Heeb Magazine - Editor in Chief

No it’s not a parody and we haven’t seen the movie. It’s important to understand that this spread is not a response to Christianity and it’s not a direct response to the movie. It’s a response to one man’s pomposity. The kind of campaign and the way Mel Gibson has positioned himself as if he optioned the story rights from Jesus himself. The way he claims the Holy Ghost has directed this film. The pretentiousness of the Aramaic and Latin and the idea that this is somehow beyond historical criticism. Also it’s the sort of evangelical purpose that makes us a little uncomfortable. I think by and large the photo spread was conceived as an appropriate feature for our audience because our audience is young Jews in their 20’s and 30’s.

This is a generation of Jews who unlike their parents and any generation before them grew up largely unscathed by Anti-Semitism. I think as this film gathered momentum we sensed that our audience was really confused, torn and ambivalent about what they were seeing in the marketing of this film and the reaction to it. I think it will be clear for anyone who looks at this that we’re not trying to present an authoritative perspective on what happened. The idea is try to debunk the idea of a historically accurate representation.

Our generation isn’t one that is going to pay so much attention to an editorial and we wanted people to pay attention to this. We think it’s really fucked up. The prerelease sales are very disturbing. We got together a bunch of our friends, Jews and Christians, and what you see on the pages is our own inter-faith take about this. So many religious leaders are arguing back and forth. So here is a bunch of Jews and Christians throwing together our own passion play. What I think the spread does is articulate our anxiety and ambivalence about the campaign.

That’s exactly what we’re responding to. We’re not responding to the movie. I’m ready to like the movie. I like historical drama and I don’t necessarily think that Mel Gibson is anti-Semitic. I like a lot of his movies. But we’re responding to the self-righteousness that this movie is beyond criticism and that it is a literal portrayal of what went on in Jesus’ final hours. We had a lot of choices here. It’s conspicuous that this is not a historical take.

Right, I’m not a historian and I haven’t seen the movie. So this really is Mel Gibson using marketing to exploit deep seated anxieties and fears in American culture and he’s been largely successful. He’s a marketing genius. No matter how much his father sticks his foot in his mouth he comes out on top. I’m not part of any boycott but I’m not going to be prone to view it as history and I think many will.

We’re trying to create dialogue and a conversation. We’re trying to express what we know is latent feelings among our readers and friends. The anger over the way this campaign has unfolded.

It’s strange because it’s following this whole slew of press over how it’s cool to be Jewish. I’ve always felt uncomfortable with that equation since it’s really not cool to be Jewish in Istanbul or Buenos Aires or on the streets of Jerusalem. It was about time we addressed anti-Semitism within our pages and not in over ly earnest or dramatic way. This is America in the year 2004 and it’s by and large a good time for Jews in America. But that being said it’s our first timely cover. Our issue comes out the same day Mel’s movie comes out so I expect it to be received differently than prior issues. I think it promises to create a lot of positive discourse and give voice to a demographic that I don’t necessarily see being represented in the media so far in the coverage of this story. Usually it’s a quote from the ADL or the UJC but I think it was important thing for young Jews to have their voices heard in a way that’s not in opposition to their Christian friends. We could have easily made this an all Jewish passion play. It’s conspicuous that we did not cast Shecky Goldfarb as Jesus. We cast this majestic beautiful friend that has nothing resembling a reverent relationship with Christianity. I think it’s an interesting fresh perspective on a very timely issue so it wouldn’t surprise me if it fostered a larger conversation.

I don’t know what that means. To me cool is a word that comes from the marketplace. It’s a word used to sell breakfast cereal. That’s what I think of cool. To describe an ethnic or religious orientation as cool is a very small step away from saying it’s uncool. I don’t think of Heeb as a magazine for cool Jews, I think of it as a magazine for Jews or young people that are actively trying to make sense of what it means to be Jewish in the 21st century. That I think is a search that accommodates for self criticism, humor, certainly iconoclasm and there’s nothing more Jewish than the effort to break idols.

I don’t know anything about that.

We’re not losing anything. It’s not even an issue. They pledged a generous contribution to us and they’ve fulfilled it. They haven’t threatened or insinuated to withdraw it. As the New York Times reported we were incubated by the organized Jewish world but part of what I’ve been trying to do since I became publisher is shift from this non for profit model to a for profit model.

22,000. We have a readership of about 90,000 based one the 4.5 pass along rate.

It is. We’re clearly tapping into something larger. It’s humbling to run a magazine with an all volunteer staff. It’s humbling to not be able to pay for written material and photographs. It’s a monumental task to put out one magazine and now we’ve put out five. It’s strange to have conceived this in the basement of a synagogue on the Lower East Side sitting around drinking beer and cracking jokes about Hebrew school then realizing that you’re a larger cultural force in some way.

by Daniel Robert Epstein

SG Username: AndersWolleck