Rereading Golden Doves after almost twenty years, to see what I understand better and what ideas I still find persuasive.
It’s a trip. Every page has an insight or claim that resonates deeply. The book is full of associations, parallels, and references that, for the careful reader, are mind-blowing to consider and transform one’s understanding of key terms and concepts in Judaism. R Faur z”l was highly intelligent, very creative, and extremely well-read.
But every page also has a tendentious claim presented nakedly or features a binary polemic that seems labored, totalizing, and at times self-contradictory. Arguments undermine each other (and sometimes the overarching claims of the book). I’ve long said that Faur the polemicist is surpassed by Faur the exponent, and it shows no less in this early work.
After twenty years, I understand why R Faur z”l had trouble getting his ideas accepted by academia: it’s not all due to Ashkenormative bias.
But after twenty years, I’m glad to see that this book, which was so impactful on my understanding of rabbinics, language, and culture, still has a lot to offer the critical reader. I’m looking forward to continuing this read and to returning to the book repeatedly in the future.
Addendum: I’ll also say that the conversations I’ve had with ChatGPT about this book and about R Faur’s ideas in general, have been very illuminating. In particular, my exploration of the intersection of semiotics and metaphysics has been quite thought-provoking.