I ‘m really glad to be here with you today, at the opening of this fascinating exhibition on the Athenian Polykatoikia, curated by Killian Schmitz-Hubsch and Dimitris Kleanthis.
The exhibition is based on Killian's recently published book, featuring wonderful photographs by Dimitris. The book has been very successful and was recently republished. You can purchase a copy here today.
In recent years, there has been growing international interest in the polykatoikia –the Athenian apartment building. This book and exhibition are valuable contributions to this ongoing discussion.
What I find particularly interesting is that Killian studies how Greek architects shaped modern Athens through the apartment building model and the system of antiparochi, a unique method of financing construction based on collaboration between contractors and landowners.
In Greece, we often assume that Greek architects have had little influence on the evolution of modern Athens. This belief is related to the fact that Greek architects have rarely had the opportunity to implement large-scale urban planning projects or build large housing complexes like architects in other European and American cities have.
This has often been perceived as a problem, and we have sometimes blamed the Greek state for being ineffective, unable to carry out large-scale urban projects. However, in recent years, this perspective has been questioned.
Historians like George Dertilis have pointed out that the Greek state’s limited power and its inability to execute major urban projects is the result of small landownership, a key feature of Greek society. Unlike other European states, the Greek state did not inherit large feudal estates. Μεγάλα φέουδα.
This social landscape of small-scale landownership is closely tied to the emergence of Modern Greece out of the Ottoman Empire. When the Ottomans departed, a power vacuum emerged, and Greek small farmers occupied the land. At the same time, Europeans with radical political ideas were drawn to Greece, inspired by its ancient democratic legacy.
In the absence of established power structures, these Europeans introduced progressive ideas in favour of liberal democracy as a counterexample to the authoritarian regimes elsewhere in Europe. For instance, Greece established universal male suffrage (δικαίωμα ψήφου σε όλους τους ενήλικες άνδρες) in 1844— 4 years earlier than France. In Germany universal male suffrage was established in 1871, Britain even later in 1918, and Italy in 1919.
These policies further established the dispersal of landownership, which in turn led to the dispersion of power. The Greek state was unable to make large-scale urban interventions due to the fragmented distribution of land and power that had been distributed among its citizens.
However, we know now that the large-scale urban projects undertaken by powerful states often fail. Modern housing estates in other countries were frequently unpopular. Some became dystopian ghettos, and in many cases were eventually demolished. For example, half of the Robin Hood Gardens - a famous housing estate, by Alison and Peter Smithson - was recently demolished in London.
Killian is aware of this critique of large-scale urban interventions when he talks about Athens and the Greek polykatoikia. He fleshes this point out in the introduction of his book. Athens is the focus of international interest nowadays because the city was built following a different approach.
Many people, architects and urban planners, acknowledge numerous qualities embedded in the Athenian urban fabric such as the vibrancy of many parts of the city throughout the day, the diversity in the facades of its buildings, a lively and sociable way of life, a mix of social classes, a sense of freedom, and a low crime rate compared to other cities.
The Athenian polykatoikia was developed through the antiparochi model. A landowner would partner with a developer who would demolish his or her existing house and construct an apartment building. Some apartments would be sold in advance to fund construction. Others would be given to the landowner as payment for the land. This exchange allowed buildings to be constructed without significant initial capital.
Residents were actively involved in the design process, making this a highly effective model of participatory design that shaped Greek cities from the 1950s onward. In contrast, participatory design in Europe and America, such as rudimentary questionnaires addressed to workers living in housing complexes, only emerged in the 1970s and remains limited to this day.
To understand the extent of the residents’ involvement in the design process in Greece, look at Zenetos’ apartment building on Vasilissis Amalias Avenue. Kilian presents this project in the book. The original open-plan design conceived by the pioneering architect was transformed into a conventional layout with numerous rooms and hallways reflecting the preferences of the residents.
Greek architects often viewed such client interventions as compromises or rejections of their ideas. However, as Killian demonstrates, many pioneering architectural concepts—like open floor plans and open kitchens—were gradually accepted by Greek society and became mainstream.
It is also interesting to note that most apartment buildings in Athens were not designed by architects but by civil engineers or contractors. Despite this, these buildings closely followed architectural patterns, proposals and layouts, with only slight variations.
This is indicative of the significant influence Greek architects had on shaping public perceptions of modern urban living. Architects in other cities were able to design large-scale projects, with minimum intervention by clients or residents. However, this resulted in projects that misfunctioned and were often rejected by their users.
It is fascinating that the visions of architects for modern urban living in Athens ultimately gained overwhelming public acceptance. Kenneth Frampton, prominent architectural historian, was among the first to argue that Athens exemplifies the ideals of Modernism more than any other city.
In contrast, in other European and American cities, where architects enjoyed significant creative freedom and designed vast housing complexes without considering peoples’ needs and wishes, found that their visions ultimately failed and were rejected. For example, contemporary London is predominantly built less following modern architects’ visions and more a historicist neo-Victorian style.
Architects outside Greece believed that the problem lay in the forms of Modernism. As a result, they turned to Postmodernism, Pre-modern styles, or elaborate formalistic experiments, which now shape the emerging cities of Asia and the Middle East.
The Greek polykatoikia as an architectural and social phenomenon, however, tells a different story. The values of Modern architecture, abstraction, simplicity, pure geometry, repetition, and basic construction were highly praised by the public.
These architectural values made the projects accessible to all. Anyone could copy the initial high-quality projects designed by prominent architects with minimum resources. Therefore, Athens achieved one of Modernism’s main goals: decent housing for all.
If we compare the living conditions in a typical Athenian apartment with those in an apartment in a comparable social setting in London, for example, we understand this insight.
This unique method of urban development may have denied Greek architects the satisfaction of creating large-scale, narcissistic projects. In Athens, projects were smaller and more modest, with original plans often altered during implementation, frustrating the architects and altering their initial visions. Large parts of the city were even built without the involvement of architects at all.
Yet, the relentless efforts of Greek architects to negotiate with countless clients—persuading them to understand and accept every single detail they designed—earned them something invaluable: the widespread acceptance of important architectural innovations. These innovations profoundly shaped life in Athens, in a way that remains deeply intriguing today.
Through his research, Kilian sheds light on the significance of the achievement and honors the efforts of these Greek architects. I would like to conclude by highlighting one more interesting aspect of the Athenian Polykatoikia. This building type reflects another profound idea conceived by early 20th-century architects: the true beauty of a city lies in how it is inhabited: Form follows function.
Athens is an attractive city. However the city is not attractive because of its beautiful buildings, but because of its attractive way of life.
This is precisely what Dimitris Kleanthis captures in his terrific photographs. Dimitris is both an architectural photographer and a social scientist. His work, showcased in this exhibition and book, is, in my view, groundbreaking. He is among the few architectural photographers who so systematically and intentionally photograph important architectural projects trying to reveal the beauty of these buildings within the context of the living fabric of the city. Dimitris highlights the architectural value of these buildings by capturing the poetic way in which human life leaves its mark on them.
The exhibition is based on Killian's recently published book, featuring wonderful photographs by Dimitris. The book has been very successful and was recently republished. You can purchase a copy here today.
In recent years, there has been growing international interest in the polykatoikia –the Athenian apartment building. This book and exhibition are valuable contributions to this ongoing discussion.
What I find particularly interesting is that Killian studies how Greek architects shaped modern Athens through the apartment building model and the system of antiparochi, a unique method of financing construction based on collaboration between contractors and landowners.
In Greece, we often assume that Greek architects have had little influence on the evolution of modern Athens. This belief is related to the fact that Greek architects have rarely had the opportunity to implement large-scale urban planning projects or build large housing complexes like architects in other European and American cities have.
This has often been perceived as a problem, and we have sometimes blamed the Greek state for being ineffective, unable to carry out large-scale urban projects. However, in recent years, this perspective has been questioned.
Historians like George Dertilis have pointed out that the Greek state’s limited power and its inability to execute major urban projects is the result of small landownership, a key feature of Greek society. Unlike other European states, the Greek state did not inherit large feudal estates. Μεγάλα φέουδα.
This social landscape of small-scale landownership is closely tied to the emergence of Modern Greece out of the Ottoman Empire. When the Ottomans departed, a power vacuum emerged, and Greek small farmers occupied the land. At the same time, Europeans with radical political ideas were drawn to Greece, inspired by its ancient democratic legacy.
In the absence of established power structures, these Europeans introduced progressive ideas in favour of liberal democracy as a counterexample to the authoritarian regimes elsewhere in Europe. For instance, Greece established universal male suffrage (δικαίωμα ψήφου σε όλους τους ενήλικες άνδρες) in 1844— 4 years earlier than France. In Germany universal male suffrage was established in 1871, Britain even later in 1918, and Italy in 1919.
However, we know now that the large-scale urban projects undertaken by powerful states often fail. Modern housing estates in other countries were frequently unpopular. Some became dystopian ghettos, and in many cases were eventually demolished. For example, half of the Robin Hood Gardens - a famous housing estate, by Alison and Peter Smithson - was recently demolished in London.
Killian is aware of this critique of large-scale urban interventions when he talks about Athens and the Greek polykatoikia. He fleshes this point out in the introduction of his book. Athens is the focus of international interest nowadays because the city was built following a different approach.
Many people, architects and urban planners, acknowledge numerous qualities embedded in the Athenian urban fabric such as the vibrancy of many parts of the city throughout the day, the diversity in the facades of its buildings, a lively and sociable way of life, a mix of social classes, a sense of freedom, and a low crime rate compared to other cities.
The Athenian polykatoikia was developed through the antiparochi model. A landowner would partner with a developer who would demolish his or her existing house and construct an apartment building. Some apartments would be sold in advance to fund construction. Others would be given to the landowner as payment for the land. This exchange allowed buildings to be constructed without significant initial capital.
Residents were actively involved in the design process, making this a highly effective model of participatory design that shaped Greek cities from the 1950s onward. In contrast, participatory design in Europe and America, such as rudimentary questionnaires addressed to workers living in housing complexes, only emerged in the 1970s and remains limited to this day.
To understand the extent of the residents’ involvement in the design process in Greece, look at Zenetos’ apartment building on Vasilissis Amalias Avenue. Kilian presents this project in the book. The original open-plan design conceived by the pioneering architect was transformed into a conventional layout with numerous rooms and hallways reflecting the preferences of the residents.
It is also interesting to note that most apartment buildings in Athens were not designed by architects but by civil engineers or contractors. Despite this, these buildings closely followed architectural patterns, proposals and layouts, with only slight variations.
This is indicative of the significant influence Greek architects had on shaping public perceptions of modern urban living. Architects in other cities were able to design large-scale projects, with minimum intervention by clients or residents. However, this resulted in projects that misfunctioned and were often rejected by their users.
It is fascinating that the visions of architects for modern urban living in Athens ultimately gained overwhelming public acceptance. Kenneth Frampton, prominent architectural historian, was among the first to argue that Athens exemplifies the ideals of Modernism more than any other city.
In contrast, in other European and American cities, where architects enjoyed significant creative freedom and designed vast housing complexes without considering peoples’ needs and wishes, found that their visions ultimately failed and were rejected. For example, contemporary London is predominantly built less following modern architects’ visions and more a historicist neo-Victorian style.
Architects outside Greece believed that the problem lay in the forms of Modernism. As a result, they turned to Postmodernism, Pre-modern styles, or elaborate formalistic experiments, which now shape the emerging cities of Asia and the Middle East.
The Greek polykatoikia as an architectural and social phenomenon, however, tells a different story. The values of Modern architecture, abstraction, simplicity, pure geometry, repetition, and basic construction were highly praised by the public.
These architectural values made the projects accessible to all. Anyone could copy the initial high-quality projects designed by prominent architects with minimum resources. Therefore, Athens achieved one of Modernism’s main goals: decent housing for all.
If we compare the living conditions in a typical Athenian apartment with those in an apartment in a comparable social setting in London, for example, we understand this insight.
This unique method of urban development may have denied Greek architects the satisfaction of creating large-scale, narcissistic projects. In Athens, projects were smaller and more modest, with original plans often altered during implementation, frustrating the architects and altering their initial visions. Large parts of the city were even built without the involvement of architects at all.
Yet, the relentless efforts of Greek architects to negotiate with countless clients—persuading them to understand and accept every single detail they designed—earned them something invaluable: the widespread acceptance of important architectural innovations. These innovations profoundly shaped life in Athens, in a way that remains deeply intriguing today.
Through his research, Kilian sheds light on the significance of the achievement and honors the efforts of these Greek architects. I would like to conclude by highlighting one more interesting aspect of the Athenian Polykatoikia. This building type reflects another profound idea conceived by early 20th-century architects: the true beauty of a city lies in how it is inhabited: Form follows function.
Athens is an attractive city. However the city is not attractive because of its beautiful buildings, but because of its attractive way of life.
This is precisely what Dimitris Kleanthis captures in his terrific photographs. Dimitris is both an architectural photographer and a social scientist. His work, showcased in this exhibition and book, is, in my view, groundbreaking. He is among the few architectural photographers who so systematically and intentionally photograph important architectural projects trying to reveal the beauty of these buildings within the context of the living fabric of the city. Dimitris highlights the architectural value of these buildings by capturing the poetic way in which human life leaves its mark on them.
