WHEN T H E STATE WI NKS THE PERFORMANCE OF JEWISH CONVERSION IN ISRAEL
M I C H A L K R AV E L -T O V I
Introduction Taking Winking Seriously
We Both Came in Jeans ,7 722. 0( a moment to recognize Moran and a little longer to understand why.1 $W ϮUVW JODQFH VKH ORRNHG H[DFWO\ WKH VDPH +HU KDLU ZDV ORQJ and thin, as before, and her face was pretty and makeup-free, like I remembered from the conversion class (ulpan). But there was something else about her now. It perhaps sounds a bit cliché, but there was something freer about her. And it certainly seems funny in retrospect that I failed to UHFRJQL]H KHU EHFDXVH VKH ZRUH EOXH MHDQV +RZ PXFK GLϸHUHQFH FDQ EOXH MHDQV PDNH" %XW VKH GLG ORRN PRUH FRPIRUWDEOH HYHQ IURP DIDU DQG WKH EOXH MHDQV GLG PDNH D GLϸHUHQFH HPEDUUDVVLQJO\ EXW DOVR LQVWUXFWLYHO\ , only recognized her when she approached me. ,W KDG EHHQ VL[ PRQWKV VLQFH ,·G ODVW VHHQ 0RUDQ , ϮUVW PHW KHU ZKLOH VKH ZDV VWXG\LQJ LQ WKH FRQYHUVLRQ XOSDQ WKH ϮUVW DQG ORQJHVW VWDJH RI WKH VWDWH conversion process. Moran had since completed her conversion requirePHQWV $IWHU HϸHFWLYHO\ ϮQLVKLQJ WKH WHQ PRQWK XOSDQ VKH ZDV LQYLWHG WR D hearing of the rabbinic conversion court regarding her conversion application. Her hearing was a success, and she soon underwent immersion in the ULWXDO EDWK³WKH ϮQDO DQG GHFLVLYH DFW RI FRQYHUVLRQ $ IHZ PRQWKV ODWHU VKH UHFHLYHG WKH FHUWLϮFDWH RI FRQYHUVLRQ DQG ZDV UHJLVWHUHG DV D -HZ LQ WKH SRSulation registry.
[ 10 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ 6KH KDV EHHQ LQ ,VUDHO IRU TXLWH D IHZ \HDUV IRXUWHHQ WR EH H[DFW VLQFH immigrating (making aliyah; lit. “ascension”) to Israel from Ukraine at the DJH RI HOHYHQ 6KH FDPH ZLWK KHU SDUHQWV XQGHU WKH H[WHQGHG ,VUDHOL ODZ of repatriation, a law that since 1970 has granted the right of entry and “return” not only to those recognized as Jews but also to people of Jewish ancestry and their spouses. Moran’s grandfather—the only halakhically recognized Jew in her family—never made it to Israel. Moran received Israeli citizenship upon her arrival. She grew up in the PRVWO\ -HZLVK *XVK 'DQ PHWURSROLWDQ DUHD RI JUHDWHU 7HO $YLY ZDV HGXcated in the public Jewish-Israeli school system, and served in the army. If \RX VDZ KHU \RX ZRXOG QHYHU UHDOL]H WKDW VKH LV QRW D -HZLVK ,VUDHOL <RX would not even necessarily pick up on her Ukrainian background. She adopted a common Hebrew name, she speaks beautiful Israeli Hebrew with only the faintest trace of an accent, and she is knowledgeable about Israeli politics.2 /LNH PRVW -HZLVK ,VUDHOLV VKH FHOHEUDWHV ERWK UHOLJLRXV DQG FLYLO Jewish holidays (Shoham 2014), and like many FSU immigrants, she is proud WR EH ,VUDHOL DQG FDQQRW LPDJLQH D IXWXUH HOVHZKHUH /HVKHP %XW LQ spite of all these meaningful testaments to her national, cultural, and social Jewish Israeli belonging, the state only recognized Moran as a Jew when she FRPSOHWHG WKH 2UWKRGR[ FRQYHUVLRQ SURFHVV 7KURXJKRXW PRVW RI WKH FRQYHUVLRQ XOSDQ 0RUDQ FRQVLVWHQWO\ ZRUH D VNLUW RU D GUHVV KHU DUPV DOZD\V FRYHUHG E\ ORQJ VKLUW VOHHYHV H[WHQGLQJ below her elbows. As an anthropologist, I also took care to dress according to WKH PRGHVW\ FRGH WKDW WKH WKUHH PDOH 2UWKRGR[ WHDFKHUV KDG LQWURGXFHG WR WKH FODVV RI PRVWO\ \RXQJ ZRPHQ %XW QRZ VL[ PRQWKV ODWHU RQO\ D VKRUW walking distance from the ulpan, we both allowed ourselves to show up in jeans. ´:H ERWK FDPH LQ MHDQV µ , ZURWH LQ P\ ϮHOG QRWHV D IHZ KRXUV ODWHU DIWHU UHWXUQLQJ IURP WKH FDIp ZKHUH , LQWHUYLHZHG 0RUDQ 7KLV VHQWHQFH ZRXOG reappear more than once in my notebook, following the interviews I conducted with Moran’s conversion course classmates. It described what was FOHDUO\ YLVLEOH³WKDW LQGHHG ZH RIWHQ ZRUH MHDQV %XW LW DOVR VLJQLϮHG P\ own feeling, a feeling of free and open conversation, “talking in jeans,” between us who could formerly meet only in skirts. I had not always been sure that I wanted or would even be able to interview Moran. While I had successfully established a rapport with many women in the conversion
[ 11 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ FODVV , FRXOG DSSUHFLDWH 0RUDQ RQO\ IURP D GLVWDQFH 7KDW GLVWDQFH WR EH sure, was of her making. She maintained it even in situations that seemed WR DϸRUG WKH SRVVLELOLW\ RI PRUH LQWLPDWH FRQYHUVDWLRQ³IRU H[DPSOH ZKHQ I drove her home one evening after class. I could tell even then that she felt guarded around me, saying little and speaking in a somewhat reserved tone. But at the café, during an interview that lasted three hours, her speech ϰRZHG DQG , ZDV JODG ZH ZHUH ´WDONLQJ LQ MHDQV µ :H PHW LQ WKH FHQWHU RI 7HO $YLY RQ WKH 3XULP KROLGD\ ´6RPH GD\ ZH picked for this interview,” she said, gesturing toward the adjacent street DOLYH ZLWK WKH VRXQGV RI WKH FLW\·V WUDGLWLRQDO 3XULP SDUDGH 7KRVH VRXQGV occasionally picked up by my audio recorder, highlighted the irony of our PHHWLQJ WKDW SUHFLVHO\ ZKHQ -HZV LQ ,VUDHO GRQ FRVWXPHV LQ WKH FDUQLvalesque spirit of the Purim tradition, I met Moran when, as she put it, she “wasn’t masquerading anymore.” 7KH VWRU\ RI P\ HQFRXQWHU ZLWK 0RUDQ FDSWXUHV WKH SROLWLFV RI SHUIRUmance and sincerity that are at the heart of my ethnographic account of Israel’s Jewish conversion policy. Insofar as this account is rooted in the parDGR[HV WKDW VWUXFWXUH ,VUDHOL FRQYHUVLRQ SROLF\ DW WKH PDFUROHYHO DV , EULHϰ\ described in the prologue), the vignette with Moran provides a personal JOLPSVH LQWR KRZ WKHVH SDUDGR[HV VKDSH WKH OLYHG H[SHULHQFH DQG LQWHUSHUsonal dynamics of the conversion process at the microlevel. One of the central arguments of this book is that in order to understand how both conversion candidates and state agents handle, individually and jointly, the contradictory forces of the conversion policy, we need to better understand the mundane preoccupations, among those on both sides of these relationships, with issues of sincerity, role-playing, and suspicion. My meeting with Moran after she had been freed from such preoccupations epitomizes this core argument. Nevertheless, there is certainly a risk involved in opening this ethnography about the conversion of non-Jewish FSU immigrants with the story of Moran’s conversion. Hers is precisely the kind of story that is likely to feed the simplistic public and bureaucratic discourses that portray conversion DV DQ HODERUDWH UXVH³GLVFRXUVHV WKDW WKLV ERRN H[SORUHV EXW DOVR FRPSOLFDWHV 7KHVH SRSXODU UHSUHVHQWDWLRQV GHSLFW FRQYHUVLRQ FDQGLGDWHV DV RQO\ masquerading—not really intending to commit to the halakhic lifestyle they promise to maintain; their observance of Sabbath laws, kosher dietary restrictions, the modesty code, and family purity laws, these popular
[ 12 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ GLVFRXUVHV PDLQWDLQ ODVWV RQO\ WKH GXUDWLRQ RI WKH FRQYHUVLRQ SURFHVV 7KH ubiquitous assumption is that conversion is merely about formality and that these converts put on an act for the rabbinic bureaucratic establishment, taking advantage of the conversion track for the sole purpose of obtaining RϲFLDO -HZLVK UHFRJQLWLRQ 7KLV UHFRJQLWLRQ LV LQFRQVHTXHQWLDO IRU PDWWHUV RI LPPLJUDWLRQ DQG QDWXUDOL]DWLRQ D UHDOLW\ UHϰHFWHG LQ WKH IDFW WKDW ,VUDHO JUDQWV QRQ -HZLVK ROLP citizenship upon their arrival. But Jewish recognition is crucial for personal status matters (i.e., marriage, divorce, and burial) that are handled by the 2UWKRGR[ UDEELQLF HVWDEOLVKPHQW 1RQ -HZLVK FLWL]HQV ZKR VHHN WR PDUU\ ,VUDHOL -HZV RU VLPSO\ ZLVK WR PDUU\ DFFRUGLQJ WR 2UWKRGR[ VWDQGDUGV PXVW DWWDLQ -HZLVK UHFRJQLWLRQ 6WDWH 2UWKRGR[ FRQYHUVLRQ LV WKH SULPDU\ PHDQV of doing so.3 ,Q UHODWLRQ WR 0RUDQ FULWLFV PLJKW HPSKDVL]H KRZ MXVW VL[ PRQWKV DIWHU the conversion process, she had already traded in her skirt for jeans. Or they might point out how she openly shares with an ethnographer stories that PXVW GLϸHU LQ VSLULW IURP WKRVH VKH WROG WKH FRQYHUVLRQ DJHQWV ,QGHHG KHU VWRULHV WR PH ZHUH GLϸHUHQW³OLNH WKH RQH DERXW KRZ PXFK VKH KDWHG ZHDUing skirts, and how one day, only a few months into the conversion process, she already felt she “couldn’t take it anymore.” Pulling out jeans and a tank top from her dresser, she put them on and walked outside, her face shielded by sunglasses and a wide-brimmed hat in case, god forbid, someone might recognize her on the street. Or her story about the day she immersed herself in the mikveh (ritual bath), a story that also features blue jeans. She abhorred WKH PLNYHK H[SHULHQFH 6KH KDG DUULYHG WKHUH GHSOHWHG DQG DQJU\ ZUDFNHG with ambivalence about the whole process. Other converts sometimes shared ZLWK PH WKH H[FLWHPHQW DQG MR\ WKH\ IHOW DERXW WKH V\PEROLF PHDQLQJ RI UHELUWK DQG UHSDLU DQG WKH FHUHPRQLDO H[SHULHQFH RI EHLQJ DFFHSWHG LQWR the national fold; Moran felt none of this. Instead, apologizing for the graphic depiction, she described being forced to submerge herself “in that pee water” (“sorry, the water was just warmish for some reason”) and WKHQ H[SODLQHG WKDW ZKDW IROORZHG ZDV WKH KDSSLHVW GD\ RI KHU OLIH ´$IWHU immersing myself in that ‘amazing’ mikveh, I left the place, went straight KRPH WR VKRZHU DQG ZHQW RXW IRU WKH ϮUVW WLPH LQ D ORQJ ZKLOH LQ MHDQV DQG D 7 VKLUW , ZDV VR KDSS\ , IHOW VR OLEHUDWHG DV LI , KDG VKHG D EXLOGLQJ HLJKW\ tons dropped from my shoulders. I didn’t have to put on sunglasses and wear a wide-brimmed hat. A huge joy, what can I say, a huge joy.”
[ 13 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ But a suspicious reading of Moran’s story would obscure the subtle, QXDQFHG GHWDLOV WKDW VKDSH WKH FRQYHUVLRQ H[SHULHQFH DQG DV , ZLOO DUJXH WKH FRQYHUVLRQ SHUIRUPDQFH RI VR PDQ\ FRQYHUWV LQ OHVV GLFKRWRPRXV ZD\V as deeply complicated engagements unfolding in a gray area that blurs WUXWKV DQG OLHV VLQFHULW\ DQG GHFHSWLRQ³PL[LQJ VNLUWV ZLWK EOXH MHDQV
2Q :LQNV DQG /LHV 7KH SHUFHSWLRQ WKDW FRQYHUWV IURP )68 EDFNJURXQGV KHQFHIRUWK ´)68 FRQverts”) lie during their conversion process permeates Israeli public spheres. 7KH ,VUDHOL SUHVV VRFLDO PHGLD DQG HYHQ WKH SURWRFROV RI ,VUDHOL SDUOLDPHQtary committees all reinforce the idea that state conversion could very well DPRXQW WR DQ HODERUDWH VKDP 7KHVH SXEOLF GHEDWHV DUH SRO\SKRQLF HQFRPpassing an array of ideological voices. Jewish Israeli citizens of all religious RULHQWDWLRQV LQFOXGLQJ VHFXODU -HZV WUDGLWLRQDO -HZV UHOLJLRXV 2UWKRGR[ -HZV DQG XOWUD 2UWKRGR[ -HZV 4 liberals seeking to separate religion from state and their opponents who support state intervention in religious life; FSU immigrants who underwent conversion and those who openly refuse WR GR VR DQG JURXSV LGHQWLϮHG ZLWK OHQLHQW DQG RWKHUV ZLWK VWULQJHQW approaches to halakha—all these interlocutors, for various reasons, look XSRQ WKH H[WDQW VWDWH FRQYHUVLRQ SROLF\ ZLWK VXVSLFLRQ ,Q WKH OHVV SXEOLF GRPDLQV RI WKH FRQYHUVLRQ GHEDWH OLNH WKH VRFLDO FRQWH[WV ZKHUH WKH FRQYHUsion process actually takes place, the concepts of sincerity, deception, and OLHV FRQVWLWXWH WKH FKLHI REVHVVLRQV RI DOO SDUWLHV LQYROYHG 'XULQJ P\ ϮHOGwork, this is what everybody talked about. 7KHVH NLQGV RI SUHRFFXSDWLRQV DUH QRW XQLTXH WR WKH FDVH RI )68 FRQverts in Israel. Concerns about converts’ honesty, purity of intention, and trustworthiness—that is, about whether they might be motivated less by religious intentions and more by political or material interests— DQLPDWH D EURDG UDQJH RI FRQYHUVLRQ FRQWH[WV ,Q WKH ,VUDHOL VHWWLQJ WKH FDVH RI )HUHV 0XUD LPPLJUDQWV IURP (WKLRSLD RϸHUV WKH PRVW LPPHGLDWH parallel to the situation of FSU immigrants. As Don Seeman documented, mutual suspicion animates the relationship between the Feres Mura and the Israeli state. On the one hand, state gatekeepers suspect Feres Mura LPPLJUDQWV RI F\QLFDOO\ XVLQJ -HZLVK FRQYHUVLRQ WR ϰHH RSSUHVVLRQ DQG poverty in Ethiopia. On the other hand, the immigrants themselves suspect
[ 14 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ that Israel’s rabbinic establishment has sought to trick them into conversion (Seeman 2010). What makes these public and bureaucratic discourses of suspicion so FRPSHOOLQJ LQ WKH FRQWH[W RI VWDWH VSRQVRUHG FRQYHUVLRQ RI )68 LPPLgrants is the fact that, quite often, they treat conversion agents as complicit in the insincerity of converts. In particular, these discourses bear GLUHFWO\ RQ WKH VWDWH FRQYHUVLRQ DJHQWV ZKR UDWKHU WKDQ H[SRVLQJ OLDUV help maintain the performances of converts. 2I FRXUVH )68 FRQYHUWV GR QRW HVFDSH EODPH 7KH ´5XVVLDQVµ DV )68 immigrants are commonly called) are described as both post-Soviet subjects who know a great deal about deceiving state authorities (see also Fialkova DQG <HOHQHYVND\D DQG DV IXQGDPHQWDOO\ DWKHLVW VXEMHFWV ZKR ODFN DQ\ authentic religious inclination.5 But for the most part, the suspicious public discourses of conversion blame the complicated Israeli political situation for WKH FRQYHUVLRQ FDQGLGDWHV· OLHV 7KHVH GLVFRXUVHV UHIHUHQFH WKH VWUXFWXUDO conditions, political circumstances, and rabbinic authorities who force—but also enable—FSU conversion candidates to become impostors. ´:K\ GR , QHHG WR JR WKURXJK KHOO DQG OLH"µ DVNHG D IRUPHU ,VUDHOL ZKR immigrated from the FSU as a child, in a news article about non-Jewish “Russian” olim who later emigrated (yardu; lit. “descended”) from Israel. “In all conversion cases,” she continued, “women lie to the rabbinic court. Not one woman I know intended to observe the commandments, even though the point of conversion is to become religious. Conversion creates armies upon armies of liars, and they stand together and laugh about it” (Edelman ,Q FRQWUDVW XOWUD 2UWKRGR[ UDEELV ZKR LQVLVW RQ VLQFHUH DQG ODVWLQJ commitments to religious practice as the central condition of conversion, DFFXVH 2UWKRGR[ =LRQLVW FRQYHUVLRQ DJHQWV RI PDNLQJ D PRFNHU\ RI KDODNKD in the name of their Zionist ideology. 6SHDNLQJ IURP TXLWH GLϸHUHQW UHOLJLRXV DQG SROLWLFDO SHUVSHFWLYHV OLEHUDO 2UWKRGR[ UDEELV DQG UHOLJLRXV DFDGHPLFV VKDUH D JURZLQJ SXEOLF FULWLFLVP RI WKH UDEELQDWH 7KH\ DUJXH WKDW LWV KDUVK FRQYHUVLRQ SROLF\ VLPSO\ leaves conversion candidates no other choice but insincerity and thus LQVWLWXWLRQDOL]HV GHFHLW ZLWKLQ WKH FRQYHUVLRQ SURFHVV 7KHVH FULWLFV GHVFULEH FRQYHUVLRQ DV D SURFHVV RI VHOI RU PXWXDO GHFHSWLRQ $V <HGLG\D 6WHUQ the vice president at the Israel Democracy Institute and a religious public LQWHOOHFWXDO ZULWHV ´,Q SUDFWLFH PRVW QRQ -HZLVK ROLP DUH QRW LQWHUHVWHG LQ religious observance, they consider themselves to be joining a nation, not a
[ 15 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ UHOLJLRQ 7KH\ GRQ·W ZDQW WR EH GLϸHUHQW IURP WKH VHFXODU -HZLVK PDMRULW\ LQ ,VUDHO DQG GRQ·W XQGHUVWDQG ZK\ WKH\ PXVW IXOϮOO D UHTXLUHPHQW WKDW PRVW -HZV GRQ·W 7KH UHVXOW LV WKDW LQ RUGHU WR FRQYHUW WKH\ PXVW ZHDU D PDVN 7KH SDWK LQWR -XGDLVP DQG IXOO LQWHJUDWLRQ LQWR WKH -HZLVK QDWLRQ SDVVHV WKURXJK D OLH µ 6WHUQ
During a 2008 conference on conversion at the Israeli Democracy Institute, which I attended, Rabbi David Stav, a well-respected liberal Zionist UDEEL NQRZQ IRU KLV FULWLFDO VWDQFH RQ WKH H[WDQW VWDWH FRQYHUVLRQ SROLF\ VKDUSO\ DUWLFXODWHG D VLPLODU FRQFHUQ ZKLFK , UHFRGHG LQ P\ ϮHOG QRWHV ´7KHUH LV D GLVDJUHHPHQW PD\EH HYHQ RI FRQYHUWV GR QRW REVHUYH WKH FRPPDQGPHQWV 6R ZKR DUH \RX FKHDWLQJ" -XGJLQJ E\ WKH RXWFRPHV ZKR LV FKHDWLQJ ZKRP" $UH WKH\ FKHDWLQJ \RX" 2U DUH \RX FKHDWLQJ WKHP"µ 7KLV SXEOLF SRO\SKRQLF FULWLTXH RI WKH FRQYHUVLRQ SURFHVV LV RIWHQ H[SUHVVHG WKURXJK WKH PHWDSKRU RI ZLQNLQJ ,Q DQ DUWLFOH HQWLWOHG ´7KH Renewed Polemics of Conversion,” published in a journal of Jewish thought GHYRWHG WR WKH LVVXH RI FRQYHUVLRQ 5DEEL 'U <HKXGD %UDQGHV ZKR OLNH 5DEEL 6WDY LV LGHQWLϮHG ZLWK WKH OLEHUDO 2UWKRGR[ FDPS FRLQHG WKH WHUP wink-wink conversion %UDQGHV ZULWHV WKDW =LRQLVW 2UWKRGR[ UDEELV LQ WKH UDEELQLF FRQYHUVLRQ FRXUW DUH ERXQG E\ GXDO OR\DOWLHV WR -HZLVK ODZ DQG WR WKHLU national responsibility. Because of this article’s public resonance (see Abraham 2009; Edrei 2010; Rosen 2010), it is worth citing at length Rabbi Brandes’s GHVFULSWLRQ RI WKH RXWFRPHV RI WKLV GXDOLW\ >$V D UHVXOW@ D PLGGOH ZD\ KDV HPHUJHG RQH ZKLFK RϲFLDOO\ UHTXLUHV DFFHSWDQFH of the yoke of commandments but tolerates the fact that many of the converts GR QRW VLQFHUHO\ LQWHQG WR IXOO\ DFFHSW WKHP 7KLV LQWHUPHGLDWH DSSURDFK LV ZHOO known to teachers in the conversion ulpans and to the conversion candidates WKHPVHOYHV 7KH ODWWHU NQRZ WKDW ZKHQ WKH\ VWDQG LQ IURQW RI WKH FRXUW WKH\ ZLOO have to answer its questions in a manner that makes them appear as though WKH\ VHULRXVO\ LQWHQG WR REVHUYH WKH FRPPDQGPHQWV 7KH UDEELQLF FRXUW LJQRUHV the high likelihood that the vast majority of these converts do not intend to join religious society and adopt a fully-observant lifestyle, and both parties are thus VDWLVϮHG¬ ¬ ¬ WKLV DSSURDFK LV H[WUHPHO\ KDUPIXO QRW RQO\ WR KDODNKD EXW DOVR WR WKH FRQYHUVLRQ SURFHVV 7KH FRQYHUWV XQGHUVWDQG WKDW LQ RUGHU WR MRLQ WKH -HZish faith they must collaborate in a process of lying and self-deception which is
[ 16 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ encouraged by the rabbis—an entire gang that has banded together for a kind of trickery and sophistry that lacks both integrity and decency. %UDQGHV
Subsequently, Rabbi Brandes describes state conversion as a system in ZKLFK WKH DJHQWV DQG VXEMHFWV RI WKH UDEELQLF FRQYHUVLRQ FRXUW H[FKDQJH winks. He denounces the moral stance of this system and suggests some halakhic alternatives. Winking constitutes a system in his mind because of its JURXQGLQJ LQ D PXWXDOO\ DJUHHG XSRQ DQG LQVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG DUUDQJHPHQW the rabbinic judges wink at the converts and invite them to wink back.
Winking Relations and the Conversion Performance 7KLV ERRN GUDZV RQ WKH PHWDSKRU RI ZLQN ZLQN FRQYHUVLRQV LQ RUGHU WR DQDlytically conceptualize the tense, institutional relationships that emerge between the agents and subjects of Israel’s state-sponsored conversion polLF\ %\ DWWULEXWLQJ DQDO\WLFDO VLJQLϮFDQFH WR WKH ZLQNLQJ PHWDSKRU , ZRXOG like to distance myself from the popular, cynical association between winks and lies and from the sharp distinction between sincere converts and impostors. My central critique is not only that the conversion process conVWLWXWHV D FRPSOH[ KXPDQ H[SHULHQFH WKDW FDQQRW EH FRQϮQHG WR D ELQDU\ logic of truth and falsity—a point already suggestively argued in the literature on religious conversion (see Seeman 2003, 2010). Nor would I, as an ethnographer, presume to know how to discriminate between truths and lies, a position that would problematically situate me “above” the social reality I investigate. Most of all, such a distinction does not help us understand the institutional relationships that are the subject matter of this book. I develop the idea of winking relations in order to understand how the 2UWKRGR[ UHSUHVHQWDWLYHV RI WKH ,VUDHOL QDWLRQ VWDWH DQG )68 FRQYHUVLRQ FDQGLGDWHV SHUIRUP WKH LPSRVVLEOH +RZ GHVSLWH WKH H[WDQW WHQVLRQV WKDW characterize state conversion policy—tensions between population policy and individual identity work, between national goals and religious techQRORJLHV EHWZHHQ LQFOXVLYH DQG H[FOXVLYH SROLWLFV RI EHORQJLQJ DQG ϮQDOO\ EHWZHHQ WKH 2UWKRGR[ UDEELQLF HVWDEOLVKPHQW DQG ,VUDHOL FLWL]HQV IURP VHFXODU EDFNJURXQGV³KRZ LQ WKH FRQWH[W RI DOO RI WKHVH FRQWUDGLFWRU\
[ 17 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ FRQGLWLRQV WKH FRQYHUVLRQ SROLF\ LV UHDOL]HG DQG H[SHULHQFHG LQ HYHU\GD\ life. At the heart of this book, then, lies an ethnographic riddle. Several of the following chapters unpack the various dimensions of this riddle by pointing to the winking relations that permit both sides to achieve their shared JRDO WR IDFLOLWDWH DQG XQGHUJR FRQYHUVLRQ As an anthropologist, I take winking quite seriously. For those familiar with Geertz’s (1973) canonical writing, winking represents the paradigmatic H[DPSOH RI ZKDW LQWHUSUHWLYH HWKQRJUDSK\ DQG DQWKURSRORJ\ PRUH JHQHUDOO\ LV DOO DERXW )RU P\ SXUSRVHV ZLQNLQJ LQGH[HV D FHQWUDO SUREOHP WKDW the protagonists of this book confront—a problem of contested interpretaWLRQ 7KH QRWLRQ RI ZLQNLQJ DOORZV PH WR WUDFH KRZ VWDWH DJHQWV DQG FRQversion candidates manage this problem in and through their mundane socio-institutional interactions. In the most basic sense, winking (which IDPRXVO\ GLϸHUV IURP EOLQNLQJ RU SDURG\LQJ D ZLQN LELG ² LV WKH WUDQVmission of a nuanced message. As such, it is an interactive gesture that takes place within a social situation and invests it with another layer of meaning. $ ZLQN LV H[SUHVVHG LQ ERGLO\ DQG YHUEDO VLJQDOV SRWHQWLDOO\ FUHDWLQJ D UHϰH[LYH PRPHQW LQ ZKLFK WKH SDUWLFLSDQW VHHPV WR EUHDN IURP WKH VRFLDO situation in order to comment upon it or deliver information about it to someone else. Winking contains an “as if” quality and signals an equivocal understanding about what is actually going on here. It indicates that what is EHLQJ VDLG PLJKW KDYH DQ DGGLWLRQDO PHDQLQJ WKDW LW UHϰHFWV RQO\ D SDUWLDO truth, and that much has gone unsaid. By winking, individuals can create a shared understanding and invite each other to collaborate in the producWLRQ RI UHϮQHG PHDQLQJ In my own analytical use of this concept, I place primary emphasis on the everyday transmission of messages between conversion agents and candiGDWHV ZLWKLQ WKHLU PXQGDQH HQFRXQWHUV 7KH FRQFHSW RI ZLQNLQJ XQGHUOLQHV the fact that what transpires between the agents and subjects of state conversion policy is a sophisticated, creative system of double messages regardLQJ WKH H[SHFWDWLRQV SODFHG RQ FRQYHUVLRQ FDQGLGDWHV DV ZHOO DV WKH VWDNHV of conversion policy for state agents—and the state itself. Equally important, in my account I emphasize the mutual, collaborative nature of winking relations. At a higher theoretical level this concept allows us to think analytically about these nuanced yet central features of sociability that are HPEHGGHG LQ YDULHG FRQWH[WV RI LQVWLWXWLRQDOL]HG UHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ WKH state and its subjects, in Israel and beyond.
[ 18 ]
ᇹቨዧወኂᅡዼᅐዧᇹኂቨ 7KLV ERRN PDNHV WKH FDVH WKDW GUDPDWXUJLFDO SULQFLSOHV RUJDQL]H ZLQNLQJ UHODWLRQV EHWZHHQ FRQYHUVLRQ FDQGLGDWHV DQG FRQYHUVLRQ DJHQWV 7KLV argument complements my earlier argument about the centrality of the politics of sincerity in the mundane operations of Israel’s conversion policy. As I will show throughout this book, these two dimensions develop symbiotically as a way to practically handle the contradictory features of state conversion policy. When I argue that dramaturgical principles organize winking relations, I mean that converts learn to manage impressions and play roles in order to SDVV DV SURSHU FRQYHUWV 7KLV WHUPLQRORJ\ GUDZV KHDYLO\ RQ (UYLQJ *RϸPDQ·V GUDPDWXUJLFDO SHUVSHFWLYH RQ VRFLDO LQWHUDFWLRQ VHH *RϸPDQ > @ 7DNLQJ WKHDWHU DV KLV NH\ PHWDSKRU *RϸPDQ RϸHUV a microsociological understanding of how people, like actors, perform their LGHQWLWLHV DQG UROHV RQ VWDJH LQ IURQW RI DXGLHQFHV 7R WKH H[WHQW WKDW HYHU\day situations can be compared to interactions between actors and audiHQFHV WKHLU VXFFHVV GHSHQGV RQ DQ DJUHHG XSRQ GHϮQLWLRQ RI WKH VLWXDWLRQ DV ZHOO DV RQ WKH ERXQGDULHV EHWZHHQ IURQW VWDJH EDFNVWDJH DQG Rϸ VWDJH domains. Going against the popular notion of wink-wink conversions, in which converts blatantly learn how to lie and feign piety, I will show that converts learn from teachers, rabbis, and other bureaucrats how to present a SHUVRQD VXϲFLHQWO\ ZRUWK\ RI FRQYHUVLRQ GHVSLWH EXW DOVR SUHFLVHO\ EHFDXVH RI WKH SXEOLF DQG UDEELQLF VXVSLFLRQ WRZDUG WKHP 7KH\ GR VR E\ LQYHVWing themselves in the management of what I call conversion performances— performances that will diminish bureaucratic suspicion and thus help evade the public designation of “wink-wink conversions.” If it is true, as Rabbi Brandes writes, that conversion candidates “know that when they stand in front of the court they will have to answer its questions in a manner that makes them appear as though they seriously intend to REVHUYH WKH FRPPDQGPHQWVµ %UDQGHV WKHQ KRZ GR WKH\ NQRZ WKLV" :KR WHDFKHV WKHP WKHLU UROH DV FRQYHUWV" +RZ DUH WKH\ DVVLVWHG LQ WKH VWDJLQJ GLUHFWLRQ DQG SUHVHQWDWLRQ RI WKHLU SHUVRQDV" $QG ZKDW GRHV LW WDNH IRU WKHP WR SHUIRUP WKHVH SHUVRQDV FRUUHFWO\" %HFDXVH WKHVH ZLQNLQJ UHODtionships are dialogical, I ask not only how the candidates learn to present believable personas to conversion agents but also how, throughout these dramaturgical processes, conversion agents present their own professional personas to candidates, and whether candidates believe them.
[ 19 ]
PRAISE FOR
WH EN THE STATE WI N KS “In this probe of state-religion relations in Israel, Michal Kravel-Tovi brings the critical but sympathetic curiosity of a skilled ethnographer to explore the use of religious conversion for the purpose of creating national belonging. Addressing the substantial divergence between rabbinical practice and theological ideals and portraying converts whose reasons for choosing Judaism are often practical rather than spiritual, she shows how officials of state as well as rabbinical judges wink collusively at the short shrift given to doctrinal requirements in favor of well-trained performances of sincerity.”
—MICHAEL HERZFELD, HARVARD UNIVERSITY “The question of who is allowed to convert to Judaism in Israel, and how and when, is deeply charged with both spiritual and political commitments. Kravel-Tovi’s insightful, thoughtful book helps us to understand the nature of these contradictions and their consequences and the way that converts themselves come to experience their conversion.”
—TANYA LUHRMANN, STANFORD UNIVERSITY “When the State Winks is an excellent, original work that uniquely situates its analysis not just within an anthropological framework but also within a broad, humanistic one. Kravel-Tovi tells a compelling story about the political and personal complexities of conversion in Israel, and it will be of great interest to anthropologists, sociologists, and historians as well as scholars of Judaism and religion more generally.”
—LEORA BATNITZKY, PRINCETON UNIVERSITY “The best recent ethnography of state bureaucratic practice in Israel and the best ethnography of state-assisted conversion more broadly. With clarity of prose, pathbreaking ethnography, and a humanizing argument, Kravel-Tovi’s work moves beyond accounts that treat ‘the state’ as a monolithic and inimical entity. Real people—rabbis, converts, and state workers—emerge from these pages, not stick figures of the sociological imagination.”
—DON SEEMAN, EMORY UNIVERSITY “A beautifully written and engaged ethnography of the overlooked topic of state-sponsored conversion to Judaism. Kravel-Tovi illustrates how the complicated playing field of conversion is constrained with tensions between state secularism and religion; Zionism and Judaism; and bureaucracy and sincerity.”
—ESRA OZYUREK, LONDON SCHOOL OF ECONOMICS R E L I G I O N , C U LT U R E , A N D P U B L I C L I F E
COLU M B I A U N I V E RS ITY PR ES S / N EW Y ORK cup.columbia.edu Printed in the U.S.A.