Davide Groppi is an Italian lighting designer, born in Piacenza. In the late 1980s, after an initial training in drafting, he started a small workshop in the historic heart of the city, inventing and manufacturing lamps with the brand by his same name. Over time, creative independence and management have allowed him to develop his own brand of original and unique products, distributed the world over. In his work, simplicity, lightness, emotion, invention, and amazement are the fundamental elements. The things that inspire these ideas are works of art, ready-made objects, magic, the desire to make things with his hands or simply the urge to play and have fun with light.

 

S.M.: What drew you to lighting design in the first place? Which different aspects of design did your interest shift to during your activity?

D.G.: The need to communicate and do a job that belonged to me. Light has always fascinated me, and I have always liked the idea of telling stories with my lamps. Now I am mainly interested in the immaterial aspect of light, and therefore the possibility of inventing something new, never seen before.

 

 

S.M.: Your breakthrough design came through an encounter with Maddalena de Padova, from an already established company mostly centered around furniture; beyond image or typology, what do you think lay at the essence of this design to match with the sensibility of the brand?

D.G.: I believe that Maddalena De Padova felt my passion for light and lamps. And, also, a certain way of describing my work.

 

 

S.M.: Design and production are strictly linked. How early did you choose to become a producer of your own designs, and what have been the advantages and disadvantages of managing both fields?

D.G.: Immediately. I was too young to think about presenting my ideas to companies. So, I imagined self-producing what I invented. It was an adventure, but I had the opportunity to grow independently and free from the typical constraints of the industry.

 

Read the full interview in the annual issue Villas 2024.

Ateno Architecture Studio was founded in Athens in 2018 by architects Giorgos Fiorentinos and Ilias Theodorakis. Its initial ambition was to create a collaborative platform centered on architectural composition—one that would encourage dialogue and experimentation around form and the spatial relationships of the built environment. Over time, the team broadened its scope, undertaking a wide range of private and public commissions. Envisioned as an entity that integrates research, design and construction into a unified creative process, the practice continues to evolve, looking to the future with optimism.

 

ek: One of your first projects involved the renovation of a damaged restaurant in Mati, Attica, conceived through a narrative approach in which memory played a central role. Have you addressed subsequent renovations in a similar way? What is the primary challenge when changing the use of a space?

ATENO: Intervening in an existing building is a process of reading and reinterpretation. Every structure carries a narrative embedded in its form, layout and traces of use. These elements suggest ways of inhabiting; they carry memories and stories that often shape the framework of our work.

The greatest challenge in a change of use lies in the fact that we are sometimes required to intervene in this narrative in an almost violent manner. Through our work, we strive to preserve living fragments of history while simultaneously creating a fresh substratum capable of accommodating the stories of future occupants.

The balance between old and new, the decision to preserve or radically transform a space’s character, the safeguarding of craft traditions that may have faded, alongside the integration of new materials and technologies, constitute for us an ongoing and creative exercise.

 

 

ek: Among your unrealized projects, the proposals for the Eleneio Public Kindergarten and the Arts Building of Athens College stand out. Although formally distinct, was there a shared approach between the two? In your view, how does architecture contribute to supporting a contemporary educational experience?

ATENO: We regard architectural competitions as opportunities for experimentation, extroversion and collaboration. Indeed, our office was founded on the occasion of a competition for Public Utility Facilities in Thessaloniki. The projects you mention were developed in collaboration with colleagues and friends—Dimitris Zampopoulos, Nestor Skantzouris (Arts Building) and Studio Spacecraft (Eleneio).

Each design endeavor was shaped by multiple parameters – the site, the life scenario, and the collective references of each design team – with a shared aspiration to create timeless learning environments that move and inspire. We believe architecture can enhance the educational experience both functionally and experientially. Proportions, geometries, visual perspectives, the interplay of light and shadow, colors and textures encountered in school environments as children form our first perception of the world; they become embedded in memory and return, consciously or not, throughout our lives.

 

 

ek: As your practice continues to grow, are there particular building types or categories of projects you hope to explore further?

ATENO: Undoubtedly, like the majority of architectural practices in Greece, we are primarily engaged in projects related to tourism, commerce and housing, within both new constructions and existing shells. Throughout our trajectory so far, we approach every commission with equal interest. Regardless of scale or typology, the distinct challenges accompanying each project stimulate us, expand our knowledge and strengthen the team’s creativity.

Ideally, we would like to engage with as many project categories as possible in the future, without focusing exclusively on a specific typology. At the same time, we observe a gap between private and public infrastructure – from sidewalks to hospitals, schools and administrative buildings. We recognize the urgent need for high-quality works of collective interest and would welcome the opportunity to contribute meaningfully to that direction.

Kydoniatis Architects, based in Athens, is an architectural practice with a lineage spanning three generations. The office undertakes both small- and large-scale projects: fully integrated tourist resorts, residential complexes and private homes, apartment buildings and vacation houses, restorations and reconstructions, over 240 high-spec retail stores, office buildings, schools, pharmaceutical industries, and data centers.

Its design approach combines functionality and sustainability with respect for place, organizing complex programs with deep technical and construction knowledge. The practice is currently led by architect Konstantinos Kydoniatis, representing the younger generation, alongside his brother Phaedon.

 

S.M.: The office has extensive experience in designing integrated resorts based on the all inclusive model. How did this activity begin, and how have the relevant standards changed over the years? Does this typology have a sustainable future?

K.K.: We have repeatedly undertaken large-scale complexes, with capacities reaching 2,000 beds. However, I believe the term all inclusive remains misunderstood: historically it was associated with “cheap” tourism, whereas today it includes products of exceptionally high standards. There is a Greek hotel chain that operates exemplary all inclusive resorts with a notably high daily rate. The hotels we design—whether targeting couples or families, whether offering accommodation only or full service packages—strictly follow quality and organizational standards.

My personal involvement began early in my career at my father’s office. Twenty-five years ago, a family-run hotel company with three complexes in Cyprus commissioned us to support its first steps in Greece, on the island of Rhodes. Since then, the company has grown into a giant with over 45 resorts, and our collaboration continues. The experience of that period, combined with a stable relationship of trust, gave us a solid framework to deeply understand operational flows, renovation cycles, and strategies for differentiating the guest experience.

The persistent problem in Greece is the absence of an organized, coherent national tourism strategy. Policies rarely have continuity, infrastructure lags behind, and overall coordination is insufficient. While private initiative has significantly upgraded accommodations and services through competition, it cannot carry the entire burden. Many stakeholders act based on narrow self-interest, without a broader strategic vision. At key arrival and departure nodes, such as airports and ports, infrastructure is often inadequate, and transportation to and from them remains problematic – despite the fact that we are a tourism-driven country.

I believe Greece should – and can – address a wide range of visitors, from very high to mid-level spending. A critical priority is extending the tourist season, at least on the major islands (Rhodes, Crete, Corfu, Kos). New complexes must be designed from the outset for more than 6–7 months of operation, with sufficient indoor activity spaces and programmatic flexibility. Large resorts facilitate this transition, offering a rich mix of dining, leisure, wellness, and sports facilities, with clearly organized workflows and infrastructure.

Organized complexes serve families exceptionally well, with safe, distinct, high-quality spaces for all ages. Smaller accommodations, on the other hand, offer more specialized experiences with a strong following. The key requirement, regardless of scale, is adherence to standards and proper organization.

Unfortunately, a large portion of the supply remains unorganized. In terms of sustainability, the all inclusive model clearly has a future, provided it incorporates bioclimatic strategies, energy and water efficiency, circular material practices, adequate shading and natural ventilation, and infrastructure for year-round operation. This way, it ceases to be a “flattening” package and becomes a tool for the rational management of resources and experiences, with measurable benefits for the local area.

 

 

S.M.: You often renovate your older works to bring them up to contemporary standards. When do you preserve existing features and when is new architecture required?

K.K.: Long-term client relationships are a hallmark of our office. Typically, after around 12 years of operation, an accommodation facility requires renovation, sometimes fully, other times in targeted areas. Indicative interventions include adding private pools to ground-floor rooms, aesthetic and energy upgrades, creating indoor pools to extend the season, and reorganizing F&B spaces with multiple dining points and themed concepts. Where older complexes had 1–2 restaurants, today large resorts require 6–7, plus 4–5 café-bar points.

For newer buildings, interventions are usually mild, focusing on energy and lighting. For older ones, often in prime locations, we essentially proceed with radical reconstruction, applying a new, contemporary architectural vocabulary and technical framework. Statistically, for every new hotel we design, we reconstruct at least twice as many older units from the same portfolio, a reality that reflects the renewal needs of mature tourism markets.

 

 

S.M.: What other types of building projects does the office undertake, and how does this experience enrich your hospitality design?

K.K.: We are interested in new challenges and diverse building programs. We design and implement single-family homes, residential complexes, apartment buildings, vacation houses, restorations and reconstructions, office buildings, schools, and even pharmaceutical factories. We have designed and executed over 240 high-end retail stores.

The interaction between typologies is bidirectional, but I find that experience from “other” projects feeds even more strongly into hospitality design: an integrated resort is, in practice, a small city.

A resort’s program includes reception areas, dining facilities, indoor, outdoor, and semi-outdoor activity spaces, sports facilities, spas, pools, retail, daycare centers and playgrounds, multipurpose halls and amphitheaters, medical spaces, professional kitchens, storage areas, staff rooms and facilities, mechanical rooms, tanks, and water/wastewater treatment installations. Understanding this complexity requires design that balances function, experience, and resilience. This is precisely where we draw on knowledge from our other typologies, so the whole becomes more than the sum of its parts.

 

Read the full interview in the ek issue 302 | November 2025.

With a history spanning nearly seven decades, the firm Thymios Papayannis and Associates – TPA, founded in Athens in 1959, holds a distinguished position in the field of spatial planning and environmental design in Greece. Combining architecture and landscape, urban and regional planning, and environmental management along with engineering disciplines, the office operates as a collective, interdisciplinary team driven by a profound sense of social responsibility, with a vision of achieving harmony between humanity and nature in a long-term perspective.

Its current identity is shaped both by the rich legacy inherited from its distinguished partners and, of course, from its founder and visionary Thymios Papayannis, architect, urban planner, and environmentalist, as well as by its steady orientation toward rethinking its role as a consultant and designer in an ever-changing modern world. Ivi Nanopoulou, managing partner of the firm, speaks about her commitment to continuity and to the office’s responsibility to remain a living hub of designers – open, contemporary, democratic, responsive to the challenges of our time – fostering collaborations and advancing architecture and spatial design with sustainability and the identity of place as guiding principles.

 

S.M.: The office maintains an interdisciplinary approach, combining design with technology, ecology, and culture. What needs do you foresee emerging – in Greece and internationally – in terms of architectural and urban planning over the next decade?

I.N.: Today’s challenges are immense – as are our responsibilities to address them. These include tackling climate change and strengthening our resilience to extreme phenomena, protecting our unique landscape and rapidly declining countryside, empowering local communities and ensuring social cohesion to smoothly integrate emerging pressures, reducing the waste of resources – particularly land, water, and energy – and ensuring flexibility in design, as we live in a world of constantly changing needs.

The challenge lies in harnessing technology in ways that remain consistent with universal and timeless human values. It has now become second nature for us to work holistically, across all scales and increasingly broad fields, using technology as a tool that enables us to meet new challenges – to monitor our spatial footprint through a continuous process of “zooming in” and “zooming out,” guided both by the human being as a social entity and by nature as a sustainable system. The great challenge today, both locally and globally, is to draw knowledge from the past, to live as its continuation rather than in rupture with it, to restore our relationship with the countryside as a productive and living landscape, to limit our needs, and to rediscover the joy and balance of life, coexistence within measure, beauty, and environmental empathy. We work toward this vision and actively support the work of the Mediterranean Institute for Nature and Anthropos (MedINA) – the NGO founded twenty years ago by Thymios Papayannis.

 

 

S.M.:Intangible cultural heritage is not simply a field of documentation but a foundation of your design philosophy. How does this cultural foundation translate into a contemporary and active process of spatial production? In what ways does memory become a driver of evolution and innovation?

I.N.: Perhaps many had the chance to see a unique exhibition at the Acropolis Museum, “Allspice: Michael Rakowitz and Ancient Civilizations”, which explored the importance of identity and memory, of resilience… I was deeply moved by the ability of the artist – and of the curators – to highlight both the value of the dialogue between intangible and material heritage, between ancient civilizations and contemporary art, and the pain of loss and rupture, the fragmentation of a monument or collection, and the need to restore their continuity. But how do we, as architects and urban planners, translate this cultural foundation into our work? How does memory become, in our contemporary projects, a catalyst for growth and innovation?

A recent example illustrates this: our firm was awarded the European Architectural Heritage Intervention (AHI) Prize in Urban Planning this past June, for the masterplan of the archaeological site of Ancient Corinth, titled “Bridging Time and Space: Master Plan for the Regeneration of Ancient Corinth.” The study was carried out in collaboration with the Greek Ministry of Culture, the Ephorate of Antiquities of Corinth, and the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, and it stood out among numerous international entries for its innovative and holistic approach to cultural heritage management. As the School itself noted, the project “aims to bridge the historical layers of the archaeological site with the needs of the local community and visitors. It represents a model of responsible and inspired design for managing cultural heritage, combining traditional tools of urban intervention with sustainable development and exemplary management of natural and cultural landscapes.” The award, as the School’s director Bonna D. Wescoat stated, “recognizes the power of a collective vision for the protection and redefinition of cultural landscapes.”

 

 

S.M.: The office operates across multiple scales – from national spatial strategies and landscape management to architectural design. What is the main challenge when you are called to unify different levels of intervention into a single system of thought and practice?

I.N.: The challenge is not so difficult – as long as one seeks truth in what they do, to be both substantive and convincing. To unify different levels of spatial intervention in a creative and regenerative way, collaboration among interdisciplinary teams and successive analytical approaches are essential.

On one hand, this involves a detailed analysis and understanding of the space and the parameters that define it, emphasizing spatial and cultural characteristics and the landscape they compose. On the other, it requires the formulation of a strong vision capable of awakening local forces and aligning actions into a cohesive network of interventions, structured through a strategic, phased approach. In this strategy, open dialogue, consultation with stakeholders, and participatory processes play a crucial role – practices that are still lacking in Greece. Yet, when achieved, they can create momentum and long-term resilience. A characteristic example is the redevelopment of the Phaleron Bay – the “Aenaon” Park, currently in the tendering phase – a project that exemplifies commitment to goals, continuous dialogue, and cohesive design decisions that have endured and evolved over time.

 

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 301 | October 2025.

 

Founded in Athens in 2013 by Michalis Kraounakis, k-division is an award-winning architectural firm known for its thoughtful and versatile approach. The studio engages in a broad spectrum of projects, ranging from tourist resorts and private residences to interventions in existing buildings. It offers comprehensive architectural services -from concept development and design to construction supervision and interior design. Central to their practice is a strong commitment to the initial design idea, a collaborative team dynamic, and a seamless approach that connects the overarching concept with its material execution.

 

S.M.: Your studio was established during the financial crisis. What were the key steps that allowed you to transition to larger-scale projects over time?

Michalis Kraounakis: The crisis was a defining period -not just because it marked the beginning of our practice, but also due to the extremely challenging conditions at the time. Fortunately, I brought with me a decade of experience from another firm, having worked on small- and medium-scale projects. That experience gave me valuable tools -both technical expertise and emotional resilience- which proved essential in navigating the challenges.

We essentially started from scratch, investing in our existing client network and accepting projects regardless of scale or architectural complexity. That phase acted as a reset -a chance to reflect on the identity of our practice and build solid foundations. We focused on strengthening our brand, both in name and visual identity, while also organizing our internal operations to meet the demands of the contemporary landscape.

Over time, this cohesive strategy -reflected in both our internal structure and our architectural output- began to bear fruit. When new opportunities emerged, we were prepared, both organizationally and creatively. Our consistent delivery of holistic services and attention to detail at every stage helped us earn the trust of clients and led to commissions of greater scale, as our structured, thorough approach became recognized.

 

 

S.M.: Your work doesn’t follow a standardized style or focus on a specific typology. How do you define your target audience, and how do you communicate your architectural vision?

M.K.: That’s true -we intentionally avoid a fixed stylistic identity. We tailor our architectural language to each project and client, always grounded in our core principles and design ethics. This flexible approach is also evident in our digital presence. Our website, for example, doesn’t follow the typical format of an architectural portfolio. We believe our visitors are looking for something more personal- more “tailor-made.” Our outreach is often indirect, conveyed through the content and atmosphere of the work itself.

We communicate our proposals with clarity and an accessible methodology. While our approach doesn’t radically differ from that of other studios, we make a point of clarifying the final outcome from the very beginning. Floor plans, for instance, are rarely intuitive for clients. Instead, we emphasize visual communication -especially three-dimensional forms- which offer a clearer and more immediate understanding of the space.

From the early design stages, we present the massing and spatial composition of each project, helping clients visualize how it will be built. In an era of information overload and rapid visual consumption, we aim not only to inspire but also to inform. We explain what each proposal entails -design-wise, technically, and financially- essentially “educating” the client in a creative, engaging way.

 

 

S.M.: Your studio is built around a young team. How do you balance personal responsibility with the collective design process?

M.K.: In my early career, I was fortunate to work at a studio where I was entrusted with complete responsibility for significant projects from a young age. That trust played a pivotal role in my growth, and we’ve adopted a similar model at k-division. Young architects are given real responsibility from the outset, within a learning environment grounded in practice. This is exactly how Dorothea Aligianni joined the studio -she is now a vital part of our evolution.

Dorothea Aligianni: We believe that this hands-on approach allows young architects to immerse themselves deeply in the profession. They quickly grasp the demands of the role and experience both the weight of responsibility and the satisfaction of creation. Of course, all work is carried out under the active guidance of more experienced team members, ensuring both quality and direction.

Ultimately, our process is deeply collaborative. Before every presentation, we seek diverse viewpoints from across the team, using internal dialogue to enrich our proposals. This ongoing exchange of ideas enhances the architectural integrity of each project and gives every design a collectively refined identity. For us, maintaining a balance between individual responsibility and collective creativity is fundamental to our architectural practice.

Read the full interview in issue ek 299 | July – August 2025.

 

The Spanish architect Fran Silvestre studied at the Polytechnic University of Valencia and continued with postgraduate studies in urban planning at the Technical University of Eindhoven in the Netherlands, while at the same time working at MVRDV. He later collaborated with Álvaro Siza until 2005, when he founded his own practice, Fran Silvestre Arquitectos, in Valencia. In 2016 he completed his PhD at the Polytechnic University of Valencia, where he also teaches at the School of Architecture, directing postgraduate programs. His architecture stands out for its modern idiom, with large white surfaces, an exceptional handling of space, light, and materials, clean geometries, and a pushing of structural limits to the edge of contemporary possibilities. We spoke with Fran Silvestre on the occasion of his participation as a guest of honor of the Embassy of Spain in Athens and ICEX–Interiors from Spain at the event “Shaping Spaces: A Spanish Perspective on Contemporary Architecture & Design”, held on June 4 at “Aigli” in Zappeion. The event was curated by ek magazine.

 

S.M.: How do you perceive the relationship between contemporary architecture and classical tradition?

Fran Silvestre: We are very interested in this correlation. In a way, the classical tradition has taught us that architectural proportions are a matter of order and harmony. Contemporary architecture is not a rupture but rather another kind of continuity. The idea of a tradition infused with innovation lies at the core of our thinking, since it is nothing other than designing on top of what has already been tested and proven to work, but from a new perspective, open to technology, materials, and today’s way of life.

The architecture we find interesting draws its sources from tradition but creates a new synthesis, a transformation, while adapting to a different era and different needs. In our design, we are concerned with clarity, both in structure and in proportions.

 

 

S.M.: The choice of materials and the perception of light play a central role in your work. How do you shape the spatial experience guided by them?

F.S.: We like to work with natural materials for their honesty, their ability to age beautifully, and their strong connection to place. For us, each project is not perceived as something uniform but as a heterogeneous whole, where every element retains its character while participating in a coherent composition. Light plays a critical role in our architecture because it has the power to transform static objects. We are fascinated by how the apparent stillness of architecture comes to life over the course of the day, as light moves across surfaces, revealing and concealing them. This constant alternation transforms space into experience.

 

 

S.M.: You have often emphasized the importance of model-making in the design process. How can models help develop an architectural idea, and what do you think they offer that digital tools do not?

F.S.: We like to think with our hands. Working with models has become for us a kind of meditation that allows us to perceive each project in ever greater depth. Models impose limits, just like construction does: we want to work with this way of thinking, with this kind of constraint. Digital tools, of course, are immensely powerful and offer us countless possibilities, yet we remain closer to the manual method. Working with our hands gives us access to knowledge that digital media alone cannot provide.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 298 | June 2025.

 

Point Supreme, an architecture studio based in Athens, was founded in 2008 in Rotterdam by Marianna Rentzou and Konstantinos Pantazis. Their careers have taken them through London, Brussels, Tokyo, and Rotterdam, where they worked at renowned firms such as OMA and MVRDV. The studio has received first prizes for projects including a social housing complex in Trondheim, the Faliro Pier in Athens, a public space in Tel Aviv, a fire lookout tower in Belgium, the new School of Architecture in Marseille, and an artists’ center in Genk. Their urban research has been featured at the 13th Venice Architecture Biennale, and they frequently teach at leading architecture schools, including Columbia University in New York and EPFL in Lausanne.

 

S.M.: What initially drew you to architecture? What was your entry point, and when did you realize you had your own perspective on the profession?

Konstantinos Pantazis: For me, it was two things. First, I realized that through architecture, one could influence the image of the city. Second, I was always intrigued by how differently I felt when entering unique homes -that sensation was exciting to me.

Marianna Rentzou: I originally studied Electrical and then Chemical Engineering, before realizing that my drive to create was stronger than my interest in math and engineering. Architecture fascinates me because it balances practicality with creativity and individuality. It provides a framework -whether it’s a building, a city, an interior, or a piece of furniture- that can adapt to the specific needs of people, families, society, and objects. At the same time, its impact is profound, which makes it deeply meaningful.

 

 

S.M.: One of the key influences on your work was your time at OMA in Rotterdam. How did that experience shape the way you approach projects in Greece- even in less obvious ways?

K.P.: Working with Rem Koolhaas and OMA was a defining moment in how we came to think about architecture. In the Netherlands, it felt as if we set aside everything we had learned in school and started over. At OMA, we were taught to only begin designing after conducting thorough research into the topic or building. Even now, we devote most of our design time to researching examples from architectural history- both global and Greek, formal and vernacular. Every idea and proposal we develop is grounded in the program, the function, and the user’s experience. Even decisions about form and aesthetics are driven by use. The focus is always the human being—not the building as an object. And finally, we learned that there are no absolute rules or conventions. The architect is a storyteller first, and an artist second.

M.R.: What stood out at OMA was their critical approach to the brief, their boldness in initiating projects independently, and their view of architecture and urbanism as interchangeable. A building was always seen as something that contributed to the city, and the city was treated as if it were a building. Our proposal for the Faliro Pier is a clear example of that influence. We expanded the scope of the brief- the proposal didn’t end with the platform but extended its impact across the entire Athenian coastline.

 

 

S.M.: After many years abroad, you chose to establish your office in Greece, right at the peak of the financial crisis. What drew you back to this place at that particular moment?

K.P.: Our primary interest has always been the city. Our experiences abroad gave us a new perspective on what Athens is -and what it could become. We came to appreciate its distinctiveness and potential. At the same time, we saw a lack of vision and attention in contemporary Greek architecture toward these qualities- and a loss of authentic Greek identity. We wanted to help define a new, contemporary Greek architecture. One that is globally aware but doesn’t blindly replicate international styles. Instead, it draws from the richness of Greek history, tradition, landscape, and climate to create something both modern and uniquely Greek.

M.R.: Interestingly, that’s exactly what the Japanese magazine a+u (architecture + urbanism) told us when they decided to dedicate an entire issue to our work -they saw us as an international studio, but one with a distinctly Greek identity.

 

Read the full interview at the ek issue 287 | May 2024.

 

A&S Architects is a multidisciplinary architectural office based in Athens, founded by Anna Assana and Nikolaos Siapkaras. The firm’s dynamic and established team has an extensive portfolio of public and private works, including a significant number of sports facilities in Greece and abroad. Their approach is characterized by continuous evolution and the pursuit of new boundaries in architectural creation. Through a comprehensive range of services -from initial concept and design to management, supervision, and construction- the office integrates architecture with landscape design, engineering, interior design, and consultancy, delivering innovative, functional, and sustainable solutions.

 

S.M.: One of your original activities was the publication of an “encyclopedia” of construction details. How has conventional construction in Greece evolved since then, and what is coming next?

Nikos Siapkaras: The preparation of a manual with construction details -at a time when there was no access to anything similar, and material production companies had not yet developed their technical departments or support for designers- was born partly out of our need to experiment with new materials and innovative technical solutions, and partly from our general view of architecture and the completeness of a proposal. Every design must first of all include all stages and scales of design, from a master plan to a 1:1 detail. Every detail and every technical solution plays a significant role in construction -in delivering a quality project, it is a key compositional decision.

In our projects, compositional principles are built upon a fundamental structural rule. The smallest detail and the overall form and scale derive from the same spirit, the same intent for a pure composition. Construction quality and the processing of materials acquire fundamental importance because they imbue both the parts and the whole with a spiritual intensity. A detail is a conception: both space and materials are chosen with criteria of sustainability, circular economy, energy awareness, and the health and well-being of users.

 

 

S.M.: What is your experience with Building Information Modeling, and how has this technology influenced the way you design and implement projects?

N.S.: We were fortunate, working on projects outside Greece, to come into contact very early with all the advantages that this technology offers, and to realize that it represents a holistic approach to the digitization of projects -from design and construction to their operation and maintenance- and not just a simple 3D design tool. The digital 3D model provides a visual representation not only of the building’s form but also of its materials, systems, and functions.

What is particularly interesting, and should make us reflect, is that while in Greece there is much discussion about educating engineers in BIM and about the financial tools available to design offices to support the digital transition, worldwide the introduction of virtual and augmented reality -as well as artificial intelligence- is redefining architecture and can lead to unprecedented efficiency, innovation, and sustainability.

As projects evolve, artificial intelligence will play a critical role in management and execution. The enhancement of BIM with AI capabilities will provide real-time updates and proactive file maintenance, ensuring accurate design and project monitoring. One of AI’s potential benefits is that it can help streamline workflows and enable businesses to become more efficient. This could be especially valuable for smaller offices. We believe that every new technology must ensure that architects have more quality time for study, design, and research.

 

 

S.M.: What has been your most demanding office project to date? Do you believe that recent changes in the working environment are permanent or temporary?

Anna Assana: A particularly demanding and at the same time timely project is “P.180-186”, because on the one hand it addresses a major issue: the management of the existing building stock and, in particular, the insertion of a completely new use at every level. On the other hand, it is a large-scale project that was designed, licensed, and implemented in a very short timeframe -less than two years- managing to respond to a highly demanding building program and schedule without the slightest compromise in construction quality, ultimately delivering the first public building in Greece with LEED Gold certification, both energy-efficient and sustainable.

The project concerns the transformation of the Athens Heart shopping mall into a sustainable and pioneering office complex, alongside the addition of a new independent five-story building, totaling approximately 26,500 m². The excellent organization of the project at all levels, the use of technology, and the flawless and continuous collaboration between designers, project manager, contractor, and client formed the foundation for its success.

As for the second part of your question, we believe that in the near future architecture will be further shaped by the introduction of virtual and augmented reality as well as the integration of artificial intelligence. Imagine working from home in an unprecedentedly realistic experience that simulates physical presence in the office as closely as possible. This would represent a huge innovation -not only in the way we design, but also in the working reality itself, as well as in social and professional relationships. We believe that soon this different experiential reality will need to be analyzed and incorporated into the design of offices and, more broadly, of public and private spaces.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 296 | April 2025.

KN Group, founded by Konstantinos Stratantonakis and Nadia Konstantinou, is an interdisciplinary architectural firm based in Athens. Its distinct collaborative culture enables it to undertake highly complex projects, offering a full spectrum of services necessary for their realization. The company began in 1969 in the furniture sector and gradually expanded into interior design and commercial space renovations. By 2000, it had evolved into a network of collaborators, and in 2015, it took on its current structure. Since 2021, KN Group has further broadened its scope to include real estate development for commercial use.

 

S.M.: What have been the most significant milestones in your journey, and how did they come about? Does your previous experience influence KN Group’s current structure? Is there a next step on the horizon?

KN: The seamless integration of design and construction has always defined our work, whether we are crafting buildings or furniture. We approach each project with customized solutions, carefully considering all aspects of execution -architectural, aesthetic, environmental, technical, financial, and legal.

Our philosophy was shaped early on through custom office equipment production for commercial spaces. This experience allowed us to develop flexible, client-specific solutions, blurring the boundaries between design and construction. Today, we deliver fully customized, furnished professional spaces, including those in our own real estate developments designed for this purpose.

 

 

S.M.: You have designed numerous office spaces for globally recognized brands. How restrictive are corporate brand manuals in architectural design and how much creative freedom do you have?

KN: Our design process integrates a company’s brand identity into the architectural concept from the outset. While corporate brand manuals are often quite restrictive, every project and space present unique challenges. In collaboration with each company’s marketing team, we identify creative strategies that allow us to develop contemporary, functional spaces that reinforce the brand without compromising architectural integrity. Our goal is to create environments where all elements -space, function, and branding- interact seamlessly.

One of our most ambitious projects was ENA Campus, where we designed a 33,000m² call center with 3,500 workstations for some of the world’s largest brands. We began by naming the project “ENA” (Greek for “one”), symbolizing uniqueness and unity. We then developed a strong concept that reflected six continents across six buildings, incorporating the client’s branding in a distinct way for each. Additionally, within each building, we adapted individual tenant branding in harmony with the overall design concept. The result is a dynamic environment where multiple brands coexist and interact, strengthening their presence while enhancing the overall user experience.

 

 

S.M.: How has office design evolved in the post-Covid era? With remote work on the rise, do you anticipate office spaces expanding or shrinking? The market appears to be exploring both directions.

KN: The way people interact within office environments is evolving worldwide. We strongly believe in the value of in-person collaboration, and our designs reflect this philosophy. To meet the demands of the post-Covid era, we create flexible workstations and multi-functional spaces that can accommodate shifting workforce dynamics. Our designs incorporate advanced technologies and automation to enhance efficiency and adaptability.

Additionally, we prioritize activated meeting areas and breakout spaces, both indoors and outdoors, to foster collaboration and well-being. The increased reliance on technology, a lasting impact of the Covid era, presents both advantages and challenges for employees. Addressing these concerns, we are actively developing a digital wellness program within our offices to enhance productivity and well-being in the modern workplace.

 

 

Read the full interview at the 276 | April 2023 ek issue.

 

Pieris.Architects is an award-winning architectural practice based in Athens, founded by Constantinos Pieris in 1974. In 2004, after completing their studies in London, Stella and Pieros Pieris joined the team, bringing an interdisciplinary and outward-looking character. Since then, they have participated in architectural competitions, earning important distinctions. The studio’s built work in Greece, Cyprus, and the United Kingdom spans various scales and typologies, yet always remains attuned to its urban, natural, and cultural context. Their projects are consistently developed with a focus on sustainability, centered on the concept of “eco-emotional intelligence,” where architecture is conceived as an intellectual, emotional, sensory, and bodily experience, ultimately acting as a force of holistic regeneration.

 

S.M.: Your architecture focuses on the interaction between nature, technology, and emotion. How do you integrate this approach into your everyday architectural practice, and how does it affect the user’s experience of space?

Pieros Pieris: The interaction of nature, technology, and emotion shapes a living dialogue between space and the user. For us, architectural design is not a static process but a dynamic act that evolves and converses with both the environment and people. The natural landscape is not a decorative element but the very soul of our design. Technology -whether as a tool for modeling and analyzing parameters such as light and wind, or as an innovation in construction- enhances both sustainability and the user experience. Our aim is for spaces to be not only functional but alive, emotionally familiar, and human. We strive for every project, every line, every texture, every shadow to have purpose. The spaces we create should not be static but should evoke sensations, memories, and moments that inspire, educate, and encourage a more sustainable and meaningful way of life.

 

 

S.M.: What does the concept of “eco-emotional intelligence” include?

P.P.: Architectural design has the power to shape people’s emotional state, influencing how they feel, think, and interact with space. This term, which we coined, is based on the belief that architecture can provide calm, inspiration, a sense of safety, and belonging. It is achieved through a delicate balance between light and shadow, fullness and emptiness, the natural and the artificial. In our projects, we highlight the imperfections of nature and design spaces with soul. For us, architecture is not just walls—it is the sensation a space leaves behind, the connection that emerges between people and their environment, transforming the built landscape into a lived experience.

 

 

S.M.: How do you combine local traditions with contemporary architectural features in your projects?

C.P.: Architecture must have roots -especially in Greece, where both the urban landscape and the countryside are deeply intertwined with history and traditions. We believe that every place has its own identity, its own history, and its own materiality. Our mission is to highlight them, to breathe new life into them through contemporary design. For us, tradition is not something that belongs solely to the past; it is alive and in constant dialogue with the present. We focus on authentic local materials -stone that grows out of the earth, wood that bears the marks of time, techniques that preserve the wisdom of master builders. It is not necessary to reproduce the past, but to transmute it into a contemporary narrative that respects memory while looking forward. After all, architecture should not impose itself but serve as a dialogue between past and future, a bridge that connects history with the present, people with their place.

Read the full interview in ek issue 295 | March 2025.

OOAK (One Of A Kind Architects) is an architectural practice founded by Maria Papafigou and Johan Annerhed. Their professional journey, spanning from Athens to Stockholm and back, informs a diverse portfolio of projects across various scales and typologies worldwide. Regardless of location, OOAK remains committed to a deep sensitivity toward the landscape and meticulous attention to the small details of everyday life.

 

S.M.: You began your architectural studies in Sweden and completed them in Greece. How would you describe the architectural differences between the two?

OA.: The key difference lies in the deep sense of community responsibility ingrained in Swedish culture, which extends to a profound respect for the environment and nature. When we moved from Sweden to Athens to complete our diploma thesis -focused on urban planning and social-commercial synergy- we were labeled socialists. In reality, our ideas were far more nuanced, emphasizing a society where commerce and public space support each other. We believe that true prosperity and sustainable development arise when private, public, and commercial interests align, creating a balanced coexistence that enhances overall quality of life. For us, architecture -at every scale- must serve the whole, preserve environmental integrity, foster synergy, and create the ideal conditions for new experiences.

 

 

S.M.: You began your professional career in Athens in 2004, relocated to Sweden during the financial crisis, and returned permanently a few years ago. How has the architectural landscape in Greece evolved during this time, and how have you adapted to these changes?

OA.: Looking back, we believe that the financial crisis played a crucial role in advancing the Greek architectural scene, elevating both its aesthetics and expertise. Challenging times often spark creativity, and in Greece, the crisis provided the space and opportunity for architectural innovation. Meanwhile, in other countries, the impact of the crisis was not as deeply felt. Given that tourism is a driving force of the Greek economy, the demand for high-quality architecture in hospitality and private vacation residences led to remarkable developments. It is particularly gratifying to see how architecture in Greece has evolved, both in quality and design, since we first left.

At the same time, we feel that our international experience enables us to contribute meaningfully to the conversation about architecture’s growing responsibilities in Greece. It is essential to approach terms like “green,” “sustainable,” and “bioclimatic” with greater honesty and humility. For instance, an underground building cannot be considered inherently “sustainable” without acknowledging the broader environmental impact of its construction. While it may be the most appropriate architectural solution, the narrative surrounding it must be more nuanced and truthful.

 

 

S.M.: You are working on a diverse range of typologies and scales across various parts of the world. What do you carry forward from one project to the next in terms of experience, and what remains constant in your work?

OA.: Our vastly different backgrounds have helped us recognize early on that there is no single architectural aesthetic that can be universally applied across various places and cultures. We always strive to create projects that are deeply rooted in their context, with references to their surroundings, rather than lifestyle-driven designs that could fit anywhere. We are also living in an era defined by uncertainty and a strong sense of responsibility for our future and evolution. Climate change and sustainability, at every level, are concepts that inform all of our projects. We are committed to approaching the environment with respect, contributing to the development of the location, and enriching the experience of its users. Additionally, what we bring to all of our projects is a commitment to “good practice,” especially from our international collaborations, which have been exemplary in terms of how design teams work- from the initial concept through to the execution of the project.

 

Read the full interview at the  277 | May 2023 ek issue.

Sir David Alan Chipperfield, CH -architect, urban planner, and activist- was awarded the 2023 Pritzker Prize, the highest honor in architecture, in recognition of his lifelong contributions to the field. His career spans over four decades and encompasses a diverse range of projects across numerous countries. Beyond designing some of the most significant contemporary public buildings, including the upcoming extension of the National Archaeological Museum of Athens -Chipperfield is also deeply involved in architectural consultancy. Through the RIA Foundation, he actively supports the development of public architectural competitions in Galicia, Spain, where he resides.

His exclusive interview with ek magazine, conducted at the invitation of the Pritzker Architecture Prize, took place on May 24 in Athens, just hours before the award ceremony at the Ancient Agora.

 

S.M.: What are the key characteristics of a well-crafted architectural competition brief? How can architects influence the questions posed before offering their design solutions? What is the significance of architectural competitions today, and what is the ideal context in which they should be held?

D.C.: In any project, the client must take responsibility. When moving forward with an assignment or tender, no one can shirk the responsibility of clearly formulating the question and establishing priorities. Furthermore, the client remains responsible for providing the necessary conditions for those tasked with answering the question. However, the process of delegation is often misunderstood. For instance, if a client says, “I have a plot of land and want to build a skyscraper there,” they are essentially asking architects to design a skyscraper for that site, even though this may not have been the best idea from the start. So, who is responsible? The architects, who must design a skyscraper without being certain it’s the right choice for the location, or the client, who failed to take the necessary professional steps to ensure its viability?

The reputation of architectural competitions is mixed. In Switzerland, and to some extent in Germany, when a public body decides to hold a competition, it often commissions an architectural firm to create a ‘theoretical’ project first. Through this process, architects realize that it’s not so simple to fit a large number of square meters onto a given plot or to make the traffic system envisioned by the institution actually work.

A young architect should aspire to design a housing complex or a well-crafted school building. The challenge, however, is that in many cases, such projects are not available through competitions, largely because the public system is not functioning effectively. In Galicia, through the RIA Foundation, we are working to create reliable and high-quality tenders. Without this reliability, architects are not taken seriously, and their work is overshadowed by commercial firms that exploit them. Additionally, tenders need to be tiered appropriately. For instance, if a competition is for an airport, I believe even my office should not participate alone, but in partnership with others, as such a project is too complex to tackle alone. I also think it would be more practical for some competitions to be held on a qualification basis by default, rather than being completely open and narrowing down to a shortlist of just 20 in the second phase. Most importantly, I believe competitions should not only be reserved for “flagship” projects. The world is built not just through iconic structures but also through thoughtful housing, quality schools…

As a young architect in Britain, I would have loved the opportunity to learn in the same way that some of my European colleagues in Switzerland or Austria have. There, architects in their mid-30s are able to design meaningful projects like school extensions or bus stations. With hundreds of competitions available, it’s clear to me that having a well-established system for such opportunities is crucial.

S.M.: Are you saying that established offices should refrain from this level?

D.C.: Certainly. They would have done it regardless. In many European countries, the competition system has experienced both highs and lows. In the 80s and 90s, Spain had an exceptionally strong system, which allowed many young architects to win competitions, putting them in a much more favorable position to succeed. For young architects, winning was incredibly important. Could they handle the scale of the project? Yes. Did they have the experience? Yes. Were they technically competent? Yes. Did they have the energy? Absolutely. The more established firms were less willing to invest the same effort into winning, giving younger firms a significant advantage, as long as they could pose the right questions to the right people.

S.M.: What is the role of architectural institutions in this context? Ideally, these collective bodies can serve as advisors to public institutions. At their worst, however, they are often bypassed entirely.

D.C.: Absolutely. We’ve learned this lesson. In England, for instance, RIBA is struggling. They’ve become focused on marketing. Thirty years ago, they chose to prioritize “promoting architecture,” much like the nationwide campaign at the time to encourage people to eat more fresh eggs. However, the true role of an architectural association should be to create an environment that protects the profession. When a competition is announced, the institution should review the notice and determine if the jury is qualified. In Germany, for example, public projects require juries to consist of more experts and fewer “ordinary citizens” or “personalities.” There must be a recognized head of the jury, and all of this should be made clear before the competition begins. The public sector in Germany has a stronger competition culture, and even though the country may be shifting in a different direction, it remains the responsibility of architectural institutions to reclaim this ground. Additionally, a critical responsibility of these institutions is to ensure fair compensation for award-winning projects.

The idea that RIBA should abandon proposed fee levels is utterly absurd, as it would allow young architects to be underpaid at the expense of their more experienced counterparts. When you’re a young architect, the last thing you want is to win a competition without a proper fee. If you ask yourself, “Should we take this on?” of course you give it your all. You’ve spent three years working on a great project, but you haven’t made any money and you’re completely exhausted. This is not sustainable for a new firm—you’re simply being taken advantage of. In contrast, in Switzerland, if you win a good competition, the fee is fair. You complete the project, everyone is satisfied, and you have money in the bank. You can invest that money back into your office. It’s a way to move forward professionally. An architectural project should never be seen as a lottery. Someone might say, “You were lucky to win,” but that’s only true if you haven’t been worn out in the process.

 

Read the full interview at the  279 | July – August 2023 ek issue.

Trail Practice, an architecture and design studio based in Athens, is composed of a team spanning multiple design disciplines and scales, founded by Manos Babounis. The team views space as a dynamic, ever-evolving landscape of interactions, with design extending beyond three dimensions to focus on the relationship between place and person. Know-how, an unconventional gaze toward the existing, and respect for user needs -together with a love of detail and respect for the environment- are the studio’s core design tools for every project.

 

S.M.: How did your involvement with hospitality/restaurant spaces begin? Which landmark examples marked your path, and in what ways?

Manos Babounis: Our work with dining spaces reflects our practice’s broader philosophy. Our aim is to create spaces that encourage human connection and retrieve memories, functioning as places of collective interaction. Our design evolves as a constant negotiation between public and private, introverted and open to the city, innovative and timeless. Nolan, in Syntagma, which marked the beginning of our engagement with hospitality, was born in 2016, during a period of social and economic fluidity. It was the moment we were called to overturn conventions, creating a space that reflects its time while also offering a sense of the familiar. The urban landscape was our primary field of inspiration. We drew materials, textures, and techniques from the city’s contrasting facets -from the entrances of 1970s Athenian apartment buildings to the metal scaffolding that supports the façades of neoclassical buildings.

We used these elements in non-conventional ways, redefining users’ relationship with space. For example, terrazzo- a material one would expect to see on the floor -was placed on the ceiling, imparting dynamism to the space and a sense of movement and flow. Projects followed such as Theophilos in New York, Proveleggios in Kerameikos, and Ypseli in Paris, each in its own way capturing our design intent. With Theophilos, the need to create a space within a different cultural and geographic canvas pushed us to explore new design approaches, while Ypseli, housed in a historic 1836 building, allowed us to relate historicity to the needs of contemporary life. Each project became a milestone -not only for its capacity to influence our design qualities but also for the technical challenges we had to confront. In all cases, our primary concern is that the user remains at the heart of the experience.

 

 

S.M.: By what means can a distinctive brand identity be expressed in space? What methodologies do you follow to arrive at the necessary deliverables each time?

M.B.: Creating a brand identity in space requires a multidimensional approach aimed at generating a total experience. Image, atmosphere, scent, texture, and the emotion the space evokes all combine to form a multisensory environment that gives tangible form to each brand’s essence. We believe branding doesn’t need to be loud.

We seek for the space to “speak” through details, materials, and their composition. This composition, moreover, transcends the physical boundaries of spaces and becomes an architectural vocabulary that allows the project to function like a world within other worlds. Our method begins with mapping the brand’s identity, which we ensure is expressed distinctively and ultimately woven organically into the atmosphere of the given shell -its historical references and aesthetic values- into a coherent architectural narrative. Original thinking, though not an end in itself, serves as a tool for conveying each project’s distinctiveness. This process demands the harmonious convergence of architecture, interior and industrial design, and graphic design, unifying different scales in a complementary workflow. Deliverables are shaped according to each project’s and client’s needs, including elements that ensure functional performance and aesthetic integrity. Maintaining the “backstory” of each project -as a core design principle serving commercial objectives- is a challenge that inspires us.

 

 

S.M.: In your work you often create custom constructions. What advantages does this kind of design offer, and what difficulties have you encountered? Can you mention some examples?

M.B.: Custom constructions are among our most dynamic tools for enriching spatial experience and the narrative that accompanies it. They offer opportunities for experimentation while strengthening a project’s “script” in ways that off-the-shelf solutions cannot achieve. On the other hand, custom solutions come with significant challenges. Developing new implementation methods and addressing technical constraints require flexibility and perseverance. Nevertheless, each custom construction expands the team’s knowledge and skills, while also creating the element of surprise that gives a space its identity. A characteristic example is the door of Nolan in Syntagma, which bears a markedly Doric character that turns it into a key compositional element interacting with the city.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 294 | January – February 2025.

The architectural office Kokkinou-Kourkoulas | Architects and Associates was founded by Maria Kokkinou and Andreas Kourkoulas in 1987. With studies in Athens and London, the founders have worked professionally on numerous public and private buildings, at every scale of design. Their work is regularly published both in Greece and abroad. Recently, the practice has incorporated the team of en-route architecture with Katerina Kourkoulas and Hannes Livers Gutberlet, continuing Kokkinou-Kourkoulas’ pursuit of new typologies, inventive construction solutions, and innovative materials. We spoke with Andreas Kourkoulas about the long journey of the practice and its future, as it is shaped by three decades of accumulated experience.

 

S.M.: You belong to a generation that explored in many ways the relationship between architecture and the city. To what extent did your studies in London allow you to interpret Athens differently? What do you think of its evolution over time?

Andreas Kourkoulas: I belong to a generation that lived through the nightmare of applying the ideas of modern urbanism -the ideas that dominated the development of industrial cities especially after World War II. These applications led to tragic social phenomena: loneliness, abandonment, vandalism -and ultimately, to a large extent, they were demolished. In the 1980s, both internationally and particularly in London, the realization of this tragic failure led to the rise of architectural movements that opposed the views of modern urbanism. Greece, due to the “antiparochi” (apartment-for-land-exchange) system, avoided this nightmare. The structure of the city block and the street ensured a certain social vitality in the city. For this reason, the discussion around the problems of urban design did not concern us. The issue of the character of Greek cities, and Athens in particular, first appeared in the early 1990s, in the introduction written by Kenneth Frampton to the Greek edition of History of Modern Architecture(Themelio Publications). There, the author praises the structure of the city and its strong social character. I believe that the advent of the internet, a new and powerful mechanism of intangible relationships, places urban design on a new footing. The structure of the city block and the street seems to ensure a kind of social vitality that is absolutely essential in new societies, where online communication reduces physical encounters.

 

 

S.M.: Alongside your architectural work, you have also had a significant teaching role at the School of Architecture at NTUA. What do you consider the most important problems in architectural education in Greece, and where do you think architectural education is heading internationally?

A.K.: In Greece, for reasons we do not fully understand, architectural studies have a very strong appeal. The existence of six schools throughout the country, as well as the large number of Greeks studying architecture abroad, is something inexplicable to us. It should concern us, but above all, we must find a way to utilize this vast potential that exists internationally -Greeks who hold important positions at leading universities and architectural practices worldwide. We must break our introversion and participate actively in the international architectural discourse. Spain and Portugal did this with great success, with spectacular results.

 

 

S.M.: Greek legislation provides different procedures for the commissioning of studies for public spaces and buildings. In which cases do you think open architectural competitions are the best procedure? Is it important for architects’ professional bodies to act as institutional advisors to the state?

A.K.: The issue of open architectural competitions for public spaces and buildings should concern us. On the one hand, they are the cornerstone of a democratic, participatory process, offering opportunities for expression to everyone —especially to young architects. On the other hand, we must reflect on and evaluate the outcomes of this process, which was adopted after the restoration of democracy. Something went wrong, something undermined this procedure, and its results do not justify it. We need to re-examine the process and upgrade it. This is very important for Greek architecture, and particularly for young architects.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 293 | December 2024.

Maria Kokkinou and Andreas Kourkoulas established their architectural practice in 1987. Both having studied in Athens and London, they have since worked on a diverse range of public and private buildings, tackling projects of varying scales. Their work is regularly featured in publications both in Greece and internationally. Over the past three decades, together with their practice partners, they have continually sought new typologies, innovative construction methods, and original materials, shaping a distinctive and forward-thinking approach to architecture.

 

S.M: You have closely observed the rapid transformation of Greek society from the post-independence era, spanning the 1980s to the decade of economic crisis in the 2010s, all while producing architectural work. What changes have you witnessed in the perception of architecture in Greece, in its design and construction processes, and how have these shifts influenced your own approach to design?

KK: The fall of the dictatorship marked the end of Greece’s period of introversion and ushered in a new era of creative exploration for Greek architecture. Gradually, though not without challenges, Greek architects became involved in international architectural discussions and produced work that addressed both individual buildings and broader urban issues. However, the economic crisis had a devastating impact, halting this momentum and driving many of the most talented young architects abroad. Construction activity plummeted by 90%. Recently, there has been a modest recovery, primarily in tourism and, to a lesser extent, in the repurposing of existing buildings. The future of Greek architecture will depend on the country’s ability to bring this generation of architects back home and integrate them into the recovery process.

 

S.M: Early in his career, after establishing himself as an architect, Rem Koolhaas declared that architectural competitions are pointless. What has been your experience with architectural competitions, and how do you view his statement?

KK: Competitions are valuable, particularly because they provide an opportunity for young talents to emerge from obscurity. The OMA team, with whom we had the privilege of working in London during the 1980s, is a prime example of how competitions can offer such opportunities. However, like any competitive process, the outcome is largely determined by the quality of the judges and their ability to assess submissions from a comprehensive perspective. This is an issue we must seriously consider, particularly when evaluating the results of such processes in our country. In Greek football, for instance, we have adopted the solution of using foreign referees.

 

S.M: Building production does not rely solely on architects. Who do you believe architecture is truly for, and what examples from your own experience can you provide to elaborate on this?

KK: Architecture is for everyone. Throughout each phase of civilization, this “everyone” takes on a specific form. In our country, it has evolved through countless phases, where civil engineers and technicians played the dominant role. Gradually, from the post-independence period onward, the profession’s prestige began to rise. However, we must also acknowledge our responsibilities and recognize the tragic mistakes, particularly in urban planning during the 20th century, which significantly undermined the reputation of architecture.

 

Read the full interview at the  241 | October 2019 ek issue.

Massouridis Theodoraki Architects is a well-established architectural firm with decades of experience in designing and overseeing a wide range of projects, including tourism, residential, industrial, commercial, educational, and public buildings. Building on a 45-year legacy in architectural design, interior design, and master planning, the firm is now led by architects Alexandros Massouridis and Myrto Theodorakis.

 

S.M: You studied at architectural schools known for their strong theoretical focus, yet your work is market oriented. What skills did you gain from those studies?

MT: Innovation in architecture, and what constitutes an innovative building, remains a topic of debate. We believe that true innovation in architecture lies in how it is constructed and realized, rather than in the act of design itself—which is always a response to a problem that can arise in countless ways. Instead of highlighting specific examples of architecture, we focus on a period in architectural history: Modernism. In our view, this era was pivotal in shaping the architectural timeline and in redefining the way architecture is brought to life.

 

S.M: How is the luxury market in architecture defined in Greece? Given your firm’s extensive experience, what changes have you observed over the years, and what trends do you foresee in the future?

MT: MTArchitects brings many years of experience to the field, having worked on numerous high-end projects across hotels, residential, office, educational, and public buildings. With extensive expertise in the luxury market, we have observed that while the fundamental demands for design excellence, quality, and aesthetics remain unchanged, the understanding of space is evolving. It is increasingly seen as a medium for storytelling and creating memorable experiences. In the luxury hospitality sector, the focus has shifted to the guest’s “experience”, with multiple layers of references. Architectural design now incorporates a wide array of factors that shape the identity of a project and its connection to its location.

The visitor is placed at the center, with the primary goal of architectural design being to create reference points that foster memories, imbuing the hospitality experience with purpose and meaning. The space is designed to evoke empathy, meeting the needs of each individual. Elements such as light and shadow, noise and tranquility, texture, color, temperature, and the weight or lightness of materials all play distinct roles and work in harmony. Another evolving factor is the integration of new technologies into building design. There is a growing demand for ‘smart’ building systems that serve a dual purpose: optimizing control over the space’s living conditions while also respecting the environment through bioclimatic design and sustainable solutions.

 

S.M: We often say that new hotels “change the map of Athens.” However, in your experience, what infrastructures are lacking in the city to allow such designs to thrive -without being overshadowed by the urban environment, or disregarding it entirely?

MT: Athens is a city with a dynamic and multifaceted character, constantly evolving. It is a place of contrasts and tensions, where the ancient and the modern coexist, as well as the private and the public, the organic and the planned. In Greece, it is common to see infrastructure develop in response to emerging needs, rather than through a carefully designed master plan. This is also true for the recent surge in tourism, which has led to a rapid increase in hotel establishments, while infrastructure and government response have followed in kind.

Infrastructure, in this context, includes not only physical systems but also institutions and the legislative framework. New attractions are being created, and networks are emerging that connect key landmarks such as hotels, museums, monuments, and squares. As a result, the map of Athens is being refreshed, offering travelers new ways to explore the city. At the urban level, collaboration between hotels, infrastructure, and both private and public initiatives is essential to creating a functional and livable city.

 

Read the full interview at the 252 | November 2020 ek issue.

Spaceworkers is an architecture and design studio located in Paredes, in northern Portugal, founded by creative directors Henrique Marques and Rui Dinis, and by its financial director Carla Duarte. The studio bases its practice on the exploration and constant research of new paradigms for contemporary architecture, in order to achieve a close relation between form and emotions. The work of the studio reflects the pragmatic vision with which they face challenges, and the critical spirit which evaluates each project’s context, appealing to the sensibility of its clients for a new way to face and perceive space in its sensorial dimension.

 

S.M: Which examples of contemporary architecture do you consider to be innovative, especially when you are often dealing with historical precedents in your work?

SW: Innovation in architecture, or what an innovative building is, remains a topic of discussion. We believe that true innovation in the field of architecture has to do with the way we make architecture and with its materialization, not with the act of designing: the latter is always an answer to a problem that can arise in the most varied ways. We wouldn’t highlight examples of architecture, but a period in the history of architecture: Modernism. In our opinion, this was crucial in the architectural timeline and in the way architecture is materialized.

 

S.M: You are both graduates of a private university and chose to stay in Paredes to establish your own practice. Did this framework create any “distance” from established figures in Portuguese architecture during your formative years? How does this reflect upon your work?

SW: We consider that our academic education did not carry the “weight” of those established figures, despite them being present throughout our formative period. They were never imposed as a model to emulate, and we consider this a positive situation at the beginning of our journey as young architects, looking for a path. This allowed us to test different approaches in different contexts and this is still how we do our architecture today. The fact that we are based in our hometown -which we never left, because even during our academic years we continued to live in Paredes- allowed us to gain a critical awareness of this territory. We set out to act with the will to transform it occasionally, by creating in its population an awareness of the importance of architecture in this transformation.

 

S.M: Why do you have such a preference for bare concrete in your projects? Aren’t you deterred by new regulations which seem to favor more sustainable building materials?

SW: We really like the appearance and plasticity of exposed concrete. However, its use did not appear in our work as a preference, but rather as a consequence. This may seem strange, but the choice of concrete resulted almost exclusively from structural needs and financial constraints, combined with the technical knowhow in our region. Our first projects were developed almost exclusively in Paredes, where the use of advanced construction techniques, outside the traditional building process, were very challenging and very expensive. It was very easy to find a construction team that could build in concrete and given the fact that, structurally, it was the most economically balanced solution, we decided to take advantage of the aesthetics of the material, while saving on coatings and maintenance. Additionally -and this seems to be a contradiction- the use of concrete reduced the ecological footprint, because everything was produced and carried out locally, with local companies, and formwork materials such as local wood.

Even though the production of concrete is not an ecological process in itself, in fact the entire construction, considering it was based on local technology, was as sustainable as possible and stimulating the region’s endogenous resources, while also enhancing a kind of social sustainability. Notably, this happened at a time of deep crisis in the construction sector, which characterized our first projects. After our first works, concrete almost became a kind of identity and those who came to us wanted concrete as the main material, which eventually led to several works in concrete. As far as the sustainability of the material is concerned, our entire process has tried to reduce its ecological footprint to the bare minimum, which we have achieved by producing concrete in-situ, using a local workforce, with local wooden formwork and aggregates. However, this process and concrete still have a lot of room to evolve and become more ecological, from the use of recycled aggregates and additives capable of capturing carbon, with recycled steel, capable of improving the efficiency of the construction system without  introducing a high additional cost. Concrete cannot be understood as the “ugly duckling” of sustainability. And there is still a large margin of progress for this material, we just need to study the alternatives. There is still a long way to go.

 

Read the full interview at the Villas 2022 annual issue.

Doxiadis+ is an architecture and landscape architecture consultancy founded in Athens in 1999 by Thomas Doxiadis, one of the pioneers in this field when landscape architecture was virtually unknown in Greece. Over the past two decades, the firm has experienced significant growth, building a dedicated team of 30 specialists and earning international recognition. Through its projects, doxiadis+ has played a key role in shifting public perceptions of landscape architecture. The firm’s approach seamlessly integrates practice with research, guided by core principles that have been fundamental since its inception: ecology, biophilia, and people-centered design.

 

S.M: With a background in architecture from your early studies, when did you first discover landscape architecture, and how soon did you decide to explore the opportunities it presented?

T.D: I began my studies in architecture at Harvard, where the department was closely linked with landscape architecture. As I observed my fellow students working, I found their creations and forms more intriguing than what I was doing as an architect. After completing my degree, I decided to pursue landscape architecture, even though at the time, most people had little understanding of the field. This fascinating discipline offered me a deeper insight into the symbiosis of species, the significance of biology and ecology, and a more holistic perspective on the planet’s ecosystems.

As an architect, I have a desire to build, to create structures that endure long after I’m gone, since architecture often seeks to leave a monumental legacy. However, as a landscape architect, I recognize the beauty of landscapes and how they are impacted by construction. From this perspective, the less we intervene in the landscape, the more harmonious our relationship with it becomes. At the same time, it’s important to acknowledge that landscapes evolve over time -they are living entities, made up of organisms, including us. To live in harmony with nature, we must respect its dynamic, ever-changing nature.

 

S.M: What led you to choose Greece as your base, especially at a time when landscape architecture was largely unknown? How have your clients evolved since then, and how have you changed?

T.D: Until recently, the combination of landscape architecture and traditional architecture seemed almost prohibitive. When I returned to Greece from the US in 1997 and spoke about landscape design, I was often met with astonished looks, as if people didn’t quite understand the concept. However, over the past 20 years, there has been significant progress on many fronts. At every step, doxiadis+ has played a key role in shifting this mindset, both through our projects and the lectures we give in Greece as well as internationally.

Let me share a personal example: During the 2004 Olympics, I worked on the Organizing Committee as the Green Officer and Director of the City Image Sector. Before 2004, it was common for municipalities to plant palm trees everywhere, but soon after, they shifted towards planting olive trees. In the early days, sustainability and landscape architecture may have seemed like a distant vision or even a luxury at the office level. However, we have since built strong relationships with major companies in Greece, as well as with both Greek and international private clients. We now undertake projects such as the Elliniko Metropolitan Park, the redevelopment of industrial areas, urban regeneration, the creation of public spaces, and holiday homes.

 

S.M: Which projects do you consider as milestones in your career and why?

T.D: The project I’m most proud of is building a team of passionate, skilled collaborators based in Greece, with whom we are establishing global leadership in ecological architecture and landscape design. One of our flagship projects is Landscapes of Cohabitation -350 acres of stunning Cycladic landscape with villas in Antiparos, which began in 2000 and is still ongoing. At the time, using native plants drew curious looks. This project has given us the opportunity to deeply explore the relationship between humans and nature across space and time, while conducting research and experiments that have honed our expertise. As a result, it has earned several international mentions, including being a finalist for the prestigious Rosa Barba Prize for landscape architecture, and has been featured in the Financial Times.

Unfortunately, in Greece, there is a mindset where “green” is viewed as merely an addition. As architects and landscape architects, we design everything from buildings to urban spaces, parks, and gardens and treating space, concrete, stone, water, plants, and people as interconnected elements of a living environment -especially in the face of climate change. With this approach, we are considering a series of projects in Athens, where targeted efforts through specific initiatives aim to deliver significant results in both ecology and quality of life.

On Strefis Hill, we preserve all existing elements, adding only what is necessary to make it more vibrant, healthy, beautiful, and accessible for all ages. In our Elliniko projects -such as the Marina Tower, streets and sidewalks, small squares, and the first phase of the Metropolitan Park- we are exploring how the city of the future can be more humane and ecological. At Plato’s Academy, we are discussing how an archaeological site can also function as a neighborhood park, and how the ancient can harmonize with the present.

 

Read the full interview at the 265 | March 2022 ek issue.

GFRA architecture was founded in Athens by architects Tasos Gousis, Joost Frijda, and Eddy Roberts, with Fotini Anagnostou also being part of the team. The international character of the office leads to a constant search for new ideas and forms, both in large- and small-scale buildings, while aiming to bring a “European spirit” into architecture. Through a realistic approach and close collaboration with engineering consultants, while also giving particular importance to the wishes and needs of the client, the office’s goal is to elevate the quality of design and architectural technology to the highest possible level.

 

S.M.: You founded your office in Greece just before the economic crisis and have followed the development of domestic architecture up to today, with your roots, however, being abroad. What, in your view, has changed between the “before” and the “after”?

GFRA: Architecture after the economic crisis has been upgraded. We see an improvement in the quality of design as well as construction, with the aim of achieving competitiveness and a more organized and comprehensive design process, in order to better control each project’s budget. It is also important that, after the crisis, the idea of “star architects” was abandoned, as they were considered a “luxury,” and room was given to younger professionals to emerge and develop. Moreover, for reasons of economy, the concept of reuse emerged, giving a major impetus to renovations and allowing these young architects to propose fresh, innovative ideas.

 

 

S.M.: You have implemented several embassy projects, starting with the Dutch Embassy. How did you process the elements that differentiate an embassy from a typical office building?

GFRA: An embassy could be treated as an office building, but it has some important particularities. First of all, an embassy expresses its country’s need for representation. Therefore, its building must somehow showcase its “national identity” through distinctive elements chosen from its tradition, culture, and customs. For this reason, research in various fields is necessary: architecture, art, literature, fashion, food, etc. These elements are simplified, analyzed into forms, words, and colors, and then serve as inspiration for design -either used directly or translated into architectural terms. Another particularity of an embassy compared to a standard office building is that it must be immediately accessible and open to the public, while at the same time complying with specific security and control requirements.

 

 

S.M.: School buildings are a typology you have studied extensively, either in competitions or in built projects, though not in Greece. What led you to undertake such projects abroad, and what would you like to see in a school building here?

GFRA: We designed and supervised the construction of a school complex in Durrës. It was a project we undertook with great enthusiasm, partly because designing for children is in itself a highly engaging subject, and partly because Albania did not have what Greece has: a fixed formula, a set typology for school buildings. Of course, there were older schools, but the country was in a phase of regeneration and development, remaining open to any new idea or innovation. Thus, we found fertile ground to realize our vision of educational architecture -principles we would also like to see applied in Greek schools. We imagine a friendly and comfortable interior, with bright and airy spaces, pleasant for students.

After the crisis, the notion of “star architects” was abolished, as they were considered a “luxury,” and space was given to younger professionals to emerge and evolve. In addition, for reasons of economy, the concept of reuse developed, giving a significant boost to renovations. In such schools, more functions are incorporated than the standard ones: laboratories, libraries, a cafeteria, and multipurpose halls equipped for events. Break areas include comfortable seating and play spaces, while the schoolyard is not limited to a sports field but also features planting and a garden. Naturally, the building should be easily accessible to everyone and apply the principles of bioclimatic design. Ultimately, the school itself can function as a landmark of the neighborhood, expressing its role not only as a place of education but also as a hub of social integration.

Read the full interview in ek issue 289 | July-August 2024.

Mastrominas Architecture, an award-winning architectural firm, was founded in 1984 in Kos by Ilias Mastrominas. After studying at the Polytechnic University of Milan and the School of Architecture at the Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Mastrominas established the firm, which currently has a second office in Athens. The firm has extensive experience in designing hotels, luxury residences, and office buildings. Their design philosophy is distinguished by its minimalist expression, emphasis on functionality, and the incorporation of elements of traditional Greek architecture in a contemporary style.

 

S.M: You began your studies at the Technical University of Milan and completed them in Thessaloniki. What skills did you acquire in Italy, and how did you initially perceive architecture within the Greek context? What do you consider to be the milestones in the evolution of your design approach?

I.M: In 1977, when I went to Milan, Greece was seeking a new path into democracy and modernization. As students, we were highly politicized, full of dreams, and eager to learn and progress. Milan offered me the rich culture of northern Italy, exposure to art and culture, and formative influences that unconsciously shape my design approach. In the extensive library of the Faculty of Architecture, I discovered the masters of the modernist movement -Le Corbusier, Mies Van der Rohe, Alvar Aalto, and others- who profoundly influenced me.

Dimitris Fatouros and his lecture at the School of Architecture in Milan inspired me to return to Greece, where I discovered Pikionis, Crocus, and especially Aris Konstantinidis. I read all of Konstantinidis’ books, striving to deepen my understanding of his work. The way he elevated Greekness through modern architecture, the simplicity of his style, and above all, the “truth” that reflects the architect’s soul, captivated me. From then on, achieving this in my own work became my daily goal.

My professional journey began with a collaboration with the late Sotiris Kouki, a hotel architect known for his work throughout Greece. Under his guidance, I learned about hotel operations and the organization of a large architectural office. The next phase of my career was my partnership with ISV in 2004. In 2005, I moved to Athens to work with them, and together we founded ISV+M, a real estate agency. At the same time, we worked together on the design of hotels in Kos and Patmos. I am deeply grateful to them and want to express my appreciation.

 

S.M: You established your first office in Kos, focusing on the tourist sector through large hotels and residences. Was this choice inevitable?

I.M: Borrowing Aris Konstantinidis’ definition that “residences are containers of life,” I would say that “hotels are containers of joy.” They provide visitors with a refuge from the stress of everyday life and the hustle of urban centers, allowing them to connect with nature. My interest was sparked by the rapid tourist development of Kos in the 1980s, during which accommodations were built haphazardly to meet the overwhelming demand. This prompted me, as a student at the Architectural School of Thessaloniki, to choose a course focusing on hospitality buildings.

I was fortunate to train under Professor Xanthippe Hoepel. The coursework was more demanding than a typical university thesis; we spent months working from morning till night on projects for a city hotel and a resort. Our team excelled, and our project was presented to the next year’s students. Upon graduation, my professor, who was then a shareholder in the largest architectural firm in Thessaloniki, “Tzonos-Hoepel-Hoepel” -with Panos Tzonos being another excellent professor- offered me a position in their office. Thus, Kos was not an inevitable choice; it was my love for the place that made me start an office there. In retrospect, I believe that accepting the position at my professors’ office would have saved me considerable time and effort in achieving the milestones I have reached.

 

S.M: When and why did you decide to move to Athens, and how much knowledge exchange occurs between the two offices?

I.M: Working in Kos, I had the opportunity to design hotels from a very young age, many of which were quite large, with capacities of up to 1,200 beds. I am very grateful for this experience. However, my love for architecture led me to Athens twice -first through my collaboration with ISV, and later to establish my own firm. My office in Athens is staffed by young architects and interior designers, and my goal is to pass on my extensive experience to them. In turn, they enrich our work with a diverse range of ideas, approaches, and trends.

The Kos office provides us with projects from the island, which are primarily developed in Athens, where our main team is based. The exposure to new ideas, products, technologies, and construction materials is more direct in Athens, and this integration is crucial to our design process.

 

Read the full interview at the 272 | November 2022 ek issue.

David Gianotten is an architect and managing partner at OMA – Office for Metropolitan Architecture. Beyond the architectural projects he oversees, he is responsible for the firm’s overall organizational and financial management, business strategy, and global development. He joined OMA in 2008, inaugurated the Hong Kong office in 2009, and became a partner in 2010, coordinating the Asia-Pacific division for seven years before returning to the Netherlands in 2015 as Managing Partner. On March 28, he presented recent projects as well as the renewed operational approach of the office in Athens, in an event organized by the Dutch Embassy and the Hellenic Institute of Architecture.

 

S.M.: In your recent lecture in Athens, on March 28, the keyword was “sustainability.” When and why did the office begin to emphasize this dimension of architecture so strongly?

David Gianotten: I believe that decorating a building with a green roof and lots of trees on top does not represent “sustainable architecture” but simply makes it look like a broccoli. I have always been – and remain – skeptical of greenwashing phenomena that attempt to present themselves as sustainability models. Sustainability is much more than the use of tools such as photovoltaics and green walls to simply meet certain requirements. At our office, until recent years, we did not emphasize this aspect of our work externally, although the concept of sustainability is intrinsic to the way we work – which, from the beginning, takes the environment into account and responds to specific programmatic requirements.

This began to change when I started collaborating with Ronald Akili, founder of the Potato Head hospitality brand, which promotes sustainable tourism. At some point, while we were working together on the Potato Head Studios resort in Bali, Ronald went surfing with his children and realized the extent of the plastic waste problem. From then on, our design for Potato Head Studios – as well as subsequent collaborations – focused mainly on sustainable design approaches and zero waste. We experimented with different uses of local and recycled materials and also explored approaches to eliminating the waste generated by and for tourism. In 2022, OMA and Potato Head co-curated the exhibition Nthing is Possible* at Singapore’s National Design Center, presenting the results of this research. Earlier this year, the AIR Circular Campus and Cooking Club was inaugurated, a collaboration between OMA, Ronald, and chefs Matt Orlando and Will Goldfarb. The restaurant is dedicated to experimenting with zero-waste cooking and dining.

Essentially, in all our projects, our understanding of sustainability goes beyond energy issues and extends to society. For us, social sustainability is vital, and we always make references to the place – to culture, techniques, materials, needs, and aspirations.

 

 

S.M.: Tourism may be the least sustainable industry – both environmentally and socially. Can the architecture of large hotel complexes really make a difference?

D.G.: I am optimistic, as I have witnessed firsthand the positive impact Potato Head had in Bali, leading to a broader transformation. We designed Potato Head Studios as part of the Desa Potato Head complex, which includes clubs and the Katamama Resort. We were not only involved in the architecture but also acted as consultants for the overall program and operation of Desa. Together with Potato Head, we created an experience that is not just about leisure for visitors but also connects them to local culture and fosters environmental awareness.

Upon arrival, guests receive a welcome package including a beautifully designed fabric bag and a metal bottle, which they are encouraged to use throughout their stay, thereby minimizing plastic waste. This practice proved feasible, and in 2019 it led to the province of Bali banning single-use plastics altogether.

Culturally, inside Potato Head Studios we designed a public platform at ground level, which remains permanently open to the local community. We run programs related to local art and culture, and the space has progressively transformed into a place of cultural exchange, both intentionally and unintentionally. The success of Desa has convinced me that making a difference is possible. All it takes is courage and a good plan. In tourism, you can have fun and at the same time do the right thing.

 

 

S.M.: OMA has acted as an advisor to the Singapore government on waste management. Why would such an institutional body entrust an architectural office with a service not directly related to conventional design, and what kind of “design” could that be?

D.G.: OMA is an office of architectural and urban design, but we also maintain a genuine, strong interest in other fields. We have a dedicated think tank called AMO, where we research a wide range of environmental topics such as energy networks and the countryside. One example of our research is the roadmap Roadmap 2050: A Practical Guide to a Prosperous, Low-carbon Europe, published in 2010, which explores how the European Union could develop a carbon-free energy network by 2050. Over the past decade, we further researched rural issues, examining the impacts of urbanization as well as the opportunities it brings. Through these research programs, we have built a body of knowledge that has greatly expanded our perspective on environmental issues.

This knowledge and broadened perspective are factors that influence our built work worldwide. I believe that our unique experience, which combines theoretical research with practical application, can be invaluable to any institution. As for the result, it is difficult to predetermine. It could be a design –for example, an energy network– but it could equally be a guideline system for best practices in construction. Or, as in the case of Singapore, a proposal on how the city might change its perspective on waste and its management policies, learning from examples in other places, such as Bali.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 288 | July 2024.

Gagos Architecture and Design was founded in 1997 in Larissa by interior designer Kostas Gagos and his brother Vangelis, quickly establishing itself as a leader in interior architecture, particularly in the catering sector. Over two decades later, the firm has expanded significantly, now with a second office in Athens, and a portfolio filled with numerous successful projects and prestigious awards. Despite the increasing scale and complexity of their assignments, the firm’s approach remains rooted in strong client communication and meticulous project management, with an unwavering focus on construction detail.

 

S.M: You began your operations in Larissa and have recently expanded to Athens. What experience has your Larissa headquarters provided you with? When and why did you feel it was necessary to open a second office?

K.G: Starting my professional journey in a smaller city has been incredibly beneficial. People tend to trust you more easily, especially when they see you offering something different, which helps you quickly gain recognition within the community. Larissa, in particular, is known as the city of coffee and catering, making it an excellent “school” for me. When the rapid development in this sector began, I was among the first to be involved, right at the heart of the transformation in people’s lifestyles and habits. While my main base was in Larissa, we were creating projects across Greece and internationally for many years. During the crisis, I began to focus more on the capital, and by 2017, when I felt ready, we opened our first branch in Athens. The aim was to accelerate growth by being closer to potential investors and clients. I have no regrets about this decision.

 

 

S.M: We have been designing catering and leisure facilities for over two decades. How have client expectations and your own perspective evolved during this time? Which of your projects would you consider milestones in this journey, and why?

K.G: A catering establishment should be not only aesthetically pleasing and atmospheric but also functional and built around a clear concept. It’s essential to combine materials, lighting, and innovative products to create a project that stands out and feels unique. The evolution of foodservice design moves rapidly, with trends constantly changing and offering new experiences for consumers.

Entrepreneurs are always seeking new ideas, which they share with us as a vision, and we are tasked with bringing them to life. Throughout my career, there have been numerous projects that could be considered milestones, and while it would be hard to highlight just a few without doing a disservice to others, I must express my deep gratitude to all the business owners who have trusted me -and continue to do so.

 

 

S.M: Based on your experience, what are the key differences and overlaps between architecture and interior design? And what led you to focus specifically on interior design?

K.G: The answer is clear and simple: to achieve a perfect and successful result, the architect needs the interior designer, and the interior designer needs the architect. The synergy between the two elevates the outcome for the benefit of the client. The idea that one can do it all is often not true. I became drawn to interior design from the very beginning because I wanted to constantly experiment with new materials, unique constructions, and innovative combinations of colors and textures. I must admit that my early inspiration came from my father, Antonis Gagos, a carpenter. Every summer, I would spend time in his workshop, absorbing invaluable hands-on experiences in construction.

 

Read the full interview at the  264 | January – February 2022 ek issue.

The creative studio Saint of Athens, based in Athens, was founded in 2007 by Nikos Palaiologos. With typography, branding, and communication as its main fields, the studio often expands -through collaborations with architects- into the creation of complete interior spaces, where its methodology shifts into three dimensions, covering different scales. Every project it undertakes begins with an original idea, which determines a different technical approach depending on the case. In this spirit, each design is treated as a living organism, with its own characteristics and distinct purpose.

 

S.M.: What is the range of services you offer as a studio when it comes to creating a space?

Nikos Palaiologos: The sense of familiarity that develops in a space is what our team seeks. From the creative concept to the custom detail, everything follows a unified functional line. Decorative and construction proposals always place the brand and the experience it offers the consumer at the center. All this is combined with conceptual logos and their development within the company’s overall identity.

 

 

S.M.: How did you move into interior design? What preceded your first steps in designing commercial spaces?

N.P.: Everything starts with the core idea, the concept. The holistic corporate identity we had designed for a high-profile patisserie also required a corresponding environment. So that project became our official starting point in creating a space designed to host pastry creations, while embodying the urban atmosphere of a boutique that could be found in any cosmopolitan capital.

 

 

S.M.: What methodological tools from your experience in typography do you carry over into spatial design, and how? Where does the boundary lie between visual and three-dimensional design?

N.P.: The architecture of information and the overall visual vocabulary of a brand also define the total image. Environmental branding and art are the holy grail for our team. Essentially, we are the ones who set the boundary. One art form must “invade” the other. This must always happen organically, without noise and, above all, with respect for the brand and the space. Too many voices neutralize the power of a strong statement. And we love the reason for existence.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 284 | January – February 2024.

The architectural office Petras architecture was founded in 2013 in Athens by Tsampikos Petras and has distinguished itself, beyond its built work, for its important distinctions in national and international architectural competitions. The office develops contemporary technologies in relation to traditional design techniques and seeks the evolving spatial experience through the simplicity and clarity of materials, bioclimatic design, economy, and respect for each place, contributing to the creation of culture.

 

S.M.: The office was founded in Athens, at the most difficult time of the economic crisis, when opportunities for built work -especially for young architects- were minimal. What kind of decision was that, and with what prospects?

T.P.: During the financial crisis, I realized that a young architect had two main options to start his professional path: either to seek employment in architectural offices abroad until things improved in Greece, or to remain in Greece and claim projects through European and international competitions. The modern era of the internet, along with our European identity at that moment, made it possible -unlike in previous times when such an endeavor would have been extremely difficult, if not impossible. Both options had their pros and cons, and both paths presented difficulties. I chose the second route and made a decision -perhaps more out of persistence than out of a specific strategy- not to abandon my country and to participate from Greece in competitions abroad, as an act of creative freedom within an adverse environment. The initial aim was to secure a monetary prize to generate some income, while at the same time creating freely within a more progressive architectural culture, expressing our personal architectural vision.

In the end -at least for us- things turned out unexpectedly well: we began receiving successive distinctions and awards (the office has more than 25 distinctions and 7 first prizes), secured external cash flow, and entered, almost without realizing it, into a competitive arena of continuous creation, design, and development. We became familiar with large-scale design and complex building programs, through which we gained substantial design experience. The awards also brought publications and recognition, and gradually, property owners in Greece began to approach us with new projects, as the situation was indeed improving. Today, some of the first-prize projects we won are being completed, while at the same time we are designing and implementing more than 20 private projects, both small- and large-scale.

 

 

S.M.: You adopted BIM for project organization very early. How did you make that decision, and what advantages has it given you?

T.P.: Indeed, from the beginning of the office we introduced design through BIM, precisely because the team was initially very small and we had to find a way to produce a large volume of design information in a short time and at the lowest cost for competitions. The decision came as a response to that first need, and as time passed, we increasingly exploited the BIM logic of design. This was facilitated by the free time available during the early period and our proficiency with 3D design tools. With BIM, we now have a much better overview of three-dimensional space, the structure, and the building systems, the ability to explore multiple alternative solutions, simultaneous teamwork on a project without communication delays, and a significant reduction of design errors in studies and construction drawings. All the above allow us to compose and design with great efficiency.

Today, after at least 10 years of working with this technology, we have fully standardized the design process at all study levels, we have incorporated point-cloud technologies for better understanding of the relationship between the building and its environment, and while we are a team with a core of about 10 people, we have at least double -if not more- the productive capacity. This allows us to remain competitive and available for any interesting competition that may be announced, despite the daily workload of ongoing projects.

 

 

S.M.: A major part of your activity is architectural competitions, with an emphasis on those held abroad. Where do you believe the competition framework in Greece falls short, and what could be improved compared to your experience in other countries? Looking ahead, what incentives can an architectural office have to participate in such a process, which is -at least initially- unpaid?

T.P.: I believe that competition prizes and study fees must be increased significantly and immediately, so that architectural competitions become truly attractive to a wider number of architects, and in some way the implementation of projects must be ensured, so that participation has real meaning. I also consider it a disadvantage that calls for very important public projects in Greece are not opened to the European or international scene.

Translated briefs and the presence of international jurors could attract creators from abroad and raise the level of the organization, while the opposite has been happening for years across Europe. Many of the great architectural offices we see today around the world -offices that nobody knew years ago- emerged and soared through distinctions in architectural competitions. I think that says it all.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 275 | March 2023.

Ron Arad is a designer, working throughout the entire spectrum of the creative field. Born in Tel Aviv in 1951, he settled in London in 1973, where he is based ever since. His constant experimentation with the possibilities of materials such as steel, aluminum or polyamide and his radical re-conception of the form and structure of furniture has put him at the forefront of contemporary design and architecture. Alongside his limited-edition studio work, Arad designs for leading international companies including Kartell, Vitra, Moroso, Fiam, Driade, Alessi, Cappellini, Cassina, WMF and Magis, among many others.

 

Upon moving to London, you enrolled at the Architectural Association, an alternative school of architecture, at a time when there was little professional work to do. What drew you there and what have you kept from this experience?

The AA was not alternative. It was a special school, of course, and I really enjoyed my time there, but it was still a famous school of architecture drawing students from all over the world, at a time when no one was building anything in England. I did not come to London with a plan to study at the AA; I just improvised through the interviews and they made a mistake and offered me a place. It seemed to me more like an art school, that was not so much about making buildings, but rather about ideas and concepts that could materialize at a later stage, like the Pompidou Center, that drew from the work of Archigram, who had never produced anything but drawings.

Practicing architects often have their potential narrowed down from outside factors, and I feel free from that: I love architecture, but I am not in love with the profession. If you graduate from architecture school, you have to be commissioned to do something, unlike when you are a student, and you can design entire islands no one asked you to. When you are in an art school, on the other hand, you can continue doing what you did as an idealistic young person. This is what I keep from the AA.

 

You practice many fields of creative work, outside any given discipline. When you had your exhibition at the Pompidou, called “No Discipline”, may I assume it was you who chose the name?

“No discipline” describes my character, as I am not a very disciplined person; also, “no discipline” means that I do not have exclusive belonging to any discipline. The Pompidou was uneasy with the name because it had been decided a few years earlier that only French names should be given to exhibitions, but when I found that they had had an exhibition called “African Remix”, which is English, I convinced them to allow the name “No Discipline”. Then again, when the show moved to New York, I gave it a French name and it was called “La Cage sans Frontières”, the cage without borders.

If you have “no discipline”, at least you must have some sort of creative strategy. What is it about?

I do not have a creative strategy; I do not have a five-year plan. I sketch and I talk: I have very good people around me to talk to, who are a lot better than me. My personal test, when I have an idea, is whether I would be jealous if I saw such a thing at an exhibition in a gallery: If the answer is yes, then it’s worth doing; if it is not, then why bother? Materials and technology are tools, regardless of whether it is a CNC cutting machine, or a brush with paint. Equally important contributors are the artisans I collaborate with, like the one who carried out the latest collection that I did for Moroso, titled “Modou”. Sometimes you come across an amazing material and you think what can you do with it, and sometimes you have a great idea for something you want to do and wonder what is the best material that could be used for it. It is never one or the other.

You may be branded as an “industrial designer”, but how is your hands-on, artistic practice consistent with industrial production? There is an interesting story about how you first made your Tom Vac chair as a sculptural, vacuum-formed aluminum prototype, and then the industrial version kept the form but not the material, replacing it with poly mix.

I designed the Tom Vac when I was commissioned to do a totem at Via Manzoni for Domus magazine, for the Fiera in Milano. My idea for the totem was to make it with a hundred stacking chairs, and, instead of choosing one of the chairs in the market, I thought to make one. Those days I was interested in vacuum forming aluminum, and I needed an excuse to make something with it. So, I used the opportunity of the totem to make a mold. Vitra looked at it, and wanted to make a version of the chair in injection-molding, that is a more industrial, cost-effective method, and I didn’ t have an objection, since those are very serious considerations: When you do studio pieces, you don’ t have to think about production, you think about different things but, to be honest, that plastic chair is more “sitter-friendly” than an aluminum chair -and, if you do a chair, it has to be a good chair to sit on. It also needs to have enough “newness” to it, to justify doing it; I could have taken any old stacking chair, but something new evolved in the end. There is always a sort of dialogue with the companies on what to do with the artworks. For example, I think of the Bookworm for Kartell: It is one of the most successful industrial design pieces, and it started from an artwork before it became industrial design. Kartell produced more than 1000km of extrusion, which is longer than Italy.

One of your latest pieces, a blown glass vase collection for Venini, is titled “Where are my Glasses”. Why are “your” glasses the round, black, thick-framed “architect glasses” that you used there?

I was busy with eyewear at the time when Venini asked to do something, so instead of cutting lenses I took the frames and I said: “let’s blow glass into them!”. After a few sketches, we went to Murano to tell people there what to prepare and we explored the idea. When you design, it’s always about the material, the process, and about the dialogue between the two. What you get is a combination or a symbiosis between them. When you also work with a corporation, that synergy further involves the master craftsmen, whose contribution is very important. I can’ t blow glass; they blow glass beautifully. It was, in a way, one of the easiest projects I ’ve ever done. The embedded glasses at the Venini collection are not special or ideal; you could only think of “ideal glasses” if you have an architectural background. They don’t belong to Le Corbusier, but they are rather the generic, simple glasses that you find illustrating a dictionary entry.

 

What are you currently working on?

Before the lockdown, I was working on a piece for the Summer Show at the Royal Academy, which was going to be a Morgan car covered by woven fabric of a sketch of a Morgan car. I am always fascinated when I walk in the streets and see cars that are covered, as if Christo had covered them, and I had the idea of sketching what we don’t see, on the canvas. After digital processing, the flattened sketch was woven into a jacquard fabric and underneath is the car. The process is pretty amazing, and it is a little known fact that the fabric industry was the first industry to use computers in production, long before the car industry did. So, everything is a computer generation of handmade sketches, with amazing threads: I didn’t have a Morgan here in the lockdown so when the fabric arrived I had to improvise a car using whatever I could find around me, including a circular speaker I once made, shelves, cushions, one of my Moroso Little Albert chairs, a Danish 60’s chair that formed the perfect grille, all placed on a Borsani sofa onto which I then placed a Gaetano Pesce felt chair that formed the car bonnet. Later, for the exhibit at Huntsman in Savile Row, I made a painterly sculpture of a Morgan car, to sit under the fabric, incorporating parts kindly given to me by Morgan.

What are you good at, as an individual or as part of a team, and where do you draw your inspiration from?

I think that I am good in coming up with original ideas, in satisfying my curiosity and my boredom and in making it work. I have noticed that the best source of ideas and “inspiration” – however little I like this word- is your own work. When you work on something, you can only progress one bit at a time, and, along the way, you get ideas of other ways of doing it, that may evolve into something altogether new, after the previous project is finished. For example, when I needed to work on something that was hidden under a blanket, I thought that it was not important, that it was for no one to see, and then I found myself doing something that I wanted everyone to see. So, one came from the other, the next kind from the same source. It’s always the work that gives birth to ideas in the future.

Plaini and Karahalios Architects is an Athens-based architectural office. It was founded in 2011 by Elisavet Plaini and Yiannis Karahalios, at a moment that coincided with the onset of the financial crisis. At first, they responded by gaining substantial experience in small-scale design, while gradually taking on increasingly complex building projects. Today, their working method reflects the distinctive characteristics of an entire generation of architects who harnessed the experiences of the crisis and transformed them into qualitative traits.

 

S.M.: You come from different educational backgrounds. How did your collaboration begin, and how did you combine your different experiences into something new? At what point do you feel your office acquired its own unified identity?

E.P.: We met at the Noukakis–Babalou office. I had worked in some offices after my studies in London, and Yiannis came straight after finishing his postgraduate degree in New York. We had the opportunity to work, within a creative and collegial atmosphere, on several interesting projects. The highlight was the international competition for the main axis of Beirut, which won first prize. When we later decided to work as freelancers, we remained friends and collaborators, eventually sharing a workspace and finally founding a unified office. We shared common views on design-related issues as well as on a broader outlook on things.

Our identity was shaped around our shared intention to seek solutions with the fewest possible means and with restraint, both in morphological and material expression. Gradually, this also found its visual codification, mainly through the exploration of boundaries.

 

 

S.M.: The founding of your office coincided with the financial crisis in Greece, which had significant effects on architectural activity, as for nearly a decade almost all new constructions stopped. How did you respond to these conditions, and what do you retain today as experience within a completely different landscape that now includes many larger building projects?

Y.K.: As with many of our colleagues, the main activity shifted to renovation and interior design. It’s interesting that as a field we turned to an area that lies at the edge of our discipline and for which, I believe, we didn’t even have the necessary educational background. However, this introspection helped us better understand space, materials, and construction, especially in relation to housing, which was at the center of the renovations. Now that we are returning to the typical object of architecture, the building, this apprenticeship in the interior of the apartment feels like a valuable acquisition.

 

S.M.: You have studied the typology of housing in detail, but your built or designed work in other types of buildings or spaces is less well known. Is this the result of specific circumstances or a conscious choice? Do you participate in architectural competitions, private or public?

Y.K.: It is the result of circumstances. It comes primarily as a continuation of our experience in apartment renovations. Now that our scope has broadened, it is logical that the direction of this expansion happens more within the housing field. In other typologies, such as leisure, commerce, or hospitality, the main demand is not so much functional resolution as communication or differentiation from competition.

There, our architectural language and approach often clash with the culture of experience and individual enjoyment. It’s a fragile balance, and there have been times when we failed to remain completely faithful to our principles. Regarding competitions, we participate selectively since the dedication, human effort, and material resources required for a complete submission form a difficult equation within the framework of independent practice. Competitions, although exhausting, are an opportunity to gain distance from things and are crucial for the office’s development. Through them, we have had the chance to gain experience in larger-scale projects, something particularly important during the crisis years.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 270 | September 2022.

Roberto Palomba, of Palomba Serafini Associati, is Chief Design Officer at Ideal Standard, the leading company in the bathroom sector. He will be in Athens on October 5-6^th for the official launch of the Ideal Standard showroom and will deliver a keynote speech at the Goulandris Foundation.

When did your collaboration with Ideal Standard begin and how do you describe your relationship? Also, what brings you to Athens?

I started working with Ideal Standard as their Chief Design Officer more than three years ago. It fills me with great confidence to be the exclusive designer for Ideal Standard, but I am also humbled by the hard work, and crucially, the passion of everyone in the business. The opportunity to combine elegant design with technology that will have a genuine impact on the daily lives of people is amazing.

As we grow our collections at Ideal Standard, we are strengthening relationship between the brand – Ideal Standard – and architects, designers and specifiers, because we are providing more options to them to create deeply personalised bathrooms. This is what I find most rewarding about my role.

I am in Athens to officially open Ideal Standard’s new flagship showroom. The space has been designed by myself and my design firm Palomba Serafini Associati, not just to demonstrate Ideal Standard’s latest contributions to the bathroom sector, but to the field of design itself.

Bathrooms are probably the least photographed rooms of an interior, due to constraints of space and restricted viewpoints. is the reduced importance of architectural photography a factor impacting bathroom design?

There is a kind of ambiguity in the world of the bathroom this place is the least photographed room in the house but at the same time the most used for taking photographs. In this sort of ambiguity, the bathroom has become a place/not a place where in reality one can talk about oneself and not about architecture. The fact that people and influencers photograph themselves a lot inside the bathroom has allowed this room to be cleared even more.

You will be in Athens, October 5&6, to officially open the new Ideal Standard showroom; what are the main considerations in the design of this space, and how can you bring such bathroom displays to life/ make them feel real?

I am happy to land again in Athens which, as everyone knows, is my second adopted home!

The project was conceived as a meeting place for professionals who try to find an architectural and interior dimension inside the bathroom, for which there are references to the Ideal Standard product part, but also to what is the contribution that these products can give this space. We have made a selection of materials, finishes and colours, proposing complete solutions for the bathroom even if only hinted at, which may entice the interior designer or the end customer to inspire new solutions or the use of Ideal Standard products.

With “Atelier Collections” Ideal Standard is returning to its roots of working with master designers of their time and demonstrating its renewed focus on design-led products. Which were the most important elements, and which were the difficulties in the design process of the different ranges within Atelier Collections?

This year we have just concluded what we have decreed as the first phase of the relaunch of Ideal Standard’s leadership in the world of design.

In the past, Ideal Standard represented the company with the greatest sensitivity to the design and use of creatives.

It is useless to mention the story of a brand that has been one of the greatest examples of the good use of creativity, with long lasting collaboration with well known designers.

I am very honoured to have been decreed as heir and interpreter of this legacy and to be able to carry it and spread it among the new generations. To do this, we have brought the historical values of the brand back into vogue by projecting them into the future of the new collections that will be contemporary and that will try to investigate the new vision of design.

Ideal Standard has developed Singular, a new approach that was specifically developed to streamline bathroom design and simplify the selection process, while still inspiring creativity. In what ways can creativity be guided and what does Singular mean to you?

We believe in inclusivity and diversity.

As the Chief Design Officer of Ideal Standard, I need to be able to read the trends of the society.

At this time, the vision of style is extremely varied, in fact we have entered the phase of neo-eclecticism, which means that we can mix a classical aesthetic along with extremely contemporary and minimal products.

Not just trendy products but an eclectic, pluralist, and transversal vision.

Of course, this leads the company to create collections as perfect tools to help designers from all over the world in the creation of their projects, being able to draw from a series of complete and multifaceted catalogues, called Sector Books, that are specially focus on the bathroom of Residential spaces, Hotels and hospitality, Offices, Public places, leisure, Health services etc. Different sectors need different approach.

We call this strategic approach, Singular, where we believe it best represents the inclusiveness and diversity of different styles and needs giving everyone the opportunity to express themselves as they see fit.

Panagiotis Touliatos is Emeritus Professor at the National Technical University of Athens (NTUA), Professor and Chair of the Department of Architecture at Frederick University, and Greece’s scientific lead and representative to CEN – Eurocode EC-5. Professionally, as an architect–engineer, he has focused on pioneering, non-conventional constructions with large structural spans, on composite systems using reinforced concrete, steel, and timber, and on structures with particular seismic and bioclimatic performance. He is the author of numerous scientific articles, teaching aids, and books, and he is active as coordinator of postgraduate and research programs -especially in the restoration of historic monuments and in contemporary structures with large spans and advanced bioclimatic operation.

 

S.M.: You are among the first architects in Greece to have worked systematically with the possibilities of engineered timber. What initially drew your interest to this material?

P.T.: In the early stages of my academic career, in the Building Technology area at NTUA, I focused particularly on prefabrication systems with reinforced concrete. From the 1980s onward, alongside teaching and research at NTUA, I regularly taught at the Fire Academy of Greece with the main objective of training Cadet Officers on issues of seismic risk. For decades we experienced Greece’s earthquakes together, observing and analyzing building failures, rescues, writing course notes and intervention guidelines, and carrying out experiments on earthquakes and building fires with both institutions. Already from my student years at NTUA, thanks to my inspiring professors such as Angelos Prokopiou and Pavlos Mylonas, I was drawn to the fascinating realm of humankind’s monumental structures.

Thus the view began to take shape in my mind that, for me as an architect–engineer to dare something new, bold, and useful in building practice, I must first approach in depth and understand the corresponding achievements of our past. Early on I discerned the potential of timber construction. This insight was reinforced by my long service in scientific bodies -on the one hand the Council of Europe (PACT 19) and UNESCO, and on the other the CEN Eurocodes (Greece’s representative on EC5 – Timber Structures) and the United Nations IDNDR (Greece’s representative to the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction). My continuous academic and research collaboration with universities in Central and Northern Europe -such as Turin, Florence, Mons in Belgium, Oulu in Finland, and in North America, such as Vancouver with the Florintec research center and Harvard in Boston -gave rise to both a question and a strong desire, a dream.

My question was this: how and why did a nation -a people, the Greeks- who had incredible technology combining timber and masonry in the prehistoric Minoan era; who built the formidable triremes, where I tried to contribute to deciphering the historical “Shell-First” shipbuilding system of the Greeks, and their siege engines; who used Byzantine timber banding in age-old castles and monasteries that I studied and continue to study; who created the remarkable manor houses that endure and adorn Greek architectural tradition -how did this people renounce timber construction, lose confidence in it, and abandon it? That is how I began.

 

 

S.M.: How easy was it to build your first projects when local know-how in timber was limited? What were the characteristics of the clients who accepted such a proposal and which crews did you work with?

P.T.: It was never easy. The first major opportunity -both for me and for introducing the Athenian public to contemporary timber construction- was “Autokinisi” in 1977, at a prominent location on Kifisias Avenue. I was asked by a group of entrepreneurs and friends to design a relatively large exhibition building, initially for automobiles, that would be attractive and relocatable from place to place. The building was so popular with the public that it was soon converted into a famous disco and became widely known. It thus served as a tangible example that in Greece, too, one could design, calculate, and build a large-scale building from glued-laminated timber (glulam). As with timber everywhere, in Greece it wins people’s sympathy. Above all, it showed that timber construction can yield contemporary typologies and morphologies and a highly progressive aesthetic. This view was reinforced when I designed and built “Kouros”, a tourist pavilion on the National Road after Livadeia, toward Delphi and Parnassos.

After these two buildings, one project after another facilitated the advancement in Greece of large-scale and boldly conceived timber structures. Various misconceptions that had unfortunately taken root collapsed. It became clear that timber construction is fully competitive economically -evidenced by success in demanding architectural competitions such as the large swimming complex for the students of the Hellenic American College in Kantza, Attica, or the three Olympic gymnasiums in Greece’s most seismically active areas -Argostoli, Lefkada, and Loutraki- where a seismic fault passed through the building causing damage only to the floor. It was proven that timber construction is robust enough to protect, as a wooden shell, a two-story reinforced-concrete structure under the harsh conditions at the summit of Parnassos.

Its unique capacity for bioclimatic and energy design was also confirmed -for example, with the electrically operable roof of the swimming pool in Pallini. Implementation, however, was never easy. First, the design team had to decide that all significant details of the proposal would be resolved from the preliminary design stage. At the same time and from the outset, the architect had to shape the usually non-standard structural members in close, timely collaboration with the structural engineer. Contractor teams were unable to adapt to the required millimetric precision of construction details. Manufacturers were, at times, unconvinced about producing in strict compliance with European codes and specifications. The solution came from my two brothers: they formed a small crew, trained it by working manually themselves, thereby enabling the proper implementation of my designs.

 

 

S.M.: You have been a member of the scientific team that drafted the Eurocodes. Could you briefly explain the aim of this work and what trends it suggests for the future of construction in Europe?

P.T.: I represented Greece in Eurocode 5 – Timber Structures during its drafting and later during its implementation phase in Greece. The Eurocodes constitute a historic European effort in the field of structural design calculations. A major success of the Eurocodes, in my view, is that they placed on an equal footing load-bearing structures of masonry, timber, steel, and reinforced concrete, also adding the case of composite construction. Thus, within this pan-European scientific group, we managed to establish and disseminate among architects and engineers the motto: “In a building, use in each part the structural material that suits and performs best -without prejudice and without fear of collaboration- while ensuring the correct method of implementing that collaboration.” I believe that this, above all, re-emphasizes the message carried by the Greek word “ypologismós” (calculation): namely, that mathematical quantification must remain under the sovereignty of reasoned design each time.

Read the full interview in ek issue 267 | May 2022.

Erieta Attali, photographer and university professor, has been exploring the relationship between architecture and landscape at the edges of the world for two decades. Her photographic work investigates how extreme conditions lead humanity to reorient itself and rediscover its center, through architectural responses. She taught architectural photography for 15 years at Columbia University’s architecture department in New York, and as Visiting Professor at the architecture departments of the Catholic University of Santiago in Chile, the Technion in Haifa, Israel, the University of Tokyo, and many others. Since January 2020 she has been Assistant Professor in the architecture department of Cooper Union in New York, and since January 2021 she has been Visiting Professor at the National University of Singapore, while simultaneously photographing and publishing photography and architecture books with renowned publishers in Germany.

 

S.M.: You are among the few architectural photographers who work on large-scale constructions, bridges being a characteristic example. Where does this particular interest come from? As a woman photographer, have you faced difficulties due to the special demands of such photo shoots?

EA: I was born in Tel Aviv where I lived until I was four years old, before moving to Istanbul. Among the many advantages of living in such a place, I was able to witness up close the construction of the Bosporus Bridge, which was a very significant moment in the city’s history, as it united East and West. From a construction perspective, in such a dramatic landscape as the Bosporus, I was deeply impressed as a little girl. Among my fantasies of traveling and crossing the entire world was also the dream of filming the experience of a new landscape through the creation of a megastructure.

On July 14, 2016, I was fortunate to attend a conference at the V&A Museum in London, titled “Beyond the Bridge.”On the list of speakers, I saw the biography of Marc Mimram. I didn’t know who he was, but I was curious to hear him talk about his work. I was astonished by his award-winning bridges in Morocco, China, and Kehl—just to name a few. I had just discovered someone whose mission was to connect geographies, the seas with the land. I saw curves sinking into the water, windows opening to the sky, reflecting, floating, and creating new crossroads. Looking at Mimram’s bridges was like immersing myself in Max Ernst’s painting Humboldt Current (1951–52). By that time, I had already photographed across the world and had just completed my PhD studies in Australia, with important photographic monographs ready for publication. I had also been a long-distance runner since I was very young. My first routes were through the lush Princes’ Islands. Running was a reflective experience, I felt attuned to the rhythm of the tree trunks.

When you run, you gain a physical experience of the landscape. You are neither a spectator nor a theoretical commentator. The process is not necessarily comfortable, but it offers a unique perspective, which I have carried into my profession and my research. The runner is exposed to nature, to vegetation, dust, and weather conditions. Choosing the right route takes on an existential dimension. The physical dimension of photography, which is often overlooked, is a very important element in my work. The constant attraction I feel for extremes is, above all, an existential condition related to the exploration of the physical and psychological limits of humanity. I express this by choosing inaccessible landscapes, with heavy loads of equipment, and through a general perspective shaped by the years I spent as a long-distance runner.

 

 

S.M.: What is it that makes architectural photography a distinct category, in your experience?

EA: Looking back at my student years as a photography student and later as an archaeological photographer—while landscape remained my main focus—I always aimed to identify structures and, through composition, integrate them into a new, composite landscape. I use the word “structures” in the broadest sense, since for many years these were either natural formations, such as stones or plants, or—especially at the beginning of my career—ancient ruins. The search for structures stemmed from the need to identify and investigate relationships among these solitary elements—almost imaginary characters—and the landscape. The intensity of the transition from one to the other provoked my curiosity, through their dialogue.

Through my experience as a photographer of archaeology, landscape, and—for the past twenty-five years—architecture, I worked to create a visual language where the separation between content (human-made structures) and environment (natural or urban) is dissolved and their relationship is inverted. Architecture is regarded as one of the elements of its environment. At the same time, the environment penetrates architecture and is filtered through it. This interpretation recalls the architect Bruno Taut, who considered architecture as an act of “designing relationships” rather than the organization of “forms within light” or the simple geometrization of architectural space.

Architectural photography (not necessarily “architectural photography” as a genre) can reveal and intensify the interaction between artifacts and their respective environments, transcending the utilitarian, documentary dimension of the medium, so that it functions as a tool of interpretation and understanding. Human-made structures are always situated within an environment: natural, urban, or even an abstract landscape that is constantly evolving. Awareness of this environment provides not only information and better understanding of the subject of photography, but also a glimpse into the natural forces that affect it and, perhaps, shaped its initial conception.

 

 

S.M.: Your photographic work is based on systematic research, seeking a unique narrative. How do you approach your subject each time? What do you prepare, and what do you leave “open”?

EA: I use narrative as a counter-mechanism to the use of images that function emblematically. Exploring ways to further develop the narrative character of architectural photography and aiming to move away from an iconic image, toward a cinematic expression, I discover and capture transitions: circadian, seasonal, climatic—as they appear in architectural materials, crystalline formations, and plants. While working, I realized the importance of wandering, both as an analytical tool for understanding space and as a narrative tool for communicating it.

Although there is an astonishing range of freely available photographs, through print and digital channels, monographs and special editions focusing on specific regions, styles, or materials, the majority are homogeneous in the way they visually communicate architecture. This common language stems both from how architectural photographers have learned to approach the built environment and from the demands of publishers, who dictate a particular method of documentation they want. Even in such a tiring professional environment dominated by sameness, there are still photographers who persist in devoting days to becoming familiar with their subject.

The photographic perspective I had developed coincided with the work of Kengo Kuma, without me having studied either his theoretical stance or his built works. His work happened to express what I was seeking through photography: being in absolute osmosis with the landscape, while in fact being within architecture. As a matter of principle, I never study architects’ texts.

I interpret their architecture myself through a subjective exploration, with the camera and in relation to the landscape. This approach is always enriched by close discussions, but it always begins on-site and through the lens.

Read the full interview in ek issue ek 260 | September 2021.

A&M Architects is an architectural practice founded in Athens in 1983 by Michalis Mavroleon and Andy Alexiades, after their professional experience in the USA, bringing together the necessary specialties for the management of complex private-sector projects. Today, A&M continues to build relationships both in Greece and abroad, incorporating the expertise and flexibility required to meet the growing demands of a rapidly changing and ever-closer world.

We spoke with A&M’s Management Committee: Michalis Mavroleon (MM), CEO; Esta Georgala (EG), Design Director; Marika Mavroleon (MMM), Design Operations Manager; Marios Kaklamanos (MK), Construction Operations Manager; Nikos Menagias (NM), Finance Manager; and Zoe Santikou (ZS), Marketing & Communications Coordinator, about the firm’s trajectory, its internal structure, and the transformations shaping its identity.

 

S.M.: We are used to associating architecture practices with a recognizable “signature” image of their buildings, yet yours show great variety. What remains constant, as a pursuit and as research, in A&M’s architecture?

MMM: Over these 38 years, and especially in the last 15, A&M has had the opportunity to engage with many projects and typologies, creating a diverse portfolio. Since the needs of each project differ, and every client comes with a unique brief, what we create must respond to that individuality.

EG: At the same time, we have the privilege of being a large team, and in architectural composition we enjoy plurality. Having designed several commercial spaces, our aim is to deliver a new product in every project, without repeating ourselves. We travel extensively, and our references are broad. We are interested in making our projects reflect the culture, vision, and needs of those who will inhabit them, whether individual or organization, while always maintaining high aesthetics, expertise, and harmony.

MM: What remains constant throughout our architectural journey is the balanced approach to the data and requirements set by clients, combined with the use of modern building systems and materials aimed at creating quality constructions that convey both impression and aesthetics.

 

 

S.M.: Based in Athens, you work on projects both in Greece and abroad. Where are the boundaries of the “Greek market,” and how do they shift?

MM: International projects posed a challenge of professionalism and knowledge for A&M’s people, which was quickly absorbed and became evident in our subsequent projects, as well as in the way we communicate with clients. This also reinforced A&M’s motto, “Building Relationships” – that is, we don’t just build buildings, we build relationships with our clients. In Greece, over the past decade, we’ve seen the evolution of many practices in design quality and standards that compete with international firms. As projects grow in scale, design responsibility often falls to international practices, such as in the Hellinikon Project.

For Greek firms to support such projects, they must have experience in works of similar scale under the umbrella of those international firms. A&M’s involvement in several airports -Dubai, Abu Dhabi, Cairo, Budapest, Moscow, Doha, and most recently Bahrain, equipped us with knowledge strong enough to carry us further, beyond the “boundaries” of the Greek market.

MK: Involvement in these projects was also a challenge for the project management team, giving us the opportunity to collaborate with renowned companies in the field and meet the demands set by international standards. At the same time, we realized how crucial training and the acquisition of the right certifications are in order to be considered equivalent partners, even formally.

 

 

S.M.: What are the milestones in the evolution of the practice -both in terms of buildings and in terms of organizational structure and services?

EG: A key milestone in the company’s evolution was 2016, when, due to turnover growth and the doubling of our collaborators, we decided to restructure in order to compete with international firms and organizations. We worked hard to build an organizational structure that enabled us to step into the international arena. We hope that in the coming years, the corporate culture -which has now become our asset- will take us to new synergies and collaborations, as we strongly believe in them.

MMM: A&M began with the philosophy of offering a holistic design service, covering all specialties necessary to complete an architectural project. Thus, we created teams dealing with various fields -Architecture, Engineering, Interior & Graphic Design, as well as Project & Construction Management- specialties that allow us to coordinate and manage projects all the way to delivery. With this Total Design strategy, A&M Group was born: a finely tuned team of people encompassing six distinct specialties that provide services either independently or as a single entity.

NM: Subsequently, the adoption of advanced technology and IT systems was required to support these teams. Over the past year, due to the pandemic we are experiencing, we further developed infrastructures that reduce the dependence of work on being tied to a specific physical space. In this new reality, beyond the challenges we face, we have also observed advantages, and for that reason we are considering maintaining some elements of this organization in the post–Covid-19 era.

Read the full interview in ek issue 256 | April 2021.

Giorgos Batzios is an architect based in Athens. After studying at the ÉNS d’Architecture Paris-Malaquais, he worked for five years at Ateliers Jean Nouvel in Paris and New York, followed by a period in London at David Chipperfield’s office. Returning to Greece in 2011, he collaborated with AETER–Harry Bougadellis and SPARCH (Rena Sakellaridou – Morfo Papanikolaou) before founding Georges Batzios Architects. He has been awarded in many architectural competitions, and his work spans multiple scales, from interior design to buildings of complex requirements and urban design.

 

S.M.: You have worked in many architectural firms with recognizable styles, yet you explicitly refuse to commit yourself to a single “image.” Where is the boundary between designing on the basis of principles and building a corporate identity (brand) as an architect? Given that Jean Nouvel’s office, where you collaborated for many years, promotes a similar stance, is it fair to say that a brand is exhausted in its “image” or “style”?

G.B.: Architecture is not a commercial product; it is a vision to which the architect is called to give function, substance, and texture. Our identity self-destructs and is reborn with each personal experience of the user, at every given moment. Take, for example, the main reception area of the office building we just completed in Attica. The space changes throughout the day and across the seasons, through reflections and light. Colors alternate, shadows trace new lines and abstract scales. The sound of flowing water adds a fourth dimension to the architectural experience. The architectural vision becomes subject to the consciousness of the passerby.

We design intuitively and build on principles that stem from the relationships of the individual structural elements. In short, we are not concerned with the matter of brand as an end in itself. That said, one could argue that all of the above inevitably create a brand, in any case.

 

 

S.M.: What led you to return to Greece in 2011, and how were you able to make use of and enrich your experience?

G.B.: In 2011 I was supposed to move to Sydney for the construction of a Jean Nouvel building, after similar “missions” in Paris, London, and New York. However, I decided to return to Greece for specific reasons. First of all, architects of Jean Nouvel’s caliber have the ability to absorb their collaborators. After some years alongside such strong maestros, there is a real danger of losing the ability to compose your own music. In addition, after 17 years of a nomadic life, I was tired of these “missions” and was seeking a base where I could, on one hand, express myself freely without the constraints of major architectural offices, and on the other, make use of the experience I had gained through my involvement in large and complex projects. My return to Greece enriched my work with a filter of constructive modesty.

 

 

S.M.: You have collaborated on projects with many different architectural firms. What changes for you in the context of such a collaboration, and what remains the same? And does what remains constant carry over to an “individual” project (which is again a product of collaboration, in a different context)?

G.B.: Beauty is objective, function is scientific, intuition is always the same. Methodology changes and is reflected in the construction systems. In other words, the architect remains the same, but the engineer must adapt.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 251 | October 2020.

The architectural team Divercity (Nikolas and Dimitris Travasaros, Christina Achtypi), based in London and Athens, has within fifteen years grown into an international practice with a strong Greek character, undertaking highly demanding building projects around the world. Despite their accumulated experience, Divercity maintain the same curiosity about the phenomena of contemporary life in the built environment as if they were encountering each project for the first time. Perhaps the secret of their perspective on the world is exactly that: each new challenge is nourished by their initial foundations. We spoke with the firm’s founder, Nikolas Travasaros, about this unique team, which is continually enriched with new faces and new projects in new locations.

 

SM: How did the practice begin and where is it today? What are the roles of the different partners within it?

NT: The name Divercity was to a large extent coincidental, like many beautiful things in our lives. At our beginning, in 2005, we found ourselves in a time of transition: while previous generations were used to working in an environment with more rigid boundaries, suddenly more and more large and small projects were being carried out in Greece by architects from abroad. Beyond the outward-looking spirit and optimism of the country during the initial phase of globalization, at the same time, in the era of the internet and low-cost air tickets, it became easy to collaborate with an architect from anywhere in the world.

At the same time, the personal, atelier-like structure of architectural practices, centered around the lead architect, seemed unsustainable as a model in the new era. I always believed that the vision of a younger generation of architects, who were then coming into the field, would find space for expression within more open structures, offering greater opportunities for ownership to their members. Starting out as young architects, we chose a name that was not personalized but instead reflected the diversity and flexibility that would go on to define our way of working and become our hallmark.

Furthermore, in 2008, when we made the leap to London, we wanted to participate in the global conversation from an international hub, with all the risks and rewards that entailed. Today, Dimitris runs our Athens office as Director, while Christina Achtypi is Director at our London office, where Daniel Silva and Marios Triantafyllou are Associate Directors. My own role is more of a coordinating one, between the two offices and our projects around the world.

 

 

SM: You are a practice that hires young architects from Greece and abroad. What problems do you identify in the transition from education to the professional environment, drawing examples from across the globe?

NT: Speaking personally, based on my experience both as a student and as a (former) teacher of architecture, I perceive the environment of architectural education as a dialogue balancing theory and practice. Architectural teaching must be mutually informed and enriched in meaning by the theoretical, research, design, or built work of the educator -only in this way can it be understood, and not as an autonomous, isolated act.

In Greece, in the absence of public architecture, a very large part is lost that could otherwise highlight a new Spaniard or Portuguese. At the same time, architects themselves remain rather detached from society.

Over the past twenty years, architecture schools in Greece and internationally have multiplied, making it increasingly difficult to staff them with educators who can at least partially meet the above condition. As a result, architectural education has become more and more nebulous and vague, devoid of real meaning. Inevitably, we live in an era of painful disconnection -a “rupture”- between the academic and professional environments.

An optimistic development, however, comes from the younger generation’s turn toward new design techniques, such as parametric design. Thanks to impressive technological advances, it has now become possible -mainly through digital fabrication- to realize such work. Through this process, more and more opportunities will emerge in the coming years, inevitably marking major and significant changes in architecture. The situation resembles the early 20th century, when with reinforced concrete a new way of designing and building was discovered and gradually dominated, ultimately changing society and our lives. If, in the meantime, we sought architectural innovation perhaps more than was fruitful in the wider field of related social sciences and theories, it seems we are now gradually returning, in a more focused way, to a field of research at the very core of the architectural discipline.

 

 

SM: Your practice is structured around the dynamics of diversity. What role do clients play within this model?

NT: For us, the client is a co-creator of the project. Especially in Greece, we often (and mistakenly, in my opinion) speak in architecture of the “user” -and this is a sign of our detachment from society. A “user” is granted rights of use of one’s intellectual creation, but not the right to intervene. In this way, a crucial factor in the creative process is lost.

From the beginning of our career, we were fortunate to collaborate, in projects such as the house in Psychiko or the Kinsterna Hotel (to mention a few indicative examples), with clients who possessed a high architectural vision. Such clients, who move in the tradition of the “patrons of the arts,” carry the weight to understand and actively support an architecture focused on creation and innovation, enjoying the vindication of their choices over time.

There is, however, another parallel reality, which has now also taken shape in Greece, especially in the tourism sector. Here we encounter a different type of client, governed by an entirely different framework, requiring other rules of collaboration and, of course, leading to a different outcome. In this scenario, the personalized client is absent -the project’s funds now belong to investment groups, which seek through architecture to generate added value based solely on quantitative criteria, choosing to ignore the qualitative aspects that are harder to communicate and perceive in the short term. Inevitably, the manager -the client’s representative tasked with this responsibility- bases decisions mainly on eliminating any potential risk, and thus any innovation, preferring the safety of the average and the repetitive. I feel that we, as architects, are still searching for the tools to navigate this new condition.

 

Read the full interview in ek issue 245 | March 2020.

Spanish architect Fran Silvestre graduated with honours from the Escuela Técnica Superior de Arquitectura de Valencia in 2001, obtaining a year later an MA in urban planning at the Technische Universiteit Eindhoven, also with the highest grade, while working for MVRDV architects. Having won a scholarship, he subsequently worked at the studio of Pritzker Prize laureate architect Alvaro Siza in Portugal, until 2005 when he founded Fran Silvestre Arquitectos, with projects that redefine abstraction, emphasizing white coloured plasticity and clean geometries, and delivering many awards and publications in the international press. Upon completion of his Doctorate, with distinction cum laude at the Universitat Politècnica de València (UPV), his academic career became a worthy rival to his professional.

 

Μ.Κ.: You have lectured at the Eindhoven University of Technology (TU/e), and teach at the Projects Department of the Polytechnic University of Valencia (UPV), where you currently also hold the position of Director of the MArch programmes, as well as being visiting professor on several architecture schools in Europe, and most recently at Kansas State University, in USA. Does this proximity to architectural theory feed into your own architectural practice, and how?

F.S.: Teaching gives you an enormous amount of energy. In the end, it is an exchange between the teacher and the students. If they maintain an interest, they will keep you updated and also maintain your initial investigative intention, your curiosity. The talent is always there, playing an active part in the whole procedure, as happens in all creative professions. However, this specific field of architecture requires a more personalized approach.

 

 

Μ.Κ.: Your design, be it buildings, furniture or sustainable wind towers, is permeated by the modernist essence. According to Le Corbusier, that is perfectly captured in the Cycladic vernacular, with the Mediterranean Sea as its common denominator; white volumes of fluid plasticity, nothing unnecessary, everything integrated. What new can one offer to this complete set of aesthetics?

F.S.: There is always the quality of continuity that one can offer, to an environment-framework that ought to be respected, but also understood from its own spatial and temporal point of view. In this way we can give value to an architecture that is capable of persisting in time without becoming obsolete.

 

 

Μ.Κ.: Your projects share your subtractive aesthetic approach, each with distinct variations. What is your main concern, designing them?

F.S.: The focus in all my projects arises from a double commitment: the will to give a technical response to a specific context and the desire to seek beauty through the built work.

 

 

Read the full interview at the Villas 2018 annual issue.