The world of the arts is largely a progressive one, so perhaps it should come as no surprise that it has been beset by anti-Zionist fervor since October 7. Contemporary English-language poets may no longer put much stock in the works of such distinguished predecessors as Chaucer, T.S. Eliot, or Ezra Pound, but many of them seem to share their attitudes toward Jews. Maxim D. Shrayer writes:

American poets, specifically, have been at the vanguard of local and national efforts to isolate friends and supporters of Israel. Organized anti-Israel protests also occurred at the conference of the Association of Writers and Writing Programs (AWP) in Kansas City, an annual gathering especially important for independent and literary publishers and literary magazines. According to a detailed report by the writer Sarah Einstein, “a few days ahead of the conference, [Radius of Arab American Writers] sent out a letter to all panel organizers (except those who were obviously Jewish or whose panel had a Jewish theme).” Panel organizers and moderators were “urged” to “acknowledge the ongoing genocide in Gaza.”

Quite a number of America’s literary publishers and literary magazines are run by writers openly opposed to Israel and increasingly disinterested in Jewish poetic creativity; the fact that they may have Jewish editors on staff, or as part of their historical patrimony or matrimony makes them even less willing, or able, to publish work by Jewish writers. . . . A literary agent in the UK recently claimed that “Half of British publishers are refusing to take books by authors who are identifiably Jewish.” How long will it be before U.S. publishers follow the British trend?

Shrayer, who grew up in the Soviet Union, feels he has seen all this before:

As a teenager, I saw poets forget our Moscow phone number after my father, David Shrayer-Petrov, was expelled from the Union of Soviet Writers for our family’s attempt to emigrate and branded a “Zionist writer.” I remember picking up a copy of a daily Soviet newspaper in 1980 and reading a poem by a gifted Russian nationalist, in which he called my father a “werewolf” (oboroten) and a “son of a bitch.”

Yet Shrayer is also hopeful that these very circumstances could spark an American Jewish poetic revival.

Israel’s goals of freeing the hostages and defeating Hamas (the latter necessary to prevent further hostage taking) are to some extent contradictory, since Yahya Sinwar, the ruler of the Gaza Strip, will only turn over hostages in exchange for concessions. But Jacob Nagel remains convinced that Jerusalem should continue to pursue both goals:

Only consistent military pressure on Hamas can lead to the hostages’ release, either through negotiation or military operation. There’s little chance of reaching a deal with Hamas using current approaches, including the latest Egyptian proposal. Israeli concessions would only encourage further pressure from Hamas.

There is no incentive for Hamas to agree to a deal, especially since it believes it can achieve its full objectives without one. Unfortunately, many contribute to this belief, mainly from outside of Israel, but also from within.

Recent months saw Israel mistakenly refraining from entering Rafah for several reasons. Initially, the main [reason was to try] to negotiate a deal with Hamas. However, as it became clear that Hamas was uninterested, and its only goal was to return to its situation before October 7—where Hamas and its leadership control Gaza, Israeli forces are out, and there are no changes in the borders—the deal didn’t mature.