“Exotic Settings”
I really enjoyed ‘The Rabbi’s Cat’. Along with ‘Epileptic’, it may be my favorite graphic novel we’ve read this semester. We only spoke briefly in class about the significance of the setting, but 1930s Algeria is an especially interesting place to set a modern dialogue about religion, and not only because it’s ‘exotic’ (though that is absolutely part of the entertainment). I suspect that Sfar put quite a bit of research into his recreation of the environments. Though he only touches on the various cultural clashes that occur daily, when he does, it’s very engaging. The Jewish rabbinical student who makes sure to attend the arab whorehouse, for example. There is also something interesting and retrograde about the fact that, though they are still in conflict, there is a form of bond between the native arabs and jews in relation to the French colonialists—”We don’t serve arabs or jews here.” Today it seems that jewish culture is considered to be inextricably Western. Israel, for example, is often touted by anti-Israel speakers as a sort of bastion of Western imperialism, even, in the Middle East. And there is an element of truth, I think, in the idea that our support of Israel (whether right or wrong) stems partially from an idea of Western solidarity. That is something that is missing in the world of ‘The Rabbi’s Cat’, where a Rabbi and a Muslim friend can laugh at the French exam given by a colonizer. (Not to say that those cross-religious relationships don’t still exist in the middle east, but the colonial dynamic does create something different.) Sfar touches on the Western conception of Judaism as a Western religion when the Rabbi’s nephew Rebibo (El Rebibo!) says that in France “to play a Jew you have to have a Polish accent…Playing a North African Jew just doesn’t work, people aren’t interested, it’s too complicated for them.” For alot of readers, including me, I suspect that this is particularly why this story of North African Jews is so interesting, because it is at some level challenging to the popular conception.
A couple side notes about the art—we spoke today about the Rabbi and his cat and Malka and his lion as counterpart pairs, and I like how the Rabbi and the cat share the same very simple, undetailed art style while the two are together while Malka and the lion stand out as equally complex. I also noticed that, particularly on the bottom left of page 79, Zlabya’s fiance looks suspiciously similar to the author’s photo on the back cover. The ears, the hair, the eyes and the nose are all identical. I wonder if he used himself as a model for the drawing… Or even perhaps for the character to some extent… Not that one could really know from his fairly limited role.
The scenario of Rebibo performing in an Arab caricature is interesting. Black minstrel performers are often criticized in retrospect for exploiting a negative image of their race in order to make money. The flipside, of course, is that minstrelsy was one of the few ways for black performers to truly become successful in entertainment (alongside whites in blackface). For Rebibo to imitate another’s racial stereotype though, seems akin to performing in blackface—though in this case, he too belongs to a different suppressed minority. Still, while he is sympathetic, the act is wrong… And much more wrong than it would be were he imitating a Jewish stereotype. The Rabbi, though, is willing to condone it. I wonder if his character would make the same decision were it North African Jews who were being mocked.
I loved the ending. The Rabbi admits he doesn’t know, but smilingly continues with the service. The entire book has been about exploring questions like these—”If we can be happy without respecting the Torah, why should we exhaust ourselves to apply all these precepts that make life so complicated?” (And in Judaism there is no concept of penance for heaven and hell as there is in Christianity) I do not believe the Rabbi is continuing because he realizes it’s a sham but he enjoys it at some level, which I suppose could be suggested. I believe Sfar is suggesting that while asking these questions is important, knowing the answers or not knowing them does not necessarily discount the importance of religion to people, or make it meaningless. Religion does not have to be about knowing all the answers, and I think that this is something which many evangelicals and extremists of all stripes could take to heart. So could those who would simply discount religion for this reason.
