There is tons of “new” music being produced and presented as “new Jewish music”, but is it either? Can it be considered “new” when it it draws so heavily and obviously on traditional Jewish music? And what makes music, or any art for that matter, “Jewish”?
Are music and art Jewish because they are made by Jews, draw on Jewish themes either in terms of what inspires the artist or that which they present? Does it even matter if the artist is Jewish? What if the Jewishness of the art is seen only by the artist? Would that make it “less Jewish”?
It seems to me that any work produced and labeled by an artist as Jewish, is by definiton, Jewish art. Then it’s up to the rest of us to consider the realtionship between that artist’s Jewishness and our own sense of what it means for anything or anyone to be Jewish.
This way, we reserve the right to make Judgments, but never make the presumption that the judgments which we make, are anything more, or less, than a measure of our own beliefs, and not some objective measure of the essence of what it means to be Jewish.
Here are some examples of new Jewish music, which I am certain are Jewish, and are probably new. What do you think?
The first link is to the work of Eugene Marlow and his Heritage Ensemble, and the next is to the work of Jeremiah Lockwood and the band Sway Machinery. Enjoy!
Author, radio and TV talk show host, and President of CLAL-The National Jewish Center for Learning and Leadership, Brad Hirschfield is the author of 
posted March 18, 2010 at 5:03 pm
What is the jewish essence Rabbi Brad? I read your Book and was interested in what Rabbi Kook was teaching, since you refered to him, and came across this very interesting material.
You are at http://mailstar.net/shahak2.html.
(1) Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel (2) Israel Shahak, Open Secrets: Israeli Nuclear and Foreign Policies
(1) Israel Shahak and Norton Mezvinsky, Jewish Fundamentalism in Israel, Pluto Press, London, 1999.
{ p. ix} Conflicts in Israeli society between adherents and opponents of Jewish fundamentalism rank among the most important issues in Israeli politics … Defenders of the “Jewish interest” often attack persons who write critically about Jews and/or Judaism … Some of these defenders, for example, attacked Seffi Rachlevsky after the publication of his best-selling book, Messiahs’ Donkeys. In his book, Rachlevsky correctly claimed that Rabbi Kook, the Elder, the revered father of the messianic tendency of Jewish fundamentalism (who is featured in our book), said “The difference between a Jewish soul and souls of non-Jews – all of them in all dlfferent levels – is greater and deeper than the difference between a human soul and the souls of cattle.” The Rachlevsky detractors did not attempt to refute substantively the relevance of the Kook quotation. Rather, they argued that Rabbi Kook said other things and that Rachlevsky, by neglecting to mention them, had distorted the teachings of Rabbi Kook. Rachlevsky pointed out that Rabbi Kook’s entire teaching was based upon the Lurianic Cabbala, the school of Jewish mysticism that dominated Judaism from the late sixteenth to the early nineteenth century. One of the basic tenants of the Lurianic Cabbala is the absolute superiority of the Jewish soul and body over the non-Jewish soul and body. According to the Lurianic Cabbala, the world was created solely for the sake of Jews; the existence of non-Jews was subsidiary. If an influential Christian bishop or Islamic scholar argued that the difference between the superior souls of non-Jews and the inferior souls of Jews was greater than the difference between the human soul and the souls of cattle, he would incur the wrath of and be viewed as an anti-Semite by most Jewish scholars regardless of whatever less meaningful, positive statements he included. From this perspective the detractors of Rachlevsky are hypocrites. That Rabbi Kook was a vegetarian and even respected the rights of plants to the extent that he did not allow
{p. x} flowers or grass to be cut for his own pleasure neither distracted from nor added anything to his position regarding the comparison of the souls of Jews and non-Jews. That Kook deprecated unnecessary Jewish brutality against non-Jews should not minimize criticism of his expressed delight in the belief that the death of millions of soldiers during World War One constituted a sign of the approaching salvation of Jews and the coming of the Messiah.
See the website above to read more. WOW, what an eye-opener to the past.
posted March 20, 2010 at 10:56 am
There are more than one kind of Jew and more than one kind of Jewish music. New music has a chance to become old music just as our old music was at one time new music. Enjoy it all.
posted March 27, 2010 at 11:14 pm
I think there may be something Jewish in asking the question of a work art whether it is Jewish. Just as a challenge for Jews who identify with their faith is to ask if there jobs, relationships, etc. reflect their values. Wouldn’t it be far more interesting to assume the existence of Jewish music and to strive to create/appreciate it, rather than to deny it from the start?