Academics Terence Portelli and Nikki Petroni speak with Lara Zammit about their analysis of sketches the late Oliver Friggieri drew throughout his life, displayed in the recent publication Oliver Friggieri: Bejn Kliem u Linji

LARA ZAMMIT: Oliver Friggieri saw writing and drawing as a twinned practice – distinct yet complementary aspects of his creative identity. As you mention in your analysis of Friggieri’s drawings and sketches, the very idea of a sketch denotes a sense of spontaneity which the critic E.H. Gombrich describes as an innocent, ludic activity. What have you observed about the nature and attitude of Friggieri’s sketches?

TERENCE PORTELLI: The identity of a creative person is a complex phenomenon that critics try to understand and interpret through the different ways it manifests itself. Until now, Oliver Friggieri’s creative output is synonymous with his written word, mainly his literary output that spans across short stories, novels, poetry, plays and oratories. These literary works form a central part of Maltese literary canon during the latter half of the 20th century.

NIKKI PETRONI: Although underestimated by Oliver Friggieri himself, one might critically consider also the numerous sketches that he drew from his childhood onwards. These sketches have found a revival during the latter part of his life. Since meetings carry a sense of ennui about them, Friggieri would doodle and possibly develop elaborate sketches and illustrations.

TP: Our thesis in this book is that there is an intimate relationship between his literature and these drawings. The main thrust of this argument draws on Friggieri’s assertion that they are twins. In the introduction to the book, we therefore try to identify similarities and parallelisms that substantiate such a claim.

We propose that Friggieri possibly sketched what for years he obsessively wrote about: the built environment from Megalithic temples to the traditional Maltese village; open undeveloped Maltese spaces and landscape; scenes by the sea and around the port; different fauna and flora; and, above all, trees and the crucifix.

NP: These drawings arguably present a comforting world for Friggieri: Malta during the 1950s and 60s. The overdevelopment and uglification of the island, even if he witnessed them during his last few years, thus were set aside. Instead, he preferred to sketch a world that is in his mind was still intact, innocent and pure; maybe an idealised recollection of his childhood.

LZ: Many of Friggieri’s sketches display scenes of nature and humble, rural landscapes, featuring, among other elements, trees, chapels and birds in unspoilt Maltese countryside. What do his sketches elucidate about the author’s thoughts and reflections, especially his philosophical and political ideas and observations?

TP: In both his writings and sketches, Friggieri tried to unravel Malta’s roots, a past – a mythical past, some might contend – from which the future can be built. It is a love for Malta and anything essentially Maltese that drives Friggieri’s passion and formed his life’s mission.

I think that Friggieri was against Malta’s hyped-up political project of urbanisation and Dubaisation. He preferred a country that respects its roots. He understood that being small is not just a geographical limitation; small can be beautiful and whole.

Any political, cultural or economic progress could be natural as long as it reflects and respects the local culture that transpired and evolved through the ages. Hence, continuity without being revolutionary was Friggieri’s creed and this is manifested in an authentic manner in both his writings and sketches.

NP: The book’s title Oliver Friggieri: Bejn Kliem u Linji evinces the marriage of the written word and the drawn line in Friggieri’s thought, wherein the line itself as verse and as drawing is the primary mode of expression, the visceral creative moment.

Friggieri abhorred indifference, and thus every component of his praxis is a statement on the world around him and his profound love for Malta’s culture, heritage, and the built and natural environment. Friggieri’s lack of formal training in the visual arts gave his sketches a naïve aesthetic, one that conveys both sincerity and simplicity. This authentic character of the sketches – their directness – is testament to his worldview.

Further to Friggieri’s own political concerns, the sketches were contextualised within the development of Maltese post-war art history. Certain themes are congruent with those addressed by leading modern artists, albeit with diverse idiomatic solutions.

LZ: The selected text accompanying the sketches is Friggieri’s 1991 academic oration in which he drew attention to the many lessons he learnt from students over the years. Why was this text selected to meander through the sketches and what does this highlight about Friggieri as an educator and intellectual?

TP: An important dimension of Friggieri’s life as an academic, parallel to his research, was his teaching. He felt a sense of duty and pride in being able to share his knowledge and insights with his students. He cared for his students. His love for Maltese literature and culture permea­ted all his actions.

Furthermore, especially in his old age, Friggieri was a very good listener. Students used to visit him regularly at his office, even during holidays. He used to impart a message of hope that so much soothed his students in difficult times. He was, to quote Franco Battiato’s words, a centro di gravità permanente (a permanent centre of gravity) in a world of constant change and a crosswind of relativistic values.

His deep reflections and insights about education and its importance are crystallised in the oration he gave in November of 1991 to university graduate students. In this oration, Friggieri highlights the symbiotic relationship between the student and teacher; teaching and learning become a never-ending process.

Friggieri also evidenced a strong belief in his students. Social change was envisioned through an educational effort that touched the individuals on a cultural, spiritual and emotional level. In a sense, Friggieri reinterpreted for his times a dream held and expounded by his predecessors, like Mikiel Anton Vassalli and Manwel Dimech.

NP: His critics might claim that Friggieri was part of the establishment. Indeed, Friggieri believed that social change can be attained from within institutions. From his perspective, one powerful way to bring about such change is through education that values the critical thinker.

TP: In his oration, Oliver explains what he has learned from his students. Moreover, Friggieri inspires them to aspire for ideals rather than be carried away by the hustle and bustle of daily life.

Malta is considered a synthesis of cultures; the Mediterranean Sea is the cradle of at times opposite worldviews, that can co-exist if there is understanding, empathy and a will to love and celebrate the differences without losing one’s identity.

NP: The oration can be read as a sequence of aphorisms from university life and a reflection of what it means to be a teacher and a graduate student at the alma mater. This is the main reason why we chose this speech. This explains why we presented it as a divider between different themes explored in the sketches. Words and lines counterpoint each other in what can be an exhibition worth leafing and reading through.

LZ: Written in the form of a dialogue, you discuss Friggieri’s influence, writings and art according to your academic orientations and specialisations. How has Friggieri influenced each of you with respect to your work and thought?

NP: Friggieri’s intellectual educational approach was born from a genuine love and respect for the world around him as expressed through art. In published interviews and during discussions, he transmitted an abounding modesty and humanity unencumbered by professional conventions. This was what made him such a brilliant artist.

His modesty stemmed from his sincere character, from his sincere need to address and confront the issues that make the world beautiful as well as those which attempt to annihilate or compromise such beauty. He strove to make students think about these concerns so that future generations would not be accepting nor perpetuators of the status quo.

On a personal level, when I had met with Friggieri during the years of my doctoral research, he would immediately question the very questions and points which I had prepared. He did not take things at face value, instead opting for the difficult path of reflection, contemplation and deep investigation. This analytical approach gave him his intellectual and artistic strength.

TP: I feel privileged to have met Friggieri during my undergraduate studies while reading to become a teacher of Maltese. Later, our roads crossed again, this time as colleagues with a passion for teaching and Maltese literature, in different faculties. Our friendship spanned over more than 25 years.

Moreover, I cherish memories of the frequent occasions when we used to discuss diverse issues ranging from television programmes, namely Italian television, to literary and musical news. Again, we often conversed about social and political matters.

Students’ well-being was another preoccupation we shared. I consider Friggieri’s empathy, compassion and emotional intelligence as a model of a pedagogy of care infused with an ethical awareness, and to which I aspire.