In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content:

4 Rhetoric in Flames: Fire Inscriptions in Israeli Youth Movement Ceremonials INTRODUCTION Fire has become a central element in the ceremonial idiom of contemporary Israel, and is found in a variety of "civic rituals" (Bocock 1974; Liebman and Don-Yehia 1983; Kertzer 1988). For example, fire symbolism is used on such calendrical occasions as the festive lighting of "commemoration candles" in front ofthe Western Wall on Memorial Day, or the lighting oftwelve torches by carefully selected members of the populace on Independence Day on Mt. Herzl in Jerusalem. The Hanuka festival of lights is occasion for repeated reenactments of traditional Jewish symbolism of fire and light in a variety of private and public settings-from the lighting ofthe candelabra in private homes to the symbolic torch-run that connects Israel to Jewish communities abroad in a gesture of flames. The bonfires that nowadays serve as a focus for youngsters' celebrations of the traditional annual holiday of Lag Baomer all over the country similarly highlight fire symbolism. These calendrical occasions are regularly televised by the National Television Network, and are participated in vicariously by large segments of the population. Even such home-centered, ftre-related traditional practices as the lighting of the Hanuka or Sabbath candles are modeled on TV on a regular basis so that their symbolic communal import is underscored. A special use of fire symbolism found in a variety of Israeli public ceremonies involves the practice oflighting "fire inscriptions" (natively known as "ktovot esh") as a highly impressive celebratory move at the closing of public ceremonials. This particular practice, which involves the lighting of large-lettered slogans on festive occasions, was the subject of considerable elaboration in the Israeli youth movements in the nation-building era. Youth movement documents abound with references to the fire theme in general and to the art ofpyrotechnics in particular, and publications specifically concerned with fire have been compiled (Naor 1949; Tal 1963; Zilka 1970). The effectiveness of fire inscriptions as enacted cultural forms is attested to by the fact that they have been in continuous use for about half a century now, and have become an official element of other traditional Israeli ceremonials, notably military ceremonials, kibbutz celebrations and high profile public occasions 51 52 Communal Webs such as Independence Day celebrations. They are also used more sporadically on such occasions as, for example, the closing ceremony of the Soviet Jewry Month celebrated in the spring of 1985, when Anatole Sharansky was honored by being invited to light a fire inscription in a highly visible, televised ceremonial gesture. In attempting to account for the particular rhetorical effectiveness of these words-in-flames, fire inscriptions are considered here as a form ofephemeral art, a category ofaesthetic objects found cross-culturally in a variety of ritual contexts. In M. Ravicz's explication of this notion, " 'ephermeral' includes visual phenomena created or assembled with conscious knowledge that they will be destroyed, dismantled, or permitted to decompose within hours, days, or, at the most, several months. 'Art' designates visual phenomena created so that they incorporate structural, decorative, or other stimulatory characteristics perceived as aesthetically rewarding to the members of the culture concerned" (Ravicz 1980:115). The frequent and integral part played by repetitively used ephemeral forms in ritual communication can be accounted for in terms of their role in bridging the two fundamental, formal aspects of the ritual experience, an experience described as encompassing "carefully orchestrated packages of (1) highly stereotypic activities, including familiar roles and ideas; and (2) what Turner has called 'mandatory improvisations,' or the liminal aspects, replete with change, ambiguities and surprise" (Ravicz 1980:124). In R. Rappaport's formulation (1979), these two aspects of ritual involve the transmission of two orders of information: (1) Canonical information, which involves messages not encoded by participants, but part of the "liturgy." These messages tend to be invariant, durable, and are mainly conveyed through the symbolic dimension of the signs participating in ritual communication; and (2) Indexical information, which concerns (or points to) participants' own current physical, psychic, or social states, especially as they relate to the manner and degree of their engagement in the ritual action. Ephemeral art forms are designed in such a way as to combine these two types of messages: Whereas the aesthetic forms in which they are cast and the symbolic vehicles used are part of a canonical, often sanctified, symbolic idiom, they are clearly designed to affect participants' current states and dispositions through their arousal potential. Ephemeral art forms, as...

Share