Naxxar demolition of centuries-old houses: MEPA agitates defensively and childishly on Facebook
Leave aside the absolutely terrible English and hopeless grammar – though we do have to ask, as some Facebook users have done, why somebody barely literate is:
1. working in the MEPA’s communications office, and
2. running its Facebook page.
Who’s doing it – billboard woman Audrey Harrison, who has been rewarded for her efforts on behalf of the Labour Party with a comfortable desk job in the MEPA’s PR department?
No, the real issue here is that the MEPA is defending its decision to allow the demolition of those old Naxxar buildings, which are right next to the parish church, and their replacement with flats, in this childishly defensive manner.
Worse, it reveals the most absurdly crass ignorance of whoever is doing this for the MEPA: old building = bad and ugly; new building = sign of progress.
This is, to put it really brutally, the mentality of people on the lowermost developmental rung of a harsh subsistence society. Appreciation of old buildings for what they signify comes with sophistication, evolution, education and insight.
You can tell that the person writing that genuinely believes that a new building is always better than an old one, especially an old one in need of restoration, that he or she thinks an old house is like an old cooker or an old washing-machine – something to be replaced as soon as you can, with the new one being unarguably better.
But the bottom line is this: the MEPA should not be bickering with people in that manner on Facebook or anywhere else, trying to justify and defend its controversial decisions. It looks all wrong and invites anger. Worse, when it is done in shockingly bad English, it invites mockery and ridicule.
24 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
If MEPA is convinced that the decision taken is a good one, than it wouldn’t have felt the need to resort to Facebook (or any other means) to defend it.
RIP English – Classic…
Do you believe that a new cooker/washing machine/TV set/vehicle is better than an old one? I doubt it.
[Daphne – Yes, of course I do. And they most certainly are.]
http://www.independent.com.mt/articles/2013-10-24/news/pm-enters-european-council-2983657472/
They say sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
I am sorry but the only phrase that came first to my mind was “f**k him and the switchers” and the second “God help us”
The awful English has been predominant from March onwards. Oh well, a sign of the times.
There’s nothing like being barely coherent to do away with synthesis, design and innovation.
Style as usual becomes a dogma not something to explore. The resulting bipolar confrontation doesn’t allow anything in between. Pity it’s red modernism versus fuzzy nostalgia.
How can we ever explore stylemes which sate us indefinitely? Those two won’t.
Pathetic to see MEPA’s going the exact opposite way of ‘burokrazija’, from certification of aesthetics by numbers to ‘progress’ as some mystical coming of social awakening.
And not a hint of discernment leading the way.
I remeber ONE’s Jackie Mercieca hosting great architects like Charles Buhagiar moaning to the restrictions on washrooms.
Miskina il-mara tad-dar. Honest.
I used to watch entranced how Labour promoted social aspiration via this symbol of female emancipation drawing on its diametric opposite.
The problem we, but in particular they, face is the exodus from Mintoff’s housing estates and other non places lining the outskirts of everywhere.
Places where front gardens resemble a tacky garden centre.
No one wants to go there, not when closed balconies riddled with turned columns are squashed onto double width kewba doors. But that was in line with Mintoffian mythology to some fantastic identity, why even cotto became Maltese.
And when it’s up to Michael Falzon’s brigade to determine grace, harmony and truth, the rape turns incest.
No wonder the faculty of architecture is no more, reduced to an admission that ours is just a ‘built environment’.
This is beyond Labour, they’re both incapable and happily enslaved to particular agendas. All doing their bit to make a cacophany of bits and pieces currently in fashion.
Fragmentation never created anything. Definitely not with our penchant for off the shelf, instant gratification.
This is for the PN. Nothing to lose. The criteria post independent and cognitive of concrete now that the gebla’s extinct.
It’s a fine balance, achieved only if painstaking effort is adhered to. What matters is design language. And that’s basic vocabulary. Radical and impossible to concieve in its simplicity if literal meaning remains the method.
As if those idiots running the ‘authority’ in its present perverse ruins ever can. Separating both arms was their admission of a vast mental restriction. Falzon thinks the same.
Obviously they’ll feel hurt if criticised in full honesty. It’s too brutal but boy, do they need it.
This is irreversible cultural vandalism if it goes ahead.
Although she will never admit it in public, even Astrid will agree with you on this one.
Whatever happened to the “village core” policy? If those houses are not part of the village core I don’t know what is.
What is the Naxxar Local Council doing about it? What are the inhabitants of Naxxar doing?
With all the problems of the “old” MEPA I prefer it to the present set up. Their raison d’etre seems to be the gratification of the contractors and builders.
Well, with Labour such niceties as village core and old buildings are a waste of time, space and money. It reminds me of the song in “Oliver Twist” – “In this world one thing counts, in the bank large amounts”. Instead of picking pockets, they’re destroying part of our historical heritage – in this case architectural.
Shame on you.
What are the inhabitants doing?
Let me crib a line from elsewhere.
Short of assassination there is little people can do when their political masters have forgotten the true meaning of the democracy of which they are forever prating, and are determined to have their own way at all costs.
The screen shot missed this comment:
Woody Aki Your use of English is as disastrous as the policies of your employers, and English like that can only mean that you’ve been fast-tracked into this ‘job’ you have. Mmmm – I love the smell of brown tongues in the morning…
Who is the developer?
It is not just in Naxxar. In Mosta after they have condemned nearly all rural areas with buildings, Mepa has in the past years been in another phase of destroying what remains of old townhouses.
Retro retro retro .
The standard of English is abysmal.
With such an appalling level of education this guy would knock down the Palazzo Farnese (Rome or Caprarola take your pick) to build an all-glass and stainless steel supermarket without batting an eyelid.
We seem to be really go the pits. Is my eyesight deceiving me or has the Mayor of Zurrieq been tasked with the new colour arrangements for the floodlighting of Portes de Bombes. It has turned pink.
Well, perhaps the same person could run the marketing department for some of our TEFL schools. It would work wonders.
Could it still be “payback time ” for someone?
The fundamental point is not so much that it’s the opinion of the lowest rung of developmental thinking but the fact that this development breaks many laws, which makes it illegal.
We need to learn in Malta that legal compliance is a social norm in developed societies and not some target we pretend to aim to reach when convenient.
I’m surprised “better than” is spelt correctly
Where is Astrid and her placards?
The green switchers must be feeling like right nitwits by now.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20131023/opinion/Building-building-everywhere.491553#.Umm8sHBmiSo
First and foremost, it should be noted that the development is split on three applications (PA 2436/10, PA 3778/10, PA 3783 – same applicant, same neighbourhood). What is shown on that photo is PA 3783/10 – approximately 1/4th of the proposed demolition of facades.
MEPA officers did do their job properly. They did end up with the right conclusions/recommendations.
The politically appointed MEPA board members decided to overrule these recommendations and approved the proposal.
________________
Quoting from Cultural Heritage Advisory Committee notes / recommendation :
Il-Kumitat ikkunsidra it-talba u jirrileva li l-proġett ta’ żvilupp propost huwa inaċċettabli fi kwalunkwe kas u il-proposta ta’ żvilupp mhiex kompatibli mal-kuntest urban ta’ fejn jinsab is-sit. Għalhekk il-kumitat hu tal-fehma li din it-talba ma għandiex tiġi milqugħa.
_______________
Quoting from MEPA’s case officer conclusion of his report on these applications :
in view of the above comments and issues, since the proposed demolition is contrary to the Structure Plan and the design of the replacement fails to respect the urban context of the area, works proposed cannot be favourably considered. Hence a refusal is being recommended.
_______________
MEPA’s board final decision : APPROVED