No room for two Jewish museums
It is difficult to have rachmones (compassion) for the Contemporary Jewish Museum. Its predecessor, a small exhibition space in the basement of the Federation building on Steuart Street in San Francisco, also owned no art.
In an act of hubris, Bay Area Jewish philanthropists raised $47.5 million to hire a world-renowned architect to design and build them an edifice. They did this even though the Judah L. Magnes Museum had over 30 years of collecting, owning and exhibiting Jewish art.
Did the Bay Area need two Jewish museums? It seems clear that the philanthropists knew they were in trouble from the start. They merged with the Magnes, but the partnership ended in less than two years. The only conclusion one can draw from this origin story is that the CJM was an exercise in ego.
Yes, Jewish institutions are at risk. How could they not be when philanthropists spend $47.5 million to erect an edifice to their egos? Jewish institutions are at risk because Jewish philanthropists refuse to believe decades of study findings. Among the top predictors of Jewish continuity are synagogue membership/attendance, Jewish camp and Jewish religious school — day and synagogue.
Instead of raising $47.5 million for a building or to underwrite what they think is a cutting-edge program, the money should have been spent on subsidizing synagogue membership, camp tuition, school tuition and JCC fees. Are they blind to the finding that emerges in every survey? “It costs too much to be Jewish. I can’t afford it.” Millions were wasted on a building. It would have been better spent on making the foundations of Jewish life more affordable.
Leslie Kane
San Francisco
CJM avoided deeper issues
In a recent article about the closure of the Contemporary Jewish Museum titled “‘A punch in the gut’: Artists and fans worry about the Contemporary Jewish Museum’s future” (Nov. 29), artist Beth Grossman lamented the loss of an institution that, for her, embodied Jewish contemporaneity “not as an old story, not stuck in the Holocaust or in the shtetl or any of those kinds of things,” but as a “culture that’s living and growing and changing and wrestling with contemporary issues.”
Yet, CJM’s pursuit of the contemporary often fell into the very trap it sought to avoid: presenting a sanitized version of Jewish identity that sidestepped the complexities of navigating Jewishness today. By largely avoiding foundational topics like the Holocaust and Israel and its relation to the American Jewish diaspora, the museum framed the contemporary as a way to bypass difficult conversations.
This approach produced programming heavy on light-hearted exhibitions and performative Yiddishkeit — charming but superficial — while neglecting the Bay Area Jewish community’s deeper cultural, political and social challenges.
In its effort to appeal to non-Jewish audiences, CJM failed to address pressing questions of the contemporary Jewish experience, culminating in the symbolic emptiness of its recent California Jewish Open exhibition. While blank spaces marked artists’ refusal to participate in protest of the war in Gaza, the museum offered no meaningful dialogue on Jewish existence in the wake of Oct. 7, whether before this exhibition or since. These vacant walls now extend to the entire museum, reflecting an institution that has lost its grounding.
But this emptiness presents an opportunity to reimagine what contemporary Jewishness can mean in the Bay Area. A renewed CJM must become a vital cultural resource — one that embraces the weight of history while seriously grappling with the complexities of the present. By fostering bold dialogue within the Jewish community and forging solidarities across cultural and religious boundaries, CJM can anchor fragmented identities and offer a framework for a localized, truly contemporary Jewish being.
Nadav Hochman
Oakland
Defining antisemitism
In her letter in J.’s Nov. 29 edition, Sheree Roth criticizes our local Jewish Community Relations Council for not adopting the International Holocaust Remembrance Alliance’s (IHRA) definition of antisemitism.
While I fully agree that the JCRC should speak forcefully against antisemitism whenever and wherever it occurs and, furthermore, that the State of California should include antisemitism in any discussion of racial, ethnic or religious discrimination, the IHRA definition is the wrong one to use.
The IHRA definition has been widely criticized for being so vague that any legitimate criticism of Israel (or anyone or anything Jewish, for that matter) can be called “antisemitic.”
The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism is much better, and should be promoted wherever possible. The Jerusalem Declaration, unlike the IHRA, clarifies when criticism of Israel is, and is not, antisemitic, and includes specific examples that can guide policymakers and the legal system. Let’s definitely call out antisemitism whenever we see it, but let’s not fall into the trap of calling any legitimate criticism of Israel “antisemitic.” The Jerusalem Declaration on Antisemitism is much more helpful than the IHRA definition.
Andrew Scharlach
Alamo
Give Trump a chance
In the Nov. 15 issue of J., I saw fairly broad coverage of what Bay Area Jews are feeling and thinking about the Nov. 5 election (“Bay Area Jewish liberals grappling with Trump’s win”). I’ve read J. on a regular basis since 1978 when I immigrated to San Francisco from South Africa.
Notwithstanding the breadth of coverage, it was jarring to read of the distress and dismay expressed by the election of Donald Trump.
I have a visceral response to antisemitism. I can smell it and feel it; seeing it in print is simple. For me, anti-Zionism and antisemitism are interchangeable. That’s why when I read about so-called liberal Jews squirming after the election results, it was discouraging.
Being liberal means being open to hearing all ideas. It doesn’t mean you have to accept them as your own. One can be a liberal thinker and make conservative choices. If survival is a conservative choice, count me in.
For me, the most enduring message from those who think Trump’s election will be bad for Jews is that it reinforces my belief that we are our own worst enemies.
Desmond Tuck
San Mateo