LETTERS T o THE EDITORS: Bernard Choseed in his "Categorizing Soviet Yiddish Writers" (Slavic Review, March 1968) states that "Sovetish Heimland gave material proof diat the overwhelming majority of established Soviet Yiddish writers who had flourished dirough 1948 had survived the holocaust" (p. 104). Unfortunately it is not true. Mr. Choseed quotes correctly diat Sovetish Heimland in its very first issue published a list of 111 writers who would regularly participate in the journal. However, there were in the Soviet Union in 1941, before die outbreak of the Soviet-German war, nearly 800 Yiddish writers, journalists, researchers, scholars, and translators. About fifty writers fell on the various battlefields or died from war wounds. We will assume that one hundred died a natural death during the war years, and the years following the war. Still there were about 650 Yiddish writers at the end of 1948 when die liquidation of Yiddish culture began. At that time most of diese writers were arrested. About thirty writers, die most creative and most prominent, were executed in August 1952. Since about 111 writers were listed in the Moscow Yiddish journal, we assume diat only diese survived die holocaust, aldiough diey were in die concentration camps. Subtracting from die original figure of 800 (I have all their names) diose who died a natural deadi (maximum 100), diose who were executed in August 1952 (30), those who are listed in Sovetish Heimland (111), diere are still missing more dian 500 writers. We can dierefore assume diat diey died in various camps. As for Tsodek Dolgopolski—he was arrested during die purges of 1936-38, but evidently he was released. Since his books appeared in Russian during the holocaust, it is clear diat he was not among diose arrested during 1948-52. I n Sovetish Heim- land, No. 4, 1964, diere is a note that he died on July 16, 1959. Since he could not publish anydiing in Yiddish during the "dark period," he published in Russian. T h e note in Sovetish Heimland lists his Yiddish books, but does not mention any Russian works. Apparently the two books diat Bernard Choseed lists by Dolgopolski diat were published in Russian in 1955 and 1959 were translated from die Yiddish, either from die manuscript or from a book previously published in Yiddish. T h e book diat Choseed mentions, Na beregakh Sylvy, is ap- parently a translation from his Yiddish book Af Der Linker Zeit. As for Emmanuil Kazakevitch—it is clear diat since he knew Russian very well, he drifted into Russian literature because it provided greater opportunities than Yiddish literature. But die fact that he himself translated his novel Zvezda into Yid- dish shows that he did not abandon Yiddish literature. April 16,1968 ELIAS SCHULMAN Editor, Der Wecker T o THE EDITORS: Permit me to comment on diat part of William W. Brickman's review of Religion and the Search for New Ideals in the USSR that discusses the article by Hans Lamm on Soviet Jews and Judaism (Slavic Review, March 1968, pages 172-73). Though at first I shared Mr. Brickman's feeling that it "has little to offer on religion and is but vaguely related to die dieme of die book," I have since had reason to change my mind. Lamm's first paragraph begins, "It seems necessary to begin by clarifying die LETTERS 507 concept ' J e w s » ' " a n d ends, "While we need not enter into this discussion [of what and who Jews are] we must still determine how the term 'Jews' is applied in die Soviet U n i o n " (p. 102). If what follows seems sterile, it is because religious activities, cultural life, national life, evidence of anti-Semitism, international relations, sup- pression of culture, reactions to Soviet policy toward Judaism and Jewish life, and the attitude of Soviet Jewry (largely unknown) are discussed, as Brickman notes, from secondary sources. But this is not Hans Lamm's fault. As a student both of Soviet nationality policy and of religious sectarianism in Russia, I have been scour- ing Soviet booklists for some years for references to Jews in the Soviet Union be- cause my two areas of interest are really rather closely connected (just how closely would make an article by itself). I have in hand diree books diat contain references to the Russian Jews: M. Shakhnovich's Zakat iudeiskoi religii (Leningrad, 1965), which is a historical survey of Judaism as a religion in world history, prefaced by a few piquant details about Jews in the Soviet Union ("In 1961, 7,623 Jews were elected as deputies to local or- gans of power.") and followed by a short section on the extinction of belief in God. This section does at least tell us (p. 223) that if we could get, for example, Cherkasskaia pravda, we might read how a seventy-year-old woman broke with re- ligion, the interesting part being that she had been a member of the synagogue's ruling board (dvadtsatok). M. S. Belen'kii's Judaizm was written for the Library of Contemporary Religions (Moscow, 1966). Belen'kii has been writing adieistic propaganda since die 1920s, but none of his practical experience appears in the book, which treats Judaism almost exclusively in historical terms as a religion. By comparison with odier books in die series (on Baptists, Mennonites, Adventists, etc.), it is thin stuff indeed. Finally, diere are six pages devoted to Judaism in the collection Stroitel'stvo kommunizma i preodolenie religioznykh perezhitkov (Moscow, 1966, p p . 121-25). This particular book shows very clearly the attempts of Soviet scholars to make all religions part of die same phenomenon. Accordingly, on page 122 we read diat in the city of Korosten, Zhitomir Oblast, the leaders of die Jewish community violated Soviet law by taking u p a collection to aid "the poor." Sociologically, diis has greater significance than diat die Jewish leaders were fulfilling a religious commandment. Such an act is specifically forbidden in die Soviet criminal code because (particularly among non-Russian Orthodox communities) in die early years of Soviet power, the money of the faithful was successfully used to mount a campaign for culture change in die countryside on a non-Soviet (and dierefore anti-Soviet) basis. T h e Director of the Institute of Ethnography, Iu. V. Bromlei, in an article de- voted to the achievements of Soviet edinographers, took specific note of die fact diat die daily life of many peoples is often determined by die religion diey profess (Voprosy istorii, No. 1, 1968, pp. 43-44) and diat diere has been renewed interest "in such traditional edinographic diemes as popular morals, customs, and ceremo- nies," largely because of a current Soviet need to find alternatives to religious ceremonies. T h e very slight extent to which ethnographic investigation has touched upon die Jews has been noted by Stephen P. Dunn (Slavic Review, December 1965, pages 702-5). It is noteworthy diat a recent collection testifying to increasing interest in die sociology of religion (Konkretnye issledovaniia sovremennykh religioznykh verovanii, Moscow, 1967) contains no study of Jews, and thereby implies diat none are being conducted. As it happens, current Soviet sociology of religion has begun to discuss religion in terms of what might be called the last gasp of nationalism, and die fardier back one 508 SLAVIC REVIEW goes into Russian history, the better case can be made for this approach. Read in mis light, Hans Lamm's article does not seem so unsatisfactory to me as it does to Brick- man. T h e article does, after all, suggest that what is involved is "culturecide" rather than genocide, but before we condemn the former absolutely, we would d o well to remember that genocide has been practiced on die Jews by nations with strong Christian traditions and that certain aspects of Jewish culture (from a Soviet point of view specifically Zionism) are quite definite reactions to that fact. T h e way in which Lamm has dealt with Soviet Jews and Judaism makes his article one of the most important in Religion and the Search for New Ideals. From a Soviet point of view all religions are parochial—they set u p artificial divisions between people. Anti-Semitism is inherent in die entire Christian world view, insofar as Christianity claims exclusive knowledge of the trudi. If, therefore, Communism asserts that it is ' another, more viable alternative to die way of life presented by eidier Christianity or Judaism, Communism can tolerate neither anti-Semitism (in this context die ideology of "Christian culture") nor Jewish culture (a defense mechanism against anti-Semitism). Under Soviet conditions mere has been a certain convergence among all religions, although it is a moot point whemer this convergence has helped to eradicate anti-Semitism as effectively as Soviet nationality policy. It seems to me mat Hans Lamm's article discusses the effect (or lack of effect) of the Soviet nationality policy on religion, and is merefore very much to the point, though by n o means easy to read. Finally, if Brickman is doing more than—to paraphrase the editorial—emitting die customary angry snort of protest, I wish he would say why he minks that Lamm's unfamiliarity with Jewish life leads him to feel m a t "only a small remnant cares for Jewish life." Serious theoretical issues are at stake, issues that serious scholars should document rather than dismiss with yea or nay. Zvi Gitelman's summary paragraph in his review of die question ("The Jewish Question," Survey, January 1968, p . 83) indicates how complex the problem is: " T h e decision taken in the 1920s to eliminate religious education has probably sealed its [Judaism in die USSR's] fate. Many young Jewish people are intensely interested in Jewish culture and history, but few are religious believers. T h e thousands who dance in the street near the synagogue on the holiday of Simkhat Torah do so because they are Jewish, not because mey are religious. They are affirming dieir national identity, not their religious faith. Only 4 in the unlikely event of the Soviets permitting a general revival of Jewish culture might some religious forms and practices survive—and mey would survive as national customs, not as religious ritual If such a revival does not occur, then it must be assumed m a t the eclipse of the Jewish religion in the USSR will become total." Lamm speaks of "Jewish life" and Gitelman makes a distinction between Jewish religion and Jewish culture. W h e m e r or not such distinctions can be made, I wonder if Brickman really has enough data at his command to be able to tell when an author 4 has or has not failed in his task. March 26,1968 ETHEL DUNN University of California, Berkeley T o THE EDITORS: I n disagreeing with my appraisal of Hans Lamm's chapter, Mrs. Dunn first calls attention to his discussion of the concept "Jews." However one wishes to consider it, the term "Jew" has a basis in the religious tradition of millennia. Some Jews have become assimilated, and meir descendants have ceased to identify themselves as such.