After the victory at Sanremo 2026, the song “Forever yes” di Sal Da Vinci It's become the center of the usual controversy. Some talk about toxic love, some bring up the patriarchy, some say certain phrases are "dangerous."
Honestly? But where?
As a woman, I don't feel control in that song, I don't feel possession, I don't feel submission. I feel a promise. I feel a man saying "I believe in us," "I'm staying," "I'm here." And sorry if that's not enough.
It seems like we can no longer talk about intense love without someone crying foul. If you say "forever," it becomes dependency. If you say "I don't want to lose you," it becomes manipulation. If you talk about dedication, then you're fueling some kind of patriarchal system.
But love isn't a press release written with the handbrake on. Love is a feeling. It's momentum. It's also exaggeration. It's saying "forever" even if life will take its course. It's a way of saying: I believe in this.
Not everything has to become a social issue. Not every song is a political manifesto. Sometimes it's just a love story. And "Per sempre sì" is just that: a romantic declaration, perhaps classic, perhaps traditional... but that doesn't make it wrong.
It almost seems like today the idea of commitment, of promising something that goes beyond the moment, is annoying. As if "forever" were a forbidden word. But why? If two people choose each other freely, what's the problem?
Political correctness, when it goes too far, ends up ruining even the simplest things. You can't always look for the dark side in every sentence. You can't turn every emotion into an ideological battle. I don't feel offended by that song. I don't feel belittled. I don't feel cornered. I simply feel a promise of love.
And in a world where everything is disposable, perhaps hearing someone say "I'm forever" isn't a threat. It's almost like a breath of fresh air.
Maybe, every now and then, we could just stop analyzing everything… and just listen.
Source EDITORIAL TEAM
Comments (2)
The author of this article is brilliant. I agree with her every word. But why do all these problems always crop up when it comes to a Neapolitan singer, especially when he wins? Could it be the usual "bitterness" masked by challenging and high-sounding themes, as the equally brilliant author of another article rightly pointed out? Otherwise, there's no explanation for this illogical obstinacy in wanting to paint as negative values that are, on the contrary, objectively positive, like those conveyed by the winning song at Sanremo. And then, could anyone explain to me why these same themes were expressed, even on the Ariston stage, in famous songs by Al Bano, Toto Cutugno, and so many other big names without anyone having a word to say? But when Sal Da Vinci sings them, it's no longer acceptable? How can we not doubt the good faith of those who make these criticisms? You may or may not like the musical style, or you may prefer the melody of other songs by the same artist, but there's no denying the universal validity and quality of this song's lyrics. Nor can it be denied that Sal Da Vinci is a great interpreter of modern Neapolitan melodic song: in my opinion, one of the four pillars of this great tradition, along with Nino D'Angelo and the two Gigis, D'Alessio and Finizio (the latter, again in my humble opinion, is closest to Sal Da Vinci's style and melodic approach, although, unfortunately, he hasn't had as much success as the other three).
I agree with what I read, great article. Congratulations!