On the Eighth Day: Ethics and the Face in Samuel Bak's Adam And
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Chazen 1 On the Eighth Day: Ethics and the Face in Samuel Bak’s Adam and Eve Collection Emily Chazen Senior Thesis Advisor: Molly Farneth Religion Department Haverford College April 20, 2018 Chazen 2 Table of Contents Abstract 3 Acknowledgments 4 R’fuah Sh’leimah: Bearing Witness to the Unbearable 5 Here there is a why: Post-Holocaust Traumatic Reconciliation in Samuel Bak’s Artwork 12 Nothing Can Be Changed Unless It is Faced: The Ethics of Representation 30 (Re)visioning the Past: Transforming the Landscape of Memory 53 Works Cited 56 Works Consulted 61 Chazen 3 Abstract Holocaust survivor Samuel Bak has dedicated his life to exploring the intersections of trauma and the human condition through his artwork. Though most scholarship on his paintings has been focused on its implications for Holocaust studies, I look to re-position Bak’s works in the context of ethics, gender theory, and disability studies. Focusing specifically on his 2008 to 2011 Adam and Eve collection, I examine the face as a site of ethical exploration to suggest that Bak reimagines the landscape of memory to illustrate how truly remembering the Holocaust entails both recounting the narratives of the past and ensuring that future generations do not endure trauma. In the first section of this thesis, I suggest that Bak’s use of the face leads to the production of communities of healing between victims, survivors, and viewers alike. In the next section, I illustrate how Bak invites the viewer to problematize her relationship to social norms in order to confound systems of gendered and ability-centric oppression. In the conclusion, I demonstrate how Bak’s paintings refuse to situate themselves within a confined set of ethical dilemmas, revising narratives of Holocaust memory such that they come to empower people to challenge the trauma that becomes perpetuated in their own society. Chazen 4 Acknowledgments Just over two years ago, I sat in Naomi Koltun-Fromm’s office, leafing through the thin pages of the Harper Collins Bible, anxiously chattering about the paper I had just written on Genesis 2-3. It was in the conversation that ensued that my eyes were opened (pun intended) to the potential for liberation within the text; it was there that the start of my passion for Genesis 2-3 was born and that the trajectory of my relationship to Religious Studies was shaped. Without Naomi’s encouragement, I would not have become a minor and then a major in Religion. I am indebted to the support and kindness she has continually extended to me over the years: were it not for her, my time at Haverford would not have been the same. There are others to whom I owe my deepest gratitude. In the all-too-brief time that I have had the privilege of studying Religion, the members of the faculty have shaped my relationship to and changed my outlook on the world. Brett Krutzsch’s encouragement to investigate Queer Studies inspired much of the latter half of this thesis, and I am truly grateful for what he offered. Pika Ghosh’s dedication to helping me find external artwork broadened the scope of my understanding, and I have been so lucky to work with her throughout this year. Terrance Wiley, our fearless leader in Religion 298, expanded my intellectual horizons and allowed me to muse more expansively on the boundaries (or lack thereof) of Religious Studies. His probing helped push me analyze more critically the central claims of this thesis and influenced how I understand religious scholarship overall. And Ken Koltun-Fromm has altered my relationship to religious thought and practice. Through his wit and humor, Ken has shown me how to really think through ethical quandaries I encounter in the world around me. I am so grateful that he took the time to read an early iteration of this thesis, and more importantly, that he took the time to care about me as a student. My thesis advisor, Molly Farneth has been instrumental in my personal growth and development throughout my time at Haverford. I was blessed to have stumbled upon Gender and Power in Modern Jewish & Christian Thought in the course catalogue prior to my junior year, and since then, Molly has offered some of the most insightful reflections on my writing, thinking, and reading I have ever received. This thesis would be nothing were it not for her continual investment in my work. As I have told people time and time again, she is Haverfordian in every sense of the word, and I am better for having been her student. It would be remiss not to acknowledge the amazing cohort of Religion seniors: Alliyah Allen, Aya Wertheimer, Cristian Espinoza, Fatou Sylla, James Levy, Justin Brendel, Marilee Oldstone-Moore, Miles Lee, and Shirah Kraus. It has been one of the biggest privileges I have had to learn with and from you all. To my best friends—Caroline Steliotes, Ben Yellin, and Kelly Waychoff—who have listened to me prattle about my theses nonstop since the start of the year: I cannot begin to express how grateful I am that you (at least pretended to) care about my intellectual passions. There is no one in the world who I would’ve rather had dinner at 6 with every night. And to the friends who have laughed and lamented with me since our first days of college—Annika Ulrich, Jia-Ling Tuan, Greta Koch, and so many others—I have been so blessed by your friendship. Haverford would not have been the same without you. My family has offered their undying support, and I would not be where I am without them. My grandfather, Shikie, a Holocaust survivor himself, has shown me the true meaning of forgiveness and kindness: he continues to bring light to a world obscured by darkness. So too have my grandmothers, Judy and Mary, and my grandfather, Marty, taught me the value of generosity, diligence, and, above all else, love. It is because of them that I strive to do and be better. My parents, Ally and Jeff, and my brother, Max, have encouraged me to embrace who I am in ways that have allowed me to grow exponentially over the years. Were it not for their continued love and care, I would not be half the person I am today. Most importantly, I owe everything to the eleven million people who perished in the Holocaust, who I have lived with but never met, loved but never known. This thesis is theirs. Chazen 5 R’fuah Sh’leimah1: Bearing Witness to the Unbearable Let it be known: I did not fall from grace. I leapt to freedom. ANSEL ELKINS, “THE AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF EVE.” In the beginning, there was a narrative. A tale of origins, of humanity, of loss and life, Genesis 2-3 tells the story of Adam and Eve, the two beings that the Hebrew Bible2 suggests were the first among the “generations of the and subsequently (האדם) heavens and the earth.”3 According to the story, God formed ha’adam created the Garden of Eden, the space that the being would inhabit, “till[ing] it and keep[ing] it.”4 To sustain ha’adam, God created bountiful, beautiful trees filled with luscious fruit, intended for eating, and in the center of Eden, God placed two trees: the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil, and the Tree of Life. Though God invited ha’adam to eat freely of almost all of the trees in Eden, God warned that ha’adam must not eat of either of the two specially-designated trees. If ha’adam were to do so, God explained, the human would face imminent death. As time passed for ha’adam, God came to realize that isolating the human in Eden would not suffice. Rather, the being needed a companion, a helper and partner with whom Eden could be enjoyed. In a first attempt at providing ha’adam companionship, God offered the human the opportunity to interact with and name every living creature; however, even as ha’adam named them, no partnership seemed apt. In response, God put ha’adam in a deep, tranquilizing sleep and 1 Borrowed from “Mi Shebeirach,” the Jewish prayer for healing, this phrase traditionally translates to a “complete healing.” 2 The Christian Bible and the Qur’an also view Adam and Eve as the original beings, though the Qur’an associates their origins with a different narrative than that presented in Jewish and Christian traditions. 3 Gen 2:4. 4 Gen 2:15. Chazen 6 :Upon awakening, the man proclaimed 5.(מצלעתיו אחת ויקח) ultimately cleaved the being in two for out ,(אשה) This at last is bone of my bones, flesh of my flesh; this one shall be called Woman“ this one was taken.”6 At the time of their creation, both woman and man were naked (אש) of Man but not ashamed. One day, the serpent, an animal deemed “more crafty than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made,”7 asked the woman whether God had said not to eat from any of the trees in the Garden of Eden. Of course, the woman knew that she was allowed to eat of almost all the trees except those in the middle of Eden. She explained this to the serpent, adding that she would die if she even touched8 either of the trees in the center of the garden. However, the serpent explained that neither the man nor the woman (“you”) would die if they were to eat of the Tree; instead, the serpent suggested, they would gain access to knowledge that would put them on a similar plane as God, knowing “good and evil.”9 Weighing the choice that lay before her, the woman decided to eat the fruit of the Tree, and she subsequently gave some of the fruit to the man, who ate it as 5 Though the traditional account of the Genesis 2-3 story suggests that Eve was taken from the “rib” of Adam, feminist theologians have long argued that the Hebrew term actually points toward the notion that Eve emerged from the “side” of Adam.