Rewards This rather silly letter in today's Sunday Times, reproduced by Rob here, and certainly grist to Vlad's mill, links up nicely with the translation project I kicked off a few days ago.

In Lanzarote, Houellebecq takes on the tourist industry. And guess what? Malta gets mentioned on page 13. Wow! Maybe we can reward the enfant terrible of French contemporary literature by holing him up in The Phoenicia for a few days c/o the MTA. Claire's idea might not be so bad after all. He might even be inspired to write another novel. Now that would really be something.

Here's a funny snippet from the English version. Here he describes the habits of English holidaymakers:

They gather in small groups and head for unlikely islands absent from Continental holiday brochures - Malta, Madeira or, indeed Lanzarote. Once there, they duplicate the principal elements of their home environment right there. When asked to explain their choice of destination, they give answers which are evasive and tautological: "I came because I came here last year."

Costa del Fifty Quid anyone?
  ¶ 3:02 PM 1 comments

  Lanzarote - il-Ktieb Jekk ma naqilbux letteratura kontemporanja ghall-Malti ma nkunux serji meta nitkellmu dwar l-importanza ta' dan l-ilsien.

Dan il-progett ilu mdendel zmien twil. Issa wasal il-waqt li nibdew l-esperiment.

Lanzarote - il-Ktieb.   ¶ 1:25 PM 13 comments

  Ghax ghandna lil Fredu maghna.... Kontroversji, tgergir, Song for Europe li m'ghogob lil hadd, Requiem for a Jazz Festival, euro/ewro, toroq imhaffrin, Kristu fuq l-ewro, politikanti fundamentalisti, Xarabank, l-ANR, artikolisti li jghidu c-cucati, il-kitarra ta' Lou Bondi, il-"great unwashed", il-hamalli u tal-pepe...

U kulhadd ghaddej igerger.

Wara l-attakki tas-7 ta' Lulju f'Londra, kien hemm bloggej Ingliz (li bhalissa insejt x'jismu) li kellu idea brillanti. Bhala sinjal ta' sfida kontra t-terroristi, kiteb lista ta' affarijiet li u jghozz dwar il-kultura Brittanika u wara kull wahda nizzel il-kliem FUCK YEAH! Xi haga hekk:

The Union Jack FUCK YEAH!
Shepherd's pie FUCK YEAH!
Robbie Williams FUCK YEAH!
Terry Wogan! FUCK FUCK YEAH!
Double-decker buses FUCK YEAH!
Blackadder FUCK YEAH!
Eastenders FUCK YEAH!
David Beckham FUCK YEAH!
The Spice Girls...F...oops!
Ricky Gervais FUCK YEAH!

e cosi via...

Il-bloggejja l-ohra tant ghogbithom l-idea li komplew ghaddejjin biha u l-bloggata originali spiccat bl-ikbar numru ta' kummenti "in the history of British blogging".

Jien ser nibda wahda fuq Malta ha nghollu naqra l-ispirtu. Min ma jippartecipax nghajruh jew wankellectual, jew spoil-sport jew xi haga ohra. Ghalissa l-FUCK YEAH! ser inhalliha hekk, kemm ghax tinhass tajba, kemm ghax nahseb li ghadna nehilsu naqra mill-'hang-ups' lingwistici u kemm sabiex Jacques jerga' jghajjarni Dolly. Jekk xi hadd isib alternattiva, merhba biha.

Tlaqna....

Gbejniet tal-bzar FUCK YEAH!
Freddie Portelli FUCK YEAH!
Is-swar FUCK YEAH!
L-ghannejja FUCK YEAH!
Il-Beangrowers FUCK YEAH!
Bragoli FUCK YEAH!
Il-festa tar-rahal FUCK YEAH!
Inbid ta' kuljum ER...u ija xiz-zobb, FUCK YEAH!  ¶ 2:11 AM 6 comments

  Just joking. I'm Normile.   ¶ 4:30 AM 0 comments

  Bloggeficina

It is reported that after this picture was painted, Monet insulted Manet by calling him an intellobranleur. The term is a synthesis of intello (short for intellectual) and branleur (a wanker).

  ¶ 4:22 PM 11 comments

  J'accuse as friendly wolf   ¶ 1:02 AM 0 comments

  Clone Wars   ¶ 7:58 AM 0 comments

  Beckensian Democracy



  ¶ 2:06 AM 0 comments

  Sideways

Kemm ghamilna xorti dil-gimgha, ma. L-Erbgha is-sir tal-PE hadna naraw loghba futbol u t-tim taghna rebah avolja kien qed jilghab away u kien hemm hafna kesha. Lili u lil siehbi Mark kienu ser jaghmlu ghalina ghax hasbuna Rumani imma Mark kellimhom bil-Franciz u qalilhom li jzomm mal-Furjana. Imbaghad il-Gimgha, mal-klassi ta' Pierre morna outing minn dawk is-sbieh nett, ghax haduna nisimghu kuncert. U ma kienx bhal ta' Faniello imma xorta ddejjaqna ghax il-miss qaltilna li kien ser ikun sexy-trashy-rock imma kien kollu ghajjat u twerziq u dehrilna li l-Francizi ma tantx jinqalghu biex iwerzqu b'dak il-mod. Kien hemm tifel xorta ghogbu ghax qal li kellhom base eccezzjonali. Pierre bravu u kiteb storja helwa wara l-kuncert imma xi hadd qal li biex hareg b'dik l-istorja bilfors ipejjipha. U xi hadd iehor semma' lil tifel jismu Huxley. Imma jien ma fhimtx x'riedu jghidu biha. Imbaghad kien hemm tifel qabbizhieli ghax qalli li jien ikkuppjajtlu il-project u li kien ser jugzani lis-surmast.

U dak mhux kollox ghax il-miss haditna naraw film sabih dil-gimgha. Jismu Sideways u dhakna hafna l-izjed meta Miles icempel lil Christine waqt li jkun hara patata u jsaqsiha x'jismu r-ragel il-gdid taghha. U hi tghidlu 'Ken'. U hu jaghlaq ghajnejh u jirrepeti 'Ken' b'lehen li bikkieni bid-dahk. U dhakna ukoll meta wara l-ikla fir-ristorant, Stephanie tghid lil Jack u lil Miles "oh, we thought we could go back to my place. I've got some cheeses and wines." U Jack jghid "oh yeah!". Imbaghad ixengel rasu u jaghmel hoss qisu qattus ifferocjat.  ¶ 10:28 AM 2 comments

  Dedika

  ¶ 3:05 AM 0 comments

  The Return of the Jedi   ¶ 3:32 AM 1 comments

  Jazz u stejjer ohra #1 Bir-ragun id-d u sandro huma mdejjqin, irrabjati u nkazzati bl-ahbar dwar il-metamorfosi (jew ahjar ir-rekwijem, kif sejhilha wiehed minhom) li ghaddej minnu l-jazz festival. Mark, bhal ma' jaghmel ta' spiss, jipponta subajh lejn il-politikant. Jien il-jazz festival dejjem rajtu bhala miraklu zghir fil-gzira tal-eurovixin u x-Xarabank. Un piccolo paradiso nell'isola del kitch. Imma l-problema naraha band'ohra. Kulhadd jinkazza bil-kwalita' atroci tat-TV Malti, dis-sena tkazaw ghax Bondi daqq l-air guitar fuq il-palk tal-Mediterranean Conference Centre u lil Peppi nghidulu li Xarabank sar hamallata nazzjonali. Orrajt. Imma kieku kien hemm min jahdem programmi sura ta' nies, kuncerti tajbin u festivals ohrajn, ma konniex inhossu li waqghet id-dinja, jew li "dal-pajjiz taz-zobb u mhux ser nersaq 'l hemm" ghax biddlu l-format tal-jazz festival. Bhal dak li qallu li l-Fjammingi ser jaghmlu f'qalbhom wisq jekk igibu lil Ozzy jdoqq f'xi Metal Festival partikolari. Fi kliem iehor il-problema mhux Xarabank jew il-Ewrovixin jew il-bidla fil-jazz festival. Il-problema li m'hemmx ghazla wiesa'. Kellna nhottu jazz festival biex naghmlu iehor minfloku. Kollox isir Xarabank, kollox isir Ewrovixin u kollox isir Bondi. U kif qalet tajjeb darba Sharon, lilhom ma ttihomx tort li jistaqsu Where (the fuck's) Everybody?

#2 "Faites l'amour pas les magasins". Spotted in Brussels on 11/2/2006. Three days before Valentine's day.

#3 Demander que l'Etat se porte garant de verites religieuses, c'est exiger ouvertement qu'il pratique l'intolerance. (Jacques Julliard, Le Nouvel Obs, 9-15 fevrier 2006)

#4 As the Arab TV station Al-Jazeera skilfully explained, while the Koran, the Islamic Holy Book, does not explicitly prohibit the depiction of human figures, Muslims understand Koranic verses 41 to 52 as meaning that Allah and His prophets cannot be captured in an image by human hand, such is God's grandeur. (Leo Brincat, Shadow Minister, Foreign Affairs, The Sunday Times, 12th Feb 2006)

#5 Moderates do not want to kill anyone in the name of God, but they want us to keep using the word "God" as though we knew what we were talking about. And they do not want anything too critical said about people who really believe in the God of their fathers, because tolerance, perhaps above all else, is sacred. To speak plainly and truthfully about the state of the world - to say, for instance, that the Bible and the Koran both contain mountains of life-destroying gibberish - is antithetical to tolerance as moderates currently conceive it. But we can no longer afford the luxury of such political correctness. We must finally recognize the price we are paying to maintain the iconography of our ignorance." (Sam Harris, The End of Faith - Religion, Terror, and The Future of Reason, p. 22-23)

# 6 The newspapers had every right to publish the cartoons in question but were stupid to do so. One hopes that no such cartoons will appear again in the European press. (Anthony Manduca, The Sunday Times, 12th Feb 2006, calmly brushes away the arguments of the editors of Jyllands-Posten, Die Welt, France Soir and many, many others )

#7 Fish symbols on cars (from The Encyclopedia of Modern Life)

Early Christians used a fish symbol to identify fellow believers during times of persecution. These days, to let people know they are really into Jesus, many Cristians stick a fish sign on the back of their car. Like Baby On Board stickers - but with God-knobs on.
In the US, these symbols have caused belief-system-related mayhem. This is because the symbols don't just mean 'I'm the nice sort of Christian who sometimes distributes hot soup to the homeless', but are more likelt to mean: 'Science is witchcraft and you're all going to hell'. To underline the hard-right/anti-science/anti-abortion intent, some fish contain the word 'Bush' inside indicating that George W. is 'doing God's work'.
Incensed, humanists created their own bumper fish symbols with the word 'Darwin' inside hoping to irritate the Christian right. It worked. They didn't like it. It got nasty. Chris Gilman, the Hollywood special-effects whizz who apparently invented the Darwin-fish, said: 'Here's a religion about forgiveness, peace, and love, but I can't tell you how many times I've heard about Darwin fish being torn off of cars or broken.'
The Christians retaliated with a bumper sticker depicting the Darwin fish being swallowed by a larger 'Jesus', or 'Truth', fish.
The humanists shot back with a reversed version of the sticker.
Then the Ring of Fire website produced a sticker depicting the Darwin fish and the Jesus fish forming 'what Shakespeare jauntily termed the beast with two backs' (they were at it, like knives).
Nothing will wind up a right-wing Christian more than piscine penetration faith denigration. And so it proved, with yet more car park/highway altercations.
Actually, this is possibly a good way finally to settle the evolution/creation debate: a demolition derby on the highway with the loser ending up bleeding in a ditch with bits of car stuck in them.
If the Christians won, they could shout back at the twisted wreckage: 'What's that you said about survival of the fittest? I CAN'T HEAR YOU!!!'  ¶ 4:28 AM 0 comments

  Pagna Sport

  ¶ 6:06 AM 3 comments

  Ejja mmorru sas-Swings   ¶ 1:35 AM 3 comments

  Fumetti, 2

The debate surrounding the cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammed rages on. I’ve read opinion pieces in La Repubblica, The UK Independent, the Sunday Telegraph and even bought Il Giornale at lunch time today to check out what the Italian right had to say. I watched a discussion programme on French TV and another on the Spain's TVE. The Socratic dialogue taking place between Maqluba and Akkuza is also interesting.

One of the participants in the debate on Spanish TV captured the mood brilliantly. We have to admit, he said, that Europe is confused. The truth is, he added, that we don’t know how to deal with this situation in a coherent manner. Observing how the British press have reacted is enough to see what he meant. Here is an institution which has mastered the art of satire, of critical technique, the champion of lampooning anything under the sun (‘stars’, politicians, footballers and footballers’ wives, the man in the street, religion, God, priests…) which suddenly decides to censor itself because it would cause ‘offence’. I’ve read the reasons for their choice and, frankly, they don’t ring true.

I think that there are two levels on which we should conduct this debate and they are entirely separate. And we must be aware that they are different.

1) On a theoretical level we must be honest. This is not merely about offence, as Twanny (and many others) would have it. This is about two divergent views of the world. We are lucky to live in a part of the world which, thanks to the Enlightenment (and some courageous fellows who fought hard, and often died, for the values it represented), allows us a crucial freedom. That is the freedom to consider that religion itself, its various symbols and protagonists as well as its institutions are not considered above criticism. We treat them as belief systems and give people the right to believe in Allah, God, Yahweh, Buddha and to practice their faith. But it ends there. They are simply that: belief systems like all the rest. And just as I have every right to jest at Tom Cruise for being a member of the Church of Scientology, so Tom Cruise has the right to take the mickey out of Papa Ratzi if he wants to.

We have accepted this idea and our societies, while not as pious (read, uniform) as some people would like, are FREE. Nobody prevents me from believing in God but my beliefs are not free from criticism. This is simply too important for us to give up since religion is not merely a private affair but a very public one. The danger it potentially represents is as great as political power, has been and continues to be a real threat. To say (as some have) that religion (ANY religion) should somehow be protected from satire would be a fatal blow to our system.

The Iranian newspaper which has now commissioned a cartoon competition about the Holocaust is perverting the story. The Holocaust was the most terrible genocide ever perpetrated. Human beings were slaughtered. Humanity itself was being massacred. This was not a belief system being lampooned. These were individuals. Human beings. A race. Had the Iranians decided to draw the Jewish deity as a bulldozer it would be a different story.

Yet some people are now saying or implying that religion should be above satire and criticism so that we don’t “offend”. This latest bit of news from La Repubblica clearly shows how dangerous it is to give in to this line of thought:

13:44 I vescovi italiani: "Occorre limite a libertà di pensiero"
"Il diritto alla libertà di pensiero e di espressione non può implicare il diritto di offendere il sentimento religioso dei credenti". E affermare che esistono dei limiti "mette in guardia contro ogni secolarismo, contro i pericoli di una secolarizzazione radicale proprio in ordine alla dignità dell'uomo". Lo scrive il Servizio Informazione Religiosa della Chiesa Italiana che pone "il tema del limite, essenziale per fare vivificare e fruttificare la democrazia", commentando in una nota "la deflagrazione ad orologeria della protesta contro le vignette danesi, con la sua tragica coda in un ampio quadrante del mondo islamico".

Oh yes? Why should religion be treated differently? Does this mean that we can laugh at politicians, national stereotypes, film stars, footballers, the man in the street but not at religion? This is sheer madness.

I challenge anyone to prove that it is our ‘Christian heritage’ (as opposed to the principles of the Enlightenment) that makes Europe the beacon of free speech, liberty and freedom of expression that it is today.

2) The other factor is simply geared at avoiding an escalation of the situation. On a pragmatic and diplomatic level what is happening clearly amounts to damage limitation. Our politicians’ appeals to ‘refrain from throwing oil on the fire’, statements such as ‘we have no obligation to offend’, the various (late) ‘apologies’ and so on are simply a reaction to the destruction, violence and savagery that followed the publication of the cartoons and which threaten to engulf us all. We know these people mean business, we realise that the threat is real and dangerous and we’ve decided to be pragmatic about it. The British press, I think, would have published the cartoons before 9/11, Madrid and London. But it does not for one minute mean that giving in will not be a serious threat to our freedoms as we know them. And it’s more dangerous than that. We must surely ask ourselves “What next?”

  ¶ 8:11 AM 5 comments

  Vases, coins and cartoons "I snagged my shoelace, missed a step and crash, bang, wallop and there was a million pieces of high quality Qing ceramics lying around underneath me," Mr Flynn told BBC Radio 4's Today programme.

In the current whirlwind of religious mania hitting cartoons and coins in a cinema near you, thank God for people like Mr Flynn.  ¶ 1:46 AM 1 comments

  Ix-Xiferta tas-Sibt Filghaxija
Ritratt fuq: Lanzarote, Pierre J. Mejlak u Xifer Vella backstage waqt ix-Xifer Song Contest, is-Sibt filghaxija.

"Voulez-vous xiferez avec moi, ce soir?" staqsietu E, b'dak il-lehen mimli senswalita'.

aktar dettalji ghadhom qed jaslulna. Aggornament fil-bulettin ta' nofsinhar.

Karl Stagno Navarra gewwa Brussell.

  ¶ 1:11 AM 0 comments

  Just being honest It looks like Malta may be waking up at last. We are starting to feel shock at how far our mania with religion can take us. And, perhaps, some of us have been jolted out of our complacency. I always thought that joining the EU was a good thing primarily because it would tell us some very painful things about ourselves. Or at least that it would force us to ask ourselves who we are in a more vigorous way.

The debate about the symbols to be placed on 'our' euro coins crystallizes 21st century Malta perfectly. Several pundits have already lamented the final choice, for a number of reasons. Some say it's plain vulgar to have an image of Christ adorning a coin (Kenneth Zammit Tabona), some have said that it will simply show the outside world that we're a bunch of bigots (Daphne), others have hinted or implied that they don't quite like the choice (Fr. Noel Grima). And I love the fact that even evangelist Roamer appears to be slightly embarrassed without saying exactly why!

But we may be missing the wood for the trees. Symbols are important and national symbols are meant to capture something that describes the soul of the nation. Now while many people I know are either dimayed by the choice, have simply given up hope or have entirely lost interest in any sort of public debate in the island, the status quo is a largely unchallenged flow of religious waffle. Our values are defined in religious terms, politicians from both sides of the House pander to the religious mass while Europe (after our accession) has been frequently described as a Godless and soulless place. The implication being that secularism is inherently wrong and that we should 'show them' that strong belief is important. While the PN is a serial offender in this respect, the Labour party isn't much better. Both have their fair share of semi-fanatics hell-bent on purifying the island and eager not to lose 'the religious vote'. The language used is also extremely evocative while the sheer output of religious propaganda/discourse in the 'independent press' still astonishes me today. I have yet to see anything like it in the mainstream press anywhere in the western world.

However, it's too easy to blame the usual institutional suspects. And this is my point. While I know several close friends who've more or less abandoned religion and while there are a few indicators that the under 20s may prove to be the generation that shifts the tide, it appears to me that there is still a large mass out there who define themselves primarily in Catholic terms. Maltese identity is difficult to pin down as the recent debate on the euro/ewro has shown. We are divided linguistically, politically and, to a large extent, there's nothing really cultural which binds us together. Saying that you're Mediterranean, that Hagar Qim and the Auberge de Castille are part of your urban heritage and that you like pastizzi, leaves, I think, an important vacuum. This is where religion comes in.

The choice of the statue of Christ's baptism as a symbol on our euro coins, while dismaying for some, is nothing more than an honest depiction of how we really define ourselves as a nation and of how the constant flow of religious discourse by politicians, pundits and priests has moulded that view. Alternatively, it could mean that the only people who still give a damn at all are the most fanatical while the rest have simply abandoned the field. We can only begin to take ourselves seriously and discuss anything in a worthwhile manner when we fully acknowledge this. The masks have fallen and that's a very good thing.

A few days ago, Twanny thought I was joking when I wrote this. This was my reaction:

Imma kif ghidt, din kienet biss parzjalment cajta. Jekk thares ftit madwarek tintebah li l-'massa kritika' ta' pajjizna baqghet ir-religjon. Lanqas l-ilsien ma ghaqqadna wisq, kif taf sew. U l-progett politiku farrakna wahda gmielha. Imma r-religjon tghaqqadlek lil Anglu Farrugia li jerfaghlek fil-festa, lil Roamer li jaghmillek panigierku kull nhar ta' Hadd, lil Gonzi neveu de l'archeveque, lis-Slimiza li tikteb lit-Times "about how I found Jesus" u lil dak li jiktiblek fl-orizzont dwar il-vara fil-festa. M'hemm xejn hazin f'dan kollu (wara kollox hija r-realta') imma ejja nkunu naqra onesti. Ghalxejn noqoghdu nduru ma' denbna biex niskopru l-"identita' Maltija" fic-Cippus u fil-lampuka. U hallikom mill-widnet il-bahar f'gieh l-Iran.  ¶ 9:01 AM 3 comments

  Fumetti   ¶ 5:18 AM 0 comments

  Perfect Timing


The Almighty must have a wicked sense of humour. I mean how could this and this be happening at the same time if he didn't?

The plot, as they say, thickens.

Le Monde  ¶ 3:46 AM 3 comments

  Magno, Bevo e Tifo Roma   ¶ 1:15 AM 0 comments

  Bieb il-Belt

The Royal Opera House Car Park

An article written by Lucy Daniel in the FT's Weekend supplement of 21-22 January caught my eye. Architectural journalist Robert Bevan has written a book called The Destruction of Memory: Architecture at War.

I think any Maltese person who feels a marked dampening of the spirit everytime she walks through the hideous garage door of Bieb il-Belt and past the ruins of Barry's Opera House, would find this book interesting. If the euro/ewro/George Cross/Dun Karm/Kristu debate has rekindled questions of identity, what does the way we've treated architecture say about us?

I haven't bought the book yet so here are some snippets from the article:

(Bevan) shows how reconstruction has been used to mould, construct and falsify history and national identity. Historic Warsaw, devastated by the Nazis, was rebuilt in replica after the second world war in an astonishing display of resolve.

It is not a misalliance of sympathies to describe buildings as "vanquished" or "murdered". These are sentiments we can all understand, through deep-seated attachment to our own treasured built environments.

  ¶ 4:38 AM 0 comments