Uncategorized
Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments
(JTA) — When the New York Times journalist Jodi Kantor was reporting the 2017 Harvey Weinstein sexual assault story that earned her a Pulitzer prize, the powerful Hollywood producer and his team tried to influence her by using something they had in common: They are both Jewish.
“Weinstein put [Jewishness] on the table and seemed to expect that I was going to have some sort of tribal loyalty to him,” Kantor told the Jewish Telegraphic Agency on a video call from the New York Times newsroom. “And that was just not going to be the case.”
Now, that exchange has been immortalized in “She Said,” a new film adaptation of the nonfiction book of the same name by Kantor and her collaborator Megan Twohey that details their investigation into Weinstein’s conduct, which helped launch the #MeToo movement.
The film, directed by Maria Schrader with stars Zoe Kazan as Kantor and Carey Mulligan as Twohey, is an understated thriller that has drawn comparisons to “All the President’s Men” — and multiple subtle but powerful Jewish-themed subplots reveal the way Kantor’s Jewishness arose during and at times intersected with the investigation.
In one scene, the Kantor character notes that a Jewish member of Weinstein’s team tried to appeal to her “Jew to Jew.” In another, Kantor shares a moving moment with Weinstein’s longtime accountant, the child of Holocaust survivors, as they discuss the importance of speaking up about wrongdoing.
Kantor, 47, grew up between New York and New Jersey, the first grandchild of Holocaust survivors — born “almost 30 years to the day after my grandparents were liberated,” she notes. She calls her grandmother Hana Kantor, a 99-year-old Holocaust survivor, her “lodestar.” Kantor — who doesn’t often speak publicly about her personal life, including her Jewish background, which involved some education in Jewish schools — led a segment for CBS in May 2021 on her grandmother and their relationship. Before her journalism career, she spent a year in Israel on a Dorot Fellowship, working with Israeli and Palestinian organizations. She’s now a “proud member” of a Reform synagogue in Brooklyn.
Kantor spoke with JTA about the film’s Jewish threads, the portrayal of the New York Times newsroom and what Zoe Kazan’s performance captures about journalism.
This interview has been edited and condensed for clarity and length.
JTA: How did you feel having Zoe Kazan, who is not Jewish, play you? Kazan has played some notably Jewish characters before, for example in the HBO miniseries “The Plot Against America.”
JK: I feel Zoe’s performance is so sensitive and so layered. What I really appreciate about her performance is that she captures so many of the emotions I was feeling under the surface in the investigation. You know, when you’re a reporter and especially a reporter handling that sensitive a story, it’s your responsibility to present a really smooth professional exterior to the world. At the end of the investigation, I had the job of reading Harvey Weinstein some of the allegations and really confronting him. And in dealing with the victims, I wanted to be a rock for them and it was my job to get them to believe in the investigation. And so on the one hand, you have that smooth, professional exterior, but then below that, of course you’re feeling all the feelings. You’re feeling the power of the material, you’re feeling the urgency of getting the story, you’re feeling the fear that Weinstein could hurt somebody else. You’re feeling the loss that these women are expressing, including over their careers. And so I think Zoe’s performance just communicates that so beautifully.
What Zoe says about the character is that there are elements of me, there are elements of herself, and then there are elements of pure invention because she’s an artist, and that’s what she does.
I think the screenplay gets at a small but significant line of Jewish sub-drama that ran through the investigation. It went like this: Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew. And they’ve done this more recently, as well. There have been times when Harvey Weinstein was trying to approach me “Jew to Jew,” like almost in a tone of “you and I are the same, we understand each other.” We found dossiers later that they had compiled on me and it was clear that they knew that I was the grandchild of Holocaust survivors, and they tried to sort of deploy that. So speaking of keeping things under the surface, I privately thought that was offensive, that he was citing that. But your job as a reporter is to be completely professional. And I wasn’t looking to get into a fight with Weinstein. I just wanted to find out the truth and I actually wanted to be fair to the guy. Anyway, even as he was approaching me “Jew to Jew” in private, he was hiring Black Cube — sort of Israeli private intelligence agents — to try to dupe me. And they actually sent an agent to me, and she posed as a women’s rights advocate. And she was intimating that they were going to pay me a lot of money to appear at a conference in London. Luckily I shooed her away.
To some degree I can’t explain why private Israeli intelligence agents were hired to try to dupe the Hebrew speaking, yeshiva-educated, granddaughter of Holocaust survivors. But it’s not my job to explain that! It’s their job to explain why they did that.
Then the theme reappeared with Irwin Reiter, Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years, who kind of became the Deep Throat of the investigation. I quickly figured out that Irwin and I were from the same small world. He was the child of survivors, and had also spent his summers at bungalow colonies in the Catskills just down the road from mine. I don’t bring up the Holocaust a lot. It’s a sacred matter for me, and I didn’t do it lightly. But once I discovered that we did in fact have this really powerful connection in our backgrounds, I did gently sound it with him – I felt that was sincere and real. Because he was making such a critical decision: Weinstein’s accountant of 30 years is still working for the guy by day and he’s meeting with me at night. And I felt like I did need to go to that place with him, saying, “Okay, Irwin, we both know that there are people who talk and there are people who don’t. And we both grew up around that mix of people and what do we think is the difference? And also if you know if you have the chance to act and intervene in a bad situation, are you going to take it?”
We didn’t talk a lot about it, because I raised it and he didn’t want to fully engage. But I always felt like that was under the surface of our conversations, and he made a very brave decision to help us.
That was a very powerful scene in the film, and it felt like a turning point in the movie that kind of got at the ethical core of what was motivating your character. Was that a scene that was important to you personally to include in the film?
What Megan and I want people to know overall is that a small number of brave sources can make an extraordinary difference. When you really look at the number of people who gave us the essential information about Weinstein, it’s a small conference room’s worth of people. Most of them are incredibly brave women, some of whom are depicted, I think, quite beautifully in the film. But there was also Irwin, Weinstein’s accountant of all these years, among them. It’s Megan and my job to build people’s confidence in telling the truth. And as we become custodians of this story for the long term, one of the things we really want people to know is that a tiny group of brave sources, sometimes one source, can make a massive difference. Look at the impact that these people had all around the world.
Did you feel the film captured the New York Times newsroom? There’s a kind of great reverence to the toughness and professionalism in the newspaper business that really came through.
Megan and I are so grateful for the sincerity and professionalism with which the journalism is displayed. There are a lot of on screen depictions of journalists in which we’re depicted as manipulative or doing things for the wrong reasons or sleeping with our sources!
We [as journalists] feel incredible drama in what we do every day. And we’re so grateful to the filmmakers for finding it and sharing it with people. And I know the New York Times can look intimidating or remote as an institution. I hope people really consider this an invitation into the building and into our meetings, and into our way of working and our value system.
And we’re also proud that it’s a vision of a really female New York Times, which was not traditionally the case at this institution for a long time. This is a book and a movie about women as narrators.
“Harvey Weinstein and his representatives were constantly trying to approach me as a Jew,” Kantor said. (The New York Times)
There have been comparisons made between this movie and “All the President’s Men.” One of the striking differences is that those journalists are two male bachelors running around D.C. And this film has scenes of motherhood, of the Shabbat table, of making lunches. What was it like seeing your personal lives reflected on screen?
It’s really true that the Weinstein investigation was kind of born in the crucible of motherhood and Megan and my attempt to combine work with parenting. On the one hand, it’s the most everyday thing in the world, but on the other hand, you don’t see it actually portrayed on screen that much. We’re really honored by the way that throughout the film you see motherhood and work mixing, I think in a way that is so natural despite our obviously pretty stressful circumstances.
I started out alone on the Weinstein investigation, and I called Megan because movie stars were telling me their secrets but they were very reluctant to go on the record. So I had gone some way in persuading and engaging them, but I was looking to make the absolute strongest case for them. So I called Megan. We had both done years of reporting on women and children. Mine involved the workplace more and hers involved sex crimes more, which is part of why everything melded together so well eventually. I wanted to talk to her about what she had said to female victims in the past. But when I reached her, I could hear that something was wrong. And she had just had a baby, and I had had postpartum depression myself. So we talked about it and I gave her the name of my doctor, who I had seen. Then she got treatment. And she not only gave very good advice on that [initial] phone call, but she joined me in the investigation.
I think the theme is responsibility. Our relationship was forged in a sense of shared responsibility, primarily for the work – once we began to understand the truths about Weinstein, we couldn’t allow ourselves to fail. But also Megan was learning to shoulder the responsibility of being a parent, and I had two kids. And so we started this joint dialogue that was mostly about work, but also about motherhood. And I think throughout the film and throughout the real investigation, we felt those themes melding. It’s totally true that my daughter Tali was asking me about what I was doing. It’s very hard to keep secrets from your kid in a New York City apartment, even though I didn’t tell her everything. And Megan and I would go from discussing really critical matters with the investigation to talking about her daughter’s evolving nap schedule. It really felt like we had to get the story and get home to the kids.
And also, we were reporting on our own cohort. A lot of Weinstein victims were and are women in their 40s. And so even though we were very professional with this and we tried to be very professional with the sources, there was an aspect of looking in the mirror. For example, with Laura Madden, who was so brave about going on the record, it was conversations with her own teenage daughters that helped her make her decision.
We didn’t write about this in our book because it was hard to mix the motherhood stuff with this sort of serious reporter-detective story and all the important facts. And we didn’t want to talk about ourselves too much in the book. But the filmmakers captured something that I think is very true. It feels particular to us but also universal. When Zoe [Kazan] is pushing a stroller and taking a phone call at the same time, I suspect lots of people will identify with that. And what I also really like is the grace and dignity with which that’s portrayed.
It must have been surreal, seeing a Hollywood movie about your investigation of Hollywood.
I think part of the power of the film is that it returns the Weinstein investigation to the producer’s medium, but on vastly different terms, with the women in charge. Megan and I are particularly moved by the portrayals of Zelda Perkins, Laura Madden and Rowena Chiu — these former Weinstein assistants are in many ways at the core of the story. They’re everyday people who made the incredibly brave decision to help us, in spite of everything from breast cancer to legal barriers.
Working with the filmmakers was really interesting. They were really committed to the integrity of the story, and they asked a ton of questions, both large and small. Ranging from the really big things about the investigation to these tiny details. Like in the scene where we go to Gwyneth Paltrow’s house and Megan and I discover we’re practically wearing the same dress — those were the actual white dresses that we wore that day. We had to send them in an envelope to the costume department, and they copied the dresses in Zoe and Carey’s sizes and that’s what they’re wearing. There was a strand of extreme fidelity, but they needed some artistic license because it’s a movie. And the movie plays out in the key of emotion.
—
The post Weinstein approached me ‘Jew to Jew’: Jodi Kantor opens up on the ‘She Said’ movie’s Jewish moments appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
The PA Just Made More ‘Pay-for-Slay’ Payments; Here’s How the US and EU Could Stop It
The opening of a hall that the Palestinian Authority named for a terrorist who killed 125 people. Photo: Palestinian Media Watch.
Palestinian Media Watch (PMW) reported yesterday that the Palestinian Authority (PA) is continuing its Pay-for-Slay payments outside the PA areas, beyond US and EU donor oversight.
Families in Jordan and Syria confirmed the salaries were paid earlier this week. Yesterday, families in Lebanon also reported receiving their Pay-for-Slay payments. Families in Egypt were told to expect the payments, “Thursday or the beginning of next week.”
So, how is the PA keeping these monthly terror salaries flowing without triggering EU and US scrutiny?
The PA’s own budget exposed the foreign Pay-for-Slay payments
The PA’s 2017 budget book included a breakdown of how many “Martyrs and wounded” families receive monthly allowances — both inside and outside PA-controlled areas. (The PA has not published the figures about the number of Martyr family recipients since 2017.)
Although the file is no longer available online, PMW downloaded it at the time.
The relevant section on page 622 states:
13,500 families of Martyrs and wounded received monthly allowances. The Institution [for Care of the Families of the Martyrs and the Wounded] pays monthly allowances to the families of the Martyrs and the wounded through the institution’s branches abroad.
The budget continues:
21,500 families of martyrs and wounded inside the homeland (the PA areas and Israel) received allowances. Providing financial allowances to the families of the Martyrs and the wounded inside the homeland through the institution’s branches.
This was the PA admitting — in its budget — that it maintained an organized foreign-branch system to pay 13,500 terror “allowances” outside the “homeland.”
The minimum foreign Pay-for-Slay total: NIS 18.9 million per month
Under PA regulations, the minimum monthly payment to “Martyrs’ families” is 1,400 shekels.
The 2017 figure for overseas recipients:
- 13,500 families × 1,400 shekels = 18,900,000 shekels per month
This figure of 18.9 million is clearly a minimum for 2026:
- Payments rise based on family status (+400 shekels for a wife and +60 shekels for each child). For simplicity, PMW has ignored the extras.
- The number of eligible “Martyrs” families has certainly increased since 2017.
- PMW did not calculate the exiled Palestinian released terrorist prisoners who have continued to receive monthly payments.
The method: The PA hides foreign payments under the PLO heading
This money avoids EU and US donor scrutiny because the PA does not pay terrorists’ families outside the country through the PA’s local Commission of Prisoners. Instead, the PA routes payments through the PLO, where donors are not demanding transparency.
Donors scrutinize PA payments; donors do not scrutinize PLO payments. The PA exploits that gap.
Looking at the PA transfers to the PLO in 2025 confirms PMW’s analysis.
In 2025, the PA reported transferring to the PLO 269,434,600 shekels, averaging 22.5 million shekels per month, listed as “transfer expenses” — the budget category used to describe the terrorist payments.
That number aligns cleanly with what the PA already documented in 2017:
- Foreign terror payments in 2017 were NIS 18.9 million/month (minimum)
- A 2025 monthly transfer average of NIS 22.5 million/month to cover these “transfer expenses” reflects an expected increase over eight years
Case study: Ahlam Tamimi — paid in Jordan, protected from scrutiny
This month, Ahlam Tamimi should have received 6,000 shekels, bringing her total PA salary since arrest to 1,158,800 shekels.
Tamimi is one of the most notorious freed terrorists. She orchestrated the Sbarro restaurant bombing, in which 15 people — including 8 children — were murdered. Two victims were US citizens. After being released in the Gilad Shalit deal, Tamimi was exiled to Jordan.
According to PA law, released prisoners continue receiving monthly salaries. Tamimi has therefore continued receiving her PA salary while living outside PA areas. As a celebrated PA figure, there is no reason her payment would have stopped, meaning she certainly would have received her salary this week with the thousands of other Jordanian Pay-for-Slay recipients.
If the US and EU want to seriously eliminate Pay-for-Slay, they must stop ignoring PA transfers to the PLO.
PMW recommends that the US and EU demand full disclosure of the recipients of “transfer expenses” in the PLO’s budget, including the names and countries of where the PA is paying terrorists and their families beyond donor oversight.
As long as the donors turn the other way and ignore the foreign payments, even the PA “reform” of Pay-for-Slay will remain a sham, and Pay-for-Slay will continue, on schedule, every month.
The author is the Founder and Director of Palestinian Media Watch, where a version of this article first appeared.
Uncategorized
Chabad attack suspect had previously sought ‘spiritual guidance’ from rabbi
The 36-year-old man arrested after repeatedly crashing into the entrance of the Chabad-Lubavitch world headquarters in Brooklyn on Wednesday night has a history of engaging with Chabad.
Rabbi Levi Azimov, who leads Chabad of South Brunswick in New Jersey, said the suspect, who has not yet been identified by police, attended a Purim service at Chabad in March of last year. He visited there twice more, seeking spiritual guidance, Azimov told the Forward.
“I was able to talk to him for a few minutes and see that he’s not exactly stable,” Azimov said.
Video confirmed by eyewitnesses shows the suspect repeatedly ramming his grey Honda sedan into the doors at 770 Eastern Parkway in the Crown Heights neighborhood, the main headquarters of the Chabad movement and one of the most recognized Jewish buildings in the world.
The video shows the driver yelling at bystanders to move out of the way before he drove down a ramp leading to the doors.
Video from Daniel David Yeroshalmi via Storyful:
Police arrived at the scene around 8:45 p.m. and arrested the individual. There were no reported injuries. A bomb squad conducted a sweep of the vehicle and found no explosive devices, police said.
According to Chabad spokesperson Yaacov Behrman, the suspect had arrived at 770 Eastern Parkway earlier in the night and removed two metal bollards that block cars from going down the driveway toward the building.
The incident took place on the 75th anniversary of the date that Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson became the leader of the Lubavitch movement. Thousands were gathered Wednesday night at the movement’s headquarters — Schneerson’s former home.
Rabbi Motti Seligson, a spokesperson for the movement, said on X that the ramming “seems intentional, but the motivations are unclear.” The evening’s festivities would carry on elsewhere undeterred, he said. Rabbi Mordechai Lightstone, Chabad’s social media director, said in a post on X that the attack did not appear to be antisemitic.
The attack follows a rash of antisemitic incidents across the city. On Tuesday, a rabbi was punched in Forest Hills, Queens, and last week, a playground frequented by Orthodox families in the Borough Park neighborhood in Brooklyn was graffitied with swastikas two days in a row. In both incidents, the suspects have been arrested. Antisemitic incidents accounted for 57% of reported hate crimes in New York City in 2025.
The incident is being investigated as a hate crime, said Police Commissioner Jessica Tisch.
Additional reporting by Jacob Kornbluh and Louis Keene.
The post Chabad attack suspect had previously sought ‘spiritual guidance’ from rabbi appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Shiri Shapira’s Yiddish stories reflect the anxieties of millennials
שירי שאַפּיראַס ליטעראַרישע שאַפֿונג איז שױן באַקאַנט די לײענערס פֿון „פֿאָרװערטס“. די העלדן פֿון אירע דערצײלונגען, װאָס זײַנען אַרײַן אינעם בוך „די צוקונפֿט“, זײַנען ישׂראלדיקע מענער און פֿרױען פֿון אַ גאַנץ יאָר, די מחברטע בתוכם. זײערע דאגות זײַנען װעגן פּרנסה, משפּחה, געזונט און וכּדומה. אָבער הינטער אָט דעם טאָג־טעגלעכן שטײגער שטעקט אַ נײַע פּערזענלעכע דערפֿאַרונג, װאָס אַנטפּלעקט זיך אין אַ קריטישן מאָמענט און עפֿנט אָפֿט מאָל אַ נײַע תּקופֿה אין זײער לעבן.
בײַם 13־יאָריקן מײדל אין דער דערצײלונג „די צוקונפֿט“, װאָס עפֿנט דאָס בוך, האָט זיך די נײַע תּקופֿה אָנגעהױבן אין 2001. די טעראָר־אַטאַקע אױף ניו־יאָרק האָט זיך צונױפֿגעפֿאַלן מיט אַ טעראָר־אָנפֿאַל אין איר שטאָט:
„אין יאָר 2001 איז געקומען דער ערשטער טעראָר־אָנפֿאַל אין אונדזער שטאָט. די השפּעות אויפֿן טאָג־טעגלעכן לעבן זענען געווען גרויס. מע האָט אָנגעפֿירט אָנסופֿיקע שמועסקרײַזן צום אָנדענק פֿון איין קרבן פֿון אונדזער שול, וועמען איך האָב ניט געקענט; יעדן פֿרימאָרגן האָב איך געדאַרפֿט קוקן אויף זײַן שמייכלענדיק, פּרישטשעוואַטע פּנים אויפֿן בילד, וואָס מע האָט געהאַט פֿאַרגרעסערט און אויפֿגעהאָנגען לעבן דעם שולטויער.“
אַזױ האָט דאָס יאָר 2001 אַרײַנגעבראַכט די „טעראָר־אָנפֿאַלן פֿון דער צוקונפֿט […] הױך ביז אין הימל אַרײַן, גלאַנציקע, זילבערנע“, װאָס זײַנען געװאָרן אַ באַשטאַנדטײל פֿון דער נײַער טאָג־טעגלעכקײט אי פֿאַר שאַפּיראַ אי פֿאַר מדינת־ישׂראל אי פֿאַר דער גאַנצער װעלט.
דאָס װאָרט „צוקונפֿט“ איז סײַ דער טיטל פֿונעם גאַנצן בוך און סײַ דאָס קעפּל פֿון דער ערשטער און דער לעצטער דערצײלונג. דער דאָזיקער באַגריף דינט װי אַ שליסל צו שאַפּיראַס שאַפֿונג. בײַ דער מחברטע און אירע העלדן איז די צוקונפֿט געפֿערלעך און אומזיכער. אַזאַ מין געפֿיל שפּיגלט אָפּ די אַלגעמײנע שטימונג פֿונעם „מילעניאַל“ דור (געבױרן צװישן די 1980ער און 1990ער יאָרן), צו װעלכן זי געהערט.
„די צוקונפֿט“ איז אױך דער נאָמען פֿון אײנער פֿון די װיכטיקסטע ייִדישע צײַטשריפֿטן, װאָס איז פּובליקירט געװאָרן אין ניו־יאָרק צװישן די יאָרן 1892 און 2010. אין אַ קאַפּיטל זכרונות דערצײלט שאַפּיראַ װעגן דעם, װי זי האָט קאַטאַלאָגירט אַרטיקלען פֿונעם דאָזיקן זשורנאַל פֿאַרן ייִדישן ביבליאָגראַפֿישן פּראָיעקט אינעם העברעיִשן אוניװערסיטעט אין ירושלים. אַזױ בױט זי אַ טעמאַטישע בריק צו ייִדיש, װאָס פֿאַרנעמט אַ חשובֿן טײל פֿון איר לעבן.
לכתּחילה האָט זי געהאָפֿט, אַז זי װעט קענען לײענען די צײַטשריפֿט און „זיך לערנען אָן אַ שיעור וועגן ייִדישער געשיכטע.“ אָבער אַנשטאָט דעם האָט זי געלײענט די טאָגלעכע נײַעס װעגן טעראָריסטישע אָנפֿאַלן אין ישׂראל בעת דער אַזױ־גערופֿענער „יחידים־אינטיפֿאַדע“. די ישׂראלדיקע הײַנטצײַטיקײט מאַכט בטל דעם שײנעם צוקונפֿט־חלום פֿון די אַמאָליקע ייִדישע סאָציאַליסטן: „ווער רעדט נאָך וועגן עפּעס אַ צוקונפֿט? די צוקונפֿט איז שוין אַ געוועזענע זאַך.“
שירי שאַפּיראַ פֿאַרמאָגט אַ שאַרפֿן חוש פֿאַר צײַט און הײַנטצײַטיקײט. די צײַט אין אירע מעשׂיות פֿליסט כּסדר מאָנאָטאָן אָבער צומאָל ברענגט זי אַרײַן בײַטן אינעם לעבן פֿון יחידים און פֿונעם כּלל. די סתּירה צװישן דעם גלײַכמעסיקן צײַטגאַנג און דעם פּלוצעמדיקן צײַטבראָך פֿילט מען ספּעציעל שאַרף אין ישׂראל. יעדער טאָג טראָגט אין זיך אַ פּאָטענציעלע סכּנה.
װי אַזױ קען אַ פּשוטער בשׂר־ודם זיך געבן אַן עצה אין דעם הײַנטיקן פּאָליטישן װירװאַר? װאָס איז טאַקע די נאַטור פֿון דער צײַט?
שאַפּיראַ דערמאָנט זיך: „מיידלווײַז האָב איך געהאַט אַ רושם, אַז פֿאַר דער פֿאַרגאַנגענהייט בין איך אָנגעקומען צו שפּעט, און אַז פֿאַר דער צוקונפֿט טויג ניט קיין מענטש, וועמענס פֿאַרגאַנגענהייט איז אים פֿאַרווערט.“ אַ סבֿרא, אַזאַ מין קשיות האָבן זי געשטױסן צו שטודירן פֿילאָסאָפֿיע אינעם אוניװערסיטעט.
דער פֿילאָסאָפֿישער יסוד איז װיכטיק פֿאַרן פֿאַרשטײן שאַפּיראַס ליטעראַרישער שאַפֿונג. אָבער װי אַ געניטע שרײַבערין קען זי קונציק אַרײַנפֿלעכטן די פֿילאָסאָפֿישע חקירות אינעם נאַראַטיװן לײַװנט פֿון אירע דערצײלונגען.
שאַפּיראַס העלדן לעבן אין ישׂראל און רעדן העברעיִש. לרובֿ קענען זײ ניט קײן ייִדיש. זי אַלײן איז אַ העברעיִשע שרײַבערין װאָס האָט איבערגעזעצט אַ היפּשע צאָל ליטעראַרישע װערק פֿון דײַטשיש אױף העברעיִש. איז אױף װאָס דאַרף מען ייִדיש? אַן ענטפֿער אױף אַזאַ פֿראַגע לאָזט זיך געפֿינען אין אירע דערצײלונגען.
דאָס עלטערע פּאָרפֿאָלק בני און דליה, אין דער דערצײלונג „ערדציטערניש“, האָט איבערגעלעבט אַן ערדציטערניש אין ירושלים. זײער מאָדערנע דירה איז ניט געשעדיקט געװאָרן, אָבער אַ סך געבײַדעס אינעם פּאַלעסטינער פּליטים־לאַגער שואַפֿאַט אינעם מזרחדיקן טײל פֿון דער שטאָט זײַנען יאָ חרובֿ געװאָרן און אַרום 700 מענטשן זײַנען אומגעקומען. זײער אַראַבישע אױפֿראַמערין איז פֿאַרפֿאַלן געװאָרן און קײנער װײסט ניט, װאָס עס איז מיט איר געשען.
בײַ דעם פּאָרפֿאָלק גייט דאָס לעבן װײַטער װי פֿריִער. זײ האָבן אין גיכן פֿאַרגעסן אָן דער אױפֿראַמערין, בפֿרט אַז זײ האָבן אַפֿילו ניט געװוּסט, װי אַזױ מען זאָל אַרױסרעדן איר נאָמען. ייִדן און אַראַבער זײַנען תּושבֿים פֿון דער אײגענער שטאָט אָבער באַװױנען פֿאַרשײדענע װעלטן.
יעדן אָװנט עסן בני און דליה װעטשערע, קוקן אַ טעלעװיזיע־פּראָגראַם און כאַפּן בעת־מעשׂה אַ דרעמל. אָבער עפּעס נײַס קומט טאַקע פֿאָר אין זײער לעבן. זײ פֿאַרשרײַבן זיך אױף ייִדיש־קורסן. כאָטש זײ געדענקען כּמעט גאָרנישט פֿון ייִדיש, װאָס זײערע עלטערן האָבן אַ מאָל גערעדט האָפֿן, אַז „זיי וועלן זיך לערנען כאָטש עפּעס, איידער סע קומט דאָס קומעדיקע ערדציטערניש.“
דאָס ערדציטערניש דינט װי אַ מעטאַפֿאָר פֿאַר דראַמאַטישע און טראַגישע געשעענישן, װאָס טרעפֿן זיך אין ישׂראל. אַזוינע אומגליקן רײַסן איבער דעם מאָנאָטאָנעם צײַטגאַנג אָבער אין גיכן גײט דאָס לעבן װײַטער װי פֿריִער. און אין די דאָזיקע מאָמענטן קומט ייִדיש אַרײַן װי אַ מין געשפּענסט פֿון דער ייִדישער געשיכטע, בײַ װעמען מען קען אָנלערנען „כאָטש עפּעס“ פֿאַרן קומעדיקן איבערבראָך.
שאַפּיראַ דערמאָנט זיך װעגן אַ געפֿיל, װאָס האָט זי מײדלװײַז באַאומרויִקט: „איך בין געווען גאָר יונג און האָב געמיינט, אַז אַלע מענטשן אַחוץ מיר געבן זיך אַן עצה אין אַלע פֿאַלן, אַז אַלע זענען גוט פֿאַרוואָרצלט אין זייער לעבן, און נאָר איך שוועב אין דער לופֿטן, ניט וויסנדיק וווּ זיך אַהינצוטאָן.“ און דװקא ייִדיש שאַפֿט אַ מין גײַסטיקן מקום־מלקט װוּ מען קען „זיך אַהינטאָן“ און געפֿינען היסטאָרישע װאָרצלען.
צומאָל װערט שאַפּיראָס טאָן ביטער־איראָניש, בפֿרט װען ס׳גײט װעגן דעם לײדיקן גורל פֿונעם שרײַבער אין דער הײַנטיקער געזעלשאַפֿט. די העלדין פֿון דער דערציילונג „זעלבסטפּאָרטרעט װי אַ העברעיִשע שרײַבערין“ חלומט װעגן אַן אידעאַלן לײענער:
„ער קומט צום אָוונט לכּבֿוד מײַן ערשט בוך, מײַן דעביוט. […] דאָ זיצט אַ מאַן, שיין ווי די וועלט, און הערט זיך צו צו מײַן פּלאַפּלערײַ וועגן דער שווערער,
אויסגעצויגענער אַרבעט אויפֿן טעקסט, אַפּלאָדירט ענערגיש, ווען די מוזיקערס ענדיקן זייער טייל.“
דער מאַן האָט צװײ מאָל איבערגעלײענעט איר בוך און האָט טיף פֿאַרשטאַנען איר נשמה. זײער באַגעגעניש ענדיקט זיך אין בעט: „דערגרייכנדיק צום שפּיץ, לאָזט ער אַרויס אַ זיסן זיפֿץ, אַ זאַטן געזאַנג, ווי אַן ענטוזיאַסטישע, שאַרפֿזיניקע רעצענזיע.“
שאַפּיראַס דערצײלונגען זײַנען פֿײַנע מוסטערן פֿון דער עכטער ערנסטער ליטעראַטור, װאָס זוכט ענטפֿערס אױף די הײסע פֿראַגן פֿונעם מענטשלעכן קיום. זײ שפּיגלען אָפּ די איצטיקע צײַט װי אַ פֿליסיקער מאָמענט פֿונעם גרױסן היסטאָרישן איבערבראָך.
The post Shiri Shapira’s Yiddish stories reflect the anxieties of millennials appeared first on The Forward.