Between the Street and the Shut Religion and Jewish Second-Generation Identity in Interwar Glasgow.
Until relatively recently there were very few studies that specifically focused on the experience of the children of the immigrant generation, although they were discussed within some of the general histories of British Jewry. (1) Of the few studies that deal with the experience of the second generation, David Cesarani's and Rosalyn Livshin's are probably the most significant. (2) Cesarani's study focuses on social mobility between the wars, but also includes insights on voung people's leisure activities and their attitude towards religion. (3) Livshin's study deals with the acculturation of the children of immigrants in Manchester from 1890 to 1930. Again, although the focus is on anglicization and anglicizing influences, Livshin's piece also offers useful insights into the religious beliefs of this generation. (4) The new wave of interest in this field can be seen in the work of scholars such as David Dee, Sally Smith, and Susan L. Tananbaum, all of whom have published notable recent studies dealing with the second generation. Their work has expanded our understanding of subjects as diverse as the leisure habits, politics, sexual practices, and sporting activities of young Jewish men and women. (1)
The existing secondary literature has generally focused on the issue of religious decline among the second generation. As Cesarani rightly points out, "Faced with competition from the dance halls, the billiards rooms and the boxing tournaments, the study and practice of Judaism suffered a dramatic decline." (6) While Cesarani is right to direct our attention to these secularizing influences, he arguably overstates the case for religious decline. Dee offers a conclusion that is more in line with the findings of this study: "Where religion and its observance fitted in with young Jews' changing expectations and lifestyles, adherence and attitudes remained strong. Where it proved too constricting, too contrasting or too demanding, however, it was sidelined and/or its most demanding aspects overlooked." (7) Dee argues that a decline in religious observance rarely resulted in individuals abandoning their faith completely. Instead, the second generation were more likely to practice their religion in a selective manner, allowing some aspects to lapse (typically Sabbath observance) while maintaining others (like bar mitzvahs, for example). (8) Livshin's piece offers another key point of departure. She acknowledges the influences that were drawing young people away from Judaism, but adds that "the degree to which each child was affected by these influences differed and was affected by the choices and compromises that had already been made by his or her immigrant parents." (9) This brings us to a key goal of the current article: to add to our understanding of the relationship between children and their parents and the manner in which attitudes towards Judaism were either transmitted or transformed from one generation to another.
This article will argue that the first generation were largely successful in their aim of transmitting their values to their children. However, a minority of the second generation rejected Judaism altogether and, in these cases, their parents' unquestioning acceptance of religion was one of the factors that could alienate them from their faith. In addition, there was also a significant difference in perception between religious leaders and the second generation in some respects. I will also suggest that gender was significant in the formation of attitudes towards religion, as different genders had different experiences of religious observance and were also subject to different external influences that could potentially undermine their attachment to Judaism. A sociological model that understands religion as a group phenomenon has been adopted here, wherein individual religious beliefs need to be understood in terms of the communal norms of the local congregation. Taking forward some of the issues raised in the existing secondary literature, the distinctive contribution of this article is the use of oral testimony to investigate the process by which individual attitudes to religion were formed.
The history of Jews in Glasgow is also a burgeoning field of study. Kenneth Collins laid the foundations for work in this area. (10) Subsequently, other scholars have added to our knowledge of various aspects of Jewish life in the city, including participation in trade unions and relations between the Jewish and Irish communities." Henry Maitles has demonstrated that Jewish trade unionists in Glasgow showed a high degree of militancy, although this needs to be seen in the context of the general militancy in Clydeside during and after the First World War. (12) Maitles also describes one of the key institutions for the discussion of radical political ideas in the Gorbals: The Workers' Circle (150 Gorbals Street). As he says, "It fulfilled some functions of a friendly society (important in this pre-welfare state era) and doubled as a socialist and trade union meeting place." (13)
Benjamin Braber's study of Jews in Glasgow is of particular significance for this article. Braber points to the popularity of Zionist groups and the Communist Party amongst Jewish youth in Glasgow during the 1930s, though these two ideologies tended to be mutually exclusive, and generally did not attract the same individuals." He also discusses the development of Judaism in Glasgow, as well as the creation of organizations for Jewish youth that were intended to promote the values of mainstream society, while also keeping young Jewish people together. These included the Jewish Lads' Brigade (JLB) and the Glasgow Jewish Institute. (15) The latter offered young people opportunities for leisure and recreation and was a significant part of the social lives of the respondents interviewed for this study. In addition, Braber addresses the perceived decline of religion among both working-class and middle-class Jews in the interwar period. However, as he rightly points out, "The fact that synagogues were only filled to capacity on Festival days was not necessarily an indication of a decline in Judaism." (16) The second generation's attitudes towards their religion, however, is not the central concern of his study. Therefore the current article seeks to address a lacuna in both the historiography of Jews in Britain as a whole as well as the literature on Jews in Glasgow itself.
This piece also has broader significance for our understanding of how-religious observance in Jewish communities should be studied and the theoretical framework that should be used to understand it. The relationship between the first and the second generation of immigrants discussed here also relates to wider research questions on the transmission of attitudes and values from one generation of immigrants to the next. Combining the insights of existing historical literature with those offered by sociologists in the field helps to provide a proper appreciation of the complexity of the problem, which could be a fruitful direction for future research. The historical literature has alerted us to the wider social changes that have tended to weaken or strengthen religious belief as well as processes of immigration and assimilation. However, this could be enhanced by a deeper understanding of religion as a group phenomenon, as opposed to a primarily theological one, as offered in the interaction model of religious influence first outlined by Richard H. White in 1968. (17) White argued that religious groups created certain normative expectations of individual behavior, and that these norms were maintained by social interaction. (18) This approach was further developed by Kevin W. Welch in his study of religious commitment amongst American Protestants. Welch noted that "[t]he local congregation and its auxiliary activities represent the primary source of these [religious] norms and the individual is very unlikely to come into sustained contact with an equally important alternative." (19) This insight is particularly applicable to this discussion of a provincial Jewish community, as we will see, and it also raises the issue of how and why individuals may become detached from the religious community. White suggests that those most inclined to leave the community are individuals "with strong interactive ties outside the religious group and weak interactive ties within it." (20) This alerts us to the impact of interaction with people outside the religious community who hold different norms and values on shaping religious behavior.
My focus here is on a particular congregation (the Gorbals) within one provincial city (Glasgow), looking at the issue from both "above" and "below." The views of the religious leadership of the city will first be considered through a discussion of representative newspaper articles. Oral testimony will also be used to further explore the topic of religious observance in the second generation, not just through a focus on practices and attitudes, but through an understanding of communal norms and attitude formation. The second section of this article is based on a collection of thirteen oral history interviews conducted by the author with elderly members of the Jewish community in Glasgow between 2003 and 2010.
Oral history initially faced slow acceptance as a valid historical methodology among professional historians. This was partly a result of the presumed left-wing bias of practitioners of oral history, as well as suspicions about the reliability of the material. Early oral historians countered these criticisms through extensive cross-checking of the data they had gathered with documentary sources. (21) The unreliability of memory was at the center of this critique, and oral historians subsequently developed sophisticated responses to this charge by asserting the unique ability of their chosen methodology to access both individual subjectivity and collective memory, enabling us to understand a particular culture from within. (22) Thus, more recent developments in oral history have taken it far beyond its initial goal of merely recovering information about the past that could not be found in the written record. (23) As Alessandro Portelli put it in a seminal article, "what is really important is that memory is not just a passive depository of facts, but an active process of creation of meanings." (24) As a result, oral historians have often focused on what is not said in an interview as "what is forgotten or absent may be as important as what is remembered, and silence may equally reveal important feelings." (25)
In the current research, the hardest issues to explore were not those associated with trauma, but those so closely bound up with individual identity that the respondents found it difficult to reflect on them. Thus, in the case of those individuals who still classified themselves as religiously observant, Judaism was such an intrinsic part of their identity that they found it difficult to discuss the process by which these beliefs were formed. By contrast, those respondents who no longer saw themselves as religious were able to talk about the reasons for their abandonment of Judaism in considerable detail.
Despite some of the difficulties involved in this type of enquiry, oral history gives us the opportunity to explore the beliefs of those who would not otherwise be given a voice. Sarah C. Williams has shown how oral history can be used to investigate religious belief in working-class communities as it offers, "a means whereby to escape from institutional definitions and a source with which to counterbalance the opinions of socio-religious observers." (26) However, this takes us into difficult territory: not only are religious beliefs very personal, but individuals can also find it difficult to describe how their beliefs were formed or developed over time.
To help us to understand this process, the article posits a four-stage model spanning two generations. The first stage takes place in the country of origin of the first generation of immigrants, where initial beliefs were formed. The second stage takes place after migration to the destination country and entails adjustment to the new urban environment that the immigrants found themselves in, which often (but not always) led to a modification of religious practice. The third stage involves the transmission of religious values from one generation to the next, and the extent to which those values were initially accepted or rejected by the second generation. The final stage is the process by which the inherited beliefs are shaped by the environment that the young person grows up in. At each stage the outcome is contingent as so many different variables are in play. Individual characteristics interact with external influences to create a particular attitude towards religion in any given individual in a manner that is in no way straightforward or predictable.
THE BEGINNING OF THE DECLINE? THE FIRST GENERATION
In order to assess the extent to which the second generation either adopted or rejected the attitudes of their parents, it is first necessary to have a clear picture of how the first generation (i.e., Jewish immigrants from Eastern Europe who settled in Britain between the late nineteenth century and the beginning of the First World War) viewed their religion. Todd M. Endelman offers a good starting point for this discussion: "Although immigrant religious and educational institutions were Orthodox in character, it cannot be inferred that most immigrants remained (or ever were) steadfast in their observance of Jewish law.... Some had loosened the yoke of religious law before emigration." (27) This is a significant point, as it is important not to treat the first generation as a single group with a homogenous attitude towards religious observance. The distinctiveness of immigrant Jewish communities could certainly lead those outside them to view them as more uniform than they were in reality. (28) Both Endelman and Lloyd P. Gartner point out that the move from the immigrants' community of origin to Britain loosened the social bonds that had previously bound them to their religion, and this was exemplified by the pressure to work on the Sabbath. (29) Gartner's classic study of the first generation of Jewish immigrants concludes that, apart from a small minority who rejected religion altogether, most immigrants were comfortable with a less than zealous degree of religious observance, and probably only attended synagogue on High Festivals. (30) This is broadly consistent with the practice of the immigrant community in Glasgow, as we will see, with complete rejection and zealous observance both being relatively rare.
The immigrants also need to be understood in relation to the established Jewish community in Britain which they encountered upon their arrival. As V. D. Lipman points out, during the nineteenth century, the existing community consolidated and centralized its religious institutions and developed a representative body (the Board of Deputies), and became "increasingly anglicized and middle class." (31) Not only was there an existing Jewish community in Britain with its own national structures, but there were also established communities in the provincial areas that the immigrants moved to. In Manchester, for example, the established community was relatively prosperous and, as Rosalyn Livshin points out, "was seen as respectable, honourable in its dealings and well known for its benevolence." (32) Similarly, in Glasgow, there was already an established and affluent Jewish community in the city before the arrival of the immigrants from Eastern Europe. (33) The Jews who settled in the city in the earlier part of the nineteenth century were mostly from Germany and Poland. (34) This community was both large and prosperous enough to open the first purpose-built synagogue in Scotland in 1879 in the Garnethill district of Glasgow, which, as Ben Braber points out, "probably did not cater for recent immigrants who resided near the Clyde [the Gorbals community]." (35) Thus, the Garnethill community was distinct from that formed by the immigrants who arrived from 1880 onwards. As Miri J. Freud-Kandel puts it, "Each community looked at the other with considerable horror. The native community was shocked by the foreignness of the immigrants and what they viewed as their uncivilised social and religious demeanour." (36) This difference between the two communities manifested itself in Glasgow in the perception of the immigrants who lived in the Gorbals on the south side of the city that the Garnethill Synagogue was an "englisher shul" designed to cater to a more assimilated community. (37) As Freud-Kandel says, the immigrants chose to pray in chevrot [small prayer groups] rather than the synagogues of the Anglo-Jewish community. (38)
This distinctiveness in institutional arrangements is significant in terms of understanding the environment in which the second generation grew up and had their formative experiences in, particularly in relation to religious education. The immigrants brought their own religious schools with them, creating small chadarim [Jewish elementary school] for after-school study delivered in Yiddish. (39) Talmud Torah schools represented the next level of educational institution provided by the immigrant communities themselves, as they were larger and more organized than the chedarim, generally with better accommodation and the classes were often taught in English. (40) In the Gorbals, the main source of Jewish education in our period was the Talmud Torah, which opened in Clyde Street in 1895. Although the classes were originally taught in Yiddish, after 1908 the Great Synagogue in South Portland Street began teaching in English. (41) It is also important to note that, although efforts were made to set one up, there was no Jewish school in the Gorbals. (42) Thus, Jewish children attended the local state schools, and this was obviously a significant factor shaping their interactions with their non-Jewish contemporaries in particular, and the experience of growing up in general. (43)
THE VIEW FROM ABOVE: "WHY BLAME THE YOUTH?"
One of the central preoccupations of the leadership of the Jewish community during the interwar period, both nationally and in Glasgow itself, was what was often referred to as the "problem of youth." As David Cesarani says, this generally referred to a perceived growth in delinquency amongst Jewish youth that "was commonly attributed to the strains on the children of immigrants, the break-down of parental control and the erosion of Jewish values because of assimilation." (44) At a national level, concern over this issue frequently manifested itself in the pages of the Jewish Chronicle. (45) However, it could also be found in other Jewish newspapers, such as the Jewish Guardian, which, in 1930, expressed the view that "irreligion and ignorance were endemic among young Jews." (46) As Susan L. Tananbaum puts it, "Leaders who just a decade before expressed concern over Eastern European chevrot, now feared that the rising generation had too little connection with Judaism." (47) Much of this discussion focused on the alleged lack of commitment to their religion of the second generation of immigrants in London's East End, but it also extended to comparable communities in the provinces. (48)
We should now consider what contemporaries said about the perceived decline in religious commitment of the second generation of Jewish immigrants in Glasgow. As we will see, this was also a central preoccupation of the communal leaders in Glasgow in the interwar period, and various explanations were given to account for the supposed lack of commitment to their religion of the younger generation at this time. The first issue of The Jewish Echo ("Scotland's only Jewish newspaper"), (49) which was published in 1928, (perhaps predictably) contains an editorial on the decline in synagogue attendance in Glasgow. However, not only does it suggest that this is not just a trend in the younger generation, but the author's explanation of this decline is also revealing of contemporary views on this issue:
Even in our days we remember men of very broadminded views on matters religious who were frequent visitors to the Synagogue. It is therefore most perplexing the fact that most of our Synagogues are at present being deserted by the members of both sexes and all ages. Many have pondered over this problem before us, some of whom have tried to explain the matter by the fact that the people are generally becoming less religious, and that the attendances in other churches are also on the decline.... [But] to the Jew, the Synagogue was not only a House of Prayer: it was his Spiritual Home. (50)
The author expands on this by asserting that part of the explanation for the decline in synagogue attendance lies in "[t]he perversion of the Synagogue spirit," and the loss of the communal functions of the idea of the synagogue as a Beth Hamidrasb [house of study]. (51) This is an explicit reference to the key religious institution of the immigrant community, "a house of religious study, which would double as a house of worship when the need arose," as Geoffrey Alderman puts it. (52) As to whether the change in the nature of the synagogue as an institution was actually the cause of the decline in attendance, is an open question. The 1928 piece is indicative of the manner in which the synagogue had become subject to a struggle over its nature and function. However, an explanation of the decline in attendance must go beyond the changing nature of the synagogue as an institution to encompass wider social changes and pressures.
As Braber says, synagogue attendance in Glasgow remained an issue during the interwar years, as "during the 1930s the problem of empty seats suffocated some of the Gorbals synagogues." (53) The Glasgow community also became increasingly concerned with the attitude of the younger generation towards Judaism in the 1930s, and this manifested itself in the pages of The Jewish Echo. For example, in 1935 the paper reported on a lecture delivered to the Jewish Literary Society in Sunderland by a rabbi from Belfast. His starting point was that "[t]he minds of present-day youth were agitated by conflicting versions of Judaism.... There was Reform, Liberal, Conservative, Progressive Judaism etc., etc. Meanwhile, our youth became inundated with feelings of contempt and ignorance." (54) The Rabbi acknowledges the pressures of contemporary society on the traditional Jewish way of life, but concludes by saving that the solution to the increasing indifference of Jewish youth towards their religion is through "rehabilitating orthodox Judaism." (55)
It is beyond the scope of this study to test the claim that the increasing fragmentation of Judaism was the cause of the alleged disinterest of the younger generation. However, it should be pointed out that none of my respondents identified this as a factor in their attitude towards their religion. The nature of their experience of Judaism was also very much contained within the locality of the Gorbals. In terms of Reform Judaism, in particular, it is important to be very specific about where and when it became a significant movement. Anne J. Kershen and Jonathan A. Romain acknowledge the difficulty of establishing Reform synagogues in some provincial communities in this period, including Glasgow, as "the decline in Orthodox practices among Jews was not accompanied in similar measure by a drift to Reform synagogues." (56) Also, as Braber makes clear, although the Reform movement apparently had some influence in the Garnethill Synagogue, and a small Reform congregation was formed in Govanhill in 1931, beyond that the movement made little impact in Glasgow. (57)
Soon after the publication of the aforementioned article, The Jewish Echo published a piece that seems to be a reply to the previous one, entitled "Why Blame The Youth?" (58) The author begins by making it clear how widespread condemnation of the younger generation was at the time: "Much criticism has recently been levelled against the Jewish youth of Glasgow. At most of the literary meetings held under the auspices of the local Lodge of the B'nai B'rith, on the various Zionist platforms and at a particular meeting of the Glasgow Jewish Institute, the younger element of our community have been caused to pass beneath the crook of the critics, who credit them with all the evils of the day. To chastise the youth has now become a fashion. But is there justification for it? We say, no!" (59) The author acknowledges that "our present youth has less love for and admiration of the study of Hebrew literature and Jewish history, and that it indulges rather too excessively in amusement and pleasure-hunting." (60) However, the author argues that the responsibility for this apparent lack of interest should be placed "at the door of their parents," and their "indifference towards our educational institutions." (61) Although this statement merely displaces blame from one generation to another without fully acknowledging the significance of the environment in which the second generation grew up, it also posits a further explanation of religious indifference or decline to those offered in the earlier articles, namely the general decline in religion in the country as a whole, changes in the nature of the synagogue as a communal institution, and the negative impact of the fragmentation of Judaism. While not wanting to endorse the rather simplistic explanation offered by the author of "Why Blame The Youth?" (i.e., that indifference to religion in the second generation stemmed from parental indifference to Judaism), it does take us onto the relationship between the religious views of the first and second generation of Jews in Glasgow, which is one of the central concerns of this article.
NORMS OF RELIGIOUS OBSERVANCE: "NOT FRUM, KOSHER."
The second section of this article is based on the oral history interviews referred to above, as well as published autobiographies by Jack Caplan, Evelyn Cowan, and Ralph Glasser, all of whom grew up in the Gorbals during this period. (62) In the following discussion, common Jewish surnames have been used as pseudonyms. If we look at the interviewees as a whole, we can see that the majority of the respondents were not alienated from their religion during their childhood and adolescence. On the other hand, it is also worth noting that none of the respondents reacted to their upbringing by becoming ultra-Orthodox. Their notion of a "proper" level of religious observance was, largely, the same as the communal norm described below. When the issue of how they felt about those who were very devout (or frummers) did come up, respondents generally expressed their disapproval of that level of devotion to Judaism. It is notable that only three of the respondents described themselves as no longer being religious: Mrs. Friedlander (born 1936, left school at fifteen), Mr. Levy (born, 1923, left school at fourteen), Mr. Zuckerman (born, 1910, left school at fourteen). The remainder described themselves as being religious, although observant to varying degrees: Mrs. Abrahams (born 1912, left school at fourteen), Mrs. Adler (born 1917, left school at fourteen), Mrs. Cohen (born 1931, left school at seventeen), Mr. Danzig (born 1925, left school at thirteen), Mrs. Danzig (born 1931, left school at fourteen), Mr. Goldman (born 1923, the only respondent that went to university), Mrs. Greenberg (born 1918, left school at fourteen), Mrs. Laski (born 1929, left school at fourteen), Mrs. Rosenberg (born 1932, left school at sixteen), Mrs. Solomons (born 1926, left school at fourteen). The age at which the respondents left school has been included here as their experience of full-time education is one of the factors that could be considered to be significant in the formation of their attitudes towards religion. It is apparent from the interviews that there was a behavioral norm that most of the respondents seemed to adhere to in terms of their religious practice. This collective sense of what was acceptable is very well expressed by Mr. Levy:
You were Jewish and there were certain customs connected to Judaism which you carried out. But we weren't frum enough to go to shut morning noon and night and daven and all of that. My uncle did. He would get up in the morning and do his davening before he went to work. Things like that, his tefillin and all that nonsense... But we were not that way inclined. Although, as I said, we were Jewish enough that you didn't go out and get a ham sandwich. I didn't even know what ham tasted like in those days. (63)
Or, as Mrs. Laski puts it, "I was brought up religious, I wouldn't say fanatical." (64) This is even more concisely expressed by Mrs. Danzig, who said that her family were "Not frum, kosher." (65) As is apparent from these descriptions, the notion of a "normal" level of religious observance is defined in relation to one that is seen as eccentric or "fanatical," and this was a generally held view among the respondents. Although this is obviously more of an attitude towards religion than a precise formula, it generally meant a strict observance of kashrut and the High Holy Days. However, although most members of the community aspired towards Sabbath observance, it did not always mean observing the Sabbath in practice, as for many working on a Saturday was an economic necessity. Mr. Danzig's description of the Synagogue attendance of his extended family is typical of the experience of the respondents as a whole: "They would go to shul. Very few went on a Sbabbos because they were all working. Unless you were working for a Jewish boss and the place closed, and you could go to shul. My dad, he was a Rosh Hashanah, Yom Kippur man." (66)
EMBRACING JUDAISM: "I JUST LIKED BEING JEWISH."
The respondents that described themselves as religious generally saw Judaism as both an intrinsic part of their lives as well as something that they genuinely enjoyed. There were various ways in which the respondents experienced their religion positively and various aspects of their heritage that tied them to it. For Mrs. Danzig, there were various aspects to her attachment to her religion that were bound up with her identity, beginning with the Yiddish language: "I learned to speak Yiddish before I learned to speak English. I haven't forgotten the Jewish tongue... I have tried to teach my children [to speak Yiddish.] I loved being Yiddish. That's why I say it's like a way of life being Jewish. It's something to hang onto. Without your heritage you have nothing. That's what I feel personally. Being Yiddish is a way of life. It's tradition." (67) Thus, for Mrs. Danzig, her heritage was important to her, and she enjoyed the idea of continuing a tradition. It could also be said the fact that she learnt to speak Yiddish before she spoke English meant that she did not perceive her parents as "strange" and "alien," as some other respondents did.
The following anecdote perfectly illustrates the extent of Mrs. Danzig's accordance with her parents' attitudes: "There were very funny incidents happened. I had one sister, she didn't look Jewish, and the Yiddishe people who lived in the next street to us used to ask her to light their fire on a Shabbos and they would give her a slice of matzo, and my mother had a sense of humor, so we found this funny. Rather than tell them who she was [her mother just allowed the arrangement to continue.] They were a very Orthodox Jewish family." (68) Obviously, she is describing how her sister was mistaken for a non-Jewish person, and how this led to her mistakenly being employed as a Shabbos goy by an Orthodox family. What is notable in this account is that Mrs. Danzig's mother was not only in on the joke, but was also happy to perpetuate it, despite the fact that, by its very nature, it transgressed Jewish law, and thus caused the Orthodox family to transgress. Thus, it demonstrates her mother's rather lax attitude toward religious observance in some of its aspects.
Mrs. Cohen's attitude towards religion was firstly shaped by that of her parents. As with the other respondents, she described her parents as "religious but not extreme." (69) Her mother's religious observance was constrained by the demands of her working life, as she explains: "My mother would have been stricter if she didn't have to work on Shabbos. She couldn't avoid it really. When she could avoid it, she did." (70) This made her mother quite typical of her community in regard to Sabbath observance. Mrs. Cohen herself had a similar view: "My attitude was to keep the work down as much as possible on a Shabbos. Things that you had to do like light the gas to heat the dinner. Things like that." (71) Her commitment to her religion manifested itself in the desire to teach in a cheder, as she explains: "I was studying to be a teacher at one time [from the age of 14]... So I tried to keep it [her religion] up as much as possible." (72) Although she was not totally observant, Mrs. Cohen's commitment to her religion was important enough for her to begin studying to teach it. She only abandoned her religious studies when she found it difficult to combine with her other school work.
During her teenage years Mrs. Cohen gradually became politicized, although interestingly, in her case, this did not lead to any questioning of her religious beliefs. Her brother was in the Communist Party when she was growing up, and she felt this had an influence on her, but she did not join the Party; although, she did buy The Daily Worker (the Communist Party newspaper) occasionally. Mrs. Cohen really became politicized during the 1945 election campaign, which made her a passionate Labour Party supporter. She also described herself as a socialist. However, she never felt any conflict between her religious and political views:
Q: Would you say that even though you became more political, you didn't become less religious? A: I didn't, that's true. No, I don't think I did. Q: You just didn't see it like that? A: No. There are plenty of Christian Socialists. (73)
It is notable that Mrs. Cohen was clearly exposed to a lot of secularizing influences, most notably from the Communist Party, but they did not result in any weakening of her faith.
Mr. Goldman offers a similar description of his parents' attitude towards religion as the other respondents, and his account also describes how his generation's religious education and experiences was rooted in the locality:
Q: Were your parents frum? A: Not terribly frum. When we were young we always used to go to shul. There was a shul round the corner from us: Chevra Kadisha. Then we went to cheder, it was the Talmud Torah in Turriff Street. I actually went to college there. My father always said that, whether one kept it up or not, they [his children] should know about it. (74)
Mr. Goldman thought that his father was probably a socialist, and his sister was in the Left Book Club but, unlike Mrs. Cohen, he himself was apolitical. When asked about whether he ever felt the need to rebel against his religion, his reply highlights his positive perception of it: "Judaism is one of the best religions. One of the most tolerant. It is a very understanding religion. This business about a person is ill, it doesn't matter if it is Shabbos or not. You can help them. Take them to a hospital. So it is a very tolerant religion. Although I wouldn't say I was an Orthodox Jew or anything like that." (75)
Mrs. Adler had much less contact with non-Jewish people than most of the other respondents. Most of her time was spent within her extended family circle and her neighbors were also mostly Jewish. As a result, she was less exposed to any outside influences, and this shaped her view of her religion. (76) She said that her parents were religiously observant and not political, and this also shaped her formative experiences, which were focused on religious observance and the communal institutions of the Jewish community: "You have no idea the things that used to happen in our family, because that's the way we were brought up. We didn't eat treyf [non-kosher food]. We were Jewish. We went to cheder and we went to shul. (77) At twelve, Mrs. Adler joined the Habonim [Young Zionists], as she describes below, and she stressed the sense of belonging that Jewish youth organizations gave her: I was in the Habonim. I was in the first group of Habonim in Glasgow. We started, my sister... came with me... It was marvellous. It was always everything Jewish. Then there was the Jewish Institute in South Portland Street, which all the Jewish boys and girls always went to. They had table tennis and all different things there, and everybody met there and a lot of people married from there... I just liked being Jewish." (78) Her absorption into the life of the community and her extended family meant that she was very comfortable with her upbringing, and never felt the need to question her religious beliefs. (79) She emphasized the sense of being part of a Jewish community in a close-knit Jewish neighborhood, which she experienced as positive rather than oppressive: "That's the way we lived, and we were happy. We had all Jewish people around us and the Jewish food and we had plenty friends and I had a very' happy childhood." (80)
Mrs. Laski also said that she really enjoyed being Jewish and emphasized the sense of being part of a Jewish community in a vibrant Jewish neighborhood: "I knew I was Jewish... and I loved being Jewish... The Gorbals was wonderful. Every neighbor was Yiddish. You didn't need babysitters. If your mother wasn't in. You just went next door, and if your mother wasn't home in time to give you tea before you went to cheder, then even next door or the neighbors upstairs [would give you something to eat]." (81) As with the other respondents she considered herself to have had a "normal" Jewish upbringing: "I was brought up religious, I wouldn't say fanatical." (82) Also, as with the other respondents, her social life was largely centered around the institutions of the community, particularly the Jewish Institute. Her father's leisure time was largely spent at the Workers' Circle. However, she saw the Workers' Circle as effectively just a social club for Jewish men and a place where they met and played cards. (83) In fact, she did not even see the Workers' Circle as political at all and was not aware of the political discussions that took place there. (84) She stressed the fact that her father was a Labour supporter and not a communist, and he was also heavily involved in the Tailors' Union. (85) Radical politics and political discussion were not a feature of Mrs. Laski's upbringing, despite her father's involvement in trade unionism and his regular visits to the Workers' Circle, and she never felt the need to question her religious beliefs.
It is also worth noting that Mrs. Danzig also mentioned the Workers' Circle in connection with her brother, despite her family's lack of political affiliations. She said that her brother was not political, but he went to the Workers' Circle to play snooker because it had a very good snooker table. (86) This illustrates the difficulty of characterizing the political views of the community. While there is no doubt that many of the Jewish residents of the Gorbals had a commitment to a variety of left-wing ideals and were also politically active, there were also many who were largely indifferent to politics. Thus, the existence of a vibrant and active Workers' Circle does not necessarily indicate that the community as a whole was actively engaged in left-wing politics. For those respondents that we have focused on in this section, the heavily politicized environment that they grew up in often had very little impact on their daily lives, and even less influence on their view of religion.
QUESTIONING TRADITION: "EVERYTHING WAS JUST DONE BY THE BOOK."
David Dee has identified some of the factors that contributed towards young Jews either becoming less religiously observant or abandoning their religion altogether. These included the feeling that Judaism had no relevance to their lives, that its customs and rituals were too restrictive, and the greater integration into wider society of the second generation compared to their parents' generation. (87) Some of my respondents also identified these issues as significant in shaping their attitudes. In the case of those respondents who either questioned their religion or rejected it altogether, there was no single factor that resulted in a negative perception of Judaism. Their attitudes were shaped by a number of different factors that came together to create a particular attitude towards their faith as a result of their individual experiences. However, we can identify some key elements in this process, beginning with the way in which relationships between parents and children, as well as the way parents transmitted religious beliefs to their children, shaped individual perceptions of religion.
In one of Ralph Glasser's accounts of his childhood in the Gorbals during this period, he recounts how his immigrant father first explained his faith to him: "There are rules in life you have to obey--God's rules--and never ask why. God never answers you. You have to trust Him. There is no other way." (88) As we will see, the idea of unquestioning acceptance of religious laws was not something that fitted in with the values of some young Jews at all. As Glasser put it, "We longed to reject the world view that the preceding generation seemed to be passing on to us, attitudes of submission, of 'make do,' of finding comfort in old saws and signs and portents, in thrift, prudence, automatic religious observance with little faith, in survival one day at a time." (89) Obviously, although Glasser's reference to "We" in this passage is intended to be a description of the attitudes of his generation and their response to the values of their parents, it does not reflect the views of those who wanted to maintain Jewish traditions. On the other hand, their parents' unquestioning acceptance of religion was an issue for some of the respondents, as we will discuss below.
The account offered by Mrs. Friedlander does highlight the role that her parents played in shaping her attitude towards religion, but not in the rather simplistic manner of the Jewish Echo article cited above, which blamed parents for religious decline. Interestingly, she clearly differentiated between her parents' attitudes:
Q: Were you parents frum? A: Yes. I won't say so much my father, I don't know. He went out to work, he met non-Jewish people. My mother lived among the Yiddishe people, she shopped among the Yiddishe people. She didn't know from non-kosher, you know, she didn't know from it at all. (90)
Mrs. Friedlander did experience her religion as restrictive, even, surprisingly, in comparison to Catholicism:
I envied my Catholic friends, because it didn't seem so strict to me. I could understand it better, perhaps it was because the parents spoke English... I was just brought up as a Yiddish girl, learning from watching my mother. She couldn't explain an awful lot to me. The language difference, you know. So I had to learn that way, so the Catholics and the Protestants it seemed so simple to me, and perhaps at this age, I was going against strictness and rules and regulations. In shul it used to annoy me, because the women and the men were separated, and if you opened your mouth... there weren't that many people who could daven. So, what could we do? Talk to one another? There would be banging [from the men] downstairs. I resented all that lack of freedom, not at that time, as I was growing up. (91)
This highlights another issue that some respondents identified as a factor in undermining their attachment to their religion: the alienating experience of synagogue attendance. As she makes clear, she not only found synagogue attendance burdensome but, in addition, her religious instruction was unconvincing:
Q: Did you rebel? A: I felt that, when you went to school, and you went to work, and you had parents, it was enough restrictions. You were being told what to do all the time. When I first got married, I felt so free! I think religion was the hardest because when I read it, when I went to cheder, when I read the history of Yiddish... I thought, is this a fairy story? Is this all a fairy story? (92)
The following quote from this interview epitomizes her frustration with both her upbringing and her religious instruction: "Everything was just done by the book. Nothing was explained to you. (93)
Mr. Levy identified his father's influence as significant in shaping his views but, in his case, it was his father's apparent lack of faith that caused him to question his own beliefs: "My father was a wee bit Socialistic. I was always that way inclined." (94) As a result, from the age of eleven or twelve he began to question his religion:
I went to shul on Kosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur. I didn't know what I was doing, but I went to shul. I would daven in a foreign language and think, what am I reading this foreign language for? I would read the translation in English. I says, am I saying this? What's it lead to? What's it all about? I'm saying nothing. I'm praying to God the whole time. I'm not getting it. I'm asking him for favors the whole time. So as I say, It didn't mean much to me...The stories they told us, I just couldn't accept it. (95)
As with Mrs. Friedlander, he was also alienated by the lack of explanation of religious laws that he encountered in Judaism. Here is his description of his experience of a study group: "I couldn't believe it because the Rabbi says you do this. We would discuss things with the Rov [rabbi] and every time someone asked an awkward question he would say, because it is written." (96)
Mr. Zuckerman came from a religiously observant family, but his father abandoned his family when Mr. Zuckerman was nine years old, and this had a major impact on not only Mr. Zuckerman's family life but also his attitude towards religion: "Until I was nine or ten years of age I was as good a Jew as anybody else. From a very early age my life went into a Gentile way of life. Whether it was in school or whatever it was. I was a rebel. I earned the right to live my own life and mix with all denominations and all types and so on... I drifted away from Yiddishkeit when I really started working seriously." (97) He stopped attending synagogue in his early teenage years, as a direct result of his growing hostility towards his father and his association of his father with Judaism: "Why was I a rebel? Very simple, because of the way my father treated my mother. That's all ... I rebelled against it. The reason I became irreligious is the way my father treated my mother. I didn't want to be religious if he was... He was high up [in the synagogue]. From the day I learned the difference between right and wrong, I hated the sight of him because he could be that way. I did not want to be religious with my father like that." (98) Thus, Mr. Zuckerman's account stresses a very personal reaction to his father's mistreatment of his mother and his abandonment of his family.
At the same time, Mr. Zuckerman stressed his commitment to his Jewish identity: "I'm a proud Jew. I'm not a religious Jew. I never tried to hide that I am a Jew. I never needed to, I was proud of it." (99) Mr. Zuckerman was influenced by left-wing politics, which he describes as being an intrinsic part of life in the Gorbals, and he became a trade union official in the furniture maker's union as well as a socialist. (100) However, in his case, he did not identify politics as the source of his disenchantment with religion, as he traced that back to his attitude towards his father. Mr. Zuckerman was also heavily involved in illicit gambling and, by the time he was sixteen, he had become part of a successful greyhound racing syndicate. (101) This aspect of his life, in particular, took him away from the Jewish community. But he never lost contact with it altogether and, as he says, although he no longer practiced his religion, he maintained his Jewish identity, despite other influences. Jack Caplan describes a similar experience in his autobiography, inasmuch as his involvement in the life of the "street" clearly drew him away from the Jewish community. Caplan describes himself and his brother as "the culprits involved in street brawls, the local tough guys." (102) In addition, despite the fact that his parents clearly maintained some religious practices he was "never compelled to study the ancient book of Jewish law, the Torah" as he puts it. (103) Thus, |ack Caplan and Mr. Zuckerman are representative of a small minority of young Jewish men for whom the life of the wider neighborhood became more important than that of the Jewish community and its institutions.
"IT WAS TOTALLY DIFFERENT FOR BOYS": GENDER AND ATTITUDES TOWARD RELIGION
I will now turn to consider the significance of gender in the formation of attitudes towards religion. The central question is: To what extent did gender impact upon the experience of the respondents and did this make any difference to their view of religion? As we saw above, there was no significant difference in school-leaving age between the female and male respondents, as most respondents left school at around the age of fourteen, and only one respondent went to university. In addition, and this is a significant point, in contrast to elsewhere in the city, there was no discernible difference in their experience of religious instruction. David Dee states that girls did not usually attend cheder in the interwar years. (104) However, while girls had clearly been excluded from religious instruction in the past, as Susan L. Tananbaum has pointed out, this was gradually changing during the interwar period, even though it still remained an issue. (105) Although there are no accurate figures, it has also been estimated that hundreds of Jewish girls in Glasgow were not receiving any religious education at all. (106) This does make it rather surprising that the respondents had largely similar experiences of Jewish education regardless of gender (i.e., attendance at the Talmud Torah in the Gorbals as a child.) In fact, as we saw above, Mrs. Cohen even attended Hebrew College to train as a cheder teacher, which would have given her a higher level of Jewish learning than almost all of the other respondents. The reasons for this unexpectedly high level of religious education among girls in the Gorbals are not clear, but it seems to have been part of the communal norm discussed above. (107)
However, once we move beyond religious instruction to synagogue attendance, some clear differences emerge. Depending on an individual's gender, they experienced synagogue attendance very differently. As the genders are seated separately in an Orthodox synagogue and girls were under a greater degree of parental control, this had an impact on their experience of the synagogue. As I noted above, Mrs. Friedlander found synagogue attendance frustrating and oppressive. However, for boys it could be quite a different experience. They were not under as close supervision, as Mr. Levy explains: "Come yontif, my mother always sent us to shul. I'd stay there for five minutes and I'd disappear and meet ma pal outside and go back in again to see if there were any girls when we got older. We all met up and we used to walk from shul to shul." (108) Thus, for Mr. Levy, this became a social occasion rather than a religious one and he and his peers were given the freedom to roam across the district from synagogue to synagogue at will, in complete contrast to the restrictive experience that Mrs. Friedlander had. This contrast extended to almost every aspect of the lives of the respondents.
Mrs. Abrahams was kept under very close supervision by her parents as she was growing up. In fact, she was prevented from mixing with her non-Jewish contemporaries, while her brothers, on the other hand, were allowed much greater freedom:
A lot of their [her brothers'] friends weren't Yiddish. He [one of her brothers] used to go to billiard rooms, and [here she is describing her parents' attitudes] "Only goyim went to billiard rooms. No decent person went to billiard rooms." A lot of Yiddishe boys went to billiard rooms because it was a place they could enjoy themselves. Q: Do you think your brothers had more freedom than you? A: Oh, very much so. Q: Do you think they just did what they wanted? A: Of course they did. More or less. Outside anyway. It was totally different for boys and for girls. (109)
This highlights one of the factors that could undermine the attachment of Jewish boys to both their community and their religion, as participation in leisure pursuits that brought them into more frequent contact with their non-Jewish peers. As David Dee has pointed out, regular participation in sports and recreation activities differentiated the second generation from their parents. (110) In the Gorbals, as we have seen, quite a lot of this activity took place within the institutions of the Jewish community itself but, as Mrs. Abrahams indicates, not all of it did. Billiards and snooker featured quite heavily in the accounts of the respondents and Mr. Levy identified billiard halls as a significant factor in weakening the attachment of some Jewish boys to their religion. (111) Also, as noted in relation to Mr. Zuckerman, other pursuits like gambling could also pull Jewish boys away from the orbit of their community. The Gorbals was also notorious for gangs and street violence, and a tiny minority of Jewish youths became gang members, but there do not seem to have been any identifiably Jewish gangs in the Gorbals. (112) Thus, while there were also influences that young Jewish males were exposed to as a result of growing up in the area that drew them away from their religion, Jewish boys rarely became totally immersed in "street" culture, and very few abandoned their religion altogether as a result.
This is not to say that Jewish girls did not share some of the leisure experiences of their non-Jewish peers, particularly cinemas and dance halls, but the protective attitude of their parents meant that their exposure to these influences was much less than it was for boys. One potential source of resentment for Jewish girls was the expectation that they would help prepare for the Sabbath and religious festivals. This involved a considerable amount of domestic work that was generally carried out by the women and girls in a household. In her memoirs of the Gorbals, Evelyn Cowan describes how this resentment came to a head in her family during one Passover when her mother asked her sister to do the washing up:
The two of us started to clear the table. But Kate was muttering to me "anyway when I grow up, I won't have all this nonsense. What's it all for, after all? Passover?" Kate rattled the cutlery. "Just a lot of work for women. That's all." This last remark angered Ma, who was standing nearby sorting dishes. Ma swung Katie round by the shoulders. She turned her into the suddenly hushed room. Ma's face turned red-hued with suppressed rage. "You hear what she say? She won't bother with all dis. She won't bother with God or with all that nonsense." (113)
In the families of the respondents there was usually a fairly clear division of labor between boys and girls with regard to housework, although this rarely caused the degree of resentment described above. In fact, in Mrs. Adler's case, her brothers helped with the housework and, as a result, she did not feel any resentment over this particular issue. (114) However, the expectation that Jewish girls would help with the preparations for these occasions was one potential factor that could alienate them from their religion.
In his study of the first generation of Jewish immigrants in London, David Feldman says that, "A concept such as secularization is too large to convey the complexity of these developments." (115) This could also be said to be true of the processes of change that we have considered in this study of the second generation during the interwar years. We have seen that this was a period when the children of Jewish immigrants were subject to a variety of factors that could potentially either distance or separate them from their religion. However, this rarely resulted in individuals abandoning their faith completely. For example, political ideologies had the potential to be a secularizing influence. However, we saw that it was difficult to characterize the political views of the Gorbals community. While there is no doubt that many of the Jewish residents of the Gorbals had a commitment to a variety of left-wing ideals and were also politically active, there were also many who were largely indifferent to politics. Leisure activities and delinquency also had the potential to draw young Jewish people away from their community, and in some cases they did have this effect. However, the Jewish community in the Gorbals seems to have been largely successful in its attempts at creating institutions that kept young people within the confines of the community, while also offering opportunities for them to engage in some of the same activities as their non-Jewish peers, such as dancing.
This can be related to the interactionist perspective on religious commitment alluded to above, which stressed the importance of group ties as well as the impact that social interaction with those outside the group could have on religious behavior. What Welch describes as "extra-congregational or out-group social participation" was clearly a significant factor in weakening some young Jewish people's ties to their community. (116) On the other hand, this is not an adequate explanation of why individuals rejected religion, as there were clearly other factors. We have seen that religious pedagogy could result in them having a negative perception of Judaism, as epitomized in the phrase used by the respondents, "Nothing was explained to you." We saw that the leaders of the community in Glasgow seemed to have had a limited understanding of the factors that were undermining religious belief, judging by their explanations of changes in religious behavior cited above. They were largely unable to transcend their own narrow preoccupations, with changes in the nature of the synagogue, for example. This is suggestive of a significant difference in perception between religious leaders and the second generation in some respects.
This study of a community in Glasgow has demonstrated the existence of a widely shared communal norm of religious observance that was largely determined by the practices of the first generation. This communal norm was reinforced by the closeness of the Gorbals community itself, and its communal institutions. However, although there was considerable potential for individuals to come into contact with a variety of secularizing influences, their impact was contingent on an individual's circumstances and predisposition. This brings us to the second key phrase used by those respondents who embraced their religion: "I just liked being Jewish." As we have seen, this phrase refers to various aspects of life in the Gorbals, from speaking Yiddish to the sense of belonging that individuals gained from participation in the associational life of the community. It is at this point that religion and ethnic identity become hard to separate, as a positive perception of Yiddishkeit [Jewish culture] is difficult to separate from religious beliefs. It could also be said that what separates those respondents with a positive view of Judaism from those who hold the opposite opinion is their perception of "tradition." This can be seen as something that should be upheld as it links the individual with their heritage or, alternatively, a constraining and sometimes incomprehensible iron cage of rituals and behavior.
The discussion in this article has only suggested some possible explanations of why particular individuals viewed their religion in such different ways. Although the respondents lived in close proximity to each other, and also shared many of the same experiences, the experiences of a few led them to reject their religion, and it is not easy to explain why this was the case. The overall success of the Gorbals community can partly be explained by the ability of the first generation to adapt to the changed circumstances in which they found themselves in, and the fact that they were largely successful in their aim of transmitting their values to their children. While the leaders of the community struggled to understand the younger generation, the communal institutions in the Gorbals were able to partially adapt to the changing environment of the interwar years with its greater premium on leisure pursuits. All of this helped to maintain the community and bind its members together. There were also pressures from both within the Jewish community and wider society that drew young people away from their community, but these were not usually strong enough to draw them away from their religion altogether.
(1.) See, for example, Lipman, A History of the Jews, 207-13; Endelman, The Jews of Britain, 205-7.
(2.) Cesarani, "A Funny Thing Happened," 5-26; Livshin, "The Acculturation," 79-96.
(3.) Cesarani, "A Funny Thing Happened," 13-18.
(4.) Livshin, "The Acculturation," 85-94.
(5.) See, for example, Smith, "Sex, Leisure and Jewish Youth," 1-26; Dee, '"Wandering Jews'?," 563-79; Tananbaum, '"Ironing out the Ghetto Bend,'" 53-75.
(6.) Cesarani, "A Funny Thing Happened," 17.
(7.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 190.
(8.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 190.
(9.) Livshin, "The Acculturation," 91.
(10.) See Collins, Second City Jewry and Be Weill
(11.) See, for example, Maitles, "Jewish Trade Unionists," 46-69; Kenefick, "Jewish and Catholic Irish Relations," 215-34.
(12.) Maitles, "Jewish Trade Unionists," 59-64.
(13.) Maitles, "Jewish Trade Unionists," 58.
(14.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 127-30.
(15.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 161-62.
(16.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 154.
(17.) White, "Toward a Theory of Religious Influence," 23-28.
(18.) White, "Toward a Theory of Religious Influence," 25-26.
(19.) Welch, "An Interpersonal Influence Model," 84.
(20.) White, "Toward a Theory of Religious Influence," 27.
(21.) Abrams, Oral History Theory, 5.
(22.) Thomson, "Unreliable memories?," 27-28.
(23.) Abrams, Oral History Theory, 5.
(24.) Portelli, "What Makes Oral History," 69.
(25.) Palmer, "'Every Morning Before You,'" 38
(26.) Williams, "The Problem of Belief," 34.
(27.) Endelman, The Jews of Britain, 147.
(28.) Steinbach, Understanding the Victorians, 270.
(29.) Endelman, The Jews of Britain, 147; Gartner, The Jewish Immigrant, 194-95.
(30.) Gartner, The Jewish Immigrant, 196-97.
(31.) Lipman, A History of the Jews, 6-7.
(32.) Livshin, "The Acculturation," 80.
(33.) Bermant, Troubled Eden, 55.
(34.) Alderman, Modern British Jewry, 25.
(35.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 9.
(36.) Freud-Kandel, Orthodox Judaism in Britain, 17.
(37.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 159.
(38.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 159.
(39.) Tananbaum, Jewish Immigrants in London, 91-92.
(40.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 155-56.
(41.) Collins, Well!, 31.
(42.) Collins, Be Well!, 31.
(43.) Jack Caplan makes this point in his autobiography. Caplan, Memories of the Gorbals, 146-47.
(44.) Cesarani, The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry, 136-37.
(45.) Cesarani, The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry, 137.
(46.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 150.
(47.) Tananbaum, Jewish Immigrants in London, 102.
(48.) Tananbaum, Jewish Immigrants in London, 102; Cesarani, The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry, 137.
(49.) There were two Yiddish newspapers in Glasgow before the Jewish Echo was launched, but they failed to establish themselves. See Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 163.
(50.) Jewish Echo, 6 January 1928.
(51.) Jewish Echo, 6 January 1928.
(52.) Alderman, Modern British Jewry, 143.
(53.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 153.
(54.) Jewish Echo, 1 February 1935.
(55.) Jewish Echo, 1 February 1935.
(56.) Kershen and Romain, Tradition and Change, 179-80.
(57.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 158-59.
(58.) Jewish Echo, 22 February 1935.
(59.) Jewish Echo, 22 February 1935.
(60.) Jewish Echo, 22 February 1935.
(61.) Jewish Echo, 22 February 1935.
(62.) For a discussion of these autobiographies, see Taylor, '"Remembering Spring Through Gorbals Voices,"' 1-31).
(63.) Tape: Mr. Levy--21.7.05--Side 2--0000-25. These interviews were originally recorded on cassette tape and the numbers in the references refer to the counter on the tape deck used to replay them.
(64.) Tape: Mrs. Laski--21.7.05--2455.
(65.) Tape: Mrs. Danzig--0653.
(66.) Tape: Mr. Danzig--28.8.03--0654-58.
(67.) Tape: Mrs. Danzig--Tape Two--Side One--28.8.03--0085-98.
(68.) Tape: Mrs. Danzig--Tape Two--Side One--28.8.03--0635-50.
(69.) Tape: Mrs. Cohen--18.4.10--0666.
(70.) Tape: Mrs. Cohen--18.4.10--0180-90.
(71.) Tape: Mrs. Cohen--18.4.10--0924-26.
(72.) Tape: Mrs. Cohen--18.4.10--0990-92.
(73.) Tape: Mrs. Cohen--18.4.10--0460-70.
(74.) Tape: Mr. Goldman--25.8.03--2380-90.
(75.) Tape: Mr. Goldman--25.8.03--Side 2--2205-15.
(76.) Tape: Mrs. Adler--24.7.05--0600, 2130, and 2314.
(77.) Tape: Mrs. Adler--24.7.05--0695-0705.
(78.) Tape: Mrs. Adler--24.7.05--1200-1300.
(79.) Tape: Mrs. Adler--24.7.05--Side 2--0000-15.
(80.) Tape: Mrs. Adler--24.7.05--Side 2--Side 2--0922-29.
(81.) Tape: Mrs. Laski--21.7.05--1088-1138.
(82.) Tape: Mrs. Laski--21.7.05--2455.
(83.) Tape: Mrs. Laski--21.705--Side 2--1115-1250.
(84.) Tape: Mrs. Laski--21.7.05--Side 2--1338.
(85.) Tape: Mrs. Laski--21.7.05--Side 2--1570.
(86.) Tape: Mrs. Danzig--28.8.03--Tape 2--Side 1--0570.
(87.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 184-85.
(88.) Glasser, A Gorbals Legacy, 41.
(89.) Glasser, Growing Up in the Gorbals, 47.
(90.) Tape: Mrs. Friedlander--20.7.05--1530-35.
(91.) Tape: Mrs. Friedlander--20.7.05--1598-1652.
(92.) Tape: Mrs. Friedlander--20.7.05--1654-66.
(93.) Tape: Mrs. Friedlander--20.7.05--1668.
(94.) Tape: Mr. Levy--21.7.05--Side 2--0925-30.
(95.) Tape: Mr. Levy--21.7.05--Side 2--0845-0915.
(96.) Tape: Mr. Levy--21.7.05--Side 2--1000-10.
(97.) Tape: Mr. Zuckerman--24.8.03--Side 2--1019-1120.
(98.) Tape: Mr. Zuckerman--24.8.03--Side 2--1185-1225.
(99.) Tape: Mr. Zuckerman--24.8.03--Side 2--1122.
(100.) Tape: Mr. Zuckerman--24.8.03--Side 2--1688-92.
(101.) Tape: Mr. Zuckerman--24.8.03--Side 1--2400-10.
(102.) Caplan, Memories of the Gorbals, 31.
(103.) Caplan, Memories of the Gorbals, 111.
(104.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 161.
(105.) Tananbaum, Jewish Immigrants in London, 103-4.
(106.) Braber, Jews in Glasgow, 57.
(107.) See also Cowan, Spring Remembered, 28.
(108.) Tape: Mr. Levy--21.7.05--Side 2--1045-50
(109.) Tape: Mrs. Abrahams--197.05--Side 2--0950-60
(110.) Dee, The 'Estranged' Generation?, 281.
(111.) Tape: Mr. Levy--21.7.05--Side 1--1945.
(112.) For more detail on Jewish participation in street gangs see Taylor, "Street Gangs in the Interwar Gorbals," 214-31.
(113.) Cowan, Spring Remembered, 38.
(114.) Tape: Mrs. Adler--24.7.05--1855-65.
(115.) Feldman, "Jews in London," 221.
(116.) Welch, "An Interpersonal Influence Model," 85.
Abrams, Lynn. Oral History Theory. London: Routledge, 2010.
Alderman, Geoffrey. Slodern British Jewry. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1998.
Bermant, Chaim. Troubled Eden: An Anatomy of British Jewry. London: Vallentine Mitchell, 1969.
Braber, Benjamin. Jews in Glasgow 1879-1939: Immigration and Integration. Edgeware: Vallentine Mitchell, 2007.
Caplan, Jack. Memories of the Gorbals. Oxford: Isis, 1994.
Cesarani, David. "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Suburbs: Social Change in Anglo-Jewry Between The Wars, 1914-1945." Jewish Culture and History 1, no. 1 (1998): 5-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1462169X.1998.10512209
--. The Jewish Chronicle and Anglo-Jewry, 1841-1991. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1994.
Collins, Kenneth E. Second City Jewry: The Jews of Glasgow in the Age of Expansion, 1790-1919. Glasgow: Scottish Jewish Archives, 1990.
--. Be Well! Jewish Health and Welfare in Glasgow, 1860-1914. East Linton, SCT: Tuckwell Press, 2001.
Cowan, Evelyn. Spring Remembered: A Scottish Jewish Childhood. Edinburgh: Southside, 1974.
Dee, David. '"Wandering Jews'? British Jewry, Outdoor Recreation and the Far-Left, 1900-1939." Labor History 55, no. 5 (2014): 563-79. https://doi.org/10.1080/0023656X.2014.961752.
--. The 'Estranged' Generation? Social and Generational Change in Interwar British Jewry. London: Palgrave Macmillan, 2017.
Endelman, Todd M. The Jews of Britain, 1656 to 2000. Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2002.
Feldman, David. "Jews in London, 1880-1914." In Patriotism: The Making and Unmaking of British National Identity Volume II: Minorities and Outsiders, edited by Raphael Samuel, 207-29. History Workshop Series. London: Routledge, 1989.
Freud-Kandel, Miri J. Orthodox Judaism in Britain Since 1913: An Ideology Forsaken. Edgeware: Vallentine Mitchell, 2006.
Gartner, Lloyd P. The Jewish Immigrant in England, 1870-1914. London: Simon Publications, 1973.
Glasser, Ralph. Growing up in the Gorbals. London: Pan Books, 1987.
--. A Gorbals Legacy. Edinburgh: Mainstream Publishing, 2000.
Kenefick, William. "Jewish and Catholic Irish Relations: The Glasgow Waterfront c.1880-1914." In Jews and Port Cities 1590-1900: Commerce, Community and Cosmopolitanism, edited by David Cesarani and Gemma Romain, 215-34. Parkes-Wiener Series on Jewish Studies. London: Vallentine Mitchell, 2006.
Kershen, Anne J., and |onathan A. Romain. Tradition and Change: A History of Reform Judaism in Britain 1840-1955. London: Vallentine Mitchell, 1995.
Lipman, Y. D. A History of the Jews in Britain Since 1858. Leicester, UK: Leicester University Press, 1990.
Livshin, Rosalyn. "The Acculturation of the Children of Immigrant Jews in Manchester, 1890-1930." In The Making of Modern Anglo-Jewry, edited by David Cesarani, 79-96. Oxford: Basil Blackwell, 1990.
Maitles, Henry. "Jewish Trade Unionists in Glasgow." Immigrants and Minorities 10, no. 3 (1991): 46-69.
Palmer, David. '"Every Morning before You Open the Door You Have to Watch for that Brown Envelope': Complexities and Challenges of Undertaking Oral History with Ethiopian Forced Migrants in London, U.K." The Oral History Review 37, no. 1 (Winter-Spring 2010): 35-53. https://doi.org/10.1093/ohr/ohq041.
Portelli, Alessandro. "What Makes Oral History Different." In The Oral History Reader, edited by Robert Perks and Alistair Thomson, 63-74. London: Routledge, 2000.
Smith, Sally. "Sex, Leisure and Jewish Youth Clubs in Inter-War London." Jewish Culture and History 9, no. 1 (200"): 1-26. https://doi.org/10.1080/1462169X.2007.10512064.
Steinbach, Susie L. Understanding the Victorians: Politics, Culture and Society in Nineteenth-Century Britain. 2nd ed. London: Routledge, 2016.
Tananbaum, Susan L. '"Ironing out the Ghetto Bend': Sports, Character and the Making of British Jews." Journal of Sport History 31, no. 1 (Spring 2004): 53-75.
--. Jewish Immigrants in London, 1880-1959. London: Pickering & Chatto, 2014.
Taylor, Avram. '"Remembering Spring through Gorbals Voices': Autobiography and the Memory of a Community." Immigrants & Minorities 28, no. 1 (2010): 1-30.
--. "Street Gangs in the Interwar Gorbals: The Jewish Experience." Contemporary British History 27, no. 2 (2013): 214-31.
Thomson, Alistair. "Unreliable Memories? The Use and Abuse of Oral History." In Historical Controversies and Historians, edited by William Lamont, 23-34. London: Routledge, 1998.
Welch, Kevin W. "An Interpersonal Influence Model of Traditional Religious Commitment." The Sociological Quarterly 22, no. 1 (1981): 81-92. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.l533-8525.1981.tb02210.x.
White, Richard H. "Toward a Theory of Religious Influence." The Pacific Sociological Review 11, no. 1 (Spring 1968): 23-28. https://doi.org/10.2307/1388521.
Williams, Sarah C. "The Problem of Belief: The Place of Oral History in the Study of Popular Religion." Oral History 24, no. 2 (1996): 27-34.
Avram G. Taylor is Senior Lecturer in History at Northumbria University. Much of his teaching and research reflects an interest in theoretical issues and the philosophy of history, as well as concerns with class, gender, and ethnicity. His thesis has been published as Working Class Credit and Community since 1918 (Palgrave, 2002). His second book, co-authored with Don MacRaild, Social Theory and Social History (Palgrave, 2004), reflects his ongoing interest in the relationship between history and theory. He is currently working on the history of Jews in Britain and has published several articles on Glasgow Jewry.
|Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback|
|Author:||Taylor, Avram G.|
|Date:||Dec 22, 2019|
|Previous Article:||Exhibiting Jewish Culture in Postwar Britain: Glasgow's 1951 Festival of Jewish Arts.|
|Next Article:||Three Poems.|