LESSONS IN NOTHINGNESS

What transcendent lessons might we learn from Britany’s downward careen?

“Absolutely none,” you’ll wearily answer. A once-innocent child, coached by her handlers and her own narcissism, has decomposed into an annoying, but entertaining, puddle of schadenfreude.

The expected litany of cliches: Britney . . . “too much too soon,” “both a cause and result of the slack-jawed empty-headedness of today’s youth,” “a symptom of society’s pervasive decadence,” “a grotesque image of self-indulgence gone wild,” “a basically stupid, big-breasted girl co-opted by greedy phonies,” “simply self-destructive.”

Beyond all the clichés, the transcendent message is to let Britney choke on her own vomit. Stop with the pity. Stop with the excuse-making. Stop with the compassion. Stop the limousines dropping her off and then taking her back to 90210 after her field trips to rehab. Marginalize her as a loser, just another deflowered flower out on the street on a collision course with coked up ‘ho-dom.

Britney’s path has been sabotaged by greedy faux-friends. Nonetheless, her path has been paved with gold. She blew it herself. She had assistance, but she also was guilty of rejecting a better way, presumably inculcated by parents, school, church, and small-town values.
But now transcend Britney and consider people living in squalor on the streets.

Most of us do not pity them, nor make excuses, nor show them understanding and the benefit of doubt, nor send limousines to pick them up and drop them off. At best, maybe they get is a corndog and a mat in a shelter, then to be booted back on the streets at 6:00 AM. They roil in their own vomit, some of them because they blew it via alcohol, drugs, or shiftlessness.

But a majority of the homeless are out on the streets due to no fault of their own. They are there because of domestic violence, mental illness, lack of education and marketable job skills. Only a small minority of them will ever be in place to transition out of homelessness, because those resources are so pitifully scarce.

The homeless should not be relegated to the streets, but they are. Britney, in her lucrative self-inflicted destructiveness, should be. But she will likely never be relegated to a taste of the mean streets, but she should be.

This is the transcendent lesson of Britney’s self-debauchery: We who are warmly ensconced in the Upper Middle Class, just like me, have never tasted the bitterness of the streets, a descent from phony self-sufficiency to pathos to nothingness. Maybe an encounter with helplessness would so enlighten us to come away humbled, more cherishing of that which is sacred in our lives, understanding of the reality of the human condition, no longer so oblivious of love of neighbor and love of God.

A friend of mine, an orthodox rabbi in his 50’s, took the self-challenge to the extreme, at the advice of a Presbyterian colleague. My friend would take only the clothes on his back, a clean towel, and a knapsack. He would randomly pinpoint a town, fly there, and – devoid of any money or resources – find his way back home.

Upon his return, he spoke to me of the nights spent in shelters, sleeping on the streets, begging to sweep out a bar for $2 an hour, where the best place to hitchhike are (truck stops), learning how to beg, adapting to nothingness. My friend, a genius, scion of great rabbinical families, Johns Hopkins credentials, got a third of the way back home, from Buffalo to Atlanta, in a week.
He know that he would return to Upper Middle Class-dom. Regardless, the changes to him brought on not only stories, but encounters so core-shattering and life-shaking that they gave birth in him empathy, understanding, and self-doubts that he had never before experienced. The transformation of a life.

This is precisely what Britney, stripped of all pretension, needs. It’s likely what every one of us needs: an encounter with nothingness, a descent into relentless urban squalor.

Need we ourselves go on that same sobering journey? Is that what it would take to open our hearts and souls?

A MASHKE MARTINI

Scotch or vodka, it makes no difference to me. Pour me three shots of Glenlivet or Grey Goose, and I’m a happy man, gleefully under the table.

However, the discriminating palate of my Lubavitch friends prefers “white” liquor (vodka), over “brown,” (scotch, bourbon, etc.) Indeed, they simply call white “mashke – the beverage par excellence.”

Why “white” above “brown”? Perhaps the answer derives from kashrut: Brown could attain some of its darkness by adding goyische wine, rendering it unkosher. White, could not be polluted.

I recently had conversation with a young Lubavitcher about drinking white mashke. He whispered to me that he had hard time drinking vodka – nausea, headache, horrific hangover. He craved, he said, to have the same celebratory, euphoric buzz that his friends enjoyed at the various Chasidic functions, while he was busy steering the porcelain bowl.

I have decades of experience in drinking white, so I offered him unsolicited advice. I told him: “Chill the mashke, almost to the point of freezing. Only use the best vodka, nothing less than Stolichnaya. Then, pour it into a broad glass. Shot-glasses are used to measure, not drink. Why broad? Mashke must be allowed to breathe, so that its bouquet is savored. And, I bet you’re drinking it with cake or nauseating sweets. Sweets make mashke disgusting. Good mashke deserves something salty. Do you like olives? Try soaking some of them in the mashke. Then, sip it. No more shots.”

A few months went by. We encountered each other. Yes, his friends consider him a heretic, but it was a price he was willing to pay for a buzz without a retching hangover. And the best benefit, he said, was that his bride-to-be was no longer furious with him, nor did she have to clean his shoes the next morning.

So, he is a heretic. But, if Lubavitch has evolved into the age of laptops, iPods, and satellites, why shouldn’t they bring the same modernity to the mashke they drink?

And along the way, no one will realize that I have just taught them how to transform the yesterday’s “white mashke” into a beverage that they will never know is a really great Martini.

KUGEL AT THE MEAT-AND-THREE

Have you ever eaten at a “meat-and-three”?

Chances are not, unless you have visited my hometown in rural America. There are at least 25 meat-and-three restaurants within a 16-kilometer radius from where I live. The common denominator among them is that they all serve the simplest food in the simplest manner: one plain main course chosen from the likes of meat loaf, chicken, fried fish, and three side dishes selected from among pickled beets, peas, beans, squash, bread pudding, and the other foodstuffs you would expect a yokel to eat.

I have had occasion to dine (fish, not ham) at a local meat-and-three and have always enjoyed it. Ironically, I have recently been ordained as a local meat-and-three expert under the pseudonym, “Rabbi Ribeye,” because of my newspaper column and forthcoming television show. The premise of my column and show is to travel throughout rural America, sampling the cooking and chatting with the cooks and diners.

Knowing the proprietors of a local meat-and-three, I proposed to them a novel idea: Let me cook a tray of potato kugel, I asked, and offer it as one of the three side dishes for a couple of days. We’ll see who eats it and what their reaction is, without telling them that it is quintessential Jewish food. Let’s see if the word gets out and the diners eat more and more kugel each day.

Well, need I tell you that it was such a tremendous success that it now appears on the menu every day and has become a favorite among the yokels, never knowing that it is “Jew-food”?
Then I tried the same with matzo-ball soup, with resounding results. The ultimate success came with my chopped liver, which many of the goyim declared “better than ham-and-cheese.”
Oy, what a victory for God’s chosen people. The local meat-and-three was being slowly converted to a classical Jewish delicatessen, just as the local gentiles were unwittingly being converted to Judaism.

I take no credit for this discovery. All honor goes to God. One can only assume that the goyim stood there with us at the foot of Mount Sinai, and instead of manna, they insisted on ordering meat-and-three.