10.54103/2036-461X/20641
When considering the circulation of European films across Europe within a post-national framework, an investigation on the role of national institutes for culture could offer a particular take on the “Europeanisation” (Carpentier 2021) process through cinema-related initiatives. If they were conceived to promote national heritage and values, they have found themselves in the ambivalent position of pursuing their main goal within a changing institutional and cultural context that requires more integrated approaches, since the beginning of the 1990s, namely after the end of the Cold War. Notably, since the creation of the European National Institutes for Culture network (hereafter EUNIC) in 2006, they have been asked to cooperate and to valorise the heterogeneity and multiplicity of European subjectivities and communities, according to the motto “unity in diversity” (Liz 2016; Bondebjerg, Novrup Redvall, and Higson 2014). In particular, this research concentrates on the circulation, among European and Italian institutes for culture, of films that deal with European issues, and has reflected on how they affect the construction of a transnational European identity by addressing sensitive topics.
application/pdf
2036-461X
20641
41
en
Annalisa Pellino
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0
Cinéma & Cie. Film and Media Studies Journal
Film Diplomacy
Decentering Nations: The Role of National Institutes for Culture in the Promotion and Circulation of European Cinema
Text.Serial.Journal
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie
23
Thematic issue / Section thématique
2024-04-05
2023-07-19
2024-04-05
2024-04-05
95-114
Cinéma & Cie
Annalisa Pellino
2023
10.54103/2036-461X/20641
95
IULM University, Milan
2036-461X
41
Film Diplomacy
en
114
Sorlin, Pierre. 1991. European Cinemas, European Societies, 1939–1990. London-New York: Routledge.
Decentering Nations: The Role of National Institutes for Culture in the Promotion and Circulation of European Cinema
https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/cinemaetcie/article/download/20641/20360
23
                                                                                       Decentering Nations:
                                                                                       The Role of National Institutes
                                                                                       for Culture in the Promotion and
                                                                                       Circulation of European Cinema
                                                                                       Annalisa Pellino, IULM University, Milan




                                                                                       When considering the circulation of European films across Europe within a post-national                      Keywords
                                                                                       framework, an investigation on the role of national institutes for culture could offer a              Post-nationalism
                                                                                       particular take on the “Europeanisation” (Carpentier 2021) process through cinema-
                                                                                       related initiatives. If they were conceived to promote national heritage and values, they
                                                                                                                                                                                    Transnational Identity(ies)
                                                                                       have found themselves in the ambivalent position of pursuing their main goal within a                   Policy making
                                                                                       changing institutional and cultural context that requires more integrated approaches,            European Institutes of
                                                                                       since the beginning of the 1990s, namely after the end of the Cold War. Notably, since                         Culture
                                                                                       the creation of the European National Institutes for Culture network (hereafter EUNIC)                 Film Diplomacy
                                                                                       in 2006, they have been asked to cooperate and to valorise the heterogeneity and
                                                                                                                                                                                                           DOI
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License




                                                                                       multiplicity of European subjectivities and communities, according to the motto “unity
                                                                                       in diversity” (Liz 2016; Bondebjerg, Novrup Redvall, and Higson 2014).1 In particular,                   https://doi.
                                                                                       this research concentrates on the circulation, among European and Italian institutes for         org/10.54103/2036-
                                                                                       culture, of films that deal with European issues, and has reflected on how they affect the               461X/20641
                                                                                       construction of a transnational European identity by addressing sensitive topics.




                                                                                       INTRODUCTION
                                                                                         This study originates from an investigation into the relationship between
                                                                                       cinematic Europe and its multiple identities that has occurred over the last three
                                                                                       decades and finds significant evidence in many scholars. Thomas Elsaesser
                                                                                       and his study on European cinema are cases in point: here, by questioning its
                                                                                       “conditions of impossibility”, he asks “on what basis, other than bureaucratic and


                                                                                       1        Art. 128 of The Treaty of Maastricht on European Union (1992) explicitly claims
                                                                                       that “The Community shall contribute to the flowering of the cultures of the Member
                                                                                       States, while respecting their national and regional diversity and at the same time
                                                                                       bringing the common cultural heritage to the fore”. Similarly, the European Convention
                                                                                       on Cinematographic Co-Production, established in the same year (1992) by the Council
                                                                                       of Europe, was designed to “safeguard and promote the ideals and principles which form
                                                                                       [a] common heritage” while being “an instrument of creation and expression of cultural
                                                                                       diversity”. The Council of Europe Convention on Cinematographic Co-production was
                                                                                       revised in Rotterdam in 2017, not only “by providing a platform to make cinematographic
                                                                                       co-productions more systematic and easier to construct”, but also opening for accession
                                                                                       by non-European countries. See also Paganoni 2015.


                                                                                       Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                                                 95
     economic, a European cinema might build a sense of identity that was neither
     merely the sum of its parts nor the result of new lines of exclusion and ‘other’-
     ing?” (2005, 24). It follows that, to understand and conceptualise contemporary
     Europe on screen, it is necessary, according to Elsaesser, to enlarge the context
     and look at “Europe’s bio- and body-politics” (2014, 17–32). It is a matter of
     representativeness, where at stake there is an idea of Europeanness that
     draws on “a common European history and cultural heritage, together with
     more contemporary issues addressing nationalism, migration, identity, and
     gender politics” (Rivi 2007). This approach seems to be in continuity with that
     used by Pierre Sorlin (1991) in his study on European Cinemas, European
     Societies, 1939—1990, where the author provides a comparative study on the
     main themes of European cinema—including urbanisation, immigration, sex and
     gender—drawing on examples from French, German, Italian and British films,
     and significantly moving from the question: what does cinema tell us regarding
     the contrasts between European nations?
        For a finer-grained approach it is important to emphasise that the connotation
     of identity taken into consideration herein is that of cultural identity, which differs
     from the civic dimension of support to the EU as a political project, inasmuch
     as “people could feel European (identify as European) but not quite act upon it
     (identify with Europe).” (Ciaglia, Fuest, and Heineman 2018, 15). Hence, even
     though they do not necessarily evolve in conjunction, it goes without saying that
     these two facets of European identity are closely linked, as cultural activities are
     widely considered an instrument for fostering civic identification in EU policies
     by generating “new ideas, innovation and social cohesion” (Barroso 2023).
        Given these premises, this study has attempted to answer the following
     questions: do the cinema-related initiatives held by national institutes for culture
     concur in building a transnational image of Europe? How and to what extent do
     they encourage the promotion and the successful circulation of a film that we
     can consider “European”? Does European cinema represent national identity
     first and cross-international identities second? (Comand and Menarini 2014).
        As a consequence, having thoroughly examined the recurring topics in the
     field literature on contemporary European cinema, the investigation has been
     carried out according to three intersecting lines of enquiry: the first emphasises
     the occurrence of sensitive topics in cinema-related initiatives by considering
     them the litmus test of a discursive and intersectional approach to Europeanness
     and European multiple-identities (Carpentier 2021); the second highlights how
     cinema-related initiatives address a niche audience that could be deemed part
     of a “united European cinema sphere” (Biltereyst and Cuelenaere 2021); the
     third explores the status of national institutes for culture, as “diplomatic tools”
     and “unofficial cultural ambassador[s]” (Noto and Peretti 2016), as special sites
     to observe how European cinema fosters the construction of a transnational
     image of European culture, namely as sites “where Europeanity is discursively
     and materially performed” (Carpentier 2021, 237).




96                                                            Pellino, Decentering Nations
METHODOLOGICAL FRAMEWORK
   Firstly, the research has moved from the assumption that the circuits of
national institutes for culture could help the film promotion by integrating the
main paths of circulation, thus partly compensating the historical fragmentation
and “lack of a [...] distribution network covering Europe” (Bondebjerg, Novrup
Redvall, and Higson 2014, 1); a lack even more clear if compared with the effort
made in terms of co-production (Scaglioni 2020)—especially for those films that,
despite their high cultural value, are less interesting for commercial purposes.
Indeed, “[w]hile discussions of European film tend to only focus just on the
cinema market, it is important to stress that cinema admissions do not show
the whole picture, since Europeans are not only watching films in the cinema”
(Bondebjerg, Novrup Redvall, and Higson 2014, 13). In this regard, it is worth
disambiguating the concept of circulation, intended herein in its broadest sense
as the wide network of formal and informal places and occasions (Lobato 2012)
that valorise the cultural and political side of film experience (Holdaway and
Scaglioni 2018, 2019; Scaglioni 2020). That is the reason why the circuits of
national institutes for culture have been examined by considering them as a
kind of IRL (in real life) “secondary window” (Curtin, Holt, and Sanson 2014),
which have a significant role in film circulation beyond national borders, as in
constructing the cultural value and identity of films.
   Secondly, in trying to answer Randall Halle’s questions “What is European
film? How does European film differ from national film?” (Halle 2014, 15), one
could assume that a film has to be deemed as European if it is a co-production—a
so-called “Euro-pudding”—, or if it addresses European issues (Liz 2014)—
namely if it reflects on the meaning of Europeanness and its representations.
Nonetheless, this study concentrates on the second aspect. Indeed, if the
WP1 of the EUMEPLAT project shows the growing popularity of European
co-productions in terms of theatrical release and sold tickets (Biltereyst and
Cuelenaere 2021), at the same time, co-production as a criterion to define the
Europeanness of a film and its relation with the public preferences, fades into
the background if we speak of non-theatrical release. In line with Harrod, Liz
and Timoshkina the aim:

         [...] is to revisit the issue of the significance of European cinema as
         a category in the wake of the recent acceleration in transnational
         filmmaking and globalisation as a whole. [...] Throughout the 1990s
         and early 2000s, scholarly work considered not only the industrial
         aspects of European film (Jäckel 2003), particularly the renaissance
         of co-productions (Rivi 2007), but also its relationship with national
         and transnational identities (Wayne 2002; Everett 2005b). (Harrod,
         Liz, and Timoshkina 2014)




Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                  97
     STUDY SAMPLE AND TOOLS OF ENQUIRY
       The present investigation has begun with a preliminary mapping of the
     cinema-related events held by seventeen among European and Italian institutes
     for culture, with the aim of understanding their importance within the institutes’
     cultural programmes. The research has focused on the cultural institutes
     belonging and/or taking place into the so-called Big Five Countries. Then,
     the study sample has been further circumscribed by taking into account the
     activities held by European cultural institutes in Italy: the Institut Français in
     Milan, the Goethe-Institut and the Instituto Cervantes in Rome, and the British
     Council Italy—the latter, we will see later in the text, provides a very peculiar
     exemplum. Moreover, the focus on the Italian cultural institutes in Europe has
     been on those located in the biggest cities and those deemed as important
     for their film tradition: Berlin, Hamburg, Cologne, Munich, Stuttgart, Madrid,
     Barcelona, Paris, Lyon, Marseille, Strasbourg, London and Brussels. In addition
     to these, even though Brussels is not located in one of the big five countries, it
     has been included by virtue of its peculiar geo-political and diplomatic position,
     and because it provides a movie-theatre with 250 seats.
       By using the time frame considered by the EUMEPLAT project, this research
     has taken into consideration film programming from 1996 to 2019—but it also
     mentions more recent film seasons and single projections because of their
     relevance with the research question. Based on qualitative methods, it has
     proceeded through a comparative analysis via data collections, a literature
     study and interviews with the heads of cultural activities.
       Each institution has a website with an archive of events, from which it has
     been possible to partially map the film-related activities—year by year and
     by focusing on film title and synopsis, some of which have been viewed for a
     deeper knowledge—, even though some web pages are no longer active, and it
     has not been possible to obtain specific information about all the films featured
     by the events mentioned below. Depending on the accessibility of information
     and documents, data-collection has offered a rather wide bird’s eye view, which
     has been supplemented with surveys and interviews: these have been helpful
     in zooming in on specific cases and highlighting otherwise invisible aspects.2
     Indeed, paraphrasing Giorgio Avezzù (2022, 10), a study into the geographies of
     circulation entails looking at the data from afar, but also requires a closer focus
     on cultural contents.




     2         I’m grateful for the helpful contribution to: Alison Driver (Arts Manager British
     Council Italia), Antonella Croci, Linda Marchetti and Agnès Pallini-Martin (respectively
     director of the Institut, responsible for cultural activities and attachée of cooperation of
     the Institut Français in Milan), Carmen Hof (Goethe-Institut Rome), Allegra Iafrate (IIC-
     Brussels), Maria Teresa De Palma (IIC-London), Gianfranco Zicarelli (Instituto Cervantes
     Rome), who read and approved the statements contained in this article.



98                                                               Pellino, Decentering Nations
ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE PLAYED IN
THE CIRCULATION OF EUROPEAN
CINEMA BY THE EUROPEAN
INSTITUTES FOR CULTURE IN ITALY
  Film programming depends on many variables: the cultural policies of the
country the institute belongs to; the cultural policies of the hosting country—
with possible restrictions on sensitive issues; the degree of autonomy from the
Ministry of Culture or from the Embassy; the availability of economic resources;
the specific interest or competence of the head of cultural events; the cooperation
with other institutes, or cultural events and festivals; and, not least, the public
tastes, which are quite heterogeneous, given the wide geographical distribution
of the institutes taken into consideration.

Intitut Français
  The Institut Français (henceforth IF) falls within the jurisdiction of the French
Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Its presence in Italy acts under the bilateral cultural
agreement signed by France and Italy in 1949 and regularly updated ever since.
Its mission explicitly mentions the aim of “strengthening the French presence
within the Italian audiovisual scene, especially in cinema, an art in which the
Franco-Italian relationship has always been particularly rich and fruitful” (my
translation). It follows that the promotion and circulation of cinema and other
audiovisual media covers a specific and strategic operational area (alongside
the linguistic and university cooperation, the promotion of artistic creation
and the cooperation on heritage and museums, the debate on ideas and book
industries).
  Functions and roles change every three or four years; a fact that hampers
from thinking about a wide-ranging programming with continuity, or to have a
general vision in a diachronic sense on how the cultural offer of the institute has
changed over the years. The choice regarding contents and film programming
depends on both budget management and on the curators’ choice and
competence—even though their particular training is not a precondition for
recruitment. Its programming refers to a central film library (coordinated by a
person in charge of the French Embassy in Rome), from which it is possible to
draw films without right transfer costs.
  One of the most interesting aspects of such a film library is that, alongside
the section dedicated to French cinema, and to alternative contents—namely to
new audiovisual forms—there is a special section on the Cinémathèque Afrique,
that contains over 1,700 films of Francophone African cinema from its origins
to the present, more than 600 of which are royalty-free for non-commercial
use. Cases in point are: classics by directors such as Sembène Ousmane,
Souleymane Cissé, Idrissa Ouédraogo and Moustapha Alassane; the winners



Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                      99
      of the Yennenga Stallion Fespaco Grand Prix; the recent productions of young
      filmmakers, including the Ghanaian comedy Keteke (Peter Sedufia, 2017), the
      documentary Roundabout in my Head (Fi rassi rond-point, Hassen Ferhani,
      2015) and the romantic drama film Rafiki (Wanuri Kahiu, 2018). Furthermore,
      and not by chance, among the thematic seasons such as Cannes Film Festival
      and Carnets de campagne-Élections présidentielles 2022, a season devoted to
      the Auteurs de la décolonisation could also be mentioned, as could a special
      collections dedicated to the New Generation of Female Filmmakers and Young
      Audience.
         Particular attention to the platformisation processes is the distinguishing
      feature of the IF—alongside more traditional initiatives such as New French
      Cinema, a collaboration based on the theatrical release between Milan and
      Turin held since 2000. Indeed, it allows access to a wide range of online content
      through the Rendez Vous Play platform that acts as a collector of audiovisual
      content, available thanks to collaborations with other platforms such as ARTE,
      MUBI, Il Cinema Ritrovato and RAI Play. It also offers the possibility to watch
      eight feature films and eleven French and African shorts for free and through
      the online platform IFcinéma à la carte.
         Moreover, not only cinema, but also new audiovisual forms have a certain
      weight in IF programming: initiatives such as Théâtre à l’écran, and both the
      production and distribution of the artwork presented at the French pavilion of
      the Venice Biennale (Les rêves n’ont pas de titre by Zineb Sedira), and at the
      XXII Triennale Milano (De la pensée au visible. Design as a Large Ring) are
      cases in point.
         External occasions such as events and festivals significantly affect the film
      programming, with a number of collaborations with Milano Film Network, the
      Francophone month, the partnership with Cineteca di Bologna and MUBI.


      Goethe-Institut Roma
        The information available on the Goethe-Institut (henceforth GI) dates back
      to the last decade, which was characterised by the coordination of Carmen Hof,
      Department of Cultural Programmes and film library. Whilst, data related to the
      1990s and 2000s have been difficult to recover.
        The organisation of a yearly thematic film selection, which shows a clear
      interest in sensitive topics, is at the core of the GI’s strategy. In 2010 and
      2011 two thematic exhibitions regarding gender issues were devoted to Divas
      from the early and modern cinema (Marlene Dietrich, Hildegard Knef, Hanna
      Schygulla e Romy Schneider), and to the new actresses of contemporary German
      cinema like Franka Potente, Nina Hoss, Martina Gedeck e Corinna Harfouch.
      While, more recently, in 2018–19, the exhibition devoted to female directors
      (Frauenfilm) included films by Maren Ade, Valeska Grisebach, Margarethe von
      Trotta, Doris Dörrie, Helke Misselwitz, Caroline Link, Karoline Herfurth, Sylke
      Enders, and Maria Schrader, authors that have been recognised for their
      “extraordinary diversity of themes and approaches”. As for LGBTQIA+ issues



100                                                        Pellino, Decentering Nations
the film programming in 2013–14 was devoted to the topic Couples “declined in
all its possible variations: very young, elderly, gay, lesbian”.
   With reference to the focus of this research, the most interesting initiative
concerns migrations and multiculturalism, such as a longitudinal exploration
of what it means to be Europeans: yesterday, today and tomorrow. Indeed,
even though the title—Hollywood is far away. Films, Stories and Protagonists
under the European Sky—refers more to the old opposition between the
north-American and European approaches to filmmaking and storytelling, the
selection features films by German directors of foreign origin, who depicted
Europeans as a multi-ethnic society. In this vein, the film selection Il migliore dei
mondi possibili? held in 2017–18 questions the recent history of Europe through
the lens of the family.
   A further aspect worth mentioning is that, similarly to the Institut Français,
GI provides a film library with over 600 titles, including feature films and
documentaries, which are available on loan and for non-commercial purposes,
even for cultural practitioners operating outside the GI. It also offers other
services, such as the collaboration for thematic exhibitions; a research service
in the field of film and cinema studies; and support for programming on silent
films with musical accompaniment.


Instituto Cervantes
   Similarly to the Institut Français, the Instituto Cervantes (henceforth IC)
falls within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Founded in 1991,
it represents an unicum within the panorama outlined in the present study,
because its main goal consists in promoting not only the Spanish language and
culture, but also those of the three other official languages of Spain—Catalan,
Basque and Galician—and those of the all “hispanos hablantes” countries.
It follows that its cultural programming covers a wide range of intrinsically
transnational aspects, to the extent that since 2012 the IC organises Scoprir,
a yearly Muestra de cine Ibero-Americano held with many Ibero-American
embassies in Italy and hosted by Casa del Cinema in Rome.
   Additionally, it collaborates with IBERMEDIA, the Ibero-American aid fund that
promotes audiovisual activities in its member States: Argentina, Bolivia, Brazil,
Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Chile, Ecuador, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras,
Mexico, Nicaragua, Panama, Paraguay, Peru, Portugal, Puerto Rico, Dominican
Republic, Spain, Uruguay and Venezuela, to which Italy has been added in 2017.
   The curators’ choices are aligned with the address notes of the IC headquarters
in Madrid and a considerable amount of the programming is devoted to cinema,
also thanks to the collaboration with a number of local and regional events and
festivals, such as the RIFF—Roma Independent Film Festival and Pesaro Film
Festival, CinemaSpagna.
   The online data concerning cinema-related events have been available since
2004. They show that the main trends consist of prioritising contemporary
Spanish cinema, with a focus on young directors (Il giovane cinema spagnolo,



Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                       101
      2004–05) and debut features (Opera Primeras, 2008), with the explicit intention
      of promoting young “directors who manage to enter feature film production for
      the first time”, and on auteur cinema (Cinefilia e nuovo cinema d’autore, 2016).
        As far as European issues are concerned, the IC collaborated with Festival
      Europa Cinema (2007) and L’Isola del Cinema (2012), which is a summer event
      that presents European films released during the previous winter.
        The attention paid to LGBTQIA+ topics is recent and took place mostly online
      via the IC’s Vimeo channel, because of Covid-19 restrictions (LGTBI+ en español
      in 2020; Te estoy amando locamente. Rassegna di cortometraggi LGTBI+ in
      2021). Furthermore, the space devoted to gender issues is much wider and,
      so far, has focused on films directed by women (Mujeres en la cresta de la ola,
      2009), on the presentation of single directors, such as Carla Simón with Estiu
      (1993) at the Med Film Festival in 2017, on debut features (Opere prime: donne
      nel cinema, 2018), on short films (Cortos en femenino, 2020) and on the women
      who debuted as film directors from the 1950s to the 1980s (Espacio femenino.
      Pioneras, 2021).


      British Council
         Founded in 1934 the mission of the British Council (henceforth BC) consists
      of “promoting abroad a wider appreciation of British culture and civilisation [by]
      encouraging cultural, educational and other interchanges between the United
      Kingdom and elsewhere”.3
         This case is quite different from other national cultural institutes because the
      British Council in Italy does not itself run film festivals or other film screening
      events which directly engage audiences, but its commitment goes through
      other channels and strategies. First, BC features a special website dedicated
      to the UK productions, with a yearly updated catalogue of films produced and
      co-produced in the UK, with information from leading experts in the field and
      conceived as a tool for festival programmers.
         According to Alison Driver (Arts Manager for Italy), BC does not directly
      seek to engage with audience development, but performs an intermediary
      function and concentrates on offering “opportunities to film professionals—
      filmmakers, actors, platforms, festival programmers and film enthusiasts—and
      broker creative relationships between UK filmmakers and their international
      counterparts”, with a particular attention to issues facing our contemporary
      societies. Indeed, as for Italy, BC is among the partners of the network Europe
      Beyond Access—a four-year program conceived to internationalise the disabled
      artists’ careers. Therefore, the role of BC Italy is focused on business connection,
      and over the years it has also worked with MIA – Mercato Internazionale
      Audiovisivo on events promoting inclusivity in the sector through invitations to
      share UK expertise.




      3       https://www.bfi.org.uk/.



102                                                          Pellino, Decentering Nations
   The BFI Film Fund is the main tool used by the BC to sponsor new productions,
previously testing them through a cultural test designed to certify whether they
are properly “British” or not, by considering four sections: cultural content,
contribution, hubs, and practitioners. As for the first section on cultural content,
what is remarkable is that the list published by BC every year includes films
considered as “British” if: they are set in the UK “or a European Economic Area”;
are based on British “or EEA subject matter”; their lead characters are British
“or EEA citizens or residents”; and where the original dialogue is recorded
mainly in English or UK indigenous language “or EEA language”.4
   In light of this, one could infer that even the national institute for culture
representing a country that recently left the EU cannot avoid considering the
film production as a cultural issue that, first and foremost, addresses the idea
of a European identity and its less visible subjectivities, and accounting national
culture and its cinematic representations in terms of transnational identity.



ANALYSIS OF THE ROLE PLAYED IN
THE CIRCULATION OF EUROPEAN
CINEMA BY THE ITALIAN CULTURAL
INSTITUTES IN EUROPE
  Similarly to the Institut Français and to the Instituto Cervantes, the Italian
Cultural Institutes (henceforth IIC) depend on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
and International Cooperation: their mission and operation are regulated by
the law n. 401/1990, updated with the D.M. 27 aprile 1995, n. 392, which has
remained unchanged over the years. Within their general mission of promoting
Italian culture and language abroad, cinema has always been one of the leading
sectors of the cultural programming: its importance as a diplomatic tool has
been confirmed in recent years through the creation in 2018 of the annual festival
Fare Cinema—entirely dedicated to the promotion of the field’s professions
and skills—by the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and International Cooperation.
Each institute in the world reinterprets the annual theme of the exhibition, by
organising screenings, talks, masterclasses and meetings with professionals.
As reported by Paolo Noto, “[t]he dissemination of film culture takes place in
collaboration and overlaps with other public and private initiatives” (2019, 427).
Indeed, Noto points out that, if the promotion of Italian cinema abroad is one of
the MAECI’s diplomatic tasks, it also falls within

         the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Economic Development, through
         the ICE—Agency for the promotion and internationalisation of
         Italian companies (cooperating with ANICA), and of the Ministry



4       https://www.bfi.org.uk/apply-british-certification-tax-relief/cultural-test-film.



Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                           103
                of Economy and Finance, which in turn supports the activities of
                FilmItalia, an agency specialised in the promotion of Italian films,
                through the Istituto Luce-Cinecittà, which operationally falls
                within the jurisdiction of the Ministry of Cultural Heritage. […] In
                addition to these intersections with government agencies, the
                Italian Institutes often collaborate or act in parallel with private
                associations, foundations, or cultural institutions (Noto 2019, 426;
                my translation).

         As far as data collection is concerned, the information on cultural events
      available on various IICs’ websites dates back to 2006. This first survey shows
      that the main trend over the course of the 2000s was to screen and support
      films directed by authors considered to be part of the Italian (male) canon
      related to Neorealism and the post-Neorealism period and to Italian-style
      comedy (namely Luchino Visconti, Roberto Rossellini, Michelangelo Antonioni,
      Pier Paolo Pasolini, Federico Fellini, Marco Bellocchio, Ettore Scola, Mario
      Monicelli), and to host tributes to leading female directors, professionals and
      actresses such as Liliana Cavani, Cecilia Mangini, Suso Cecchi d’Amico, Anna
      Magnani and Monica Vitti.
         Furthermore, these years were characterised by the tendency to focus on
      the relationship between cinema and other aspects that are deemed to be
      qualifying the Italian cultural identity, such as gastronomy and fashion—and
      more sporadically with architecture, literature and music—sometimes with a
      regionalist declination: the IIC in Strasbourg (with L’Italie et ses Régions: voyage
      à travers l’Art, le Cinéma, l’Histoire, l’Artisanat, la Gastronomie et l’Oenologie in
      2006); and the IIC Berlin (Kino-di-Vino in 2007, CineFood - Basilicata tra cinema
      e cibo in 2013) are cases in point.
         Afterwards, similarly to the Instituto Cervantes in Rome, main trends consisted
      of prioritising contemporary Italian cinema, especially the new wave of Italian
      documentary filmmakers, a choice justified also by the intention to support the
      sector—as confirmed by Allegra Iafrate (IIC-Bruxelles). In their study dedicated
      to the Italian cinema in the IICs abroad, Noto and Peretti affirms:

                The IICs regularly screen Italian films which even in Italy often
                do not benefit from theatrical distributions, or that are poorly
                distributed: this is the case of a huge number of documentaries
                which are screened abroad, and that over the last few years turned
                to be a sort of example of Italian cinema for diplomatic functions, if
                not an exportation product (2016, 409).

        It follows a diversification in programming that comprehends more films
      directed by women and/or addressed to sensitive topics, including gender and
      migrant issues, and, to a lower degree, LGBTQIA+ and disability issues.
        Although, according to their mission, film programming doesn’t draw on a
      distinctly European perspective, the IICs take part in events dedicated to
      European cinema such as Les Rencontres du Cinéma Européen (held since
      1999). More specifically, what follows is an overview of recurring films in most




104                                                           Pellino, Decentering Nations
of the IICs’ film programming.
   During the 2000s, the IIC-Brussels programming undoubtedly presented the
largest number of initiatives specifically addressed to European issues, also
due to its particular geopolitical position and to the fact that the city hosts the
EUNIC cluster. A case in point is the screening of Once You’re Born You Can No
Longer Hide (Quando sei nato non puoi più nasconderti, Marco Tullio Giordana,
2005), presented in 2008 at the EUNIC Film Festival dedicated to intercultural
dialogue; and FOCUS 89. Film e dibattiti su 20 anni di (r)evoluzione in Europa
(2009), alongside other recurring events such as the Festival del cinema
Mediterraneo.
   In 2006 the IIC Barcelona hosted the 2nd edition of the Congreso Internacional
de Cine Europeo Contemporáneo (CICEC), focusing on the “need to create a
‘eurocinema’ capable of facing the challenges of the market and those of the
new geopolitical scenarios, without erasing the differences”.
   In 2009 the IIC Berlin hosted the film season La caduta della cortina di ferro.
   In 2010 the IIC Madrid collaborated with the Atlantic Film Festival for the
Screen Europe section.
   In 2013 the IIC Paris collaborated with the ÉCU-European Independent Film
Festival of Paris.
   In 2017 the IIC Lyon hosted Métamorphoses. Focus sur le cinéma Européen
and, more recently, in 2022, Vox Populi. Focus sur le Film Européen Engagé.
It also collaborates with La Maison de l’Image for Les rencontres des cinémas
d’Europe (held since 1999), as well as that of the IIC Barcellona with the Festival
de cine de Menorca - Young European Cinema On the Move in 2014, and with
the Festival del Cinema Europeo di Siviglia—by supporting the presentation of
Martin Eden (Pietro Marcello, 2019) in 2020.
   In 2019 the IIC London presented the documentary film Looking for Europe
(Alla ricerca di Europa, Alessandro Scillitani, 2019), and in 2020 collaborated
with the ArteKino festival.
   In the same year the IIC Paris paid attention to the relationship between the
European East and West, by screening films like Comunisti (Davide Ferrario,
Daniele Vicari, 1998) and Verso Est (Laura Angiulli, 2008).
   In 2020 the IIC Munich hosted an event dedicated to the LUX Prize of the
European Parliament.
   Ultimately, it should be mentioned that the film with the greatest circulation
among the IICs has been Primo Levi’s Journey (La strada di Levi, Davide
Ferrario, 2005), screened in Strasbourg, Barcelona, Lyon, and Marseille: a road-
movie that follows the Primo Levi’s journey from Poland to Italy, which depicts
the image of a new Europe still linked to the remains of the Soviet Union and its
neo-Nazi movements.
   From the attention paid in recent years to contemporary Italian cinema has
also sprung an increasing interest for films directed by women, especially when
emerging. The most screened female directors are Alice Rohrwacher, Susanna
Nicchiarelli, Laura Bispuri, Emma Dante, Valeria Golino, Francesca Comencini
and Francesca Archibugi. In some cases the IICs organised or collaborated,


Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                     105
                         more or less regularly, with events or festival dedicated to female directors
                         such as Films, Femmes, Méditerranée (IIC Marseille, since 2008); Con gli occhi
                         di lei (IIC Munich, 2010); Cinema al Femminile (IIC Barcelona, 2013); Festival
                         Internacional de Cine Hecho por Mujeres (IIC Madrid, 2019); Sguardi Altrove
                         (IIC Brussels, 2021); The Wave: Italian Women Filmmakers (IIC London, 2020–
                         21) and, more recently, Femminile, plurale, una nuova generazione di registe
                         italiane (IIC Berlin, 2022).
                            Furthermore, and in a complementary way, great attention has also been paid
                         to films that address gender issues such as The Interval (L’intervallo, 2012) and
                         L’Intruder (L’intrusa, 2019) by Leonardo di Costanzo, Lea - Something About Me
                         (Lea, Marco Tullio Giordana, 2015) and A Chiara (Jonas Carpignano, 2021).
                            Similarly, when it comes to migrant issues there are recurring films and
                         directors such as Jonas Carpignano with Mediterranea (2015), Emanuele Crialese
                         with Golden Door (Nuovomondo, 2006) and Terraferma (2011), Gianfranco Rosi
                         with Fire at Sea (Fuocoammare, 2016), Daniele Vicari with The Human Cargo
                         (La nave dolce, 2012) [Fig. 1], Antonio Augugliaro, Gabriele Del Grande, Khaled
                         Soliman with On the Bride’s Side (Io sto con la sposa, 2014). In this case, it
                         should be noted that the IIC Paris regularly takes part to the Semaine des
                         cultures étrangères du FICEP - Forum des Instituts Culturels Étrangers à Paris,
                         and organises events like Destinazione Italia: cinema di migrazioni, migrazioni
Fig. 1
The Human Cargo          di cinema; while the IIC Monaco collaborates with Rassegna del Mediterraneo
(La nave dolce,          by organising the season Lontana terra: i migranti nel cinema italiano.
Daniele Vicari, 2012).




106                                                                           Pellino, Decentering Nations
                                                                                    Fig. 2
                                                                                    A Ciambra (Jonas
                                                                                    Carpignano, 2017).




   Conversely, much less attention is usually paid to LGBTQIA+ and disability
issues, except as for few isolated occasions represented by The Mouth of
the Wolf (La bocca del lupo, Pietro Marcello, 2009) and Loose Cannons (Mine
Vaganti, Ferzan Ozpetek, 2010) in the first case, and by All My Crazy Love (Tutto
il mio folle amore, Gabriele Salvatores, 2019) in the second one.
   Finally, also the occasions devoted to new audiovisual forms are sporadic:
indeed, the institutes that over the years had paid more attention to this aspect
are the IIC Berlin and IIC Paris through their involvement in Les Rencontres
Internationales Paris-Berlin. New Cinema and Contemporary Art (since 2011)—
which also involved Madrid for a few years—; the IIC Berlin with the screening
of artworks by Rosa Barba; the IIC Madrid, through its collaboration with the
Milano Design Film Festival and the organisation of two screenings of the
artists Francesco Jodice and Rä di Martino. The reason for this lesser attention
to new audiovisual forms (which IICs share with other national institutes for
culture) may lie in the fact that such a kind of double relocation—of cinema in
contemporary art and vice versa—, is not expected by their regular spectators
and disregards their viewing habits. This kind of content, indeed, seems to
be difficult to present within this context, if compared with other forms of
contemporary audiovisual practices. Nonetheless, Maria Teresa De Palma (IIC-
London) affirms that “in recent years, the action of the IIC has tried to focus
more on the contemporary audiovisual culture and recent productions, in
every artistic and creative field, as well as on sub-sectors and genres that have
excellently established themselves in the film scene, such as documentary and
animation”.



THE CARPIGNANO TRILOGY
  As far as the representation and the fostering of European cultural identity
through the lens of sensitive topics are concerned, the projection of the Jonas
Carpignano trilogy Mediterranea (2015), A Ciambra (2017) [Fig. 2] and A Chiara



Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                                    107
      (2021), is particularly emblematic and symptomatic of the way institutes
      approach cinema to address issues that are relevant for both national and
      transnational perspectives.
        Moving forward from the Cinema-of-the-Real approach, Carpignano deals
      with the representation of marginal subjectivities, and his dramas genuinely
      adhere to the body of the non-professional actors he works with,5 through whom
      the director suggests how civil rights and the right to search for a better life
      cannot apply just to a few social categories. Indeed, Ayiva (an African migrant,
      in Mediterranea), Pino (a Roma boy, in A Ciambra) and Chiara (daughter of
      an affiliate of the criminal organisation ‘ndrangheta, in A Chiara) respectively
      embody the failure of EU migration policies, the minoritization of ethnic groups,
      and the persistence of a culture of criminal violence and old values in certain
      remote areas of Southern Italy. Here, the scarce presence of institutions and
      public agencies in citizens’ lives gives way to wide areas of stubborn social
      exclusion. Their vicissitudes take place in Calabria, an economically and
      culturally backward region of the peninsula; an area that is already marginal
      per se, at the periphery of Europe, both from a geographical and political point
      of view, where old and new forms of slavery and human rights violations are
      daily committed against refugee seekers, ethnic minorities and lower middle
      classes. Southern Italy, namely Italian shores, are not only a mere scenery or
      a narrative pretext, but a significant framework, a vantage point from which to
      explore and return the Other’s point of view.
        In showing and promoting this kind of films, national institutes for culture hinge
      on a two-speed Europe. The first represents the cultural identity and diplomacy
      fostered by institutes, their community and niche-audiences, who are in the
      position and have the faculty to imagine Europe as a long-term cooperative
      project. The second, however, represents a position that cannot be anything but
      local, circumscribed and unable of wide-ranging political imagination or, simply,
      of thinking of a social ecosystem beyond its narrow regional boundaries. In
      particular, the A Chiara’s final scenes, which portray the long-standing and
      apparently irremediable distance between the North and South of Italy, mirrors,
      in a sort of scale model, the distance between the North and South of Europe;
      they both strive for unity, but still struggle to engage with their different shades
      of diversity.



      EUNIC  EUROPEAN UNION NATIONAL
      INSTITUTES FOR CULTURE
        Bi- or three-lateral collaborations are important occasions to foster diplomatic
      relations through European film culture from a transnational perspective. In



      5        Cfr. the video essay A Chiara - Breath of the Real (2022) by Chiara Grizzaffi:
      https://vimeo.com/686624679.



108                                                            Pellino, Decentering Nations
2022, for instance, the Instituto Cervantes, the Institut Français Italia and the
Goethe-Institut signed a partnership to launch Sala Europa, consisting of three
months of European cinema in original language with Italian subtitles at Casa
del Cinema in Rome. A few institutes have also been involved in the promotion
of a more experimental cinema that tends the hand to other arts thanks to
occasions such as the already mentioned Les Rencontres Internationales Paris-
Berlin. New Cinema and Contemporary Art.
   This kind of collaboration has become more and more intense over the
years, and is progressively moving towards developing a coordinated, namely
bilateral and multilateral, strategy of value-co-creation by “exchanging cultural
practice and diffusing cultural productions” (Martel and Simic 2017, 48), rather
than merely projecting national values. In particular, this shared vision became
established thanks to the creation in 2006 of EUNIC, the European national
institutes for culture network from all EU Member States. Founded with the
explicit intention to cooperate with the Council of Europe as a strategic partner
of the EU “actively involved in the further definition of European cultural
policy”,6 its existence confirms the diplomatic weight of institutes for culture,
yet within a renewed transnational framework. Since 2014 EUNIC has been
supported by the Creative Europe programme, and the Joint Communication
Towards an EU Strategy for International Cultural Relations (2016) recognises
it “as one of the implementing partners of the EU’s cultural relations approach”.
The partnership with the EU consists of joint activities between EU Delegations
and EUNIC clusters, as well as on partnership agreements with the European
Commission (2017) and with the EEAS-European External Action Service (2021).
Its vision is based on the idea of culture as a tool to enhance international
relations. That is the reason why it also works as a “platform for knowledge
sharing and for capacity building amongst its members and partners”, with the
aim to promote cultural diversity, understanding and cooperation, to conduct
research and share best practices.7 According to the aim of this study, it is
important to shed light on the section of the EUNIC mission that focus on the
criteria through which the 38 members act: “for or on behalf of a national entity,
based in EU Member States” but “engage[d] in cultural and related activities
beyond their national borders”.
   Over the years EUNIC has promoted different events and supported shared
programming on some common themes. The film season The Fall of the
Iron Curtain (2009) is a case in point: the occasion was offered by the Wall’s
fall twentieth anniversary, through which the European cultural institutes
members of the EUNIC in Berlin presented films on the Cold War, its end and
its consequences on contemporary Europe. While initiatives such as Europa che
Ride (Europe laughing), held in 2013 at Casa del Cinema in Rome hosted films
chosen by the various institutes to reflect on prejudices and stereotypes. As for


6      https://www.eunicglobal.eu/about.
7      https://eunic.eu/media/site/fbf4c8e726-1591718794/eunic-strategic-fra-
mework-2020-2024-final.pdf.



Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                    109
      Metamorphoses - Focus sur le Cinéma Européen Contemporain (Metamorphoses
      - Focus on Contemporary European Cinema) in 2017 at the IIC-Lyon, the
      occasion was the celebration of the Rome Treaty’s sixtieth anniversary,8 with
      twelve contemporary European films (from Germany, Romania, Portugal, Italy,
      Poland, Spain). Another common initiative that does not question the concept
      of national cinema but supports the idea of a transnational and pan-European
      cinema is Days of Contemporary European Cinema: held for the first time in
      2018, it is a selection of the last two years’ European film production.
        The European Film Festival (held since 1988) is probably the most important
      initiative co-organized by EUNIC. Founded by the European Union and based on
      the partnership between institutes for culture, academies and embassies, it is
      a travelling film festival that offers a kaleidoscope of European film production
      in its original language,9 and film programming is accompanied by debates and
      meetings with directors, actors and screenwriters.



      MAIN FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS
        The above survey outlines a multi-faceted panorama of practices. Nonetheless,
      even though institutes have different juridical statuses—a difference that
      could be an obstacle to developing joint projects according to a supra-national
      model, as institutes continue to adhere to their national models with the risk
      of big countries imposing their visions (Martel and Simic 2018)—at the same
      time, as film promotion and circulation are concerned, they share a number
      of complementary strategies. On one hand, thanks to a capillary presence on
      territories, they stand as partners or supporters of many festivals, benefitting
      from collateral events and occasions to present films with their directors,
      interpreters, and professionals. Indeed, according to Noto, not only the circuit
      of the IICs takes part in the value-adding process, but organically participates
      in the value-creation of films, potentially functioning “as a sort of temporal
      and spatial extension of the festival circuit” (Noto and Peretti 2016, 430; my
      translation).
        Moreover, they keep alive a kind of (traditional) cinematic experience, by
      implementing practices similar to those of the art-house sector, which “include
      inviting directors, actors and film critics, screening retrospectives dedicated to
      a particular filmmaker, or organising special seasons of films originating from
      a particular country or continent” (Jäckel 2004, 26). A strategy confirmed by
      interviews with Carmen Hof (Goethe-Institut in Rome), Linda Marchetti (Institut
      Français in Milan), and Maria Teresa De Palma (Italian Institute for Culture in
      London).



      8         Signed in 1949, the Treaty of Rome not only established the European Econo-
      mic Community (CEE), but also fostered the circulation of co-produced films between
      the six founding members. See also Rivi 2007, 42.
      9         http://www.accadromania.it/2015/MNCE.pdf.



110                                                           Pellino, Decentering Nations
  Another aspect worth to be mentioned is that the national institutes for
culture foster a transnational cinematic community, grounded on niches formed
by small audiences of regular visitors. Besides, if this could be considered as an
obstacle for the widespread circulation—or a consequence of the fragmentation
of cultural policies (Noto and Peretti 2016)—, nonetheless it should be noticed
that such niches are increasingly intersecting, also due to initiatives like that
taken by EUNIC. In doing so, they “challenge a monolithic configuration of Europe
and attempt to reconfigure it into a heterogeneous, hybrid, and polycentric
space so as to take into account multiple subjectivities, nations, and realities”
(Rivi 2007, 7).
  The investigation has also revealed a general shift of interest towards a more
(trans-)European cinema occurred between the 1990s and 2010s. Indeed, on
the side of non-theatrical release this study has dealt with, audiences seem
to prefer neither American productions (Comand and Menarini 2014) nor
their own domestic ones (Jäckel 2004), at least not exclusively as it could be
assumed when speaking of theatrical distribution. Similarly, Higson also points
out that European national film cultures are “surprisingly resilient in this era
of globalised, digital storytelling [while] a surprising amount of national film-
making is still enjoyed by national audiences”. (Higson 2018, 306).
  This scenario highlights an inversion of the general trend of the influence
institutional policies have had on film reception—here clearly intended as
affected by the film promotion and circulation strategies. According to Pierre
Sorlin, indeed, until the 1990s they played “a rather marginal part” and “no
simple, direct connection existed between political evolution and the tastes of
the public” (Sorlin 1991, 200). Otherwise, the conclusion that could be drawn
from the present enquiry is that the role of national institutes for culture in the
promotion and circulation of a European transnational cinema clearly emerges
as an outcome of European shifting policies and practices addressed to overcome
the nation-state framework (Elsaesser 2005, 2014). Therefore, according to the
EU policies which supports “national, transnational (co-production) and cross-
European policies” (Bilterheyst and Cuelenaere 2021, 18), they form a useful
network to ensure film circulation among a particular audience.
  Therefore, one could state that cinema-related initiatives of the national
institutes for culture take advantage, paraphrasing Elsaesser, of a sort of
“tactical weakness”, which consists in “[p]erforming the nation rather than
representing it” (Elsaesser 2014, 28). Undoubtedly, they return the image of
an “imperfect Europe” or of a European cinema’s newly found freedom to be
marginal” (Harrod, Liz, and Timoshkina 2014, 35). Nonetheless, how long can
this weakness, albeit tactical, be incisive within a scenario characterised by
increasingly scarce resources? Will the art-house model further ensure non-
theatrical circulation among a transnational niches-based audience? Can the
fragmentation be overcome in favour of a more structured network-oriented
strategy?
  A possible answer is offered by the British Council circulation model. As reported
above, even if the BC doesn’t offer proper film programming in the cities where


Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                      111
      it is present, it aims at fostering business connections between professionals
      and cinema industries in the UK and the hosting countries, ensuring proper
      distribution for films otherwise difficult to position within the European cinema
      market. Hence, the value-creation and value-adding processes here are focused
      not only on the distribution but even on the production, in particular of films that
      address sensitive topics and by supporting disabled artists’ careers.
         Such a verticalization could be assumed as a best practice to emulate also
      by other national institutes for culture, by intensifying, for instance, their
      relationships via EUNIC to improve the transnational features of films and their
      circulation beyond the mainstream circuits. Indeed, the fragmentation could be
      a weakness for the circulation and the promotion of European films beyond their
      theatrical release, primarily due to a lack of funding the individual institutes
      have to deal with. Conversely, pooling economic and human resources for a
      more efficient network, could ensure broader circulation for European films and
      their authors in different countries despite their nationality.
         In conclusion, if national institutes for culture already play a significant role
      in film circulation, they also have the potentialities to increase their role in the
      construction of films’ cultural value and identity, by fostering the European
      cinema sphere: “a vibrant space in which to understand and work through
      notions of and beyond national borders” (Gott and Herzog 2015, 1).




112                                                          Pellino, Decentering Nations
REFERENCE LIST
Avezzù, Giorgio. 2022. L’Italia che guarda. Geografie del consumo audiovisivo. Rome: Carocci.
Biltereyst Daniel, and Eduard Cuelenaere. WP1.3. Region Report: European Movie Market Report. EUMEPLAT
project.
Brunetta, Gian Piero. 2020. L’Italia sullo schermo. Come il cinema ha raccontato l’identità italiana, Rome:
Carocci.
Bondebjerg, Ib, Eva Novrup Redvall, and Andrew Higson, eds. 2014. European Cinema and Television. Cultural
Policy and Everyday Life. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
Comand, Mariapia, and Roy Menarini. 2014. Il cinema europeo. Bari: Laterza.
Carpentier, Nico. 2021. “The European Assemblage: A Discursive-Material Analysis of European Identity,
Europaneity and Europeanisation.” Filosofija. Sociologija 32 (3): 231–39. DOI: https://doi.org/10.6001/fil-soc.
v32i3.4495.
Ciaglia, Sarah, Clemens Fuest, and Friedrich Heinemann. 2018. What a Feeling?! How to Promote ‘European
Identity’. EconPol Policy Report 9. October 2018.
Curtin, Michael, Jennifer Holt, and Kevin Sanson, eds. 2014. Distribution Revolution. Conversations about the
Digital Future of Film and Television. Oakland: University of California.
Elsaesser, Thomas. 2014. “European Cinema into the Twenty-First Century: Enlarging the Context?” In The
Europeanness of European Cinema. Identity, Meaning, Globalisation, edited by Mary Harrod, Mariana Liz, and
Alissa Timoshkina, 17–32. London-New York: I. B. Tauris.
Elsaesser, Thomas. 2005. European Cinema. Face to Face with Hollywood. Amsterdam: Amsterdam University
Press.
Garofalo, Damiano, Dom Holdaway, and Massimo Scaglioni, eds. 2018. “The International Circulation of
European Cinema in the Digital Age.” Comunicazioni Sociali 40 (3).
Gott, Michael, and Todd Herzog. 2015. East West and Centre. Reframing Post-1989 European Cinema. Edinburgh:
Edinburgh University Press.
Halle, Randall. 2014. The Europeanization of Cinema. Interzones and Imaginative Communities. Urbana-
Chicago-Springfield: University of Illinois Press.
Harrod, Mary, Mariana Liz, and Alissa Timoshkina, eds. 2014. The Europeanness of European Cinema. Identity,
Meaning, Globalisation. London-New York: I. B. Tauris.
Holdaway, Dom, and Massimo Scaglioni. 2019. “Studiare la circolazione. Metodologie e problematiche di un
progetto di ricerca.” In Cinema e identità italiana, edited by Stefania Parigi, Christian Uva, and Vito Zagarrio,
403–24. Rome: RomaTre Press.
Holdaway, Dom, and Massimo Scaglioni. 2018. “From Distribution to Circulation Studies: Mapping Italian Films
Abroad.” Comunicazioni Sociali 40 (3), 341–55. DOI: https://doi.org/10.26350/001200_000024.
Jäckel, Anne. 2004. European Film Industries. London: British Film Institute.
Liz, Mariana. 2016. Euro-Visions. Europe in Contemporary Cinema. New York-London: Bloomsbury.


Cinéma & Cie vol. 23 no. 41 2023 · ISSN 2036-461X                                                        113
Lobato, Ramon. 2012. Shadow Economies of Cinema: Mapping Informal Film Distribution. London: BFI.
Martel, Kerstin, and Ljiljana Simic. 2018. “Building a Joint Approach in European Union Cultural Diplomacy:
From Soft Power to Intercultural Cooperation?” Revista Chilena de Relaciones Internacionales 2 (1): 27–54.
Noto, Paolo. 2019. “Il cinema italiano negli Istituti Italiani di Cultura all’estero. Alcuni casi di studio.” In Cinema
e identità italiana, edited by Stefania Parigi, Christian Uva, and Vito Zagarrio, 425–32. Rome: RomaTre Press.
Noto, Paolo, and Luca Peretti. 2016. “The Diplomatic Promotion of Italian Cinema in English-Speaking
Countries.” Comunicazioni Sociali 38 (3): 398–411.
Paganoni, Maria Cristina. 2015. “Cultural Heritage in the Discourse of European Institutions.” LCM Languages
Cultures Mediation 2 (2): 117–30.
Parigi, Stefania, Christian Uva, and Vito Zagarrio, eds. 2019. Cinema e identità italiana. Rome: RomaTre Press.
Rivi, Luisa. 2007. European Cinema after 1989. Cultural Identity and Transnational Production. New York:
Palgrave Macmillan.
Scaglioni, Massimo, ed. 2020. Cinema made in Italy. La circolazione internazionale dell’audiovisivo italiano.
Rome: Carocci.
Sorlin, Pierre. 1991. European Cinemas, European Societies, 1939–1990. London-New York: Routledge.




114                                                                                      Pellino, Decentering Nations
