The news of Dario Fo's passing came the morning after a meeting held at the Italian Cultural Institute to discuss future academic and creative collaborations between the Department of History of Art, the Strada Stretta Concept and the Institute. A considerable part of the conversation centred on Fo's works and Dr. Giuseppe Schembri Bonaci's relationship with the Italian playwright which began in the 1970s and which developed into a personal and artistic one in the late 80s and early 90s. Schembri Bonaci said that it has always been a dream of his to bring Fo to Malta to stage one of his comedies in his presence, yet was aware that such was no longer possible given Fo's old age.
Schembri Bonaci's fascination with Fo was incited by an affinity with his philosophy of theatre; the commedia dell'arte form and definition of art as a continuous political commitment. Fo was the last major figure to trace his theatrical lineage to Vsevolod Meyerhold. Schembri Bonaci, one of the founders of the Theatre Studies programme at the University of Malta, used to lecture on this Russian theatre director and naturally wanted to meet with his surviving heir, Dario Fo.
He used to attend Fo's productions in Milan in the 1970s, but had never met him in person. Only when he was sent to the Italian city on a scholarship to study at the University of Milan did he exploit this opportunity to meet with Fo.
The playwright proved to be elusive, despite Schembri Bonaci's insistence. It was only with the help of a close friend who knew a member of Fo's theatre company that he finally managed to get in contact and found out that Fo lived right across from his residence.
Their first encounter was, as would be expected, rather unconventional. Fo opened his front door whilst clearly in the middle of his morning routine. Schembri Bonaci had to follow him around the house as he prepared for the day. Television and radio were blaring the news, and Fo was trying to follow he conversation with his guest together with the latest updates in world affairs. This marked the beginning of a creative relationship that lasted throughout the remainder of Fo's life.
Schembri Bonaci became one of Fo's students, a bottega assistant, training in his method of theatre direction together with Fo's wife Franca Rame. In later years, he adapted Fo's productions in Moscow and Malta. Gli arcangeli non giocano a flipper was staged in Moscow at coincidentally the same time that he received the Nobel Prize, whilst a Maltese version of Mistero Buffo, translated by Schembri Bonaci himself, was performed by a group of għannejja including Karmenu l-Baħri and il-Budaj, linking local troubadour culture to one of Fo's best known works. He also produced Meta Gaħan Skopra l-Amerika (Johan Padan and the Discovery of the Americas) and a number of Rame's works.
Mistero Buffo was set to be screened by PBS but was cancelled at the eleventh hour in order to censor the work, despite the signing of an initial agreement. This did not deter Schembri Bonaci as the production was shown across Malta at various taverns and outdoor locations. Street theatre and improvisation were, and still are, his preferred forms of theatre, and when he established Teatru Strada Stretta the aim was to promote this method in Malta. This idea has recently been revived with the inception of Strada Stretta Concept that is supported by the Valletta 2018 Foundation. On November 24, the most ambitious project to date will be held in Valletta's former counter-cultural street, a rendition of Bizet's Carmen featuring professional performers and musicians who are accustomed to conventional theatre settings.
Fo believed that theatre should directly respond to political happenings. It was something living. In fact, it would be impossible to study transcripts of his productions as these were intended as a skeleton to give direction to the pieces. Each individual performance would be constituted of the base text and the element of improvisation that incorporated the latest in current affairs. This gave the works constant relevance. Furthermore, his theatre company moved around Italy to perform near sites of political upheaval. Schembri Bonaci recounted that his schedule was extremely chaotic and all members of the company had to be prepared to travel day in day out. Fo's fervent energy was crucial to the realisation of his theatrical ideology.
It is a lesser known fact that Fo was also a visual artist and an alumnus of the Brera Academy in Milan. His artistic relationship with Malta also extends into this sphere. In the last edition of the Mdina Cathedral Contemporary Art Biennale, a selection of his prints were displayed in the refectory of the Mdina Cathedral Museum. The prints delved into biblical themes and scenes from the life of St. Francis.
This is surprising when considering Fo's difficult relationship with the church. However, as Schembri Bonaci elucidated in the Mdina Biennale catalogue, 'Fo's works being shown in an exhibition created under the auspices of the Metropolitan Cathedral shows us that spirituality does not solely pertain to the Church, that spirituality is not solely religious. All Fo's works are spiritual, even when he exploits biblical themes. Yes, he combines it with commedia dell'arte, burlesque and other popular forms, but these do not minimise his spirituality.'
It is probably Fo's versatility that made him such a remarkable artistic figure in the twentieth-century. His close links with Malta on such an organic level led to the introduction of innovative theatrical methods that unfortunately have not been given due attention. I was given the chance to view his visual works numerous times, and looking at them made me realise why he must be upheld as a leading contemporary artist.
His ability to enter into profound themes, to address harsh realities and challenge power, all of which are loaded subjects, were presented in a seemingly light-hearted manner, under the guise of comedy and satire. The Mdina Biennale prints were playful, colourful, and posed a naïve Byzantine approach to form, yet they said more about the themes they portrayed than any crudely realistic depiction of same. Very few are capable of transforming the politics of dominant ideologies into art.