History in representations of Jerusalem in modern Hebrew poetry

Neohelicon ◽  
1987 ◽  
Vol 14 (2) ◽  
pp. 353-358
Author(s):  
Ziva Ben-Porat
Keyword(s):  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
Modern Hebrew

Modern Hebrew Poetry

1982 ◽  
Vol 56 (1) ◽  
pp. 173
Author(s):  
Gila Ramras-Rauch ◽  
Bernhard Frank
Keyword(s):  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
Modern Hebrew

Bialik, Hayim Nahman (H. N.) (1873–1934)

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Miryam Segal
Keyword(s):  
Twentieth Century ◽  
Folk Song ◽  
Turn Of The Century ◽  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
Textual Tradition ◽  
Literary Revival ◽  
Modern Hebrew ◽  
Song Lyrics ◽  
Long Poems ◽  
Hebrew Culture

Hayim Nahman Bialik was one of the most influential and widely-read Hebrew poets of the twentieth century. He revitalized modern Hebrew poetry with his romantic tropes, intense introspection, allusive irony and modernist treatment of language. Together with Shaul Tchernichovsky, his peer in the literary revival of the turn of the century, Bialik re-invented the sound of Hebrew poetry by introducing accentual-syllabic meter to Hebrew. Bialik was born into a religious and very poor family, and engaged with the Jewish textual tradition even after leaving behind, first, his Hasidic upbringing, and then the more rationalist and intellectual but ultimately unsatisfying world of the famous Volozhin yeshiva. Bialik spent the better part of three very productive decades in Odessa, the capital of the literary revival in which he was received as a young literary talent, then as national poet and one of the foremost Hebrew writers. He wrote lyric poetry, long poems, poems in the form of folk-song lyrics, children’s poetry and essay, and was an important figure in Hebrew publishing, with a particular interest in preserving the ‘Jewish Bookcase’ of classic works for secular Hebrew culture.

Modern Hebrew Poetry

Books Abroad ◽  
1967 ◽  
Vol 41 (4) ◽  
pp. 485
Author(s):  
Eisig Silberschlag ◽  
Ruth Finer Mintz
Keyword(s):  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
Modern Hebrew

Michael Gluzman. The Politics of Canonicity: Lines of Resistance in Modernist Hebrew Poetry. Contraversions: Jews and Other Differences. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 2003. xiv, 250 pp.

AJS Review ◽  
2005 ◽  
Vol 29 (1) ◽  
pp. 179-181
Author(s):  
Chanita Goodblatt
Keyword(s):  
Full Range ◽  
Historical Context ◽  
Hebrew Literature ◽  
Primary Interest ◽  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
Modern Hebrew ◽  
Private And Public ◽  
The Aesthetic ◽  
Leah Goldberg

In his epilogue to The Politics of Canonicity, Michael Gluzman has aptly delineated the parameters of this book, by writing that it “originates from the American debate on canon formation and cultural wars that predominated academic discourse during my years at University of California, Berkeley” (p. 181). This statement firmly sets its author within a critical context that auspiciously brings a wider literary discourse, such as that sustained by Chana Kronfeld and Hannan Hever, into the realm of modern Hebrew poetry. In particular, The Politics of Canonicity is identified by its publication in the series entitled Contraversions: Jews and Other Differences, which has a primary interest in the ongoing redefinition of Jewish identity and culture, specifically involving issues of gender, modernity, and politics. The Politics of Canonicity is effectively divided into two parts. In the first, comprising Chapters 1 and 2, Gluzman provides the intellectual and historical context for the interwoven formation of national identity and the literary canon in modern Hebrew literature. In particular, in Chapter 1 he relates the story of the 1896–1897 debate between Ahad Ha'am and Mikha Yosef Berdichevsky, arguing that it produced a dominant and regulative paradigm of Hebrew literature that integrates the private and public, the aesthetic and the national. In the second chapter, Gluzman discusses the way in which Hebrew modernism created a counterpoint to international modernism's glorification of exile. He discusses a full range of premodernist and modernist Hebrew poets—Shaul Tchernichovsky, Avigdor Hameiri, Avraham Shlonsky, Noach Stern, and Leah Goldberg—in order to underline their resistance to “the idea of exile as a literary privilege or as an inherently Jewish vocation” (p. 37), a resistance which Gluzman determines as calling into question “the critical tendency to read modernist practices as essentially antinationalist” (p. 37).

The Figure of Moses in Modern Hebrew Poetry

AJS Review ◽  
2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (1) ◽  
pp. 157-171
Author(s):  
Malka Shaked
Keyword(s):  
Israeli Society ◽  
Literary Genres ◽  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
The Bible ◽  
The Enlightenment ◽  
Modern Hebrew

From its inception in the Enlightenment to this day, modern Hebrew poetry conveys a deep connection to the Bible that manifests itself in a variety of ways. An in-depth understanding of this connection—including its various expressions in content and language, its causes, its purposes, and its manifestations in all the literary genres, in each generation and for each individual writer—would require extensive research that could profitably occupy a large number of scholars. Nonetheless, even with the limited research that I have conducted, focusing on the place of the Bible in Hebrew poetry from the generation of national renaissance to the present time, the substantial anthology of poems that I am preparing for this purpose demonstrate clearly that modern Hebrew poetry constantly returns to the Bible, and that the Bible's oft-lamented decline in stature in Israeli society is nowhere to be seen.

?הַאִם אַתָּה דּוֹמֶה לְיוֹם אָבִיב

2018 ◽  
Vol 51 (2) ◽  
pp. 97-105
Author(s):  
Adriana X. Jacobs
Keyword(s):  
Hebrew Poetry ◽  
Modern Hebrew ◽  
History Of

Abstract In this article, I address contemporary Hebrew translations of Shakespeare’s Sonnets, specifically those by the Israeli poet Anna Herman. My reading of Herman’s translation of Sonnet 18 contextualizes this translation in the Hebrew translation history of the Sonnets. I discuss how Hebrew retranslations of the Sonnets illuminate and complicate our understanding of shifts in the development of modern Hebrew writing and translation from the nineteenth to twenty-first centuries. How do Herman’s translations ‘compare’, as it were, with the translations that have come before, particularly those by male translators? As part of a neoformalist turn in contemporary Hebrew poetry, I call attention to the ways in which Herman’s translations, which were published in 2006, revitalize our reading of the original Shakespearean English and the Hebrew translations that followed, thereby constituting an altogether contemporary text.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document