Uncategorized
For ill and for good, this ‘Wicked’ song has become ubiquitous
In the final minutes of the second act of the Broadway musical Wicked, Glinda and Elphaba sing together one last time. They have reached their ultimate, iconic forms: Glinda is the Good Witch, ringletted and resplendent. Elphaba is the Wicked Witch of the West, caped and glittering. They suspect they will never see each other again. And so the two women sing a duet that is part yearbook note, part deathbed confession.
“Because I knew you,” Glinda sings, “I have been changed for good.”
Jenna and her husband watched from their orchestra seats. It was 2005, Wicked was the toast of Broadway, and the tickets were a splurge. When the actress playing Elphaba sang, “It well may be that we will never meet again in this lifetime, so let me say before we part: so much of me is made of what I learned from you. You’ll be with me, like a handprint on my heart,” Jenna’s eyes filled with tears. Her husband reached over and took her hand.
Four months later, they separated. On her birthday that year, Jenna’s ex-husband sent her a card. “Because I knew you,” he wrote, “I have been changed for good.”
“I love the double meaning of that,” said Jenna, now 57 and a volunteer manager at a nonprofit in Maryland. “I have been changed to be a better person, but I have also been changed permanently, for good. There’s no going back.”
The second life of ‘For Good’
Amidst cheers and ballyhoo — to borrow a phrase from Glinda — a second Wicked movie is now hitting theaters. To mark the distinction between this movie and its predecessor, the 2025 edition is called Wicked: For Good.
“For Good,” the song, has attained an unusual second life outside of the musical. In Wicked, Jewish composer-lyricist Stephen Schwartz launched a number of forever entries into the musical theater book of standards — “Defying Gravity,” “Popular,” “The Wizard and I” — but “For Good” belongs to an exclusive category: songs that have become staples at graduations, retirement celebrations and funerals. If you see a cap and gown, you are not safe from a heartfelt rendition of “For Good.” If there is a casket on a table, these days you may be as likely to hear “For Good” as you are to hear “Wind Beneath My Wings” or “Candle in the Wind.”
“As a cantor, it’s impossible to hear ‘For Good’ from Wicked without sensing that the song is doing something deeply Jewish, whether or not its creators intended it,” said Neil Michaels of Temple Israel in West Bloomfield, Michigan. “It has become, in many sanctuaries and life-cycle moments, a kind of contemporary niggun, carrying emotional truth where spoken liturgy might fall short.”
“I’ve played it for a funeral,” said Joe Wicht, who has accompanied singers for 18 years at the San Francisco piano bar Martuni’s. “I’ve played it for singers at wedding receptions, too.” But most often, he said, the song is sung “by two best friends.” Duos who request “For Good” are often about to be separated by a move, or redefined by one person getting married, he said. Sometimes, the singers are a parent and a child.
“This isn’t the kind of song where people just willy-nilly decide to sing it in a bar, a la karaoke,” he said. “It’s always sung with intent.”
“It’s always the same scenario — best friends,” he added. “I’ve never heard this song performed between two people in love.”
An anthem of friendship for this generation
Few songs aim to articulate the way that two people can alter each other’s lives and edit each other’s characters, sans romantic love. Schwartz has said in interviews that he wrote the song after sitting down with his daughter and asking her about her best friend. “If you could never see Sarah again and you had one chance to tell her what she’s meant to you,” he asked, “what would you say?”
The song, which lifts some of Schwartz’s daughter’s words directly, literalizes the way two people can blend without losing their own specificity. It begins with a solo for each woman, then they sing in counterpoint, then harmony. “For Good” is sometimes derided as schmaltzy and overearnest. But its impact is indelible: it is a song people rely on to express a kind of love that often goes unsung.
“For those of us who have lost someone,” wrote vocal coach and therapist Petra Borzynski in a recent essay, ‘For Good’ is “the song that speaks the unspeakable: that the person who is gone still lives in every choice we make, every kindness we extend, every moment we choose differently because they existed (for better, for worse).”
Borzynski sang the song for years. Then her mother died, at 59, of ovarian cancer. When Borzynski attempted to sing the song, she recalled, “my voice literally broke.”
When 75-year-old Melbourne resident Des Flannery was in his late 60s, he got into a fight with his best friend, Max. They made up when Des sent Max a written apology, Des’ daughter, Breanna, told me. In his note, Des quoted the opening lyrics from “For Good.” When Max died several years later, Des eulogized him, reciting the lyrics that had helped bring him and his friend back together.
“He wasn’t confident he could get through it without becoming a wailing mess,” his daughter, Breanna Flannery, said. “So reading it seemed the best way to get it out.” (Afterwards, women mourners crowded around Des to praise his bold, emotional writing, unaware that he had been quoting Wicked.)
Drew Wutke, a pianist at Marie’s Crisis, the famed Broadway musical singalong bar in the West Village, is used to looking up from the piano during “For Good” and seeing drinkers crying into their tequila sodas.
“It is the friendship anthem of the last 25 years,” he said.
“I don’t know another way to say it other than: it is a heaven-blessed song,” he said. “The hope that soul-friendship exists, that chosen family exists — those are the wires that get tripped when that introduction starts,” he said, humming the song’s opening notes. “Even though it is lyrically nonsensical at times.” One lyric often maligned even by fans is, “Like a seed dropped by a sky bird, in a distant wood.”
“A skybird! Please!” said Wutke. “We could have workshopped that lyric.”
I’ve heard it said…but what does it mean?
As with the rest of the musical, the universality of “For Good” is both a strength and weakness. Wicked is a musical about a woman who faces cruelty and discrimination because of her skin color. It has been called a parable about fascism, and an allegory for racism and ableism. But no Black actress played Elphaba full-time on Broadway for the musical’s first 22 years. And though one character in Wicked uses a wheelchair, the first time a wheelchair user ever played Nessarose was in last year’s movie.
Though the Wicked movies have been released during a time of rising authoritarianism, the movie’s stars and creators have limited themselves to comments like the joint statement Cynthia Erivo and Ariana Grande made recently, which spoke of “times like these that feel so divided, as if we’re reading from different pages and different books.”
Though the song is deeply meaningful to listeners, the meaning those listeners derive is not consistent. “At its core, ‘For Good’ is about hineni — ‘here I am’: standing fully present in relationship,” said the cantor, Michaels. “It is the musical embodiment of the Jewish belief that who we become is inextricably shaped by the people who walk beside us.” The song, he argued, “echoes the teaching that every person you encounter teaches you something, that chevruta (sacred partnership) shapes the soul, and that human connection is one of Judaism’s most powerful agents of transformation.”
No one religion or perspective has a monopoly on interpreting Schwartz’s message. Ali, a friend of mine, and a 31-year-old interior designer from Los Angeles, grew up singing songs from Wicked with her friend Brittany. “She would always be Elphaba and I would always be Glinda, even though I secretly wanted to sing the Elphaba part,” Ali said.
Ali was active in the Catholic church, and the girls were often asked to perform at fundraisers and other events. They reserved “For Good” for the finale. “It’s about connection and sisterhood, and friendship,” Ali said. “It was a tearjerker.”
As 14 year olds, the two girls were summoned to perform in a hotel ballroom for a group of about “200 nuns and other women,” Ali remembered. After the song, the nuns thanked them profusely for lending their voices to their cause. The two girls exited the stage to wild applause, then sat down to eat lunch and when they looked back up, “they were literally showing fetuses on the screen and just spewing anti-abortion rhetoric,” Ali remembered. The shift was shocking, she said. “From sisterhood and friendship to hating other women for having abortions.”
Changed for good? Or just good at singing?
“For Good” is usually performed in the context of honoring another person. No matter how tragic or poignant an event is, though, for a theater kid it’s also an opportunity to perform “For Good.” If that sounds cynical, it comes from personal experience: Your author performed the Elphaba part at her high school graduation. I knew that it was my job to move the audience to tears, but my thoughts were largely about how to achieve vocal clarity and resonance. Also, my ankle was broken, and my secular high school had rented out a synagogue for graduation, so I sang the song on the steps of the bima, mindful of the fact that my cast was wider than the steps and if I gestured emotionally during the “like a comet pulled from orbit” harmony I could roll forward and crash to the ground.
But Victoria, 21, who sang the song just a few years ago at her high school graduation in Port Richey, Florida, begs to differ. “I think that vocally, it is not an extremely challenging song,” she said. The real challenge, she said, is allowing yourself to feel the meaning of the song, and conveying that depth of feeling to the audience. “I couldn’t help but really internalize the lyrics I was singing,” she said.
“I was reflecting on all of the relationships I had made with my fellow students, as well as my teachers,” Victoria said. “And I knew then that they had changed and helped create the person I am today, because I knew them.” Among masses who will see Wicked: For Good in the coming weeks, there will be many who weep throughout the title song, and many who call the song saccharine and sentimental. The second group is missing the point. “For Good” is meant to be saccharine. It takes on the most cringe-inducing, embarrassing topic in the world: human connection. If you love it, it probably came into your life for a reason.
The post For ill and for good, this ‘Wicked’ song has become ubiquitous appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
With anti-Arab campaign ad, Netanyahu stoops to new moral and political lows
Israeli election campaigns have often been ugly. They have featured exaggeration, fearmongering and outright deception. But even by those standards, the first major campaign advertisement by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s Likud party, posted on Netanyahu’s X account on Tuesday, managed to shock much of the country.
The AI-generated video depicts former military chief Gadi Eisenkot, who has become the standard-bearer for the opposition, walking through a sunlit field toward a young Jewish man before passing him by to embrace Mansour Abbas of Ra’am, the United Arab List, instead.
The young man looks strikingly like Eisenkot’s son, Gal, who was killed fighting in Gaza in late 2023 — although Likud insists he isn’t meant to. Strictly speaking, there is enough difference to sustain the protestations. The young man has longer, wavier hair than Gal Eisenkot did — just enough, perhaps, to preserve plausible deniability. Yet almost everyone I know believed they were watching a father joyfully approaching his slain son, seemingly restored to life, only to ignore him in favor of an Arab political leader at a time when Arab political participation in Israel is particularly contentious.
The only possible explanation: Likud wants their campaign to be as mean as possible. Or perhaps that they believe that anything that creates a buzz — and therefore distracts from the governing coalition’s disastrous and controversial policies, including a wildly unpopular recent legislative blitz — is a good thing.
And buzz there is. The perception that a father’s personal loss had been weaponized for electoral gain struck many as a line that simply should not be crossed. “This is Netanyahu, and this is his machine of incitement”, wrote Einav Zangauker, whose son was held hostage in Gaza by Hamas, on social media. “This isn’t politics,” Zangauker added, but rather “an attack on a bereaved father and an assault on his dignity. It is the lowest of the low.”
“I turn to elected representatives, activists, and all candidates from all parties, and demand that you do not cross red lines. Do not turn rivals into enemies,” Israeli President Isaac Herzog said. “I call on the people of Israel, in a clear voice: Remember that elections are not a civil war.”
But even if one puts aside the controversy surrounding the young man altogether, the advertisement remains deeply troubling. It is, at its core, an exercise in incitement against Ra’am — and, by extension, against the very idea that Arab citizens may legitimately participate in governing Israel.
Abbas himself accused Netanyahu of “trying to incite between different parts of society”; about a fifth of Israelis are Arab, and the ad was obviously trying to delegitimize collaboration with the parties who generally represent them.
From Likud’s perspective, that too is logical — so long as they ignore the goal of Israel remaining a democratic country in which component ethnic groups live in harmony. It’s logical because Arab parties have always been part of the opposition to Likud and the chances are high that Eisenkot might need them, even passively, to successfully craft a coalition after the Oct. 27 election.
This isn’t just dangerous. It ignores the essential role that Arab parties have played in building toward a strong Israeli future.
Ra’am, under Abbas, has been the most integrationist Arab party Israel has ever seen. Abbas broke with decades of Arab political orthodoxy by arguing that Arab citizens should seek influence through practical cooperation with whichever Zionist government Israelis elected. He has repeatedly recognized Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people while demanding full equality for its Arab citizens.
Whatever one thinks of his politics, these choices have represented one of the boldest experiments in Jewish-Arab partnership since the state’s founding.
That experiment briefly succeeded. Ra’am joined Naftali Bennett and Yair Lapid’s coalition in 2021 and demonstrated that Arab participation in government could become something ordinary rather than revolutionary.
More awkward still for Likud, Netanyahu himself spent some weeks after the 2021 election attempting to persuade Abbas to support — or even participate in — his own coalition. Those negotiations failed for one principal reason: Far-right firebrand Bezalel Smotrich — now Netanyahu’s finance minister — refused to countenance a government dependent on an Arab party. Without Ra’am, Netanyahu lacked a majority.
It is therefore surreal to portray Eisenkot’s willingness to work with Ra’am as somehow beyond the democratic pale, when not so long ago, Netanyahu himself tried to do precisely the same thing.
Nor should anyone pretend that Arab parties suddenly became relevant because of Eisenkot. Since the emergence of today’s political blocs, Arab parties have almost invariably belonged to the anti-Likud camp. Any center-left coalition aspiring to govern has depended, directly or indirectly, on their parliamentary support. That is not a distortion of Israeli democracy. It is one of its enduring structural realities.
Which brings us to the larger significance of this episode.
Many Israelis have long predicted that this Likud campaign would barely concern policy at all. They expected, instead, an effort to delegitimize any prospective change government by portraying it as illegitimate because it relied on Arab parties. They expected renewed attempts to cast Arab political participation as inherently suspect. They expected emotional manipulation to substitute for argument and personal attacks to eclipse serious debate. Some feared renewed efforts to discourage Arab turnout and disqualify Arab parties from the ballot.
That appears to be exactly what they’re getting.
The remarkable thing is not merely that Likud produced this advertisement, but that doing so was effectively its first act of the campaign, which kicked off after the Knesset recently went into recess.
Before voters had heard competing visions for Israel’s economy, security or diplomacy, the country’s governing party chose to launch its campaign by inflaming fears about Arab political participation while employing imagery that countless Israelis immediately interpreted as mocking one father’s unbearable personal loss.
By the next day, competing ads using a similar aesthetic were put out by opponents of Netanyahu. One depicted Netanyahu on a similar field running past a soldier to hug a Haredi politician holding a sign that says — as many Haredi anti-draft protesters chant — “we’d rather die than serve.”
One reason AI is so attractive to political strategists is because it blurs responsibility. Images can be carefully engineered to evoke a conclusion while remaining just different enough to deny that such a conclusion was ever the intention. The technology offers something every spin doctor craves: emotional impact coupled with plausible deniability.
“I do not think we can allow this to continue,” lamented David Lau, a former chief rabbi of Israel, who has served in the military. “We must stop all these disputes, all this talk, and all these behaviors. This path does not lead to building anything. It does not lead to peace. It is a bad path, and I am even more concerned about the next generation.”
It is entirely possible that this advertisement will prove to have established the moral tone of the campaign. Israel deserves better.
The post With anti-Arab campaign ad, Netanyahu stoops to new moral and political lows appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Reed College agrees to sweeping reforms as part of Title VI antisemitism settlement
(JTA) — Reed College has agreed to a host of far-reaching institutional changes, including asserting that targeting Jewish Zionists will be considered discriminatory, in order to settle multiple federal antisemitism investigations, parties to the complaint announced Wednesday.
The settlement was announced by the Anti-Defamation League and the Brandeis Center for Human Rights Under Law, which jointly filed the complaint, under Title VI of the Civil Rights Act, which prohibits discrimination at any institution receiving federal funds. It comes as campuses across the country, facing threats of losing federal funding under the Trump administration, have demonstrated willingness to negotiate new antisemitism protections.
As part of the agreement, the private Portland, Oregon, liberal arts school says it will insert language into its discrimination policy asserting that “for many Jewish people, Zionism is integral to their religious, ancestral and/or ethnic Jewish identity,” and that “targeting Jews on the basis of their Zionist identity” will be considered discriminatory.
The school will also contract a third-party consultant to monitor and report on its effectiveness in adhering to antisemitism protections, role that is unusual in similar Title VI agreements. The agreement says Reed will “consider” the International Holocaust Remembrance Association’s working definition of antisemitism, which includes some criticisms of Israel, and implement antisemitism training for faculty and staff.
“We take concerns about antisemitism, and all forms of unlawful discrimination, seriously, and we will continue to support the well-being, safety, and success of every member of our community,” a Reed College spokesperson told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency in a statement acknowledging the agreement. Reed declined to comment further.
ADL CEO Jonathan Greenblatt and Brandeis Center officials praised the agreement in a release as a potential model for other colleges.
“We believe it should serve as a model for other schools,” Denise Katz-Prober, director of legal initiatives at the Brandeis Center, told JTA about the agreement. The required language in Reed’s discrimination guidelines, she said, is “very clear about what constitutes anti-Zionist conduct in violation of civil rights and in violation of the policy.”
“This outcome demonstrates how the Title VI process can work to effectively protect Jewish students,” Greenblatt said in his own statement.
Around 100 students at Reed College are Jewish, or about 7% of the total student body, according to estimates from Hillel International. A request for comment to the director of PDX Hillel, which serves Jewish students at Reed and others in the region, was not immediately returned.
The resolution stems from two anonymous Title VI antisemitism complaints from Jewish former Reed students, both filed in 2024 under the Biden administration. One of those cases related to a student whose dorm-room mezuzah was vandalized, and who herself was later pelted with rocks, during a pro-Palestinian demonstration in spring 2024. The student later left the school out of concern for her safety.
Both of the described acts would have already been considered violations of school policy for reasons unrelated to the student’s Jewish or Zionist identity. Brandeis’s Katz-Prober argued both should have also been considered in the context of her targeting by anti-Zionist activists.
“It might be difficult for someone to, at first glance, understand whether it was simply an assault or an assault motivated by bias,” she said. The case, she said, demonstrated how in some cases, “‘Zionist’ is merely a codeword for Jew.”
Katz-Prober also touted the agreement’s mandate that the school bring on a third-party compliance consultant, separate from its Title VI coordinator. While she insisted that such a role would be “independent” and free of bias, she noted that both the ADL and the Brandeis Center would have a role in their selection.
“Both sides get a say,” she said.
The post Reed College agrees to sweeping reforms as part of Title VI antisemitism settlement appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs cruises to GOP nomination for governor amid allegations of antisemitism
(JTA) — Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs, who has drawn criticism for ties to white nationalist figures, will officially be the Republican nominee for Arizona governor, after winning the primary on Tuesday night.
Biggs, who is backed by President Donald Trump, has drawn criticism for encouraging Stew Peters, an internet personality, and appearing on his show. Peters has labeled Judaism a “death cult” and has called for a “final solution” that involves the deportation of American Jews, and multiple watchdogs identify him as promoting antisemitism.
“Keep preaching,” Biggs told Peters at the end of his June 2023 appearance on the show, during which they discussed government corruption and Biggs agreed with Peters that the FBI should be abolished.
Biggs, 67, who won handily with 73.4% of votes according to multiple media outlets, will challenge Democratic Gov. Katie Hobbs in what is expected to be a competitive race in November. Biggs has represented Arizona’s 5th Congressional District, which is outside of Phoenix, since 2017.
His opponent in the GOP primary, Rep. David Schweikert, had put out a campaign mailer in March tying Biggs to white supremacy and antisemitism. The mailer featured mentions of Biggs’ interview with Peters as well as Biggs’ endorsement of Texas GOP candidate Brandon Herrera, who owned a copy of “Mein Kampf.”
Biggs’ campaign did not respond to the Jewish Telegraphic Agency’s request for comment, but in a local TV interview last month he called the accusations politically motivated and said, “This notion that I am antisemitic is absolutely one of the most ludicrous, insane arguments ever.”
In 2024, Biggs opposed the bipartisan Antisemitism Awareness Act, which passed in the House of Representatives. Biggs wrote that he opposes antisemitism and that the “pro-Hamas, pro-genocide, anti-Israel events happening across the nation are sickening.” He rejected the legislation, he said, because it was “so poorly drafted that it violates the Constitution and could have serious ramifications for the Christian community.” Right wing Republicans objected especially to the bill citing a definition of antisemitism that included as an example the claim that the Jews killed Jesus.
That same year, Biggs attended a rally co-sponsored by the Proud Boys, an extremist militia style group. In 2019, he spoke at a “Patriotism over Socialism” rally in Arizona, which watchdogs warned would draw extremist groups.
Media Matters, a group that mostly monitors right-wing groups, in 2023 wrote that “the links between Biggs and far-right extremists have been well-documented,” citing among other things his ties to another far-right group, the Oath Keepers.
The Republican Jewish Coalition did not respond to a question over whether it would support Biggs’ run for governor.
At a campaign event on Tuesday, Hobbs skewered Biggs for his denial of Trump’s 2020 election loss, and for not acknowledging Hobbs’ narrow 2022 gubernatorial victory over Republican Kari Lake.
This article originally appeared on JTA.org.
The post Arizona Rep. Andy Biggs cruises to GOP nomination for governor amid allegations of antisemitism appeared first on The Forward.
