I think that yeshiva bochurim today do dress well - if they have the money. If they don’t, they have cheap non0pressed suits. It’s a class issue and not a old time/current yeshivish issue.

How can you say that? They are all dressed quite nattily. They look, in fact, far nicer — far more concerned with chetzoniyus, arguably — than today’s chareidi bachurim and yungerleit, whose cheap black suits and tieless white shirts may be described as a somewhat more dignified than the equally thoughtless and unpressed “uniform” of non-chareidi young men (e.g., t-shirts and jeans). On the contrary, the young men in these pictures are well put together, and accepted upon themselves the responsibility, evidently, to make a “nice impression” in the world, as we are told the Alter wanted them to do.

I think this supports the “penguin suit” more than anything else. If you think that yeshiva bochurim don’t know style like these gedolim did than you know too many 30 year olds who are poor and not enough 20 year olds who are dating.

You have a good point regarding the ultimate purpose of blogs in general. I am relatively new to blogging so you might be correct in questioning how one measures if real changes are made through these forums.

I think that Cross Currents fulfill its purpose of having people [become] aware “of diverse views representing a traditional Jewish perspective” and [developing] “a more balanced and nuanced perspective than that which you find in the general and Jewish media”. (from the “About Us” page).

In general, I feel that open discussion, with a sensitivity to Kiddush Hashem is healthy for the Frum society. Certain things will become public knowledge in any event in today’s information age(check out the other Jblogs). It is becoming increasingly hard to hide all of “our dirty laundry”. Whether correct or not, the positives and negatives of our community which are discussed in the Letters to the Editor of the Jewish Press, for example, are read by a large audience, including one ardently-Zionist Christian congregation in the Midwest which has the distinction of its entire membership subscribing to that paper! Certainly, forums such as Cross-Currents can serve as a unique opportunity for the Torah community to exchange ideas, and present these issues in the most positive way possible.

In the few comments I’ve made, I’ve reviewed them to make sure that notwithstanding the fact that I an expressing my honest ideas and feeling, the comments are fair, balanced, and sensitive to darchei noam and kovod hatorah. I am sure everyone–myself included– could do better in this regard, but I think that all bloggers, no matter their POV or the blog to which they are posting to, should keep these responsibilities in mind when posting.

By you also, im yirtzeh Hashem!

I think that this is a good illustration of a healthy diversity of opinion which exists within the Torah community. Regarding the specific issue of the Artscoll Talmud , R’ Yaakov Kaminetsky encouraged this project at a time when Artscroll’s editors had not yet conceived of the idea. There was also a standing ovation given at the Siyum Hashas by the thousands of the event’s participants following the Noverminsker Rebbe’s mention of how the Schottenstein edition had facilitated additional Talmud study.

R’ Shimon Schwab has stressed the validity of different derachim(approaches) within the Mesorah: e’ilu v’eilu divrei Elokim Chaim. There is more than one equally valid and legitimate means of Avodas Hashem contained in the Mesorah(tradition). As Rabbi Adlerstein aptly put it, there are many people who are just as much a part of the Torah world, but who “march to a different drummer”.

Part of what is responsible for the difference in derachim, is the different needs of dissimilar people and communities– k’shem sh’ein partzufeihen shavos, kach ein deioseihem shavos. In my opinion, awareness and acceptance of the complexity of the makeup and needs of different people and diverse Torah communities, is a prerequisite to understanding the responses of different parts of the Torah World to some of the recent much-discussed issues and events which have occurred over the past two years. The ideal approach in each instance should take into consideration the different needs of these somewhat diverse communities.

“I think that it is fair to note that its hashkafic slant leans towards the Charedi world and rarely has something praiseworthy to say about the RZ/MO world.”

I don’t work for Artscroll so I’ve got horse in this race but I don’t think it’s hard to see why they have little praiseworthy [or negative for that matter] to say about the RZ/MO world. THEY DON”T AGREE WITH THEM! Why in heavens name would they praise an ideology that they disagree with?

“Its view of the Holocaust is that despite the fact that 6,000,000 Kedoshim died, the yeshivos survived.”

Really? Where’d you get that idea from? They published many books on the holocaust treating every imaginable aspect of it and this is what you decided “their” opinion is?

“It has not come to grips with the fact that there is a sovereign State of Israel.”

This statement is blatant nonsense. They are well aware of the existence of the state of israel but they don’t view it through the same lens as the RZ?MO world and give it little credence in terms of being a “Jewish” state. Therefore, they don’t push that angle.

“This trend is also present in a recently produced hagiography of R A Kotler ZTL as well. One sees nothing positive about Religious Zionism, Modern Orthodoxy or Yeshiva University/RIETS. IMO, that is revisionism of history on a grand scale.”

Again, why would they write positive things about a movement and ideology that they strongly disagree with? Funny, last I checked there was nothing in Jewish Action that was positive about Lakewood Yeshivah although so many ex-YU’ers now study there? I’ve never once seen the Young Israel publications discuss the need to support Mir, Lakewood, Ponoveizh or any other black hat Yeshivah. Nor do I have a problem with that. They should support whatever fits their ideological bent. Why have the rules changed for the Hareidim?

“Of course, the claim voiced posthumously only by ArtScroll without a source that R Zevin ZTL retreated from a positive view towards the founding of the State of Israel has been discussed by many others as well.”

Worse is that Art Scroll when it translates Moadim bhalacha leaves out an occasional phrase-when it is pro Zionistic. Eg. when Zevin discusses whether one has to do kriyah on seeing arei Yehuda-doubts it now-written circa 1964 before the 6 day war-that there is a State of Israel and Ahrei shezachinu bcach. Art Scroll leaves out the Ashres Shezachuinu….

Where their yichus was from before that is irrelevant.

Because comparatively few Orthodox Jews have actual Litvish ancestry. Assimilation and the Holocaust ensured that. Most Israeli and American yehivishe people are not descended from actual Litvaks, and most didn’t have parents and grandparents who learned in the great Litvishe yeshivos. That fact is obscured by the fact that the great yeshivos today are the heirs of those Litvishe yeshivos insofar as they were founded or run by real Litvaks. Many, many people who think of themselves as Litvaks today are nothing of the sort.

Except for the volumes on RYK and R EE Dessler, Zicronam Livracha, the hagiographies are a long boring drone-the subject was a child prodigy who held from every conceivable chumrah and who never told a word of Lashon Harah. One sees zero about the obstacles within their families or society that the Gdolim overcame to become Gdolim.

The hagiographies/biographies are particularly apt examples of this trend. (It is noteworthy that those authors whose views who seek ArtScroll distribution assistance without allowing for editorial control such as R B Wein or R D A Twerski publish under an ArtScroll imprint-Shaar Press. )

I found Making Of A Gadol (”MOAG”) ( I bought the revised edition long before it was rebanned) fascinating. One sees the struggle to overcome the powerful forces of Haskalah, secular Zionism and the growth and dispute over the propriety of Mussar in yeshivos discussed in amazing detail. The Amkus of Talmud Torah described therein and the relationships described with the Gdolim therein should be required reading for anyone wondering why some talmidim complain about a lack of a relationship with a RY, Mashgiach and rebbe. One also sees the the growth of Volozhin, Brisk,Telze, Mir and Slabodka and the fact that some talmidim of R Y Salanter and The Alter of Slabodka openned schools that had some secular studies as well as schools for women.One also sees much backrground material on all of the Litvishe Gdolim of that era-many of whom have much influence on the way that Torah is learned
and taught today. MOAG should be read it carefully with the footnotes and excurses . Although MOAG needed a better editing, it is far superior to any of ArtScroll’s works on the subject and time period.

Do you really think most kollel guys in Lakewood’s grandfathers were Litvishe yeshiva bachurim 70 or 80 years ago?