“Siyasi/estetik gösterge” olarak kamusal alanda anıt ve heykel

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Türkiye

Monument and sculpture in public sphere, as “political and aesthetical signs”

This article is about the place and significance of monuments and sculptures in the public sphere since the Early Republican Period until today. The relationship between these objects and the city are discussed; where, their transformation; the connection between monument, sculpture and political preferences of governments; as well as their function, meaning and content in the eyes of the artist and the public, are discussed. Together with the representative objectives it takes, sculpture has played an important role in relation to discussions of the problem of ‘visibility’ and ‘representation’ as from the perspective of “art regardless of the public” and “art in the public domain”. This field comprises significant dynamics as regards the relationship it establishes with the medium of IT technologies, media and the internet, as well as those it establishes as per global and urban scales. From the perspective of daily practices, social, political and visual dimensions of the relationship sculpture has established with the public sphere and public place as an identified discipline have obviously changed by time. As one thinks about “art in the public sphere” in Turkey, primarily monuments and sculptures of Atatürk together with the Republican squares where they are seated come to mind. The project of creating a public domain, designed squares filled with monumental sculptures that were mostly financed by the state funds regularized in line with the ideological demands of the governments and local administrations played a major role. Parks and squares that were built within the framework of new urban ideal of the Early Republican Era were designed as the new public sphere. Art in the aforementioned domain meant “Gazi Sculptures” that were to be built everywhere, including even the smallest villages around Anatolia. As regards the embracement of the art of sculpture, the ideological need felt by the republican regime for monuments within the scope of modernization as a program played a significant role. The Movement for Monuments became an important element for the public visualisation and the adoption of principles signified by the six arrows of the Republican Peoples’ Party. During 1933-1945, the period which includes the Second World War, the cultural formation that became a source for the art of monument/sculpture became a monumental tool for political propoganda in Turkey as in Europe and the Soviets. For Atatürk, image management had to start from point zero and it meant a secular image freed from religion which symbolizes the futuristic revolutionary ideology and democracy of the Turkish Republic. In 1946, religion, secularism and tradition came to the foregorund as issues that played significant roles in determining agendas of political parties which were the main tools for competitive elections. During the rule of the Democratic Party from 1950 to 1960, in line with policies of the central government, the number of Atatürk sculptures decreased and buildings like touristic hotels, banks and malls gained momentum. Artistic works also became important for ornamentation of monumental structures. During the period, artists from various disciplines carried out cooperative works for creating time and space. This particular approach suggested existence of sculptures in cooperation with architecture rather than its possession of the squares as monuments. The same approach also helped architecture as architecture of synthesis or art while it transformed into a main monument. With the military coup of 1960, activities in relation to monuments increased for refreshing the memory of Atatürk and for reinforcing loyalty to the revolutions. From then onward, more monuments were built in the university campuses. After the coup de main in 1980 September and during the celebrations of the 100th birthday of Atatürk, even more monuments and sculptures of Atatürk were built. Atatürk monuments which were mostly financed by the state funds were regularized and directed by the ideological demands of the local administrations and governments. These became widespread at every province, town and village from the east of Turkey to the west. Today one can see many Atatürk sculptures at almost each and every province and town. The Parliament, university campuses that increased in number with YÖK (Council for Higher Education), schools, military compounds, war cemeteries, patios of public agencies are filled with those sculptures. Within the scope of competitions and projects launched by the municipalities of İstanbul and Ankara between 1970 and 1990, most urban sculptures that had been planned to get seated in the public domain were stolen or removed from their corresponding places. The nudity created by them was attacked, because of certain symbols such as the hammer and sickle; or due their abstract figures, they were disliked by certain political groups. They could not gain a spot in the public sphere. Not only the sculptures of Atatürk but any three dimensional work was in the sphere of vandalism. After the 1990s, as the variety of religious, historical and ethnical cultural identities and differences rendered as pluralisations increased, there was a need for monumental sculptures with political contents and presentations. After 2001 when the Justice and Development Party (AKP) came into power, sculptures became new elements at mosques and squares. Images became more diverse, and besides Atatürk, other Turkish figures such as the Ottoman sultans, viziers and admirals as well as Anatolian poets, logos of provinces (cock, cow, cotton, cherry, watermelon etc) as figures, took their place in the public domain. As elsewhere in the world, the modernisation project that includeed the ideal of creation of spaces with monuments had completed its era in Turkey. Today many artists and artistic initiatives push forward and question the public domain and public places whilst they discuss the meaning of three dimensional artistic creation that has considerably changed.

Keywords:

Turkey,

PDF

___

ADAL, H. Ş. (1936) Şehir ve Köyün Ulusal Kültürün Korunmasında ve Yenilik Hareketlerindeki Rolü, Yeni Türk Mecmuası, c: 4, s: 37; 17.
AKSOY, A. ve ERTÜRK, E., ed. (2007) Kamusal Alan ve Güncel Sanat/The Public Turn in Contemporary Art (Proje Kitabı/Project Book), İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, İstanbul.
Ali Süreyya (1934) Kemalist Türk Köyü, Karınca, n: 5, Birinci teşrin 1934; 16’dan aktaran Tuğluoğlu (2008); 173.
ALTAN, M. (2011) Heykeller Sevişir Mi?, Star, 10 Ocak; http://www. stargazete.com/yazar/mehmet-altan/heykeller-sevisir-mi-haber- 322379.htm (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
ANON. (1935) Halkevleri Öğreneği, Türk Mecmuası, 1935, c: 3, n: 36; 2273, 2278-9.
ANON. (1955) Plastik Sanatlar Sentezi Arne Jacobsen-Fernand Leger-İlhan Koman, Arkitekt, s: 282; 152.
ANON. (1958) Milletlerarası Brüksel Sergisi, Arkitekt, c: 26, s: 288; 111.
ANON. (1963) Sanatlar Birleşimi, Yeni İnsan, Nisan-Mayıs, s: 4-5; 20-1.
ANON. (1988) Kuzgun Acar’ın Yapıtı Hurda Fiyatına Satıldı, Milliyet, 23 Ağustos 1988; 10.
ANON (2005a). Boğaza Fatihin Heykeli Dikilecek!; http://www. turkforum.net/52111-bogaza-fatihin-heykeli-dikilecek.html (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
ANON. (2005b) İstanbul’a Fatih Sultan Mehmet anıtı; http://www. cnnturk.com/2005/kultur.sanat/diger/02/04/istanbula.fatih.sultan. mehmet.aniti/70275.0/index.html (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
ANON. (2006) Tünel ve artık orada olmayan ‘Açık Sütun’, 14 Temmuz; http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/Blog.aspx?BlogNo=2097 (Erişim 1 Haziran 2011).
ANON. (2009a), Cumhuriyet pastasından Atatürk heykeli çıktı, 30 Ekim; http://www.ihlassondakika.com/haberdetay2.php?id=216165 (Erişim 1 Haziran 2011).
ANON. (2009b), Pastadan Atatürk çıktı! Cumhuriyet Resepsiyonu’nda ilginç an... , 30 Ekim; http://www.kanaldhaber.com.tr/HaberDetay. aspx?haberid=53806&catid=34 (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
ANON. (2005c) Fatih İçin Referandum, Vatan, 25.Mayıs; http://www.yapi. com.tr/Haberler/fatih-icin-referandum_27467.html (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010)
ANON. (2010a) Heykeltraş Mehmet Aksoy: İnsanlık Anıtı’nın Yapımı Devam Etmeli, 29 Ocak 2010; http://www.haberler.com/heykeltrasmehmet aksoy-insanlik-aniti-nin-yapimi-haberi/ (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010)
ANON. (2010b) Kars’taki İnsanlık Anıtı’nı Yıkmayan Başkan Hakkında Suç Duyurusu; http://www.dha.com.tr/n.php?n=insanlik-anitiniyikmayan- baskan-hakkinda-suc-duyurusu--2010-03-24 (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010)
ANON. (2010c) MHP Kars İl Başkanı Aktaş ”İnsanlık Anıtı” Nedeniyle Suç Duyurusunda Bulundu; http://bolge.25haber.com/2010/03/mhp-kars- il-baskani-aktas-insanlik-aniti-nedeniyle-suc-duyurusundabulundu/ (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010)
AR, (1934) Halkevi Nedir? Oraya Kimler Girer ve Nasıl Girilir?, Yeni Türk Mecmuası, c: 1, n: 22; 1504-7.
ARTUN, A., ed. (1994) Çevre-Sanat, (Ankara Büyükşehir Belediyesi Çevresel Sanat Etkinlikleri Kataloğu), Sevna Aygün (Metinler), Ankara.
BARA, H. (1955a) ‘Grup Espas’: Plastik Sanatların Sentezi, Arkitekt, s: 279; 21, 24.
BARA, H. (1955b) Grup Espas, Arkitekt, s: 280; 79.
BARA, H. (1956) Mimari Polikromi Hakkında Notlar, Arkitekt, s: 284; 66.
BAY, Y. (2011) Siyasiler sanat yapıtını yok edemez, Milliyet, 12 Ocak; http://www.arkitera.com/h59981-siyasiler-sanat-yapitini-yokedemez. html (Erişim: 10 Haziran 2011)
BERBEROĞLU, E. (2011) Heykele Ucube Dedim, Hürriyet, 13 Ocak; http:// www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/16750441.asp (Erişim: 10 Haziran 2011)
BERK, N. (1958) Çağdaş Resmimizde Eski Gelenekler, AÜ İlâhiyat Fakültesi, Türk ve İsâm Sanatları Tarihi Enstitüsü Yıllık Araştırmalar Dergisi, Ankara, Ajans-Türk Matbaası, c: II, s: 1957;193 (ayrı basım).
BUCK-MORSS, S. (2004) Rüya Âlemi ve Felaket (Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East and West, Massachusetts of Technology, 2000), çev. T. Birkan, Metis Yayınları, İstanbul.
BUMİN, K. Hayırsız Ada’yı ‘Korkunç Ada’ yapma girişimi”, Yeni Şafak, 11 Ocak 2005; http://forum.arkitera.com/archive/index.php/t-4068. html (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010)
BURKE, P. (2003) Afişten Heykele Minyatürden Fotoğrafa Tarihin Görgü Tanıkları (Eyewitnessing: The Uses of Images as Historical Evidence, London, Reaktion Books, 2001), çev. Z. Yelçe, Kitapyayınevi, İstanbul.
CENGİZKAN, A. (2002) Modernin Saati, Mimarlar Derneği Yayını: 9, Ankara.
CAUSEY, A. (1998) Sculpture since 1945, Oxford University Press, New York.
Culture Shock: Flashpoints: Visual Arts: Richard Serra’s Tilted Arc; http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/cultureshock/flashpoints/visualarts/ tiltedarc_a.html (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
DOĞAN, Y. (2009) İnsanlık Anıtı siyaset satırında, Hürriyet, 10 Mart; http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/11172379.asp (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010).
DURHAN, S. (2006a) Türkiye Cumhuriyeti’nin Uluslararası Dünya Fuarlarına Katılımı (1930-2000), Arredamento Mimarlık, Ocak, Sa: 187, s: 94-108, İstanbul.
DURHAN, S. (2006b). Malzeme, Kimlik, Temsiliyet: Uluslararası Brüksel Dünya Fuarı (1958) Türkiye Pavyonu, 3. Ulusal Yapı Malzemeleri Kongresi, İTÜ Yayını, İstanbul.
DÜNDAR, C. (2011) Ucube Zihniyet, Milliyet, 9 Ocak; http:// www.milliyet.com.tr/ucube-zihniyet/can-dundar/guncel/ yazardetay/09.01.2011/1336909/default.htm (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
ELİBAL, G. (1973) Atatürk ve Resim Heykel, İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, İstanbul.
ERDEM, T. (2011) Ucube! Ne Yapmalı!, Radikal, 10 Ocak; http://www. radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalYazar&ArticleID=10358 31&Yazar=TARHAN%20ERDEM&Date=11.06.2011&CategoryID=99 (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
ERDER, C. (1975) Tarihi Çevre Bilinci, ODTÜ Üniversitesi Mimarlık Fakültesi Yayını, Ankara.
GEZER, H. (1984) Cumhuriyet Dönemi Türk Heykeli, Türkiye İş Bankası Kültür Yayınları, Ankara.
GÜMÜŞ, K. (2005) Fetihçi İdeoloji ve Sanat, Radikal, 31 Mayıs; http:// www.radikal.com.tr/haber.php?haberno=154311 (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010).
HABERMAS, J. (2009) Kamusallığın Yapısal Dönüşümü (Strukturwandel der Öffentlichkeit), çev. M. Sancar-T. Bora, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul.
HAKAN, A. (2011) Başbakan’ın helkele ‘ucube’ deme hakkı, Hürriyet, 10 Ocak; http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/16722819_p.asp (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
İNÖNÜ, İ. (1934) İsmet Paşa Hazretlerinin Nutukları, Yeni Türk Mecmuası, 1934, c: 1, s: 18; 1313-16.
KIVANÇ, H. (1958) Brüksel Yolculuğuna Hazırlanan Eserler, Milliyet, 21 Şubat , s: 3.
KRAUSS, R. E. (2002) Daniel Buren, ArtForum, s: Aralık.
KÜÇÜKŞAHİN, Ş. (2011) Sorun sadece ‘ucube’ heykel değil, Hürriyet, 10 Ocak; http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/yazarlar/16723261_p.asp (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011)
Necip Ali (1934) Necip Ali Beyin Nutukları”, Yeni Türk Mecmuası, c: 1, s: 18; 1322-3.
ORAL, Z. (1979) Kotil, Brüksel Dünya Fuarı’nda Altın Madalya Alan Panoları Bulmak İçin Günlerce Uğraştı, Milliyet, 7 Ekim, s: 7.
ORAL, Z. (2002) Tükürük Cezasının Düşündürdükleri; http://www. zeyneporal.com/yazilar/2002/29haziran2002.htm
Richard Serra, “Biography of Postmodernist Sculptor in Sheet Metal”, Encyclopedia of Irish and World Art, http://www.visual-arts-cork. com/sculpture/richard-serra.htm (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
SARGIN, G. A. (2005) Ötekinin Gözüyle Ankara’yı Kurmak: Sovyet Propaganda Filmlerinde Devrimci Bellek Kaybı ve Anımsama, Özcan Altaban’a Armağan ‘Cumhuriyet’in Ankara’sı’, der. T. Şenyapılı, ODTÜ Yayıncılık, Ankara.
SPENDER, S. (1953) Modernizmin Ölümü”, Vatan’ın İlâvesi, 18 Temmuz, s: 3.
ŞEHSUVAROĞLU, H. Y. (1958) Brüksel Sergisinde Türkiye, Cumhuriyet, 18 Haziran, s: 3.
ŞENOL, G. (2005a) Fatih Sultan Mehmet Heykeli’nin Dönüştürecekleri, 11Temmuz; http://arkitera.com/news.php?action=displayNewsIte m&ID=3009 (Erişim 10 Mayıs 2010).
ŞENOL, G. (2005b) Bin Akıllının Çıkaramadığı Taş, 13 Temmuz; http:// www.arkitera.com/news.php?ID=3064&action=displayNewsItem (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
TANY ELİ, U. (1997) Söyleşi : Utarit İzgi.
http://arkiv.arkitera.com/ko18357-soylesi-utarit-izgi (Erişim: 21 Mart 2010).
TUĞLUOĞLU, F. (2008) Erken Cumhuriyet Döneminde Köyleri Kalkındırma ya da “İdeal Cumhuriyet Köyü” Projesi, CTAD Cumhuriyet Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve Inkılâp Tarihi Enstitüsü, c: 4, Güz 2008, s: 8; 163- 85.
TÜKEL, Milliyet, 20 Ocak 1963, s. 3.
TÜRENÇ, T. (2011) O dizi kesilecek o heykel yıkılacak, Hürriyet, 10 Ocak; http://hurarsiv.hurriyet.com.tr/goster/haber. aspx?id=16723302&tarih=2011-01-10 (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
UZUN, H. (2008) 1951 Yılında Kırşehir’de Atatürk Büstüne Saldırı Olayı ve Tepkiler, CTAD Cumhuriyet Tarihi Araştırmaları Dergisi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Atatürk İlkeleri ve Inkılâp Tarihi Enstitüsü, c: 4, Güz 2008, s: 8; 188-9.
YASA YAMAN, Z. (2007) “Quintette à Ankara/Ankara’da Beşli” Sergisi Üzerine Düşünceler, Arredamento Mimarlık, Haziran 2007, s: 203; 34-42.
YASA YAMAN, Z. (2002) Cumhuriyet’in İdeolojik Anlamı Olarak Anıt ve Heykel (1923- 1950), Sanat Dünyamız, 2002, Kış 82; 155-71.
YASA YAMAN, Z. (1996) Yurt Gezileri ve Sergileri ya da ‘Mektepten Memlekete Dönüş’, Toplumbilim, Haziran 1996, s: 4; 35-52.
YASA YAMAN, Z. (1996) 1950’li Yılların Sanat Ortamı ve ‘Temsil Sorunu’, Toplum ve Bilim, Kış, s: 79; 94-137.
YENER, T. –H. ÖRNEKOĞLU (2009), Cumhuriyet Resepsiyonu’nda pastadan Atatürk çıktı, Hürriyet, 30 Ekim; http://www.hurriyet. com.tr/gundem/12812762.asp (Erişim: 10 Mayıs 2010).
YEŞİLKAYA, N. G. (1999) Halkevleri: İdeoloji ve Mimarlık, İletişim Yayınevi, İstanbul.
YILMAZ, A. N. (2006) Mekân Estetiği: ‘Grup Espas’ ve Türk Sanıtındaki Yansımaları, Cey Sanat, Kasım/Aralık, s: 13; 18-22.
YILMAZ, A. N. (2007) Mekân Estetiği: ‘Grup Espas’ ve Türk Sanatındaki Yansımaları, Cey Sanat, Nisan/Mayıs, s:15; 36-42.
ZURCHER, E. J. (1995) Modernleşen Türkiye’nin Tarihi (Turkey, A Modern History), çev. Y. S. Gönen, İletişim Yayınları, İstanbul.
www.tankutoktem.com (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/ theunknownpoliticalprisoner/default.shtm (Erişim: 7 Şubat 2010).
http://edition.cnn.com/WORLD/9803/31/fringe/let.them.eat.lenin/ index.html (Erişim: 07 Şubat 2010).
http://www.buca.bel.tr/00300-179-071019.php (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
http://wowturkey.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=24766 (Erişim: 1 Haziran 2011).
http://remzisavas.tripod.com/giris/giris.htm (Erişim: 7 Şubat 2010).
http://blog.milliyet.com.tr/Blog.aspx?BlogNo=206140 (Erişim: 7 Şubat 2010).
http://eniyion.hurriyet.com.tr/default.aspx?mekanID=1264&siraID=3512 &hID=10598915&mKat=0 (Erişim : 1 Haziran 2011).
http://www.tate.org.uk/britain/exhibitions/ theunknownpoliticalprisoner/default.shtm (Erişim: 10.02.2010)