'Things have to change so that they can stay the same'

hi,

i think it means that although people may change, for example faces of those in power, meaning in the end the labels change, in the end the substance stays the same. in the film although there was a revolution and different people came into power and a new class was emerging and gaining strength, this change was not a real change, because as was seen the aristocracy still had power and strength. also, sometimes in order to prevent REAL substantial change there are other changes. for instance in politics although parties come and go and it seems like real change has happened in actual fact they are still serving the same people's interests.

sorry if the explanation is a bit bad, it's hard to explain in typing. hope you get the idea though :)

I studied this idea in English Lit and history last year.
It is simply that the aristocracy must accept the rise in power and circumstance of the monied merchant class to ensure their survival. Anjelica's father is such a man and the Leopard strongly advocates his nephew into marriage with her as her wealth will save the dignity of his own family name and estate. The Leopard argues that if the aristocracy does not absorb this new class they will become impoverished and disappear. It also has a political meaning as the aristocracy easily transformed from being under the Bourbons in Sicily to being the aristocracy of a new united Italy under Piedmont. For them nothing changes in their life style but they must accept new society and a new ruler to maintain their position.

Hope this explains it to you!


Gordon Ramsay is GOD!

Can someone please explain to me what the movie (and book) is trying to say by this exactly?

It's what a character says, first of all. Taken in context, it's a pithy aphorism characteristic of dashing aristocractic dandies like Tancredi trying to appear as intelligent and insightful to his great uncle.

As the story advances it takes on different meaning which I think is fairly clear and direct by the end.



"Ça va by me, madame...Ça va by me!" - The Red Shoes

In fact, Tancredi was right in his cynical assessment.

He joined Garibaldi, the subversive antithesis of his class and tradition, making a name for himself. He participated in the making of a new united Italy. This unification and modernization of Italy was inevitable, something he understood. Thus, he joined the times, seemingly cutting his ties from his past. Joining the revolution made him seem like a revolutionary, what the idealism of that time required. By becoming something of a hero, he becomes the "elite" of the era, as well as the "elite" of the past. Doing so made him seem progressive and less threatening to the masses. As soon as it was unfashionable, or rather, politically uninteresting to be a Garibaldi Red Shirt, he joined the Royal Forces of the New Italy which then became more accepted and trusted. Although it was hypocritical to again work for the elite/nobility/royalty, the political climate favored it. Tancredi's political allegiances always reflected the spirit of the times rather than his convictions. By following the spirit of the times he always maintained the upper hand. Towards the end of the film, he once again proved his assessment to work in his favor, as Tancredi was going to run for elections. Since the eligible voters were probably going to vote for him anyway (this was addressed in the film where the masses followed Prince Salina's electoral choices), it is safe to say that Tancredi will probably become the new era's prominent politician. This proves that a leopard may change his spots but is still a leopard. A prince can always remain a prince on top if he knows how to play the game. Prince Salina mourns this fact, as he is nostalgic and wishes for the world he treasured to be forever preserved. However, he is full of sadness that people like Tancredi are going to change the very world they miss in order to stay in power.

[deleted]

“Unless we ourselves take a hand now, they’ll foist a republic on us. If we want things to stay as they are, things will have to change.” When the Prince of Salina earlier protests: “A Falconeri should be with us, for the King”, Tancredi exclaims: “For the King, yes, of course. But which King?”