Mekandaki görünmez: Ötekinin kaydını tutan mimarlık üzerine bir araştırma
The invisible in space: A study on architecture keeping record of the other
Yazar: ZEYNEP ÇABUK
Danışman: PROF. DR. AYŞE ŞENTÜRER
İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi / Lisansüstü Eğitim Enstitüsü / Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı / Mimari Tasarım Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2024
Konu: Mimarlık = Architecture ; Sosyoloji = Sociology
Dizin: Mimari eleştiri = Architectural critism ; Sosyal eleştiri = Social criticism

Özet:
Bu araştırma "kayıt" kavramını zıttı olan "kayıtsızlık" üzerinden; mimarlık-sosyoloji arakesitinde tartışmaya açmayı hedefler. Kayıtsızlık; kaydın yaygın kullanılan anlamı olan arşivleme işlevinin dışında "önemseyen", "ilgilenen" ve "dikkate alan" anlamlarını ortaya çıkarır. Çalışmanın başlangıç noktası mimarlığın büyük anlatıların dışarıda bıraktığı, ötekileştirilip görünmezleştirilenleri kaydetme potansiyelidir. Bu potaniyele sahip olan mimarlık, statükonun yüzeyini yaptığı kayıtlar aracılığıyla kaldırıp, Görünmezleri ortaya çıkarmaktadır.
Araştırma üç fazda ilerler: birinci faz kayıtsız kalınanlar; ikinci faz kaydetmek, son faz ise kaydedileni okumak üzerinedir. Kayıtsız kalınanlar üç kavram ile açılır: Öteki, Yabancı ve Görünmez. Bu çalışmada ele alınan Öteki, postkolonyal çerçevede ele alınan Öteki ile paraleldir. Yabancı kavramı Öteki'ye mekansal bir katman eklerken, Görünmez ise tarihsel bir boyut kazandırır. Kayıtsız kalınanların ardından "kayıtsız kalan" açılmalıdır: Arşivin kaydeden, meşrulaştıran ve evrenselleştirme süreciyle paralel işleyen güçsüzleştirme ve görünmezleştirme süreçleri ve bu süreçlerin mekanla bağlantıları tartışılır. Ötekinin kaydını yapan mimarlığı inceleyen bu çalışma kapsamında kayıt dışında kalan mimarlık da tartışmaya dahil olmalıdır: Ötekini kaydeden mimarlığın ne olduğu, mimarlığın disipliner sınırlarında dolaşan tartışmalar üzerinden araştırılır, Ötekini kaydeden mimarlığın da "Öteki Mimarlık" hatta "Öteki Mimarlıklar" olduğu sonucuyla birlikte tezin Colomina (1996)'dan yola çıkarak bir öncülünden söz edilmelidir: Mekan da yazı, çizim, fotoğraf veya film gibi okunabilir/araştırılabilir bir mecradır. Öteki Mimarlıklar, sözkonusu mecralarda Ötekiliğin kaydını tutabilmektedir.
Araştırmanın ikinci fazı kayıtsız kalınanı kaydetmek üzerinedir, kaydetmeye dair daha teknik meseleler üzerinde durulur: Öteki nasıl kaydedilebilir, Ötekini kaydederken mimarlığın pozisyonu nedir; hepsinden önce kayıt nedir? Tezdeki kapsamını açıklamak üzere kaydın yaygın olmayan anlam ve özellikleri üzerinde durulur; bunlar "kaydın görünmezleri" olarak adlandırılmıştır. Kayıt tutmanın araştırmada ilk ele alınacak olan özelliği bu araştırmanın ilgisi olan kaydın ilgilenme, dikkate alma ve önemseme anlamlarıdır. Bu anlam şehirleri ve mimarlığı ötekileşmenin coğrafyaları olarak görüp bunları derslerinde keşfe çıkan Sharóne Tomer üzerinden incelenir: Tomer, mimarlığın üretimi sırasında potansiyel olarak marjinalize edilen görünmez figürleri ortaya çıkarmayı hedefler ve tarihsel kayıtlardan yararlanır (2020). Kaydın dikkate değer bir başka özelliği ise temelde her zaman geleceğe yönelik bir kaygıyla yapılıyor olmasıdır; yaygın olarak geçmişle ilişkilendirilen kayıt tutma, aslında geleceğe yönlendirilmiş bir girişimdir. İlgilenen ve dikkate alan bir özne ya da araç olarak mimarlığın Ötekinin kaydını tutarken nasıl bir pozisyonda bulunduğu sorusu, Muybridge'in sinemanın geliştirilmesinde bir mil taşı kabul edilen dörtnala koşan atlar serisi (1878) analojisiyle açıklanır. Koşan atın hareketlerini sekanslar halinde gösteren bu seride atın tüm ayaklarının yerden kesilip "uçtuğu" anlar da yer alır. Kamera atın tamamen havada olduğu anı yakalayabilir ancak kaydı yapmakta olan göz, atın en az bir ayağının daima yerde olduğu yanılgısındadır: Kamera, gözün yapamadığı bir şey yapmaktadır (Silverman, 1996). Benzer şekilde, mimarlığı kayıt aracı olarak kullanan bir gözün asla yakalayamayacağı ötekilik hallerini mimarlık yakalayabilir. Burada kayıt yapan mimarlığın, Ötekini ortaya çıkartırken bir araçtan çok bir özne olduğu fikri güçlenir. Mimarlığın mekanda ötekini nasıl kaydettiği sorusundan önce farklı mecralarda kaydedilen ötekilik örnekleri incelenecektir. 
Araştırmanın üçüncü fazı kaydedileni okumak üzerinedir; Ötekini açığa çıkartan kaydın egemenin kaydından farklılıkları olması gerektiği aşikardır. Burada tezin ikinci öncülünden söz edilebilir: Görünmezi açığa çıkartan kaydın eleştirel bir arka planı olmalıdır. Bu arka plan; eleştirinin iki temel özelliğini barındırır: İlki, eleştirinin daima statükoyu ele alıyor olması, ikincisi ise eleştirinin her zaman daha iyi bir gelecek idealiyle yapılıyor olmasıdır. Mimarlığın eleştiriyle birlikte kazandığı katmanlılık, toplumsal konuları dert edinme potansiyelidir ve onun Ötekilerle ilgilenmesini sağlar. Bu bölümde bu iki temel özelliğine sahip kayıt örnekleri tartışılacaktır. Tartışılam ilk kayıt örnekleri Filarete'nin Risalesi ve tarihteki ilk filmler olan aktüalite film örnekleridir. Bu örneklerde araştırılan bu iki temel özellik, mekanda okunacak olan eleştirel kayıtlarda da mevcuttur.
Mimarlığın Ötekini mekanda nasıl kaydettiği son bölümde tartışılır. Bunun için yaygın olarak başvurulan bir yöntem olarak ötekinin kurduğu bir mekanı incelemek yerine Ötekinin tamamen "Görünmez" olduğu bir mekan ele alınır: Ötekinin nasıl "Öteki" haline getirildiği; mekanı çevreleyen söylem, mekanın materyal özellikleri ve mekan üzerine oluşturulan eleştirel söylem çarpıştırılarak araştırılır. Kaydın anlamını karşıtı olan "kayıtsızlık" üzerinden anlamamız gibi; öteki de onu şekillendiren, sınırlarını belirleyen hakim olan üzerinden okunabilirdir. Mekan aracılığıyla ötekileştirilme süreçlerine ışık tutmak, bir filmin negatifinden okuma yapar gibi; orada "olmayan"ı belgelemek, anlamak, ilgilenmek üzerine bir iz sürme işine girişmek araştırmada "kaydı ters yüz etmek" olarak isimlendirilmiştir. Bu okuma işlemi için Bourdieu'nün geliştirdiği simgesel iktidar kuramı çerçevesinde açtığı "alan" ve "yanlış tanıma" kavramlarından yararlanılır. Mimarlığın ötekileştirme süreçleri içerisindeki rollerini okumak ve dışlanma sürecinin farklı mecralarda izini sürebilmek için üzerine çok sayıda kayıt olan bir mega proje örneği olarak Galataport Projesi incelenmiştir. 
Günümüzde mimarlık, çeşitli karmaşık süreçlerin içerisindeki rolleri ile Ötekilerin; eşitsizliğin, ırk ve toplumsal cinsiyet temelli ayrımcılığın oluşturulmasında işbirliği yapmaktadır. Tam da bu sebepten ötekiliğin kaydını yapma potansiyelini içinde barındırır. Dahası, mimarlığın "kayıtsız kalma" amacıyla araçsallaştırıldığı bir ortamda, bu eylemlerin kendileri birer kayıt haline gelmektedir.

Abstract:
This research discusses the concept of "record" at the architecture-sociology intersection with its aspects of "caring," "being interested," and "taking into account" outside of its archival function, which is the commonly used meaning of record keeping. The starting point of the study is the potential of architecture to record what is unseen; silenced by grand narratives, explicitly or implicitly marginalized and made invisible. Architecture has this potential removes the surface of the status quo through these records and reveals the Invisibles.
The research proceeds in three phases: the first phase is about what is left unrecorded, the second phase is about recording, and the last phase is about surveying what is recorded. Those who are unrecorded are elaborated with three concepts: Other, Stranger and Invisible. The Other discussed in this study is parallel to the Other discussed in the Postcolonial framework. While the concept of the Stranger adds a spatial layer to the Other, the Invisible adds a historical dimension. The concept of Stranger belongs to Sara Ahmed (2000). This concept is significant because it gives the Other a spatial feature: However, its most critical feature is that it reveals an overlooked aspect of the Other; it is the connection of capital and otherness. The Stranger has become a Stranger not because he is actually a "foreigner", but because he has gone through a process of alienation. Another concept is Invisible. This concept is coined within the scope of the thesis and is based on Michelle Trouillot's (1995) classification of how human societies are included in history. Trouillot points out that only those who are aware of their own voice are historically subjects; this is explained in this study as the Other being Invisible when it is not recorded. In addition to these three concepts, the thesis also considers non-human agents as Others. Animals and plants are also agents that the dominant discourse remain indifferent and ignores. After those that are unrecorded, the one who does not record or who is indeferrent should be investigated. The processes of disempowerment and invisibilization, which operate in parallel with the recording, legitimizing and universalization process of the archive and the connections of these processes with space are discussed. As the thesis deals with the invisibilizing nature of the archive; Zeynep Sayın's (2017) concept of an-archive is a meaningful term in this sense. The tracing feature of the an-archive parallels with the architecture that keeps the record of the Other. At this stage, the issue of what architecture is that records the Other is emphasized; it is also the architecture that the archive excludes: This leads to the conclusion that it is also the other architecture. The other architecture; records the other through different media such as film, photography, writing and space. What constitutes architecture that records the other is explored through discussions that circulate within the disciplinary boundaries of architecture.
In the phase of recording what remains unrecorded, more technical issues regarding recording are focused on: How can the Other be recorded, what is the position of the architecture while recording the Other; first of all, what is the record keeping? The first feature of record keeping that will be discussed in the research is the taking into account, caring and considering implications of record which are the main interests. These meanings are examined through Sharóne Tomer, who sees cities and architecture as geographies of marginalization and explores them in her classes: Tomer aims to reveal invisible figures that are potentially marginalized during the production of architecture and uses historical records (2020). Another noteworthy feature of recording is that it is fundamentally done with a concern for the future. Record keeping, commonly associated with the past, is actually an attempt directed towards the future. The question of the position of Architecture as a subject or tool that cares and takes into account while keeping the record of the Other is explained with the analogy of Muybridge's The Horse in Motion series (1878), which is considered a milestone in the development of cinema. This series, which shows the movements of a running horse in sequences, also includes moments when all of the horse's feet are off the ground and the horse "flies". The camera may capture the moment when the horse is completely in the air, but the eye that is recording it is mistaken for the horse to always have at least one foot on the ground: The camera is doing something that the eye cannot do (Silverman, 1996). In the same way, architecture can capture states of otherness that an eye that uses architecture as a recording tool can never capture. Here, the idea that the architecture that records is a subject rather than a tool while revealing the other is strengthened. Before the question of how architecture records the other, examples of otherness recorded in different mediums will be examined.
The third phase of the research is about surveying what is recorded. After all, it is obvious that the record that reveals the other must have differences from the record of the dominant. The difference in question can be sought in the critical background of the record that reveals the other. The connection of the record with criticism is established as it is a record of the Other. The characteristics of criticism brought from its historical roots, focusing on the status quo and aiming to transform the status quo into a better future, are also present in the records of otherness. This partnership, which is a premise of the thesis, is independent of time and medium as a set of rules. This commonality is explored by examining two examples of recordings of otherness made in different media, at different times. In both examples, architecture is included - albeit implicitly - as a contributing factor to recording.. The layeredness that architecture gains with criticism is its potential to concern itself with social issues and enables it to care about Others. In this section, examples of records with these two basic features will be discussed. These recording examples are Filarete's Treatise and actuality films, which are the first films in history.
At this stage, the literature research progressed on the axis of criticism that enables architecture to deal with social issues. The axis in question forms a basis for interdisciplinary studies in architecture with social sciences. While researching architecture's concern with social issues and criticism, it would be meaningful to talk about the capitalism-architecture connection established by Manfredo Tafuri, who played a role in the construction of critical architectural theory in the 1970s, with the foundations of thought from the Frankfurt School. Tafuri defines architectural theory as a critique of ideology that is not limited to the formal analysis of independent objects and designs, but discusses architecture as the hiding/obscuring of social conditions (Fischer, 2012). This definition has similarities with one of the main concerns of the thesis, the instrumentalization of architecture in processes of marginalization and the issue of keeping records during this instrumentalization. Stating that architectural theory and practice should be separated from each other by sharp boundaries, Tafuri attributes this to the inevitable instrumentalization of any production within the capitalist order (Tafuri, 1976). Therefore, it is impossible to think of architectural practice and architects separately from the economic and political context; architecture cooperates in reproducing the structures of the dominant system over and over again. Kim Dovey (2016) explains a similar issue as architecture's "silent complicity": According to him, thinking that architecture is neutral or impartial reduces the questionability of architecture and ensures that it continues to work in harmony with the system elements. While Tafuri states that architecture can never remain outside the dominant political and economic framework, mentioning that architecture is being distanced from social issues day by day confirms his views. Kiel Moe (2021) mentions that social layers are excluded from today's architecture and that architecture is reduced to highly specialized technical details, and that architects are neutralized more than ever before in history; he explains that their perception of the whole is lost while solving the details of the details. Although all of these may cause a negative connotation by pointing out that architecture is a tool that produces the same social structures over and over again, the existence of architecture as a tool actually makes it a good source of data. According to the approach of the thesis, the main question here is how to benefit from this data. The thesis tries to develop a method in respect to it.
The record in space can be read in its entirety through the reading of multiple interrelated records in which architecture exists in different mediums such as space and discourse. Hilde Heynen, who explains how space and social layers relate to each other and how this is handled with three different models, talks about the "space as stage" model (2012). In the model in question, social components and space mutually influence each other, and both are active. As a matter of fact, social scientists who continue their research with this understanding accept this interaction and still do not benefit from representations produced by architects and city planners such as plans, maps or even diagrams of space, but try to analyze and explain the material features they attach great importance to solely with discourse: Heynen criticizes this and considers it a weakness (2012). Therefore, the new method to be developed to read the record of the other in space should examine social layers; While doing this, it should also benefit from the research and representation methods of spatial disciplines. At this stage, new concepts are needed. Right here, the concepts introduced by Pierre Bourdieu, who said that the main task of sociology is to reveal the implicit means of domination in society, can be mentioned. With reference to Kim Dovey's views, Bourdieu's concepts are used to decipher the processes of marginalization and invisibility (2016).
The method developed within the scope of the thesis aims to examine a space where the Other is completely invisible, instead of examining a space that is produced/marginalized by the Other, as in otherness and space based researches carried out up to the present. For this reason, the method is called "turning the record upside down": Trying to understand what comes out of a mould by examining the mould itself; a tracing process is undertaken to document, understand and deal with what is not there. Bourdieu's concept of "field" is used to decipher the actors and actions that have different positions and perspectives during the production of space, just like deciphering the players and rules of a game. While doing this, the concepts of social capital, cultural capital and symbolic capital, which are types of capital that Bourdieu lists other than economic capital, are included in the method as concepts that enable the production process of architecture to be questioned. At the same time, the concepts of symbolic power, misrecognition and interest, developed by Bourdieu within the framework of theory of symbolic power, are used to reveal how the Other is made invisible, excluded and marginalized throughout a process and how this is legitimized. While the "field" of the project is deciphered with the concepts in question, the spatial features of the project are collided with the discursive records in which this field is read. Consequently, through the medium of space, it becomes possible to observe the process which Other turns into the Invisible. As an example to be reading the records upside down, Galataport was chosen as a very controversial mega project today. The reason why Galataport was chosen is that it is at the center of a current debate: There are sharp positions as well as there is a lot of data on this project, which means there are a lot of records to collide.
The thesis aims to make visible the background of a current and universal contradiction. It is concerned with revealing what goes on behind the curtain, illuminating hidden processes and making them understandable. It aims to create a kind of "conceptual filter" with the method it has developed. With this filter, the trace of the Other should become visible in the space where it is excluded. According to Dovey, today in the field of architecture criticism is reduced to "booing" and "cheerleading" (2016). This reduction draw architecture away from social issues. With the critical method it has developed, the thesis also investigates the possibility of architectural criticism saying something different from the good and bad binary about architecture of today.