Lowdown on Berlusconi's high culture failings
A letter from Michael Pacitti, England
Dear Domenico Pacitti [unrelated, as far as we know - JR],
Re: What Berlusconi has done for Italian culture (JUST Response, June 26 2004)
In
your reply to Gillian Harper's question regarding Silvio Berlusconi's
contribution to Italian culture you overlook his contribution via the media and,
in particular, television.
Berlusconi's television programmes have been adequately lambasted by much more
eloquent and informed commentators than I. Tobias Jones re-ignited a discussion
of Italian television programming standards last year (which has perhaps been
superseded by the continued dumbing down of British television and the
discrediting of BBC's reporting standards) while David Sells of the BBC once
memorably, and accurately, referred to "Non è la RAI" as "a
paedophile's delight." Further apposite reflection on Berlusconi's
contribution to Italian popular culture can be found in Paul Ginsborg's recent
book Silvio Berlusconi: Television, Power and Patrimony.
Berlusconi is not, to the best of my knowledge, a devotee of what has come to be known as "high culture". His musical tastes appear to tend towards night-club crooners and sentimental Neapolitan ballads and I think it fair to say that he prefers the football stadium to the theatre. I am not aware of Fininvest, or any of its subsidiaries, providing sponsorship for the restoration of public monuments or national treasures as other private sector companies have. That said, I have frequently seen Berlusconi's closest associate Fedele Confaloniere, a pianist of considerable ability it is said, attend performances at La Scala in Milan and demonstrate enthusiastic appreciation of them.
I
believe that Ginsborg is accurate when he suggests that Berlusconi
cares only for the mass appeal of his audience or electorate and that his
greatest efforts are directed at winning an ever bigger audience or, in
political terms, appealing to greatest number of voters, and that in order to do
so the end justifies the means. The result, while undoubtedly beneficial to Berlusconi, his family and his companies, can only be the preference of the mass
audience for vapid, easy and inconsequential popular culture with the risk of a
lack of popular appreciation of Italy's unparalleled artistic patrimony.
This
was evident to me on a recent holiday in Sicily during which hordes of Italian
schoolchildren with the ubiquitous Invicta backpacks clambered and
crawled about the theatre at Taormina and abandoned litter on the mosaics at
Piazza Armerina. Recent attacks and damage inflicted on statues, fountains and
national monuments in Rome and Venice confirm my fears.
Ultimately
Italy's treasures belong to the nation. The nation, alas, now belongs to Berlusconi and one must fear, as your correctly point out, for the future of
Italy's treasures under the stewardship of a man who builds his pleasure dome on
the Sardinian coast, complete with ersatz amphitheatre.
I
believe that much of Italy's artistic patrimony is at risk without private
sector support and that whatever funds are allocated by the state, which is
teetering on the brink of financial, as well as moral, bankruptcy will be hard
wrought from the current administration. Private sector companies which sponsor
the restoration or protection may be permitted to raise funds from private
exhibition or charging for access but should also be required to provide
adequate maintenance while ownership should always remain with the state.
Note:
This letter was published by JUST Response on August 20 2004.
Return to top
Return to
opening page