A week or so ago, in response to our email announcement about the concert in D.C. this week, we received the following communication from Comivez@aol.com:

Your show was sophomoric and embarrassing in Seattle, I hope you have made some improvements.

Since our email list is voluntary, I wondered why Comivez@aol.com had signed up to be contacted by us, despite having clearly quite disliked the show. I decided this person was either a masochist, who liked being reminded of painful experiences, or a sadist, who enjoyed the role of a scolding schoolmarm. I mean, to call our show sophomoric is just such an error of–oh wait, we are sophomoric. But since we like it that way, why would we make any sort of “improvements”?

My reply to Comivez: (more…)

In the Weekend section of today’s Washington Post, Curt Fields picks the Good For The Jews show on Tuesday night at Jammin’ Java as one of the week’s best D.C. concerts:

The irreverent and lively humor of Good for the Jews comes to Jammin’ Java (703-255-1566) along with the Alexandria Kleztet.

See it at http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/04/17/AR2008041701225.html

Thanks, Curt! But you forgot to use the world “hilarious.”

I have a Google alert set up for the phrase “Good For The Jews,” so I’ll know when a newspaper or blogger has written about our music. Sometimes, the alert brings me to a reference that has nothing to do with the band — lately, it’s often brought me to a discussion of whether a political candidate is or is not “good for the jews.” (more…)

Matthue Roth, whom I don’t think I’ve ever met, posted on Jewcy.com today that a) he doesn’t really like our music, b) we’re nice guys, c) we do too many songs about circumcision, d) he’s jealous of us, and e) he had a dream about me.

Read it here:

http://www.jewcy.com/user/1988/matthue_roth1988-5

I’m thinking of writing a comment to his post. But aside from saying that c) we don’t have any songs about circumcision in our set, and b) we’re really not all that nice, I’m not sure what to say. Any ideas?

That, believe it or not, was the title of a blog entry today: “What’s a Rabbi to do with the Rob Tannenbaums of the world?”

You can read it yourself, at ravmorey.wordpress.com.

Now, I know what a priest would do. But a rabbi? I was expecting a lecture, to be blunt — no matter how many times rabbis endorse what we do, or invite us to perform at their synagogues, I still think we’re one song away from being yanked by the ear. But this rabbi’s thoughts, even though he doesn’t seem to have ever heard our music, were far more provocative, and I agree with his central premise: inclusion suits our religion.