All About Jewish Theatre - What is going on

Ala Zuskin-Perelman, the daughter of Benjamin Zuskin and Eda Berkovsky, both actors in the Moscow State Jewish Theater, was born in Moscow. There, she became engineer (MSc) and translator / information expert (MA), and raised her family. Zuskin-Perelman immigrated to Israel in 1975 with her husband Yuri Perelman and their two sons. For two decades she ran the Information Center at the Standards Institution of Israel. She works to memorialize her father: by giving speeches, being interviewed, publishing articles, and assisting The Tel Aviv Diaspora Museum, The Jerusalem Cinematheque, Israeli community television producers, and The New York Jewish Museum. Zuskin-Perelman’s book, The Travels of Benjamin Zuskin, has been published in Russian, 2002, and in Hebrew, 2006. She is preparing now the English version. e-mail : ala@bezeqint.net

“A bridge is not a road… a bridge merely connects, right and left, one side and another … thus, a bridge becomes a metaphor for connection, for difference, and for the space in-between” (p. 1).

It is how Olga Gershenson begins her book. At once, she introduces us into the atmosphere of being ‘in-between’. The further we move through her narrative, the more we understand that such a beginning is not only meaningful as to the book’s context, but the only possible one. Even though the title Gesher (Hebrew for bridge) is given to the book after its "main character" - the Israeli theatre Gesher, the book relates not solely to this theatre. Actually it is about a bridge in much broader sense - a bridge between cultures, languages, mentalities, preferences, countries, generations, and epochs.

The topic of a bridge continues throughout Gershenson’s entire book, although it is not its only tune.

The title, Gesher, is accompanied by the subtitle A Study of Cultural Colonization. "Cultural colonization" is another theme. Gershenson does not speak about colonization in a one-dimensional, traditional, military-political sense. She tries to understand and to explain the complex relationships between cultures, and to this end borrows “from the theoretical tool-box of post-colonial discourse analysis” (p. 11). She understands the colonial discourse “as a discourse of inequity of power” (p. 12). During the book’s narrative the discursive sides may switch positions – from a colonizing to a colonized one, and vice versa. Gershenson suggests that this gives place to a “multiple value system, where subjects can be different but not better or worse than each other” (p. 19), and thus, she is optimistic.
The book emerged out of a scientific research and as such, it is thoroughly documented. To support statements or descriptions concerned with theatre performances, life episodes or political situations, Gershenson mostly quotes different sources – mainly reviews, but also interviews, articles, and books. She does not comment on the quotations, so it is up to the reader to conclude whether she he is on the source’s side or not. Instead, she positions her quotations within the framework of colonizing-colonized relationships, which vary with periods of time or performance styles, and this instability presents a transparent picture of what is going on – on the bridge.

Olga Gershenson precedes her story on Gesher Theatre by telling us about "a tsunami" (p. 1) of Soviet Jewish immigrants in Israel of 1990s. “The new Soviet immigrants… fed up with the ideology of their Soviet past, and coming from successful professional background… were not in rush to leave behind their exilic past and plunge into a new cultural reality” (pp 1 – 2). Gershenson describes the political and social situation in Israel in relation to this immigration wave.
”Neither quite Israeli nor quite Soviet” (p. 2), these immigrants started their first steps on the bridge connecting between old and new realities. Gershenson states that one of the few places where they were “seen and heard was Gesher Theatre” (p. 3).

I am writing about a book concerned with a theatre belonging to our epoch, and nevertheless it is difficult for me not to bring into line another theatre, which ceased to exist more than half a century ago. Perhaps it is not fair, but associations evoked in my mind by Gershenson’s book are so strong that I have no choice. This "other theatre” was GOSET – The Moscow State Jewish (Yiddish) Theatre (1919 – 1949), and I studied everything about it while writing the book about one of his stars, my father Benjamin Zuskin.

Both theatres started as means of self-expression of Soviet Jews in crucial moments of their life: GOSET after the Russian revolution, which seemed to ensure a better future, and Gesher, at the beginning of the mass immigration to Israel. In both, there is much in common, including the authority of a talented stage director, a complete devotion of actors to their art, a family-like atmosphere, the transmission, to audiences, of the theatre’s credo using grotesque or carnivalesque tools, including music, light, stage settings, and choreography into performance concept as intrinsic components.

Both may be positioned in a "cultural colonization" framework, with one difference: GOSET always was in colonized position. It was never "on a bridge", but on a road leading straight to the grave.

It is a pity that Gesher’s people are not aware of this likeness. As Gershenson explains, it is not their fault: “By the time Gesher’s actors and director were trained, GOSET and other Yiddish theatres were erased from the Soviet cultural memory” (p. 178).

Gershenson provides us with a detailed description of every one of Gesher’s performances. Beside content, cast, directing or artistic style, etc, we learn about personalities of stage director Yevgeni Arie, and the actors, their hopes, achievements or disappointments. We also learn about relationships in various periods of time between the theatre and its different audiences, the Israeli establishment, reviewers, and public-opinion-makers. In addition, we get familiar with the political, military, or social situation in Israel and with new immigrant problems - all in given moments. So, Gesher Theatre is an inseparable element of the general picture of Israel. Actually, the theatre is more than that - it mirrors this picture.

Gesher Theatre started its way by performing in Russian, for Russian-speaking audiences. Then critics wrote about it, like sixty years before about Habima (Hebrew-speaking theatre established in Russia and becoming the national theatre in Israel), that it was ‘too Russian’ on one side, and “favored artistic values over ideological” (p. 44), on another. Here, Gershenson’s conclusions are very interesting: while demonstrating high artistic values, Gesher Theatre is in a colonizing position, versus Israeli culture, but being ‘too Russian’, in a colonized position, versus Zionist ideology.

Alongside with ideological pressure, Gershenson mentions a commercial one: most Israeli theatre-lovers do not attend non-Hebrew-speaking performances.
Gershenson’s writings all over the book are impressive. Her presentation of how this theatre succeeded to pass across the ‘linguistic bridge’ (essentially a bridge between performing in Russian and then Hebrew) is amazing. She tells us about such a passage without missing any tiny detail. This part of her story, which is really exciting, is summed-up with the following statement: “The transition to Hebrew was an important step in the theatre’s development that in many ways defined its future… the transition that started as a conformist adherence to ideological and financial pressures led to fine artistic achievements. Careful work with text allowed the actors and director to reach a higher level of concentration and precision” (p. 61). In my humble opinion, this transition may be interpreted not only as Gesher’s submission to ideological and/or financial pressure ( in another words, as liberation of a colonized position), but also, and perhaps mainly, as an invincible need of theatre-makers to be understood by the audiences and to pass them their message.

As a ‘full-rights’ local public theatre, Gesher received constant housing. At first, the theatre opened in a modest building, but gradually upgraded into the best accommodations. Gesher receives acclaim from a constantly growing audience base, as well as from the establishment; so far it received numerous awards and prices. Nevertheless, critics’ reactions are polarized. In most cases they not only praise Arie’s staging approach, unified acting team, specific actors’ personal achievements, stage and light settings, costumes, etc, but even put Gesher above other public theatres in Israel. Therefore, from the point of view of artistic style, Gesher finds itself in a colonizing position.

On the other hand, critics, with a few exceptions, still see in Gesher a non-Israeli cultural phenomenon. The position of this theatre from the point of view of Zionist ideology is thus a colonized one. The reader, as Gershenson herself, became aware that the main problem is not – or not only – an ideology, but rather a condescending approach of Israelis to "the other". They may act wonderfully, they may be applauded in Israel and all around the world, they may speak impeccable Hebrew – as long as they are ‘on the bridge’, they will always be "the other".

In fact their Hebrew is not so impeccable, which does not prevent a performance like The Idiot, based on Dostoyevsky’s novel, from being tremendously successful and deserving wonderful critics’ approval. “This unique combination – Russian repertoire and Hebrew language of production – presented Gesher in a favorable light to critics and audiences… it was a win-win situation and every one loved it”, writes Gershenson (p. 68). Gesher is here in a colonizing position.
Paradoxically, it reaches a similar position with the play Village. The play is a genuine ‘Israeliana’: scenes of life in an Israeli village at the time of the Independence War. With this plot, nostalgic or warm personal feelings are in focus rather than heroic events, giving the actors a possibility of truly convincing the Israeli audiences, with no need of a “Zionist pathos”, in which the actors have less expertise.

“Only two Gesher’s productions”, concludes Gershenson, “encountered unproblematic critical reception: The Idiot and Village” (p. 179).
A completely opposite situation erects when the choice of a play may be interpreted as ‘touching the sacred cows’. Therefore, most of the critics and the public do not approve Adam Resurrected for its content concerning the Holocaust. Gershenson explains that out of a non-spoken consensus, dealing with Holocaust is a privilege of Israelis, not of new immigrants. She quotes a critic: “[The Holocaust topic] is too remote from [Gesher] actors’ experience; [this performance] is rather a story of an artist under the Soviet dictatorship” (p. 84). It seems to me that out of this a non-spoken consensus, Israelis want to know neither about the Holocaust on Soviet territories occupied by Nazis, nor the similarity between Hitler's and Stalin's dictatorships.

Another performance, Eating, touches another "sacred cow". In it, there is a lot of mockery versus Israeli society. Such a mockery is a prerogative of Israelis, isn’t it? I have already mentioned that Gershenson does not miss any detail. Here she emphasizes that a few reviewers do not approve of a ‘non-Israeli menu’ regarding what the characters eat. This detail is not marginal. It indicates that even in this field Gesher is still ‘on the bridge’.

I have also mentioned Gershenson’s description of how Gesher was passing through the "linguistic bridge", Gershenson keeps relating to the language topic, with the same impressive manner, all over her text. She tells us that the language switch evoked a need of cast regrouping, which became especially crucial when Arie started to engage young Israel-born actors. For the same performance, it was necessary to decide which role may be played with a Russian accent and which cannot. Gershenson underlines that not all the reviewers like every aspect of such linguistic heterogeneity.

In fact, not all the reviewers like every aspect of the artistic style either. In plays like Adam Resurrected, or Tartuffe by Moliere for instance, some critics thought that there was too much of a grotesque or carnival atmosphere and that in certain performances there was too much of stage director Arie. Indeed, nobody has doubts about Aries’ talents, but in some critics’ eyes he is, now and then, showing-up his own talents to the detriment of the actors. To native Israeli young actors or students in Arie’s theatrical school, even if they were satisfied with the artistic style and family-like atmosphere, it was difficult to get familiar with the director’s autocratic methods of staging, as well as with the unlimited working hours and hard rehearsal discipline. Gershenson makes her readers aware of a need of both sides ‘to pass across the bridge’, even inside the theatre.

So, step-by-step, she develops the picture of a theatre, which is unique in the Israeli context. She praises its successes and hides neither its difficulties, nor its failures.

In Gershenson’s book, everything is interwoven – ‘bridge’ and ‘cultural colonization’ topics, quotations and author’s writings, passages related to the Gesher Theatre and those describing politics, history, or ideology. All together it is thrilling, and not only for those who know nothing about the Gesher theatre or Israeli realities. For instance, I was born in Russia, live in Israel, am a part of this theatre’s audience, and I read critiques. Yet, I read through this book as if it was a thriller. "What next?" I kept asking myself. What interpretation will be given to such or such event? What will happen after a tremendous success described in a given page? A failure? Another success? Will a balance between veteran immigrants and native born Israelis ever materialize? Would the "Bridge" Theatre (Gesher) remain "on the bridge" forever?

These great writing/ thrilling abilities do not let us forget that Gershenson is a scholar.

“In this book”, sums-up Gershenson in her last chapter, which is mindfully named Retracing the Journey (pp 177 – 182): “I applied cultural and critical studies to the analysis of the cultural practices of Gesher Theatre and emergent discourses in the Theatre’s media reception. (…) Gesher is a hybrid theatre. Gesher is located in Israel, it performs in Hebrew, its organizational structure and budget are similar to other Israeli theatres. Yet, its style, its mode of artistic production, and hierarchy within the troupe definitely have Russian sources” (p. 177).

As a scholar, Gershenson also resumes the contribution of her study “to several areas, among them cultural studies, research on immigration, rhetorical criticism, studies of the Diaspora, cultural policy, and post-colonial discourse analysis” (p. 181). With this, her scholarly approach primarily relates to the theatre. It is very important, given that “the performing arts have been somehow less studied, especially drama theatre” (Id). Moreover, Gershenson’s connecting of theatrical art to different interdisciplinary topics is so skillful, that it seems to open a new path for future performing arts researchers.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Gesher: Russian Theatre in Israel – A Study of Cultural Colonization by Olga Gershenson, Peter Lang Publishing, Inc., New York, 2005, 214 pages.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(2485)