Russian-Jewish Literature Research Articles

To the Holy Land and Back: The Opposition of Two Zions in Russian-Jewish Literature of the 1930s

W roku 1934 rząd radziecki podjął decyzję o utworzeniu Żydowskiego Obwodu Autonomicznego Birobidżan w odległym zakątku Dalekiego Wschodu. Ogólna koncepcja ŻOA nawiązywała zarówno do propagandy radzieckiej, jak i szerzonej w Palestynie przez osadników żydowskich. Pisarzom żydowskim w ZSRR władze nieoczekiwanie zezwoliły wówczas na tworzenie tekstów promujących i rozwijających tematykę żydowską, jak również opisujących żydowskich osadników w Palestynie. Spośród wszystkich utworów poświęconych zestawieniu ŻOA i Palestyny na wyróżnienie zasługuje powieść Siemiona Götha i pamiętniki Marka Egarta — jedyne beletryzowane biografie dotyczące Palestyny w języku rosyjskim. Artykuł ma na celu zbadanie obecności i interpretacji palestyńskiego projektu w literaturze rosyjskiej lat 30. ubiegłego stulecia, analizę czynników ideologicznych i kulturowych, które przyczyniły się do powstania wspomnianych utworów oraz uzasadnienie ich znaczenia dla historii kultury Żydów radzieckich.

Lev Levanda, Russian Jewish Literature, and Literary Madness in 1880s Russia

This article attempts to reassess the last years of the writer Lev Levanda's life and work in order to consider new paradigms for understanding the influence of Russia's first pogroms (1881–82) on Jewish individuals. Conventionally, studies of the pogroms deal with the macro-picture: How did the Jewish people react? This research investigates the response of one person, Levanda, who previously tethered himself ideologically to the idea of integration in Russia. After 1882, he found himself without an ideal and mission. He flirted with several movements, including Ḥibbat Tsiyyon, but could not find a positive solution and consolation to his disappointments. The pogroms apparently contributed to the mental illness that killed him.

Odessa City Spaces in Literature: «Potemkin Days» by Karmen, Jabotinsky and Chukovsky

In the revolutionary year 1905, Odessa became an area of violence in the tension of social, religious and cultural upheaval. In this year there were strikes, escalations of revolutional mood, a fire in the port after the arrival of the battleship «Knjaz´ Potemkin-Tavričeskij» («Potemkin») in the night of June 14-15. Arrival of the rebellious battleship was a significant event not only for the city of Odessa and the Russian revolution, but also for the history of the fate of Jews of the early 20th century. This was the first armed insurrection in the course of the revolution, which moved Odessa and its social, geographical and semiotic city spaces. The «Potemkin days» entered the history of the city of Odessa mainly through the periodicals of that time but also through the Russian-Jewish literature such as Lazar Karmen’s story «Potemkin Days» (1907), Korney Chukovsky’s essay «1905, June» (1958) and Vladimir Jabotinsky’s novel «The Five» (1936). These works depict not only the resulting collective violence but also its semiotic and social spaces in the city. Up until now, this field has not been investigated in any historical, cultural or literary research. The focus of this paper is to analyse geographical, social and symbolic city spaces in Odessa with the help of the space theories by Jury Lotman and Michel de Certeau. Both scholars work with the definitions of the city, the place and the space, which are significant for the selected literate works about Odessa in 1905. The analysis will show not only the ambivalence, mobility and variability of city spaces, but also the narrators expectations and thus the fate of Jews in Odessa and the perspectives in the historical processes for them — assimilation or emigration.

Problems in the Study of Russian Jewish Literature

Problems in the Study of Russian Jewish Literature

Mimikry und jüdische Identität(en) in der zeitgenössischen polnisch- und russisch-jüdischen Literatur

Abstract This article considers the phenomenon of mimicry as dealt with in contemporary Polish-Jewish and Russian-Jewish literature. Due to the massive social, religious and political marginalisation of Jews in the 20th century, mimicry once again became widespread among Eastern European Jews over this period as a special means of ethnic and cultural assimilation, dissimulation and deception. The effects of mimicry on the identity of Jews, often long after the end of the Holocaust, or more recently the fall of the communist dictatorships, are reflected in texts by Eastern European Jewish authors. The article considers mimicry as a complex-laden strategy that gives contemporary relevance once again to the problems of the socially constructed “Jewish body”, and ancient historical phenomena such as European crypto-Judaism.

The Jewish persona in the European imagination: a case of Russian literature

This book proposes that the idea of the Jews in European cultures has little to do with actual Jews, but rather is derived from the conception of Jews as Christianity's paradigmatic Other, eternally reenacting their morally ambiguous New Testament role as the Christ-bearing and -killing chosen people of God. Through new readings of canonical Russian literary texts by Gogol, Turgenev, Chekhov, Babel, and others, the author argues that these European writers-Christian, secular, and Jewish-based their representation of Jews on the Christian exegetical tradition of anti-Judaism. Indeed, Livak disputes the classification of some writers as belonging to Jewish arguing that such an approach obscures these writers' debt to European literary traditions and their ambivalence about their Jewishness. This work seeks to move the study of Russian literature, and Russian-Jewish literature in particular, down a new path. It will stir up controversy around Christian-Jewish cultural interaction; the representation of otherness in European arts and folklore; modern experience; and Russian literature and culture.

Israel and the Concept of Homeland in Russian Jewish Literature after 1970

Israel and the Concept of Homeland in Russian Jewish Literature after 1970

Tolstoy: A Guide for the Perplexed by Jeff Love (review)

REVIEWS 709 contemporary Jewishlife(compareAnna P. Ronell, 'Some Thoughtson Russian-Language IsraeliFiction:Introducing Dina Rubina', Proofiexts, 26, 2008, 2, pp. 197-231).Althoughthe Union of Russian-Language Writers, founded inIsraelin 1971, publishes several literary periodicals, Henétyi argues that'Israeliliterature written in Russianis an altogether different, peculiar phenomenon withlittleawarenessoftheone-time Russian-Jewish literature investigated inthisbook'.In other words,sheisreadytofindaffinity between Lev Levanda,Vladimir Jabotinsky and Friedrich Gorenstein, butcannotfind a place in thisgroupforDina Rubina. Some of Zsuzsa Henétyi'sstatements are inaccurate.It is incorrect, forinstance,to statethatin the 1920s'the word "Jewish" itself began to be treatedas taboo due to theincreasingly sharpcontradiction betweenthe slogansofSocialismand theanti-Semitism characterizing theSovietUnion, and thefearfollowing from thatcontradiction' (p. 178).Especially sincep. 175 carries theinformation abouthundreds ofYiddishschoolsandseveral publishinghouses .The bibliographic apparatusofIn a Maelstrom appearssometimes as a randomcollection ofpublications thathappenedto be on theauthor's bookshelf. Thus, outdatedsources on Birobidzhan(Chimen Abramsky's articles c. 1970s)and a student workbyE. Shkol'nikova on theSovietshtetl introducethe reader to erroneousinformation about the year ofJewish resettlement to theFar East and thenumberofSovietYiddishnewspapers. MaximVinaveris a grandname foranyhistorian ofJewishpoliticallifein lateimperialRussiabut,accordingto Zsuzsa Henétyi, his 'name is familiar from theautobiography ofMarc Chagall' (p. 119). Allinall,readers mayfind useful separatevignettes devotedtosuchwriters as Yakov Rombro, AleksandrKipen, Semyon Hekht and Lev Lunts. However,In a Maelstrom is byno meansthe history ofRussian-Jewish prose. Skirball Department ofHebrewandJudaicStudies New YorkUniversity G. ESTRAIKH Love,Jeff. Tolstoy: A Guide forthe Perplexed. Continuum, LondonandNewYork, 2008. ix + 178pp. Notes.Bibliography. Further reading.Index.£12.99 (paperback). Is itpossibleto achievea definitive understanding ofLev Tolstoi?Of all the 'accursedquestions' saidtobesetRussianliterary andphilosophical activity of thelasttwocenturies, thisis surely one ofthemorethorny. Forwe think of Tolstoiandwe think ofcontradiction: novelist, sermonizer; aristocrat, pilgrim; hedgehog,fox.So it is intriguing to finda slimpaperbackthatpurports to offer theperplexedamongus a guidethrough thesecontradictions. The Guides forthePerplexed seriesintendsto offer 'clear, concise and accessible introductions to thinkers, writers and subjectsthatstudents and readerscan findespecially challenging', as thebackcoverstates, and is pitchedat a level above existing introductory or student guideseriesin an acknowledgement 710 SEER, 88, 4, OCTOBER 2010 thatdegreestudyinvolvesgrasping some difficult concepts.This is a tricky briefas one mustnavigatea path thatis bothaccessibleand conceptually demanding as wellas academically rigorous. Love managesto succeedwithhisTolstoivolume,butonlyto an extent. The problemis thatTolstoi'soeuvre is vast,and someofthemostcelebrated critical monographs devotedto himare correspondingly thicktomes.To fit thebrief ofintroductory guide,Love hasofnecessity had tobe selective inhis approachtothematerial. Some ofhisomissions areunderstandable: Tolstoi's plays,forexample,are little knownand Lovejustifiably indicates their lesser impactin Tolstoi'sliterary and philosophical legacybycomparison withhis otherworks.In otherrespects thelacunae can be moreproblematic. Love choosesto followmajority critical strategy and overlooks Resurrection 'simply on practicalgrounds'(p. 5), but thishas the air of a cop-outregarding a textthatdidnotfithischosenschema;forcertainly one ofthemostperplexing aspectsof Tolstoi'sworkis precisely whyResurrection comes in forless scholarly attention and appreciation, and thisshouldhavebeen addressed. The book dividesTolstoi'swritings intofourmain areas: novels,shorter fiction, religioustextsand philosophical texts.Withthe obviousexception of WarandPeaceand AnnaKarenina, thedivision betweennovelsand shorter fiction mightseem a littlearbitrary, but Love cleverly groupsthematerial accordingto Tolstoi'sintensely self-conscious preoccupation withnovelistic form intheformer case and according tofurther concentration ofthemeand narrative experimentation in thelatter.Thus,via thetwogreatnovelsplus TheCossacks andHadjiMur at,Love explores Tolstoi'soverriding questfortruth ina mediumfundamentally concerned withdeception. Then TheDeath ofIvan Ilyich, TheKreutzer Sonata,How MuchLandDoes a Man Need?and MasterandMan takeus through death,sex,eviland inequality, as an orientation towards the conceptsofconcernin thereligious and philosophical texts. The chapteron thenovelsis impressive in itsdepthand clarity and offers manynewinsights, particularly on thetrajectory ofthecharacter ofLevin.Buthereinafter Love's study beginsto showthestrain imposedbytheseries'aims.The subsequent chapters are shorter and Love's explanations briefer, onlyjust beginning to offer illumination beforehe moveson to thenexttextforanalysis, so that thereadercan onlyturnto therecommended further readingforanswers to questions barelyexplored.As an intermediary betweenTolstoi'swriting and themore 'academic' criticalcanon, I feelthatLove's volumeis somewhat lacking here.It is as ifitsuffers from, as Love allegesofA Confession, 'a brevity that seeks to say in a paragraphwhat entirebooks are unable to say' (P-"9)Whatis ,on theotherhand,particularly interesting aboutLove's approach is thatas he foregrounds Tolstoi'sdistrust ofnarrative and hisawarenessof bothitstrapsand itspossibilities, he makespossiblea 'postmodern' reading ofTolstoi.Love signalsin a notethathe foresees complaints aboutthisand justifies hisdiscussion oftheroleoftheauthorwithreference toWittgenstein (p. 156).However,I see no reasonwhya postmodern takeon Tolstoishould notyielda valuablelineofinquiry, given, justtocitebutone example,Milan Kundera's(whomLove frequently quotes)intertextual use ofAnna Karenina in REVIEWS 71I hisnovelTheUnbearable Lightness ofBeing. It...

In a Maelstrom: The History of Russian-Jewish Prose (1860-1940) by Zsuzsa Hen�tyi (review)

SEER, Vol.88, No. 4, October 2010 Reviews Henétyi,Zsuzsa. In a Maelstrom: TheHistory ofRussian-Jewish Prose(1860-1940). CEU Press,Budapestand New York,2008.xv + 316pp. Notes.Biographiesofauthors . Appendix.Bibliography. Index.£21.95. In thenineteenth century, Russification through educationwas partof the imperial government's endeavours to integrate theJewsintoan ideologically and economically acceptablemainstream. WhileYiddishremainedthemain or evenonlylanguageofthemajority ofRussia'sJewish population, Russian was increasingly spokenbythemodernized Jews,and someofthememerged as Russian literati.The AmericanYiddish and EnglishwriterAbraham Cahan, himself a man ofRussianculture, remembered seeingin Vilna Lev Levanda,a pioneerRussian-Jewish author, whose'writings constituted a small literary worldwhichwas neither RussiannorJewish'(TheEducation of Abraham Cahan, Philadelphia, PA, 1969,p. 135).Initially, suchauthorswereregarded as a phenomenon ofJewishliterature andjournalism, buttheirvoicebegan increasingly to be heard also in non-Jewish Russian intellectual circles.In 1908,theroleofJewsintheRussianworldofletters waswidely and heatedly discussed in thepress,following a provocative articleby KorneiChukovskii (see Evgeniia Ivanova, Chukovskii i ^habotinskii: Istoriiavzaimootnoshenii v tekstakh i kommentariiakh, Moscow/Jerusalem, 2005). The 1922book, Russko-evreiskaia literatura, byVasiliiL'vov-Rogachevskii, laid thegroundwork forattempts to describethe Jewish presence in Russian literature. Accordingto thisschool of thought, onlyauthorsofJewishoriginqualifiedfora place in RussianJewish sub-literature. On theotherhand,therearescholars whoquestionthe elimination ofnon-Jewish authors' works with Jewish content (see,e.g.,Dora Rytman,'Russian-Jewish Literatureas a Mirrorof the Fate of Russian Jewry:The Special Case of Ilya Ehrenburg',unpublishedPhD, Brown University, 1993). ZsuzsaHenétyi tries to squarethecirclebyconcentrating on thehistory of Russian-Jewish prose. In reality, however, sheisinterested inexclusively Jewish (which'maysignify religious, national and cultural identity', p. 32)authors whose writings manifest their Jewishness. As a result, her corpusdoes notinclude stories andnovelsbysuch'inconsistent' Jewsas Il'ia Ehrenburg, VasiliiGrossman ,David Khait,Aleksandra Brushtein and Anatolii Rybakov, letalonethe half-Jewish AleksandrMeilakhs (Melikhov)and the non-Jewish Anatolii Kuznetsovand I. Grekova. It is hard to understand the past tensein Henétyi'scharacterization of Grigory Kanovichwho (longlifeto him!)continues tobe activein literature: 'The last Russian-Jewish writer,or more exactlythe last who may be regarded as such(a Lithuanian Jewwriting inRussian)wasprobably Grigorii Kanovich,who emigrated to Israelin 1993,but he wroteexclusively about subjectsof the past, a bygoneworld' (p. 220). Kanovich'smissionas the 'lastRussian-Jewish writer' also remains unclear.Forinstance, Dina Rubina, who moved to Israel in 1990,writesboth about the bygoneSoviet and REVIEWS 709 contemporary Jewishlife(compareAnna P. Ronell, 'Some Thoughtson Russian-Language IsraeliFiction:Introducing Dina Rubina', Proofiexts, 26, 2008, 2, pp. 197-231).Althoughthe Union of Russian-Language Writers, founded inIsraelin 1971, publishes several literary periodicals, Henétyi argues that'Israeliliterature written in Russianis an altogether different, peculiar phenomenon withlittleawarenessoftheone-time Russian-Jewish literature investigated inthisbook'.In other words,sheisreadytofindaffinity between Lev Levanda,Vladimir Jabotinsky and Friedrich Gorenstein, butcannotfind a place in thisgroupforDina Rubina. Some of Zsuzsa Henétyi'sstatements are inaccurate.It is incorrect, forinstance,to statethatin the 1920s'the word "Jewish" itself began to be treatedas taboo due to theincreasingly sharpcontradiction betweenthe slogansofSocialismand theanti-Semitism characterizing theSovietUnion, and thefearfollowing from thatcontradiction' (p. 178).Especially sincep. 175 carries theinformation abouthundreds ofYiddishschoolsandseveral publishinghouses .The bibliographic apparatusofIn a Maelstrom appearssometimes as a randomcollection ofpublications thathappenedto be on theauthor's bookshelf. Thus, outdatedsources on Birobidzhan(Chimen Abramsky's articles c. 1970s)and a student workbyE. Shkol'nikova on theSovietshtetl introducethe reader to erroneousinformation about the year ofJewish resettlement to theFar East and thenumberofSovietYiddishnewspapers. MaximVinaveris a grandname foranyhistorian ofJewishpoliticallifein lateimperialRussiabut,accordingto Zsuzsa Henétyi, his 'name is familiar from theautobiography ofMarc Chagall' (p. 119). Allinall,readers mayfind useful separatevignettes devotedtosuchwriters as Yakov Rombro, AleksandrKipen, Semyon Hekht and Lev Lunts. However,In a Maelstrom is byno meansthe history ofRussian-Jewish prose. Skirball Department ofHebrewandJudaicStudies New YorkUniversity G. ESTRAIKH Love,Jeff. Tolstoy: A Guide forthe Perplexed. Continuum, LondonandNewYork, 2008. ix + 178pp. Notes.Bibliography. Further reading.Index.£12.99 (paperback). Is itpossibleto achievea definitive understanding ofLev Tolstoi?Of all the 'accursedquestions' saidtobesetRussianliterary andphilosophical activity of thelasttwocenturies, thisis surely one ofthemorethorny. Forwe think of Tolstoiandwe think ofcontradiction: novelist, sermonizer; aristocrat, pilgrim; hedgehog,fox.So it is intriguing to finda slimpaperbackthatpurports to offer theperplexedamongus a guidethrough thesecontradictions. The Guides forthePerplexed seriesintendsto offer 'clear, concise and accessible introductions to thinkers, writers and subjectsthatstudents and readerscan findespecially challenging', as thebackcoverstates, and is pitchedat a level above existing introductory or student guideseriesin an acknowledgement ...

An Anthology of Jewish-Russian Literature: Two Centuries of Dual Identity in Prose and Poetry (review)

An Anthology of Jewish-Russian Literature: Two Centuries of Dual Identity in Prose and Poetry, edited by Maxim D. Shrayer. Armonk, NY: M. E. Sharpe, 2007. 2 vols., 1278 pp. $225.00. As a reader of Russian-Jewish literature, I have to welcome Maxim Shrayer's anthology, because there are few resources on the subject. But I have reservations that I will raise in the course of this review. The anthology consists of two volumes and features over a hundred writers, some well known and others less so. Consisting of eleven sections, the anthology groups together authors who wrote at the same time. In each section the editor provides an introduction and gives a short biographical sketch of each author. Because of the large number of authors, the original prose stories are often abridged, which makes them less valuable for scholars, but perhaps still useful for the classroom. The working definition that Professor Shrayer uses for the selection of authors in the volume is this: Any Russian-language writer of Jewish origin for whom the question of Jewish identity is, on some level, (p. xxx). Borrowing this formulation from Alice Stone Nakhimovsky, Shrayer applies it to some writers for whom it does not work well. For example, while the definition leads Nakhimovsky to write about Vladimir Jabotinsky, Isaac Babel, and Felix Roziner, Professor Shrayer features a long list of writers of Jewish background for whom Jewish identity is hardly compelling. This is particularly true for writers in the former Soviet and Post-Soviet Russia who either purposely drew attention away from their ethnicity or did not consider it a significant fact of their biography. Such authors in the volume as Joseph Brodsky, Naum Korzhavin, YuIy Daniel, Vassily Aksyonov, Nadezhda Mandelstam, Yury Trifonov, Evgeny Reyn, Michael Kreps, Sergei Dovlatov, Anatoly Nayman, Ludmila Ulitskaia, Mikhail Zhvanetsky, Ilya Kutik, and Yuri Leving cannot be said to have a compelling attitude toward their Jewish identity. They are, for better or worse, Russian authors. The issue of definition is central because it reflects the editor's conception of Jewish identity and Jewish-Russian literature (as he uniquely calls it; the conventional name is Russian-Jewish literature). Ordinarily one defines a RussianJewish writer according to the author's involvement with Jewish life, whether in politics, culture, or society. Here authence, orientation, and context matter. In their discussions about who belongs to Russian-Jewish literature, experts like Vladimir Jabotinsky and Shimon Markish ask directly whether this literature is important to the Jewish people and to Jews for whom Jewish life and culture is central to their consciousness. This is why most scholars - including the ones Professor Shrayer praises in his introduction - do not consider Boris Pasternak or Osip Mandelshtam authors of Russian-Jewish literature. These authors were not occupied with Jewish life and the problems of the Jewish world even if they were born Jews and at times wrote on Jewish themes. To decide if an author should be in an anthology of Russian -Jewish literature, one should ask, what is the context, to which literary world, political orientation, and social context is the author speaking? Jewish background or the so-called piatyi punkt (ethnicity) in one's passport is not the determining factor. For example, there are good reasons why no one calls Walter Benjamin a writer of German -Jewish literature, and why everyone knows that Gershom Sholem is a Get man-Jewish writer. It is because, while both are Jewish and even deal at times with Jewish issues, one, Sholem, is occupied with Jewish problems in a Jewish context, while the other has devoted himself to German literature and cosmopolitanism. …

Jewish Book Publishing Today in the Countries of the Former USSR

SUMMARY This article discusses Jewish book publishing in most of the Soviet Union's successor states after 1990. All publications on Jewish history, culture, traditions, and religion (Judaism) are included under this rubric. In addition to scholarly and educational publications, fiction translated from Yiddish and Hebrew, and “Russian-Jewish literature” are also included. The author provides statistics and discusses basic themes, linguistic issues, and problems encountered in the post-Soviet states. The article lists different publishers and organizations involved in Jewish book publishing.

Russian-Jewish Literature and Identity: Jabotinsky, Babel, Grossman, Galich, Roziner, Markish

Russian-Jewish Literature and Identity: Jabotinsky, Babel, Grossman, Galich, Roziner, Markish

Alice Stone Nakhimovsky. Russian Jewish Literature and Identity. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1991. xiv, 215 pp.

Alice Stone Nakhimovsky. Russian Jewish Literature and Identity. Baltimore: The John Hopkins University Press, 1991. xiv, 215 pp.

Russian-Jewish Literature and Identity: Jabotinsky, Babel, Grossman, Galich, Roziner, Markish

Russian-Jewish Literature and Identity: Jabotinsky, Babel, Grossman, Galich, Roziner, Markish

A History of Russian Jewish Literature. By V. Lvov-Rogachevsky. Edited and translated by Arthur Levin. Essay by B. Gorev. Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1979. 213 pp. Photographs. $14.00, cloth. $4.95, paper.

An abstract is not available for this content so a preview has been provided. Please use the Get access link above for information on how to access this content.

La littérature russo-juive et Isaak Babel'

Simon Markiš, The Russian-Jewish literature and Isaak Babel'. The author of the present article establishes that the fact of Babel's belonging to Jewish culture played a more important and profound part than generally admitted. He explains by Babel's double cultural appurtenance and by the invincible antinomies that resulted therefrom, the origin of the principal literary methods of this writer and his characteristic pathos. Starting with Babel', he endeavours to specify the place of non-Russian cultures of Russian expression in the Soviet literature and their contribution to same. Generally speaking this study stresses the methodological problem of the participation of a specifically Jewish culture to national literatures.