Fraying Thread

S. Y. Agnon’s “Agunot” responds to the potent geographic and religious dislocations in European Jewish history between 1881-1908 through allegorically transmuting the community’s divergent beliefs into characters within this tragic fable. Literary scholars attempting to arrange a better world, rebellious Zionist youths, skilled laborers, religious Jews who reject the Zionist movement, and assimilationists are all represented within this transmutation as individual characters. Through each of the individuals’ actions and failings Agnon illustrates how and why the dislocations persist and bar people from their ideal reality.

The story starts with a midrash-like exaltation that outlines the overall course that will take place and its end fate, tragedy.  With the first lines, “It is said: A thread of grace is spun and drawn out of the deeds of Israel,” Agnon gives both the setting and the ideal world to strive for which is dashed with the following statement that, “…there are times—alas!—when some hindrance creeps up, and snaps a thread in the loom” (Agnon 30). This allegorical method allows for a quasi-timeless quality to the work while also reinterpreting the religious Hebraic style in a secular and scholarly way. In doing so, he is able to address the aforementioned people in a way that all of them can, if not accept, at least understand. Scholars and skilled laborers can appreciate the literary craft, Zionist want to read it because it is secular Hebrew, religious Jews, like the scholars, can understand the midrash-like form, and assimilationist can take heart with the statement that there is an issue that is difficult to solve.

For proposed solutions however, one needs to look no further than Sire Ahiezer, a wealthy and prominent man that has restored some of Jerusalem’s former glory, who wishes to continue this prosperity through marrying his lovely daughter Dinah to someone worthy of her in his eyes and through making an amazing Ark for his new temple. To do the first task he sends, “couriers to all the dispersions of Israel, to spy out a youth that would be her match, such a paragon, a cluster of virtue, as had no peer in all the world…” and for the second, “…an Ark such as the eye of man had never seen…” he hires a skilled laborer by the name of Ben Uri (32, 33). These two tasks at the start of the story mirror reality as Sire Ahiezer reflects scholars like Theodor Herzl, who laid the groundwork for the Zionist youth to build from, Dinah symbolizes potential, youth, and ambition, commonly found in the early Zionist movement, and Ben Uri is an exemplar of living arts and devotion, which is something sought after by both parties for different reasons.

These differences in reasoning are where the complications in Sire Ahiezer’s plan begin. In trying to achieve both simultaneously, Dinah falls in love with Ben Uri, which is not the person Ahiezer is looking for her to marry. Ben Uri does not reciprocate her feelings, however, as he so feverishly focuses on his task that when he finishes his artwork, the Ark, “…he himself was like an empty vessel…” who disappears soon after (34). This conversion or sacrifice can be explained in how, once a piece is finished it forces the artist to abandon it as the art can only be worked on for so long as time is, of course, limited.

What is left consequently is only the Ark, which Dinah resents because it not only distracts Ben Uri from noticing her affections, but it also takes him permanently away from her. This resentment becomes personified and states to her that, “It is not for naught that Ben Uri takes no thought of you; it is the Ark that separates you twain…” which causes her to push the Ark out of a window but “…no part of it was broken, no corner was blemished…” afterwards (35). This represents the Zionist’s rejection of religion and tradition, which they see as a barrier to achieving their goal because the talent and devotion they crave is being directed towards it instead of them. As a result of them throwing out what the people they want to be with have sacrificed to create though, they harm those they care for as it was undoubtedly of sound design because it remains unblemished despite their attempts to destroy it.

This, however, does not mean that the Ark, and by proxy religion and tradition, are still revered. As a matter of fact, because it is cast aside by Dinah the common people deem it unworthy, “And having revered the Ark, they loathed it…” which leads a rabbi to, “immediately condemn…it to banishment” (36). With the first part of his plan in ruins, Ahiezer continues with the marriage, as he has found a partner, Ezekiel.

Ezekiel though, a rabbi from Poland, who has the title, “the esteemed and the learned,” is averse to the marriage as his heart is set on Freidele, who is the daughter of his housekeeper back in Poland and who is the character representing assimilationism (37). He, on the other hand, is a symbol of the wisdom and logos of the Torah and a stand in for the deeply religious Jews who reject Zionism and who do not wish to hasten the end by resettling in the holy land. Instead, they wish to remain in the Diaspora, just like Ezekiel’s infatuation with Freidele. Despite this he has agreed to it, just like how those who are religious ascend to the holy land from time to time, as it helps them get closer to God by going through the motions.

Dinah, who is still grieving the loss of her one-sided love is likewise distasting of the marriage, but because she is regretting what she did to the Ark she reveals her mistake to a rabbi who tells her that, “the rearing of children in the ways of the Lord…” is the best way to make amends, so she goes through with it anyway, which represents how, despite their differences, the Zionists and religious Jews both share the land of Israel (38).  

This, of course, ends poorly with both never fully able to commit to the idea as

The groom broods in one corner, his thoughts straying elsewhere. He dwells on his father’s house, on Freidele, whose mother had tended his father and him since his sainted mother had died. And Dinah broods in the other, her thoughts going back to the Ark and its builder who has vanished from the city, no one knowing where he has turned. (39)

As others begin to see this along with the lack of any children being born between the two, they realize that this is not going to work out. Ezekiel, though, is still holding out hope for Freidele, until he learns through a letter that Freidele got married while he is “…fancying her still…[and he and Dinah]…When they pass each other, she stares off in one direction, he in another” (42). This is paralleled by the three different diverging paths of the Jewish Europeans in the Diaspora. Zionists want youth and skilled labor, but they alienate many of them by their rejection of traditionalism and religion, the religious Jews want more of the Jewish population to follow their ways but because of their obligations to their duties they are ostracized lands in foreign to them, and the assimilationist do not even go to Jerusalem, instead choosing to stay where they live now and marry there.

Ahiezer, representing the scholars who orchestrated this, perceives all of this and realizes that, “…his works had not prospered…[as his Ark is banished and]…the couple was ill-matched…” (42). This leads to them getting a divorce and Ahiezer leaving Jerusalem in shame, “His house…deserted…[and]…the House of Study…desolate” (42). These feelings of regret and loss are manifested by Ahiezer’s inability to foresee, or at the very least adapt, to the complications that he faces. This results in Dinah, Ezekiel, and Ben Uri failing in their own goals as they each take each other’s dreams away from each other. Its as the allegory at the beginning of the story states, “…there are times—alas!—when some hindrance creeps up, and snaps a thread in the loom…” which leads the whole garment to be torn to shreds because they continue to work with the fraying material (30).

In other words, Agnon highlights that the conflict and divergence in beliefs present within the Jewish community relating to the solutions to the geographic and religious dislocations leads to a fraying thread, one which, if left unchecked, could cause a great deal of tragedy for everyone involved in making a unified whole. The story makes the tensions and the stakes clear, making it evident why individuals should examine their shortcomings and be sure they do not make the same mistakes that led these characters to tragedy.