The Visual Artists and Art Theorists Association – phytorio has condemned the withdrawal of a publication from Cyprus’s pavilion at the Venice Architecture Biennale 2025 as censorship, following government intervention that the group described as belonging to “authoritarian regimes, not democratic cultural frameworks”.
Deputy Culture Minister Dr Vasiliki Kassianidou ordered the immediate withdrawal after discovering the material was not approved by authorities and contained references she deemed “historically inaccurate” and “diplomatically damaging”. The controversy centres on descriptions of the 1974 Turkish invasion and the Cyprus problem.
The book, published in Greek Cypriot, Turkish Cypriot and English, and displayed at Cyprus’s pavilion “To The Stones” exhibition, includes passages describing “forced population exchange” taking place in 1974 and refers to “conflicts” rather than a Turkish invasion. The publication describes how “the war, through its dramatic and violent explosive brutality, led to forced population exchange, where the majority of Greek Cypriots were displaced from north to south, and the majority of Turkish Cypriots from south to north.”
The controversy emerged after DIKO MP Pavlos Mylonas, chairman of the House Education Committee, raised “serious issues of executive control over what receives funding” following coverage in Phileleftheros. Mylonas has scheduled the matter for parliamentary discussion, describing the book as containing “historical inaccuracies that raise serious questions about executive oversight of funded projects”.
“The fact that the book, translated into English, circulates abroad makes this issue dangerous for our national cause,” Mylonas said, confirming the Deputy Culture Minister will be called to explain the matter to parliament.
Kassianidou stated: “I state unequivocally that, as an individual and as Deputy Minister, I fundamentally disagree with these references.” She confirmed she was not presented with the publication beforehand and only learned of the content when attending the exhibition opening.
In a statement on Thursday, phytorio stated it “expresses deep concern and sorrow” over the decision and declared “unconditional solidarity with the Cyprus pavilion team”. The organisation raised fundamental questions about government oversight, asking: “When does institutional power cease to function as a guarantor of cultural freedom and transform into a mechanism of suppression?”
Phrases taken out of context, phytorio says
The association noted that “isolated phrases were extracted from the broader content of the publication and presented out of context” but emphasised concerns about “the centralised and controlling approach to managing Cyprus’s cultural representation at an international institution”.
“This practice implies that every participation must conform to predetermined narratives and acceptable interpretations, thus undermining creative independence,” the statement read.
The material did not undergo ministry review as it represented the artistic team’s proposal selected through a competition organised by the Cyprus Scientific and Technical Chamber (ETEK) and the Cyprus Architects Association. Kassianidou noted that “similar issues occurred last year” and announced intentions to implement “corrective measures” for state representation, given that participation costs hundreds of thousands of euros in public funding.
Historical context
An estimated 200,000 Greek Cypriots (40% of the Greek Cypriot population) and more than 50,000 Turkish Cypriots were displaced from their homes during the Turkish invasion of 1974. Turkish Cypriots had begun abandoning rural areas and mixed villages to move into enclaves during intercommunal violence in 1963-1964.
Democratic values at stake
The arts group argued that state intervention raises critical questions about “the limits of the Deputy Ministry of Culture’s intervention in international artistic events”. They emphasised that “artists and curators owe and must be able to express their positions and works, even when they carry political charge or cause discomfort”.
“Critical thinking does not flourish in a climate of control or intimidation,” the statement continued. “Contemporary art, like every form of reflective creation, has a duty to maintain its independence, to pose questions, to provoke dialogue and to contribute to the formation of historical consciousness through multiple perspectives.”
The organisation called on “institutions, curators and cultural bodies to rise to the occasion, to defend artistic freedom and to reject every form of censorship, whether direct or indirect”.
The statement concluded: “Democracy is tested and judged by how it handles disagreement, not by how it silences it.”
Read more:
