2026/10 Discussion of Kindle the Light of Liberty--POLL WINNER > Likes and Comments
date
newest »
newest »
I am enjoying this book as it is a historic timeframe that I haven’t learned much about Jewish involvement. Since I grew up near Philadelphia and my relatives immigrated there (early 1900s) I have always been fascinated with this city and its history.
I understand the benefit of asking members to discuss the book before the author participates. Readers should absolutely have the opportunity to form and express their own opinions without having to endure (gasp!) an author's presentation.What I do have a problem with is the apparent need to single out these particular books with a reminder that has not, as far as I can recall, accompanied the books selected in previous months.
Both books this month (Kindle the Light of Liberty and Stories My Father Told Me) apparently are independently published. Tell me you're anti-indie without telling me you're anti- indie.
I rarely, if ever, comment in this group. I tend to read historical fiction or clean historical romance. Not very high-brow, I'll admit. I am a great fan of Trupp's work. I'll admit that too. If we can't cheer on the work of an indie author- a Jewish indie author- in this venue, then what's the point of the group?
I read *Kindle the Light of Liberty* because it interested me, and I genuinely enjoyed it. My Goodreads review was written because I thought the book deserved praise. I found the Austen influence thoughtful and well done, the Revolutionary Philadelphia setting fascinating, and the relationship between Rose and Nathan particularly well handled. Is it on the level of the next great American novel? Probably not- at least, probably not if you're not into this sort of narrative. It's clean. No sex. No violence. Nothing that would make you uncomfortable to read aloud with your Sisterhood friends. But it does tell an interesting story, and it portrays Jews in a historical period that is NEVER showcased.
Whether a book is published by a major publishing house, a small press, or independently seems to me to be beside the point. The book itself is what we're here to discuss. Why should you care if her friends voted? Why should you care if she posts a comment in a thread about HER book? Based on her posts to fans of her work, I'd say she'd be over the moon that the book is being featured here. WHERE ELSE IS SHE GOING TO GET THE OPPORTUNITY? She'd probably just want to thank readers for their support. Because that's what I thought we were doing here. Supporting Jewish authors, and I, for one, support Trupp for giving me something to read other than sex, death, destruction, and terror.
I'm going to make it a point to read the other featured book of the month, because God only knows, she'll probably need the support too.
I don't know anyone who is anti-Indie except publishers. I'm not reading this book because it looks a bit too romancy, chick lit to me. Not making any statements by not reading it, just not my usual fare.
Denise S wrote: "I don't know anyone who is anti-Indie except publishers. I'm not reading this book because it looks a bit too romancy, chick lit to me. Not making any statements by not reading it, just not my usua..."That's fair. I get that. My rant was more about the numerous times the moderator has gone out of her way to undermine or accuse indies and their supporters.
I loved this book. I can't recall ever learning about Jews in Colonial America. Not from school teachers or Hebrew school teachers, camp leaders, etc. Later in life, I might have heard a word about Jewish financiers...but it always seemed to be layered with "of course, the Jews lent us the money." I'm nearly 70 years old. It has taken this year's anniversary of America's independence to really consider the role of the Jewish colonial. The one that took up arms. The one that refused to swear an oath to a Christian god. The one that risked their livelihood by participating in a spy ring...Trupp brings us this story and also nods to her muse, Jane Austen. That happens to speak to my heart. And like Austen, the romance part is not the focus of the story.I absolutely loved the historical afterword. Trupp provides a few lines on historical figures. Fascinating stuff. That alone makes this little "chicklit" book worth the read. Especially today, with the rise of antisemitism. We need to know and understand our roots in this country—they go back further than I understood. After reading this novel, I was moved to do a little research on the phrase: Judeo-Christian. It doesn't mean what I always assumed it meant.
"When the adjectival term "Judeo-Christian" was first coined in the 1820s and 1830s, it did not mean a shared modern culture. French and English historians used it technically to describe the earliest followers of Jesus. These original disciples (often called the "Jerusalem Church" led by James) still considered themselves entirely Jewish. They followed Jewish dietary laws, worshipped at the Temple, and believed Jesus's message was exclusively for the Jewish people. In this scholarly context, "Judeo-Christian" refers exactly to that transitional era before the Apostle Paul began aggressively converting non-Jewish gentiles, which eventually caused the two religions to split." https://www.jstor.org/content/oa_book...
To the moderator: I am a Goodreads "friend" of Trupp's. I voted for her book because I enjoy wholesome, entertaining, historical narratives. In my opinion, your *mama bear tactics over this group have gotten out of hand. We're all adults here, I would think. People can decide for themselves what to read and when to comment.
* You have posted (at least two or three times): "Don't mean to offend, but I'm a real mama bear when it comes to this group."
Judy wrote: "I loved this book. I can't recall ever learning about Jews in Colonial America. Not from school teachers or Hebrew school teachers, camp leaders, etc. Later in life, I might have heard a word about..."Wow I'm not a moderator of this group, but your comments about them are quite undeserved. But I may think differently if I understand where you are coming from. I've never seen them tell people they can't read something and have only seen them tell authors to please advertise their books under the appropriate topic.
Most other groups do voting to decide on next books to read AND do not allow authors to advertise or comment, as is done here. This is not unusual.
I'm not sure where you get the impression they are telling you, you can't read something or can't comment. Do you mind me asking you what you mean or give me an example?
It is not easy to be a moderator . People take offense easily, people break rules easily pissing off other people, (not moderators) people want more activity and moderators provide it then people don't show up, it goes on and on. Moderators are not perfect nor gods but take the time to guide and help structure groups and our moderators, at least from what I've seen do the best they can.
Primarily, I am sorry you feel that way and would like to understand why you do. I like this group and don't want to lose members and would like to see more participation.
Claudia wrote: "My rant was more about the numerous times the moderator has gone out of her way to undermine or accuse indies and their supporter.."
OK. i've never seen that - can you give me an example? just curious. Do you mean people who self-publish?
I don't think you were asking a regular member but I wouldn't be very interested in hearing from the author early on until AFTER I read the book. It would ruin things for me and prejudice how I would think about the book. It isn't anti-indie - it is anti-don't tell me what to think before I've had the opportunity to know what I'm thinking. Hope that made sense.
Without knowing anything about either book this month I decided not to read them because there was something about them that didn't attract me and it had nothing to do with indie or anything else, just personal preference. I had no idea until now they were indie.
Denise S wrote: "Judy wrote: "I loved this book. I can't recall ever learning about Jews in Colonial America. Not from school teachers or Hebrew school teachers, camp leaders, etc. Later in life, I might have heard..."I completely understand that a moderator's job is hard. It's a volunteer position, and I'm sure a lot of heart goes into it. But this thread, as well as the Moderator's Choice thread, both have an introductory post that differs from the others. (Let's follow our usual policy of discussion by members and not the author, at least at first, lest the discussion become like an author presentation, instead of the spot for readers to discuss their own reactions.) The moderator, in this case, Jan, hasn't said that for other titles. The question is: why?
I did some research about author posts and announcements in this group. Here are just three examples:
"Don't nominate the book of a friend, family member, fellow congregant, client, or the like."--- Why not? Doesn't my vote count? If the majority don't want to read it, it won't win.
"Jan wrote: Destiny by Design--Leah's Journey is actually on our bookshelf, Claudia. It was our book for Aug. 2019, if you'd like to comment. Actually there are a couple other closed threads from back then. It was the Jewish Book Club's "wild, wild west" period. We no longer accept author promotions on the discussion threads, but if she'd like to comment on the author thread for freebies, she'd be welcome to do so." -- This was in reference to Claudia's post under the thread, "What are you reading?" Claudia answered (not the author of the book).
"And may I also remind you both about restricting author book promotions to the assigned discussion threads! Authors Announcing Their Work and others -- see the home page. There is a reason for this! (please also see "Latest Group News" on the home page.) Don't mean to offend, but I'm a real mama bear when it comes to this group. 😆
I feel that the moderator's tone on this thread was harsh. She didn't preface any of the other threads in the same manner. It insinuates something about the author, and I don't like it. And, if people are still on the fence about reading KINDLE THE LIGHT OF LIBERTY: A Jewish Colonial Love Story of the American Revolution, or the Moderator's choice Stories My Father Told Me: From Warsaw, Moscow, Algeria, Siberia, Kazakhstan, Dominican Republic, they just might skip it based on her insinuations.
Judy wrote: "Are either author part of this group?
For the most part I do not think most books selected for monthly reads have an author who would show up which is the reason it would not need to be spelled out. That is just my opinion.
I don't agree Jan's words were harsh - they were decisive and firm yes, but from what I've seen a lot of authors try to sneak in mention of their books in almost anything lol. So, you have to set perhaps harsh guidelines if you choose to call them that. I would use the word "firm."
I understand your view Jewish authors should be supported here and I agree but at the same time they have a place to talk about their books - it is provided - and should stick to that. I get a little pissed off when they want to be my "friend" - they request to be my "friend" through the Goodreads system - just to advertise their books no interest in being my friend - a limit has to be set IMHO.
As I said to Claudia elsewhere "Without knowing anything about either book this month I decided not to read them because there was something about them that didn't attract me and it had nothing to do with indie or anything else, just personal preference. I had no idea until now they were indie. " I had not read anything by the moderators about these books and didn't even vote this month as I had surgery and blah blah blah.
I am not professing to be right this is just my opinion, and I understand your right to have yours.
Thank you for taking the time for explaining your point of view.
As a lifelong Austen fan, I was immediately drawn to the Darcy-and-Lizzy quality of Rose and Nathan’s relationship in Trupp's novel. I enjoyed the misunderstandings, the initial judgments, and the gradual realization that each had misread the other. Those elements gave me the familiar Austen feeling that I love.But what ultimately kept me reading was Trupp’s storytelling. I found myself becoming genuinely interested in the lives of Jewish Americans during the Revolution and realizing how much I didn't know about that part of American history.
What I particularly appreciated was the way Trupp illuminated the very real and complicated issues Jews themselves would have been facing during the Revolution. By bringing in both Loyalist Jews, such as Rebecca Franks, and Patriot Jews, such as Jonas Phillips and Moses Michael Hays, she showed that there wasn't a single "Jewish" position on the Revolution. Add Abigail Minis and the Sheftalls in the South, whose experiences added yet another dimension to the story. Not to mention other historical figures, such as David Salisbury Franks (often maligned for his association with Benedict Arnold), the Gratz families, and the afterword, which was very much appreciated.
These weren't simply Jewish characters placed into an American Revolution story. Their religion, communities, family ties, political loyalties, and concerns about what the Revolution might mean for them all intersected in complicated ways.
For me, that's one of the pleasures of historical fiction. The story draws you in, and along the way, you discover a piece of history you didn't know you were missing. Now, more than ever, I'm very proud to be an American Jew. And was very pleasantly surprised that Trupp received commendations from a leading member of DAR (Daughters of the American Revolution) who happens to head the Jewish research division.
Mrs wrote: "As a lifelong Austen fan, I was immediately drawn to the Darcy-and-Lizzy quality of Rose and Nathan’s relationship in Trupp's novel. I enjoyed the misunderstandings, the initial judgments, and the ..."Mrs,
Great opinion and review of this book .
Thank you for commenting.
***************
Good morning! I just caught up on these comments. One downside for "me" is that it is sometimes hard to follow the exact thread of an issue, which can lead to misunderstandings. Please know this is written gently with the best of intentions and zero accusations.
I may have missed a turn in the threads, but I am a bit confused as to how the topic of indie books and indie authors came up. Is it following up on previous comments? I didn't see anything related to this earlier in the discussion. Many of us are well aware that since October 7th, the traditional publishing world has severely let down Jewish-themed authors—to the point where it feels nearly impossible to get a book picked up or promoted which is disgusting.
Im told that self published books and independent presses are used also for time constraints. Regardless, just because a book is published by "The Big 5 " does not automatically make it quality.
Could someone point me in the direction of what I missed?
Stacey B wrote: "***************
Good morning! I just caught up on these comments. One downside for "me" is that it is sometimes hard to follow the exact thread of an issue, which can lead to misunderstandings. Pl..."
Good morning and chag sameach.
The "indie issue" was a point I brought up. I may have jumped to conclusions—and I apologize. I was simply trying to figure out why the moderator would choose to begin a discussion in this way. To me, she was telling the author to keep quiet. She was insinuating that the author (and her friends) were hijacking (for lack of a better word) the discussion.
I looked back at previous threads, and the only thing that was different from this title and the others was that Trupp is an indie. So is the author of Stories My Father Told Me: From Warsaw, Moscow, Algeria, Siberia, Kazakhstan, Dominican Republic.
But you have hit the nail on the head. Since 10/7, Jewish authors have been hard hit by traditional publishing. EVEN IF they could get a contract, authors still need to do marketing.
Someone in this thread mentioned something about an author "sneaking" their book into the group's conversation. If a Jewish author can't talk about her book amongst other Jews, I just don't know...
I mentioned that Jewish authors sneaked in their book in conversations on other topics INCLUDING about OTHER JEWISH AUTHORS BOOKS which they have no right or lets face it, class to do. I don't apologize for this. They have a lot of nerve to interrupt discussion of another Jewish author's book with a discussion of their own. As you say, it is hard enough to get recognition and I say let the author get the recognition without interrupting it with your own stuff. Be polite. Have some class. (I don't mean you Claudia I mean you as the author interrupting...hope this is understandable whew)As I mentioned in an earlier post perhaps the author is a member of the group?? Usually, this is not the case and the author has no idea we are discussing her/his book so perhaps it was mentioned for that reason as I earlier explained. There is space provided for ALL authors to discuss their books. So why the complaints? Whatever. I admit I am getting impatient with what I NOW perceive as an over-sensitivity so I'll try to keep out of the discussion.
Claudia wrote: "Stacey B wrote: "***************
Good morning! I just caught up on these comments. One downside for "me" is that it is sometimes hard to follow the exact thread of an issue, which can lead to misu..."
Hi Claudia,
I so appreciate your response. The issues you bring up, as well as your reasoning are quite valid. I also am one of the moderators for this group. This is what I know- We don't determine books by publisher. Honest.
Every month Jan and I chat about what topics, polls, and our moderator choices. What you and Judy refer now -was not
part and parcel to any conversations we had, so I can't give "her explanation or rational. I did send an email to her, but Im sure at some point after sundown Jan will explain. What I do know, is that we try to do everything to make are members feel inclusive; wishing more members would comment. On that note, for Jan to write something mean spirited would only be shooting herself in the foot. Yes, she is stricter than I, but loves this group as much as I do. Let give her the benefit of the doubt.
Stacey B wrote: "...Yes, she is stricter than I, but loves this group as much as I do. Let give her the benefit of the doubt."...and I'm more comfortable with being an authority figure.
Thank you, Stacey.
I'm not so appreciative of the criticisms, though. They don't seem designed to be helpful.
I can tell if I'm being firm vs. harsh. The critics are entitled to their feelings, but accusing somebody of being harsh isn't a feeling. It's an accusation. (And also likely has to do with my being a woman. At least not "shrill," thank goodness!)
The rationale for the limits on posting and commenting by authors has been explained repeatedly in the long-form group news updates that I used to put out monthly (through Nov. 2025). Those explanations never produced any objections. I can copy and paste; will do it after a little while over at What's the big deal about author self-promotion.
As Denise pointed out, Goodreads groups typically disallow authors nominating their own books or promoting their work. At bottom the groups are for the readers. We do allow promotion in designated threads. Do I hear a thank-you?
For an example of what happens if authors are given their head, see Jewish Book Carnival. It used to have comments from readers. Eventually there was little reason for the writers to post. It's like killing the goose that laid the golden eggs.
The reported research missed the key point on why these October books are different: these books are in fact the product of our group-member authors being allowed to nominate their own books. (Do I hear another thank-you?)
Allowing our authors to nominate their books raises particular challenges. Go to Nominations for our book of Oct. 2026: our author members' books to see all the challenges we had to overcome to get to this point. But it's worth it! (And do I hear a third thank-you?)
Now, we've had prior disruptions such as this one. I don't think we've had bots. We have had outsiders come in and try to sow dissension. This attack is like outsiders in that they happened over a Shabbat and holiday. But it actually seems more like someone with an axe to grind.
I wish I were wrong, but these don't seem like good-faith criticisms.
How the critics choose to respond will be telling.
Denise S wrote: "I mentioned that Jewish authors sneaked in their book in conversations on other topics INCLUDING about OTHER JEWISH AUTHORS BOOKS which they have no right or lets face it, class to do. I don't apol..."Hi Denise-
Why dont I remember this? Ha, Im two for two and not happy.
Based on your post, yes, its quite rude for authors to insinuate themselves in another discussion only to promote their book. It is one of the reasons why we and many other groups have dedicated topics for things such as this and we... didnt invent the wheel. But when we had the gift of private messaging, many issues were taken care of without becoming public.
Thank you for commenting.
Ok, back to the discussion of our poll winning book..I have a thirty-page rule that allows for no guilt when closing a book that hasn't grabbed me by that point.
Having just started the book, I'm past that point and learning some history admittedly I did not know. The title of the
book is apropos, as is the storyline. Iv'e read a few other books by this author, and so far, she doesn't disappoint. Not ever an Austen fan; having read only read Pride and Prejudice-not by choice, I'm starting to become one due to the authors inclusion of jewish themed books.
Jan wrote: "Stacey B wrote: "...Yes, she is stricter than I, but loves this group as much as I do. Let give her the benefit of the doubt."...and I'm more comfortable with being an authority figure.
Thank y..."
This entire situation came up not because of the policy about authors nominating or talking about their books—or their friends talking about their books. It came up because of the way you introduced this thread. I took exception to it. I don't have an ax to grind. I just don't think it was nice.
Claudia wrote: "...This entire situation came up not because of the policy about authors nominating or talking about their books—or their friends talking about their books. It came up because of the way you introduced this thread. I took exception to it. I don't have an ax to grind. I just don't think it was nice.."Claudia, I hope you understand now. There are particular issues attached to these being our current authors, the winners from among those who nominated their own books. Not in this case with friends talking about their books, I don't think, since they wouldn't be changing the subject to do so. I didn't think I was rude, although I did think you were being rude and that there was some underlying issue. If not, let's leave it, or continue with any hell raising about the rules pertaining to authors or other objections as to how authors are treated over on the link I gave above. Again, it's What's the big deal about author self-opromotion.
To other members, sorry about that "Thank you" bit. I was trying to be sarcastic.
And hope I didn't use "mama bear" more than once. That would be a devastating literary criticism, like using the word "guffaw" more than once in a book. 😲
Can we resume discussing the book?
One of the things I especially enjoyed about "Kindle the Light of Liberty" was the way it brought the American Revolution down from the level of generals, politicians, and famous patriots and placed it firmly in the hands of ordinary citizens. As a chandler's daughter, Rose’s story is a good example. I went on to research heroines of the Revolution and the Culper Spy Ring. It also made me think of Jewish immigrants in the colonies, having escaped persecution in Europe, only to find that they had to take a stand for their liberty in this new place.
Two passages from the book:
Rose had learned to navigate the gathering storm with the same precision she used to trim a wick. Philadelphia had settled into a wary civility, and her father sanctioned friendships with women like Hannah Ellicott, the baker’s wife, and Martha Riley of Riley’s Farm—women who understood that a measure of flour or a basket of eggs had become a test of loyalty. They would speak in hushed tones, pausing mid-sentence whenever unfamiliar footsteps approached, their friendship forged in the shared language of scarcity and survival. It was this same necessity that had bridged the ancient divides of the Old World.
A generation ago, a marriage between a Wachsman of the Duchy of Lithuania and a Portuguese Sheftall would have been a scandal of the highest order; yet in the crucible of the colonies, such distinctions had melted away. Rose now found herself bound by blood and shared principles to distant cousins in the South, Judith and Rachel Sheftall. Together, the women fashioned a system of receiving and transmitting information in the days when news and suspicion were currency. Her father encouraged the enterprise, believing an immigrant knew better than most the importance of familial ties, especially when one was caught in another struggle for liberty. Knowledge was a form of defense.
And that, she understood, was the only reason he allowed her to accept an invitation to her aunt and uncle Franks’ house.
********
Nearby, a prosperous merchant—his coat a shade too bright for the room—prattled about the rumors of Hessian troops arriving to bolster the Crown. Another man joked that if the King’s Germans did arrive, he would simply use his old-world Yiddish to win their favor.
“Do you mean to say,” the merchant asked, looking over his wine glass with a mix of curiosity and disdain, “that your Jew jargon is the same High German spoken by the King’s own cousins?”
“No,” the man replied, shifting awkwardly as the eyes of the room turned toward him. “Their Hochdeutsch is a stiffer, mountain tongue, and my Yiddish has the flavor of the East. But the bones of the words—the brot, the wasser—they are close enough for a man to strike a bargain.”
“Leave it to your people to figure out a way to make a profit!”
Rebecca laughed then, a piercing, practiced ring that rivaled the music drifting from the adjoining room. She caught her father’s eye across the parlor; he was nodding with a strained conciliatory smile—his particular speech often peppered with the very eastern flavor she spent her life trying to scrub from her own.
Claudia wrote: "One of the things I especially enjoyed about "Kindle the Light of Liberty" was the way it brought the American Revolution down from the level of generals, politicians, and famous patriots and place..."Claudia,
You make a great point .
I love the passages you included. I showed this book to my husband; a history buff . He can sometimes be the type of guy that when you ask him what time it is, he tells you how to make the watch. omg. But he just bought it.
Much of the book's history rolled off his tongue with more explanations after I had moved on. ( spoilers)
Im so glad you loved this one, and am looking forward to finishing this.
I finished it quickly as I couldn’t stop reading. I thoroughly enjoyed this book for all the reasons stated in previous comments.
Beryl wrote: "I finished it quickly as I couldn’t stop reading. I thoroughly enjoyed this book for all the reasons stated in previous comments."So happy you enjoyed this Beryl.
Denise S wrote: "Judy wrote: "Are either author part of this group?
For the most part I do not think most books selected for monthly reads have an author who would show up which is the reason it would not need ..."
I'm the author of the other book, and I'm here. I haven't read this book. As for my own, I haven't showed up there because no comments have been posted so far.
Dvora wrote: "Denise S wrote: "Judy wrote: "Are either author part of this group?
For the most part I do not think most books selected for monthly reads have an author who would show up which is the reason i..."
To answer your question; yes- both authors are members.
The poll stated that this was the month for our authors who are members to nominate their books.
I was addressing the reason Jan might have asked the author not make comment right away,when someone else complained that was stated and thought it harsh. Nevermind.The discussion is over. Done. Finished.
Stacey B wrote: "Mrs wrote: "As a lifelong Austen fan, I was immediately drawn to the Darcy-and-Lizzy quality of Rose and Nathan’s relationship in Trupp's novel. I enjoyed the misunderstandings, the initial judgmen..."I'm glad you liked my review! I have found a DAR (Daughters of the American Revolution) member's review of Trupp's book and thought others would like to read some points for discussion. The DAR member is not Jewish, and that is why I thought it especially remarkable.
Tessa Smith gave this 5 stars and made the following points in a nut shell;
* Great read for our nation's 250th birthday. Rings true with the story of diversity amongst our early Patriots
* Although the author suggests inspiration came from Austen's "Pride and Prejudice," readers don't have to rely on knowledge or a particular interest in that book or its characters. "These are dynamic characters in their own right worthy of their own story and do not hold a candle to anyone else's tale. Beyond historical fiction or Jane Austen fan fiction, this novel excels at a higher literary level.
*"The use of a Jewish-American candlemaker as a metaphor for "kindling the light of liberty" is inspired. The author delicately and effortlessly layers it within the fabric of the story. The theme gives one pause to consider where we have come and where we are headed as a nation, that we never become lost in darkness or lose our way from the one true Light that guides us all. It is not merely a novel about the Jewish experience in early America. It is the story of us all, individually and united in one quest for liberty and freedom for all."
I think these words coming from a non-Jew in these times of increased antisemitism is worthy of discussion in this venue.
Thank you for sharing this review. I do appreciate this review from a DAR non Jew. I agree with this review of this book. I Would enjoy more stories of Jewish involvement in history.
Mrs wrote: "Stacey B wrote: "Mrs wrote: "As a lifelong Austen fan, I was immediately drawn to the Darcy-and-Lizzy quality of Rose and Nathan’s relationship in Trupp's novel. I enjoyed the misunderstandings, th..."Mrs- Thanks for posting Tessa's review. I saw it in its entirety and am very impressed. Love how she writes.
Ms Trupp posted two very interesting blog entries today. Fascinating history, relevant to her novel and to American history. As we are now heading into the colder, winter months, I returned to look at Trupp's treatment of Chanukah. Snippet:
By midwinter, the city glittered with a borrowed and brittle cheer. Evergreens and holly adorned the windows of houses the British had requisitioned as their own. Redcoats lingered on every corner, their presence a staged contradiction of goodwill. And amidst such uneasy festivities, lesser-known traditions persisted. Chanukah arrived with a quiet discretion that year, its first candle falling upon the twenty-fourth of December, its last on the turning of the year. Rose and her father closed the shop early each evening, lighting their small chanukiah. Though the streets remained cold and the rebellious ferment grew increasingly heavy, they placed their ritual lamp, not in the shadows of the backroom, but directly upon the unshuttered windowsill. It was a modest flame, yet it shed its light upon a dark and unsettled world. Her father set the lead candle with a hand that did not falter, his voice reciting the ancient blessings with a certainty that seemed to steady the very walls.
“Is it merely faith we are keeping? No!” he exclaimed. “We are dedicating ourselves anew—to our character and to what this land must yet become. Freedom, Raizele, is never a gift; it is a fire that must be kindled and carefully preserved.”
Outside, the air was thick with the boisterous enthusiasm of the King’s men. They raised their tankards in the nearby taverns, their voices heavy with ale as they roared through the verses of Joy to the World. They sang it not as a prayer, but as a victory march, an anthem of dominion that seemed to claim the heavens themselves for a terrestrial king. Inside the humble home of the Wachsmans, however, the small flames declared a sovereignty older than any empire.
*-*-*-*-*-*-*-
I truly appreciate the research and the effort to make the story ring true. I looked up the Hebrew date and Chanukah did, in fact, fall on 12/24/1777. I can't begin to imagine what it must have felt like for them- lighting a chanukkiah to commemorate a victory over tyranny... in the middle of a revolution that was battling against tyranny!
Mrs wrote: "Ms Trupp posted two very interesting blog entries today. Fascinating history, relevant to her novel and to American history. As we are now heading into the colder, winter months, I returned to look..."Mrs....
Excellent post.
Denise S wrote: "It is too bad tyranny has taken over our country again. Hopefully, it won't last much longer and we can get back to normal."I wonder whether we sometimes take the very freedoms the Patriots fought for so much for granted that we forget what it meant to live without them.
One thought that keeps coming to me as I read Trupp's book, is how different the meaning of liberty must have been to those who actually lived through the American Revolution. Rose Wachsman, her father, and the other Jews (recent immigrants from the "old countries") are not debating liberty as an abstract political concept.
The Patriots of 1776, Jewish or not, understood what it meant to live under royal authority, and they knew that freedom required more than disliking a particular ruler. It required establishing a system in which power would be limited, government would be accountable, and people could participate in determining their own future.
There is an irony worth considering when today we have people invoking a slogan like “No Kings.” One of the great achievements of the Revolution was to establish a country where citizens could openly criticize their leaders, protest their government, and even march under that very banner without seeking permission from a monarch. That freedom is not incidental to the American experiment; it is one of its defining accomplishments.
As Jews, we might also reflect on the distinction between merely escaping oppression and accepting the responsibilities that come with freedom. The liberty these Patriots fought for was not simply freedom from a king, but the opportunity to build a sovereign nation founded on principles of self-government, with secure borders and freedoms unheard of in other lands. I think the book invites us to appreciate both the historical meaning of that struggle and the extraordinary freedoms that its legacy has made possible.
Denise S wrote: "Not all citizens have been treated as citizens but have had their homes raided by the FBI , have been detained and arrested by ICE and have been killed by ICE when in one case were backing up their..."And you have every right to voice that opinion and demand that the constitution and our civil rights be respected. That is the freedom you have, because we don't have a king.
One thing I found particularly interesting in Trupp’s narrative is that the struggle for liberty was not a simple matter of Patriots versus Loyalists.
Nathan’s father fears that his son is trading a lifetime of security for an uncertain promise of natural rights. Nathan, however, recognizes the injustice of defending an established order simply because it offers the familiar comforts of stability. Rose understands his dilemma and sees that he is struggling for something greater than his own interests.
I think this offers us something worth reflecting on today: the tension between security and liberty, and the question of what we owe ourselves and one another when we believe our rights are at stake. It is one of the things that makes this historical setting so compelling to me.
I find myself reflecting on this week's parsha and the correlation to Trupp's book. Lech Lecha begins with Abram being called to leave his familiar world and journey toward something new, trusting in a future he cannot yet see. It has me thinking about the Jewish patriots in "Kindle the Light of Liberty," who came from different lands and carried different histories, languages, and experiences. Somehow, they found common cause in the struggle for liberty and helped build a country they could call their own. It couldn't have been easy to set aside old differences and embrace a shared identity. America wasn't even America yet, after all! They did not have to become alike to stand together. They had a common purpose that reached beyond the things that divided them.Recalling Trupp's narrative—and finding it much more than a throw-away, Chicklit novel— I wonder when did these patriots stop identifying as English, Polish, Quaker, Jew? When do we, today, drop the hyphen? What about our own families? I'm thinking of about those closer to our own personal immigrant stories. I think it is a modern—American—habit to hyphenate our identity. Isn't it? Do people in England introduce themselves as an Anglo-Saxon-Jute-Viking-Norman-Huguenot-Londoner?
Anyway, this week's parsha seems to echo my questions. Abram goes forth, leaves what is familiar, and venture into the unknown. His journey leads to a new future and even a new name. That's still the challenge today, isn't it? How do we make a new home, embrace a new identity, and still carry the past that made us who we are? Benjamin Wachsman and his daughter Rose, as I read their story, were part of that journey. They were Polish Jews who became Americans, without their Jewishness needing to disappear.
I wonder if we might take a little of that spirit into our own conversations, making room for differences in our politics, just as we make room for differences in our tastes and interpretations of books. We don't need to agree on everything to share a love of reading, learn from one another, and enjoy the conversation. I wonder if that was Trupp's purpose for writing the story in the first place. We can't all claim to have Jewish patriots in our family tree, but I certainly feel proud to call them my own. To align myself with that history and to call myself a proud American. No hyphen.
Shavua Tov!
Claudia wrote: "I find myself reflecting on this week's parsha and the correlation to Trupp's book. Lech Lecha begins with Abram being called to leave his familiar world and journey toward something new, trusting ..."Hi all.
Great discussions here. Wonderful surprise for me on
Sunday am. As the month is almost up, I will ask the author if she would answer some of your questions.
Love the song L’Chi Lach ( Lech Lecha ) by the late Debbie Friedman.
As to Claudia's thought about discussing politics in a kind and tolerant way, years ago we had many discussions. Some members resented this- saying politics interfered with a book club, and there are plenty of political groups to join- so they left our group. Times have changed, and I have no problem with this, but it will need its own topic. Off the top of my head I cant remember which ones we have now.
Lets see what Jan's feeling is on this. In the meantime, for those who see this, let us know your thoughts.
Thank you.
Oy I'm sure no politics is a rule - I'll delete what I said. I forgot. It seems I feel a LOT stronger about it than others so its just as well. I just can't say things like at least we are free to say what we think hence we are a democracy - no, that is not how it works. Not everyone is free to say what they think.....
Denise S wrote: "Oy I'm sure no politics is a rule - I'll delete what I said. I forgot. It seems I feel a LOT stronger about it than others so its just as well. I just can't say things like at least we are free to ..."OY - (cute-) NO Denise- dont delete. Its not a written rule. :)
I appreciate this discussion about Trupp’s book and the relevance to Judaism, our history in the US and current times. So much was said that I don’t want to repeat. I am struck by the comments regarding the perspectives of our Jewish immigrants over time. I remember my grandparents (my grandmothers specifically because they lived longer) explaining the importance of being ‘American’ after they immigrated from ‘Eastern Europe’. They strongly believed in building the best life they could here with the freedom not available where they came from. They recognized that there were challenges and issues but also that it was the best they could hope to experience. They had hope and belief that by their hard work they could make a better life and an opportunity for their children and then grandchildren. These are the ideals that I saw in Trupp’s characters.Regarding discussions on issues, Judaism shows to examine them from multiple perspectives and to dialogue to foster understanding and to evolve. The goal to learn from each other does not require tacit agreement; but the ability to listen and to hear various perspectives and work towards the best possible path.
Thank you all for the thoughtful questions and reflections on 𝑲𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒍𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑳𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝑳𝒊𝒃𝒆𝒓𝒕𝒚. I am grateful for the opportunity to engage with readers.I would like to share a little of my own family's story, because the questions of identity, belonging, immigration, and liberty that arise in the book are also questions that have shaped my life.
I am a naturalized citizen of the United States. My parents were immensely proud to be Americans. We did not hyphenate our identity. We did not fly the Argentine flag outside our home. We would have considered that disrespectful to the neighbors and fellow countrymen who had adopted us as their own. My family cherished Argentine culture, our food, our music—but it was infinitely important to assimilate. We had only to look at our elders for an example.
My grandparents had immigrated to Argentina from Imperial Russia, fleeing persecution, poverty, and the looming revolution. They became proud Argentine citizens. With heavy Yiddish accents, they assimilated. Grateful for the opportunities afforded them, they overcame hardships; they overlooked Old-World bigotries. There was no time for that. They came to build a better life for themselves and for future generations.
That is the tradition of immigration and assimilation that I value, and that I sometimes feel is missing from today's American conversation.
The United States has long welcomed people from around the world, offering them the opportunity to become part of the American tapestry. In recent decades, roughly a million people a year have obtained lawful permanent residency. Immigration was never meant to be a right. It is a privilege given to those who come to share their skills, their education, and their labor in order to help build this country. During the colonial period, laws, circumstances, and expectations may have been different, but the aspiration was familiar: Come help build a nation in which you and your children might pursue life, liberty, and happiness.
I wrote 𝑲𝒊𝒏𝒅𝒍𝒆 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑳𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒐𝒇 𝑳𝒊𝒃𝒆𝒓𝒕𝒚 to honor the people of 𝐊𝐥𝐚𝐥 𝐘𝐢𝐬𝐫𝐚𝐞𝐥, the Jewish people, who helped shape its founding. I would have loved to say that I could trace my own ancestry to the colonial period. I cannot. But I can say with pride that I belong to the same Jewish community that contributed to the founding of this nation. In honor of the 250th anniversary of American independence, I wanted to tell a story that placed these Jewish patriots at the center of the Revolution. I wanted to explore what it meant for them to leave behind the world they knew and take a chance in a new land—to explore what liberty meant to people who had experienced persecution and exclusion. What did they hope to build for their children?
These are not merely historical questions. They are questions every generation must ask anew.
As immigrants, whether in colonial days or modern days, it is our duty to recall what we have escaped. To recall the cost of beginning again. To never take liberty for granted. To understand our rights and our responsibilities as citizens of a Republic. We must understand that it is up to us—not the government—to live up to our inalienable rights. Because in this great nation, the possibilities are endless.
It isn't a matter of denying your history or refuting your past. It is stepping up to become the better version, the stronger version, of yourself—the version of yourself that was denied you in your land of origin. Otherwise, what is the point of 𝑳𝒆𝒄𝒉 𝑳𝒆𝒄𝒉𝒂? Why leave your family and friends, your culture, and your traditions? In the case of the Wachsman patriarch, I strove to emulate my own father's point of view on this exact journey. He used to ask, "Why leave Argentina only to bring Argentina ℎ𝑒𝑟𝑒?" Like Abraham, my father left behind his land and went forth to "make his America."
That spirit informed my portrayal of Benjamin Wachsman:
𝐼𝑛 𝑃ℎ𝑖𝑙𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑙𝑝ℎ𝑖𝑎, 𝑎 𝑚𝑎𝑛’𝑠 𝑙𝑖𝑛𝑒𝑎𝑔𝑒 𝑤𝑎𝑠 𝑛𝑜 𝑙𝑜𝑛𝑔𝑒𝑟 𝑎 𝑠𝑒𝑐𝑟𝑒𝑡 𝑡𝑜 𝑏𝑒 ℎ𝑖𝑑𝑑𝑒𝑛, 𝑏𝑢𝑡 𝑎 𝑓𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑑𝑎𝑡𝑖𝑜𝑛 𝑢𝑝𝑜𝑛 𝑤ℎ𝑖𝑐ℎ 𝑎 𝑡𝑟𝑎𝑑𝑒𝑠𝑚𝑎𝑛’𝑠 ℎ𝑜𝑢𝑠𝑒—𝑎𝑛𝑑 𝑎 𝑓𝑎𝑚𝑖𝑙𝑦’𝑠 𝑓𝑢𝑡𝑢𝑟𝑒—𝑚𝑖𝑔ℎ𝑡 𝑓𝑖𝑛𝑎𝑙𝑙𝑦 𝑏𝑒 𝑏𝑢𝑖𝑙𝑡.
Benjamin believed that his hard work should allow him to live with dignity and independence. When the Crown tightened its rules, imposed heavier taxes, and curtailed freedoms, he understood what was at stake.
“The Crown closes the ports and calls it 𝑜𝑟𝑑𝑒𝑟,” he muttered, gesturing to a stack of unpaid bills. “They quarter their Regulars in private parlors and call it protection. I have labored nearly forty years to stand beholden to no man. I will not begin now to ask permission of a king to sell a candle or say a prayer in my own manner.”
For Benjamin, liberty was not an abstraction. It was the ability to work, worship, raise a family, and live without arbitrary interference. It was the promise that the future might belong to him, to his daughter, Rose, and to her future children. That is what I wanted to honor in this book: the Jewish men and women who helped build a nation in which people of different backgrounds could contribute to a common future. They did not all share the same beliefs or experiences. They did not need to. They needed a common commitment to the country they were helping to create.
It is against the backdrop of this shared commitment that I would like to address a specific question raised in our discussion: whether everyone is free to voice an opinion in the United States today, particularly under the current administration.
Political pressure and social consequences do not belong exclusively to one party or one point of view. If we are to have an open discussion, we must be careful about assuming that the fear of speaking openly belongs to only one political side. The Patriots understood that the right to challenge those in power was essential to liberty.
The early republic itself struggled with this principle, as the controversy over the Alien and Sedition Acts demonstrated. The Alien Enemies Act permitted the government to arrest and deport all male citizens of an enemy nation in the event of war. And the Alien Friends Act allowed the president to deport any non-citizen suspected of plotting against the government, even in peacetime.
This history also reminds us that the use of immigration enforcement powers is not unique to one administration. During President Obama's two terms, the federal government carried out nearly three million formal removals of illegal aliens. Earlier administrations have likewise used the legal powers available to them to enforce immigration laws. These examples remind us that immigration enforcement, national security, and civil liberties have been contested questions throughout American history. Even from the beginning.
The Founders held deeply conflicted, anxious, and pragmatic views regarding early immigration and national identity. While the U.S. Constitution gave Congress the explicit power to "establish an uniform rule of naturalization,” the early republic quickly fractured over how open the nation should actually be. Leaders like John Adams and Alexander Hamilton worried that immigrants arriving from revolutionary France or British-occupied Ireland carried radical ideas or secret loyalties that would destabilize American institutions. Thomas Jefferson expressed concerns in his writings (𝑁𝑜𝑡𝑒𝑠 𝑜𝑛 𝑡ℎ𝑒 𝑆𝑡𝑎𝑡𝑒 𝑜𝑓 𝑉𝑖𝑟𝑔𝑖𝑛𝑖𝑎) that an influx of immigrants raised under absolute monarchies might bring principles detrimental to American liberty.
That is precisely why the principles of the Revolution remain important. We must keep asking whether we are willing to defend the freedom of people whose opinions we dislike as firmly as we defend our own. Are we willing to extend the same standards to the party we oppose that we demand for our own? Can we disagree without treating our fellow citizens as enemies? A meaningful commitment to liberty cannot depend on which party holds power or which political views happen to be popular. That, to me, is the very core of the revolutionary ideal. It is also a deeply Jewish ideal.
Our tradition honors 𝑴𝒂𝒄𝒉𝒍𝒐𝒌𝒆𝒕 𝒍'𝒔𝒉𝒆𝒎 𝑺𝒉𝒂𝒎𝒂𝒚𝒊𝒎—disagreement for the sake of Heaven. In the pages of the Talmud, minority opinions are never erased or silenced; they are preserved alongside the majority because our sages understood that true wisdom requires wrestling with ideas, not crushing them. To defend the right of others to speak, even when we deeply disagree, is to honor that sacred tradition.
Moving forward, we can honor our ancestors without living in the past, holding a common commitment to the country we continue to build together. We can cherish the cultures from which we came while embracing and upholding the laws of the country that has become our home. And we can disagree about politics while still defending the liberty that allows us to disagree.
To me, that is one of the enduring lessons of the American Revolution—and one worth remembering as we celebrate 250 years of American independence.
Thank you again for this opportunity to discuss KINDLE THE LIGHT OF LIBERTY: A Jewish Colonial Love Story of the American Revolution
Stacey B wrote: "Claudia wrote: "I find myself reflecting on this week's parsha and the correlation to Trupp's book. Lech Lecha begins with Abram being called to leave his familiar world and journey toward somethin..."I love Debbie Friedman's work!
Absolutely love Debbie Friedman’s work. She continues to be a blessing. She brought me something special of Judaism when I was a young adult finding my way.
Beryl wrote: "Absolutely love Debbie Friedman’s work. She continues to be a blessing. She brought me something special of Judaism when I was a young adult finding my way."She was so full of talent. So sad.
Mirta: Thank you so very much for elaborating on your book and the ideals that inspired you. I learned very much the same philosophy from my grandparents and my parents. I wish I could articulate my gratitude and relief for your book to illustrate these crucial philosophies and further for sharing your thoughts on Judaism and its past and continuing relevance to our society. I have had similar discussions regarding the difference in immigrants’ approach to ‘becoming’ American. I look forward to your future writing and thoughts.
Beryl wrote: "Mirta: Thank you so very much for elaborating on your book and the ideals that inspired you. I learned very much the same philosophy from my grandparents and my parents. I wish I could articulate m..."Thank you, dear Beryl, for your kind words and your generous support of my work. By generous, I don't mean to imply the obvious, but the generous spirit you have bestowed on my scribblings.
Judy wrote: "I loved this book. I can't recall ever learning about Jews in Colonial America. Not from school teachers or Hebrew school teachers, camp leaders, etc. Later in life, I might have heard a word about..."Judy, thanks for your support and for your interest in this work. I'm so glad that you were inspired to research the topic further. I think that is quite the compliment! I'm happy you enjoyed the Austenesque vibe as well!
Mrs wrote: "As a lifelong Austen fan, I was immediately drawn to the Darcy-and-Lizzy quality of Rose and Nathan’s relationship in Trupp's novel. I enjoyed the misunderstandings, the initial judgments, and the ..."Mrs. W, thanks for sharing your thoughts. As always, I am left speechless by such thoughtful feedback.
It's all fascinating, isn't it? I've had two DAR members reach out, one Jewish, one not. I can't begin to tell you how honored I was— and how excited I was to share it with all of you!
Stacey B wrote: "Ok, back to the discussion of our poll winning book..I have a thirty-page rule that allows for no guilt when closing a book that hasn't grabbed me by that point.
Having just started the book, ..."
I look forward to reading your thoughts, Stacey! All in all, the novel is only lightly seasoned with an Austenesque flavor. I'm hoping the dash of yiddishkeit, coupled with a generous sprinkling of Americana wins you over!
Claudia wrote: "I find myself reflecting on this week's parsha and the correlation to Trupp's book. Lech Lecha begins with Abram being called to leave his familiar world and journey toward something new, trusting ..."What can I say, Claudia? Thank you for your support, for speaking your mind, for your thoughtful posts...I'm grateful. Truly.
Let's follow our usual policy of discussion by members and not the author, at least at first, lest the discussion become like an author presentation, instead of the spot for readers to discuss their own reactions. (I think that's for the best, but you may have a thought in reaction to that as well. 😊)