Walking the Line
[Book Review]
Hella Winston
In Unchosen: The Hidden Lives of Hasidic Rebels, Hella Winston chronicles the lives of Yossi, Dini, Yitzchak, Malkie and others as they diverge from the prescribed path of Chasidic Jewish culture and religion.
Let’s start by judging this book by its cover, which cleverly illustrates the title. (I have a degree in design, so I’m allowed to do that.) The photo shows a Chasidic man, complete with shtreimel and bekishe, walking across the Brooklyn Bridge towards Manhattan. Thus, it highlights the ambivalence that many Chasidic rebels feel about the lifestyle they’ve been raised in, and the secular society they’re venturing into. The man is treading on the yellow line that divides the pedestrian lane from the cyclists’ lane—a literal illustration of “walking the line” between his religious home borough and Manhattan as a symbol of a broader secular world. (Though perhaps he is just trying to avoid being hit by those pesky hipster bike-riders.) I also suspect that the choice of blue ink for the title and the back cover of the dust jacket serves to visually relate this book to Judaism. (For us goyim, blue Chanukah wrapping paper in stores is a counterpoint to the red-and-gold foil at Christmas, and the only thing we recognize as Jewish. Except for that funny candelabra y’all use.)
The book is structured in an alternating-chapter format, with the author arranging her narratives around the character Yossi, who merits the focus of every other chapter. Between chapters about Yossi, Winston visits the lives of other rebels. The readers meet Dini, who vents her frustration about the restrictions on women in Chasidism; Chaim, who hosts open-minded gatherings; Malkie, the founder of Footsteps, an organization that supports those seeking to leave the community; and several other Chasidic rebels. Each character is a device used to explore one area of Chasidic culture or beliefs, and the reasons one might have for rejecting them. Because of this structure, the book often feels like a prolonged introduction; I wanted Winston to move past the explanations and into more of the fascinating narratives of the subjects’ lives.
I have no vested interest in maintaining a good image of Chasidim; I am a red-haired goy from the South who grew up in a religiously-ambiguous household. That being said, I don’t understand the emphasis in this book on the character Yossi. With his substance abuse problems and obvious mental illness, he seems like he’d be an outlier in any group—not just a selection of rebels. Additionally, Leah, the divorcée and young mother, is briefly addicted to drugs. Yossi’s prominent position (and Leah’s ancillary one) makes the other characters lose credibility. If he is put forward as representative of the dissenters, either the author’s discretion is lax or Chasidism can really drive one towards insanity.
Despite its shortcomings, I genuinely enjoyed Hella Winston’s writing. She integrates Yiddish terms into her explanations without them seeming clunky or distracting, and the treatment of each character is respectful and fair. The case studies inspire in the reader a sense of personal connection to each character. I’d love to see Winston write Unchosen Again (or Re-Unchosen?) as a sequel so that we can find out how Yossi is managing in life, or where Malkie plans to take Footsteps in the future. (In the case of Yossi, though, I fear the worst.)
The people for whom Unchosen would be an interesting read are voyeuristic goyim like myself who are fascinated with those whose lives are vastly different from ours, or the rebels among us who see a bit of themselves in every anecdote. In the case of the goyim, all the explanations of religion and ritual will be necessary and helpful. In the latter case, however, I imagine the reader will skim over it to get to the juicy parts, like someone thumbing through a romance novel for the sex scenes. That being said, there are many groups to whom this book wouldn’t appeal—secular Jews who would find the explanations tedious, goyim with no interest in Judaism, or Chasidim with a distaste for dissent. If you fit one of these categories, you’re at the wrong website anyway.
Unchosen is nonfiction, and is available in both hardcover and paperback from Beacon Press for $23.95. (Or, for the thrifty Jews among us, you can buy a cheap used version from Amazon like I did.) I award it four Stars of David, out of five.
Printable Version
Sara,
Well done. It’s great to see Southern belles interested in our little niche.
Like this comment?
1
This book was the most ridiculous book ever written, and probably still is, unless the author has written a sequel to her story about a loser with serious issues.
If you want an insight into the minds of those “going off the derech”, then find another book to read.
Unless of course all “off the derechs” are clowns with the IQ of a mouse and the people skills to match. Then indeed the book is right on target.
Highly rated. Like this comment?
11
Opppps. I jumped in without reading the article. I saw the title and saw red.
I HATE this book!
I am pleased that you too share my concerns with the author’s emphasis on Yossi.
Ms. Winston seems to have based her ideas of such people on him, and boy, she is way off target.
But it’s all in a published book, so it must be true. No?
Like this comment?
1
I agree with Frummer. This book was another example of an author not doing proper research before labeling an entire community.
I have my own issues with the community, but if I were to write a book, I wouldn’t single out the most problematic rebels to use them as ‘proof.’
Highly rated. Like this comment?
4
Re-Unchosen, eh? Somehow sounds familiar…
Way back when, I attempted to clarify some of the misconceptions Hella Winstons put forth. Call it the impetuousness of youth, but I was certain that I might get people to understand the truth. I actually believed that Ms. Winston wanted to give an honest portrayal, and I was sure that people cared about the ‘real deal’.
Ha! The innocence of youth. It’s a darling thing.
I’ve since realized, then for most people, it’s the sensationalism they’re after. And for someone to tell them they’re right – and it’s the world that’s wrong. And for all those seeking a reason out – Hella helped them find it.
As for Ms. Winston’s interest in the facts? After personal interaction and interactions that she had with others, I’ve noticed that Hella Winston’s only concern is with making her claim appear valid. That any dissident in this community is “unchosen”, unloved and unwelcome. And she’ll twist her stories any which way to help support her thesis.
It is a biased and hateful piece of work. Or she is. Same difference.
Like this comment?
2
Well done Ms Winston.
Somehow you’ve managed to get free publicity for your book, a good number of years after it was published. In usual circumstances a book targeting a niche market such as this one, would gather dust very soon after the rumbles of the grumbles have worn off. Not this one. Ever so often some well meaning soul brings it up again. More $$$$$$$ for the author.
To anybody who hasn’t purchased this book and is now thinking of doing so, don’t!
Like this comment?
0
>With his substance abuse problems and obvious mental illness, he seems like he’d be an outlier in any group…
That comment really hit me. I would say the same about people who do not have substance abuse problems or mental illness. Some degree of mental pathology is necessary to explain why the “doubters” in such settings can stay in when it’s abusive and destructive – not merely comfortable and safe. Since the 60s, Orthodox Jewry has been suffused with a sense of obligation to Outreach to non-Orthodox Jews (Kiruv), but a response of sorts has formed in “Kiruv Judaism”, a complex lifestyle apologetics filled with expectations that EVERY JEW has a place at the Charedi table, and if Orthodoxy is rational and reasonable, at least THEORETICALLY any ‘normal’ non-Jew. But the idea that a religious Jewish community can, indeed, have elements *that would be outliers anywhere* is unthinkable to many BTs and Jews “inspired” by BTs and the new Orthodox Jewish culture the are part of. It suggests both that Orthodox Jews are human, and that Orthodox Judaism is not for all humans – even all Jews.
Like this comment?
0
“I imagine the reader will skim over it to get to the juicy parts”
.)
So the question is, are there enough juicy parts to make it worthwhile? I have not read it, and according to this review, the juicy parts would be the only reason for me to read it. (And can someone send me a copy that has the juicy parts marked off, so I don’t need to look for them? RandC, sort of like the Heichal Habrachah chumashim in Tosh…
I have a nagging suspicion that the characters in the book are more represantative of OTD chassidim than many on here would like to imagine. It is just a guess, but that is the way it seems to me from the OTD people that I know. Reb Yaakov Horowitz recently had an editorial on VIN, with 5 causes for most OTD kids. Pedophilia, learning disablities, shalom bayis, and 2 others which I don’t remeber right now. There are exceptions, of course, but I think it is a small minority. The majority of people with intellectual reasons to leave the religion opt not to upend their lives and stay inside, either leading double lives, or as in my own case, are “magbir the lev on the sechel”. Just my observations, which are either right or wrong. I’d like to hear what others have to say.
One more point, what are the qualifications of Mrs. Winston? Is she presenting herself as a sociologist, as a psychologist, or as an author just supplying her readership with interesting reading material? The strength of her detractors’ arguments would depend on that. Anyone knows?
Like this comment?
0
I’m glad to see that you have all rightfully unmasked Ms. Winston for the fraud she is. I read the book a while ago and I was unimpressed to the extreme. She presents the book with the pretence of being a well researched and scholarly work, which couldn’t be further from the truth. She totally didn’t grasp the heart of the issues at hand. She vulgarly oversimplified and was poorly informed. Everything in the book is based on a select few sources and poorly conducted interviews. All in all, a completely detestable read. I would give it 4 swastikas instead of the 4 shields of David.
On a personal note, I know the hero of the book Yossi, and the way she dealt with him was extremely deceitful and unethical. I don’t want to get into details, but take me for my word. She literally screwed him over for the advancement of her personal narcissistic need to gain notoriety and fame. For those of you concerned, Yossi made a full 180 and is a pious Jew now.
Like this comment?
1
Great book and excellent review.
Frummer: As Sara pinted out so astutely: “there are many groups to whom this book wouldn’t appeal…Chasidim with a distaste for dissent. If you fit one of these categories, you’re at the wrong website anyway.”
Piss off.
Like this comment?
0
>Yossi made a full 180 and is a pious Jew now.
I guess when Sara said “With his substance abuse problems and obvious mental illness, he seems like he’d be an outlier in any group” she was wrong.
He’d fit right in in the frum community!
Like this comment?
2
offthederech; “piss off”
Isn’t the correct term, FUCK OFF!!!
(ugh, the bitter vibes coming off you, why are you so angry?)
Like this comment?
2
Kaf
There are quite some juicy parts in the book. I don’t question her talent as a writer. She is pretty decent writer. I was unimpressed with the content and her narrow view of contemporary Chassidish society.
I am not familiar with the Tosh chumushim.
The so called ‘reasons’ you quoted above happen to be true in a lot of the cases, but you must be very careful with attributing causality to them. I’m not sure if they are correlational or causational. My first thought would be that attributing OTD, solely, to one of those factors is extremely narrow minded and shallow.
Winston’s credentials are: un-academic bitch.
Like this comment?
0
Off.
Dont make fun of Yossi. He is a tragic and pathetic figure, who Hella abused.
Like this comment?
0
>Yossi made a full 180 and is a pious Jew now
Bullocks.
He is DRESSED as a pious jew, but he is the same Yossi. The only change, which is also the good part, is that he found stability in life.
Also, I have spent hours talking to him and he doesn’t feel he’s been taken advantage of, nor does he feel defrauded. So I think your harsh words towards Winston is more for the sensation of it than for the actual facts.
Like this comment?
3
Kaf.
Here is how I would approach Horrowitz’s position.
1)How did he arrive at the 5 factors?
2)Was there an empirical study done?
3)What are his resources, statistics, etc.
4)Could Horrowitz be biased?
5)Frummers doing research on OTD is biased in its inception. They view OTD as a perversion so they have to apply unflattering reasons for its occurrence. They can never admit that a stable healthy person left, so I would question the motive of the study too.
6)Theoretically is it even plausible to attribute a given lifestyle to “one” factor?
Like this comment?
0
And the most important question is: Who says OTD’ness is an abomination that there must be an underlying reason for it? Should I conduct a study of why people are frum? Should OTD people come up with 5 factors why people are religious? How would the Frum community take to that?
Like this comment?
0
Kaf: >Isn’t the correct term, FUCK OFF!!!
You said it, not me.
>why are you so angry?
Kol hapoisel…
R and C: >Dont make fun of Yossi.
Chas veshalom. I’m making fun of the community.
Good points above about OTDness, but I can’t agree with you about Winston. Not that I ton any background details (although I’d love to hear more from you), but she seemed like a professional, and the book did bring up some of the major problems in the frum world. I’d say it’s somewhat like Faranak Margolese’s book “Off the Derech”, just written about real people and with less of that frum bias you pointed out above. Neither book is perfect, but they both shed light on a subject few have bothered/dared to explore.
Like this comment?
1
Not to toot my own horn, but I posted some excerpts from the book here.
Like this comment?
0
offthederech;
“Kol hapoisel…”
Firstly, shvache comeback.
Secondly, you’re implying that I am angry, but that has no basis in reality. For real. Your comments, on the other hand, reek with anger, and so does your blog. There’s always the possibility that I am reading you wrong, of course. Do you honestly believe that you’re not angry?
Like this comment?
2
And the most important question is: Who says OTD’ness is an abomination that there must be an underlying reason for it?
No one is calling “OTD’ness” an abomination. But for a person to reject the basics he was taught, for him to suddenly see ‘reality’ in an entirely different light (even if what he arrived at NOW is the truth), there needs to be an underlyling reason.
Should I conduct a study of why people are frum? Should OTD people come up with 5 factors why people are religious?
Indeed there are many who’ll give you a laundry list of reasons of why people become religious. It is not the everyday typical occurrence, and there are for the most part extenuating circumstances that bring it about.
In whatever form it happens, there usually is a catalyst for change.
Like this comment?
0
>you’re implying that I am angry, but that has no basis in reality.
Methinks you need to read the books of one great OTDer, Shloimy Freud. You’re in denial.
Like this comment?
0
Rabbi Howrowitz, who has been working with “kids at risk” for the past 15 claims that these are primarily the reasons why people chose to go OTD.
Child abuse/molestation/neglect
2. Lack of simchas chayim/shalom bayis at home
3. Poor parenting or overbearing parents
4. Undiagnosed or unaddressed learning disabilities.
5. Extremism (lack of flexibility in raising children and forcing them into the same mold) .
I would add a fifth;
Undiagnosed or diagnosed psychological/ social disabilities as well.
RandC,
Should I conduct a study of why people are frum? Should OTD people come up with 5 factors why people are religious? How would the Frum community take to that?
Would you conduct a study to find out why people sleep, eat, and breath?
Human beings don’t need much reason to follow the status quo.
If a person choses to disrupt his life in such an extreme fashion, there usually is reason for it.
Like this comment?
0
I don’t know if Yossi feels like he has been taken advantage of, or wrongly portrayed – but I do know that he is not the only one.
I know of quite a few of the ‘personal stories’ she shared, where the person in question feels lied to and manipulated.
She took what she wanted, twisted what she could, and discarded the rest. This is not the in-depth and balanced sociological study she claims she intended it to be. This is simply bias – put on paper.
Like this comment?
0
Someone asked about Hella Winston’s credentials.
Dr. Winston is a sociologist.
Like this comment?
3
I agree with Tzippi, although I can never be as eloquent as her. Nobody is making a study of why men in American culture wear pants, as opposed to long robes or kilts. If someone would start wearing a kilt, we would need to find a reason for that.
RandC; Re Horowitz, although you are probably right that he has a bias towards frumkeit, he definitely does have a lot of experience in the field, and even though I am sure the 5 factors he mentions are not the results of a scientific study, nonetheless he is in a position to make such estimations as good as anyone. That should answer questions 1 2 and 3. I am not sure what you mean by question 6, because even though every individual is likely to have multiple reasons, a general trend can usually still be found.
Can you explain your earlier comment about correlation and causation? I understood your comment to mean that those 5 factors might not be the cause of leaving the community, rather they might be the cause that would remove, so to speak, the impediments to leave, by mitigating the effects of social pressure. Assuming that is true, those factors still play a huge role in determining the reasons people leave and the types of people you can expect the “rebels” to be. Thus, what I said before is still true, that Ms. Winston’s sample in the book, is maybe more representative of the “unchosen” than you can admit. I am not saying anything with certainty, just suggesting the possibility.
Like this comment?
0
offthederech; “Methinks you need to read the books of one great OTDer, Shloimy Freud. You’re in denial.”
Can you bother to elaborate? I am quite thick, and I have no clue to what Freud’s theories have to do with this. Is that supposed to be a retort similar to the first one, “kol haposeil bemumo poseil”? Because if it is, I long outgrew those “arguments”, and have had my share of those in yeshiva arguing who was in the right, chassidim or misnagdim…..
Like this comment?
1
Hoezen, I didn’t see that you had already made the same point as Tzippi, that people don’t need much of reason to follow the status quo, and I totally agree.
Like this comment?
0
Look Kaf, there’s no reason why I or anyone should have to put up with accusations of being angry or anything. That’s called “ad hominem attacks.” I don’t know you and you don’t know me, so why should either of us make assumptions about each other?
Stick to the issues. If you prefer flame wars, I can do that too.
How would you like it if I accused you of being old, or smelly, or in jail, or anything else? It’s just not nice. I don’t think I’m angry, but even if I am, I think it’s rude of you to bring it up (on a public forum, especially).
If you insist on insulting me, fine. Just don’t expect to get away with it. Besides, there’s an old saying I used to hear: if you have nothing nice to say, don’t say it. You’re violating basic rules of manners, I’ll have you know.
Like this comment?
1
offthederech; In all honesty, I had no intention to “flame you” or anything of the like. Actually, I don’t necessarily disagree with your comments neither on here nor on your blog. Having said that, I do think that your comments come off sounding angry and bitter. This is what I wrote earlier-
“There’s always the possibility that I am reading you wrong, of course. Do you honestly believe that you’re not angry?”
and you just answered me-
“I don’t think I’m angry”.
I can leave it at that, if you want, but if you give your permission, I would like to hear from others if I am the only one that felt anger coming from your posts. (So that if it turns out that I was the only one with this impression, I will have my eyeglasses checked.) Also, do I come off sounding angry?
Like this comment?
1
good job, sara. With my alabama-born, jewish girlfriend living in philadelphia right now, i’m getting a good second-hand look at the diversity of jewish lifetyles… it’s interesting stuff indeed.
Like this comment?
1
@kafhakela: You’re not the only one. I have no idea who this guy is,nor do I care, but I dislike reading his bitter comments. Not going to make assumptions about him as a person, but his rants seem angry and obnoxious.
Like this comment?
2
offthederech;
“How would you like it if I accused you of being old, or smelly, or in jail, or anything else?”
Funny, I do feel kinda old sometimes (e.g. when I am with my kids in an amusement park), I am smelly at times (You should have smelled me the other day after doing some heavy labor! But the ladies out there should probably focus on what my skin smells like after a nice long shower… I use fruity body wash…) and I clearly am in a kind of jail.
Like this comment?
0
Kaf: Now all you need to do is apologize and it’s water under the bridge.
Though I wonder why it matters to you whether or not I’m
Maybe my name bothers you more than my personality. If I used the handle “Joe Shmo” would your opinions be any different?
Like this comment?
0
R&C,
You were off the mark with “Yossi” being used or otherwise mistreated. That’s not HE feels, nor was that my impression when I saw them together (on more than one occasion). So I’m not sure where you get your information from.
As far as the choices Dr. Winston chose, I’ll agree that a sequel is in order. In the few years that have passed there has been a greater awareness inside and outside to the phenomenon of OTDs. With all the sites and organizations available there are plenty of people willing and able to be part of it. I only hope Dr. Winston will take her time to write the next book.
Highly rated. Like this comment?
7
Sara’s review of Unchosen was short but astute. I was surprised to see so many commentors criticize Hella Winston for what they perceive to be a mis-characterization of the entire chasidic community. These commentors seem to take it as a personal affront that the author chose to shed light upon the untold stories of individuals who felt trapped in a life they did not choose. This book doesn’t purport to be in an in-depth study of chasidim and/or chasidus. Rather, the author is very clear about this book focusing on the stories of just several misfits who let her into her life and allowed their stories to be told by her. The stories are fascinating because outsiders (and even insiders) rarely get a glimpse into the turmoil that a chasidic dissenter encounters. Throughough the book, Ms. Winston remains non-judgemental and objective about the chasidic lifestyle, and is respectful of her subjects and their backgrounds. She skillfully describes her subjects’ ambivalence about their lives, but makes it a point not to take sides or denigrate their former and current lifestyles.
Highly rated. Like this comment?
6
>But for a person to reject the basics he was taught, for him to suddenly see ‘reality’ in an entirely different light (even if what he arrived at NOW is the truth), there needs to be an underlyling reason.
Thats funny; that statement could apply to Gerim too, positively and/or negatively – which means it could apply to OTDs positively as well. If you bring Gerim in as their own kinds of OTDs, there’s a lot of overlap with R. Ethan Tucker’s series on Gerim and BTs at Machon Hadar’s website. As a lapsing Ger who has met many gerim, there is quite often something ‘up’ with Gerim, other than intellectual inclination to Judaism, true (similar in some ways to BTs who become Chabad). But there’s also often more continuity than people like to believe (or want to admit to), between the worldviews they left and their adopted ones. The West, where most OTDs and gerim come from and remain in – is deeply saturated with Biblical presuppositions, even the “secular” is built on selective rejection of Biblical views, and is even now still juxtaposing against it. Admittance of non-Jewish men into Judaism really began in earnest at a time when one could ‘become’ Greek (Alexander’s empire spread beyond his ‘world’ and new peoples came under their dominion), and Judaism responded as Jews saw a way ‘out’. I don’t think it’s possible to talk about apostasy from Judaism without noting similarities to ‘apostasy’ into it.
Like this comment?
0
I hope it’s not against the rules to use an old post as a comment. I just don’t feel like rewriting it…
Hella Winston does a wonderful job. She does a wonderful at job at giving us a look at the world through the eyes of her characters. I know many people who fall into the category of Hasidic Rebels and the book gives an accurate account of their lives, from their point of view. She accurately portrays her characters feelings and battles and she chose an interesting set of characters. I enjoyed the book immensely and would recommend it to anyone chasidish who wants to understand the rebels.
Any serious reader will find him/herself asking if some of the characters’ issues do not stem from their society or community but stem from other issues such as disorders that exist in the outside world as well. I think that to an extent Ms. Winston is guilty of portraying some of these issues as stemming from the community, but she is definitely not as guilty as most of us make her out to be.
As an anthropological subject, shouldn’t the book have the opposing points of view as well? I was surprised to see no interviews with the people within the community who are fighting the trend. I was even more surprised that she didn’t write about the ones who have rebelled, gone all the way, and then came back. I think that to the outsider reading the book such a character would have been very insightful. I think it would’ve given the book another dimension that it desperately needs. After portraying such a good picture of leaving the fold, a reader wants to know how one can go and come back. I have a friend who grew up in chasidish Boro Park, left the fold in his late teenage years and ended up ‘living the life’ in Eastern Europe. Why did he come back? How is he accepted? What did he learn?
Another thing I was thinking about was along the lines of what the rebel wrote. Is Hella now friends with Malkie and her characters or was it all good for the book and is now gone?
originally written in January 2006 as my last ever blog post.
Like this comment?
2
Tzipi, Kaf and Hoezen, you all seem to be saying the same thing so I’ll address you as one with my sincere apologies to your individual glory.
I never said I disagree with Rabbi Horrowitz’s assessment; I haven’t done a counter study to disprove him. I only have certain questions before I take his words for granted and apply canonical gravity to them.
Of course you were all right that there needs to be no study done on why people remain in a certain mold; it’s only if we observe a change that the question presents itself: why did this change occur?, or what was the catalyst for the switch? I’m only questioning whether Horrowitz has any validity due to certain flaws in his study, or better yet, lack thereof.
I understand that he is an expert, and that he has been working with teens at risk for 15 years and so on, but that still doesn’t give his proclamation a sniff of validity. If he would have done a comprehensive study and would have reached the same conclusion I would have to keep mum. But, I’m quite positive he didn’t do any scientific research on the subject; he is just speaking from an experiential point of view. I’m not throwing that away completely, experience is something, but I would need more to accept his words as fact. This is my first gripe. My second gripe with his statements concern the preexisting biased perspective Frum people hold when explaining the OTD trend.
Frum people definitely view OTD’ness as an abomination and corruption of proper values and respectable lifestyle. They view religion as the truth and the natural order of things. When someone decides to shed his religiosity the motive has to be a negative one; similar to the way a personality disorder is explained in psychology. Is it not shocking that all 5 reasons have a negative connotation to them?
A frum person can never admit that secular life is valid. The frum approach to the dilemma is: the behavior the person is exhibiting is deviant, now we have to find a cause for the perverse behavior. Hence, if the behavior is considered deviant and perverse the causation will always be a tragic event, general discontent, a mental or personality disorder, poor upbringing etc.
If the approach to the phenomenon would be unbiased, it’s not inconceivable that “philosophical differences of opinion” might arise as a factor. It’s not at all puzzling to me that the aforementioned is never given as a reason. Giving differences of belief and opinion as a reason would validate the newly adopted lifestyle, which in the frum mindset can’t be.
In the frum mindset the result of the switch must be attributed to a negative episode or a subversive attitude, so as to affirm that the other life is not equivalent, never the less-God forbid, superior to frum life.
Tzipi- “Indeed there are many who’ll give you a laundry list of reasons of why people become religious. It is not the everyday typical occurrence, and there are for the most part extenuating circumstances that bring it about.”
Shocked to hear this from you! This is very offensive and highly deconstructionist. Is it not because they saw the light that they return to God? Is it not an expression of the deep yearning of the soul that compels them to God?
Kaf- “Can you explain your earlier comment about correlation and causation?”
I am very aware that in many cases Horrowitz is right. The OTD individuals I am familiar with due tend to come from unprivileged backgrounds or had a harsh childhood. Never the less, until its proven empirically, one can never know if the change in lifestyle is a direct product of the former harsh life. In other words one cannot be sure if the former life causes the later life, or the former life is just a correlation (it just co-exists) without having any profound effects of the later life.
I’ll illustrate causation and correlation with a description I once read. Here goes: Every person that talks has teeth. Do teeth make a person talk? Of course not. One might argue that teeth “causes” speech, because we see that a person that has no teeth has hardships with speech. But, we know for a fact that teeth are not one of the factors that “causes” speech, hence it’s only a correlation. For speech to be a reality teeth have to exist, but they don’t necessarily cause speech.
The same is with the reasons Horrowitz gave. I know that the reasons are in many cases the reality of the OTD individual, but I’m not necessarily convinced it’s the cause for the phenomenon.
Like this comment?
0
RandC;
You bring out valid points, but our discussion is quite different than the analogy of the teeth and talking. We know that teeth do not cause people to talk, so we know it’s only a correlation (I don’t like the use of this word in this context, but I’ll go along with it). But let’s assume that we do not know what causes people to talk, and we do not know that teeth do not cause it, and we do see that people who talk have teeth and vice versa. Wouldn’t we SUSPECT, that one causes the other?
Here, we know (not with certainty, but it definitely seems that way) that most people that are OTD have had a hard time fitting in and feeling comfortable with the rest of frum society. We also know that the vast majority of them have not had an intellectual search for the TRUTH. Doesn’t it follow that we should suspect that the first caused the second? They were not happy with their life, and were looking to change that. That doesn’t in any way intimate that had they been searching for the truth they would have stayed frum, all it saying that the cause of leaving the culture has nothing to do with TRUTH.
Actually, I believe, that the reason to be frum for most people that ARE frum also has nothing to do with TRUTH. The same social pressures that cause the OTD’s to leave, cause the rest of us to stay. Intellectual truth doesn’t affect most people’s choice of either staying or leaving. Hasn’t it been said, “halvai sheyehai moreh shomayim kemorai bosor vedam”?
Like this comment?
0
Kaf
I couldnt have said better than thou hast. “Suspect” is a good start for speculation, its not a fact.
Like this comment?
0
I really don’t understand why offthederech objects every time someone makes the observation that he sounds angry and bitter. Even the smallest sampling of his comments from various blogs reveal how bitterly angry he is that it seems pointless to deny it. I mean, his first comment here was, “piss off!”
Personally, I think that attributing his nasty comments to being angry is much preferred. After all, if it’s not anger that’s making him act like such a jerk, then that means he’s just an ordinary asshole.
Like this comment?
3
To those who feel Hella is to be excoriated for her work, I think you miss the point. Many of us may feel a bit disappointed that the book focuses on Yossi, a character who is obviously in need of help and not at all representative of the typical Chasidic rebel. But despite all that, Hella’s research and scholarship is impeccable, and she has her finger on the pulse of the Chasidic lifestyle in a way that few outsiders have ever managed.
There are those of us who might feel that the overemphasis on Yossi’s story reflects badly on others who choose to leave, others with more focus and direction, and of course, with more emotional stability. That doesn’t discount Yossi’s tale from having value for being told. While he might be an anomaly, and perhaps unfair as a representative of the OTD phenomenon, there really is no such thing as “typical” when it comes to leaving the fold. We have to face the fact: some who leave are emotionally unstable and somewhat disturbed psychologically. For those who feel it is a bad reflection of the reality, I think it says more about our own insecurity about our image — both to the rest of the community and the world at large.
Seen objectively, Unchosen has provided a highly thought-provoking image of Chasidim and the misfits among them. Misfits being what they are, they will take all shapes and forms. And despite the negative image people may see in the book, anecdotal evidence suggests that most readers — mainstream Americans, for the most part — find it highly fascinating and seem little inclined to generalize based on these few case studies, least of which the case of Yossi.
And while Yossi’s story provide much for its storytelling value, Hella also chose subjects like Malkie Schwarz and Yehoshua Fine, examples of stability, level-headedness, and overall fine examples of individuals who chose to leave the Chasidic lifestyle. I for one think Hella is to be applauded for her work, lauded for an ambitious endeavor that few would dare undertake.
Highly rated. Like this comment?
7
Rather, the author is very clear about this book focusing on the stories of just several misfits who let her into her life and allowed their stories to be told by her. and Throughough the book, Ms. Winston remains non-judgemental and objective about the chasidic lifestyle, and is respectful of her subjects and their backgrounds.
Then why is it that more than one of her ‘subjects’ felt that their story was distorted and didn’t reflect what they said or meant?
Face it – her book wouldn’t have sold if she simply said ‘They live an odd life. Some stay, some leave.’ She needed the sensationalism, the pathetic fanaticism, the excessive disillusionment, and the outright rejection, for her story to be listened to. She didn’t find enough of it, so she created it.
I wouldn’t mind nearly as much – if she would place the book in the ‘fiction’ aisle.
Like this comment?
0
Is it not because they saw the light that they return to God? Is it not an expression of the deep yearning of the soul that compels them to God?
Unhappy people yearn for something – anything! that might give them happiness. The common denominator between BTs and OTDs, is that they both are disillusioned with the life they are living, they see pain and dissatisfaction all around, and they are certain that they’ll find the answer – - – there.
The farther the better.
Only thing I do wanna point out – - odd thing. More BTs actually find happiness than OTDs. I wish someone would do a study to discover the whys of that.
Like this comment?
1
Tzippi, you make me laugh, I like you. I just discovered your blog, (I am looking forward to many hours of enjoyable reading, I just need to find the time!) and I wanted to send you an email, but you have no email posted. If you want, you can contact me at kafhakela@yahoo.com.
Like this comment?
0
Thanks Kaf. I quite enjoyed that blog myself.
Good times.
Like this comment?
0
“More BTs actually find happiness than OTDs. I wish someone would do a study to discover the whys of that.”
I wish someone would do a study to discover why some people talk out of their ass making up facts to suit their agenda.
Your comments, Tzippi, are outrageous in their ignorance. Many BTs are happy; and many become seriously disillusioned over the years. Let’s not even start on the 2nd generation, the children and grandchildren of BTs, who find themselves in serious identity crises with no clear sense of belonging to either the world they’re in or the world their parents left.
And plenty OTD’s are happy. The fact that you state so matter-of-factly that they’re not, without a single study to prove it and with anecdotal evidence clearly to the contrary, shows your total and utter lack of respect for facts, since apparently, facts, being so tenaciously uncooperative, will stand in the way of whatever preconceptions you have about your own world and those who leave it, that it is best to leave yourself unencumbered by such trivialities. Who indeed cares about facts when there’s a PR campaign to wage?
Highly rated. Like this comment?
7
HR;
I am afraid of antagonizing the powers-that-be on this website, so I will be cautious…
Could it be that I chanced here upon a long running feud? It certainly seems so, because I am having a hard time finding the cause for the sudden escalation in tone.
Like this comment?
0
I don’t for a moment think that OTDs are lacking in intelligence, compassion, or emotional maturity. Yet I do know that the OTDs see far more unhappiness than their BT counterparts.
Facts you ask for? Though I hate to broach it – take the suicide rate. Sad. Morbid. Inappropriate per my usual. But there you have it.
(And what do the children and grandchildren of BTs have to do with this conversation? Talk about staying on topic!)
Like this comment?
0
Kaf,
I’m not very beloved around these parts. *whimper* Dissident views and all. They’re not all that ‘accepting’.
But I quite enjoy when the gloves come off and certain characters get to show their true colors.
Like this comment?
0
offthederech:
Wow! Somebody is having a bad day.
I read that book when I was more off than on and I didn’t like it then. I still don’t like it.
It’s funny how at the time the book came out, blogvelt was full of people bashing anybody who DARED criticise the book or the writer. It’s pleasing to see how the tables have turned and how so many are now acknowledging that her book is far from the Gospel.
I am also seeing intense disappointment from those who trusted her. People who probably assumed that “here is a nice Goy who will befriend us offnicks, and accept us”. It seems that in the end, all her “friendships” were only to extract info for her thesis.
When there was nothing left to chew on, she spat you out and moved onto the next cage.
I can’t say I’m surprised. But I do feel bad for those of you who were stupid enough to trust her.
Like this comment?
0
Frummer, it didn’t require stupidity. When she started to interview people, she wasn’t entirely upfront on the precise nature of her study.
She was telling them that she is studying Chassidic life and all its factions. She introduced the concept phrasing it as closely as to what she assumed they might want to hear.
Many people are just naturally trusting. Choosing to believe that people are good and don’t necessarily have an underlying agenda, isn’t be an automatic failing.
Using people is.
Like this comment?
0
I still don’t believe she “used” anyone. She interviewed a bunch of people and turned it into a book. What’s there to feel so betrayed about?
Kafhakela: I’m sick and tired of your nonsense. Von Hayes was definitey you and “tweedly” probably is as well. Maybe in shul you can get away with acting like a complete chazer, but not here.
Like this comment?
0
Re the comments that Hella lied. I believe that isn’t the case. Hella initially planned to write a book about chassidism. In the course of her research, she apparently stumbled upon a more sensationalist, ergo more popular commercially, topic and chose to switch themes. This happens often and is no reason for crucifixion. I understand that some characters (pretty sure that’s character, singular) may have felt miffed, but it’s unfair to presume that Hella set out to deceive.
As far as her credentials, her PhD in sociology entitles her to write a book of this sort. (HR, I wouldn’t say her scholarship is “impeccable”; this is not a scholarly book by any stretch of the imagination.) Rather, my beef with Hella is that she has taken the writing of this pleasantly readable, but ultimately shallow book to create a persona for herself as an expert of chassidism. When a Williamsburg melamed was accused of molestation, Hella got on tv (can’t remember which station) and offered her “educated” opinion. Hella is NOT an expert on chassidism and has no clue (nor do none but the direct parties involved) of what occured, yet she shamelessly used her publication of an unscholarly, superficial book to get on the air and speak as an “expert.”
Like this comment?
0
Tzippi,
I disagree. People don’t share their life experiences just like that. Intrustive people with questions are generally given short thrift.
My feeling is that the individuals in question were enthralled by the fact that somebody was going to write a book about them. Somebody cares about us! We are something!
They then became very upset when they realised that she doesn’t care after all.
And indeed, why on earth should she?
Like this comment?
0
You guys are being entirely unfair to Hella. It so happens that some of her subjects (precisely one, that I know of) were upset with the outcome. But more because of peripheral issues than for shoddy research or a deceitful intent.
Hella has indeed remained good friends with many former (and current) Chasidim, many of whom she only met after the book was published. As someone indicated, I did once write about my reservations about Chasidim as anthropological subjects. And I still find the endeavor distasteful overall. But as it turns out, Hella did not treat Chasidim as lab rats, but became (and remains) genuine friends with many of them.
Bethany — The book itself may not be “scholarly,” as it was intended for a popular audience. But Hella did “scholarship,” and wrote her doctoral thesis on the subject, which was separate from the book. And her research was definitely solid. Re her standing as an expert on the Chasidic community, especially with respect to sexual abuse, well… that’s just TV and the media for you. She’s no worse than Sam Heilman or Menachem Friedman or any of the other self-styled “experts.” The problem lies in the fact that Chasidim have been unable to produce credentialed experts from within their own ranks; so when outsiders speak or write about us, especially in unflattering ways, we tend to get a bit miffed at the “chutzpah.”
Highly rated. Like this comment?
4
HR, I agree with you that “that’s just tv and the media for you.” I would not, however, compare Heilman and Friedman to Hella. The former have done extensive research on chassidism, and their books build upon the works of others plus their own observations. In the case of Heilman, he spent years as a participant of chassidic lifestyle when he did his ethnographic study. (His only book that seemed to employ somewhat shoddy research was Sliding to the Right.) Hella, on the other hand, has written one book about a chassidic subset. The book does not build on other scholars’ works, nor does it analyze the chassid’s mindset. For her to put herself up as any sort of expert is dissimulative. And quite the chutzpah.
Like this comment?
0
“Facts you ask for? Though I hate to broach it – take the suicide rate. Sad. Morbid. Inappropriate per my usual. But there you have it.”
Tzippy, what exactly does that prove? Can it be perhaps that;
1. The OTD was always struggling with emotional disabilities?
2 Was his experience within the frum community extremely disturbing, to the point where the OTD was traumatized and psychologically scarred for life?
3. Was he shunned, ridiculed and ostracized by his frum family and community after he left the fold, unlike the Bal Teshuva whose progressive family perhaps embraced his personal choices?
Chicken or egg, that is always the question.
Highly rated. Like this comment?
4
“I understand that he is an expert, and that he has been working with teens at risk for 15 years and so on, but that still doesn’t give his proclamation a sniff of validity. If he would have done a comprehensive study and would have reached the same conclusion I would have to keep mum. But, I’m quite positive he didn’t do any scientific research on the subject; he is just speaking from an experiential point of view.”
RandC,
You want scientific psychological research? That’s almost an oxymoron. If my recollection is correct, one of my blog buddies claimed that psychology isn’t a hard science.
How are you going to put a number on happiness, sholem bies, rigid parenting, etc?
15 years of experience with this niche population, that’s enough to impress me.
Like this comment?
1
Yet I do know that the OTDs see far more unhappiness than their BT counterparts.
Many BTs latch onto frumkeit in search of close-knit community and a rigidly structured life. They get that, and the ones that don’t become disillusioned find happiness. BTs also tend to be a lot older when becoming frum than OTDs do when becoming frei, and therefore their situations cannot easily be compared.
You’d have a tougher time comparing OTDs to their frum counterparts, since a good many OTDs left the fold due to problems they had when they were in it. Their happiness is not guaranteed either way, and in some ways stands a better chance when not frum.
Like this comment?
1
Hhahahah, HT, I’m glad to see that all the fumes you most definitely inhale during the process of “Pesach cleaning” hasn’t affected your memory.
I didn’t mean scientific per se. I meant to say that there is a certain way statistics are gathered there is a certain professional way to conduct research, to question people and to interview, which I am sure he did not do. He is talking from the “armchair expert’s” point of view , which I don’t take lightly as I have repeatedly pointed out. But, I take his words for what they are, a narrowly constructed hypothesis. He didn’t do a diverse study on the matter, with multiple subjects from multiple backgrounds; he is talking from his limited scope of personal experience.
I didn’t change my position on psychology and science; I hope you can see the difference between claiming something to be scientific and properly done research.
In any case, you shouldn’t be commenting so close to Paysech. Hust shoin getihn die oiybershte milichigeh cabinet? So, oif voos vartsti? S’zul zien bedikes chumetz nocht, demults vesti zien tzi beezy mit andere zochen, in farshtiets zich az s’vet fallen oif mien kup, azoiy vie ales arim dey hoiz!
Like this comment?
0
offthederech, I am not any of the people you accuse me of being. Nor am I Garnel, which I’m sure would be your next guess.
Why is it that whenever you don’t like something that someone says to you, you immediately assume it’s another commenter under an assumed name? Is that how you typically operate?
Like this comment?
3
I don’t think Hella ever sets herself up as an expert, but merely a person knowledgeable about the topic. (If I’m wrong, please provide some source to the contrary). If the media keeps turning to her, it’s simply because she is the most well-known person that they know of which they can talk to about an inscrutable subject.
As to her subjects feeling used by her and resentful, that doesn’t jive at all with my knowledge of the situation. I know a number of her subjects (but not all) and last I heard (which is pretty recently) they are still good friends. (As am I.)
The venomous and angry tone of the criticisms directed at Ms. Winston make it abundantly clear that certain people are not approaching the subject very rationally. Which is not surprising to me at all. People in the frum world hate it when any sort of publicity, legitimacy, or recognition is granted to a subject which they don’t like to be talked about. The same thing is heard about books from Naomi Ragen, Tova Mirvis, and other authors who write insider accounts of the frum world. I even get it in response to my “Better Know a Kofer” series. It’s all an attempt to delegitimize the author and her subjects.
It’s perfectly fair to be critical of her book, and I think Ms. Nordmann was reasonable in her review. But this gratuitous character assassination of Ms. Winston indicates a much more disturbing motivation at play.
Highly rated. Like this comment?
8
Hedyot, that’s precisely my point. Hella is NOT knowledgable about chassidism. She is somewhat knowledgable about the rebellious subset within chassidism, which is a miniscule percentage of the whole. If she is approached by the media to be the spokesperson regarding an issue within the chassidic community, she should–if she is truly honest–admit that she’s the wrong person for the job. Of course, it’s entirely human to be pragmatic about this and not admit it. Which is why I understand Hella’s motives. But it’s still dishonest.
I agree with you regarding her relationship with her characters. The single exception is due to a misunderstanding rather than deceit on Hella’s part.
Like this comment?
0
“The venomous and angry tone of the criticisms….”
Oh, Hedyot, have you been following the comments on this blog? Almost everyone here jumps at the slightest chance to criticize chassidim and their culture. If they are against Unchosen, it is NOT because they can’t stand chassidism being criticized.
Like this comment?
0
>>The same thing is heard about books from Naomi Ragen, Tova Mirvis <<
FWIW, I don't think that either Tova Mirvis or Naomi Ragen are so off in their portrayal of the Charedi lifestyle. A lot of what they write is true, with some minor exaggerations. But Hella Winston's book was beyond that.
Like this comment?
0
Bethany, I don’t see reasonable criticism of the book (or of any person, or any group) as a problem. Like I said, the review itself was critical, but IMHO, a fair-minded critique. But what’s being expressed here goes way beyond criticism. There’s a big difference between objective criticism and these kind of attacks.
> Hella is NOT knowledgable about chassidism.
I actually think she has a fairly good grasp of chassidish society and is, for the most part, aware where her knowledge falls short. Can you provide an example of something she wrote which demonstrates her lack of understanding of chassidim or their society?
Like this comment?
2
Bethany — What makes you insist she’s NOT knowledgeable? I happen to think otherwise. Can you cite something she said or wrote that you found to be a blatant error?
Re her speaking to the media in the capacity of an expert, I find it entirely reasonable for her to do so. Even if you think she’s not an expert, she may think otherwise; nothing dishonest about it. And if you admit she’s an expert on a subset of Chasidim, the research that got her there, almost by definition, had to include the mainstream as well to a large degree.
As for those who excoriate her on this site, are you seriously arguing that it has nothing to do with sensitivity to negative portrayals?! Of course it does. Nobody gets this worked up simply because they don’t love a book. But I have yet to see anyone cite major errors on her part — make that, I haven’t seen anyone cite a single example of anything that was incorrect. All I see are vague allusions to “not doing proper research” along with a LOT of ad hominem attacks. (“un-academic bitch,” anyone?) Not a single thoughtful or insightful comment about where she went wrong. To me, that says something loud and clear: people are angry and are taking this book personally.
And, for the most part, these are the same commenters that are generally quite vocal about the whole “Chasidic rebel” phenom (Tzippi, Frummer, et al.), of which they are entirely unhappy, often for similar reasons — it gives Chasidim an image problem. As far as I can tell, yes, these are people who indeed “can’t stand chassidism being criticized.”
Highly rated. Like this comment?
6
Bethany: >Almost everyone here jumps at the slightest chance to criticize chassidim and their culture.
LOL. Which people? Some just see my name and already go apeshit.
Like this comment?
0
I opened the book randomly and came upon this:
Getting an education and going to college might be perfectly all right for non-Jews, but for Hasidic people it is irrelevant, the women explain. They learn all they need to know within the community, which, by being good wives and mothers, they are helping to perpetuate. They are also doing this through their tremendous involvement in community charity. Some Hasidic women even work for pay, helping to support their families as teachers or administrators in the schools, or in other organizations or businesses that serve the community or are run by Hasidim. Further, because Hasidic women focus not on the theoretical aspects of Jewish law, but on its practical, everyday applications, most of them actually learn to speak and read better in English, and know more math, than the men.
It isn’t the condescension that I’m complaining about, although there is an ample amount of that. I’m talking about the exaggeration – or mishaps sincere misinformation. But I have reason to know that it isn’t the latter. See? I know quite a few of the people interviewed for her ‘better understanding’ of the community. Many didn’t warrant entire subjects, just anecdotal side stories within other chapters. No not just one, (at least 4 for sure) were intensely frustrated with the way she so obviously purposely misconstrued and misportrayed.
At her book signing in Brookly, as she was signing my book, I commented on her reading and anecdotally mentioned that although I frequent libraries, I just hadn’t attended a book signing before. Two weeks later she’s on Zev Brenner and talks about the book signing. She goes on to mention that ‘there was this woman from the community that told me that because of my book signing she stepped into a library for the first time.’ She was commenting on how proud she was of her ‘making a difference’.
No, nothing drastic. She just twisted the story to suit her needs.
I don’t begrudge her the success. I don’t object to much of the book. But I am intensely frustrated when I read the condescending and judgmental tone – and know unequivocally that she knows that it isn’t so.
Like this comment?
0
…she had started getting a little more daring with her clothes in the neighborhood. She bought a few skirts that were a little shorter than “regulation,” with a bit of a flounce, and also began wearing a thinner grade of stocking. Sometimes, even in Williamsburg, she dared to wear high-heeled shoes and boots.
She’s kidding me. Right? Has she walked the streets of Willi? Has she??
Like this comment?
0
Bethany — What makes you insist she’s NOT knowledgeable? I happen to think otherwise. Can you cite something she said or wrote that you found to be a blatant error?
In her book? No. Her book is accurate. It’s easy to draw inaccurate conclusions because she relates the experiences of a tiny minority, but that’s not Hella’s fault or problem.
However, regarding chassidism itself, even if she got to know chassidim during the course of her research for the book, I do not consider that adequate credentials for setting herself up as an expert on the chassidic community in a child molestation case. Unfortunately, I don’t have a copy nor know how to access the clip, but I do seem to recall that there was something off in her comments. If you know how to get the clip, would you email it to me so that I can comment more intelligently?
Like this comment?
0
” Two weeks later she’s on Zev Brenner and talks about the book signing. She goes on to mention that ‘there was this woman from the community that told me that because of my book signing she stepped into a library for the first time.’ ‘
Tzippy,
Who says she was referring to you when she said that? Maybe she was talking about me?
Like this comment?
2
Bethany, just curious;
Who would you consider an expert?
Like this comment?
0