In January 2016, just a bit over 10 years ago, I submitted an unsolicited, over-the-transom column to the Jewish Standard, titled “Remembering Rabbi Eugene Borowitz.” It was an appreciation that I, a lifelong member of the Modern Orthodox community, had written about my surprisingly warm relationship with a towering, leading 20th-century Reform theologian. I thought that since we made somewhat strange bedfellows, I could easily find someone to publish it. Nope; I almost struck out.
However, after swinging and missing twice, I was lucky that the Standard’s editor, Joanne Palmer, my now friend but then a complete stranger, accepted the piece. It appeared a few days later, complete with a headshot and a one-paragraph bio. (For the full version of this tale, see “Column A . . . .”)
And just like that — poof! — here I am, a decade older and a regular Standard columnist with 199 “I’ve Been Thinking” columns under my belt, angsting over how to commemorate this 10th anniversary/bicentennial column.
Much has changed in my personal life since that first column. While still blessedly married to the same woman (with our 56th wedding anniversary just days away), since writing column No. 1, I’ve retired from practicing law, published a book, begun once again to devote regular weekly time to the study of Torah as I had done in my long-ago days at Yeshiva College, won some Rockower awards, eased off my New York Times addiction — I now have the print paper delivered only three days a week (with digital access the rest), and have developed the fortitude to be able to miss some issues without feeling the need to go to the library to read them weeks later — and have become more involved in Teaneck concerns, activities, and politics, while expanding local relationships beyond my more intimate Modern Orthodox community.
Together, Sharon and I have danced at the wedding of a daughter who, with her husband, has given us three exceptional grandchildren on top of the three stupendous ones we already had, enjoyed a daughter’s oeuvre at a juried art show, celebrated many wonderful family rites of passage, survived the covid years, watched a grandson star at Chidon Tanach on Israeli television, observed secular and Jewish holidays surrounded by family ranging from infants to those more than nine decades old, saw a daughter’s expert care for her students expand to her fellow teachers by accepting a union leadership role, enjoyed some serious and exhilarating world travel, and lost deeply mourned core members of our immediate family. We’ve also aged, experienced, and, pooh pooh, recovered from some health issues, and while we feel much younger than our almost 79 years, we understand the calendar doesn’t lie.
It’s been a decade-long rollicking and somber roller coaster ride, during which I’ve been privileged to share in these pages the details of lots of the above, and much more. But as I approach this personally meaningful date in my life, I wonder what my being a columnist has taught me; I ask myself whether this particular experience — sitting down at my computer every week or two or three over the past 10 years for several hours, often over several days, and banging out some thoughts and opinions for publication — has, perhaps, changed me in some way.
My overall writing process certainly isn’t new; indeed, it’s similar in many ways to what I’d done for more than 46 years as a commercial litigator. During those years it was affidavits, memoranda of law, and appellate briefs; for the past decade it’s been Jewish newspaper columns. But the hard work, and I like to think skill, of taking roughly thought-out ideas and formulating them into — hopefully — carefully reasoned and tightly written, compelling, and articulate arguments that can — again, hopefully — persuade and convince readers, whether judges sitting in their chambers or neighbors relaxing with the Jewish Standard on a Shabbat afternoon, are alike in many ways.
In both, each word, sentence, and paragraph must be carefully weighed, each fact painstakingly and conscientiously researched, each argument tested for flaws and weaknesses, each introduction analyzed to determine if it’s inviting and each conclusion to see if it brings home the point with a memorable bang. And then, after enough redrafting makes it suitable for others to read, it’s circulated to a select few who ask questions, make suggestions, and proffer criticisms, which usually engender further revision and rewriting — often more than once — until the final product is ready for submission.
But with all these similarities, my style of writing has seen some change. There’s a freedom I feel in writing columns that I didn’t with briefs. I’m relieved from some of the more somber rules of serious prose — why not use contractions? After all, that’s how I talk, and if it makes my columns more conversational in tone, all the better. Indeed, one of the loveliest compliments I received on a column (and I cherish all, so keep them coming), was from a long-time friend dating back to my Far Rockaway/HILI days, who said that reading my columns is like chatting with me on the phone. Well, with “I’ve Been Thinking” I’m on a party line (think Zoom without a computer), with many hundreds participating in the conversation. And although I’m still a stickler for some aspects of grammar, I’ve discovered that sometimes — perhaps even often — thoughtfully breaking a rule can lead to greater vitality and appeal.
Most judges, though, were too overworked, with mounds of paper piled on their desks, to forgive a violation of one of Strunk & White’s elements or appreciate any clever, or even elegant, turns of phrase. They were — and understandably so — more concerned with getting the facts and the law right because they needed to decide the case fairly, rather than chat with me or relish an enjoyable read.
But my column readers have no motions to decide or opinions to write; they have the time to experience and enjoy the writing even if they don’t agree with my arguments and opinions, or savor a bon mot or an aside that tries to add to the overall experience even if not relevant on all fours to the point being made. This gives me latitude to perhaps use an allusion that might require an encyclopedia or Google, be playful with a phrase, abuse alliteration articulation in arguments, try out different column formats, be a bit mushy in telling a personal story or punchy by using a one-word sentence or three-word paragraph.
Sure. Why not?
Of course, these attempts at different writing styles don’t always work out as well as I had hoped. However, being responsible only for myself and not for a client’s case (and pocketbook), I have leeway to take risks with language, writing, and argumentation that I couldn’t take before. And trying out new approaches is fun, unlike drafting yet another affidavit explaining why my adversary didn’t produce all the documents requested in my discovery demand.
Another difference is that when writing legal documents, I never had to struggle with choosing a topic. If, for example, a case was suitable for summary judgement, the circumstances of the case dictated the topic, and I knew exactly what I needed to do. The analysis and writing might be hard, but deciding what I would write about wasn’t.
It’s different in the Standard. When Joanne offered me this gig, she said I’d appear every four or six weeks — hah! little did she know — and said my brief was to write about “whatever I liked.” That offer, which clinched my saying “yes,” was both liberating and frightening. On the one hand nothing was off limits; on the other, I’d have to narrow that ocean of possibilities to a specific single topic for each column. Not as easy as I first thought.
I quickly realized that I’d have to always be on the lookout for topics, always searching for something interesting to me that would also be, I hoped, interesting to my readers. And this resulted in a life lesson that I continue to learn: I listen more intently to what others are saying and keep my eyes wide to what’s happening around me. As I noted once before, I’m “forced to more carefully notice and seriously consider experiences I otherwise might have passed over without a second glance.” Or to put it in Seinfeldian terms, by constantly being on the lookout for things that are “column worthy,” I’m able to not only appreciate things that I find worthy but also those that did not make the cut. My world glows with more vitality, people are more interesting, conversations more compelling, interactions more intriguing, stories more vibrant. I miss less around me and feel more engaged.
I’ve had a wonderful 10 years here at the Standard and learned life lessons to boot. Some might take the win and hang up their spurs, but I ain’t going anywhere. I’m having too much fun (how I love being recognized at a wedding or in ShopRite as the guy with the bowtie who writes for the Jewish paper), still learning a lot, with plenty more to say, lots of opinions to expound, numerous lessons to preach, and many more family and adorable grandkid stories to tell. Thank you, Joanne, for discovering the columnist within the litigator, and Jamie for providing me with such a wonderful platform. I don’t know how long I’ll last, but provided my brain and fingers are still working, you’ll be able to find me here regularly at “I’ve Been Thinking,” telling you what, well, what I’ve been thinking.