In six parts
From "Ceneri di Gramsci" of Pasolini to
the historical sense of our age
We have always located in the first half of the past century our poets
known as "hermetics". Only one, Ungaretti with his poem "il
dolore", tries appear in the second half of century, i.e. in our age,
but without succeding to pass "the Rubicone".
I also thought that especially Ungaretti, who, like me, suffered from the
"regret of who stays", could sing my "insanity" . But
vain I thought because Ungaretti stopped to the door, not only of History,
but of Memory, that is inevitably produced by the regret.
"I ricordi, un inutile infinito" ("Memories, a vain
infinite") "Memories, sand without weight on the sand"
"…silent / the shout of deads is stronger"
Why "silent" ? The shout of deads is , for who stais, a piercing
barking of dogs which rebounds between the Galaxies because hangries,
rightly, of Memory and History.
We can conclude with "Roma occupata". In the general torment of
the town "unbearable the torment becomes between the brothers fury
and death ". Ungaretti thinks to be blasphemous because he reproaches
to Crist that his goodness has gone away too much".
And this is the born that Ungaretti don't succeed to pass.
Why he adresses himself to goodness of Crist and not to goodness of God ?
Jesus is always deading on the Cross and feels on the ground under his
feet the human, laic torment of His Mother because His Mother stays with
the real torment and for that She becomes the torment symbol of all
Jesus is always deading and addresses himself to God : "Father, why
You abandon me ?"
Ungaretti has not courage to adress himself to God. In front to God he
stays and makes a mistake of person. However Jesus and His Mother are in
the Memory and in the History as symbols of love and regret.
There is the reason for that Ungaretti doesnt't succeed to pass the "Rubicone".
We have put forward this brief note on Ungaretti in order to give a
signal of distinction between the first and the second part of century.
Ungaretti cannot confide to goodness of God , for "Ceneri di Gramsci"
and for "Generazione tradita" the Man enters in History as Ethic
subject up to revean the immortality of History.
There is it because we consider the last fifty years as "our age"
that surely shall continue for a long time.
For that reason we must see the cultural basis of this two poems.
Talk about History and Moral
The talk begins by adfirmation of Sartre " History needs to have a
crisis as well as Phisics and frees itself from hegelian and marxist
-By Hegel, in "the phenomenology of spirit" , History is
ended. Only so dialectic can achieve its synthesis and only on this point
History can be narrate. What he makes consequently.
-By Marx, we are not living History but a long Prehistory. Only a
Society without classes shall be able to begin the history of humanity.
-By Sartre there isn't one only dialectic, but several dialectics in
accordance with the ages . Today, for example, we have a continual
alternation " alienation / liberation/ new alienation and so on
without never to reach a synthesis.
History and Moral
Here also it is necessary to begin by the adfirmation of Sartre on the
interdependence of History and Moral.
Moral couldn't exist without History (that is philosophy in action ) and
History wouldn't have a sense without Moral (that is philosophy who moves
History, i.e. permit to it to exist). Consequently the Man gains a new
identity as subject at the same time historic and ethic.
-By Hegel the Man is at disposal of Ethic State and, achieved it,
vanishis himself in it. And that is possible because "history is
ended", i.e. it has reached its dialectic synthesis.
-By Marx the Man is the reflection of the social - economic structure.
Only in a society without classes he will be able to realize himself as
"total man", as Henri Lefebvre says. Here is it because today,
by Marx, we are living a long Prehistory.
-By Sartre the Man, all values and all absolute values fell ( the
" God is dead" of Nietzsche or the "If God is dead,
everything is possible" of Dostoevskij) has remained alone in front
to his own existence, that is freedom, and he can only create himself from
alienation ( "Here is not freedom without liberation") in order
to become an ethic subject, indipendent and responsible, i.e. the man of
our age, as we deduce from initial affirmation of Sartre . And
consequently, in order the ethic subject is good at getting out in the
History, Sartre says : "It is necessary historialize themselves to
become historic against historicity".
Historicity is history in action, partial, limited, without a complete
other words inauthentic.
Historialize themselves means to enter in the history in order to make it.
a book can only be a historic fact for an authentic history,
It is necessary again never forget that History, because it is moved by
subjectivism can be as the truth, only subjective. History "objective"
exist , is inuthentic. Here is it because the ethic subject only can enter
history and stay authentic. As aristotelic "Etos which precedes
From "Ceneri di Gramsci" of Pasolini to our "Generazione
-Pasolini, in "Ceneri di Gramsci" is absolutely conscient of
crisis of History and describes it perfectly. But his conclusion is
problematic. He is conscient that life is only into History but, he asks
to himself, how he could live in the History if he is also conscient that
History is ended ? The crisis of History is clear.
-"La generazione tradita" has overcome such a problematic, and
also the same History's crisis, discovering, troughout the grief which is
the basis of the historical memory, that History is the sole possible
immortality for the man in the world. Up to sun will be estinguished.
For that it results overcome the historical absolute of Hegel and the
prehistorical absolute of Marx
-In addition, and as a matter of fact, the "Generazione
tradita", after historical suffering made of alienation/liberation/new
alienation without end but that shall discover the History's immortality,
is obliged to face the moral reflection, another kind of suffering (i.e.
of individual conscience) not less painful than History's one, in order to
reach Creation, i.e. the capacity of the man to create himself and the
world. And here is it from the live flesh of protagonists to born
concretely the man as ethic subject, i.e. the man of our age, who shall
aim at eternal Myth of interior youth as an announcement of History
-Also the moral of Pasolini aim at a Myth: that of primordial innocence of
man. He looks for it in the under-proletary of the suburbs, in the
sub-culture of arab tales or of christian pilgrinages, in the
incontrollable ingenuousness of Christ where the pain is deep and deeply
concrete and earthly of Virgin Mary on feet of the Cross (maybe the
highest lyric image of Pasolini), besides in the archaic legends of our
-I don't find any difference between the Myth of primordial innocence of
Pasolini and the eternal Myth of interior Youth of the "Generazione
Both express ethic subject as man of our age.
Poetry of our age
By these notes we have estabilished the structural basis of our age's
Ungaretti closes the first half century, Pasolini opens the new age and we
have signed the road until a new age else will appear in the History. As a
matter of fact, only by "Generation betrayed" history of our age
Anybody will be allowed to strengthen such a structure if every poem has
itself philosophy, i.e. Ethic, of our age. World and humanity need poetry,
not linguistic plays.