Comments on: Spanish Work: Translating the Magnes Collection

By: Francesco Spagnolo

Francesco Spagnolo — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 19:33:53 +0000

Thank you, Jeremy Potash, for reading this post. Especially this week, when we all mourn Ruth Eis, who passed away just a few days ago. A page on the Magnes webside includes some video of her reminiscing about collecting for the Magnes, and is available here. Ruth’s legacy remains an essential building block of The Magnes Collection, to whom she and her family continued to contribute until the very last day, as my blog post .

Let me reassure you immediately, though: you do not need to be concerned about the changing descriptors. The expression, “Spanish work,” was a pun (also on my own last name, “Spagnolo”–not “Espagnola”–which means “Spanish” in Italian…) used in the title of the post, and not the suggestion that “Spanier Arbeit” would be changed into “Spanish work.” Quite the opposite! Updated catalog descriptions will now include both “Spanier Arbeit” and the more accurate “shpanyer arbet.” The latter, which is the more commonly used Yiddish equivalent, was missing altogether from previous descriptions (along with “Spanier Arbeit”), and will now be included in all relevant records, placing the catalog of The Magnes in the excellent company of YIVO, the Israel Museum, and others.

Bringing the catalog records back to Ruth’s descriptor (the German “Spanier Arbeit”), adding the Yiddish (“shpanyer arbet”) and eliminating the confusion generated by “Spanier work” is in fact a way to ensure that Ruth Eis’ scholarship continues to benefit the community of scholars that is now working with The Magnes Collection at UC Berkeley and beyond. (Follow the activities of the faculty and graduate student working group here).

Sincerely,
Francesco Spagnolo

By: Jeremy Potash

Jeremy Potash — Fri, 28 Dec 2012 19:10:07 +0000

I am concerned by Mr. Espagnola’s effort here (and perhaps elsewhere) to translate a well established Jewish object descriptor into what he describes as more ecumenical language because it is Germanic. In this case: the style of weaving described in the past at the Magnes and elsewhere as Spanier Arbeit. A simple translation of this as “Spanish work” does not suggest the nuances / characteristics of this particular style of uniquely Jewish weaving, long described as “spanier arbeit” or Yiddish equivalents. For example, please see http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1191&context=tsaconf (she also wrote the Yivo description with a somewhat conflicted tenor) or http://www.jewishpressads.com/pageroute.do/17496/ (the correct address for the Ita Aber article). I am certainly not a German or Yiddish expert or an expert in museum descriptors, but I watched and learned from Ruth Eis for four decades, observing her prodigious scholarship, her care to check and cross check and cross reference using international resources before she committed to the language of description. And when she didn’t know, she was the first to admit it.

Finally, as this post suggests that spanier arbeit is difficult to find on line (viz. “In 1996, The Magnes devoted an exhibition to “Spanier Arbeit” weavings (see here). A quick online search for these words will immediately show that this is a unique case.”) and my own quick online research finds that there remains a lot of uncertainty about the craft — and a lot to learn for scholars — perhaps it would be useful to cover all bases:
Spanier Arbeit/Shpanyer Macher/shpanyer arbet/“Spanish Work”.