The naysayers gird their loins
The big story in the newspapers this morning is the unveiling by Renzo Piano last night of his plans for the entrance to Valletta.
The naysayers will be girding their loins as we speak, preparing to go into battle in the just cause of missing the wood for the trees.
Instead of celebrating because something is being done at last, and that something is being done by one of greatest architects of all time, people are queuing up to carp and cavil.
These are not people in general, but people with newspaper columns and megaphones and very loud voices and, above all, a sense of privilege and entitlement and the unassailable conviction that they are the ones who know best.
The amusing thing is that they describe others as arrogant while positing their personal views as being of ‘the people’.
It is all so very small-minded. Renzo Piano presents a project and we scrabble around to find the fly in his ointment. After listening to people and reading what’s being written on the internet, I cannot help but conclude that many fail to grasp the full significance of what it means to have the entrance to our capital city revitalised by a living legend.
More disturbingly still, some seek to drag this living legend down to their level, thereby revealing their breathtaking ignorance and Lilliputian mindset, by describing him as ‘just another architect when we have many architects of our own’, a ‘barrani’, and best of all ‘just because he’s Renzo Piano it doesn’t mean he knows what he’s doing’.
Piano doesn’t know what he’s doing but they, of course, do.
Others insist that the government has a colonial mentality because it has sought the services of a foreigner. We should use our own architects, they say, possibly following a competition, to reconstruct Barry’s 19th-century monstrosity – except that they don’t call it a monstrosity, because that’s not how they see it.
In their minds, if it was old then it must have been beautiful, appropriate and a remarkable piece of architectural innovation. But Barry’s theatre was none of those things. It was – how shall I put it without causing offence to the maximum number of people? – an unfortunate choice at the time.
The war so far has been for a theatre on the site of the remains of the opera house. Facebook groups have been set up, the irony missed of using the most contemporary of media to fight a battle for the reconstruction of the past. Letters have been written to the newspapers, columns churned out, battles royal devised and threats meted out.
When it was announced some days ago that yes, there is to be a theatre there and that Piano doesn’t think otherwise, because he believes the spirit of the past should be respected in the present, the war took a new turn.
Instead of expressing pleasure that Piano sees things as they do, but goes one step further in wishing to preserve the remains as a monument to the past which will survive into the future, the naysayers are sulking and stamping their little feet.
“OK, so it’s a theatre, but it’s not the kind of theatre we had in mind.” “Why does it have no roof?” “What are the acoustics going to be like?” – the assumption being that Renzo Piano knows nothing about acoustics, but they do.
“Why is it an open-air theatre and not a grand opera house, which will impress the foreigners whose advice we don’t want and show them how cultured we are?” This last one is so revealing in its implied belief that ‘foreigners’ will be more impressed by a neo-classical pastiche of an opera house built by a nonentity than they will be by a glamorous project executed by Renzo Piano.
Try explaining to people who think like this that if ‘the Maltese’ reject the glamour, excitement and forward-looking creativity of Renzo Piano in favour of a pastiche chosen by popular poll, the message transmitted to those foreigners at whom we’re so keen to thumb our noses will not be that we are cultured but that we are not.
Giovanni Bonello, a personage whose views on such matters are more widely respected than my own – which is why I quote them here – made the point some months ago that democracy has no place in art and architecture. The idea that the design and use of the space immediately within our city’s gate should be chosen by that amorphous entity called ‘the people’ is a hideous one being put about by the usual suspects.
If those usual suspects wish to be furnished with good reasons as to why ‘the people’ should not be permitted a say in such matters, all they have to do is take two hours off from the normal course of their business and drive about the island, taking note of the sort of homes that ‘the people’ design and decorate for themselves, and the outfits on which they spend several weeks’ wages and choose to wear after long and careful deliberation.
I do not want the plans for the entrance to Valletta chosen by a popular vote of people who pay a fortune to have lions carved into the front wall of their maisonettes and who leave their homes wearing what look like the clothes in which they have slept. I want them created by Renzo Piano.
I do not even want to have any input myself, because the extent of my knowledge is enough to make me aware of just how little I know and how insignificant, trifling and inconsequential my views are. I do not know more than Renzo Piano, and I am astonished to find myself surrounded by people who think they do.
Because we Maltese are accustomed to a conflation of arrogance and ignorance in the presumptuous individuals who seek to run our lives with their megaphones and their protests, we are unfamiliar with the concept that true greatness comes with the self-confident security that makes a person quiet and unassuming in real life rather than boastful, loud and brazen.
Those who watched Renzo Piano being interviewed on television last Monday were struck by his reserved, quietly humorous and ‘ordinary’ demeanour. ‘How humble he is,’ one person told me. No, that’s not humbleness. That’s the self-assurance which comes from knowing that what you do is truly wonderful, that the world acknowledges it as wonderful, and that hence there is no need to brag about it or defend it.
Renzo Piano can leave all that to the protestors with their megaphones and their letters to The Times of Malta. He doesn’t need them, but he knows that they need him – though one imagines that he would curl up and die rather than be so crass as to point this out.
This article is published in The Malta Independent on Sunday today.
86 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
First many were commenting about how they wish to see Valletta restored to its ‘former glory’ and now that Renzo Piano unveiled his plans for Valletta which include restoring the bridge to its original state, restoring the bastions, restoring the old train station beneath Valletta and restoring the ruins of the opera house: now that Renzo Piano wants to restore Valletta to its former glory they are rubbishing the project. Also a lot are commenting on the parliament being an ultra modern building. What they do not realise is that when Barry designed the now destroyed opera house, his design was ultra modern for its time.
Good comment. Actually Barry’s was a neo-classical building and it was seen as a British cultural interference in a city whose soul is baroque.
I have one curiosity about Piano’s designs. At present the gate has a road on top of it. Actually it is a bridge linking traffic from the Central Bank area to the other part (Hastings Gardens etc). Will this traffic link be severed completely?
[Daphne – Yes. If you visit Valletta to take a look at the model, you’ll see how traffic is going to be diverted.]
Labour has called on the government to heed the people’s views. OK, so heed these views then, all from this morning’s timesofmalta.com comments board:
“I suggest a Statue of La Vallette (and perhaps two–of Grand Master del Monte)–on each side of the Gate.”
“A gate, like a door to a traditional Maltese house, should welcome the visitor to the sitting room while clearly but politely demarcating the boundary between what’s public and what belongs to the host. But our Valletta has now been degraded from a dame to a ravished, raped noble lady. What definitely jars is the new Parliament House – a massive monolith with absolutely no stonemasonry features. It’s a shame that our parliamentarians do not want to adorn the powerhouse of the country with the impressive work of the workers they represent.”
“The City gate……will become a XAQQ,
The Ditch…………will become a ROVINA where IL-FJURI LI MA KIBRUX FIL-PARLAMENT SER JIKBRU BLA XEMX,
The Opera House……..will become a HOFRA fejn ma jkunx hemm bzonn suggerituri,
Freedom Square………..will become a PALK li jkun facli ghal GUY Fawkes biex itajjru,
Valletta………….will become more of a cemetery minghajr karnival, manifestazzjoniet, christmas activities ”
and lots more where those came from. What nation of whingers!
What do they mean by ‘stonemasonry features’? Balavostri?
Here’s another brilliant one:
John Zammit (4 hours, 50 minutes ago)
I have to be blunt by saying that this is a project which reflects our state of mediocrity. The Entrance to Valletta has always been unique. I do not like pianos project, Because his projects are accepted in Dubai and other emerging new modern countries does not mean we fit the design. Valletta is an old city and deserves a gate which should be restored to its original way. We do not need carnivals in Valletta, but with this project it will only be creating a daily one non stop. I hope and urge the prime minister to see common sense and avoid another farce. I fully agree with Mario Tabone Vassallo. Restoration as it should be will re vamp the city. Whoever wants a dubai in Valletta can knock elsewhere. We have a right to have our Capital as it was before not take it to some science fiction film studios to make some people rich!
Isn’t he that nutter who said that he deserves to be an MEP, because he went to Brussels?
Also I’ve noticed that people just cannot understand the difference between Valletta and Las Vegas.
And more:
Ethelbert Schembri (4 hours, 1 minute ago)
I’m not going to comment on the design because if I am against or even if in favour now it is useless to comment because “il froga saret” and by the way this GOV handles public consultation, again it is totally useless to comment.
After all they are just going to use public money that is OUR money for this project.
Let us hope that this project doesn’t end up like SMAR CITY “tutto fumo niente arosto” like our GonziPN GOV.
Thanks Architect Renzo Piano but from all the hype the GOV put around your name you could come with something better and hope that you haven’t got any political pressure.
m debono (3 hours, 26 minutes ago)
It’s like I said before. Thanks and good bye Arch. Piano…
1. The ruins should be built to host it’s former glory. The excuse of “not enough space” does not hold water. The interior is large enough to host anything to anything. We definately need a large interior space in Valletta for cultural activities.
2. Parlament should remain were it is.. having a big square in front of it.
3. City gate… well I have mixed views but definately it’s better then it was, but I still sustain that it should be as was originally planned when La Vallett built it
Chris Ebejer (3 hours, 19 minutes ago)
This project shall be listed in history as the Piano’s Paprata!
Is it possible that there are many who still do believe, if someone is famous so he’s the right person? I would have given Piano a chance yes, designing the airport or Tignie, but not Valletta.
And I didn’t attend for this presentation yesterday although I was invited as a matter of fact that I whole heartedly disagrees and cannot applaud the idea of leaving those brutal flats and erecting a parliament at the entrance of a Noble city.
And all those who claimed that Barry’s neo classical architecture didn’t compliment with Valletta, Ghandhom il-wicc issa jghidu li dan il-binja imtajra hija kompatibbli?!
Chris Ebejer (3 hours, 18 minutes ago)
And should these pseudo modernist intellectuals are now pleased with an odious scaffolding supporting some kind of metal partitioning erected over just 60 years old demolished building.
And where is the City gate design? Should now we call this breach a contemporary design? It’s the same case of the Emperor’s new clothes story.
These proposals are nothing but a sign of a decadent society that accepts everything without good taste and a lack of aesthetics. Beauty is a joy forever.
I shall never and cannot express the approval and appreciation for this project as for many cultural lovers; this is a sin against our culture and an insult to Valletta. A project like this is the kind to be found in Beijing or Malaysia but not in a European Valletta.
And from Norman Lowell’s treasurer:
Charles Sammut (2 hours, 43 minutes ago)
All those suggesting the demolition of the horrible block of flats above the equally horrible shopping arcade are forgetting one thing. The occupants of those flats translate into VOTES.
St James Cavalier will now be hidden behind a haphazard and grotesque , I mean modern, conglomeration of halls and offices to satisfy Gonzi’s personal ambition to move parliament to this last open space in Valletta. Wouldn’t the Main Guard have been good enough? Apparently not for our very own Roi Soleil and his entourage.
Henry S Pace (1 hour, 14 minutes ago)
Yes, it is a beautiful design however, please this design is absolutely not for our Capital City
Valletta. This design would be appropriate for a newly but town .
Professor Piano failed to tell us from where he will be getting the ruins (the sculptured stones) of the old opera house dismantled by the Labour Government in the 1955-58 Administration.
An open air theatre as he describes it would be ideal for dog-fights and cock-fights .
I am sure that this would be fille to capacity in the summer breeze.
Buildings in the form of boxes are not appropriate for our capital city.
It also appears that the road over the city gate would be discontinued. The traffic would be unable to proceed into Valletta via Hastings Gardens. It appears that such traffic access would only be through St Paul’s Street or via the ring road. Can Prof. Piano tells us something about this throughfare.
Dr Gonzi and Dr Gatt think it all over again because peoples’ money is going down the drain.
From Jason Micallef’s predecessor at the Labour Party:
Jimmy Magro (59 minutes ago)
One big question:
How come MEPA will approve the projects in less than six months when for an ordinary citizen to widen a window it takes MEPA more than four years? Is this another case taken from “Animal Farm”.
How clever of Jimmy Magro to mention Animal Farm. That’s what this collection of whingers sounds like, squawking, clucking, and ruminating for want of something interesting to do.
I have seen the designs on the newspapers and my first comment is about the bridge and entrance. I am for now excluding parliament and the theatre and I can say that it is FANTASTIC. I agree with you that we “the people” have to see what professionals the calibre of Renzo Piano can create.
[Daphne – If you’re at a loose end today or tomorrow, you should pop into Valletta and take a look at the model and the plans. They’re not working days, so parking is easier. The museum is open 9am to 7pm.]
Piano did not create the bridge. It was built in the 16th century.
In general I like Piano’s ideas but I am not so sure about the design of the parliament building though. I think it’s going to clash with Valletta’s appearance. I know Mr. Piano is a living legend and I also appreciate that something has to be done, and soon, but Valletta is too set in the old styles. I mean even where the buildings are not grand they still have old-style balconies, for example. The parliament building would have looked great on the Regional Road for example but at the entrance of Valletta, I really don’t know.
The rest of the project I agree with, even the idea of an open-air theatre on the ruins and using the ditch. The idea of using the large blocks for the entrance is also interesting but again maybe there are better solutions like actually having some sort of gate.
Renzo Piano versus ‘the people’:
“It is this obsessive refinement that raises Mr. Piano’s best architecture to the level of art. In an age with few idealists, he exudes a touching faith in the value of slow, incremental progress. He has never fully abandoned the belief that machines can elevate as well as destroy.The beauty of his designs stems from his stubborn insistence that the placement of a column or a window, when done with enough patience and care, brings us a step closer to a more enlightened society.”
From the New York Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/arts/design/14muse.html
Does anybody know what’s going to happen to the arcades? Looking at the model, it appears that they will be removed.
[Daphne – Yes.]
These plans are a masterclass in architecture. The whole idea is to invite people in to enjoy Valletta, and to explore it, and to stay and not want to leave. The bastions will be exposed for this effect. The entire project has a light, fresh and airy feel, as if Valletta is saying that it can be all things to all men and women of all ages.
Instead of that horrible, perit tac-civil-designed arcade, we have an unencumbered and simple entry with the bastions flanking it, and with those two so evocative staircases. The opera house ruins have been given dignity. The new parliament building will be a landmark of good design besides a work of art.
The perspectives are also good in the ditch. He is treating this entry as his own, and his sense of connection and openness are between what lies beneath and the entry are refreshing. How we needed a critical but open mind like Piano’s .
Piano has connected the old and the new, the history with today’s spirit, the outside and the inside, in such a sweet way. It shows he is the best there is.
If I were Piano, I would sweep away those hideous flats tal-gvern and the Galea Sluta arcade beneath them, opening a vista and connecting the two Cavaliers by less obtrusive but equally landmark buildings. But then that’s me. What he proposed is superlative enough. imagine if he could have gotten rid of the flats tal-gvern as well. The mind boggles.
[Daphne – In his original project of 20 years ago, he had wanted to remove them. I imagine this time he was persuaded otherwise, because it would take years just to get the people and businesses out.]
Looking at the timesofmalta.com comments board this morning, I got a feeling that the Doomsday people are dead against it. They want Barry. And they want Valletta to remain as it is because, of all things, that excuse for a kitschfest we call carnival, where the worst of the worst comes out.
At the very least, we would have got rid of the hideous arena tal-karnival made up of scaffolding and wooden planks. Soon we will have Astrid and her minions decrying the project, not because of the project itself, but “ghax ghamlu Gonzi” . Mark my words.
[Daphne – She was up front with The Important People at the unveiling ceremony last night, while those who have really worked for our heritage, like Maurice de Giorgio of Patrimonju Malti, and the chairman of Heritage Malta, and others, were behind her. That was a bit of a miscalculation: inviting her keeps her sweet (ish) but putting her ahead of others will only give her an unwarranted sense of her own importance. As a friend said: “I’m surprised the audience didn’t boo when her face came up on the screen.”]
These people do not love Malta. Or Valletta. They just love their sense of importance. Now they are saying that “the people” want this, or that. They profess to speak on behalf of the people, without understanding that the people elected Gonzi to speak and do things on their behalf.
No one elected the FAA except bored housewives with nothing better to do than go to some villa in Attard or some Sliema flat and paint.
Funny how you always have some “friend” or “acquaintance” or “relative” who says something apt or witty that just happens to bolster the argument you are making. Ah, me and my suspicious nature.
[Daphne – Well, it’s easier to believe that others are using illicit means to bolster their arguments than to acknowledge that maybe, just maybe, you’re talking hogwash. Also, I tend not to need others to bolster my arguments, because I base them on fact not opinion and gossip.]
I don’t agree that it would take long to get the shops and people out. They all lease the property from the government so they are on ‘mera tolleranza’ anyway. It would involve intense discussions but it’s possible. The shops on the other side, where the arcade is surely going, are already in discussions and there seems to be an agreement except for a particular elderly man who is usually rather obnoxious and is demanding the earth.
As for the tenants of the flats, the government is building a new block in Pembroke. It’s nicer than Valletta. Maybe they should be offered a home there. And the government would pick up the relocation costs.
Piano is not “restoring” anything
– He dodged the problem of “which gate” by opting for “no gate” – brilliant
– The opera house site will resemble nothing so much as a permanent building site. It only needs a tower crane to complete the illusion.
– The parliament building is a matter of taste, I suppose, and we can argue about it till the next millenium. Pesonally, I don’t think it fits in with Valletta from any aspect.
So we should rejoice because something is being done at last? Something should have been done a long time ago, but after a massive defeat at the polls Gonzi had no other option than to be seen to have started doing something.
[Daphne – You’re right, I imagine. After 7 June, the prime minister gave Renzo Piano a ring, introduced himself, and said: “You have three weeks in which to produce plans for Valletta.”]
I’m not an architect but putting a modern building in the middle of a baroque/classic-style capital city is not on. Isn’t this obvious? I liked the idea of an open air theatre but the parliament will definitely be an eye-sore.
[Daphne – Done a lot of travelling, have you?]
Labour has already advised the government to listen to what the “people” have to say about the Valletta project being proposed by Renzo Piano. In the meantime, they will very probably have no opinion. As might be expected, Labour itself will listen and wait before offering its opinion. And its opinion will be in line with what the dissenters will say. So that it will lead the “moviment ta’ progressivi u demokratici”. To please the “opposition” to the project. Good.
D – maybe the usual moaners and groaners would prefer government to construct a mega bingo hall.
No, I think they wanted something from Disneyland. Cinderella’s castle perhaps.
The plans and model presented were exactly what I was expecting. Enough prior info was subtly or directly unleashed for any technical person to realise what was going to be offered.
I look at this project from three viewpoints.
1. The demolishing of the existing ugly city gate had to be done and a new, remodelled plan was to be submitted. This was done by the Renzo Piano team and is one idea of a possible dozen others. It is far better than the old one, but the pros and cons have to be studied in more detail in the coming days before more comments can be made.
2. The retaining of the old Barry opera house ruins and to convert them into an open air theatre is mainly being looked upon by qualified project managers, various architects and others as merely a stop-gap exercise before a better decision on the site’s development is made. In my view these ruins should have been totally removed as of now, those ghastly shops and stalls removed and a decision taken on what’s to be done. Retaining the ruins and claiming that we are conserving a part of history is a false premise for lack of an adequate and feasible decision and most probably lack of finance to carry out the project, which finance is being used for the development of the parliament building
3. The new development on Freedom Square which is to house our parliament – this is a new concept which has been designed from scratch. The design itself apart from the stilts is based on the Menil Collection of Houston (one of Renzo Piano’s major projects).
I’m sure that the technical designs are going to be state of the art, no doubt about that. What I cannot really identify clearly is the fact that this is going to be a state of the art, ultra modern, ultra technical construction which is going to take the full limelight of everything else around it and which jars immensely with the surrounding bastions of St. John’s and St. James’ Cavaliers.
I’m not deriding the design and concept, I am only questioning its suitability, aesthetic-wise within a fortified, baroque city such as Valletta.
I’m sure that the flak will start to be fired shortly, but from a project management and technical viewpoint these are my opinions.
[Daphne – That’s why project managers are not asked to design buildings, but only to manage their implementation.]
Daph, you have the definition of a project manager wrong. A project manager can be the lead designer of a project (Renzo Piano in this case for instance), or he can be the co-ordinating and managing engineer/architect/designer/ tester/approval scientist, etc., etc., involved in the successful implementation of a project ranging from the building of a block of flats to building the Hoover Dam or launching of the Shuttle Enterprise. Take your pick.
“presumptuous individuals who seek to run our lives with their megaphones and their protests”…….and their blogs and their columns!!
[Daphne – Did you ever notice me claiming to speak on behalf of anyone other than myself? It’s my opinion, with my name and sometimes my picture on top.]
I enjoyed the off-the-cuff presentation by Renzo Piano. Now I understand a lot of what he is proposing. The only thing I cannot understand is the proposal of a theatre without a roof.
In Malta there is no month in which it never rained. Only yesterday it rained enough in the morning to disturb an open air activity. I hope the eminent architect took note of this. Another problem in Malta is the big amount of dust in the air. Thirdly the furnishing and equipment inside an open-air theatre on the Sceberras peninsula will suffer greatly with the salty sea-spray and dew. I understand that ruins have no roofs, but some sort of cover from rain, dust, sea-spray and what-have-you is something which we cannot do without.
Renzo Piano mingled with us to listen to Valletta; Barry never did – he didn’t even know that the theatre had to be built on an incline. The plinth on which the theatre was built was a quick fix. It could be that if he knew about the one-storey difference between Kingsway and Christopher Street his design would have been very different. His original design had no stairs.
Barry did not bother about the base and put a plinth. Please someone explain why Renzo Piano needs no roof.
The only thing I really liked was the opera site.
The proposed plans are 100x better than what we have now (which is tal-misthija). The house of parliament I didn’t like, but I did think the transparent ground floor looked pretty cool. The entrance (not the bridge; the bridge is nice) is a bit bare and I think it really lacks a good arch.
I can’t imagine what the Maltese thought of Caravaggio way back when: “Jaqq, qatalu rasu dan xi qziezz hu!!!!!!!??????? Dan ma jafx ipingi Wignacort????!!!!! GM WERE ARR YOUR GAULENTS!!”.
This is not just another open-air theatre. The (mechanised?) steel structure could take all sorts of audio-visual props on the four walls (on both the interior and exterior). This goes beyond what is imaginable and has huge potential. Imagine the experience with, say, holographic images surrounding the audience and not just the usual backdrop to the stage.
[Daphne – Our Kev, we’re on the same wavelength for once.]
You mean we’re just building a huge billboard?
That’s funny, John II. These words are what ‘Ganni Borg’ alias ‘Ettore Bono’ said on another forum. Great minds and all that I suppose.
Yes, John II, with Lenin and Stalin giving the red salute.
Pity you’re not in Lilliput, Kev. You could pop into the project exhibition in Valletta and see – rather than imagine – the sort of performance you describe.
Oh, imagine that Corinne. What if I bump into you?
You won’t. I’ve been and gone.
My opinions of architecture in general and Renzo Piano in particular are akin to yours on sport – nothing to get thrilled about but I assume that your hero-worship is somehow justified.
I find Dr Gonzi’s declaration that the project will be finished on time and within the budget much more interesting. It seems like he’s finally learning that people are sick and tired of the ‘over budget and late’ syndrome which has characterized the PN government since 1987 and looks forward to having this under his belt come the next general election, which he’s clearly concentrating on, already.
Should be easily achievable – four years is plenty of time to build one building on clear land and refurbish a few bits and bobs in the vicinity and €80 million should surely cover it – but my bet is that whilst the ribbon will be cut shortly before the election, the works won’t be completed until later. Remember Mater Dei, anyone?
A city built by gentlemen for gentlemen. Now we have an exceptional proposal for its entrance by another gentleman. And this gentleman, at this point of the design process, is ready to listen to our comment. Let us be constructive in our comments, (because there are some clarifications to be made) but at the end of the day……. let’s go for it.
i) Are the thin columns underneath the “flying building” enough, or will structural engineers impose thicker columns and defeat the whole concept?
[Daphne – don’t you think this has been worked out already? Come on.]
ii) What is the alternative for the existing parking at Pjazza Helsien, Yellow Garage, and so on?
[Daphne – There doesn’t have to be alternative parking.]
iii) What is the alternative access route to Valletta once one of the major traffic entrance (above city gate) is eliminated?
[Daphne – Visit the exhibition and look at the model.]
iv) What is the access route for the backstage of the opera house? Yellow Garage?
[Daphne – Ditto; don’t be lazy.]
But these are truly minor clarifications when compared to the logic expressed in Piano’s design.
Let’s go for it. Maybe as Andrew Borg Cardona puts it……. “maybe someday soon I can walk into town and feel exhilarated straight away”.
I cannot understand this obsession of the Maltese with cars and parking. Any regenerated city-centre has done one very simple thing: remove cars and let people walk. That is the only way to see these projects in a few years when they’re finished.
Actually Daphne, the point about the stilts is a very good point and it’s not a question of whether it has ben worked out or not, but the eventual building loading. The stilts should be as thin as possible so very careful engineering has to go into this. If they leave it to a Maltese perit, we will have kolonni tad disa galore because they over-engineer buildings and err on the side of caution….very heavily may I say.
[Daphne – What is it with you people? Do you honestly believe that Renzo Piano’s office needs your advice on load-bearing calculations, or that Renzo Piano – who is first and foremost an engineer – needs you lot to tell him that he needs to be careful with those columns? Sorry, Mario, but this is unbelievable. “The stilts should be as thin as possible so very careful engineering has to go into this.” Quick, better ring him. He mightn’t have thought about that.]
Perhaps Renzo has never heard of reinforced steel. You wouldn’t know, these days… he might be thinking of the gebla Maltija.
Did he take into consideration and allow for Pullicino?
Gdimtli rasi ghalxejn. i LIKE the project in its totality. I come from a family of builders and it’s not the fist time I argued with Maltese architects who tend to over-engineer load-bearing columns on projects that I have undertaken. Renzo Piano needs no advice from me, but it’s easy to thicken the stilts instead of using the right material to make them. It’s cheaper. I don’t want cheap. I don’t want him influenced. That’s my point.
Daphne fl-ahhar mill-ahhar il bennej jaghmel il binja ghax irid ilahham l-idejat tal-perit. Although we have very, very good people in Malta I can’t see Piano here all the time. Someone may err in favour of caution and ruin the whole perspective through the transparent underbody of the parliament building. Satisfied?
Mario Debono, and all the other structural engineering ‘experts’ giving Renzo Piano advice:
perhaps Ove Arup knows a thing or two about structural engineering. Or maybe they don’t, and they just put their name on the exhibition poster for the hell of it.
http://www.arup.com/
@Nigel – Don’t be nasty. Having said that, did he make allowances for somebody’s big-headedness?
I did. I confirm that the presentation is truly exceptional. I am more than convinced that this project should be given the green light.
But as Piano said, the design is still at the “schematic” stage. And I have enough experience in the construction industry to know that at this stage the structural calculations are very basic as well.
No alternative parking? No way. Shifting parking away from Valletta, yes. Probably it would mean extending the ‘park and ride’ – but an alternative parking solution must be included in the proposal.
Removing a major access road to a city has to be backed with an alternative solution. Libertas says “Remove cars and let people walk” – I agree because personally I wouldn’t mind walking in Valletta. But the shop owners expect and deserve a better solution than that.
Backstage? It’s below street level and behind the stage. Access is not very clear from the drawings I managed to see (http://opm.gov.mt/opera_house) . Could be that Piano is proposing access from the area presently used as a police station (which is being demolished to expose the adjacent church). If that is the case ………. that’s ingenious.
What about the bus terminus?
The designs for the entrance & opera house look very interesting but it would be a shame if nothing is done about the arcade and social housing on the left of Freedom Square and the bus terminus. The bus terminus should be moved away from city gate if we really want to enhance the entrance to Valletta. Personally I would suggest leaving the open space and transforming into a public garden of sorts (but without the excessive building which is so common on the island a la Ta Qali)
Also, something must be done about the car park which is a horrible eyesore. Surely there must be some way to make the car park less obtrusive.
Obviously while there are budgetary constraints, a more holistic approach to the enhancement of city gate/ freedom square/ opera house would really elevate the whole project.
I would have loved the flats and shops on the other side of the square to vanish into thin air. But I guess, apart from increasing costs substantially, we would have caused another world war to get people out and compensated.
I am not against discussion of any sort but I also believe that these kind of projects should not be done on condition of acquiring poplular support. It is enough that we have entrusted the job to a genius, who has a lot of experience and has already proved his worth on many occasions. If there are details to be corrected, let us correct them by all means but we should not start stripping the whole concept bit by bit.
Like many others, I say let’s go for it. Imissna inroddu s-salib, inxammru l-kmiem u nibdew il-progett illum qabel ghada.
I have just read what Din l-Art Helwa are saying. Their comment about the Parliament building being higher than the bastions, would have been correct only if Valletta’s skyline had remained intact. With all the extra floors going up everywhere, their criticism does not hold. How long is it since they have been to St, Barbara Bastions?
@ maryanne – what happened at St Barbara Bastion? I’m interested because I lived there until I was 10 – centre house – it’s Sullivan Shipping now… I wish we never left, but that was 1971 and anyone who could build or buy a house elsewhere was leaving Valletta.
Yes, remove cars and let people walk, as Libertas said, but what about the members of parliament? I’m already having a nightmare of a certain type of an Alfa Romeo badly parked in the future ex carnival arena.
[Daphne – All the details were released yesterday and are available in the newspapers today, on line and at the Museum of Archaeology in Valletta. So please would everyone stop commenting without reference to the facts, and speculating pointlessly? The parking area for parliament will be where the Yellow Garage is today.]
Daph, this is a genuine question. Does this project needs approval from MEPA as well? Can they object?
No. The PM said that he thinks that national projects will not be the remit of MEPA although they will have input. I hope he carries it out.
From The Times:
“This morning they were visited by 125 architects and architecture students in the presence of Mr Piano. Their reaction was that the projects would take Malta to the 21st century.”
No quotes – just a generalised “reaction” from the “students” about taking Malta in the 21st century! No voices of dissent at all. No discourse. This is almost Pravda style reporting.
[Daphne – Why, because it doesn’t chime with your views? Ring a few architects and ask them what they think. My brother-in-law was at that presentation, and he told me the same thing.]
So there were 125 people architects and students and they were all nodding along? Every single one of them? God, it is a scary world we live in nowadays.
[Daphne – I beg to differ. A scary world would be one in which a 20-year-old architecture student decided to point out deficiencies in Renzo Piano’s project.]
I am an architect and civil engineer, and yes ……
i) Renzo Piano’s proposal is truly exceptional,
ii) I am proud that my country’s capital city will be having a Renzo Piano design.
And when that is the case ….. you only need to discuss further, fine tune, and switch on the green light.
matthew 2: maybe – just maybe – there weren’t any dissenting voices at all. We’re all so used to the type of reaction typified by the timesofmalta.com comment boards, we’re taken aback when confronted with the possibility of anything else.
No, not because it doesn`t “chime with my views” but because, while I find it conceivable that there was a general consensus of approval or even overwhelming approval from the people present, I don`t believe that the response of 125 people can be encapsulated in the phrase: “Their reaction was that the projects would take Malta to the 21st century”.
All 125 people can not have been thinking exactly the same hackneyed, grammatically awkward cliche about things being “taken to the 21st century.”
[Daphne – It’s called being concise in a short report.]
I heard the solution for the opera house roof. Someone phoned on some programme or other and solved the problem.
All we have to do is get the roof from the dock dismantled in Bormla and just put it on top. Simple, no?
First of all, John II should be given the Idiot of the Year Award (Daphne pls publish this part).
Ivan and Mario, how you ever heard of steel?
Also, engineers are creating new materials which can take a lot of weight. These are derived form carbon, mainly. Although I am not an engineer I have worked on huge building sites and the materials we use to build these mega structures are unbelievable.
I was referring to steel columns. There is also carbon steel, kevlar steel braiding members, or woven carbon fibre interspersed with steel rope. As Ivan said, the calculations at the design stage are necessarily rudimentary.
I’m sorry if I haven’t been clear. I don’t want to see breeze-blocks or concrete in the columns except for light cladding. Steel is so nice.
Mario
Maybe you should contact Ove Arup. I believe the company is in need of sound advice.
Don’t be sarcastic. I commissioned Ove Arup and Partners for a particular project in Malta in 1992 if you must know. I doubt if you had heard about them then.
Don’t be so touchy and condescending. You don’t know me well enough to know what I do know and don’t. I just think it’s odd that so many people are offering structural engineering advice to one of the biggest consultancy firms in the world. Since you’re familiar with Over Arup, you must be aware of the irony, too.
Yes, it’s a must that the bus terminus is removed from outside the city entrance. We cannot afford to have such a large area as the Independence Arena used solely for sports. What I am suggesting is a two-storey building: bottom floor for private parking which can take hundreds of cars, and the other floor used as a covered bus terminus. These two floors should still be below the level of the Mall and when finished the sports facilities can be on top.
My feeling is that Renzo Piano won the public to his side. ‘Resistance to change’ was overcome by good communication skills from the government side. People can understand what lies behind the project now. I hope MEPA will not find any objections and the permits are fast-tracked. “How long is it since they have been to St. Barbara Bastions?” May I add lower St Paul’s Street and St Ursola looking on the left from Upper Barrakka gardens.
I don’t know how many of your readers and Din l-Art Helwa know that on Saint John’s Cavalier there is a ‘villa’ which was built in the 1980s.
I know. Its the ambassador’s residence. Shame on the Knights of St John. They should remove it and restore that cavalier as soon as possible. It’s falling to pieces.
What on earth do some commentators think an architect does? I cannot believe that some are ‘advising’ Renzo Piano on how it should be done. Some are mixing ‘architect’ with ‘special effects co-ordinator’. You can rest assured that the design is perfectly doable. Have some faith in the man – he is one of the world’s leading architects, with a long track record of fantastic projects.
I received this comment by email:
I am in total agreement with you on this matter. I was amazed at the brilliance of the man and his capability of explaining complex concepts in simple language, as well as pointing out issues that everyone has missed by a a hundred miles. Such as the folly of spending lots of money on building an opera house that would not be big enough to become part of the international circuit. It would never attract the international artists and audiences like the big opera houses do. And forget the Maltese. They don’t go to operas. and the fact that if rebuilt the theatre would only be a replica, a fake, not the original. People do not see these issues in their self-righteous blindness. I think the project is brilliant and cannot wait for it to start and end.
“And forget the Maltese”. That says it all really – what the hell do they have to do with this project? Thay are only paying for it.
This is what I call communication: https://opm.gov.mt/valletta_projects1
Valletta is NOT a Baroque city. It is a Renaissance city.
[Daphne – Ah, but you forget that in trend-setting Malta, l’ombelico del mondo, the baroque period began in the mid-16th century.]
Valletta has a number of palaces and auberges that follow the Baroque idiom but that does not make it a Baroque city. It was around 150 years too early for that. Part of the beauty of Valletta, and indeed any city, is the diversity of the architecture within, all dating from different eras and demonstrating it in a physical calendar of architectural pride.
As for things ‘fitting’ . . . . one must be blind or plain stupid not to notice that at least 250 years separate the totally different architectural typology of the Grandmaster’s Palace and the Main Guard just across the square. Barry’s opera house, when it was first designed, could not fit on the site.
Do the several beautiful Art Nouveau buildings in the city ‘fit’ with the renaissance palaces and the baroque churches? What have you got to say about the eclectic neo-classicism of Ferrerija Palace? Or are you insisting that it is ‘baroque too?
God forbid that architecture should be subjected to public opinion and thrown to the abysmal level of crude ‘pop-art’. Where would we be if anyone listened to these pompous morons spouting forth? I’ve got a good idea where . . . . if it were up to people like them throughout history, there would be no art and no architecture. The masterpieces of the world would never have been realised, from the pyramids to the Colosseum, from the great temples to the Sydney Opera House, from Tower Bridge to Calatrava’s masterpiece in Seville, from the impressionists to the surrealists from Da Vinci to Dali . . . none of it would have happened if it were left up to people with small minds, no imagination, poor knowledge, an inbred and colossal fear of change and an exaggerated impression of their own intelligence.
I disagree. Valletta is not a “Renaissance city”. Whether it can correctly be described as a “Baroque city” is debatable. It would be pointless to have a never-ending, hair-splitting discussion along those lines. I think that it would be uncontroversial to describe Valletta as a city built over a period of time using a variety of styles of architecture, most predominantly Baroque.
[Daphne – http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Renaissance and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baroque Valletta was built during the Renaissance, and before the Baroque movement even began, still less filtered through to this backwater. Some of Valletta’s palaces, churches and houses were ‘tarted’ up in the baroque fashion during the late 17th and 18th centuries, but this does not make Valletta a baroque city. That’s an anachronism http://www.answers.com/topic/anachronism Those who claim Valletta is a baroque city have been devouring rather too many tourism-related urban legends.]
Don’t you think the rest of your rant is a little bit over the top? It is quite a leap to suggest that the people who have their reservations about this particular project are the sworn enemies of all art and architecture. Personally, while there are a great many modern and contemporary artists whose work I love, I can`t stand Salvador Dali and I wouldn`t hang a picture of his on my wall if you gave me one.
[Daphne – That’s what people say who don’t have one.]
Tower Bridge raised the heckles of a lot of critics because it was not an honest reflection of the prevailing architecture of the times. Most people think it is much older than it is and maintained it was a pastiche, (or to use the favoured term a “fake”), designed to ape the features of the much older Tower of London. In short, its critics were on the very same side of the debate you now champion.
As for the pyramids, well, yes thank God there were no “small minds” around to stop their construction, eh? Maybe we should have a constitutional amendment to make Lawrence Gonzi into a Pharaoh with powers to instantly crush all dissent on sight.
A plurality of opinions is not something to be afraid of and there is nothing admirable in slavishly worshipping all that is modern just for the sake of it. Just because some of us refuse to kneel at the altar of the living god that is Renzo Piano it doesn`t necessarily mean we are stupid.
I knew what an anachronism was but thank you for the link to wikipedia anyway. If you actually read what I wrote then you will see that I didn`t claim that Valletta is a “Baroque city”. I merely disputed the claim that it was a “Renaissance city”. However, many of the buildings in Valletta are in the Baroque style of architecture. That is indisputable.
You are conflating the historical eras roughly referred to as Baroque and Renaissance with the more clearly defined architectural styles which carry the same names.
[Daphne – Just imagine if the FAA and the Matthew 2 of the 18th century had said of Valletta: “Hey, no baroque buildings here! This is a renaissance city! All new buildings should be in the renaissance style!” Now do you see where you’re going wrong with your assertion that we shouldn’t have any 21st-century buildings in Valletta?]
Matthew2, for a variety of reasons, in the late 18th and especially 19th century it was popular to imitate previous architecture and “neo-” objects and buildings were in fashion; they revived classical, gothic and even romanesque styles.
It is different nowadays and you will not find any self-respecting architect creating an important building in a neo-whatever style. It’s not just Piano, it’s everybody. Why do you think that architects themselves are enthusiastic about his proposals, rather than feeling professional jealousy? The plans on display are “schematic”, meaning that details are still to be finalised but what matters at this point is the concept.
One last thing. Criticising the critics does not automatically turn them into martyrs. Nobody is crushing you matthew so stop being melodramatic.
No, I really wouldn`t want a Salvador Dali painting on my living room wall and I wouldn`t hang one there if you gave me one. You doubt me? Well, give me one and we can settle this once and for all.
There’s one particular comment I remember Piano making: it is unusual to present a design project publicly at the schematic stage.
Here’s why: everyone thinks that the presentation is an invitation to give advice based on their own experience and to talk about the design as though the designer himself has no clue about how to proceed.
This is a SCHEMATIC design. Why is everyone – including those who have not looked at the plans or visited the exhibition – talking about it as though it’s going to be left to Johnny il-bennej to work it out on the spot ‘ghax ix-xoghol jurik wahdu’?
Corinne, I do not think that at all. I see the presentation as an opportunity to appreciate the validity of the concept that the architect is following and to understand the way his mind is approaching the challenge. I also see it as an opportunity to look forward to the way the project proposals will develop, and this is why I can’t stand it when the usual self-appointed doomsday professors start spouting forth (even at concept stage) with their usual nostalgic crap laced with nasty comments and personal remarks about the architect.
Having been fortunate enough to visit Berlin a couple of years ago I am very comfortable with what is being proposed. Berlin was destroyed to a far greater extent than Valletta. This destruction continued after the war in the eastern part with the construction of grey communist blocks.
Since the fall of the Wall, historic buildings, especially churches, have been rebuilt, “reproduced” to perfection. Others such as the Reichstag and the Canadian (?) bank just within the Brandenburg Gate are beautiful buildings using glass as their main component and giving a great feeling of light, space and freedom.
I have no doubt that the proposed plans will make our capital city even more interesting both from an urban and architectural point of view. In years to come I am convinced that the planners, architects and builders will be remembered with gratitude and admiration.
jien nahseb li hafna nies li dejjaqhom id-disinn ta Piano huma:
a. Injoranti ghas-semplici fatt li mhux qed jirrealizzaw li xorta fl-ahhar mill-ahhar ir-rizultat estetiku ser ikun ferm izjed sodisfacenti. (anzi jien inzid sabih mhux sodisfacenti)
b. Purcinelli ghax iridu jaraw l-opera theatre ‘restored’ imbghad naqta rasi barra dawn l-istess nies ilhom ma jmorru ghal kuncert live jew ezebizzjoni teatrali minn tfulithom.
Tridu t-teatri? Mela morru imlewhom l-ewwel. ‘Open air venue’ nahseb hija dcizjoni izjed ragonevoli. Bhal li kieku l-opera biss hija espressjoni artistika denja ta nota. Kif gej il-venue hem il-facilita li jakkomoda muzika hafna izjed versatili.
c. Boloh ghax dejjem jispiccaw jaghmlu kollox ballun politiku. Kieku Piano ma tax spjegazzjoni ghad-decizjonijiet tieghu kieku kont naghtikom nofs ragun, pero jien inhoss li kien elokwenti u konvincenti fir-ragunar tieghu. Sa minn alla l-gvern Nazzjonalista ghal darba ser japprova ‘construction site’ legali. Hekk jonqos, noqghod nilmenta. Nispera biss li jzommu mal-budget li mhux qed narah realsitiku hafna. Jien filfatt nahseb li l-istima hija pjuttost baxxa.
@mattew 2,
No I do not think it is over the top at all. For a start, as Daphne so aptly pointed out, you need to brush up on your knowledge of our own history. Valletta was built as a renaissance city .. . historical fact, period. Even its layout on a grid-iron pattern and the defensive structures enclosing it reflect the military ideology prevalent in the early renaissance. True several buildings (including some baroque ones) were added decades later and even centuries later. That is precisely why the thesis that things should be built as they used to be is a load of bovine excrement as are all the references to Valletta being a ‘baroque city’.
Your knowledge of baroque and indeed history of architecture is sadly lacking if you must insist that the buildings in Valletta are predominantly baroque, and this is precisely why I find most of the negative (even malicious) criticism reprehensible, coming as it does from people who clearly have no idea of what they’re talking about.
A city is made up of a physical calendar of buildings all pointing to the era in which they were designed and built. Anything other than that kills the city’s life and its organic growth. What the ‘build it as it was’ rabble want is not a city. They want a mausoleum dedicated to their pompous nostalgia.
I do not have an issue with those who have reservations about the proposals. I even have some reservations myself, but as has been pointed out before, the proposals are at conceptual stage and have yet to develop further. It will be interesting to observe their development. On the other hand, however, I most certainly have an issue with people who want to see the production of imitations of historic buildings that have all the architectural and historical relevance of an excavated corpse dressed up in period costume.
Your reference to Tower Bridge is an interesting one; the critics seem to have been well informed people who knew what they were talking about and appreciated the true nature of architecture, which is more than anybody can say for most of the local ones, I’m afraid.
Dali aside, you profess to love modern art. Well then, you will agree that if art (of any form) is subject to badly informed, unappreciative, even ignorant or plain pig-headed public opinion for its acceptance, then we will have art no more but a sad endless repetition which never develops new ideas, never explores the boundaries, never refreshes itself, never sets new standards and differs little from its precedents. If it were up to the people with whom I take issue, there would be no ‘modern’ art.
You are entitled to your opinion about the prime minister but this is not about politics, it is about architecture. Had Alfred Sant’s government commissioned a contemporary project by a world famous architect, I would have applauded it regardless.
I do not for one moment even suggest that everything that is modern is good, far less do I suggest that anyone should elevate Renzo Piano to divine status – but I would point out that the very same people who argue that we should try and recreate the past or that Piano does not know anything about Malta or Valletta, would have crucified Barry when he had the vulgar temerity to propose a ‘trendy’ neo-classical edifice in our ‘sacred baroque city’. Then they would have dug him up and done it again when they realised that the building he originally proposed could not fit on the site but had to be altered by the local Department of Public Works.
Having said that, I would feel proud to boast that our capital city has, in addition to its illustrious history and noble auberges, neo classical and art nouveau buildings, churches and palaces, a project within its walls designed by one of the world’s most acclaimed architects. I would feel even prouder if the Maltese people look past their nostalgic reflections, forget their militant politics and leave aside their provincial and secular attitude and their anti-foreign obsessions and actually contribute something positive for a change.
I think this librarian has a point: “Laurence Zerafa (26 minutes ago)
The Malta Library and Information Association – MaLIA http://www.malia-malta.org/ notes with pleasure that Mr. Renzo Piano is of the opinion (ToM 22nd June) that the space beneath Parliament building should be used as Public lending Library. Such a library in a location that is so central and so readily accessible would be big plus to the public library scene in Malta. MaLIA is of the opinion the the present Floriana location of the Central public Library is far from ideal. Since OCtober 2008 MaLIA has been lobbying for a public library as part of the city gate regeneration project. Our poposals, with the considerable support we have found from the general public, were presented to the Prime Minister in March and can be read at http://www.malia-malta.org/ So we are pleased with Renzo Piano’s proposal. What we will be querying is what is now being reported since last Saturday that the indicated space beneath the proposed Parliament building at ground floor level is now being billed as Museum of political history. Will there be this Public Library that Renzo Piano would like to see? MalIA certainly hopes that it will be a Public Library.”
A location for a political museum can be found elsewhere. A much needed easily accessible public landing library is a must.
[Daphne – I am completely in agreement. Contemporary libraries are very social spaces: internet, magazines, newspapers, research, children’s areas, lectures – all bright and airy. They’re not fusty spaces at all. A political museum is not at all social – non-Maltese will have no interest in it, and as for us Maltese, if we’ve been once, we’ll never go again.]
And there will be the open-air (hopefully covered) theatre where one can browse through the books. Let’s face it, the Floriana ditch is not an ideal place where one can send his kids alone to get their books.
Watch what others have : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-pJl1wDGMr0
I fully agree that the opera house was a monstrosity. It had nothing to do with Malta or Valletta but with imperial illusions of grandeur. It was ponderous and heavy with no grace at all. It is quite ironic that those who today are eager to trash Piano’s plans as irrelevant and not suiting our city are the first to defend something that really was irrelevant.
Frank, whether the Royal Opera House was a monstrosity or not may be debatable. I do not like it myself and consider it to have been poorly concieved and designed with a measure of brash colonial insensitivity that was more concerned with producing a symbol of imperial grandeur in the neo-classical architectural idiom that was ‘trendy’ amongst the aristocracy in Britain at the time, rather than with producing a building that respected its context and actually performed well. You may, however, wish to see what the much lamented architectural critic Quentin Hughes had to say about it.
For the lazy ones : –
http://www.chrisfarrugia.net/photosynths/renzo-piano-valletta-citygate.html
A very recent design of an Opera house by Renzo Piano. (presented in Athens January 2009)
http://parsifal79.blogspot.com/2009/01/renzo-piano-reveals-his-plans-for-new.html
This gives an idea of the volume needed for a properly designed modern opera house. There simply is no space for it. The stage tower on its own (excluding the volume below ground level) would be higher than Auberge de
Castille. Also, to fit that foyer, auditorium, stage tower and backstage, you would need the space between Palazzo Ferreria to St. James Cavalier.
Project Target year: 2015
http://www.ekathimerini.com/4dcgi/_w_articles_ell_2_28/07/2008_98969