Lahav – Kibbutz?
Rami Yerushalmi, a member of Kibbutz Lahav in the south of the country, has been documenting the social, economic and political changes that his kibbutz has been experiencing in the last decades as a metaphor for the changes taking place in Israeli society on the whole and in kibbutzim specifically. Yerushalmi’s work raises questions and doubts about the meanings and functions the kibbutz represents. His photographs provide a look at the place itself and its story which, in turn, serves to trigger a reality check about the community within which the artist has grown and worked.
A definition of the kibbutz therefore is constructed by understanding of the photographs. Criticism of the kibbutz management is suggested by its reflected representation as a complex reality. The exhibit discusses themes of location and locality, subjects which involve and challenge contemporary Israeli photographic discourse which touches upon representations of kibbutz and its current conception from a social-political-cultural and economic perspective. The photographs in the exhibit show landscapes, communal spaces, and private spaces and represent templates of identity reflecting reality shots that raise questions about personal, collective and national memory.
Yerushalmi, a veteran member of his kibbutz, works with a deep sense of commitment while he takes a critical and controlled look at the Israeli experience. He makes an attempt to understand the role that socialist kibbutz ideology has played in his own life. The exhibit offers a meeting place between nostalgia associated with the kibbutz experience on the one hand and ethical questions about socialism and society as we currently experience it on the other. Misgivings and contemplation are expressed in his search for a way forward while he wonders about the relationship between an individual’s needs and his role in the complex texture of kibbutz life, wanting to serve his community, responding to the changing world; sometimes carried away by the tide and sometimes critically resisting.
What happens to the ideology of the collective over time? The concept of a deep connection between people, nature and the earth as formulated by A.D. Gordon ¹ and Gordon’s belief that complete identity with working the land and with a natural life would enrich the pioneers’ life with deep meaningful spirituality is not an aspect of kibbutz life evident today and does not lend its force to the building of a spiritual connection between kibbutz members and nature. Kibbutzim have undergone a conceptual revolution, from socialism based on individual work and mutual responsibility to capitalism which is based on producing goods for sale - for example, the sausage that is produced in Kibbutz Lahav. Twenty first century Israel is a competitive entity, its achievements and successes as a consumer society confront the kibbutz with a choice; either to adjust to the trend or shut down. The desire to emulate the successes of Israeli society that surround them, has lead kibbutzim to an ideological crisis that extends, in some cases, to kibbutzim completely losing their way.
Yerushalmi’s work describes the changes using the language of landscape and public spaces through the changes that have taken place in the kibbutz community. The individual’s release from the context of the kibbutz produces an acknowledgement of the spatial separation between people and emphasizes their differences. The kibbutz has many advantages : familiarity, shared experiences, shared responsibility towards the community, freedom and security. The kibbutz, based on values of honesty, family and labor were all directed and supported by these advantages. Today the difference between private and public space is evident and the borders between them are clearly delineated and guarded. The members “rooms” have become private property and are identifiable by different characteristics. Consequently, the kibbutz is characterized by dynamic change. It comprises of a series of spatial events that have happened along with the social and individual changes that have taken place – changes that are moving the kibbutz to a quasi-city status.
The sociologist, Henri Lefebvre, claims that “Social space is a social product” ² so that each society creates a unique social space, unlike all others.  Despite appearances, a city is not an arbitrary collection of people and things in space but established in a certain order according to the values of a specific society. If an established space is derived from a society’s values then it’s not only possible to learn about a space from an analysis of said society but also about the society’s institutions from an analysis of a space.
A thorough discussion about Israeli place from an understanding of its significance and its creative process as an integral part of cultural, social, economic and political processes is offered in the book "Architectural Culture – Place, Representation and Physicality". ³ This discussion has focused, for the last few decades, on the authority and sovereignty of place as they are determined by the balance of power and how this constructs the physical environment. Israel, following the establishment of its independence, set itself two tasks: The territorialization of its space , that is the determination of sovereignty for the areas taken and also determining the nature of the space, that is the construction of physical landscape by its design and structure, which would serve as the basis for the creation of a political sovereign framework within which issues of place, identity and power are realized through constant, daily conflict and compromise between economic, social and political powers. ⁴
The pieces in this exhibit touch upon issues of society, history and place and reflect the place in which they were created. Walter Benjamin, in his essay “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction”, cites the removal from location and context as a new characteristic of photography. Photography offers us the possibility to observe a photographed object for its own sake, alienated from the context in which it was photographed. Benjamin’s argues that the source loses its historical period and its uniqueness and there is no significance associated with space and time. ⁵ Yerushalmi’s photographs, on the other hand, are not alienated from the place in which they were taken. The purpose of the photographs, according to Yerushalmi, is to rouse the viewers out of their established position and reexamine with an inquiring eye the context in which they were produced.
Yerushalmi was influenced by a number of well-known American photographers – Robert Frank, Walker Evans, Gary Winogrand and William Klein who worked with subjective topics such as identity and personal significance and whose approach brought new understanding to the world of 20th century American documentary photography. These photographers became involved with the documentation of daily life and events of modern life from a harsh position of social criticism which was expressed in their work.
The viewing activity that Yerushalmi’s work generates is one of complexity and ambivalence. His perspective is that of someone who has been a part of the kibbutz for many years, witnessing the changes that have taken place over time, documentation of places that can represent other kibbutzim as well. The activity of photography produces a double gaze – documentary and questioning. This ambivalence doesn’t require the choosing of sides to solve its difficulty but rather an understanding and acceptance of the contradiction.
 There is a contradiction between individuality and the uniform templates and framework that kibbutz life dictates. This tension of this contrast can be seen in photographs of the way people on the kibbutz have constructed walls around their homes which serve as a barrier to the rest of the kibbutz. At present, there is no harmony between people and the idealism of kibbutz .The kibbutz saga has vanished. The “dream and the ideal” have been abandoned. The dining room, which embodies the “togetherness” of the whole kibbutz, has been partially abandoned and has turned from a public space into a commercial business.
The problematic undoing of kibbutz social ideals has caused a difficult paradox expressed by the Lahav – Kibbutz? exhibit in which the artist raises crucial question : Is it a society based on kibbutz ideals and principles of  sharing and unity or is it merely a metaphor for kibbutz while in fact functioning as a prosperous neighborhood within the boundaries of a city? 
A number of photographs show collective celebrations for holidays which represent the product of a Zionist education. Ecstatic enthusiasm grips the dancers who dance against a backdrop of flames. No more do they dance in circles around a standard bonfire as did the pioneers before them. The circle – a symbol of a united strength, a formal unit of consolidation and equality no longer serves as a source for inspiration.
Yerushalmi’s visual language is the outcome his world view and of the space in which he lives and is expressed by the language of his unique contemplation and personal statement. His surroundings serve as a point of departure and as the central subject of the exhibition. Reality is presented from a personal viewpoint. Yerushalmi photographs that which is near and familiar. 
The kibbutz is likened to the situation or shape of a bubble that is cut off from ordinary reality. This separation from the flow characterizes the way people conduct themselves and is a purposeful decision, it is a latent characteristic and expressed by the locking away of oneself in a peaceful bubble .What happens in the bubble is private and related to the desire to maintain the unique “I” which doesn’t include the other “I” which is directed by imprinted forces – mechanical and automated. Does this seclusion indicate escapism? Is this evidence of a human defense strategy for refuge and safety?
Is the kibbutz an heterotopic bubble? Heterotopia, as defined by Foucault ⁶ is a type of spatial organization that requires real space in order to exist. Heterotopia exists in every society and its formation changes at different times and in different places. By means of the heterotopia the general public processes its diverse form and designs itself as a society with differences, hierarchy and shades in a way that is tailored to its own time and place.
And maybe the kibbutz is a mystification of memory? A moment of coming together, merging biographical data, a tapestry of evidence that temporarily freezes time and space while creating limits and attempting to adhere to an aesthetic? Society embraces, defends, strengthens and accompanies us wherever we go, based on reality and part of history frozen and concentrated in a bubble of nostalgia for something that has vanished.
The kibbutz as a bubble serves as a means of defense and safe refuge providing a sense of security, orientation and certainty. It follows that this bubble is liable to last for many years. A bubble that is unlikely to burst creates an ironic situation- there is a danger that people will spend an inordinate amount of time on themselves. The inhabitants of the bubble, the kibbutzniks, are captives of their own spiritual world and are unable to see the rest of the world as it is, they only see what they want to. Bursting the bubble and breaking through its limits is a way to overcome boundaries, obstacles to understanding and knowledge about the world, oneself, the other and the relationships between them.
This exhibit deals with the continuum between the past and the future and leaves room for thought: Will the kibbutz as a national Zionist symbol currently fighting for its way cease to exist? Will the face of kibbutz with its global future become a part of the cities that surround it but still maintain a certain unique character?

1 Joseph Aharonovitz (editor) The  Writings of A. D. Gordon. Ha Poel Hatzair., Tel Aviv.
2 Lefebvre, Henri. “The production of space”. In:  Architectural Culture: Place, Representation, Body. Eds. Rachel Kalush and Tali Hatuka. Tel Aviv: Resling 2005, pps. 177-200.
3 Rachel Kalush and Tali Hatuka .Eds. Architectural Culture: Place, Representation, Body. Tel Aviv : Resling 2005.
4 ibid. p.34.
5 Benjamin, Walter. The Work of Art in the Age of  Mechanical Reproduction, Poalim, Tel Aviv, 1983.
6 Foucault, Michel. Heterotopia, Resling, Tel Aviv, 2003.