Final remarks
An account of the work of a cultural foundation can have no conclusion. At numerous points in
this book it should be clear that I have been discussing a dynamic process of an institution which is
continuing its work and continuing to learn and enrich itself via its programmes.
To illustrate this I might point out that, when I was finishing the Italian version of this account,
in the winter of 1998-9, we were returning to the theme of regional finance, showing how the
system of transfers between individual Regions, and between the Regions as a whole and the central
state, had changed over the last few years. At the same time we were finishing the first stage of our
programme on Turin’s system of museums, and commencing a new programme on Eastern Europe
(focusing particularly on Russia); and we were taking a significant step forward in our dialogue
with the Islamic world by organizing an encounter with Iranian Shiite culture. All these are
developments of work I have described or mentioned in the book, which gives a fairly realistic idea
of the ongoing nature of the Foundation’s work – dynamic and flexible cultural reflection, oriented
towards policy concerns, organized in programmes, and operating on a day-to-day level as a
permanent “work site”.
However, a book has to come to an end, so I must close even though the Foundation has already
moved on, in its programmes and activities – even though, in other words, my account already has a
sequel in a number of public events we have organized, newspaper articles or books we have
published.
The book is divided into chronological periods: the Distant Past, the Recent Past, and the
Present. The distant past of the 1970s is genuinely remote – another age. Nonetheless, it might be
remarked that there is a strange circularity in “Italian time”. For a number of themes and problems –
such as the reform of the state and the question of how to reinforce the powers of decentralized
authorities – have never been solved over the decades, and still remain very much on the agenda.
However, one only obtains this impression that time might be circular if one restricts one’s view to
Italy. If we look outside, we cannot avoid the impression that the velocity of time has increased, and
has carried us an enormous distance from the 1970s.
In Part Four and Part Five of the book, I sought to describe how we at the Foundation saw this
great transformation, which first became noticeable at the end of the 1980s. I decided to signal this
change by making 1989 the beginning of the Foundation’s “Present”.
In 1989 I made the following comment, which I have already cited, but which I wish to restate:
“We are now at the watershed between two centuries. It has already been the case in Europe’s
history that the transition from one century to another has been of exceptional significance. We
might think, for example, of the closing years of the fifteenth century, and the first years of the
sixteenth (the discovery of America, the arrival of Europeans in the Far East, the broadening of the
horizons of European man, and the triumph of humanism). There are many signs that we are living
through similarly exceptional times at the turn of the twentieth and twenty-first centuries”1.
Events in the decade which followed my remark have confirmed the fact that these are, indeed,
exceptional times: evidence of transformation, and of the beginning of a new epoch, has become so
overwhelming as to constitute certainty. I wish to draw out the parallel I made with the end of the
15th century.
1
Marcello Pacini, “Perché XXI Secolo: raccontare le idee”, XXI Secolo, 1, (1), I, 1989, p. 2.
We currently find ourselves in a situation somewhat similar to that which followed the first great
voyages of exploration across the Atlantic. At that time Europeans knew that the island of
Hispaniola (Haiti) existed, along with a number of nearby islands, and they knew of the existence of
a few stretches of the coast of the Americas, such as Florida, Yucatan, and Brazil. Map-makers
were thus starting to draw the first outlines of a new world.
We are in a rather similar position vis-à-vis the twenty-first century – trying to interpret and
describe signs of the “new world” which is taking shape. We know little of this new world, but a
number of essential points are already clear – for example, the changed importance of “space”.
What is happening is the exact opposite of what happened in the 15th century. At that time, space
widened enormously, whereas today it is shrinking, almost to the extent of eliminating physical
distance. What will the consequences of this new spatial dimension be? In my view (as I have
already said), they will be no less revolutionary than those which we experienced at the end of the
15th century. We are currently beginning new voyages of discovery which will take us towards new
dimensions and towards cultural, scientific, social and economic realities which were until recently
quite unforeseen and un-foreseeable.
On the basis of this observation, I would like to say something about Italy, and its society and
culture. Fernand Braudel argues2 that the sidelining of Italy after the discovery of America (which is
usually considered the root of our country’s economic and political decline) was not an automatic
consequence of the shift of the most important sea routes away from the Mediterranean and towards
the Atlantic, but was rather a process which had cultural causes – the inability to formulate a new
project. As Braudel says, Genoa was no further from the New World than Amsterdam or Antwerp,
and if it had been capable of formulating a new cultural project it could have had a role as a great
power in the new 16th century geo-economy. Yet neither Genoa nor any other Italian city proved
itself capable of inventing a strategic project. For some time afterwards, Italy remained a land of
great culture, and continued to produce some exceptional intellectuals. But since no city or region
(the collective units of the time in Italy) was able to formulate a coherent project for the future, slow
but inexorable decline ensued.
The risk of decadence is a recurrent one, and one which becomes greater in the great passages
from one epoch to another, like that we are currently experiencing. Today, as in the sixteenth
century, the only adequate response is cultural adaptation and the formulation of a cultural project.
Today, as in the 16th century, the collective actors which need to find a response to changed
conditions are cities and regions. Naturally, similarities stop there, for the current situation is also
totally different: today cities and regions are situated within national states, which in turn make up
part of the European Union. We live inside a complex organizational structure – one which
sometimes involves hierarchically organized decisions and processes, but more often ones which
derive from competition and cooperation between local bodies taking their own decisions
independently. Coping with this complexity has become part of our conditions of existence.
I mentioned Braudel’s assessment of the causes of Italy’s decline in the epoch which school
textbooks call early modern history because it brings out the need to have a project which is
adequate to the new times. It raises a number of questions about Italy’s culture and politics,
regarding whether or not they are able to comprehend and grasp the new world which is taking
shape.
A culture is adequate to the times when it is able to formulate a project vis-à-vis the future, in
other words when it is long-sighted, able to set itself long-term objectives, yet at the same time
exercise firm, intelligent governance over processes which lead to the rational attainment of these
objectives. The experience which lies behind the story I have recounted permits me to end this book
by expressing the hope that Italy will very soon throw itself into formulating a project for its future,
and for how this future should be governed.
2
Fernand Braudel, “L'Italia fuori d'Italia. Due secoli e tre Italie” in Storia d'Italia, vol. II, Dalla caduta dell'Impero
romano al secolo XVIII, Turin, Einaudi, 1974, p. 2241.