Dear Reader,
A protest against the Metropolitan Opera's decision to stage a performance of "The Death Of Klinghoffer" has picked up steam and more mainstream Jewish support, prompting the threat of a backlash from the director of the Met. Staff Writer Stewart Ain has the story.
A protest against the Metropolitan Opera's decision to stage a performance of "The Death Of Klinghoffer" has picked up steam and more mainstream Jewish support, prompting the threat of a backlash from the director of the Met. Staff Writer Stewart Ain has the story.
NEW YORK
‘Klinghoffer’ Protest Moves Beyond Right Wing
Met Opera’s Gelb stands ground in private meeting with Jewish leaders, warns of backlash against Jews.
Stewart Ain
Staff Writer
A rally protesting the Met Opera's planned staging of "The death of Klinghoffer" drew and estimated 1,500-2,000 people this week
Three days before more than 1,500 demonstrators protested an upcoming opera they consider anti-Semitic, five Jewish leaders, representing a wide swath of the Jewish community, met privately with the general manager of the Metropolitan Opera to implore him to cancel the performance.
“I don’t think it went well,” said Rabbi Joseph Potasnik, executive vice president of the New York Board of Rabbis, of their meeting with Peter Gelb.
“He was angry at us for daring to question his judgment. There was not an iota of retreat; he had made his decision before we arrived.”
At issue is the staging of “The Death of Klinghoffer,” John Adams’ contemporary opera about the brutal killing of Leon Klinghoffer, a 69-year-old disabled Jewish American who was shot and killed in 1985 by four Palestinian hijackers while aboard the Italian cruise ship Achille Lauro. His body — still in its wheelchair — was then hurled into the sea.
Joining Rabbi Potasnik at the meeting were Malcolm Hoenlein, executive chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations; Eric Goldstein, CEO of UJA-Federation of New York; Michael Miller, executive vice president and CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New York, and Rabbi David-Seth Kirshner, president of the New York Board of Rabbis.
“He thinks this is one of the most creative operas of all time and he said he is honored to have it at the Met,” Rabbi Potasnik recalled of their conversation with Gelb. “He said he feels the composer is a genius and that this is an extraordinary opera. We all told him that he wouldn’t glorify ISIS or the 9/11 hijackers, so why would you do it for the killers of Klinghoffer? Throwing a man off a ship because he is a Jew is not an act of genius but an act of brutal anti-Semitism.”
What is significant about the meeting with Gelb is that it seems to move the Klinghoffer story beyond the right flank of the Jewish community, which has been beating the drums against the opera for several months, into the mainstream.
The Met’s decision to proceed with the production, which opens Oct. 20 for the first of eight performances, has received support from several individuals and organizations. On its website, the Met posted an editorial from The New York Times, which said that in proceeding with the production Gelb was “defending both the opera and the principle of artistic freedom in a world rife with political pressures.”
Rabbi Potasnik said the Jewish leaders told Gelb that this is “not about censorship but about choices — and choices have consequences.”
“He took the outrageous position that challenging this opera would increase anti-Semitism because it would appear that Jews were controlling the arts,” the rabbi recalled. “We said this opera is an affront not only to Jews but also to all decent people, especially those victimized by terrorists. Many 9/11 families have spoken against it. Given this mentality what’s next, an ISIS love story?”
A spokesman for Gelb said he was unavailable for an interview, but Gelb issued a statement saying the fact that the opera “grapples with the complexities of an unconscionable real-life act of violence does not mean it should not be performed.”
“The rumors and inaccuracies about the opera and its presentation at the Met are part of a campaign to have it suppressed,” he said. “‘Klinghoffer’ is neither anti-Semitic nor does it glorify terrorism. The Met will not bow to this pressure.
“As a cultural institution, we unwaveringly support the freedom of artists to create responsible work that addresses difficult contemporary topics. We firmly believe that artistic explorations of politically charged subjects should be presented to the public without fear of censorship.”
Gelb noted that the opera was planned five years ago and is a co-production with the English National Opera, which performed it without incident two years ago. And he said it has been presented to critical and public acclaim to audiences worldwide since its premiere 23 years ago.
“We stand behind the opera on its artistic merits,” he added.
Protests about the Met’s decision to stage the opera were initially tempered by a deal Gelb worked out with Abraham Foxman, national director of the Anti-Defamation League, in which it was agreed that the show would go on but that its live transmission to movie theaters worldwide would be canceled. Gelb explained at the time that although he believes the opera is not anti-Semitic, he became convinced that the “international Jewish community” believed its transmission “would be inappropriate at this time of rising anti-Semitism, particularly in Europe.” Foxman said at the time that, although he hadn’t seen the opera, he did not believe, based on the libretto, that it was anti-Semitic. As part of the agreement, the Klinghoffer daughters were offered an opportunity to write their own response to the opera for inclusion in the Met Playbill during each performance of the opera.
In their response, an advance copy of which was obtained by The Jewish Week, Lisa and Isla Klinghoffer noted that in the opera the terrorists who killed their father “are given a back story, an ‘explanation’ for their brutal act of terror and violence.”
“Terrorism cannot be rationalized,” they wrote. “It cannot be understood. It can never be tolerated as a vehicle for political expression or grievance. Unfortunately, ‘The Death of Klinghoffer’ does all this, and sullies the memory of a fine, principled, sweet man in the process.”
They added that the opera “presents false moral equivalencies without context, and offers no real insight into the historical reality and the senseless murder of an American Jew. It rationalizes, romanticizes and legitimizes the terrorist murder of our father.”
Although at first protests against staging the opera came from smaller, right-wing Jewish groups, more and more mainstream Jewish organizations joined in. And some Christian groups, most notably the Catholic League, also joined the protest.
The JCRC issued a statement Monday saying it is “deeply disturbed by The Metropolitan Opera’s decision to move forward with the production” and it released an open letter to Gelb that it is asking people, synagogues and organizations sign.
The letter said it is “not surprising” that the decision to stage the opera has generated such “disappointment and negative reaction.”
“The opera’s juxtaposition of terrorists and their victims on the same moral plane is gravely inappropriate,” the letter states. “Moreover, this production runs the risk of legitimizing acts of terror, which is particularly sensitive now as anti-Jewish attacks and expressions of hatred against Jews have reached frightening levels around the globe, and innocent American journalists have been cruelly beheaded by radical Islamists.”
Among those who have thus far signed are the top lay and professional leaders of UJA-Federation of New York and the leaders of Hadassah, the Jewish Council for Public Affairs, the Orthodox Union, United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, the National Council of Young Israel, the Religious Zionists of America, Jewish National Fund, several JCCs and YM-YWHAs, the Bnai Zion Foundation, New York Association of Jews from the Former Soviet Union, and the Holocaust Memorial and Tolerance Center of Nassau County. So far no leaders have signed from the Union for Reform Judaism, by far the largest denomination.
The American Jewish Committee released its own statement last week expressing concern that the opera will glorify terrorism and noting that canceling the simulcast has not alleviated concerns in New York City, the site of the 9/11 terror attacks. Today with increasingly virulent anti-Western, anti-American, anti-Semitic and anti-Israel terrorism, all reminiscent of the cruelty perpetrated against Leon Klinghoffer, we should not rationalize or humanize acts of terrorism or terrorists, wrote David Harris the organization’s executive director. We must not desecrate the memory of terrorist victims, nor offer rationales, artistic or otherwise, that could be seen to justify or contextualize the targeting of civilians.
In a statement, Farley Weiss, president of the National Council of Young Israel, said The Death of Klinghoffer is not an opera, it is an outrage.” He called it a show that glorifies terrorism and essentially downgrades the evil actions of the Palestinian-Arab terrorists, and said its production is wholly insensitive and beyond the pale… Giving a sympathetic platform to terrorism and calling it an opera is a reprehensible distortion of the arts and shows a callous disregard for the heinous execution of an innocent Jew.”
The JCRC said that on the opening night of the Klinghoffer opera it plans to screen a film at the JCC of Manhattan depicting the actual events surrounding the murder of Klinghoffer called, “Voyage of Terror: The Achille Lauro Affair.”
But one of those protesting outside the Met Monday evening, Eve Epstein, who described herself as a longtime opera fan and regular attendee (and who noted that she just received a postcard from the Met offering cut-rate, $25 tickets to the Klinghoffer production, something she’s never seen before), said she would prefer to see all Jewish groups join the opening night rally at the Met.
“They should be mobilizing as best they can for that main rally,” she said. “It will be a bigger protest. What you saw Monday was just a dress rehearsal.”
Stewart also reports on two federal court rulings this week that could pave the way for American
victims of Arab terrorism to hold the terror groups' bankers responsible.
NEW YORK
Two Rulings Seen Aiding Terror Victims
Arab Bank, NatWest decisions ‘could embolden others’ to challenge Hamas funders.
Stewart Ain
Staff Writer
Plaintiffs' lawyer Gary Osen wins Arab Bank case.
Decisions in two federal court cases this week appear to make it easier for American victims of terrorist attacks to hold a terrorist groups’ bankers responsible for its actions, opening the door to similar suits.
A jury in Brooklyn Federal Court Monday found that Arab Bank, a major multinational Jordanian-based institution, knowingly provided financial support to the terrorist organization Hamas, marking the first time that a financial institution has been held civilly liable for supporting terrorism.
The jury returned the verdict Monday afternoon after having deliberated nearly two days. A new trial must now be held with a new jury to hear evidence about the nearly 300 Americans who were killed or maimed in 24 Hamas terrorist attacks in Israel from 2001 to 2004. The jury will then be asked to determine how much the bank must pay those who were injured or the estates of those killed. No date for the new trial has been set.
The verdict came just hours after the Second Circuit U.S. Court of Appeals in New York unanimously reinstated a similar lawsuit against a different bank — National Westminster Bank — by about 200 American victims of alleged Hamas terrorism in Israel.
The appeals court said a lower court erred in dismissing two suits against NatWest, whose parent company is the Royal Bank of Scotland Group.
“The verdict in the Arab Bank case sends a very powerful message to financial institutions that they must know their customers,” said David Miller, who until recently was a federal prosecutor in Manhattan who had worked on terrorism cases. “It also says that they must keep strict compliance with U.S. terrorism financing and bank secrecy laws. And it may likely result in follow-on suits against banks for violations of the Anti-Terrorism Act.”
He noted that similar civil suits are pending against financial institutions and that this was the first private civil suit to go to trial. “Trials are always risky and parties traditionally settle before trial,” Miller told The Jewish Week. “But this resounding victory could embolden other parties to take the risk and go to trial.”
Peter Raven-Hansen, a George Washington University law professor who worked on the Arab Bank case, told The Jewish Week that the jury was telling banks that they “cannot simply hide behind their OFAC filters.”
He was referring to a computer program known as OFAC (Official Foreign Asset Control), which contains a list of known terrorists compiled by the U.S., the United Nations and the European Union.
“If they see Osama bin Laden come in to empty his bank account, they simply cannot say he is not on the list,” Raven-Hansen said. “If they are obviously dealing with someone who is known to be a terrorist, they must act.”
He said the lesson of these cases would likely also apply to companies that provide money to terrorists. For instance, in a case pending in Florida, Chiquita Brands International, the well-known banana company, has been sued civilly for allegedly funding terrorist guerrillas in Colombia. It pleaded guilty to similar charges in 2007 and paid the U.S. $25 million in fines. Chiquita has reportedly insisted that the payments were protection money to ensure that their farm workers would not be killed.
“There is no defense that says you can make the payments if it helps your profit line,” Raven-Hansen said. “You just can’t do it, no matter what the reason.”
The Anti-Terrorism Act allows plaintiffs to sue for actions committed within the last 10 years. But Raven-Hansen said he does not expect to see “an explosion of suits against banks” because plaintiffs still have the burden of proving the bank was aware it was handling transactions for a terrorist group. The Arab Bank case took 10 years to prepare.
“In the case of Arab Bank, these guys were Hamas’ bankers,” he said. “But you can imagine other banks that do not nearly fit that bill.”
Gary Osen, one of the plaintiffs’ attorneys in the Arab Bank case, said after the verdict, “Every bank, every company and every government in the world now has to decide whether it is willing to continue doing business with an institution proven to have knowingly supported terrorism and proven to have helped murder Americans.”
In a statement Monday, Arab Bank said would appeal the decision, saying its hands were tied by pretrial rulings.
During the trial, attorneys for the plaintiffs presented evidence that Arab Bank transferred more than $30 million to Hamas-controlled institutions in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank and that the bank served as the conduit between several charities that funneled money to Hamas. Among them was the Saudi Committee in Support of the Intifada Al Quds, a Saudi charity established in October 2000 that provided financial support to the families of Hamas suicide bombers, those who were injured in attacks and those who were imprisoned by Israel.
Among the terror attacks cited in the suit are three of the most well-known in Hamas’ reign of terror during what became known as the second intifada: the Dolphinarium discotheque suicide bombing in Tel Aviv; the Sbarro pizzeria bombing in Jerusalem; and the Passover Massacre — the bombing of the crowded dining room of the Park Hotel in Netanya during the Passover seder in 2002.
After the jury began deliberations, the plaintiffs received a memorandum from the U.S. State Department that said the U.S. in 2003 had provided Saudi authorities with evidence that the Saudi Committee “was forwarding millions of dollars in funds to the families of Palestinians engaged in terrorist activities, including those of suicide bombers.”
Michael Eisner, an attorney for the plaintiffs who had requested the information, said in a statement that the “timing of the State Department’s disclosure raises deeply troubling questions.”
The State Department did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
“Obviously, the jury reached the same conclusion about the Saudi payments in finding Arab Bank guilty for its support of Hamas, but this last minute disclosure of this evidence six years after we requested it and hours after the jury began its deliberations is telling,” he said.
In the trial, which lasted nearly six weeks, the jury heard evidence that Arab Bank held accounts of several senior Hamas leaders, including Hamas founder and spiritual leader Sheikh Ahmad Yassin and current Hamas leaders Osama Hamdan and Ismail Haniyeh.
In his summation last Thursday, Mark Werbner, another plaintiffs’ attorney, had asked the jury of eight women and three men to “send a message” by finding Arab Bank guilty of providing Hamas with the money it needed to carry out the 24 deadly attacks.
“They won’t accept responsibility unless and until you make them,” he said. “It was pretty foreseeable that by helping this organization and facilitating financing services that bad things were going to happen. … The message you can send will reverberate around the world and reverberate as a message to these families that there is justice.”
During the course of the trial before Brooklyn Federal Court Judge Brian Cogan, officials and employees of Arab Bank testified that they had no idea that any of the financial transactions they processed was for Hamas terrorists or for charities that were raising money for Hamas.
The attorney for Arab Bank, Shand Stephens, said in his summation that there had not been “one word of testimony that anyone [associated with the bank] supported terrorism — not one word.”
Stephens argued that evidence showed that the bank ran all transaction requests through OFAC and, regarding the claim that Arab Bank helped charities that raised money for Hamas, Stephens noted that the United States Agency for International Development “gave money to charities that they [the plaintiffs] say were Hamas controlled.”
Attorneys for the 297 American plaintiffs killed or seriously injured in the terror attacks claimed Arab Bank did know and that Hamas could not have acted without the Jordanian-based bank.
In his closing arguments to the jury, another attorney for the plaintiffs, Tab Turner, said the “greatest force of evil in our society today is terrorism. And these terrorists cannot function, they cannot operate, they cannot preach, they cannot buy weapons, they cannot commit suicide with bombs, without money.”
He said also that Arab Bank’s refusal to release certain bank records, citing privacy laws of its host countries, caused the judge to tell the jury that they may infer those records were damaging to the bank.
“It wasn’t a mistake” the records were withheld, Turner told the jury. “This bank said no, we’re not giving you those records. What’s so important in those records that they don’t want the jury to see? They did not want you to see the money going into those accounts, the money going out, where it was going — and the internal bank correspondence discussing the accounts.”
Among the plaintiffs in the case was Sarri Singer, who was injured in a 2003 suicide bombing.
“I started crying when the email came in,” Singer, the daughter of New Jersey state Sen. Robert Singer, told JTA shortly after the verdict was announced.
Singer was on the No. 14 bus in Jerusalem on June 11, 2003 when the suicide bomber — standing a few feet from her — blew himself up. Sixteen people on the bus were killed and 100 others were injured. Singer broke her clavicle and she still has shrapnel lodged in her mouth.
“I feel very validated and acknowledged as a victim of terror,” Singer said. “The jury has given us a sense that there is someone responsible for what happened to us.”
stewart@jewishweek.org
My column wonders why it
seems far easier to mobilize young Jews to rally against the threat of global
warming than to speak out against the threat of global terror, especially aimed
at Israel and the West.
GARY ROSENBLATT
An Inconvenient Truth
Gauging global threats, from climate change to the enemies of Israel and the West.
Gary Rosenblatt
Editor and Publisher
Imagine that it was far easier for progressive Jewish organizations and synagogues to attract young Jews to participate in Sunday’s People’s Climate March than, say, attend a rally in support of Israel or come to synagogue on the High Holy Days.
It’s just an observation, not a value judgment, and I can’t prove it, but that’s the sense I have, based on conversations with people across the generations. And I think it bears exploring why that is and what it portends for our Jewish future.
The Climate March surely had a compelling cause, voicing a universal concern about the survival of our planet. It’s an issue that transcends race, politics (mostly), religion, geography, gender, socioeconomic status, and more. There was power in the sheer numbers of attendees here in New York City on Sunday — somewhere between 100,000 and 300,000, according to estimates — a procession that was part celebration, with music and banners and floats, and part deadly serious. Most scientists agree that if carbon emissions are not limited significantly, the forces of nature will punish us for our refusal to accept reality with cataclysmic events, including floods and earthquakes.
How fascinating that the high dramatic point of the vast rally here was not a rousing speech but a moment of silence followed by a full minute of loud, sustained noise. According to The New York Times report, “There were drumbeats and the blaring of horns, but mostly it was generated by people’s whoops and screams.”
I was reminded of the blowing of the shofar as the high point of Rosh HaShanah services. It, too, is a call to action, a recognition of the majesty of the moment — an annual review on high of our actions here on earth — and a call to service. In Jewish tradition, it is the service not only to our Creator but to our fellow man, a reminder to treat each person as having been created in the image of God.
Actually, it goes further than that. Judaism views man as God’s stewards over the planet. We are responsible to maintain the earth, its environment and creatures, a concept going back to the Bible. There are prohibitions against destroying fruit trees and mandates for allowing one’s animals to rest each week and for the land itself to lie fallow every seven years. (This new year, 5775, is the Sabbatical Year, the year of Shmittah, when the land of Israel shall have “a complete rest.”)
One wonders how many Jews committed to protecting the environment realize that these values are rooted in their own religious tradition. Perhaps if we did a better job of educating our children about the relevance of Judaism today, as a matter of faith, heritage and morality, we might be more successful in our call for them to join us in the synagogue on the holiest days of the year.
One message those who do attend services this Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur will hear from the pulpit — more so, it seems, than in recent years, according to a number of rabbis interviewed — is the RELEVANCE OF ANOTHER GLOBAL MATTER, THE need to support the State of Israel as a religious, ethical and strategic imperative. Rabbi Andy Bachman, a highly respected voice for progressive Judaism, signaled the seriousness of Israel’s plight when he told us recently that his message to congregants this High Holy Day season — his last as spiritual leader of Congregation Beth Elohim in Park Slope, Brooklyn — will be: “Don’t abandon Israel.” (See “Bachman’s Parting Shot At Progressives On Israel,” Sept. 5.)
He explained that having witnessed in Israel this summer the effects of the Hamas war, in addition to the rise of ISIS and Islamic militants in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, funded by Iran, he concluded that the violent aggression is “all interconnected.” He said that “Israel is at the front lines of a conflict that will affect us for the next 100 years, so we’d better get used to it.”
Let’s hope his message hits home and that and more young people, committed as they should be to universalist ideals and recognizing the need to counter environmental threats, appreciate as well the very real threat to Western civilization of Islamic militants whose goal is to destroy us and our way of life.
Somehow the latter effort is seen as less politically correct, but both are vitally important.
Global warming, if not checked, can cause great damage over the next several decades. But the catastrophic effects of unchecked militant groups now wreaking havoc in the Middle East could come much sooner. In both cases what’s needed is the political will to identify and confront the danger at hand. Are we up to the task?
Gary@jewishweek.org
Also this week, Rabbi David Wolpe on King David as the Bible's most complex character; a message to our readers from
the board of The Jewish Week; and a look at Jewish-themed films at the New York Film Festival.
IN THE BEGINNING
King David, ‘A Very Problematic Character’
Rabbi David Wolpe, in conversation with Abigail Pogrebin, described the Bible's King David as a "very problematic character."
Noting that a character’s first recorded words in the Bible reveal a great deal about his personality, Rabbi David Wolpe pointed out at a Jewish Week Forum here last week that as a youngster, the future King David’s first words in the Book of Samuel are, “What will be given to the man who slays Goliath?”
Clearly looking out for his own future, the young shepherd used his wits and his sling shot to kill the Philistine giant and set his own trajectory toward becoming the most acclaimed king of Israel — as well as the most complex, developed and beloved figure in the Bible, accord to the rabbi.
It was David’s fully human nature — poet and warrior, Psalmist and seducer, murderer and devoted friend — that drew the acclaimed author, spiritual leader of Los Angeles’ Sinai Temple and Jewish Week columnist to write a just-published biography, “David: The Divided Heart” (Yale University Press). He discussed it last Tuesday evening at Temple Emanu-El’s Skirball Center, a co-sponsor of the event, which was attended by more than 200 people.
Rabbi Wolpe, who was named to the No. 1 spot on the Newsweek list of America’s Top 50 Rabbis, was interviewed by author-journalist Abigail Pogrebin, who helped compile the Newsweek list for a number of years.
Drawn to the biblical David since he himself was a high school student, the rabbi asserted that David was, indeed, a “very problematic character” but also “the most vital person in the Bible.” He could be portrayed as Machiavellian in his political, personal and military moves, but he was also a wonderful figure loved by so many who knew him, according to Rabbi Wolpe.
“I think he was both,” he said. “He had real feelings and he was also calculating” in his actions. And despite his sins, most notably seducing the beautiful Bathsheba and then arranging for her noble husband to be killed on the battlefield so that David could marry her, he was favored by God, who promises him that his line of kingship will last forever. And it is from the House of David, we are told, that the Messiah will come.
Rabbi Wolpe’s 145-page book offers psychological insights and crisp, clear writing in a biography published as part of the Yale University Press “Jewish Lives” series of biographies. The book focuses on the various roles King David played, with chapters on Young David, Lover and Husband, Fugitive, The King, The Sinner, The Father and Caretaker.
“David violated God’s law but he never denies God,” Rabbi Wolpe said. “He had a personal relationship with God.”
He urged readers to judge the biblical figure by the violent times he lived in rather than by today’s standards. “He needed to be ruthless to survive,” he said, but few kings or leaders were also poets.
“David,” Rabbi Wolpe said, “remains a lastingly relevant leader.”
Gary@jewishweek.org
____________________________
EDITORIAL
A Year Of Challenges, And Hope
Dear Friends,
Every year at this time it is our privilege to report to you on the state of The Jewish Week.
At Rosh HaShanah it is appropriate to take stock of where we have been and to look forward, with renewed commitment to journalistic excellence, to the coming year.
The year just ending has been difficult on many levels. We continue to monitor events in Israel and throughout the Middle East with apprehension and concern, mourning those lost in Israel and Gaza, and noting that peace between Israel and the Palestinians seems a distant dream. With the region increasingly in chaos under assault from Islamic militants, Israel’s status as a thriving democracy seems all the more precious. But witnessing the increasing and blatant display of anti-Semitism this summer, especially in Europe, we are reminded of the ongoing need to counter racism and bias. In the next two months, as the deadline for talks over Iran’s nuclear program draws near, we will be watching to see if a resolution can be reached that satisfies Israel’s sense of security. And if not, which nation, if any, will ensure that protection from a nuclear Tehran?
Here in New York, the past year saw many reasons for promise as innovators brought new ideas and opportunities for connections to our community. Yet the level of disagreement and conflict amongst our people, particularly over Israel’s policies, is a serious and growing concern – one we seek to address. We see the role of The Jewish Week as not only reporting on Jewish life but serving as a vital bridge, connecting and strengthening the diverse elements of our community through a number of educational programs we have launched and maintain over the years.
One in particular, The Conversation, an annual two-day retreat for current and emerging Jewish thought-leaders and activists from around the country, seeks to address the communal divide directly. Having just marked its 10th anniversary it now has close to 600 alumni. The program recognizes the need for a safe space for serious Jews to meet, discuss and disagree with each other in a respectful manner on the major topics of the day. Its model is The Jewish Week itself, whose goal is to provide a place for the Jewish community to be informed, to share ideas and hear each other’s views on the path, however elusive, to increased respect and unity.
A visit to our homepage will reveal that we sponsor Jewish Week Forums year-round to bring New Yorkers into contact with authors, thinkers and leaders who are having an impact on Jewish life. We also educate young people about the complexities of modern Israel (Write on For Israel) and showcase teen journalism (Fresh Ink, a webzine by and for teens.) Our Jewish Week Investigative Journalism Fund enables us to tackle in-depth, enterprise stories and supports writers whose work sheds light on issues too often limited to the shadows.
We appreciate this opportunity to publicly applaud our staff members and share their pride in additions to our web offerings, including a lively Food and Wine section and new blogs like The New Normal, which gives voice to issues and ideas relating to those with disabilities; the blog already has generated a grateful and energetic international following.
In addition, we offer Blueprint, in New York, Los Angeles and Jerusalem, a leading online source of information and events for single Jewish professionals in their 20s and 30s.
Our sales and business team works tirelessly to serve our advertisers and build circulation, reaching out to every part of the community.
Running a media business in the New York media market is not easy. Maintaining our commitment to editorial excellence through original local, national and international reporting adds financial cost, as does our series of community-building programs. Nevertheless, we keep pushing ahead, motivated by a deep desire to contribute to this vibrant community and to help us all connect. But all of this costs money.
That is where you can help. Your support can enable The Jewish Week to grow through tax-deductible contributions to FJC, which holds donor-advised funds for The Jewish Week (www.thejewishweek.com/support).
Our major event of the coming year will be held on November 5 as we honor one of our founders, the remarkable businessman and philanthropist Eugene Grant at a special dinner. It will be followed by a public Forum featuring author and educator Daniel Gordis in conversation with Ethan Bronner, deputy national editor of The New York Times, on how Israel is covered in the media.
Click here for information on this special evening and click here to learn more about our extensive schedule of forums and other events.
Finally, please click here to learn more about our programs and the ways we strengthen and celebrate Jewish life and ideas -- and ways you can support our work.
Most importantly, we thank you for your interest and support, and encourage you to give us feedback. On behalf the of the entire Jewish Week Media Group team, including our Board of Directors, we wish you a happy, healthy and peaceful New Year.
Shanah Tovah,
Stuart Himmelfarb President
Peter Wang, Board Chair
____________________________
FILM
Godard Goes 3-D, The Safdies Take To The Streets
‘Goodbye to Language’ and ‘Heaven Knows What’ tackle Hitler and heroin at New York Film Festival.
George Robinson
Special To The Jewish Week
Arielle Holmes as a heroin addict in Josh and Bennie Safdie's "Heaven Knows What."
Note: This is the first of two articles on Jewish-themed works in this year’s New York Film Festival.
Homeless heroin addicts and Hitler: Sounds like a typical opening week for the New York Film Festival, huh?
When this year’s edition opens on Sept. 26, there will be plenty of Jewish-themed films and films by Jewish filmmakers on display, but in the first week of press screenings, two are worth shout-outs. Happily, “Goodbye to Language” by Jean-Luc Godard and “Heaven Knows What” by Josh and Benny Safdie set the bar pretty high for the rest of this year’s festival.
Godard’s fascination (some say obsession) with the Second World War, the Holocaust, the Resistance and the Jews is proverbial. His new film, “Goodbye to Language,” continues that interest, albeit more in passing than in some of his previous work. Bu the result is provocative nonetheless. A casual remark links the election of Hitler as Reichschancellor and Zworykin’s invention of the television, both of which occurred in 1933. A young woman retells a chilling anecdote about a boy being herded into the gas chambers, and Godard’s narration indirectly but warmly invokes Emmanuel Levinas and his ethics based on compassion for the Other (and we see one of Levinas’ books on a sales table, alongside a volume on usury by Ezra Pound). And there is a sinister, business-suited German running around throughout the film, shooting people for no apparent reason.
What makes the film thrilling to watch, though, is that it is Godard’s first foray into 3-D and, as one might expect, his manipulation of the illusion of depth is dazzling, funny and frustrating. At several key moments in the film, he uses the bifurcated visuals of the audience’s polarized glasses to create two different images that can only be understood by blinking one eye and then the other in succession; when the two images are reunited in a single frame, the result is weirdly exhilarating. He also uses the three-dimensional image to bounce texts around (metaphorically, not literally) with results that will tickle anyone who has followed his highly logo-centric cinema in the past.
This is the most playful Godard film in recent years, a rumination on the never-ending battle of genders that is at the center of most of his work, but one that is daffy enough to include — believe it or not — fart jokes. Visually pyrotechnic, verbally convulsive, frequently funny and always provoking, “Goodbye to Language” left me absolutely at a loss for explanations but thoroughly delighted by the experience. Even more than usual with Godard, this is a film that demands multiple viewings, and I suspect it will reward them richly. (Happily, the film will open theatrically on Oct. 29).
Josh and Benny Safdie have been the center of a collective of talented young filmmakers based here in New York, and their own highly variegated work has been a prominent part of the output. They dabbled in documentary most recently, but their last fiction feature, “Daddy Longlegs,” was memorably intense, working its way from a light-hearted family saga to something much darker and troubling. Needless to say, they should be on the radar of anyone interested in contemporary film. And with their new film “Heaven Knows What” they have made a great leap forward.
“Heaven Knows What” is a harrowing trip through a brief period in the life of a homeless junkie, played with astonishing nuance by writer Arielle Holmes. Holmes is not an actress, but the film is based on her memoir and she clearly has achieved the necessary distance to remember and recreate the hellish life she has left behind. Not, perhaps, recalled in tranquility, but certainly recalled in vivid detail.
Harley (Holmes) is madly, damningly in love with Ilya (Caleb Landry Jones), a fellow addict who is only interested in his next fix. When she offers to commit suicide to prove her love, he encourages her to make good on the threat. She survives and is soon back on the streets, hanging with a motley gang of drug fiends, drunks and losers, led by dealer-user Mike (Buddy Duress, apparently a legendary street character himself). Then it’s the agonizingly repetitive life of getting high, searching for the next fix, getting high again and on and on.
The Safdies make this material profoundly compelling. Using a visual style that echoes the quasi-neo-realist drug movies of the early ’70s (think “Panic in Needle Park” but with even less gloss), but without recourse to hand-held camera; they rely instead on long lenses and static set-ups, which give the film a distanced, occasionally hallucinatory look. And they find a striking balance that eschews both voyeurism and preaching. There are a few moments of dark humor, as in the scene in which an oddly supportive chasid offers Harley money so that she can stay high; she replies quizzically, “I’m not Jewish or anything.”
But mostly this is a bleak world in which a recurring scene of Harley and Ilya embracing in extreme close-up is so ambiguous that one cannot tell whether they are making love or trying to strangle one another. Such is the chilling reality that the film captures so adroitly.
The 52nd Annual New York Film Festival opens Friday, Sept. 26 and runs through Oct. 12. Screenings will take place at Alice Tully Hall, Walter Reade Theater, Elinor Munroe Bunin Film Center (all at Lincoln Center). For details of the schedule and venues, go to www.filmlinc.com/nyff2014.
____________________________
Enjoy the read, and Shana Tova to you and your family from ours at The Jewish
Week. May it be a sweet, healthy and fulfilling year for us all, personally and
collectively,
Gary Rosenblatt
P.S. Please check out the newest version of our
website faster and easier to navigate and read for breaking
stories, videos and exclusive blogs, op-eds and features.Gary Rosenblatt
http://www.thejewishweek.com/
____________________________
|
Between the Lines
- Gary Rosenblatt
|
|
GARY ROSENBLATT
An Inconvenient Truth
Gauging global threats, from climate change to the enemies of Israel and the West.
Gary Rosenblatt
Editor and Publisher
Imagine that it was far easier for progressive Jewish organizations and synagogues to attract young Jews to participate in Sunday’s People’s Climate March than, say, attend a rally in support of Israel or come to synagogue on the High Holy Days.
It’s just an observation, not a value judgment, and I can’t prove it, but that’s the sense I have, based on conversations with people across the generations. And I think it bears exploring why that is and what it portends for our Jewish future.
The Climate March surely had a compelling cause, voicing a universal concern about the survival of our planet. It’s an issue that transcends race, politics (mostly), religion, geography, gender, socioeconomic status, and more. There was power in the sheer numbers of attendees here in New York City on Sunday — somewhere between 100,000 and 300,000, according to estimates — a procession that was part celebration, with music and banners and floats, and part deadly serious. Most scientists agree that if carbon emissions are not limited significantly, the forces of nature will punish us for our refusal to accept reality with cataclysmic events, including floods and earthquakes.
How fascinating that the high dramatic point of the vast rally here was not a rousing speech but a moment of silence followed by a full minute of loud, sustained noise. According to The New York Times report, “There were drumbeats and the blaring of horns, but mostly it was generated by people’s whoops and screams.”
I was reminded of the blowing of the shofar as the high point of Rosh HaShanah services. It, too, is a call to action, a recognition of the majesty of the moment — an annual review on high of our actions here on earth — and a call to service. In Jewish tradition, it is the service not only to our Creator but to our fellow man, a reminder to treat each person as having been created in the image of God.
Actually, it goes further than that. Judaism views man as God’s stewards over the planet. We are responsible to maintain the earth, its environment and creatures, a concept going back to the Bible. There are prohibitions against destroying fruit trees and mandates for allowing one’s animals to rest each week and for the land itself to lie fallow every seven years. (This new year, 5775, is the Sabbatical Year, the year of Shmittah, when the land of Israel shall have “a complete rest.”)
One wonders how many Jews committed to protecting the environment realize that these values are rooted in their own religious tradition. Perhaps if we did a better job of educating our children about the relevance of Judaism today, as a matter of faith, heritage and morality, we might be more successful in our call for them to join us in the synagogue on the holiest days of the year.
One message those who do attend services this Rosh HaShanah and Yom Kippur will hear from the pulpit — more so, it seems, than in recent years, according to a number of rabbis interviewed — is the RELEVANCE OF ANOTHER GLOBAL MATTER, THE need to support the State of Israel as a religious, ethical and strategic imperative. Rabbi Andy Bachman, a highly respected voice for progressive Judaism, signaled the seriousness of Israel’s plight when he told us recently that his message to congregants this High Holy Day season — his last as spiritual leader of Congregation Beth Elohim in Park Slope, Brooklyn — will be: “Don’t abandon Israel.” (See “Bachman’s Parting Shot At Progressives On Israel,” Sept. 5.)
He explained that having witnessed in Israel this summer the effects of the Hamas war, in addition to the rise of ISIS and Islamic militants in Syria, Iraq, and Lebanon, funded by Iran, he concluded that the violent aggression is “all interconnected.” He said that “Israel is at the front lines of a conflict that will affect us for the next 100 years, so we’d better get used to it.”
Let’s hope his message hits home and that and more young people, committed as they should be to universalist ideals and recognizing the need to counter environmental threats, appreciate as well the very real threat to Western civilization of Islamic militants whose goal is to destroy us and our way of life.
Somehow the latter effort is seen as less politically correct, but both are vitally important.
Global warming, if not checked, can cause great damage over the next several decades. But the catastrophic effects of unchecked militant groups now wreaking havoc in the Middle East could come much sooner. In both cases what’s needed is the political will to identify and confront the danger at hand. Are we up to the task?
Gary@jewishweek.org
|
|
|
The Jewish Week
1501 Broadway, Suite 505
New York, New York 10036 United States
____________________________
No comments:
Post a Comment