on TV
Noon, December 22, 2022 – 07:40
The television version of the Edwardian masterpiece, signed by Francesco Amato, oscillates between incongruity and caricaturism: nuance and ambiguity are absent
by Henry Fiore
A scene from Filumena Marturano
So here we are with another television channel, Filumena Marturano: the return, broadcast on Tuesday evening by Rai 1 and marked by the direction of Francesco Amato and the interpretation of Vanessa Scalera and Massimiliano Gallo in the two main roles, of the success achieved with the series Imma Tataranni . But before proceeding to the analysis of what was shown on the small screen, let me summarize the thinking I have developed over the years in relation to this famous Edwardian text by reading and re-reading it and seeing its productions and revised. There are at least three keys to interpreting the masterpiece in question: that of recording (or realism), that of myth (or symbolism), and finally that of psychoanalysis (or egocentrism).
From Chronicle to Myth
As for the coverage and the realism derived from it, it is known that it was Eduardo himself who questioned it: when he declared in an interview published by Oggi in ’56: The idea of ”Filumena Marturano” it came to me when I was a Message read: A woman in Naples who was living with a man without being his wife had managed to get married by pretending to be dying. This was the piquant little fact, but tiny: from this I drew the much fuller and more pathetic tale of Filumena, the dearest of my creatures. As for the myth and the symbolism, I take up a comment of mine which, given the sea of useless chatter with which the soloists on duty gradually flooded the newspapers, was the only one based on historical data on the occasion of the comedy’s new editions, that we are talking about. I really believe that in order to make a non-obvious speech about Filumena Marturano today, one must start from fragment 4149 of Friedrich Hebbel’s diaries, which, dated Vienna, April 18, 1847, reads: A woman to her husband: yes, correct , only one of these three children is your son, but I won’t tell you which one because I don’t want him to treat others badly, regardless of whether Eduardo knew the Hebbel diaries or not. The fragment in question shows sufficiently that the story of Filumena Marturano revolved in the air, crossing centuries and therefore fitting precisely into the sphere of myth.
Sustained success
Certain intuitions present themselves on stage as common daughters of time, space and many authors. But when we speak of a myth, as I said, we speak of a symbol. And that also explains the ongoing success that Filumena Marturano achieves on stages all over the world across all language barriers: the right theater is the realm of symbols. Finally, regarding psychoanalysis and egocentrism, I repeat that we must finally convince ourselves that in Filumena Marturano there is also (if not primarily) Strindberg. And consequently there is very little love. The situation becomes – beyond the now proverbially sentimental interpretations of this extraordinarily allusive and therefore ambiguous or at least ambivalent text – already from the concluding part of the long initial signature very clear: when Eduardo presents us a pale and spasmodic Domenico Soriano in front of Filumena, this “nothing” – Woman who has been treated by him like a slave for so many years and who now holds him in her fist ready to crush him like a chick.
The desire
Yes, Filumena is not a woman struggling to stabilize (and save in terms of marital status) her relationship with Domenico, nor a mother struggling to give a surname and thereby legitimize her children. Or rather, even that. But essentially an animal, with the ferocity and dignity that make up the genetic code of animals: and only one desire actually governs and drives it, that to exact revenge on the man who first bought it has, in a house of “appointment”. , and then – in his, at home – reduced it to some object. It is no coincidence that even when love is mentioned in the text (which occurs no more than two or three times), it is only out of calculation or weary habit. To Domenico Soriano, who on that famous evening, before chasing horses and mares to London or Paris, said to her: Filume’, facimm’avved ca ce vulimmo bene, she replied, Filumena, by declaring: I, chella sera te vulette bene excessively. Exactly, this evening. And before? And especially afterwards?
Nothing innocent
Not only. On the one hand we have the Filumena professing: All’uocchie miee tu ire nu Dio and on the other hand the Domenico stating: Pecch te voglio bene, simmo stati nzieme vincinc’anne, and vincinc’anne represent a life . As we see, we oscillate between transferring feelings to an almost mythical level and evaluating the relationship between Filumena and Domenico in terms of a pure and banal habit. So nothing natural and spontaneous. Nothing that smacks of innocent devotion to the delight of the soul and senses. On this point, it must at least be mentioned that the story of Filumena Marturano and her three children is clearly the story of Luisa De Filippo and her three sons Eduardo, Titina and Peppino. And this also explains the seemingly contradictory attitude that Eduardo takes towards the character in question: he declares that she is the dearest of his creatures, but then outlines Filumena in the text with clear coldness. In short, Filumena Marturano is the theatrical projection of Luisa De Filippo, who loved Eduardo as a mother but did not approve of as a woman because he wanted her to rebel against Eduardo Scarpetta, just as Filumena rebels against Domenico Soriano on stage.
gone rough
On the other hand, on the identity card of Filumena Marturano di Amato it could read: Filumena fu Marturano. In the sense that this Filumena Marturano retains the traits and most of the jokes that the plot reserved for her, but no longer possesses the subtle nuances and ambiguous implications that Eduardo gave her. First, Amato transforms her into an unscratchable block of roughness and hardness: we see her while illiterate, practicing writing her signature, or gorging herself on pasta and beans, and acting like a mistress in Soriano’s pastry shop, the most mistress could not be . And this is only the first of many inventions that, compared to the great Edwardian text (a perfect dramaturgical machine that has no more and no less than it should have), oscillate between redundancy, incongruity and a sketchiness to which reference is almost always made rhymes comics.
See, just to name a few examples, Diana turned into the daughter of a senator who wants to be an actress, moving between a Gozzani living room and a bed where she, half-naked, forces Soriano to help her. Script in hand, reviewing the part for a sample; Soriano, who justifies himself to the senator’s daughter by saying that Filumena is only his housekeeper and that he always looked at her like a beggar; and finally the last kiss on the mouth between Filumena and Domenico, who, like lovers, lean on a veranda so that the whole neighborhood can take note of their happiness. Eduardo’s text ends—to reiterate the basic fact of ambiguity—with Domenico Soriano drinking his wine (drinking, the original caption says), after saying, “And daughters are daughters… And they are all the same… They have.” Right, Filume’, you’re right! …. The remarkable technical feat of Vanessa Scalera and Massimiliano Gallo remains. The latter gives us a scan of the beats that has a real musical rhythm that was certainly passed on to him by his father Nunzio. And Scalera, for its part, reveals, at least temporarily, the underground vein that is the true and inexhaustible engine of Filumena Marturano. In this text, I repeat, there is no love. But there is no hate either. However, there is something far worse than hate: resentment.
The newsletter Corriere del Mezzogiorno
If you want to keep up to date with news from Campania, subscribe to the Corriere del Mezzogiorno newsletter for free. It arrives straight to your inbox at 12pm every day. Just click here.
December 22, 2022 | 07:40
© REPRODUCTION RESERVED