Uncategorized
How Judy Blume’s ‘Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret’ broke taboos around interfaith marriage
(JTA) — When Judy Blume’s young adult novel “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret” appeared in 1970, intermarried families were a small segment of the American Jewish population. Perhaps 17% of Jews were married to someone who wasn’t Jewish; today, 42% of married Jews have a spouse who is not Jewish, and in the past decade, 61% of Jews married non-Jewish partners.
Through the 1960s, middle-grade and young adult fiction rarely acknowledged the existence of these families, reflecting and reinforcing their outsider status. Today it is routine for authors to address the reality of inter-religious and culturally mixed families, portraying them with insight and compassion. (See “Not Your All-American Girl” by Wendy Wan-Long Shang and Madelyn Rosenberg, “Becoming Brianna” by Terri Libenson and “The Whole Story of Half a Girl” by Veera Hiranandani.)
This change was made possible partly by Blume’s story of sixth-grader Margaret Simon and her one-sided conversations with God.
Blume’s status as a pioneer in young adult literature is usually associated with her honest approach to the emotional, physical and sexual milestones of growing up, with her works still attracting readers and still finding an honored place on lists of banned books. That legacy is being celebrated in April with a new documentary, Amazon Prime Video’s “Judy Blume Forever,” and a theatrical release by Lionsgate of a feature film version of “Are You There God?”
Yet her treatment of contested identity in intermarried families is as revolutionary as her openness about bras, menstruation and sexual feelings. Actors Lena Dunham and Molly Ringwald, comedian Samantha Bee and many authors, including Raina Telgemeier, Tayari Jones and Gary Shteyngart, have cited Blume’s influence on both their lives and their work. Book lists for intermarried families frequently list the novel as a resource.
Margaret Simon is 11 years old at the start of “Are You There God?” Her Jewish dad and Christian mom have pointedly ignored the possibility that their daughter might have questions about her identity. Along with other issues of teen angst, she feels compelled to decide if she is Jewish, Christian or neither. Without any guidance, the last alternative leaves her in a frightening void. As she pointedly asks God, in her ongoing series of questions for Him, “I can’t go on being nothing forever, can I?”
Margaret’s parents, Barbara Hutchins and Herb Simon, fell in love and defied their respective parents by marrying out of their faiths. They assure Margaret that she has no religion, but can choose one when she is older, oblivious to the fact that this solution seems more of a burden than a promise of future freedom. Their avoidance of any serious engagement with either religion or culture renders any possible choice unlikely.
Blume situates Margaret’s search within the specific landscape of post-World War II America. When the Simons decide to leave their Upper West Side home in New York City and move to suburban New Jersey, their decision suggests a coded reference to their religious status. Long Island is “too social,” an implied euphemism for “too Jewish.” Living there might have made it harder for their relatively unusual situation to be discreetly ignored. On the other hand, the more affluent Westchester and Connecticut are “too expensive” and “too inconvenient.” Farbrook, New Jersey has enough Jews for it to feel right for Herb, but not so many as to make their mixed family stand out.
Margaret also suspects that her parents’ are determined to put distance between the Simons and Sylvia, her paternal grandmother, who lives in New York City. This gregarious woman shows up at their new home unannounced and toting deli foods, making it clear that Margaret’s one unambiguous connection to Judaism is not going to disappear. While Barbara’s parents utterly rejected her when she married a Jew, Sylvia has pragmatically decided to accept what she cannot change. In the postwar era, more Jews began to abandon or minimize religious practice, while still maintaining ethnically distinct customs. Like holiday observance or synagogue attendance, ethnic Jewish culture is also absent from the Simon home. Sylvia’s Jewish food, her frequent trips to Florida, even her combination of sarcasm and smothering warmth, provide Margaret with markers of the tradition her parents have eschewed.
Still, when Sylvia repeatedly asks Margaret if her (nonexistent) boyfriends are Jewish, the young girl is baffled. Given her own lack of consciousness of herself as Jewish, why would Margaret care?
Rachel McAdams and Abby Ryder Fortson in the forthcoming film adaptation of “Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret.” (Dana Hawley/Lionsgate © 2022)
In the larger world of Farbrook, Margaret’s new friends seem to have more secure identities, conveniently defined by membership either in the “Y” (Young Men’s Christian Association) or the Jewish Community Center. Perfunctory attendance at Hebrew school until after one’s bar mitzvah is the furthest extent of her peers’ Jewishness. Margaret explains that her parents are “nothing” and that, prior to their marriage, they were Jewish and Christian, as if those identities could be cast off like an article of clothing. When Mr. Benedict, her enthusiastic young teacher, distributes a questionnaire, Margaret completes the prompt “I hate” with “religious holidays.” He attempts to draw her out about this troubling answer, and she scornfully observes that her teacher acted as if “he had uncovered some deep, dark mystery.”
On one level, he has. Her mother’s blandly universal definition of God as a “nice idea,” who “belongs to everybody,” is clearly a denial of the fractures in her family members’ lives.
Blume also captures the essence of mid-century non-Orthodox Judaism as comfortably accessible, yet also somewhat empty. On a visit to Grandma Sylvia’s elegant temple, the atmosphere is quietly decorous, the sanctuary filled with well-appointed congregants and beautifully arranged flowers. Sylvia’s rabbi greets Margaret with an enthusiastic “Good Yom Tov,” which he translates as “Happy New Year,” although it is actually a generic holiday greeting.
When Margaret later visits Presbyterian and Methodist churches, she notes the remarkable similarity among all three experiences.
The novel’s one incident of specific religious practice involves Margaret’s brief, unfinished confession in a classmate’s Catholic church. Having participated in bullying, Margaret tries to assuage her guilt through a ritual alien to both her father’s Judaism and her mother’s Protestant Christianity. She even momentarily confuses the priest with the silent God of her conversations. Nothing could be further from her parents’ rejection of religion, or from Grandma Sylvia’s loving assurance to Margaret that “I knew you were a Jewish girl at heart.”
When Margaret’s Christian grandparents decide to resume contact, the suppressed anger in the Simon home finally erupts. Herb is furious, and accuses his in-laws of only wanting to meet Margaret “to make sure she doesn’t have horns!” — a caustic reference to a persistent antisemitic myth. Blume had subtly foreshadowed this disruption of the status quo in a parallel event at school. When a Jewish student, backed by his parents, refuses to sing Christmas carols, the implicit agreement of the town’s Jews to quietly conform is broken. A Christian girl, in what seems an act of retaliation, then refuses to sing Hanukkah songs. These acts of resistance reinforce Margaret’s marginal status. Her intermarried family represents neither conformity with postwar norms nor an assertion of Jewish pride.
Blume appears to tip the scales in her portrayal of Mary and Paul Hutchins, Margaret’s maternal grandparents. Entirely unlikeable, simultaneously pushy and cold, they insist that the granddaughter they had never acknowledged is Christian. After their failed visit, Grandma Sylvia returns, along with her sweet and obviously Jewish new boyfriend, Mr. Binamin (“rhymes with cinnamon”). Readers rooting for the triumph of Margaret’s Jewish roots may breathe a sigh of relief here, but hope for a satisfying ending is illusory. Margaret’s search for a stable sense of self is still unfinished, and will not be satisfied by choosing membership in either the Y or the JCC.
For young readers, the novel’s discussion of religious identity proved as life-changing as its honest portrayal of puberty and menstruation. “I related to that kind of conflict of religion,” the comedian Chelsea Handler, who grew up in a mixed Jewish-Mormon home, told Blume in 2020. “At that time, I just found out my mom was Mormon, on top of thinking she was Jewish, and your books were such a reprieve for me and such a joy.”
More than 50 years ago, Judy Blume tackled a difficult subject, about both changing demographics and the search for authenticity in American Jewish life. Margaret’s conclusion that “twelve is very late to learn” about the essence of who you are still poses a challenge, while her persistent search for a meaningful identity offers a degree of optimism.
—
The post How Judy Blume’s ‘Are You There God? It’s Me, Margaret’ broke taboos around interfaith marriage appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
How a klezmer parade became part of the annual carnival in Sao Paulo
דעם פֿאַרגאַנגענעם חודש איז אין סאַאָ־פּאָולאָ, בראַזיל פֿאָרגעקומען דער יערלעכער כּלי־זמר קאַרניוואַל און פּאַראַד — אַ טייל פֿונעם אַלגעמיינעם קאַרנאַװאַל וואָס איז די גרעסטע פֿאָלקס־שׂמחה אין לאַנד.
יעדן פֿעברואַר פֿאַרשטעלן זיך מיליאָנען מענטשן און גײען טאַנצן אױף די גאַסן פֿון טױזנטער שטעט און שטעטלעך צום טאַקט פֿון פֿרײלעכער מוזיק, דער עיקר — סאַמבאַ און אַשע מוזיק. אין באָם־רעטיראָ, אַ געגנט װאָס האָט זיך אױסגעפֿורעמט דורך כּסדרדיקע און פֿאַרשײדנאַרטיקע אימיגראַציע־כװאַליעס, איז די דאָזיקע שׂמחה געװאָרן אַ פּלאַטפֿאָרמע צו פֿײַערן אויך די ייִדישע קולטור.
אַ װידעאָ פֿונעם פּאַראַד קען מען זען דאָ.
די טעמע פֿונעם הײַיאָריקן פּאַראַד, וואָס איז פֿאָרגעקומען דעם 8טן פֿעברואַר, איז געווען „באָמרעלע“ — די הײמישע באַצײכענונג פֿון דער געגנט וווּ אימיגראַנטן האָבן געוווינט אױפֿן סאַאָ־פּאַולער ייִדיש. דער ציל איז געװען אָפּצוגעבן כּבֿוד די אומפֿאַרגעסלעכע ייִדישע פּאַרשױנען פֿונעם פֿאָלקלאָר פֿון דער אָרטיקער קהילה. אָט זענען עטלעכע פֿון זיי:
- מעכעלע דער קליענטלטשיק (פּעדלער, אױף בראַזיליאַנער ייִדיש) מיט זײַן גראָבן מאַנטל, פֿול געפּאַקט מיט סחורה
- בעני־יאַנגאַ, אַ ייִד פֿון ראַזשאַסטאַן װאָס האָט זיך אַזױ גוט אױסגעלערנט ייִדיש אַז ער איז געװאָרן אַ ייִדיש־לערער אין דער אָרטיקער שלום־עליכם שול
- דער בײגל־פֿאַרקױפֿער װאָס פֿלעג גײען איבער די גאַסן פֿון באָם־רעטיראָ שרײַענדיק „דער בײגלמאַן גײט שױן אַװעק!“
צװישן אַנדערע פֿיגורן האָט מען אויך אָפּגעגעבן כּבֿוד די אַזױ גערופֿענע „פּאָלאַקאַס“ — די ייִדישקעס, דער עיקר פֿון פּױלן, װאָס זײַנען געװאָרן קרבנות פֿון פֿרױען־האַנדל דורך דער „צבֿי־מגדל מאַפֿיע“ און אַנדערע קרימינעלע באַנדעס. דערבײַ האָט דאָס דערמאָנט אַלטע מחלוקתן און װײטיקדיקע קאַפּיטלען פֿון דער בראַזיליאַנער ייִדישער געשיכטע.
די מערהײט פֿון די דאָזיקע פֿרױען האָט מען אָפּגענאַרט נאָך איידער זיי זענען אַוועק פֿון פּוילן, צוזאָגנדיק זיי חתנים און פֿעסטע אַרבעט־שטעלעס. אָנקומענדיק קײן בראַזיל, האָט מען זײ אָבער געצװוּנגען צו אַרבעטן ווי פּראָסטיטוטקעס. די ייִדישע קהילה, אַנשטאָט זײ אױפֿצונעמען און העלפֿן פֿאַרבעסערן זײער לאַגע, האָט זײ באַרעדט און זיי אויסגעשלאָסן פֿון דער געזעלשאַפֿט. האָבן די דאָזיקע מוטיקע פֿרױען געמוזט גרינדן זײערע אײגענע ייִדישע אינסטיטוציעס, שולן און בית־עולמס.
די געגנט באָם־רעטיראָ איז דער טראַדיציאָנעלער ייִדישער קוואַרטאַל פֿון סאַאָ פּאַולאָ, װוּ טױזנטער ייִדישע אימיגראַנטן, דער עיקר פֿון מזרח־אײראָפּע, האָבן זיך באַזעצט במשך דעם 19טן און 20סטן יאָרהונדערט. אַחוץ ייִדן, האָט די געגנט מקבל־פּנים געװען איטאַליענישע, גריכישע און אַרמענישע אימיגראַנטן, װי אױך בראַזיליאַנער פֿון צפֿון־מזרח לאַנד. הײַנט װערט די געגנט איבערהױפּט באַצײכנט דורך די קאָרעאַנישע און לאַטײַן־אַמעריקאַנער באַפֿעלקערונגען. לעצטנס האַלטן די באָליװיאַנער אײַנוווינער אָפּ זייער אײגענעם קאַרנאַװאַל־פּאַראַד אין דעם קװאַרטאַל.
פּונקט אין דער דאָזיקער פֿאַרשײדנאַרטיקער טעריטאָריע דעפֿילירט די קאַפּעליע, „בלאָקאָ כּלי־זמר“. יעדעס יאָר קלײַבט זי צונױף איבער 30 כּלי־זמרים און ברענגט דערמיט די ייִדישע מוזיק צו די גאַסן לױטן בראַזיליאַנער סטיל׃ מיט שװוּנג און פֿרײד פֿון טאַנצנדיקע מאַסן.
דער בלאָקאָ באַגרענעצט זיך ניט נאָר מיט מוזיק, װאָרן עס באַטײליקן זיך אין פּאַראַד אױך אַקטיאָרן, פֿאָרשערס, פּאָעטן, פּראָדוצענטן, דעזײַנערס און אײַנװױנערס פֿון דער געגנט, װאָס גרײטן זיך צו במשך די פֿילצאָליקע רעפּעטיציעס ממש אַ יאָר לאַנג. דורך פֿילפֿאַרביקע קאָסטיומען און גרויסע טאַנצנדיקע ליאַלקעס ווערט די גאַס פֿאַרװאַנדלט אין אַ לעבעדיקן אַרכיװ פֿון ייִדישן געדעכעניש פֿון שטאָט.
דער „בלאָקאָ“ האָט דעפֿילירט צום ערשטן מאָל מיט צװײ יאָר צוריק און איז זינט דעמאָלט ממשותדיק געװאַקסן. אין 2025 איז דער לאָזונג פֿון פּאַראַד געװען „ס’איז פֿרײלעך אין שטעטל“ און מע האָט געפֿײַערט די „חתונה“ צװישן דער כּלי־זמר־מוזיק און דעם בראַזיליאַנער קאַרנאַװאַל, מיט אַ קאָלעקטיװן טאַנץ אונטער אַ גיגאַנטישער חופּה, װאָס איז געשטעלט געװאָרן אין מיטן גאַס.
אינספּירירט דורכן קאָנצעפּט פֿון דאָיִקײט, האָט דער בלאָקאָ װידער אױפֿגעלעבט די זכרונות פֿון אַ מאָל און באַװיזן אַז ייִדן געהערן אױך צו דער פֿילמיניקער קולטורעלער לאַנדשאַפֿט פֿון בראַזיל. דער בלאָקאָ כּלי־זמר האָט אױך דערװיזן אַז די רײַכע קולטור־ירושה פֿון מזרח־אײראָפּעיִשן ייִדנטום לעבט דאָ װײַטער, מחוץ אַרכיװן און אַקאַדעמישע אַנשטאַלטן. זי לעבט אױך אין דער היץ פֿונעם טראָפּישן זומער, צװישן קאָנפֿעטי, שװייס און די קלאַנגען פֿונעם קלאַרנעט.
[דער אַרטיקל איז רעדאַקטירט געוואָרן מיט דער הילף פֿון גוסטאַװאָ־גרשום עמאָס]
The post How a klezmer parade became part of the annual carnival in Sao Paulo appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Chabad on high alert after false Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens war claims
Jewish institutions are on high alert after Tucker Carlson falsely claimed on his podcast Wednesday that the Chabad-Lubavitch movement is behind the war in Iran.
Carlson claimed that Chabad is orchestrating a religious war aimed at destroying the Al-Aqsa mosque and the Dome of the Rock in Jerusalem’s Old City so that the Third Temple could be rebuilt in its place.
“This has been going on a long time in public through, in part, the efforts of a group called Chabad. C-H-A-B-A-D,” Carlson said.
Chabad, a sect of Hasidic Judaism known for its global religious outreach and houses on hundreds of college campuses, does not function as a political advocacy organization. Its teachings describe the rebuilding of the Third Temple as part of a future messianic redemption achieved through acts of mitzvot — not a project to be advanced through modern warfare or the destruction of the Al-Aqsa Mosque.
“To blame it on a Hasidic movement based in Brooklyn that just goes around the world, spreading Judaism, spreading love, spreading kindness, it’s the most ridiculous thing I’ve ever heard,” Yossi Farro, a member of the Chabad movement known for wrapping tefillin with celebrities, told the Forward in a phone interview. “He’s appealing to people that have never heard of Chabad and now, their first opinion is, this is horrible, these people are warmongers — which is the exact opposite of what we represent.”
The right-wing podcaster Candace Owens amplified the claim, posting to X, “Tucker is telling the truth about the Chabad Lubavitch.”
The comments come as Congress is set to vote today on a war powers resolution that would halt President Donald Trump’s military action in Iran. Several polls show that Republicans overwhelmingly support the decision to attack Iran, while a majority of Democrats oppose the military action.
The rhetoric also follows a series of attacks targeting Chabad celebrations. In December, a gunman opened fire at a Chabad Hanukkah celebration at Bondi Beach in Sydney, Australia. The incident left 15 people dead, including a Chabad rabbi, a Holocaust survivor and a 10-year-old girl.
In January, a driver repeatedly rammed his car into an entrance to the Chabad-Lubavitch world headquarters in Crown Heights, Brooklyn, damaging the building on a night thousands had gathered there to celebrate.
Both Owens and Carlson have ramped up their use of conspiratorial anti-Israel rhetoric over the past year. In October 2025, Carlson drew widespread condemnation after hosting avowed antisemite and white nationalist Nick Fuentes for a friendly conversation.
During yesterday’s podcast, Carlson showed photos of IDF soldiers wearing patches embroidered with an outline of the Temple Mount as evidence of his claim that Chabad was behind the war in Iran, saying that “it seems like, from the reading we did recently, that those patches actually came from Chabad.”
The photos Carlson shared match those posted by the Temple Institute in January 2024 — long before the U.S. military campaign in Iran. The Temple Institute is a Jerusalem-based nonprofit that aims to “bring about the building of the Holy Temple in our time” and is unaffiliated with Chabad.
“He is also wrong about the Temple patches. They did not come from Chabad. Had he done even basic research, that would be clear,” Rabbi Yaacov Berman, a Chabad spokesperson, posted to X. “It would also show that many who wear the Temple patches see them as symbols of faith and hope for peace, and a yearning for the day when there will be no more war.”
The post Chabad on high alert after false Tucker Carlson and Candace Owens war claims appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Top PLO, Fatah Officials: Hamas Should Join Us, No Need to Disarm
Hamas police officers stand guard, amid a ceasefire between Israel and Hamas, in Gaza City, Oct. 11, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stringer
The Palestinian Authority (PA) appears eager to hijack the Board of Peace’s UN Security Council-approved administration of Gaza and unite with Hamas to control the Strip themselves, according to comments made by a top PLO official in a new interview documented by Palestinian Media Watch.
According to Egyptian reports, PLO Executive Committee Secretary Azzam Al-Ahmad has been in Cairo meeting with Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad:
Two informed Palestinian sources said Azzam Al-Ahmad, the secretary-general of the PLO Executive Committee, held talks in Cairo with faction leaders including Hamas and Islamic Jihad about the two movements joining the PLO.
[Manassa.news (Egypt), Feb. 22, 2026]
Officials from the governing PA and its parent political body the Palestine Liberation Organization have been making repeated overtures to Hamas to join the PLO.
In November 2025, Fatah Central Committee Secretary Jibril Rajoub called on Egyptian help to “bridge the gaps” between Fatah and Hamas so they can unite against Israel.
The previous month, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas’ Advisor Mahmoud Al-Habbash declared “our hands are extended, and our hearts are open to rapprochement with Hamas.”
The implicit hope behind the unity push is that move might satisfy international demands for Hamas to relinquish control of Gaza. Back in October, Al-Habbash said that Hamas needed to disarm, but clearly the PA position has since softened. As a sweetener for Hamas to agree to join the PLO, the PLO says it is now ready to appease the terror group by allowing it to keep its weapons and remain an armed force on the ground.
The PA and PLO are aware that to legitimize absorbing Hamas into the PLO, Hamas – the perpetrators of the largest massacre of Jews since the Holocaust – must also be laundered of the stigma of being defined as a terror organization.
During al-Ahmad’s visit, he was interviewed by an Egyptian newspaper, tacitly confirming his mission:
They [US President Donald Trump and the Board of Peace] do not want Hamas to play any role in the Gaza Strip, and we reject this completely, because Hamas is part of the Palestinian national activity. It is true that it has not yet joined the PLO, but we are in a constant national dialogue with them to complete what is required for their entry into the PLO. Therefore, all talk about disarming Hamas and it being a terror organization is unacceptable to us, because Hamas is not a terror organization. [emphasis added]
[Shorouk News (Egyptian paper), Feb. 23, 2026]
The immediate follow-up question in the interview was seen as so important by Al-Ahmad that he made it into a post for his Facebook page:
Shorouk News’ Mohammed Khayal: “You mean clearly that you in the PLO do not view Hamas as a terror organization?”
Azzam Al-Ahmad: “We have never viewed it as a terror organization, and we always oppose when a decision is made by any international institution or any government classifying them as a terror organization, because they are part of the Palestinian national fabric.”
[Azzam Al-Ahmed’s Facebook page, Feb. 23, 2026]
Lest anyone thought that Al-Ahmad had misspoken, his strong statement was soon backed by Rajoub:
“Fatah Central Committee [Secretary and] member Jibril Rajoub emphasized that [PLO Executive Committee member] Azzam Al-Ahmad did not err in defending the weapons of the Hamas Movement and stating that it is part of the Palestinian national fabric.”
[Shahed, independent Palestinian news website, Feb. 24, 2026]
Meanwhile, without referencing Al-Ahmad directly, Fatah Movement Central Committee member Abbas Zaki doubled down on the renewed push for unity with the Islamist terror groups.
“Fatah Movement Central Committee member Abbas Zaki emphasized that national dialogue among Palestinian factions, foremost among them Hamas and Islamic Jihad, constitutes a ‘necessary path and an urgent national need… The real enemy of this unity is the Israeli occupation, and those who stand behind it politically and militarily, foremost among them the US, which is working to rearrange the region in a way that will serve Israel’s sovereignty at the expense of the Arab and Islamic rights.’”
[Sanad News, independent Palestinian news agency, Feb. 26, 2026]
Statements like these are nothing new for PA or PLO officials, who have been making overtures to Hamas for years. Yet the timing and stridency of this particular effort is everything, as it seeks to directly undermine the Trump-brokered ceasefire agreement and Gaza reconstruction plan based on the establishment of a technocratic government.
A technocratic government, to be known as the National Committee for the Administration of Gaza (NCAG), was chosen as the most effective way to begin to restore services to Gazans, and that makes sense. It provides the administrative structure to deliver essential services while at the same time depriving oxygen to any resumption of warfare against Israel from the territory – at least the parts of Gaza that Hamas no longer controls.
While the PA has decided to go along with the plan, a recent letter from PA Vice Chairman Hussein Al-Sheikh welcoming a PA liaison office with the NCAG stressed the PA’s expectation that this was all just a “transitional” prelude to PA control.
“These constitute practical transitional steps that contribute to alleviating the suffering of our people and providing administrative and security services, without creating administrative, legal, or security duality among our people in Gaza and the West Bank, and while reinforcing the principle of one system, one law, and one legitimate authority over arms.”
[WAFA, official PA news agency, English edition, Feb. 21, 2026]
In the PA’s mindset, whatever moves can hasten the end of this transition, the better, as the notion of suspending conflict with Israel in any Palestinian-populated area even temporarily is anathema to the PLO and Hamas alike.
As evidenced by Al-Ahmad’s latest remarks and others, the PA and PLO have no problem whatsoever with Hamas’ zeal for terrorism – but only appear to differ with the Islamist terror group on who gets to decide when and how it is used.
The author is a contributor to Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article first appeared.