The Politics of Yiddish
(March
/ April 2001)
THE POLITICS OF YIDDISH: STUDIES IN LANGUAGE, LITERATURE AND SOCIETY, Edited by Dov-Ber Kerler. AltaMira Press, Walnut Creek, CA, 1998.
The Politics of Yiddish; Studies In Language, Literature
and Society,
edited by Dr. Dov-Ber Kerler, draws our attention to the central importance
of language in the political arena in general and the Yiddish language
in
particular. It also brings to light the internal and external forces that
transpired, mainly during the twentieth century, and contributed to the
ebb
and flow of the Yiddish language as it exists today. Dr. Kerler is a
professor at the Oxford Centre for Hebrew and Jewish Studies, Oxford,
England.
This book is a compilation of essays delivered in December
1988 in Oxford, England as part of the Annual Winter Symposia on Yiddish
and Literature. Included are several articles from a later symposium,
while
several were written specifically for this issue. This is the fourth volume
in a series of seven and is commemorating the eightieth anniversary of
the
first Yiddish Language Conference held in Czernowitz in 1908.
While the Czernowitz conference had little immediate impact on the Jewish
world, it had a great symbolic impact in resolving the "Kulturkampf between
Yiddish and Hebrew". The Yiddish language was finally being accepted,
hence the title of the book: "The Power of Yiddish." In trying to find
an
amicable resolution to this kulturkampf, the Yiddish poet Avrom Valt
Lyesinon stressed the importance of both languages, each with a distinct
purpose: Hebrew was the "sacred language" while Yiddish was "mame loshn",
the language of the East European Jewish masses. It was not only the language
of everyday communication but, by 1908, Yiddish had developed to the stage
where it had become the vehicle for a growing body of creative
activity-literature, poetry, drama, song, etc.
Language as politics is certainly not a new phenomenon.
In the twentieth
century, besides the Hebrew/Yiddish controversy, we can identify-to name
but a few-the French/English debate in Quebec and the Catalan/Castillian
clash in Spain. The latter is discussed in an article in this collection,
"The First International Conference of the Catalan Language in Barcelona
(1906): a Precursor to Czernowitz (1908)?". The Russian/Ukrainian
debate
during the Soviet era is another well-known example. Language is an
intrinsic component of most minority/majority conflicts, of the clash
of
dominant forces against the powerless in the struggle to maintain cultural
hegemony, linguistic identity and power.
We can see the enormous power of the Yiddish language in
shaping modern
Jewish life when we learn from Emanuel Goldsmith's article "Yiddishism
and
Judaism" that Yiddish became "the official language of significant
international welfare agencies as ORT, OZET, HIAS, the Zionist and Jewish
Socialist movements, and all Jewish political parties in Eastern Europe."
Furthermore, Yiddish was once spoken by three out of every four Jews in
the
world (p. 16).
While it does not bring new revelations, reading the three
essays on
Yiddish in the Soviet Union still brings us pain. The dreams and potential
for a Yiddish cultural renaissance were short-lived, with devastating
effects upon all of world Jewry. This potential "burst forth suddenly
in
full creative bloom, within a year or two of the October Revolution, that
false omen of all people's redemption" (p. 171). This "full creative bloom"
of exceptional literary figures included, to name but a few, writers and
poets such as Dovid Hofstein, Perets Markish, Dovid Bergelson, Leyb Kvitko,
Itzik Fefer and Shloyme Mikhoels. In the forefront of Soviet Yiddish
poetry, Dovid Hofstein was also the first to be eradicated by Stalin's
executioners.
The overwhelming majority of Yiddish and Hebrew poets in
Russia were
wholehearted supporters of the Russian Revolution and believers in the
justice of the revolution. As Hofstein wrote,
No hand was ever so raised
In such fervent faith! ...
Only to be shattered and disillusioned, leading Hofstein
to write, "how
easy it was to believe, then!" and, "What sweet grief it is to be a human
being!"
From the Soviet experience, we learn how language was subverted,
how
meanings had to be couched, how metaphors were used to convey meaning,
disillusionment and frustration and how difficult and dangerous it was
to
survive as a Jewish artist.
We have come a long way from the period when Yiddish was
acknowledged as the official language of the Jews. This of course has
led to continuous
debate among world Jewry, bringing into focus two major questions that
fuel
the debate. First, what were the intervening factors that led to the
decline of Yiddish as the spoken language of the Jews? Secondly, how much
is language a factor in ethnic identification? Many factors on the decline
of Yiddish are discussed. They range from linguistic assimilation,
integration into other nations, the Holocaust, Stalinism, and the founding
of the State of Israel with the ascendancy of the Hebrew language. There
is
less attention paid to the second question, one that, I believe, deserves
further discussion.
In his article "The Politics of Research on Spoken Yiddish",
Rachmeil Peltz
presents us with new food for thought on the decline of Yiddish, in North
America, in particular. Peltz reflects on the negativism of leading
American Yiddish linguists such as Yudl Mark and Max Weinreich in
describing the future of Yiddish in America. By comparing American Yiddish
to what existed in Eastern Europe, they concluded that Yiddish was in
a
"state of disintegration." This was based on their perception of the
increasing Anglicization of the Yiddish language. Peltz accuses
Weinreich
of stating "his case with considerable emotional fervour but without
systematically collected data" (P.67). This negativism by two well-known
American Yiddish linguists hampered future research in studying the
language as it was spoken at the time. The case was determined a priori,
without recognizing that language is continuously changing, that it is
never static and is rarely pure. Rather, Yiddish, like all other languages,
is constantly in flux, reflecting and accepting from other cultures and
environments. In the North American case, it is common knowledge that
Yiddish has not only taken from but also contributed to the dominant
language.
In examining the Soviet period when Yiddish research was
flourishing
(1925/26-1932), Peltz states: "With the support of the government, Soviet
Yiddish linguists were able to pursue their research with more energy
and
resources in the short period allotted to them than their colleagues in
the
West." While this period was very brief, it was evident that Yiddish in
the
Soviet Union was also undergoing similar changes to that in North America,
borrowing from Russian and Ukrainian. This became very clear to me as
a
Canadian-born Jew. For a long time, I did not appreciate the extent of
the
Russian and Ukrainian words and phrases that had been incorporated into
the
Yiddish that I had learned at home from my Ukrainian-born Jewish parents.
For Secularists who were the central force in the ascendancy
of the
Yiddish language, it is a profound irony to see that Yiddish, while in
decline as a folk language, is on the increase amongst the ultra-Orthodox
communities in Israel as well as in America. (See "Yiddish in the Orthodox
Communities of Jerusalem", P.85.) However, the author notes that
while
Yiddish is the oral language among the Haredim, secular Yiddish literature
is forbidden in their communities.
For those concerned with the future of Yiddish, this is
a book well worth
examining. It brings to the discussion some of the most creative thinkers
and research in an area of great concern to many. And while there are
no
prophecies as to the future of Yiddish, it is more fruitful to carry on
the
discussion with an objective, global perspective.