Uncategorized
As landmark Saul Bellow documentary premieres, a look back at his life through the JTA archive
(JTA) — Given his place in the international literary canon, it’s hard to believe that there has never been a widely-released documentary made about the Jewish Nobel Prize winner Saul Bellow.
That’s about to change, as PBS debuts “American Masters: The Adventures of Saul Bellow” on Monday night.
The documentary, which was filmed by Israeli director Asaf Galay between 2016 and 2019 and features what is being touted as the last interview Philip Roth gave before his death in 2018, digs deep into Bellow’s personal life and inspirations. Many know about his successful novels and memorable (usually Jewish) characters, but as the film shows, Bellow had a turbulent personal life that involved five marriages. Several of his closest friends and family members felt betrayed or offended by how Bellow wrote unflattering characters closely based on them. His moderate conservative political leanings put him at odds with the ethos of the 1960s, and some saw his framing of occasional Black characters as racist.
But the film also devotes time to explaining — through interviews with scholars, other novelists and members of the Bellow clan — how Bellow’s deep-rooted sense of “otherness” as the son of Jewish immigrants influenced his work, and how he, in turn, influenced many Jewish American writers who followed him. Roth, for instance, says on camera that Bellow inspired him to create fuller Jewish characters in his own work.
To mark the milestone film, we looked back through all of the Saul Bellow content in the Jewish Telegraphic Agency’s archive. What emerged was a portrait of a leading Jewish intellectual of his time who was deeply invested in the Soviet Jewry movement and Israel, and who was beloved by the American Jewish community — despite his complicated relationship to his Jewishness and his bristling at being called a “Jewish writer.”
The Soviet Jewry movement
Bellow was born in 1915 in Canada to parents with Lithuanian ancestry who first immigrated from St. Petersburg, Russia. In the 1920s, when Bellow was 9, the family moved to Chicago. By the 1950s, the plight of Jews in the Soviet Union — who were forbidden from openly practicing their religion and from emigrating — had become a rallying cry for American Jews. As a 1958 JTA report shows, Bellow was passionate about the issue; in January of that year, he signed a letter to The New York Times about “the purge of Yiddish writers, the refusal of the current Soviet regime to permit a renaissance of Jewish culture and the existence of a quota system on Jews in education, professional and civil service fields.” Other signatories included fellow Jewish writers Irving Howe, Alfred Kazin and Lionel Trilling.
Saul Bellow, Anita Goshkin (his first wife) and their son Gregory Bellow, circa 1940. Bellow’s turbulent personal life involved five marriages. (Courtesy of the Bellow family)
He signed another letter to the Times on the topic in 1965, and in 1969 he circulated an appeal for cultural freedom for Jews to the Soviet Writers Union, getting other prominent writers such as Noam Chomsky and Nat Hentoff to sign. By 1970, the issue had become widely publicized, and Bellow stayed involved, signing onto a petition with several other thought leaders that asked: “Has the government of the Soviet Union no concern for human rights or for the decent opinion of mankind?”
Israel
Like many American Jews, Bellow had complicated feelings on Israel. “If you want everyone to love you, don’t discuss Israeli politics,” he once wrote.
In the 1970s, JTA reports show that he followed Israeli diplomacy closely and was a strong supporter of the Jewish state in the face of international criticism. In 1974, at a PEN press conference, he called for a boycott of UNESCO, the United Nations’ cultural heritage arm that has historically been very critical of Israeli policy.
In 1984, Bellow met with then-Israeli Prime Minister Shimon Peres, who was in the United States on an official state visit.
But Bellow wasn’t a blanket supporter of Israel — in 1979, he signed a letter protesting West Bank settlement expansion that was read at a rally of 30,000 people in Tel Aviv. In 1987, while in Haifa for a conference on his work, Bellow criticized the Israeli government for the way it handled the Jonathan Pollard spy case, bringing up an issue that still reverberates in Israel-Diaspora conversation — and in U.S. politics.
“I think the American Jews are very sensitive to the question of dual allegiance, and it is probably wrong of Israel to press this question because it is one which is very often used by antisemites,” Bellow said.
Nobel Prize
After garnering multiple National Book Awards and a Pulitzer Prize, Bellow won the Nobel Prize in Literature in 1976. JTA’s report on the award noted that Bellow’s most recent book at the time, published right around the time of the Nobel announcements, was a memoir about his 1975 stay in Jerusalem, titled “To Jerusalem and Back.” The report added: “Two of his books, ‘Herzog,’ published in 1964 and ‘Mr. Sammler’s Planet,’ which won him the National Book Award in 1971, have been translated into Hebrew and were enthusiastically received by Israeli critics and public.”
(Bellow wasn’t the only Jew to win a Nobel that year: Milton Friedman won the economics prize, Baruch Blumberg shared the medicine prize and Burton Richter shared the physics prize.)
Bellow, center, with his fifth wife Janis Freedman-Bellow and longtime friend Allan Bloom, who is the subject of Bellow’s last novel, “Ravelstein.” (Courtesy of the Bellow family)
A “Jewish writer”?
The Anti-Defamation League also gave Bellow an award in 1976. According to a JTA report, Seymour Graubard, honorary national chairman of the ADL at the time, said that Bellow “has correctly rejected all efforts to pigeonhole him as a ‘Jewish writer.’ Rather, he has simply found in the Jewish experience those common strains of humanity that are part of all of us — and therein lies his greatness as an American writer.”
Debate over whether or not Bellow should be labeled a “Jewish writer,” and what that meant, dogged him for much of his career. After his death in 2005, at 89, a New York Jewish Week obituary focused on Bellow as “a literary giant who did not want to be bound by the tag of Jewish writer.”
“Mr. Bellow bridled at being considered a Jewish writer, though his early novels, most notably 1944’s ‘The Victim,’ dealt with anti-Semitism and featured characters who spoke Yiddish and Russian,” Steve Lipman wrote.
Bellow’s biographer James Atlas added in the obituary: “He always said he was a writer first, an American second and Jewish third. But all three were elements of his genius. His greatest contribution was that he was able to write fiction that had tremendous philosophical depth.”
In a JTA essay at the time of Bellow’s death, academic and fiction writer John J. Clayton argued: “No good writer wants to be pigeonholed or limited in scope. But he is deeply a Jewish writer — not just a Jew by birth.
“Jewish culture, Jewish sensibility, a Jewish sense of holiness in the everyday, permeate his work.”
—
The post As landmark Saul Bellow documentary premieres, a look back at his life through the JTA archive appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Jewish languages meet in Birobidzhan
אויף אַן אינטערנאַציאָנאַלן ייִדישן קולטור־פֿעסטיוואַל לעצטנס אין ביראָבידזשאַן האָט מיך, ווי אַ ייִדישיסט, באַזונדערס פֿאַרחידושט די אינערלעכע ייִדישע פֿיל־שפּראַכיקייט.
דער „אינטערנאַציאָנאַלער פֿעסטיוואַל פֿון ייִדישער קולטור און קונסט“ איז פֿאָרגעקומען פֿונעם 6טן ביזן 9טן סעפּטעמבער.
מיט איינעם פֿון די געסט, הרבֿ עובֿדיה איסאַקאָוו, האָב איך לאַנג געשמועסט וועגן זײַן אייגענער ייִדישער שפּראַך — דזשוהורי, אַ שפּראַך ענלעך אויף פּערסיש. מיט אַנדערע געסט, דרײַ טוניסער ייִדן, וואָס וווינען אין ישׂראל, האָבן מיר גערעדט וועגן זייער מאַמע־לשון, אַ ייִדישן מין אַראַביש. דערצו האָט אַ זינגער און כּלל־טוער, אליעזר (איגאָר) דאַבאַקאַראָו, מיר געזאָגט אַז ער איז אויפֿגעוואַקסן אין סאַמאַרקאַנד, אוזבעקיסטאַן, רעדנדיק אויף בוכאָרי — פּערסיש מיט אַ ייִדישן טעם.
אויף עטלעכע אונטערנעמונגען האָט מען אויך געזונגען לידער אויף העברעיִש. בעת דער שבתדיקער סעודה (כ׳בין אָנגעקומען מיט עטלעכע אַנדערע געסט פֿון פֿריִער, ערבֿ־שבת) האָבן מיר אַרומגערעדט די קשיא, צי איז לשון־קודש אָדער דער מאָדערנער העברעיִש באמת אַ ייִדישע שפּראַך? דער ביראָבידזשאַנער הויפּט־רבֿ אפֿרים קאָלפּאַק, אַ ליובאַוויטשער חסיד, האַלט, אַז נישט. לשון־קודש איז, לויט אים, די געטלעכע שפּראַך, דורך וועלכן דער רבונו־של־עולם האָט באַשאַפֿן די וועלט איידער דער ערשטער ייִד, אַבֿרהם אָבֿינו, איז געבוירן געוואָרן. אַזוי איז די מעשׂה לויט דער ייִדישער מסורה.
די עכטע ייִדישע שפּראַך, אויף וועלכער ייִדן האָבן גערעדט טאָג און נאַכט במשך פֿון דור צו דור, די שפּראַך פֿון די גרעסטע צדיקים און קדושים, איז דווקא ייִדיש. איך בין מסכּים דערמיט, נאָר, פֿאַרשטייט זיך, אַ סך מענטשן האַלטן אַנדערש.
דער ערשטער פֿעסטיוואַל פֿון דעם מין איז אָרגאַניזירט געוואָרן נאָך אין דער סאָוועטישער תּקופֿה, אין 1989; דערנאָך, מיט איבעררײַסן — יעדע צוויי יאָר. דער 13טער אינטערנאַציאָנאַלער פֿעסטיוואַל פֿון ייִדישער קולטור און קונסט איז פֿאָרגעקומען אין 2017. זינט דעמאָלט און ביז איצט האָט מען אים, צוליב פֿאַרשיידענע שוועריקייטן, נישט געקאָנט אָרגאַניזירן.
להיפּוך, האָט די איצטיקע אונטערנעמונג געשטעלט דעם טראָפּ אויף ייִדן אַרום דער וועלט בכלל, אויף פֿאַרשיידענע ייִדישע עדות, לאַוו־דווקא ייִדיש־רעדנדיקע אַשכּנזים. די אויסלענדישע געסט זענען געקומען פֿון ווײַסרוסלאַנד, מדינת־ישׂראל און כינע. ווי געזאָגט, זענען דרײַ פֿון די ישׂראלדיקע באַטייליקטע געבוירן געוואָרן אין טוניס. דערפֿאַר קאָן מען זאָגן, אַז צפֿון־אַפֿריקע איז אויך געווען פֿאָרגעשטעלט.
בסך־הכּל האָט מען דורכגעפֿירט 160 אונטערנעמונגען, על־פּי רובֿ גאַנץ קליינע, און עטלעכע גרויס־מאַסשטאַביקע. צוליב דעם גוטן וואַרעמען וועטער, איז דער אומזיסטער שלוס־קאָנצערט, וווּ ס׳איז אַרויסגעטראָטן דער באַקאַנטער מאָסקווער כאָר בראָש מיט מיכאַיִל טורעצקי, פֿאָרגעקומען אין דרויסן, אויף אַ פּלאַץ לעבן דעם ברעג פֿונעם טײַך ביראַ.
אומגעוויינטלעך איז געווען דאָס פֿאַרזוכן די גרעסטע חלה אין דער וועלט — איבער 12 מעטער (40 פֿוס) די לענג — וואָס די אָרטיקע קולינאַרן האָבן קונציק אויסגעבאַקן אונטער דער השגחה פֿון הרבֿ קאָלפּאַק. צווישן קליינע און פּשוטע אונטערנעמונגען איז געווען אַ וואַרשטאַט ווי צו שרײַבן די ייִדישע אותיות. די הויפּט־רעדאַקטאָרין פֿון „ביראָבידזשאַנער שטערן‟, יעלענע סאַראַשעווסקאַיאַ, האָט מיך געבעטן איר מיטצוהעלפֿן. זי האָט צוגעטראַכט אַ ספּעציעלן פּלאַסטיק־טראַפֿאַרעט (שטענצל־אותיות) מיטן ייִדיש אַלף־בית, טאַקע לויט די ייִוואָ־תּקנות: מיט אַ קמף אונטערן אַלף, צוויי יודן מיט אַ פּתח אאַז״וו), וואָס דערמעגלעכט אָפּצוצייכענען יעדן אות אויף אַ גרינגן אופֿן. זענען מיר געזעסן אין דרויסן מיט אַ טישל און געוויזן יעדן נײַגעריקן פֿאַרבײַגייער, ווי אַזוי עס שרײַבן זיך אויף ייִדיש זייערע נעמען צי אַנדערע פֿראַזעס.
די אַטמאָספֿער איז געווען אַ לוסטיקע און אומפֿאָרמעלע. עטלעכע געסט האָט פֿאַרחידושט די אַלטע סאָוועטישע אַוואַנגאַרד־אַרכיטעקטור, וועלכער ס׳איז טאַקע געווידמעט אַ נײַ בוך, וואָס מע האָט אויך פּרעזענטירט אויפֿן פֿעסטיוואַל. אין דער זעלבער צײַט, איז אין דער שטאָט פֿאָרגעקומען אַ באַשיידענע פּאַראַלעלע אונטערנעמונג: דער פֿעסיטיוואַל פֿון ייִדישע באָבעס — מיט אויסשטעלונגען, פֿאַרמעסטן, קאָנצערטן, אַ יריד פֿון היימגעמאַכטע קליידער און אַנדערע חפֿצים.
וואָס שייך דער שפּראַך בוכאָרי, באַטראַכטן אַ סך בוכאַרישע ייִדן אין קווינס דאָס לשון ווי אַ באַזונדערע שפּראַך. במשך פֿון אַ סך יאָרן האָט מיטן פֿאָרווערטס מיטגעאַרבעט דער בוכאַרישער פֿאָטאָגראַף אַרקאַדי יאַגודאַיעוו, מיט וועלכן איך פֿלעג שמועסן וועגן זײַן מאַמע־לשון. בעצם איז זי סתּם פּערסיש, אָבער מיט אַ צאָל ספּעציפֿיש ייִדישע עלעמענטן.
אַן אַנדער מעשׂה איז דזשוהורי — די שפּראַך פֿון די קאַווקאַזישע באַרג־ייִדן, וואָס האָט אַן אָפֿיציעלן סטאַטוס אין דאַגעסטאַן, איינער פֿון די רוסלענדישע דרומדיקער ראַיאָנען. אָפֿיציעל הייסט ער טאַטיש, ווײַל לויט דער סאָוועטישער טערמינאָלאָגיע איז ער ענלעך אויפֿן מוסולמענישן לשון טאַטיש. דער חילוק צווישן דזשוהורי (וואָס מיינט „ייִדיש‟) און טאַטיש איז אָבער ממשותדיק, הגם נישט אַזוי גרויס, ווי צווישן ייִדיש און דײַטשיש. דאָס איז טאַקע אַ באַזונדער לשון מיט אַן אייגענער ליטעראַטור.
אין דער שטאָט דערבענט, פֿון וואַנען עס איז אָנגעקומען קיין ביראָבידזשאַן הרבֿ עובֿדיה איסאַקאָוו, גייט אַרויס די צוויי־שפּראַכיקע דזשהורי־רוסישע צײַטונג „וואַטאַן‟ („היימלאַנד‟). איסאַקאַוו איז אויך אַ שוחט, אַ מוהל און אַ באַגאַבטער מאָלער. אַן אויסשטעלונג פֿון זײַנע ווערק איז געווען א טייל פֿונעם פֿעסיטיוואַל. נאָך איין קאַווקאַזישער ייִד, אַלבערט ראַפֿיִעוו, האָט פֿאָרגעשטעלט זײַנע פּרעכטיקע מיזרחדיקע טעפּעכער מיט אַ ייִדישן טעם.
די אינערלעכע ייִדישע פֿאַרשיידנאַרטיקייט איז געווען, לויט מײַן מיינונג, דער וויכטיקסטער מאָמענט פֿון דער אונטערנעמונג. עטלעכע זאַכן וואָס ס׳איז כּדאַי צו דערמאָנען איז, אַז אין רוסלאַנד זענען פֿאַראַן צוויי אָפֿיציעל אָנערקענטע ייִדישע לשונות — ייִדיש און באַרג־ייִדיש (דזשוהורי); אַז אַ סך ספֿרדים רעדן נאָך אַלץ אויף לאַדינאָ אָדער ייִדיש־אַראַבישע דיאַלעקטן, און אַז בײַ די בוכאַרישע ייִדן איז פֿאַראַן אויך אַן אייגענער דיאַלעקט און אַ באַזונדערע קולטור.
בקיצור, ייִדן שטעלן מיט זיך פֿאָר נישט עפּעס אַ מאָנאָטאָנע מאַסע, נאָר אַ בונטן „מערבֿ־מיזרחדיקן‟ טעפּעך פֿון פֿאַרשיידענע עדות מיט זייערע אוניקאַלע לשונות און טראַדיציעס.
The post Jewish languages meet in Birobidzhan appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The Yeshiva issue that won’t go away
A backroom deal to gut oversight of private schools – specifically to bail out yeshivas that fail to teach basic subjects, condemning tens of thousands of Hasidic students to illiteracy and choking off the chance to participate in broader society – is coming back to haunt its architects. New York’s Governor and the Legislature likely assumed they secured a political win that would quickly fade from public attention.
They were wrong.
The state was forced to justify its actions before a judge in a pair of hearings in April as part of a lawsuit challenging the rollback that was filed last September. As a longtime attorney, I can tell you that the language of small-minded politics translates poorly to the courtroom. The state’s lawyers were forced to advance arguments that legitimize educational denial and forced insularity. And in doing so, they mar our state’s tradition of protecting individual rights.
Renowned education attorney Michael Rebell was leading the suit on behalf of Hasidic and Haredi students who have been harmed by the dismantling of standards. The plaintiffs argue that the state abandoned its obligation to ensure all children receive a “sound basic education,” a constitutional floor for schooling recognized by the Court of Appeals.
To justify the evisceration of standards, the state claims our guarantee of a sound basic education does not apply to students of nonpublic schools. It strikes at the foundation of New York’s educational system, which was codified in the State Constitution’s Education Article through a Constitutional Convention more than 130 years ago.
The Article’s framers made their intention clear: to ensure all children are prepared for engagement in civic life, whether they attended a public or nonpublic school. As one delegate of the Convention avowed, “there can be found no man in this Convention who will say that there are children of the State that ought not to be educated.”
The principle is simple: While parents may choose religious or private education, the state still bears responsibility for ensuring all children receive the basic tools necessary to function as citizens. But to defend last year’s rollback, state lawyers argued that parents are “free to opt out” of public schools, even if the alternative schools deny students the tools to understand the world around them. The state’s position, taken to its logical conclusion, permits nonpublic schools to teach children anything, or nothing at all.
This becomes even more troubling as New York expands support for nonpublic education. Through its recent opt-in to the nonprofit scholarship tax credit program, New York will see billions more dollars in donations toward private school tuition. Establishing baseline standards for curriculum is essential for producing an informed citizenry — that becomes significantly more difficult when our tax system props up institutions without meaningful oversight.
The state’s arguments also undermine New York’s reputation as a national leader in protecting individual rights.
State officials have aggressively defended voting rights protections, reproductive freedom, and anti-discrimination laws against legal attack. As a rogue White House tramples upon our rights, our Governor, Legislature, and Attorney General have gone to great lengths to fortify our protections.
Yet in this case, the state was effectively arguing that tens of thousands of children can be carved out both from the guarantee of a right and the opportunity to participate in society. State lawyers even contended that students denied a basic education possess no actionable deprivation of liberty or property rights.
This is a glaring departure from the contentions our state makes for the preservation of individual liberties against violation from the government. How could we credibly argue, for example, that immigrants should be able to sue ICE agents over due process rights if students can’t sue the state over their constitutional guarantee to an education? It’s a slippery slope: Deny one group legal protection against harm from the state, and you imperil the sanctity of all those protections.
The lawsuit over last year’s budget deal is still ongoing. A decision may come down any time now, but certainly is likely before the end of the year. An appeal by the losing party is all but certain. That means New York’s lawyers may continue to be forced into defending arguments that sanction students’ educational deprivation and societal isolation, and, in the process, irreparably damage our status as a bulwark for individual liberty.
The political architects of this deal may have hoped the issue would quietly disappear. Instead, the consequences are only becoming harder to defend.
The post The Yeshiva issue that won’t go away appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The Netherlands will return to Eurovision after boycott over Israel
(JTA) — The Netherlands will return to the Eurovision Song Contest, overriding a broadcaster that withdrew over Israel’s actions in Gaza.
The Dutch organization that oversees public broadcasting, the Nederlandse Publieke Omroep, said on Wednesday that it will take over the country’s entry to Eurovision after Avrotros, the broadcaster that usually takes part in Eurovision for the Netherlands, pulled out of the 2027 event in Burgas, Bulgaria.
Avrotros said last month that it withdrew because the event “can no longer be considered neutral,” citing Israel’s inclusion amid “the severe humanitarian suffering in Gaza and the ongoing restrictions on press freedom.”
Avrotros dropped out of the most recent contest in May 2026, and the Netherlands did not participate after the NPO ruled out identifying another broadcaster. Spain, Ireland, Iceland and Slovenia also boycotted this year’s Eurovision. Israel’s participation in the world’s largest music contest has become a source of intense controversy, sparking mass protests. The contest drew 35 million fewer viewers this year.
For the next Eurovision, NPO is assigning the broadcaster NOS to provide coverage of the event and an “independent team of experts” to select the Dutch act.
“We understand that participation in the Eurovision Song Contest evokes mixed feelings in the Netherlands,” said Jet de Ranitz, the chairman of the NPO’s executive board. “We have explicitly asked the [European Broadcasting Union] to once again make the unifying character of the festival an important part of the event, in recognition of a time of geopolitical unrest, war, and polarization.”
The NPO added that the EBU, which owns the contest, has “taken significant steps regarding the rules of the Eurovision Song Contest.” The EBU introduced changes in August that included barring countries involved in armed conflict from hosting the competition. It also made adjustments to the voting process after accusations of politically motivated voting.
Avrotros said the new rules were not sufficient to ensure that Eurovision remains “independent and neutral.”
Martin Green, the director of Eurovision, said in a statement that the contest was “delighted to welcome the Netherlands back” in 2027.
Ireland is set to boycott Eurovision again in 2027 after RTÉ, the national broadcaster, said last week that its position “remains unchanged.”
RTÉ cited “the appalling and ongoing loss of lives in Gaza and the humanitarian crisis there which continues to put the lives of so many civilians at risk,” adding that it was “deeply concerned by the continued denial of independent access to international journalists to the territory.”
Spain could also stay out of Eurovision next year. José Pablo López, the president of Spanish broadcaster RTVE, announced at a Senate hearing on Tuesday that he supported a continued boycott, saying it was “painful that Israel continues to participate.”
Meanwhile, Belgium confirmed its participation despite calls for a boycott by its public media unions.
“Participation is in no way an endorsement or normalization of what is happening in Gaza and the rest of the world,” said Frederik Delaplace, the CEO of the Flemish broadcaster VRT. “We do note, however, that the EBU is no longer shying away from these difficult societal and geopolitical issues.”
The post The Netherlands will return to Eurovision after boycott over Israel appeared first on The Forward.
