Wednesday, September 18th, on La7 during prime time, a Lectio Magistralis by Vittorio Sgarbi on the life and works of Michelangelo was broadcast. It was an excellent choice for a network with the ambition to serve the public.
The event took place at the Teatro Sociale in Sondrio, effectively turning the televised program into a theatrical performance. As we'll see later, this has significant implications in terms of "quality" as understood by the entertainment industry.
From the perspective of the average cultured viewer, the "product" was fascinating, engaging, and highly informative; when it comes to the narration and dissemination of Renaissance art, Vittorio Sgarbi is unmatched. He truly represents an Italian excellence. If he confined himself to this alone, he would deserve to be the Minister of Culture for life.
Even Aldo Grasso, a renowned TV critic from Corriere della Sera, couldn’t help but praise him: "Michelangelo's works, so vividly recalled by the critic, become the starting points of a journey through art, like a circle without beginning or end, where the necessity and urgency of beauty around us emerge clearly and powerfully."
In Milan, they might say: "It’s never happened before!".
Now, the website Dagospia, which many consider a go-to source for information, labeled the program a 'flop' in one of its summaries, based on viewership data: 2.8% share and 438,000 viewers. The tone was vaguely dismissive, and the assessment was definitely reductive. Share percentages and viewer numbers aren't what define the quality of a TV program, nor was it the old, much-missed "appreciation index." The "I like it or I don’t" concept is entirely subjective and doesn’t consider good direction, cinematography, skilled and creative writers, competent and charismatic hosts or actors, or even a well-allocated budget. And yet, whether it’s television or cinema, even with the best professionals, there’s never a guarantee that a product will be successful.
Returning, as promised, to the concept of quality from the industry's perspective, recording a theatrical performance costs just a few thousand euros, excluding Vittorio Sgarbi’s fee; the recording is essentially a live broadcast delayed for airing. A fee is paid to the theater for lighting and crew, a small production truck is rented, and there are minimal editing costs. In contrast, a TV program produced for the same show would require a studio with staff, lighting, a director of photography, a set with a designer, at least a small editorial team, a director, and would cost several tens of thousands of euros, again excluding Sgarbi’s fee. Considering this is an evergreen product, meaning it can be rebroadcast multiple times in the future, La7 can rightly consider it an extraordinary business success.
Of course, there were some flaws. The lecture was staged with Sgarbi at a podium lit by a spotlight against a dark backdrop, to allow the audience in the theater to view the images projected on the screen behind him. However, it's well known that television audiences react poorly to dark visuals, so this presentation choice likely resulted in a loss of 0.3-0.5% in share. Moving from a 2.8% to a 3.1-3.3% share would have been a significant television success.
Simply opening with the entire theater fully lit and then gradually transitioning to the dim lighting before projecting the images onto the screen would have been more effective. This subtlety highlights the difference between a seasoned director and a video mixer technician!
Illustration by Gloria Dozio - Acrimònia Studios
.jpg)