Refine
Year of publication
- 2019 (26) (remove)
Document Type
- Article (13)
- Review (9)
- Other (2)
- Doctoral Thesis (1)
- Part of Periodical (1)
Keywords
- Bibel (1)
- Bible (1)
- Early Modern Age (1)
- Frühe Neuzeit (1)
- Hasidism (1)
- Hebrew (1)
- Hebräisch (1)
- Jewish Studies (1)
- Jiddisch (1)
- Judaism (1)
- Jüdische Studien (1)
- Martin Buber (1)
- Middle Ages (1)
- Mittelalter (1)
- Myth-Activism (1)
- Religion (1)
- Religionsbegriff (1)
- Secularization (1)
- Säkularisierung (1)
- Translations (1)
- Volkism (1)
- Yiddish (1)
- Zionism (1)
- activism (1)
- myth (1)
- politics (1)
- theopolitics (1)
- Übersetzungen (1)
Institute
- Institut für Jüdische Studien und Religionswissenschaft (26) (remove)
This article explores an instructive case of translation critique against the background of the rise of Zionism in Europe at the turn of the previous century. It seeks to answer the question: Why did David Frishman, one of the most prolific Hebrew writers and translators of the late 1890s and early 1900s, criticize Vladimir Jabotinsky’s Russian translation of Hayim Nahman Bialik’s Hebrew poems? Both Bialik and Jabotinsky were major figures in the field of Hebrew culture and Zionist politics in the early 1900s, while Frishman generally shunned partisan activism and consistently presented himself as devoted solely to literature. Frishman perceived literature, nevertheless, as a political arena, viewing translation, in particular, as a locus of ideological debate. Writing from the viewpoint of a political minority at a time in which the Hebrew translation industry in Europe gained momentum, Frishman deemed translation a tool for cementing cultural hierarchies. He anticipated later analyses of the act and products of translation as reflective of intercultural tensions. The article suggests, more specifically, that it was Frishman’s view of the Hebrew Bible that informed his “avant-garde” stance on translation.
Hasidic Myth-Activism
(2019)
Since the 1970s, Buber has often been suspected of being a Volkish thinker. This essay reconsiders the affinity of Buber’s late writings with Volkish ideology. It examines the allegations against Buber’s Volkish thought in light of his later biblical and Hasidic writings. By illuminating the ideological affinity between these two modes of thought, the essay explains how Buber aims to depart from the dangers of myth without rejecting myth as such. I argue that Buber’s relationship to myth can help us to explain his critique of nationalism. My basic argument is that in his struggle with hyper-nationalism, Buber follows the Baal Shem Tov and his struggle against Sabbateanism. Like the Besht, Buber does not reject myth, but seeks instead to repair it from within. Whereas hyper-nationalism uses myth to advance its political goals, Buber seeks to reposition ethics within a mythic framework. I view Buber’s exegesis and commentaries on biblical and Hasidic myths as myth-activism.