Grasshopper

After a healthy break from the computer lasting a few days, I returned to my little house and found this gem from one Cialo (Cialo? A typo or a mispronunciation written down? In any case, a nickname that is already an error in itself) from Alcamo. A town where, it’s worth noting, an excellent and full-bodied white wine is produced, which our hero must have overindulged in at this juncture, because it’s hard to understand what on earth he could have read that was so terrible as to drive him (what a sacrifice, and what an honor for us…) to sign up for this worthy site. Since I am a conscientious type, I reread my old writing, among other things one of my most neutral and analytical, without too many personal considerations. If our distorter of stilnovists wanted to, perhaps after sobering up, at least hint at the dreadful words that so brutally disturbed his sensitive soul, it could even spark a civilized discussion. But it seems to me that the pompous and hazy tone of our critic, as well as a mimic of Oscar Wilde's aphorisms, does not deserve the slightest shred of response. Nonetheless, I thank the two commentators who tried to respond, although I fear they just wasted their time.

@Telespallabob: I would avoid getting overly upset by the words of Axel and Eletto1987, even though reading about Saviano as a "showman" makes me a bit jump in my seat. In my opinion, they are both acting in good faith and certainly not supporters of the Camorra, but they share the typical superficial attitude of those who focus on the finger pointing to the moon instead of the moon itself. No offense to the moon, of course. According to them, Saviano's finger moves with gestures that are too broad and spectacular when indicating the moon, and that's not acceptable. It's a very common attitude: I think of Lucia Annunziata, who indignantly leaves Santoro's show because, according to her, in describing the atrocities committed by Israelis in Gaza, he maintained too pro-Palestinian a stance instead of being outraged, if anything, by the substance of the events that occurred. The sensationalism of every phenomenon, including Saviano, can lead some to focus exclusively on the style with which a topic is addressed rather than the topic itself. Of course, I understand your indignation, but I explain their attitude and words, which I also find largely absurd, in this way.

Remedy for a forgetfulness: I entered this discussion riled by Eletto1987's comment on the media personality and the small change, which then became big bucks with Axel. But I didn't spare two words (nor two votes) for the review, written by a character I don't particularly like due to his bravado and his one-sided view of the world (me against everyone). However, here he seems to have given his best: you can feel that the "mountain of crap" weighs on his stomach as well, not just on Saviano's. I imagine he will find this comment too polite, greasy, and overly nice, a bit like Fabio Fazio if you will. But I couldn't care less: it's what I think, and I said it. Now I am reluctantly forced to leave this discussion because I have an obligation. Nevertheless, while wandering around Florence, I won't be able to help but think about my luck in not living in a place where every face represents a potential threat. Here, at most, the faces show the usual petty indifference of average Italians. Yet this contributes to making possible everything Saviano describes.

A sincere thank you to Panapp for saying more or less what I would have said during the night. After the comments about "making money" from Eletto1987 and Axel, I went to bed: I had enough. Now I return to this discussion and find this gem from Axel: "the people who insult their own country disgust me as much as a mafia member." But who are the people insulting their own country: those who say "Watch out, we are in deep trouble," or those who make it sink a little more every day?

Well... there are so many ways to make money that choosing this one seems like pure self-harm to me; however, if this is your interpretation, feel free... I don’t claim to be in Saviano's head, if only because I didn't feel remotely up to par.

What can I tell you? I thought I was too pessimistic, but if anything, I'm too optimistic. I still feel it as if it's alive, or if you prefer, I refuse to think of it as already dead, not even in a moral sense, perhaps because I don’t see myself as one of those Italians you mentioned, those who preach morality in front of a television or behind a newspaper. However, it’s easy that you might be right, that the "blender" is not just televisual, but also exists in the minds of many, and has already managed to pulverize the "Saviano phenomenon" after having created it. After all, aren't we the same people who in 1992 suddenly discovered themselves as fanatics of the judiciary, reaching peaks of "forcaiolite" acute, only to two years later put into power the One who embodies the negation of every form of legality?

I don't want to be too pessimistic, but I fear that even Saviano, however it ends (assassinated by the camorra, exiled to who knows which country, or canceled out by the "television blender"), will be spoken of in a few years more or less like the ones you mentioned. At least the history of this nation, lacking in awareness and historical memory, suggests such an outcome to me. I hope I'm wrong.

I don't know how many fewer copies would have been sold if Saviano hadn't lived under those conditions. I can only speak for myself and those I know: both I and they bought the book not to celebrate a media phenomenon (which we don't usually do), but based on simple word of mouth and well before the film, in order to get at least a faint idea of a reality that, living in a different part of Italy, we could not possibly know in such chilling detail as Saviano reveals. The essence is this, what is being described: everything else is just superstructure, whether it's the literary style (what importance can it have when the subject at hand grips you by the throat?) or especially the potential creation of a "character" Saviano, which, given how the mechanism of media "characters" works here in Italy, can only serve to harm Saviano himself, in the sense that once the character is created, the same TV "blender" can just as easily destroy it, forever diverting the attention of those who have so far followed him (perhaps only "as a character") away from what is truly important, namely the reality that Saviano describes. Then you can talk to me about "sterile" information, about the fact that information alone can't eradicate a phenomenon like this, so deeply rooted that it is called a "system," but in the meantime, just having brought the attention of part of the Italian population (the reading part, thus always a minority) to this reality is an undeniable merit, which may not make him a hero (a word I don’t like: unfortunate is the country that needs heroes, as Brecht said, if I’m not mistaken) but at least a symbol of a civil consciousness that is increasingly absent in Italy, particularly in the South. And I don’t understand why to cite that list of "uncomfortable" journalists killed by the mafia: compared to Saviano, the only difference they have is that in their case the death sentence has already been executed.

@Eletto1987: Frankly, I can't understand what "comfort" there could be in the "role of a writer hunted by the Camorra who lives under protection," nor your repeatedly mentioned definition of Saviano as a "character" or, worse, as a marketing phenomenon. Saviano simply does what any journalist or writer should do in a normal country, which is to denounce what is happening, without sparing names and surnames. What makes him a "phenomenon," and consequently earns him those "many nice bucks" that you seem to almost hold against him, is that he does all of this in a country that is anything but normal, and moreover in a region that is even less normal than the rest of the country. The weight of the "mountain of shit" mentioned in the review is infinitely greater than the power of any editorial strategy created on purpose. Sometimes even spontaneous phenomena can casually "pay off": not everything that succeeds is the result of marketing strategies, as powerful as they might be nowadays.

Here's a nice suggestion to refresh my knowledge in a genre that has always inspired me, but of which, apart from Caetano Veloso and a bit of Milton Nascimento, I know little more than the founding fathers (Antonio Carlos Jobim and Joao Gilberto). As for Chico Buarque (de Hollanda: surname or nickname?), I only know "O que será...", and moreover only in the Italian version by Ivano Fossati (and consequently also by Fiorella Mannoia). That's a bit too little.