States General of Culture? No, of rhetoric and chatter

Let’s say that for the first live tweeting of Finestre Sull’Arte we were hoping for slightly more interesting topics. But the fact remains that the first live tweeting that we conducted on our Twitter profile took place this morning on the occasion of the States General of Culture held at the Auditorium Conciliazione in Rome, and we probably would have done better to focus our energies on more constructive efforts, because we witnessed nothing but three hours of trite chatter (with a few minor exceptions), as well as pure rhetoric.

I will not go into too much detail about what was said because it is possible to find, on the Web, very detailed accounts: for example, an almost minute-by-minute summary came out on the Sole 24 Ore website. However, I would like to make a few points. The first: in Italy, as is now increasingly the case, the floor is given to the over-70s, and the young people are always forced into the stands. Because, apart from the exception of the director of the Egyptian Museum of Christian Greco, 39 years old (assuming that at 39 one can still be considered professionally young: in Italy, probably yes), the parterre was composed of people who to call mature, in some cases, is an understatement. I mention only, among others, Andrea Carandini (class of 1937), Emmanuele Emanuele (class of 1937, and moreover he is keen to specify, as the first information on his resume on the MiBACT website, his titles of nobility: and I thought they were no longer recognized in Italy), Antonio Paolucci (class of 1939), Benito Benedini (class of 1934), Carla Fendi (class of 1937). In short, almost half of this morning’s speakers (5 out of 13), were born before Mussolini delivered the declaration of war to the ambassadors of Great Britain and France. Frankly, when I hear them talk about innovation, I get at least a smile.

We then heard again the usual boring, trite and tiresome metaphors about Italy’s cultural heritage. Obviously with an energy background. Emanuele thought to give the whole thing a semblance of novelty by calling culture the “clean energy of the country,” but it took Carla Fendi to bring us back to the oil metaphors: it was obvious that in such a ruthlessly rhetorical context, the metaphor of “the culture oil of Italy” would pop up at any moment. We again witnessed the drab rhetoric about private individuals: “wide open to private individuals in culture,” Emanuele said. He was echoed by Minister Dario Franceschini saying, in essence, that the state alone cannot do it and needs private help. We politely reminded the minister, moreover with a tweet that was well received during the live broadcast, that with the MOSE affair in Venice a billion euros were burned in corruption and bribes. So the politicians would have us believe that the money is not there? But wouldn’t it be a case of seriously reducing waste and effectively fighting corruption, even before asking for help from private individuals? Private individuals to whom we, of course, almost always give something in return (and of course we are not talking about thanks or plaques), based on the provincial logic that the giver of a handout must always have a return or interest.

But we have also heard ideas that would make the skin crawl for those who care even a little about cultural heritage. Such as the first of those proposed by Benedini: making Italian works of art travel the world as much as possible, works of art that in this way would go to act as a bit of a testimonial for Italy up and down the globe. Or take the Riace bronzes to the Expo. Or anyway around Italy-because if they’re in Reggio Calabria, who’s going to see them? And since there has been a lot of insistence on this last concept, there has been a righteous protest from the public: the goal should be to bring visitors to Calabria (a goal with which any reasonable person will agree), and not to bring Calabria to visitors. And thus give visitors reason to come to Calabria by developing a stimulating, modern and attractive tourist offer. And how can we not mention another idea of Benedini’s, which is just as far-fetched, namely that of creating a national museum in the style of the Louvre? For quite some time now here on Finestre Sull’Arte we have been discussing the fact that culture should be decentralized and the so-called most popular art cities should be decongested in favor of smaller (but equally interesting) centers, and this morning comes instead the fantastic gimmick of centralizing even more by creating a national museum. It is to be hoped that such a stunt will not be followed: it is completely disrespectful to the history of Italy, its diversity, the extraordinary spread of its cultural heritage, and the many peripheral centers that are constantly trying to carve out a space for themselves in the logic of tourist flows.

What Minister Franceschini said about has already been mentioned, but in addition he also laid out what the new pricing plan for state museums will be as of July 1: summarizing, no longer free ticket for the over-65s, first Sunday of the month free and Friday museums open until evening. Otherwise, the usual rhetoric of protection and enhancement. We all know that heritage needs protection and enhancement: it would be time to stop talking and start acting. It makes one think, of course, that the most interesting speech was also that of the youngest of the speakers, Christian Greco, who proposed the idea of introducing an evaluation of cultural realities by commissions of international experts: a procedure that is already in place abroad, and which obviously does not exist in Italy.

And if the defense of superintendencies, which do not need managers (or rather: “they do not need Bocconians”) to function at their best, falls to Antonio Paolucci, some very serious questions need to be asked. The first: those who are not in the business usually have no idea how superintendencies work, so shouldn’t the public and politicians be made aware of their importance? The second: why was the only person who spoke about superintendencies today a person who works for a foreign museum, namely the Vatican Museums? The third: why should the defense of the superintendencies be delegated to a person who will turn 80 in 2019? And so on.

Let us completely overlook Piero Fassino’s intervention, which only served to prolong the public’s misery by about a quarter of an hour, since there was talk (as if it had not been enough before), of “culture and development” and “the need for private intervention,” and let us go directly to the last intervention, that of Education Minister Stefania Giannini, who kindly lets us know that in order to reintroduce art history at school, 25 million euros a year are sufficient. We recall, because repetita iuvant, that corruption in the Venice MOSE project cost us 100 million a year for ten years. Reducing waste and fighting corruption is a civilizational fight and should be the main priority in our country.

Ultimately, the feeling remains that we witnessed a talk that was not felt to be necessary, amid rhetoric, platitudes, things already said, and self-referentiality. And of talk, the world of culture no longer needs: there is a need for facts, there is a need for people to roll up their sleeves and get to work, because culture in Italy can no longer wait and needs concrete answers to its problems. And finally: young people, as usual, acted as spectators. How can we get people who are well into their seventies to talk about the future? They are not the future. So when are we going to start listening to young people and give them a consistent voice to understand their (our) problems and try to implement their (our) solutions? Italy is full of competent young people: let’s give them opportunities, not relegate them to the role of voiceless spectators. I’ll throw an idea out there: it would be nice, at the next edition of the States General of Culture, to avoid inviting the usual elderly figures and instead propose a parterre of young, prepared and qualified people, each chosen in different areas of culture. I am sure they would have much more interesting things to say than what was said this morning.

Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.