Office Girls
Chani Mink2010I needed a job, any job, anything to pay rent and buy a box of pasta and occasionally, chicken. They needed an office girl. Someone from Crown Heights. Why Crown Heights? Maybe they considered Lubavitch girls to be louder, more assertive, better educated than their Williamsburg counterparts. I don’t know. But I aced the interview and was told to show up on Monday at 10:00. I had not been hired for the previous job I applied for, in the Brooklyn Navy Yards, and I was grateful for that because the Yards were hard to get to with public transportation, and the car of Crown Heights girls was already full. Furthermore, the office was a warehouse and a total dump and the Navy Yards buildings loomed large and empty.
The place in Williasmburg was on a quiet street, not far from the waterfront. Two brothers, a father, and a manager who commuted from Borough Park. They all used fake secular names on the phone and in business correspondence, as if their accents and grammar didn’t give them away. I was neither loud nor assertive, but they hired me and I could get there with one bus and some walking, so I rode and walked.
A young married woman with two names trained me in. She was soft spoken, always whispering so as not to disturb the bosses with her femininity. The men all had their own comfortable offices, while we sat in middle of the main room, a large, drafty, bare room with a grey-black threadbare “carpet”, awkwardly-placed supporting beams and rows of filing cabinets.
Ruchel-Gittel was carrying her first child. She taught me everything I needed to know about the job, but the manager soon assigned me new responsibilities, such as scouring competitor’s websites for pricing and item information. Aha, this is why they needed an outsider. Ruchel-Gittel didn’t know how to surf the web. When I brought it up, her eyes grew big and she whispered, “I don’t think they let! You shouldn’t use the Internet!” But our computers were connected to the Internet and her fear made no sense to me. Ruchel-Gittel was married and I was not, yet she was a few years younger than me, having married straight out of high school.
Suri, the bookeeper, came in part-time. She too was young, with a baby son she left with her aging mother in a small apartment a few blocks away from the office. Ruchel-Gittel and Suri gossiped furiously, mostly in Yiddish but sometimes in English so I would understand, but they were too far from my desk anyway, and I didn’t know the people involved. When they were not busy exchanging information they were doing so on the phone, whispering furtively, chattering all day long while I did tedious work.
One day it occured to me that nobody had said anything about a lunch break. “Do we get a break for lunch?” I asked Ruchel-Gittel. She said yes, probably, could be. So I gave myself 30 to 40 minutes a day, ate across the street near the water, walked around the neighborhood, bought black coffee and read books, anything to get some fresh air.
Sometimes, Ruchel-Gittel inquired about my life. I wasn’t really from Crown Heights, I just rented a basement there like hundreds of other girls waiting for life to happen. I was from Europe, from a country they weren’t very familiar with, and Ruchel Gittel and Suri couldn’t wrap their heads around it.
“There are Yidden there?” they asked, “Is it near London?” “Aren’t the goyim dangerous? What do they do? What do you eat there?”
One morning, I told them that my parents had felt a small earthquake. They weren’t familiar with the word. I explained about the ground shaking, in kindergarten terms. I mentioned volcanoes. “What’s a volcano?” Ruchel-Gittel asked. How could a 20 to 22 year old woman not know what a volcano is? Don’t they teach basic science in Chasidic schools? I learned from Suri that the schools offered a “business math” class for the girls who would work as secretaries to men called Motti-Matt and Shlomo-Sam. But secretaries don’t need to know about volcanoes. There are none in Brooklyn.
The others, the outsiders, tend to lump us all within one category. The Orthodox, the ultra-Orthodox, and the Chasidim. You see it in the movies, in the articles, time and time again, and it makes you angry, to be compared to meek and submissive Ruchel-Gittel. You have seen the world after all, speak 5 languages, read The Odyssey in school, read a thousand books a year.
Were all Chasidic women like Ruchel-Gittel? I had to admit, I didn’t know. We are different, groups within groups, we make fun of each other’s dress and mannerisms and carry preconceived notions, just like those filmakers and journalists. We tell each other that all the Flatbush girls wear black and straighten their hair and date 75 guys before finding the one; we murmur dismissively about Williamsburgers who seem to automatically age 15 years the day after their wedding, with the shpitzel and the clean scrubbed face under it, the black suits “made in Italy.” We all talk about each other and are no better than one another.
Ruchel-Gittel treated the bosses and the manager like gods, addressing them in reverential tones. But I only saw them as men who would be absolutely lost without us. One day I grew bold and demanded a transportation subsidy. Metrocards were setting me back $80 a month. They gave me a raise. Ruchel-Gittel handed me my bigger check the following Friday, eyes as round as saucers. A girl had spoken! The revolution was coming. Ruchel-Gittel and Suri used car services, which they paid for with a voucher provided by the office, back and forth every day. Whispering, submissive office girls efficiently ferried back and forth, everything in order.
When Ruchel-Gittel had her baby, she was back in less than six weeks, acting as if nothing had happened, like a soldier. A few years later, in a different time and place, when I had my own baby, I could not bring myself to go back to work. But Ruchel Gittel was back so quickly. The office couldn’t run without her.
But she didn’t know what a volcano was.
90 Responses
Earth science is taught in depth in the 8th and 10th grades the Chassidish schools in Williamsburg.
If you would have left it at the volcano, the piece might have sounded a little bit authentic. But it was overdone by claiming not to know about earthquakes. I remember learning about them in the 4th grade.
I wish ‘writers’ would bother to learn the facts about the community before spouting stereotypes which no one in their right mind would believe.
Wow, even for Unpious, this is a stupidly stereotypical article. I think it’s even worse than the nail polish one.
The question, Maya, is “Is it true?” I’ve met Chassidishe folks out here in the West who were educated in the Brooklyn bubble. Some were very knowledgeable. Others who were astoundingly ignorant of everything except a Talmud and a couple very specific job skills. The quality of education seems to vary radically from school to school.
No, Maya’s right. There are plenty of ignorant people, but not knowing what an earthquake or volcano is? Highly unrealistic.
I liked the feel of the article, but like Maya, the author lost me by the earthquake part. I mean, forget about learning about in science class, doesn’t she read “Der Blatt” or “Der Yid”? Don’t those papers report “der ehrd tsiternishin”, and in the back of Kol Haolom Kulo doesn’t she see the pictures of turned over cars?
To the author’s credit, she does admit that she also has preconceived notions about different groups of people, and doesn’t claim to be any better than anybody else.
Nice flash fiction, Mrs. Mink, but this line gives you away;
“A few years later, in a different time and place, when I had my own baby, I could not bring myself to go back to work. But Ruchel Gittel was back so quickly. The office couldn’t run without her”.
You forgot. You were writing about Williamsburg, not Lakewood. You sophisticated ‘woman of the world’ is supposed to pursue her career. Ruchel Gittel is in the kitchen.
“The men all had their own comfortable offices, while we sat in middle of the main room, a large, drafty, bare room with a grey-black threadbare “carpet”, awkwardly-placed supporting beams and rows of filing cabinets.”
This sentence is supposed to show how the women are second class citizens, but the real reason that they had comfortable offices, and the girls sat in the middle of a large and drafty room is because the men were the owners and managers of the business, while the girls were just secretaries. You might argue (unsuccessfully, in my opinion) that the fact that the girls are just lowly secretaries is a symptom of the same inequality, but I don’t think that was the author’s intent.
I also want to take issue with the following statement:
“Ruchel-Gittel treated the bosses and the manager like gods, addressing them in reverential tones.”
Maybe that is how an outsider would understand it, but I think the word should be deferential instead of reverential, and the deference is in my estimation a combination of tznius (which in general causes women to be more submissive IN APPEARANCE) and the regular deference which people normally have for the boss.
Hoesen, haha, you are cute!
But in all seriousness….couldn’t you choose a sexier name than hoesen tragger?! Unless it is supposed to mean that you are the one trugging hoisin, in which case you can stick with than handle.
I too agree with Maya and Kaf; the earthquake part sounds very unreal, even the volcano is surprising, but ok, I’ll buy it. But the only way I can imagine such ignorance is if the woman is from overseas (Israel, etc.). Even then, somewhat hard to imagine.
I do think the piece has merit overall as a well-written essay “from the author’s perspective.” Plus I find it hard to believe that a writer would make that up, which is why we chose to publish — although extrapolating from one such person to other Chasidic women would be an obvious, gross misstep.
I don’t think it’s made up, but definitely embellished.
Kaf,
Hu? tragger? Who ever said that?
Hoezen, I assumed Hoezen T stands for Hoezen Tragger. What does it really mean?
Kaf — ah, the curse of the newbie…
HT is a veteran of the blogosphere, but perhaps only the old-timers know her real handle: Hoezentragerin! The one and only.
So can you explain what hoezentraggerin means?
Thanks Rebel for being so patronizing
As for your question Kaf, I don’t wear pants, but I do wear ‘the’ pants.
Ha ha, thanks for the clarification. The “the pants” that you wear, is tight and sexy, or loose and homely?
I dare say, Kaf is the new Insider…
Shnel. Where is the Mishmeres Haznius AKA RandC? Men miz moiche zien zefort
“I dare say, Kaf is the new Insider…
Shnel. Where is the Mishmeres Haznius AKA RandC? Men miz moiche zien zefort”
Another “inside joke”. A blank look on my face. A hope that one day I too will be an “insider”. R and C, what is it that you mentioned yesterday, something about everybody on here being newbies?
You may be right. But I’ve certainly met a few who believed the Sun goes around the Earth, don’t know what continents are and are agnostic on whether the planet is flat. And this I swear by the Unholy Ichor of Great Cthulhu.
Is it necessary for me to chime in on the exaggeration – or outright fabrication?
It all seems to have already been said.
I do have to comment though that I’ve noticed that Satmar grads are often considered the ideal secretary. Apparently because of their smarts, dedication, and (sadly)reliability. – Few have ambitions to further their careers. Way back when – when I was sending out my resumes, I got call backs from offices in Manhattan, BP and Crown Heights – best part of my resume? The fact that I was a Satmar grad. (Of course the pay they were offering was crap, which made me quickly realize that being a ‘secretary’ wasn’t gonna be in my career path. Having a secretary though, was.)
And how predictable will I be if I mention taking offense at the ‘aging fifteen years’ and ‘clean scrubbed faces under the shpitzel’? Does the writer realize that a clean scrubbed face under the shpitzel is – at most – 20% of this community? They exist, wonderful people all – but must we stereotype?
“Satmar grads are often considered the ideal secretary.”
And Viznitz grads make superb kokosh cake. What exactly is the point?
(One might suppose you’re assuming the woman in the story was Satmar. But I wouldn’t accuse you of assuming, which, after all, is a mere cousin of stereotyping.)
I should have said: ‘Satmar Williamsburg’.
The writer was relating her assumptions that she was hired because they wanted a Crown Heights girl over a Williamsburg one. Which just made my own experience ironic. They wanted me in Crown Heights because I was Satmar Willi. Satmar, as much as Williamsburg, being a relevant factor in the equation.
In my day (eons ago) Satmar Willi grads seemed to have been the preferred employee. Perhaps things have changed. And perhaps it is entirely irrelevant.
true freedom is found in being able to think what you think is right.
to live within the world that you want to. its not for us to judge.
it is for us to choose our own way, within mitzvos or without, and to respect others choices too.
why is this so hard for off the derech people.
you have to respect a frum persons choices too.
is it part of your catharsis and your journey to be judgemental fucks.
You hated being the victims of judgment when you were frum? cant you see it?
jeez
Nicely written. But I don’t like the stereotype.
Keep in mind that people born and bred in Brooklyn can not fathom earthquakes and other natural disasters. While they might know about it, it’s not something they are familiar with. In essence, you’re not really saying anything about their ignorance.
A few points, if I may:
No part of this essay is a fabrication. Does it come off as stereotypical? Sure, but that was hardly avoidable.
That was my first ‘close encounter’ with the type of people described and I have since met and lived next to a wider variety of Chassidishe people of various stripes, colors, and areas of knowledge.
I am however still occasionally subjected to ridiculous lines of questioning by people such as those described in the article.
As one of the commenters has pointed out, I clearly stated that we do all stereotype and these things go both ways.
So, take it or leave it
in defense of chani, while not satmar (ever), i often spent time in kiryas yoel. during the school day, while there were many kids in school, it was my observation that there were often just as many kids not in school. i’d see them in landau’s, on the streets, sometimes helping with a bunch of little ones. i cannot say that volcanoes and earthquakes were never taught in these schools, but i can offer that if kids were routinely kept home, it’s quite conceivable that they may not be aware of these things. and then, there’s also the issue of a language gap. if they are reading about earthquakes in yiddish, then it may account for them not understanding the english term.
additionally, how many of you have gone to school and learned about things you could not relate to at all and then proceeded to dismiss it completely? when not much value is placed on secular studies there will be people who will memorize whatever they need to get by and then promptly forget.
i’m not saying any of this necessarily pertains to the women in chani’s piece, but that these are possibilities that exist that can explain the lack of knowledge of these subjects.
’m not saying any of this necessarily pertains to the women in chani’s piece, but that these are possibilities that exist that can explain the lack of knowledge of these subjects.
Emily, possibilities abound – in all walks of life. Idiots do too. But to stereotype a group of people based on the ignorance of one – is entirely unfair. Add to that the simple fact that it is exceptionally unlikely that this girl (who was employed – thus sufficiently employable) doesn’t know what a earthquake is. I’m seriously curious as to the mathematical probability of ‘Chani’ working with someone so illiterate.
Again, anything is possible. This is just so ridiculously unlikely, that it should be irrelevant. Unless the writer was simply trying to make her point regarding stereotyping. She chances upon the greatest ignoramus in the bunch, and as one is wont to, when unfamiliar with the larger group – she allowed it to color her opinion of an entire sect.
An unfair mistake to be sure – and one that we all are guilty of at one time or another.
“Shnel. Where is the Mishmeres Haznius AKA RandC? Men miz moiche zien zefort”
My silence should serve as the most tenacious objection and profoundest protest as to what was going on here last night. Nu shemst dich nisht, Kaf?
Besides I wouldn’t suspect anyone of wearing tight fitting pants, it’s in direct violation of an explicit halakha that prohibits it.
If I am indeed the “mishmeres” I am very much like the Iranian Revolutionary Guardians. I make sure to do what I scold everyone else for doing
I think this raises a valid point. The Orthodox community is not really a community, but a collection of communities layered like an onion: each peal mocking its inner neighbor and pitying its outer neighbor. Granted most Williamsburg women know about earthquakes and volcanoes, there are plenty of other basic stuff they don’t, and the author resents being lumped together with them under the same UO brand.
And, Tzippi, what if only a minority of Williamsburg women wears a shiptzel? There is still a community of shiptzel wearers out there and what label befits that community other than Williamsburg? Which further comes to show how Williamsburg itself is nothing but layers-layers with no core.
You have all rightfully blasted the piece as being stereotypical and oversimplifying. I don’t think I need to expand on that theme. The more profound question that begs to be asked (which to my surprise no one seemed to notice) is that the writer infers throughout the piece that not being educated is a disadvantage and that there is something fundamentally awry with the uneducated person’s existence. I am dumbfounded that everyone seems to agree with this assumption.
“They all used fake secular names on the phone and in business correspondence, as if their accents and grammar didn’t give them away.”
Note to Chani: The usage of Anglicized names is not an attempt to hide identity. Chasidish men do that all the time in encountering the outside world. It makes them feel more Goyish and hence more professional. It’s laughable; I agree, but I don’t think it stems from a veiled attempt to be deceitful or dishonest.
The question here isn’t if those ‘volcano/earthquake’ detail are true or false, but rather why would the writer think she can get away with those fabricated details. The answer is fairly simple: the writer is close minded and demonstrates how little she knows about Hasidic girls, or about Hasidic people in general, and such she thinks about the Hasidics or may just think she can get away with it; which either way is a result of one being narrow-minded.
The Hasidics of course have their weaknesses, just the way any other ethnicity or culture. There’s something sure more unique about the Hasidim that makes all this blog-worthy. I’ve written some essays myself about them in the past, but does one really have to lie to (try to) make a great essay?
R&C – a more likely purpose for Anglicized names is for ease of pronunciation.
Too many Hebrew and Yiddish names are difficult for outsiders to pronounce. It’s got little to do with feeling more goyish, and everything to do with not having the other party struggle with tongue twisters like Yitzchok Chaimowitz.
-“Tuhzippi Laahngsss-shteermph”
R&C, Chani wasn’t saying deceitful or dishonest; she said fake, and fake it is. His name isn’t Matt. It’s not on his ID and nobody calls him that in real life. And the Anglicization of name is not laughable. All new immigrants did that a century ago, and even today it’s convenient in business as it simplifies spelling and eliminates unnecessary questions.
” The more profound question that begs to be asked (which to my surprise no one seemed to notice) is that the writer infers throughout the piece that not being educated is a disadvantage and that there is something fundamentally awry with the uneducated persons existence. I am dumbfounded that everyone seems to agree with this assumption.”
Only someone as educated as yourself can have the confidence to come out and say this, I wouldn’t have the chutzpah!
” The usage of Anglicized names is not an attempt to hide identity”
There is another reason for using “goyishe names”, it saves time (kafhakela is spelled k-a-f-h-a-k-e-l-a) and doesn’t put the other person in an uncomfortable position when he isn’t familiar or can’t pronounce your Hebrew name.
My last point was already mentioned my two earlier posters, I am learning that I need to keep one finger on the refresh button while reading this site!
Tzippi and all.
You’re right about names like Groinem, Getzil, Fiyvel, Kalman, Paltiel, etc. But, what about all the Yoli-Joes, Moshe- Mosses’s, Yakov-Jacobs, Shlome –Solomons, etc?
BTW, what would be the Anglicization of Chaimovitch, Lifewitz?
Missy- “And the Anglicization of name is not laughable. All new immigrants did that a century ago”
I know. You can’t get more Jewish than Isador, Irving, Christopher, Alex, Benedict, etc. It’s laughable from the sense that you don’t fool anyone by anglicizing your name. Sooner or later your true identity shows. We should learn from the Rasta Jamaicans, they’re proud of their heritage, they don’t anglicize.
Kaf- “Only someone as educated as yourself can have the confidence to come out and say this, I wouldn’t have the chutzpah”
You’re implying that you thought about it too. Stop pretending, but thanks anyway
“You’re implying that you thought about it too. Stop pretending, but thanks anyway ;)”
Ok. You win. Everyone else is miles below you in terms of brilliance, analytical skills, and the ability to pierce through the fog to recognize the obvious.
Also, thanx for alerting me to the fact, that even though I thought I was just trying to compliment you, in truth there was an underlying ulterior motive. I did not realize that myself……. do I need to place here a winking smiley so you shouldn’t mistake me for being serious, or can I rely on your מוח עצום to figure it out?
Roptch,
I know. You can’t get more Jewish than Isador, Irving, Christopher, Alex, Benedict, etc. It’s laughable from the sense that you don’t fool anyone by anglicizing your name. Sooner or later your true identity shows. We should learn from the Rasta Jamaicans, they’re proud of their heritage, they don’t anglicize.
How would Isador, Irving, Christopher, or Benedict be identified as Jewish? You make no sense at all. And again, it’s not about fooling anybody or—in this day and age—trying to deny ones heritage. It’s simply more convenient.
And you thanking Kaf for praising you on how well educated you are. At least you think it’s a good thing.
R&C – It’s precisely because of difficult-to-pronounce surnames that people choose simple secular first names.
Take it from someone who is used to spelling a long first and last name, and then offering an alternate secular name for the duration of the conversation. It’s simply more convenient.
Tzipi, ma inyan given name eitzel surname? If you’re mane is Moshe Puplunash, why do you need to call yourself Moses? What’s wrong with the simple Moshe?
Missy, I was actually agreeing with you, but since you didn’t get it I’ll explain.
When the Jewish immigrants came here at the turn of the century they desperately wanted to shed every semblance of Eastern European- shtetel Jewishness they had, so they adopted the most Anglo Saxon sounding first names. Names like Isador and Irving, names that had no connection or root in jewish culture, and were unmistakably goiyish. They abused the naming process to such an extent that in essence Isador and Irving became synonymous with Eastern European Jewish immigrants.
I am not against education, but I don’t think uneducated people have worse off lives.
Kaf, miles? Light years!
You don’t have to insert a winking emoticon, but I like when you wink at me, so in the future please do.
R&C: (RE Moshe Puplunash)
“Hello, may I please speak to Mr. Pup, Pupel, Puplansh, Pupelanshe, errr. Ummm, may I speak to Mauwshhe?”
“Just call me Michael. How can I help you?”
I am not against education, but I don’t think uneducated people have worse off lives.
Except, R&C, when they live in the Bible Belt and rush to enroll in the army to die. I think your original point–the misconception “that there is something fundamentally awry with the uneducated persons existence”–is a keener one.
With all due respect : In having to choose between “sophisticated” Crown Heights ‘Chani’ & “uneducated” Satmar Willi ‘Tzippi’ who can honestly say that they would have a problem ?
Tzipi, why are you reiterating the problem that is associated with names like Puplunosh, Ruchlitz, Trumpelfresserboiymovitch. I agree that they should be avoided in conversation with outsiders, but what’s wrong with Yoily and Moishy, you don’t need to be acquainted with peculiar Jewish salables to pronounce these names correctly.
R & C – vowels at the end of a name r often a giveaway to an immigrant origin.
Does anybody besides me think it’s hilarious that the only post to unite all UP commenters (and the only one to get almost unanimous negative feedback) is the one that dared to commit the ultimate heresy: it suggested *gasp* that Lubavitch is superior to Satmar. We chassidim are so predictible.
R&C – you don’t need to be acquainted with peculiar Jewish salables to pronounce these names correctly.
Oh, but you do.
Bethany – the one thing that consistently annoys is stereotyping. I didn’t notice her attempt at making Lubavitch superior to Satmar. If that was indeed her intent – she didn’t do so very successfully.
Re Anglicized given names–
Surely y’all know that Jews have been using double names, a Hebrew (usually) shem kodesh and another name drawn from the surrounding culture, for more than 2000 years. Miriam and Moses (Moshe) are drawn from the Egyptian language (Moses is derived from the same root as Thutmose, a pharaonic name). Esther is a Persian Indo-European name, as opposed to Hadassah. Mordechai is derived from the name of the deity Marduk. In the Middle Ages Jews living in Muslim lands even used the name Mohammed when doing business with Muslims. Philo of Alexandria was actually Yedidia. Titus Flavius Josephus was really Yosef ben Matisyahu. And then there are Shaul/Paul, Shimon/Peter, Miryam/Maria, Yeshua/Jesus, etc., from the Greek accounts of the foundation of Christianity.
This double naming (shem kodesh/shem kinnui) was not just invented by people who wanted to assimilate when they came to America and who think they are hiding something. It was the custom in the old country too. My grandfather, a chassid from Ukraine, was Meyer (Meir) Wolf. There were countless men named Tzvi Hirsch, and so on.
A few years ago I checked into a ski resort during Hanukah (no, I don’t ski and there was no snow anyway) which had just been purchased by Israelis. The reception lady asked me if I were Jewish (it wasn’t kosher and we didn’t eat there because the food wasn’t suitable), because she noticed my name is Miriam (plenty of goyim are named Miriam, but she may not have known that). The fact that I was wearing dreidel earrings and had a menorah on top of my luggage might have been additional clues. I said I was and asked her name. She said that her name was Michal, but since absolutely no one in the US can pronounce it (well, except for us), she has given up and just says her name is Michelle when she has to identify herself. So, no one is hiding anything by using an Anglicized name. If you live in Lakewood or Kiryas Joel or Boro Park and never interact with goyim, Yerachmiel is fine. For interacting with the larger world ‘Jerry’ is simply more convenient and has thousands of years of custom behind it.
MM – your comment is incisive & to the point from someone without the hangups of the ‘hood.
Bethany: “Except, R&C, when they live in the Bible Belt and rush to enroll in the army to die.” I’m not touching this can of worms.
Tzipi: “Oh, but you do”. I can say “Oh, but you don’t”, but what’s the point? As far as I’m concerned it’s the end of the debate, unless of course you have some new evidence or sources you want to introduce.
Mendy: “R & C – vowels at the end of a name r often a giveaway to an immigrant origin” Who denied that?
MM: Interesting stuff about the names, but I think you’re confusing a bit. Mordechai, Esther and Moshe could indeed be names derivative of the native tongue, but they weren’t double names. Mordechai didn’t have a Persian and Jewish name; he had one name which might have had its roots in a foreign language. Peter, Paul, Jesus, and Marry also didn’t use two names. Jesus never identified himself as Jesus, he was known by his Jewish name Yeshua. Its only when the bible was first translated to Greek that Yeshuah , Saul, Shimon, and Merriam got their Greek names. I don’t know about Philo and Josephus, but my hunch is that they didn’t use their Greek names either. The Greeks identified them with these names, but it would be curious if they identified themselves that way too.
Now as to how the names worked in pre war Eastern Europe my understanding is that the magistrate officials just slapped secular names on people without any connection to their Jewish names.
If you are into name origins, I have another one for you. The Jewish name Kloinymus is actually the name of the Greek deity Kalo Nemus.
Good points all, MM. And to further illustrate the point, consider that the names of Yitzchok Eizik, Shlomo Zalmen, Chaim Feitel, Shraga Feivish, are re-Yiddishized versions of the literal translations: Isaac, Solomon, Vital and Phoebus.
As a matter of fact, most of the girls’ names in the Yiddish speaking community don’t even originate from Hebrew names at all – but are botched up versions of the secular original. (Esperanza = Shprintza, and even Juanita into Yenta)
R&C As far as I’m concerned it’s the end of the debate, unless of course you have some new evidence or sources you want to introduce.
You need me to ‘introduce’ into this all important proceedings ‘evidence or sources’ that’ll prove that regardless of how familiar and supposedly easy to pronounce a name may seem, an outsider can still struggle with simple names of ‘Mawsheh?’, ‘Menahtchem?’ and ‘You-ell?’ – all pronunciations finished with the tentative questioning sound at the end, hoping they didn’t screw up.
Even girls names like Gitty (Giddy), Breindy (Brain-dy)…
Simple spelling, and obvious-looking pronunciation, doesn’t mean that it’ll go over so easily with an outsider.
Have I sufficiently ‘made my case’?
Tzipi- your intentional drawn out and trite misspelling of the names shows me that you know the weakness of your position.
I have heard Irish, Black, Indian, Chinese, German, British, Polish, Russian, Hungarian, Italian, Spanish, Mexican (OK not Mexicans) gentiles say “Moiyshi” with no problem and with no strenuous effort whatsoever.
R&C – No one knows to pronounce the name Moshe as Moishy – unless they were familiar with the name prior to the interaction. Absolutely NO ONE has a problem pronouncing the name Moses or Morris.
But I’m starting to see your point. We’re beating a dead horse – and I really need to move on. Now that I (might) have a moment, I have to respond to your assumptions that Greek and Roman names were only assigned within biblical translations. What was even more surprising was your idea that secular names were ‘slapped on’ by local magistrate.
Both premises are so so wrong.
First off, I’m certain that you are far more familiar than me with our biblical texts that are full of Aramaic, Greek, Persian and then even some Roman/Latin names. Greek examples: Antignos Ish Socho, Reb Chanina ben Dosa, Reb Tarfon, Reb Eluzer ben Harkonos. No translations necessary. These men went by these names in their lifetime – voluntarily.
As for people being assigned their secular names? Consider that the double names we see today are leftover from the days of secular nicknames, business names to even given birth names. At one point secular names were so common that the Rabbis came forth with a ruling that no man can be called up to the Torah, with anything other than a Hebrew name. That is when the add-ons were actually quite the opposite. The Hebrew name was matched to the existing secular name.
There were the direct translations:
-Dov was added to the German Behr.
-Tzvi for Hersch or Herschel
-Zev for Wolfe
-Arye for Leib, while some added Yehuda.
The common German name of Gottfried (shortened to Getzel) got the Hebrew addition of Eliyokom or Yedidya (ironically, these opted to go by the secular name of ‘Getzel’ so as not to use God’s name [which was present in their Hebrew name] in every day conversation)
Then German name of Benedict, (which we conveniently butchered to ‘Bendit’) got the Hebrew addition of Baruch.
-Efraim for the German Fischel (Because of Yaakov’s blessing)
-Naftali – Hertzka (for Hertz, aka Hart aka a male deer – because of that comparison too)
I’ve already mention Yitzchok Isaac, Shlomo Zalman (Solomon, Chaim Feitel (Vital), Shraga Feivish (Phoebus). But did you know that Todros is for the Greek name Theodorus which basically means Nathaniel?
And one more: Bunim (as in Reb Simcha Bunim) comes from the French nickname for babies bonhomme (as in good boy). Sweet. Hu?
Perhaps I’m even mistaken as to which came first – the Secular name or the Hebrew name, but one thing is abundantly clear – no name was ‘slapped on’ by any magistrate official.
Tzippi — Fascinating about all these origins. Can’t help wondering about the source. Not that they’re counter-intuitive, but it sounds like this comes from somewhere. Care to indulge?
R&C — Tzippi is probably right that secular authorities didn’t routinely slap on secular names, at least not early on, at least not in most places. Tax and census records show abundant use of proper Jewish names. Interestingly, the census for Mezbuz in the time of the Baal Shem Tov even lists him there as Balsam; clearly they had no issue with such.
It also seems to have been fairly common in Hungary and other more Western European countries for Jews to adopt secular names. It doesn’t sound like an attempt at “hiding” the Jewish name; just seems to have been a matter of convenience, as trivial as such a convenience might have been.
HR, It’s just years of accumulated tidbits of info that I’ve discovered on the topic. At one point I was fascinated with the origin of names. (Probably because of my own still-meaningless name combinations, and a surname that is most likely secular in origin).
As someone who is exposed to pseudo african names such as Molik, Shanda, Vashti (I swear), Iyannah, Givonni, Abidia, Jada, Jaden, Jahliq, Keshawn, Kemani, Jyel, Keyanna, Larue, Marquis, Latoya, Siniya, Tabrea, Tajee, Tazayan, Tyrel, Trevon, Typhon, Xavion, Yahaira, Yessenia, and Zamie (aseres… Deep breath. )
I can attest to the fact that keeping it simple is the reason, and should be, for chasidic men taking on more American sounding names.
Its not just about struggling with pronunciations. I can remember what Gitty asked and when she called, with a lot more ease than I can figure out what Taziya, or was it Messiah, actually needed.
MM and others, you veering off the original discussion (which is fine): identifying with a false name for whatever purpose. What you’re talking about is legitimate non-Hebrew names. A valid argument in the debate of whether Jews adopted foreign names as opposed to the assertion that shem, loshon, malbush shouldn’t be changed. And you can’t support your claim of what Jews did by citing examples of Moses, Miriam, Eshter, and other early Biblical figures. These were not ‘Jews’, per se.
Tzippi, I too am fascinated by the litany of names and origins. Great stuff!
There were occasions in Eastern Europe where the magistrate refused to record Jewish names. They recognized as valid ‘real’ names only.
Hozen, no (I swear) after Shanda?
R&C–
Actually you are a bit confused on several points. First of all, the Christian scriptures were written in koine Greek (with a few passages–direct quotes–in Aramaic), not translated into Greek. These books were, however, translated into Latin by St. Jerome. Three of the four evangelists (putative authors of the gospels) were Jews. Luke (Loukas), the fourth, was Greek and a physician. There is proof that the characters themselves used double names. Yeshua (Jesus) calls Shimon the rock on which he will build his church, punning on Shimon’s goyishe name Peter. When Shaul of Tarsus has his conversion experience and goes off to be the apostle to the gentiles (eventually winning his battle against those early followers of Yeshua, including his family members, who wished to remain Jews), he takes a name familiar to the goyim, Paul.
As for eastern European naming practices, it was surnames that were often slapped on Jews by government officials, not so much given names. Exactly how would some minion of the Czar or the Kaiser know that Hirsch is the translation of Tzvi? There were sometimes odd secular names conferred on people at Ellis Island. One gentleman I knew growing up was given the name Hitchcock, because the immigration official couldn’t relate to Yitzchok.
Josephus always called himself Iosepos (the Greek form of his name–he wrote in Greek). He acquired his Roman names when he was given Roman citizenship under the patronage of the imperial Flavians. Freed slaves and new Roman citizens always took the names of their patrons. So Josephus used his Latin names for public purposes. All of his children (all of whom had Jewish mothers) also had Roman names. Presumably, since Josephus was observant, they also each had a shem kodesh, but I don’t think anyone knows what they were. Philo of Alexandria was named Julius Philo, because his family had been granted citizenship by Julius Caesar. His brothers were named Alexander and Lysimachus, and the family was related to the Hasmoneans. We know that Philo’s shem kodesh was Yedidia. We don’t know about the Hebrew names of other members of his family, but certainly they had Hebrew names.
Esther and Mordechai are also names used at a goyishe court, as was Moshe. Were Moshe and Mordechai the names given at their respective brisim? Nothing about that is written in the texts, but would Jewish parents have given their sons the names of a pharaoh or a goyishe idol? Perhaps not, but we’ll never know for sure. Our books do not record every single detail of our ancestors’ lives.
In any case, it is irrelevant as to whether Philo and Josephus identified themselves by their Greek names (we know that Josephus did identify himself by the Greek form of his Hebrew name). The whole point of having a double name is to have a name to use in society at large for business and civic purposes, whether it is used in family life or not. My father’s name was Eliyahu/Edward. His parents and siblings called him Ellie 100% of the time. Well, sometimes my bubbe called him Eliyahu ha-Navi. His professional contacts all called him Ed/Eddie. My mother called him by a nickname derived from our surname. In other words, Ed/Eddie/Edward was used strictly by outsiders. That’s the point of having a shem kinnui.
MM, you familiar with the story of der yidel who got himself an Irish name in Ellis Island? He memorized the tough English phrases, but when officer queried him he forgot it all and murmured “shoin fargesen”, for which he wrote down Sean Furgessen. Old story.
Can we try guessing who of the regular commenters, for example, is Berl Blackman? I have a hunch…
Were Moshe and Mordechai the names given at their respective brisim? Nothing about that is written in the texts, but would Jewish parents have given their sons the names of a pharaoh or a goyishe idol? Perhaps not, but we’ll never know for sure.
Actually, our biblical texts about with Greek, Latin and even obviously Christian names. Leaving aside the previously discussed Greek names (like Yochanan -Harkonos, Nakdimon, Pappos, Nanos, Yehida-Arisobolos, and the Feivish from Phoebus, and the Todros for Theodorus), perhaps the learned guys can help me out with where exactly a ‘Rav Peter’ and even a ‘Reb Titus’ are mentioned? Reb Titus is supposed to be mentioned in several places in Talmud Yerushalmi? And if I’m not mistaken, Rav Peter died a martyr’s death in France at the times of the Second Crusades.
They weren’t the only ones.
For the first 2000 years of Jewish history Jews did not give their gives names ‘after’ any ancestory. As a matter of fact, there are no repeats of Avraham, Yitzchok, Yaakov, Moshe and even Dovid. Even in the royal family – not one of the kings of Yehuda are named David, the first in the dynasty.
As names were being invented they were heavily influenced by the local culture. Some were loyal nationalists and stuck to Hebrew names, while others adopted and adapted to the names of the locals.
I can go on, but I’m boring myself.
Suffice it to say that the concept of having secular names isn’t something invented by Shlomo/Sol in the Shmatte industry.
Tzipi.
There is a Rav Yehudah ben Titus mentioned in tractate Avodah Zurah and Bikurim of the Palestinian Talmud, but I never heard of a Rav Peter.
Fascinating stuff you have compiled with all the names. I am aware of the Greek and Latin names of our sages, our masters. My point was that people of old didn’t have a secular and Jewish name. All those Tanuim and Amoruim had Greek names, and that was their given names. They didn’t have alternative Jewish names. Having a Jewish and secular name is a much later development as you correctly pointed out.
My Great Grandfathers name was Yisucher. He was known by his Magyarized name Bartok, when I did some family roots research and I found out that Bartok has no connection to Yisucher, I was told that the local officials just slapped on the name when my grandfathers legal papers were drawn up. As someone has mentioned before, for quite some time in Europe the officials viewed Jewish names as illegitimate. You had to have a Christian or secular name. Most people were just slapped on with a name with no similarity or translational association to their Hebrew/Jewish name.
H.R.
“Interestingly, the census for Mezbuz in the time of the Baal Shem Tov even lists him there as Balsam; clearly they had no issue with such”
I am aware of this, but I think that it’s the tax records that have the Bal Shem’s appearance on the stage of history, not the census records. Scholars were forever mystified if that personality we refer to as the Bal Shem ever existed. This record might be the first, and I think only, documented evidence of his existence. I think this was only discovered recently with the fall of Communism. An interesting note about the tax record of Mezbuz is that there are three successive years that the Bal Shem is mentioned and we can see his figure and notoriety taking shape. If I’m not mistaken in the first year he is referred to simply as “Israel”, in the second mention he is given the appellation “Doctor Rabbiner”, and in the third year he is already known as Balshem.
MM
Good stuff, many thanks for the enlightening post!
“First of all, the Christian scriptures were written in koine Greek (with a few passages–direct quotes–in Aramaic), not translated into Greek.”
Well, depends on whether you accept the Greek Primacist or Aramaic Primacist stance. In any case Jesus didn’t speak Classical Greek; he probably spoke a version of Aramaic sprinkled in with some Greek and Hebrew words which was the common vernacular of the times. How would you know that Shimon had a Goiyish name? Maybe Shimon was translated to Peter because of the Lords proclamation of “Upon this rock I shall build my church”. Maybe he got the name because of this saying, not that he was known as Peter and that prompted Jesus to use the pun. Maybe Jesus referred to him as his rock, because according to most accounts he was his most beloved disciple
Ahhhh, Saul’s conversion on the road to Damascus; one of the most fascinating bible epics. “Saul, Saul, why do you persecute me?” Is it not curious that Saul and Paul are so similar? Again, what’s your source that he adopted the name himself? Maybe it was a transliteration of Saul.
I hear you on Josephus and Philo, I wasn’t sure about them. Thanks for the info.
“Were Moshe and Mordechai the names given at their respective brisim? Nothing about that is written in the texts, but would Jewish parents have given their sons the names of a pharaoh or a goyishe idol?”
A couple of notes and questions.
1)The tradition of naming a Jewish child at his bris, how old is that? I doubt it’s that old, going back to biblical times.
2)The whole idea of an official naming rite of passage is probably not that old either. I think in ancient times people came to be known and called with a specific name in accordance to an event or happening that was associated with them. With Moses the bible states “Ki min hamayim meshisihu” (because he was extracted/drawn/pulled from the water).
3)I also don’t think that the naming rights were reserved for parents, back in time. The whole naming process was a lose and nonchalant institution; it didn’t have the seriousness and weightiness it has today.
I am wondering about this things, if you have any additional information please share.
Gitchabbes to all the members of this august community. I love you all!
Peace!
Rabbeiny Peter is mentioned in Tosfos Gittin 8a. תוד”ה רבי יהודה
Thanks for the mareh mukoim, Kaf. Have a great Shabbes!
It is a folk tale that names were changed at Ellis Island.
To get there, you had to have a name, in English, on a ticket and a ship manifest. The records are available online, you can search them yourself.
Now, names may have been garbled in getting them on the tickets in the first place, and there are some fascinating stories about the assignment of second names in the Austrian Empire, but that doesn’t directly relate to Ellis Island.
As for external influences on Jewish names…
“Sender”, from Alexander the Great.
“Kalmen”, from Kalonymous (“of the good name”).
Thanx Tzip for the nice ‘Likut’.
Interesting stuff about the names, but I think youre confusing a bit. Mordechai, Esther and Moshe Mordechai didnt have a Persian and Jewish name – r n c
Though biblical nomenclature is quite a different issue than its modern counterpart, regardless of the historicity of Mosheh (as we have yet to fully decipher the heirogliphic census/tax records) and other Bible characters; however, not only according to the Talmudic, Midrashic and rabbinic commentary and exegetes, but even within the Good Book itself these figures went by many names. The frequent (mid-verse) interchange of Y’akobh-Yisrael is a blatant example thereof, as is the case (hijacked by the High-Critics) of the Bible’s main character, God; YHVH, Adonoy, El, Shaday, Elohim… Ad-Infinitum (figuratively as well as literally according to the Kabbalah tradition). Of these many theonyms, some are more Hebraic in origin (YHVH), some less (Elohah/im) and some not at all (El). Then there is
(contd.)Then there is the Talmudic/Midrashic theme, a slew people with seven names, of the most famous being Yithro (Jetro) but also his son-in-law Mosheh got seven names, most of them clearly Hebraic, and Mordekhai is Pthachyah…
A separate but also interesting phenomena of nomenclature, at least in Judaic tradition, is the use of multiple names in tandem. As the earliest record of such, some point to a Tosafist R. Y’akobh Yisrael (Yoma 46b)…
In Chassidic lit. there’s an interesting vignette about the Judaized secular names. When naming a child, R. Eizykl Komarner would anounce only the sec. name. The Hebrew name he enterd in a journal, encrypted by ‘at bash. At the child’s third birthday, he revealed to them their full name. BTW, this Komarners full name was Yitzchak Isaac Yehudah Yechiel Mechl.
Quasi: Interesting. For what it’s worth, most scholars agree that many of the names attributed to the time of the exodus are clearly Egyptian. Examples are Moses, Aron, Pinchas, and others. Parallels have been found with similar etymology in the extensive studies on Egyptology.
Quasi; I never heard about that minhag of Reb Ayzikel Komarna, do you have a source for it? I heard there is a tradition by at least part of his descendants not to name children Eizik after him, but I never heard the reason for that. Also I believe his name was only Yitchak Eisik Yehidah Yechiel, without the Mechel.
As a side note, I have a feeling that Reb Eizikel would feel at home here at Unpious, and he would have a lot to add to the discussion. I have forever had a strong interest in that man, there is something dark about him that pulls me in.
Kaf
We have something in common. I know very little about the “Hylige Komarner” but I’m quite fascinated by him. He seems to have been different that the typical chassidisher rebbe. He was a maverick, very original, and man what a vivid overactive imagination. I have read some of his things, his memories of his birth and early years, his grandiose self evaluation and hyper egoistic placement in the stratosphere of tzadikim; all in all a fascinating character. I wish there was some scholarly work done on him, I would read it yesterday.
R&C, I am unaware of any scholarly books devoted to him, but I do remember him being mentioned in some books I read when studying mystics. What about him is so fascinating? I seem to remember him as a delusional mystic who seriously believed he had ruach hakodesh and was the messiah.
If you enter his name in Google books, you’ll definitely find some stuff about him, but one book that I clearly recall with info on him is by the Cohn-Sherboks. Pretty sure the title is Mind, Body and Spirit. I cited from this book on another guy, but r’ eizikel komarno is there, too.
Beth.
“What about him is so fascinating? I seem to remember him as a delusional mystic who seriously believed he had ruach hakodesh and was the messiah.”
Precisely that is what is so fascinating about him. He somewhat breaks the mold of classical chasiddisher rebbe. He has freshness; he is not stale and decrepit like other Rebbes of his time. He seems to be exuberant, vibrant, energetic, and extreme. His persona is wide and in a Jewish sense all encompassing. He was a true torah giant, was a master kabbalist, a certified genius by all accounts, highly original and innovative in his ways, he also exhibits streaks of antinomianism with his breaks from the accepted p’sak on many halakhick dictums in his responsa and other assorted works, added to that he was completely delusional and insane. All in all, I would say, a very distinguishable and estimable character, at least someone I have to know.
I didn’t find anything in google. Would you be so kind and provide a link?
RandC; very nicely brought out, but I don’t consider him delusional per se any more than any of the other Hasidic masters. Was the Chozeh delusional? He definitely lived in his own realms, but that doesn’t mean that he was imagining experiences which didn’t exist. I am not a psychologist, but I am sure that the human mind has the capability to soar higher than many of us would imagine possible. He might have interpreted those experiences into his own language, but the experiences were nonetheless real. Did you know that he was also a gevaldige lamdan? cf his sefer on Toras Kohanim, I forgot the name of it. I once heard from Rav Dov Landau a comment on that sefer, and I forgot that as well!
The source of this minhag is the Komarner’s son R Eliyezr Zvi, in his encyclopedia-style ‘Or einaym vol. 1, entry: shmos bney yisrael. I do recall another source [which I cannot currently locate] where a descendent or disciple reports that after the passing of R Eizykl there was a clamoring to find the journal wherein the full names were safely encrypted… A somewhat related custom is recorded of R Yehoshua Heshl of Apta; for their first month he’d refer to toddlers as such [das kind], not by their given name.
(BTW, maybe Tzip or someone else can enlighten me to the etymology of the name Heschl. I think its attribution to Herschel is a mistake.)
In the Komarner’s Shtar T’noyim [prenuptial:) conditions contract] his name is entered with Mekhl at the end. The shtar t’noym is published (among other places) as an appendix to his “m’gilath s’torim” (hidden scroll, also subtitles “Chezyonot uma’ase hashem” – Visions and Acts). That ‘scroll’ is also where his more radical ideas and imaginations are found. I’m not certain, but there might be an excerpt from this m’gilah in Louis Jocobs’ Jewish Mistycal Testimonies, vtzarikh iyun shum.
Though I don’t recall his eluding to his self as a messiah, he did hint at his being a sort of reincarnation of the soul of the BeSHT, incomparably far less delusional…
Re the Komarner’s hypothetical relationship to us Unpious. Seeing such relationship takes merely a tad of imagination; he saw himself (as he pretty much was) a proud and staunch BeSHTian, and so loved any and every Jew unconditionally…
I can imagine myself sitting at his tisch one shabbos and hearing him elaborate in his toyreh… “o my dear brethren! You should only know how many angels dance round n round each click of the “@” key, and with each click on ‘go’ how many goyim [- only the heathens of yore, unlike the nations in whose shadow we’re secure] go where the black peppers grow…”
Let that flight of fancy sore to the heights n find its heavenly rest in the in the ‘Birds Nests’ pearched atop the ‘Blessed Chamber’ of the Komarner.
However I’ll indulge just a bit more. I don’t want to imagine him reading, posting, and commenting in our environs. When he’d come across a fan of RMC Lutzatto, he may still attempt some dialogue with such. But woe to us when he meets his first of our brethren who proffess to be neo-, proto- a/o post- Sabbatians, Frankists… fuggedabouddit.
Now back to (so-to-speak) seriousness. One of my greatest appreciations goes for the general idea to be garnered from his ‘Shulchan Hatahor [cleansed table], where he subjugates the ‘canon’ of Orthodox Judaism’ to being more adherent and play second fiddle to Jewish Mysticism. This book was first published from manuscript in ’63. O how that riled up some of the wannabe Chassidim and rebbes who were more or less farbisseneeh missnagdim disguised in fur coats n hats. vd”l. V’yesh lha’arikh, akh, me’epheth p’nay, hineh ketz ar’ay, leelein mi’lay, v’od hazzon l’mo’aday…
Ha, R&C, I see what you mean. I hadn’t looked for links in google, but if you want to, I will. Later.
Quasi; I see you’re really familiar with his ideas and mehalech! I would love to hear more. Maybe you can contribute to Unpious a piece based on his ideas?
“This book was first published from manuscript in ’63. O how that riled up some of the wannabe Chassidim and rebbes who were more or less farbisseneeh missnagdim disguised in fur coats n hats. vd”l. ”
Wasn’t it his descendants that didn’t want it published? What were the reasons? I would guess that it was just a fight of who owns the rights to it, but I heard that the reason given was that it was not written to be printed, it was “too dangerous” for that.
“and so loved any and every Jew unconditionally…”
-unless you’re found to be from the sheidin yehudo’in…… in which case you can also go back to the mountains of darkness….
My gift to R&C. (Unfortunately, I can’t make the links work, but if you paste the info into google, I think you’ll get it.)
The Jewish Messiahs: From the Galilee to Crown Heights – Google Books Result
Harris Lenowitz – 2001 – Religion – 297 pages
Page 210
Jewish and Christian mysticism: introduction – Google Books Result
Dan Cohn-Sherbok, Lavinia Cohn-Sherbok – 1995 – Body, Mind & Spirit – 186 pages
Page 79
Tree of souls: the mythology of Judaism – Google Books ResultHoward Schwartz – 2004 – Religion – 618 pages
Page 273
Thanks Beth, much appreciated
I know. You can’t get more Jewish than Isador, Irving, Christopher, Alex, Benedict, etc. It’s laughable from the sense that you don’t fool anyone by anglicizing your name. Sooner or later your true identity shows. We should learn from the Rasta Jamaicans, they’re proud of their heritage, they don’t anglicize.
Have you spoken to some support person in a call center in India recently? Did they tell you their names were Pradesh, Deepahleta, or Radeshuman? Or John, John, and Jane? Personally, I prefer the latter, at least when I have to make the callback.
It sounds just like the place my sister works in Brooklyn. But, The double named women are a whole lot more aggressive than you’re describing them! They might be quiet around the bosses but their mouths move a mile a minute talking about kleina kepeldik things. I for one think that its wrong not to educate women. But, unfortunately I think that it still wouldn’t stop them from talking lashon hara about one another.
I enjoyed reading your article. Whether “correct” or not was not the point. I saw an op-ed that expressed just that- a human experience. Well done, Chani. Like you brushed upon in your article; people love to ctriticize…