A FEW WORDS FROM MR. SCHIFF.
SPEAKING in Kansas City, last month, before the Federation of Jewish Charities, Mr. Jacob H. Schiff gave expression to the following opinion:
"Establish a Jewish nation in Palestine? What is this conflict we see raging across the sea? It is the result of the extreme nationalism of the past thirty years. Do we want to follow in their footsteps? No Jew can be a good American who does not bring up his children in the tenets of his religion. This is Zionism as I understand it. Therefore, my friends, do not permit Zionism from over the seas to come among you."
What is this Zionism from over the seas which Mr. Schiff fears? Is it not the same Zionism which is to be found in America, waxing stronger from year to year? It is the same Zionism here, as there, which has brought a strengthened faith among those capable of entertaining faith; it is that Zionism which has brought parents to a realization of the need of Jewish education in order that the child, when he grows up, may be in a position to be faithful to his religion, if religious feeling possesses him. Without Zionism, what becomes of the young people? Has religion per se, as it is conceived by American Jewish educators, made possible the transmission of the Jewish heritage? Judaism without Zionism is impotent. Judaism with Zionism, or Zionism which includes Judaism, has brought about the revival of interest in religious life. Second, if extreme nationalism produces war, the argument should be against extremes in national feeling, but not opposition to nationality. We do not want to follow in the footsteps of the warring European nations. We do not intend being extremists. Does Mr. Schiff deprecate the rational nationalism of the Englishman or German or Frenchman? Does he advocate the obliteration of national distinctions? Not at all, if we read his recent pro-German articles and speeches aright. If nationality is a good thing for Germans, why should it not be good for Jews?
THE YIDDISH THEATRICAL SEASON.
IT is idle to speak of a Yiddish theatrical season. There is no form to the entire phenomenon. It lacks symmetry. It does not grow harmoniously. It suffers setbacks in the midst of artistic success. It is just a rank growth, now and then developing something of interest, but as a whole making the impression of barbarism.
This year, the prevailing taste seemed to be in the direction of cheap melodramas, plots taken from moving pictures. There was operetta for entree, Libin for the roast, Solaterevsky for dessert, and to exhilarate, some tid-bit taken from the comic opera field of alien peoples. In the midst of the dinner, so to speak, there intruded Sholom Asch with his splendid “Unser Glauben” and Schomer with his ridiculous but laughable “Greener Millionaire ”
The same cheap atmosphere surrounded the theatre, and the same appeal to "Moshe" was made everywhere. They have given it up as a waste of effort to appeal to the intelligent element, for they are convinced there is no such element. The theatre has become, as it was in the
first years of Goldfaden, the rendezvous of the unintelligent, the mass. As men of business, having forgotten the time when they posed as artists, the Yiddish actor-managers cater to the mass, hoping thereby to fill their theatres.
But they do not fill their theatres; they are not amassing wealth. One season may bring profits which are consumed by the next. It is a risky business. It is an undependable clientele. A trust is formed of the leading "stars," each with his business satellite to show him the way. The trust maintains its life for a six months and goes into bankruptcy. A leading "star," noted as being the Belasco of the Yiddish stage, finds himself at the end of the season of "shund" confronted with judgments, and takes refuge in the bankruptcy courts.
Is it possible tht these shrewd business actors are wrong in their understanding of the situation? Is it possible that “shund” in fact does not pay? Are the mass more intelligent than they give them credit for?
But it is idle to investigate this matter. The actor-manager are too old, their habits are fixed, and with them conversion to new ideals is out of the question. May they live to Methusalem's age, but as long as they live and rule the roost of the Yiddish stage, a discussion of its possibilities is sheer idle talk. No one cares what becomes of this vagrant phenomenon in Jewish life. Salvation must come from the outer Jewish world. And no one in the outer world cares, either.
SINCE the death of Leo N. Levi, the Independent Order B'nai Berith has been drifting. Leo N. Levi forced part of the Order out of the rut of the lodge system and endeavored to make of it the foremost Jewish organization in America. He had a statesman's outlook. Unfortunately he met with strenuous opposition in the Order on the part of the old leaders, and before he had an opportunity to measure swords with them, he died. He was succeeded by Simon Wolf, and then by Adolph Kraus. While Mr. Kraus has been eager to assert the claims of the I. O. B. B., to American leadership, he has not been able to develop a policy that would entitle him to the prerogatives of that position. He has been timid, vacillating, uncertain as to whither he would steer the ship of state. It is to be hoped that the San Francisco Convention of the Constitution Grand Lodge will give firmness and direction to the I. O. B. B. Unless new ideas come into the Order, it is doomed to a senile old age, unworthy of its beginnings.
The Boston section of the Council of Jewish Women is the first to endorse the Zionist program and to offer its sympathy and co-operation to the Zionist organization. Dr. Maurice H. Harris asks for a reconsideration of Zionism by reform organizations. These are straws showing whither the wind is blowing.
Many German Zionists, serving the Fatherland in the trenches, are having their monthly pay assigned to the National Fund.