Author: Jacques René Zammit

Categories
Rubriques Values

I.M. Jack – the one about satire

Today’s Times editorial invites readers “to get serious about laughter” and is an appeal to learn how to laugh about ourselves once more. I read a good article by David Quantick in the UK Independent yesterday in which he welcomed the return of political satire on prime time TV. ‘Twas the post-Thatcher 90’s that killed it you know – and the inability of satirists to let go of the facile spoofing of personalities and return to the dark minefield of satirising issues.

Seriously Funny

We’ve seen it all. The long arm of the law applied to carnival (priests, Jesus and his disciples), to what classifies as “comedy” on TV (Bla Kondixin‘ VIP Xow’s (thanks PG) shoe throwing stunt) and more. If the Maltese are relentless in their beliefs then there is little room for humour quoth the Times editor. M.A. Falzon, writing in the Times two years ago today had attempted to translate the local version of satire to “nejk” – a realm of “banter, jokes and jestful blasphemy” that “rarely makes it into the public sphere”.

Falzon suggested that the reason we find it hard to write (or understand) “nejk” in English is that English generally means serious business with little room for humour. Maltese – with all its “nejk” – is limited to the vernacular – always according to Falzon (and he does worry that “Linguistic nationalists will eat me alive for this”).

I’m not too sure about Falzon’s theory though there is some truth in the fact that the Maltese concept of “comedy” (and not necessarily satire) might differ radically from that of the Anglo-Saxons or French to mention but two others. Incidentally the other field that has been at the receiving end of the grossly overblown and outdated baton of the law is the field of literature. The point of overlap in the venn diagram seems to be a shady area of “taste” that somehow is qualified in terms of either “obscenity/vulgarity” or “immoral/unholy”.

In both cases what is now being waved around as a case of “Censorship in Malta” is really an outdated reaction to provoking events that could (and have been) be seen as being immoral – obscene – vulgar – unholy/blasphemous if taken from a conservative point of view. Whether that means that we are witnessing a real censorship of the “political” kind with the Maltese equivalent(s) of Solzenhitsyn rushing to exile is questionable. True there is an archaic law and perception that needs to be challenged – one that exalts a fictitious mentality of close-mindedness, religiosity and prudeness and does not take in the alternate reality of “nejk” within which we really live.

Does this seem funny to you?

Are we capable of being satirical? Is there space to caricaturise our politicians and their decisions. Can we even caricaturise ourselves in our everyday life to the point of subtle satire? We think that it is more than possible and that it is already being done in spurts. We mostly do not know how to react to it. The impression of a communist style politburo censoring every vague thought is a false one. As I said elsewhere J’accuse has never been censored no matter how critical it has been of the PLPN establishment.

Ignored? Yes. Attempts at character assassination? Of course it’s how business is done. But censored? Nope. Nyet. Sorry. And neither has any of the other variety of columnists/non-columnists been told not to speak their mind. I’m quite sure of that. We do not have censorship in Malta. We have the retarded (sic) application of archaic provisions that is distracting us from a possible development of our literature (maybe).

It’s literature that might not even intend to be funny. Take Vella Gera’s “Li Tkisser Sewwi”. I’m sure Alex never intended to be in the limelight (he says so himself) and never expected this kind of reaction (he said so too). He just woke up one day to find that his particular mode of expression is -according to the police, still to be seen by the court – considered as either obscene or vulgar in the eyes of the law that regulates our society.

Is it censorship? No. I don’t think so. I think it is the result of a society that is uncomfortable with itself when it looks in the mirror. What does that say about the future of satire in Malta.

It says it is possible. But that we have a long, long way to go. It goes beyond politicians or expected saviours (Oliver? Why Oliver?). It goes straight to the heart of what literature can be all about. Provocative, illuminating, and often a satirical exposé of the state of a nation. Warts, cunts, penises and all.

Funny that. He said “exposé”.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J’accuse: Oliver’s Twist & Other Perspectives

Almost 20 years have passed since I used to hitch rides to the university in the evening to attend a series of lectures by Professor Oliver Friggieri. If my memory serves me right, the lectures were about creative writing in Maltese but in actual fact they served as a real eye opener that went far beyond any tips on how to use your pen creatively. If you learn the benefits of learning and asking questions at the age of 16 then the world is your oyster. “Id-dinja mistoqsija, mimlija b’elf ghaliex” (“the world is a question full of a thousand ‘why’s’”).

What Prof. Friggieri imparted, among many other things, was the importance of observing the world around you, looking for clues of change as well as for the strands of similarity that occasionally get to give us a sense of identity or belonging. It was Oliver’s twist on life and it became a useful tool as life went on.

It was a pleasure to see Oliver (forgive me the first name sense of familiarity) on TV last Monday. There he was giving his take on different aspects of our life and the way we are. Are we partisan? Why? Where do we begin to look for an answer? There was that and more peppered with what I saw as the humility to declare (admit?) the limits of his comprehension. This was apparent when he was asked whether our party TV stations make us more partisan: “It’s a difficult question and I cannot answer it.” Oliver has never tired of reminding us that the world should be our reference point and nothing should be examined out of context. Twenty years may have passed but his philosophical yardstick used to see the world around him remains pleasantly reliable.

Mind the revolution

Browsing through Facebook the next day I was surprised to see a negative reaction to Oliver’s appearance on TV. The general idea was that Oliver was yet another of the mild intellectuals of the island who dance around controversy preferring the fence to the battlefield. I think that assessment is unfair. Oliver is less about controversy and criticism and more about sociological snapshots. He is less about the controversial medicine and more about the discovery of DNA and our origins. He has been observing for a long time now and is not about to pop a cigar into his mouth, grow some beard and wear military slacks while announcing the intellectual coup d’êtat on the nation’s corroded junta of partisan ignorantia.

Expecting Oliver to become Simón Bolívar is wrong. You also have to wonder exactly what kind of revolution people are expecting. We have become somewhat lax with words − something Oliver tried to explain to Lou. As an expat feeding solely on news as it is filtered, I can vouch that it is more and more difficult to fathom what is really going on in the country. When you reach a situation that a Times report is so convoluted that it could provoke a seminar of interpretations, then it is difficult to really observe and comment.

The picture is twisted beyond ken. I read an article in an English language newspaper that seemed to refer to authors generally commenting on the infamous Realtà article. Nowhere in the article could you find an indication that these were witnesses in the Magistrates’ Court. It was only after reading other papers that I understood why the likes of Maria Grech Ganado and Ranier Fsadni had decided to “revive” the subject. Then there was the reporting on the honorarium saga. What with parties wanting to spin their take, and with journalists getting half-baked reports, it was a total mess. Look at the post “Honour Among Thieves” in www.akkuza.com to see what I mean.

BERT4J_110123

Praeter intentionem

Or as Aquinas would put it − per accidens or outside the moral intention. We are becoming more and more slack with the use of our words or reporting. Most times we get the excuse that the resulting miscommunication was “not intended”. We try to define the indefinable such as “What is a real Nationalist?” after the latest manual revolutionary (from the DIY of PN backbenchers) has drawn his dividends from the D’Hondt one-man majority conundrum.

We swing between the hands of the Opposition that would love us to believe that this is the eternal battle of Rich (arrogant) vs. Poor (subject) and the gaffes of the party in government (We didn’t mean to get greedy). We fall over ourselves in asking the ridiculously sublime question of “What would Ugo Mifsud have done?”

Sadly a necessary and important debate about formulating a proper pay scale for MPs that justifies their job has been turned into a political football. The point is that while we apparently already know the answer to the question whether our politicians deserve the money they vote themselves, we fail to ask ourselves the even more important question: “Do we deserve the politicians that we elect?”

Honoraria: What lies beneath

Fausto Majistral has done a wonderful job of asking the right questions about the honoraria. Again you can find his post entitled “Honoraria: What lies beneath” in J’accuse − the blog. It’s less about whether Gonzi meant it, whether J.P. Farrugia deserved it, or whether Joseph’s Labour have really grasped the concept that it’s not theirs to donate if they pooh-poohed accepting it in the first place. It’s more about where we want

to go with our House of Representatives. Alfred Sant and Franco Debono have both made not too subtle statements about the current state of disrespect that surrounds our House of Representatives.

Something tells me that that is a lesson that our wannabe revolutionaries and half-baked political class still cannot get to terms with. We do not need saviours but a good set of servants, well paid if necessary, but servants nevertheless.

U ssirlek poezija (and it becomes a poem)

Jack Frost is back in the north of Europe and it’s a cold cold time again. It gets warmer in the living room catching up on the excellent series “Mad Men” with a smashing soundtrack (Enoch Light’s Autumn Leaves is a screamer). For the app fanatics about, I strongly recommend “Google Goggles” − watch your iPhone solve the hardest of sudokus before your eyes. One last word goes to one of the world’s latest citizens.

A big welcome goes out to baby Ella who turns eight (days) today. It’s a big, big world Ella, but if you ask the right questions you can turn it into the most wonderful of poems. At least Oliver told me so!

www.akkuza.com provides a wealth of information to the lost expats. Venture inside to interpret the mixed messages coming from the isle of milk and honey.

Categories
Zolabytes

Honoraria : What lies beneath?

Fausto Majistral is back with another Zolabyte. He gives us a no-nonsense analysis of the main issues that surround the whole ruckus about honoraria. It’s less about the politics and more about the constitutional issues.

Service as an MP in the Maltese House of Representatives is a part-time affair. “Part-time” is a misnomer, of course, because parliamentary work is not only attending sittings in plenary and involves all other sorts of things including constituents who could be quite demanding (to say the least) both in what they demand and the time at which they demand.

But we should not linger on this point: after all, nobody calls teachers “part timers” because the time they spend in the classroom is less than the usual annual average of 40 hours.

There were moves in the past, very discreet, to make parliament a “full time” affair. That would have meant, amongst other things, that apart from ministerial duties parliamentary service would have been to the exclusion of all other work (a condition which would have no justification for as long as being an MP was part-time). A significant advantage gained would have been that the risk of situations of conflict of interest would have been hugely reduced.

Needless to say, this was resisted by some MPs, particularly those who are also members of a profession. Their full time work is as big as the size of their clientele which is largely a matter of their choosing. In many cases, the service they offer their clientele can be delegated to professional partners or assistants. MPs whose full time job is as an employee, where the working hours are not of their choosing and where the duties cannot be delegated, do not have such luxury.

So parliamentary service remained part-time. Paid. Which you can combine with any other full time job. Equally paid. Except for one full time job: being minister.

Before anyone makes the point that being a minister you waive your moral right to be paid anything for basic MP work because your full time job is paid from the public purse, please note that you can combine a full time salary for a job in the public sector and the honorarium for being a part-time MP. Being a minister is one of the very few jobs, in the public as well as a private sector, which disqualifies you from the parliamentary honorarium.

I will not go here into the concurrent issue of whether MPs’ honoraria should have gone from 50% to 70% of the civil service’s salary scale 1. For the very simple reason that, I have no way to tell if 50% or 70% is what is deserved for the duties in question. Note however that one of Jean-Pierre Farrugia’s main gripes (which I think is representative of what the critics have so far said) was that it was bad timing in the prevailing financial situation.

Certainly. But please note that a pay increase that’s unrelated either to productivity or cost of living is hardly and alien concept in Maltese labour law. It’s the stuff annual increments based on a sector’s collective agreement are made of.

Neither do I need to go into the other main gripe, that these increases should not have been introduced by stealth. For the simple reason, that the critics are right on this one. Salaries and honoraria for ministers and parliamentarians should be the subject of law, as is already the case with the salaries of the President of Malta, the Attorney-General and the Auditor-General, or at least a parliamentary resolution.

But this should not detract us from the fact that the way payment is made for ministerial or parliamentary service disadvantages members of one category of employment over an other. The compromise struck between Farrugia and his Leader hardly addresses that question.

This is not a trivial discussion or one which is irrelevant to the health of a democracy. The early proponents of paid service argued their case on the grounds that no one should be barred from being an MP if elected simply because he has no other private means.

That was the argument in the UK in the beginning of the 20th century; it would have lost little force in Malta of the 21st. Apart from the Leader of the Opposition and MPs who have private means, note the the MPs who first and enthusiastically stated they’ll donate the increase to charity or some pet campaign were mostly members of the professions.

Given much credence to that quote by George Bernard Shaw that the professions are really conspiracies against the laity.

*****
Zolabytes is a rubrique on J’accuse – the name is a nod to the original J’accuser (Emile Zola) and a building block of the digital age (byte). Zolabytes is intended to be a collection of guest contributions in the spirit of discussion that has been promoted by J’accuse on the online Maltese political scene for 5 years.
Opinions expressed in zolabyte contributions are those of the author in question. Opinions appearing on zolabytes do not necessarily reflect the editorial line of J’accuse the blog.
***

Categories
iTech

Apps to Buy For

…your iphone of course. I am told by the lesser denizens of this earth that these apps are also available for non-iphone users. Anyway. I thought I’d give you a peep at the apps that have tickled my fancy recently. January 2011 might be a tad bit too late to wax lyrical about the power available at your fingertips but on the other hand that is one of the beauties of the internet powered revolution: it never ceases to impress. The apps listed below are in no particular order but they are all mystically superliciliously snobbishly fantabulastic.

J’accuse has no sponsorship deal with any of the following apps or their creators. Just in case you were wondering of course.

1. Whatsapp

I thought I’d get rid of this one because it is the most down-to-earth and unglamorous of the lot. What it lacks in glam and glitter it wins back in absolute practicality and money-savingness. This nifty app zaps through your telephonic contacts and makes them its own and then proceeds to inform you which among these contacts is already equipped with Whatsapp. The next step is instant messaging at prices that neither Go nor Vodafone nor Melita will give you… it’s free. Bully for the expats… we get to sms people in Rome, London, Rio and Malta for free… and they answer back at the same expense. Now to make some friends around the world who will actually speak to me….

2. TuneIn Radio App

If, like me, you never swallowed the line “video killed the radio star” then you will love this one. Open up to the world of radios wherever you are. Why be limited to the range of stations on the FM band? Why be a slave to the hissing fadings and shoutings of the AM frequency? Travel back in time and listen to the best radio Italy and the UK have to offer as though you were carrying a tranny in Rome or Sheffield.  It’s simple. Download the app that runs on the radiotime database then just browse the world – literally. Your iphone will be as at home in Mauritius as it is in Mumbai. There’s no limit.

So if you are bored of counting the number of times Maltese rock deejays drool over the cliches of il-Floyd and il-Bono and if you are addicted to the non-stop orgasm that is Classic FM this is your answer. Plug it into a set of JBL on stage speakers (iphone users beware – buy the phone adapted version to make sure you eliminate the intereference from cellular buzzing) and bob’s your uncle. You can leave it plugged in at your bedside overnight and you’ll fall asleep to the sound of your favourite radio (timer enabled) and wake up to it thanks to the programmable wake-up alarm. And while it is in sleep mode your iphone doubles as a wonderful bedside clock. Next time I’ll share some cool radios I’ve discovered… it had been ages since I could hear a crystal clear footie commentary (Radio Rai 1 or BBC 5 live).

Goggles by Google

3. Google Goggles

Save the best for last. Transform your iphone into a Star Trek app. I’d say that the basic principle behind google goggles is “doing things with images”. Google has jumped onto the fact that people now carry cameras everywhere thanks to advanced optics on iphones (and maybe on other non-iphones). The idea is to take a photo of ANYTHING and see what goggles does it with.

Not recognising a landmark? Snap a photo of it and let goggles scan it and browse the web for it. After a few seconds it will tell you what it is. I took a photo of a Gauguin poster in the office. In a few seconds Goggles told me what it was and where to find it. You could try it on people but it is not that good at recognising those yet. Take a photo of a barcode and Goggles will tell you what the product is, where to find it and how to buy it online.

The most jaw-dropping of all was the Sudoku. I took a photo of a Sudoku puzzle straight off the pages of the Daily Mail (difficulty hardest). It took Goggles a few seconds (a) to tell me that  it was a Sudoku image and (b) to ask me if I want it solved. Want it solved? Want it solved? I couldn’t believe my eyes. I pressed solve puzzle and there you were… in what was surely under three seconds the Daily Mail hardest puzzle was solved. Stuff that. For the crossword enthusiasts out there… don’t despair, the day a machine can get through the nuances of a cryptic crossword is still very far off.

There you have it. Three goldmines to tap. There’s much much more but I thought I’d share these three lovely ‘uns for the weekend. It’s frosty in Luxembourg as in all of Europe (I know that because my iphone told me this morning). There we were thinking that summer was round the corner… instead we’re stuck inside, playing with our iphones.

Related articles
Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Politics

Honour Among Thieves

There’s nothing better than giving a Times report the “Lorna” treatment in order to really get an impartial picture of the partisan positions in the honorarium saga. Farrugia’s meeting with the PM was swell. The Cabinet took a day off to find a way out of shit creek without a paddle and an announcement is expected shortly. Meanwhile Inhobbkom J is preparing his position on the honorarium saga without wanting to wait for the new government position. Which only makes sense in a cuckoo world where Inhobbkom J can be seen as a potential saviour from that mess that is the PN government in such cases.

So here goes. For the uninitiated the “Lorna” treatment is what J’accuse used to reserve to articles penned by the much missed Lorna Vassallo when her contributions to the Times of Malta’s opinion columns provided us with occasions of mirth punctuated with goggle-eyed bafflement. Just search TGIL on the old J’accuse site and you’ll get the gist.

Labour Party to announce position on ministers’ salaries, honoraria

The Labour Party is expected to issue a formal position on ministerial salaries and the honoraria given to MPs, informed sources said this afternoon. [cue Michael Jackson: Can you feel it? – the tension is palpable… what will they come up with this time?]

The Labour parliamentary group this afternoon held an unexpected meeting [as in they all serendipitally surfaced in Hamrun by pure chance. FBI despatched a unit from Quantico to examine this supernatural occurrence] , at the same time as the issue was also being discussed down the road by the Nationalist parliamentary group at PN headquarters [It was so supernatural that they were discussing an as yet undisclosed subject referred to by the codename “the issue”… informed sources told J’accuse that this might refer to a mucuous substance exuded rabidly by the coincidental congregation].

The issue [there they go again with the mysterious “issue”] was also discussed by the Cabinet this morning. Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi did not give details of the outcomes [they don’t know what was discussed, how it was discussed or what was said but they do know … with what seems to be absolute certainty…. that it’s plural] and said a decision would be announced later. However informed sources said ministers would refund part of the honoraria which they have been paid since 2008 [there go the deep throats… so the issue having been settled they moved on to tell us that there will be a form of ministerial refund of the honoraria they have been receiving since 2008].

Meanwhile, sources in the Labour Party said the party would announce its position, independently of what the government decided [since when is that news? Would they even bother with the government decision anyway?] The position would be announced by Labour leader Joseph Muscat [in the presence of white suited minions of course].

The PL had criticised ministers for having given themselves a double pay – their ministerial salary and their honoraria as MPs. As recently as last Sunday, Dr Muscat said one could discuss reviewing ministerial salaries, but he was against having a double pay [is that a general statement? would he apply this principle to the private sector? is there a double pay for discussing ministerial salaries? who writes these articles?].

Dr Muscat, who was also offered the honoraria along with the Opposition leader’s salary, had also declared that he would donate the honoraria (of €26,000 per year) to charity [still perpetuating the myth that he has refused the honorarium but ALSO AND AT THE SAME TIME donated it to charity… syou wish he could decide on that one].

Opposition MPs had been left at liberty to decide whether to accept a €7,000 annual increase to their honoraria. However a fund was set up for those who opted to donate the money. [See what we mean Joe? It’s confusing. You either ACCEPT the honoraria AND donate it to charity OR you DON’T ACCEPT the honorarium  AND it’s not yours to give.]

There you have it. We await with trepidation for Gonzi’s declaration. Will they give the money back? Will they hang on to some of it? What will this tell us about Gonzi’s control over his one-man majority party? Remember what J’accuse told you on the day after the election? Well you should. Coz you know what we hate to have to remind you that we were right.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Mediawatch

A Brilliant Bondi+

We know you’d never thought we’d say this but we will. Last night’s Bondi+ was brilliant. It may be that it’s because Oliver Friggieri was given practically a free rein to speak his mind about Malta and the Maltese but it is thoroughly enjoyable. Interesting insights and thoughts. Friggieri at his best. You’ve got to love his humility : “Ma hix mistoqsija facli. Ma nafx inwegibha” (when asked if party TV stations are contributing to increase the sense of partisanism.)

PS. Got to the point where Bondi expresses his new pet hate: “il-hmerijiet li taqra fuq l-internet.” He still cannot stomach the idea that there is a space which cannot be bought out for some opinions only. A repugnant interlude.

Watch it here.