Number Our Days by Barbara Myerhoff was created as both a short film (produced in 1976) and as an ethnographic book (published in 1978). The variety in format provides a detailed look into the daily lives of elderly Jewish immigrants in Venice Beach, California. Unlike other ethnographic sources we have looked at, the two formats of Number Our Days provide complementary but distinct perspectives on themes of aging, memory, ritual, and cultural survival within the Jewish diaspora. Though the book allows for deeper, more detailed explorations of these themes through rich narrative detail and analysis, the short film offers a powerful visual and emotional intimacy that enhances the communities stories. Myerhoff’s studies are not only an academic reflection, but also a humanizing portrayal of individuals grappling with universal questions of identity, aging, and legacy.
The book version of Number Our Days is a detailed ethnographic text that allows Myerhoff to expand on the theoretical implications of her research. Through participant observation, she provides rich descriptions of the elderly Jewish immigrants who gather at the Israel Levin Senior Center. She explores their stories, rituals, and struggles in great depth, weaving her reflexive commentary into the narrative. Myerhoff delves into the emotional and cultural complexities of aging, offering insights into how these elders grapple with both personal loss and the disconnection from their children’s more assimilated lifestyles.
In contrast, the short film, directed by Lynne Littman, offers a visual representation of this same community. The 30-minute documentary highlights the emotional heart of Myerhoff’s work, capturing the elders’ expressions, interactions, and daily routines. The film brings to life the people whom Myerhoff writes about, providing a visceral understanding of their personalities and the setting they inhabit. The documentary includes scenes of communal singing, storytelling, and personal reflection, showcasing the emotional depth of the elders’ lives in ways that the written word cannot fully convey. One elderly woman in the film poignantly says: “We live to be remembered. And if we are not remembered, it is like we never existed.” The immediacy of her face and voice make this statement resonate even more deeply, showing how the film complements the book’s text by giving the audience direct access to the elders’ emotions.
In both the book and film, Meyerhoff explores the theme of aging as a process that is not only physical but also cultural and emotional. Many of the elders she documents are Holocaust survivors or individuals who fled Eastern Europe to escape persecution. Now, in their later years, they confront new challenges: physical decline, loneliness, and the fear of being forgotten. Both mediums emphasize how these elderly Jews fight not only to survive but to ensure their stories are heard.
In the book, Myerhoff explores the existential dimension of aging in greater depth, reflecting on how the elderly use storytelling and ritual to maintain a sense of continuity between their past and present. As one of the men she interviews, Shmuel, notes “We survived the camps, but what now? Now, it is our memories we must keep alive, or else we will be as good as dead” (page 63). The book allows Myerhoff to unpack these complex emotions and histories in a detailed manner, providing context for the struggles that many of the elders face. For example, she reflects on how the community feels increasingly isolated from their children and grandchildren, who have often assimilated into mainstream American culture. The book gives Myerhoff space to explore the generational tensions that arise when cultural traditions begin to fade with younger generations.
The film, however, captures the everyday moments of resilience. In one touching scene, the elderly men and women sing Yiddish songs together, their voices shaky yet filled with determination. The visual depiction of this ritual underscores their collective strength. Even in their old age, they resist the erasure of their heritage, using communal rituals to affirm their Jewish identity. While the book provides more analytical depth, the film vividly shows these moments, revealing the emotional strength behind their cultural practices. The visualizations are not something that has been reflected in other ethnographies we have viewed or analyzed.
Both the book and film emphasize the role of memory and ritual in preserving identity, but each approaches these themes differently. In the book, Myerhoff writes extensively about how the elderly use storytelling as a way to reclaim their personal and collective histories. She explains how memory is not just about recollection but is an active process that helps sustain Jewish identity within the diaspora. One elder in the book reflects “It’s not just our memories that we are keeping alive. We are carrying the memories of our people, our traditions. If we forget, who will remember?” (page 91). Rituals like daily prayers, holiday celebrations, and the communal sharing of food take on added significance in this context. Myerhoff shows how these rituals help the elderly maintain a sense of continuity with their past, even as their bodies weaken and their world becomes smaller.
The film offers a more sensory experience of these rituals. It brings the reader into the physical space of the Israel Levin Center, showing the communal dining tables, the prayer gatherings, and the celebrations. The camera focuses on the tactile elements of Jewish ritual—hands lighting candles, bread being broken, songs being sung. These visual moments allow the audience to see how these rituals are not just symbolic but embodied practices that connect the community to their faith and to each other.
By using these 2 different formats together Barbara Myerhoff is able to show a more complete picture of this community. Number Our Days short film offers a visual representation and emotional depth that the book alone cannot fully convey. While the book provides a classic ethnographic perspective and detailed sociological analysis within the Jewish community of Venice, California, the film is able to humanize these characters and bring insights to life through facial expressions, songs, and everyday activities of elderly residents. The immediacy of seeing real people grapple with loneliness, mortality, community, and tradition creates a more visceral connection with the audience, offering visual empathy that compliments the intellectual and detailed depth of the book. Together, these works offer a powerful, complementary understanding of cultural survival and identity within the Jewish diaspora.
Myerhoff’s dual approach through text and film underscores the importance of both academic analysis and emotional engagement in anthropology. Whether through the written word or the visual medium, Number Our Days offers a timeless reflection on the resilience of the human spirit and the enduring power of memory, ritual, and community.
I think you did a great job describing the differences between the book and the film as well as how they complement one another. While it’s possible to visualize scenes that are written in a book, it is a completely different experience to view the real footage. It was very moving to see these elders and to hear about their daily struggles. You certainly could see their resilience and desire to keep living life and making memories while at the same time experiencing losses and health issues. These are people who survived the Holocaust and have endured much pain. However, their Jewish identity remains to be very important to them and it is evident by their desire to keep traditions alive. In order to not be erased, they will continue to live their lives and to make sure people remember them.
The first time I read Barbra Meyerhoff’s I looked at it from the lens of an anthropologist, thinking about her ethnographic methods as she wrote about Jewish people in the people living in the Israel Levin Senior Center. Meyerhoff wrote that “the amount and variety of information accumulated in a field study is overwhelming. There is no definite or correct solution to the problem of what to include, how to cup the pie of social reality, and when precisely to leave or stop”(79). Meyerhoff suggests that the solution to this is to attempt to “experience the new culture from within, living in it for a time as a member, all the while maintaining sufficient detachment to observe and analyze with some objectivity”(79). This solution allows anthropologists to better understand the essential qualities in the communities they are in, but while immersing oneself into the culture is helpful, it also causes the problem of remaining objective. This was very interesting to think about when re-reading this from the Jewish lens. Meyerhoff captures Jewish culture, understanding the ways in which it changes over time but also stays the same—a concept we are still trying to understand as we define Judaism as a culture. She captures this very well in her film, discussing how the essence of Judaism is told through stories shaping both religion and culture. This was especially interesting to think about as Rosh Hashana was happening and we heard sermons from rabbis tying in both rabbinical analysis and social reflections. I think both Julia and Maddie did a very good job capturing how the cross-section between the book and the movie captures the shaping of Jewish culture over time through both an anthropological and emotional engagement.
I really enjoyed reading your reflection on “Number our Days” because you comprehensively covered Myerhoff’s central themes of aging, ritual, resilience, and community. A quote that stuck out to me in Myerhoff’s book that you also included in your blog post, was one of the men she interviewed. Shmuel said, “We survived the camps, but what now? Now, it is our memories we must keep alive, or else we will be as good as dead” (page 63). This was eye-opening because even after surviving the Holocaust (a miracle and accomplishment), survivors are still faced with uncertainty and fear to leave a greater legacy. The book and film reinforced one of the defining qualities of Judaism: storytelling. Through the observation of Jewish immigrants in America, Myerhoff showed how important keeping traditions alive and reflecting on the past is for Jewish people.
In “Existentialism is a Humanism”, Jean Paul Sartre suggests a controversial alternative to the commonplace notion that humans are born with a predefined purpose. Instead, he argues that individuals must define themselves through their actions. Sartre proposes this as the optimal way of achieving an authentic life as long as certain conditions are met. This paper argues that Sartre’s “Existentialism is a Humanism” hinges on two principal human traits, authenticity and accountability. These serve as the basis of his call for us to define ourselves, assume responsibility for our choices, and live with dignity through the acceptance of our duty. The uncharted freedom that Sartre presents in this text is a double-edged sword, both liberating and taxing. Ultimately, without a rigorous adherence to authenticity and accountability, freedom itself becomes a burden to mankind, becoming a source of anxiety and fear.
I think you did a great job at explaining how the book and film complement one another as well as their distinct differences. I definitely agree that Myerhoff’s studies help to humanize these individuals and we especially see this during the film. Being able to witness their facial expressions and interactions really helps to bring them to life. One can always try to visualize characters in a book, but it is a completely different experience to see them on screen. It enables us to remember them better, which was their goal.
I like the way you describe the two different formats of research as complementary to one another, because there are some things that just cannot be captured through one singular perspective. From a research perspective, the more information you can collect, the better, and you describe how this particular project is a good example of that. Though equally effective in relaying information, the two formats offer differing perspectives and touch on different aspects of the elder Jewish community in Venice, California. In this way, we are better able to learn about and understand this particular culture in a broader, more wholistic way.
Hi Maddie!
I think you did a fantastic job deconstructing the book and film and looking at how they are complementary to each other. I particularly liked the way that you looked at the difference between the community aspect that is highlighted in the film in contrast to the memory of people who went through the holocaust and might feel alienated without their community. I think documentaries have a huge role to play in anthropology as they are able to really immerse one into the environment that otherwise turns into an analytical monologue in an ethnography (at least in some). I am interested in knowing which one you really thought was more impactful, or if you think the message was equally potent across the mediums?
I completely agree with you, I think there is only so much that can be done when reading ethnographies such as Life is With People because there is this distance that comes with the non-visual experience, whereas The Number Our Days film offers that visual connection. In Life is With People, without seeing the faces and actual paces that people live in, it’s naturally harder to grasp the emotional and sensory depth of their experiences. In contrast, Number Our Days breaks down this barrier and builds this connection through the film’s visual narratives. Where we’re actually able to watch the elders engage in their daily rituals, hear their voices and see their expressions, we are able to see those more immediate emotional responses. The film is able to beautifully transform these struggles, resilience, and cultural practices into something tangible and deeply felt, which creates a bond with us, the audience, that words alone, such as Life Is With People, at times do not achieve. I think over all these two forms of connection, the combination of text and film, make these experiences both intellectually and emotionally accessible.
Thanks for this insightful comparison of Myerhoff’s book and film. I completely agree that using both formats offers a more complete picture of the community. The book’s depth of analysis and rich narrative helps us understand the complexities of aging, memory, and cultural survival, while the film provides a more intimate, emotional glimpse into the lives of these elders. Seeing them sing, reflect, and gather at the Israel Levin Center really drives home their resilience in a way that complements the book’s deeper analysis. Your point about how the different formats shape our understanding made me think, does seeing the elders on film create more empathy compared to reading about them, and what does that mean for how we approach ethnography? Do you think the emotional immediacy of the film introduces any potential bias compared to the book? The combination of both formats really shows the value of integrating analytical depth with sensory engagement, creating a powerful portrayal of aging and identity in the Jewish diaspora.