This paper attempts to connect the figure of Umberto Eco to reflections on education in the contemporary era. It analyzes very recent aspects of the debate, which have not yet been explored. Indeed, in various texts, Eco has reflected on the role of the teacher in a changing world, placing as an increasingly fundamental theme the challenging role that teachers must assume as critical advisors within digital galaxies. Eco’s discourse currently intersects with two major current trajectories. On the one hand, the expansion of digital products and a new frontier of critical work to be undertaken with respect to artificial intelligence, which schools cannot ignore and which would be part of the work on knowledge for the future outlined by Morin (2001). On the other hand, the ministerial policy of “reaction, “ clearly highlighted by the New National Guidelines that the Ministry of Education and Merit is attempting to introduce in the first cycle of education and on which it is already working for the second cycle. The presentation will focus primarily on this second aspect. The text presented by Minister, after a general introduction that brings together diverse perspectives, reveals its profound thinking as soon as it delves into the core of the vision of knowledge. It regresses beyond the School’s scope of observation and explicitly calls for a reduction in objectives beyond critical analysis. The teaching paradigm of World History and the analysis of texts and sources is dismantled piece by piece, as are those of sociolinguistics and democratic linguistics. A culture closely tied to memory and the quantity of stored texts and words is back in vogue, despite Eco himself already indicating in 2016 the need to work more on the selection of content and the relationships between them. The orientations of the Commission selected by the Minister reveal, in some key passages, a strong inclination toward retrotopia (Baumann, 2017), a selection of past practices as a response to the present. The traits of conservatism, paternalism, and immobility that Eco aptly describes in Mike Bongiorno’s celebrated phenomenology (1963) hark back to the criticisms that Giscel (1975) leveled at the old linguistic pedagogy defined as “imitative, prescriptive, and exclusive. “ The profile of the Magister, which the document outlines with a view to a “newfound authority, “ as an expert who introduces limits and rules to the student’s freedom, harks back to the idea of the intellectual as a “technician in the field” and representative of the “authorized culture, “ which accepts society’s myths and conventions. Eco lucidly captured all these characteristics in the idea of knowledge that Mike Bongiorno’s television projected into the Italian imagination, and which today seem to once again become a desirable horizon, a petty-bourgeois ideal to be applied to schools, even though television has become extremely peripheral in the collective imagination and society has changed dramatically. The study, maintaining a theoretical perspective, attempts to document the Ministry’s proposed paradigm’s departure from the reflections on knowledge and teaching that intellectuals like Umberto Eco have proposed as important tools for safeguarding the relevance of public education.
Il contributo prova a collegare la figura di Umberto Eco alle riflessioni sull’educazione nell’epoca contemporanea, facendo riferimento all’attualità del suo pensiero nel contesto politico e tecnologico odierno. Vengono analizzati aspetti di dibattito molto recenti, che ancora non hanno trovato spazi di analisi. Eco ha riflettuto, infatti, in vari testi sulla figura del docente nel mondo che cambia, ponendo come tema sempre più fondamentale il ruolo difficile che l’insegnante deve assumere come orientatore critico all’interno delle galassie digitali. Il discorso di Eco incrocia in questo momento due grandi traiettorie in atto. Da una parte l’espansione dei prodotti digitali e una nuova frontiera di lavoro critico da operare rispetto all’intelligenza artificiale, che la Scuola non può ignorare e che farebbero parte di quel lavoro sui saperi per il futuro delineato da Morin (2001). Dall’altra parte la politica di ‘’reazione’’ ministeriale bene evidenziata dalle Nuove Indicazioni Nazionali che il Ministero dell’Istruzione e del Merito sta cercando di introdurre nel primo ciclo d’istruzione e su cui è già al lavoro per il secondo ciclo. L’intervento si concentrerà soprattutto su questo secondo aspetto. Il testo licenziato da Valditara, dopo una premessa generale che mette insieme orientamenti di indirizzo diverso, appena entra nel cuore della visione dei saperi, manifesta il suo pensiero profondo. Si torna indietro rispetto al raggio d’osservazione della Scuola e si invita esplicitamente a una riduzione degli obiettivi rispetto all’analisi critica. Il paradigma didattico della World History e dell’analisi dei testi e delle fonti, viene smontato a pezzo a pezzo, così come quello della sociolinguistica e della linguistica democratica. Torna in voga una cultura molto legata alla memoria e alla quantità di testi e parole immagazzinate, nonostante proprio Eco indicasse già nel 2016 la necessità di lavorare più sulla scelta dei contenuti e sui rapporti tra di essi. Gli orientamenti della Commissione scelta dal Ministro rivelano in alcuni passaggi chiave un’inclinazione forte alla retrotopia (Baumann, 2017), una selezione di pratiche del passato come risposta al presente. I tratti della conservazione, del paternalismo e dell’immobilismo che Eco descrive bene nella celeberrima fenomenologia di Mike Bongiorno (1963), rimandano alle critiche che il Giscel (1975) rivolgeva alla vecchia pedagogia linguistica definita ‘’ imitativa, prescrittiva ed esclusiva’’. Il profilo del Magister, che il documento tratteggia in vista di una ‘ritrovata autorevolezza’’, come esperto che introduce limiti e regole alla libertà dello studente, rimanda a quell’idea di intellettuale come ‘’tecnico del ramo’’ e rappresentante della ‘’cultura autorizzata’’, che della società accetta miti e convenzioni. I conflitti dentro le classi e con le famiglie, che sono ormai due dimensioni di intersezione della professione docente, non sfiorano mai le pagine delle Indicazioni: è come se venisse ignorata la ‘’dimensione tragica della vita’’. Tutte queste caratteristiche Eco le ha lucidamente fotografate nell’idea di sapere che ha proiettato la televisione di Mike Bongiorno nell’immaginario italiano e che oggi sembrano diventare di nuovo un orizzonte auspicabile, un ideale piccolo borghese da applicare alla Scuola, anche se la televisione è diventata estremamente periferica nell’immaginario collettivo e la società è cambiata moltissimo. Lo studio, mantenendosi su un profilo teoretico, prova a documentare l’allontanamento del paradigma proposto dal Ministero dalle riflessioni sul sapere e sull’insegnamento che intellettuali come Umberto Eco hanno proposto come strumenti importanti per salvare la significatività dell’istruzione pubblica.
Tracà, C. (2026). Il Magister e Mike Bongiorno.
Il Magister e Mike Bongiorno
Cristian Tracà
2026
Abstract
This paper attempts to connect the figure of Umberto Eco to reflections on education in the contemporary era. It analyzes very recent aspects of the debate, which have not yet been explored. Indeed, in various texts, Eco has reflected on the role of the teacher in a changing world, placing as an increasingly fundamental theme the challenging role that teachers must assume as critical advisors within digital galaxies. Eco’s discourse currently intersects with two major current trajectories. On the one hand, the expansion of digital products and a new frontier of critical work to be undertaken with respect to artificial intelligence, which schools cannot ignore and which would be part of the work on knowledge for the future outlined by Morin (2001). On the other hand, the ministerial policy of “reaction, “ clearly highlighted by the New National Guidelines that the Ministry of Education and Merit is attempting to introduce in the first cycle of education and on which it is already working for the second cycle. The presentation will focus primarily on this second aspect. The text presented by Minister, after a general introduction that brings together diverse perspectives, reveals its profound thinking as soon as it delves into the core of the vision of knowledge. It regresses beyond the School’s scope of observation and explicitly calls for a reduction in objectives beyond critical analysis. The teaching paradigm of World History and the analysis of texts and sources is dismantled piece by piece, as are those of sociolinguistics and democratic linguistics. A culture closely tied to memory and the quantity of stored texts and words is back in vogue, despite Eco himself already indicating in 2016 the need to work more on the selection of content and the relationships between them. The orientations of the Commission selected by the Minister reveal, in some key passages, a strong inclination toward retrotopia (Baumann, 2017), a selection of past practices as a response to the present. The traits of conservatism, paternalism, and immobility that Eco aptly describes in Mike Bongiorno’s celebrated phenomenology (1963) hark back to the criticisms that Giscel (1975) leveled at the old linguistic pedagogy defined as “imitative, prescriptive, and exclusive. “ The profile of the Magister, which the document outlines with a view to a “newfound authority, “ as an expert who introduces limits and rules to the student’s freedom, harks back to the idea of the intellectual as a “technician in the field” and representative of the “authorized culture, “ which accepts society’s myths and conventions. Eco lucidly captured all these characteristics in the idea of knowledge that Mike Bongiorno’s television projected into the Italian imagination, and which today seem to once again become a desirable horizon, a petty-bourgeois ideal to be applied to schools, even though television has become extremely peripheral in the collective imagination and society has changed dramatically. The study, maintaining a theoretical perspective, attempts to document the Ministry’s proposed paradigm’s departure from the reflections on knowledge and teaching that intellectuals like Umberto Eco have proposed as important tools for safeguarding the relevance of public education.I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.



