The TV series Unorthodox has been making waves among Jews (and perhaps ripples among non-Jews) across the nation. Most rave about it. Some, predictably, are critical of it from a defensive point of view, being members of the broader orthodox Jewish community. I watched it and had decidedly mixed feelings. While I found it moving and fascinating, I also found it very contrived and unconvincing (especially the last episode).
At this link
I have posted a long video lecture by Rivkah Slonim that is ostensibly about
the series. I say ostensibly because after an excellent analysis and evaluation
of the series at the beginning, for perhaps the first twenty minutes, the conversation
(in the form of chat Q&A) then meanders into an exposition of Chassidic
belief and practice – in equal measure information and justification – for the
rest of the one hour and 45 minutes that I recorded. I stopped watching and
recording at that point because I have heard it all before and it was becoming tiresome.*
* I do not know if a recording will be posted by the Chabad organization. If it is you can get the rest of it from that. My recording is unfortunately dysfunctional
in parts, at one point I lost the feed until I was able to reconnect.
-----
I am posting this because I think that
Rivkah Slonim is an amazing intellect, analyst and expositor of her worldview –
the worldview of Chabad Chassidism. (For those who do not know what this is you
can look it up or watch the video for Slonim’s cogent explanation.) I think her
talk is valuable because it does capture what is wrong with the TV series,
namely, that insofar as it may be accurate in its description of the lifestyle
of the Satmar Chassidic community in Williamsburg, it is also only one side of
that lifestyle, the sordid, oppressive side, and neglects the very real tender,
compassionate, nurturing side. Also, aspects of the TV portrayal were decidedly
inaccurate, like the way in which attitudes to sex by the community is
portrayed. Slonim does an excellent job debunking this while, at the same time,
noting the artistic accomplishments of the series. It achieved its dramatic
intent for the most part.
For the rest, in fact, if not intent, the talk provided an
opportunity to wax eloquent about the truth, falsehood and beauty of orthodox
Jewish life in general and of Chabad Chassidism in particular. So posting it
will allow its sponsors to reach a wider audience for this purpose as well as
for simply a deeper look into the TV series.
Reaching a wider audience for the purpose of explaining Chassidism (and orthodox Judaism) may enlighten and
impress some, but is equally likely to have the opposite effect leaving many
singularly unimpressed if not annoyed and repelled. It all depends, I suppose,
on what one’s fundamental beliefs are.
The latter group will see Slonim’s eloquent explanations,
extolling the virtues of what most see as strange or unacceptable practices, as transparent special pleading that ignores the most disturbing aspects of that
culture– aspects that can never be squared with the expectations of those who see
them this way. I am in that group. While I admire and treasure many aspects of Jewish
orthodoxy and Chabad Chassidism in particular, there are many other aspects
that strike me as ridiculous, oppressive, superstitious, and sometimes
downright medieval (to wit, attitudes about homosexuality, masturbation, sexual
purity, ritual egalitarianism, divorce, intellectual inquiry, and more). In
this respect, Slonim’s early dogmatic assertion that all Jews are fundamentally
the same (which has some rather unpleasant overtones when considered as saying
all Jews are fundamentally different from non-Jews) strikes me as absolutely false.
I see myself having nothing in common whatsoever with many (most?) in the
Haredi community, save for a remote common ancestry.
It is fascinating to see how much these fundamentalist
communities have adapted to the modern world, no better example than the
eloquent expertise of Rivkah Slonim, who straddles both worlds so effortlessly,
in an attempt to make jarring anomalies acceptable. But ultimately it comes
down to free choice, a phenomenon pretty much exclusive to the modern industrial
world.
Not so long ago, in the Netherlands, a Jewish community
could use its power, underwritten by the power of the government, to
excommunicate Baruch Spinoza, a free thinker, for his nonconformism in word,
belief and action, an act which dramatically damaged his life. Today
communities like that, and like the Chabad community, compete to persuade
thousands of people who essentially share Spinoza’s perspective, to affiliate
with them [see here
for more]. This one-eighty degree change is completely explained by the loss by religious
communities of the power to compel belief, observance and conformity - that is, by the transformation of religion into a 'lifestyle choice', a free choice. Slonim
may be correct when she says that the Satmar community is not a prison since anyone
is free to leave, but she no doubt realizes that that freedom is a matter of
regret if not anguish for many if not most true believers.
