My opinion

Posted on March 21, 2019 by babbityjean

When I hear the word “Rico,” I think of two things:  First, the 1931 crime film Little Caesar starring Edward G. Robinson as Caesar “Rico” Bandello, a small-time hoodlum who ascends to the highest ranks of organized crime only in the end to die in a gutter.  His famous last line is “Mother of mercy, is this the end of Rico?”

Second, I think of the 1970 federal RICO Act that was passed as a result of the Valachi hearings in Congress in the 1960s.  The mobster Joseph Valachi broke the code of silence, called omertà, to talk about the crimes of Cosa Nostra.  The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as RICO, provides, among other things, that mafia bosses can be tried for crimes that they ordered others to do or assisted them in doing. It closed a loophole that allowed a person who instructed someone else to commit murder, for example, to be exempt from trial because he did not personally commit the crime.

Fighting the mafia has always been a difficult challenge.  Mafia families have been involved in many, many crimes over long periods of time all for the benefit of their leaders.  But these godfathers were difficult to smoke out because they rarely committed the crimes themselves.  They spoke in code and their “wise guys” knew how to implement their wishes.

What we have learned recently from the testimony of Michael “the fixer” Cohen is that President Trump is, in essence, a mafia don.  The Trump Organization sounds a lot like a racketeering enterprise with all of the decisions made at the very top.  Alleged corruptions include bank fraud, tax fraud, obstruction of justice, perjury, and the list goes on.  And, as Mr. Cohen said, “Mr. Trump did not directly tell me to lie to Congress. That’s not how he operates.  He doesn’t give orders.  He speaks in code.  And I understand that code.”  Further, Mr. Cohen claimed, “Everybody’s job at the Trump Organization is to protect Mr. Trump.  Every day most of us knew we were coming to work and we were going to lie for him about something.  That became the norm.”

Ironically, Trump calls Cohen a “rat.”  In crime lingo, this means that someone snitched—turned state’s evidence—became a penitent.  It does not mean he lied.  In fact, it means the opposite.

Also ironically, federal prosecutors in the Southern District of New York are investigating Trump and the Trump Organization.  It is precisely this body that hit its stride in the 1980s against the bosses of the city’s five families—Bonanno, Colombo, Gambino, Genovese, and Lucchese.  And now Trumpo.  And finally one more irony:  the head of the Southern District of New York in the ‘80s was none other than lawyer Rudy Giuliani.  He most certainly must have lost his moral compass as he now serves as the president’s mouthpiece, at least on TV, and I suspect that he too lies, lies, lies for Trump.

May we someday hear the words, “Mother of mercy, is this the end of the Donald?”

Posted in Abitudini, English, Film, Italoamericani, Mafia, New York, Politica, Storia | 4 Comments

I diritti degli animali e linguaggio

Posted on March 14, 2019 by babbityjean

Almeno dagli anni ’80, le campagne anti-pelliccia sono in pieno vigore. I gruppi per i diritti degli animali hanno sensibilizzato il mondo occidentale verso la crudeltà con cui vengono intrappolati e uccisi certi animali selvatici. Oggi sui media si possono trovare foto, articoli sulla caccia grossa in Africa; alcuni si vantano su Facebook postando foto con leoni o giraffe morti, rischiando in realtà la propria vita a causa della feroce opposizione di così tante persone. La PETA, un’associazione per il trattamento etico degli animali, ha preso di mira designer e celebrità come Donatella Versace e Kim Kardashian per aver indossato e promosso abiti di pelliccia. Anche la pelliccia sintetica è disapprovata per due motivi: sostiene un ideale di moda delle pelli di animali, ed è ottenuta dal petrolio, una risorsa non rinnovabile, non coerente con l’uso sostenibile del nostro ambiente.

La battaglia continua ed è passata al mondo del linguaggio. Molti proverbi, metafore e detti popolari di uso quotidiano sono basati sulla violenza o sull’abuso degli animali. Ad esempio, per augurare a qualcuno buona fortuna in Italia, si dice “in bocca al lupo” e la risposta tradizionale è “crepi il lupo”.  Ma sempre più spesso c’è chi risponde “viva il lupo” perché sperare nella morte di un animale non è più eticamente accettabile. (C’è anche un’altra possibile origine di questa frase idiomatica “in bocca al lupo”, che rimanda alla mamma-lupa che prende in bocca i suoi cuccioli, acquisendo così un significato di difesa e protezione).

La crescita dei diritti degli animali e del veganesimo ha messo in discussione detti come “uccidere due uccelli con un sasso” (inglese) e “ho preso due piccioni con una fava” (italiano).  Queste ed altre frasi idiomatiche dimostrano anche i diversi metodi di caccia e le diverse diete fra italiani ed inglesi.  In America si dice “bring home the bacon” (“portare a casa la pancetta”), che è simile all’espressione italiana, “Portare a casa la pagnotta”.

Ricercatori linguisti in Inghilterra affermano che molte metafore basate sulla carne o sulla crudeltà sugli animali sono destinate a scomparire nel tempo, poiché le questioni etiche e ambientali cambiano sia l’uso comune del linguaggio che della letteratura.  Uno sul tagliere è “fustigare un cavallo morto” (inglese) che è simile all’italiana “menare il can per l’aia”; entrambi suggeriscono che qualcuno continua a fare qualcosa di inutile.

La PETA ha chiesto agli insegnanti di far riflettere i propri bambini e ragazzi sul pensiero sottinteso a queste espressioni.  La PETA suggerisce che “portare a casa la pancetta” può diventare “portare a casa i bagel” e che “mettere le uova in un cesto” può diventare per i vegani “mettere tutte le bacche in sola una ciotola”.  Gli attivisti sostengono che anche se queste espressioni possono sembrare innocue, rafforzano in realtà l’idea di un rapporto con gli animali basato sulla violenza e l’abuso.  “Insegnare agli studenti a usare un linguaggio non crudele promuove una relazione positiva fra tutti gli esseri viventi”.

 

 

Posted in Abitudini, Animali, Differenze culturali, Foto, Italiano, La Lingua, La Moda, Politica, Storia | 1 Comment

Animal Rights and Language

Posted on March 14, 2019 by babbityjean

Since at least the 1980s, anti-fur campaigns have been in full force.  Animal rights groups have sensitized the western world to the cruelty of trapping and killing wildlife.  Today there is outrage in the media over trophy hunting in Africa, for example; those who brag on Facebook – posing in a photo with a dead lion or giraffe and a gun — actually risk their own lives due to the fierce opposition of so many people.  PETA, People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals, has targeted designers and celebrities like Donatella Versace and Kim Kardashian for wearing and promoting fur clothing.  Even faux or synthetic fur is frowned upon for two reasons:  it sustains the fashion ideal of animal hides, and it is made from petroleum, a non-renewable resource which is not consistent with the sustainable use of our environment.

The battle continues and has moved to the world of language.  Many proverbs, metaphors, and common sayings in everyday use are based on violence or abuse of animals.  For example, to wish someone good luck in Italy, one says “in bocca al lupo” (“in the mouth of the wolf”).  The traditional response is “crepi il lupo” (“may the wolf die”), but there are now those who say “viva il lupo” (“long live the wolf”) because it is no longer acceptable to hope for the death of an animal.  (There is another possible origin to the idiomatic expression “in bocca al lupo,” which refers to the mamma wolf who holds her babies in her mouth suggesting a gesture of defense and protection.)

The growth of animal rights and of veganism has called into question sayings like “To kill two birds with one stone,” or in Italian, “ho preso due piccioni con una fava” (“I took two pigeons with one fava bean”). These and other idiomatic phrases also demonstrate the different hunting methods and diets of Italians versus Americans (and British and other Northern Europeans.  In America one says, “Bring home the bacon,” which is similar to the Italian expression, “Portare a casa la pagnotta” (“Bring home the loaf”).

Linguistic researchers in England say that many metaphors based on meat or on animal cruelty are destined to disappear over time as ethical and environment issues change both common use of language and literature.  One on the chopping block is “flogging a dead horse,” which is similar to the Italian “menare il can per l’aia”(“lead the dog to the barnyard”); both suggest that someone continues to do something useless.

PETA has asked teachers to have children reflect on the thoughts implied by these expressions. PETA suggests that “bringing home the bacon” can become “bringing home the bagels” and that “putting all your eggs in one basket” can become for vegans “putting all the berries in one bowl.” Activists maintain that while these expressions may seem harmless, they reinforce the idea of a relationship with animals based on violence and abuse.  “Teaching students to use non-cruel language promotes a positive relationship among all living beings.”

 

Posted in Abitudini, Animali, English, Foto, La Lingua, La Moda, Storia | Leave a comment