How is the idea of Jewish national identity portrayed in Meir Shalev's "The Blue Mountain"?

Authors Avatar

How is the idea of Jewish national identity portrayed in Meir Shalev’s “The Blue Mountain”?

In order to answer this question effectively, it is first necessary to define what I mean by the term “Jewish national identity”. This implies the bond between the Jewish people based on religion and race that has always existed but which in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries became focused on territorial acquisition.  

 

The Blue Mountain is a fictional depiction of the lives of second aliyah immigrants to Palestine. This was the wave of immigration from Russia that took place between 1904-14. The novel is based on a group of founding fathers of a village in the Valley of Jezreel. This central point of focus is important because it shows the birth of a community and thus is comparable to the birth of the state of Israel. Although the scope of the novel is very small, it seems to be a metaphor for Jewish nationhood and identity in general. The themes that are deployed are heavily connected to this central idea of the nation. Nature, community and the importance of manual work are recurring ideas. Shalev paints a very sarcastic picture of nation building through the satirical exploits of his characters. It seems he is trying to depict a more human side to the founders and to show that they are not perfect, angelic figures. However, despite their idiosyncrasies they are a people committed to their land and the idea of community.

The most seemingly out of place theme in the novel is that of death. Baruch, the protagonist, establishes a graveyard enterprise after his Grandfather, Ya’akov Mirkin’s, death. Whereas the nation is often seen as something rising, alive and dynamic, death in contrast is seen as the ultimate end. It is a negative phenomenon. However, in this novel the idea of death is relevant to the theme of nation because it raises the question, why are people so eager to be buried in this land? The answer is perhaps that in death one can feel like they finally belong somewhere. From never having a homeland at least one can feel at home in death. Some people thought being buried in Palestine was salvation for the soul; however, Pinness the schoolteacher refutes this theory. ““We, however, do not believe in the resurrection of the dead and ritual atonement. Our atonement is the tiling of the soil rather than the quarrying of graves…Our sin will be purged by hard work””.1 With the issue of who is fit to be buried in Palestine there is a conflict between two ideas. The first is that all Jews belong to this “Promised Land” and the second is that one can only earn the right to belong to the land if one does the hard work that is required. The author explores this contentious issue through the issue of burial. Shalev highlights all the main aspects of nationalism and nation building within the context of this village, and as a result he tries to portray failings within Jewish nationalism, especially in the strong comparison between ideals and practicality.         

According to Zeev Sternhell, collective identity is a very important factor for the Jewish community. With the rise of ideas such as nationalism, liberalism and Marxism, Jews felt threatened that their existence as a separate entity was endangered. “Liberal individualism suddenly appeared as a real threat to the continued Jewish people’s existence as a homogenous and autonomous unit”.2 There were also other threats such as the physical aspects, anti-Semitism and world wars, however the most potent to Zionists was the threat to identity. According to Sternhell, David Ben Gurion, (1886- 1973) believed that Zionism was the answer to this potential loss of identity of the Jews. Eminent Jewish thinkers and activists campaigned to find a solution to this problem and the answer came in the form of establishing a homeland for the Jewish people. There was a need to save the Jews from the “danger of collective annihilation”.3 The stress on identity was however in a group dynamic rather than on a personal basis. Jews were regarded as a nation that had been displaced centuries ago and though they had been scattered all over the world, they still regarded themselves as a collective whole. “The individual was regarded as an organic part of the whole, and the whole took precedence over the individual”.4

In the Blue Mountain, the reader is exposed to this idea of collective identity and community. Mirkin is part of a trio of young men and one woman who establish a community of farmers in Palestine. The fact that the community is placed before the individual is highlighted in this story by the marriage of convenience between Mirkin and Feyge. This is an arranged marriage that is thought to be beneficial for the future of the community, but Mirkin has emotional attachments elsewhere. This attachment creates tensions between him and his wife and the story implies that Feyge dies an immature death as a result of heartbreak. Her death creates further resentment towards Mirkin because some members of the community blame him for his wife’s demise. This raises the inevitable question, is the nation more important than the individual? After all it is a collection of individuals that make the nation and if they are discontented then this does not make for a healthy society. The type of selflessness shown by Mirkin and Feyge is supposed to be necessary for the greater cause, which is the dream of having one’s own nation, but it seems to ruin more lives in the process.

Sternhell argues that social concern was not a priority for the founders of Israel. The fundamental issue was the founding of a nation state and everything else was secondary. “No social consideration was allowed to stand in the way of national interest”.5 The founders followed the idea of nationalist socialism, where one was elevated to a higher status according to the sacrifices they made for Israel. “This form of socialism preached the organic unity of the nation and the mobilization of all classes of society for the achievement of national objectives. According to the theory, this process was to be led by natural elites, whose membership was determined not by class, origin, or educational qualifications but by sentiment, dedication, and a readiness to make sacrifices for all”.6 S. N. Eisenstadt also comments on the pioneer’s selflessness. “Common factors inherent in the “pioneer” type include first and foremost an element of social and personal self-sacrifice”.7 Mirkin and the founding fathers of the village of Jezreel fall into this category of “natural elites”.

Join now!

However, it was only a minority of Jews from the Diaspora  that came to Palestine and stayed there. This issue is very controversial in Jewish society because the founding fathers saw these deserters as traitors to the cause. Sternhell refers to those few that immigrated to Israel, “For this minute minority, a pioneering elite in all respects, Zionism was more than an attempt to save themselves or their possessions; it was a response to the degeneracy with which the processes of modernization threatened Jewish society”.8 The Blue Mountain also touches on the issue of those who did not make ...

This is a preview of the whole essay