Moscow: Open City

An uncommon comparison of Italian nNeorealism and the Soviet cCinema of the Thaw.

In modern times, Man lost every heroic feeling pertaining to life. We must give it back to him, for Man is a hero. Every man is a hero. The everyday struggle is an heroic struggle. To describe this we need to start from the bottom... Roberto Rossellini1 The eye of the film director is like a mirror that reflects an image. Directors, like poets, might have inside them a reflector (observation) and a condenser (commotionemotion). They are after life, the meaning that makes life existing. I never had the presumption of being a director. Vittorio De Sica2

A necessary introduction: What is Reality? In this essay, I will be talking abou This essay will be dealing with t cinema. Cinema is a dynamic representation of reality. It is an attempt to recreate reality by means of images and sounds: it is a simulation of our multi- sensorial interaction with the external world, limited to the senses of vision and hearing. The French critic Andre Bazin wrote a beautiful very intelligent essay with the title What is Cinema?. In this introduction, I decidedThe purpose of this introduction to take a step back and attempt to provide an accurate definition of what reality actually is, before moving onto my main topic. What we usually call reality is the external world, with which we are in constant interaction.
1 2

G.. Rondolino, Roberto Rossellini, L'Unita'/Il Castoro, 1995, p. 11. Franco Pecori, Vittorio De Sica, LUnita/Il Castoro, 1995, p. 24.

Since we all live on the same planet, we may all therefore agree on the fact that this external world is the same for every one of us. Obviously, people live in different places and have to deal with different circumstances, but in essence we all interact with the same external matter. To explain this concept, I will make use of a simple example.A simple example will clarify this concept. When Person A looks at an object, let us say a car, that person is processing information from the external world through their five senses (Visual, Audio, Kinaesthetic, Olfactory, Taste). Once the information is received through the senses, Person A's brain performs three main operations: deletion, distortion and generalization. All these operations are performed by the mind in order to be able to deal with the incoming information without being overwhelmed or overloaded. Cancellation is performed to select the relevant information and delete the superfluous. Without this process, the mind would be driven crazy by the tremendous amount of information processed by the senses at any given moment. Distortion is performed in order to transform the external reality into a compatible format that can be understood and elaborated by our brain. This is because the whole of reality would simply not physically fit into our mind,mind; it needs to be somehow adapted. Lastly, generalization is a process that prevents our mind to learn new notions or abilities from scratchanew each timeevery single time. In our example, this is what allows Person A to identify the external object as a car and to extend that definition to all other similar objects. If we see a particular car on the street for the very first time in our lives, we are able to tell that that object can be identified as a car, even if that is the first time that we actually see that particular vehicle. At the end of this process, what we have in Person A's mind is a virtual representation of the external world, that has been filtered, distorted and adapted. The interesting thing is that when Person A talks to another Person B about the car (reality), what they are actually talking about is their representation of the car, not the car itself. And when the information leaves Person A, all the three processes are performed again, it passes through Person A's senses, then Person B's senses, then again processed (cancellation, generalization, distortion) and eventually reaches Person B's brain. As a result, a new virtual representation of reality is created in Person B's mind, which differs both from Person A's representation and the car (reality) itself. The consequences of this discovery have a tremendous impact on our definition of reality,, for when we one talks about reality what we they are actually doing is confronting our their own personal representations of reality, which differ significantly from reality itself. 3
3

R. Bandler, J. Grinder, The Structure of Magic, Science And Behaviours Books, California, 1975, p. 92.

This brief clarification, which comes from a personal interest in Neurology, will prove useful since this essay will be dealing with I believe thatd it will proveas useful to have madke this brief clarification, which derivescomes from amy personal interest in Nneurology, since in this essay I will'll be talking about Italian neorneorealism and Soviet Ccinema of the Thaw years, where the world reality assumes different meanings in different contexts. Critics of nneorneorealism often talk about the filmmakers' ability to be able to represent reality as it is, without any sort of manipulative intervention. Especially in under the light of the above, this is clearly is an impossible task because -, as previouslywe asserted -, we ourselves distort reality whilste we interact with it: we create our own representation that functions as our personal guidance to interact with the external world. Everything, even the absence of overtly- manipulative montage or a particular kind of photography, is a distortion of the external reality, made with a precise goal in mind. Neor. Neorealists repeatedly admitted this: their intention was rather to show, to provide access to a reality thatwhich was being ignored or was simply unknown. OneWe, as a viewers, must be really careful to distinguish between reality and the actual content of a movie. MEven more importantly, between Content and Form, for it is impossible not possible to have only Content alone: Content must be adapted and formatted through Form in order to be understood and communicated to someone. The choice of Form is a necessary choice, as Basin wrote in his famous renowned essay : this choice sets up a contradiction which is at once unacceptable and necessary: necessary because art can only exist when such a choice is made. Without it, supposing total cinema was here and now technically possible, we would go back purely to reality.4 At this point, we one might be mislead and think that, since the individualevery single person creates histheir own representation of reality, there canould be no such thing as objectivity in reality. On the one hand, this is perfectly true. In 1971, Roberto Rossellini, speakingtalking onabout neorneorealism, stated during made this statement in an interview that: tThe moral position was to observe things with objectivity and to pull together the elements of which things were made, without trying to add any sort of judgement. Because things, in themselves, carry their own judgement5. SinceIf we agree on the fact that every single one of us involuntarily distorts the external reality, and when we one speaks oftalk about reality we they are actually referring totalking about our their own representation of it thatwhich we create in our mind, h., Hhow can external things carry any kind of objectivity? I intend to resolve this issue This issue will be resolved by the end of the next paragraphsection.
4 5

A. Bazin, What is Cinema?, trans. By Hugh Gray, Berkeley and Los Angeles, pag. 25 G.. Rondolino, Roberto Rossellini, L'Unita'/Il Castoro, 1995, pag. 11.

Italy and Russia This paper is intended to be a comparison:. aA comparison of modalities, of contents and, most of all, of intentions. The films thatwhich I will'll bewill be compareding are often separated by a gap of about a decade. By no means this paper is conceived as a comprehensive comparison embracing many movies. In fact, most of the movies considered relate to the early period of nNeorealism in Italy, and mainly to some of the key movies of Marlen Khutzev, with some other important Soviet filmmakers. Post-war Italian film- makers felt the urge to show, to tell present a reality thatwhich was too painful to be left unspoken. Too many sorrows were directly touching the people, and it was time, despite Andreotti's embarrassment, to wash one's dirty laundry in public and to scream out loud the truth. The result wasere direct, straight- forward movies with very compelling messages, which could be hardly be misunderstood. Different film- makers used different tools techniques and operated with different modalities to pursueit what they all believed wasfelt as a common mission. They could operate in a new post- war climate, where public scandal, disappointing results at the box office and a relatively permissive censorship were the most disgraceful events a film- maker could clash with. A different story was to be heard in the Soviet Union. After the horrors of the War, we have to wait another decade and Khrushchevsthe Khrushchevian Thaw to notice extraordinary new modalities in the way films were made. The death of a tyrant and the new order proclaimed by his successor pavwed the way to one of the most fascinatinginteresting periods in Soviet life and culture. Destalinization allowed for eventsthings thatwhich were unthinkable of only a few years earlierpreviousearlie. Ur, but, unlike in liberated Italy, the regime fixed specific limits on how and up to where was possible to dissent and deviate from the original standardson the extent of deviation from the ordinary standard, and the manner in which this dissention could be performed. Thus it was all up to the film- makers' ability to understand where these limits where and how to get upreally close to them without unveiling their real intentions, their mission becoming to codeingcoding their message in order to deliver it and make it through the censorship mechanism. At stake waserewere not only economic success, but also ones career and personal freedom. 6
6

J. Woll, Real Images: Soviet Cinema and the Thaw, London and New York, 2000, Introduction, pp. 3-30.

Two different countries, then, with different pasts and statuses. On the one side, Italy, liberated yet humiliated by a catastrophic defeat, eager to stand up again yet still weak and full of contradictions. On the other, the Soviet Union, victor ofwinner over the Nazis after having paid a tremendous price in terms of human losses, but paradoxically victim of its own system and the contradictions of its everyday life. On both sides, the will and the urge to tell, to show, to eradicate long silenced truths in order to face the present empowered with new knowledge about one's own past. Behind the Truth, behind History, at the very hearth of these movies lies Mman, undressed of the false pomposity proclaimed by the regimes. Man in his entireness, with all his weaknesses, Mman as a creature rather than a programmable robot. Man as a force, Mman as a complex being, pursuing his happiness in the torbidturbid waters of life. And the core driving force for each Mman islie the most precious of his treasures: his values. Values are the most powerful, most compelling and most decisive elements that determine the course of a man's life. A common characteristic of many characters which we will encounter is their unshakeable belief in the rightness of their own core values. Even when war, cruelty or life in general overwhelm their existence, they often hold on tightly to the values that regulate their life in order to find salvation or guidance. Although it might seem a minor thing, the psychological complexity of these characters was an incredible achievement at the time, both in Italy and Russia, where fixed, flat types had been shown for decades. It is exactly in values that we find the answer to the question which arose earlier. Values determines the validity of our representations of reality. If our ones representation is not modelled according to the values that are important for usthem, we one generates incongruence. Values guide our actions and influence our perception of reality, they compel us to take action, to hold a certain moral position. The message that Italian and Soviet filmmakers are delivering us is: Here, watch this movie. I am giving you Content, altered by my personal choices as far as Form is concerned. But if you share some of the core values that I share, you will necessarily feel some specific emotions, think about some specific issues, become aware of things you were not aware of, start perceiving my reality in a new way, because I enriched your vision of the world with this new information. This, I believe, is the key to understanding nNeorealism and the Soviet movies that I have chosen to comparewill be compared in this paper. It is fundamental to understand that what these filmmakers wanted to communicate were values, and their means to do this was an intelligent

choice of Content and Form. Cinema is a form of communication: values lie at the core of the message and Content and Form are both means to deliver it.

Everyday Life One of the main traits that some of the movies made in the Soviet Union during the Thaw share with nNeorealist movies of post-war Italy is their focus on everyday life, what Italians refer to as il quotidiano. In both countries up to the War, Ccinema had always been considered to be either a sort of entertainment or, most importantly during the reigns of Mussolini and StalinMussolini and Stalin's reigns, a very powerful means to educate the masses. The dictators' attempt to combine these two elements in movies that were at the same time educational and entertaining did produce good results on the illiterate or poorly educated masses. For the educated part of the population however, these miserably failed miserably, for movies were too constrained by the strict limitations of ideology and censorship to actually have a concrete appeal on the educated masses appeal. . Nevertheless, both Fascism and Communism favoured stories based on everyday heroes, to foment the myth of a just society where hard work, devotion and strict obedience could transform a simple man into a collective hero in almost no time. 7 However, this everyday reality was completely artificial. If the starting point were everyday contexts, these were certainly not an accurate representation of the actual conditions people were living in. With nneorealism, film-makers transported on screen a reality that, although willingly modified and withatat traits exaggerated, was nevertheless much closer to the actual life people were experiencing at the time. To achieve this, they decided to place the camera in the very midst of the byt and look at the world through the eyes of characters that resembled actual citizens rather than mythmythologizedified heroes. The result was incredible: the ever since discarded quotidianita', with its boring routines and unexciting events, turned out to be was actually a swirl of powerful emotions, tragic moments and almost epic quests. This apparently simple and uninteresting world suddenly revealed itself in all its complexity. There is something fascinating, something ineffable in the quotidianita' of the

E. Brunetta, Dal fascismo alla Liberazione, Consiglio Regionale del Veneto, Treviso, 1976, pp.46-51.

events of De Sica's Umberto D. De Sica described the film as uncompromising8. It 9 It is a celebration of the ordinary man, an attempt to dignify the ordinary, every day life and its moments, which are unique and full of human passions and emotions, despite their apparent banality. Cinema is based on our personal experience of life, and most of us are normal individuals, not heroes. Rather than a pursuit for reality, nNeorealism could be described as the pursuit of accuracy, aligning the eye of the camera with that of a simple man, like each one of us. After watching such a movie, audiences could have left the cinemas thinking that that was not an unfamiliar story after all,all or that they might have known someone that resembled the main character. In this case, De Sica rejects all conventional melodramatic means (from a technical point of view, if we exclude the balcony scene with the close zoom on the pavement and the happy ending), yet is able to evoke in us compassion whilst maintaining a considerable degree of authenticity.10 When considering the influence of this kind of approach to a movie such as Vesna na Zarechnoy ulize, Zorkaia wrote: , , , , , , , . , 50- , - , .11 ZorkayaTurovskaia is completely right: it would be erroneous to talk about such influence if we one limits our ones definition of nNeorealism to accuracy and truthfulness only. In fact, the pure documentary objectivity that is often attributed to neorealist movies is, in many cases, a myth. If it is true that some of nneorrealistm milestones such as De Sica's Ladri di Biciclette or Rossellini's Paisa do have a certain degree of objectivity (and by which anthis I meanobjective documentary style is implied objectivity), some others, such as Rome Open City for instance, represent a complete violation of many classic nNeorealist traits such as, in this example, the abundant use of melodrama and the over- typificationcharacterization of the characters.12 One should be really careful not to limit one's definitions, for we one must bear in mind that Italian
8 8
9 10 11 12

M., Millicent, Italian film in the light of neo-realism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1986, p. 102. M., Millicent, Italian film in the light of neo-realism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1986, p. 102. Millicent, p. 105. N. Zorkaia, 'Khuziev' in Portrety, Moscow, 1966, pag. 79. D. Forgacs, Rome: Open City, BFI Publishing, London, 2000, pp. 58-66.

nNeorealism was not a unified movement with a definite set of rules. Instead, we areInstead, one should focus their attention on the talking about the willingness that these filmmakers had to convey some facts. The purpose of these facts was in order to almost force the viewers to take a moral position on the matter, or at least to make them aware of circumstances that were not widely known.unknown to them before. It is remarkable, when confronting Italian and Soviet movies, to notice the complex subtlety that the latter required in order to convey a certain kind of message, often similar in content to that of the Italians, without being blocked by the censors. In his Vesna na Zarechnoy ulize, Khutzev attempted to transport on screen the byt of a provincial industrial town. Although the overall impact of the movie is certainly not as crude as that of movies like Umberto D or Ladri, it can be considered to be a necessary osnovanie, on which Khutzev was able to develop his subsequentfollowing, more explicit, works. What is important in this movie is, in Zorkaia's words: [...] , , , , , , , , , , , -, .13 Khutzev is telling usbelieves that a passionate love story can take place even in the midst of the banality of everyday life. His detailed yet disarmingly simple byt is, as it was in De Sica, a method to underline and bring out the powerful force of human feelings. Since the events take place in a banal (in cinematographic terms) environment, viewers are less entertained by the cinematic choices and more focused on the characters and the events, as these acquire a poignant significance. I believe this is a : a crucial discoverypointapproach that was used both by Italians and Soviet filmmakers. Why create stories that have no real grounding with our everyday experience when the life we livfe is so full of drama itself? The events in Ladri di Biciclette take place over the course of a normal day, and so do those in Umberto D. Yet how tragic, how full of significance these days are! And how many emotions, moral choices and dilemmas that we one would usually associate to the finest literature
13

Zorkaia, pag. 82.

we are to be foundencounter in them! Epicthem. Epic traits are transplanted into the everyday routine, for this is where men live, this is how they experience their life.

AThe return to simplicity To refuse or despise the beauty of everyday life often leads to corruption and perdition. In De Santis' Riso Amaro , the mondina Silvana is corrupted by the theiefft Walter, who promises her a life of luxury, thus taking her away from her rural context. The tragic ending is perhaps too melodramatic, but in a much sober rural movie such as Konchalovskii's Istoria Asi Kljachinoj, the idea that urban culture brings with it some sort of corruption is also a key theme. The character of Chirkunov, who lived outside the village and experienced modern life, attempts to rape Asia, thus conveying a strong negative image. This is juxtaposed with the integrity of the rural character of Tikhomir, who spent eight years in a concentration camp and yet is still able to talk about faith, love and patriotism of the Russian people. It is interesting to note how this simplicity is actually not that simple and is often more complex than ever. Both in Italy and the Soviet Union, this return to simplicity was an expedient to bring back down to earth discussions that were being led astray by ideological orthodoxy. If this was more marked in Italian films (Mussolini 's regime was over at the time), it was a powerful way to obliquely critique Soviet power as well. By simple, these filmmakers meant essential, a return to the essence of life, to the pillars that constitute life itself. Another parallel could be drawn between the deviation of Marina in Rome Open City and Mark in Letiat Shuravli. Sacrificing one's own values in order to gain power and status is a common trait in both characters. The critique to their behaviour is carried out not by over- characterizing them, but rather by juxtaposing their actions to the actions of nobler and humbler characters. This avoids melodrama and allows for a more objective structuring of the movie plot. , and the movies are purposely structured in order to create the illusion that these characters are both inevitably condemned by the objectivity of the facts rather than by artistic manipulation.

Space and the Environment

Space plays a fundamental role in nneorealism and in the Ccinema of the Thaw years. The external environment in neorealist movies is often a mirror that reflects the internal emotional state of the characters. In a movie such as Germany Year 0, the city of Berlin is more than a setting: it externalises the inner degradation that pervades its inhabitants. Human dilemmas are recreated externally as ruins. The whole concept of setting is somehow enriched, for it becomes part of a character. Thus the demolition of a wall in Umberto's room in Umberto D represents more than just a refurbishment: that wall is somehow a bit of the character's persona. In Paisa', the ruins of Florence and the misery of Naples reflect the internal state of the inhabitants, thus linking the environment and the characters with a bijection. Troianovskii made a good remark noticeable remark about Letiat Shuravli, which shows how this correspondence was present in some Soviet movies as well: . ( , , ) , . , , . , : , .
14

Space is more than just a setting. There is a tendency to associate urban landscapes with more decaying lifestyles, but the different setting does not hinder filmmakers in showing the genuine flow of life. Turovskaia wrote about Vesna that , , . , , . []15. This is true, and one could add that but it is only a choice. As a matter of fact, Khutzev succeeds in portraying the authentic Moscovite life both in Iul'skii Doshd' and Mne Dvadzat' Let, without allowing the urban setting to alter the perception of a genuine and trustable representation. Simply, in front of us the viewer lie two different types of men: provincial and urban citizens. In Italian movies, both of these types are present. The simplicity and authenticity of the fishermen in La Terra Trema is by no means different from that of the urban kids in Sciuscia'. We are only looking at different environments, while the intention of portraying the essence of the
14
15

V. Troianovskii, Letiat Shuravli, tret' veka spustia, Kinovedcheskie zapiskie,1993, 17, pag.16. M. Turovskaya, 'Marlen Khuziev' in Molodie Reshissiory Sovetskovo Kino, Leningrad, 1962, pag. 132.

characters' life remains the same. Since I have the concept of spatiality has been mentioned, talked about spatiality, I would like to makit is important to note a keye an important point here regarding kinematics. Sometimes, we might be mislead by technical differences. Movies such as La Terra Trema and Istoria Asi are shoot with a very similar technique (detached, non- intrusive camera, linear montage) and differ considerably from others such as Letiat Shuravli and Rome Open City. We must bear in mind that each director employs different means to deliver their message to the audience. If we one thinks about how we one experiences the world and we considers how our eyes perceive reality, we one acknowledges that if we they were to transpose our their experience on screen, the resulting movie would be filmed from a fixed camera in our their head, looking out through our their own eyes. We do not possess the ability to zoom in and out, to move the point of view, to regulate brightness and so forth: we can only do that by using our imagination. Some directors, in this case Visconti and Konchalovskii, decided to adopt a filming method that would, as a rule of thumb, resemble the point of view of a spectator watching the scene, keeping all the alterations to a minimum. This, in effect, is the closest representation of our sensorial experience: a fixed point of view, that of an external observer. These two movies in particular can be considered more neorealistic than others and, from a technical point of view, this is probably true. Golovskoy reminds us that Konchalovski himself outlined what were the core principles of his artistic style: the use of improvisation. [...] black-and-white images; the use of non-professional actors; the use of two or three cameras at once to shoot the film; the simultaneous recording of the sound; the filming of entire episodes without any cutaway shots and subsequent montage; and the predominance of wide angles, rather than close-ups. The entire film was shot in natural interiors or on location.16 These stylistic choices are the common technical ground of Italian nNeorealist movies as well. What I am trying to sayA is that although these guiding principles help us to define a neorealist movie, these should not be our ones only parameters, for if that was the case we one would miss out other important aspects. Riso Amaro is also a rural nNeorealist movie, yet it is much more digestible by the audiences for it employs some melodrama and a slightly more dynamic use of camera. Nevertheless, the movie is able to deliver the goods, that is to show us an uncommon and unknown reality, simple and yet with very complex dynamics. What I believe to bewas Tthe real beauty of this uncommon and unofficial artistic movement was its multi-faceted and diverse approach to similar themes. TI believe that the diversity uniqueness of every approach is what made this whole thing so fascinating. Critics often call violations cinematic choices that carry their own meaning for the filmmaker and, even if they
16

V. Golovskoy, http://www.filmreference.com/Films-Im-Le/Istoria-Asi-Kliachinoi-Kotoraia-Lubila-da-Nie-VyshlaZamuzh.html#ixzz1WPAF5dV7

seem to be deviating, are congruent with the overall impression of the movie. Recreating the so called objectivity on screen, an artificially simple Form , that would not distract us viewers from the actual Content, actually required a considerable effort. Both Form and Content are equally important because they are indivisible from each other. Sometimes, especially when we analyseanalyzing nNeorealism, we one might confuse Content with reality, thus forgetting that the filmmaker chooses not only how to show us something, but also what to show us. According to circumstances, a filmmaker chooses what he believeswhat is the best way to convey a message or to show his reality to the audience.

Kak zhit? The encounter between the protagonist of Khutzev's Zastava Ilicha (Mne Dvadzat' Let) Sergei and the ghost of his father was the last drop straw that made Nikita Khrushchev pronounce in a speech in 1963: , , ? , , ... . , ? ! [...] , , ?17 Despite Khrushchev's concerns, the notorious question on how to live is often left unanswered. In times of trouble, it is often difficult for a father to answer such a question. Sergei finds it hard to fit in a society full of contradictions that does not practice what it preaches. The encounter with Ania's father shocks him: how can all men be cruel and refuse to help each other? Ania's father, as Kuznetsov remarks,18, is the 19,, the exemplification of a deep contradiction, and the fact that he is nnot either happy nor satisfied reveals the contradictions of a society that requires you to believe in some principles and then to secretly go against them. Sergei has his own values and refuses to disaffirm them for the sake of conformity. The biggest challenge is to hold on tight onto one's values when the chains of misery are
17

18 19

From Khrushchev's speech delivered at the vstreche rukovoditelei partii I pravitel'stva s deiateliami literatury I sskustva, 8 Marta 1963, Kinematograf Ottepeli, Documenty I Sviditelstva, Moskow 1998, pag 132. P. Kuznetsov, "Otsy I sinovia. Istoria Voprosa", Seans, 21/22, 2004, pag 20. P. Kuznetsov, "Otsy I sinovia. Istoria Voprosa", Seans, 21/22, 2004, pag 20.

tightening all around. Which kind of father is Antonio in Ladri, when he steals the bicycle in front of his younglittle son at the end? How is it possible to educate and raisegrow one's children in the midst of a corrupted and indifferent society? And yet, when Fiodor Malenkii steals some vegetables from a nearby field in Dva Fiodora, his father-figure Fiodor Bolshoi does not hesitate to condemn his behaviour, thus demonstrating that it is necessary to stick to one's beliefs and live honestly. But is Antonio not honest, right up to the very end of the movie? The question asked by Sergei to his father resounds in almost all nNeorealist movies. The answer provided by the Italians was: we don't know how to live, but certainly we certainly cannot carry on like this. It is interesting to note how different connotations this question assumes as the context varies. When hardships are severe, life recedes to a primitive, elementary level. Things are very simple and survival becomes one's priority. How to live? becomes a technical question: kids in Sciuscia or Antonio in Ladri are concerned about how to get to the end of the day, on the how to survive. Even Umberto in Umberto D , despite the fact that he does not live on the actual debris of damaged buildings like the characters in the Naples episode of Paisa', is very much concerned about his own survival rather than asking ethical questions on how to lead a coherent existence. Dva Fiodora is also a movie where characters have to cope with misery and a lowlow living standard of livings: Fiodor Bol'shoi is very careful not to let the question of how to survive overtake the how to live on the ground of just values. For this to happen though, a certain degree of serenity is needed, or else the risk is to end up like Antonio. It is worth to spending a few wordsfocusing on the father-son relationship in these two movies. The shadow of Wwar is casted on both adults characters: Antonio has been unemployed for over two years and Fiodor is an ex- soldier whothat needs to get used to peace- time again. Their role as educational figures is fundamental in influencing their children, who look at them in awe. Having a guide to admire and modelmodel to admire and guide them is a fact welcomed by both kids: as Millicent noted, Bruno is happy to relinquish his premature adulthood when the bike is retrieved at the film's start and the traditional family hierarchy is reconstituted once more20. At the same time, Fiodor Malenkii is happy to finally have a father that can allow him to live a childhood that had nearly been destroyed by the war. The children implicitly ask the question on how to live to their fathers, considering them almost infallible and able to always take the right decisions. They are both going to be somehow disillusioned: Antonio steals and Fiodor fulfils his emotional needs by marrying Natasha, thus breaking his almost sacred connection with the boy. This is interpreted by the kids as a loss of stability, for their own fathers do no't really know how to live, but rather attempt to live as
20

M.Millicent, Italian Films in the Light of Neorealism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1986, pag.60.

they can. In Rossellini's Germany Year 0, Edmund asks the same question to the wrong person, with extremely tragic consequences. Again , theis illusion that there should be someone to guide you and explain to you how to live your life is createdpresent/invoked/present. But how is one to find an answer when asking to a younger ghost or a pedophilepaedophile Nazi in dismay? In Khutzev's Mne Dvadzat' Let and Iul'skii doshd' , this question shifts from a basic level to a more advanced one. When the war and its dynamics are over and acceptable living conditions are recovered, moral dilemmas are to be found in the midst of the comforts of everyday life. The characters in both Khutzev's movies are looking for a meaning to give to their existence. Lena and Sergei seem unable to fit into their respective social circles, where careerism and a certain degree of cynicism have obscured the true values that supposedly are to be found at the base of a socialist society. Routine has replaced life and everyone seems to be dragging on day by day. Conversations skim over important issues and rather than being indicators of shallowness are to be considered the natural consequence of the absence of a direction in people's life. It is no wonder that both movies were fiercely criticized by the censors. People should not be filling their lives with frivolous activities and ideas, especially if they live in the capital city of the motherland of Communism.

Ideology vs. Man The contrast between ideological orthodoxy and the essence of Man emerges as a strong conflict in the movies I have chosen to comparecompared here. It is very interesting to note how in most of these movies there are very little traces of official ideology. A distinction has to be made here between Italian and Soviet films as for the meaning of the world ideology. As far as the Italian movies are concerned, the world ideology should probably be substituted by official code of conduct. The absence of an institutionalized regime did not imply the absence of a common, unwritten set of rules about which ones were considered acceptable themes and which were

considered avoidable by the political elite.21 In the Soviet Union, ideology was obviously much more influential and regimented. Both countries, however, cared not to show some aspects of their recent, turbulent past. One of the main discoveries made in Ccinema during those years was the complexity of the human spirit, too often bridled by the chains of ideological supervision. The necessity to explore the elementary traits of humans prevailed over their idealization purposely made by the regimes. Times have changed: if, before the war, people could have been prompted to act and participate in politics by the adversities of everyday life, now, when the horrors and the fatality of the war have left their SOLCOscars, they refuse to externalize their identity in favour of the communal cause. There is no time for abstract discussion nor unrealistic dreams: people need to experience their range of emotions on a daily basis, to solve their own, little problems. Umberto in Umberto D, Antonio in Ladri, Sergei in Mne Dvadzet Let, Lena in Iulskii doshd': all these characters are single units that need to fixo sort out their own lives before even thinking about problems that regard the social community. True, Lena volunteers as an agitator and Sergei proudly declaims his fidelity to the International and the Revolution during the house party, but these are mere involucres that conceal individuals in search of an answer for how to live their own lichnaia zhizn'. Same is true for Umberto: although he takes part in the demonstration at the beginning with other unemployedds, but their protest is is feeble and disorganized, itstheir participants are unable to unite and voice their discontent effectively.22 The crowd is made by many individualities rather that by many individuals giving life to a single entity. A common trait between the Italian and Soviet movies considered here is the willingness to show the complete defeat of ideology. This is more noticeable in some movies such as Rossellini's Germany Year Zero, where the ruins of Berlin and the moral depravity of the Nnazi schoolteacher child molestermolesting kids talk for themselvesare far from subtle. In a movie such as Askol'dov's Kommissar, the banality of the everyday routine opposes Clavdia's utopian vision. Paradoxically, the Commissar, a diligent soldier on the forefront of the Revolution, is unable to come to terms with her deeds as a mother, d. Deeds thatwhich supposedly should not be perceived as a burden but rather as a source of joy. The criticism expressed here is very explicit, for it is directed straight at the basis of the revolutionary ideology. Clavdia is a character that perfectly fulfils all the canons of Socialist Realism, and in fact she can only act within the boundaries dictated by this Realism, which do not include giving up the cause to take care of a new human being. How can a man set out to
21

22

F. Barbagallo, Dal 43 al 48 La formazione dellItalia democratica, LUnita, Einaudi, 1996.AGGIUNGI LIBRO STORIA ITALIANO Millicent, pag. 97.

regulate other people's communal life when he i's unable to enjoy his own, small individual existence? Man is much more complex and at the same time much more simple than ideologies portray/assumethink. When the Nazi Bergmann tries to convince Don Pietro by talking about the right cause in Rome Open City, he replies that the only worth cause is the cause of God, thus establishing an even deeper distinction. In his opinion, we can look at Man, for he is in front of us every day, or we can look at God, for He is the supreme Good that regulates Man's life. Any abstraction that lies within these two moves the focus away from the really important things in life. How can ideologies solve Man's problems if they refuse to accept Mman for what he is and create instead an idealized representation of him to justify their outcomes? Don Pietro's favourable attitude towards the partisans is simply because their cause is closer to the religious cause he fights for. In the Soviet movies of the Thaw period, ideology is often an hindrance in people's livesfe. While in Italian movies ideology is often absent altogether, in Soviet ones it is obviously still presentartfully, even if concealed. It is very difficult, if not impossible, to identify a very Ccommunist character, a character that completely adheres to communist principles as those proposed by the official propaganda. Not even the negative onesnegatively portrayed characters, such aslike Ania's father in Mne Dvadzat' Let, do actually believe in mainstream Ccommunism. Politics is also absent from conversations. Characters experience profound existential crises and are incapable of becoming true social beings because of their own personal issues, which are immensely more concrete and actual than those concerning the abstract entity of the Soviet state. Chernenko noted something very interesting in the movie Dva Fedora, where the [...] , - , : , , - . . , , , , , , , , , .23 There is a refusal to insert an abstract noun or notion into a world made of flesh and dust. When we one thinks of an abstract world, we one must represent it in our their mind with a
23

M. Chernenko, Noveishaia Istoria Otechestvennogo Kino,19862000, St. Petersburg, 2001, p.98.

symbolic image that has for us them a specific meaning. We One experiences difficulty in associating it with something pertaining to the world of matter. Somehow, such word or idea is alien to our primary existential level, for we define ourselves firstly as earthly animals, then as intelligent beings with the ability to think. We One cannot touch nor see Ccommunism, Eegalitarianism, jjustice. ButHowever, we one can touch Little Fiodor's flesh, we can see his dusty feet and smell his sweaty skin. We One can read his facial expressions that externalize his fears, his joys, his doubts. And this we understand. This evokes in us certain emotions, this brings us back to the soil: this reminds us that we must remain faithful to the Eearth.

Tania's Communism and her sternnessity in Vesna na Zarechnoi ulice, often associated with Soviet intellectuals, make her a daydreamer, in love with humanity, arts and music but unable to love a human being next to her. Khutzev communicates this very elegantly in the scene where Sasha goes to Tania's apartment and the music of r Rachmaninov Rakhmanikov starts playing. Again, the filmmaker does not need to add any drama to such a scene, for it is through a banal situation that he communicates portrays the deep intellectual division between these two characters. As Turovskaia remaks, , .24 This is what we could be called a technical paradox common in both neorealist Italian and Soviet movies: the ability to convey through simple scenes and without an overtly manipulative montage a very important message. The camera in this scene simply shifts from one face to the oanother and the music operates as a divisional element: from the visual point of view, there is nothing special of relevance going on. Tania is absorbed in her singing, while Sasha lingers at the back: the impression is as if we were watching the scene from behind his shoulders, free to observe as we would observe normally. It is interesting here to confront this scene with another similar technical example from De Sica's Ladri, when Antonio is about to steal the bike towards the end: the camera goes from the bicycle against the wall to the shoot of the stadium with people coming out from the distance, but refuses to give the whole scene an overtly dramatic cut recurring to close ups on the bike or Antonio's face. Here too the music adds drama to the scene when he finally reaches for the bike, but refuses to associate each crescendo to a visual correspondence. As Pisarevskii wrote about this episode: [] . , . , .25 The paradox of the educated
24 25

, pag. 133

N. Pisarevskii, 100 Filmov, Isskustvo, Moscow, 1967, p.179.

intellectual who has a lot to learn from an ignorant but real worker is indeed a strong, yet elegantly subtle critique to official propaganda.

Conclusion When I set out to write this paper, I was initially worried I couldThe main concern in writing this paper was not finding enough concrete analogies and common themes between Italian nNeorealism and the Soviet cinema of the Thaw years. The initial I focused on Content, but the different contexts sseeemed to trace areveal a profound division between the movies, for the contexts in which they were filmed differed significantly. I then tried to analyse Form and technique, but that also limited my researchThe sole analysis of Form and technique also somehow limited . research. Then, I understoodA more flexible approach was necessary. Cinema is a form of Art. Art in itself does not have rules nor canons, or at least it doeis not originated from them. It is after the creative act is performed, once the piece of art lies in front of us, that we one starts analysing it and, in order to understand it and somehow classify it, we one discerns in it currents, styles and parameters. Our brain works in such a way that once it interprets something according to a specific model, it finds it really difficult to detach itself from it and return to the original sense of confusion and amazement we experience when we face something utterly new for the first time. When we one looks at a cloud in the sky, , we areone is only looking at condensed white vapour. But if weas soon as one discerns in that very cloud a shape or form which is familiar to usthem, such as a face or anything that resembles one of our their internal representations, we findone finds it impossible to look at the same cloud as we they initially didused to do initially. For us, it becomes a face.The cloud becomes that object. In this paper, I looked The purpose of this paper was to look at these movies as I one looks at those masses of vapour those clouds in the sky. I refused toIt would have not been correct to

classify them or overtly analyse them a priority?. Instead, I a better approach is to focused on what these filmmakers wanted to convey to us the viewers, what was their intention. And I discovered what they wanted to do was really quite simple: to bring bring usaudiences back with our feet to the earth. Bring us back down to Earth sounds better but it is a massive clich youre tryingdown to Earth. The world is an extremely complex place. Everyach single one of ushuman being has to operate a fundamental distinction between oneself as a living being and the external reality. This creates confusion, for we humans experience reality in different ways, all different from each otheras every single individual creates for himself a tailored representation of . it. A filmmaker sets himself for the delicate challenging mission of recreating the illusion of reality on screen. Italian nNeorealists and the Soviet filmmakers I took intotaken into account here not only wanted to recreate this illusion, they wanted to create an illusion that would bring us people closer to our their everyday experience of life. They wanted to show us on screen the real world, which for too long had been concealed by dictators and dogmas. A world made of flesh, of faces, of emotions. A world that had been too long ignored. True, it might seem too shallow to focus on the pettiness of this muddy, sweaty and dusty reality. Yet this reality shown on screen is immensely more accurate and faithful than the one proposed by Socialist Realism. What do I mean by In which sense faithful and accurate? I meanIn the sense that this is a reality that we one can can touch, smell, see, taste. An illusion that brings us people closer to that multi- sensorial experience, that complex interaction with the external reality that we which we refer to as call life. Theyse filmmakers preached to remain faithful to the Eearth and to the senses. Why? Because that is something concrete, something that we one can experience and understand. In nature, there is no such thing as compassion. Compassion is a term we useused to identify a complex, multifaceted feeling. We One do not, we one can not understand compassion, for that it is only a a sound and a bunch of letters pulled togetherword. But we one is able tdo understand Umberto's face when he is told to leave his house. OneWe do understands Sasha's sad eyes when he listens to Rachmaninov Rakhmanikov in Tania's room. OneWe do understands the tension that runs through Sergei's body when he asks his terrible, unanswerable kak zhit?. We This must be interpreted this as a reminder. We One must remember that we are human beings. We must understand that Iit is really easy to love the Revolution and humanity like Clavdia

does in Kommissar, but it is very difficult to love our ones own son, for we one can touch him, see him, smell the sweat on his skin. In the aftermath of the most devastating war of all times, which was fought in the name of ideologies, this return to the mud of the Eearth was perceived by these attentive filmmakers as a necessary step, as the first stone to be laid to begin the reconstructing process. A return to the primitive level of life, free from the chains of dogma and artistic conventions. A return to a world, our everyday world, made of feelings, emotions, contradictions, difficulties and joys. An elementary world, yet immensely beautiful and full of hidden significance. Bazin wrote that the originality of Italian neorealism as compared with the chief schools of realism that preceded it and with the Soviet cinema, lies in never making reality the servant of some a priori point of view26. He then added that the true merit of Ladri di Biciclette was not betraying the essence of things, in allowing them first of all to exist for their own sakes, freely; it is in loving them in their singular individuality27. This I believe this merit goes not only to De Sica, but to some extent to all the filmmakers mentioned in this paper. Even though they employed different means and operated in different contexts, I believe this was in essence their common intention: a humble declaration of love for life itself. The decided to look at life, to observe even its smallest details: as if they were looking in amazement at a cloud in the sky, for the very first time.

Bibliography: R. Bandler, J. Grinder, The Structure of Magic, Science And Behaviours Books, California, 1975, p. 92.. F. Barbagallo, Dal 43 al 48 La formazione dellItalia democratica, LUnita, Einaudi, 1996. A. Bazin, What is Cinema?, trans. By Hugh Gray, Berkeley and Los Angeles, 1967. , pag. 25. E. Brunetta, Dal fascismo alla Liberazione, Consiglio Regionale del Veneto, Treviso, 1976. M. Chernenko, Noveishaia Istoria Otechestvennogo Kino,19862000, St. Petersburg, 2001, p.98..

26 27

Bazin, pag. 64.

Bazin, pag. 66.

V.I. Fomin, Kinematograf Ottepeli, Documenty I Sviditelstva, Moskow 1998, pag 132.. V. Golovskoy, http://www.filmreference.com/Films-Im-Le/Istoria-Asi-Kliachinoi-Kotoraia-Lubila-da-Nie-VyshlaZamuzh.html#ixzz1WPAF5dV7 P. Kuznetsov, "Otsy I sinovia. Istoria Voprosa",in Seans, 21/22, 2004, pag 20.. M., Millicent, Italian film in the light of neo-realism, Princeton Univ. Press, Princeton, 1986, p. 102.. N. Pisarevskii, 100 Filmov, Isskustvo, Moscow, 1967, p.179.. G.. Rondolino, Roberto Rossellini, L'Unita'/Il Castoro, 1995, pag. 11.. V. Troianovskii, Letiat Shuravli, tret' veka spustia, in Kinovedcheskie zapiskie,1993, 17, pag.16.. M. Turovskaya, 'Marlen Khuziev' in Molodie Reshissiory Sovetskovo Kino, Leningrad, 1962, pag. 132. .

J. Woll, Real Images: Soviet Cinema and the Thaw, London and New York, 2000, Introduction, pp. 3-30..

Filmography: A. Askoldov, Komissar, 1966. V. De Sica, Sciuscia 1946, Umberto D 1952 , Ladri di Biciclette 1948. G. De Santis, Riso Amaro, 1949. M. Khutzev, Vesna Na Zarechnoi ulize 1956, Mne Dvadzat Lte 1966 , Iulskii doshd 1966. M. Konchalovski, Istoria Asi Kliachinoi, kotoraia liubila da ne vyshla zamush, 1967. R.Rossellini, Rome Open City 1945, Paisa 1946 , GermanyYear 0, 1948. L. Visconti, La Terra Trema, 1948.