The prettiest building in T&T

Perhaps no building is more controversial in T&T than the national academy for the performing arts. From a government that takes pride in the project, to an opposition that consider it wasteful spending, to artists who find it the prettiest and most spectacular structure in the country, but also one that needs modifications to meet their practical needs.
In the midst of this controversy the ordinary people must be confused. Nevertheless we see them pose for photographs in front of that building, including newly wedded couples who like to have NAPA in the background of their special days.

The recent report in which the Artists Coalition of Trinidad and Tobago (ACTT) Critique the project seemed motivated by the sincere desire to serve the public, which really touched me.

We often have negative attitudes. When we see something wrong we either say it’s not our business, or at best, criticize without offering solutions, so I found this particular report different in an encouraging way.
The report acknowledges that NAPA is the prettiest and most significant in T&T, which is something we all agree with. I think the report was right in pointing out that the beauty and unique characteristics of the building could make it a source of national income. The opera house in Australia is a good example of a building that failed to serve its original purpose-as an opera house-yet that failure was turned to huge success in the form of billions of dollars in revenue from tourism activities that specifically target that building. At the end of the day the failed opera house became an Australian icon.
There are certainly good things about the report. I completely agree that the artists of the country should have a say in planning art-related projects. I disagree with the authors of the report on the idea of addressing technical issues. The report for example says the main theater should hold 5,000 instead of 1,500 viewers. I think this kind of criticism shows that there are some serious misunderstandings regarding the purpose and scope of the project by the authors of the report. NAPA is only one piece in a larger picture that will involve a number of art centers and institutes that complete one another—NAPA is not a place for everything!
Anyway, I still agree with the report on the idea that there’s a chance to turn the building to a great cultural and financial opportunity for the country. Giving more architects and artists the chance to contribute their thoughts to the project will not only make the outcome better but also foster the sense that such projects belong to the whole society.
What was frustrating to read in the report was how the press ignored the letters artists had sent when NAPA was still under construction. The press evidently started paying attention to the subject only after work was completed. If the press really cared about getting the project done right they should have paid attention to the artists’ letters long time ago. Unfortunately the press seems more interested in writing about what’s politically controversial. The damage cynicism can do to NAPA, and any of the other ambitious works in T&T, can indeed be greater than that done by engineering mistakes. The second could break a stone, the first breaks spirits.

Now what do you think?