Those who dismiss parliament dismiss democracy
The plans for a parliament building on the empty lot where the opera house once stood have met with near-unanimous objection, even from the most unexpected quarters. It is all very interesting. The reaction tells us much about where democracy is ranked in the value system of the Maltese, who appear not, at least from these arguments, to understand the symbolic significance of a parliament building.
The most common argument being put forward against this proposal runs roughly along these lines: why should we spend a fortune and waste a good location just to house MPs in splendour and luxury? This argument is put forward with varying degrees of eloquence, but it is still the same argument. The thinking that underpins it is this: the parliament building is not the symbolic representation of our democracy and statehood, but a roof beneath which despised MPs may gather three evenings a week to do their dirty work. In other words, it is their office and their place of work and has nothing to do with us. We should not spend money on it or give Those People comfortable quarters in which to luxuriate.
I have had occasion to write before that democracy is not really understood in Malta, even by the better-educated. But what prompted me to write on those other occasions were matters like freedom of expression, civil liberties and so on. I never expected to find myself listening to people who should know better arguing that a music hall, a rebuilt opera house, or a museum of modern art has a greater claim to Valletta’s most prominent site than our first parliament building ever. In all these years that Malta has had a parliament it has never had a parliament building. That alone speaks volumes.
Perhaps it’s time to point out to all those who are arguing that we should have an opera house or a museum on that site that the only reason we had one in the first place, rather than a parliament building, was because Malta was not in control of its own affairs. It was entirely fitting, in the context of our colonial status, that the most imposing building a person saw on entering the city was a place of entertainment, rather than the seat of legislative power. It is not fitting now.
I find it disquieting, sad even, that so many people are talking in terms of shunting Them – members of parliament – down to the lower side of Valletta, where presumably they will be neither seen nor heard in some make-do ‘repurposed’ (it’s the new buzz-word) building. Is that the value and prestige they place on parliamentary democracy and the fundamental symbol of our statehood, or do they just not know what they are saying?
The world over, those countries, provinces and regions which are fortunate enough to have gained administration of their own affairs through the workings of a parliament – sometimes only after prolonged negotiations, political battles and actual wars and bloodshed – enshrine that fact in an important piece of architecture in one of the most prominent locations of the national or regional capital. That’s why the British parliament is housed in the 1,100-room Westminster Palace, built for the purpose in the 19th century and an internationally-recognised symbol of Britain, to say nothing of a huge tourist attraction. Britain’s MPs do not hunker down in a bunker in Brixton or a ‘repurposed’ hotel in Greenwich.
The strange thing is that some of those who are getting upset at the suggestion of a splendid piece of architecture in a prominent location as Malta’s first-ever parliament building – perish the thought of such a thing! – in the same breath make favourable remarks about what Norman Foster did with Berlin’s Reichstag building. It makes me wonder whether they know what the word Reichstag means or what actually goes on inside that building they so admire. Yes, that’s right: it’s the German parliament. The Reichstag was the first parliament of the German Empire, and that building was purposely designed to house it, which it did between 1894 and 1933, when it was half-destroyed by fire. It lay in ruins until the reunification of Germany 18 years ago, when a decision was taken to rebuild it and vest it with its new significance: the symbol of a reunified democratic Germany. And so Norman Foster was called in.
Nobody suggested turning the ruins of the Reichstag into a music hall or a centre for the arts. Nobody was wrong-headed enough to suggest that either of these two imperatives were more pressing or ranked higher in importance than the national parliament of a reunified Germany. Nobody let out the merest moo that Norman Foster’s fees and efforts should be expended on a place to hang paintings rather than on the symbolic home of democratic nationhood. Or if they did, I didn’t hear them. Since 1999, Norman Foster’s Reichstag has housed the modern German parliament, the Bundestag. The Bundestag does not sit in a repurposed ex-Communist building tricked up with a lick of paint and some clever lighting. No. It sits in the only Berlin building that your average Maltese person can name, if he or she can name a Berlin building at all.
In Budapest, with its tragic history of oppression, the most architecturally imposing building (and this in a city packed full of them) is not the royal palace but the parliament building. Most visitors mistake it for the royal palace; I certainly did on my first visit there, because it is built on that kind of scale, dominating the river-view and visible for miles around. The most recognisable building in Washington, after the White House, is the Capitol. If somebody were to show you a picture of a museum or theatre in Washington, you wouldn’t know what it was unless you had been there (and even so, you probably wouldn’t). But you’d recognise the Capitol even if you’ve never been to Washington, just as you’d recognise Westminster Palace. Westminster Palace is the symbol of British democracy. The Capitol is the symbol of American democracy.
The French national assembly has as its seat the former palace of the Bourbon kings, which is described as ‘a palace of democracy’ and not as a palace for politicians – perhaps because the French won their democracy through wholesale slaughter and know its value and the significance of having representatives of the people legislating where once an absolute monarch gave vent to his whims. Spain’s Congreso de los Diputados is a 19th-century Palladian palace and not a converted (or repurposed) office block in one of Madrid’s less salubrious areas.
It is now that we take democracy for granted that we chafe at the idea of a grand building in a prominent location to house its workings. Take Scotland, for example – you’ll have to, because it’s the only example I can come up with, at the late hour I’m writing this, of another European country that has had to plan a parliament building within the last 10 years. The new Scottish parliament building is in Holyrood, a UNESCO World Heritage Site in central Edinburgh. It took five years to build, the Spanish architect died before it was finished, and the Scots criticised every aspect from day one: the choice of location, the ‘foreign’ architect, the design (very avant-garde), and the construction company. It was over schedule by three years and over-ran costs by a truly heady few hundred million sterling. A public inquiry into the handling of the construction, chaired by a former Lord Advocate, was established five years ago, and was severely critical of the entire project. The building was, despite all this, warmly welcomed by architects and those who write about architecture. It won many awards, and will survive to give pleasure long after the whining has died down.
But that’s by the bye. The crucial point is that Scotland chose as the site for its precious parliament not some side-street in a one-time city slum, but Edinburgh’s Holyrood, near the Palace of Holyroodhouse, the official residence of the British monarch in Scotland, precisely the sort of location where permission to build an arts centre or a theatre would never be granted because they do not have the necessary national significance. With Malta, it appears to be the other way round: a parliament building – Malta’s first ever – is considered to be of less importance, and far less deserving of time, effort and funds, than a music-hall or a picture gallery.
To speak of an opera house or a museum of modern art would be to speak out of turn, for a music-hall and a picture gallery are precisely what they would turn out to be, the opera house having to stage Christmas pantomimes and various farces by amateur theatrical groups to make ends meet, and the museum of modern art having no worthwhile collection to hang in it, or rather no collection that anyone can be bothered paying to see.
It is not disgraceful that the site has been earmarked for a parliament building designed by one of the leading architects of our time. It is disgraceful that Malta has never had a parliament building. If a parliament building is the architectural symbol of the value a country places on its democracy, then this tells us something about how much we value ours.
This article is published in The Malta Independent today, and was uploaded earlier than usual because I will have no access to internet for the next 24 hours.
62 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
Hallelujah! My thoughts exactly. What’s most worrying is not that the average man in the street is opposing the Opera House site as a parliament, but well-educated people who should know better!
I don’t know if this government really intends to do something about this site, or whether it was just an alienatory gimmick to divert attention from other issues. I just hope that whatever the government’s intention is, it just gets the project done without any further ado and discussion. Punto e basta!
“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” – Thomas Jefferson
I cannot but agree with the Moderator on the fact that the Maltese are not eager on matters of national priority, this to focus on the subject matter of the discussion. Nonetheless I must point out that the Moderator has failed to also feel the pulse of the people at present towards the proposal of yet another national project, which shall recourse towards another colossal financial expense at initial stages with the consequence of an outpouring economic haemorrhage towards its completion.
We have been experiencing many of these situations over the past twenty years, to mention a few: the Gudja International Airport, various road systems around the islands, the Delimara Power Station, the Mater Dei Hospital, various contracts attributed to the Foundation for Tomorrow Schools, the Cirkewwa and Mgarr (Gozo) quays for the ferries and the last project being the Manwel Dimech Bridge.
Now all of the above were highly necessary to the country, but all turned out to be afflicted by some sort of a financial overshot (some due to erratic political decisions, others by some obscure happenings etc) together with miscalculated delivery dates. This, in my opinion, coupled with the present economic shakiness of our nation, to which some of the mentioned projects share in the pool of the burden is the basis of the present nationwide lethargy behind the seemingly surprising reaction to the proposed project. Is it really the right time to go for yet another national financial burden on a project that promises no return on its own capital expense? Can we wait a little longer, just in time to recover from the present shamble?
Hence while I reiterate that I agree with the Moderator’s viewpoint regarding national priorities, I must show my disagreement with respect to the stance of calling the Maltese as being indifferent towards the importance of Democracy. After all our National history throughout the 20th century has proven this subject to be at heart of the Maltese people and certainly a topic of high priority. To mention a few instances; 7 June 1919 uprising, 1956’s Integration proposal turned down, Declaration of Independence, the becoming of a Republic, liberation of foreign NATO forces and lastly the choice of joining the EU.
With respect to other countries choosing their Parliament buildings, well the Reichstag was, as you have clearly mentioned, already the seat of Parliament and therefore there was no need to change people’s concepts for an alternative use to the building in replacement. It is only fair to mention that this is one of the contestations in the case of the Royal Opera House. Incidentally all other examples mentioned in your interesting article also share in the same measure. With respect to Washington DC, well I do not think that this is a right example because the US is incomparable to European cities with their glorious architecture as in your own example of Budapest’s baroque and rococo styles.
In conclusion I must say that I was pleased to read your comment with respect to the Scottish experience as I strongly feel that it will unintentionally lay down the tracks for our upcoming history, future national disputes and media showdowns. Having said this I sincerely hope that the new building will complement our capital city and enhance its stand as a UNESCO landmark and not create a monstrosity of the likes of Pompidou Building or the Louvre’s Pyramids.
Excellent point – thanks for this.
I find that the people who say these sort of things are the kind who think that if we can “make do” with something we should. I’m not talking about watching the pennies – that is admirable, esp if you’re hard up and cannot afford otherwise – but you would not watch the pennies if you wanted to buy a new suit to go to an interview.
These are the people who say:
If we can make do with a pirated DVD why pay more to get an original?
If we can make do with a few bricks and a door by the beach, why buy a proper house?
If we can make do with a few bricks in front of my house to keep a parking spot, why drive around the block a few times at the end of the day.
“U ijja,” they claim, when pressed, “Mhux xorta?”
They suffer from large-scale ignorance and genuinely cannot see that, no, this is NOT the same thing. There is a difference.
This “U ijja” culture is what is most detrimental to Maltese society in my opinion.
Meh.
I don’t really know how you could call Joseph Calleja Amateur, and an Opera house would improve the local art, because you know all the countries you mentioned had a parliament building as well as an Opera house.
A parliament building won’t improve the quality of politicians, politicians are in it for power.
On the other hand an Opera house will improve the quality of art in Malta, there will be more people going to events and therefore art will no longer be a poor man’s job.
Sa fej naf jien, the politicians have a parliament house and if they don’t I don’t care, its not like any party represents me anymore.
The last time I watched a parliament video (they don’t have a parliament building? They must have been at Manwel Theater then ) there were people banging their hands like monkeys and this idiot saying ” miister speeeker …mister speeeeker”. No building will improve THAT.
Conversely I could do like you did with your article and tell you Just go to Rome, London or Madrid you see famous statues and famous buildings oh and each one has an Opera house, but in Valletta all we have is a planned DEMOCRACY BUILDING.
Democracy is not a building, democracy is a political system and no building will strengthen it, actually it will weaken it, because now the tyrants will have a new fancy building were to rule from…hardly democracy.
Anyways majority wants an Opera house, its only these dawdling PN fanboys/girls who are for it. You argue democracy requires a parliament building, but democracy is about majority rule. Therefore it should be an Opera house, like it once was, since we all are in favor of democracy.
Well done Daphne, excellent piece. I thought I was the only one who felt that people were not appreciating the importance ina democracy of Parliament and thus the need to have a building that befits this important institution. Can you imagine in the UK the Parliament meeting in Buckingham Palace! This is what we have in Malta at the moment! People who equate corruption with politicians and politicians with parliament show a high degree of flawed logic. In any case thanks to the democracy they barely understand they have the freedom to whine and whinge all they want.
We need a new parlament building just as much as we needed Dar Malta in Brussels a few years ago.
[Daphne – The two don’t equate. Your argument is seriously flawed.]
Daphne,
Spot on! To add to your article the German parliament in Berlin is a masterpiece as with its dome (as per photos you can see through the links below) you could also see the proceeding of the parliaments, giving thus a sense of transparency.
I many times feel that we Maltese do not yet feel that we are truly a nation, believing that democracy is something that happens every 5 years and not a process which requires the interest and participation of all, and which like all other things requires the input of various resources in order to serve us well.
A parliament housed in the president’s palace is already a big contradiction, not to mention that it is housed in what used to be an armoury, relegating the latter to what were the stables.
http://photos.igougo.com/images/p120310-Berlin-The_Dome.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3120/2632689113_8eb9cf59aa.jpg
Some slightly random thoughts:
Malta does need to invest more money in buildings and people in order to support the arts. And we do need a national ‘picture gallery’ that showcases our talented artists (of which we have been blessed with more than our fair share). In this sense, I understand the gripes of our long-suffering artistic community.
That said, I agree fully with the gist of Daphne’s article. It baffles me when intelligent people talk about an opera house for all the people as opposed to a Parliament for 65 MPs. If we are talking about quantity rather than quality, then the correct approach is that 65 MPs are there for all the people, whereas an opera house would serve a minority. Even if the numbers added up differently, the premise is plain wrong. As Daphne correctly points out, the symbolism of the building is significant (quite apart from the fact that our magnificent presidential palace will be turned into a proper museum as it should be).
To add to Daphne’s argument, if I may, besides the fundamental misunderstanding of Parliament as a symbol of democracy, Malta also lacks a symbol of nationhood. Most of our great monuments are symbols of colonial powers or ancient cultures to which we no longer have any genuine, living cultural connection. A magnificent parliamentary building would fill this gaping void.
I believe you’re treating democracy in the same way we treat religion – as long as we have the icons, churches and monuments then we’re OK. There is however no profound connection to either religion or democracy in this country – we just use them as instruments to gain advantage, be it political, social, financial or otherwise.
As for the Reichstag, the restored building maintained its previous function, that of German parliament. And it didn’t prevent the Nazi regime to seize power either !
Parliament should remain where it is – it is by no means a slum and the place has a tradition and a legacy which no new building will ever hope to achieve. It doesn’t have to do with the esteem for Parliament -in fact I think that it is insulting for them to move away from an area which is steeped in history. After all, using your example, the British parlimentarians did not opt to switch to Canary Wharf which is the in place (at least for now). It would be a pity to uproot our highest institution to what will arguably be a bland building full of nothingness.
My thoughts exactly. Daphne is a philistine suck up to Dr Gonzi. She will agree with whatever he says. Had Dr Muscat suggested it, she would have argued against. We all know that she is the PM’s chief spin-doctor.
Her argument of having to stage pantos to make ends meet is flawed. I don’t stage pantos; I stage in-yer-face theatre; the most difficult kind of theatre to sell; and I always sell out. May I suggest to Ms Caruana Galizia to go to the theatre now and again? Not only to panto, though . . .
I hold Dr Gonzi responsible for this farce for coming up with the idea in the first place, AND Dr Muscat for not speaking out against it.
And please, all those who oppose the idea of having the site turned into an Arts Centre, STOP this talk of not being big enough. Do you think the plays I put on would be effective at, say, MCC? No. I don’ think we need another large hall. We need something like St James.
To conclude, I am not opposing Parliament having its own building either, but why on earth does it have to be on a cultural site? THIS is where the controversy stems from.
[Daphne – A cultural site? What on earth might that be? The fact that an opera house once stood there in the days when Malta was not entitled to its own parliament does not mean millions must now be spent building a theatre so that somebody called Adrian Buckle can stage a few plays. I don’t go to the theatre in Malta. There’s only so much I can take of people ham-acting in faux British or American accents. Some people are good in their roles, but others are just plain terrible. It’s precisely because I’m NOT a philistine that I can’t bear the theatre in Malta. It sets my teeth on edge.]
Your excellent article is spot on. Instead of belittling our members of parliament at every turn these downers(read pre election moaners) should direct their energy at trying to raise the profile of our elected representatives .It will be no mean task as the mediocre tends to elect the mediore. We will get there hopefully, as the standard of education reaches a higher level.In the mean time let’s let Piano get on with it and create something fresh that will survive the test of time and be a fitting House of Representitves.
An excellent piece!
Hard to find fault with a well-reasoned and well-researched essay on the order of priorities of the Maltese. If there was a sentence which I may argue with it is at the beginning of the article where you wrote: “The plans for a parliament building on the empty lot where the opera house once stood have met with near-unanimous objection”. I believe that opinions are split almost evenly – as everything else is, around political lines. This is an instance when the PM should be firm and go ahead with building the first ever Parliament Building in Malta. I also believe that officially, the (now) LP is also not objecting, if not outrightly approving, to having Parliament housed in the former ROH. As usual though the Lil’elves continue to display their sour grapes attitude which is typical of the unhappy group.
[Daphne – Actually I don’t think attitudes towards the project reflect party lines at all.]
It will be interesting to see if you can swing public opinion on this one. If you do, you’ll have proved your value to your backers. You are absolutely right in your analysis. The only question I have is the timing of this proposal. The world outside is experiencing a recession not seen since the great depression and Malta is about to experience an economic slowdown at the least. Is this the time to suggest a prestige project however needed to express our commitment to parliamentary democracy in the country? You can understand why people would be a little sceptical at a time when politicians are under attack for awarding themselves a big pay increase while hoisting a huge increase in utilities on taxpayers and giving everyone a minimal wage increase.
[Daphne – I have no backers. And if you say that again, I shall have to drop a little law suit on your Miami office. You’re wearing my patience thin.]
Let me be the first to say “prosit”. I probably won’t be around when Parliament is eventually built but re-building the opera house would be a waste of money.
Maltese democracy is a system whereby every five years or so 320,000 wise honest, law-abiding, god-fearing virgins (called voters) choose 65 (or even 69) despicable, dishonest, cheating and lying thieves called MPs) to represent them….
Daphne dear
I am afraid that we will have to remain poles apart on this one. A MOMA or a proper concert hall is vastly more important than a parliament building.
Berlin first built its concert hall and its gemeldegalerie and then rebuilt its Reichstag.
It’s called the Politics of Art
Ken
[Daphne – Kenneth, when a museum of modern art begins to legislate, then tell me that it’s more important than parliament. Parliament is for the entire nation. A museum of modern art, whether you like it or not (and I certainly don’t) is for those who like that kind of thing, hard though it may be to accept. And interestingly, those who argue for the building of such a museum overlook the fact that the collection comes first, then the museum is built to house it. Where and what is Malta’s collection of modern art that would justify housing it instead of parliament?]
The importance due to democracy should not be represented only by the buildings in which parliaments are housed. I refer to the recent case in the media, were it was made obvious that no real distinction exists between political party structures and government structures. That is a serious threat to the democratic process yet the issue was politicized to no end with the parties pointing fingers at each other until the whole issue fizzled out and is forgotten. Buildings are important and significant symbols but the true spirit of a free democracy has to be defended by each and every one us every time we become aware of such improper activities. Wishful thinking i guess…
No comments yet? Is everyone at a party or simply – like me – not fired up by this article? If the French can use a former royal palace to house their parliament, I don’t see why we, in our own small way, should feel any shame at using a former Grand Master’s palace to house ours.I don’t have strong feelings on the matter. A purpose-built building would be fine – I have no objection. What I do object to is having 69 MP’s – probably the highest number, pro-rata to the size of the population, of any national parliament. Do we really need that many?
[Daphne – There were lots of comments, but I’ve been in airports and on planes for the last 27 hours and hadn’t uploaded them.]
Apart from the never ending debate on an opera house or a Parliament on a site which has been in ruins for decades one interesting observation comes out. The low esteem in which politicians and parliamentarians are held in this country.
[Daphne – They’re held in low esteem in most countries, as a general rule, people elsewhere don’t confuse their respect for the institution of parliament with their respect for John Bloggs MP.]
@ Drew
You wrote :“A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine.” – Thomas Jefferson
In Malta 49% are imposing on the rest, since the present administration has a relative majority. This is Democracy in action.We had a very similar situation in the early 80’s,
though with our two political parties had a reversed situation.
Once again the “Gonzi & Borg Olivier Partnership” is being revived, a regression so many are so happy about.
What on earth, do buildings and democracy have to do with each other?? That palace is more than enough to suit our MP’s needs. This is a time of recession, and money spent on making a parliament out of a ruined opera house, is money wasted. This whole thing is a farce right from the start. We might as well leave it as it is for another 60 years if it didn’t bother us for the past 60.
@Michael Falzon
“Maltese democracy is a system whereby every five years or so 320,000 wise honest, law-abiding, god-fearing virgins (called voters) choose…”
Bilmod. The current generation of Maltese is anything but law-abiding, honest and god-fearing.
[Daphne – Your first sentence sums up the general attitude. Buildings have nothing to do with democracy per se. And you obviously failed your comprehension classes at school. The whole point of my article is that the parliament building is the PHYSICAL AND SYMBOLIC REPRESENTATION of the value that particular society places on a democratic system in which the elected representatives of the people are the legislators. Hence, British democracy is represented by Westminster Palace and US democracy is represented by the Capitol. Maltese democracy, on the other hand, is represented by a room in the head of state’s city palace.]
I can’t wait for this blessed building to be erected and finally have a real building housing Parliament rather than some makeshift, hideous room in an otherwise magnificent building.
Indeed, Parliament should become a tourist attraction in itself – our first ever real Parliament. It would be great to have it – and we shouldn’t have waited all these years for it.
In any case, better late than never. Let’s hope that the powers that be decide in its favour in order to remove the atrocious entrance and the atrocious room we now call “parliament”.
By Daphne’s own arguments, the EU, which she wept when we joined, is anti-democratic because it will not give Malta money for building her parliament. Mind you, they would subsidise a building for the Arts.
And yes, you are a philistine, Daphne dear. If you went to local productions you would see that our productions when good (I’ll give you that) can be as good as any foreign production. We have the talent, we just don’t have the investment.
Moreover, this someone called Adrian Buckle has brought over foreign actors and directors to work for him, all of them of high renown in their countries, as has Tony Bezzina of Masquerade and many others. None of these artists went back home complaining.
But why don’t you accept an invitation I am putting forward now, to one of my productions, so you can see that a GOOD play has more to say then your partisan articles . . . and says it better too?
[Daphne – No thanks. I would rather drink ink.]
Hey daph, did you read this?
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20081211/local/banned-from-speaking-maltese-at-conference-on-languages
Too much ado about nothing.
Come on chaps, you can’t have that much talent out of a pool of 400 000 individuals. In any case, a “talented” Maltese performer would rather bugger off to where the real action is, rather than stagnate on a rock just on the border of civilisation. Our productions, when good (I’ll give you that), just don’t cut it.
My point being that the Manoel is enough, thank you very much, if we would just stop trying to stage Wagner-scale operas (alright then, Verdi-scale, since our “classical” repertoire seems to be stuck somewhere around turn-of-the-century Italy). As for modern art, I thought it was meant to be “lived”, not imprisoned in a museum. Or so I’ve been told.
But I’m still worried about the virtual shanty town around City Gate. Will it stay or will it go?
Democracy is represented by people not by buildings. The point of democracy is not WHERE it takes place, but rather that it takes place. Who cares if the MPs meet in a skyscraper or in a wharf? As long as democracy takes place, then it is fine. Usually the less distractions the more work the MPs can do.
[Daphne – True. Why bother about anything? Why not live in caves and wear skins?]
If you really cared for Democracy in Malta Ms Caruana Galizia, you wouldn’t care for a symbolic building, however well designed, whoever the architect.
In this tin pot little country we call home, our “Democracy” consists of peddling the lowest common denominator policies.
Democracy isn’t only a building, its our values and the way we order our society. If we are to strengthen our Democratic values, don’t you think that having a totally biased news media, and having a political system that has been dominated by the same families for eons is enough damage.
Just a small exercise. The Times has those small inserts “A hundred years ago” and “Fifty years ago”. Just notice the surnames. The similarity with today is eye-opening. To see that a hundred years have passed, and that social mobility has only occurred minimally does go against Democratic principals.
I’m not comparing living standards here, there is obviously no comparison with those days. I’m just comparing the networks and familial relations that have, for better or worse, ruled this island. I’m not some Communist revolutionary, saying off with their heads. However,some “change” in who runs any democratic society is always important.
@ KZT oh come on ! since when have the Germans given priority to a concert hall over parliament. The concert hall was built first because the decision to move the seat of government from Bonn to Berlin took quite some time. Indeed the Germans gave it so much importance that notwithstanding they had a modern Parliament building in Bonn , they nonetheless felt that a new parliament be built in Berlin. ( and a transfer of thousands of civil servants )
Futhermore its hardly the case that St James Cavalier is overflowing with notable works of modern art
Mr Adrian Buckle, if the opera house is built again what would you say the difference in seating capacity will be to the Manoel theatre? Will it be worth the experience? Now about our famous tenor Calleja who complained that it will be a scandal if the Opera House is not rebuilt . Again, we go back to capacity. Surely Mr Calleja knows how much money is involved in putting on an opera season. It is impossible to stage an opera season and at least break even. If not, who is going to subsidize the event? In Gozo, where they have two excellent opera houses. they rely a lot on volunteers – something which you don’t even have at the Manoel.
[Daphne – True. Why bother about anything? Why not live in caves and wear skins?]
Well, old Diogenes the well known cyic from Sinope is said to have come up with his best anticonformist thinking whilst living inside a barrel.
And aren’t we wearing skins when we don leather goods ,fur jackets and coats?
Maltastar.com is upgrading (again). It seems that whenever PL runs out of resources for its English language news website it claims it’s upgrading. Perhaps JM should know that to upgrade you don’t need to go offline for weeks. I pick on this because, yet again, if PL is unable to manage even a news website, are they fit to govern a country?
Michael Falzon’s witty remark hit the nail squarely on the head. I find through experience that, in the main, those who persistently rubbish and defame our parliamentarians without distinction, have no qualms about entering into any shady deal coming their way, and will not find it at all hypocritical to solict favour from the same much maligned politicians.
Well, the earliest forms of human thought and expression occurred in caves.
http://www.catholiceducation.org/images/cave_painting_horse.jpg
[Daphne – Just out of curioisity, why did you go to catholiceducation.org as your source for basic archaeological information?]
@Daphne. Just reading the comments above it seems as if you have plenty of backers. As for your patience wearing thin – what can I say: are you one of those people that is able to dish it out but not accept it? As for suing me – go ahead – bring it on – you’ll be laughed out of court!
[Daphne – You know what you meant by backers. As for suing you, take a joke.]
I’m sure some of the plan’s critics are hammering on the “our MPs are bad, bla bla bla” point – though most of the people whom I’ve spoken to and who disagree with the plans have not, in fact, dismissed parliament, and would never think of dismissing democracy. They’re actually lamenting the distinct lack of transparency that has been part and parcel of this whole process.
Democracy is not just about asking people to vote (thank god it isn’t, sometimes). Democracy is, however, all about explaining decisions, especially those that do not entail a popular vote.
I was only interested in the picture nothing else. Being Catholic does not mean you’re an inferior academic/scientist/researcher.
Darren Azzopardi – “Just a small exercise. The Times has those small inserts “A hundred years ago” and “Fifty years ago”. Just notice the surnames. The similarity with today is eye-opening. To see that a hundred years have passed, and that social mobility has only occurred minimally does go against Democratic principals”
The cases normally highlighted in the snippets you mention are simply that – snippets of a much wider spectrum of news/articles. Such snippets are usually items of general interest, or aimed at the “old” Times readership base – which, seemingly, does not include yourself.
Hey guys cool it……………….On a funnier note, did anyone see our Mrs Future First lady at the Palace today, dressed like the top of a Xmas tree. Miaow miaow.
Actually, that’s not fair,………… like her husband we really must give them time…………….a lot of time.
Malta will soon be celebrating the 90th anniversary since the introduction of Responsible Government with the first Constitution of 1921. The new Piano project to include the House of Representatives in Valletta should be the occasion that fits perfectly this important anniversary. Malta, with her rich history in the political development throughout over a hundred years, should have the Parliament.
Allow me to quote Sir Sean Connery who had this to say on the occasion of Scotland’s opening of the New Parliament: “We have waited nearly 300 years. My hope is that it will evolve with dignity and integrity and it will truly reflect the new voice of Scotland. My position on Scotland has never changed in 30-odd-years. Scotland should be nothing less than an equal of other nations of the world”. And what about Malta?
I join Daphne’s initiative and so many others approving and supporting government’s decision, and say it with Donald Dewar, Scottish Labour polician and First Minister for Scotland at the official opening of the Scottish Parliament in 1999: ” ‘There shall be a Scottish parliament’. Through long years, those words were first a hope, then a belief,then a promise. Now they are a reality”. Let us look forward to repeat what Malta deserves.
I feel I should add also this quote with my previous message from Sir Sean Connery on the same occasion: “It is Scotland’s rightful heritage that its people should create a modern Parliament…This entire issue is above and beyond any political party”.
At a time when various importers are threatening to stop importing medicine, to go towards our health services, because Government has not come up with the payment of goods already consumed, we have the same Government proposing to engage in the building of a prestige project to house Parliament.
To Hell with the British Houses of Parliament and the Capitol. This is Malta we’re speaking about – poor Malta, where politicians must milk the people of more taxes and tariffs to make up for any wasteage, just for want of other sources of income.
It is not important that Parliament convenes in a dazzling, new Parliament. The important thing is that it convenes – even if it does so in a shoe-box!
[Daphne – I happen to agree with you about the money and priorities issue, and I am sceptical about how the wherewithal is going to be found to finance this project. But speaking on principle, and assuming a scenario in which the government has the money to pay for medicinals and a new city gate/old-opera-house-site project, then I would say the priority is for a parliament building and not an arts centre. If spending the money on a parliament building is frivolous and wasteful, then why is it not (more) frivolous and wasteful to spend it on an arts centre?]
[Daphne – But speaking on principle, and assuming a scenario in which the government has the money to pay for medicinals and a new city gate/old-opera-house-site project, then I would say the priority is for a parliament building and not an arts centre.]
Assuming that scenario then, yes, I would agree with you. We already have an Arts Centre up the road if anything. The problem here is the timing and the fact that Government seems to be muddling things were priorities are concerned. In this sense people have every right to their indignation.
[Daphne – Those who oppose the project come in two groups: those who say it is not a financial priority in what appear to be straitened times, and those who say that we should have a museum instead of a parliament building. I have no argument to make against the former group.]
Daphne – can’t agree with you that the parliament building is not a priority. It is, for the simple reason that we can’t remain with that scar as you enter Valletta. It is 44 years since we achieved independence and we still don’t have a FUNCTIONAL parliament building. Moreover the OPM is the grandest building – reminiscent of some dictatorship.
50 million euros over 4 years is a relatively small spend. We threw away in excess of 1.2 billion euros in dockyard subsidies
[Daphne – I don’t go to the theatre in Malta. There’s only so much I can take of people ham-acting in faux British or American accents. Some people are good in their roles, but others are just plain terrible. It’s precisely because I’m NOT a philistine that I can’t bear the theatre in Malta. It sets my teeth on edge.]
You overstate your case here (presumably for dramatic effect). There have been a number of excellent productions over the years. Of course you can’t compare Malta with the West End but it’s hardly realistic to expect theatre-goers to pop over to London every time they want to take in a good show. We should be glad that there are a number of people and organisations who put in a lot of hard work to produce theatre in Malta. Malta would be much poorer without it. I’m all for fair criticism, but you condemn the whole scene out of hand, and that’s simply unfair.
Having said all that, it is also true to say that there is not a large theatre-going public in Malta (I’d say fewer than 5000 regular theatre-goers, if you exclude pantos) and there is definitely no need for another theatre in Malta, much less an opera house. With all due respect to Joseph Calleja (and you must respect his achievements), I can’t see people turning up in sufficient numbers to make even one production a year viable if they’re going to have to fork out several hundred euros for a ticket – that’s what it would take, you know – and his idea of having an opera season in Malta is a pipe-dream and a re-built opera house would be madness. As for a gallery of modern art…the mind boggles.
produce theatre IN Malta
@ Richard Muscat
That don’t impress me much.
Noticed how there no mention made in this year’s budget where the financing of this project is concerned?
@ Adrian Buckle
I totally agree with you.
As for Ms. Daphne Caruana Galizia, I’m appalled at your ignorance and superiority complex when it comes to local theatre. How can you pass those degrading statements if you do not attend any Maltese Theatre whatsoever? It pains me to see a Maltese person shun local artists, because YES we do have excellent local talents and we stage excellent local productions. Before you utter such a sweeping statement you should be well informed. I would advise you to accept Adrian Buckle’s proposal of attending one of his productions, because I am sure you will be surprised.
[Daphne – I went to several ‘local productions’, as you refer to them, of Maltese Theatre, as you capitalise it, and the experience, variously, made me break out in hives, fall asleep, head for the bar across the road after the first act, leave at the interval and not return to my seat, amuse myself by reciting the alphabet backwards, wonder at the assumed accents of the performers, and thank God for cinema. I did not feel the same way when watching Lauren Bacall and Gabriel Byrne perform on Broadway, but you can’t always be so lucky. Theatre started out as a form of entertainment when there was precious little else to entertain. It has since been superseded in its essential form by cinema, which is vastly superior in terms of entertainment, as it brings together the skills of the actor with the unlimited possibilities of cinematography and changing scenery – real places, not stage-sets. This has caused the role of theatre to shrink, so don’t be too cut up if you find that many people can’t be bothered, and that doesn’t mean they are uneducated, philistines, or inferior. Theatre is like sport: some people love it, and the rest just don’t get what’s so fascinating about it. I have no interest in sport, either.]
“This has caused the role of theatre to shrink, so don’t be too cut up if you find that many people can’t be bothered, and that doesn’t mean they are uneducated, philistines, or inferior. Theatre is like sport: some people love it, and the rest just don’t get what’s so fascinating about it. I have no interest in sport, either.”
I agree with you on that one. However, if you do not like it, it doesn’t mean that local productions are bad. Of course, the are local productions which ARE very bad and insult your intelligence but there are many others which are very good and intellectually engaging. Do not put everyone in the same basket. You tend to generalize a lot, Daphne.
@Leann Gauci
I think theater ticket prices should be lowered if you want more people to attend. Money can be quite a barrier for most people. You’ll say, of course people are willing to buy 60 euro tickets to go to some party or concert. They go to such events because the literally enjoy themselves. In a theatre you just sit back and watch the play. Might as well, watch a DVD in your own home then. You’d be doing the same thing. Theatre should re-tailored to make it more attractive to the people’s tastes if you want more people to attend. Also, you have to accept the fact that theatre is not one of the favourite pastimes of this country. The most obvious parameters you have to modify are the prices and the audience range.
[Daphne – Funny how the business imperatives are inevitably left out of every debate about theatre, art and music in Malta. Theatre tickets have to be priced to cover the costs of production companies at least, even if they have no interest in making a profit because they are doing it for fun. Production companies are not there to give away tickets so as to attract people to the stalls. And I don’t generalise. My communication style is different to what is considered culturally acceptable in Malta: in other words, I don’t prevaricate, qualify my words, or equivocate. This is not generalisation; it is directness.]
WHAAAAAAAT! No theatre! No sport! Do you mean to say you can miss the Champions League (or the Premier League, or the World Cup) and still live with yourself?
[Daphne – I really hate sport. You have no idea. If I end up in hell, it will be full of large screens showing baseball leagues, tennis games, football, and athletics on a loop.]
I think you are defying your own statements… You just mentioned Broadway and its fantastic shows. Well if maltese actors/enthusiasts don’t have the resources (i.e. an adequate modern stage to perform on) how can you expect to reach such a level without the necessary investments? It’s not talent that we’re lacking. If performances were so bad in Malta, people would just stop attending and performing in the first place. Again, Maltese talent (especially young talent) is actually very good when compared to foreign talent. I am sure that with better equipment, funding, and location we can reach a satisfactory level of performance which will prevent you from feeling sick, although I believe your description was terribly exaggerated and ill-humoured.
[Daphne – Maltese/foreign: why do I find this opposition whatever the subject under discussion? Maltese/foreign wine; Maltese/foreign actors. Malta versus the rest of the world, from China to Tobago. Maltese actors are amateurs. They’re not professional. Some are good, the rest are of the kind of level you’d find at any amateur playhouse anywhere else. When I mentioned Broadway, I wasn’t talking about the stage-set; I was talking about the actors.]
Funnily enough, the best music, theater and art is not driven by profits, but rather by those who love it at heart, even if they do not receive a penny. When a thing is driven by profits, it become a process devoid of life. As someone said, ‘Art should done for its own sake”.
By the way, you’re really missing out in life if you don’t like at least one sport. Even taking interest in table games such as billiard or table tennis is enough. Don’t tell me that you didn’t even watch a bit of the Euro 2008 cup final?
let me get this straight…according to Ms. Caruana Galizia the Maltese are biologically incapable of producing offspring who are capable of performing…I mean isn’t this what she means when she says:
‘There’s only so much I can take of people ham-acting in faux British or American accents. Some people are good in their roles, but others are just plain terrible.’
Apparently, only a select few are capable of performing in Malta. Well, I guess the opinion of foreign actors and directors (who Ms.Caruana Galizia so wholly admires and qualifies as the only people who can actually perform), who were more than impressed by local talented artists after working with them, doesn’t really count then…or is it the case that Ms.Caruana Galizia thinks she undertsands theatre even more than these people as well? I wouldn’t think this is the case though, as she so remarkably stated that:
‘the experience, variously, made me break out in hives, fall asleep, head for the bar across the road after the first act, leave at the interval and not return to my seat, amuse myself by reciting the alphabet backwards, wonder at the assumed accents of the performers,…’
which usually happens when the concept of the play is completely beyond the understanding of the individual!!!
[Daphne – Mrs Buckle, your husband/brother/.whatever has already made this point. It’s simply a matter of the law of averages. A population of 400,000 can’t possibly generate the same numbers of talented individuals as a population of 50 million.]
Daphne, I am truly sorry you do not appreciate sport but I understand how you feel. Personally, I hate everything to do with food except eating it, which I only do out of necessity (the rest, choosing what to eat, purchasing the ingredients, transporting and storing them, putting them together, cooking the meal and cleaning and washing up afterwards take a huge chunk of valuable time out of our lives, time which can never be replaced). I’ve been called a philistine for my opinion too but given the possibility, I’d much rather pop a couple of pills a day. That way I’d have more time to follow sport and maybe catch the odd play…
You tell ’em, Daphne. Football is a game for overpaid coiffeured fags. Euro 2008? Pfft! Real men (and spirited fillies) follow the Six Nations.
Now, re. theatre. Where to start? I once bravely ventured to sit through “Who’s afraid of Virginia Woolf” at the Manoel. It was the last play I ever watched in Malta. And it’s not the actors’ fault. Some deified playwrights are just plain shyte. It was all there: The suppressed sexual tension, the inevitable descent into chaos, the hidden lunacy, the sheer narcissistic supercilious intellectual arsewipery. I sat aghast throughout the whole charade. I usually think up more interestingly desperate stuff while waiting for the microwave to go ping. But I didn’t dress it up as theatre, become an instant celebrity and bonk a supermodel. I went to a psychiatrist and got fleeced.
Today’s artists are just like today’s football players. They’re still in their twenties, and they’ve already got their own fief. They’re demigods, and think they’ve nothing more to learn. And no one dares to utter the unspeakable, lest they be deemed uncultured yobs.
Then again, I loved watching Benjamin Lazar’s production of Le Bourgeois Gentilhomme. See, I’m not impossible to entertain.
“[Daphne – I went to several ‘local productions’, as you refer to them, of Maltese Theatre, as you capitalise it, and the experience, variously, made me break out in hives, fall asleep, head for the bar across the road after the first act, leave at the interval and not return to my seat, amuse myself by reciting the alphabet backwards, wonder at the assumed accents of the performers, and thank God for cinema. I did not feel the same way when watching Lauren Bacall and Gabriel Byrne perform on Broadway, but you can’t always be so lucky. Theatre started out as a form of entertainment when there was precious little else to entertain. It has since been superseded in its essential form by cinema, which is vastly superior in terms of entertainment, as it brings together the skills of the actor with the unlimited possibilities of cinematography and changing scenery – real places, not stage-sets. This has caused the role of theatre to shrink, so don’t be too cut up if you find that many people can’t be bothered, and that doesn’t mean they are uneducated, philistines, or inferior. Theatre is like sport: some people love it, and the rest just don’t get what’s so fascinating about it. I have no interest in sport, either.]”
I get exactly the same sort of feeling whenever I hear a local parliamentary debate – which is why I am against frittering millions on a new building to house parliament.
[Daphne – But of course! Why not do away with the parliamentary system altogether, because the MPs WHO HAVE BEEN CHOSEN BY THE PEOPLE AND NOT IMPOSED ON THEM are disliked by some.]
Equating democracy with the proposed Renzo Piano project is, in my humble opinion tantamout to marketing to the general public the concept that you have to have a state of the art very expensive kitchen to be able to churn out an excellent meal.
[Daphne – Sybil, you are clearly unfamiliar with the significance and importance of symbolism. And this from somebody who thrives on religion.]
@Daphne. Please use one of those smiley face icons the next time you make a joke. It’s good to read that you do have a sense of humour. Thus far I’ve only witnessed you pontificate to your groupies, sneer and belittle those who have divergent views even if they are in the same camp and deride those who oppose your views. Hello to the new Daphne!
[Daphne – Deadpan people like me don’t use smiley faces; we’d rather wear a shell-suit and dangle fluffy dice from our rear-view mirrors. There’s no new Daphne; there’s always been the same one. Ask around.]
[Daphne – Sybil, you are clearly unfamiliar with the significance and importance of symbolism. And this from somebody who thrives on religion.
I’m all for symbolism, so long as does not make too big a hole in my pocket.
I first must apologise for contributing over a month after the article was posted but I only just read it, having come across it via a friend’s blog (www.thingsthatrun.blogspot.com).
I disagree with your argument on why the Opera House site should become the new parliament. While I feel the palace is definitely unsuitable, I could think of a number of better alternatives than the opera house. Such a prominent position would be much better suited to attracting interest in cultural activities, both from Maltese and tourists entering Valletta.
I also disagree with your objections to using a building in the lower part of Valletta. To my knowledge, there is hardly an awful lot of people interested in visiting the parliament to “see and hear” the MPs. Same can be said of the UK MPs in their great palace – the tourists go to photograph the building – not see the sessions.
The main reason I am commenting is with regards to your mention of the Scottish parliament. I don’t know whether or not you have visited Edinburgh recently but you seem to have shot yourself in the foot with this example. Being half Scottish, surprisingly I have been a fair few times. The main touristic part of the capital is laid out on either side of the top portion of the Royal Mile in the old town. This is where the vast majority of the tourists visit, along with Princes Street across the valley in the New Town. The parliament building at Holyrood is right down at the end of the Royal Mile in a somewhat less interesting part of town. True, there’s the Queen’s palace, but you can’t exactly go wandering about inside and she’s never there anyway. Oh, and the Abbey doesn’t have much to show for itself. So there you have it – in Scotland, the parliament is housed in an unimposing building (compared to others, at least) in a quieter, out of the way, part of the city.
You also got it wrong on another point – they did allow a ‘cultural’ building to be sited nearby. Right beside the parliament is the ‘Our Dynamic Earth’ science centre housed in a modern tent shaped building. The reason there are no theatres down there – it’s too quiet. They’re in the busier parts where the footfall (therefore exposure) is greater and the public and tourists can be tempted in.
[Daphne – I was in Edinburgh a few months ago, and visited each of the areas you describe. There are tourist buses specifically laid on to take visitors down to the area of the Scottish parliament, the palace and the science centre, and thousands of people go there. I can’t understand why you describe the parliament house as ‘not an imposing building’. It is a stunning piece of architecture, as one would expect. The reason why it was built there, and not in the thick of things, should be obvious: building it on the Royal Mile would have meant demolishing an ancient building to clear the way. Fortunately, with Valletta we don’t have to do that because there is an open area right at the beginning of its ‘royal mile’.]