University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles

(USC Thesis Other)

Religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content RELIGIOUS AND OTHER CULTURAL FACTORS IN SOCIAL CONTROL AFFECTING THE ASSIMILATION OF JEWS IN LOS ANGELES A Dissertation Presented to the Faculty of the Department of Sociology The University of Southern California In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy by Dave Bin-Nun October 1952 \ l I: Ph.D "So- /53 8t:,Jl/- T his dissertation, w1·itten by Dave Bin-Nun under the guidance of h.."tEl_.Faculty Committee on Studies, and approved by all its members, has been presented to and accepted by the Council on Graduate Study and Research) in partial ful fillment of requirements f01" the degree of DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY if ... _. __ _-:.:.-.. -.:..:- :..~. __ ._ _ . ~~. Dean Committee on Studies ~L=..J -/-----....~~ Chairman ~ ..~. Zoo _ . ---- --~ .- --- -- --.. . ~~:: TABLE OF CONTENTS CHAPTER I. INTRODUCTION................ The problem. • • • • • • • • • • • • . Statement of the problem • • • • • • •• The purpose of the study • • • • • • • • • ,; Method and scope • • • • • • • • • • • • • Criteria for Jewish assimilation ••••• , Dafinitiona of terms used. • • • • • • • • Religion • • • • • . • • • • • • • • • • Assimilation • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Social control • • • • • • • •• •• I Culture. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . II. III. IV. j Comm.unity. • • • • • • . • • • • • • Jew, Jewish. • • • •• • • • • • • • Organization of the remainder of the study THE NATURE OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION INTO THE UNITED STATES. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Jewish immigration into the United States. The Jewish community in Los Angeles: its history and development. • • • • • • • • Summary • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • CULTURAL FACTORS IN JEWISH SURVIVAL. • • • • FACTORS PROMOTING JEWISH ASSIMILATION•••• PAGE 1 1 1 2 2 4 8 8 9 9 10 10 10 10 12 12 17 23 26 47 CHAPTER V. ANALYSIS OF GENERAL DATA CONCERNING THE COMPOSITION OF THE GROUPS STUDIED. • • • • • iv PAGE 67 VI. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCEffi ING ANNUAL INCOME AND VARIOU S CULTURAL FACTORS • • • • • • • • 112 VII. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING EDUCATIONAL FACTORS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 131 VIII. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING RELIGIOUS FACTORS 171 IX. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING JEWISH CULINARY TERMS. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 261 • • • • X. ANALYSIS OF DATA CON CERNIN G MEMBERSHIP IN JEWISH AND NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS. 293 XI. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING PHILANTHROPICAL INTERESTS IN JEWISH AND NON-JEWISH CAUSES.. 305 j XII. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING OTHER CULTURAL FACTORS • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 334 XIII. ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING ATTITUDES TOWARD " JEWISHNESS"•• • • • • • • • • • • • 355 XIV. COMPARATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE GROUPS STUDIED. • .... . ~~t.'> • • • • • • • SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS•• • • • • • 391 408 422 433 437 445 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Schedule • Code Face Sheet. • • • • • • • • • XV. SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY • GLOSSARY•• APpmDIX A. APPENDIX B. v CHAPTER PAGE APPENDIX C. / Tabulation Code. • • • • • • • • • •• 448 APPENDIX D. Map: The Three Study Areas • • • • •• 470 APPENDIX E. Los Angeles Jewish Population Study_ _ 471 "LIST OF TABLES TABLE PAGE I. Age - Number and Per cent of Respondents 86 II. Age Groups and Proper Religious Utensils 87 III. Sex . . . . • • . . . . . . · . . . · . . 88 IV. Religion.. • • • • • . • • • • • • • •• 89 · . . . . 96 90 91 92 93 94 95 • • • • · . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • · . . • • • • • • • · . . . . · . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Birthplace of Parents • • Birthplace of Grandparent,s. • • Marital Status. • • • • Religion of Spouse•• Birthplace. Number of Boys Under 18 • • Number of Girls Under 18. V. VI. X. XI. IX. VII. VIII. • • Others Living with Family • • • • • XII. XIII. XIV. Number of Boys Over 18•• Number of Girls Over 18 • • • • • · . • • • · . • • • • • • 97 98 99 xv. Length of Residence in the United States of America. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 100 XVI. Length of Residence in Los Angeles. • •• 101 XVII. Length of Residence in Los Angeles and Jewish Identity • • • • • • •• • • •• 102 XVIII. Length of Residence at Present Address.. 103 · . . . . . . . . Head of Household. Political Affiliation ./ • • 104 105 106 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Occupation: Citizenship status. xx. XXI. XIX. vii TABLE PAGE XXII. Occupation and Zionist Organization Affiliation • • • • • • · · · • • · • · 107 XXIII. Employment status • • • • · • • · • • 108 XXIV. Employment Categories • • · · • · • • 109 xxv. Home Ownership. • • · · · · • • • · • 110 XXVI. Annual Income of Family • • • • · · · · • 111 XXVII. Annual Income and Intermarriage · • · • • 120 XXVIII. Annual Income and Display of Mezuzah. • • 121 XXIX. Annual Income and Zionist Organizat i on Affiliation • • • • · • • • • • • • • • 122 XXX. Annual Income and Seder Celebration • • • 123 XXXI. Annual Income and Proper Religious Utensils. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 124 XXXII. Annual Income and Preservation of Judaism in the United States of America with Reference to Israel • • • • • • • • • • 125 XXXIII. Annual Income and Jewish Playgoing. • • • 126 XXXIV. Annual Income and Neighborhood Preference 127 XXXV. Annual Income and Possession of Jewish Art Objects • • • • • • • • · · • • • • 128 XXXVI. Annual Income and Preservation of Judaism Without Changes • • • • · • · • 129 XXXVII. Annual Income and Anti-Semitism in Los Angeles • · • · · · • • • • · • • • 130 TABLE XXXVIII. Secular Education: Number of Years viii PAGE Completed • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 150 Secular Education and Jewish Identity XXXIX.. XL. Secular Education of Spouse • • · . . • • • • 151 152 XLI. College Majors. • • • • • • • • • • • •• 153 XLII. Distribution of Academic Degrees. • • •• 154 XLIII. Additional Non-Academic Schooling. • •• 155 XLIV. Hebrew Education: Number of Years Completed • • • • • • • • • • · . • • • 156 XLV. Hebrew Education and Attendance of Religious Services. • • • • • •• • •• 157 XLVI. Hebrew Education end Jewish Organization Hebrew Education and Intermarriage. XLVII. Affiliation • • • • • • • · . . . • • • · . . 158 159 164 165 L. Hebrew Education: Foreign Countries. • • LI. Yiddish Education • • • . · • . · . · LII. Sunday School Education: Number of Years Completed • • • • • . • • • • • • · · • LIII. Sunday School Education: Type of School. LIV. Sunday School Education: Regional XLVIII. Hebrew Education: Type of School Attended 160 XLIX. Hebrew Education: Regional Distribution (United States of America). • • • • •• 161 162 163 TABLE Distribution. . . . . . . · . . . • • ix PAGE 166 LV. Jewish Education of Spouse: Number of Years Completed • • • . • · . • • • . • · LVI. Jewish Education of Spouse: Type of School. • • • • • . • . . • • • . · . • • LVII. Children's Attendance of Jewish Schools • • LVIII. Distribution of Children Attending Various 167 168 169 Jewish Schools · . . . . . . . . . . . . 170 LIX. Religious Preference. • • • • • . • • • •• 198 LX.- Religious Preference and Intermarriage. • • 199 • • • • / LXI. Religious Preference and Identification as Americans (Excluding Religion) 200 LXII. Religious Preference and Separation from Religio-Ethnlc Group. • • • • • • • • •• 201 LXIII. Religious Preference and Preference for Jewish Neighbors. • • . • • • • • • • •• 202 LXIV. Distanoe of Synagogue from Home • • • • •• 203 LXV. .Attendance of Religious Services. • • • • • 204 LXVI. Synagogue Affiliation • • • • • • • • • • • 205 LXVII. Synagogue Confirmants • • • • • • • • • • • 206 LXVIII. Distribution of Synagogue Membership. • • • 207 LXIX. Active in Synagogue • • • • • • • • • • • • 208 LXX. Type of Activity- in Synagogue·. • • • • • • 209 " .x TABLE PAGE LXXI. Number Holding Office in Synagogue. • • • 210 LXXII. Familiarity with Jewish Ritual Terms a. Kaddish • • • • • • • • • • • 211 b. Yiskor. • • · • • 212 c. Shofar. • • 213 d. Hazen • • • • • 214 e. Yarmulken • • • • • • • • • • • 215 f. Tefllin · • • 216 g. Aron Kodesh ·,. • • 217 h. Yahrzeit. • • • · • 218 i. Kiddush • • 219 j. Haggadah. • • • • • 220 k. Kol NidreL • • 221 1. Talis • • • • • • • 222 m. Siddur. • • 223 n. Bar-Mitzvah • • • • • • • 224 o. Magilah • • • • • • • • • • • • 225 Average • • • · ' . • · 226 LXXIII. Jewish Ritual Terms and Jewish Identity a. Kaddish • • • • • • • • • 227 b. Yiskor. • · • • 228 c. Shofar. • • • • • 229 d. Hazan • • • • • • 230 xi f. Tefilin.. Aron Kodesh • • • • • • • • 234 PAGE 231 232 233 • • 00' • • o • o 0 • . . • • · . • • • • • • Yahrzeit. Yarmulkeh g. e. h. TABLE • • • • Kol Nidrei••• • • • • • • • • • 235 236 237 238 239 240 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • o • • o • o • • • • · . . . • • • • · . . . . • • • • • • • • • • • • • • Bar-Mitzvah. Siddur•• Haggadah•• Talis • Kiddush • j. 1. n. m. k. o. Megilah. • • • • • • • • • 0 • •• 241 • • · . . . . . . LXXIV. LXXV. Bar-Mitzvah Ceremony•••• Circumcision Performer. • • • • • 0 • 242 243 LXXVI. Display of Mezuzah••• 0 o. . . . . .. 244 LXXVII. Observ~ce of Jewish Dietary Laws • • • • 245 LXXVIII. Dietary Laws and Foreign Versus Native Born. • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 246 • • • LXXIX. LXXX. Serving of Meat and Deiry Products•• Matzos Versus Bread on Passover • • · . 247 248 LXXXI. Yom Kippur Fast • • • • • • • • 0 0 • •• 249 , Home Christmas Tree Decoration. · . . . . LXXXII. LXXXIII. Seder Oelebration • • o • • · . • • o • • 250 251 LXXXIV. Home Christmas Tree Decoration and TABLE xii PAGE Listening to "Eternal Light" Radio Program • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 252 LXXXV. Home Christmas Tree Decoration and Nar- ration of Jewish stories to Children.. 253 , LXXXVI. Home Christmas Tree Decoration and LXXXVIII. Friday Night Candle Lighting. LXXXIX. Friday Night Candle Lighting and Foreign Working on Sabbath. • • • • • • • LXXXVII. Intermarriage • • · . . . · . · . • • 254 255 256 XC. Versus Native Born. • • • • • • •• Yom Kippur Public School Attendance. • • • • 257 258 XCI. Jewish Holiday Attendance of Public · . · . . . . XCII. School. • • • • • • Marriage Celebrant. · . • • • · . · . • • 259 260 XCIII. Familiarity with Jewish Culinary Terms a. Knishes • · • • · · · · • · • • 264 b. Kneydlech • · • • • • • · • • · • • 265 c. Kashe • · · • · · · • · 266 d. Gefilte fish. • • • · · · · • • 267 e. Chq.lunt · • • · • · · · • • 268 f. Chremzlech. • • • • • · · • · · · · 269 g. Homentashen · · · • · · • · · • 270 h. Latkes. • • • · • • • • · • · • • • 271 J.. xiii TABLE PAGE i. Mamaligeh • • • 272 j. Farfle. • 273 k. Kreplech. • • 274 1. Teig1ech. • 275 m. Blintzes. • • • • • • 276 n. Matzos. • • • • • 277 Average • • • 278 XCIV. Jewish Culinary Terms and Jewish Play- going a. Knishes • • • • • 279 b. Kneyd1ech · 280 c. Kashe • • • 281 d. Gefilte fish. • • • • 282 e. Cho1unt • • • 283 f. Chr'emzlech. • • • 284 g. Homentashen • • 285 h. Latkes. • • • • • 286 i. Mamaligen • • • • • • • • 287 j. Farfle. • • • 288 k. Krep1ech. • • • • • 289 1. Teig1ecb. • • • • • • • • • 290 m. Blintzes. • • • • • • • 291 n. Ma.tzos. • • • • • • 292 Jewish Organizations Affiliation. • • • Membership in Non-Jewish Organizations. Type of Non-Jewish Organizations. • • • Y.M.C.A. Membership • • • • •• • • Jewish Organizations Attendance • • •• Zionist Parties • • • • • • • • • • • • Contributions To: A. Zionist Causes a. General Zionists••••••••• b. Labor Zionist • • • • • • • • • • c. Hapoel, Hamizrahi, Mizrahi. • •• e. Jewish National Fund••••••• f. Other Zionist Organizations • • • Contributions To: B. Jewish·Philan thropic Institutions a. Synagogues • • • • • • • • • • • b. United Jewish Welfare Fund. • • • c. Hospitals. • • • • • • • • • • • d. Orphanages. • • • • • • • • • • • e. Home for the Aged • • • • • • • • f. Federation of Welfare Organiza- tlona • • . . . . . . . . . . . . g. Other Jewish Institutions •••• TABLE XCV. XCVI. XCVII. XCVIII. XCIX. C. CI. d. Hadasaah. • • • . . . . . . . . . xiv PAGE 299 300 301 302 303 304 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 xv TABLE PAGE CII. Contributions to Jewish Philanthropic Institutions and Jewish Identity a. Contributions to Synagogues • I • • 325 b. Contributions to United Jewish . . . . . c. Welfare Fund. • • • • Contributions to Hospitals. . . . 326 327 d. Contributions to Orphanages . " • • 328 e. Contributions to Home For the Aged 329 f. Contributions to Federation of Jewish Welfare Organizations. • 330 g. Contributions to Other Jewish Institutions. • • • • • • • 331 CIII. Contributions to Non-Jewish Organiza- tions • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 332 CIV. Contributions to Non-Jewish Causes and Jewish Identity • • • • • • . • • • • 333 ev. Household Languages • • • • • . . . . . 343 eVI. Household Languages and Jewish Identity 344 eVIl. Jewish Newspaper and Periodical Readers 345 eVIII. Languages in Which Jewish Publications Are Read•• . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346 CIX. Subscriptions to Jewish Publications in Various Languages. • • • • • • • • 347 xvi TABLE PAGE CX. Subscriptions to Jewish PUblications . . . . . . CXI. and Jewish Identity • Jewish Playgoing ••••••• • • • • • 348 349 CXII. Listening to Yiddish Radio Programs • • 350 CXIII. Listening to "Eternal Light" Radio Program • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 351 CXIV. Jewish Phonograph Records in the Home • 352 CXV. Jewish Art Objects in the Home. • • • • 353 CXVI. Narration of Jewish Stories to Children 354 CXVII. Neighborhood Types. • • • • • • • • • • 370 CXVIII. Neighborhoods Preferred • • • • CXIX. CXX. Preference for Jewish Neighbors • • Attitude Toward Changes in JUdaism. · . • • • • 371 372 373 CXXI. Attitude Toward Identification as Americans (Excluding Religion). • • • 374 CXXII. Attitude Toward Separation from Religio- Ethnic Group. • • • • • • • • • • • • 375 CXXIII. Attitude Toward Jewish Identity •• • • 376 CXXIV. Jewish Identity and Marriage Celebrant. 377 - CXXV. Jewish Identity and Foreign Versus Native Born • . . . . . . . . . • • • 378 CXXVI. Attitude Toward, Intermarriage ••••'. 379 CXXVII. Intermarriage and Yom Kippur Fast • • • 380 xvii TABLE PAGE CXXVIII. Intermarriage and Foreign Versus Native Born . . • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 381 - CXXIX. Intermarriage and Political Affiliation.. 382 CXXX. Attitude Toward Jewish Parochial Schools. 383 CXXXI. Jewish Parochial Schools and Intermarriage 384 CXXXII. Attitude Toward Embracing Christianity.. 385 CXXXIII. Embracing Christianity on Foreign Versus Native Born. • • • • • , . . . . . . . . . 386 CXXXIV. Attitude Toward Business Dealings With Jews or Gentiles • • • . . . . . . • • • 387 CXXXV. Attitude Toward the Establishment of the state of Israel and Preservation of Judaism in the United states of America 388 CXXXVI. Anti-Semitism in Los Angeles • • • • • •• 389 CXXXVII. Jewishness and Occupational Discrimina- / tion •• • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • 3i30 TABLE A. Distribution of Jewish Interviewees in the Los Angeles Jewish Population study for the Three Areas Under Investigation••••••• B. Comparison of Number Interviewed in the Jewish Population and Present Studies in the Three xviii PAGE 5 ~Areas. • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 C. Jewish and Non-Je~ish Population in the Three Areas. • • • • • • . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7 D. The Growth of Jewish Population in Los Angeles .I '1905-1937 • • • • • • • • • • • • • • • •• 24 . E. Distribution of Gomposition and Cultural Traits of the Three Areas StUdied, Rated in Terms of First, Second and Third Place.. 392 CHAPTER I INTRODUCTION I. THE PROBLEM statement of the problem. A number of studies have been made of assimilation as a social process, but this study has been undertaken for a particular purpose, namely, _to investigate the religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles, and to ascertain to what extent there are noticeab'le variations in the effects of these factors in three distinct areas available for comparison. The three areas are: Beverly Hills, Beverlywood and Boyle Heights. The two latter are a part of the city of Los Angeles, Beverly Hills is an incorporated city within the environs of the city of Los Angeles. The cultural factors in social control which have been emphasized in this study fall within the religious, educational and socio-economic categories. A working hypothesis has been taken into considera- / tion while planning the pattern of this study, namely, that the Jewish people have shown different rates of assimilation under social conditions which differ according to the following: ,/ 2 1. Synagogue affiliation. 2. Religious preference. a. Orthodox b. Conservative c. Reform d. Other 3. Intensiveness of Jewish education. 4. Nature of residential area. a. Segregated area b. Mixed area c. Gentile area 5. Jewish organization membership. 6. Occupational differences. 7. Socio-economic status. II. THE PURPOSE OF THE STUDY The present study is an attempt to indicate the 'v ralati va importance of selected cultural factor s in social control involved in the process of Jewish assimilation. It is not within the scope of this study to justify or con demn the rate of assimilation of the Jew, but rather to d~ fine the situation as it exists, and to suggest those con ditions enhancing or retarding the assimilation of the Jew. III. METHOD AND SCOPE Primarily, this study has been a field study in i---------- I which . the frame of reference was-designated in'a schedule 3 , consisting of 99 questions which have been developed into 137 analytical tables, for each of which there is a brief analysis and interpretation. The composi~ion factors selected, are such aa to make it possible to show variations in the three areas that are compared. For historical as / well as general background material, the resources of several libraries were consulted, among them the library of the University. of Southern California and the main city library of Los Angeles. The three areas were selected for this stUdy because they represent three distinot aocio-economic levels: (' Beverly Hills a high socio-economic status area. ' Beverlywood -- a middle socio-economic status are~. Boyle Heights statUB area.' a relatively low socio-economic The next step was to obtain a proper sample in each area. Fortunately, the Lo s Angele s Jewish Community Caunc:U had conducted a Jewish population study in Loa Angeles, under the directorship of Fred Massarik. The cooperation of the Los Angeles Jewish Community Council that was extended toward this stUdy proved very helpful. The ad- i dresses of the prospective interviewees were made available . for each area under investigation. (See Table A.) The /( , 4 t prospective interviewees were those who filled out the questionnaire for the Jewish Population Study conducted by the Los Angeles Jewish Community Council. The difference in the numbers interviewed in these two studies, with an interval of four to six months between them, may be accounted for by noting their ~obility as indicated by change of residence. The data gathered as per; schedule (see Appendix A) were reduced to a code suitable for I.B.M. cards to facilitate the process and analysis. (The code is shown in Appendix C.) A face-sheet was pre pared for each schedule to facilitate the I.B.M. punching and provide for greater accuracy. (See Appendix B.) A final verification of the -I.B.M. cards was made in order to· eliminate further possible errors. IV. CRITERIA FOR JEWISH ASSIMILATION The following criteria have been selected to repre sent attitudes toward Jewish assimilation: 1. Opposition to any change in Jewish tradition. 2. Emphasis on the nationalistic aspect of Judaism. / 3. Conformation to the culture of the majority, but would preserve JUdaism through religion only. 4. Favorable toward extinction of the Jews as a i ! separate group. ---------~.- --_._------ _._--_.----------_. --- TABLE A DISTRIBUTION OF JEWISH INTERVIEWEES IN '!HE LOS ANGELES JE'iUSH POPULATION STUDY FOR THE THREE AREAS UNDER INVESTIGATION Number of Number of Others, not Jewish non-Jewish Uncooperative at hane, no Area respondents respondents respondents address etc. Total Beverly Hills 74 10" 10 2 191 -- Beverly- wood 77 131 9 15 232 Boyle Heights 97 84 1:( 3 201 Total 248 320 36 20 624 VI. '~ 'I TABLE B COMPARISON OF NUMBER INTERVIEWED IN THE JEWISH POPULATION AND PRESENT STUDIES IN THE THREE AREAS Number Number Uncooperative interviewed interviewed no address Uncooperative :in Jewish in Per cent of etc.,Jewish no address poptllation present completed popalation etc., present Area study study interviews study study Beverly Hills 74 70 94.5 12 4 Beverly- wood 77, 69 89.9 24 8 Boyle Heights 97 ./ 67 69.9 20 30 {, Total 248 206 830.5 .56 42 0'> 1 TABLE C JEWISH AND NON-JEVr.[SH POPULATION IN THE TEREE AREAS* Area Total population Non-Jewish population Jewish population Per cent of Jewish population BeverJ.:y' Hills 32,326 15,340 16,986 52.4 Beverlywood 54,699 29,411 25,288 40.7 Boyle Heights 13,999 6,108 7,891 56.3 Total 101,024 50,859 50,165 49.8 * Statistics taken from the Los Angeles Jewish Population study, 1951. -.:J 8 These criteria used by the'study have led to the following hypotheses: The Jews least likely to assimilate are those opposed to any change in Jewish tradition. The Jews who emphasize the nationalistic aspect of Judaism are not likely to assimilate all the non-Jewish customs and practices. The Jews who conform to the culture of the majority, &"" but would preserve JUdaism through religion, are more likely to assimilate. The Jews who desire the extinction of the Jews as a separate group are most likely to assimilate. V. DEFINITION S OF TERMS USED In order to provide a foundation for the study, definitions of the most essential terms have been selected from the works (of authors quoted below. Religion. Religion may be defined as: The social institution built up around the idea of a supernatural being or beings, and the relation of human beings to them. In any particular culture this idea becomes formalized into a social pattern, or patterns. Such a pattern comes to be known as the religion of a particular group. Every true religion involves three major aspects. (1) A conception of the nature and character of divinity. (2) A set of doctrines concerning the reciprocal duties and pt. 9 obligations between divinity and humanity. (3) A set of behavior patterns designed to conform to the will of God and to assure to the individual believer the approval of his conscience and whatever regards of freedom from penalties in this world or the next are included in the doctrines of his particular faith. l Assimilation. The term assimilation is used with different meanings by Jewish writers. In one sense it signifies the absorption of the ,Jewish people as a minority group, into the masses of the people among whom they live. An example of this would be'the assimilation of the Jews in Alexandria during the Hellenistic period. More appropriate for the ~resent stUdy is the definition of assimilation as "the adoption by the Jewish people of the language, manners and customs of the environ ment of which they form a part."2 Social control. Social control is taken to mean: A process by which stimuli are brought to bear effec tively upon some person or group of persons, thus producing responses that function in adjustment. 3 1 H. P. Fairch+ld, editor, Dictionary of Sociology (New York: Philosophical Library, 1944), p. 256. 2 !h! Universal Jewish Encyclopedia (New York: The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Ino., 1939), Vol. I, p. 556. 3 L. L. Bernard, Social Control (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1939), p. 11. 10 # Culture. In this study, the term culture is used broadly: A collective name for all behavior patterns socially acquired and socially transmitted by means of symbols; hence a name for all the distinctive achievements of human groups ••• including: language, tool-making, industry, art, science, law, government, morals, religion and material instruments of artifacts in which cultural achievements are embodied.~ Communltl. Lundberg defines as a community: ••• any plural (group) which haa a given minimum degree of geographic homogeneity and kinds of inter action. S \ J,w, Jewish. The term "Jewish" is derived from the term "Jew": In the Old Testament the term "Jew" appears to be applied to adherents of the worship of YHWH as con ducted at Jerusalem after the exile: it is thus used in the late Book of Esther. In more modern usage the word is often applied to any person of the Hebrew race,' apart from ~is religious ereed. 6 VI. ORGANIZATION OF THE REMAINDER OF THE STUDY The chapters in the remainder of the thesis have 4 H. P. Fairchild, ~. cit., pp. 80-81. 5 G. A. Lundberg, Foundations of Sociology (New Yor~ The Macmillan Company, 1937), p. 361.-- 6 The Jewish Encyclopedia (New York and London: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1904), Vol. VII, p. 174. 11 :. bean organized as follows: Chapter II traces the Jewish immigration into the United States in general and Los Angeles in particular. Chapter III treats of cultural factors in Jewish / survival. Chapter IV consists of the cultural factors promot- ing Jewish ass~ilation. Chapters V through XIII are concerned with the analysis of data related to composition and cultural traits of the groups studied. Chapter XIV consists of the comparative distribu \ tion of composition and cultural traits of the groups studied. Chapter XV is the summary chapter of findings and conclusions. CHAPTER II THE NATURE OF JEWISH IMMIGRATION INTO THE UNITED STATES I. JEWISH IMMIGRATION INTO THE UNITED STATES In order to understand the cultural factors in social control which affect the assimilation of Jews in Los Angele~ one must probe into the past because the roots of the problems may be found there. An attempt will be made to trace the three major periods of Jewish immigration into the United states: the sephardic,l the German and the East- European Jews. It is significant that the first Jewish community in the United states, established in New Amsterdam (now known as New York), was of Sepbardic cultural background. Says Janowsky: Twenty-three men, women and children, fugitives from South American bigotry sailed into what is today New York harbor in September 1654--but, without the welcome which Emma Lazarus later discerned in the Mother of Exiles, like moat refugees they were poor, their meager belongings had to be sold at auction to pay for their passage, but they were bold and self reliant.2 1 The term "Sephardic" is applied to Jews whose lands of origin were Spain and Portugal. 2 O. Janowsky, The American Jew (New York: Harper land Brothers, 1942), p74. - l ~ .. 13 / The American colonists at first restricted the political and economic rights of the Jews. The right of public worship was denied to them. Before the seventeenth century had come to an end, the Jews were granted the right to worship in public. Rhode Island has been reported as the only New England colony which tolerated a permanent Jewish community in the seventeenth century.3 In 1669, during the colonial period, John Locke drafted the Fundamental Constitution of Carolina, which contained clauses guaranteeing religious toleration to Jews, heathens and other dissenters and provided that "any seven or more persons agreeing in any religion shall constitute a church. ,,4 In 1745 Jews settled in Philadelphia, when William Penn inaugurated the so-called religious liberty. When the republic was founded, the Jewish popUlation was located chiefly in six seaboard centers. There were some 2,000 to 3,000 Jewish settlers in a total population of about 4,000,000. In 1840 the Jewish population had increased to about 15,000, in a total population of 17,000,000. Up to this time the majority of this Jewish 3 According to Janowsky, loco cit. 4 Ibid., p. 5. 14 population continued to be Sephardic. From about the middle of the nineteenth century, some 200,000 Jews coming from Germany settled in the United states. They came to this country due to oppressive measures of the government in Germany, an important one being limitations concerning the marriages of Jews in / Bavaria. By 1880, the American Jews comprised one-half of one per cent of the population in the United State5. During the last two decades of the nineteenth century, the United states had undergone a rapid industri alization and there was a crying need for labor. The old sources of ~~igration from Germany came to a stand-still. Germany had become unified and was undergoing an industrial speed-Up and hence needed whatever labor was available. In oraer to keep her manpower, the German government relaxed some of the unfavorable laws against the Jews. The place of Western European in American immigra tion was taken by the millions coming from southern and eastern Europe, inclUding many Jews. Between 1880 and 1920, 2,000,000 entered the United states. The peak of this immigration came after 1905,5 and by 1920, the Jewish popUlation in the United states reached 3,500,000. After 5 The Russian Revolution and the Russo-Japanese War. 15 World War I, the United states government introduced dras~ restrictions of all immigration. By 1877, the Jews nominally enjoyed full political and civil equality in the United states, but actually religious differences delayed the absorption of the Jews into the political life of the country. In the economic development of the country, however, there were no restric tions against the Jews. The unlimited opportunities that prevailed for the settlers were also exploited by them, particUlarly in the field of commerce. Beginning as peddlers, they eventually became important factors in commerce. The East-European Jews came to this country in an -' era o~ free capital. The bulk of the East-European Jewish immigrants developed into an industrial proletariat, largely in the needle trades, while others developed great business enterprises. However, many of those in the second' generation benefited from schooling and formed a profes sional and white collar class. In the United states Jews have gradually undergone a remarkable psychological metamorphosis. Although at first the Jewish people did not master the English language or grasp the meaning of American culture, they nevertheless f~lt themselves to be a part of their adopted homeland, and 16 rallied to its defense. 6 The Jews responded to the need for changes in their institutions following their settle ment'in the United states, as for example, in their reli- , gious, educational, cultural, philanthropic and other patterns. When the East-European Jews arrived in this country, those who had come from Germany were already established. They constituted ~ong their own people a middle and upper middle cla~s, while the Ea~t-European Jews had to struggle for their livelihood. The German Jews developed a prejudice toward the . East-European immigrants. Earlier, the Sephardic Jews had exhibited a similar prejUdice toward the German Jews. The Sephardic, Gennan and East-European Jews manifested national cultural infl~ences in the reshaping of institutions to meet their special needs. These three groups had a share in the'fasqioning of the American Jewish community of today. The German Jews who arrived in the middle of the nineteenth century, settled in various parts of the country, more particularly in the middle west, because they were unable to concentrate- in one city and engage in peddling. Since the Germ~ Jews were not accepted by the non-Jewish 6 Janowsky, £E. cit., p. 16. 17 fraternal organizations, they had ~o establish their own landsmanschaften. The German Jews being scattered over a wide area united to form organizations of national scope \ to promote more effectively their cultural assimilation. The German Jews provided for hospitals, orphanages, bene volent societies and other causes. The East-European Jews followed much the same i pattern, with the exception of Jewish education which was strongly emphasized by them, because Jewish learning was an important aspect in their cultural background. II. THE JEWISH COMMUNITY IN LOS ANGELES: ITS HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT Until the middle of the nineteenth century California's popu~ation was sparse. The early settlers were mainly adventurers and explorers. In 1848, James Marshall discovered gold in California, and a year later thousands of people flocked to its shores. Among these people were several Jews who came in search of gold. Soref's stUdy indicates.that: In 1849 the Jew~ had pUblic services during the High Holidays, there were 20 congregants and it was they who helped establish 1n the course of time, two 18 temples known as tI Sheeri t Israel" and "Emanuel. ,,7 The number of Jewish settlers incre~sed so that by 1850, there were about 100 Jews in California communities, most of them in San Francisco. In 1849, Los Angeles was a small village, not even the Gold Rush stimulating its growth. The denser popula tion was in the northern part of the state. Rabbi Magnin 8 states that there were several Jews in Los Angeles in 1845, the number being only six souls. In 1850, the first census was taken in Los Angeles, 1n which six Jewish names were listed. In 1852, Joseph Newmark arrived in Los Ange'les. He was born in Prussia where he received an intensive .Jewish education and was ordained into the Rabbinate. Prior to his arrival in Los Angeles he lived in New York, where he devoted his time and energy to public welfare work. In 1854, he organized the first Jewish philanthropic organiza- tion in Los Angeles, known as the "Hebrew Benevolent Society." He also arranged for the first public Jewish worship during the High Holidays. 7 Irwin Soref, "L'Toldot HaHinukh HaYehudi B' Lo s Angeles 1850--1937," (unpublished Master's thesis, Chicago, College of Jewish Studies, 1950), p. 4. 8 E. F. Magnin~ The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia 19 The first synagogue, known as "B'nai B'rith" was established in 1862. Rabbi Adleman of San Francisco was appointed ~s the spiritual leader of the congregation with its 30 members. Since the membership was small there was no immediate need for a special synagogue bUilding. Ordi narily, the members me~ in private homes, but during the High Holidays they rented halls. In 1872, the Jewish 'population reached the 100 mark, and plans were made to start the construction of a synagogue. A lot was purchased ion Fort street (now Broadway) between Second and Third istreets. The corner stone was laid in 1872, and the edifice :completed in 1873. In 1885, the Reform Movement in Judaism spread throughout the United states, and Los Angeles was affected b,y it. The traditional prayer book was found to be inade quate, and in its stead, the· Jastrow 9 prayer book was :introduced. In 1888, the old Jewish.tradition requiring the use of hats in synagogues, was abolished, and services were conducted according to the Reform Movement--without hats.' (New York: The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia Inc., 1939), Vol. 7, p. 197. 9 . . Jastrow compiled a prayer book for use in Reform servic'es. 20 The changes that were introduced in "B'nai B'rith Temple" caused a schism in the membership and gave rise to the establishment of an orthodox synagogue named "Kahal Israel," and later another orfu odox congregation named "R'nai Israel," was established. In 1899, Rabbi Solomon established a conservative congregation named :'Beth-El." The two orthodox and the conservative congregations merged and erected a synagogue on Olive street, which was named "Kahal Adat Beth Israel." i After several years the conservative members left this congregation and erected a synagogue of their own, which was named "Sinai Temple." The 1850 Los Angeles census fixed the popUlation of the "city" at 1,600. Twenty years later the popUlation of Los Angeles reacheq 5,278_ Meanwhile, the Jewish popula tion was very small. By the turn of the century (1900) the i popUlation of Los Angeles numbered 102,479 persons. lO ! i , , The Jewish populat~on of Los Angeles in 1897, had reached 1,500. According to an editorial 1n the B'nai •B'rith Messenger, this Jewish population included about 300 families. Two synagogues were established, one orthodox and one reform, with, a combined membership of slightly over 10 Soref, ,2E- cit., p. 6. • 21 one hundred. ll In the year 1907, the Jewish population of Los Angeles numbered 7,000. Until the turn of the twentieth century, the Jewish population was composed mainly of West European Jews. The Jews ~f E~stern Europe (mainly from , Russia) began to arrive in Los Angeles about 1907. Many of the Jewish immigrants who worked in the "sweat shops" of New York and resided in congested tenement houses, con tracted tuberculosis~ These were advised by physicians to reside in Los Angeles for climatic reasons. Many Jews, leaving San Francisco atter the 1906 earthquake, also settled in Los Angeles. Soref 12 states that the orthodox population was on the increase in Los Angeles during the first decade of the twentieth century. Five orthodox synagogues were built there during that period. The increase in orthodox Jewry meant that East-European Jews, rather than the West-Europe an Jews arrived in Los Angeles in great numbers. Meanwhile not only the religious life, but other cultural and philanthropic aspects began to develop. The Zionist organization became active, various national 11 12 Blnai B'rith Messenger, 15:1, January 29, 1911. Soret, .2P..~cit.,p. 9. - 22 workers organizations were activated, such as, the "Work men's Circle." It was the membership of Branch 248 of the "Workmen's Circle" organization that founded the Duarte Sanitarium (renamed City of Hope). In 1911, the Federation of Jewish Charities was established. As the name implies, this organization dealt only with philanthropic needs, such as were reqUired. More incidentally, in 1927, the Federation allocated a small sum of money for Jewish educational purposes. The Federation of Jewish Charities did not include all the local Jewish organizations, so a number of Jewish leaders attempted to coordinate all Jewish aativit~es through a r~presentative body. After several years of planned effort the Loa Ange~s Jewish Community Council was established in 1937. I The phenomenal growth of the Jewish Community of Los Angeles occurred between 1920 and 1927, when the numbers increased from 28,582 to 65,000. 13 This growth in population was marked by a voluntary segregation process, the Jewish population becoming concentrated in the areas of : Boyle Heights, Temple street, and Central Avenue. The Jews who resided in these areas were of Eastern European origin. 13 Samuel G. Kohs and Louis Blumenthal, The Jewish Community of Los Angeles: A Survey of Recreational and Cultural Needs-Tunpublished-work; LoS-Angeles, 1942)-,- p. 91. (See Table D.) \ = 23 When Boyle Heights became over-congested, the Jews began to settle in newer se~tions in the western part of the ci~ Summary. The ~ewish migration to Los Angeles dates back a hundred years. It was not until the middle of the nineteenth century, however, that the Jews considered their stay in Los Angeles as permanent. The general pattern of development of the Jewish community in Los Angeles has not been unique, but has paralleled the patterns of other cities in the United states. The Reform movement in Judaism gained ground after the middle of the nineteenth century, n~t only, in Los Angeles but in other cities where Jews were settled. Toward the end of the nineteenth century and the beginning of the twentieth century, the Orthodox movement was on the increase in Los Angeles, following the pattern of the country. Three major stages in the development of the Jewish Community in Los Angeles have now been indicated: l4 1. From the middle of the nineteenth century to 1900. This was the early period when Jews numbered less than 2,000. It was during this period, however, that the Reform Movement gained strength over that of Orthodox 14 The actual growth, at irregular intervals between 1905 and 1937, is represented in Table D. 24 TABLE D THE GROW1H OF JEWISH POPULATION IN LOS ANGELES 1905-1937* Jewish Increase Year population by per cent 1905 2,500 1907 7,000 180,,0 1912 10,000 42.9 1917 20,000 100.0 1920 28,582 42.9 1923 44,000 53.9 1927 65,000 47.7 1931 70,000 7.7 1932 75,000 7.1 1936 80,000 6.7 1937 82,000 2.5 * S. Kohs, .2E. ill·, p. 91. 25 Judaism, due to the arrival of Jews from Germany. 2. From 1900 - 1920. The period of growth and expansion of the Jewish population in Los Angeles, by the Jews of Eastern Europe. During this period Orthodox Judaism increased steadily and gained momentum over Reform JUdaism. 3. From~-~. The crystallization of organ ized Jewish life fostered by the Los Angeles Jewish Com munity Council. CHAPTER III ,CULTURAL FACTORS IN JEWISH SURVIVAL For nearly two thousand years after the Exile the Jews lived in a dispersed condition known as the Diaspora, yet they survived as a separate cultural, or religious, group wherever they resided. What caused this Jewish survival? There are definite theories concerning the factors in Jewish surVival, and some of these theories need attention at this point. One theory is that the religion of the Jew set him apart from the other people. An aspect of this religion was the belief that the Messiah would come and gather the dispersed Jews from the four corners of the earth, and bring them to Palestine. In order to realize this belief, a certain religious way of life was required of the Jew. , Religion, which set the Jews apart from other people served to unite them and increase their social solidarity, and preserve them through the hard years of the Diaspora. Another theory emphasizes social segregation. In the Middle Ages, the Jews were segregated in the ghetto, which resulted in their having greater unity among them selves. The Jewish leaders purposefully accentuated the differences between Jews and Gentiles, and insisted that p 27 the Jew_had to conform to the approved way of life, under the dreaded ban of excommunication. Another theory in Jewish survival stresses that anti-Semitism served to unite the Jews and strengthen their will to survive as a group. The term anti-Semitism is, however, somewhat misleading, because the cultural term, semitic, would include peoples other than the Jews. It is now debatable whether the Jews may be properly classified as Semites. JUdenhass, has been suggested as a more suit able term, though it is not used widely. Various interpretations have been attributed to anti-Semitism, according to the following hypotheses or beliefs: 1. The orthodox Jews hold the overthrow of the Jewi$h state and their exile as punishment for their sins, hence anti-Semitism wi 11 reign supreme until the comin g of the Messiah~ 2. The neo-orthodox Jews believe in a gradual unde~ standing between Jews and non-Jews. 3. The liberal Jews believe that anti-Semitism will disappear once humanity will be more enlightened. 4. Some Jews believe in complete Jewish assimila tion. On~e assimilation takes effect, there will be no Jewish problem. = 28 5. The Zionist regards anti-Semitism as a result of ;the abnormal position of the Jew because he did not possess a state for many centuries. 6. The Marxists regard the Jewish question as of a : social nature; anti-Semitism arises because of competition and jealousy, which are in turn exploited by leaders, who revi~9 ancient prejudices based on stereotypes and popular 1 ignorance. 7. Another view of anti-Semitism is the inability 'of the Gentile to compete with "Jewish aggressiveness." Prior to the Crusades, the Jews were the connecting links . between the East and West so far as trade was concerned • . After the Crusades, Christian burghers began to compete with the great Jewish merchants. Since that time, the economic factor has entered into the Jewish question. 8. There is anot~er explanation, namely, that anti-' Semitism was caused by the religious factor. That is to say, in antiquity the Jews severed connections with all : gods, believing only in one God. In the Middle Ages, the ! Christians were intolerant of the Jews who were regarded as the murderers of the Savior. Modern religious anti-Semitism has not changed except for assuming a disguise of racial . " antipathy. According to Valentin, .anti-Semitism is "merely pz 29 a special case of the hatred of foreigners."l Probably the most important factor in the group survival of the Jews has been the synagogue. When the Jews were exiled, after the destruction of the Second Temple, they found existing synagogues in the various communities wherein they settled. The origin of the synagogue in which people gathered to worship as well as receive reli gious instruction is not known, but has met with consider able speculation. It has been claimed, or assumed that the synagogue was of ancient Mosaic origin, although its function as a permanent institution is known to have dated from the Babylonian Captivity. There was an urgent need for a 'common place of worship, this was one of the reasons why the synagogue as a permanent institution came into ! being. At the termination of- the Babylonian CaptiVity many Jews returned to Palestine. Ezra, the Scribe, reorganized the congregational worship, which was manifested in prayer and readings from the Bible. The revival of the religious cult led to the bUilding of more synagogues. The spreading of synagogues received its impetus in 1 H. Valentin, Anti-Semitism Historically and Criti- cally Examined (NewYo~ Viking Press, 1940), p:-I9. u---------------------- 30 I the first century (C.E.) Josephus Flavius mentions the \ , synagogue of Agrippa I and that of Tiberias wherein, during the Jewish-Roman War of 66-70 A.D., the Jews used to assemble on the Sabbath and discuss, after the services, political problems, hence the term "Kanishta-di-Meradta,,2 was applied to the synagogues at the time of the outbreak of the Roman-Jewish War. The establishment of synagogues spread to other large Jewish communities outside of Palestine. Alexandria had a large Jewish population which began its settlement at the beginning of the Ptolemaic dynasty, if not earlier~ Philo Judaeus mentions the synagogue of Alexandria as a place of worship and learning. 3 Gradually, a dissolution of the large synagogue into many small synagogues occurred. The smaller synagogues were composed of more homogeneous and compatible groups. George Foot Moore 4 maintains that the synagogue and the school were the two institutions which worked in harmo- I ny for the education of the people as a whole in the tenets 2 The Revolutionary Synagogue. 3 It is probable that Beth Hakneseth and Beth Hamidrash were combined. 4 G. F. Moore, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era (Cambridge: -narvard University Press, 1946), 2 vols.--- 31 of Judaism. In the centuries preceding the Christian era, synagogues were not mentioned as such. 5 During the time of Judas Maccabaeus, the Galilean part of Palestine was composed mainly of heathens and the Jews believed it was necessary to convert these peoples to Judaism. For this purpose the synagogue was especially \ helpful. Outside of Palestine there was still greater need! for the synagogue, beoause in Palestine the temple united the Jews, whereas in the Diaspora there was nothing of that kind. It was natural for the Jews in Diaspora to get together on the Sabbath (the day of leisure). Only gradu ally did these ga~herings become religious in character. Dr. Kohler 6 declares that the maintenance of reli- gion is not based upon its doctrines. The stability of religion is based upon forms and institutions which producei a peculiar character, and which express definite ideas- religious, ethical and historical. The most important social faot about Judaism is the synagogue, which helped spread the Gospel of Judaism. The peculiar rituals and ceremonies observed in the synagpgue 5 Some writers' claim that the Psalm 74:8: "They have burned all the meeting places of "God in the land," is an indioation of then existing synagogues. 6 K. Kohler, Jewish Theology (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1918). --_.-- -- -- "---- 32 aim to preserve the historic memory of the people. The rituals and ceremonie's of the Jews during the primitive period may have been built around such things as: charm, amulet and talisman. The phylacteries (tefillin) that the Jew had to wear on h~s forehead and arm; the mezuzzah that was fixed on the doorpost of the house of the Jew; the fringes (zizzith) and the shawl (tallith)--all of these may' have been amulets at an earlier stage of development of Judaism. However, in mediaeval times, in the observance of the above-mentioned rites and ceremonies a clear distinc tion was made between Jew and non-Jew. Later on different meanings were ascribed to the various rituals and cere monies, partiCUlarly that of symbolism. The Sabbath has been the most important institution observed in the synagogue. The Sabbath, it was claimed, brought blessing to mankind; a day of rest was recognized. When the Sabbath as an institution developed, it lost a good deal of its original meaning. Various interpretations by different leaders at different times were attached to it. The Sadducees and Pharisees (at first) held that the Sabbath must be observed literally, later on a different , trend of thinking had been in troduced, namely, that "the 33 Sabbath was made for man and not man for the Sabbath. rr7 The Sabbath was distinguished from other days by scriptural instruction and comfort, including recitations from the prophets. The Jews in Diaspora assembled on the Sabbath in the synagogues to join in prayer and song. Thus the Sabbath became a permanent institution. The Sabbath gave rise to religious education which in part was later adopted by Christianity and Mohammedanism. Jewish observance of the sabbath in the West has / undergone marked changes as a result of the Industrial Revolution. The synagogue in the past motivated the Jew to consider communal needs and communal responsibility. Now the synagogue is a place wherein people are gathered to pray a little or attend a lecture. In olden times the Jewish community functioned as a unit, with an emphasis on social solidarity. The community was both a civic and religious organization. The representatives, in behalf of the Jewish commun ; ity planned for educational facilities, construction of synagogues, social service, philanthropic and other needs. Louis Wirth 8 discusses the synagogue from a sociological 7 Mark 2:2. This-saying was derived from the liberal pharisaic school. 8 Louis Wirth, The Ghetto (Chicago: University of Chicago ~ress~ 1928). --- , 34 i point of view, he remarks that the Jewish community, 'even :before the advent of the ghetto, had been concentrated taround the synagogue. The foregoing has shown that the synagogue was the 'center around which Jewish life was organ- ! ized. The control of the_synagogue over the Jewish commun- I iity was manifestly strong during the Middle Ages, as well i as up to the end of the eighteenth century. It was only in . , the beginning of the nineteenth century with the advent of political emancipation that the synagogue'began to experi ence its fading process~ The existenceof'the Jews, as a homogeneous group bas been due to their common religious practices and traditions. The bond that tied the Jews together has been the synagogue. [The Jew not only prayed in the synagogue; he also lived , there.' It was in the synagogue that the Jew stUdied; it was. therein where he came in contact with his brethren. It was the synagogue wherein the Jew would flock in time of joy or ,in time of catastrophe. They assembled in the synagogue i three times a day for prayers, and at certain holidays9 they would remain there a whole day. The prayer was a com munal one, not a mere ritual performed by the rabbi or cantor. 9 Such as D~y of_~tonemen~--YomKiEpur. / / 35 The synagogue in the Middle Ages had three major functions: 1. The synagogue was primarily a ~-Hattefilah,lO as the term suggests, it was a house of prayer. Not only a conventional type of prayer, but a communal one, such as would be introduced at a time of catastrophe, or decrees which were frequently imposed on the Jews. Thus ./ ! the bond among the Jewish members of the community became stronger and more durable. 2. Beth-Hamidrash. ll The school and the synagogue were always in close association in the life of the Jews. \ The members who came to the synagogue before the services began, would "naturally" enter into discussions about the various interpretations of the Law (the Torah). When the services came to an end, many of the gathered members would' , remain in the synagogue in order to exchange views in the interpretations of the law. 3. The synagogue was also referred to as Beth Hakneseth,12 as the term suggests, it was a community center in the broadest sense of the word. It was the 10 House of prayer. 11 The House of stUdy. 12 The House of Assembly. 36 synagogue that administered the ghetto-life of the members who made up the comm~nity. - Some of the functions of the synagogue were: 1. To make public announcements. , 2. To collect taxes for civil and ecclesiastic purposes. 3. To perform jUdicial functions. 4. To conduct educational activities. ~ 5. To arrange for philanthropic disbursement. 6. To plan recre~tional facilities, and other functions. During the Middle-Ages, the synagogue was the most important institution in moulding the Jew insofar as social control was concerned, as a result, the Jews were well integrated among themselves. Toward the end of the sixteenth century, the ghetto began to disintegrate. Several factors caused the break down of the ghetto. The Cabalistic movement and later the Hassidic movement injected new thinking among the Jews. Jewry was divided into two main streams: One which wanted to preserve the policy of separation, and the other was determined to ,crush the ghetto walls. These social forces ushered in the Haskalah move~ent, the period of enlighten ment, which began with Moses Mendelssohn. This movement, in turn, brought about the nationalistic aspirations of the 37 Jews which resulted later in the movement called Zionism. During the nineteenth century the air was filled with patriotism. Europe experienced the rise of national . ism, as in Germany where the minor states were unified with Prussia. , Ita~y, too, became united. These factors / affected the Jews of Europe and elsewhere. Nationalism began to spread;to such an extent that the synagogue no longer could remain the sole institution of social control • . Gradually other institutions arose which began to take over the functions of the synagogue. Summary. The function of the synagogue and the role it played in social contrQl needs special emphasis. Until the Jewish emancip~tion, conformity to Jewish traditions and religious life was taken for granted. The Jews lived a life of isolation insofar as their relations with non- Jews were concerned. The crumbling ghetto walls and the opening of new vistas for emancipated Jews influenced their assimilation, but changes in the role and functions of the synagogue lagged behind other changes in Jewish life. The synagog~e had to adjust itself to a changing Jewish culture. The development of the Reform and Conservative movements in Judaism was the result of the synagoguets inability to 38 enforce its social control over the Jewish people. The onward march,of civilization in general and the age -of rationalism during the' nineteenth century, influenced the dynamics of Jewish life, encouraged them to learn the \ language of the country and to adopt the dress and manners ... of the majority population. The interaction between Jew and Gentile in the fields of commerce and, later, in social intercourse, furthered the process of Jewish assimilation. Another theory in Jewish survival emphasizes the aversion toward intermarriage between Jews and non-Jews • . According to Epstein 13 t~ere. are five motives prohibiting intermarriage between people of different cultures: 1. Endo gamy. 2. Historic experiences of the tribe. The tribe may develop a hostile feeling toward another tribe, consequently intermarriage is prohibited. 3. Religious differences among tribes may serve as a barrier against intermarriage. 4. When a tribe is weakened and is in danger of r disintegration, especially when uprooted from its soil and forced to live among other racial or cultural groups as a minority, builds up an outer wall of separation, a kind of compensating resistance to an outside world, as a means of self-preservation; and therein it finds its motive for prohibiting inter marriage. 14 13 Louis Epstein, Marriage Laws in the Bible and Talmud (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1942),-ch. 4. 14 Ibid., p. 145. ,\ 39 In Jewish history, intermarriage prohibitions followed the same pattern, at times one motive and at ! different periods other motives or a combination of motives which served as factors against intermarriage. The Hebrews practiced endogamous marriage early, according to biblical history. Abraham married his half siater. 15 Nahor, Abraham's brother, married a niece. 16 Isaac, Jacob and Esau married cousins. 17 Although numerous cases of marriage between near relatives are mentioned in the Bible, there appears to have been no prohibition of mar~iage with non-relatives. Intermarriage often took place among the tribes of Israel. The only ground for objection to intertribal marriage was the transference of property from one tribe to another. A law concerning this was promulgated by Moses, when Zelaphebad died. Zelaphehad had left no male heirs, and his daughters demanded that their father's estate be given to them. Moses granted their request, ruling that in the absence of sons, daughters may inherit their father's i estate. However, there was a clause in this legislation requiring that the daughters must marry within the tribe in 15 Genesis, 20: 12. 16 Genesis, 11:29. 17 Genesis, 24: 15; 28:9; 12. 40 order that the estate remain in that tribe. 18 Although the above clause in the legislation regard ing inheritance rights of the female was in effect until the second century B.C., it was then abrogated. Tribal distinction was no longer a limitation in the marriage laws, yet the social tradition of marrying relatives continued in operation. After the destruction of the Second Temple, in 70 A.D., there seemed to have been a good reason for the waning of pride in marrying close relatives. Such marriage; was no longer possible on account of loss of records, the thing that remained was to marry more distant relatives, because the latter mingled in the same social stratum. In the middle ages, when the shadkhan (match-maker) was engaged in marriage negotiations, the number of marry ing relatives was further reduced. In modern times, marrying of cousins is not a frequent occurrence, because of the free mingling of the sexes. The rule of' kinship endogamy became a barrier to intermarriage. ~esides this, there existed a degree of aversion to marriage with alien races in early biblical times. Examples of this are afforded by the sto~y of 18 Numbers, 36. \ 41 Abraham's choice of wife for,Isaac,19 and later by the factor in Jacob's20 marriage. On the other hand, when Esau mar~ied a Hittite woman, an alien, his parents were grief-stricken. In the story of Samson's falling in love with a Philistine woman, is demonstrated the aversion to inter marriage between the Jews and the alien, particularly the uncircumcised. Samson was told by his parents "Is there no wife among the daughters of thy brothers or among all my people that thou goest to take a wife from the uncircum-: , cised Philistines?,,21 A general aversion to foreign marriage may account for the fact "that the kings of Judah and Israel, numbering thirty-nine, and reigning for three-hundred and ninety three years, had only two end possibly three who married foreign wives."22 Yet, earlier, JUdah 23 and Simeon married! Canaanite wives, Joseph 24 married an Egyptian, Moses 25 19 Genesis, 24:3. 20 Genesis, 27:46. 21 JUdges, 14:3. 22 Epstein, ,2,£. cit., p. 150 23 Genesis, 38:2. 24 Genesis, 47:10. 25 Gen esis, 41:45. - ------ ..- - _.. - / . 42 married a Midianite 26 -and a Cushite. 27 Although endogamy among the Jews was the rule, there was no specific legislation to that effect in the pre deuteronomic period. No legal prohibition of foreign mar riages existed then, the only aversion being that of social standards. The Book of Ruth assumes a favorable attitude toward intermarriage. The period represented in this book has not been established. Some scholars place it in the post-exilic period as a reaction to Ezra's severe criticism and condem nation of interm$rriage. Epstein,28 howeve~ thinks that the Book of Ruth must have been written in an early period, perhaps in the pre-deuteronomic period when "the Jewish attitude toward intermarriage was totally different from what it was during Ezra's days."29 In the deuteronomic period, the days of the later kings of JUdah, intermarriage was no longer a matter of social standards, but was determined by law. Functionally, the law intended to preserve political and religious solidarity 26 ExodUS, 2:21. 28 29 Numbers, 21:1. Epstein, ~. cit., p. 151. Ibid., p. 152. 43 among the Jews. There seems to be some evtdence that the aversion to intermarriage is associated with national crises, when antagonism toward foreigners develops. Epstein maintains that: Four definite attacks upon intermarriage are to be . found in Jewish hlstory,and all of them came in I the wake of a reformation movement consequent upon na.tional crises. The first was the deuteronomic reformation, the second came with the restoration under Ezra, the third with the Maccabean Victory in the War of Independence~ the fourth with the final fall of the Jewish State. 3 When the Jews lived in the ghetto intermarriage was strictly prohibited since no Jew was allowed to marry a Christian. When the Jews'were emancipated, various ques tio~s pf intermarriage arose. The leaders of the Reform movement, at a conference held at Braunschweig, Germany, in 1844, concluded as follows: The intermarriage of Jews and Christians, and in general, the intermarriage of Jews with adherents of any of the monotheistic religions, is not forbidden, provided that the parents are permitted by the law of the state to bring up the offspring of such marriage in the Jewish faith.31 From the middle of the nineteenth century to the present time, intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew has 30 31 Epstein, 2E. cit., p. 155. Ibid., p. 181. 44 · been increasing steadily in the Diaspora, meaning the Jews outside of Palestine (Israel). According to Drachsler: The increasing spread of intermarriage is indeed not likely to be hindered by any race theories so long as the social differences between Christians and Jews are wiped out and the path to intermarriage made smooth. 32 The number of intermarriages between Jews and Gentiles up to the middle of the nineteenth century cannot be estab lished statistica~ly. However, toward the end of the nine- .~: teenth century and beginning of the twentieth century some : countries released statistical data regarding intermarriage' j as well as the religious denomination of the parties enter ing matrimony. In Russia, until the Communist Revolution of 1917, · Jews were forbidden to marry Christians unless the Jew chose to be baptized. In Austria, similarly, prior to World War I, no Jew was permitted to marry a, Christian unless "one or both of the couples seeking a marriage license declares I himself or herself a Freethinker (Konfessionslos)."33 i Therefore, until World War I, intermarriage was forbidden · in these two countries where more than one-half of the total number of Jews resided. 32 J. Drachsler, Democracl and Assimilation (New York: The Macmillan Company, 1920~p. 127. 33 Maurice Fishberg, The Jews {London: The Walter Scot.t PUblishing Co., Ltd., I9Il}'"';"P. 195. 45 In other coun~ries where intermarriage was permitted, the record would show only the faith of the couple. In other words,-if a baptized Jew would marry a Jewess, the i marr'iage would be considered "mixed"; the marriage of a ! I ! Christian woman who adopted Judaism prior to entering !matrimony would be considered a "pure" Jewish marriage It is difficult, therefore, to establish exact statistics on the subject of intermarriage. The available statistics are incomplete and tend to minimize the extent of intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew, for the simple I reason that the records do not call fo~ certain questions I I . that would have given a truer picture of the case. Fishberg indicates that: A study of available statistics shows that there are more mixed marriages contracted between Jews and Christians than is generally supposed • • • In 1905 17 per cent of all the Jewesses, and 27 per cent of all the Jews who entered matrimony in Berlin married Christians. 34 While the synagogue and the church exercised their :full sway over the people, there were few mixed marriages, but with the decrease in social control of the synagogue and the church over the people, intermarriage has been on the increase. Says Drachsler: Intermarriage, as such, is perhaps the severest test of group cohesion. Individuals who freely pass in 34 Fishberg,op.cit., p. 199. t b- 46 marriage from one ethnic circle into another a~e not under the spell of an intense cultural or racial con sciousness. 35 It is difficult to determine the trend of inter- marriage between Jews and non-Jews at the present time, since there have been no recent studies in this field. The studies on ,this subject were made prior to World War II. Therefore, no conclusion can be reached as to the increase of intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew at the present time. 35 Drachsler, ££. cit., p. 87. CHAPTER IV FACTORS PROMOTING JEWISH ASSIMILATION The Jewish people, with nearly four thousand years of existence, have experienced varied degrees of assimila tion. According to Dr. Ruppin: Assimilation has never ceased since the destruction of the Jewish State, and has led in some countries, such as China, to the complete disappearance of the Jews or to the disappearance of all but an insignifi cant number. l I : Assimilation of the Jews, although fundamentally not diffe~i ent from any other ethnic group is of great interest to the / sociologist. The reason for such an interest, perhaps may . be found in the uniqueness of the history of the Jewish . people. The Jewish people, upon the destruction of their state, migrated to various countries and were confronted with different cultures. The process of accommodation preceded that of assimilation. The Jews had to adjust their lives in order to maintain social relations, to pre- vent or minimize conflicts between themselves and the ma j o'rity group. The process of accommodation is of an immediate necessity and may take place with rapidity. This opinion 1 A. Ruppin, The Jewish Fate and Future (London: The Macmillan Compan~1940), p:-244:-- - ----- ---- 48 is maintained by Park and Burges, who say: -An accommodation of a conflict, or en accommodation to a new situation, may take place with rapidity. In accommodation the person or the group is generally, though not always, highly conscious of the occasion, as in the peace treaty that ends the war, in the arbitration of an industrial controversy in the adjustment of the person to the formal requirements of life in a new social world. 2 The modification of attitudes in the process of assimila tion, unlike accommodation, is generally gradual and un / conscious. Dr. Ruppin suggests that there are three stages in Jewish assimilation: 1. The Jews abandon their own language in favor of the one spoken by the majority wh~rein they (the Jews) happen to reside, with the Jews modifying or changing their names to non-lewish ones. 2. The children attend secular schools rather than religious schools, by so doing, the Jewish tradition is replaced by that of the new country. 3. The final stage is characterized by "loss of the sense of~embership of the Jewish community and the aban donment of the Jewish religion. rr3 2 Park and Burgess, Introduction to the Science of Sociology (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1924}-, p. 736. 3 Ruppin, Ope cit., p. 247. 49 The process of Jewish assimilation may be uncon scious, but at times it becomes purposive and conscious. Until the beginning of the eighteenth century, when the Jew lived in the ghettos, assimilation was not feasible. The intellectual life of the Jew was confined to the study of Bible and Talmud and to some extent the Kabbalah. There was almost no contact between Jew and Gentile. Says, I' I I Fishberg: It is ,evident from all available facts that Judaism thrives be.st when its faithful sons are isolated from the surrounding people, segregated in Ghettoes or Pales of Settlement, excluded from educational institutions frequented by people of the dominant faith, and thus prevented from coming into intimate contact with their non-Jewish neighbours. 4 Once contact is established between Jews and Gentiles the process of assimilation begins. Hellenism, a process of Jewish assimilation into Greek culture may now be considered. The term Hellenism means to speak Greek, or to make Greek: "Word used to express the assimilation, especially by the Jews of Greek I speech, manners, and culture, from the Fourth Century B.C., through the first centuries of the common era."5 Hellenism began to spread among the Jews during the time of 4 Fishberg, £E. cit., p. 466. 5 The Jewish EnCyclO¥aedia (New York: Wagnalls Company, 1904), vo • VI, p. 335. Funk and 50 Alexander the Great and received its momentum during the first century B.C., through the first century A.D. The Jews of Alexandria, prior to the Roman conquest - ! (30 B.C.) fared well, and possessed strength and influence. There was a central synagogue of great splendor and many other smaller sYnagogues throughout the city. The Jewry of Alexandria possessed ua merchant class and financiers, and alongside of it the masses of various trades. The Jews created a rich literature in the Greek language which was the language of the state. n6 Even outside of Alexandria, in the Nile Valley that extends about 750 miles, there were many Jewish settle ments. There was even "a Jewish army under Jewish com mand.,,7 The Ptolemaic dynasty in Egypt regarded the Jewish settlers with high esteem. According to Philo,8 the Jewish population in Egypt reached the million mark and 150 years later there had been a cataclysmic change. In the beginning of the reign of Hadrian (117-138 A.D.) burned 6 A. Tcherikover, Shkiatah Shel HaGolah HaYehudit BeMitsrayim Batekufah HaRomit (Tel-Aviv: Dvir PUblishing Co., Ltd., 1945), Kneset 9:143-162. 7 Loc. cit. -- -- 8 N. Bentwich, Philo-Judaeus of Alexandria (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1948), p. 21. 51 synagogues and confiscated Jewish properties were not un- common. This was the situation after the J~wish rebellion against the Romans (in Egypt 115-117) was ehecked. But even one hundred years later, when the Jews were no longer molested, a resurgence of Jewish life could not be found. With the exception of some isolated cases, the Jews no longer played any part in the economy as well as in the culture of the country. The_ Jews estranged themselves from the cultural life of the majority and returned to their own traditions. Says Tcherikover: Their return to their own tradition was fruitless. Hundreds of years in history passed on those Jews without any significance until the Arabic Period brought in new life into the old bodies. 9 , Thus within a period of 150 years from Augustus to Hadrian; i it may be said that the Jews of Alexandria have passed from, a cultural zenith, to a down-trodden people experiencing persecution. Three major historical factors may account for such a change: 1. Egypt was just a part of the Roman Empire, ther~ fore the Jews of Egypt depended greatly on the political situation of the Roman Empire. The Jews began to forsake I their traditions, and began to assimilate into the 9 Tcherikover, loc. cit. r---- , ..... I 52 , Greek culture. 2. ~The environment of the Jews in Egypt, particu larly that of Alexandria, which was Greek in culture, influenced the Jews greatly by the Greek attitude toward Judaism. 3. The Egyptian Jewry was but one part of the Jewish nation as a whole. Therefore, the fate of the Egyptian Jews was linked with that of Jewry everywhere, primarily with the Jewry in Palestine. However, the ties between the Jews of Egypt and Palestine were rather weak, i resulting in further Hellenization. These three historical factors brought about the decline of the Egyptian Jewry during the period under investigation. When Alexandria fell to the conquering Romans (30 B.C.), the Jews looked for a bright future. The tottering i Ptolemaic dynasty was rapidly coming to an end. The last Ptolemaic kings were void of power and wielded no influence, consequently they did all that was within their power to find favor in the eyes of the Romans. The Jews threw in their lot with that of the Romans. Indeed, a short time after the conquest of Egypt, Augustus ratified the privi leges of the Alexandrian Jewry. However, the Jews soon found out that the Roman conquest brought disappointment 53 and bitter degnidation. The change for the worse was not brought about due to the negative attitude of the Romans toward the Jews; but rather the conditions that prevailed after the Roman conquest were responsible for the deterioration of the Jewish position. There was a period of transition and adjustment. The out-going Ptolemaic rulers, and the in- coming Roman conquerors caused some consternation to the Alexandrian population. It is interesting to note that whereas the Romans SUbjugated all the conquered peoples, they nevertheless recognized the superior culture of the Greeks, and as such, the Greek language was recognized as the official language in all the eastern provinces of Rome. The Greek language was only a beginning, later, the Romans had to concede other privileges to the Greeks. These events gave rise to the spread of Hellenism and its development. The Romans granted privileges to the Greeks, but the term Greek begged a definition. From the ethnic point of view there could be no definition, since the so-called "Greeks" in Alexandria were termed Greeks • because of their linguo-cultural connection. They spoke the Greek language, they were imbued with the Greek cultur~ but ethnically they were not cohesive. 54 Dr. Tcherikover lO says that the Romans found an arbitrary measure for the definition of a Greek. Only people who lived in a city and who were educated in the Greek gymnasia and palaestra were allowed to become free citizens. They could elect officers and be elected into office. This definition was welcomed by the Greeks who lived in the large cities, and as such they were granted all the privileges. The Roman definition of the te~ Greek established two categories, that of the cultured and the illiterate. The position of the Jews was somewhat peculiar. They could have been placed in the Greek category, but since the Jews enjoyed all the rights and priVileges of following their own religio-national life they were unable to be placed in the Greek category. There were several classes of citizenship in Alexandria. These classes were defined by taxation and exemption from taxation, as stated by Radin: There were the Alexandreis, or Alexandrians. We know that there were at least two groups--those that were enrolled in a given tribe or deme, and these not so enrolled. ll 10 A. Tcherikover, Shkiatah Shel HaGolah HaYehudit BeMitsrayim Batekufah HaRomit (Tel-Aviv: Dvir Publishing Companyi1Ltd., 1945)', Kneset 9:143-162. Max Radin, The Jews Among the Greeks and Romans 55 Besides these classes, there were other groups "whose legal right of reside~ce was unque'stioned. They were variously designated. We find Persians, Jews and other nationali ties."l2 The Jews, as such, were not placed in one category of citizenship. It is qUite likely that the Jews in Alexandria were classified into several classifications of so-called citizenry. There is enough evidence to support Dr. Radin 1 s l3 view that the Jews were not all placed in a ! single category, but rather in several categories of citizenship. While the Hellenizing process was getting under way in Egypt at the end of the third century B.C., and primarily at the beginning of the second century B.C., the struggle against Greek culture was under way in Palestine. At that time Palestine was ruled by the Seleucids, sometimes known as Graeco-Syrlans. After Alexander the Great, the Hellenization process penetrated into Palestine, although the Greek language was not known to the masses. "It is only within the rather (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1915), p. 108. 12 13 Loc. cit. Loc. cit. 56 narrow limits set by wealth and education that the Hellen ization was really effective.,,14 The people who P?ssessed wealth and education were / attract~d to Hellenism because it offered them the charm of intellectual discovery. The Greek culture was undoubt edly superior in certain fields to that of the other cultures inclUding that of the Palestinian Jews. In the field of art, music, dancing and philosophy the Greek superiority was evident. Another factor favoring the spread of Hellenization was the desire to become free citizens. Only those who were considered Greeks, possessed first-class citizenship. In Palestine, Hellenism was introduced in 198 B.C., when Antiochus III brought Palestine under the rule of the Seleucidan dynasty. In the beginning, the transition from the Ptolemaic to the Seleucidan rule did not introduce considerable changes, however, several decades later a Hellenistic party had arisen in Palestine due to the Seleucidan rule. This party "had shown a great admiration toward the Greek culture and at the same time a derision to old Jewish traditions.,,15 14 Radin, on. cit., p. 120. 15 ~ - A. Tcherikover, HaYehudim VeHayevanim Batkufab HaHellenistit (Tel-AViv: Dvir PUblishing Company, Ltd., 1930), p. 162, (free translation). 57 The Hellenistic Jews' attempted to convert Jerusalem to a Greek city. They introduced Greek customs, such as gymnastics, wrestling and the like. The Hellenistic Jews built a gymnasium in Jerusalem and they indulged even in idol-worshipping. It is needless to state that their actions were supported by Antiochus Epiphanes, who inter vened in the political and internal affairs of the Jews in Palestine. The rise and growth of the Hellenistic party in Palestine lasted until the revolt of the Maccabeans who stemmed the tide of the Hellenistic movement in Palestine. Dr. Tcherikover 16 states that it was not Antiochus who forced the issue of Hellenism upon the Jews, but that the Hellenistic party in Palestine paved the way for Antiochus to disseminate the Greek culture in Palestine. According to Tcherikover: It was not the external powers that brought in ,. -Hellenism to the Jewish nation, but a portion of the Jews adopted foreign customs and tried to create a milieu for these customs. 17 , The Hellenistic movement in Palestine had a close connection with the family of Ben Tuviah, who had been in the center of events and were leaders of the party. The urge for political power and prestige prompted Joseph Ben Tuviah to accept Hellenism as the culture of those high in 16 Loc. cit. 17 Tcherikover, £E. cit., p. 171. 58 power, prestige and the world of finance. It was the :Hellenistic movement that could give Joseph Ben Tuviah all that riches, glory and power, hence his family was in the i midst of this movement for several generations. Tcherikover claims that: The religious, national and ethical traditions were of no significance to Ben Tuviah; it was permissible for him to mingle with Samaritans, if profits were in volved. It was quite in order to eat forbidden food in royal palaces and to be in the company of Greek dancers if all that could ~erve one purpose - namely, to be accepted in that social circle that will strengthen his career. It was qUite ethical to kill citizens who were delinquent in tax payment. All the things that were accepted as within the correct behavior among the Hellenic world, were diametrically opposed by Judaism. 18 The family of Ben Tuviah played an important role in spreading the process of Hellenism in Palestine. Hellenism meant assimilation into the Greek culture no matter where the individual resided, be it in Egypt, as a , Jewish minority, or even in Palestine--a Jewish country. I i Perhaps, the process of assimilation is more thorough and speedier among the richer strata of society, and not so much for the sake of culture per se, but rather for person al enrichment and amassing of power. "While Hellenism. served as a symbol for the rich, the Jewish tradition was 18 ~., p. 174. 59 the symbol of the masses. tl19 By the end of the second century, the Jews settled 'down to their life in exile. The organization of the synagogue in all parts of the Roman Empire and the Sanhedrin 20 in Palestine had assumed a certain measure of self government. The Romans considered the Jewish religion ~ as a recognized denomination, religiorlicita, of the empire. The loss of Jewish territory produced a certain compensation, namely, the resurgence in stUdy of the law and history. Rabbi Judah completed the Mishna (c. 200 A.D.) 'which in turn was considered the authoritative text of the oral law, thus once more Palestine became the citadel of Jewish learning. While Hellenistic ideas in Palestinian Jewry were noti eliminated, the most striking phenomenon was the fading importance of Hellenistic Jewry. The Alexandrian Jewry, however, dwindled in numbers and importance. During the time of Philo there were about 1,000,000 Jews in Alexandria, two centuries later the Jewish population became negligible. Says Bentwich: 19 20 Tcherikover, ££. cit., p. 216. Jewish legislative assembly. / 60 Marcus Aurelius, the philosopher-emperor, spoke con temptuously of the Jewish rabble at Alexandria; and what had once been the most productive centre of Hellenistic-Jewish literature gave not a single record to the world after the Second Century.2l . Alexandrian Jewry, neglecting their Hebrew language, manners and dress little by little mingled "with gnostic and Christian ideas."22 In Palestine, when the threat of Hellenism was diminished, the rabbis of the third century, engaged in intercourse with noted Greek philosophers. Rabbi Meir and i the noted Greek philosopher OenomauB of Gadata exchanged views,23 and it may be assumed that Hellenistic ideas penetrated into Jewish teachings. Says Bentwich: The vocabulary of the rabbinical writings likewise bears witness to Greek influence. It has been calcu lated that there are three thousand borrowed words, mostly Greek, in the Telmud;Greek transcriptions are used not only for official and legal terms, but for names of animals and plants, for abstract and scientific ideas, and even for synonyms of the most cherished Jewish institutes. 24 During the third century in Babylonia, where Hellen ism did not constitute a threat to JUdaism, the speculative 21 Norman Bentwich, Hellenism (Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1919), p. 301. 22 Loe. cit. -- 23 Ibid., p. 304. 24 Ibid., p. 306. 61 allegorical teach1ngsof Rabbah about cosmology are discern ible. Bentw1ch says, that Rabbah's ideas about Bezs.lel, the artificer of the tabernacle, "shows a remarkable corre spondence with the idealistic 'allegories of Philo."25 Hellenism did not disappear at any given time. It may have been suppressed at times only to rise again. Even in the sixth century, Jews in the Byzantine Empire read the Bible both in Hebrew and Greek languages. Justinian, in 553, issued a decree that the Jews may "use any language for the reading of the Scriptures in the synagogue, so that all may understand."26 The Jews welcomed this decree and utilized the Greek language for Scripture reading. In the eighth century, when the Arabs conquered the Persian dominions, Jewish literature was again influenced by Hellenistic ideas. Under the Abbasid Caliphs, the Arabs; I attained a high cultural stage, by assimilating the classi-, cal and Hellenistic literature which was translated into 8yr1ac. The Jews again familiarized themselves with the outside culture and as a consequence the Jewish culture was , the mixture or Hebraism and Hellenism. The eighth and the ninth centuries witnessed the 25 Bentwich, ~. ~., p. 314. 26 Ibid., p. 322. / 62 rise of the Kabbalistic movement, which may be termed as mystic literature. However, the higher type of Jewish literature developed in the t~nth century. This literature: may be ylassified as the development of Jewish philosophy. Saadya Gaon in Egypt, Ibn Gebirol and Judah HaLevi in Spain, and Maimonides in Egypt were the great minds of the medieval period, who had enrtched Jewish literature by adapting and combining (not knowingly) the Aristotelian and Neo-Platonic-systems. The Middle Ages witnessed a harmony between Hebrew and Greek culture. "Hellenic specu-i lation was used to bolster Hebraic belief, and Greek ethics, to justify the Jewish Torah."27 The spurious, rather than the fine Greek culture, was introduced to Palestinian Jewry. The end product was an admixture of the Hebraic and Hellenio cultures not at their best. It was the marginal men among the Jews who clung to the so-oalled Hellenistic movement. In Alexandri~i the Hellenization was much purer than in Palestine. The environment facilitated the assim1lati~n of the finer aspect of the Greek culture. The emancipation of the Jews in modern times may be somewhat analogous to the conditions that prevailed when 27 Bentwieh, !E. cit., p. 330. 63 Alexander conquered Palestine and opened to the Jews a new world, a Greek world. The transition period from the Middle Ages to modern times, was swift for the Jews. The French Revolution and its aftermath brought the life of the Jews into the open. No longer could they return to the ghetto-life. They were not yet ready for the new order. Disorganization of Jewish tradition, thought and values resulted. Toward the end of the eighteenth century, the development of commerce and industry brought Jews and / Christians into contact. Hitherto considered a usurer, the Jew became a financier, whose capital was sought by busi- nessmen. The social status of the Jew was affected by the change in his economic position. He began to look into the Christian realm of thought, and was influenced by it. According to Steinberg: The French Revolution was a spectacular rather than a decisive event. It introduced no violent changes in the tenor of mass life ••• but here, too, the Jew ran true to form as an anomaly among the nations of the world. For him alone the French Revolution in- / augurated a real revolution • • • hi~ seclusion was at an end; he had been transformed from a passive and indifferent spectator into an active and interested participant. 28 28 Milton Steinberg, The Making of the Modern Jew (New York: Behrman House, 1948), p. 141. 64 This sudden change accelerated tbe process of as similation. No longer confined to the narrow walls of the ghetto, the Jew could mingle with the outside world as an equal. This metamorphosis in Jewish life brought about changes in dress, manners, language and other Jewish cul tural traits. As the Yiddish language was supplanted by the German language, the Jew began to abandon his tradi tions, at times he completely renunciated Judaism. The economically favored Jew, understood that the new economic trend held promise for him. The Jewish masses continued in their tradition controlled by the momentum of two thousand years. But the economically favored Jew began. to waver in his loyalty to his group. He began to import teachers of French and German for his children. The higher /'/" the Jew climbed on the Bocial and economic ladder, the more his home was emptied of JewishnesB and replaced with art and music of the country of his residence. Various 8ocio-psycholegical causes drove the Jews to / / <' adopt the language, dress, manners and at times the reli- gion of the surrounding Christian majority. These complex phenomena mark the character of the process of Jewish assimilation. The Jews, upon being emancipated, began a conscious process of assimilation. The present stUdy will attempt to throw light on the cultural factors thatenhanc~ 65 or retard assimilation. Summary. The historical review or cultural factors in Jewish survival on the one hand and cultural factors in Jewish assimilation on the other, was discussed in this chapter in order to have a better perspective for the I / I empirical research that will follow. The long history of I the Jewish people in their own land, and later in Diaspora,: ! forms a great labyrinth for students of social sciences. The Jews, having lived in'many countries were in fluenced by the surrounding environment, when conditions were conduoive to suoh an influence. Only when segregated did the Jew live according to his traditions, beliefs and / practices. Upon emancipation, the Jew began to burst out of his / ' ghetto walls. He saw a strange world about him and he began to participate in its life. The suddenness of emane~ pation that engulfed the Jew, without warning, was cata clysmic. He begsn to forsake his tradition, but was unable to acquire the real culture or the surrounding majority. Instead, the Jew acquired the spu~ious culture of the people among whom he lived. The Jews in the United States, living in a democrac~ J witnessed freedom to an e~tent unparalleled throughout / 66 their history in Diaspora. This freedom brought about greater fusion between Jews and non-Jews. The Jews ac / quired the sentiments and attitudes of the majority popula- tion and incorporated with them in a common cultural life. This study is confined to three specific areas in r Los Angeles, and they may not be typical for the entire Jewish populatien of Los Angeles. However, certain pat terns in Jewish assimilation may become discernible, and / may lay the background for further research in this field. CHAPTER V ANALYSIS OF GENERAL DATA CONCERNING THE COMPOSITION OF THE GROUPS STUDIED In a study of this kind it is essential to think of the informants as people, and not merely as units in a statistical study of population. ,The informants have, therefore, been grouped in such a manner as to emphasize qualities described as composition in population study, including the following: Age distribution; sex distribu- tion of respondents; religion of respondents; birthplace of respondents; birthplace of parents; birthplace of grand- parents; marital status; number of children over and under 18; length of residence in the United states; length of residence in Los Angeles; citizenship status; political affiliation; occupational interests; employment status; home ownership; annual income of family. The data thus presented' are again referred to in subsequent cross references, not to establish correlations in the strictest sense, but to point out some interrela tions between these composition factors and the attitudes and values examined in this stUdy. The knowledge of the composition factors of the groups stUdied, inclUding 80- \ called vital statistics, is essential in a practical analy- sis of aspects of social control which affect the 68 assimilation of Jews. For the analysis of the group composition, Tables I - XXVI have been developed, (pp. 86-111). These follow a general statement concerning them, with an emphasis of the principal characteristic of each table. Although education factors would properly be in cluded in the analysis of c'omposition, a separate chapter has been given to this subject, with Tables XXXVIII-LVIII (pp. 150-170). A separate showing is made for secular and Jewish education. It was known beforehand that the re- spondents in Boyle Heights were lacking in secular educa tion, although they did possess a more intensive type of Jewish education. Education is, of course, a factor in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews, and it I was advantageous to examine these secular and Jewish educa-i tional factors. COMPARATIVE AGE GROUPING According to Table I, 27 of the 206 respondents, or 34.7 per cent, living in Beverlywood, were between 20 and 34 years of age. In this same age group, in Beverly Hills "- there were 20 such cases, or 28.5 per cent, and in Boyle Heights there were 9 eases, or 13.5 per cent. For the age group 55 years and over, 1n Boyle Heights there were 28, or 69 41.8 per cent, while in Beverly Hills there were 17 cases, or 24.3 per cent, and in Beverlywood there were 7 cases, or 10.2 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN AGE GROUP S AND THE USE OF PROPER RELIGIOUS UTENSILS According to Table II, 21 respondents, or 44.8 per cent using proper religious utensils, were 50 years old and over, while of these not using proper religious utens~ 44, or only 27.8 per cent, of the respondents were 50 years: old and over. In the younger age group, 20 to 34 years, only 6, or 12.7 per cent, of the respondents were found using proper religious utensils, while in the group not using these utensils, a larger proportion, 47, or 29.5 per cent, was reported. SEX DISTRIBUTION OF RESPONDENTS According to Table III, 40, or 57.9 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents were males, but the corresponding percentages for Beverly Hills and Boyle Heights were 25, or 35.7 and 21, or 31.3 per cent, respectively. Of Beverlywood respondents, 29, or 42.1 per cent, were females; but the corresponding percentages for Beverly Hills and B01le Heights were 45, or 64.3 per cent, and 46, 70 or 68.7 per cent, respectively. RELIGION According to Table IV, there were in Beverly Hills and in Beverlywbod 3, or 4.3 per cent, and 3, or 4.4 per cent, of the respondents who reported a religion other than Jewish as their faith. The corresponding figures for Boyle Heights were 2 cases, or 2.8 per cent. RELIGION OF SPOUSE According to Table V, in Beverlywood 4 of the 67 respondents, or 6 per cent, indicated that they were married to non-Jewish spouses, in Boyle Heights 2, or 4.6 per cent, so reported, and in Beverly Hills 2, or 2.9 per cent, reported that their spouses were non-Jewish. While the number of cases is not large enough to form a generalization, it may be indicated that Beverlywood respondents had the largest percentage of non-Jewish spous~ The respondents of Beverly Hills and Boyle Heights reported a lower percentage of non-Jewish spouses. BIRTHPLACE According to Table VI, the majority of the respond ents residing in Boyle Heights, some 39 of them, or 58.4 71 per cent, gave Eastern Europe as their birthplace, but in Beverlywood and Beverly Hills the relevant figures were 10" or 14.5 per cent, and 8, or 11.3 per cent, respectively. On the ,other hand, only 16, or 23.7 per cent, of the Boyle Heights respondents were native born. In Beverlywood and Beverly Hills 50, or 82.4 per cent, and 43, or 81.4 per cent, respectively, were born in the United states. BIRTHPLACE OF PARENTS According to Table VII, 51 of the 67 respondents in Boyle Heights, or 76.1 per cent, indicated that their parents were born in Eastern Europe, but in Beverlywood only 29, or 42.1 per cent, gave Eastern Europe as the birthplace of their parents. The number was even smaller for Beverly Hills, 23, or 32.9 per cent. Only a single Boyle Heights respondent, or 1.5 per cent, of the total, said that he had American born parents. The corresponding percentages for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills were 20, or 28.9 per cent, and 26, or 37.5 per cent, respectively. BIRTHPLACE OF GRANDPARENTS According to Table VIII, there were no respondents in Boyle Heights who reported grandparents of American origin. However, in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood there r----- -- I 72 I were 8 cases each, or 11.5 per cent, and 11.8 per cent, respectively who claimed to have had American born grand- parents. Once more Boyle Heights led in the percentage of ancestors born in Eastern Europe with 51, or 76.2 per cent, falling into this category. Beverlywood and Beverly Hills followed with ~5, or 50.1 per cent, and 34, or 48.5 per cent, respectively, falling into the oategory of having had grandparents born in Eastern Europe. MARITAL STATUS Acoording to Table IX, the respondents in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, 65, or 92.9 per cent, and 64, or 95.5 per cent, respectively, were married, but the percent I ages for Boyle Heights were smaller, 51 cases, or 76.2 per cent. A significant group in- Boyle Heights, 11, or 16.5 per cent, were widowed, while in Beverlywood and Beverly ! Hills the number of widowed respondents were relatively small. NUMBER OF BOYS UNDER 18 According. to Table X, 43 of the 105 respondents, or 66.1 'per cent, reported having no boys under 18 in the \ 73 family. In Beverly Rills, 38 of the 69 respondents, or 55.1 per cent, reported having no boys under 18, while only 24, or 35.9 per cent, gave a similar report in Beverlywood. Of the 201 respondents 68, or 34 per cent, reported having one boy per family who was under 18. In Beverly wood, 29 families, or 43.2 per cent, re~orted having one boy per family. The figures for Beverly Hills and Boyle Heights were: 22, or 31.8 per cent, and 17, or 26.1 per cent, respectively. NUMBER OF GIRLS UNDER 18 According to Table XI, the findings regarding the number of girls under 18 resemble those pertaining to boys under 18. No girls under, 18 were reported in 44, or 67.5 per cent, for Boyle Heights respondents, in 42, or 60.8 per cent, for Beverly Rills respondents, and in 25, or 37.3 per cent, for Beverlywood respondents. Of the 201 respondents 68, or 34 per cent, reported having one girl per family who was under 18. In Beverly wood 33 families, or 49.2 per cent, reported having one girl per family. The figures for Beverly Hills and Boyle Heights were: 18, or 26.2 per cent, and,l7, or 26.2 per cent, respectively. 74 NUMBER OF BOYS OVER 18 According to Table XII, the majority of the cases in All areas reported hAving no boys over lB. This majority was greatest, however, for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills with 60, or 89.8 per cent, and 59, or 85.4 per cent, respectively, indicating that no boys over 18 were in the family. Of the 201 respondents, 22, or 11 per cent, reported having one boy per family who was over 18. In Boyle Heights, 13, or 20 per cent, reported having one boy per family who was over 18, with Beverly Hills and Beverlywood,i 6, or 8.7 per cent, and 3, or 4.8 per cent, respectively. NUMBER OF GIRLS OVER 18 According to Table XIII, in all three areas, the majority of the respondents reported haVing no girls over 18 in the family. This was the ease for 63, or 94 per cent, for" Beverlywood respcmdents, for 55, or 79.8 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents, and for 41, or 63.1 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents. Of the 201 respondents, 27, or 13.4 per cent, reported having one girl per family who was over 18. In I Boyle Heights, 14, or 21.1 per cent, reported having one girl per family, who was over 18, with 10, or 14.5 per cen~ 75 and 3, or 4.6 per cent, in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, respectively. OTHERS LIVING WITIf FAMILY According to Table XIV, in the Boyle Heights area, 7, or 10.4 per cent, stated that roomers or boarders were living with the family; while no such persons were co resident with Beverly Hills or Beverlywood respondents. On' the other hand, 17, or 24.3 per cent, of the Beverly Hills households reported that a servant was living on the premises. Servants also were reported for 7, or 10.2 per cent, of Beverlywood households; but in no instance in Boyle Heights households. The Beverlywood area led in the number of cases in which relatives were living with the family with 8 cases, or 11.5 per cent. Beverly Hills followed with 5, or 7.2 per cent, and Boyle Heights with 2, or 3 per cent. LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES According to Table XV, 7 cases of Boyle Heights respondents, or 10.4 per cent, have lived in the United states less than 5 years. However, both in Beverly Hills and in Beverlywood such recent arrivals qonstitute only 2, or 3 per cent, of the sampled Jewish population. On the 76 other hand, 3 cases, or 4.2 per cent, of the Beverly Hills respondents said that they came to 'the United states less than 15 years ago. LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN LOS ANGELES According to Table XVI, the majority of Boyle Heighm respondents, 37, or 55.3 per cent, have been in Los Angeles for 15 years or more, but the relevant figures for Beverly wood and Beverly Hills were 25, or 36.3 per cent, and 23, or 32.8 per cent, respectively. The proportion of recent arrivals in Los Angeles is smallest in the Beverlywood area with 10, or 14.6 per cent, having come to L08 Angeles during the past 5 years. RELATION BETWEEN LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN LOS AN GELES AND ATTITUDE TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS A JEW According to Table XVII, 29 respondents, or 66.9 per cent, who were indifferent toward or against being identi fied as Jews, have lived in Los Angeles 10 years or more. But of those favoring identification as Jews, a somewhat smaller proportion, 88, or 54 per cent, have been Los Angeles residents for 10 years or longer. 77 LENGTH OF RESIDENCE AT PRESENT ADDRESS According to Table XVIII, 18 of Boyle Heights re spondents, or 26.9 per cent, have lived at their present address for 10 years or longer. The corresponding propor- tions were much smaller in Beverlywood and Beverly Hills: 3, or 4.4 per cent, and 1, or 1.4 per cent, respectively. Recent in-movement apparently was greatest in Beverlywood with 50, or 72.4 per cent,of the respondents having lived at their present address less than 5 years, followed by Beverly Hills with 45, or 64.3 per cent, and Boyle Heights with 30, or 44.9 per cent. CITIZENSHIP STATUS According to Table XIX, both in Beverly Hills and in Beverlywood almost all respondents were American citi zens. The figures for Beverly Hills were 69, or 98.6 per cent, and for Beverlywood 68, or 98.6 per cent. On the other band, only 55, Qr 82.1 per cant, of the Boyle Heights respondents were American citizens, although 10, or 14.9 per cent, of the total were planning to apply for citizen ship. POLITICAL AFFILIATION According to Table XX, in Boyle Heights and in -_ _ ..------- .__.__ .~ '---'-.- -'-', ._-----_.__.--- - .--.--- ,,---.'-- 78 Beverlywood the majority of the respondents identified themselves as Democrats; 51, or 76.3 per cent, in Boyle Heights, and 42, or 60.8 per cent, in Beverlywood. The percentage of Democrats was smaller in Beverly Hills; 33, or 47.1 per cent. There were no Republicans among the respondents in Boyle Heights, however, 6, or 8.9 per cent, of the Boyle Heights group identified themselves as Progressives, while ' the corresponding percentages for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills were: 2 cases each, or 3 per cent, and 2.9 per cent, respectively. Of the Beverly Hills respondents 27, or 38.5 per cent, identified themselves as Republicans, while 17, •or 24.7 per oent, fell into the RepUblican column in Beverlywood. OCCUPATION: HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD According to Table XXI, "22 cases, or 31.4 per cent, of Beverly Hills heads of households, were Qccupied as : professionals, or semi-professionals. In BeYerlywood 17, 'or 24.7 per cent, were classified as professionals and , semi-professionals; but the figures for Boyle Heights were only 4, or 6.9 per cent. On the other hand, 26, or 38.7 ,,' per _cent, .. of Boyle Heights heads of households were employed in operative, protective and other occupations, · \ 79 while this held true for only 11, or 15.8 per cent, of Beverly Hilla household heads, and for 8, or 11.7 per cent of Beverlywood household heads. RELATION BETWEEN OCCUPATION AND AFFILIATION WITH A ZIONIST ORGANIZATION - According to Table XXII, 32 of the 206 respondents, I or 64 per cent,. affiliated with a Zionist organization were I I employed in the two top occupational categories, profes- sional and semi-professional, and proprietorial and mana- gerial. On the other hand, of those not affiliated with a Zionist organization only 65 cases, or 41.5 per cent, were employed in these occupational groupings. EMPLOYMENT STATUS Aocording to Table XXIII, 60 of the Beverlywood re spondents, or 86.9 per cent, were employed. The figures were somewhat lower for Beverly, Hills with 55, or 78.6: per cent, and for Boyle Heights 46, or 68.7 per cent. Boyle Heights led in the "retired" category, with 10 respondents, or 14.9 per cent, retired. Boyle Heights also led in the not-employed category with 9, or 13.5 per cent, not employed. 80 EMPLOYMENT CATEGORIES According to Table XXIV, 55 of the Beverly Hilla respondents, or 100 per cent, who were employed, reported full-time employment. In Beverlywood, 57, or 90.6 per cen~ said that they were employed full time. In Boyle Heights, 89, or 81.2 per cent, stated that they were employed full time. Boyle Heights led in part-time employment, 7 cases, or 14.5_per cent. Beverly Hills reported no part-time employment among the respondents. HOME OWNERSHIP According to Table XXV, home ownership was greatest in Beverlywood with 56 respondends, or 81.2 per cent, owning their homes. Beverly Hilla followed with 48, or 68.6 per cent, and Boyle Heights was last with 24, or 35.9 per cent. ANNUAL INCOME OF FAMILY According to Table XXVI, the majority of Boyle Heights families studied, 44, or 65.7 per cent, reported l annual incomes of leas than $5,000. The same was the case for only 14, or 20.3 per cent, of Beverlywood families, and for a mere 4, or 5.9 per cent, of Beverly Hills 81 families. On the other hand, 34, or 48.4 per cent, of Beverly Hills families studied, reported that their incomes were in excess of $10,000. Some 18 of Beverlywood f&milies, or 26.3 per cent, indicated incomes of $10,000 or over, but no Boyle Heights families fell into this highest economic inoome oategory. Recapitulation. The Boyle Heights respondents were typically the oldest group. The respondents of Beverly Hills next and the respondents of Beverlywood were the youngest group. The older age group respondents, used separate dishes for meat and dairy foods more frequently than did the younger age group respondents. In male popUlation the largest number was reported for the Beverlywood respondents. The next largest number of males was reported for Beverly Hills, and the smallest number of males was found in Boyle Heights. ThUS, the findings indicate that the oldest group (Boyle Heights) had the largest number of female respondents. For the three groups, no marked difference is re vealed in the religion of the respondents. The vast major ity professed the Jewish faith. The findings indicate that the largest percentage of non-Jewish spouses was among the respondents of Beverlywood, but this should not be 82 generalized owing to the limitations of the sample. The largest number of foreign born respondents was reported for Boyle Heights, the next-largest number of foreign born was in Beverly Hills,. and the smallest number of ~oreign born was reported for Beverlywood. The typi oally oldest group (Boyle Heights) has the largest percent age of foreign born. Boyle Heights respondents reported the largest percentage of parents born in Eastern Europe. Beverlywood and Beverly Hills followed in that order. No grandparents of American origin was reported for Boyle Heights, whereas respondents in Beverly Hills and Beverly wood reported haVing grandparents born in the United States. The Boyle Heights area reported the largest number of widowed respondents. In Boyle Heights, the typioally oldest group, is found the largest percentage of widowed 0 respondents. The respondents of Beverlywood, reported 'having the largest number of children under 18, with Beverly Hills I and Boyle Heights following in that order. The findings indicate that children over 18 were fewest in Beverlywood, slightly more ohildren in Beverly Hills and the greatest number of children over 18 in Boyle Heights. According to the findings, the largest number of 83 roomers and boarders was reported for Boyle Heights. No roomers or boarders were reported for Beverlywood and , iBeverly Hills. The Beverl,ywood area led in the number of ' eases in which relatives were living with the family. Beverly hills and Boyle Heights following in that order. The findings indicate that Beverlywood respondents have been in the United states the long9st, with Beverly Hills and Boyle Heights following in that order. The re spondents who have been in Los Angeles the longest were reported for Boyle Heights, with Beverlywood and Beverly Hills following in that order. The respondents of Boyle Heights have lived at their present address the longest period of time. Next lon~st and least longest were re ported for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills respectively. i The findings reveal that the respondents who resided in Los Angeles a longer period of time, had a slightly less favorable attitude toward being identified as Jewish. In Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, almost all re- spondents were American citizens. However, in Boyle Heights, there was a considerable number of respondents who were not American citizens. In the post-war years a number of refugees settled in that area. The majority of the respondents in Boyle Heights and Beverlywood identified themselves as Democrats. In Beverly 84 Hills, a lower percentage of the respondents identified themselves as Demoorats. Beverly Hills led in Republican affiliation, followed by Beverlywood, with no Republicans found in Boyle Heights. The largest group of Progressives also was found in Boyle Heights. The findings reveal that Beverly Hills heads of :households were occupied as professionals or semi-profes- sionals. A slightly smaller number of respondents were !occupied as professionals and semi-professionals in Beverly- ! I iwood. The majority of Boyle Heights respondents fell into ! the category of operative, protective and other occupations.' The data indicate that those respondents who were employed iin the higher occupational cate@Ories, were those affili .8.ted with Zionist organizations. Beverlywood reported the highest number of employed respondents. Beverly Hills was next highest, and Boyle Heights the lowest in gainfUl employment. Among the re spondents of Beverly Hills who were employed, full time employment was reported. A slightly lower number of full ! time employment was reported for Beverlywood, followed by Boyle Heights. Boyle Heights led in part-time employment. Home ownership was greatest in Beverlywood, Beverly i Hills and Boyle Heights followed in that order. It would seem that the respondents of Beverlywood, who fell into the f.. i ~. 85 middle socio-economic level, were able to own their homes. In Beverly Hills, where the socio-economic level is high, home ownership is somewhat smaller, because a number of respondents resided in hotels. Where the socia-economic level is low (as in Boyle Heights) the respondents were unable to own homes. The highest annual income was reported for Beverly HillS, next highest in Beverlywood, and lowest in Boyle Heights•. TABLE I AGE - NUMBER AND PER CENT OF RESPONDENTS Total Beverly Hills Bever],ywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 20 - 34 years 53 25.1 20 28.5 24 34.1 9 13.5 35 - 44 years 63 30.6 20 28.6 - 28 40.6 15 22.4 45 - 54 years 38 18.5 13 18.6 10 14.5 15 22.3 55 and over 52 25.2 11 24.3 1 10.2 28 41.8 Total 206 100.0 10 100.0 69 100.0 61 100.0 (Xl '" TABLE II AGE GROUPS AND PROPER RELIGIOUS UTENSILS Age group 87 Number and Per cent of Respondents having Separate .Dishes for Meat and Dailz Total Have Do not have Total TABLE III SEX Number and Per cent of Respondents Beverly Hills Bever1ywood Boyle Heights,. ""-"l Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nunber Per cent JfaJ.e Female Total 86· 120 206 41.7 58.3 100.0 25 45 70 35.7 64.3 100.0 . 40 29 69 57.9 42.1 100.0 21 46 67 31.3 68.7 100.0 co co . r' TABLE IV RELIGION Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverg Hills Beverqwood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Nlaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Jewish 198 96.2 67 95.7 66 95.6 65 97.2 Protestant 7 3.3 3 4.3 3 4.4 1 1~4 . Catholic 1 •5 - - - - 1 1.4 Total. 206 100.0 70 100.0 &; 100.0 67 100.0 OJ '0 ... ~,...«", ...."".~ I TABLE V RELIGION OF SPOUSE Number and Per cent of Respondents '1'otal. Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nwnber Per cent Jewish 193 96.1 67 97.1 63 94.0 63 9,.4 Protestant 7 3.5 2 2.9 4 6.0 1 2.3 Catholic 1 .4 - - - - 1 2.3 TotaJ. 201* 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 65 100.0 * Of the 206 respondents 201lfere married and ,lfere single. '0 o "~ TABLE VI BIR'l'HPLACE Number and Per cent of Respondents " Region or country Total Beverq Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Nlmber Per cent Number Per cent 57 27.9 13 6.1 7 3.3 5 2.6 15 7.1 206 100.0 United. States 0:£ .Am.erica* Pacific South Jlid:west Middle and South Atlantic Foreign**' Eastern Europe (Russia and Poland, etc.) Oentral and Western Europe Jlediterranean region England Other Total. 17 5 40 47 8.2 2.6 19.4 22.8 8 11.4 7 10.2 2 2.9 1 1.5 4 5.8 21 29.9 13 18.8 6 8.9 13 18.6 26 37.6 8 11.9 I$~, Y (~' '(;. ,r ' '.7 8 11.3 10 14.5 39 58.4 7 10.1 3 4.5 3 4.5 3 4.2 1 1.5 3 4.5 2 2.9 2 2.8 1 1.5 7 10.1 3 4.3 5 7.4 70 100.0 $ 100.0 67 100.0 * Total. born in the United States 109 or 52.9 per cent•. ** Total foreign born 97 or 47.1 per cent. '0 ..... -='~. TABLE VII BIRTHPLACE OF PAREBTS Number and Per cen"b of Respondents Region or coun1A1"y' Total Beverq Hills Beverly1!ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Namber Per cent United States of America* Pacific 3 1.5 1 1..5 2 3.0 South 3 1.5 1 1.5 2 3.0 Jlidwest 11 5.5 5 7.2 6 8.5 ltlddle and South A.antic 30 14.5 19 27.3 10 14.4 1 1.5 Foreii!** Eastern Europe (Russia and 103 49.8 23 32.9 29 42.1 51 76.1 Poland) Central and Western Europe 35 17.0 13 18.4 15 21.5 7 10.4 :Mediterranean region 6 2.9 2 2.8 1 1.5 3 4.5 England 6 2.9 3 4.2 2 3.0 1 1.5 Other 9 4.4 3 4.2 2 3.0 4 6.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 * Total bom in the United states 47 or 22.8 per cent. ** Total foreign. born 159 or 77.2 per cent. \0 I\) .._, ... ,--q=""'~""ll':1\',,,"j!!"'A:'~ I TABLE VIII BIRTHPLACE OF GRANDPARENrS Nmnber and Per cent of Responden16s Region or count17 Total Beverly Hills Bever~ .. Boyle Heights .. United states of America* Namber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Bum.ber Per cent 120 58.4 34 48.5 35 ,0.1 51 76.2 34 16.5 13 18.6 14 20.4 7 10.4 8 3.9 2 3.0 5 7.3 1 lS 11 ,.3 8 11.3 2 3.1 1 1.5 17 8.1 S 7.1 5 7.3 7 10.4 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 Pacific South tidwest Middle and South Atlantic Foreign.** Eastern Europe (Russia and Poland) Central and Westem Europe Mediterranean region l!ngland Other ~ Total 1 1 2 12 .5 .5 .9 ,.9 1 1 6 1., I., 8., 1 - 1 6 1., 1.5 8.8 * Total born in the United. States 16 or 7.7 per cent. ** Total foreign born 190 or 92.3 per cent. '0 Vol TABLE IX MARITAL STATUS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverg Hil.ls Beverlpood Bor1e Heights Number Per eent Number Per cent Number Per cent lllmber Per cent Single 5 2.5 1 1.5 2 2.9 2 2.9 /-\ Jlarried 180 87.4 65 92.8 64 92.8 51 76.2 , DiVorced 4. 1.9 1 1.5 1 1.5 2 2.9 Widowed. 16 7.8 3 4.2 2 2.8 11 16.5 Separated 1 .4 - - - - 1 1.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ TABLE X NUWER OF BOYS UNDER 18 '* Of the 206 respondents S were single, hence the total is 201. '0 V1. 'l TABLE II NUMBER OF GIRLS UNDER 18 * Of the 206 respondents 5 were single, bence the total is 201. \0 0'\ TABLE nI NUMBER OF BOYS OVER 18 Number and Per cent of Respondents having Children "'''''·'''')''''''''''=1 Bever~H;l1~ _d__ Be~rl..~ ~leJieights Number of boys per fami~ Total Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 1 Boy 2 Boys 3 Boys 4 Boys 5 Boys 22 14 7 1 1 11.0 7.0 3.2 .4 .4 6 4 8.7 5.9 Reported having no boys over 18 , 156 78.0 Tota1 201* 100.0 59 69 85.4 100.0 * Of the 206 respondents 5 were single, hence the total is 201. '0 -.J TABLE XIII JlIinmER OF GIRLS OVER 18 \() co Total Number Per cent - RoarJ.er 5 2.4 Boarder 2 .9 Servant 24 11.7 Relative 15 7.3 None 160 77.7 Total 206 100.0 TABLE nv OTHERS LIVING WITH FAMILY Humber and Per cent of Respondents Beverly Hills Bever:qnood ~_Heig!l¥L Nmnber Per cent lumber Per cent Number Per cent ~ F"" TABLE XV LEN<J1'H OF RESIDENCE IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Nl1m.ber and Per cent of Respondents Total. Beverly Hills Bever1ywoC?d Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 1 yr. to 4 yrs. and 11 months 11 5.3 2 3.0 2 3.0 7 10.4 5 yrs. to 9 yrs. and 11 months 2 .9 1 1.5 1 1.5 10 yrs. to14 yrs. and 11 months 5 2.5 3 4.2 - - 2 2.9 ~ 15 years and over 188 91.3 ~ 91.3 66 95.5 58 86.7 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.00 67 100.0 b o --~""""'I!!!!!I! ""'A$4_g;,¥"'.iA_.,,~,'eli!"""""-"'''''''''''''''''*,''6i.,N:;at,..JMQI,¥'1 ,Ji;''fIl41iHii!&,,';; ,d\!I!i , !II i k>U;:jJIIW,~ TABLE XVI LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN LOS ANGELES Nmaber and Per cent of Respondents Total Bever~yHills Bever~ywood Boyle Heights e Humber Per cent Nmnber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent " ~ CD ~ 1 yr. to 4 yrs. and 11 months 44 21.7 18 2,.7 10 14.6 16 23.9 ~ 0 , yrs.to 9 yrs. and 11 months 4, 21.6 24.4 27.4 13.3 .." 17 19 9 en 0 c 10 yrs.to 14 yrs. and 11 months 1,., 15 , 7.5 .... 32 12 17.1 21.7 ::T {D "'" ::l 15 years and over 85 41.2 23 32.8 25 36.3 37 55.3 0 III a: .. ;;:! Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 .. j I-' a I' ""'~.":'" '·c"""",,·,~",,-"';~'··'::!1!""""'~··"~""~"~"""1I1r!fii~¥~O!?ii"!~'Q¥;;;".ii!l\#iiiJJ£$i. ! TABLE XVII LENGTH OF RESIDENCE IN LOS ANGELES AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent or Respondents I Atti'bldes toward Jewish Identi.ty Length or Indifferent residence Toiial Favoring or against lien Women :in Los Angeles Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 1 yr.to 4 yrs. and II manths 44 21.7 38 23.3 6 13.9 19 22.0 25 20.8 5 yrs.to 9 yrs. and II months 45 21.6 37 22.7 8 19.2 22 25.5 23 19.1 10 years and over 117 56.7 88 54.0 29 66.9 45 52.5 72 60.1 Total. 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 b I\) TABLE XVIII LEH<JrH OF RESIDElCE AT PRESENT ADDRESS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Bills Bever1ywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 1 yr. to 4 yrs. and 11 months 125 60.8 45 64.3 50 72.4 .30 44.9 5 yra. to 9 yrs. and ·11 months 59 28.5 24 .34.3 16 23.2 19 28.2 10 yra. to 14 yrs. and 11 months 10 4.9 1 1.4 2 2.9 7 10.4 15 years and over 12 5.8 - - 1 1.5 11 16.5 - Total. 206 100.0 70 10000 69 100.0 67 100.0 ..... 8 wnm;;L>,,",,~"-" 'r""~'''''<' TABLE In CITIZENSHIP STATUS . 1',;;::.-:~' ""- '"""o-",~",.>'iiJ"~#\A14¥" Number and Per cent of Re~ndents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent American 01tizens 192 93.2 69 98.6 68 98.6 55 82.1 Plan to appl1' 12 5.8 1 1.4 1 1.4 10 14.9 Do not plan to appq 2 1.0 - - - - 2 3.0 TotaJ. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I-' g. TABLE XX POLITICAL AFFILIATION Number and Per cent of Respondents 1 Bolle peights Total Bever:g Hills Beverlywood Hum.ber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per can't Nmaber Per cent Deaocrats _ 126 61.1 33 47.1 42 60.8 5~ 76.) Repablicans 44 21.3 27 38.5 17 24.7 Progressive 10 4.9 2 2.9 2 3.0 6 8.9 Not stated 6 2.9 -- - 1 IS 5 7.4 None 20 9.8 8 11.5 7 10.0 5 7.4 Total. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 .\-' & ~::, ..•... ,. TABLE XXI OCCUPATION: HEAD OF HOUSEHOLD ;t... . c"'''''- r'·~'··-"""~·'·":""'··'~c,""",,,,,,,,.·t~"':,-¥;J;""~;:I!l!.H_t;4lt\\i%. . '.' ...,. ' " ",' . ·-P.'('''-,'''~'''~:'.<~''Jfr-~~~<-~: ,'_. ,:::.,,",. Number and Per cent of Respondents Total BeverqHills Bever~ Boyleliei.ghts Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Professional and serni- professional 43 20.8 22 31.4 17 24.7 4 5.9 Proprietors, managers and officials 54 26.2 2$ 35.7 22 31.8 7 10.5 Clerical, foremen, craftsman. 64 31.1 12 17.1 22 31.8 30 44.9 Operative, protective 45 and others 21.9 11 15.8 8 11.7 26 38.7 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 $ 100.0 67 100.0 1-1 & 107 TABLE XIII OCCUPATION AND ZIONIST ORGANIZATION AFFILIATION Number and Per cent of Respondents I Zionist Affiliation Status , Occupational Total Affiliated Not affiliated classification Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Professional and 43 20.8 17 34.0 26 16.6 semi-professiona1 Proprietors, managers 54 26.2 15 30.0 39 24.9 and officials Clerical, foremen, 64 31.1 11 22.0 53 33.9 craftsmen, ete. • Operative, protective, 45 21.9 7 14.0 38 24.6 laborers, housewives, retired and others Total 206 100.0 50 100.0 156 100.0 TABLE XXIII EllP.LO!lIJ!:NT STATUS Humber and Per cent or Res~8nts Total Beverly BUls Beverly!ood Bolle Heights Nlmlber Per cent Nmnber Per cent Number Per cent lfumber Per can't Plap1oy'ed 161 78.2 55 78.6 60 86.9 46 68.7 Not eaploTEd 18 8.7 7 9.9 2 2.9 9 13.5 Retired 22 10.6 8 11.5 4 5.8 10 14.9 Self-employed 5 2.5 - - 3 4.4 2 2.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 g TABLE XXIV EMPLOYl4ENT CATEGORIES $ TABLE XXV HOME O1mERSHIP Nalnber and Pe~_~~nt of Respondents Total Bever~Bi.lls __ Bever;1.l'!o¢ _ Boyle He!g!lts _ Nwnber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Rent bane OWn hCllle Total 78 128 206 37.8 62.2 100.0 22 48 70 31.4 68.6 100.0 ,. 13 56 (J) 18.8 81.2 100.0 43 24 61 64.1 35.9 100.0 J-I b TABLE XXVI ANNUAL INCOME OF FAlITLY Number_EI1ld per~ent_ of R~~dents Total NlBber Per cent Less than $,000 62 30.1 $"QOO - $9,999 67 32.6 $10,000 ~d over ,2 25.2 Unspecified . 25 12.1 Total 206 100.0 Bever1l !!i)1.s --. Bever9'!ood Boyle Heights , Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number per cent 4 ,.9 14 20.3 44 65.7 , 21 30.0 31 44.8 15 22.4 34 48.4 18 26.3 11 1.5.7 6 8.6 8 11.9 70 100.0 (I} 100.0 67 100.0 j:: I-' CHAPTER VI .ANALYSISOF DATA CONCERNING ANNUAL INCOME AND VARIOUS CULTURAL FACTORS The family income, as one of the cultural factors in social control which affects the assimilatian of Jews, , may retard or enhance the process of assimilation. Vari- ous forms of relationships between the annual income of the family and the cultural factors are indicated in Tables XXVII - XXXVII (pp. 120-130), for the following topics: annual inoome and intermarriage; annual income and display of mezuzah; annual income and affiliation in Zionist organization; annual income and Seder celebration; annual income and use of proper religious utensils; annual income and preservation of Judaism in the United states due to the' establishment of the state of Israel; annual income and Jewish playgoing; annual income and neighborhood preference; annual income and possession of Jewish art objects) annual income and preservation of Judaism without changes; annual income and the problem of anti-Semitism. There are discernible variations in the attitudes and values reported for the different income groups which merit emphasis. The respondents in the highest income brackets usually identified themselves with the Reform movement in JUdaism, the respondents of the lowest income 113 brackets, usually fell into the Orthodox movement. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND INTERMARRIAGE BETWEEN JEW AND NON-JEW According to Table XXVII, 18 of the 52 respondents, or 40.9 per cent, whose annual incomes ware $10,000 and Qver favored intermarriage, while of those opposing inter marriage 18, or 16.9 per cent, had incomes of $10,000 and over. Of the 206 respondents 62, or 30.1 per cent, report•. ad annual incomes of less than $5,000. Of these: 7, or 15.9 per cent, favored intermarriage, 41, or 38.6 per cent, were opposed to intermarriage, and 14, or 25.2 per cent, would intermarry under certain circumstances. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND DISPLAY OF MEZUZAH According to Table XXVIII, 55 of the 75 respondents, or 73.4 per cent, who display a mezuzah had annual incomes of less than $10,000, while only 74 cases, or 57 per cent, of those not displaying mezuzah had incomes of less than $10,000. Of those whose annual incomes were $10,000 and over: 15 of the 75 respondents, or 20 per cent, display a imezuzah, whereas 37 of the 131 respondents, or 27.4 per I icent, do not display a mezuzah. 114 RELATION -BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND AFFILIATION WITH A ZIONIST ORGANIZATION According to Table XXIX, a larger proportion of the respondents affiliated with Zionist organizations was in the higher income brackets, while conversely, of those unaffiliated, a larger se~ent was accounted for by the lower income brackets. Some 20, or 40 per cent, of those affiliated with a Zionist organization indicated that their incomes exceeded $10,000 per annum, while only 32, or 20.6 per cent, of those unaffiliated with a Zionist organization fell within this higher income category. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND SEDER CELEBRATION According to Table XXX, there appeared to be no consistent relationship between income and the incidence of Seder celebration. For example, 34 of all Seder cele brants, or 24.2 per cent, reported incomes in excess of $10,000 per annum, whi~e 18 of all non-Seder celebrants, or 29.5 per cent, reported incomes in this same income ,group. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND USE OF PROPER RELIGIOUS UTENSILS According to Table XXXI, a somewhat greater share of 115 families reported use of proper religious utensils fell within the lowest income bracket, 21, or 44.5 per cent, as compared with those not using proper religious utensils, 41 oases, or 25.8 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND ATTITUDE TOWARD PRESERVATION OF JUDAISM IN THE UNITED STJ\TES DUE TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL According to Table XXXII, a larger proportion of those who thought that Israel would help preserve Judaism in the United states, was found in the lowest economic bracket, less than $5,000 per year, while relatively fewer of those who thought it would not help were found in this lower income group. The respective figures were 52 cases, or 35.2 per cent, versus 10 cases, or 17.2 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND JEWISH PLAYGOING According to Table XXXIII, lower incomes were assooiated mostly with those respondents who indicated that they attended Jewish shows ocoasionally (the category of maximum frequency in this analysis scheme), 47 cases, or 79.4 per cent. On the other hand of those not attending Jewish shows, only 54, or 59.3 per cent, were in the lowest income group. 116 RELATION BETWEEN ,ANNUAL INCOME AND NEIGHBORHOOD PREFERENCE According to Table XXXIV, the large~t number ot those preferring Jewish neighborhoods, fell within the low- est income group, 41 cases, or 55.6 per cent, while a considerably smaller proportion of those choosing mixed or Gentile neighborhoods were in the lowest economic category,! 19 cases, or 15.8 per cent, and 2 cases, or 16.7 per cent, respecti vely. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND POSSESSION OF JEWISH ART OBJECTS According to Table XXXV, somewhat more of those respondents possessing Jewish art objects were in the low- i est income group, 40 cases, or 34.2 per cent, as contrasted: with those not possessing suoh art objects. The oorre sponding figures tor the latter group were 22 cases, or 24.5 per cent. However, this relationship was not entirely olear cut. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND PRESERVATION OF JUDAI8M WITHOUT CHANGES Aocording to Table XXXVI, among those favoring 117 changes in JUdaism, a larger group could be classified within the lowest income category than was the case for those opposing such changes. The relative percentages were 37 cases, or 42.5 per cent, as against 25 cases, or 21.1 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN ANNUAL INCOME AND ATTITUDE TOWARD ANTI-SEMITISM IN LOS ANGELES ~ According to Table XXXVII, no consistent relation ship has appeared between income and attitude toward the problem of anti-Semitism. For example: of those whose income was between $5,000 and $10,000 per annum, 12 of the 34 respondents, or 35.3 per cent, thought that anti Semitism was ~ very serious problem. Some 30 of the 92 i respondents, or 32.5 per cent, thought that anti-Semitism was ~ serious problem. Some 13 of the 36 respondents, or 36.1 per cent, thought that anti-Semitism was a minor problem, and 12 of the 44 respondents, or 27.2 per cent, considered anti-Semitism as~ problem. No significant percentage differences occurred in the other income brack ets. Recapitulation. The respondents who favored inter marriage were usually in the higher income group. The data indicate that tqere is a positive relation between high 118 income and more favorable attitude toward intermarriage. The findings also indicate a slightly negative relationship between annual income and the displaying of mezuzah. The respondents who displayed a mezuzah were usually in the lower income group. According to the findings there was a positive rela tionship between income and Zionist affiliation. The re spondents who were affiliated with the Zionist organization were usually in the higher income group. According to the findings there appeared to be no consistent relationship between annual income and Seder celebration. The respondents who reported using proper religious utensils, usually were within the lowest income bracket. The respondents who did not use proper religious utensils were usually within the highest income brackets. According to the data, the belief that the estab lishment of the state of Israel would be of help in the preservation of Judaism in America, was associated nega tively with income. The respondents in the higher income group thought that the establishment of the state of Israel would not be of help in the preservation of Judaism in America. The findings suggest a slightly negative 119 relationship between annual income and frequency of attend ance of Jewish shows. Respondents who were in the lower income group attended Jewish shows more frequently than respondents who were in higher income groups. The largest number of respondents preferring Jewish neighborhoods fell within the lowest income group. Thus, there seemed to exist a negative relationship between annual' income and preference for Jewish neighborhoods. A slightly larger number of respondentB possessing Jewish art Objects, were in the lowest income group. How ever, the difference in number of respondents was slight. The data indicate a possible negative relationship between attitudes favorable toward changes in Judaism and annual income. The hypothesis may be, that within the higher income category, the group has made already some changes in Judaism. There is no consistent relationship between income and attitude toward the problem of anti-Semitism. No marked differences were evident between the lower and higher income groups with reference to attitudes toward anti Semitism. ~'r'" ~ · .. ·e'"' .'p' ,." "'C"C'''''' '." ",.. ·z,,~m···',",",,",,"":""~""~"".""""'.""!¥I."€"~'!l1!"'i}"j"4i#;;:;:;i\li¥"J*" " JeQI,', I TABLE XXVII ANNUAL INCOME AND INTERJWUUAGE I-' I\) o 121 TA.BLE XXVIII ANNUAL INCOME AND DISPLAY OF WZUZAH Number and Per cent of Respondents DiBpl3fing Mezuzah , \-- ( , f· ~. t J ·': . '" ; Annual incane Less than $5,000 $5,000 - $9,999 $10,000 - $19,999 $20,000 and over Unspecified Total Do not Total Display mezuzah display mezuzah Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 62 30.1 30 40.1 32 24.4 67 32.6 25 33.3 42 32.6 32 15.5 9 12.0 23 17.4 20 9.7 6 8.0 14 10.4 25 12.1 5 6.6 20 15.2 206 100.0 75 100.0 131 100.0 TABLE XXIX ANNUAL INCOME AND ZIONIST ORGANIZATION AFFll.UTION 122 TABLE XXX ANNuAL INCOME AND SEDER CELEBRATION 123 Number and Per cent of Respondents Oelebrating Seder Do not Total Celebrate Seder celebrate Seder Anrmal ineane Number Per cent Number Per cent Num.ber Per cent Less than $5,000 62 30.1 47 32.5 15 23.2 #5,000 - $9,999 67 32.6 46 32.2 21 35.1 $10,000 - $19,999 32 15., 19 13.2 13 20.2 $20,000 and' over 20 9.7 15 11.0 5 7.3 Unspecified 25 12.1 16 11.1 9 14.2 Total 206 100.0 143 100.0 63 100.0 i l 124 TABLE XXXI ANNUAL INCOME AND PROPER RELIGIOUS UTENSILS NlDIlber and Per cent of Respondents Using Proper Religious Utensils Total Use Do not use Annual income Number Per oent NtDn.ber Per cent NuIllber Per cent Less than $,,000 62 30.1 21 44., 41 25.8 $,,000 - $9,999 67 32.6 11 23.1 ,6 35.2 $10,000 - $19,999 32 1,., , 11.2 27 16.9 $20,000 and over 20 9.7 4 8.5 16 10.2 Unspecified 25 12.1 6 12.7 19 11.9 Total 206 100.0 47 100.0 159 100.0 TABLE XXIII ANNUAL INCOME .AND PRESERVATION OF JUDAISM IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WITH REFERENCE TO ISRAEL 125 Number and Per cent of Respondents Believing that Israel Will Help Preserve Judaism in the Un!ted statee of America Annual !ncane Total Will help Will not help Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less than $5,000 62 30.1 $2 3502 10 17.2 $5,000 - $9,999 67 32.6 50 33.7 17 29.4 #10,000 - $19,999 .32 15.5 20 13.5 12 20.7 $20,000 and over 20 9.7 II 7.4 9 15.5 Unspecified 25 12.1 15 10.2 10 1702 Total 206 100.0 148 100.0 58 100.0 Annual incaae Less than #5,000 $5,000 - $9,999 $10,000 - $19,999 $20,000 .and over Unspecified Total TABLE XXXIII ANNUAL INCOME !lID JEWISH PLUGOING Number and Per cent of Respondents Attending Jewish Shows Total OCcasi0IJ8J.9: Seldc:u. Never Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 62 30.1 21 3S.2 12 21.S 29 31.8 67 32.6 26 44.2 16 28.6 25 27.5 32 15.5 S 8.6 12 21.5 JS 16.5 20 9.7 2 3.4 8 14.2 10 10.9 2S 12.1 5 8.6 8 14.2 12 13.3 206 100.0 S9 100.0 % 100.0 91 100.0 ...... N '" TABLE XXXIV ANNUAL INCOME AND NEIGHroRHOOD PREFERENCE t-' l\) -.:J TABLE XXXV ANNUAL INOOME AND POSSESSION OF JEWISH ART O:BJ1X'TS 128 Humber and Per cent of Respondents Possessing Jewish Art Objects Total Possess Do not possess .Annual incane Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less than $5,000 62 30.1 40 34.4 22 24.5 $5,000 - $9,999 67 32.6 34 29.3 33 36.7 $10,000 - $19,999 32 15.5 17 14.7 15 16.6 $20,000 and over 20 9.7 13 ll.3 7 7.8 Unspecified 25 12.1 12 100 3 13 14.4 Total 206 100.0 116 100.0 90 100.0 TABLE XXXVI ANNUAL INCOME AND PRESERVATION OF JUDAISM WITHOUT CHANGES 129 NUlI.ber and Per cent of Respondents .For or Aga!nst Changes in Judaism Anrmal income Total For Against Number Per oent Number Per oent Number Per cent Less than $5,000 62 30.1 37 42.5 25 21.1 $5,000 - $9,999 67 32.6 27 31.0 -40 33.5 $10,000 - $19,999 32 15.5 1 8.0 25 21.1 $20,000 and over 20 9.7 4 4.6 16 13.2 Unspecified 25 12.1 12 13.9 13 11.1 Total 206 100.0 87 100.0 119 100.0 !ABLE XXXVII ADUAL INCOME AND ANTI-sEJlITISJI IN 108 ANGELES Humber and Per cent of Respondents Regarding Anti-S_itism in Los Angeles A V6I7 A. .AnnualincCIIle Total. serious problem serious prob1._" _A minor prob1E11l No problElll Number per cent Humber Per cent Humber Per cent 'Number Per cent Nunber Per cent Less than .5000 62 30.1 8 23.5 35 38.5 9 25.0 10 22.7 .5()()()-$9999 67 32.6 12 35.3 30 32.5 13 36.1 12 27.2 $1()()()()-$19999 32 15.5 7 200 7 15 16.3 2 5.5 8 18.1 $2ססoo and oYer 20 9.7 4 11.7 5 5.4 5 13.9 6 13.9 Unspecified 25 12.1 3 8.8 7 7.3 7 19.5 8 18.1 Total. 206 100.0 34 100.0 92 100.0 36 100.0 W4. 100.0 ~ o CHAPTER VII ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING EDUCATIONAL FACTORS Education is one of the cultural factors in social control which affects the assimilation of Jews. The educa tional factors were divided into two principal categories: secular education and Jewish education. Various relation ships between the secular education and attitudes toward being identified as Jews are indicated in Tables XXXVIII XLIII (pp. 150-170), for the following topics: Number of years completed in school; secular education and acknow ledgement of Jewish identity; secular education of spouse; college graduates and academic degrees. Three aspects of Jewish education were taken into consideration: Hebrew, Yiddish, and the Sunday School. A special section is devoted to an analysis of Jewish edu cation in order to determine the Jewish cultural background of the respondents. This cultural background may retard or enhance the process of Jewish assimilation. Various forms of relationships between Jewish educa tion and other cultural factors are indicated in Tables XLIV-LVIII (pp. 156-170), for the following topics: Number of years completed in a Hebrew school; Hebrew education and attendance of religious services; Hebrew education and 132 Jewish organization affiliation; Hebrew education and inter marriage; type of Hebrew school attended; regional distribu tion of Hebrew schools attended by respondents; Hebrew education in foreign countries; Yiddish education; number of years completed in Sunday school; type of Sunday school; regional distribution of Sunday schools; Jewish education of spouse; type of school attended by spouse; children's attendance of Jewish schools; distribution of children attending various Jewish schools. There were noticeable differences in attitudes and values manifested by the respondents of different educa tional backgrounds. The respondents who possessed a more intensive type of Jewish education were usually more eager to identify themselves as Jewish, than were those who did not possess an intensive Jewish educational background. SECULAR EDUCATION: NUMBER OF YEARS COMPLETED IN SCHOOL According to Table XXXVIII, 64 of the 206 respond ents, or 31.3 per cent, had less than 10 years of schoolhlg. In Beverly Hills 9, or 13.1 per cent, had less than 10 years of schooling. In Beverlywood 9, or 13.1 per cent, . had less than 10 years of schooling, whereas in Boyle Heights 46, or 69.1 per cent, had less than 10 years of schooling. A slightly higher education was reported for 69 of 133 the 206 respondents, or 33.5 per cent, who had between 11 and 12 years of schooling. In Beverly Hills 24, or 34.2 per cent, had between 11 and 12 years of schooling. In Beverlywood 29, or 42 per cent, had between 11 and 12 years of schooling, whereas in Boyle Heights 16, or 23.5 per cent, had between 11 and 12 years of schooling. A higher education was reported for 58 of the 206 respondents, or 28.1 per cent, who had between 1 and 4 years of college education. In Beverly Hills 29, or 41.3 per cent, had between 1 and 4 years of college education. , In Bever1ywood 26, or 37.7 per cent had between 1 and 4 years of college education, whereas in Boyle Heights 3, or 4.4 per cent, had between 1 and 4 years of college educa- tion. Post-graduate stUdy was reported for 15 of the 206 respondents, or 7.1 per cent, who had 1 year or more of post-graduate stUdy. There were 8, or 11.4 per cent, from Beverly Hills, 5, or 7.2 per cent, from Beverlywood, and 2, or 3 per cent, from Boyle Heights. RELATION BETWEEN SECULAR EDUCATION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENT OF JEWISH IDENTIFICATION According to Table XXXIX, 64 of the 206 respondents, or 31.3 per cent, had less than 10 years of schooling. 134 Some 59, or 36.1 per cent, favored being identified as Jewish, wh~reas 5, or 11.8 per cent, were against being identified as Jewish. A slightly higher education was reported for 69 of the 206 respondents, or 33.5 per cent, who had between 11 and 12 years of schooling. Some 50, or 30.6 per cent, favored being identified as Jewish, whereas 19, or 44.2 per cent, were against such identification. A higher education was reported for 58 of the 206 respondents, or 28.1 per cent, who had one year or more of college education. ,Some 41, or 25.1 per cent, favored being identified as Jewish, whereas 17, or 39.3 per cent, were against such identification. Post-graduate stUdy was reported for 15 of the 206 respondents, or 7.1 per cent, who had one or more years of post-graduate stUdy. Some 13, or 8.2 per cent, favored being identified as Jewish, and 2, or 4.7 per cent, were against such identification. SECULAR EDUCATION OF SPOUSE According to Table XL, 14 of the 201 spouses, or 7 per cent, had no secular education. Of the 69 spouses 1, or 1.4 per cent, in Beverly Hills had no secular education. Of the 67 spouses· 2, or 2.8 per cent, in Beverlywood had 135 no secular education. Of the 65 spouses 11, or 16.9 per cent, in Boyle Heights had no secular education. Secondary education was reported for 63 of th~ 201 spouses, or 31.2 per cent, who had between 11 and 12 years of schooling. Of the 69 spouses 19, or 27.5 per cent, in Beverly Hills had a secondary education. Of the 67 spouses 33, or 50 per cent, in Beverlywood had secondary education. Of the 65 spouses 11, or 16.8 per cent, in Boyle Heights had secondary education. A college education was reported for 36 of the 201 spouses, or 18 per cent. Of the 69 spouses 20, or 29.2 per cent, in Beverly Hills had a college education. Of the 67 spouses 10, or 14.9 per cent, in Beverlywood had a college education. Of the 65 spouses 6, or 9.4 per cent, in Boyle Heights had a college education. COLLEGE GRADUATES AND ACADEMIC DEGREES According to Tables XLI, XLII, XLIII, 40 of the 206 respondents, or 19.4 per cent, were college graduates. The highest number of college graduates, 21 of the 40 respond ents, or 52.5 per cent, was reported for Beverly Hills. Beverlywood reported 17, or 42.5 per cent, and Boyle Heigh~ had only 2, or 5 per cent of college graduates. Of the 37 respondents who had college degrees 18, or 48.2 per cent, 136 was reported for Beverly Hills, 17, or 45.9 per cent, was reported for Beverlywood, and 2, or 5.9 per cent, for Boyle Heights. HEBREW EDUCATION: NUMBER OF YEARS COMPLETED IN SCHOOL According to Table XLIV, 87 of the 206 respondents, or 42.2 per cent, had no Hebrew education. In Beverly Hills 35, or 50.1 per cent, had no Hebrew schooling. In Beverlywood 31, or 44.9 per cent, had no Hebrew schooling, whereas in Boyle Heights 21, or 31.4 per cent, reported having no schooling. Of the 206 respondents 52, or 25.3 per cent, had less than 4 years of schooling. In Beverly Hills 15, or 21.5 per cent, had less than 4 years of schooling. In Beverlywood 14, or 20.3 per cent, had less than 4 years of schooling, whereas in Boyle Heights 23, or 34.2 per cent, had less than 4 years of schooling. A slightly higher education was reported for 44 of the 206 respondents, or 21.3,per cent, who had between 5 and 8 years of schooling. In Beverly Hills 11, or 15.6 per cent, had between 5 and 8 years of schooling. In Beverly wood 18, or 26.1 per cent, had between 5 and 8 years of schooling, whereas 1n Boyle Heights 15, or 22.4 per cent, had between 5 and 8 years of schooling. 137 A higher Hebrew education was reported for 23 of the 206 respondents, or 11.2 per cent, who had between 9 and 16 years of schooling. Nine, or 12.8 per cent, was reported for Beverly Hills. Six, or 8.7 per cent, was reported for Beverlywood, and 8, or 12 per cent, in Boyle Heights who bad between 9 and 16 years of schooling. RELATION BETWEEN HEBREW EDUCATION AND ATTENDANCE OF RELIGIOUS SERVICES According to Table XLV, a, or lB.l per cent, of the respondents who had no Hebrew schooling, attended religious services on all holidays. Some 44, or 43.7 per cent, at tended services on High Holidays only, and 35, or 57.4 per cent, did not attend any services. The following attendance of religious services was reported for respondents who had less than 4 years of Hebrew schooling: Some 15, or 34.9 per cent, attended services on all holidays, 23, or 22.8 per cent, attended services on High Holidays only, and 14, or 22.9 per cent, did not attend any services. The following attendance of religious services was reported for the respondents who had between 5 and 8 years of Hebrew schooling: 13, or 28.9 per cent, attended services on all holidays, 23, or 22.8 per cent, attended services on 138 High Holidays only, and 8, or 13.1 per cent, did not attend any services. The following attendance of religious services was reported for the respondents who had between 9 and 16 years of Hebrew schooling: 8, or 18.1 per cent, attended services on all holidays, 11, or 10.7 per cent, attended services on High Holidays only, whereas 4, or 6.6 per cent, did not attend any services. RELATION BETWEEN HEBREW EDUCATION AND AFFILIATION WITH JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS According to Table XLVI, 24, or 24.4 per cent, of the respondents who had no Hebrew schooling were affiliated with Jewish organizations, and 28, or 26.2 per cent, were not affiliated with Jewish organizations. Of the respondents who had less than 4 years of schooling, 24, or 24.4 per cent were affiliated with Jewish organizations, and 28, or 26.2 per cent, were not affili ated with Jewish organizations. Bome 44 of,the 206 respondents, or 21.3 per cent, had between 5 and 7 years of schooling, of these: 30, or 30.6 per cent, were affiliated with Jewish organizations, and 14, or 11.8 per cent, were not affiliated with Jewish organizations. 139 Of the respondents who had between 9 and 16 years of Hebrew schooling, 15, or 15.4 per cent, were affiliated with Jewish organizations, whereas 8, or 6 per cent, were not affiliated with Jewish organizations. RELATION BETWEEN HEBREW EDUCATION AND INTERMARRIAGE According to Table XLVII, 30, or 68.5 per cent, of the respondents who had no Hebrew education favored inter marriage. Some 24, or 22.5 per cent, were against inter marriage, and 33, or 58.9 per oent,were indifferent toward intermarriage. Of the 52 respondents who had less than 4 years of Hebrew education, 9, or 20.4 per cent, favored intermarr.mg~ whereas 33, or 31.2 per cent, were against, and 10, or 17.8 per cent, were indifferent toward intermarriage. Some 3, or 6.8 per cent, of the respondents who had between 5 and 8 years of Hebrew education favored inter marriage, 33, or 31.2 per cent, were against, and 8, or 14.4 per cent, were indifferent toward intermarriage. Some 23 of the 206 respondents, or 11.2 per cent, had between 9 and 16 years of Hebrew education. Of this g~eup 2, or 4.3 per cent, favored intermarriage, 16, or 15.1 per cent, were against, and 33, or 58.9 per cent, were indifferent toward intermarriage. 140 HEBREW EDUCATION: TYPE OF SCHOOL ATTENDED According to Table XLVIII, 59, of the 206 respond ents, or 49.6 per cent, attended a 5-day-a-week school. In Beverly Hills 18, or 51.4 per cent, attended a 5-day-a week school. In Beverlywood 19, or 50.1 per cent, and in Boyle Heights 22, or 48.3 per cent, attended a 5-day-a week school. A Heder, or Yeshivah type of schooling was reported for 22, or 18.5 per cent. Of these: in Beverly Hills 6, or 17.3 per cent, attended a Heder or a Yeshivah. In Beverlywood 5, or 13.1 per cent, attended a Heder or Yeshivah, and 11, or 23.3 per cent, of Boyle Heights re spondents attended a Heder or Yeshivah. A 3-day-a-week school was reported for 14, or 11.7 per cent. In Beverly Hills 5, or 14.3 per cent, attended a 3-daY~9-week school. In Beverlywood 6, or 15.9 per cent, attended a 3-day-a-week school. In Boyle Heights 3, or 6.5 per cent, attended a 3-day-a-week school. HEBREW EDUCATION: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION (UNITED STATES OF AMERICA) According to Table XLIX, of the 63 respondents who attended Hebrew schools in the United States, 27, or 42.8 per cent, attended Hebrew schools in the Middle and South 141 Atlantic region, of whom 10, or 45.3 per cent, resided in Beverly Hills, 15, or 46.5 per cent, resided in Beverlywoo~ and 2, or 22.2 per cent, resided in Boyle Heights. In the Midwest region, 14, or 22.4 per cent, attend ed Hebrew schools, of whom 7, or 31.6 per cent, resided in Beverly Hills, 6, or 18.8 per cent, resided in Beverlywood, end 1, or 11.1 per cent, resided in Boyle Heights. In Los Angeles County, 11, or 17.4 per cent, attended Hebrew schools, of whom 1, or 4.6 per cent, resided in Beverly Hills, 6, or 18.8 per cent, resided in Bever1ywood, and 4, or 44.5 per cent, resided in Boyle Heights. HEBREW EDUCATION: FOREIGN COUNTRIES According to Table L, 54 respondents attended Hebrew schools in foreign countries. Some 24, or 43.7 per cent, obtained Hebrew schooling in Russia, of whom 2, or 15.4 per cent, resided in Beverly Hills, 3, or 60 per cent, resided in Beverlywood, and 19, or 52.9 per cent, resided in Boyle Heights. Of the respondents, 11, or 20.7 per cent, attended Hebrew schools in Poland, of whom 2, or 15.4 per cent, resided in Beverly Hills, and 9, or 25.1 per cent, resided in Boyle Heights. 142 YIDDISH EDUCATION According to Table LI, 17 of the 206 respondents, or 8.3 per cent, had some kind of Yiddish education, of whom 6, or 8.7 per cent, were in Beverlywood, and 5, or 7.5 per cent, were in Boyle Heights. Of the 206 respondents, 189, or 91.7 per cent, had no formal Yiddish schooling. The number of respondents who had formal Yiddish schooling is too small for any analysis, hence no inference may be drawn from these data. SUNDAY SCHOOL EDUCATION: NUMBER OF YEARS COMPLETED According to Table LII, 167 of the 206 respondents, or 81 per cent, had no Sunday school education. In Beverly Hills 48, or 68.6 per cent, had no Sunday school education. In Beverlywood 55, or 79.6 per cent, had no Sunday school education. In Boyle Heights 64, or 95.5 per cent, had no Sunday school education. Of the 206 respondents, 37, or 18 per cent, had less than 10 years of Sunday school education. In Beverly Hills 22, or 31.4 per cent, had less than 10 years of Sunday school education. In Beverlywood 12, or 17.4 per cent, had less than 10 years of Sunday school education. In Boyle Heights 3, or 4.5 per cent, bad less than 10 years of 143 Sunday Bchool education. Only 2, of the 206 respondents, or 1 per cent, had more than 10 years of Sunday school education. .The 2 re spondents were from Beverly Hills. There were no respond ents in Beverlywood or Boyle Heights> who had over 10 years of Sunday school education. SUNDAY SCHOOL EDUCATION: TYPE OF SCHOOL Acoording to Table LIII"38 respondents attended Sunday schools. Some 20, or 52.6 per cent, attended a Reform Sunday school. In Beverly Hills 11, or 52.3 per cent, attended a Rerorm Sunday school. In Beverlywood 8, or 57.2 per cent, attended a Reform Sunday Bchool, and only 1, or 33.4 per cent, in Boyle Heights attended a Reform Sunday school. There were 15 respondents, or 39.5 per cent, who attended a Conservative Sunday school. Of these, 10, or 47.7 per cent, were in Beverly Hills. Four, or 28.5 per cent, were in Beverlywood, and 1, or 33.3 per cent, in Boyle Heights. Only 3 respondents, or 7.9 per cent, attended an Orthodox Sunday school, of whom 2, or 14.3 per cent, were in Beverlywood, and 1, or 33.3 per cent, in Boyle Heights. (None for Beverly Hills.) 144 SUNDAY SCHOOL EDUCATION: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION According to Table LIV, of the 38 respondents, 20, or 53.2 per cent, attended Sunday schools in the Mountain, South and Midwest regions, of whom 12, or 57.3 per cent, were Beverly Hills respondents, 5, or 35.7 per cent, were Beverlywood respondents, and 3, or 100 per cent, were Boyle Heights respondents. In New England, Middle and South Atlantic, 10, or 25.4 per cent, attended Sunday schools, of whom 5, or 23.8 per cent, were Beverly Hills respondents, and 5, or 35.7 per cent, were Beverlywood respondents (none from Boyle Heights). In the Pacific region, 8, or 21.4 per cent, attended Sunday schools, of whom 4, or 18.9 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, and 4, or 28.6 per cent, were from Beverly wood. (None from Boyle Heights.) JEWISH EDUCATION OF SPOUSE: NUMBER OF YEARS COMPLETED IN SCHOOL According to Table LV, 46 of the 201 respondents' spouses, or 22.4 per cent, had no Jewish education, of whom 11, or 15.7 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, 21, or 30.5 per cent, were from Beverlywood, and 14, or 20.9 per cent, were from Boyle Heights. 145 Some 43, of the respondents' spouses, or 20.8 per cent, had 5 to 6 years of Jewish education, of whom 15, or 21.5 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, 10, or 14.5 per cent, from Bever1ywood, and 18, or 26.9 per cent, were from Boyle Heights. A higher education was reported for 36, or 17.4 per cent, of the respondents' spouses, of whom 15, or 21.5 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, 15, or 21.8 per cent, from Beverlywood, and 6, or 8.9 per cent, from Boyle Heights. JEWISH EDUCATION OF SPOUSE: TYPE OF SCHOOL ATTENDED According to Table LVI, 74, of the 146 respondents' spouses, or 49.5 per cent, attended Hebrew schools, of whom 27, or 51.9 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, 19, or 41.9 per cent, were from Beverlywood, and 28, or 58.5 per cent, were from Boyle Heights. There were 38, or 28.4 per cent, who attended Sunday school, of whom 17, or 32.8 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, and 20, or 42.6 per cent, were from Beverlywood, and 1, or 2.4 per cent, from Boyle Heights. Of the 18, or 13.2 per cent, who attended Hadarim, or Yeshivot, 5, or 9.8 per cent, were in Beverly Hills, 2, or 4.4 per cent, were in Beverlywood, and 11, or 22.1 per cent, were in Boyle Heights. 146 CHILDREN'S ATTENDANCE OF JEWISH SCHOOLS , According to Table LVII, 72, of the 206 respondents, or 34.9 per cent, send their children to Jewish schools. Of these, 22, or 31.5 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, 24, or 34.8 per cent, were from Beverlywood, and 26, or 38.5 per cent, were from Boyle Heights. Of the 206 respondents, 44, or 21.4 per cent, do not send their children to Jewish schools. Of these, 16, or 22.8 per cent, were from Beverly Hills, 22, or 31.9 per cent, were from Beverlywood, and 6, or 8.9 per cent, were from Boyle Heights. DISTRIBUTION OF CHIIDREN ATTENDING VARIOUS JEWISH SCHOOLS According to Table LVIII, 64 children attended vari ous Jewish schools in the three areas. In the Boyle Heighm area, 25, or 39 per cent, attended Jewish schools. In Beverlywood 21, or 32.9 per cent, attended Jewish schools. In Beverly Hills 18, or 28.1 per cent, attended Jewish schools. Recapitulation. Beverly Hills reported having the highest number of respondents who had a college education. Beverlywood was next highest, and Boyle Heights the lowest 147 in number of respondents who had a college eduoation. The respondents having the lowest seoular eduoation, favored being identified as Jewish to a greater extent than those who had a higher secular education. The largest number of spouses who had a college education was reported for Beverly Hills, the second highest in Beverlywood, while the lowest number was reported for Boyle Heights. In the higher socio-eoonomio area (Beverly Hills), the respondents had less Hebrew schooling than in the lowest socio-economic area (Boyle Heights)._ The data indi cate that these respondents who had fewer years of Hebrew schooling, attended religious services more frequently than those respondents with a higher Hebrew schooling. The data indicate that the relation between Hebrew education and affiliation with Jewish organizations was as follows: Those who did not have a Hebrew sohooling were less likely to belong to Jewish organizations, those re spondents who had a higher Hebrew education are more likely . to belong to Jewish organizations. The respondents who had no Hebrew eduoationwera more favorable toward intermarr1a~ Opposition to intermarriage inoreased among the respondents who had a higher Hebrew education. The findings reveal that the respondents of Boyle Heights had a more intensive Hebrew education than the re- 148 spondents of Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. The respond ents of Beverly Hills and Beverlywood had no marked differ ences in the intensity of their Hebrew schooling. The findings suggest that the greatest number of respondents obtained their Hebrew education in the Atlantic Coast area, mainly in New York. The next largest number of respondents obtained their Hebrew education in the Midwest, the smallest number of respondents obtained their Hebrew education in Los Angeles. According to the findings, the largest number of respondents obtained their Hebrew educa tion in two foreign countries, Russia and Poland, and that the largest concentration of foreign born Jews was in Boyle Heights. The number of respondents who had formal Yiddish schooling was not large enough to draw any generalization. There was a positive relationship between the higher socio-economic area, and Sunday school education. The higher the socio-economic area, the larger the number of respondents who had a Sunday school education. The data indicate a positive relationship between types of Sunday schools and family income. The higher income group pre ferred the Reform Sunday school, the next highest income group preferred the Conservative type Sunday school, where as the lowest income group preferred the Orthodox type 149 Sunday school. The largest number of respondents attended Sunday schools in the Mountain and Midwest regions, whereas the smallest number of respondents attended Sunday schools in the Pacific region. The spouses of Boyle Heights respondents received a higher Jewish education than the spouses in the other areas under investigation. Beverly Hills and Beverlywood spouses had a lower Jewish education following in that order. The spouses of Boyle Heights respondents, attended the most intensive Jewish schools in foreign countries as well as in the United states. Beverly Hills spouses at tended a less intensive Jewish school. Beverlywood spouses attended the least intensive Jewish schools. The respondents of Boyle Heights sent their children to Jewish schools moat frequently. Beverly Hills respond ents sent their children to Jewish schools less frequently. Beverlywood respondents sent their children to Jewish schools least frequently. TABLE xnvIII SlOOULAR EDUCATION: NUJIBER OF YEARS COMPLETED Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent o - 10 years 64 31.3 9 1301 9 13.1 46 69.1 11 - 12 years .69 33.5 24 34.2 29 420 0 16 23.5 13 - 16 years 58 28.1 29 41.3 26 37.7 3 4.4 17 and over 15 7.1 8 11.4 5 7.2 2 3.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 61 100.0 ~ TABLE XXXIX SECULAR EDUOATION AND JEWISH IDENTITY 151 Number and Per cent of Respondents' Secular education: J.ttitudes Toward Jewish Iden~ NUIIlber of years I· ferent completed Total For or against Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent o - 10 years 64 31.3 59 36•.1 , 11.8 11 - 12 years 69 33.$ 50 30.6 19 44.2 13 - 16 years ,a 28.1 41 2$.1. 17 39.3 17 )Tears and over 1$ 7.1 13 8.2 2 4.7 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE XL SlOOULAR EDUCATION OF SPOUSE \ Number and Per cent of tlarri.ed Respondents Years completed Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent None 14 7.0 1 1.4 2 2.8 11 16.9 1 - 2 years 2 100 - - . - - 2 3.1 3 - 4 years 2 1.0 - - - - 2 3.1 5 - 6 years 8 4.0 1 1.4 - - 7 10.8 7 - 8 years 12 6.0 2 2.7 4 5.8 6 9.4 9 - 10 years 7 3.3 1 1.4 1 1.4 5 7.6 11 - 12 years 63 31.2 19 27.5 33 50.0 11 16.8 13 - 14 years 34 17.0 17 25.2 12 17.9 5 7.6 15 - 16 years 36 18.0 20 29.2 10 14.9 6 9.4 17 - 18 years 5 2.5 - - 4 5.8 1 1.5 19 or more 6 3.0 5 7.1 1 1.4 Do not Imow 12 6.0 3 4.1 - - 9 13.8 Total 201 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 65 100.0 .... 'j{} TABLE XLI COLLEGE MAJORS Number and Per cent of Respondents Who are College Graduates llajors Total Beverq Hills Bevergwood Boyle Heights Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Medicine 3 7.5 1 h.8 2 11.8 Law 4 10.0 h 19.0 Dentistr.r 1 2.5 1 4.8 Social Science 8 20.0 5 24.0 .3 17.8 EdIleation .3 7.5 1 4.8 1 5.9 1 50.0 Fine~ .3 7.5 - - .3 17.2 Social Work 5 12.5 3 14.0 2 11.6 Other 3 7.5 1 h.8 1 5.9 1 50.0 Accounting 9 22.5 4 1900 5 29.8 Philology 1 2.5 1 4.8 Total 40 100.0 21 100.0 17 100.0 2 100.0 s """5'-".-. I TABLE XLn DISTRIBUTION OF ACADEMIC DEGREES Number and Per cent of Respondents Who are College Graduates Degrees Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cen't Namber Per cent Number Per cent A. B. 1~ 32.5 5 27.5 6 35.3 1 50.0 B. S. 9 24.4 4 22.5 5 29.4 A.. M. 2 5.3 ,- - 1 5.9 1 50.0 M. S. 3 8.2 2 li.a 1 5.9 - - Ph.' D. 2 5.3 1 5.5 1 5.9 M. D. 3 8.2 1 5.5 2 li.7 DD. S 1 2.7 1 5.5 LL. B. 4 10.7 4 22.5 B. M. 1 2.7 - - 1 5.9 Total 37* 100.0 18 100.0 17 100.0 2 100.0 * Of the 40 college graduates as shown in Table XLI, 37 received college degrees whereas 3 were graduated from foreign uniV'ersities where degrees were not conferred. I-' ¥1 TABLE XLIII ADDITIONAL NON-ACADEMIC SCHOOLING Number and Per cent of Respondents having Other Schooling Total Bever~ Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Canmercial 8 47.3 2 100.0 3 25.1 3 100.0 Trade 1 5.9 - - 1 8.3 Nursing(Practical) 2 11.6 - - 2 16.7 Art 1 5.9 - - l. 8.3 Interior Decorating 1 5.9 - - 1 8.3 Designing 1 5.9 - - l. 8.3 Aircraft 2 1106 - - 2 16.7 Drama 1 5.9 - - l. 8.3 Total 17 100.0 2 100.0 1.2 100.0 3 100.0 J-I V\ V\ "1i'i;4Itii!#!!iMi.tA!~~~1<"'l\§\"!"'!'1'~~'C''''<~''1iF'''''''''''"'W' '''E' , ,-"_. ,,- TABLE n.IV HEBREW EDUCATION: NUMBER OF YEARS COMPLETED Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Bever1zHills BeverJpuod Boyle Heights Nlaber Per cent Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent NmRber Per cent o - 4 years 52 25.3 15 21.5 1k 20.3 23 34.2 5 - 8 years h4 21.3 II 15.6 18 26.1 15 22.!I. 9 - 16 years 23 1l.2 9 12.8 6 8.7 .8 12.0 None 87 42.2 35 50.1 31 44.9 21 31.4 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 !-J ~ TABLE nv BEERa' EDUCATION AND ATTENDANCE OF RELIGIOUS SERVICES Number and Per cent of Respondents A.ttending Religious services Number of All High Do not years completed Total holidays - holidays onl7 attend at all Number Per cent Number Per cent NmIlber Per cent Number Per cent o - 4 years 52 25.3 15 34.9 23 22.8 14 22.9 5 - 8 years 44 21.3 13 28.9 23 22.8 8 13.1 9 - 16 years 23 1l.2 8 18.1 11 10.7 4 6.6 None 87 42.2 8. 18.1 44 43.7 35 57.4 Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 101 100.0 61 100.0 I--' V1, ~ TABLE XLVI HEBREW EDUCATION AND JEWISH ORGANIZATION AFFILIATION Number and Per cent of Respondents Affiliated With Jewish Org~zations Number of years 'fotal Affiliated. Not affiliated completed Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 0 - 4 years ,2 2,.3 24 24.4 28 26.2 , - 8 years 21.3 30 30.6 11.8 9 - 16 years 23 11.2 1, 1,.4 8 6.0 None 87 42.2 29 29.6 ,8 ,6.0 'fotal 206 100.0 98 100.0 108 100.0 TABLE XLVII HEBREW EDUCATION AND INTERMARRIAGE I-' ~ TABLE DoVIII HEBREW EDUCATION: TYPE OF SCHOOL ATTENDED Number and Per cent o£ Respondents 'Who Attended Hebrew Schools Type of school Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Bolle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Num.ber Per cent 3 - day-a-week 14 11.7 5 14.3 6 15.9 3 6.5 5 - day-a-week 59 49.6 18 51.4 19 50.1 22 48.3 A11-day (parochial) 2 1.7 - - - - 2 4.4 Hebrew High SChool 2 1.7 - - 1 2.6 1 2.2 Higher Jewish education 7 5.8 3 8.5 2 5.2 2 4.4 Private tu1ioring 11 9.3 3 B.5 5 13.1 3 6.5 Heder, Yeshivah 22 IB.5 6 17.3 5 13.1 11 23.3 Jewish cormmmi ty school 2 1.7 - - - - 2 4.4 Total 119 100.0 35 100.0 3B 100.0 46 100.0 J--.I g)' TABLE XLIX HEBREW' EDUCATION: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION (UNITED STATES OF Al1ERICA) Number and Per cent of Respondents who attended Hebrew Schools in United States of America Region Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Los Angeles County 11. 17.4 1 4.6 6 18.8 4 44.5 Other California .except Los Angeles 1 1.6 - - 1 3.2 Pacific 2 3.1 - - 2 6.3 Mountain 1 1.6 - - 1 3.2 Midwest 14 22.4 1 31.6 6 18.8 1 11.1 New England 3 4.8 2 9.3 1 302 Middle and South Atlantic 21 42.8 10 45.3 15 46.5 2 22.2 Unlisted Region 4 6.3 2 9.2 - - 2 22.2 Total 63 100.0 22 100.0 32 100.0 9 100.0 I-' ~ f'"' TABLE L HEBREW EDUCATION: FOREIGN COUNTRIES Number and Per cent of Respondents who attended Hebrew Schools in Foreign Countries Country Total Beverly Hills Beverly1rood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent lfumberPer ceni; Russia 24 43.7 2 15.4 3 60.0 19 52.9 Poland, Galicia 11 20.7 2 15.4 - - 9 25.1 Latvia, Lithuania 3 5.5 2 15.4 - - 1 2.7 Rumania 2 3.7 2 15.4 GemaDy 1 1.9 1 7.6 Austria 6 11.5 2 15.4 1, 20.0 3 8.3 France 1 1.9 - - - - 1 2.7 Hangary,Czechos1ovakia 3 5.5 2 15.4 - - 1 2.7 Palestine 2 3.7 - - - - 2 5.6 Canada 1 1.9 - - 1 20.0 Total 54 100.0 13 100.0 5 100.0 36 100.0 ~ V" TABLE LI lIDDISH EDUCATION Number and Per cent 0:£ Respondents Number of years Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights completed Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less than. a year 1 .5 - - 1 1.5 1 - 2 years 6 2.9 1 1.5 4 5.7 1 1.5 3 - 4 years 4 2.0 3 4.2 - - 1 1.5 5 - 6 years 4 2.0 2 2.9 - - 2 3.0 7 - 8 years 9 - 10 years 2 .9 - - 1 1.5 1 1.5 None 189 91.7 64 91.4 63 91.3 62 92.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ..... e TABLE Lll SUNDAY SCHOOL EDUCATION: NUMBER OF YEARS COKPLETED Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverlz Hills Bever1ywood Boyle Heights Nnmber Per cent Number Per cent Number Percent Number Per cent 1 - 10 years 37 18.0 22 ' 31.4 12 17.4 3 4.5 10 years and over 2 1.0 - - 2 3.0 None 167 81.0 48 $_6 55 79.6 64 95.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 10000 67 100.0 I-' ~ l'F"~~",.," TABLE LIII SUNDA.Y SCHOOL EDUCA.TION= TYPE OF SCHOOL Number and Per cent of Respondents having attended Bundcv School Type of School Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent NtDI1ber Per cent Orthodox 3 7.9 - - 2 1403 1 33.3 Conservative 15 39.5 10 47.7 4 26.5 1 33.3 Reform 20 52.6 11 52.3 8 57.2 1 33.4 'fatal 38 100.0 21 100.0 14 100.0 3 100.0 I-' Sl TABLE LIV SUNDAY SCHOOL EDUCATION: REGIONAL DISTRIBUTION llum.ber and Per cent of Besponden1is hav.lng attended Stm:iq School in United States of America Region Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent lfumber Per cent Number Per cent NUIIlber Per cent Pacific 8 ·21.4 4 18.9 4 28.6 Mountain, South ,3.2 ,7.3 and lidwest 20 12 5 3,.7 3 100.0 New England, tid 2,.4 , and South Atlantic 10 23.8 5 35.7 Total 38 100.0 21 100.0 14 100.0 3 100.0 f-I ~ .. TABLE LV JEWISH EDUCATION OF SPOUSE: NUMBER OF YEARS COMPLETED Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Ntmlber Per cent Unknown number of years 14 6.8 7 9.9 2 2.9 5 705 Less than a year 2 1.0 2 20 9 - -- -- -- I - 2 years 19 9.3 7 9.9 B 11.6 4 5.9 3 - 4 years 36 17.4 15 21.5 15 21.8 6 8.9 5 - 6 years 43 20.8 1.5 21.5 10 14•.5 18 26.9 7 - 8 years 16 7.7 6 805 4 .507 6 8.9 9 - 10 years 11 5.4 4 5.7 2 2.9 5 7.6 11 - 12 years 8 3.8 2 2.9 4 5.7 2 3.0 13 - 14 years 4 1 09 - - - -- 4 ,.9 15 - 16 years 2 1.0 - -- I 1.5 1 1•.5 None 46 2204 11 15.1 21 30.5 14 20.9 Single, no spouse 5 2.5 1 1., 2 2.9 2 3.0 Total 206 1000 0 70 100.0 69 100.0 61 100.0 ~ 0\ -.J TABLE LVI JEWISH EDUCATION OF SPOUSE: TYPE OF SCHOOL Number and Per cent of Respondents' Spouses having attended Jewish. Schools Total Beverly Hills Bever~od Boyle Heights Number Per Cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Hebrew school 74 49.5 27 51.9 19 41.9 All-day school 1 .6 Heder, Yeshivah. 18 13.2 5 9.8 2 4.4 Private (Hebrew) 3 1.8 -- - 3 6.7 Hebrew High School G 3.1 1 1.8 1 2.2 Wormen's Circle 4 2.2 2 307 1 2.2 Yiddish (private) 2 1.2 Sunday School-Drthodox 2 1.2 - - 2 4.4 Sunday School--Conservative 15 12.1 1 13.4 7 16.3 Sunday School-Reform. 21 15.1 10 19.h 11 21.9 Total 146 100.0 52 100.0 146 100.0 28 58.5 1 2.4 11 22.1 - 4 8.h 1 2.2 2 4.0 - 1 2.4 48 100.0 I-' ~ TABLE LVII CHILDRENI S ATTENDANCE OF JEWISH SCHOOLS Humber and Per cent ot Respondents . Total Beverly HUls Bever1ywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Attend 72 .34.9 22 31.5 24 34.8 26 38.8 Do not attend 44 21.4 16 22.8 22 31.9 6 8.9 Too young 28 13.5 7 9.9 15 21.7 6 8.9 Too old 46 22.4 17 24.3 6 8.7 23 34.4 Single, respondent 1 .5 - - - - 1 1.5 Reported having no children 15 7.3 8 li.5 2 2.9 5 7.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 f-I $ TABLE LVIII DISTRIBUTION OF CHILDREN ATTENDING VARIOUS JEWISH SCHOOLS Number and Per cent of Children Attellding Jewish Schools School Total Beverly Hillfj Beverlywood Boyle Heights OlJ'DlPic Center Temple »n.anuel Tem.ple Isaiah. Anshey kat West. Los Angeles Wilshire Temple B'nai Reuben Los Angeles Jewish Academy* Yiddish High SCOOGI University Synagogu.e Other Total N'Ulll.ber Per cent Nmmber Per cent NUmber Per cent Num.ber Per cent 5 7.8 2 11.2 3 14.3 4 6.3 3 16.7 1 4.8 2 3.1 - - 2 9.5 2 3.1 -- -- 2 9.5 4 6.3 3 1607 1 40 8 2 3.1 1 5.5 1 4.8 5 7.8 1 5.5 4 19.1 15 23.5 - - - - 15 60 0 0 1 1.5 - - - - 1 4.0 1 1.5 1 5.5 23 36.0 7 38.9 7 33.2 9 .360 0 64 100.0 18 10000 21 1000 0 25 100.0 * Los Angeles Academy is a parochial school. See Table CXXX, "Attitude Toward Jewish Parochial Schools, p. 38.3. l-' -.:J o CHAPTER VIII ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING RELIGIOUS FACTORS Religion is one of the strongest cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews. Various forms of relationships between religion and other cultural factors are indicated in Tables LIX-XCII (pp. 198-260), for the following topics which are in some degree criteria of the orthodoxy of the respondents: Religious preference; religious preference and intermarriage; religious prefer ence and attitude toward being identified as Americans in traits other than religion; religious preference and sepa ration from religio-ethnic group; religious preference and preference for Jewish neighbors; distance of synagogue from home; attendance of religious services; synagogue affilia tion; synagogue confirmants; distribution of synagogue member~hip; active in synagogue; type of activity in synagogue; number holding office in synagogue; familiarity with Jewish ritual terms; Jewish ritual terms and attitude toward being identified as Jewish; Bar-Mitzvah ceremony; circumcision performer; display of mezuzah; observance of Jewish dietary laws; dietary laws and foreign versus native born; serving of meat and dairy products; matzos versus bread on Passover; Yom Kippur fast; Seder celebration; home Christmas tree decoration; home Christmas tree decoration 172 and listening to "Eternal Light" radio program; home ~ Christmas tree decoration and narration of Jewish stories to children; home Christmas tree decoration and intermar- riage; working on the sabbath; Friday night candle lightin~ Friday night candle lighting and foreign versus native born; Yom Kippur public school attendance; Jewish holidays attendance of public school (excluding Yom Kippur); marriage celebrant. There are three major movements in the Jewish reli g~on: the Orthodox, Conservative and Reform. The Orthodox being the most fundamentalist of the three, the Conserva tive somewhat more liberal in interpretation of Judaism, while the Reform represents the most liberal interpretation . of Judaism. There are considerable differenooa in values and attitudes among the respondents of each major Jewish religious grouping. The Reform Jew, for example, expressed no preference for Jewish neighbors, while the Orthodox Jew, preferred Jewish neighbors. The Reform Jew desired to be identified as an American, religion excepted, while the Orthodox Jew wanted to be identified as Jewish. RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE According to Table LIX, 30 of the Boyle Heights re spondents, or 44.7 per cent, preferred orthodoxy as their 173 religious identification. The corresponding percentages for Beverlywood and Beverly Hilla were: 7 cases, or 10.2 per cent, and 5 cases, or 7.1 per cent, respectively. In Beverly Hills 28 respondents, or 37.2 per cent, preferred Reform, 24 cases, or 34.7 per cent, preferred Reform in Beverlywood, but only 7 cases, or 10.5 per cent, preferred Reform in Boyle Heights. The figures for other religious preferences were fairly similar from area to area: Boyle Heights 20, or 29.9 per cent; Beverly Hills 15, or 21.5 per cent; and Beverlywood 14, or 20.4 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND INTERMARRIAGE BETWEEN JEW AND NON-JEW According to Table LX, 25, or 56.9 per cent, who favored intermarriage indicated a religious preference other than Orthodox, Conservative or Reform; but of those opposing intermarriage 95, or$9.6 per cent, identified Orthodox~ Conservative or Reform as their religious prefer- ence. Of the 206 respondents 42, or 19.9 per cent, were Orthodox, of whom 37, or 34.9 per cent, were against inter marriage. Only 5, or 8.7 per cent, stated that under certain conditions they would not be opposed to 174 intermarriage, but none favored intermarriage. Of the 206 respondents, 58, or 28.3 per cent, were Conservative, of whom 45, or 42.4 per cent, were against intermarriage. Some 11, or 19.8 per cent, would not be opposed to intermarriage under certain circumstances, and 2, or 4.4 per cent favored intermarriage. Of the 206 respondents 57, or 27.8 per cent, were Reform, of whom 17, or 38.7 per cent, favored intermarriag~ 13, or 12.3 per cent, were against intermarriage, and 27, or 47.1 per cent, would not be opposed to intermarriage under certain circumstances. RELATION BETWEEN RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND IDENTIFICATION AS AMERICANS (RELIGION EXCEPTED) According to Table LXI, 30, or 39.3 per cent, of those favoring identification as Americans, religion ex cepted, preferred Reform, while of those opposing identifi cation as Americans only 27, or 20.7 per cent, preferred Reform. But, 7, or 9.3 per cent, of those favoring American identification, religion excepted, chose orthodox, while 35, or 27 per cent, of those opposing identification as Americans chose Orthodox. 175 RELATION BETWEEN RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND SEPARATION FROM RELIGIO-ETHNIC GROUP According to Table LXII, 18, or 37.5 per cent, of those favoring separation from religio-ethnlc group pre ferred Reform, while of those opposing this separation only 39, or 24.8 per cent, ohose Reform. In the same vein 23, or 46.1 per cent, of those favoring separation from re1igio-ethnic group do not identify themselves as Orthodo~ Conservative or Reform. But of those opposing separat'ion only 26, or 16.7 per cent, do not identify themselves with one of the three major Jewish religious categories. RELATION BETWEEN RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND PREFERENCE FOR JEWISH NEIGHBORS Aocording to Table LXIII, 75, of those preferring Jewish neighbors, or 74 per cent, were identified as Orthodox or Conservative. On the other hand, only 25, or 23 per cent, having no preferenoe regarding neighbors, fell into the Orthodox or Conservative categories. DISTANCE OF SYNAGOGUE FROM HOME Acoording to Table LXIV, the vast majority of Boyle Heights respondents, 61, or 91.1 per oent,- lived within one 176 mile of a synagogue. The situation was different in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood where only 7, or 9.9 per oent, and 9, or 13.1 per cent, of respondents lived within a mile of a synagogue. Contrariwise, 53, or 75.8 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents lived ~ore than 3 miles away from a synagogue. ATTENDANCE OF RELIGIOUS SERVICES According to Table LXV, interestingly enough, the pattern of attendance of religious service differs only slightly from area to area. For example, attendance on all holidays was 13, or 18.8 per cent, in Beverlywood, 11, or 16.5 per cent, in Boyle Heights, and 9, or 12.8 per cent, in Beverly Hills. Complete lack of attendance was 21, or 29.9 per oent, in Beverly Hills, 19, or 28.3 per cent, in Boyle Heights, and 17, or 24.6 per cent, in Beverlywood. SYNAGOGUE AFFILIATION According to Table LXVI, synagogue affiliation is highest in Beverly Hills, 31, or 44.2 per cent, next high est in Beverlywood, 25, or 36.2 per cent, and lowest in Boyle Heights, 22, or 32.8 per cent. 177 SYNAGOGUE CONFIRMANTS According to Table LXVII, the greatest percentage of confirmants was found in Beverlywood, 19, or 27.6 per cent, it was followed by Beverly Hills with 14, or 19.9 per cent, and by Boyle Heights with 2, or 2.9 per cent. DISTRIBUTION OF SYNAGOGUE MEMBERSHIP According to Table LXVIII, there is a considerable diversification with respect to synagogue membership. Of those belonging to a synagogue in Boyle Heights, the larg est concentration was in the Breed street Synagogue, 4 cases, or 18.2 per cent. The largest concentration in Beverlywood was at the Olympic Jewish Temple and Center, 6 cases, or 24 per cent, and in Beverly Hills, the largest concentration was at the Olympic Jewish Temple and Center also, 5 cases, or 16.4 per cent. ACTIVE IN SYNAGOGUE According to Table LXIX, only 31 of the 206 respond ents, or 15 per cent, were active in synagogue leadership. In Beverly Hills 15 cases, or 21.4 per cent, were active in the synagogue, but the corresponding percentages for Beverlywood dropped to 11 cases, or 15.9 per cent, and for 178 Boyle Heights 5 cases, or 7.4 per cent. As is indicated in the Table, only 15 per cent, of the respondents are engaged in synagogue activities. The percentage may appear rather small, however, in Table LXVI, the data indicate that only~8 of the 206 respondents, or 37.6 per cent, were affiliated with synagogues. TYPE OF ACTIVITIY IN SYNAGOGUE According to Table LXX, the majority of those who were active in a synagogue in Beverly Hills, 9, or 55.9 per cent, were synagogue officers. In Beverlywood 3, or 25 per cent, were synagogue officers, but none in this category were found in Boyle Heights. The major synagogue activity in Boyle Heights, was in the field of religious P.T.A. membership. NUMBER HOIDING OFFICE IN SYNAGOGUE According to Table LXXI, Beverly Hills was the high est in the percentage of respondents holding synagogue offices, 12 cases, or 17.1 per cent. Beverlywood was the next highest with 9 cases, or 13 per cent, and Boyle Heighu was the last, with 1 case, or .4 per cent. 179 FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS According to Table LXXII, the respondents in Boyle Heights were most familiar with Jewish ritual terms, with an average of 61.1 cases, or 91 per cent, followed by Bever1ywood with 49.6 cases, or 72.1 per cent, and by Beverly Hills with 46.1 cases, or 65.7 per cent. The percentages of familiarity wi th t he ri tual term "tefilin" were reported for Boyle Heights 63, or 94.1 per cent, in Beverlywood 45, or 65.3 per cent, and in Beverly Hills 39, or 55.8 per cent. Tefilin may be designated as phylacteries, the origin of which is somewhat obscure. Phylacteries, meaning guard against evil, occurs only in the New Testament (Matthew 23:5). In the Old Testament, the term "totaf'ottl which is restricted to ornamentation of the forehead, is referred to in Deuteronomy 6:8; 11:18 and Exodus 13:9,16. In biblical times, tattooing of the fore head was prevalent among the Hebrews, it served as a guard against evil. Later, the custom of wearing ornaments on the forehead was introduced and eventually became a reli gions rite. The adherents of this custom are Orthodox Jews. Aron Kodesh, or the Holy Ark, refers to the closet wherein the Torah is kept. The following percentage of familiarity with this t&rm obtained in the three areas: in 180 Boyle Heights 53, or 79.2 per cent, in Beverlywood 31, or 44.9 per cent, and in Beverly Hilla 30, or 42.8 per cent. Shofar is referred to as ram's horn, although etymo logically, the word shofar means tuba or clarion. The shofar is one of the oldest surviving forms of wind instru ments used in religious rituals, particularly to usher in the Jewish New Year. In the religious life of the Jews, the shofar ritual plays an important role. The respondents who were familiar with this term manifested a stronger desire to be identified as Jews than those who were not familiar with this term. The following percentage of familiarity with shofar obtained in the three areas: in Boyle Heights 63, or 94.1 per cent, in Beverlywood 52, or 75.4 per cent, and in Beverly Hills 45, or 64.3 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND ATTITUDE , TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS A JEW According to Table LXXIII, 147 of the 206 respond ents, or 71.3 per cent, were familiar with the ritual term Tefilin. Of these, 137, or 84 per cent, favored being identified as Jews, and only 10, or 23.3 per cent, were against such identification. Of the 59 respondents, or 28.7 per cent, who were not familiar with this term, only 26, or 16 per cent, favored being identified as Jews, and 181 33, or 76.7 per cent, were against such identification. Some 114 respondents, or 55.3 per cent, were famUUw with the ritual term Aron Kodesh. Of thase, 107, or 65.6 per cent, favored being identified as Jews, and only 7, or 16.4 per cent, were against such identification. However, of the 92 respondents, or 44.7 per cent, who were not familiar with that term, only 56, or 34.4 per cent, favored being identified as Jews, whereas 36, or 83.6 per cent, were against auch identification. Some 160 respondents, or 77.6 per cent, were fami~ with the term Shofar. Of these 147 respondents, or 90 per cent, favored being identified as Jews, and only 13, or 30 per cent, were opposed to such identification. Of the 46 respondents, or 22.4 per cent, who were not familiar with the term shofar only 16, or 10 per cent, favored being identifed as Jews, whereas 30, or 69.7 per cent, were against such identification. BAR-MITZVAH CEREMONY Bar-Mitzvah is a solemn initiation of a Jewish boy upon reaching his thirteenth birthday, into his ancestral faith. The youth is then considered bound to observe the duties of the Jewish religion. Aocording to Table LXXIV, the percentages of male 182 respondents having had Bar-Mitzvah ceremonies were rela- tively similar for the three areas: 27 cases, or 79.9 per cent, in Beverly Hills; 34 cases, or 70.8 per cent, in Beverlywood; 18 cases, or 78.3 per cent, in Boyle Heights. CIRCUMCISION - BY WHOM PERFORMED? Circumcision is a religious rite performed on male children of Jews on the eighth day after birth. The act of circumcision must be performed by a Mohel, an ordained representative of the Jewish faith, in accordance with the Orthodox doctrine. The observants of this rite manifest a degree of adherence to Jewish traditions and orthodoxy. According to Table LXXV, 169 of the male respondents were circamcised by a Mohel. However, the figure was greatest in Boyle Heights with 64, or 95.6 per cent, having been circumcised by a Mohel, followed by Beverlywood with 55 cases, or 79.7 per cent, and by Beverly Hills with 50 cases, or 71.4 per cent. DISPLAY OF MEZUZAH The mezuzah, meaning "doorpost,tt in the religious terminology of the Jews, designates the parchment scroll placed upon the doorpost of a house. The scroll contains ~. two portions of the Pentateuch, consisting of Deuteronomy [I & .•....' ~v ~ '~ ~,-- ~{i !c _ l<· 183 6:4-9 and 11:13-21. The first portion consists of the love of one God and the devotion to Him; the second passage treats of divine retribution and man's responsibility for the observance of the Ten Commandments. The display of mezuzah represents a certain degree of adherence to Jewish tradition. According to Table LXXVI, 75 of the 206 respondents, or 36.4 per een~, display a mezuzah. Of these 41, or 61.4 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents displayed a mezuzah. The percentages were considerably smaller for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills; 17 cases each or 24.8 per cent, and 24.2 per cent, respectively. OBSERVANCE OF JEWISH DIETARY IA WS The Jewish dietary laws are prescribed in the Bible, Leviticus XI:44, XX:25,26. These laws designate the kind of food which may be eaten and that which is forbidden. Among the Orthodox Jews, the Jewish dietary laws constitute one of the major tenets of Judaism. According to Table LXXVII, 41 of the 206 respondents observed the Jewish dietary laws. Boyle Heights was the highest in the percentage of respondents observing Jewish dietary laws, 26, or 38.8 per cent, and Beverly Hilla . followed with 9 cases, or 12.8 per cent, with Beverlywood 184 last, 6 cases, or 8.6 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN DIETARY LAWS AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN According to ~able LXXVIII, there were 109 native born respondents, or 52.9 per cent. Of those observing dietary laws 35 cases, or 85.4 per cent, were foreign born, while of those not observing dietary laws 62, or 37.5 per cent, were native born. SERVING OF MEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS Serving meat with dairy products is forbidden by the Mosaic law, Deuteronomy 14:21; ExodUS 23:19, 34, 26. The Mosaic law also requires that separate dishes and utensils be used for preparation of meat and dairy dishes. The respondents who observe these laws manifest positive attitudes toward orthodoxy and adherence to Jewish tradi tion. According to Table LXXIX, 47 of the 206 respondents, or 22.8 per cent, use separate dishes for meat and dairy products. Some 29 of Boyle Heights respondents, or 43.2 per cent, used separate dishes, but the observants of this custom were considerably less frequent, in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, 10 cases, or 14.2 per cent, and 8 cases, 185 or 11.5 per cent, using separate dishes for meat and dairy products. MATZOS VERSUS BREAD ON PASSOVER Matzos, unleavened bread, are used during the holi day of Passover, as a symbol of the bread of affliction to remind the Jews of their slavery in Egypt. The. use of bread, or any leavened food is forbidden throughout the Passover. The observants of this custom display a certain degree of orthodoxy. According to Table LXXX, 127 of the 206 respondents, or 61.7 per cent, used matzos instead of bread on Passover. Some 54, or 80.6 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents ate matzos instead of bread on Passover. On the other hand, only 40, or 57.1 per cent, followed this custom in Beverly Hills, while the proportion dropped still further in Bever- lywood, 33 cases, or 47.8 per cent. YOM KIPPUR FAST Yom Kippur, the Day of Atonement, was instituted by . Moses. It is regarded as the holiest day in the Jewish calendar. The Jews gather £ogether in synagogues in sup plication to God to ask for forgiveness of their sins. Fasting on Yom Kippur is customary among Orthodox Jews. 186 According to Table LXXXI, 86 of the 206 respondents, or 41.8 per cent, fast on Yom Kippur. The differences in the percentage of respondents fasting on Yom Kippur fol lowed the expected pattern. Some 35 of Boyle Heights re spondents, or 52.2 per cent, fasted on Yom Kippur, in Beverly Hills 29, or 41.4 per cent, fasted on Yom Kippur, and in Beverlywood 22, or 38.1 per cent, fasted on Yom Kippur. SEDER CELEBRATION The term Jt Seder" meaning order, or arrangement, designates the name of the home service held on the first two evenings of the Passover festival, which must follow a prescribed and fixed order. The Seder celebration repre sents a certain degree of orthodoxy, or observance of the Jewish tradition. According to Table LXXXII, 143 of the 206 respond ents, or 69.4 per cent, had a Seder celebration. The per centage, however, is greatest in Boyle Heights where 52 cases, or 77.7 per cent, celebrated Seder. In Beverly Hills 49 cases, or 69.9 per cent, celebrated Seder, and in Beverlywood 42, or 60.9 per cent, had a Seder celebration. 187 CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION IN HOME According to Table LXXXIII, 46 of the 206 respond ents, or 22.3 per cent, decorated their homes with Christmas trees, 24, or 34.7 per cent, of Beverlywood re" spondents have had a Christmas tree. The observance of this nonwJewish ritual also was relatively frequent in Beverly Hills where 19 cases, or 27.1 per cent, decorated their homes with Christmas trees, but it was negligible in Boyle Heights, 3 cases only, or 4.4 per cent, have had Christmas trees. RELATION BETWEEN CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION IN HOME AND LISTENING TO "ETERNAL LIGHT" RADIO According to Table LXXXIV, 46 of the 206 respondents decorated their homes with a Christmas tree. Of those listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program 112 cases, or 97.4 per cent, did not have a Christmas tree, while of those not listening to this prQgram 48, or 52.8 per cent, abstained from participating in this non-Jewish custom. RELATION BETWEEN CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION IN HOME AND NARRATION OF JEWISH STORIES TO CHILDREN According to Table LXXXV, 46, of the 206 respondents, or 22.3 per cent, had Christmas trees in their homes. Of 188 those narrating Jewish stories to ohildren only 6, or 6.8 per oent, had a Christmas tree. Some 24, or 46.4 per oent, who did not narrate Jewish stories to ohildren had Christ- mas trees. Of the 206 respondents 160, or 77.7 per cent, did not have Christmas trees. Of these: 81, or 93.2 per cent, narrated Jewish stories. Only 29, or 53.6 per cent, who did not narrate Jewish stories to children had no Christmas trees. RELATION BETWEEN CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION IN HOME AND INTERMARRIAGE According to Table LXXXVI, 35 respondents, or 79.9 per cent, who favored intermarriage had Christmas trees, but of those opposing intermarriage only 1, or .9 per oent, had a Christmas tree. WORKING ON THE SABBATH Working on the Sabbath is forbidden by the Mosaic law, Exodus 20:10. Abstaining from work on the Sabbath ! represents a high degree:of orthodoxy in the Jewish religion. Acoording to Table LXXXVII, in all three areas the majority of the respondents did not objeot to working on the Sabbath. However, this majority was smallest in Boyle ~.\ i;i:, ~" ~, ~ ~:". " L; to, ; 1891 Heights with 45, or 67.2 per cent, working on the Sabbath. The corresponding figures for Beverly Hills and Beverlywood were 59, or 84.2 per cent, and 60, or 86.9 per cent, respectively. FRIDAY NIGHT CANDLE LIGHTING On Friday night, the mother lights the Sabbath oandles, these are usually two, but sometimes seven. The lighting of candles is a sign of joy, the joy of Sabbath and family union. The observants of this custom manifest positive attitudes toward the Jewish tradition. According to Table LXXXVIII, a considerably larger number of respondents in Boyle Heights partook in the Friday night candle lighting ceremony, than respondents either in Beverly Hil~s or Beverlywood. Some 43 cases, or 64.1 per cent, of those lighting candles were in Boyle Heights, while the relevant figures for Beverly Hills and Beverlywood were 20 cases, or 28.5 per cent, and 18 cases, or 21.6 per cent, respectively. RELATION BETWEEN FRIDAY NIGHT CANDLE LIGHTING AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN According to Table LXXXIX, the majority of those lighting candles were foreign born, 32 of the 48 190 respondents, or 66.7 per cent, while the majority of those not lighting candles, 46 of the 71 respondents, or 64.7 per cent, were native born. These figures pertain only to married women, because married women only are required to light candles. YOM KIPPUR PUBLIC SCHOOL ATTENDANCE According to Table XC, public school attendance on Yom Kippur was more frequent in Beverly Hills and Beverly wood than it was in Boyle Heights. The figures for the three areas showed that Beverly Hilla led with 9 cases, or 12.9 per cent, attending school on Yom Kippur, followed by Beverlywood with 8 cases, or 11.6 per cent, and by Boyle Heights 1 case, or 1.5 per cent. However, it must be recognized that in each of these three areas there was a considerable number of cases of households without children, or with children over, or under school age and of single respondents. PUBLIC SCHOOL ATTENDANCE ON JEWISH HOLIDAYS OTHER THAN YOM KIPPUR According to Table XCI, the percentage of cases refraining from attending school on Jewish holidays, other than Yom Kippur, was the highest in Boyle Heights, 21 cases, 191 or 31.4 per cent, Beverly Hills was next with 17 cases, or 24.3 per cent, and it was followed by Beverlywood with 14 cases, or 20.3 per cent. MARRIAGE CELEBRANT According to Table XCII, 163 of the 206 respondents, or 79.1 per cent, were married by a Rabbi. However, 15 re spondents, or 21.4 per oent, in Beverly Hills were married by a Justice of the Peace. In Beverlywood 12 respondents, or 17.3 per cent, were married by a Justice of the Peace. In Boyle Heights 8 respondents, or 11.9 per cent, were married by a Justice of the Peace. Of the 206 respondents 3, or 2.5 per cent, were married by a Christian minister. Two, or 2.9 per cent, and I, or 1.5 per cent, were reported for Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, respectively. Recapitulation. Orthodoxy was greatest in Boyle Heights, followed by Beverlywood and Beverly Hills in that order. The Reform group was highest in Beverly Hills, followed by Beverlywood and Boyle Heights. There was a positive relationship between a specific religious affili ation and opposition to intermarriage. The Orthodox group was most opposed to intermarriage, the Conservative group - less opposed to intermarriage, and the Reform group least 192 opposed to intermarriage. The Reform group was most desirous to be identified as Americans, religion excepted. The Conservative and the Orthodox groups followed in that order. This may imply that more persons moving away from Orthodox toward Reform identification also preferred identification as Americans. An attitude favoring separation from the re1igio-ethnic group, tends to be associated with a, moving away from orthodoxy towa~d Reform and toward non-identification with Jewish religious categories. The finding support the hypothesis that a lack of preference for Jewish neighbors tends to be associated with the Reform group, or non-identification with one of the three major Jewish religious groups. In Boyle Heights, w~ere greater orthodoxy prevailed, the respondents lived within one mile of a synagogue. In Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, the vast majority of the respondents lived more than three miles away from a syna gogue. There were no marked differences from area to area with regard to attendance of religious services, they followed a similar pattern in the three areas under invest~ gation. Syna~gue affiliation was highest in Beverly Hills, next highest in Beverlywood and lowest in Boyle Heights. The findings may imply that synagogue membership :..<_-- 193 is associated with the family income. The respondents of Boyle Heights, being in the lowest socio-economic area, of the three studied, were unable to pay the required membership fees. The largest number of confirmants were found in Beverlywood. Beverly Hills and Boyle Heights followed in that order. Synagogue confirmation is practiced primarily by Reform and Conservative synagogues. This may acoount for the small number of confirmants in Boyle Heights. In Boyle Heights, the largest concentration of syna gogue membership was in the Breed street Synagogue. In Beverlywood and Beverly Hills, the largest concentration of synagpgue membership was in the Olympic Jewish Temple and ~ Center. The number of active members in synagogues was small in all three areas. At the present time, no infer ences may be drawn with regard to active synagogu member- ship. The respondents were engaged in two major ctivities: synagogue officers and religious school P.T.A. B verly Hills was the highest in number of respondents wh were ~ynagogue officers. Beverlywood and Boyle Height followed in that order. The respondents in Boyle Heights were most familiar with Jewish ritual terms, followed by Beverlyweod and Beverly Hills in that order. The findings reveal that 194 those who were most familiar with Jewish ritual terms, favored Jewish identification to a greater extent than those who were not familiar with the ritual terms. There were no noticeable differences in the three areas with regard to Bar-Mitzvah ceremonies. The largest number of respondents who had Bar-Mitzvah ceremonies was reported for Beverly Hills with Boyle Heights and Beverly wood following in that order. The vast majDrity of respondents reported the Mohel as performing the rite of circumcision. However, the largest number of respondents having been circumcised by a Mohel was reported for Boyle Heights, Beverlywood and Beverly Hills followed in that order. There was a greater number of Orthodox Jews 1n Boyle Heights than 1n the other two areas, as a reSUlt, circumcision was performed by a Mohel in almost all cases. The largest number of respondents displaying a mezuzah was reported for Boyle Heights, with Beverlywood and Beverly Hills following in that order. Boyle Heights reported the largest number of respon~ ents obserVing Jewish dietary laws, Beverly Hills and Beverlywood followed in that order. The findings indicated a positive relationship between observance of Jewish dietary laws and foreign born respondents. Usually, the foreign 195 born respondents observed Jewish dietary laws, whereas, only a small peroentage of native born respondents observed the Jewish dietary laws. The largest number of respondents who used separate dishes for meat and dairy produots were found in Boyle Heights, but the observants of this custom were considerably fewer in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. The largest number of respondents who fasted on Yom Kippur was reported for Boyle Height.s, with Beverly Hills and Beverlywood following in that order. The number of respondents who had a Seder celebra tion was highest in Boyle Heights, next highest in Beverly Hills, and lowest in Beverlywood. The vast majority of Boyle Heights respondents used matzos instead of bread on Passover. A considerably smaller number of respondents followed this custom in Beverly Hills. Beverlywood re ported, the smallest number of respondents who used matzos instead of bread on Passover. Beverlywood respondents reported the largest number decorating their homes with Christmas trees. This non Jewish custom was relatively frequent in Beverly Hills, but it was negligible in Boyle Heights. The vast majority of the respondents who lis:temed to the "Eternal Light" radio program, did not have a Christmas tree. On the other hand, a large number of respondents who did not listen to 196 the "Eternal Light" radio program, deco,rated their homes with Christmas trees. Thus, a negative relationship was found between listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program and Christmas tree decoration in the home. The findings suggest a negative relationship between narration of Jewish stories to children and Christmas tree decoration in the home. The respondents who narrated Jewish stories to children usually did not have Christmas trees in their homes. On the .other hand, those respondents who did not narrate Jewish stories to children, decorated their homes with Christmas trees. The data indicate a highly signifi cant relationship between haVing Christmas trees and atti tudes favoring intermarriage. The vast majority of the respondents who favored intermarriage, decorated their hom~ with Christmas trees. On the other hand, those who were against intermarriage, usually, did not decorate their homes with Christmas trees. The majority of respondents in the three areas did not object to working on the Sabbath. However, this major ity was smallest in Boyle Heights, followed by Beverly Hills and Beverlywood in that order. A considerably larger number of female respondents in Boyle Heights, partook in Friday night candle lighting ceremony than respondents in either Beverly Hills or 197 Beverlywood. The number ot temale respondents in Beverly wood who lit candles, was the smallest of the three areas. The largest number of female respondents who lit candles Friday night was foreign born, while the majority of those not lighting candles was native born. Public school attendance on Yom Kippur, was more frequent in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, while the number of respondents who sent their children to public schools on Yom Kippur was negligible in Boyle Heights. The children of Beverlywood respondents attended public schools on Jewish holidays, other than Yom Kippur, more frequently than the children of Beverly Hills respondents. While the children of Boyle Heights respondents comprised a consider able number who refrained from attending schools on Jewish holidays. Most of the respondents were married by a Rabbi. However, the largest number of respondents who were married by a Justice of the Peace, or a Christian minister was found in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. No Christian minister, or Justice of the Peace, or both, acted as mar riage celebrant in Boyle Heights. TABLE LIX RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE lfumber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood BaTIe Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Num.ber Per cent, Number Per cent Orthodox 42 19.9 5 7.1 7 10.2 30 44.7 Conservative 58 28.3 24 34.2 24 34.7 10 14.9 Reform 57 27.8 26 37.2 24 34.7 7 10.5 Other 49 24.0 15 21.5 14 20.4 20 29.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ ()) p'" TABLE LX RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND INTERKARRIAGE Number and Per cent of Respondents I Attitudes Toward Intemarriage Religious Total Favoring Against Depends preference Number,' Per cent Number Per cent NlJIllber Per cent Number Per cent Orthodox 42 19.9 - - 37 34.9 5 8.7 Conservative 58 28.3 2 4.4 45 42.4 11 19.8 Reform 57 27.8 17 )8.7 13 12.3 27 47.1 Other 49 24.0 25 56.9 11 10.4 13 24.4 • Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 106 100.0 56 100.0 ~ '0 TABLE LXI - RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND IDENTIFICATION AS JJlERICANS (EXCLUDING RELIGION) Number and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Identification as Americans (Excluding Religion) Religious Total For Against preference Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per ceni; Orthodox 42 19.9 7 9.3 35 27.0 Conservative 58 28.3 22 28.9 36 27.7 Reform 57 27.8 30 39.3 27 20.7 Other 49 24.0 17 22.5 32 24.6 - Total 206 100.0 76 100.0 130 100.0 l\J 8 TABLE LXII RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE AND SEPARATION FROM RELIGIO - ETHNIC GROUP Number and. Per cen1i of RespoDien1is' Attimdes Toward Separation from Religio - Ethnic Group Religious preference Tota1 For Against ltmaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Orthodox 42 19.9 2 4.1 40 25.4 Conservative 58 28.3 6 12.3 52 33.1 Retom 57 27.8 18 37.5 39 24.8 Other 49 24.0 23 46.1 26 16.7 Total 206 100.0 49 100.0 157 100.0 l\) ~ TABLE LXIII RELIGIOUS~E AND PR.EFEREmE FOR JElISH NEIGHBORS Number and Per cent of Respondents f Preference for Jewish Neighbors Religious Total Prefer No preference preference Nmaber Per cent Humber Per cent Humber Per cent Orthodox 42 19.9 37 36.4 5 4.1 Conservative 58 28.3 38 37.6 20 18.9 Rerom. 57 27.8 13 12.4 44 42.9 Other 49 24.0 14 13.6 35 34.1 Total 206 100.0 102 100.0 104 100.0 N o N ~ tJt dtP "•. ,TI~I; "~r~'~··'"" TABLE LXIV DISTANCE OF SYNAGOGUE FROM HOllE Number and. Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less than. a mile 77 37.3 7 9.9 9 13.1 61 91.1 1 - 3 miles 58 28.2 10 14.3 43 62.4 5 7.4 3 - 5 miles 46 22.3 34 48.6 11 15.9 1 1.5 5 miles and over 25 12.2 19 27.2 6 8.6 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) S 'lI""-_"",!I'_@""'C"'" --- - TABLE LXV ATTENDANCE OF RELIGIOUS SERVICES Number and Per cent Qf Rfitspondents Total Beverly Hills _Be~rly1food Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Once a week 11 5.4 5 7.2 1 1.5 5 7.5 All holidays 33 16.0 9 12.8 13 18.8 11 16.5 High Holidays only 101 4900 34 48.6 37 53.6 30 44.7 Do not attend at all 57 27.6 21 29.9 17 24.6 19 28.3 Too sick to attend :3 1.5 1 1.5 - - 2 3.0 Once in several years 1 .5 - - 1 1.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I'\) g TABLE LXVI SDIAGOOUE AFFILIATION Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlp:ood Boyle Heights Number Per cenii Number Per cent Number Per cent NUIllber Per cent Ufiliated 78 37.8 31 44.2 25 36.2 22 32.8 Not affiliated 128 62.2 39 55.8 44 63.8 45 67.2 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 61 100.0 I\,) ~ TABLE LXVII SYNAGOGUE CONFIRlIABTS Ifumber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Bever;J.ywood Boyle Heights :Nmn.ber Per cen't Wumber Per cent Humber Per cent Nmnber Per cent Confirmed 35 '16.'9 14 19.9 19 27.6 2 2.9 Not confirmed 171 83.1 56 80.1 50 72.4 65 97.1 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 &; 100.0 67 100.0 N o 0-- 7'''}",-, "', TABLE LXVIII DISTRIBUTION OF SYNAGOGUE MEMBERSHIP Number and Per cent of SynagQgu.e Members Synagogue Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood . Boyle Heights Number Per cent ,Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmnber~ cent O~pic Jewish Center 11 14.2 5 16.4 6 24.0 TEmple !manuel 7 8.9 3 9.9 4 16.0 TEmple Isaiah 5 6.5 2 6.7 3 12.0 Anshey !met 1 1.3 - - 1 4.0 West !A:>s Angeles 5 6.5 3 9.9 2 8.0 Wilshire Temple 6 7.6 2 6.7 4 16.0 lJnai Reuben, Beth Yehudah 1 1.3 - - 1 4.0 Breed Street Synagogue 4 5.1 - - - - 4 18.2 University Synagogue 1 1.3 1 3.3 Other 33 42.2 13 40.4 4 16.0 16 72.7 Unspecified 4 5.1 2 6.7 - - 2 9.1 Total 78 100.0 31 100.0 25 100.0 22 100.0 N o -.J TABLE LXIX ACTIVE IN SYNAGOGUE Number and Percent or Respondents Total Beverl:y Hills Bevergwoed Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Ac1;ive 31 15.0 15 21.h. 11 15.9 5 7.4 Inactive 175 85.0 55 78.6 58 84.1 62 92.6 Total 206 1.00.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 N g TABLE LXX TYPE OF ACTIVITY IN SYNAGOGUE Number and Per cent of Respondents acti.vein Splagogues Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Member of P.T.A. 8 26.8 .3 18.9 4 3.3.3 1 3.3.3 Officer of temple 12 38.0 9 55.9 .3 25.0 Sunday School teacher 4 13.3 1 6.3 .3 25.0 Other 7 21.9 3 18.9 2 16.7 2 66.7 Total .31 100.0 16 100.0 12 100.0 .3 100.0 I\) ~ TABLE LXXI NUMBER HOLDING OFFICE IN SYNAGOGUE Number and. Per cent of Respondents Total Beverg Hills Bever1y'Wood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Holding office 22 10.6 J2 17.1 9 13.0 1 1.4 Not holding office 184 89.4 58 82.9 60 87.0 66 98.6 Total 206 100.0 70 100 0 0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) b a. Kaddish TABLE LXIII FAMILlARITI WIT H JEWISH RITUAL TERlfS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly'~ills __~~!'~_ -.13oLl.!'_Beights Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent· - i Familiar Not- familiar Total 178 28 206 86.h. 13.6 100.0 56 14 70 80.1 19.9 100.0 58 11 69 84.1 15.9 100.0 64 3 67 95.6 4.4 100.0 ~ TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERJlS Number and Per cent of Respondents b. Yizkor Total Bever1LH~l1s Bevezogw~od Boy1~ Heights Number Per cen't Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 158 48 206 76.6 23.4 100.0 45 25 70 64.3 35.7 100.0 51 18 69 74.0 26.0 100.0 62 5 67 92.6 7.4 100.0 l\) ~ TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents c. Shofar Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 160 46 206 77.6 22.4 100.0 45 25 70 64.3 35.7 100.0 52 17 69 75.4 24.6 100.0 63 4 67 94.1 5.9 100.0 I\) ~ TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TEm&S Number and Per cent of Respondents d. Haza Total. Beverl;y Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 152 54 206 73.7 26.3 lOO~O 42 28 70 60.1 39.9 100.0 46 23 69 67.2 32.8 100.0 64 3 67 95.6 4.4 100.0 I\) ~ e. Yannu1keh Familiar Not familiar TotaJ. TABLE LXXII (continued) FAnLIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents TotaJ. Beverq Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 161 78.1 44 62.9 53 76.9 64 95.6 45 21.9 26 37.1 16 23.1 3 4.4 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ TABLE LXIII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERM'S Number and Per cent of Respondents f. Tefi1in Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Namber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 147 59 206 71.3 28.7 100.0 39 31 70 55.8 44.2 100.0 45 24 69 65.3 34.7 100.0 63 4 67 94.1 5.9 100.0 I\) I-' 0'- TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents g. !ron Kodesh Total -Beverly Hills _ Bever~o¢_ !3Oyle Heights Number Per cent Number. Per cent Number Per cent Nmber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total ll4 92 206 55.3 44.7 100.0 30 40 70 42.8 57.2 100.0 31 38 69 44.9 55.1 100.0 53 14 67 79.2 20.8 100.0 N I-' -oJ TABLE LXXII (continued) FJJm,IARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERJIS Number and Per cent of Respondents h. Yahrzeit Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle ~ights " Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 176 30 206 85.4 14.6 100.0 59 11 70 84.3 1.5.7 100.0 53 16 69 76.9 23.1 10000 64 3 67 9.5.6 4.4 10000 I\) I-' CD ~ i TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH. RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent or Respondents i. Kiddush Total Beverly Bille~ _ Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per oent Number Per oent Number Per cent Familiar Not ranUlar Total 159 47 206 77.1 22.9 100 0 0 47 23 70 67.2 32.8 100.0 50 19 69 72.5 27.5 100.0 62 5 67 92.6 7.4 100.0 I\) ~ ~¢? ;"tw:'".~'-'","'i TABLE LXIII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RTIUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents j. Haggadah Total Bever17 Hil~ Bevergwood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 142 64 206 68.9 3101 100.0 42 28 70 60.1 39.9 100.0 42 27 69 60.9 39.1 100.0 58 9 67 86.6 13.4 100.0 I\) I\) o k. Kol Nidrei Familiar Not familiar Total TABLE LXIII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Nmn.ber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 178 86.4 55 78.6 63 91.4 60 89.6 28 13.6 15 21.4 6 8.6 7 10.4 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \ ~ t-' TABLE LXXII (continued) FAmI,IARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents 1. Talis Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 158 16 0 6 42 60.1 52 15.4 64 95.6 Not familiar 48 23.4 28 39.9 11 24.6 3 4.4 Total 206 100.0 10 100.0 69 100.0 67 100 0 0 I\) ~ TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TER14S Number and Per cent of Respondents m. Siddur Total Bever~ Hills Bever~~ ~y].~~tB Bomber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cen't Familiar Not familiar Total 162 44 206 7806 21.4 100.0 50 20 70 7105 28.5 100.0 49 20 69 71.1 28.9 100.0 63 4 67 94.1 5.9 100.0 f\) f\) "'" TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMTIJARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents n. Bar-Vitzvab. Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights NUIIlber Per cent NUIIlber Per cent Ntuaber Per cent NUIIlber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 199 1 206 96.6 3.4 100.0 66 4 10 94.3 5.7 100.0 66 3 69 95.1 4.3 100.0 61 61 100.0 100.0 I\) I\) +:"" TABLE LXXll (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents o. 'Magi-1ah Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent NUBlber Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 109 91 206 38.4 61.6 100.0 30 40 10 42.8 57 0 2 100.0 33 36 69 41.8 52.2 100.0 46 21 67 68.7 31.3 100.0 N N \J"l TABLE LXXII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH RITUAL TERJIS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Bolle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent . Average f811.iliar 156.8 76.2 4601 65.7 49.6 72.1 61.1 91.0 Average not familiar 49.2 23.8 23.9 34.3 19.4 27.9 5.9 9.0 Total 206.0 100.0 70.0 100.0 69.0 100.0 67.0 100.0 l\) ~ ~"':'~~;;;fR;ftS".r "~~~",::."~,~,;-:~",:,,.,...>,,.,. TABLE LXXIll J:nISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents t Attitudes Toward. Jewish Identity a. Kaddish Total Favoring Against lien Women Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 178 86.4 155 95.0 23 53.5 78 90.7 100 83.3 Not familiar 28. 13.6 8 5.0 20 46.5 8 9.3 20 16.7 . Total 206 100 0 0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 I\) f\) ~ TABLE LXXIII (Continued) JmSH RITUAL TERlIS AND JEWISH IDENTITY HlJDlber and Per cent of Respondents' At1i1tudes Toward. Jewish Identi1iy b. Yizkor Total Favoring Against )len Wanen Humber Per cent "ber Per cent NTmber Per cent Nmnber Per cent N''I1D1ber Per cent Familiar 158 76.6 141 86.9 17 39.9 69 80.3 89 74.1 Not familiar 48 23.4 22 13.1 26 60.1 17 19.7 31 25.9 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 ~43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 I\) I\) en TABLE LXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND JmISH IDENTITY Nmnber and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity c. Shofar Total Favoring ~gaU1st :Men Wanen Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 160 46 206 77.6 22.4 100 0 0 147 16 163 90.0 10.0 100.0 13· 30.3 30 69.7 43 1000 0 70 16 86 81.4 18.6 100.0 90 30 120 74.9 25.1 100.0 N N '0 TABLE LXXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent .0£ Respdndents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity d. Hazan Total Favoring Against Men W'cmen Nmuber Per cent Hmnber Per ceni; Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per ceni; Familiar 152 13.7 138 64.6 14 32.6 66 76.9 86 71.7 Not £ani1iar 54 2603 25 15.4- 29 67.4 20 23.1 34 28.3 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 I\) \.&) o TABLE LXIII (contimed) JElllISH RITUAL TERVS AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity e. Yarmu1keh Total. Fawring Against )(en W'CIIlen Number Per eent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 161 78.1 1.45 88.2 16 :31.6 70 81.4 91 75.7 \ Not familiar 45 210 9 18 li.8 27 62.4 16 1806 29 24.3 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 10000 86 100.0 120 100.0 I\) ~ TABLE. LXXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERllB AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward. Jewish Identity f. Tefilin Total Favoring Against Men Wanen Number Per cent Number Per cent ~ber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 147 71.3 137 84.0 10 23.3 66 76.9 81 67.5 Not familiar 59 28.7 26 16.0 33 76.7 20 23.1 39 32.5 ToW 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100 0 0 120 100.0 ~ ["" TABLE LXXIII(continued) JEllISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY NuDlber and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity g. Aron Kodesh Total Favoring Againsii Men Wcmen Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent lfuDLber Per cent Number Per cent Familiar ll4 55.3 107 65.6 7 16.4 56 6503 58 48.1 \ Not familiar 92 44.7 56 34.4 36 83.6 30 34.7 62 51.9 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 I\) \.w \.w TABLE LXXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY N'milber and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity h. Yahrzeit Total Favoring Against Men Women Number Per cent Number Per cent Humber Per cent NlDD.ber Per cent Number Per cent Familiar " Not fani1iar Total 176 30 206 85.4 14.6 100.0 154 9 163 94.4 5.6 100.0 22 21 43 51.2 48.8 100.0 73 13 86 84.7 15.3 100.0 103 17 120 85.8 14.2 100.0 ~ .j::'" TABLE LXIIII.(conthmed) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS .AND JEWISH mENTrrY Number am Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity i. Kiddush Total Favoring Against Men Women Nmuber Per cent 'Number Per cent 'Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 159 77.1 144 87.6 15 34.9 68 79.2 91 75.7 'Not familiar 47 22.9 19 12.4 28 65.1 18 20.8 29 24.3 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 I\) "'" \J\ TABLE LXXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AN.D JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity j. Ha.ggadah Total Fa.voring Against Men Women Number Per cent Number Per cent N'Imlber Per cant Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 142 68.9 133 81.6 9 21.0 63 73.2 79 65.8 Not familiar 64 31.1 30 18.4 34 79.0 23 26.8 41 34.2 Total 206 100.0 16.3 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 ~ 0\ TABLE LXXIII (continued) JDlISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY Humber and Per cent or Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity k. Ko1 Nidrei Total Favoring Against Men Wanen Namber Per cent Number Per cent NUDlber Per cent Number Per cent NUDlber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 178 28 206 86.4 13.6 100.0 154 9 163 94.4 5.6 100.0 24 19 43 55.6 44.2 100.0 80 6 86 93.4 6.6 100.0 98 22 120 81.6 18.4 100.0 I\:) W -.3 TABLE LXXITI (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY I\) \.V a:> m. Siddur TABLE LXXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTI TY Number and Per cent of Respondents' Atti~des T~ardJew;!,h_Identijiy Total Favoring Against _ Men Women Number Per cent Number Per cent N1mber p~ cent Humber Per cent Num.ber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 162 44 206 78.6 21.4 100.0 146 17 163 88.8 11.2 100.0 16 27 43 37.6 62.4 100.0 72 14 86 83.6 16.4 100.0 90 30 120 74.9 25.1 100.0 ~ TABLE LXXIII (contimled) JaISH RITUAL TERlfB AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents r Attitudes Toward Jewish Identit[ n. Ba,r-lti.tzvah Total Favoring Against Men Women N'tBIlber Per cent Number Per cent Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Nmn.ber Per·cent Familiar 199 96.6 159 97.7 40 93.1 82 95.6 117 97.5 Bot familiar 7 3.4 4 2.3 3 6.9 4 4.4 3 2.5 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 N go TABLE LXXIII (continued) JEWISH RITUAL TERMS AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity- o. Megi1ah Total Favoring Against :Men Women Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent Familiar 109 52.9 103 63.1 6 114..2 55 64.2 54 45.0 Not ramiliar 97 47.1 60 36.9 37 85.8 31 35.8 66 55.0 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 4.3 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 ~ TABLE LXXIV BAR-MITZVAH CEREMONY Number and Per cent of JlaJ.e Respondents TotaJ. Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent NUIlber Per cent NUDlber Per cent Had Bar-Jti.tzvah Cerem~ Did not have Bar-Mitzvab CerEmony Total 79 7,.2 26 24.8 10.5* 100.0 27 7 .34 79.9 20.1 100.0 34 14 48 70.8 29.2 100.0 18 5 23 78.3 21.7 100.0 *' . There 'Were 86 male respondents, of whan 60 bad Bar-JIitzvah ceremonies; 26 did not have. However, 19 additional Bar-llitzvah ceremonies were reported by respondents. I\) K; TABLE LXXV CIRCUMCISION PERFORMER Number and. Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent lfumber Per cent Number Per cent Mohel 169 82.0 50 71.b. 55 79.7 64 95.6 Physician 12 5.9 4 5.7 6 8.6 2 2.9 Not circ1iDD.oised 5 2.4 5 7.2 Do not know 17 8.3 9 12.9 7 10.2 1 1.5 Gentile respondent 2 .9 2 2.8 Single (female) 1 .5 - - 1 1.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100 0 0 67 100.0 N e; TABLE LXXVI DISPLAY OF MEZUZAH Number and Per cent of IiBspondents Total Beverq Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Num.ber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Have Mezuzah 75 36.4 17 24.2 17 24.6 41 61.1 Do not have Mezuzah 131 63.6 53 75.8 52 75.4 26 38.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) g: TABLE LXXVII OBSERVANCE OF JEWI~H DIETARY LAWS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly"_Hills __ Beverlywood _ Boyle Heights Number Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent Humber Per cent Observe Do not observe Total 41 165 206 19.9 80.1 100.0 9 61 70 12.8 87.2 100.0 6 63 69 8.6 91.4 100.0 26 h1 67 38.8 61.2 100.0 f\) ~ 246 TABLE LXXVIII DIETARY LAWS AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN Number and Per cent of Respondents Observing Jewish Dietary Laws Foreign versus native born Total Observe Do not observe Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Native born Foreign born Total 109 97 206 6 35 100.0 103 62 165 62.5 37.5 100.0 TABLE LXXIX SERVING OF lIEAT AND DAIRY PRODUCTS Number and Per cent of Respondents Dishes used Total Beverly Hills Beverlylrood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Use separate dishes 47 22.8 10 14.2 8 ll.5 29 43.2 Do not use separate dishes 159 77.2 60 85.8 61 88.5 38 56.8 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 N +="" -J TABLE LXXX MATZOS VERSUS BREAD ON PASSOVER Nmn~r and ~er ceny of Respondep.!B__ Total Beverly~ Beverlywood _ _ Boyle Heights Humber Per cent Nmnber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Eat matzos instead of bread Do not eat matzos instead of bread Total. 127 79 206 61.7 38.3 100.0 40 30 70 57.1. 42.9 100.0 33 36 69 47.8 42.2 100.0 54 13 67 80.6 19.4 100.0 I'\) g; TABLE LXXXI YOM KIPPUR FAST Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverg Hills Beverlpood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Fast 86 41.8 29 41.4 22 31.8 35 52.2 Do not fast li8 57.3 40 57.1 46 66.7 32 47.8 Agamst health 2 .9 1 1.5 1 1.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) fa \ TABLE LXXXII SEDER CErEBRATION Number and Per cent of Respoments Total Beverq Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Celebrate seder 143 69.4 49 69.9 42 60.9 ,2 77.7 Do not oelebrade seder 63 30.6 21 30.1 27 39.1 15 22.3 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 N ~ TABLE LXXXIII HOME CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Have Cbris1mas tree Do not have Chris1maB tree Total 46 160 206 22.3 77.7 100.0 19 51 70 27.1 72.9 100.0 24 45 69 31h7 65.3 100.0 3 64 67 4.4 95.6 100.0 I'\) ~ TABLE LXXXIV HOME CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION AND LISTENING TO "ErERNAL LIGHT" RADIO PROGRAM 252 TABLE LXXIV HOME CHRISTMAS TREE nOOORATION AND NARRATION OF JEWISH STORIES TO CHILDREN Number and Per cent of Respondents Narrating Jewish Stories to Children CbrisUnas tree in the heme Total Narrate Do not naITate Others Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cen1# Have Chris1mas tree 46 22.3 6 6.8 24 46.4 16 23.3 Do not have Christmas tree 160 77.7 81 93.2 29 53.6 50 76.7 Total 206 100.0 87 100.0 53 100.0 66 100.0 I\) ~ r,'" I TABLE LXXXVI HOME CHRISTMAS TREE DECORATION AND INTERMARRIAGE Number and Per cent or Respondents I Attitudes Toward In~rmarriage Cb.iti.simas tree Total Favoring Against Depends Men Women in the heme Per Per Per Per Per Per Number cent NUIIlber cent Number cent Number cent Number cent Number cent Have Christmas tree 46 22.3 35 79.9 1 .9 10 17.8 22 25.5 24 20.0 Do not have Christmas tree 160 77.7 9 20.1 105 99.1 46 82.2 64 74.5 96 80.0 Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 106 100.0 56 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 f\) ~ TABLE LXXXVII WORKING ON SABBATH Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverly1!ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Work 164- 79.7 59 84.2 60 86.9 45 67.2 Do not work 37 17.9 10 14.3 9 13.1 18 26.9 Not stated 5 2.4 1 1.5 - - 4 5.9 .Total 20(5 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 l'\) ~ r I TABLE LXXXVIII FRIDAY NIGHT CANDLE LIGHTING Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlyw00d Boyle Heights Number Per oent Number Per cent Number Per oent Number Per oent Light oandles 78 37.8 20 28.5 15 21.6 43 64.1 Do not light oandles 127 61.7 ,0 71.5 53 77.0 24 35.9 Single man* 1 .5 - - 1 1.4 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 * Only married women are required to light candles. I\) \11. ~ TABLE LXXXIX FRIDAY NIGHT CANDLE·LIGHTING AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN Number and Per cent of Respondents Lighting Candles Foreign versus native born Total. Light Do not lig!lt Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent Number Per cent Native born 62 52.1 16 33.3 46 64.7 Foreign born 57 47.9 32 66.7 25 35.3 Total 119* 100.0 48 100.0 71 100.0 * Of the 206 respondents, there were 120 female respondents of whan 119 are married (only' married wanen are required to light canUes). J\) \n -3 TABLE XC , YOM KIPPUR PUBLIC SCHOOL ATTENDANCE NtDnber and Per cent or Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Attend 18 8.7 9 12.9 8 11.6 1 1.5 Do not attend 95 46.1 28 39.9 39 56.5 28 41.8 Under school age 25 12.2 6 8.6 13 18.8 6 8.9 Over school age 45 21.9 16 22.8 5 7.3 24 35.9 No children 18 8.7 10 14.3 2 2.9 6 8.9 Single respondents 5 2.4 1 1.5 2 2.9 '2 3.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 N 'iJ TABLE XCI JElIISH HOLIDAY ATTENDANCE OF PUBLIC SCHOOL* Number and Per cent of Respondents TotaJ. Beverly .Hills Beverlp'ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Attend 61 29.6 20 28.5 33 47.9 8 11.9 Do not attend ,2 2,.3 17 24.3 14 20.3 2J. 31.4 Under school age 24 11.6 6 8.5 12 17.4 6 8.9 Over school age 44 21.4 16 22.9 4 5.7 24 35.9 No children 18 8.7 10 14.3 2 2.9 6 8.9 Single respondents 7 3.4 1 1.5 4 5.8 2 3.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 * Jerlsb Holidays excluding Yan Kippur. N ~ TABLE XCII MARRIAGE CELEBRANT Num.ber and Per cent o£ Respondents Total Beverly Hills BeverqwoocI Boyle Heights Number Per cent. Number Per cent Number Per c~nt Number Per cent Rabbi 163 79.1 52 74.2 54 78.2 57 85.1 Justice o£ the Peace 35 16.9 15 21.4 12 17.3 8 11.9 Minister 3 1.5 2 2.9 1 1.5 Single and not stated 5 2.5 1 1.5 2 3.0 2 3.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69. 100.0 67 100.0 I\:) ~ CHAPTER IX ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING JEWISH CULINARY TERMS The preparation of food and the menner in which it is served, is a culture trait. The knowledge of Jewish culinary terms represents an aspect of Jewish culture. This chapter is concerned with the familiarity of Jewish culinary terms and the relationship between these terms and Jewish playgoing. The culinary terms often give a clue to a given way of life which is dramatized on the stage. Some Jewish culinary terms are associated with religious practices that are no lODger continued, but food is being prepared along traditional lines. The knowledge of Jewish CUlinary terms and the rela tionship between familiarity of Jewish CUlinary terms and Jewish playgoing are indicated in Tables XCIII-XCIV (pp. 264-279). The CUlinary terms selected for this study are: knishes; kneydlech; kashe; gefilte fish; cholunt; chremzlech; homentashen; latkes; mamaligeh; farfle; kreplech; teiglech; blintzes; matzos. (See glossary, p. 434.) The Jewish CUlinary terms, as a culture trait, do have some effect on the assimilation of Jews. Familiarity with the Jewish culinary terms may retard the process of assimilation; lack of familiarity, on the other hand, may 262 facilitate the process of assimilation. FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS According to Table XCIII, 153 of the 206 respond ents, or 74.3 per cent, were familiar with the term kneydlecn, or dumplings. In Boyle Heights 64, or 95.6 per cent, were familiar with the term kneydlech. In Beverly. wood 47, or 68.2 per cent, were familiar with the term kneydlech, and in Beverly Hills 42, or 60.1 per cent, were familiar with the same term. In Boyle Heights 67, or 100 per cent, were familiar with the term kashe, or buckwheat cereal. The following was reported for Bever1ywood and Beverly Hills: 56, or 81.2 per cent, and 48, or 68.6 per cent, respectively. In Boyle Heights 61, or 91.1 per cent, were familiar with the term cholunt. The following was reported for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills: 29, or 42.1 per cent, and 22, or 31.5 per cent, respectively. Cooking on the Sabbath is forbidden by the Mosaic law, therefore, the Orthodox Jews cook their food on Friday and place it in a covered stove, so that the food may remain warm throughout the Sabbath. This cooked food is designated as "cholunt." For several culinary terms the average familiarity was highest in Boyle Heights, 62.9 cases, or 92.6 per cent; 263 next came Beverlywood with 51.1 cases, or 74 per cent; and Beverly Hills with 45.3 cases, or 64.3 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN JEWISH CULINARY TERMS AND JEWISH PLAYGOING According to Table XCIV, 153 of the 208 respondents, or, 74.3 per cent, were familiar with the term kneydlech. Some 58 of the 59 respondents, or 98.3 per cent, who at tended Jewish shows occasionally were familiar with the term kneydlech. Some 48 of the 56 respondents, or 86 per cent, who seldom attended Jewish shows were familiar with the term kneydlech. Of the 91 respondents 47, or 51.7 per cent, who never attended Jewish shows were familiar with the term kneydlech. Recapitulation. The average familiarity with Jewish culinary terms, for the three areas, was highest in Boyle Heights. Beverlywood and Beverly Hills followed in that order. The Jewish CUlinary terms were originated mainly in Europe~ Since a considerable number of Boyle Heights reM spondents came from Eastern Europe, they were most familiar with the culinary terms. a. Knishes Familiar Not familiar Total TABLE XCIII FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 185 89.9 58 82.9 65 94.3 62 92.6 21 10.1 12 17.1 4 5.7 5 7.4 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 J\) ~ TABLE XCIII (contimed) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents b. Kneyd1ech Total Beverly_Hills Beve~ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 153 53 206 74.3 25.7 100.0 42 28 70 60.1 39.9 100.0 47 22 69 68.2 31.8 100.0 64 3 67 95.6 4.4 100.0 f\) 8\ c. hshe TABLE XCIII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEVVISH CULINARY TERMS Numer and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 171 35 206 83.1 16.9 100.0 48 22 70 68.' 31.4 100.0 56 13 69 81.2 18.8 100.0 67 67 100.0 100.0 f\) ~ ~ TABLE XOIn (contimed) FAMILIARITY WITH J],WISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents d. Gefilte fish Total Beverly Rills Beverlywood Boy1e Heights Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 197 9 206 95.7 4.3 100.0 66 4 70 94.3 5.7 100.0 66 3 69 95.7 4.3 100.0 65 2 67 97.1 2.9 100.0 N ~ TABLE XCIII (cont.inued) , ' FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent. of Respondents e. ChoJ.unt Total Beverly Hills, Bever~o¢_B~le Heights ~ Number Per cent Number Per cent. Humber Per cent. Number Per cent Familiar Not. familiar Tot.a.1 112 94 206 54.4 45.6 100.0 22 48 70 31.5 68.5 100.0 29 40 69 42.1 57.9 100.0 61 6 67 91.J: 8.9 100.0 I\J C1' 0:> TABLE XCIII (contirmed) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents f. Ohrem.zlech Total Beverly Hills Beverlyw'ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familiar 94 45.6 21 30.1 20 29.0 53 79.2 Not familiar 112 54.4 49 69.9 49 71.0 14 20.8 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I'\) ~ TABLE XCIII (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents g. Hanentashen Total Beverly Hills Bever~o~ Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 159 47 206 77.2 22.8 100.0 44 26 10 62.9 37.1 100 0 0 53 16 69 76.9 23.1 100.0 62 5 61 92.6 7.4 100.0 N ~ TABLE XCIII (cont1m.ed) FAMILIARIfi WITH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents h. Latkes Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights HUIIlber Per cent NU1Ilber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Familim- 186 90.3 ,6 80.J. 66 95.7 64 95.6 Not familiar 20 9.7 14 19.9 3 4.3 3 4.4 Total 206 100 0 0 10 J.oo.o 69 100.0 67 100.0 N ~ TABLE zenI (continued) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CtJLDIARY TERVB Bumber and Per cent of Respondents i. JIaIIlaligeh '1011&1 Beverg Hills Bever1l"ood Boz1e Hei@its B1Iaber Per cent lfuJaber Per cent Humber Per cent Humber Per cent Familiar 117 $6.8 23 32.9 34 49.3 60 89.6 Not f-iJiar 89 h,3.2 h,T 67.1 3$ $0.7 7 lOeb. Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) -J I\) TABLE XCIII (contimled) FAMILIARITY WITH JEWISH CULIlfARY TERMS Num.ber and Per cent of Respondents j. Farne Total Beverg Hills Beverqwood BoTle Heights lfmDber Per cent Number Per cent Nmaber Per cent lfmaber Per cent Familiar 156 75.8 43 61.5 h9 71.1 64 95.6 Not tarail:lar 50 24.2 27 38.5 20 28.9 3 4.4 Total. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 N \j 'fABLE XCln (continued) FA1tIILIARI'l'Y WIi'H JDISH CULINARY 'lE1UIS NuIIlber and Per cent of Respondents k. K"rep1ech Beverly Hills Beverl;ywood. 'fotal Boyle Heights • NlIaber Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent Nuaber -Per can't Faailiar 168 81.6 48 68.6 ,6 81.2 64 9,.6 Not fami] 1ar 38 18.4 22 31.4 13 18.8 3 4.4 'fota1 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) ~ TABLE xcm (contiDned) FAVITJARITY 1II'fH JElg:SH ctJLDlARI TERMS Nuraber and Per cent of Respondents 1. Teiglech Total Bever~ Hill.s Beverlywood Boyle Heights ll1Dber Per cent lfumber Per cent Humber Per cent Nuaber Per cent F_iliar Not faailiar Total 131 63.6 75 36.4 206 100.0 31 39 70 hk.3 55.1 100.0 39 56.6 30 43.4 $ 100.0 61 91.1 6 8.9 61 100.0 N -.;J \J1. 'fABLE XCIII (contimed) FAMILIARITY 1I1TH JEWISH CULINARY TERMS Number and Per cent of RespomentB m. Blintzes Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Eoyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent N'UII1ber Per cent Familiar 198 96.2 6, 92.9 67 97.2 66 98.6 Not familiar 8 3.8 , 7.1 2 2.8 1 1.4 Total 206 100.0 10 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 l\) ~ 'rABLE XCIII (contimed) FAMTI,IARIfi WITH JEWISH CULIHARI TERMS Number and Per cent of Respondents . n. Matzos Total. Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights NUIIlber Per cent NmRber Per cent Baber Per cent Huraber Per cent Familiar Bot familiar Total 202 4 206 98.1 1.9 100.0 67 3 70 95.8 4.2 100.0 66 1 69 98.6 1.4 100.0 67 67 100.0 100.0 N -.1 -.1 TABLE XOIII (contimled) FAWTJARITI WITH JE\YISH CULDWlY TERMS IuDlber and Per cent of RespoDdents Total Beverll Hills Bever9"ood BOrle Heights Nmaber Per cent lbIber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent J.'Verage familiar 159.3 77.3 45.3 64.3 51.1 74.0 62.9 92.6 AV8rage not failiar 46.7 22.7 21h7 35.7 17.9 26.0 4.1 7.4 Total 206.0 100.0 70.0 100.0 69.0 100.0 67.0 100.0 I\) ~ TABLE XCIV JEWISH CULINARY TERVS AND JEWISH PLA.YGOING NiDber and Per cen't of Respondents A'ttending Jewish Shan a. Knishes Total OCcasionalJy 8eldClll Never Humber Per cent lumber Per cent Number Per cent 1fum.ber Per cent FamUiar Not familiar TotaJ. 185 21 206 89.9 10.1 100.0 57 2 59 96.6 3.4 100.0 56 56 100.0 100.0 72 19 91 79.2 20.8 100.0 I'\) \3 TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CULINARY TERVS Am) JEWISH PLAYGOING Number and Per cent o£ Respondents Attending Jewish Shows b. lneydlecb Total Occasiona1Jy seldom Never lllmber Per cent lfuaber Per cent Number Per cent Nlmber Per cent Familiar J53 7h.3 58 98.3 h8 86.0 41 51.7 Not familiar 53 25.7 1 1.7 8 l.1I..O 4h 48.3 Total. 206 100.0 59 100.0 56 100.0 91 100.0 I\) 0) o TABLE XCIV (contimed) JEWISH CULIIARY TERMS .AID JEWISH PLAYGOING Number and Per cent o£ Respondents Attending Jewish Shows c. Kashe 'fotaJ. occasiona1lz ·8eldom Never Number Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent Nlmber Per cent Familiar 171 83.1 S9 100.0 S4 96., S8 63.7 Not £amUiar 3S 16.9 - - 2 3.S 33 36.3 'lotaJ. 206 100.0 S9 100.0 S6 100.0 91 100.0 N ~ d. Gefilte fish Familiar Not f8lldliar Total TABLE XCIV (cont1Jm.ed) JEWISH CULDIARY TERMS AND JEWISH PLAYGOIIG Humber and Per cent of Respondents At\eDding Jewish Shows Total occasionall.z Se1dcm Never Number Per cent Bum'ber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 197 95.7 58 98•.3 5.3 94..7 86 94.5 9 4•.3 1 1.7 .3 5•.3 5 5.5 206 100.0 59 100.0 56 100.0 91 100.0 ~ I\) r' , TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CtJLJ:BARI TERMS AlID JEIISH PLAYGOING lfumber and Per cent of Respondents Attending Jewish Shows e. Cbolunt Total OCcas1o~ Seld_ Never Number Per cent Bmnber Per cent Number Per cent NUBber Per cent Familiar Not tamili&1" ll2 94 Sh.4 45.6 50 9 84.7 15.3 33 23 59.0 !a..o 29 62 31.9 68.1 Total 206 100~O 59 100.0 56. 100.0 9J. 100.0 '" e r",:"' i TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CULINARY TERMS AIm JEWISH PLAYGOING Number and Per cent of Respondents Attending Jewish Shows f. Obremzleeh Total Occasionally 8eldan Never Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nualber Per cent Familiar Not familiar Total 94 45.6 112 54.4 206 100.0 44 15 59 74.5 25.5 100.0 28 28 56 50.0 50.0 100.0 22 69 91 24.2 75.8 100.0 I\) 0.> +=- g. Hcmentashen Familiar Not fami 1iar To1m1 TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CULINARY TERMS AND JEWISH PLAYGOING Number and Per cent of Respondents Attendi.ng Jewish ShOws Total Occasionalg BeldeD Never Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent N'UIllber Per cent 159 77.2 57 96.6 48 86.0 54 59.3 47 22.8 2 3.4 8 14.0 37 40.7 206 100.0 59 100.0 56 100.0 91 100.0 J\) CD \J'1. h. Latkes Fadliar Hot tadliar Total. TABLE mIV (oont:im1ed.) JEWISH CULlNARI TERMS AND JEllISH PLAYGODIG Number and Per oent of Respondents Atten~ Jewish Shows Total Oooasional1y Seldom Never Na.ber Per oent Number Per cent lfumber Per cent NtDlber Per cent 186 90.3 sa 98.3 5h 96.5 74 81.4 20 9.7 1 1.7 2 3.5 17 18.6 206 100.0 59 100.0 56 100.0 91 100.0 I\) co 0\ i. Jlamaligen Familiar Ho-t familiar Total 'fABLE XCIV (ccmtitmed) JEWISH CULDlARI· i'EmIS AND JEWISH PLAYGOING Number and Per cent of Respondents AtterJding Jewish Shows 'ro1ial OCcasi0na1.ll" seldan Never Namber Per cent Nmaber Per cent lflimber Per cent Nmaber Per cent 117 S6.8 , S2 88.1 37 66.1 28 30.8 89 43.2 7 11.9 19 .33.9 63 69.2 206 100.0 S9 100.0 S6 100.0 91 100.0 l\) CP -.J j. Farfie Familiar 1{01; :familiar Total TABLE XCIV (cont1Du.ed) JDttSH CULINARY TERMS AND JElISH PLAYGODlG Number anQ Per Cell1i of Respondents A1itending J8w1sh Shows To1ial OCcasional.:b" Seldam Never Number Per cen1; Number Per cent Hmaber Per cent Jl'uIaber Per ceD.1i 156 75.8 58 98.3 48 86.0 50 55.0 50 24.2 1 1.7 8 14.0 41 45.0 206 100.0 59 3,.00.0 56 100.0 91 100.0 I\) 0:> 0:> k. Krep1ech Familiar Not familiar Total TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CULINARI TERMS A1ID JEWISH PLAYGOING NUIIlber and Per cent of Respondents A.ttending Jewish ShoWs Total Occasionall;r Seldon Never lfuIIlber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent , 168 81.6 58 98.3 55 98.2 55 60.1 38 18.4 1 1.7 1 1.8 36 39.9 206 100.0 59 100.0 .56 100.0 91 100.0 l\) co \0 1. Teigleeh Fam:iliar Not familiar Total TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CULINARY TERMS AlID JEWISH PLAYGOIHG Nmaber and Per cent o£ Respondents ~:t't~~!l8J~shSho~ _ Total OccasionallT Baldan Never Hmaber Per cent Number Per cent lfamber Per cent Ntmlber Per cen't 131 63.6 56 94.9 39 69.6 36 39.9 7$ 36.4 3 5.1 17 30.4 )5 60.1 206 100.0 59 100.0 $6 100.0 91 100.0 ~ o 'fABLE XCIV (continned) JEVI'ISB CULINARY 'fERIfS A:ND JEWISH PLAYGOING Humber 8J1d Per cent o£ Respondents Attend1ng Jewish Shows m. Blintzes 'fotal OccaeionaJ.:b" Seldan- Never lbaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Ntmber Per cent Familiar Not r-.Uiar 'fotal 198 8 206 96.2 3.8 100.0 59 59 100.0 100.0 56 56 100.0 100.0 83 8 91 91.3 8.7 100.0 {g I-' TABLE XCIV (continued) JEWISH CULINARY TERMS AND JEWISH PLAYGOING Nmn.ber and Per cent o£ Respondents Attending Jewish Shows n. Matzos Total OCcasioM11y Se1dcm Never . Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent NuIIlber Per cen't Familiar 202 98.1 59 100.0 56 100.0 87 95.6 Not £ami1iar 4 1.9 - - - - 4 4.4 Total 206 100.0 59 100.0 56 100.0 91 100.0 I\) \0 I\) CHAPTER X ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING MEMBERSHIP IN JEWISH AND NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS As a result of social interaction, men form organ izations to satisfy their human wants. The Jews, as a cultural group, formed their various organizations to promote their solidarity and well-being. Membership in organizations is a socio-cultural faotor in social control affecting the process of assimilation. Affiliation with Jewish organizations may retard assimilation, on the other hand, l~ck of affiliation may facilitate the process of assimilation. The following affiliation with Jewish and non-Jewish organizations are indicated in Tables XCV-C (pp. 299-304). Affiliation with Jewish organizations; membership in non Jewish organizations; Y.M.C.A. membership; attendance of meetings of Jewish organizations; membership in Zionist parties. The respondents who were affiliated with Jewish organizations, possessed a greater degree of identification as Jews than those respondents who were not affiliated with Jewish organizations. 294 AFFILIATION ~~TH JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS According to Table XCV, in Beverlywood the majority of respondents were not affiliated with any Jewish organ ization. In Beverly Hills, however, 28 respondents, or 39.9 per cent, belonged to a Zionist organization. Affili ation with a Zionist group was also qUite considerable in Boyle Heights, 12 cases, or 17.9 per cent, and in Beverly wood 9 cases, or 13.1 per cent. The remainder of organiza tional affiliations was scattered over a considerable number of other groups, with Jewish centers next highest to Zionist groups in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, and with the Workmen's Circle and Farband highest in Boyle Heights. MEMBERSHIP IN NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS According to Table XCVI, membership in non-Jewish organizations was greatest in Beverly Hills, where 26 re spondents, or 36.7 per cent, were affiliated with non Jewish organizations. Beverlywood was next with 20, or 28.9 per cent, and Boyle Heights was last with 6, or 8.9 per cent. TYPE OF NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATION According to Table XCVII, there exists a considerab~ 295 variation in non-Jewish organizational affiliations. These include conventional lodges, civic groups, unions, frater nities and veterans associations. Y.M.C.A. MEMBERSHIP According to Table XCVIII, in all areas Y.M.C.A. membership was negligible. It amounted to 2 cases each, or 2.8 per cent, in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, while no cases were found in Boyle Heights. ATTENDANCE OF MEETINGS IN JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS According to Table XCIX, Beverly Hills respondents led the list in frequent attendance of activities sponsored by Jewish organizations, 23 cases, or 32.8 per cent. Some 14, or 28.9 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents reported frequent attendance, followed by 11, or 15.9 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents. On the other hand, non-attendance was greatest in Beverlywood, 40 eases, or 58.1 per cent. This was followed by 31 cases, or 53.8 per cent, in Boyle Heights, and 31 cases, or 44.2 per cent, in Beverly Hills. MEMBERSHIP IN ZIONIST PARTIES The Zionists make the following affirmations: The Jews are a people, as a people they have the right to 296 express their legitimate natianal aspirations, to have a land in which the Jewish civilization may become the native civilization. Therefore, the objective of the Zionist movement is to provide a home, so that the Jewish people may reconstitute itself as a nation in its awn national territory. That national hQme can only be Palestine, the sole land where the Jews lived as a nation and the land to which they still remain spiritually and CUlturally attached. In the words of the first Zionist Congress, held at BasIs, Switzerland, in 189'7, "Zionism aims to establish a legally assured, pUbliely recognized home for the Jewish people in Palestine." In this stUdy, three of the many parties within the Zionist organization, namely, the General Zionist, Labor Zionist and Hadassah are defined as follows: General Zionist. A middle class non-socialist party holding that Israel must be developed by cooperation among capital, industry and labor with equal emphasis on each. Labor Zionist. A Zionist party emphasiZing democ racy and socialism in the development of Israel. Hadassah. All of Hadassah's work is predicated upon the premise taat Hadaaaah is an American women's 297 Zionist organization and that its educational and practical work are all directed toward tbe objectives of aiding in tbe development of the Jewish state, strengthening the Jewish community of America, and participating in efforts to extend democracy in the United States and to effect world peace. According to Table 0, among the respondents belong ing to Zionist parties, the General Zionist led in Beverly Hills with 11 cBses, or 39 per cent. In Beverlywood there were 3 cases, or 33.3 per cent, and no cases were reported for Boyle Heights. Among respondents belonging to the Labor Zionist party 3 cases, or 33.3 per cent, were reported for Beverly wood. Some 3 'cases, or 11 per cent, were reported for Beverly Hills, and 2 eases, or 16.7 per cent were reported for Boyle Heights. Among respondents belonging to Hadassah 11 cases, or 39 per cent, were reported for Beverly Hills. Some 3 cases, or 33.4 per cent, were reported for Bever1ywood, and 3 cases, or 25 per cent, were reported for Boyle Heights. RecapitUlation. A considerable number of respond ents in Beverly Hills was affiliated with the Zionist organization. A smaller number of respondents affiliated 298 with the Zionist organization was reported for Boyle Heights. The smallest number of respondents affiliated with the Zionist organization was reported for Beverlywood. The remainder of organizational affiliation was distributed in all areas without significant differences. Membership in non-Jewish organizatiens was largest in Beverly Hills, followed by Beverlywood and Boyle Heights in that order. This may indicate that in the higher socio economic areas, there was a stronger contact between Jews and Gentiles. There was a considerable variation in non Jewish organizational affiliation. These inclUded: con ventional lodges, civic groups, Qnions, fraternities and veteran associations. In Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, Y.M.C.A. membership was negligible, while no cases were reported for Boyle Heights. The largest number of respondents who attended activities sponsored by Jewish organizations, was reported for Beverly Hills. Boyle Heights and Beverlywood followed in that order. Among the respondents belonging to Zionist parties, the General Zionist and Hadassah led in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. Boyle Heights respondents belonged to various Zionist parties, however, none belonged to the General Zionist party. TABLE XCV JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS. AFFILIATION Num.ber and Per cent of Respondents TotaJ. BevergHtPB Beverlp"ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent Zionist organizationa 49 23.7 28 39.9 9 13.1 12 17.9 Jewish Centers 18 8.8 8 ll.4 7 10.1 3 4.4 Workmen's Circle and Farband 8 3.9 1 1.5 1 1.5 6 9.0 ihai Brlth 13 6.3 6 8.5 6 8.6 1 1.5 Others 10 4.8 2 3.0 2 3.0 6 9.0 Not affiliated witb. any Jewish organization 108 52.5 25 35.7 h4 63.7 39 58.2 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 I\) \0 '0 TABLE XCVI BMBERSBIP IN NOB-JmrISH ORGABIZATIONS lhDber and Per cent of ~spoD:1e~ts Total Beverly" Billa _ ~1:ywood Boyle Heights BuIIlber Per cent HtiDlber Per cent Number Per cent NtDber Per cent Belong 51 24.7 2S 35.7 20 28.9 6 8.9 Do not belong 155 75.3 45 64.3 49 11.1 61 91.1 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 VJ 8 TABLE XCVII TYPE OF NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS Number and Per cent of Respondents Bel0ng1D.g to Non-Jewish Organizations Total Beverly Hills Bevergwood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Mason 7 13.6 - - 6 30.0 1 16.7 Christian Science 1 1.7 - - 1 ,.0 Elks 5 9.9 2 8.0 3 1,.0 League of .WcmeD. Voters 2 3.4 1 4.0 1 ,.0 Veterans of Foreign Wars 1 1.7 - - 1 5.0 Unspecified 1 1.7 - - 1 ,.0 L. I. U. 1 1.7 - - - - 1 16.7 Propert,y Owners Association 1 1.7 - - - - 1 16.7 Plumbers Union 1 1.7 - - - - 1 16.7 College fraternity or sorority 2 3.4 2 8.0 Other 29 59., 20 80.0 7 35.0 2 33.2 Total 51 100.0 25 100.0 20 100.0 6 100.0 VJ ~ I"' . ! TABLE XOVIn Y.M.O .A • MEMBERSHIP limnber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverll Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent NUIIlber Per cent Humber Per cent Belong 4 1.9 2 2.8 2 2.8 Do not belong 202 98.1 68 97.2 67 97.2 67 100.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \.oJ 2 TABLE XCIX JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS ATTENDANCE Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverll HUls BeYerlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent NUalber Per cent Number Per cent Frequently 48 23•.3 23 3Z.8 11 15.9 14 .20.9 OCcasiona.J.ly 43 20.8 1S 21.S 14 20.2 14 20.9 . Seldom 8 .3.8 1 1.5 4 S.8 3 4.4 Non-attendance 107 S2.1 31 44.2 40 58.1 36 53.8 Total. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 '-'> 8 'fABLE C , ZIONIS'r PARTIES Number and Per cent ot Respondents Belonging to Zionist Parties Party 'fotal Beverly Hills Bever:gwooo. , Bolle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Humber Per cent lumber Per cent General Zionist 14 28.1 11 .39.0 .3 3.3•.3 Mizrahi ' 5 10.1 3 11.0 -- - 2 16.7 Labor Zionist 8 16.1 3 11.0 .3 .3.3•.3 2 16.7 Hadassah 17 '.34.5 11 .39.0 .3 .33.4 3 25.0 Pioneer W<I1len 2 4•.3 - - - - 2 16.7 Revisionist 1 2.3 - - - - 1 8.3 Agudatb Israel 1 2.3 - - - - 1 8.3 Other 1 2.3 - - - - 1 8.3 Total 49 100.0 28 100.0 9 100.0 12 100.0 - - VJ g CHAPTER XI ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING PHILANTHROPICAL INTERESTS IN JEWISH .AND NON-JEWISH CAUSES The Jewish people have manifested their philanthrop ieal interests in Jewish and non-Jewish causes. The two main causes to which Jews have been contributing their money are: the Jewish Welfare Agencies, and Overseas Needs which is expressed chiefly in the upbuilding of Israel. Contributions to the following causes and their relationship to identification as Jewish are indicated in Tables OI-CrV (pp. 312-333): General Zionist; Labor Zion ist; the Jewish National Fund; the synagogue; United Jewish Welfare Fund; contributions to non-Jewish causes. A show ing is also made of the relationship between the making of contributions to non-Jewish causes and the attitudes of the contributors toward being 1d entified as Jews. The nature of the philanthropic interests of the respondents may be so restricted to contributions to Jewish causes as to retard their response to the process of as similation. On the other hand, some respondents have contributed more or less freely to non-Jewish causes, and only negligibly to Jewish causes, which, it is believed indicates a positive relation between philanthropic contri butions and the process or assimilation. 306 CONTRIBUTIONS TO ZIONIST CAUSES According to Table CI, the following contributions to Zionist causes were made: General Zionist. Of the 206 respondents, 188, or 91.2 per cent, did not contribute to that cause. No con tribution to this cause was reported for Boyle Heights. The percentage of non-contributors in Beverlywood and Beverly Hills was 6~, or 95.7 per cent, and 55, or 78.6 per cent, respectively. In Beverly Hills 12 respondents, or 17.1 per cent, contributed between $50 and $300. In Beverlywood only 3, or 4.3 per cent, contributed the same amount, whereas no cont ributions were reported for Boyle Heights. Labor Zionist. Of the 22 contributors to this cauB~ Boyle Heights led with 15, or 22.4 per cent, of the total sample with Beverlywood and Beverly Hills following in that order. The Jewish National Fund, raises money for the ex clusive purpose of buying land, and facilitating the estab lishment of agricultural settlements in Palestine. Boyle Heights reported the largest percentage of contributors to this cause with 15, or 22.2 per cent, Beverly Hills was next highest with 12 contributors, or 17.1 per cent, and 307 Beverlywood was lowest with 10 contributors, or 14.4 per cent. CONTRIBUTIONS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS Synagogue. Beverly Hills was highest in the number of contributors to this cause with 44, or 62.9 per cent. Boyle Heights was next highest with 33 contributors, or 49.3 per cent, and Beverlywood was lowest with 30 contribu tors, or 43.3 per cent. The United Jewish Welfare Fund, is a fund raising agency of the Los Angeles Jewish Community Council. The Welfare Fund allocates the money it raises to local, national and overseas Jewish cultural and philanthropic needs. Some 161 of the 206 respondents, or 78.2 per cent, contributed to the Jewish Welfare Fund. The largest number of contributor.s were in Beverlywood with 59 cases, or 85.5 per cent, next highest was Beverly Hills with 53 cases, or 75.8 per cent, and Boyle Heights was the lowest with 49 cases, or 73.2 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN CONTRIBUTIONS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS AND ATTITUDE TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS A JEW According to Table CII, 93 of the 206 respondents, 308 I or 57.4 per cent, who favored being identified as Jewish contributed to synagogues. Of those opposing such identi fieation 14 respondents, or 32.6 per cent, contributed to synagogues. Similarly, of those favoring being identified as Jewish 132, or 82.2 per cent, contributed to the United Jewish Welfare Fund, while of those opposing it only 29, or 67.5 per cent, contributed to that cause. Similar rela- tions were found for contributions to other Jewish inatitu- tions, such as hospitals, orphanages, homes for the aged, I the Federation of Jewish Welfare Organizations, and other institutions, although the frequencies of contributions were smaller than those found for the Welfare Fund and the synagogue, CONTRIBUTIONS TO NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS According to Table CIII, contributions to non-Jewish organizations were evidenced least frequently in Boyle Heights and most frequently in Beverly Hills. Some 12, or 17.9 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents did not remem~ ber contributing to a non-Jewish cause; while the corre sponding percentage for Beverly Hills was only 2, or 3.1 per cent. Beverlywood occupied an intermediate position with 5 cases, or 7.3 per cent, not contributing. The largest group of Beve~ly Rills contributions was 309 in the range of $50 - $299, 31 cases, or 44.1 per cent. In Beverlywood 38 cases, or 54.9 per cent, gave less than $50, while in Boyle Heights those giving less than $50 were 54 cases or 80.6 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN CONTRIBUTIONS TO NON-JEWISH CAUSES AND ATTITUDE TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS A JEW According to Table CIV, those respondents who fav~ed being identified as Jews 80, or 48.8 per cent, gave less than $50 to a Jewish cause, and 18, or 11.4 per cent, contributed not at all, or did not recall doing so; but among respondents opposing Jewish identification, those contributing relatively little, less than $50, or not at all, were in the minority, 11 cases, or 25.7 per cent, and 1 case, or 2.4 per cent, respectively. Recapitulation. No contributions to the General Zionist cause were reported for Boyle Heights. The respon~ ents of Beverlywood who contributed to this cause were few. In Beverly Hills, the number of respondents who contributed to the General Zionist cause was considerably larger. The largest number of respondents who contributed to the Labor Zionist cause was reported for Boyle Heights, with Beverly wood and Beverly Hills following in that order. Boyle Heights also reported the largest number of contributors to 310 the Jewish National Fund, with Beverly Hills and Beverly wood following in that order. The vast majority of respondents in the three areas, contributed to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. The largest number of contributors was reported for Beverlywood. The next largest number of contributors was found in Beverly Hills. The smallest number of contributors was reported for Boyle Heights. Beverly Hills reported the largest number of contri butors to synagogues, Boyle Heights reported the next largest number of contributors, and Beverlywood had the lowest number of contributors to synagogues. The largest number of respondents who contributed to synagogues favored being identified as Jews. The same pattern followed among the contributors to the United Jewish Welfare Fund and other philanthropic organizations. The data indicate a positive relationship between contribu tions to Jewish causes and Jewish identification. The largest number of respondents who contributed to non-Jewish causes was reported for Beverly Hills, followed by Beverlywood and Boyle Heights. In Boyle Heights, where the contact between Jew and Gentile is not strong, the respondents' contributions to non-Jewish cases were infre quent. According to the findings, a small contribution, 311 or no contributions to non-Jewish causes, was more charac teristic of those respondents who favored Jewish identifi cation, than it was of those opposing it. a. General. Zionists TABLE CI CONTRIBUTIONS TO: A. ZIONIST CAUSES Ruaber and Per cent of Respondents Total BeYerly Hills Bever~ood . Bo7le Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent NUtBber Per cent Number Per cent / Less than • 50 None and do not know $50 $299 3 15 188 1.6 7.2 91.2 3 12 55 4.3 17.1 78.6 3 66 4.3 95.7 67 100.0 Tota1 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ TJ.BLE C1 (continued) CONTRIBJT10NS TO: J.. ZIONIST CAUSES Number and Per cent of Respondents b. Labor Zionist Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent 1fmnber Per cent Less than $ 50 17 8.2 2 3.0 3 4.3 12 18.0 $50 - $299 5 2" 1 1.5 1 1.5 3 4.4 None and do not know 184 89.3 67 95.5 65 94.2 52 77.6 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ ...., TABLE 01 (continued) OONTRIBUTIONS TO: A. ZIONIST OAUSES \.U ~ TABLE CI (continued) CONTRIBJfiONS TO: A. ZIONIST CAUSES Humber ar:Jd Per cent of Respoments d. Hadassah Total. Beverly H:llls Beverlpood Boyle Heights BUDlber Per cent l'luIIlber Per cen:t Bl1mber. Per cent lfumber Per cent Less than $ 50 5 2.4 1 1.5 1 1.5 3 4.4 $50 - $299 4 1.9 1 1.5 2 2.8 1 1.4 $300 - 1m 1 .6 - - 1 1.5 None and do not 1moW 196 95.1 68 97.0 65 94.2 63 9la..2 To'tal. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ e. Jewish National FuM TABLE CI (continued) CONTRIBUTIONS TO: A. ZIONIST CAUSES Number and Per cent of Respondents 'rotal Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent NUIlber Per cent N'QID.ber Per cent Number Per cent Less than $ 50 .50 $299 23 1.4 11.2 6.7 4 8 5.7 11.4 6 4 8.4 6.0 13 2 19.2 3.0 $1000 and over None and do not mow Total 2 167 206 1.0 81.1 100.0 2 56 70 2.8 80.1 10000 59 69 85.6 100.0 52 67 77.8 100.0 ~ TABLE C1 (contimled) CONTRIBlJT10NS TO' A. zIONIST CAUSES Number and Per cent of Respondents f. Other Zionist Total _ Beve~ Hills jlever1~ood _ _Boyle Heights organizations Number Per cent Number Per cent NUmber Per cent Number Per cent L~ss than • $0 $ 2.4 1 1.$ 2 2.8 2 3.0 $$0 - $299 $ 2.4 3 40$ 1 1.$ 1 1.$ None and do not know 196 9$.2 66 94.0 66 9$.7 64 9$.$ Tota1 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ -.::I TABLE CI (continued) CONTRIBUTIONS TO: B. JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS Number and Per cent of Respondents a. Synagogues Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood ?al1e Heights NUiRber Per cent NUIllber Per cent Nlmlber Per cent Number Per cent Less than $ 50 50 24.2 10 14.3 12 17.2 28 41.9 $50 - $299 47 22.7 25 35.6 17 24.6 5 7.4 $300 - $999 5 2.4 4 5.8 1 1.5 $1000 and over 5 2.4 5 7.2 Not stated and none 99 48.3 26 37.1 39 56.7 34 50.7 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 )::l OJ TABLE 01 (eontirmed) CONTRIBUTIONS TO: B. JEWISH F'HILA.lmmOPIO INSTITUTIONS ~ TABLE 01 (continued) OONTRImTIONS TO: B. JEWISH PHILANTHROPIO INSTITUTIONS BuIIlber and Per cent o£ Respondents c. Hospitals 'fotal Beverly Hills Beverl;vrood Bolle Heights Number Per cent Btaber Per cent llmaber Per cent luBber Per cent Less than t 50 42 20.3 9 12.9 9 13.0 24 35.9 $50 - $299 6 2.9 3 4.3 1 1.$ 2 2.9 $300 - $999 1 .5 1 1.5 Not stated and none 151 76.3 57 61.3 59 85.5 41 61.2 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 $ 100.0 67 100.0 \..U I\) o TABLE 01 (contimed) OOHftIBUTIONS TO: B. JEWISH PHILAlf.rHROPIO INSTITUTIONS Humber am. Per cent of Respondents d. Orphanages Total Beverll Hills Beverlp'ood Boyle Heights Humber Per cent Number Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent Less than $ 50 7 3.4 1 1.5 1 1., , 7.4 $50 - $299 3 1.5 3 4.3 $300 - $999 1 .5 1 1.5 Not stated. and none 19, 94.6 65 92.7 68 98.5 62 92.6 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 1000 0 67 100.0 Ul ~ TABLE C1 (continued) COBTRIBUT1ONS TO: B. JEWISH PHILA.NTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS Humber and Per cent of Respondents e. Hcme for the Aged Total Beverly Bills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Namber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less than • 50 16 7.8 3 4.3 4 5.8 9 13.3 $50 - $299 4 1.9 2 3.0 1 1.5 1 1.5 Not stated am none 186 90.3 65 92.7 64 92.7 57 85.2 Total 206 100.0 10 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \..&> I\) I\) TABLE CI (continued) CONTRIBUTIONS TO: B. JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS Number and Per cent of Respondents f. Federation of Welfare Total Bever1y_HillB. Bever1pood Boyle Heights Organizations Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent lllJm.ber Per cent Less than • 50 4 2.0 2 3.0 2 3.0 $50 - 1299 2 1.0 2 3.0 Not stated and none Total 200 206 97.0 100.0 70 70 100.0 100.0 65 69 94.0 100.0 65 67 97.0 100.0 w ~ TABLE C1 (contimled) CONTRIBUTIONS TO: B. JEWISH PHILOTHRDPIC IBST:rrtrfiONS ..ber and Per cent of Respondents g. Other Jewish Total Beverly HUls Beverlytroocl Boyle Heights iDstitutions NuQiber Per cent Bmnber Per cent Humber Per cent Humber Per cent Less tbsn I 50 10 4.8 2 2.8 6 8.7 2 3.0 $50 - $299 13 6.4 8 1l.5 4 5.6 1 1.5 1300 - $999 3 1.4 2 2.8 1 1.5 $1000 and over 2 1.0 2 2.8 Not stated and none 178 86.4 56 80.1 58 84.2 64 95.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 (fJ 100.0 67 100.0 \i.J S?- TABLE ell eONTRIEUTIONS TO JEWISH MLANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS AND JEWISH IDENTITY 325 Number and Per cent ot Respondents 1 Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity Contributions to Total Favoring Aga1nst a. Synagogues N_her Per cent N\1IIlber Per cent Number Per cent Less than • So ,0 24.2 4, 27.8 5 1l.7 .50 - $299 47 22.8 la1 25.4 6 13.9 $300 - $999 5 2.4 3 1.8 2 4.7 $1000 and. over , 2.4 4 2.4 1 2.3 None and do not know 99 48.2 70 42.6 29 67.4 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE OIl (continned) CONTRIBJTIONS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS AND JEWISH IDENTITY 326 Number and Per cent of Respondents. Contribu.tions to Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity b. United Jewish Total Favoring ApinBt Welfare Fund Number Per cent Number Per cent Humber Per cent Less than $ ,0 71 34.5 63 36.7 8 18., $50 - $299 56 27.2 Wi. 27.2 12 27.9 $300 - $999 22 10.6 16 9.6 6 13.7 $1000 and over 12 5.8 9 5., 3 7.4 None and do no1i know ~5 21.9 31 18.8 14 32.5 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE CII (continued) CONTRIBUTIONS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC DlSTITUTIONS AND JEWISH IDENTrrY 327 Number and Per cent of RespoDdents t Contributions to Attltudes Toward Jewish ldentit1 c. hospitals Total Favoring Against Number Per cent IUDlber Per cent Nuaber Per cent Less than • 50 42 20.3 39 23.3 3 6.9 $50 $299 6 2.9 5 3.0 1 2.3 $300 $999 1 .5 1 .6 -- $l000.and over - - NODe and do not know 157 76.3 118 73.1 39 90.8 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 . 10<).0 'fABLE ell (contUmed) CONTRIBUTIONS TO JiWISH PHILAHTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS AND JEWISH IDENTrrY 328 Number and Per cent of RespoDdents t Contributions to Attitudes Toward Jewish Identit1 d. orphanages Total Favoring Against Humber Per cent lumber Per cent RuJilber Per cent Less than • 50 7 3.4 7 4.4 $,0 $299 3 IS 2 1.2 1 2.3 8300 - $999 1 .5 1 .6 $1000 and over - None and do not know 19, 94.6 153 93.8 42 97.7 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE CII (continued) CONTRIBJTIONS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTI'rUTIONS AND JEWISH IDENTITY 329 Number and Per cent of Respondents' Contributions to Attitudes Toward JewiBh Identity e. Hane For Total Favoring Against The Aged Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less than $ ,0 16 7.8 1, I ,9.2 $,0 $299 4 1.9 3 1.8 1 2.4 $300 - $999 $1000 and over None and do not know 186 90.3 145 89.0 42 97.6 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE erI (eontiDned) CONTl1IBJTIONS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTIMIONS AND JEWISH mENTm 330 NumHr and Per cent ot Respomants' Contribo.tions to Attitudes Toward Jewish Identitl t. Federation of Total Favorrng Against Jewish Welfare Organizations Num.ber Per cent Hum,er Per cent Number Per cent Less than $ ~o 4 2.0 4 2.4 .50 - $299 2 1.0 1 .6 $300 - $999 - $1000 aM over - None and do not know 200 97.0 158 97.0 43 100.0 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 100.0 TABLE CII (continued) CONTRIBUTIOIfS TO JEWISH PHILANTHROPIC INSTITUTIONS un JEWISH IDENTITY 331 Number and Per cent of Respondents I Contributions to Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity g. Other Jewish Total Favoring Against institutions Nmlber Per cent Bmaber Per cent lJmaber Per oent Less than 1 50 10 4.8 10 6.1 - 850 8299 1.3 6.4 11 6.7 2 4.6 $300 - 1999 3 1.4 2 1.2 1 203 11000 and O'V8r 2 1.0 2 1.2 - - None and do not know 178 66.4 1.38 64.6 40 9.3.1 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 p-. I TABLE CIII CONTRIBUTIONS TO NON-JEWISH ORGANIZATIONS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Less: than $ 50 112 54.3 20 28.5 38 54.9 54 80.6 $50 -$ 299 54 26.3 31 44.1 22 31.8 1 1.5 $300 - $ 999 10 5.0 8 11.4 2 3.0 $1000 and over 11 5.3 9 12.9 2 3.0 None and do not know 19 9.1 2 3.1 5 7.3 12 17.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 VJ VJ l'\) TABLE CIV CONTRI1lJTIONS TO NON-JEWISH CAUSES AND JEWISH IDENTITY 333 Number and Per cent or Respondents f Contributions to Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity non-Jewish causes Total Favoring Against. Number Per cent N1DIlber Percent Number Per cent Less than • ,0 91 44.2 80 48.8 11 2,.7 $,0 - $299 39 18.9 29 17.7 10 23.2 $300 - $999 46 22., 30 18.4 16 37.4 $1000 and over 11 5.3 6 3.7 5 11.3 None and do not maw 19 9.1 18 ll.lt. 1 2.4 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 CHAPTER XII ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING OTHER CULTURAL FACTORS Other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews are indicated in Tables CV-CXVI (pp. 343-354), for. the following topics: Household languages used; household languages and Jewish identifica tion; the reading of Jewish newspapers and periodicals; languages in which Jewish pUblications are read; SUbscrip tions to Jewish publications in various languages; sub scriptions to Jewish publications as related to willingness to be identified as Jewish; Jewish playgoing; listening to Yiddish radio programs; listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program; Jewish phonograph records in the home; Jewish art objects in home; narration of Jewish stories to children. The cultural factors mentioned above play an impor tant role in the process of assimilation. Language is one of the strongest cultural factors in social control affect ing the assimilation of Jewse The respondents whQ did not possess the knowledge of the English language were least responsive to the process of assimilation. HOUSEHOLD LANGUAGES There is a number of names for Yiddish in various 335 languages and by different groups of Jews. The term "Taitsh" a corruption of the German Deutsch, and "Yiddish" from ''Judisch,uwere commonly used in the older literature. As soon as the Jews adopted the German language as their vernacular they have developed and modified the language in their own fashion. Yiddish is written in Hebrew letters, for which it had the precedent of other Jewish languages, such as JUdeo-Arabic, JUdeo-Spanish and others. According ta Table ev, both English and Yiddish were spoken in a majority of Boyle Heights households, 39, or 58.2 per cent. The use of both of these languages was less frequent in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood with the corre sponding figures: 18 cases, or 26 per cent, and 9 cases, or 12.8 per cent. Also, Yiddish alone was spoken in 10, or 14.9 per cent, of Boyle Heights households, while the corresponding percentages were negligible in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. RELATION BETWEEN HOUSEHOLD LANGUAGES AND WILLINGNESS TO BE IDENTIFIED AS JEWISH According to Tab~e eVI, the data indicate that among those favoring being identified as Jewish, Yiddish or another language, whether in combination with English or not, was spoken in 81 households, or 49.3 per cent, of the 336 cases. On the other hand, among those opposing Jewish identification, Yiddish or another language, whether or not in conjunction with English was spoken in only 7 households, or 16.1 per cent, of the cases. This indicated that the speaking of Yiddish or another language was positively associated with attitudes favoring Jewish identification. THE READING OF JEWISH NEWSPAPERS AND PERIODICALS According to Table CVII, a majority of the respond ents in all three areas read a Jewish newspaper or periodi cal. This was most pronounced, however, in Boyle Heights with 53 cases, or 79.1 per cent, Beverly Hills and Beverl~ wood fol16wed in that order with 44 cases, or 62.8 per cent, and 41 cases, or 59.4 per cent, respectively. LANGUAGES IN WEIICH JEWISH PUBLICATION ARE READ According to Table CVIII, in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, English is the language in which Jewish pub lications were read. The respective cases for the two areas were 32 cases, or 45.7 per cent, and 30 cases, or 43.5 per cent. On the other hand, in Boyle Heights, Yiddlim was the language in whioh Jewish publioations were read most frequently, 27 cases, or 40.3 per eent. Only 14, or 20.9 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents did not read 337 Jewish pUblications. SUBSCRIPTIONS TO JEWISH PUBLICATIONS IN VARIOUS LANGUAGES Acoording to Table CIX, approximately one half of the respondents in the three areas did not subsoribe to Jewish pUblications. In Beverly Hills and in Beverlywood, the B'nai B'rith Messenger had the largest subscription; the respective figures being 22, or 31.4 per cent, and 15, or 21.7 per cent. In Boyle Heights, Yiddish pUblications auch as the Forward, Day, or Morning Journal were most frequently subscribed in 22, or 32.8 per cent, of the cases. RELATION BETWEm SUBSCRIPTIONS TO .rEWISH PUBLICATIONS AND ATTITUDE TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS A JEW According to Table CX, 94 respondents, or 57.7 per cent, who favored being identified as a Jew subscribed to a Jewish pUblication, while among those opposed to such identification 7, or 16.2 per cent, subscribed to a Jewish publication. JEWISH PLAYGOING Accordingte Table eXI, Jewish pl~ygoing was most 338 frequent for Boyle Heights respondents with 31, or 46.2 per cent, attending Jewish plays. Some 18, or 26.1 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents attended Jewish plays occasionally, while only 10, or 14.2 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents fell into this category. LISTENING TO YIDDISH RADIO PROGRAMS Aocording to Table eXII, in Boyle Heights 39 respond ents, or 58.2 per cent, listened to Yiddi$h radio programs. This activity was considerably less frequent in Beverlywood and Beverly Hills with 18, or 26 per cent, and 10, or 14.2 per cent, respectively taking part in it. LISTENING TO "ETERNAL LIGHT" RADIO PROGRAM The "Eternal Light" radio program was initiated by the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in order to reflect the finer points of Judaism and to promote the brotherhood of man. The program is broadcast in the English language on Sundays, on a national hook-up. According to Table eXIll, Boyle Heights respondents also listened relatively more frequently to the "Eternal Light" radio program, but differences between areas were of relatively small magnitUde, with 42 cases, or 62.6 per cent, of the Boyle Heights group listening. The relevant figures 339 . for Beverly Hills and Beverlywood were: 39, or 55.7 per cent, and 34, or 49.2 per cent, respectively. JEWISH PHONOGRAPH RECORDS IN HOME According to Table CXIV, Jewish phonograph records were somewhat mo·re frequent in t he homes of Boyle Heights than elsewhere, but differences between areas were of fairly small magnitude. Some 30, or 44.7 per cent, of Boyle Heights respondents said that they had Jewish phono graph recorda in the home. Some 28, or 39.9 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents, and 23, or 33.3 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents indicated that they possessed such records. JEWISH ART OBJElJTS IN HOME According to Table CXV, 47 of the 67 respondents of Boyle Heights, or 70.1 per cent, indicated that they had ene or more Jewish art objects in the home. Most frequently those objects were calendars and menorahs. Of the 70 re spondents in Beverly Hills 37, or 52.8 per cent, said that they had Jewish art objects in their home. Of these, menorahs and candlesticks were moat frequently mentioned. Some 32 of the 69 respondents, or 46.2 per cent, in Beverl~ wood said that they had Jewish art objects in the home. 340 Candlesticks, menorahs and paintings on a Jewish theme were mentioned most frequently. Thus, while menorahs seemed to be the most popular Jewish art object the specific pattern seemed to vary from area to area. NARRATION OF JEWISH STORIES TO CHILDREN According to Table, CXVI, telling children Jewish stories appeared most frequently in Boyle Heights, 32 case~ or 47.8 per cent. It was followed by Beverlywood with 30 eases, or 43.5 per cent, and by Beverly Hills with 25 cases, or 35.7 p-er cent. With no children of appropriate age in the household this question did not apply most frequently in Beverly Hills. Recapitulation. Trre majority of Boyle Heights re spondents spoke English and Yiddish. Speaking both English and Yiddish was less frequent in Beverly Hills and Beverly wood. Yiddish alone was spoken by a considerable number of respondents in Boyle Heights, whereas, Yiddish alone was not spoken by the respondents of Beverly Hills and Beverly wood. The speaking of Yiddish in the home was most typical of Boyle Heights households. The findings indicate that the speaking of Yiddish was assooiated positively with attitudes favoring Jewish identification. 341 The majority of the respondents in all three areas read Jewish newspapers. However, this was most pronounced in Boyle Heights, with Beverly Hills and Beverlywood following in that order. In Boyle Heights, Yiddish was the language 1n which Jewish pUblications were read. In Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, the largest number of the respondents read Jewish pUblioations in the English lan- guage. In Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, the B'nai B'rith Messenger had the largest subscription. In Boyle Heights, the Yiddish newspapers, such as, lIForward," "Day, If or "Morning Journal," were most frequently subscribed. There .. - was a positive relationship between sUbsoription to Jewish publications and Jewish identifioation. Among those opposed.to Jewish identification, a negligible number sub scribed to Jewish publications. The findings reveal that attendance of Jewish shows was most frequent for Boyle Heights respondents, less frequent for Beverly Hilla respondents, and least frequent for Beverlywood respondents. The largest number of respondents who listened to Yiddish radio programs was reported for Boyle Heights, A considerably smaller number of respondents was found in Beverlywood, while the smallest number was reported for 342 Beverly Hills. The largest number of respondents listenmg to the "Eternal Light" radio program was reported for Boyle Heights, followed by Beverly Hills and Beverlywood in that order. There were no marked differences in the number of respondents in each area who possessed Jewish phonograph records. However, Boyle Heights reported the largest number of respondents who possessed Jewish records. Beverly Hills and Beverlywood followed 1n that order. The largest number of respondents who had one or more Jewish art objects was reported for Boyle Heights. Beverly Hills and Beverlywood followed in that order. Narrating Jewish stories to children appeared most frequently in Boyle Heights, it was followed by Beverlywood and Beverly Hills in that order. TABLE CV BJUSEHOLD LANGUAGES Number and Per cent o£ Resp?ndents Languages Total Beverly HUls Beverlywood Bolle~~~ Number Par cent Humber Per cent lfumber Per cent lUmber Per cen't English 118 57.3 58 82.7 49 71.0 11 16.4 Yiddish 11 5.3 1 1.5 - - 10 14.9 Polish 1 .5 - - - - 1 1.5 Ladino and English 1 .5 - - - - 1 1.5 English and Yiddish 66 .32.J. 9 12.8 18 26.0 39 58.2 English, Yiddish and Hebrew 9 4.3 2 3.0 2 3.0 .5 7.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 59 100.0 67 100.0 \..oJ e; TABLE eVI HOUSmOLDLANGUAGES AND JEWISH IDENTITY 344 Number and Per cent of Respondents r Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity Languages Total Favoring Against Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent English only 118 ,7.3 82 ,0.3 36 83.9 English and Yidd:l.sh 66 32.1 62 38.0 4 9.2 Yiddish only 11 ,.3 9 ,.5 2 4.6 other languages 11 ,.3 10 6.2 1 2.3 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE evIl JEwIsH NEWSPAPER AHD PERIODICAL READERS Number and Per cent of Respondents Tota1 Beverly Hills Beverlywood Bolle Heie"ts Number Per cent Humber Per cent Number Per cent N'11Dlber Per cent Readers 138 66.9 h4 62.8 41 59.14 53 79.1 Non-readers 68 33.1 26 37.2 28 40.6 14 20.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 w e;: TABLE eVIlI LANGUAGES IN WHICH Jlm:SH PUBLICATIONS ARE READ Number and Per cent of Respondents Language Total Beverly Hills Bever1ywood B:011e HeigAts hmber Per cent Baber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent English n 34.4 32 45.7 30 43.5 9 13.4 Yiddish 31 15.1 2 2.9 2 2.9 27 40.3 English and Yiddish 21 10.2 5 7.1 5 7.2 11 16.5 English, Yiddish and Hebrew 15 7.2 5 7.1 4 5.1 6 8.9 Non-readers 68 33.1 26 37.2 28 11.0.7 14 20.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \.U ~ TABLE Cn: SUBSCRIPTIONS TO JElISB PUBLICATIONS IN VARIOUS LANGUAGES Number and Per cent of Respondents Publications Total Beverg Hills Bever1ywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Cal..if"ornia Jewish Voice(~g1ish) Jb 6.7 8 n.4 3 4.3 3 4.5 B1nai B'rigbt Messenger(English) 4l 19.9 22 31.4 15 21.7 4 6.0 Hadoar1 Bituron (Hebrew) 8 3.8 .3 4.4 1 1.5 4 6.0 Forward. DaY', Morning Journal 1.5 4 5.9 32.8 (nddish) 27 13.3 1 22' Other (in English) 12 5.8 4 5.6 6 8.7 2 3.0 Non-subscribers 104 50.5 32 45.7 40 57.9 32 47.7 Total. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ -3 348 TABLE OX SUBSCRIPTIONS TO JEWISH PUBLICATIONS AND JEWISH IDENTITY Number and Per cent of Respondents! Subscribers to Jewish ....;A~t;,.-t_i_tu.;.-.d_e_s-.;..To.;;..w_ar __ d_J.;;..e.;...Wl....;.·....;.s_h....;I.;;..d....;e.;;.;n...;.ti_ty..2- _ publioations Total Favoring Against Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent 7 Subscribers Non-subscribers Total 102 49., 94 57.7 104 ,0 0 5 69 42.3 206 100.0 163 100.0 36 43 100.0 TABLE en JEWISH PLA.YGOING Number and Per cent or Respondents Attendance Tota1 Beverq HUls Beverlywood. Boyle Heights Number Per cent BOmber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent -- FrequentJ..y 4 2.0 - - 1 1.5 3 4.5 OCcasionally 55 26.6 10 14.2 17 24.6 28 41.7 Seldan 56 27.2 26 37.2 17 24.6 13 19.4 Never 91 44.2 34 48.6 34 49.3 23 .34.4 Total 206 100.0. 70 100.0 (fJ 100.0 67 100.0 \.U $" TABLE CXII LISTENING TO YIDDISH RADIO PROGRAMS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nomber Per cent L~sten. 67 32.5 10 14.2 18 26.0 39 ,8.2 Do not listen. 139 67.5 60 8,.8 51 74.0 28 lU..8 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 $ 100.0 67 100.0 VJ ~ TABLE onII LISTENING TO "ETERNAL LIGHT" RADIO PROGRAM Number and. Per cent or Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlywood Bolle Heishts Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Listen 115 55.9 39 55.7 34 49.2 42 62.6 Do not listen 91 44.1 31 44.3 35 50.8 25 37.4 Total 206 lCXhO 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \..t.) ):} TABLE CXIV Jl!.WISH PHONOGRAPH RECORDS IN THE HOllE Number a.tld. Per cent of ResP9ndents Total Bever~ Hills _ Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent B'mDber Per cent Humber Per cent lumber Per cent Have records Do not have records Total. 81 125 206 39.3 00.7 100.0 28 42 70 39.9 60.1 100.0 23 46 69 33.3 66.7 100.0 30 37 67 44.7 55.3 100.0 ~ TABLE CXV JEWISH ART OBJECTS IN '!'HE HOME N'UIIlber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Bever9Wood Bolle Heights Number Per cent .Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Candlesticks 16 7.8 S 7.1 9 13.0 2 2.9 Menorah 43 20.8 19 27.0 8 U.S 16 23.8 Paintings (Jewish theme) 14 6.8 4 5.7 7 10.1 3 4.$ Statues (Jewish theme) 4 2.0 2 2.9 1 1.S 1 1.$ Religious articles 5 2.4 4 $.7 - - 1 1.5 Spice box 3 1.5 1 105 1 1.5 1 1.5 Art Calendar 28 13.5 2 2.9 5 7.2 21 31.4 Jevn.sh books 1 .5 - - - - 1 1.5 O~r 2 1.0 - - 1 1.5 1 1.5 Do not have Jewish art objects 90 43.7 33 47.2 37 53.7 20 29.9 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 v.> \J1. v.> "TABLE CXVI NARRATION OF JEWISH STORIES TO CFtJI.DREN Buaber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly BUls Beverqwood Bolle Heipts Hmaber Per cent "bar Per cent lftmil3er Per cent Nuaber Per .cent Narrate 67 42.3 25 35.7 30 43.5 32 47.8 Do not narrate 53 25.7 17 24.3 27 39.2 9 13.5 ChUdren too young 10 4.8 2 2.8 S 7.3 3 4.5 Children too old 34 16.5 15 21.5 3 4.4 16 23.8 No c)rl.ldren in farni.:q 17 6.3 10 14.2 2 2.8 5 7.4 Single respoDdents 5 2.4 1 1.5 2 2.8 2 3.0 Total. 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ CHAPTER XIII ANALYSIS OF DATA CONCERNING ATTITUDES TOWARD "JEWISHNESS" The respondents' attitudes toward their "Jewishness" are based on the cultural background and social values which they possess. Jewish values have grOwn up in the course of social interaction, and eventually assumed specml meaning for the group. The attitudes of the respondents toward their "Jewishness" are indicated in Tables CXVII-CXXXVII (pp. 370 390), in the following topics: Neighborhood types; neigh borhood preference; preference for Jewish neighbors; attitudes toward changes in JUdaism; attitudes toward being identified as Americans (religion excepted); attitudes toward separation from religio-ethnic group; attitude toward being identified as a Jew; Jewish identification and marriage celebrant; Jewish identification and foreign versus native born; attitude toward intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew; intermarriage and Yom Kippur fast; inter marriage and foreign versus native born; intermarriage and political affiliation; attitude toward Jewish parochial schools; Jewish parochial schools and intermarriage; attitude toward embraching Christianity; embracing Christi anity and foreign versus nati ve b0;r'n; attitudes toward business dealings with Jews or Gentiles; attitudes toward 356 the establishment of the state of Israel and preservation of Judaism in the United states; anti-Semitism in Los Angeles; "Jewishness" and occupational discrimination. The Orthodox respondents manifested a stronger pref erence for Jewish neighborhoods and Jewish neighbors than did the Conservative or Reform respondents. The Orthodox respondents were more strongly opposed to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew, than were the Conservative or Reform respondents. The attitudes of the respondents towaId their "Jewishness" are important faotors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews. The Orthodox respond ents were least responsive to the process of assimilation. On the other hand, the respondents who do not identify themselves with any religious grouping are usually, though not always, most responsive to the process of assimilation. NEIGHBORHOOD TYPES Acoording to Table CXVII, the vast majority of Boyle Heights respondents, 58, or 86.6 per cent, said that the neighborhood was primarily Jewish. Both, Beverly Hills and Beverlywood respondents said they were living in mixed neighborhoods, where the population of Jews and Gentiles was about the same. The figures were 59 cases, or 84.3 per oent, and 56 oases, or 81.3 per cent, respectively. 357 NEIGHBORHOOD PREFERENCE According to Table CXVIII, typically, Boyle Heights respondents preferred Jewish neighborhoods, 53, or 79.1 per cent, giving this preference. Mixed neighborhoods were the choice both in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood with 55 respondents, or 78.6 per cent, and 48 respondents, or 69.6 per cent, respectively, indicating that they would choose neighborhoods that were partially Jewish and partially Gentile. PREFERENCE FOR JENISH NEIGHBORS According to Table CXIX, Jewish neighbors were pre ferred by 46, or 68.6 per cent, of Boyle Heights respond ents. Such preference was indicated by 30, or 43.4 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents, and by 26, or 37.1 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents. Not preferring Jewish neighbors was indicated by 6, or 8.5 per cent, of Beverly Hilla respondents, by 3, or 4.3 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents, and by no Boyle Heights respondents. ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANGES IN JUDAISM According to Table CXX, changes in JUdaism seemed to be favored more frequently by Boyle Heights respondents than by the respondents of Beveriywood or Beverly Hills. 358 Some 45, or 67.3 per oent, of those included in the Boyle Heights sample favored changes, while the corresponding figures were: 26, or 37.6 per cent, and 16, or 22.8 per cent, respectively for Beverlywood and Beverly Hills. ATTITUDE TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS AMERICANS (RELIGION EXCEPTED) According to Table CXXI, 49 of the Boyle Heights respondents, or 73.1 per cent, did not favor being identi fied as American (religion excepted). Absence of a favor able attitude towards such identification was in evidence for 32, or 45.7 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents, and for 21, or 30.5 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents. Indifference towards such identification was relatively highest in Beverly Hills, 13, or 18.6 per cent, followed by Beverlywood, 9, or 13 per cent, and by Boyle Heights, 6, or 9 per cent. ATTITUDE TOWARD SEPARATION FROM RELIGIO-ETHNIC GROUP According to Table CXXII, 20 respondents in Beverly Hills, or 28.5 per cent, favored separation from religio ethnic group. The corresponding percentages were: 15 cases, or 21.7 per cent, in Beverlywood, and 10 cases, or 15 per cent, in Boyle Heights. 359 ATTITUDE TOWARD BEING IDENTIFIED AS A JEW According to Table CXXIII, in all three areas the vast majority of respondents favored being identified as a Jew. This relationship was most pronounced in Boyle Heights with 59, or 88 per cent, favoring Jewish identifi cation. In Beverlywood and Beverly Hills, 52 cases, or 75.3 per cent, and 52 cases, or 74.2 per cent, respectively favored being identified as a Jew. Qualified replies were elicited most often by Beverly Hills respondents, 18 cases, or 25.8 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN WILLINGNESS TO BE IDENTIFIED AS A JEW AND MARRIAGE CELEBRANT According to Table CXXIV, 149 of the 163 respondents, or 90.9 per cent, who favored being identified as a Jew were married by a Rabbi. In sharp distinction to this, of those opposed to such identification only 14, or 33.1 per cent, were married by a Rabbi. RELA TION BETWEEN WILLINGN:§:SS TO BE IDENTIFIED AS A JEW AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN According to Table CXXV, those favoring Jewish identification were divided almost "~venly between foreign born and native born, 84 cases, or 51.6 per cent, fell into \ 360 the former category, and 79, or 48.4 per cent, fell into the latter category. On the other hand, among those opposing Jewish identification, a higher proportion of native born was found, 30, or 69.8 per cent, native born, as contrasted with 13, or 30.2 per cent, foreign born. Mor e men were DB. tiva born than women. ATTITUDE TOWARD INTERMARRIAGE According to Table CXXVI, intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew was opposed most frequently in Boyle Heights, 47 respondents, or 70.1 per cent, expressing opinions against it. Unqualified opposition was indicated by 30 cases, or 42.9 per cent, in Beverly Hilla, and by 29 cases, or 42.1 per cent, in Beverlywood. Attitudes indicating conditional acceptance of intermarriage was found in 23 casea, or 32.9 per cent, of Beverly Hills respondents, and in 21 cases, or 30.4 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents. RELATION BETWEPN INTERMARRIAGE AND YOM KIPPUR FAST Aocording to Table CXXVII, only 2 respondents, or 4.5 per cent, who favored intermarriage, said that they fasted on Yom Kippur. Of those opposing intermarriage 69, or 65 per cent, said that they fasted on Yom Kippur. Of those with qualified attitudes towards intermarriage 15, or 361 23.5 per cent, fasted. RELATION BETWEEN INTERMARRIAGE AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN According to Table CXXVIII, 32, of the 44 r$spond ents, or 72.7 per cent, who expressed themselves as favor ing intermarriage were native born. Of those expressing a qualified opinion 35, or 62.3 per cent, were native born, while among those opposing intermarriage only 42, or 39.6 per cent, were native born. RELATION BETWEEN INTERMARRIAGE AND POLITICAL AFFILIATION According to Table CXXIX, 40 of the 126 respondents, or 71.5 per cent, who expressed a qualified opinion about intermarri~ge were Democrats. Of those opposing intermar riage witbout qualifications 66, or 62.3 per cent, were Democrats, and among those favoring intermarriage 20, or 45.8 per cent were Demoorats. On the other hand, a large proportion of those favoring intermarriage was Republican, 18, or 40.6 per cent, and Progressive 4, or 9 per oent. ATTITUDE TOWARD JEWISH EAROCHIAL SCHOOLS Aocording to Table CXXX, the vast majority of Boyle Heights respondents, 57, or 85 per cent, favored Jewish 362 parochial schools. Corresponding percentages for Bever1y wood and Beverly Hills were considerably smaller; 33 cases, or 47.8 per cent, and 33 cases, or 47.1 per cent, respec. tively. RELATION BETWEEN JEWISH PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS AND INTERMARRIAGE According to Table CXXXI, 36 of the 44 respondents, or 81.9 per cent, who favored intermarriage were unfavor ably disposed towards Jewish parochial schools. Among those with qualified intermarriage attitudes 33, or 58.3 per cent, were unfavorable towards Jewish parochial schools, but among those who were against intermarriage only 14, or 13.3 per cent, expressed opinions antagonistic towards Jewish parochial schools. ATTITUDE TOWARD EMBRACING CHRISTIANITY According to Table CXXXII, in all three areas the vast majority of respondents was against embracing Christi anity. The percentage stating such opposition was highest in Boyle Heights, 61 cases, or 91.2 per cent. It was followed by Beverlywood with 58 cases, or 84.1 per cent, and by Beverly Hills with 56 cases, or 79.9 per cent. The largest proportion of those indifferent towards the subject 363 was found in Beverly Hills in 12 eases, or 17.3 per cent. Attitudes favorable toward embracing Christianity were negligible, never exceeding 3 per cent. RELATION BETWEEN EMBRACING CHRISTIANITY AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN According to Table CXXXIII, 22, of the 30 respond ents, or 73.4 per cent, who favored embracing Christianity were native born, but among those opposing it only 87, or 49.4 per cent were native born. ATTITUDE TOWARD BUSINESS DEALING WITH JEWS OR GENTILES Aocording to Table CXXXIV, 12 or 17.4 per cent, of Beverlywood respondents preferred business dealings with Gentiles. The corresponding percentages were: 8, or 11.4 per cent, in Beverly Hills, and 3, or 4.5 per cent, in Boyle Heights. The percentages preferring business deal ings with Jews were small, never exoeeding 4.4 per cent, ,in Beverlywood. ATTITUDE TOWARD THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL AND PRESERVATION OF JUDAISM IN TEE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA According to Table CXXXV, the majority of respond ents in all three areas. expressed the belief that the 364 establishment of the state of Israel will help preserve Judalsm 1n the Unlted States. This relationship was most clear-cut in Boyle Heights wbere 58, or 86.5 per cent, of the respondents expressed this belief', followed by Beverly Hills with 48 cases, or 68.6 per cent, and by Beverlywood with 42, or 60.9 per cent. ANTI-SEMITISM IN LOS ANGELES According to Table CXXXVI, the proportion of re spondents stating that they considered anti-Semitism in Los Angeles a serious, or very serious problem was great est in Boyle Heights, 46 cases, or 68.6 per cent. Bever lywood occupied an intermediate position 42 cases, or 60.9 per cent, and Beverly Hills was last with 38 cases, or 54.3 per cent. In spite of this, a relatively large group of' the Beverly Hills respondents 16, or 22.8 per cent, said that they considered anti-Semitism in Los Angeles a very serious problem. "JEWISBNESS" AND OCCUPATIONAL DISCRIMINATION According to Table CXXXVII, in all areas the most typical attitude was that being Jewish made no particular difference in occupational life. However, the greatest 365 proportion holding this attitude was found in Beverly Hills 59 cases, or 84.2 per cent. It was followed by Beverlywood with 51 cases, or 73.9 per cent, and by Boyle Heights with 44 cases, or 65.8 per cent. "Jewishness" was seen as a hindrance in occupational life most often in Boyle Heights with 16 cases, or 13.9 per cent. It was viewed as a barrier next most often in Beverlywood with 12 cases, or 17.4 per cent, and least in Beverly Hills with 7 cases, or 9.9 per cent. "Jewiahness t' was seen as being helpful in a small number of cases, but never exceeding 8.7 per cent, in Beverlywood. Recapitulation. The majority of Boyle Heights re spondents said that their neighborhood was Jewish. Both, in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood, the respondents indicated that their neighborhood was "mixed," where the population of Jews and Gentiles was about the same. Jewish neighbor hoods were preferred by Boyle Heights respondents, while mixed neighborhoods were preferred by the majority of both Beverly Hills and Beverlywood respondents. The majority of Boyle Heights respondents also preferred Jewish neigh bor3. Both in Beverlywood and Beverly Hills, a smaller number of respondents preferred Jewish neighbors. The majority of Boyle Heights respondents favored changes in JUdaism, while the pumber of respondents who 366 desired changes in Judaism in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood was much smaller. These findings may imply that the re spondents in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood made some changes in Jewish tradition, whereas the respondents of Boyle Heights are in the process of making such changes. The majority of Boyle Heights respondents did not favor identification as American, religion excepted. A smaller number of respondents in Beverly Hills, did not favor identification as Americans. The smallest number of respondents in Beverlywood, did not favor identification as Americans. ThUS, identification as Americans, religion excepted, was favored most frequently in Beverlywood, next most frequently in Beverly Hills, and least frequently in Boyle Heights. Separation from religio-etbnic group, was favored most often in Beverly Hills, next most-often in Beverly wood, and least often in Boyle Heights. The vast majority in all three areas favored being identified as Jews. The largest number of respondents who favored such identification was reported for Boyle Heights, followed by Beveaywood and Beverly Hills. The findings also indicate that there is a positive relationship between attitudes favorable to Jewish identification and performmIDe of the marriage ceremony by an ordained representative of 367 the Jewish faith. Among those opposing Jewish identifica tion, a higher proportion of native born respondents was found, whereas the foreign born respondents favored such identification. The most frequent unqualified opposition to inter marriage was reported for Boyle Heights, while fewer re spondents expressed such opposition in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. The findings also suggest a negative rela tionship between Yom Kippur fasting and attitUdes favor able to intermarriage. The respondents fasting on Yom Kippur opposed intermarriage to a greater extent than the non-fasting respondents. The data indicate that a positive relationship existed between native born respondents and attitudes favoring intermarriage. The native born respondents possessed a more favorable attitude toward intermarriage than the foreign born respondents. Attitudes favoring intermarriage tended to be associated with other than the "Democratic" political norm of the Jewish population. Those who did not identify themselves as Democrats, had a more favorable attitude toward intermarriage. There was a higher proportion of women than men who identified them selves as Democrats. The largest number of respondents who favored Jewish 368 parochial schools was reported for Boyle Heights. A con siderably smaller number of respondents in Beverlywood and Beverly Hills favored Jewish parochial schools. The findings also indicate that an inverse relationship existed between attitudes favoring Jewish parochial schools and intermarriage. In all three areas, the vast majority of respond ents was against embracing Christianity. The respondents stating such opposition were highest in Boyle Heights, followed by Beverlywood and Beverly Hills. The findings also suggest a positive relationship between attitudes favorable toward embracing Christianity and native born respondents. The most typical attitude toward business dealings with Jews or Gentiles was that of no preference. The re spondents of Beverlywood, however, expressed the highest preference for business dealings with Gentiles rather than Jews as compared with the other two areas. The majority of respondents in all three areas thought that the establishment of the state of Israel will help pre~erve Judaism in the United states. However, Boyle Heights respondents were more numerous in expressing this belief, followed by Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. The largest number of respondents who considered 369 anti-Semitism as a very serious, or serious problem was reported for Boyle Heights, followed by Beverlywood and Beverly Hills in that order. However, a considerable number of respondents in Beverly Hills regard anti-~tism as a very serious problem. In all three areas, the typical attitude was that being Jewish made no particular difference in occupational status. "Jewishness" was considered as a hindrance most often in Boyle Heights, slightly less often in Beverlywood and least often in Beverly Hills. ... TABLE CXV!I NEIGHOORHOOD TYPE'S Nmnber and Per cent of Respondents Total. Beverly Hills Bever~ood Boyle Heights Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent lumber Per cent Gentile neighborhood* Mixed**' Jevrish*** 19 124 63 9.2 60.3 30.5 II 59 15.7 84.3 8 56 5 li.5 81.3 7.2 9 58 13.4 86.6 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 * 'Where the majority of the population is Gen1a1e. ** Where the nmnber of Jews and Gent:Ues is about the same. ***' Where the majority' of the population is Jewish. -< VJ C5 TA.BLE CXVIII NEIGHBORHOODS PREFERRED Number and Per can't of Respondents , Total Beverly Hills Beverl:ywood Bolle Heigh1;s Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent lumber Per cent Prefer Gentile neighborhood 12 5.9 7 9.9 2 2.8 3 4.5 Prefer mixed neighborhood 111 53.9 55 78.6 48 69.6 8 11.9 Prefer Jewish neighborhood 74 35.9 6 8.6 15 21.8 53 79.1 No preference 9 4.3 2 2.9 4 5.8 3 4.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 (f} 100.0 67 100.0 \.» ~ TABLE CXIX PREFERENCE FOR JEWISH NEIGHOORS Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverg Hills Beverlytrood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Num.ber Per cent Ntmber Per cent Number Per cent Prefer Jewish neighbors 102 49.5 26 37.1 30 43.4 46 68.6 Do not prefer Jewish neighbors 9 4.3 6 8.5 3 4.3 No preference 95 46.2 38 54.4 36 52.3 21 31.4 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 v" -.J I'\:l TABLE en ATTITUDE TOWARD CHANaES IN JUDAISM Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills BeverJ.:ywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Favor changes 87 42.3 16 22.8 26 37.6 45 67.3 Do not favor changes 94 45.6 41 58.5 36 52.2 17 25.4 Do not know 8 3.8 4 5.7 3 4.4 1 1.5 Gentile respondent 5 2.5 1 1.5 2 2.9 2 2.9 Indifferent 12 5~8 8 u.5 2 2.9 2 2.9 Total 206 100~0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 VJ ~ TABLE CXXI ATTITUDE TOWARD IDENTIFICATION AS AMERICANS (EXCLUDING RELIGION) Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Bever:qwood. Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent liumber Per cent Favoring 76 36.8 25 35.7 39 56.5 12 17.9 Not favoring 102 49.6 32 45.7 21 30.5 49 73.1 Indifferent 28 13.6 1.3 18.6 9 13.0 6 9.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 w ~ TABLE CXIlI ATTI'l'UDE TOI'lARD SEPARATION FROM RELIGIo-ETHNIC GROUP N'UlD.ber and Per cent o:f Respondents Total Beverq Bills Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Favoring separation 45 21.8 20 28.5 15 21.7 10 15.0 Not favoring separation 157 76.2 1Q 70.0 53 76.8 55 82.0 Indifferent 4 2.0 1 1.5 1 1.5 2 3.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 VJ -.1 \J'l ... / TABLE CXXIII ATTITUDE TOWAIm JEWISH IDENTITY Number and. Per oent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverly'Wood Boyle -Heights Humber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Favoring 163 79.2 52 74.2 52 75.3 59 88.0 Not. favoring 4 1.9 - - 3 4.4 1 1.5' Depends 39 18.9 18 25'.8 14 20.3 7- 10.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 8) 100.0 67 100.0 W -J 0\ TABLE cxnv JEWISH IDENTITY AND MARRIAGE CELEBRANT 377 NUlllber and Per cent of Respornents I Atti1ndes Toward Jewish Identity 1larr1age celebrant Total Favoring Against Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Rabbi 163 79.1 90.9 14 33.1 Minister w/or Justice of the Peace 38 18.4 9 5.5 29 66.9 Single respondents 5 2.5 5 3.6 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 TABLE CXIV JEWISH lDENTITY AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE B>R1{ Number and Per cent of Responden'ts' Attitudes Toward Jewish Identity- Foreign versus Total Favoring Against Men Wamen native born Per Per Per Per Per Num.ber cent Number cent Number cent Nmnber cent Number cent , Native born 109 52.9 79 48.4 30 69.8 46 53.5 6.3 52.5 Foreign born 97 47.1 84 51.6 1.3 30.2 40 46.5 57 47.5 Total 206 100.0 163 100.0 43 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 \.lJ ~ TABLE- CXXVI ATTITUDE TOWARD IN"lERMARRIAGE Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Bever1ywood Boyle Heights Ntmlber Per cent Number Per cent Namber Per cent Number Per cent Favoring 44 21.4 17 24.2 19 27.5 8 11.9 Against 106 51.4 30 42.9 29 42.1 47 70.1 Under certain circ:mnstances 56 27.2 23 32.9 2l 30.4 12 18.0 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 w 'Cl TABLE CXXVII INTEmIARRIAGE AND YOM KIPPUR FASt Number and Per cent of Respondents' Attitudes Toward Intermarriage Ycm. Kippur Fast Total Favoring Against Depends Number Per cent lbnber Per cent Number Per cent lumber. Per cent Fast 86 u.a 2 4.5 69 65.0 15 23.5 Do not fast 120 58.2 42 95.5 37 35.0 41 76.5 Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 106 100.0 56 100.0 \.oJ 0) o TABLE CxxvrII INTERMARRIAGE AND FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE BORN • Number am Per cent of Respondents' Att1-m.d~s Toward_!n~rmarriage Foreign versus Total Favoring Against Depends Men Wanen native born Per Per Per Per Per Per Nomber oent Number cent Nmaber cent Number cent Number cent Number oent Native born Foreign born 109 52.9 97 47.1 32 72.7 12 27.3 42 39.6 64 60.4 35 62.3 21 37.7 46 53.5 40 46.5 63 52.5 57 47.5 Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 106 100.0 56 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 VJ CD ...... TABLE CXXIX INTERVARRIAGE AND POLITICAL AFFILIATION .. Humber and Per cent of Respondents 1 Att1tudes Toward Intezmarriage Political Total Favoring Against DepeuU! :Men Wanen affiliation Per Per Per Per Per Per Number cent Number cent Number cent N\1m.ber cent N_ber cent Number cent Democrats 126 61.1 20 45.8 66 62.3 40 71.5 44 51.2 82 68.4 Republicans 44 21.3 18 40.6 17 16.0 9 16.0 26 30.2 18 15.0 Progr-6Ss1ve 10 4.9 4 9.0 4 3.7 2 3.6 6 6.9 4 3•.3 Not stated 6 2.9 - - 6 5.7 - - 2 2.4 4 3.3 None 20 9.8 2 4.6 13 12.3 5 8.9 8 9• .3 12 10.0 Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 106 100.0 56 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 w co N TABLE cnx ATTITUDE TOWARD JEWISH PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS Number and Per cent or Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverly!ood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per.cent Number Per cent Favoring 123 59.7 33 47.1 33 47.8 57 85.0 Against 80 38.8 35 49.9 36 52.2 9 13.5 Indifferent 1 S 1 1.5 Depends on school 2 1.0 1 1.5 - - 1 lS Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ \.t,) TABLE cnn JEWISH PAROCHIAL SCHOOLS AND DrrERMA.RRIAGE Nmber and Per cent of Respondents' Atti'bldes Toward Intermarriage Attitudes toward Total. Favoring Against Depends Men Wanen Jewish parochial schools Per Per Per Per Per Per Number cent Number cent Humber cent NlDIlber cent Number cent Number cent Favorable 123 59.7 8 18.1 92 86.7 23 42.7 48 55.8 75, 62.5 Unfavorable 83 40.3 36 81.9 14 13.3 33 58.3 38 44.2 45 37.5 Total 206 100.0 44 100.0 106 100.0 56 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 ~ .r::- TABLE CXXIII A.TTITUDE TCIlABD EMBRACING CHllISTIANITI . lilmlber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills .Beverlywood Boyle Heights Number Per cent lhDnber Per cent Number Per cent Humber Per cent Favoring 6 2.9 2 2.8 2 3.0 2 2.9 Against 176 64.9 56 79.9 56 84.1 62 92.6 Indif£eren1; 24 12.2 12 17.3 9 12.9 3 4.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 1.00.0 ~ \rt T.A.BLE CXXXIII EMBRACING CHRISTIANITY ON FOREIGN VERSUS NATIVE OORN Number am Per cent of· Respondents 1 Attitndes Toward Embracing Christiani ty Foreign versus Indifferent native born Total or favoring Against Men Yemen Number Per cent Nmaber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Native born 109 52.9 22 73.4 87 49.4 46 53.4 63 52.5 Foreign born 97 47.J. 8 26.6 89 ,0.6 40 46.6 57 47.5 Total 206 100.0 30 100.0 176 100.0 86 100.0 120 100.0 'vJ co 0-- TABLE CXXXIV ATTITUDE TOWARD BUSINESS DEALINGS WITH JEWS OR GENTILES - ... '. Nmn~ and Per cen1;'of Respondents Total Bever]y Hills BeverJ.1wood Boyle Heights Number Per cent Ntmber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Prefer dealing with Jews 4 1.9 - - 3 4.4 1 1.S' Prefer deaJ.ing with Gentiles 23 11.2 8 11.4 12 17.4 3 4.5 . No preference '179 86.9 62 88.6 54 78.2 63 94.0 Tota1 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \..IJ co -:J TABLE CXXXV ATTITUDE TOWARD THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE STATE OF ISRAEL AND PRESERVATION OF JUDAISM IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Number and Per cent of Respondents Total Bever:q H:ills Beverlywood ~).e Hei~ts Number Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Nmnber Per cent Will help preserve Judaism in 148 48 42 86.5 the United states of America 71.8 68.6 60.9 58 Will not help preserve Judaism. in the United States of America 58 28.2 22: 31.4 27 39.1 9 13.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 w CD CD TABLE CxnvI AlTI-8EMITISlf IN LOS ANGELES Nmaber and Per cent of Respondents Total Beverly Hills Beverlpood Boyle Heights N1:uaber Per cent Bamber Per cent Number Per cent Number Per cent Very serious problem 34 16.6 16 2208 8 11.6 10 14.9 8erious 92 44.7 22 31.5 34 49.3 36 53.7 Minor 36 17.4 12 17.1 15 21.7 9 13.4 No problem 35 16.9 16 22.8 12 17.4 7 10.5 Do not 1mow 9 4.4 4 5.8 - - 5 7.5 Total' 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 \.AJ (X) \,Q TABLE CIXXVII JEWISHNESS AIm OCCUPATIONAL DISCRIJlINATION Number and Per cent or Respondents Jnisbness Tot;U Beverg Hllls Bever1{Wood Boyle Heights Nainber Per cent Number Per cent lfumber Per cent Namber Per cent Helpful 12 5.8 2 2.9 6 8.7 4 5.9 Hindrance 35 16.9 7 9.9 12 17.4 16 23.9 lfade no difrerence 154 74.8- 59 84.2 51 73.9 44 65.8 " Do not 1mow 3 1.5 1 1.5 - - 2 2.9 Gentile respoIXlent 2 1.0 1 1.5 - - 1 1.5 Total 206 100.0 70 100.0 69 100.0 67 100.0 ~ o CHAPTER XIV COMPARATIVE DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE GROUPS STUDIED Whereas the previous chapters have been developed for an analysis of the composition and cultural traits of the groups studied, the present chapter is intended to present a synthesis of the composition and culture traits. This is achieved by grouping the composition and culture traits according to the preponderance of them as reported for first, second, or third position in the view of the respondents for the three areas; Boyle Heights, Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. In Table E, which follows, a horizontal comparison is facilitated for sixty items embracing all of the com position and culture traits considered in this study. TABLE E DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE THREE AREAS STUDIED, RATED IN TERMS OF FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD PLACE Boyle Heights Beverly' Hills Beverlywood 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 1. Preponderance of older age grouping X X X 2. Preponderance of foreign bom respondents X X X 3. Foreign born parents X X X 4. Length of residence in Los Angeles area X X X 5. Length of residence at presen·t address X X X 6. Number of Democrats X X X 7. Intensiveness of Jewish education of respondents X X X 8. Intensiveness of Jewish education of spouse X X X 9. Children attending Jewish schools X X X 10. Orthodox preference in religion. X X X 11. Nearness to synagogue X X X 12. Familiarity with Jewish ritual tenns X X X 'v..l \,() l\.) TABLE E (continued) DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE THREE AREAS STUDIED, RATED IN TERMS OF FIRST, SECOlIDAND THIRD PLACE Boyle Heights Beverly Hills Bever:tywood 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 13. Displaying of mezuzah X X X 14. Observance of Jewish dietary laws X X X 15. The use of matzos instead of bread on Passover X X X 16. FAsting on Yom Kippur X X X 17. Celebration of seder X X X 18. Friday night candle lighting X X X 19. Familiarity wi.th Jewish culinary terms X X X 20. Membership in Labor Zionist part,y X X X 21. Contributions to Jewish National Fund X X X 22. The use of Yiddish as a household language X X X 23. Attendance of Jewish shows X X X 24. Listening to Yiddish radio programs X X X 25. Listening to ~'Eterna1 Light" radio program X X X~ UJ TABLE E (contirmed) DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE THREE AREAS STUDIED, RATED IN TERMS OF FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD PLACE BC?7le Heights Beverly Hills Beverlywood 26. Possession of Jewish phonograph records 27. Possession of Jewish art objects 28. Narration of Jewish stories to children 29. Preference for Jewish neighborhood 30. Pref'erence for Jewish neighbors 31. Preference for changes in Judaism 32. Willingness to be identified as a Jew 33•.Opposition to intennarriage 34. Favoring Jewish parochial schools 35. Opposition to embracing Christianity 36. Favorable attitude toward Israel 37. Considering anti-Semitism as a serious problem 1 x X x x x x x x x x x x 2 3 1 2 x X x x 3 x x x x x x x x 1 2 x x x x x x x x 3 x x x x 38. Considering ffJewishness" as a hindrance in w occupation X X X ~ TABLE E (continued) DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE THREE AREAS STUDIED, RATED IN TERMS OF FIRST, SECOND AND THIRD PLACE . Boyle Heights Beverly Hills Beverlywood 1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3 39. Attendance of meetings of Jewish organizations X X X 40. The ratio of male population X X X 41. Number of non-Jewish spouses X X X 42. Relativas living with family X X X 43. Length of residence in United States of America X X X 44. Number of Republicans X X X 4,. Occupation as professionals X X X 46. Hane ownership X X X 47. Family income X X X 48. Secular education of respondents X X X 49. Secular education of spouse X X X ,0. Sunday school education X X X ,1. Refonn preference in religion X X X ~ \J"l TABLE E (continued) DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS OF THE THREE AREAS STUDIED, RATED IN TERMS OF FIRST, SECOND. AND THIRD PLACE Barle Heights Beverly Hills Beverlywood 52. Affiliation with synagogues 53. Christmas tree decoration in home 54. Working on the Sabbath 55. Membership in General Zionist party 56. Contributions to non-Jewish causes 57. Contribution to the Jewish Welfare Fund 58. Willingness to be identified as American, religion excepted 59. Willingnes IS to separate from religio-ethnic group 60. Preference for business; dealings with Gentiles 1 2 3 x x x x x X X x X 1 x x x X x 2 x x X x 3 l x x x x 2 x x X x X 3 \J.J '0 ~ 397 Besides this horizontal method of comparison, it is desirable to list as a group, the composition and cultural traits according to their relative positions, first, second, or third place, as reported by the respondents for each of the three groups studied. In a broad sense, this constitutes a cultural cluster or complex, in which the values associated indicate a relative orthodoxy, tradi tionalism, or tendencies toward the opposite values. For example, in Boyle Heights, some thirty eight traits have been reported in the first place. By scanning this list, it should become evident that these may be weighted on the side of orthodoxy or traditionalism in view point. These factors should be considered as related in a more dynamic manner to promote the survival of Jewish culture, and as retarding the assimilation of the respond ents of Boyle Heights. The enumeration of traditional orthodox traits in first position for Boyle Heights, indi cates a slower process of assimilation than in the other two groups, Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. According to the culture complexes presented in similar manner of the other two groups stUdied, the re spondents of Beverly Hills are less traditional or orthodox than the respondents of Boyle Heights. As expressed in terms of assimilation the respondents of Beverlywood are 398 the least traditional or orthodox. In a sense all these sixty items of composition and cultural traits are reported as having either first, seoond, or third plaoe. Aooordingly, these items are a part of the cultural oomplex as a whole, but since they have different weights, by arranging them in the three groups, the relative influence as factors for Jewish sur vival or for promotion of Jewish assimilation is broadly indicated. In proportion of foreign born respondents. In proportion of foreign born parenta. In lengtl:;l. of residenoe in Los Angeles area. In length of residenoe at preaent address. 399 DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CUL~LJRAL TRAITS IN BOYLE HEIGHTS In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into first place in Boyle Heights: 1. In preponderance of older age grouping. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. In intensiveness of Jewish education of respondents. 7. In intensiveness of Jewish education of spouse. 8. Number of Democrats. 9. In proportion of children attending Jewish schools. 10. Preference for Orthodoxy in religion. 11. Nearness to synagogue. 12. Familiarity with Jewish ritual terms. 13. Displaying of mezuzah. 14. The observance of Jewish dietary laws. 15. Fasting on Yom Kippur. 16. The use of matzos instead of bread on Passover. 17. Celebration of Seder. 18. Friday night candle lighting. 19. Familiarity with Jewish culinary terms. 20. Membership in Labor Zionist party. 400 21. Contributions to the Jewish National Fund. 22. The use of Yiddish as a household language. 23. Attendance of Jewish shows. 24. Listening to Yiddish radio programs. 25. Listening to "Eternal Light" radio program. 26. Possession of Jewish phonograph records in home. 27. Possession of Jewish art objects. 28. Narration of Jewish stories to children. 29. Preference for Jewish neighborhoods. 30. Preference for Jewish neighbors. 31. Preference for changes in Judaism. 32. In Willingness to be identified as Jews. 33. Opposition to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew. 34. In favoring Jewish parochial schools. 35. Opposition to embracing Christianity. 36. In regarding anti-Semitism as a serious problem. 37. In regarding "Jewishness lt as a hindrance in occupation. 38. In favorable attitude toward Israel. In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into second place in Boyle Heights: 1. Attendance of meetings in Jewish organizations. In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into third place in Boyle Heights: 1. The male ratio of popUlation. 2. 4. 5. 6. 19· it 18 1 • 16 1. 17. 18. 19. 401 Number of non-Jewish spouses. In number of relatives living with family. In length of residence in the United states. Number of Republicans. Occupation as professionals. Home ownership. Family income. Secular education of respondents. Secular education of spouse. Sunday school education. Reform preference in religion. Affiliation with synagogues. Christmas tree decoration in home. Working on the Sabbath. Membership in General Zionist party. Contributions to non-Jewish causes. Contributions to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. In willingness to be identified as American, religion excepted. 20. In willingness to separate from religio-ethnlc group. ! I 211. Preference for business dealings with Gentiles. 402 DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS IN BEVERLY HILLS According to the respondents the following criteria are given first place in number of frequencies in Beverly Hills: 1. Attendance of meetings in Jewish organizations. 2. Number of Republicans. 3. Occupation as professionals. 4. Family income. 5. Secular education of respondents. 6. Secular eduoation of spouse. 7. Sunday school education. 8. Reform in religious preference. 9. Affiliation with synagogues. 10. Membership in General Zionist party. 11. Contributions to non-Jewish causes. 12. Contributions to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. 13. Willingness to separate from religio-ethnic group. In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into second place in Beverly Hills: 1. The male ratio of population. 2. In preponderance of older age grouping. 3. In proportion of foreign born re spondents. 4. In proportion of foreign born parents. In intensiveness of Jewish education of respondents. In intensivene ss of Jewish eduoation of spouse. In proportion of children attending Jewish schools. The observanoe of Jewish dietary laws. The use of matzos instead of bread on Passover. 405 5. In number of relatives living with family. 6. In length of residenoe in United States of Amerioa. 7. Home ownership. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. In fasting on Yom Kippur. 14. Celebration of Seder. 15. Friday night candle lighting. 16. Contributions to the Jewish National Fund. 17. The use of Yiddish as a household language. 18. Attendanoe of Jewish shows. 19. Listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program. 20. Possession of Jewish phonograph reoords. 21. Possession of Jewish art objeots. 22. Preference for changes in Judaism. 23. Opposition to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew. 24. Proportion of non-Jewish spouses of respondents. 25. Christmas tree decoration in home. 26. Working on the Sabbath. 27. Identification as American, religion excepted. 28. Preference for business dealings with Gentiles. 404 In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into third place in Beverly Hills: 1. In length of residence in Los Angeles area. 2. In length of residence at present address. 3. Number of Democrats. 4. In preference for Orthodoxy in religion. 5. In nearness to synagogue. 6. Familiarity with Jewish ,ritual terms. 7. In displaying of mezuzah. 8. Familiarity with Jewish culinary terms. 9. Membershi~ in Labor Zionist party. 10. In listening to Yiddish radio programs. 11. Narration of Jewish stories to children. 12. Preference for Jewish neighborhoods. 13. Preference for Jewish neighbors. 14. In willingness to be identified as Jews. 15. In favoring Jewish parochial schools. 16. Opposition to embracing Christianity. 17. In favorable attitude toward Israel. 18. In considering anti-Semitism as a serious problem. 19. In considering "Jewishness" as a hindrance in occupation. 405 DISTRIBUTION OF COMPOSITION AND CULTURAL TRAITS IN BEVERLYWOOD In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into first place in Beverlywood: 1. The male ratio of population. 2. In number of non-Jewish spouses. 3. In number of relatives living with family. 4. In length of residence in United states of America. 5. Home ownership. 6. Christmas tree decoration in home. 7. Working on the Sabbath. 8. In Willingness to be identified as American, religion excepted. 9. Preference for business dealings with Gentiles. In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into second place in Beverlywood: 1. In length of residence in Los Angeles area. 2. In length of residence at present address. 3. Number of Democrats. 4. Preference for Orthodoxy in religion. 5. Nearness to synagogue. 6. Familiarity with Jewish ritual terms. 7. Displaying mezuzah. 8. Familiarity with Jewish culinary terms. 406 9. Labor Zionist party membership. 10. Listening to Yiddish radio programs. 11. Narration of Jewish stories to children. 12. Preference for Jewish neighborhood. 13. Preference for Jewish neighbors. 14. In willingness to be identified as a Jew. 15. In favoring Jewish parochial schools. 16. Opposition to embracing Christianity. 17. In favorable attitades toward Israel. 18. In regarding anti-Semitism as a serious problem. 19. In regarding "Jewishness" as a hindrance in oocupation. 20. Number of Republicans. 21. Oocupation as professionals. 22. Family income. 23. Seoular eduoation of respondents. 24. Seoular education of spouse. 25. Sunday school eduoation. 26. Reform in religious preference. 27. Affiliation with synagogues. 28. Membership in General Zionist party. 29. Contributions to non-Jewish oauses. 30. Contributions to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. 31. In willingness to separate from religio-ethnlc group. In preponderance of older age grouping. In proportion of foreign born respondents. In proportion of foreign born parents. In intensivene ss of Jewish education of respondents. In intensiveness of Jewish education of spouse. 407 In relative number of frequencies the following criteria fall into third place in Beverlywood: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. In proportion of children attending Jewish schools. 7. The observance of Jewish dietary laws. 8. The use of matzos instead of bread on_Passover. 9. Fasting on Yom Kippur. 10. Celebration of Seder. 11. Friday night candle lighting. 12. Contributions te the Jewish National Fund. 13. The use of Yiddish as a household language. 14. Attendance of Jewish shows. 15. Listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program. 16. Possession of Jewish phonograph records in home. 17. Possession of Jewish art objects. 18. Preference for changes in Judaism. 19. Opposition to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew. 20. Attendance of meetings of Jewish organizations. CHAPTER XV SUMMARY AND CONCLUSIONS The problem of this study has been to trace, for general information, the nature of Jewish immigration into the United States and the cultural background of the Jews, in order to understand the characteristics in the develop ment of the Jewish community in Loa Angeles. Factors of importance in Jewish cultural survival, and factors counte~ acting such survival, which tend to promote assimilation of the Jews have been considered in order to understand more fUlly the cultural background of the groups studied. The criteria emphasized in the study have been brought together for a comparative analysis of the composi tion of the groups and their culture traits to indicate their relative importance for the groups studied. These composition and cultural traits are also listed to repre sent what might be termed a culture complex, to provide a perspective for reaching conclusions. Composition of the groups and cultural factors tending to retard the process of Jewish assimilation and promote Jewish survival in Boyle Heights, include the following qualities: 1. Preponderance of an older age grouping. 2. Larger proportion of foreign born respondents. 3. Larger proportion of foreign born parents. 4. Longer residence in Loa Angeles area. 5. Longer residence at present address. 6. Shortest stay in the United states. 7. Greater number of relatives living with family. 8. Smaller number occupied as professionals. 9. Democratic affiliation. 10. Low proportion of home ownership. 11. Low family income. 12. Segregated Jewish neighborhood. 13. Intensiveness of Jewish education of respondents. 14. Intensiveness of Jewish education of spouse. 15. Children attending Jewish schools. 16. Low degree of secular education of respondents. 17. Low degree of secular education of spouse. 18. Nearness to synagogue. 19. Orthodox preference in religion. 20. Familiarity with Jewish ritual terms. 21. Mezuzah display. 22. Observance of Jewish dietary laws. 23. The use of matzos instead of bread on Passover. 24•. Fasting on Yom Kippur. 409 410 25. Celebration of Seder. 26. Friday night candle lighting. 27. Smaller number working on the Sabbath. 28. Contributions to Jewish causes. 29. Small or no contribution to non-Jewish causes. 30. The use of Yiddish as a household language. 31. Attendance of Jewish shows. 32. 33. 34. 35. Listening to Yiddish radio programs. Listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program. Possession of Jewish phonograph records. Possession of Jewish art objects. 36. Narration of Jewish stories to children. 37. Preference for Jewish neighborhoods. 38. Preference for Jewish neighbors. 39. Willingness to be identified as a Jew. 40. Unwillingness to be identified as Americans, religion excepted. 41. UnWillingness to separate from religio-ethnic group. 42. Opposition to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew. 43. Favoring Jewish parochial schools. 44. Opposition to embraqing Christianity. 45. Favorable attitude toward Israel. 46. Considering anti-Semitism as a serious problem. 47. Preference for business dealings with Jews. 48. Regarding "Jewishness" as a hindrance in occupation. 411 This list indicates that there were more qualities tending to retard the process of Jewish assimilation in Boyle Heights than in the other two areas studied, for which details follow. The respondents of Boyle Heights were the least assimilated group in this study. Composition of the group and cultural factors that tend to facilitate the process of Jewish assimilation in Boyle Heights are: 1. Preference for changes in Judaism. 2. Comparatively smaller membership in synagogue. 3. Smaller and less frequent contributions to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. There are, of course, other cultural factors that tend to facilitate the process of Jewish assimilation in Boyle Heights; some persons almost completely disregard the Jewish religion, or lack Jewish education, and so on. Composition of the group and cultural factors which retard the process of Jewish assimilation and promote Jew ish survival in Beverly Hills, include the following qualities: 1. Attendance of meetings in Jewish organizations. 2. Jewish Sunday school education. 3. Highest affiliation with synagogues. 4. High membership in the Zionist organization. 412 5. Largest and most frequent contributions to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. The respondents of Beverly Hills occupied a middle position in the following qualities which tend to retard the process of Jewish assimilation: 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. Preponderance of an older age grouping. Length of residence in the United states. Length of residence in Los Angeles area. Length of residence at present address. Foreign born respondents. 6. Foreign born parents. 7. Number of relatives living with family. 8. Intensiveness of Jewish education of respondents. 9. Intensiveness of Jewish education of spouse. 10. Children attending Jewish schools. 11. Observance of Jewish dietary laws. 12. The use of matzos instead of bread on Passover. 13. Fasting on Yom Kippur. 14. Celebration of Seder. 15. Friday night candle lighting. 16. Contributions to the Jewish National Fund. 17. The use of Yiddish as a household language. 18. Attendance of Jewish shows. 19. Listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program. 20. Possession of Jewish phonograph records. 413 21. Possession of Jewish art objects. 22. Opposition to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew • . 23. Working on the Sabbath. The respondents of Beverly Hills were more respon sive to the process of Jewish assimilation than those of Boyle Heights, but less responsive than those in Beverly wood. Composition of the group and cultural factors which tend to facilitate the process of Jewish assimilation in Beverly Hills are: 1. Highest family income. 2. Farthes·t from synagogue. 3. Least familiar with Jewish ritual terms. 4. Smallest proportion displaying mezuzah. 5. Least familiar with Jewish cUlinary terms. 6. Smallest number listening to Yiddish radio programs. 7. Smallest number narrating Jewish stories to children. 8. Lack of preference for Jewish neighborhoods. , 9. Lack of preference for Jewish neighbors. 10. Largest number of Republicans. 11. Least willing to be identified as a Jew. 12. Least favorable toward Jewish parochial schools. 13. Least opposed to embracing Christianity. 14. Least favorable attitude toward Israel. 15. Occupation as ,professionals. 414 16. Reform preference in religion. 17. High secular education of respondents. 18. High secular education of spouse. 19. Least in Orthodox preference in religion. 20. Anti-Semitism was regarded as a serious problem only by a small number of respondents. 21. "Jewishness" was not regarded as a hindrance in occupation. The respondents of Beverly Hills occupied a middle position in the following qualities which tend to facili- tate the process of Jewish assimilation: 1. Home ownership. 2. Non-Jewish spouses. 3. Preferencecfor changes in JUdaism. A. Christmas tree in the home. 5. Contribution to non-Jewish causes. 6. Willingness to separate from religio-ethnic group. 7. Preference for business dealings with Gentiles. 8. Willingness to be identified as Americans, religion excepted. The respondents of Beverlywood occupied a middle position in the following qualities which tend to retard the process of Jewish assimilation: 1. Number of Democrats. 2. Orthodox preference in religion. 3. Nearness to synagogue. 415 4. Familiarity with Jewish ritual terms. 5. Displaying of the mezuzah. 6. Familiarity with Jewish culinary terms. 7. Membership in Labor Zionist organization. 8. Membership in General Zionist organization. 9. Listening to Yiddish radio programs. 10. Narration of Jewish sto~ies to ~hildren. 11. Preference for Jewish neighborhoods. 12. Preference for Jewish neighbors. 13. Willingness to be identified as a Jew. 14. Favoring Jewish parochial schools. 15. Opposition to embracing Christianity. 16. Favorable attitude toward Israel. 17. Considering anti-Semitism as a serious problem. 18. Considering ItJewishness lf as a hindrance in occupation. 19. Affiliation with synagogues. 20. Con~ribution to the United Jewish Welfare Fund. The respondents of Beverlywood occupied a middle position in the following qualities which tend to facilitate the process of Jewish assimilation: 1. Number of Republicans. 2. Occupation as professionals. 3. Family income. 4. Secular education of respondents. 416 5. Secular education of spouse. 6. Reform preference in religion. 7. Contribution to non-Jewish causes. 8. Willingness to separate from religio-ethnic group. The respondents of Beverlywood were the most assimi- lated of the three groups studied. This is indicated by an enumeration of the following qualities: 1. Preponderance of a younger age grouping. 2. Preponderance of native born respondents. 3. Preponderance of native born parents. 4. Least intensive Jewish education of respondents. 5. Least intensive Jewish education of spouse. 6. SMallest proportion of children attending Jewish schools. 7. Lowest proportion observing Jewish dietary laws. 8. Least usage of matzos instead of bread on Passover. 9. Lowest proportion fasting on Yom Kippur. 10. Smallest number celebrating Seder. 11. Smallest number lighting candles on Friday night. 12. Smallest number contributing to the Jewish National Fund. 13. Least frequent usage of Yiddish as a household langu~. 14. Smallest attendance of Jewish shows. 15. Smallest number listening to the "Eternal Light" radio program. 417 16. Smallest number in possession of Jewish phonograph records-. 17. Smallest number in possession of Jewish art objects. 18. Least opposed to intePmarriage between Jew and non-Je~ 19. Least attendance of meetings in Jewish organizations. 20. Highest in non-Jewish/spouses. 21. Longest residence in the United states. 22. Larger proportion of home ownership. 23. Highest in home Christmas tree decoration. 24. Least observance of the Sabbath. 25. Moat Willing to be identified as Americans, religion excepted. 26. Preference for business dealings with Gentiles. Respondents who favored intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew, who had Christmas trees in their homes, who favored separation from religio-ethnic group, who opposed being identified as a Jew, and other qualities which tend to facilitate the process of Jewish assimilation were found in all three groups, but their emphases upon these varied. The findings indicate that the respondents who were most likely to assimilate expressed the desire to separate from their religio-ethnic group. The greatest proportion of respondents expressing such a desire was reported for Beverlywood. The respondents of Beverlywood were mostly native born Americans with a minimal Jewish education. 418 The respondents who were least likely to assimilate were foreign born. They possessed an intensive Jewish education. They observed Jewish rituals and religious practiees. The greatest proportion of respondents qualify ing in these particulars was found in Boyle Heights. The following may be concluded from the findings: 1. The more liberal the group in its interpretation of Judaism the greater the willingness to be identified as Americans. 2. The more liberal the group in its interpretation of Judaism the less opposition to intermarriage between Jew and non-Jew. 3. The more Orthodox the group, the greater has been the proportion of respondents affiliated with the Democratic party. 4. There is an inverse relationship between Jewish orthodoxy and contributions to non-Jewish causes. 5. The more Orthodox the group, the lower the family income. 6. The observance of Jewish holidays and adherence to Jewish traditions, as forms of control, tend to retard the process of assimilation. 7. Orthodox preference in religion retards the process of assimilation of the Jews to a greater 419 extent than do Conservative or Reform prefer ences in religion. 8. The observance of non-Jewish holidays and non Jewish religious customs, such as having Christmas trees in the home, facilitates the process of assimilation of the Jews. 9. Intensive Jewish education, as a form of social control, tends to retard the process of assimi lation, whereas having more secular education facilitates the process of assimilation of the Jews. 10. Nationalistic sentiments, such as favorable attitudes toward Israel and membership in Zionist organizations, tend to retard the pro cess of assimilation. 11. Desire to separate from religio-ethnic group facilitates the process of assimilation of the Jews. 12. Preference for Jewish neighborhoods and neigh bors, whether resulting in voluntary or in voluntary segregation, retards the process of assimilation. 13. In all three groups studied, there is an aware ness of anti-Semitism as a serious problem. 420 This becomes more apparent in the groups which have become more assimilated, as in Beverly Hills and Beverlywood. 14. Communic~tion carried on in languages other than English was more prevalent among the Orthodox than among the Conservative or the Reform Jews. 15. Non-affiliation with Jewish organizations tends to be associated with facilitation of the pro cess of assimilation. 16. Age versus youth conflict are more apparent in the Orthodox group. 17. Native born respondents are usually more amenable to the process of assimilation of the Jews. 18. Foreign born respondents are usually less re sponsive to the process of assimilation. 19. For the three groups studied, the length of residence in the Los Angeles area by itself is not a satisfactory criterion for assimilation, but must be associated with other factors. In general it may be concluded that, of the forms of institutional control, those related to religion are the most effective in retarding social change among the Jews. Next 1n effectiveness, would be the influences of Jewish education. FollOWing 1n importance would be the 421 nationalistic .sentiments (Zionism); then the other cultural factors in social control, such as possession of Jewish art objects, listening to Jewish radio programs and others, which tend to retard the process of assimilation of the Jews. Fina.lly, the economie factors are to be accounted for as affecting the assimilation of the Jew. The higher the economic position, the greater the tendency of the Jews to become assimilated. BIB L lOG RAP H Y 423 SELECTED BIBLIOGRAPHY A. BOOKS Abbott, G. F., Israel in Europe. London: Macmillan and Company Ltd., 1907-.- Abrahams, Israel, Jewish Life in the Middle Afes. Philadelphia: The Jewish PublICation Soc ety of America, 1911. Barnes, Harry Elmer, The Twililht £! Christianity. York: Vanguard Press, 192 • New Baron, Salo W., The Jewish Community. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1942. 3 vols. ____~~, A Social and Religious History of~ I!!!. New York: Columbia University Press, 1937. 3 vols. Bentwich, Norman, Hellenism. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication SOCiety of America, 1919. ____=-_, Philo-Judaeus of Alexandria. Philadelphia: The Jewi.sh Publication Society of America, 1948. Berkson, Isaac B., Theories of Americanization. New York: Columbia University PresS; 1920. Bernard, L. L., Social Control in its Sociological Aspects. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1939. Bernfeld, S., Dor Tahpukhot. Warsaw: Shuldberg Brothers, 1897. 2 vols. Bevan, Edwyn R., The Legacy of Israel. London: Oxford at the Clarendon Preas, 1927. Bible, New York: Hebrew Publishing Company, 1943. Bogardus, Emory S., Essentials of Americanization. Los Angeles: University of Southern California, 1919. , Immigration and Race Attitudes. New York: D. C. ----=H-e-ath, 1928. 424 Brav, Stanley R., Marriage and the Jewish Tradition. New York: Philosophical Library, 1951. Brown, Francis J., and Joseph S. Roucek, One America. New York: Prentice-Hall, 1945. --- BUber, Martin, Israel and the World. New York: Schocken Books, 1948. Case, Clarence Marsh, Social Process and Human Progress. New York: Harcourt, Brace and Company, 1931. Chapin, F. stuart, Cultural Change. New York: The Cent~ Company, 1928. Chipkin, Israel, Twenty-Five Years of Jewish Education in the United states. American Jewish Year Book. Philadelphia: Jewish Publication Society of America, 1937. Cohon, Beryl D., Judaism in Theory and Practice. New York: Bloch PUblishing Company, 1948. Cox, Oliver Cromwell, Caste, Class and Race. Garden City, New York: Doubleday and Company, Inc., 1948. Danby, Herbert, The Jew and Christianity. New York: The Macmillan Company;-r9Wi• Davie, Maurice Rea, and others, Refugees in America. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1947. Report of the Committee for the Study of Recent Immigration from Europe. Dinaburg, Ben-Zion, Toldot Israel. Jerusalem: Dvir PUblishing Company, 1926. Vol. I. Dinin, Samuel, Judaism in ~ Changing Civilization. New York: Columbia University Press, 1933. Drachsler, Julius, Democracy and Assimilation. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1920. , Intermarriage in New York City. New York: ----~c-o~lumbia University-press, 1921. DuBois, Rachel, The Jews in American Life. New York: T. Nelson and Sonlll, 1935. 425 Durkheim, Einile, The Elementary Forms of Religious Life, translated by Joseph Ward Sawai. London: G. Allen and Unwin, Ltd., 1915. Duahkin, A. M., Jewish Education in New York. New York The Bureau of Jewish Education, 1918:--- Eisenstein, J. D., Ozar Yisrael. London: Shapiro, Vallentine and Company, 1935. Vol. IV. Encyclopaedia of the Social Sciences. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1948. Vol. XII. Epstein, Isidore, Judaism of Tradition. London: Edward Goldston, Ltd., 1931. Epstein, Louis M., Marriage Laws in the Bible and~ Talmud. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1942. Fairchild, Henry Pratt, DictionarI 0.£ ,Sociolo51_ New York: Philoso~hical Library, 1944. Faris, Robert E. Lee, Social Disorganization. New York: Ronald Press Company, 1948. Finkelstein, Louis, The Jews: Their History, Culture and Reli~ion. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1949. 2 vo s. , The Pharisees. Philadelphia: The Jewish Public ----~aTtTion-SOcietyof America, 1940. 2 vols. , The Religions of Democracy (JUdaism, Catholicism, --"=P~r-otestanti sm) • New York: The Devin-Adair Company, 1941. Fineberg, Solomon A., Overcoming Anti-Semitism. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1943. ---- Fishberg, Maurice, The Jews. London: The Walter Scott PUblishing Company, Ltd., 1911. Frank,Waldo, The Jew in~ Day. New York: Duell, Sloan and Pearce, 1944. Goldman, Solomon, A Rabbi Takes stock. New York and London: Harper and Brothers, 1931. 428 Goodenough, Erwin R., ~ Light, Light. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1935. Gordis, Robert, The Jew Faces a New World. New York: Behrman's Jewish Book House, 1941. Gordon, Albert I., Jews in Transition. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1949. Graeber, Isacque, Jews in ~ Gentile World. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1942. Graetz, H. H., History of the Jews. Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1891-1898. 6 vols. Harris, Charles W., The Hebrew Heritage. New York: The Abingdon Press, ~5. Hastings, James, A Dictionary of the Bible. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1902. Vol. III. Hayes, Edward Cary, Sociology and Ethics. New York: Appleton and Company, 1948-.-- Heller, Abraham M., Jewish Survival. New York: Behrman's Jewish Book House, 1939. Hook, Samuel Henry, Myth and Ritual. London: Oxford University Press, 1933. Janowsky, Osoar I., The American Jew., New York: Harper and Brothers, 19~ , The Jews and Minority Rights. New York: -~cor-o""luml5Ii University Press, 1933. The Jewish Encyclopedia. New York and London: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1905. Vol. VI. The Jewish People Past .!!!£ Present. New York: Marstin Press, 1946. 3 vols. Kaplan, Mordecai;M., The Future of the American Jew. New York: The Macmillan Company-;-1948. ____=-_, JUdaism~ ! Civilization. New York: The Macmillan Company, 1934. 427 Karpf, Maurice J., Jewish Community Organization in the United states. New York: Bloch PUblishing Company, 1938. Kent, Cbarles Foster, A History of tbe Jewish People. New York: Cbarles ScrIbner's Sons,-rBgg. Kobler, Kaufman, Jewisb Theology. New York: The Macmilhn Company, 1918. ____~~, The Origins of the Synagogue and !h! Church. York:"'"The Macml1Iin Company, 1929. Landis, Paul H., Man in Environment. New York: T. Y. Crowell Company, !949. New Lasker, Bruno, Jewish Experience in America. New York: Jewish Welfare Board, 1930. -- Levinger, Rabbi Lee J., A Histori of the Jews in the United States. Cincinnati: The Un on or-Imerican Hebrew Congregations, 1935. Levy, Felix A., Selected Works of H~an G. Enelow. Kingsport: Kingsport Press Inc., 1935. 4 vola. Lewisohn, LUdwig, The Answer. New York: Liveright;pub lishing Corp.,-r939. , Rebirth. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1935. ----- Lichtenstein, Morris, Judaism. New York: Jewish Science PUblishing Company, 1934. Lumley, Frederick E., Means of Social Control. New York: The Century Company, 1920; MacIver, Robert M., Community: A Sociological StUdy. London: The Macmillan Company, 1917. __....._, Society: Its structure and Changes. New York: R. Long and R. R. Smith Inc., 1931. Malamut, Jos~h, A Survey of Jewish Progress and Achieve ment in the Southland. Los Angeles, California: The Sunland PUblishing Company, Inc., 1926. Vola. I, II and III. Edited by Southwest Jewry. 428 Margolis, M. L., A History of the Jewish People. Philadelphia:- The Jewish Publication socIety of America, 1927. McGroarty, John steven, Loa Angeles - From the Mountains to the SeA. Chicago and New York: The American Historical Society, 1921. Moore, George Foot, Judaism in the First Centuries of the Christian Era. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1946. 2 vols. Morrison, William D., !h! Jews Under Roman Rule. New York: G. P. Putnam's Sons, 1870. Myrdal, Gunnar, An American Dilemma. New York: Harper and Brothers-,-1944. Newman, Marco H., and Marco R. Newman, Sixty Years in Southern California (1853-1913). Boston and New York: Houghton Mifflin Company, 1930. Newmark, Maurice H., and Marco R. Newmark, Census of the City and County of Los Angeles, California, for the Year 1850. Los Angeles: The Times-Mirror Press, 192% --- Ogburn, William F., Social Changes with Respect to Culture and Original Nature. New York: B. W. Huebsch, Inc., !'922. Park, Robert E., and Ernest w. Burgess, Introduction to the Science of Sociology. Chicago: University or CErcago PresS; 1924. Parkes, James William, The Jewish Problem in the Modern World. Londonc Oxford Univarsity Press, 1946. Peters, John P., The Religion of the Hebrews. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, I92~ Radin, Max, The Jews Among the Greeks and Romans. PhiladelpnIa:--The Jewish Publication Society of America, 1915. Reuter, Edward Byron, Handbook of Sociology. New York: The Dryden, Press, 1941.---- Ribalow, M., Sefer Ha-Shanah Liyhudey Amerika. New York: New 429 Histradruth Ivrith Inc., 1944. Ruppin, Arthur, The Jewish Fate and Future. London: The Macmillan Company, 1940:------ , The Jew. in the Modern World. London: The -----:-:M~a-clll.illal'l Company0934. , The Jews of Today. New York: Holt and Company, -~11":'l:9:-orI3.- - - Segal, M.Z., Torah Neviim Ukhtuvim. Tel-Aviv: Dvir PUblishing Company, Ltd., 1948. 6 vols. Sherman, Charles Bezalel, Yidn un Andere Etnishe Grupes in di Fareinikte Shtatn.~ YOrk: Far1ag Undzer Weg,- 1948. Shevky, Eshref and Marilyn Williams, The Social Areas o£ Los Angeles. Los Angeles: University of CalifornIa Pre ss, 1949. Simmel, Ernst, Anti-Semitism. New York: International Universities Press, 1946. smith, William Carlson, Americans in the Making. New York: D. Appleton - Century Co., Inc., 1939. Sorokin, Pitrim A., Societ s ' Culture and Personality. York: Harper and Broters, 1947. Steinberg, Milton, A Partisan Guide to the Jewish Problem. New York: The Bobbs-Merril1 Company, 1945. __=-_, The Making of the Modern Jew. New York: Behrman House, 1948. Tartakover, Arieh, The Jewish Refugee. New York: New York Institute of Jewish Affairs of the American Jewish Congress and World Jewish Congress, 1944. Tcherikover, A., HaYehudim VehaYevanim Batku£ah HaHellen istit. Tel-Aviv: Dvir PUblishing Company, Ltd., 1930. Thomas, William I., and Florian Znanlecki, The Polish Peasant in Europe and America. Boston:~lchard G. Badger, 1920. 5 vols. 430 Tsano!!, Radoslav A., The Moral Ideals of Our Civilization. New York: E. P. Dutton and Company;-Inc7, 1942. The Universal Jewish Encyclopedia. New York: The Univer~ al Jewish Encyclopedia Inc., 1939. Vol. II. Valentin, Hugo M., Anti-Semitism Historically and Criti cally Examined. New York: Viking Press, 1940. Wirth, Louis, The Ghetto. Chicago: The University of Chicagp Presa, 1928. Wolfson, Harry Austryn, Philo. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 1947. 2 vols. Young, Pauline V., Pilgrims of Russian Town. Chicago: University of ChIcago Press, 1932. ---- Zimmerman, Carle C., The Changi~8 Community. New York: Harper and Brothers, 1938. B. PERIODICAL ARTICLES Blumer, H., "Studies in Quantitative and Caltural Soci ology," American Sociological Society, 24:1-23, May, 1930. Cohen, E. E., "Jewish Culture in America," Commentary, 3:412-20, May, 1947. Duker, Abraham G., "Emerging Culture Patterns in America," The American Jewish Historical Society (reprinted from pUblIcation), 39:part 4, June, 1950. Fox, M., "Three Approaches to the Jewish Problem: Assimilation, Maximal, Zionism and Survivalism," Antioch Review, 6:54-68, February, 1946. Goldberg, Nathan, "Economic Trends Among American Jews," Jewish Affairs, l:No. 9, August, 1946. Hadoar, Hebrew Weekly, special Los Angeles edition, 30:1, January, 1950. Hersh, L., "The Downward Trend of Jewish Population," Commentary, 7:185-191, January-June, 1947. 431 Lipset, S. M., flChanging Social StatuB and Prejudice," Commentary, 9:475-79, January-June, 1950. Riesman, D., "Philosophy for Minority Living: The Jewish Situation and the Nerve of Failure," Commentary, 6:413-22, November, 1948. Tcherikover, A., "Shkiatah Shel HaGolah HaYehudit Bemits rayim Batkufah HaRomit," Kneseth, 9:143-62, March, 1945. C. PUBLICATIONS OF LEARNED ORGANIZATIONS Anti-Semitism in the United states in 1947. New York: -----Anti-Defamation League, 1948. Billings, J. S., "Vital Statistics of the Jews in the United states," The American Jewish Year Book, Vol. XVII (5701). Philadelphia, 1940. "The Classification of Jewish Immigrants," YIVO. New York: Yiddish Scientifio Institute, 1945. Pp:-I04. "Cultural Assimilation of Immigrants," International Union for the Scientific Study of Population. London: Cambridge University Press, 1949. Fine, Morris, editor, American Jewish Year Book, Vol. 52. The American Jewish Committee and the Jewish Publica tion Society of America. Philadelphia: Norwood Press Sales, 1951. Fine, Morris, editor, American Jewish Year Book, Vol. 50. Philadelphia: The JewIsh PUblIcat~socIetyof America, 1949. Pp. ~5l-690. Jews in America, the editors of Fortune Magazine, New York: ----Random House, 1936. "Racial Contacts and Social Research," American Sociologi cal Society Publication, Vol. XXVIII. ChIcago: ThnrversIty of Chicago Press, 1934. Shirley, Audrey M., Personality Traits of Jewish and Non Jewish StUdents, Archives of Psychology, No. 290,-- R. S. Woodworth, editor. 432 YIVO Annual of Jewish Social Science, Volume I, edited by ----Shlomo Noble. New York: Yiddish Scientific Institute, 1946. D. UNPUBLISHED MATERIALS Drachsler, Julius and Samuel Goldsmith, "The Los Angeles Jewish Community," Los Angeles, 1923. (In mimeographed form) • Kohs, Samuel C., and Louis H. Blumenthal, "The Jewish Community of Los Angeles." Unpublished work. A Survey of Recreational and Cultural Needs, Los Angeles, 1942. Massarik, Fred, "The Jewish Population of the West Adams Area." (In mimeographed form). Los Angeles: Jewish Centers Association, 1948. Resnik, Reuben Busch, "Intermarriage of Jew and Non-Jew." Unpublished Master's thesis, The University of Southern California, Los Angeles, 1931. Soref, Irwin, tfL'Toldot IiIaHinukh HaYehudi B'Loa Angeles 1850-1937." Unpublished Master's thesis, College of Jewish Studies, Chicago, 1950. E. NEWSPAPERS B'nai B'rith Messenger, 15:1, January 29, 1911. Aron Kodesb BQ%'-Mitzvah Blintzes Cholunt Chremzlech Farfle Gefilte fish Haggadah Hazan Homentashen Kaddish Kashe Kiddush Kneydlech Knishes Kol Nidrei Kreplech Latkes Mamaligeh Matzos 434 GLOSSARY Holy ark (ark of the scroll). Male conflrmant at the age of thirteen. Pancake, custard. Food cooked in covered stove. A Passover cake-delicacy, baked dry in a pan. Dough crumb. Fish cake. Reading book for the first two Passover nights. Cantor Haman's pouch, poppy seed roll (a three cornered roll stuffed with poppy seeds). Prayer for the dead. Gruel, porridge (buckwheat). Benediction of the cup (on Sabbaths and holidays). Dumplings. Paste stuffed with meat or cheese. nAIl Vows"--prayer chanted on Yom Kippur eve. Dough stuffed with meat. Potato pancakes. Corn-meal porridge. Unleavened bread. Megilah Mezuzah Mahel Shofar Siddur Seder Talis Tefilin Teiglech Yahrzeit Yarmulkeh Yizkor 435 The "Scroll of Esther," read on Purim. Parchment schedule with inscription from the Bible, attached to door-post. Circumciser. Ram's horn (blown on New Year's day). Prayer book. Passover ceremony. Prayer shawl. Phylacteries. Cake-delicacy (with ingredients of dough and honey). Anniversary prayer for the departed. Skull-cap. Memorial services for the departed, recited . on certain holidays. APPENDIX -------- APPENDIX A 437 SCHEDULE 1. Age: 2. Sex: Male Female 3. Race: White Oolored Other - 4. Religion: Jewish Protestant Catholic Other -- ----- ----- ,. Place of Birth: Oity State OountI"Y"__ 6. Birth-place ot Parents: Oity__ State_ Oountry__ 7. Birth-place ot Grandparents: Oity__ State Country__ 8. Marital Status: Single_ Married__ Divorced WidOlfed 9. Number of children under 18: BoYS_Girls 10. Number of children over 18: Boys Girls - -- 11. Others living with family: _ 12. How long in U.S.A.: Years Months__ 1.3 • How long in Los Angeles: Years Months -- 14. How long at present address: Years__ Months__ 1,. Do you rent__ or 6wn your home__ 16. Occupation: ----------------------- 17. Oitizenship: Are you a oitizen of the U.S.A.? Yes No -- 18. If not a citizen: Did you apply, or do you intend to apply for citizenship papers? Yes No -- 19. Political Affiliation: Democrat Republican Socialist Other - - - 20. Are you sployed: Yes No - Retired 21. If yes: Full time Part-time 438 22. Annual Incane: a. Head of family $ b. other wage ------ earners $ _ Total • ------ 23. Race of spouse: White Negro Other - - - 24. Religion of spouse: Jewish Protestant Catholic Other- - - - 25. Education (Secular): Circle highest grade completed: a. Grades: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, Junior High Scl'Da1 10, 11, 12, senior High SChool. b. College: Years completed: 1, 2, 3, 4 c. Graduate studies: Years completed: ,,6, 7 d. Degrees held: Major _ e. Other schooling: Such as Trade, Camnercial, etc., Please specit.1 ___ 26. Education (Secular)--spouse: highest grade completed ------- 27. Education (Hebrew): Hebrew School: City state Country' - - - a. Total number of years attended --------- b. Type of sohool: e. d. e. f. g. h. i. 3 day a week 5 day a week- A.ll day (parochial) Hebrew High School Higher Jewish education Diploma or degree held---- Other None------------- 28. Eduoation (Yiddish): Yiddish School: City State Country' - - - a. Total number of years attended ___ b. Type of sohool: Worlanen t s Circle c. Farband- d. Shalan IIerchem 439 28. Education (Yiddish): Yiddish School: (continued) e. Type of school: Jewish Peoplets Fraternal Order -- f. Other ------------- g. None -------------- 29. Education (Sunday School)~ City_State_country _ a. Total number of years attended ---------- b. Type of SUnday School: Orthodox c. Conservative d. Refom - 30. Education (Jewish)-Spou.se: Number of years attended: a. Hebrew School b. Yiddish Schoo··l--- c. SUnday School..... _ d. Other ------- e. None ------- 31. Do your children attend a Jewish school: Yes No --- 32. If yes, name of school ------------------- 33. Are you a member of a synagogue or temple: Yes No -- 34. If yes, speci£y: _ 35. Distance of synagogue from home: a. Less than a mile b. 1 to 3 miles -- c. 3 to 5 miles· d. 5 miles and over- -- 36. How often do you attend religious services: a. D~ b. Once -a~w~e""'ek c. All holidayS-- d. High holidays oIilY e. Do not attend at al"'lr--- f. Do not attend, sickJi__ 37. Do you hold a.n.y office in your synagogue or temple: Yes No -- 38. Have you taken an active part in your synagogue or temple in the past year: Yes No Too old or sick 440 39. If yes, check your particular activitys a. Sunday school teacher b. MEIIlber of P.T.A. (relIgiOus c. Youth group leader d. Officer in the Tem:pye- e. O~er --- school) - No - 40. Languages spoken at hane: English Yiddish Hebrew O~er- - - 41. Do you read Jewish newspapers, periodicals & books. Yes No - - 42. It yes, in which language: a. English b. Yiddish- c. Hebrew- d. What otli8r languages --------- 43. Do you subscribe to Jewish newspapers, periodicals, etc. s' Yes No - 44. If yes, in which language: a. English b. Yiddish- c. Hebrew- d. Other- ------------ 45. Name of newspaper, periodical, etc.: ------------ 46. Do you have in your hane pictures or any art objects on Jewish themes: Yes No 47. If yes, name some: _ 48. Are you a member of the Zionist Organization: Yes No - 49. If yes, of which one: a. General Zionist --- b. Mizrahi .. c. Labor Z"l'"ion---;ir""s'"l't---- d. Hashomer Hatzair -- e. Other ------- $0. Are you a member of a Jewish Center: Yes 51. It yes, which one: _ g. Other. -------------- 53. Approx. contriblltions to Zionist causes: a. General Zionist $ b. Labor Zionist (Gew-e-~"'k-sc"""lhif:--ll:-'ten--):--z"'---- c. HashClller Hatzair$ d. Hapoel Hamizrahi$---------- e. Mizrahi $ f. Jewish National F'und'- ....~.-------- g. Hadassah $ h. Pioneer Women $'---------- 54. List your contributions to non-Jewish causes; such as, CommuniV Chest, Red Cross, etc. $ _ 52. Indicate approx. amount of your contriblltions to the following causes in the past year: a. Synagogue and religious organizations • b. United Jewish Welfare Fund .---- c. Hosp1tals and clinic5 (Jewi8h)~ d. Orphanage (Jewish) # --- e. Hane for the Aged (JewISh) $ f. Federation of Jewish Welfare------ organization $ _ ,5. Do you belong to 8.'D7 Jewish organizations or clubs: Yes No- - 56~ If yes, which: _ 57. Do you attend meetings of Jewish organizations or clubs: Yes No- 58. If yes, how otten: Frequently Occasionally Seldom Never - -- 59. Do you go to Jewish shows, concerts and plays: Frequently_OCcasionally_ Seldan_ Never_ 60. Do you 1iva in a-a. Gentile neighborhood b. 1Wced neighborhood - c. Jewish neighborhoOO- 61. Where do you prefer to liva, in a-- a. Gentile neighborhood b. Mixed neighborhood - c. Jewish neighborhoOd d. Indifferent - 62. Do you prefer Jewish neighbors: Yes No Indifferent - - - 63. Do you have a mezuzah on your door: Yes_ No_ 64. Do you have separate dishes for meat & dairy foods: Yes No -- 65. Do you fast on Yom Kippur: Yes_ No_ 66. Do your children attend pu.blic school on Yom Kippur: Yes_No_ 67. Do your children attend public school on other Jewish holidays: Yes No - - 68. Are candles lit in your hame on Friday Night: Yes No -- &7. Do 10u work on sabbath: Yes_No_ 70. Do you have a "Seder" on Passover: Yes No - - 71. Do you eat matti!os instead of bread during Passover: Yes No 72. Do 10u tell your children Jewish stories at home: Yes_ No_ 73. Do you listen to Jewish radio programs, such as, "Eternal Light": Yes No - - 74. Do you listen to Yiddish radio programs: Yes_ No_ 75. Do you have Hebrew or Yiddish records at home: Yes No - - 76. Do you eat only kosher food: Yes_ No_ 77. Did you bave a Bar-llitzvah cerEID.Ony: Yes_No_ 78. Were you married by a - Rabbi Justice of the Peace Minist.er - - 79. Were you confinned in a temple or Synagogue: Yes_No_ 80. Circumcised by whan: Physician_ JIohel_ I don't lmow_ 81. Are you familiar with the following culinary tems: a. knishes yes_no_ h. latkes yes_no_ b. kneydlech yes_no_ i. mama1igeh yes_ no - c. kashe yes_no_ j. farne yes_no_ d. gefilte fish yes no k. krepleeh yes_no_ - - e. cholunt yes_no_ 1. teiglacb yes_no_" f. chremzlech yes_no_ m. blintzes yes_ no - g. hamentashen yes_no_ n. matzos yes_ no - 82. Do you mow the following ritual concepts: a. Kaddish yes_no_ i. Kiddush yes no b. Yizkor Haggadah - - yes no j. yes_ no - - - c. Shofar yes_ no k. Kol Nidrey yes_ no - - d. Bazan yes_Do_ l. Talis yes_no_ e. Yarmulkeh yes_no_ m. Siddur yes no Tefilin Bar-)fitzvah - - f. yes_no_ n. yes_rlO_ g. Aron-Kodesh yes_ no o. Megilah yes_ no - h. Yahrseit yes_no_ 83. Do you want to preserve Judaism without a.ny changes in religious laws and. traditions: Yes No Indifferent - - - 84. Do you want to be identified as a Jew: Yes No Indifferent - - - 85. Do you want the Jews to be identified as Americans with the exception of religion: Yes_No_ Indifferent 86. In America, the Jews should cease to be a separate ethnic or religious group: Yes_ No_ Indifferent_ 87. Should Jewish parochial schools be encouraged: Yes_ No_ 88. Would you favor intermarriage: a. Yes b. Under-certain circUDlstances c. No - - 89. Do you think that the establisbnent of the State of Israel will help the Jew in America to preserve Judaism: a. Yes b. No- c. I donrt. mow - 90. If yes, are you in favor of it: Yes_ No_ 91. Do you belong to any non-Jewish organizations, clubs, etc.: Yes No - - 444 92. If yes, which ones: _ 93. Do you belong to the I.M.C.A.: Yes No 94. Do you think that the Jews should embraee Christianitys yes _ No Ind'P'J:lrlf ... e-re-n"'"r\---- 95. In business, do you prefer dealing with: Jews Gent"l'ln--e-s----- Indifferent ---- 96. Do you think that anti-semitism in Los Angeles is: a. A very serious problem _ b. 1 serious problem. _ c. A minor problem d. No problem at at ..1----- 97. In your occupation, or getting a job was your Jewishiless: a. Helpful b. A b1ndr~an~ce~·:-------- c. Made no difference ---- 98. ReligiOUS Preference: Orthodox Conservative Reform Other -Wne -- - 99. At Christmas time do you have a Dlas tree: Yes No APPENDIX B 445 CODE FACE SHEET QUESTION # Column QUESTION # Column QUESTION # Column 1 1- 17 22- 31 43- 2 2- 18 23- 98 44- 3 3- 19 24- 33 45- 4 4- 20 25- 34 46- 5 USA 5- 21 26- 35 47- Foreign 6- 22 27- 36 48- 6 USA 7- 23 28- 37 49- Foreign 8- 24 29- 38 50- 7 USA 9- 25a 30- 39 51- Foreign 10- 26 31- 40 52- 8 ll- 27 Years 32- 41 53- 9 Boy" 12- Type 33- 42 54- Girl 13- Region 34- 43 55- 10 Boy 14- 28 Years 35- 44 56- Girl 15- Type 36- 45 57- 11 16- Region 37- 46 58- 12 17- 29 Years 38- 47 59- 13 18- Type 39- 48 60- 14 19- Region 40- 49 61- 15 20- 30 Years 41- 50 62- 16 21- Type 42- 51 63- 446 CODE FACE SHEET (oontinued) QUESTION /I Column QUESTION /I Column QUESTION /I Column 52 a 65- $8 34- 79 5,.. b 66- 59 35- 80 56- c 67- 60 36- 81 a 57- d 68- 61 37- b 58- e 69- 62 38- 0 59- f 70- 63 39- d 60- g 71- 64 40- e 61- 53 a 72- 65 41- f 62- b 73- 66 42- g 63- 0 74- 67 43- h 64- d 75- 68 44- i 65- e 76- 69 45- j 66- f 77- 70 46- k 67- g 78- 71 47- 1 68- h 79- 72 48- m 69- 1 80- 73 49- n 70- START CARD # 2 74 50- 82 a 71- 54 30- 75 51- b 72- 55 31- 76 $2- 0 73- 56 32- 77 53- d 74- 57 33- 78 54- e 75- 447 CODE FACE SHEET (continued) QUESTION # Column QUESTION # Column 82 f 76- 90 42- g 77- 91 43- h 78- 92 1Jh- . 79- 93 45- J. j 80- 94 46- START CARD II j 95 47- k 30- 96 48- 1 31- 97 49- m 32- 99 52- n 33- 32 53- 0 34- 251> 54- 83 35- 250 55- 84 36- 25d 56- 85 37- 27 57- 86 38- 28 58- 87 39- 29 59- 88 40- 89 41- APPENDIX C 448 TABULATION CODE CARD 1 Columns i - 80 . ~. - 1 - Age oi. 1 Q. - 5 - Plaoe of Birth 001. 5 U.S.A. o 20 or less 1 20 - 24 2 2, - 29 . 3 30 - 34 4 3, - 39 , 40 - 44 6 4, - 49 7 ,0 -54 8 55 - 59 9 60-64 X 6, and up Y unspecified Q. - 2 - Sex Col. 2 1 male 2 temale Q. - 3 - Race coi. 3 o 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 X Y LOB Angeles County other Calif., except L.A. Pacific - (Washington, Oregon) Mountain - (Montana, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, N.Mex., Arizona, Nevada) South - (Kentucky, Tenn., Miss., Alabama, Arkansas, La., Va., Okla., Texas, W.Va., N.C., S.C., Georgia, Florida) Midwest - (Ohio, ~diana, Ill., Mich., Wise., Minn., Iowa, llissouri, N.D., S.D., Kansas, Nebraska) New England - (Maine, N.H., Conn., Vermont, Rhode Is., Mass.) Middle & South Atlantic - (N.Y., Pa., N.J•~ Delaware, Maryland, Washington, D.C.) any U.S. born Phgland 13elgium, Netherlands, Sweden, etc. an unlisted foreign country Q. - 5 - Place of Birth 001. 6 Foreign Hungary, CZ80os1ovakia Palestine Canada 9 Russia Poland, Galicia Latvia, Lithuania X 1hmlania Y Germany Austria France Italy, Greece Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Syria,Turkey o 1 2 3 4 other 5 UIlspeci- 6 fied 7 8 o Jewish 3 1 Protestant 4 2 Catholio Q. - 4 - Religion Col. 4 o White 1 Negro 2 lAllatto 3 Yellow 4 other Q. - 6 - Birth-place of Parents Col. 7 U.S.A. Q. - 7 - Birth-place of Grandparents ~01. 9 U.S.A. 0 Los Angeles County 0 Los Angeles County 1 other Calif., except L.A. 1 other Calif. J except L.A. '2 Pacific - (Washington, Oregon) 2 Pacific - (Washington, Oregon) 3 Mountain - (Montana, Idaho, 3 Mountain - (Montana, Idaho, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, Utah, Wyoming, Colorado, N. Mex., N.Mex., Arizona, Nevada) Arizona, Nevada) 4 South - (Kentucky", Tenn., 4 South -(Kentucky, Tenn., Miss., Miss., Alabama, Arkansas, La., Alabama, Arkansas, La., Va., Va., Okla., Texas, W.Va., Okla., Texas, W.Va., N.C., 5 N.C., S.C., Georgia, Florida) 5 s.C., Georgia, Florida) Midwest - (Ohio, Indiana, Midwest - (Ohio, Indiana, Ill., Ill., Mich., Wisc., ltinn. I Mich., Wisc. 1 Minn., Iowa, Iowa, Missouri, N.D., S.D., Missouri, N.D., S.D., Kansas, Kansas, Nebraska) Nebraska) 6 New England - (Maine, N.H., 6 New England - (Maine, N.H., conn.) Vermont, Rhode Is., Conn. 1 Vermont, Rhode Is., Mass. Mass.) 7 Middle & South Atlantic - 7 :Middle & South Atlantic - N.Y., N.Y., Pa., N.J., Delaware, Pa., N.J., Delaware, Maryland, Maryland, Washington, D.C.) Washington, D.C.) 8 any U.S. born 8 any U.S. born 9 England 9 England X Belgium, Netherlands, X Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, Sweden, etc. etc. Y , an unlisted foreign country Y an unlisted foreign country Q. - 6 - Birth -place of Parents Col. 8 Foreign o Russia " 1 Poland, Galicia 2 Latna, Lithuania 3 Rumania 4 Germany' 5 Austria 6 France 7 Italy, Greece 8 Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Syria, Turkey 9 Hungary, Czecoslovalda X Palestine Y Canada ~. - 7 - Birth-place of Grandparents 01. 10 Foreign o Russia 1 Poland, Galicia 2 Latvia, Lithuania 3 Rumania 4 Germany 5 Austria 6 France 7 Italy, Greece 8 Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Syria, Turkey 9 Hungary, Czecos1ovakia X Palestine Y Canada o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 or more §. - 8 - Marltal Status 01. II o single 1 married 2 divorced 3 widowed 4 separated Q. - 9 - No. children under 18 Col. 12 ~ o 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 or more 9 Q. - 9 - No. children under 18 Col. 13 Girls 450 ~. - 10 - children over 18 01. 14 Boys o 0 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 6 6 7 7 8 8 9 or more 9 §. - 10 - No. children over 18 01. 15 Girls o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 or more o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Q. - II - Others 11ving wittl fami.ly Col. 16 o none 1 roansr 2 boarder 3 servant 4 refugee 5 relative r 451 Q. - 12 - How long in U.S.A. Col. I7 ~. - 15 - Do you rent or own hane 01. 20 professional & semi-professioml proprietors,managers,officia1s c1erical,sales,& kindred worlcers craf'tsmen,foremen & " " operative &kindred workers protective service workers domestic &other workers laborers part~ retired housewife student retired, invalid yes no rent own no answer ~. - 17 - 01tizensh1p 01. 22 o 1 Q. - 16 - occupation Col. 21 o 1 2 less than. a year 1 year to 1 yr. & 11 mo. 2 years to 2 yrs. & 11 mo. .3 years to .3 yrs. & 11 mo. 4 years to 4 yre. & 11 JIlO. 5 years to 5 yrs. & 11 mo. 6 years to 6 yrs. & 11 mo. 1 years to 1 yrs. & 11 mo. B years to B yra. & 11 mo. 9 years to 9 yrs. & 11 mo. 10 yrs. to 14 yrs. & 11 mo. 15 yrs. and over less than a year 1 year to 1 yr. & 11 mo. 2 years to 2 yrs. & 11 mo. 3 yeara to 3 yra. & 11 mo. 4 years to 4 yrs. & 11 mo. 5 years to 5 yrs. & 11 mo. 6 years to 6 yrs. & 11 mo. 7 years to 7 yrs. & 11 mo. 8 years to 8 yrs. & 11 mo. 9 years to 9 yrs. & 11 mo. 10 yrs. to 14 yrs. & 11 mo. 15 yrs. and over o 1 2 .3 4 5 Q. - 13 - How long in Los Angeles 6 Col. 18 1 B 9 X Y o 1 2 .3 4 5 6 7 B 9 X y o 1 2 ) 4 5 6 7 8 9 X Y Q.-1B - If not citisen-did you BP& eo1. 23 Q.-J.4-How long at present adiress Col. 19 0 yes 1 no o 1 2 ~ 6 7 B 9 X Y less than a year 1 year to 1 yr. & 11 mo. 2 years to 2 yrs. & 11 mo. .3 years to .3 yrs. & 11 mo. 4 years to 4 yrs. & 11 100. 5 years to 5 yrs. & 11 mo. 67ears to 6 yra. & 11 mo. 1 years to 7 yrs. & 11 BlO. B years to 8 yrs. & 11 mo. 9 years to 9 yrs. & 11 mo. 10 YrS. to 14 TrS. & 11 mo. 15 yrs. and over 452 ~. - 19 - Political AtfW-ation Q. - 22 - Anrmal Income (continued) ~.a C~.ft o Democrat 1 Republican 2 Socialist 3 Canmu.nist 4 Other 5 None 6 Progressive 7 Not stated 8 Rather not state Q. - 20 - Are ygu em.plol!d dol•. 25 o yes 1 no 2 retired 3 self-Employed Q. - 21 - If Y!s - how dol. 26 o $14000 - 14999 P 15000 - 15999 Q 16000 - 16999 R 17000 - 17999 S 18000 - 18999 T 19000 - 19999 U 20000 - 20999 V 21000 - 211999 W 25000 - 29999 X 30000 - and over unspecified ~. - 23 - Race of Spouse 01. 28 o 'White 1 Negro 2 1Iu.latto 3 Yellow 4 Other Q. - 24 - Religion of Spouse Col. 29 ~. - 25a - Education - secular 01. 30 o Jewish 1 Protestant 2 Catholic 3 Other 4 Unspecified 5 Single, no spouse o full-time 1 part-time 2 not stated 8. - 22 - Annual Incane 01. 21 A less than $1000 B $1000 - 1999 C 2000 - 2999 D 3000 - 3999 E 4000 - 4999 F 5000 - 5999 G 6000 - 6999 H 7000 - 7999 I 8000 - 8999 J 9000 - 9999 K 1ססoo - 10999 L 11000 - 11999 • 12000 - 12999 N 13000 - 13999 o none 1 1 - 2 yrs. 2 :3 - 4 yrs. 3 5 - 6 yrs. 4 7 - 8 yrs. , 9 - 10 yrs. 6 11 - 12 yrs. 7 13 - 14 yrs. 8 15 - 16 yrs. 9 17 - 18 yrs. X 19 or more yrs. Y don I t moll' No punch - single no spouse 454 Orthodox Conservative Reform Region Los Angeles County other Calif., except L.A. Pacific -(Washington, Oregon) Mountain - (Montana, ldaho,Ut$h., Wyoming, Colorado, N.Max. , Arizona, Nevada) South - (Kentucky, Tenn., Miss., Alabama, Arkansas, ta., Va., Okla., Texas, W.Va., N.C., S.C., Georgia, Florida) :Midwest - (Ohio, Indiana, Ill., Mich., Wise., Uinn., Iowa, Missouri, N.D., S.D., Kansas, Nebraska) New England - (:Maine, N.H.,Conn-, Vermont, Rhode Is., Mass.) Middle & South Atlantic - (N.Y., Pa., N.J., Delaware, Maryland, Washington, D.C.) (continued next page) 4 7 o 1 2 3 9. - 29 - Education - Sunday School Col. 39 :!1E! Q. - 29 - Education - SUnday School Col. 40 Years o unknown # of yrs. attended 1 less than a year 2 1 - 2 yrs. 3 3 - 4 yrs. 4 5 - 6 yrs. 5 7 - 8 yrs. 6 9 - 10 yrs. 7 11 - 12 yrs. B 13 - 14 yrs. 9 15 - 16 yrs. X none Q. - 29 - Education - Sunday School 001. 38 Region Los Angeles County other Calif., except L.A. 1. PacUic - (Washington,Oregon) 2 Mountain - (Montana, Idaho, 3 utah, Wyoming, Colorado, N. Mex., Arizona, Nevada) South - (Kentucky, Tenn., Miss., Alabama, Arkansas, La., Va., Okla.~ Texas,. W.Va., N.C., S.li., Georgia, Florida) Midwest - (Ohio, Indiana, Ill., Mich., Wise., Minn., Iowa, Missouri, N.D., S.D., Kansas, Nebraska) New England - (Main, N.H., Conn., Vermont, Rhode Is., Mass.) Middle &South Atlantic (N.Y., Pa., N.J., Delaware, Maryland, Washington,D.C.) any U.S. born England Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, eWe 6 an unlisted foreign country' 7 6 4 8 9 X Y Q. - 26 - Education - Yiddish Col. 37 o 1 2 3 o Workmen I s Circle 1 Farband 2 Shalom AleichElJl 3 J.P.F.O. 4 other 5 unknown 6 private 7 L.A. Yiddish School 8 European Yiddish School .9. - 28 - Education - Yiddish coi. 36 !lE!. Q. - 29 - Education - SUnday School Col. 40 (continued) Region a any u.s. born 9 England X Belgium, Netherlands, Sweden, etc. Y an unlisted foreign country Q. - 30 - Education ot Spouse - 001. 41 JEiiish Years - o unknown # of yrs. attended 1 less than a year 2 1 - 2 yre. 3 3 - 4 yrs. 4 5 - 6 yre. 5 7 - 8 yrs. 6 9 - 10 yrs. 7 11 - 12 yre. a 13 - 14 yre. 9 15 - 16 yre. X none Q. - 30 - Educa.tion of swse - Col. 42 JeWis !If!. o Hebrew 1 All-day 2 Heder, Yeshivah 3 private (Hebrew) 4 Hebrew High School 5 Worlanen' s Circle Farband 6 Yiddish (private) 7 J.P.F.O. 8 Higher Yiddish education 9 Sunday School Orthodox X Sunday School Conservative I Sunday School Reform No Punch - Single, No spouse 455 Q. - 31 - Do children attend dol. 43 Jewish school 1 yes 2 no 3 too young 4 too old 5 single 6 no childrel'} §. - 98 - Religious Preference 01. 44 o Orthodox 1 Conservativa 2 Reform 3 Reconstruotist 4 Sephardic 5 none 6 Catholic 7 Protestant 8 Refused to answer 9 Unitarian Clmrch ~. - 33 - Member of ~afogue or 01. 45 emp e o :res 1 no 2 refused to answer Q. - 34 - If member, specify Cole 46 o O.J.C. 1 Rodel Shalom 2 Temple J!)nsnuel 3 Temple Isiah 4 Anshe mnet 5 West L.A. 6 WUshire Temple 7 Baai Reuben, Beth Yehudah a Breed St. Synagogue 9 Uni-versity Synagogue X other Y Unspecified 4,6 Q. 3,-Distallce of Synagogue fr.home Q. 4o-Languages spoken at home Col. 47 Col. 52 Q. hI-Do you read Jewish hews- rpers, periOdicalS & bOoks Col. 5 o yes 1 no o less than a mile I 1 - 3 miles 2 3 - 5 miles 3 , miles and over Q. 36-How often attend religious Col. 48 serve o daily" 1 once a week 2 .all holidays 3 high holidays only" 4 do not attend at all , too sick to attend 6 once in several years 'Q. 37-Hold office in Synagogue eol. 49 o 1 2 ~ 6 7 8 9 X Y Endish Yiadish Hebrew Russian Polish Ladino &English German Spanish, French English &Yiddish English, Yiddish & Hebrew Hungarian other o yes I no Q. 36-T&ld.ng active part in Col. 50 Synagogue o yes 1 no Q. 39-If active in Synagoguet what Col. 51 act1viY o Stmday School teacher 1 member or P.T.A. 2 youth group leader 3 officer in the Temple 4 other , none 6 Ladies Auxiliary 7 Rabbi 8 Sisterhood Q. 42-If you do read, in which eol. 54 language o English 1 Yiddish 2 Hebrew 3 Russian 4 Polish 5 Ladino &English 6 German 7 Spanish, French 8 English & Yiddish 9 English, Yiddish & Hebrew X Hungarian Yother Q. 43-Do lOU subscribe to Jewish newspapers, periOdicils, etc. Col. 55 o Yes 1 no Q. 44-If' lOu do SUbSCribe! in which Col. ;6 . &Uguage o English 1 Yiddish 2 Hebrew 3 Russian 4 Polish 5 Ladino &. English 6 German 7 Spanish, French 8 English &. Yiddish 9 English, Yiddish &. Hebrew X Hungarian Y other 457 Q. 47-If lOU have art obJ~, Col. 59 name some o Oandlesticks 1 Menorah 2 Bible stories illustrated .3 Painting (Jewish themes) 4 Statues (Jewish themes) 5 Torah 6 Mezuzah 7 Religious articles (art.) 8 other 9 Spice Box X art calendar Y Jewish books §. 45-Name of newspaper, periodical, Q. 4e-Member of the Zionist Organ. 01. 57 . etc. dol. 60 o Calif. Jewish Voice 1 Bnai Brith Messenger 2 Hadoar .3 Bitzaron 4 Forward 5 The Day 6 Morning Joumal 7 other 8 Jewish National llonthly 9 Israel Speaks X Forward &. Voice Y Hebrew, Yiddish &. English Q. 46-Dom have in home pictures or ar objects on Jewish themes Col. 58 o yes 1 no o yes 1 no Q. 49-If' memberI of which one Col. 61 o General Zionist 1 Mizrahi 2 Labor Zionist .3 HashClller Hatzair 4 HadaSsah 5 Pioneer Wanen 6 other 7 Revisionist 8 Agudath Israel Q. 50-Are you member ot Jewish Col. 62 Center o yes 1 no 456 Q. 52d-Approx.amt.of contribu.tions col. 65 Orphanage (Jewish) less than $10 $10 - $ 24 25 - 49 50 - 99 100 - 299 300 - 499 Soo - 999 1000 - 2999 3000 - 4999 5000 - and over none doean 1 t mow - not stated Q. 52c-Approx. amt. of contributklls Col. 67 Hospitals &C1inics(Jewi~ o less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 1J9 3 ,0 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 999 7 1000 - 2999 B 3000 - 4999 9 ,000 and over X none Y doesnlt know - not stated Q. 52a-Approx.amt.of contributions ?jot. 65 SYnagogue o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Q. 52b-Approx.amt.of contributions 8 C01.66 9 Un!ted Jewish Welfare Fund X Y Q. 51-If member, of 'Which one Col. 63 o Beverly Fairfax 1 Menorah 2 West Adams 3 Sota-Michigan 4 other 5 Santa Monica o less than $10 1 $10- $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 B 3000 - 4999 9 5000 - and over I none Y doesn't know - not stated. o less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 ,00 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 B 3000 4999 9 5000 - and over X none Y doesnIt lmow - not stated. ~. S2e-Approx.amt.of contribltions 01. 69 Home for Aged (Jewish} o less than $10 9 5000 &over 1 110 - $ 24 X none 2 25 49 Y doesn't 3,0 99 lmow - not 4 100 299 stated 5 300 499 6,00 999 7 1000 - 2999 6 3000 - 4999 Q. 52f-Approx.amt.of ccmtributions Col. 76 Federation of Jewish weJAre o less thau $10 1 $10 - • 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doeen't know - not stated. Q. 52g=Approx.amt.of contributions Col. 7I Other Charities o less than $10 1 $10 - • 24 2 25 - f 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none I doesnlt know - not stated ~. 53a-Approx.contr:ib. to Zionist 01. 72 causes General Zionist o less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doesn't knaw- not stated 459 ~. 53b-Approx.con1irib.to Zionist 01. 73 causes Labor Zionist o less than,$10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none I doesn't know - not stated Q. 53c-Approx.oontrib.to Zionist Col. 74 causes HashClllller Hatzair o less than $10 1 $10 - • 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doesn't know - not stated Q. 5.3d-Approx.contrib. to Zionist 001. 75 causes Rapael Hamizrahi o less then $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doesn't know - not stated Q. 53e-Approx.contrib.to Zionist eol. 16 causes J1izrabi o less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 350- 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 1 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doesn't !maw - not stated ~_ 53f-Approx.contrib.to Zionist 01. 77 causes Jewish National Fum o ·18S8 than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 1 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doesn't !mow - not stated ~. 53~APProx.eontrib.toZionist 01. causes Hadassah o ·less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 460 Q. 53g-Aprox. contrib.to Zionist Col_ 78 continued) causes 7 $1000 - $2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 ,000 and over X none Y doesn't mow - not stated 8. 53h-Approx.contrib.to Zionist 01. 79 causes Pioneer Women o less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 50 - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X no_ Y doesn't know - not stated &_ 53i-Approx. contrib.to Zionist 01. 80 ceases Other Charities o less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 :3 50- 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 .and over X none Y doesn 1 t mow - not stated 461 Card ~ c01~-8a 9. 54-Contrib. to non-Jewish causes Q. 58- 1£ l?u do attend. -how often Col. 36 Gol. 34 a less than $10 1 $10 - $ 24 2 25 - 49 3 So - 99 4 100 - 299 5 300 - 499 ,6 500 - 999 7 1000 - 2999 8 3000 - 4999 9 5000 and over X none Y doesn' t mow - not stated Q. 55-Belong to Jewish Organ. or Col. 31 Clubs o yes 1 no Q. 56-If you do belong - which Col. 32 o Hadassah 1 Pioneer WCII1en 2 General Zionist 3 Farband 4 Worlanen 1 s Circle 5 Histadrut Ivrit 6 Yiddish Culture. Club 7 Mizrahi . 8 SUrvivors of Concentration Camps 9 other X Bnai Brith Y Zionist Youth Conunission Q. 57-Attend meetings of Jewish Col. 33 Organs. a yes 1 no o frequently 1 occasio~ 2 seldan 3 never Q. 59-Attend Jewish shows,conceIj§ Col. 35 etc. a frequently 1 occasiona.lly 2 seldan 3 never §_ 6O-In what neighborhood do lOu 01. 36 !:!! o Gentile neighborhood. 1 mixed neighborhood 2 Jewish neighborhood Q. 6l-Where do lOU prefer to 11ve Col. 37 o Gentile neighborhood 1 mixed neighborhood 2 Jewish neighborhood 3 no difference Q. 62 -Do you prefer Jewish Col_ 38 neifilbOrs o yes 1 no 2 no difference Q. 63-Do lOU have :Mezuzah on £or Col. 39 oor - o yes 1 no 462 Q. 64-no you have separate, dishes Q. 69-Do you 'M)rk on Sabbath for meat and dairy foods Col. 45 Col. 40 o yes 1 no Q. 65-Do you fast on Yom Kippur Col.' 41 o yes 1 no 2 against health Q. 66-Do children attend Public School on y_ Kippur Col. 42 o yes 1 no 2 under school age 3 over school age 4 no children 5 single Q. 67-Do chUdren attenli Public School on other Jewish ~olidaiS Col. 4 o yes 1 no 2 under school age 3 over school age 4 no children 5 single Q. 68-Are candles lit in your hODB on FridaY' night Col. 44 o yes 1 no 2 single man o yes 1 no 2 not stated 3 retired Q. 70-D0 you have "Seder" on Col. 46 Passover o yes 1 no 2 sometimes Q. 7l-Do you eat matzos instead of Dread duri!ig Passover Col. 47 o yes 1 no Q. 72-Do gu tell children Jewish sta as at hCIile Col. 48 o yes 1 no 2 too young 3 too old 4 no children 5 single Q. 73-Do you listen to Jewish radio rgr8lllll, such as IIEtei'1lal ~!ghtil Col. k o yes 1 no Q. 74-Do you listen to Yiddish r8di.o programs Col. 50 o yes 1 no Q. 7$-Do ~u have Hebrew or Yid sh records at home Col. 51 o yes 1 no Q. 76-Do you eat only kosher food Col. 52 . o yes 1 no Q. 77-Did IOu have a Bar-Mitzvah ceremony Col. 53 o yes 1 no 2 I don 1 t remEmber §. 785fl1 whan 'Were you married 01. o by Rabbi 1 by Justice of the Peace onJ.y 2 single :3 Jlinister Q. 79-Were you confirmed in a Temple or Synagogue Col. 5> o yes 1 no 2 I don 1 t remEmber Q. SO-By whan circumcised Col. 56 o by Mabel 1 by physician 2 not ciroumcised :3 I don't know 4 Gentile 5 Sing1e,female 463 Q. ala-Are you familiar with these cUlinary tems Col. 57 knishes o yes 1 no Q. alb-Are&ijfamlliar with these cu1_ tems Col. 58 lmeydlech o yes 1 no Q. a1c-ArMOU fami11ar with these cu .arz te1'llS Col. >9 kashe o yes 1 no Q. a1d-Are you familiar with these cUlinary terms Col. 60 gefilte fish o yes 1 no Q. 81e-Ar~U familiar with these cu1 aq '£ems Col. 61 cholunt () yes 1 no Q. alf-Are you familiar with these Ciillilart terms Col. 62 ehremzlech o yes 1 no 464 Q. alg-Are you familiar with these Q. a1m-Are you familia.r with these Culinary terms cUlinary terms Col. 63 Col. 69 o yes 1 no homentashen o 1 yes no blintzes Q. Blh-Are you familiar with these 9. Bln-Are you familiar with these cUlinary terms CUiiiUiry terms ~.~ ~.N o yes 1 no latkes o 1 yes no matzos Q. Bli-AretAiu familiar with these Q. 82a-Do you know these ritual cUi ary tems .concepts Col. 65 Col. 71 o yes 1 no mamaligeh a 1 yes no Kaddish Q. 81j-Areif/m. familiar with these Q. a2b-Do you know these ritual cUI ary terms conceptS Col. 66 Col. 72 o yes 1 no farfle o 1 yes no Yizkor Q. 8lk-Are~ familiar with these 9. 82c-Do you know these ritual cw::ary terms concepts Col•. 67 Col. 73 o yes 1 no o yes 1 no kreplech teiglach o 1 o 1 yes no yes no Shofar Hazen Q. 82e-Do you lmow these ritual concepts Col. 75 Yarmulkeh o yes 1 no Q. 82t-Do lOU know these ritual concepts Col. 76 TetUin o yes 1 no Q. 82g-Do you mow these ritual concepte Col. 77 Aron-Kodesh o yes 1 no 465 Q. 82h-Do you know these ritual concepts Col. 78 Yahrzeit o yes 1 no Q. 82i-Do IOU know these ritual concepts Col. 79 Kiddush o yes 1 no Q. 62J-Do you know these ritual concepts Col. 80 Haggadah o ye. 1 no 466 Card 3 CollDl1ls ~O - 59 Q. 52k-Do you know these ritual concepts Col. 30 Kol Nidrey o yes 1 no Q. 82L-Do ;eU mOft' these ritual concePts Col. 31 Talis o yes 1 no Q. 82m-Do you know these ritual concepts Col. 32 Siddur o yes 1 no Q. 52n-Do you mow these ritual concepta Col. 33 Bar-Mitzvah o yes 1 no Q. 520-Do you Imow these ritual concepts Col. 34 Megilab o yes 1 no Q. 53-Want to preserve Judaism without cb8i1ges in reliiious laws and traditions Col. 35 o yes 1 no 2 doni 10 know 3 Gentile respondent 4 indifferent Q. 54-want to be identified as a Jew Coil. 36 o yes 1 no 2 no difference 3 Gentile respondent 4 not stated , it all 'depends 6 doni 10 care Q. 5,-want the Jews to be identified as Americans With exception of relig:ton Col. 37 o yes 1 no 2 no difference 3 Gentile respondent 4 don't lmaw Q. 56-In Americt: should Jews cease to be separa ethiiic or religious ~ Co1.3r- o yes 1 no 2 no difference 3 it all depends 4 don't mow 467 Mason Y.M.C.A. Y.W.O.A. Elks other League of Wanen Voters V.F.W. unspecified 1.1.U. Property OWners Assoc. Plumbers Union College fraternity, sorority, alumni Q. 93-Do you belong to the Y.ll.C.A. Col. 45 Q. 92-If you do belong, which ones Col. WOi o yes 1 no yes no under certain circumstances yes no no difference dependa on school Q. 89-Do you think that the establishment of the state of Israel will help the JEJW iii America flO preserve Jud8Ism Col. Li o 1 2 Q. 87-Should Jewish parochial schools be encouraged Col. 39 o 1 2 3 o 1 2 3 4 5 Q. 58-Would y<?U favor intermarr.iarp 6 Col. 40 7 8 9 X Y o yes 1 no 2 I don't know 3 don't care Q. 90-1f yes, are you in favor of it Col. 4~ o yes 1 no 2 no difference 3 don't Imaw Q. 9l-Belonf 1;0 arry non-Jewish organ zationa, clubS,etc • Col. 43 Q. 94-Do you think that Jews should embrace Chr1stianity Col. 46 o yes I no 2 indifferent 3 don't Imaw Q. 95-In wsinesa, with whom do you ,refer dealing Col. 4 o Jews 1 Gentiles 2 no difference o yes 1 no Q. 96-What do zeu think anti semitism 1n LOs Angeles is Col. 48 o very serious problem 1 serious problem 2 minor problem 3 no problem at all 4 don t t know Q. 97-In iiur OCC\lrtion, or get ing a 30 what was Sur Jewi.shness Col. o helpful. 1 a hindrance 2 made no difference :3 dontt know 4 Gentile respondent Q. 99-Do you po.t up Das tree coi. 52 o yes 1 no Q. :32-If !Wi children do attend a J sh school, name of school Col. 53 o O.J.0. 1 Roder ShalElll 2 Tenple &lannel :3 TtIIlple Isiah 4 !nahey Emet 5 West L.A. 6 Wilshire Temple 7 Bnai Reuben 8 L.A.J.A. 9 Yiddish H.S. X University Synagogue Y other 468 Q. 2.$b-Education-secular Col. 5li Degrees held o AB 1 BS 2 AM :3 MS 4 PhD 5 lID 6 DD S 7 LL B 8 other 9 BME §. 25c-Education-secular 01. 55 MaJ<!' o :Medicine 1 Law 2 Dentistry :3 Social Science 4 Education, Business Administratbn 5 Fine Arts 6 En'gineering 7 Physics and Chemistry 8 Social Work 9 other X English, Accounting Y Philology ~. 25d-Education-secular 01. 56 other sChoolinS o Oanmercial 1 Trade 2 Photography :3 Nursmg 4 Art 5 Interior decorating 6 Designing 7 Aircraft 8 Drama Q. 27-Education - Hebrew Col. 57 Foreign o Russia 1 Poland.. Galicia. 2 Latvia, Lithuania 3 Rmnania 4 Germany' 5 Austria 6 France 7 Italy, Greece 8 Spain, Morocco, Algeria, Syria, Turkey 9 Hungary, Czechoslovakia X Palestine Y Canada §. 28-Education - Yiddish 01. 58 Foreigp. o Russia 1 Poland, Galicia 2 'Latvia, Lithuania 3 Rumania 4 Germany 5 Austria 6 France 7 Italy, Greece 8 Spain, Morocco, Algeria" Syria, Turkey 9 H1mga.ry, Czechoslovakia X Palestine Y Canada 469 §e 29-Education - Sunday School 01. S, Foreign o Russia 1 Poland, Galicia 2 Latvia, Lithuania 3 Rumania 4 Germany 5 Austria 6 France 7 Italy, Greece 8 Spain" Morocco, Algeria, Syria, Turkey 9 Hungary" Ozechoslovakia X Palestine Y Canada LEGEND Beverly Hills - 7 Beverlywood - 36" 66" 9 Boyle Heights" Northeast - 62 o o THE THJRI<E STUDY (i) ."' " ", @ @ ~ ..::I (') PIl(PaIl£D SY 1l[~[ ..IlC~ O£""Il.,...(",T W~L~"A[ COUNCIL 0' ...r''IOPOLt~''N LO!> ....(.tLt~ &.,. "II CIl~ 471 APPENDIX E LOS ANGELES JEWISH POPULATION STUDY 1951 Preliminary Notes on )[ethod Fred Massarik, Research Assooiate I Introduotion During the year 1950 to 1951, the Los Angeles Jewish Camnunit,v Counoil sponsored a survey of Jewish population designed to furnish a broad background of facts that 'WOuld prove use.ful to the more efficient planning of a wide variety of organizational and welfare aotivities in the Greater Los Angeles Area. A small popularized report dealing with a fesw facts gathered through this research has already appeared. II SUrvey Method The following were the major steps of the researoh prooess: A. Pre aration of Prelimin Estimates of Jewish Po ation on an a Area Basis. 1 A modification of the "Distinotive Jewish Names" teohnique was employed as the basic estimation method. Subsequent sampling indi oated that the data obtained through the Distinctive Jewish Names teohnique generally oanPared olosely with estimates arrived at by sampling, When suoh factors as -the ratio of distinotive Jewish names to all Jewish names, and average household size were obtained empirioally and used in the oalculationa • For a oombination of study areas 62, 63, 40 and 41, representing the most densely populated areas in the City Eastside and Westside, the Distinctive Jewish Names method resulted in an over-estimate of 1.8%, as oomPared with the sampling results. 1. Data Needed for Making the Preliminary Estimates: a) Spot Map and Count of Phone Book Distinotive Jewish Names (1) The areas that were used for all researoh purposes were "study Areas" as defined by the Metropolitan Welfare Council of Los Angeles, or multiples of such areas. 472 Using the regular telephone directory as a source, house holds bearing the 35 most distinctively Jewish names, as defined by a list developed by samuel C. Kohs (see attached list), were spot mapped and counted by study sections. All listings which were not private residences, such as businesses or ptlblic buildings, were eliminated. All duplicate listings 'Were eliminated. Thus, if Joe Goldberg and Moe Goldberg both have telephones, but live at the same address, one or the other would be omitted from the list. b) §pQt Map and Count of United Jewish Welfare Fund List lIblstinctive Name" ana: "other Jewish Name" Samp!es. All business listings and duplicate listings were eliminated from the United Jewish Wel£are Fund master file. This resulted in an unduplicated file covering 75,000 Jewish households.(2) A 10% sample was drawn by Employing a random method that made use of IBM sorting procedures. This 10% sample was subdivided into two categories: Distinctive Jewish names j and non-distinctive Jewish names. The distinctive Jewish names and the non-distinctive Jewish names 'Were spot-mapped. and. counted area by area. From this it was possible to arrive at a specific ratio of distinctive Jewish names to aJ.l Jewish names on an area bY area basis. When areas were combined into larger sections, this ratio became more statistically stable. c) Phone omership Estimates The telephone company had made available a series of esti mates of telephone ownership percentages for each level of (2) It should be stressed. that the Los Angeles United Jewish Welfare Fund fUe differs considerably from fund raising fUes in many other cities. Recognidng the fluidity or Los Angeles Jewish population and the fact that relatively little is known about any individual new arrival, every attempt is made to make the tile as comprehensive as possible. This means that the bias towards higher econanic status and other biases are less serious than elsewhere. 473 econanic well-being, as defined by average rental or by average hane-ownership value, thus telephone ownership per centages could be calculated for each study section. d) Household Sizes Average household sizes were available for each study section fran three sources: a) The 1940 census; b) The 1945 Los Angeles sampling census; c) Current estimates prepared by the Regional Planning Camnission (Los Angeles County) 2. Steps:in the Calculations Giving the Preliminary Estimates a) The total number of unduplicated households bearing distinctive Jewish names as dra-nn tram the telephone book (see 18. above) was inflated by the proportion of dist:inc tive Jewish names to all Jewish names, obtained by means of the spot-mapping and counting of the United Jewish Welfare Fund distinctive Jewish names and other Jewish names (see lb. above). For example, if' it is shom that 10 out of every 100 names of Jewish households are distinctive Jewish names as defined by the l1st~ we 'Would multiply the 10 (as obtained from the phone book) by 10, to take into account those Jewish households not having distinctive Jewish names, pro viding an est:imate of 100 Jewish households. This resulting figure is equivalent to the estimated number of all Jewish households with telephones in a particular study section. However, this is ll.kely to be an underestimate, because not all Jewish households have telephones. b) Because of this lmderestimat.e, this figure was further inflated for the proportion of households not possessing telephones, as estimated on the basis of the telephone company data (see lc. above). For example, it it is indicated that the percentage of phone ownership is 50%, and if 'We have found that there are approJdmatel;y 100 Jewish households with telephones, we would multiply the est1mate by two to make the necessary correction, giving us the figure of 200 Jewish households. c) The resulting figure, which corresponds to the total number of Jewish households estimated to be resident within 474 the area, was multiplied by an average household size, as obtainable by one of the three sources listed previously'• . For example, following through with the illustration used before, the household size might be approximate~ 3, in which case we would estimate a Jewish population of 200 X 3, or 600. Here we assume temporarily that Jewish house hold size is approximately equal to non-Jewish household si~e, although later, using results obtained from sampling, a more speoific Jewish household size may be substituted. 3. Assumptions Underlying the Prelimin!U'Y Estimates This estimation method rests upon a number ot assumptions, which although individual11' open to challenge, on the whole seem to provide adequate results as indicated by the correspondence between sampling est:IJD.ates and the Distinctive Jewish Names method estimates. The following assumptions are pertinent: Assumption 1: Assumption 2: Within a particular relative~ hanogeneous social area, the Jewish population has approximately the same proportion of telephones as the non Jewish population. In view of the fact that the average econanic status of the Jewish population tends to be some what higher than that of the non-Jewish popula tion, this assumption may lead to a slight over estmation of Jewish popl.1lation. The ratio of distinctive Jewish names to all Jewish names as obtained from the large, albeit not exhaustive United Jewish Welfare Fund lists, is similar to the ratio actuaJ.]y found for the total Jewish population. This assumption is like1¥ to lead. to underesti mates of Jewish poPllation, because we suspect that the list may be biased somewhat in the direction of greater identifiability as Jews, in which the Jewish name would playa role. Particu larly', it may be argued that in areas to which "name changers lt or more assimilated Jews tend to move, these ratios become less meaningful. Assumption 3: The original percentages of telephone ownership as furnished by the telephone company are accur ate. 475 We have no direct evidence ot the adequacy ot the telephone company research, but recognizing that the telephone company figures are estimates, there is no reason to doubt their usefulness for our purposes here. Whenever methods such as the Distinctive Jewish Names teclmique are used to estimate Jewish population, the use of EIIlpirical constants (such as actual ratios of distinctive Jewish names, actual percent ages of phone ownership, etc.), make possible est:1m.ations that are DDlch closer to results ascertained through sampling than if hypo thetical constants are used. B Design?f Samples Based Upon Preliminary Jewish Population Estimates The knowledge gained about the geographical distribution of Jewish popu lation trom the estimates specified above, laid the groundwork for a more economioal design of samples of households which may be selected for interviewing. However, an;y study of Jewish population faces a major dilemma in its sampling design. If Jewish households onl3" are to be investigated, direct area sampling teclmiques become very unrewarding in areas in which the Jewish popu.1.ation is sparse. It we were interest ed in designing a s~ee sample for a large area containing both densely populated sections, 1S problem would not be nearl3" as serious as it is 1£ we are interested in some information on an area by area basis. '!'he latter was the case in this survey. In a section which has perhaps 5% Jewish population, about 95% "wasted" calls would have to be made with non-Jewish households, in order to secure even five contacts that are meaningful in terms ot the survey objective. Realizing these difficulties, the following procedure was utUized: Random area samples were designed for those sections in which Jewish population was shown to be relativel3" dense by the preliminary estimates. The cut-off point of density was about 35%. In areas in which the percentage of Jewish population fell below this mark, it became necessary to lean upon available lists as a basis for sampling. Special efforts were made to obtain broad, representative lists of Jewish population for these less densely populated sections, particularly as provided by samples drawn from the United Jewish Welfare Fund household 11st. Admittedly, samples drawn from even a relatively comprehensive list are subject to some criticiam. They are likely to include a group of personS more readily identified as Jewish; they are more likely to include contributors to the Welfare Fund, although this is by no means a requirEment for their inclusion in the list; they are more likely to include organization members, etc. However, while some bias of this nature is likely to exist, the extent of this bias need not be as pro nounced as one might tear. We might recall that the United Jewish 476 Welfare Fund list that was spot-mapped contains 75,000 Jewish house holds. Per~ps 10% of this list represented "deadwood, It people who may have moved away, etc. But even with let us say 65,000 Jewish households, a total population of approximately' 200,000 is covered. Recognizing that this total of 200,000 covers not the entire area, but onl.y a portion of it, we may assume that the lists are of the average between 2/3 and 3/4 canplete. Thus, the major bias lfould be produced by 25% or 33% not included in the list. Furthermore, as far as social planning purposes are concerned, this bias is not particularly serious, because persons included on the list are more likely to be recipients of service, participators in community organizations, etc., as con trasted with those individuals not identified. In the final technical report data will be analyzed section by section, and any generalization based upon samples drawn from lists as oPP9s~ to samples selected on a random area basis will be distinguished.l3) However, for PIll1'Oses of convenience and recognizing the limitation of the methods, generalizations reported during reports are based upon a weighted master sample, with cases drawn from each of the sections and strata in proportion to their total weight in the entire uni verse. (4) Specific sampling procedures used for area sampling purposes were fair4" complicated and will not be reported. here in detail. Two major methods were used; one was based upon the "reverse gu.ide tele phone book, 11 which lists phone nwnbers and addresses by street address rather than alphabetical4r by name. However, this procedure was so designed that it was not subject to any significant bias in the direc tion of higher phone ownership. The other method involved the random marking of spots on a large map, with the interviewer required to hit a home near a particular target spot. (3) From a methodological standpoint it 'Would have been ad:vis able to select two small or moderately sized samples during the pre test, one drawn on a city-1ride basis through. area sampling, and one drawn on the basis of list sampling. Subsequently, the significance of difference of characteristics between these two populations could have been investigated, and. some overall indication of the extent of bias made. Limitations of funds prevented this approach in this particular survey. Although it is quite likely that the differences are fairq stable through time" at least through. a period of two or three years, at that it 'Would be possible in future research to proceed on this basis in an effort to check any possible biased influences. (4) In the master sample referred to here, somewhat less than 700 households were included, although the entire survey covered. more that 1,,400 cases. However, from a standpoint of convenience of tabula tion, this "throwing awrq of information" temporarily seemed justified. Specific checks indicate that percentages deriVed from an analysis of 471 Q. Interviewing By means of a small-group interview method l information~ obtained from all respondents present when the interviewer ca1led. t5 ) Responses on the "objective" characteristics of households, such as age composi tion, la15t plaoe of residence, natiVity', etc., are relatively, although not entirely, independent of the inter-personal dynamics of the small group interview situation. The average interview was about 4,-,0 minutes in duration. 3, DISTINCTIVE JEWISH NAMES (Kobs Study) Bernstein Berman Caplan Cohen Cohn Epstein Feldman Friedman Ginsberg Gold Goldberg Goldman Goldstein Greenberg Grossman Horowitz Kalm Kaplan Katz Levin Levine Levinson Rosen Rosenbaum Rosenblocm Rosenthal Rothman Rubin Samuels Shapiro Siegel Silverman Weinberg Weiner Weinstein the master sample compare very closely' against percentages calculated on appropriate weighting of the non-proportional stratified randan sample, which constituted the actual study design. , The final report 'Will be based on the non-proportional stratified random sample rather than on the shortcuts which fail to make use of the full amount of information actually available. (,) To be reported in the forthcoming issue of Sociometrz. U nivet £i;ty tOt Southern CaliforniaL.I~

Abstract (if available)

Abstract A number of studies have been made of assimilation as a social process, but this study has been undertaken for a particular purpose, namely, to investigate the religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles, and to ascertain to what extent there are noticeable variations in the effects of these factors in three distinct areas available for comparison.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles

PDF

Changing socio-cultural patterns of the Chinese community in Los Angeles

PDF

Movie habits and attitudes of the under-priviledged boys of the All Nations area in Los Angeles

PDF

The Korean community in Los Angeles County

PDF

The participation of the Negro in the community life of Los Angeles

PDF

A study of one hundred unmarried mothers in Los Angeles

PDF

A sociological analysis of the Negro press in Los Angeles

PDF

A study of the war time control imposed on the civilian motion picture industry and with some reference to those affecting the Army motion pictures during World War II

PDF

Cultural, organizational, and communicational factors affecting the social marketing campaigns for a non-governmental organization to establish a successful presence in China

PDF

The French in Los Angeles: A study of a transplanted culture

PDF

A study of the growth of Negro population in Los Angeles and available housing facilities between 1940 and 1946

Asset Metadata

Creator Bin-Nun, Dave (author)

Core Title Religious and other cultural factors in social control affecting the assimilation of Jews in Los Angeles

School Department of Sociology

Degree Doctor of Philosophy

Degree Program Sociology

Publication Date 10/01/1952

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag anti-semitism,Aron Kodesh,assimilation,Bar-Mitzvah,Blintzes,Business,Cholunt,Chremzlech,circumcism,citizenship status,Community,cultural factors,culture,education,employment,Farfle,Federation of Welfare Organizations,Gefilte fish,Haggadah,Hamizrahi,Hazen,home for the aged,Homentashen,Hospitals,household,Hspoel,immigration,Income,intermarriage,jew,Jewish,Jewish National Fund,Jewish organizations,Jewishness,Kaddish,Kashe,Kiddush,Kneydlech,Knishes,Kol Nidrei,Kreplech,Labor Zionist,Language,Latkes,Magilah,Mamaligeh,Marriage,Matzos,Mezuzah,Mizrahi,non-Jewish organizations,OAI-PMH Harvest,Orphanages,political affiliation,Population,Recreation,Religion,religious factors,Seder,Shofar,Siddur,social control,synagogue,Talis,Tefilin,Teiglech,United Jewish Welfare Fund,Yahrzeit,Yarmulkeh,Yiskor,YMCA,Yom Kippur,zionist parties

Place Name Beverly Hills (city or populated place), Beverlywood (city or populated place), Boyle Heights (city or populated place), California (states), Los Angeles (city or populated place), Los Angeles (counties), USA (countries)

Format dissertations (aat), xviii, 477 leaves : ill. ; 29[?] cm. (aacr2)

Language English

Contributor Digitized by the University of Southern California (provenance)

Advisor Vincent, Melvin J. (committee chair), McDonagh, Edward C. (committee member), Neumeyer, Martin H. (committee member), Nordskog, John E. (committee member), Sabagh, Georges (committee member)

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-m25

Unique identifier UC1108579

Identifier etd-BinNun-19521001 (filename),usctheses-m40 (legacy collection record id),usctheses-c127-7747 (legacy record id),usctheses-m25 (legacy record id)

Legacy Identifier etd-BinNun-19521001.pdf

Dmrecord 7747

Document Type Dissertation

Format dissertations (aat),xviii, 477 leaves : ill. ; 29[?] cm. (aacr2)

Rights Bin-Nun, Dave

Type texts

Source University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions (213) 743-1672; https://www.usc.edu/isd/libraries/locations/grand/

Repository Name Libraries, University of Southern California

Repository Location Grand Avenue Library, 3434 South Grand Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90007

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu