Tez (Yüksek Lisans) -- İstanbul Teknik Üniversitesi, Fen Bilimleri Enstitüsü, 2012Thesis (M.Sc.) -- İstanbul Technical University, Institute of Science and Technology, 2012Tez çalışmasını oluşturan her bölüm, Mimari Tasarım, İnsan ve Varlık konuları etrafında belirli bir tasarım farkındalığı uyandırma endişesindedirler. Bölümler kendi içlerinde kuramsal bir altyapıda bağlıdırlar ve kendi bağlamlarında iç içedirler. Ne var ki bu tez çalışması, kendi başına kaldığında da tezin özsel içeriğini temsil edebilecek bölümlerin biraraya gelmesinden oluşan mimari bir düşün yolculuğudur. Bilgi, Düşünce ve Mimari Biçim adlı bölümde; insanın doğa içinde doğa-dışı kalmışlığı, onun varlıksal bir eksikliği, insanın düşünmesi, onun varlıksal bir fazlalığıdır. Ona dair elde edilen bir bilginin geçerliliği, onun işine yaradığı ve ona hizmet getirdiği sürece anlam kazanır ve kullanılabilir mantıklı bilgi dizinleri oluşurlar. Oluşan bilgi türleri mimarlığın biçimine matematiğin temel formları ile hâkim olur, bu bugün de böyledir. Gelgelelim insanoğlu, elde ettiği bilgi türünün biçimi değiştirip durmuş olması pratiğinden yola çıkarak, mimarlığın hakiki formlarının ve belki de formculuğunun bugünkü algılanışı ve geçerliliği üzerine yeniden düşünmesi gerekir. Hayatı boyunca değişip durmuş olan insanın, değişmeyen statik mimarlık anıtlarına yuva, barınak, ev demiş olması, tartışılması ve açıklığa kavuşturulması gereken temel mesele olarak algılanmıştır. Kendi Kendine Modernizm adlı bölüme göre; insanlık tarihi geçirdiği dönemler ve özellikleri sonucunda modernizm akımı ve onun yarattığı dönemi evrenselci bir dilde yaşamaya başlar. Modernizmin varolma biçimi, kılık değiştirerek ya da yeniden dirilerek kendi kendisini var etmek şeklinde olduğu için, bugün bazı kuramcılar yaşadığımız dönemin hala modernizm olduğuna dikkat çekerler. Modernizm öyle bir kısır döngü tanımlamıştır ki, adeta Escher’in merdivenleri gibi dönüp dolaşılan yer hep aynı zaman ve mekanda gibidir. Bilimin insan yaşamına getirdiği ratio(oran) kavramı veya seri üretim döneminin insanın barınağı olan evini de seri olarak üretmiş olması ile bu üretim biçiminin evrenselci bir tekdüzelikte mimarlık sektörüne fonksiyonel altlık oluşturagelmiş olması, kuşkusuz çoğu araştırmacıyı, modernizm, onun kökü, değişik biçim ve kullanışları ile döneminin baskın sonuçlarını yeniden gözden geçirmeye yönlendiriyor. Kamusal Mekânın Ümitsizliği çalışmasında; günümüzde kamusal mekânlar, farklı toplulukların bir araya gelerek birbirlerinin çeşitliliğinden beslendikleri alanlar, değişik ekonomik ve kültürel oluşumlara ait kişilerin karşılaşmalarından doğacak deneyimlere ev sahipliği yapan yerler olma özelliklerini kaybetmeye başlamışlardır. Bu inceleme, kentsel kamu mekânlarının çağımızda terk edilmiş, işlevini yitirmiş boş alanlar gibi anlaşılmalarına etken olan konular ile güncel kent kültürü sonucunda oluşan ‘ayrışmış toplumların kapalı kamusal mekânları’ algısını anlama ve açıklama çabasındadır. İki Film Birden: Yapılaşma ve ‘Modern’in Görüntüsü incelemesi; sinematografik düzlemde eleştirel-sanatsal bir kurgu ve atmosfere sahip Tony Takitani ve Durgun Yaşam filmleri aracılığı ile, Modern ve Yapılaşma kavramlarını gözlemeye ve analiz etmeye yöneliktir. Bireyin modern mekândaki yalnızsallığı ya da modernizm manifestosunun insan olma durumuna ve onun mekânsal anlayışına biçtiği kader, Tony Takitani analizinde ‘modern’in birebir görüntülerinin yorumlandığı kareler sergilenerek tartışılmaktadır. Durgun yaşamda ise ‘güncel olmayan’, geçmişlerini arayan karakterler ile artık geçmişte kalacak bir memleket birleşimi algılanırlar. Filmde iki nostaljik öykü, ‘geçmiş bir kent’in şimdiki zamanını, güncellenmeyen bölgenin geçmişte kalmış kent yaşamında gözler önüne sererler. ‘Varlık’ı İdrak Etmek ve ‘Varlık Mimarlığı’nı Düşünmek analizi; ‘Varlık’ denen o şeyi, özellikleri ile kendi başına, değişik başlıklar altında, başka söyleyiş-adlandırma biçimleriyle günümüz felsefesinde açığa çıkarmayı hedefleyen bu inceleme, hedefe yaklaştığında mimarlığa dair belki de ilk defa dile getirilen bir kavramın olabilirliğini sorgulamaya ve anlamlandırmaya başlar: “Varlık Mimarlığı” dediği, kaynağını ‘özgür olmaya mahkum’ bir hümanizmada (insancılık) tasarlayan, bu dünyada etkin ve aktif olan, hareket eden, değişimi, dönüşümü; antagonist inşaatların organik artikülasyonlarını yaşayan bir organizmaymışçasına kendi yaşantısı içinde var ettiği, doğurduğu, gerektirdiği ‘canlı’ yaşama organlarını ve sistemlerini..Each part that constitutes the thesis work is into a worry of awakening some design awareness around the subjects of Architectural Design, Human and Being. These parts are connected among themselves through a theoretical substructure and are one within the other into their contexts. However, this thesis work is a journey of architectural thought constituted by the togetherness of these parts that can represent the thesis’s essential context even they remain by themselves. This thesis work called An Architectural Journey In-between ‘Human’ And ‘Being’, huts the critical thought networks that is develeoped against architecture’s ‘architecture-for-human’ design understanding. With its simplest expression, the whole of works and searches started to be written for the reason that how the reality of, ‘human has developed and thought the architectural design only for-himself’, still can continue into our ages, could not be perceived. The insensitiveness to this subject brings some sort of positionings to mind felt into architectural designs: It can be thought as what thesis wants to declare as statement of architectural awareness is the meaning and context traffic among the ‘user’ that is interpreted as the target mass into produced architectural designs, ‘used’ as the place that is enabling target’s extent and ‘designer’ who is indicating the target by identifying networks or distances between the user and the used. The hope of this work is being able to expose a vision where has been perceived and affirmed ‘sharer’ or ‘shared’ design world instead of ‘user’ or ‘used’ into reader’s mind about positionings at the end of thesis. The indication types of interpretations and analyses built in researches also needs to be perceived as an awareness process on that the emerging periods of architectural products we design is not being developed and so built by human’s existential being and paradoxes; but by his determined identities, gifted egos and systematized individualisms. It can be said this thesis work emerged for opening discussions about the egocentric center of static and monumental architectural understanding that has only been produced by the reference of human, and for discussing design frames towards the Being in the name of new spatial perceptions and interpretations that includes the human to be able to transpose the essence of architecture into perceived world. Into the first part called Knowledge, Thought and Architectural Form, human’s outsideness-of-nature into the nature is his onthological deficiency, human’s think is his onthological redundancy. Validity of knowledge obtained as to him gains meaning as long as it serves and is useful; and logical usable knowledge folders occur. Occurred knowledge types dominate the form of architecture with the basic forms of mathemathics, which still is today. However, man needs to rethink on today’s perception and validity of architecture’s real forms and maybe of its formalism, by departing from the practice that the knowledge type man obtain has all been into a position of changing the form. What perceived, as the basic issue needs to be discussed and be exposed is that the human who has been transforming ever after, has said shelter, house to unchanging static architectural monuments. As for the part called Modernism By Itself, history of humanity starts to live modernism movement and the age it created, into a universalist langue as the result of periods and their properties it had passed. Today some theorists point out that our lived age is still modernism for the reason that modernism’s existent formation is formed by disguising or re-awakening to exist itself. Into the research called Despair Of Public Space; nowadays, the public spaces has started to lose their properties such as being the spaces of different communities feed each other by coming together and the spaces where host the experiences which will be created by the encounters of people who belong to different economic and cultural formations. This research aims firstly to understand and express the topics that are the factors of urban public spaces’ understanding as if they are abandoned, empty places that lost their functions. Two Films Together: The Images of Building and Modern investigation is to watch and analyse the concepts of building and modern through the films Tony Takitani and Still Life that have critical-artistic fictions and atmospheres in cinematographic plane. Individual’s solitariness into modern space or the destiny that modernism manifest chose for the attitude of being of human and his spatial understanding, is discussed into Tony Takitani analyse by being presented the frames that has been commented on the exact images of ‘modern’. In Still Life, ‘uncurrent’ characters that are looking for their pasts and a land that will remain in the past synthesis is perceived. Into film, two nostalgic story set out the present time of ‘one past city’ in region’s not being updated city life that has remained in the past. When we come to Perceiving The ‘Being’ And Thinking The ‘Architecture Of Being’, which intends to expose that ‘Being’ thing into today’s philosophy with its own characteristics itself, with other sayings-classifications, and into different headlines, starts to question and explain the probability of one concept that might be very newly expressed relating to architecture, when the research approaches to the intension: A concept that this investigation says it “Architecture of Being”, which imagines its source into a humanism ‘condemned to be free’, a source which is active, is moving, which are ‘live’ Living Organs and Formations that have been existing, rebirthing and necessitating the organic articulations of antagonistic structures as if they are living organisms into its whole. How kind of spatial response are the one-sided, rational and definitely being-for-human manifests, which are into a definite non-philosophical view and which can’t have the space’s essential quality feel, of today’s architecture works we get in touch with, able to generate, basically our main issue is this. If necessary to speak more open: Where does that ‘supreme establishment’ which we call it Architecture learn creating and creating the memorial boxes from, which are for the egocentric individuals of the system who will dwell, work, will feed and grow their identities? On the other hand, how kind of a true design do the architects be into a realization by thinking their criterias into this system and by feeding from this system when they design? Briefly what and why for design, why are we designing? If the answer is: - For human, then there seems a serious requirement to remember what we design and for, to focus on if today’s meaning is at human or at the Being including the human; or to focus on the idea of where the meaning is if it exists. Because “one mentality departing from the subject still won’t be able to get rid of mistakes as long as life turns into appearance. The individualistic experience has to be referenced to old subject at the moment, for the reason that the irresistible objectivity, which the historical mobility wins into current phase, only caused the solution of the subject for now and that no new one took the place of it. This old subject is historically finished, sentenced: It is still a being for-itself, but is no more in-itself. Wondering does the condition, that architectural products designed for-itself will not be able to get rid of mistakes, indicates to necessitate this design thought to be designed for in-itself? Maybe that design space where architect needs to concentrate on is at somewhere between ‘in-itself’ and ‘for-itself’; consistently in motion from duality’s one edge to another, somewhere is in-between of ‘unterwegs’… We live into an atmosphere where architecture’s liberal face has transformed into the bosses’ million euros. Besides, my thoughts to be said for the such dominant and totally anti-humanist but capitalist atmosphere of ‘ego architecture which seems as if the memorial boxes of liberal systems’, is a case which removes and postpones my work positions into widespread architecture. Every day that goes by, my passionate curiosity for the matter of Being, my concern about what It indicates and what It will be able to tell us people, all explain to me as if, it is completely needed to forget the design criterias of this widespread architecture that has been being practiced, and it will be more auspicious on behalf of humanity to give up from them swiftly. Because of this, it is more useful to found the frame of this design place which I will name as Architecture of Being, to found my opinions about its politics and that it is ‘more humanistic’ than today’s architecture, with the idea that we will already be able to comprehend the frame of human being and its real spatial happiness when we perceive the matter of Being. If you pay attention we are not naming our suggestion as Existential Architecture; the point that is wished the imply and attention to be denoted is mostly on a mimesis called Architecture of Being which is unassuming, undisciplined and appearing in-itself. However, “there are many things which we designate as ‘being’ [“seiend”], and we do so in various senses. Everything we talk about, everything we have in view, everything towards which we comport ourselves in any way, is being; what we are is being, and so is how we are. Being lies in the fact that something is, and in its Being as it is; in Reality; in presence-at-hand; in subsistence; in validity; in Dasein; in the ‘there is’.”…Yüksek LisansM.Sc
