South Tyrol. The Other Italy

When the German writer, philosopher and social activist of Jewish descent Hannah Arendt published her book Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil, most Israeli friends broke off relations with her, failing to appreciate her view of the events of the past. Arendt’s bold work was severely criticized, and the writer herself was boycotted in Israel for more than 30 years. At the heart of the plot of Eichmann in Jerusalem: A Report on the Banality of Evil was the 1961 Jerusalem trial of Adolf Eichmann, a former S.S. Lieutenant Colonel, head of Gestapo Department IV B4; inter alia, it was responsible for the “final solution of the Jewish question”, which meant mass extermination of the Jewish population of Europe. Arendt was present at the trial as New York Times correspondent. In the book, written based on the results of the trial, the writer analyzed the events she had witnessed and gave them a third-party assessment.

Adolf Eichmann, judging by Arendt’s book, was a déclassé son of a solid middle-class family, a normal person, without mental disorders, surprisingly not distinguished by fanatical anti-Semitic views or a commitment to any kind of doctrine. Both the psychiatrists and the priest who had talked to Eichmann unanimously recognized him to be absolutely reasonable and, moreover, even a person with “very positive ideas”. Hannah Arendt, describing Eichmann, noted that “the deeds were monstrous, but the doer – at least the very effective one now on trial – was quite ordinary, commonplace, and neither demonic nor monstrous”.

Eichmann himself, during the police interrogation, described himself as an “idealist”, meaning by this the degree of his readiness to obey orders, to sacrifice everything and everyone for his cause. He did not admit his personal involvement in the systematic extermination of the Jews, and repeatedly said that the only thing he could be accused of was “aiding and abetting” their destruction. Eichmann explained his actions by the desire to fulfill his duty, to obey not only the orders, but also the law. His defender, Dr. Servatius, echoed his client’s words, saying that the latter was innocent because he had not done anything illegal, simply because it was his duty to obey the laws adopted in the state at that time, as well as the orders of Hitler, which in the Third Reich were considered equivalent to laws.

Once, during the police investigation process, Adolf Eichmann declared with great vehemence that “he had lived his whole life according to Kant’s moral precepts, and especially according to a Kantian definition of duty”. He said: “I meant by my remark about Kant that the principle of my will must always be such that it can become the principle of general laws,” adding that he had read Kant’s Critique of Practical Reason. After that, judging by the records of Arendt, Eichmann “proceeded to explain that from the moment he was charged with carrying out the Final Solution he had ceased to live according to Kantian principles, that he had known it, and that he had consoled himself with the thought that he no longer ‘was master of his own deeds’, that he was unable ‘to change anything’. ” In connection with this statement, Arendt in The Banality of Evil mentions the wording of the “categorical imperative in the Third Reich” given by Hans Frank, which Adolf Eichmann could well have known: “Act in such a way that the Führer, if he knew your action, would approve it” (Die Technik des Staates, 1942, pp. 15—16).

Kant would be extremely surprised if he found out about such an interpretation of his philosophy. He, on the contrary, believed that each person, starting to act, uses his “practical reason” and becomes a legislator. Every man establishes for himself moral norms which can and even must become norms of law. The only thing which remained unchanged in Eichmann’s distorted Kantian philosophy was that a person must not only obey the law; he must go further and identify his will with the moral norm behind the law – with the source of the law itself. Hannah Arendt noted that “in Kant’s philosophy, that source was practical reason; in Eichmann’s household use of him, it was the will of the Führer”.

On November 9, 1964, in her radio interview to Joachim Fest, Arendt pronounced the phrase which immediately became famous: “According to Kant, no one has the right to obey.” Those who, committing crimes against humanity, justified themselves by their need to obey orders, had no right to such an excuse. Arendt insisted on the ethical duty of every individual to abandon unfair orders and to realize the significance of their actions. Adolf Eichmann justified his terrible actions by referring to Kant’s categorical imperative, which he completely distorted, whereas in fact the meaning of the Kantian moral doctrine was totally different. Hannah Arendt managed to get it across in a phrase that was as clear as possible: “No one has the right to obey”.

This phrase can be seen twice in the capital of South Tyrol, Bolzano (Bozen): in the museum under the triumphal arch – the Victory Monument – and on the facade of the former headquarters of the Fascist party. On the facade of the latter, the phrase, written in letters that glow in the evening, is superimposed over the bas-relief covering an area of 198 square metres – by far the largest work devoted to “Il Duce” Benito Mussolini and the Fascist era to still have been preserved in a public space.

The bas-relief was made by a South Tyrolean sculptor, Hans Piffrader, in the period from 1939 to 1942, to decorate the building of Palazzo degli Uffici Finanziari, which had formerly been called Casa Littoria and had been the headquarters of the Fascist organization in Bolzano (Bozen). The architects of the former headquarters of the Fascist organization were Guido Pelizzari, Francesco Rossi and Luis Plattner. This building was part of a general architectural project in the square named after Arnaldo Mussolini (brother of Benito Mussolini), which is today called Court Square (Piazza Tribunale). Piazza Arnaldo Mussolini was to become the central part of the plan of “new” Bolzano, developed by the Fascist regime in 1933—1934. Opposite the former headquarters of the Fascist organization, a courthouse was built by the design of architects Paolo Rossi de Paoli and Michele Busiri Vici. The two buildings formed the space of the square. Initially, the architectural ensemble was to include a 32-metre-high Torre Littoria, but the project of the tower was never implemented.

A few metres from the Court Square, next to the Dominican monastery, they built the church of Cristo Re (Christ the King). This work was created by the architect Guido Palmer in 1938—1939. Immediately after the Second World War, a bell tower was added to the church.

Thus, political, legal and religious forces were concentrated in one place, the “heart” of the new Bolzano (Bozen). The perfectly formed triad of the totalitarian state is still easily readable in the space of the urban fabric.

The bas-relief by Hans Piffrader is dominated by the figure of Mussolini on a horse with his right hand raised in the gesture of Roman salute. Few people remember that the sculptural image of Il Duce passed strict control of the Casa Littoria Construction Committee, and Piffrader had to repeatedly refine both the Mussolini on the horseback composition and other parts of the bas-relief. As a consequence, the work went slowly, and the last three of the 57 travertine panels were delivered to Bolzano (Bozen) about two months before the fall of the Fascist regime in Italy.

Piffrader’s bas-relief shows a brief history of the development, formation and “achievements” of the Fascist organization. Beneath the characteristic figure of Mussolini on the horseback, there is the clearly visible inscription: Il Duce’s commandment “Believe. Obey. Fight.” Next to this Fascist call, the year is stated by the Fascist calendar: ANNO XX EF, or the twentieth year of the Fascist era, 1942. Il Duce on the horse is surrounded by four allegorical figures, representatives of the Fascist university group, the Fascist national party, the organization of the national post-work rest and the union of Fascist youth.

The story on the bas-relief begins with a scene dedicated to the end of the Great War, the return of soldiers. Italy won World War I, in honour of which the gun on the bas-relief is decorated with a laurel wreath. The soldiers return to their homelands, and the first of them, the Alpine soldier, is welcomed by his wife and his two children.

The next scene of the bas-relief depicts the revolutionary fury of the “Red Biennium” period (1919—1920) – the rise of the labour movement in Italy, accompanied by a massive seizure of factories and plants by workers and by the creation of workers’ councils. The four male figures in the scene symbolize the “subversive actions” of the population in the years following World War I. One of the men, standing against the background of a burning building, is holding a torch.

The next scene of the bas-relief shows “Bolshevik violence” over the Fascist “martyrs”. Here we see a young Fascist, Giovanni Berta, dumped into the Arno River in Florence in February 1921, as well as two tied male figures who are tortured with fire, which symbolizes the sufferings of Fascists at the hands of Bolsheviks.

The origin of the Fascist movement in Italy is shown by the scene of the creation of the Italian Fasces of Combat by Mussolini in 1919, transformed in 1921 into the National Fascist Party. In the centre of this part of the bas-relief there is the figure of Il Duce with the constituent document in his hands. Mussolini is surrounded by three of his followers, who swear allegiance to the organization.

The history of the development of Italian Fascism on Piffrader’s bas-relief continues in the next scene, where Bolshevik enemies of the movement are shown again. The figures of the Nazis wounded by the Bolsheviks symbolize the former’s sacrifice in the name of their motherland. The image of the Fascist in the centre of the composition refers the viewer to another work by Piffrader – taking Jesus Christ down from the cross.

A young Fascist with a drum in the next scene of the bas-relief symbolizes the beginning of the “March on Rome” on October 28, 1922 – the prelude to the seizure of power in the country by the Fascist regime. The military phalanx in front of the young man is headed by a man who carries the banner in an aggressive manner. In the background of the sculptural composition, one can easily distinguish the Colosseum and the Seven hills of Rome.

The idea of the alleged historical continuity of Fascism is shown in the scene of the next fragment of Piffrader’s bas-relief. Two male figures are standing side by side: a Roman legionary in a fighting posture, holding a shield and a sign with the initials of the Roman Republic (S.P.Q.R – Senatus Populusque Romanus – Senate and the Roman people), and a Fascist soldier. The latter is holding Lictor’s rods – the symbol of the Fascist party after World War I, which was originally an attribute of power of the ancient Roman kings, and later, in the era of the Republic, of the highest magistrates. Behind the figure of the Fascist soldier we can see a book – a code of laws – and a sword.

In this “sculptural history of Fascism”, Piffrader perpetuated, inter alia, the conquest of Libya and Ethiopia by this organization. Libya is symbolized in the bas-relief by a male figure in a long tunic next to which we see the so-called Arch of the Philaeni (Marble Arch) – a triumphal arch that was built on the coastal road Via Balbia in the era of Italian rule in the country. This work by the architect Florestano di Fausto, inscribed with the Latin words “Alme Sol, possis nihil urbe Roma visere maius” (“Kind Sun, may you look upon nothing greater than the city of Rome”), was demolished when Gaddafi came to power in Libya.

In the centre of this scene of the bas-relief, there are two Fascists defeating two roaring lions. The first one is the lion of Judah, which allegorically personifies the emperor of Ethiopia, Haile Selassie, and the second one symbolizes Britain, vainly opposing the Italian conquest of Ethiopia.

The scene is completed by an African figure in shackles, which symbolizes the period of British colonial rule in the Mediterranean.

The visual narration of the achievements of the era of Italian Fascism continues on the bas-relief with a sculptural composition devoted to the participation of Italy in the Spanish Civil War. A tall bearded man with a cartridge belt thrown over his shoulder is an Italian legionnaire, who came to the country to fight on the side of Francoists from the Italian Fascist organization. He raises his hand as a sign that he is defending the Alcázar fortress in Toledo, which is depicted behind him. The three triangular flags in the background bear various symbols, one of which is a sign of the Spanish ultra-right political party, Falange Española (“Spanish Phalanx”), led by Francisco Franco. Next to the figure of the Italian legionnaire, we can see a woman with her head covered, who, according to Piffrader, allegorically represents the oppressed Spain. The third figure in the composition is a Spaniard in traditional clothing carrying a basket of gifts.

The last series of scenes in the bas-relief is devoted to the idyllic life during the Fascist era. The first three figures symbolize education in Fascist Italy. The young woman with classical theater masks is an allegory of art. The lady with a roll of parchment in her hand and scales in the background symbolizes science, and the third figure with swimmers behind her back symbolizes sport.

The agricultural riches of Fascist Italy are glorified by the following three figures of the bas-relief: women carrying grapes, grains and fruits. Thus, Piffrader showed the abundance and the food self-sufficiency of Italy during the Fascist era.

The next scene illustrates family life in peaceful Italy. The father of the family has laid down his weapon, and his wife is standing nearby holding a child in her arms; the child is holding out an apple to his father. At some distance from them, a worker is building a new house.

Next to the worker, there is a male figure, the last one in the visual story of the bas-relief. One version is that Piffrader portrayed Mussolini in the image of the architect of New Italy holding his project in one hand; another version is that the author immortalized himself in this figure. In the background, there is an easily discernible inscription “DVX”, which stands for “Il Duce”, and at the bottom – the signature of the sculptor: “Giovanni Piffrader, 52 years old”. Hans Piffrader, a South Tyrolean, whose full name was Johann, signed his name in Italian manner – Giovanni.

In the same way as frescoes in Catholic cathedrals tell us about the life of saints, the 198 square metres of bas-relief in the centre of “New Bolzano” can tell us much, if not everything, about the era of Italian Fascism.

Arendt’s phrase “No one has the right to obey” placed over Piffrader’s bas-relief in Italian, German and Ladin, the installation specially designed by South Tyrolean artists Arnold Holzknecht and Michele Bernardi, is neither an attempt to “weaken” the monument or, whatever opponents of this decision may say, vandalism of an art object. This is, above all, an appeal to critical memory.

As to those who asked to treat the bas-relief solely as an art object, I would like to ask them a question. Do they really believe that Piffrader’s work, glorifying the era of Fascism and standing on the land affected by two dictatorships, should be considered out of context and studied exclusively as “art for art’s sake”? The bas-relief of the South Tyrolean master is not a sculptural composition devoted to peace, goodness and beauty, but a totalitarian message, containing a definite appeal to “believe, obey and fight”. Do we really need to evaluate only the talent of the sculptor who moulded these words, without thinking about their meaning?