In Conversation with Scholar of Jewish Studies Malka Simkovich, Stern ‘04

By: Rachel Renz  |  May 12, 2014
SHARE

Malka SimkovichWhat year did you graduate YU, and what did you major in during your time here?

I graduated Stern in 2004 with a double major – one in Jewish Studies, concentrating in Bible, and a shaped major in Music Theory.

What have you done since graduating from YU? What are you currently doing, and what are your plans for the near future?

I went straight from Stern into a Masters program in Hebrew Bible at Harvard University’s Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations (NELC), which I completed in 2006. I taught Tanakh part-time at Maimonides Upper School in Brookline, MA, while I was a student at NELC, and then taught full time three more years at Maimonides, and for some of that time served as the 11th grade Dean. In Fall 2009 I started a doctoral program in Jewish studies at Brandeis, with a focus on Second Temple, Early Rabbinics, and Early Christianity. Along the way I have gotten married and had three beautiful, spunky kids that keep me pretty busy.

I’m now writing my dissertation on Jewish universalist literature that was written in the Second Temple period. We tend to think of the Second Temple period as defined by divisive sectarianism, which was resolved when the rabbinic community “inherited” Pharisaic traditions and other sects did not survive the Romans’ destruction of the Temple, but in fact most Jews were probably not affiliated with any sect. And of these Jews, a good number regarded all of humankind as having equal access to a covenantal relationship with God. These Jews were proudly and openly Jewish, but do not refer to distinguishing aspects of Judaism such as circumcision, Sabbath, and dietary law in their writings. I’m very fortunate to have outstanding advisors at Brandeis like Professors Bernadette Brooten, Reuven Kimelman, and Marc Brettler who are helping me along the dissertation writing process.

My family and I have recently moved from Boston to Chicago, and I have just been hired to teach Jewish Studies at Catholic Theological Union, a graduate school in Hyde Park. I am particularly excited about this position because it is not only an opportunity to teach at a high academic level, but will also enable me to be involved in meaningful interfaith dialogue. In fact, CTU is sending me to Istanbul, Turkey in June to represent Judaism at an interfaith panel. Although I don’t know quite what the future will bring, I’m really excited about this job.

I also work as an editorial assistant for the Harvard Theological Review, which I love. I get to read manuscripts submitted to the journal that relate to my field, and recommend whether or not they be submitted to a second, more senior, reader. The best part of this job is that I feel that I have direct access to the newest scholarship in my field. What’s newer than an article that hasn’t even been published yet? It gives me a rush every time I am sent another article to read.

Finally, I am an occasional writer for TheTorah.Com – I’ve written a number of articles for this site, which all regard the intersections of late Second Temple Judaism, Rabbinic Judaism, and early Christianity.

Why did you choose to come to YU? Do you think the YU you chose to attend was the same YU you attended? Meaning, was it as you expected it to be?

I knew very little about YU before I attended it. I did romanticize it as some sort of “haven of Modern Orthodoxy” where I would find many like-minded people and opportunities to be involved in an active M.O. community. What I found was that Stern was much more diverse than I expected – and that’s a good thing. Although “diverse” in this sense is still far more narrow than what it would mean when discussing a large, public university.

In what ways did YU (both intentionally and unintentionally) shape your goals and interests? 

I don’t know what I can accurately say about YU as an institution, but Professors Michelle Levine, David Glaser, and Saul Berman shaped my goals and interests more than any of the other professors I had at Stern. Dr. Levine taught me that it’s not enough to cite other scholars; I need to respond to them, to engage with them, and if necessary, to critique them. Dr. Levine gave me the permission to do this and encouraged me to have the confidence to do this. Until I took her classes, I never knew that I had a “right” to invite myself into the academic conversation. Besides that, she is an outstanding teacher and I learned a lot from her, especially about Rashbam!

Dr. Glaser taught me music (in 8 or 9 separate courses, I think), but he taught me a lot more too. I learned from him that you don’t have to be a complete jerk to be a good academic. Dr. Glaser’s great sense of humor, accessibility, and passion for his field made him one of the most influential role models for me at Stern – and in my life in general. When I teach Bible or Second Temple Judaism now, I think a lot about how he taught music.

The other person who I was influenced by was Rabbi Saul Berman, who taught me the importance of engaging with rabbinic texts as modern readers and considering the ways in which the halakhic system might be used to advance ourselves and our religious communities ethically and socially. Everyone who knows Rabbi Berman knows that he puts this into practice on a daily basis.

I should mention that Stern shaped me in another way, years after I graduated: they rejected me from their PhD program after I finished Harvard. I fully expected that after graduating from Harvard I would go back to Revel for a PhD, and one day possibly teach at Stern. Being rejected from Revel caught me off guard and made me think about who I think I am, versus how I am perceived. When I asked for feedback about why I was rejected, despite good grades and good recommendation letters, I was told point-blank that there was concern that I would not finish the program. I still wonder how many great women at Stern did not pursue their goals of being in academia because they were told that they were not worth the investment. I try not to dwell on this rejection because I don’t want it to affect my very positive memories of my time at Stern.

You’ve since been a student at at least two leading institutions since your time here at Stern (Harvard and Brandeis). How does Stern rank: what aspects of your education are you now grateful for, as you become more aware of what other places lack and possess? And what aspects of your Stern education seem problematic, or even simply lacking, by comparison to other institutions?

I prefer not to make evaluations of an institution, since there are too many exceptions and complications to any generalization. In every university there are outstanding individuals who might affect a students’ experience more than the institution itself.

The first thing that I noticed when I went to Harvard was its library. Harvard actually has dozens of libraries, but Widener and Andover Theological are libraries that enable a student of Bible to research literally anything he or she could imagine. It’s a student’s dream to have that kind of access. Unfortunately, Stern’s library, at least when I was there, is small, and many students have to go uptown to get the books they need (and even then, they might need to use ILL to get all their books). What message does it send to Stern students that, in order to grow as a young scholar and researcher, they need to go to the men’s campus regularly to get the best books on their subject?

The truth is, though, I was not even aware of how lacking Stern’s library was until I got to Harvard. There are many things about Stern that I loved. Like other colleges, Stern is what you make of it, and I was able to be engaged in campus life in a way that made my time there very meaningful. As a member of the Honors program, I was privileged to have many opportunities to attend interesting events and lectures, and meet students whom I otherwise would not have come across. And my favorite and funniest memories from Stern take place in the Writing Center, where I was a tutor. A couple of the other Writing Center tutors became some of my closest friends at Stern.

Though not yet awarded your doctorate, you’ve taught or lectured at a number of schools (Ida Crown, Maimonides, Brandeis, Loyola, etc). What kinds of things do you try to impart to your students? Do you think you emphasize the cultivation of skill over that of knowledge, vice versa, or both? Is that an unfair binary?

A lot of students these days are enamored with theory and hermeneutics. They want to study Foucault, Derrida, Barthes, and Lacan. I’ve heard students at SBL (the Society for Biblical Literature annual meeting) tout themselves as “scholars of postmodernism.” More than the eye-roll – inducing arrogance of statements like these, such declarations are problematic because students are not sufficiently trained in how to use theory selectively and sensitively. Learning to use theory – whether it’s Genre Theory, Postmodernism, Post-Colonial Theory, or another theoretical lens – is considered essential now to become a good scholar of ancient literature. Some of the scholarship that uses this theory does it well. But a lot of scholarship that uses these methods does so poorly, in a way in which the theory is dragging and reshaping the text, rather than enlightening the text.

Before my students are seduced by hermeneutics, I try to instill in them the importance of relating to a text as a text, with nothing standing between them and the text. I encourage them to look at a passage and ask literary and historical questions. At a later stage of scholarship, introducing method is perfectly fine, if it is useful. I am not sure that Freshmen college students should be required to use theory, as they are at Brandeis’ Writing Seminars.

As for skill, it is imperative that a student of ancient history or religion can work with texts in their original languages. Learning Hebrew and Aramaic is a good start for a Bible student, but for my period, Greek is a must as well, and Latin and Syriac are extremely useful. For someone studying older material, learning Semitic languages such as Akkadian is crucial if they want to do any serious comparative work. That doesn’t even scratch the surface, since you need modern German and French to read contemporary scholarship. Without languages, (and of course the skills to be an analytical, close reader of the text), a student’s academic progress will be limited.

Because you are involved in the academic study of Bible (as am I!), I must ask: Do you think Stern College does perform the academic study of the Bible? What might they do better than they do? What do they already do which impresses you?

I had some great teachers at Stern. As I mentioned, Drs. Michelle Levine and Saul Berman, as well as Dr. Mordechai Cohen, were formative for me. But do I think Stern “does” academic study of the Bible? To be honest, no. Not in the same way that other major institutions do. As far as I know, Stern doesn’t offer classes on Akkadian, Ugaritic, and Sumerian, let alone courses on the ancient near east. In that sense, Stern is not offering a Bible program that is competitive with departments of other universities. When I got to Harvard and took classes with Peter Machinist and Jon Levenson, among others, I entered a new realm of academic study of the Bible.

I understand that you are asking about Biblical Criticism. I think that some professors touch on Biblical Criticism but don’t engage with it in a sustained way. I don’t want to get into the question of whether this is or isn’t appropriate for Stern. Whatever the motivations are that stand behind the decision to skirt around Biblical Criticism, I think the bigger issue is whether Stern is going to offer its students more opportunities to study Hebrew Bible in a very academically rigorous way that would prepare students to pursue doctoral degrees in this subject.

I think YU has put itself on the map because of the great Bible scholars it has, and there are a number of young scholars at YU who have decades of good work ahead of them. Unfortunately, Stern does not, as far as I know, have the same number of high level Bible scholars who can do serious comparative and interdisciplinary work. I hope this disparity changes soon.

In what way would you like your work, method, attitude, ideas, commitment, (or anything else) to influence others? What impact do you hope you and your career to have?

Right now I’m happy to be firmly planted in both the world of academia and Jewish education. I also like to cross imaginary cultural lines, and have no intention of resolving the tension that this might create. Life is all about tensions and contradictions, especially for Modern Orthodox Jews trying to fully actualize all parts of themselves – personally, professionally, and religiously. The way I dress (skirts, sheitel, etc) would imply that I’m a right of center Orthodox Jew, but I am an employee of a Catholic University with major interests in interfaith dialogue. I give lectures regularly in my community on Tanakh and Second Temple Judaism, but currently have about twenty books taken out of the library on the Church Fathers, which helps me to study rabbinic literature in a culturally broad sense. There shouldn’t be anything weird about this, and to me, it’s perfectly normal.

SHARE