Reading Responses
Anzia Yezierska, Bread Givers: 1-53.
What caught my attention was the similarities between Mashah and Reb Smolinsky.
The phrase by Reb Smolinsky "I give my daughters brains enough to marry
when the time comes" (13) seems to hold true in Mashah's case. They both
do not seem to have the "brains" to act rationally in a pragmatic
world.
Both of them are similar in that they are very caught up in their own world
and oblivious to their surroundings. Even when the rest of the family is worried
sick about how they are going to make ends meet, Mashah is still engrossed with
her looks instead of trying to share the burden of the family by finding a job.
Although she "lived in the same dirt & trouble"(4) with them,
"nothing ever seemed to bother her"(4). The father is obssessed with
his religion and believes that spirtual faith was enough, and material needs
were not necessary. He thinks that there is nothing "to worry about, as
long as we have enough to keep the breath in our bodies" (5), and that
the "real food is God's holy Torah" (5). In a way,they are both self-centred
in a sense, they care only about the world which revolves around themselves,
and neglect the pressing needs that face the rest of the family whom they live
with- they are fast running out of money, food, and even shelter if they are
unable to get jobs to provide for their necessities.
The father enjoyed the top part of the soup with all the fat pieces and the
sour pickle that was reserved for him, while his children waited hungrily for
their meagre and unsubstantial portion. At the same time, he declared that material
needs were nothing when compared to spiritual needs. Mashah asked "Then
why didn't they pay her the rent? Don't everybody pay rent?" (19) when
told of the confrontation between her father and teh rent-collector. At the
same time, she reached out for the money that Muhmenkah left behind because
she was hungry and wanted to get something for herself. They talk as if they
were not part of the family which was experiencing trouble. Their actions show
their self-absorbed nature, the way they did not even bother to take others
into consideration. Was it because they were really selfish? Or were they really
that gullible and naive as to think that the situation at home was alright?
Other similarities included the fact that nobody dared to touch their things.
"It was like a law in the house that nobody dared to Mashah's things, no
more than they dared to touch Father's Hebrew books" (5). This sentence
alone shows their unreasonable aspect, for the others are cautious about touching
their stuff for fear of disastrous consequences.
Yet, most people yielded to them. When the father spoke, "All faces turned
to Father. Eyes widened, necks stretched, ears strained not to miss a word"
(p.11). In spite of him not showing enough concern for his family, the family
still greatly respected him and took his words as wise. "Everywhere Mashah
went men followed her with melting looks" (p.4). Despite the things they
do, the family does not try to disrupt their way of life and let them continue
as usual. And when the family utter pleas for help with family affairs, their
remarks are just easily brushed away and unheeded.
--Jaclyn Chan
[TOP]
What strikes me about this novel is the way the narrator uses the simplest
words to convey deep meanings and touch our hearts. In fact, at first glance,
this seemed like an ordinary and easy-to-read novel, but the themes that are
brought up, such as the way females are treated, and the meaning of religion,
resonate within the reader’s mind despite the lack of over dramatic and
bombastic words.
For example, in second paragraph of page 8, where Sara swallowed her pride
and focused upon getting coal for her Mother, despite really detesting the scavenger
act, her courage really touches me. It must have taken tremendous determination
and patience to fill the pail with tiny bits of coal when you hated doing the
job. I was thinking if it was me, I am not too sure I wouldn’t have given
up just a quarter way through. Here, the words used in the two paragraphs look
almost as if they are out of a children’s story book, so simple, yet, for
someone who has gotten used to the language after reading 8 pages, its simplicity
is what conveys the struggle best.
Sara’s father is a very ‘religious’ man, as we can see, and
some of his speeches are a bit elating, however, we can feel the sense of contempt
as she regards her father, and she makes him out to be a ridiculous fluffy air-head
in his preaching, and just as we thought he might be simply too caught up with
the Bible, naive and detached from reality, in the 3rd chapter he appears to
be self-centered and scheming as well, and definitely not the self-sacrificing
“light of the block”. He worked out that Bessie provided his income
and that his future son-in-law, Bessie’s husband, had better make sure
to pay him so he can set up a business and have a living hood after Bessie is
taken away. That sounds so calculative, as it is as if marrying away a daughter
is a pure economic transaction and one needs to minimize losses. Last paragraph
of page 9 is not a resigned, matter-of-fact way of reporting, but a very indignant
tone about the way women are treated as slaves for men. The way she describes
her father as getting the best part of everything they have just because he
is a man and not a woman sounds like she thinks it is most unfair, for she says
“since men are the only people who counted with God…” in a mocking
tone, as she obviously doesn’t believe this.
--Kang Xiaoting
[TOP]
In this extract we see the battle-lines being drawn between the old orthodoxy
and a pragmatic new reality. On the side of the old world we have Reb Smolinsky,
the father-in-law and indigent Talmudic scholar. Berel Bernstein is the young
materialist; a poster-boy for the frenetic entrepreneurial spirit of the New
World. They could not be more different. And yet they hold in common more than
mere ethnicity and religion (albeit of varying convictions). They both couch
their arguments in pecuniary terms, and commodify poor Bessie.
Of the two men, Berel Bernstein is perhaps the one who escapes with a less
damning verdict. He is after all a fully paid up subscriber to the American
dream. "Sure, I got money saved. For years already I lived for a purpose.
I know inside the clothing trade. I was working already as a baster, a presser,
and an operator. And now I'm already a head cutter. And I'm thinking to start
myself a shop" (44). Fiducial responsibility, good old fashioned toil,
steady promotion and the classic leap of entrepreneurial daring. All good attributes
to have, but they have to be, because it seems that these are all that Bernstein
possesses. One wonders if he truly loves Bessie. Indeed, he has amazingly neglected
to use that most essential word in persuading the father-in-law, Reb Smolinsky,
of his eligibility. He finds her "fitting" (45), but the closest he
comes to any verbal warmth is "like". "I like your girl better"
(47). And why? Bernstein obligingly elaborates: "I don't want those dressed-up
dolls, to spend my money on them. I look ahead on the future. I want a wife
for a purpose. I mst open myself a shop. And Bessie could help me with the 'hands',
while I do the cutting" (47). How mercenary, how callous! And how consummately
entrepreneurial. Bernstein is negotiating not so much for marriage as for a
piece of human capital.
What then, to make of Reb Smolinsky, the self proclaimed "light of the
block" (48)? To him we should accord the greater share of sin. He squeezes
his daughter for guilt, all the while hiding behind a cloak of religious piety.
He defends the Torah with a passion, even to the point of assaulting a rent
collector who soils it, but deigns it beneath his station to keep his family
from the clasp of an undignified poverty. "What? I work like a common thickneck?"
(48). He remonstrates to Bernstein, without a shred of irony, that his daughters
would "spend every cent on themselves if I'd only let them" (46).
Reb Smolinsky's blinkered, self-righteous logic enmeshes his daughter in a web
of misplaced filial piety and moral blackmail. Bessie has the opportunity to
elope with Bernstein, but can't bring herself to "marry a man that don't
respect my father" (51). Taking Bessie away from him, would be like "tearing
the bread away from my mouth" (46). Bernstein retorts: "You got two
hands and two feet. Why don't you go to work?" (48). For a "man of
the earth" (46), this is a statement of the blindingly obvious. In truth
it marks a fissure between the different worlds that they inhabit. One mocks
the transcendent and worships gross reality; the other sniffs at the transient
phenomenon of ground beneath its feet. Bessie then, is the wretch who finds
herself caught between the two, unable to synthesize her own reality from these
disparate halves.
--Tan Suan Fong
[TOP]
|
