Peter Novick, in his 1999 The Holocaust in American Life — a brilliant analysis of the process by which the Holocaust went from being, in American Jewish life, the subject of shame and silence to a central fact and a sacralized event — speaks of the “profound ‘Israelization’” of American Jews following the 1967 Six-Day War. This “change,” writes Novick, “extended to language, as kippa replaced yarmulke and as Israeli (Sephardic) pronunciation of Hebrew – Shabbat instead of Shabbos, bat rather than bas mitzvah — became dominant.”
Since that book, the change Novick identifies has continued apace, and Simkhas Torah, Sukes, Shvues, mitsves, and the poor talis have all turned “t” on us and fallen victim in the war to turn everything Jewish into an adjunct of Israel. Even the Holocaust itself is as often as not called the Shoah, becoming an Israeli-named event.
“Yarmulke” by Lawrence Bush
This has not been the result of a concerted campaign by Israel to impose its form of Hebrew on the Diaspora. Rather, American Jews, in their weakness and ignorance, have willingly surrendered their linguistic independence along with their political independence to Israel. But the issue is, in fact, far more profound than that, for language is politics. We say many things when we say anything, and linguistic choices, pronunciations and accents implicitly speak volumes: meanings are embedded in how a word or sentence is said. By importing Israeli pronunciations, American Jews have further allowed Israel to occupy their minds; with Israeli pronunciation of common words and names now so normative, those Ashkenaz who say “Shabbat Shalom” instead of “Gut Shabbos” have so thoroughly internalized Israeli hegemony that they accept it as natural.
Among many if not most Orthodox and fundamentalist sects, however, the Ashkenaz terminal “s” and the “aw” missing in Sephardic Hebrew have been retained, at least in religious life. Among the Orthodox — who have contributed mightily to turning Israel into a pesthole of racism and obscurantism — this can be explained largely by fidelity to tradition, though there no doubt enters into this the strain of anti-Sephardi racism that is, in my experience, quite strong among them. Caught between the rock of their love of Greater Israel and their disdain for Jewish Arabs, they allow tradition to decide. They maintain their historic pronunciations at prayer and then become faux Israelis when they speak the language conversationally.
Of course, many if not most Jews of those who celebrate “Shabbat” know no more Hebrew than the odd prayer learned by heart and a handful of words, and they are certainly not aware of the role of Eliezer Ben-Yehuda, the man responsible for the revival of Hebrew as a spoken language, in deciding that Sephardic pronunciation is more closely related to Hebrew as it was spoken in antiquity. Their use of the Sephardic pronunciation simply serves as a clear, even if not-quite-conscious, marker of fealty and submission to Israel.
What those who use Sephardic pronunciations are seeking though, is not just a connection to Israel, but a form of authenticity.
It’s hard to conceive of services at a progressive synagogue without someone playing the oud to the accompaniment of a doumbek while wearing a Bokharan yarmulke. Sephardic music, Sephardic tunes for prayers, have become signs of both open-mindedness and of a more real, more inclusive Judaism. Even with the success of the klezmer revival, no shul brings in an accordionist to drone A7 and D minor chords, the most Jewish chords of all: that would be gauche. But replace “biddi-bums” with ululations and that’s another matter. You get to be Jewish and cosmopolitan as Sabbath services become a world music festival.
Why, though, should the Sephardic be thought of as more authentic? With some exceptions, like the communities in Algeria (where Jews, unlike their Muslim neighbors, were French citizens) and sections of the Egyptian and Iraqi communities, Mizrakhi communities remained in their ghettos long after many European Jews had moved out. To be sure, huge chunks of European Jewry — those found in the photographs of Roman Vishniac — remained literally mired in the past. Although some seekers of Jewish authenticity romanticize the ghetto, it is too close to Ashkenaz for us to be fooled into thinking that there is something essential and authentic about it. But if the Judaism of our parents’ generation, the children of immigrants, was an empty, desiccated thing, we have to distinguish ourselves from them and represent something more elemental, more alive. Far better something that is the same but different; fellow Jews but a little different, with different customs, different foods, even a different history: the exotically authentic Sephardim.
This difference is the key: as American Jews increasingly become an indistinguishable part of the American whole, being a fake Sephard provides just enough estrangement to make being Jewish fascinating. It simultaneously provides a falsely progressive cover for the support of Israel some Jews feel is necessary.
Sephardic pronunciation has something for everyone: it provides progressive Jews with an attractive and cheap cultural cover for their support of Israel and its policies, and more conservative Jews with a direct line to the Israeliness they so covet without ever having to go to there. It is bad faith squared.
Mitchell Abidor is a contributing writer to our magazine and a translator, musician, and actor living in Brooklyn. He is author of Communards: The Paris Commune of 1871 as Told by Those Who Fought For It.
{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }
An interesting point of view which, as a speaker of Yiddish, I’m inclined to accept, with one minor quibble. The word “shoah” is preferable to the word “holocaust”; in fact, anything is preferable to the word “holocaust,” and if you look up its literal meaning and etymology, you’ll see immediately why that is so. Best, in my view, is the Yiddish “khurbm eyropa,” but until English speakers can get “KH” through their throats the Hebrew shoah will do. (If you really want tsuris, use “nakba,” but I’m not risking my life by trying it.)
It struck me as more than a bit hypocritical when Chuck Hagel was attacked for calling AIPAC the Jewish lobby rather than the Israeli lobby. AIPAC has never really sought to distinguish itself from an organization of Jews than as an organization for Israel. As American Jews and AIPAC seek to minimize the distinction why attack Hagel for being confused? Of course, one can spend pages discussing the various mis-uses of Israeli, Zionist, Jew and their many iterations.
Using Sephardic (or is the Mizrakhic) pronunciation of Hebrew words does not make someone a fake Sephard, but it does conform to the Zionist principle that Israel should be the center of Jewish culture.
Abidor makes some valid points, but what is his alternative?
really happy that you brought up the whole issue-also that it’s not just the Sephardic pronunciation. i feel very grateful to America for the freedoms that we have here, and the opportunities., as R. Michael Lerner has pointed out also. Personally-i had a very difficult time in my childhood with the McCarthy era, and that my 4’7″ mother office worker was subpoenaed by HuAC and hunted by the FBI. However-those were lessons, and a lesson as a Jewess-to stand for justice and to help your fellow and sister human being. To me, Jewishness-in this country-the Ashkenazim who were brave, and came here-this is our legacy To be Jews here-Mort Sahl, Lenny Bruce Irving Berlin, L. Bernstein-etc. etc. etc. And life is both terrible and wonderful. We know that as Jews, i don’t feel we need to go shopping for Israel Anti-Semitism? Yes, we need to deal with it, and also listen and hear what criticisms the goyim have of us-straight-on and in open dialogue.
I never thought about Sephardi pronunciation as an ideological statement, and reading M Abidor’s article I’m not convinced. I use Sephardi pronunciation because that’s what I was taught. I prefer Ashkenazi melodies to Sephardi melodies. I use “Holocaust” & “Shoah” interchangeably, though I suppose a Hebrew word is more appropriate than a Greek word. By this article’s logic I should say “Shoiah.” “Gut Shabbes” is Yiddish, “Shabbat Shalom” is Hebrew. Both are fine by me. Using the former doesn’t make one Haredi, using the latter doesn’t make one a West Bank settler. I could be wrong about this, but I feel like many Jews would look at it the same way.
Kudos to Mitch! (Where does “kudos” come from?) Together, he and I form an intercontinental alliance for the equal validity of the Ashkenazic pronunciation of Hebrew words and the equal Jewishness of Yiddish. The official Jewish media — read by a comparative handful of the 5.5 million U.S. Jews — and the throngs who “had” a bar or bat mitzvah and can barely remember the words they memorized, all these form what we’re meant to accept as the “norm.” I ain’t buyin’ it. Just as I don’t buy the “norm” of referring to undocumented immigrants as “illegals.”
To Mr. Muraskin: the “proposal” is simply to be ourselves, true to our own heritages as progressive, Secular Jews whose inspirational — or spiritual — heritage lies in the richness of Yiddish culture beyond but including food.
To the fancy-type disquisition on “yarmulka”: the origin of the word is the Turkish word for hat and no Talmudic thumb-turning will change that linguistic fact.
…And, about the terms for Nazi genocide: The survivors of the ghettos and death camps had one word: khurbn. It was the term previously used to describe the destruction of the First and Second Jerusalem Temples, and it was for that very reason that the Orthodox rabbinate banned its use. Nothing, they averred, dare be compared to those Torah-described destructions. They were joined by U.S. fundraising professionals who couldn’t pronounce the “kh.” Besides, “holocaust” came in modern, sophisticated dress. So what if its meaning up to that time meant “widespread destruction by fire?” As for “shoah,” it owes its popularity to the film of the same name (sort of like raising brides and grooms in chairs came from a Hollywood movie). Don’t we owe it to its victims to call the genocide by the name they gave it, even if we have to compromise on “hurban,” as in “hanukkah?”
According to one on-line dictionary, “kudos” derives from the Greek kydos, which it says means “praise,” and was first used in English in 1831. Meanwhile, Hershl, the “yarmulke” piece isn’t about etymology or the Talmud, it’s about the fact that those paper 1199 union hats (maybe you have a hard time making them out in the photos) were the yarmulkes of my childhood and were every bit as “holy.”