Great. The Philistines are back with their policies of utilitarianism, backed by the creators of bad art.
The Malta Independent reports:
Government whip Carmelo Abela believes that if that the new parliament building designed by world renowned architect Renzo Piano is not adequate to cater for the future needs of this institution, government might as well consider leaving parliament at the presidential palace and find an alternative use for the new parliament building.
Mr Abela floated this idea for the first time on Wednesday evening during the budget debate. Contacted this morning by The Malta Independent online to elaborate on his point, the government whip referred to recent media reports in which it was stated that contrary to what had been promised when the project was unveiled by the previous administration, MPs will not have an office of their own and that there is not even enough space for the offices of permanent committee chairmen.
Mr Abela suggested that a parliamentary delegation including Minister Joe Mizzi who is now in charge of this capital project, which in total will cost €80 million, visit the new building to assess the situation.
Read the rest of the story in the link posted below.
———-
Imagine talking about ‘finding an alternative use for’ a parliament house designed by Renzo Piano, as though it’s some block of flats.
To those who, like Kenneth Zammit Tabona, are agitating to have a Museum of Modern Art there instead, I say that just as the frame should never be worth more than the painting, so one does not commission Renzo Piano to design a piece of world-class architecture to house a collection of mediocre Maltese modern art.
Museum buildings designed by architects of that calibre are intended to house paintings of the same calibre, which they do. Only a Philistine, and a pretentious one at that, would demand a museum designed by Renzo Piano in which to display paintings that are good, all their limitations considered, but ultimately forgettable and certainly not ground-breaking, history-making or trend-setting.
You don’t walk into a museum that’s a piece of destination architecture to see a painting by – well, I won’t mention names because people are so bloody touchy. You walk into it to see a Picasso. Or a Chagall.
If we can’t afford to buy the paintings to put in it, then we can’t afford the museum building. Spending millions and commissioning a grand architect to house a collection worth hundreds of thousands at most (if that) is a typical case of ‘iz-zalza ghola mill-huta’.
Setting up a Museum of Modern Art that is full of nothing but paintings by Maltese people, because we can’t afford to buy in any others and nobody is likely to donate a Goya is a pointless and self-defeating exercise that displays a mentality rooted in misplaced nationalistic pride.
Maltese people do not need more exposure to yet more Malteseness and ‘wow, kemm ahna tajbin il-Maltin’. We need more exposure to external influences and to different ways of being.
Should the parliament house stay the parliament house? Of course it should. It is the symbolic expression of our democracy. You can’t put too high a price on that, or find too grand an architect to create it.
Those who believe that the country’s mediocre paintings deserve to be more beautifully and prominently housed than the country’s parliament deserve a one-way ticket to China, which will understand both sentiments.
47 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2013-04-11/news/carmelo-abela-questions-the-suitability-of-the-new-parliament-building-1372356608/
You mean this isn’t ground-breaking, bleeding edge contemporary art? Tsk tsk, such lack of culture.
http://www.kztabona.com/old/Benedictus.JPG
Ah, a Zammit Tabona. Should fetch more than 80 million at Sotheby’s.
Used to do much better myself at primary school.
Mein Gott, that’s Benoit top left.
Does he get paid for that?
The projection of four-dimensional metaphysical space onto a two-dimensional white surface embedded in the three-dimensionality of the frame is just overwhelming.
Baxxter, if only this could be but a teaser into another novella. Please, do regale us on the subject.
NB
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424127887324020504578396742330033344.html?mod=e2tw
I’ve sketched out the plot of Fifty Shades of Red, which was cut off by the damned election. I was thinking of publishing it in serialised form, not out of any artsy fartsy pretensions, but as a marketing ploy. Keep the audience hooked, and keep the money flowing in.
Well, in the 80s they built a ‘supermarket’ and now it’s housing Evarist’s education ministry.
Kenneth is the ultimate symbol of what is wrong with this country – big headedness in Lilliput, with no clue of what goes on in the rest of the world, pampered and extremely arrogant, supercilious and snobbish, who thinks that people should adulate and listen to him just because he says so, and who enjoys patronising Labour because Labour are ‘socially inferior’ and look up to him whereas ‘the other lot’ do not because they see him for what he is.
Tipiku Gvern ta’ medjokrita u ta’ “m’hux xorta”. And what happens to the greater picture of returning the existing Parliament as the Armoury to be appreciated by the public? Treating this grand project with Socialist disdain is an unfortunate forbearing of five years of regress.
Well, symbolic expression of our democracy. With democracy threatened under Joseph, do we really need Parliament to be housed there?
Perhaps it’s a good idea not to have it there after all. We should wait till we get rid of this lot again, hopefully soon enough. Labour never approved of the whole project anyway, so why should they get to use it first?
[Daphne – ‘Why should they get to use if first?’ I think you need to learn the difference between parliament and government. Both sides of the house get to use it first altogether. Opening it…well, that’s a different matter.]
Well what I meant by them “using” it is the fact that the Government ministers etc are the ones using it more, rather than the Opposition, I’m sure you agree. If we are to be correct, Parliament is “open” already, so I think what we mean is the inauguration of the new Parliament building, of course.
Hasn’t it dawned on them that once the new building is set to host house representatives, they may in turn host paintings in their respective rooms and halls?
Well said, I’m perfectly positive there’s no problem with commissioning works to enrich the chamber.
Chagall’s largest work happens to be the Opera’s domed ceiling, the Transatlantico is so named due the works commissioned in the early twenties and Hogarth, Britain’s zaniest political cartoonist, produced his largest canvasses for St.Bartholomew’s.
A superlative juxtaposition of styles, I suppose it takes bold conviction to be so adventurous.
If there was something Piano recognised in the Maltese, and which we tend to consider as somewhat negative, it’s our instinctive need for ludo in all we do.
We’re good at it, enthused, why not apply it to further use? If it serves our Summer season and its attractions, perhaps we could take it up a notch.
Oh, god, please, NO. DON’T unleash ANYONE on the walls and ceilings. Hung paintings can be moved around. Anything plastered to the walls and ceilings stays there.
It doesn’t have to be plastered. Doesn’t even have to be on canvas.
There’s some talent out there, the fact they don’t subscribe to galleries, sponsors and conventional media leaves them free.
Even because they will interact digitally with Piano’s algorithms. Wired, hungry and determined to experiment.
It is only a matter of time before they bung the Sette Gunjo monument between the theatre and the Piano parliament building, with perhaps a set of shepherd and shepherdess statues and couple of stone lions thrown in for dramatic effect.
Let us stay steeped in Maltese mediocrity. Kenneth Zammit Tabona can always patronize us about Bronzino through the pages of The Times of Malta.
As soon as I think that at least one member of the PL is decent, out he comes with a stupidity not worth thinking of.
Renzo Piano’s design for our parliament building is so beautiful and our Mr Abela comes and tells us parliament should stay where it is and have something else there instead.
Why? Because there are not enough rooms for personal offices. They have offices all over Valletta, so why should they be accommodated in parliament as well, and what need was there to have such a very large cabinet anyway if not only to satisfy their egos.
Shame on you Mr Abela, I honestly thought you, at least, were somehow better. I was wrong.
Carmelo Abela votes Labour. That tells you what you need to know about his judgement.
If indeed there is a temporary dearth of space in the Piano building due to excessively large cabinet, the obvious solution is to utilise Palazzo Ferreria across the street, though ideally the size of the cabinet should be reduced.
First they complain about its cost, then they want to further burden taxpayers by not even using the Parliament building for its intended purpose. Hypocrites.
I agree that parliament deserves to be housed in a building that reflects the importance attached to democracy. However, the current parliament building in my opinion is a good piece of old architecture that affords parliament the dignity it deserves. The water fountains in the square opposite parliament are attractive too and it was about time the parking area and horse shelters were moved.
I am not particularly convinced of the location of the new parliament building. The concrete arcades and flats surrounding the area are the real eyesore. I would have preferred for those to be demolished and the space to remain vacant and open. I look forward to seeing the completion of the gate to the city.
With the new parliament building, I get the feeling that too much architecture is being crammed in a small space making me feel claustrophobic.
There is also the cost of the building itself. Agreed no expense should be spared for such an important building but I question the timing. I have my doubts whether the country’s finances were good enough to absorb this expense and to the man in the street hearing constant news of recession beyond Malta, it comes across as unwise and insensitive to spend so much at a time of austerity budgets.
I do suspect however, that much of the outcry against this project is actually because despite the Maltese worship of politicians, there still lurks the Maltese tendency of viewing others with suspicion and the common perception that our parliamentarians are crooks who are not there to serve but to further their personal interests.
Where I disagree with your comparisons of democracy as practised in the civilized world and here in Malta, is that you somehow ignore that public service, volunteering and selflessness are not part of the Maltese psyche. In Malta, selfishness reigns supreme, our men do not serve in the military to protect their country. So much of what makes Britain an intellectually superior land especially compared to this backwater of civilization is alien to the average Maltese illiterate, lumberjack shirt-wearing man, clinging to a caged bird – just to mention one stereotype.
There is simply no comparison between the two countries. The more British than the British in Malta are far outnumbered by the illiterate masses. An aside – spending time on social networking sites reveals the true depth of Malta’s illiteracy curse. Most foreigners, whatever their occupation can actualy spell and string a sentence together. The average Maltese opens a conversation with a “Haw are you, hi?”. Enough said.
Malta’s more British than the British are part of the problem. No, make that THE problem.
How are Malta’s more British than the British the problem when they are a minority group?
I find that the problem as you call it is the Sicilian rather than the British influence on Malta. The bad manners, the narrow-mindedness, the paranoia, the pomposity, the religious/cult-like devotion.
[Daphne – Sicilians do not have bad manners, but rather the opposite: they are gracious and formal. Some Sicilians give all Sicilians a bad name in this respect.]
They’re the problem because they combine unshakeable self-belief with shallow understanding and lack insight into the deficiencies of their world-view. Some are considerably influential among those who shudder at the thought of being classed as Labour hamalli but who don’t mind at all associating themselves with people who speak and write properly in English.
The symbolic expression of parliamentary democracy in a country which has been dominated by foreign powers since time immemorial, which gained independence a mere half a century ago and today a vibrant member of EU, unfortunately escapes the imagination of too many people.
Our Malteseness, as you tellingly describe it in your blogpost, keeps us locked in our insular, Baroque mindset. It has viciously paralysed our collective superego.
We can’t smell talent if it were under our nose. The world-renowned Renzo Piano architecture, like that of our own Richard England, is shunned in favour of pomposity mistakenly understood as dignity even by ‘intellectually superior’ citizens. We tend to see the fly in the ointment thereby missing the proverbial wood for the trees.
No wonder the cultural illiterates who are running the present administration can only think of the new parliament building in terms of lack of office space for each member and the entourages surrounding the various (surplus) ministers and parliamentary secretaries.
When I see such attitude, in all its guises and variations, I can’t help thinking of “biskuttini f’halq il-hmir” (literally sweet pastries in donkeys’ mouths).
Quite a rant. Got the flu?
Such a bloody pity. It makes me want to cry. If only the PN government had taken a leaf out of Labour’s declared policy, and ran roughshod over everything and everyone. The project over ran its term by a mere six months. An immensely costly six months it is turning out to be.
I have a better suggestion than Carmelo Abela’s: trim the fat from government’s cabinet. And no, this is not a personal attack on anyone in particular.
So these idiots will revise and resubmit, simply to sate Kenneth’s need to vendetta following his ridiculous performance on Bondi+ years ago.
Remember when he tried to argue his way around the architects philology?
Valletta 2018 and Malta’s presidency lie at the mercy of this dork. Muscat had better stick to his survival instinct and rely on the ones who deliver instead.
The two events warrant common sense, people who know what it takes and full integration of the two. That requires Piano’s presence, and the project finished in time, no strings attached.
I’m sure Muscat prefers his personal glory to Kenneth’s endless naive meanderings.
Your basic argument – that comparing Maltese artists to Maltese artists tends towards deifying anyone with a smidgen of talent; that the public needs to be exposed to influences beyond the Maltese if Maltese art is to develop – is actually incredibly valid.
It’s just a pity it gets swept up so soon in the tedious rhetoric that’foreign’ art is ipso facto better than Maltese art. Due recognition, opportunities to perform and exhibit, are vital for an artistic community to grow.
It’s a pity that people like you (who really should know better) choose to take the opposite line in the interest of some sort of bizarre cultural elitism.
[Daphne – It’s got nothing to do with cultural elitism. It’s got to do with facts. It is not because of lack of opportunities to exhibit, or the lack of due recognition, that they fail to grow and develop, but because of an innate lack of talent, training and ability, and above all, a consummate lack of imagination and originality. And what ultimately damns them is their refusal to see this, the result of lack of insight (which comes from lack of imagination) coupled with inappropriate response from the public in the form of approval through purchasing, which only encourages them to do more of the same until the point where sales dry up through buyers’ boredom. The ‘foreign’ versus ‘Maltese’ argument is a false one. All of this is merely a question of numbers and probability. What are the odds that a population of 400,000 or thereabouts will regularly turn up brilliance, if at all? Not very great. We just have to accept that we are the size of a small town and not expect that we will have excellence by dint of being a nation-state. In the world of music, for there is no similar example in painting, Joseph Calleja is the exception that proves this.]
Joseph Calleja is only a household name because he has a household repertoire. If he were the most brilliant baroque countertenor in Europe, no one would’ve noticed.
There’s something about the subservient dipping movement of the head that many, many Maltese make when meeting somebody and shaking hands, or upon leaving a meeting, a group or an acquaintance, that strikes me (negatively) – every single time.
Does it need to be done? I think it comes from a simultaneous linking of the moment to the internal expression that might be happening, even if not verbally expressed, due to choice of language coding: obbligat… inservik…
Check. It’s quite a national habit, despite the more British than the British.
Is it necessary? So many consequential small actions happen off this, and so many big ones.
TL,
there’s a contradiction in your argument, cultural elitism is brought about by the same circles which should do the exact opposite.
Recognition, as you term it, will only become opportunity as soon as the idea that there’s some ‘high art’ in need of subsidy is gotten rid of.
Art, like anything else, is subject to the public’s perception, if an artist refuses to engage, it’s their choice. In that case, it’s not even something to consider.
But please let us not settle for the crap that somehow a public needs to be educated to appreciate. Talent and the determination to nurture it, will come through.
As for art as some sort of national expression, will you outline the qualities?
Even the Palace, the present site of Parliament is grossly inadequate for the so many Ministers and their entourage.
By the way, what happened to that elderly man with the art collection? Is he still willing to donate his 2000+ collection of paintings to Malta?
The parliamentary secretary for culture is still considering the minutiae of local councils and is rather busy meeting his constituents. So, patience, please.
And rather a lot of that collection you mention wasn’t quite what it was meant to be.
That collection happened to be full of reproductions.
Il-Parlament Taghna Lkoll.
Another timely post with spot-on reflections on our Malteseness. I particularly like this remark which I would like to see displayed in every school, workplace and selected public places:
“(We) Maltese … do not need more exposure to yet more Malteseness and ‘wow, kemm ahna tajbin il-Maltin’.
WE NEED MORE EXPOSURE TO EXTERNAL INFLUENCES AND TO DIFFERENT WAYS OF BEING.”
What’s become of that Polish chap donating his prized collection to Malta? Some big names there although some paintings were labelled as fakes. He probably had a change of heart after the election outcome.
In a nutshell, it came with too many strings attached, and wasn’t worth the trouble.
Perhaps not. If I recall correctly, he was quite advanced in age. Most likely just needs a nudge.
I too can’t understand why some people like Kenneth Zammit Tabona want to set up a Museum of Modern Art in Malta. Modernism barely even touched Malta and as such we have an almost insignificant amount of cultural heritage which can be described as ‘modern’.
I question whether we have enough modern art by Maltese artists, good enough to be exhibited in museums, to fill a room let alone a museum.
If on the other hand they want to set a Modern Art Museum to house international modern art then they might have a case. But I doubt whether Malta owns modern art by international relatively-acclaimed modernist artists let alone by acclaimed modernist artists.
People who advocate the setting up of a Modern art Museum in Malta makes me question whether they really know what ‘modern’ means. And they make me wonder whether they’re confusing it with ‘contemporary’. In art & architecture, there is a clear distinction between ‘modern’ and ‘contemporary’.