Europe in times of confusion | Interview with Pedro Olalla
- Eleni Ioannidou
- Aug 1, 2023
- 10 min read
A few days ago, the Spanish philhellene gave an interview to the Cypriot newspaper "Filenews" in which he spoke about Greece, philhellenism, the world situation, and Europe. I find the thoughts of this great intellectual so relevant that I am translating this interview for my readers.

Pedro Olalla: Today’s Greece also has its fans
Interview to Giorgos Savvinidis
His full Spanish name is Pedro Olalla Gonzalez de la Vega, and he is a writer, Hellenist, philologist, translator, and documentary filmmaker. He was named an Ambassador of Hellenism for, among other things, his work in promoting Greek culture, which he has studied in situ for 30 years. His works include the "Mythological Atlas of Greece," awarded by the Athens Academy of Sciences, for which he traveled tens of thousands of kilometers across the country. He is socially conscious and emphasizes the need for an organized social response and the defense of the common interest, modeled on Athenian democracy. We met him on the occasion of his arrival on the island and his participation in the 6th International Literature Festival «ες γην εναλίαν Κύπρον» (ancient Greek for "on Cyprus surrounded by the sea," my note), for a discussion about his own Greece and its contradictions, but also about the European Union, which, in his opinion, is incompatible with democracy.
–How many years have you lived in Greece? I've lived here permanently since 1994.
And I've been coming and going since 1984. So I've been involved with Greece for almost 40 years, and have been here for the last 30.
–Does this decision have an emotional aspect that goes beyond the professional or academic aspect?
Yes, the truth is that the emotional aspect has always existed, but it has been further cultivated over the years. Initially, there was a more cultural, spiritual attraction. But over four decades, it has developed on all levels. This means that the emotional, life-related, and familial aspects are now included in the decision, which I have renewed and reaffirmed many times. I could have left, but I still live in Greece and feed off the inspiration it offers me. The conscious decision to stay shows that there is not only emotion, but also a productive "fueling" between the country and the people.
–As you describe it, it looks like the development of a love relationship. Were there ups and downs along the way?
Of course, as in all relationships, there were ups and downs. There were theses and contradictions, but I insist that the fact that I didn't leave and didn't lose my interest in Greece and Greek culture is crucial.
– Was there a time when you were frustrated?
Not from the decision to study Hellenism on the ground. From the prevailing situation, yes, of course. Anyone with even the slightest sensitivity is disappointed by many things in Greece today. Let me say here, of course, that this is a global phenomenon. It is not endemic; it is epidemic. However, the situation in Greece over the past decades—not years—has been painful. I experienced it not as an observer or eyewitness, but as a sufferer, as a political being generally affected by the situation. The situation is still disappointing. We haven't closed the debt cycle; we've entered a new cycle. It's just that the issue has tired us all out and is no longer in the news. What's even more worrying is that we're not talking about it.
-Did you perhaps idealize it at first and were therefore disappointed over time?
No, I didn't have that problem. Sometimes, when someone loves Greece from afar, they cultivate certain impressions that don't quite correspond to reality. Before I came, I had no illusions, no overly idealized image in my head. I was completely open to suggestions and to reality. If there's anything that disappoints me, it's the same thing that could disappoint me in Spain or elsewhere: the injustice, the lack of social awareness, the arbitrariness, the selfishness.
-Aren't these phenomena more intense in Greece than in Spain?
I wouldn't say we're moving in diametrically opposed directions. Rather, we lead parallel lives in many respects. Unfortunately, these are two countries going through similar situations. OK, perhaps there's a somewhat more organized social response in Spain. But it's also a politically divided country with its contradictions and antagonisms.
– Is the source of Greekness over time in geography?
Yes, of course. Greek culture in the broadest sense of the word, not only from Classical Greece to the present day, but also from its deep roots, emerges and develops in the Aegean region, on the Hemos Peninsula, in Anatolia, on Crete and in this whole part of the Mediterranean. It is a culture deeply shaped by the geography and the space in which it develops. It is also historically strongly influenced and marked by the element of maritime navigation. It goes back at least 15,000 years. There is evidence of an obsidian trade in the Aegean in 12,000 BC. And there are islands inhabited since the Paleolithic era that humans could only reach by boat. Perhaps Homo Sapiens traveled to these places 150 or even 200,000 years ago. The element of navigation stems from the construction of buildings themselves. Perhaps navigational elements were more necessary than houses. So it's this combination of mountain and sea, light, and proximity between islands and coasts. Essentially, it's not a peninsula surrounded by the sea like Spain. It's the exact opposite: a sea surrounded by coasts and islands, a watery homeland. Of course, there are other factors, but the element of the sea is what truly distinguishes Greek culture.
–What other element do you consider crucial?
Very important and much older than we think is the element of writing, the love of literature. It runs as a recognizable constant through Greek culture from antiquity to the present. It is a culture of logos, and even of written logos. In the famous laws he first presented to the Athenians, Solon includes a declaration: "Let children learn to swim and to write/read." ("Let children learn to swim and to read/write.") The first thing children should learn is "no," that is, to sail (the ancient Greek word νειν means both swimming and sailing, my observation), to be at sea, and to engage in literature. I think no other civilization could be described so epigrammatically, with just two elements: the sea and the logos.
– Is that still true today?
Today, it is experiencing a more general crisis within itself. Like everywhere else in the world, there is a tendency towards globalization, in the sense of being integrated into a common patchwork of countries and cultures.
– Is this only bad?
It is not only bad, but it also neutralizes many of the characteristics that every culture traditionally has. That is, it puts traditional cultures in a position to be revised and redefined. I think that in this process, Greece has the foundations and guarantees to emerge strong and victorious. But of course, the country is still shaky. And it is being tested by all these challenges and influences that could even cause it to "derail." That is, to lose the identity and the good qualities that have followed it throughout its historical path and be replaced by other elements of lesser value that are considered "modern." It is a threat to which all civilizations on Earth face today.
– Is this even more intense in the case of Greece?
Better observed. Because there is a reference point: a vast and ancient civilization that has evolved over the centuries. It hasn't remained frozen in a distant time. This is where the value of a culture lies: in its ability to evolve and continually inspire others to create something new. Greek culture has always had this. But now I think it has reached a point where, if not decay, it is at least confused. It is more influenced than influencing. It is the state of ambiguity we spoke of before: everything tends toward assimilation. Greece, which has strong foundations and stable and strong role models to withstand these trends, does not. I'm not saying that its case is different from others. But the contrast is more recognizable and more intense—perhaps even more tragic—because there is a recognizable reference point throughout the centuries. It isn't just any civilization, an insignificant country that never had a voice of its own.
- To what do you attribute the fact that the influence of modern Greek literature abroad is not great enough?
For two reasons. One is the enormous volume of ancient Greek literature. The influence of ancient Greece on world civilization is so strong that it overshadows the influence of modern Greece. The burden is unbearable. However, there are people who have always been interested in what we call "common Greece," the common culture that unites us all, and this interest has also brought them closer to today's modern Greek—as in my case. The other reason may be the dynamism of modern Greek abroad, which is not as great as that of English, French, and Spanish. This has begun to change in the last two decades. With the firm exceptions of Kazantzakis, Seferis, Elytis, and earlier, Cavafy, modern Greek literature has recently found appeal among non-Greek speakers as well.
-Where does this shift in thinking come from?
It's primarily the result of the individual cultural mission of certain people who appreciated ancient Greece and had a genuine interest in modern Greece, becoming its "apostles" and ambassadors. I'm referring to passionate translators who take it personally and are dedicated to this cause. They not only identify works that might resonate, but they also translate, seek publishers, and often even seek out new readers. And all of this is often done on a voluntary and unpaid basis. Thus, in recent years, we've witnessed the spread of modern Greek literature. We've now reached a third phase, in which a readership abroad is beginning to cultivate itself that is interested in contemporary Greece and its writers, in the Greek "cause." I'm referring to the audience of writers like Petros Markaris and Thodoros Kallifatidis, who have enjoyed great success in Spain over the past five or six years.
- Why do you think the stereotypes about modern Greece and Greeks abroad are so deeply rooted?
These are some recognizable characteristics that the average tourist looks for. But I think there are people who have started coming here regularly because they love it in an experiential way, not just in a touristy mood. Somehow, they become regulars and begin to be interested not only in the Greece of stereotypes, but also in other aspects of it. After all, modern-day Greece has found its admirers.
–What is your opinion of Cyprus's literary output?
I haven't read much about it. Participating in the International Literature Festival gives me the opportunity to get to know its representatives. However, in my mind, Cyprus is still culturally one Greece and not something distinct. Perhaps elements of a separate identity can be recognized, some distinctive features. But I think what unites them is clearly stronger.
– As a citizen of two countries, how do you see the current direction of the European project?
It has long been proven that the European Union has failed to become the progressive and solidarity-based enterprise it was initially envisioned to be. It is not the Pan-Europe of Kudenhove-Kallergi, but the Europe of Walter Hallstein – with all that entails. That is, the Europe of Merkel, of Sarkozy, the Europe that managed to transform another power, which already existed de facto, into a de jure power.
- What do you mean?
We essentially created a legal system, a de jure system, to defend a de facto power and give it the legal protection it lacked. We created this structure and these mechanisms to legitimize a supranational policy as a cover for financial and ideological forces. That is, forces that already ruled de facto. This is not being done for the good of the peoples of Europe, but to protect the interests of this de facto power. We saw it with the so-called bailout packages. We found out firsthand that what rules is money, that power lies in the markets, not in governments—and certainly not in the people. Now, with this sad event with the war in the Middle East, we are seeing again what the priorities are and who is in charge. As we saw in the case of Ukraine. Unfortunately, it is a Europe that doesn't correspond to me at all. We have been living a great fraud for a long time.
–In your opinion, where is a united Europe heading?
This Europe is incompatible with democracy because the interests it represents are not the interests of its citizens. There is no such thing as a European citizen in the sense of a "political being," the true bearer of the nature of society. We are not "citizens" in Europe or in our own countries. We are building a Europe that is incompatible with the ethics of democracy and the values that should prevail. It is not a Europe of equality, access to goods, and justice. It is essentially a collusion that seeks to consolidate the interests of a few and exercise this power over the traditional barriers erected by national governments, national legislation, and the historic achievements of progress over the past centuries in the areas of employment, health, education, and so on. It even functions beyond the obstacles presented by democracy itself. It is moving in that direction, and at a rapid pace.
-Do you think it's correctable?
A few decades ago, the situation wasn't so obvious. But when I analyze the course of the last 15 to 20 years—everything we've experienced with the bailouts, and when I see who's really in charge, what the agenda is, and what interests are at stake—I don't think we can have any illusions anymore. If we really want something to change, we need a reconstitution of the United Nations and a reconstitution of a united Europe on a completely different basis. To get to the values that really matter to us and that must be defended, because now we're not defending values, only interests.
-Is there any chance of that happening?
There is, as long as there is awareness of the situation, as long as we can talk about these issues. As long as there is also the opportunity to comment—why are we losing that too? Freedom of expression is diminishing, as is the opportunity to dissent against the increasingly dominant monologue narrative. We've seen it with the pandemic, the wars, and the Ukraine issue. It's become difficult to disagree and avoid being ostracized and labeled a "conspiracy theorist." But eventually, reality sets in and reveals how things really are. There is hope, but you have to organize. As I mentioned before, it saddens me that the social and political organization of resistance in Greece is not yet consolidated. We have become aware of many things because we have suffered a lot and ultimately understood a lot. But when it comes to organized resistance against the logic of the "one-way street," we haven't made much progress.
-What era do you think we live in?
A blatant and threatening era of the erosion of concepts. Boundaries are blurring, and there is general confusion. Some, for example, have once again seized the opportunity to speak of a war between civilizations. But the only war is the war of civilization—written with capital letters—against barbarism. Everything else is a pretext to set people against each other and to defend interests instead of defending civilization.
"Eleuthera", 3.12.2023
Kommentare