Opposition to the new stadium in Milan is driven more by misoneism than by nostalgia

A famous English commentator posted a photo taken from the press box at the Meazza: “I will certainly miss what, for me, is the best press box in all of football”. It is unlikely that the press box at the Generali Stadium will be any worse, but even Montanelli was fond of ‘Lettera 22’. Thousands of fans felt a pang of sadness on Thursday evening when, against the (somewhat unlikely) backdrop of the Castello Sforzesco, Inter and Milan unveiled the official rendering of Milan’s new stadium, designed by Lord Norman Foster and David Manica, the star architect specialising in stadiums.

Saying goodbye to the legendary Scala del Calcio, to the ‘bowl’ that even the new stadium promises to symbolically replicate, is an emotional blow. Quite different is the negative reaction – certainly not born the other evening – of so many opponents who harbour preconceived notions about the project. We are not so much referring to the Soviet-style political opponents, those who would have preferred the stadium to remain in public ownership. More bizarre, and less comprehensible, is the opposition from the aesthetes.

Dozens of keyboard warriors are claiming that the Foster-Manica stadium would be ‘an urban eyesore’, an ‘architectural disaster for Milan’. It is unclear on what basis they are making this assessment. They have written that ‘Milan has never seen a change like this’, but twenty years ago the Vertical Forest did not exist. Some have written – drawing on the history of architecture, and obviously with more noble concepts than those of social media aesthetes – that the Meazza now has the architectural status of a monument and should not have been demolished. All these comments consistently fail to mention certain facts: that the stadium was no longer fit for purpose; that urban and economic development – including the concept of the ‘new’ – are essential for a city (or nation) that does not wish to decline; and that this approach has been successfully followed in other countries. There is nostalgia, there is the Soviet model, but above all there is the cultural and mental breakdown that poses the greatest threat to our country: misoneism. A hatred of what is new simply because it is new.