[HANASHIR:8255] A Carlebach and then a Gold thought

[Jessica Gold <Jess...>]

I spoke to Neshama Carlebach on the issue of Kol Isha and her line (for what
it is worth) is that as long as the music is 'for the sake of heaven' then
it is fine and acceptable to sing to a mixed audience. Of course there are
many who don't accept this in the orthodox community. And there are many who
will go to her concerts and stand outside or at the back desperately
curious, desperately hoping, to hear whether the daughter of Shlomo has the
spirit. And indeed more often than not, she has.

As a Jew who would happily be reform on Monday, conservative on Tuesday,
reconstructionist on Wednesday, modern orthodox on Thursday and Lubavitch on
shabbes (although not before shabbes - I'd like to avoid all the
preparation!) I think Kol Isha has preserved a very special thing, concerts
by women for women. Yes, the guys get left out - but its great for the gals.
A very special womanly space is created. This kind of forum is also found,
interestingly at the other end of the political spectrum, on the radical
feminist front. The songs are probably slightly different, but I think both
celebrate the feminine, and enhance female bonding - a good thing in my
perspective. 

Jess Gold
London


> From: Judah Cohen <jcohen (at) fas(dot)harvard(dot)edu>
> Reply-To: hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org
> Date: Mon, 19 Feb 2001 06:35:34 -0500
> To: <hanashir (at) shamash(dot)org>
> Subject: [HANASHIR:8239] Re: Some more Kol Isha  clarification
> 
> 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 -----------------------+