![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
d'Annunzio notes
Dec. 4th, 2015 02:11 pmAn article by me about Gabriele d'Annunzio just went up at Atlas Obscura. It's fair to say the article doesn't do him justice, due to word count restrictions, partly because he was a tremendously strange person, partly because his sexual appetite is hard to wrap your head around (and not appropriate for all readers), and partly because it's hard to convey how incredibly famous he was during his lifetime. I don't think there's anyone equivalent now.
However, what's really strange to me is the difference in perception between Italians and English-speakers. Even though Lucy Hughes-Hallett wrote a wildly-celebrated biography of him a couple years back, I don't think most Americans have ever heard of him, not even the kinds of Americans who cherish oddballs and weird history. And he was a tremendously, tremendously significant historical figure, and tremendously, tremendously flamboyant. You could write a dozen dissertations about him without needing to overlap.
Italians, meanwhile, have heard of him, especially in Abruzzo, where he's from, but don't understand why non-Italians keep reductively obsessing over the fact that he invented the core tenets and pageantry of Fascism. It's like if every time you brought up McCarthyism, somebody winced and said "God, why does everybody focus on the red scare stuff, as though he didn't also try to make sure Pepsi was readily available." Or: "Look, quit it with the Tate-LaBianca stuff, we all know Charles Manson's true cultural importance was his folk music."
I mean, Italians, I get it: he did write a lot of poems, plays, operas, novels, sleep with a ton of extremely famous women, and build a truly amazing house, and I would plausibly find any of that interesting even without the fascism. But because the fascism is there: yes, I'm afraid I'm always going to primarily think of him as a guy who ran a pirate state where he maybe thought it was a great idea to feed political opponents laxatives and then tie them up in burlap bags until they shit themselves to death.
However, what's really strange to me is the difference in perception between Italians and English-speakers. Even though Lucy Hughes-Hallett wrote a wildly-celebrated biography of him a couple years back, I don't think most Americans have ever heard of him, not even the kinds of Americans who cherish oddballs and weird history. And he was a tremendously, tremendously significant historical figure, and tremendously, tremendously flamboyant. You could write a dozen dissertations about him without needing to overlap.
Italians, meanwhile, have heard of him, especially in Abruzzo, where he's from, but don't understand why non-Italians keep reductively obsessing over the fact that he invented the core tenets and pageantry of Fascism. It's like if every time you brought up McCarthyism, somebody winced and said "God, why does everybody focus on the red scare stuff, as though he didn't also try to make sure Pepsi was readily available." Or: "Look, quit it with the Tate-LaBianca stuff, we all know Charles Manson's true cultural importance was his folk music."
I mean, Italians, I get it: he did write a lot of poems, plays, operas, novels, sleep with a ton of extremely famous women, and build a truly amazing house, and I would plausibly find any of that interesting even without the fascism. But because the fascism is there: yes, I'm afraid I'm always going to primarily think of him as a guy who ran a pirate state where he maybe thought it was a great idea to feed political opponents laxatives and then tie them up in burlap bags until they shit themselves to death.
