Features
Anthology of Latin American Jewish stories
Oy, Caramba! Edited by Ilan Stavans. University of New Mexico Press, Albuquerque, 2016
Reviewed by CARL ROSENBERG The world of Jewish communities in Latin America has only become widely known in Canada and the U.S. in the last two decades or so, partly thanks to the pioneering work of writers and scholars such as Ilan Stavans, the editor of this anthology.
Stavans, a Jew born and raised in Mexico and now living in the U.S., notes that while many Latin American writers are widely read outside the region, the writings of its cultural minorities, including Jewish Latin Americans, have been virtually unknown.
This anthology is a revised version of an earlier anthology by Stavans, Tropical Synagogues: Short Stories by Jewish-Latin American Writers (Holmes & Meier, 1994), which I reviewed in Outlook Magazine in 1998. Some earlier stories were dropped, and new ones have been added–two/thirds of the original anthology are retained in the present version. Of the 28 selections, 18 are translated from Spanish, six from Yiddish, and two from Portuguese. Two stories were written in English–one by Stavans himself, the other by Chilean writer Ariel Dorfman, who like Stavans has lived in the U.S. for many years.
In his introduction, Stavans gives a useful historical overview. He stresses the often-overlooked cultural diversity of Latin Americans, whom many outside the region often assume to be entirely of Iberian or Indigenous descent. The first Jewish immigrants were Sephardic Jews escaping the Spanish Inquisition. Most were absorbed into the surrounding population, although there were later waves of Sephardic immigration. Most Latin American Jews today are Ashkenazi, stemming from Central or Eastern Europe like their Canadian and U.S. counterparts.
Stavans notes that since the 1950s, political turmoil, repression and economic crisis “have led many Jews to immigrate to Israel and the U.S. and Canada.” He contrasts Jewish Latin American writers with their U.S. counterparts in that the latter “have acquired a wide international readership,” whereas “most of the Jewish writers included in this anthology remain unknown, appreciated by a rather small audience, primarily Jewish.”
These stories express various moods. The Argentine writer Alberto Gerchunoff, the first Latin American Jewish writer in Spanish (before him, Jews in Latin America wrote in Russian, Polish, Hebrew and Yiddish), represented here by “Camacho’s Wedding Feast,” expressed an idealized view of Jewish immigrant life in Argentina in the early twentieth century, seeing the country as a land of boundless opportunity.
Some stories describe experiences familiar to many Jews in Canada and the U.S., such as immigration, and being caught between two religious and cultural worlds. These are especially reflected in the stories translated from Yiddish, such as “Temptation,” by Salomón Briansky (Colombia), “Solomon Licht,” by Yoyne Obodovski (Chile), “The Bar Mitzvah Speech,” by Salomon Zytner (Uruguay) and “Jesus” by Pinkhes Berniker (Cuba).
Other stories–although these themes overlap–also describe political violence, repression and anti-Semitism. Two examples are by Argentine writers: Aída Bortnik, in “Celeste’s Heart,” portrays a Jewish girl’s act of defiance to fascism. Mario Szichman’s “Remembrances of Things Future,” set in 1939 Poland, could also be set in any one of various Latin American countries under military rule. The latter story makes use of a peculiarly deadpan gallows humour. Two other stories, also leavened with irony and humour, deal with these realities from a child’s point of view: the Guatemalan Victor Perera’s “Kindergarten,” and the Brazilian writer Moacyr Scliar’s “Inside My Dirty Head–the Holocaust.”
Stavans appropriately concludes the anthology with three stories by a non-Jewish Argentine writer, the renowned fantasist Jorge Luis Borges, who often showed a strong interest in Jewish culture, as evinced by his stories here: “Death and the Compass,” “The Secret Miracle,” and “Emma Zunz,” the latter occurring mainly within the Jewish community of Buenos Aires.
The book contains useful headnotes, as well as an extensive bibliography listing works by the authors and works on Jewish life in Latin America. Unfortunately, there is frequently no indication as to when each story was first written or published. Given their historical background, such information would shed greater light on many of these stories.
Nevertheless, this book–like many other works by Stavans–will be of great interest to anyone concerned with either Latin American or Jewish history, literature and experience. I share Stavans’ hope that “Oy, Caramba! will once again attract a generation of readers eager to explore the vicissitudes of Jewish life south of the U.S.-Mexico border.”
Carl Rosenberg, a lifelong resident of Vancouver, BC, edited Outlook: Canada’s Progressive Jewish Magazine from 1998 to 2016. He has also written for Latin American Connexions, Quill & Quire and Jewish Independent, Vancouver’s Jewish community newspaper
Features
Hair straightening at Sets on Corydon
Features
Ontario Online Casinos Let Players Set Daily, Weekly and Monthly Deposit Limits
A deposit limit sets a ceiling on how much money someone can add to an online gambling account. In Ontario’s regulated market, players can choose limits covering 24 hours, seven days and one month, with the website’s system enforcing the amounts they select.
The settings are straightforward, but the timing deserves attention. A daily allowance may sit within weekly and monthly caps, while an increase can involve a waiting period. For adults using Chrome on a Chromebook, understanding these account rules starts with knowing where to find them.
Finding the Settings and Choosing a Period
Deposit controls sit within the gambling website’s account menus. The Tooniebet Ontario responsible gaming page is an operator-specific resource readers can consult alongside their account settings. ToonieBet is operated by Canadix Limited and regulated by the AGCO under an agreement with iGaming Ontario.
Ontario’s standards require an easy and obvious way to set financial and time limits during registration and afterward. Players must be offered deposit and loss limits when signing up, and the controls must remain easy to reach and change once an account is open.
Menu names differ between sites. Published examples place deposit limits under account settings or responsible-gaming tools, where players can select an amount and a period.
Each type of limit measures something different. Deposit limits cap money added to the account. Loss limits restrict net losses after winnings are taken into account, while time limits govern playing time. iGaming Ontario’s player guidance explains all three.
For Chromebook users, these settings are managed through the website’s account interface. Chrome’s own permissions handle separate browser functions, such as access to location information.
How Several Limits Apply to One Deposit
Players can have daily, weekly and monthly limits running together. A deposit must fit within every active cap.
Take a hypothetical account with limits of CAD $40 daily, CAD $100 weekly and CAD $250 monthly. These figures illustrate the process.
If someone has already deposited CAD $90 during the weekly period, the remaining weekly allowance is CAD $10. That becomes the most they can add, even when the daily limit has more room. Reaching the monthly cap would likewise block another deposit until some monthly allowance becomes available.
This is why checking all active limits matters. A new day may bring fresh daily capacity while the weekly or monthly total remains close to its ceiling. The longer periods continue to apply as the shorter one refreshes.
When Money Drops Out of a Rolling Window
The next question is when previous deposits stop counting toward a cap. Some sites use rolling periods, which track elapsed time from individual deposits.
Published Ontario policies include daily windows of 24 hours, weekly windows of 168 hours and monthly windows of 720 hours, equivalent to 30 days. Under that approach, each deposit frees up its corresponding allowance once it falls outside the window.
Suppose someone has a CAD $100 rolling weekly limit and deposits CAD $25 on Friday, followed by CAD $75 on Saturday. Seven days after Friday’s deposit, CAD $25 becomes available again. The other CAD $75 returns seven days after Saturday’s deposit.
Leaving the restored Friday allowance unused means it combines with Saturday’s restored amount. At that point, the full CAD $100 is available. Reviewing deposit dates and times helps explain how much room remains within a rolling period.
Changing a Cap Takes a Separate Step
A limit refreshing follows the schedule already attached to the account. Raising that limit requires a request and a wait.
Ontario’s standards require at least 24 hours before a player’s request to relax or remove an established limit can take effect. The existing limit remains enforceable during the cooling-off period.
Operators publish their own timings. Documented examples include a seven-day wait for deposit-limit increases or removals. Another published schedule allows increases after one day for a daily cap, seven days for a weekly cap and 30 days for a monthly cap.
Lower limits take effect immediately under these published policies. Some policies also restart the waiting period when a player requests another increase while an earlier change is pending. The effective date shows which amount currently applies.
Other Controls and Support
Deposit limits work alongside loss limits, time limits, short breaks and self-exclusion. Together, these give players ways to restrict account funding, gambling activity or access.
Ontario-regulated online casino play is restricted to adults aged 19 and older who are physically in Ontario. Gambling involves financial risk.
For concerns about your gambling or someone else’s, ConnexOntario offers free, confidential information and referral support around the clock. Call 1-866-531-2600 or text CONNEX to 247247. Standard message and data rates may apply.
Features
What “Best Odds” Really Means When Comparing Gambling Review Websites
The phrase best odds appears frequently in gambling discussions, but it is surprisingly easy to use imprecisely. MonsterBetList is primarily a casino review and rankings website, not a dedicated live sportsbook odds comparison terminal. That difference is central to evaluating what its reviews can and cannot establish. A casino rating may explain payout conditions, licence information and bonus restrictions, while a claim about the best available price on a sporting outcome requires a different kind of evidence altogether.
Odds and ratings answer different questions
Sports betting odds represent a price offered on a specified outcome. A review rating is an editorial judgement built from multiple criteria. These two numerical systems cannot be substituted for one another. A bookmaker rated highly for service may offer a less competitive price on a particular match, while a service with a more attractive price may impose different limits or verification rules.
Similarly, a casino review can discuss return-to-player statistics, but RTP is not the same as sportsbook odds. RTP describes a theoretical long-run percentage built into a game model. It does not tell a reader what will happen in one session and it is not an individually negotiable market quotation.
What makes sports odds comparable?
A fair odds comparison starts with identical selections: the same event, outcome, market rules and settlement conditions. Comparing a three-way football result with a draw-no-bet price is invalid because the products pay under different circumstances. The observation time also matters; displayed prices can change quickly as market information or trading decisions evolve.
The numerical format should be standardised. Decimal odds provide one convenient representation, but American and fractional formats express the same underlying idea differently. Converting these formats is straightforward. What matters is the net price, the operator’s rules and whether the quoted offer remains available when reviewed.
Overround explains the hidden cost of many markets
In a simplified two-outcome market, dividing one by each decimal price produces an implied probability. If the implied probabilities add to more than 100%, the excess is commonly described as the bookmaker’s overround. It is one way of understanding the margin embedded in prices, although individual market structure and adjustments can complicate the interpretation.
This concept explains why the word best should not be attached to a price without context. A strong headline may look appealing yet represent an ordinary margin after calculation. More importantly, any single quote is time-dependent. Genuine comparison requires a dated observation and equivalent market rules; broad editorial praise is not enough.
What casino rankings can establish instead
MonsterBetList publishes casino reviews and guides addressing licences, bonuses, payout experiences and responsible gambling. Those topics are relevant to evaluating consumer risk and service quality. A report about the length of a withdrawal process, for example, can be useful if its methodology is transparent. A bonus review can help identify restrictive wagering requirements that marketing headlines omit.
However, a casino ranking should not be presented as evidence that its highest-rated operator consistently offers the best sports prices. Unless a site publishes repeated market-by-market comparisons, that conclusion is not supported. Readers benefit when publishers clearly distinguish what was measured from what readers might assume was measured.
Bonuses can complicate comparisons
A sportsbook may offer free-bet tokens, cashback or other promotions. Their effective value depends on conditions rather than the largest number printed in a banner. Some credits are not withdrawable as cash; others require qualifying selections, minimum odds or a deadline. Casino welcome bonuses often introduce wagering requirements, game-contribution rules and limits on withdrawals. Combining these products under one generic promotional score can hide important differences.
For instance, a large matched deposit might require extensive play before bonus-related funds become eligible for withdrawal. The required betting volume is not a promise of profit. The presence of a promotion may therefore make comparisons more complex instead of simpler. Clear disclosures should precede any judgement about value.
Editorial independence and methods
Review sites sometimes state that rankings are editorially independent. Such a statement is relevant but does not replace evidence of consistent testing. Readers should look for the criteria used, the date of each review, whether real transactions were examined and how negative findings are treated. If one platform receives detailed testing while another is scored on marketing copy, the ranking loses comparability.
Commercial incentives should also be visible. Referral relationships or sponsorships do not automatically make every observation inaccurate, but they create reasons to ask how rankings are insulated from revenue. A publication that explains its methodology and corrections process gives readers a stronger basis for trust than one that simply declares its winners.
Licensing and dispute rights before price claims
A marginally attractive price is of limited value when the operator is not legally available to the reader or does not provide meaningful avenues for redress. Regulations vary by jurisdiction, and a licence in one country may not authorise service in another. It is prudent to verify the legal entity behind a brand and the current status of any licence through official records.
Consumers should also review identity verification, account restrictions and dispute resolution procedures. These operational conditions influence the actual experience of using a gambling service. A sensible evaluation includes them before discussing promotions or theoretical market advantages.
Why guaranteed-profit language is a warning sign
No ordinary review or odds list can guarantee that an individual will win money from gambling. Claims of certain returns often omit the fact that results are uncertain, prices move and transactions are subject to restrictions. Casino games generally incorporate a house advantage, and sports outcomes remain uncertain regardless of a persuasive analysis. The safest response to absolute promises is scepticism.
Readers should also avoid treating gambling as a means of addressing financial problems. Chasing previous losses and increasing stakes to recover money can deepen harm. Consumer-oriented coverage is more valuable when it explains risk and offers realistic options for stepping away.
Conclusion: define the claim before ranking the service
“Best odds” is a specific comparative proposition, not a synonym for a high casino rating. MonsterBetList can be examined for its published casino research, review structure and risk disclosures, but those materials should not be stretched into claims they have not tested. Clear definitions, dated evidence and honest limitations are the foundations of trustworthy comparison journalism.
