Antisemitism and Philosemitism in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries (review)

Is it possible to read a blatantly antisemitic work without considering the writer's agenda? Many would simply point to the offensive and rigid character of such discourse and stop right there. But is it the wisest course to dismiss such work as tendentious propaganda? The contributors to Phyllis Lassner's and Lara Trubowitz's essay collection Antisemitism and Philosemitism in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries all address this issue, particularly philosemitism, or as some say, "anti-antisemitism." Philosemitism's persistence may force scholars to reconsider their ideas of Jewish identity. After all, anti-semites have long stereotyped Jews by pointing out obvious "Jewish markers" such as hooked noses and putatively superior intelligence. Philosemites, however, subscribe to the same stereotypes, but particularly with "Jewish intelligence," view them positively. This volume's contributors theorize that these stereotypes might be beloved by philosemites who, in some general agreement, despise Jews for their strengths, not because Jews possess what non-Jewish majority populations lack. The contributors conclude that we can view antisemitic views not as pure nonsense, but rather as a form of constructive criticism of Jews' "faults."

The contributors share perspectives on the two terms in the book's title and on other keywords, including "Jew," "Jewishness," and "Other." They also provide useful literary examples of the same. The collection's first half focuses on how antisemitism and philosemitism originated and evolved to the twenty-first century. The first essay by Jonathan Judaken presents a broad, clear overview of current theories and their shortcomings. The subsequent essays focus on European theorists and Islamic leaders criticized for antisemitic rhetoric and demonstrate that they were philosemites, not merely antisemites. In other words, the writings and speeches of Hannah Arendt, Jean Paul Sartre, and (Malaysian Prime Minister) Mahathir Mohamad might not only suggest hatred for Jews. Rather, these works may have been framed to show exactly which Jewish attributes might benefit society. Philosemitism, these scholars contend, reflects a more critical view of Jewish identity, whereas antisemitism is straightforward hatred. The essayists challenge common assumptions about Jewish hatred by arguing that envy has motivated the fixation on and criticism of "common Jewish traits and features."

In this collection's second half, titled "Reimagining Philosemitism and Antisemitism: Cultural Artifacts in the Twentieth and Twenty-First Centuries," specialists of literature and film provide readings that narrate differences between antisemitism and philosemitism. Examples include Helene Meyers's essay "Educating for a Jewish Gaze" (about Sandra Goldbacher's 1998 film The Governess) and Lisa Marcus's article "'May Jews Go to College?': Fictions of Jewishness in the 1920s," which considers classics of American literature from by Ernest Hemingway and F. Scott Fitzgerald.

This book serves as a useful preliminary discussion among interested scholars for future discussions in Jewish Studies that attempt to locate a more critical view of Jewish identity beneath passionate antisemitic rhetoric. To approach these works as examples of philosemitism, each essayist presents a personal view of antisemitism and philosemitism and then explains whether philosemitism grew out of antisemitism or if it evolved separately. The essays provide compelling examples that force one to reconsider generally accepted facts and assumptions. Sara R. Horowitz, in her essay "Lovin' Me, Lovin' Jew: Gender, Intermarriage, and Metaphor", uses the metaphor of "intermarriage" between Jews and high German culture as that which produced the German Jew. These German Jews then became deeply integrated in German society until the Nuremberg laws forced a "divorce" and stripped German Jews of their German identity and right to participate. This divorce brought disastrous consequences, Horowitz argues, because when Nazi Germany used Jews as scapegoats for its economic failures, it caused a significance decline in German cultural and intellectual life. Germany refused to admit that its cultural realm depended on Jews' talents and intelligence for its very survival.

Occasionally the essays seem underdeveloped because they delve too deeply in background material. Their arguments remain somewhat hidden in...