Alberto Moravia was an ambiguous figure for the Fascists. His first novel, Gli Indifferenti, was an international success, and was praised by Bottai. His second novel, Le ambizioni sbagliate, ran into difficulties with Fascist censorship. His maternal uncle was a member of Mussolini's government. His paternal first cousins were Carlo and Nello Rosselli. This essay explores Moravia's relations with the regime in the light of archival evidence, contemporary ‘revisions’ of his reputation and recent controversy over his letters to Ciano and Mussolini.

The earthquake that struck both coasts of the Straits of Messina on 28 December 1908 was probably the worst natural disaster in the history of the Italian peninsula. It was followed by an extraordinary movement of public grief and solidarity. These extremely widespread manifestations of patriotism in a country that is frequently thought to ‘lack’ national identity give cause to reflect on the way the notion of national identity is used in the Italian context and beyond. The article looks specifically at some of the contrasting ways in which timing and memory simultaneously became patriotic and controversial issues in the Italian press in the aftermath of the catastrophe. It does so through a sustained dialogue with the most influential thinker on nationalism, time and memory: Benedict Anderson. It emerges from the analysis that different constructions of timing and memory are an indicator of the social and political functions of patriotism, which offers ways to manage crisis situations like the earthquake, but at the same time covertly politicizes them.

The article examines the first official, national Holocaust memorial day in Italy, the so-called Giorno della memoria (Day of memory), marked on the 56th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz on 27 January 2001. It looks at the ways in which the day acted as a filter for issues of national collective memory and identity, in particular state and public negotiation of the legacy of Fascism, as well as addressing broader issues of Holocaust remembrance. The article looks first at the origins of the Giorno della memoria in political and in legislative terms. Then it sketches in the events of the day itself, at national and local levels, in political, educational and cultural terms. This is followed by an analysis of media coverage and contemporary commentary, showing how various lines of interpretation addressed general issues related to the Holocaust and specifically Italian historical, ideological and contemporary questions.

This article takes up the question posed by Claudio Pavone—‘Have the Italians truly known how to come to terms with their past?’—and argues that Italians have indeed grappled with their Fascist past, albeit in varied, contradictory, ambiguous and incomplete ways. This article demonstrates the myriad ways in which Italians—historians, politicians, intellectuals, and segments of the general public—have debated the meaning of Fascism since the fall of Mussolini and the end of the Second World War. What follows below argues that selective remembering and wilful forgetting of the Mussolini regime are nevertheless evidence of an ongoing process of confronting the legacy of Italy's recent past.

Recent cultural and political debate in contemporary Italy, which has often been focused on Fascism and the Resistance, has seen an attempt to reconsider the importance of the constitutive moment of the Republic, namely the Liberazione from Nazism–Fascism, and to equate the memories of Fascism and anti-Fascism. The direct consequence of these confused revisionist approaches is either to rehabilitate many aspects of the Duce's regime, or on the contrary to assign this shady page of history to oblivion. The effect of this would be to marginalize anti-Fascism, and even to depict Fascism as relatively ‘harmless’ or ‘apolitical’. The danger is that this trend may construct an artificial and distorted history and thus a ‘manipulated’ public memory for Italian society. The purpose of this article is not to defend anti-Fascism but to restore the reality of ‘Fascism in action’, and to challenge distorted revisionist perceptions of the past.