We haven’t yet seen the plans, but already the lines are being drawn for what promises to be a hard-fought battle over the future of the Royal Opera House in Valletta.
Renzo Piano this week revealed his intention to “transform” the site into what, in essence, it already is – an open-air venue for theatrical performances – while building the controversial House of Parliament next door in Freedom Square.
He talks eloquently of creating a “magical space” on a “magical island”... but no amount of pleasant sound-bites will disguise the fact that the Italian master architect has essentially offered us a compromise to assuage public opprobrium at the original suggestion of a House of Parliament instead of a theatre.
In a sense, the situation is entirely analogous to Gonzi's controversial suggestion to turn the Xaghra l-Hamra near Manikata into a golf course in 2004. If the word “opera” strikes an immediate cultural chord in many Maltese, then “golf” provokes instantaneous fury among environmentalists who argue – not without good reason – that Malta lacks the two basic resources to accommodate this sport: land, and water.
But in a pattern of behaviour we have since seen repeated several times over, Gonzi eventually retracted his proposal: only... after an expensive (and futile) EIA, as well as a series of stinging protests by an incensed and increasingly vocal green lobby.
Then as now, nothing was “writ in stone”. But it would be unwise to forget that while Malta raged over that particularly issue, farmers who had tilled the land at Manikata for generations suddenly found that the government was refusing to renew their tithes.
So even if the Manikata golf course was in the end shelved, and the area earmarked for a park instead, the so-called “Golf War” nonetheless illustrated the extent to which things get moving in this country, when the Prime Minister makes his wishes known.
Back to the Opera House/Parliament controversy, and the arguments in favour and against are now well enough known not to be repeated here. Suffice to say that, taken out of context, Gonzi’s idea to site Parliament at the entrance to a capital city is not exactly as outrageous as some have made it appear. Parliaments across Europe are traditionally sited on prime locations in their respective capitals; and to argue that Malta should be different because its parliament is somehow less well respected is at best absurd.
But then again, context cannot lightly be cast aside. Dr Gonzi’s suggestion must also be seen in the light of a 70-year-old controversy that has always been exclusively about rebuilding a once-cherished Opera House. By so breezily recommending an entirely different use for the same site – no matter how sensible a suggestion – the Prime Minister was inevitably going to irk and irritate an entire segment of the population, which identifies that particular spot with an aura of lost magnificence, as well as a now largely forgotten tradition for erudition and high culture.
Added to the undeniable fact that the present government has sadly neglected culture in general in its 22 years in power, and Gonzi’s proposal also came across as greedy, short-sighted and utterly insensitive to the wishes and aspirations of the people: unsurprisingly, the same accusations also levelled at this government on other, more serious issues such as the utility bills.
In fact it would be unwise not to take on board the full significance of the Piano compromise. Whether we like it or not, individual places and landmarks tend to have resonate emotionally with people. We saw this in the massive popular resentment at the granting of a permit to redevelop Ulysses Lodge: an already disturbed site overlooking the priceless view of Ramla l-Hamra.
Were the objections to this development irrational? Possibly. But then again, who would want to live in a country governed only by utilitarian rationality, at the expense of popular sentiment and emotion?
By so rashly blinding himself to the romantic allure that “rebuilding the Opera House” still conveys to so many people’s minds – and above all by failing to anticipate that his own Parliament proposal would be so poorly received – the Prime Minister has once again illustrated the extent to which his government is out of synch with the popular mood: more concerned with leaving something tangible for his own legacy to be remembered by... and even then, something for the exclusive use of himself and his parliamentary colleagues.
From this perspective, it is significant that it had to be the artist, Renzo Piano, to suggest a practical political compromise, while the Prime Minister appeared to be lost in quasi-artistic fantasies.
Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below. Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.
Download front page in pdf file format
All the interviews from Reporter on MaltaToday's YouTube channel.
