Asch’s Diamonds

Criticism A New Essay Collection Gives an Oft-neglected Master His Due

By Alyssa Quint

Published August 19, 2005, issue of August 19, 2005.
  • Print
  • Share Share

Maybe it’s the fallacy that rewarding literature must be difficult that explains why no scholar has lingered in the literary universe of Polish-born American Yiddish novelist and playwright Sholem Asch (1880-1957). Asch, who published alongside Isaac Bashevis Singer and other luminaries in the Yiddish Forward, was considered a master of Yiddish fiction until a literary scandal permanently divided him from his primary audience . His blocky tomes sit on the shelves of libraries and secondhand bookstores, awaiting a new generation of the curious — much as Helena Stepanovna awaits Zachary Mirkin in Asch’s “Three Cities” — “with no trace of tragic despair” but with a “sincere smile” that conveyed “frank pleasure.” Asch’s work is the spurned lover of 20th-century Jewish fiction.

Which might explain the tone of reproach assumed by doyen of Yiddish letters Dan Miron in the very first line of his contribution to “Sholem Asch Reconsidered,” a collection of essays on Asch edited by Nanette Stahl, the Judaica curator at the Yale University Library. “‘East River,’ Sholem Asch’s mature, comprehensive, meticulously conceived and tightly-structured novel of immigrant Jewish New York around World War I, never received the attention it deserved,” he writes. With its own Aschian sweep, Miron’s essay is the centerpiece of a chain of scholarly pieces that lend a more robust appreciation to Asch’s life and work. With the benefit of this volume and some distance, more than just frank pleasure awaits discovery by scholars and readers alike.

‘Comfortable in the world” –– as Yiddishist and Asch descendant David Mazower describes his great-grandfather in an eloquent biographical sketch –– Asch was born to a Hasidic businessman, Moyshe Gombiner Asch, a livestock trader in 1880 in Kutno, Poland. Counting offspring from both his wives, Moyshe’s children numbered 17 (Sholem was his fourth). Moyshe expected Sholem’s observable gifts as a student to translate into a career as a rabbi, while Sholem recalled feeling choked by his religious studies and by his sole language, Yiddish. He left Kutno, but religion and Yiddish, in their own way, would become the sustaining fires of his work.

After scratching out a few short stories, at 19 Asch left for Warsaw and showed up at the door of I.L. Peretz, the gatekeeper of Yiddish literary excellence. No two Yiddish writers could have been more different. Peretz’s is a tight and pearly literary realm, his storytelling voice modulated with precision. Asch chose the epic; his characters reflect the pogroms, revolutions, immigration patterns, the class and religious divisions –– all of which formed the lives of contemporary Eastern European Jews. And like the author himself, Asch’s heroes transcend humble beginnings, mingle with artists, linger in St. Petersburg and take long journeys that speak volumes about their spiritual quests — he was not above the well-placed cliché. Peretz coined a Jewish literary idiom; Asch was interested in novels about Jews, not Jewish novels. With broad strokes, he translated the world into Yiddish and translated it back for the sake of his ever-growing non-Yiddish readership.

Peretz gave his nod to the young writer, ensuring him publication in the Yiddish journals of his day, and Asch’s dramas pulled him into collaborations with such celebrities as actor Jacob Adler and director Max Reinhardt, thereby giving him entrée to the international stage. Written while he was still a novice, “God of Vengeance,” first staged in Berlin in the famous Deutsches Theater in 1907, is one of his only works to maintain its high profile until today. Recently retranslated into English by Nobel Prize-winning playwright Donald Margulies, the play tells the story of Yankl, a Jewish brothel owner, and his doomed attempt at raising and marrying off a chaste daughter in order to gain social respectability.

In her essay in this collection, Naomi Seidman, associate professor at the Graduate Theological Union in Berkeley, Calif., makes sense of a number of the play’s more puzzling elements, including a seemingly gratuitous lesbian scene between Yankl’s daughter and a prostitute named Manke. In Seidman’s reading, as the characters surrender physically to one another, they pretend to be a sexually innocent bride and groom exchanging shy glances at the Sabbath table, a fantasy that points up the falseness of Yankl’s bourgeois aspirations. “By self-consciously dramatizing the effects (failed or otherwise) of modern, fallen Jews to restage tradition, Asch’s play touches on the crucial questions of Jewish continuity,” Seidman writes. “For what is Jewish modernity in the face of migrations, urbanization, and desecrations, if not such a necessary staging and restaging, by turns flimsy and magical, shoddy and persuasive, corrupt and holy?”

On his first visit to America in 1909, Asch was repulsed by its “brashness and materialism.” Still, plagued by a bad feeling about Russia, he settled his family into a house on Staten Island until the end of World War I. Perhaps such institutions as the American Joint Distribution Committee, of which Asch was a founding member, made him consider the country differently. In 1919, the committee sent him to Lithuania on a fact-finding mission after a series of bloody pogroms. He suffered a nervous breakdown on his return.

Still, Asch did not give up on his love for Europe. After stints in Poland and Germany, in 1930 he settled in Nice, France, where he eventually would build “Villa Shalom,” a private compound designed to resemble a beis midrash or Jewish study house (Mazower includes pictures). The 1930s belonged to Asch. He basked in the international acclaim won by “Three Cities” and crisscrossed the globe to attend celebrations in honor of his jubilee.

Then, in 1939, Asch’s world crumbled when he published “The Nazarene.” The book had a gripping conceit — the existence of a fifth gospel written by a misunderstood Judas Iscariot — a conceit whose outlandishness might be trumped only by Asch’s naive hope that the book would vanquish antisemitism. For years, Asch’s head had been swimming with ideas about Judaism and Christianity, so no one motive can be assigned to his work. But, to a large extent, the author seemed bent on convincing the Christian world that Jews were a lot more like them than they ever knew; and for that reason alone, did not deserve to die.

While the book pleased English critics — the novel was on The New York Times Bestsellers list and would reach more than 2 million American readers by 1941 — Yiddish critics felt betrayed by what they considered a piece of thinly veiled proselytizing literature that was distastefully timed. Yiddish Forward editor Abraham Cahan, friend and patron, refused to publish Asch — cutting him off from his Yiddish readership — and then spearheaded an attack on his work and person.

On this subject, Anita Norich’s treatment of the stream of articles, books and disquisitions — not to mention Asch’s theological concoctions that were at the center of the storm, novels and responses alike — is deft and illuminating, even if it leaves the reader wanting more. She persuasively argues that the fury of his critics was really their coming to grips with the Holocaust and their frustration with the breakdown of Yiddish. His American Yiddish readers had lost their loved ones to Christians and their language to English — and they needed to blame someone to whom their opinion mattered.

Still, even as one recognizes that Asch’s critics acted deplorably, it’s hard to avoid the fact that some of his views were confused. In the Christian Herald in 1944, for instance, Asch explained that he believed Jesus to be the Son of God and the son of man, and in another newspaper he insisted that he remained a Jew. There were also apologetic fiction stories about Christians in Nazi Europe who turned the other cheek, and a Nazi who saves a Jewish prisoner. Uplifting as they might have seemed to Asch, his wishful thinking cheated his Jewish readers of the catharsis that accompanies the blunter depiction of reality.

By this time, Asch had left France — “having delayed his departure from Europe until the last possible moment,” Mazower notes — and reluctantly moved to the United States. He suffered a great deal from the exile imposed on him by the Yiddish community at a time when he most needed the consolation of his people. Still, Asch brought his religious ruminations with him to America and in 1946 published “East River,” a melodrama about the lives of Moshe Wolf Davidowsky, saintly and religiously zealous, and his sons, Irving and Nathan, and their life on East 48th Street in the 1940s, amid their Christian neighbors. Stricken by infantile paralysis, Nathan passes through extreme despair before coming to the epiphany that he is “the instrument of a divine mission.” Under his guardianship, all the novel’s conflicts dissolve, including one centered on Irving’s marriage to a Catholic. The religion of love that is allowed to thrive in America trumps Judaism.

Yiddish journalists advised their audiences that “East River” was an antisemitic defense of intermarriage. But according to Miron, it is one of Asch’s masterpieces, one in which he rewrites the narrative and characters he grappled with earlier in his career with greater force and clarity. Moreover, unlike the work of his peers, “East River” feels gloriously unburdened by the Holocaust. In it, the Jewish American experiment is triumphant and the Jewish-Christian reconciliation — tragically unachievable elsewhere in the world — is achieved. As Miron explains, this is why Asch eschewed the homogeneously Jewish Lower East Side as the novel’s backdrop for a neighborhood on the banks of the East River, populated by poor immigrants of a multiplicity of ethnic backgrounds. However divided he was about his own life in America — he left, never to return, in 1953 — Asch never doubted the promise it offered the Jewish people.

Sholem Asch awaits those who will give his story the epic scope of biography. Still, “Sholem Asch Reconsidered” brushes some dust off one of the giants of Yiddish American letters. As Asch once put it (in “The Nazarene”), “The first rays of the morning sun have pierced the barriers of darkness and cobwebs.”






Find us on Facebook!
  • "I’ve never bought illegal drugs, but I imagine a small-time drug deal to feel a bit like buying hummus underground in Brooklyn."
  • We try to show things that get less exposed to the public here. We don’t look to document things that are nice or that people would like. We don’t try to show this place as a beautiful place.”
  • A new Gallup poll shows that only 25% of Americans under 35 support the war in #Gaza. Does this statistic worry you?
  • “You will stomp us into the dirt,” is how her mother responded to Anya Ulinich’s new tragicomic graphic novel. Paul Berger has a more open view of ‘Lena Finkle’s Magic Barrel." What do you think?
  • PHOTOS: Hundreds of protesters marched through lower Manhattan yesterday demanding an end to American support for Israel’s operation in #Gaza.
  • Does #Hamas have to lose for there to be peace? Read the latest analysis by J.J. Goldberg.
  • This is what the rockets over Israel and Gaza look like from space:
  • "Israel should not let captives languish or corpses rot. It should do everything in its power to recover people and bodies. Jewish law places a premium on pidyon shvuyim, “the redemption of captives,” and proper burial. But not when the price will lead to more death and more kidnappings." Do you agree?
  • Slate.com's Allison Benedikt wrote that Taglit-Birthright Israel is partly to blame for the death of American IDF volunteer Max Steinberg. This is why she's wrong:
  • Israeli soldiers want you to buy them socks. And snacks. And backpacks. And underwear. And pizza. So claim dozens of fundraising campaigns launched by American Jewish and Israeli charities since the start of the current wave of crisis and conflict in Israel and Gaza.
  • The sign reads: “Dogs are allowed in this establishment but Zionists are not under any circumstances.”
  • Is Twitter Israel's new worst enemy?
  • More than 50 former Israeli soldiers have refused to serve in the current ground operation in #Gaza.
  • "My wife and I are both half-Jewish. Both of us very much felt and feel American first and Jewish second. We are currently debating whether we should send our daughter to a Jewish pre-K and kindergarten program or to a public one. Pros? Give her a Jewish community and identity that she could build on throughout her life. Cons? Costs a lot of money; She will enter school with the idea that being Jewish makes her different somehow instead of something that you do after or in addition to regular school. Maybe a Shabbat sing-along would be enough?"
  • Undeterred by the conflict, 24 Jews participated in the first ever Jewish National Fund— JDate singles trip to Israel. Translation: Jews age 30 to 45 travelled to Israel to get it on in the sun, with a side of hummus.
  • from-cache

Would you like to receive updates about new stories?




















We will not share your e-mail address or other personal information.

Already subscribed? Manage your subscription.