Warsaw can exist in two parallel images: a summer one, dominated by greenery, and a winter one, in which architectural structures and urban interventions come to the fore. Çiğdem Cörek Öztaş – an urban planner, researcher and specialist in urban policy, who has been living in the Polish capital for over two years – has sent us her observations on Warsaw .
Are cities merely physical structures where various functions converge, or are they mental images shaped by people’s experiences, perceptions and memories, carrying different meanings for each individual? Kevin Lynch analyses this question in detail in his book *The Image of the City*. Lynch explains the concept of the image of the city as the way in which people perceive space and form a mental image of it. According to him, cities are not understood haphazardly – observers create mental maps and an image of the city, interpreting them through elements such as boundaries, paths, neighbourhoods, nodes and landmarks. This set of concepts provides a solid foundation for understanding how the image of a city is formed. However, if we broaden this perspective slightly, we can discern yet another layer that influences the formation of this image: urban surfaces.
At its most basic level, a city can be understood as a system of surfaces. These surfaces not only define physical boundaries – they also create a visual backdrop that guides perception. For example, whether a road is covered in grass or stone affects how clearly it is perceived; the character of a neighbourhood can be revealed through the materials used; a square can be emphasised by a different surface design.
For this reason, urban surfaces play a significant role as a complementary layer, supporting the five main elements defined by Lynch and contributing to the image of the city.
The same city, different images
So can the same city exist in people’s minds in more than one version? And what role do urban spaces play in shaping this image? For me, the answer is yes. Especially when I think of Warsaw, two distinct images come to mind: Warsaw in summer and Warsaw in winter. The summer image – when the city turns green and trees and plants take over the space – is completely different from the winter one, which begins as the leaves fall. In summer, the city is defined by a dense network of greenery covering almost all open spaces. Trees with large leaves obscure the surroundings so thoroughly that it is sometimes difficult to make out not only the façades, but the entire buildings. In winter, the situation is reversed. The trees shed their leaves, and other urban features suddenly become visible. Greenery gives way to greys, browns and more subdued tones; the sense of emptiness becomes more pronounced.
Of course, explaining this transformation solely through the city’s greenery would be incomplete. The city’s planning approach and its architectural character also play a key role in shaping this picture. In particular, the symmetrical layout, wide avenues and the monumental architectural style developed during the Socialist Realism period (1949–1956) mean that in winter – when the greenery disappears – the impression of a grey expanse spreading across the city becomes even more pronounced.
At this point, another layer of surface emerges, filling the winter voids and giving the city a new character: wall paintings, murals and graffiti.
Colour on the walls
Contemporary graffiti and street art practices in Warsaw are not a new phenomenon – their roots stretch back through the city’s history. The ‘Anchor’ symbol, which during the Second World War became a sign of resistance against the occupation, can be seen as an early form of intervention in the urban landscape. Spreading rapidly across the city’s walls, this symbol is not merely a mark – it creates a shared meaning, a sense of belonging and an image of resistance. Repeated in various parts of the city, it transcends individual action and becomes part of the collective memory.
Similarly, sgraffito has long shaped Warsaw’s walls. It developed during the post-war reconstruction period, when the aesthetics of façades were being redefined. This technique (which involves scraping away layers of plaster) was both economical and durable, which is why it became widespread in residential and public buildings from the 1950s and 1960s, adding a distinctive visual layer to the city.
See also:
Zrobili to świetnie! Odnowione sgraffito na ścianie kamienicy w Warszawie
Following the collapse of the rigid and uniform architectural language of the socialist era, more diverse and colourful forms of expression began to appear in the city. Today, graffiti spontaneously brings the city’s invisible voices to the surface, whilst more structured mural practices (ranging from small-scale interventions to large-scale wall compositions) transform surfaces into powerful visual symbols, almost like new landmarks. In recent years, mural projects – particularly on the remaining grey buildings – have gained significant importance in Warsaw and attracted widespread interest from residents. These projects not only bring colour to the city, but also change the way space is perceived, creating new, clearly defined public spaces and memorable parts of the city where there was previously a sense of vagueness.
These interventions do not merely alter a single building or street – they have the power to transform the perception of entire neighbourhoods and estates. For example, Praga North, long regarded as one of the city’s most neglected areas, has recently gained a new identity thanks to the work of artists. The murals do not merely add an aesthetic dimension here – they tell stories about the local past, everyday life and the social fabric. Similarly, graphic interventions and murals along the Vistula Boulevards are transforming the waterfront from a mere thoroughfare into a public space that people experience and remember.
A city that can be rewritten
Warsaw reminds us of this: a city is not a fixed form, but a surface on which visibility is constantly shifting. On this surface, no single element remains permanently at the centre – nature, architecture and interventions take turns, meaning that the city can be interpreted in different ways at different times. In this sense, the city becomes less a designed whole and more an experience that is constantly being reconstructed depending on which layer happens to be visible at any given moment. The same space may disappear beneath a green canopy or be redefined by walls. It is not the city itself that changes – it is the surface that speaks at any given moment.
Therefore, the question is no longer about the definition of the city itself, but about what we actually perceive when trying to understand it – the architecture, or that layer of the surface which comes to the fore at any given moment.
_
Çiğdem Cörek Öztaş – urban planner, researcher and specialist in urban policy. An urban planner with a master’s degree in social policy and a PhD on sustainable urbanism. For many years, she worked in international civil society organisations and development institutions in Istanbul, focusing on urban development and social policy. She currently works as an independent researcher, focusing on cities, urban life and social change, which she analyses through research and observation. She also supports institutions and organisations in preparing policy briefs and strategic documents on sustainable urban development.
See also: City | Warsaw | Urban Planning | Recommended | Squares, Public Spaces, Parks | whiteMAD on Instagram
