#themoldovandiaries
Interview with Cesare de Giglio and Paolo Paterlini
Can you
tell us something about your project 'The Moldovan Diaries'?
The first time we've been in Moldova was around two years ago,
during a broader trip. For the project, we have been three times during this
year: on January and February, on April and on August and September. We were
interested in 'charting' Moldova on the base of its several regions and
cultural identities, rather than on some topics or storylines.
We have always been interested in issues regarding European countries and former Soviet Republics, not only under a professional perspective but also as travelers.
We have always been interested in issues regarding European countries and former Soviet Republics, not only under a professional perspective but also as travelers.
Why Moldova?
Two years
ago, for example, we had a long trip around the so-called 'Silk Road', which
was the subject of our documentary 'Routes – the journey'. Our main purpose was
to show how many stereotypes about former Soviet Republics have nothing to do
with the social, political, even landscape reality of those countries. Since
then, we went deep into the subject and we spent much time collecting
information about Moldova, because among all the former Soviet Republics it is
the one at the border between two different worlds (at least, in the collective
unconscious).
After
researching for some months, we discovered that there are very few reports
about Moldova which are not stereotypical, is to say that do not deal with the
mostly-known topics (the problem of Transnistria, Moldavia as the poorest
European country, the wine production, human trafficking, emigration, etc.).
There is a huge blank spot, especially figurative one, regarding Moldova and
its society as a whole.
Therefore,
it was important for us to, on the one hand, provide some comprehensive and
updated information about Moldova to a Western audience, who is generally
devoid of it, and, on the other hand, try to compose a 'visual portrait' of the
country and its internal diversity. Because of that, we focused more on
identity issues than on geopolitical ones, even though we are aware the latter
are fundamental for the future of the country. We can say our project is an
attempt to give a broad answer to the question 'what is the Republic of
Moldova?'
Western European audience is the exclusive
target of your work or you think it can be interesting also for a Moldavian
one?
As we
previously said it is conceived mainly for a Western audience but, on the other
hand, many of the people with whom we got in touch during our trip were
sincerely supporting the project because they found it relevant. At the same
time, it is difficult to speak about a 'Moldavian audience'. The capital city
Chisinau is not representative at all: it is a modern, changing,
European-oriented city, completely different from the rest of the country,
which is, in my opinion, torn from the main modernizing processes. The problem
is the access to information: if in Chisinau there surely is a part of the
population who speaks English and is passionate about acquiring more knowledge,
in the rest of the country (apart from a few cities) the situation is
developing very slowly. Therefore, we would say that our project will
difficultly get an audience there, except maybe for that people who are close
to some of the stories we told.
How was your methodological approach to the
people you interviewed?
We tried to
be as neutral as possible without any preconceptions or particular requests.
Our field of interest was regarding identity issues but we didn't take the side
neither of the European part nor of the Russian one. We focused just on
listening people's opinions at the point that we didn't spent so much time in
explaining our project to some of them, because we thought it could have been
made the interview less genuine.
Of course we
wanted people to be aware of the reasons behind our project, but at the same
time we discovered that giving too many details could have been
counterproductive or misleading.
Can you explain what 'identity issue' means to
you?
Well, it was
something that spontaneously emerged from the words of the people interviewed.
We basically asked to tell their biography but, in one way or another, issues
concerning 'identity' were always taken into account. If you think about
Moldavian history, it cannot be otherwise: there are so many elements which
refer to 'identity', namely the language you are speaking, the country you used
to live before the Republic of Moldova was formed, the conflicts you saw or you
took part in...
Again, we
didn't direct the interviews towards certain topics or perspective but the
information that people gave us naturally led us to identify 'identity' as the
core issue of Moldova.
Do you think this diversity is an asset or
rather an obstacle to the Moldavian society?
Of course it
is an asset; Moldova in our opinion has to preserve all these different
identities. From the geopolitical point of view, Moldova had a troubled story
which brought to arbitrary borders. Because of that, the inner strength of the
country lies in its social diversity and plurality, which make it a natural
'bridge' between the so-called European and Russian worlds.
Separatist
tendencies as well as centralizing ones in our opinion are not a solution. The
real problem is the sense of 'citizenship'. Maybe, the only positive legacy
from the Soviet era is exactly a solid concept of 'citizenship' you can still
clearly grasp if you speak with old people, which is a more effective way than
the European one of nowadays.
Despite the lack of political freedom and disregard for human rights, the Soviet Union managed to
create a supranational sense of citizenship which was connecting all the ethnic
identities while preserving their peculiarity. By contrast, European sense of
citizenship is something formal to which people adhere in a more superficial
way than the Soviet one. That is a topic which should be taken into account if
we speak about the choice between integration with Europe and integration with
Russia.
In our
opinion, being part of the European Union can be a great opportunity for
Moldova, but at the same time we think that the country will lose part of its
distinctive traits: it will probably become another work market exploited by
rich countries such as Bulgaria or Romania.
What is in your opinion one of the main problems
of Moldova?
Well, the
political situation is really bad, especially concerning corruption. According
to what we saw, there is a small group of people who understood the right
direction the country should take, but it's a minority.
Also, we
have to consider the situation in the villages: political patronage is common
there and it is something difficult to change. A case point is a woman with whom we spoke in a small village in Cahul district who explained us how politicians use to 'buy' votes in
exchange for works in the village (the rebuilding of a church, in that case).
It was sad to talk with lots of youngsters resourceful people who were
well-educated and wanted to change Moldavian reality but who were stopped by a
political class and a bureaucracy which are maybe the worst in Europe. This is
a big problem: these kinds of people are usually moving to other countries and
Moldova is losing its future political class.
Interview by
Francesco Brusa
Pictures by:
Cesare de Giglio& Paolo Paterlini
