Untitled

Stephen Gundle
never became dehumanized or detached from the realm of the real. They were, it
is true, molded by men in a way that took account of the sex appeal of American
stars (and sometimes against the instincts and desires of the women themselves)
but they retained at least a strong appearance of the natural.
In Italy at the time the body was not fully an object of narcissistic cultivation in
a consumerised sense of self, although the female body was certainly subjected to
a tendentially modern male gaze. 27 Rather it was mainly perceived as geared to
natural functions and to work. Italian stars were often bodies in landscapes;
beautiful bodies representing working bodies in real contexts – rice-fields, lagoons,
and mountains. Piera De Tassis quotes Carlo Lizzani, who worked as a writer on
Riso amaro, as saying that Mangano’s body in the film assumed a presence and
meaning not foreseen in the script. Her body was “offered up for viewing like a
natural prodigy, a beautiful animal or a beautiful tree.” 28 Because Italy was not
yet a fully industrial society, it found its star figures in men and women who were
recognizable and real: cyclists, boxers, and shapely women. “In Italy the talents
and qualities that are celebrated are absolutely natural and spontaneous, the fruit
not of research, study or effort so much as gifts received at birth and cultivated
spontaneously which, when they are suddenly revealed, bring the individual to
public attention, just like a stroke of luck or a lottery,” wrote Silvio Guarnieri in
1956. 29
Italians wondered at the polished, glossy images of Marilyn Monroe, but many
commentators did not find her sexy. Her stylized sexuality was enticing, Oreste
Del Buono conceded, “but beneath all the fuss there is the extremely unexciting
reality of a small, chubby girl who is almost innocuous and rather dull. In the
matter of sex appeal, she certainly bears no comparison with our Mangano in Riso
amaro.” 30 Sex appeal was considered by Italians as something imported and
curious, an American feature that was constructed rather than natural. Even in the
mid-1950s, the term glamour was scarcely used, but some efforts were made to
try and understand what it signified in the United States. It tended to be seen as
something alien and alienating, the product of “the orderly frigidity of appearances
and social relations” in theUnited States. 31
When Italian magazines depicted Silvana Pampanini and others in regal apparel,
almost as though they were queens, they did so not because the external manifestations
of royalty had been taken over entirely by the entertainment industry, but
because the myth of royalty still exercised considerable fascination for Italians.
Lacking a studio system, Italy could not manufacture glamour except by imitation.
The ersatz effects of the 1930s’ “white telephone” films gave way in the 1940s
and early 1950s to a relation with one aspect of glamour – sex appeal – but the
neglect of other aspects, including fashion and consumerism, which in the United
States gave it a special appeal to women. Fashion spoke to their experiences and
desires and provided a utopian element in the construction of images of the ideal
348