Jews, Antisemitism, and British Civility, 1881–1939

Notes

Introduction Conspiring to Be Civil: Jews, Antisemitism, and British Civility, 1881–1939

1 . Ultimately, Davison provocatively concludes that “Bloom’s struggle as a Jew is the axis on which the realist novel of Ulysses revolves” (187). For other astute readings of what we might call Jewish textuality in Ulysses, see Connor, “‘I . . . AM. A’”; Levi; and Reizbaum. I comment further on their work in chapter 3 . 2 . The impact of such approaches can be traced back to the 1988 publication of Christopher Ricks’s, T. S. Eliot and Prejudice, but becomes fully evident only in the late 1990s with the proliferation of works such as Cheyette’s Constructions of “the Jew” in English Literature and Society and Between “Race” and Culture, Julius’s controversial T. S. Eliot, Anti- Semitism, and Literary Form, Reizbaum’s James Joyce’s Judaic Other, and in 2000, Jonathan Freedman’s The Temple of Culture. Julius’s most recent book, Trials of the Diaspora, published in 2010, extends these discussions with chapters on medieval, modern, and contemporary antisemitism. See also Donald J. Childs, “Generating Modernism and New Criticism from Antisemitism.” 3 . As late as 1997, highly respected readers of modernism were still regularly dismissing such critical approaches as mere drivel. Julius, in particular, was subject to derision and condemnation for his work on Eliot. In the National Review, Hugh Kenner aligns Julius with “sniffers after anti-Semitism” (63); for decades, Kenner asserts, “no one seems to have been worried about the passages that worry Dr. Julius for a whole book” (62). Stephen Medcalf similarly rebukes Julius for “unfairly belabour[ing]” Eliot’s comments about Jews (13). Vincent Passaro, worried about the diminishing influence of Western literary traditions, accuses Julius of being a “hit-man” trying to “take down” literature (64, 62). For Passaro, Julius’s scholarship, ush- ering in a new era of political correctness, reveals our inability to engage with anything that “dares to speak unpleasantly or even plainly about the darker corners of the heart,” and makes one of “the two great poets in 194 Notes

English . . . since Blake, Keats and Wordsworth” utterly vile (63, 62). Finally, in a more insidious commentary, Frank McCombie accuses Julius himself of “fueling anti-Semitism,” adding that Eliot’s deprecation of Jews is rooted in Jewish tradition (289). Intolerance, McCombie explains, is fundamental to Judaism and was “only” inherited by the church. 4 . The line of poetry is from Eliot’s “Sweeney Among the Nightingales.” 5 . Elsewhere, Stratton defines this rise of “Jewish moments” as a kind of “Yiddish generalization,” a process by which traits conventionally characterized as distinctly Jewish come to be associated with Jews and non-Jews alike (297). One may “act” Jewish without actually being a Jew. 6 . For additional analyses of the significance of tropes of conversion in representations of Jews, see Gilman, Love + Marriage, especially chapter 3; and Ragussis, Figures of Conversion. 7 . Urmila Seshagiri describes a similar reversal in her analysis of Sax Rohmer’s Dr. Fu-Manchu narratives, which she reads in relation to the “Yellow Peril” scares of turn of the twentieth century Britain: “Rohmer’s thirteen novels about a Chinese ‘devil doctor’ captivated massive readership in England and America. The central, recurring conflict of these thrillers—Dr. Fu-Manchu’s schemes for global domination—rewrote the master narrative of modern England, inverting the British Empire’s racial and political hierarchies to imagine a dystopic civilization dominated by evil Orientals” (162). One might attribute the resonances between my description and Seshagiri’s to significant overlaps in the history of Chinese and Jewish immigration into Britain, specifically, each group’s respective “occupation” or “invasion” of the East End of London. But, perhaps more likely, such similarities indicate the rather circumscribed, even oddly prosaic, nature of hate rhetoric itself: while the specific groups targeted by such rhetoric may change, the discourse is characterized by a fixed and relatively limited set of images, figures of speech, and narrative styles. This does not mean that the catalysts for such rhetoric are the same. 8 . Bauman defines proteophobia as an “apprehension and vexation related not to something or someone disquieting through otherness and unfamiliarity, but to something or someone that . . . does not fall easily into into any . . . established categories” (144). 9 . In his most recent work, Anthony Julius extends Garrard’s observation, characterizing events on the Continent and in Russia as potential causes of efforts by anti-immigration advocates to downplay their antisemitism. “[U]ntil recently,” he writes, “there was no shame in being hostile to Jews” and “the hostile measures taken against [Jews] were incapable of being misunderstood as anything other than hostile.” He adds: “This changed in England around the turn of the twentieth century. The immediate occa- sion was the debate over Jewish immigration. . . . Many campaigners against Jewish immigration into England were anxious to distance themselves from the unreasoned, inequitable, destructive passions associated with the Dreyfus Affair in France and the state-sponsored pogroms in Russia” ( Trials xlv). 10 . Kushner uses the phrase “social dislike of Jews” to describe Harold Nicolson’s famous assertion, and the epigraph with which I begin chapter 4: Notes 195

“although I loathe antisemitism, I do dislike Jews” ( Persistence 2). Later, Kushner speaks of “social antisemitism,” which he correlates with “(non- fascist) hostility to Jews” (101). Thomas Weber employs the phrase “social anti-Semitism” in his analysis of early twentieth-century anti-Jewish sentiments at Oxford, distinguishing polite forms of prejudice from “overt and loutish anti-Semitism,” the latter of which he concludes was largely “absent” at Oxford (110). Jean Radford, focusing on the politics of women modernist writers in the 1930s, speaks astutely of Elizabeth Bowen’s representations of “genteel antisemitism,” a form Bowen herself contrasts with “virulent anti- Semitic discourses” of the period (42). 11 . See Kushner, Holocaust, especially chs. 1 and 4. 12 . Elsewhere, Ragussis defines “unconscious prejudice” and “secret antisemitism” as sentiments of “the enlightened and liberal Englishman . . . who keeps his own prejudices secret, even to himself” ( Figures 292). 13 . See, for instance, Kushner, “Beyond the Pale?” 143. 14 . This is a point similarly suggested by Julius, who contrasts “modern, quotid- ian anti-Semitism of insult and partial exclusion” with “radical anti-Semi- tism of defamation, expropriation, murder, and expulsion” ( Trials xxxvi). Although the latter, he asserts, reaches its peak in 1290 “when there were no Jews left to torment,” both sorts “have an English provenance, either wholly or in substantial part” (Ibid.). 15 . See Bauman’s “Allosemitism: Premodern, Modern, Postmodern.” For an earlier, equally astute discussion of ambivalence, see Kushner’s Persistence, in which he writes: “The ambivalence in attitudes toward Jews where many are ‘both pro and anti-Jewish at the same time,’ shows the . . . danger of rely- ing too heavily on concepts such as philo- and antisemitism. It is indeed revealing that the image of the Jew in extreme antisemitism is only matched in its unreality by that of ‘the Jew’ in extreme philosemitism” (4). 16 . For additional discussion of the ecclesiastical foundation of Christian attitudes toward Jews, see Yvonne Sherwood, who focuses on Christian theological exegeses of Jonah. Linett’s discussion of supersession theory in Modernism is also useful. See, in particular, her analysis of Virginia Woolf and Dorothy Richardson in chapter 2 . Cheyette’s phrase “received Christological discourse” is quoted in C. Davison 166 note 4. 17 . Also see Cheyette’s “Jewish Stereotyping and English Literature,” in which he shows how “best-selling novelists explicitly reworked ‘medieval’ Christological stereotypes” (26). 18 . See also Kushner, Persistence, in particular, 10–11. 19 . Or, as Linda Rozmovits explains, “[u]nder the terms of this agreement, Jews would not simply be tolerated but indeed encouraged to prosper provided they conformed to the dominant values of their host society. . . . Another way of putting this is simply to say that Jews were welcome provided they effaced the outward signs of cultural difference, in effect, so long as they made themselves invisible as Jews ” (710–11; emphasis Rozmovits). 20 . The distinctly Christian theological nature of such beliefs does not mean that racial discourses never came into conflict with Christianity. In Cheyette’s “Neither Black Nor White,” such conflict is epitomized by writers such as 196 Notes

John Buchan, whose “Judeo-Christian vocabulary . . . is . . . split between lau- datory biblical references to the Old Testament and racialized references to [the savagery of] contemporary Jews” (32). This split suggests the difficulty colonial writers had in depicting “Jews [as] unambivalent—fixed in their whiteness or Judeo-Christian superiority” (33, 32). 21 . Also see Adam McKible, who, in his intriguing discussion of Wyndham Lewis’s 1917 short story, “Cantelman’s Spring-Mate,” writes of the piece that it “demonstrates an overwhelming distrust of the body and a displace- ment of that distrust onto the body and the intellect of the Jew” (97). 22 . Wetherell and Potter contend that “an argument becomes ideological (linked to oppressive forms of power) through its use, construction and form of mobilization” (171). 23 . My approach to such “productive” convolutions may be seen, to some extent, as a kind of literary-historical counterpart to rhetorical studies now conducted within the field of critical discursive psychology, specifically, Michael Billig’s work on rhetoric that “simultaneously deplores, denies, and protects prejudice,” and Wetherell’s engagement with “the social and political consequences of discursive patterning” (144, 405). See also Shiao-Yun Chiang and Simon Goodman, both of whom focus on contemporary asylum debates in Britain and America. 24 . These distinctions are derived in part from Lewis’s own assessment of Woolf’s work in his 1934 Men Without Art, in which, according to Judy Suh, he “aligns Woolf’s degraded modernism . . . with a neurotic feminist politics informed by the depraved combination of ‘sexual inversion’ and femi- ninity” (37). For critics, such distinctions are reconfirmed by the contrast between Lewis’s quasi-nationalist and protectionist tendencies, exemplified by his vocal efforts in Left Wings to preserve Britain’s sovereign rule, and by what, within modernist studies today, is generally characterized as a kind of Bloomsbury “cosmopolitanism,” a categorization evinced, for instance, by Leonard Woolf’s active support of the League of Nations, Virginia Woolf’s famous evocation in Three Guineas of her “Outsiders’ Society” (106), and Joseph Conrad’s recurring emphasis on deracination in Heart of Darkness. 25 . In bringing Barnes into this mix, I draw on Jed Esty’s use of the term Anglophone modernists, a group that includes Forster, Eliot, and Woolf, writers whom he describes as canonical representatives of the modernist period “living and writing in England,” and who “represent . . . the established poetry and fiction of [the] inter-war” period (4, 5).

1 Acting Like an Alien: The Rhetoricized Jew in British Immigration Law, 1902–1914

1 . In 1902, White testified in favor of anti-immigration legislation before the Royal Commission on Alien Immigration (RCAI). For transcripts, see White, Testimony. 2 . John Garrard comments on this omission in The English and Immigration (59). Notes 197

3 . From 1881 to 1914, “between 120,000 and 150,000 East European Jews settled permanently in Great Britain,” a consequence of political uprisings in Tsarist Russia and, more specifically, of the passage of Russia’s May Laws in 1882 (Bar-Yosef and Valman, “Introduction” 12). The Royal Commission on Alien Immigration was charged by Parliament with the task of assem- bling data on the impact of immigration trends in Britain. For an additional synopsis of the anti-immigration movements and policies that immediately preceded the 1904 legislation, see Pellew. 4 . The 1904 bill was opposed by a majority of members of Parliament, particularly those in the Liberal Party, who argued, on the one hand, that the bill threatened a tradition of political asylum in Britain, and on the other hand, that the terms of the bill were too vague to be efficiently leg- islated. In the 1905 Act, which was drafted in response to overwhelming criticism of the original legislation, safeguards were established to protect immigrants seeking political or religious asylum, references to the moral character of immigrants were clarified, and the clause on the creation of prohibited areas for immigrants was eliminated. For more on the 1905 Act, see Holmes, who describes the legislation as both a “watered down version of the 1904 Aliens Bill” and as an “Act which offended ardent restriction- ists” (101). 5 . In 1918, calls for a review of the law were proposed, with MPs demanding even stricter restrictions. A new bill, referred to as the British Nationality and Status of Aliens Act, was presented in Parliament. It was revised in 1919 as the new Aliens Act and renewed without debate annually until the passage of the Aliens Order in 1953 and the Aliens Act of 1956, both of which remained in effect until they were repealed in 1971. For more on the 1918 and 1919 bills, see Holmes; Black. 6 . In a 1914 speech before the House of Commons, Reginald McKenna, author of the 1914 bill and Secretary of State for the Home Department at the time, said of his bill that it would “remove or restrain the movements of undesirable aliens” (August 5, 1914; 1986). All references to parliamentary remarks, unless otherwise noted, are cited from the online version of the Hansard House of Commons debates, and will be referenced in the text and endnotes by date and/or column number. 7 . See David Feldman’s work on British politics and the formation of Anglo- Jewish communities. Feldman says of the Aliens Act of 1905 that it was “designed to restrict Jewish immigration specifically” (6). He attributes rising concerns about Jewish immigration to late-Victorian Britain’s preoccupation with it’s own social and economic “health,” a condition that many believed was threatened by the rise of allegedly “Jewish” business practices such as the sweating system. 8 . See also Holmes 101, 106. 9 . Evans-Gordon was elected MP for Stepney in 1900. Stepney is part of the East End of London, which, at the turn of the twentieth century, was one of the areas most affected by escalating immigration into Britain. 10 . A number of scholars have offered detailed analyses of the Conservative Party’s response to antisemitism. See, in particular, Garrard 57; Holmes 198 Notes

28–7, 92, 104–6. However, exchanges during Commons debates indicate that both the Liberal and Conservative parties were cognizant of public concern about the effects of antisemitism on anti-immigration legislation. During one such debate, for instance, Sir Charles Dilke, Liberal MP for Forest of Dean, raises the issue of the government’s susceptibility to antisemitism, commenting specifically on the public’s perception that the 1905 Act targets Jews (May 2, 1905; 698). He reminds his fellow ministers of the presumption, held both by the British press and by the public at large, that the Act is designed primarily “to protect the British working man against the competition of the Polish Jew.” He then declares that “the Government are not anti-Semitic and do not desire to encourage that feeling.” His comments about antisemitism are met with “ministerial cries of ‘No, No,’” a retort that, although ambiguous, can be read either as the parliamentarians’ refu- tation of public charges of antisemitism, or as a vexed response to the press’s description of the act as antisemitic. 11 . See Landa for additional details on Evans-Gordon’s role in the shaping of the Aliens bills (29–30, 175). According to Landa, Evans-Gordon, unlike White, “was no doctrinaire politician, or demagogue appealing [to the public] with melodramatic phrases” (26); rather, he used “the gift of clever argument” to convince parliament of the detrimental effects of the “concentration of aliens” on native-born Englishmen and women (29). 12 . Evans-Gordon, The Alien Immigrant , 7. 13 . For an especially astute discussion of these “effects” in contemporary judicial discourse, see Didi Herman’s analysis of what she calls “rhetorical tech- nologies,” particularly as they come into play in Mandla v. Dowell Lee, a 1976 Race Relations Act focused largely on “whether Sikhs constituted an ‘ethnic group,’” and in Garnel v. Brighton Branch of the Musician’s Union, a 1983 antidiscrimination case (277, 295–96). Investigating the deployment of these effects in cases over the course of the twentieth century, Herman ultimately concludes that “judicial knowledge about ‘the Jew’ has played an important constitutive role in the making of ‘Englishness’” (282). 14 . Holmes says of the book that it was one of many “written specifically to influence public opinion in the debates over immigration” (27). The Alien Immigrant is followed by the publication of works such as Evans-Gordon’s 1904 “Aliens in England,” part of a series on immigration that appeared in the Illustrated London News, a popular weekly. 15 . Here we might recall Edward Said’s classic formulation of orientalist discourse, specifically his description of Arthur James Balfour’s 1910 speech before the House of Commons on Anglo-Egyptian relations. Focusing on Balfour’s preoccupation with his own “knowledge” of Egypt, Said writes: “The object of such knowledge is inherently vulnerable to scrutiny; this object is a ‘fact’ which, if it develops, changes, or otherwise transforms itself in a way that civilizations frequently do, nevertheless is fundamentally, even ontologically stable. To have such knowledge of such a thing is to dominate it, to have authority over it” (32). 16 . As Herman notes, in the twentieth century we began to see a significant change in rhetorical invocations of “the Wandering Jew” in English case Notes 199

law: “It was . . . in the first decades of the twentieth century that the figure of the ‘Wandering Jew’ became less associated with ancient Israelites and more with unwanted immigrants” (287). Interestingly, the exception to this development occurs in trust law, which “necessarily concerns propertied Jewish families well-settled in England,” and in cases in which trust law is used to establish precedent (286). In such instances, race in relation to Jews is “largely understood as heritage or lineage ” (284; emphasis Herman), a concept that elsewhere Cooper and Herman describe as a preoccupation with “vertical descent” and racial purity (352, 353). “To some extent,” they argue, “the propertied status of the Jewish testators . . . may have mitigated their ‘alien’ status, allowing them to assimilate within the court’s eyes. These are not poor refugees or immigrants but, for the most part, established members of the community” (352). For astute remarks on the ways in which Christian Hebraist scholarship informs these tendencies, see Bush 1233. 17 . Elsewhere, Bush describes this phenomenon as “a process of retention,” which he asserts “explains how English lawyers thought and argued in styl- ized and non-functional terms during a period of important legal change” (1228). 18 . Driving Cooper and Herman’s analysis of English trust law is the concept of “legal productivity,” a notion the contentiousness of which within the legal community both scholars acknowledge. To speak of “legal productivity,” they explain, is to focus on the law’s “constitutive role,” that is, the ways in which the law generates rather than reflects “reality.” This notion of productivity allows them to consider the complex ways in which the law “discur- sively produces its own Jews.” Significantly, as they track such “discursive productions,” they also aim “to avoid . . . the assumption that [the] law’s approach toward Judaism will take a particular (discriminatory) form.” This latter claim, a crucial caveat in their analysis of legal constructions of Jews and Judaism, compels them to consider thoughtfully the “historically con- tingent interweaving of legal doctrine—what is possible to legally think and know—with extant discourses about Judaism” (341). 19 . In analyzing the relative rationality of legal structures, and the inability of these structures to adequately confront racism, Fitzpatrick asserts the following: “metaphorically law positively acquires identity by taking elements of racism into itself and shaping them in its own terms. Yet law also takes identity from its opposition to and separation from racism. But this very opposition is not innocent for it operates by containing and constraining law. Law, as a result, and contrary to the principle of universality, is unable assuredly to counter racism” (122). 20 . Such claims are consistent with what Kushner, describing British assessments of Nazi antisemitism, calls the “well-earned” theory of antisemitism, that is, the belief that “the persecution of the Jews [is] partly . . . the Jews’ own fault” (Holocaust 37). For additional analysis of this theory, see Kushner, Holocaust , 36–42. 21 . These questions are addressed repeatedly in debates over the passage of the Infectious Disease Notification Act in 1889, the Infectious Disease Prevention Act and the Public Health Acts Amendment in 1890, and later, 200 Notes

in the first decade of the twentieth century, in policy deliberations over the proliferation of foot-and-mouth disease on farms, the slaughtering of tubercular cattle, increased cases of trichinae in imported bacon, the distribution of army blankets “infected with typhoid germs,” the recurrence of bubonic plague, and the spread of smallpox and swine fever. See, for instance, the remarks of Sir Herbert Maxwell, Conservative MP for Wigtownshire, on the possibility of tubercular disease passing between “bovine animals and man” (March 10, 1904; 820). 22 . Such a transformation represents the modern, secular, social, and political version of a much older theological form of conversion rhetoric, one that Ragussis and C. Davison, in their respective analyses of eighteenth- and nineteenth-century Britain, aptly identity as the “literary and cultural master trope by which Jewish identity is represented and regulated” (Ragussis, Figures 86). 23 . See for instance, Holmes 37–40, 42; Landa, who, by 1911, was already extensively commenting on this tendency; and more recently, Maglen. 24 . May 29, 1902, rpt. in RCAI 128. 25 . Norman’s portrait of East End life was not unusual, concurring with representations such as those given to the Royal Commission by East End resident William Walker, who in his interview likened areas typically inhabited by Jews, for instance Whitechapel, to Jerusalem ( RCAI 298). 26 . Lawson was the eldest son of Harriett Georgiana Webster and Edward Levy Lawson and the grandchild of Esther Cohen and Joseph Moses Levy. In 1855, Joseph Levy acquired the Daily Telegraph and Courier. Thirty years later, in 1885, Edward became the paper’s primary manager and owner. Active in politics, and a leading figure in journalism, he received a baronet in 1892 and was raised to the peerage in 1903 as Baron Burnham, at which point he gave control of the Daily Telegraph to his son, Harry. 27 . This sentiment is later echoed by Evans-Gordon in his analysis of the Jewish Board of Guardians’ various attempts to discourage “undesirable” Jews from entering Britain (May 2, 1905; 720–21). 28 . The article originally appeared on November 29, 1901, and is reprinted in the Jewish Chronicle (Dec. 6, 1910; 8). Trevelyan cites the material during the course of the second reading of the “Aliens Bill” (April 25, 1904; 1077). 29 . Members of the committee included, among others, Lord Rothschild, the Hon. Alfred Lyttelton, Sir Henry Norman, William Vallance, and Sir Kenelm Digby, Under-Secretary for the Home Department. 30 . July 31, 1902, rpt. in RCAI 302. 31 . July 24, 1902, rpt. in RCAI 288. 32 . Jonathan Freedman provides an astute reading of the ways in which “a language of sexual aberration” was similarly employed “to contain [Jews’] pro- liferating indecipherability” (“Coming Out” 336–37). 33 . T he most usef ul scholarship in this area is largely indebted to Sander Gilman’s seminal The Jew’s Body, a work that is now a mainstay of Jewish studies scholarship. Gilman’s analyses of figurations within medical literature of the Notes 201

“Jewish” foot and of syphilitic Jews are especially helpful. See, in particular, chapter 2 . 34 . The Jewish Chronicle and the London Observer provided particularly rich sources of commentary for parliamentarians, a fact that is hardly surprising given the frequency with which arguments for and against the bill were cited in both papers. 35 . I am here citing from the original print version of Hansard . See “Aliens Bill,” The Parliamentary Debates . In the recently digitalized version, Lawson’s reference to German “officials” has been changed to the singular German “official.” 36 . Nancy Fraser’s analysis of public opinion and the public sphere supplies a useful example, or possibly a counterexample, for understanding the legitimization of public “categorical articulations” within the Aliens debates: “In public-sphere theory . . . public opinion is considered legitimate if and only if all who are potentially affected are able to participate as peers in deliberations concerning the organization of their common affairs. In effect, then, the theory holds that the legitimacy of public opinion is a function of two analytically distinct characteristics of the communicative process, namely, the extent of its inclusiveness and the degree to which it realizes participa- tory parity. In the first case, which I shall call the inclusiveness condition, discussion must in principle, be open to all with a stake in the outcome. In the second case, which I shall call the parity condition, all interlocutors must, in principle, enjoy roughly equal chances to state their views, place issues on the agenda, question the tacit and explicit assumptions of others, switch levels as needed, and generally receive a fair hearing” (61; emphasis Fraser). 37 . For more on the platforms of the British Brothers League, and on the organization’s alliances with Conservative Party members, see Feldman 281–90. 38 . Feldman discusses the lasting impact of the British Brothers League on the passage of the Aliens Act. Of particular interest is his contention that the Royal Commission on Alien Immigration was, in actuality, a parliamentary tool by which to control the agitation of the League’s membership (288). 39 . In addition to campaigning for the exclusion and repatriation of Jews from Britain, the Britons demanded the nullification of the Act of Settlement of 1700—the Act had ensured the descendents of immigrants the right to hold public office. Richard Thurlow has said of the Britons that its “most distinguishing feature was its . . . obsessional anti-semitism” (46). Beamish eventu- ally became an influential member of Britain’s Imperial Fascist League. 40 . According to Holmes, the “actual” William Stanley Shaw adopted the title “Captain” during the course of his work for the British Brothers League, an appropriation that seems ironically in keeping with my own reading of the fictional Shaw’s fear of name-changing. See Holmes 262, note 49. 41 . As Rich observes, writers and politicians in this period struggled with the rhetoric of “peaceful England,” attempting to make it equal in romance to the adventures offered by Imperial England (38). 42 . Rich 34; Clive Bell, qtd. in Froula 5. 202 Notes

2 Philosemitic Fascists and the Conspiracy Novel

1 . Nicolson was a well-respected British diplomat and close associate of many Bloomsbury intellectuals and artists, including, most famously, Virginia and Leonard Woolf. He joined Mosley’s New Party during it’s initial stages of development, running unsuccessfully in the 1931 General Election as a New Party candidate. That same year, he became editor of the party’s journal, Action. In 1932, shortly before Mosley reconstituted the New Party as the British Union of Fascists (BUF), Nicolson severed his and Mosley’s political relationship. 2 . Cimmie was Mosley’s first wife. 3 . Quoted in Kushner and Valman, Remembering Cable Street, 81. See also the early work of W. F. Mandle, who, like Thurlow, argues that it was not until “the end of [1934 that] the BUF was frankly and militantly anti-Semitic” (8). Mandle attributes the BUF’s turn toward antisemitism to the declining membership of the organization, a decline that Mosley apparently believed he could counter by emulating the more explicitly antisemitic propaganda of Hitler and the Nazis. Such models, Mandle explains, seemed especially enticing following the BUF’s Olympia meeting of June 7, 1934, which had “damaged the public image of the movement” (18). By 1936, Mandle claims, “the [BUF’s] commitment to anti-Semitism was both total and concentrated” (49). However, it “was virtually dropped as a major issue from 1938 onwards” (61), a transition Mandle does not fully examine. Kushner, diverg- ing from Mandle, argues that, in fact, the BUF became once again more openly antisemitic in 1939 ( Persistence 18). 4 . Only minimal references to Jews appear in the initial years of such openly fascist publications as the British Fascisti Bulletin, which was renamed the British Fascist Bulletin in 1924, and The Bulletin in 1925. For further discussion of Mosley’s administration of the BUF and of his changing approaches to antisemitism, see Pugh, in particular chapter 12 . 5 . Billig uses the classical rhetorical term prolepsis to define such deflections. Prolepsis is a form of argumentation in which a speaker, foreseeing and hop- ing to forestall potential objections to a claim, incorporates retorts to those objections into his or her speech. 6 . For instance, in 1933, BUF leaders challenged the newspaper Jewish World to locate any examples of antisemitism in BUF publications; shortly after, in the fascist periodical Blackshirt , the organization asserted that it had always encouraged a benign, even charitable, relation with Jews (Mandle 5). 7 . Politicians across the political spectrum recognized the inadvisability of appearing overtly antisemitic, and their speeches are frequently informed by such self-prohibition. For examples, see comments on the Moneylenders Bill before the House of Commons by Lieutenant Commander Joseph Kenworthy (“Comments”). Kenworthy was a Liberal MP until he joined the Labour Party in 1926. For nonparliamentary examples, see Kushner’s assessment of Notes 203

the Labour movement’s response to the Jewish refugee crisis of the 1930s. He writes: “It is significant that even in the sympathetic treatments of the refugee question in the British labour movement, the word ‘Jew’ was con- stantly and carefully avoided” ( Holocaust 88). 8 . Ultra-right-wing organizations of this period in Britain, including the British Fascisti, the Imperial Fascist League, and the Britons, shared a number of concerns and objectives with European fascism at large, for example, an emphasis on aristocratic political authority over parliamentary forms of governance, the sovereignty of nations and the racial purity or “sprit” of a national body politic, the importance of “will” and “action” in generating the “energy” of a “new age,” and the defeat of communism. However, British fascist groups were also closely linked to an indigenous political tradition, the roots of which can be traced to the “aristocratic revivalists and Diehard peers of the Edwardian period” (Stone, “The English Mistery” 339). Dan Stone astutely defines these interwar groups as “instigators of what could have become, under different political circumstances, . . . a full-fledged [fascist] movement integral to the [British] political scene and threatening to take power” (338). 9 . The Britons Society and Publishing Company was founded by Henry Hamilton Beamish in 1919. Platforms of the group included “the forced expulsion of Jews from England,” the “eradication of . . . alien influences in British life,” and the revocation of “the Act of Settlement of 1700, which would ensure that immigrants and their descendents would be ineligible to hold public office” (Thurlow 66). Prominent members included J. H. Clarke, “who was chief consulting physician to the Homeopathic Hospital in London” and served as chairman of the Britons from 1918 to 1931, A. H. Lane, and George P. Mudge, a renowned eugenicist and lecturer at the London Medical School (69). According to Thurlow, the Britons made little headway in disseminating their policies, “but the survival of the publishing arm of the organization and the influence of the society on Arnold Leese [leader of the Imperial Fascist League] were to be of crucial significance to the development of radical fascism in Britain” (25). Titles published by Beamish include George Shanks’s The Jewish Peril, Victor Marsden’s World Conquest through World Government, Clarke’s England Under the Heel of the Jew, and Lane’s The Alien Menace. Two years after the formation of The Britons Society and Publishing Company, Beamish founded the Judaic Publishing Company, which, in 1922, he renamed the Britons Publishing Company. The Britons Publishing Company was severed from the Britons Society in 1932 and continued “as a publishing and distribution business for extreme right-wing groups until the 1970s, producing eighty-five editions of the Protocols, as well as becoming the main outlet for circulating American conspiracy theory works and racist material” (67). For additional information on the Britons, see Holmes; Lebzelter; and Linehan. 10 . Jewry Ueber Alles went through a number of name changes, appearing variously as The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles, The Hidden Hand or the Jewish Peril and, later, as The British Guardian. However, it is usually 204 Notes

referred to simply as Jewry Ueber Alles. I follow this convention, and in my works cited, indicate alternative titles under which articles were published. 11 . Most of the articles in Jewry Ueber Alles were anonymously written, although it is not a stretch to surmise that Joseph Banister, one of the key architects of the Britons’ policies and political platforms, penned a majority of the works that I cite. 12 . “Jews Confess themselves the Cause of Anti-semitism,” an article featured in the November 1920 issue of Jewry Ueber Alles, opens with the following proclamation: “Herzl (the Prophet of Zionism and the alleged promulgator of The Protocols ) was right when he said that the Jew takes anti-semitism into the country of his migration with the pack on his back. . . . Quite so. ‘Nationalism’ is a ‘convention’ with Britons but it is a ‘religion’ with Jews! And though Jews are the cause of anti-semitism, it is the unfortunate Britons who are the culprits for being what the Jews make them!” (3). 13 . Later, as if to explain the curious pairing of Hitler with Jewish texts, the following statement is inserted: “To complete our survey of Jewish character it is necessary to refer to [Jews’] own historical records. . . . We must confine ourselves strictly to the hard historical facts (or rather statements) therein recorded” (9). 14 . See, for instance, “Jews on Jews” in the December 1920 issue of Jewry Ueber Alles. 15 . The book includes chapters on circumcision, marriage brokers, sabbath food and rituals, Jewish conversion, and other Jewish practices. 16 . Thus, ironically, these “Jewish” texts are made part of a fascist literary canon, and more crucially, become a way of indicating what defines a “proper” British, or more specifically, “fascist” reader. To employ the words of Jeffrey Shandler, such texts tell advocates of fascism “not only what [the fascist] reads” and should read, “but also how and to what end” (14). More importantly, as the private world of Jews—or at least a social and collective fantasy of that world—is brought into the fascist’s purview, a kind of inti- macy between fascist and Jew is seemingly established. The fascist supporter becomes a so-called authority on Jews, purveyor of a body of knowledge to which other fascists, and non-Jews more generally, can (and should) appeal. 17 . An early issue of Jewry Ueber Alles, published in April 1921, includes the following declaration by an anonymous writer: “In England there is no race- hatred. . . . It is the Jew who divided the world into Jews and non-Jews. . . . We protest that we have nothing but the kindest feeling toward Jews. . . . For those exceptional Jews who have conquered the Judaism in their blood we have nothing but praise” (3:1). The comments anticipate assertions such as those in the work of Anglus. 18 . In 1950, the Britons Society acquired the copyright of all works published by the Boswell Publishing Company. Thurlow writes of Boswell that it was “non-fascist in inspiration,” but also notes that for many years the group avidly embraced policies of the British Fascists (46–47). 19 . For the most extensive discussions of Webster, see Davies; Martha Lee; and Michell. Davies offers a particularly interesting account of the continuing Notes 205

effects of Webster’s work on far right-wing thinkers today, analyzing the impact of Webster’s ideas on what he describes as “[t]he Keegstra Affair,” a play on “the Dreyfus affair.” In 1984, James Keegstra, a high school social studies teacher in Alberta, Canada, was charged under section 281.1(2) of the Criminal Code of Canada with inciting “hatred against . . . the Jewish people” (Davies 227). The code prohibits the public propagation of hate speech. The trial and various appeals lasted into the early 1990s, when Keegstra was found guilty of fomenting hatred. According to Davies, Webster was a primary influence on Keegstra and informed much of what he taught his students (233). 20 . See, for instance, Churchill’s 1920 article, “Zionism versus Bolshevism,” which opens with the infamous lines: “Some people like Jews and some do not; but no thoughtful man can doubt the fact that they are beyond all question the most formidable and the most remarkable race which has ever appeared in the world” (5). Having praised Jews in this backhanded manner, Churchill then assesses the “schemes of the International Jews” to “overthrow civilization,” commending Webster for her “able” study of the “definitely recognizable part [of these schemes] in the tragedy of the French Revolution.” Today, Webster’s views continue to be circulated by members of the John Birch Society and the Christian Book Club of America, which, in 1985, reissued The Secret of the Zodiac in paperback. See, for instance, William Jasper’s paean to Webster in The New American, an online Birch Society publication (October 31, 1994). See, also, Pat Robertson’s New World Order , 71, 180. 21 . The Post became famous in 1920 for its publication of The Protocols (Thurlow 58). Other well-known conspiracy texts of the period include Potted Biographies, Beamish’s The Jews’ Who’s Who, Crosland’s The Fine Old English Gentleman, Lane’s The Hidden Hand, Northumberland’s Conspiracy Series, Harold Sherwood Spencer’s Democracy or Shylocracy, and newspapers such as The John Bulletin. 22 . For additional information on the Protocols, see Bronner; Cohn. 23 . These concerns were all part of the Die-Hards’ political platform, and they would have been recognized by readers as such. The Die-Hards were a radical right-wing faction of Parliament consisting primarily of Unionist peers “who defied the party whip by voting against the Parliament Act in the House of Lords in 1911” (Thurlow 3). As a group, they supported “tariff reform, compulsory military service, an expansion of the army and navy, the development of social welfare, . . . an end to ‘alien’ immigration[,] and armed resistance to Home Rule in Ireland” (4). They were wary of Germany’s military designs and rapidly growing military capability, and yet admired its “administrative efficiency, and social welfare programme and the leading role of the state in national development” (ibid.). In the 1920s, their cause was picked up by the British Fascists and by Alan Percy, whose father was an original Die-Hard, and who ran The Patriot from 1922 through 1950. Percy acquired the Morning Post “as a mouthpiece for Die-hard conservatism in 1924” and financed the Boswell Publishing Company in 1921, thus ensuring 206 Notes

the survival of “Die-hard conservatism . . . at least in journalistic form, until 1950” (49–50). 24 . We can read this development in the plot as a reaction to Jewish assimilation, which, as I note in my introduction, tended in early twentieth-century Britain to elide differences between Jews and non-Jews; for example, Jews were no longer identifiable according to dress or social custom. Webster addresses this ostensible elision in a scene at a party, during which Kavanagh decries the vulgarity of foreigners who wear “Western” clothing; here, the “foreigners” to which he refers are Jews, although in keeping with Webster’s formal practice, they are never fully identified as such: “Looking round the table he noticed that most of [the guests] had a certain family resemblance. Asiatics, he said to himself, and though the fact inspired him with no antagonism, for he was entirely free from racial prejudices, he was still fresh enough from India to feel that ‘East is East and West is West and never the twain shall meet’” (120). The dinner ends with Kavanagh speculating on how noble foreigners would become if only they dressed in their own native garb, a point he makes only after Webster has assured her readers emphatically that his comments do not reflect any “racial prejudices”: “The mistake these people made was to try to Occidentalize themselves. After all, he reflected, it’s really our Western clothes that handicap and vulgarize them” (120). Kavanagh’s lament follows his delineation of the physical characteristics of his host, curiously named Sir Paul. Kavanagh describes these features in conventionally antisemitic terms, noting, for instance, Sir Paul’s big nose and brows, but once again without overtly mentioning his Jewish identity: “[Sir Paul’s] heavy nose turning down towards the rather thick lips, the lower of which protruded slightly, giving a bitter and sneering expression to the whole face, the hard eyes looking out from beneath beetling brows, as if estimating one’s value and setting it at a very low figure—all combined to convey a far from pleasing impression. ‘Sinister,’ Kavanagh said to himself” (119–20). 25 . In Webster’s work, there are “good,” or acceptable, Jews and “bad” Jews. The “good” Jew, following Kavanagh’s logic, is unassimilated; that is, he or she is identifiable as Jewish, hence not hidden. In common parlance of the period, one might have described this latter type as an “authentic” Jew, with the “bad” Jew figuring as the “new” Jew who attempts to pass as British.

3 In Search of “the Jew” in Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood

1 . Throughout this chapter, I maintain the spelling, punctuation, and grammar of Barnes’s and Coleman’s original letters. I dwell on comments by Coleman chiefly because of the importance of her and Barnes’s friendship to the production and eventual publication of Nightwood. As scholars Catherine Hollis, Cheryl Plumb, Elizabeth Podnieks, and, more recently, Monika Faltejskova, have shown, Coleman provided extensive editorial advice on revisions in Nightwood and advocated vehemently for the book’s Notes 207

publication. In effect, Coleman was, Faltejskova observes, Barnes’s “unof- ficial literary agent” (39). 2 . Plumb also treats Barnes’s and Coleman’s debates over Felix as a key to Barnes’s conception of the content and design of Nightwood. She concludes, however, that Barnes ignored Coleman’s advice because Barnes had discov- ered in Felix’s Judaism a means of describing her own sense of alienation. “[Felix’s] identity as a Jew,” writes Plumb, “precludes his inclusion in a society he admires, and his alienation produces longing for acceptance. He lives a perpetual disqualification . . . and I suggest this sense of disqualification is what interested Barnes because it was her story too” (“Revising Nightwood ” 150). Plumb extends this discussion in her introduction to the drafts of Nightwood (“Introduction” 147). See also Hollis, who argues that “Felix was, for his author at least, an intrinsic part of the narrative” (239); and in contrast, Caroline Rupprecht, who suggests that Felix is a “leftover from [Barnes’s] earlier [Guggenheim] project, . . . which she decided to abandon when starting to work on Nightwood ” (103). 3 . See Reizbaum, James Joyce’s Judaic Other , especially chs. 1–3. 4 . Fadiman ends the letter by telling Barnes that the manuscript is “far too ‘unconventional’, ‘mad’, too many inverts [for anything] to be done by a standard house like my own.” He cushions the rejection by offering to rec- ommend the book to a less traditional publisher and tells Barnes that “to decline this book is simply equivalent to chastising the mentality of the American reading public.” 5 . As Bonnie Kime Scott reminds us, “during the twenties and thirties, Barnes was more in Paris and London than the U.S.” (1:xxxviii). 6 . Coleman’s claim about Jews is part of a series of observations that she records in her journals regarding the “Jewish” characteristics of her friends Sonia Ginsberg Himmel and Peggy Guggenheim. Of Ginsberg Himmel, she writes: “Sonia seems strange, and untouched by anything. How odd that she can also have that vulgar Jewish look. Perhaps the Jewish look is the illusion.” Equating both Guggenheim and Sonia with the figure of the Wandering Jew, she then exclaims: “I told [Sonia] I could not see how people could suddenly uproot themselves from a place they had loved—as Peggy can. Her insen- sibility in that direction is phenomenal. I begged Sonia not, in a moment of Jewish fervour, to abandon this place. Jews can give up anything.” Here we must keep in mind that Guggenheim and Himmel were also friends and benefactors of Barnes. In the draft of her memoirs, Barnes makes an opposite claim: “A Jew is always running both before and behind you, that he may ‘catch’ everything” (“Vantage Ground” 236). 7 . Scholars tend to interpret Nightwood alongside the work of other modernist women writers, as part of the European avant-garde, or, conversely, as instrumental to the development of a twentieth-century American literary canon. Only rarely has the book been discussed specifically in relation to British literary and social-political traditions. 8 . For extensive analysis of the influence of fascism on Nightwood , see Carlston, who identifies a series of “curious convergences” between fascist ideology 208 Notes

and Barnes’s “highly figurative and mediated literary style” (62, 79–80): “ Nightwood addresses the same metaphysical problems that fascism did in the 1920s and 1930s, and uses the same images and tropes that fascism used. . . . It is a text preoccupied with the significance of history and the problem of mediation, as was fascist thought. It occupies the same terrain that fascism tried to manipulate, that of the irrational. And it shares fascism’s corporealization of racial difference. It is only with regret that . . . Barnes finally dismisses fascism’s utopian fantasies” (83–84). 9 . Barnes had begun to consider European Jewish life as early as 1917, with the publication of “Surcease in Hurry and Whirl,” which opens, as Alex Goody notes, “with a vignette of a Jewish-Norwegian woman, a failed revolution- ary” (90). 10 . Until recently, Barnes scholars have tended to treat Barnes’s experiences in Germany as a backdrop for her romantic liaisons, thus perhaps inad- vertently disregarding the potential effects of her time in Germany on her views of fascism or on the development of Nightwood. See, for example, Andrew Field 165. 11 . In his 1957 memoir, Unheard Witness, which he dedicates to Spengler, Hanfstaengl recalls his attempts to acquire the rights to Mein Kampf for his family’s publishing firm; he was deterred in his efforts, he writes, by his brother, Edgar, a “very conservative businessman” whose repudiation of the manuscript “was highly indicative of the way a great many people felt about Hitler after the failure of the Bürgerbräu Putsch” (134). 12 . At the same time, Coleman read extensive sections of her own journals to Barnes. Thanks to Elizabeth Podnieks, we now know that Coleman did not intend her journal writings to be private, viewing them instead as an essential part of an “artistic product which was carefully (re)considered at various stages of her writing and rewriting” (Podnieks 98). Podnieks notes: “Having travelled in the mid-1990s to the University of Delaware to study Coleman’s original diaries, I immediately sensed, upon opening the first folder, that I was looking at a manuscript of a publicly oriented novel rather than of a supposedly private journal. . . . [T]he diary is heavily edited: not only certain words but sentences and whole passages have been blocked out with lines of typed Xs, while others have been expanded, grammatically corrected, or critiqued in marginal asides” (ibid.). Elsewhere, Podnieks advises us to read Coleman’s diary as part of a distinctly “Modernist project” and, even more specifically, “as a dramatic poem in prose,” adding, “we can imagine early portions of it as being dedicated in spirit . . . to Guggenheim and Barnes” (98, 101). Coleman’s diary of September 1932 certainly gives evidence of this “dedication.” According to Podnieks, Coleman “recorded that she was sitting in the living room with Guggenheim, [John] Holms, and Barnes, talking as usual.” Coleman writes: “Then they clamoured for the diary since it was raining, and we had had tea. . . . Peggy was bored and wanted me to read the diary. So I got it, thinking it would not go off well, and began reading it. . . . From [the] opening sentence, until I stopped exhausted, at time for dinner, they sat and roared, and screamed, and howled with laughter, Notes 209

they doubled up and shrieked, until I was worn, and Peggy had to go to the lavatory, because it had made her bowels work” (99). Later, Podnieks characterizes such entries as “written both for [the benefit of Coleman’s friends] and for future audiences. The Hayford Hall journal shows us explicitly how [Coleman] was one of the dramatis personae in, as well as the dramatist of, this textual show” (115). While we do not know if Barnes was privy to the particular fragments of Coleman’s journals that I cite in note 6, Podnieks’s analysis of the general tenor and development of Coleman’s diary clearly indicates how injudicious it would be to treat Coleman’s various comments about Jews solely as the private and idiosyncratic ruminations of an antisemite. Rather, I suggest, they constitute a crucial part of the distinctly public conversation about Jews in which Barnes and Coleman were engaged. For both Coleman and Barnes, Jewish identity and history is material to be for- mulated and reformulated—a “textual show” essential to the foundation of Nightwood (ibid.). 13 . Guggenheim’s biographer, Mary Dearborn, reiterates Guggenheim’s account, as do Sandra Chait and Podnieks in their provocative edited collection on Hayford Hall (10). Paraphrasing Phillip Herring, from his biography of Barnes, Chait and Podnieks write: “Barnes apparently spent most of the day indoors, afraid to go outside because the moors terrified her” (10; Herring 192). 14 . Indeed, I suggest that to read Nightwood as if Barnes were oblivious or indifferent to fascist activities and attitudes is tantamount to resurrecting a now typically discounted narrative about women writers, but one that, at least until the 1970s, was a mainstay of modernist scholarship: the belief that female modernists were, if not outright apolitical, certainly more interested in the psychological evolutions of their characters, domestic relations, and form for form’s sake than in the social and political communities surrounding them. See, for instance, Leonard Woolf’s often quoted assertion about his wife that “Virginia was the least political animal that has lived since Aristotle invented the definition” ( Downhill 27). 15 . As Bonnie Kime Scott notes, Barnes’s comments to Coleman were prompted, in part, by her developing friendship with Janet Flanner, who, when she and Barnes met in 1936, was “riding high” from the publication and reception of her reports on Hitler in The New Yorker. See Barnes’s letter to Coleman, April 1–3, 1936 (qtd. in Kime Scott, 2:170). 16 . For instance, a Times article of July 18, 1933, entitled “Fascist March in London,” reports that “over a thousand members of the British Union of Fascists, wearing their black shirts, marched through the West End of London on Sunday night, led by Sir Oswald Mosley. . . . Thousands of people watched the procession as it marched along Piccadilly, Regent Street, Oxford Street, the Strand, and Whitehall. . . . The march was organized for recruiting purposes, and the procession was headed by a band and a standard bearer carrying the Union Jack” (21). Other articles describe “collisions between Fascists and Jews,” various “disturbances” at fascist meetings, and the growing crowds at Mosley’s London rallies. See, for instance, “Fight at Fascist 210 Notes

Meeting,” The Times (October 25, 1932: 16); “Sunday Night Disturbance,” The Times (May 9, 1933: 11). 17 . Of recurring interest to the press were incidences of public disorder, clashes between fascists and nonfascists, and potential attacks on Jews. Significantly, by 1933, Devon authorities had already begun to express anxieties about the importation of Nazi attitudes toward Jews into Britain, and about the personal and political sentiments of Britain’s fascist leaders (Gray 17–18, 41). These anxieties were, in turn, reiterated in the papers. “There is no anti- Jewish movement in British Fascism. . . . Members are expressly forbidden to have anything to do with anti-Jewish movements. If they do so they are very severely dealt with,” proclaimed one fascist leader in response to a journalist’s question about the significance of Jews within the fascist’s platform (qtd. in Gray 88). Such responses suggest how forceful the pressures to cur- tail antisemitism were, even in these early years, and how quickly such pressures became a conspicuous part of policy debates and political rhetoric. 18 . Not all the reporting on the rise of British fascism was negative. In July 1933, for instance, a reporter for the Western Independent described Plymouth’s Blackshirted leaders as “fine upstanding young fellows, earnest and per- suasive, who well earn their bread by their courage. They thrill with the thought [of] their great leader, whose portrait may yet adorn one of the windows in the guildhall, and whose very presence may honour the presence of a reformed City Council” (qtd. in Gray). Two months later, in September 1933, The Exmouth Chronicle featured a photograph of Hitler and praised him as “Germany’s Man of the Moment” (ibid. 79). These portraits were not altogether unusual. In March of that same year, The Illustrated London News, a national periodical, ran a pictorial spread entitled “The Human Side of Germany’s Nazi Chancellor: Hitler the Man,” which featured various photographs of Hitler reclining in shorts, feeding deer, reading a newspaper, relaxing over coffee, and chatting with a small child in a field of flowers (345). Significantly, the piece was followed, only one month later, by a scathing two-page illustrated report on Germany’s boycott of Jewish shops, suggesting how suddenly sentiments about Germany and Hitler could shift (“The Nazi Boycott” 485–86). 19 . According to Philip Herring, Barnes and Peter Neagoe became lovers in 1934. Anna Neagoe, Herring writes, “probably knew about [the affair] but pretended not to, perhaps confident that her husband would not leave in the end” (222). 20 . See Mairead Hanrahan’s “Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood: The Cruci-Fiction of the Jew” for an insightful discussion of what Hanrahan terms the “Christianization” of Jewishness in Nightwood. Maren Linett also provides an extremely thoughtful discussion of the issue in chapter 4 of Modernism, Feminism, and Jewishness. 21 . That there is a figurative, if not causal, link between Guido’s interest in Christianity and the erasure of Jewish identity in the text is reinforced by Barnes’s assertion that “in accepting Guido” and, by extension, Guido’s preoccupation with the church, Felix realizes that he is “accepting the Notes 211

demolition of his own life” (108). Moments later, suggestively playing on the word “chosen,” Barnes affixes this “demolition” to the loss of Felix’s and Guido’s Jewishness and, more significantly, to the general destruction of the Jewish line. Felix, she tells us, “received no answer” from any of the church officials to whom he had written. “He knew,” she continues, “that in all probability the child would never be ‘chosen’” (109). The word “chosen” is a pun, evoking the biblical notion of Jews as the “chosen people” and suggesting that it is not the church from which Guido will be separated, but rather Jewish history and Jewish identity. 22 . Here Barnes is referring to the first Guido. 23 . Barnes likely modeled her description of the decree on an edict issued in 1466 by Pope Paul II that forced the Jews of Rome to run naked through the streets of the city during the Saturnalia festival (before he became Pope in 1464, Paul II was known as Pietro Barbo, and served the church as a Roman cardinal). For more on Paul II, see David Kertzer’s The Pope Against the Jews. Note that in Nightwood, Barnes gives the date of Barbo’s edict as 1468. 24 . For extended discussions of the origins and recurrence of the image of the decaying Jew in the arts, see Sander Gilman’s The Jew’s Body and Love + Marriage, and Reizbaum’s “Max Nordau and the Generation of Jewish Muscle.” Reizbaum provides an extremely useful overview of prevailing theories of degeneracy in turn-of-the-twentieth-century Europe, and explores the legacy of such theories in literature and film, from Ulysses to Pat Barker’s 1991 novel, Regeneration. 25 . That Barnes herself correlates Jews and Jewish history with changes in the structure and style of Nightwood is indicated by letters she wrote to Coleman. For instance, in a letter from October 1935, she invokes the apparent structure of the Jewish “race” to explain to Coleman her reasons for neglecting the structure of Nightwood, prefacing her comments by recalling Fadiman’s earlier condemnation of her treatment of Jews: “Fadiman, you remember, also said that the Jew was sheer romanticism. That’s a race with a structure if there ever was one, and then Fadiman goes right smack back on his own people. The stupidity of people is really what is driving me mad” (Letter to Coleman, October 30, 1935). 26 . The wandering nature of the doctor’s narrative is perhaps clearest in his speech on the difference between great and common men, which the doctor delivers to disabuse Felix of his obsession with the aristocracy (39). The doctor begins his diatribe by comparing kings to a “peasant’s actor.” Scandal, he then tells Felix, makes us bow down to the monarch. The doctor’s exposi- tion on bowing in turn evokes the image of a dog whose disobedience is so great that it fouls church rafters. These images immediately lead the doctor to contrast disobedient dogs—those that cannot be housebroken—with obedient people who, he says, are “church-broken.” To be “church-broken,” he continues, is to conform or, as he later puts it, to have a “heart-broken house.” This lengthy and complex train of images suggests the metaphor “all men are dogs” without the doctor ever having to state it. The reader is left to 212 Notes

follow the doctor’s associative connections, to wander with him through the metonymic chains that only underlie, never represent, the metaphoric dog- man and, by extension, the doctor’s claim that even great men are “dogs,” hence that the difference between “great” and “peasant” is very small. 27 . That Barnes saw the doctor as intricately related to this complex configura- tion of ideas—wandering, storytelling, and the Jewish identity of Felix—is supported interestingly by an early draft of Nightwood which, as Plumb notes, Barnes sent to the American publisher T. R. Smith in 1934 (Plumb, “Introduction” 241). In this draft, the doctor describes himself as “a poor fellow from some unknown country,” echoing Barnes’s depiction of Felix (Barnes, Nightwood: The Original Version 282). 28 . Comments that Barnes made to Coleman regarding her own methods of analysis indicate that she herself conceived of thinking specifically in terms of wandering: “You see, the value of my mind (such as it is) is that it wan- ders!” (Barnes to Coleman, October 30, 1938). Interestingly, the doctor’s first name, Matthew, is placed inside parentheses immediately following the statement; thus, Barnes circuitously establishes a connection between her own style of thought and the doctor’s. 29 . For further discussion of the disjunctions between the doctor’s final chapter and “The Possessed,” see Donna Gerstenberger’s “The Radical Narrative of Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood ” and “Modern (Post) Modern: Djuna Barnes Among the Others.” In “The Radical Narrative,” Gerstenberger characterizes this second, implied narrator as “dispassionate” (137). In “Modern (Post) Modern,” she likens the overall style of “The Possessed” to the “straightforward prose” of Barnes’s short stories (39). See also Plumb’s notes on T. S. Eliot’s initial responses to “The Possessed.” Plumb reminds us that, initially, Eliot recommended “the omission of the last chapter, which is not only superfluous, but really an anti-climax” (qtd. in Plumb, “Introduction” xxi). 30 . Barnes’s characterization of the Count suggests two seemingly paradoxical, but closely interrelated, antisemitic claims circulating in the early twentieth century, which I discussed in detail in the two previous chapters: on the one hand, the seemingly essentialist belief that all cultures are subject to the unrecorded presence of “secret Jews,” and that these Jews are inherently different from non-Jews, and on the other hand, the ostensibly anti- essentialist notion that anyone who comes into contact with Jews can in fact “turn” Jewish. The latter notion grew in popularity alongside emerging theories of disease, and was commonly invoked to warn Christians about the “spreading” of Jewish immigrants into host nations. Rhetorically, both forms of antisemitism have a similar aim: to suggest that the population of Jews is much greater than it initially appears to be, and hence that it is more dangerous to the social and economic health of the nation than one might suppose. 31 . Barnes introduces Nora with the assertion that “[w]andering people the world over found her profitable in that she could be sold for a price forever, for she carried her betrayal money in her own pocket” (51). The attention Notes 213

that Barnes pays to Robin’s “betrayal” of Nora suggests that the “wandering people” who will sell Nora for profit are, in fact, an early reference to Robin. 32 . For instance, Kaivola argues that Barnes draws on images of the primitive not only to depict her Jewish characters, but also Nikka, the black carnival performer, and Robin. Although Kaivola explains that Barnes distinguishes among “primitive types,” separating Jews “from other outsiders who popu- late [ Nightwood ],” she concludes that “the lesbian content [of Nightwood ] is primary” and that Barnes “portrays blacks and Jews as primitive in order to provide an especially compelling backdrop for Robin and Nora” (179, 181). Kaivola’s work belongs to a trend within Barnes scholarship to treat the Jewish Felix as an archetypal figure, or quintessential other, who stands symbolically for all marginalized groups. For an especially thoughtful example of this tendency, see Victoria Smith’s analysis of loss in Nightwood, in which she reads Jewish identity in the novel as an analogy for historically unrepresented forms of homosexuality (197).

Interlude I From Courtesy to Etiquette to the “Uncivil” Jew

1 . As G. R. Elton puts it, “[t]he true Court of our imagining could not exist until the Crown had destroyed all alternative centers of political loyalty or (to emphasize another function of the Court) all alternative sources of worldly advancement” (qtd. in Shephard 722). 2 . Both Jacque Carré and Marjorie Morgan also distinguish between courtesy and conduct books. According to Carré, the transformation of courtesy into conduct began in the seventeenth century and continued through the eighteenth century when “the emerging culture of the new, more diverse elites, which was an increasingly urban, consumerist culture, was now undermin- ing the Renaissance ideal of the gentleman” (3). After the Restoration, he continues, discourse about conduct was “less often legitimized by social superiority than by parental responsibility, professional experience or posi- tions of trust,” which provided “sufficient justification for giving advice, without recourse to social eminence” (3). In addition, “[v]irtues . . . foreign to the aristocratic world such as the proper management of time and the dedication to hard work were now regularly emphasized” (6). For more extensive discussion of these transitions, see Newman (71). 3 . See also Christine Berberich, who, in her analysis of representations of the English gentleman, similarly observes the distinctions between the “primarily upper class male” readership of the early modern courtesy books and the “new middle class audience” of the Victorian etiquette manual. Focusing particularly on male readers, she writes, “[t]he nineteenth-century etiquette book . . . helped middle class men to emulate the manners of those who had run the country before them, by providing them with a set of rules of 214 Notes

behaviour which allowed them to take on their increasingly influential role in society” (18). 4 . Not surprisingly, middle-class readers’ preoccupation with etiquette man- uals was often balanced by a disaffection for the genre among the more traditionally entrenched aristocratic or genteel classes; for those “who held to rigorous standards of character, achievement, and morality,” Curtin explains, “[t]he low intellectual level of the etiquette book in comparison to the old courtesy tradition measured the descent of manners from an ideal of civilization to a symbol of vanity and status. . . . A concern with status symbols and other means of identifying the ‘ins’ and ‘outs’ superseded the traditional interests of writers on manners such as the nature of ‘pleasing,’ of self-control, or of the legitimate and illegitimate forms of hypocrisy. A satisfaction with standards based on ‘set’ or class replaced a striving after universal politeness” (414–15). 5 . Curtin concurs: “[i]t was assumed that manners identified individuals according to their class and that middle-class individuals wished to blur this identification by learning the manners of their betters. Etiquette writers taught readers who were eager both to make social advances and to hide the fact of their advance how to avoid those humiliating blunders that draw attention to humble origins” (414). 6 . This belief was supported in the early part of the twentieth century by “major developments in the . . . expansion and modernization of the British state,” in particular, the turn toward state welfarism (Goodlad x). Prior to the development of the modern welfare state, charitable institutions, especially those connected with the church, were largely responsible for ensuring the well-being of the nation’s poor and uneducated. With the development of the welfare state, society and, by extension, the very notion of communal health, came more prominently to “rest . . . on just laws, fair procedures and sound civic institutions, not on the qualities of personal character, altruism, and public spirit” (Harris 7). The idea that the state rather than charitable institutions would take care of the poor did not greatly change levels of poverty per se, but it successfully provided a foundation for arguing that “the fear of destitution” was no longer justified, especially for those in the middle classes. In short, one could achieve wealth and prestige by hard work, and if that failed, the state would provide an economic and social cushion. This faith in the eventual disappearance of poverty (rather than its actual elimination) contributed to the perception of an increasingly open or “liberal” society, which in turn gave rise to the “informalization” of culture. In other words, what was effectively undercut was a belief “in the need to assimilate aristocratic codes” or “hierarchically approved” conventions (Newman 74–75). According to Newman, “greater economic security and equality mean that there is no longer such a need for a ‘class act’ . . . and in consequence there is a lessening of a desire for the formality that went with this act” (74). Here, I would supplement Newman’s claim: it is not “greater economic security and equality” per se that eliminates the “need for a ‘class act,’” but rather faith that one can achieve such “security and equality.” Notes 215

7 . Examples include Household truths for working men (1800); The Polite present, or, Child’s manual of good manners (1832); The habits of good society: a handbook of etiquette for ladies and gentlemen: the whole interspersed with humourous illustrations of social predicaments (1859); The English gentlewoman: a practical journal for ladies on their entrance into society (1861); Good society: a complete manual of manners (1869); Mixing in society: a complete manual of manners (1869). 8 . The authors’ first example is excerpted from J. J. Martinet’s Essai ou princi- pes élémentaires de l’art de la danse, published in Lausanne in 1797. 9 . In other moments, Leonard’s critique of etiquette is more complicated or ambiguous, as when he recalls his and his friends’ great admiration for James’s novels, an appreciation he equates with a drunken binge: “During the years we were at Trinity, Henry James was at the height of his powers, writing those strange, involved, elusive novels of his last period. . . . Lytton Strachey, Saxon, and I were fascinated by them—entranced and almost hyp- notized. . . . My enjoyment and admiration [for the novels] have always been and still are great, but always with a reservation. There is an element of ridic- ulousness, even of ‘phoneyness’ in them which makes it impossible to rank them with the greatest or great novels. But the strange, Jamesian, convoluted beauty and subtlety of them act upon those who yield to them like drink or drugs; for a time we became addicts, habitual drunkards” ( Sowing 106). Here, Leonard’s distain for “phoneyness” appears almost as an afterthought, a means of qualifying his attraction to the “convoluted beauty and subtlety” of James’s style. But we might also read “phoneyness” as itself a kind of drug, one that acts upon Leonard throughout his fictional works, coexisting with, rather than fully distinct from, “Jamesian . . . beauty and subtlety.” 10 . For a biographical analysis of this scene, see Rosenfeld, who reads The Wise Virgins as Leonard’s repudiation of his family and, implicitly, of his Jewish identity: “Like himself, those of Leonard’s siblings who married all married Gentiles—without, however, making dramas of their exit from the fold. The Wise Virgins is such a drama” (73). 11 . In the twentieth century, such a transition is illuminated by what Anindyo Roy calls the “fractured rhetorics of civility,” a phrase he develops in relation to the figure of the baboo in colonial India: “The power of civility lay in its ability subtly to impose control or effect exclusion by establishing a normative code of imperial Britishness that operated on the variables of nationality, class, and gender. However, the same concept came to acquire an elusive quality when transferred to the colonial domain, and it is this elusiveness, visible in the sometimes fractured rhetorics of civility, that opens up a new history of colonial power relations” (1). A similarly “elusive” quality is in play with the rapid growth and assimilation of Britain’s Jewish immigrant population, which forces a “reconsolidation,” to use Roy’s term, of both the “normative codes” of conduct that defined the Victorian gentleman and of British national identity as such (5). 12 . Such anxieties were compounded by Britain’s defeats in the Boer War at the turn of the twentieth century. 216 Notes

13 . According to Cheyette, it was the “popular identification of the baptised Disraeli with a racial Jewishness that can be said to be the beginnings of modern antisemitism in Britain” (“Jewish Stereotyping and English Literature” 16). 14 . Such perceptions were at the heart of early twentieth-century anti-Jewish conspiracy theories, informing for instance J. A. Hobson’s famous description of Jewish control over the war in South Africa—what he calls the “Jew- Imperialist design”—and the infamous Protocols of the Elders of Zion. For more on Hobson, see Bar-Yosef 3. A 1925 letter to the editor of the protofascist paper, The British Guardian [ Jewry Ueber Alles ], illustrates its readers’ preoccupation with the Jews’ voting power, a preoccupation that also informed Conservative party politics: To the Editor of the British Guardian, Sir,—Your disclosures in THE BRITISH GUARDIAN of January 30th, regarding the “duty visit” of Mr. Finburgh, M. P. to the Home Secretary, at Mentone, were strikingly confirmed by the reports in the Press—cautious and meager as they were—of the recent interview between Sir William Joynson-Hicks and the delegates of the Jewish Nation for this county. In both interviews one is struck by the open admission on the part of these Jewish delegates that the Alien Question is pre-eminently a Jewish Question. In each case, too, there is the threat—for one can call it nothing else—that unless the demands of these Jewish national representatives are met, the Home Secretary will find himself branded an “Anti-Semite”—a fate which seems to have positively startled Sir William into a sort of torrent of denials to prove his entire freedom from this awful taint. Indeed, there is something heartbreakingly undignified in the spectacle of an Englishman, Minister in a Conservative Government, desperately protesting his horror and alarm lest he should be thought “anti-semitic” either by “anti-semites abroad ” or by “ Semites ” at Home. The fear of losing Jewish votes may, of course, account for some emotion—an important matter for a politician who wants to “get on,” and in a Liberal or Labour Member it would be merely “ common form, ” but one cannot help feeling that during the two hours’ conversation with Mr. Finburgh, and doubtless also during his interview with the Jewish Nation’s delegates, it was plainly conveyed to Sir William that it would be “easier” and more convenient for him to shut his eyes to the things which the Englishman in the street is having forced upon his notice, aye, down his throat, more and more every day—things which show how little reliance could be placed on the “bold words” and “firm stands” of previous Home Secretaries. Yours, etc., ONE OF SIR WILLIAM’S ELECTORS. (“Letter to the Editor” 48) See also Lunn 25, and Kushner, the latter of whom cites a 1940 letter from C. Ponsonby to then Prime Minister, Neville Chamberlain: “The Jewish vote is so strong in some constituencies that the Member has no freedom of action” ( Persistence 83). Notes 217

15 . Here, Roy’s observations on the “normative function of civil behavior” prove useful (11). As he notes, in the nineteenth century, the distinction between the civil deportment of the colonial subject and that of the colonizing authority was relatively stable. However, “[i]n the twentieth century, . . . a new tension erupts within this differential dynamic as the civility of the metropolitan subject itself becomes problematic, revealing within its structural stability its own history, that is, its own troubled links with the political economy of colonialism and its vision of ‘modernity’” (8). Thus, for Roy, the “elusiveness of the colonial subject is utilized to structure and reinforce the ideologies of civility with the same energy as the material resources of the colony were being utilized to organize the modern state” (8). A similar claim may be made about the ostensible “elusiveness” of Jewishness in Britain. 16 . The most famous study of Jewish schoolchildren was conducted by Karl Pearson and published in the Annals of Eugenics between the years 1925 and 1928. Pearson, who began the study in 1911, argued that differences between Jews and British gentiles were “due to heredity and not environment” (Schaffer 18). 17 . Comments such as those by the anthropologist J. Gould Avery were not uncommon. “Racial characteristics,” he explains, “are not the result of acci- dent, habit, or climate, but are physical, material, and indelible” (qtd. in Cohen 472). 18 . As Cohen notes, “[t]he meaning of the term ‘race’ changed over the course of the nineteenth century.” She writes: “Amid the emancipation efforts of the 1830s and 1840s, Jews were variously—and interchangeably—described as a ‘nation,’ a ‘tribe,’ or a ‘race,’ less often as a ‘class’ or ‘people.’ Like ‘tribe’ and ‘nation,’ race conveyed a sense of religious, cultural, and historical sep- arateness, but it did not imply inherent homogeneity. By midcentury, race had acquired a narrower, more specifically biological definition. . . . Race designated a hereditary type whose members shared fundamental characteristics passed through the blood” (472–73). The result of efforts to racially demarcate Jews within scientific circles is that Jews as a group went from being less and less observable—that is, identifiable according to rituals, customs, dress, or distinct behavior—to being once again what Bar-Yosef and Valman describe as “unprecedentedly visible” (“Introduction” 8), or at least as visible as Jews en masse had been in the early 1880s upon first arriving in Britain from Eastern Europe. 19 . Charles Booth’s 17-volume survey of London’s poor, Life and Labour of the People in London, was the most influential of the ethnographic studies published in this period. He began researching economic and social conditions in London in response to “a survey of working-class districts taken by the Marxist Social Democratic Federation[,]” which had been serialized in the Pall Mall Gazette in 1885 (Fried and Elman xvii). Booth’s initial aim was to prove that the MSDF study, which claimed that “25 percent of the working class was poor,” had overstated British levels of poverty; instead, he found that the number of poor in Britain was closer to 35 percent of the population (xxiv). Each of the volumes combines statistical data on East London 218 Notes

collected by Booth’s team of researchers, charts and detailed maps, essays on local institutions and social relations affecting the poor, and a series of sections entitled “special subjects,” including material on the sweating system, the changing demographics of the population, and the Jewish community (xx); the latter section was written by Beatrice Potter. For an overview of the history of British ethnographic studies of the East End, see Jon Marriott. 20 . As Cohen notes, studies of Jews did not become common among members of Britain’s renown Anthropological Institute until the 1880s; ensuing interest in the Anglo-Jewish community thus corresponded directly with the large-scale immigration of Jews into Britain, and the increasing preoccupation among non-Jews about the nature and character of Jewish difference. Curiously, scholars of twentieth-century British ethnography have only cur- sorily attended to this focus, an effect, I would suggest, of the tendency among the founding thinkers of British anthropology, from E. B. Tylor to Franz Boas, to favor “culture” over “race” as a critical category, or as Susan Hegeman puts it, “cultural relativism” over “evolutionary ethnography” (458). Influenced by these categories, contemporary scholars miss the peculiar ways in which Jews, as a distinctly racialized people in this period, figure prominently, or particularly, within the ethnographic narrative. 21 . Such views represent a radical departure from long-standing theologically grounded conceptions of Jewish identity. Until the late nineteenth century, and the introduction of race discourse, Judaism had been understood primarily as a system of belief that could be renounced to “deliver . . . Jews from the stigma of their identity” (Garb 22). 22 . See, in particular, the work of Pearson. 23 . See, in particular, Magubane, ch. 4. 24 . See also Anne McClintock, who describes how “[t]he density, size and sprawl of the tangled slums [of the East End] were equated with jungles, and the language of imperial missionary enterprise was evoked to justify their penetration and their subjection to progress. Journalists and writers who ventured into the slums were seen as missionaries and settlers, bringing light into benighted darkness” (120–21). 25 . The emergence of Jewish ethnography as a distinct area of investigation was concurrent with a crucial reassessment, even the rejection, of one of the central premises of anthropology itself: a belief in the existence of a shared or universal humanity, which, despite the differences among “the various societies of mankind,” might be identified by comparing the cultural practices of primitive cultures and “higher nations” (Winter 430). In its place, we have what Susan Hegeman describes as a “cultural paradigm of the twentieth century, in which human groups [are] understood to differ from one another along the lines of their different (but comparable) ‘cultures’” (458). 26 . As John Darwin writes, “[w]here communities were already under strain—as embattled minorities or defeated majorities—failure to uphold their established order of civility in its full rigour seemed to threaten the unraveling of the whole social fabric” (321–22). Notes 219

27 . We might revisit Magubane’s analysis of Victorian poverty studies to argue that Jewish ethnographies, like the studies of poor, working-class gentile communities that came before them, were effectively a mechanism for deflecting attention away from the actual economic causes of poverty. However, in this case, the studies diverted attention primarily by racializing urban poverty, that is, by making race, and hence the innate qualities of an ostensibly foreign people, a primary cause of changing economic conditions. See, in particular, Magubane 118–19. 28 . Magubane astutely contends that the shift in ethnographic interest from the colonies to East London was an effect of a renewed interest in the nation as a social body, or more precisely, the transition from a notion of Britain as a body politic to a social body (84, 70). 29 . See Magubane 87, 92–93. 30 . Of course, this is not a fully negative development, since it also challenges common conspiratorial rhetoric about Jews’ desire to dominate world financial markets and political agencies. Significantly, such studies extend the original intention of the “social survey movement” that began in the late 1790s with evangelical missionaries into East London: they offer a “blueprint for social action” combined with Charles Booth’s desire to create, as he himself notes, a “statistical encyclopedia of life and labour in the greatest city in the world” (Englander and O’Day 22). As O’Day and Englander observe, the “credo” of early Victorian surveyors “was one of optimism— one set out with the premises that action was not only possible but necessary and desirable if only and when only one had collected the informative data” (18).

4 Concealing Leonard’s Nose: Virginia Woolf, Antisemitism, and “The Duchess and the Jeweller”

1 . Throughout this chapter, I maintain the spelling, punctuation, grammar, and abbreviations of Woolf’s original letters and diaries. 2 . See, for instance, Woolf’s diary entry of April 17, 1935: “The Wigrams a little defensive about Jews in Germany” ( Diary 4:301). A few days later, in an entry of April 22, she quotes Ralph Wigram’s description of Hitler and the German military: “Hitler very impressive; very frightening. . . . Made speeches lasting 20 minutes with out [ sic ] a failure. . . . The Germans . . . have enough aeroplanes ready to start to keep us under. But if they do kill us all? Well they will have their Colonies” ( Diary 4:304). 3 . Davies was general secretary of the Women’s Co-operative Guild and, since the early years of World War I, had been a close friend of the Woolfs. 4 . As Briggs notes, by January 1935, Woolf was already mapping connections between fascism and women’s limited access to education. The trip to Germany reaffirmed her belief that disparities between men’s and women’s 220 Notes

social and economic status in Britain could be linked to the broader structure of fascist practices. See also H. Lee 667–68; Leaska 365–66. 5 . See, for instance, Linett; Lassner; and Rosenfeld. 6 . “Jews,” a sketch that Woolf composed in 1909, also focuses on a Jewish character, the “fat Jewess,” Mrs. Loeb. It was posthumously published in 2003 by David Bradshaw in Carlyle’s House as part of a collection of Woolf’s notebook sketches. As Bradshaw observes, the piece was never intended for publication (“Commentary” 44). I discuss the sketch in greater detail shortly. “The Duchess and the Jeweller” initially appeared in Harper’s Bazaar in 1938 (London and New York) and was subsequently reprinted in A Haunted House and The Complete Shorter Fiction of Virginia Woolf. All quotations in the text are from The Complete Shorter Fiction. 7 . In a letter to her sister Vanessa dated August 17, 1937, Woolf cites Bacon’s knowledge of the pearls’ inauthenticity as a central element of the plot of “The Duchess”: “You were right about the American magazine: they now say they will take my story if I wire a suitable synopsis—which is a sketch of the plot; so I’ve made up a story about a jeweller and a duchess, and cabled the plot—how he buys her pearls, for £10,000, knowing them to be false” (Letters 6:158–59). 8 . This point is also observed by Lassner in her analysis of the story’s antisemitism (132–33). 9 . This image of the finger pressed to the nose similarly appears in Charles Dickens’s Oliver Twist, where it is explicitly equated with both Fagin’s cunning as a thief and his Jewish identity. See, in particular, Dickens 125, 289. By 1928, the fashionable retailer, Harrods of London, had begun marketing a Fagin nutcracker as part of the English Peerage nutcracker series. Fagin is depicted on the nutcracker with his finger pressed to his nose; with his other hand he holds a moneybag out of which gold coins are spilling. The nutcracker, which was sold as a common household item for 5s 3d, was part of a larger collection of nutcrackers inspired by characters from Oliver Twist. Of course, Woolf’s decision to name her Jewish protagonist Oliver suggests both the title character of Dickens’s book and, by extension, Fagin. Throughout her life, Woolf was an avid reader of Dickens, and she frequently comments on his work in her diaries. See, for instance, her entry of Tuesday, June 16, 1925 ( Diary 3:31–32). 10 . Woolf uses the same expression in The Years to describe the “Jew-boy from Birmingham,” one of Edward’s fellow students at Oxford, and the figure who seems most to represent Edward’s anxieties about his own intellectual limits and failings. See, in particular, 47, 59. 11 . For more on the publication history and reception of the story, see Julia Briggs, “Cut deep,” 181–84; Dick 308–9; Krueger Henderson 49–50; Rodríguez 117; Schröder 305; and Lassner 132–33. 12 . In her emphasis on the nose, Virginia echoes Leonard, who, in his 1917 short story “Three Jews,” links the Jewish identity of one of the story’s protagonists to a description of the character’s elephantine nose: “You couldn’t mistake [the man] for anything but a Jew . . . . Clever, cunning grey eyes, gold Notes 221

pince-nez, and a nose, by Jove, Sir, one of the best, one of those noses, white and shiny, which, when you look at it full face, seems almost flat on the face, but immensely broad, curving down. . . . And side face, it was colos- sal; it stood out like an elephant’s trunk” (11). “Three Jews” appeared with Virginia’s “The Mark on the Wall” in Two Stories, a pairing that, according to Rebecca Walkowitz, significantly “orients Virginia’s story,” framing her “literary project within a social context of anti-Semitism and strong international feeling about the relative patriotism of British Jews” (85). 13 . In one of Woolf’s more striking revisions, she changes her Jewish protagonist’s Hebraic sounding name, Isidore Theodoric, to Oliver Bacon, a pun referencing a central tenet of Kosher law, the Jewish prohibition against eating pork. That Woolf was aware of such laws is indicated by a letter she sent to her childhood teacher, Janet Case, in June 1912, recounting an evening that she spent with Leonard’s mother, Marie Woolf: [S]uch a tea party at Putney. “A sandwich, Miss Stephen—or may I call you Virginia?” “What? Ham sandwiches for tea?” “Not Ham : potted meat. We don’t eat Ham or bacon or Shellfish in this house.” “Not Shellfish? Why not shellfish?” “Because it says in the Scriptures that they are unclean creatures, and our Mr. Josephs at the synagogue—and—” It was queer—. (Letters 1:502–03) 14 . This paradox is reinforced by disparate critical reactions to Woolf’s depiction of Bacon. Some, like Julia Briggs and Laura Rodríguez, assume that antisemitism is an axiomatic feature of “The Duchess and the Jeweller” (Briggs, “Cut deep” 182; Rodríguez 116). Others, like Schröder, are more ambivalent, and claim that Woolf’s portrait of Bacon is compassionate enough to rouse our sympathies: “We cannot help but feel sorry for the emotionally lonely jeweler” (310). See also Reynier, who describes Bacon as “noble and tender-hearted” (142) and Krueger Henderson, who enumerates strategies in the story by which “Woolf encourages her readers to identify with the Jewish protagonist” (49). 15 . “Bloomsbury’s modernist aesthetic,” Froula explains, “resonates with Kant’s emphasis on the artwork’s purely formal beauty, apart from content, truth claims, and external rule” (13). For Bloomsbury writers and artists, influenced by Kantian theories of aesthetic judgment, she adds, “art culti- vates a civilized (and civilizing) disinterestedness that tends to enhance the common life and the sensus communis, not by eradicating always interested sentiment but by making us conscious of it as such and so keeping it in its ‘proper’ . . . place” (14). 16 . Woolf’s invocations of such standard narratives about Jewish conversion and Christian supersession gesture toward, and simultaneously undermine, a position frequently espoused by right-wing, protofascist ideologues of the period such as J. H. Clarke and Henry Hamilton Beamish, namely, the belief that inherent dissimilarities between Jews and British gentiles make 222 Notes

it impossible for Jews ever to integrate fully into British society. See, for instance, Clarke x. 17 . Concerns about the ostensible practice among Jews of purloining dogs in the East End also inform the plot of Woolf’s 1933 satirical novel, Flush, even despite the fact that, as Karen Leick notes, “the figure of the . . . Jew is absent from [the] bestselling [novel]” (124). In Flush, Leick writes, “Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s dog is abducted by a man named Mr. Taylor in Whitechapel for ransom. . . . [She] is forced to enter into negotiations with a Jewish-inflected character . . . in order to recover her beloved dog. Taylor, of course is not a Jewish name; instead, Woolf relies on the stereotype of the Jewish tailor to identify his ethnicity” (124). As Leick remarks, the novel’s “thinly veiled reference to the threat of Jews” (123) becomes especially apparent when the story is juxtaposed with “The Duchess and the Jeweller,” where Bacon recalls “selling stolen dogs to the fashionable women of Whitechapel” (Woolf, “The Duchess” 253). Woolf’s cognizance of Jewish life in the East End may also be surmised from The Years. For instance, Eleanor Pargiter, one of the novel’s central protagonists, goes to the East End to assist Mrs. Levy, a poor Jewish woman, and imagines “the old Jewess sitting up in her bed in her hot little room,” dying of cancer (29). Eleanor’s sister, Sara, also lives in the area, and disdainfully laments the presence of her Jewish neighbor, Abrahamson, an encounter I describe at greater length in note 42. Such recurring images of Jewish East Enders echo prevailing perceptions of actual immigration trends. Whitechapel, Shoreditch, and the surrounding areas were “primarily known for . . . the extreme poverty of the Jewish immigrants who lived there” (Leick 124). 18 . Rodríguez interprets the jewels both metaphorically, as “a symbol of secular aesthetic value”—that is, as art detached from the “constraints of church, court, and state,” and produced only for art’s sake—and economically, as an aesthetic object the value of which comes from the “commodification of beauty” (125, 122, 127). “The Duchess and the Jeweller,” writes Rodríguez, “exemplifies Woolf’s ambiguous and complex attitude and relationship to the mass market and the consideration of art as a commodity” (121). 19 . That the diamond industry informs Woolf’s understanding of Jewish forms of labor and, by extension, Jewish character traits and essences may be attributable to her encounters with her mother-in-law’s family, who were diamond merchants in Amsterdam (Schröder 325 note 7). Amsterdam is mentioned in “The Duchess” as one of the places where Bacon goes to learn his trade (248). The extent of Woolf’s specific knowledge of the South African diamond industry can only be surmised. We do know that information on South Africa’s diamond mines was available at the British Empire Exhibit of 1924, and that Woolf both attended and wrote about the exhibit; see, for instance, her 1924 essay, “Thunder at Wembley.” 20 . See Hobson, The War in South Africa. For thoughtful analyses of the effects of the rhetoric of the “diamond-hoarding Jew” on popular literature, especially in the Edwardian and early twentieth-century periods, see Kaufman, chapter 6 ; Munich; and Valman. Notes 223

21 . George Aschman opens his 1955 essay on Jews in the South African diamond industry with Oppenheim’s statement, referencing it without attribu- tion, effectively as gossip: “‘Jews are diamonds’, sir Ernest Oppenheimer is reported as saying to a friend” (121). In Rob Nixon’s more recent essay, “The Feather Palace,” the quotation appears once again unattributed: “Diamonds brought the first wave of Jewish settlers to South Africa. Some made for- tunes so vast that Sir Ernest Oppenheimer, the wealthiest magnate of them all, declared: ‘Jews are diamonds’” (74). However, in this case the statement is presented no longer as gossip, but as straightforward fact. The difference is illuminating. To a large extent, it hardly matters whether Oppenheimer himself was the one who actually stated, “Jews are diamonds,” or when and to whom he made the assertion. He now serves as a conduit for more widespread beliefs or even “facts” about the Jews’ ineluctable control over the diamond industry. That he can be seen (claimed) either as Jewish or Christian (and hence as an unprejudiced spokesperson) gives the claim espe- cial authority and credence. This variation of what here I shall loosely call “witnessing,” whereby belief becomes fact by virtue of its repetition (and not its verifiability), I also discuss at greater length in chapter 1 in my analysis of citations in the Aliens Acts debates. 22 . See, for instance, Woolf’s comments on the British Union of Fascists in her entry of September 4, 1935: “Writings chalked all over the walls. ‘Don’t fight for foreigners. Britain should mind her own business.’ Then a circle with a symbol in it. Fascist propaganda, L. said. Mosley active again” ( Diary 4:337). In an entry of November 24, 1936, she describes seeing on the seat of a passing car a copy of The Blackshirt, one of the more popular fascist newspapers of the period (5:36). Additional comments may be found in her letters and fiction. In 1935, for instance, she writes to her nephew Julian Bell that T. S. Eliot’s ex-wife Vivien “has taken to the stage. She wears a black shirt, believes in Mussolini, and accosts Tom just as hes [ sic ] about to lecture on the Future of Poetry before a devout and cultured audience. Such are the chief events in the world of letters” (December 1, 1935; Letters 5:450). Vivien Eliot had joined the BUF in 1934. See also, The Years 294, 389. 23 . In the published version of the story, the gems sheathed in velvet are described as “safe, shining, cool, yet burning, eternally, with their own compressed light” (250). In the original draft, Woolf depicts the gems as “burning with their own coagulated light,” reinforcing the jewels’ connection with blood (Unpublished Draft 5). 24 . Woolf’s use of the figure of the dynamitard may partially reflect her involvement with the 1910 post-impressionist exhibit that Roger Fry organized in London, and the kind of political reactions that the exhibit immediately prompted, reactions that Woolf traces in her 1940 biography of Fry. As Jane Goldman notes, the exhibit was lambasted both by those in the academic art community and by reviewers in the popular press as a symptom of the decline of western cultural values and, more specifically, of parliamentary forms of government. Robert Ross, a reviewer for the Morning Post, even goes so far as to equate Roger Fry and his fellow organizers with the conspirators of that 224 Notes

same 1605 Gunpowder Plot that is obliquely referenced in “The Duchess”: “A date more favorable . . . for revealing the existence of a wide-spread plot to destroy the whole fabric of European painting could hardly have been better chosen. On Saturday accordingly the Press was invited to the Grafton Gallery—an admirable substitute for the vaults of Westminster—where the new Guido Fawkes, his colleagues, and alleged predecessors are exhibit- ing their gunpowder. Mr. Roger Fry, I regret to say, has acted the part of Catesby, while a glance at the names of the honorary committee reveal that more than one member of the Upper House is implicated. It is the way of modern conspiracies; we all join them sooner or later. To-day, which is the private view, it will be decided whether the anticipated explosion is going to take place” (Ross 3). We know from her correspondence that Woolf herself participated in Guy Fawkes Day celebrations. In a letter of November 15, 1937 to Vita Sackville-West, she describes a commemoration on the downs at Lewes: “Tossing torches all up and down the streets: people rigged up as courtiers, gondoliers, old farmers in black Spanish hats. Then we all trooped onto the downs, and burnt the Pope. It was the very image of an Italian picture of Calvary” ( Letters 6:187). In this case, of course, the violence evoked by the plot is more figurative than literal, an “image” of a “picture of Calvary.” That Woolf was also capable of associating gunpowder and the dynamitard with actual carnage is indicated by her comments immediately following these remarks—“As you say, though, Spains burning and Hitler booming”—and, more famously, by the photographs of the Spanish Civil War to which she refers in Three Guineas, images that she earlier describes in a letter of November 14, 1936 to Julian Bell: “This morning I got a packet of photographs from Spain all of dead children, killed by bombs” ( Letters 6:85). For further discussion of these photographs, see Elena Gualtieri. 25 . I am not the first to describe Woolf’s antisemitism as “genteel.” In Outsiders Together, Natania Rosenfeld says of Woolf’s early novel, Night and Day, that it is a book “purged of the distaste [for Jews] that Virginia had expressed privately.” Its tenor, Rosenfeld continues, “is genteel throughout: gentile and genteel” (60). See also Lassner 136. 26 . That, very early in her career, Woolf already recognized a powerful align- ment between parlor behavior and the “flows of social and cultural capi- tal” is indicated in The Voyage Out during an “amiable” sermon given by Mr. Bax, the clergyman. Hirst, Hewett, and Rachel, the protagonists of the novel, are listening to the sermon when the narrator interrupts to sum- marize the homily’s crucial points: “The argument of the sermon was that visitors to this beautiful land, although they were on holiday, owed a duty to the natives. . . . It rambled with a kind of amiable verbosity . . . suggesting that all human beings are very much the same under their skin . . . ; in fact, a very dear friend of Mr. Bax’s had told him that the success of [England’s] rule in India . . . largely depended upon the strict code of politeness which the English adopted” (231). This claim “of a very dear friend” not only effectively turns colonial acquisition into a noncoercive form of sociability, but also pointedly creates an equivalence between India’s colonizers and Rachel, Notes 225

Hirst, and Hewett, the English “visitors” to South America, all of whom now presumably have a “duty” to be “polite” to the natives. “Politeness” stands in for the act of colonization itself, despite the seemingly egalitarian assertion that “all human beings are very much the same under their skin.” 27 . For example, juxtaposing the ruminations of Charles Tansley in Woolf’s 1925 novel, To The Lighthouse, with Woolf’s own recollections of her childhood in her 1939 memoir-essay, “A Sketch of the Past,” Latham underscores the frequency with which “the intellectual freedom of the upstairs bedrooms” is cast by Woolf as the antithesis of “the vacuous propriety of the downstairs drawing room” (83). But he also notes that “[c]linging to her own sense of refinement and ever attentive to the smallest details of distinction, Woolf jealously guards the privileges of the upper middle class, imagining herself to be a world away from the vulgarity of the middle class proper” (65). Blair similarly emphasizes Woolf’s “simultaneous hostility toward confining descriptions of . . . etiquette and her appreciation for their beauty, their usefulness in delineating distinctions,” arguing that “tea-table tactics,” to use Blair’s phrase, “provide . . . Woolf with a language and an aesthetic framework that . . . offer the terms for defining . . . the writing of fiction” (42, 70). 28 . To Blair’s observations I would add that Woolf does not simply utilize the conventions of the etiquette manual for writerly means. Rather, transform- ing the protocols it advocates into stylistic practices, she exposes as a fabri- cation the manual’s putatively anti-aesthetic bent. Here we might note for a moment the remarks of best-selling author, Sarah Stickney Ellis, who in her widely disseminated Women of England claims that etiquette, to be properly grasped, must be presented in distinctly unaesthetic fashion: “Had I not known before the commencement of this work, its progress would soon have convinced me, that in order to perform my task with candour and faithful- ness, I must renounce all idea of what is called fine writing; because the very nature of the duty I have undertaken, restricts me to the consideration of subjects, too minute in themselves to admit of their being expatiated upon with eloquence by the writer—too familiar to produce upon the reader any startling effect. Had I even felt within myself a capability for treating any subject in this manner, I should have been willing in this instance to resign all opportunity of such display, if, by so doing, I could more clearly point out to my countrywomen, by what means they may best meet that pressing exigency of the times” (vi–vii). 29 . By 1910, in her brief but provocative essay, “Mrs. Gaskell,” Woolf not only was already developing this distinctly aesthetic view of obliqueness, but was using it specifically to illustrate a new, modern method of storytelling, a method that in “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown” she famously classifies as “Georgian” (95). Ruminating on both “the cant and clutter” of Edwardian writers and her own “modern” technique, she says of Edwardian novelists that they “left nothing out that they knew how to say. Our ambition,” she counters, “is to put nothing in that need not be there” (“Mrs. Gaskell” 341). That Woolf’s interest in obliquity propels the dramatic arc and shape of her 226 Notes

narratives is now recognized by most Woolf critics. See, for instance, Suzanne Raitt’s analysis of Jacob’s Room, in which she treats Woolf’s emphasis on “the things one doesn’t say” as the foundation for her experiment with voice (31). Raitt takes the phrase “the things one doesn’t say” from a letter that Woolf wrote to Janet Case, dated November 19, 1919 ( Letters 2:400). See also, Maria DiBattista’s discussion of Woolf and authorship. 30 . Of course, as critics such as Rebecca Walkowitz and Froula observe, such transformations have political implications. Woolf’s goal, writes Walkowitz, is “to display the customs and conventions, social and psychological, that control what can be seen and what can be said” (83). To accomplish this, Woolf engages in practices that “preclude, pervert, or abjure national col- lectivity or civic culture: these can include domestic or intimate practices that seem, perhaps by design, exceptional or eccentric, or they can include manners or behaviors, such as those attributed to Jewish immigrants, that seem naturally to lack any trait whatsoever” (13). Walkowitz usefully refers to such practices in Deleuzian terms, as “style”: “When Deleuze speaks of ‘a style,’ he means the specific projection of unorthodox, unsocialized thought” (97). For this reason, Walkowitz continues, Deleuze “will say that ‘style’ belongs to people ‘of whom you normally say “They have no style”’; it belongs to people like Septimus [in Mrs. Dalloway ], whose manners do not correspond to an appropriate, invisible fashion” (Walkowitz 97). Drawing on the work of Melba Cuddy-Keane, Walkowitz then shows how, for Woolf, such “projections” are repeatedly translated into “narrative forms that are evasive rather than explicit or even utopian ” (82; emphasis Walkowitz). Elsewhere, Walkowitz connects this evasiveness to a kind of “stammering,” even “agitated,” prose, terms she employs to describe Woolf’s “critique of ‘logical hierarchy’” in the name of anti-imperialism and antifascism and, more specifically, Woolf’s unwillingness “to say, to say easily and with con- viction, what is social required” (93, 97). In short, for Walkowitz, Woolf’s “style” represents a disruption of social norms (rather than, as in Blair, their continuation or direct legacy), providing the symbolic foundation through which Woolf imagines an alternative and distinctly non-totalitarian community and politics. 31 . For a comparison with some of the earliest configurations of Jewish impro- priety in Woolf’s published work, see The Voyage Out, in which Woolf met- onymically links the non-Jewish Hirst’s unsuitability for propagating the English race with “Jewish” blood, an apparently distinct “Jewish” physical appearance, and Jews’ improper talk (205–06). 32 . For similar analyses of these recurring images in “Jews” and in Woolf’s diaries and letters, see Linett’s Modernism, Feminism , and Jewishness, chapter 6 , esp. 183–87. Linett is particularly interested in Woolf’s representations of the Jewish body in these texts, a “corporeality [that] must be ejected . . . to maintain the ideal of Woolf’s bodiless, ‘spiritual’ modernism” (187). 33 . For further discussion of self-censorship in Woolf’s work, see Froula, esp. chapter 7 ; and Neverow, both of whom astutely demonstrate the multitude of ways in which censorship informs Woolf’s narrative techniques. Notes 227

34 . David Bradshaw, who compiled the collection, similarly characterizes the sketch “Jews” as “plainly offensive” (“Introduction” xv); elsewhere, he describes it as “Woolf’s first significant anti-Semitic smear,” “disagreeable,” and “decidedly uncouth” (“Commentary” 40; ”Introduction” xviii). 35 . Extending Lessing’s assessment of Woolf’s more mature work, I turn briefly to Woolf’s resurrection of the figure of the ostensibly uncouth Jew in her 1941 novel, Between the Acts; there the figure is correlated with the flamboyant Mrs. Manresa, who, although never explicitly described as Jewish herself, is married to Ralph, a Jew “got up to look the very spit and image of the landed gentry” (40). Woolf describes Mrs. Manresa as “[v]ulgar . . . in her gestures, in her whole person, over-sexed, over-dressed for a picnic” (41). Yet, in this case such vulgarity proves advantageous, not just for Mrs. Manresa, but for the community as a whole: “But what a desirable, at least valuable, quality it was—for everybody felt, directly she spoke, ‘She’s said it, she’s done it, not I,’ and could take advantage of the breach of decorum, of the fresh air that blew in, to follow like leaping dolphins in the wake of an ice-breaking vessel” (41). 36 . In “The Duchess,” Bacon’s manner of eating as a child in the East End underscores the economic and social distinctions between London’s Jewish community and the English aristocratic class. Woolf writes: “He dabbled his fingers in ropes of tripe; he dipped them in pans of frying fish” (250). Later in the text, Bacon imagines himself enjoying the comforts of the Duchess’s country home and the company of her daughter, Diana, a fantasy prompted by the Duchess herself, who has invited Bacon to join her for a gathering at her family’s estate: “He looked past [the Duchess], at the backs of the houses in Bond Street. But he saw, not the houses in Bond Street, but a dimpling river; and trout rising and salmon” (253). The difference between the two scenes indicates not only how distant Bacon is from the aristocratic community he so admires—he eats “frying fish” but can only imagine “rising trout and salmon”—but also how often Woolf relies on images of food and eating to reflect the incivility of Jews. 37 . In making this claim, I extend Carey Snyder’s notion that, in order to “revitalize English fiction” and to create new methods of experimentation, writers such as Woolf borrowed from outside disciplines, most obviously psychology, but also ethnography and anthropology (93 note 25). 38 . Here I depart from Sonita Sarker’s provocative contention that “[w]hat remained invisible in the words of Woolf, and emerged in the debates about race, imperial power, and cultural pride [circulating in 1930s politics] was the fact that [non-Anglo-Saxon communities] lived not only in other places, but in London itself” (4). Sarker’s emphasis is on former colonial subjects from India and Africa. 39 . A s S n a it h ex pla i n s , Wool f d rew on t h is re se a rch to depic t “B a r re t t B row n i ng ’s London (the division between Whitechapel and Wimpole Street, the chronic poverty in the metropolis)” in her 1933 novel, Flush; she ultimately links such poverty to “the dire economic and employment situation of the early 1930s, but also the familiar attendant discourses of degeneration, disease, 228 Notes

and ‘foreignness’” (615). Woolf, Snaith adds, understood “the transition from the racial analogies used to describe London slums and their inhabitants, to the racial hierarchies that underpinned eugenics, fascism, and the reactions to the growing immigrant population in London” (632). 40 . Quoted in Snaith 622. See also Woolf, A Passionate Apprentice , 83. For an example of Duckworth’s contribution to Booth’s research, see “Jewellers, Gold and Silver Smiths.” In their survey of Booth’s work, Englander and O’Day describe Duckworth as being of “singular importance to the Booth inquiry” (30). 41 . For another example of Woolf’s ethnographic tendencies, see her comments in 1934 to Quentin Bell about the funeral of Leonard’s sister Clara: “It is true that one of Leonard’s sisters died last week, and we went up for the funeral. Jewesses are buried without much hope of immortality: at Balls Pond, it is a very severe service, Leonard said. I did not go, as women are happily not allowed. . . . It was all very interesting, as the Jews dress up in black, wear top hats, and look exactly like Hebrew prophets. My brothers in law sat around, cursing, and entirely righteous and hopeless (January 10; Letters 5:268). The next day, she writes to Ethel Smyth, describing the funeral in similar terms: “and then there was the funeral and the Jews came to Tavistock Sqre and sat around like prophets in their black clothes and top hats denouncing unrighteousness” (January 11; 269). Yet there is a crucial shift; by the time Woolf writes to Smyth, she has eliminated the voice of the observer—“it was all very interesting”—to offer instead a kind of biblical tableau, her aesthetic rendering of an ethnographic observation of Jewish behavior. 42 . This correlation is suggested, first, by Woolf’s emphasis on the repulsiveness of Abrahamson’s behavior in the bath—he is heard “coughing,” “clearing his throat,” and “snorting as he spong[es] himself,” acts that cause North, one of the text’s non-Jewish protagonists, to “shiver”—and second, by Woolf’s pun on Abrahamson’s name, which turns this “Jew in the bath” into the “son” of Abraham, the Jewish patriarch, and thus links him to the Hebraic people overall, an observation similarly noted by David Bradshaw in “Hyams Place” ( The Years 322; Bradshaw 185). For additional discussion of Woolf’s construction of Jewish identity in The Years, see Connor, “Virginia Woolf”; and Linett, esp. 49–59. All three critics focus extensively on Woolf’s descriptions of Abrahamson, noting repeated allusions to the hair and “line of grease” he leaves in the bathtub. 43 . In The Years, Woolf resurrects, albeit obliquely, Vanessa’s evocation of the “flavour” of “the Jew,” however, this time using it to address the anti- Jewish sentiments of the Parigiter family and, in particular, of Milly Parigiter. Describing Milly’s response to Eleanor Parigiter’s charitable work with the Levys, a poor Jewish family, Woolf writes: “‘Jews?’ said Milly. She seemed to consider the taste of the Jews; and then to dismiss it” (30). As Linett astutely notes, “[c]onsidering ‘the taste of the Jews’ may literally mean considering the Jews’ taste in ‘finery’” (1). But, Linett continues, “Milly also seems to be considering the taste of the word or category ‘Jews.’ The text hints . . . that there is . . . some intrinsic quality of Jewness, [an] essence in the sense of an Notes 229

extract, a concentrated form of a scent or flavor” (emphasis Linett). For Linett, this belief “that Jewishness has a unique ‘taste’” serves crucially “as a blueprint for modernist representations of Jewishness” overall (ibid.). To Linett’s observation I would add that to truly appreciate the significance of Milly’s distinct “taste of the Jew” within modernism at large, we must also take into account the second clause in Milly’s assertion: “She seemed to consider the taste of the Jews; and then to dismiss it ” (emphasis mine). Thus, the issue of the difference between Jews and gentiles is addressed and almost simultaneously negated. Woolf reinforces this negation a few lines later when, in the process of describing the philanthropy of Eleanor, she has Milly speak of the “poor” instead of Jews: “Milly smiled,” adding that “Eleanor would always stick up for the poor” (30). Thus, the Jews’ difference is paraliptically transformed into a class distinction, as if the “taste of the Jew” was never in fact worthy of commentary at all, or had never actually existed. Whatever antisemitism may have been evoked by the text is quickly excised. 44 . The letter to Smyth is dated November 1, 1933. The exact date of the Sackville-West letter remains uncertain, although it was composed some- time in late June 1933, perhaps on June 23. See also Woolf’s letter of December 12, 1933, to Quentin Bell, in which she refers to Rothschild as “the richest Jew in Europe” and then focuses her attention specifically on Rothschild’s gems: “We had [Rothschild, and his fiancé, Barbara] the other night; and they brought a brown bag; and out of this they lifted rubies— rubies set in diamonds. And we all crowned ourselves with the Rothschild rubies; worth £300,000” ( Letters 5:258). 45 . Note, for instance, the parallels between Woolf’s transfiguration of Rothschild’s butcherlike flesh into a cut of meat and Joyce’s transformation of a local pork butcher’s “blotchy” fingers into pork sausage in chapter 4 of Ulysses, a transformation witnessed by Bloom, whose carnivorous appe- tite is merged with his sexual lust throughout the scene: “The ferreteyed porkbutcher folded the sausages he had snipped off with blotchy fingers, sausagepink. Sound meat there: like a stallfed heifer” (48). Joyce connects “sausages” and “fingers” first with the word “sausagepink,” which describes both the butcher’s fingers and the sausage itself, and then with “blotchy,” which, phonetically akin to the word “bloody,” turns the butcher’s fingers into the image of a freshly cut, bloodied piece of meat. Moments later, he writes of the young woman standing next to Bloom that she “tendered [the butcher] a coin, smiling broadly, holding her thick wrist out” (ibid.). The description produces parallels between the woman’s “thick” wrists, the butcher’s “sound,” “sausagepink” fingers, and the sausage itself, all of which seem ready to be “snipped” and “wrapped.” In fact, Bloom’s ravenous desire transforms everything around him into food. The text thus perpetuates a stereotypical image of Jewish insatiability, despite its broader philosemitic attitudes toward Jews. And yet, through the metonymic structure of the scene, Joyce also suggests that Bloom’s sexual desire is as “un-Jewish” as his desire for pork, even, ironically, a symptom of his desire not to be Jewish. 230 Notes

For both Joyce and Woolf, such desire can appear to be the primary charac- teristic of the British (or Irish) Jew, whose longing to be assimilated is what inevitably identifies him as unassimilable. 46 . Bacon’s sighting of the “blue lake and the fringe of palm trees” recalls the same kind of colonial fantasies about the exotic desert that we find in Woolf’s 1905 “A Description of the Desert,” her review of Gilbert Watson’s travel narrative, The Voice of the South. 47 . For a useful discussion of the relationship between postcards and the commodification of ethnological types in Europe and America, see Rydell; and Wollaeger, “Woolf, Postcards.” 48 . In a frequently cited passage of Three Guineas, Woolf highlights the influence of foreign tyrannies on “Oxford or Cambridge, in Whitehall or Downing Street,” introducing for a brief moment the subject of Hitler’s mis- treatment of Jews, but only in the most general terms: “abroad the monster has come more openly to the surface. . . . He has widened his scope. He is interfering now with your liberty . . . ; he is making distinctions not merely between the sexes, but between the races. . . . Now you are being shut out, you are being shut up, because you are Jews, because you are democrats, because of race, because of religion. . . . The whole iniquity of dictatorship, whether in Oxford or Cambridge, in Whitehall or Downing Street, against Jews or against women, in England, or in Germany, in Italy or in Spain is now apparent to you” (102–03). 49 . For additional discussion of Woolf’s apparent inattention to the plight of the Jews in Three Guineas, see Erin Carlston, who suggests that although we may find “passing references” to “Jewishness and anti-Semitism . . . [and] the oppression of colonized peoples and peoples of color” in Woolf’s work, she “is lacking the theoretical vocabulary to explore the problem [of racism and antisemitism] further” (150–51). 50 . Woolf herself notes this phenomenon in her diary as she recalls a visit with Bruno Walter, then conductor of the Städtische Oper in Berlin and the Gewandhaus Concerts in Leipzig, and his comments on Hitler: “He is a swarthy, fattish, man; not at all smart. Not at all the ‘great conductor’. He is a little Slav, a little semitic. He is very nearly mad; that is, he can’t get ‘the poison’ as he called it of Hitler out of him. ‘You must not think of the Jews’ he kept on saying ‘You must think of this awful reign of intolerance’” (April 29, 1933; Diary 4:153). 51 . Woolf’s awareness of the plight of Jewish refugees and, by extension, their presence as “newsworthy” subject matter, figures most explicitly in her 1941 work, Between the Acts, during a performance of Miss La Trobe’s famous pageant play. The action of the play has momentarily paused as the actors change their costumes. In the course of this change, anonymous members of the audience begin discussing news items covered by the morning papers, shifting rapidly from a story about dogs to the latest excursion by the royal family: “Did you see it in the papers—the case about the Dogs? . . . And Queen Mary and the Duke of Windsor on the south coast? . . . D’you believe what’s in the papers?” (121). A second voice than interrupts: “And what about the Notes 231

Jews? The refugees . . . the Jews . . . People like ourselves, beginning life again.” The dialogue then becomes more disjointed, a gesture by which Woolf, in her typical fashion, provides the political connotations of the allusion: “But its always been the same. . . . My old mother, who’s over eighty, can remember . . . Yes, she still reads without glasses [ . . . ] Now they’re coming . . . No, that’s nothing. . . . I’d make it penal, leaving litter.” In short, the casual manner in which the text leaps from the refugees back to the subject of the dogs not only suggests that the issues are equivalent in their seriousness, but also metaleptically turns Jews into dogs, a technique that we have seen similarly employed by Djuna Barnes in Nightwood as her narrator, Dr. Matthew O’Connor, transforms the figure of disobedient dogs into disobedient men (see ch. 3, note 26). Whether or not the text is saying that Jews are equivalent to dogs, or merely asserting that they are now being treated as dogs, is not immediately obvious. What is clear is that the predicament of the Jews is correlated directly with the rise of fascism, a link suggested by a brief and unattributed conversation about dictators that precedes Woolf’s allusion to Jews and dogs: “No, I don’t go by politicians. I’ve a friend who’s been to Russia. He says . . . And my daughter, just back from Rome, she says the common people, in the cafés, hate Dictators” (ibid.). This correlation is reinforced by Miss La Trobe’s role in the text as director/dictator of the play’s action, a position that Woolf employs to critique fascist authority overall (for additional discussion of fascism and La Trobe, see Esty, ch. 2). Significantly, the presence of the ellipses in the dialogue I quoted above emphasizes the impersonal nature of the exchange, as if the voices speaking belong to no one in particular, but rather an anonymous public body, perhaps that of the consumer of the news and, less literally, even of the newspaper itself—in short, a body that represents public awareness of the plight of the Jews or, to quote Wyndham Lewis, the fact that the “Jews are news” ( The Jews, Are They Human? 7). Other references to refugees can be found in Woolf’s diaries. See, for instance, her entries of November 14, 1938 and February 28, 1939: “Then the refugees— They clamour” and “Innumerable refugees to add to the tangle. There—I’ve recorded them when I said I wouldn’t. Harold [Woolf] upstairs talking, about refugees, to L. I go in, out of courtesy” ( Diary 5:186, 205). 52 . For further analysis of the work of Mass Observation, see Kushner’s We Europeans.

Interlude II Civil Antisemitism and the Jewish Refugee Crisis of the 1930s

1 . Criticism of Britain’s efforts to assist the refugees increased after the Anschluss, an episode that radically accelerated the number of refugees fleeing from Reich-occupied territories into England. 2 . See Woolf’s diary of May 11, 1932, Diary 4:100. In later years, she consults The Times for reports of the war and Hitler’s advances. See, for instance, her entries of September 13 and 30, 1938, Diary 5:169, 176. 232 Notes

3 . Here we might consider, in particular, the Public Order Act of 1936, which was designed to regulate paramilitary activity, and more broadly, perceived threats to public order. For analysis of the act, see John Stevenson, “The BUF, the Metropolitan Police and Public Order.” 4 . These convictions are reinforced by a broad affinity for Germany felt by many among the British public, an affinity bolstered by popular condemnation of the Versailles treaty, and by a widespread belief that the treaty’s inequitable terms gave credence not only to Germany’s claims to its former territories, but also to its right to rearm. 5 . Such outbreaks of antisemitism are at times unwittingly presented by the paper’s reporters as justifiable. For instance, elaborating on the demarca- tion of Jewish-owned shops in Berlin, the writer of the article published on June 20, 1938, which I cite in the text, asserts that “[a] drive to-day along the Kurfürstendamm gives a surprising idea of the extent to which Jews still control the ‘luxury’ retail trade in Berlin. The windows of almost every third shop bore the word Jude (Jew) or in the case of many fashion shops, ‘Jewess’” (13). 6 . As I note in my introduction, such logic is in keeping with what critics such as Cheyette and Kushner describe as an “interactionist model of racial hatred,” which attributes increases in antisemitism to Jewish involvement in political events and crises (Cheyette, “Hilaire Belloc” 134; Kushner, Persistence 5–6). 7 . Tanganyika was transferred to Britain by a League of Nations mandate in 1919. 8 . On one level, such a characterization would seem positive in nature, indicating a belief that distinctions between Jews and the English might be bridge- able. However, politically, the representation is complicated by the fact that, at this point in time, British officials generally assert that Palestine has been overpopulated by refugees, and thus is no longer suitable as a site for relocation. For additional analysis of the figuration of Palestine in British politics and literature, see Bar-Yosef, The Holy Land. 9 . Similarly underscoring the latent economic potential of the refugees, a con- tributor to the “Letters to the Editor” section of The Times suggests using “vast unoccupied stretches of cultivable land” in the Argentine Republic for relocation: “The most helpful centres for the settlement of a large Jewish population are in South America, where they would find themselves under the sympathetic eye of the United States. . . . Backed by the wealth of the Jewish communities in North America and in other countries, including our own, . . . there is no reason why men and women of [the Jewish race] should not achieve success with hands willing to work and keen brains. . . . There are possibilities, too, in Uruguay and in Paraguay, which lack inhabitants to develop their resources” (King-Farlow 17). 10 . Other areas suggested for possible settlement included Alaska and, on the African continent, Angola, Madagascar, and North-Eastern Rhodesia. 11 . Salter’s proposal, whereby each government would have contributed territory to assist the refugees, and overseen the resettlement process within its Notes 233

territories “through to success,” is one that might have garnered Wyndham Lewis’s approval. In 1936, in Left Wings Over Europe, Lewis argues vehemently against Europe’s movement toward the “ internationalized, non- Sovereign State,” the dismantling of the nation by legislative bodies such as the League of Nations, and what he characterizes as the rise of a politics of “indivisibility,” in short, a form of pre-E.U. unification (23; emphasis Lewis). Britain, he asserts, “stands for an international conscience,” and wants to impose an international form of governance on Germany (ibid.). He then characterizes the present struggle between Germany and Britain as a conflict between “internationalists and nationalists—between those who are in favor of centralized power, and those who are not” (24), and later, as a conflict between private affairs—“personal business”—and corporate control.

5 Wyndham Lewis: Jewish Antisemites and Tolerant Britons in the Era of the Jewish Refugee

1 . For instance, describing Lewis’s 1937 novel, The Revenge for Love, Judy Suh writes: “[w]hile [the novel’s] defensive appraisal of fascism hesitates to con- cede to its warmongering, it nonetheless creates an active sympathy with Nazi violence and with a distinctly fascist sexual politics” (18). Later, she shows how “fascism emerges [in the novel] as . . . a way to correct the deception of liberal and communist politics” (25). However, she also criticizes readings that treat Lewis, in fully absolutist terms, “either as a fascist sympathizer or as a reformed anti-fascist” (16). For an overview of current critical approaches to fascism in Lewis’s work, see Ivan Phillips’s “In His Bad Books.” 2 . According to Tony Kushner “[f]rom Kristallnacht to the start of the war, more then 40 percent of the Jews who escaped Nazi-controlled Europe found refuge in Britain” ( Holocaust 51). Kushner attributes Britain’s failure to reconsider its earlier immigration policies, in particular those passed in 1919 and as late as 1925, to the dominance of liberalism and to a widespread ambivalence about Jews that pervaded the country at large. Extending Kushner’s arguments, Louise London argues that domestic economic and social concerns dissuaded public officials from implementing humanitarian efforts to assist the Jews; national self-interest took precedence over the refugees’ plight. 3 . See David Ayers, ch. 7, and Suh, ch. 1, for additional discussion of Lewis’s treatment of Jews in works such as The Apes and The Revenge for Love. 4 . Elsewhere, Archie’s voice is also described as a detonator (513). 5 . For specific analyses of Lewis’s invocations of racist discourse, especially against American blacks, see Carey, ch. 9. 6 . Analyzing the nature of prejudice in The Apes, Christopher Lane remarks that “[r]ather than offering what Lewis called a ‘moralist[’s]’ critique of 234 Notes

prejudice, . . . The Apes . . . satirizes how phobias with widespread political effects often stem from ridiculous notions. But while moralists, in Lewis’s words, have ‘a strange propensity to side with the stronger and more ortho- dox party: they cannot even be depended on not to betray what is ostensibly their own client,’ his own brand of satire is iconoclastic. Highlighting the etiology of prejudice in a twofold joke . . . Lewis distinguishes between pho- bic objects and the fantasies that give them a strange patina of credibility, thereby forcing us to rethink conventional (egoic) patterns of identification” (790–91). 7 . For Lewis’s comments on the importance of sovereign powers, see Left Wings, esp. 270–73. 8 . Hence, Britain’s rapid condemnation of Italy following Mussolini’s incur- sion into Abyssinia in 1935, a condemnation that led to economic sanctions against the Italian government and “the concentration of the British fleet in the Mediterranean” ( Left Wings 194). For more on Lewis’s analysis of Italian deployments, see 164–65. 9 . Elsewhere Lewis asks: “But what is the attitude of the plain, blunt, democratic statesman to this famous ‘Empire’ he is supposed to administer? That, again, is not an easy question. In the eighteenth century, he would have been temperamentally a ‘King’s Man,’ in the nineteenth an ‘Empire builder.’ But ‘we are all socialists to-day,’ as Sir John Simon has said. So to-day he is some sort of ‘socialist,’ and as such, is exceedingly shy of this huge imperialist white elephant which dogs his steps with its embarrassing requirements” (56). He then accuses the British statesman of aligning democracy (“parlia- mentarism”) and bolshevism in order to fight fascism (77). 10 . The argument itself was not uncommon, especially among German fascists, but was typically articulated in more explicit fashion. See, for instance, Jeffrey Herf’s analysis in “The ‘Jewish War’: Goebbels and the Antisemitic Campaigns of the Nazi Propaganda Ministry.” 11 . See, for instance, Left Wings, 258–59. For a more extensive analysis of Arnold’s late nineteenth- and early twentieth-century literary and philo- sophical legacies, see Cheyette, Constructions, esp. chapter 2 . 12 . This is the opposite of Arnold’s contention about Hebraism’s foundational role in contemporary Western society. 13 . Earlier, Lewis describes the Marcionites as “the sort of people you burn ” (253; emphasis Lewis). 14 . We can recall Lewis’s depiction of democratic statesmen as adherents of Old Testament conduct “falling upon their knees before the Arc of the Covenant of the League.” 15 . As Shane Weller writes, Lewis “comes to advocate a federalist world-state as the only solution to both the possibility of war and the dissolution of ‘Western culture,’ that culture being something he no longer sees any reason to defend” (637). In his 1950 autobiography, Rude Assignment, Lewis himself declares that “until the doctrine of the ‘sovereign state’ is repudiated, there must be war” (225). 16 . This curious correlation between antisemites and Jews is exemplified by a conversation between Lewis and Herr Thost, the Nazi’s official envoy in Notes 235

London, with whom Lewis opens the second chapter of The Hitler Cult. Thost has come to “chat” with Lewis about Lewis’s analysis of the “Jewish question” in Hitler, a book that Thost admires but about which he also has reservations (12). “Jew-knowledge,” Thost concludes, is apparently not Lewis’s “strong point” (13). Their exchange continues, with Lewis explain- ing to Thost that “no Englishman would likely to see eye to eye with [the National Socialist Party] about the Jewish question. . . . The anti-Semitic machinery would bore and repel the Englishman. Also, I added that it was of secondary importance, after all. There was nothing new in the so-called ‘Jewish problem.’ It had merely cropped up in more violent form in Germany for the moment, because of the slump” (13). Observing Thost’s somber reaction to his remarks, Lewis then writes: “Herr Thost looked grave. He shook his large, rather wooden (and as a matter of fact somewhat Jewish-looking) head. He was another of those ‘towering jitterbugs’ of which Germany produces a fair number—quite as tall as Putzi Hanfstängl; loosely put together, jerky or ‘jittery,’ about six foot four or five, with a face over-life-size and hands and feet to match. He seemed quite a decent fellow; and if he was partly a Jew, I am sure that he was quite unaware of the fact—he probably would have committed suicide if he found out, and I hope this book never falls into his hands as it might have fatal consequences” (13–14). Here, Lewis not only makes Thost Jewish; by turning Thost into a German “type,” of which “Germany produces a fair number,” he also makes Jewishness common among Germans. Thus, as happens so frequently in antisemitic rhetoric of the period, the antisemite is revealed to be a Jew. But in Lewis’s account of the meeting, Jewishness also appears to pose an actual, rather than imagi- nary, threat to Thost, who is now representative not only of the Nazi Party, but of Germans in general. In short, the antisemite (the “Jew”) is correct to be fearful of his own Jewishness. More crucially, it is Lewis’s book—a narrative about the “Jewish question”—that becomes the vehicle by which the threat might be carried to its “fatal” conclusion. 17 . Critiquing fascism’s “impulse to impress by scale,” he explains that “[a] false impression of strength is conveyed by these arts of the mammoth producer” (Hitler Cult 64). 18 . Lewis similarly describes Goering as “a sheriff in a cowboy film” (6). 19 . As Lewis notes, the newspaper article, the photograph, and the radio guar- antee that the fascist image remains in continuous circulation until what was once clearly an imitation, even a caricature, is received by the public as more authentic and powerful than anything the image might have once been seen to evoke (64). Lewis’s depiction of Hitler’s residence in Bavaria suggests the effectiveness of this circulation: “But there was that anchoritic shack in the Bavarian Alps. I pictured this harmless little patriot sitting in his log-cabin and concocting his simple-hearted speeches. And then one day I saw a photograph of a gigantic spa, containing (so I read with dismay) forty bedrooms: a vegetarian spa, it is true, but a different place from the humble shack of Nazi propaganda. Last of all, I heard of the traffic in interviews: that an audience with Herr Hitler costs three thousand pounds for five minutes. Herr Hitler had become an industry” (38). He captures this dual nature of Hitler’s 236 Notes

identity in two separate remarks: “Even to-day,” he writes, “we must take care not to underestimate that machine, simply because it is a machine . A man-eating tiger is after all only a machine: a machine-of-prey” (9; emphasis Lewis). Later, he depicts Hitler as “an emanation of the old may-schlossed, spiky, and bosky landscapes, the feudal valleys of the Oesterreich” (49). 20 . For Lewis’s discussion of Hitler as a “type,” see Hitler Cult 77–78. For further analysis of the links Lewis draws between the body as machine and the body as mass-produced art, see Jessica Burstein’s “Waspish Segments.” 21 . By 1938, the Polish government’s refusal to repatriate thousands of Polish Jews expelled by Germany was a major news story, and had effectively turned Poland into a troubling symbol of the Jewish refugee crisis overall. Press reports focus especially on the plight of Polish Jews in Zbonszyn, which I discuss at greater length in my second interlude. As Fredric Jameson notes in Fables of Aggression, there always “comes to be [in Lewis’s work] a surcharged text, a palimpsest in which what is cancelled and aufgehoben must continue to be visible and readable behind the cancellations that draw their value from it, as in a kind of transgression” (62). In this instance, I would suggest, English obligation to Polish and German Jews is that “surcharged text.” Curiously, in Lewis’s hands, Poland’s failure to help the Jewish refugees alter their habits—for instance, to properly dine—threatens to turn Englishmen into Poles, a people who, incapable of ignoring Jewish behavior, cause the Jews in Poland to “begin wearing two hats instead of one” (The Jews 23; emphasis Lewis). Such failure signals not only the Poles’ lack of “tolerance” for the Jews, their unwillingness to help the Jews assimilate, but also a lack of tolerance on the part of the British—in short, that which “is cancelled and aufgehoben. ” 22 . The status of China’s social, economic, and political relationship with Britain was an ongoing focus of the British press throughout the 1920s and 1930s; this was due to actual trade relations between the two nations, as well as to the curious role China played as Britain, in light of the decline of its empire, attempted to revitalize its power on the international stage. As Edmund Fung, in his work on Sino-British diplomacy, observes, by 1930, “the value of British interests in China, not including Hong Kong” was approximately £244.36 million (4). However, such interests represented a relatively small portion of British investment in the global market. More significant to British officials was the possibility of future economic arrangements with China. Indeed, according to Fung, “China had always had the allure of the potentially limitless demand of its huge population” (4). In other words, by the 1930s, China represented a crucial opportunity for expanding British trade, and hence for reasserting British economic dominance in the global arena. During this same period, Japan’s attacks on China became increasingly aggressive, posing a threat to Britain’s potential investment in East Asia and thus, once again, bringing China to the forefront of the British news. Indeed, Japan’s incursions on Chinese territory repeatedly indicated to the British public that Britain’s power in the region might be largely illusory, or if not an illusion, than at least easily derailed. Given the crucial and highly Notes 237

idealized role that China played in the British imagination as Lewis was writing, it is no surprise that Lewis chose China as an exemplar of tolerance, or more precisely, as a framework with which to shape and define British manners. However, Lewis’s advocacy of a “Chinese” version of tolerance in Britain may also be based on China’s long-standing position as a historically safe haven for Jewish émigrés, a position recognized by Jews and non-Jews alike. Since 1848, Shanghai had been populated by a large community of Jews, especially by Sephardim, Jews of Spanish descent. 23 . As correspondents from The Times frequently note, Shanghai was one of the last ports open to Jewish refugees fleeing from Reich-controlled territories. See, for instance, “Jewish Refugees in Shanghai” (December 24, 1938). Approximately 30,000 Jews immigrated to Shanghai between 1933 and 1941, at which point Japan secured the territory, closing the doors to further immigration. 24 . Thus, in effect, Lewis strangely anticipates Jean-Paul Sartre’s often cited claim that the Jew is an invention of the antisemite. As Lewis notes, “[w]hat was the use of being ‘a peculiar people,’ if no one noticed it or gave a damn?” (24).

Conclusion Conspiring to Be Civil in the Contemporary Moment: The English Defence League

1 . For additional works on rhetorical, cultural, and sociopolitical expressions of hatred, see, in particular, David Theo Goldberg, Simon Goodman, Jane H. Hill, Arun Kundnani, and Pierre-Andre Taguieff, all of whom provide concise overviews of recent methodological approaches to racism, especially as they pertain to analyses of white racism. 2 . As journalist Billy Briggs notes, the EDL’s rise “has been rapid. Since its formation at the start of the summer [2009] the group has organised nearly 20 major protests in Britain’s cities, including London, Birmingham, Manchester, Leeds, Luton, Nottingham, Glasgow and Swansea” (n.p.). The group’s “self-proclaimed leader” is Tommy Robinson, a pseudonym. According to Robinson, the group began in Luton as the “United People of Luton and, after linking up with a Birmingham-based organisation called British Citizens Against Muslim Extremists and another called Casuals United (largely made up of former football hooligans), they realised there was potential for a national movement” (qtd. in Briggs n.p.). In Searchlight Magazine, an anti-fascist and anti-racist publication, Nick Lowles identifies the head of the EDL as Alan Lake, also a pseudonym. 3 . The quotation from Adrian Tudway is from an email to The Guardian on April 27, 2011, cited by Bob Pitt in his web post on Islamophobia Watch. 238 Notes

4 . Elsewhere, Collins describes EDL leader Tommy Robinson as a “skilled rhetorician”; “It is easy to see how, under different circumstances, he might have become a lawyer” (31). 5 . In its overall mission statement, the EDL describes itself as a “human rights organization,” and emphasizes its commitment to diversity by encouraging “support from people of all races, all faiths, all political persuasions, and all lifestyle choices.” This commitment is reiterated by Morrigan Emmaleth and Cassandra Victoria in the Jewish Division’s first press release: “Our EDL units have gays. transgender. Black. [sic] Sikhs. Hindus. Jews and ex-Muslims (apostates). We are professionals of ALL classes!” (qtd. in LutherBlissetts). 6 . According to its website, Jihad Watch was established to bring “public attention to the role that jihad theology and ideology plays in the modern world” (“Why Jihad Watch”). 7 . Throughout this chapter, I maintain the grammar, spelling, and punctuation of web comments and blogs. 8 . From postings by “Dumbledoresarmy” and “golem911,” respectively. 9 . “Jewishness (as opposed to Judaism),” he adds, “contains all the elements of a cult. . . . It is also a racially orientated supremacist ideology. It has even set a list of barbarian rituals that are known as the Zionist practice” (August 15, 2010). 10 . In their mission statement, the EDL declares its commitment to “protect against the unjust assumption that all Muslims are complicit in or somehow responsible for [religiously-inspired intolerance and barbarity that are thriv- ing amongst certain sections of the Muslim population in Britain].” The writers assert that they “also recognise that Muslims themselves are frequently the main victims of some Islamic traditions and practices. The Government should protect the individual human rights of members of British Muslims. It should ensure that they can openly criticise Islamic orthodoxy, challenge Islamic leaders without fear of retribution, receive full equality before the law (including equal rights for Muslim women), and leave Islam if they see fit, without fear of censure.” Works Cited

“500 Jews Leave Vienna for Palestine.” The Times (London), November 2, 1938: 13. Abraham, Julie. “Woman, Remember You: Djuna Barnes and History.” Silence and Power: A Reevaluation of Djuna Barnes. Ed. Mary Lynn Broe. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 1991. 252–70. Alexander, Peter. Leonard and Virginia Woolf: A Literary Partnership. New York: St. Martin’s, 1992. Aliens Act (“Aliens Bill”), 1904. Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 133 (April 25, 1904): cols. 1062–1131. Aliens Act (“Aliens Bill”), 1905. Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 145 (May 2, 1905): cols. 687–768. Aliens Act (“Aliens Bill”), 1905. The Parliamentary Debates (Authorized Edition), Fourth Series, vol. CXLV (May 2, 1905). London: Wyman and Sons, 1905. “Aliens Restriction Bill.” Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fifth Series) vol. 65 (August 14, 1914): cols. 1986–1990. Rev. of Amongst the Aristocracy of the Ghetto: Sketches Drawn from the Life of the New Rich , by A. Raymond and A. Bunin. Jewry Ueber Alles [The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles ] 11 (December 1921): 7. Anglus. “The Jew Conquest of England.” Part I. Jewry Ueber Alles [The Hidden Hand or the Jewish Peril ] 5.1 (January 1924): 11–13. ———. “The Jew Conquest of England.” Part II. Jewry Ueber Alles [ The Hidden Hand or the Jewish Peril ] 5.2 (February 1924): 23–24. “Anti-Jewish Feeling in Poland.” The Times (London), December 5, 1938: 11. “Anti-Semitism.” Jewry Ueber Alles [ The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles ] 10 (November 1920): 1–2. Arnold, Matthew. Culture and Anarchy: An Essay in Political and Social Criticism. London: Murray, 1869. Aschman, George. “Oudtshoorn in the Early Days.” The Jews in South Africa. Ed. Gustav Saron and Louis Hotz. Cape Town: Oxford UP, 1955. 121–37. Atzmon, Gilad. “The Jewish Division.” Gilad Atzmon. August 15, 2010. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . 240 Works Cited

Ayers, David. Wyndham Lewis and Western Man. New York: St. Martin’s, 1992. Balfour, Arthur James. Remarks. “Aliens Bill.” Hansard , House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 145 (May 2, 1905): col. 795. Banister, Joseph, ed. The John Bulletin 1–2 (June 1929). ———. The John Bulletin 2 (September 1929). Bar-Yosef, Eitan. The Holy Land in English Culture, 1799–1917. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2005. Bar-Yosef, Eitan and Nadia Valman. “Introduction: Between the East End and East Africa: Rethinking Images of “the Jew” in Late-Victorian and Edwardian Culture.” In Bar-Yosef and Valman, “ The Jew, ” 1–27. ———, eds. “The Jew” in Late Victorian and Edwardian Culture: Between the East End and East Africa. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Barnes, Djuna. The Antiphon: A Play . London: Faber and Faber, 1958. ———. Guggenheim Application. 1930. Barnes Papers. Special Collections, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. ———. Letter to Emily Coleman. August 10, 1935. TS. Emily Holmes Coleman Papers. Special Collections. University of Delaware Library, Newark, DE. ———. Letter to Emily Coleman. October 30, 1935. TS. Emily Holmes Coleman Papers. ———. Letter to Emily Coleman. March 27, 1938. TS. Emily Holmes Coleman Papers. ———. Letter to Emily Coleman. October 30, 1938. TS. Emily Holmes Coleman Papers. ———. Nightwood. Norfolk, CT.: New Directions, 1937. ———. Nightwood: The Original Version and Related Drafts. Ed. Cheryl Plumb. Normal, IL: Dalkey Archive, 1995. ———. “Surcease in Hurry and Whirl.” 1917. New York. Ed. Alice Barry. Los Angeles: Sun and Moon, 1989. ———. “Vantage Ground.” Collected Poems with Notes Toward the Memoirs. Ed. Phillip Herring and Osias Stutman. Madison, WI: U of Wisconsin P, 2005. 235–42. Bauman, Zygmunt. “Allosemitism: Premodern, Modern, Postmodern.” Modernity, Culture and “the Jew.” Ed. Bryan Cheyette and Laura Marcus. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1998. 143–56. Baxendale, John and Christopher Pawling. Narrating the Thirties: A Decade in the Making, 1930 to the Present. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 1996. Baxter, Charles. “A Self-Consuming Light: Nightwood and the Crisis of Modernism.” Journal of Modern Literature 3 (1974): 1175–87. Beamish, Henry Hamilton. The Jews’ Who’s Who. Israelite Finance. Its Sinister Influence. London: The Judaic Publishing Co., 1920. Bell, Duncan. The Idea of Greater Britain: Empire and the Future of World Order, 1860–1900. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2007. Bentley, Nancy. The Ethnography of Manners: Hawthorne, James, Wharton. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995. Works Cited 241

Berberich, Christine. The Image of the English Gentleman in Twentieth-Century Literature: Englishness and Nostalgia. Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2007. “Berlin Anti-Jewish Campaign.” The Times (London), June 20, 1938: 13. The Bible: Authorized King James Version. Ed. Robert Carroll and Stephen Prickett. 1997. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2008. Billig, Michael. “The Notion of ‘Prejudice’: Some Rhetorical and Ideological Aspects.” Text 8:1–2 (1988): 91–110. Black, Eugene. The Social Politics of Anglo-Jewry 1880–1920. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1988. Blair, Emily. Virginia Woolf and the Nineteenth-Century Domestic Novel. Albany: SUNY P, 2007. Blair, Sara. “Modernism and the Politics of Culture.” The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Ed. Michael Levenson. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1999: 157–73. Boldt, Julius. Trachoma. Trans. J. Herbert Parsons. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1904. Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo. Racism without Racists: Color-Blind Racism and the Persistence of Racial Inequality in the United States. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, 2003. Booth, Charles, ed. Life and Labour of the People in London. 17 vols. London: Macmillan, 1902–1903. Bradshaw, David. “Commentary.” In Woolf, V., Carlyle’s House and Other Sketches, 25–49. ———. “Hyams Place: The Years , the Jews and the British Union of Fascists.” Women Writers of the 1930s: Gender, Politics, and History. Ed. Maroula Joannou. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999. 179–91. ———. “Introduction.” In Woolf, V., Carlyle’s House and Other Sketches, xiii–xxv. Brianstewey. Online forum comment. English Defence League. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Briggs, Billy. “This is England.” Mail Online, January 2, 2010. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. Briggs, Julia. “‘Cut deep and scored thick with meaning’: Frame and Focus in Woolf’s Later Short Stories.” Trespassing Boundaries: Virginia Woolf’s Short Stories. Ed. Kathryn N. Benzel and Ruth Hoberman. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. 175–91. ———. Virginia Woolf: An Inner Life. London: Allen Lane, 2005. Bronner. Stephen Eric. A Rumor about the Jews: Reflections on Antisemitism and the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Zion. New York: St. Martin’s, 2000. Burstein, Jessica. “Waspish Segments: Lewis, Prosthesis, Fascism.” Modernism/ Modernity 4:2 (April 1997): 139–64. Bush, Jonathan. “‘You’re Gonna Miss Me When I’m Gone’: Early Modern Common Law Discourse and the Case of Jews.” Wisconsin Law Review 5 (1993): 1225–85. 242 Works Cited

Carey, John. The Intellectuals and the Masses: Pride and Prejudice among the Literary Intelligentsia, 1880–1939. London: Faber and Faber, 1992. Carlston, Erin. Thinking Fascism: Sapphic Modernism and Fascist Modernity. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 2000. Carré, Jacques, “Introduction.” The Crisis of Courtesy: Studies in the Conduct Book in Britain, 1600–1900. Ed. Carré. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1994. 1–8. Carroll, David. French Literary Fascism: Nationalism, Anti-Semitism, and the Ideology of Culture. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1995. Casualgreen. Online forum comment. UK Freedom Forum. Web. Accessed May 2, 2011. . Cazalet, V. A. Letter. The Times (London), May 6, 1938: 12. Chait, Sandra and Elizabeth Podnieks. “Introduction.” Hayford Hall: Hangovers, Erotics, and Modernist Aesthetics. Ed. Chait and Podnieks. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2005. 1–22. Chamberlain, Joseph. “The True Conception of Empire.” The Fin de Siècle: A Reader in Cultural History, c. 1880–1900. Ed. Sally Ledger and Roger Luckhurst. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. 137–41. Cheyette, Bryan, ed. Between “Race” and Culture: Representations of “the Jew” in English and American Literature. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1996. ———. Constructions of “the Jew” in English Literature and Society: Racial Representations, 1875–1945. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1996. ———. “Hilaire Belloc and the ‘Marconi Scandal’ 1900–1914: A Reassessment of the Interactionist Model of Racial Hatred.” In Kushner and Lunn, 131–42. ———. “Jewish Stereotyping and English Literature 1875–1920: Toward a Political Analysis.” In Kushner and Lunn, 12–32. ———. “Neither Black Nor White: The Figure of ‘the Jew’ in Imperial British Literature.” In Garb and Nochlin, 31–41. ———. “Neither Excuse nor Accuse: T. S. Eliot’s Semitic Discourse.” Modernism/ Modernity 10.3 (2003): 431–37. ———. “The Other Self: Anglo-Jewish Fiction and the Representation of Jews in England, 1875–1905.” The Making of Modern Anglo-Jewry. Ed. David Cesarani. Oxford: Blackwell, 1990. 97–111. Childs, Donald J. “Generating Modernism and New Criticism from Antisemitism: Laura Riding and Robert Graves Read T. S. Eliot’s Early Poetry.” Modernism and Race . Ed. Len Platt. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2011. 77–96. Chiang, Shiao-Yun. “‘Well, I’m a lot of things, but I’m Sure not a Bigot’: Positive Self-Presentation in Confrontational Discourse on Racism.” Discourse and Society 21 (2010): 273–94. Churchill, Winston. “Zionism versus Bolshevism: A Struggle for the Soul of the Jewish People.” Illustrated Sunday Herald, February 8, 1920: 5. “Churchmen and Anti-Semitism.” The Times (London), December 19, 1938: 19. Clarke, John Henry. Preface. England under the Heel of the Jew: a Tale of Two Books. Ed. J. H. Clarke. 1918. London: The Britons, 1921. Clee1970. Online forum comment. UK Freedom Forum. Web. Accessed May 2, 2011. . Cohen, Deborah. “Who Was Who? Race and Jews in Turn-of-the-Century Britain.” The Journal of British Studies 41.4 (October 2002): 460–83. Works Cited 243

Cohn, Norman. Warrant for Genocide: The Myth of the Jewish World Conspiracy and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. New York: Harper and Row, 1966. Coleman, Emily Holmes. Unpublished diaries. September 1932 and November 28, 1932. TS. Emily Holmes Coleman Papers. ———. Letter to Djuna Barnes. August 17, 1935. TS. Barnes Papers. Special Collections, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. Collins, Lauren. “Letter from Luton: England, Their England.” The New Yorker (July 4, 2011): 28–34. Collins, Treacher E. “Introduction.” Trachoma. By J. Boldt. Trans. J. Herbert Parsons. London: Hodder and Stoughton, 1904. xi–lii. ———. Researches into the Anatomy and Pathology of the Eye. London: H. K. Lewis, 1896. Connolly, William. Identity/Difference: Democratic Negotiations of Political Paradox. Minneapolis, MN: U of Minnesota P, 2002. Connor, Steven. “‘I . . . AM. A’: Addressing the Jewish Question in Joyce’s Ulysses. ” In Garb and Nochlin, 219–37. ———. “Virginia Woolf, the Baby and the Bathwater.” In The Years, by Virginia Woolf. London: Vintage, 1992. xi–xxx. Conrad, Joseph. Heart of Darkness. London: Penguin, 1950. “The Conspiracy against the British Empire.” Conspiracy Series A-F. London: Boswell Printing and Publishing Co. 1921. Cooper, Davina and Didi Herman. “Jews and Other Uncertainties: Race, Faith, and English Law.” Legal Studies 19 (1999): 339–66. Copsey, Nigel. Contemporary British Fascism: The British National Party and the Quest for Legitimacy. 2nd ed. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. “Court and Fashion.” Judy, or the London Serio-Comic Journal (September 23, 1896): 770. Crosland, T. W. H. The Fine Old Hebrew Gentlemen . n.p.: T. Werner Laurie, n.d. Cruddas, Jon. “English Defence League is Bigger than the BNP.” The Observer, October 9, 2010: 15. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. Curtin, Michael. “A Question of Manners: Status and Gender in Etiquette and Courtesy.” The Journal of Modern History 57.3 (September 1985): 395–423. Darwin, John. “Civility and Empire.” Civil Histories: Essays Presented to Sir Keith Thomas. Ed. Peter Burke, Brian Harrison, and Paul Slack. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2000. 321–36. Davies, Alan. “The Keegstra Affair.” Antisemitism in Canada: History and Interpretation. Ed. Davies. Waterloo, Ontario: Wilfrid Laurier UP, 1992. 227–47. Davison, Carol. Anti-Semitism and British Gothic Literature. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2004. Davison, Neil R. James Joyce, Ulysses, and the Construction of Jewish Identity: Culture, Biography, and “the Jew” in Modernist Europe. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1996. Dearborn, Mary. Mistress of Modernism: The Life of Peggy Guggenheim. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 2004. “The Decline of Hatred.” Scribner’s Magazine 29.2 (February 1901): 249–52. 244 Works Cited

Desidude. Online forum comment. Jihad Watch. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . DiBattista, Maria. “Virginia Woolf and the Language of Authorship.” In Roe and Sellers, 127–45. Dick, Susan. Notes on “The Duchess and the Jeweller.” The Complete Shorter Fiction of Virginia Woolf. Ed. Dick. 1985. New York: Harcourt, 1989. 308–09. Dickens, Charles. Oliver Twist. Ed. Kathleen Tillotson. 1838. Oxford: Clarendon, 1966. Dilke, Sir Charles. Remarks. “Aliens Bill.” Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 145 (May 2, 1905): col. 698. Dubino, Jeanne, ed. Virginia Woolf and the Literary Marketplace. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2010. Duckworth, George. “Jewellers, Gold and Silver Smiths.” Life and Labour of the People in London. Ed. Charles Booth. Ser. 2, vol. 2, part 1. London: Macmillan, 1895. 7–24. Dumbledoresarmy. Online forum comment. Jihad Watch. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Duncan, Ian. “Wild England: George Borrow’s Nomadology.” Victorian Studies 41.3 (Spring 1998): 381–403. Durham, Martin. Women and Fascism. London: Routledge, 1998. “EDL Forms Jewish Division.” Jihad Watch. July 18, 2010. Web. Accessed December 1, 2011. . Elgot, Jessica. “EDL dismisses Jewish Arm as Too Extreme.” The Jewish Chronicle Online, February 25, 2011. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. Elias, Norbert. The Civilizing Process. 3 vols. Trans. Edmund Jephcott. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1994. Eliot, T. S. “Gerontion.” The Waste Land and Other Writings. New York: Modern Library, 2002. 22–24. ———. “Sweeney Among the Nightingales.” The Waste Land and Other Writings. New York: Modern Library, 2002. 36–37. Ellis, Sarah Stickney. Women of England: Their Social Duties, and Domestic Habits. London: Fisher, Son, and Co., 1839. Emily Holmes Coleman Papers. Morris Library Special Collections. University of Delaware, Newark, DE. Englander, David. “Booth’s Jews: The Presentation of Jews and Judaism in Life and Labour of the People in London .” Retrieved Riches: Social Investigation in Britain 1840–1914. Ed. Englander and Rosemary O’Day. Aldershot, Hants, UK: Scolar, 1995. 289–322. Englander, David and Rosemary O’Day. “Introduction.” Charles Booth’s Inquiry: Life and Labour of the People of London Reconsidered. Ed. Englander and O’Day. London: Hambledon, 1993. 3–24. ———. “Introduction.” Retrieved Riches: Social Investigation in Britain 1840–1914. Aldershot, Hants, UK: Scolar, 1995. 1–48. English Defence League Jewish Division. Facebook . Web. Accessed May 3, 2011. The English gentlewoman: a practical journal for ladies on their entrance into society. London: James Hogg and Sons, 1861. Works Cited 245

Esty, Jed. A Shrinking Island: Modernism and National Culture in England. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2004. “Etiquette for Trippers.” Judy, or the London Serio-Comic Journal (August 1, 1894): 51. Evans-Gordon, William. “Aliens Bill.” Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 145 (May 2, 1905): cols. 707-722. ———. “Aliens Bill.” Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 133 (April 25, 1904): col. 1089. ———. The Alien Immigrant. London: William Heinemann, 1903. ———. “Aliens in England: The Immigrant Problem.” Supplement. “The Alien in England: Scenes of the Foreign Invasion of the East End.” Illustrated London News 3393 (April 30, 1904): 654–55. Fadiman, Clifton. Letter to Djuna Barnes. July 25, 1935. TS. Barnes Papers. Special Collections, University of Maryland, College Park, MD. “Fascist March in London.” The Times (London), July 18, 1933: 21. Faltejskova, Monika. Djuna Barnes, T. S. Eliot and the Gender Dynamics of Modernism: Tracing Nightwood. New York: Routledge, 2010. Feinstein, Amy. “Goy Interrupted: Mina Loy’s Unfinished Novel and Mongrel Jewish Fiction.” Modern Fiction Studies 51.2 (Summer 2005): 335–53. Feldman, David. Englishmen and Jews: Social Relations and Political Culture 1840–1914. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 1994. Felman, Shoshana. “Education and Crisis, Or the Vicissitudes of Teaching.” Testimony: Crises of Witnessing in Literature, Psychoanalysis, and History. Ed. Felman and Dori Laub. New York: Routledge, 1990. 1–56. ———. “The Return of the Voice: Claude Lanzmann’s Shoah. ” Testimony: Crises of Witnessing in Literature, Psychoanalysis, and History. Ed. Felman and Dori Laub. New York: Routledge, 1990. 204–83. Field, Andrew. Djuna: The Formidable Miss Barnes . Austin, TX: University of Texas P, 1985. Field, Geoffrey G. “Anti-Semitism with the Boots Off: Recent Research on England.” The Weiner Library Bulletin (1983): 25–46. “Fight at Fascist Meeting.” The Times (London), 25 October 1932: 16. Fishberg, Maurice. The Jews: A Study of Race and Environment . The Contemporary Science Series. Ed. Havelock Ellis. London and Felling-on- Tyne, New York: The Walter Scott Publishing, Co., 1911. Fitzpatrick, Peter. “Racism and the Innocence of Law.” Journal of Law and Society 14.1 (Spring 1987): 119–32. Fraser, John Foster. The Conquering Jew. London: Cassell, 1915. Fraser, Nancy. “Transnationalizing the Public Sphere: On the Legitimacy and Efficacy of Public Opinion in a Post-Westphalian World.” Identities, Affiliations, and Alliances . Ed. Seyla Benhabib, Ian Shapiro, and Danilo Petranovic. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. 45–66. Freedman, Jonathan. “Coming Out of the Jewish Closet with Marcel Proust.” Queer Theory and the Jewish Question. Ed. Daniel Boyarin, Daniel Itzkovitz, and Ann Pellegrini. New York: Columbia UP, 2003. 334–64. ———. The Temple of Culture: Assimilation and Anti-Semitism in Literary Anglo-America. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2002. 246 Works Cited

Fried, Albert and Richard Elman, eds. Charles Booth’s London: A Portrait of the Poor at the Turn of the Century, Drawn from His “Life and labour of the people in London.” New York: Pantheon, 1968. Froula, Christine. Virginia Woolf and the Bloomsbury Avant-Garde: War, Civilization, Modernity. New York, Columbia UP, 2005. Fung, Edmund. The Diplomacy of Imperial Retreat: Britain’s South China Policy, 1924–1931. New York: Oxford UP, 1991. Garb, Tamar. “Introduction: Modernity, Identity, Textuality.” In Garb and Nochlin, 20–30. Garb, Tamar and Linda Nochlin, eds. The Jew in the Text: Modernity and the Construction of Identity. London: Thames and Hudson, 1995. Garrard, John. The English and Immigration 1880–1910. London: Oxford UP, 1971. Gerstenberger, Donna. “Modern (Post) Modern: Djuna Barnes Among the Others.” The Review of Contemporary Literature 13.3 (Fall 1993): 33–40. ———. “The Radical Narrative of Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood. ” Breaking the Sequence: Women’s Experimental Fiction . Ed. Ellen G. Friedman and Miriam Fuchs. Princeton: Princeton UP, 1989. 129–39. Gilman, Sander. Jewish Self-Hatred: Anti-Semitism and the Hidden Language of the Jews. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 1986. ———. The Jew’s Body. New York: Routledge, 1991. ———. Love + Marriage = Death and Other Essays on Representing Difference. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1998. Goldberg, David Theo. Racial Subjects. Writing on Race in America. London: Routledge, 1997. ———. The Threat of Race: Reflections on Racial Neoliberalism. London: Wiley-Blackwell, 2008. Goldman, Jane. The Feminist Aesthetics of Virginia Woolf: Modernism, Post- Impressionism, and the Politics of the Visual. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1998. golem911. Online forum comment. UK Freedom Forum. Web. Accessed May 2, 2011. . Good society: a complete manual of manners. London: Routledge, 1869. Goodlad, Lauren M. E. Victorian Literature and the Victorian State: Character and Governance in a Liberal Society. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins UP, 2003. Goodman, Simon. “‘It’s Not Racist To Impose Limits on Immigration’: Constructing the Boundaries of Racism in the Asylum and Immigration Debate.” Critical Approaches to Discourse Analysis Across Disciplines (CADAAD) 4.1 (2010): 1–17. Goody, Alex. Modernist Articulations: A Cultural Study of Djuna Barnes, Mina Loy, and Gertrude Stein. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2007. Gray, Todd. Blackshirts in Devon. Exeter, UK: Mint, 2006. GrimsbyEDL. Online forum comment. English Defence League . Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Gualtieri, Elena. “Three Guineas and the Photograph: The Art of Propaganda.” Women Writers of the 1930s: Gender, Politics, and History. Ed. Maroula Joannou. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999. 165–78. Works Cited 247

Guggenheim, Peggy. Out of this Century: The Informal Memoirs of Peggy Guggenheim . New York: The Dial Press, 1946. Gutiérrez-Jones, Carl. Critical Race Narratives: A Study of Race, Rhetoric, and Injury. New York: New York UP, 2001. The habits of good society: a handbook of etiquette for ladies and gentlemen. With thoughts, hints, and anecdotes concerning social observances; nice points of taste and good manners; and the art of making one’s-self agreeable. The whole interspersed with humorous illustrations of social predicaments; remarks on the history and changes of fashion; and the differences of English and continental etiquette . London: James Hogg and Sons, 1859. A Handbook for Anti-Socialists. London: Boswell Printing and Publishing, n.d. Hanfstaengl, Ernst. Unheard Witness. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott, 1957. Hanrahan, Mairead. “Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood: The Cruci-Fiction of the Jew.” Paragraph: The Journal of the Modern Critical Theory Group 24.1 (March 2001): 32–49. Harris, Jose. “Introduction: Civil Society in British History: Paradigm or Peculiarity?” Civil Society in British History: Ideas, Identities, Institutions. Ed. Harris. New York: Oxford UP, 2003. 1–12. Hart, Robert. The Sacrifice. London: Boswell Printing and Publishing, 1925. Hawk64. Online forum comment. English Defence League. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Hegeman, Susan. “Franz Boas and Professional Anthropology: On Mapping the Borders of the ‘Modern.’” Victorian Studies 41.3 (Spring 1998): 455–83. “Help for the Refugees” The Times (London), July 16, 1938: 12. “Helping Jewish Refugees.” The Times (London), November 21, 1938: 18. Herf, Jeffrey. “The ‘Jewish War’: Goebbels and the Antisemitic Campaigns of the Nazi Propaganda Ministry.” Holocaust and Genocide Studies 19.1 (2005): 51–80. Herman, Didi. “‘An Unfortunate Coincidence’: Jews and Jewishness in Twentieth- Century English Judicial Discourse.” Journal of Law and Society 33.2 (June 2006): 277–301. Herring, Phillip. Djuna: The Life and Work of Djuna Barnes . New York: Penguin, 1995. Hewitt, Andrew. Fascist Modernism: Aesthetics, Politics, and the Avant-Garde. Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1993. Hill, Jane H. The Everyday Language of White Racism. Oxford: Wiley- Blackwell, 2008. “Hints on the Management of Children.” Judy, or the London Serio-Comic Journal (April 13, 1892): 176. “Hints to Skaters on Etiquette and Deportment.” Punch (February 16, 1895): 73. Hird, Frank. The Cry of the Children: An Exposure of Certain British Industries in which Children are Iniquitously Employed . 2nd ed. London: James Bowden, 1898. Hirschfield, Claire. “The British Left and the ‘Jewish Conspiracy’: A Case Study of Modern Antisemitism.” Jewish Social Studies 43.2 (Spring 1981): 95–112. 248 Works Cited

Hobson, J. A. The War in South Africa: Its Causes and Effects. London: James Nisbet, 1900. Hollis, Catherine. “No Marriage in Heaven: Editorial Resurrection in Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood. ” Text 13 (2000): 233–49. Holmes, Colin. Anti-Semitism in British Society, 1876–1939. New York: Holmes and Meier, 1979. Household truths for working men. London: Jarrold and Sons, 1800. “The Human Side of Germany’s Nazi Chancellor: Hitler the Man.” The Illustrated London News, March 11, 1933: 345. “Incorporated Austria.” The Times (London), March 18, 1938: 15. Jameson, Fredric. Fables of Aggression: Wyndham Lewis, the Modernist as Fascist. Berkeley: U of California P, 1979. Jasper, William F. “Fact and Fiction: Sifting Reality from Alarmist Rumors.” New American , October 31, 1994. Web. Accessed April 5, 2010. “Jewish Refugees in Shanghai.” The Times (London), December 24, 1938: 9. Jewry Ueber Alles [The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles ] 11 (December 1920): 11. Jewry Ueber Alles 3 (April 1921): 1 “Jews Confess themselves the Cause of Anti-semitism.” Jewry Ueber Alles [The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles ] 10 (November 1920). “Jews on Jews.” Jewry Ueber Alles [The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles ] 11 (December 1920): 5. Johnson, James William. RCAI , vol. 2: Minutes of Evidence (July 28, 1902). Joyce, James. Ulysses. 1922. New York: Random House, 1986. Julius, Anthony. T. S. Eliot, Anti-Semitism, and Literary Form . Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1995. ———. Trials of the Diaspora: A History of Anti-Semitism in England. Oxford: Oxford UP, 2010. Kaufman, Heidi. English Origins, Jewish Discourse, and the Nineteenth- Century British Novel: Reflections on a Nested Nation. University Park, PA: Penn State UP, 2009. Kaivola, Karen. “The ‘beast turning human’: Constructions of the ‘Primitive’ in Nightwood. ” The Review of Contemporary Fiction 13.3 (Fall 1993): 172–85. Kenner, Hugh. “Eliot’s Unfit Reader.” Rev. of T. S. Eliot, Anti-Semitism, and Literary Form, by Anthony Julius. National Review, Sept. 30, 1996: 62–63. Kenworthy, Joseph. Comments. “Moneylenders Bill.” Hansard, House of Commons Deb (Fifth Series) vol. 203 (March 4, 1927): cols. 727–92. Kertzer, David. The Pope Against the Jews: The Vatican’s Role in the Rise of Modern Anti-Semitism. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 2001. Kime Scott, Bonnie. Refiguring Modernism, Vol. 1: The Women of 1928. Bloomington, IN: Indiana UP, 1995. ———. Refiguring Modernism, Vol. 2: Postmodern Feminist Readings of Woolf, West, and Barnes . Bloomington, IN: Indiana UP, 1995. King-Farlow, Sidney. “Vacant Lands for Settlers.” Letter. The Times (London), December 13, 1938. Works Cited 249

Krueger Henderson, Kate. “Fashioning Anti-Semitism: Virginia Woolf’s ‘The Duchess and the Jeweller’ and the Readers of Harper’s Bazaar. ” Journal of the Short Story in English 50 (Spring 2008): 49–65. Kundnani, Arun. The End of Tolerance: Racism in 21st Century Britain. London: Pluto, 2007. Kushner, Tony. “Beyond the Pale?: British Reactions to Nazi Anti-Semitism, 1933–1939.” Immigrants and Minorities 8.1 (1989): 143–60. ———. The Holocaust and the Liberal Imagination: A Social and Cultural History . Oxford: Wiley Blackwell, 1994. ———. The Persistence of Prejudice: Antisemitism in British Society During the Second World War. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1989. ———. We Europeans?: Mass-Observation, “Race” and British Identity in the Twentieth Century. Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2004. Kushner, Tony and Kenneth Lunn, eds. Traditions of Intolerance: Historical Perspectives on Fascism and Race Discourse in British Society. Manchester: Manchester UP, 1989. Kushner, Tony and Nadia Valman, eds. Remembering Cable Street: Fascism and Anti-Fascism in British Society. London: Vallentine Mitchell, 2000. ———. Philosemitism, Antisemitism and “the Jews”: Perspectives from the Middle Ages to the Twentieth Century. Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2004. Landa, M. J. The Alien Problem and Its Remedy. London: P. S. King and Son, 1911. Lane, Lieut.-Col. A. H. The Alien Menace: A Statement of the Case. 3rd revised and enlarged ed. London: Boswell Printing and Publishing, Co., 1932. Lane, Christopher. “The Unrest Cure According to Lawrence, Saki, and Lewis.” Modernism/Modernity 11:4 (November 2004): 769–96. Langmuir, Gavin. “Intolerance and Tolerance: Only One ‘One and Only’ God or More.” In Kushner and Valman, Philosemitism, Antisemitism and “the Jews,” 17–30. Lassner, Phyllis. “‘The Milk of Our Mother’s Kindness Has Ceased to Flow’: Virginia Woolf, Stevie Smith, and the Representation of the Jew.” In Cheyette, Between “Race” and Culture, 129–44. Lassner, Phyllis and Lara Trubowitz, eds. Antisemitism and Philosemitism in the Twentieth- and Twenty-First Centuries: Representing Jews, Jewishness, and Modern Culture. Newark, DE: U of Delaware P, 2008. Latham, Sean. Am I a Snob?: Modernism and the Novel. Ithaca: Cornell UP, 2003. Lawrence, D. H. The Fox, The Captain’s Doll, The Ladybird. New York: Penguin, 1994. Lawson, Harry. Remarks. “Aliens Bill.” Hansard , House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 145 (May 2, 1905): col. 734–35, 737. Leaska, Mitchell. Granite and Rainbow: The Life of Virginia Woolf. New York: Farrar, Straus, Giroux, 1998. Lebzelter, Gisela C. Political Anti-Semitism in England, 1918–1939. New York: Holmes and Meier, 1978. Lee, Hermione. Virginia Woolf. New York: Alfred A. Knopf, 1997. 250 Works Cited

Lee, Martha F. “Nesta Webster: The Voice of Conspiracy.” Journal of Women’s History 17.3 (Fall 2005): 81–104. Leick, Karen. “Virginia Woolf and Gertrude Stein: Commerce, Bestsellers, and the Jew.” In Dubino, 121–33. Lessing, Doris. “Foreword.” In Woolf, V., Carlyle’s House and Other Sketches, vii–xii. “Letter to the Editor.” Jewry Ueber Alles [The British Guardian ] 6 (February 13, 1925): 48. Levenson, Michael. “Introduction.” The Cambridge Companion to Modernism. Ed. Levenson. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1999. 1–8. Levi, Neil. “‘See that Straw? That’s a Straw’: Anti-Semitism and Narrative Form in Ulysses. ” Modernism/Modernity 9.3 (September 2002): 375–88. Levinas, Emmanuel. Existence and Existents. Trans. Alphonso Lingus. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff, 1978. Levine, Gary. The Merchant of Modernism: The Economic Jews in Anglo- American Literature, 1864–1939. New York: Routledge, 2003. Lewis, Wyndham. The Apes of God. London: Arthur, 1930. ———. Hitler. London: Chatto and Windus, 1931. ———. The Hitler Cult . London: Dent, 1939. ———. The Jews, Are They Human? London: Allen and Unwin, 1939. ———. Left Wings Over Europe: or, How to Make a War About Nothing. London: Cape, 1936. ———. Men Without Art. London: Cassell and Co., 1934. ———. The Revenge for Love. London: Cassell, 1937. ———. Rude Assignment: A Narrative of My Career Up-to-Date . London: Hutchinson, 1950. Linehan, Thomas. British Fascism, 1918–1939: Parties, Ideology and Culture. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2000. Linett, Maren Tova. Modernism, Feminism, and Jewishness. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Loewenstein, Andrea Freud. Loathsome Jews and Engulfing Women: Metaphors of Projection in the Works of Wyndham Lewis, Charles Williams, and Graham Greene. New York: New York UP, 1995. ———. “The Protection of Masculinity: Jews as Projective Pawns in the Texts of William Gerhardi and George Orwell.” In Cheyette, Between “Race” and Culture , 144–64. London, Jack. The People of the Abyss. New York: MacMillan, 1903. London, Louise. Whitehall and the Jews, 1933–1948: British Immigration Policy, Jewish Refugees and the Holocaust. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. “Lord Rothschild’s Tribute to Britain.” The Times (London), June 1, 1938: 16. Lowles, Nick. “Puppet Master.” Searchlight Magazine, March 2011. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. Lunn, Kenneth. “Political Anti-Semitism before 1914: Fascism’s Heritage?” British Fascism: Essays on the Radical Right in Inter-War Britain . Ed. Lunn and Richard C. Thurlow. London: Croom Helm, 1980. 20–40. Works Cited 251

LutherBlissetts. “Investigation Unit.” Twitpic . August 14, 2010. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . MDK. “Gilad Atzmon: EDL—The Jewish Division.” Stormfront.org . August 31, 2010. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . MacKay, Marina. Modernism and World War II. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2007. Mackie, Gregory. “The Function of Decorum at the Present Time: Manners, Moral Language, and Modernity in ‘an Oscar Wilde Play.’” Modern Drama 52.2 (Summer 2009): 145–67. Macklin, Graham. Very Deeply Dyed in Black: Sir Oswald Mosley and the Resurrection of British Fascism after 1945. London: I. B. Taurus, 2007. Maglen, Krista. “Importing Trachoma: The Introduction into Britain of American Ideas of an ‘Immigrant Disease,’ 1892–1906.” Immigrants and Minorities 23.1 (2005): 80–99. Magubane, Zine. Bringing the Empire Home: Race, Class, and Gender in Britain and Colonial South Africa . Chicago: U of Chicago P, 2004. Mahihkan. Online forum comment. UK Freedom Forum. Web. Accessed May 2, 2011. . Mandle, William Frederick. Anti-Semitism and the British Union of Fascists. London: Longmans, 1968. Marriott, Jon. The Other Empire: Metropolis, India and Progress in the Colonial Imagination. Manchester: Manchester UP, 2003. Maxwell, Sir Herbert. Remarks. “London County Council (General Powers) Bill.” Hansard, House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 131 (March 10, 1904): col. 820. McClintock, Anne. Imperial Leather: Race, Gender, and Sexuality in the Colonial Contest . London: Routledge, 1995. McCombie, Frank. Rev. of T. S. Eliot, Anti-Semitism, and Literary Form , by Anthony Julius. Notes and Queries 44 (June 1997): 287–91. McKenna, Reginald. Remarks. “Aliens Restriction Bill.” Hansard , House of Commons Deb (Fifth Series) vol. 65 (August 5, 1914): col. 1986. McKible, Adam. The Space and Place of Modernism: The Russian Revolution, Little Magazines, and New York. New York: Routledge, 2002. McNeillie, Andrew. “Bloomsbury.” In Roe and Sellers, 1–28. Memmi, Albert. Racism. Trans. Steve Martinot. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 1999. Medcalf, Stephen. “Eliot and the Punk Aesthetic.” Rev. of T. S. Eliot, Anti- Semitism, and Literary Form , by Anthony Julius. TLS, June 7, 1996: 13. Michell, John. Eccentric Lives and Peculiar Notions. San Diego: Harcourt Brace and Jovanovich, 1984. Miller, Tyrus. Late Modernism: Politics, Fiction, and the Arts Between the World Wars. Berkeley: U of California P, 1999. “Mission Statement.” English Defence League. Web. Accessed November 30, 2011. . 252 Works Cited

Mixing in society: A complete manual of manners. London: G. Routledge and Sons, 1869. Morgan, Marjorie. Manners, Morals and Class in England, 1774–1858 . New York: St. Martin’s, 1994. Mosley, Oswald. My Life. London: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1968. Mufti, Aamir R. Enlightenment in the Colony: The Jewish Question and the Crisis of Postcolonial Culture. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2007. Munich, Adrienne. “Jews and Jewels: A Symbolic Economy on the South African Diamond Mines.” In Bar-Yosef and Valman, “The Jew,” 28–44. Myers, Kristen. Racetalk: Racism Hiding in Plain Sight. Oxford: Rowman and Littlefield, 2005. Nadel, Alan. “Paranoia, Terrorism, and the Fictional Condition of Knowledge.” Contemporary Literature 43.2 (Summer 2002): 406–21. Nadel, Ira. Joyce and the Jews: Culture and Contexts. 2nd ed. Gainesville, FL: UP of Florida, 1996. “The Nazi Boycott of the Jews: Shops and Offices are Taboo.” The Illustrated London News, April 8, 1933: 485–86. Neverow, Vera. “Woolf’s Editorial Self-Censorship and Risk-Taking in Jacob’s Room. ” In Dubino, 57–71. Newman, Tim. “The Sociogenesis of Emotion: A Historical Sociology?” Emotions in Social Life: Critical Themes and Contemporary Issues. Ed. Gillian Bendelow and Simon Johnson Williams. Florence, KY: Routledge, 1997. 61–80. Nicolson, Harold. Diaries and Letters: The War Years 1939–1945. Vol. 2. Ed. Nigel Nicolson. New York: Atheneum, 1967. Nixon, Rob. “The Feather Palace.” Transition 77 (1998): 70–85. Norman, Henry. Remarks. “Aliens Bill.” Hansard , House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 133 (April 25, 1904): col. 1110. North, Michael. Reading 1922: A Return to the Scene of the Modern. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1999. O’Neal, Hank. “Life is Painful, Nasty, and Short—In My Case It Has Only Been Painful and Nasty”: Djuna Barnes, 1978-1981: An Informal Memoir . New York: Paragon House, 1990. Orwell, George. “Marrakech.” George Orwell: A Collection of Essays. Boston: Mariner, 1970. 181–87. Passaro, Vincent. “A Flapping of Scolds: The Literary Establishment Descends on T. S. Eliot.” Harper’s 294 (January 1997): 62–68. Pearson, Karl and Margaret Moul. “The Problem of Alien Immigration into Great Britain, Illustrated by an Examination of Russian and Polish Jewish Children.” Annals of Eugenics: A Journal for the Scientific Study of Racial Problems 1 (1925–1926). Cambridge: Francis Galton Laboratory for National Eugenics, University of London, 1926. 1–128. Pellew, Jill. “The Home Office and the Aliens Act, 1905.” The Historical Review 32.2 (June 1989): 369–85. Phillips, Ivan. “In His Bad Books: Wyndham Lewis and Fascism.” The Journal of Wyndham Lewis Studies 2 (2011): 105-34. Works Cited 253

Pitt, Bob. Web post. “Met’s anti-extremism co-ordinator claims EDL are not extremists, tells Muslims to engage in ‘dialogue’ with them.” Islamophobia Watch. September 2, 2011. Web. Accessed September 25, 2011. . “Plight of Stranded Polish Jews.” The Times (London), December 28, 1938: 12. Plumb, Cheryl. “Introduction” [to “Related Drafts”]. Nightwood: The Original Version and Related Drafts . By Djuna Barnes. Ed. Plumb. Normal, Illinois: Dalkey Archive, 1995. ———. “Revising Nightwood: ‘A Kind of Glee of Despair.’” The Review of Contemporary Fiction 13.3 (Fall 1993): 149–59. Pochoda, Elizabeth. “Style’s Hoax: A Reading of Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood. ” Twentieth-Century Literature 22.2 (May 1976): 179–91. Podnieks, Elizabeth. “‘They sat and roared’: Hayford Hall’s Performance in the Diary of Emily Coleman.” Hayford Hall: Hangovers, Erotics, and Modernist Aesthetics. Ed. Sandra Chait and Elizabeth Podnieks. Carbondale, IL: Southern Illinois UP, 2005. 89–115. The Polite present, or, Child’s manual of good manners. Glasglow: John Reid and Co., 1832. Potted Biographies “Lest We Forget”: a dictionary of anti-national biography. 4th ed. London: Boswell, 1930. Potter, Beatrice. “The Jewish Community.” Labour and Life of the People. 2nd ed. Ed. Charles Booth. Vol. 1: East London, part 3. London: Williams and Norgate, 1889. 564–90. Rpt. in Life and Labour of the People in London. Ed. Booth. Ser. 1, vol. 3, part 1. London: Macmillan, 1892. 166–92. Protocols of the Meetings of the Learned Elders of Zion . Trans. Victor E. Marsden. London: The Britons, 1923. Prydain Fawr. Online forum comment. Irish Nationalism. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Pugh, Martin. “Hurrah for the Blackshirts!”: Fascists and Fascism in Britain between the Wars. London: Jonathan Cape, 2005. Quinn, Ben. “English Democrats Could Become ‘Electorally Credible’ as BNP Decline.” The Guardian Online, September 25, 2011. Web. Accessed October 1, 2011. Radford, Jean. “Late Modernism and the Politics of History.” Women Writers of the 1930s: Gender, Politics, and History. Ed. Maroula Joannou. Edinburgh: Edinburgh UP, 1999. 33–45. Ragussis, Michael. Figures of Conversion: “The Jewish Question” and English National Identity. Durham: Duke UP, 1995. ———. “The ‘Secret’ of English Anti-Semitism: Anglo-Jewish Studies and Victorian Studies.” Victorian Studies 40.2 (Winter 1997): 295–307. Raitt, Suzanne. “Finding a Voice: Virginia Woolf’s Early Novels.” In Roe and Sellers, 29–49. Raymond, A. and A. Bunin. Amongst the Aristocracy of the Ghetto: Sketches Drawn from Life of the New Rich. London: Stanley Paul, n.d. 254 Works Cited

Reizbaum, Marilyn. James Joyce’s Judaic Other . Stanford, CA: Stanford UP, 1999. ———. “Max Nordau and the Generation of Jewish Muscle.” The Image of the Jew in European Liberal Culture 1789–1914. Ed. Bryan Cheyette and Nadia Valman. London: Vallentine Mitchell, 2004. 130–51. Reynier, Christine. Virginia Woolf’s Ethics of the Short Story. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009. Rhys, Jean. Good Morning, Midnight. 1938. New York: Norton, 1986. Rich, Paul. “Imperial Decline and the Resurgence of English National Identity, 1918–1979.” In Kushner and Lunn, 33–52. Ricks, Christopher. T. S. Eliot and Prejudice. London: Faber and Faber, 1988. Robertson, Pat. The New World Order . Dallas: Word Publishing, 1991. Rodríguez, Laura María Lojo. “Contradiction and Ambivalence: Virginia Woolf and the Aesthetic Experience in ‘The Duchess and the Jeweller.’” Journal of English Studies 3 (2001–02): 115–29. Roe, Sue and Susan Sellers, eds. The Cambridge Companion to Virginia Woolf. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 2000. Rose, William. Remarks. rpt. in RCAI , vol. 2: Minutes of Evidence (July 31, 1902). Rosenfeld, Natania. Outsiders Together: Virginia and Leonard Woolf. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2000. Ross, Robert. “The Post-Impressionists at the Grafton: The Twilight of the Idols.” Morning Post, November 7, 1910: 3. Rpt. in Post-Impressionists in England. Ed. J. B. Bullen. London: Routledge, 1988. 100–04. Roy, Anindyo. Civility and Empire: Literature and Culture in British India, 1822–1922. New York: Routledge, 2005. Royal Commission on Alien Immigration (RCAI), vols. 1–2: Minutes of Evidence . London: Wyman and Sons, 1903. Rozmovits, Linda. “‘Now You See ‘Em, Now You Don’t’: Jewish Visibility and the Problem of Citizenship in the British Telecom ‘Beattie’ Campaign.” Media, Culture and Society 22.6 (2000): 707–22. Rupprecht, Caroline. Subject to Delusions: Narcissism, Modernism, Gender. Evanston, IL: Northwestern UP, 2006. Russell, C. and H. S. Lewis. The Jew in London: A Study of the Racial Character and Present-Day Conditions. London: T. Fisher Unwin, 1900. Russell, Lord, of Killowen. Remarks. “Evidence in Criminal Cases Bill.” Hansard, House of Lords Deb. vol. 63 (August 1, 1898): cols. 660–61. Ryan, Mike. Online forum comment. Jihad Watch . Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Rydell, Robert W. “Souvenirs of Imperialism: World’s Fair Postcards.” Delivering Views: Distant Cultures in Early Postcards. Ed. Christraud M. Geary and Virginia-Lee Webb. Washington, DC: Smithsonian, 1998. 47–63. Said, Edward. Orientalism. New York: Vintage, 1979. Salter, Sir Arthur. “The Case of the Refugees.” The Times (London), December 27, 1938: 9. Works Cited 255

Sarker, Sonita. “Locating a Native Englishness in Virginia Woolf’s ‘The London Scene.’” National Women’s Studies Association Journal 13.2 (2001): 1–30. Sartre, Jean-Paul. Anti-Semite and Jew. Trans. George J. Becker. New York: Schocken, 1995. Schaffer, Gavin. Racial Science and British Society, 1930–62. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2008. Schröder, Leena Kore. “Tales of Abjection and Miscegenation: Virginia Woolf’s and Leonard Woolf’s ‘Jewish Stories.’” Twentieth-Century Literature 49.3 (Fall 2003): 298–327. Seshagiri, Urmila. “Modernity’s (Yellow) Peril: Dr. Fu-Manchu and English Race Paranoia.” Cultural Critique 62 (Winter 2006): 162–94. Shandler, Jeffrey. “Keepers of Accounts: The Practice of Inventory in Modern Jewish Life.” Talk presented March 11, 2010. David W. Belin Lecture in American Jewish Affairs. Vol. 17. Ann Arbor, MI: Jean and Samuel Frankel Center for Judaic Studies, U of Michigan P, 2010. 7–46. Sharf, Andrew. The British Press and Jews Under Nazi Rule. London: Oxford UP, 1964. Shaviv, Miriam. “Diaspora Jews Beware: Stay away from Bigots, No Matter how Friendly They Seem.” Haaretz.com, June 29, 2010. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. Shephard, Robert. “Court Factions in Early Modern England.” The Journal of Modern History 64.4 (December 1992): 721–45. Sherman, A. J. Island Refuge: Britain and the Refugee from the Third Reich 1933–1939. 2nd ed. London: Frank Cass, 1994. Sherwood, Yvonne. “Jonah the Jew: The Evolution of a Biblical Character.” In Kushner and Valman, Philosemitism, Antisemitism and “the Jews,” 95–113. Skidelsky, Robert. Sir Oswald Mosley. London: Macmillan, 1975. Smith, Victoria. “A Story Beside(s) Itself: The Language of Loss in Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood. ” PMLA 114.2 (March 1999): 194–206. Snaith, Anna. “Of Fanciers, Footnotes, and Fascism: Virginia Woolf’s Flush. ” Modern Fiction Studies 48.3 (2002): 614–36. Snyder, Carey. “Ethnographic Modernism: Self-Nativizing in The Voyage Out and Beyond.” Woolf Studies Annual 10 (2004): 81–108. Solomos, John and Les Back. “Conceptualizing Racism: Social Theory, Politics and Research.” Racism: Essential Readings. Ed. Ellis Cashmore and James Jennings. London: Sage, 2001. 346–56. Spader, George, and Ian Parsons. A M arriage of True Minds: An Intimate Portrait of Leonard and Virginia Woolf. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977. Spencer, Harold Sherwood. Democracy or Shylocracy. 3rd ed. London: Britons, 1922. Squarepeg. Online forum comment. UK Freedom Forum. Web. Accessed May 2, 2011. . Stevenson, John. “The BUF, the Metropolitan Police and Public Order.” British Fascism: Essays on the Radical Right in Inter-War Britain . Ed. Kenneth Lunn and Richard C. Thurlow. London: Croom Helm, 1980. 135–49. 256 Works Cited

Stone, Dan. “The English Mistery, the BUF, and the Dilemmas of British Fascism.” The Journal of Modern History 75.2 (June 2003): 336–58. ———. Responses to Nazism in Britain, 1933–1939: Before War and Holocaust. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2003. Stratton, Jon. Coming Out Jewish: Constructing Ambivalent Identities . London: Routledge, 2000. Suh, Judy. Fascism and Anti-Fascism in Twentieth-Century British Fiction. New York: Palgrave MacMillan, 2009. “Sunday Night Disturbance.” The Times (London), May 9, 1933: 11. Taguieff, Pierre-André. The Force of Prejudice: On Racism and Its Doubles. Trans. Hassan Melehy. 1987. Minneapolis: U of Minnesota P, 2001. “Tanganyika And The Jews.” The Times (London), November 23, 1938: 13. Ten Years of Tory Government, 1895-1905, Home Affairs: A Handbook for the Use of Liberals. London: The Liberal Publication Department, 1905. Thurlow, Richard C. Fascism in Britain: A History, 1918–1985. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1987. Trevelyan, Charles. Remarks. “The Aliens Bill.” Hansard , House of Commons Deb. (Fourth Series) vol. 133 (April 25, 1904): col. 1077. Trubowitz, Lara. “Acting like an Alien: ‘Civil’ Antisemitism, the Rhetoricized Jew, and Early Twentieth-Century British Immigration Law.” In Bar-Yosef and Valman, “The Jew,” 65–79. ———. “In Search of ‘the Jew’ in Djuna Barnes’s Nightwood: Jewishness, Antisemitism, Structure, and Style.” Modern Fiction Studies 51.2 (Summer 2005): 311–34. ———. “Concealing Leonard’s Nose: Virginia Woolf, Antisemitism, and ‘The Duchess and the Jeweller.’” Twentieth-Century Literature 54.3 (Fall 2008): 273–306. “Two Books on Jews by Jewesses.” Rev. of Dr. Phillips: a Maida Vale idyll, by Julia Frankau, and Reuben Sachs: A Sketch, by Amy Levy. Jewry Ueber Alles [The Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles ] 9 (October 1921): 7. Tyrrell, Dr. Francis. A. C. RCAI, vol. 2: Minutes of Evidence (May 29, 1902): 127–29. Valman, Nadia. “Little Jew Boys Made Good: Immigration, the South African War, and Anglo-Jewish Fiction.” In Bar-Yosef and Valman, “The Jew,” 45–64. Van Dijk, Teun A. Elite Discourse and Racism. London: Sage, 1993. “A Vicious Thing.” The Times (London), July 25, 1938: 9. Walker, William. RCAI, vol. 2: Minutes of Evidence (July 24, 1902): 298. Walkowitz, Judith. City of Dreadful Delight: Narratives of Sexual Danger in Late-Victorian London. London: Virago, 1992. Walkowitz, Rebecca L. Cosmopolitan Style: Modernism Beyond the Nation . New York: Columbia UP, 2006. Waller, Philip. “Altercation Over Civil Society: The Bitter Cry of the Edwardian Middle Classes.” Civil Society in British History: Ideas, Identities, Institutions. Ed. Jose Harris. New York: Oxford UP, 2003. 155–234. Warren, Diane. Djuna Barnes’ Consuming Fictions . Aldershot, Hampshire, UK: Ashgate, 2008. Works Cited 257

Watson, Gilbert. The Voice of the South. London: Hurst and Blackett, 1905. Weber, Thomas. “Anti-Semitism and Philo-Semitism among the British and German Elites: Oxford and Heidelberg before the First World War.” English Historical Review 118.475 (February 2003): 86–119. Webster, Nesta (Julian Sterne). The Secret of the Zodiac . London: Boswell Publishing, 1933. ———. Secret Societies and Subversive Movements. London: Boswell Printing and Publishing: London, 1924. ———. World Revolution: the Plot against Civilization. 6th ed. Edited and brought up-to-date by Anthony Gittens. Chawleigh: Britons Publishing Co., 1971. Weller, Shane. “Nietzsche among the Modernists: The Case of Wyndham Lewis.” Modernism/Modernity 14.4 (November 2007): 625–43. Wellman, David. Portraits of White Racism. 2nd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge UP, 1993. Wetherell, Margaret and Jonathan Potter. Mapping the Language of Racism: Discourse and the Legitimization of Exploitation. New York: Columbia UP, 1992. White, Arnold. The Modern Jew. London: W. Heinemann, 1899. ———. Testimony. RCAI, vol. 2: Minutes of Evidence (April 28, 1902): 15–28. “Why are the Jews Hated?” Pamphlet. London: The Britons, 1936. “Why Jihad Watch?” Jihad Watch. Web. Accessed May 6, 2011. . Wildeblood, Joan, and Peter Brinson. The Polite World: A Guide to English Manners and Deportment from the Thirteenth to the Nineteenth Century. New York: Oxford UP, 1965. Winter, Sarah. “Liberal Pedagogy and the Emergence of Ethnographic Knowledge.” Victorian Studies 41.3 (Spring 1998): 427–54. Wollaeger, Mark. Modernism, Media, and Propaganda: British Narrative from 1900 to 1945. Princeton: Princeton UP, 2006. ———. “Woolf, Postcards, and the Elision of Race: Colonizing Women in The Voyage Out. ” Modernism/Modernity 8.1 (2001): 43–75. Woolf, Leonard. Downhill All the Way: An Autobiography of the Years 1919– 1939. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1967. ———. Sowing: An Autobiography of the Years 1880 to 1904. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1960. ———. “Three Jews.” Two Stories. By Virginia and Leonard Woolf. Richmond, UK: Hogarth, 1917. 5–18. ———. The Wise Virgins. 1914. New Haven, CT: Yale UP, 2007. Woolf, Virginia. Between the Acts. London: Harcourt, 1941. ———. Carlyle’s House and Other Sketches . Ed. David Bradshaw. London: Hesperus, 2003. ———. “A Description of the Desert.” The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Vol. I: 1904-1912. Ed. Andrew McNeillie. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1986. 72–74. 258 Works Cited

———. The Diary of Virginia Woolf. Ed. Anne Olivier Bell and Andrew McNeillie. 5 vols. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1977–1984. ———. “The Duchess and the Jeweller.” 1938. The Complete Shorter Fiction of Virginia Woolf. Ed. Susan Dick. 2nd ed. New York: Harcourt, 1989. 248–53. ———. “The Duchess and the Jeweller.” Unpublished Draft. Manuscript Box [Haunted House, A] [The Duchess and the Jeweller.] Passages in the life of a great jeweller. N.d. TS with author’s ms. corrections. Berg Collection of English and American Literature, New York Public Library, New York. ———. “Mrs. Gaskell.” The Essays of Virginia Woolf, Vol. I: 1904–1912. Ed. Andrew McNeillie. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1986. 340–344. ———. Flush. London: Hogarth, 1933. ———. A Haunted House and Other Stories. Ed. Leonard Woolf. 1944. New York: Harcourt, 2002. ———. “Jews.” In Woolf, V., Carlyle’s House and Other Sketches, 14–15. ———. The Letters of Virginia Woolf. Ed. Nigel Nicolson and Joanne Trautmann. 6 vols. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1975–1980. ———. “Manuscript Notes for the Speech of January 21 1931.” The Pargiters: the Novel-Essay Portion of The Years. Ed. Mitchell A. Leaska. New York: Harvest/Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978. 163–67. ———. “Modern Fiction.” The Common Reader. 1925. New York: Harcourt Brace, 1984. 146–54. ———. “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown.” The Captain’s Death Bed and Other Essays. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1950. 94–119. ———. Mrs. Dalloway. 1925. New York: Harcourt Brace and Co., 1953. ———. A Passionate Apprentice: The Early Journals 1897–1909. Ed. Mitchell A. Leaska. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1990. ———. Roger Fry: A Biography. London: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1940. ———. “A Sketch of the Past.” Moments of Being: A Collection of Autobiographical Writings. Ed. Jeanne Schulkind. 2nd ed. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1985. 64–159. ———. Three Guineas. 1938. New York: Harcourt, 1966. ———. “Thunder at Wembley.” The Captain’s Death Bed and Other Essays. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1950. 223–27. ———. To the Lighthouse. 1927. New York: Harcourt, 1955. ———. The Voyage Out. 1915. New York: Harcourt, 1920. ———. The Years. 1937. New York: Harcourt, 2008. Zangwill, Israel. “Israel.” Blind Children. London: n. p., 1903. Index

Abraham, Julie, 93 Atzmon, Gilad, 188 Act of Settlement (1700), 201n39 , Avery, J. Gould, 217n17 203n9 Ayers, David, 233n3 Action ( see Mosley , Oswald) Aguilar, Grace, 119 Back, Les, 183 Alexander, Peter, 16 Balfour, Arthur James, 26 , 49 , Alien Immigrant, The 198n15 ( see Evans– Gordon, William) Banister, Joseph, 54 , 204n11 Alien Menace, The: A Statement Barnes, Djuna, 118 , 121 , 122 , 151 , of the Case ( see Lane , 179 , 196n25 (see also Decay ; Lt. Col. A. H.) Degeneracy) Aliens Act (1956), 197n5 Antiphon, The, 77 Aliens Acts (1904 and 1905), Christianity, images/motifs of, 8–9 , 25–49 , 197n4 , 197n7 , and, 73 , 78–81 , 210n20 , 197–98n10 , 198n11 , 210–11n21 , 211n23 200n27 , 201n34–35 , 201n38 Devonshire and, 75–77 , 210n18 ( see also Royal Commission on Experiences in Europe and, 75 , Alien Immigration) 207n5 , 208n10 Aliens Order (1953), 197n5 Fascism and, 75–78 , 207–08n8 , Aliens Restriction Bill (1914), 27 208n10 , 209n15 , 209–10n16 , Allosemitism, 12–13 , 15–16 , 210n17–18 195n15 (see also Ambivalence) Guggenheim Application and, Ambivalence (as critical category), 71–72 , 75 , 207n2 12–18 , 57 , 195n15 , 233n2 Hayford Hall and, 75–76 , Amongst the Aristocracy of the 208–09n12 , 209n13 Ghetto (Adolphus and Bunin), Letters ( see Coleman, Emily 58–59 Holmes ; Fadiman, Clifton) Anglo-Boer War ( see Boer War) Nightwood, 5 , 20–22 , 71–75 , Annals of Eugenics, 217n16 79–93 , 118 , 207n2 , 207n7 , Anschluss, 136 , 137 , 231n1 207–08n8 , 210n20 , 210–11n21 , Arnold, Matthew, 159 , 172 , 179 , 211n25 , 211–12n26 , 234n11–12 212n27–30 , 212–13n31 , Aschman, George, 223n21 213n32 , 230–31n51 260 Index

Barnes, Djuna—Continued Bonilla-Silva, Eduardo, 182–83 Nightwood, publishing history of, Booth, Charles, 43 , 105 , 109–10 , and, 71 , 73 , 206–07n1 , 207n4 , 127 , 217–18n19 , 219n30 , 212n29 228n40 “Surcease in Hurry and Whirl,” Booth, William, 105 208n9 Boswell Press (a.k.a. Boswell “Vantage Ground,” 207n6 Publishing Company; Boswell Bar-Yosef, Eitan, 12–13 , 19–20 , 48 , Printing and Publishing), 62 , 104 , 197n3 , 216n14 , 217n18 , 66 , 204n18 , 205–06n23 232n8 Bowen, Elizabeth, 195n10 Bauman, Zygmunt, 7 , 12–13 , 15 , Bradshaw, David, 220n6 , 227n34 , 33 , 194n8 , 195n15 228n42 Baxendale, John, 138 Breivik, Anders Behring, 23 Baxter, Charles, 89 Briggs, Billy, 237n2 Beamish, Henry Hamilton, 201n39 , Briggs, Julia, 115 , 219–20n4 , 203n9 , 205n21 , 221–22n16 220n11 , 221n14 Beaverbrook, Lord (William Brinson, Peter, 99 Maxwell Aitken), 76 British Brothers League (BBL), 25 , Bell, Clive, 49 , 123 41 , 46 , 201n37–38, 201n40 Bell, Duncan, 49 British Diplomacy, 147 , 234n8 , Bell, Julian, 223n22 , 223–24n22 236–37n22 (see also Lewis , Bell, Quentin, 128 , 130 , 228n41 , Wyndham , Internationalism) 229n44 British Fascisti, 120 , 202n4 , 203n8 Bell, Vanessa, 102 , 123 , 128–29 , British Fascists (BF), 66 , 204n18 , 220n7 , 228–29n43 205n23 Benjamin, Walter, 170–71 British Guardian, The (see Jewry Bentley, Nancy, 128 Ueber Alles ) Berberich, Christine, 213–14n3 British National Party (BNP), 184 , Bible, 131 , 158–63 , 195–96n20 , 189–91 234n14 (see also Israelite British Nationality and Status of [biblical] ; Talmud ; Aliens Act, 197n5 Wandering Jew) British Union of Fascists Billig, Michael, 53 , 56–57 , 196n23 , ( see Mosley , Oswald) 202n5 Britons, 25 , 46 , 54 , 56 , 66 , 67 , Bismarck, Otto von (Prince), 114 201n39 , 203n8–9 , 204n11 , Black, Eugene, 197n5 204n18 Blackshirt, The, 202n6 , 223n22 Bronner, Stephen, 205n22 Blair, Emily, 122–23 , 225n27–28 , Buchan, John, 15 , 195–96n20 226n30 Burstein, Jessica, 169 , 236n20 Blair, Sara, 21 Bush, Jonathan, 33 , 199n16–17 Blood libel, 6–7 , 11–12 , 41 Boas, Franz, 218n20 Carey, John, 233n5 Boer War, 29, 120–21, 215n12 , Carlston, Erin, 74 , 207–08n8 , 216n14 230n49 Index 261

Carré, Jacques, 111 , 213n2 early modern court society and, Carroll, David, 65–66 95–97 , 213n1 Case, Janet, 221n13 , 226n29 the state and, 96 , 214n6 Cazalet, V. A., 136–38 Clarke, J. H., 203n9 , 221–22n16 Céline, Louis-Ferdinand, 66 Cohen, Deborah, 105–06 , Censorship, 125 , 134 , 226n33 217n17–18 , 218n20 Chait, Sandra, 209n13 Cohn, Norman, 205n22 Chamberlain, Joseph, 110–11 Coleman, Emily Holmes, 71–76 , Chamberlain, Neville, 216n14 78 , 121 , 206–07n1–2 , 207n6 , Chambrun, Jacques, 117–18 , 122 208–09n12 , 209n15 , 211n25 , Chaplin, Charlie, 168 , 170 , 173 212n27 Cheyette, Bryan, 4 , 12–16 , 119 , Collins, E. Treacher, 37 193n2 , 195n16–17 , 195–96n20 , Collins, Lauren, 184 , 237n4 216n13 , 232n6 , 234n11 Colonialism (see Civility , historical Chiang, Shiao-Yun, 196n23 notions of) Childs, Donald, 193n2 Common law, English, 32–34 Christian Book Club of America, Connolly, William, 17 205n20 Connor, Steven, 193n1 , 228n42 Christianity ( see also Barnes, Conquering Jew, The (John Foster Djuna, Christianity, images/ Fraser), 61 motifs of ; Bible ; Conversion ; Conrad, Joseph, 2–4 , 196n24 Hermeneutics [Christian] ; Conversion, rhetoric of, 6 , 63 , Supersession ; Tolerance ; Woolf, 79–81 , 194n6 , 200n22 , Virginia, Christianity, images/ 221–22n16 motifs of) Cooper, Davina, 27–28 , 32–34 , 41 , interpretations of Jewish scripture 45 , 199n16 , 199n18 and, 13–14 , 162 , 195n16 , Copsey, Nigel, 190–91 195–96n20 , 198–99n16 , Courtesy ( see Civility , historical 210n20 , 218n21 notions of) liberalism and, 14 , 119 Crosland, T. W. H., 205n21 Churchill, Winston, 62 , 205n20 Cruddas, Jon, 184 Civility, historical notions of Cry of the Children, The: An ( see also Etiquette guides ; Exposure of Certain British Lewis, Wyndham, Etiquette ; Industries in which Children Woolf, Virginia, Etiquette) are Iniquitously Employed the bourgeoisie, and, 96 , 102–03 (Frank Hird), 106–09 colonialism and, 111 , 215n11 , Cuddy-Keane, Melba, 77 , 226n30 217n15 , 224–25n26 Curtin, Michael, 96–97 , 214n4–5 courtesy and, 95–96 , 97 , 213–14n3 , 214n4 Daily Mail, The, 46 courtesy versus conduct, historical Darwin, John, 11 , 218n26 notions of, and, 213n2 Davies, Alan, 204–05n19 “courtly rationality” and, 22 , Davies, Margaret Llewelyn, 114 , 96–97 219n3 262 Index

Davison, Carol, 195n16 , 200n22 Englander, David, 105–07 , 110 , Davison, Neil, 3 , 193n1 219n30 , 228n40 Dearborn, Mary, 209n13 English Defence League (EDL), 23 , Decay, 81 , 83–84 , 86–90 , 92 , 116 , 184–91 , 237–38n2–10 211n24 ( see also Degeneracy) Esty, Jed, 108 , 147 , 196n25 , 231n51 Degeneracy, 3 , 25 , 42 , 74 , 211n24 , Ethnography, 2 , 22 , 58–59 , 227–28n39 ( see also Decay) 65–66 , 95 , 104–11 , 127–28 , Deleuze, Gilles, 226n30 131–33 , 217–18n19–20 , Desai, Anita, 4 218n25 , 219n27–30 , 227n37 , Diamond trade, 116 , 120–21 , 227–28n39–41 222–23n19–21 Etiquette guides, 96–97 , 99 DiBattista, Maria, 226n29 ( see also Civility, historical Dick, Susan, 117 , 220n11 notions of ; Lewis, Wyndham, Dickens, Charles, 5 , 220n9 Etiquette ; Woolf, Virginia, Dickinson, Violet, 114 Etiquette) Digby, Sir Kenelm, 200n29 “end of” etiquette and, 95 , Dilke, Sir Charles, 198n10 97–104 , 109 , 214n6 , 215n9 Disease, 2 , 6 , 31 , 35–42 , 48 , 60 , 88 , middle class and, 97 , 213–14n3 , 168 , 199–200n21, 200–01n33 , 214n4–5 212n30 , 227–28n39 publishers of, 98–99 Disraeli, Benjamin, 104 , 216n13 Evans-Gordon, William, 27–39 , Dreyfus Affair, 194n9 41 , 44–47 , 49 , 54 , 197n9 , Duckworth, George, 105 , 110 , 127 , 198n11–12, 198n14 , 200n27 228n40 Exmouth Chronicle, The, 77 , Duncan, Ian, 108 210n18 Durham, Martin, 120 Fadiman, Clifton, 73 , 207n4 , 211n25 East End (London), 61 , 105–09 , Faltejskova, Monika, 206–07n1 194n7 , 217–18n19 , 218n24 , Feinstein, Amy, 3 , 72 222n17 , 227–28n39 Feldman, David, 19 , 120 , 197n7 , Parliament and, 32 , 37–41 , 44 , 201n37–38 46–48 , 197n9 , 200n25 Felman, Shoshana, 43–44 , 73 Woolf, Virginia and, 115–17 , Field, Andrew, 77 , 208n10 119–20 , 127 , 222n17 , 227n36 Field, Geoffrey, 28–29 Elias, Norbert, 96 Fishberg, Maurice, 105 Eliot, George, 5 Fitzpatrick, Peter, 34 , 199n19 Eliot, T. S., 2 , 4 , 193–94n2–4 , Flanner, Janet, 209n15 196n25 , 212n29 Forster, E. M., 3–4 , 196n25 Eliot, Vivien, 223n22 Frankau, Julia (Frank Danby), Ellis, Sarah Stickney, 225n28 58–59 Ellul, Jacques, 21 Fraser, John Foster, 61–62 , 65 Elton, G. R., 213n1 Fraser, Nancy, 45 , 201n36 Emancipation, of Jews, 14 , Freedman, Jonathan, 4 , 12 , 72 , 217n18 193n2 , 200n32 Index 263

Freud, Sigmund, 110 , 119 Hegeman, Susan, 218n20 , 218n25 Froula, Christine, 49 , 118 , 122 , Herf, Jeffrey, 234n10 201n42 , 221n15 , 226n30 , Herman, Didi, 27–28 , 32–34 , 226n33 41–43 , 45 , 198n13 , Fry, Roger, 118 , 123 , 223–24n24 198–99n16 , 199n18 Fung, Edmund, 236n22 Hermeneutics (Christian), 79 , 83 , 195n16 Garb, Tamar, 12–14 , 218n21 Hermeneutics (Rabbinic), 3 Garrard, John, 8–9 , 27 , 194n9 , Herring, Phillip, 75 , 209n13 , 196–97n2 , 197n10 210n19 Gerhardie, William, 75–76 Hewitt, Andrew, 170 German remilitarization, 146 , Hidden Hand or Jewry Ueber Alles, 232n4 The (see Jewry Ueber Alles ) Gerstenberger, Donna, 212n29 Hidden Hand or the Jewish Peril, Ghosh, Amitav, 4 The (see Jewry Ueber Alles ) Gilman, Sander, 16 , 194n6 , Hill, Jane H., 237n1 200–01n33 , 211n24 Himmel, Sonia Ginsberg, 207n6 Goldberg, David Theo, 237n1 Hird, Frank, 105–09 Goldman, Jane, 223n24 Hirschfield, Claire, 29 Goodlad, Lauren, 214n6 Hitler, Adolf, 56 , 75–77 , 132–33 , Goodman, Simon, 196n23 , 237n1 136 , 171 , 202n3 , 204n13 , Goody, Alex, 72 , 208n9 208n11 , 209n15 , 210n18 Gothic England: A Survey of ( see also Lewis, Wyndham, National Culture (John Hooper Hitler ; Woolf, Virginia, Hitler) Harvey), 53 Hoare, Sir Samuel (Peter), 75 Gray, Todd, 76–77 , 210n17–18 Hobson, J. A., 118 , 120 , 216n14 , Greene, Graham, 16 222n20 Griffin, Nick, 190–91 Hollis, Catherine, 206–07n1–2 Gualtieri, Elena, 224n24 Holmes, Colin, 19 , 25–26 , 46–47 , Guggenheim, Peggy, 75–76 , 207n6 , 197n4–5 , 197n8, 197–98n10 , 208–09n12–13 198n14 , 200n23 , 201n40 , 203n9 Gutiérrez-Jones, Carl, 17 Holms, John, 75 , 208n12 Holocaust, 14–15 , 72 , Hanfstaengl, Ernst (Putzi), 75 , 137–38 , 199n20 , 233n2 208n11 ( see also Anschluss ; Hilter, Hanrahan, Mairead, 210n20 Adolf; Kristallnacht; Nazism; Harris, Jose, 214n6 Nuremberg Laws) Harris, Rendel, 160 Houston, “Jock,” 53 Hart, Robert, 20 , 54 , 62–66 Hutchinson, Barbara, 128–30 Harvey, John Hooper, 53 Hate rhetoric, 8–10 , 18–20 , 23 , 54 , Illustrated London News, The , 59–60 , 62 , 138 , 171–72 , 183 , 198n14 188–89 , 194n7 , 204–05n19 Imperial Fascist League (IFL), 67 , Hazlitt, William, 14 120 , 201n39 , 203n8–9 264 Index

Infectious Disease Notification Act Judaic Publishing Company, 203n9 (1889), 199–200n21 Judy, or the London Serio-Comic Infectious Disease Prevention Act Journal, 97–98 (1890), 199–200n21 Julius, Anthony, 4 , 72 , 193–94n2–3 , Irish Nationalism (website), 188–89 194n9 , 195n14 Islam ( see Muslims) Israel (State of), 186–88 Kaivola, Karen, 93 , 213n32 Israelite (biblical), 32 , 33 , 60 , Kant, Immanuel, 118 , 221n15 198–99n16 , 210–11n21 , Karp, Jonathan, 183 228n41 ( see also Bible ; Kaufman, Heidi, 222n20 Wandering Jew) “Keegstra Affair,” 204–05n19 Kenner, Hugh, 193n3 Jackman, Mary, 182 Kertzer, David, 211n23 James, Henry, 102–04 , 215n9 “Khaki election,” 29 Jameson, Fredric, 236n21 Kime Scott, Bonnie, 76 , 207n5 , Jasper, William, 205n20 209n15 Jennings, Humphrey, 75 King-Farlow, Sidney, 222n9 Jewish bodies, images of, 2 , 6–7 , Kipling, Rudyard, 15 42 , 106 , 111 , 114–17 , 124–27 , Kosher law, 129 , 130 , 174 , 221n13 133 , 150 , 175–76 , 196n21 , Kristallnacht, 137 , 233n2 200–01n33 , 206n24 , 211n24 , Krueger Henderson, Kate, 220n11 , 220n9 , 220–21n12 , 226n32 , 221n14 228n42 Kundnani, Arun, 237n1 Jewish Chronicle, The (online), 189 Kureishi, Hanif, 4 Jewish Guardian, The, 58–59 Kushner, Tony, 9–10 , 14–15 , 19 , “Jewish question,” 3 , 165 , 178 , 48 , 53 , 133–34 , 138–39 , 216n14 , 234–35n16 194–95n10–11 , 195n13–14, Jewish refugee crisis, 2 , 19 , 22 , 195n18 , 199n20 , 202n3 , 69 , 135 , 137–43 , 202–03n7 , 202–03n7 , 216n14 , 231n52 , 231n1 , 232–33n8–11 , 233n2 232n6 , 233n2 Lewis, Wyndham and, 146–47 , 173–77 , 236n21 , 237n23 Landa, M. J., 198n11 , 200n23 Woolf, Virginia and, 132–34 , Lane, Christopher, 233–34n6 230–31n51 Lane, Lt. Col. A. H., 46 , 203n9 , Jewish self-hatred ( see Self-hatred) 205n21 Jewish World, 58 , 202n6 Langmuir, Gavin, 13–14 Jewry Ueber Alles, 20 , 54–55 , 57–62 , Lassner, Phyllis, 183 , 220n5 , 65 , 203–04n10–12 , 204n14 , 220n8 , 220n11 , 224n25 204n17 , 205n21 , 216n14 Latham, Sean, 122 , 225n27 Jihad Watch (website), 185 , 238n6 Lawrence, D. H., 4 Johnson, James William, 41–42 , 46 Lawson, Harry, 28 , 30 , 39–40 , 43 , Joyce, James, 2–3 , 16–17 , 72 , 131 , 49 , 54 , 200n26 , 201n35 229–30n45 League of Nations, 156–60 , 232n7 , Joynson-Hicks, William, 216n14 232–33n11 Index 265

Leaska, Mitchell, 220n4 Nazism and, 146 , 152–56 , Lebzelter, Gisela, 203n9 163–74 , 233n1–2 , 234n10 , Lee, Hermione, 220n4 234–35n16 , 235–36n19–20 Lee, Martha, 204n19 Pogroms and, 148–49 , 151–52 Leese, Arnold, 203n9 Poland and, 174 , 176 , 236n21 Leick, Karen, 222n17 Revenge for Love, The, 233n1 , Lessing, Doris, 125–26 , 227n35 233n3 Levenson, Michael, 21 Rude Assignment, 234n15 Levi, Neil, 72 , 193n1 Liberalism, 11 , 14–15 , 56–57 , 119 , Levine, Gary, 16 138–39 , 156 , 183 , 233n2 Levy, Amy, 58–59 Life and labour of the people in Lewis, H. S., 105 , 109 London ( see Booth , Charles) Lewis, Wyndham, 17 , 22 , 74 , 80 , Linehan, Thomas, 203n9 118 , 122 , 135 , 143 , 145–46 , Linett, Maren, 3 , 5 , 12 , 72 , 195n16 , 178–79 , 189 (see also Bible ; 210n20 , 220n5 , 226n32 , Jewish bodies ; Jewish refugee 228–29n42–43 crisis) Lippmann, Walter, 176 Apes of God, The, 16 , 21 , Loewenstein, Andrea Freud, 16 147–52 , 164 , 168 , 177–78 , London, Jack, 105 233n3–4 , 233–34n6 London, Louise, 19 , 233n2 “Cantelman’s Spring-Mate,” Lowles, Nick, 237n2 196n21 Loy, Mina, 3 China and, 174–76 , 236–37n22 , Lunn, Kenneth, 48 , 216n14 237n24 Lyttelton, Alfred, 200n29 Etiquette and, 146 , 150–54 , 165 , 172 , 173–77 , 236n21 MacKay, Marina, 20 Hitler, 17 , 146 , 152–54 , 166 , 176 Mackie, Gregory, 99–100 Hitler, Adolf and, 146 , Macklin, Graham, 66 152–53 , 164–65 , 168–73 , Maddison, Fred, 29 235–36n19–20 Maglen, Krista, 200n23 Hitler Cult, The, 146 , 163–73 , Magubane, Zine, 107 , 218n23 , 178 , 235n17–18 , 235–36n19 , 219n27–29 236n20 Mandle, W. F., 202n3 , 202n6 Internationalism and, 146 , Manners (see Civility, historical 153–63 , 196n24 , 232–33n11 , notions of ; Etiquette guides) 234n7 , 234n9 , 234n14–15 Marcion (of Sinope), 162 , 234n13 The Jews, Are They Human?, Marriott, Jon, 218n19 146 , 173–78 , 231n51 Mass Observation, 133–34 , 231n52 Left Wings Over Europe: or, Maxwell, Sir Herbert, 200n21 How to Make a War About Mayhew, Henry, 105 Nothing, 146 , 154–63 , 167 , McClintock, Anne, 218n24 232–33n11, 234n7–9 , 234n11 , McCombie, Frank, 194n3 234n13–14 McKenna, Reginald, 197n6 Men Without Art, 196n24 McKible, Adam, 196n21 266 Index

McNeillie, Andrew, 124 North, Michael, 176 Mearns, Andrew, 105 Northumberland, Duke of (Alan Medcalf, Stephen, 193n3 Percy), 46 , 62 , 65 , 205n21 , Mein Kampf, 75 , 171 , 208n11 205–06n23 Michell, John, 204n19 Nuremberg Laws, 136 Miller, Tyrus, 76–77 Moneylending, 46 , 202–03n7 O’Day, Rosemary, 219n30 , 228n40 Moore, Roberta, 185–88 O’Neal, Hank, 75 Morgan, Marjorie, 96–97 , 213n2 Observer (London), The, 201n34 Morning Post, 20 , 62 , 66 , 205n22 , Oppenheimer, Ernst, 120 , 223n21 205–06n23 , 223–24n24 Orwell, George, 2 Mosley, Cimmie (Cynthia), 51 , 202n1 Palestine, 20 , 60 , 139 , 142–43 , Mosley, Oswald, 25 , 47 , 51–53 , 67 , 232n8 76–77 , 120 , 202n1–4, 202n6 , Pall Mall Gazette, 40–41 , 43 , 209–10n16 , 223n22 217n19 Mudge, George, 203n9 Parliament (British) (see also Royal Mufti, Aamir, 3–4 Commission on Alien Multiculturalism, 6 Immigration [RCAI]) Munich, Adrienne, 222n20 Conservative Party, 26–29 , Muslims, 4 , 160 , 184–90 , 238n5 , 67–68 , 197–98n10 , 201n37 , 238n10 216n14 Myers, Kristen, 18 , 183 evidence, debates about, 44–46 Labour Party, 76 , 216n14 Nadel, Alan, 69 Liberal Party, 27 , 29 , 197n4 , Nadel, Ira, 3 , 16–17 197–98n10 , 216n14 Nazism, 10 , 14–15 , 51 , 132–43 , public testimony and, 36–38 , 199n20 , 202n3 , 210n17–18 40–46 , 196n1 , 200n25 , ( see also Lewis, Wyndham, 201n34 , 201n36 Nazism ; Woolf, Virginia, Royal Assent, 27 Nazism) Parliament Act (1911), 205n23 Neagoe, Anna, 78–79 , 210n19 Parsons, Ian, 17 Neagoe, Peter, 78–79 , 210n19 Passaro, Vincent, 193–94n3 Neverow, Vera, 226n33 Patriot, The, 62 , 205n23 New American, The, 205n20 Pawling, Christopher, 138 New Yorker, The, 184 , 209n15 Pearson, Karl, 105 , 217n16 , 218n22 Newman, Tim, 96–97 , 213n2 , Pellew, Jill, 27 , 197n3 214n6 Percy, Alan (see Northumberland , Nicolson, Harold, 51 , 113–14 , 134 , Duke of) 202n1 Phillips, Ivan, 233n1 Nietzsche, Friedrich, 17 Philosemitism, 10 , 11–12 , 15–16 , Nixon, Rob, 223n21 18 , 25–26 , 30 , 36 , 39–40 , 57 , Norman, Henry, 38–39 , 200n25 , 61–62 , 80 , 118 , 178–79 , 183 , 200n29 185 , 187 , 195n15 , 229n45 Index 267

Plumb, Cheryl, 71 , 93 , 206–07n1–2 , Rothermere, Lord (Harold 212n27 , 212n29 Harmsworth), 76 Pochoda, Elizabeth, 87 , 89–90 Rothschild, Lionel de, 104 , 200n29 Podnieks, Elizabeth, 206n1 , Rothschild, Victor, 2 , 115 , 124–32 , 208–09n12–13 140 , 229n44–45 Potter (Webb), Beatrice, 105 , 127 , Roy, Anindyo, 7–8 , 103–04 , 111 , 218n19 215n11 , 217n15 Potter, Jonathan, 18 , 181–83 , Royal Commission on Alien 189–90 , 196n22 Immigration (RCAI), 26 , 30 , Proteophobia, 7 , 194n8 36–38 , 41 , 43 , 46 , 196–97n1–3 , Protocols of the [Learned] Elders 200n25 , 201n38 of Zion, 11–12 , 20 , 62 , 67 , Rozmovits, Linda, 195n19 203n9 , 204n12 , 205n21–22 , Rupprecht, Caroline, 93 , 207n2 216n14 Rushdie, Salman, 4 Public Health Acts Amendment Bill Russell, C., 105 , 109 (1890), 199n21 Russell, Lord, of Killowen (Sir Public Order Act (1936), 232n3 Charles Russell), 44–45 Pugh, Martin, 202n4 Rydell, Robert, 230n47 Punch, 97–98 Sackville-West, Vita, 129–30 , Quinn, Ben, 190 224n24 , 229n44 Sacrifice, The (Robert Hart), 62–66 Race Relations Act (1976), 198n1 Said, Edward, 132 , 198n15 Radford, Jean, 195n10 Salter, Sir Arthur, 142–43 , Ragussis, Michael, 9–10 , 194n6 , 232–33n11 195n12 , 200n22 Samuel, Herbert, 54 Raitt, Suzanne, 226n29 Sarker, Sonita, 227n38 Refugees ( see Jewish refugee Sartre, Jean-Paul, 237n24 crisis) Schaffer, Gavin, 217n16 Reizbaum, Marilyn, 72 , 193n1–2 , Schröder, Leena Kore, 118 , 220n11 , 207n3 , 211n24 221n14 , 222n19 Rhys, Jean, 4 Scientific racism (“race science”), 15 , Rich, Paul, 49 , 201n41–42 104–08 , 110 , 116 , 217n16–17 , Richardson, Dorothy, 3 , 195n16 218n20–21 , 219n27 , 226n31 Ricks, Christopher, 193n2 ( see also Disease) Robertson, Pat, 62 , 205n20 Searchlight Magazine, 237n2 Robey, George, 154–55 Self-hatred, 16–17 , 18 Rodríguez, Laura María Lojo, 120 , “Semitic discourse,” 15–16 220n11 , 221n14 , 222n18 Seshagiri, Urmila, 194n7 Rohmer, Sax, 194n7 Shandler, Jeffrey, 204n16 Rose, William, 41–42 Sharf, Andrew, 138 Rosenfeld, Natania, 215n10 , 220n5 , Shaviv, Miriam, 185 224n25 Shaw, Bernard, 159–60 Ross, Robert, 223–24n24 Shaw, W. Stanley, 46–48 , 201n40 268 Index

Shephard, Robert, 96 , 213n1 Trust law, English, 34 , 199n16 , Sherwood, Yvonne, 195n16 199n18 Skidelsky, Robert, 51 Tudway, Adrian, 184 , 237n3 Smith, Ethyl, 125 Tylor, E. B., 108 , 218n20 Smith, Victoria, 93 , 213n32 Tyrrell, Francis, 36–37 Snaith, Anna, 120 , 127 , 227–28n39 Snyder, Carey, 127–28 , 227n38 UK Freedom Forum (website), 186 Solomos, John, 183 Spater, George, 17 Vallance, William, 200n29 Spencer, Harold Sherwood, 205n21 Valman, Nadia, 12–13 , 20 , 49 , 104 , Spengler, Oswald, 75 , 208n11 197n3 , 217n18 , 222n20 Stanhope, Philip, 29 Van Dijk, Teun A., 182–83 Stead, W. T., 105 Vincent, Sir Howard, 46 Steadman, William C., 29 Voltaire, 56 Sterne, Julian ( see Webster , Nesta) Stevenson, John, 232n3 Walker, William, 200n25 Stone, Dan, 9–10 , 203n8 Walkowitz, Judith, 121 Stormfront (website), 188 Walkowitz, Rebecca, 77 , 122 , Strachey, Lytton, 102 , 215n9 221n12 , 226n30 Stratton, Jon, 5–6 , 109 , 194n5 Walpole, Hugh, 103 Suh, Judy, 196n24 , 233n1 , 233n3 Walter, Bruno, 230n50 Supersession, 13–14 , 70 , 79 , 118 , Wandering Jew, 32–33 , 39 , 69 , 85 , 159–61 , 195n16 , 221–22n16 91 , 133 , 198–99n16 , 207n6 Sutcliffe, Adam, 183 Warner, Sylvia Townsend, 3 Sydney-Turner, Saxon, 102–03 , Warren, Diane, 72 215n9 Waterlow, Sydney, 103 Watson, Gilbert, 230n46 Taguieff, Pierre-Andre, 105 , 237n1 Webb, Beatrice ( see Potter , Beatrice) Talmud, 56 , 59 Weber, Thomas, 195n10 Television sitcoms, 5–6 Webster, Nesta (Julian Sterne), Ten Years of Tory Government, 26 20 , 54 , 62–63 , 66–70 , 158 , Thurlow, Richard, 51 , 66–67 , 204–05n19–20 , 206n24–25 201n39 , 202n3 , 203n9 , Weller, Shane, 234n15 204n18 , 205n23 Wellman, David, 181 Times (London), The , 22 , 135–43 , Western Independent, The, 77 , 154 , 168 , 209–10n16 , 231n2 , 210n18 232n9 , 237n23 Wetherell, Margaret, 18 , 181–83 , Tolerance, 9 , 15 , 39 , 53 , 111 , 164 , 189–90 , 196n22–23 168 , 174–76 , 178–79 , 189–90 , Wharton, Edith, 16 236–37n22 White, Antonia, 75 Christianity and, 13 , 63–64 , White, Arnold, 25 , 49 , 196n1 , 140–41 198n11 Treveylan, Charles, 38–39 Wigram, Ralph, 113–14 , 219n2 Trubowitz, Lara, 183 Wilde, Oscar, 99–100 Index 269

Wildeblood, Joan, 99 Letters, 114–15 , 125 , 128–30 , Williams, Charles, 16 220n7 , 223n22 , 223–24n24 , Winter, Sarah, 218n25 225–26n29 , 228n41 , 229n44 Woolf, Leonard, 16–17 , 102–03 , “Manuscript Notes” ( The 113–15 , 125 , 133 , 196n24 , Pargiters ), 122 202n1 , 209n14 , 215n9–10 , “The Mark on the Wall,” 220–21n12–13 , 228n41 220–21n12 Woolf, Marie, 221n13 , 222n19 “Modern Fiction,” 126 Woolf, Virginia ( see also Boer war ; “Mr. Bennett and Mrs. Brown,” Diamond trade ; East End ; 123 , 128 , 225–26n29 Ethnography ; Jewish bodies ; Mrs. Dalloway, 130 , 226n30 Jewish refugee crisis ; Kosher “Mrs. Gaskell,” 225–26n29 law ; Rothschild, Victor) Nazism and, 114–15 , 133–43 , 1910 post-impressionist exhibit 219n2 , 230–31n48–51 , 231n2 (London), 223–24n24 Night and Day, 224n25 Between the Acts, 4–5 , 125 , 130 , Oliver Twist and, 220n9 132 , 227n35 , 230–31n51 A Passionate Apprentice, Christianity, images/motifs of, 228n40 and, 118–19 , 131 Revisions and, 117–18 , 121–22 , “A Description of the Desert,” 221n13 , 223n23 230n46 Roger Fry, 118 Diaries, 114 , 126 , 127 , 129–30 , “A Sketch of the Past,” 101–02 , 219n2 , 220n9 , 223n22 , 123–24 , 225n27 230n50 Spanish Civil War and, “The Duchess and the Jeweller,” 223–24n24 115–23 , 129–32 , 220n6–7, Three Guineas, 115 , 132 , 196n24 , 220n11 , 221n13–14 , 222n17–19 , 219–20n4 , 223–24n24 , 223n23 , 227n36 , 230n46 230n48–49 Etiquette and, 101–02 , 115 , “Thunder at Wembley,” 222n19 122–28 , 133 , 224–25n26 , To the Lighthouse, 225n27 225n27–28 , 226n30–31 , Voyage Out, The, 127–28 , 227n35–36 , 228n42 224–25n26 , 226n31 Flush, 222n17 , 227–28n39 Years, The, 4 , 128 , 220n10 , Food and, 124–25 , 126 , 128–31 , 222n17 , 223n22 , 227n35 , 221n13 , 227n36 , 229–30n45 228n42 , 228–29n43 , Gunpowder Plot and, 121 , 230–31n10 223–24n24 Hitler, Adolf and, 114 , 219n2 , Xenophobia, 166 , 189 224n24 , 230n48 , 230n50 , 231n2 “Yellow Peril,” 194n7 Jewish assimilation and, 118–19 , 121 , 127 , 130–32 , 221–22n16 Zangwill, Israel, 43 , 57–58 “Jews,” 124–26 , 220n6 , 226n32 , Zionism, 3 , 58 , 186–91 , 204n12 , 227n34 205n20 , 238n9