An architectural blunder

Houses of character in the village core of Attard are much sought after and bought or sold for high prices. The buyers remove paint and plaster to enjoy the colour of the Maltese stone, and old features are made to glow in their original beauty and freshness.

In the very heart of the village core, there is the parish church, a unique exemplar of Renaissance architecture, one of the five churches of Vittorio Cassar, erroneously attributed to Tommaso Dingli because he took over where Vittorio left at his death. (In this matter I follow the History of Maltese Architecture written by my departed friend, Architect Leonard Mahoney, not just dilettante hearsay).

Can you imagine that, come the day of the feast, this church is covered with damask, pieces of red cloth; even if it were to be the richest brocade, to hide from your eyes a beauty one can enjoy all the year round, not on the day when it is supposed to glow in all its architectural glory! I consider it an architectural blunder.

Can you imagine visiting St John's Co-Cathedral and finding the columns which are now being cleaned and gilded afresh, covered with some red material, even the richest? Some 40 years ago Emvin Cremona decorated St Cajetan's parish church in Hamrun and removed the damask except for the arches. Comparisons apart, the parish of Attard is not St John's (as for me it has great merit) but far richer than St Cajetan.

The columns are not plain but moulded; every corner and plane is divided by lines and intersected by decorative sculpture in the stone to create one great effect made of lines and curves forming beautiful geometric designs. All of this is covered by the stupid belief of the Maltese that a touch of red means festa. I do not opt to remove the paint, I leave that to more qualified artists, but to have damask on it is a 'shame'.

To add insult to injury, when the parish has some 15 more years, unless the unknown and impossible happens, to square the loan on the pastoral centre, in this third millennium of Christianity, can a pastoral consultative body worthy of its name approve of a further Lm30,000 to Lm40,000 to be spent in this way? Is this the number one priority on the list?

If it is, I am closer to the spiritual needs of the parish and can point out tens. I am closer to the needs of the parish than any other after 15 years here. Or are they so flattered as to think that we have an avant guarde parish? This is enough to let one think how wrong it is to think that!

The parish deserves better advice, but better advice is not welcome. Those in the upper posts in the Curia could have given different and better advice in this day and age. Can I still hope for more sense and better judgment!