Bucharest 2006: a photo essay

Like any place in a state of transition, Romania is a fascinating place. On the verge of EU membership, still recovering from the ravages of a megalomaniac dictator, with almost vanished memories of a brief prosperity, and with reminders in the most unlikely places of turn of the (19th) century elegance, this is a country which takes more than a while to get to grips with. Romania is an isolated Latin outpost, surrounded by Slavs and Balkans. Although claims of being the closest thing to a living relict of the Roman Empire are a bit far-fetched, it is certainly the case that the Romanian language is closer to Latin than is modern Italian. Culturally however Romania shows a closer proximity to France than to Italy. So all in all a very rich blend, with a very strong identity.

Part of the Cantacuzino Palace (George Enescu museum)

Photographically speaking Romania is a treasure trove. Recently I had the opportunity to spend a few hours wandering around the centre of Bucharest, a city of many layers and many contrasts. In the early 1900s, Bucharest emulated and rivaled Paris. Buildings of all sizes, from palaces to family homes, show a strong Art Nouveau influence, although most are in a poor state of repair. Following the Second World War, Romania fell under the Soviet influence, and was severely punished for supporting Hitler's Germany. A period of Stalinisation followed, and the periphery of Bucharest, as well as most parts of Romania, is dominated by Soviet-style tower blocks.

A typical unreconstructed tower block facade

Later, in the earlier period of Ceausecu's dominion, things were considerably more relaxed, and Romania was verging on non-aligned status. Unfortunately, towards the 1980s Ceausecu fell under Chinese influence and basically went mad. Vast swathes of Romanian countryside were collectivised, and large parts of historic Bucharest were demolished to make way for his megalomaniac plans to build a communist megapolis. Following the somewhat fabricated revolution in 1989, the country become a happy hunting ground for home-grown and foreign mafiosi (collectively known as the "Romanian government"), with the resulting creation of a small number of ultra-rich and a large number of very poor. In 2006, things seem to be improving, slowly, although it is extremely debatable how beneficial EU membership will be to the non-elite.

The inevitable face of progress

There are layers, upon layers, upon layers in Bucharest. The country style houses of Sector 1, the restored palatial villas in the diplomatic areas, Ceausescu's civic center, remnants of communist-era shopfronts, elegant arcades, leafy, friendly parks, all mingling in with decaying communist tower blocks, and ultra-modern glass and concrete edifices. Every corner hides a surprise, for example a busy market full of the sort of fruit and vegetables that seem too tasty, too good, and especially far too cheap, to exist in Europe in 2006.

Europe, from the market

Even the civic centre, with the unbelievable Casa Poporului (House of the People) as its focal point, starts to become acceptable, attractive even, with the numerous fountains restored to full working order, and the wide sidewalks line with leafy trees. The neoclassical Athenaeum is genuinely beautiful. Photographic opportunities are everywhere, and tourists are still thin on the ground. People are, by and large, extremely friendly and warm, although there are some aggressive beggars around. However, the number of hustlers and touts seems to have reduced a lot over the past few years.

New use for old Style

Bucharest is changing very fast. Time will tell what happens next, if it retains its quirky identity or becomes a Eurostandard metropolis, but either way this period of transition will not last. No visit to Romania should end with Bucharest - you could spend years exploring this wonderful country - but it is a good place to start.

Exchange. For better or for worse ?