Shadows of Yiddish on Modern Jewish American Writers (review)

Yoshiji Hirose. Shadows of on Modern Jewish American Writers. Osaka, Japan: Osaka Kyoiku Tosho, 2005. 165 pp. 2,200 yen.Yoshiji Hirose has achieved modicum of fame as rarity of rarities: 'a Japanese person who reads, writes, and speaks Yiddish,' as cover of this book reminds us, quoting Canadian Jewish News. However, this peculiarity not necessarily situate him well to speak to an Englishlanguage readership on vestiges of in American Jewish fiction. The inaccuracies in this book start with its first sentence; sentence that would make infinitely more sense addressed to Japanese audience: is not without exaggeration to say that my fate changed when I discovered Yiddish, language that before was everyday language of Jews of Russian and Eastern Europe (iii). Yiddish, littleknown language? Certainly not in sense of little-heard-of (the only meaning expression little-known really has, as used here), and not even in more improbable sense of not-widely-known. It is certainly hard to decide whom to include in category of Yiddish nowadays, but counting those who can read some, those who can speak some, and those who can understand some, there must be million at very least-and that not include those people just capable of recognizing or uttering few words. In addition, Hirose disregards fact that by World War II, many Russian and Eastern European Jews had already forsaken as their daily vernacular.Of course, number of speakers is far afield from ostensible subject of book, among American Jewish writers, but Hirose's misstatements are so numerous that they constantly impinge on reading. Some of more egregious errors are equal to spoonerisms of Sacha Baron Cohen's alter ego, Ali G, making one chuckle despite terrible subjects spoken of: goes without saying that 'blood libel' accusation not exist, still anti-Semitic feeling by which non-Jewish Germans were led to building atrocious concentration camps does (89); or Especially after Holocaust, Israel was inclined to feel humiliation with East European Jews who had been easily murdered as result of their sheep-like meekness towards Nazis during war (93). Indeed, Hirose has peculiar genius for redundant, unidiomatic, or totally mistaken recitation of hackneyed thoughts and fixed expressions. Thus, we are reminded parenthetically of Christian name for Hebrew scripture: the Jewish Bible (The Old Testament) (47, emphasis in original), which he had earlier referred to as the Jewish Testament (20). The first sentence of his chapter on author of Night reads: Wiesel, survivor, seems to be yoked to and haunted by, [sic] his everlasting memory of Holocaust (67). Wiesel is certainly something more than a survivor (emphasis added).Hirose's use of English is bad enough, but content of his work is not any better. The authors studied are broad bunch: I. B. Singer, Henry Roth, Saul Bellow, Philip Roth, Chaim Potok, Cynthia Ozick, Steve Stern, and Elie Wiesel. In each case, reader is treated to Hirose's articulation of plot elements with some overarching cultural concern, import of which is often enough only partially understood. For example, Hirose presents Pipik's Diasporism in Operation Shylock as Roth's serious, and not ironic, answer to Zionism:It is true that Diasporism and Zionism are ideologies incompatible with each other. Diasporism has never been associated with military forces and its binding- force was dependent upon religiosity in pre-war East Europe; on contrary, Zionism was driving-force in establishing Jewish nation without help of Messiah. These basic differences between them are well reflected throughout this novel. …

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.