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
Mourning the victims of the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire
דעם 25סטן מערץ וועט ווערן 105 יאָר זינט דער שרעקלעכער טראַגעדיע — די שׂריפֿה אינעם טרײַענגל־שוירטווייסט־פֿאַבריק, אין 1911. 146 יונגע אַרבעטאָרינס, ס׳רובֿ ייִדישע און איטאַליענישע, זענען אומגעקומען, ווען די טיר, וואָס האָט באַדאַרפֿט בלײַבן אָפֿן זיך צו ראַטעווען אין אַזאַ פֿאַל, האָבן די סוועטשאַפּ־באַלעבאַטים געהאַלטן פֿאַרשלאָסן.
צו יענער צײַט, האָט דער פּאָעט מאָריס ראָזענפֿעלד געאַרבעט אין „פֿאָרווערטס“ סײַ ווי אַ זשורנאַליסט, סײַ ווי אַ פּאָעט. ער איז אָנגעקומען צו דער שׂרפֿה, בעת די טראַגעדיע איז פֿאָרגעקומען און האָט במשך פֿון עטלעכע וואָכן געשריבן עטלעכע אַרטיקלען און לידער וועגן דער טראַגעדיע. מיר דרוקן דאָ אַן אויסצוג פֿון זײַן אַרטיקל, וואָס איז געווען געדרוקט אויף דער ערשטער זײַט פֿונעם „פֿאָרווערטס“, אַ וואָך נאָך דער טראַגעדיע, און אַן אויסצוג פֿון אַ פּאָעמע וואָס ער האָט געשריבן אין אָנדענק פֿון די אומגעקומענע מיידלעך.
זינט עס זײַנען אין ניו־יאָרק איבער הונדערט לעבנס פֿאַרברענט געוואָרן צוליב דער צוגעשלאָסענער טיר, וואָס האָט לויט דעם געזעץ געזאָלט זײַן אָפֿן, קוק איך מיט פֿאַרדאַכט אויף אַ טיר, אויפֿן געזעץ און אויף פֿײַער.
איך באַטראַכט זיי אַלע פֿאַר איבעריקע זאַכן.
וואָס טויג מיר אַ טיר, אַז זי איז פֿאַרשפּאַרט? וואָס טויג דאָס געזעץ ווען מען פֿירט אים נישט דורך? און פֿײַער… יאָ, מיר דאַכט, אַז מענטשן ווייסן נישט וואָס צו טאָן מיט זייער פֿײַער…
איך האָב פֿון אייביק אָן געוווּסט, אַז מיט פֿײַער שפּילט מען זיך נישט. איצט אָבער ציטער איך פֿאַר דעם וואָרט פֿײַער. איך קען קיין נאַכט נישט שלאָפֿן. פֿײַערדיקע חלומות שרעקן מיך, זיי פֿאַרברענען מײַן מנוחה און איך ליג און שוידער.
מיר דאַכט, אַז הימל און ערד האַלטן אין אײַן ברענען, אַז עס פֿלאַקערן די זון, די לבֿנה און די שטערן, אַז די מלאכים שפּרינגען ברענענדיק פֿון די הימלשע פֿענצטער אויף דער ערד און פֿאַלן אַרונטער טויטע… און די אַמבולאַנסן פֿירן זיי אַוועק אין מאָרג (מתים־שטיבל).
מיר דאַכט, אַז גאָט אַליין איז אײַנגעהילט אין אַ פֿײַערדיקן טלית און ברענט. ברענט און גיסט מיט פֿײַערדיקע טרערן, וואָס פֿאַלן אַרײַן און פֿאַרלירן זיך אין זײַן וועלטן־גרויסער, פֿלאַקערדיקער באָרד, און פֿון זײַנע נאָזלעכער זעצט אַ רויך ווי פֿון אַ צוויי וווּלקאַנען.
איך זע ווי די גאַנצע פּמליא־של־מעלה קרימט זיך, דרייט זיך מיט גסיסה־שמערצן אין אַ ים פֿלאַמען, ווי די כּרובֿים און שׂרפֿים און חיות־הקודש צאַפּלען מיט די פֿלאַמענדיקע פֿעדערן, רײַסן זיך די אָנגעצונדענע האָר פֿון די ברענענדיקע קעפּ און קלאַפּן פֿאַרצווייפֿלט מיט די רויטע, פֿײַערדיקע פֿליגל אין אַ שווערער, גרויסער, אײַזערנער טיר און די טיר איז פֿאַרשלאָסן… דער שׂטן האָט איר פֿאַרשלאָסן און באַהאַלטן דעם שליסל…
איך זע ווי די „אופֿנים“ און „גלגלים“, די „הימלשע רעדער“ דרייען זיך און פֿלאַקערן, און מיר דאַכט, אַז דאָס זײַנען שנײַדער־מאַשינען, און אין די ברענענדיקע, צום טויט־שפּרינגנדיקע מלאכים דערקען איך די פּנימער פֿון די פֿאַרשׂרפֿעטע אַרבעטער־מיידלעך, די טעכטער פֿון דער ייִדישער גאַס אין דער בלוטיקער פֿון פֿרויען־יאַקעס פֿון וואַשינגטאָן פּלייס.
איך שרײַ, איך ליאַרעם, איך וויין, איך פֿלוך, איך לאַך און כאַפּ זיך אויף אין היסטעריע.
פֿײַער… פֿײַער…
וואָס איז אייגנטלעך פֿײַער? איז דאָס אַ ברכה? איז דאָס אַ קללה?
די תּורה איז געגעבן געוואָרן אין פֿײַער, די אינקוויזיציע האָט געהערשט אין פֿײַער.
פֿײַער איז די נשמה פֿון דער וועלט. אין פֿײַער גייט אויף דער טאָג און מיט אַ פֿײַער פֿאַרגייט ער.
דאָס לעבן פֿון יעדן באַשעפֿעניש איז פֿײַער.
דער מענטש, אין וועמען זײַן פֿײַער האָט אויסגעברענט, דער האָט אויפֿגעהערט צו „זײַן“.
אַפֿילו די מילב האָט אין זיך אַ קליינעם לאָקאָמאָטיוועלע מיט פֿײַער, וואָס טרײַבט איר דורכן לעבן.
ליבע איז פֿײַער, דענקען — פֿײַער, אַרבעט — פֿײַער, האַס — פֿײַער, ראַכע (נקמה) — פֿײַער. אַלץ איז פֿײַער, אַפֿילו דאָס וואַסער: מיר גיסן אין זיך וואַסער צו פֿאַרלענגערן אונדזער פֿײַער. די דורשטיקע ערד טרינקט וואַסער, כּדי צו האָבן גענוג פֿײַער אַרויסצוגעבן אירע געוויקסן.
איך קען דאָס קלענסטע ליד נישט זינגען, ווען איך זאָל נישט דערפֿילן אין דער נשמה אַ ברען, אַ פֿײַער, דעם הייליקן פֿײַער פֿון שאַפֿן.
איך פֿאַרגעטער דעם פֿײַער, ער איז דער סימבאָל פֿון טעטיקייט, פֿון שטרעבן, פֿון שטײַגן, פֿון גיין אַרויף, הויך, הויך הימלווערטס…
אָבער איך פֿאַרער נאָר אין פֿײַער דאָס שאַפֿערישע און נישט דאָס צעשטערנדיקע. איך בענטש אים ווען ער גיט, אָבער נישט ווען ער נעמט. איך בענטש אים אויפֿן סיני און פֿלוך אים (שעלט אים) אויפֿן שײַטער־הויפֿן.
איצט פֿאַרדאַם איך אים. ער האָט פֿאַרצערט אַ פֿאַבריק מיט אַרבעטער־מיידלעך. ער האָט פֿאַרוואַנדלט ניו־יאָרק אין אַ לוויה־שטאָט און איז געוואָרן די קללה פֿון דער מענטשהייט.
ברעכט אויף די טיר און באַפֿרײַט זיך!
און אָט איז דאָס ליד וואָס משה ראָזענפֿעלד האָט דעמאָלט אָנגעשריבן:
די פֿאַרשלאָסענע טיר (פֿײַער־געדאַנקען איבער פֿאַרברענטע אַרבעטער)
דער פֿײַער בושעוועט אָן שיעור
עס זעצט דער רויך, די העל דערוואַכט.
מען שפּאַרט זיך צו דער רעטונגס־טיר,
אומזיסט! אָ, וויי, זי איז פֿאַרמאַכט!
מען שרײַט, מען ראַנגלט זיך, מען פֿאַלט,
אין טײַוולס בלוטיקן געצעלט.
מען בלײַבט אין זײַן פֿאַרפֿלוכטן גוואַלט,
אַיעדער אויסגאַנג איז פֿאַרשטעלט.
מען לויפֿט, מען ווייס אַליין ניט וווּ,
און יעדע האָפֿענונג איז גענאַרט.
די שווערע גיהנום־טיר איז צו,
דער אַשמדאַי האָט איר פֿאַרשפּאַרט.
ניט רופֿט דעם שוואַרצן שד צום דין!
אַ שאָד די מי, ער איז גערעכט…
צו דער פֿאַרמאַכטער טיר אַהין!..
און אַלע, פּונקט ווי איינער, ברעכט!
מען בלײַבט אין דעם גיהנום־בראַנד
כּל־זמן דער שלאָס איז אים געטרײַ…
קומט אַלע גלײַך, לייגט צו אַ האַנט!
ברעכט אויף די טיר און איר זײַט פֿרײַ…
די העל איז נאָר אַ העל ווי לאַנג
דער שלאָס פֿון טײַוול הענגט אויף איר.
געפֿערלעך איז איר פֿלאַם, איר צוואַנג
נאָר בײַ אַ צוגעמאַכטער טיר…
אַ צווייט ליד וואָס מאָריס ראָזענפֿעלד האָט אָנגעשריבן וועגן דער שׂריפֿה האָט די פֿאָרשערין און זאַמלערין פֿון ייִדישע לידער, חנה מלאָטעק, אָפּגעדרוקט אינעם פֿאָרווערטס אין 2011 — פּונקט הונדערט יאָר נאָך דעם אומגליק, אינעם אַרטיקל, קינות וועגן דעם טרײַענגל־פֿײַער. דאָס ליד געפֿינט זיך אויף דער פּלאַטע „דאָס גאָלדענע לאַנד“ פֿון יאָסל מלאָטעק:
די רויטע בהלה (אויף פֿאַרברענטע פֿאַבריק־מיידלעך אין ניו־יאָרק)
ניט קיין שלאַכט, ניט קיין פֿאַרטײַוולטער פּאָגראָם
האָט אָנגעפֿילט די גרעסטע שטאָט מיט קלאָגן,
די ערד האָט ניט געציטערט אין איר תּהום,
עס האָט קיין בליץ, קיין דונער ניט געשלאָגן;
סע האָבן קיין שוואַרצע וועטער־וואָלקנס ניט געקראַכט,
און קיין קאַנאָנען ניט די לופֿט צעאַקערט —
אָ, ניין! דאָס האָט אַ מוראדיקע העל דערוואַכט,
אַ שקלאַפֿן־נעסט מיט שקלאַפֿן ווילד געפֿלאַקערט,
דאָס האָט דער גאָלד־גאָט מיט אַ בראַנד־געלעכטער
געפֿרעסן אונדזערע זין און טעכטער,
געלעקט די לעבנס מיט זײַנע רויטע צונגען —
זיי זײַנען אין דעם טויט געשפּרונגען,
אין זײַן שויס געדרונגען,
ער האָט זיי געכאַפּט, געלאַכט, געזונגען…
ער האָט זיי פֿאַרשלונגען.
* * *
זיי זײַנען געזעסן אין זייער יאָך פֿאַרטיפֿט,
זייער שווייס האָט געטריפֿט —
אין דעם פֿאַרטויבנדן געזשום
פֿון מאַשינען אַרום, —
ווען צען שטאָק אין דער הויך,
האָט זיי פֿאַרוויקלט דער רויך,
פֿאַרשפּונען דער פֿלאַם,
און אַ גלוטיקער ים
געפֿרעסן, גענאַשט,
פֿאַרקוילט, פֿאַראַשט!
* * *
שוועסטער מײַנע! יונגע שוועסטער!
מײַנע יונגע ברידער!…
טרויערט מײַנע לידער!
יאָמערט און טרויערט!…
זעט ווי עס לויערט
פֿון טונקעלע נעסטער
דעם אַרבעטערס טויט;
ווי ער האַלט זײַן ברויט…
ווי ער גלאָצט בײַ זײַן טיר,
בײַ זײַן אָרעם געצעלט —
וויי, וויי איז מיר!
וויי, וויי דיר, וועלט!
אַ שבת איז דאָס געווען,
אַן אַרבעטערס אַ שבת,
זײַן „קידוש!“… זײַן „הבֿדלה!“…
די רויטע בהלה
איז פּלוצלינג געשען,
געשיקט פֿון דעם רײַכן,
דעם פּרינץ פֿון געלט.
אָ, אָ, וויי אָן אַ גלײַכן!
פֿליסט טרערנטײַכן,
אַ פֿלוך דער אָרדענונג!
אַ פֿלוך דער אומאָרדענונג!
אַ פֿלוך דער וועלט!
* * *
אויף וועמען זאָל מען פֿריִער קלאָגן?
אויף די פֿאַרברענטע?
אויף די ניט־דערקענטע?
אויף די, וואָס קדיש זאָגן?
אויף די פֿאַרקריפּלטע,
פֿון „זײַן“ געטראָגן?
מײַן טרערנטײַך
אויף אײַך אַלעמען גלײַך!
* * *
פֿאַרהיל זיך אין שוואַרצן, דו גאָלדן לאַנד!
צו טיף דײַן פֿאַרברעכן, צו שרעקלעך דײַן שאַנד,
צו טויב דײַן געוויסן, צו בלינד דײַן געזעץ,
צו טײַוולש דײַן „האַווען“, צו בלוטיק דײַן נעץ,
דײַן נעץ, וועלכע פֿאַנגט דײַנע אָרעמע־לייט —
ס׳וועט קומען די צײַט!… ס׳וועט קומען דײַן צײַט!…
* * *
צינדט יאָרצײַט־ליכט אָן אין די ייִדישע גאַסן!
דער בראָך איז דער בראָך פֿון די ייִדישע מאַסן,
פֿון אונדזערע מאַסן פֿאַרחושכט און אָרעם.
ס׳איז אונדזער לוויה, יאָ, — אונדזערע קבֿרים,
ס׳האָט אונדזערע קינדער, וויי, אונדזערע בלומען,
דער פֿײַער פֿון אונדזערע אָרעמס גענומען.
וויי! אונדזערע ליבע פֿאַרשׂרפֿעטע קוילן,
וויי! אונדזערע פֿריידן אַ העלע מיט גרוילן,
וויי! אונדזערע גליקן אַ באַרג מיט אַרונות,
וויי! אונדזערע זיסע — גיהנום זכרונות!…
אַ צווייט ליד וואָס חנה מלאָטעק האָט דעמאָלט געדרוקט הייסט „מאַמעניו, אָדער עלעגיע פֿאַר די טרײַענגל־פֿײַער־קרבנות“, ווערטער פֿון אַנשל שאָר, מוזיק פֿון יוסל רומשינסקי:
עס רײַסט דאָס האַרץ פֿון דער שרעקלעכער פּלאָג,
ס׳ייִדישע פֿאָלק קלאָגט און וויינט, און ברעכט די הענט.
עס ברעכט אויס אַ פֿײַער, אין העלן טאָג
און הונדערטער אַרבעטער, זיי ווערן פֿאַרברענט.
די וואָס זײַנען פֿון פֿײַער אַנטרינען
האָבן שפּרינגענדיק זייער טויט געפֿינען.
די „מאָרג“ איז פֿול,
מען ווערט שיעור דיל,
ווי אַ מאַמע קלאָגט דאָרט אין דער שטיל:
— אוי־וויי, קינדעניו!
רײַסט זיך בײַ די האָר די מאַמעניו,
— צוליב דעם שטיקל ברויט
האָט אַ שרעקלעכער טויט
גערויבט מיר מײַן איינציק קינד;
טויט ליגט מײַן מיידעלע,
תּכריכים ׳שטאָט אַ חופּה־קליידעלע,
וויי איז מײַנע יאָר,
אַ קינד פֿון זעכצן יאָר,
אוי, מאַמע, מאַמע, וויי איז מיר!
חנה מלאָטעק האָט אויך אַרײַנגענומען טייל פֿון אַ ליד וואָס זי האָט באַקומען פֿון איוו סיקולאַר. די ווערטער זײַנען פֿון לויִס גילראָד און די מוזיק — פֿון ד. מייעראָוויץ. דער אָנהייב לייענט זיך אַזוי:
די שטונדע האָט געקלאַפּט,
דער שאַפּ האָט געסטאַפּט
אין דער גרויסער ווייסט־פֿעקטאָרי.
די אַרבעטער, זיי
האָבן געקראָגן די פּיי
און געאײַלט זיך אַהיימגיין פֿאַר פֿרי.
נאָר פּלוצים, אוי־וויי,
אַ שרעק, אַ געשריי,
אַ העלישער פֿײַער ברעכט אויס.
פֿון איבעראַל קומען
פֿאַרצווייפֿלטע שטימען
אַיעדער וויל פֿריִער אַרויס.
פֿײַערלײַט קלינגען,
פֿון צענטן פֿלאָר שפּרינגען
מיידלעך פֿאַר אַנגסט און פֿון נויט.
עס קראַכט אומגעהײַער
דאָס שרעקלעכע פֿײַער
און פֿאַרברענט יונגע לײַבן צום טויט.
The post Mourning the victims of the 1911 Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
I had a shot and rock ‘n’ roll fame — I chose a lifetime of Shabbat instead
In 1986, saying no was not part of the plan. I was 26, newly signed to Island Records, and for the first time in my life, the machinery of the music business had begun to move in my favor. My songs “Waning Moon,” “I Feel Young Today,” and “1000 Years,” from my second album Gematria, were on the radio and MTV. There was talk of tours, of opening slots with artists like Sting, Joe Cocker and Greg Allman. My job, as everyone understood it, was simple: Say yes. Yes to every opportunity, yes to every kind of exposure, yes to everything that could possibly give my career momentum.
Lou Maglia, the president of Island Records, was an old-school Italian record guy — street-smart, direct and deeply invested in the artists he believed in. I was among his first signings. He had taken me on largely because of an independent record I had made called This Father’s Day, written and recorded as tribute to my dad, who died at 54, just a day after I’d turned 24. He was my mentor and my hero. Those who say his death had much to do with my sudden turn toward observant Judaism are partly right.
The other part is that in seeking a record deal since I was 13, and then finally getting one, I discovered it wasn’t the answer to what I’d actually been searching for, which was a loving family, a clearer understanding of what my life’s purpose might be, and a deeper sense of belonging in my tribe — the Jewish people.
That’s why, one afternoon, when I walked into Lou’s office and closed the door behind me, what I said to him must have sounded incomprehensible.
“Lou, I’m starting to keep this Jewish thing called Shabbos, and I won’t be available to perform on Friday nights anymore.”
He stared at me for a moment, then burst out laughing.
“Ha! Fucking Shabbos. Ok, that’s a good one, I get it. But can we talk about these opening slots?”
It wasn’t a cruel laugh. It was the laugh of a man encountering something he had no category for. In Lou’s world, artists did all kinds of self-destructive things and made radically poor decisions. But remove themselves from the single most important performance night of the week? Never. Ever.
I was, in effect, telling him I had decided to become unavailable for my own ascent.
At the time, I couldn’t have explained my decision in any coherent way. I didn’t have the vocabulary or even the conceptual framework. All I knew was that after my dad’s death something had begun to feel hollow. Not the music. The music was real. It was everything around it. The sense that if I just kept moving forward fast enough, saying yes often enough, I’d arrive at some point where things would finally make sense. They didn’t. (I can state for the record, 40 years later, they still don’t.)
But around that same time, through a chain of introductions, I met the record producer and singer Kenny Vance, of Jay and the Americans fame. Kenny, now my dear friend, had worked with everyone, and he wasn’t shy about mentioning it.
“I used to date Diane Keaton,” he told me. “I know Woody Allen. I was the music director for Saturday Night Live. But tonight, I’m gonna take you to my main connection, a religious Jew in Brooklyn.”
I suspect he thought I’d roll my eyes at the prospect. I did nothing of the sort. I was excited.
Before long, we were crossing the Brooklyn Bridge, the lights of lower Manhattan burning behind us. We arrived at an apartment in Crown Heights where Rabbi Simon Jacobson greeted us. I connected with Simon right off the bat. His eyes reflected a paradox, an awareness that being alive was both a source of great humor and great sadness. Simon told me about his work reconstructing the Lubavitcher Rebbe’s talks from memory, highly complex talks that lasted for hours and drew on thousands of Jewish sources. The scale of it was incomprehensible to me. It belonged to a world governed by entirely different assumptions than my own.
Later that night, after Kenny, who seemed very old — I think he was 40 — got tired and left for his home in Far Rockaway, I asked Simon about the paintings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe hanging on the wall.
“What’s the deal with those pictures?” I said. “They seem sort of cultish to me.”
Simon wasn’t offended. “I enjoy them,” he said. “To me, the Rebbe is like a very inspiring grandfather.”
Makes sense, I thought.
He grew quiet, then continued. “There are people called tzadikim,” he said. “They have no sense of self. They live only to serve others. And they can do anything they wish.”
I knew enough to know he wasn’t using the colloquial tzadik, as in “What a tzadik, that Herb Shapiro. Got me such a deal on my new Firestones.”
“Really?” I asked. “Can they fly?”
Simon looked at me. He became serious.
“I’ve never seen anyone fly. But for a tzadik, flying is no greater miracle than walking.”
The remark just about toppled me. Not because it sounded weird and mystical, but because it cohered with something I had always felt, but had never heard expressed so simply: that walking itself was a miracle. That breathing, eating pancakes, taking a piss, that just being alive, was a miracle.
One could accurately say that I was the fastest person ever to join the “cult.” I went out and bought tzitzit the next day. I began keeping kosher. “One less shrimp,” was how I thought of it. Then came Shabbat observance in my dumpy railroad apartment on 47th and Eighth Avenue in Hell’s Kitchen.
Shabbat, like music, was the space between notes. A kind of purposeful interruption. For one day each week, I stopped. I stopped producing. I stopped striving. Most importantly, I stopped trying to turn success into proof of my worth. It wasn’t only about stopping work. That’s too simple. It was about remembering that I was more than my work. It felt like an authentic subversion of shallow cultural norms, something that instinctively appealed to me. It was the more truthful version of the so-called subversion that rock and roll had always only imitated.
This is why I told Lou Maglia no.
Not because I was certain, but because I had begun to understand that if I lost this, I might lose something far more essential than a career.
My friend, the late Lou Maglia, lapsed Catholic, soulful man that he was, stopped laughing. He saw that I was serious. He didn’t drop me. Far from it. He became my biggest champion. When it would have been only logical for us to play cities like Cleveland and Chicago in support of one of my recordings, Lou even helped finance my tour of the Caucasus in what was then the USSR. (Another story for another time.) He knew that my music wasn’t a posture, but a reflection of my deeply held values.
Hey Lou, if you’re up there listening, thank you. You were a beautiful man with a beautiful spirit.
People sometimes ask me if the cost to my career was worth it. There are two issues I have with the question. First, it assumes the career was the central measure of my life. Second, few ask what I received in return. I have, thank God, been blessed with a beautiful marriage, a tight-knit, loving family, grandchildren, a body of work that I could never have imagined at age 26, and time. I have been able to see the value of time and secure it as my own.
As for music, Shabbat didn’t take any of it away from me. It taught me to hear it better, write it better, and perform it better.
I have never struck a better bargain.
The post I had a shot and rock ‘n’ roll fame — I chose a lifetime of Shabbat instead appeared first on The Forward.
Uncategorized
Spain withdraws ambassador to Israel, widening diplomatic rift as Trump threatens to sever trade
(JTA) — MADRID — Spain has permanently withdrawn its ambassador to Israel in a symbolic rebuke of the U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez has emerged as an unequivocal and lonely voice in Europe against the Iran war, widening Spain’s rift with Israel and making an enemy of President Donald Trump.
Ambassador Ana María Salomón Pérez was removed from her post on Tuesday, according to an announcement issued Wednesday by the Spanish government. Israel recalled its ambassador to Spain, Rodica Radian-Gordon, shortly after Spain said it would recognize a Palestinian state in May 2024.
Spain’s move marks an escalation in the countries’ strained relations, which have severely deteriorated since the start of the war in Gaza in 2023.
Spanish Prime Minister Pedro Sánchez became one of Europe’s most vocal critics of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s prosecution of that war. Over the last three years, he rallied support for Palestinian statehood, accused Israel of genocide in Gaza and imposed a total arms embargo on Israel.
Pérez was summoned to Madrid in September, following a diplomatic row over Spain’s ban on aircrafts and ships carrying weapons to Israel. Israel’s foreign minister Gideon Saar called the measure antisemitic and barred two members of Sánchez’s Cabinet from entering Israel, saying they supported “terrorism and violence against Israelis.”
Spain and Israel are now both represented in each other’s embassies by their respective chargés d’affaires, lower-ranking officials who reflect their downgraded relations. It is the same status that Israel maintained with South Africa before the two countries ejected even the lower-level envoys earlier this year.
Sánchez has been one of few major European leaders to emphatically reject the U.S.-Israeli attacks on Iran, calling them “an unjustified and dangerous military intervention” that he says violates international law.
As the leaders of Germany, France and Italy have taken more conciliatory tones, Trump has lashed back at Sánchez. After Spain refused to allow the United States permission to use two jointly operated bases in its territory for strikes on Iran, Trump threatened to sever trade.
“Spain has been terrible,” Trump said during a press conference with German Chancellor Friedrich Merz on March 3. He added, “We’re going to cut off all trade with Spain. We don’t want anything to do with Spain.”
Sánchez, in response, has revived the “No to war” slogan that galvanized Spaniards in 2003. At the time, millions took to the streets to reject then-Prime Minister José María Aznar’s support for the Iraq war, contributing to his center-right party’s collapse in 2004. The war was also seen as a driver behind a deadly terrorist attack in Madrid whose 22nd anniversary Spain marked on Wednesday.
Sánchez said the slogan summed up the Spanish government’s position in a televised address on March 4. In a pointed line, he said leaders who have not improved their people’s lives “make use of war to hide their failure whilst filling the pockets of a few — the usual ones, the only ones who win when the world stops building hospitals in order to build missiles.”
Even more pointedly, without naming Trump, he said, “We are not going to be complicit in something that is bad for the world and contrary to our values and interests, simply out of fear of reprisals from anyone.”
The post Spain withdraws ambassador to Israel, widening diplomatic rift as Trump threatens to sever trade appeared first on The Forward.