Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism, Philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival by Geneviève Zubrzycki (review)

IF 0.7 3区 哲学 Q1 HISTORY
Monika Rice
{"title":"Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism, Philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival by Geneviève Zubrzycki (review)","authors":"Monika Rice","doi":"10.1353/ajs.2023.a911551","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Reviewed by: Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism, Philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival by Geneviève Zubrzycki Monika Rice Geneviève Zubrzycki. Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism, Philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2022. 288 pp. Geneviève Zubrzycki’s original scholarship, straddling sociology and anthropology, analyzes conflicting influences of nationalism and religion in crucial moments of cultural transformation. Following one essential book on the Auschwitz cross controversy, and another on the formation of a secular Québécois identity, she turns to address the confounding phenomenon of Jewish revival in Poland. The growing literature on material and symbolic interpretations of what Zubrzycki calls a “Jewish turn” displays a spectrum of assessments. One fascinating development is the formation of an ultracritical “school” of researchers who analyze these complex phenomena as stemming exclusively from antisemitism. Elżbieta Janicka, in particular, in her brilliant and alluring work, casts a clear judgment on some “less-adequate” Polish attempts to recover the memory of Jewish existence in public commemorative and artistic initiatives. Zubrzycki’s approach, in contrast, seems more humanistically underwritten and open to surprising research developments. Upending established canons whenever analyses appear inadequate to the Polish context, her more than a decade of patient, multifaceted research has produced unimpeachable findings. As a foundational premise, Zubrzycki assumes that both “anti-and philosemitism—non-Jews’ support of and even identification with, Jews—are part of a single struggle to define what constitutes Polishness” (2). Like Erica Lehrer, who regards “vicarious Jewishness” as a critique of Polish antisemitism, she posits [End Page 491] that these seemingly contradicting phenomena express multilayered attitudes to the current political climate in Poland. The first part of the book describes cultural sites of a mnemonic Jewish awakening. Zubrzycki begins by crediting the diverse mnemonic practices that indicate both Jewish presence in a given locality and the process of its erasure and tabooization. From the installation of a path tracing the ghetto wall into the pavement of present-day Warsaw, to a project recreating the presence of mezuzot from remnants on the doorframes of Kraków’s Kazimierz district, these initiatives commemorate the dead and indict the intentional acts of postwar forgetting of the Polish Jews, for whatever political and social reasons, not all of which can be ascribed to the Communist control of public discourse. Immediately following, there is an analysis of testimonies gathered in response to Rafal Betlejewski’s artistic action, I Miss You Jew. Although most appear self-serving, even narcissistic, the project garnered positive feedback from both Polish and Jewish communities. In contrast, Betlejewski’s next “performance,” Burning the Barn, on the Jedwabne pogrom, provoked outrage for trivializing the brutal murder and privileging “the expiation of the perpetrators’ sins over respecting Jewish trauma” (86). In chapter 4, Zubrzycki discusses her ethnographic research on encounters in the Polin Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw. Conceding the point that the museum design appears to reinforce thinking of Poles as hosts and Jews as guests, and leaves Jewish history unincorporated into Polish history, she acknowledges that for some visitors from abroad, the experience can yet be “redemptive.” Further challenging the museum’s critics, Zubrzycki legitimately questions, “Should violence and death be the prism through which Jewish history is presented” (107)? There appears to be no satisfactory answer to this question; unearthing one’s buried “dark past” may often conflict with the goals of public education. The second part of the book opens with analyses of non-Jews performing Jewishness, which Zubrzycki identifies as a longing to recreate a “multicultural, colorful, tolerant Poland,” an imagined construct of a multiethnic and multireligious Polish history. This imagined longing for multiculturality takes place through identifying not with large contemporary minorities like the Vietnamese and Ukrainians, but with absent Jews whom Poles desire to return. Considering the paradigm of cultural appropriation insufficient for discussing this phenomenon, Zubrzycki proposes a list of six “registers of engagement” with Jewish culture. Progressing from “crude cultural appropriation,” to “casual engagement,” “romantic engagement,” “critical-introspective engagement,” “political engagement,” and an “empathetic version of appropriation” (157), her typology, which brilliantly situates diverse attitudes toward Jewishness in Poland, may be a useful tool for any future cultural...","PeriodicalId":54106,"journal":{"name":"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies","volume":"24 10","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.7000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"AJS Review-The Journal of the Association for Jewish Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/ajs.2023.a911551","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HISTORY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Reviewed by: Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism, Philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival by Geneviève Zubrzycki Monika Rice Geneviève Zubrzycki. Resurrecting the Jew: Nationalism, Philosemitism, and Poland’s Jewish Revival. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2022. 288 pp. Geneviève Zubrzycki’s original scholarship, straddling sociology and anthropology, analyzes conflicting influences of nationalism and religion in crucial moments of cultural transformation. Following one essential book on the Auschwitz cross controversy, and another on the formation of a secular Québécois identity, she turns to address the confounding phenomenon of Jewish revival in Poland. The growing literature on material and symbolic interpretations of what Zubrzycki calls a “Jewish turn” displays a spectrum of assessments. One fascinating development is the formation of an ultracritical “school” of researchers who analyze these complex phenomena as stemming exclusively from antisemitism. Elżbieta Janicka, in particular, in her brilliant and alluring work, casts a clear judgment on some “less-adequate” Polish attempts to recover the memory of Jewish existence in public commemorative and artistic initiatives. Zubrzycki’s approach, in contrast, seems more humanistically underwritten and open to surprising research developments. Upending established canons whenever analyses appear inadequate to the Polish context, her more than a decade of patient, multifaceted research has produced unimpeachable findings. As a foundational premise, Zubrzycki assumes that both “anti-and philosemitism—non-Jews’ support of and even identification with, Jews—are part of a single struggle to define what constitutes Polishness” (2). Like Erica Lehrer, who regards “vicarious Jewishness” as a critique of Polish antisemitism, she posits [End Page 491] that these seemingly contradicting phenomena express multilayered attitudes to the current political climate in Poland. The first part of the book describes cultural sites of a mnemonic Jewish awakening. Zubrzycki begins by crediting the diverse mnemonic practices that indicate both Jewish presence in a given locality and the process of its erasure and tabooization. From the installation of a path tracing the ghetto wall into the pavement of present-day Warsaw, to a project recreating the presence of mezuzot from remnants on the doorframes of Kraków’s Kazimierz district, these initiatives commemorate the dead and indict the intentional acts of postwar forgetting of the Polish Jews, for whatever political and social reasons, not all of which can be ascribed to the Communist control of public discourse. Immediately following, there is an analysis of testimonies gathered in response to Rafal Betlejewski’s artistic action, I Miss You Jew. Although most appear self-serving, even narcissistic, the project garnered positive feedback from both Polish and Jewish communities. In contrast, Betlejewski’s next “performance,” Burning the Barn, on the Jedwabne pogrom, provoked outrage for trivializing the brutal murder and privileging “the expiation of the perpetrators’ sins over respecting Jewish trauma” (86). In chapter 4, Zubrzycki discusses her ethnographic research on encounters in the Polin Museum of the History of Polish Jews in Warsaw. Conceding the point that the museum design appears to reinforce thinking of Poles as hosts and Jews as guests, and leaves Jewish history unincorporated into Polish history, she acknowledges that for some visitors from abroad, the experience can yet be “redemptive.” Further challenging the museum’s critics, Zubrzycki legitimately questions, “Should violence and death be the prism through which Jewish history is presented” (107)? There appears to be no satisfactory answer to this question; unearthing one’s buried “dark past” may often conflict with the goals of public education. The second part of the book opens with analyses of non-Jews performing Jewishness, which Zubrzycki identifies as a longing to recreate a “multicultural, colorful, tolerant Poland,” an imagined construct of a multiethnic and multireligious Polish history. This imagined longing for multiculturality takes place through identifying not with large contemporary minorities like the Vietnamese and Ukrainians, but with absent Jews whom Poles desire to return. Considering the paradigm of cultural appropriation insufficient for discussing this phenomenon, Zubrzycki proposes a list of six “registers of engagement” with Jewish culture. Progressing from “crude cultural appropriation,” to “casual engagement,” “romantic engagement,” “critical-introspective engagement,” “political engagement,” and an “empathetic version of appropriation” (157), her typology, which brilliantly situates diverse attitudes toward Jewishness in Poland, may be a useful tool for any future cultural...
《复活的犹太人:民族主义、哲学主义和波兰的犹太人复兴》作者:genevi Zubrzycki
书评:《复活的犹太人:民族主义、哲学主义和波兰的犹太人复兴》,作者:莫妮卡·赖斯·吉纳维·祖布日茨基。《复活的犹太人:民族主义、哲学主义和波兰的犹太人复兴》。普林斯顿,新泽西州:普林斯顿大学出版社,2022。genevi Zubrzycki的原创学术,横跨社会学和人类学,分析了在文化转型的关键时刻,民族主义和宗教的冲突影响。在一本关于奥斯维辛十字架争议的重要著作和另一本关于世俗的quacimbsicois身份形成的著作之后,她转向了犹太人在波兰复兴的令人困惑的现象。关于祖布日茨基所称的“犹太转向”的物质和象征解释的文献越来越多,呈现出一系列的评估。一个引人入胜的发展是形成了一个极端批判的研究“学派”,他们将这些复杂的现象分析为完全源于反犹主义。Elżbieta特别是Janicka,在她辉煌而诱人的作品中,对一些“不够充分”的波兰人试图在公共纪念和艺术活动中恢复犹太人存在的记忆做出了明确的判断。相比之下,Zubrzycki的方法似乎更人性化,并对令人惊讶的研究发展持开放态度。每当分析似乎不适合波兰的背景时,她就会颠覆既定的经典,她十多年来耐心而多方面的研究得出了无懈可击的发现。作为一个基本前提,Zubrzycki假设“反犹太人主义和哲学主义——非犹太人对犹太人的支持甚至认同——都是定义波兰性的单一斗争的一部分”(2)。就像Erica Lehrer一样,她认为“替代犹太人”是对波兰反犹主义的批评,她认为这些看似矛盾的现象表达了对波兰当前政治气候的多层次态度。这本书的第一部分描述了犹太人的记忆觉醒的文化遗址。Zubrzycki首先将各种各样的记忆方法归功于这些方法,这些方法既表明了犹太人在特定地区的存在,也表明了犹太人被抹去和禁忌化的过程。从修建一条从隔都墙延伸到今天华沙人行道的道路,到在Kraków Kazimierz区的门框上重建mezuzot存在的项目,这些举措都是为了纪念死者,并谴责战后蓄意遗忘波兰犹太人的行为,无论出于何种政治和社会原因,并非所有这些都可以归因于共产党对公共话语的控制。紧接着是对拉斐尔·贝特莱耶夫斯基的艺术作品《我想念你犹太人》所收集的证词的分析。尽管大多数人表现得自私自利,甚至自恋,但该项目获得了波兰和犹太社区的积极反馈。相比之下,贝特莱耶夫斯基的下一部“表演”《燃烧谷仓》(Burning the Barn)讲述的是耶德瓦布内大屠杀,这部作品因轻视残忍的谋杀,并将“对肇事者罪行的赎罪置于对犹太人创伤的尊重之上”的特权而激起了愤怒(86)。在第四章中,祖布日茨基讨论了她在华沙的波兰犹太人历史博物馆中遭遇的民族志研究。她承认,博物馆的设计似乎强化了波兰人是主人、犹太人是客人的观念,让犹太人的历史没有融入波兰的历史。她承认,对于一些来自国外的游客来说,这种经历可能是“救赎”的。进一步挑战博物馆的批评者,Zubrzycki合理地质疑,“暴力和死亡是否应该成为展示犹太历史的棱镜”(107)?这个问题似乎没有令人满意的答案;挖掘一个人被掩埋的“黑暗过去”可能经常与公共教育的目标相冲突。书的第二部分以分析非犹太人扮演的犹太人身份开始,祖布日茨基认为,这是一种重建“多元文化、丰富多彩、宽容的波兰”的渴望,是一种对多种族、多宗教波兰历史的想象建构。这种想象中的对多元文化的渴望不是通过认同像越南人和乌克兰人这样的当代少数民族,而是通过认同波兰人渴望回归的缺席犹太人来实现的。考虑到文化挪用的范式不足以讨论这一现象,Zubrzycki提出了六个与犹太文化“接触”的清单。从“粗糙的文化挪用”到“随意的参与”、“浪漫的参与”、“批判内省的参与”、“政治参与”和“移情版的挪用”(157),她的类型学出色地定位了波兰对犹太人的不同态度,可能是任何未来文化的有用工具……
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
25.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信