Opening cultural places can be done. But who really wants it?

The issue of the closure of cultural venues because of Covid-19 is very complicated. First of all, there are reasons that are “external” to the cultural world and that make one cringe, but which should prompt the average citizen to do some self-criticism: in fact, it would seem that the “philosophy” that has dictated, in the last two governments, the measures to contain the virus, has been not so much related to the actual dangerousness of the activity, but to the indiscipline and poor civic sense of Italians. In short: Conte first and Draghi now seem to want to limit not so much the “dangerous” activities, but those that might justify in citizens an uncaring behavior. After all, the proof is in the closing of clothing stores (usually deserted except during end-of-season sales) that remain closed, compared to bars that can stay open but only with take-out (so everyone out drinking coffee standing without a mask fifty centimeters away). Based on this first observation, museums and theaters, in the eyes of government, should not necessarily be “dangerous” but can be a justification for movements in the territory that are instead dangerous.

Another consideration is related to the output of a well-known “intellectual and sociologist” who asserted that “with culture you cannot eat.” But as opinions pulverize in the face of mathematics, putting two and two together, it would seem that Italy is crying for the lack of the tourism and culture industry. Of that certain snobbery that spewed improprieties about mass tourism (but lavishly feasted on it), there are only a few tinny, muted echoes left. Behind the controversy of the halt to cultural activities in fact, the bulk of the “flab” is not so much given by the alleged need for culture as by an actual need for work: there is an army of employees of that world who are literally starving in relative (if not total) indifference. Here we also open the painful parenthesis of precarious, undeclared, black labor, which involves the sector and which, inevitably, will not enjoy any kind of relief ... but that’s another story.

Distancing at the Duse Theater in Bologna (October 2020).

A further consideration prompts me to reflect on who really wants to reopen cultural venues. Let’s start with “cultural enterprises”: many of them, without mass tourism, would go into loss. Under the closure regime, between special layoffs, contributions and reduced expenses, they could greatly limit their losses, having a real hope of survival. Working at 15 or 20 percent of turnover while maintaining the same level of services would mean mathematical death.

What about the workers? Have you ever wondered how many cultural services workers are willing to work and under what conditions? Well, from my own experience, I can tell you that not only are museums safe, but they have implemented extremely expensive protocols in the face of dramatically reduced revenues. There is a very strong pressure on unions related to the (legitimate) fear of working in public services during a pandemic.

One last thought I want to devote to “comparisons” between different realities. I preface that this last consideration arises, fundamentally, from the invitation (which I want to share) to stop producing hatred toward “others,” especially at this time. Again, the discourse can be very broad, but I limit my thoughts to a theme that is very popular on social media: why open churches and closed cinemas? I would start by saying that perhaps one could enforce just the opening of churches to show, data in hand, that cinemas, theaters, concert halls, could stay open. Of course church attendance is much lower and it is easier to sanitize a wooden pew than a velvet chair (so much so that some trade associations have said they would never open under these conditions!) but perhaps something can be done. I also believe in a substantial discord between artists and technicians in the entertainment world and impresarios (and, with due distinction, in the parallel world of museums and libraries): the need to express oneself artistically, the need to work, or the need to make ends meet, cannot function under the same conditions.

I throw in the towel: I don’t have a solution or an idea of a solution. But I don’t see big risks in “cultural places,” and I believe that we can and should start again: with a little courage on the part of some, with a little care on the part of others, and with a high sense of civic duty on the part of all of us.

Warning: the translation into English of the original Italian article was created using automatic tools. We undertake to review all articles, but we do not guarantee the total absence of inaccuracies in the translation due to the program. You can find the original by clicking on the ITA button. If you find any mistake,please contact us.