Thursday, February 03, 2005

PRELUDE TO A RESPONSE

I’ve been trying to piece together a coherent response to Wendy Shalit’s piece on "The Observant Reader" in the Sunday NY Times, but keep hitting wall after wall. Perhaps it’s because I feel like I'm constantly on deadline for other projects, or perhaps it’s that I just can’t wrap my brain around her premise. I’m finding it hard to address her points item-by-item; I think it’s just going to be its own essay.

In the interim, you may want to try:

Miriam
Allison Kaplan Sommer featuring Chayyei Sarah
Tova Mirvis via Chayyei Sarah

UPDATE:
DovBear
The Jewish Week

I'll be weighing in soon. One can hope, semi-intelligently.

4 Comments:

At 12:59 PM, February 03, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

FYI, here's my $.02 on this:

While I think Wendy makes some decent points, she too is coming from a biased perspective, just from the opposite direction. She is correct that many of the negative portrayals of the Orthodox, and particularly the ultra-Orthodox, in contemporary literature are ultimately coming from positions of polemic, from people with chips on their shoulders. But this does not mean that any negative portrayals by these authors fit that category or are automatically bad.

In particular, Mirvis' portrayals (caveats: I know Mirvis, and I also have not read any of the other responses yet, in case this point has been made already) are much more even-handed. Yes, they make some criticisms about the right wing Ortho community, but I believe, in my experience, that they are accurate portrayals, and certainly are sketched with an even-handed style. They are not judgmental, nor are they purely negative. In fact, it is for these reasons that I find reading her books so depressing (to me) -- because I feel they are accurate, and thus I feel sad about the negative aspects of the community that come through.

Ultimately, just because someone makes a negative comment on Orthodoxy (or any other group), this does not automatically make them "outsiders" or "outsider insiders." If they are even-handed, it makes them social critics.

Peace.

Fun Joel

P.S. (Sorry if that ended up coming out as a bit more than TWO cents!)

 
At 1:09 PM, February 03, 2005, Blogger Esther Kustanowitz said...

Good comments, Joel. I don't mind your two cents becoming a quarter. You're always welcome here.

 
At 1:40 PM, February 03, 2005, Blogger Sarah said...

Thanks for the links and the positive vibes!

And, good comment, Joel. I agree with you there.

 
At 7:52 PM, February 03, 2005, Blogger Lyss said...

Though her books may not fall into the religious fiction category, I have found that Fay Kellerman's mystery novels bring a fascinating middle view to intra-Jewish dealings. As someone who has aday school/yeshiva background but is not actively observant I have found her books to be rather on target about how different 'types' of Jews realte to each other, as well as to the world around them.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home

My Urban Kvetch: PRELUDE TO A RESPONSE

Thursday, February 03, 2005

PRELUDE TO A RESPONSE

I’ve been trying to piece together a coherent response to Wendy Shalit’s piece on "The Observant Reader" in the Sunday NY Times, but keep hitting wall after wall. Perhaps it’s because I feel like I'm constantly on deadline for other projects, or perhaps it’s that I just can’t wrap my brain around her premise. I’m finding it hard to address her points item-by-item; I think it’s just going to be its own essay.

In the interim, you may want to try:

Miriam
Allison Kaplan Sommer featuring Chayyei Sarah
Tova Mirvis via Chayyei Sarah

UPDATE:
DovBear
The Jewish Week

I'll be weighing in soon. One can hope, semi-intelligently.

4 Comments:

At 12:59 PM, February 03, 2005, Anonymous Anonymous said...

FYI, here's my $.02 on this:

While I think Wendy makes some decent points, she too is coming from a biased perspective, just from the opposite direction. She is correct that many of the negative portrayals of the Orthodox, and particularly the ultra-Orthodox, in contemporary literature are ultimately coming from positions of polemic, from people with chips on their shoulders. But this does not mean that any negative portrayals by these authors fit that category or are automatically bad.

In particular, Mirvis' portrayals (caveats: I know Mirvis, and I also have not read any of the other responses yet, in case this point has been made already) are much more even-handed. Yes, they make some criticisms about the right wing Ortho community, but I believe, in my experience, that they are accurate portrayals, and certainly are sketched with an even-handed style. They are not judgmental, nor are they purely negative. In fact, it is for these reasons that I find reading her books so depressing (to me) -- because I feel they are accurate, and thus I feel sad about the negative aspects of the community that come through.

Ultimately, just because someone makes a negative comment on Orthodoxy (or any other group), this does not automatically make them "outsiders" or "outsider insiders." If they are even-handed, it makes them social critics.

Peace.

Fun Joel

P.S. (Sorry if that ended up coming out as a bit more than TWO cents!)

 
At 1:09 PM, February 03, 2005, Blogger Esther Kustanowitz said...

Good comments, Joel. I don't mind your two cents becoming a quarter. You're always welcome here.

 
At 1:40 PM, February 03, 2005, Blogger Sarah said...

Thanks for the links and the positive vibes!

And, good comment, Joel. I agree with you there.

 
At 7:52 PM, February 03, 2005, Blogger Lyss said...

Though her books may not fall into the religious fiction category, I have found that Fay Kellerman's mystery novels bring a fascinating middle view to intra-Jewish dealings. As someone who has aday school/yeshiva background but is not actively observant I have found her books to be rather on target about how different 'types' of Jews realte to each other, as well as to the world around them.

 

Post a Comment

<< Home