The two students who wrote Pearl N.1 the night before the midterm, were able to repeat the exploit before the final exam...
Dec 19, 2012
Dec 18, 2012
Dec 13, 2012
Dec 6, 2012
American and Italian Hypocrisy
I started my lecture “The Mediatic Construction of a Leader” with the following quote: “Don't walk in front of me; I may not follow. Don't walk behind me; I may not lead. Just walk beside me and be my friend (attributed to Albert Camus, but I never found it in one of his articles or books). Therefore, I have declared two things: how much I care about friendship; the difficulty of an Italian (me) in facing the theme of leadership. The motivations are somewhat obvious for those who have a minimum knowledge of Italian past ad recent history: Fascism and Berlusconism — along with the narcissism of the center-left competitors. Moreover, I pointed out the absence of an Italian Myth. What’s the “Italian Dream”? Wine, olive oil, fashion, art, soccer, etc. are not enough. They do not define what we stand for as a people. The past is past, and a foundation myth always connects the past, the present and the future of a community. The Italian anarchist attitude — everyone is a leader of him/herself — and the struggle to imagine any form of trust and commitment outside the confines of the family — amoral familism — constitute the two other main cultural explanations of our trouble in being leaders (and followers). Thus, I’ve shared my “grand dichotomy”: the Skeptic (nihilist, cynic?) Italian versus the American Believer. Charismatic leaders do not grow as mushroom. Kharisma is a “divine gift”, and — following Max Weber — the charismatic authority disrupts tradition and rests only on the person of the leader. Charisma is “… A certain quality of an individual personality by virtue of which he is set apart from ordinary men and treated as endowed with supernatural, super-human, or at least specifically exceptional powers or qualities” (Weber M., 1922/ 1947 Theory of Social and Economic Organization, 358). Such a charismatic leader has a new prophecy, vision and mission. Any leader like that out there? I’d say… NO! Your president Barack Obama — to be clear — is following the American Dream in any words he pronounces… Thus, in terms of ideas, he is a traditional or a rational leader (still following Weber’s ideal types). I have then constructed a playful narrative about leadership. Taking a short cut, I was clearly being ironic toward the American credo in leadership. I’ve showed the two presidential candidates wearing a sports jacket right after the hurricane Sandy… The unavoidable presence of their wives and the “happy family” picture — although brilliant and truly charismatic, someone single will never be the President of the US.
Not happy of expressing the feeling of triviality that an average European might feel in seeing such a show, I pushed it further on, touching the General Petraeus sex scandal. And I’ve then juxtaposed the wife and the mistress pictures…Saying: “Everyone in the world is wondering why he did that… An incredible puzzle”.
At the peak of my typical Italian sarcasm and political incorrectness, I’ve shared my last thought, that goes in the opposite direction. General Petraeus resigned, our former president Silvio Berlusconi never did; and he never had a true pressure by Italian people for doing so. Many Italians where amused by the sexual adventures of the prime minister. The Italian ethical relativism stems also from a survey about Berlusconi’s behavior toward women, family and homosexual: 16% admire him, 25% are indulgent; 5% real fans (total: 46%). Only 37% of women (18-29 years old) consider Berlusconi’s behavior offensive (the percentage drops to 28% for Italian women between 30 and 44). The average Italian annoyed reaction toward what is considered the typical American puritan hypocrisy, turned into something else: hypocrisy indicates that there is a value. You cannot cross that thin red line. If you do, the public opinion will condemn you, and you are out. I wish we had such public and collective hypocrisy; it would have saved us from a 20 years long squalid show — that keeps going on, just watch some Italian TV. A letter from Italian journalist and historian Indro Montanelli to the Pulitzer prize winner Edmund Stevens explains the difference between American and Italian hypocrisy. Read it all. Below the translation by Alexander Pinoci, and here is the Italian original version.
Montanelli: An American Lesson
A letter written in the early 50’s by Idro Montanelli to Pulitzer Prize winner Edmund Stevens: A comparison of the weaknesses of two peoples
Dear Edmund,
I have some objections to your feedback on American hypocrisy. First of all, I have not noticed that hypocrisy is more widespread in America than elsewhere: as found in Italy, for example. I did notice however that it is of a different nature. With us hypocrisy is not a social fact. It belongs to the category of private iniziatives, and as such is exercised for private agendas. Italians, for example, can’t ever get together with each other to sponsor a useful lie for the interests of the State or of a social class, as it happens in America, where every now and then big a gross collective lie is launched, in which those sponsors engage the pretense for the rest to believe in. With us not even the fascist dictatorship managed to impose conformity. The people applauded Mussolini but gave him the minimum necessary in order to continue to live in peace. Italo Balbo, Governor of Libya, who I once visited in Tripoli, said to me, pointing to his black shirt uniform: “You see what I have to do to support the family?”. This is more or less the answer that the old Rossini gave to the young Wagner, when he asked him why and how come he stopped composing. “What do you want? Before, when I had to support many children, I was forced to believe in the importance of music. But now my children are grown up and provide for themselves … “.
Hypocrisy in Italy is dictated by a sense of the “opportune”. It is petty, practical and utilitarian. When an Italian wants to change political affiliation, it is not a question of conscience, but a simple calculation of convenience. Fifty years ago, in Capri, a wealthy English family requested me to set out the path in order to convert the inhabitants into Protestant Christianity. They somewhat succeeded in this task simply because all neophytes had the right to eat for free. But at some point they discovered that every Sunday the neophytes went for confession to a Catholic priest, who had given them the permission. Meanwhile, the missionaries had fallen completely into economic distress because the neophytes had little faith, but huge appetites. And in the end it was these “hypocrites” who came to feed the English without expecting in return their conversion to Catholicism.
No, a real and proper hypocrisy in Italy there is not; and there is not for the simple and not very noble reason, because Italians do not have ‘ideals’. They accept themselves. Do not strive to be different and better than what they are. In America the hypocrisy is born from the desire to be better. The American woman who, before making love with a man who is not her husband, drinks herself to stupor stimulating her desires with alcohol, as a means to be able to exculpate her actions the next day . Her excuse is veiled under an ‘influence’ which justifies her actions and it is certainly hypocritical., Nevertheless, she remains ‘virginal’ within the delusory illusion of a self serving ideal of false honesty and cleanliness to preserve against her own weaknesses. I remember my indignant surprise when, in the aftermath of my first erotic American experience, I found myself treated with extreme coldness by my companion who refused to talk about it. I was furious. As a good Italian, I found it offensive and disgraceful that a woman had forgotten or felt disgust for a night of love with me. And I could not forgive her.
This attitude, not even today I comprehend nor like, but think I understand the reasons. My mind accepts them, even though my temperament rejects them.
You are hypocrites also in politics, when you, for example, talk against colonialism, you, who are the sons and heirs of the most ruthless colonization in the history of man. Let me tell you the language that you use at the UN is a little out of place and more fitting to be heard from the mouth of redskins, but is not fitting to be used by those who exterminated the Indians. You oppose the French in North Africa in favor of the natives against whom they have done a lot less than what you did to your native population. Now, it is true that you treat the Indians fairly and humanely today, much more so than the French do the Arabs. But you also have it easier, having reduced the Indians to a small minority that cannot compete against you, even though fully equal to whites in law and rights. You are preventing the Europeans from doing in Africa and in Asia, what your European fathers, did in America. Politically, perhaps you are right. This I can affirm, as a countryman and pupil of Machiavelli who taught me the distinction between politics and morality, but not you. For you Americans, politics and morality must coincide. But sometimes even you admit that that they coincide badly. So much so, that I’m reminded of what Disraeli said of Gladstone: “I do not blame them for cheating because every politician does so. I reproach them for saying that it was God’s ‘will’ who slipped them the winning Ace”.
Nevertheless, I admire your hypocrisy and I understand that it is a social force of incalculable value. Roosevelt was a big hypocrite when he “forced” the Japanese to attack Pearl Harbor while swearing to American mothers that their children will never ,,, etc. However with that act of hypocrisy he put you on the side of good vs. evil and gave the U.S. soldier a weapon far mightier than the atomic bomb: Righteousness. In short, he, a Puritan, a good Machiavellian Catholic, much more Machiavellian than our comparatively simple Mussolini, who parroted so much about Machiavelli whilst understood him so little..
Besides, who cares? All this hypocrisy does not alter the fact that American life is interwoven with human relationships that are among the most hebetudinosity simple, honest and friendly in the world. I, in “sincere” Italy, never know how far to trust a friend, and to what extent be wary of an enemy. Here, however, I am confident that when someone in New York invites me to lunch, I by accepting will give him pleasure. In Rome, no, I am not so sure, or at least not always.
In conclusion, I remain firm in my opinion that hypocrisy is an obligatory tribute that sin pays to virtue. But it is important that there be this ‘virtue’ and that a people pays tribute to this ‘virtue’. In America this has been accomplished. It is an effort that every American voluntarily makes, more or less in good faith, to be virtuous. You do not always succeed, but you almost always try. In the end, each one of you wants to believe in what Jefferson stated: That a desire to do good is in itself enough, to bring good to the world.
We Italians have lost this faith in centuries past. And for this reason we are mature enough to become a colony of a puritanical, strong and hypocritical people. If you continue to be anti-colonialist, someone else – also a puritan, in his own way, and certainly more hypocritical than you – will use this to his advantage.
Think about it.
Indro Montanell
Nov 29, 2012
Nov 12, 2012
Nov 8, 2012
Carnage
In the movie Carnage
(Roman Polanski 2011) — adapted from Le Dieu du carnage, by French
playwright Yasmina Reza
— two young teenagers get into a fight in the park; one hits the other in the
mouth with a stick. Alan and Nancy Cowan (Waltz and Winslet), visit the home of
Michael and Penelope Longstreet (Reilly and Foster), the parents of the boy who
was hit: “As the Cowans and the Longstreets go through the motions of mature,
reasonable conflict resolution, that old primal force asserts itself in various
forms. These nice, complacent people turn angry, competitive, contemptuous and
stupid” (A.O.Scott, Carnage Review, NYT, December 15, 2011). You can see here the trailer & clips and you can find her the whole screenplay.
Below two key moments of the “dialogue”.
- NANCY: Hotshot firebrands like my husband, you got to
understand, it's hard for them to get excited about what happens down the
block.
- ALAN: Exactly.
- PENELOPE: I don't see why. I don't see why. We're all citizens of the world. I don't see why we shouldn't have some sense of community.
- MICHAEL: Oh Penny! Give us a break with the highfalutin clap trap!
- PENELOPE: I'm going to kill him.
- ALAN: Exactly.
- PENELOPE: I don't see why. I don't see why. We're all citizens of the world. I don't see why we shouldn't have some sense of community.
- MICHAEL: Oh Penny! Give us a break with the highfalutin clap trap!
- PENELOPE: I'm going to kill him.
----
- MICHAEL: They
don't give a shit! It's so obvious, right from the beginning, they don't give a shit! She doesn't give a shit either, you're right!
- ALAN: Like you do?
- NANCY: I...
- ALAN: Explain
to me, Michael, exactly how you care. What does that mean anyway? You're more
credible when you're being openly
despicable. Truth is, nobody here cares. Except maybe Penelope, one must
acknowledge her integrity.
- PENELOPE: I don't need your acknowledgment! I don’t
need your acknowledgment!
- NANCY: But I do care. I really do care.
- ALAN: We care in a hysterical way, Nancy. Not like
heroic figures of a social movement.
- (to PENELOPE:) I saw your friend Jane Fonda on TV the
other day. Made me want to run
- out and buy a Ku Klux Klan poster.
- PENELOPE: My friend Jane Fonda? What the hell does she have to do with this?!
- ALAN: You're the same breed. You're the same kind of
involved, problem-solver woman. Those are not the women we like, the women we like are sensual, crazy,
shot full of hormones. The ones who want to show off how perceptive they are,
the gatekeepers of the world, they're a huge turnoff. Even poor Michael, your own husband is turned
off...
- MICHAEL: Don't you speak for me!
- PENELOPE: We don't
give a shit about what you like in a woman! Where do you get off spouting these
opinions? You're one man whose opinions we don't give a shit about!
- ALAN: She's screaming. A quartermaster on a slave
ship!
- PENELOPE: What about her? She doesn't scream? She didn't just scream that your little
asshole was right to beat up ours?
- NANCY: He was right! At least our kid isn't a little
wimpy-ass faggot!
- PENELOPE; Yours is a snitch, that's supposed to be
better?
Nov 5, 2012
What's in a Leader?
Nov 2, 2012
Oct 29, 2012
A Room with a View
A Room with a View is a 1985 British movie directed
by James
Ivory. The film is
a close adaptation of E.M.Forster's novel.
“Lucy Honeychurch and her chaperone, the
genteel Miss Bartlett, are frustrated in their hopes of obtaining a room with a
view at the Pensione Bertolini in Florence. Offered an exchange by Mr Emerson
and his son, George, Miss Bartlett's sense of social propriety is offended. She
graciously accepts the proposal, however, after being reassured by a
respectable acquaintance, the Rev. Mr Beebe. Lucy, innocent and impressionable,
is shown around Florence by the lady novelist, Miss Lavish, one of the novel's
many English ‘characters’ about whom Forster is gently satirical.
Venturing out alone, Lucy witnesses a quarrel
between two Italians, one of whom is stabbed and dies in front of her. She
faints, and recovers to find herself in the arms of George Emerson. Later, a
party from the pensione joins an excursion to Fiesole. During the trip Lucy is
again rescued, after a fall, by George and impulsively embraced. She and Miss
Bartlett are affronted and take themselves off to Rome, then back to Surrey.
Lucy becomes engaged to the cultured, but
shallow and over-protective Cecil Vyse. Her independent spirit is aroused and
she eventually rebels. The Emersons, meanwhile, arrive to take up residence
nearby. Lucy realizes with some perturbation that she loves George, not Cecil.
She extricates herself from the relationship with Cecil, aided by Miss
Bartlett, and marries George. The close of the novel finds George and Lucy on
their honeymoon in the Pensione Bertolini” (Room with a View, The Cambridge
Guide to Literature in English).
“In Forster’s splendid novel of initiation, Florence
herself is transfigured and becomes a fiery metaphor for the enigmatic relationship
between life and art, or between individual passion and social norms – and for
their turbulent interrelationship” (Finkand Bernardi, It Happened to the Visigoths, Too: Florence in American Films).
Italian for Beginners
Italian for Beginners (Italiensk for begyndere, 2000) is a 2000 Danish film written and
directed by Lone Scherfig — who, by
the way, "borrowed" her plot
from the Irish novel Evening Class by Maeve Binchy.
“The film takes place in a squalid Copenhagen
suburb where emotions and anxiety seemingly run amok. While the actual
narrative is simplistic, it profiles six desperately needy and complicated
individuals looking to fulfill themselves… Just as life shoots uncontrollable
twists and turns at these folks, the characters also turn their attention into mastering the Italian tongue. The focus
is meant to ease their frustrations over life and love, to the point where the 'beginners' literally beg for a whole new
beginning. Conquering the foreign language is a metaphor for the mending of a broken heart or the escape
from the vicious circle of daily life. And yet the universe ends up
completely in balance” (Frank Ochieng, Filmcritic.com).
Six singles
— whose sentimental life, in the cold and bleak Copenhagen, is in pieces — are “saved”
by an introductory Italian class. Italian is synonymous with love, and the
protagonists are novices in love as much as they are in speaking Italian. Italian
language and culture is the catalyst for love and the chance for a new
beginning. The plot — as we will see later during the course — is the classical
“Italian (Romantic) Paradigm”: the typical representation of Italy in the Grand
Tour narrative.
The movie follows
the Dogme 95 movement developed by Lars von Trier, Thomas Vinterberg,
Kristian Levring, and Soren Kragh-Jacobsen. The objective of the Dogma 95
movement is to encourage a sense of plainness in filmmaking, free of
postproduction alterations. Von Trier and Vinterberg formulated a set of ten
rules that a Dogme film must conform to.
1. Shooting must be done on location. Props and sets must not be brought in (if a
particular prop is necessary for the story, a location must be chosen where
this prop is to be found).
2. The sound must never be produced apart from the images or vice versa. Music must not be used unless it
occurs where the scene is being shot.
3. The camera must be hand-held. Any movement or immobility attainable in the
hand is permitted. The film must not take place where the camera is standing;
shooting must take place where the film takes place.
4. The film must be in colour. Special lighting is not acceptable. If there is too little light for
exposure the scene must be cut or a single lamp be attached to the camera.
5. Optical work and filters are forbidden.
6. The film must not contain superficial action. Murders, weapons, etc. must not occur.
7. Temporal and geographical alienation are forbidden. That is to say that the film takes
place here and now.
8.
Genre movies are not
acceptable.
9. The film format must be Academy 35mm film.
10. The director must not be credited.
I cannot affirm that the eight “commandment” is not entirely maintained, but it is interesting
to observe that the power of the Italian romantic myth “survives” to Dogme 95. Here you
can find the entire script of the movie. Below the dialogue beween Jørgen and Giulia. Language
barriers do not exists; we are in Venice, the city of romantic love.
Jørgen:
Giulia, I know you can't understand what I'm
saying. But I'll say it anyway.
I'm ten years older than you and I'm not really
good at anything.
I've no relatives any more. I'm no good at my
job.
I've no hobbies. Apart from doing Italian. And
that's really for Halvfinn's sake, - because I'm no real good at languages. I
can't even say anything to you.
Actually I think I'm rather dull. I certainly
haven't your temperament.
And sex isn't something I feel confident about
any more.
I know you don't understand what I'm saying.
But if I don't say it now I'll never get it
said.
But I love you, Giulia, and I want to be with
you for always.
I'd like to have children ...... and to watch
you get older ... and grow old.
I'll love you every day from when I wake up
till we do to bed at night.
I so much want to marry you, Giulia.
Giulia:
I do understand a bit of Danish. I just speak
it very badly. Perhaps I would like to marry you. But I want to do to a church
...
Oct 18, 2012
Pearls from students...
The night before the midterm exam I have received this email from two of my students.
I believe this is a "pearl" that I should share with all of you...
Sep 24, 2012
Living with Mom (or very very close)
A survey by
Censis
reveals that 31% of Italians live at home with their mother and
that 42.3% live at no more than a 30 minute walk from her.
The survey indicates that more than half of the adult Italian population (54%)
lives at no more than a half-hour walk from close relatives. I have published
extensively in Italian upon this phenomenon — Clicca su te stesso. Sé senzal'Altro; I giovani italiani tra famiglia escuola — and you can read the article How to do Words with Things.
Take a look to the CBS video The Mammoni Phenomenon and check out the articles Mammoni: Good Men or Lazy-Asses?, Italians 'slow toleave the nest', Italy Crisis: Growing Number Of Adults Live In Family Home.
We will
discuss later during the semester the structural and cultural interpretations
of the so called prolongation of youth in Italy and compare it with the pattern of transition to adulthood in Northern
Europe and United States. In the meantime you can take a look at the US the reality show Mama's Boys of the Bronx: NewReality Show on TLC and to the article Real Italians. We will also talk about Jersey Shore in Florence (and how the city reacted).
Sep 12, 2012
Culture Shock in Florence
First of
all I hope that none of my students will ever experience a “culture shock”
while they are spending their institutional semester abroad in Italy.
I tend to associate the term ‘shock’ to a traumatic event that causes a sudden
and violent disturbance in the emotions.
If my use of the term makes any sense, I do not think that American students necessarily experience
a “culture shock” (Kalvero Oberg 1960) [1] while they are studying in
Florence. Or, to put it in other, more sociological terms, I do not see this
group of people exposed to such a threat — no more than any other group of
youngsters that comes to my mind. As a sociologist, I would never start studying
the topic “American Students Abroad” from such perspective. That’s why I am
always surprised when a student uses the expression “culture shock” — a bit as
a mantra, I shall confess — in class. It seems as if they were prepared and socialized
to this theory, and they are applying it as "the" interpretative paradigm for their acculturation
process abroad. Therefore, I believe culture "shock" is an inopportune terminological choice; I
would consider “culture malaise”, or “culture fatigue”, or “culture frustration”, or “culture
anxiety”, or “culture stress”, proper expressions. Shortly, I consider the locution cultural shock, referred
to the average American youngster who is studying in Florence, a hyperbole. How
would you describe a true traumatic event, Cultural
Super-Shock! I believe there is a profound difference between frustrating and
traumatic events.
Within the
psychological literature “acculturative stress” has become the preferred expression
for other reasons, because “it is
closely linked to psychological models of stress as a response to environmental
stressors” (Berry & Sam, 1997, 298). Anyhow, we are talking about stressors, not shockers!
Acculturative
stress is defined as a negative psychological reaction to the experiences of
acculturation, often characterized by anxiety, depression and a variety of
psychosomatic problems. Berry prefers
to use the expression “acculturative stress” for two more reasons.
First, the notion of shock carries only negative connotations, whereas
stress can vary from positive (eustress) to negative (dis-stress) in valence.
Because acculturation has both positive (e.g., new opportunities) and negative
(e.g., discrimination) aspects, the stress conceptualization better matches the
range of affect experienced during acculturation. Moreover, shock has no
cultural or psychological theory or research context associated with it,
whereas stress has a place in a well-developed
theoretical matrix (i.e., stress-coping-adaptation). Second, the phenomena of
interest have their life in the intersection of two cultures; they are
intercultural, rather than cultural, in their origin. The term “culture”
implies that only one culture is involved, whereas the term “acculturation” draws
our attention to the fact that two cultures are interacting with, and
producing, the phenomena. Hence, for both reasons, the author prefers the
notion of acculturative stress to that of culture shock (Berry, 'Acculturation',
in Encyclopedia of Applied Psychology, 2004).
I do have
some problems also applying to the American students in Florence Peter Adler’s five-stage process (1975). The initial
contact, or the honeymoon stage, is when the newly arrived individual
experiences the curiosity and excitement of a tourist without any corresponding
sense of responsibility for his or her own behavior. The second stage involves
disintegration of familiar cues and overwhelms the individual with the
requirements of the new culture. The individual typically experiences
self-blame and a sense of personal inadequacy for difficulties encountered. The
third stage reintegrates new cues with an increased ability to function in the
new culture. However, the emotions associated with this third stage are
typically anger, blame, and resentment toward the new culture for having caused
difficulties unnecessarily. The fourth stage continues the process of
reintegration toward gradual autonomy and increased ability to see both bad and
good elements of the old and new cultures. The fifth stage is when the
individual has achieved a bicultural identity and is able to function in both
the old and the new cultures.
What's my problem with such a sequence? I simply
never met a student that went through anything like that; if you are one of
them — or you know one — please reply to this post.
Moreover, this sequence is considered by some scholars controversial and simplistic. According
to Furnham and Bochner (1986) the U-curve theory first does not consider
several important variables in the adjustment process — such as depression,
loneliness, homesickness. Second, each subject might experience cultural stress
in different moments of the adjustment process. That is, you might be "shocked" as soon as you get off the plane, and experience the honeymoon stage at
the end of your sojourn — may be because you truly fall in love with an Italian
boy or girl!
The U-curve model does not even address differences
in time, location, and intensity of the sojourn —predicting the same curve for
people who experience little or significant culture gaps. The U-curve
and its variations —W-curves; but I can
easily imagine other kinds of curves appearing in the next future (M, Z, K, and X-curves) — are largely anecdotal
and fail to describe other types of sojourners: who fails to adjust; who returns home early.
Finally, why
cultural problems, or however you want to name them, are thought in a negative
way? Why critical cultural encounters have to be weathered in advance? Why not
seeing them as positive experiences within the overall identity development
of the youngster abroad?
-
Berry,
J. W.; Kim, U.; Minde, T.; Mok, D. (1987) Comparative studies of acculturative stress. “International
Migration Review”, 21, 491-511.
-
Berry,
J. W.; Kim, U.; Power, S.; Young, M.; Bujaki, M. (1989)
Acculturation attitudes in plural
societies. “Applied Psychology”, 38, 185-206.
-
Berry,
J.W., & Sam, D. (1997) Acculturation
and adaptation. In J.W. Berry, M.H. Segall, & C. Kagitcibasi (Eds.), Handbook of cross-cultural psychology:
Vol 3 (pp. 291–326). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
-
Furnham,
A., & Bochner, S. (1986) Culture
shock: Psychological reactions to unfamiliar environments. London: Methuen.
-
Oberg,
K. (1960) Cultural shock: Adjustment to
new cultural environments. “Practical Anthropology”, 7, 177–182.
Shock (New Oxford American Dictionary. Oxford University Press, 2010).
N. 1. a sudden upsetting
or surprising event or experience: it was a shock to face
such hostile attitudes when I arrived. ■ a feeling of disturbed surprise
resulting from such an event: her death gave us all a terrible shock | her
eyes opened wide in shock. ■ an acute medical condition
associated with a fall in blood pressure, caused by such events as loss of
blood, severe burns, bacterial infection, allergic reaction, or sudden
emotional stress, and marked by cold, pallid skin, irregular breathing, rapid pulse,
and dilated pupils: he died of shock due to massive abdominal
hemorrhage. ■ a disturbance causing instability in an economy: trading
imbalances caused by the two oil shocks. ■short for electric shock. 2. a violent shaking movement caused by an impact, explosion, or
tremor: earthquake shocks | rackets today don't
bend or absorb shock the way wooden rackets do. ■short for shockabsorber.
V. 1. [with obj.] cause (someone) to feel surprised and upset: she was shocked at the state of his injuries. ■ offend the moral feelings of; outrage: the revelations shocked the nation. ■[no obj.] experience such feelings: he shocked so easily. ■(usu. be shocked) affect with physiological shock, or with an electric shock. 2. [no obj.] (archaic) collide violently: carriage after carriage shocked fiercely against the engine.
V. 1. [with obj.] cause (someone) to feel surprised and upset: she was shocked at the state of his injuries. ■ offend the moral feelings of; outrage: the revelations shocked the nation. ■[no obj.] experience such feelings: he shocked so easily. ■(usu. be shocked) affect with physiological shock, or with an electric shock. 2. [no obj.] (archaic) collide violently: carriage after carriage shocked fiercely against the engine.
ORIGIN mid 16th cent.: from French choc (noun), choquer (verb),
of unknown origin. The original senses were ‘throw (troops) into confusion by
charging at them’ and ‘an encounter between charging forces,’ giving rise to
the notion of ‘sudden violent blow or impact.’
[1] Kalvero Oberg coined the
term culture shock to describe the anxiety resulting from losing one’s sense of
when to do what and how in a new culture. A visitor to a foreign culture
experiencing culture shock discovers that familiar cues have been replaced by
strange or unfamiliar cues. Oberg mentioned six aspects of culture shock: (1)
strain, resulting from the effort of psychological adaptation; (2) a sense of
loss and deprivation, referring to former friends, status, profession, and
possessions; (3) rejection by or of the culture; (4) confusion, referring to
role, role expectations, feelings, and self-identity; (5) surprise, anxiety,
disgust, or indignation regarding the cultural differences between old and new
ways; and (6) feelings of impotence, as a result of the inability to cope in
the new environment.
Sep 7, 2012
Italian Sugar-Misogyny
A member of
the Arcigay (an Italian association whose aim is to defend gay rights) walks in
a bar and — I imagine — order an espresso. While putting the sugar, she notices
what is written on the packet:
“The
difference between a toilet and a woman is that the toilet is not chasing you
for nine months after you've used it”.
She feels
offended, disgusted and picks up another packet “What is the difference between a battery and a woman? That the battery
has at least one positive side” and another “The difference between a mirror and a woman: the woman speaks without
thinking, the mirror reflects without speaking”.
The italian
LGTB community reacted and an article on the local edition of the Corriere
della Sera finally appeared Frasi sessiste sulle bustine dello zucchero (Sexist phrases on sugar packets).
The marketing manager of the company, Techmania, replied: “The message has a clear ironic
purpose and was conveyed without wanting to offend anyone”.
I may
perhaps stop here — there is enough information to formulate a clear
opinion about the issue — but I won’t stop, and, in a certain sense, surrender.
While I continue to write, I feel a bitter taste, a strange and uncomfortable sentiment.
I keep it under control because I hope — I hope — that another Italian professor, female, who is also introducing Italian society and culture to American students, is
doing the same. According to Maria Laura Rodotà , Italian women today are an incomprehensible hybrid:
"Today's
average Italian woman is a hybrid incomprehensible to foreigners: she's
overdressed, overworked and has the lowest self-esteem in the western world. If
she has a job, she has to work overtime inside and outside the home (Italian
men rarely clean or cook, and spend less time looking after the children).
Unwritten laws demand that she is cute, thin, elegant and well made-up. For
Italian men it's normal to have a wife and a lover, which is why many have been
amused by the adventures of the prime minister. The number of women in
positions of power is small; in politics, almost all owe their status to men.
The fear of being caricatured as a bitter feminist (who probably hasn't got a
sex life) is always strong. Women who overcome that fear are often
ridiculed". (Italianwomen have to fight sexism in every aspect of their lives, Guardian Sunday20 September 2009).
To get started, you can watch the documentary “Ilcorpo delle donne (The Body of Women), by Lorella Zanardo and read the
article WomenTake On Sexist Image in Italian Media.
Then let’s go
back to the bar where everything started (re-started?). The bar is in Eboli, a little
town in the province of Salerno, southern Italy. The name Eboli is known mainly
for the book Christ Stopped at Eboli (Italian: Cristo
si è fermato a Eboli; movie adaptation by Francesco Rosi). It is a memoir
by the antifascist Carlo Levi, giving an account of his exile from
1935-1936 to Grassano and Aliano, remote
towns in southern Italy, in the region of Lucania which
is known today as Basilicata. In the book Levi gives Aliano the invented
name 'Gagliano'.
The title
of the book comes from an expression by the people of Gagliano who say of themselves,
'Christ stopped short of here, at Eboli' which means, in effect, that they feel they have been bypassed by
Christianity, by morality, by history itself — that they have somehow been excluded from the full human experience.
Levi explained that Eboli, a location in the region of Campania to the
west near the seacoast, is where the road and railway to Basilicata branched
away from the coastal north-south routes. Below the full incipit of the book in its English translation (Farrar and Straus,
New York 1947).
Because of his
uncompromising opposition to Fascism, Carlo Levi was banished at the start of
the Abyssinian War (1935) to a small primitive village in Lucania, a remote province of southern Italy. In this region,
which remains unknown not only to tourists but also to the vast majority of
Italians, Carlo Levi, a painter, doctor, and writer, lived out a memorable time.
MANY years have gone by, years of war and of
what men call History. Buffeted here and there at random I have not been able
to return to my peasants as I promised when I left them, and I do not know
when, if ever, I can keep my promise. But closed in one room, in a world apart,
I am glad to travel in my memory to that other world, hedged in by custom and sorrow,
cut off from History and the State, eternally patient, to that land without
comfort or solace, where the peasant lives out his motionless civilization on barren
ground in remote poverty, and in the presence of death,
"We're not Christians," they say.
"Christ stopped short of here, at
Eboli." "Christian," In their way of speaking means "human
being," and this almost proverbial phrase that I have so often heard them repeat may be
no more than the expression of a hopeless feeling of inferiority.
We're not Christians, we're not human beings;
we're not thought of as men but simply as beasts, beasts of burden, or even
less than beasts, mere creatures of the wild. They at least live for better or
for worse, like angels or demons, in a world of their own, while we have to
submit to the world of Christians, beyond the horizon, to carry its weight and
to stand comparison with it. But the phrase has a much deeper meaning and, as
is the way of symbols, this is the literal one.
Christ did stop at Eboli, where the road and
the railway leave the coast of Salerno and turn into the desolate reaches of Lucania.
Christ never came this far, nor did time, nor the individual soul, nor hope,
nor the relation of cause to effect, nor reason nor history. Christ never came,
just as the Romans never came, content to garrison the highways without penetrating
the mountains and forests, nor the Greeks, who flourished beside the Gulf of
Taranto. None of the pioneers of Western
civilization brought here his sense of the passage of time, his deification of
the State or that ceaseless activity which feeds upon itself. No one has come
to this land except as an enemy, a conqueror, or a visitor devoid of understanding.
The seasons pass today over the toil of the peasants, just as they did three
thousand years before Christ; no message, human or divine, has reached this
stubborn poverty. We speak a different language, and here our tongue is incomprehensible.
The greatest travelers have not gone beyond the limits of their own world; they
have trodden the paths of their own souls, of good and evil, of morality and
redemption. Christ descended into the underground hell of Hebrew moral
principle in order to break down its doors in time and to seal them up into eternity. But
to this shadowy land, that knows neither sin nor redemption from sin, where evil
is not moral but is only the pain residing forever in earthly things, Christ
did not come. Christ stopped at Eboli.
Jul 18, 2012
The Media Frenzy of Amanda Knox (by Nathan Dines)
At the end of the first full week of classes in Florence, two of my friends and I decided to take a weekend trip and explore a new part of Italy. We did not go into the trip with anything more than two nights booked in two different hostels and an itinerary proposed by my host parents to visit three nearby cities: Perugia, Assisi, and Lake Trasimeno. The trip turned out to be one of the most fun and culturally rewarding of the semester, yet it was my short stay in Perugia that inspired me to focus this paper on Amanda Knox. Before arriving in Florence, I had never heard of Amanda Knox. Maybe it was because I did not live in Washington or simply because it never came up at school, but hearing about her story was fascinating. Here was a girl who left the States during her junior year, just like most everyone else in the Gonzaga in Florence program, yet the similarities from that point stop almost immediately. Knox’s predicament of facing a murder charge, being humiliated by the European media, being convicted of the murder of her roommate, serving four years in a foreign jail thousands of miles from home, and finally given a chance for appeal and receiving an acquittal of those murder charges is almost impossible to imagine, let alone accept as reality. Read more…
Italian Cultural Attitudes toward Homosexuality in an Age of Globalization (by Patrick Noonan)
In a heteronormative world, the narrative of a sexual dissident can be comparatively characterized as that of a traveler. The cultural norms, attitudes and expectations threaten to be anything but familiar. A heterosexual hegemony challenges the perceived other to adapt and acculturate in a social milieu that may or may not value their presence in society. In society’s gravest failings, a heterosexist authority reduces this traveler to a marginalized role suffered by that of a vagabond. In society’s most honorable accomplishments, a heteronormative culture becomes self-conscious and the social norms of the past are deconstructed to make a home for the weary traveler. With any hope, the weary traveler of the past will be the prosperous cosmopolitan of the future. Italy has been both a gracious and crude host over time. Cultural attitudes in Italy’s history have at times appeared as temperamental as the winds that brought prosperity and prevalence to the peninsula’s ports. Even before considering the “anxieties of anachronism”, one can at least acknowledge the possible acceptable existence of homosexuality in ancient Rome and the Renaissance. In search of an equilibrium echoing justice, contemporary society turns to the promising stabilizer of globalization. Despite its limitations, globalization offers an opportunity for social consciousness and change. Read more...
Jun 18, 2012
L'Ultimo Kiss (by David Kouroyen)
The purpose of this essay is to express the issues and flaws that can arise creating a remake of a foreign film. When a director with a different background remakes a film for a culture different to the originally intended audience, the film itself is modified and potentially hampered, this is especially true for Last Kiss (Tony Goldwyn, US 2006)¸ the American remake of the Italian L’ultimo bacio (Gabriele Muccino, Italy 2001). Some changes were subtle, such as the names of the characters; but more dramatic changes also existed (i.e. removing characters altogether or adding or deleting scenery). The Last Kiss was altered to suit an American audience, which greatly hampered the message and quality of the film, primarily in the areas of a college mentality, sex, and the display of emotion. The main issue is that L’Ultimo Bacio is an Italian story through and thorough, which is what led to its significantly higher rating, box office sales, and national recognition over its American knockoff (David Kouroyen). Read more…
Jun 13, 2012
Jun 6, 2012
Gomorrah: no Honor or Tradition
Gomorra (Matteo Garrone, Italy 2008).
“There are
no colorful characters in Gomorrah, Matteo
Garrone’s corrosive and ferociously unsentimental fictional look at Italian
organized crime; no white-haired mamas lovingly stirring the spaghetti sauce;
no opera arias swelling on the soundtrack; no homilies about family, honor or
tradition; no dark jokes; no catchy pop songs; no film allusions; no winking
fun; no thrilling violence....
... Instead, there is waste, grotesque human waste,
some of which ends up illegally buried in the same ground where trees now bear
bad fruit, some of which, like the teenager scooped up by a bulldozer on a
desolate beach, is cast away like trash” (Manohla Dargis, Lesser-Known Mobsters, as Brutal as the OldOnes, New York Times, February 12, 2009).
In late 2007, the Sicilian police found a list of “Ten Commandments” in the hideout of the mafia boss Salvatore Lo Piccolo. They are thought to be guidelines on how to be a good, respectful and honorable mafioso.
1. No one can present himself directly to another of our
friends. There must be a third person to do it.
2. Never look at the wives of friends.
3. Never be seen with cops.
4. Don't go to pubs and clubs.
5. Always being available for Cosa Nostra is a duty —
even if your wife is about to give birth.
6. Appointments must absolutely be respected.
7. Wives must be treated with respect (7.Thou Shalt
Not Commit Adultery)
8. When asked for any information, the answer must be the
truth.
9. Money cannot be appropriated if it belongs to others
or to other families.
10. People who can't be part of Cosa Nostra: anyone who
has a close relative in the police, anyone with a two-timing relative in the family, anyone who behaves badly and doesn't
hold to moral values.
Are we talking about blood ceremonies, obscure
symbols, elaborate codes? Is it the arcane remnants of a defunct culture?
According to Diego Gambetta’s The
Sicilian Mafia: the Business of Private
Protection (1996) Cosa Nostra ten commandments
can be considered norms and guidelines for a well working (criminal)
organization. Gambetta’s main thesis is that Mafia begins to resemble any other
business. In a society where trust is in short supply, this business sells
protection: a guarantee for commercial and social transactions. As you
understand, this is not a “mythical” interpretation. Mafia here is considered the logical response to existing market conditions.
Organized Crime either replaces the State or they coexist in the same
territory.
Cosa Nostra cannot be understood outside its
historical roots in Sicilian society. Mafia arose in mid 19th century
with the collapse of feudalism and landed aristocracy on one side; the
emergence of a new bourgeoisie and the unification of the Italian state on the
other. People belonging to the new upper class did not propose and support new
type of social development for Sicilian society; they just “moved into villas
of aristocracy” and assumed their values. Thus, the class that is the “engine”
of any modernization process, did not provide an economic, political and civic
leadership when aristocracy collapsed. According to Gambetta (and other
scholars) organized crime in Sicily (and in the South of Italy) can be considered
as the answer to the absence of a civil society — in other parts of Italy patronage
absolved a similar function. Therefore, Mafia arose in a liminal, transitional period: the old social-economical structure
was fading away but the passage to a new social-economical order with its legal
apparatus (the state) was not completed. In such historical period, Mafia
provided the needed protection for the emerging business and new landholding
class. Gambetta posits that Mafia protection was a substitute for the absence
of institutional and interpersonal trust. The lack of trust in the state is
considered as the “cultural spring” for Mafia uprise — the resemblance between
Sicily and Russia after the collapse of former Soviet-Union is sticking.
What about Camorra?
This is not a stalactite in a magnificent cavern close to volcanoVesuvio. This is Napoli Center underground, and the stalactites are the result of 200 years of waste disposal exhalations. A strong indicator of the historical presence of Camorra — and of well “grounded” detrimental social, political and cultural attitudes toward the public good (to the costs of people’s health, camorristi included). Camorra’s power structure is horizontal, unlike the hierarchical one of Cosa Nostra. Distinct clans operate largely autonomously without a single leader — each clan has its own boss. Alliances can be created between clans; that is when Camorra functions like a single organization. Coalitions are maintained only as long as there is equilibrium of power and reciprocal benefits. Sometimes, a inter-organized crime alliances can be created: the Casalesi, a group of confederate families, is allied with the Calabria 'Ndrangheta and Sicily Cosa Nostra. According to the Italian Ministry of Internal Affairs (2009) Camorra counted between 100 and 200 clans, for approximately 10,000 formal members and 50,000 associate: an army. The area of operation in Italy is mainly in the following regions: Lombardy, Veneto, Emilia Romagna, Tuscany, Marche, Umbria, Molise, Lazio, Basilicata. Camorra’s international ramifications can be found mainly in: Eastern Europe, France, The Netherlands, Spain, Scotland, Portugal, Latin America (Colombia), United States, Canada. All of this to say: Camorra cannot be considered just a local phenomenon.
This is not a stalactite in a magnificent cavern close to volcanoVesuvio. This is Napoli Center underground, and the stalactites are the result of 200 years of waste disposal exhalations. A strong indicator of the historical presence of Camorra — and of well “grounded” detrimental social, political and cultural attitudes toward the public good (to the costs of people’s health, camorristi included). Camorra’s power structure is horizontal, unlike the hierarchical one of Cosa Nostra. Distinct clans operate largely autonomously without a single leader — each clan has its own boss. Alliances can be created between clans; that is when Camorra functions like a single organization. Coalitions are maintained only as long as there is equilibrium of power and reciprocal benefits. Sometimes, a inter-organized crime alliances can be created: the Casalesi, a group of confederate families, is allied with the Calabria 'Ndrangheta and Sicily Cosa Nostra. According to the Italian Ministry of Internal Affairs (2009) Camorra counted between 100 and 200 clans, for approximately 10,000 formal members and 50,000 associate: an army. The area of operation in Italy is mainly in the following regions: Lombardy, Veneto, Emilia Romagna, Tuscany, Marche, Umbria, Molise, Lazio, Basilicata. Camorra’s international ramifications can be found mainly in: Eastern Europe, France, The Netherlands, Spain, Scotland, Portugal, Latin America (Colombia), United States, Canada. All of this to say: Camorra cannot be considered just a local phenomenon.
In its early
incarnations the main illegal activities were local criminal and patronage
structures, escalating to extortion and 'taxes' on illegal activities, such as
prostitution. Later Camorra interests
expanded to counterfeiting, money laundering and smuggling, primarily of drugs.
Camorra’s infiltration of local bodies and public administration is evident:
the province of Naples has had the most instances of city councils dissolving
(44 cases between 1991 and 2007) owing to suspected ties to the Camorra.
One of
the most recent criminal “opportunities” for the Camorra is the waste
management industry. Hundreds of companies contract the organization’s clans
for the disposal of toxic waste; the waste is disposed in a number of ways,
including burying it and burning it. The market cost for disposing of toxic
waste is between USD 0.21 and USD 0.62 per kg. Camorra offers the same service
for a mere USD 0.09 per kg. According to
Italian environmental organization Legambiente,
waste trafficking earns organized crime groups around EUR 22 billion (USD 32
billion) per year. Out of the drug trafficking (mainly cocaine) the sole clan
Di Lauro earns approximately EUR 300 million (USD 439 million) per year. The
annual revenues of the Camorra are around EUR 16 billion (USD 23 billion). Camorristi
define themselves “entrepreneurs”.
From another
sociological point of view, Camorra has of course a locally based identity
which strengthens its social base. The majority of residents have some interest
in maintaining the existing system: the family-based clan structure ensures
that most residents have family or friendship links to Camorra associates,
making it less likely that anyone would betray the group. Camorra offers its
own social network, a sense of community (although illegal), and jobs for
unemployed young people (cigarette smuggling, drugs or minor crime). Now the
approximate meaning of camorra — “organization” — makes more sense. The members
of the Camorra prefer to use the word “sistema”, or system, to identify their
criminal organization, viewing the group structure as analogous to a business
system. Felia Allum, in Becoming a camorrista: criminal culture and life
choices in Naples, points out an interesting qualitative and cultural
analysis. At its origins, Camorra had a code of conduct for its members — values
such as defending one’s honour, respect for all, prestige, personal vendetta
and power. According to Allum, by the 1980s these basic traditional values had
been manipulated and transformed by the Camorra subculture into new values,
based predominantly around business: respect for power and money, strategic use
of friends and family, greed. In a certain way, joining nowadays the Camorra
becomes a “shortcut to success” — which is not a biographical path that can be
relegated only to the organized crime world. The ’50 core values (honour,
family and friendship), where transformed in the 80’s to money, social prestige
and, most of all, power: “Beyond
the craving for wealth which is undoubtedly an important motive in criminal
activities, the Mafia’s paramount aim is power” (Siebert 1996, 61). And this kind of
neo-feudal system of ‘power’, means the control over a territory, over the
lives of the people, over social and political activities, over everything: “in
its abrogation of absolute power to itself, the power over life and death”
(Siebert, 62).
Exhibitionism
is another piece of this cultural mosaic: “Unfortunately, pathologically, we are
exhibitionists, real exhibitionists, you do not undertake a crime if you do
not want people to talk about it”
(Boss Umberto Ammaturo, Tribunale di Napoli 1994).
Allum’s
concluding remark is: “The changes in
motivation for joining
the Camorra during the period we have studied reflect closely those of the capitalist society and culture in which it
operates and of which it has become the very epitome” (2001, 343).
Other
scholarly synthetic propositions, attempting to capture the gist of the South Italy’s social and cultural phenomenology
are: “great social disintegration”
(Gramsci 1930); “amoral familism” (Banfield 1958) ; lack of in “social capital” (Putnam 1993; Fukuyama
1995). Much more can be written about the relationship between organized crime
and others socio-cultural features supporting the Italian modernization process.
I would
like to finish this scattered reflection with a question. To which
statement you feel closer?
1) “In general, it’s worth to trust
people”;
2) “You can’t trust people, they will
take advantage of you”.
The 70% of
young Italians (25-35 years) picked the
second statement (Iard 2007). In Italy, young people have one of the lowest levels
of “institutional” and “interpersonal” trust within the Western world. The
passage from low trust in Otherness, low trust in the future and low trust in
yourself does not sounds as an hazardous conceptual consequential chain to me. Are
these young people proud to be Italian?
In 2007 one
of my students (Georgetown University) wrote about his pride of being American:
“I am personally proud to say I am an American.
“I am personally proud to say I am an American.
I am not proud of everything America does and
stands for.
But I have learned to love my home.
If I didn't love it, I wouldn't have any care or concern to try to change it for the better”.
But I have learned to love my home.
If I didn't love it, I wouldn't have any care or concern to try to change it for the better”.
- ALLUM, F. (2001) Becoming
a camorrista: criminal culture
and life choices in Naples, in “Journal of Modern Italian Studies”, 6, 3:
324–347.
-
BANFIELD, E.G. (1958) The
Moral Basis of a Backward Society. Glencoe: Free Press.
-
IARD (2007) Sesta
indagine dell’Istituto Iard sulla condizione giovanile in Italia. Bologna: Il
Mulino.
-
COVINO, M. (2009) La
Malavita: Gomorrah and Naples, in “Film Quarterly”, 62, 4: 72-75.
-
FBI, Organized
Crime in Italy, http://www.fbi.gov/hq/cid/orgcrime/lcnindex.htm.
-
FUKUYAMA, F. (1995) Trust.
New York: Free Press.
-
GAMBETTA, D. (1996) The
Sicilian Mafia. Harvard: University Press.
- GRAMSCI, A. (1926/1983) The Southern Question, in The Modern Prince and Other Writings,
ed. L. Marks. New York: International Publishers.
-
PINE, J. (2008) Icons
and iconoclasm: Roberto Saviano's Gomorrah and La Denuncia, in “Journal of
Modern Italian Studies”,13, 3: 431-436.
-
PUTNAM, R.D. (1993) Making
Democracy Work: Civic Traditions in Modern Italy. Princeton: University
Press.
-
SHELLEY, L.I. (1994) Mafia and the Italian State: the Historical Roots of the Current Crisis,
in “Sociological Forum”, 9, 4: 661-672.
-
SIEBERT, R. (1996) Secrets of Life and Death: Women
and the Mafia, London: Verso.
- Tribunale di Napoli, V Sezione Penale, RG
3952/November 1992, Contro Alfieri Carmine + 9, verbale di
udienza: Pasquale Galasso (a 15 November 1993), Carmine Alfieri (b 22 April
1994, c 4 May 1994, d 5 May 1994), (e 13 April 1994), (f 17 February 1994),
Carmine Schiavone, Umberto Ammaturo (d 5 May 1994).
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)