The contribution by Jason Joe Farrugia entitled “‘The Art and Architecture of Twentieth Century Gozo” in the issue of The Gozo Observer (No.26) magazine of last June makes interesting reading. It provides a good rendering of the Gozo artistic milieu were it not for some observations regarding my artistic output as well as my late lather’s artistic life which demand some clarifications.

On page 14, Mr Farrugia says that the architect of the Ta’ Pinu church, Andrea Vassallo, “was a natural choice”. I vouch, from the records, that Andrea Vassallo was introduced to the Ta’ Pinu project thanks to his brother, the renowned Maltese grammarian John Vassallo who at the time was the Gozo Courts’ registrar. It was through the latter’s friendship with some of the Gozo curia’s representatives that his brother Andrea was picked and eventually charged to draw up the Ta’ Pinu church plans. This information was given to me by my late father Wistinu Camilleri, who was actively involved as he was entrusted with the designs for the sculptural motifs and reliefs and to some extent was Andrea’s confidant throughout the construction project.

This compels me to query Mr Farrugia’s conclusion further down on the same page that “the Ta’ Pinu church has a marked resemblance to the stereotyped Cathedral of the Sacred Heart in Tripoli...” I believe that today art students have sufficient available means to carry out their research. It is undeniable that in the course of such research is to seek the opinion of competent and experienced persons in their own field of specialisation. Unfortunately, there is a tendency for students to quote sources that are not verified and hence the information goes unchecked with the result that the misinformation becomes an actual fact The assertion as to the probable inspiration for the Ta’ Pinu church model cannot hold ground because my reliable and documentary sources point to the church dedicated to Saint Camillo de Lellis in Rome.

ln connection with the Ta’ Pinu artistic history, I cannot ignore the comments found in footnote 8 on page 9. Here Mr Farrugia attributes some of the designs to George Borg judging from initials found on them. I am sure that the initials G. B. stand for another sculptor who was very active in Gozo at the time and whose services were sought after by the church authorities at the behest of my late father because he could not be continuously involved due to his busy artistic schedule. Mr Borg was only involved in executing in plastica the two gradenzini which were eventually executed in marble in Rome and installed on the presbytery area.

Further on in his contribution on page 17, Mr Farrugia comments about my artistic contribution. He asserts that “within the historic context, his religious works fall into a melancholic nostalgia” and goes on to state that notwithstanding this my works reached the common tastes of the local patrons.

I would have expected, as some researchers actually do, that such observations would have been jotted down after the artist had been consulted so that his view about his works would be sought. Such assertions make me wonder about the guidelines used to instruct art students learning about objective art appreciation. Regrettably, sometimes similar assertions are also addressed in cases or deceased artists, whom I know very well, and which surely they do not deserve. Sometimes they lack substantial truth.

I am sure that Mr Farrugia knows that painting has many functions and has been used for many different purposes as history can attest. It is an undeniable truth that some of the greatest paintings have been produced in the service of religion. Paintings are an inexhaustible source of beauty and derive from the originality or the artist’s outlook, his gift or perception and quality of mind, his capacity for combining form and colour into a harmonious unity. This is felt the greater when such works are destined to be mounted in churches and challenge the artist to respect the internal architectural idiom. Hence the artist is constrained as regards the style of the painting to be adopted. This complicates itself when the artist is left with no liberty at all in its execution when patrons demand that the style should be in tandem with the extant paintings in the church. Such situations were also met by artists whose established style was compromised on being commissioned with church paintings as can be verified during the academic art courses. Such experiences befell the artists whom I came across as well as to me.

My works, which can be found decorating church vaults, attest to the teaching of the Church as far as the commission of art works are concerned. Churches are not art galleries. They are places of worship and hence works of art are to be understood by people from all walks of life and can also be internationally understood. Painters in their way teach one to see, not simply the observable facts, but with something of their own imagination.

I am afraid that the current academic art appreciation does not offer the student any challenges to think, which kills his/her capabilities. It is a two-shaded attitude with no grey areas. I can confirm this from an actual experience that befell me. A Gozo art student turned up at my studio and requested my help for an art assignment. At some point in time, he recounted to me about an onsite art appreciation to a Gozo church organised by their art teacher. As they were entering the church, their teacher exhorted them not to look at the vault painting, which happened to be my work. I query whether this is discrimination against the artist or destructive art appreciation which divest the art student from objectively reaching his own art appreciation. If such a cadre of art teachers find this to be insufficient justification for this kind of work, it remains an admirable achievement − a triumph of skill and talent.

Reading Mr Farrugia’s contribution convinces me that the art critic should not start from a visually constricting premise, and that one should have the courage to combine visual and historical intuitions in such a way as to produce a genuine history of the visual.

Paul Camilleri-Cauchi

VICTORIA