I refer to Paul Radmilli’s opinion piece titled ‘Heritage Malta’s wrong priorities’ (February 10). Radmilli starts by saying how public money will not be spent on what he deems important, and he points his finger at Heritage Malta and its chair for having the wrong priorities.
To start off with, it would have suited him and Times of Malta readers better had he bothered to read the Cultural Heritage Act beforehand, in order to verify the duties of Heritage Malta.
Some of the supposedly sore points which he mentions, such as the National Symphony Orchestra, have nothing to do with Heritage Malta at all.
It seems justified to suspect that putting Heritage Malta in the heading was more important.
However, perhaps far more important is his claim about “glorifying the history of our colonisers”. Let us break this down.
It seems that Radmilli has crowned himself with the prerogative to decide what Maltese history should consist of. Let’s start with Villa Guardamangia. The government and Heritage Malta were criticised for not buying Villa Guardamangia before, forgetting that it was always private property. Now that it has been bought (at the first possible opportunity), it is considered fit and proper to criticise Heritage Malta for having bought it.
What Radmilli does not know, or ignores, is that Villa Guardamangia is also important for its own sake, being a Grade 2 scheduled building for its architectural value. Having been the residence of Princess Elizabeth and Prince Philip is of course important, but they were only the last of a long string of important persons who made it their home.
In any case, is not the fact that the royals spent around two years residing there, calling it their home ever since, also a part of Maltese history?
By the same argument, considering that Malta has, in some way or another, been colonised for millennia, where does ‘Maltese’ history start from exactly? 1964? 1974? Or 1979 perhaps?
Whichever date one chooses, or any other for that matter, what do we make of objects, properties, stories, etc. which derive from the period before that? Are they less ‘Maltese’, by any chance? In this case, should we destroy Villa Guardamangia, deschedule it, ignore it, let it crumble, or perhaps classify it as of secondary importance?
The history of Malta is what it is, warts and all. Rightly or wrongly, positively or negatively, all colonisers have contributed in one way or another, in more ways than one, to the story of Malta and to make the Maltese what they are today.
Considering that Malta has been colonised for millennia, where does ‘Maltese’ history start from exactly? 1964? 1974? Or 1979 perhaps?
By the same argument, one presumes that we should not try to bring back what used to be ‘ours’ (i.e. in Malta), for instance displayed at the Grand Master’s Palace and Armoury, since these artworks or artefacts were mostly authored by European artists and were acquired by our colonisers at the time – the Knights of St John.
Does spending time and energy to bring such objects back to Malta also amount to glorifying the colonisers?
Radmilli jumps to conclusions and misses the wood for the trees even in the case of the sword “that Napoleon gave to a French admiral”.
Rear Admiral Decres had escaped from Aboukir in 1798 with the only surviving French ship, the Guillaume Tell, and had been blockaded in Valletta for two years. On midnight of March 30, 1800 he tried an adventurous escape from the Grand Harbour aboard the Guillaume Tell, full of wounded men and stolen treasure, in a brave and desperate attempt to sail to France for reinforcements.
It was spotted by the Maltese, who alerted the British blockading troops, who in turn engaged the enemy off Marsaxlokk. It was one of the most epic and bloody battles ever in Maltese waters. The 80-gun French ship was pounded until she could not muster any defence and was renamed HMS Malta, the first ever of her name.
Decres eventually returned to Paris when the French garrison finally surrendered. His bravery unmatched, Napoleon Bonaparte awarded him the sword of honour. It is unique, artistically of fine quality, and historically of immense significance for the history of Malta on the evolving European stage.
The events above are described in detail in Sir Alexander Ball’s diary at the Malta Maritime Museum. Perhaps we should discard that too since it belongs to our colonisers.
The truth which Radmilli never acknowledges is that the last few years have witnessed an unprecedented investment in cultural heritage assets (fixed and mobile), one which our country has never seen before.
Incidentally, this also applies to contemporary art. Another thing which Radmilli fails to mention, presumably because he is not aware and did not bother to check, is that Heritage Malta dedicates a specific annual vote to the purchase of modern and contemporary Maltese artworks. Who said that most of the artists he mentioned are not already represented in the national collection?
Moreover, currently MUŻA is being rethought to allow more space for the display of modern and contemporary artworks, while Heritage Malta is spearheading the first-ever maltabiennale art, taking place in Malta this year, which inter alia will expose Maltese art alongside foremost international contemporary artists.
It is very easy to cast doubts while ignoring all positive initiatives, such as the recently restored Grand Master’s Palace and Malta Maritime Museum, which were opened to the public within weeks of one another, as well as other projects and initiatives that Heritage Malta is actively working on.
Radmilli could have easily limited himself to constructive suggestions, which would have certainly been gladly considered. Obtaining some reliable information would have helped too, but evidently throwing mud is easier. Contributions on the cultural heritage sector in Malta are always welcome – even better if they are well informed and can therefore be taken seriously.
There is one thing with which one can certainly agree in Radmilli’s piece – his parting shot. It really does make sad reading.
And, by the way, MUŻA is an internationally recognised word (muża, muse, musa, etc.) from which the word ‘museum’ itself is derived.
Noel ZammitNoel Zammit is CEO of Heritage Malta.