Uncategorized
Documentary explores the ‘Talmudic’ relationship between writer Robert Caro and his famous longtime editor
(New York Jewish Week) — Bob Gottlieb, who as editor-in-chief of Simon & Schuster, Alfred A. Knopf and The New Yorker ushered into print some of the 20th-century’s most accomplished writers — Nora Ephron, Toni Morrison, Salman Rushdie, John Cheever and Ray Bradbury, to name a few — believes editing is a service job, one that should go unnoticed by the reader.
And yet, it is the relationship between editor and writer that his daughter Lizzie Gottlieb, a documentary filmmaker, explores in her latest film, “Turn Every Page: The Adventures of Robert Caro and Robert Gottlieb,” which premiered at the Tribeca Film Festival in 2022 and is now screening at theaters across the country.
Lizzie’s documentary sets out to explore the sometimes tense but ultimately caring relationship between her father, Bob, and one of his longest running authors, Robert Caro, who over the course of 50 years has produced “only” five major books: “The Power Broker,” a classic biography of urban planner Robert Moses, and four volumes of “The Years of Lyndon B. Johnson.”
Jews born and raised in Manhattan, Caro and Gottlieb have worked together since Gottlieb helped cut 350,000 words out of the first draft of “The Power Broker,” bringing it down to a book that ultimately ran 1,338 pages when it was published in 1974.
The thing they squabble over most often? Semicolons, still. Or, maybe, Caro’s overuse of the word “looms.”
The film, seven years in the making, takes on the ways Moses shaped New York City, the mysteries of LBJ’s political power, the sausage-making of bestselling books and the idiosyncrasies of two workaholics. It is also a story of two now elderly men — Caro is 87, Gottlieb is 91 — in what Bob Gottlieb calls an “actuarial” contest to finish Caro’s highly anticipated fifth volume of his Johnson biography.
“My dad and I are very close. We’re in constant contact with each other. If something funny happens, I call my dad. If something sad or confusing happens, I’ll call him. We’re just in each other’s lives all the time, so I didn’t feel that there was a secret I needed to uncover or something unexamined in our relationship,” said director Lizzie Gottlieb, who also teaches documentary filmmaking at the New York Film Academy.
“But the one thing I really knew nothing about in his life was his relationship with Bob Caro,” she said. “Because it was so different from anything else, and it was so kind of private. So really, the whole movie is the process of me understanding something that I didn’t understand before.”
The New York Jewish Week recently caught up with Gottlieb to talk about the making of the film, what it was like growing up in a high-profile family and how Jewishness impacts the work of the two men.
This interview has been lightly edited for length and clarity.
Lizzie Gottlieb is a documentary filmmaker who previously directed “Today’s Man” (2008) and “Romeo Romeo” (2012).
New York Jewish Week: You’ve been working on this movie for seven years. When did you realize you needed to make this movie and how did it get from start to finish?
For a long time, people would say to me, “You should make a film about your father.” I have an incredible father. He’s done a lot of great things. He’s interesting and funny. But I just thought, a film whose message is “look how great my dad is” is not a movie that anybody wants to see.
And then my father was given some award and Bob Caro was presenting the award. Bob Caro gave a speech about working with my dad over what was then 45 years. He talked about how he needs him, and he respects him and how they’re so productive. Then he started talking about their arguments. Somebody in the audience asked what they fought about and he said, “We have very different feelings about the semicolon.” Everybody erupted into laughs and it just hit me like a bolt of lightning. I thought, “This is the movie, this is the story.”
I wanted a story that had forward momentum and had something big at stake. A film about two men in their 60s who had done a lot of great stuff is not that interesting. But a film about two men who are hovering around 90 and are still in it, and engaged in their work, who have a dedication and passion and are in a race against time to finish their life’s work, felt really, really compelling to me.
People say, “Are you sure you should be wasting [Caro’s] time with a movie? He needs to be writing.” My producer Jen Small said we should put on the poster, “No Lyndon Johnson books were harmed in the making of this film.”
Do you think you had a perspective that made you the best person to try and talk about their relationship and document it, or was it challenging to make the leap of them being willing to open up to you?
There was definitely a pursuit of them. I called my father and I was like, “I have the best idea ever. I’m going to make a film about you and Robert Caro.” He said, “No way. Absolutely not. Never. It would not be good for our relationship.”
I just kept pestering and pestering and pestering him. Finally, he said I could call Bob Caro but he would say no and of course Bob Caro did initially say no. Then he said that he’d seen another film of mine and I could come and speak to him. Eventually, Caro said, “I’ve never seen a film about a writer and an editor, and I think this could be meaningful. I don’t think anyone’s ever seen this before.” So he let me start, but he had this kind of hilarious condition, which was that he didn’t want to ever appear in the same room as my father. That seemed funny and a little maddening and sort of endearing. It also seemed like an irresistible challenge to try to make a buddy film where they don’t appear in the same room as each other. A woman came to a screening recently and she said, “It’s a love story, and they don’t get together until the last scene.”
They both say that somehow the making of this movie has brought them closer together and that they have developed a real friendship after 50 years. Maybe just having to articulate what their relationship has meant to each other has made them appreciate it more.
What was it like to grow up in your household, with your father as this major editor and your mother (actress Maria Tucci) on Broadway?
I grew up in a really incredible household. My mother’s an actress, my father’s a publisher and editor. Our house was this kind of vibrant, boisterous household that was always filled with eccentric, incredible people — actors and writers. My dad’s writers would come for dinner and then my mother would go off and do a play on Broadway and then come back at midnight and make another dinner. It was incredible. So I feel that both of their work was kind of integrated into our life and into our family. All of his writers were really like family members, except for Bob Caro, who never came over and who I never met. I think that there’s something particular and peculiar about their relationship that they needed to stay apart and only come together over work. I guess that was something that intrigued me and that’s part of why I wanted to make the movie.
“Turn Every Page: The Adventures of Robert Caro and Robert Gottlieb” (Courtesy Tribeca Film Festival)
The Jewishness in the film is a bit more implicit, though you discuss it when talking about their upbringings. How do you think their Jewish identities have impacted their work?
I don’t want to presume to speak for either of them about their Jewishness. I know they both very strongly identify as New York Jews, which probably means something slightly different to each of them, but I think it’s essential to their definitions of themselves. Their humor may be particularly Jewish as well. David Remnick uses a word at the end of the movie, where he says Caro needs to have “sitzfleisch” in order to finish the book. It’s this Yiddish [and German] word that means the ability to sit for long, long periods of time and apply yourself to something. I think that that is something that these two guys have: It’s almost a Talmudic focus on their craft, and without that they wouldn’t be who they are. So to the extent that that’s a Jewish quality, I think that’s essential to their being, to their achievements. There’s something like a Talmudic scholar in going over all these things, the industriousness and the empathy as well, this sort of looking at a thing from all sides and dedicating yourself to this pursuit.
Bonus question: You briefly show the various eccentric collections your dad has, including plastic handbags and kitschy Israeli record albums from the ’60s and ’70s. What is that about?
Yes, he has a lot of collections. He also has a collection of macramé owls. There are many that are not in the movie. Maybe that’s a Talmudic thing as well, like a deep dive into whatever it is that is interesting to him. He says that every subject gets more interesting the deeper you get into it. When something strikes him as charming or funny or curious, he goes all the way with it. My mother doesn’t love them. There’s a little bit of a power struggle there, but he wins. You grow up with something and you don’t really think about it. But I knew I had to find a way to put this in the movie. People kept saying it’s irrelevant, it’s to the side, but I knew I had to because it’s so weird and says so much about him.
—
The post Documentary explores the ‘Talmudic’ relationship between writer Robert Caro and his famous longtime editor appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Gal Gadot’s $1 Million Genesis Prize to Be Doubled to Help Israelis With Trauma Post-Oct. 7
Actor Gal Gadot gestures during the unveiling ceremony for her star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame in Los Angeles, California, US, March 18, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Mario Anzuoni
The Genesis Prize Foundation (GPF) and the Jewish Funders Network (JFN) launched on Sunday a $2 million matching grant program in honor of 2026 Genesis Prize Laureate Gal Gadot to help Israeli healing with emotional and physical trauma in the aftermath of the deadly terrorist attack in Israel on Oct. 7, 2023, the subsequent Israel-Hamas war, and now the ongoing war with Iran.
The initiative was spearheaded by Gadot, who was announced as the recipient of this year’s $1 million Genesis Prize in November 2025. The Genesis Prize Foundation has committed $1 million to the prize award, and members of JFN and other donors are expected to contribute at least $1 million more through participation in the new matching program.
The $2 million will be given to Israeli NGOs, nonprofits, and professionals who are helping Israelis in their long-term recovery from trauma and mental health issues. Participating NGOs must first secure funding contributions from individual donors or foundations, and can then apply to have those gifts matched by The Genesis Prize Foundation.
“The program will prioritize initiatives that train and develop frontline professionals, strengthen retention, well-being, and resilience among caregivers, expand human capital in mental health and community care, and deploy innovative tools that support and scale professional services,” GPF and JFN announced. “Emphasis will be placed on sustainability and long-term impact rather than short-term interventions.”
“At a time when Israel’s caregivers are stretched beyond capacity, we must ensure that those who are helping others heal receive the support they need,” said JFN President and CEO Andres Spokoiny. “JFN is proud to steward this collaborative effort, and we call on donors and foundations to join us in meeting these critical needs.”
“In this moment, and in honoring Gal Gadot, the most urgent investment we can make is in Israel’s human infrastructure: the therapists, educators, and caregivers who sustain national resilience, helping communities heal from the trauma of Oct. 7 and the ongoing conflict with Iran and Hezbollah,” said Stan Polovets, co-founder and chairman of The Genesis Prize Foundation. “Working with Jewish Funders Network allows us to mobilize philanthropy in a thoughtful, collaborative, and lasting way.”
The annual Genesis Prize is given to individuals “for their professional excellence, significant impact in their fields, and dedication to Jewish values.” Gadot was named this year’s Genesis Prize Laureate in recognition of her strong support and advocacy for her home country of Israel amid the Israel-Hamas war.
“I am humbled to receive the Genesis Prize and to stand alongside the amazing laureates who came before me,” she said last year. “I am a proud Jew and a proud Israeli. I love my country and dedicate this award to the organizations who will help Israel heal and to those incredible people who serve on the front lines of compassion. Israel has endured unimaginable pain. Now we must begin to heal – to rebuild hearts, families, and communities.”
Uncategorized
Harvard’s Jewish Enrollment Drops to Pre-World War II Levels, New Report Shows
Demonstrators take part in an “Emergency Rally: Stand With Palestinians Under Siege in Gaza,” amid the ongoing conflict between Israel and Hamas, at Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, US, Oct. 14, 2023. Photo: REUTERS/Brian Snyder
Jewish undergraduate enrollment at Harvard University has plummeted to lows not seen since the eve of World War II and the Holocaust, falling to just 7 percent, according to a new report issued by the Harvard Jewish Alumni Alliance (HJAA) that describes the statistic as an “anomaly.”
“We want to be direct about what this report does and does not claim,” HJAA said in a statement. “It does not assert that Harvard intentionally discriminates against Jewish applicants. What it finds is something more specific and, we believe, more actionable.”
The group went on to deny that declining Jewish enrollment at Harvard is alone the result of racial preferences in admissions — popularly known as “affirmative action” — which, in the name of “diversity,” affords preferential consideration to applicants whose academic achievement and standardized test scores fall outside the range of the typical elite students who schools like Harvard select for membership in the Ivy League.
In 2023, the US Supreme Court ruled 6-3 that Harvard University’s racial preferences in its admissions policy violated the Constitution for its discriminatory effect on Asian American enrollment.
HJAA found a similar trend occurring at Yale University, which infamously adopted racial preferences under the leadership of President Kingman Brewster in the 1960s, despite growing evidence that the practice created an environment of academic maladjustment and racial division. This led to the creation of segregated programming and amenities for African Americans, as well as a summer remedial program for minority students — PROP (Pre-Orientation Program) — that was eventually rebranded in the late 1990s when its apparent subtext proved unpalatable to a new generation of students.
“Yale added 1,281 undergraduate seats in 2018. Hispanic, Asian, and Black enrollment all grew in absolute terms. Jewish enrollment fell by approximately 256 students,” the group stated. “The report tests seven structural explanations for this divergence, including geographic diversification, socioeconomic targeting, Asian enrollment growth, international expansion, and athletic recruitment, individually and in combination. None of them explains the gap.”
The first Jewish alumni association in the history of Harvard University, HJAA was formed in the fall of 2023 in response to Hamas’s Oct. 7 massacre across southern Israel and the wave of antisemitism around the world that it triggered. The following month, more than 1,200 of its members signed a letter which gave notice to then-Harvard president Claudine Gay that Jewish community members would no longer walk delicately around the college administration when it comes to the issue of campus antisemitism.
The HJAA report came after Harvard last year released a major report on campus antisemitism along with an apology from new campus president Alan Garber which acknowledged that school officials failed in critical ways to address the hatred to which Jewish students were subjected following Hamas’s Oct. 7 atrocities.
Recent political developments have caused some Jewish students affiliated with the Ivy League to temper their criticisms of elite higher education due to concerns that it validates US President Donald Trump’s coupling addressing campus antisemitism with pursuing higher education reform preferred by political conservatives. In pursuing his policy agenda, Trump has cconfiscated billions of dollars of taxpayer-funded research grants from private universities.
Just last month, The Algemeiner covered Harvard University student Sarah Silverman’s scolding Trump during a hearing on campus antisemitism held by the US Commission on Civil Rights. Screaming the entirety of her seven-minute statement, she at one point charged that “policy described as protecting Jewish students did not make me feel protected,” adding, “In a deeply troubling way, I felt blamed. I knew I had done nothing wrong, but when decisions are made in your name without ever speaking to you but are affecting your academic community in extremely negative ways, you begin to worry that others believed you asked for these actions.”
Nonetheless, HJAA is calling on Harvard to hold itself accountable, unfettered by politics and outside commentary.
“What we are asking of Harvard is straightforward: count, audit, and report. Harvard already tracks enrollment by race, gender, income, and first-generation status,” the group said. Its president, Adrian Ashekenazy added, “This report is not an accusation. It is an invitation to build the infrastructure that makes accountability possible.”
Follow Dion J. Pierre @DionJPierre.
Uncategorized
Top Iran Official Larijani Was No ‘Pragmatist,’ His Death Strikes Major Blow to Regime: Analysts
Ali Larijani, top Iranian national security official and former chairman of the parliament of Iran, attends a press conference after meeting with Lebanese Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri in Beirut, Lebanon, Nov. 15, 2024. Photo: REUTERS/Thaier Al-Sudani
Israel’s announcement that it had killed de facto Iranian leader Ali Larijani was cast by some Western analysts on Tuesday as a blow to any remaining chance of a ceasefire, but Israeli officials and Iran watchers pushed back sharply, arguing Larijani was not a pragmatic off-ramp figure but a central architect of the regime’s wartime strategy and internal repression.
Meir Ben-Shabbat, Israel’s former national security adviser, described Larijani’s removal as a significant escalation in the campaign against Iran’s leadership, arguing it further erodes the regime’s ability to function at the highest level.
“It is not merely a symbolic step,” he told The Algemeiner. “Larijani was considered one of the most influential figures in the Islamic regime … shaping Iran’s military and political responses. His elimination intensifies the regime’s disarray.”
The killing will severely impede the regime’s efforts to recover, Ben-Shabbat said, forcing its senior figures to lower their profile even further.
Larijani’s elimination, alongside that of other senior Basij officials, “sends a sharp and clear message to regime opponents and protesters: The opportunity to bring about change is real, perhaps even just around the corner,” Ben-Shabbat said.
Israel said it also killed Gholamreza Soleimani, the head of Iran’s Basij paramilitary force which is affiliated with the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC). The news of both killings was later confirmed by the regime in Tehran.
At the time of his death, Larijani had been overseeing multiple overlapping crises that defined Iran’s wartime posture.
The Iranian hardliner was deeply involved in shaping the country’s response to joint US-Israeli strikes, advocating for a long campaign and widening the conflict across the region, including pressure on Gulf states and maritime routes such as the Strait of Hormuz.
At the same time, Larijani was grappling with fallout from a surge of domestic unrest, which was met with a sweeping crackdown in January, killing tens of thousands of anti-regime protesters.
He was also managing Iran’s nuclear file, including stalled indirect talks with Washington that had already been thrown into disarray by the fighting. He previously played a central role in shepherding the Obama-led 2015 nuclear agreement between Iran and world powers — a deal later abandoned by US President Donald Trump.
Trained in Western philosophy, Larijani had close personal ties to the US, and his daughter, Fatemeh, lived and worked there as a doctor for more than a decade. Earlier on Monday, Larijani referred to the US as the “Great Satan” when he condemned the UAE and other Islamic countries for abandoning Iran.
“You know that America is not loyal and that Israel is your enemy,” Larijani said, arguing that “the unity of the Islamic ummah, if realized with full strength, can guarantee security, progress. and independence for all Islamic countries.”
“Iran continues on the path of resistance against the ‘Great Satan’ and the ‘Little Satan,’” he added, referring to the US and Israel, respectively.
Nevertheless, much of Western media has cast Larijani in more nuanced terms, often describing him as a pragmatic conservative or potential interlocutor with the West who could have played a role in future diplomacy.
The Guardian, citing a Middle East analyst, reported that Larijani was seen as a potential channel for any future diplomacy, someone who could have been tasked with advancing ceasefire discussions or follow-up talks with Washington.
“Larijani would have been the man to get that job done,” the newspaper cited Ellie Geranmayeh, an Iran expert at the European Council on Foreign Relations, as saying. She added that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s focus was on “on blocking Trump’s pathways” to ending the war.
Ron Malley, the former US special envoy for Iran, went further, describing him as “one of the smarter, maybe ‘pragmatic’ members of the leadership,” a figure some diplomats saw as capable of reengaging on nuclear talks.
BBC veteran correspondent John Simpson came under fire for casting Larijani as “clever and reasonable.”
“I’ve met Ali Larijani several times over the years. Yes, he was a top figure in a nasty regime,” Simpson wrote on X. “But he always seemed clever and reasonable – the kind of person you might want to negotiate a peace deal with.”
“Is it a good idea for Israel to take out people like him?” the journalist added.
Sima Shine, head of the Iran program at the Institute for National Security Studies in Tel Aviv, rejected portrayals of Larijani as a pragmatic counterweight within the regime, calling such characterizations “wishful” external projections to find a moderate figure inside the regime who could “take Iran on a different course.” She pointed instead to his record during the regime’s brutal crackdown on protesters earlier this year, saying “he was very much involved in the oppression of the Iranian people in January.”
Larijani was instrumental in reinforcing the regime’s strict religious and social controls, reshaping state broadcasting into a vehicle for official propaganda and targeting any reformist voices.
“He was nominated by [former Supreme Leader Ali] Khamenei to lead this operation not because he was a pragmatist, but because he could be counted on to stand fast and strong vis-à-vis the US and Israel,” she said on a call with reporters on Tuesday.
At the same time, Shine warned against assuming that removing senior figures would translate into a strategic breakthrough. “We’ve never succeeded in toppling a regime,” she said. “One cannot count on elimination as the main tool to a change of regime.”
Iran’s leadership, Shine continued, is “a system, not a person,” a structure built not only on senior officials but on institutions, coercive power, and a residual support base of “some millions that are still supporting the regime.”