"The Women" - Conversation with Lady Elaine Sacks and Dr. Esther Joel

I had the absolute privilege to attend the Shabbaton at Stern this past week with special guests of honor, Lord Rabbi Jonathan Sacks (Chief Rabbi of England) and his wife, Lady Elaine. President Joel and his wife, Dr. "Queen" Esther Joel, were there as well. For a fantastic summary of the Shabbaton and the inspiring divrei Torah of Rabbi Sacks, check out Shades of Grey's post, Why Can't America Have a Chief Rabbi This Cool?!

One part of the Shabbaton that Shades didn't mention (see comments on his post for why) was the post-luncheon panel with the Chief Rebbetzin and First Lady. Dean Karen Bacon moderated, asking a list of (pre-approved) questions to each of the two women, and of course, moved along with funny comments from President Joel sitting on the sidelines. I'll try my best to remember all the questions and answers.

Before she began, Dean Bacon made a really great remark; The old saying "Behind every great man lies a great woman" isn't really true, at least according to the way Judaism views the powerful partnership that is marriage. A more correct statement would be, "Behind every great person is a great life partner." Both Dr. Joel and Lady Elaine are wonderful examples of this truth.

The first question was a basic rundown of each woman's professional background, and how that has changed since entering public roles with their husbands.

Dr. Joel, a practicing psychologist (who got her PhD. over ten years, while raising children!), is on the board at a health facility, and has always been very involved in community work, whether it be on the school board, an active member of shul committees, or part of the Chevra Kadisha. She made a really interesting and important point regarding communal work: If you want something to be done (in your child's school for instance), don't wait for someone else to do it. You should do it! Ever since her husband (formerly a lawyer) became president of YU, she had a new role; hostess to many public figures.

Lady Elaine is, by education, a radiographer (I guess the American equivalent would be a radiologist), who also writes book reviews for a Jewish journal. She is also extremely involved in the community, and that seems to now be her primary role as wife of the Chief Rabbi. She mentioned chessed, being involved with the high school girls on a personal basis, and the annual poetry contest and tea reception for children in the Jewish day schools. Like Dr. Joel, she also does a lot of entertaining and hosting of dignitaries (from many walks of life), and even royalty (such as the private dinner she and Rabbi Sacks had with Prince Charles and Camilla Parker Bowles, before they were married - smooth political move, anyone?).

"What would be one piece of advice you wished someone would have told you when you were in college/university?"

Both Lady Elaine and Dr. Joel answered "Enjoy it!" Don't take up time now worrying about the future - these are such great years of your life, so take advantage of it! (A cute story that Dean Bacon stuck in was how Stern's psych professor, Dr. Aharon Fried - a Munkacher Chassid - was asked the same question on a video for Stern. He answered by singing a line from Simon and Garfunkel's great song, "Feelin' Groovy": "Slow down, you move too fast/ You've got to make the morning last...")

Another question was something along the lines of, "What advice could you give to young women today who want to balance working and raising a Jewish family?"

Dr. Joel (a response that drew cheers from the female half of the crowd): "Guys, help out!" She also stressed the importance of prioritizing your time between family and work. Lady Elaine (I think it was in response to this question) spoke about how children learn most from examples in the home, more that anywhere else. The example she gave was that if tzedakah and chessed are priorities in your home, your children will copy that. So when prioritizing between work and family, keep that in mind as well.

What is the biggest problem facing the Jewish community today?

Lady Elaine said that she believed "outmarriage" (translation: intermarriage) and anti-Semitism are what she sees as the biggest problems. While the first is universally a concern, the second is probably more relevant to European Jewry than it is to American Jewry. Dr. Joel gravely said she believes diffidence is our biggest concern. She wasn't even talking about lack of discussion between Orthodox, Reform, and Conservative; she meant that lack of tolerance between the difference shades of Orthodoxy is what is ripping apart our community today.

What was the most interesting question you were ever asked?

Dr. Joel was once in Carvel, and she was paying with a check, and the high school kid behind the counter asked her if she was Billy Joel's mom. Mind you, Billy Joel is a bit older than Dr. Joel...

Rabbi and Lady Sack's daughter came to them after she got the ultrasound of her first child, asking if there was a bracha for such an occasion (the first time you see your child - up until then, Hashem was the only one who saw him/her). They said "She'hechiyanu."

The great part of this Shabbaton was seeing both the Sackses and Joels in a relaxed setting, getting to know them (a little bit), rather than merely seeing them as great, but distant, figures. Not only were the words of Torah and wisdom they gave us valuable, but the experience of being in their presence was just as enlightening. Both are strong couples living genuine, dedicated, passionate lives of Torah in the world-straddling communities we belong to, real example for how we should and can conduct our lives. I am personally very grateful to both the Joels and Sackses for sharing a Shabbos with the students at YU and Stern, and I'm sure anyone who was lucky enough to be there would agree.

I wish I could remember more, but my brain is shutting down. If any readers remember more, please add it in the comments!

Purim in YU: Not Very Funny...

The Beren Campus buildings have recently been graced with two YU Purim publications - The Closetator and Kol Hamishtakker (spoofs on the YU newspaper The Commentator, and the Jewish thought magazine Kol Hamevaser, respectively). Excited at the prospect of having a laugh over my dinner the other night, I picked up a copy of each while waiting for the elevator.

Allow me a brief definition of Purim merriment, courtesy of Wikipedia. There are two classic types of humor associated with Purim.

A) “Purim Torah” - “humorous, satirical writings... Purim Torah authors, often displaying an amazing grasp of Jewish knowledge, playfully use some of the far-fetched methods of Talmudic logic and Biblical exegesis in order to reach absurd conclusions.” Purim Torah generally consists of comical, yet erudite Torah teachings, or things like linguistic tricks.

B) “Purim Shpiels” - humorous plays or skits that tend to affectionately exaggerate and poke fun at certain qualities of well-known figures (from Tanach or present-day Jewish life, such as a community Rav or teacher) and elements of recorded stories (again, from Tanach or recent community events). These satirical parodies are popular in yeshivas and shuls.

The Kol Hamishtakker was, in my humble opinion, a fantastic blend of wit, wisdom, and (literally) laugh-out-loud humor. They successfully created a “Purim Torah” publication, in every sense of the term. The articles incorporated the classic pilpul learning style of a beis medrash in the silliest of matters, and utilized many little twists on language, resulting in a great Purim publication.

When I picked up The Closestator, however, I was immediately shocked with the very first headline: “Prominent Rosh Yeshiva Emerges from Closet” with a large digitally edited photo of “R’ Twersky” literally coming out from a closet. I was so upset and appalled at the reference that I had a moment of actual nausea.

How could such a bizayon of a Torah authority be publicly printed? Yes, it was all in the name of “simchas Purim,” but there are halachos that need to be taken into account before such “jokes” are made public. There are lo ta’asehs of nezikin (physical damages), lashon hara, ona’as devarim, and embarrassment that one could easily violate when creating Purim shtick. (See “Purim Pranks in Halacha,” a translation of a shiur by R’ Yosef Zvi Rimon on Virtual Beit Midrash)

In this particular case of this article, there are serious issues of ona’as devarim involved. The source for this issur is Vayikra 25:17 - “V’lo tonu ish et amito…” “You shall not wrong one another,” which the Sefer Hachinuch (338) clearly defines as “not shaming people or causing them pain in any way.” Not only is this a matter that cannot be ignored when involved in Purim shtick, but it gets even more problematic when the subject of the shtick is a mechanech, because at that point, both a person and the Torah (which he teaches) are being made fun of. Kal v’chomer, in the case of a Rosh Yeshiva!

Aren’t we told that the Jews of Persia re-accepted the Torah on Purim? (“Ki’yimu v’kiblu,” Esther 9:27) What is the point to Purim shtick if it makes a mockery of that very same Torah and the Rabbanim who transmit it?

Additionally, we know that Purim and Adar are the time when we are told “macho timche et zecher Amalek,” to wipe out the remembrance of Amalek. How do we keep this mitzvah today? According to one interpretation (forgive me, I can’t remember where I saw it), Amalek represents the midah of leitzanus, or mockery, which is achieved by approaching wisdom or Torah and finding one tiny thing wrong with it, publicly declaring that, and thus undermining all authority and credibility which that wisdom contains. We can destroy Amalek today by eliminating that negative midah from within ourselves. But if this is the exact midah that is utilized in creating Purim shpiels (i.e. - making a gadol b‘Torah and the Torah he teaches the butt of one‘s joke), it is allowing Amalek to continue existing. Certainly, this is antithetical to the everlasting message and meaning of Purim!

I believe there is a very fine line between proper “Purim Torah” or “Purim Shpiels” and bizayon v’leitzanus. I don’t think it is unfair to say that The Closetator, at times, crossed that line.

Regarding the particular article; I understand the line of thinking. It was very shticky and sharp to have a literal spin on the phrase “come out of the closet.” When one reads the whole article, there are, admittedly, some funny lines. And I can understand the writer’s though process; “Well, who would be the funniest subject to write this about?” R’ Twersky seems like a perfect subject, given his vehement opposition to the entire episode of the gay panel.

But that is where the line was crossed. It is by very virtue of the fact that R’ Twersky was such a serious force of opposition that he was the most inappropriate choice. Had the subject been anyone else, such as a fictional student, or possibly even Rabbi Blau (given his involvement in the panel), the article would have been less (if not at all) offensive. But any redeeming humor in the article is overshadowed by the shocking lack of kavod for a Rosh Yeshiva.

Maybe its just a girl thing, and this is how guys do Purim. I wouldn’t know. I did see the YU Purim shpiel from last year on YouTube, which did make fun of rebbeim (in front of them, no less) - but it seemed to me that there wasn’t an offensive nature to the jokes. At least, it didn’t bother me. And some kind of light-hearted, affectionate teasing of mechanchim (in the context of a Purim shpiel) seems to be permitted sometimes (see footnote 8 of the above article).

Maybe The Closetator article bothered me because it was so in-your-face, so openly ridiculous, and with a picture. Plus, it was such a delicate topic. If anyone heard R’ Twersky speak in response to the panel, it was really intense. I’m not paskening here, but making fun of something so incredibly serious is in poor taste and cannot possibly be mutar.

Maybe it’s just a difference in the subject matter of each publication. The Kol Hamevaser is a machshava/Jewish thought magazine, and consequently, all of the articles have some element, usually a very large portion, of analytical Torah and Jewish philosophy to it (in the regular editions). Thus, it is expected and appropriate that the Kol Hamevaser’s Purim publication is of this “Purim Torah” nature (in keeping with the above definition).

The Commentator, however, is a general student newspaper, not directed at Torah (or science, such as Derech Hateva, for example). The articles in this publication are of an informational, not analytical, nature. They report on events, happenings, student body undercurrents, etc. It would be out of place to expect all of their articles to be of a Torah-centric nature, which is the Kol Hamevaser’s area of expertise. But this does not mean that The Commentator, a Yeshiva University publication, should be void of Torah values. Even if it is a Purim edition.

Now, one could argue that the Kol Hamishtakker had their fair share of mockery. But there are two differences. The first is that the Kol Hamishtakker dealt with these serious matters with an appropriate delicacy and distance (and definitely not as often as The Closetator - one needs to merely look at the title and banner of the publication to see a running theme in it).

Secondly, the articles in the Kol Hamishtakker had some sort of philosophical message. To quote the authors, “[We] wrote articles making fun of everything YU, with a kernel of truth so strong it could never be ignored.” A perfect example of this is the charming, lengthy, Dr. Seuss-esque poem dealing with that unanswerable question of how to define “Modern Orthodox” (“Bistu Modernish?” p. 17-20). The Closetator, on the other hand, seems to have no agenda or message, other than distasteful mockery of everything.

We could then compare The Closetator to the Stern Purim publication, The Unobservant. It too is a newspaper of a general sort, not focused on Torah. The Unobservant seemed, to me, to be harmlessly cute, not bitingly sharp or (pardon the harsh language) boorishly humorous. (I could bring more examples from The Closetator that rubbed me the wrong way, but I won’t.)

Please don't think that I have anything personal against the writers or editors themselves. I don’t know a single one of them, and I am sure that they are all upstanding b'nei Torah. The only thing that disturbs me is their judgment regarding what was and wasn’t appropriate for the Purim publication.

Maybe it’s a matter of personal taste. But humor at the expense of kavod haTorah is undoubtedly antithetical.

My only hope is that next year, IY”H, we can celebrate Purim with the true, unsullied, pure, and effective simcha that is the hallmark of Adar.

(Please pardon the length of this post. I just needed to express my thoughts and feelings. Thanks for understanding.)