triangle of history ozick

8/8/2019 Triangle of History ozick

1/16

Triangles of History and the Slippery Slope of Jewish American Identity in Two Stories by

Cynthia OzickAuthor(s): Janet L. CooperSource: MELUS, Vol. 25, No. 1, Jewish American Literature (Spring, 2000), pp. 181-195Published by: The Society for the Study of the Multi-Ethnic Literature of the United States(MELUS)Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/468156

Accessed: 18/04/2010 08:54

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use, available at

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp. JSTOR's Terms and Conditions of Use provides, in part, that unless

you have obtained prior permission, you may not download an entire issue of a journal or multiple copies of articles, and you

may use content in the JSTOR archive only for your personal, non-commercial use.

Please contact the publisher regarding any further use of this work. Publisher contact information may be obtained at

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=melus.

Each copy of any part of a JSTOR transmission must contain the same copyright notice that appears on the screen or printed

page of such transmission.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of

content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms

of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

The Society for the Study of the Multi-Ethnic Literature of the United States (MELUS) is collaborating with

JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access toMELUS.

http://www.jstor.org
http://www.jstor.org/stable/468156?origin=JSTOR-pdfhttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=melushttp://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=melushttp://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsphttp://www.jstor.org/stable/468156?origin=JSTOR-pdf


2/16

Triangles of History and the SlipperySlope of Jewish American Identity in TwoStories by Cynthia OzickJanet L. CooperPennsylvaniaStateUniversity

Cynthia Ozick's fiction is filled with characters n a state ofidentitycrisis: "paganrabbis,"Holocaustsurvivors,and frustratedartists who are strugglingagainst the continualpressureof beingJewish in a hostile Christian environment. Not only do thesecharacters stumble through America like "inevitable exiles"(Kielsky 23), but they are extremely conscious of their struggleand think a great deal about who they are in relation to thosearound them (Walden 2). Therefore, it is virtually impossible toread one of Ozick's texts without thinking a great deal aboutJewish American dentity.Ozick's message, however, often is not clear; her texts aretightlycondensed and often difficult,especially for the non-Jewishreader. Rather than mitigating the complexity of her fiction,Ozick's impressive volumes of essays further complicate thereader'sunderstanding f hermessage. If one believes that Ozick'scharacters uffer from crises of identitybecause they areJewish, itseems logical to browse Ozick's essays in search of what shebelieves to be the key elements of Jewishness,but one will againfind the consummate artist challenging her readers. At variouspoints, Ozick defines Jewishness as originatingin the covenant(Artand Ardor 123), history,the avoidance of idolatry,the abilityto make distinctions,and study (Metaphorand Memory224). Thisis by no means an exhaustive list, but it demonstrates hat Ozickavoids essentializing Jewish identity and posits the meaning ofsuch an identityoutsideof one concrete,stabledefinition.

One of Ozick's most straightforward, et most profoundstate-mentsregardingJewish identity ndicates where a fruitfulexamina-tion of this identitylies. "Tobe a Jew,"she asserts,"is to be old inhistory" Metaphorand Memory224). Accordingto Paul Mendes-MELUS,Volume25, Number1 (Spring2000)


3/16

JANETL. COOPERFlohr in Contemporary ewish Thought,a historicalconsciousnesstransmits raditions,rituals,and legends throughgenerations 378)so that they may inform the presentand the future.Such a defini-tion of history indicates both the collective memory and thecommon ancestryof Jewishpeople, such as traditionspasseddownthroughcenturiesof Judaismandexperiencesof diasporaand exiledue to persecution.On a familial, communal,or national evel, thisconcept of history may also include memories of immigrating oAmericaand growingup Jewish in an unfamiliaror hostile Chris-tian environment.This lens of history encompassesthe divergenceof experiences that Jewish people have had in America, and yetcalls into simultaneousplay manyelementsthatOzick and literaryscholars such as Leon Yudkin and Victor Strandberghave pin-pointedas the foundationof Jewishness.Identity,or a sense of self constructedthroughforces, institu-tions, and structures,however, is not createdby a simple integra-tion of the stories or collective and familial historiespassed downby others. "To own a future is not only to redeem the past,"statesElaine Kauvar, "[but] to judge its meaning" (xii). One createshimself or herself when he or she makes sense of the pastandthen,according to Peter Kerry Powers, brings that past into a livingrelationshipwith the present(90) in orderto informthepresentandthe future. I would extend Kauvar's and Powers' argumentstoassert that history is not only judged by each individual, butreinvented and reconstructedby each individual as he or sheselectively attends to details and carefully revises the historicalnarratives of others from his or her particularviewpoint. Eachperson then accommodates this invented history into his or herown consciousness or identity. A fruitful examination of theidentities of Ozick's characters ies in their struggle to reinventhistory and not in any consistent or unchanging definition ofJewishness.Two excellent examples of texts by Ozick in which the maincharactersstruggle to achieve self-knowledge througha reinven-tion of history are "The PaganRabbi" and "Envy;or, Yiddish inAmerica." Predictably,Ozick has not made this examination astraightforward ne for the reader;he or she must strugglejust asthe charactersdo. According to Kauvar,Ozick "scrutinize[s]her[own] ideas from disparate angles" so that there is an "ongoing

182


4/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKdialectic" regarding both history and identity (xiii). SanfordPinsker expands this dialectic to a dialogic and describes theprocess that leads the readerto understandEdelshtein'sidentityin"Envy;or, Yiddish in America"as a triangle;Ozick creates threecharacterswho carry Ozick's message between them (45). "ThePaganRabbi"has a similar structure.By combining Pinsker's concept of the trianglewith Kauvar'sinsistence on the importanceof history, I will demonstratethatmeaningis most effectively derived from "ThePaganRabbi" and"Envy; or, Yiddish in America" through a constructionof theidentitiesof the protagonists.This construction s accomplishedbyan analysis of the discourses of the three main charactersof eachstoryand a synthesisof these threeviewpoints into a complex andcoherent whole. This process is challengingfor the readerbecauseall three characterswho makeup these trianglesarebothtellingthetruth and completelyoff the mark;all three are both attractiveandrepulsive(Pinsker47). In each story,the two supportingegs of thetriangle cause the main characterto rethink his constructionofhistory and have a large impact on his identity. It is up to thereaderto decide which parts of each triangle's legs' discourse isuseful and relevantand then to combine these partsto informtheidentityformationof the main characterand ultimatelythe mean-ing of the story.The title of "ThePaganRabbi"reveals the primary ensions ofthe story, the divisions between holy andpagan,natureand study,Pan andMoses. The conflicting appealof Pan and Moses is also acentraltheme of Ozick's first novel Trust.In Trust,the narratorstorn between her pleasure seeking, sensual biological fatherNickand her deeply Judaic and learnedstep-fatherEnock (Lowin 44).The narrator's trugglebetween Pan and Moses is a brief one; shesloughs off her interest in Pan to live "withinthe Jewish ideal"(Cohen 36). Ozick returnsto the Pan versus Moses theme andcomplicates it in "ThePagan Rabbi." Rabbi Korfeld, a famousauthorof "remarkable" ollections of responsa and Professor ofMishnaic History, finds himself inextricablydrawn to nature, apractice typicallydenouncedas "Idolatry"n JudaicLaw. Komfeldfinds thathe cannot choose between Pan andMoses withoutlosingcrucial parts of himself. He therefore attempts to reconstructbiblicalhistoryso that Panand Moses arenot mutuallyexclusive.

183


5/16

JANETL. COOPERKomfeld insists that, "It is false history, false philosophy,andfalse religion which declareto us human ones thatwe live amongThings. ... There is nothing that is Dead. . . . Hence in God'sfecundatingCreationthere is no possibility of Idolatry,and there-fore no possibility of committingthis so-called abomination" 20-21). These statements exhibit Komfeld's conclusion that thesecond commandment,which requires that Jews shun idols, ismisleading. Komfeld is also stronglyattracted o the idea of a freesoul and is anguishedby the fact that men are"burdened" y being

"chained" o their souls. He reconstructsbiblicalhistoryto explainthe origin of the rootedness of men's souls and the false com-mandment against Idolatry:"It was not out of ignorance thatMoses failed to teach about those souls that are free. . . . [Heknew] our ancestors.. .would not have abandoned heirslaveryinEgypthad they been taughtof the free souls.... ThereforeMosesnever spoke to them of the free souls, lest the people not do God'swill and go out from Egypt"(22-3). After convincinghimself thathe has accuratelyreconstructedbiblical historyand declaringthat"the condition of men is evil and unjust"(22), Komfeld desper-ately tries to free his own soul by communingwith nature,confi-dent that "if only I could couple with one of the free souls, thestrengthof the connection would likely wrest my own soul frommy body ... to its own freedom" 28).It is clear the Komfeld, torturedby the conflict between hisfaith and his love for nature, has attemptedto choose a pathbetween the two by breakingapart he binary hat divides themandcreating an intermediaryspace. In this intermediaryspace, faithand naturearenot mutuallyexclusive, but mutualin theirnourish-ment of the individual. Komfeld successfully couples with thedryad Iripomonoeia, and experiences "marvels, blisses, andtransportsno man has slaked himself with since Father Adampressed out the forbidden chlorophyllof Eden" (32). His story,however, is to have an unhappyending.His soul, greedyto possessIripomonoeia,escapes his bodyby attaching tself to her.However,Komfeld is horrifiedby the sight of his nature-spuming,Torah-readingsoul, who shows him that he cannotworshipboth natureand the word;he must choose one or the other.Moreover,becauseof Komfeld's successful attemptto separatehimself from his soul,he will lie in his grave alone and his soul will forever "walk here

184


6/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKalone... in my garden" 36). Distraught,Komfeld commits suicideby hanging himself from a tree with his prayershawl. Ironically,nature and religion have joined to take him from this world andinto the next.The reader learns this information,which occurs before thenarrative time of the story, through Komfeld's suicide letter.However, Ozick creates a triangularnarrativestructure n whichthe narrator f the tale reads most of this letter aloud as bothhe andKomfeld's widow comment on its content. The reader can con-struct Komfeld's identityonly by combining partsof each charac-ters' assertionsregardinghistory,both biblicalhistoryandpersonalhistory prior to the narrativetime of the story, into a coherentwhole.

Sheindel,Komfeld's orthodox anduncompromisingwidow, hasa very differentinterpretation f Komfeld's actions than either ofthe other legs of this triangle.In her opinion, Judaic biblical lawsand traditionare sacred and unchangeable,and Komfeld's pre-sumptuousness n alteringthem makes him a pagan.Her concreteand unwavering declarations provide a foil for her husband'squaveringand uncertainstruggle to integrateboth Hellenic andHebraicparts of his identity. A symbol of Sheindel's black andwhite approachto life is a fence. Sheindel wears the mark of afence on herface; she was bornin a concentration amp,andan SSguard attemptedto kill her by hurling her against an electrifiedfence. Inexplicably, the currentvanished from the fence at thismoment and Sheindel was saved. She interpretsJewish law as afence as well (Lyons 19), one thatprotectsby clearlydistinguish-ing betweenwhatbelongs within andwhat shouldbe keptwithout.In Sheindel's mind, the most damning aspect of Rabbi Komfeld'sstruggle to integratenatureand the sacred is that "he scaled theFence of the Law" (24), a fence that has both saved her life andgiven it coherence and meaning. Komfeld's act of scaling thefence, accordingto Sheindel, can only lead him to join what liesbeyondit; according o her,one is either Jew orpagan.Although some readers may discount Sheindel's viewpointbecause of her pitiless contemptfor her deceased husband,OzicksupportsSheindel's points by highlightingthat she has a long lineof religious textual historybehind her. The epigraphto the story,which asserts that one who worships nature "hurt[s] his own

185


7/16

JANETL. COOPERbeing," is an excerpt from TheEthics of the Fathers, a text sup-portedby hundredsof years of religious tradition and the Torah.This excerpt establishes the importanceof religious study, andasserts that anythingthat disruptsor detracts from that study isforbidden. Sheindel possesses the ability to distinguish clearlybetween what is Jewishand what is not because herjudgmentsareinformedby religioustexts andtraditions.The unnamednarratorof the story interpretsKorfeld's searchin an entirely different manner. He and Komfeld grew up asfriends and went to seminary together;both of their fathers wererabbis. The narrator,however, became an atheist and marriedoutside the Jewish faith. These events give the narrator complexpositionality. Althoughhe is no longera believer, he spentseveralyears in a rabbinicalseminaryand is very knowledgeableaboutJewish religion and law. This inside/outside position makes thenarrator's nterpretationof Komfeld's questioning of the sacredvery different from Sheindel's. Whereas Sheindel judges Kom-feld's reinterpretation f Moses as sinful, the narratorexclaims,"The man was a genius"(23). The narrator,when faced with doubtabouthis religion, relinquishedhis religionand became an atheist;he respects Komfeld's struggle to reconcile nature and religioninstead of abandoninghis faith. In otherwords,while the narratorhas crossed the "fence" of Judaism to stand firmly on the otherside, Komfeld has struggledto perchhimself precariouslyatopthefence with a leg on either side; to the narrator, uch a struggleisadmirableand demonstratesa deeply religiousidentity,not a paganone.While all Sheindel feels for herhusbandafter his death is scorn,the narrator tates,"Pityhim"(37). Accordingto VeraKielsky,thesecond commandment, which warns against idols and whichKornfeld has "proven"false, also makes a case for pity as "thefundamenton which the Mosaic idea stands"(206). Therefore, ndenyingpity for her husband,Sheindel is not following the secondcommandment; ike Komfeld, she is outside of Judaiclaw in herrefusalto adhereto the second commandment.The narrator evealsthat he recognizes Sheindel's disobedience when he declares,"only the pitiless [implying her] are illusory"(37). The narratorlaunches his final attack on Sheindel's feelings of smug spiritualsuperioritywhen he commands,"Your husband's soul is in that

186


8/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKpark. Consult it" (37). The narratorviews Komfeld's struggleasadmirable,exceptional,and even heroic, and his fall as worthyofpity. As an insider/outsider to the faith, the narrator nterpretsKomfeld's pursuitsas both intellectuallyambitious and informedby faith,and thereforenot sacrilegious.Insteadof concentratingonthe scandal of Komfeld's story, the narrator ocuses on the painthat Komfeld's strugglecausedhim.One place for the reader o begin interrogatinghe discourses ofthe majorcharacters n an effort to discernwhich elements will beuseful in the constructionof Komfeld's identityis by isolatingtheelements that make Komfeld Jewish. In many ways, Komfeld'sreinvention of biblical history makes him more, and not less,Hebraic.Accordingto RuthWisse, the midrashicmode of Jewishscholarship is concerned with providing a new reading for afamiliar story (42). Komfeld is never more within this traditionthan when he is reinventing the story of Moses. Additionally,KauvarassertsthatKomfeld's letter takesthe form of a "responsa"by both its reasoning and style (44). Komfeld is not turninghisback on his religion,but using the form and style of the midrashictradition o create a new tradition,one in which loving naturewillnot be a "hurt against]his own being."Komfeld's enterprise s notto debunkreligion, but to find a place within religionwhere he iscomfortable o love bothGodandnature.There are, however, definitely pagan elements in Korfeld'sreinventionof history. Accordingto Ozick, a majorstandardof theJewish idea is the second commandmentor the avoidance of idols(Metaphorand Memory224). This is a standard hatdistinguishesJews from all other people. By asserting that the second com-mandment s false and by embracingnature,which is identifiedasan idol in the epigraph rom The Ethics of theFathers, Komfeld isclearly disengaging himself from Hebraic practice. Furthermore,his lust for naturecauses him to remain in the parkuntil dawn formonths, thus causing him to neglect his responsibilities to hissynagogue and his family. His suicide can be interpretedas theheight of his selfishness; what will happento his wife and sevenchildren? His rejection of Hebraism is also dramatizedin hisconfrontationwith his soul. When his stereotypicallyJewish soulasserts,"the smell of Law is more radiant han moss. The taste ofthe Law exceeds clear water,"Korfeld exclaims, "It is not mine!

187


9/16

JANET L. COOPERI will not have it be mine!" (36). He clearly rejects traditionallyJewishaspectsof himself.The narrator'sposition inside/outside the Jewish faith causeshim to attemptto insertan intermediary pace between the binaricdivisions of Jew and pagan. The narrator udges Komfeld as abrilliant ntellectualwhose only sin was to reachtoo farbeyondhisgrasp.Komfeld's last act is to call to his naturedryad,for whomhe has forsaken his soul, for assistance. His cries fall on deaf ears.In an effort to integrate he sacredwith nature,Komfeld loses both.He is, according to the narrator,a pathetic figure, deserving ofcompassionandpity.All three sides have theirpoints;all aretellingpartsof the truth.At this point, one could assumethat the reader s left to agreewiththe characterthat he or she finds most sympatheticor credible.However, the ending of the story preventssuch a solution. Whenthe narrator irst meets with Sheindelto discuss Komfeld's death,she tells him she disposed of the plants in her house: "I couldn'tsleep in the same spacewith plants.They are like little trees"(15).The reader can infer that the trees remind her of what led herhusbandto his downfall;without his love of nature,he could haveremaineda modelrabbi,husband,and father.Although by the end of the storythe narrator eems to disagreecompletely with Sheindel's assessment of Komfeld, the lastparagraphof the story reveals, "I rememberedher [Sheindel's]earlier words and dropped three green house plants down thetoilet." Why does the narratorreplicate Sheindel's action? Hecontinues, "after a journey of some miles throughconduits theystraightway nteredTrilham'sInlet," he site of Komfeld's suicide,"wherethey decayed amid the civic excrement"(37). Why doesthe narratorabhorthe trees? Do they signify the loss of a greatmind? The impossibility of satisfactorily mediating the conflictbetween Hebraismand Hellenism?

Although Sheindel and the narratordispose of their plants fordifferentreasons, this action holds the key to understanding hisstoryandKomfeld's character.For both Sheindel and the narrator,the plants are a reminderof Komfeld's failure. More specifically,they symbolize Komfeld's failure to break down the binarybetween pagan and Jew and place himself between it. The reader,however, must break down this binaryin his or her assessment of

188


10/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKKomfeld's identity.Komfeld was neitherpagannorJew, but both.He was neither selfish nor heroic,but both. It is in his struggleforidentity where the truth of this story lies, and the houseplantssymbolizethis struggle. AlthoughSheindel andthe narratormourndifferentaspects of their loss (Sheindel the loss of a model rabbi,husband,and father,the narratora loss of a greatmind), the realpathosof the storyis causedby the pictureof a manwho could notreconcile himself to the binarieshis society placed on him. Kom-feld attemptedto mitigate the discomfort he experiencedwithinthese binaries by rewritingbiblical history, only to discover thathis successful effortsto separatehis body andsoul produceda soulthathe neitherexpected nor accepted.Therefore,he chose to takehis own life. It is only througha criticalexamination of the view-points of all three characters n this story that a complex under-standingof Komfeldcanbe reached."Envy; or, Yiddish in America," also utilizes the triangularstructure o encouragethe reader o constructa complexversion ofJewish Americanidentity,yet the readermay find the constructionof Edelshtein's identityeven more difficult thanthat of Komfeld.Not only are all three characters hat make up the discoursetrian-gle in "Envy;or, Yiddish in America"unattractive,but none ofthem communicatetheir identities in a consistent manner.All oftheir identitiesareshiftingdue to a strugglebetween collective andpersonal history, which makes the reader's task of interpretingtheirdiscoursesmore difficult.

The main characterof the story is Edelshtein,a Jewish Ameri-can poet who writes in Yiddish andis frustratedby his anonymity.He asserts that his goal is to save Yiddish, which has been de-stroyed by the Holocaust: "a language that never had a territoryexcept Jewishmouths,andhalf the Jewishmouthson earthalreadystopped up with German worms" (74). He warns all who willlisten, "whoeverforgets Yiddish courts amnesia of history"(74).As critic Vera Kielsky asserts,Yiddish is not only a language,butsymbolizes the bond between Jewish people, is the location ofJewish culture,andis the "storehouse" f history(154). Edelshteinquotes the Talmud to reinforce the importance of Yiddish toJewish identityin America:"in Talmudif you save a life it's as ifyou saved the world." He continues, self-indulgently,"And if you

189


11/16

JANETL. COOPERsave a language?Worlds maybe. Galaxies. The whole universe"(83).These assertionsmay, on the surface,lead the readerto believethat Edelshtein is sincere and selfless in his effort to resurrectYiddish, and by extension, Jewish historyand culture. His use ofJewish history, however, makes him feel superiorto other Jewsratherthan creatinga bond of memory and connection with them(Powers 91). Futhermore,Edelshtein's solution to his problemreveals his hypocrisy;he wants to procurean interpreter.Obvi-ously, translatinghis poetry into English will do nothing to saveYiddish, but it will, he believes, rescue him from obscurity.Atheart,Edelshtein s languishing romenvy of Ostrover, he Yiddishwriter who is translated nto English and enjoys immense fame.Edelshtein's only venue for his poetry is an obscure Yiddishperiodical edited by his friend Baumzweig called Bitterer Yam,'while Ostrover is the subject of graduatedissertations and givesdenselyattendedreadings o adoring ans.

Edelshteinattendsone suchreadingwhere Ostroverreadsa newstory that is a thinly disguised parable about Edelshtein. In thestory, the main charactergives one fourth of his soul to Satantolearn a new language that will guaranteehis fame as a writer.However, this new language does not achieve the desired effect,and the writer makes the same bargainfor anotherlanguage,andthen another,and then another. As a result,he loses his soul andarrives n hell where he must toss each page he writes into flames,but he declares,"No difference,no difference!It was the same upthere!" (60). Ostrover's point is that it is Edelshtein's lack oftalent,andnot his lack of access to English,thatcauses his lack offame.Edelshteinis enraged by the story, and spends the rest of theevening railingat all who will listen. He blindlyflees the reading,only to have an angryaltercationwith PaulaBaumzweig,the wifeof his friend and editor.Althoughhe self-righteously nsists in hisanger that "Ostrover wanted to save only himself, Edelshteinwanted to save Yiddish,"Edelshteincannot fool even himself;it isenvy over Ostrover'ssuccess, and not a sense of dutyto Yiddish,that causes much of his anguish. It becomes even clearer thatEdelshtein is not a sincere advocate for Yiddish when he takes anhonest look at himself. Ozick dramatizes this self-realization

190


12/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKthroughthe metaphorof a mirrorthroughwhich Edelshtein seeshimself as others do: "an old man crying, dragginga stripedscarflike a prayershawl"(67). This insight disturbshim so thoroughlythat in despair, he "wishe[s] he had been born a Gentile" (68).Edelshtein, although he adopts a "Jewisher-than-thou"xterior,would forsakehis Jewish identityfor fame andpositive regard.Immediatelyafter he makes this wish into the mirror,Ozickpresents a dialogue between Ostrover and Edelshtein. In Edel-shtein's rage following Ostrover's reading, Ozick presents thereaderwith severalconversationsbetween Edelshteinand othersinthe form of drama dialogue and several letters composed byEdelshteinthatmay or maynot havebeen sent.Due to the multipleforms presentedin this section of the shortstory and Edelshtein'sobviously perturbedmental state, it is not clear whether his con-versation with Ostroveractually occurredor is merely imagined.Nonetheless, this dialogue providesthe readerwith most of Ostro-ver's leg of the discoursetriangle;even if Edelshteinimaginedthisconversation, Ostrover's words impact how Edelshtein seesOstrover,andultimatelyhow he sees himself.2Duringthis dialogue, it is never quiteclear to the readerwho orwhat Ostrover s. Ostrovermakes several contradictory tatementsthat confuse the readerwho is tryingto constructhis identity.Heasserts, "I'm one of them" (68), "I'm only a make-believe Gen-tile," and "Iplay at a Jew to satisfy them"(69). In the first line, itappearsthat Ostroveris aligninghimself with the Gentiles. In thesecond, althoughhe admitsthathe dons the exterior of a Gentileina "make-believe"game, it seems clear that inside, he identifieshimself as a Jew. In the thirdquote, the meaningis more complex.In acting the part of a Jew "to satisfy them," Ostrover couldinternally identify as either Gentile or Jew. The satisfaction ofanothergroupdoes not necessarily impingeon Ostrover'sidentity.However, he never identifies who "them" is. Is it the Gentilecommunity,or the Jewishone?

Ostrover's troubling parable furthercomplicates his identity:"Inmy village when I was a boy they used to bring in a dancingbear for the carnival,and everyonesaid, 'It's human!'-They saidthis because they knew it was a bear, thoughit stood on two legsand waltzed. But it was a bear"(69). Who is Ostrover,a Gentilewho plays at being a Jew or a dancingbear of a Jew who plays at

191


13/16

JANETL. COOPERbeing a Gentile? Is the show independentof how Ostroverseeshimself, or are the two intimatelyentangled? Although it is clearthat Ostrover accurately interpretsEdelshtein's hypocrisy in theline, "envy sounds the same in all languages"(83), Ostrover'scredibility s seriouslydiminishedwhen it is not clearto the readerwho orwhat he is.One way for the readerto organize Ostrover's words so thatthey may be usefully applied to Edelshtein's identity is to breakdown the binary between Jew and Gentile. Ostrover does notproclaim himself to be either Jew or Gentile; he insists that he"plays"the part of both when it is to his advantage.Yet again,Ozick is strugglingwith the Panversus Moses debate andpointingto instanceswhere the binarybetween the two breaksdown.Hannah,the daughterof one of Ostrover's interpreters,makesup the third leg of the trianglein this story. She both dramatizesEdelshtein's concerns about Jewish Americanidentityandcompli-cates the constructionof Edelshtein's identity. Hannah,"bornin1945, the hour of the death camps" (91), represents the nextgenerationof Jewish Americans. She speaksYiddish,which as the"storehouse"of history should align her with her ancestors,butironically, she wants nothing to do with them. During an angryaltercationwith Edelshtein on the night of Ostrover'sreading,sheclearly identifies herself only by what she is not; she tells Edel-shtein she is not "yourkind"of Jew, and asserts,"all you peoplewant to do is suffer"(92). She clearly separatesherself from herEastern EuropeanJewish ancestors and their heritage when sheasserts, "history'sa waste" (92). She has turned her back on thehistoryand anguishof her people, and wants only "universalism"or assimilation into the American mainstream.She admires Ostro-ver because "he speaks for everybody"(95). According to criticSarahCohen, this rush to assimilate reveals the interalization ofanti-Semitism 60).Hannah's feelings of anti-Semitism become clear when sheshouts, "Hangingon my neck, him [her uncle] and now you, thewhole bunch of you, parasites,hurryup and die" (97). Her lack ofrespect and love for her ancestors,many of whom share a livedmemory of Hitler, is appalling. More dangerous is her rush toforget all of those who have come before her. Her conceptionofhistory as a burden will not allow her to use history to bring

192


14/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKmeaningto her life. Her hate for her ancestors'historyis really aself hate that paralyzes ratherthan assists identity construction.Without a history,she has no identity,and can only pinpointwhatshe is by rejectingwhatshe thinks she is not.Edelshtein is accurate in assessing that Jewish Americanidentityis in grave dangerdue to Americanfreedom,acceptance,and thus assimilation(Kielsky 151). He also pinpointswhy assimi-lation threatens Jewish identity; it demands historical amnesia.However, because Edelshtein sometimes bastardizes Jewishhistoryfor his own personalgain, he lacks credibilityin his inter-actions with others. For example,when he urges Hannah o "growold in Yiddish ... andcarryyourfathersand uncles into the futurewith you" (74), even he can see throughhis selfish siren song, ashe indicates by asking, "What did the death of Jews have to dowith his own troubles?" 75). The pull of his personal historyhasovershadowed a committed struggle to save Yiddish in Americaboth because it so fully engages his personalenergiesandbecauseit causes Edelshtein to become a lone railer whom others do nottakeseriously.The truthof this storylies in the ways the charactersuse historyto constructidentity.All exhibit how to use history by how theymisuse it. AlthoughEdelshtein retains Jewish culture and historyby speaking Yiddish, he also exploits historical memory for hisown selfish ends. Instead of using history to inform his present,Edelshtein tries to invoke feelings of guilt in others so that theywill help him in his quest for fame. Hannahrefuses history, andtherefore does not really know who she is or feel a connection toother Jews. Ironically, n her rejectionof her ancestors,she allowsthem to define her by what they are not. Although Ostrover hasimmigrated rom Poland and carrieshistorywith him, boththroughmemory and his usage of Yiddish, Ozick never clearly presentsOstrover's identity to the reader. Therefore, the reader cannotidentifyOstroveras Jew or Gentile,but must inventa classificationin between these categories.A desirable state of using history is one in which historyinforms what one is, and not just what one is not, as is true inHannah's case. It is also a state in which collective and personalhistories work togetherto informidentityconstructionrather hanstruggling against one another,as they do in Edelshtein's case.

193


15/16

JANETL. COOPERFinally, history arises from an internalstruggle,and not a simplerejectionof historyor an employmentof historywhen it suitsone'sends. It is only throughviewing Edelshtein'sconcernfor Yiddishfiltered through Hannah's violent disentanglementfrom historyand Ostrover's bear dance that one can constructthis lesson fromthe story.CynthiaOzick's triangular tructureof creating meaningout ofcompetinginventions of history preventsher stories' lessons frombeing simple, essentialist,or stereotypical.Ozick stronglyimpliesthat Jewish identityis both complex and always changingas eachperson struggles to discover who he or she is by reinventingpersonaland collective histories.If these strivingswere not evidentby her characters' actions, Ozick further highlights them bymakingher readersstruggleas well. Ozick's structureof triangulardiscourse forces the reader to become an active participantinmaking meaning. One does not merely read Ozick's texts, butstrugglesto understandherby taking partsof characters'historicaldiscourses and tryingto fit them into the emerging pictureof themain character's identity like a complex and shifting jigsawpuzzle. Such a painstaking enterprise prevents the reader fromcreating simplistic meaning from Ozick's stories and fostersconstructionsof Jewishness that are as complexas Ozick's vision.Notes1. Bitterer Yam is translated nto Bitter Sea in English. However, the journal"hadso few subscribers hatBaumzweig'swife called it InvisibleInk" 47).2. Also, althoughcritics such as Lowin have assertedthat Ostrover is a thinlyveiled I.B. Singer, I will discuss Ostrover ndependentof Singer'sbiographicalinformation n order to reach a conclusion regardingwhat Ozick is implyingaboutJewishidentityon a largerscale.Works CitedCohen,SarahBlacher. CynthiaOzick's ComicArt. Bloomington:IndianaUP,

1994.Kauvar,Elaine M. CynthiaOzick'sFiction. Bloomington: IndianaUP, 1993.Kielsky, Vera Emuna. Inevitable Exiles: Cynthia Ozick's View of thePrecariousness of Jewish Existence in a Gentile Society. New York: PeterLang, 1989.Lowin,Joseph. CynthiaOzick. Boston: Twayne, 1988.Lyons,Bonnie. "CynthiaOzick as a JewishWriter." Studies inAmerican

194


16/16

HISTORYAND IDENTITYIN OZICKJewishLiterature6 (1987): 13-23.Mendes-Flohr,Paul. "History."Contemporary ewishReligious Thought. Ed.ArthurA. Cohenand Paul Mendes-Flohr. New York: Scribner's,1987.371-87.

Ozick, Cynthia.Art andArdor. New York:Knopf, 1983.-. "Envy;or, Yiddishin America." 1969. Rpt. in ThePagan Rabbi and OtherStories. Syracuse:SyracuseUP, 1995. 39-100.- "ThePaganRabbi." 1966. Rpt. in ThePagan Rabbi and OtherStories.Syracuse: SyracuseUP, 1995. 1-38.-. MetaphorandMemory. New York:Knopf, 1989.Pinsker,Sanford. TheUncompromisingFictions of CynthiaOzick. Columbia:U of MissouriP, 1987.Powers,PeterKerry. "DisruptiveMemories: CynthiaOzick, Assimilation,andthe InventedPast." MELUS20.3 (1995): 79-97.Strandberg,Victor. GreekMind/JewishSoul: TheConflictedArtof CynthiaOzick. Madison: U of WisconsinP, 1994.Walden,Daniel. "Introduction." tudies in AmericanJewishLiterature6 (Fall1987): 1-4.Wisse, Ruth. "Ozick as AmericanJewishWriter."Studies inAmericanJewishLiterature6 (1987): 35-45.Yudkin,LeonIsrael. Jewish Writing ndIdentity n the TwentiethCentury.London: CroomHelm, 1982.

195

triangle of history ozick

Documents