Menorah · 1923-01-01 · Heft 1 · p. Seite 12

12 MENORAH Gotthard Deutsch einer starken dramatischen Wirkung, die nie reificrisch, aber immer ' sicher ist. Unter den Dramen Pinskis gibt es keine leeren Machwerke. Entweder sie sind verfehlt oder sie taugen etwas, ein Zwischending von jener Art, die man so oft aus der Ohnmacht geschaffen sieht, jene Bilder und Bildchen, jene Symbole mit Figurinen kennt Pinski nicht. Er hat es mit dem symbolischen Drama nur ein einzigcsmal versucht, in einem etwas naiven aber den Vorzug der Ehrlichkeit in sich tragenden Drama: „Die Bergsteiger". Ibsen ist dabei Pate gestanden, wie denn in der übrigen Dramatik Pinskis Shaws „Cäsar und Kleopatra" den Aufbau der modernen Dramen Pinskis beeinflußt hat. Solche Einflüsse sind bei einer jungen Literatur durchaus begreiflich und keineswegs verwerflich. Es bleibt noch genug in Pinskis Dramatik an Eigenem: Der Blick für das jüdische Leben und seine Kämpfe und die Widerspiegelung der jüdischen Moderne, das Widerspiel des alten jüdischen Geistes in der neuen jüdischen Menschheit. Die jüdische Dramatik ist über David Pinski bis heute nicht hinausgekommen. Was Pcre/. Hirschbein geschaffen hat, mag vielleicht als Verwebung alten Sagengutes in volkstümlichem Gewände einen Wert haben, aber Dramatik ist das nicht; An-skis Legendendrama ,,Der Dybuk", welches zu solcher Berühmtheit gelangte, ist eigentlich nur dichterisch geadeltes Folklor. Und einer der jüngsten dramatischen Begabungen, H. Leiwik, hat in seinen „Schmales" vielleicht gröf.iere Sachlichkeil als Pinski gezeigt und sich als der tiefer schürfende Psychologe erwiesen, aber er wandelt deutlich in den Spuren Pinskis. Für che Entwicklung des jüdischen Dramas, über welche David Pinski eine kleine, aber einzig wertvolle kritische Analyse geschrieben hat, ist Pinski ein Markstein. Alle Bestrebungen, dem jüdischen Theater zur Gellung zu verhelfen, brauchen Pinskis dramatisches Werk, das bisher in der Kraft der Gestaltung und in der Weitspannung der Probleme keinen Nachfolger von Bedeutung gefunden hat, der sein Milieu zum Menschlichen ausgestalten würde. Siegfried Schmitz /por© nn rms in:n ncDom ppviann »pars "in ./vnrrn /vncDa ntrs nva»ööinBm mpBinn ynra «in .1872 rotra amiaa ibv »pwe uro "p in« iay ,rpmiDBn rmrrn ^aia bv -m^ieia nnco aroi ru^iai rnrna wiru? .nayn fwicn »»na canvs) mararpai n»jna nan Abv »to payrr y»ein 1894 jwa pTpi;b 13 nn« -[bn sin «anayn o^jriBn "na »nnsen pnyn n« ruDibt? di> nma K'xim ins mi "tsBne^yr^n yü"TK kh" :pisrank*t ravn pnyn f?e> »trän lanyb -p mim np^ama Tan yciria irun »pars »pars pa pvna man*? nrp p Sjn rtvmaan la^ya sm «pp1 twann ^parsi ptta^K^ian anwoian ns irasb vaym nv^a^a man ana rrna-nn amisa a'aits w ,nabts»i *rn btr v-nari an n:n »ovan a:ana a^awa im ,'ai n:nsn" /rn^K ay ins ^2" :awnann -mmn»n me»bansa Iran bub* ^a ipr -ipars Saaa waa nnra paxa .m^K»xian na:" /naun ^ypr" : ma-nna a»twn na^anaa ."nanKn be» m^ppn o»amn" "bn.t ,"B»twrn npnaaa mnm nnsan nninrienn jrrnmD» nstbn naia raaiaa n»:iBün nmrpn npwanm) rptavsn inn mvar bt» .ppers btr ir by aannri^ *ny np>aan Gotthard Deutsch who had taught Jcwish History and Litcrature al the Hcbrew Union College in Cincinnali for 30 years ( I 891 — 1 92 1) died two years ago, but the following lines are not going to be an obituary. Anything but that. Deutsch is a living force in Jewry, and will conlinue lo be that for a good long lime. That his many pupils will carry on the Iradition of Jcwish historiography so ably rcpresenled by their beloved teacher gocs wilhout saying; how much the excellent man was appreciated by the alumni of the Hebrcw Union College is evident from many gratifving facts, and it is to these disciples that he dedicated his Scrolls (2 volumes. Cincinnati. Ark Publishing Company. 1917). The influencc of a teacher is a difficull thing to gauge; the stronger his individuality, the morc likcly it is to be obscured in his pupils. And Deutsch was an individuality of very pronounced characteristics which cannot be transmitted. He had vision, ancl open mind, detachment — but, above all, a failhful heart. Born in Kanitz (nenr Nicolsburg in Moravia) in 1859 he was brought up by his cholarly father in the orthodox way, and although at the Grammar school, in that period of Iriumphanl Liberalism, and still morc at the university, conforming Judaism had become the laughing stock of the new generation. Deutsch pcrsislcnily kept up the old allegiance, piactising at the same timc the virtuc of tolerance David Pinski David Pinski, dramatic author and novelist, is onc of the representative men in the modern Yiddish litcrature. Born in Mohilew in 1872 ancl brought up in the traditional way, he becume a journalisl in Warsaw and Wilna, wrote populär cssays on scientific subjects and sketches from the lives of Jcwish uorkingmen. In 1899 his ,Eisik Schcftel' was published, a play of Jcwish Labour. FIc then emigrated to New York where in collaboration with Schloüberg he edited the good litcrary paper „Die jüdische Wochenschrift" (The Jewish Weekly); afterwards he became editorin-chilf of the daily „Die Zeit" (The Times). A sharp boundary-linc between Pinski, the Romantic, and Pinski, the Socialist, is not perccptible in his work as he is constantly under the influence of old Jewish Romanlicism. He even wrote Biblical plays, giving life lo such figures as David and Solomon. Much morc vigorous in their dramatic construetion ancl morc compact in iheir coneeplion are the plays with the Jcwish social problem as the m o t i f, as „Der Oizcr" (The Trcasurc), „Jeder mit sein Gott" (Everybody with his God) eic. The Woman Problem is dealth with on original lines in „Jekel der Schmied" (Jekel, Blacksmith), „Gabri und die Frauen" (Gabri and Womcn), „Die Mutter" (The Mother), „Der Liebe krumme Wege" (Love's Tortuous Ways). The American late evolutiou of the Yiddish litcrature starts largely from the work of Pinski, the Yiddish playwrights have not gol much in advance of D. Pinski. to such an extent that he was liable to be misundcrslood on all hands: the zcalots denounced him as halfhearted, the "enlightened" took him for an obscurantist. Whcn a pupil of ihe Breslau Seminary he surprised his fellow-students by taking up Universal History as the subjekt of his secular studics. It was the rulc to attend university leclures on Arabie an Syrian. Comparative grammar was in vogue at the timc (1876), ancl most of the Christian and Jcwish theologians took infinite pride in being able to throw light — borrowed, as a rulc, from Genesius, Ewald, and others — on an obscure Hebrew word b\' tracing it back to a kinkred rool in another Semitic languagc. Deutsch was not attracted by philology; he missed the human touch in the study of words. Neithcr could he sympathize with philosophy as it was understood and laught in the German universities. The proper study of man, lo him, was man, ancl as history was the next best to be found in the academic curriculum he took up history. Hc used to handle enormous tomes with his enormous hands — Deutsch was a giant, broad of ehest and big of limb —. ancl at the timc. 1 could not for the life of me understand his inleresl in the mediaeval Chronicles and Rccords printed the many-volumcd works of Pertz and the Bollanclists. The Halacha lectures of Dr. Lazarus, the then Rector of the Seminary, which we attended lagether found him an apt scholar, bu' his heart was not in them. Nor was hc enthusiastic aboul Gotthard Deutsch