Uncategorized
Richard Belzer was a Jewish comedian. Why didn’t his obituaries say so?
(JTA) — Ever hear Bob Dylan’s “Like a Rolling Stone” sung in Yiddish dialect? It used to be a regular bit performed by comedian and actor Richard Belzer, who died this week at 78. He also used to do a routine about Bob Dylan’s bar mitzvah in which he recited a Hebrew prayer in the singer’s distinctive tone. A similar Elvis bar mitzvah bit was also part of his routine.
Surprisingly, Belzer performed these niche routines in numerous comedy venues and even on the nationally televised “The Late Show with David Letterman.” In addition to a variety of other Jewish references embedded in his act, Belzer also performed Yiddish-inflected parodies of Prince’s “Let’s Go Crazy” and “When Doves Cry.”
But like so many American comedians of the Hebraic persuasion, Belzer didn’t really work Jewish. The bulk of his act was general and observational. To be sure, there were bits and pieces of Jewish material that can be found scattered about his comedic oeuvre, though to have the broad appeal he achieved, he understood that he had to deal in comic generalities. But to have thrown bits like Dylan’s bar mitzvah into routines for venues as broad as Letterman is an indication that he was truly dedicated to his Jewish material.
Moreover, he enjoyed it. Around 2003, after he’d snagged a contract to do a special on a cable network, he approached Letterman’s legendary bandleader, Paul Schaffer, and told him he wanted to do something “Jewish” for the show. Schaffer suggested The Barton Brothers’ risqué Yiddish radio ad parody song “Joe and Paul.” Belzer loved the idea. The duo learned the Yiddish lines and performed the tune, which, in veiled Yiddish tones, talks about masturbation and going to a prostitute named “Cock-eyed Jenny.” It was so well-received and the two enjoyed it so much, they began to do it in other venues. It eventually wound up on a 2008 album titled “The Jewish Songbook,” together with songs sung by Neil Sedaka and Barbra Streisand.
Which is why it’s been strange to read obit after obit in outlets like The New York Times, The Guardian and The Hollywood Reporter, among others, that didn’t bother to mention that Belzer was Jewish — even when, as the Jewish Telegraphic Agency pointed out, the character for which he was best known, Det. John Munch on “Homicide: Life on the Street” and “Law & Order: Special Victims Unit,” identified as Jewish. Obituaries, after all, are meant to be the final stock-taking of a person’s life. They should include the basics of who they were. And one of the basics of Richard Belzer is that he was a Yid.
Moreover, according to Paul Shaffer, he was a proud one. I should also point out that I don’t mean Jewish in a religious sense. Belzer, after all, appears to have been an atheist, so what is meant here is Jew as an ethnic category, one that apparently confounds a lot of people and which results in many Jewish artists being described as anything but Jewish.
To call Burt Bacharach an “American composer” or Barbara Walters a “pioneering woman newscaster” is accurate, but misses a significant ethno-cultural aspect of these people, one that was integrally responsible for making them who they are and influencing their creative choices. The notion that “Jewish” is something more than a religious denomination — that it’s a wide-ranging culture that includes art, literature, music, food, folkways and languages — is terribly difficult to grasp for some people.
One case in point is an excellent book by Kliph Nesteroff that appeared in 2015 called “The Comedians,” which richly details the history of stand-up comedy in America. Assiduously researched, it’s become the definitive work on the topic. The book, however, deracinates the history of the field. From reading it, you would never know that 20th-century American comedy was largely a Jewish enterprise. In fact, you’d hardly know that Jews were involved at all. You will read about comedians such as Milton Berle, Joan Rivers, Lenny Bruce and Jerry Seinfeld, but you’ll have no idea that any of them are Jews, or that Jewish history and culture might have had at least a nominal influence in their work and in their field. It’s like a history of opera that doesn’t bother to mention Italians: They weren’t the only ones involved, but the field would have been far poorer without their distinct contributions.
The matter of the mysteriously disappearing Jew occurs in other industries as well. It’s particularly egregious in the art world and popped up last year at the opening of the Academy Museum of Motion Pictures, a lavishly funded new institution that celebrated the diversity of Hollywood, touting the contributions of minorities involved in the film industry. However, the one minority they initially left out was the one that was instrumental in building that very industry. It’s all part of a phenomenon comedian David Baddiel describes as “Jews don’t count.” They’re not considered a minority among the many others and have apparently become white people who don’t believe in Jesus. As such, they’re not worthy of distinction.
History, however, tells a different story. When Jews began to come to this country en masse at the end of the 19th century, the culture they met often mocked and derided them. Suffering discrimination in multiple realms, they were excluded from certain neighborhoods, clubs and a variety of occupations. Universities placed quotas on them. Many hotels denied them entry, a fact that led to the creation of hundreds of Jewish hotels in New York’s Catskill Mountains. While American attitudes toward Jews eventually changed, a fact that allowed them to become full participants in society, they still find themselves victimized by Jew-hatred. Even though it’s often denied, the mystery of Jewish difference, apparently, is still a thing.
And for Richard Belzer, it was a thing he obviously enjoyed. Comedy writer and novelist Seth Greenland, who worked on numerous projects with Belzer and whose first novel was based on him, told me, “Something about Richard was quintessentially Jewish. He was kind, disputatious, intellectually curious, and hilarious. Although he wasn’t at all religious, he was proud to be Jewish and embraced that identity.”
Alan Zweibel, a comedy writer who worked with Belzer beginning in the mid-1970s on “Saturday Night Live,” added, “Belz made no bones about being Jewish in his act or in his life.” Zweibel once took Belzer to his parents’ Long Island home for a Friday night dinner, over which the comedian bonded with Mr. and Mrs. Zweibel over milchig and fleishig issues, the minutiae of keeping kosher. Alan’s father pointed to Belzer and told his son, “You could learn a lot from this guy.”
“Belz and Gilbert Gottfried would always do Jewish shtick and saw themselves in a long line of Jewish comics,” said author Ratso Sloman. “And one time I was at Catch [A Rising Star], probably in the mid ’80s and at the end of the night, Belz and Gilbert went on stage and did dueling old Jewish weather forecasters. It was so hilarious, I almost pissed my pants.”
Paul Schaffer also recalled how Belzer once accompanied him to say Kaddish for Schaffer’s father at the Carlebach Shul on the Upper West Side. “I didn’t know what kind of Jewish education he had,” Schaffer told me, “but the cat could daven [pray].” Paul added that he and Belzer once bonded over old cassettes of Friars Club roasts. One of the tapes was of a roast emceed by DJ and Sinatra expert William B. Williams (born Velvel Breitbard), who, whenever someone’s joke bombed, would begin to utter the Jewish prayer for the dead — “Yisgadal, yisgadash, shemey rabo….” — and get big laughs. Belzer loved it so much, he stole it and would recite the prayer onstage at subsequent roasts whenever a comic bombed, and even when his own jokes died.
Yisgadal, yisgadash, Belz. You will be missed.
—
The post Richard Belzer was a Jewish comedian. Why didn’t his obituaries say so? appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
British Airways breaks ties with Louis Theroux after interview with ‘Death to the IDF’ artist Bob Vylan
(JTA) — British Airways has dropped its sponsorship of documentarian Louis Theroux’s podcast following an interview with British punk musician Bobby Vylan where the artist defended his chants of “death, death to the IDF” at the Glastonbury music festival.
Following the band’s Glastonbury performance in June, the two members of Bob Vylan had their U.S. visas revoked by the State Department ahead of a planned tour this month. The BBC also said the livestream of the performance broke its guidelines because Bob Vylan’s chants could “fairly be characterised as antisemitic.”
Bob Vylan’s frontman, whose real name is Pascal Robinson-Foster, Theroux that he did not regret the chants during the interview.
“If I was to go on Glastonbury again tomorrow? Yeah, I would do it again. I’m not regretful of it,” said Vylan. “I’d do it again tomorrow, twice on Sundays. I’m not regretful of it at all. Like, the subsequent backlash that I’ve faced is minimal. It’s minimal compared to what people in Palestine are going through.”
Robinson-Foster also criticized a report by the Community Security Trust, British Jewry’s antisemitism watchdog, that found antisemitic incidents had spiked the day after Bob Vylan’s set, telling Theroux that it was unclear what the group was “counting as antisemitic.”
“I don’t think I have created an unsafe atmosphere for the Jewish community,” said Robinson-Foster. “If there were large numbers of people being like, going out and ‘Bob Vylan made me do this,’ then maybe I might go, woof, I’ve had a negative impact here. Again, in that report, what definition are they going by? We don’t know that.”
During the interview, Robinson-Foster also said that the “focus” should not have been placed on the “death to the IDF” chant, but rather “on the conditions that allow for that chant to exist.”
“Ultimately, the fight is against white supremacy, right?,” said Robinson-Foster. “That is what the fight is against. And I think white supremacy is displayed so vividly in Zionists.”
In response, Theroux replied, “They say we’re not white, we’re Jewish, right?”
Later, Theroux appeared to agree with Robinson-Foster’s assertion that the “Zionist movement and the war crimes being committed by Israel” should be viewed through the “lens of white supremacy.”
“I think I’d add to that, there’s an even more macro lens which you can put on it, which is that Jewish identity in the Jewish community, as expressed in Israel, has become almost like an acceptable quote, unquote, way of understanding ethno-nationalism,” said Theroux, later adding that “this sense of post-Holocaust Jewish exceptionalism or Zionist exceptionalism, has become a role model on the national stage for what these white identitarians would like to do in their own countries.”
Following the interview, Theroux drew criticism for failing to challenge Robinson-Foster’s defense of his chants during the interview.
“Louis Theroux has every right to interview whoever he wants, but with that right comes responsibility,” Jewish film producer Leo Pearlman told the British outlet Jewish News. “When you give a microphone to someone who proudly repeats a genocidal chant that played a part in inspiring attacks on Jews across Britain, you’re not probing hate, you’re amplifying it.”
Dave Rich, the head of policy at the Community Service Trust, wrote in a blog post that he had been distressed that Theroux did not note that Robinson-Foster had publicly undercut the idea that his chant of “death to the IDF” was not meant as a call to voice when he commented at another concert, “We are for an armed resistance. We wanna make that explicitly f–king clear.” Rich also criticized the decision to release the interview even after the attack on a Manchester, England, synagogue in which two people were killed on Yom Kippur.
“Theroux’s podcast was recorded before the Manchester attack, which he acknowledges in the introduction,” Rich wrote. “But they still went ahead and published it anyway, as if the death of two Jews due to an Israel-hating jihadist doesn’t change the context of an interview with someone who became famous for calling for death for Israelis.”
After the interview aired on Spotify last Friday, British Airways issued a statement to announce it had dropped its sponsorship of Theroux’s show.
“Our sponsorship of the series has now been paused and the advert has been removed,” the airline wrote in a statement shared with the British outlet Jewish News. “We’re grateful that this was brought to our attention, as the content clearly breaches our sponsorship policy in relation to politically sensitive or controversial subject matters.”
The episode follows the release, in April, of a documentary by Theroux titled “The Settlers” that served a searing portrayal of the far-right Israeli settler movement in the West Bank.
The post British Airways breaks ties with Louis Theroux after interview with ‘Death to the IDF’ artist Bob Vylan appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Prominent Orthodox politician swaps endorsement of Sliwa for Cuomo as NYC mayoral election nears
(JTA) — Curtis Sliwa has long pointed to Dov Hikind, a former New York state assemblyman who represented Jewish neighborhoods in Brooklyn for more than three decades, as one of strongest allies within the New York Jewish community.
Last month, in an interview with the Jewish Telegraphic Agency, Sliwa named Hikind, who also founded the nonprofit Americans Against Antisemitism, as a key Jewish figure in his circle. The pair also canvassed together during Rosh Hashanah.
“Without a doubt, the man that I’ve been through so many struggles over the years is Dov Hikind,” said Sliwa. “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.’”
But on Sunday, as early voting started in the election, Hikind dropped his support for Sliwa. Instead, he urged New Yorkers to vote for former Gov. Andrew Cuomo in a last-ditch effort to halt frontrunner Zohran Mamdani’s march to City Hall.
“As difficult as it is for me to post this video, I must face the reality as I see it,” Hikind said in a message posted to social media. “I endorsed Curtis Sliwa and while I never thought I’d say this, I am now asking that you vote for Andrew Cuomo. Why? Because if Mamdani wins, the very future of New York City is at stake.”
He added, “You don’t have to love Cuomo. I’ve been clear about how I feel about him. This election though isn’t about who we like. It’s about saving New York City from Mamdani.”
Hikind’s flip-flop comes as Jewish advocates increasingly urge voters to back Cuomo as a way to consolidate opposition to Mamdani, a democratic socialist who is staunchly critical of Israel. With Mamdani posting a double-digit lead over Cuomo in polls, and Sliwa is tailing third in the race, some Jewish voices are intensifying efforts to persuade Sliwa to drop out and back Cuomo. That includes in Hikind’s region of Brooklyn, where the exit last month of Mayor Eric Adams from the race caused some Jewish leaders who had not committed to a candidate to back Cuomo.
Hikind has indeed long criticized Cuomo for his handling of the COVID-19 pandemic and the sexual harassment allegations against him in 2021 that led to his resignation.
“I believe that the person that is best for the people of New York is Curtis Sliwa,” said Hikind during a Fox News interview posted by Sliwa on Instagram earlier this month. “We have Cuomo, who was governor of the state of New York, and quit. He decided to quit because of things that he was involved in, the inappropriate behavior with so many women, and let’s not forget, Cuomo is responsible for 1000s and 1000s of senior citizens being sent to nursing homes during COVID.”
In 2020, Hikind published a book trolling Cuomo’s decisions during the pandemic titled “Lessons in ‘Leadership,’” that included a foreword lambasting “King Covidius Cuomo” followed by 100 pages of blank white paper.
Now, he said in his new post, he had no choice but to vote for Cuomo. “We do not have the luxury of misplacing our votes. I like Curtis. I still think he’d be a great mayor, but right now, there’s only one person who can stop Mamdani, and that’s Andrew Cuomo,” he said. “You don’t have to love him. You don’t have to like him. You just have to save New York City. So I urge you to vote for Cuomo.”
The post Prominent Orthodox politician swaps endorsement of Sliwa for Cuomo as NYC mayoral election nears appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Anyone saying Jews face a simple choice in the NYC mayoral election is not paying attention
(JTA) — As a New York City voter, I’m preparing to cast my ballot in the upcoming mayoral election. But as a congregational rabbi and now the head of the largest Jewish movement in North America, I’ve never told congregants for whom they should vote.
I won’t start now, despite the Trump administration’s misguided efforts to weaken the Johnson Amendment, the longstanding rule that bars congregations and their leaders from endorsing or opposing candidates from the pulpit. Keeping partisan politics out of our politically diverse congregations feels more essential than ever in today’s polarized climate.
I respect rabbinic colleagues who have added their names to the letter “A Rabbinic Call to Action: Defending the Jewish Future” — as more than 1,100 from across the country have now done. Similarly, I respect colleagues who have principled reasons for not signing on. The fact is that there is more than one way for rabbis to express moral clarity and to speak about urgent issues facing our community.
Addressing moral issues has always been part of the art of preaching sermons. And as always, clergy can do this during campaign season without crossing the line into electioneering.
As a rabbi, I am deeply committed to living Jewish values and looking at contemporary issues through the prism of Jewish tradition and values. Matters of Jewish safety and security are of paramount importance to me, especially now with rising incidents of antisemitism. Following the Anti-Defamation League’s report of a record-breaking 976 antisemitic incidents in New York City in 2024, the highest count in any U.S. city last year, this year has also seen an alarming increase in antisemitism including harassment, vandalism and physical violence.
Given these increasing threats to our community, we need a mayor who will work tirelessly to protect us. This includes making sure that the NYPD continues to provide extra protection for our community on Jewish holidays and at other moments of Jewish gathering.
I can attest that Zohran Mamdani is not lacking in empathy for the Jewish community’s anxiety over regular threats to our safety. In public interviews and in a personal meeting, I’ve heard him pledge to protect the Jewish community. But his many comments about the intersection of antisemitism and anti-Zionism — issues that are not synonymous but do overlap — have been problematic.
Expressing criticism of the Israeli government’s policies is not foreign to me or to many other ardent Zionists. However, denying Israel’s right to exist as both a Jewish and democratic state crosses the line from criticism of Israeli policy to a rejection of Israel and the 3,000-year-old identification of Judaism with Israel as the Jewish people’s homeland. And in an atmosphere where Israel is regularly and harshly demonized, Jewish safety is threatened.
Mamdani has been consistent in saying that he believes Israel has a right to exist as a state of all its citizens, but not as a Jewish state. This argument might sound tidy in a seminar; in the real world it is cause for grave concern. Given centuries of global antisemitism — from age-old accusations of deicide to the Inquisition to the Holocaust to Oct. 7 — as well as the many wars and terrorist attacks emanating from Israel’s neighbors over the last seven decades, the “one-state” solution Mamdani espouses would put the lives of the 7 million Israeli Jews at great risk and end Israel’s identity as the Jewish people’s homeland.
While this is a moment when our vulnerable Jewish community is rightfully lifting up the needs and dangers before us, our tradition forbids us from ignoring the many other compelling areas of vital concern for the Jewish community. Primary among them is addressing the many threats to the core pillars of our democracy that have given Jews the rights and freedoms that have allowed us to flourish in America and in New York City. These are the very pillars that promise hope for groups facing discrimination, barriers, and threats to their safety and well-being. Those priorities also include the moral responsibility to reverse the ever-widening gap between rich and poor New Yorkers.
Judaism has never been about caring only for our own community or just personal piety but rather, as the prophet Isaiah reminds us, a societal commitment to:
To let the oppressed go free;
To break off every yoke.
It is to share your bread with the hungry,
And to take the wretched poor into your home;
When you see the naked, to clothe him,
And not to ignore your own kin.”
— Isaiah 58:6-7
And when we are considering whom to elect as leaders, a candidate who has been morally compromised should not easily collect our votes. As I have questioned what Mamdani might do based on his statements, so too I question what Andrew Cuomo might do in light of past findings of his pattern of harassment, as documented in the New York Attorney General’s 2021 report. According to Psalm 15, a person of moral character is someone:
whose tongue is not given to evil;
who has never done harm to his fellow,
or borne reproach for [his acts toward] his neighbor;
who has never lent money at interest,
or accepted a bribe against the innocent. (Psalm 15:3, 5)
If you think the choice for mayor is simple, I respectfully suggest that you are not paying attention. I implore our Jewish community and all New Yorkers to carefully consider the many urgent issues our city faces before casting your vote. The stakes couldn’t be higher.
The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of JTA or its parent company, 70 Faces Media.
The post Anyone saying Jews face a simple choice in the NYC mayoral election is not paying attention appeared first on The Forward.