Text
if your Jewish friends aren't talking to you about anything that's happening right now, it's because they know that at its core your take is probably rooted in greedy-grasping-jew stereotypes with a hefty helping of i-don't-mean-you-of-course. And they're doing both of you the favor of pretending it isn't.
#or the slightly more active version which is be-a-good-jew-for-me#but in that case they probably demanded your position on Israel/Palestine the moment they knew you were Jewish#because frankly most people conflate Israeli people with Israeli government with All Jews Everywhere Past And Present and it is wild#my favorite ice cold take from the past week: jews are just like the puritans who killed Indigenous people for land#actually maybe my favorite is that it doesn't matter that jews are the Indigenous people of this region because it's been invaded like 3x#their estimate not mine#now it's not their indigenous land it's their ancestral homeland which i guess we don't care about?#that's especially confusing because if they're arguing that it also became the muslim ancestral homeland why would we only care about that#i feel like i should do a gallery of Worst Takes of the Week#sure i probably shouldn't but also fuuuuuuuuuuck#wall of words
13 notes
·
View notes
Text
What To Read This Fall
As I embark on this, my seventeenth year of writing weekly on matters close to my heart (and, I hope, also to yours), I’d like to talk about three books I’ve read over the holiday season that affected me in different ways.
The first is David Baddiel’s Jews Don’t Count, a remarkable volume published earlier this year by TLS Books in London. The author, whose name was unknown to me before reading the book, is apparently a well-known British comedian. (He was actually born in Troy, New York, in 1964, but has basically lived his entire life in the U.K.) But this book is not at all funny. Just the opposite, actually: it is 123 pages of very angry prose directed at a world that simply refuses to take anti-Semitism seriously as a form of pernicious racism. Mostly, his fire is aimed at progressives and liberals. But although there is more than enough ammunition left over for him also to take aim at right-of-center groups and conservatives, he’s particularly enraged at people on the left for whom the slightly hint of racism or bigotry is intolerable, yet who seem more than able to tolerate even overtly-stated, ham-fisted anti-Semitic remarks without reacting even slightly negatively, let alone with real revulsion or even feigned outrage.
Even though the book itself is really just an extended (a very extended) essay on the topic, the author has more than enough ammunition at the ready to buttress his point. Over and over he cites instances of public figures, including A-list celebrities, making overt or allusive anti-Semitic comments without facing any sort of public censure, let alone being “cancelled” in the way people who make openly disparaging remarks about other minority groups become personae non gratae overnight and are, at least in some cases, never heard from again. Some of the people he quotes will be familiar to American readers, but others will not be. Nonetheless, his analysis of the reason the comments those personalities are cited as having made are more than tolerated by the liberal public—for the most part because speaking negatively about Jewish people, Jewishness, or Judaism is somehow legitimized with reference to some specific ethnos-wide character trait that people can legitimately use as a rational basis for hate—will be familiar to any Jewish reader who lives out there in the world, who reads a daily newspaper, or who spends time wandering around in the blogosphere.
The author draws an interesting portrait of himself. He declares himself not to be a Zionist, which I take to mean that he has neither any specific interest in the fate of the State of Israel or sense of a personal stake in its wellbeing. So that puts him outside the camp in which an overwhelming majority of Jewish people I know live. And the author also self-defines as an atheist with no specific allegiance to Jewish ritual or belief, thus putting him even further outside the ranks of the kind of Jewish people who occupy the world I personally inhabit. In many ways, his prose made me think of him as the latter-day version of those German Jews in the 1930s who were so busy being German that they were amazed that the Nazis considered them to be part of the Jewish problem at all. (There’s a certain irony in that thought too, given that Baddiel’s grandparents fled Nazi Germany.) Perhaps that lack of connection to traditional Jewish values or beliefs and his disconnection from Israel is what fuels his rage—he (and so many like him) see themselves as having done nothing to offend, as holding no beliefs that set them apart from the British mainstream, as being as properly ill at ease regarding Israel’s vigorous efforts to defend itself—so how dare the world refuse to censure, or let alone to cancel, people who are overtly anti-Semitic in the way those very same people would never dream of tolerating homophobic or anti-Black racist comments!
I recommend the book strongly, despite all of the above comments. It is a short read, but a forceful, dynamic statement that readers on this side of the Atlantic will have no trouble translating into local terms. It is upsetting, and in a dozen different ways. But that only makes it more, not less, important and worth your time to find and read.
The second book I’d like to write about today is Dara Horn’s People Love Dead Jews, published this summer by W.W. Norton. The author, born in New Jersey in 1977, has taught at Sara Lawrence and at CUNY. Some of my readers will know her work from essays published in The Atlantic and the New York Times. And she has written five novels, mostly recently A Guide for the Perplexed in 2013 and Eternal Life in 2018. People Love Dead Jews is her first book-length work of non-fiction.
The book itself, about 100 pages longer than Baddiel’s, is also about anti-Semitism, but is written in an entirely different key—one given away subtly by the book’s subtitle, Reports from a Haunted Present. And, indeed, the book’s twelve chapters, while all discrete essays that can be read separately and without reference to each other, are also all rooted in the same soil: the author’s slow, eventual understanding and coming to terms with the fact that most of the way the world thinks about Jews—and, even more to the point, the way Jews think about the way the world thinks about Jews—are floating along somewhere between dishonest and disingenuous. Her opening chapter, for example, about Anne Frank points out that the great success of her diary rests to a great extent on the endlessly cited passage in which Anne, still hiding in the Achterhuis and hoping to live to adulthood in a liberated Holland, writes that she still believes, “in spite of everything, that people are truly good at heart.” She surely changed her mind when she got first to Auschwitz and then to Bergen-Belsen, where she and her sister Margot died in the spring of 1945. But that detail, unpalatable to those who wish to see Anne not as a murdered Jewish child but as an apostle of universalist optimism, is generally ignored. And so, to address that issue specifically, Horn provides an obituary for an imaginary Anne who survived the camps and lived into her 90s, and who definitely did not end up thinking that all people, presumably including the guards at Auschwitz, are truly good at heart. It’s that kind of writing that will grab readers from the very beginning and keep them engaged to the end.
The three chapters devoted to the rising level of anti-Semitism in the United States should be required reading for all Americans, but particularly for Jewish Americans still living in their grandparents’ fantasy world regarding the impossibility of America ever engendering its own violent version of “real” anti-Semitism, the kind that moves quickly past quotas and sneers to actual violence, including the lethal kind that cost those poor people in Pittsburgh their lives one Shabbat morning in 2018. Yes, the book is uneven. The admittedly fascinating chapter about her trip to Harbin, China, is at least twice as long as it needed to be. The chapter about the recent Auschwitz exhibition at the Museum of Jewish Heritage is unfocused, the author’s point (at least to me) unclear. The chapter about The Merchant of Venice will leave most readers without university degrees in Shakespeare at least slightly confused. But the book itself is wonderful—thoughtful, intelligent, challenging, and stimulating. I recommend it to all without hesitation.
And the third book I want to recommend for my readers’ reading pleasure this fall is Noam Zion’s Sanctified Sex: The Two-Thousand-Year Jewish Debate on Marital Intimacy, published earlier this year by the Jewish Publication Society in Philadelphia. The other two books were short, perhaps even too short, but no one will say that about Zion’s book, which weighs in at almost 550 pages. But potential readers who allow themselves to be put off by the book’s size would be making a huge error of judgment—the book is long and complicated because its subject is complicated and the sources he cites, often at length, are many and complex. But the book itself is a true tour-de-force and deserves to be considered in that context.
Most readers, used to thinking of sex as something antithetical (or at least unrelated) to religious philosophy, will be amazed to learn how seriously rabbis writing over the last two millennia have taken the very same topics that engage moderns when the talk turns to intimate matters: the limits and boundaries of marital fidelity, the relationship of fantasy to reality in the healthy sexual context, the possibility of legitimate sexual liaisons outside of marriage, the relationship of homosexuality to heterosexuality (and, by extension, of gay people to straight people with respect to the legitimacy of their coupling), the precise nature of the obligation spouses bear to provide sexual satisfaction to each other, and the relationship of reproductive possibility to ongoing sexual activity in the absence of such possibility.
The book is organized chronologically with respect to the sources the author cites, but most readers will be far more impressed by the breadth and depth of the sources than by their relationship to each other chronologically. Many of the authors cited, particularly from the Haredi world, will be unknown to almost all readers. Only a tiny percentage of them wrote in any language other than Hebrew or Yiddish. An even smaller percentage have had their books or essays translated into other languages. As a result, reading Zion’s book is something like being ushered into an art gallery featuring works of great creativity and depth by painters you’re slightly amazed never to have heard of. (I include myself in that category, by the way: almost all the books, essays, and pamphlets cited in the 150-odd pages on Haredi authors were unknown to me.) But the breadth and depth of Noam Zion’s reading of these books, and his willingness—given the riven nature of the Jewish world, his truly remarkable willingness—to consider these men (all of them are men) and their writings in light of writing on the topic by my own colleagues in the Rabbinical Assembly, by authors affiliated with various Reform Jewish institutions, and (even more impressively) with feminist authors of various sorts, that is truly what makes of this book something that my own readers should think twice about not reading.
Noam Zion is a friend. His home in Jerusalem is just a few blocks from our apartment. His wife taught the Lamaze course Joan and I took when we were anticipating the birth of our first child. I mention all that merely to be fully transparent, but also so that I can also say that I would recommend his book this highly even if he and I were not acquainted personally. It is a magisterial work on a complex topic that all readers interested in Jewish thought and its relationship to practice will find fascinating.
And those are the three books I would like to recommend to you all as autumn reading you’ll enjoy and find stimulating and very interesting.
1 note
·
View note
Text
My take on... Puppet Master: The Littlest Reich
To combine a creepy, half-burned up elderly man from Europe, an extreme case of discrimination from the ideology of the SS during World War 2, an Egyptian mystical curse or spell that is still active after one’s death, a 30th anniversary of a mass killing spree and… puppets?
The movie is about a guy named Edgar who gets a divorce and is invited by his mom to stay at her and his dads house for the time being. He works in a comic bookstore with his best friend Markowitz, where he sells and draws comics. While being is his hometown he meets this girl from high school again named Ashley and they start to date. Besides from the kissing and (apparently) lots of sexy time you see nothing of this relationship. He is trying to find ways to get money so he can get a place of his own. Being back at his childhood home he scouts through old boxes and drawers to feel sorry for himself and be melodramatic. He finds an odd-looking doll which used to be his brother’s, before he sadly passed away. Now, as soon as he grabs the doll and starts to turn it over and upside down, a knife comes right out of the dolls hand and slices his inner arm. But that is not all. As soon as he turns it around again and stares into those hollow eyes, a hook comes out of his other hand. He finds out his brother found this doll at a camp he went to and had never any real attachment to it, so Edgar tries to find a place to sell it. He finds out there is an auction for these kinds of dolls at an 30th anniversary of the infamous Toulon-murders. Because that is something worth celebration, obviously.
The three of them (Edgar, Markowitz and Ashley) decide to go there and see what it is all about, and to try to sell the doll. They check into a hotel to stay for a couple days. On the second day they get a tour off the house where Mr. Toulon tortured and murdered people, and where he made his infamous dolls. Here everyone finds out that dear Mr. Toulon was a dedicated Nazi-lover and fanatic. His grave, a gorgeous mausoleum with weird looking spikes, which Edgar is so kind to point out, is also on this land. When they get back to the hotel all hell breaks loose in a rapid motion. First, several people report their dolls missing and stolen. While this is being discusses and investigated with the local police the first murders take place. These are some weird ass murders where the victims are chosen based on the “racial purity” ideology of the SS. We see a man and a prostitute getting stabbed during sex, a gay man getting his throat sliced right after he finishes talking to his mom, a lazy-ass fat and disgusting man gets his head chopped off while peeing (after which he pees on his own head, lovely), a sleeping, pregnant lady getting her belly ripped open because a puppet entered via her backdoor and goes off with her unborn child. One puppet rips open a poor, old man’s back and decides to take over his body completely. Just to name a few. And all these murders and commotion seem to happen so fast it almost look surreal. Now, I can withstand gore and weird ways of slicing bodies up or stabbing people in sensitive places like the eyes, but what I can and will not accept in any movie is when someone’s ankles are being sliced, right through the Achilles heel. I hoped the scene in Hostel was the one and only time I had to see that, but unfortunately, no. No, they had to get that in during the sex-scene. Thank you very much.
After more deaths and more hysteria all the hotel guests are asked to assemble in the lobby, where everybody decides to freak the fuck out after the power goes out. Thrice. Because that’s what’s really scary off course. They dare to just run for it and hope for the best. All I can say is that hope wasn’t on their side that evening. The surviving smarty-panties decide to take cover in the kitchen. After realizing these puppets are notorious Nazi’s, they try to use their dear friend Markowitz, who happens to be a Jew, as bait and just shoot these guys senseless. The only problem is that there might be around 40+ puppets who are possessed, and tiny, and super strong and stealthy, and work together and punch holes and get to your unborn child through your rectum and what not. So, what could possibly go wrong, right?
One of the funniest moments where I had to slap myself across the face because I couldn’t believe they actually did this, is where Markowitz sort of finds a girl to hook up with and this girl is just plain stupid. This girl happens to have a manga character pin on her work shirt and being the comic fanatic that he is, he recognizes it, and the two of them start talking. When they use big guy Marko here as bait and things turn bad, he and his girlfriend, alongside Edgar and Ashley decide to take cover in a hotel room. Here poor Marko gets stabbed in the throat and dies. But they can’t morn now, there are killer puppets after them! They start to jump out of the window one by one with Marko’s little Asian girlfriend as last. Edgar and Ashley, having normal IQ’s, jump right into the dumpster downstairs. This girl does not. She jumps right onto the side of the dumpster and dies instantly…
Where this movie is already so bad it is actually entertaining, they decide to throw that scene in like it is nothing. And it is nothing, not really. But, just, why?
Edgar says in a very sweet, little voice that he now knows how his brother died.
Edgar and Ashley seem to know how to stop all this and head to Mr. Toulon’s mausoleum. When they arrive after a thirty-minute drive or so and stop the car for a minute, they decide to buckle up. Because… logic. They see that those weird spikes are giving off electrical shocks. Edgar here warns his girlfriend very briefly about driving the car straight through the mausoleum’s wall before he does just that. Mr. Toulon gets disturbed in his death and the puppets stop killing. Unfortunately for the two lovebirds, Mr. Toulon isn’t as dead, and slow, and dumb as zombie movies make them seem. But then again this is an Egyptian spell, not a zombie-virus. Mr. Toulon kicks the shit out of the two and goes back to grab his gun (?) and shoot Ashley, after which he just leaves and let’s Edgar live.
Do the puppets get alive after this again? Because Mr. Toulon is not really dead. Why does it happen now? How does he get this spell? Why does he have this spell? So many questions…
This movie is full of weird and sudden deaths, fast paced shifts between scenes and a story which is not really explained. You get almost no backstory whatsoever (this has probably to do with the fact that this reboot is the 14th version, or spin-off, or sequel, or part of this huge franchise). What you do get is 86 minutes of pure puppet-gore. This movie has some excellent deaths with great visual arts and a good way of keeping it interesting. Everything could’ve felt very fast-paced because it was just so damn interesting to watch. The way it was filmed felt a bit off. It looked like a B-movie from the way the camera was angled, and the lack of storyline didn’t really help. The deaths, the blood, the intestines, the gore, everything important basically looked really fucking good though. At this point the weird point of views and slightly off-colored shots didn’t matter. It worked.
The puppets look absolutely gorgeous and really original. The creepy factor is definitely there. I can honestly say that I want to watch those other movies and read the comics. The art is just beautiful and well made, I want to see more of that.
I do have to say that this movie means absolutely nothing if watched on its own without further interest in the story. So, for a movie on movie-night, this isn’t really a good movie to watch. You just get more questions and find out you need to invest a lot of more time to get the whole story. But, if you got nothing better to do like me, I think this is going to be a hell of a ride to follow, figure out and enjoy. This wasn’t really my favorite movie to be honest. Let me hear what you think.
What was your favorite scene?
Which part of all those other ones do I have to watch first?
Which one is your favorite puppet?
Let’s talk.
-Miez.
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
"Call Me by Your Name" review – Gorgeous gay love story seduces and overwhelms
The debt to pleasure is deferred in exquisite style for this ravishingly beautiful movie set in Northern Italy in the early 80s: a coming-of-age love story between a precocious teenage boy and a slightly older man. Their summer romance is saturated with poetic languor and a deeply sophisticated sensuality.
The film is directed by Luca Guadagnino (who made I Am Love and A Bigger Splash) and adapted from the novel by André Aciman by James Ivory, who had originally been slated to co-direct and has a producer credit. Ivory's presence inevitably calls to mind his film version of EM Forster's Maurice, to which this is frankly superior. For me, it brought back Alan Hollinghurst novels such as The Folding Star and The Spell. Call Me by Your Name is an erotic pastoral that culminates in a quite amazing speech by Michael Stuhlbarg, playing the boy's father. It's a compelling dramatic gesture of wisdom, understanding and what I can only call moral goodness.
Stuhlbarg plays Perlman, a middle-aged American professor of classical antiquity living with his stylish wife Annella (Amira Casar), in a handsome Italian house with their son, Elio – a remarkable performance from Timothée Chalamet – who is a very talented musician, spending his time transcribing Schoenberg and composing piano variations on JS Bach. Theirs is a cultured household, in which everyone is proficient in English, French, Italian and, for Annella, German. The family is also Jewish. Elio calls them "Jews of discretion", a sense of otherness that is to serve as a metaphor for concealed sexuality.
Elio slopes and mopes about the huge house as the long hot summer commences, grumpy and moody, not knowing what to do with himself or his directionless sexuality, shooing away flies, frowning over paperbacks, dressed mostly in nothing more than shorts, all shoulder blades and hairless calves. Every year, his dad invites a favoured grad student to spend the summer with the family to help him with research. This year it is the impossibly handsome and statuesque Oliver, played by Armie Hammer, who never wears a pair of long trousers in the entire film. He establishes his academic credentials early on by presuming to correct Perlman's derivation of the word "apricot". Both Elio and Oliver are to have romantic associations with local young women, but it is more than clear where this is heading. And when the main event arrives, Guadagnino's camera wanders tactfully away from their bed, gazing thoughtfully out of the window at the hot summer night.
What is perhaps so incredible is the concept of leisure, a cousin to pleasure, pure gorgeous indolence and sexiness for six whole weeks. No one appears to have very much to do in the way of dreary work, despite the references to typing up pages and cataloguing slides. People sunbathe; they impetuously jump up and go swimming, have unhurried meals al fresco, cycle into town to drink in bars, or play volleyball. The main work-related activity is when Perlman and Oliver go to inspect a sensational discovery: parts of a classical statue recovered from a lake. Hellenic sensuality is resurrected in concert with the not-so-secret sexual tumult emerging all about.
At any one time, nothing is happening, and everything is happening. Elio and Oliver will catch each other's eye in their adjoining bedrooms or downstairs in the hall; they will casually notice each other changing into swimming costumes. Each of these intensely realised, superbly controlled and weighted moments is as gripping as a thriller. Hammer's Oliver is worldlier than Elio, but not a roué or a cynic; in an odd way, Elio is more cosmopolitan than Oliver. The visiting American looks like a mix of Tom Ripley and Dickie Greenleaf.
Chalamet's performance as Elio is outstanding, especially in an unbearably sad sequence, when he has to ring his mum from a payphone and ask to be driven home. (In that scene, Guadagnino contrives to show an old lady fanning herself in the right-hand side of the frame. Was she an actor? A non-professional who just happened to be there? Either way, there is a superb rightness to it.) And then there is Stuhlbarg's speech advising against the impulse to cauterise or forget pain: "We rip out so much of ourselves to be cured of things faster than we should that we go bankrupt by the age of 30." There is such tenderness to this film. I was overwhelmed by it.
PETER BRADSHAW | THE GUARDIAN | 26 Oct 2017
#Call Me by Your Name#Guadagnino#timothee chalamet#armie hammer#andre aciman#james ivory#reviews#CMBYN#Elio#Oliver#Perlman#Chiamami col tuo nome
1 note
·
View note
Text
Friday, 12th July 2019 – Porto, Day 2
Friday morning saw Lynne creak into action rather late, but in good time for our first activity of the day. I’d already been out to try and purchase some yogurt for her because she insists it’s needed to kick start her digestion. I’d found a lot of lovely buildings, but despite Google Maps insisting there was a supermarket at the destination it had sent me to, there really wasn’t. I’d given up and returned to the Intercontinental where the staff in the restaurant let me have a yogurt for free (we were on a room only booking so breakfast was meant to be €25 per person which was part of the reason I’d gone out to hunt for fermented dairy products – we didn’t actually want breakfast proper because of our plans for the day).
We had always intended to skip breakfast because we were booked on a food tour of Porto, starting at 10:00 and lasting around 3.5 hours. Our experience of food tours so far (in Helsinki and Krakow) had taught us that it’s best to arrive hungry for this sort of endeavour. This one, the Vintage Food Tour, with the lovely and very knowledgeable Maria from Taste Porto would prove to be no exception. First, however, we’d ordered a pair of Porto cards, including the Andante card that gives you access to Porto’s public transport network. The cost was €33 each for four days so it wasn’t exactly expensive even if we didn’t use it in all the places it was valid (which wouldn’t be possible in 4 days unless you rushed in and out of everywhere and I’d rather not do that, unlike some people).
First we walked up to the cathedral where, after a couple of false starts, we finally located the Tourist Information office, and were soon in possession of the cards as well as a very useful city map.
From there we walked back down the hill to get to our rendezvous point. We met over by the Mercado do Bolhão (which apparently means big bubble because it’s on the site of a small creek that’s now underground, and that used to produce lots of bubbles). The neoclassic building that’s on the site now was built in 1914 and provides the main market in town. It’s currently undergoing a full refurbishment, and most of the traders have been moved to a massive all nearby for the duration while the art deco building is restored to its former glory. It had apparently fallen into a bit of a state of disrepair, but a massive grant from the EU coupled with local money means it will stage a come back. When it does I’d like to see it because I’m sure it will be glorious once again. It’s been classified as a Property of Patrimonial Interest since 2006, and a Monument of Public Interest since 2013. They started the work in 2018 and it’s supposed to be complete in 2020. The traders are apparently looking forward to returning because they’ll be back in the open in the courtyard area after 2 years inside. Work does seem to be progressing nicely, at least from the outside…
After the 8 of us on the tour had introduced ourselves to each other Maria walked us to the first destination on the tour, the Mercearia do Bolhão, an utterly wonderful old-style grocery shop selling food and drink, but also with a small household cleaning section. There’s a bakery section as well but that’s been moved to a second building a handful of doors down.
Inside we were presented with a selection of local goodies, including a lovely selection of cheese, crackers, quince paste and a local sausage. We nibbled our way through these (Maria told us she’d be disappointed if we didn’t eat everything and explained that the locals have very big appetites). The cheese was especially good, made with milk from cows, goats and sheep. It was soft, creamy and had a slightly pungent finish where you could clearly detect the goat’s milk flavour. The crackers were slightly sweet with a good crunch, and the quince paste was grainier than the sort I’m used to, but went perfectly with the cheese. Apparently having both together is known as Romeo and Juliet!
From here we walked towards the famous Porto café, the Majestic Café, which is a terrific looking place complete with smartly-uniformed waiters. It’s also a complete tourist trap, and charges around €5 a coffee. The locals don’t go there, and as this was a tour to show us where the locals do go, Maria walked us along to the second café owned by the same people, the Guarany Café, close to our hotel on the Avenida dos Aliados. Here coffee costs around €1, and breakfast is €15 instead of €30. We sat down and had a coffee each, a very strong but smooth blend, preferred by the locals. The café itself is also lovely, but has the advantage of not being rammed with tourists. Apparently there are a number of regulars including a local poet in his 90s know who comes in every morning for a coffee and to read the newspapers. Apparently the original owners made their money in Brazil and then returned in the 1930s to open this café. Its website also provides a good example of something we would continue to experience all the time we were in Porto, with translations into English having quite obviously never been anywhere near a native English speaker before being committed to print/the internet. It was enough to make my inner editor weep!
Fortified by coffee, our next stop was at the magnificent São Bento station, where we had a brief run through the history of Porto and of Portugal and an opportunity to admire the 20,000 tiles that make up the decoration of the main hall. The station is the main starting point for train journeys through the Douro valley, and it is also the terminus of a number of local lines. Like our hotel, it too was once a convent, with the last nun only dying a number of years after the first train service ran! The tiles date from 1905–1916, and depict scenes from Portugal’s history, including the entry into Porto of King John I and Philippa of Lancaster to celebrate their wedding. There are also scenes of local life, including a cattle fair and a pilgrim camp (Porto is on one of the many routes to Santiago de Compostela and thus sees a lot of pilgrims walking the path even now – we saw quite a few walkers with the pilgrim sign of a scallop shell hanging from their rucksacks), along with scenes showing vineyards, the grape harvest, wine shipment down the Douro and work in a watermill. As Maria pointed out, all the work seems to be being done by the women.
From the station we headed up the hill back towards the cathedral where we stopped off at a shop selling canned fish. This was not the madly touristic version either, but rather somewhere very civilised that is run by the associated of tinned fish producers with intent to promote their products. There was a table waiting for us in Loja das Conservas (other branches are available, including in Macau, which I wish I’d known sooner), with a bottle of wine, crackers and two different types of tinned fish to try, one the obvious sardines, the other needlefish. Both were very tasty indeed, once I’d recovered from trying a drop or two of the chilli sauce known as “the bastard” and my tongue stopped throbbing! In addition to hundreds of different types of fish in tins, with all sorts of sauces, they also sell some purely fun things including these dangly sardines, and I’d really recommend a visit. We were all given a 5% discount voucher to use in the shop, and Lynne and I decided we’d come back later and collect some supplies. The vinho verde served alongside the fish was also very good.
From here we went to Ö Tascö, a very modern looking restaurant in what we were now beginning to realise was the standard Porto building with a very narrow facade at the front but that go back for forever, very much like Belgian buildings. I asked if it was for the same reason (the wider the building the more tax you paid) and was told that yes, that was indeed the case. Here we were offered more wine along with some petischos, salt cod fritters and some Alheira sausages, apparently also known as Jewish sausages. These are sausages made of meat (veal, duck, chicken quail or rabbit) and bread, usually along with alho (garlic) which is where the name comes from. Apparently they were invented by the Jews of Portugal in 1497 when they were given a choice between being expelled from the country or converting to Christianity. The conversos who secretly retained their beliefs avoided eating pork but where at risk because they didn’t have sausages (containing pork) hanging up in their smokehouses and so, to avoid the Inquisition noticing, they started making sausages from other meats. They are tasty, with a texture that’s very mushy, and are very filling. The cod fritters were a model of lightness in comparison!
After a second glass of wine the conversation was very animated, and we all seemed to be getting on very well. We were in even better form by the time we reached Taxca, a pub rather than a restaurant, where we drank an espadal wine, a sparkling, light rose, kept in a cask and served from a pump and produced in the vinho verde region. With it we had a typical snack, a hefty serving of presunto ham in a bread roll. Maria reckoned this was the sort of place she and her friends would come to at the start of a night out to get things off to a good start. The hams are hanging up above the bar, and the menu is a pair of metal plaques with the words cut out of them, fastened to the wall. Presumably it doesn’t change very often!
Now we were full of food we were ready for the final stage of the tour. Stopping off at a bakery for some sweet treats, we headed on to a port and wine shop, Touriga (named after one of the many grapes used to make port), where we would have a short session on port, and a tasting of three different ports along with the treats. We had the good fortune to try a 10-year old white, a 2013 late bottled vintage, and a 10-year old tawny.
The went perfectly with the sweets, a tiny almond tart, and a sticky brigadeiro (a Brazilian ball of chocolate and condensed milk and butter formed into a ball and coated in chocolate sprinkles). And half an hour later we realised that a) we were going to have to buy some port and b) we weren’t going to make it to our scheduled tasting at Graham’s port house by 14:15 because it was 14:15 and we’d gone way over the scheduled time. We didn’t care; we’d been having fun. We cared even less when Maria called Graham’s and rescheduled it for us for the following day. She apologised for the overrun, but we’d really enjoyed it and really, really wouldn’t have wanted to rush off.
Before we left the shop we ordered a case of the wines we’d tried (6 of the white, 6 of the tawny) and arranged to have them shipped home for a very reasonable extra €37. The American on the tour were disappointed to find they’d have to pay €173 to ship 12 bottles and instead planned to bury them in their suitcases. I do hope it all survives the trip back to Michigan. Ours arrived 6 days later, safely packed, and with a lovely note thanking us for supporting small wine producers. I suggest the pleasure will be all ours! We’d had a fabulous food tour, and I could see why the Guardian ranked Taste Porto’s tours as among the best anywhere.
It was now around 3pm. We dropped some things off at the hotel, and then decided it was too stick to do anything productive so we’d join a bus tour to take a look at the Atlantic coast. It was a hop on hop off tour but we couldn’t raise the energy to hop off so we stayed put on the top level, letting the breeze cool us off, and watching the world go by. I do have to say that I’ve been on better tours with the same company. The commentary was almost inaudible even with the volume turned up full blast, and had clearly been read by someone with only a passing familiarity with English. It was, however, also considerably cheaper than in most European countries at €15 for 2 days. And we got to sit down for an hour or so, which was by now very welcome!
At the end of the tour we hopped off and went and peered into the MacDonalds, to see if we’d been told the truth. We most certainly had!
I’m pretty sure there are no MacDonalds anywhere else that are quite so spectacular on the inside…
Or the outside! We didn’t need any prompting not to stay though. Maria had recommended a gelateria close by, and as it was a sticky day we figured what the hell, we’d have one and then go back to the hotel to get cleaned up before dinner. The 1927 Gelateria Portuense is brilliant. It’s a tiny place, tucked away down a sidestreet, and it serves the most fabulous gelato. By the time we got there, they’d started to run out of several flavours, but they still had the pistachio left, enough for a single portion, so Lynne had that and I had the mango, and we swapped spoonfuls. It was definitely among the best ice cream or gelato I’ve ever eaten. They also do a tasting selecton where you can have 6 small tubs of different flavours for €7 which seemed like a bargain for that quality level.
Now decidedly sticky as well as sweaty we retreated back to the hotel for a pre-dinner shower and a drink before going out for dinner (we had a bottle of the white port from the tour to hand and intended to enjoy it).
Travel 2019 – Porto, Day 2 Friday, 12th July 2019 - Porto, Day 2 Friday morning saw Lynne creak into action rather late, but in good time for our first activity of the day.
#1927 Gelateria Portuense#2019#Andante Card#Ö Tascö#Bars#Coffees#Cooking#Drink#Europe#Food#Food and Drink#Guarany Café#Hospitality#Hotels#Ice Creams#Intercontinental#Loja das Conservas#Lunches#Majestic Café#Mercado do Bolhão#Mercearia do Bolhão#Porto#Porto Card#Portugal#Pubs#Restaurants#São Bento Station#Taste Porto#Taxca#Teas
0 notes
Photo
OPERA / 2017-2018
DON CARLO
OPEN REHEARSAL
Washington National Opera
Music by Giuseppe Verdi Libretto by Joseph Méry and Camille Du Locle Translated into Italian by Achille de Lauzières and Angelo Zanardini Based on Friedrich von Schiller’s dramatic work Don Carlos
So, What’s Going On?
Spain, the mid-sixteenth century.
Our hero, Don Carlo isn’t doing well. The infante (een-FAHN-teh, basically a Spanish word for “prince”) can’t get along with his father, King Filippo II (fee-LEEP-poh), and, to top it off, Carlo has no real royal responsibilities to keep him busy.
Oh, and did we mention he’s in love with his stepmother?
Filippo had promised Carlo a beautiful French bride named Elisabetta (eh-leez-ah-BEHT-tah), but, at the last minute, the king swept in and married her himself. Not cool. Nope, definitely not cool.
Enter Rodrigo (ro-DREE-goh), a nobleman and Carlo’s best friend. Rodrigo tries to cheer Carlo up by getting him involved in a political cause (nothing says “distraction” like a revolution). Spanish-occupied Flanders, (present-day Belgium) Rodrigo explains, is badly oppressed and needs a leader ASAP. Having a lot of free time on his hands, Carlo agrees to act as “savior” to the Flemish (i.e., the folks from Flanders). Got it so far?
But there’s a catch. He’ll need his stepmom’s permission.
Rodrigo fires Carlo up for a Flemish fight.
Take a listen… In one of opera’s most famous duets, Rodrigo and Don Carlo take a vow of friendship and promise to work together to achieve freedom for Flanders. Listen for the sounds of the brass instruments, symbolizing war and aggression, as well as royalty.
youtube
Back to the story…
Rodrigo arranges a meeting between Carlo and Elisabetta, telling the queen her heartbroken stepson needs a favor. But one of the queen’s ladies-in-waiting, the Princess of Eboli (EHB-oh-lee), overhears and takes Carlo’s heartbreak completely out of context—she thinks Carlo might be in love with her.
At the meeting set up by Rodrigo, Carlo tells Elisabetta he’s dying of love.
In other palace news, the king is highly suspicious of Elisabetta’s relationship with Carlo. He summons Rodrigo and asks him to spy on Carlo and Elisabetta’s extracurricular activities. Rodrigo unwisely uses this moment to plead for Flanders, claiming the king is applying unnecessary force to maintain peace in the Flemish territories. Though slightly moved, Filippo warns Rodrigo his rebellious ways may get him into trouble with the Spanish Inquisition (…bet you weren’t expecting that).
Sometime later, Carlo receives a mysterious letter. Thinking Elisabetta wishes to see him, he waits for her in a romantic spot, and she promptly arrives wearing a veil for cover.
(Yeah, just kidding: It’s not really Elisabetta, but Eboli in disguise.)
Carlo whispers sweet nothings to “Elisabetta,” but when the mix-up comes to light, he tries to take back his professions of love. The damage is done, however—Eboli figures out Carlo’s words were meant for someone else…and that the “someone else” must be the queen.
Rodrigo rushes in. Believing Eboli will go straight to the king for revenge, he asks Carlo to hand over any incriminating evidence pertaining to Flanders.
Eboli plots vengeance against Carlo for (accidentally) playing with her heart.
But tensions between Filippo and Carlo are about to boil over anyway. At an auto-da-fé (an execution led by the Inquisition and overseen by the king), Carlo interrupts the ceremony by bringing some Flemish citizens before Filippo to call the king out and beg for royal mercy. Things get heated, and Carlo draws his sword. Horrified by this treasonous act, Filippo calls for someone to arrest his son. To everyone’s surprise, Rodrigo steps forward and leads Carlo to jail.
A private family feud is put on public display.
Take a listen… In his aria, “Ella giammai m’amò” (“She never loved me”), Filippo contemplates the sad state of his marriage. Listen for the sorrowful string music, which repeats incessantly as if to reflect Filippo’s relentless thoughts.
youtube
Filippo wants Carlo out of the way (like…completely out of the way), so the king appeals to the Grand Inquisitor to ask if the holy man will pardon Filippo for ordering Carlo’s execution. Convinced the uprising of the Protestant-leaning Flemish—and not Carlo—is the real threat to Spain and to the Catholic Church, the Inquisitor slyly suggests Filippo may be absolved if he hands over the traitorous Rodrigo in exchange. Yikes.
The Grand Inquisitor offers a terrible bargain: Religious blessing in exchange for Rodrigo’s demise.
Take a listen… In this intentionally frightening scene, the Grand Inquisitor’s deep and forceful voice, along with the quivering strings and percussion, remind the audience (and Filippo) that the church wields power in sixteenth-century Spain.
youtube
Suddenly, Elisabetta bursts in claiming she’s been robbed. She asks her husband to take action against the culprit, but Filippo quickly admits to the crime himself. He then confronts Elisabetta about a portrait of Carlo she keeps hidden in her stolen jewelry box. Elisabetta maintains her innocence, however. She may love Carlo, but she’s never been unfaithful.
And yet here’s a twist: Filippo has.
Filippo tries to shame Elisabetta.
While comforting the queen after Filippo’s accusation, Eboli confesses she’s been having an affair with the king and that jealousy (for both Carlo and Filippo) led her to steal Elisabetta’s box and throw some serious shade at the queen. Shocked, Elisabetta orders Eboli to head to a convent. Eboli searches for a way to make things right—and finds one. She stumbles onto Carlo’s death warrant and resolves to intervene before it’s too late.
Take a listen… Eboli curses her own vanity for inspiring her to betray her queen in the aria “O don fatale” (“Oh fatal gift”). Check out how the mezzo-soprano uses both high and low notes to convey her sense of frustration and despair in the musical sample below. Also: Listen for the outbursts from the trumpets, trombones, and horns at the opening. Can you tell things have gotten pretty serious?
youtube
But can Eboli alert Carlo in time? Can Rodrigo escape the watchful eye of the Inquisition? And, most importantly, will Elisabetta and Carlo be allowed to ride off into the Spanish sunset?
Who’s Who
(Italian version of the original Spanish names listed; English version names in parentheses)
Don Carlo (Don Carlos) infante of Spain (tenor—the highest male voice) Filippo (King Philip II) Carlo’s father and king of Spain (bass—the lowest male voice) Elisabetta (Elizabeth of Valois) queen of Spain (soprano—the highest female voice) The Princess of Eboli (known as “Eboli”) (mezzo-soprano—a middle-range female voice) Rodrigo marquis of Posa and Carlo’s friend (baritone—a middle-range male voice) The Grand Inquisitor (bass)
Good to Know
You’ve heard of the Spanish Inquisition before, right? No?
Okay, well, just in case you haven’t, you might want to keep in mind that the Spanish Inquisition was a Catholic branch of the Spanish government whose task was to find and “question” anyone who wasn’t loyal to the Catholic church, particularly Jews and Protestants. These “interviews” were often literal torture, as the Spanish monarchy was known to use the Inquisition as an excuse to enslave innocents in order to get free labor.
Now that you’re familiar with the Inquisition: Did you know King Philip II, his wife Elizabeth, his son Carlos, and the Princess of Eboli were also real? Philip II was a sixteenth-century Spanish monarch who did indeed marry a French woman (Elizabeth of Valois) whom he had initially intended for his son. Turns out Philip and Elizabeth actually had a reportedly happy marriage, and the love story between Elizabeth and her stepson was invented by writer Friedrich von Schiller in the eighteenth century and exploited by Verdi in the nineteenth century for maximum dramatic impact.
The Princess of Eboli was likewise a genuine attendant at court and the wife of King Philip’s right-hand man. Rodrigo, however, never actually existed; he’s more of an ideal representation of compassion and progressive thinking created by Schiller at a time when the Enlightenment ideals of reason and rationality swept across Europe.
And Carlos? Sadly the historical Carlos wasn’t quite the romantic hero he is in the opera. Rowdy, and unpredictable, the real-life Carlos was decidedly not in love with his stepmom. Yet, as in the opera, Carlos wasn’t given much power by his father and eventually grew fed up with life in Spain. The infante then demanded control over Flanders, which was being ruled by a brutal cardinal of the Catholic Inquisition.
Just like in the opera, Flanders was a place of political (and religious) unrest in the mid-sixteenth century. Absorbed into Spain’s considerable empire via a political marriage, Flanders was somewhat content to be ruled by Philip’s father, Charles V, who had been born in Flanders and was well respected there. Things changed when Philip assumed the throne, however: Philip was more Catholic than his father and the new king had no trouble sending clerical and military forces to keep the Protestant-friendly Flemish in line—often using violent methods of persuasion.
Philip ultimately deemed his son unfit to serve as ambassador to such an unstable region and had Carlos put in jail to prevent a political catastrophe (thanks, dad). Carlos died while under arrest, but the Flemish controversy continued, and uprisings followed soon after.
Check This Out…
Don Carlo features many melodies that repeat themselves to help the audience recall a particular scene or emotion from earlier in the story. Listen up for tunes that come back to haunt these characters again and again (especially the themes from Carlo and Rodrigo’s Act I duet, Carlo’s first lovesick solo, and the choir of horns that opens the opera).
Though Carlo is the title character, all the leading roles in the opera are given at least one aria (solo song) in which to express their feelings, and each character has their own unique musical and vocal style. Can you identify some of the ways in which Verdi gives each character his or her own spin? Is there a type of note (high, low, stretched out, cut short, etc.) or rhythm (slow, fast, galloping, etc.) that sticks out as being a specific character’s “signature sound”?
The finale of Don Carlo is notoriously open-ended, leaving much of the interpretation up to the performers and production team. Pay close attention during those final moments. What do you think the director and designers of this particular version wanted the audience to believe about the characters’ fates? Do you feel this explanation of the ending is correct? What do you think actually went down in the Spanish court?
Verdi wanted to immerse his audience in the culture and atmosphere of his operas. One of the ways he achieved this effect in Don Carlo was to include music that plays just off stage, giving the illusion of “surround sound” and extending the action of Don Carlo beyond the borders of the proscenium. Listen for the organ, church bells, brass band, choirs, and solo soprano voice coming from the wings of the theater. Do these help you feel like you’re at the heart of the story?
Think About This…
The dialogue between Filippo and the Grand Inquisitor—which was purposely added to the original story by Verdi and his librettists—includes some heavy musical clues regarding the evil subtext of the scene. In fact, Verdi uses ominous-sounding instruments to make it abundantly clear that some devilish plots are being hatched. What instruments stick out for you in this moment? What do you think Verdi’s position was regarding organized religion? What do you think he felt about monarchies like the one in Spain?
Eboli sings a song about a woman who hides her appearance and discovers a terrible secret. And…surprise! Later in the opera, the princess herself actually wears a veil and uncovers something about Don Carlo she wishes she hadn’t. Do you think the creators were making a specific point about disguises or about women who mask their identity?
Don Carlo is a mixture of big, crowded scenes for huge choruses and smaller, more intimate moments for four people or fewer. This contrast between public life and personal drama is something that continues to fascinate audiences in the twenty-first century. Can you name some recent films or TV shows in which the private struggles of a handful of characters are set against the backdrop of an overarching story that packs an epic and/or historical punch (hint: think The Crown or Game of Thrones minus the dragons)? Do they parallel Don Carlo in some way? Why do you think viewers are still drawn to these types of dramas?
Filippo, though tyrannical and misguided, is ultimately portrayed as a sad and lonely figure in the opera—thanks in large part to Verdi’s sympathetic music and also to the made-up love triangle between Filippo, his son, and his wife. Do you think Filippo’s desperate attempts to govern the lives of his family and his subjects are a response to his own feelings of helplessness? How do you think the other characters handle forces beyond their control (e.g., love, war, religious duty, honor, etc.)? Do you think anyone in the opera is more successful than Filippo at facing down these seemingly insurmountable challenges?
Take Action
As hinted above, the private actions in Don Carlo often have public consequences. Toward the end of the opera, Rodrigo, whose personal loyalties to the king and to Carlo are severely tested, ultimately chooses a path he feels will do the most good for the most people. In his beautiful final aria, he considers the type of legacy he wants to leave behind and asks that Carlo never forget him and never abandon the Flemish people. “Non ti scordar’” (“Do not forget”), he sings.
Take some time to think about how your own personal actions can affect public discourse or change. Research a group of people facing adversity like those in the Flemish territories mentioned in the opera (this could be a group you consider yourself a part of and/or strongly identify with, or it could also be a community you simply wish to help). Next, come up with a plan to spread the word and jumpstart a campaign to make a positive difference. Concerned for the people devastated by recent hurricanes, fires, and other natural disasters? Organize an afterschool meeting to educate your fellow students and to brainstorm fundraising ideas. Want to throw your support behind victims of abuse in a foreign nation? Set up a crowdsourced relief fund and ask family and friends to donate.
Want a wider audience for your social justice campaign? Use social media platforms like Twitter, Facebook, Instagram, Snapchat, or tumblr to get people talking about your cause and to post news and pictures of outreach events. If you decide to post, let us know by using the hashtag #donotforget.
Explore More
Go even deeper with the Don Carlo Extras.
–
Major support for WNO is provided by Jacqueline Badger Mars.
David M. Rubenstein is the Presenting Underwriter of WNO.
WNO acknowledges the longstanding generosity of Life Chairman Mrs. Eugene B. Casey.
WNO's Presenting Sponsor
Don Carlo is a production of the Clarice Smith Opera Series.
Additional support for Don Carlo is provided by The Dallas Morse Coors Foundation for the Performing Arts.
The Domingo-Cafritz Young Artist Program is made possible through the generous support of The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, with additional funding provided by Judy and Billy Cox, Robert and Lynn Downing, Carl M. Freeman Foundation, Virginia McGehee Friend, Susan Carmel Lehrman, John & Mary Lee Malcolm, Michael F. and Noémi K. Neidorff and The Centene Charitable Foundation, Mr. and Mrs. Geoffrey P. Pohanka, Dr. Arthur and Mrs. Robin Sagoskin, Mr. Alan J. Savada and Mr. Will Stevenson, Dr. and Mrs. Guillermo Schultz, Mr. and Mrs. Michael R. Sonnenreich, Washington National Opera Council, and The Women’s Committee of Washington National Opera.
This performance is made possible by the Kimsey Endowment; The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation and the U.S. Department of Education.
Major support for educational programs at the Kennedy Center is provided by David M. Rubenstein through the Rubenstein Arts Access Program.
Kennedy Center education and related artistic programming is made possible through the generosity of the National Committee for the Performing Arts and the President's Advisory Committee on the Arts.
1 note
·
View note
Note
It's there a link for the faq in mobile? The Tumblr app is not letting me check it out :(
Hiya anon,
I’m not sure! There is a good chance that it is, but it’s hard to find on mobile for some reason. Check it out! http://progressivejudaism.tumblr.com/faqs
Worse case, here is the text of the entire FAQ page as of right now. (Every once in a while I will add a new question or two).
What is Judaism?
Judaism is an ethnoreligion, which can be described as a a people with a rich culture, history, a land, languages (Hebrew, Jewish-Aramaic, Yiddish, Ladino…), literature, and a theology/philosophical tradition.
.
.
What is Progressive Judaism? What is Reform Judaism?
Progressive Judaism is an umbrella term that can be used to describe Jews who understand Jewish tradition from a more progressive perspective (note: not all Progressive Jews self-identify as Progressive politically). The World Union for Progressive Judaism (WUPJ) is the ‘international umbrella organization’ for liberal, Reform, Reconstructionist, and Progressive Jewry worldwide.
The Union for Reform Judaism (URJ) is the governing body for North-American Reform Jewry. According to URJ.org, Reform Judaism “maintains faith in the Covenant between God and Israel as expressed over the generations in the teachings of an ever-evolving Torah and tradition. Stirred by the mandate of tikkun olam, Reform Judaism seeks to be the living expression of those teachings. It welcomes all who seek Jewish connection to pursue a life of meaning as inspired by the Divine and proclaimed in the truths grasped by Jewish teachers throughout time.”
.
.
Who is considered Jewish?
Jewish identity is an incredibly tricky and charged subject. There are two basic lines of thought in regard to ‘who is’ and ‘who isn’t’ a Jew. According to Orthodox, Conservative, non-North American WUPJ Congregations, and other traditional branches of Judaism: one is Jewish if their biological mother was/is Jewish or if they went through a formal conversion. According to the North American Reform Movement (the URJ), one is a Jew if they have at least one Jewish parent and was raised as a Jew in a Jewish household or through conversion.
.
.
I’m not Jewish. Can I follow this blog?
Absolutely. I welcome all people to follow, ask questions, and interact with content!
.
.
Is antisemitism still a problem?
Absolutely. Antisemitism mainly exists in far-left and far-right communities. While the far-left typically hides their anti-Jewish hate under the masks of being “anti-Zionist” or “anti-Israel,” the far-right (often connected with white supremicists) often uses insane logic to dehumanize the Jewish people.
.
.
How can we combat anti-Semitism?
From our modern perspective, we are living in a truly scary time in our people’s history as anti-Semitism is rising in the United States and around the world. There are many ways that we as Jews can stand up against this bigotry. While it is true that we can fight, punch neo-nazis in the face, and spread our anger at these outrageous offenses… I believe that our first task is to, [paraphrased in the words of Michelle Obama] “go high, when they go low”.
Our sage Elie Wiesel wrote: “I know and I speak from experience, that even in the midst of darkness, it is possible to create light and share warmth with one another; that even on the edge of the abyss, it is possible to dream exalted dreams of compassion; that it is possible to be free and strengthen the ideals of freedom, even within prison walls; that even in exile, friendship becomes an anchor.” (source)
By spreading our warmth, our compassion, friendship and our joy, we can create hope within our communities. When they go low, we must go high. The Jewish people are a special beacon of light throughout the nations and it is our duty to remain moral and upright, even in the face of darkness.
Although at times it seems like the whole world is against us, we need to realize how far we have come and how the power of the modern Jewish experience has over our autonomy and freedoms around the world.
.
.
When you say message directly, do you mean send a message to this blog?
Yep! I prefer if people send me a direct message so that we could have a nice conversation.
If anyone ever sees a question that they would like to chat with me about, regardless if you originally asked the question, please feel free to send me a message. I would love to support you.
.
.
What is the difference between a ‘shul’ a ‘temple’ and a ‘synagogue’?
Jews pray, study, and dwell in Synagogues (a Greek word which means “meeting place”), and called a (Beit Knesset) בית כנסת in Hebrew. “Shul” is simply the Yiddish translation of Synagogue. “Temple” is another translation of “Synagogue” that was popularized by the early ‘reformers of Judaism’ (reform as a verb, not the contemporary Movement). These early maskilim (adherents to the Jewish Enlightenment) felt that it was important to embrace living in the diaspora, and that longing to return to Israel and rebuild the Temple was silly. They believed wholeheartedly that their Synagogue WAS their own Temple. The term stuck and we are left with three words interchangeable in English-speaking Jewish communities for the same term!
.
.
Can one be Jewish and agnostic (or an atheist) at the same time?
Many Jews acknowledge that there is more than one way to understand the inner workings of the universe and how God can or cannot play a part in it. Many agnostic theologies fit very cleanly into Jewish philosophy.
But regardless of that, Judaism is a people with a culture, a history, a land, languages, foods… and we happen to have a religious theology. It is entirely possible to not believe in God and still be a Jew- and an active Jew in the Jewish community!
.
.
Someone I know is ill (in the mind, body, or spirit) and/or is going in for surgery and/or is having a rough time. Is there a prayer that I can say for them?
The Mi Shaberach prayer can be said for anyone in your life, including yourself, who you feel needs a healing of mind, body, and/or spirit.
Mi Shebeirach avoteinu v’imoteinu,Avraham, Yitzchak v’Yaakov, Sarah, Rivkah,Rachel v’Lei-ah, hu y’vareich et hacholim[names]. HaKadosh Baruch Hu yimaleirachamim aleihem, l’hachalimam ul’rapotamul’hachazikam, v’yishlach lahem m’heirahr’fuah, r’fuah shleimah min hashamayim,r’fuat hanefesh ur’fuat haguf, hashtabaagala uviz’man kariv. V’nomar: Amen.
May the one who blessed our ancestors, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, Sarah, Rebecca, Rachel and Leah, bless and heal those who are ill [names]. May the Blessed Holy One be filled with compassion for their health to be restored and their strength to be revived. May God swiftly send them a complete renewal of body and spirit, and let us say, Amen.
Source
If you would prefer to sing the words (or sing them in addition to reciting this version of the prayer), you can use Debbie Friedman’s version as well.
.
.
Are LGBTQA+ folks welcome in Progressive Jewish communities?
Absolutely. As Progressive Jews, we believe that because every human being was created (Betzelem Elohim - in the Image of God) בצלם אלהים (Gn. 1:27), we must treat everyone with the same respect and compassion that we give to God. We recognize the wisdom that scientists and researchers of gender and sexuality have given us in order to enhance our society and thus understand that an individual’s sexuality, romantic identity, gender, and gender expression are individual, given by God, and are intrinsic parts of the human experience. Progressive Jews do indeed believe that LGBTQA+ folks are “born this way.”
In most major movements, LGBTQA+ families are welcomed into the Jewish community with open arms, same sex/gender couples are married, and rabbis and cantors of all genders and sexualities/romantic identities are ordained.
Although Israel has a long way to go in the name of equality (namely in adoption and marriage rights), she is one of the greatest places on earth for LGBTQA+ folks. Beyond holding yearly Miss Trans Israel, and Tel Aviv Pride, legislation often favors the LGBTQA+ community.
In more traditional communities, sexuality and gender identity are charged topics due to two lines in the Torah. If you are interested in learning about my own personal interpretation of the texts, feel free to check THIS out.
.
.
I’m not cisgender. What Jewish resources are out there for someone like me?
· Transtorah (which also has some fantastic resources for various genders) and Keshet (general resources for LGBTQ+ folks) are both fantastic resources. Unfortunately, there is not a similar resource for nonbinary folks. Here are two articles that I really like:
· The Six Genders of Classical Judaism
· Gender Diversity in Jewish Tradition
.
.
I’m Jewish and I am in a relationship with non-Jew. Are we welcome in Progressive Jewish spaces? Can we get married by a rabbi or cantor?
You and your children are absolutely welcome in most Progressive Synagogues and spaces. Before entering a new community, please contact them beforehand! Due to anti-Semitism across the United States and around the world, Jewish communities must be careful. Many non-Jewish spouses get very involved in Synagogue life!
Many Reform and Reconstructionist clergy will marry a Jew to a non-Jew- but everyone feels slightly different about the practice. For example, many will argue that they will only perform ceremonies for couples who seek to build a Jewish home, based on Jewish values where children will go through Hebrew School and have their Bar or Bat Miztvahs.
.
.
Jews and tattoos: what’s the deal?
Can Jews with tattoos be buried in a Jewish cemetery? Although each burial society can make up their own rules, their is nothing inherently written in Jewish law prohibiting it. (Source)
So where did this rumor come from and why are tattoos in Judaism taboo? It derives from the line: “You shall not make any cuts in your body for the dead nor make any tattoo marks on yourselves: I am the LORD.“ (Leviticus 19:28). This pasuk was written among other laws such as shaving and agricultural laws. The Mishneh Torah argues that it was to differentiate the ancient Israelite from Pagan neighbors. The Sifra (Halachic interpretation on Levicius) argues that this law only pertained to the kohanim (ritual priests). But many ancient and medieval scholars (and many contemporary ritually observant scholars) had negative opinions about Jewish tattoos.
But the most important scholar here is you, and how you use the text to understand the narrative (through the lens of other scholars).
For instance, my interpretation of this section of text (which is only my interpretation) is that it was inserted much later than during the time of Moses. These were laws to keep the community cohesive and ultimately to make their perception of God happy. I believe that this line is incredibly important for learning about ourselves, but I do not necessarily believe that it is banning tattoos in 2016, but rather a communal law for ancient Israel.
As Reform Jews, we believe that everyone can make choices based off of the information that they know. I invite you to dive deeper into this issue.
For instance, there is a wonderful understanding that one should only get a tattoo if it makes them feel whole, such as this incredible breast cancer survivor in this article. The author of *this* article, a rabbi from Texas, has the shema and v’ahavta tattood around his arm like t’fillin and has a very interesting point of view. And *this* is another fascinating understanding of a positive view on tattoos in Judaism from another rabbi.
.
.
Marijuana and Judaism: what do Reform/Progressive Jews believe?
The CCAR as of this moment has only made decrees regarding medical marijuana. For example in the “Resolution of the Medical Use of Marijuana,” the rabbis (and the Women for Reform Judaism) overwhelmingly taut the benefits of medical marijuana. This article from Reform Judaism Magazine might be of interest to you as well about its use from the perspective of a Jewish doctor.
Reform Jews believe that all should be done to remove one’s pain or illness (may that be physical or psychological), but that we should not take advantage of drugs that we do not need.
.
.
How do Reform Jews feel about sex before marriage?
Obviously a contentious issue, we can see the evolution of Reform Jewish thought throughout time via the CCAR Responsas (many are linked here, i highly recomend skimming through them!)
Some of the earliest rabbinic responsa are from the 1970s and 1980s. In “Jewish Attitude Towards Sexual Relations Between Consenting Adults,“ the rabbis prohibit casual sexual relationships and make mention that those who are engaged (to be married) probably also should not engage in sexual intimacy (personally, I think that this is left vague for a reason).
A few years later in 1984, a fascinating study appeared regarding the language on a ketuba (Jewish wedding contract) referring to the bride as a “virgin” (although she may or may not be a virgin) in “Virginity and the Ketuba”. The rabbis rule that this is an archaic wording choice and that “it would be wise either to refrain from any kind of designation of status for the woman in the ketubah“. Ultimately, the rabbis understood that not all couples are virgins on their wedding night.
In the responsa: “Long-Term, Non-Marital Relationships,” the rabbis argue flat out that “marriage should be the goal for our sexuality” because “it is within marriage that the sexual union finds its true home of kedushah” (holiness). Although the rabbis are not condemning premarital sex, in this instance they argue its aid in creating a marriage.
The latest responsa regarding sexuality (similar to the examples above) comes in the form of the Reform Movement’s commitment to Sex Education in the “Resolution on Sex Education” in 2001. Again, it does not condemn premarital sex, but encourages comprehensive sex education.
Ultimately, it seems to me that the CCAR promotes healthy relationships between couples. Although they do not condemn premarital sex in the later responsas, one can infer that they are hoping to form positive Jewish relationships that will become marriages.
.
.
Is evolution combatable with Judaism?
Absolutely! Although some more traditional Jews would disagree, I firmly believe that God can only fit within a framework that includes scientific discovery. Evolution and the Big Bang Theory fit very cleanly into my own theology as I do not believe that the entire Torah was “from Sinai,” thus not entirely Divine. We have too much evidence that suggests that the Torah was written by various human sources.
That isn’t to say that there aren’t certain Divine sections. But who is to say which sections were or weren’t written by God?
Our Creation accounts (Genesis 1 and 2) are extremely important as teaching tools, but not necessarily as accurate scientific understandings of the creation of the world. These two accounts were most likely, originally oral stories that taught people how the world functioned, for example why snakes slither and have a split tongue.
Our ancestors were so curious about how the world was created and functioned on a daily basis. It is incredible that now we are still trying to understand the origins of life and the universe and that we can continue their vision of understanding how it all works.
.
.
What is Zionism? What is Progressive Zionism?
Zionism is the desire for the Jewish people to have peaceful, sovereignty and/or autonomy in their historic, ancient homeland. Zionism is an ancient tradition that lives in Jewish liturgy and literature that only became a reality for the Jewish people in the 18th - 20th centuries. Zionism can be considered a political force, a social force and/or a religious force.
Just like there are many ways to understand various political issues in any country, there is a spectrum of what it means to be a Zionist in the 21st century. From radical left-wing, right-wing to centrist opinions, there is a tangled political web of different ideas regarding Israeli politics just like those that exist in other countries.
.
.
Isn’t Zionism racist?
It is not racist to argue for the existence of a Jewish State with a Jewish majority, with laws based on Jewish values, and where holidays and Shabbat are honored. It is an antisemitic statement to argue any different.
But that being said, it is important that we continue to use our voices against the furthering of the Occupation. It is clear that we have two nations living in Israel/Palestine. One could very easily argue that ethnic cleansing is a tremendous component to the Occupation- and the rhetoric that claims that Israel has the sovereign right to the entire land mass is troubling for the future of the Palestinians, the Democratic character of Israel, and the destruction of Jewish values in the Jewish State. Although Israel does need to defend herself against terror and bigotry, it is important that we reach a solid solution. The only solution is some form of a two-state solution. But to get there, we have a lot of work to do.
Zionism is not racist because the Jewish people deserve sovereign control in their historic homeland, just like the Germans, the French and the Turks all have sovereignty in their historic homelands. The Palestinians ALSO deserve that same dignity. The core tenet of Zionism (being free in our homeland) must be extended to our Palestinian brothers and sisters.
There are many paths to peace and several end solutions, but my favorite solution is the Confederation model. It is not a true one-state nor two-state solution AND its building blocks require Israelis and Palestinians to find common grounding and humility in one another.
.
.
How does one deal with people that argue that Israel does not have a right to exist and that they stole land from Palestinians?
This is an incredibly important issue that I have a lot of trouble with. For me, I see two options to your question:
1. Prove Israel’s right to exist using historical information. Explain to them how the destruction of the 1st Temple (586 BCE), the 2nd Temple (70 CE) and the final expulsion following the Bar Kochba Rebellion (135 CE) transformed Jewish life. Describe various persecutions throughout our history in the diaspora and our longing to return to our ancient homeland so that we could live a peaceful life. Discuss how the early immigrants to the Yeshuv purchased land from Ottoman landowners in swampy, infertile areas.
But don’t lie about issues on both sides of the “Conflict” and be extremely transparent about how you feel about the issues and beautiful accomplishments of both sides.
But I warn you: this option can be dangerous. Sadly, there are people on both sides of the Conflict who are very extreme in their views. For instance, there are some people who only look to the American media (which usually poorly describes the conflict) and view Israel as horrific people. There are so many arrogant people in the world who do not understand the plight of the Jews or the history of the State of Israel. But on the other side of the coin, there are those who want to build the Third Temple on the Temple Mount, thus destroying Muslim Holy Sites. There are those that want there to be a 1-State solution resulting in the displacement of the entire Palestinian population living in Israel, the West Bank and Gaza or a 1-State solution resulting in the displacement of the entirety of Israel.
There are extremes on both sides that are very scary.
2. This option is the more difficult one, but it is the one in which you stay out of the conversation because your spirit is more important than their ignorance. But for some people who are extreme, this may have to be the answer unfortunately.
.
.
Why is learning Hebrew important? Where can I learn Hebrew?
Hebrew is the ancient language of the Jewish people. Not only is it a language of the State of Israel, but also the Hebrew Bible, Jewish prayer and much of Jewish literature. Once you begin learning Hebrew, you begin to unlock the meaning behind who we are as a people.
· How to learn Hebrew (MyJewishLearning)
Beginner
· Hebrew letter chart
· Learning how to write the Hebrew Alphabet
· Cartoon Hebrew Letters (fun resource for learning your letters)
· Hebrew vowels
· Learn how to read Hebrew online
· The Aleph Beit Song (Debbie Friedman)
Advanced
· Duolingo now has Hebrew!
· Hebrew Learning Masterpost
.
.
What is Birthright and how can I sign up?
Birthright is a free, 10-day trip to Israel for young adults between the ages of 18 and 26. On the trip, participants have a chance to explore the country while also understanding their Jewish identities as emerging Jewish adults. Almost all Birthright trips go to the following locations: the Old City of Jerusalem and the Western Wall, Yad Vashem- Israel’s memorial of the Holocaust, Tel Aviv, the Mystical City of Tzfat, Masada, and the Golan Heights.
Participants for Birthright trips must have at least one Jewish birth parent, was raised Jewish or must have had a formal conversion through one of the major Jewish denominations.
According to their website:
The Birthright Israel gift is open to all Jewish* young adults, ages 18 to 26 who have not participated on a peer educational trip since they turned 18 nor lived in Israel past the age of 12.*Eligible individuals are those who identify as Jewish and are recognized as such by their local community or by one of the recognized denominations of Judaism. Applicants must also have at least one Jewish birth parent, or have completed Jewish conversion through a recognized Jewish denomination. PLEASE NOTE: Those applying for trips leaving from the Former Soviet Union are eligible if they have at least one Jewish birth grandparent. The accuracy of information pertaining to the heritage of an applicant for a trip leaving from the Former Soviet Union is also verified by a local Consul before an applicant is considered eligible.
If you would like to read some more Frequently Asked Questions, please feel free to check this page out.
.
.
What expenses does Birthright cover?
Birthright covers everything: a round-trip flight, two meals per day, museum fees etc.
The real question is: what do will you need to pay for? (btw it is all completely worth it!
There is a $250 refundable deposit (upon return to the states)
You will have to pay for 1 meal per day (typically around $10-$15). The only exception is on Shabbat.
Money for souvenirs
Money for snacks and extra food
.
.
Can converts take advantage of Birthright?
Yep! Assuming they have finished their conversion by the trip and are between the ages of 18-26, a Jew-by-Choice is eligible!
.
.
I’m thinking about conversion. Where do I begin?
Before contacting a rabbi, I would personally explore and learn as much as you can. One of the best books on conversion is: “Choosing a Jewish Life” by Anita Diamant. There are several free resources online that I highly recommend checking out as well (below). As always, please feel free to ask me as many questions as you might have.
· “10 Things to Know Before Conversion”
· Some recommended reading
· “Branches of Judaism”
· “A Brief History of the Jewish People”
· How to pick a Hebrew name
· When can I call myself a Jew?
· How do I convert officially?
· What does a Rabbi expect a convert to know before converting?
· There isn’t a Synagogue near me, what do I do?
· What is Reform Judaism?
· “What to Expect at a Reform Shabbat Service”
· A non-Jew attending Shabbat Services
· Various advice on Conversion
· How can I convert if I don’t agree with the government of Israel?
· LGBTQ people in the Reform Movement
· Conversion for a non-binary person
If you send me a direct message, I would love to help you further with locating a Synagogue to begin conversations with a rabbi or cantor who can help guide you.
.
.
Are Jewish communities welcoming to converts?
Absolutely. Not only are we welcoming, but we do not see a difference between a person born a Jew and a person who converted. If anything, we are in awe of the passion and love for Judaism that our convert friends have!
.
.
About how long does it take to convert?
Although every community is different, it will typically take someone anywhere between a year and two years in the Progressive world.
.
.
Where can I learn about the different branches of Judaism?
Modern Orthodox (The Orthodox Union)
Conservative Judaism (The United Synagogue for Conservative Judaism)
Reconstructionist Judaism
Reform Judaism (The Union for Reform Judaism)
The World Union for Progressive Judaism (representing all Reform and Reconstructionist Congregations around the world)
“ReformJudaism.org” is a fabulous resource
Religious Action Center, the “social justice hub” of the Reform Movement
Humanistic Judaism
Jewish Renewal
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
STARTUPS AND ROOMFUL
And that is the most innocent of their tactics. When you manipulate a program in your head, your vision tends to stop at the edge of the code you own. So really this is a constant problem when you're painting still lifes. Luxuries seem self-indulgent. Maybe the people in charge of facilities, not having any concentration to shatter, have no idea that working in a promising field; and they just cannot give up. And put this kind of misjudgement. Hackers are not stupid, and if they show the slightest sign of wasting your time, you'll be confident enough to tell them why they should be on it.
It's not aimed at producing a correct estimate of any given individual, but at selecting a reasonably optimal set. But I have a legitimate reason for doing this. 05214485 i'm 0. Startups are almost entirely a product of the Gilded Age, and things have changed since then. Fortunately we've come up with a programming language isn't just a format. In Javascript the example is, again, slightly longer, because Javascript retains the distinction between statements and expressions, so you need explicit return statements to return values: function foo n return function i return n i To be fair, Perl also retains this distinction, but deals with it in typical Perl fashion by letting you omit returns. If we use filtering to whittle their options down to mails like the one above, that should pretty much put the spammers on the legitimate end of the spectrum, if you look at the ones that went on to do great things, you find that open source operating systems already have a dominant market share, and the corresponding things running Android.
96. 09019077 enter 0. And to get rich is to start startups, they'll start startups. You can still see evidence of that if you don't make something users want. I think filtering based on individual words, Bayesian filters automatically notice. So to the extent you can preserve hacking as something you love, you're likely to do it well. So approach this like an algorithm that gets the right answer by successive approximations. The same is true in the arts, things are very different.
Larry and Sergey apparently felt this way too at first. For example, if you're not sure, you're not just making a technical decision. Which means, especially in the case of the most important principles in Silicon Valley it seems normal. But why should people who program computers be so concerned about copyrights, of all things?1 N s s: n. In this case, it might be worth trying to decompose them. Here's a sketch of how I do statistical filtering. There are no meetings or, God forbid, corporate retreats or team-building exercises. What we mean by a programming language is something we use to tell a computer what to do if you are yourself a programmer, and one about what to do.
That makes it more persuasive to people who are mistaken, you can't start a startup, so don't compromise there. It sounded promising.2 Even hackers can't tell. He was one of the main ideas in that mix is that if you're building something new, you should ask what those people would have done when it was different. The cartoon strip Dilbert has a lot to like I've done a few things, like intro it to my friends at Foundry who were investors in Service Metrics and understand this model I am also talking to my father reminded me of a heuristic the rest of the company sold in series A rounds for as much equity as founders want to sell and with no option pool that comes only from the founders' shares stands to reap huge benefits. We did the first thing we thought of. But there is a name for the phenomenon, Greenspun's Tenth Rule: Any sufficiently complicated C or Fortran program contains an ad hoc informally-specified bug-ridden slow implementation of half of Common Lisp. The most common mistake people make about economic inequality combines all three. It certainly describes what happened in Viaweb. Other times it's more unconscious. If I were a farmer and suddenly heard a lot of programmers I know, this is the reason that high-tech areas only happen around universities.
Because the people whose job is to sell you stuff are really, really good at it. Never say we're passionate or our product is great. Perhaps there's a rule here: perhaps you create wealth in proportion to how good an environment you create for them. I'm generating by hand the expansions of some macro that I need to give an example of a paragraph from an essay I wrote about labor unions. Platform is a vague word.3 The next generation of business computer. If you're designing a tool, for example, to want to use a completely different voice and manner talking to a roomful of people than you would otherwise, because every bad startup would approach them first. If you do this right, you only have a few minutes, spend them explaining what your product does and why it's important. Now almost every drawing teacher will tell you what they want. It's probably perfect. The most extreme case is developing programming languages, which distinguish between expressions and statements.
But actually the two are not that highly correlated. The best hackers tend to clump together—sometimes spectacularly so, as at Xerox Parc. So the short explanation of why this 1950s language is not simply how clean the path to the finished program looks in it, and have never spoken to a group of people they didn't already know. And most founders who've been burned by such disputes probably had misgivings, which they generally are in startups. Spammers range from businesses running so-called portals was that search was boring and unimportant. Chance meetings play a role like the role of technology in wealth creation. A demo explains what you've made more effectively than any verbal description. You can't prevent great variations in wealth without preventing people from getting rich, and you decide to move to the Valley for the summer to work on it.
But hackers use their offices for more than half the agreed upon price. The active ingredient here is not so much the professors as the students. The reason I describe it as an opportunity is that there will start to be thrown off. They were the kind of turbulent and ambitious people you find now in America. Few people know so early or so certainly what they want.4 This person is either astonishingly credulous or deeply in denial about their sexual interests.5 There is such a tenacious source of inequality is that it was too late. They let their acquaintance drift, but only a little; they were both meeting someone they had a lot in common with.
Notes
For most of the reason the founders: agree with them. The shift in power from investors to founders with established reputations. Indeed, it would be improper to name names, while we have to deliver these sentences as if you'd invested at a blistering pace in the life of a startup was a special recipient of favour, being offered large bribes by the time they're fifteen the kids are convinced the whole story. Forums and places like Twitter seem empirically to work like casual conversation.
I don't think you should be taken into account, they have zero ability to solve this problem, we found Dave Shen there, only Jews would move there, only for startups to kill bad comments to solve a lot of people, you may as well they do the opposite: when we were working on some project of your last round of funding rounds are bad. The best investors rarely care who else is investing, which shows how unimportant the Arpanet which became the Internet Bubble I talked to a super-angels tend not to grow big by transforming consulting into a de facto chosen by human editors. Some types of applicants—for example, America's abnormally high incarceration rate is a self fulfilling prophecy. There's not much use, because a part has come unscrewed, you can eliminate, do not do this right you'd have to disclose the threat to potential investors are also several you can't tell what the rule of law per se but from which Renaissance civilization radiated.
Correction: Earlier versions used a TV as a monitor.
I'm claiming with the founders'. A lot of great things were created mainly to make peace with Spain, and—A Spam Classification Organization Program.
I realized the other: the company will be coordinating efforts among partners. It's not the distribution of good ones. This is why it's such a dangerous mistake to believe your whole future depends on where you read about startup founders who continued to live a certain field, and there are few things worse than he was notoriously improvident and was soon to reap the rewards. He did eventually graduate at about 26.
#automatically generated text#Markov chains#Paul Graham#Python#Patrick Mooney#reason#C#Correction#creation#misjudgement#kind#efforts#expressions#turbulent#computer#code#above#Organization#Common#Foundry#rate#sup#hand#return#Lisp#people#ones#answer#farmer#Even
0 notes
Text
When “Sorry” Isn’t Enough
Like all of us, I suppose, I was surprised and more than just slightly taken aback by the revelation that the sitting governor of Virginia, a man known for his liberality and his commitment to civil rights, once placed a photograph of someone in blackface and someone else dressed up in a Ku Klux Klan outfit on his page in the Eastern Virginia Medical School yearbook of 1984. Was either person in the photograph himself? He’s been oddly equivocal in answering what is in essence a simple enough question, but it hardly matters at this point—the bottom line was that he himself chose to place that picture on that page, which means that he either thought at the time that the photograph was funny enough to warrant permanent memorialization in that space or, even more disconcertingly, that it was in some way suggestive enough of who he was and/or what he stood for to make it reasonable for people looking back years later to remember him by looking at it. As many have lately noted, it was a long time ago. But not that long! (The 1680s were a long time ago. The 1980s, not so much.) But the question isn’t really how long ago 1984 was, but whether the man who chose to adorn his yearbook page with racist images should be the governor of an American state now in the present, not in the distant or not so distant past. And another question asks itself as well: what kind of school would permit such pictures to be published in its yearbook in the first place? (Or is that one of those questions that is its own answer?)
But the focus in these last days has rightly been on the governor, not the school. Oddly, that confuses rather than clarifies the issue…because Ralph Northam has been a strong supporter of civil rights for all of his years in public service. So his non-racist bona fides—Northam left the field of pediatric neurology to become a United States senator in 2008—are not the issue at all. The question, therefore, is whether the past should outbalance the present…and whether apologizing for past errors of judgment should be enough to earn the right to move forward unencumbered by one’s own youthful stupidity.
The governor issued a statement in which he described the photograph as both “clearly racist and offensive.” And then he went on to apologize. “I am deeply sorry,” he said, “for the decision I made to appear as I did in this photo and for the hurt that decision caused then and now. This behavior is not in keeping with who I am today and the values I have fought for throughout my career in the military, in medicine, and in public service…The first step is to offer my sincerest apology and to state my absolute commitment to living up to the expectations Virginians set for me when they elected me to be their Governor.”
That certainly sounds like a sincere effort to own up to what even his most ardent supporter would surely characterize as an error of judgment of monumental proportions. But is saying you’re sorry enough? Can you undo the past with mere words? Can regret in the present outweigh tasteless vulgarity in the past? Those are the issues I’d like to write about today.
At the heart of the matter is a fundamental philosophical question relating to the way the past relates to the present. Trees grow over the course of decades and their trunks become broader and thicker as the former outer layer of wood becomes one of the tree trunk’s inner growth rings and is superseded by a new outer layer. So, at least with trees, it’s all in there somewhere: the outermost layer of wood becomes interiorized as the past retains its physical presence within the ongoing tree. But is the same true of people? Is the eleven-year-old me in there somewhere? It’s hard to say. It feels as though he must be—where else could he be?—and yet the tree model doesn’t feel quite right: boy-me hardly lives within man-me in the same way that a tree’s inner rings are physically present within its trunk as living testimony to its past. Boy-me is more in there somehow than somewhere.
Nor is this mere philosophical musing: our entire criminal justice system rests on the principle that we bear responsibility for our own past acts because we are not ethereal projections or reconceptualizations of the people we were in the past but actually are those same people. And that, in turn, leads me to the pertinent question worth asking with respect to the governor’s racist tastelessness as a young man: since the deed cannot be undone but apparently does not rise to the level of criminal activity for which he could tried in a court of law, then what exactly should he do to address the issue? To that question, the chorus of responses has been varied and, each in its own way (I believe), off-mark. Giving him a pass merely because he doesn’t have a time machine and can’t return to 1985 to re-edit his yearbook page sounds idiotic to me. But maintaining that precisely because he can’t undo the past he should now withdraw into premature retirement and spend the rest of his days ruing a huge error of judgment from a quarter-century ago sounds not only excessive, but also profoundly counterproductive.
One of the features of our intellectual life at Shelter Rock is my annual series of lessons, undertaken every August and lasting through the High Holiday season, devoted to the section of Maimonides’ great law code, the Mishneh Torah, devoted to the law of t’shuvah. The Hebrew word, t’shuvah, is regularly translated as “repentance,” but the English words sounds to me like a slightly more august version of regret whereas t’shuvah involves constructively using some amalgam of remorse, shame, and guilt as a platform upon which to stand not while attempting to travel from the present into the past (which is impossible, see above) but while attempting to move meaningfully from the present into the future.
The text is rich and satisfying—challenging in some ways, but bracing in others and always inspiring. When considered alongside the book I think of as its companion volume, the Ḥibbur Ha-t’shuvah (“The Book of T’shuvah”) by Rabbi Menaḥem ben Solomon Meiri (1249-1306)—an understudied and underestimated work that I come to esteem even more highly each time I open it—a path opens up for poor Governor Northam to consider as a way forward out of his self-inflicted predicament.
In our tradition, the past cannot be undone but it can be addressed profoundly and meaningfully. The first step is always a public confession: t’shuvah cannot be done in private, let alone in secret. If the misdeed under consideration involved harm to another person, then you have to beg that person’s pardon in person and out loud. If the person is no longer alive, then you must gather a minyan by the side of his or her grave and there confess your sin and pledge to become a finer person in the future who has learned from the error in judgment that led to the event being repented. In every case, the viddui (that is, the public confession of wrongdoing) is an essential element in the larger process.
And then, having stepped into the world, you need to step out of it and demonstrate your resolve to grow into a finer iteration of yourself through a regimen of prayer, fasting, and self-denial. Jews, of course, have Yom Kippur as our national day devoted to doing exactly those things: fasting, engaging in various forms of self-denial, spending the day immersed in contemplative communal prayer. Rambam—as Maimonides is familiarly called even in scholarly circles—goes into all of this in great detail. And then, finally, he says this about the individual seeking to do t’shuvah for a specific misdeed: “Such a person,” he writes, “must be humble of demeanor and modest. If boors mock such a person by referencing the deed for which that person has repented by saying ‘you once did such-and-such a thing’ or ‘you once spoke in such-and-such a way,’ then the person who has done t’shuvah honestly will not respond in anger, but rather should listen carefully and take pleasure in their insults—because such taunts will lead to becoming even more ashamed of the past behavior in question and more filled with remorse, and that experience will not be degrading but elevating….”
And that is what I think Governor Northam should do. He seems to be a good man in many ways, but one who made a terrible mistake as a young man that now, all these years later, has hurt many people who must now wonder if they can trust him at all. There is a way forward and, speaking as a rabbi, I recommend our Jewish path of principled t’shuvah coupled with a public commitment to grow through this scandal into a finer version of himself, one even more devoted to the pursuit of civil rights for all than he has been in the past. A bit of public prayer probably wouldn’t hurt either.
And one more detail too, also from Rambam: “Once people have done t’shuvah for some specific misdeeds, it becomes absolutely forbidden to humiliate them by reminding them of their former misdeeds…and doing so is to break the commandment of the Torah that forbids individuals from oppressing each other unduly.”
Can this rule to applied to this last week’s other politician-apologizer, Representative Ilhan Omer (D- Minnesota), who seems so far to have made her mark on Congress solely by sending out anti-Semitic tweets and then apologizing for them? That will have to be the topic of a different letter!
1 note
·
View note
Text
Counting Tao - Omer 30
Today’s Omer theme is stringency and judgement in humility and grace. (See comments below for more on the Omer)
Before and after meditating today, I read chapter 57 from the The Lao Tzu (See comments below for full text)
The smallness of this week, combined with the strength of today’s theme, and the Tao offering a hands off way of governing ourselves and each other - all pose a challenge indeed to the “type A” version of achievement that seems to consume me today.
When facing difficulties or crises we celebrate the ones who take charge and act, I know that I do.
And yet, at every moment our sages ask us to assess - just how much will our action help? How important is it that we take charge? Can we really take charge?
The “stop and breathe” and “take five minutes before we act” advice seems pretty sound. There are very few of us who couldn’t benefit by taking a moment or two before embarking on the next great leap forward.
Aiming to find for myself the space of a breath before my next action - a good afternoon to all.
[From The Lao Tzu (Tao-Te Ching) as found in Wing-Tsit Chan (translator and compiler), A Source Book in Chinese Philosophy, (1963), pages 166-167, slightly adapted by Jonathan Freirich]
57. Govern the state with correctness. Operate the army with surprise tactics. Administer the empire by engaging in no activity. How do I know that this should be so? Through this: The more taboos and prohibitions there are in the world, The poorer the people will be. The more share weapons the people have, The more troubled the state will be. The more cunning and skill a person possesses, The more vicious things will appear. The more laws and orders are made prominent, The more thieves and robbers there will be. Therefore the sage says: I take no action and the people of themselves are transformed. I love tranquility and the people of themselves become correct. I engage in no activity and the people of themselves become prosperous. I have no desires and the people of themselves become simple.
About the Counting of the Omer in the Jewish holiday cycle: Today is thirty days, which is four weeks and two days of the Counting of the Omer - a time when many Jews note each day between the Second Day of Passover, the celebration of freedom, and the next major holiday, Shavuot, or “weeks”, when Jews celebrate the covenant given at Mount Sinai. Each of the seven weeks and each of the seven days in these weeks correspond to a particular “sefirah” or “sphere”, or perhaps better, “a divine emanation/human aspiration”. These themes allow us to reflect on the days as we move from liberation to revelation in the Jewish calendar. Today’s Omer theme is stringency and judgement (“g’vurah” גְבוּרָה) in the week of humility and grace (“hod” הוֹד).
0 notes