Fellini uses a recollection of his youth in his film, Amarcord in order to critique the indifferent attitudes of Italians, while fascism come to power. Many filmmakers of his generation tackled the fascist agenda in their films, but Fellini discussed fascism in a revolutionary way. He focused on the apathy of average Italians in Amarcord, and their apathy can be attributed to fascisms absurdity in Italy.

Farber, Stephen. “‘Amarcord’ and ‘Lacombe, Lucien’: Illuminations of Things Past.” New York Times. Nov. 3, 1974, 157. ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2004). University of Pennslvania Library, Philadelphia. 4 April 2008 <http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=0&did=148855932&SrchMode=1&sid=5&Fmt=11&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1207803701&clientId=3748>

Stephen Farber touches on the themes of two films of the early 1970’s: Amarcord and Lacombe, Lucien. Federico Fellini’s Amarcord takes place in 1930’s fascist Italy, at Mussolini’s prime, while Louis Malle’s Lacombe, Lucien is set just prior to the liberation of France, around 1944. Both filmmakers exploit the apathetic responses of everyday people as the cause of fascism. The films make a similar statement, but achieve this with two very different means. In Lacombe, Lucien, the sequence of events seem unplanned and occur randomly, but they come together with rational answers. The main character Lucien, seems to join the Gestapo by chance: he is first rejected from joining the Resistance, but is picked up by Vichy police and pressured into helping their organization. Scenes are presented with such cold, harsh reality, that it is almost comical. Stephen Farber describes a scene where a Gestapo officer holds a man’s head below water, while his girlfriend laughs that his expensive pants are getting wet. Fellini’s  Amarcord places the most importance on the warm and personal day-to-day events in the lives of Italians. Farber calls the film “less overtly political; it is a personal memoir”. The audience observes the passing of time in a small town of Italy and is consistently reminded of the apathy and submissiveness of the citizens.   Fascism in Italy is built from the cooperation of similar towns.

The memoir-like quality of the film is likely the result of Fellini exploring this film from his own experiences. The comparison of these two films exposes Amarcord’s warmth in the telling of everyday events. Italy has come under fascist rule, yet the people carry on, with business as usual. The film has captured these events in a life-like, human quality that makes the passive choice of the characters actually understandable. The film makes a point of presenting this style of life on a silver platter--apathy is an easy route to take.

Author James Hay introduces his book Popular Film Culture in Fascist Italy: The Passing of the Rex with an extensive analysis of Federico Fellini’s film Amarcord. He uses this particular film, even though he cites many other Italian films that touched on fascism and refers to the reviews of critics, who have called Amarcord “one of the most accurate representations of the essence of Italian Fascism.” He finds that the film was unique in portraying fascism through the close examination of a young boy’s life, without overtly alluding to the repressive ideology, that most films about fascism indulged in. Amarcord--as the title’s meaning in Italian suggests (“I Remember”)--is more or less remembrance of Fellini’s own childhood, where Fellini relates to the young boy and interprets Fascism as he experienced it.  Fascism for the boy was no more than: “...his immediate relationships family, schoolfriends, and neighbors...it was simply another “imposition””. Amarcord covers the “institutions” of the boy’s life: the church, the Grand Hotel and the town cinema, which encompass all of his communal and familial connections. These are what Hay calls the town’s “fabric of consensus”, and nothing exists outside of this consensus for the community. Hay finds that the film views fascism at the “most vital” level--the local level, which includes the personal, intimate and communal. Amarcord is a film that touches on fascism through the eyes of a young boy and a small, isolated community in Italy going through radical cultural changes. Hay mentions a growing popularity in films about Italian fascism in the 70’s and argues that Stalin’s death and the Hungarian revolution in the 1950’s led to a rise of film directors who were free to question the authority of fascism. He argues that the cultural changes after Stalin’s death also gave way to interest in popular cinema, rather than auteuristic cinema, which is “aristocratic and authoritative”.

Fellini made Amarcord with his own childhood in mind. The film appears to be an accurate representation of the sentiments at the time, precisely because the filmmaker himself experienced it. Amarcord is told much like a personal memoir and it captures Fellini’s personal distaste for fascism. This film is a very intimate view into the filmmaker’s childhood. It is important to note that the “institutions” of the boy’s life were no more than the workings of opportunistic Italians--most Italians only joined the fascist party in order to maintain their professionalism. Such actions were not driven by an interest in the ideals of fascism. (see The Fascist Experience; Italian Society and Culture 1922-1945 by Edward R. Tannenbaum)

Rothstein, Edward. “ Using Farce to Break the Dark Spell of Fascism.” New York Times. 18 Oct 1998, AR28. ProQuest Historical Newspapers The New York Times (1851 - 2004). University of Pennslvania Library, Philadelphia. 4 April 2008 <http://proquest.umi.com/pqdweb?index=1&did=116548724&SrchMode=1&sid=10&Fmt=11&VInst=PROD&VType=PQD&RQT=309&VName=HNP&TS=1207804019&clientId=3748>

Fascism and humor are conflicting themes. Fascism is not just a serious topic, the word itself implies conformity under a law and it challenges personal liberties. Humor thrives on ridicule, vulnerability and the upending of authority, while turning what is most important into an absurdity. Edward Rothstein discusses the use of humor in the film Life is Beautiful. The film attempts to fight fascism with humor. The main character is a Jewish bookseller persistent in keeping the monstrosity of the Holocaust from his son. He turns the horrors of the time into a game for the boy. This fantasy is possible, in part because the film plays on the innocence of a child. Although humor may be the strongest opposition to fascism, downplaying fascism may also downplay the hardships faced by its victims.

Life is Beautiful can be nightmarish, yet also grotesquely outrageous. At times, the humor of the film outplays the seriousness of the topic, and the concentration camps appear less appalling. However the film manages to properly preserve the main character’s trying efforts in the face of death. Rothstein calls this terror in the company of humor a “death-haunted clowning”. The writer and director of Life is Beautiful, Roberto Benigni, had been largely influenced by Charlie Chaplin’s Great Dictator and Fellini’s Amarcord. Amarcord uses a similar style of the “death-haunted clowning”. He calls it clowing, because fascism is presented theatrically, like a circus, although not in a cheery light. Mr. Benigni relates it to the acts of the Italian clown Toto, whose presence brought laughter, even though he was certainly facing death in his acts.

Amarcord is something of a humorous, yet anti-fascist tale. Like Life is Beautiful, life under fascism is presented so theatrically, that it becomes ridiculous, almost to the point of humor. Although humor and fascism do not go hand in hand, Fellini was articulated humor, in order to take a jab at fascism’s absurdity. Fellini is not someone who holds any respect for fascist ideals, and he finds those ideals so fallacious, that they are comical.