[HANASHIR:8239] Re: Some more Kol Isha clarification

[Judah Cohen <jcohen...>]

Thank you for your wonderful post, Rachel.  I'm posting here a response I
sent to the "World music from a Jewish slant" list.  It was completely
ignored there, suggesting to me that a number of people (ack, some of the
world's greatest Jewish music performers and broadcasters!) would rather
stick to their old (and uselessly simple) arguments vehemently than even
attempt to take a more complex view of the issue [other than "it's bogus" v.
"it's halacha"].  It seems *this* list is much more interested in actually
*thinking* about the issue a little, and perhaps trying to put it in some
perspective.

So here it is.  I make no claims to be right; I only wish to attempt to look
at this in directions I don't think have been considered before:

Shirona,

I find this kind of posting on Kol Isha rather timely, considering the
recent list discussion of Ellen Koskoff's book (on music in Lubavicher
life).  Looking at the issue of "Kol Isha" in Lubavicher communities is an
important part of her research (chapter 8 in her book), and an important
part of two of her earlier essays ("The Sound of a Woman's Voice:  Gender
and Music in a New York Hassidic Community" in Koskoff, ed., *Women and
Music in Cross-Cultural Perspective* (Urbana:  University of Illinois Press,
1989); and "Miriam Sings Her Song:  the Self and Other in Anthropological
Discourse." in Ruth Solie, ed.  *Musicology and Difference* (Berkeley: UC
Press, 1993).  While you feel (justifiable) outrage about the issue, several
of the women in Koskoff's work tend to see the issue as a point of
(justifiable) pride.  In a society where different genders can often be seen
as creating their own separate (and often private) worlds, such "rules" can
be constructive, and help reinforce these separate spaces (remember that
such talmudic discussion takes place in a male space, and often focuses on
ways to preserve that space).  In the "mainstream" world (i.e., the
proverbial "world we live in"), where men and women are all but required to
occupy the same spaces and aspire to the same goals, such a concept can be
seen as medieval, cruel and one-sided.

I'll say something controversial:  most gender issues that I've seen and
studied thus far seem to be perpetuated on *all* sides--men, women, and
others (and there *are* accepted non-male and -female gender types in some
societies).  Just because the men had the monopoly on the publishing within
Jewish life doesn't mean they had the last word on the topic (remember that
the rabbis often did as much *reflection* of culture as they did creation of
it--and who is to say that this issue wasn't propounded bilaterally?).  I
think it is unfair to thus characterize "Kol Isha" as purely a "men did this
to women" issue.  Doing so denigrates the integrity of generations of women
who likely had (and still have) varying relationships with "Kol Isha," and
perhaps even used it to create their own musical lives, spaces and
repertoires.  What if, for example, the "Kol Isha" situation was a major
contributor to the "T'china" repertoire?  Or, for that matter, Judeo-Spanish
"romanceros" (which were often passed from mother to daughter)?  Ironically,
these repertoires sometimes embraced today as symbols of a "feminist" Jewish
ideology may have been a result of what seems its antithetical situation.

Moreover, to some women who follow the "Kol Isha" norms, knowing the voice
has sensual power can be a source of great empowerment.  Especially in a
society in which the bodies of *both* genders are traditionally covered up,
the voice can serve a very important function, and becomes a prime place for
regulation.  It is important to note that in the same literature, men's
voices were criticized as well for being frivolous and distracting from
prayer--just look at the way "hazzanim" were treated by the rabbis.  Yes the
criticism was a different style; but remember, it wasn't usually in the
rabbis' nature to deal with homosexual longing.

 Also controversial, but I'll say it on this list:  "Kol Isha," taken at
face value, makes a good straw horse for feminist invective.  It is easy to
criticize because it seems to be (heck, it *is*) so clearly chauvinistic.
However, this idea generally requires subscribing to a narrative of Jewish
women's history that is based on suffering (or at least disenfranchisement)
at the hands of "male-centered" law.  There is an irony to this as well,
since arguing from this perspective often means subscribing blindly to the
absolute nature of the laws themselves--which was usually not the case
(that's why the laws existed, after all).  While womens' voices did not
survive in a widely-disseminated written format from this time, it is
belittling to these women to believe their voices were non-existent.
  Your criticisms are really quite valid as you set them up.  Given your
cultural sensibilities and the superficial evidence you present (I say this
as  description, not a moral value), you have every right to feel offended.
But in that context, your arguments are themselves quite narrow and
one-sided--a response to what you seem to see as an equally narrow and
one-sided "regulation."  If you wish to extend your criticism beyond the
personal, I think it is important that you search for understanding, rather
than start with answers.  For, by starting with a reasonable question, what
may seem offensive to you at first may lead to a deep and fulfilling
dialogue.

Judah Cohen.
(who was first introduced to the complexities of "Kol Isha" when a woman
brought it up to me just as I was pushing to convert my Jewish a cappella
singing group from all male to co-ed). 

------------------------ hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org -----------------------+