• Choose a category
• All
• Classic-Fiction

The speaker's rhetorical techniques include not only repetition but also a sly hint that the administrator had a considerable self-interest in not calling regular meetings, given that one of the requirements would have been that his tenure of office would also be up for annual renewal. Note that on this point, and virtually on this point alone, the speaker avoided repeating himself. It would have seemed mean-spirited to dwell too obviously on such ad hominem considerations; but, by slipping the specific charge into his torrent of words almost as though it had been an afterthought, he reminded his hearers that this was actually a key aspect of the administrator's tactics, and he managed to do this without appearing uncivil.

His emphasis on procedure is not quite as transparent as it may have seemed. He restrained one of his own supporters from speaking out on a specific complaint, not only because the approved rhetorical style required conveying an almost obsequious respect for the rights of the other side ~a tactic that the administrator and the office manager had mastered with great skill), but also, almost certainly, because he knew that the administrator would take advantage of a discussion of detail-which might in turn have reminded some of the practical advantages of the old ways, as perhaps the elderly merchant wanted to emphasize by ironically remarking to the administrator, "They haven't understood a thing, my dear Giuliani!"

The administrator's side did not surrender easily. The political operator swung into action again, from his position in the front of the room and beside the administrator's high-backed chair behind an imposing old desk: "Let's say that there's been a tacit agreement after so many years," by which apparently he meant a capacity to look the other way while the administrator skirted the edge of the law. He concluded his exposition by proposing that they retain the present administrator with the commitment (impegno) that he henceforth conduct annual meetings. A young woman at the back of the room erupted: "It's not that it's a commitment that he should make; it's a legal requirement!" (Non e ch'e un impegno the deve prendere, e un obbligo di legge!) The political operator and the new candidate began to talking about respect for the legal norms; but then the former reiterated the proposal to renominate the old administrator. To this, the young medical professional responded with a counter-proposal: to postpone the decision until the next meeting. Out of this, after much further discussion, was born the eventual agreement that the old administrator should collaborate with the new nominee in the intervening months.

The entire incident illustrates the mixture of civic and civil values that complicate the micropolitics of Monti life. On the one hand, the observation of procedure is directly linked to judgments about the extent to which the old administrator adhered to the requirements of law. On the other, the mixture of threats, cajoling, and pressure tactics by both sides shows that neither group had a monopoly of procedural purity. The civility that allowed the old administrator to remain in office, albeit jointly, seems to have been a face-saving device; the younger group, having essentially won its battle, had no interest in exacerbating an already disruptive tension, although the cordial relationship between the merchant and the new administrator would gradually restore a sense of cordiality and neighborly symbiosis.

That outcome would represent a striking victory for the Roman taste for social accommodation and belie the city administration's claim-which it made in defense of its much-touted "feast of neighbors"-that some sort of official intervention was increasingly necessary in order to bring peace to condominiums throughout Rome. The oldest resident was already on relatively amiable terms, albeit heavily larded with the sarcastic Roman speech, with the new administrator. The latter, himself a resident, readily