Sollers’s cigarette, thrust into his ivory cigarette holder, shines in the darkness.
And yet there is a difference between the situation today and Gramsci’s era. Today we no longer live under the threat of fascism. Fascism is already established in the heart of the government. It writhes there like larvae. Fascism is no longer the catastrophic consequence of a state in crisis and a dominant class that has lost control of the masses. It is no longer the sanction of the ruling class but its insidious recourse, its extension, designed to contain the advance of progressive forces. This is no longer a fascism supported openly but a slinking, shadowy, ashamed fascism, a fascism not of soldiers but shifty politicians, not a party of youth but a fascism of old people, a fascism of secret, dubious sects made up of aging spies in the pay of racist bosses who want to preserve the status quo but who are suffocating Italy inside a deadly cocoon. It is the cousin who makes embarrassing jokes during dinner but who we still invite to family meals. It is no longer Mussolini, it is the Freemasons of Propaganda Due.
There are boos from the audience. The young Apulian need only wrap up now: Incapable of imposing itself completely, but sufficiently established in every echelon of the state machinery to prevent any change in government (he wisely says nothing about the historic compromise), fascism in its larval form is no longer the menace hovering over a never-ending crisis, but is the very condition of that crisis’s permanence. The crisis that has mired Italy for years will be resolved only when fascism is eradicated from the state. And for that, he says, raising his fist, “la lotta continua!”
Applause.
Although his opponent will offer a strong defense of the négrienne idea that the crisis is no longer a passing or possibly cyclical moment, the product of a dysfunctional or exhausted system, but the necessary engine of a mutant, polymorphic capitalism obliged to keep moving forward in order to regenerate, to find new markets and keep the workforce under pressure, citing as evidence the election of Thatcher and the imminent election of Reagan, he will be defeated by two votes to one. In the audience’s opinion, the two duelists will have put on a high-quality show, justifying their rank of dialectician (the fourth of the seven levels). But the young Apulian will certainly have drawn some advantage from speaking against fascism.
It’s the same thing for the next duel: “Cattolicesimo e marxismo.” (A great Italian classic.)
The first duelist talks about Saint Francis of Assisi, about mendicant orders, about Pasolini’s The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, about worker priests, about liberation theology in South America, about Christ driving the money changers from the temple, and concludes by making Jesus the first authentic Marxist-Leninist.
Uproar in the amphitheater. Bianca applauds noisily. The scarf gang lights a joint. Stefano uncorks a bottle that he brought with him just in case.
The second duelist can talk all he likes about the opium of the people, about Franco and the Spanish Civil War, about Pius XII and Hitler, about the collusion between the Vatican and the Mafia, about the Inquisition, about the Counter-Reformation, about the Crusades as a perfect example of an imperialist war, about the trials of Jan Hus, Bruno, and Galileo. But it’s hopeless. The audience is impassioned. Everyone gets to their feet and starts singing “Bella Ciao,” even though this has no connection with anything. With the crowd fully behind him, the first duelist wins by three votes to zero, but I wonder if Bifo was entirely convinced. Bianca sings her heart out. Simon watches her in profile as she sings, fascinated by the supple, mobile features of her radiant face. (He thinks she looks like Claudia Cardinale.) Enzo and the student sing. Luciano and his mother sing. Antonioni and Monica Vitti sing. Sollers sings. Bayard and BHL try to figure out the words.
The next duel pits a young woman against an older man; the question is about soccer and the class struggle; Bianca explains to Simon that the country has been rocked by “Totonero,” a match-fixing scandal involving the players of Juventus, Lazio, Perugia … and also Bologna.
Once more, against all expectations, it is the young woman who wins by defending the idea that the players are proletarians like other workers and that the club bosses are stealing their hard work.
Bianca explains to Simon that the national team’s young striker, Paolo Rossi, was suspended for three years following the match-fixing scandal, meaning that he will not be able to play in the World Cup in Spain. Tough shit for him, says Bianca, he refused a transfer to Napoli. Simon asks why. Bianca sighs. Napoli is too poor; it can’t compete with the biggest clubs. No great player will ever go to Napoli.
Strange country, thinks Simon.
The night wears on, and the time is come for the digital duel. The silence of the statues—Gallienus, Hippocrates, the Italian anatomists, the flayed men, and the woman on the tray—contrasts with the agitation of the living. People smoke, drink, chat, eat picnics.
Bifo summons the duelists. A dialectician is challenging a peripatetician.
A man takes his place next to the dissecting table. It’s Antonioni. Simon observes Monica Vitti, wrapped up in a delicately patterned gauze scarf, as she stares lovingly at the great director.
And facing him, stiff-backed and severe with her immaculate bun, Luciano’s mother walks down the steps to the dissecting table.
Simon and Bayard look at each other. They look at Enzo and Bianca: they also seem surprised.
Bifo draws the subject: “Gli intellettuali e il potere.” Intellectuals and power.
It is the prerogative of the lower-ranked player to begin—the dialectician.
In order for the subject to be discussed, it is up to the first duelist to problematize it. In this case, that’s easy to work out: Are intellectuals the enemies or the allies of those in power? It’s simply a question of choosing. For or against? Antonioni decides to criticize the caste to which he belongs, the caste that fills the amphitheater. Intellectuals as accomplices with those in power. Così sia.
Intellectuals: functionaries of the superstructures that participate in the construction of the hegemony. So, Gramsci again: all men are intellectuals, true, but not all men serve the function of intellectuals in society, which consists in working for the spontaneous consent of the masses. Whether “organic” or “traditional,” the intellectual always belongs to an “economic-corporative” logic. Organic or traditional, he is always in the service of those in power, present, past, or future.
The salvation of the intellectual, according to Gramsci? Becoming one with the Party. Antonioni laughs sardonically. But the Communist Party itself is so corrupt! How could it provide redemption for anyone these days? Compromesso storico, sto cazzo! Compromise leads to compromised principles.
The subversive intellectual? Ma fammi il piacere! He recites a phrase from another man’s film: “Think about what Suetonius did for the Caesars! You start with the ambition to denounce something and you end up an accomplice.”
Theatrical bow.
Prolonged applause.
It’s the old lady’s turn to speak.
“Io so.”