Post on 25-Mar-2018
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
11
account of my findings using data visualization. While similar methods have been utilized in a
wide range of fields, my project is one of the first to apply data visualization to a theatre history
question and thus demonstrates the potential and the challenges of data-driven theatre history.
Building this visualization took longer than I anticipated. From start to finish, it took
almost two years to populate the dataset and build the project, with most of that time spent on
data collection. I began by compiling a dataset about the personal and professional relationships
of the 290 Yiddish theatre artists I was able to identify who worked on at least one Vilna Troupe
production between 1915 and 1936 (the complete dataset can be downloaded online as an Excel
file at http://vilnatroupe.com/data/current_database.xlsx). The first step was to identify which
artists were involved in the Vilna Troupe and the roles that they played (actor, designer, director,
musician, etc.). Most of these people were obscure even within Yiddish theatre history and had
little written about them outside of a single brief encyclopedia entry, if that. Some had no
mentions in secondary sources in any language. Interviews that I conducted with descendants of
Vilna Troupe members, along with theatre reviews and memoirs, helped to fill in some, but not
all, of these gaps. Even after extensive research, there were still dozens of individuals for whom I
was never able to find even the most schematic biographical details. Only a few of these
performers (like Joseph Buloff, Luba Kadison, and Ida Kaminska) made it into the Yiddish
theatre histories of the period. For hundreds of others, their names never appeared outside of
theatre programs and other archival ephemera. This problem, of course, is not limited solely to
Yiddish theatre. Traditional scholarship requires that scholars manually identify figures of
significance; as such, theatre historians have tended to write about well-known artists who
attained major acting, directing, and design roles. Those who remained in the chorus or spent
their entire careers as assistants or stagehands recede into the background of theatre
12
historiography more often than not. My project offers a model for using the data contained in
theatre programs to recover the role of the “minor” theatre artist.
Names presented another key challenge in populating and organizing the dataset. In some
cases when performers were listed with a first initial and a last name, I was never able to find out
their first name. Still others appeared under multiple names, especially women, who often
performed under maiden names, married names, stage names, and pseudonyms interchangeably.
For example, Molly Pickus also performed as Mania Pickus (her birth name), Molly Shlosberg
(her married name), Mania Shlosberg, and Molly Madko (a stage alter-ego). Roza Birnboym was
married twice, first to Vilna Troupe member Leyzer Zhelazo and later to Dovid Birnboym, also a
Vilna Troupe member. She performed interchangeably as Roza Birnboym, Roza Zhelazo, and
Roza Birnboym-Zhelazo. Others adopted stage names to hide their true identities in times of war
and political uncertainty. Noah Bushlewicz became Noah Nachbush. Leyb Shuster became Leyb
Kadison. And Yankev Sherman was occasionally billed in Vilna Troupe programs simply as
“Hamacabi” (“The Maccabee”). Still others changed names and spellings as they moved from
one country to the next. Simkhe Vaynshtok performed as Simi Weinstock in Western Europe,
Simon Weinstock in England, and Sam Weinstock in the United States. Chava Eisen performed
variously as Eva Eisen, Manya Eisen, Chawe Eisen, and Eva Zhelizshinska. Fortunately,
Leksikon entries and information from memoirs and interviews often provided these alternate
names. Each time I came across an alternate names or pseudonym, I cross-listed them in my
Excel file so that all name variants would be linked to a single entry. Whenever I came across a
new name in a program, I checked the alternate names column first to ensure that the individual
in question was not already present in the dataset.
13
I drew data from Zalmen Zylbercweig’s seven volume reference work Leksikon fun
yidishn teater (Encyclopedia of the Yiddish Theatre) and from listings of names, dates, plays, and
locations from hundreds of Vilna Troupe programs found in the archival collections of individual
actors at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, the Harvard Library Judaica Division, the Billy
Rose Theatre Division and the Dorot Jewish Division of the New York Public Library, and the
Columbia University Jewish Studies Collection. I also collected data from the Internet Broadway
Database, the Internet Movie Database, and from dozens of oral history interviews that I
conducted with the living descendants of Vilna Troupe members.27
I intentionally collected data from both quantitative (that is, lists of names and dates in
programs and the Leksikon) and qualitative (interviews, memoirs, and correspondence) sources.
These sources served different, yet complementary, purposes. The programs and encyclopedia
were instrumental in establishing the professional connections among this group of theatre artists
– for instance, who worked with whom, and in what capacity. Interviews, memoirs, and
correspondence, on the other hand, offered valuable insight into key social connections outside
of the professional sphere: romances, marriages, and affairs; family relationships and quarrels;
friendships; and – most difficult to ascertain, but perhaps most significant – networks of
influence. How did famous theater families like the Turkows and Waislitzes recruit new
members into the company from among their kin? Which actors remained close friends after they
stopped working together, and which friendships stood the test of time, as attested to by
correspondence? Whom did these artists cite as their primary artistic influences, and who later
cited them as influencers? These kinds of social connections are integral to how artists make
theatre, and yet they too often vanish from theatre history. My project offers a model for how to
recapture the social dimensions of historical theatre-making.
14
Next, I traced the personal and professional relationships developed by each artist over
the course of their lifetimes: the actors, directors and designers whom they worked with; their
nuclear and extended families; their marriages, affairs, and divorces; the people that they studied
with and those whom they taught; their friendships; and the artists whom they inspired. My goal
was to capture every social connection that I could document in order to build a database that
accounted for the social networks of these artists. Ultimately, I hoped my database would
resemble what an early twentieth-century version of today’s social media might have looked like
if these artists had had access to it, a kind of Yiddish theatre Facebook for the 1920s and 30s.
The 290 artists associated with the Vilna Troupe formed a tightly interconnected artistic
network that stretched across five continents. Its members lived, worked, and correspondence
across Eastern and Western Europe, North and South America, Africa, the Middle East, and
Oceania. For the purposes of this project, I considered any individual who ever worked with the
Vilna Troupe – even if only for a single production – to be a member of the company, regardless
of their specific role or the length of their tenure. Leading actors and assistant stage managers,
set designers and build crews, producers and extras were all accorded equal attention in the
dataset. Some of the artists on my list, like Millie Alter, were involved with the Vilna Troupe for
only a single production, while others, like Joseph Buloff, performed with the company for
decades. Because members tended to cycle in and out of the Vilna Troupe frequently and because
many continued to leverage their Vilna Troupe credentials to market their work long after leaving
the company, I decided to consider all 290 artists as equal parts of the same phenomenon.
I deliberately use ‘phenomenon’ here, rather than theatre company. For most of its
existence, the Vilna Troupe was actually not a singular troupe, but rather, a global network of
companies that all adopted the same brand identity. A 1918 quarrel over a love triangle followed
15
by a surprise elopement led to the creation of the first of many Vilna Troupe branches. Many
subsequent splits followed over the next fifteen years, for reasons that ranged from artistic
disagreements to family quarrels to immigration issues. Using hundreds of theatre programs and
their cast lists, I was able to identify ten distinct branches of the company, each of which used the
same Vilna Troupe name, logo, and repertoire. Some branches lasted for over two decades, while
others existed only for a season. Some branches traveled around the world, while others stayed in
a single city or region. All, however, marketed their strikingly similar productions under the
imprimatur “The Vilna Troupe.” More often than not, actors were members of more than one
Vilna Troupe company, as people changed their branch affiliations frequently to settle
interpersonal disputes, to negotiate for better roles and higher pay, or to facilitate travel to
particular places. The complexity, size, and remarkable interconnectedness of this theatre
company, I believe, offers an ideal case study for experimenting with data visualization.
Tracking a company with so many branches and such a large number of rotating
participants raises important methodological questions. How can one account for the ever-
changing dynamics of a theatrical phenomenon with multiple constituent parts with precision?
What is the best way to construct a dataset when one name refers to more than one object, as is
the case for both the Vilna Troupe with its multiple branches and its actors who often performed
under many names? How can one identify data about a particular company or individual with the
same name as others (for example, a particular “Theatre Royal” in a world full of Theatre
Royals)? A well-structured relational dataset offers the ability to link large quantities of complex
information together while still accounting for individual differences. That being said, however,
building such a dataset requires significant manual labor at the outset. For my project, I tagged
each individual artist with codes signifying their branch memberships, while simultaneously
16
tracing the geographical pathways of each branch. A future visualization, currently in progress,
will layer the interpersonal connections between individuals on top of a map and timeline
indicating the comings and goings of the ten Vilna Troupe branches. This planned visualization
will demonstrate how the social connections formed within the Vilna Troupe sparked the creation
of dozens of theatre companies, schools, and organizations around the world.
I also built a second linked dataset of non-Vilna Troupe members whose names were
frequently mentioned in connection to one or more Vilna Troupe members (this dataset is in the
second tab of the Excel file). This dataset of second- and third-degree Vilna Troupe connections
included biographical information, fields of influence, and information about how these
individuals were related to Vilna Troupe members. Taken together, these two datasets offer an
account of how the members of the Vilna Troupe were connected to one another and to other
artists, writers, and thinkers who never performed with the company.
Finally, I worked with a data visualization programmer to create an online tool
(www.vilnatroupe.com) that demonstrates how these Yiddish performers were connected to each
other and to other artists.28 This visualization, built in D3 (a Javascript library for creating data
visualizations), allows users to interact with the data I collected using a series of responsive
filters. My visualization aims to animate the social relationships that shaped the careers of the
Vilna Troupe members and their colleagues and to bring the broader social context of the
interwar Yiddish stage to light.
Relationships in the visualization are expressed as colored lines, with each color
signifying a different type of connection. Viewers can manipulate the filters to choose which
relationships they see in order to compare how different types of social connections shaped the
Vilna Troupe and contributed to its impact. For example, a user interested in how gender
17
impacted the formation of friendships in Yiddish theatre could choose to view only friendships
and compare the results by gender.
The filters organize the data into five types of connections. Family connections in the
visualization include kinship, marriages, and romantic relationships. Study connections
document relationships between teachers and their students. Professional connections reflect
people who worked together on theatre productions and/or films. The friendship category
includes close friendships as documented in actors’ letters and memoirs. Finally, the “inspired”
category shows how Vilna Troupe members influenced each other and other artists. For each of
these categories, I only included relationships that were well documented in the sources. For
example, for the friendship category I included only those who engaged in frequent
correspondence over a period of at least five years and/or described close friendships in letters or
memoirs. For the “inspired” category, I included only instances where one artist claimed to have
been directly inspired by another. A sidebar on the left side of the screen allows viewers to see
more information about the specific relationships between individuals, including lists of each
individual’s connections and the organizations and theatre companies with which they were
involved. A future visualization, in development, will further document how interpersonal
relationships in the Yiddish theatre forged connections between theatre companies, schools, and
other theatrical institutions.
Connection lines between Vilna Troupe members represent professional connections
outside of the company. For example, Hanoch Mayer is listed as performing with Yankev Mestel.
This means that Mayer and Mestel worked together on at least one non-Vilna Troupe production
(they may well have worked together in the Vilna Troupe as well, but the visualization is
designed to document how the company fostered artistic networks outside of itself). The
18
connections between Vilna Troupe members thus document how the relationships that people
formed within this single company influenced Yiddish theatre at large between the two world
wars. For instance, this image depicts how many Vilna Troupe members worked with each other
outside of their work with the company. According to the data I collected, Vilna Troupe members
worked with one another in productions by at least 75 other theatre companies, including groups
performing in Yiddish, English, German, Hebrew, and Polish in Warsaw, Lodz, Bialystok,
Moscow, Odessa, Kharkov, Lemberg, Krakow, Kishinev, Riga, Vilna, Brussels, Paris, Berlin,
New York City, Philadelphia, Chicago, Buenos Aires, and Johannesburg, among others.
In addition, my dataset reveals that the 290 Vilna Troupe members worked with a total of
132 theatre companies in some capacity over the course of their careers. This data offers insight
into how the Vilna Troupe members were connected, socially and professionally, to theatre artists
in other companies.
Users can also filter which Vilna Troupe members are shown in the center circle of the
visualization by gender, branch membership, and role (actor, director, designer, stage manager,
etc.). A second set of filters allows users to sort individuals who had second-degree connections
to the Vilna Troupe by gender, field of influence (theatre, film, literature, television, dance etc.),
and an impact rating that I assigned to track how famous these figures were. I assigned each
second-degree connection artist a numerical rating on a scale from 1 (low) to 5 (high) to signify
their historical impact. The “high impact” category (impact rating of 4-5) includes those who
made significant contributions to their fields that are well documented by historians. Most “high
impact” individuals have merited numerous entries in other encyclopedias and reference works
and all have met the notability criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. For example, Stella Adler,
Cary Grant, Eugene Ionesco, and Sanford Meisner all were assigned “high” impact ratings. “Low
19
impact” individuals (impact rating 1-2) are either lesser known or have made smaller
contributions to their fields. Most “low impact” individuals have neither standard encyclopedia
entries nor Wikipedia pages. In my dataset, this category includes figures like Max Wiskind, Liza
Schlossberg, and Paul Breitman. Those in the “medium impact” category received impact ratings
of 3 and their names may be somewhat familiar to viewers. “Impact,” in this schema, refers to
historiographic impact, not necessarily historical impact; indeed, as I have argued in this article,
these do not always line up. Paul Breitman, for example, was certainly a significant non-Vilna
Troupe member figure in Yiddish theatre history, but his name is probably unfamiliar to most
non-experts as it appears infrequently in secondary sources. Adler, Grant, Ionesco, and Meisner,
on the other hand, are so well known that most viewers of the visualization can be expected to
have some familiarity with them. The impact rating filter is subjective and is not intended to be a
precise measure of historical significance. Instead, I assigned impact ratings simply to enable
users to filter the visualization for names that are likely to already be familiar.
The responsive filters enable users to manipulate the dataset in real time in order to ask
and answer questions of their own. For example, to what extent was the Vilna Troupe and its
many branches a family affair? How did the Vilna Troupe’s professional network work
differently for men versus for women? Which branch of the company had the most social
connections? How were the members of the Vilna Troupe connected to well-known figures in
theatre, film, literature, and the visual arts, and what does this tell us about the company’s
impact? Visualizing the Vilna Troupe encourages users to experiment with the filters to answer
these questions and more.
To illustrate how this tool could contribute to historical analysis, let us examine what the
visualization reveals about the social connections of two seminal company members. Dovid
20
Herman (1876-1937) was one of the Vilna Troupe’s leading directors, best known for directing
the company’s world premiere production of The Dybbuk in 1920. Mikhl Vaykhert (1890-1967)
was another major Vilna Troupe director, known for his use of experimental theatre techniques
drawn from the Polish avant-garde. Both of these men were extraordinarily well connected.
Herman maintained close friendships with many leading Yiddish writers of the day, including
Peretz Hirschbein and Sholem Asch, as well as with Alexander Zelwerowicz, a major Polish
actor and director of the period. Vaykhert’s friendships, on the other hand, were firmly
concentrated in the world of the Polish avant-garde: Juliusz Osterwa, Arnold Szyfman, Leon
Schiller. Both directors ran influential theatre schools where many members of the Vilna Troupe
learned the craft of acting. Interestingly, the data reveals that while Herman’s classes enrolled
more future members of the Vilna Troupe, Herman and Vaykhert both taught many of the same
individuals, including Zalmen Hirshfeld, Ester Rapel, Simkhe Vaynshtok, Basheva Kremer,
Nokhum Melnik, Yankev Mansdorf, Dovid Birnboym, and Moyshe Potashinsky. Many of these
individuals enrolled in Herman’s classes early in their careers and studied with Vaykhert later on.
In both cases, education often led directly to employment in a Vilna Troupe production. Did
these directors offer complementary acting training, or did they actively poach students from one
another? Did aspiring actors sign up for classes with Herman or Vaykhert to improve their
chances of being cast in a future Vilna Troupe production?
For another example of how data visualization can raise new questions, let us consider
what the data suggests about theatre families and the Vilna Troupe. As Yiddish theatre historian
Nahma Sandrow has written, family troupes were common on the Yiddish stage, as they were in
most theatre traditions for centuries.29 Yet while the prevalence of family troupes in many theatre
tradition is well established, I have not been able to find any scholarly work that analyzes how
21
kinship influences theatre company formation, longevity, and productions. Collecting kinship
data and visualizing family networks among theatre artists can help us ask new questions about
how intrafamily relationships influence theatre making.
Out of the 290 members of the Vilna Troupe, 73 (more than one-quarter) were related to
one another. Husbands and wives, brothers and sisters, parents and children, cousins, in-laws –
these were the ties that connected many Vilna Troupe members to one another. Many likely
would have never become theatre artists were it not for the influence of their family members.
Noah Nachbush’s nephew, Wolf Faynzilber, for example, was recruited into a theatre career by
his famous uncle. Mila Waislitz grew up performing alongside her Vilna Troupe actor parents
Jacob and Yocheved Waislitz; after marrying a fellow Vilna Troupe actor Moyshe Potashinski,
they all traveled and performed together for several years. The filters in the visualization allow
the user to make comparisons and draw specific conclusions about the role of family
relationships in the Vilna Troupe. For example, Mordechai Mazo’s branch of the company had
more members with family connections than any other branch, including the largest number of
husband-wife pairs (22). Alexander Asro and Alomis’s Vilna Troupe, though run by a married
couple, had far fewer romantic partners among its members (9 spouse pairs, including the
founders). Was this because Asro and Alomis’s branch traveled across greater distances? Did the
prevalence of married couples in Mazo’s company contribute to its longevity (Asro and Alomis’s
company lasted for only 8 years, while Mazo’s lasted for 17)? Visualizing the data about the
Vilna Troupe’s intrafamily connections may not readily answer these questions, but it offers a
new way of looking at this company that suggests further avenues for research.
My visualization suggests that the Vilna Troupe was a central node in a vibrant artistic
network that connected hundreds of influential artists around the world and across the twentieth
22
century. The visualization also reveals how the members of the Vilna Troupe were transnational
cultural conduits, connecting theatre artists in Russia and Eastern Europe with their counterparts
in North and South America, and vice versa. Like all theatre companies, the Vilna Troupe did not
create its work in isolation. Its work was part of a complex web of entangled artistic
collaborations, interpersonal relationships, romantic dramas, and networks of influence.
Visualizing the Vilna Troupe at the center of a network of personal and professional connections
reveals previously invisible relationships between theatre practitioners who otherwise might have
had little connection with one another.
For example, Stella Adler began her career performing in Yiddish with Maurice
Schwartz’s Yiddish Art Theater, alongside many Vilna Troupe members. A few years later, she
enrolled in the Theater Arts Institute of the American Laboratory Theater, run by former
Moscow Art Theater actors Richard Boleslavsky and Maria Ouspenskaya. It was there that Adler
first encountered the Method acting techniques that became the foundation for her actor training
methods. It was also there that Adler met Lee Strasberg, her future Group Theater collaborator,
and Harold Clurman, her future colleague and husband. Like Stella Adler, Clurman’s first
encounter with the stage had also been via the Yiddish theater, and he remained fascinated with
the tradition for his entire life.30 Helen Krich Chinoy has suggested that a shared love of Yiddish
theater was what first brought Stella Adler and Harold Clurman together and helped spark their
ideas for the Group Theater.31 Meanwhile, Adler’s career continued to intersect with the Vilna
Troupe. In 1928, Adler starred opposite Luba Kadison in a production of Sholem Asch’s Di
kishefmakherin fun Castille [The Witch of Castille] at the Yiddish Art Theater. They became
friends and for years, Kadison would meet Adler and Harold Clurman at the Café Royal on
Second Avenue for coffee, dinner, and gossip.
23
Richard Boleslavsky, a former Moscow Art Theater actor and Adler’s first acting teacher,
had Vilna Troupe connections of his own. In 1923, Boleslavsky was a founding member of
America’s first Yiddish drama school, where he taught acting alongside former Vilna Troupe
director Mendl Elkin and playwrights Peretz Hirschbein, Dovid Pinski, and H. Leivick.32 A year
later, the teachers and pupils of this Yiddish drama school formed their own Yiddish art theater
called Unzer Teater [Our Theater].
Nearly everyone in the company was connected to the Vilna Troupe in one way or
another: besides Elkin and the playwrights from the short-lived drama school, the founding
members of Unzer Teater also included Vilner husband-and-wife acting team Chaim Shniur and
Bella Bellarina, and Egon Brecher, Dovid Herman’s director friend from Vienna. Other members
included an unknown but talented stage designer who had just immigrated to the United States
named Boris Aronson. In an explicit nod to the Vilna Troupe, Unzer Teater opened with a
production of one of its most successful plays: An-sky’s Day and Night. The directors gave Boris
Aronson free reign to experiment with the set, costumes, and lighting. None of them quite
understood his strange ideas about design anyway.
When Day and Night opened in 1924, Aronson’s designs catapulted him to instant fame.
After designing for Maurice Schwartz’s Yiddish Art Theater, the Artef Theater, and the
Schildkraut Theater to steady acclaim, Aronson moved on to the English-language stage in 1932,
working first for the Group Theater and then Broadway, where he would go on to win six Tony
Awards for designing hit musicals like Cabaret, Company, Follies, and Pacific Overtures.
Aronson also famously designed the sets for the Broadway production of Fiddler on the Roof.
Aronson’s designs were instrumental in bringing abstract sets to the mainstream
American stage.33 Robert Brustein called Aronson “the leader of a national movement.”34
24
Aronson was also responsible for training some of the American theater’s most important
designers. In the 1950s, one of his Broadway apprentices was a young unknown named Ming
Cho Lee. It was Aronson who first introduced Lee to the Constructivist aesthetics of the Russian
and German stage; years later, Lee would describe Aronson as “an outside comet that fell into
the Western world.”35 Today, Lee is a Tony Award-winning designer and Yale professor. The
American Theater Wing considers Lee to have exerted “a greater influence on American
scenography than any other contemporary designer,” and his former students include scenic
designers Tony Straiges, Santo Loquasto, and John Lee Beatty.36 Without the Vilna Troupe,
there would likely have been no Unzer Teater to give Aronson his big break. Perhaps he never
would have brought his unconventional ideas to American scenic design.
Aronson’s approach to theatrical design was developed during his early career in the
Yiddish theater, working alongside former Vilner in a company modeled after the Vilna Troupe.
Aronson’s conception of the stage as an artistic laboratory, his transnational aesthetic that drew
equally upon Russian, Jewish, Polish, and German material for inspiration, his interest in visual
abstraction, his technical prowess and ability to make beautiful sets regardless of budget – all
came from the Yiddish art theater movement. The contemporary American stage thus owes
significant debts to the Vilna Troupe for incubating Stella Adler’s early acting training and for its
influence on a young Boris Aronson.
A network model of the interwar stage that takes the Vilna Troupe as its starting point
reveals whole centers of activity that were concentrated around particular individuals like Dovid
Herman, who not only personally trained nearly every major Yiddish director of the interwar
period, but also maintained close professional ties to key figures in the Polish, Russian, and
German theatrical avant-garde, or Yankev Blayfer. The members of the Vilna Troupe were global
25
theatrical conduits, connecting theater artists in Russia and Eastern Europe with work that was
happening in North and South America, and vice versa.
Other kinds of connections happened outside of the theater. Vilna Troupe actor Baruch
Lumet, father of American film director Sidney Lumet, worked briefly at Camp Kindervelt, a
Jewish overnight camp outside of New York City. One of the kids enrolled in his drama class
was a young Martin Ritt, who drove his teacher crazy when he kept skipping rehearsal to play
baseball. Years later, when the elder Lumet (who went by the nickname “Bulu”) saw a Group
Theater play, he was shocked to see Martin’s name in the program.
I pick up a program, I see ‘Martin Ritt.’ I said, ‘What in the devil is he doing there? That
boy, he should be a ball player. I couldn’t believe it, it’s the same Martin Ritt. I go
backstage. I said, ‘Martin, what in the devil are you doing here?’ He said, ‘Bulu, you
poisoned me.’”37
For Martin Ritt, those rehearsals that he laughed off at Camp Kindervelt stayed with him and set
the direction of his future theater career.
There are many such stories of Vilner inspiring talented young people to enter the theater.
For Judy Graubart and Manny Azenberg, it was seeing their uncle Wolf Barzel, a former Vilna
Troupe actor, perform on Second Avenue. Wearing his signature purple pants and a black beret,
Barzel would take his niece and nephew backstage; inspired by their uncle’s bohemian lifestyle,
the siblings pursued theatrical careers as a comedian and a producer, respectively. Judy Graubart
went on to star in the The Electric Company with Morgan Freeman, Rita Moreno, and Bill Cosby
and to marry actor Bob Dishy. Manny Azenberg became a legendary producer who produced
almost every Neil Simon play since 1972, along with dozens of other Broadway plays and
musicals.38 In 2012, Azenberg received a lifetime achievement Tony Award for his contributions
26
to the American stage. “Wolfie was the inspiration for everyone in the family to go into the
entertainment business,” Azenberg told me, “because who would have thought of it
otherwise?”39 The Vilna Troupe was the connective tissue that bound hundreds of important
figures in the theater together, across language, geography, and time.
Theatre, as a medium that requires collaboration and interconnectedness, is ideally suited
to being analyzed through the artistic networks that it creates. These networks include all of the
individuals involved in a production – from the artistic director to the production intern – and all
of their contributions, no matter how small. In traditional theatre historiography, the
interconnectedness of individual artists is often invisible. Scholars may read though lists of
castmates and letter addresses, or memoir accounts of drinks with friends and backstage visits,
but we rarely account for all of this social networking data. Until recently, we have not had
methodologies for looking at these kinds of connections on a macro level, let alone for analyzing
or assessing their importance. Data visualization offers a way of doing precisely that.
Visualizing the Vilna Troupe is not yet complete, but it offers a starting point that
demonstrates what a data-driven approach to documenting the social connections of theatre
artists can offer our field. My project is a small-scale experiment about the social networks of a
single, albeit large, theatre company. But this tool would be even more useful if scholars
collaborated to share data about social connections across theatre history. If twenty scholars
worked together to collecting data about performers from a particular period, genre, or period,
what new connections might such a dataset reveal? Or a hundred scholars with different
languages, disciplines, and expertise? It is my hope that we will soon see an explosion of these
types of projects, including mechanisms for large-scale collaborative efforts that will allow
scholars to combine and compare theatre history datasets.
27
Drawing from my experience working on this project, here are some concluding
thoughts:
1. Data relationalizes theatre history
We know that theatre artists create work via processes that are extremely collaborative,
far more so than writers, painters, and musicians. And yet, these collaborations are often left out
of our scholarship. Visualizing a dataset focused on social connections like this one offers a
means of examining the relationships between large numbers of theatre artists while still
accounting for the individual differences between them.
A data-driven approach to theatre history would encourage scholars to think more
critically about how all of the many people who contribute to theatrical productions interact with
one another. What would theatre history look like if we could account for every single individual
contribution to a production, no matter how small? How does social connectedness and
networking impact the work that artists produce? Data visualization allows us to ask and answer
complex questions about collaboration and theatre.
2. Data offers new perspectives on what is significant and what is “obscure”
How accurate is our understanding of what is important in theatre history? Where have
long-held assumptions led us astray? Who are the understudied figures that merit closer
examination? Using the available tools at their disposal, theatre historians have traditionally
tended to engage in granular analysis that focuses on a particular topic, person, or tradition
through a relatively narrow lens. A data-driven methodology offers the opportunity to expand
that lens dramatically to include material that might previously have been disregarded as
insignificant or obscure. This is relevant even for topics in theatre history that have been more
extensively researched. For example, much has been written on Shakespeare’s global reception,
28
but the database developed by the Asian Shakespeare Intercultural Archive (http://a-s-i-a-
web.org) offers new insight into the contemporary landscape of Shakespeare productions in East
and Southeast Asia.
In a network visualization, data is significant only to the extent that it is connected to
other data. The more connections between artists and the fewer steps to get from one to another,
the more significant the individual. A data visualization of the social networks of one Yiddish
theatre company and its little-known actors reveals that they were not nearly as obscure as the
extant historical record might suggest. What other equally little-known but significant figures
might visualization of a larger dataset — say tens of thousands of cast lists across decades of
American theatre programs — reveal?
3. Data can offer a corrective for problems with sources and bias
As scholars who write about ephemeral events in the past, theatre historians must often
contend with sources that are not entirely reliable and that present thorny methodological
challenges. In many cases, including in Yiddish theatre, the most detailed accounts of
performances are often contained in memoirs and theatre reviews. While memoirs can provide a
level of detail about the visual elements, tone, audience, and affect of a production that is
difficult to find in other sources, these subjective accounts do not always offer strict historical
truths. Most memoir authors rely solely on their memories, and since memoirists often write their
recollections decades after the historical events they recall, their accounts often tell us more
about the author’s experience in the intervening years than about the event itself.
The job of a memoirist is to capture the lived experiences of an individual, not the
historical contours of a group. Taken together, the memoirs of individuals involved in the same
historical event often offer contradictory perspectives. In the case of the Vilna Troupe, for
29
example, most of the actors refused to acknowledge that multiple Vilna Troupe branches existed.
Like the famous joke about a lone Jew stranded on a desert island who builds two synagogues
(“the shul I go to, and the one I would never set foot in”) 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.40 In their memoirs, the actors tended to
treat each of their individual pathways through a myriad of branches as though they were a single
company. If we were to take these memoirs at face value, the “real” Vilna Troupe was simply
whichever branch the writer happened to be working with at any given moment. My
visualization, in contrast, demonstrates just how flexible and dynamic the actors’ affiliations with
individual branches actually were. Performing this macro-level analysis of the extant data
enabled me to place the material gleaned from memoirs in conversation with the broader
contours of a many-headed Hydra of a theatre company.
Reviewers, on the other hand, may be writing immediately after the performance, but
they can be swayed by other kinds of bias: interpersonal rivalries, tight deadlines, seating, etc.
Moreover, theatre reviewers do not always accurately capture the audience’s reaction to a
production. Again, data can level the playing field and enable the scholar to examine these
subjective sources within a broader context. For example, scholars might close read reviews
alongside analyses of ticket sale figures, investment records, and other financial data.
4. A caveat: big data is not a methodological panacea
Big data is no cure-all for the problems of theatre history. Like any methodology, data-
driven analysis offers the historian a particular glimpse of a theatrical event or tradition. Unless a
theatre historian is somehow able to attend every rehearsal and the entire run of a production in
person, we will never be able to know everything about a show. Big data allows us to see a lot
30
more of the picture than we are accustomed to and it enables us to look at large quantities of
information at once. But there will always be missing data, even in the largest datasets. There are
still bits and pieces that have vanished from the archives: the conversations and disputes never
recorded, the scrapping of a song in the final dress rehearsal, the actor who was fired mid-run,
the understudy who stole the show but only for a single night, the set pieces that broke and had to
be replaced, the extras who were never listed in the program. Big data can only show what is
accounted for in the dataset, which is still curated by the scholar who chooses what to include
and what to exclude.
Critical caution is just as important with data-driven methodologies as with any other
approach. Caution is especially important in an environment in which “big data” is often invoked
as a solution to every problem. “We [humanities scholars] seem ready and eager to suspend
critical judgment in a rush to visualization,” warns Joanna Drucker.41 We would be wise to heed
Drucker’s warning and think carefully about what we choose to visualize, how we evaluate that
scholarship, and what kinds of analysis are better left to more traditional methods of scholarly
practice. Ultimately, I believe that data visualization scholarship works best when it is put in
conversation with more traditional scholarly methodologies. Digital data visualization is an
exciting new addition to our existing methodologies. But it is not a replacement.
Notes
1 Blayfer’s Wikipedia entry, under the name he adopted for film, John Bleifer
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Bleifer) offers many details on his Hollywood career and
virtually nothing about his decades as a Yiddish actor (the article erroneously states that Blayfer
began his acting career in Hollywood in 1927). See also IMDB, “John Bleifer”
(http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0088197/), IBDB, “John Bleifer”
31
(http://www.ibdb.com/Person/View/32298). Sonia Alomis has only a brief stub in the German
Wikipedia and no other encyclopedia articles (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sonia_Alomis).
Leola Vendorf has an IMDB page under the spelling “Wendorff”
(http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0920906/).Baruch Lumet has a Wikipedia stub
(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baruch_Lumet), an IMDB page
(http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0525885/), and an IBDB page
(https://www.ibdb.com/Person/View/4435). An article I wrote about Lumet (“Advice from
Sidney Lumet’s Yiddish Actor Dad”) appeared on the blog of the Digital Yiddish Theatre Project
on December 14, 2015 (http://www.yiddishstage.org/2014/12/15/lessons-from-sidney-lumets-
yiddish-actor-dad/). Wolf Barzel has an IBDB page under the spelling “Wolfe Barzell”
(http://www.ibdb.com/Person/View/31219).
2 Sharon Asro, interviewed by the author, Arlington, VA, November 28, 2014.
3 Baruch Lumet, interview with Anita M. Wincelberg, December 12-20, 1976. William E.
Wiener Oral History Library of the American Jewish Committee, New York Public Library.
4 Manny Azenberg, interviewed by the author. New York, February 7, 2014.
5 Ibid.
6 See Azenberg’s IBDB page at http://www.ibdb.com/Person/View/21830.
7 Azenberg, int. by the author.
8 Oscar G. Brockett and Franklin J. Hildy, History of the Theater, 10th edition (Harlow,
England: Pearson, 2014); John Russell Brown, The Oxford Illustrated History of Theatre
(Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2001); David Wiles and Christine Dymkowski, The
Cambridge Companion to Theatre History (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2013);
32
Phillip B. Zarrilli, Bruce McConachie, Gary Jay Williams, and Carol Fisher Sorgenfrei, Theatre
Histories: An Introduction, 2nd edition (New York: Routledge, 2010).
9 Debra Caplan, “Nomadic Chutzpah: The Vilna Troupe’s Transnational Yiddish Theatre
Paradigm, 1915-1935,” Theatre Survey 55.3 (September 2014): 296-317; Judith Thissen,
“Reconsidering the Decline of the New York Yiddish Theatre in the Early 1900s,” Theatre
Survey 44.2 (2003): 173-197; Edward Portnoy, “Modicut Puppet Theatre: Modernism, Satire,
and Yiddish Culture,” TDR/The Drama Review 43.3 (1999): 115-134; Harley Erdman, “Jewish
Anxiety in ‘Days of Judgement:’ Community Conflict, Antisemitism, and the God of Vengeance
Obscenity Case,” Theatre Survey 40.1 (1999): 51-74; and Nina Warnke, "Immigrant Popular
Culture as Contested Sphere: Yiddish Music Halls, the Yiddish Press, and the Processes of
Americanization, 1900-1910," Theatre Journal 48.3 (1996): 321-335.
10 For example, see Don B. Wilmeth and Christopher Bigsby, eds., The Cambridge
History of American Theatre, volume 3 (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000), 134
and 498.
11 For example, on theatre programs, see Marvin Carlson, “The Development of the
American Theatre Program” (101-114) in Ron Engle and Rice L. Miller, eds., The American
Stage: Social and Economic Issues from the Colonial Period to the Present (New York:
Cambridge University Press, 1993) and Susan Bennett, Theatre Audiences: A theory of
production and reception (New York: Routledge, 2003), 136-138.
12 “Wolfe Barzell,” Internet Broadway Database, https://www.ibdb.com/broadway-cast-
staff/wolfe-barzell-31219.
33
13 “Alexander Asro,” Internet Broadway Database, https://www.ibdb.com/broadway-cast-
staff/alexander-asro-30279 and “Alexander Asro,” Internet Movie Database,
http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0039729/.
14 “Joseph Buloff,” Internet Broadway Database, https://www.ibdb.com/broadway-cast-
staff/joseph-buloff-14313, and “Joseph Buloff,” Internet Movie Database,
http://gb.imdb.com/name/nm0120233/?ref_=filmo_li_st_3.
15 D. Troy Sherrod, Historic Dallas Theatres (Charleston, SC: Arcadia Publishing, 2014),
111 and Finding Aid for the Baruch Lumet Papers, UCLA Library,
http://www.oac.cdlib.org/findaid/ark:/13030/kt2199p8q5/.
16 “Andrzej Pronaszko,” Culture.pl, http://culture.pl/en/artist/andrzej-pronaszko.
17 “Szymon and Helena Syrkus,” Culture.pl, http://culture.pl/en/artist/szymon-and-helena-
syrkus.
18 Judith Brin Ingber, “Identity Peddlers and the Influence of Gertrud Kraus,” Congress on
Research in Dance Conference Proceedings 39 (January 2007), 100-105.
19 Bułat, “Turkow Family;” “Zalmen Hirshfeld,” HaBait,
http://www.habait.co.il/document/80,62,29.aspx; Donny Inbar, “No Raisins and Almonds in the
Land of Israel,” in Inventing the Modern Yiddish Stage, edited by Joel Berkowitz and Barbara
Henry (Detroit: Wayne State University Press, 2012), 314; Reuven Rubin, Rubin: My Life, My
Art (New York: Sabra Books, 1974), 12
20 Mayzel, Geven a mol a lebn, 120.
21 Joseph Buloff, int. with Jack Garfein, 1980.
22 Mukdoyni, “Alte bakantn,” 7.
23 Ibid.
34
24 Joseph Telushkin, Jewish Humor: What the Best Jewish Jokes Say About the Jews (New
York: William Morrow, 1992), 19-20.
25 Leyb Kadison, “A bisl zikhroynes,” 692.
26 The Dybbuk is arguably the most influential Jewish drama of the modern period. In the
first year of performances alone, the Vilna Troupe performed The Dybbuk over 390 times to a
cumulative audience of over 200,000 theatergoers. The Vilna Troupe’s world premiere
production of The Dybbuk (with two nearly identical productions by two distinct branches)
propelled the company to international acclaim and secured its reputation as an avant-garde
theater of significance. See Michael C. Steinlauf, “‘Fardibekt!’: An-sky’s Polish Legacy,” (232-
251), Seth L. Wolitz, “Inscribing An-sky’s Dybbuk in Russian and Jewish Letters” (164-202),
and Vladislav Ivanov, “An-sky, Evegeny Vakhtangov, and The Dybbuk” (252-265) in The
Worlds of S. An-sky, edited by Gabriella Safran and Steven J. Zipperstein (Stanford: Stanford
University Press, 2006); and Jacob Waislitz, “Der gang in der velt,” in Itzik Manger, Yonas
Turkow, and Moyshe Perenson, eds., Yidisher teater in Eyrope tsvishn beyde velt milkhomes:
Poyln (New York: Congress for Jewish Culture, 1968), 35-49.
27 Special thanks to my research assistant Rebecca Galpern for her assistance in
collecting data from the Leksikon and to Vilna Troupe descendants Sharon Asro, Alexander
Zaloum, Barbara Buloff, Dr. Dan Ben-Amos, Madeleine Friedman, Carmela Rubin, Craig Rapel,
Dr. Ziva Ben-Porat, Irene Fishler, and Michael S. Levy for their interviews and access to private
family collections of Vilna Troupe epehemera.
28 D3 programming by Jessica Hamel. Support for this project was provided by a PSC-
CUNY Award, jointly funded by the Professional Staff Congress and the City University of New
York.
35
29 Nahma Sandrow, Vagabond Stars: A World History of Yiddish Theatre (Syracuse:
Syracuse University Press, 1996), 55.
30 Harold Clurman, “Ida Kaminska and the Yiddish Theater,” Midstream: A Monthly Jewish
Review 14.1 (January 1968), 53-7.
31 Chinoy, 22.
32 Sandrow, 276.
33 See June Mamana, “From the Pale of Settlement to Pacific Overtures: The Evolution of
Boris Aronson’s Visual Aesthetic,” Ph.D. Diss, Tufts University, 1997, 1-2.
34 Robert Brustein, “Design for Living Rooms (The Theatre of Boris Aronson)” in Brustein,
Reimagining American Theatre (New York: Macmillan, 2003), 232.
35 Mamana, 2.
36 “Ming Cho Lee” biography, American Theatre Wing, 2008.
http://americantheatrewing.org/biography/detail/ming_cho_lee.
37 Baruch Lumet, int. with Anita M. Wincelberg.
38 See Azenberg’s IBDB page: http://www.ibdb.com/Person/View/21830.
39 Manny Azenberg, int. by the author. New York, February 7, 2014.
40 Joseph Telushkin, Jewish Humor: What the Best Jewish Jokes Say About the Jews
(New York: HarperCollins, 2002), 19-20.
41 Joanna Drucker, “Humanities Approaches to Graphical Display,” Digital Humanities
Quarterly 5.1 (2011). http://www.digitalhumanities.org/dhq/vol/5/1/000091/000091.html.