Aesthetics is defined as “a set of principles concerned with the nature and appreciation of beauty”. It could be the appreciation of a work of art or music, but also of a building, landscape or streetscape. The word ħelwa in the first few words of Malta’s national anthem refers to the beauty of the Maltese Islands and was the inspiration for the late Judge Maurice Caruana Curran who founded the non-governmental organisation Din l-Art Ħelwa together with my great uncle Dr Godfrey Randon in 1965.
The perception of beauty is subjective and a question of taste. Aesthetics is a branch of philosophy and is a study of subjective and sensory-emotional judgements. Although subjective, the perception of beauty is generally very similar among people with similar social, cultural and educational backgrounds; in such cases, the stimulation of senses is similar and leads to similar reactions.
Although aesthetics may be subjective, we can mention a number of local examples that bring most people in agreement.
Many would think that a countryside chapel or a Maltese dry hut (girna) are aesthetically pleasing and that they integrate well with their surroundings. Most would also think that a garage-like structure built of cement would not be aesthetically pleasing in the same context.
A row of vernacular buildings, as simple as they may look, are more aesthetically pleasing to the eye than a series of lifeless concrete apartments of different styles and height. Similarly, a road with houses adorned with Maltese balconies and painted wooden doors looks more attractive than one with houses that have balconies made of different materials, shapes and colours.
Likewise, sensory-emotional stimuli are more positive if one had to walk along a promenade and enjoy unobstructed sea views rather than having to walk along a series of permanent lidos obstructing the views and access points to the foreshore. A valley that has been transformed into a road with adjacent showrooms is not as aesthetically pleasing as one that is still in its natural state. Likewise, a ridge is spoilt if buildings are erected on it.
It is about time aesthetics is considered by developer, architect and planner. When is this going to happen?
Since independence in 1964, Malta underwent rapid transformation that was essential for the growth of industries and to render the islands as economically independent as possible. Recently, our islands experienced another wave of transformation with planning applications on the rise.
Unfortunately, this transformation occurred with little planning and with very little attention to aesthetics. Most people would agree on what is aesthetically pleasing and what is not. Proof of this is when one looks at photos or videos where Malta is promoted as a tourist destination and where only aesthetically pleasing views of landscapes and streetscapes are shown.
Although it should be the responsibility of the architect and developer to see that a new building integrates well within its surrounding, it is the planner who has to conserve the characteristics of the surroundings to render the place aesthetically acceptable.
If new policies are causing the destruction of houses and rebuilding of apartments, the least the planner could do is set a list of requirements that would render the road scape more pleasing to the eyes.
Unfortunately, the physical, cultural and social environment plays little part in the planning and not much attention is given to the finishing and materials used. Consequently, the end result is a hotchpotch of haphazardly built constructions which gives no uniformity to the street.
Homes are destroyed to be replaced with lifeless apartments; our villages are being transformed into concrete matchboxes. An obvious example is Sliema, which partly ruined the aesthetically pleasing views from Valletta. This has occurred due to a lack of sensitivity towards our natural and built environment. Policies issued under different governments allowing more floors to be built in conjunction with an uncontrolled growth in population led to a knee-jerk reaction by many to destroy their homes and replace them with concrete structures.
Lack of proper policies is also leading to the building of high-rise complexes. These factors are also leading to an increased pressure to build in Outside Development Zones and around Urban Conservation Areas. All these factors have changed the aesthetics of our rural and urban environment. So why are we destroying all that is part of our environmental identity? It is all a question of greed. Economic interests are put before aesthetics and common sense.
An aesthetics board existed in the 1970s, but it was removed. Din l-Art Ħelwa had objected to this and thinks that it should form an integral part in the evaluation of every application.
Mepa has a checklist of policies and if these are ticked then the building of the site is approved. But there is much more to this. Every building should be evaluated in its context and the developer and architect should see that these requirements form an integral part of the application.
A Design Advisory Committee does exist, but I believe with limited power to change planning from its routes. It is of little use to comment on facade treatment without changing the planning rules beforehand.
It is about time that aesthetics is considered by developer, architect and planner. When is this going to happen? Is it too late; is everything already lost?
Stanley Farrugia Randon is a long-standing council member of Din l-Art Ħelwa.