Mikhail Krutikov. Der Nister's Soviet Years: Yiddish Writer as Witness to the People. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, 2019. 309 pp (original) (raw)

AJS Review, 2021

Abstract

Pinhas Kahanovich (1884–1950), better known as Der Nister, remains one of the most enigmatic Yiddish writers of the twentieth century. His works—phantasmagoric stories, fables for children, historical novels, and reportages of the Holocaust—have fascinated many Yiddish literary scholars, including Chone Shmeruk, Dan Miron, Gennady Estraikh, David Roskies, Harriet Murav, Avrom Novershtern, Ber Kotlerman, Daniela Motovan, and now Mikhail Krutikov. Among the many questions Krutikov poses in his new book, is how a writer of such caliber, such complexity, and such nonlinear plot lines ended up in the Soviet Union when he had the option to be somewhere else, including Paris, where his brother immigrated. Krutikov challenges previous scholarship that considered 1929 to be the last year of the author’s artistic freedom. Instead, he argues that one should analyze the works that Der Nister produced during the last twentyone years of his life on their artistic merits, and think of his works as “witnessing the people,” rather than concealing from them. The second major innovation of Krutikov’s approach is to think of Der Nister as part of a larger European tradition, rather than its by-product. Just as in his previous book on Meir Weiner, Krutikov chooses to study Der Nister as a European and Russian intellectual, in conversation with Thomas Mann, Franz Kafka, and Andrei Bely, as well as Rabbi Nah.man of Bratslav and Y. L. Peretz. In addition, Krutikov sets out to demonstrate that “Der Nister’s position in Soviet literature . . . was not as marginal as assumed” (17). The book is built chronologically: chapter 1 addresses a collection of stories called Gedakht (Imagined), with a special focus on multiple readings of the celebrated story “Under a Fence” (1929). In this chapter, Krutikov situates Der Nister within the context of politics in Ukrainian literary circles, as well as the formation of Soviet Yiddish writing. Two points caught my attention: Der Nister’s attitude toward Zionism and his fight to attract readers. Regarding the latter, Krutikov mentions that while Der Nister’s writing enjoyed quite a bit of popularity among writers, his books were in low demand among general readers, who preferred Yiddish classics. I wonder whether Der Nister’s departure from symbolism can also be explained by his desire for a wider audience. Regarding attitudes to Zionism, Krutikov cites an episode when Der Nister took offence when the Ukrainian writer Yuri Smolich asked him about the nature of Zionism, thinking that Smolich implied his affinity with the movement. Krutikov argues that in his explicit denial of any connection to Zionism, Der Nister possibly betrayed anxiety about being associated with the movement. Chapter 2 is devoted to Der Nister’s first attempts as a realist writer and a detailed analysis of his reportage-style work called Hoypshtet (Capitals), devoted to Moscow, Kharkiv, and Leningrad. Krutikov not only points out silences in Der Nister’s work, such as not mentioning the famine in Ukraine, but also analyzes his use of symbolism in descriptions of weather and nature in relation to stories that he is telling. Krutikov brilliantly juxtaposes his work with the travel Book Reviews

Anna Shternshis hasn't uploaded this paper.

Let Anna know you want this paper to be uploaded.

Ask for this paper to be uploaded.