MT VOID, 04/19/24 -- Vol. 42, No. 42, Whole Number 2324

THE MT VOID
04/19/24 -- Vol. 42, No. 42, Whole Number 2324
Co-Editor: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Co-Editor: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
Sending Address: evelynchimelisleeper@gmail.com
All material is the opinion of the author and is copyrighted by
the
author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe or unsubscribe, send mail to eleeper@optonline.net
The latest issue is at <http://www.leepers.us/mtvoid/latest.htm>.
An index with links to the issues of the MT VOID since 1986 is at
<http://leepers.us/mtvoid/back_issues.htm>.
Topics:
         Passover Video
         Mini Reviews, Part 23 (THE GOLEM (1920),
                 THE HALFWAY HOUSE, MYSTERIOUS ISLAND (2005))
                 (film reviews by Mark R. Leeper
                 and Evelyn C. Leeper)
         Supermarket Offers (letters of comment by Gary McGath,
                 Scott Dorsey, and Keith F. Lynch]
         This Week's Reading (translations)
                 (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Passover Video
Karen Silverstein's fourteen-minute video about gefilte fish ("A
documentary about an endangered species":
<https://vimeo.com/261016424>
===================================================================
TOPIC: Mini Reviews, Part 23 (film reviews by Mark R. Leeper and
Evelyn C. Leeper)
This is the twenty-third batch of mini-reviews, all films of the
fantastic.
THE GOLEM, AND HOW HE WAS MADE (DER GOLEM, WIE ER IN DIE WELT KAM)
(1920): THE GOLEM, AND HOW HE WAS MADE is considered the
definitive "Golem" film, by Paul Wegener and Henrik Galeen has
made major changes to the original legend.  For starters, the
life-giving power comes from Astaroth, not God.  It consist of an
amulet on the golem's chest, not the word "emet" on its forehead.
Astrology is also involved.  And they added a love story, between
Rabbi Loew's daughter and Prince Florian (shades of Shakespeare's
"Merchant of Venice"!).  [-ecl]
Released 29 October 1920 [United States 19 June 1921].   Available
on Kanopy, Internet Archive (archive.org), and other sites.
Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0011237/reference>
What others are saying:
<https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/golem_1920>
THE HALFWAY HOUSE (1944): THE HALFWAY HOUSE bears a certain
resemblance to DEAD OF NIGHT--or perhaps more accurately, DEAD OF
NIGHT bears a certain resemblance to THE HALFWAY HOUSE, since THE
HALFWAY HOUSE came out a year before DEAD OF NIGHT.  In both
cases, a group of people gathers, or is gathered, at an inn in
rural Wales.  Each has their own story, just as in DEAD OF NIGHT,
and there is also a supernatural element, but unlike DEAD OF NIGHT
the supernatural element is for the framing sequence, not the
individual stories.  As such this is perhaps less engaging than
DEAD OF NIGHT: the individual stories are rather mundane and
common: no time-traveling mirrors, ghostly golfers, or malevolent
dummies here.  Still, it is an excellent example of wartime Ealing
filmmaking.  [-ecl]
Released 2 April 1944.  Available at Internet Archive
(archive.org).
Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0035962/reference>
What others are saying:
<https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_halfway_house_1944>
MYSTERIOUS ISLAND (2005): The 2005 TV version of MYSTERIOUS ISLAND
is based more on the 1961 Ray Harryhausen film than on the Jules
Verne novel, though it diverges quite  abit from either.
Harryhausen came up with the idea of giant animals on the island
(or more probably, producer Charles Schneer).  This version keeps
that idea, although it attempts to do some technobabble to explain
it.  It also follows the 1961 version by making sure that there
are some women in the cast (following what Carl Denham said: " ...
the public, bless "em, must have a pretty face.").
It diverges from both the book and the earlier movie by
introducing Captain Nemo almost at the very beginning, having a
lot more interaction with the pirates, and introducing a racist
Confederate so that everyone else can criticize him whenever he
says something racist.
When I was about ten or eleven, I found a copy of the Scribner's
edition of THE MYSTERIOUS ISLAND in the house and literally read
it almost to pieces.  (Yes, literally--the cover were attached
only by shreds of the cloth that covered the binding.)  Newer
editions may have a more accurate translation, but that to me is
the canonical version.  I accept the Harryhausen film on its own,
though not as a true adaptation, and the other versions basically
fail for me.  (We won't even talk about the 1929 version,
especially the "duck-men".)  [-ecl]
Released 17 September 2005.
Film Credits:
<https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0448965/reference>
===================================================================
TOPIC: Supermarket Offers (letters of comment by Gary McGath,
Scott Dorsey, and Keith F. Lynch]
In response to Evelyn's comments on supermarket coupons and offers
in the 04/12/24 issue of the MT VOID, Gary McGath writes:
[Evelyn writes,] "The free holiday entree (Easter ham or turkey,
kosher chicken, etc.) now requires $400 of purchases in the four
weeks preceding Easter, which is normally the four weeks preceding
Passover.  Not this year.  So if you want the kosher chicken, you
have to spend $400 even before they have put out the Passover food
(which definitely boosted your spending).  The one bright point is
they will let people redeem their points for the kosher chicken
until Passover, even though the usual deadline is Easter.  (This
part is not the supermarket's fault; blame Pope Gregory XIII.)"
[-ecl]
The Greek Orthodox church has an extra rule that Easter must come
after Passover.  [-gmg]
Scott Dorsey asks:
What if I want both options so I can cook the kosher chicken with
the Easter ham inside?  [-sd]
Keith F. Lynch replies:
Sorry, but that isn't halal.  Especially not during Ramadan.
[-kfl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
I recently read a column by Natalia Sylvester about translation
entitled "Some Words Feel Truer in Spanish":
<https://www.nytimes.com/2024/04/13/opinion/
first-generation-bilingual-language.html
?unlocked_article_code=1.lU0.ZAdo.d17yFnT3lKmi&smid=url-share>
One of the observations Sylvester made was, "Was there really no
differentiating in Spanish between the fingers (dedos) on our
hands, and those on our feet we call toes?"
Which reminded me of my own observations on trying to translate
(well, one of my observations--it is a favorite topic of mine):
Leopoldo Lugones's "Yzur" is considered by some a forerunner
(though not a precursor) to Edger Rice Burroughs's "Tarzan" books.
  And this story is a perfect example of the pitfalls or problems
of translation.  Gilbert Alter-Gilbert's translation says, "I
bought the ape at an auction of property," but then switches to
"the lack of articulate language in monkeys," "monkeys once were
men," and other references to monkeys, until he gets to "the
chimpanzee (which is what Yzur was)."  My first reaction is that
Lugones doesn't seem to know the difference between monkeys
(tails) and apes (no tails), chimpanzees being apes.  But then I
pause, and check, and in Spanish both "ape" and "monkey" are
called "mono".  (When you get down to the species level, there
*are* separate words for "chimpanzee", "orangutan", and "gibbon".)
  When I check the Spanish, Lugones has used "mono" and
"chimpance".  Alter-Gilbert, however, has decided to translate
"mono" first as "ape" and then as "monkey", even though the latter
is basically incorrect in English.  My feeling is that he should
have translated "mono" as "ape" throughout, since I believe that
Lugones was referring primarily to apes, not monkeys, though
"primate" would be an acceptable substitute (albeit more
scientific than literary).
  Luis Borges's article "El oficio de traducir" sums up a lot of
the problems of translation.  When translating poetry, he says,
word choice and word order are very important, so literalness
would seem to be the goal.  Yet "Buenas noches" should not be
translated As "Good nights," and "Good morning" is not "Buena(s)
manana(s)."  Germanic languages have compound words, while
Latinate languages do not (except as neologisms).  So
Shakespeare's "world-weary flesh" becomes "carne cansada del
mundo"--not the same at all(*).  Similarly, the Spanish
"sentadita" has no real English equivalent, which seems to be a
combination of "seated" and "abandoned", sort of like a girl
brought to a dance and then left sitting on the sidelines the
whole time.
(*) So I guess my coining of "tecnoparleo" to be the Spanish for
"technobabble" is probably inaccurate. :-)
And in writing about translations of Chaucer, Borges observes that
various translators of "The Pardoner's Tale" into Spanish have
chosen many different words or phrases for the title character:
perdonador, bulero, buldero, vendedor de indulgencias, mercader de
perdones, echacuervos.
And as I have before, I recommend IS THAT A FISH IN YOUR EAR?:
TRANSLATION AND THE MEANING OF EVERYTHING by David Bellos, as a
good (non-academic) book on the subject.  [-ecl]
===================================================================
                      Mark Leeper
                      mleeper@optonline.net
           The only normal people are the ones you don't know
           very well.
                                           --Joe Ancis