Toward a New Kosher?
When eating pork is a Jewish act
At beliefnet, Rabbi Brad Hirschfeld noticed that New York Times restaurant critic Sam Sifton’s latest review, of the innovative Williamsburg barbecue joint Fatty ‘Cue, repeatedly describes emphatically un-kosher dishes in religious dietary terms. A mix of different types of fat, including pork fat, is “schmaltz for the deeply Reform”; a dish of clams with bacon is “in keeping with the restaurant’s interpretation of kashrut.”
Here’s what Hirschfeld says:
Far from mocking Jewish tradition, Sifton taps into the Jewish language which is clearly a part of his life to describe both the ways in which Kashrut uses eating to heighten a sense of one’s identity and how it expresses a commitment to something larger than the food on the plate. By proclaiming the treyf-ness (treyfiocoity?) of the food he was eating, and using traditional language to do so, Sifton placed the meal squarely within those traditions. In effect, treyf became a new kind of kashrut.
Hirschfeld goes on to suppose that we could be witnessing the birth of “a new kind of kosher”—literally. (As in, the religious definition could change.)
What I take away from his keen observation is a little different. The relevant thing about Sifton’s take on Fatty ‘Cue is that he is breaking the laws of kashrut, but is still understanding his eating experience, even jokingly, in terms of those laws. For him, eating pork is more than just eating pork; and eating pork fat mixed with chicken fat—which is to say, with schmaltz, the indelible Jewish edible—is thrillingly subversive. Put another way: It used to be that Jews couldn’t eat clams and bacon. Now, Jews can eat them, and have more important experiences doing so than Gentiles can. (Moreover, guess how I learned about Hirschfeld’s post?)
The new restaurant Traif, located all of a few blocks from Fatty ‘Cue, is similar. It is not kosher, but deliberately: It goes out of its way to serve shellfish and (especially) pork. It understands itself in terms of its relation to kashrut. It is less likely to lead to a new definition of kosher than to reinforce the current definition, since it depends on the old laws for its very identity.
This is not the freedom of no rules, but the freedom of breaking the rules, which is the much more meaningful sort of freedom. Sifton’s reviews and Traif do not anticipate a new kind of kosher. But they just might anticipate a new kind of Jewishness.
Daily rate: $2
Monthly rate: $18
Yearly rate: $180
WAIT, WHY DO I HAVE TO PAY TO COMMENT?
Tablet is committed to bringing you the best, smartest, most enlightening and entertaining reporting and writing on Jewish life, all free of charge. We take pride in our community of readers, and are thrilled that you choose to engage with us in a way that is both thoughtful and thought-provoking. But the Internet, for all of its wonders, poses challenges to civilized and constructive discussion, allowing vocal—and, often, anonymous—minorities to drag it down with invective (and worse). Starting today, then, we are asking people who'd like to post comments on the site to pay a nominal fee—less a paywall than a gesture of your own commitment to the cause of great conversation. All proceeds go to helping us bring you the ambitious journalism that brought you here in the first place.
I NEED TO BE HEARD! BUT I DONT WANT TO PAY.
Readers can still interact with us free of charge via Facebook, Twitter, and our other social media channels, or write to us at email@example.com. Each week, we’ll select the best letters and publish them in a new letters to the editor feature on the Scroll.
We hope this new largely symbolic measure will help us create a more pleasant and cultivated environment for all of our readers, and, as always, we thank you deeply for your support.