application/pdf
2036-461X
19039
6
en
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Cinéma & Cie. Film and Media Studies Journal
Languages, Actors and Audience. C. A K. Polni Maršalek versus Der falsche Feldmarschall
Text.Serial.Journal
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie
5
Thematic issue / Section thématique
2024-02-14
2022-11-20
2005-03-01
2024-02-14
Cinéma & Cie
Petr Mareš
2005
Univerzita Karlova, Praha
2036-461X
6
en
Languages, Actors and Audience. C. A K. Polni Maršalek versus Der falsche Feldmarschall
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie/article/download/19039/16799
5
LANGUAGES, ACTORS AND AUDIENCE.
C. A K. POLNI MARŠALEK VERSUS DER FALSCHE FELDMARSCHALL
Petr Mareš, Univerzita Karlova, Praha




Correspondence and Dissimilitudine

   Multiple-language versions of films produced at the beginning of the sound film era
represent an extreme example of the tension between a tendency towards correspon-
dence and a necessary dissimilitude, a tension that is present in virtually all cases
when a film is transposed from one language into another. This is demonstrated also
by dubbing or subtitles, the two translation techniques most widely used following
the transition-to-sound era. Multiple-language versions show an evident identity on
the level of the narrated story, in their overall use of sets and costumes, in framing as
well as in the principles of editing: this is why they are called versions and not (sepa-
rate) films. On the other hand, multiple productions with different actors result in a
significant differentiation in the concrete speech realisation and in the actors’ physi-
cal expression.
   Linguistic differences between the individual versions (not only additions, omissions
and semantic distinctions within the discourses, but also differences due to intonation
or the relationship between speech, facial expression and gestures) can generally be
viewed as a result of factors of three types:
   (a) intralinguistic factors – expressive and semantic features specific to the individual
languages;
   (b) “realisation” factors – inherent in the acting abilities of the performers cast in a
given role in the different versions;
   (c) communication factors – connected with the fact that each version is addressed to
a different audience, modelling a different addressee with a distinct linguistic as well as
national and cultural background. What becomes crucial here are such factors as
national mentality (or rather the stereotypical ideas about it), collective historical and
cultural experiences, opinions, attitudes and prejudices predominant in a particular
community (we should again note a contradiction between the real situation and the
filmmakers’ ideas of it).
   Obviously, it is not possible to ascribe all differences to the factors stated above. The
motivation for some differences is very difficult to assess, and they may in some cases
been caused by a mere accident.


Two Versions of a Film Comedy

  A particularly suitable example for supporting our claims is a film comedy about a

­66                                                           CINEMA & Cie, no. 4, Spring 2004
                                                          LANGUAGES, ACTORS AND AUDIENCE

false military commander. The Czech version, C. a k. polní maršálek (Eng. Tr.: The
Imperial and Royal Field Marshall) was made in 1930 by the director Karel Lamač 1
(who based his film on the eponymous play by the Czech playwright Emil Artur
Longen). This was the second fully synchronised Czechoslovak film (after the unsuc-
cessful melodrama Když struny lkají [F. Fehér, 1930]). The story of a retired Austrian
officer who seizes an opportunity to pretend to be a Field Marshal, i.e. a commander-
in-chief, capitalised on the popularity of satirical representations of the Austro-
Hungarian army, a body which had ceased to exist with the fall of the Austro-
Hungarian monarchy. After its first run in October 1930 C. a k. polní maršálek became
an enormous success, providing an important stimulus for the development of the
Czechoslovak sound film production. C. a k. polní maršálek was also significant for
the theatre comedian Vlasta Burian and his success as a (speaking and singing) star of
Czech cinema: in the 1920s Burian performed in four silent films which had been
much less popular, because his inimitable humour, developed on the stage, was based
on thorough interpenetration of sound realisation, facial expression, gesticulation and
physical action
   At the same time Karel Lamač also directed a German version, Der Falsche
Feldmarschall (Eng. Tr.: The Fake Field Marshall), with a title that already revealed the
main conceit of the plot, though it was also shown under the title of K. und K.
Feldmarschall, equivalent to the Czech title. The leading part in the German version
was again performed by Vlasta Burian, now speaking German; the other roles were cast
with German actors. The extras are more or less identical in both versions, including
several figures delivering short speeches; in some cases, a given speaker among the pres-
ent figures differs in the two versions.
   It is worth noting that among the authors of the German version’s dialogues was the
popular Austro-German humorist Alexander Roda Roda, who had been an officer in his
youth and had written many satirical texts about the monarchy, and its army in partic-
ular. Moreover, Roda Roda plays the real Field Marshal in the German version – who,
however, is only a minor character, appearing at the very end of the film.
   In 1931 Lamač directed a French version called Monsieur le Maréchal, with an all-
French cast and situated in the French environment; unfortunately, the copy of this
version is not available in the Czech National Film Archive, and it was not possible to
consult it.
   The following notes are based mainly on a systematic comparison of the linguistic
component in the opening parts of the Czech and German versions of C. a k. polní
maršálek. The later parts are discussed selectively, with attention only on the most
characteristic examples. The opening sequence, approximately fifteen minutes long,
functions as an exposition where the chief emphasis is placed upon the introduction
of the main characters and their relations. It is entirely dominated by Vlasta Burian
playing the role of a retired officer who yearns to be an active officer again. The offi-
cer’s characterization is achieved on one hand by revelations of his subconscious (the
film opens with the protagonist dreaming about his enormous success on the battle-
field), and on the other through encounters with other characters (maidservant, wait-
ress, members of his “veterans’ club” gathered in the pub). The hero’s account of the
achievements of his lieutenant nephew introduces a set of other characters connected
with the garrison in the little Galician town (the nephew, the garrison commander, his
daughter, etc.).

                                                                                      ­67
PETR MAREŠ

Nationalities and Languages

  The first important differentiation between the two versions is a function of the char-
acters’ nationalities, and the use of the national languages connected with it. The
German version is placed in a homogenous German-speaking environment, without
any references to the Czech community. The hero played by Burian is called Alois
Buschek (the name indicates a Czech origin, however, the graphic form – visible in a let-
ter written by the protagonist – identifies the person to be a German-speaking
Austrian), the garrison is led by colonel Gewitsch, etc. On the other hand, the situation
in the Czech version is much more complex. This version constantly emphasises the
Czech element, which is strengthened by the very choice of the characters’ names. The
Austrian army is full of Czech officers in this version: Burian plays a captain called
František Procházka (a typical Czech name), the garrison commander in Galicia is
colonel Alois Přecechtě l (again a typical Czech name), one of the local officers is called
Hřebík (“Nail”), etc. (here the German version uses the corresponding “Nagel”). It is not
without interest that this tendency towards the “Bohemicization” of the Austrian army
does not affect those characters within the story that are clearly negative. The comical
figure of a prying and timorous military servant is called Sep(p)l in both versions (the
German version uses an appropriate gemination of the consonant p), in the same way
the disclosed spy is a nobleman evidently of Hungarian origin, called Géza von Medák
(Medak in the German version, without the Hungarian – and Czech – diacritics).
  However, all the characters performing in the Czech version speak fluent Czech. It is
evident in many cases that what is brought to the fore is the convention according to
which “our” language, the language of the community that represents the intended
addressee, captures the whole fictional world; for instance, at the end of the film it is
natural for the Field Marshal to also speak Czech.
  At the same time, the position of German as the official language of the Austrian army
is here repeatedly brought to the fore; the same applies to German as the language of
the dominant nation of the monarchy in general. There are German signs in the bar-
racks, and people connected with, and influenced by the army often use German com-
mands and typical phrases (abgeblasen!, marsch!, gehorsamst, auf mein Kommando); at
times they may also use expressions that commonly evoke the military and adminis-
trative sphere (Kriegsminister). In addition, the characters’ speeches contain many dis-
torted words of German origin, words symptomatic of the speech of the Czech mem-
bers of the Austrian army (feldflaška, raport, lajtnant, obršt, vachcimra, maník, etc.),
sometimes also other words showing the German influence upon the Czech language
(sauvirtšaft, šnicl).2 The Austrian army, and virtually the whole monarchy, is in this ver-
sion viewed as both “ours” and “foreign.”


Differences in Language Usage

   The effect of the Czech version is based entirely upon Vlasta Burian’s performance, in
which he links casual everyday expression with stylized comic diction. Captain
Procházka, played by Burian, speaks a brilliantly conceived non-standard Czech (what
is known as “obecná čeština,” “common Czech”); furthermore his utterances show a reg-
ular use of marked linguistic devices, expressive words (sekanice3 “a pile-up of chops”,

­68
                                                            LANGUAGES, ACTORS AND AUDIENCE

i.e. “a fierce battle”) and expressive word modifications (e. g. emphatic vowel lengthen-
ing: majór instead of the unmarked pronunciation major), conspicuous archaic forms
(jenerál instead of generál “general”), etc. Principally, Burian uses language as a source
of play with forms and meanings, his speech is full of “accidental” slips suggesting rela-
tions between semantically opposed expressions (magor/“butthead” – major/“major”;
pověšení/“hanging” – povýšení/“promotion”), puns, associative connections between
words, allusions to their hidden semantic possibilities, etc. Burian views the Czech lan-
guage primarily as a source for his constant spontaneous improvisations.
   In a minor way, this kind of treatment of language can be observed in the speech of
several other characters as well; however, the extent of its playfulness is limited by the
fact that they necessarily need to be overshadowed by the protagonist, not to mention
the rather awkward and amateurish performances of many of them. We may notice, for
instance, a playful use of the name Medák (this name of the unwanted suitor wooing
the colonel’s daughter is the same as the popular designation for a bumble-bee, activat-
ing a connotation of “a ridiculous, unproductive person”), or the accumulation of unim-
portant, absurd details (i.e. the description of the booty in the opening dream sequence
of the film).
   The German version reveals Burian’s excellent command of the German language.
His way of speaking can be labelled as correct in terms of his formulations; perhaps
only the absence of labialisation in the pronunciation of some vowels ([gehe:rt] instead
of gehört) shows that he is not a native speaker. Nevertheless, the loss of linguistic con-
fidence is obvious. His utterances concern mainly the subject matter, the number of
marked expressions being considerably lower (e.g. the German equivalent of the
expressive Czech word sekanice is schwere Schlacht, “a heavy battle”). Essential weak-
ening can also be observed in the creative approach to language. A symptomatic proce-
dure in the German version is for instance the replacement of a dialogue with a wait-
ress based on linguistic play (present in the Czech version) by a comical scene with a
menu where words are unnecessary. Most instances of wordplay in the Czech version
lack equivalents in the German version, and it is only occasionally that we find some
attempts for creative compensation based on the German language.
   If we focus on the correspondences in other scenes, we will come to the same conclu-
sion. The name Medak occurs in the German version as well, but it is not semanticised;
the description of the booty is considerably shorter.


Differentiated Audiences

  Some other differences that emerge out of a comparison between the two versions
may be ascribed to the fact of two distinct audiences, complementing further the pri-
mary differentiation caused by the used languages and the characters’ nationalities.
  The explicit references linking the characters’ speech to the historical, geographical
and cultural context (on one hand Czech, on the other hand Austrian, or German) can
only be carried so far. It is only the Czech version that contains the garrison comman-
der’s suggestion to sing a well-known Czech children’s song called Já husárek malý
(approximately: “What a little hussar I am”), producing a comical effect by being utter-
ly inappropriate to the situation as well as to the social position of the persons present;
the scene is omitted in the German version even though it would not be probably too

                                                                                        ­69
PETR MAREŠ

difficult to find an equivalent song. Similarly, when evaluating an officer’s work, the
false Field Marshal uses a comparison whose punchline depends on the name of a cas-
tle in central Bohemia familiar to the Czech audience (“Musím vám říct, že jste si počí-
nal tak jako divokýskaut na Křivoklátě” – “I’ve got to tell you that you behaved yourself
like an out-of-control Scout at the Křivoklát Castle”); the geographically concrete ele-
ment is missing in the German version (“Sie haben sich benommen nicht wie ein
Offizier, sondern wie ein Pfadfinder auf einem Sonntagsausflug” – “You behaved not as
an Officer but like a Scout on a Sunday trip”).
  On the other hand, the German version contains “additional” statements, such as one
ascribed to Emperor Francis Joseph I (“Mir bleibt doch nichts erspart” – “I am not spared
anything”4), uttered by the fake Field Marshal, or a cabaret singer’s mentioning that he
was born in Vienna, which initiates one of the few puns occurring in this version, i.e. a
Lower Austrian (Niederösterreicher) being “elevated” to an Upper Austrian
(Oberösterreicher).
  At the same time it should be underscored that the Czech version relies on the Czech
recipients’ relatively extensive familiarity with the Austrian and German historical and
cultural contexts: Both versions show Burian excelling at yodelling; later the audience
is expected to know not only about the case of the captain of Köpenick, but also the
name and appearance of Andreas Hofer, a Tyrolean anti-Napoleonic fighter.
  But more significant yet, even though more difficult to capture, are those differences
that reflect the presupposed different attitudes of the intended audiences towards the
Austro-Hungarian monarchy and its army.
  The producers of the Czech version could rely on most recipients having rather nega-
tive or distanced attitudes towards the monarchy, yet simultaneously viewing it as a
closed matter, not affecting the present. Therefore, it was appropriate to use comical
and satirical ways of representation, perhaps with a certain indulgent distance. This is
reflected in a core paradoxical incongruity: the retired captain Procházka’s behaviour as
an officer has features of a vulgar caricature, and his love of the uniform bears on the
symbol of an organisation whose shining facade can no longer hide its decay.
Nonetheless, it is evident that Procházka is stylised as a figure intended to generate
sympathy, and his reinstatement effort results in a triumphant success.
  The version intended for the German-speaking audience starts from a different prem-
ise, for a substantial part of this audience might have been assumed to view this recent
period in a different light. It then follows that the German version attempts to contain,
at least partly, the humorous-satirical view of the monarchy, the army and the “military
spirit.” However, even this effort did not prevent the nationalist press in Austria from
objecting the film.5
  Other things apart, the comparison shows that the German version displays a signif-
icant tendency to “tune down” the ironic undermining of the old monarchic values and
military virtues. This tendency can be observed in the very appearance and behaviour
of some characters. Unlike the Czech version, in the German version the protagonist’s
nephew Rudi really is – as is said with admiration over his photograph – “ein fescher
Offizier” (“a handsome officer”). And here the members of the “veterans’ club“ are con-
siderably more disciplined and brisker compared to their Czech counterparts.
  Viewed from this perspective, the long scene showing the “veterans’ club” meeting
deserves a closer examination. We can see various subtle differences between the two
versions, e.g. the fact that the German version links the name of Prince Evžen with a tra-

­70
                                                                     LANGUAGES, ACTORS AND AUDIENCE

ditional attribute, “der edle Ritter” (“a noble knight”); above all, the difference concerns
the fatal song leading to the dismissal of the protagonist. The announcement that the
song has been banned is staged as a serious warning in the German version, whereas in
the Czech version the statement is presented by a “Mr. Apothecary” with an intonation
and gesticulation so overacted that his distance towards the Austrian official regula-
tions is entirely evident. If we compare the two versions of the lyrics about the Field
Marshal, it’s clear that they present the song’s subject in two considerably different
ways. The “Czech” Field Marshal avoids fighting and prefers other activities, such as
playing cards; he is generally indifferent to all warfare (“na války kašle na všecky” – “he
spits on all the wars”). Moreover, the lyrics also present (in a rather unflattering way)
Emperor Francis Joseph I as someone who likes to get smashed with the marshal (in the
Czech version a slang structure “maž e deku” is used). The German version of the song
focuses on the Field Marshal’s appearance (bold head, big belly, red nose) and uses it as
a source of humorous effects; yet he still keeps his military attributes (his courage, an
unsheathed sword), and carries himself as a forceful commander; the climax of the song
conveys an affectionate relation between the marshal and his subordinates.

  C. a k. polní maršálek was no more than a comedy aiming for commercial success;
nonetheless, the two versions present us with a great deal of information concerning
contemporary film practice as well as with contemporary strategies for attracting dif-
ferentiated audiences.



1 A brief survey of the film career of Karel Lamač (1897, Prague-1952, Hamburg) in
  Czechoslovakia, Germany, Austria, France and Great Britain is included in Hans-Michael
  Bock (ed.), Lexikon Regisseure und Kameraleute (Reinbeck bei Hamburg: Rowohlt, 1999), pp.
  272-273.
2 The respective German words sound as follows: Feldflasche, Rapport, Leutnant, Oberst,
  Wachzimmer, Mann, Sauwirtschaft, and Schnitzel.
3 The noun sekanice is derived from the verb sekat “to chop”.
4 This is a resigned sigh provoked by a series of tragic events in Emperor’s family. Cf. the iron-
  ic song performed by the sleeping (!) Francis Joseph I in Karl Kraus’ play Die letzten Tage der
  Menschheit: “Der Sohn, die Frau, der Otto – / bis in die Gegenwart / bleibt meines Lebens
  Motto: / Mir bleibt doch nichts erspart.” Karl Kraus, Die letzten Tage der Menschheit (Berlin:
  Volk und Welt, 1978), p. 427.
5 See LubošBartošek, Náš film. Kapitoly z dějin (1896-1945) (Praha: Mladá fronta, 1985), pp. 176-177.




                                                                                                      ­71
