Organic Intellectuals and Traditional Intellectuals

1. Differences between Organic intellectuals and Traditional intellectuals according to Antonio Gramsci

The organic intellectual concept is a very interesting concept that was formulated by Antonio Gramsci, who is the founder of a Communist party in Italy also known as PCI. The main idea or argument according to Antonio Gramsci was that the intellectual was to offer service to the party, and once the establishment of an intellectual takes place, the action and strategy to be taken were put in place. An Organic intellectual was the one responsible for looking for the best arguments to defend the actions and strategies. Therefore, in Organic intellectual, there was a deeply profound commitment to the cause. On the other hand, as opposed to organic intellectuals, the traditional intellectual, there is not so much commitment.

The other outstanding and important difference according to Gramsci was that the Organic intellectuals are bound to production, and in the same way they are bound to the class. While the Traditional intellectuals serve something that is greater than production and that is religion.

Gramsci considers the Traditional intellectuals to be independent of all other factors of natural effects. This is to say that it implies on a deeply found leftover presence. Therefore, the findings of traditional intellectuals are already a part of history. This is the very reason as to why the traditional intellectuals are associated with a higher order in the society and the surrounding environment. The final difference is that; Organic intellectuals continue emerging as each new class is generating. It is critical to realize that the traditional intellectuals arise from the individuals who already have a permanent position in the society; examples are the Clergy and Priests who are relied upon to bring about order in the society.

2. Characteristics of counter-cinema as outlined by Peter Wollen

Counter-Cinema may be defined as the rough categorizing of filmmakers, films, and the institutions which attempted to work the ideological and formalist dominion of the Hollywood cinema. Thus, a counter-cinema includes but is not limited to categories of films which do not flow. Wollen wrote a popular essay known as ‘Godard and Counter cinema.’ He uses the films of Luc Godard (Battleship) to formulate the seven characteristics of counter-cinema. There are seven characteristics of counter-cinema according to Peter Wollen, and they include:

Transitivity.

Identification.

Transparency.

Single Diegesis.

Closure.

Pleasure.

Fiction.

All the factors above, according to Wollen, are typical counter-cinema characteristics and determine the extent to which a film captivates the audience.

3. According to Luciano and Scarparo, Italian women directors suffer a “double marginality.” Please explain what they mean.

Italian women movie directors have a very complex relationship to feminism. The open discrimination pegged on the principles of female chauvinist makes it a sad case for the female individuals who are interested in venturing into the film industry. Thus, it is not wrong to view these Italian women film directors from a perspective that is framed by feminist theories. These filmmakers recognize that their works arise out of the suspicion of teleological narratives of redemption, and post-feminism. They, therefore, engage with the social conditions of modern Italy, and with women’s multifaceted positions within the society. Similarly, their films are bound by a complex relationship to a movie making tradition that is highly male-controlled. Hence the theoretical framework may be linked to a feminist revelation on the subaltern and inferior conditions of women as filmmakers and as subjects of artistic production. Thus their work suffers from a condition known as double marginality. Most Italian women movie makers in many instances represent a degree of marginality and subordination, within the film industry. In addition to that, when the subject matter of a film puts more emphasis on women, most of the movie critics and spectators consider those movies marginal. Therefore, the spectators and critics accuse the film of not having a universal appeal.

4. According to Luciano and Scarparo, contemporary Italian women filmmakers have an ”Ambivalent relationship to feminism.” Explain their position.

Luciano and Scarparo argue that their studies do not assume the existence of any differences between women and men, but rather it depicts ways in which the experience of women, their history, and their relationship to history affect their cinematography. The films that are discussed by Luciano and Scarparo range from documentaries to the mainstream features directed at a larger scale. The book ”Reframing Italy” is not aimed at providing the panoramic overview, that attempts to explain the absence of the analysis of movies by recognized directors. But in the real sense, the book is a thematic analysis based on case studies that were undertaken. Thus, Luciano and Scarparo argue that the film directors, we discuss forefront women viewpoints.

Most of the subjects are very much aware of the difficult position that they face as women who occupy the filmmaking positions. However, the Italian women filmmakers rarely identify with feminism, which they consider as an issue of the old generation. Thus, this attitude towards feminism is being conflated with women liberation movements, agrees with the attitudes of most Western nations. The unresolved tensions with feminism occur in very many instances, in Luciano and Scarparo conversations with women filmmakers. An example is Antonietta De Lillo, who is very much aware of the significance of women movements, she would not tell her awareness as a feminist. Instead, she claimed that by her being a woman created a sense of uneasiness in her as she sensed the uneasiness in other women. By this, she means to related to another person’s hardship and not her own. She continues to say that; when she was young she saw feminism as an aggressive and an ant feminine thing, but now in her point of view she thinks that feminism had played a very significant role. Despite the fact that she appreciated feminism together with its influences and benefits, she still considers it as something that belonged in the past and not her present life. Similarly, Alina Marazzi made we want roses too in the year 2007, to understand and become part of the legacy of the women liberation movement. She also feels like she has benefited from feminism but in the real sense, she is not part of it in any way.

In conclusion, as much as most of the Italian women filmmakers have benefited from feminism, they still do not consider it as a part of their present life. Rather they associate it with the past. This has made them develop an ambivalent relationship with feminism.