rescued — just before the island is to be used as
a nuclear test site. The film is more a character study than anything
else, and our feelings about Moe are left unresolved. Nonetheless, Moe
represents an early proto-Roth protagonist, one who has not yet moved
beyond ethnic identity, but remains plenty angry.
Roth’s next
adaptation to film appeared in October 1960, when “The Contest for
Aaron Gold,” originally published in 1955 as a short story in EPOCH,
appeared as an episode of the television series, “Alfred Hitchcock
Presents.”
I first turned to the Paley Center for Media’s library,
but they did not have a copy. They directed me to the UCLA Film & Television Archive, which had a copy that I was allowed to screen only in the media lab of UCLA’s Powell Library.
The special treat here was Powell Library, which stands across from
Royce Hall on the UCLA campus and is worth visiting just for the beauty
of its main reading room. “The Contest for Aaron Gold” is noteworthy
because its Philip Roth-esque lead is played by the recently deceased
Sydney Pollack, who turns in a credible performance as a sculptor who
has taken a job as the ceramics instructor at a summer camp. In the
film, all the characters have Jewish last names, but there is no
mention of the place being a Jewish summer camp, or of the campers or
the counselors being Jewish. But there is some tension here
between the lead character trying to stand up for his artistic beliefs
and not cave in to the pressures of the man running the place — some
of the issues around money and career that arise later in “Goodbye,
Columbus.” “The Contest” ends with a twist suitable for Alfred
Hitchcock. As a one-hour episodic TV drama, albeit a slightly obvious
and gimmicky one, I found it satisfying and enjoyable.
Almost
a decade passed before the next Roth work turned up on the screen. By
the time it did, Roth had become celebrated, and somewhat notorious,
for both his first collection of short stories, “Goodbye, Columbus,”
which came out in 1959, and for “Portnoy’s Complaint,” published in
1968. Both were made into films, and both star Richard Benjamin.
“Goodbye,
Columbus,” released in 1969, launched the careers of both Benjamin and
Ali McGraw. This film was easy to find; a copy was readily available at
the Santa Monica Public library.
Watching
“Goodbye, Columbus” at half a century’s remove from the short story’s
original publication is a strange experience. I found myself as
ambivalent about Benjamin’s Neil Klugman as he was about the Patimkin
family. To me, the Klugmans and the Patimkins each seemed to be playing
out their own strategy for rising above their immigrant backgrounds:
One sought insulation from the evils of the world in books, the others
in business and material goods. I found it hard to be judgmental,
because I found them so much more alike than different.
McGraw’s
Brenda Patimkin was a far more sympathetic character than I recalled.
Klugman, by contrast, never really seemed to care for Brenda beyond his
desire for her (a trait common to Roth characters that would be
examined in greater detail in “Portnoy”). In the original reviews, the
film was praised for its naturalism and its humor, but from the 21st
century perspective, I found it a less than satisfying experience.
“Portnoy’s
Complaint” was published in 1968 to huge acclaim. The 1972 film,
written, produced and directed by Ernest Lehman, was considered a huge
failure. Lehman was the screenwriter of such classics as “North by
Northwest,” “Sweet Smell of Success,” “West Side Story,” “The Sound of
Music,” “Sabrina” and “Who’s Afraid of Virginia Woolf” — “Portnoy” is
the only film he ever directed.
Watching the movie today, it
struck me as yes, failed, but better than its reputation. Lehman chose
to take what was in essence a comic monologue and set it as both a
story of a love affair and of one man’s attempt to heal himself via
analysis of that relationship and his prior ones. At the same time,
Lehman attempted to show the freedom that the sexual revolution
inspired and the consequences of that freedom. Karen Black gives a very
strong performance as “the monkey,” and Richard Benjamin delivers a
more
nuanced performance than he gave in “Goodbye, Columbus.”
Another
12 years passed before PBS offered up a version of Roth’s “The Ghost
Writer” as part of its American Masters series in 1984. As far as I can
tell, this is the only production for which Roth is credited with
collaborating on the script. That may have something to do with the
fact that Claire Bloom, whom Roth was then involved with, plays a role
in the production.
I had imagined that a copy of this would be
at UCLA or available on DVD or VHS, or even offered at Eddie Brandt.
But it wasn’t. Luckily, it was in the collection of the Paley Center, and I was able to screen it in their library.
Mark
Linn-Baker, best known as Benjy Stone in “My Favorite Year” (and who
would later gain a measure of cultural currency on the sitcom, “Perfect
Strangers”) plays the young Nathan Zuckerman, a writer at the start of
his career visiting Lonoff,
a famous older writer, at Lonoff’s country home on the very occasion
when Lonoff’s wife (Claire Bloom) leaves, and a much younger woman, his
former student, urges Lonoff to run off with her. Zuckerman, whose
parents and rabbi have rebuked him for the way he portrays Jews in his
work, imagines the young woman to be Anne Frank, an Anne who survived
the war and is now going to marry him.
Although
tension-filled, “The Ghost Writer” unfolds at a somewhat leisurely
pace, making the film perhaps not the most exciting adaptation of
Roth’s work, though certainly one of the most successful, conveying a
measure of his writing’s literary texture.
Twenty years passed
after the PBS version of “The Ghost Writer” before another Roth novel
made it to the screen. In the interim, Roth experienced a second wind
as a novelist unparalleled in American letters, during which he won
almost every major prize and award available to him, including the
National Book Critics Award,
the Pulitzer Prize and the Pen Faulkner award, among many others. If he
were an athlete, you would have him checked for steroids. In this new
era, almost everything he wrote was optioned, including “The Human
Stain.”
“The Human Stain” (2003), which stars Anthony Hopkins and Nicole Kidman, was the easiest of Roth’s films I sought out — Blockbuster had many copies — but it is probably the least successful adaptation of his work.
I
will offer here that I once tried to option “The Human Stain” myself,
but was outbid. My thought was to treat it as a murder mystery in which
the detective uncovers a secret he had not bargained for. The hoped-for
casting was Paul Newman (his agent when approached said, “Bring me an
offer”) and Ellen Barkin. So perhaps I am biased, but I believe that
“The Human Stain” is a miss — whether you blame it on the casting or
for being too faithful to the novel’s
exposition, the story just doesn’t work on screen. The most poignant
moments of the novel do not resonate.
Still,
watching “The Human Stain” the other night, I was struck by how Roth
weaved elements of the personal dramas of Anatole Broyard, who like
Roth’s hero, reached great heights while leaving his African American
heritage behind, and R. B. Kitaj, who blamed his wife’s death on those
who attacked him — all the while setting this against the backdrop of
the Monica Lewinski affair and the Clinton impeachment investigation.
Which
brings us up to “Elegy.” David Kepesh, played by Ben Kingsley, is a
teacher, a public intellectual. The movie opens with his appearance on
Charlie Rose, and he is set up as a man beyond romantic love, an
intellectual’s Hef, who finds his romance in promiscuity. So,
naturally, he is caught off-guard when he falls in love with one of his
students, Consuela, a woman 30 years his junior. And when he does, he
becomes so
obsessively convinced that he will lose her, sooner or later, that he
sabotages the relationship. There is also a further irony, an inside
joke, almost, for those who know Roth’s work, because Kepesh, who
venerates Consuela’s breasts, is also the protagonist of an earlier
Roth work, “The Breast.”
Cruz
is shot so lovingly in this film, it is hard to believe that she would
not entrance anyone. Her work in the films of Pedro Almodóvar have
demonstrated her incredible range and talents as an actress, but Coixet
provides Cruz her greatest acting opportunity thus far in an
English-language film (at least, that is, until Woody Allen’s “Vicky
Cristina Barcelona”).
Coixet also manages to soften the hard
edge of Kepesh’s narcissism, that same edge that one feels in other
films made from Roth’s work, such as “Portnoy.” Here, we understand how
a man of a certain position, of a certain age, manages his private life
with both a woman with whom he has had a
long affair (played by Patricia Clarkson) and a younger woman.
I
will not reveal the twist in the plot, and the denouement of the
relationship, but intellectually it is powerful. Unfortunately, it is
not as powerful on screen.
In the end, “Elegy” likely will not
stand as the best adaptation of Roth’s work. Roth’s work continues to
appeal because of the restless desire of his protagonists and the way
he sets their stories against the backdrops of a given time and a given
moment in his protagonist’s life, as well as the way his character’s
sex drive acts as his life force. Roth continues to ask: If none of us
get out alive, how do we go forward? And when we do, what do we make of
this life and our loves?
As I write this, several of Roth’s
other works remain under option, including “American Pastoral,” as well
as his forthcoming novel, “Indignation,” to be published in September
by Houghton Mifflin. Perhaps one of them will transcend its
provenance, to be remembered as a great film. But for that, we must
still wait — and watch.
Tom
Teicholz is a film producer in Los Angeles. Everywhere else, he’s an
author and journalist who has written for The New York Times Sunday
Magazine, Interview and The Forward. His column appears every other
week.
. Yankel is a boy who can’t stop telling stories around his village of Olkinik — but his stories belong to other people. Will the rabbi’s plan to teach Yankel a lesson work — or will it be too late? The paperback, for children ages 4-8, has great illustrations by Cindy Revell and is a great way to teach about the rights and wrongs of gossip and telling tales.</p>
<hr />
<hr />
<p><i>If you would like to win a copy of “A Sack Full of Feathers,” send an e-mail to <a href=)
kids@jewishjournal.com with your first name, age and city — along with your opinion about gossip. One winner will be selected at random — but the runners-up will have their essays printed on an upcoming YeLAdim page.