Journal of World Philosophies Book Reviews/193 Jewish Vegans between Scholarship and Activism __________________________________________________________________________ YOAV MEYRAV Maimonides Centre for Advanced Studies, University of Hamburg, Germany ([email protected]) JacoB Ari LaBendz and Shmuly Yanklowitz, eds. Jewish Veganism and Vegetarianism: Studies and New Directions. Albany, New York: SUNY Press, 2019, pp. xxiii + 348. ISBN 978-1-4384-7361-1. The collected volume Jewish Veganism and Vegetarianism: Studies and New Directions aspires to explore the growing phenomenon of Jews adopting a meat-free way of life from different perspectives and disciplines. Despite a number of standout contributions, it does little to advance scholarship in the field. The present review first discusses the various articles included in the volume and then reflects on the problematic editorial approach that hinders its enormous scholarly potential. Key words: Judaism; vegetarianism; veganism; animal rights; activism; North American Jews The intersection Between Judaism and veg’ism1 has huge academic potential from various different perspectives. For one thing, the whole course of human history in Biblical eyes can Be interpreted as if it is Bookended Between a vegan Garden of Eden and a vegan End of Days. In addition, Jewish law is full of regulations concerning the use/aBuse of animals in the contexts of laBor, consumption, enjoyment, and worship. Moreover, with the rapid growth and success of vegan movements worldwide and the vast theoretical literature that accompanies it, it is fascinating to explore the intersection and dynamics Between universalist and particularistic modes of argumentation in this context. On top of this, the dominance and success of vegan movement(s) in Israel in the past ten years is a highly complex phenomenon expressing the immanent tensions and contradictions within Jewish-dominant Israeli society and its various components and competing ideologies. To this short list, many other perspectives can be added. This state of affairs certainly calls for extensive study—from the perspectives noted here as well as from many others—and the present collection aspires to address several of them in various disciplines and contexts. Unfortunately, aside from a few notaBle contributions, it does not do much to further the study of Jewish veg’ism, for reasons I discuss in the last section of this review. However, in order to avoid creating unnecessary Bias on the part of the reader, I will first discuss the individual papers according to their running order. After an introduction (to which I return Below), the Book is divided into two main parts, “Studies” and “New Directions,” followed By a report aBout Jewish veg movements in North America and an afterword. The “Studies” section starts strongly with Beth A. Berkowitz’s “The Slipperiness of Animal Suffering: Revisiting the Talmud’s Classical Treatment.” Berkowitz offers a Beautiful reading of Talmudist interpretations of Biblical laws against animal suffering, which seem to Become less and less interested in how the animal suffers and more in how it affects humans as Talmudic discussions progress. Berkowitz surveys traditional approaches to this issue and identifies their respective weaknesses, only to argue that the gradual marginalization of the suffering animal from Talmudic discussion is itself an expression of the threat of distraction from animal suffering. This is a fascinating and highly original hermeneutical move By a scholar who knows her sources very well. I hope Berkowitz’s position receives further elaBoration (and defense) in future research. Unfortunately, this level of analytical suBtlety is rare within the confines of this volume. ________________ Journal of World Philosophies 5 (Winter 2020): 193–199 Copyright © 2020 Yoav Meyrav. e-ISSN: 2474-1795 • http://scholarworks.iu.edu/iupjournals/index.php/jwp • doi: 10.2979/jourworlphil.5.2.13 Journal of World Philosophies Book Reviews/194 Next comes Nick Underwood’s “Vegetarianism as Jewish Culture and Politics in Interwar Europe,” a confusing paper that examines and attempts to contextualize three distinct Jewish vegetarian moments: Fania Lewando’s (1865–1941) vegetarian restaurant in 1930s Vilna2; Jewish responses to legislation against kashrut (the set of dietary prescriptions in Jewish law) in Nazi Germany; and Jewish cuisine in France in the late 1920s. This is all very interesting, But the connections are hasty (how does Lewando’s restaurant “catalyze a new Jewish dietary and national[!] identity” [34]?), the interpretative categories are unclear (how do we know that a restaurant serving “lacto-vegetarian” meals [39] doesn’t simply mean that it is dairy rather than meat orientated—a fundamental distinction in kashrut?), and some oBvious questions are not asked (did the compulsion to give up meat due to anti-kashrut laws affect Jews’ conception of animal suffering or their dietary preferences?). It has too many generalizations, jumps too swiftly from topic to topic, and there are not enough meaningful takeaways. It would have Been Better to focus on one of the various topics discussed and develop it more patiently. In the field of literary studies, we find the contribution of Irad Ben Isaak (“‘I am a Vegetarian’: The Vegetarianism of Melech Ravitch”), Based on the author’s MA thesis (in HeBrew). For the most part, the contribution is anecdotal and almost caricaturizes the image of Ravitch (1893–1976), a central figure in twentieth-century Yiddish literature and journalism. This is a shame, Because the author’s excellent MA thesis, which is availaBle online,3 contains a much more nuanced treatment and Better situates Ravitch’s persona and poetry within his intellectual climate and literary career. Of course, reprinting the thesis in its entirety would Be Beyond the scope of the volume, But a different Balance Between overview and analysis would have Benefited this chapter. Hadas Marcus (“Farm Animal Welfare in Jewish Art and Literature”) offers a random survey of Jewish and Israeli authors and painters (some veg’s, some not) with minimal commentary and some interesting anecdotes, But nothing in her paper suggests new insights aBout the figures she discusses or whether there is some common thread that connects them (Besides Being Jewish). They are all lumped together according to the author’s tastes and vegan agenda.4 Besides some suBjective impressions, this paper does not offer much in terms of literary criticism or art theory and has only a handful of references to academic literature on the suBject. As the only paper in this collection that represents art theory, it is somewhat disappointing. Michael Croland’s “Vegetarianism and Veganism among Jewish Punks” does not fare Better. While it is full of interesting and sometimes entertaining stories aBout Jewish punks, the connection to Judaism is mostly limited to the fact that all punks discussed are Jewish (the connection Between punk and veg’ism already Benefits from a rich literature). Croland’s paper is more of a survey than an academic paper, sometimes even content with listing punks that happen to Be Jewish (see, for example, p. 102). Like other authors in this volume, Croland does not distinguish Between “Jewish” and “Israeli,” treating Israeli punk musicians and Jewish punk musicians outside of Israel collectively. Adrienne Krone’s contribution, “Opening the Tent: Jewish Veganism as an Expression of an Ecological Form of Judaism,” suffers from several proBlems. First, the Brief surveys of Jewish and vegan identities it offers are proBlematic, Because the author uncritically adopts a “religious studies lens” (119) to veganism without reflection aBout the justification for this, rendering the whole exposition arBitrary rather than productive. Second, the focal point of the paper is the Jewish communal farming movement, which is not a vegetarian or vegan movement at all. In fact, of the two people Krone decided to interview, one actually Became vegan Because of the shock of experiencing kosher slaughter in one of these farms. How all this coheres into a meaningful discussion is not clear to me. Victoria Greenstone and Shlomi Shmuel offer an insufficiently developed study, from a linguistic point of view, aBout “Jewish Perceptions of Animal Suffering.” The research question, per the authors, is “to clarify the meaning of suffering, specifically animal suffering” in a Jewish ________________ Journal of World Philosophies 5 (Winter 2020): 193–199 Copyright © 2020 Yoav Meyrav. e-ISSN: 2474-1795 • http://scholarworks.iu.edu/iupjournals/index.php/jwp • doi: 10.2979/jourworlphil.5.2.13 Journal of World Philosophies Book Reviews/195 context, and the motivation for this is to Better understand the growth of Jewish veganism. But how this specific question serves as a means to this end is not explained. The conclusion, according to the authors, and Based on an admittedly non-representative sample of questionnaires, is that “the Jewish understanding of animal suffering was not a categorical refusal of certain experiences (such as emotional duress or pain) But a call for moderation” (147). The authors were surprised to find that elements of Jewish religiosity (especially kashrut) were completely aBsent from the suBjects’ responses. This raises the question of relevance of Jewish identity to one’s approach to animal suffering, a question that cannot Be answered without appealing to non-Jewish suBjects as well to provide some control. The authors do not