| Abstract | In lieu of an abstract, here is a brief excerpt of the content: Israel Studies 7.2 (2002) 115-144 [Figures] THE JEWS' INTENSE PREOCCUPATION WITH the examination of their collective identity was highly pronounced in the early years of Zionist settlement in Palestine. For a society of immigrants in the process of defining its distinct collective identity and national foundations this preoccupation is hardly surprising. Although Israel has since achieved national independence and experienced major demographic, ideological, social, cultural, economic and political transformations, Israelis' passionate interest in re-examining their collective identity has not diminished. As a new series of popular publications on "The Israelis" demonstrates, this topic continues to attract public attention and to be prominently featured in Israeli popular and scholarly forums. Various segments of Israeli society continue to debate the opposing orientations of continuity and change between their pre-Israeli past and their Israeli present. This article sets out to explore one particular aspect of this broad and complex topic. Following the 19th century tradition of the grand historical narrative, Zionism constructed a sweeping interpretation of Jewish history from Antiquity to the present, marked by its teleological orientation. Advocating continuity and identification with Antiquity and a dissociation from the period of exile, the Zionist narrative constructed historical dichotomies that highlighted the introduction of a radical shift in Jewish history: its decline narrative from the "golden age" of Antiquity to Jewish life in exile was to be replaced by a progress narrative beginning with the Zionist return to the Land of Israel and leading toward national redemption. The historical juncture of two key events that took place in mid-20th century, the Holocaust and the foundation of the State of Israel, affirmed the semiotic structure of the Zionist narrative. A cataclysmic event of major proportions, the Holocaust culminated and concluded the decline narrative of exile while the establishment of the state marked Zionism's success in shifting the trajectory of history in line with the progress narrative. The discussion of the construction of a New Man, typical of a revolutionary discourse, articulated most powerfully Zionism's desire to dissociate from the discredited exilic past. Though Zionism was a Jewish movement steeped in traditional symbols, the figure of the "New Jew of the Land of Israel" manifested its highly critical stance toward the Galut (Jewish life in Exile) and was largely shaped by an opposition to the negative image of the exilic Jew. Influenced also by anti-Semitic depictions of European Jews, the Jew of exile was portrayed as uprooted, cowardly and manipulative, old and sickly, helpless and defenseless in face of persecution, interested in materialistic gains or conversely, excessively immersed in religion and spirituality. In contrast, the New Hebrew, later nicknamed "Sabra," was characterized as young and robust, daring and resourceful, direct and down-to-earth, honest and loyal, ideologically committed and ready to defend his people to the bitter end. The "Mythological Sabra" clearly serves as an ideal type, a fictive hegemonic identity that reflects the cultural background, values, and collective aspirations of the European founders. The image of the Sabra stood detached from the cultural diversity of an immigrant society and represented only a minority of the youth who were typically (though not exclusively) the descendants of the European pioneers. Yet it was a powerful cultural construct that served as a self-image and an educational model for the socialization of Israeli youth and new immigrants. This ideological framework gave rise to the Zionist conversion paradigm that associated the renewed encounter between exilic Jews and the ancient Jewish homeland with the revival of a native-Hebrew identity that had been suppressed during centuries of exile and the experience of a profound and irreversible identity change.Jews who "return" to their ancient homeland were thus recognized as Olim, a concept that distinguished them from other immigrants (mehagrim) as well as from Jews who immigrate to other destinations. Considered as reclaiming their native identity, olim were entitled to immediate citizenship by Israel's "Law of Return," eliminating the common requirement of a liminal period associated with an immigrant status. This "conversion" was often enacted by shedding off one's exilic foreign name and adapting a new Hebrew name, thereby representing the death of the exilic Jew and...
|
