Sharunas, Prince of Dainava, in a jewish gown: the cultural and social role of hebrew and yiddish translations of lithuanian literature and poetry in interwar Lithuania

• Academia.edu: straipsnio tekstas

LTReikšminiai žodžiai: Hebrajų kalba; Integracija; Jidiš; Lietuviai; Lietuvių folkloras; Literatūra; Poezija; Stereotipai; Tarpukario Lietuva; Tarpukaris; Vertimai; Žydai; Hebrew; Integration; Interwar Lithuania; Interwar period; Jews; Lithuania; Lithuanian folklore; Lithuanians; Poetry; Stereotypes; Translations; Yiddish, Lithuanian literature.

ENThe establishment of an independent Lithuanian state following World War I marked, for the Lithuanian people as well as for the local Jewish community, the end of long years of subjugation to the Czarist regime. Thus, while breathing the fresh air of a new dawn, both local Lithuanians and Jews were hoping for a beginning of a new era. However, beyond the euphoric atmosphere that characterized the initial stages of independence and the wish to return to normal life after the turmoil of war, the question of Jewish integration into the new emerging civil society was crucial for both sides. Though the populations had lived side by side for centuries in hundreds of villages, towns and cities, this new encounter was informed from the outset by a whole world of mutual negative images as well as suspicions composed mainly of stereotypes and prejudices. The image of the Jew, prevalent mostly among Lithuanian villagers and countrymen, was of a traitor, greedy exploiter, lazy bloodsucker, parasite, usurer, miser and swindler, not to mention some more diabolic characters common to nineteenth century local popular discourse. For their part, many Jews perceived the native Lithuanians as a primeval, undeveloped, primitive rural society. A typical illustration of this attitude is the following description by Boris Schatz, who was born in 1866 in Varniai and was known as one of the most famous Jewish sculptors in late nineteenth century: "The Christians from the nearby villages arrived every week on market day, wearing garments made of sheep’s leather, big leather hats and simple straw sandals. They would offer their products using a very strange language that I did not understand; sounded somewhat wild [...] they seemed to me like the Philistines, the Amalekites and some other half-wild tribes from time immemorial, that my ancient forefathers constantly struggled with".Moreover, this new encounter was also characterized by a high degree of inequality. Following centuries of subjugation to various foreign regimes, for the first time the Lithuanians not only became the majority ethnic group in their own autochthonic land but they were also bearing the ultimate responsibility for the very existence of this newborn state. Therefore it is only natural that a fundamental role of the public agenda of the new society, as well as of its governing bodies, was to consolidate the collective national self-awareness and to prove to the Lithuanian people, as well as to the entire world, that this new independent state was not just a short-lived historical phenomenon. Central to this view was the continuous process of defining the collective Lithuanian "us", mainly by raising the hidden cultural "walls" that separated the autochthonic Lithuanian society from the local ethnic minority groups. This aspect was manifested in part by the importance attributed to literature and poetry composed mainly in the previous century, as well as by contemporary Lithuanian authors and poets. The works of Simonas Daukantas, Maironis (Jonas Mačiulis), Žemaitė (Julija Beniuševičiūtė-Žymantienė), Juozas TumasVaižgantas, Vincas Krėvė (Mickevičius) and Liudas Gira played a centrai role in the process of forming the newly collective cultural self-definition. [...]. [Extract, p. 149-150]

• Literatūrologija / Literary Studies
• Istorija / History