The exemplar: Ignazio Silone.
Pryce-Jones, David
Communism, though little discussed now and loitering in hidden
garrets on miserable straw pallets, is the dark hero destined for a
great, if temporary, role in the modern tragedy.
--Heinrich Heine, June 20, 1842
Ignazio Silone liked to say that every author writes different
versions of the one book singular to him. In his own case, this book was
the novel Fontamara, published inauspiciously in Switzerland in 1933. At
the time Silone was poor, in exile, solitary, and on top of everything
else suffering, as a result of consumption, from chronic ill-health. A
couple of years earlier, he had broken with the Italian Communist party.
He had been one of its eight most senior leaders. Palmiro Togliatti, the
party's secretary general and a subtle interpreter of Stalin's
every whim, had himself come to Switzerland to warn Silone that only
someone of great strength could survive the break with the party. Silone
was one such; he persisted and went on to literary fame.
Fontamara is a village in the Marsica region of the Abruzzi -- not
so far from Rome--modelled closely, perhaps exactly, on Fucino where
Silone himself had been born in 1900, the child of a small landholder.
His real name was Secondino Tranquilli; Ignazio Silone was only one of a
number of pseudonyms he adopted in the course of his career. When he was
fifteen, his whole family, with the exception of his younger brother Romolo, was killed in an earthquake. In its aftermath, he saw a relation
stealing the wallet from the corpse of one of the victims. Once coming
out of church, he had been present when a minor aristocrat set his dog
on a seamstress. When she took this man to court, the magistrate found
against her and made her pay costs. How was a human being to come to
terms with violence, great or small, natural or unnatural? Silone
received a religious education and repaid it in his fiction with more
than one characterization of priests as humble to the point of
saintliness. His own idealistic and rather priestly nature had its roots
in the unhappiness, hardship, and injustice in which he had grown up.
Soon after the First World War, the Italian socialists split, and
the young Silone joined the breakaway Communist faction almost at once.
Quickly making a name for himself, he was sent to work for the Comintern
in Spain and Germany. In 1927 Mussolini's secret police, the oval,
virtually destroyed the party organization, whereupon Silone went
underground, adopting some of his several pseudonyms. But that same
year, he was present in Moscow when Stalin rigged the vote to expel
Trotsky from the party as a prelude to the eventual exile and murder of
this rival. Silone refused to vote on the issue as instructed. By now,
he had learnt all he needed to know of both Communism and fascism in
action, and he was to spend the rest of his life defending humane values
against totalitarianism.
A writer of that generation could still use his background to
conjure up a whole world that would be true to itself and yet
unfamiliar, as in the novels of Francois Mauriac or Isaac Bashevis
Singer. Fontamara is just such a self-contained microcosm, with a prince
as its absentee landlord, devious lawyers, assorted busybodies, and
above all peasants or cafoni, men and women who have no choice but to
accept injustice and fate with as much wisdom and humor as they can
muster. Nothing much has ever changed in their lives, and they are
unaware of the political calamity about to strike. Mussolini is nowhere
mentioned in the novel, and the word "fascisti" appears only
once by my count. "Those men in black shirts" arrive by night,
and in groups, "evil, malicious, treacherous." A series of
brilliantly plotted events, complete with trickery and misunderstanding,
leads to confrontation and finally the massacre of innocent villagers.
"What are we to do?" the survivors ask, in the novel's
closing words.
Anti-fascist and pro-Communist fiction in the Thirties as a rule
staked out ideological positions and was therefore still-born, today
ludicrous as literature. Fontamara is free from propaganda; its drama is
allowed to speak for itself and therefore depicts a generalized struggle
of good and evil. That is its strength. At the time, it was not clear
whether Mussolini would align himself with the democracies or with
Hitler. The left immediately used Fontamara to recruit for the
anti-fascist cause. Leon Trotsky and Karl Radek were among its admirers.
Graham Greene, whose own early novels were full of "the usual
left-wing scenery" as George Orwell put it, in a review described
Fontamara as "the most moving account of Fascist barbarity I have
yet read." It was a great deal more than so reduced a schema
implies. During the war, in an act of black propaganda, the Allies
flooded Italy with reprints, incidentally sealing Silone's
reputation as Italy's foremost writer.
Building on this first novel, Silone wrote Bread and Wine (1937)
and The Seed Beneath the Snow (1941), comprising what is known as The
Abruzzo Trilogy, which has been newly reissued by Vermont's
Steerforth Press.(1) In the trilogy, the character of Pietro Spina is
evidently a projection of Silone himself, a Communist on the run who
disguises himself as a priest. He believes himself to be organizing a
revolution, but the villagers take him to be a genuinely holy
self-denying man of God. "Honor poverty and friendship," says
Pietro in a sentence that amounts to the moral of the trilogy, "and
be proud." But he also observes of himself, troublingly,
"I'm not one of those whose kingdom is of this world." In
the manner of Gogol, new characters are constantly popping up to hold
the center of the stage for a moment, and wonderfully lively they are
too. To give just one example of the idiosyncrasy and economy of his
style, Silone describes an old maid: "She had the mauve-green
coloring of persons who can't stand flies." But the trilogy
seems slowly to lose its way in diffusion and Silone's own
self-examination, sailing on like a great liner unable to put into
harbor.
As the Cold War set in, Silone began employing the phrase
"ex" for former Communists. In an essay in the famous and
influential collection The God That Failed (1949), he explained how Exes
like himself had originally hoped to redress social wrongs. Instead he
had found that in the Communist movement "a vocation for tyranny
nestled next to the desire for liberty." The Soviet Union was
"a system of oppression and exploitation of a new kind." He
felt "an urgent need to testify." Silone participated in the
Congress for Cultural Freedom and was an editorial advisor for its
Italian publication, Tempo Presente. Like his contemporary Primo Levi,
he seemed to certify that it was possible to live through the ideologies
and horrors of the century and emerge as a human being through force of
will and love of the truth.
One of his friends, Iris Origo, herself a perceptive and
high-minded writer, wrote a biographical sketch of him, to which she
gave the title "A Study in Integrity." His greatness, she
thought, lay in his "persistent pre-occupation with human
suffering." He was pale, slight--as though he did not want to take
up more space than was his due--and evidently introspective. When once I
had lunch with him, all those years ago on a summer day in Rome, I was
struck that he kept the three buttons of his suit formally,
protectively, done up. "He carried within him wounds," Iris
Origo wrote, "which he knew to be unhealable."
Expiring in its final few incarnations, such as China, Cuba, or
North Korea, the experiment of Communism is set to pass into history for
what it was, a tide of oppression and murder so immense that nothing
like it had ever before happened, and nothing like it should ever happen
again. There remain intellectuals in the West, nonetheless, who argue
that the evils of "really existing" Communism in practice do
nothing to vitiate the underlying dogma. Not many in number, this is the
last moment for such intellectuals to salvage the mystique of Communism,
and leave it loitering in the garret of history for some future role.
The vilification and marginalization of anti-Communists is the best
means available to this end. Long ago, the climate of opinion was put in
place whereby anyone and everyone opposed to Communism was beyond the
pale. Whether far-fetched or trivial, accusations were conjured up to
pick off opponents and suppress their dissent. Albert Camus, for
instance, could be written off as a reactionary when he failed to
support the Moscow-backed Algerian revolution because his mother was a
pied noir still living in Algeria. George Orwell and Arthur Koestler
were labelled traitors to humanity, no less, and party publications and
meetings used to call regularly for death sentences to be passed on
them. Defamation continues posthumously. At the suggestion of a friend
with connections to British intelligence, it has lately been revealed,
Orwell wrote out a list of Communist and fellow-traveling intellectuals.
Some might think that this was an obligation at the onset of the Cold
War, but leftwing commentators at once trashed him as a police stooge.
Koestler, according to his latest biographer, was a serial rapist. By
definition, the opinions of such delinquents on any subject must be
permanently discredited.
And now it is the turn of Ignazio Silone. Two Italian academics,
Dario Biocca and Mauro Canali, in recent years have published a book and
various subsequent essays accusing him of being a fascist spy and
denouncing Communists to Mussolini's secret police. In the light of
documents they have discovered in the archives, they claim that Silone
was a regular informant of a senior OVRA official by the name of Guido
Bellone. Under the pseudonym Silvestri, he is accused of passing on
details about other clandestine Communists, their whereabouts and travel
plans, over a period starting in 1923 and perhaps even earlier. On April
13, 1930, while he was breaking with Communism, he wrote to Bellone that
he found himself "at a moment of truth," when he had either to
abandon active politics or kill himself: "I cannot carry on living
ambiguously." Also in the official files is a correspondence from
October 1937 in which Mussolini asks OVRA for information compromising
to Silone and his anti-fascist novels. The OVRA reply states that at one
moment in the past Silone "seemed to have repented of his
anti-fascist past and had attempted a rapprochement with the Italian
authorities." Nothing further developed, however, from this
exchange.
In Italy, as elsewhere in continental Europe, the anti-fascist
legacy is exaggerated to serve as a buttress to national self-respect.
If Silone really were a police informer and not the honest man he seemed
so patently to be from his writings and his conduct, then the
anti-fascist legacy is compromised. Today's reconstructed fascists
stand to gain from that, but so do the Communists, reconstructed or not,
for they can claim that Silone was a fraud who forfeited all right to be
taken seriously. Throughout the media, gleeful extremists have used
Biocca and Canali's work to stamp on his reputation. The
controversy has seemed factitious, not to say incredible. The doyen of
Italian journalists, Indro Montanelli, summed it up when he countered
that "even if Silone himself rose up from his tomb to tell me these
accusations were true, I would still not believe them."
A new book, Processo a Silone, goes over all the evidence.(2)
Declared, even militant, socialists in the Pietro Nenni tradition, the
three authors, Giuseppe Tamburrano, Gianna Granati, and Alfonso
Isinelli, are out to refute Biocca and Canali once and for all. The
book's preface immediately questions whether Silone's two
critics have been displaying "the slap-dash reading typical of
journalists, or `ideological' prejudice." The tone is outright
polemical. At times, assertion is met with counter-assertion, leaving
the reader is something of a quandary. Nonetheless, there are some firm
markers.
Silone did indeed have contact with Bellone, maybe even as early as
1919, at the outset of his political commitment. In the book's main
section, Tamburrano analyzes their rather shadowy relationship. What, if
anything, happened between them in the early 1920S remains obscure. Here
was a game, he observes, in which we cannot be sure who was the cat, who
the mouse. A quite different and highly personal drama began when
Silone's brother Romolo was arrested on a charge of having placed
the bomb that exploded in the Milan Trade Fair in April 1928, killing
eighteen people. To this day, the culprit and the motive remain unknown.
Romolo was judged innocent. But for the offense of going under a false
identity and possessing other papers thought to be compromising, he was
sentenced to a long term in prison. Probably not a formal party member,
Romolo seems to have romanticized Communism and the example of his
brother. Tortured in prison, he wrote to ask his brother for help.
Another consumptive, he was soon to die in prison.
Out of a sense of responsibility and guilt, Silone sent a telegram
to Bellone to find out whether anything could be done for his brother.
Older than Silone, Bellone had started his police work before the First
World War and rose to be General Inspector of Public Security in Rome,
finally dying in 1948 as the inmate of an lunatic asylum. Silone found
him decent enough and told him so. But Bellone saw the opportunity for
blackmail. Something could be done for Romolo if Silone were to furnish
information about the Communist party and its organization. Tamburrano
concedes that in the months between Romolo's imprisonment and the
final letter of 13 April 1930 Silone did pass "generic"
information to Bellone, in other words knowledge that was already widely
available. The proper response to Silone's dealings with Bellone,
Tamburrano argues passionately, is pity for the plight into which Romolo
had got him, and admiration for the way he emerged unscathed.
In The Abruzzo Trilogy a character by the name of Murica is a
Communist who turns to denunciation of his comrades. Silone treats
Murica with understanding, which allows Biocca and Canali to infer that
Silone was writing about himself. "Proof" of that caliber
quickly earns inverted commas from Tamburrano. He also notes that police
files contain many lists of informers, and Silone's name features
on none of them. Is it likely that Bellone ran Silone as his own agent
without informing anyone else in the OVRA hierarchy? But his best point
derives from the Mussolini request in 1937 for material with which to
blacken Silone as an anti-fascist, and the OVRA response that he had
once attempted a rapprochement with the authorities. By then, Mussolini
was sending arms to Franco in the Spanish Civil War, and Italian
Communists including Togliatti were active on the Republican side. Had
Bellone really extracted compromising material, this was the moment to
go public with it, demonstrating that Communists could not be trusted.
Nothing of the kind happened. The OVRA reponse also explicitly stated
that Silone had approached the secret police "with the intention of
helping his brother."
It is essential to Biocca and Canali's case against Silone to
establish that he had an ongoing relationship with Bellone through the
early Twenties, and that the intervention on behalf of Romolo was not
the response to a sudden crisis but the calling-in of a favor due. To
that end, they have published quite a lengthy series of documents
discovered in the police files, dated between 1923 and 1927. These are
all anonymous letters giving details about the whereabouts of Communists
and their proposed movements across frontiers. A "T" crops up,
and they assume that the initial stands for his real name of Tranquilli.
In their view, the dates of the letters, and the places where they were
written, correspond to Silone's movements, and so damn him
completely as a long-term informer.
This is all speculation, Tamburrano now replies, and it ought to be
rejected wholesale. These letters are incomplete, full of gaps, and
scribbled all over so that they are hard to decipher. In their separate
contributions, in effect scholarly appendices, Gianna Granati and
Alfonso Isinelli examine the two critics' interpretation of these
letters, one by one. It is easy to show that Biocca and Canale have made
all manner of sloppy errors and that Silone could have been be in the
right city to write some of these letters on some of the dates, but by
no means all of them.
The case is not proven, as they say on doubtful occasions in
Scottish courts, but common sense suggests that Tamburrano and his
colleagues are right, and Silone deserves sympathy for helping his
brother at a certain cost to himself. Biocca and Canali make no
allowance for the totalitarian context, but strikingly and invariably place the ugliest possible interpretation on everything to do with
Silone. Whatever its source, their animus is pointless. If beneath
appearances, Silone was a real secret police informer, then that would
be only a comment on the hateful demands totalitarianism makes on the
individual--or to put it another way, some wounds to the human soul go
deep, too deep to be understood, let alone healable. Outwardly Silone
lived his life as an anti-fascist and an anti-Communist. The personal
example stands. The writing speaks for itself.
(1) The Abruzzo Trilogy, by Ignazio Silone, translated by Eric
Mosbacher; Steerforth Italia, 800 pages, $27.
(2) Processo a Silone, by Giuseppe Tamburrano, Gianna Granati, and
Alfonso Isinelli; Piero Lacaita Editore, 161 pages, 20,000 lire.
David Pryce-Jones is a senior editor of National Review.