Sunday, October 28, 2012
Turnabout is fair play
Our good friend Dr. Samuel Heilman likes to put the magnifying glass on the protagonists of his books, articles and interviews. Now Ami magazine writer Yossi Krausz turns the tables on him and shines the spotlight on the good professor. As is often the case with writers of all kinds, they're a lot nicer than some of their hit pieces would lead you to believe, and Heilman is no exception, for the most part. Yes, he writes snide, nasty and untrue things about Charedim in general, but he's an all-around nice guy. Just look at that nice smile. And he has a גמרא שיעור as well. Krausz' style is unique here; it's gentle on the one hand, never using harsh words, but it hits hard. VERY hard at times. Of course I'm prejudiced against him because of his so-called biography of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, זצוקללה"ה, but then again, that wasn't the first, nor the last time we heard from him, and neither was it the only topic he addressed ever. He's an expert of all Charedim - not just on Lubavitcher Chassidim. And Rabbi Herschel Schachter as well.
Read and enjoy, maybe print it out so you can read it when the power goes out in the near future. Which will probably happen in my house as well, which is why you may not see me update the blog - or even moderate much in the next few days. For best results right-click on the pages and "open link in new tab." That will allow you to click on and enlarge the images so that you can actually read them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
35 comments:
I'm the first one to think Heilman should take it on the chin. In this article he says "journalists are lazy" but its a "physician heal thyself" kind of statement. Heilman's poster collecting is both inaccurate and lazy, as is the entire book called sliding to the right. I noted this in a review of that book a half decade ago, when it came out. Still, I am bothered by the AMI hit job for a few reasons. First, I think AMI misses the point of scholarship entirely. We don't say a scholar is bad for being partisan against our side. Its bad to be partisan at all. AMI doesn't want Heilman to be more objective. They are pissed that he isn't cheerleading for their team. Second, there's something of a chilling effect here. Like Hindus assailing Wendy Doniger's scholarship, when we start coming for our critics in the academic sphere, and entering into their personal lives, it doesn't encourage others to do better. At best we encourage partisanship and at worst we will get avoidance. This is connected to the first point, AMI doesn't want a better Rebbe biography; rebbe hagiography is just copacetic. Heilman isn't really on the hook for his scholarly shortcomings, but for stepping in the turd of Lubavitcher Rebbe biography at all. This attitude is polarizing and stifling. The damning with faint praise that Heilman is a nice guy just annoys me. He could be the biggest jerk on earth and be a great scholar. Or the nicest guy ever and just be terrible. We don't want to know whether to schmooze with him at kiddush or say hi to him in the halls of the graduate center. We want to know what he has to say when he isn't at kiddush or chewing the fat. Finally, the tone of the piece seems to be predicated on annoyance. Whats with this guy ruining our PR in newspapers?! Articles about sexual molestion and Haredi Jews don't need a slightly nicer expert quote. What they need is not to exist. The substance and not the rhetoric is the real problem. The NYT is reporting on a terrible trainwreck of a Hillul Hashem, and the argument is over whether the bystander was really using the most apposite turns of phrase to describe the conductor. Just don't have the endless disaster and you won't have issues with bad reportage about it.
http://thepartialview.blogspot.com/2012/10/monday-of-taanis-behab-references.html
This article is so strange I don't know where to turn. Enough with the faint praise about how Heilman learns Gemorah and is frum. He is an out and out idiot who made a living on our backs. (as an aside can i get a list of the Lithuanian Rosh Heyshivos who sought guidance of the Lubavitcher Rebbe and please don't include Chasidishe Rosh Hayeshivos of Torah Vodaas).
1) all the hard research of tbe rebbi book was done by freidman.
2) he learns gemmora...so did bialic and butcher m finkel of monsey-jerusalem
3) r sholmo carlebach once said the biggest aveira in the world is to be shallow.
Sangville
How about Reb Nuchem Partzovitz Z"L and Reb Berel Povarsky Shlita?
Chakira,
Your point is well made.Ami is a partisan apologetic magazine who would have never accepted any criticism of the Chareidim.
Unfortunately, Hirshel ,when it comes to Chabad is unable to be objective.At all.
I read Heilmans biography of the Rebbe, he should have had a critical editor review and fact check it in a better way , but it really was not a terrible book.Nothing terrible was written there.It just portrayed the Rebbe as human, something Lubavitchers have a problem accepting, while at the same time attacking Artscroll for their Gedolim biographies, which attempt to portray them in unrealistic terms
tzig, again: "but he's an all-around nice guy. Just look at that nice smile. And he has a גמרא שיעורas well. "
על כל פשעים תכסה אהבה! דער העכט שטינקט פון קאפ! חאטשע די פאשטינקענע פיש קאפ איז גאר איינגיפאקט אין א בלעטל דף יומי
!גמרא מסתמא
דער ציג האט ליעב דעם שגץ וואס אפילו א קאפעל האט ער ניט, אבער ת"ח ויר"ש מנעוריהם באמת אוויא די פילאף ברידערס רופט ער אהנ עוכרי ישראל וד"ב
Tzig: "the Lubavitcher Rebbe, זצוקללה"ה"
זצוקללה"ה. זכר צדיק וקדוש לברכה לחיי העולם הבא
פארוואזשע אזא לאנגע קרעכץ אוויא "זצוקללה"ה" ווען א זצ"ל וואלט גענוג גיווען ניט אזוי? אלא מאי? מוז זיין דער דער מכיון איז אנשטאט ,'לחיי העולם הבא' מיינט דאס לחיי העולם הזה?! יחי
They wrote in the article that the LR's detractors agreed with his scholarship. Can someone verify that? Is there any statement from the SR, Rav Shach, Reb Aaron Kotler, Reb Elya Weintraub etc as to the LR's scholarship? I am not doubting it or discussing it, I just want to know which misnagdim said that.
And in this past week's Ami's letter to editor, Prof. Moshe Zvi Reicher (who was Aguda's representative to the UN, and now is a prof. in UPenn's law school) -- adds other points of evidence (in other articles of Heilman) to his lack of knowledge of the chareidi world and its nuances.
This article isnt TRYING to be a critique of his scholarship, though its attempts to trash it were weak. It is more of a personality profile of the guy. His statements are mainstream, I hear these statmements from MO people and Jewish studies professors all the time.
Yanover said... --------
Yanover, the man of many colors talks of MO (1/2 1/3 1/4), an expert with opinions on all kind of chasidig dynasties fin-amul to today!, and all levels of frum litvish.
But it's all greek to me.
Its interesting, here he prides himself with access to Chabad "Library". But in his conversation with Rapport he complains that access was denied. (later printed in Igros).
Morocon:
though I don't realy get what you were trying to say ill try to explain myself better.
I meant in the so called "scholarly feilds" in academia, the statements made by Heilman are mainstream. I know some of the leading "Jewish studies" professors in the country (some more apikoros than others), what I mean is that AMI is trying to attack one guy when what they're trying to do is take down the whole feild of academia that may (inacurately) critique the oilom.
though overall id agree with what chakira stated in the begining.
heilman is a red flag for lubabs
A Litvishe rosh yeshiva who corresponded with the Lubavitcher Rebbe? Rav Hutner, of course. There is a sefer of their correspondence, including Rav Hutner's questions in nistar to the LR.
Chakira
"Heilman isn't really on the hook for his scholarly shortcomings, but for stepping in the turd of Lubavitcher Rebbe biography at all."
you are as lazy and inaccurate as Hielman, the answer to his Rebbe book was not personal. He wrote about the LR life in paris berlin, without reading his 3 books of Reshimois that he wrote in that era, He did not read non of the Letters of his Father in Law to him, when he resided in those Cities,the letters are 1 full volume of letters,He translated letters of his Father Reb Levik to his son on Paris like a Am Heoratz.
Is this proffesional Biography writing or a hatchet job, his work is as as subjective as a Chosid, with 1 difference the chosid loves his Rebbe and Hielman hates
The problem here is that an Am Haaretz like Prof Heilman has no appreciation of what a Gadol is.
Unless one has himself studied Gemorrah and Halacha for many years
one cannot understand Gedolim.
Prof Heiman only learned for one year in a draft dodger yeshiva
Therefore he is not qualified to comment.
Ma Rabbi :" Unless one has himself studied Gemorrah and Halacha for many years one cannot understand Gedolim."
A freesh baba maseh from a BMG type bum!
Ma Rebbe
In the acedemic field they would never appreciate a book written on astronomy,by a shoe repair person.
Drie Kup
"אלא מאי? מוז זיין דער דער מכיון איז אנשטאט ,'לחיי העולם הבא' מיינט דאס לחיי העולם הזה?! "
the Zohar(quoted in Tanya by the letter of the Vitepsker histalkus) writes that Tzadikim after their histalkus they are more on Olam Hazeh then in their life time... Its amazing how a Drie Kup can say a word of emes....
like most of ami's writings. this is trash from a journalistic standpoint. they commit all the errors and crimes of omission that they accuse heilman of doing.
http://www.crownheights.info/index.php?itemid=47918.
Hirshaleh, leyben
Nu, you still wants us to be Lubavitchers?
Do you have an ounce of truth in your bones?
Is it all just partisan?
sholom : "Hirshaleh, leyben
Nu, you still wants us to be Lubavitchers?"
Shkutzim like these aren't מעלה או מוריד if they asked me, atleast i would recomend to put in the shimous!
The tower of "bable"?! in ruins
The ami piece on heilman was simply put, a bad hit job. By journalistic standards they're not even a tabloid.
Moshe Moshel
Do you have degree from columbia journalistic school?
who are u decide?
Odom (nit kan) Mentch
Asks, "who are u decide". That is real text message prose, accompanied by a great command of the English language. If you are criticizing me, I'm doing okay, thanks!
Sholom, you should know those mosrim and notzrim who say yechi hamelech arent Lubavitchers any more than Kahane was charedi.
Being a Lubavitcher has no set definition. Anyone can declare themselves one and that makes them be.
Hagaon Rav SB Cunin has recruited many famous Lubavitchers who aren't nescessarily frum, or even Jewish. His Chabad Telethon is the fulfillment of "ish lfi mihalilo".
Moshe Moshel
Criticising the language as a answer for a straightforward question, is very intelegent,I must say
Nobody besides heilman has a degree here of any kind. Based on your writings, if you do, it should be revoked.
If you are the writer/publisher of this piece, double shame on you.
Mi som lecha peh was your question, its an open forum to the degree hirshel let's and I can express my opinion as you can.
odum Ver Mentch
"Nobody besides heilman has a degree here of any kind"
if Hielman has a degree to be a veterenian, and he never learned in a Yeshiva, then he still can Judge a torah giant..?
Is that what degrees does to your ego?
Maybe we should learn from this to distrust all 'experts' quoted in the media. When we know the truth we know how much they distort. We should use that information for when we ourselves don't know the truth.
yankel said... "Maybe we should learn from this to distrust all 'experts' "
Your record shows that you distrust them all! when it distorts your issues! snd believed them all when it suits your agenda! very typical.
במדר"ש, לשעבר היה אדם עושה מצוה והנביאים כותבים, עכשיו שאין נביאים מי כותב אותה, אליהו ומלך המשיח!, והקב``ה חותם על ידיהם, שנאמר, אז נדברו יראי ד' איש את רעהו ויקשב ד' וישמע ויכתב ספר זכרון לפניו ליראי ד' ולחשבי שמו׃
Post a Comment