Giuseppe Schembri Bonaci

When I began my academic career at the University of Malta within the Department of History of Art, I initiated regular studies on different aspects which concern Maltese art history. My studies are critical analyses of art. They are not biographical or chronological catalogue writings - of which there are already many in circulation. I chose to follow a path which remains largely undiscovered, that of critical-analytical work. There is profound need for us to tackle art in a critical manner, placing it within its context and also in relation to vital socio-economic historical connections. We must begin to understand that art forms an integral part of the intellectual and social structure of a country. Following this aim, I have already published some works which form part of the research programme of the Department of History of Art.
Amongst them are ‘Willie Apap: Descent from the Cross', ‘Apap, Cremona and St. Paul', ‘Antonio Sciortino and the British Academy of Arts in Rome', ‘Anton Agius and Gothic Socialist Realism' and ‘Shostakovich, Britten, Stravinsky and the Painters in between: 1936'. These all deal with particular aspects and works, always following the approach of critical analysis. We need to study these works in their artistic, philosophical, historical and political aspects, so that one may create a complete sphere around the understanding of art. I also try to get foreign scholars interested in Maltese art. Some of these aforementioned publications include contributions by Dr. Marjorie Trusted (Victoria and Albert Museum, London), Sarah Moulden (Dulwich Gallery, London, ex-London Portrait Gallery), Prof. Antonio Sparzani (Universita di Milano) and others. It is important to position the work of Maltese artists within the international field and to attract foreign researchers to take an academic interest.
Anton Agius is one artist I have studied in depth, an artist whom I believe is encircled by both positive and negative contradictions. Maybe this is what led me towards the challenge to study how this dominant artist could be analysed, especially during a time when Malta was undergoing radical and revolutionary changes during her birth as a nation-state. Agius also symbolizes, in my opinion, the contradictions which existed in Maltese society. A country with a rich history and which formed an integral part of the Kingdom of Two Sicilies, with an Italianate culture and politics, which somehow became a part of the British Imperial world, a contradiction which led to the independence of this country from both powers. There were great social developments after the war, and epic moments which resulted in political independence in 1964 and unforeseen social transformations in the seventies, with the construction of a strong welfare state which until today resists the aggressions of the powerful neoliberal capitalist world. Agius and his works can begin to be studied if they are placed within this framework.
As I argue in my publication on Agius, the artist interestingly attempted to unite the exciting medieval-gothic idiom which can be found around the whole gothic world; churches, cathedrals, even profane art from the middle ages, and his socio-political commitment which could not remain neutral. Artistic influences are highly strange and also mysterious. They may be direct, indirect, composite, and subconscious. This question has been debated and studied for thousands of years. I will not enter into my thesis which I believe may contribute to the debate on how this activity of influence functions. I strongly believe in that which I call the ‘quantum leap'. There is not enough space to discuss it here. What I can elicit is that Agius was directly or indirectly faced by the romanesque/gothic culture. There is no need to see this as something outstanding, Europe is replete with phenomenal examples, even ones close to our shores in Italy and Sicily. The gothic presence in Malta has been studied by Prof. Mario Buhagiar, ex-Head of Department of History of Art, and I believe that the future holds more exciting possibilities. However, independently of this, art travels without respect to national frontiers, and the perceptive talent of Agius would surely have absorbed ideas like these.
Together with this gothic idiom he succeeded in creating a world which emerged from the artistic principles of Socialist Realism, one which was born and which grew around the years of the Second World War, in the countries which chose the road of Communism and also those which began the global anti-colonialist battle. This expansion meant that the art of Socialist Realism transcended geographical and political frontiers, becoming an international artistic idiom. It is surprising that is also developed without its ideological basis, which entangles it in contradiction.
I must argue that Agius is an inconsistent artist. He has produced beautiful and extremely powerful works such as the monument to ‘Manwel Dimech' which is directly influenced by the monuments to Lenin found in Moscow and St. Petersburg. There are spiritually beautiful works such as ‘St. Francis'. The base of the General Workers Union monument is excellent. However, instead of further pursuing the gothic idiom used for this base, he completed the work by inserting personalities which do not create the same artistic expressivity which reflects the beauty of the base. The bronze couple does not manifest any artistic spirit. This is an example of Agius' artistic inconsistency. The idea of the ‘Freedom Day' monument is brilliant and historically intriguing, yet Agius produces blank-marionette faces.
The fact that Agius was a brilliant abstract sculptor at the beginning of his career, even managing to attract the attention of Victor Pasmore, but felt that abstraction could not embody the great social changes which Malta was undergoing was a grave mistake. Agius thought that for him to directly participate in these revolutionary changes which transformed Malta from a clerical-conservative culture into a modern state, he had to take the direction of figurative art. I think this was an error. He always tried to produce art which was comprehensible by switching from the abstract path to the figurative, which meant that both spheres suffered and impaired his talent.
As I have reiterated, Agius' problem is precisely that of his artistic inconsistency. It is difficult to compare ‘The Kiss' found in the Rabat garden to the beautiful work ‘Manwel Dimech', or the figures of the ‘Freedom Day' monument to the dynamism of ‘St. Francis'. Another problem in the artistic field is that of overproduction, which makes one enter into compromise. For example, if one studies the monuments of ‘Sette Giugno' and ‘Mikiel Scerri' it is obvious that they cannot be artistically separated. I do not believe that this is a positive sign for both monuments. There are certain details in both which show fantastic work, for example in the rendering of the hands in the ‘Sette Giugno' monument, yet this quality is not consistent throughout the entire monument and, furthermore, there is a conceptual blurring between this and the ‘Mikiel Scerri'.
I am not entirely certain; however it is possible that Agius' strength comes forward when he diminishes the spectacular. The more he tries to be spectacular, the more contradictory qualities emerge. ‘Manwel Dimech' is a monument which appropriates aspects of three monuments to Lenin, as argued in my book. Realist dynamism is manifested in ‘Dimech', a brilliant idea, a reflection on Dimechian philosophy, a beautiful work, an artistic-social indication and a radical statement. Moreover, it is not a cultured-monument as are the majority of monuments of this type. There is no idealization, and its former architectonic installation in Castille Square indicated that Dimech's struggle was an individual one, even during his lifetime. We must now wait for the new positioning of the monument to see if it will also be a thought-out, reasoned decision. A work transforms itself into art when personal sincerity coincides with artistic sincerity.
Anton Agius is one of Malta's most important twentieth century artists. He left behind a colossal heritage, especially one which reflects the social and historical development of our country. Agius confronts giants such as Antonio Sciortino, Vince Apap and Josef Kalleya. I would like to comparatively analyse the monument to ‘Mikiel Scerri' which was produced by Agius and that proposed by Kalleya. It was Agius who introduced the idiom of Social/Socialist Realism to Malta in the most spectacular manner.
Sciortino has particular works which were seemingly overshadowed by political aspects, but they were rather particular/singular works and there seems to have been a great distance from the political beliefs of Sciortino. In Agius' case this distance does not exist. Agius was producing works which not only reflected the socio-political ideas of his time but also his own. He even used to include self-portraits in his sculptural works to manifest himself within the socialist idea.

Article edited and translated by Nikki Petroni