64 Friday, February 5, 1982

THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS

`Never Say Die!' Proclaimed Yiddish Battlecry

(Continued from Page 2)
bokher biz hirsh glik" (1963) and "Yerushelayem
delite ilustrirt un dokumentirt" (1974), and, most
importantly, members of my immediate family
who helped me assemble the readings and check
the bibliography, and, above all, who convinced
me to include readings in Yiddish per se, so that
through this volume the language would not
merely be read about" but would actually be read
and studied directly.
In the last analysis, language is not only a
socioaffective referent but a cognitive — express-
ive system first and foremost. Like all languages,
but somehow even more than most, Yiddish
pleads to be and needs to be read, spoken,
laughed, cried, sung, shouted. It is a breath of life
itself. This volume, therefore, is, in part, also a
contribution to those who will continue to breathe
it, to use it, rather than just admire it or long at it,
and an attempt to add to their ranks.
It is noteworthy that while the plea is for Yiddish that
the Hebraic background is acknowledged and utilized. The
title page itself, reproduced here, commences with the quo-
tation in Hebrew from the Psalms: "Lo omut ki ekhye," "I
shall not die but live." That's where the title for the book,
"Never Say Die!" stems from.
The Yiddish plea appearing soon after leafing the
pages of this work is equally noteworthy, as is the repro-
duced dedicatory statement.
The fact that about half the volume is in Yiddish will
satisfy the lonesomeness for the language and its wealth of
literary gems. An essay in Yiddish by Sh. Niger illustrates
this satisfying of temptation for the glorious Yiddish cul-
tural words.
Dr. Fishman's creative labors and extensive research,
his sociological comments, are marked by the additional
impressiveness of nonpartisanship. He recalls the negative
attitudes toward Yiddish, the aspersions to it, the prejudi-
cial in early Zionist and Hebraic ranks.
Early Zionist attitudes, which Yiddishists label as
prejudicial, figure in the sociological study, and Dr.
Fishman comments upon it in reference to Ahad HaAm:
Even the assimilationist ripple in the Zionist
sea, that ripple that saw in Zionism no more than
an opportunity to be "like unto (all) the gentiles"
(or, as Ahad HaAm put it, who saw in Zionism
merely a solution to "the Jewish question" — i.e.
finding a place where persecuted Jews could live
in safety — rather than a solution to "the Jewish-
ness question" — i.e. creating a society in which
Jewish culture could develop without dislocative
interference), could confidently prefer Hebrew to
Yiddish .. .
The eminent historian Heinrich Graetz also enters
into the discussion. The views of Ma*ilim in the Haskala
— Enlightenment — era and what is ascribed as "self-hate"
by the opponents of Yiddish, scholars like Graetz, are out-
lined in this section of Fishman's study:
The facts of life were such that Yiddish had to be
used, even by those self-proclaimed intellectuals
who despised it, used even against itself; if the
common man was to be reached, there simply was
no alternative. Theoretically, elegant Hebrew
would have been much preferable to the maskilim
(the enlightened purveyors of haskole), but there
was no real alternative to the use of Yiddish (in-
deed only via Yiddish could one lead the masses
back to Hebrew if that was one's goal).
Those like the renowned German-Jewish histo-
rian Heinrich Graetz, who were so ashamed of
Yiddish as to refuse to use it at all, finally came to
be viewed as full of self-hate and therefore, as
themselves a liability to the haskole and a source
of general shame.
This is where Moses Mendelssohn steps in as a Bible
translator into German and as a leader in the pre-Haskala
period of anti-Yiddish prejudices. On this score, here is the
reference in "Never Say Die!"
This designation (usually in the form
haskala(h)/haskolo(h) had also been used earlier
in the late 18th and early 19th Centuries in con-
junction with a similar movement to Europeanize
German (and, more generally, Western European)
Jewry. The Western European haskole also -vig-
orously opposed Yiddish (Kayserling 1862;
Altman 1973), although it is an exaggeration to
ascribe to it, or, as is more frequently done, to

Moses Mendelssohn's translation of the Bible into
German (so that the earlier Yiddish translations
would no longer be needed), the decisive role in
displacing Yiddish there.
Although the Eastern European haskole inher-
ited from its Western European predecessor a dis-
tinctly negative view of Yiddish (see Liptsin 1944
for the tradition of German dictionaries that de-
fine Yiddish in accord with the bias of the Western
Enlightenment) the two haskoles ultimately took
far different developmental paths.
The paths for Yiddish were not easy. There was a
difficulty in the Polish schools towards the end of the last
century. This is linked by Prof. Fishman with an an-
tagonism that was dominant in the Hebrew University.
The manner in which the latter was corrected is outlined in
this excerpt from the Fishman volume:
At the 1919 Peace Conference in Paris, it was
agreed to require that public elementary schools
for Jewish children in the new Poland be con-
ducted in Yiddish, the mother tongue of the chil-
dren. Unfortunately, the Polish constitutional
convention in 1920 adopted a far weaker pro-
vision, not only with respect to the language of
schooling of minority children but with respect to
public or official usage of minority languages
more generally.
Seven years later (1927) Yiddish was once more
slighted, and this time in Jerusalem. There the
newly established Hebrew University decided not
to establish a chair in Yiddish. Retrospectively
this was attributed to fear of drawing upon the
still fledgling university the fire of the militantly
Hebraist "geduil m'giney hasafa," which had al-
erted the public that "an idol was about to be
brought into the Sanctuary." However, nearly a
quarter-century thereafter (1951), that wrong was
righted and a chair in Yiddish was finally estab-
lished in Jerusalem, accompanied by all of the
academic and governmental pomp and circum-
stance normally associated with expiations of
guilt .. .
Then follows a com-
ment quoting Israel's late
Prime Minister Golda
Meir. The popular Golda
was herself a master of
Yiddish. Like many of the
early pioneering Israeli
leaders, she loved Yid-
dish. Here is how her atti-
tude is drawn upon by Dr.
Fishman:
Nearly another two
decades slipped by be-
fore an Israeli Prime
Minister (Golda Meir)
could admit — at a pri-
vate ceremonial rather
GOLDA MEIR
than at a governmental
substantive initiative — that "the spirit of the mur-
dered millions lives in Yiddish culture. We dare not
commit the offense of not having provided our
youth with a consciousness of deep attachment to
those millions and to the great cultural treasure
they created . . . It is now much easier to'do so than it
was a few decades ago . . . This is a wonderful youth
and it would be the greatest injustice for them not to
recognize the great Jewish-national values that
Jews have created in Yiddish . ."
Serious attention is given to the Tshernovits (Cher-
nobitch) conference for the-promulgation of Yiddish. This
merits quoting:
Perhaps the loftiest peak of all was the Tsher-
novits (Chernovtsy, ChernowitzY Language Con-
ference of 1908, a brainchild of S. Birnboym, Zhit-
lovski and the Labor-Zionist oriented writer,
David Pinski. It left behind it a whirlwind of
commentary, memoirs, and expectations — and,
as with all things that touch upon:Yiddish, a huge
gamut of opinion.
Now, over 70 years later, it is still not clear, as it
was unclear even at the conference and im-
mediately thereafter, just what it accomplished.
Its concrete recommendations never mate-
rialized, for it had no follow-through apparatus.
However it did signal a change in mood, focus,

46

tra pz -rx

prs -r Tx ,up ,i'n

t35yov 1 ,5x 1lv5
,r Tx pp -m - tinna X nytts
.urtny-rti
tra Tyrn u"poit2opti Tlx o"P.
(1 : nun-rp pp Tyy-rni "11Y trr'nnn t on ktri 71D77;
,tnpocyaskt tom 'T .ntn -rp ntriprrn ,(2 ;rirgrip 'Dll
;10 -1t0 ri TID lynytnin Iry lyn Tx
ltt.1 tr1
P 12Y11
,y53r.ny7 Ctrl
1.2S1 ;1"1",r1
,p5 , Dn ,n 1,15P
,7pyr oy-r
; o.5pn1;,‘
.7r5
U'1 , -ittnpro
0411 pruplp
,n trip '011 17'111: U1DY11%D
,m91-rp -, rnizm. ilD prz'v 01I nynn onyr,y)
y`ni trn irrinzz Tin 1y» yp`pyn p P' 17"7-1 "Plti N1 ,11
-r p5y11 1yny3yv; C ?$•T iy-1 In< .nnnp
Tyrn
7yilya 1y1"1
yoop , 5,,77
ny-r o$n itncro ny -r 9,114 ? TrP-r,
,o5pilyxrnt
,ptta 1y35 , 11 11r1 , 5"wmin 13T1 ,K"Pl
- e $11 IP , ,
yny-rix jlx nyrwr
D' 1'»5n ynyin t:17 'nntr
ny--1 ,Pitrov - 5yz ny -r orsn v-p, 1,1$ .u11y'7ya
nrrip —
nyoni ny-r Tlx -ran nyvonyTyra
peryntm itnvo 1 ,1rt .ony5pnyn
nvyr:
pri
11 y=1 17 yuivn ,;71173x
lorin yur-r,
nnin yorna 14T 01' 1 - 151 .up , n-rylorx oDKTV" -It)
"p'n. KIM .77'1" Tilt only , o, ynyin /113'V
"1
nyP
,yu17k;ontt rp 10'3 P nizn-tp
.nromp - ntrbwri pP - rn or rx ,yuyn ,,17y)14,kt 1tt nil
rnpt nyonna x rK mp ,n., 0yr in5ttr0'itt

.t.11Y11 11.1152SOMX

•

tY"»

►

Dr. Fishman's Definitive Acclaim of and Appeal
for Retention of Yiddish as a Living Tongue.

and level of self-regard along the entire spectrum
of Yiddish activists and - devotees.
At Tshernovits, Yiddish was proclaimed a (not
the but a) national language of the Jewish people.
As such it deserved respect, cultivation, protec-
tion, recognition, and calculated promotion, for
both the secular and traditional functions, both
among Jews as well as between Jews and non-
Jews (e.g. with governmental agencies, in legisla-
tive bodies in which other minority languages
were recognized, and in government-subsidized
cultural efforts).
Its writers, teachers and advocates were to be
viewed as engaged in a great national mission of
furthering the identity and fostering the creativ-
ity of the Jewish masses. A panoply of schools,
theaters, modern and traditional genres (includ-
ing a modern translation of the Bible) and organ-
izations would arise to serve it and through it to
serve the people.
''" • -----
i Shmuel Niger was in the
front ranks of Yiddish litera-
ture in this country for three
generations. He was the idol of
" the Yiddishists. He is repre-
sented in this volume with an
inspired essay "Die Nat-
zionale Role_ Fun Yiddish un
der Yiddisher Kultur" — "The
National Role of Yiddish and
Yiddish Culture." It serves
specifically as an emphasis on
the Yiddish portions in the
Fishman-edited volume as an
indication of the wealth of the
language drawn upon here.
SH. NIGER
Dr. Fishman also draws
upon the notable labors of Max and Uriel Weinreich in
their evaluations of Yiddish and their creative labors frl
perpetuate the use of the language.
Thus, "Never Say Die!" emerges as one of the gre,-,,
works completed iii this generation in support of Yiddish.
Prof. Fishman has earned the gratitude of the Jewish
people for this encyclopedic work.
—P.S.

:ny-frpo - Tilp

.

t.7"rr8 71x ,y-i1',;

1pr131) Ut7 , 1 TI
5y11tv '1y7 `1t36

crir tnIn

cri, 1

ny,, T `n:.“

It

cy

Dr. Fishman's Dedication to Yiddish.

`7t5T 718