The Judaization of Wilhelm Busch

In the early 1920's, the Yiddish author known to his readers as Der Tunkeler (Yoysef Tunkel, 1881–1949), adapted several works by the German poet Wilhelm Busch (1837–1908). Like Busch, Der Tunkeler was a prolific writer who satirized many figures, institutions and events and, during the first half of the twentieth century, he was a central author of Yiddish parody.¹ By the second decade of the twentieth century, the incorporation of foreign literature—especially German—into the Eastern European Jewish vernacular was common. Many Yiddish authors in Europe and America translated world literature in order to broaden and legitimize the canon of modern Yiddish literature. For instance, many poets identified with Heinrich Heine and translated his works into Yiddish.² However, Der Tunkeler's appropriation of Busch is unique. Unlike the numerous writers who translated Heine into Yiddish, seeking to claim the German-Jewish author as a poetic precursor, Der Tunkeler chose to translate the works of Wilhelm Busch, an author often considered to be anti-semitic due to the negative portrayal of Jews in his works. Der Tunkeler did not merely offer the works of the German poet "freely re-worked in Yiddish" as he claimed, but rather subjected them to a thorough process of what I shall term "Judaization," in order to make Busch's works more recognizable, accessible and, indeed, palatable to his Eastern European Jewish reading audience.

Although Busch satirized many institutions, several translators and editors of the author's works singled out and excised certain passages they deemed offensive—specifically those which dealt with Jews—from their published editions. In their 1962, English language translation of Die fromme Helene,³ H. Arthur Klein and M.C. Klein omit the first chapter's sixth stanza:

Und der Jud mit krummer Ferse,Krummer Nas' und krummer Hos' Schlängelt sich zur hohen Börse Tiefverderbt und seelenlos.⁴

That same year, the pair of translators published another collection of Busch's works, including Plisch und Plum⁵ which, in its original version, contains an extensive portrayal of a negative Jewish stereotype, the money-grubbing, grotesque Schmulchen Schievelbeiner. In this case, Klein chose to exclude the entire fifth chapter of Plisch und Plum in which this character appears. Here, unlike in Hypocritical Helena, the editor explains the reason for not including the material in his translation: "This short chapter is omitted here because it unfortunately embodies some of the anti-Semitism which tainted the work of Busch from time to time. There is no need for reproducing such occurrences in this day and age."⁶

In his translation of Busch's rhymed Naturgeschichtliches Alphabet, Klein continues his subjective sanitization of the German poet by leaving out the final entry "because of its anti-Semitism."⁷ The original, rhymed entry for the letter "Z" features a hook-nosed Jew eating an onion and reads "DieZwiebel ist der Juden Speise, / DasZebra trifft man stellenweise."⁸ It is significant to note that, while Klein finds these caricatures inappropriate for reproduction and translation, he does not omit other negative stereotypes. For example, the translator maintains the offensive caricature in the entry for the letter "J," a dancing, bucktoothed African.⁹

This desire to cleanse the literary legacy of Wilhelm Busch finds further expression in Edgar Alexander's piece on Rolf Hochhuth's play Der Stellvertreter. Here, the author of the essay uses Busch in order to illuminate the playwright's supposed prejudiced views towards Jews and Catholics. Alexander states that he "shall inquire into Hochhuth's moral and political orientation and his intellectual make-up,"¹⁰ and the tool he uses in his attack on the playwright's credibility is the edition of Wilhelm Busch's collected works that Hochhuth edited and published four years earlier.¹¹ Specifically, Alexander criticizes Busch's editor for the fact that "he evinced no hesitation to include in this arrangement those anti-Semitic and religiously blasphemous texts and drawings which had made Wilhelm Busch the darling of anti-Semitic and anti-Catholic nationalists."¹² In essence, Alexander protests the fact that Hochhuth did not abridge any of Busch's texts, but rather presented a comprehensive edition—including the Jewish caricatures in Die fromme Helene and Plisch und Plum—of the poet's works.

When Busch appears in Yiddish literature, he receives a further modified treatment. Unlike Klein or Alexander who censor some of the author's more offensive passages, Der Tunkeler chooses not to translate such works as Die fromme Helene and Plisch und Plum, but rather focuses his skills on Judaizing several pieces by the German author whose works were considered racist. In certain cases, the Yiddish author does little more than offer a fairly straightforward translation of the German author's works. However, there are several instances in which Der Tunkeler does not create merely "fray ba'arbet in yidish" versions of the original, but rather, he appropriates Busch, thereby establishing a culturally Yiddish version of the author's poems, endowing them with names, terms and customs familiar to his Jewish audience.

Der Tunkeler was the most popular and active Yiddish satirist during the period between the two world wars, and he helped found some of the best-known humoristic periodicals including Der kibitzer and Der groyser kundes.¹³ He was also a regular contributor to the major Yiddish newspapers of his era including the Warsaw Haynt and Moment, and the New York Forverts. He collected many of his many sketches, poems and feuilletons and published them in book form, often with his own illustrations.¹⁴ In these works, Der Tunkeler levels his satiric eye at a host of targets, including Jewish writers, intellectuals, political figures and institutions.¹⁵ The author also satirized current events in Russia—where he lived for many years—including the sweeping changes of the Bolshevik Revolution.¹⁶ Furthermore, he did not spare himself in his satirical efforts. Like Busch, who satirized the image of the artist in several of his works,¹⁷ Der Tunkeler wrote numerous humorous critiques of his own work. For instance, in "Der Tunkeler shraybt a kritik vegn zany eygenem bukh; az men vil iz dos a hakdome," the author wonders:

Ver veys, tsi mir veln a mol nisht leynen: Tunkeler, der epokhe-makher, der nayer vegn-antdeker, der shafer fun a nayer shul, der etapn-slup af dem trakt fun der yiddisher literature, Tunkeler—der klasiker. Un efsher vet nokh a mol emetser a lektor arumforn mit a leksiye "Hegel, Spinoza, Dante un Der Tunkeler." Un efsher veln nokh zany azelkhe, vos veln vidmen zeyer lebn af tsu shtudirn bloyz Dem Tunkelen, un zey vern veln Tunkel-Kener, Tunkeleristn un Tunklianer, Tunkelerilogn, a shteyger vi "Pushkinologn," "Shakespearologn" un men vet tseyln manyne verter un oysiyes. Vifl mol, a shteyger, ikh farbroykh dos vort "un," "yo," "dos," "hagam," "nayert," "shalamoyzekhts," "kalamutne," un andere. Ver veys vos far a kuriozn mir veln vegn im nokh hern! Meyle, ikh vil zikh mit zayne farerer nisht shparn. Es treft a mol, der kritiker loybt a shrayber in himl arayn, un der shrayber iz grod take a gutter shrayber. Dos mol iz es nisht der fal.¹⁸

[Who knows whether we will one day read: Tunkeler, the era-maker, the new trail-discoverer, the creator of a new school, the signpost on the highway of Yiddish literature, Tunkeler—the classic. And perhaps some lecturer will travel around delivering the lecture "Hegel, Spinoza, Dante and Der Tunkeler." And perhaps there will even be those who will dedicate their lives to studying only Der Tunkeler and they will become Tunkel-Experts, Tunkelerists and Tunkeler-ologues, just like "Pushkinologues," "Shakespearologues," and they will count my words and letters; how many times, for example, I use the word "and," "yes," "the," "although," "but," "little song," "depressed," and others. Who knows what curious things we will yet hear about him! In any case, I do not wish to argue with his examiners. There are times when a critic praises a writer to the skies and the writer is actually a good writer. This is not the case here.]

By dismissing his own work, Der Tunkeler manages to poke fun not only at himself, but also at literary critics and, indeed, literature itself.

Around the end of the second decade of the twentieth century, Der Tunkeler began composing books for children, mostly humorous stories in verse.¹⁹ It was during this same period that the author developed an interest in translating the works of Wilhelm Busch, a project which allowed the Yiddish writer to combine his interests in satire and children's literature. In the early 1920's, Der Tunkeler published five pamphlets of Busch's poetry. For the most part, these are Yiddishized versions of the originals in which the author—like many Yiddish translators before and after him—applied cosmetic changes to the texts in order to make them more easily acceptable and accessible to Jewish readers. In his version of Die Drachen, for instance, Der Tunkeler maintains the original story, limiting his emendations of the text to transforming the three boys' typically German names—Fritz, Franz and Conrad—to three more familiar to Jews living in Russia and Poland—Leyb, Yosl and Moyshele.²⁰ This is the same strategy the writer employs in his translation of Der hinterlistige Heinrich, transforming the protagonist's German name to Kopele, one more known to his Yiddish audience.²¹ Additionally, in his re-working of Das Rabennest,²² Der Tunkeler makes a slightly greater change to the original text, this time giving Busch's two, mischievous, unnamed child-protagonists the names Notl and Motl, the same two names the translator chooses for two of Busch's best-known troublemaking children, Max und Moritz.²³

Notl un Motl represents a shift in Der Tunkeler's adaptation of Busch. This translation is more than a merely free re-working of the text in which the Yiddish writer offers a perfunctory nod to Judaism. Like in his previous translations of Busch's works, Der Tunkeler again transforms the typically German names of the protagonists and gives them names more familiar in Jewish Eastern Europe. In addition, the victims of the two boys' pranks all receive moniker make-overs: Die Witwe Bolte becomes Di almone Chaye-Sore, Schneider Böck is Der shnayder Oren-Shloymes and Onkel Fritze changes to Feter Borekh. Furthermore, as in his version of Das Rabennest, Der Tunkeler names originally unnamed characters, in this case transforming Der Bäcker into Reb Tsale der beker.

However, unlike in his other translations of Busch, Der Tunkeler does not stop with merely renaming the characters, giving them more recognizable titles. In Notl un Motl, Der Tunkeler goes beyond reproducing the drawings which accompany the German author's poems, but, for the first time, emends the drawings to suit their new, Jewish context. Although the two mischievous protagonists remain unchanged in physiognomy, several of the other characters are visually Judaized. The tailor is given a new hat, a flat peasant's cap, more familiar to the Eastern European reader than the tall, feathered hat of Schneider Böck;²⁴ Onkel Fritze's pointed sleeping cap is replaced with a traditional yarmulke and Der Tunkeler adds long whiskers to his previously shaven Gentile face;²⁵ and the Baker receives a traditional Polish cap as well as a white beard.²⁶

But the text receives further transformation than the mere renaming and recasting of its main characters. For example, Onkel Fritze's metamorphosis

Figure 1.

Set 1: Der shnayder Oren-Shloymes und Schneider Böck

Figure 2.

Set 2: Feter Borekh und Onkel Fritze

Figure 3.

Set 3: Reb Tsale der beker und Der Bäcker

does not end with his revised physiognomy; in fact, Der Tunkeler's changes suggest the character's completely new identity. In the fifth chapter of Max und Moritz, as the current victim of the boys' mischief lies down in bed—unaware that he will soon be set upon by a company of crawling bugs—he peacefully drifts off: "Seine Augen macht er zu, / Hüllt sich ein und schläft in Ruh."²⁷ In Yiddish Feter Borekh "leynt kriyes shma mit gefil / Un er shloft zikh ruhik, shtil." Here, the Judaized uncle does not merely go to sleep, but first takes time to recite the kriyes shma, the traditional Jewish, pre-bedtime prayer, before falling into slumber.²⁸

For the most part, Der Tunkeler does not stray far from the original text and most of his emendations serve to make the stories more recognizable and accessible to his Eastern European Jewish reading audience. Often, to achieve this end, the Yiddish author often reduces the original text, as he does in the proceeding chapter. The time of year when the unnamed baker prepares his delicacies is no longer "Osterzeit," but a seemingly regular day. However, to achieve his same end of Judaization, Der Tunkeler also expands on the original text, sometimes adding entire stanzas of verse. Reb Tsale, a traditional-looking Jew who is the proprietor of a "bekeray," does not merely bake generic "süße Zuckersachen," but prepares a host of traditional treats familiar to the Der Tunkeler's audience:

Bakt er bulkes, zemel, khale,kuchns, beygelekh un tortn, lekekhlekh fun ale sortn, zise korzhiklekh tsu tey, un gebeks nokh alerley.²⁹

Here, in making Max und Moritz more familiar for his audience, Der Tunkeler does not simply offer slight transformations in character, appearance or language, but actually invents new text. This new text does not merely add detail to the story, but rather reflects its Judaization. The baker is no longer an anonymous man who creates non-specific treats for Easter, but a member of the Jewish community who provides the traditional, Eastern European fare for his customers.

While Notl un Motl demonstrates Der Tunkeler's desire to transform Busch's works into ones more familiar to an Eastern European audience, the translator's Der shtifer Moyshl—Der Tunkeler's version of Der kleine Pepi—represents the most Judaized version of Busch in Yiddish.³⁰ Like in his previous adaptations of the German poet's works, Der Tunkeler here too Judaizes the name of the poem's child-protagonist, giving him one more familiar to a traditional, Jewish audience. In addition, as Der Tunkeler notes on the pamphlet's cover page, this text is more of a reworking of the original than a mere adaptation. While he credits his translations of Max und Moritz, Die Drachen, Der hinterlistige Heinrich and Das Rabennest as "fray ba'arbet in yidish," Der shtifer Moyshl is "faryidisht"; in other words, it is not a free re-working, but a "Judaized" version of the original text. This is especially true of the poem's illustrations.

The first image in Busch's text shows the protagonist being fitted by a tailor for a new pair of pants, while the child's father stands off to the side. In the original, the father is a clean-shaved man who carries a walking stick and the tailor, also clean-shaved, wears short pants and a cap, almost the same one as the tailor in Max und Moritz. In Der shtifer Moyshl, both men in the picture are given Jewish make-overs. The tailor wears a Polish peasant's cap, long black pants and a bushy beard. The father is even more Judaized. His flat-topped walking stick is replaced by a cane and, with his long, black frock, a beard and wide-rimmed derby, he resembles a typical hasidic Jew.³¹

Figure 4.

Set 4: Der shtifer Moyshl und Der kleine Pepi

However, Der Tunkeler's physical transformations of Busch's characters do not only serve to make them look more Jewish. When the protagonist falls into the water, he is rescued by a fisherman who lifts the boy in his net. In Der kleine Pepi, the fisherman is not mentioned in the text, only his image is shown. The text relates how, as soon as Pepi is fitted for a new pair of pants, "wird sie auf einer Landpartie probiert." However, "Die Probe fällt schlecht aus, und der kleine Pepi kommt in große Gefahr."³² The following image shows the protagonist stuck in a vat of shoemaker's paste. In Der shtifer Moyshl, Der Tunkeler pauses on the incident with the fisherman. He not only transforms the character into a Ukrainian peasant—with a beard and his hair in a bowl-cut—but the translator invents rhymed text for this incident:

Geyt a fisher dort farbay,Hert er gevaldn: Ay-ay-ay! Emets trinkt zikh . . . khapt er glaykh Shpreyt dos netsl oys in taykh, Shlept er Moyshlen aroysOysgeveykt, vi er iz groys,A farkhliniter, a naser, Un er khliapet fun im vaser.³³

Most notable is the transformation the title character undergoes. Aside from assuming one of the most common Ashkenazi names, he is endowed with a new face. However, unlike almost all of Busch's other characters who receive this treatment from Der Tunkeler, Pepi is not Judaized when he becomes Moyshl, but rather, he is given a more stereotypical Gentile look which, like that of the fisherman, Yiddish readers would more easily recognize. In Der shtifer Moyshl, gone are the protagonist's chubby cheeks, slanted eyes, crooked mouth and, generally unhandsome looks. Der Tunkeler gives his child-hero blonde hair, fair skin, a small nose and delicate, pursed lips.³⁴ In short, Moyshl resembles—according to the Eastern European Jewish perspective—a bona fide Gentile. A question begs itself: Why would Der Tunkeler—who sought to Judaize Busch's writings—maintain, and even exaggerate the Gentile physiognomy of the child protagonists? Pepi is now Moyshl; Heinrich becomes Kopele; Fritz, Franz and Conrad are turned into Leyb, Yosl and Moyshele; and Max and Moritz are preserved in Yiddish as Notl and Motl. However, aside from these name changes, the children's' naughty characters and, most significantly, their looks are maintained and, in the case of Der kleine Pepi, reinforced through stereotyping.

Figure 5.

Set 5: Der shtifer Moyshl und Der kleine Pepi

Figure 6.

Set 6: Der shtifer Moyshl und Der kleine Pepi

A clue to answer to this question presents itself at the beginning of the sixth chapter in Der Tunkeler's version of Max und Moritz. As the two boys prepare to cut gashes in the grain sacks of Rebbe Sholem (formerly Der Bauer Mecke), the anonymous narrator calls them shkotsim.³⁵ This is the plural form of the word sheygets which denotes a young, non-Jewish male. However, this Yiddish word for a gentile youth was also commonly used in the Eastern European vernacular to denote a Jewish boy who displays mischievous behavior. Therefore, by maintaining and, at times, reshaping their Germanic looks, Der Tunkeler reinforces the Jewish stereotype of Gentiles by equating sheygets with mischief. This technique does not undercut his Judaization of Busch; in fact, it only reinforces it. Although he renames—and, in the case of Der roben nest creates new names—for his Jewish characters, the children who occupy the center of Der Tunkeler's version of Busch possess ambivalent natures. They are clearly Jewish boys, yet they behave badly and the Yiddish author stresses this behavior to his audience by presenting the children in the forms of easily recognizable and stereotypical Gentiles.

Around the time that Der Tunkeler adapted Busch for an Eastern European Jewish audience, there was an unprecedented boom in Yiddish literary creativity. Several generations of modern writers had already produced volumes of great prose and poetry, and new generations were emerging and continuing this tradition. Nevertheless, Yiddish still bore the old scars of being degraded for centuries as a sub-literary jargon. As a result, for the first few decades of the twentieth century, there was a specific emphasis on foreign literature translations into Yiddish. For many of these modern writers, both in Europe and America, this was a way not only to expand the canon of Yiddish literature; it was a way to show that the long vilified Eastern European vernacular could not only hold its own among world literatures, but it was indeed capable of representing the major works of the western canon.

As a prolific and active writer, Der Tunkeler certainly had a sense of the significance of Yiddish and a desire to establish and further fortify it within the general literary scene. As a satirist, Der Tunkeler identified with Busch and sought to introduce his satirical portraits to his Jewish audience, regardless of the German author's supposed anti-Semitism. Der Tunkeler did not care whether Busch was or was not an anti-Semite; rather, he identified with the satirist who attacked many targets and included many stereotypes in his works. It would be wrong to say that Busch singled out Jews. In fact, in his entire published oeuvre, there are perhaps a handful of Jewish caricatures. Although Der Tunkeler chose not to adapt works such as Plisch und Plum and Die fromme Helene which contained these images, the Yiddish author did not dismiss Busch wholesale, nor did he purge these works of their Jewish stereotypes. Rather, he Judaized some of the German author's best-known poems, even stereotyping Gentiles for his own literary purposes. By translating the author's works into the popular, Jewish vernacular, Der Tunkeler offered Wilhelm Busch a place in the canon of modern Yiddish literature.