User Reviews

The last months (?) of WW II, in the Ukrainian steppe. There's a meeting of Rumanian and German officers. The Rumanians hope for important news or orders that might help improve their situation, but their German allies have only come for taking a rest and having a meal. They talk, and a German major and a Rumanian captain sing French songs for their comrades. Things only get really interesting when the major tells how he purchased an extremely valuable stamp and passes it round - and doesn't get it back...

I don't think the action of this short is very important. It has some suspense and some interesting twists towards the end - especially when Captain Tomut reveals why he refused to be searched - but I think the allegorical level is what's important here. Much of the figurative meaning is explained in the dialogue; for example: the aurochs is a symbol for Rumania's liberation from the Osmanian yoke, and there's an ellipsis (a trope) that is explained by the Rumanian captains. It may be significant that Tomut mentions they are having their meal in a school building, in the class room where the children learn to read: a 'reading' can be the same as an interpretation, and I think - as I've mentioned before - that the story has an allegorical level that the viewer needs to interpret. (Not sure though if 'reading' can mean 'interpretation' in Rumanian, too.)

What 'tertium non datur' means is not fully explained in the dialogue. Only the literal level is explained: the major says his stamp is one of only two that still exist, 'tertium non datur': 'there is no third' (one). But I think it's easy to see that it means more here. 'Tertium non datur' also means (in philosophy) that 'there is no third' possibility, that is something is either right or wrong, but not right and wrong at the same time. (This definition is a bit simplified.) This works fine in mathematics, but not necessarily regarding moral questions: the German major has purchased the stamp from a Jew in a camp. He paid much less than what the stamp is really worth. So he did the wrong thing. But when the Rumanian captains scold him for that, he replies that the money he paid the Jew saved his life, because he could use it to buy his way out of the camp and to the Land of Promise. So what he did was wrong and right at the same time. (The Rumanians could also be good and bad at the same time: they let the Jews pass, but they demand a very high price for the passage (at least the German major says so).)

This is of course only *my* interpretation. (It isn't mentioned if there are other potential buyers, or how rich the major is, that is whether he had enough money to pay substantially more.) If you are interested in movies that deal with moral questions, watch this one and see for yourself.

(There are some other important themes, especially questions of 'honour', but I think this comment would be too long if I commented on every theme.)

(Edit / addition (20th July 2008): I've added a few plot keywords to this title. If you can think of more, please add them, too.)

(Edit / addition (3rd September 2008): In one of the plot twists it is revealed that 'there is no third' is not true regarding the rare stamp. This may be meant to imply that it isn't true regarding moral questions, either.)