Unlike the GomuÅka Aliyah, the arrival of Jews from Poland after 1967 did not cause an avalanche of new Polish-language press publications. After the Six-Day War, there was an even stronger stigma surrounding newspapers and magazines published in the foreign languages spoken by the new olim, and this put a halt to their publication. The creation of new press publications did not fit into the canon of patriotic behavior. Anna Äwiakowska, who arrived in Israel in the March Aliyah, recalled, âIn a conversation with StanisÅaw [Wygodzki],1 I came up with an idiotic â as I realized after a while â idea to propose to him the publication of a new Polish-language magazine in Israel, since there were several journalists from Poland in the group of people who had emigrated with me. How upset Wygodzki became! And he âtold me offâ pretty badly.â2 The feeling among the new olim who arrived after 1967 that their stay in Israel was only temporary, the tenuous connection they felt with the Jewish state, and the numerous problems and obstacles they faced while becoming settled there weakened their need to become involved in new press initiatives, especially since Nowiny-Kurier had appeared on the market, which was weak in terms of content but nevertheless financially stable.3 Journalists who arrived after 1967 joined the editorial team of Nowiny-Kurier as part of the process of professional acclimatization supported financially by Sochnut and constituted, in addition to the former Zionists from Nowiny and writers recruited from the GomuÅka Aliyah to form Kurier, a third group of journalists.4 Others from the
Edward Rostal, the editorial secretary of Nowiny-Kurier, as Anna Äwiakowska recalls,9 eagerly agreed to their involvement in the newspaper, especially as the quality level of the newspaper at the time of the arrival of the March Aliyah was not impressive. Henryk Dankowicz characterized it as follows: âNowiny[-Kurier] is assembled mainly from reprints from the Hebrew and foreign press, and so far no correspondent has been sent to any foreign or even domestic events, except in Tel Aviv.â10 The newspaperâs average circulation in 1968 was 11,000 copies.11 The newspaper was clearly benefitting from gaining new journalists.12 It was expected that they would raise the quality level of the declining newspaper, the number of its readers would increase, and the newspaper would become more popular. However, whether the newspaper would actually be able to gain new readers among the new immigrants in the March Aliyah would be determined, on the one hand, by the quality of its articles and, on the other, by the expectations among the new immigrants â namely, the profile of the average reader recruited from this milieu.
4.1 Ambivalent Identity
A partial characterization of the new olim after 1967 is made possible by a survey conducted by Kultura, which included the first reflections on emigration. It was supposed to be a âbrief, general, journalisticâ survey, sent to randomly
The anti-Semitic campaigns in Poland led many to decide to leave. As one person recalled, âIâd never felt it was necessary to leave Poland, but after the events in March I realized the pointlessness of staying.â16 There were various reasons for immigrating to Israel â in most cases, family reasons were mentioned, as well as a sense, even if only temporary, of connection with the Jewish nation caused by anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist events, or solidarity with Israel during the Six-Day War. âIn Poland I told everyone that I was going to Israel, but it was more of a demonstration than a real plan,â wrote Professor Samuel Sandler.17 Still others indicated disappointment with the communist system, which had also become a motivation for emigration. Leaving Poland was connected with declassification; the benefit of emigration was to be liberated from discrimination and anti-Semitism. The events in March 1968, despite the âqualitative and quantitativeâ differences from previous campaigns of this kind, as the respondents pointed out, was, in the eyes of many Poles of Jewish origin, just one instance in a long tradition of anti-Semitism in which the same arguments were often repeated and to which new ones about the Jewish state
The events that occurred in Poland at the end of 1967 and beginning of 1968 revealed the failure of the idea of assimilation in Poland.20 Polish Jews became not only second-class citizens but also âagentsâ of Israel, a state that had until then been foreign to them. After the anti-Semitic events of that period and the stigmatization of Jews, on their transit to Israel, some of them indicated their Jewish origin in their travel documents for the very first time in their lives, even though they did not feel such a cultural or spiritual connection. Among them
Everyone who came to Israel in 1968 called themselves, in the first months after their arrival, âthe Polish gang.â During meetings, the number of people in the âgangâ reached 20 to 30 between the ages of 14 and 22. Initially, the meeting place was the roof of a nine-story house on Livorno Street, where they organized dances, songs, and debates. But the neighbors, insensitive to the needs of the youths and very sensitive to loud music, drove them away from the roof. From then onwards, the âRamat Hanasi roofâ was replaced by private parties, and when there was no free apartment to use, they met in ⦠a shelter. As time passed, they less often called themselves âthe Polish gangâ and more often âour chevrah.â29
The above quotation describes the change in attitude of a singular group â and a small one at that, consisting of barely 30 young people â but it is characteristic of the broader dynamics among these olim. In the process of transforming from âour gangâ into âour chevrah,â minor changes were constantly taking place that weakened their ties with Poland and tilted the scales in favor of establishing new connections with Israel. Above all, there arose a sense of community with Israel, even when these changes did not end the process of acclimatization, did not make them into Zionists, and did not determine whether they would stay in Israel permanently. At a later stage, most immigrants no longer considered returning to Poland, and when they did look for alternative places to live, they looked mostly to other countries within Europe.
Among the young people in the March Aliyah, there were no readers of the Polish-language press. Many of them enrolled in universities after their arrival,
4.2 Nowiny-Kurier vis-Ã -vis the March Aliyah
The problem for the immigrants who arrived in the March Aliyah, at least those who felt Polish, was that they could not be Poles in Poland, and even less so in Israel. An important task of the editorial staff of Nowiny-Kurier was to connect the new olim to Israel and Jewish culture. At that time, it seemed that despite the decreasing role of the foreign-language press, this particular newspaper published in Polish could once again play a significant role in the acclimatization of the Jews coming from Poland. Achieving this goal â at least partially â depended on the state of communication between the three different groups of journalists forming the editorial team of Nowiny-Kurier and the readers in the March Aliyah. It required more than simply the knowledge of the Polish language to integrate them into a cohesive group, for there was a lack of understanding between them and a divergence of aspirations and goals. The various publications revealed rifts in the editorial office that reflected not only the time period in which each aliyah had arrived, but also the mental differences between them. The values shaping the Zionist journalists from the former newspaper Nowiny and the postcommunists from Kurier in no way expressed the position of the olim who arrived after 1967 â people who, in Poland, had opted for assimilation and âprogressive,â humanistic values. In the delineation of their identity, nationalistic issues were pushed to the distant margins.
The publication of WacÅaw SzafraÅskiâs article in Å»ycie Literackie titled âEmigranci polscy w siatce Wiesenthalaâ [Polish Emigrants Caught in
Wiesenthalâs Net]42 has recently been severely criticized in our newspaper. However, it met with enthusiastic acclaim in the newspaper Prawo i Å»ycie [Law and Life], published in Poland, which does not spare the author praise, disagreeing with him only on one point: âThis is the only thing we donât like about this article by SzafraÅski. The term âPolish.ââ Prawo i Å»ycie writes that one should speak of emigrants from Poland rather than Polish emigrants. What do those who left Poland between 1968 and 1970 have in common with Polishness?43 Itâs clear to us what kind of aims were motivating WacÅaw SzafraÅski â but, of course, from a completely different point of view, the term âPolish emigrantsâ does not appeal to us, either.44
Kamila Halpern-ChyliÅska, who lived in Israel after emigrating from Poland, was responsible for conducting the Kultura survey. She commented on Rostalâs statement as follows: âThis article recalls another old saying, namely that various forms of nationalism often shake hands with one another and have common interests.â45 Both in Poland and in Israel, national exclusivity was demanded of the immigrants, and this is the common point at which both forms of nationalism met.
The problem with Kulturaâs survey might seem irrelevant if not for the loss of some of the immigrants from the March Aliyah, who decided to settle in other countries, such as in Scandinavia.47 This undoubtedly sensitized the
It is indeed a fact that among the representatives of this aliyah there is a significant number of people who have never had anything to do with Jewry, who in their genealogies sought out a Zionist ancestor only so as to take advantage of the economic situation and leave Poland. But it is a mistake to say they lack national awareness and have gone astray. For
they are Poles with a full Polish national consciousness and have made their decisions with full responsibility. And even if Sochnut stands on its head, itâll still be impossible to make Jews out of these people â even if they can prove theyâve got Jewish ancestors. However, I donât think that any administrative authorities (except, of course, racist ones) have fallen so low as to bury in the past not only a man, but his entire family, as the Polish Ministry of Internal Affairs has done.50
In Israel, citizenship was treated formally â it was described by the Jewish religious canon and the right to return, according to which Jews who arrived in Israel automatically became its citizens.51 The immigrants in the March Aliyah, rejecting the criteria of national identification through ancestry that was proposed by both communists in Poland and Zionists in Israel, searched for a place to live where they could rid themselves of the status of second-class citizens. In Poland they were reproached for their Jewish origins, while in Israel they automatically became Israeli citizens and were forced to renounce everything that testified to their Polonization, acculturation, or even total assimilation â to their being Poles.52 In both situations, national identity did not take into account their personal choices. Such people probably didnât like the growing influence of the rabbinate in Israel, which exacerbated their maladjustment to Israeli society. It also increased the disadvantage of non-Jews, the number of which increased with each successive aliyah, as more assimilated people came to Israel â those who did not have close links to Jewish culture or Zionism.53 The need to accept and absorb further aliyot forced liberal circles,
How do we know this? Of course! Itâs what the Jews were accused of in Poland â that they were eating Polish bread â and Dankowicz, making no effort to be original, repeats a primitive stunt. No matter how we
evaluate the attitude of the youths in question, their dissatisfaction is clear. With what? Dankowicz no longer cares. He is only offended by the fact that the youths are doing this in a manner that is â in his opinion â objectionable and in inappropriate places, which offends the ânativesâ ⦠After such a âdiagnosis,â the young people wonât change their attitudes, and Dankowicz and others like him will never find a common language with them because, in fact, they do not want it at all! But in such a case they should at least refrain from publishing articles that exacerbate and deepen the tragedy of the âdisoriented souls.â63
The subject of failed âheroesâ and troubles with assimilation was often exploited by Nowiny-Kurierâs journalists, most of whom had arrived in the GomuÅka Aliyah not so long before â people who still existed on the margins of the Hebrew-speaking majority, including Dankowicz himself.64 Later in the same article, Dankowicz made the following remark on how the new immigrants were flaunting their Polish identity: âBut after a year or two, some of them start to regard themselves as Poles, demonstrating this on the least appropriate occasions, in a form that does not always meet the minimum loyalty requirements to the ânativesâ contributing to their university scholarships.â65 The new olim did not understand the process of Hebraization; they negated it by ostentatiously flaunting a foreign culture. Polish culture and language had particularly negative associations, especially after Poland broke off diplomatic relations with Israel. âAfter all, there are communities pervaded with such bitterness and pain when they remember the harm they suffered that their resentful attitude includes not only the prominent people of the regime, but even the language, literature, history, and culture of Poland,â66 wrote Alina Grabowska. On the other hand, for the new olim, the Polish language, aside from all acts of political and national rejection, was an important aspect of their identity â it was difficult to part with it, and even more difficult to contest it. Certainly, less alienation was felt by those who had been functioning within the sphere of Polish-Jewish culture before they left Poland. However, Polish
I donât have to inform anyone here that intelligent Jews or half-Jews comprised a large part of the Exodus of the intelligentsia that headed in countless directions. [â¦] I am one of them. I left my country. In the streets and cafés of Vienna, once again like in the days of Franz Joseph, the Polish and Czech languages resounded. [â¦] To this day, they are still
waiting for the right to enter the USA, Canada, and Australia. They are not in ulpanim, nor in Jerusalem, nor in Haifa, nor in Nazareth. The ulpan in Ashdod is crawling with exiles and writers, as well as young, swarthy engineers and French teachers. A girl from one of the republics neighboring Cuba, a young, intellectual devotee of Dr. Fidel Castro, wanders among them like a lost child of the regiment. They communicate in Hebrew, which theyâve just learned in classes here. What do they have in common? First of all, the sense of a paradise lost â in the surprisingly difficult conditions here, their abandoned country becomes a lost paradise, despite the dramatic circumstances in which theyâd been forced to part with it. [â¦] The new immigrants seemingly love their countries; they havenât yet cut the umbilical cords that still connect them to the tragedy that is written in their faces. Engineers and chemists can hide it; they heal from nostalgia more quickly and remain silent during their countrymenâs evening discussions in the ulpanim. [â¦] Elegant villas and hotels have been put at the disposal of the new immigrants in many parts of Israel. These modern-day âOvidsâ do not live in hovels and enjoy the benefits of modernized construction all over the world. In the difficult conditions of its ongoing war, Israel is keeping pace with the reform in customs. It seems, however, that little has changed with regard to the basic absorption methods applied to the intelligentsia. This is evidenced, for example, by the textbooks from which the intelligentsia learn the countryâs language. The embarrassing âsimplicityâ of ulpan readers, reprinted in numerous editions, calls for vengeance on the Ministry of Absorption and the Language Committee. Sentimentalism still fights against tactlessness, and ignorance against involuntary ostracism. This is not the place for a methodological analysis. The stereotypical integration measures seem to disregard the tragedy in the very nature of an aliyah. Even intelligent people often try to degrade this tragedy by reducing it to the level of common shock caused by acclimatization. The phenomena require some intense consideration. Will the Israeli community deem it appropriate to revise the current criteria for infusion and will it respect the tragedy of the progressive intelligentsia having been dragged from other realities? [â¦] Will a writer, painter, or musicologist find an open, friendly society in Israel that will accept him? Has the degradation of the humanist become a permanent feature and custom? Will hundreds and thousands of engineers, technicians, and dentists be allowed or enabled to maintain ties with âtheirâ humanists, companions in fate and misery â for example, by making it possible for the latter to act publicly and have an accessible platform? Personally, I dream of a platform for my articles or poems to be published alongside a translation of a poem by Sutzkewer72 or Alterman73 into Polish. The sinful language of my poetry would then become a link between the three cultures created by Jews in Israel. Is this, perhaps, integration?74
Of course, this was not the kind of integration that the Israeli government wanted, and it was futile to expect the Hebrew literary community to be in favor of it. Writers who were creating works in a foreign language were rejected by them and were excluded from the Union of Hebrew Writers. Evidence of this was the conference organized at the initiative of Anda Amir-Pinkerfeld, the aim of which was to bring the new olim and Hebrew-language writers closer together, which ended in failure and great disappointment for the former. The new olim were not even allowed to say anything, and a speech given by a board member of the union, Israel Cohen, in which he denied them even casual contact with his community (without the status of being a member), led to the following irate responses: âYouâre talking to us like a moczarowiec!â âThis manner of speaking is familiar to us from Poland,â and âWhy did you invite us here?â75 With the Hebrew-speaking majority distancing itself from the foreign-language communities of the new olim, and the tragic failure of the olimâs previous attempt at assimilation, many longed for their country of origin. This was particularly true for writers because during the first stage of their adjustment in Israel, despite strenuous efforts to overcome the language barrier, they were still unable to express what they had already known in the Polish language â the literary spirit. Arnold SÅucki wrote the following: âA graduate of an ulpan, apart from acquiring 800 or 1000 words, will not take from there even the slightest association that will later provoke him to have any interest in the ânativeâ culture.â76
The new olim were equipped with tools in an ulpan, but these were too meager to carry deeper thoughts and content. It seems that it was not only the
In 1969, I emigrated from Poland with plans to go to Denmark, whence a suggestion came to go to Odensee, where the university promised me employment opportunities, first in its library, and then, after learning Danish, [teaching] some courses in the Slavic Studies department. The Danish Embassy in Warsaw even accepted from me some personal documents and typescripts of my unfinished works, which the Polish authorities had allowed me to take with me. [â¦] In Vienna, I learned that the university in Tel Aviv had offered me a job as a Polonist. It was there that I found out that a few kind people, whom I did not even know personally (professors Wiktor Weintraub and Tymon Terlecki), wrote letters to Vienna, to the addresses of my acquaintances from the Åódź ghetto (the Radzyners), insisting that I come to the United States, where several universities were interested in employing a Polonist in their Slavic Studies departments. [â¦] I decided to accept the offer from Tel Aviv, even though I didnât speak Hebrew at all. I knew English better, but more passively than actively (I could read well in English). I had learned English in the Åódź ghetto, as well as German and Russian. In October 1969, I moved to Israel, where my family and I were sent to an ulpan in Ashdod, where my closest friend from the camp in Åódź lived (the camp where we stayed after the liquidation of the ghetto, until the liberation in January 1945), who had emigrated to Israel in 1957. As soon as I arrived at Tel Aviv University, I was expected to start teaching. I had hoped to have a year free of classes in order to learn Hebrew, but I was told this wasnât possible, and I had to start conducting a seminar on Polish literature for students in the Department of Comparative Literature. I chose Polish poetry of the twentieth century as my subject. There were a few students â seven or eight â and less than half of them knew Polish. The rest only knew Hebrew and English. So, these were the languages in which the classes were conducted. One student who knew Hebrew and Polish very well helped by translating texts and leading discussions of them. The classes, however, were very arduous for the students, and no less for me. In the meantime, we moved to Tel Aviv, and I learned a bit of
Hebrew. From the United States came an offer of a position as a visiting professor for two or three years. I came up with a plan to go to the United States, stay there for some time, lecture, learn Hebrew (there!), and then return to Israel. At Tel Aviv University, I had already been nominated as a professor, and my decision to work for some time in the United States was even viewed favorably. I chose a state university in Chicago â the city had a reputation for being the Polish capital in the United States. Before leaving Israel, I worked with the head of the comparative literature department, Professor Horszowski (who was from the Vilnius region and spoke Polish well), on the curriculum for a Masterâs Degree in Polish Studies, which was to be approved by the university authorities. When I informed the authorities of Tel Aviv University of my intention to accept a job in the USA, I was told they thought it would be possible for me to combine my courses in the USA with what I would do in Israel. But when I pointed out that the curriculum of the Masterâs Degree in Polish Studies required the employment of more than one professor combining classes in the United States with classes in Tel Aviv, I was told that it was impossible for the time being. Indeed, Tel Aviv University still had financial problems, often lacking funds to pay monthly salaries. In 1970 I started classes at the state university in Chicago with the plan that two years later I would return to Tel Aviv, especially since the academic level there was incomparably higher than at that American university. After a year and a half of lecturing at the state university, I was asked unexpectedly by the Slavic department of the University of Chicago whether I would like to join it, and I accepted the offer enthusiastically because that department was considered at the time to be one of the best in the United States, just like the university itself. When I notified the authorities at Tel Aviv University of my decision to accept the offer, they received it positively, congratulated me, and acknowledged that my relationship with their university was ending for the time being, because the regulations required the termination [of the agreement] due to my long-term absence from the university. Besides, there were few opportunities to develop Polish Studies in Tel Aviv at that time. I had known this from the very beginning because I had met a whole group of Polonists, some of whom had PhDs and even academic achievements and publications, who were working in fields completely unrelated to their education. For example, one person in this group worked as a journalist for a Hebrew daily newspaper, while others worked as salesmen and saleswomen. They told me that Polish Studies had no chance of development, because there was no demand at all in Israel for people with such an education.82
It should be added that some of the immigrants of the March Aliyah did not share the same enthusiasm for Polish culture after experiencing the anti-Semitic events in Poland and broke off their ties with the country after leaving it. At the same time, the new olim felt alienated when faced with Jewish heritage in Israel and felt they could only fully identify with the culture of their country of origin. However, by continuing to hold onto it in the midst of Israelâs strong ethos of Hebraization, they were placing themselves on the margins of Israeli society.83 Attempts were made to counteract these tendencies by directing the attention of the new olim to current events in Israel, and the local Polish-language newspaper â Nowiny-Kurier â could play a role in this.
4.3 The Attitudes of Zionists and Postcommunists towards the March Aliyah
The effectiveness of the Polish press in the acclimatization process was determined by the editorsâ ability to identify immigrantsâ problems and needs. Relations between the journalists of Nowiny-Kurier and the Polish Jews who arrived after 1967 might have been a decisive factor in whether the new olim became its readers or, on the contrary, might have become an incentive to keep enough distance to deprive it from having any influence. The editors of
I speak of the Jewish content that I can read in their eyes, and then someone at the far end of the room who has blue eyes and blonde hair feels insulted that âIâm pandering to anthropology.â It seems that they were looking for signs of Jewishness there [in Poland â E. K.], but it turns out that here, too, one strikes this note. [â¦] He may ask them whether a Swedish or Danish âpot of meatâ does not play a greater role in their analyses than various arguments for self-determination, ideology, liberalism, and all these internal struggles.85
We have no doubt that even a short stay in Israel will become a breakthrough moment for these young people, as well as for others to whom they will express their impressions, which will make them aware of where they belong. Eventually, they will decide their own fate, without
any pressure and without the need for any declarations â but the sooner they decide to start their new lives in a country of their own, the better it will be for them.86
The two political circlesâ discourse proceeded in completely different ways, and the new immigrantsâ stances were evaluated on different levels. The postcommunists â journalists who had arrived in Israel as part of the GomuÅka Aliyah â skillfully made use of Zionist slogans, but the slogans lost validity when everyday problems were given political meaning. Despite their passionate declarations of support for the Jewish state, former communists from the GomuÅka Aliyah lacked the fundamental Zionist culture that could only be derived from years of activity in Zionist organizations in the diaspora. Having no such experience behind them, they relied solely upon slogans, ruthlessly forcing the new olim who arrived after 1967 to make politically correct declarations, with the enthusiasm typical of communists. On the other hand, the Zionists, understanding the requirements of the acclimatization process, did not attach any importance to momentary maladjustment and sought a way to spiritually reclaim the new olim â as they often repeated â for the nation.87 They kept a distance from ideological issues; unlike the postcommunists, they did not throw patriotic slogans around, nor did they make reference to Jewish values when they were in dialogue with people to whom Jewish culture was foreign or who had only discovered it for the first time in Israel.
The difference in approach between the Zionists and the former communists was also due to the fact that the former, who had been helping new olim adapt to the Hebrew-speaking society in Israel for many years, were able to properly assess the strength and attractiveness of the March Aliyah and focused primarily on the effectiveness of institutions to accelerate and facilitate the process of acclimatization for this group of people who were needed and desired by the state, hoping that in the future it would translate into deeper ties with them.88 Therefore, in the period from 1969 to 1971, their press articles focused primarily
The âThree-Millionth Oneâ came from Russia [the very first pioneers and founders of kibbutzim had also come from Russia â E. K.]. He met with the countryâs highest leaders and was featured on television. He was offered products by various companies that produced refrigerators and
washing machines and was given a beautifully furnished apartment free of charge. The man behaved modestly and said, âI do not deserve such a reception.â A few days later, young people who had either been born here or had arrived years ago protested in the streets of cities â young couples who live with their parents in very difficult conditions and can only dream of having their own home. They compared their conditions and the conditions of the new olim in irate speeches. Later, there were riots and demonstrations that were joined by young people living in poor districts â mostly Sephardic families.96
The development of the Israeli economy in the 1970s caused Israeli society to change; the ethos of an ideal state based on a social economy or a fair and equal distribution of wealth was lost. A progressive stratification of wealth and class became apparent â the communal world of the kibbutz was becoming a thing of the past. Resentment and tensions between the representatives of successive aliyot resulted precisely from the different circumstances concerning the absorption of new olim in Israelâs changing social landscape. In the descriptions of problems faced by immigrants who arrived after 1967 written by journalists who had arrived in the 1950s, there was a clash between the most recent acclimatization conditions and the conditions during the period after the Six-Day War, when the country was developing dynamically and there was a need for a specially trained workforce. The olim who arrived in the March Aliyah, mostly intellectuals, wrote about identity problems, and journalists who had arrived during the GomuÅka Aliyah responded by listing their privileges one by one, recalling the scarcity of resources when they had arrived in the country.97 It was difficult for the groups arriving at different times to communicate with one another and to understand the different problems they faced in their processes of acclimatization. Additionally, a specific kind of folklore about the immigrant world was present in the relationship between the successive aliyot, which portrayed the attitudes of earlier immigrants who were more or less settled as being averse towards immigrants who arrived later.98 Arnold SÅucki, who arrived in Israel after 1967, interpreted the atmosphere in the following way: âIn Tel Aviv, people supposedly tell one another anecdotes about the newly arrived immigrants and the flowers with
I have new friends here in the city [Ashdod â E. K.]. Manual laborers, postal workers, and dock workers. I discover among them fallen angels, former wealthy and industrious merchants from Iraq, as well as activists of German social democracy. They have become hardened in the struggle for existence and tanned by the Israeli sun. The sea has sharpened their ears to the noises coming from the world. For the people of the port, my burden is perhaps more understandable than for certain groups of intelligentsia. There are some among them who tell us: âYou have to define yourself.â Self-definition is necessary for you, the new people. If a lack of Hebrew language and knowledge of the country do not allow you to become professors or newspaper editors, then acquire some qualifications. The pragmatism of the elites is harsh, and their peculiar objectivity is supported by a strong desire to become like those who grew up in the Tel Aviv landscape in the era when the sands gave way to streets and squares. [â¦] Within six days, these people regained their sense of identity with the nation, and they cultivate that sense within themselves and cherish it like a precious treasure. Every bit of contact with the new intelligentsia that have just arrived gives them shivers, because it reactivates a universalist desire in them. So, after 12 years we no longer recognize our friends: international affairs specialists, intellectuals fascinated by Sartre, doctors, columnists, judges.101
The arrival of the March Aliyah, consisting mostly of people who had been assimilated in Poland, was compared to a âtree without roots,â but at the end of the 1960s in Israel there were still many such âtreesâ among the representatives of the GomuÅka Aliyah. A significant number of people immigrated to Israel in the 1950s because they had family members there, or for non-Zionist reasons, such as a change in the political regime. Their emigration from Poland was rarely because of ideological or Zionist motives. Almost everyone who left Poland for reasons other than Zionism carried with them a feeling of personal pain, defeat, and loss. The Jewish state was as foreign to some of those who had arrived during the GomuÅka Aliyah as to those who arrived after 1967.
And so, when the new olim were invited into the newly built houses, the process was guided by the principle of mixing people of different nationalities. Often the old, ugly houses assigned to âniggersâ many years ago were left right in the middle of beautiful, new settlements, since there was a belief in the beneficial influence of mixing Jews from a dozen or so different countries. The Sephardic Jews suddenly noticed that right next to them, newly arrived immigrants from Poland had nicely furnished, spacious apartments with several rooms, and that new cars, bought free of customs fees and taxes, were parked in front of the apartment buildings. Their hooligan instincts immediately found an ideological foundation â the leaders of posztak103 groups from the districts for olim confessed to the press that they were breaking shop windows, stealing womenâs handbags, and arguing in the streets in protest against the privileges for olim from Poland and Russia.104
Each Ashkenazi aliyah, helped in its settlement by the establishment, was perceived by the Mizrachi Jews as favoritism towards these Jews, and thus as discrimination against them. This perpetuated an ethnic conflict between Jewish groups that had been smoldering ever since the eastern Jews who first arrived in the country established its social structure. The new olim from Poland
The editors of Nowiny-Kurier were unable to help resolve the ethnic issue, since they did not deal with it in the newspaper. In a country that was built âin a hurry,â it is impossible to avoid social and ethnic differences, but the problem in the community connected to Nowiny-Kurier was that they did not notice the conflict at all, or at least did not acknowledge it in the newspaper. This topic was not discussed by either the Zionists or the communists who worked for Nowiny-Kurier. Israelâs internal world and acceptance in it was only defined by the ethno-cultural space of the Ashkenazi Jews, or, even more narrowly, the Polish Jews, which was most often transferred to relations with the European world. Many of the articles in Nowiny-Kurier had statist themes, but didnât go as far as propaganda, and paid little regard to Zionism and diaspora issues. At the level of propaganda and ideology, articles described the relationship that should be established between the new olim and the state, but not society.105 An article that discussed the integration of the new olim would completely avoid the topic of contemporary Israelâs identity â there was a lack of discussion of interethnic relations and the cultural and, most importantly, integrational aspects of Israelâs development.
Journalists of the former Kurier expected from the new olim readiness to integrate, and attitudes inconsistent with Israelâs politics were stigmatized. The way the Zionists (Nowiny) and postcommunists (Kurier) communicated with the new olim was also influenced by journalistic culture and political experience. The postcommunists, poorly integrated with Israel and not belonging to its Hebrew-speaking majority, espoused in their articles a course for foreign affairs â they avoided the real problems faced by the new immigrants, replacing them with critical articles about events taking place outside of Israel. This had a broad extraterritorial context â it was part of a deliberate information policy aimed at discrediting the diaspora, meant to strengthen the groupâs internal cohesion. The postcommunists preferred formally recognized and politically safe topics to the real problems faced by Israelâs multiethnic society at that time. Issues related to the acclimatization of the new olim were sensitive and required, especially from a party-affiliated journalist, dexterity and professionalism in order, first of all, not to fall into disfavor with political policy-makers and, secondly, to document the reality that a reader would be able to recognize in his everyday life.
The growing antagonism toward Poland in the Polish-language press stemmed from various aspects of Polish-Jewish relations. First of all, the breaking of diplomatic relations between Poland and Israel, while a large number of Israelâs citizens and, what is important â political establishment â came from Poland, caused great disappointment. The consequence of this was an increase in anti-Polonism, which was justified by the recent anti-Semitic and anti-Zionist events in Poland: âThe oversensitive chauvinists are not offended by Arabic, German, or Russian â but they get white-hot with rage when they hear the Polish language!â107 To this should be added the disappointed hopes of various groups coming from Poland after World War ii, who were hurt by the âbetrayalâ of communism on matters of ethnic policy. In the case of the GomuÅka Aliyah and the March Aliyah, the communist system, the creation of which some of these olim had participated in, had âterminatedâ their political membership and Polish citizenship, just as it had for those who had been considered, until recently, âenemies of communism.â Both groups of immigrants met in Israel but were disappointed, and it seems that the members of the communist apparatus were doubly aggrieved â they had lost their ârevolutionaryâ ideals as well as their country of origin. Some of them (former employees
There was disappointment among many Israeli left-wing political groups whose agendas included socialism and sympathy for the countries of the communist bloc (at least Mapam and Ahdut HaAvoda â which from 1965 onwards was part of the Labour Party). After World War ii, these parties tried to establish and maintain contact with communists in Poland; sometimes they had the character of personal and private relations, which were broken after the March events. For all the Jews who survived the war in the ussr, Moscowâs involvement in the Six-Day War on the side of the Arab states undermined sympathy for the communist bloc, which up until then had been fueled by the ussrâs declared anti-fascist agenda. In 1967 the majority of Israeli society lost all of its illusions about the goals of international Soviet policy â in 1947, the ussr had supported the idea of creating a Jewish state at the United Nations General Assembly, a fact often exploited by communists and Mapam until 1953, but
Former activists of the Polish United Workersâ Party get used to the new way of thinking, the new conceptual apparatus, the new paradigms and relationships the easiest. ⦠They can submit to new tasks and slogans the easiest. This isnât spite, itâs a fact. Some apparatchiks, at the time of their settlement in Israel, became the most staunch supporters of everything that was Israeli and the most unyielding opponents of everything that was happening there. The acclimatization of these people may arouse admiration. If a former cobuilder of the communist system becomes an excellent farmer after coming here, such as an apple grower (the former First Secretary of the Urban Committee lives in a certain kibbutz. He arrived in 1956 and now has become very successful in fruit farming, which, as it turned out, is his true vocation) â thatâs the incarnation in which a former communist can be accepted. If he is involved in shaping public opinion, if he works in the press, radio, or television or holds a high position in the ruling Labour Party, and if he thunders and instructs people from this grandstand as he used to thunder and instruct from the grandstand of the Polish United Workersâ Party, it is difficult to agree with the principle that âone does not reach into the past.â The former activists who decided
to join Maki (the communist party) here and at least remained faithful to their beliefs really inspire a lot more trust.114
The postcommunists from the former Kurier wrote safe, politically correct articles on topics acceptable to the mass media. Henryk Dankowicz wrote more articles similar in tone to his article about the âtragicomic disorientationâ of the new olim.115 Moshe Tigerâs and Aleksander Czerskiâs articles focused on stories that reflected the broad set of experiences of the olim â they printed several series of biographies, featuring life stories plagued by defeat and the unsuccessful fates of Jews in the galut.116 Aleksander Klugman, who had written very little until the breakdown of Polish-Israeli diplomatic relations, and thus until the time when the partyâs ban on critical publications on Polish-Jewish relations was lifted, started writing aggressive and passionate articles on foreign affairs â wide-ranging aspects of Polish-Jewish relations, communism, and anti-Semitism â in almost every issue, specializing in a critical but also one-sided approach to this subject.117 A common structure in Klugmanâs articles was
Although they mostly gained their âprofessional spursâ by working for the press of the Peopleâs Republic of Poland, when the journalists of Nowiny-Kurier decided to leave that country, they abandoned all lofty and bombastic slogans about the unique role of their profession. They are now convinced that a newspaper is not and should not be an âeducator of the nation,â and they did not like the role of âengineer of the human soulâ that had been assigned to them in the Peopleâs Republic of Poland. Gazeta Wyborcza is supposed to inform its readers about the most important events in Poland and the rest of the world, and to explain and comment on them as much as possible. Needless to say, none of the journalists ever had the opportunity to play a direct or even indirect role in any social movement, and certainly not beyond the borders of Israel.135
It is true that in the party-affiliated newspaper Nowiny-Kurier, informative articles were only reprinted from the Hebrew-language press. The journalists from the GomuÅka Aliyah were engaged in journalism that until 1967 did not cover Israeli events to any great extent, and certainly not the issues that were important for the state and society. âTheyâve given up all lofty and bombastic slogans about the unique role of their profession,â a journalist wrote about his professional field, and it was true, especially since Nowiny-Kurier was one of the many political organs of Mapai, and the combination of separate journalistic communities made it impossible to create a common ideological platform on which to conduct discourse. It was not so much the integration of values that was lacking, but a common journalistic culture that allowed people to act in the interest of universal values. It is also true that no Nowiny-Kurier journalist from the community of former communists had âplayed a role in the social movement,â and, despite their efforts, they had no chance of promotion in political life, either. The specific character and purpose of Nowiny-Kurier was to reach out to diverse, heterogeneous communities with different needs, mostly to readers who were not very demanding or for whom this newspaper was just an addition to the Hebrew-language press. However, when the new aliyah arrived after Poland broke off diplomatic relations with Israel in 1967, the former communists again wanted to be âengineers of human soulsâ and tried to lead the new olim with the old communist rhetoric, directing them towards a different system â this time Zionism. They also wanted to be their âeducatorsâ and guides on the âway back to the Jewish nation.â However, the pro-Zionist articles published in Nowiny-Kurier, which were in the form of
For many emigrants, including those who decided to settle in Israel, freeing themselves from perpetual propaganda was an important reason for leaving Poland. Nowiny-Kurier united three different groups of writers â Zionists, postcommunists from the GomuÅka Aliyah, and those who came after 1967 â who originated from the same country but were significantly different in terms of their expectations, needs, and political culture. The topics they addressed in the press said a great deal about the level of their integration into Jewish society. The Zionists were involved in the affairs of the state; they were concerned with the settlement of the new olim and monitored the operations of the institutions set up to support this process. The former communists were stuck in the past, trying to use it to their advantage or exploit it for current politics, and this is why they became involved with anti-communist and anti-diaspora propaganda. The new olim who arrived after 1967 were busy with their own lives. When they described their problems, they had to fit into a strictly defined mode of criticism so as not to violate Zionist values.
The newspapers display varying levels of journalistic skills and documentation of reality depending on the aliyah in which an articleâs author had arrived; itâs certainly impossible to evaluate Nowiny-Kurier from the point of view of only one group of journalists. The Zionists from the former Nowiny were a dwindling group, due to their age, so their influence on the new aliyah was much weaker than the influence of the postcommunists from Kurier. The positive campaign conducted by the Zionists, formally in one-third of the newspaper, was overshadowed by the journalism of the postcommunists, who regularly
However, despite the weakness of the Polish-language press in Israel, it could not be replaced by the Polish press publications from other countries, even the highly desirable magazine Kultura. Even though Kultura was important for
StanisÅaw Wygodzki, a poet and literary critic of Jewish origin, came from Poland to Israel in 1968.
From materials made available by Anna Äwiakowska; there is a copy in the authorâs archive.
âTrudnoÅci emigrantów żydowskich w Polsceâ [Difficulties of Jewish Emigrants in Poland], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 87 (1969): 3; A. Grabowska, âOstrzegam przed hienÄ â [I Warn You of the Hyena], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 265 (1969): 5; A. Äwiakowska, âNajważniejsza rzecz â atmosferaâ [The Most Important Thing â Atmosphere], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 358 (1969): 4; âO nowych olim z Polskiâ [On the New Olim from Poland] (in the column âCzytelnicy piszÄ â [Readers Are Writing]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 76 (1970): 4.
There was a system in place for introducing journalists into the profession. The most talented of them were subsidized by Sochnut and then employed in the Israeli press for a transitional period that formally lasted three years, after which they could apply to join the Union of Israeli Journalists. Some of them were sent in this manner to the Polish-language press. Editorial offices gained good writers thanks to this, but the new journalists most often carried the same burden as the other employees of the editorial office, even though the salary of a journalist who was not a member of the union was lower. See âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraeluâ [More about the New Wave of Immigration to Israel], Kultura, nos. 1â2 (1971): 176, a reprint of Chaim Jurkowskiâs article âNowy olim i stare kÅopotyâ [New Olim and Old Problems] from Biuletyn DÅugoletnich DziaÅaczy Rewolucyjnego Ruchu Robotniczego.
Anna Äwiakowska was born on 14 February 1925 in Sosnowiec. She worked for the District Public Security Office in Dzierżoniów from 1945 to 1950, then for Polish Radio Katowice from 1950 to 1968, and prior to her departure for Israel, she was the head of the Editorial Office of Foreign Journalism. In 1951â1952 she attended a one-year journalism course at the Association of Polish Journalists in Warsaw. ainr, file 1268/20737/2, Äwiakowska Anna, work certificate, card 5; ainr, file 1268/20737/2, statement, 17 September 1968, card 19; ainr, file 1268/20737/1, Äwiakowska Anna, cards 1â11; ainr, file Wr 058/1127, Anna Äwiakowskaâs file. She was employed by Nowiny-Kurier from 1 May 1969 until she retired on 28 February 1981. Work certificate issued by Shabtai Himelfarb, Tel Aviv, 7 April 1986, materials from the authorâs collection.
Alina Grabowska was born on 12 April 1935 in Åódź and died on 22 June 2006 in Munich. She earned a degree in Polish philology from the University of Åódź. She worked as a journalist for GÅos Robotniczy. This is how she recalled her parting with her profession as a journalist in Poland: âIn April last year [1968] I was dismissed from my job (along with other colleagues). It was a strange and even âunbelievableâ situation for the âPeopleâs Powerâ that I had never belonged to the Polish United Workersâ Party. Therefore, it was impossible for me to be âthrown outâ of the party. I became aware of the fact that I had lost my job one day from information published in the Åódź press.â In September 1969 she went to Israel. Archive of the Literary Institute in Maisons-Laffitte (hereinafter: ali), letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 14 February 1969. She was a journalist for Nowiny-Kurier from 1969 to 1971 and for Polandâs Radio Free Europe (rfe) broadcasting station beginning in 1971. She was the founder and secretary (1995â2006) of the Association of Employees of the rfe broadcasting station in Warsaw. The rfe Club in Nowogrodzka Street was named after her. In 1995 she was awarded the Cross of the Order of Polonia Restituta, and in 2006 she was awarded the Commanderâs Cross of the Order of Polonia Restituta.
âThe Polish Pressâ â the official press organ of the Polish Journalistsâ Association â printed announcements about the removal of members from their list. The âblack listâ included, among others, Alina Grabowska, Anna Äwiakowska-Szulimowicz, and Antoni Gutowski (Polityka). The list was reprinted by Kultura: âCzarna listaâ [The Black List], Kultura, no. 5 (1969): 123â24.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 14 February 1969. Anna Äwiakowskaâs reminiscences of StanisÅaw Wygodzki, materials from the authorâs collection (I would like to thank Anna Äwiakowska for making them available to me); K. Bernard, ed., Wygodzki: Zeszyt pamiÄci [Wygodzki: A Book of Memories] (Tel Aviv, 1992), 5â11; N. Gross, Pożegnanie â pamiÄtnik rozpaczy [Farewell â A Diary of Despair], in Bernard, Wygodzki, 74â77; R. Löw, Znaki obecnoÅci: O polsko-hebrajskich i polsko-żydowskich zwiÄ zkach literackich [Signs of Presence: On Polish-Hebrew and Polish-Jewish Literary Associations] (Kraków, 1995), 72.
She mainly produced interviews and reports, often making the foreign land more familiar to the new olim, which had high assimilation value. A. Äwiakowska, Ich dom [Their Home], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 257 (1969): 7.
ali, letter from Henryk Dankowicz to Jerzy Giedroyc, 18 June 1969.
alp, file 2/7/1968/119, minutes from a meeting of the Labour Partyâs Committee, 5 April 1968 (a report presented to Shabtai Himelfarbâs committee). The circulation figure provided by Alina Grabowska was inflated. In 1960 the daily circulation of Nowiny-Kurier amounted to 9,050 copies, while the holiday edition (on Friday) was 15,000 copies.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 24 April 1969.
The questionnaire was answered by 130 people from about a dozen countries, about one-fifth of whom were from Israel. The majority of the respondents were men between the ages of 30 and 45 with higher education â a large group of academic researchers and university students, journalists, engineers, writers, directors, actors, film, and television employees, teachers, and doctors; K. ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967 r. Ankieta âKulturyââ [Kultura Survey: Polish Emigration after 1967], Kultura 11, no. 278 (1970): 20.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 49. A similar survey was also written for the GomuÅka Aliyah, but the few responses that were received were brief and reserved, so it turned out to be much less informative. In the community of Jews from Poland, it met with a reluctant reception â for example, Dawid Lazer protested against it. ali, letter from Jerzy Giedroyc to Leo Lipski, 18 March 1958. In the introduction to the study of the questionnaire, there was the following statement: âThe results of the Kultura survey on the topic of Polish anti-Semitism are meager. Almost no response was received from the people we asked to express their opinions on this matter. [â¦] However, this is the first time that an initiative of this kind undertaken by Kultura has met with such a negative reaction.â âProblem antysemityzmu: Ankieta âKulturyââ [The Problem of Anti-Semitism: Kultura Survey], Kultura 111, no. 1 (1957): 56 (a discussion of the survey and letters that were sent are discussed on pp. 56â79); âAnkieta âKulturyââ [Kultura Survey], Kultura 107, no. 9 (1956): 12. The survey was also included in a series of Kultura publications. âProblem antysemityzmu: Ankieta âKulturyââ [The Problem of Anti-Semitism: Kulturaâs Survey], in Wizja Polski na Åamach Kultury 1947â1976 [The Image of Poland in Kultura from, 1947â1976], ed. G. Pomian (Lublin, 1999), file 2, 107â27; A. Wat, Korespondencja, vol. 1 [Correspondence, vol. 1], selected, edited, and afterword by A. Kowalczykowa (Warsaw, 2005), 125.
For example, Stanislaw Wygodzki recalled: âI was faithful to the party. You wrote: âSo one day he fell into conflict with the system â¦â Not one day, but for many years ⦠I still carry a feeling of shared guilt and coresponsibility to this day. âMyâ party murdered workers â and not only workers. Millions of innocent people were slaughtered [â¦]. At the open meetings of the Writersâ Union â from 1956 to 1964 I was the chairman of the Warsaw branch of the Union â I criticized these terrible actions. But I did not leave the party. I thought that whoever had broken the clock had to repair it. Later, I understood that the âclockâ was irreparable.â S. Wygodzki, âTagebuch der Liebeâ [Love Diary], in Eine Begegegnung in Gedichten, Briefen und Interviews, preface by H. Zehetmaier, afterword by A. Everding (Vechta-Langförden, 2005), 53â54; A. CaÅa and H. Datner-Åpiewak, eds., Dzieje Å»ydów w Polsce 1944â1968: Teksty źródÅowe [The History of Jews in Poland, 1944â1968: Source Texts] (Warsaw, 1997), 282â83; J. Bauman, J. Nigdzie na ziemi: Powroty; Opowiadania [Nowhere on Earth: Returns; Stories] (Åódź, 2011), 15â19, 26â27.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 27.
Correspondence with Prof. Samuel Sandler, 24 July 2012, materials from the authorâs archive; this has also been written about in A. Gutowski, âKażdy chce mieÄ ojczyznÄâ [Everyone Wishes to Have a Homeland], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 369 (1969): 8, 14; ali, letter from Samuel Sandler to Jerzy Giedroyc, 13 June 1970.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 13 July 1971.
Wygodzki, âTagebuch der Liebe,â 63; Bernard, Wygodzki: Zeszyt pamiÄci.
Iâm omitting a description of the events of March 1968, which has already been widely discussed: K. Kersten, âMarzec 1968 i tzw. kwestia żydowska w Polsce po II wojnie Åwiatowejâ [March 1968 and the âJewish Questionâ in Poland after World War ii], in Polacy, Å»ydzi, komunizm: Anatomia póÅprawd 1939â68 [Poles, Jews and Communism: An Anatomy of Half-Truths 1939â68] (Warsaw, 1992); Kersten, âRok 1968: Motyw żydowskiâ [The Year 1968: A Jewish Theme], Res Publica, no. 5 (1988): 58â59; D. Stola, Kampania antysyjonistyczna w Polsce 1967â1968 [The Anti-Semitic Campaign in Poland, 1967â1968] (Warsaw, 2000); J. Lipski, âKwestia żydowskaâ [The Jewish Question], in Marzec â68. Referaty z sesji na Uniwersytecie Warszawskim w 1981 r. [March â68: Reports from a Session at Warsaw University in 1981], ed. M. Gumkowski and M. Ofierska (Warsaw, 2008); G. Berendt, ed., SpoÅecznoÅÄ Å¼ydowska w PRL przed kampaniÄ antysemickÄ lat 1967â1968 i po niej [The Jewish Community in the Polish Peopleâs Republic before and after the Anti-Semitic Campaign of 1967â1968] (Warsaw, 2009); Berendt, âKarty z gdaÅskiej kroniki politycznej lat 1945â1970â [Pages from GdaÅskâs Political Chronicle from the Years 1945â1970], in Polska i Polacy: Studia z dziejów polskiej myÅli i kultury politycznej XIX i XX wieku. KsiÄga pamiÄ tkowa dedykowana profesorowi Romanowi WapiÅskiemu [Poland and Poles: Studies in the History of Polish Thought and Political Culture of the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries â A Book in Tribute to Professor Roman WapiÅski], ed. M. Mroczko (GdaÅsk, 2001), 74â80; J. Eisler, Polski rok 1968 [Poland in the Year 1968] (Warsaw, 2006), 88â140; P. OsÄka, SyjoniÅci, inspiratorzy, wichrzyciele: Obraz wroga w propagandzie marca 1968 [Zionists, Inspirers, Troublemakers: The Image of the Enemy in the Propaganda of March 1968] (Warsaw, 1999); T. ToraÅska, JesteÅmy: Rozstania â68 [Weâre Here: The Partings of â68] (Warsaw, 2008); D. Stola, âAntyżydowski nurt Marca 1968â [The Anti-Semitic Trend of March 1968], in Oblicza marca 1968 [The Faces of March 1968], ed. K. Rokicki and S. StÄpieÅ (Warsaw, 2004), 65â72; J. Wiszniewicz, Z Polski do Izraela: Rozmowy z pokoleniem â68 [From Poland to Israel: Interviews with the Generation of â68] (Warsaw, 1992), 52; W. SÄczyk, Marzec â68 w publicystyce PRL: Studium z dziejów propagandy [March â68 in the Journalism of the Polish Peopleâs Republic: A Study of the History of Propaganda] (WaÅbrzych, 2009).
A. Äwiakowska, âDom na skarpieâ [The House on the Embankment], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 209 (1969): 9; A. Gutowski, âSkreÅlony z listyâ [Crossed Off the List], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 215 (1969): 5; B. Engelking, Na ÅÄ ce popioÅów: Ocaleni z Holokaustu [In a Meadow of Ashes: Survivors of the Holocaust] (Warsaw, 1993), 32â33.
Correspondence with Prof. Samuel Sandler, 9 August 2012, materials from the authorâs collection.
A. Grabowska, âRaj utracony â raj odzyskanyâ [Paradise Lost â Paradise Regained], Kultura 267, no. 12 (1969): 126.
A. Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanemâ [Between the Vistula and the Jordan], Kultura 288, no. 9 (1971): 110; for further reading on this topic, see Grabowska, âStaroÅÄ â nie radoÅÄâ [Thereâs No Joy in Old Age], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 369 (1969): 8.
A. Grabowska, âTo czego musimy siÄ nauczyÄâ [What We Need to Learn], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 263 (1969): 8; âAkcja spoÅeczna ZwiÄ zku Å»ydów z Polskiâ [The Social Campaigns of the Union of Polish Jews], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 76 (1969): 5.
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 110.
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 111; F. ToruÅczyk and F. Ben, âÅ»ydzi polscy w nowej ojczyźnieâ [Polish Jews in a New Homeland], Kultura, no. 11/133 (1958): 84â92. A critical assessment of this article was written by Wiktor Cygielman (under the pseudonym of Hanek Szwarcman): âMyÅli oderwaneâ [Fragmentary Thoughts], Od Nowa, no. 16 (1958): 6.
Hebrew: a group of friends.
A. Gutowski, âTÄsknisz? Owszem ⦠Chcesz wróciÄ? Nie! Ankieta wÅród mÅodzieży-olim z Polskiâ [Are You Homesick? Yes, of Course ⦠Do You Want to Go Back? No! A Poll among Young Olim from Poland], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 50 (1970): 4.
The Union of Polish Jews mostly supported young people, especially those who came to Israel without families. It organized aid for them and facilitated their adjustment â for example, families of Polish Jews invited them to celebrate Shabbat and holidays with them. âAkcja spoÅeczna ZwiÄ zku Å»ydów z Polskiâ [The Social Campaigns of the Union of Polish Jews], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 76 (1969): 5; A. Äwiakowska, âStypendia i ludzieâ [Scholarships and People], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 372 (1969): 4. It was believed that creating ulpanim in the kibbutzim would increase the number of people willing to stay in them. âUlpany dla olim i ich rodzin utworzone zostanÄ w kibucachâ [Ulpanim for Olim and Their Families Will Be Created in Kibbutzim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 76 (1969): 5.
J. Wiszniewicz, Z Polski do Izraela: Rozmowy z pokoleniem â68 [From Poland to Israel: Interviews with the Generation of â68] (Warsaw, 1992), 52.
A. Gutowski, âRamat Hanasi â polskie osiedleâ [Ramat Hanasi â A Polish Housing Estate], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 22 (1970): 3.
Grabowska, âRaj utracony â raj odzyskany,â 122.
Grabowska, âRaj utracony â raj odzyskany,â 121.
ali, letter from Kamila Halpern-ChyliÅska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 22 December 1970.
Anti-European texts appeared that were intended as a response to the longings for Europe among the new olim. A. Czerski, âOstatnia przystaÅâ [The Last Port of Call], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 474 (1969): 9; âSkÅócona Europaâ [Europe Divided Against Itself], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 76 (1969): 3; R. Wolf, âPodzwonne Europie?â [Is This Europeâs Death-Knell?], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 110 (1969): 3.
See E. Rostal, âDuch pionierstwa nie zaginÄ Åâ [The Pioneering Spirit Is Not Gone], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 85 (1960): 3.
See ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 17â53.
E. Rostal, ââEmigracja polskaâ czy Å»ydzi z Polski?â [âPolish Ãmigrésâ or Jews from Poland?], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 294 (1970): 5.
Rostal, ââEmigracja polska,ââ 5.
Between 1968 and 1971, 12,927 people left Poland and indicated Israel as their preferred destination for emigration. Together with people from mixed marriages, who in individual cases could choose a country other than Israel, this number, according to Dariusz Stola, can be estimated at about 13,000. A significant minority (28 percent) went to Israel (1,349 in 1968 and 1,735 in the following year). Others chose Western Europe, North America, and Scandinavia. Among them were many officials from the central state administration, including the Ministry of the Interior, Ministry of Public Security and Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Due to the anti-intelligentsia character of the March events, as emphasized by Dariusz Stola, by September 1969, 500 lecturers and academics, 200 journalists and editors (15 editors-in-chief or their deputies, over 60 radio and television employees), and nearly 100 musicians, artists, and actors (including 23 actors from the Jewish Theater in Warsaw, with the theaterâs director, Ida KamiÅska, at the forefront) submitted requests to emigrate from Poland. Data from D. Stola, Kraj bez wyjÅcia? Migracje z Polski 1949â1989 [A Country with No Exit? Migrations from Poland, 1949â1989] (Warsaw, 2010), 222â23; see also Stola, Kampania antysyjonistyczna w Polsce, 213; For more on the topic of Poles in Norway, see E. Olszewski, Polacy w Norwegii (1940â2010) [Poles in Norway (1940â2010)] (ToruÅ, 2011); M. Shore, Smak popioÅów: W dziedzictwie totalitaryzmu w Europie Wschodniej [The Taste of Ashes: The Heritage of Totalitarianism in Eastern Europe], translated into Polish by M. Szuster (Warsaw, 2012), 162â66.
This is a reference to W. Szafranski, âEmigranci polscy w siatce Wiesenthala. Na Rudolfplatz, w Englischer Garten i gdzie indziejâ [Polish Emigrants Caught in Wiesenthalâs Net: On Rudolfplatz, in the Englischer Garten and Elsewhere], Å»ycie Literackie, no. 42 (1970): 4. SzafraÅski continued his studies in the following issue: âJeszcze o siatce Wiesenthalaâ [More on Wiesenthalâs Net], Å»ycie Literackie, no. 43 (1970): 10.
This quote comes from an article published in the column âSieÄ Szymona Wiesenthalaâ [Szymon Wiesenthalâs Net], under the heading âParagrafem przez prasÄâ [A Passage through the Press]. It reads as follows: âThis is one thing we do not like about Szafranskyâs text. The term âPolish.â One should talk about emigrants from Poland rather than Polish emigrants. What does an old agent such as Wiesenthal have to do with Polishness, or, for example, Jerzy Mond, the former Secretary of the Board of Directors of the Association of Polish Journalists, or Erwin Weit, the former Secretary of the âPolish Pressâ sdp, or the former President of the Board of Directors of the Rajski âPressâ rsw, or the entire lousy group of 720 Wiesenthal agents who emigrated from Poland between 1956 and 1958? What do those who left between 1968 and 1970 have in common with Poland or Polishness? The author does not write about this.â
âPrawo i Å»ycie: Organ Zrzeszenia Prawników Polskichâ [Law and Life: An Alliance of Polish Lawyers], no. 22 (1970): 2. Rostal also wrote about attacks on Wiesenthal in his article âWiesenthal w ataku i obronieâ [Wiesenthal in Attack and defense], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 357 (1969): 3.
Rostal, ââEmigracja polskaâ czy Å»ydzi z Polski?,â 5.
ali, letter from Kamila Halpern-ChyliÅska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 22 December 1970.
ali, letter from Kamila Halpern-ChyliÅska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 22 December 1970.
Alexander Czerski wrote, âNow he writes letters from icy Sweden, admires the hospitality of Swedes, elevates tolerance to heaven, and forgets that he is tolerated, that he is a stranger, that in Poland he could at least invoke cultural ties, language, and past eras. He forgets that he will never be a Swede of Jewish origin, for the average, tolerant Swede â taciturn and sheepish â points at a clear spot on a map of the Middle East and asks, âWhy donât you go home?ââ A. Czerski, âRok 1970 â wÄ tpliwoÅci i nadziejeâ [The Year 1970 â Doubts and Hopes], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 1 (1970): 3; E. Rostal, âEmigranci i olimâ [Emigrants and Olim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 239 (1969): 3; âJest jeszcze wiele do zrobieniaâ [Thereâs Still Much to Do] (in the column âCzytelnik ma gÅosâ [The Reader Has a Voice]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 277 (1969): 4; E. Rostal, âPrzyjÄcie, ale nie absorpcjaâ [Acceptance But Not Absorption], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 345 (1969): 3; Rostal, âWycieczka na Majorkaâ [A Trip to Majorca], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 351 (1969): 3; A. Äwiakowska, ââDuÅczycyâ i olimâ [âDanesâ and the Olim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 356 (1969): 3; Rostal, âPÄkajÄ baÅki mydlaneâ [The Soap Bubbles Are Popping], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 32 (1970): 3; Rostal, âKoniecznoÅÄ reform â w interesie naroduâ [The Necessity of Reforms â In the Interest of the Nation], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 44 (1970): 3; Rostal, âÅwiÄ teczny apelâ [A Holiday Plea], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 94 (1970): 3.
Stola, âKraj bez wyjÅcia?,â 225; F. Ben, âWÅadze polskie usiÅujÄ nakÅoniÄ emigrantów â Å»ydów do powrotuâ [Polish Authorities Are Trying to Persuade Jewish Emigrants to Return to Poland], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 121 (1969): 2. In the rhetoric of the Jewish communists who left Poland after 1967, only the party apparatus was disowned, not the ideology itself, which meant that a change of power would open the gate for the return of the March emigrants. MichaÅ Mirski (who immigrated to Denmark with his family) made use of this type of rhetoric among immigrants of the Scandinavian aliyah, which obviously angered Zionists such as Rostal. See E. Rostal, ââIdeolodzyâ emigracji żydowskiejâ [âIdeologistsâ of the Jewish Emigration], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 226 (1970): 3; ââPrzeproszenieâ P. Mirskiegoâ [P. Mirskiâs âApologyâ] (in the column âCzytelnik ma gÅosâ [The Reader Has a Voice]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 235 (1970): 4.
Rostal, âÅwiÄ teczny apel,â 3.
âList z Uppsaliâ [Letter from Uppsala] (in the column âCzytelnicy piszÄ â [Readers Are Writing]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 46 (1970): 4.
âDzieci matki nie-Å»ydówki mogÄ byÄ uznane za Å»ydówâ [Children of Non-Jewish Mothers May Be Considered Jewish], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 21 (1970): 6; âKim jestem?â [Who Am I?] (in the column âCzytelnicy piszÄ â [Readers Are Writing]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 28 (1970): 4; Rostal, âKoniecznoÅÄ reform,â 3; H. Zeidel, âAlija nie-Å»ydówâ [An Aliyah of Non-Jews], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 90 (1970): 3.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 19 July 1970: âThe inclusion of Israel â to a greater extent â in Kulturaâs materials would perhaps be an attempt to integrate the local Polish community. As time goes by, I can see how most of the intelligentsia who have recently arrived are becoming aware of who they truly are. They left Poland full of bitterness, extremely critical and convinced that for them â as Jews â there was a place in Israel. Now they are becoming increasingly aware that they are Poles, Poles in exile, in more difficult conditions in many respects than Polish emigrants in the West or in the USA, as their âPolishnessâ has a slightly illegal character.â
Alina Grabowska described the attitude to assimilation as follows: âJudging by the publications and statements of numerous influential circles, the number one enemy of Israel, Zionism, and the future (as well as the past) of Jewry is ⦠an assimilated Jew. Assimilated Jews are written and spoken about in a style reminiscent of communist publications. Alberto Moravia visited the Middle East and wrote a series of articles with which Israeli propaganda was not satisfied. The answer was that Moravia was in fact called Pinkele, and the continuation of these pronouncements â the form of âoriginâ denunciation and style of attack â was reminiscent of the year 1968 in the Polish press. At that time, the âreal nameâ was also written in brackets, next to the âused name,â in order to delicately inform the public with whom one was dealing.â
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 106; ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 17 November 1969; A. Äwiakowska, âJa Polski nie opuÅciÅam nawet emigrujÄ câ [I Never Left Poland, Even When I Emigrated] (in an issue titled âPowroty: Emigracja marcowaâ [Returns: The March Emigration]), Tygiel Kultury 27, no. 3 (1998): 25â30; âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 176; J. Habermas, Obywatelstwo a tożsamoÅÄ narodowa: Rozważania nad przyszÅoÅciÄ Europy [Citizenship and National Identity: Reflections on the Future of Europe], translated into Polish by B. Markiewicz (Warsaw, 1993), 6â17.
Further, as was characteristic for a member of the Independent Liberal Party (Liberalim Atzmaʾim), Rostal emphasized the secular nature of the state. Rostal, âWiÄcej tolerancjiâ [More Tolerance], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 80 (1969), 2; Rostal, âEmigranci i olim,â 3.
âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 175.
âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 175.
Gutowski, âKażdy chce mieÄ ojczyznÄ,â 8, 14; ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 29.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 27.
âO nowych olim z Polskiâ [On the New Olim from Poland] (in the column âCzytelnicy piszÄ â [Readers Are Writing]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 76 (1970): 4. In response to this published text, rebuttals also appeared in the same column: âW odpowiedzi p. R. M.â [In Response to Mr. R. M.], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 88 (1970): 4; âJeszcze wokóŠolim z Polskiâ [More on the Topic of the Olim from Poland], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 95 (1970): 4.
H. Dankowicz, âPolacy wygnania mojżeszowegoâ [Poles of the Moses Exile], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 220 (1970): 4; âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 173.
The article was a reprint from Biuletyn, to which Jerzy Giedroyc was also a subscriber.
âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 173.
âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 174.
ainr, file 01069/545/J microfilm, Dankowicz Henryk, card 7.
Dankowicz, âPolacy wygnania mojżeszowego,â 4.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 5 May 1969; A. Grabowska, âCzy w Tel-Avivie powstanie polonistyka?â [Will a Polish Studies Department Be Established in Tel Aviv?], Kultura 277, no. 10 (1970): 109; Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 99 (the title of which is repeated from a column in Nowiny-Kurier that published biographies of prominent people, mostly from the community of Polish Jews); ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 27 February 1971.
Wygodzki, âTagebuch der Liebe,â 31; A. Molisak, âNarracje o wygnaniu w literaturze polskiej w Izraelu po roku 1948â [Narratives of Exile in Polish Literature in Israel after 1948], in Pisarz na emigracji: Mitologie, style, strategie przetrwania [A Writer in Exile: Mythologies, Styles, and Survival Strategies], ed. H. Gosk and A. S. Kowalczyk (Warsaw, 2005); K. Adamczyk, âAntynostalgia i nostalgia. PamiÄÄ Polski w literackich Åwiadectwach emigracji 1968â [Anti-Nostalgia and Nostalgia: The Memory of Poland in Literary Testimonies of Emigrants Who Left in 1968], in Gosk and Kowalczyk, Pisarz na emigracji, 435â54.
H. Joffe, âPo sÅowach â kolej na czynyâ [After Words â Itâs Time for Action], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 105 (1969): 3.
Interview with Ignacy Iserles, 22 July 2007, materials from the authorâs collection.
ali, letter from Jerzy Giedroyc to Alina Grabowska, 22 October 1971; ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 17 July 1971.
ali, letter from Jerzy Giedroyc to Alina Grabowska, 22 October 1971; ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 17 July 1971.
Abraham Suckewer (1913â2010) was a poet and prose writer who popularized the Yiddish language in Israel.
Natan Alterman (1910â1970) was an eminent Hebrew-language writer, playwright, journalist, and translator. He received the Israel Prize, the Bialik Prize, and the Czernichowski Prize (awarded in Israel for the translation of foreign literature into Hebrew).
A. SÅucki, âInteligencka absorpcjaâ [Intelligent Absorption], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 80 (1969): 4.
E. Rostal, âO równe prawa dla pisarzy â olimâ [On Equal Rights for Writers â Olim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 110 (1969): 3; Joffe, âPo sÅowach â kolej na czyny,â 5.
A. SÅucki, âHebrajszczyzna uÅatwionaâ [Hebrew Language Facilitated], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 98 (1969): 5.
A. Grabowska, âSlawistyka â na Uniwersytecie w T.A.â [Slavic Studies â at the University of T.A.], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 38 (1970): 8.
Dawid Lazer (known by his friends as âDudekâ) was born in Kraków in 1902 and died in Tel Aviv in 1974; D. Lazer, Frezje, mimoza i róże: Szkice polskie z lat 1933â1974 (wybór) [Freesias, Mimosas, and Roses: Polish Sketches from the Years 1933â1974 (A Selection)] (Tel Aviv, 1994), 4.
D. Lazer, âMaase be katedra, bepozytywizm, szuwinizm â we âbementaliut szel konfekcjaââ [A Story about a Faculty, Positivism, and Chauvinism â and a âReady-Made Mentalityâ], Maariv, 19 February 1971, 10.
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 99; ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 27 February 1971.
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 99; ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 27 February 1971.
Correspondence with Prof. Samuel Sandler, 9 and 13 August 2012, materials from the authorâs collection. In a letter to Jerzy Giedroyc, Samuel Sandler, already in Chicago, assessed the attempt to establish a Polish Philology Department at Tel Aviv University as follows: âIt is tempting to create a Polish Philology Department, or rather a Slavic Philology Department with a good Polish Philology section, in Tel Aviv. It would be a natural complement to the Polish life in Israel. But on the other hand, the practical need for Polish Studies in Israel is almost nonexistent. As a result of the former emigration of the Jewish intelligentsia from Poland and the last two exoduses in 1956â1957 and 1958â1969, some need for them is guaranteed and, moreover, for humanists of all kinds educated in Poland â for at least a quarter of a century â including scholars of Polish philology. In this state of affairs, the functions of university-level Polish philology in Israel must be very limited, practically reduced to auxiliary studies led by amateurs, who still have to be found. Of course, this is the position of Polish philology in almost every country, but even in such a comparison the position of Polish philology in Israel would be incomparably worse.â
ali, letter from Samuel Sandler to Jerzy Giedroyc, 6 December 1970.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 14 February 1969.
The articles published in Nowiny-Kurier were analyzed separately, due to the significant differences in views, political culture, and Zionist experience between the two very different political circles.
M. Tiger, âDroga przez pustyniÄâ [The Road Through the Desert], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 2 (1970): 3; see also A. Czerski, âStudencka akcja absorpcjiâ [Student Absorption Campaign], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 126 (1969): 3; A. Äwiakowska, âStudenci â olimâ [Students â Olim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 282 (1969): 4.
E. Rostal, âProblemy i wÄ tpliwoÅci âAliji Kopenhaskiejââ [The Problems and Doubts of the âCopenhagen Aliyahâ], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 2 (1970): 3.
E. Rostal, âÅ»ydzi polscy nie zapominajÄ o swych obowiÄ zkach i zadaniach. Przed II Zjazdem Åwiatowej Federacjiâ [Polish Jews Do Not Forget about Their Duties and Work: Before the Second Congress of the World Federation], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 140 (1969): 3; Rostal, âTwarzÄ do olimâ [Facing the Olim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 144 (1969): 3.
âPaÅstwo aliji: Nowi olim z Polski w żegludze alijiâ [The Aliyah State: New Olim from Poland Navigating the Aliyot], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 263 (1969): 3; H. Zeidel, âAlija dźwigniÄ gospodarkiâ [An Aliyah as a Boost for the Economy], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 121 (1970): 3; A. Grabowska, âW naszym domuâ [In Our Home], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 207 (1969): 3.
Edward Rostal cautioned: âThe fact is that the new olim are still running up against bureaucracy, and that some officials have not yet broken with the old âtraditionâ of treating olim as intrusive petitioners. The new olim must continue to run from place to place, and what is due to them â in accordance with the rules and regulations in force â is still being received with considerable delay and ⦠as if by the grace of a particular bureaucrat. [â¦] Of course, there are also exaggerated demands and claims. And this is both on the part of the so-called akademaʾim [academics and scholars â E. K.], who benefit from special care, and those new olim who believe that favoring people with higher education is harmful to the majority of newcomers. But if an oleh of this or that category claims or demands what he is entitled to and promised â he has a full right to do so! Any bureaucracy, any dragging out or delaying of the matter, is even harmful and contrary to the interests of our country. Let there be less self-satisfaction, therefore, and more sincere concern for the fate of every family of a new oleh.â
E. Rostal, Mniej samozadowolenia [Less Self-Satisfaction], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 92 (1969): 2. See also on this subject Rostal, âTwarzÄ do olim,â 3.
H. Zeidel, âKonsolidacja w obliczu niebezpieczeÅstwaâ [Consolidation in the Face of Danger], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 80 (1969): 3. See a readerâs statement about this text in the column ââCzytelnicy piszÄ â: Kilka sÅów prawdyâ [âReaders Are Writingâ: A Few Words of Truth], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 355 (1969): 4.
Klugman shows that he completely failed to understand not only the needs of the new olim, but even the identities of the Jewish emigrants from Poland after 1967. Not many emigrants who arrived in Israel after 1967, a vast majority of whom were members of the intelligentsia, were attracted by the image of the tanned sabra. A. Klugman, âO absorpcji â tak i inaczej: Opowiadanie dla watikaâ [On the Topic of Absorption â One Way or Another: A Story for a Vatik], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 173 (1969): 3. Or, in a similar style, see Klugman, âW dniu ÅwiÄtaâ [On a Holiday], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 109 (1970): 3.
Rostal, âPrzyjÄcie, ale nie absorpcja,â 3.
L. Eliaw, âJak przyjÄto pierwszych olim po Wojnie WyzwoleÅczej?â [How Were the First Olim Accepted after the War of Independence?], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 159 (1969): 3.
Knesset Archives in Jerusalem (hereinafter: kaj), minutes of Meeting 290, Sixth Knesset, 3 June 1968.
âKonflikty i kompleksyâ [Conflicts and Complexes], Nowiny Izraelskie, no. 100 (1957): 4; âGÅos nowych olim: Dlaczego byÅem rozgoryczony?â [The Voice of the New Olim: Why Was I Bitter?], Nowiny Izraelskie, no. 4 (1958), page number illegible; A. Czerski, âAlija i oblicze paÅstwaâ [Aliyah and the Face of the State], Kurier Powszechny, no. 15 (1958): 2.
Grabowska, âMiedzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 98.
L. Eliaw, âJak przyjÄto pierwszych olim po Wojnie WyzwoleÅczej?,â 3; Joffe, H. âWÄ tpliwoÅci i nadzieje: Centrum absorpcji w Nazarecieâ [Doubts and Hopes: The Absorption Center in Nazareth], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 110 (1969): 5.
Zeidel, âAlija dźwigniÄ gospodarki,â 3; Rostal, âÅwiÄ teczny apel,â 3.
SÅucki, âInteligencka absorpcja,â 4.
In one of his articles, Aleksander Klugman presented himself as a self-created vatik, emphasizing his perseverance and patience: âIn April 1968, I met a young man who had just arrived from Poland after being expelled from there by the wave of March events. âI doubt you expect from me a declaration of love for Israel,â he said, in order to try to provoke me. [â¦] And seeing that he was unable to shock us, the vatikim who had been living in Israel for a dozen or so years, he tried some stronger arguments.â Klugman, âW dniu ÅwiÄta,â 3.
A. SÅucki, âKompleks reszty Åwiataâ [The Rest of the Worldâs Complex], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 86 (1969): 4.
See âRit, Wykwit obÅudyâ [Rit, The Essence of Hypocrisy], Nowiny Izraelskie, no. 64 (1958): 3; J. Markiewicz, ââObroÅcaâ dezercji i tchórzostwa [A âDefenderâ of Desertion and Cowardice], Nowiny Izraelskie, no. 83 (1958): 3.
Polish: a colloquial term for a mischief-maker.
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 101. For an article on a similar subject, see Grabowska, âKiedy przestajesz spaÄ na âsochnutowychâ Åóżkachâ [When You Stop Sleeping on Sochnut Beds], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 221 (1969): 6.
Joffe, âWÄ tpliwoÅci i nadzieje,â 5.
H. Dankowicz, âNowy Åadâ [A New Order], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 68 (1969): 5.
âJeszcze o nowej emigracji w Izraelu,â 175.
Dariusz Stola enumerates among the March emigrants 520 former officials of the central state administration, 176 former employees of the Ministry of the Interior and the Ministry of Public Security, 12 of whom had worked as heads of departments or directors of regional security offices, and 28 had held positions in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Out of 998 pensioner-emigrants, as many as 204 had received special pensions for their service to the Polish Peopleâs Republic before leaving the country. Stola, âKraj bez wyjÅcia?,â 222.
J. Schatz, âÅwiat mentalnoÅci i ÅwiadomoÅci komunistów polsko-żydowskich â szkic portretuâ [The World of Polish-Jewish Communistsâ Mentality and Awareness â A Sketched Portrait], in Berendt, SpoÅecznoÅÄ Å¼ydowska w PRL, 56â65.
kaj, minutes of a Knesset Meeting, 5 December 1949, 224â25; kaj, report from Meeting 101 of the Knesset, 2 April 1950, 376; G. Golan, Yom Kippur and After: The Soviet Union and the Middle East Crisis (London, 1977), 1â20.
Grabowska, âRaj utracony â raj odzyskany,â 121; kaj, minutes from Meeting 274 of the Sixth Knesset, 27 March 1968.
See J. Feldman, Above the Death Pits, beneath the Flag: Youth Voyages to Poland and the Performance of Israeli National Identity (New York, 2008); J. Leociak, Tekst wobec ZagÅady (O relacjach z getta warszawskiego) [Text on the Holocaust (Reports from the Warsaw Ghetto)] (WrocÅaw, 1997), 108, 242â91.
The articles written by journalists from the GomuÅka Aliyah who became involved with the newspapers published by Mapai lacked anti-communist statements immediately after their arrival in Israel. This was determined by the circumstances â the need for Israel to maintain positive, appropriate relations with Poland, which would encourage the communist authorities to issue exit permits to Jews still remaining in the Polish Peopleâs Republic. At least, this is how the Israeli authorities perceived the situation at the time. The cessation of diplomatic relations between the two countries freed the desire for a public demonstration of aversion towards the communist government in Poland, especially among those who had once been associated with the system. Thus in Nowiny-Kurier there was an outpouring of critical texts all in the same tone, containing a similar set of arguments and written according to the same formula. They began by revealing the fiction of the communist system, emphasizing the fiasco of the so-called Jewish question; then for those who would be prone to believing in the stability of the Moscow power center and its network of influence, the texts demonstrated its impermanence, or at least the serious crisis and the diminishing effectiveness of Soviet politics. It was propaganda directed at those who still felt resentment towards communism and wanted to foster its growth in Israel. H. Dankowicz, âPÅody przyjaźniâ [Embryos of Friendship], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 74 (1969): 5. On the other hand, the postcommunists of Nowiny-Kurier tried to confer a dimension of misguidance and error onto their involvement in communism. The term żydokomuna [âJudeo-communismâ â a pejorative term for a Jewish-communist conspiracy â S.G.], used by a journalist who wrote for Haaretz, outraged Klugman, who preferred to see involvement in communism differently, only in the context of the underprivileged situation of Jews. The Haaretz journalistâs analysis, conducted beyond the narrow perspective of one national group, removed this entire layer of motivation, which could only be reduced to confusion, until one appropriate ideology â Zionism â was found. Then they became zealous followers of a new idea, sometimes even radical nationalism. A. Klugman, âCzy machnÄ Ä rÄkÄ na Å»ydów polskich?â [Should We Wave at the Polish Jews?], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 339 (1969): 7. Ostracism of communism was so strong in Israel that references were made to it as being alien and harmful, as can be seen in the title of one of the articles: âOd âvolksdeutschaâ do komunistyâ [From Volksdeutsche to Communist], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 68 (1969): 14.
Grabowska, âMiÄdzy WisÅÄ a Jordanem,â 108.
H. Dankowicz, âOdwilż z myszkÄ â [A Thaw with a Mouse], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 80 (1969): 5; Dankowicz, âW mieÅcie ÅwiateÅâ [In the City of Lights], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 167 (1969): 5.
M. Tiger, âSonia,â Nowiny-Kurier, no. 32 (1970): 3; A. Czerski, âNiemiecki pielgrzymâ [A German Pilgrim], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 68 (1969): 9; A. Klugman, âWartoÅÄ sÅów i milczeniaâ [The Value of Words and Silence], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 68 (1969): 4; A. Czerski, âJankel ⦠Janek ⦠Jacek,â Nowiny-Kurier, no. 92 (1969): 14; Czerski, âW poszukiwaniu zÅudnego szczÄÅciaâ [In Search of Illusory Happiness â¦], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 104 (1969): 4; Czerski, âZa waszÄ i naszÄ wolnoÅÄâ [For Your and Our Freedom], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 167 (1969): 9; Czerski, âCzerwony antysocjalizmâ [Red Antisocialism], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 102 (1970): 8; Czerski, âToronto ⦠Tarnów ⦠Tel Awiwâ [Toronto ⦠Tarnów ⦠Tel Aviv], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 125 (1970): 8; Czerski, âRezerwistaâ [The Reservist], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 137 (1970): 4; Czerski, âPierwsze kroki na izraelskiej ziemiâ [First Steps on Israeli Soil], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 160 (1970): 11.
Klugmanâs attempts to explore the Polish subject in Nowiny-Kurier was attributed by the Polish secret services to his efforts to obtain employment as a journalist for Radio Free Europe or to strengthen his ties with Kultura (I will mention, for example, Klugmanâs initiatives to establish contact, sometimes through provocative articles). This seems to confirm the conclusion made by the secret services about Klugmanâs efforts to become a correspondent: âA[leksander] Klugman has for a long time made enormous efforts to become a potential candidate for the most important specialist in Polish affairs. He has sought favor everywhere, both in Israelâs intelligence services and the representatives of the Federal Republic of Germany, and has also sought support in the management of the Polish section of Radio Free Europe in Munich. [â¦] Competition and other contendersâ fears for their own positions thwarted these intentions.â ainr, file 0365/41/5, âInformacja dot. wspóÅdziaÅania organizacji syjonistycznych z podstawowymi oÅrodkami dywersji â Radio Free Europe i âKulturyââ [Information on Cooperation between Zionist organizations and Basic Sabotage Centers â Radio Free Europe and Kultura], 21 July 1969, cards 304â5. Klugmanâs articles were written according to a certain pattern in which he exploited the so-called Polish problem on every possible occasion, despite indicating different topics with his titles. For example, an article might refer to Charles de Gaulleâs political agenda, but its content would mostly concern the Polish theme (through the comparisons and analogies used, both contemporary and those referring to the past), or it was simply a pretext for taking up the same theme once again â Polish anti-Semitism, communism, and nationalism. See, for example, A. Klugman, âZniesÅawienie de Gaulleâaâ [The Defamation of de Gaulle], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 80 (1969): 4; Klugman, âIzrael spaÄ im nie daje.â [Israel Doesnât Let Them Sleep], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 193 (1969): 3; See K. Adamczyk, DoÅwiadczenia polsko-żydowskie w literaturze emigracyjnej (1939â1980) [Polish-Jewish Experiences in Ãmigré Literature (1939â1980)] (Kraków, 2008); Adamczyk, âInna pamiÄÄ: Å»ydzi z âNowin â Kurieraââ [A Different Memory: Jews of Nowiny-Kurier], in Pisarze polsko-żydowscy XX wieku: Przybliżenia [Polish-Jewish Writers of the Twentieth Century: A Closer Look], ed. M. DÄ browski and A. Molisak (Warsaw, 2006), 239â55.
Aleksander Klugman wrote: âFrom a geographical point of view, we live in the Levant. We can regard ourselves as 100% European, and we can gaze from the heights of our Europeanness with a smile of indulgence at our neighbors around us â but the incontestable and undeniable fact remains that at least geographically we are part of the Levant world. We often hear fine utterances about the great role that awaits us as a bridgehead for progress in the backward East, as a European island in the sea of Levantinism. For Levant is not only a geographical concept; it is above all a symbol of stagnation and backwardness, and the corresponding customs. In many ways, these customs remind us of the animal world â position and strength are determined by the sharpness of the fangs.â
Klugman, âInwazja lewantyzmuâ [The Invasion of Levantism], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 267 (1961): 3.
Klugman, âPióro do wynajÄcia: O ârachunku sumieniaâ podszytym tysiÄ czkamiâ [A Pen for Rent: âSoul-Searchingâ Lined with Thousands], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 191 (1971): 5, 10.
Alina Grabowskaâs choice of a place to emigrate depended on whether there were Polish émigré press publications. She first considered going to Canada; then, after receiving a job offer from Radio Free Europe, she and her husband left for Munich. In a letter to Giedroyc she wrote, âWell, my husband and I decided to leave Israel and emigrate to Canada. The reasons are not of a material nature because, as they, say âwe are set upâ; my husband and I both work, and we have never encountered any unpleasant situations connected to my husbandâs ancestry [Leszek Perth was not Jewish â E. K.]. But, as I wrote in my article that you published, you cannot be a âpolitical immigrantâ in Israel. We do not like the spiritual climate of the country, but of course we are full of admiration for the Israelis in many respects.â ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 4 January 1970.
Klugman, âPióro do wynajÄcia,â 5, 10; âList Aliny Grabowskiej, odpowiedź na artykuÅ Klugmana z października 1971â [A Letter from Alina Grabowska in Response to an Article by Klugman in October 1971] (in the column âListy do redakcjiâ [Letters to the Editor]), Kultura, nos. 1â2 (1972): 234â35; ali, letter from Aleksander Klugman to Jerzy Giedroyc, 29 January 1972.
Klugman, âO absorpcji â tak i inaczejâ; Klugman, âW dniu ÅwiÄta,â 3.
A. Tosin [A. Klugman], âRewolucja przemysÅowa?â [An Industrial Revolution?], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 132 (1970): 3.
A. Tosin [A. Klugman], âMiÄdzy jednym a drugim wybuchem miny i granatuâ [Between the Explosions of Mines and Grenades], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 130 (1970): 3; Tosin [Klugman], âInwestycja, której na imiÄ pokójâ [An Investment Named Peace], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 135 (1970): 3.
Bauman, Nigdzie na ziemi, 28; E. Etzioni-Halevy, âPatterns of Conflict Generation and Conflict âAbsorptionâ: The Cases of Israeli Labor and Ethnic Conflicts,â in Studies of Israeli Society, vol. 1: Migration, Ethnicity and Community, ed. E. Krausz (New Brunswick, 1980), 231â53.
A. Klugman, âCo âKulturaâ baÅa siÄ wydrukowaÄ: O antysemityźmie Polaków i jego źródÅach (artykuÅ skonfiskowany przez censure przeciwników cenzury)â [What Kultura Was Afraid to Print: On the Anti-Semitism of Poles and Its Sources (An Article Censored by Opponents of Censorship)] (with a postscript for Israeli readers), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 101 (1967): 4, 14. In the next issue of Nowiny-Kurier, Prof. Artur Ber who emigrated from Poland in the GomuÅka Aliyah (ainr, msw ii, file 10884, data on the Jewish population in the years 1946â1964, card 16), asked Klugman, âWhat was the purpose of publishing this one-sided and extremely negative disquisition?â A. Ber, âNie wolno generalizowaÄ: W Ålad za artykuÅem o antysemityźmie Polakówâ [We Cannot Generalize: A Follow-Up to the Article on Polish Anti-Semitism], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 117 (1967): 3; A. Klugman, âSmutna odpowiedźâ [A Sad Response], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 117 (1967): 3; Klugman, âCzy można dyskutowaÄ bez worka?â [Is It Possible to Have a Discussion Without a bag?], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 294 (1970), 5; Klugman, âSpojrzenie wstecz,â 72â78; T. Klugman and A. Klugman, â⦠A droga wiodÅa przez Åódźâ [⦠And the Road Led through Åódź] (Åódź, 2004), 69â76.
In his article Å»ydzi siÄ zawsze pchajÄ â¦ [Jews Are Always Pushy â¦], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 214 (1970), Klugman attempted to provoke a reaction from the community in London connected to WiadomoÅci by including the following request: âP.S. I would be very happy if the Polish émigré press would try to familiarize their readers with this position, for discussion must be a dialogue, not a monologue. Poles living abroad will surely be interested in the views of a Jew born in Poland on the topic of anti-Semitism and the fight against itâ (5). Åobodowskiâs response was commented on, without a reprint, in the next issue of Nowiny-Kurier: âUnlike the editorial team of WiadomoÅci, which did not reprint Klugmanâs article â before we give the floor to polemicists who will want to argue with Åobodowski, weâll reprint his article.â A person who wished to debate with Åobodowski in future issues was Klugman, whom Åobodowski did not allow to participate in the discussion. âWokóŠdyskusji na temat antysemityzmuâ [About the Debate on Anti-Semitism] (in the column âOd redakcjiâ [From the Editors]), Nowiny-Kurier, no. 288 (1970): 7.
A. Klugman, âKÅamstwo jest broniÄ sÅabychâ [Lying Is a Weapon of the Weak], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 128 (1969): 4. For the entire text, see Klugman, âÅwieckie myÅli o ÅwiÄtoÅciâ [Secular Thoughts About Holiness], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 144 (1969): 4.
Józef Åobodowski (1909â1988) was a poet, prose writer, columnist, and translator. He was born in Purwiszki (Sejny County). He wrote for various publications before World War ii, including Droga [The Road], Kamena [Nymph], MyÅl Polska [Polish Thought], Biuletyn Polsko-UkraiÅski [The Polish-Ukrainian Bulletin], Skamander and WiadomoÅci Literackie [Literary News]. He settled in 1943 in Madrid, where he wrote for Kultura and WiadomoÅci Literackie. See also B. Klimaszewski, ed., MaÅy sÅownik pisarzy polskich na obczyźnie (1939â1980) [A Small Dictionary of Polish Ãmigré Writers (1939â1980)] (Warsaw, 1992), 210; T. KÅak, âJózef Åobodowski: Na drogach Don Kichota; Emigracyjna twórczoÅÄ Józefa Åobodowskiegoâ [Józef Åobodowski: On the Roads of Don Quixote; The Ãmigré Works of Józef Åobodowski], in Pisarze emigracyjni: Sylwetki [Ãmigré Writers: Profiles], ed. B. Klimaszewski and W. LigÄza (Kraków, 1993), Zeszyty Naukowe Uniwersytetu JagielloÅskiego: Prace Polonijne [Academic Papers of the Jagiellonian University: Works of the Polish Diaspora], folder 18, 93â112.
To sum up, Åobodowski wrote: âEven those who have been most severely harmed are not always so completely, unconditionally right. Even when they are right, they might lose credibility as a result of their excessive demands. Personally, I deny this kind of privilege to Jews, Poles, and everyone else. And it is precisely the intelligent ones such as Mr. Klugman who expect to have the ultimate privilege of always being right. But do you know what vexes and annoys me the most? Mr. Brown vexes me when he considers the continent of Europe to be a secondary addition to England. [â¦] So, Iâm also vexed by Mr. Klugman, not because heâs Jewish, but because he has turned his Jewishness into a universal yardstick and condemns everything that doesnât fit into it as anti-Semitism. In other words, he is once again demanding maximum privilege. Thereâs some unmistakable blackmail inherent in this: agree with me, because if not, Iâll call you a racist. He stated at the beginning of his article that the increase of âJewish subject matterâ in the Polish-language émigré press is a direct result of âa guilty conscience.â And so, Polish immigrants feel responsible for the regimeâs âanti-Zionistâ policies. In a noble effusion, Kazimierz WierzyÅski wrote, âA Pole who is ashamed â¦â You can be ashamed that people like GomuÅka rule Poland, but that doesnât mean responsibility must be shared for their actions. And Iâm ashamed of Mr. Klugmanâs article, but he wonât even claim responsibility for it himself. I have no âguilty conscienceâ! Whoever condemns evil and opposes it every step of the way has a clear conscience. There are Jews â Mr. Klugman is one of them â who want to treat Poles not on the level of a peaceful exchange of opinions, but from a prosecutorâs seat. Well, I do not wish to sit on the defendantsâ bench, neither on my own behalf nor in general. Since the subject of conscience has come up, to examine it closely â yes, of course; however, always on condition that itâll be a mutual examination. [â¦] It only remains for me to add that Iâve put Mr. Klugman in âthe Judas Bagâ not as a Jew, for that would be to his detriment, but as an overly impassioned polemicist, which constitutes a fair repression. Sir, this is not anti-Semitism â it is anti-Klugmanism.â
J. Åobodowski, âWorek Judaszów: Pan Klugman oskarżaâ [The Judas Bag: Mr. Klugman Makes Accusations], WiadomoÅci, no. 1283 (1970), reprinted in Nowiny-Kurier, no. 288 (1970): 7 (in response to Klugman, âÅ»ydzi siÄ zawsze pchajÄ ,â 5).
Despite such assurances, after receiving a critical response from the community connected to Kultura, he undertook efforts in the following years to review books and publish articles. ali, Letters from Aleksander Klugman to Jerzy Giedroyc, e.g., from 13 November 1968, 13 June 1970, 8 April 1971, and 27 April 1973.
A. Grabowska, âAntysemityzm w kraju bez Å»ydówâ [Anti-Semitism in a Country without Jews], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 227 (1969): 8; Grabowska, âOpowieÅÄ o prawdziwym czÅowiekuâ [A Story About a Real Man], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 233 (1969): 7.
A. SÅucki, âMit litwackiâ [A Lithuanian Myth], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 251 (1969): 9; P. Horbaczewski, âGÅos Polaka, który siÄ nie wstydziâ [The Voice of a Pole Who Is Not Ashamed of Himself], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 251 (1969): 9; M. Lipszyc, âW przedwojennej Polsce nie byÅo takiego antysemityzmu jak dziÅâ [In Prewar Poland There Wasnât as Much Anti-Semitism as Today], Nowiny-Kurier, no. 257 (1969): 9.
ali, letter from Jerzy Giedroyc to Kamila Halpern-ChyliÅska, 7 February 1970.
Klugman, âSpojrzenie wstecz,â 57.
ali, letter from Alina Grabowska to Jerzy Giedroyc, 8 December 1970.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 48.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 38.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 39.
ChyliÅska, âEmigracja polska po 1967,â 37.