Uncategorized
Dating in New York after Oct. 7 was already painful. Then came Zohran Mamdani
I was considering getting back together with someone I dated earlier this year. When we reconnected this past summer, we hit it off again instantly. As we took in the sunset along the East River promenade, we reminisced about how easily the conversation had always flowed between us.
But then, she had to ask the question: “Who are you going to vote for?”
“I have to vote for Mamdani,” I said.
And that was the end of that. It became a Zohran Mamdani breakup. Or, Mamdani, the Democratic candidate for New York City mayor, torched the chances of us getting back together. I have him to blame — or thank — for that one.
Dating in New York City has never been easy. Dating here as a divorced 40-something Jewish dad seeking to meet other Jews in a post-Oct. 7 world, with an autocrat as president and a democratic socialist running for mayor, is almost impossible. There are so many political reasons to decide it’s not worth it to pursue a relationship with someone — even before determining how well you’d really get along.
When I resumed using dating apps this spring, after the end of my first long-term relationship following my divorce, I noticed that way more Jewish women in their 30s and 40s were listing their politics as “moderate” than I’d ever seen before. Many of them showcased Israeli flags or Stars of David in their bios or noted something positive about Israel or Zionism.
As I began chatting with potential interests, I learned that for some women, the aftermath of the Oct. 7 attack had transformed them from social liberals into supporters of President Donald Trump, due to Republicans’ perceived alignment with Israel’s interests. Others were liberal and perhaps even progressive in many of their views, but adamantly Zionist. They were thus much more conservative than me when it came to any question about Israel’s right to keep prosecuting a war with an exceptionally high civilian death toll.
Being back on the dating scene was a minefield. And then Mamdani’s stunning surge in the Democratic mayoral primary began.
I wasn’t ready to vote for Mamdani in the primary, instead ranking his Jewish ally, former Comptroller Brad Lander, first. But the more I learned, the more comfortable I was with Mamdani’s vision and plans for New York. And he’s running for mayor of New York City, after all, not Tel Aviv.
Yet what I found: With many potential dates, even an allusion to Mamdani would halt any progress in its tracks.
Just this month — ironically, on Oct. 7 — I was having a pleasant back-and-forth with someone on Lox Club, the supposedly selective dating app for Jews with “ridiculously high standards.” I was increasingly eager to meet her: She was bright, pretty, well-traveled, and, most importantly, starting to find me hilarious.
She lived in Manhattan, like me. But when I asked about where she’s from, she said she’s from Long Island and that she’ll likely move back after the election if Mamdani wins.
Part of me was tempted to say whatever was needed to at least score a date. I could have done the texting version of smiling and nodding, perhaps validating her fears and saying I’m worried too. But I suspected I’d be wasting my time pretending we could accommodate differing outlooks on the city’s future. I texted her that I’m convinced a Mamdani administration would be way better for the city than most people fear. Still, it seemed our views were too divergent, as much as I’d have loved to meet her. She agreed, and I ruefully tapped “unmatch.”
In some ways, it seems frivolous to lament the plight of diaspora dating. The trauma experienced by Jewish daters in the comfortable environs of New York City can’t possibly be compared to the trauma of those who experienced the terror of Oct. 7, or the suffering of Palestinian civilians in Gaza during the subsequent war.
But there’s a real cost to Jews becoming more suspicious of one another. We risk isolating ourselves into smaller and smaller blocs, making it harder for us to connect once we find each other.
It also means that those who take a less reactive and more nuanced view wind up silencing themselves. How can I express that my heart was torn apart every time I heard first-hand accounts from freed hostages who returned to Israel — but that I also grieve deeply over the devastation in Gaza? How can I admit that former Gov. Andrew Cuomo has a good track record in connecting with Jewish voters and would likely reliably stand up to antisemitism, but be more compelled by Mamdani’s infectious love for New York City — and believe his criticism of Israel doesn’t make him an antisemite?
And how can I express my love for Israel — the idea of it and its people, though not necessarily its government — while voting for a candidate who questions Israel’s viability as a Jewish state?
For too many Jewish daters like myself, there is increasingly a sense that looking for someone who is also willing to take an open-minded approach to conflicting political truths is like praying for a miracle.
There was one promising moment, before my springtime interest and I decided not to renew our romance, that gave me hope. My date and I watched an episode of Real Time with Bill Maher, one of her favorite shows, together. I hadn’t seen his show in so many years that I was game to see why she enjoyed it so much.
I was surprised she could find humor in someone so critical of Trump, the president for whom she voted. She was surprised I could agree with a lot of the centrist views from Maher and his guests, most of which didn’t toe the progressive line. I told her that night that if things worked out between us, we’d have to invite Maher to our wedding.
That obviously didn’t happen. But I still think we need more moments like that — opportunities to appreciate both our commonalities and differences. I could envision another version of that relationship, where we end up listening to different podcasts and following different Instagram accounts, but still find areas where we can share similar perspectives and laugh at the same jokes.
I’m skeptical, and disheartened. But I’m still holding out hope for some future “Maher weddings” — even though with every swipe right or left, it feels increasingly naïve to think that. And yet, at heart, I’m a Jew, and I’ve studied enough of the history of the Jews to know that we’ve been through worse. We’ll get through this. But not before more anniversaries of Oct. 7 have passed.
The post Dating in New York after Oct. 7 was already painful. Then came Zohran Mamdani appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
As long as there are movies about Nazis, there will be movies about the art they looted
Early on in Pascal Bonitzer’s film Auction, Andre (Alex Lutz). a self-serving and sleazy art dealer, is placating a condescending, cruel, and racist art owner. “You have to stop at nothing for a sale,” he tells his intern.
The French film vividly brings to life the deceptive and hypocritical high-stakes world of prestigious art dealers operating in a Parisian universe of money grubbing and bad faith.
Based on a true story, it recounts what transpired in 2005, when a major work by Expressionist artist Egon Schiele, “Wilted Sunflowers,” was discovered in a home in a suburb of Mulhouse, France.
The 1914 painting originally belonged to the Jewish Austrian collector Karl Grunwald and had last been seen in public at the Jeu de Paume in Paris in 1937. In 1938 Grunwald fled Vienna for Paris, saving as many paintings as he could in a storage unit. They were ultimately looted and auctioned off.
Grunwald made it to America, while his wife and children were killed in concentration camps. For the rest of his life he futilely tried to recover his stolen paintings. Following his death in 1964, one of his sons persevered in his late father’s pursuit.
Bonitzer places the Schiele in the home of Martin (Arcadi Radeff) a highly moral, arguably sentimentalized, young factory worker who has no idea of its monetary value or backstory. Concepts of “provenance” are alien to him; he could use some money and just wants to do the right thing. So do the rightful heirs.
The whole story ends on a positive note as the painting gets sold at auction and the young worker is given an equal share in the sale.
It is estimated that more than 600,000 paintings, decorative items and other aesthetically and culturally valued items were summarily stolen from Jews during the War. Approximately, 100,000 have never been recovered.
Auction is only the latest in a long line of works centering on Nazi-looted art.
Perhaps the best known film in this sub-genre is 2015’s The Woman in Gold, which starred Helen Mirren as the patrician Maria Altmann, who works in tandem with her dogged attorney to retrieve six paintings by Gustav Klimt, one of which was a portrait of Maria’s aunt, Adele Bloch-Bauer I.
The Klimts were ripped off by the Nazis during World War II and exhibited in Austria at the Österreichische Galerie Belvedere until 2006. After a lengthy and byzantine legal battle, a number of the works were returned to the Altmann Family, which sold the Adele portrait for $135 million to Ronald Lauder who proudly displays the work in his Neue Galerie.
It would seem axiomatic that any stolen art should be restored to its original owners or, more usually, their heirs. For some, however, it’s a grayer area filled with moral and legal questions, starting with how the work was obtained. Was it purchased in good faith? If the current owners(let’s add “s”) truly didn’t know its origins should they be allowed to keep it? If not, how much compensation, if any, should they receive?
And, more broadly, who should own great art — a private collector or a museum? Doesn’t the public have a right to see great art? Wouldn’t it be better for a museum to have and display the work rather than a family who may hide it in its basement?
One of the most interesting elements in the “Gold” story, which was also addressed in the documentaries Adele’s Wishes and Stealing Klimt was the Austrian government’s contention that Adele, who succumbed to meningitis in 1925, had in fact left the painting to her husband with the stipulation that when he died it would go to the Austrian gallery. Therefore it was rightly theirs.
But if the will existed — and that was debatable — was it legally binding since Adele’s husband was forced to flee the country in the wake of Germany’s annexation of Austria, which Adele had no way of anticipating? Her will, if there was one, was predicated on the idea that he would die at home and that his art collection would remain intact and in his possession when he passed.
The Rape of Europa, a comprehensive and detailed documentary on pillaged art also touches on the dilemma surrounding Adele’s portrait, but it places the crime in a wider context, considering the questions that emerge when one country or culture appropriates the art of another. Still, it makes clear that the most egregious example is the Nazi seizure of Jewish art.
Much of the art in question, modern, abstract and acclaimed by the likes of Picasso, Kandinsky, Klee, much of it owned by Jewish collectors, fell into the category that Hitler dubbed “degenerate,” which gave him the opportunity to further dehumanize those owners. Most of the paintings were destroyed while others were sold for enormous profits in order to underwrite a massive build up of armaments for the Third Reich.
The documentary, The Portrait of Wally, is a searing indictment of MoMA and other major American art institutions that supported MoMA in a less-than-exemplary 1997 episode.
The film recounts the brouhaha surrounding Egon Schiele’s painting of his mistress Wally, owned by Lea Bondi, a Jewish Austrian art dealer before it was grabbed by the Nazis in 1939.
Prior to landing at MoMA it was housed in Rudolph Leopold’s Austrian museum. Leopold was a classic double dealer, pretending to be on the side of the original owners and their heirs when in fact he had no intention of handing over the painting.
But when the painting was on loan to MoMA, the Bondi heirs demanded that it be returned to them. Rudolph refused, which led to a 13-year criminal investigation launched by New York District Attorney Robert Morgenthau, during which time the painting was held by the United States government.
According to the film, MoMA and other art institutions sided with Rudolph because they were afraid that aligning themselves with the Jewish family would mean that museums across the globe would no longer lend their works to American museums for fear that they might potentially lose their art or have to pay big bucks to have it returned.
Ultimately in 2010 the Bondi heirs prevailed. The Leopold Museum paid them $19 million for the painting’s return. That case succeeded in opening the floodgates to many others. And a surge of films on the topic followed.
Movies centering on Nazi-looted art have been around for decades, such as John Frankenheimer’s 1965 action thriller The Train starring Burt Lancaster; and 39 years later George Clooney’s The Monuments Men, both loosely inspired by factual events.
Set in 1944, shortly before the end of the war, The Train is a suspenseful and well-acted account of a French resistance fighter (Lancaster) determined to intercept a train carrying Nazi looted art from France to Germany without destroying the art.
Set in the same era, the starry Monuments Men, co-written and directed by George Clooney and featuring Clooney, Matt Damon, Bill Murray, and Cate Blanchett, among others, depicts a unit of historians and archivists on a mission to locate and salvage works of art across Europe before the Nazis had a chance to steal and destroy them.”
Despite the caliber of talent involved, e.g., the film was seen as problematic because of its failure to point out that many, if not most, of these art works had belonged to Jews and were brutally confiscated from the original owners, many of whom had been carted off to concentration camps to be killed.
Clooney and his Jewish co-writer said that their purpose was to explore not the experience of any one group but the profound significance of great art and the violation that’s perpetrated when it is stolen, or worse, destroyed.
Both Clooney and Frankenheimer’s films also touch on the moral quandary of whether a great painting is more valuable than a human life. If the risk to save the art is that high is it worth taking?
For me the most affecting film on lost art is Elizabeth Rynecki’s 2018 documentary Chasing Portraits, her freshman endeavor. Even though — perhaps precisely because — at times it feels more like a home movie than a professionally honed flick it reveals an emotional core that is unexpectedly moving.
Equally relevant, her film centers on paintings that were scattered after the War. They may or may not have been looted, but their fate was directly tied to the Nazi regime that forced Jewish residents to escape without their precious belongings.
Rynecki grew up surrounded by the art of her great-grandfather Moshe Rynecki, who was murdered at Majdanek in 1943. His evocative expressionistic works portray the day to day life of Polish Jews prior to the Holocaust. Of his estimated 800 works, 120 remain in Polish and Israeli museums and private collections abroad.
Throughout her life Rynecki had wanted to see these works, not to reclaim them, but to uncover how they ended up where they were. She serves as a historian and witness, her great grandfather’s art a link to her family and Jewish heritage and a world that is gone forever.
The film follows her as she travels from Canada to Poland and Israel where she is, by turns, regarded with suspicion or more usually snubbed outright. Many owners, some Jewish, cannot believe that she is not there for restitution. In one of the strongest scenes, a Polish collector, a gentile, wraps up and hands over to Elizabeth one of her great grandfather’s paintings, unsolicited.
It’s a story that lingers and will no doubt continue to inspire more documentaries and feature films. Just this week, The Guardian reported that the heirs of a Jewish couple are suing The Metropolitan Museum of Art in New York over a Vincent van Gogh painting they say was plundered by the Nazis.
‘Auction’ is currently screening in New York at Film Forum.
The post As long as there are movies about Nazis, there will be movies about the art they looted appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
The JTA Q&A with Andrew Cuomo: Antisemitism is a ‘deeply personal’ fight
Gov. Andrew Cuomo believes his track record on antisemitism and Israel speak for themselves in a New York City mayoral campaign where those issues have drawn significant attention.
“He stands for the Jewish community in deeds,” his campaign told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Related: Cuomo’s record on Jews, antisemitism and Israel | Zohran Mamdani Q&A | Curtis Sliwa Q&A
The response came as part of a broader Q&A on the eve of the election, in which Cuomo, who resigned as governor in 2021, is polling second after also coming in second in the Democratic primary in June. The entire Q&A, as completed by campaign spokesman Rich Azzopardi this week and touching on Cuomo’s Jewish relationships, record with women and handling of the pandemic in Orthodox communities, is below.
In the lead-up to the Democratic primary, you said antisemitism was the “most important issue” in your campaign for mayor. Do you still find that to be true? And what would you say to people who’ve accused you of using antisemitism as a political tool?
This is deeply personal for the governor. Like I said, he has Jewish family members and the rise of antisemitism is undeniable. Those who doubt his commitment don’t know his historic commitment to the Jewish community for decades.
You’ve faced criticism over your handling of the pandemic in Orthodox Jewish communities. What did you learn about Jewish communities from the experience that would make you better informed as mayor?
Andrew Cuomo has been very honest that he regrets not communicating enough with the community on this at the time. He was later told that they feared being in a red zone was going to stigmatize them, something the governor admits he hadn’t thought about. He’s had many conversations with the communities since then and pledged to always keep the lines of communication open in city hall.
Mayor Eric Adams has drawn criticism for engaging only with a narrow subset of the city’s Jews, particularly Orthodox men. What kind of approach would you take to soliciting advice from Jewish New Yorkers and engaging Jewish leaders in the city?
Andrew Cuomo has been in public life for 40 years, has a deep respect for the faith community as a whole, and that includes every sect of Judaism. His record speaks for itself. For example, at a time of increased hate crimes, particularly antisemitic attacks, he started a model program to provide state funding for security upgrades for houses of worship.
Your conversation about Zohran Mamdani and 9/11 with Sid Rosenberg, a Jewish shock jock, drew accusations of Islamophobia. Do you wish you had said anything differently in that moment, and if so, what do you wish you had said?
As the governor said, he didn’t believe it to be a serious comment at the time and of course he doesn’t agree with it. Islamophobia has no place in this campaign, neither does antisemitism. Now we asked Zohran Mamdani to finally denounce the term “globalize the Intifada.”
This week you had an arrangement to visit Congregation Beth Elohim in Brooklyn but did not attend. Why did that event not happen as planned?
An unfortunate and regrettable scheduling conflict that we were very sorry about, as we told the organizers.
A lot has been said about Jewish safety in this election, but we’ve also spoken to Jewish women who’ve raised concerns about their safety as women. What would you say to Jewish women who feel torn between wanting to support you over your support for Israel but have misgivings over your track record?
The accusations against Gov. Cuomo were political and disproven. Five DAs, Democrat and Republican, upstate and downstate, looked at that report and found no evidence to bring a case forward. Of the civil cases that came out of this, he was dropped from all but one, which is withering on the vine. He’s said many times that if he ever made anyone feel uncomfortable it was unintentional and he was very sorry, but this is still America and there is still due process.
Some Jewish voters have told us that they are “holding their nose and voting Cuomo,” in an effort to beat Mamdani. Why should voters be not only relieved, but excited for you to be their mayor?
Gov. Cuomo signed the first anti-BDS order in the nation. When the Monsey attack happened, he fought for and passed the toughest hate crime law in the nation. When Israel was under attack by Hamas when he was governor he led a solidarity mission there. He stands for the Jewish community in deeds. Mamdani’s hostility to the Jewish community is voluminous and Sliwa’s past statements are disqualifying.
Your daughter recently married a Jewish man. What have you learned about Jewish culture and identity from the Jews closest to you?
He’s a blessing and a great addition to the family that has many other Jewish relatives.
What is your favorite thing about Jewish New York?
There is so much to be proud of. I feel a part of the community in so many ways. Whether it’s gathering for a Shabbat dinner or joining friends and family for the high holy days or enjoying bagels and shmear for break fast following Yom Kippur, these have become my traditions too.
—
The post The JTA Q&A with Andrew Cuomo: Antisemitism is a ‘deeply personal’ fight appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
The JTA Q&A with Curtis Sliwa: ‘I have a legacy with the Jewish community here’
Republican Curtis Sliwa believes New York City can tamp down rising antisemitism with a curriculum that brings “Jews of all types” to visit third- and fourth-grade classes in public schools.
“They’re all Jews, but they’re completely different in many instances, just like you. Don’t think they’re monolithic,” the New York City mayoral candidate said students should be taught.
Related: Catch up on Curtis Sliwa’s record on Jews, antisemitism and Israel
Sliwa made the suggestion in an interview with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, conducted in person in August, in which he showcased some of the out-of-the-box ideas that his supporters say make him the best choice for mayor of New York City. A full Q&A, edited for length and clarity and covering Sliwa’s ideas for combatting hate crimes, personal and professional relationships with Jewish New Yorkers and favorite Jewish restaurant, is below.
JTA’s Andrew Cuomo Q&A | JTA’s Zohran Mamdani Q&A
Most Jews and most New Yorkers have tended to vote for Democrats. What is it about you that should get Jewish New Yorkers to vote for a Republican mayor?
The first thing is I have a legacy with the Jewish community here. During the Crown Heights riots [in 1991], the mayor at that time, David Dinkins, told the police to stand down. The only people that the Lubavitch could depend on were me and the Guardian Angels on the corner of Kingston and President.
We’re at a point now where we haven’t had a riot involving antisemitism, but it spreads throughout the city. And it’s clear that if you’re going to address it, you have to do something about it, not just have a slogan. It’s not going to resolve itself. If you look at the traditional Democrats … they have failed. And now it’s left to me. I happen to be the Republican.
You know where Curtis Sliwa’s been over the years, you know the positions that I’ve taken to protect the Jewish community.
Jews continue to be the most common target of hate crimes in New York City. You said in a recent interview that there’s “no mashiach” running for mayor who will protect Jewish communities, and that they should continue leaning into groups like Shomrim and Shmira. Is it enough to have security from those groups?
No, not enough. But I’ve worked with them for years, and they’re dedicated volunteers, as is Hatzalah, the ambulance service. And there’s this perception, because they’re predominantly Orthodox, they’re only going to help their own. No! I’ve been out on the front lines with them with the Guardian Angels. They help Jews, Gentiles, anybody in distress. I’ve seen them risk their lives and get involved in some very hairy situations, and they work in tandem with the police. So it’s a great, vital volunteer organization — but more needs to be done.
So what concrete steps would you take as mayor to address the rise in hate crimes against Jews?
There should certainly be mandatory courses in antisemitism in schools — the history, how it’s evolved, how evil it is — Islamophobia, all of the hate. I have no problem with that. It’s not like there’s one hate, and one hate alone. But clearly the hate that is rearing its ugly head in the city now, more than any other, is antisemitic hate.
I would be very neighborhood-centric. Your police commanders of the precincts, your deputy inspectors have got to have a finger on the pulse of what’s going on. [Sliwa has promised to add 7,000 NYPD officers.] Each precinct is different — Williamsburg is different than Borough Park, Borough Park is different than Crown Heights. And then you have a lot of Orthodox communities that are different. You have to be sensitive to what all the differences are. The growing Bukharian community in Queens, much different. I think that’s the role a mayor plays, but you let the police do their job. You basically back off.
You’ve said you would like to keep Jessica Tisch on as police commissioner, if she’ll stay on. You’ve also criticized her for not trying to impose a mask ban that you want to see as a safeguard against violent protesters. Why is she the right person for the job?
Now we have stability. So even though I have differences with Jessica Tisch, you never discuss them in public. If for some reason you can’t get along or you can’t agree that this is the direction we should go, then you go your separate ways! But you don’t do it in public.
You mentioned adding third- and fourth-grade classes to educate kids about antisemitism and other forms of hate. What might those classes actually look like?
You bring in Jews of all different types. You think all Jews are the same? No. This is a Hasid, this is Orthodox, this is Conservative, this is Reform, this is secular. They’re all Jews, but they’re completely different in many instances, just like you. Don’t think they’re monolithic.
Then you have to also discuss the term “Chosen People.” It’s misunderstood if you don’t fully explain it. The way I explain it to Gentile audiences is, “Look, are you Christians? Christ was lost in the desert 40 days, 40 nights. The Jews were lost 40 years, wandering around. Moses brought down like 200 commandments from Hashem, their God, God the father. We truncated it down to 10. We’re all the same! We’re all of the same people. Jesus died a Jew!”
You have two Jewish children yourself. Can you tell me a little bit about your relationship with them, and what you’ve learned about Judaism through that part of your family?
I know there’s some beliefs that Jews should not be with Gentiles, it should only be Jews with Jews. But it happens, and it happens a lot. And Melinda [Katz, Sliwa’s ex-partner] said, ‘You know, I want to raise them Jewish.’ I said, “I don’t have a problem.”
The only problem I had was when it came time for the bar mitzvahs of both boys. She was in a Conservative synagogue, and the synagogue would not let me stand up at the bimah while my sons read their lessons. I thought, ‘Oh, no, excuse me. I would like to be able to stand up there.’ So, in order to honor my wish, she went to a Reform synagogue. And I already knew the separate lines internally within the various divisions of the Jewish faith. So she accommodated me, and I appreciated that — I liked being with my boys on an important day in their life, and I had no problem with them being raised Jews. You know, they pick up on Christianity just because it’s the majority, but they’re proud Jews.
Who are the Jewish people in your circle, whether they’re officially part of your campaign or people you consult?
Without a doubt, the man that I’ve been through so many struggles over the years is Dov Hikind. First of all, politically, he was active 38 years running for elective office in Borough Park, going back and forth to Albany. He knew Eric Adams as state senator. Obviously had a lot of dealings with him up in Albany. He certainly knew Cuomo as governor and attorney general. So he knows everyone, and he is completely in support of me because he knows, whenever Jews have been in need, he says, “Curtis was always there.”
[Hikind issued a reluctant call a week before the election for voters to back Cuomo, saying he believed Sliwa could not win.]
Do you have a favorite Jewish restaurant?
Gottlieb’s in Williamsburg. I love the cholent. And I announce, “I’m having a bowl of cholent.” Remember, I’ve had ileitis, colitis, Crohn’s disease — yeah, like a lot of Jews. You know what cholent does to a stomach. “Curtis, please, don’t subject us to that.” “No, I’m going to eat. A bowl. Of cholent.”
—
The post The JTA Q&A with Curtis Sliwa: ‘I have a legacy with the Jewish community here’ appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.