All fresh starts seem to remind us of the cyclical attributes of life, of its ability to renew itself, to heal anything, to offer something fresh. Hard times? Sour lemons? Slim pickings on a record-dry season? It is always possible to look forward to the seeding and harvesting of the ensuing season. We are, after all, a resilient kind, a kind unabashed by slick envelopes unsubstantiated by quality. In other words, we know good dough from bad. So, by this metaphor, let’s say that you are watching someone without experience trying to bake a pizza. You may stop them on their tracks and show them how it is done, or, if you harbor a Zen spirit within, you may let them experiment with it, until they can dish a decent one out. Granted, they will burn their fingers, produce hundreds of half-baked ones and burn a few too, hopefully not poison in the process some willing customers. But one thing never changes. Knowledge is acquired with great personal effort. When missing, it cannot be procured vicariously or by association. You cannot claim political influence by knowing a few movers and shakers, or for that matter culinary expertise by the fact that you can eat, or spiritualism by the fact that you indulge in spirits. The fact is, we Southerners are well adept at speaking in metaphors and carving jokes out of uneasy situations. Today’s theme is the pursuit and promotion of culture. This article attempts to describe what you may do and not do with the dough. After all, we like our pizza just right!
Culture is a broad term, so broad it can be confusing, vague, even tricky. Civilization, traditions, ethnicity, way of life, cultivation, even some commerce, all spell out culture. Culinary art is culture, and so is fashion. They are all expressions of who we are. But since almost anything can be cultural, or comprise a cultural side, I suggest to narrow down on two aspects of culture: the appeal of certain lifestyles and the pursuit of culture intended as personal improvement, as cultivation of the spirit. This narrower field sounds more in line with the civil pursuit of our club.
The reason culture is the theme of this editorial is because the difference between culture used as an instrument and culture intended as a goal can be so subtle that it may pass undetected under the radar of the most vigilant observers. Culture is often used as a façade; more often than you would expect. What prompted this topic is occasional, but the meaning of this debate goes well beyond anyone’s faux pas.
Culture is the backbone of society, culture opens doors; culture gives status, clout and credibility to any program, hypothesis or affirmation. Culture is the perfect companion for the lonely, a sure cure against all kinds of depression. Culture grants you support to no end. It is so flexible and pliable, so democratic, that it bends to become a frontage for those who have little of their own. Buy a slick encyclopedia, put it on display, and it looks like you might have actually read it. Make sure you are seen in the company of great artists and you may look like a philanthropist, even if you can’t define what art is. Just move that copy of People or Cosmopolitan from the coffee table – you silly!
Those who appreciate culture for what it is, do not make a big display of it and show deference to anyone who promotes it. People who appreciate culture at a deep level identify with their culture to the point of no distinction. Conversely, people who don’t understand culture think of it as an ornament or as a grocery. This phenomenon is very common in the art world, where some “improperly called” collectors may buy a canvas to match the color of their couch, or would do anything to acquire a piece of a promiscuous artist like Herb Ritts, simply because such and such Hollywood actors has it. People would do anything to appear cultured, and I mean anything. This is a world where the uncultivated and ambitious think that they can buy an education overnight. But being cultivated, and I mean at any level, from modest to encyclopedic, works like class: it takes generations to foster it, develop it, and understand it. But the ambitious kind does not have time, when a lifetime is not enough. They have an agenda, and the agenda is now. This is the way culture is often acquire, rather than through slow absorption. But when someone finally gets it, culture allows them to understand and enjoy the subtleties of humanity, which assures a lifetime’s immunity from nonsense and from the nobilized idiots, of which the world is so full.
Fortunately, culture itself is resilient. It takes a lot of beating, and when opposed, bashed or harnessed by less-than-ethical purposes, it goes underground like a cicada, only to re-emerge, several years after, with brand new wings and a desire to sing. Culture cannot be exactly co-opted, but it can be greatly damaged by the wrong political association. This is a good reason to keep a healthy degree of separation between culture and politics.
Culture is fragile and can be destroyed by inference and divisions. You can look at the tragic split between Middle East religious factions (Fatah and Hamas) to understand why culture may not survive the interference of religion, politics and self-interest. This example is a bit extreme, but it may suggest why making culture an instrument of division is so foreign to culture itself. It is self-defeating and ultimately destructive. The reason why some individuals decide to use culture as a boundary marker is elusive to my mind. Jesse Helms was one of these deviant reformist. An obscure figure, he worked in the Reagan administration as art commissioner and did more damage to the arts in the 80’s and 90’s than the Nazis in the 30’s. Robbie Conal, a witty L.A. guerrilla artist, dubbed him “artificial art-official”, condensing in one word why art promotion cannot be fabricated.
I would argue whether cultural promotion belongs at all to the political arena. Political interest, intended as group interest, may be an inevitable occasional host of culture, but the objectives of politicians are all but cultural, unless we want to bend corporate interests into culturally driven activities. Let’s be honest here, there is no candid political agenda, not with the near school-dropouts that get elected nowadays.You understand why the natural repository of culture must remain with the Academies and the Cultural Institutes, the traditional custodians of culture. The reason of their institution was that the pursuit of a noble social and humanist agenda has always been at odds with the individualism and self-interest that runs in the political arena. In addition, most politicians tend to be unsophisticated and not particularly well read and, although some people may choose them as their leaders, it remains an oddity that they are entitled to draft policies and represent any nation’s culture, which are tasks that belong to a far more learned class of experts and specialists.
Before anyone launches itself into disputing this position and lands on some hard pavement, without parachute, I recommend one quick look at the U.S. Constitution’s First Amendment on the interferences of government. There you have your answer in plain language. Culture is, after all, in the hands of individuals like us, who wonder what difference a conversation with a friend can make, what shift one may determine by voicing an opinion.
In my mind, highly politicized cultural policies (any tainted cultural campaign, like that obtuse attempt to clear school textbooks from Darwinian content) equate to control and brainwashing. There is no reason to control culture. These attitudes belong to religion fanatics and to those frustrated populations of the world whose vision of society is a battlefield. But in a modern, civil society there is no place for tactics where “those who do not think like me” are out. The readers who know me have already guessed the greater referent of this criticism. I spare no occasion to state what a disgrace he is. Unfortunately absurdity has a certain appeal to small minds. But to the learned and the wise, culture is the crown of civilization, the miracle of amazing humanistic achievements in the midst of nonsense, the free-flight in spite of the common limitations of society, its self-interest, its feeding frenzy, its hunger for a petty material return, or a stupid throne.
Of course, at the small scale of our club, the definition of cultural goals consists primarily in the contemplation of whatever good deeds civilization has brought forth. It also depends entirely on our reach, which in turn, goes hand in hand with our budget. I don’t mean to shift into materialism, but programs cannot be made without funds. For some, cultural enjoyment may depend on their ability to treasure a few hours of genuine Italian atmosphere. And in this precise discern, Ciancia represents a side of culture, which is hard to capture and encapsulate in words. Our club is non prescriptive, though it remains highly descriptive of what culture truly is, a soothing body of common character, yet the place of wonder and surprise. You may want to take a look at this month’s article by our new member Christina Wood, where she describes the distinctive pleasures of a Ciancia meeting, identifying its close proximity to an atmosphere, lifestyle and philosophy one would have to travel to experience.
In the end, you may make of culture what you fancy. After all, culture allows any uses and interpretations of its core concept. Yet, I urge you to consider that in modern society, the role of the press and, more broadly, the role of opinion is that of guardianship of our most treasured values. Remember that First Amendment, a beacon of reason in the face of all obscurantism. I am yours respectfully. Giancarlo Pirrone