Saturday, 4th July 2009
Debate continues on Piano's City Gate plans (1)
It seems so simple, yet for our politicians it is so complicated! For 60 years they have been taking us for a ride and now they come up with this mega-expensive venture! What more can complement our capital city's entrance and its bastions than its original structures? Why not build a replica of the old theatre and City Gate? Which other building can be more original and in harmony with the surroundings? Why employ a world known architect to come up with the idea of just pulling City Gate down, leaving the theatre as it is and surrounding it with perspex walls, destroying one of the few piazzas in the city and replacing the parking area in the ditch with a garden?!
Castles and old cities around the world have been doing this for such a long time! But on this special tiny island we turned our capital's ditch into a parking lot and Mdina is surrounded by an eye-sore of a dusty football ground and tennis court. And yet it was beyond the imagination of our politicians to figure out that gardens could be more appropriate for such sites. Did we need a foreign master architect to tell us that?
And why do we have to demolish Freedom Square for the new parliament building when there are so many buildings in Valletta in a pitiable state? St Elmo is only one building that comes to mind. Wouldn't it be more impressive for a capital city to welcome visitors with a majestic pedestrian square which Freedom Square should be turned into? It certainly would be far less impressive for visitors to encounter the building where our great politicians congregate to tackle such difficult tasks as elevating the standard of our capital's entrance.
As for the theatre and the City Gate; so much money could be spared if the government follows the example of the Mediterranean Conference Centre which was turned into what we know today from the ruins of the Knights Hall by government architects and workers in months? Why not use the same Labour force to make replicas of those old monuments which made our capital's entrance so unique?
RSS
Comments
All that Piano did - I can accept, but for two ideas.
I expected the Opera House or Theatre to be sheltered, not open. As I expect that performances should be held all year round, and not limited to good weather.
And I certainly do not like the idea of a lift (elevator) on the outside of the walls, it is such a sore to the eyes. It could have been embedded in the walls behind huge glass.
In general - the reason to commission Piano for this project (not investment as some say it is) can cost us a wager for the next 100 years. Can we really afford the expense?.
Most of our schools are built like that, with the same philosophy, and so the reduction of interest and attitude of all who live in them.
Incidentally would you not considder the worker's statue at Msida GWO monument to be the start of the art present in Russia in the manner the worker and his wife were depicted? Reduction of interest and attitude in schools, university, morality in residential areas, the level of art in theatres etc, all are related to the lines projected by the building that encloses us. Just study the type of buildings that attract a lot of immorality and criminology and one has some idea of the responsibility of an architect. Such points in Malta are never considered hence our standards in all that we do.
It would have been acceptable to rebuiild the theatre just after the war as was done in other countries. I think that immediately putting up a replica of a destroyed building helps to cope with the loss and overcome the trauma of whatever catastrophe (war, earthquake, fire, etc) caused the destruction. It is like putting the clock back and creating the sensation that the disaster never happened and that life can continue - or restart - as normal. This was the case when the Royal Opera House was destroyed by fire, for example, but now, sixty five years after it was destroyed by war, it’s a bit late to justify its replication on such grounds.
So what would the Opera House ruins become once they are bedecked with those poles and panels? Faker than fake. And next to useless.
1) If the Old Opera House "did not conform to the city's architecture" , the Piaono designs conform even less. So that argument goes out of the window.
2) Those who are "in favour of replicating the old Opera House" WILL be paying for it - through their taxes. You, since you do not live in Malta and do not pay taxes here, will not.
Dresden which was destroyed by wartime bombing, was restored to its original glory, and most major historical buildinsw were built exactly as they were before they were destroyed.
So are they all "fakes"? Who planned and built them since "no architect worth his sale is going to design a copy"?
In any case, you are totally wrong when you say the it is up to a "professional architect" (is there any other kind?) to tell us what to build. That decision rests with the principal who will be paying for the work (the taxpayers) . The architect's job is to tell us the best way to do it.
Why not rebuilt City Gate and the Old Opera house?
Last two city gates were erected through imposition or haste - nothing historical about them.
Old Opera House did not conform to the city's architecture and although pleasing to the eye (most of us through old photographs) the obvious mismatch should not be repeated. If indeed the design was so pleasing, why not build something similar outside Valletta?
If there are so many in favour of replicating the old Opera House, they should be willing to, at least, pay for some of it.
So whoever speaks of the original should define of which era and in doing so, he looses the power of his argument of 'the original' when refferring to a theatre- because that was a replacement of an original itself - wantonly and not through an enemy action or otherwise.
Ohterwise he would be disguising nostalgic, personal tastes with the power of logic or argument.
Who wants a replica anyway. That would be like buying a Regency-style bureaux .... from IKEA!
Piano's vision will put Valetta on the international map and, like it or not, these will be the monuments of tomorrow.
Richard England and Conrad Thake - both Maltese, both internationally recognized - have praised the designs as being "ingenious"
As for the MCC.... it is a conference hall being used as a theatre. there are no flies, acoustics are terrible, and the backstage facilities are minimal at best.
You cannot have the original gate or the theatre because they do not exist any more. What you can have is a fake, a copy. Ray Sacoo, how can I spell it out? NO ARCHITECT WORTH HIS SALT IS GOING TO DESIGN A COPY. It is not the politicians: it is the architects - Maltese and foreign - historians and other professionals who are unanimous in this. You have a right to your opinion but you should be reasonable enough to realise that the opinion of a professional architect carries more weight than yours when it comes to decision-taking.