Grafitinin Yer Oluşturucu Etkisi: İstanbul Karaköy Alt Geçit Örneği

Bu yazıda, sokak sanatı örneklerinden grafiti, yer oluşturma kavramı üzerinden ele alınmaktadır. Grafitinin, 1980’li yılların başında kentsel mekânlarda yayılan görselliği, sosyal ve mekânsal sorunları da beraberinde getirmiştir. Nedenselliği sürekli yenilenen, tür ve tarzlara ayrılarak gelişen grafitinin, mekânsal bağlamı da buna bağlı olarak değişkenlik göstermektedir. Bu nedenle; grafiti ve mekân etkileşimini, farklı disiplinlerin bakış açıları ile buluşturabilecek, grafitinin sosyal ve mekânsal boyutunun içinde barındırdığı insan ve mekân etkileşimini merkezine alan araştırmalara gereksinim artmaktadır. Yapılan bu çalışmanın amacı; kentsel mekân ve grafiti arasındaki çok yönlü etkileşimin, mekân ve kullanıcılarına yansıyan duygusal boyutlarını belirleyerek, grafitinin yer oluşturucu etkisini tartışmaktır. Çalışmada, yer oluşturma pratiği Etkileşim Üçgeni yönteminden (Triangulation Process) yararlanılarak; mekânsal uyarıcı etken (external stimulus) olarak, izinsiz grafiti örneklerinin (illegal graffiti) kentsel mekân ile olan etkileşimine odaklanılmaktadır. İstanbul’da grafitinin yoğun olarak bulunduğu Karaköy’ün merkezindeki Karaköy Alt Geçidi ve Çarşısında alan çalışması yapılmıştır. Araştırmanın gözlem süreci 36 aya (2015- 2018 yılları arası) yayılmakta olup, alanda yazılma-silinme ve tekrar yazılma döngüsü içinde, 54 farklı grafiti konfigürasyonu belirlenmiştir. Bu döngüsel durumdan mekân kullanıcılarına geçen yer duygusunun boyutları ile grafitinin mekânsal nitelikleri arasındaki etkileşimin yer oluşturucu etkisi, hazırlanan çalışma modelinden yararlanılarak ortaya konulmaktadır. Yapılan bu ç

Effect of Graffiti As Placemaker: Istanbul Karakoy Underpass Example

This research paper aims to discuss the spatial interaction of graffiti as unauthorized marking activity in public spaces. It proposes to clarify whyinteractions between graffiti and people in public spaces are important, and how graffiti evokes an external stimulus on people who see thesemarks on the surfaces of public spaces. In this article, the spatial effect of graffiti on the street is discussed through the concept of place-making.The importance of graffiti in public spaces began to be discussed in the early 1980s, and was considered t a kind of unauthorized street activityoften associated with vandalism. However, in the 2000s this changed slightly and graffiti also began to be considered as a profound actor inbringing vitality and increased sociability to the streets according to the qualities of place-making. This drastic change in seeing graffiti hasintensified the discussions about the new relationships between the concept of place-making and the motivations for graffiti writing in publicspaces. Therefore, a multidisciplinary approach is needed to examine the various interactions between people and public spaces over the socialand spatial effects of graffiti. Through a Qualitative Research approach based on a deeper understanding of social life, this paper focuses onthe interactions between graffiti and people in public spaces. The conceptual framework of the paper is based on Whyte’s Triangulation Processand the qualities of the sense of place that are related to place-making practice derived from the seminal literature of this work . Accordingly, acase study was completed via field work covering thirty-six months between 2015-2018. This fieldwork was conducted in the Karakoy Underpass,where Istanbul’s graffiti-covered surfaces are frequently noticed. During the observation period, fifty-four different graffiti configurations wereobserved in situ and collected as visual documentation using photo and video recordings. Additionally, during the interview period of the fieldwork, conversations using semi-structured questions were carried out with the pedestrians passing through, graffiti writers, and the shopkeepersin the Karakoy Underpass. In order to decompose the data collected from the fieldwork, a prototype “Cross Matrix Table” was designed to showthe multiple relationships between the spatial effect of graffiti and the triangulated interaction of public spaces. This Table also highlights thetriangulated position of graffiti as an external stimulus that connects with the people as actors of everyday urban flux in public spaces. This paper provides empirical insights on how the Triangulation Process reflects the social interactions in public spaces. Accordingly, this research paperincludes Qualitative Research steps of data collection and decomposes the findings with a suggested model “Cross Matrix Table” at the end ofthe study. The suggested “Cross Matrix Table” model with the decomposed data and case study demonstrates that there is an architectural needto investigate how everyday street art activities can reflect the qualities of the sense of place. This study not only enables graffiti to be seen as anactivity performed on the street, but also to arouse interest in the concept of triangulation itself

PDF

___

Arslan, R. ve Ökten, A. (1994). Araştırma yöntemleri. YTÜ Baskısı. Yıldız Teknik Üniversitesi.
Auge, M. (1995). From places to non-places. Non-places Introduction to an Antropology of Supermodernity (translated by John Howe) (1. baskı, s. 75–116). Verso Publishing.
Ayral, R. (2014). Duvarların dili: Grafiti/Street art. Duvarların dili: Grafiti/Street art-Language of the wall grafiti/Street art (s. 15–55). Pera Müzesi Yayını. https://www.peramuzesi.org.tr/ Sergi/Duvarlarin-Dili/163
Bell, P. A., Greene, T. C., Fisher, J. D. ve Baum, A. L. (2001). Environmental psychology. Environmental psychology (5. baskı). Harcourt College Publishers.
Carmona, M. (2019). Principles for public space design, planning to do better. Urban Design International, 24(1), 47–59. https://doi.org/10.1057/s41289-018-0070-3
Carmona, M., Heath, T., Oc, T. ve Tiesdell, S. (2003). The social dimension. Urban spaces-public places: The dimensions of urban design (1. baskı,s. 106–110). Architectural Press-Elsevier.
Carr, S., Francis, M., Rivlin, L. G. ve Stone, A. M. (2007). Needs in public ppace. M. Carmona; S. Tiesdall (Eds.), Urban design reader (1. baskı, s. 238–239). Architectural Press-Elsevier.
Cresswell, T. (1992). The crucial “where” of graffiti: A geographical analysis of reactions to graffiti in New York. Environment and Planning Society and Space, 10(3), 329–344. https://doi.org/10.1068/d100329
Cunha, C. V. (2017). Graffiti of love, peace and joy in the olympic city: Interfaces between politics, art and religion in rio 2016. Ciiecias Sociais Unisinos, 53(3), 499–507. https://doi. org/10.4013/csu.2017.53.3.10
Docuyanan, F. (2000). Governing graffiti in contested urban spaces. Legal Anthropology Review, 23(1), 103–121. https://doi. org/10.1525/pol.2000.23.1.103
Evans, G. (2016). Graffiti art and the city: From piece-making to place-making. J. I. Ross (Ed.), Routledge handbook of graffiti and street art (Routledge international handbooks) (s. 168–183). Routledge. https://www.routledge.com/ Routledge-Handbook-of-Graffiti-and-Street-Art/Ross/p/ book/9780367335977
Ferrell, J. (1995). Urban graffiti: Crime, control, and resistance. Youth & Society, 27(1), 73–92. https://doi. org/10.1177/0044118X95027001005
Gieryn, T. F. (2000). A space for place in sociology. Annual Review of Sociology, 26(1), 463–496. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.soc.26.1.463
Gottlieb, L. (2008). Graffiti art styles. L. Gottlieb (Ed.), Graffiti art styles: A classification system and theoretical analysisillustrated edition (1. baskı, s. 50–75). McFarland & Company. Hürriyet. (1965, Temmuz 6). “Karaköy Yeraltı Geçidi Törenle Hizmete Açıldı”. Hürriyet Gazetesi, 7. 1965
Jacobs, A. ve Appleyard, D. (1987). Toward an urban design manifesto. Journal of the American Planning Association, 53(1), 112–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/01944368708976642
Kent, F. (2019). Fred kent: Creating public spaces. University of California Television (UCTV); Helen Edison Lecture Series; Helen Edison Lecture Series. https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=fYqV-PEGHHc
Kirouac, M. (2018). Alleyways are the new art galleries in the U.S. culture trip. https://theculturetrip.com/north-america/ canada/articles/toronto-s-graffiti-war-art-or-vandalism/
Lachmann, R. (1988). Graffiti as career and ideology. American Journal of Sociology, 94(2), 229–250. https://doi. org/10.1086/228990 Lang, J. (1994). Urban design: The American experience. Functionalism revisited (1. baskı). Wiley.
Lefebvre, H. (1974). Mekânın üretimi (Çeviren: I. Ergüden) (2014). The production of space (2. baskı). Sel Yayıncılık.
Ley, D. ve Cybriwsky, R. (1974). Urban graffiti as territorial markers. Annals of the Association of American Geographers, 64(4), 491–505. https://www.jstor.org/stable/2569491
Lynch, K. (2010). Kent imgesi (Çeviren: İ. Başaran). The image of the city (1960) (s. 155–158). İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları.
Maslow, A. H. (2013). A theory of human motivation. A theory of human motivation (s. 382–383). Rough Draft Printing. Mass Appeal. (2016). Cornbread Lives. Mass Appeal. https:// www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXz_5TJbXr0
Mazumdara, S. ve Mazumdar, S. (2004). Religion and place attachment: A study of sacred places. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 24(1), 385–397. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. jenvp.2004.08.005
Neuman, W. L. (2014). Toplumsal araştırma yöntemleri; nitel ve nicel yaklaşımlar (Çeviren: S. Özge). Bilim ve araştırma (7. baskı, s. 19–20). Yayın Odası Yayınları.
Norberg-Schulz, C. (1980). Place. Genius loci: Towards a phenomenology of architecture (1. baskı, s. 8–15). Rizzoli Publishing. Patrick P. (2015). Banksy you are an acceptable level of threat and if you were not you would know about it. G. Shove (Ed.) (9. baskı). Carpet Bombing Culture.
Phillips, S. A. (2016). Deconstructing gang graffiti. J. I. Ross (Ed.), Routledge handbook of graffiti and street art (Routledge international handbooks) (1. baskı,s. 48–61). Rotledge. https:// www.routledge.com/Routledge-Handbook-of-Graffiti-andStreet-Art/Ross/p/book/9780367335977
PPS. (2008). What makes a successful project? Project for public spaces. https://www.pps.org/article/goodplaces
Punter, J. (2010). Design guidelines in American cities. M. Carmona, T. Heath, T. Oc, T. Tiesdel (Eds.), Public places-urban spaces (1. baskı, s. 98–99). Architectural Press-Elsevier. Relph, E. (1976). The essence of place. Place and placelessness (1. baskı, s. 29–42). Pion Limited.
Ross, J. (2016). How major urban centers on the United States responded to graffiti/street art. J. I. Ross (Ed.), Routledge handbook of graffiti and street art (Routledge international handbooks) (1. baskı, s. 393–404). Routledge.
Schneekloth, L. H. ve Shibley, R. G. (1995).The practice of placemaking. Placemaking the art and practice of building communities (s. 5–15). John Wiley and Sons.
Simmel, G. (2015). Kültürün artan trajedisi. G. Ritzer, J. Stephisky (Eds.), Çağdaş sosyoloji kuramları ve klasik kökleri (2. baskı, s. 44). De-Ki Basım Yayım.
Storey, J. (2014). Global post-modernism. Cultural theory and popular culture (6. baskı,s. 203–209). Routledge. https://doi. org/10.4324/9781315832968
Whyte, W. H. (1980a). The social life ofsmall urban spaces/Book. F. Kent (Ed.), The social life of small urban spaces (s. 10–16). Project for Public Spaces.
Whyte, W. H. (1980b). The social life of small urban spaces/Documentary. The social life of small urban spaces. Istanbul Salt Galata Araştırma Merkezi Video/Film Arşivi
Wilson, J. ve Kelling, G. (1982). The police and neighborhood safety. The Atlantic Monthly, 3, 29–38. http://www.theatlantic. com/doc/print/198203/broken-windows