On the evening of July 30, Congregation Beth David in Amenia became the epicenter of a deep dive into one of history’s most profound and politically charged scandals. Maurice Samuels, a distinguished professor at Yale University and the director of its Program for the Study of Antisemitism, captivated a full house with his insights on the Dreyfus Affair, drawn from his latest book, “Alfred Dreyfus: The Man at the Center of the Affair.” The event, skillfully moderated by culture writer Laura van Straaten, opened a deep and complicated discussion into how historical events like the Dreyfus Affair continue to offer valuable lessons, illuminating the challenges and stakes of our own times.
After a brief welcome by Rabbi Jon Haddon, spiritual director of Congregation Beth David, the event opened with an introduction by Ilene Smith, editorial director of the Jewish Lives biography series and a member of the congregation. Smith described the series of biographies, for which Samuels was commissioned, as a “remarkable opportunity to curate deep and interesting biographies about influential figures with a real legacy.” There are now 70 books in the collection all of which “ask the question: What does it mean to be Jewish?” Smith explained.
Samuels and Van Straaten met in Kindergarten in Chicago and have been lifelong friends, so the conversation flowed easily and seamlessly throughout the evening. To provide context, Samuels began with a succinct summary of the Dreyfus Affair. In 1894, Alfred Dreyfus, a Jewish officer in the French army, was falsely accused of spying for Germany. With scant evidence, Dreyfus was publicly humiliated, stripped of his rank in a degrading ceremony, and exiled to the brutal penal colony of Devil’s Island. For five years, he endured inhumane conditions, while back in France, his family, particularly his wife, Lucie, fought tirelessly to prove his innocence. The affair divided France into Dreyfusards (supporters of Dreyfus) and anti-Dreyfusards, leading to widespread riots and political turmoil. Dreyfus was eventually exonerated in 1906 and restored to his military rank.
Samuels highlighted the complex socio-political landscape of France during the Dreyfus Affair, noting that despite France being the first European country to grant Jews full civil rights during the French Revolution, antisemitism was rampant by the late 19th century. Dreyfus, a patriotic and wealthy officer, became a scapegoat amid rising antisemitic sentiments. “Half of France committed to believing a lie,” said Samuels. “Even after it was proven that Dreyfus was innocent, people still opposed justice for Dreyfus.” He went on to explain that “France is a paradox in some ways, a kind of conundrum for scholars of antisemitism because it was the country where Jews had achieved the most, where Jews were the most integrated in the world by the 1890s.” But Jews, Samuels explained, were associated with all the changes brought on by modernity, “And by modernity, I mean, the rise of modern industrial capitalism, liberal democracy, and then all the social changes that go along with that. The people left behind by these changes became antisemitic.”
Also deeply examined was the significant role played by intellectuals like Emile Zola whose famous open letter “J’Accuse” accused the French military of a cover-up during the Dreyfus affair, igniting public outrage and prompting a re-examination of the case. In fact, said Samuels, “people say that the modern use of the term intellectual to designate someone who has a cultural position but who takes a stand on political issues, dates to the Dreyfus affair. The most famous one we can talk about is Emile Zola, the novelist. But many writers were anti-Dreyfusard including Jules Verne, for example, the science fiction writer.” The case also caused a divide amongst Impressionist painters with Monet and Pissaro, who was Jewish, being pro-Dreyfus and others such as Degas, Renoir, Rodin and Cezanne who were anti-Dreyfus. This polarization also filtered into the media landscape of the time, which Van Straaten noted bears striking similarities to today’s media environment. “I found myself thinking about how divided our country is culturally and socially again and again,” said Van Straaten “and how one of the most fascinating arguments that you make is about the way in which the trials, the imprisonment, and the fight, the affair itself, which endured 12 years, 130 years ago, became and remains a dog whistle, a cultural moment like today in terms of our divisions.”
Samuels added, “I think that you could argue that the Dreyfus affair was a battle in a kind of ongoing war between left and right which is still playing out.”
Samuels also took care to emphasize Dreyfus’s resilience and heroism and the ways in which he emerges as the true hero of his own story. Surviving the harsh conditions of Devil’s Island required immense personal fortitude. Dreyfus’s determination to clear his name, despite being unjustly convicted twice, played a crucial role in eventually bringing the truth to light.
Before opening to questions from the audience, the conversation shifted to the complex process of national healing after deep political divisions with an emphasis on the resilience required to confront and heal from deep-seated injustice. Samuels, reflecting on France post-Dreyfus, emphasized the ongoing struggle to reconcile differing visions of society and how historical events like the Dreyfus Affair offer crucial insights into the modern parallels and challenges we face today. The evening wasn’t just a history lesson; it was a mirror reflecting many of our current societal fractures, leaving the audience pondering the enduring relevance of the Dreyfus Affair, the vital lessons it holds for our times and, indeed, what it means to be Jewish.
