http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20090714/opinion/tilting-at-windmills

For example, instead of welcoming the investment in the restoration of the Auberge de Castille façade, he finds some lame excuse to disparage it. He fails to mention the one most important decision relating to art and culture: the vacating of the Grandmaster’s Palace (except for the President’s office) so that the building will be used for museums and for other cultural purposes. Kenneth Zammit Tabona claims that “200 years of art remain hidden in governmental reserve collections” and without a home. These may well end up in a museum on the ground floor of the Palace.

Why is he so determined to give a negative twist to everything?

The decision on the opera house site and Freedom Square is being seen within the overall context of Valletta, including the Grandmaster’s Palace. On the other hand, Kenneth Zammit Tabona keeps looking at the issues with blinkers and fails to see the wider picture.

At least he gave up claiming to speak on behalf of the “people”.

This comment is surprising coming from someone who compared the actions of government to those of a caged gorilla (in the June issue of The Economic Update).

Maybe you should send this comment to your friend George Debono and others who insult left, right and centre anyone who dares criticise Astrid Vella.

Incidentally, it has just been worked out how expensive it is to maintain an open-air venue like that being proposed. AND please note the government is still having to pay Riccardo Muti LM200,000 a year for doing sweet FA as Malta has NOT fulfilled its part of the agreement when the Academy was set up.

Three guesses what Malta’s obligation was and still is?

To Kenneth Zammit Tabona: maybe you do not care, but there are people who get annoyed when you claim to speak on behalf of “the people” and hence also on their behalf.

Even if there were 10 or 20 or 100 people who share your opinion you still have no right to speak on behalf of “the people” If and when you get yourself elected to parliament or to your local council then, maybe, your claim to speak on behalf of the people would not be so annoying.

Kenneth thinks the likes of me are pretty much Daphne’s Army. Daphne, in a separate riposte on this site, accused one particular anonymous poster of being a “….loser. People like you, who lack the balls to put your name to your opinion…”, which I thought was (ahem) somewhat below the belt for the other, non-insulting, non-libellous but nonetheless nameless and opinionated posters among us.

They could both be right, of course, but they’re not. It’s pretty standard behaviour on blogs and articles all over the internet, including widely followed forums such as my personal favourite, The Guardian’s ‘commentary is free’. The way I see it, a contribution to a (informal and open) debate doesn’t need a name attached to it as long as it adds to the debate and perhaps provides a new point of view. It’s not important that it’s MY point of view, unless the debate revolves around me as it does around Kenneth, in this case.

In my case, I guess it’s also because my real name isn’t much help if you’re trying to pin me down!

Chris Camilleri

I’m aware of the differences between an opera house and a concert hall, of course, but I’d imagine these limitations would apply to both, surely?

I have never criticised Renzo Piano. I adore his work and have been studying it and following him for the last 25 years. Read what I write and you will not find one word against him – only praise. He is a genius but, please note, not Merlin. What I disagree with is the brief that Piano was given.

Of course, I agree with you about Apap and Picasso and artists in general, of whom Piano is one, and you are spot on when you say I have no hidden agenda. My agenda is there for all to see: namely that culture can never be too expensive which is where I disagree with Daphne forever.

Incidentally, Daphne you were spot on about the Metropolitan – however someone has to get the ball rolling and there is a vast hoard of ‘modern’ paintings in the government collection and yet another that I know of in storage that used to belong to Mid Med, gathering dust because HSBC has no use for it.

Provided that the mechanisms are put in place that will encourage collectors to leave a prestigious piece or two to the nation as there is in the US and other civilised countries, a museum of modern art is not unrealisable.

Embor,

I or we, Mr Embor, is immaterial. I really could not care less either way. There are a whole load of people who think as I do, notably musicians who have not the privilege of being able to express themselves freely as the greater part of them are employed by the government.

Nine times out of ten I disagree with the likes of Kenneth Zammit Tabona, George Debono and Astrid Vella. This does not bother me because, more often than not, it is out of differing opinions that the best solutions are derived.

What really bothers me is when these individuals claim to be speaking on behalf of the people. I never gave them the right to speak on my behalf and as far as I know none of the other 400,000 people living on these islands gave them that right. What also bothers me is the patronising way they seek to impose their views and values on everybody else, based on the illusion that most other people share their opinion.

In the case of Astrid Vella and George Debono, I am also bothered by how they systematically distort the truth to suit their own agenda. Judging from the various comments in this blog, there are many people who get annoyed by the way these people put forward thier views.

Kenneth Zammit Tabona says “If it pleases you I will use “I”; no probs!” If any good has come out of this exchange it is that maybe, just maybe, Kenneth will not claim to speak on behalf of of “the people” when he expresses HIS opinion. Or am I being too optimistic?