1 Reassessing Obscurity: Data, the Vilna Troupe, and Digital Humanities Praxis Debra Caplan Assistant Professor of Theater Baruch College, City University of New York This essay includes material from my forthcoming book, Yiddish Empire: The Vilna Troupe, Jewish Theater, and the Art of Itinerancy (University of Michigan Press, 2018), as well as some additional meditations about data visualization and Jewish theater history. Yankev Blayfer. Sonia Alomis. Leola Vendorf. Baruch Lumet. Wolf Barzel. Who were these individuals and what were their contributions to theatre history? Their names do not appear in any theatre history text or reference work. In fact, these figures are almost entirely absent from the historiographic record. Googling their names reveals a few IMDB and IBDB references, a handful of Wikipedia stubs, and perhaps a mention or two in a little-known memoir. 1 And yet, Yankev Blayfer studied with Max Reinhardt and, in his later career as a Hollywood actor, performed alongside Harrison Ford, Sylvester Stallone, Kirk Douglas, Clark Gable, and Hedy Lamarr. Sonia Alomis was close friends with actress Sophie Tucker. 2 Leola Vendorf acted with Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant, Doris Day, Gene Kelly, Cyd Charisse, Sidney Poitier, and Leonard Nimoy. Baruch Lumet worked with Woody Allen and Jerome Robbins, discovered Jayne Mansfield, and got his son, Sidney Lumet — later a giant of American cinema — his very first acting gig. 3 Wolf “Wolfie” Barzel acted under the direction of Sanford Meisner and Lee Strasberg, was close with Zero Mostel, with whom he had a lifelong rivalry, and performed with Ethel Barrymore, Sanford Meisner, Natalie Wood, and Stella Adler. 4 Even more significantly, Barzel
35
Embed
Reassessing Obscurity: Data, the Vilna Troupe, and Digital ...
This document is posted to help you gain knowledge. Please leave a comment to let me know what you think about it! Share it to your friends and learn new things together.
Transcript
1
Reassessing Obscurity: Data, the Vilna Troupe, and Digital Humanities Praxis
Debra Caplan
Assistant Professor of Theater
Baruch College, City University of New York
This essay includes material from my forthcoming book, Yiddish Empire: The Vilna Troupe,
Jewish Theater, and the Art of Itinerancy (University of Michigan Press, 2018), as well as some
additional meditations about data visualization and Jewish theater history.
Yankev Blayfer. Sonia Alomis. Leola Vendorf. Baruch Lumet. Wolf Barzel. Who were
these individuals and what were their contributions to theatre history? Their names do not appear
in any theatre history text or reference work. In fact, these figures are almost entirely absent from
the historiographic record. Googling their names reveals a few IMDB and IBDB references, a
handful of Wikipedia stubs, and perhaps a mention or two in a little-known memoir.1
And yet, Yankev Blayfer studied with Max Reinhardt and, in his later career as a
Hollywood actor, performed alongside Harrison Ford, Sylvester Stallone, Kirk Douglas, Clark
Gable, and Hedy Lamarr. Sonia Alomis was close friends with actress Sophie Tucker.2 Leola
Vendorf acted with Jack Nicholson, Cary Grant, Doris Day, Gene Kelly, Cyd Charisse, Sidney
Poitier, and Leonard Nimoy. Baruch Lumet worked with Woody Allen and Jerome Robbins,
discovered Jayne Mansfield, and got his son, Sidney Lumet — later a giant of American cinema
— his very first acting gig.3
Wolf “Wolfie” Barzel acted under the direction of Sanford Meisner and Lee Strasberg,
was close with Zero Mostel, with whom he had a lifelong rivalry, and performed with Ethel
Barrymore, Sanford Meisner, Natalie Wood, and Stella Adler.4 Even more significantly, Barzel
2
inspired the theatrical careers of his niece Judy Graubart and nephew Manny Azenberg. Wearing
his signature purple pants and a black beret, Barzel would take Graubart and Azenberg to the
theater and bring them backstage; inspired by their uncle, the siblings pursued their careers as a
comedian and a producer, respectively.5 Judy Graubart became a star in the The Electric
Company with Morgan Freeman, Rita Moreno, and Bill Cosby. Manny Azenberg went on to
produce nearly every Neil Simon play since 1972, along with dozens of other plays and musicals
both on and off Broadway.6 In 2012, Azenberg received a lifetime achievement Tony Award, an
award whose former recipients have included Steven Sondheim, Harold Prince, and Arthur
Miller. “Wolfie was the inspiration for everyone in the family to go into the entertainment
business,” Azenberg told me over coffee in the now defunct Cafe Edison, “because who would
have thought of it otherwise? I would give him credit for planting the seed for the next
generation of our family.”7 Blayfer, Alomis, Vendorf, Lumet, and Barzel may not be well
known, but they certainly had an impact on the course of twentieth century theatre and film.
Yiddish theatre tends to be thought of by theatre historians as a somewhat obscure
tradition whose influence was limited to a certain geographical sphere (Eastern Europe and the
Lower East Side) and confined to a particular period (the sixty-odd years between the mid-1870s
and the Holocaust). As such, it is often passed over. Yiddish theatre does not appear even once in
Oscar Brockett and Franklin Hildy’s seminal History of the Theatre, nor is it mentioned a single
time in John Russell Brown’s The Oxford Illustrated History of Theatre, David Wiles’s and
Christine Dymkowski’s The Cambridge Companion to Theatre History, or Phillip B. Zarrilli,
Bruce McConachie, Gary Jay Williams, and Carol Fisher Sorgenfrei’s otherwise relatively
comprehensive Theatre Histories: An Introduction.8 To be fair, Yiddish theatre has not been
absent from the field altogether. Theatre Journal, Theatre Survey, and TDR have each published
3
several articles on Yiddish theatre and readers of these publications could be expected to have
some familiarity with the subject.9 Still, Yiddish theatre is often excluded from the historical
narratives that define our field and the canons that we teach to our students. When included,
more often than not, it is treated as peripheral, arcane, or a mere prelude to the rich history of
American Jewish actors performing in English.10
I argue that quantitative data analysis and visualization can offer an important corrective
to our understanding of what is central and what is peripheral in theatre history. I apply these
data-driven methodologies to Yiddish theater to argue for its centrality to modern theater history.
Stanislavsky, Meyerhold, Stella Adler, Leon Schiller, Max Reinhardt, David Belasco, Harold
Clurman, Eugene Ionesco, and hundreds of other key figures worked alongside, were related to,
were friends with, or were directly inspired by encounters with Yiddish performers in the early
twentieth century. These interpersonal connections may have vanished from our theatre
historiography, but if one looks carefully, their traces remain: in cast lists in theatre programs, in
records of letters written and received, in invitation lists to weddings and registers for funerals, in
recollections of conversations over dinner in actors’ memoirs, and in the memories of surviving
actors and their kin. While these sources are often consulted by theatre historians, it is typically
in relation to a particular production or in comparison with other sources of that type.11 Instead, I
suggest that theatre programs, cast lists, and correspondence are equally valuable as repositories
of historical data. These sources are full of relational data: long lists of names, dates, places, and
texts that all connect to one another. Compiling, aggregating, and analyzing the data points
contained in these sources, I contend, can offer new perspectives on the conventional wisdom of
theatre history: its key figures, its major events, and its dominant narratives about historical
significance.
4
Data-driven theater history, at its best, can reveal previously invisible patterns about
relationships between diverse groups of artists working across languages and cultures.
Visualizing the data from Yiddish theatre programs and ephemera reveals how actors like
Blayfer, Alomis, Vendorf, Lumet, Barzel and hundreds of others, who scarcely appear in the
annals of theatre history, were in fact influential figures. But the potential implications of data
visualization and other data-focused methodologies for theatre history go far beyond elucidating
the impact of one particular tradition. Data offers a fresh perspective on figures in theatre history
that have often been marginalized or overlooked: like the actors in minor roles at the bottom of
cast lists, the assistants to designers and technical directors, or the advertisers in program
booklets. If applied to datasets from other marginalized traditions, who knows what other
obscure major players a data-driven approach to theatre history might reveal?
***
The Vilna Troupe was the entry point for hundreds of actors, directors, and designers to
begin their theatrical careers; as such, it cultivated the talent pool for Yiddish theater worldwide.
In Poland, former Vilner were at the helm of dozens of professional and amateur Yiddish theater
companies including the Warsaw Yiddish Art Theater, Yung Teater, the Ida Kaminska Theater,
the Warsaw Nayer Yidisher Teater, the Studio of the Yiddish Drama School, the New Yiddish
Theater, Azazel, Ararat, Khad Gadyo, Teater Far Yugnt, Balaganeydn, Nay Azazel. In Latvia, a
group of Vilna Troupe affiliates founded the Nayer Idisher Teater. In the United States, Vilner
performed in and directed for the Jewish Art Theater, Maurice Schwartz’s Yiddish Art Theater,
the Folksbiene, Artef, the Second Avenue Theater, Unzer Teater, the Chicago Dramatishe
Gezelshaft, and the Yiddish Theater Unit of the Federal Theater Project, among others. In Paris,
a group of former Vilner founded the Parizer Yidisher Arbeter Teater. In Belgium, a team of
5
Vilner ran the Yiddish Folk Theater of Brussels. In Russia, half a dozen former Vilner performed
with the Moscow Yiddish Art Theater, GOSET. In Brazil, Yankev Kurlender directed the São
Paulo Dramatic Circle. In South Africa, Vilna Troupe members led five different Yiddish theater
companies; in Mexico City, Vilna Troupe founders Alexander Asro and Sonia Alomis ran a
Yiddish drama school; in Australia, former Vilna Troupe affiliates were among the founding
members of the Kadimah Art Theater and its long-lived successor, the Dovid Herman Theater; in
Argentina, the Yiddish Folk Theater (IFT) was developed by one-time Vilner; in Johannesburg,
Natan Breitman and Hertz Grosbard performed with the Breitner-Teffner Yiddish Theater.
Indeed, it was the rare Yiddish theater anywhere in the world that did not have a former member
of the Vilna Troupe involved.
But Yiddish theater was not the only field where the Vilner made contributions. Others left
the Yiddish stage behind to pursue careers in theater and film in other languages. In New York,
former Vilner Wolf Barzel and Jacob Ben-Ami performed in several Theater Guild productions.
In the 30s, 40s, and 50s, Barzel also acted on Broadway under the direction of Sanford Meisner,
Lee Strasberg, and Tyrone Guthrie and performed in major roles alongside Ethel Barrymore and
John Garfield.12 Alexander Asro acted on Broadway with Gene Kelly, Martin Martin, Jack
Lemmon, and Sophie Tucker, and had a briefly successful Hollywood film career starring in the
Marx Brothers 1938 film Room Service alongside Lucille Ball.13 Joseph Buloff also became a
Broadway and Hollywood star, performing alongside Paul Newman, Rita Hayworth, Edgar G.
Ulmer, Fred Astaire, Cyd Charisse, Warren Beatty, Jack Nicholson, Gene Hackman, Diane
Keaton, Harold Clurman, Sanford Meisner, Uta Hagen, Agnes De Mille, Helen Hayes, and
others.14 In Dallas, former Vilner Baruch Lumet directed the Knox Street Theater and was the
founder of the Dallas Institute for the Performing Arts.15 Andrzej Pronaszko, who designed sets
6
for the Vilna Troupe in Poland between 1932 and 1934, continued to design sets for the National
Theater in Warsaw, Krakow’s Narodowy Stary Teatr, and the Słowacki Theater, among others.
Pronaszko also became an important Polish painter and scenic design teacher.16 Szymon Syrkus,
who designed sets for the Vilna Troupe in the early 1930s, was an influential Polish architect and
architecture teacher.17 Gertrud Kraus, who choreographed for a branch of the Vilna Troupe in the
early 1930s, moved to Tel Aviv in 1935, choreographed and performed with Habima and the
Israel Ballet Company and shaped the first generation of Israeli dancers through her teaching.18
In the 40s and 50s, other Vilner also played a seminal role in shaping the nascent Israeli theater.
Zygmunt Turkow directed the Tel Aviv-based company Zuta, Zalmen Hirshfeld acted in
Habima, Dovid Likht directed for Habima, Josef Kaminski composed music for Habima, and
Reuven Rubin designed sets for Habima and the Ohel Theater.19
Paradoxically, it is only in examining the disintegration of the Vilna Troupe and the
dispersal of its members that the full measure of its impact comes into focus. As members left
the struggling company for brighter horizons in the 1930s, they brought their distinctive training,
repertoire, and style to new enterprises around the world.
The Vilna Troupe’s influence did not vanish with the dissolution of the branches. Instead,
like Théâtre Libre after 1896 or the Group Theater after 1941, echoes of the ideology, aesthetic,
and repertoire developed by the Vilna Troupe continued to linger long after the company’s
demise. Without the Vilna Troupe, we might never have had a Eugene Ionesco or a Harold
Clurman, or at the very least, their careers would have unfolded differently. An entire generation
of groundbreaking scenic designers – including Mordechai Gorelik, Sam Leve, and Boris
Aronson in the United States; and Szymon Syrkus and Andrzej Pronaszko in Poland – cut their
teeth working in the Yiddish art theaters alongside Vilner. Without the Vilna Troupe, the world
7
might have never known The Dybbuk. The Vilna Troupe was a pivotal node in a vast global
network that included many of the leading figures of the interwar stage, a network forged
pathways for the circulation of theatrical ideas across borders.
The Vilna Troupe’s role at the nexus of the interwar stage has long remained invisible to
theater historians. Details of the company’s connections to other theater artists and companies
have remained buried in actors’ archives and in never-translated Yiddish books, letters, and
theatrical ephemera. The Vilna Troupe’s size, multiplicity, and geographical instability add
further challenges. In Yiddish, there are dozens of well-documented studies of other Yiddish
theaters of the period. But to the great consternation of the Vilner, nobody ever wrote a book
about them. This was a frequent topic of conversation among Jewish theater historians, who
lamented the paucity of scholarship on the subject without ever attempting a book-length study
of the Vilna Troupe themselves.
Even those who were most closely involved with the company were reluctant to take up
the task. For example, the critic Nakhmen Mayzel would have been a perfect candidate. Mayzel
had a uniquely accurate sense of the Vilna Troupe’s scope and structure because he had often
embedded himself in different branches of the company to conduct research for his reviews. But
even Mayzel believed that writing a book about the company was beyond his ability. In his
otherwise comprehensive book about Polish-Jewish cultural life between the two World Wars,
Mayzel explained the absence of the Vilna Troupe thus:
Yes, we have long needed [a history] about that very Vilna Troupe […] It has long
needed to be written, and more than once somebody decided to write the history of the
Vilner and solemnly vowed as much before the open graves of former Vilna Troupe
members, swearing to complete it. But it seems that there is not the right person who will
8
do it, nor is there the organization to subsidize such an important cultural and historical
monograph.20
Similarly, Vilna Troupe actor Joseph Buloff often remarked that in order to pen a history of the
Vilna Troupe, a writer would need to know Yiddish, German, Polish, Romanian, Hebrew,
French, Dutch, Russian, English, Lithuanian, Spanish, and other languages just to be able to read
the company’s multilingual reviews. “The trouble is the languages, who is going to read all these
languages, you know?” Buloff told Jack Garfein. “There’ll always be people who part of me they
wouldn’t know because it’s in Romanian, or South African, or American, or Yiddish.”21
Moreover, the Vilna Troupe’s complex organizational structure made writing about it a
contentious career move. In a theatrical landscape in which the livelihoods of hundreds depended
upon a fluid definition of the term Vilner, any attempt to specifically situate “the Vilna Troupe”
was bound to spark controversy. No Yiddish writer, no matter how accomplished, was immune.
When Alexander Mukdoni wrote a brief profile of the Vilna Troupe that focused primarily
(though not exclusively) on Asro and Alomis’s company, he received a flurry of letters from
furious actors claiming that he had gotten it all wrong. Mukdoni may have been a renowned
writer who had more or less invented the field of Yiddish theater criticism, but his reputation did
not prevent angry Vilner and their fans from calling him a fraud.22 And so Mukdoni, like many
of his colleagues, turned his attention elsewhere – continuing to review occasional Vilna Troupe
productions without ever again trying to analyze the company’s broader contours. One must
always be careful when mentioning the Vilna Troupe in public, Mukdoni cautioned readers, for
even the most casual conversations almost always end in heated argument.23
The erstwhile Vilna Troupe historian may no longer have to contend with angry letters
from outraged Vilner, but Mayzel, Buloff, and Mukdoni’s warnings still ring true three-quarters
9
of a century later. The actors’ ever-fluctuating relationships with multiple branches of the Vilna
Troupe present a complex historical puzzle. Like the famous joke about a lone Jew stranded on a
desert island who builds two synagogues just so he can reject one of them, one of the most
salient characteristics of the Vilna Troupe was the staunch refusal of its members to publicly
acknowledge the existence of other branches.24 Compounding the problem is the Vilner’s
tendency to treat their individual pathways through a myriad of companies as though it were a
single “Vilna Troupe” affiliation. For example, Leyb Kadison wrote in his memoirs that he
performed with the Vilna Troupe for fifteen years.25 In truth, Kadison’s fifteen year career with
“the Vilna Troupe” actually included work with three different Vilna Troupe branches. For
Kadison, “the Vilna Troupe” was shorthand for the overall trajectory of his career during this
period. If we judge by the actors’ memoirs, the real Vilna Troupe was simply whichever branch
the writer happened to be working with at that moment.
The Vilna Troupe’s historical impact is even more difficult to pin down. As Yiddish
actors entered non-Jewish theater culture, many shed their Jewish identities by changing their
names and rewriting the narratives of their careers. In the process, the role that Yiddish theater
played in their emergence was often willfully obscured. The Jewish actors and directors who
were most successful at entering mainstream theater culture were often those were most skilled
at these acts of erasure, like Paul Muni. Those who were less skilled assimilators – like
Alexander Asro, who, try as he might, could not shake the thick Yiddish accent that doomed his
brief Hollywood career – rarely achieved mainstream success and were largely forgotten in the
annals of theater history.
But the Vilna Troupe historian of the twenty-first century has access to digital
methodologies that offer new ways to account for the artistic networks of the Vilner. In the
10
beginning, based on the extant historical record, I initially believed that the Vilna Troupe was a
small company with a core group of performers. But I soon realized that this was not the case.
Who was in the Vilna Troupe? Every artist had a different answer that said more about their own
relationships with other actors than the company as a whole. Where did the Vilna Troupe
perform? Why, everywhere, it seemed. How many Vilna Troupes were there? Each source had a
different answer. The more I learned about the Vilna Troupe, the more riddles I encountered. In
seeking to understand the Vilna Troupe as a discrete theater company, I was asking all the wrong
questions. It was only when I began to think of the Vilna Troupe as a cultural phenomenon that it
began to come into focus.
This shift in my thinking was inspired and enabled by digital tools. Initially, I began to
explore digital humanities tools for data management. My roster of Vilna Troupe actors had
grown to include nearly three hundred names; my list of locales where Vilna Troupe branches
performed had turned into a massive collection of geographical data points; my hand-drawn
network map of how Vilna Troupe actors were connected to other theater artists had so many
names that it was illegible. Digital tools enabled me to compress the data drawn from archives
and actors’ memoirs into visual forms that I could analyze.
I developed a project called Visualizing the Vilna Troupe (http://www.vilnatroupe.com) as
a digital companion to the book I am writing about the Vilna Troupe (1915-1936), an
experimental Yiddish theatre company that became famous for its world premiere of The Dybbuk
in 1920.26 Part methodological experiment, part visual aid, and part research organization tool,
my data visualization work ultimately expanded the scope of my book and deepened my
argument about the Vilna Troupe’s influence and historical significance. The following pages
document both my process in developing this project (as an aid to future researchers) and an