cultura italiana
/
Appendix 1. “Prerogatives” and guidelines of the organization

Appendix 1. “Prerogatives” and guidelines of the organization

By the word “prerogatives” are meant the qualities as well as the characteristics of the organization: the name (Institute of italian culture); the headquarters (Lado Asatiani st. 6); the members and their specific period of office; the character of the organization: it is a cultural organization. The organization is formally independent by its members (it remains active along the natural succession of them) and nevertheless, since it is understood that they constitute a determining part of it, they have to be considered, and especially the figure of the director, qualities of this organization, which yet can change over time: it is therefore required a “congruity” in such succession or alternation in compliance with the purposes, guidelines, and prerogative of the organization. Also, while the organization maintains a formal autonomy from its members, each of them is called to take any responsibility on behalf of it, which, as an “abstract entity”, or cannot respond in place of its members [cannot be answerable for its members], or it should not. The headquarters of the organization may change over time, as well as to be actually different. However, likewise, this variation must take into account the original choice of Lado Asatiani 6, II floor. It is an “old style” building, within an area of the city not chaotic nor overly modern: in short, it is in the historic center, in a building albeit old, prestigious. There is a quite big salon, the furniture is of “antique trade”. It will be set up, insofar as possible, a library. It will be desks and chairs for meetings and gatherings, and perhaps a projector, to be used only as a complement of presentations, not of course as unique “actor”. Among the qualities of the organization are also included the characteristics of its members: they must be numbered especially among scholars, where, nevertheless, the academic qualification can be put in the background against personal qualities as well as a demonstrable work, of scientific type, out of the ordinary: it will also taken into account, however, that the demonstrability of a scientific work of this kind is often a consequence of the legal title of study, and in short of a certain academic status, and therefore it will be considered in turn of secondary importance compared to an activity, realized in the “social” field, especially important and worthy of admiration, in view of the change or better said, the social improvement that the organization hopes and aims: see the article 2 of this charter about it, as well as the appendix 2, to be found in a public version of it, deliberately presented in italian language, as first product and literary example of such organization.

Some guidelines of the organization will be: a) the deep knowledge of the tools and instruments which will be used, so to be, in such a way, masters of it, and especially so that the contents realized through them will maintain an explicit and conscious autonomy. In absence of such knowledge the users will be encouraged to do without them. b) (which is a corollary of the first) The minimization of the use of intellectual products of third parties, specifically where similar goals, also if not in a similar way or grade, can be achieved using, instead, products of the own intellectual application, study, and work. This especially applies, but is not limited, to the software used by the Institute: insofar as is possible, every member of it will use and produce proprietary software to perform the required ordinary tasks: like to take care of communications toward the outside through internet, to promote the Institute and its activities and ideas, to typeset documents, and so on. All the members of the Institutee are called to not use, in an explicit and firm way, any platform providing “social” features, which is not strictly related and in turn produced, in an autonomous way, by the immediate and concrete surrounding space and individuals: this is of course strictly related to the “social” commitment of the Institute and part of its cultural mission. c) To teach and to “revive” history, literature (specifically through a philological and erudite approach) and philosophy, without to kill, at the same time, the present creativity: the maxim of Terentius “Nullum est iam dictum, quod non dictum sit prius” is of course to be considered, by contrast to its literal meaning, as an admonition toward an audience too “worldly-wise”. Please read, indeed, the successive verses: “Quare aequum est vos cognoscere et ignoscere / Quae veteres factitârunt, si faciunt novi” (In Eunuchum, Prologus vv. 42-43). Therefore, history, philosophy and literature will be read for the contribution they can give to the present, and in the great men and their actions we'll read their life example. By this perspective, for instance, their biography should not serve to explain their work (which is of course a “miracle” and fruit of freedom and not of its opposite) but to indicate us the optimal solution in front of difficult, sometimes dramatic, situations: Socrates has deliberately chosen not to escape from prison, and to drink the hemlock; Alan Turing, once he understood his sort, did the same. And so on. The best examples of the human soul must constantly show us the way, and they inform us about the solution of awfully difficult problems to which the ordinary people are not able to provide appropriate answers: in such a way that the resulting world is so prosaic and unfair (and certainly they are not learning from history). Likewise, the works of such men will be read as the best “positive” thing they could have done in their specific world [in their scope], so that we'll look in a special way at the specific audience and at the intended [desired] effects of them, since, as mr Shakespeare well states, a work is a consequence of its audience (see the dedication to the count of Southampton in front of the epos Lucretia). d) Of course the Institute is called to “highlight” the history of literature, of philosophy, and of the history tout court, in order to bring back to light characters, events, and works which the “mainstream” history has put, for accidental reasons, in the background, and which on the contrary deserve the maximum attention [and to which on the contrary must be given the maximum attention]. For instance, Marco Tizi, genial commentator of “il Giorno” of Giuseppe Parini, died at a young age for a futile incident; and Marcello Palingenio Stellato, author of the “disruptive” poem Zodiacus vitae and inspirer of Shakespeare himself, who read it at school (probably from a suggestion of [for an influence from] Einrich Bullinger, the successor of Zwingli in Zurich) remained unknown due to his social exclusion, and of course, after his death (also due to such marginalization), for the prohibition of Censorship.  Our Institute, in a certain sense, wish to “rewrite the history” in a genuine way: in the sense, that is, to give to each action and man, insofar as is possible, their authentic weight and value, once that Case and Contingency have been taken away from our judgment and consideration. Is Marcello Palingenio Stellato really a “minor author” or our judgment is influenced by his amount of success into history? Likewise stated within the guidelines for the choose of our members (the academic status is such to influence, and of course to generate in a self-referential way, a scientific baggage of publications) the Institute is aware that this lack of “historic” success is such to degrade the work itself of the author, and therefore we'll act consequently: we'll consider primarily the “spirit” of these men and works and their “final” intentions; the beauty of their voice; the purity and originality of their feelings – and on the contrary we'll condemn as wicked some works and authors widely accepted and venerated for opposite reasons, that is for an equally uncritical adherence to history. What is the prejudice? The inability to see that the fate acts in a substantial way. What is the independence of judgment, and the freedom in the vision? The benevolence to give back to others what was missing to them, and then to admire them as such. We don't know what Marco Tizi would have done if he survived longer, nor we want to argue it [to infer it]. Nevertheless we'll take in the greatest possible consideration his work, as premonitory of a work which we are missing: in such a way that, for this reason, we are of course worst. e) The Institute of italian culture wants to propose a cultural offer “across the board”. We do not believe to the separation between public and private life; between work-time and free time (thus, at bottom, between, otium and negotium). We believe that human kind is “a whole” and we'll set our offer according to this. The Institute will therefore adopt a “work time” able to cover as well as the leisure or entertainment time, with the related activities. We'll not encourage, during this alternation, any disruption by the “cultural behavior” or approach, and, in short, at sundown, we'll not start doing things which not only are not related to the culture (that is to what is professed during the day) in no way, but they are in contrast with it. We are speaking, of course, of any habit or behavior, but also thinking, which is not in some way original, “intellectual” (that is done in consideration of a theory of which not only we can give a reason, but which is attributable specifically to us, and therefore which makes ourselves really master of our actions, and therefore really free in adopting them [it]). We speak of course about any everyday activity: the acquisition of information; the use of money; the use of technological instruments and tools; the use of means of transport, and so on. Of course the aim of the Institute of italian culture, through workshops, debates, and through history, philosophy, literature, is to make understand people that this world do not belong to each of us, and that, without a complete reform of the prerogatives themselves of the human being, the ideals of justice, beauty, freedom, and so on, cannot be reached. We hope for a deep reform of the habit, of behavior, of life-style of man, and our “sworn” enemies are the division of the works, on one side, and the collective behavior, on the other. In a certain way, we wish to enclose each man within his own “world” of abilities, since out of them ... there are the territories of the irrational, which nowadays has conquered the world. − By a practical point of view, the “formative” and cultural offer of the Institute of italian culture, is continuous, and covers all the aspects of the daily life. As stated in the article 3 the use of “food and drinks” must also be covered by the “intellectuality” of the Institute, and we'll propose over time a specific “statute” or guidelines about this, of course contemplating, but not limited to, the elimination from the diet of, specifically, meat and sugar: the first for obvious reasons (“animals” are living being exactly like us, and our “cultural” convictions of a difference belong to those measures that every species of animal adopt with the very practical aim, to reduce into food the species more congenial to them), and the second, since specifically the refined sugar acts like a real drug on our body and mind, in such a way that of course should be prohibited by law. Also the eating of meat of other species should be, primarily, “prohibited by law” (which is of course against nature, but the only way by which man could actually be said different from “animals”) and the Institute of italian culture will perform specific initiatives in order to achieve this, which is of course within the reach of the new generations, as well as of the our, if only we get to work in this direction. Nevertheless, the use of meat is not only a “bad habit”, but a crime, in addition to be an a horror of the worst kind − a nightmare, if only we realize it for a moment − and therefore we'll try to move in this direction in a urgent and effective way. f) Finally − provided that these guidelines have not to be considered exhaustive, but as an example and a guidance for a further elaboration of them, to be carried out by the current director − every expression addressed to some audience, performed within the Institute of italian culture, should be accomplished in a structured, exemplar, and original way, and should contain some element of novelty.

  1. ^ For all related information I allow myself to quote my work, Tommaso de Vivo, “La fortuna europea dello Zodiacus vitae di Marcello Palingenio Stellato”, Florence 2014 (Phd thesis).