Elon begins with Moses Mendelssohn (1729-1786), whom he describes as barefoot, terribly impoverished, frail, sickly and hunchbacked yet with a mind that powers his long walk from Dessau to Berlin (about 83 miles) and with a beautiful face. By beginning this way, what bias or prejudice or scene does Elon present to the reader about German Jewish life, culture, history and engagement? What is gained by such a portrayal of Mendelssohn as both the representative of -all- German Jewry and an anomalous exemplar of exceptionalism? Again, to the comments....
Is it possible to even look at "modern" Jewish German History (post-Mendelssohn) without thinking about Nazism? In the introduction, Elon doesn't seem able to -- almost every page contains some reference to Nazism or Hitler.
ReplyDeleteI think that Elon is setting up Mendelssohn to epitomize the inherent conflict between Jew/German that maintains until 1933. By opening with a portrayal of Mendelssohn, Elon seems to be taking the great Jewish symbol of the Enlightenment and almost asking his reader to have Mendelssohn's Jewish/German divide in our mind constantly. He even asks us to think about The Golden Age of Spain -- the flourishing time leading to the Inquisition.
(Even Elon's discussion of the gate for swine and Jews seems to contain Holocaust symbolism.) Or, maybe, the issue is me and I'm over analyzing with post-WWII goggles. Sometimes a Cigar is just a Cigar.
In the History of Reform Judaism Class with Dr. Balin, we certainly were able to look at 19th Century Reform Judaism without being consumed with Nazism.
Just a thought --
Jon Prosnit
Jack--I agree with you that it can be tempting (too tempting?) to always be looking toward the Shoah when examining Jewish/German history.
ReplyDeleteHowever, it strikes me that the Shoah is so big, so looming, that it reaches backwards to indelibly leave its mark on German / Jewish history.
Much as Geiger / Holdheim saw modernity as THE dividing line in history, I would argue that the Shoah serves for us today as the dividing line for post-modernity.
The Shoah is when our belief in the unstoppable progress of humanity died, and as such I'm not sure it is possible for us to escape it's clutches when examining the society (at any time --but particularly in the historical period directly preceding it) that produced it.
I'm not saying that this is right, or allows us to better understand Germany Jewry in the 19th / early 20th centuries....just saying that I'm not convinced it is possible to do otherwise.
As Jews, the Holocaust is part of our "cultural backdrop" whether we like it or not. It is like a bad dream -- no matter how much we try to forget what happened, it is pervasive throughout modern Jewish history, thought and theology.
ReplyDeleteDaniel I agree with you to a certain extent that the Holocaust serves as an important dividing line but certainly not the line between modernity and post-modernity. I should say that I am not even sure "post-modernity" even exists. (Perhaps we are so post-modern that we are really modern again. Though this is another conversation for another time).
If we as Jews can only see modernity through the lens of the Holocaust, then I think we will miss the richness of modern Judaism. The Holocaust is just another (albeit horrifying) event in modernity. I am sure that we connect to the Holocaust just like the Jews who fled after the destruction of the Temple(s). We are just so close to the Holocaust.
Mendelssohn, as presented by Elon, appears to be a latter day Jesus walking along the road ushering in an emancipation and enlightenment. Like Paul. he must have seen the "light" along the way. Though with French emancipation happening 1791, I can understand why Mendelssohn is frail and hunchbacked seeing as Germany was not fully emancipated until the 1870's. (Sorry for the "snarky" humor!)
To generalize... Jews (non-scholarly types) I know my age (49) and older tend to view Judaism almost exclusively through the lens of the Holocaust. At my student pulpit at Pesach Seder I asked for some more things to add to the Dayeinu list and the first thing that was said was, "The Holocaust." Obviously, they weren't thanking God for it, but it was uppermost in their minds.
ReplyDeleteYounger people tend not to. They know about it of course, but their attachment to Judaism seems to have more of a basis in joy and celebration. Do other people notice this too - or am I just projecting my hopes?
Jean
I agree that much of this first chapter seems to couch the era of Mendelssohn and this golden age of modern German Jewry in the foreshadowing of the Holocaust. I also get a sense from Elon's description of Mendelssohn that he saw his identity as twofold: both the Enlightened German and the Jew. Later, when Elon talks about Rahel Levin, he highlights the same sort of dichotomy: "She was denied, she was one of the first of a new breed more common later on, always self-conscious, always looking over her shoulder. She was denied, she felt, what was readily granted to the simplest peasant woman - and easy sense of identity". As much as both Mendelssohn and Rahel sought to embrace modern philosophy and culture, there was still this "Jewish" issue to deal with, how to (or how not to) rectify their Jewishness with the ideals of modernity? Mendelssohn, as we know, turned inward and strived to modernized Judaism as a rational religion and bring German language and culture to his fellow Jews. Rahel, a generation later, chooses utter rejection of her Jewishness, as does Mendelssohn's own son. The question is, then, was Mendelssohn truly a representative of all Jews? Was he a successful revolutionary? To be sure, he was revolutionary as a Jew who managed to step out into Western society without giving up his religion. But was his legacy as successful as he was?
ReplyDelete