Uncategorized
Falafel Tanami had its regulars. Then the New York Times declared it the best falafel in NYC.
(New York Jewish Week) — What happens when the country’s premier newspaper names a hole-in-the-wall kosher falafel joint as one of the 100 best restaurants in New York?
Hundreds of people show up every day, creating lines that occasionally snake out the door. News stations from across the globe ask for interviews, catering requests come in from all over the city and, of course, the falafel often sells out before closing time.
That’s what happened at Falafel Tanami, a tiny Israeli-owned falafel place just a few blocks off the Avenue M stop on the Q train in Midwood, Brooklyn. In April, the humble eatery at 1305 East 17th Street — featuring just three counter stools, a quiet soundtrack of Israeli religious pop and photos of Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson adorning the walls — was included in the New York Times’ list of the 100 best restaurants in New York City, curated by the paper’s senior food critic, Pete Wells.
“It has been crazy, Baruch Hashem,” said Galit Tanami, using the Hebrew for “thank God.” She owns the store with her husband, Ronen. “Everybody is so excited for us.”
“The falafel are extraordinary,” Wells wrote in his review. “The thick cushions of pita, baked to order, may be better yet. It’s hard not to go wild with the salads and vegetables and garlic, all as fresh as if you were standing in a market in Tel Aviv.”
“Now everybody wants to try it,” Tanami said of her restaurant’s signature dish.
For the first few days after the Times dropped, the restaurant had to close two hours early — at 8 p.m. instead of the usual 10 p.m. — because it ran out of inventory. Since then, they have found a good rhythm to be able to stay open regular hours, Tanami said, but it’s still busy every day.
Then again, it’s not as if Falafel Tanami had been a secret. Owner Tanami said that the restaurant has been “very, very busy” since 2019, when New York Magazine’s Grub Street declared it the “Absolute Best Falafel in New York.” And it’s long been popular among Brooklyn’s kosher-keeping observant Jews: 770 Eastern Parkway, the global headquarters of the Chabad Lubavitch movement in Crown Heights, often orders Falafel Tamani catering. Yeshiva of Flatbush, the Modern Orthodox high school just three blocks away, does the same. Israelis, too, are known to drop in for a taste of home.
Galit Tanami had no prior experience in the culinary industry before she and her husband moved to Brooklyn and opened their restaurant in 2016. Previously, the couple had been living in Israel, where they raised their two teenage sons, but Ronen wanted to move the family back to New York, where he grew up. Galit followed Ronen’s lead, and she also embraced his grandmother’s falafel recipe — for decades, his family had operated Famous Pita, a popular falafel shop also in Midwood that closed in 2014.
After seven successful years of operating Falafel Tanami, Galit and Ronen Tanami still arrive at the restaurant every morning at 6 a.m. to hand make the falafel balls and chop the fresh salads, she said. “Nobody is allowed to touch the falafel except for us,” she said.
The New York Jewish Week popped by on Monday, which is typically a slow day, according to Tanami. And yet, a steady stream of customers trickled in — many on lunch break from Edward R. Murrow High School, a public school across the street with 4,000 students and nearly 500 teachers.
“I’ve been coming here every week almost since they first opened,” said Heshy Halpern, an environmental science teacher at Murrow who keeps kosher. He said he always orders a falafel pita with all the salads — the same economical order ($8!) Wells recommended in his review.
“It’s just the best,” he told the New York Jewish Week. “Everyone in Midwood knows they’re really good — Jewish, not Jewish, everyone.”
Along with Falafel Tanami, Wells named two Jewish delis — the Upper West Side’s Barney Greengrass and Flatiron’s S&P Lunch to his list. Other restaurants included in the top 100 were the Israeli-inspired Shukette and the Jewish-owned spots Mark’s Off Madison, Dirt Candy and Shopsin’s General Store.
As for Falafel Tanami, the boost in business generated by the Times’ list has given the owners an opportunity to think about growth — they may start selling frozen falafel for customers to fry at home, Tanami said, and they’re thinking about a possible second location. “Everybody wants to do business with us now,” Tanami said.
She added that they’re considering an expansion to Crown Heights — though that would have its challenges. “If I open something, I need to be there. I’m a perfectionist,” she said. “I wouldn’t be able to go home.”
“We don’t need to rush this,” Tanami said, adding that her focus, for now, is sustaining their eatery though this busy period. “We are moving slowly and safely, Baruch Hashem.”
—
The post Falafel Tanami had its regulars. Then the New York Times declared it the best falafel in NYC. appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
New documentary captures the lively history of Yiddish theater in America
The new documentary Immigrant Songs: Yiddish Theater and the American Jewish Experience, produced by the Milken Archive of Jewish Music, is fast, entertaining and a good introduction to the topic.
Focusing mainly on the musical side of the story, but covering ‘straight plays’ as well, the film opens with a superb ‘warm-up act’: “Hu Tsa Tsa,” a stock Yiddish vaudeville number performed by the widely mourned Bruce Adler, who died in 2008 at age 63. Bursting with charm and talent, Adler, scion of a top Yiddish vaudeville family, demonstrates that Yiddish theater used to be pretty damned lively.
What follows is the oft-told story of the rise and decline of the American Yiddish theater, beginning with its prehistory in the Purimshpiels — the annual performances that for centuries served as the only secular entertainment in the Ashkenazic world. From there the film takes us to Yiddish theater’s 1876 birth in Romania, courtesy of Avrom Goldfadn, a.k.a. “The Father of Yiddish Theater.”
The film also describes Yiddish theater’s arrival in America, which, thanks to massive Jewish immigration, quickly became its capital. We learn of its influence on American theater’s styles of acting and set design. And the film describes the decline of its audience, due to assimilation and the immigration quotas of the 1920s.
There’s an excellent section on “The Big Four” Yiddish theater composers — Joseph Rumshinsky, Alexander Olshanetsky, Abe Ellstein, and Sholom Secunda. All in all, the documentary does a fine job of teaching the aleph-beyz, the ABCs, of the history of Yiddish theater to the uninitiated.
The most impressive aspect of Immigrant Songs is its well-crafted pace. Though there are a few snippets of vintage Yiddish cinema (Yiddish theater’s “kid brother”), most of the film consists of recent concert footage, some well-selected photographs and ephemera, and a lot of talking heads. Almost every prominent Yiddish theater historian was interviewed for it, along with several musicologists, an archivist, Yiddish actors, directors, producers, etc. (Full disclosure: I am one of them.) Director Jeff Janeczko cuts between the interviewees so smoothly — sometimes in mid-sentence — that it feels like they’re in the same room and feeding off each other’s energy. The movie just flies by.
There are a few errors. Marc Chagall is described as an important designer of Yiddish theater; actually he designed one minor production in Russia in 1921, and never did another. In a bizarre, and biblically illiterate, statement, one interviewee claims that Jews hadn’t developed a theater culture earlier because the Second Commandment’s prohibition of “graven images” forbade the construction of sets. (Actually it’s about idol worship.)
Another interviewee claims that the Yiddish play Der Yeshiva Bokher; oder, Der Yudisher Hamlet — The Yeshiva Student; or, The Jewish Hamlet (Yiddish plays then often had subtitles), is closely patterned on Shakespeare’s tragedy. In truth, the play — written by Isidore Zolotarevski, the prolific writer of shund (“trash”) melodramas — is not only awful, but is as close to Shakespeare as baked ham is to your grandmother’s kreplach.
The film’s biggest fault, however, is its short running time (45 minutes). This is a rich topic, and too much is left by the wayside in the interest of brevity. There’s nothing about what shund melodramas felt like, why they appealed to their audiences, and why they became the only thing a lot of people know about Yiddish theater.
There’s also nothing about the World War I-era wave of shtetl plays, which reflected immigrants’ homesickness without indulging in nostalgia, and provided some of Yiddish theater’s shining moments with plays like Green Fields, The Empty Inn and Tevye. And the most important play in the Yiddish canon, The Dybbuk, is never mentioned.
Perhaps most surprisingly, considering the film’s emphasis on music, there is no examination of Yiddish theater’s influence on Broadway’s music. (Cole Porter — ironically, the only gentile among the major composers of Broadway’s Golden Age — had a pronounced Jewish lilt in a number of his songs, and he actually attended Yiddish theater regularly.)
The film’s last section is about the renewed interest in Yiddish that began in the 1970s and ’80s with the klezmer revival. Much of it focuses on the 2018 Yiddish production of Fiddler on the Roof in Yiddish, whose success was predetermined the moment the production was announced.
For the overwhelming majority of American Jews, from the Orthodox to the unaffiliated, Fiddler is all they know about the lives of their ancestors. And though it’s a world-class piece of musical theater, as a work of social history Fiddler is as phony as a glass eye. Nevertheless, for American Jews it’s a sacred text.
Fiddler was a huge hit, but it was a gimmick, a one-off, whose success does very little for the future of Yiddish theater. Worse, the Yiddish — not the text, but the lines spoken by most of the actors — was often mispronounced and had the wrong intonation. (One elderly gentleman of my acquaintance, a native Yiddish speaker from Czechoslovakia, told me he didn’t understand a word the actors said, and spent the whole evening reading the English supertitles.)
What follows the Fiddler section in Immigrant Songs is mostly bromides. But the best current Yiddish theater reflects the kind of fresh thinking that keeps the form alive.
An occasional well-presented museum piece, like the Folksbiene’s 2016 revival of Rumshinsky’s operetta The Golden Bride, is a very worthwhile project (though it, too, suffered from poorly spoken Yiddish). But the most dynamic contemporary Yiddish theater is, in Jeffrey Shandler’s apt phrase, “post vernacular” — i .e., the use of Yiddish is self-conscious, a deliberate choice rather than something that’s done automatically, as it would have been a century ago when there were a lot more Yiddish speakers in the world.
An example of this is the 2017 neo-realist film Menashe, which could far more easily and conventionally have been made in English. Or a well-known piece done in Yiddish translation, like Shane Baker’s stunning Yiddish translation of Waiting for Godot, can become something much more valuable than a mere stunt. The Yiddish version, under Moshe Yassur’s straightforward direction, humanized the play, stripping it of the encrusted pretentiousness that had hidden its soul. (When it was presented in the International Samuel Beckett Festival in Ireland, multiple audience members approached the cast afterwards with the same reaction: “I don’t speak a word of Yiddish. But I’ve seen Godot five or six times, and this is the first time I understood it.”)
There’s a lot to be learned from Immigrant Songs. If you find yourself hungry for more, you couldn’t do better than to seek out YIVO’s online Yiddish theater course “Oh, Mama, I’m in Love!” But by all means, start with Immigrant Songs. It’s a very entertaining and informative appetizer.
The post New documentary captures the lively history of Yiddish theater in America appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
UK PM Starmer Says There Could Be New Powers to Ban Pro-Palestinian Marches
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer gives a media statement at Downing Street in London, Britain, April 30, 2026. Photo: REUTERS/Jack Taylor/File photo
British Prime Minister Keir Starmer said the government could ban pro-Palestinian marches in some circumstances because of the “cumulative effect” the demonstrations had on the Jewish community after two Jewish men were stabbed in London on Wednesday.
Starmer told the BBC that he would always defend freedom of expression and peaceful protest, but chants like “Globalize the Intifada” during demonstrations were “completely off limits” and those voicing them should be prosecuted.
Pro-Palestinian marches have become a regular feature in London since the October 2023 attack by Hamas on Israel that triggered the Gaza war. Critics say the demonstrations have generated hostility and become a focus for antisemitism.
Protesters have argued they are exercising their democratic right to spotlight ongoing human rights and political issues related to the situation in Gaza.
Starmer said he was not denying there were “very strong legitimate views about the Middle East, about Gaza,” but many people in the Jewish community had told him they were concerned about the repeat nature of the marches.
Asked if the tougher response should focus on chants and banners, or whether the protests should be stopped altogether, Starmer said: “I think certainly the first, and I think there are instances for the latter.”
“I think it’s time to look across the board at protests and the cumulative effect,” he said, adding that the government needed to look at what further powers it could take.
Britain raised its terrorism threat level to “severe” on Thursday amid mounting security concerns that foreign states were helping fuel violence, including against the Jewish community.
“We are seeing an elevated threat to Jewish and Israeli individuals and institutions in the UK,” the head of counter-terrorism policing, Laurence Taylor, said in a statement, adding that police were also working “against an unpredictable global situation that has consequences closer to home, including physical threats by state-linked actors.”
Uncategorized
War Likely to Resume After Trump’s Rejection of Latest Proposal, Says IRGC General
Iranians carry a model of a missile during a celebration following an IRGC attack on Israel, in Tehran, Iran, April 15, 2024. Photo: Majid Asgaripour/WANA (West Asia News Agency) via REUTERS
i24 News – A senior Iranian military figure said that fighting with the US was “likely” to resume after President Donald Trump stated he was dissatisfied with Tehran’s latest proposal, regime media reported on Saturday.
The comments of General Mohammad Jafar Asadi, one of the top Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) commanders, were relayed by the Fars news agency, considered as a mouthpiece of the the powerful paramilitary body.
“Evidence has shown that the Americans do not not adhere to any commitments,” Asadi was quoted as saying.
He further added that Washington’s decision-making was “primarily media-driven aimed first at preventing a drop in oil prices and second at extricating themselves from the mess they have created.”
Iranian armed forces are ready “for any new adventures or foolishness from the Americans,” he said, going to assert that the Iran war would prove for the US a tragedy comparable with what was for Israel the October 7 massacre.
“Just as our martyred Leader said that the Zionist regime will never be the same as before the Al‑Aqsa Storm operation [the name chosen by Hamas leadership for the October 7, 2023 massacre in southern Israel], the United States will also never return to what it was before its attack on Iran,” he said. “The world has understood the true nature of America, and no matter how much malice it shows now, it is no longer the America that many once feared.”
