|
If there had to be awards for the worst diversionary PR ploys of all time, the government’s Opera House proposal would scoop up all the honours. Even after reading the ‘What to do When You’re in A Fix’ Chapter of ‘PR For Dummies,’ the PM or the Minister for Culture, or both, have come up with a distractive device that has gone down as well as a lead balloon with practically everyone except those hard-core Nationalists who have the maduma tattooed on their forearms, and even they’re having some doubts.
It has all requisite elements to rile up popular sentiment against the government. Whoever came up with the idea seems to have been following a recipe for a PR disaster which goes something like this: “Take a very visible area bang in the centre of our elegantly fortified capital city. Propose that it be rebuilt – not in a manner which will benefit the general public. No, that would be too sensible. Suggest a new parliamentary building to house some sixty-five odd MPs who have finally agreed on their pairing arrangements, so they can all decide when to play truant together. Choose to forge ahead with this brave and noble venture at a time when the country is extremely cash-strapped and the PM keeps harping on about the need for austerity measures. Do not let the small matter of the fall-out from the Dar Malta splurge deter another extravaganza. In this crazy scenario two wrongs might just make a right. As a final flourish choose the one architect who has been chosen to design practically every single public monument since the Sixties, to draw up plans and oversee the project. Do not enter into negotiations to cap his professional fees, as is usually the case with projects of this magnitude.”
You can see why everybody is up in arms against the project. The financial considerations and the way the site of the royal opera house has been destined to house what many consider to be a gallery of rogues instead of the cultural centre which had once been mooted, are first-class irritants. But what really gets up people’s nose is the fact that the architect chosen to design and execute the project is Richard England. Now Professor England may be a brilliant architect. He may win many architectural awards. He is also a poet and an author. But the bottom line is that the Maltese do not like his works. The unroofed corridors and slitty windows of the University he designed proved to be impractical follies, the purple/pink/turquoise colour combo favoured by him and which seemed so refreshing in the Sixties, now seems tedious and boring. The kitsch LOVE statue at St. Julian’s, bugged everyone to death. Professor England counters criticism of his works by saying that we should stop living in the past and welcome contemporary and futuristic design. During discussion shows, he inevitably drags up the Eiffel Tower and the Louvre Pyramid as examples of cutting-edge architecture which were not appreciated in their time and are now rallying admiring gasps.
What he and the PM and Jesmond Mugliett fail to understand is that we do not want a signature architectural folly which would only be cutting edge if we were tripping on LSD in the Sixties. We don’t need any further talking points courtesy of Professor England. Those funny politicians will maintain us with a steady supply of telenovella material, thank you. What we want is a site developed in a way to which most of us (not just Gonzi, Mugliett and England) can attribute value – aesthetic and social value. We’d also appreciate some value for money, which, puzzlingly enough is being left out of the PM’s wish list for the site.
If the architect designated for the project and the government propelling the idea forward, cannot tick off those requisites, they should just let the dust subside and retreat to Spin Central to twist the ears off the clever clogs who came up with this diversionary tactic. The rule to go by when trying to distract people’s attentions away from a certain issue with negative vibes, is to create another issue which is not similarly tainted. So if you want people to stop thinking about an insensitive government on the loose with taxpayers’ money, public extravagance, and a man named Richard, it would make sense not to insist on another money-drainer designed by another Richard whose masterpieces we’re all rather wary off. In Victorian times, married women who faked headaches in a bid to shirk their conjugal duties were told to “Close their eyes and think of England.” The PM’s Royal Opera House spin gives a whole new meaning to the phrase.
|
