An Orange County rabbi emails: "Luke, my son drove past the protest today and was disappointed to see no more than 30 or 35 people. You would think after hearing a sermon from rabbi weil of Beth Jacob a shul of 800 to 1000 members you would see a crowd of 200 at the least. He was also surprised that no other rabbinic authority other than Weil and another one he did not recognize came to the protest, the flyer mentioned a seruv from the RCC, why was there no support from the RCC’s Avraham Union, Nachum Sauer, Goldenberg, Korobkin etc. Something fishy with this story. I would like to see back up documents to support the flyer against Mr. Kin I’m getting the feeling Mr. Kin is telling the truth after reviewing his attachments."
He notes that the critics hated this movie. It is too simple for them. They’re jaded. They love complicated movies such as "The Departed" and "Boogie Nights" and "Casino." Dennis couldn’t understand the film ("The Departed") and gave up on it halfway through.
Dennis says he prefers reviewers on the internet, just as he prefers book reviews by customers on Amazon.com to the professional reviewers (such as the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times).
Dennis calls daylight savings time nonsense. He prefers the "real time."
"Prager H1: You think our banks are in bad shape? They look rock solid next to the banks of Europe, especially Eastern Europe… Climate change skeptics meet in New York… If Islam is a religion of peace, why don’t the clerics promote it?"
Dennis says: "People got loans they could not repay unless their house kept going up forever [in value]. On the other hand, the government did not regulate enough these derivatives and tranches where loans were packaged with other things and sold to banks and other houses until you get a leverage of 50-1, where you owe 50 times more… The reason for this was not because of a philosophical opposition to regulation…It was not conservative philosophy that stopped the regulation of these things, it was because they were so new. The government had not caught up to these practices. The proof is Europe. They have more regulations in Europe. They are far more inclined towards a national bank and socialism and they did not regulate their banks. Europe’s banks are in worse shape than ours."
Austria’s banks loaned 70% of Austria’s GDP to Eastern Europe which can’t repay the loans. Now France and Germany are being asked to bail out Austrian banks.
For while losses on Eastern European debts may be only a small fraction of those on subprime mortgages, the continent’s problems are politically harder to solve, and their consequences may prove to be much worse.
Much as in our subprime mess, Eastern Europe’s problems began with easy credit. From 2004 to 2008 Eastern Europe had its own bubble, fueled by the ready availability of international credit. In recent years countries like Bulgaria and Latvia borrowed annually the equivalent of more than 20 percent of their gross domestic product from abroad. By 2008, 13 countries that were once part of the Soviet empire had accumulated a collective debt to foreign banks or in foreign currencies of more than $1 trillion. Some of the money went into investment, much of it into consumption or real estate.
When the music stopped last year and banks retrenched, the flow of new capital to Eastern Europe came to an abrupt halt, and then reversed direction. This credit crunch hit the region just as its main export markets in Western Europe were going into free fall. Moreover, with so much of the debt denominated in foreign currencies, everyone in Eastern Europe has been scrambling to get their hands on foreign exchange and local currencies have collapsed.
Most of the Eastern European debt is held by Western European banks. It also turned out that some of the biggest lenders to Eastern Europe were Austrian and Italian banks — for example, loans by Austrian banks to Eastern European countries are almost equivalent to 70 percent of Austria’s G.D.P. Now, Italy and Austria can’t afford to bail out even their own banks.
The debt crisis in Eastern Europe is much more than an economic problem. The wrenching decline in the standard of living caused by this crisis is provoking social unrest.
Dennis tackles the Octomom. He criticizes the doctor for implanting a woman who already had six kids. A single woman. Because he does not make judgments? That is not true. He made a judgment to do it. You either judge that you should or you judge that you shouldn’t.
"This cracks me up. She has a publicist. Food stamps and a publicist. Only in America."
Last week, Octomom’s publicist defended an emergency 9-1-1 call from the family. The Octomom threatened to kill herself. The police responded eight times to those calls.
"If every woman demanded from society what this woman does, society would collapse. She’s quite something. I blame the doctor. The doctor’s the enabler."
R. Ephraim Buchwald urges us to emulate the purpose of the Menorah so that we are inspired, invigorated and excited about Jewish life: link
R. Baruch Simon investigates the unusal nature of the mitzvah of constructing the Menorah: link (audio)
The Mishkan, the Kohanim, Korban Tamid and the Miliuim
R. Ezra Bick explains the relationship between the Mishkan, the Kohanim, the Korban Tamid, and the Miluim: link
The Importance of the Korban Tamid
R. Aharon Lichtenstein elucidates why the Korban Tamid was considered a “Klal Gadol BaTorah”: link
The Urim vTumim
R. Yissocher Frand explains why Torah leadership requires both Urim ( the light of Torah) and Tumim ( the ability to render proper interpretations of Torah): link
The Ephod and the Choshen
R. Asher Brander explores the purpose and the inversion of the Ephod and the Choshen in Shmos 28:6, 15 and Shmos 39:2,8: link
R Dovid Horwitz discussses a famous statement of Rashi on Shmos 28:4: link
Understanding the Tzitz and the Mizbeach HaKtores
R. Michael Rosensweig elaborates on the purpose of the Tzitz and the Mizbeach HaKtores: link 1, link 2
Parshas Zachor
R. Avraham Gordimer explores the relationship between Parshas Zachor and Purim: link
R. Dovid Hirsch discusses the fulfillment of the mitzvah of eradicating Amalek: link (audio)
R. Daniel Z. Feldman discusses the importance of Zchirus: link (audio)
Taanis Esther
Rav Soloveitchik zt"l discusses the uniqueness of Taanis Esther: link
Purim
Rav Soloveitchik zt"l explores various hashkafic aspects of Megilas Esther: link
R. Herschel Schachter explains that Purim represents the Kabalas HaTorah , and especially our reaffirmation that our search beneath the superficial level in Torah SheBaal Peh always places Torah Shebicsav into a clearer perspective and explores many aspects of Purim, including reading the Megillah with a minyan and Esther’s request from the Chachamim: link 1, link 2 (audio), link 3 (audio), link 4 (audio), link 5 (audio)
R. Shmuel Marcus discusses the meaning and messages of Megilas Esther: link (audio)
R. Baruch Simon discusses why Megilas Esther is a form of Hallel: link (audio)
R. Doniel Schreiber explores why the halachic aspects of Purim being considered Divrei Kabalah: link
R. Yitzchak Etshalom discusses why Esther did not reveal her identity: link (PDF)
R. Asher Weiss discusses the halachic and hashkafic aspects of Mishloach Manos: link
R. Mordechai Willig discusses the obligation of women in Krias HaMegillah: link (audio)
R. Yitzchak Adlerstein, based on the Nesivos Shalom, explains why Purim can be compared favorably to Yom Hakipurim: link
R. Daniel Z Feldman discusses halachic aspects of Mishloach Manos and Ad Dlo Yada: link 1 (audio), link 2
R. Avraham Gordimer discusses when it is permitted, oblibated and probibited to drink on Purim: link
In a previous post, I quoted R. Nachum Rabinovitch as disagreeing with R. Moshe Soloveichik’s inference from the Rambam that the mitzvah to completely destroy Amalek applies to any nation that acts like Amalek (link). I have since seen that R. Eliezer Melamed (Revivim: Am, Eretz, Tzava, p. 82) also explicitly rejects R. Soloveichik’s approach. However, he adds that we should still learn from the idea behind it:
Even though the law is not like him [R. Soloveichik], and the rules of Amalek do not apply to enemies in every generation, we still learn from this that there is a moral responsibility placed on the Jewish people to unconditionally win against its enemies.
Talmid posts on Hirhurim: In a recent Q and A session at Gruss, Rav Lichtenstein said that the Rav did not base his entire psak about reparations on that shtikel torah. The Rav felt that it was morally and ethically problematic to take money from the German government and used this vort to "beef up" his argument. So in Rav Lichtenstein’s view it wasn’t just drush, but wasn’t quite a psak halacha either – a happy medium.
Anon posts: "I have since seen that R. Eliezer Melamed (Revivim: Am, Eretz, Tzava, p. 82) also explicitly rejects R. Soloveichik’s approach."
1. Does he agree with all this (from your original post on R Rabinovitch’s position):
"And in Sefer Ha-Mitzvos (positive commandment 187), the Rambam writes that just like the commandment to destroy the seven nations does not apply in every generation since they have been spread among the other nations and are unrecognizable, so too the commandment to destroy Amalek. Therefore, writes R. Rabinovitch, clearly the idea of "their memory has already been erased" also applies to Amalek and there is no halakhic concept of a "spiritual Amalek". Then why doesn’t the Rambam write that Amalek’s memory has already been erased? R. Rabinovitch explains that this is precisely what is implied when the Rambam begins discussion of this commandment with "and also" (ve-chen). The same clause that was stated about the seven Canaanite nations also applies to Amalek."
that amalek has already been destroyed, or just that there is no mitzva for a "spiritual amalek"?
2. According to R Rabinovitch’s stance that amalek has already been destroyed, why do we still read parshas zachor if the mitzva has ended?
SHAUL WRITES: In the Y.U. COMMENTATOR series on the Rav by his talmidim, Shmuel Boylan writes that he discussed this footnote with the Rav.
"I last spoke to the Rav after he had retired from the yeshiva and was living in relative seclusion in Boston with his daughter and son-in-law. Once again, access to the Rav was restricted, due to his illness and infirmity-but this time, I was successful, and was granted entry. The Rav was frailer than I remembered him. I first asked the Rav about an opinion he had quoted from his father, zt"l, that a nation (such as the Nazis) could be transformed into Amalek; I asked whether such a halakhic designation would then have implications with regard to innocent wives and children, as well. The Rav strongly rejected such a concept, reminding me that the Rambam required an approach for shalom prior to milkhemet Amalek-and that such a requirement made action against innocent parties impossible" http://media.www.yucommentator.c…212- page4.shtml
Joseph Kaplan writes:
"Do you think the Rav meant that all men, women and children of, let’s say, Palestinians must be exterminated?! "
The Rav himself answered this question in KDD in the famous footnote 25 where he wrote: "However, the obligation to wipe out individual Amalekites, as set forth in the verse from Deuteronomy, applies to only genealogical descendants of Amalek." Since the Palestinians are not such genealogical descendants, even if the Rav was speaking halachically in KDD (which I believe is, at the very least, not clear), he wrote, explicitly, that he did NOT mean that all Palestinians (or Germans in WWII etc.) should be exterminated.
Jerry: "So basically the Rav thought that enemies of the Jews are "Amalek"…except that they’re not really, because even the Rav realized that that would be ridiculous. The whole notion of "conceptualizing" a real, historical national group – in any sort of halakhic sense – is the ultimate reductio ad absurdum of the Brisker methodology."
No, because, as the Rav points out, there are two mizvot: one in Sh’mot to wage war against Amalek and one in Dvarim to eradicate Amalek. It is the second mitzvah that applies only to genealogical descendants of Amalek. The first does apply to the spiritual descendants. Thus, as I understand the Rav, it is imperitive to battle the spiritual descendants: the Nazis, Hamas, Hetzbollah and others of their ilk. But as to eradicating the nation — i.e., "exterminat[ing] all the Palestinians, men, women, children and their animals," in the words of one commenter– applies only to biological Amalek which does not today exist.
This understanding, I think, fits in well with the historical context of the Rav’s original presentation in 1956. The Rav was speaking to students and he wanted to reach their kishkes about supporting and defending Israel which was under siege at that time. He exhorted them not to make the mistake that he thought his generation made about the Nazis so he tried to get them to understand the need to do battle against these forces — battle in the real sense as it applied to Israel and the IDF and battle in other ways that would be appropriate for American Jews. Killing "men, women and children" was simply not what he was talking about as he explained in the footnote.
In some ways, these two spiritual paths compliment each other. In other ways, they conflict.
I have been studying and practicing Judaism for 20 years. I have been practicing Kundalini Yoga for two months.
Here are the most significant differences as I understand these two paths:
* Judaism is obsessed with hating evil. As the Torah commands, "You shall burn the evil out of your midst." There’s no such equivalent in Kundalini that I’ve seen. Hatred is a dirty word in Kundalini. You are supposed to cultivate a detached point of view on life. As best as I can tell, Kundalini advocates pacifism, which Judaism regards as immoral (the Torah commands that you shall not stand by while the blood of your neighbor is shed, the Torah commands capital punishment, etc).
* Judaism is obsessed with distinctions, between Jew and non-Jew, between man and God, between man and woman, between adults and children, between good and evil, between the holy and the profane, between the kosher and trafe. I’ve detected no such obsession in Kundalini.
* Judaism has a systematic system of ethics. The ethics of Kundalini, as I understand it so far, lie in developing states of being such as love and compassion.
As I practice these two paths, here is how they conflict in my life.
* For every hour I am doing yoga, I am not studying Torah nor performing its commands. I have limited time, energy and money. All the resources I give to yoga, I am not giving to Judaism.
* I hear a lot of things in Kundalini that go against what Judaism teaches. For instance, I’ve heard that "I am God." Judaism separates God and man. God can never become man.
Kundalini complements my Judaism in that Judaism has no system for exercise and stretching (I’ve heard about Jewish meditation but don’t know much about it, I have tried some Jewish yoga and it is cool). The yoga center is a far happier, more joyful place than shul. The women are prettier and nicer. Yogi tea tastes better. The idols look cool. Yogi chicks are more flexible than the average shul chick.
By doing yoga, I am a happier person and I feel more flexible for dealing with the winds of life. Yoga makes me a more pleasant person to be around, whether I am in shul or not. Yoga gives me more energy so I can study Torah and perform God’s commandments. Yoga is a diversion from the beit midrash (House of Study) so I can return to the sacred text feeling rejuvenated.
A friend writes: “Based on the yoga sutras of Patanjali (a very holy and amazing thing to study from over 2,000 years ago) and The Bhagavad Gita, the yoga philosophy is that our true self is divine but there is also “Brahman” Who is the outside God. So essentially we are like little pieces of God. It can be equated to our highest self, our best self, our most holy self, but that doesn’t conflict with believing in a Supreme God.”
I then reached out to Rabbi Brenner via Facebook. Tonight I sent him these questions and he promptly emailed back his response.
LF: How should Kellogs have reacted when their spokesmodel Michael Phelps was photographed smoking marijuana?
Rabbi: From a marketing perspective? They should have put the photo of him with the bong on the box. But I made my argument in my essay on Beliefnet from the moral perspective of a corporation that overlooks drunk driving convictions but freaks out about pot. That, to me, is just stupid.
LF: When, if ever, is it OK to call someone an idiot? What do you think of the Chofetz Chaim‘s approach to speech? In my view, no journalism is possible if one is forced to follow the admonitions of the Chofetz Chaim. What is your view?
Rabbi: The Chofetz Chaim lived in a world where people were, for the most part, in small communities where there was little privacy. That was why it was so critical to set standards regarding boundaries of speech. The rise of modern media, particularly of trash talking stand up comedy in the 1960s created the environment in which it has become acceptable to call people idiots within certain contexts. Is that a good thing? Not really sure. I don’t do it, though, and when I am called an idiot in public, I want to know the reasons.
LF: What kind of role does journalism and truth-seeking play in Judaism?
Rabbi: Truth seeking – if you mean seeking justice – runs deep in the prophets and in rabbinic Judaism, for sure. And I think that journalism and Judaism are tied at the hip. (Some folks have even argued that the seeds of journalism came from Jewish circles in Vienna).
LF: Perhaps you’ve heard of William Lobdell’s new book, Losing My Religion. He was an evangelical Christian and a religion reporter for the LA Times. He lost his faith in part because he saw that truth had such a small role in the way religion is practiced in America today (particularly the way the Catholic church protected pedophiles).
Lobdell sees Howard Stern as a role model for truth-telling. Have you ever listened to Howard Stern and do you think he is a role model for truth-telling? Who are living people you regard as role models for their courage to tell the truth?
Rabbi: I’ve listened to Stern. I think that most of the time he’s just acting like a twelve year old boy who drank a bit too much Jolt. But there have been times when his humor touched on the level of Lenny Bruce (z’l) or Carlin. I do think that it is sad that his family life crashed – all of a sudden his comedy wasn’t so cute. Living people who have the courage to tell the truth? I like the performance art crowd – Lisa Kron, Karen Finley, Deb Margolin, Danny Hoch – they are in-your-face but wise to the ways in which we live now.
LF: How should we react to friends who smoke marijuana or use other illegal drugs? How should we react to friends who regularly drink to excess and drive while intoxicated?
Rabbi: Each case is different. I have a couple of friends in recovery and I try to support them as best I can. If friends are casual users, I generally don’t comment. If I had a friend who was drinking to excess and driving a vehicle, I would do everything possible to stop them. I have kids—so the idea of drunk drivers pulling up my driveway is not something I can live with.
LF: Is it OK to engage in vice moderately? Vices such as porn, drugs, drunkenness, prostitution, sexual promiscuity, gambling?
Rabbi: I think that each one of these vices presents a different case and that there are different levels. I have a covenant with my wife that excludes a number of these vices, even moderately, so in those cases it is definitely not OK.
LF: Do you believe that drugs such as marijuana should be criminalized? What about cocaine, heroin, speed and the like?
Rabbi: To be honest, I’m worried most about Meth so I’m not about to say that we should legalize drugs. But if alcohol is legal, marijuana should be legal too. I don’t see it as being any more harmful. Not sure what I think about heroin or cocaine. But I’d criminalize the sale, not the use.
LF: When you were a kid, what did you want to be when you grew up?
Rabbi: When I realized that I couldn’t make it as a basketball star? A lawyer.
LF: Where were you in the social pecking order in high school?
Rabbi: Voted “Friendliest” in the school.
LF: Why did you become a rabbi?
Rabbi: Wanted to stay in school, study philosophy.
LF: How has your choice of profession affected you?
Rabbi: When I did hospital and prison chaplaincy training I realized that the most important things to learn were not in books. I’ve written a lot about this on my blog www.rabbidanielbrenner.blogspot.com
LF: Why did you choose to become a Reconstructionist rabbi?
Rabbi: Rabbi Mordecai Kaplan might have been a cranky man but he was a visionary thinker. I dig science, so I wanted to study the thought of someone who tried to reconcile modernity and maximal traditional ritual…not that he’s perfect (especially on theology) but he was a brilliant guy who has shaped Judaism for the last seventy years. I also wanted to learn with Dr. Art Green who teaches chasidoot and was prez of the RRC at the time. The idea that one could fuse a rational thinker and a mystical tradition sounded like a good tension to me.
LF: What excites you and what depresses you about Jewish life?
Rabbi: Excites me? Music. There is always good Jewish music coming out — like Deleon and Sway Machinery – I really love Jewish music. Depresses me? The extremes on the Israel front. I am depressed about Jews who hate Israel and about Jews who hate Arabs – they both bring me down. Other things that excite me – Aviva Zornberg’s drashot, going to study at Hartman Institute this summer, my friend Kevin who studies Sofrut, listening to my sons chant Megillah.
From CIS.org: WASHINGTON (March 8, 2009) – The E-Verify program will shut down thus week, unless it is reauthorized by Congress. The free, online system run by the Department of Homeland Security enables employers to check that new hires are indeed eligible to work in the United States, rather than relying only on easily forged paper documents.
To help inform the debate over this program, the Center for Immigration Studies has released new data from U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (online at http://cis.org/node/1087 ) that shows online employer queries of the system are already approaching 3 million so far this year, nearly half the 6.6 million queries for all of 2008, which was itself more than double the use of the system in 2007. If the usage for 2009 continues at the same rate, the number of employer queries for this year will be 442% greater than in 2007.
In 2008, about one in eight new hires nationwide was checked through E-Verify, and if the projected growth rate continues, perhaps one-quarter or one-third of all new hires will be verified by the system, putting it well on the way to becoming a standard hiring practice for all legitimate employers.
In addition, new passport data now available from the State Department is streamlining work authorization for foreign-born U.S. citizens. Increased employer satisfaction with E-Verify – demonstrated by the steady increases in employer sign-ups and queries with E-Verify – indicates that E-Verify is one of the most successful programs in government.
Janice Kephart, Director of National Security Policy at the Center for Immigration Studies, has released this data as a follow-up to her September 2008 Backgrounder, ”If It’s Fixed, Don’t Break It: Moving Forward with E-Verify,” online at http://cis.org/Everify .
A couple of weeks ago at yoga, I told the teacher how much I hated the class, how much rage and resistance I had to the exercises, and I said she was cruel.
A brunette in the class agreed with me. She’d found it difficult too. She also found herself filled with rage.
We ended up raging for an hour after class. I found out this was her first experience with Kundilini Yoga and that she was in town to do a concert that night.
We were going to go out for drinks at a raw food restaurant right then and there but there was no such place in my neighborhood so Concetta Kirschner decided instead to go get her hair done.
When I went home and Googled her, I found out more about her "Princess Superstar" personae.
(Concetta’s mom Dr. Diana Kirschner just published the book, "Love in 90 Days.")
This morning we did an interview.
Luke: "What was your experience of Kundilini Yoga?"
Concetta: "It was really hard. I’m used to practicing Jivamuchti Yoga, which is based more on ashtanga and there’s a lot of vinyassa. This was just holding different poses and doing a lot of pranayama. I thought I was a really great yogi and this kicked my ass, but I really loved it because I felt the energy moving in extraordinary ways. It’s a pretty magical practice."
Luke: "How long have you been doing yoga?"
Concetta: "About five years."
Luke: "And what has it contributed to your life?"
Concetta: "It’s really changed my life. It gave me a connection to God again. I kinda was a bit of an atheist. My father was going to be a rabbi. He went to yeshiva. He has a very religious family. He met my mother in graduate school. She was not Jewish. She came from a Catholic family. They met and fell in love. He decided not to be a rabbi. He wanted to be a psychologist, but he was still quite religious. After he met my mother, he had so much trouble with the family because she was not Jewish. They wanted to disown him. They were so harsh, he became disillusioned with religion. Even my mother converted to Judaism and they still wouldn’t accept her. He kinda threw it out, which is really sad. I was raised always identifying as Jewish but we were never very religious because my father was so hurt by his family, which has now been healed. Now we all have a relationship to my aunt and to my extended family on my father’s side.
"I grew up thinking that religion tore people apart and it wasn’t something that brought about love. When I got into yoga, I kinda found God again. I’m grateful for that."
Luke: "We were talking after yoga about raw foods. Why did you get into raw foods so much and what has that done for your life?"
Concetta: "After I started becoming very spiritual, I became obsessed with evolving my consciousness.
"Raw foods means you do not cook any of your foods because cooking kills about 50% of the minerals and vitamins and about 80% of the enzymes. The idea is that you eat a lot of high prana, high energy-giving foods and that clears your channels to the divine and gives you superior health and living on a higher vibration.
"When I got into the cuisine, you can make such extraordinary things. I can make cheese out of nuts. I can make delicious crackers and even bread that are raw. I just made a strawberry mouse pie last night for a friend’s birthday that was completely raw.
"I’ve been doing that for about a year. I travel the world and I never get sick. My meditation and yoga practice has gone to a new level as well as my thinking and my spiritual connection."
Luke: "And how much has it increased your food bill?"
Concetta: "Tripled. I just did my taxes last night with my father. I ranked out everything I spend. It’s blasphemous if I would tell you how much I spent on food last year. Horrendous. The philosophy is that you save on doctor’s bills."
Luke: "How do you keep it up when you are traveling?"
Concetta: "It’s all about intention, commitment and preparation. I travel with a little blender. I take so much stuff with me — dehydrated crackers, nuts, almond butter, seaweed, and dried fruits. And wherever you go, you can get fresh produce. I like to have organic. That’s very important. Everybody should eat organic because it’s got nearly three times as many vitamins and minerals as conventional, as well as not being genetically modified or having s— tons of chemicals all over it."
Luke: "So when you were a child, what did you want to be when you grew up?"
Concetta: "I wanted either to be a psychologist like both of my parents or a movie star. As Princess Superstar, I’m a little bit of both. I definitely end up counseling a lot of people. I make people feel good. I’m also part movie star because I definitely have this crazy glamorous personae."
Luke: "In high school, where were you in the social pecking order?"
Concetta: "I was a dork. I was president of the Latin club. I was pretty smart, and the smart girls, nobody like that. You had to be on the lacrosse team and sporty."
"I went to NYU and I studed Theater. I’ve wanted to be an actress since I was little."
Luke: "How did this Princess Superstar thing evolve?"
Concetta: "I started playing guitar in college. When I got out of college, I would go on all these auditions and I wasn’t getting very many parts. I did a little stint of Romeo & Juliet. I started joining bands. I thought, wow, you can just get up and play. You don’t have to wait for someone to give you a job. This acting stuff sucks. You have to wait. You are totally beholden to whatever winds, but if you’re in a band, you can just go play that night in some club in New York.
"I was finding more and more success with music.
"Hold on, my bird is screaming. Come on baby, OK? You, you, be quiet.
"I started recording some of my own music. I was a guitar player in an all-girl band but I really wanted to be solo, but I didn’t have the nerve for it. I was just terrified, but something in me said just go for it. Who cares if you’re nervous? I heard a really good quote last night, ‘How you deal with fear is a forced act of courage.’
"I set out on my own in 1994 and decided to do Princess Superstar. I made a demo tape and sent it to only a few labels. One of them was Grand Royal, the Beastie Boys label. This guy called me up and said, are you going to have a show in New York. I said, oh yeah. I had no idea. I had no band. I had nothing. I said, when are you coming? He said next month.
"I found out when he was coming. I got a band together. I got a show together. My first show was at The Pyramid, which was Madonna‘s first club appearance. I got my s— together. The guy never showed up but I just kept going. The rest is history. Now I’m working on my sixth album."
Luke: "How much do you DJ and how much do you sing and what goes on there?"
Concetta: "I started DJing about four years ago just for fun and that took off. DJing was really cool because it’s just me and I can go without putting a whole tour together with my band and getting the tour bus. The DJing is a one-man show. I’m singing two to three of my songs and the rest is DJing. I’m not a typical DJ because I come to it from performing. I’m always on the microphone and I’m always getting people excited and rapping over other songs. I’m a little bit crazy and trying to make it more of a show."
Luke: "And how is your music changing?"
Concetta: "That’s a really good question because as I get more spiritual, my music does too. I used to be just silly and want to make people laugh and have some smart crazy lyrics. I find that as I’m growing, my music is also growing. When I say my music is becoming more spiritual, I don’t mean it is becoming lame-ass literal. There is nothing I can’t stand more than literal New Age music, but what I’m excited about is mixing the two, keeping the crazy insane energy of Princess Superstar and that funny funny vibe but mixing it now with a deeper message. My next album is called ‘The New Evolution.’"
Luke: "How do you balance what you want to say with your music with what you think people want to hear?"
Concetta: "That’s just it. You’ve got to be subtle about the whole thing. New Age messages in music are just plain ol’ crap. They’re so boring. Nonetheless, the messages are really good. You’ve got to make people laugh. Look at ‘The Simpsons.’ They have political messages in there. Social commentary. You’re laughing and you go, ‘Wait, that’s pretty deep.’ I’m into hitting people in the head but in a subtle way."
Luke: "How did you construct the personae for Princess Superstar?"
Concetta: "When I first chose the name, it was more ironic. There were two things going on. One, every girl wants to be a princess and a superstar. Two, it’s ironic. The excesses of our society. We’re all obsessed with royalty and stardom. It’s so pathetic, the whole tabloid thing. The personae developed over time. I wanted it to be this futuristic, crazy, fun, funny, never take itself too seriously. That was always important to me, that the irony was always there."
Luke: "How has Princess Superstar affected Concetta Kirschner?"
Concetta: "When I first started, I was very shy, very nerdy. It was through default confidence that I got real confidence. I constructed this personae and behind this personae I could be whatever I wanted to be. I could be crazy on stage. All my favorite performers have incredible stage presence, like Iggy Pop. Behind this, I could hide."
Luke: "How did it affect the way people treated you, Concetta, when you evolved this outrageous personae?"
Concetta: "Certainly people have a lot of respect. People are like wow. I’ll be a white girl and I’ll be rapping. That’s rare. That I wasn’t pretending to be something I wasn’t in that world either. I was talking about my world, not talking about being from the ‘hood."
Luke: "How does Princess Superstar affect your dating and relationships?"
Concetta: "It’s really bad. It’s a real mess. Guys get really intimidated by Princess Superstar. Me, Concetta, I’m very different than this personae. It’s quite confusing for men. I did just get out of a three-year relationship, which was my longest. I’m not proud of that. I’m working on it. I’m in therapy. I’m single and I’m looking!"
Luke: "And what type of men attract you?"
Concetta: "I like Jewish men. I like very smart and deeply compassionate and conscious men. And funny. And cute. I will admit something, I thought you were cute."
Luke: "Even with the beard?"
Concetta: "I loved the beard."
Luke: "Most women hate the beard."
Concetta: "Really? I love it. I think you’re so much hotter with the beard."
Luke: "You’re the first woman who’s ever said that."
Concetta: "Really?"
Luke: "Yeah. ‘Get rid of that beard Grizzly Adams.’"
Concetta: "Do you know why? It looks holy."
Luke: "The other day, this woman offered to have sex with me if I shaved it off. I refused."
Concetta: "Are you serious?"
Luke: "Yeah. A couple of women actually have offered to have sex with me if I shave off the beard."
Concetta: "You see? You’re going after the wrong women."
I pause.
Concetta: "Now I make you shy."
Luke: "When you interact with your fans, do they want to interact with Princess Superstar or with Concetta?"
Concetta: "I think both. There are some fans who I know personally and some want to party. Man, I’m in bed at 11pm with an herbal tea. That’s my party."
Luke: "Was there a time in your life when you liked to party?"
Concetta: "Yes. I am so grateful that that time of my life is over now."
Luke: "Sexuality is a big part of what you sing about and act out. How did that happen and how do you deal with that?"
Concetta: "That was a fun topic to write about for a while. I felt like it was really taboo for women to talk, especially in the rap world. All the guys in all the rap songs, forget about rap, let’s talk about rock, in every genre, guys have been talking about sex in their songs forever, from Iggy Pop to Elvis to Robert Plant to whatever. And then when a woman does it, all of a sudden it’s a big deal, taboo, naughty. I happen to think that you can say some funny things, that sex and humor mix well. I was exploring that for a while. But I’m over it now. I feel like I’ve been there and done that. There have been quite a lot of women doing it."
Luke: "Have you read your mother’s book, "Love in 90 Days"?"
Concetta: "Yes."
Luke: "And what do you think of the book?"
Concetta: "I think it’s great. She’s amazing. She’s helped so many people find love. I really like the book because it’s about self-empowerment and becoming the best you you can be."
Luke: How do your parents relate to your career?
Concetta: "They’re completely supportive. My father has come to my shows and played air guitar. I’ll be like, ‘Dad, there’s not even guitar in that song.’ I love my parents. I’m really close to them. They’ve been married for 40 years and they love each other. It’s amazing. They even make-out."
Luke: "How do you feel about growing older?"
Concetta: "It’s so funny because everyone, especially a woman, are so afraid of getting older. I feel like I’m getting hotter as I get older. I love the confidence that it gives me. It’s an inner self-love. Especially with the eating raw, this is the beauty diet. I feel awesome about getting older."
Luke: "I was reading a column a few weeks ago entitled, ‘Prudes at dinner, gluttons in bed.’ It says that as eating has become more highly charged with moral judgment, sex has become notably less so. Do you have any thoughts?"
Concetta: "I think that’s correct. We’re living in an age where the food system is horrendous on so many levels, spiritual, moral, emotional. If you look at the factories and the way they’re keeping animals in these cages where they can’t move, and the way they’re slaughtering them, I did see a documentary about kosher slaughtering, it’s one of the most cruelest, it’s supposed to be kind, but there’s a crazy documentary on it, I think it’s called Earthlings, the way animals are being kept, even dairy production, a cow is supposed to live 20 years but dairy cows live only about six because it is standing for 24 hours a day on metal slats with the light on for 24 hours, it’s horrific. I think there should be moral judgment. People need to know where their food is coming from. And then genetically modified food. They’re putting fish genes into tomatos. They’re doing all sorts of weird s— with our food supply, injecting pesticides into plants so that they grow with the pesticides in them. I could go on and on. I actually studied this. I am very passionate that we should educate ourselves about our food."
“Jay emails: "Hey Luke! I was watching your interview with the revisionist outside of the Oscars and was thinking about why there isn’t ever a dialogue between holocaust revisionist/ deniers and actual survivors. Education is more effective, right? Like I think it was good how you talked to the guy, gave him a chance to express his views. That’s better then just shutting him down. I’ve been thinking about how my grandma survived Auschwitz and is still alive. How interesting would it be to do some sort of Documentary where we get these two different groups together for dialogue. It could be disastrous, or it could be enlightening. What do you think?"
Luke: “I suspect those who deny the Holocaust will not be open to what the survivors say.” (End of exchange)
Jay complimented you on giving me “a chance to express (my) views” on the Holocaust (or Holohoax, in the sense that, as many people believe, there was no Nazi program of extermination and certainly no executionary gas chambers.)
I second the compliment.
That remark of Jay’s was nice to hear: gentlemanly20and open minded, but it raises two questions I would like to put to Jay
and to you as well, Luke.
1: If you think I have the right to raise questions in public about the accepted story of the Holocaust, do you approve of the laws in many European countries which imprison people for doing what I was doing?
2: Would you approve and support a law in the U.S.A. that would fine or imprison someone for doing what I did or a Revisionist scholar for writing on the subject?
(Background on the 2nd question: Federal “Hate Crime” legislation is being debated in Congress now and will probably pass. I am sure it would put me in legal jeopardy were I to do again what I did on the 22nd……Our State Department has an Office of Global Anti-Semitism. It quotes and does not dispute a European Union entity’s “Working Definition of Anti-Semitism” which includes:
“Denying the fact, scope, mechanisms (e.g., gas chambers) or intentionality of the genocide of the Jewish people at the hands of National Socialist Germany and its supporters and accomplices during WW II (the Holocaust).” Google U.S. State Department of Global Anti-Semitism to satisfy yourself that we are close to following Europe’s lead in our treatment of “Holocaust Deniers.”
I limited myself to two questions so I won’t ask: Would you visit me in prison and bring me some chicken soup?
*********
Jay thought that dialogue on the Holocaust between revisionist/deniers and survivors would be interesting, possibly enlightening. ( I don’t think Abe Foxman would agree.)
Luke, you replied: “I suspect those who deny the Holocaust will not be open to what the survivors say.”
Luke, you are 180 degrees off on that. Holocaust Revisionists are eager to interact, dialogue and debate. We believe the
facts are on our side.
Unlike most Holocaust promoters and believers, we have looked at both sides. Until a year ago I thought that Holocaust Denial was as low as you could go. That was until I looked at what the Revisionists had to say.
Luke, as to Revisionists not being “open to what the survivors say,” you have the roles reversed again. It is the “survivors” and their supporters who are not “open to what the” Revisionists say.
Don’t you remember what happened when you introduced the elderly Jewish lady into the video? She was a relative of concentration camp inmates, some of whom died and some of whom survived.
She would not talk to me, insulted me (I forgive her) and refused to take the material I offered her.
Jay is toying with the idea of dialogue between the two sides, seeking your imprimatur. Luke, you did not jump at the idea.
There are some very well-informed Holocaust Revisionists who would be glad to debate an authority from the other side of the question. Dennis Prager leaps to mind. (The thought of that giant leaping is intriguing. I think of the pilot of the giant airliner who was bragging on its amenities and facilities, mentioning the bowling alley in the right wing. He ended by saying “Now if I can just get this mother off the ground!”)
I wish you both would try to get some authority to agree to such a public debate. It would be educational for you. I believe you would find that no Jewish authority would agree. It is much easier and less embarrassing for them to continue to inveigh against and insult “Holocaust Deniers” from a safe distance.
LUKE SAYS: I do not agree with criminalizing denial of the Holocaust.
"This guy knows all the gossip, the ins and outs, the lashon hara of the Orthodox world. He’s an [expert] in... all the inner workings of the Orthodox world." (Rabbi Aaron Rakeffet-Rothkoff)
