Antik dönemden günümüze mimarlık kuramlarının estetik değer yönünden bir incelemesi
An analysis of architectural theory from antiquity to present in terms of aesthetic value
Yazar: TARIK EMRE KIRHALLI
Danışman: DR. ÖĞR. ÜYESİ RİFAT GÖKHAN KOÇYİĞİT
Mimar Sinan Güzel Sanatlar Üniversitesi / Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü / Mimarlık Ana Bilim Dalı / Bina Bilgisi Bilim Dalı
Derece: Yüksek Lisans, 2018
Konu: Mimarlık = Architecture

Özet:
Bu tezde, Antik dönemden günümüze ortaya konmuş estetik odaklı mimarlık kuramları estetik değer yönünden incelenmiştir. İnceleme, seçilmiş kuramsal metinlerin, yazıldıkları mimarlık ortamının, yer verdikleri değerlerin ve bu değerlerin ontolojik statülerinin ortaya konması ve karşılaştırılıp sınıflandırılmasıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir.
Tarihsel süreçte mimarlığın gittikçe özelleştiği görülmüştür. Diğer sanatlarla birlikte bir yapma faaliyeti olmaktan, sanat, pazarlama, mühendislik dalları gibi farklı meslek ve alanlarla irtibat halinde gerçekleştirilen bir yapılı çevre tasarlama faaliyetine evrilmiştir. Bu süreçte de, genel anlamda ve sanatlar arasındaki statüsü ile estetik popülerliği artmıştır. Bununla birlikte mimarlık, her durumda sosyal olaylarla iç içe olmuş, bazen onlarca belirlenmiş, bazen de onları belirlemiştir. Mimarlıktaki statü ve kapsam artışının mesleğin uygulayıcısı olan mimar figürünü de kapsadığı, onun da kozmik kuralların uygulayıcısı olan bir aracıdan, bir öncü, entelektüel ve sanatçı figüre dönüştüğü fark edilmiştir.
Değer kazanma/değerlendirilme şemalarının ise öznelleşme ve akılcılaşma doğrultusunda değiştiği görülmüştür. Değerlere, önce mimarlık ürününün fiziksel özellikleri, ardından ise mimarlık ürününün amacına uygunluğu, verimliliği üzerinden sahip olunmuştur. Bu yaklaşımları değer yargılamasının öznede doğan hisler üzerinden özne tarafından yapıldığı ve çeşitlendiği yaklaşımlar izlemiştir. Fiziksel ve işlevsel özelliklerle yargılar arasında kurulan belirlenimci ilişki zamanla zayıflamış, öznellik giderek artmıştır. Son olarak, değerlendirme mantığının özneler-arası niteliği doğrultusunda kültürden kültüre değiştiğinin bilincine varılmış ve estetik kaygı ekolojik, sosyal, teknolojik kaygılar karşısında önemini yitirmiştir. Bu çerçevede de estetik yargılamanın kuramsal ortamda temellendirilmesi giderek azalmıştır. Günümüzde, estetik yargılama uygulama alanında örtük bir şekilde yapılmaya devam edilmektedir.
Ontolojik anlamda da ilk olarak -Antik dönemde, Ortaçağda, Klasik anlayışın etkinliğini sürdürdüğü Rönesans'ta İtalya'da, 17-18. yüzyıllarda Fransa'da ve 18. yüzyılda Almanya'da-, zihinsel-mantıksal-düşünsel olarak kavranan, nesnelerin fiziksel nitelikleri üzerinden yansıtılmakla birlikte onlardan ve özneden bağımsız olarak var olan, aşkın, tanrısal bir varlık, töz veya ide statüsündeki değerlerle karşılaşılmıştır. 18. yüzyılla, varlığı özneye bağlı, duyusal ve duygusal olarak algılanan, hislere, tepkilere dayanan ya da yine zihinsel olarak kavranmakla birlikte kültür ve geleneğin ürünü olan his veya zihin durumu statüsündeki değerler ortaya çıkmıştır. Bu ikinci grup, ide statüsünün önemini yitirdiği 19. yüzyılla birlikte, kuramsal mimarlık alandaki tekil estetik değer konumu olarak kalmış, 20. yüzyılın ikinci yarısına kadar varlığını sürdürmüştür. Bu kapsamda, ontolojik anlamda da, bir dünyevileşme ve insancıllaşmanın gerçekleştiği sonucuna ulaşılmış, değerlendirmenin özneler-arası bir zeminde ve örtük bir şekilde sürdüğü günümüzde de insani boyutun korunduğu çıkarımı yapılmıştır.

Anahtar kelimeler: mimarlık, mimarlık kuramı, estetik, mimari estetik, estetik değer, estetik yargı

Abstract:
In this thesis, theoretical texts from the field of architecture which are concerned with the aesthetics of architecture, ranging from antiquity to present, are analyzed in terms of aesthetic value, in order to discover the changes and document the evolution of these values. The aim is to provide a deeper explanation and a classification from the gathered information.
Selection of the texts was made with the help of anthological texts. The selected texts, belonging to different historical periods, then analyzed from different perspectives, by using these three questions:
1.	From the standpoint of architectural culture, what is the historical and social background of the periods in which these values -and the texts containing them- emerged? Which changes occurred within these periods and how did these changes affected the values?
2.	Which aesthetic values are used, directly or indirectly, to convey the ideas covered by these texts, discourses? How aesthetic judgements are made by using these aesthetic values?
3.	What are the ontological statuses of the aesthetic values involved in these texts?
Before delving into the answering process of these questions, the concepts of "architectural theory" and "aesthetic value" are explained in a separate, informative chapter, in which an insight was given concerning the unavoidable subjectivity of the concept of architectural theory, making it inseparable from another theoretical concept, "discourse".
From the data collected and organized within this research scope:
1.	It is seen that, throughout the centuries, profession of architecture became more specialized. Meanwhile the status of architecture -in general and within the arts- and its aesthetic popularity increased: Changing from an activity of "making" analogous with the arts and crafts in the Antique Era, to an aspect of design of the built environment in close contact with different varieties of art, marketing and branches of engineering today. And in between: 
•	A "mechanical art" in Middle Ages 
•	A "liberal art" then science and then "fine art" with Renaissance and Enlightenment
•	A "spatial art", "the most important and holy" art and "an art closely related to science" in 19th century
•	"An art covering all arts", "an art which all arts serve" in 20th century
Ever related with, affected by or affecting the social environment within it exists.
This rise in status also covered its applicator, the architect: Changing him/her from an executor of cosmic rules -aesthetically, an ineffective, mediatory figure- a figure who
 
 knows the rules, technical qualities of building design (a classical role mostly remained intact due to the popularity of classical thought and culture within the western architecture), to a visionary/artist/intellectual, a leading figure in "modern" and "contemporary" society (20th and 21st centuries), proposing methods and solutions, implementing researches with other professionals to improve the society's living conditions. 
2.	On the other hand, the changes at the aesthetic value-gaining and aesthetic judgement processes are defined by increasing subjectivity and increasing importance of rationalist thought from Antique Era to present:
First, in a classical, "Vitruvian" scheme; architectural objects "gained" aesthetic values in accordance with how much they reflect mentioned values by following related guiding principles, concepts concerning physical attributes (proportions, forms and styles). This scheme re-appeared and got adopted more strictly in 16th century Italy as a result of the Renaissance ideal of resurrecting the classical past. This objective scheme resumed its existence throughout 17th century -especially in France, with subjective, inter-subjective modifications- with the continuing importance of the classical themes and culture within the western architectural theory, eventually losing its importance at the beginning of 19th century.
In a more rational approach, appeared in 18th century France, these aesthetic values are gained though a building's suitability to its function and its efficiency (smaller structural dimensions, longer spans, larger window openings resulting with a more spacious interior space; using logic as the one and only principle of design). In this approach it can be seen that the value is still gained through the accordance to some physical qualities but the main principle behind it is logical instead of cosmic-mythological. 
These schemes are followed by more subjective ones, appearing in European and American theoretical contexts in 18th, 19th and 20th centuries, at which the aesthetic judgement is "made" by the subject/observer. This judgement can be the result of several things:
a.	Sensations of the subject aroused; by the physical qualities of a product of architecture, by the sensations -resulting from the physical qualities of products of architecture- and by a building's suitability to its function
b.	Later in 19th century, in a more direct, psychological model, formal qualities of an architectural object as perceived by the observer.
The deterministic relationship between the aesthetic judgements and the physical qualities or functional appropriateness has weakened over time, resulting with even more subjectivity. The shared quality of some of these subjective judgement schemes, or their inter-subjectivity, can be named as a main theme of following times.
The emergence of the most recent stage of the aesthetic judgement process, which is still in effect today, dates back to the second half of the 20th century. At which, with increasing importance of ecological, social and technological developments, problems and concerns coupled with the realization and apparent appreciation of the inter-subjectivity of the aesthetic judgements; the notion of producing newer aesthetic judgement schemes or the need to ground these schemes on a theoretical basis has lost its charm, making way for the aesthetic judgements to be made implicitly in the field of architectural practice.
3.	Ontologically, four different types of aesthetic value statuses have been encountered between Antiquity and present: 
a.	Values which are substances; separate, independent -in some cases, divine- beings above the object plane, grasped mentally or logically through an object's (a building) intrinsic physical attributes
Values of this status (the value, notion of beauty), being a product of Platonian metaphysical though are first hinted in the writings of Vitruvius. Later, they eventually found their way to theoretical spotlight in Renaissance Italy with the adoption of a classical notion of architectural aesthetics which remained in existence in 17th and 18th century French and 18th century German theories, eventually losing its importance prior to 19th century. This loss of importance can be understood within a greater anti-metaphysical front developing since the 18th century in harmony with rationalist way of thinking and secularism in general.
b.	Values which are sensations; feelings that arise in subjects in relation to various physical characteristics of an object (a vista, a product of architecture, etc.)
Values of this status (notions of beauty, sublimity and picturesqueness) have first appeared in 18th century French and English theories, closely related with the English Empiricist thought in latter, continually appearing in architectural theories regarding aesthetic judgement until the second half of the 20th century. 
c.	Values which are reactions; neurological responses of subjects to the physical qualities of objects, a status of "lower" value compared to the sensations, due to it being a result of a more direct process, not requiring an intellectual understanding or the use logical thinking
Values of this status have appeared simultaneously with the previous status of "sensation", in the 18th century English architectural aesthetics and briefly mentioned without its proper architectural connections again, in 19th century German thought (judgement of beauty in Burke – 18th century and Nietzsche – 19th century).
d.	Values which are states of mind; which occur during the mind's process of relating ideas, free from both the physical qualities of objects and the sensations related to them; culturally ingrained, resulting in them being shared between different subjects of a society but differing from one society to another, meaning, an "inter-subjectivity"
Values belonging to this status have also appeared within 18th century English Empiricist thought (aesthetic judgement in Knight's theory).
In this context, it can be said that the ontological development in the medium of architectural theory went through a process of secularization and humanization, losing its divine properties among the way. Even now, today, in an environment which aesthetic judgements are made implicitly and inter-subjectively within the practice of architecture, closely related with and defined by multiple fields, inputs (social, environmental, technological, etc.), this humane aspect is still present.

Keywords: architecture, architectural theory, aesthetics, architectural aesthetics, aesthetic value, aesthetic judgement