The relationship between Athens and the Parthenon is complex. As a matter of fact, Greek identity is torn between a glorious past, the decadence of the present and a future without any horizon (which might actually be blocked by the Parthenon itself). It therefore becomes schizophrenic when facing the greatness of the edifice, which is hard to live with: “She [our city] didn’t deserve Him, she wasn’t worthy of Him”; “it was the city which killed Him”. We can therefore assume that the Athenians themselves had been willing to destroy this symbol, which they were unable to affront. Indeed, they constantly refer to it, but have trouble living in the shadow of their glorious past. It seems that the Athenians are ashamed of what they have become: “whatever we do, we will never be able to be worthy of such a masterpiece” (p. 43).

The literary tradition which tends to depict the destruction of the Parthenon may be explained by this schizophrenia. The Parthenon is a cause for pride, an attraction for mass tourism and a painful reminder of lost greatness, a symbol lead astray by the failures of European construction. Ch. K., wanted to put an end to this internal conflict and liberate the country from a fascination which only leads to the cult of a past too significant and glorious to live with.