orrespondence

Hebrew Literature should be viewed better as monism, diverse embodiments of a single cos- To the Editors: mic power. However, his astounding There are two ways to create and assertion that there is no “story” to be study an “ethnic” or a “national” lit- found in that eternal, static absolute erature: One is to focus on the group is completely false. The sources for of writers and works who identify much of ancient Indian monism, the themselves as being of that people, Upanishads, are told almost entirely and look at the diversities and com- through narrative. Stories are told to mon threads between them. The other illustrate philosophical principles; is to identify the common thread that principles are enunciated through the binds these writers together, and ex- frame of narratives. Moreover, ancient clude examples which do not fit the Indian literature is replete with “testa- thread, defining them as “outside the ments” of encounter between personal people,” or in some other way “dis- gods and human beings, as well as eased.” There are flaws to both ap- between human beings and monistic proaches. In the first, the boundaries principles. It is clear that Inbari has can become overly fuzzy as to what not read much of ancient Indian lit- constitutes a literature properly be- erature carefully. Current literary de- longing to that people. The second bate about the status of “history” and can gravely distort facts for the sake of “historical consciousness” in India intellectual purity, in the attempt to takes place at a much subtler, and draw a fixed and stable boundary more interesting, level. where none exists. Moreover, Inbari’s repetition of the Assaf Inbari’s article (“Towards a tired (and now challenged) dichotomy Hebrew Literature,” Azure 9, Spring of “pagan” time being cyclical and 2000) suffers gravely from the flaws Hebrew time being “linear” creates of the second approach. We will fo- such a large generalization that com- cus, first, on his depiction of the an- parison itself becomes an uninterest- cient world (particularly India) and, ing list of cultural stereotypes. More second, on his portrayal of contem- recent writing on ancient India shows porary literature. that its literature engages in the very To begin with the ancient world: dialectic between the individual and Inbari rightly asserts that polytheism the collective that Inbari approves of.

winter 5761 / 2001 • 3 Moreover, to assert that, contrary last two centuries of research on the to the biblical authors, Indian authors history of the Hebrew Bible. More harbored a love for philosophical ab- specifically, it ignores the Bible’s rela- straction and individualism entirely tion to the cultures of the Ancient ignores a huge genre of Indian texts, Near East—and especially to the of which we can name only a few. textual and narrative traditions of The Indian epics of the Ramayana neighboring cultures. Inbari’s asser- and the Mahabharata (ten times the tion that “pagan texts” are about the size of the Bible) narrate the exploits individual, but the Bible is about the and duties of dynasties and kings; the spiritual and material restoration of Indian text of the Arthasastra outlines the Jewish polity in the land of Israel, the world of ancient Indian politics can only work when one completely and bureaucracy. All of these are clas- ignores the connections between the sics in Indian literature; Inbari would Bible and the other literatures of the do well to read them before he makes Ancient Near East. claims to Hebrew uniqueness. Yet the complexity and the gran- There are indeed fascinating com- deur of the various and varied bibli- parisons between biblical literary tech- cal narrative, which shares so much nique and that of its non-biblical with other Near Eastern “pagan” lit- counterparts which students of com- eratures, does not make it impure. parative literature and religion are now Biblical literature need not have a sin- exploring—about the relationship be- gle essence to be powerful. Its exhor- tween narrative and philosophy (both tation to Jewish national pride and powerfully present in the literatures restoration, a warning against “Hel- of ancient worlds); about the role of lenism” and nihilism, is only one of etymologies and punning; about the many possible characteristics of bibli- role of dynasty and lineage; and so cal literature. forth. These themes are not the mis- Yet Inbari’s article is more con- leadingly generalized ones that Inbari cerned with the contemporary Israeli engages; they are based on careful, literary scene, and it is best to turn linguistically informed, reading of now to the contemporary period. De- other cultures’ texts. crying the “melancholy that has domi- What about texts closer to the nated Israeli literature since 1967” (an Bible than those of India or Greece? assertion that would shock the very Inbari’s assertion about pagan narra- large readership of contemporary tives (and the lack thereof) contra- Hebrew fiction), and blaming that dicts without basis the findings of the “melancholy” on the New Left, the

4 • Azure student revolts, the sexual revolution, continually responded. Brenner was and the wave of protests against the the martyred defender of the Jewish Vietnam War, Inbari calls for a re- settlements in Jaffa, a martyrdom turn to what he describes as the “his- which earned him a place in the pan- torical, national, deed-based… prose” theon of Israeli national identity. of the Bible. But all of this goes unmentioned. The only writer who escapes In- For Inbari, it is Brenner, not Agnon, bari’s censure, and seems to model who is the most widely emulated of this national, deed-based biblical Israeli authors, and as today’s Israeli prose, is S.Y. Agnon. According to authors disappoint Inbari, they are Inbari, Agnon was the only author part of the “decades-long process of writing in the Hebrew language in alienation from the Hebrew poetic the twentieth century who produced tradition.” It is the tradition of Bren- anything that can be properly called a ner and the ensuing “alienation” “Hebrew literature.” Agnon meets which must be blamed. Agnon him- Inbari’s requisite standards of purity self would have strenuously objected because his stories are in a “closed, to the Agnon-Brenner dichotomy. ‘communal’ and particularist style, Agnon survived Brenner by fifty years which stands in marked contrast to and never expressed anything but the universal communicativeness to the highest regard for the older and which the artistic, individualistic more revolutionary writer. This di- Western narrative aspires.” Contrast- chotomy is a modern expression of ed with Agnon’s “traditional” style is the earlier dichotomy posited by the that of Yosef Haim Brenner, which is author, mentioned above: Between the “intemperate, impatient and at times “national content” of the biblical nar- frenzied.… Unlike Agnon’s language, rative and the “individualistic, anthro- which is infused with tradition, Bren- pocentric worldview” of the Greeks ner’s language is choppy, detached and and other ancient societies. chaotic.” Inbari is right to care about litera- In his assertion of this dichotomy, ture, Hebrew identity, and the crea- Inbari blatantly overlooks the histori- tion of a vibrant, muscular Hebrew cal fact of Brenner’s relationship to literary tradition. He is right to focus Agnon. Brenner was mentor and on Hebrew literature in its relation- advocate of the younger writer. Bren- ship to the cultures surrounding it. ner was the revered cultural figure He is dangerously wrong to create of the Second Aliya who projected the lengthy series of false dichotomies a tone and voice to which Agnon and generalizations which supposedly

winter 5761 / 2001 • 5 help to distinguish Hebrew literature Inbari is not satisfied with the sim- from others. Our points are best punc- ple meaning of these terms, however. tuated by the testimony of Inbari’s “All of these definitions ignore the supposed exemplar, S.Y. Agnon. In a unique literary qualities that form the 1962 address in Jerusalem, Agnon heart of the Hebrew literary tradi- spoke of his literary influences, and of tion,” he maintains. “Hebrew litera- his love for the world storytelling tra- ture, for my purposes, refers to litera- dition. He enumerated for his listen- ture that employs a particular kind of ers some of his favorite authors. First poetics—that is, a certain artistic strat- among them was Homer. egy for writing—of which the biblical narrative constitutes the first, but by Shalom Goldman no means only, example.” Department of Hebrew Literature Arguments about the poetics of Laurie L. Patton Hebrew literature through the ages Department of Early Indian are legitimate, and can be fascinating. Religions But why change the accepted terms? Emory University In order to make the case that authors should write in the spirit of biblical poetics, there is no need to claim that To the Editors: any other writing is not “Hebrew.” Assaf Inbari’s essay, “Towards a He- The Greeks created the tragedy and brew Literature,” builds its argument the comedy—but neither Shake- on a new definition of “Hebrew lit- speare’s tragedies nor Moliere’s com- erature,” one that is contrived and edies can plausibly be called “Greek demagogic. literature.” Similarly, if Greek authors The common use of the term, ob- were to begin writing poetry in the viously, refers to language: “Hebrew spirit of haiku, readers would pick up literature” is usually taken to refer to on the literary influence, but who works written in the Hebrew language, would say it was not Greek literature? whether or not they were written by As opposed to instrumental music and Jews, and regardless of their content. visual art, which are defined purely in The Jewish literature in Ladino, Yid- terms of their style, literature has a dish, English, Arabic, French and other language, which profoundly influences languages is called “Jewish literature,” the way its works are disseminated and religious literature is usually and by whom they are read. Inbari known as “Tora literature,” “halachic plays down this seemingly technical literature,” or some similar term. point, redefining the terms in order

6 • Azure to build his case for a “Hebrew poet- message of the latter; ultimately, how- ics.” Whoever does not accept its rules ever, Inbari seems to care much more presumably takes the name of He- about the means than the monotheis- brew literature in vain. tic ends. To him, the most important The first realization of Hebrew po- thing about Hebrew literature, includ- etics, according to Inbari, is the Bible. ing the Bible, is its poetics, not its Most of the Bible consists of “histori- ideas. cal, national, deed-based narrative Along with the idea of one God, of prose”: “Historical,” in that it depicts whom no sculptured image may be a sequence of events causally linked; made, other ideas also are central to “national,” in that it describes the his- the Bible, and could have plausibly tory of a people, incorporating the gone into the definition of “Hebrew people’s most important, unique fig- literature”: God’s hand in history; his ures; and “deed-based narrative prose,” authority over man; man’s obligation in that it offers a clear plot and em- to heed him; the covenant with the phasizes actions rather than descrip- Jewish people (not just any ordinary tion. This genre, according to Inbari, national historical development), and was chosen because it is the most ap- God’s special relationship with them propriate for delivering the monothe- throughout history; revelation as a istic message of the Bible. And in- possible element in the relationship deed, two-thirds of the Bible does between man and God; reward and comprise the sort of prose Inbari is punishment; free will, and with it describing. Almost all these passages man’s ability to fall and rise, to move of prose depict episodes in the history away from God and to return to him. of the people of Israel; and perhaps These ideas are a recurring theme this is the most appropriate genre for throughout the books of the Bible— a monotheistic message. in its prose as well as its poetry. Yet the Bible possesses other quali- Apparently, Hebrew ideas may be ties which Inbari ignores. Monothe- expressed in several ways. As is well ism, for example. “Historical, national, known, the books of Isaiah, Jeremiah, deed-based narrative prose” is a liter- Ezekiel and the twelve Minor Proph- ary quality, while monotheism is part ets, written almost exclusively as po- of the book’s actual content—an in- etry, all deliver an unabashedly mono- tellectual quality. Inbari maintains theistic message. Theoretical writing that the literary form was selected as is also capable of delivering such a part of the monotheistic revolution message, as was the case in both the since it best corresponded to the medieval and modern periods of

winter 5761 / 2001 • 7 Jewish philosophy. Even the halachic The answer may lie in Inbari’s un- literature, with its complex legal derstanding of the nature of Jewish formulations, delivers these ideas, identity. According to him, “The na- which are at its very foundation. ture of Hebrew literature is not sim- Anyone who reads Agnon’s “non- ply an academic matter, as its impli- Hebrew” books, the Jewish ballads cations reach to the heart of Jewish of Saul Tchernichowsky, a consider- cultural and national identity. For the able amount of the poetry and prose essence of Jewish identity is not eth- of Haim Nahman Bialik, the comic nic, religious, or lingual—but lit- and tragicomic works of Sholom erary.” Our identity is not ethnic, Aleichem, and many more works of because, according to the biblical ac- that period, none of which are count, the Jewish people was made of “Hebrew” according to Inbari, and a number of ethnic streams. It is not then reads Haim Sabato’s new novel religious, because the Jewish religion Adjustment of Sights will discover that is nothing but a mass of disagree- psychological literature, like many ments. It is not linguistic, because so other genres, can deliver a message much of its important literature was infused with monotheism in particu- written in languages other than He- lar, and with Jewish and Hebrew cul- brew. Only Hebrew poetics can con- ture in general. stitute the basis of our culture, Inbari One should, of course, mourn the argues. Yet he ignores the fact that passing of the Jewish-Hebrew unique- this poetics was abandoned by most ness of Hebrew literature, apparently of Jewish literature throughout the due to the paucity of Jewish educa- ages. This includes one-third of the tion and a decline in Jewish motiva- Bible (written as poetry), the codes of tion, but the poetics of a “historical, Jewish law, the responsa literature, national, deed-based narrative prose” the liturgical poetry of different peri- is but a single detail in the entire ods, the poetry of the Middle Ages, picture, and not necessarily the most modern Hebrew poetry, and the trea- important detail. tises of modern and medieval Jewish Why does Inbari go to such lengths philosophy. Even the Mishna and the to divorce the term “Hebrew litera- Talmud, including their narrative sec- ture” from its simple meaning? Why tions, do not meet the rigorous de- does he seek to give center stage to the mands that Inbari himself imposed Bible’s poetics, while leaving its con- when he defined the “historical, na- tent aside? tional, deed-based narrative prose.”

8 • Azure The definition of cultural identity understand even those parts he re- along literary lines, no matter how jects, and then internalizing only that absurd in the case of the Jews, under- which is meaningful to him. Such lies Inbari’s entire essay. selectiveness may dilute the spirit of a It is not unreasonable to look at culture, but it still maintains a meas- the Bible as the foundation of He- ure of authenticity. Inbari’s solution, brew literary culture. Modern Hebrew however—to choose one poetic ele- literature, especially at its early stages, ment, give it center stage and ignore drew much of its richness and depth the rest—is not a reasonable one, for from the influence of the Bible. This it requires too much in the way of influence is on the wane, and Inbari disingenuous acrobatics. wants to reverse the deterioration of Ruth Landau Israeli literature, offering a literary Jerusalem ideal that draws upon the biblical tra- dition. But this tradition is infused with entirely religious ideas. Perhaps Assaf Inbari responds: Inbari has difficulty identifying with The letter by Mr. Goldman and this element: Like the young writers Ms. Patton contains three arguments upon whom he turns his wrath, Inbari against my essay: (i) The contrast I does not feel at home with the reli- made between biblical prose and an- gious element of the biblical tradi- cient Indian literature is, in their opin- tion. He therefore focuses primarily ion, a false one, for Indian literature on the Bible’s form, while all but ig- was no less narrative than the Bible; noring its content. It would seem that (ii) they argue that I ignored the con- for Inbari, “Hebrew” prose that is nection between the Bible and the based on Christian or pagan elements Mesopotamian literature; and (iii) is somehow more “Hebrew” than they dispute the distinction I made the description-intensive Tevyeh the between the poetics of Agnon and Milkman, or the poetry of Isaiah, Jer- that of Brenner, because Brenner and emiah and Job. Agnon were good friends, because Truth be told, anyone who cannot Brenner was a Zionist, and because accept the entirety of Jewish sources, Agnon, whom I defined as having a with the intellectual and spiritual Hebrew poetics, attested that he had world they entail, but at the same been influenced, inter alia, by Homer. time is unwilling to cast them off, As for the first argument: The an- has the option of attempting to cient Indian literature consisted in its

winter 5761 / 2001 • 9 entirety of poetry, from the Vedas and father of all the characters to whom Upanishads to the Mahabharata and he relates (imagine for a moment that Ramayana. Structurally and phoneti- the Bible had been written as a first- cally, these works are poems in the person monologue by Abraham). In full sense of the word. They are the same manner, Valmiki, one of the chanted with a fixed meter (which principals of the Ramayana, is the poet takes into account short and long vow- who puts his name on this work. els) and fixed stanzas (shlokas). The Regarding the second argument: Brahmans sang them. The fact that a Not only did I not ignore the con- part of the literature consists of sto- nection between the Bible and the ries is not relevant to the point raised Mesopotamian literature, I expressly in my essay. I did not maintain that argued that the authors of the Bible they were not narratives, but that they took the central Mesopotamian myths were not prose. Poetry can be narra- and adapted them in order to trans- tive, just as it can be philosophical or form their meaning radically. I did ritual—and the Indian poetry was all not present the Bible as having ap- of these. This does not make it prose. peared in a cultural vacuum, but the The Indian epic, like the Sumerian or opposite: As a text whose innovation the Homeric epic, was poetry with a lay primarily in its direct confronta- plot. Of all the narrative texts of an- tion with the pagan literature of the tiquity, the Bible, in its narrative sec- region. tions, was the only text that unfolded Their third argument, regarding its story in prose, without any poeti- Agnon and Brenner, is a claim about cal rhythm or division into stanzas. their personal lives, and is irrelevant This is not the only essential con- to my claim, which was literary. Does trast between the Bible and the In- the fact that Brenner and Agnon were dian classics. Take, for example, the friends imply anything about the nar- voice of the narrator, which I dis- rative art of each? I wrote nothing cussed at length in my essay. It is hard about Brenner the person or Agnon to imagine a more striking contrast the person; I wrote about their poet- than that between the impersonal ics. I showed that the prose of Agnon biblical narrator, who represents an walked the poetical path that extends anonymous author, and the extreme from the Bible to the Hasidic tale, self-personification of the Indian epic and that the prose of Brenner did not author. Vyasa, the author of the follow this path. Typical of their ar- Mahabharata, was the biological guments, Goldman and Patton even

10 • Azure invoke Homer in a personal, not lit- (iii) that I overlooked the religious erary, context. Agnon’s testimony content of the Hebrew canon, and about his sources of inspiration can- therefore my definition of Hebrew not replace an analysis of his works. literature (“historical, national, deed- What is important is not what the based narrative prose”) misses the most author said, but what he wrote. If important element of our national there is any similarity between the identity, the belief in God. novels of Agnon and the epics of As for Landau’s first charge, it is Homer, this pales in comparison with instructive to apply her linguistic the poetical gulf that separates them: standards to literature written in the The disparity between prose and po- German language. Some of the great- etry, between a broader historical se- est authors of twentieth-century quence (Agnon) and a focus upon a “German literature” (Thomas Mann, dramatic moment (Homer), and be- Heinrich Boll, Gunter Grass) were tween national content (Agnon) and indeed Germans; yet what is one to one focusing on the tribulations of make of Austrians such as Robert individuals. (During the time of Musil and Hermann Broch, Czechs Homer, the Greeks did not possess a such as Franz Kafka and Rainer Maria national consciousness, and did not Rilke, Swiss such as Max Frisch and perceive themselves as a “people.” See Friedrich Durrenmatt, the Bulgarian M.I. Finley, The World of Odysseus Elias Canetti or the Rumanian Paul (London: Random House, 1999), Celan? They all wrote in German, p. 24.) and their works figure prominently in Ruth Landau’s letter also makes the modern canon of “German litera- three arguments against my essay: ture”; but they share no common na- (i) That “Hebrew literature” is com- tional identity (Broch, Kafka, Canetti monly taken to mean literature writ- and Celan, who lived in four different ten in Hebrew, which thereby refutes countries, were, moreover, Jews— my argument that it is not the lan- a fact that further underscores the guage, but rather the poetics that irrelevance of language to national defines the identity of a national lit- identity). erature; (ii) that I disregarded the non- The same is true of twentieth- narrative portions of the Bible (mainly century “Spanish literature,” whose in the prophetical books), and thus most important figures came from presented a tendentious and false se- vastly different countries: Argentina lection of the Book of Books; and (Jorge Luis Borges, Julio Cortazar),

winter 5761 / 2001 • 11 Colombia (Gabriel Garcia Marquez), in a distinct national approach, pos- Spain (Federico Garcia Lorca), Mexico sessing discernible qualities, both in (Carlos Fuentes) and Peru (Mario terms of the contents with which it Vargas Llosa). This is also true, of is occupied, and in terms of the liter- course, for what Landau would have ary means it employs. If there is a us call “English literature”—which “Hebrew literature,” then its essence must include authors from the United is defined by its poetics. That is the States (William Faulkner, Ernest subject of my essay. Hemingway), Ireland (James Joyce, As for her second argument, about William Butler Yeats), Great Britain my “disregard” for the non-narrative (Virginia Woolfe, Graham Greene), sections of the Bible: Landau mis- Australia (Patrick White), Rhodesia takes my claim of a hierarchy of gen- (Doris Lessing) and South Africa res for one that would focus exclu- (Andre Brink). One wonders what sively upon narrative prose at the Landau would say about writers who expense of all else. When we approach abandoned their mother tongue for any heterogeneous system, such as the another language, such as the Irish- Bible, in order to identify those as- man Samuel Beckett, who wrote in pects which distinguish it from other French, or the Pole Joseph Con- textual enterprises (such as the Ho- rad and the Dane Isak Dinesen, who meric, Mesopotamian or Indian ep- wrote in English? And what of au- ics), we must ask: What does this lit- thors who deserted one language for erary enterprise have that the others another in the middle of their literary do not? Regardless of its heterogene- career, such as Vladimir Nabokov ity, what distinguishes it? What is its (who rejected Russian for English) or literary innovation? In the case of the Milan Kundera (who left Czech for Bible, the answer is prose. Narrative French)? An author can choose his prose was invented in the Bible. About language of writing independent of two-thirds of the Bible is written as his national identity. Kafka was no narrative prose, including the most German, Marquez no Spaniard, sacred biblical unit, the Books of Mo- Beckett no Frenchman and Nabokov ses. In other words, that the Bible is no Englishman. The touchstone of mainly narrative prose is as much a national identity in literature is not qualitative as a quantitative assess- language but poetics. If there is any ment. As my essay shows, this fact real meaning to “French” (or “Rus- is connected to the very essence of sian,” or “Irish”) literature, it is rooted the biblical revolution: The Bible’s

12 • Azure historical-national monotheism can generation has its commentators, and be expressed and imparted only as a in each generation the commentators historical-national narrative, not as are divided by a joy of creative dis- philosophy or poetry. pute that is unparalleled in any other This does not mean that there national culture. The ideal, established was no need for the Bible to include at the time of the Sages, of “increas- discursive writing (Ecclesiastes, Prov- ing disagreements in Israel” is the dia- erbs), poetical writing (Psalms, the metric opposite of dogmatism. The Song of Songs) or visionary writing only agreement that Jews enjoy con- (Isaiah to Malachi). The question is, cerning the essence of their “religion” rather, what is the basic genre of the is with respect to the textual canon Bible, without which there may be no which is the object of the midrash. literary significance to all the other “Tora study” does not mean teaching genres it includes. The God of the fundamental principles of faith, but prophets is the “God of Abraham, rather the endless interpretation of Isaac and Jacob” who “brought us the canon, in accordance with the forth from Egypt”; to prophesy, in dictum: “Turn it, and turn it, for eve- the Bible, means to speak on behalf of rything is in it.” (Avot 5:25) The the narrative that is represented in the Judaism of the Lubavitcher Rebbe is segments of prose. This is a one-way, not that of Yeshayahu Leibowitz. The subordinate relationship: Prophecy is Judaism of Rabbi Shach is not that of completely secondary to the narrative Rabbi Kaduri. The Lithuanian yeshiva story of the Patriarchs, the Exodus world, the Hasidim, the Conserva- and the Revelation at Sinai, while the tives, the Reform, the religious Zion- narrative exists either with or without ists from the school of Rabbi Kook or prophecy. Rabbi Reines, the amulet-hawking Regarding the third argument, to “Kabbalists,” those for whom Juda- the effect that I ignore the religious ism is a sort of folk culture, and the content of the Hebrew canon: I will secularists whose Jewishness is a be eternally grateful to Landau if she biological-genetic matter—they all are can produce any two Jews who agree kosher Jews who share no single arti- with one another regarding this “reli- cle of faith. What they share, rather, gious content.” Christianity and Is- is textual. Our nation is established lam have a religious dogma; Judaism by a common text, and our history as does not. Judaism is the bound- a nation is the history of the literature less enterprise of midrash. Each we wrote in the wake of that text. The

winter 5761 / 2001 • 13 faith of Maimonides was radically by military historians, political lead- different from that of Judah Halevi, ers and scholars researching the but each drew his faith from the same critical subject of Israeli-American literary source. “These and those are relations. the words of the living God,” goes the In the thick of the Six Day War, on rabbinic dictum, and Maimonides is June 8, 1967, Israeli warships and tor- not to be dismissed in favor of Judah pedo boats opened fire on the Ameri- Halevi, nor Judah Halevi in favor of can surveillance ship USS Liberty, Maimonides. Our national-cultural which was sailing not far to the north identity cannot be formulated as a of the Sinai coast at El-Arish. The “claim” about the world, God or man, Liberty was severely damaged, with 34 but rather as a continual relationship dead and 171 injured. with the textual sources, regardless of The tragic incident sparked a pro- how these sources are interpreted. In longed controversy in the United a sense, “observance” of the Tora is States, with many publications, offi- occupation with it. And this means cial and unofficial, charging the Is- studying the canon of Hebrew litera- raeli government and its armed forces ture, interpreting it, and writing He- with having mounted a malicious and brew literature that follows its path. deliberate attack on the ship. Michael Oren has undoubtedly succeeded, through his meticulous and evenhanded archival research, in solv- The USS Liberty ing the riddle of the attack on a ship of Israel’s most important ally, by To the Editors: showing persuasively that the Liberty The actions of men and women tragedy resulted, as happens in every from times past inevitably leave many war, from a string of blunders, mis- unresolved questions for those who identifications and human errors, on later try to understand them, and both the American and Israeli sides. nowhere is this more the case than I understand that Oren’s essay is with regard to the study of wars, which part of a comprehensive study on are frequently shrouded by the smoke the Six Day War. It is to be hoped of battle. Michael B. Oren’s excel- that this study will also address the lent essay, “The ‘USS Liberty’: Case question of whether the Liberty inci- Closed” (Azure 9, Spring 2000), dent had long-range repercussions should be widely read, and not only on Israeli-American relations. The

14 • Azure persistent anger of former Secretary aircraft carrier to aid the Liberty were of State Dean Rusk, American naval not, as Oren says, “F-104s”—he may officers and anti-Israeli journalists at- mean F-14s—and it is highly unlikely tests to the complexity and sensitivity that the aircraft, whatever they were, of the relations of a small country were “armed with nuclear weapons”— dependent upon the support of a su- for one thing, the use of such weap- perpower. Given the ongoing con- ons needs to be authorized by the cern over Israel’s arms sales to other National Command Authority, not countries, and especially in light of by any local commander; for another, the recent flap over the sale of Phal- how would such weapons be used in con systems to China, it is especial- defense of the Liberty? ly instructive to cite a letter written It is a shame that an article de- by Winston Churchill to Franklin signed to correct others’ errors, and Delano Roosevelt in 1941 (the letter set a confused record straight, should was never sent): “No nation has the itself be marred by technical errors. right to cause another nation to be so Mark Halpern dependent upon it, as the United New York, New York States wants to cause Britain.” It seems to me that Churchill’s statement is valid with regard to Israeli-American Michael Oren responds: relations as well. I wish to thank Mark Halpern for calling my attention to the error re- Tzvi Ganin garding the make of the American Kefar Sava aircraft dispatched to aid the Liberty. Several readers noted the mistake, To the Editors: among them J.R. Dunn, Associate There are one or two technical er- Editor of The International Military rors in Michael B. Oren’s article that Encyclopedia. Indeed, the fighters are of little significance in themselves, were not F-104s, or F-14s, but F-4 but which will give some ammuni- Phantoms, A-4 Skyhawks and A-1 tion to the article’s critics, and make Skyraiders. even friendly readers a little dubious Along with Halpern, readers also about Oren’s familiarity with mili- raised questions about the nuclear ord- tary matters. nance these planes were carrying. Ac- It is certain, for example, that the cording to A. Jay Cristol, a leading U.S. aircraft dispatched from an authority on the Liberty incident who

winter 5761 / 2001 • 15 interviewed senior officers aboard the decade know that Raider is a young carrier Saratoga, from which the planes Labor-Zionist activist; among other took off, the carriers were involved in things, he was a candidate in the last nuclear exercises at the time of the two World Zionist Congress elections attack and had to respond with the on the Labor-Zionist slate. ordnance they had on deck. The fear In other words, Raider is not an that the bombs, if used against Soviet impartial historian; he has a politi- targets, would trigger World War III cally partisan agenda. On the politi- led to the planes’ sudden recall. In- cal battlefield of the World Zionist deed, Cristol’s dissertation notes: Congress, Raider seeks to advance “Some of the aircraft were armed with Labor’s agenda. Troy notes that while ordnance that could not be safely Raider’s book is called The Emergence brought back aboard the ship and of American Zionism, it “really only those aircraft were diverted to Soudha analyzes the emergence of the Labor- Bay, Crete.” Zionist paradigm and the Labor- Zionist establishment in America.” But Troy makes this remark in pass- ing, and then proceeds to treat the American Zionism book as if it is a serious history of American Zionism. Raider’s book is To the Editors: actually an attempt to rewrite Ameri- Your editorial “Making History” can Zionist history to make it appear (Azure 9, Spring 2000) did a splen- as if the Labor-Zionists were a major did job of analyzing the motives and force in the movement—when actu- impact of Israel’s “new historians.” ally they were one of the smallest and Unfortunately, Gil Troy, author of least significant of the Zionist organi- one of the book reviews in the same zations in the United States during issue (“After Virtue”), seems unaware those years and ever since. of the damage being done by Ameri- In Israel, “new historians” are twist- can Jewry’s own “new historians.” ing historical facts to promote a po- Troy referred to Mark Raider, au- litical agenda; here in the United thor of the recent book The Emer- States, we can see the emergence of a gence of American Zionism, as “a prom- similar phenomenon. ising young historian.” Those of us Gideon Evans who have been involved in Zionist Cherry Hill, New Jersey movement politics during the past

16 • Azure Gil Troy responds: The fact is, for better or for worse, the Mr. Evans seems disappointed that Labor Party dominated Israeli poli- I chose to evaluate Raider’s work, tics for the first three decades of the rather than attacking Raider person- state’s existence, and still remains a ally or politically. Historians, like major force. Similarly, as I noted in other citizens, are free to get involved my review, despite the fact that “the in politics. The best way to keep great majority of American Zionists us all honest is not to engage in ad belonged to organizations which were hominem attacks based on an author’s not formally Labor-Zionist, such as political bent, but to evaluate the au- Hadassah and the Zionist Organi- thor’s work objectively and dispas- zation of America… the ideal of a sionately, which is what I tried to do, Labor-Zionist Palestine” dominated noting both strengths and weaknesses “American Jewish conceptions of the in the work. Jewish state” for decades. We can be- Evans also seems disappointed that moan this fact, or we can celebrate it. the realities of American Zionism do Nevertheless, however misleading the not quite correspond to his ideology. title may be, The Emergence of Ameri- Emphasizing the centrality of Labor can Zionism helps us understand this Zionism in America—or in Israel— fascinating anomaly, and Raider de- does not strike me as “new” history serves credit for a thought-provoking or “old” history, but simply history. and well-organized discussion.

Azure welcomes letters from its readers. Letters should be sent to: Azure, 22A Hatzfira Street, Jerusalem, Israel. Fax: 972-2-566-1171; E-mail: [email protected]. Letters may be edited for length and clarity.

winter 5761 / 2001 • 17