The Shtetl: Image and Reality
Edited by Gennady Estraikh and Mikhail Krutikov
Studies In Yiddish 21 July 2000

Yiddish and the Left: Papers of the Third Mendel Friedman International Conference on Yiddish
Edited by Gennady Estraikh and Mikhail Krutikov
Studies In Yiddish 31 July 2001

  • ‘The international roster of contributors covers an impressively broad range of topics... linked by a common thematic thread, the attempt of progressive Yiddish-language writers, intellectuals and activists to reconcile their competing allegiances to the Jewish poeple or religion and their leftist politics. The uniformly high quality of the collection and its breadth of topics and approaches makes it an important contribution to interdisciplinary Yiddish studies and to related fields of enquiry (foreign language and immigrant journalism, bilingual education, minority and exile literatures, African colonial literature, Soviet studies).’ — Elizabeth Loentz, Modern Language Review 98.4, 2003, 1066-7 (full text online)
  • ‘The quality of all the essays is no less than would be expected from the list of contributors, but particularly worthy of mention are Estraikh's analysis of the presence and representation of the Soviet Union in the New York-based communist daily Morga-frayhayt, Dafna Clifford's reflections on the Berlin period of author David Bergelson, and Efraim Zadoff's exploration of the educational systems of the Ashkenazi communities of Argentina and Mexico.’ — unsigned notice, Forum for Modern Language Studies XL.1, 2004, 120

Yiddish in the Cold War
Gennady Estraikh
Studies In Yiddish 73 October 2008

  • ‘This meticulously researched book is the first comprehensive English-language study of Yiddish in the Communist world after the murder of Soviet Yiddish writers on 12 August 1952. Estraikh’s story more or less begins where everyone else’s ends. For this alone, Estraikh’s book is an important corrective to our understanding of Yiddish in general, and Soviet Yiddish culture in particular. Just because Stalin said he’d killed off Yiddish culture didn’t make it so... Full of amazing research.’ — David Shneer, East European Jewish Affairs 39.3, December 2009, 401–413
  • ‘Yiddish in the Cold War tells an important story in the history of twentieth-century Yiddish. The book's focus on the internal machinations of the editorial boards of Communist Yiddish periodicals, though, cuts short any broader observations about the Cold War per se... One hopes that Estraikh's new work will stimulate more research into Yiddish culture in the postwar Soviet Union.’ — Jeffrey Veidlinger, Russian Review 69.1, January 2009, 173-74
  • ‘A carefully researched monograph about a hitherto hidden corner of Yiddish culture during a period of contraction.’ — Zachary M. Baker, Shofar: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Jewish Studies 28.4, Summer 2010, 190-92

Three Cities of Yiddish: St Petersburg, Warsaw and Moscow
Edited by Gennady Estraikh and Mikhail Krutikov
Studies In Yiddish 153 April 2017

  • ‘The British book series “Studies in Yiddish,” published by Legenda (and known among academics as “the Legenda series”), is in my estimation the most important venue for contemporary research on Yiddish literature and culture in the world today... Krutikov deals with the travelogue Hoyptshtet (Capital Cities) of 1934, written by Der Nister (“The Hidden One”), one of the greatest Soviet-Yiddish writers. The German professor Sabine Koller also contributes an essay dedicated to Der Nister’s book, which records his impressions of Leningrad, Moscow, and Kharkov during the 1920s. It’s a real delight to see so much attention is devoted to this book, which has been relatively unappreciated in previous considerations of Der Nister.’ — Marc Caplan, Forward 2 August 2017
  • ‘In “Moscow Threefold: Olgin, Bergelson, Benjamin,” Murav elegantly analyzes depictions of Moscow in the mid-1920s by three writers. Emphasizing Moscow as a Jewish “space of contiguity,” Murav addresses no less the relating of Moscow to time... If Olgin’s Moscow “has achieved ... its future,” the works of Benjamin and Bergelson show more ambivalence, and Murav is especially vivid on Bergelson’s vision of destruction likely to precede any possible redemption, which may end up permanently deferred.’ — Jeffrey A. Grossman, Slavic Review Spring 2019, 293-95