Zaman-mekan kavramının mimarlığa etkileri
Affects of space-time concept on architecture
Yazar: TUTKU SEVİNÇ
Danışman: DOÇ. DR. İPEK AKPINAR
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı / Mimari Tasarım Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2013
Konu: Mimarlık = Architecture

Özet:
Bu çalışma, informel yerleşimlerle zaman-mekan kavramını buluşturmak suretiyle yeni mimarlıkları görünür kılmak amacındadır. İnformel süreçler esasen mimarlık üretiminin bir alternatifi olarak değil, kaçınılmaz bir parçası, yönü olarak görülmelidir. Zaman-mekan kavramı bu düşünceyi anlamlandırmayı olanaklı kılar. Bu çerçevede yapılacak olan, mekanı zaman kavramı ile birlikte bir süreç, bir oluş(um) olarak tariflemek, tekil mekan, obje ile ilişkisi tanımlanmış olan Mimarlık Disiplini ve meslek insanı, müellif olarak Mimar yerine mimarlık edimi ile hareket eden mimarın zamanmekan ile ilişkisini kurmak, tariflenilen zaman-mekan kavramının örnekler üzerinden farklı açılımlarını ortaya koymak olacaktır. Zaman-mekan kavramı, değişim, hareket, çokluk, entropi, oluş, ilişkisellik gibi kavramlar yardımıyla açılacaktır. Hareket, zaman ve mekanda tanımlanır, zaman değişimlerle algılanır. Mekan kavramı gibi temsiliyetler üzerinden düşünmenin sonucu olan bir ve çok kavramları yerine zaman-mekan bir çokluklar dünyası olarak tariflenecektir. Öyleyse üretimlerini ve söylemlerini mekan kavramı üzerinden sürdüren Mimarlık Disiplini'nin zaman-mekan ile ilişkisi nedir? Zaman-mekan, bir disiplin ile ilişki kurabilir mi, yoksa buradan yeni mimarlık ürünleri ve yapma biçimleri keşfetme imkanı mı doğacaktır? Bu anlamda Mimarlık Disiplinine tabi olmayan mimarlık üreticilerine ve onların üretimlerine bakmak faydalı olacaktır. İnformel yerleşimler ve informel üretim süreçleri zaman-mekan kavramı ile mimarlık arasında bir bağ kurulmasını oldukça olanaklı kılmaktadır. Mimarlık Disiplininin söylemlerinin aksine, informel üretimler, geçici, bir yandan kollektif diğer yandan bireysel üretimler ve zamana dirençli olmayan yapılardır. Onlar sürekli bir inşa halidedirler. Bu inşa, hem fiziksel, hem de sosyal inşayı beraber kapsar ve yürütür. Bu durumda zaman-mekan bir mücadele alanı olarak tariflenir. Öte yandan, Mimarlık Disiplini gerçekten söylemlerini gerçekleştirebilmekte midir, yoksa söylemleri ile üretimleri farklılaşmakta mıdır? Eğer ayrı ayrı zaman ve mekan kavramları geçerliliğini yitirmiş, yerlerine tek bir bütün olarak zaman-mekan kavramıgelmişse, tüm mimarlar kaçınılmaz olarak zaman-mekanda üretim yapmakta ve onun tüm etkilerine kaçınılmaz olarak açık ve tabi olmaktadırlar. Karatani (2006) mimarlığın olumsal olduğunu ve herzaman yapanın kontrolünü aşan bir üretim olduğunu söyler. Bu olumsallık mimarı ve üretimini yıkan, ortadan kaldıran bir olgu değil, onu bağlam, doğa ve diğer tüm aktörler ile ilişkisi bulunmayan bir üretim yapmaktan alıkoyan bir olgudur. Bu anlamda informel üreticilerin ve ürünlerinin Mimar'dan farklı olarak önemi, olumsallık ve entropi ile barışık bir üretim sürecine sahip olmalarıdır. Ancak burada sorulması gereken bir diğer soru formel ve informel üretim süreçlerinin birbirlerine karşıt ve alternatif iki üretim biçimi olup olmadığıdır? Bu anlamda formel ile informelin gündelik hayat içerisinde hangi alanlarda, hangi miktarlarda bütünleşebileceğini, beraber çalışabileceğini aramak önemli bir araştırma konusu olarak görünmektedir.

Abstract:
This work, aims to make visible new ways of doing and thinking architecture by bringing space-time concept and informal settlements together. Space-time concept is neighter found recently, nor assented by majority and accepted in daily life. It is still a high level philosophical issue. Nevertheless, it is very easy to find features of space-time concept in daily life. Although it is everywhere at anytime, it is easier to find it in informal processes which are not dependent to mainstream discourses. In this case, informal processes should not be seen as an alternative to the traditional ways of doing architecture, but an inevitable part of it. Space-time concept, makes possible to give a meaning to this comprehension. Therefore, in this work; space is going to be explained as a process, a being itself by the presence of time. It is going to be tried to find explainations to relations between architectural act (instead of Architectural Dicipline), architect (as an actor), performer (instead of Architect as author, authority) and space-time concepts. And these issues are going to be projected and argued due to three examples which are informal settlements or productions. First of all, there is going to be a recent description or explanation of space-time in a way subjective due to recent discussions because it is an endless issue which can easily have contact to any subject in history. In this sense, space-time concept, is going to be unpacked via its sub-concepts like; change, motion, multiplicity, entropy, being and relativity. Time can only be perceived by changes and changes occur by movements of matter in space-time. Motion can only be defined in both space and time. If so, time concept depends on movement and transformation of matter. Space (without time) is described by concepts of 'one and multiple'. According to these concepts for example two chairs can be identical to each other. So you can produce 'one' chair and duplicate the 'same' chair millions time more. Indeed, what you can duplicate may only be representation of the chair. The fact that you can never put two of these chairs in same space-time is proof of they are not the same. So, in this instance, Bergson produces the concept of 'multiplicity' instead of 'one and multiple'. He suggest us to comprehend whole world as multiplicities. In this case, how the relationship will established between space-time and Architectural Dicipline which has composed its production and discourse via space? Is it possible to establish a relation between space-time and a dicipline? Or will we discover new ways of doing and thinking architecture when we think architecture via space-time? In this case, looking at informal settlements and productions as architectural productions which does not involve to Architectural Dicipline may be useful. Informal settlements are in a struggle in space because of their illegality and in time because of their temporality. So anyhow they produce with terms of space-time. Thus, they make possible to discover the bond between architecture and space-time. In contrast with Architectural Dicipline, informal productions are temporary, in a manner individual and at the same time collective productions which are not resistant to time. They are aware of their productions are evanescent. They know that there is always a risk of demolishment of their settlement, but they never built to xvii let it collapse or be demolished. They are ready for struggle. They constantly build, in another words, building or settlement is always in a being process. It can also be described as a performance. This situation brings productions which are constantly changing, transforming and formless in time. This is one of the terms of multiplicity. At the same time, we can describe them in terms of multiplicity because, they are produced by a collective (not a hierarchical group) and sustained by every one of individuals of the collective again. And this endless construction contains physical and social constructions together in the same time. Exploring three chosen examples in specific will make more visible the bond we are looking for between space-time and architecture. First of these three examples is Kowloon Walled City from Hong Kong. It is a very compact, one huge settlement instead of consisting of singular buildings. And more importantly, in contrast of its field size, it is almost a complete city itself by its enormous variety of functions, spaces and human profiles. In this most crowded settlement in the world, struggle is a must in any moment of time and anywhere. People didn't live in good and healty conditions in this settlement, (on the other hand some of them were not complaining) but is this the fault of informality Second example is Torre David from Caracas, Venezuela. It is unexpectedly a vertical informal settlement. It is a squated unfinished skyscraper. This situation brings two main issues. First of these, it is located in the very center of the city. And secondly, any high building has some extra difficulties of building like circulation and infrastructure. The importance of this example is people who live in Torre David solve these architectural problems by being a collective. Besides, Torre David is not a complete informal production, but an informal production on a formal production and formal again. So the question is if formel and informal productions can work together? Third example is Dalyans from Tekirdağ, Turkey. With this example there is going to be more chance to focus on the product itself as an informal architecture and production process. In this sense, production processes and relationship between the producer and the product are going to be examined. Another issue which makes these informal buildings important for this research is the relationship of these buildings with nature. Is the building act has to be against nature or is there a chance for mankind to build with nature? If space and time concepts are not valid anymore seperately, and space-time exists instead, than it means that any architect has to produce in space-time and any architectural production is open to the all affects of space-time. Even if Architect encircled by whole doctrines of the dicipline, he/she still causes discoveries in space-time consciously or unconsciously while producing architecture. Karatani said that architecture is contingent and it is a production which always go beyond the control of the producer. In this case, the importance of informal producers, different from Architects, that they produce harmoniously with these facts. In addition, there is a question needs to be asked; does formal and informal production processes opposite or alternative to each other? In this sense, it may be a good research question that in which areas and proportions in daily life formal and informal can be combined? As a result, comprehension of space-time affect and change almost everything we know, but maybe it affects architecture most. In a way, ways of doing architecture and architectural product has been changing tremendously in ages, on the other hand there are still things which stays almost same for ages. For sometime now, space-time has been making a shift on architecture. According to this shift architecture is not a product which stays still but is a being in time. And Architect is not producing 'Monuments' anymore, but maybe potentials. He/she is not 'The One' xviii but a catalyst. Informel settlements and productions are places which these already occur and visible.