Before me lies a book of four hundred and sixty pages, bearing the proud title, Culture and Civilization. The book is written in a language which my blockhead cannot understand--it is written in a Yiddish of the twenty-second century--and I am only a child of my time and understand only the language of my time. I have often had occasion to read philosophic books which were written in an obscure style, but I have now, for the first time in my life, read a philosophic book written in a wrapping-paper style (sic).

These names run through the book indiscriminately: Kant, Y. L. Peretz, Emerson, and Tolstoi--practically all of whom are well known and famous. However, as I read of these famous men who are grouped together although they were as far apart as the poles in their trend of thought (for example, Y. L. Peretz and Emmanuel Kant), I had the feeling that I was eating a cold goulash and reluctantly thought of kosher hot dogs, of hot dumplings, of my grandmother's holiday cakes, of cream cheese, of manischewitz's mazoth, of 2Kelmer [small town in Lithuania], of preacher's sermons....and of my great-grandfather's mother-in-law.

You must understand that the book is written for plain folks who understand only Yiddish, because people who can read English or any European language need not depend on Mr. [W.] Nathanson's philosophic tripe. And Jews who can read Yiddish only are plain folks who have common sense. When they are served such a cold goulash, which is half goulash and half hash, and are told, "Read, and choke it down," I can imagine what an unpleasant feeling they must have. Even if they swallow all of the cold goulash that Mr. Nathanson serves them, they are still not satisfied, because they do not know what Mr. Nathanson is aiming at, nor what he wishes to prove, nor what his principal ideas are.

If you know that your wife has purchased a fine quality of fresh meat and fresh vegetables and instead of preparing a good meal, serves an unpalatable dish of hash, you certainly are angry--and in reprimanding her, you may even 3remind her that she had no dowry when she married you. And when I see a person taking two such great subjects as culture and civilization, and turning them into something highly involved--both as to logic and as to literary style--I become angry with him and charge him with not being prepared for his work, and with approaching a question about which he is totally uninformed.

Civilization and culture are two extremely complicated subjects, which should not be handled by Yiddishists [advocate of Yiddish as national language], who are radical stump speakers. If a radical Yiddishist does write on civilization and culture, he should not wander off into other fields; he should write on the civilization and culture of his own environment. Yiddishist conceptions of civilization and culture in general are very interesting, but it would be better to read the great French, English, and German sociologists and philosophers on culture and civilization. However, it would be very interesting to listen occasionally to some theories on Jewish culture and Jewish civilization 4held by a man who considers himself a modern Jew. Naturally, these ideas must be expressed clearly, so that everybody can understand them.

If Mr. Nathanson does not deem it an honor to occupy himself [solely] with the question of Jewish culture and Jewish civilization. I shall help him by formulating this question: Is there a Jewish civilization? Has there ever been a Jewish civilization? If not, why not? In order to answer this question, Mr. Nathanson must, first of all, know what civilization in general is, and what Jewish civilization in particular is--provided that there is, or ever was such a thing as Jewish civilization. I am convinced that Mr. Nathanson cannot define civilization because a definition of civilization is still a highly controversial question. The French, for example, cannot distinguish between civilization and culture. In French, the word "civilization" means both civilization and culture.

Next, the author will have to explain what Jewish culture in general is and whether there is such a thing at the present time as Jewish culture. If 5there is, what is its relationship to Jewish civilization, i. e., to what extent has Jewish culture been developed and formed by Jewish civilization?

I realize however, that Mr. Nathanson cannot tackle such a piece of work. An analysis of Jewish culture requires more than the reading of pamphlets by Karl Marx; it requires an intensive study of Hebrew literature--above all, one must be a Jew, a sincere Jew with true Jewish ideas. But this cannot be expected of a man who is a Yiddishist and a radical. A radical Yiddishist will not, under any circumstances, acknowledge Jewish culture, nor can he ever form a conception of Jewish culture--from the ocean of Jewish thought which has found its expression in fifty thousand Hebrew books from the Bible to Ahad Ha-am [considered the father of modern Hebrew]. If a radical Jew does believe in Jewish culture, the culture in which he believes, is neither culture nor Jewish, but is rather Sholom Asch's "God of Revenge".....Since it is impossible to write a book of five hundred pages on this type of Jewish culture, Mr. Nathanson wrote instead, in his involved Yiddish, a book on culture and civilization in general. He proved 6one good thing by his book. He proved that a person should not--a person must not write such a book if he does not wish to be considered a literary jackass.

If the author of this book had been a true friend of mankind, he would not have written this book because the world is boring enough without publishing boring books--books which make one yawn are crimes against humanity.