THE MT VOID
Mt. Holz Science Fiction Society
10/28/16 -- Vol. 35, No. 18, Whole Number 1934
Co-Editor: Mark Leeper, mleeper@optonline.net
Co-Editor: Evelyn Leeper, eleeper@optonline.net
All material is copyrighted by author unless otherwise noted.
All comments sent or posted will be assumed authorized for
inclusion unless otherwise noted.
To subscribe, send mail to mtvoid-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
To unsubscribe, send mail to mtvoid-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
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:
Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups, Films,
Lectures, etc. (NJ)
My Picks for Turner Classic Movies in November (comments
by Mark R. Leeper)
THE MONSTER (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
General Grant's PERSONAL MEMOIRS (letters of comment
by Jim Susky, Taras Wolansky, John Purcell,
and Philip Chee)
Canine Intelligence (letters of comment by Jim Susky
and Taras Wolansky)
SHIN GODZILLA and Rating Scales (letter of comment
by John Purcell)
SHIN GODZILLA and Translated Titles (letters of comment
by Philip Chee, Steve Coltrin, Gary McCath,
Scott Dorsey, and Paul Dormer)
AURORA and Gregory Benford, Jane Austen, One-Word Film
Titles, Walmart, CASABLANCA, SEED: THE UNTOLD STORY,
and Ideology and Scientific Consensus (letter
of comment by Taras Wolansky)
This Week's Reading (TWELVE DAYS OF TERROR) (book comments
by Evelyn C. Leeper)
===================================================================
TOPIC: Science Fiction (and Other) Discussion Groups, Films,
Lectures, etc. (NJ)
November 10: ISLAND OF LOST SOULS (1932) & THE ISLAND OF DOCTOR
MOREAU by H.G. Wells, Middletown (NJ) Public Library, 5:30PM
November 17: "Rogue Moon" by Algis Budrys and "The Moon Moth" by
Jack Vance (both in SCIENCE FICTION HALL OF FAME 2B),
Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library, 7PM
December 8: ENDER'S GAME (2013) and ENDER'S GAME by Orson Scott
Card, Middletown (NJ) Public Library, 5:30PM
December 22: COPENHAGEN by Michael Frayn, Old Bridge (NJ) Public
Library, 7PM
January 26: "The Spectre General" by Theodore R. Cogswell and "The
Witches of Karres" by James H. Schmitz (both in SCIENCE
FICTION HALL OF FAME 2B), Old Bridge (NJ) Public Library,
7PM
Garden State Spec. Fiction Writers Lectures (subject to change):
November 5: David Sklar, Character Dreaming, Old Bridge (NJ)
Public Library, 12N
Northern New Jersey events are listed at:
http://www.sfsnnj.com/news.html
===================================================================
TOPIC: My Picks for Turner Classic Movies in November (comments by
Mark R. Leeper)
Well, we are into the holidays and shooting into the year 2017.
This is the time of the year that some of the best films are in
theaters, those that have hopes of getting awards. I will not
point you to a bunch of films, but I have some to recommend.
Myself, I will be seeing some of the best films of the year and
considering them for my Top Ten list. But I expect I will not be
so busy that I will not take a time out and watch two or three
Harry Palmer spy films.
In 1962 the newly formed EON film productions company had a big
success with their DR. NO, a spy film starring Sean Connery as
James Bond. (I know. Tell you something you don't already know.)
Eon planned another James Bond film to follow entitled FROM RUSSIA
WITH LOVE. They arranged for a popular spy novelist Len Deighton
to write a FROM RUSSIA WITH LOVE screenplay. Harry Saltzman was
dissatisfied with the script, but also was thinking EON could start
another series of spy films, parallel to the Bonds, based on Len
Deighton's novels.
One hitch was that Deighton's novels were all written in the first
person and Deighton never gave a name to his secret agent. How
would his character's name appear in the credits? How would the
filmmakers discuss the character? That just would not work for a
film, so it was decided to name the character. James Bond had a
very bland name and that seemed to work for his series and they
settled on the equally bland name Harry Palmer. Actually it was
Michael Caine who was playing the character who came up with a
name. Asked for a dull first name Caine thought of "Harry." Asked
for a dull last name, Caine had known a very dull person named
Palmer. So the spy was called Harry Palmer. He was the thinking
man's secret agent.
He would be easy to distinguish from Bond. While Bond was a bon
vivant, Palmer was by design in some ways just the opposite.
Palmer was smarter and much less flamboyant than Bond. Going a
step further, Palmer wore glasses, unusual for anyone in a film.
Bond knew good food when it was served to him, but Palmer really
knew his way around the kitchen. At least for the time the writing
for the first two Palmer films--THE IPCRESS FILE (1965) and FUNERAL
IN BERLIN (1966)--was more realistic and intelligent than the
writing for Bond. A third Palmer film, BILLION DOLLAR BRAIN, was
made in 1967 and for me it was a bad combination. Ken Russell, a
fan of surrealist art film, directed it. Russell tried mixing a
surreal narrative style with what was already a strange storyline
and the film shot straight off the rails. On the other hand, the
film was way, way ahead of its time in recognizing the clout that
computing power could have in the intelligence business.
There were three more Harry Palmer films made in the 1990s, but
they were not nearly as good as the first three. And it is the
first three that will be shown in a block on Turner Classic Movies.
On Saturday, December 19 TCM will show THE IPCRESS FILE at 8:00 PM
and FUNERAL IN BERLIN at 10:00 PM. At midnight we will get the
third Harry Palmer film BILLION DOLLAR BRAIN. The films have a
marvelous "cold war spy film" feel to them, more realistic than a
Bond film but still with more action and thrill than a John LeCarre
film.
As for best film of the month, I would probably pick the basketball
documentary HOOP DREAMS (1994), which will be shown 9:45 PM on
Wednesday, December 16. I never thought I would be recommending a
sports film, but HOOP DREAMS is much more.
(Note: Remember all times are Eastern Time zone, Daylight Saving
Time through November 5, then Standard Time for the rest of the
month.) [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: THE MONSTER (film review by Mark R. Leeper)
CAPSULE: Bryan Bertino directs a suspenseful horror film about a
mother and daughter stranded at night on a deserted road. Their
car is besieged by what might be a wounded wolf or what might be
what wounded it. They have a very dysfunctional relationship and
with flashbacks we learn why. This film is an exercise in suspense
that does not always work, but still has a few good scares for the
audience. Rating: high +1 (-4 to +4) or 6/10
There is a popular sequence in a well-known science fiction or
horror film (let me be a little cagey here and try to avoid a major
spoiler). It would appear here that writer/director Bryan Bertino
adapted that sequence into an entire movie by replacing and
developing the characters and telling their background in
flashbacks. The basic situation and some of the ways to handle
scenes seem to have been borrowed from the previous film.
Kathy (played by Zoe Kazan) and her daughter Lizzy (Ella
Ballentine) have a relationship that is bad from the ground up.
Kathy is irresponsible and a substance abuser and estranged from
Lizzy's father, so Lizzy has previously taken the role of the adult
of the family. Now Lizzy is fed up and wants to go to her father,
and while Cathy does not like the idea, she is cooperating. Lizzy
wants to get there as soon as possible even if it means that Kathy
has to drive all night.
They are the only people on a back road when suddenly their car
hits something big and spins around smashing the driver's door. It
looks to be a wolf dead in the road, but a few minutes later the
wolf's body has disappeared. There must be something else on the
road, probably bigger than the wolf. And you guessed it: as the
mother and daughter learn to depend on each other the ice between
them melts. If it had not, the audience would not be so anxious to
have the two save themselves. At first neither person seemed worth
the effort to save. But each eventually realizes that the other
may be the key to her survival
The film is left with some long scenes of the beleaguered pair
facing off against something they can never get a good look at.
Scenes like these put the director on a knife-edge between keeping
the viewer in suspense and being tedious. Sometimes seeing too much
nothing in the progress in the story will lose the viewer or it may
just tighten the suspense. Here it does both. The film sometimes
works, though some pieces carry on too long.
Bertino does some decent exercise in atmosphere, e.g. sending the
car down dark Freudian roads lit only by a pair of headlights. He
largely introduces the whatsit just a bit at a time. The viewer is
left to question if he/she really saw what it looked like. Little
visual details are added slowly. [Incidentally, I saw the poster
after only after seeing the film and I would have been unhappy had
I seen them in the other order. The poster is a stupendous
spoiler. Take that as a warning.]
I rate THE MONSTER a high +1 on the -4 to +4 scale or 6/10. It is
of note that Zoe Kazan is the granddaughter of the great but
controversial film director Elia Kazan.
Film Credits:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt3976144/combined
What others are saying:
[-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: General Grant's PERSONAL MEMOIRS (letters of comment by Jim
Susky, Taras Wolansky, John Purcell, and Philip Chee)
In response to Evelyn's comments on General Grant's PERSONAL
MEMOIRS in the 10/21/16 issue of the MT VOID, Jim Susky writes:
Please extend my thanks to Evelyn for her outstanding and very
generous review of General Grant's Memoirs. I now have at the ready
a public domain copy and am eager to read it.
Based on the review Grant seems overly modest--a self-admitted non-
academic who nonetheless expresses himself well in print (the
product of a good editor?) and who betrays a thoughtful temperament
and a keen moral conscience.
There was one bit of dissonance (for me, anyway).
She wrote:
"Grant's observation on the surrender at Appomattox has been much
quoted, but probably should be included here:
'I felt like anything rather than rejoicing at the downfall of a
foe who had fought so long and valiantly, and had suffered so much
for a cause, though that cause was, I believe, one of the worst for
which a people ever fought, and one for which there was the least
excuse. I do not question, however, the sincerity of the great
mass of those who were opposed to us.'
It sounds very noble, from 150 years away, when both sides were re-
united into one country again. It sounds a little less glorious if
one considers trying to ask the Allied troops who fought the
Japanese in World War II to take this attitude, or the troops
fighting ISIS now. Fighting long and valiantly is not enough to
make up for fighting for a terrible cause."
I detect no glory in Grant's observation--rather the opposite. He
acknowledges the South's effort and suffering even as he critiques
the implied "cause" (to be let alone to practice slavery). He then
acknowledges the soldier's (Grant's "great mass") plight in
defending the interests of the more abstract collective "foe".
Quite a lot in a short paragraph.
I wonder if in his Memoir Grant explicitly addressed the complex
and conflicting loyalties between the individuals who chose sides?
I know only a little of the extensive written history involved with
the Southern Rebellion, but know that no less than Theodore
Roosevelt's father regretted not going to war for the North (Mrs.
Roosevelt was a "Southern Belle"). His progeny thus fought in every
American War for decades thereafter.
If only for reasons of proximity (lack thereof) one should hardly
expect American troops (or their Allied counterparts) to take an
attitude much congruent with Grant's. Both wars had their
triggering events and both involved conscripts, but beyond that the
parallels are sketchy.
By December 7th Japan was many years into its conquest of the
Pacific. Our "beef" with them was a reaction to what Japan hoped to
be a preemptive blow. The Southern Rebellion (and the North's
reaction) had fermented for decades and was likely to be
inevitable. One wonders how stable a Japanese Empire would have
been without their drastic Pearl Harbor mis-calculation.
In any case, I thank Evelyn again for her fascinating character
sketch of General Grant. [-js]
Mark responds:
Let me ask you a question. If you had been a Southerner with no
political power and no slaves and you were forced to join the fight
or be punished for committing a crime, what would you have done?
Suppose you were just cannon fodder being applied to a cause you
did not choose. Grant is complimenting the cannon fodder that
fought for the South. In that context his statement makes sense to
me. [-mrl]
Jim replies:
I think we agree about Grant's regard for those that did not
desert.
That's a good question about cannon fodder, Mark. I imagine I
might have deserted and, if not captured and hung (by either side),
would have sent a letter to my family explaining my desertion.
I've read that Lincoln first instituted "the draft" to assure a
preponderance of force for the Union and that there were riots in
New York over that--but I'm not so sure about the draft for freemen
in the South.
I admit to being colorblind about the matter--or merely ignorant.
When I think of Civil War soldiers I think of white men who sent
letters and kept diaries about the War. To shine light on my own
ignorance--I checked a presumably credible source.
Under "Armed Forces" there is a brief discussion about the terms of
military service in the South:
Here's a synopsis:
Confederate forces consisted of mainly white males aged between 16
and 28. were volunteers at first--most did not reinlist after
their one-year commitments expired. To build up their forces "the
Confederate Congress enacted the first mass conscription on the
North American continent." At first this was a "selective service"
but later became essentially "universal".
So, you are right that men without power were forced to fight for
the South. [-js]
Taras Wolansky writes:
I enjoyed the excerpts from Ulysses Grant's memoirs. He was dying
of cancer, of course, trying to earn some money for his wife before
the end. Does he mention the most embarrassing episode of his
military career, when he expelled all "Jews" from parts of three
Southern states?
"The Texians brought slavery into Mexican territory, where it was
prohibited": Rather, slavery was banned after the settlers brought
their slaves. The American settlers--armed yeomen--had been
invited in to fight the Comanche; evidently nobody in the Mexican
government recalled what happened when Rome tried to use Germans
the same way. [-tw]
And John Purcell adds:
The other item of note I really enjoyed reading was Evelyn's
extensive review of Ulysses Grant's memoir. As a history buff,
this book certainly appeals to me, and Evelyn's review definitely
solidified my desire to read the book. It is probably in my
school's library. I shall check into that. An interesting
autobiography would be a most welcome change from reading and
grading student essays. [-jp]
Evelyn notes:
Project Gutenberg has a copy if you can't find one locally.
No, Grant did not mention General Order No. 11 in his memoirs. See
my review of WHEN GENERAL GRANT EXPELLED THE JEWS by Jonathan
D. Sarna, reviewed in the 05/17/16 issue of the MT VOID, and
available at http://leepers.us/evelyn/reviews/rev-s.htm#order11,
for more details.
Also Kevin R notes that I misspelled "habeas corpus". [-ecl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: Canine Intelligence (letters of comment by Jim Susky and
Taras Wolansky)
In response to Mark's comments on canine intelligence in the
10/14/16 issue of the MT VOID, Jim Susky writes:
I read with great interest your piece on dogs and how they
demonstrate intelligence and learning.
(Shared as well with my dog-loving friends--one of whom shares a
house with "doxies".)
That dog who was trained to reliably select a thousand different
objects is the most impressive intellectual canine feat I've heard
of.
I'd like to remark that seems comparable to the memories of mostly
non-literate medieval Europeans.
We moderns have literacy tools that permit us to let our memories
remain undeveloped. Our predecessors had few such tools so had to
rely on keenly-developed memories to retain and access information
that we routinely write--or so I have read. [-js]
Taras Wolansky writes:
My sister had a dog, a highly intelligent black Lab, with a sense
of humor. Every time they went for a drive, he would steal one of
her seat cushions and gleefully wait until she took notice, and
then they would have a playful tug of war while she "scolded" him.
Of course, to his doggy mind, the exact same joke was funny over
and over and over; he was like Triumph the Insult Comic Dog in that
respect. [-tw]
Mark responds:
I guess it is questionable if dogs have a sense of humor. I
believe it is thought that dogs actually laugh, but they do it as a
pant. I find the subject a little embarrassing. My dachshund
seemed to have a sense of humor. He liked to play a game. He
would have me hold his dog collar and then pull it out of my hands
and take it across the floor and dropped it. I would be expected
to go pick it up and hold it in my hands for a second and the game
would start again. It was years before I realized he had taught me
to go fetch. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: SHIN GODZILLA and Rating Scales (letter of comment by John
Purcell)
In response to Mark's review of SHIN GODZILLA in the 10/21/16 issue
of the MT VOID, John Purcell writes:
I have yet to see the newest Godzilla film, despite my deep
affinity for all things Gojira and Daikaiju. The 1954 original
movie had a lot going for it, especially those dark undertones of
destructive loss to a foreign invader, to say nothing about the
cold war and nuclear fears hanging over the world. I always
thought that the seriousness of the original followed the standards
set by that many other early Fifties science fiction movies that
dealt with similar fearful topics, such as THE DAY THE EARTH STOOD
STILL, THE WAR OF THE WORLDS, FORBIDDEN PLANET, and THE THING FROM
ANOTHER WORLD. I have long felt that GOJIRA belonged in that group
of classics for the very reasons you mentioned as its strengths. I
definitely would like to see SHIN GODZILLA. It certainly sounds
like a worthy addition to the Godzilla canon.
Your movie rating system has always interested me a little. I
mean, why use both the -4 to +4 scale, followed by the 1-10 scale?
Why not instead just use one, such as simply rating SHIN GODZILLA
at 8/10 or a high +2? I get the really bad side of the first
scale--having a negative score indicates true wretchedness--but why
use both rating scales? Just curious. [-jp]
Mark responds:
John, I promise you one of my first columns on November will be on
the subject of why I have the funny rating scales and why I like
them. And I want to thank you for asking. Why so effusive? After
writing columns on weekly or nearly weekly basis since the late
1970s I am not ashamed to say I am going through a spate of
writers' block. That being the case at the time of your request I
would be delighted to discuss my rating scale and how to interpret
it. [-mrl]
===================================================================
TOPIC: SHIN GODZILLA and Translated Titles (letters of comment by
Philip Chee, Steve Coltrin, Gary McCath, Scott Dorsey, and Paul
Dormer)
In response to Mark's review of SHIN GODZILLA in the 10/21/16 issue
of the MT VOID, Philip Chee asks:
Shouldn't that be *NEW* GODZILLA [rather than GODZILLA RESURGENCE]?
[-pc]
Steve Coltrin adds:
That's what SHIN GODZILLA means. [-sc]
Philip says:
It also doesn't mean GODZILLA RESURGENCE. [-pc]
To which Steve responds:
So what? Also, it's a hell of a lot closer than many translations
of titles are. [-sc]
Scott Dorsey adds:
THE INCREDIBLY STRANGE CREATURES WHO STOPPED LIVING AND BECAME
MIXED-UP ZOMBIES was translated into German as CABARET DER ZOMBIES.
Which, to be honest, is a far better title. [-sd]
Steve replies:
Not much wouldn't be. [-sc]
Paul Dormer notes:
I used to be able to get German TV on satellite, and some of the
translations were quite amusing. As I recall (and IMDb has just
confirmed), AIRPLANE II was DIE UNGLAUBLICHE REISE IN EINEM
VERRUCKTEN RAUMSCHIFF, which I translate as THE UNBELIEVABLE
JOURNEY IN A CRAZY SPACESHIP.
And (as those who read James Nicoll's LiveJournal might have seen)
the classic British comedy KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS is ADEL
VERPFLICHTET, which Google translate renders as NOBLESSE OBLIGE,
which technically is not an English translation. (Actually, when I
first tried to translate the German some years ago, Google
translate gave KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS as a translation of ADEL
VERPFLICHTET.) [-pd]
Gary McGath says [in response to both threads]:
[SHIN GODZILLA has] got me thinking of a two-foot-high Godzilla who
breathes fire on your shins.
The German translation of Terry Pratchett's THE UNADULTERATED CAT
is titled DIE GEMEINE HAUSKATZE, or "the common house cat." The
rest of the translation is just as much of a dud. [-gmg]
Mark says:
Now there is a scary idea, pocket monsters. As for the title, I
have no choice on that. Toho chooses the title, of course. But
since it is a reboot from the very beginning, it is both a
resurgence of Godzilla stories and it is about a new Godzilla.
[-mrl]
And Paul adds:
Terry used to tell a story about how he changed German publishers
because the first one was interpolating adverts into the
translation. (I think he said Iain Banks had tipped him off about
this.) So, after some characters had been captured and put in a
dungeon, the text continued, "And while our heroes are in the
dungeon, they could do with a nice cup of Schmidt's soup." Or
words to that effect. [-pd]
===================================================================
TOPIC: AURORA and Gregory Benford, Jane Austen, One-Word Film
Titles, Walmart, CASABLANCA, SEED: THE UNTOLD STORY, and Ideology
and Scientific Consensus (letter of comment by Taras Wolansky)
In response to various comments in recent issues of the MT VOID,
Taras Wolansky writes:
On the subject of Gregory Benford: At Worldcon I heard him
excoriate Kim Stanley Robinson for his novel, AURORA. While the
questions Robinson raised were important, Benford said, Robinson
handled them in a--how do we put this tactfully--disingenuous way.
I never read AURORA, but I read Robinson's related essay in
SCIENTIFIC AMERICAN--but I didn't realize he was the author until
the end. I remember thinking the author is aware of SF but can't
have read much, or he would know all his objections to interstellar
travel have been raised and answered dozens of time.
Review of THE CAMBRIDGE COMPANION TO JANE AUSTEN: One of the fun
things about reading Austen is that, with only six novels plus one
volume of juvenilia and fragments, the amateur can read all of her
fiction and then argue with the critics on equal terms. By
contrast, if you tried to do the same thing with Trollope, you'd
have to read about 70 novels. (I've read about half, I think.)
When I glanced at Evelyn's "One-Word Film Titles", it took me a
minute to realize these were real movies, not parodies. I go to
the movies a lot but, out of 16, I saw only 7, and heard of just 2
more. (LOOPER sounded ridiculous; and HER violated my rule about
movies with protagonists whose lives are duller than mine.)
I've had better luck with Walmart pies than you have. (Their
multi-berry pie is particularly good.) Most likely, the assistant
baker at your store forgot to stir the big can of pie filling
before he ladled it into the crusts, so the last pies he made got
all the cherries. "Everyone knew the consumer would be
disappointed and probably actually cheated." If Walmart had made
it a practice to disappoint their customers, it would not have
grown to 11,500 locations and half-a-trillion dollars a year in
revenues.
[I think you are wrong about accepting the practice. The
percentage of disappointments need only be small enough that it
does not frighten away customers. And what strikes one person as
low quality some other customer might not complain about and for
that customer would lead to a successful sale. Getting the one bad
pie has not changed my buying habits at Walmart beyond making me
avoid one brand of pie. -mrl]
Nobody has to shop at Walmart.
One place Walmart really shines is in their pharmacy department.
There's an OTC medication I use that costs me 10 or 12 times more
if I buy it anyplace else. Also, there's an Rx that had gradually
risen, over the years, to over $215 every 90 days from
drugstore.com. Recently I switched to Walmart: my last receipt
(including about $20 off from a discount card) came to $106 and
change. And the pharmacist apologized to me because they couldn't
get it any lower!
[I am curious, have you tried Costco? I find they are extremely
reasonable on OTC. -mrl]
Depending on how you figure it, Walmart is either four or eight
times the size of Costco, with about twelve times as many US
employees. They're not in direct competition, however: Walmart is
a retailer, while Costco is a warehouse club.
Unions and their friends hate Walmart, so they spread false stories
about it (and do other things, too). I got into an argument with a
Walmart hater who insisted Walmart sells only "home product" items.
Clearly she had never even been inside a Walmart, not even once.
[I do know people who hate Walmart. Evelyn and I are frequent
shoppers at each. Sometimes it will depend on the item which store
we will go to. -mrl]
CASABLANCA's "Letters of Transit": Perhaps not literally as
described in the movie, but the Nazis were sticklers for legal
form, which is how Raoul Wallenberg was able to save thousands of
Jews by handing out slips of paper.
[What stopped the Wallenberg Jews from being killed was not the
slips of paper, but the fact that the enforcers of Nazi policy were
ignorant of what Wallenberg was doing. Had they found out it would
have had very nasty consequences. -mrl]
Review of SEED: THE UNTOLD STORY. What's wrong with this sentence:
"There are serious threats to that biodiversity as mega-
corporations genetically modify plants ..." Obviously, genetically
modifying plants increases biodiversity, rather than reducing it.
[In the short term, yes. But if through genetic modification you
create a strain that out competes every other competing strain you
have lost diversity. -mrl]
The latest SKEPTICAL INQUIRER has an article about how one's
ideology can prevent one from accepting a scientific consensus.
For conservatives, it's global warming. For liberals, fracking,
and genetically modified organisms. Liberals have more documentary
filmmakers than conservatives do, of course!
Finally, thanks again for all the great issues I've been commenting
on. [-tw]
===================================================================
TOPIC: This Week's Reading (book comments by Evelyn C. Leeper)
At first glance, TWELVE DAYS OF TERROR by Richard G. Fernicola, MD
(ISBN 978-1-4930-2324-0) would appear to be similar to CLOSE TO
SHORE by Michael Capuzzo (ISBN 978-0-7679-0414-8), which is
reviewed in the 07/29/16 issue of the MT VOID. but it differs in
many ways.
First off, let me say that one rarely sees an author use "M.D."
after his name on a cover unless the book is about something
medical, and while one can argue that the injuries sustained by the
victims qualify, this does not seem to be primarily a medical book.
Second, the cover says, "With a New 100th Anniversary Preface" and
the back cover says that the book was made into a television movie
also titled TWELVE DAYS OF TERROR, yet the copyright date in the
book is 2016, with no indication of an earlier publication. A bit
of Googling shows the book was originally published in 2001 and the
movie made in 2004, but whether this book has any new material
other than the new preface is unknown. (Capuzzo's book was also
published in 2001.)
As one reviewer noted, Capuzzo treats the shark as a character and
his book has the flow of a novel (think Truman Capote's "non-
fiction novel"), while Fernicola is more like a textbook. In
addition, Fernicola includes the story of his research: how he
tracked down witnesses and relatives of witnesses, and what they
said. Capuzzo relies more on documents (death certificates,
newspapers, and so on), and if he includes "direct testimony" he
does does make how he got it part of the narrative.
Fernicola also spends more time on subsequent shark attacks and
studies, trying to find some definite answers to whether it was one
shark, and what type of shark(s). Capuzzo has much less of this,
because he covers much more of the ambiance of the 1916 Jersey
Shore.
Apparently, Fernicola spent twenty years researching the attacks.
Capuzzo's book, on the other hand, will be more accessible to the
casual reader. [-ecl]
===================================================================
Mark Leeper
mleeper@optonline.net
Middle age is when you've met so many people that
every new person you meet reminds you of someone
else.
--Ogden Nash