the torments of
LILLIPUT GULLIVER IN THE LAND OF CULTURE AND CULTURAL HERITAGE BETWEEN cities and small towns
my speech has an intentionally ironic title and at least unusual for a subject as challenging which is tied to the relationship between culture "and" culture ", to be understood, I presume, the first as a central culture and somehow imposed by a hypothetical center that directs the program and the second as a peripheral culture, too often declassified as marginal and parasitic diseases, irrational, out of a center that would rational and rationalizing ... at least on paper. That
of Gulliver in the land of Lilliput becomes, therefore, a metaphor expendable to highlight a relationship difficult and often conflicting for different situations: between State and local governments, including big cities and small towns, including large events and smaller quantities also though not necessarily inferior in quality, including cultural macrostructures in the face of small, sometimes really small exhibition, theatrical, literary, etc .... Situations, in fact, conflicting, often related to love and hate, attraction and repulsion, and where I often come across both as an art critic and, above all, as an administrator, being, temporarily, Head of Culture and environmental planning of a small town which is San Vero Milis.
Just by that vantage point I must point out the problem of "social desertification", which for decades gripping the inland areas and small towns in general: population growth near zero; metropolitan areas that are designed to explode and capable, in 'collective imagination more than in reality, to ensure a higher quality of life, escape from the center of the island to the coastal resorts with the increasingly likely disappear in a very near future, many countries of the Interior.
Now, this is not the place and time to address such issues but the fact remains that this is the basis from which to analyze the problems related to cultural heritage and who can contribute, albeit partially, to provide the "quality" Urban aforesaid, provided that the regional authorities do not think, and I hope not, that the service quality, including cultural, should be directly proportional to the number of inhabitants of a particular center. This
urban quality will therefore be re-created a short-sighted vision beyond economistic even in small towns, not only for cultural policy, strengthening and restoring essential services and ensuring local accessibility - authentic Sardinian chimera - which facilitates communication between cities. But it must be said though that it is not farfetched the need for cost reduction and rationalization of expenditure made by the region, appear out of place, if not harmful, some exaggerated and anti-historical parochialism, carried out by certain local government - with a good deal of demagogy and had little effect on the practical side - who do not want to give up anything, and at the same time, reject any initiative tending to merge certain centers in some essential exercises, only policy currently feasible, in view of a "harm reduction".
Cultural heritage, in this context, if treated and raised to the system, can certainly lend a hand to win the hard battle of desertification, but without being excessive illusions: We certainly can not be accused of much more extensive and serious problems, the resolution can not even question the viability of the assets. On the positive side think of the archaeological park and its museum in Gennamari Villanovaforru, the latter, though small, proved to be extremely vital in the years and able to compete with the offers far greater cultural centers, giving lifeblood of a community on its last legs and an area dedicated to that process of desertification that the social presence of the museum has at least slowed down.
on the relationship between the museum and territory and their reciprocity is based on the goodness of the operation, it is a fundamental relationship, which is closely related to enlargement of the concept of cultural heritage and protection, it appears increasingly anachronistic concept of the museum store-and more urgent, even if in a painting is still confused, the need to link the museum to the local context, in order to arrive at a integrated conservation of cultural heritage, regardless of their location, allowing the reconstruction of the unitary and continuously in a specific civilization. The preservation of historic, architectural and social protection of the past thus becomes the background of the individual and the care, preservation, the same living in a small town or in its historic center, a source of intellectual distinction. In short, this is, ultimately, take the form of the equation = protection of the good preservation of the identity.
Now, faced with a regional policy which finally seems to respond to such issues, both in terms of environmental protection, and with the policies in support the recovery of both city centers and, finally, with those aimed at tourists and seasonal adjustment of the reversal of such flows in coastal areas, there is, on the face of cultural heritage management, a centralized policy that seems to move in the opposite direction, so as to create a regulatory framework at least schizophrenic.
One example is the case of bethel. I will use again the figure of Gulliver in the land of Lilliput, where Gulliver is at bethel, the Museum of Nuragic Mediterranean and contemporary art, as is the already mentioned Lilliput Museum Gennamari Villanovaforru and all of the network of small museums and cultural institutions administered by the local authorities and, for good and evil, between waste and inefficiency, and lack of professionalism among logical parochial, for years guarantees, however, a widespread cultural programming, diverse and sometimes excellent.
I wonder and ask the regional authorities, who benefits bethel? Avoids going on the quality of the project by Zaha Hadid (who also deserves some consideration), flying over the smallness of the plant which is the theoretical basis of a transaction that poses as a comparison between innovative and contemporary nuragico and knows so much, Instead, an anachronistic and unrealistic déjà vu-style avant-garde primonovecentesco, also remove the cumbersome and inappropriate comparison to Bilbao and the Solomon R. Guggenheim Foundation in New York that somehow ensures the quality of the proposals in the museum designed by Frank O. Gehry, bethel has all the characteristics of a pernicious political and cultural process of "image" from the impression strongly centralized and authoritarian, bad for the network of small cultural realities described above.
One wonders what logic underlies the idea of \u200b\u200binvesting 70 to € 120 million for the construction of the building and very optimistic for the 2 million annual management alone, a flood of public money for a structure more than the gateway to the potential cultural island has all the credentials to become a useless mausoleum to the memory of someone and the decline of those institutions and places of culture (museums, archaeological parks, libraries and archives) that the recent Resolution No. 50/24 of '11 December 2007 of the Regional Council, have seen a 20% cut by the ordinary resources trasferitegli usually through local management services.
As we know all expire on December 31 management contracts signed between local authorities, companies and cooperatives that manage cultural facilities with the consequent closure of the structures and loss of employment by about 800 workers in the cultural sector . All in a substantial indifference, as if closing a library or a museum is less important than the removal of a bank or that the cultural workers are less important than other sectors, perhaps because they occupied the regional roads and paralyze the island. In this sense, the almost total silence of the trade unions and political parties is indicative of a failure of social planning and cultural politics. But perhaps it is unreasonable to require our politicians and trade unionists (and also by opinion) some familiarity with the problems of culture. The approval of the resolution
regional, at least temporarily, would have had to deal with this situation, represented, however, a worrying step back from the Region on the management culture. In fact, the council for months and deaf to the alarms to the proposals in the world of cooperatives, local authorities and operators, has approved an extension of funding (for months denied) as inadequate and time as funds. The extension was approved until 30 May, is wholly insufficient time to process and approve new projects and to banish their matches expectations, which of course means that the expiration will require a further extension. 
But the act contains two other elements of concern, the first, already mentioned, of a financial nature: until December 31, 2007 services were secured with a contribution from the region of 90% of the cost of labor alone, the rest comprising 10% of the labor force plus all costs, was paid by the municipalities. With the extension of the regional contribution drops abruptly to 70%, creating in fact a certain shrinkage of services and jobs. This was, however, at least one positive effect awakening those municipalities a bit 'distracted that will certainly be more stimulated by the scissors of regions without a real interest in the fate of culture.
But even more worrying aspect of the resolution is the decision to expropriate the local communities in managing their cultural facilities to entrust to 8 phantom company-sized province. The mechanism, which fixes the initial choice of a single mega regional contractor, is still a strong desire contrasts with the centralized nature of cultural services and with the same wording of the Law on Regional Culture (LR 14/2006) and for this I have spoken before of schizophrenia in certain choices. But the act contains two other elements of concern, the first, already mentioned, of a financial nature: until December 31, 2007 services were secured with a contribution from the region of 90% of the cost of labor alone, the rest comprising 10% of the labor force plus all costs, was paid by the municipalities. With the extension of the regional contribution drops abruptly to 70%, creating in fact a certain shrinkage of services and jobs. This was, however, at least one positive effect awakening those municipalities a bit 'distracted that will certainly be more stimulated by the scissors of regions without a real interest in the fate of culture. The provinces are, in fact, fictitious administrative entities that have little to do with the reality of the territories and communities as they have developed over time. No coincidence that the Region is promoting the Union of Municipalities on the basis of logical spatial longer conform to the historical-cultural reality. Centralizing the management of services means uniform, based on purely managerial culture which, by definition. thrives on diversity: the culture is diverse or not. Otherwise it becomes something of a mummified, good for travel sales, confine yes bethel-in Mausoleum.
Centralization also means a privately-owned and reflected the reality in which you want to affect, not only for the purely functional aspect but also because none, or nearly so, the companies that now run our services can compete in a mega contract that will, necessarily, the Community value. Which in practice means that expectations will be to external companies, not in the area and little interest in rooting that inevitably, given the size of Sardinia, it is not profitable in economic terms. 
The choice raised eyebrows because it is done without yet been approved "regional plan for cultural heritage, institutions and cultural sites under the Law on Culture (LR 14/2006, art. 7), previously established, so by an act of dominion the conclusions which must be submitted to the Regional Commission. It also raises concerns because it is inconsistent with the wording of that law that gives the State the power to centralize, but only to coordinate and give addresses in accordance with the Local Authorities, owners of cultural goods and services management. Do not forget which, according to the same law, shall be representatives of local communities, "the chief guardians of the values \u200b\u200bof culture and local identities" (LR 14/2006, art. 6, paragraph 1). Or maybe it's in the mood of the Region to expropriate the local communities of their property?
The road is being asked to take another and can be summarized in terms of the extension and credible operating in expanding in the approval and implementation of a time schedule for 2008 that contains: The choice raised eyebrows because it is done without yet been approved "regional plan for cultural heritage, institutions and cultural sites under the Law on Culture (LR 14/2006, art. 7), previously established, so by an act of dominion the conclusions which must be submitted to the Regional Commission. It also raises concerns because it is inconsistent with the wording of that law that gives the State the power to centralize, but only to coordinate and give addresses in accordance with the Local Authorities, owners of cultural goods and services management. Do not forget which, according to the same law, shall be representatives of local communities, "the chief guardians of the values \u200b\u200bof culture and local identities" (LR 14/2006, art. 6, paragraph 1). Or maybe it's in the mood of the Region to expropriate the local communities of their property? · the approval within the first few months of 'year of the Regional Plan that contains the addresses and accreditation criteria of cultural structures, suitable to the reality;
· the speedy publication of a call for project management and cultural development by local authorities, focusing on web forms such as the Union of Municipalities in the terms, a contract that, unlike the previous ones, is discussed and drawn by comparison with the local authorities and operators should be adapted to cultural realities of our communities;
· a firm date for project approval by the Region and disbursement of funds.
only way to credibly give rise to a serious management system adapted to the culture of the times and the needs of local communities, shared by them and they participated in the manner and time that a modern conception culture requires.
Finally, if Sardinia is the island of Lilliput, Gulliver, whatever form it may take, can only be a guest uncomfortable. At the same invader and a prisoner, to be released, as stated in the story, but his release is not an act of appeasement, but rather, a confirmation that the two worlds of Gulliver to Lilliput, remain strangers to one another, completely separate planes.
Dear President, avoid conflict and invest, rather than a bulky Gulliver, on the wide network of Lilliput, the raise in the system, coordinate and highlights each individual and always remember the quote from Armando Peres (Councillor Culture of the Municipality of Venice) that opens the final report of the Project Monitoring and Evaluation related to the LL.RR. 11/1988 and 4 / 2000: "The culture, you know, it costs, but ignorance costs far more."
Ivo Serafino Fenu
We take this opportunity to invite everyone who is in fact present at Berchidda to bring with them printed informative material concerning his activities. 
so a place to collect ideas for the comparison, so that the days of Berchidda not represent an isolated event, but a starting point for an extended time job scheduling, distributed throughout the region and aims to create a purposeful and constructive. 
