Nine Jewish Necessities for A College Freshman

Well said. Especially the hummus :)

http://guthagogo.com

1. Israel was founded and settled mainly by Eastern Europeans. They wouldn't have known hummus if it whistled Dixie and gave them a blowjob.

2. Hummus has been enjoyed by Arab communities throughout the Levant for centuries.

3. Israelis have done their best to erase the traces of the hundreds of thousands they displaced-towns and villages renamed in Hebrew, etc.-and this attempt to appropriate a central feature of Arab cultural history is of a piece with those attempts.

4. Make you a deal-I will gladly foreswear any Arab claim to cholent if you will cease making the preposterous claim that hummus has any significant connection to a state that didn't even exist 60 years ago.

5. Sabra hummus, by the way, is for dilletantes and rubes. Terrible stuff.

..this has to be my all time fav accusation against Israeli’s. The stole our recipes!

Seriously, if you were interested in taking a look at the historical background of foods you will find that almost any food type has been used by many groups. And hummus is clearly enjoyed by both Arab and Jewish Israeli’s. I won't even diginify the rest of the accusations.

I loved the overall recommendations great job.

I'm all for great humus but whoever prepared the stuff in the photo went a bit crazy with the olive oil. It looks like the bowl was condemned to the Masters of the Universe Slime Pit. (if you are not an American male born between 1975 and 1983, you can learn all about the slime pit here: http://www.x-entertainment.com/articles/0731/ )

--Z

People take it seriously! In this issue of Gastronomica: the Journal of Food and Culture, there's an article about competing Israeli and Palestinian claims to another chick-pea-based food, the falafel. This conflict sprawls onto every imaginable battlefield, it's nuts. Or legumes, anyway. Ha!

I wouldn't be so dismissive and snarky about this issue. As cultural historians understand, there is more to a people's sense of self and identity than generals, politicians, philosophers et al. History is composed of all the details of everyday life.

If one takes it as a given that Israel was built on the backs of the Palestinians (that is, if one possesses a fully functioning cerebral cortex), and that the Arab history of Palestine was then deliberately effaced in the manner of colonialists everywhere (see Moshe Dayan's celebrated comments made at the Technion), it's no small potatoes (or chickpeas) that folks continue to dismiss the relevance of these efforts.

It's not really just about hummus, you see.

My fellow anonym,

Re 1: Israel was founded and settled partly by Eastern European Jews, members of a Middle Eastern diaspora. Members of their community had been returning to Israel for centuries -- distinctly Ashkenazi congregations in Israel date back to the 14th century, which is not too long after the Ashkenazi community split off altogether. Other members of their community had long had ongoing human and intellectual traffic with other parts of the diaspora in countries across North Africa and the Middle East such as, well, the Levant.

Of course, Israel was also founded and settled by Jews from other parts of the world. You seek to write their histories out of the picture. Perhaps you would like to stop.

2. Hummus has been enjoyed by Arab communities throughout the Levant for centuries. Also by all the other communities throughout the Levant for centuries. Jews, for instance.

3. The idea that hummis is "a central feature of Arab cultural history" is racist and incorrect. It is neither central to the Arabs, nor does it belong only to the Arabs. It was long enjoyed by all of the communities of the multicultural Middle East, an idea that seems anathema to you. And it was long spread far and wide as a result of the Ottoman empire -- cultures were not frozen in place and time till the 20th century, much as you appear to imagine otherwise.

As to different peoples borrowing culinary traditions from one another, don't even get me started. If you really want to talk about Levantine food as some autonomous authentic food that didn't borrow from aaaaanybody else, you might want to keep it to yourself, because you're unlikely to convince too many others. As to the idea that the dominant cultural community in any region is the only one who gets to claim a food enjoyed in that region, don't worry your pretty little head about cholent. I'm sure the Polish Slavs can claim the cholent over their Jewish neighbours, the Moroccan Arabs and Berbers can claim the dafina over their Jewish neighbours, and so on for all the slow-cooked stews of the Jewish world. Or, on the other hand, you can go for the *non* racist approach, in which multicultural areas actually share foods across communities. Who knew?

4. As to the preposterous claim that hummus has any significant connection to a state that didn't even exist 60 years ago, I suggest you visit said state, and see for yourself. (In other news, hummus apparently also has a significant connection to Lebanon, a state that didn't exist -- wait, until 1943. That was, what, 70 years ago? Your obsession with independence days befuddles.)

5. Sabra hummus, by the way, is indeed better than some brands, and worse than others, insofar as store-bought stuff. De gustibus non disputandum, so I suggest you tell us what mass-produced brand you prefer, if your goal is to contribute rather than throw stones.

First off top all of the anonymous posters...

Lest of all that we should feel the need to point out that there have been Jews living in Israel before there was an Arab population; secondly, it is not as if Hummus grows naturally in the environment like olives. It is something that exists from any number of influences.

Now, to the 2nd anonymous...you make an important and valid point regarding the formation of cultural history. Yet, you go under an entirely false assumption about the building of Israel.

Perhaps most importantly, however, is the idea that there was Arab cuisine before all others. Whereas in actuality foods like hummus and such are Assyrian and Turkish in etymology. But that is kind of the point. NO ONE can own cuisine. It is an entire amalgamation of influences, based on the naturally occurring ingredients that exist in any given landmass. Denying a Jewish/Israeli/Hebrew connection to such foods is not surprising given the posters above apparently do not believe there to be an actual Jewish connection to the land of Israel. I am guessing that my descendents who lived in Israel, as well as Morocco, Syria and the like, enjoyed hummus and other such similar foods just as much as I do today.

So it really is just about the hummus, you see.

I'm still waiting for someone to claim that Israelis give Palestinians AIDS in their hummus. Personally, I prefer tahini.

I once saw a bumper sticker that said, "Ein Aravim ein chummus." "If there are no Arabs there's no chummus."  Hilarious.  (This is a takeoff on the one that says "Ein Aravim ein piguyim" "If there are no Arabs there are no bombings.")

Anyway, it's funny that hummus is causing such controversy.  In my mind it's the most peaceful thing ever. 

Adam Shprintzen : "I am guessing that my descendents who lived in Israel, as well as Morocco, Syria and the like, enjoyed hummus and other such similar foods just as much as I do today."

I didn't know you had any descendants who live in Israel. Are you even married?

the reason Israelis cannot claim hummus as their own is because Ashkenazi Jews are not semitic, no matter how much they protest. The vast majority of Ashkenazim are descendants of European and Central Asian converts. Next we'll see the absurd spectacle of Jewcy's Irish-Korean Israeli Jew claiming that hummus is part of her patrimiony, though kimchi or Irish potato stew would be more accurate. So latkes and cholent is actually more Israeli food than hummus.

Besides, there is no mention of hummus in any pre-diaspora Jewish writings. Which means that hummus was developed in the middle-east after the diaspora. Now, Sephardic Jews might have some claim to hummus. But not Ashkenazi Israelis or American Jews.

Anon says, "As cultural historians understand, there is more to a people's sense of self and identity than generals, politicians, philosophers et al."

Perhaps. But the narcissism of small differences must end somewhere, and I'm drawing my line at garbanzo beans. A sense of self to which garbanzo beans are integral is just not acceptable.

I am so fertile that my descendents already existed in the past! No more posting at midnight after an entire day in a classroom...

Haha, umm, that would be antecedents.

This is such a pointless argument. No one has true ownership over a food. How could we ever really document or track something so complex? Chickpeas grow throughout the world, including in parts of Europe (near the Mediterranean); do you really think no one there ever thought to make it into a paste?

And you claim that Sephardic Jews could have claim to hummus, but not American? As if American Judaism transcends Ashkenazi and Sephardic identities? And what about people who are of mixed ancestry? Am I allowed to only partly claim hummus?

You bring up cholent, which actually in a way disproves your point; there are variations of cholent made by Moroccans, Bukharians, etc...

I think Anon has a point. For too long we've been taking food from other cultures, and passing it off as our own. The primary example: Chinese food.

Does anyone really associate Chinese food with China anymore? It's all wrapped up in Jewish Christmas rituals, along with going to the movies and getting killer discounts on those little multi-colored strings of lights.

Let China regain control of its culinary heritage! Let us surrender our claim to strange-flavored chicken, and won-ton soup. Surely this is one of the most vital aspects of our rocky relationship with our far eastern brethren. Although they're not from the Levant, so do they still qualify as siblings? Are they cousins instead? Either way, why can't Jews be satisfied with stews, extra-sweet wine and bubbe's brisket?

    Other commenters have not exhausted the cultural imperialist attitudes and religious triumphalism of the original post.  Tzedakah (which is just a fancy Hebrew word for charitable giving) boxes have been used by Christians, and by people of other religions, for centuries.  Collection plates were standard operating procedure in every Christian church long before the Jewish Catalog stimulated Jewish counterculturalists to decorate little cans and paste a Hebrew word on them.  (And yes, even long before Keren Kayemet distributed blue and white cans.)  Jews stole this important component of Christian practice.  And don't dismiss this as unimportant -- a religion's artifacts that are part of its belief and practice system are core consituents of what that religion _is_.

Not to interupt the whole hummus thing, but what's wrong with artscroll?

And if hummus is an Arab thing, why have I only found good hummus at the Greek restaurants?

I'll stand by my original comment. Hummus is not an Israeli dish.

To those of you who made the point that cuisines arise from a multiplicity of influences...well, yes, but this is a trivial insight. I'm not arguing that hummus emerged, like Athena, from the brow of some Ur-Arab. Is this the only way to understand a sentence like, "X is an (your ethnicity here) food"? Of course not. Each of you say things like this all the time, though presumably you all recognize the cultural voyages that have given rise to cuisine.

So it's perfectly legit to say that "X is a Y food", even though we all know that dishes have a multicultural pedigree. So much for the disquisitions on the Greeks et al.

My point was that hummus is indigenous to the broader Levant. While the relatively few Jews in the modern Levant enjoyed its succulence along with their neighbors, the center of Jewish culture had for most of modernity shifted to the West. It was these Western Jews who, despite the claims of the prolix commenter above, provided the ideology, political power and wealth to found Israel. Is it controversial to claim that Israel is a Middle-Eastern country only in terms of geography, that its dominant culture is primarily Western?

Despite the best efforts of the wits above to cast this as a variant of, e.g., the squabble between two towns in Iowa over who invented the corn dog, more is at stake here. None of the posters acknowledged the most crucial feature of my argument-the context of the displacement of 800,000 people and the ongoing, relentless effort on the part of Israel to vanish them, their society, their peoplehood. As Dayan said, towns were obliterated, names changed, etc-standard operating procedure for conquerors. So what might seem an excrescence of silly nationalism is nothing of the sort; it's a refusal to see another piece of one's cultural patrimony be appropriated.

As I said, it's not really just about hummus.

Why does a Jewish student going to college in North America need hummus or an Israeli flag? Can you be fully Jewish only if you identify completely with Israel? I have Jewish friends who bristle if I call them Israeli. According to them, they are Jewish and American, and Israel has nothing to do with their identity, though they might be interested in visiting that country as much as any other tourist destination. They certainly would not be caught dead with an Israeli flag. That's when this whole dual loyalty thing arises.

"That's when this whole dual loyalty thing arises." Yes, yes it is. It's like the Irish-Americans, with their tricolors and sappy tales about the evil English. Or the Arab-Americans. Speaking their Arabic and eating their hummus. Who exactly are they loyal to? Who would they support if the chips were really down? You just can't ignore this dual loyalty thing.

This dual-loyalty thing must end!

And I think that we have to start with CDs decorated with the Argentinian flag that hang down from rearview mirrors.

Oh for the love of God--if you hate Israel then obviously don't bring an Israeli flag with you to Israel.  The vast majority of my friends are Zionists and have at least some connection to Israel.  In an age when contention between Israeli and Palestinian activists is on the rise, especially on college compuses, I think it's nice to have something that says you have some allegiance to the Jewish state.  It doesn't have to mean anything other than that, though of course for many people the love for Israel is much stronger than that. 

As for the hummus--I don't really care who invented hummus.  I like it.  Every Israeli I've ever met loves it, and I think the best hummus in the world is found in Israel, so to me it's Jewish.  If, to you, it's an oppressive food that simply serves as a reminder of Zionist aggression, then so be it.  Leave your hummus at home.  If you can make yerushalmi kugel in your dorm room, I encourage you to do so.    

"I think the best hummus in the world is found in Israel, so to me it's Jewish."

Interesting. And you think this because you've tried the tasty dip in Lebanon? Syria? How 'bout Ramallah? No? Egypt? Jordan? Or are you comparing Israeli hummus to US supermarket swill?

I know I'm in the minority on this issue, but I've had plenty of "Arab-made" hummus including in Jordan, Egypt, Ramallah, Nablus, Israeli-Arab restaurants in Haifa, et cetera, and overall I prefer the hummus in Israeli Jewish restaurants. I have a pretty vulgar palate, so maybe the Israeli Jews just dump more tahini in it or something, but there you go.

Joey-

Bet you there's some Abdul or Yasser back in the kitchen while Menachem's taking care of the front of the house.
A similar situation is known to be widespread in Israeli Chinese restaurants. Asian guy at the stove. They call him the Shabbas Soy.

"Bet you there's some Abdul or Yasser back in the kitchen while Menachem's taking care of the front of the house."

That's a possibility, yes. 

someone is actually questioning Tamar's personal preference and palate.

Clearly it is because her Zionist tastebuds are occupying the parts of her tounge that would appreciate hummus ful.

Adam-

Do you mean to say that questioning someone's taste is somehow beyond the pale?
While there can be no doubting that Tamar does prefer Israeli hummus (she is the final authority on her preferences, as are we all), it's entirely permissible to question what this may say about her palate.
Some people prefer Celine Dion to Billie Holiday. Is that the end of the story? Or can the musically literate say something interesting about what a preference for the bombastic Canadienne entails?

Certainly, we would agree--between you and I--of the better quality of Billie Holiday's voice. Further, in a historical sense we could also use any amount of evidence to illustrate how Billie Holiday is a far more important figure than Celine Dion. Yet, could I ever argue with someone's personal choice if he/she prefered Celine Dion? Or think that there is any larger implication about that person's character or choice? Now if that choice was driven because, say, someone would never listen to an African-American singer, then yes it would say something larger. Based purely on aesthetics (or taste, in the hummous instance), I really don't think so.

Ok, I will willingly admit I would snicker at someone's choice of Celine. Yet even in that snicker is certainly something kind of elitist. I suppose my point is thus; music, food, art and the like are all entirely subjective. I don't think there really can be an objective truth or quality about Mingus, Incubus or hummous. Umm, sorry I was really stretching for alliteration there. Anyway, so yes I would say that "taste" in and of itself is beyond the pale. On the other hand, larger political and social choices that are reflected by choices en mass, are certainly important to look at for their implications.

"Yet, could I ever argue with someone's personal choice if he/she prefered Celine Dion? "

No, not with their personal choice. As I said, each of us is the final authority on what he/she likes. That is, you can't say, "No, you do not prefer Celine Dion". My question is whether or not there is anything interesting to be said over differences in taste, or must the conversation stop as soon as someone says, "I like X". Put another way, is there such a thing as expertise in aesthetic questions?

I say there is. I believe that concepts such as "an educated palate", "musical literacy", "good taste" et al are substantive ones, and we'd be throwing out a great deal if we jettison them.

I think this is clear when we look at the e.g. of a child's preference for Lucky Charms over, say, a fresh croissant. Do we really want to say that a taste for the French triumph and for the leprechaun-endorsed chemical kibble are equivalent in any interesting way? There's no doubt that the kid may really prefer the sweetened styrofoam, but don't we want to retain concepts like "developed palate", et al? Don't we want to say that, to a normally functioning palate, the one is uni-dimensional, overly sweetened, tasting of chemicals?

In fact, I'd say that taking your point of view would simply eliminate an entire level of conversation, to no one's benefit. Really, all you could say would be "I like this" or "This sucks". No more music criticism, no more restaurant reviews, etc.

And I don't think that snickering at a Celine fan is elitist. Well, maybe snickering would be, but not asserting that there are musically interesting truths that differentiate Celine from Billie.

It may also be useful to distinguish liking from appreciating. I am phistine enough to prefer watching a George Romero zombie movie to a Bergman film. I know that Ingmar is an infinitely superior craftsman or artist compared to George. In some sense, I know I'm wrong to prefer Romero, but there you are. I would never say, though, that Romero is a greater filmmaker. Ingmar is. I just don't like him. So perhaps the ability to distinguish one's preferences from normative issues is important to this discussion.

That said, Arab hummus rules.

I agree, I think that distinguishing between preferences and normative values (or aesthetics in a way) is somewhat vital to this discussion (which I love that it has gone from hummous to zombie flicks, two things I certainly love). Yet, there is even something more important beyond elitism in these issue regarding aesthetics, culture (popular and otherwise) and taste. I would actually dare say that Romero's contributions to cinema are perhaps more important than Ingmar Bergman, that finding a way to effectively present vitally important political cinema, yet also make it accessible to the masses trumps the oft-esocteric nature of Bergman. This is in a purely historical sense I realize, and in that the discussion transcends taste (I think that maybe I just have a problem with using the term taste; it seems to imply to me a choice based purely on aesthetics, tonality, flavor, etc...). Certainly it is not my intent to negate the importance of critique; if anything I believe that more is needed in all realms.  That said, I don't think one can ultimately make a moral judgement regarding the implications of Lucky Charms (traiyf! sorry, couldn't resist) versus filet mignon, outside of perhaps from a nutritional standpoint. Well, moral too, but in its production not its flavors. Those things that we are likely to belittle as being trashy, low-class, etc...(say like talk shows) also tell us a lot about the world in which we live. And often belittling such things is just snobbery. Why do we accept boxing as part of high culture (and people show up in tuxedos and dresses to watch it) yet belittle something like wrestling. Wow, how did I get onto this? Not a defense of wrestling, just something to consider.

I equally enjoy Arab and Jewish-style hummous, precisely because of its differences. As well as Greek, Persian and the like. And that is based purely on physiological reactions, not on any sense of a developed or stunted palate.

Fellow anon -- that's your big argument? That the only real Jewish food is European food, because the centre of the Jewish world had "shifted" to "the West"?

Centre of your Jewish world, anyway. Out here in the sticks, my Moroccan ancestors (who never ate hummus, by the way; hummus was bigger out east, and all over the Ottoman lands, really) would respectfully disagree. So would the Polish and Russian rabbis with whom my rabbi great-grandfather kept up a correspendence (in, of course, Hebrew).

As to hummus being "indigenous" to the Levant ... well, what Adam said. It was indigenous to a highly multicultural area and to the travelling and diasporic communities located in it. Who were influenced by recipes from abroad. Who took food back abroad all over again. And so on and so forth. Gawd, is there any food in the Levant which isn't influenced by what you would apparently call "foreign" influences? (Short answer: no. See also red-haired Samaritans, blue-eyed Palestinians, etc.)