THE POLITICS OF AN ITALIAN CONSUL IN NEW YORK

The post of consul general of Italy in New York is difficult. Indeed, I would venture to say that, for the Italian diplomatic corps, it is the most difficult of all similar positions in the world.

Fist of all, the location: all sorts of important personalities pass through here, including those who outrank the consul and who blame him if the city doesn’t notice them or the mayor doesn’t run to welcome them with the key to the city on a golden tray. Then there are true tragedies—like the sinking of the Andrea Doria[1]—when the telephone rings incessantly for days and days. One more problem is the close relationship with the embassy. When the ambassador is a gentleman like Manlio Brosio,[2] the consul doesn’t have to worry about pettiness and backstabs: but with other ambassadors? The consul, moreover, has to constantly worry about his actions and words on a big stage like New York, where everything is under scrutiny and analyzed with a magnifying glass. Things that would go undetected in Seattle quickly become reasons for scandal in New York. The biggest current problem concerns criminals of Italian origin that America wants to get rid of by expelling and dumping them in Italy like garbage bags. The consul must oppose these moves despite the fact that international law allows it. Another test of patience for the consul must be the distorted, confused and mistaken image harbored by all Italians about America, Americans and Italian Americans. From top ministers to humble shoe shines, from the Marquis of Forlimpopoli[3] to Guccio Imbratta,[4] they all have irrational expectations that America will shower them with support and warm feelings of friendship.

As if this were not enough the biggest headaches, like icing on the cake, come from the Italian American community. This mass of people is divided along lines of personal loyalties; of thousands of narrow-minded, parochial associations; full of insatiable vanity, grandiose ambitions and incurable thin-skinnedness; full of nouveau-riche delusions and contempt for the poor. In theory they should not be in the purview of the Italian consul, in that almost all are American citizens. However, in reality, based on my observations, this has always been the main preoccupation of consuls, whether they were from the liberal, Fascist or republican regimes. This happens by virtue of sophistry and the complicity of the money that Italian Americans send to Italy to support various organizations and the little hopes that the dream of money from America triggers in the majority of Italians, from university professors to shoes exporters.

Thus, it’s not hard to understand why some consuls only lasted for a short time: some left unhappy and others left behind much unhappiness. For those who understand the situation—and I think I am one of them—the function of the Italian consul in New York generates much admiration together with a sense of pity for the man who occupies that post. High doses of admiration and pity saluted Baron Carlo De Ferrariis[5] who managed to stay here for five and a half years in addition to a year and a half in Chicago. When he left he was honored by so many cocktail parties, private dinners, lunches and banquets that he probably had to skip regular meals to avoid dying of overeating. Even if we discount some obligatory homage required by etiquette and the general hypocrisy of social functions, such a unanimous choir of approval was rather impressive. It should also be said that the departure of Consul De Ferrariis was even mentioned in a short editorial by the New York Times. (I seemed to recognize the style of Herbert Matthews, a former correspondent from Italy who has maintained a great interest in the country and its cultural and political developments.) The consuls of other countries also gave him a good-bye dinner party. Last but not least was the so-called Italian community, namely those Italian Americans who are constantly trying to show off and appear on the page of newspapers that are still printed in a language that approximates Italian; or composed of clips from newspapers from Italy to which the only local contribution are typos, grammatical errors, layout mistakes and headlines that have nothing to do with the story they cap.

If nothing else, De Ferrariis was able to navigate around rocks and shallow waters. A year ago, in recognition of his high-quality diplomatic work, he was promoted to the rank of minister and was appointed director of the office in charge of relations with the United Nations, which is a very sensitive job. It was a very well deserved promotion. Later, he became general secretary of the ministry, and, after some major changes under Prime Minister Amintore Fanfani,[6] he was promoted ambassador to Canada.

All this notwithstanding, I will repeat here what I told him privately: my opinion is that his political approach in New York (his strategy was approved by Rome) was profoundly wrong. Personally I had a very good relationship with Baron De Ferrariis. We would meet once in a while, alone or with other worthwhile guests (otherwise I would have declined). His conversation was refined, elegant and erudite. He was the scion of one of the few Neapolitan aristocratic families that—after the military conquest of the south by the Piedmontese in 1860—understood immediately that the Bourbon[7] regime was over and that the Savoy[8] dynasty was going to stay. They recognized the new situation and decided to cooperate with the new liberal Italian state out of a sense of duty. This is something that still remains as a vestigial trait, at least in part, in the aristocracy that lost its power. I have met very few servitori dello stato[9] who had the same sense of commitment toward the government as De Ferrariis. I was deeply impressed by the long days he put in at work; by his patience in dealing with situations that were often both unpleasant and ridiculous; by his self control and skills in time management. Except for the long hours, I have none of those qualities. Without ostentation, he would keep me informed about books that I should know about. His criteria in judging Italy, from the Risorgimento to recent events, often found me in agreement and, to my great surprise, I wasn’t able to get into a fight with him about these topics. I also knew, from other sources, about his efforts to prevent the American government from dumping back in Italy the garbage of gangsters who are properly a by-product of American culture.

One evening I ran into him near my house. He had come to pick up his daughter who was studying architecture and was staying at her studio until very late at night. He told me she worked past midnight five days a week and he had to pick her up after a long day of work, with more meetings in one day that I would have in a month. But what about his strategy and politics? It was based on Italian Americans. I want to make it clear that I don’t want to diminish their merits and importance. Indeed, I have always maintained that the great majority of Italian immigrants ought to be admired for the economic success they have attained. Moreover, they owe these achievements only to their vitality as they owe nothing to the various Italian governments that abandoned them in America without an education, without leaders and without support. They also owe nothing to the American government that, in those days, did nothing to protect immigrants. However, Italian consuls ignore the healthy, successful majority of our fellow Italians. The only part of this population they pay attention to is also the worst: vain, loud, ignorant, often connected with criminal elements or at least in silent complicity with the criminals whom they never dare oppose or denounce. The complicity of all Italian consuls with this minority has always stunned me, not because of its immorality, but because it’s the wrong political strategy. These individuals, a minority, sell to the Italian government the influence they claims to have, but they would have no influence in the community if the Italian governments just refused to treat them with favors, protections, honors and with coveted invitations to banquets and social events. Moreover, the new generations of Italian Americans couldn’t care less about this minority that is losing strength with every passing year.

This minority survives by exploiting the myth of the Italian American vote despite the fact that this vote doesn’t exist. Those who claim to control it are just like Dulcamara,[10] as the victories of Fiorello La Guardia (who fought against political machines) and Vincent Impellitteri clearly demonstrated. Both these candidates defeated their Italian American adversaries supported by their respective parties’ electoral machines. Meanwhile, new generations of Italian Americans have emerged who speak American and don’t read the community newspapers printed in what passes for Italian language. If Italy cares about its long-term relationship with Italian Americans, it must learn to invest in these new generations instead of aiming at quick-and-dirty immediate results with the old ones. Italy can still be very appealing to young Italian Americans on the condition that a new tone and new policies are put in place. Obviously, the consul general of Italy in New York can’t be like Don Quixote and can’t be a moralist either. He still finds in many Italians a mentality that is stuck in the past; as if we were still in 1880 when America was only concerned with getting workers from Italy to replace blacks who were no longer slaves, or more labor to employ in the emerging industries. A consul is a consul, not a miracle worker, but he should not be nearsighted.

Italy’s major political problem in these times is how to establish new relations with the American people, not with Italian Americans. The visit to the United States by President Gronchi should have been a splendid opportunity to engage in a dialogue with the real leadership of America. The president should have taken the opportunity to step up to a higher level and explain that Italy and Italians are not longer like those who arrived here in 1880. Italy should also be more careful about the kind of Americans it invites to Italy. Many Professor Sausage (a caricature of teachers of Italian I created), people with very little understanding of Italy, have been introduced to Italian universities as ambassadors of American culture. These people harbor notions about Italy that are based on old clichés while their academic work is worthy that of a typist. Many fake and so-called valuable individuals have passed through the consulate’s filter and have been welcome by ministers, universities and even by the Vatican. Venality and vanity dominate these relations. This is why I thought Consul De Ferrariis’ politics were wrong; despite the fact that I spent some delightful hours in conversation with him and that I greatly respect him as a functionary. But maybe it wasn’t his fault. Maybe he just followed orders. I don’t know which one is true. In five years he never asked me what I thought about anything. I never felt more useless as an Italian than when I was with him.

New York, December 19, 1958