Categories
Articles

J’accuse : That Bohemian Planet 51

Is this the real life? Or is it just fantasy?I think I’ve mentioned before the popular Chinese curse that involves wishing someone: “May you live in interesting times”. Well, it does not get any more interesting than this. French intellectual Jacques Attali (listed in the top 100 by Foreign Policy Magazine) has been quoted as saying that the euro might not survive Christmas – the common currency will drown sometime between Black Friday (that’s last Friday) and St. Stephen’s Day.Here is this week’s leader in “The Economist”: “The chances of the euro zone being smashed apart have risen alarmingly, thanks to financial panic, a rapidly weakening economic outlook and pigheaded brinkmanship. The odds of a safe landing are dwindling fast”. Help! I’ve added the “Help” bit (just in case the end-quote escaped your attention) and “Help!” is just the kind of default mode disposition you’d expect a normal citizen to have in this crisis-stricken period. At least “HELP”… if not “What shall we do about it?”During a lift conversation with a German work colleague of mine conversation shifted to things trivial (as it always does in elevators) so I asked her somewhere between the fourth and third floor whether she believed she’d be shopping in Deutsche Marks (or the German Dollar) come Christmas eve. She looked at me with the kind of resignation that Angela must have reserved for Silvio and said “I’ve stopped thinking about it. My grandma always said that you should always worry about things that you can do something about. If it’s got to happen, it will happen.” Ah. These practical Deutsche Mensch (und Womensch).Caught in a landslide. No escape from reality. You’d think that given the current circumstances even the nation that believes itself to be a planet of its own right would “come down to earth” so to speak. You’d think. Hollywood must have taken up the offer of Tonio Fenech’s new residence scheme and is now a permanent part of our lives thanks to the screenings offered by our supposed leaders and leaders to be. The purveyors of fiction from all sides of the house have contrived to collude in the creation of a mind-boggling, reality-twisting cocooned fantasy carrying along with them most of the citizens of Oz.

Tonio Fenech gave the nation its budget not so long ago. Since then the Prime Minister has taken it upon himself to ignore the accusations of doctoring of figures (and such wondrously magickal words as capital expenditure) and concentrated on proving how under his leadership Malta is weathering the storm. My question (since questions seem to be the order of the day) to Prime Minister Gonzi would be: Has Malta decided to think like my German friend and opted to concentrate on matters that are within its control? So we can’t save the euro but what is our plan for the crisis? If so what is our default plan for the day the euro dies? Do we need one? Surely not everything is “Ward u Zahar”. (Sweet smelling roses).

I’m sorry to be the one to ask PM Gonzi this question but the PM-in-waiting seems to be busy working on Malta’s first ever space program. Or so I gather from the evidence that is available. Well yes. I am about to criticise “Inhobbkom Joseph” again. I was told more than once this week that since my return from my nuptial escapade I seem to be digging my critical talons deeper into Joseph’s flesh than is to many a Labourite voter’s liking.

Open your eyes. I had quite an argument with Bertu the cartoonist this week. After I had, as usual, described the toon that I would require to accompany this week’s article he challenged me to convince him first that Joseph Muscat deserved more attention (and picking on) than the Gonzi government (and budget). Hot on the heels of his objection came one or two comments on facebook accusing the Great J’accuse of not balancing his repartees out and “picking on Labour too often”. Like it’s a game. I cannot stand this bloody “mhux fair” reasoning.

Here’s one reason that should suffice. Joseph Muscat wants to be the leader of this country. “Iss, imma Gonzi IS the leader now” I hear them object. Fine. What the Labourite advocates of par condicio (balanced criticism) fail to realise is that my concentrating on Muscat and what he has to offer implies a decision to not consider the “GonziPN” option next election. Yes dears. The average non-flag waving voter would have to go through that mental process that begins with thinking “So. I do not like what the Gonzi government has done for X reasons so I will definitely not be voting him back into government. Let’s see what “the others” have to offer”.

Look up to the skies and see. Well yes folks. As i put it to Bertu, if I have a stomach ache or an ulcer that is bothering me I do not reach for my grandpa’s old hunting rifle and aim in the general direction of my navel. Yes, you’ve guessed it – a gastroenterologist will do the trick most times. So if you believe that there is a problem, studying the right solution is not an exercise in “opposition bashing” but a careful check to see if there really is someone better to take the reins of the country into his hands. And tough shit for your dreams of a flag fest and carcade if the tests prove there isn’t.

Anyway the wind blows doesn’t really matter to me. So as the Labour-lites were showering plaudits on their Dear Leader for his supposedly wonderful performance in producing a larger number from his hat than did Lawrence Gonzi (51 beats 10 –  booyakasha, raspberry and italian ombrello for good measure) J’accuse and plenty another pundit actually contrived to read the 51 “proposals”. For our reaction please refer to the post “51 proposals from another planet” on www.akkuza.com.

We were not amused. There was a children’s movie that goes by the name of Planet 51. The first words of the trailer describe another planet “Somewhere far, far away. There is a place where life is simple. Children are care free. And everything is pleasant”…. Planet 51. Muscat’s 51 “proposals” were written for this kind of planet. A planet oblivious to the universe around it where “everything is pleasant” and a few catch phrases (not to mention empty phrases like “We’ll give priority to fishing and farming” or “Youth before bureaucracy” – did they forget “Age before beauty?”) are supposed to magic away everyone’s woes.

Easy come easy go. Right before Tonio Fenech’s budget speech we were regaled with the sad scene of opposition bench members “daring” the government to mention the European crisis. You could see them ROTFL-ing and LOL-ing every mention of Greece, Spain and the European instability. After the budget we got Joseph Muscat’s proposals that are so intangible and detached from actual workability that they might as well be from another planet. Planet 51. Yet the nation remains divided and it is evident from reactions on the net that the mental sieve that is required by your average voter in order to make weighted choices is conspicuous in its absence. The next election is round the corner, there’s a record-breaking economic crisis out there and we still vote on the basis of tribal instinct.

Got to leave you all behind and face the truth. It may be jarring for many who would love to see the back of the Gonzi government that some like myself persist in surgically dissecting the Muscat option. We get called “armchair critics” (iss how easy) by people from both sides of the spectrum. In this case it is our realism that hurts. What we see from here is a nationalist party that is shedding most of its uncomfortable elements – JPO announced that he will not run again (will Labour woo him too?), Austin “Bulldozer” Gatt is on his way out and meanwhile there is a never-too-late rereading of the Basic Principles.

Muscat meanwhile is fast becoming a predictable populist puppet of easy words and shallow promises. Which does not mean they will not work. It takes big balls to prioritise your desire to run a country above the need to have a plan of how to run it once you’re actually in the driving seat. Big balls or a particularly devious mind driven by ignorance. Is this really a little silhouetto of a man we are seeing before us? One for whom nothing really matters, anyway the wind blows so long as it gets him to Castille?

In the end, when the curtain falls it is up to the audience to applaud or to boo. Joseph Muscat gave us 51 proposals in answer to Lawrence Gonzi’s 10 questions. If you are willing to believe that the 51 proposals are the solution that this country needs in these interesting times then you deserve a Labour government. Those who don’t believe the 51 proposals don’t deserve a Labour government, but at the rate populist feeling is going it seems that they’ll get it anyway.

That. In short. Is the beauty of democratic government.

www.akkuza.com has always been biased. We declared a journalistic passion for questions and a search for answers as from the beginning. Which makes us biased in our quest for the truth. This article is dedicated to the memory of one of the great philosophers of the twentieth century: Farrokh Bulsara a.k.a Freddie Mercury.

Categories
NRD

therealopposition.com

Here’s another one for the New Republic Dictionary – where’s the real opposition? Andrew Borg Cardona beat me to this reflection yesterday in his Times blog (Snappy Little Annoyances). This is no race though and ABC’s pondering only comforted my thinking in the sense that if other people are reaching the same conclusions then the concept might be worth a moment of elaboration and analysis. In this case the idea (or question provoking the idea) is simple: Who is performing the work of the real opposition in Malta nowadays? Surely, I hear you protest,  it’s Joseph Muscat and his merry band of “għaqlin”. Well no it isn’t.

If we needed any confirmation of the absolute abdication by the Malta Labour Party from its duties as a real opposition then the run up to the budget and subsequent follow up have given us enough to digest. There they were arming their cannons with the fodder of overused cliches about the cost-of-living and the water and electricity bills. The likes of Luciano Busuttil, Cyrus Engerer and Leo Brincat crammed social networks with “warnings” that the government benches’ vocabulary would be rife with references to the international state of economic affairs – like that would be a bad thing. The “opposition” wanted you to believe that a government presenting its budget in November 2011 was obliged to do so without thinking about what was going on in France, Spain, Greece and Italy. Basically according to Labour, our Budget in Times of Crisis had to ignore the Eurozone in its entirety.

Did “we the people” fall for it? Well the “sarcastic” elements of the web might have found something to chew on – coming up with Eurovision-like games about the number of times Tonio F would mention the PIGS (that’s Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain and not the porcine patterers) but on the whole the reaction to what on the surface seems to be a very family oriented and equity-driven budget (“equity” that’s a word to hang on to nowadays) seems to be relatively positive and unaffected by Labour’s shenanigans. There is hope yet.

We cannot be distracted though by the sanity of the PN budget planning. Two years before a general election it behooves us to drill the fact that Joseph Muscat’s Labour has not only been caught with its pants down but (if you forgive the extensive milking of the metaphor) it is very evidently lacking any signs of puberty – let alone full blown maturity. We couldn’t put it simpler – the Labour opposition is transparently unable to come to terms with the simplest of facts: a budget is not only where to spend your money but also about where it will be coming from.

Muscat is headstrong about the downsizing of water and electricity bills (while expecting Tonio Fenech to both announce a hike AND a cut in the utility bills) but cannot be brought to explain to anyone who cares to listen where the hell the money to cover those cuts will be coming from. Broad statements and planning coming from the opposition involve spending more and cutting less or some half-baked plans about alternative forms of energy. This while Sarkozy’s government (shit, he mentioned France) is hell-bent on AUSTERITY, SuperMario (darn.,there goes Italy) has been installed to supervise a cost-cutting and tax-hiking exercise to tackle the spread, and Greece (no, don’t mention the Greeks) is battling for survival with the latest technical government.

Even in a time of crisis where in other countries (sorry but they exist) opposition members co-operate with governments in order to perform the tightrope act of equitable measures that might just about keep the euro bomb from exploding, Muscat wants to play at the traditional, old fashioned opposition selling unsustainable populist wares to what he hopes is a sufficiently gullible and greedy electorate.

Which brings me back to the question. Who is the real opposition? Well the likes of Franco Debono embody the kind of unlovable opposition (from a government point of view) that we really deserve. Even with a crisis looming backbenchers found time to rap the government hand on such issues as responsibility in transport reform, divorce legislation, and now criminal justice reform. They did not hesitate to throw themselves four-square behind the government when it came to the all-important measures related to economic stability. better still we got an added bonus because the government could plan confidently and include incentives that remind us of the true worth of christian-democrat politics when practised properly.

The New Republic has the potential to banish futile, old-fashioned oppositions from their undeserved seats and benches in parliament. Joseph Muscat’s failure to breathe fresh air into an old and tired Labour might find that the final test will be an unfortunate one for his fate and of those who would love to preserve the old fashioned way of the all-nixing opposition. Far from being progressive, Muscat and his minions have proved to be a clunking metal ball at the foot of real progress in constitutional, institutional and republican matters. The sooner the Republic is rid of this baggage the faster everyone gets to move on.

 

Categories
Politics

Budgetary Woes

I’d almost apologise for not commenting on the budget but then again there is not much to comment about nowadays. Reactions to the budget could have been predicted much before Tonio Fenech opened his mouth and in any case J’accuse has never professed to be an expert in matters economical. Reactions to the budget on social networks served to prove that the critical mass of our voting population have been overfed clichés so many times that they are quite capable of spouting them back when requested “budget responsabbli” must have clinched the winning vote for the ayes. On Labour’s side, the realbudget.com gimmick turned out to be simply the yawn inducing assessment of what was not there. How else can you explain Labour’s obstinate refusal to factor, ever so slightly, the EU economic scenario into the context?

One of the most intriguing part of the budget is the increase in VAT on tourism to 7%. While the private sector began its whinge fest about how this would destroy the tourism industry nobody seemed to be aware of the fact that the European tourist industry is folding upon itself. Thomas Cook, one of the largest tour operators has recently communicated to its partners that it will be unilaterally deciding not to pay 5% of what it had promised. It was an offer they could not refuse for in the industry, the bulk provided by Cook is enough of an incentive for the receivers to hang on to Cook notwithstanding its bullying ways.

For a country that claims to be heavily dependent on tourism we seem to be surprisingly slow on adapting to the European mood and insist on depending on what we deem to be the veritable gold mine of mass supply from the likes of Birmingham, Manchester and Luton. Air Malta’s reaction to the budget was to downsize the number of flights to and from the UK – with the impact that 38,000 beds will not be filled come next summer.

Malta’s absence from hot deal sites that cater for DIY tourists from all over the world and the reluctance to explore new routes to the more stable parts of Europe really have me flummoxed.

Another point that has me even more confused is our inability to cater for the pension bomb more directly. Luxembourg has just calculated that the current rate of 14% of the population will change to 1 in every four persons being a pensioner over the next 50 years. I am sure Malta is not far behind on that ratio. While our current crop of politicians have proven diligent enough to steer the cake clear from the poorlands of the economic crisis, both government and opposition seem too tied to short-term gains (in the opposition case it is short-term fantasies coupled with irresponsible planning) to have an eye on the big picture.

Still. You reap what you sow don’t you. Remember that next time you vote PLPN.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Abre los Ojos

Labour (Inhobbkom’s Labour not Ed’s New New One) is busy conferencing this weekend. They’re huddled cosily in the university’s Aula Magna for a full day of talks in a conference entitled “Revisting Labour’s History” and I still cannot get over the fact that I was unable to make it there. Yes, you read that right, I would have loved to witness at first hand this conference of sorts that is part of the wider Labour strategy of “Re-”s. They’re re-visiting their history, re-inventing their logo, re-gurgitating old economic principles, re-moving their facial hair and (once again) re-cycling an image that has been a work in progress since is-Salvatur ta’ Malta went into re-tirement (never a minute too late).

There’s something manifestly wrong in the way Labour went about this whole “re-” business though, and this weekend’s conference contains some clear pointers to what that could be. Someone, somewhere is guilty of a gross miscalculation when choosing the title first of all: “Revisiting Labour’s History”. It’s the political equivalent of a Freudian slip combined with all the evident trappings of a modern day “Pimp my Party” in the making. The term “revisit” is a few letters away from becoming “revise” and I have a hunch that this is not a small coincidence.

In legal terms, when a court revisits an earlier decision it normally does so because of the necessity of reinterpreting the earlier position – there would be not other reason to revisit and reopen the case. In historical terms there is another “re-” word that is of relevance here. It’s the idea of revisionism. Revisionism need not always be extreme as in holocaust denial. Reading through the agenda of this weekend’s conference, I couldn’t help but think that Labour is sorely tempted to rewrite some chapters of history of its own. They’ve been at it for a while now and we have all become used to the polyphonic history of our islands – whether it is sung by Mary Spiteri to the tunes of Gensna or whether it is yelled from the pedestals of il-Fosos by the latest crowd-stirring nationalist orator – the messages are always excitingly dissonant and cacophonous: the result of two virtual realities and perceptions colliding.

Rapid eye movement

The political audience is already, as it is, doomed to the regular resurrection of revisited myths and legends in our political discourse. The narratives woven by opposing parties are now firmly ingrained in our collective minds and it is hard to reasonably detach from them completely. It is extremely significant that, bang in the middle of the process of change and reinvention, Labour chose to “revisit” its history and discuss, among other things: “The Worker Student Scheme: 1978-1987”. As I type (11.30am, Saturday, 2 October), Peter Mayo is about to launch into an explanation of how Great Leader Mintoff (May God Give Him Long Life and Order a Hail of Stones on All His Evil Wishers) sowed the seeds of the stipend system and how we must be eternally grateful for his insights that allowed us to progress to a university accepting 3,000+ freshers this year.

The irony will be lost on the listeners sitting in that cosy hall of the Aula Magna on the 2nd of October 2010 that 33 years and one day before this the atmosphere in that very same place would best have been described as tensely electric. I wonder whether Peter Mayo will stop for a moment to explain to the young listeners (I’d imagine a Nikita Alamango fawning in the audience – one who according to her latest Times “blog” post cannot stand the PN reminders of the past) that on the 3rd October 1977 the opening ceremony at university featured heavy protests by the medical students who had just been shut out of the course (and always risked brutal cancellation if the thugs decided that it was open day at Tal-Qroqq).

Sure, it was not yet 1978 so it might (just) be beyond Peter Mayo’s remit. He will be forgiven therefore for not reminding those present that only two days later, on 5 October 1977, the man dubbed as is-Salvatur tal-Maltin would walk past a group of students chained to the railings in Castille oblivious to the fact that his government’s decisions in the educational sector (the much lauded Worker Student Scheme) were about to deny thousands of young people the path to tertiary education and send them abroad in droves.

Remember, remember the 5th of October

To be fair to Peter Mayo he probably couldn’t dare criticise the workings of the Great Leader. Not after a wonderful morning discussing his battles with the church in the sixties and his “electrifying” speeches to the proletariat. The electric effect Mintoff and his handymen had on some parts of the population would best be described as “shocking” actually. Whatever you may think of Labour’s dim-witted purposive ignorance of the past and bulldozering of historic relevance, don’t you for one moment run away with the idea that it is only the party of Joseph, Evarist (Bartolo – of removed stipends fame) and Alfred (Sant – of interview boards at university) who is in the business of revising historical facts.

You see, I sympathise with such Young Turks as Nikita Alamango who are frustrated at having to carry the burden of Labour’s past every time they squeak a new idea or criticise the current regime (sorry – did I say regime? – it’s the “Re” word fixation). Hell, this week even the German Republic paid the final instalment in World War I Reparations (started paying in 1919 and was suspended as long as Germany was split). Ninety-two years on and the German conscience is slightly freer – so why not Labour? Most times they are right. PN lackeys all too often emerge from the primordial slew of infertile political ground and rely on historical mudslinging for want of a better argument.

The problem I have with Labour is twofold – disputing the relevance of past actions is one thing. Revising (sorry, revisiting) them is another. Revisiting them on the anniversary of events that marked the watershed of Old Labour’s hopeless politics of the late 70s is insulting – insulting not just to the PN hardliners but also to neutral observers like myself who can see through the charade. Labour cannot expect this to go unnoticed. It is strategically stupid and politically insensitive. It does not stop at conferences: Recently, someone from Labour’s “think-tank” (IDEAT) was busy on Facebook quoting a party press release which stated that the current government’s agreements with China are a confirmation of the Labour vision of the seventies. Sit down and weep.

Virtually real

Mine is not simply an angry case of indignation though. Labour’s Revisionist Conference is part of a wider mentality that is the inner workings and thinking of the two major parties in this country. In this day and age of multimedia and mass communication, the modes of communication might be evolving at such a rapid pace that we will soon be tweeting in our sleep, but there is one basic constant whether it’s TV, radio, newspaper or Internet and that constant is the word. In principio stat verbum (in the beginning was the word) and it’s going to be with us for a long time yet.

Words and their meaning are at the basis of whatever construction of reality we choose to live in. Einstein once stated that reality is an illusion but a very good illusion at that. The PLPN (un)wittingly engage in a constant battleground of establishing the reality in which we live (and that is why they NEED the media influence). Whether we are considering the “cost of living”, the “minimum wage” or the “living wage”, we sometimes fail to notice that a large number of constants that we take for granted in these arguments are the fruit of elaborate definitions of perception suited to whatever party is making its claim. We are not that dopey really – there is a general acceptance that “parties colour the world as best they see it”, and although as a nation we struggle to come to terms with irony and sarcasm we still manage to joke about the PL-PN chiaroscuro worlds.

I am not sure however about how much the electorate is in control of the button that switches us between perception and reality. How capable are we of switching off the virtual reality and putting our foot down when we believe that things have been taken too far? Can we decide when we want to open our eyes? Are we, like the character in Almodovar’s Abre Los Ojos (open your eyes – spoiler warning) still able to opt out of the programme that creates a “lucid and lifelike virtual reality of dreams” and yell that enough is enough? Worse still – have the very parties that are responsible for the manufactured realities that we inhabit become so embroiled and enmeshed in them that they are unable to find the switch themselves?

Denial

Take the Nationalist Party. They are an incredible subject for this sort of test. This week they engaged in a mind-boggling collective exercise of denial of truths. We had Minister Tonio Fenech and his cataclysmic Tax-Free Maid slip. Watching The Times interview that gave Tonio a chance to right his previous wrongs was like watching an exercise in verbal prestidigitation featuring a ministerial equivalent of the Mad Hatter. Quizzed on VAT he replied on Stamp Duty and vice-versa, and then went on a trip about not having to answer about private affairs that he himself had brought up as a public example. You could only squirm in your seat as you watched Tonio attempt to make his statements vanish into thin air. Apologists tried other tactics – the cream of the crop coming from the Runs claiming that since the law is inadequate then Tonio and his maid are right in not following it to the letter. Perception? Forget the doors… they’ve swallowed the key.

Meanwhile El Supremo del Govermento was busy wearing the party hat, having been asked to pass summary judgement on the PBO-VAT saga. Prime Minister Lawrence Gonzi found absolutely nothing incongruous with the fact that his very exacting sec-gen failed to apply his own standards of political propriety when faced with a legal crisis of his own. Same same but different – just like in the alleyways in Thailand when they sell fake brands. Fake – it’s just an illusion of reality but not exactly so.

As if PBO and Tonio were not enough, we also had the DimechGate spin-off in the form of the uncomfortable presence of Robert Arrigo – the last of the disgruntled backbenchers. PN councillor Yves Cali was the latest to slip in a frank interview with The Times in which he more than just alleged that Arrigo was in the business of throwing his weight around the council to get what he wants. Yves (or Bobby) tried to retract his statement so an irritated Times published a transcript of the interview in which the allegations were made. A transcript – that’s a word for word proof that the statements were made. Quizzed about this, Paul Borg Olivier (fresh from his own reality check) came up with the quote of the week by insisting that the transcript published by The Times was “not faithful to the statement of clarification made by Yves Cali”.

Open your eyes

bert4j_101003

Take your time and read that short, Orwellian PBO phrase. If ever there was an example of the convoluted logic somersaults performed by parties to twist your perception of reality, here it was.

The transcript (a text bearing witness to reality at its crudest) was not faithful to the statement of clarification (an attempt at revising/reinterpreting that reality). And which reality does PBO want you to believe? No prizes for guessing.

We need to open your eyes. This is a political generation that one week expresses its love for the environment on car free day while parading in front of journalists using alternative modes of transportation and then, in the following week, the collective parliamentary group (PLPN) self-allocates a huge chunk of (previously pedestrian) Merchants Street for reserved MP parking in connivance with the Valletta Local Council (remember Cali? “We serve our MPs and Labour serve theirs”). The excuse? It will free up more parking for residents and visitors. Park and Ride anyone?

It’s time we opened our eyes – and remember, sometimes actions speak louder than words.

www.akkuza.com would like to congratulate Toni Sant (and friends) for the www.m3p.com.mt project. Happy Student’s Day to you all!

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Articles

J'accuse : Nolens Volens

Art is not dead. The Front Against Censorship (FAC) may parade along Republic Street in a make-believe funeral, along with the usual suspects and hanger-on politicians, proclaiming that Art with a capital “A” is henceforth to be considered defunct and that the muses shall muse no more. They may paint the words “Art is dead” along the length of the coffin carried solemnly to the beat of the drums and the roar of the megaphone, but what they profess is a lie.

Art is not dead. It is alive and kicking in all its forms – from the amateur to the mediocre to the professionally entertaining. Whether it is to be seen prostituting itself in exchange for monetary tokens of appreciation, or whether it spontaneously erupts from the pen, the voice or the flash of one who has just been visited by the aforementioned muses, it continues in its existence quite happily and oblivious to all the fuss being made about its very own death.

Last week’s procession of the dozens (I am guilty of not attending but not for the same reasons as John Attard Montalto MEP) only contributed to the general theatrical air surrounding the whole issue of “censorship v expression” and risked becoming another caricature in the running saga. The Front has come up with a list of instances when art and expression have supposedly been on the wrong end of the long arm of the law. They range from the banning of biblical figures during carnival to various photo shoots being called off (remember the model in a cemetery?) to the infamous instances of Realtà and Stitching.

It’s now official – the Front has become a full-fledged whingeing member of this molly-cuddled pseudo-democracy. Theirs is not a reaction of artists angered by risible instances of conservative hypocrisy but the reaction of brainwashed citizens who actually believe that a coffin and a couple of megaphones is what it takes to get the dominant elements of our society to wake up and smell the coffee. In this country, where counter-culture translates into simply being a normal 21st century cosmopolitan person, our “artists” have chosen to abdicate their responsibilities.

‘Opera morta’

I shall not pretend for one moment to be able to define art. What I do believe is that in times of societal poverty and intellectual blandness, society sub-consciously depends on its reserve of artists and intellectuals for inspiration for change. Rarely has society welcomed artists and intellectuals with open arms – rather, it has more often than not kicked them down and attempted to silence them. On the other hand, those artists who have been trampled upon and shunned did not congregate in the middle of the main thoroughfares of Europe to protest “It’s not fair” but preferred to use their art to expose the hypocrisy of their very persecutors. Action. Reaction.

Not in Malta though. My suggested choice of action for the artistic fraternity would have been a self-imposed nationwide moratorium on the arts. No more plays by actors, no more songs to be sung and no more paintings to be exhibited (continue in this vein). A silent veil would be drawn over the whole works as the supposed audience is starved of such outlets of expression. For if the Civil Court – when assessing a play from the point of view of a reasonable man – is unable to grasp concepts such as suspension of reality, metaphors and the very essence of representative art, then it is not art that is dead but the very spectators that have slipped into some sort ofpermanent coma.

The FAC should not be angry at the “authorities” (even in their wide definition of the term that includes private art galleries) but should get busy urging artists to embark on a nationwide awareness campaign of what art is about and why it is an integral part of the soul of society. They should be provoking the man in the street to think himself out of the self-imposed rigidity and vacuum bubble. Rather than writing eulogies on Art’s tomb, they should be making the sorts of noises (or silences) that bring the current situation to everyone’s attention – using the very medium whose death they are supposed to be lamenting. My idea of a moratorium is only one way of making the right impact. When I bounced that idea off some friends they reacted typically: “Who would notice?” Would anyone notice that the artists have gone on strike? Is our situation that dire?

Willy-nilly

It all boils down to the “audience” or rather to the citizens that make up our Republic. They are citizens brought up on the Myth of Saint Paul, the Bedtime Story of Count Roger, the Saga of the Great Siege and the Narrative of Malta – Blitzed but Not Beaten. Our tiny nation has had its defining moments that were then cemented with the musical chair moments of Integration – Independence – Republic – Freedom – European Union Membership. We read the story line convinced that, like the Israelites, we too are the chosen people and that fate will inevitably look favourably upon us and that everyone and everything in the world will owe us a living because we are after all the islands where civilisation practically kicked off – how else would you explain the Neolithic temples?

Try to look back at the narrative again and introduce one new element – inevitability. Think of every step as having been inevitable – that it would have occurred with or without, and not thanks to, the inhabitants of the time. Saul of Tarsus or no Saul of Tarsus, we would still have had a couple of hundred years as a mostly Muslim people and there is absolutely nothing wrong with that. Roger was the last of many of Tancred’s sons scrambling for some territory, and although the story of the Great Siege would make for a lovely Guy Ritchie film it would not be the last of its kind.

There were similar perils to “Christendom” faced in Vienna and Buda, and the Ottomans only turned away because they got distracted elsewhere. Meanwhile “Christian” Europe – seeing another day and another Hail Mary thanks to the valiant Maltese (no doubt) – would soon be immersed in a fratricidal war that would render any effects of La Valette’s last stand hugely inconsequential (the Thirty Years War pitting Christian versus Christian).

The Malta-centric narrative is badly in need of a couple of blows to the stomach. Our political representatives have long feasted on our gullibility within this context and fed us more propagandistic drivel fit for the 20th century. I have once before drawn the opprobrium of die-hard Nationalists by stating that European membership was an inevitable obvious step for this country and we got there in spite of our political establishment and not thanks to any part of it. The PN was lucky enough to have a blind, incompetent adversary who believed (for an incredibly long time) that membership was anathema and thus could step into the shoes of supposed saviours of the nation – much like good old Dom had conned the other half of the nation into believing the Helsien joke a couple of decades before. In a normal, civilised and rational country, we would have been joining the EU without so much as a referendum. The equation was all too clear – out was not an option, it was a disaster.

Yet. Yet. Yet. Even in the most obvious of situations – a no-brainer – a large part of the population had to have the wool lifted from its eyes and had to be dragged unwillingly – nolens volens – along with the rest. Still I find the assertion of Nationalist flag-wavers that “dahhalnikom fl-Ewropa” (we put you into Europe) so pathetically absurd. Little do they know what a great part they had in almost getting us to miss this supposedly most obvious of targets. Sic transit gloria Melitae (Thus passes the glory of Malta).

Mules and asses

The latest “discussion” (should I say dialogue) on censorship and divorce has once again brought out the nolens volens element of Maltese society and of its most honourable representatives. You can imagine one great mass insisting as obstinately as possible on moving against the signs of the times: “because it has always been so”, “because those are our values and traditions”, “because God wants us to be his soldiers” and other such drivel. We are by nature a people who would have been ignored by history but who, through an incredible twist of geopolitical necessity, seem to always end up in the thick of some action or other (and manage to take the credit).

The fundamental right of expression and the civil right of divorce are a bit more complicated than the no-brainer of inevitable membership of a large economic and political union. This time, fate and destiny might not be so willing to lend a helping hand and we risk becoming the victims of our own obstinacy and our conservatism founded on myth. It is time to break the old narratives and rediscover our true likeness in order to better understand where we want to go next. It’s not going to be an easy task.

The tsk-tskers and tut-tutters in Balluta who turned on the bikini-clad lass like a mediaeval crowd of peasants minus the pitchforks exemplify the type of people who will have to be dragged nolens volens into the age of reason. Then there were those who harassed the prankster who had the audacity to pitch a deckchair on the hallowed ground of Saint George’s Square (The Times report claimed that some people hurled insults at him). There’s the huge mass of automatic voters who cancel each other out at the poll every five years, and then there’s plenty more where those came from so it will take more than a coffin ride through Republic Street to swing the balance away from their considerable (voting) clout.

bert4j_100801

‘Eppur’ si muove’ (and yet it moves)

Meanwhile, Tonio Fenech’s men have published the Pre-Budget Document and I am using it as my choice bedtime reading for the next week. I’m already horrified by the government’s idea of “creative works” – surely, given the current environment, a statement like “Government is committed to championing the creative economy” is grossly misplaced. There are other interesting insights to be had from this pre-budget document entitled “Ideas, Vision and Discussion” and I’ll have more to say about it next week.

In the meantime, a bit of news from that other intransigent, conservative institution of power. The Vatican has been getting some heat with regard to the radio masts of Radio Vaticana. In response to allegations linking their masts to tumours the Radio responded: ““Il nesso tra tumori e onde elettromagnetiche non è scientificamente dimostrato” (The link between tumours and electromagnetic waves has not been scientifically proven). Scientifically proven? The Vatican? Now if you don’t see the irony in that one, don’t ask me to help you…. I’d hate to have to explain it in (the civil) court.


www.akkuza.com is back at the home away from home. The weather here is miserable, which probably explains the time we have to spare for “Ideas, Vision and Discussion”.

Enhanced by Zemanta
Categories
Admin Politics

We Come Unstuck

Van Isacker Pourquoi Pas 1931
Image via Wikipedia

Apologies for the relative paucity of blogging but we have been affected by a rather irritating bout of the gastric. It was not nice and it has kept us away from the nicer side of blogging for over three days now. Just so you know, we are following the Great Divorce Debate at PN HQ with a rabid interest and are particularly intrigued (and vaguely suspicious) of Ranier’s speculation as to how PN will proceed with the gambit. Will the Gonzi clan really take the neither here nor there approach as advanced by Ranier as the final solution? Will they do their turn of “turiamoci il naso” and find a way to include the civil right while shoving a load of constitutional caveats in a slipshod manner? Short of doing a Re Baldovino (of the Belgian variety) it might be Gonzi’s way out to keeping his premiership period relatively Vatican approved.

Then there’s Minister Fenech’s spanking new document called pre-budget something in which we are told that the economy is shrinking and that one of the reasons (surprise, surprise) is that notwithstanding 20 odd years of nationalist direction we still have a relatively stupid population. By relatively stupid we mean that we still have an extremely high level of early school leavers. Which is not the best statistic to stand aside the glaringly obvious fact that our need to diversify the economy can only be satiated by improving on the quality of our workforce (and not the manual labour kind). Being competitive means also offering a relatively competitive wage system though at the same time the Blues at the Helm would love to tell us how our salaries have gradually approached EU27 averages over the past ten years (there’s a sweet straight line graph of steady growth somewhere in that document).

Surely the funniest pages in the doc must be the new buzzowrd of “creative works” or the monetarisation of creativity in order that it contribute towards the growth and happiness of this tiny nation. Find it and read how the government intends to become the champion of creativity (and don’t forget competitiveness). Correct me if I am wrong but if there is one place that is definitely an infertile ground for competitive development in the creative world (and pardon the heretical combination) then that is this tiny country of friends’ networks where the few IT and creative enterprises only exist because of a continued and sustained patronage from government contracts. Q.E.D.? I guess it’s more a case of tough shit.

Finally the image accompanying this post is my latest foray into the world of self-deprecation. It’s a tee I made with one of my favourite holiday images when I did my best impression of how I thought Adonis would pose (while floating on a boat near Comino). The captions read “MY BODY, MY TEMPLE” and “Our bodies are our gardens and our wills our gardeners – William Shakespeare. (My gardener sucks).” Who said Threadless tees are the only nice tees around? (this one’s from Vistaprint) I know, I know, it’s gym time for me… but at least I get some jest out of it.

P.S. Watch this video of the Sliema Council Meeting (take 2 – they found the keys and got the time right). You’ve got to love the eye contact that’s happening in the meeting. Video from Maltatoday.

Enhanced by Zemanta