Brancati’s “Don Giovanni in Sicily ” … Surely No Greater Contempt for Sicily … Plato: “Beware the Poets and Tragedians”
Brancati’s “Don Giovanni in Sicily ” … Surely No Greater Contempt for Sicily … Plato: “Beware the Poets and Tragedians”
(November 22, 2014)
Top: "American Girl in Italy" (Florence); Bottom Rt.: Poster for 1967 movie version of Brancati's book
The relentless theme of this blog is the profound irony that in the country with near seventeen million southern-Italian Americans there are no dedicated university Patria Meridionale major or minor curriculums. While, there are scores of northern-Italian and post-Ellis Island history and culture curriculums, the history and culture of southern-Italian Americans going back near three thousand years south of Rome is conscientiously and systematically ignored by the Italian American literati (aka teachers). /// /// If it should ever come to pass that such a Meridionale curriculum is judged appropriate in the university system that services millions of southern-Italian American students, the implementation would not require any major bureaucratic restructuring. /// /// This is to say, it would not be necessary to create a new department in the college and all that goes with that type of thing (department head, budget lines, physical facilities, etc.). Rather, a currently existing Italian American Studies programs offering courses in post-Ellis Island-ism could simply add-on new courses in pre-Ellis Island history and culture. /// /// This blog has posited numerous suggestions for such pre-Ellis Island courses that could be implemented immediately without any bureaucratic complications. All that is needed is a teacher’s will. /// /// Also, in such a comprehensive Meridionale curriculum, a comparative study of post-1920 south of Rome culture with its diasporic southern-Italian American offspring would be appropriate. What, for example, does Meridionale literature after the great emigration came to an end tell us about southern Italian culture, and how does it compare with southern-Italian American post-immigrant culture? How does, for example, the profound denigration of Sicilian culture implied in a novel like “Don Giovanni in Sicily” compare with Sicilian-American culture? Are Sicilian men generally the fossilized adolescent idiots depicted in the novel? What are the similarities and differences of those depictions vis a vis Sicilian American men?
Preface: The British Troubador Edition of “Don Giovanni in Sicily ”
The very first order of business when discussing this book is an expression of appreciation to the translator and the Troubador publishing house.
Inter-cultural studies are carried on the backs of unsung translator heroes. Without them there would be no inter-cultural studies for those not fluent in the respective foreign languages. However, even in that ‘round-table’ of heroes, Carrada Biazzo Curry plays the role of Lancelot. She does not simply translate ... she teaches!
Her translation includes a 22 page “Introduction” to include 65 annotated endnotes. Further, the body of the translation itself includes an additional chapter by chapter 72 annotated endnotes. All in an effort to bring the reader, not just a ‘good read’; rather, knowledge of Sicilian culture.
Has any translator made such a commitment to bringing a foreign text into English? Most especially a Sicilian text!
Further, Troubador provides a 10 page “Critical Note by Rocco Giudice” to include 18 annnotated endnotes. Also (as they say television marketing – That’s Not All!), there is a two-page note by Vitalino’s daughter Antonia Brancate: “Vitalinao Brancati and the English”.
Has any publishing house made such a commitment to bring a foreign text into English? Most especially a Sicilian text!
In sum, the Troubador publication is not simply “a translation”; it is a scholarly and pedagogic gem. If ever a Meridionale curriculum were developed in an American university, the first purchase orders ‘cut’ no doubt would include this book.
Introduction Categories of Literary Discussion
There are three broad categories of discussion about any work of art, especially literary works, of which students should be apprised.
First, there is the purely subjective aesthetic category, which essential takes the form of subjective value judgments such as: “I like it” (i.e. painting, sculpture, movie, novel, etc.) or “I don’t like it”.
These are purely subjective responses to a work of art. One may discuss (posit reasons) why they ‘like’ or ‘dislike’ a work, but essentially the response is a subjective aesthetic emotional response. There is no ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ – ‘true’ or ‘false’… only ‘opinions’ in aesthetic discourse.
The second category of discussion may be characterized as critiquing (aka ‘criticism’: as in ‘literary criticism’), which entails an objective analysis of a work in terms of some aesthetic theory or philosophy.
For example, in what is probably the first recorded work of literary theorizing, Aristotle’s “Poetics”, wherein he posits the components of Greek Drama (plot, character, diction, etc.). The plot of the drama is, according to Aristotle, the essential part of drama.
His theory has come down (albeit in various modified forms) through the centuries. For example, in the 1930’s a group of literary critics at the University of Chicago (e.g. Elder Olsen) considered themselves neo-Aristotelians. They in turn were rejecting the literary theory called “New Criticism” (e.g. I. A. Richards).
Critiquing is meant to be independent of subjective aesthetic judgments. Thus, for example, one should be able to analyze the ‘plot’ of a drama independently of whether one likes or dislikes the plot.
However, there is no such thing as purely objective analysis of art. All criticism derives from fundamental aesthetic (emotional) experiences. Thus, for example, the fundamental difference between the Chicago Critics and the New Critics is the respective aesthetics assumptions constituting the fountainhead of the respective theories ... i. e. the nature and purpose of literature.
The significance of ‘plot’, for example, ultimately is an aesthetic judgment.
The third category of art discussion is, what I would characterize as, social historical. The social historian uses the artwork as the observable factual basis (as s/he would any other manuscript or document) to make inferences (i.e. logical deductions) about cultural values (aesthetic, moral, political, religious) of the society in which the artwork was created.
Independent of and without regard to subjective aesthetic judgments and aesthetic theories, the social historian reaches conclusions about prevailing values of a society based on careful examination of the contemporary artworks.
For example, the artworks produced in the “Quattrocento” clearly indicate the Catholic religious values that prevailed in fifteenth century Italy.
Again, for any give work of art, there are at least three categories, in terms of which the work may be considered and discussed. For example, my three responses to Vitaliano Brancati’s novel Don Giiovanni In Sicily:
1) Aesthetically, I found it absolutely abhorrent. Time and again I was moved to stop reading and discard the book. Based on my purely subjective aesthetic judgment, the novel is a ridiculous work.
2) Nevertheless, Critiquing, independent of my subjective aesthetic judgment, as an unabashed, classicist I found Aristotelian critical virtues in the novel; thus piquing my interesting.
The plot for example, followed a near perfect ‘cause and effect’ sequence of events as opposed to a melodramatic plot driven by ‘dues ex machine’ events. Further, consistent with the Chicago critical school of criticism, the plot line manifested itself in the changing behavior and values of the protagonist.
From the point of view of literary criticism (critiquing), Brancati is clearly a master literary craftsman. In terms of plot construction, character development, eloquent narrative, etc. he is an outstanding writer.
However, while craft is a ‘necessary’ condition of art, it is not a ‘sufficient’ condition.
During the Renaissance, for example, there were untold numbers of men who could masterfully carve marble and paint fresco. What differentiated the likes of Michelangelo and Raphael from this mass of craftsmen was not their carving and painting skill; rather, the ideas expressed in the forms they created with their craftsmanship. Art is the idea in the crafted form!
Similarly, fictional writing is a craft that many have mastered, but few rise to the honorific level of artist, because few use the craft to express significant, indeed, profound ideas. Dostoevsky's genius is not his writing skill (craft). Indeed, much of the plot in a work like “Crime and Punishment” is very un-masterful amateurish ‘dues ex machine’ (e.g. people coincidentally meeting each other on the streets of St. Petersburg). However, his genius is in the provocative psychological ideas (guilt, justice, etc.) he posits and develops in the narrative and action.
Brancati is a master craftsman all will agree. But, many may reasonably disagree about the artistic value of his work, because his ideas are mundane.
3) Finally, what I found to be so very interesting, from the social historical point of view, the profoundly denigrating and insulting representation of Sicilian men. Is this an accurate description of reality or is it Brancati’s fantasy?
In sum, it is important to keep these three categories in mind when considering any work of art (literary or otherwise).
It is especially import to keep these categories in mind if one is seeking knowledge of a culture via its artwork. For example, if one is seeking knowledge of one’s own historic culture, such as American Meridionali seeking knowledge of their Patria; they must be very critical readers … indeed! Socrates and the Apostle Thomas should be their models!
Plato … “Beware the Poet’s and Tragedians”
Those who use art as a medium for the study of social and cultural history (third category of discussion above) should keep in mind Plato’s juxtaposition of “poetry” (i.e. literary arts) and “philosophy” (i.e. objective and rational knowledge) discussed in, for example, “Republic Book II” [Stephanus # 377-385] and “Book X” [595-609]”.
Plato via Socrates character:
“Poetry [Literature] may be either true or false…[False understood as] an erroneous representation … although we are admirers of Homer, we do not admire false representations even by him …
“I [Socrates] should not like to have my words repeated to the tragedians and the rest of the imitative tribe [i.e. poets] … all poetical imitations are ruinous to the understand of the hearer …
“There is an ancient quarrel between philosophy and poetry … Poetry is not to be regarded seriously as attaining to the truth
In contemporary parlance, a fiction writer may or may not give accurate representations of reality. Accordingly, although a fine work of fiction may be pleasing and we admire it aesthetically, it should not be considered an accurate representation of reality unless and until the poet’s perceptions are tested empirically against the reality the poet presumes to describe.
For example, the “poet”, so to speak, Vitaliano Brancati makes representations of Sicilian society and culture. The student of Sicilian culture seeking ‘objective’ knowledge about Sicily should not uncritically accept Brancati’s representation as accurate and true. He is writing, by definition, fiction! Accordingly, the whole Sicilian presentation could be a figment of his imagination, a gross misrepresentation.
Plato warns readers not be seduced by the ‘beauty’ of the art; the eloquence of the narrative; the pleasure that the story induces. All of that is a purely subjective aesthetic responses to the poet’s craft. None of it necessarily has anything to do with the reality of Sicily. For example, Brancati’s representation of men’s attitude and behavior vis-à-vis women: is it an accurate and true description or false representation of Sicilian men?
Immature Men ‘Gawking’ at Girls ... not Peculiar to Sicily
Much of the narrative of “Don Giovanni in Sicily” has to do with descriptions and dialogues of men preoccupied with women sexually. Some literary scholar’s, acting the role of cultural historians (third type of discussion above); argue that these men are ‘representative’ of Sicilian male culture generally. This is to say; they think that Brancati has provided through fiction an accurate objective representation of Sicilian reality.
For example, translator and scholarly commentator Corrada Biazzo Curry quotes the very scholarly work of Stanley Hochmen, who writes:
“ ‘Brancati’s fiction focuses on the satiric description of the Sicilian Middle Class society…’”(p. x)
Curry herself has similar thoughts, she writes:
“Brancati’s work represents the decadence of the Sicilian life characterized by a crisis of human and ideological values.
“ [His work] consist of a keen criticism of contemporary society … a distortion of daily bourgeois reality.” (p.xi)
After generalizations about Sicilian “life” and “values”, Curry gets more specific about Catania. She writes:
"Catania, with its tedious daily life and the lazy habits of its people can be considered as the metaphor of Sicily…Brancati has the brilliant capacity to show the defects of his people … (p xvii)
Another example of scholars finding Sicilian / Catanian ‘reality’ in Brancati’s fiction comes from the dedicated Sicilian-ologist Gaetano Cipolla, who writes:
“This novel presents an image of the provincial society of Catania, completely oblivious of what is happening in the world ... (“Siciliana: Studies on the Sicilian Ethos”, e-book Locations 5103-5104).
One final example wherein a scholar finds not simply Sicilian cultural reality in Brancati, but Sicilian genetics; Siegfried Mandel writes:
"Exaggerated eroticism is an inheritance of Sicilian blood and the island's moral tradition …Brancati's imaginative re-creation of the erotic atmosphere of Eastern Sicily, and particularly of the bourgeois milieu to which he was born" ("Contemporary European Novelists", p. 145)
Thus, one could go on with the volumes of authoritative commentators who assure us, without providing any objective sociological evidence and analysis, that Brancati has provided an accurate description/representation of Sicilian culture and biology.
Students of Sicilian cultural history and sociology are obliged to give scholars like Hochmen, Curry, Cipolla, Mandel, etc. due consideration. Their credentials are impressive and dedication undeniable. However, students sensitized to Plato’s admonition to “Beware Poet’s and Tragedians”, while admiring Brancati’s art are rightfully skeptical of Brancati’s Sicilian ‘sociology’, not to mention 'genetics'.
Like Socrates who rigorously engaged the scholars of his day (Sophist), so to the students seeking objective knowledge of reality must not be decieved by what Plato called “the imitators of reality” (i.e. poets [literary artist]). Nor must they be overwhelmed by scholarly erudition.
For example, is the male behavior towards and attitude about women depicted in “Don Giovanni …” peculiar to the men of Catania and Sicily generally? The above scholars think so! However, consider the following social facts about ‘girl watching’ ‘immature’ men outside of Sicily.
1) The iconic “American Girl in Italy” photograph above … Florence not Catania!
2) “Grazia Deledda's Eternal Adolescents: The Pathology of Arrested Maturation [in Sardinia Not Sicily!] by Janice M. Kozma …
3) “There is Nothing Like a Dame” … song from 1948 Broadway musical “South Pacific”
3) “Standing on the Corner … Watching all the Girls Go By” … song from 1956 Broadway musical "The Most Happy Fellow", which went on to be pop music hit recorded by The Four Lads
4) “I'm a Girl Watcher” … American hit pop song by the O'Kaysions in 1968
5) Nov. 2014: Shoshana Roberts was catcalled 108 times as she walked around New York (see: http://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/Catcall-Street-Harassment-Manhattan-New-York-City-Video-Hollaback-280660972.html)
In short, clearly there is significant evidence that male preoccupation with women is not peculiar to Catania or Sicily generally. Yet, literary scholars donning-the-hat of cultural historians ("Everybody wants ta get inta da act!" Jimmy Durante) are telling us that the culture of Sicily/Catania is in-fact as Brancanti represents it in his novel.
The concepts of poet’s prerogative and poetic hyperbole are not even considered by would be cultural historians. Is it not possible that Brancati has a distorted or bias opinion of Cantanese men? Why is he to be considered an indubitable voice of Truth without any attempt at objective verification?
Students of Sicilian culture must act the role of Thomas the Apostle (“… unless I see… I will not believe” John 20:26). They must demand to see “objective evidence about the cultural reality under consideration before they believe in the truth and accuracy of the poet’s representations.
Scholarly commentators presenting their own subjective aesthetic and cultural opinion may mislead students about the reality basis of a literary work.
For example, consider the difference in the response of the literati to mafia literature and Brancati.
Hating Mafia literature and Loving “Don Giovanni”
In America, at least since the first “Godfather” movie through the “Soprano’s” series to “Jersey Shore” reality show, to include all the many other movies, television programs, dime novels; there has been a hue and cry (indeed law suits) protesting the negative image of Italians generally and Sicilians particularly depicted in these ‘literary’ works purporting to represent southern-Italian American reality.
Virtually all the protestation comes from the Italian American prominenti and literati. The masses of southern-Italians to include the seventy percent with less than four years of college (per Census Dept. statistics) are generally not troubled by the media images; indeed enjoy them and mimic the dramatic behavior.
To my mind, it is truly a delicious irony, that the accolades poured upon the profoundly denigrating “Don Giovanni” comes from the same scholarly ‘class’ (not necessarily same individuals) of people who find Puzo et al. abhorrent.
In Conclusion:
Students of culture generally and Sicily particularly would be wise to take Plato admonition seriously: “Beware the Poets, Tragedians and Sophist (i.e. scholars) ”.
Which is not to say they are to be ignored. On the contrary, they are to be given very careful consideration: evaluating the truth of their posited empirical proposition and validity of their logical inferences. Don’t confuse eloquent and authoritatively expressed subjectivity with objectivity! The line between subjectivity and objectivity is very thin indeed, not always obvious and too easily crossed even by the finest of thinkers.
///
Postscript … Brancati’s “Eyes”
I found intriguing the repeat reference to “eyes” in Brancati’s narrative. I counted 73 times that the word appeared in 116 pages (on average: nearly once every page and a half). This is especially intriguing give the Sicilian tradition of malocchio.
DISCLAIMER: Posts published in i-Italy are intended to stimulate a debate in the Italian and Italian-American Community and sometimes deal with controversial issues. The Editors are not responsible for, nor necessarily in agreement with the views presented by individual contributors.
© ALL RIGHTS RESERVED - RIPRODUZIONE VIETATA.This work may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission.
Questo lavoro non può essere riprodotto, in tutto o in parte, senza permesso scritto.
Add a comment
-
This Blog
-
ABOUT THE AUTHOR
Most Commented
