Le (Mauvais) Goût des Autres

J’accuse today is a question of love and an apologia for blogging – bear hugs to all the j’accuse readers on this festival of love

Little is known about the man we call Saint Valentine. When Pope Gelasius I established the feast of Saint Valentine in 496 he described the saint as being one among those “whose names are justly reverenced among men, but whose acts are only known to God” – which is a diplomatic 5th century way of saying “We’re making this geezer into a saint on the strength of the grapevine and don’t ask us anything else because only God knows“. The history of the association of the Saint with lovers is rather murky and while conducting internet searches I found a tenuous clue of secondary evidence.

The author of the Legenda Aurea does not seem to have spent much time on this soon to be popular divo of lovers but it would seem that Val was caught marrying christian couples at a time when practising the christian rite was not considered to be hip in Rome. He was (probably) duly read his rights (“You have a right to be heard by a Roman Court before a Roman Magistrate who will dispense the full power of the law upon your Roman Self”) and expedited to a court of law from whence he would have been taken to be summarily executed: as the legend goes his penalty was a sequence of attempts to prematurely terminate his life worthy of the Russian nobility (as Rasputin would surely vouch).

Having survived clubbing and stoning, the valiant Valentine had his head severed from the rest of his body – at which point his subscription to earthly woes duly expired and (depending on whether you believe in such things or not) he rose to meet his maker (and probably exchange a few words on the rather abrupt course of events that had been ordained as his destiny). Much as it saddens me to learn such information from Wikipedia, I also discovered that Balzan, Malta includes the feastday of Saint Valentine in its local calendar (can some Balzanic authority confirm this?) and that relics of the saint are claimed to be found in the aforementioned parish.

Nowadays, like “talcum powder”, the words “clubbing” and “stoning” would not lead one to think of a venerable saint – actually Valentine’s feastday was declassified to “Simple” in the Tridentine Calendar and later reduced to “commemoration” by Pius XII before being completely removed from the General Roman Caledar. Instead, “clubbing” and “stoning” light up the boxes named “revelry” and “debauchery” and “illicit behaviour” among (mostly) the younger generations. Valentine however, as we all know, has through some wonderful stroke of divine retribution, achieved notoriety (yes, I purposely used that word) as the patron saint of lovers. Ironic isn’t it? The guy whose trip to martyrdom was triggered off when caught marrying off couples clandestinely was to become the patron saint of all lovers (married or unmarried alike). When asked to comment about this extraordinary twist of events, Valentine had two words in reply: “Stone me!”

You Give Love A Bad Name
Twice this week I read articles that in some way or another implied that “blogs” are some form of evil that must be curbed before they precipitate a mediatic armageddon on the unsuspecting public. On Tuesday, Austin Sammut, that sans-pareil of nationalist columnists, gave us this gem of a quote:

“I must admit that I am totally against blogs and this was the first I had ever had a look at. I think blogs are really a whole load of nonsense and a waste of time (although I have now unfortunately taken to have a look at them).”

It goes without saying that Austin Sammut has about as much a clue of what he was on about as I have on the workings of the Large Hadron Collider in Switzerland (and France).

Try re-reading the Sammut quote replacing the word “blogs” with one of the following: “newspapers”, “televisions” or “radios”. See what I mean? Austin staggers into a blog attracted no doubt by the scent of scandal and after having dipped his finger in the morass of information that parades as rights-motivated civic philanthropy in one corner of the blogosphere he dutifully proceeds to express an absolute dislike of all things blog.

To be fair to Austin the levels of popularity enjoyed by the blog in question might lead the general non-savvy public to believe that it is what blogging is all about and therefore result a huge increase of the “I Hate Blogs Fraternity” membership. Hell, if my first ever experience of TV had to be an episode of Xarabank I’d be “against tvs” till kingdom come wouldn’t I? If the first time I tuned into a radio programme I heard a Manwel Cuschieri style debate you could bet your last penny that I’d be campaigning for the abolishment of radios for the next ten years.

I can only thank Austin for inspiring the “Austin the Hip Monthly Post” in which any member of the J’accuse blogging community is invited to submit his own post and stand on our modest soapboax to give us his point of view. The best part of the blog is in fact its nature as an open platform of reasonable discussion. The blog owner has the prerogative of nurturing the right kind of discussion within the acceptable parameters as established by the same owner. No different from the runnning of a tv, radio or newspaper. Of course different blog owners have different styles and approaches to principles of netiquette (or ethics of the net).

Anna Mallia was worried about a particular use of blogs in her column on Wednesday’s edition of Malta Today. In her article entitled ” Character Assassination” Anna Mallia tried to drive home two points. The first suits her very open agenda of labourite columnist (and that is not a critcism). Anna argued that the way Daphne Caruana Galizia has resorted to using the power of the internet is proof that even DCG has lost faith in the institutions. Anna then picks up on my earlier assertion that the right place for the kind of information being touted on the net is a well drafted report to the relevant authorities (and I am glad to note here that Daphne has found better use for her lawyer than “just to make a poitn” and is drafting a report to the appropriate authority). Should that fail then there is definitely a case for a campaign – a clear campaign that identifies the source of the failure of the system and concentrates on changing that (and not on the ancillary pink news that smacks of schoolgirl spats).

Anna then wrongly (in my not too modest opinion) proceeds to warn:

“I admit that there is the Constitutional right to free speech, but I am afraid that this will give rise to a profusion of bloggers in the coming months, baring all about public officials and political personalities in this country.”

Again the medium is being sacrificed on the altar because of a faulty messenger. Anna should know that blogs are subject to the same kind of scrutiny at law as are newspapers, radio and tv. There should be no fear in applying the law to the the use that is made of the new medium simply because it is more effective, more cutting and more direct and democratic than any medium previously known to man.

Amour Courtois

Daphne’s blog (for it is a blog) has once again turned the spotlights on one of the internet’s finer tools. We still have a basic unhealthy misunderstanding of blogs and what to do with them on this island. There is no doubt that the next election will have a huge chunk of it fought out on the net. We have progressed much since “The Malta Chronicle” and “J’accuse” broke new ground on internet discussion of political issues close to four years ago. Daphne or no Daphne the way forward is via the net – whether the ayatollahs and mullahs of the conservative and pseudo-progressive forces like it or not. Demonising the medium only shows them up as uninformed citizens who are unprepared for the Way of the Net.

As for the content of Daphne’s blog, I have already said that the main question to be asked in most of the cases being raised is “Why Now?”. It is a question that hits at the ethical dilemma of the use of such information as the columnist claims to be in possession of. There is no doubt that the Daphnes of the world will find people like myself (and most liberals who believe in the social contract and duties of the branches of the state) behind them when it comes to cleaning the rot that is slowly eroding faith in the institutions. It is a pity that earlier on, when we yelled foul at the values that inspired the system – at the gradual erosion of party principles and ideologies – we were constantly showered with a tirade of abuse based on value judgements measured by taste.

Earlier on when we yelled foul at the way a whole political machinery twisted the rules of the game to allow Mr Pullicino Orlando to survive through an election (and save earn his party a relative majority along the way) we we were told that we were setting ourselves up as objects of hate. When the J’accuse discussion boards constantly produced warnings of the perils of casting a wide net of candidates just for the sake of grabbing votes we were told that it was our green agenda speaking.

Presumably it’s the same green agenda that had advised in favour of a vote for the greens in the EP to increase Malta’s collective influence in that institution. The same green agenda that was laughed at for that suggestion (and rubbished by those conservative pundits who claim that “small parties” are a waste of time and vote) only to be proven right when Mr Dalli took Harry Vassallo under his wing in Brussels. To quote the Times:

“(Dr Vassallo) considered to be a moderate, is known to have strong contacts with the Green Group in the European Parliament, which Mr Dalli will be using in his favour particularly due to environment-sensitive issues in his portfolio such as animal welfare and GMOs.”

In short, we would be in favour of a Clean Up Politics Campaign but not one that is based on personal grudges and chips and inspired by personal exigencies and context and not the constant reference point of basic principles. Given a choice between pink paper scandal and the slow politics of persuasion and argumentation we have made our choice. In the meantime it is important that the media community finds a way of updating itself on the nature and workings of blogs – we canot afford to fall back any further and risk the media circus becoming just that – a media circus.

For the Love of the Arts

The main title of the article translates as “The (Bad) Taste of Others”. Dr Gonzi has been accused this week of basing his choices on the taste-inspired suggestions of others. The rumours about the inspirations behind the cabinet shuffle did not really confirm or unconfirm what would be a definite weakness of this Prime Minister. The shuffle had a long genesis from the Galea and Dalli nominations to the Musumeci saga, not to mention the Debono (Franco) Pre-Christmas Prelude. It’s been ugly and has not left Dr Gonzi with much of a choice. The worst is yet to come. The next two years of GonziPN loom include the threat of an economic meltdown in the EU zone, the erosion of faith in the institutions (most dangerously the judiciary, whether justified or not) and the confirmation of the sinking feeling that the new political blood in both parties does not promise much. Seeing the perilous deal that lies on the table it is a small wonder that Dr Gonzi chose to keep his cards and hold them close to his chest.

Dr Gonzi also met Renzo Piano and discussed some fine details of the Valletta project. It seems that “Roofless in Valletta” has been confirmed. We’ll be discussing that and more on the blog this week. In the meantime hope you spend a good time with your loved ones this “Clubbed, Stoned and Beheaded Saint’s Day” and don’t let all this gloomy news lead you to despair – just think amor vincit omnia – and hug the first person to be passing by as you finish reading. A good action done with good intentions… always a good start.

Happy Valentine’s day Lara!

Jacques is proud to announce the simplified web address for J’accuse: www.akkuza.com … where brain matters.

This article and accompanying Bertoon appear in today’s edition of The Malta Independent on Sunday.