Aisthesis
Firenze University Press
www.fupress.com/aisthesis
Pandemic and the Fairy Tale Narrative
Citation: D. Cecchi (2021) Pandemic and
the Fairy Tale Narrative. Aisthesis 14(1):
37-43. doi: 10.36253/Aisthesis-12499
Copyright: © 2021 D. Cecchi. This is an
open access, peer-reviewed article
published by Firenze University Press
(http://www.fupress.com/aisthesis)
and distributed under the terms of the
Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and
source are credited.
Data Availability Statement: All relevant data are within the paper and its
Supporting Information files.
Competing Interests: The authors
have declared that no competing interests exist.
Dario Cecchi
Abstract. The article considers how the narrative of the pandemic has been developed, especially with regard to literature. The case study analyzed is the Italian novel
L’assemblea degli animali, written by an anonymous author, whose penname is Filelfo.
The article shows that the wide range of classical, literary and artistic references recognizable inside the text corresponds to a precise attitude of the ecologist culture, which
is in search for traditional and elevated models to assert their ethical and political
objective. The novel brings this directory to the point that it evokes an esoteric dimension of ecology. The article states that this stance is not serious, but ends into a literary
game and feeds the needs for entertainment by the cultural industry, rather than giving
any real contribution to the ecological question.
Keywords: ecology, literature, entertainment, cultural industry, esoterism.
THE ECOLOGIST NARRATIVE
The representation of the pandemic through images has shown
a poverty that does not allow the elaboration of narrative formulas that are completely appropriate to the situation (see Cappelletto [2021]). If we look at the journalistic account of the pandemic, it seems that journalism is increasingly rediscovering speech,
after years of uncontested domination of images. It is interesting to
note that, at this juncture, genres such as the Bildungsroman or the
didactic fable are making a comeback. I would like to consider in
particular a literary case, which will let me reflect precisely upon
this aspect: the forms of narration that are emerging, or re-emerging, during the pandemic indicate a renewed role of literature.
However, I refrain from formulating a general thesis on the narrative forms of the pandemic, whether it concerns literature or cinema. In short, I avoid suggesting delays or foresight of this or that
art. I will limit myself to pointing out how for instance, in the period preceding the pandemic and with regard to a now flourishing
activity like documentary, cinema does not seem to have reacted in
a striking way to this event – except of course wondering about the
Aisthesis. Pratiche, linguaggi e saperi dell'estetico 14(1): 37-43, 2021
ISSN 2035-8466 (online) | DOI: 10.36253/Aisthesis-12499
38
limits of its medium in conditions of lockdown.
On the contrary, the ecological question, as emerges in the work of many remarkable directors, of
which I will mention only the name of Nossiter,
had been deepened by cinema. It is also interesting
to see how, once an epidemic has broken out and
spread all over the globe, the same interpretative
model has often been proposed, that is, the rediscovery of traditions and a lifestyle more respectful
of a ‘natural order’. A sort of revolutionary claim is
linked to this model, however revolution is intended, and is meant to be a sort of reparative action.
Omelia contadina (2020), the recent film realized by Alice Rohrwacher in collaboration with
street artist JR, goes exactly in the same direction,
despite being released when the global ecological
agenda is now having to deal with the pandemic.
It seems to me that cinema – I repeat: taken
in its most widespread expressions and subject to
every possible exception – has not reacted fully
adequately to the novelty of the event, believing
to be able to treat the pandemic as a continuation of the discourse already started on the subject of other issues: the ecological question, but
also the question of globalization understood as
the cancellation of distances. Thus, while films
on ecology continue to focus on the disasters of
the Anthropocene, the issue of physical distancing during confinement is mostly dealt with as
a variant of the incredible virtual approach now
within the reach of almost everyone (at least in
the West), thanks to new digital devices. This
problem, in other words, is addressed in terms
of a more or less effective and attractive remodeling of social media (Facebook, Instagram and
others) and communication technologies (Skype,
Whatsapp and now Zoom, Meet etc.). And it is no
coincidence that some documentary experiments
concerning the lockdown took direct inspiration
from a film model that marked the advent of the
internet in the world: I am referring to Life in a
Day (2011) by the Scott brothers, in which the
directors had he asked people around the world to
film a fragment of their day. They would then edit
parts of these videos together, thus creating an
ideal day for humanity across the globe. I speak of
Dario Cecchi
a model because the experiment was replicated by
Gabriele Salvatores with his Italy in a Day (2014),
which limits the perspective to Italy. However, it
seems to me that in the experiments indicated
above there is always the risk of activating the
mechanism of what Grusin calls premediation.
I am of course referring to how certain themes
or narrative models were taken up after the outbreak of the pandemic. It is not so much the fact
that familiar narrative formulas are repeated: the
thing in itself is neither an evil nor an indication
of little attention to current events. The point is
that narrative themes and frames are repeated: in
other words, the contexts of the narrative1 have
not been reworked in any way. But it is not fully
accounted that, due to the overlap between narrative and information about the pandemic, such
marked narrative continuity can end up providing
the feeling that the pandemic is somehow within
the number of foreseeable events. In short, the
trauma of the event is anesthetized (see Montani
[2007]), but, due to a perverse effect, this anesthetization creates even more anger, because it
supports the idea that the pandemic could have
been avoided 2. In summary, the visual narrative
of the pandemic has not always promoted a new
understanding of reality3. The effect of the sense
1
I use the notion of “context” in the meaning proposed by
Umberto Eco (1979), which distinguishes context and “cotext”.
The cotext is all that we find on the surface of the text and that
contributes to the understanding of the cell we are dealing with.
To a minimum degree, this is what we need to understand the
different use or sense of the preposition “of ” depending on
whether we are talking about “Elizabeth of England” or “bottle
of wine”. The context is, so to say, the background that is necessary for us to understand what is said in the text: the phrase
“they brought the lion back to the cage” presupposes the existence of a city with a zoological garden or a circus that is camped
somewhere.
2 Of course, I do not want to say that this forecasting work, for
example by science, is not desirable and commendable: it is in
every respect. But the problem here is the communication, direct
or indirect, in the form of information or narration (of reality
or fiction), of how we are coping with the pandemic, with what
technical means, with what strategies and projects, with what
scientific tools.
3 For the reciprocal implication and the intertwining of understanding and narrating, see Garroni (2003), who thinks of this
relationship as a “paradox” [Garroni (2003): 175] together irre-
Pandemic and the Fairy Tale Narrative
of narration on understanding is basically the
expansion, on the level of the imagination and its
ability to anticipate an intellectual grasp of reality, of the art process described by Sklovskij (1968)
as “estrangement”. Except that here not only the
renewal of perception and therefore its flagrance
is at stake, but also the possibility of experiencing things, that is, of bringing them back to a
possible sense, even in the absence of specific
practical or cognitive discoveries (see Garroni
[2005]). In this perspective, the idea of narrating
as a possible anticipation of the sense of experience refers to an investigation of the ways and
forms through which the subject makes an image
of the world. Given these premises, it cannot be
said that, in cinema, a similar reconfiguration of
meaning, with respect to the ecological question
or the media question, has emerged in a recognizable way, even though it is evoked in numerous
videos or films. Take the question of the “spillover”, or leap of the virus from one animal species
to another, in this case to the human being. This
scientifically attested fact has an undoubted narrative potential: that is, it invites not to a didactic
exposition of the scientific meaning of the concept, but to a narrative development of a spillover case and its catastrophic consequences, as it is
hypothesized that it happened in the case of Covid-19. In other words, it would be a very powerful
accelerator in the process of configuring the story,
of what Paul Ricoeur (1983: 125-135) calls “Mimesis 2”. As we will see in the next paragraph, this
happens, surprisingly indeed, in a novel, or rather
a “fairy tale”, released at the end of 2020.
THE ANIMAL FAIRY TALE
The fairy tale mentioned at the end of the
previous paragraph is L’assemblea degli animali
[The Assembly of Animals], released in the original Italian edition by Einaudi in November 2020,
whose subtitle reads Una favola selvaggia [A Wild
Fairy Tale]. The anonymous author uses a nickducible to explanations in a strictly logical sense and yet necessary.
39
name, “Filelfo”, on whose meaning he will offer
an explanation at the end of the book. I will have
to return to the fable-like nature of the story later.
Let us start with the construction of the weave. In
fact, the story is thought of as a sort of mythical
explanation of the reason why the virus spillover
from a bat to a human being. The explanation
provided is linked to the ecological theme of the
revolt of nature against the abuse perpetrated by
mankind, but introduces some original elements.
In fact, throughout the first part of the book
(Chapters I-IX), the author imagines that animals
gather in assembly to decide what to do with an
increasingly aggressive and voracious human
being. The casus belli was given by the terrible fire
that devastated the forest in Australia, causing
a terrible slaughter of animals and the destruction of their environment. The book opens with
a description of all the animals that gather in the
secret place of the assembly, known to all animals
from the moment of birth, to decide what to do.
Only the human being has forgotten the existence
of this place. The scene is effectively outlined: it
is the spectacle of nature that is both the setting
for the meeting and it is itself, represented by all
animal species, that comes together. It is a cosmic movement that narrated. The poet’s words
would fit well with its bucolic and epic development: redeunt Saturnia regna. Here too, the ferocious beast stands next to its prey, not because a
kingdom of peace has been established among the
animals, but because, the book informs us, it is
the eternal rule of this assembly that the fundamental law of nature is suspended: say the law of
the strongest. I suggested to make a comparison
between the fable of Philelf and the IV Virgilian
Eclogue – si parva licet. In fact, the assembly of
animals is teeming with cultured references, not
least to the Greek-Latin classics. Curiously, however, the bucolic Virgil is absent, at least explicitly. The author has in fact accompanied the book
with a thick appendix of annotations in which,
chapter after chapter, he indicates the more or
less hidden or evident references of his to other
texts. The author’s cultural encyclopedia – if I can
express myself thus, paraphrasing a notion bor-
40
rowed from Umberto Eco (1979) – could not be
more extensive. It goes from classical literature to
contemporary writers: Italo Calvino is mentioned
several times; Borges is referred to as the greatest modern poet. But there are also references as
much to pre-classical mythologies as to pop culture, with quotes taken for example from the
songs of Fabrizio De André. A similar heterogeneity suggests to a first critical reading a judgment
that sees in the story a sort of pastiche covered by
the aura of the allegorical fable. But, beyond the
critical judgments, I am interested in establishing, in the wake of Eco’s theory of cooperation,
if it is possible to trace the identity of the author
and establish who they are addressing, who their
audience is. Naturally, the reference to Eco goes
in this direction, the interest is not so much for
the real identity of the mysterious Filelfo, but for
the “model author” that this story presupposes.
Similarly, I am interested in what could be, in the
mind of the writer or at least in accordance with
the narrative device they have created, the “model reader” they address. But before proceeding to
examine the two issues, I will add the few other
elements necessary to understand what I will
want to say about the book.
The assembly, in which chiefs, the “kings” of
the various elementary kingdoms (earth, air, sea,
underground world; therefore: lion, eagle, whale,
mouse) and the victims of human fury (the Australian koala), deliberates that the only possible
solution is to hit the human being so as to make
him reflect on what he is doing to nature and the
rest of the animal world. It was therefore decided to accept the proposal of the king of mice to
spread a virus that will hit humanity hard without
annihilating it. This is obviously Covid-19, whose
epidemic arises from a spillover from the bat (the
winged mouse) to the human being through some
well-known passages, which the author describes
effectively as the future of history: the pangolin,
bite from the bat, in the cage of the farmer’s son
who goes to the market to sell it. Everything happens in the most anonymous and insignificant
events. The pandemic’s direct witnesses in the story are obviously the white cat and the dog MoMo,
Dario Cecchi
representatives of the domestic species closest to
the human being, from which they even rise to
religious symbols (in Egypt) and literary figures.
MoMo and the cat see the point of maximum resistance of mankind in the progressive degradation of the life of people and families of which they are pets, until death from the
virus of the owner of MoMo, of which we intuit
that he was a doctor engaged in fight against the
epidemic. The pain is such that the dog is transformed into a new being, a Filelfo in fact, half
dog and half human. The “Filelfi” are those beings
who have undergone a process of metamorphosis that makes them hybrids; hybridization is
seen as access to a higher stage of existence, even
of essence, similar to the ascension towards the
astral constellations.
We can now formulate hypotheses on the identity of Filelfo. First of all, in order to understand
who the author is, we need to understand what
kind of text they propose to us. At first glance,
L’assemblea degli animali, according to what has
been said, would seem to be an initiatory fable.
However, there are two elements that must lead
us to be more cautious. Unlike other authoritative
models of esoteric or key fable, just think of Goethe’s Fabel, here the historical context in which
the fantastic story is to be placed is clearly indicated: the immemorial time typical of the fable
and of the epos disappears, which refer typically
at the time of “once upon a time” or “no longer
always”, that is, they represent a world that exists
and does not exist at the same time4 (see Bachtin
[1981]). Furthermore, the precise reference to the
sources taken from different auctores and inserted
in the plot of the text is made sometimes for the
sake of the quotation, as in the case of that “Last
comes the Raven” (Filelfo [2020]: 5), explicitly taken up by Calvino, with whom the story opens. This
takes away much of its esoteric character from the
story. There are no enigmas to solve, a fundamental element in activating the operational procedure
4
Persian fables, for example, do not begin with “Once upon a
time” but with “Yeki bud wa yeki nabud” (“Once upon a time
there was and there was not”).
Pandemic and the Fairy Tale Narrative
through which the reader can start his or her initiatory path. Nor can it be said that the structure
of the text constructed as a montage of citations of
which the author indicates the sources functions
here according to the authoritative model it evokes
– and which is promptly cited among the numerous sources. I refer to Eliot’s Wasteland. What is
missing here, unlike Eliot’s masterpiece, is the typically modernist intention of making the reader feel
all the dissonant force that exists in approaching,
for example, Madame Blavatsky and Tiresias. It is
then up to the reader to elaborate – using a cinematographic metaphor, in the intervals of the montage – the meaning of what he has read.
Intertwining the two elements, the pastiche
that refuses to give the reader reading instructions (Jameson [1991]) and the pulverization of
time frames (Lyotard [1984]), both internal to the
text and in relation to the possible “refiguration”
of the reader’s world (Ricoeur [1983]: 138-143),
we could say that we are dealing with a product
of late postmodernity, which, however, lacks the
ironic trait typical of postmodern literature: it is
not possible here to assert the clause according to
which that’s all folks! The fable is “wild”, as the
subtitle states, not so much because it operates
a ‘conversion’ of the reader to the feral state, but
because it offers a pastiche that can no longer be
dismantled as it is immune to an ironic reading.
Therefore, it is not an esoteric fable in the narrow
sense of the word, but rather a successful Singspiel
which, winking at themes and figures taken from
the most disparate traditions, exhibits a variable
rate of hermeticity. Therefore, despite the crowd
of cultured references, the matrix of the story
does not seem to come from literature and high
culture but from entertainment and pop culture
(Bolter 2020), in the highest and noblest sense of
the term, which a well-thought-out Singspiel can
guarantee. Consequently, Filelfo is not a Pythagorean sage, a hermit by his choice in some remote
land of the Italian countryside, but rather the
refined editor of a large publishing house.
We can now ask ourselves who is the model
reader of Filelfo’s “fable”. Here is what the author
themselves says at the end of the book, with
41
words and cadences that emphasize its mysterious
or esoteric character:
Sappi però che i nuovi giusti sono ovunque, confusi
tra la gente comune, disseminati in tutto il mondo,
persi in mille lavori e fatiche e problemi, a ricostruire umilmente, finché dura la terra, una nuova arca.
Forse qualcuno di loro ora ha tra le mani questo libro
e lo sta leggendo. Forse sei tu, lettore arrivato alle
sue ultime parole. Che non possono che essere: de te
fabula narratur. Perché da sempre la favola parla di
te. Sei tu, lettore, l’autore di questa e della prossima.
(Filelfo 2020: 140)
[But know that the new righteous are everywhere,
confused among the common people, scattered all
over the world, lost in a thousand jobs and hardships
and problems, humbly rebuilding a new ark while the
earth lasts. Perhaps some of them now have this book
in their hands and are reading it. Maybe it’s you,
reader come to its last words. Which can only be: de
te fabula narratur. Because the story has always been
about you. You, reader, are the author of this and the
next.]
The syntax, always fluid, has maintained an
adequate level of hypotactic complexity throughout the text, such as not to discourage the average
reader, without risking the accusation of simplification. In closing it becomes a little more complicated: subordinates and incisions increase. The
sentence even breaks up and gives rise to two
consecutive subordinates at the beginning of a
proposition, connected in meaning with the previous proposition. Everything emphasizes the
dramatic tone of the author’s final considerations. Not only is the book about the reader, as we
would feel to understand the saying de te fabula
narrator, according to a lectio facilior. The fable
belongs to the readers, in the sense that they are
the authentic author, also in view of future extensions of history.
We draw the conclusion that the reader is the
one who gives meaning to the unprecedented dissolution of the historical time of the pandemic in
the mythical time of animal nature: readers are
in fact the author of the present and future fable,
42
as if the story had created a direct bridge, without mediation, between the world of fiction and
the real world. From a similar perspective, the
concrete author of the story can affirm the total
reversibility between themselves and the reader:
the invitation is to enter into a communion of
ideas and a communion of intentions and feelings.
The author is not Filelfo, but the newly formed
brotherhood of the Filelfi, in which the reader is
called to enter, becoming an author in turn. And
the fable itself from a pure metamorphosis tale
becomes an effective transformation action of a
human race that must choose whether to embrace
the project of a return to animality as a new frontier of moral and civil progress reformed according to the imperative of ecology. In this respect,
the most powerful classic reference in the final
part of the book undoubtedly goes to Ovid’s Metamorphoses. In this sense, L’assemblea degli animali is not really an esoteric fable for initiates, but
a sort of propaganda pamphlet for the layman,
which uses a high style and classic models to gain
authority among the reading public.
The point reached satisfies only in part, especially if we start from the assumption, widely
requested by the story, that the “encyclopedia” the
reader needs to interpret the text cannot be composed only of knowledge and notions, but must
also include a bundle of feelings and inclinations,
a wide-ranging sensitivity towards the themes of
ecology and the protection of nature. The model
reader of this story is not, in all respects, a scholar or a militant ecologist. The reader’s culture
is solicited in a broader meaning: not only his
knowledge properly so called, but the set of informal knowledge, information and quasi-knowledge
that contribute to forming his opinion. It could
be said that this model reader, due to the culture
and preferences attributed to him, comes from
that middle or upper middle class with a progressive orientation, which lives in the centers of large
urban agglomerations. We could almost speak
of a “Limit Traffic Area” reader, to use a figure
which has become popular in the Italian political debate. However, we must bear in mind that
this popular journalistic category perhaps makes
Dario Cecchi
more sense on a cultural level than on a political one. Consequently, more than a model reader,
L’assemblea degli animali implicitly draws the contours of a model environment of possible readers: it is in fact in the mechanism of imitation
and emulation, in the sharing of cultural habits
within the same social reality, which goes to place
the fortune of this book. In the absence of salons
and literary circles, we must imagine the relationship between the model author, behind whom
we think there is the figure of an editor, and the
model reader in terms of the relationship between
spin doctor and blogger, that is, between professional and semi-professional actors of the same
media system.
As argues Wolfgang Iser (2013: 228), elaborating a paradigm of interpretative cooperation more
open to the assumption of the aesthetic elements
of this performance, reading presupposes an
“artificial habitat” (künstliches Habitat) in which,
like an actor, the reader can move with a certain
degree of freedom. Readers can thus restructure their own hierarchies of aesthetic, ethical
and political values. In this context, the aesthetic
component of experience performs in particular
the function of fluidifying the complex of other
values, so that it is possible to shape a new configuration of life (Jauss 1972). In this sense, aesthetic values present themselves as meta-values
of human experience. L’assemblea degli animali
essentially insists on the meeting point between
media and the dimension of affectivity widely
understood, and interprets this relationship in
terms of an overlapping between the sphere of
human communication and the sphere of interspecific communication, between the cultural
environment and natural environment.
At this level, the ambiguity of the book emerges. It is the same ambiguity that runs through
the rhetoric of the rediscovery of the nature of
progressive, intellectual and even philosophical
discourse (cf. Coccia [2020] among others). The
starting point is not problematic, which is indisputable: the defense of the environment requires
a decisive change of gear in the industrial policies
of developed countries. This is a priority on the
Pandemic and the Fairy Tale Narrative
global political agenda. Problematic are the point
of arrival and the ideological substrate, if you can
call it that, connected to this rhetoric. The latter
often ends up identifying the “metamorphosis” of
the human with the uncritical re-appropriation
of an alleged animality, or even a lost “vegetality” (Coccia [2018]; Mancuso [2019]). A problematic element of these philosophies emerges, for
example, in the latest formulation of his thought
program by Emanuele Coccia (2020). Here, the
notion of metamorphosis has both a descriptive
value and a normative value at the same time: it
indicates belonging to a cycle of natural transformations and the imperative to a return to
the origin. L’assemblea degli animali relaunches
this contradiction, or perhaps indicates its place
of origin: the question should not be sought so
much in the conflict between nature and culture,
between ecology and progress, but in the short
circuit between communication and information,
between the sphere of the media and the culture
of sharing and the sphere of knowledge and critical knowledge. Filelfi are placed here, but they are
not the wise guardians of an ancient wisdom: they
are skilled users of the internet, at times shrewd at
times (maybe intentionally, or just luckily) naïve.
REFERENCES
Bachtin, M., 1981: The Epic and the Novel:
Towards a Methodology for the Study in the
Novel, in Id., The Dialogic Imagination, ed. by
M. Holquist, University of Texas Press, Austin.
Bolter, J.D., 2019: The Digital Plenitudine. The
Decline of the Elite Culture and the Rise of the
New scenario Media, MIT Press, Cambridge
(Mass.).
Cappelletto, C., 2021: Arguments for a New Aesthetics of Presence, “Critical Inquiry”, n. 47, pp.
100-3.
Coccia, E., 2020a: The Life of Plants. A Metaphysics
of Mixture, trans. eng. by D.J. Montanari, Polity, Cambridge 2018.
Coccia, E., 2020b: Métamorphoses, Payot & Rivages, Paris.
43
Desideri, F., 2018: Origine dell’estetico. Dalle emozioni al giudizio, Carocci, Roma
Eco, U., 1979: Lector in fabula: la cooperazione
interpretativa nei testi narrativi, Bompiani,
Milano.
Filelfo, 2020: L’assemblea degli animali. Una favolta
selvaggia, Einaudi, Torino.
Frankfurt, H.G., 2005: On Bullshit, Princeton University Press, Princeton.
Garroni, E., 2003: Comprendere e narrare, in Id.,
L’arte e l’altro dall’arte, Laterza, Roma-Bari, pp.
175-197.
Garroni, E., 2005: Immagine Linguaggio Figura.
Osservazioni e ipotesi, Laterza, Roma-Bari.
Grusin, R., 2015: Radical Mediation, “Critical
Inquiry”, Vol. 42, No. 1 (Autumn), pp. 124148.
Iser, W., 2015: Kultur. Ein emergentes Phänomen,
in Id., Emergenz. Nachgelassene und verstruet
publizierte Essays, ed. by A. Schmitz, Konstanz
University Press, Konstanz.
Jameson, W., 1991: Postmodernism, or The Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, Duke University
Press, Durham.
Jauss, H.R., 1972: Kleine Apologie der ästhetischen
Erfahrung, Universitätsverlag, Konstanz, pp.
227-245.
Lyotard, J.-F., 1984: The Postmodern Condition. A
Report on Knowledge, trans. eng. by G. Bannington, B. Massumi, University of Minnesota
Press, Minneapolis.
Mancuso, S., 2019: La nazione delle piante, Laterza, Roma-Bari.
Montani, P., 2007: Bioestetica. Senso comune, tecnica e arte nell’età della globalizzazione, Carocci,
Roma.
Ricoeur, P., 1983: Temps et récit 1, Seuil, Paris.