CWith the publication of the Blood of the Vanquished a second public life began for Giampaolo Pansa. A happy season, because kissed by a huge editorial success, continued with a series of books dedicated to the same topic, and that is the summary killings of the fascists even after April 25, after the Liberation took place. But also a difficult and complicated season, because from that moment Pansa will be considered, on one side of his left, if not a traitor, a rehabilitator of fascism, a journalist who would have written a book to muddy the bright page of the Resistance and tickle the resentment of neo-fascists or families of soldiers or sympathizers of the Social Republic.
–
Pansa had already written books on the Resistance. With the Blood of the defeated he wanted to face a very delicate chapter of our history, often suffocated by a blanket of reticence and embarrassment. The spiral of revenge that stains the blood of the defeated fascists with blood, but also, the case of remembering, of moderate partisans, priests and landowners of the triangle of death in the heart of Emilia, a page that is not entirely unedited. On the side of the fascist memory, the works of Giorgio Pisan had already quantified in detail the number of dead and the exact places of the bloody reprisals after April 25. They were very popular and highly sold works, but nevertheless within the enclosure of the memory and grudges of the defeated. Pansa, on the other hand, illustrated those themes within the democratic and anti-fascist world, where even the detailed details represented something new and surprising.
–
Il Sangue di vinti was a sensational editorial event, adding the readers who had already been Pisan and the neo-fascist historiography and those who traditionally constituted the public accustomed to the books of Giampaolo Pansa. And the reactions were also sensational. The anathema, which is generally motivated by the fact that Pansa would not have brought any new documentary elements, confining itself to putting together already published documents, is part of a sector which is very influential in left-wing historiography. Giorgio Bocca had fiery words against his colleague Pansa. The presentations of the book, and subsequent ones, were marked by very loud protests to prevent Pansa from speaking freely. He, the author of the Blood of the Vanquished, did not back down and did not seem to suffer much from the excommunication that a part of his world was declaring. Indeed, he reacted by publishing books on the same theme again, guaranteeing editorial success and renewing controversy and attacks every time. None for the contest specific errors or factual alterations. The attacks focused on Pansa’s interpretation and above all on the fear that that reinterpretation of the Resistance could give space to the resentment of a neo-fascist world, strengthened by the admissions of an exponent of anti-fascist culture. But not infrequently tones of new inquisition were touched or perhaps even centered, with intimations to silence, vehement corporate reactions from historians not kissed by the same editorial success, attacks on the tables where the Pansa books were presented.
–
From this point of view, Pansa suffered a loneliness and isolation from his truly unexpected world, as if the spirit of body and of alignment had torn any solidarity with an ex-treated like a deserter. The combative vis of Giampaolo Pansa, however, appeared more leathery.
–
–
January 13, 2020 (change January 13, 2020 | 00:19)
© RESERVED REPRODUCTION
– .
