Karl Ebejer
A magical touch for the city
Last October, the committee of the organisation that represents architecture and civil engineering students (SACES) held a workshop entitled SACES: City, dealing exclusively with the regeneration of our capital city. Participating students were split into different groups, each one discussing a specific area in Valletta. Naturally, our discussions also included Freedom Square, City Gate and the opera house site.
Just a few weeks later, we are being given the opportunity to view and discuss the designs of one of the best architects of our time.
Renzo Piano's project will undoubtedly give the entrance to Valletta a new lease of life. But what is particularly crucial is that Mr Piano has addressed the whole area in a holistic manner. Not only has he been sensitive in adapting his designs to the surrounding buildings and squares but the architect has also sought to bring the plans in line with the whole regeneration programme for Valletta. The launch of the schematic designs has undoubtedly created another opportunity for debate. Bloggers have rushed online to give their opinions and letters are pouring into Malta's newsrooms. While debate is healthy, I feel it is crucial that as many people visit the exhibition at the Museum of Archaeology in Valletta so that the discussions may be informed, not to give rise to misconceptions.
The exhibition itself is very well set up. The plans and models help even the most inexperienced individual to understand the depth of Mr Piano's ideas for our capital city.
It is clear, for example, that the opera house site is far too small to fit a modern opera theatre. With the proposed simplistic design, the ruins shall be reinstated as a living monument. And while the intervention here seems to be quite minimal, hence elevating the importance of our past, the fusion of old and new technology befits a capital city in the heart of the Mediterranean. The new open-air theatre is therefore a sensitively judged conciliation of the years that have passed since the site was bombed over 60 years ago.
The schematic designs show that the bridge shall be narrowed down to its original size and, consequently, to its original function. A bridge must have a clear direction; what we have had to bear with over the past decades is nothing more than a tarmac piazza on stilts.
Mr Piano's intervention in City Gate is architecturally very humble because it shows deep respect for the walls built and the materials utilised by our forefathers centuries ago. What's innovative is Mr Piano's use of the same materials (stone) in a different manner by changing the scale drastically and by separating the new and old parts of the bastions to create a clear gap for onlookers entering Valletta.
Though inevitably governed by its function, the new Parliament building must also be viewed from the perspective of use of space, contextuality and, most importantly, the application of materials. While the two buildings in Freedom Square will be constructed using traditional materials, we will witness different modules to what we have been used to. The shading devices are also cut out of stone but the concept of utilising louvers is both effective and efficient in this case. Through the skilful use of the rigid geometry and clear lines that relate directly to the context of St James Cavalier and the surroundings, the Parliament building will be transformed into an integrated part of the entrance to the city. Placing a building on a square sounds wrong. However, Mr Piano is proposing a "permeable" building, in the sense that it is elevated on stilts, revealing (and, therefore, accentuating) the real Freedom Square. I am struck by the way Mr Piano allowed the urban historic context to determine the project's strategy, astutely exploiting aspects of our culture, tradition and past to bring them to life.
We, the public, will now be given spaces back that are ours by right. Mr Piano's contribution shall help erase the cosmetic excuses we built years ago, replacing them with humble interventions with the overarching principle of respect throughout their holistic design, bringing the city's real beauty to the surface.
Mr Piano describes Valletta as a magical city. I believe it is just about to receive a deserved magical touch.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
16 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Antoine Vella
Jul 16th 2009, 20:25
Victor Laiviera
If the Royal Opera House should be rebuilt because "the people" want it, then "the people" would also have a say in its running, deciding which performance is the be produced from time to time. After all, it would have been built - and most probably run - with "their" money so it would belong to "them". Do you agree?
Adrian Borg Cardona
Jul 16th 2009, 15:47
@Antoine Vella: Sorry but you are wrong on two counts: yes we have been told to shut up by your colleagues who defend anything this Govt does - I'm glad to hear that we are now allowed to give good reasons! Secondly, my only criticiism (not rubbished - I leave that to the PN scribblers who attack critics on a personal level) is that the proposed theatre does not have a roof. Do I need to to list the many reasons why a theatre should have a roof?? And do not tell me that you and the other PN apologistas do not have an agenda to defend this project at all costs. It has become so obvious that this project is only being proposed for the greater glory of the PM.
Corinne Vella
Jul 16th 2009, 08:01
Victor Laiviera: Here's another way of looking at your 67% argument: were you in urgent need of medical attention, would you rely on the opinion of a medical expert or on a straw poll taken among the mob that usually gathers around an accident site?
Corinne Vella
Jul 16th 2009, 07:59
Victor Laiviera: It isn't wise to keep trumpeting that survey as evidence that "all the people ...disapprove of those designs to the tune of 67%". The survey was published in January this year, several months before Renzo Piano's schematic design was made public. In other words, it is disingenuous or deliberately deceptive to repeatedly claim that 67% of 'the people' prefer Barry's design to Renzo Piano's, and to assume (as you yourself have said) that those same people had been to the exhibition at Auberge de Provence.
Incidentally, the report of that survey you quote said that 49% of respondents want the opera house to be rebuilt and that 67% want it rebuilt to Barry's design. The figures appear to be in conflict, but if we take them at face value, then fewer than one third (67% of 49% is 32.83%) want Barry's design - the opposite, in fact, of what you are claiming.
In any case, you're making a mistake when you assume that popular vote results in good design. If that were the case, our towns and villages would be picture perfect.
Antoine Vella
Jul 15th 2009, 20:06
Victor Laiviera
I have no idea what you're talking about and my growing suspicion is that neither do you.
Antoine Vella
Jul 15th 2009, 20:04
Adrian Borg Cardona,
Nobody is telling you to shut up but everybody is telling you to give reasons - good reasons - for rubbishing Piano's proposals. You and the few who have criticised the proposals have never brought forward any objective reason but simply say that you 'want' something different as if this is enough to make Piano change his mind. This is not the way to convince the people.
In his article, Mr Ebejer explains in detail why the students of architecture like the designs. Can you or someone else explain in the same detail why you don't like them? This is the debate that Piano had in mind, not the endless nagging that we're having.
Vince DeBono
Jul 15th 2009, 19:35
Work in Valletta will now mean - TO ME -
being funnelled through a narrow walkway. PLEASE work out the width someone and calculate the flow possible - entering and leaving.
The GATE will be no more. It will need time to adjust psychologically to entering the main axis of Valletta with no gateway.
Opera House - I have said countless times they should be left as they are BUT with some bronze art to reinforce the message - 'WAR is DESTRUCTIVE'.
Removing parliament from the Palace is a shock to symbolism. If we have to do it, then I would have selected St Elmo with lots of space. Piano's futuristic design can be inserted in the Piazza d'Armi. Great result though with the opening of the Palace to visitors.
DISCLAIMER: Not an architect - not a politically motivated individual (either PN or MLP or ) -not bothered by the tendering process short-cirquited - just a tour guide who takes people into Valletta - including Italians who have Renzo Piano's designs in their cities. They all incidentally say he is a great (Italian) architect yet they personally don't like his designs (sic)
Galea. L
Jul 15th 2009, 18:49
Steve Cassar
Further to Mr Laiviera's answer, how about holding a nation-wide referendum on the subject? Then you will get your clearest answer Cassar.
Victor Laiviera
Jul 15th 2009, 18:20
@ Mr Antoine VellA
The survey was published in a reputable local paper. Why do you assume it was "non-scientific"?
Adrian Borg Cardona
Jul 15th 2009, 17:14
I find it ridiculous that each time someone dares to criticise Paino's plans, he is jumped upon and told to shut up by certain nationalist party apologists. Mr. Piano himself, at his presentation, stated "let the debate begin" - and I don't think that was aimed at the 'experts'. On the other hand, these apologists demand total acceptance of the plans. I wonder why? Only the irremediably stubborn and those with a partisan agenda, however, will be happy with the plans as they are.
Antoine Vella
Jul 15th 2009, 16:45
Victor Laiviera,
Instead of quoting an non-scientific survey, why don't you tell us, point by point why you disagree with the excellent article of Mr Ebejer? The article does not simply say that the author likes Piano's proposals but gives reasons for it. Why not give us the technical reasons why you are against it? if you have any, that is.
Victor Laiviera
Jul 15th 2009, 16:32
@ Mr Steve Cassar
Yes, a well conducted, professional survey, with a sufficient sample size, is generaly taken as a very good indication of the opinion of the group surveyed. And a sample of 1000 on a population of 400,000 is quite large
Didn't you know?
Anthony Magri
Jul 15th 2009, 16:11
Architect Piano plans for Valletta might be the idea of one of the 100 architects he has as an understudy. Piano just approved and made it his. Not all of his understudies know Malta and particularly Valletta. The Governmnt could have lunched an international competition and just nominate Piano as the chairman of the adjudicating body.
Of course its crying over spilt milk. It is however never too late to mend things before they start if it is felt so.
It appears that Piano was not given the task to make plans for a theatre but for a house of Parliament. He decided to make plans for both including the entrance to Valletta. So why not stick
to the construction of Parliament that was given special attention by the architect, and leave the construction of the theatre as another single issue.
Steve Cassar
Jul 15th 2009, 15:24
Victor Laiviera you've been mentioning this survey for so long now! Does a survey of 1000 people represent 400,000 for you?
If you dont agree with this project - bad luck! I personally dont agree with certain decisions of this government but in this particular project, the government must stick to the proposal or else the project will never materialise! It already took too much.
There will never be anything in this world that every one will agree onto it! This project is an example!
You sound like you're back in 1988 when there was the competition for this project!
Victor Laiviera
Jul 15th 2009, 14:07
It is becoming clear thyat Mr Piano is an "architects' architect" and his proposals have found favour mainly (one could almost say solely) within the architectural profession.
Whether there is an element of "the emperor's new clothes (and to what extent) is hard to say. The fact that Mr Ebejer repeated Mr Piano's "magical" tags may be significant.
We would do well to remind ourselves that this project is not intended for the architectural profession; it is meant for (and financed by) all the people. And those same people, according to a survey published recently, disapprove of the designs to the tune of 67%.
Antoine Vella
Jul 15th 2009, 12:55
Karl Ebejer's piece is interesting and well-informed, obviously written by someone who is competent and has actually put some thought into what he's writing. It will serve to open the eyes of the few who have mistakenly criticised the Piano proposals. The irremediably stubborn and those with a partisan agenda, however, will not be happy with it.