Serracino-Inglott insists theatre without a roof is useless

Raymond Sammut

Mar 6th 2010, 11:54

@ j ellul

I would prefer the open-air theatre not to have any roofing at all. The idea of a fully retractable roof is motivated by the need to make the venue more accessible and adaptable to a range of activities. Like you said, once the roof is rolled out, the quality of the acoustics is going to be severely compromised. So obviously, a full-blown performance, with tenors and classical musicians, will best be left for summer nights. In other parts of the year, other performances and activities, which would not require acoustical precision, can be offered. In Christmas time, for example, the theatre can be used by schools for carol singing (just a possibility).

What gets me upset is the certain attitudes expressed here on this comments board. Mr Manduca, for example, insisted that he is an opera lover and a regular patron. He has assured everyone here that he would not have a bar of the open-air concept on the opera house site. But what if I were to say to him on Christmas eve: Mr Manduca, there are some children singing carols at the new theatre, and they want you to go and join them.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 6th 2010, 11:09

@ Joe Vella

Costing is not something that can be dealt with here in a meaningful way. The arguments put forward on this comments board, for and against the outdoor theatre concept, are more about what people in general think of the concept in terms of what can be done (that is, technological possibilities for sound re-production without adulterating tenor voices and musical instruments, uniformity across all members of the audience, and insulating the theatre from extraneous noise).

The links I pointed at --there are many other such links-- give a fair idea on how possible and practical these methods are. More importantly, these methods will also keep improving as things and people keep moving on. It should be clear that an open-air theatre offers much more potential to leverage future technological advances.

Costs have to be matched with benefits. If benefits exceed costs, then the open-air concept can be accepted, else it has to be rejected. Piano & Associates have obviously accepted it.
Besides, the theatre on the Opera House site would be there to stay, so you will have to buy the system only once --which should make it economical in the long-run.

Anthony Pace Gouder

Mar 6th 2010, 02:46

The adding of a PARTIAL ROOF has even more exposed the shortcomings not only on the so called theatre , but on the whole project . Another addition has been the Sette Gugnio Monument , which the promoters of this project in vain tried to stress that it was always integrated with the project .The facts are that It has never featured in the models , was never mentioned and its location not yet localized ! Then again the PM and Min. Gatt return from Paris and not a single word !

Most important was the project extension outside the Walls . Another addition ! This projects' pre-characteristics were on the minus ," take-away factor" as the gate , opera-house, no roof ,Queensway , flying-parliament , no freedom square , parking , 66% off the bridge and the shopping arcades .

Gradually , 9 months after the unveiling , ADDITIONS are becoming the Rule rather than the exception .

The latest is Dr.Gonzi stating his intention of leaving/entrusting the theatre design totally in Renzo's capable (?) hands . Its Piano's total responsibility, now ! Gonzi's version of Pontius' washing of the hands ? Easter is drawing near , Fr.Serracino-Inglott .

j ellul

Mar 5th 2010, 23:59

The open air theatre is best left without a retractable roof.

When the retractable roof is closed, the acoustics will not be any better than the MCC. In winter, the theatre with the closed retractable roof will not be used much because the MCC will be preferred.

On the other hand, the acoustics of the theatre open to the sky are likely to be excellent. The theatre will be intensively used over a period of four or five months in the spring and summer.

Joe Vella

Mar 5th 2010, 22:42

@Raymond Sammut.
with all due respect.....do you have any experience in theatre? Have you any idea of the cost of the cost of that installation you gave the link to? To give you an idea a used Meyer system would cost in the region of 80,000 US$!!!!!!! Also the venue you are referring to was not permanent but a one of!!!!

S Borg

Mar 5th 2010, 22:09

The money which is going to be spent for this project should be directed else where. At this point in time all Malta needs is to start moving forward economically and not the construction of a theater. First thing first.

Lydia Pace Workman

Mar 5th 2010, 21:55

If this were a country that could afford, be it area wise or economic wise, to have some six or seven theatres of sophistication and elevated culture orientation, then I would agree that diversity would be acceptable, however, this is simply not the case. A partial or no roof is preposterous. I can just see people purchasing expensive tickets ahead of time to have to go through the inevitable hassle of obtaining refunds time and time again due to inclement weather.We have waited long enough for the reconstruction of this theatre so let's get the show on the road if you'll excuse the pun.

J Brincat

Mar 5th 2010, 20:40

Although I have always dreamed of a roofed theatre I have given up hope that my dream will ever materialise because of sheer hard headiness on part of the PM. It seems that dialogue is a word of the distant past, used only when it best suited the PN..

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 19:26

@ j ellul Here is some interesting reading on the challenges of sound design for an outdoor setting: http://www.meyersound.com/applications/story.php?type=14&id=1427 The accomplishment of good sound design systems, along with effective lighting settings, would make the Piano open-air theatre unique --highly differentiated from all other theatres in the Med. Once you put a "roof" over this theatre, it would immediately become just another theatre. No-one would want to travel all the way to Malta to experience an ordinary theatre --a theatre that offers no differentiation from other nearby theatres.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 18:39

@ j ellul There are some videos on-line you can search for, under say, "outdoor sound engineering" key words. Here is an example of Research & Development carried out in New Zealand on noise control in outdoor environments: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P_pC2UH1pIA This issue is very much about moving Valletta forward into the 21st century, rather than moving it back into the 19th, 18th, and 17th centuries.

ray sacco

Mar 5th 2010, 18:13

@michael sammut: why drag politics into this issue? the reason why there was no opposition for the block of flats in mintioff's era was because there was no development awareness at that time. there was no opposition when the old valletta gate was substituted with the present eyesore either. on the other hand, there was a lot of antagonism when the labour government presented plans for a new building on the theatre site some years ago. the fact is that the building of the old theatre site has become a delicate matter for the maltese people whoever is in government and it seems that nothing but building a replica of the old theatre will satisfy the majority of the population, irrevelant of the colour they behold!

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 5th 2010, 18:00

@j.ellul I can tell you that I have seen L’Aida at the Caracalla in Rome, watched various plays at the Teatro Greco in Siracusa and enjoyed a various shows at the Teatro Greco of Taormina. All these venues had no roofs, and it appears that the Greeks had long understood their acoustics. I can confirm that right up in the last rows up top I was unable to notice any significant degeneration in the signal quality, only the expected attenuation in intensity. The Greeks certainly knew their physics! Theater’s semicircular configuration ? No flat plateas - ascending stepped rows?. Unhindered vision ? Acoustically ? obstacles which occlude vision tend to attenuate sound waves too ! So?? Ensure the spectator to be reached by a ‘pure’ sound wave, just make him sit that much higher than those in front of him ! The other characteristic is the focal point on the stage for optimum reception by the audience.. Once one starts involving reflecting surfaces then I am sure that the issue will get quite complicated. In your company, I will await some kind soul to illuminate us

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 17:29

@ George Manduca --"You will NEVER see my face in that Roof-less and Soul-less Theater - EVER AGAIN!" It cannot be, Mr Manduca. You have never been there.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 17:18

@ Henry Galea Souchet --"If that esclamation has stuck underneath your skin, just go back, discover the responsible author and confront him instead ! You are still in good enough time, I presume !" No need to get personal, Mr Galea Souchet. What makes you presume that I am the least interested as to who the author might be?

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 5th 2010, 15:07

@Raymond Sammut
For the n th time I repeat that I have never made any reference to theaters with or without roofs. So, I will kindly ask you to refrain from cycling elsewhere, and keep within the demarcation of our discussion. If that esclamation has stuck underneath your skin, just go back, discover the responsible author and confront him instead ! You are still in good enough time, I presume !

As you point out you need “arguments” - the “constructive” type, of course ???? Contrary to your mission, I am here to discuss matters in a civilized manner about our Capital City in the hope that the eventual outcome would be a success and an asset to that FANTASTIC CITY !. Once your intention is to argue, then, it might be worth trying to face a mirror. One should then be able to argue endlessly to his heart’s content (and this is not rhetoric)!

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 14:53

@ j ellul

There is a wealth of information on acoustics, and on sound engineering in general, on-line. Wikipedia has a page dedicated to acoustics, which is a good starting point. A retractable canopy would not be something that the sound engineer isn't able to deal with (most likely). In the end, it would always come down to a decision by management based on practicalities on the ground. If a weather forecast were to indicate that inclement weather is expected, then no performances will be offered --regardless of what a retractable canopy could or couldn't do in prevailing weather. It's like everything else. A sea-captain may decide not to remain on the present course if a weather forecast says that gale force-16 is expected to occur along his path. People may decide not to leave home altogether, regardless whether the theatre has a roof or not. Honestly, how many people would we expect to see on the streets of Valletta in inclement weather? No theatre on this planet can expect to have performances without interruptions, or with a full house every week. Open-air theatres operate in many parts of the world. They have advantages and disadvantages like everything else.

George Manduca

Mar 5th 2010, 14:25

As the quick-witted Mario Azzopardi recently noted, this latest Renzo Piano proposal has now degenerated into a veritable "Opera Buffa" of megalithic proportions. All we get are, a bunch of complementary front-row tickets to watch this contemptible, politically-infested show unfold. This may be the first and, I fear, the last show to be held AT - or I should say - AT THE EXPENSE OF our beloved Royal Opera House.

What started off as the equisitely exciting prospect of having our Theater (and city) back on the national agenda, is increasingly growing into an injurious debacle at the expense of Maltese National Pride. As time passes and hope fades, deep dismay and disgust fills the space left in the hearts of the Maltese.

I pride myself for being a respected patron of Opera at many theatres all over the world. If this charade keeps going any further in all the wrong directions, the only urge I get, is to dissociate myself from it as far as I possibly can. You will NEVER see my face in that Roof-less and Soul-less Theater - EVER AGAIN! .... You can also kiss my vote GOOD-BYE!

j ellul

Mar 5th 2010, 12:41

I do not think that a theatre with a retractable roof can me made to work acoustically. One of the main difficulties of acoustics is reflection of sound waves off the ceiling. With a fixed roof, the shape and material used for the soffit ensures optimum acoustics. With a retractable roof, there can be no such soffit and therefore the acoustics will be inadequate. The end result could be that, in the winter, artists would prefer to use other Valletta theatres anyway instead of the theatre with the closed retractable roof.

This opinion is based on my limited knowledge of acoustics. Is there anyone knowledgeable in acoustics able to offer an opinion on this point?

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 5th 2010, 12:33

@michael sammut
You are so right ! A vast ocean flows between the Luxury of a Democracy and the Terror of a Dictatorship ! sic.

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 5th 2010, 12:15

@j.ebejer
As you may note the reference quoted is being made re the 'creation' of historic facades etc where they never existed before! This is likewise to the adoption of baroc style for a ‘new’ imaginary building right in the centre of Floriana parade ground – here I am sure that the resultant building would deservedly earn the same identical comments which the Southgate Shopping Center did.
In the case of our Capital City – the whole process does not involve a ‘new building’ (in the sense that one is developing an open unused space) but restoration of that, which used to "exist" once upon a time !
Maybe I should have pointed this out to you earlier on, namely, that I have been to Bath a couple of years ago – and I must tell you that the Cube as it is widely known, only reflects the Georgian buildings just because they happen to be there nearby. One cardinal reason for the construction of the Cube around the Spa was to facilitate the resultant glasshouse effect – temperature control, you will appreciate, is of utmost importance in a Spa located in a cool environment !

J. Mamo

Mar 5th 2010, 12:06

I find the idea of re-building the theatre more hilarious than the roofless theatre. The site is very small, that even rebuilding it, it still cannot be called an opera house. Furthermore, a British Royal- style theatre in a baroque city looks worse than a modern style theatre in my opinion.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 11:41

@ Henry Galea Souchet --❝ Very strange that you should pay attention to something which you yourself have just judged as being “unworthy of attention” ❞

My attention was to language --as opposed to content-- used: "play about" and "theatre without a roof is useless". We cannot use vague words or terms freely and then assume that they will convey the meaning we intend. What we say has to be said clearly and with some form of explanation to support our statement.

What I have judged as being unworthy of attention was another example which I did not attribute to you. It highlights the potential damage it can cause rather than presenting a constructive argument. I chose this example because it is exactly the rhetoric that has led to the comments we are seeing here. We need constructive arguments and not rhetoric. This applies equally to everyone.

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 5th 2010, 10:46

@Raymond Sammut
I regret to note that you have taken my loose term ‘play about’ so literally, it was no intention of mine to be derogatory to anyone or any setup in particular! After having said that, I do not think there was any need for a recap of the burocratic process involved. I would have preferred to hear from you that, for example, you have had the opportunity to examine the schematic diagram related to the resultant acoustical characteristics of the place!

But, without deviating any further from the main issue (i.e. restoration of our Capital City), may I kind ask you, if one fine morning you would find yourself the owner of a damaged Phoenician earthenware amphora – would you consider fiberglass ?

I think that you must have ended too keyed up by my well-meaning contribution, so much so you have failed to recognize, that I have never expressed myself as you quoted in your closing sentence. Very strange that you should pay attention to something which you yourself have just judged as being “unworthy of attention” ::))

Joseph Bartolo

Mar 5th 2010, 10:27

As I done on previous occasions stated the Opera House in Valletta City gate area, should have a retractable roof. Closed in the winter times and when weather is not good and open, in the summer time. Simple as that, and its common sense as well. :)

michael sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 08:57

this amazes me how nobody dared to oppose mintoff's block of flats on top of freedom square. Oh yeah right, at that time we were still living in the middle ages and if somebody dares to say something god knows what would have happened. I dont agree with the roofless theatre but im no architect neither, but I dont use these blogs to attack every move from the government

John O Scerri

Mar 5th 2010, 07:15

One does not need to be a university graduate to reason out that a theatre of that design without a roof is a stupid idea. Where do the acoustics go ? up in heaven ??
Shall one use instead a more sofisticated sound system which is obviously not environment friendly , and consumes loads of electricity ?

Raymond Sammut

Mar 5th 2010, 06:30

@ Henry Galea Souchet --"Which country has ever allowed any architect (local or foreign) to play about with the character of its Capital City."

The Maltese government, like any other, does not "allow" or "disallow" anything when dealing with an architectural firm of international standing. Instead, it "commissions" the firm to prepare a master plan. The architect then proceeds by working on the plan, finalizing the plan and submitting the plan. It's then left to the government (client) to accept or reject the plan. It's clearly not appropriate to say that the firm "plays about" with the character of the capital city. This is because the kind of firms you are referring to, whether they are local or not, act professionally --otherwise they would not enjoy the reputable international standing that keeps them at the forefront in their field. Unless we get the language right, arguments will lack the coherence needed to persuade the government to accept or reject the plan. Rhetoric such as, for example, "a theatre without a roof is useless" is simply just that, rhetoric --which is totally unworthy of attention, and utterly discredits the person uttering it, regardless of what their station in society is.

Anthony Pace Gouder

Mar 5th 2010, 00:48

The Project started on the wrong foot from the very start Fr. Serracino Inglott .

The Hon. PM had been negotiating and discussing (?) the whole project ,i.e,THEATRE , PARLIAMENT , CITY GATE, BRIDGE and THE DITCH GARDENS behind closed doors for some time . By any chance , did you have a clue what was going on ?

Many questions still have no answer ! Who were the ADVISERS to Dr,Gonzi ? When was Renzo Piano first contacted and by whom ? Who estimated the Cost at about eu 80 m ? The PM as the Client has still not made public the Contract with the World renouned Architect . Only The latest meeting was announced beforehand ,with the PM describing it 'no big deal". We all know what the essence of this deal turned out to be. Venda tal-Karozzi tal- linja ! How absurd ! A Prime Minister spending precious time personally dealing and appointing RP on such a petty job ! I bet Renzo felt humbled. PROBABLY he must have mistaken some of his jobs for bus stations ! After all ,couldn't this job be executed by the WorksDepartment ? and save the expense .

j ebejer

Mar 4th 2010, 23:43

@Henry Galea Souchet

The idea that new buildings in a historic town should slavishly copy architectural styles of the past is a misconception.

Allow me to quote to you another section of the same UNESCO World Heritage Committee. This refers to Southgate Shopping Centre in Bath: “It is regrettable that the new shopping centre was built using a “pastiche” architectural style. …… it is not a solution - as realized in this example – to copy or create more or less historic façades with several historic details which have never existed. It seems necessary to state that "pastiche architecture" does not constitute an appropriate mean of structural intervention.”

In other words, your advice to restore Valletta to "its pre-war splendour” by using "historic" architectural styles for new buildings would most likely be considered to be an incorrect approach by UNESCO’s World Heritage Committee.

For your benefit here is the link to the report:

http://www.culture.gov.uk/ukwhportal/documents/Bath_mission_report.pdf

The report includes photos of both the Thermae Bath Spa (referred to in my previous comment) and the Southgate Shopping Centre.

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 4th 2010, 18:08

@ j.ebejer
Fair enough, out of all the existing Cities, you have chosen to quote the City of Bath. I have no intention to enter into any polemic with you or any one else for that matter, but I would certainly refrain from confusing an additional adjunct such as a reflecting medium with a project involving a significant degree of restructuring in a prominent and cardinal area (the entry) to a City adopting a type of architecture which clashes horribly with the general theme and style of the rest of the edifices!
Who cares what “The English” decided to do ! – the best of British luck to them all ! Just because they did whatever they chose to do, should anyone of us assume that there should be a commitment at this end to follow suit ?
BTW you left so much unanswered.

j ebejer

Mar 4th 2010, 16:00

Henry Galea Souchet says “Which country has ever allowed any architect (local or foreign) to play about with the character of its Capital City?”

This is an extract of a UNESCO World Heritage Committee report on the City of Bath (UK) which is a World Heritage Site. The comment refers to the “Thermae Bath Spa” (completed in 2006).

“The architectural partipris is definitely contemporary, with a glass façade which elegantly reflects the adjacent Georgian buildings without any adverse impact on the Outstanding Universal Value and integrity of Bath.”

@Henry Galea Souchet The English found no difficulty letting the architect “play around” with the character of Bath, which has immense historical value, even if not a capital city.

As for London, one could mention the London Eye which is on the River Thames opposite the Houses of Parliament.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 4th 2010, 15:26

@ Joseph V. Grech

Sorry for the misspelling. I actually meant "L'Imnarja". I also meant SJC, rather than SCJ, which I wrongly typed in twice in my latest comment.

Just as a matter of interest, the former apparently is a derivative of the Italian word "Luminaria"
(public illumination).

"You must really be disappointing readers with your insistence..."(Grech)

Mr Grech, I am not "insisting" on anything, as you are alleging. I am expressing my views, and providing reasons for my views. Nor do I have any intention to please or disappoint readers as you are implying. Readers are, of course, free to agree or disagree with views expressed on this comments board.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 4th 2010, 15:11

@ j ellul --"...I do not think your criticism of Fr. Peter is fair."

My first comment expressed in this thread in reference to Serracino-Inglott's stance --as reported in this article by The Times-- was what you have just said it was: "criticism" --nothing more, nothing less. I also accept and fully respect your view that my criticism was not fair. It is your view, to which you are fully entitled, and which is not necessarily in accordance with the facts.

g.portelli

Mar 4th 2010, 15:04

@ Joe Micallef

An affront to creativity and innovation? The real affront comes from creatively challenged politicians who cannot see the wood from trees!

@ Dominic Fenech


New singer perhaps but the sudden appetite for demythologising Father Peter is definitely something new.

Henry Galea Souchet

Mar 4th 2010, 14:11

Why all this controversy and opposition to restoring the World Heritage Site of Valletta to its pre-war splendour ? Which country has ever allowed any architect (local or foreign) to play about with the character of its Capital City. Where is our National Pride ? Do we really have any, after all ?
About time we roll up our sleeves and put our thinking caps on – start guarding ourselves from stepping over some banana skin round the corner ! How long is it going to take us to learn ? We do have our share of competent personnel – what’s wrong in deciding to utilize their know-how ? What kind of faith does this administration have in its ‘workers’ ? Is it all a big load of bla bla bla ?

j ellul

Mar 4th 2010, 13:51

@ Frans Sammut

The wisdom of Fr. Peter Serracino Inglott is not in doubt although it does not mean one has to agree with his views on the subject. I certainly disagree with him when he says that the open air theatre will be useless.

@ Ray Sammut As much as I disagree with the views he expressed, I do not think your criticism of Fr. Peter is fair.

Joseph V. Grech

Mar 4th 2010, 12:39

@Mr. Raymond Sammut
Sorry but your latest Comment addressed to myself certainly does not provide feedback to my earlier Comments. Anything but!
You elected NOT to refer to the points I had sent in earlier, choosing instead to provide historical information that in no way impinges on the subject readers are discussing.
You must really be disappointing readers with your insistence on the attractiveness of the Open Air Theatre Concept per se which you state is ''so suited to Malta's long most pleasant summer nights.'' :)
You deviate widely even choosing to refer to ''church/band-club ...typical festa week-end'' activities and (unbelievably) even into ''Imnagħajra (your spelling) traditionally attracting thousands of people every year spending a whole night at Buskett! ''
The cherry on the cakes comes when you declare ''The open-air is in Malta's blood --breathing fresh not conditioned air.''
Sorry but I really believe your contributions are really dragging this important subject down into the mire of nonsense!
I am still awaiting plausible Comments from other commentators including THE MAIN STAKEHOLDERS to the suggestion presented earlier - that Ordnance Street, and possibly just a small part of Freedom Square be incorporated into the existing Bombed Site footprint.

Joe Micallef

Mar 4th 2010, 12:34

I find the objections to Piano's design raised by Profs. Serracino Inglott as reactionary, superficial and a straight forward affront to much needed creativity and innovation! The latter is surely the most worrying.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 4th 2010, 02:30

@ Joseph V. Grech

Malta, as an independent state, should have a free standing Parliament House. This objective should have been priority one in the sixties under the administration of Dr Borg-Olivier. Unfortunately, Borg-Olivier built shops instead, massacred city-gate, and left SJC Hastings end undeveloped. He also wasted resources rebuilding the Law Courts in the wrong place. These were very serious mistakes. Then came the 70's, and under the Mintoff administration the massacre continued. More shops and even flats were built, and Misraħ-il Ħelsien degenerated into a car-park. This all amounted to mismanagement and gross under-development. Malta, as a tourist revenue-earner, suffered heavy financial losses as a result. I agree with Parliament House next to SJC CentralBank end with the proviso that flats/shops are pulled down and build Law Courts next to SCJ Hastings end for symmetrical balancing of Valletta's entrance.

The Open-Air theatre concept next to SCJ is suited to Malta's long most pleasant summer nights. How many people, for example, you find inside the church/band-club over a typical festa week-end? Why Imnagħajra traditionally attracted thousands of people every year spending a whole night at Buskett? The open-air is in Malta's blood --breathing fresh not conditioned air.

Frans Sammut

Mar 4th 2010, 00:30

As usual one finds oneself unable to disagree with the wisdom of the Rev Professor Peter Serracino Inglott who will not be intimidated by the antics of Minister Austin Gatt and his ilk. PSI was, is and will continue to be one of Malta's best assets. I am inclined to believe he will score another victory over Minister Gatt et al.

j ellul

Mar 3rd 2010, 22:48

Back to the future: A timesonline news item in December 2011;

“After a protracted debate where all the 400,000 experts-on-everything-under-the-sun expressed an opinion, it was decided to survey people’s opinions on the open air theatre. 20% want it as designed by Piano, another 20% want a retracting roof, another 20 % want a permanent roof, another 20% refuse to give a reply because they want the Barry opera built whereas another 20% will only accept a national theatre. So what do we do now? Government decides to build the open air theatre as proposed by Piano anyway. At least now we know what we have supposed all along – that there are countless different opinions and views. It is now established that whatever government decides, at least 80% will think it is the wrong decision. ”

I hope works on site get started as soon as possible. There is no time to lose.

Peter Serracino Inglott

Mar 3rd 2010, 22:38

As a septuagenarian nearing the golden jubilee of his priesthood, I am grateful to Mr. Raymond Sammut for electing me as target of his vituperation. The personal insults delivered with the exact accents of a verbal mercenary practically constrain me to overcome my ineptness at blogging, pardonable perhaps at my age. I must contest the suggestion that I described myself as a "PN strategist" or "priest-philosopher" as special entitlement to an opinion about the relative merits of roofed and roofless theatres. I may, however, remind Mr. Sammut that I had been appointed by a PN Government as Chairman of the jury that was to judge the architectural competition for rebuilding the Opera House site. On the present occasion, I did not even volunteer my opinions, but only responded to questions that were pressed upon me by a friendly newspaper, while I rejected several invitations to give my views on the subject on various media. I confess, however, that I am unable to resist re-acting when spin-doctors do their best to antagonise any fair-minded art-lover towards the admirable architect and personal friend of mine, Renzo Piano, with ludicrous eyewash.

Peter Bonnici

Mar 3rd 2010, 22:03

we will cringe at the sight of this theatre in a few years time, just as we do at the sight of City Gate today, barely 40 years after we built it.

Myriam Warrinton

Mar 3rd 2010, 21:55

I am quite sure that after listening to the people, the prime minister will have the good sense and humility to admit that this whole idea is just wrong.He would be greatly admired for it.. There are so many valid reasons for Piano's (ugly -my opinion) plan not to materialise. Besides, with Malta being in such a bad financial situation at the moment, could we really afford this project? Especially when there are historical buildings which need restoring, like St. Elmo. And why shouldn't pariament be housed at the bottom of Valletta? I think that makes more sense. Either MCC which is hopeless for acoustics as a theatre, and being such a beautiful, prestigious and historical building, it would be perfect to house parliament. Or else St Elmo. Regarding the theatre, it might actually be silly to build a replica of something old, as it will be just that - a reproduction with no value. But surely Maltese (able architects) could come up with something more befitting our great city, other than Piano's glasshouse - possibly bigger than the old one, with great acoustics. Citygate should be changed into something of stone, but nothing modern.

Astrid Vella

Mar 3rd 2010, 20:40

@ C Bonello: re what you say "It will not serve the purpose of a national theatre for holding grand opera because of its limited footprint. If we encroach on Ordinance Street and Freedom Square the result will be a new distinct edifice, probably obliterating in the process the historic ruins."

I stand to be corrected, but as I recall the Trevisan plans respected the exterior ruins of the Opera House and could still seat over 1,000, so a national theatre which respects this site is not impossible.

As for an extension onto Ordinance Street, this would could serve as the foyer area, freeing up more of the inside space to the stage and stalls. Piano has cleverly located changing rooms etc across the road under the present police station, so the potential of site is great. Of course it would be a "new distinct edifice" but isn't that what the modernists are clamouring for?

As for the Conference Centre, it is precisely large productions that its shallow stage cannot cope with. Any extension backstage would mean building into the bastion which is what lies behind the stage and would not solve the acoustics problem.

T Camilleri

Mar 3rd 2010, 20:17

Ian Fenech Too small for Parliament? Then how many BIGHEADS do we have in Parliament?

J Martinelli Then can you tell us how operas were held before the theatre was Luftwaffed?

Raymond Sammut

Mar 3rd 2010, 20:06

@ wally vella-zarb

We could "almost" say the same thing for Mdina (where, incidentally, I was raised --from 4 to 19--). If we were to look at detailed city plans, we are likely to find that they are not strictly rectilinear. I would suspect, however, that the knights would have originally gotten the idea from Mdina when they were designing Senglea and later Valletta, after having resided in Mdina before they moved to the harbour forts. Also, when we say "city" we are referring to major cities, like Melbourne, where I lived for several years. Melbourne is the only rectilinear city in Australia. Another major city which is rectilinear is in Canada, but the name escapes me. Rectilinear cities satisfy strict criteria in civil design. Strangely enough, there are not all that many of them. Probably because major cities around the world evolved over the years, and were not holistically pre-designed like Valletta (and like Melbourne which was planned and built long after Sydney, which is a maze) --hence they are likely to have expanded mostly ad hoc.
All this, however, is from the top of my head.

Joan Nelson

Mar 3rd 2010, 19:31

Hey,
Since they like the idea so much, why not give Parliament a roofless building to match as well!!
Then not only will we hear the clowning that goes on in the theatre but in parliament too.
They will also gain access to open weather as well. We must return the favour.

Joseph V. Grech

Mar 3rd 2010, 19:26

@Mr. Raymond Sammut
Could you please reply to my Comment beginning: ''Thanks for taking the trouble to reply...''

I had visited the Renzo Piano Plans Exhibition in Valletta but accessed the site indicated anyway.
There is MUCH that I like in the Plans but admittedly do not like the Open Air theatre concept. I would prefer to have Parliament sited elsewhere

The Open Air theatre is exhilarating in concept - BUT it remains impractical for two reasons - Insufficient Space and Openness to the elements and Surroundings.

Should the adjoining Ordnance Street be added to the site this will make a bigger roofed Arts Centre possible.

May I please point out:
- the area can can still remain pedestrianised;
- admittedly ''the open air...outdoor lights, and exposure to St. James Cavalier...'' would not be there but neither would the related inconveniences;
- The ''open air design'', attractive on paper, will require costly and ongoing maintenance
- A truly genuine theatre art experience NEED NOT be in the open!

-Renzo Piano CAN come up with something better if only we let him use the adjoining Ordnance Street!
Why insist so much on a ''differentiated theatre art experience''?

k azzoppardi

Mar 3rd 2010, 19:19

A man of the cloth "One of the Nationalist Party's longest standing strategists" ? Not a very nice image for the Ecclesiastical Authorites with more than half of the Island giving support to other Political Parties.

C Bonello

Mar 3rd 2010, 19:02

The onus here is the preserving of the remains of a national icon for posterity.

It is practically inconceivable to rebuild the Royal Opera House as a replica of its former glory. It will not serve the purpose of a national theatre for holding grand opera because of its limited footprint. If we encroach on Ordinance Street and Freedom Square the result will be a new distinct edifice, probably obliterating in the process the historic ruins.

We do not need a new theatre on the site to preserve the ruins, however, if in the process this hallowed ground will also be used as performing arts venue albeit roofless, as proposed by Renzo Piano, we would solve the issue admirably.

The MCC, with major additions backstage, can the used for big productions. If the MCC is still not adequate and we shall still insist on a proper state of the art theatre this could be built somewhere else in Malta. (I just do not know how to fill this new theatre with 'paying' patrons for the classical fare)

The new Parliament Building should, in my humble opinion, be built on top of the Italian Cultural Institute.and not in Freedom Square.

wally vella-zarb

Mar 3rd 2010, 19:00

@ Raymond Sammut

"In fact, Valletta was the first rectilinear city ever built in the world"

I don't think that is correct. Senglea, where I was raised, is a rectilinear city that was built before Valletta. Grandmaster De la Sengle had considerable impact on the military strengthening of Malta, notably by initiating in 1554 the development of the city of Senglea, which was later named after him and bears his coat of arms. Claude de la Sengle (1494 – 18 August 1557) was Grand Master of the Maltese Knights (Knights Hospitaller) from 11 September 1553 until his death. His successor was Jean Parisot de la Valette. As far as I know, Valletta was built after Senglea.

John Grima

Mar 3rd 2010, 18:11

So,,,,,,,,, please, please Mr. Prime Minister. Roof or no roof. We beg you to scrap the whole designe and save the money for the rebuilding of the ORIGINAL monument.
Use the money instead as the first donation twoards Mario Phillip Azzopardi's so called, "impossible dream", to rebuild the Royal Opera House. It is NOT an impossible dream. It IS the only way, donations by Maltese everywhere, that this phoenix can rise from the ashes.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 3rd 2010, 17:38

Those who may not have seen them yet, there are some very detailed pictures of the open-air theatre proposal by Mr Piano here:

http://www.di-ve.com/default.aspx?id=146&Search=True&MediaDBSearchCategory=@155@

Please keep in mind that Mr Piano is prohibiting all vehicle traffic flow around the relevant sites, so this is a very pedestrian friendly proposition by the Genoese architect. Note also how the open-air theatre would offer crisp clean natural air on a typical Malta summer night, with lots of outdoor lights, high-tech acoustics and exposure to the nearby Saint James Cavalier. This design would make a truly genuine theatre art experience to everyone who can appreciate the open-air environment within an historic ancient city that is Valletta. Utterly unique in the world. Nowhere else to be found. We needed a Genoese architect to make the Maltese people aware of the potential we are looking at here --a totally differentiated theatre art experience. Please don't let the voices of darkness blind you and mislead you. Let Mr Piano convince Dr Gonzi to proceed as is. The Australian people continue to regret until this day what they had done to Jørn Utzon in 1966. The Maltese people shouldn't repeat the same mistake now in 2010.

Joseph V. Grech

Mar 3rd 2010, 17:29

@Mr. Raymond Sammut
Thanks for taking the trouble to reply. Quite valid point on your part.
So you believe my suggestion is not really recommendable for the reasons you explain.
Excuse me but I do not really believe my suggestion , if taken up, will necessarily change Valletta's intrinsic ''rectilinear'' characteristic.
Also if we are sensible - and I strongly believe the architect Mr. Renzo Piano possesses this attribute - there is no reason to believe that the suggested building just cannot be built without being also ''reasonably proportional'' as you explain it so well. We ned not build a Mammoth of a building mind you!
I tend to agree with you: excavation may indeed not be recommendable but I really believe that there may just be a chance that extensive excavation won't really be necessary.
I thank you again for your feedback and anxiously await other Comments from other stakeholderes - especially people like Fr. Peter, the Hon. P.M. Renzo Piano, Astrid Vella, Mario P. Azzopardi, Joseph Calleja etc.
Hopefully a way out will be found - for the good of our beautiful Valletta.

j ebejer

Mar 3rd 2010, 17:19

The theatre/ performing space may not be the perfect venue for all forms of artistic self-expression. There are however countless activities of varying artistic and cultural content which could be held within the proposed performing space. The number of open air cultural and entertainment activities held in the open in events like Notte Bianca is proof of this.

I also like the idea of having an open public piazza within the site, when the theatre is not in use. The use of audio and the projection of images on the translucent wall elements will make this urban space all the more attractive and unique. With good attention ot detail, it will make a fantastic piazza in the winter months.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 3rd 2010, 17:00

@ Joseph V. Grech --"Does this suggestion make any sense please - or am I writing just silly, impractical ideas?[Reco]mendations?"

No, Mr Grech. No suggestion can ever be silly.

Combining sites in Valletta is not appropriate because one of the important features of Valletta is that Valletta is a rectilinear city. In fact, Valletta was the first rectilinear city ever built in the world. The City of Melbourne, for example, was designed on the same principle.

The next problem is that individual buildings should be reasonably proportional. In fact, when we look at an aerial photograph of the Barry design we quickly note that even the Barry designed theatre was somewhat too large when compared with nearby buildings. One of the strengths of the Piano design is its sense of proportionality.

The other problem with your suggestion is that one cannot start "excavated", layer upon layer, within the Valletta periphery. This for the simple reason that it could cause land instability to neighbouring structures.

Raymond Sammut

Mar 3rd 2010, 16:43

Do we need to know that Serracino-Inglott, who insists that the open-air theatre is "useless", is a "priest philosopher"? Does a "priest philosopher" understand architecture and theatre art more than anyone else? What makes Serracino-Inglott think that he is better than anyone else, so much so that he can judge the Prime Minister as "failure" with the way he has handled this "small point"? Will there ever be an end to this type of intellectual arrogance on Malta? When will the Maltese people be ever free from domineering, unelected and self-important individuals? No amount of so-called "credentials" can give a person the right to dominate over others when it comes to free thought. Serracino-Inglott has no right whatsoever to claim a greater right to free thought than anyone else. His opinion on the Piano designed Open-Air Theatre has no greater preponderance than that of any other person on Malta. He has no right to keep exerting this kind of pressure on the Maltese prime minister, and Serracino-Inglott should know how to back off and learn how to mind his own business.

Joseph V. Grech

Mar 3rd 2010, 16:39

Dear Hon. P.M., Architect Renso Piano, Astrid Vella and all the others discussing this problem of inadequate space, may I respectfull suggest that:
-the two sites (old theatre site and the site earmarked for the new Parliament plus Offices) be combined into one
-to this further add the upper part of Ordnance Street which anyway is not really serving any useful purpose whatsoever.
Surely these three combined areas will produce a big enough site to build:
-- a lovely Renzo Piano designed Arts and Community Centre where Operatic and other Shows may be produced.
--very probably there will be ample space left for a modern Parliamentary Building to be built also. Remember it would be possible to excavate at least two or three separate building layers.
World renowned Renzo Piano would I am sure produce beautiful plans and indeed even make use of at least a number of plans he has already designed.
Does this suggestion make any sense please - or am I writing just silly, impractical ideas?mendations?

E. Ciantar

Mar 3rd 2010, 16:38

What a red herring this roof of a building in Valletta, which for 60 or so years has had no walls either.
I am sure that all those blogging here for a roof have already set aside 33c a day into their piggy bank in the last couple of weeks to finance a new design to be proposed by the People. Perhaps that is why they are complaining about the electricity bills.
I believe that Mr. Piano's concept for the theatre site is not that of building a new theatre, but of conserving the ruins, retaining an open space, and retain, as far as possible, the role of theatre that this space once had.
People, it is now time to move on and do something. Stop moaning.
Apologies to Mr. Piano for the insults on this blog - there are surely better ways one can disagree with an Architect. I am sure Mr. Piano will not loose his reputation because of proposing a topless theatre in Malta.

Mario Philip Azzopardi

Mar 3rd 2010, 16:30

Thank you Father Peter for speaking out in favour of Maltese national cultural interests.

Joe Vella

Mar 3rd 2010, 16:15

I feel that we are missing a very important point, that Malta is one of the very few (if not the only) countries in Europe without a national theatre! It is not true that we have already 3 theatres in Valletta. We only have ONE, and that is the Manoel. Then we have 2 studio theatres, the MITP and St James and conference hall, MCC. If we wnat to save millions of euros, then Parliament should be transferred to MCC, use the existing Royal Opera site together with part of Freedom Square and turn the axis of the theatre site through 90 degrees to make it parallel with Republic street.

wally vella-zarb

Mar 3rd 2010, 15:15

@ J.Martinelli

"The LP/GWU claim to speak for half the country, therefore it is safe to assume that half the country cannot afford their electricity bill, so the new 'theatre' can only be supported be half the country.

That makes a lot of sense!"


The fallacy of your nonsensical 'witticism' is that it will be ALL of the Maltese who will be paying for Gonzi's Folly, and not just the half that, presumably, 'can afford it', whoever they are. If we cannot, as a country, afford so many things of vital importance, how are we expected to finance an extravaganza that gives us neither fish nor fowl, a gateless gate, a main traffic artery that jumps 150 metres through the air over Republic street, a roofless 'theatre'? The only part that is arguably relevant would be the 'parliament-on-stilts' in that it symbolises a Government that it totally detached from the reality that surrounds them!

Dominic Fenech

Mar 3rd 2010, 15:14

So what's new in this repetitive song, except the singer?

wally vella-zarb

Mar 3rd 2010, 15:12

@ J.Martinelli

"The LP/GWU claim to speak for half the country, therefore it is safe to assume that half the country cannot afford their electricity bill, so the new 'theatre' can only be supported be half the country.

That makes a lot of sense!"


The fallacy of your nonsensical 'witticism' is that it will be ALL of the Maltese who will be paying for Gonzi's Folly, and not just the half that, presumably, 'can afford it', whoever they are. If we cannot, as a country, afford so many things of vital importance, how are we expected to finance an extravaganza that gives us neither fish nor fowl, a gateless gate, a main traffic artery that jumps 150 metres through the air over Republic street, a roofless 'theatre'? The only part that is arguably relevant would be the 'parliament-on-stilts' in that it symbolises a Government that it totally detached from the reality that surrounds them!

Astrid Vella

Mar 3rd 2010, 14:57

@ Ian Fenech: in saying "one of our greatest palaces is closed to the public as its is being used as a parliament" you are just repeating the spin that Fr. Peter is protesting against. The Palace is NOT off-limits because of Parliament as that mainly convenes in the evening when all our museums and palaces are closed.

The Palace is closed during public visiting hours when the President is in office receiving dignitaries etc. and the President is rightly going to remain in office there, so public accessibility is not going to change much and is no reason to break the Structure Plan which says that Parliament and the Ministries have to concentrate in the palaces and auberges of Valletta.

Anyone wanting to object to the Valletta Rehabilitation plans as presently proposed, can do so at: http://www.ambjentahjar.org/Form1.htm

You will get an email from MEPA saying that you're too late to be a legal objector but no problem, hundreds were in time. The main thing is to let MEPA and the authorities know your stand.

Ian Fenech

Mar 3rd 2010, 14:43

J.Martinelli,

I have to agree with you about the footprint of the theater being too small to make a state of the art theater. I have pointed this out myself many times and recently so has Renzo Piano. However he has also pointed out that the site is also too small for parliament too.
What can be done with the site I don't really know. The obvious question here would be which is needed more?
People have to wake up and smell the coffee and realise, they are fighting a loosing battle with regards to the theater. No matter how hard they try, the fact remains there is not enough space.What about the fact that one of our greatest palaces is closed to the public as its is being used as a parliament? Now you tell me which is more necessary

Astrid Vella

Mar 3rd 2010, 14:33

@Carmel Callus & JoeAzzopardi: you are right that we don’t need a third theatre, we need two fully-functioning ones that have the minimum theatrical requirements since Baroque times, ie. good acoustics and workable facilities, and the Mediterranean Conference Centre has neither. That’s why it would be the ideal candidate to be transformed into a new Parliament, thereby saving us millions of Euros,while the theatre could be rebuilt on the Opera House site,expanding out onto Ordinance Street and Freedom Square as suggested by JV Grech.That would leave most of the square free for public enjoyment as suggested by JoeAzzopardi.

@ J Martinelli: you are conveniently forgetting that the new theatre as proposed by the British theatre designers brought over by Minister Zammit Dimech had a capacity of 1,000 – 1,500 a far cry from the 500 you mention.

And yes, the country is facing an economic crisis. So why are you opposing a new theatre that could cost as little as €16 (Trevisan’s plan) and will create employment and tourism, and yet support an extravagant new parliament which will employ nobody?

@Leon Zawadzki; you are right. We are still colonised in our own country.

v zammit

Mar 3rd 2010, 14:32

“…but those who do not want to listen, will not!”
Very well said, too.
As I humbly submitted (Comments: 20.2.2010 – “Roofless theatre unworthy of artistic tradition (1)” by Mario Azzopardi, Toronto, Canada), if otherwise Mr Piano will put his foot down, and all his pens and brushes, and say “Take it or leave it”, deep down, I believe, for a roof to be or not to be, we will be the poorer. Without it ever crossing my mind to belittle Fr Feter’s views (he is wise enough not to doubt that), it is easy to critise, even positively, and for some to belittle and poke fun of, than to do and create.

Joseph Grech

Mar 3rd 2010, 14:15

@Mr. J. Marinelli
Thank goodness you have sent in a Comment! I address my question to you confident that you will provide the CORRECT and UNBIASED reply :)
Upset by the ongoing Valletta Roofless Theatre cum Parliement cum Ancillary Office Block debate I could not go to sleep last night. I kept thinking...asking myself: ''What can we do to save our captital city from the impending disaster?''
Eureka! It suddently hit me!
Why not combine the two sites (plus that little bit of Ordanance Street which is not really serving any purpose anyway) into ONE enlarged site and build a beautiful Arts Centre / Community Building thereon? We could excavate you know....why not?
If a Parliamentary Building can be included so much the better....
I ask Mr. J. Martinelli - what do you think please? Do send in a reply.

jsaliba

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:50

1. No hint about the meeting gonzi/piano/elite proposed by the p.m.
2. Nothing wrong or absurd in a 'roofless' theatre. Same as nothing absurd with the Reverend's wishes or friend mario's verses.
3. Still waiting for an historical discussion which according to my humble opinion should end with a conclusion.
One last question: Had the other Piano national projects had such a reaction/discussion in the other countries before they were carried out? Although, I find nothing absurd whatever the answer.

Muscat. Pat

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:47

GonziPN .s legacy is going to be a "kaxxa ( ta Malta) bla qiegh, and a "tejatru bla saqaf!"

Joseph Brincat

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:46

How blind all of us have been.

It is now more clear that the PM is playing for time, come summer and the people will all go out forcing him to call election.

This project was never meant to be realized.

Joe E Galea

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:45

I am waiting for the usual PN slurpers to attack Serracino-Inglott calling him a traitor and that he is now sleeping with PL and any other name imaginable.

But everyone knows that once Gonzi has decided there is no way of turning back...u kien jghidu ghal A Sant. Ara veru l-ispizjar milli jkollu jtik. The only honorouble way left for Gonzi is to resign and call it a day. The more time passes the more he drowns in his own dirt.

J Martinelli

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:36

"Mr Piano must have had a reason for doing the theatre roofless"

Very well said and he gave reasons why, but those who do not want to listen, will not!

To build a theatre/opera house on the existing footprint is to build a venue not much bigger than the Manoel Theatre. The restrictions will be such that most operas will be out as is the case with the Manoel, and with a seating capacity of less than 500.

Then we will have to be charged prices well above what we have been used to in order to attract opera companies of any renown, we will certainly start complaining and the government (taxpayer) will end up subsidizing the theatre.

At the same time, this past weekend, thousand flocked to Valletta at the call of the LP to protest the increase in electricity tariffs! Put these two together and one can see the incongruency of the arguments. The LP/GWU claim to speak for half the country, therefore it is safe to assume that half the country cannot afford their electricity bill, so the new 'theatre' can only be supported be half the country.

That makes a lot of sense!

A Abela

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:34

Fr Peter is getting old now, we have be modern.

vincent a galea

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:21

What will it take for the PM to realise that the whole PIANO PROJECT is a waste of time and money, and pathetic?! The writing is there for all to see!

HAS HE BY ANY CHANCE FORGOTTEN HOW TO READ? !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Joseph V. Grech

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:20

Can we - or can't we - join the two sites together and including the bit of Ordnance Street that's in the middle and serving no real purpose?
Please refer my earlier Comment below. Could somebody reply please? Tks a lot.

Joe Azzopardi

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:15

It seems Fr Serracino Inglott wants to have the cake and eat it too. "My wish is to see a whole retractable roof,", and just where would this cumbersome retractable roof be stored while the space is serving its most needed function – that of an open square.

Frankly I don't really care for another theater. There are already enough in Valletta for the rare occasions when there is something worth watching. But a square surrounded by the beautiful and dramatic ruins of the old opera house reminding all how foolish men can be is a much more desirable, functional, and cost-effective thing. Besides it will be enjoyed by all and not just the few theater goers. So Dr Gonzi, do what you may with their theater but leave us our square.

Lawrence Fenech

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:11

I believe that Mr Piano is letting his imagination run away with him in the wrong place in the wrong country.

Leon Zawadzki

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:10

It's about time that the Maltese had faith in the Maltese. Why is it that every time a project is mentioned the Maltese have the habit of looking for foreign consultants ?. The Maltese have an inferiority complex with no trust in their own abilities. I have met many bright, intelligent individuals who are screaming out for the chance to air their abilities, but being Maltese no-body hears them. I am sure there must be a good half dozen Maltese architects capable of designing an opera house, be proud and give them a chance. I strongly believe that most people in power only listen to foreigners and not to their fellow countrymen. As a foreigner living in Malta, I have great faith in the Maltese individual, it about time that the Maltese government also showed faith and pride in their own people.

victor pulis

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:08

This is certainly not professional. Mr. Piano is risking his reputation as an artist. The partial roof solution is no solution. What about the patrons? and as astrid commented, Will a partial roof keep out the background din of people moving about outside not to mention the yearly aerial bombardment during festa season? Furthermore, I still feel thet a parliament building besides being a waste of money will deprive us of an open space which could be better utilized. Let us have a proper art centre wherein one would find represented all the art forms, music, drama, visual arts.

carmel callus

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:06

In my opinion this country does not need more theatres. What we have is enough ...! Whye should we have more white elephants? It would have made more sense where that site with turned into parliament's building as originally proposed.

j ellul

Mar 3rd 2010, 13:02

If we procrastinate any further we will end up with neither a theatre nor a performance space nor a parliament; just acute embarrassment and the current dismal state of city gate for many more years to come.

Stella Farrugia

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:55

Many Maltese with refined tastes will never like Piano's disgusting designs for our Baroque & glorious Valletta. I am not the least impressed with Piano's supposedly 'world renowned' architecte & his plans. There are so many excellent local architects who would have done a better job than him & who would have been sensitive to our tastes & needs. Thanks Fr. Peter & all the others who are opposing the sheer arrogance of Piano's impositions and Gonzi's lakey attitude. Give Valletta its glorious architectural pre-war buildings with today's needs. The original theatre should be rebuilt & the roof issue is completely nonsense. Ideally Piano's plans for Valletta should be ditched. We do not need him to ruin forever our capital city.

Walter Busuttil

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:42

if we are to finally do something - lets do it right, first time! Partial roof or no roof is same difference for the audiences present. Lets have a retractable roof which could be used in all type of weather and seasons. Do we have to carry an umbrella with us in case it rains or protect us from the pigeaon droppings. A bit of further thought is asked for. Such an expensive project surely requires deeper thought before we proceed. We are the customer!!!

Pierre Fiorentino

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:41

If the PL had said these things, then we would have some rubbish comments that the PL always criticises everything and this sort of stuff. But now that people with certain backgrounds are claiming the same it is credible.

Ah bdw, this episode shows once more how hard-headed is our Prime Minister!

Paul Borg

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:16

Can we have a net as well for any bird droppings ! Wouldn't want an opera singer ending up with bird droppings in his or her mouth !!!!

Charles DeMicoli

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:12

Thank you Fr. Serracino-Inglott for stating the obvious.

v zammit

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:08

Mr Piano must have had a reason for doing the theatre roofless. But as I respectfully submitted in a previous comment to “Fr Peter’s Perspective” (Sunday Times - 21.2.2010) time still is to modify, adjust, change… Artist/architects are known to do that. I am no expert, but for one, I am thinking of the Louvre and National Gallery (London) versions of Da Vinci’s “Virgin (sometimes ‘Madonna’) of the Rocks”. Whatever might have been the reason. Other ‘changes’ famously include the ‘re-doing’ of David’s nose by Michaelangelo to satisfy his critics. But, obviously, that is not the case here. Consultation and time do wonders. The greater problems (to my mind) are the siting of Parliament and the building of a new Gate. They are more context-related.

Anthony A. Mifsud

Mar 3rd 2010, 12:02

Perhaps now that Fr. Peter has spoken, we change the roofless theatre to one with a proper roof.
Do we have the money to spend?
Or the Central bank will issue a other alotment of unsecured bonds?
The problem is one only ,we have a hard headed Prime Minister, who doesn't givea hoots about what the people who will use this theatre think, or that it's an unnecessary , what does he know?
Grazzi
Toni

R Agius

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:46

If it is not controversial then its probably not worth doing - so let's just get on with it please!! Our procrastination has gotten us nowhere! Its not like our future depends on it!

Ray Mangion

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:43

Serracino-Inglott, having been the ex Prime Minister`s personal advisor, should head an official objection to the Prime Minister`s plans and stop this nonsense and egotistic move, which in the process, is going to ruin Valletta and keeping our place as a Heritage City. Has not the Prime Minister been reading what is being said? This talk about building "another theatre"; we need an Opera House, which is the creme` de la Creme` of theatres and if managed properly by the right people appointed, and not those given the responsibility because they know someone, it should create jobs, brings more cultrural tourists following the opera stars, hotels will be fuller and the economy in general will improve. Some people,including the Prime Minister, have no idea how effective the Performing Arts are. We have a talent for producing good voices and should be nurtured. Joseph Calleja is respected all over the world now. What do we do here? We abuse him by using his talent and abuse his generosity. An Opera House should be built in his name. Build an Opera House to match Valletta`s Baroque buildings; it will need a larger footprint and there is room for that.

mike farrugia

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:33

@ Julian Esposito
Most maltese want a pre-war design. That's what they cried for when they asked for the theatre to be rebuilt.

Mario Bonnici

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:31

So two days after the government confirmed the new electicity tariffs, Fr. Serracinio Inglott is proposing to spend more money on a roof for the theatre.
This is an insult to the taxpayers.

Matthew Bugeja

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:24

as i look foward to study design! i always tought that his highness mr renzo piano was a god in these type of design sector!! but in my humble opinion this is a real flop!! to me it will be just a panel closed car park like the current use!!!
please authorities reconsider this design about the opera house

A.Busuttil

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:23

Instead we walk Republic street in protest we should organise a cultural day on the theatre site and square (Sunday) in protest about our topless theatre

Joseph V. Grech

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:23

Thank Heavens there still are people like the Rev. Fr. Peter Serracino Inglott, Mr. Mario Azzopardi, Ms. Astrid Vella, etc.
I'm no architect and rarely do I go to the theatre. But may I please suggest a possible way out of the embarassing and crucially important problem - crucially important not just for us Maltese but also for the administration and our capital city.
Could the two sites be combined into one - ie. that of the bombed out site and the one where the two Parliamentary Buildings are to be built?
The common site would possibly be built as one lovely building - an Arts / Community centre where Operas might possibly also be staged.
If it would be possible to accomodate the Parliament and ancillary offices on this common site so much the better - we could use underground levels also, why not?
World renowned Renzo Piano would I am sure produce beautiful plans and indeed even make use of at least a number of plans he has already come up with.
People will be sending in Comments. Could somebody please tell me whether this suggestion has been forwarded already and whether it can actually be done?

ASpiteri

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:22

As someone once said...

The madness will be remembered as the last miserable act of this miserable government...

...and I also add...

...the project that helped Renzo Piano losing his ‘world renowned’ status!

Adrian Borg Cardona

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:22

I look forward to seeing the PN sycophants attacking Fr. Peter as being ignorant of theatre matters and asking him to shut up as he is not an architect - just as they told those who disagreed with the topless theatre.

Julian Esposito

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:16

Call me old fashioned, but I would love to see the exterior rebuilt to the pre-war design. I would not mind the interior being redesigned as required though.

John Schembri

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:13

The problem of us Maltese is that we have a hard headed Prime Minister, who doesn't give two hoots about what the people who will use this theatre think, or that it's an unnecessary extravagance in this time of PN brought on austerity. He knows best and that's it. And we all clap and cheer him on. Let the madness continue.

g. scerri

Mar 3rd 2010, 11:13

Perhaps now that Fr. Peter has spoken, those who were against this concept from the very beginning will no longer be derided. As a people we no longer need to go down on our knees every time a foreign "expert" speaks.