Searching for Zero Point in Architecture?

AKIN NALCA ING OFS.qxd:AKIN NALCA ING OFS.qxd 3/20/15 2:58 PM Page 2

AKINNALÇA

BOOKSI

ONE


EDITO

R

BÜLENTTANJU

CONCEPTANDDESIGN

BÜLENTERKMEN

PRE-PRESSPRODUCTIO

N

ZEYNEPARMAN,BEK

TRANSLATIO

N

BÜLENTTANJU,HÜSEY‹NFIRATfiENOL

PRINTIN

G

OFSETYAPIMEV‹VE

MATBAACILIK

SAN.VE

T‹C.A.fi.

YAHYAKEMALMAH.

fiA‹RSOKAKNO:4,

KA⁄ITH

ANE,‹STANBUL

©AKINNALÇA,2003

ISBN975-92059-0-4


SEARCHING

FORZEROPOINT

INARCHITECTURE?

READING

ARCHITECTUREVIA

HANTÜMERTEKIN’SWORK


HAN TÜMERTEK‹N

1958 > BORN IN

‹STANBUL.

1976-1982 > STUDIED

ARCHITECTURE IN

‹STANBUL TECHNICAL

UNIVERSITY.

1988 > FINISHED

GRADUATE PROGRAM IN

‹STANBUL UNIVERSITY.

1986 > FOUNDING

MEMBER OF MIMARLAR

TASARIM, WORKS AS

DESIGN DIRECTOR.


Reading

Architecture via

Han Tümerkekin’s Work

Bülent Tanju

Searching

forzeropoint

inarchitecture?


INDEX

BEINGBURIED30,60,81,92

BEINGSWALLOWED11,17,22,30,52,60,65,81,92

BORDER/BORDER-PLANE/TRANSGRESSION22,55,68,71,74

COMPLEX(ITY)36,48

CONJUNCTION17,21,30,60,68,92

CONTEX30,73

DIFFERENCE/DIFFERENTIATION11,13,18,21,22,36,55,68,71,83,92

(DIS)ORDER36,48,60

ERASURE48,52,71,81

EVENT51,65,71,74,84

EVERYDAY(NESS)30,47,48,52,60,68,73,74,78,81,83,89

EXPERIENCE/PRESCRIBEDEXPERIENCE36,47,59,60,68,73,74,81,84

FLUIDITY42,48

FORESEEING/PRECEDING/DEFERRING11,12,15,17,18,22,48


GAMEOFSOLVING/FREEZING36,81

GIVEN/DATA

68,73,74,84

INERTIA60,68

INTEGRITY12,19,21,30,48,57,84

LIFE

36,48,52,60,68,74,77,81

MOMENTARY36,48,52,60

MOVEMENT/MOBILITY18,69,78

OTHER17,22,30,60,68,92

PROBLEM18,21

SCHWEBEN18,49

SOLUTION18,21

SPACE

36,42,48,51,65,68,71,74,81,89

TEMPORALITY

12,29,36,48,52,68,81

TRACE11,52

VIOLENCE33,37,60


"Every new designlooks for its ownzero point.The zero point requiresan absolute loss of memory."

SIFIRDA BAfiLAMAKHAN TÜMERTEK‹N, HAYR‹YE SÖZEN,

AHMET ÖNDER, HAKAN fiENGÜN

ARREDAMENTO M‹MARLIK, 1999/12 S.: 57-58.


Noteverydesign,buteverynewdesign

looksforitsownzeropoint,andnot

thezeropoint:Insteadof"everydesign

looksforthe

zeropoint","everynew

design

looksforitsownzeropoint".

Anobjectconjoinedtothegameofdifferencesstructuralizedpriortothe

designer.Butnotany

object,anewone.Withoutany

doubt,thisnovelty

isnotthe

onecausedbythepreviousabsenceoftheobject,norbyits

mere

presenceatthismom

entand

here.Rather,itisahistoricalnovelty;anovelty

thatisbothaforeseen/deferredandforeseeing/deferring

one.

Foreseen/deferred,becauseitisanovelty

pointingtoits

ownpossibilityvia

thetraceofits

absenceinthegameofdifferencesstructuralizedinthepast.

Aforeseeing/deferring

novelty,becauseitforeseesanddefersthepossible

with

thetracesofabsencecarriedbyits

existence.Ratherthanbeingan

everydayobject,whichisabsorbedbythegameofdifferences;an

objectof

architecture,whichsearchesfor/constructsnewstrategiesfordifferenceand

deferralbybeingconjoinedtotheeverydayness.

SEARCHINGFORZEROPOINTINARCHITECTURE?11


Itsownzeropoint,therefore,itisnotthe

zeropointofthe

Architecture,but,

isthezeropointofthe

architectureofthearchitect,or,ofher/his

architecturalproduct:Themostinnocentstateofher/hisarchitectureatthe

verybeginning;its

truth.Theassertion,comparedwith

themetaphysicsof

thesearchforthe

startingpointofthe

Architectureorthefirst-Architecture

precedingallthe

structuralizeddifferences,hasamorehumbleimpression;

thezeropointw

ithdrawsitselftoaspecificlim

itofentity.However,entity

isneitherlim

itedwith

thepresent,norisitacompleteintegrity.Tem

porality

andlanguage—thereisno

needtoadd,alsothegameofarchitectureofthe

historicallystructuralizeddifferences—

bothprecedeanddeferthe

subject

thatclaimstobean

entity.Theyprecede,becausethesubjectcan

conceive

itselfonlyaspastinthepresenttime;theydefer,becausethesubjectcan

conceiveitselfinpresenttimeonlyaspastinthefuture.The

subject:Thepast

andfutureexistinginthepresenttime.

Absolutelossofmem

ory,theimpossiblesupplementofthe

zeropoint.The

zeropoint,existinginan

absolutepresenttimewith

nobeforeorafter

—thereforeoutoftem

porality(historicity)—

asan

integratedcomplete


entityandasatruth,ispossiblewith

theerasureofalldifferencesand

deferrals,andwith

theoverlappingofexistenceandits

meaning.The

eternal

cleanground

whichpredatesthegameofallstructuraldifferencesmakes

architecturetheArchitecture:Thecentrewithoutperiphery.And

the

zero

—inno

needof

one—

existingon

thisground;the

meaning

initselfasasign

onlysignifyingitself.Anobjectwhichiscapableofbeingaproductof

architecture,inno

needofthegameofdifferencesofarchitecture:Speech

withoutlanguage.

Thezeropointofdesignisametaphysicalobjectiontothecontingencyofthe

pointofdifferentiation,atwhichthehistoricalpossibilityofdesign

begins

—orends.The

factthatthedesign

proposalsareenunciatedina‘unstable’

and‘dirty’activity,and

notona‘sound’and‘clean’ground,quite

paradoxically,isthecondition

ofpossibilityoftheconceptofdesign.




Is it possible to design with

absolute loss of memory? There

can neither be a language, nor a

practice without the possibility of

being repeated. The zero point of

any product is another difference

and deferral, which constructed by

the designer with the remains of

the concepts and practices s/he

wants to exclude and which is

already there but covered, and is

marginalized, and all these sum

up to much more than the

absolute zero.




Local craftsmen, stone, concrete,

landscape, slope, sun, heat,

shadow, (im)mobility,

sound(lessness), horizon,

distance, wind, inside, outside,

and walls: The O/others, through

which the designer constructs the

context. Differences, every one of

which precedes the designer and

product, and is constructed by

cultural practices. The design

problematic: The tension between

being swallowed by or being

buried into this game of

differences and being conjoined

to it.



Problems,solutions.And

problemsarethestartingpoints;problem

sasthe

zeropoint.Arepetitionofthewidelyacceptedparadigm

:Architectureexists

throughsolvingproblems;problemsprecedesolutions.

Isproblemasovereignconcept,whichisdefinedinitself,andon

itsown?Isa

mereproblempossible,independentoftheconceptofsolution?

Zerocanbe

definedwith

one,andonlyaftero

ne.Butthisdefinition

isalsoincomplete

—ithastoremainthatway—,the

numbersasconceptsshouldbe

distinguishedfrom

otherconceptsofmathematics,andeventually,the

conceptsofmathematicsshouldbedistinguishedfrom

thosewhichare

conceptsofnon-mathematics.Anenvironm

entw

hichstructuresitself

throughcontinuousdifferentiationsanddeferrals,inotherw

ords,which

appearswith

instantstructuralsequences;anenvironm

entlacking

anouter

stratum(A

German

verb,s

chw

eben,ifallthedifferencescontainedbyits

meaning

areused,finelydescribesthemovem

entinsuchan

environm

ent:

1.tohang;leftinsuspense,2.tofloat,3.toremaininsuspense,tobe

undecided,4.tobeon

thetip

ofone’stongue,toslipone’smem

ory5.tobein

danger).


Theproblemsofdesign

donotawaittheirsolutionsbyjustappearing

spontaneouslyinthegameofdifferences.Justlike

zerocanbedefinedafter

one,theproblemtoocanbedefinedonlyafterthe

solution;thesolutionalso

precedestheproblem.The

dichotom

yofproblemandsolution:Theyare

knots,whichcomeintobeinginarelationofmutualdifferentiation

—throughbeingforeseen/deferredbyotherconceptssurroundingthem

—attheintersectionpointofm

anypowercurves,everyoneofwhichdefine

different,disintegrated,movingplanes.Bothproblemsandsolutionsforesee

eachother.




The moment the problem is

defined, the solution is defined as

well. When the problem is defined

as industrial extensibility,

modularity, and repeatability, the

solution is defined, too: The

inextensible, non-modular and

unique. The semantic difference of

the designer or her/his product is

determined by its position among

the former attitudes of

uniqueness in the game of

differences of architecture. The

only choice for the designer who

is eager to repeat and add, but is

reluctant towards the constructive

or figurative/decorative acts of

uniqueness is the geometric

solution: Two curved masses

placed facing one another render

each other inextensible,

non-modular and unique.

However, design is also an

imagined, foreseen object. When

one of the two masses is not

executed, the executed one

ironically remains waiting to be

added and extended in order to

be inextensible and non-modular.



Designworkson

twotypesofotherand

othering

(O/other).Themutual

tie(s)thatis(are)tobeconstructedwith

thesetwotypesdefine(s)theplane

inwhichthedesigningsubject,her/hisproductand

practicefloat.Likeall

ties,this(these)is(are)arelation(s)ofdifferentiationanddeferraltoo.

Theproblemarises,through

thesortingout/definingofotherprobable

problemsandnon-problems;justlikethesolutionarisesthrough

thesortingout/definingofotherprobablesolutionsandnon-solutions.Such

anact,inevitablyrequiresagameofsortingout/defining—aplane;

architectureastheOther.ArchitectureascentralO

ther;areferenceinwhich

thedesigningsubjectisdefined,towhichs/he

issubjected,orperhapsto

whichs/he

isconjoinedasan

architect.Hence,the

problemishowtoform

thelinkwith

theOther.Architectureasagameofhistoricaldifferences

precedesthearchitect;inthissense,it‘speaksthearchitect’.Ontheother

hand,thislanguagecannotexistw

ithoutthe

speechofthearchitect,inthat

sense,itcomesafterthe

architect.Therefore,the

differencebetweenbeing

swallowedbyan

illusionofabsolutecentre,whichisconceivedasan

integral

first-ground,afirst-truth,notspoiledbyspeechandmisunderstanding,and


beingconjoinedtothedisunitedandself-contradictorygameofdifferences

definesthequality

ofthelink,formedwith

theOther.

Asecond

typeofothering,however,distinguishesarchitectureand

non-architecture;non-architectureasother.Architectureneeds

non-architecture,ifitisnota

completeintegrity

andnota

self-sufficient

truthinitself.Hence,the

borderunitesasmuchas,orm

orethan

itseparates;

theborderisaplacetogo

beyond,toenter,eventuallyaplacetosettlein

temporarilyratherthan

beingaplacenottopassandnottoenter.Theborder

iswherearchitectureisspoken.Designcomesoutthrough

transgression.

Theotherand

thestrategies,through

whichthelinkissetw

iththeother,

definetheborder.Architecture,architect,and

her/hisproductexiston

aborder-plane,ratherthanon

acleanfirst-ground.Everyborder-plane

shelters(initself)thetracesofpossiblepastandfutureborder-planes.Every

planecontainsafundam

entalincom

pleteness;completenessiscontinuously

deferred.




Constructing one's own ground:

Developing a relation of the third

kind both with architecture and

non-architecture. Being the

residence, and deconstructing the

residence at the same time. Going

to the forest, but not becoming a

boor. Not being ashamed of

her/his artificiality while gazing at

the nature. Not deceiving, not

integrating, underlining

differences without making

absolute; erasing while

underlining.




Is plain a void? If it is a void, what

distinguishes it from an organized

industrial region? If, what

prevents an organized industrial

region to be a place is its

undercoded single-stratification,

then what renders a plain as a

void is the overcoded single

-stratification. The other as

non-architecture exists there as a

single, bare and all-absorbing

formation —the plain. One of the

links to be set with the plain as a

void can develop in terms of the

strategy of not being swallowed,

of not gliding and being thrown

on its surface: Sticking to the soil,

clawing it, eventually, being

buried into it.




The plain dissolves the relation of

motion, journey, transition, voice

and shadow with time and space,

everything is swallowed by a

present time with no before and

after. Standing up against the

plain requires reminding to those

swallowed by the plain what they

are. A space of hesitation which

will give a sense of scale and time

to motion, journey and transition.

A space in which voice and

shadow that is neither pure dark

nor pure light can be experienced.



Theplaneinterwoven

bythemutualtiessetw

ith‘O/other’s;context.Nota

static,eternalandcompletewholewithoutthe

possibilitytoaddtoorto

subtractfrom

.Severalplanes,inmotion,continuouslybuiltandbroken

down;severalprobablecontexts.The

incompletenessofcontextisthe

condition

ofpossibilityoftherelationtobeformedwith

O/other;the

completedtotalitymeansentity(context,architecture,architect,structure,

product,etc.),whichdoesnotrequireanytypeofotherforits

existenceand

generatesits

ownmeaning.

Whiledesign

interweavesits

context,itexhibitstwotypesofattitudes;

being-swallowed/being-buriedorbeingconjoined.A1:Context,asa

completewhole,alreadyexistsinthepresentand

isnotinterwoven.Itisnot

possibletoaddpiecestocompletewholes,theycanonlyberepeated.Design

isswallowedbythetruthoftheeverydayness.A2:Context,asacomplete

whole,alreadyexistsinthepresentpast/future,isnotinterwoven,butis

revealed/discoveredthroughaclearanceofthepresentfromits

filth.Itisnot

possibletoaddpiecestocompletewholes,buttheycanberepeated.Designis

buriedintothepast/futuretruth,hidden

bytheeveryday.B:Severalcontexts


—asincompletewholes—

existedinthepast,existinthepresentand

will

existinthefuture;contextsarecontinuouslyinterwoven

andunraveled.

Thereisno

innocentground/contexttorevealortodiscover.The

absenceof

innocencemakesspeech/designpossible.Speech/design

neitherrepeatsthe

ultim

ate-truth,nordiscoversthelastandcertaindictum

;allultim

ate-truths

arecopies,and

allcopiesaredifferent.Thedesign

displacestheeverydayby

beingconjoinedtoit.




To make overlap/to compress/to

empty/to leave/to be enclosed/to

look/to live: Except living, though,

it should be recalled that this

living itself is a living in nature

and with nature, or a living in a

village and with the village, which

are not the usual spaces of the

urbanite —consequently an

exceeding, an occupation, an

obtainment—, all strategic actions

express a violence directed

towards the outside; towards the

other, with which a link is to be

set. This is a constructive

violence: A violence breaking

down the existing contrasts

between city/village, urban-

ite/peasant, city/nature and defin-

ing a new form of relation. SEARCHINGFORZEROPOINTINARCHITECTURE?33



Concrete load-bearing structures

and stone walls; a little deviation

takes place while one of the

important binary distinctions of

modernist architecture is

emphasized. The wall becomes

floor/ceiling/terrace-covering by

turning horizontally just at the

point it has to end. An

interference takes place which

shakes and disintegrates the

modernist architecture.

Why has the wall between

concrete load-bearing structures

been left to local craftsmen?

While concrete load-bearing

structure is the essential, prior

component, the wall is the

subordinate component, control

of which can be ceased; a

compromise made with the

non-architecture for some reason.



How

dospaceandliferelatetoeachother?Itisclearthattheymutuallyaffect

oneanother.Butthisinteractionismediatedbyaseriesofconceptsof

differenttypes:O

rder,com

plexity,and

temporality.Spaceandliferelateto

eachotherthrough

thebinariesbuilton

thesethreeconcepts.Design,the

attempttogiveordertothedisorderly,tosimplify

thecomplexandto

constructthe

temporalityofwhatismom

entary.Ifgivingorder,simplifying,

anderasingthemom

entaryaretheconstructivedifferencesofspace,then,

disorder,com

plexity,and

mom

entaryaretheconstructivedifferencesoflife.

Justasapureorder,simplicity

andthestateofbeingpurifiedfrom

the

mom

entaryaddup

totheendofpossibilityoflife;apuredisorder,com

plexity

andmom

entaryaddup

totheimpossibilityofspace.Theencounterofspace

andlifeisalwaysan

incompleteone,thisencounterneverdefinesamom

ent

ofcompleteconsensus.Spaceisasolid

matterw

ithvariedflexibility,whichis

shapedwith

thehopeofcarrying

theturbidliquidoflifeinconstantmotion

atvariedspeeds.Experienceanddesign

continuouslyreshape,transformeach

other;theformerbysolving,thelatterbyfreezing.The

meaning

andvalueof

anyspecificdesign

—ifthereareany—

canberead

intermsofthefluxof


solving/freezing.

Apointnottobeforgotten:Therelationbetweenspaceandlifeisnota

compulsoryencounter.Everyspacemayencountereverylife,everyspacemay

playthegameofsolving/freezing

with

everylife.Thecontingencyofthegame

containsviolence.Violenceissometimesterminating,causespain;provokes

thelongingforthe

safetranquilityofhabits,the

prescribedgamesarethe

onestoreturnto.Som

etimesitisproductive,itdestroyshabits;m

ightstart

differentsetsofhabits.

Whilethedesignertriestoform

lifeandexperiencethroughspace,triesto

form

fluidthroughsolid,s/heherself/himselfisdisintegratedalsothrough

space.




Transforming the spontaneously

existing nature into image, into

landscape; constructing a

landscape. To look at, to

differentiate what is to be looked

at; to frame, to limit. A residence

—a short holiday house— that is

different from other residences:

Having been bent and

differentiated, prescribed

experience and space (holiday

and house) acquire quality

(name): Voyeuristic experience

and frame-space.




The space of peeping experience

closing into its own boundaries;

the inside, which gazes at the

landscape, the sea, in short, the

outside, but is not gazed at from

the outside. The urban subject is

in her/his holiday residence:

Power in rest.



Doesn’tonlybeinglookedat,and/orbeing

worthyoflookingatcausea

slowingdown,calmingdownwithinthefluidity

oflife?Isn’tthisa

mom

entaryformation,likeanykind

ofcalmingdown?Spacecanbetouched,

smelled,heard,andseen

(perhaps,betasted,too).Designgivesordertospace

byusingallthe

potentialsofthesensory;thefluidity

oflifeacquires

mom

entaryformationsbybeinghung

onthesensory.Whatisunpleasantis

thatthehabitsofarchitectureareconstructedunderthe

sovereigntyofthe

visual(Phenomenon

[görüngü]:Anythingthatcanbeperceivedthrough

senses[Dictionary-TurkishLanguageAssociation].Irony:Everythingthat

canbeperceivedthroughsenses,isconceptualizedthroughthesenseof

‘sight’[görme]inTurkish).





A space of short hesitation and

temporary solitude within the

diffusion and the inclusiveness of

urban space. An attempt to

construct a small island of

distancing within the everyday

fluidity of Tokyo through the

unfamiliarity of the tiles covering

the inside of the structure, for the

one experiencing it. Space as a

monument; space in the hope of

keeping alive the probability of

the subject to remember/perceive

the unseen, through isolating

her/him from manifest

appearances.




In order to sustain the everyday

inexperience, leisure time has to

be subjected to prescription

through small and controlled

activities away from the city, from

urban coincidences, and from

strangers. An uninterrupted

24-hour sensorial inertia is the

ideal. A visual description with a

new age emphasis exactly fits for

the recreational extension of the

office towers in the midst of the

city and isolated from the city:

A static, non-flowing water with

unperceivable contours and

unpredictable boundaries; a green

which is neither nature nor

non-nature is closing the horizon;

purposeless stones in water

leading nowhere; a sky

stimulating a sense of falling in; a

floating structure bordered by the

water; a few people sunbathing in

the distance and meditation. A

space which has no exit once

entered: Recreation of

everydayness.

A little change in light; night. This

uncanny split separates city which

can be heard outside but cannot

be seen and recreation in such a

way that they can never unite

again.

Recreation: Refreshment of

strength and spirits after work

[+ in order to work]*.

*WEBSTER’S NINTH NEW COLLEGIATE DICTIONARY,

MERRIAM WEBSTER INC., SPRINGFIELD, MASS., 1991

WORDS IN PARENTHESIS BY BT.



Spacecanbealsoformed(wasformed,isbeingformed,[probably]isgoingto

beformed),withoutbeing

mediatedbythedesigner.However,suchan

actof

spaceformationistotallydifferentfrom

theactivity

ofthedesigner,which

functionsthroughArchitectureasOtherandthroughnon-architectureas

others.Anonymousspaceswhichcollecttheirconceptsthroughthecommon

experiencesoftemporarysecuritypockets—arisinghereandthereofthe

irregular,complicatedandmom

entaryfluxofeverydaylanguage.Thetotaland

continuous,greyspace,wherealldifferencesanddeferralsofmeaning

are

erasedbytheeveryday.Theunseenappearance,whichpassesthrougheveryday

lifewithoutrubbing

itselfagainstit,withouttouchingit,whichiseverydaylife

itself:Non-existent-phenom

enon.

Theinstrumentsofthedesigner—bothspaceformingonesandconcepts—

aredimmedinallthedisorder,com

plexity,and

mom

entaryexistenceof

everydaylife.Withinan

‘unstable’and‘dirty’flux,thedesignerbuildsislands

oftemporaryorderand

simplicity,awayfrom

themom

entary—islandsof

temporality.Theclots,whichareunraveled/dissolvedjustastheyarecoming

intobeing,bringoutdifferentchannels,powercurveswithinthefluidity

ofthe


everyday.Theyfloat(s

chw

eben)havingbeensavedfrom

beingswallowedby

everydaylifeorfrom

beingburiedintoitthroughrubbingthemselvesagainst

theeverydayness.




The street is the space of possible

experience or event. It is the place

where the possibility to encounter

both with unfamiliar objects and

subjects exists. Does transforming

the inner circulation areas of a

building into streets result with

the same effect, where there is no

street? The street of the building

is the space for encounter with

neighbor (acquaintance) and,

eventually, considering that this

building is a specific dwelling for

employees, with colleague

(acquaintance). Unless the object

itself is in the scale of a city the

circulation areas of a building

cannot transform into the space of

encounter with a stranger.



Themagicofeverydaylifeisinits

abilitytoofferthe

mom

ent—

i.e.,what

existshereandnow—

astheonlyandabsolutetruth/ground,and

inits

abilitytohideits

temporality.Thedissolutionofmagicispossiblethrough

giving

upthemetaphysicsofintegralground

andoferasureoftemporality,

ratherthan

throughchanging

thisillusiveground

with

otherand

realfirstor

futureground.Todesign;acontinuousspaceoftransgressionwhichleavesa

tracewhileerasingthemom

entary,whereeveryerasuremeansleaving

anothertrace,and

whereeverymom

entimpliestheprecedingandproceeding

mom

ents.

Thedifferencebetweentemporalitiesofdesign

andeverydaylife:The

everydaynessoffersthetemporalityformedbychangesinsenses,astheonly

possiblerealmom

ent,asthenecessarymom

entw

hichcan’tbeotherwise,and

turnstheindividualintoasubjectbysubjectingher/himtothissituation.

Itpreventstheperceptionofdifferentchanges.Design,on

theotherhand,

hasthepotentialforopeningperceptiontodifferenceshidden

bythe

everydaylife,andequallyimportant,byitself.Usually,designdoesnotuse

thispotential;rather,itleavesitselftobeingswallowedbytheeverydaynessor


beingburiedintoit.Itgetsestablishedintheprescribedpracticeofa

technocratwho

reproducestheeveryday,or,ofalife-styleproducerwho

polishestheeveryday.

Physicalmovem

entchangessensations;the

dailylifetriestocontrolphysical

movem

entaswell.However,the

powerofeverydayreality

topresentitselfas

theonlypossiblereality

isduetotheillusionthatallthe

meaningsofsigns

arecompleteandnotdeferredinthem

selvesatthatmom

entand

there;rather

than,duetoits

controloverphysicalm

ovem

ent.Everyproductofdesign,

conjoinedtotheeveryday,solvesthisillusion—bothforthe

everydaylifeand

foritself—

byimposing

itsowntemporality:Temporalityasthegameof

differences—i.e.historicity—,asopposedtothetemporalityoftheeveryday,

whichonlypointsatnow,the

presentm

oment.




If not the ‘well-educated’,

‘modern’, and ‘westerner’

bourgeois but someone else wins

the struggle for hegemony in the

everyday routine in the city, then

s/he too constructs her/his own

illusion of integrated space

through escaping from the city.

Here, even though the houses can

be ‘varied’ and ‘adapted’, the

basic constructs do/can not

change. Every relocation and

movement, at best, turns into an

architectural tour in interiors, the

urban architectural tour becomes

impossible. The illusion of

integrity has already lost the 'aura'

hiding and naturalizing it. The

uncanniness of urban space

interwoven by unfamiliarity and

differences is the 'home', from

which there is no escape. The

border at which the modern

parvenu(e) constructs her/himself

is this uncanny 'home'. For the

parvenu(e) the variation of the

'same' which is the 'home' of the

traditional and territorialized

human being is from now on, the

uncanny.SEARCHINGFORZEROPOINTINARCHITECTURE?55



Decoration: The practice which the

designers —at least the architects—

make use of with an ironical

emphasis but cannot give up. The

attempt to render at least the

interior, coherent in a world which

has forever lost its integrity and

coherence; to set a décor. As

much as it is a décor it is the most

easily dissolving and changing

one among the end products

which designers try, with great

jealousy, to prevent them from

being transformed. A spatial

design ideal moment of which is a

show-room. Whether it appears in

the form of a rich trend and

life-style production or of a

practical information for

middle-class —no suggestions to

the poor since they are hopeless

in terms of becoming a

responsible member of society, it

is an activity of updating and

reinforcing the prescribed

experiences.

Without any doubt, it is

impossible to imagine a public life

without any prescriptions.

However, the individual and social

experiences are not any other

administrative utility that can be

managed by prescription.

Decoration, in its common form

along with the urban design, has a

distinct position among the

technocratic practices which

flatten the potential to demand

the differences.




A strategy of attachment and

compression in order to prolong

the urbanity and to resist to its

disintegration at the periphery of

the city, where the loose pattern

of single houses dissolves the

urbanity. The physical pattern

formed with the expectation to

contain urban characteristics

outside the city. 164 units

containing eight different house

types generated through the

multiplication and differentiation

of two basic types. The first

problem is concentrated on the

minimum dimension of the

pattern in which complicated

layers appear rendering the city as

a city: Do the 164 units keep the

urban characteristics alive?

The second problem is that the

concept of two basic types and

164 units generated by

multiplication of these basic types

bring together only those who are

similar. Therefore, what comes out

is a gated settlement excluding

both the unfamiliar object and

individual rather than a city;

the publicity of

guaranteed/prescribed experience

instead of the environment of the

city providing the possibility of

uncanny experience.

The rereading of the spaces of

prescribed experience of the city

through architecture as Other.

The qualification of the prescribed

spaces through relating them with

Other; the updating of their

quality: Styling operation.



Acrash/trem

or/nudgecontaining

violenceorashockcandestroytheinertia

setbyeverydaylifeon

thesensorial.Any

experienceindependentof

movem

ent—

bothofthephysicalmovem

entorofthe

spatialm

ovem

entof

theperceptioninsensorialinertia—

solvingthementionedinertia,isan

‘aesthetic’experiencepointingouta

possiblenewchannelorhavinga

potentialtodislocatethemom

entaryexistenceoftheeveryday.Strategies

suchasspatialfluidity,conceptualdislocation/displacementorfasten-

ing/enclosure,andconstructionssuchasconceptualizationoftheobjectof

architectureasan

objectofpleasure,spaceforlife,orasfunctionalm

achine

arethepiecesoftheinstitutionalizedgameoftheknowledgeofarchitecture

asOther.W

hatissignificantfrom

thestandpointofdesign

ishowthese

strategiesandconstructions,and

thenewones,joining

them

,wouldbecon-

joinedtotheeveryday.Ifdesigndoesnotshakethesensorialinertiaofthe

everyday,and

doesnotconstructdifferentformsofperceiving

anddescribing

thelifeandtheworld,itiseitherswallowedbytheeveryday,orburiedinto

theeverydayasan

prescribedtechnocraticactivity

reproducingit.

Themom

entaryliveswhichtheproductofarchitecturereorders


(contains/excludes/cuts/divides...etc.)byconjoining

tothem

,destroythe

metaphysicsoftheeverydayoferasing/covering/hidingthetemporality.

Mom

entarylivesaretransformedintodifferentexperiences.

Thetemporalityofdesign,whethertheindividualmovesornot,originates

from

thecollision

whichbreaksthesensorialinertia.




The strategies of conjoining or

resisting to the everydayness:

"Between the forest and the

stream... Two houses... The

environment is under a heavy

construction and is continuously

filled... The reason to go there is the

forest... To turn to the forest....

Relating all spaces with the forest...

Turning back on others… Not

surrounding the site with garden

walls… Making the wall used by

both the house and the garden...

Settling on higher grounds, and not

on natural ground... Constructing

one’s own ground.. Protection

against flood ... Not touching the

existing pasture grass .. Not

building up gardens.. Building

blank façades facing settlements,

and transparent ones facing the

forest.. The ground floor is one

single volume.. The swimming pool

should not be on the ground while

the house is elevated.. The swim-

ming pool is on top of the garage..

Nothing artificial is on natural

ground.. The study-room is wherever

the laptop is..There is no more

fireplace.. The keeper’s house is

probably the guest house.. The new

plot, single house.. The flooring,

inside and outside, is a wooden

deck... The forest, the border of the

house.. The house, the border of the

forest..."*

*FROM ARCHITECT’S STATEMENT.

EMPHASIZED BY BT.




The designer cannot give up

interference, cannot remain

indifferent. S/he always has a

position which makes her/him a

designer even when s/he is

unaware of it. Also, neither the

decision to interfere excessively,

nor deficiently do not change this.

S/he can be conjoined through

deficient interference or can be

swallowed/buried through

excessive interference and

obviously vice versa. The problem

is different than the relationship

of priority between space and

event. Whether space is prior to

event or not, the design/designer

always interferes. The problem

appears more around the form of

the relation the space sets with

the event regardless of its priority.

If the identity of the space is

redefined with every particular

event, the space, the identity of

which is continuously redefinable,

is the condition of possibility for

every unpredictable event.

The designer only transforms the

space and objects (in this case,

the computer print-outs) into

events (in this case, into objects

of art), through attaching, putting

them together. When the two are

unraveled, the event is over, the

identity of the space disappears.




The working spaces as

instruments of controlling the

forms of experiencing the world:

Temples of sensorial inertia.

The working spaces where the

power of everydayness is most

intensely executed also indicate

the limit of the potential of

architecture as a practice to

transform the world.



Thedistinctionbetweenthegivenandthedatacanbeexplainedthroughthe

relationwith

constructedness.Everydaylifepresentsthesocial/physical

environm

entasgiven,andpresentstheexistingthatishereandnowas

alreadyinevitableandnecessary,asinherentwith

meaning;coversits

constructedness,temporality.Inthissensethegivenisnotexperienced,or,is

atbest,aprescribedexperience:A

repetitionoftheknownexperience.

Whatturnsthegivenintodata,whatbringsoutthe

constructedness,the

temporalityinthegiven,istheactofreading,interpretation.Thisactisalso

thepreconditionofpossibilityofpersonalexperience.Designcanbe

conceivedasafocalpointofresistance,anobjectionbothtotherealmof

sensorialinertiaoftheeverydayroutine,whichpresentssocial/physical

environm

entasgiven,andtotheabsenceofpersonalexperience.

Thespaceofthedifferent,ofwhathasnotbeentriedbefore:Architectureas

focalpointofresistance.Unlesseverytim

eitredefinesanewdifferentiation

channel/borderbothoutofthe

historicallystructuralizedgameofdifferences

ofarchitectureasOther,and

outofthe

non-architectureasother,

architecturecannotbeconjoinedtotheeverydaybytransformingit.


Thetransformationofthegivenintodataisrealizedbythemediationofthe

designingsubject.

Inthissense,architectureisafieldofknowledgeandpractice,whichcan

neverbecompleted,justlikeallotherculturalpractices.Everyactofdrawinga

border,and

settlingattheborderisexcessiveanddeficient;excessivethan

whatstaysin,and

deficientthan

whatisleftout.And

allsettlements,all

constructionsofpositionarelasting,butsettling

attheborderisalways

temporary;the

settlingsubjectorobjectstaysthere,butthe

borderismobile.




The city is the space of conflict

and differentiation.

Moreover it is the space of the

tension between possible

differences/adventures/events

and the discourses struggling for

hegemony by controlling those

differences, adventures and

events through the mediation of

the ordinary everyday life.

This space of tension is the

liminal space where the

differences start conflicting

relations with each other; where

they are transformed by

conjunctions and differentiate

once again. Every transgression is

the experience of the fact that

differences are contingent and

constructed rather than essential.

The transgression as a new and

different experience destroys the

prescriptions of everydayness.

Suburbia or gated settlement is

the escape from the urban, which

is a continuous space of

transgression. They are the search

for essentializing the differences

and for the enclosure of their

transformation, eventually, for

covering the differences in order

to erase them from the apparent.

No matter where and for what

purpose it takes place, it is the

relocation of human beings who

are dislocated from their

traditional social locations and

are enabled to differentiate by the

urbanity and it is the necessitation

of their relation with the social

space. While this act absolutizes

the social differences and renders

them unchanging and

impenetrable into each other, it

also controls the possibilities of

individual differences within the

social differences.




Where non-architecture as others

defining the context is too weak

or even non-existent, it can be

designed through Architecture as

the Other.

An environment where the codes

of neither the city nor the nature

don’t work. Outside of these

codes, an environment which is

undercoded in order to organize

the industrial production only

(organized industrial region) and

cleansed from the sophisticated

layers concerning of the city and

nature. An environment which is

undercoded and reduced to a

single layer is the place where the

everyday life controls the

experience and the event most

efficiently. Regardless of the

extent to which the city is

controlled, its complexity allows

experiences opposing to the

prescribed ones to appear and

allows their conjunction to the

city. However, an undercoded

environment is one where the

probability of conjunction and

transformation almost doesn’t

exist. In this sense, the

undercoded environment is the

ideal of the prescribed experience

and it is also what the prescribed

experience aims to transform the

city into.

An object of design, which is not

foreseen to be there, can only

exist through introversion and

solitude. It signifies only through

Architecture as the Other. The

problem, inevitably, turns into

separation from the given, rather

than transformation of the given

into data.



Themostproductiverelationbetweenevent/experienceandspaceisaloose,

indirectandmediatedconjunction,eventually,having-no-relation,insome

situations.

Theeverydaylife,inordertoremainaseveryday,loadsandascribesits

prescribedexperiences,whichitpreventsfrom

beingtransformedintoevents,

tolim

itedtypesofspace.Thebasiccondition

tokeepexperiencesprescribed,

undifferentiated,andimpossibletobetransformedintoeventsisthe

relationshipofnecessity

betweenexperienceandspace.Thestrictpatternof

theeverydaynessexistsinordertofreezeexperience,tocontrolitand

topreventitsinternalizationwhenitappears;theeverydaynessexiststhisway.

Thecondition

ofdifferentexperiences,and,eventually,the

condition

ofthe

eventisaspace,whichdeviatesandshockstheprescribedexperiences.Every

deviatedexperience,startingfrom

thespacewhichisits

owncondition,drags

allotherspacesintocrisis,toborder.The

transformationoflifeinto

experience,itsmediatedconstructionbyindividual(s),isthere-organization

ofthegivenasdata.





A residence. Whose residence?

It is possible to reach a general

judgment: The residence of those

who have more than a certain

amount of money. The class

status is certainly one of the

significant compounds of identity,

but not sufficient enough solely to

construct an identity. Eventually,

why do the members of a class,

who are expected to overcome the

obstacles for differentiation and

to express their individuality

relatively more easily, prefer

similarity instead of

differentiation? It is clear that this

situation cannot be explained only

with the class status. Can the

designer shake the expectations

of prescribed life of those who

buy 'the optimum residences'?

And, what is the money paid for?

The payment is legitimized by the

high level of technical equipment

of residences. Why is it required

to pay an extra price for technical

equipment which in fact should be

standard? And why doesn’t

anybody take any risk, while there

is a price that has to be paid in

order to get rid of prescribed

experiences?



Theeverydaylifearrivesatits

necessaryspace.Thedesign

objectcollideswith

theeverydaylife,andasmuchasits

powerandfortunehelps,dissolvesthe

givenstructureofdailylife,whichpresentsitselfasabsolute;itdisplacesthe

elem

entsofstructure.Theshockcreatedbythecollision

andtherelative

unconstrainednessandmobility,whichtheelem

entsacquire,meanthatthe

probabilitiesofredescriptionoflife—throughdifferentformationsand

metaphors—

comeout.Thedesignedspace,whichisitselfa

different

formationandmetaphor,reshapesthelifeitencountersasadifferent

experience.Everydifferentformationissimultaneouslyadifferentformer.

Metaphorw

orksbothways,thelikeningandthelikenedbecomebentatthe

sametim

e.Thepredestinedpointsofarrivalforbothdesign

andlifeare

misplaced.





The relation between life and

space is contingent, it cannot be

constructed through necessity.

Design is to experiment on the

possibilities to coincide some

spaces with some lives or to

relate them temporarily, rather

than to set up a necessary

relation between space and life.

The activity of restoration

—if not defined as a pure

bureaucratic/technocratic activity—

displays all the tensions of the

game of solving/freezing of the

architectural design. The space,

protection of which is required, is

exactly what the everyday life

seeks for. The space, ironically, is

torn apart from its historicity

either due to its oldness, which is

a special form of relation with

temporality, or due to its

distinctive place within the game

of differences of architecture; the

moment of the object is rendered

absolute. In this sense, the space

is over-coded, the game of

differences operating through the

binary of solving/freezing is

closed. It is transformed into the

spatial icon of everyday

(in)experience; the space which is

in its most solid form and is

deprived of the possibility of to

differentiate both itself and

others. Historical space, as the

easiest strategy of being

swallowed/buried, constructs

prescriptions through nostalgia,

transmutation into museum, and

eventually, making touristic.

However, as in all claims of

integrity, there is a hole which

cannot be covered in this case

also. The aim is to coincide the

past space, which is consecrated

and mythicized through being

cleansed from its historicity, with

the new everyday life which is

another operation of erasure of

temporality, hence mythical again.

In spite of various technocratic

restrictions, no other encounter

constructed by the everydayness

as necessity between space and

experience brings out the

contingency of the encounter

between space and experience as

radically as this particular

encounter of historical space and

everyday experience. Restoration

as a problematic of design sways

between nostalgia (as the most

widespread instrumental form to

affirm the everydayness) and

uncanniness bending the

everydayness.




Book-wall as metaphor for the

city:

A book-wall, there are many

books in it; crowded. The

book-wall bears its own weight.

The books in the book-wall, when

viewed from a distance, are hardly

distinguished from each other

through their most general

features. The borders are not very

clear, moreover, the borders

cannot be recognized. They

constitute a total image:

The book-wall. Yet, as one gets

closer, they start to differentiate

like the pieces of a mosaic.

Eventually, it turns out that they

don't have given meanings

generated by the total image

which integrates them. Their

meaning is generated by the

position they hold within the

book-wall; they just stand

side by side.

On the one hand, numerous

books different from each other,

meanings of which is only given

when they are read or which only

exist by being read, on the other

hand, the book-wall, which offers

the possibility of recognition and

expression of differences. Within

a never-ending activity books go

and new ones come. They are

classified; they are sub-classified;

some of them speak completely

different languages; some alikes

increase in number and become

the dominant pattern on the

book-wall; some of them are

prohibited, excluded, and burned;

but the book-wall always remains

incomplete.



Theeverydaynessexistsinanarrow

fieldofseeing

andbeing-seen,limits

ofwhicharedrawnrigidly.Whatcouldbeseen

inthisnarrow

fieldarethe

prescribedroutineacts,whichalreadyhadlosttheirqualityasexperience,

andspaces,onwhichtheseactsareinscribed,andwith

whichtheyare

necessarilymatched.Necessaryactsdepend

upon

necessaryspaces.The

relationshipofnecessity

betweenactsandspacesisoneoftheinstruments

forenclosing

andcontrolling

thereality,whichisnothingmorethan

aconvention,hence,itisalsoan

instrumentforenclosingandcontrolling

otherpossibleconstructsofreality.Thisrelationshipmanipulates

conventionsforthe

continuationofthedominantnarrative.However,an

absoluteenclosureisimpossible.Allnarrativespresentingthem

selvesas

something

morethan

aconvention,astheabsoluteandlasttruthcontaina

varietyofcontradictions,pointsofcrisis;the

enclosure—inasense—

always

remainsmissing.Likeeverydifferentnarrationandmetaphor,design

setsoff

from

theinevitabledeficiencyoftheclaimofenclosure,from

thepointof

crisis.Itscratchestheholeintheblanketoftotality,m

akestheholeeven

bigger.Differentconstructsofreality

aremadepossiblethroughthe


enclosure’sdissolution.Everyholeisaprobabilityofafieldofexperience

whichdiffersfrom

thegiven;everyholeisan

event.Experience,asan

event,

isnota

definedsubjectivity

whichisgivenfrom

outside,butrathera

probabilityofasubjectivity

attractingtoadifferentconstruct,whichhasnot

yetbeenbutw

hichcanbe.The

form

oftherelationbetweenthe

non-prescribedexperienceandspaceisrathercontingentthan

necessary.




Not the outside of the house,

the exterior-house. A counter

attack spoiling the game in a

language which relates the

concept of house with the

secret/closed rather than with the

open. Transition from private to

the more private is only possible

through exterior. The vertical

movement turns into the display

of transition to the more private.

(Is it) A temporary destruction of

the power of the gazer or a

denouncement of power (?):

A short sequence of being

watched. Or just the opposite:

Such a power that it is not

concerned to exhibit itself while

passing to the private.

The space of the urbanite is the

interior or, more accurately, for

her/him also the exterior is also

the interior. The urban space is

coded in intense layers by the

social/cultural practices and, in a

sense, is transformed into interior

(into home). However, the nature

outside the city is relatively less of

an inside, it has to be coded.

What would the outside become if

the prescribed domesticating

activities and objects would be

erased and replaced by the

element of vertical circulation

which should actually be inside?




Art as a practice, which should at

least theoretically enlarge or bring

out the holes of everyday

(in)experience, continuously puts

the probability of event into the

agenda. The most radical

expression of the non-necessary

relation between space and

experience/event comes out

in the relation between art

as a dissolving and

prescription-destroying event and

design as a freezing activity even

at its most loose moment. Art is

the unpredictable event, it cannot

be reduced to prescribed

experience or cannot be

catalogued. To attribute a

necessary space to the

unpredictable event means

foreseeing the event before it

takes place; and this situation is

the destruction of the condition of

the possibility of the event.

On the other hand, since it is

impossible to get rid of

non-architecture as others and

architecture as Other or there is

no outside of the game of

differences, a neutral, unbiased

and non-positioned space is also

impossible. In this case, it is

necessary to find new positions

constructing the relation of space

and event through contingency;

just like the designer has found

for himself: Providing space with

the opportunity to gain an identity

through the events happening in

it. This opportunity can only be set

up by defining a new position and

a radical differentiation rather

than by remaining neutral.

To inscribe the identity once again

from scratch with every different

event is a completely different

attempt than the claim of being a

white-background for objects of

'high culture', which have already

lost the quality of being an event

and consumptions of which have

been prescribed through art

history and guides.

(By the way, like all

administrative, executive, and

bureaucratic apparatus, municipal

offices are also organized to look

out for public security, rather than

making room for the event. When

was the last time that an event

took place in this art space?)




Once again, inside and outside.

Park as a non-natural nature or as

the simulation of nature is the

internalized exterior of the

urbanite. Park as the simulation

of nature is an urban cultural

practice and an artifact.

It effortlessly reaches over to the

inside, gets closer to the event of

art —which is also an artifact even

if it were consecrated by aura of

sublimity— and disturbs privacy.

Not only the park, but also the

urban space with all its filth, noise

and complexity is separated from

the gallery by a very thin and

fragile boundary which tends to

let through rather than to stop.

The space of event is still a

protected interior, but the interior

is very close now.



Theproductofarchitectureasasupplementaryobjecttotheworldisneither

thereflection/projection,northe

expression

ofthementalconstructofits

producer.O

ncetheobjectcomesout,themeaning

oftheobjectbecomes

independentofitssubject.Themeaning

ofthedesign

objectisread

byvariouspositions,withinthecontextofitstextualrelationswith

theO/other.

Theproblemishowitisread:The

tensionbetweenthetendencyof

pluralizationanddifferentiationthereadingsandtheexperiences,andthe

tendencyoflim

iting

them

,isatthesametim

ethetensionbetweenbeing

conjoinedandbeingburied/swallowed.

Forany

object,thereforealsoforthe

productofarchitecture,tobe

perceived,tobeexperienced,andits

historicalreality

tobeconstructedinthe

placeandtim

elived,itsgivenreality

hastobedeconstructed.Theassent,that

theclaimsofreality

ofthenarratives—constructedwith

differentm

ediations

around

theobjectstartingfrom

itsproductiontoseveralformsofits

consum

ption—

arelim

ited,deficientandcontingent/historical,allowsthe

notcenteredormulti-andtemporally-centeredconstructionofsubjectivity;

suchaconstructionofsubjectm

eanspluralizationoftheformsof



experiencing

theworld.

Iftheproductisazeropointw

ithno

beforeorafterand

astateof

completenessofwhichmeaning

isinitself,then

itdoesnotrequire

interpretationandcritique;its

meaning

isalreadytheretogetherwithinthe

product,itexposesits

meaning.Yet,whatismadeismoreexcessiveandmore

deficientthan

justtobemade.Excessivenessanddeficiencyneedtobe

interpreted,read.Everyreadingsignifiesdifferentm

eaning(s)andsign(s)

beyond

theproduct.Everyreadingisajourneystartingfrom

theproductto

newpossibilitiesofdifference.Inthissense,everyreadingisamisreading,

everymeaning

isadeferred/deficientmeaning.Everyproductofdesignerases

itsdesignerandrewritesit.W

hiletheimpossibilitytolocatethemeaning

oftheproductthrough

textualdifferencesanddeferralserasesthedesignerasa

semantic

authority,the

sameimpossibilityasapointofpossibilityofnew

setsofreadingandmeaning

rewritesthedesignerasasubject.


PROJECT: ATK HOUSING

LOCATION: ÇERKEZKÖY, ‹STANBUL

DATE OF DESIGN: 1995

DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: 1996-1997

PHOTOGRAPHS: HAN TÜMERTEK‹N

THE BUILDINGS ARE THE LODGMENTS OF A

TEXTILE COMPANY IN AN “ORGANIZED

INDUSTRIAL REGION”. THE CURVILINEARITY

OF TWO THREE-STOREY MASSES MAKES

THEM INEXTENSIBLE, NON-MODULAR AND

UNIQUE. THIS ATTITUDE IS AGAINST THE

FUNDAMENTAL QUALITY OF THE INDUSTRIAL

BUILDINGS, AND DIFFERENTIATES THE

HOUSING FROM THEM. THE LIVING AREAS

HAVE A VIEW OF THE GREEN BETWEEN THE

MASSES AND SUPPORTING UNITS LOOK AT A

STREET-LIKE WHERE CIRCULATION TAKES

PLACE. THIS ‘STREET’ IS THE ONLY

CIRCULATION AREA IN THE BUILDINGS.

PROJECT: AYTEK HOUSES

LOCATION: KEMERBURGAZ, ‹STANBUL



PHOTOGRAPH: ES‹N ÖZIfiIK

THE SETTLEMENT IS LOCATED IN A

WIDESPREAD PATTERN, ON THE PERIPHERY

OF THE CITY AND WHERE MOST OF THE

HOUSES ARE SINGLE. IT CONSISTS OF FIVE

BLOCKS IN A ROW –OF 164 ONE OR

TWO-STOREY UNITS IN TOTAL– AND PUBLIC

SPACES. THE BLOCKS ARE CONSTRUCTED

THROUGH THE MULTIPLICATION OF ONE OF

THE TWO BASIC TYPES, AND THROUGH THE

VARIATION OF THE OTHER. THE TWO

DIFFERENT BLOCK TYPES CONTAIN EIGHT

HOUSE PLANS. THIS LIFE, CONSTRUCTED

OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, HAS AN URBAN

INFRASTRUCTURE, WITH ITS ROW-HOUSE

LAYOUT AND WITH ITS LARGE AND GREEN

PUBLIC AREAS. LIFE IS LEAD WITH THE

OTHERS, BUT INDEPENDENTLY.

PAGE 20

PAGE 58

PAGE 50

Works of Han Tümertekin

PAGE 72


PROJECT: B HOUSE

LOCATION: KEMERBURGAZ, ‹STANBUL

DATE OF DESIGN: 1997-2003

BETWEEN THE FOREST AND THE STREAM.

THE ENVIRONMENT IS UNDER A HEAVY

CONSTRUCTION. THE REASON TO GO THERE

IS THE FOREST. TO TURN TO THE FOREST.

RELATING ALL SPACES WITH THE FOREST.

TURNING BACK ON OTHERS. NOT

SURROUNDING THE SITE WITH GARDEN

WALLS. MAKING THE WALL USED BY BOTH

THE HOUSE AND THE GARDEN. NOT

SETTLING ON NATURAL GROUND.

CONSTRUCTING ONE’S OWN GROUND.

PROTECTION AGAINST FLOOD. NOT

TOUCHING THE EXISTING PASTURE GRASS.

NOT BUILDING UP GARDENS. BUILDING

BLANK FAÇADES FACING SETTLEMENTS, AND

TRANSPARENT ONES FACING THE FOREST.

NOTHING ARTIFICIAL IS ON NATURAL

GROUND. THERE IS NO MORE FIREPLACE.

THE FLOORING, INSIDE AND OUTSIDE, IS A

WOODEN DECK. THE FOREST, THE BORDER

OF THE HOUSE. THE HOUSE, THE BORDER OF

THE FOREST.

PROJECT: B2 HOUSE

LOCATION: BÜYÜKHÜSÜN, AYVACIK



PHOTOGRAPHS: CEMAL EMDEN

A HOLIDAY HOUSE FOR AN INDUSTRIALIST.

CAN A URBANITE’S HOUSE –BELONGING TO

THE VILLAGE BUT NOT A PEASANT– BE BUILT

IN A VILLAGE? LOCAL CRAFTSMEN, STONE,

CONCRETE, LANDSCAPE, SLOPE, SUN, HEAT,

SHADOW, MOVEMENT, SILENCE, HORIZON,

DISTANCE, WIND, INTERIOR, EXTERIOR,

WALLS. ONE MORE OF THE PRISMS IN THE

VILLAGE. INSIDE AND OUTSIDE HOUSE. TO

MAKE OVERLAP AND TO CONDENSE THE

SERVICE AREAS WITH THE LOAD-BEARING

STRUCTURE. TO EMPTY THE LIVING AREAS

AND THE VIEW OF LANDSCAPE. TO LEAVE THE

STONE WALLS AND RETAINING WALLS TO

LOCAL CRAFTSMEN. TO WITHDRAW TO ONE’S

OWN BORDERS. TO WATCH THE SEA. TO LIVE

IN THE GARDEN.

PAGE 14

PAGE 24

PAGE 62 PAGE 16

PAGE 32

PAGE 38

PAGE 32

PAGE 34

PAGE 38


PROJECT: ÇATALHÖYÜK MUSEUM AND

VISITORS' CENTRE

LOCATION: ÇUMRA, KONYA


CAN THE VOID AND THE FLATNESS OF THE

PLAIN OF KONYA BE TRANSFORMED INTO A

BUILDING? IS IT POSSIBLE TO STAND UP

AGAINST THE PLAIN WITH A BUILDING?

MOTION, JOURNEY, HESITATION, TRANSITION,

VOID, FLATNESS, SILENCE, UNDERGROUND,

CHANGING LIGHT, WIND, SOIL, SLOPE,

CONCRETE, VENTILATION, ARCHEOLOGICAL

SITE AND FINDS, TRANSPORTATION. TO GO

DOWN TO THE UNDERGROUND. TO LOSE THE

PLAIN AND THE HORIZON OUT OF SIGHT. TO

PAUSE UNDER A ROOF. TO ENTER MUSEUM

OR TO VISIT EXHIBITIONS. TO CONTINUE. TO

GO UP, TO STEP ON THE PLAIN. TO GO TO

EXCAVATION SITES. TO TURN BACK AGAIN TO

THE UNDERGROUND. TO PAUSE OR TO GO

ON; TO GO UP TO THE PRESENT.

PROJECT: ‹fi BANKASI RECREATION CENTRE

LOCATION: LEVENT, ‹STANBUL


RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN UNDERGROUND

AND GROUND. TO CREATE AN

UNDERGROUND FAÇADE TO REFLECT THE

SKY ON WATER. TO LOOK AT A VERTICAL

GARDEN.

PAGE 26

PAGE 28

PAGE 46

PAGE 46

PAGE 86

PAGE 40

PAGE 40


PROJECT: MENGÜ ERTEL EXHIBITION:

"BLOW-UPS"

LOCATION: BEfi‹KTAfi, ‹STANBUL


DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: APRIL 1999

PHOTOGRAPH: HAN TÜMERTEK‹N

DESIGNING AN EXHIBITION IS DANGEROUS

FOR THE ARCHITECT. IT IS VERY DIFFICULT

TO PREVENT THE DOMINATION OF THE

ARCHITECTURE OR OF THE SPACE OVER THE

WORKS. THE EXISTING SPACE WAS TO BE

RECONSTRUCTED WITH THE WORK. THE

ARCHITECTURAL CONTRIBUTION TO THIS

SITUATION WAS REALIZED BY DOING

NOTHING EXCEPT KEEPING THEM TOGETHER.

PROJECT: OPTIMUM RESIDENCES

LOCATION: ÖMERL‹, ‹STANBUL



PHOTOGRAPHS: CEMAL EMDEN

OPTIMUM CONSISTS OF 84 HOUSES OF FOUR

TYPES. THEIR POSITIONS DIFFERENTIATE

AND VARY. YET, THE BASIC PLAN

CONSTRUCTIONS OF THE HOUSES DO NOT

CHANGE. EVERY HOUSE IS ADAPTED TO ITS

SURROUNDING. THE HOUSE HAS UNITS

SURROUNDED WITH GARDEN: THE LIVING-

ROOM, THE DINING-ROOM, AND THE KITCHEN

FOR THE EVERYDAY-LIFE, AND THE PARENT’S

QUARTER UPSTAIRS. SUPPORTING UNITS

LIKE THE GARAGE, THE STORAGE, THE

SERVANT’S ROOM OR HOME-OFFICE AND

CHILDREN’S ROOMS UPSTAIRS. THUS THE

HOUSES ARE DIVIDED AND DIFFERENTIATED;

THE ROOMS GET FURTHER OR CLOSER;

THEIR VIEWS CHANGE; AND UNDER ONE

ROOF DIFFERENT HOUSES ARE

CONSTRUCTED. THE TWO HOUSES LOOK AT

A TWO-STOREY VOID, AND IT LOOKS AT THE

LANDSCAPE. WHILE WALKING FROM ONE

ROOM TO THE OTHER OR FROM ONE FLOOR

TO THE OTHER, ONE ALWAYS GOES AROUND

OR THROUGH THAT VOID. EACH MOVE TURNS

INTO AN ARCHITECTURAL WALK.

PAGE 64

PAGE 54

PAGE 56

PAGE 70

PAGE 70

PAGE 76


PROJECT: ROBINSON BOOKSTORE

LOCATION: BEYO⁄LU, ‹STANBUL


DATE OF CONSTRUCTION: 1994

PHOTOGRAPH: U⁄UR ERUZUN

THE FLOOR, THE BOOKS AND THE CEILING.

A VOLUME WITH A RECTANGULAR PLAN. TWO

FLOORS, 45M2 EACH. A FAÇADE WITH A

PRESERVATION ORDER. AND A CAP VAULT

CEILING. IN ORDER TO TRANSFORM THE VOID

LIMITED BY THOSE COMPOUNDS INTO A

BOOKSTORE; THE BOOKS WHICH WOULD

GIVE THE BOOKSTORE ITS IDENTITY ARE

INSTALLED IN THE FORM OF WALLS. HENCE,

THE SPACE IS CONSTITUTED BY THE FLOOR,

THE BOOKS AND THE CEILING. THE FAÇADE

IS RENDERED TRANSPARENT FROM THE

FLOOR TO THE CEILING WITHOUT A SOLID

WALL. "BOOK-WALLS" CARRY THEMSELVES.

PROJECT: SHIBUYA MONUMENT

LOCATION: SHIBUYA, TOKYO




TO KEEP THE CLADDING MATERIAL

STANDING, TO CUT AND CURL THE PLANE,

TO CLAD THE LOAD-BEARING PLANE,

TO SET THE RELATION NOT FROM FAR BUT

FROM THE INSIDE, TO BE ISOLATED.

NOT TO INTERFERE WITH THE TRADITIONAL

PATTERN OF THE TILES.

PROJECT: TAKS‹M ART GALLERY

LOCATION: BEYO⁄LU, ‹STANBUL




WHY NOT AN ART GALLERY, BUT A GALLERY

OF CONTEMPORARY ART? AS IT IS OBVIOUS

FROM ITS TITLE, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A

SPACE IN WHICH CONTEMPORARY ART WILL

BE EXHIBITED. IT IS QUITE DIFFICULT TO

EXHIBIT OR TO REALIZE A WORK OF

CONTEMPORARY ART IN A TRADITIONAL

GALLERY. BECAUSE A CONTEMPORARY WORK

OF ART BROUGHT TO THE GALLERY IS

ALMOST NEVER CONSIDERED

INDEPENDENTLY AND THEREFORE ITS

PRODUCTION PROCESS IS MOSTLY

IMCOMPLETE. THE ARTIST USUALLY CREATES

HER/HIS WORK WITH AND IN THE SPACE IN

WHICH IT WILL EXIST. THIS IS WHY, THE

EXHIBITION SPACE MUST HAVE NEUTRAL

QUALITIES WHICH WOULD EMPHASIZE THE

WORK. SINCE WE THOUGHT THAT THE NEW

EXHIBITION SPACE TO BE CREATED, SHOULD

GAIN ITS IDENTITY FROM THE WORK OR THE

WORKS WHICH WILL BE EXHIBITED IN IT, WE

CHOSE THE SPACE TO BE NEUTRAL. DUE TO

TECHNICAL REASONS, THE EXHIBITION

HALLS ARE SPACES WHICH ARE INWARD,

PROTECTED FROM THE EXTERNAL WORLD,

AND IN NEED OF THE SAME PRIVACY OF A

CONCERT HALL. BUT ITS LOCATION IN A VERY

BUSY AND CROWDED AREA OF THE CITY AND

RIGHT AT THE BEGINNING POINT OF A PARK

MADE IT NECESSARY TO MAKE THIS

PARTICULAR GALLERY TO RELATE TO THE

WORLD OUTSIDE TO SOME EXTENT. THE

GALLERY WHICH IS AT THE END OF THE ROW

OF THE TAKSIM GEZI STORES HAD ALSO TO

REFER TO THE PARK, WHICH STARTS RIGHT

NEXT TO IT. FOLLOWING THESE CRITERIA,

AND STAYING LOYAL TO THE PRINCIPLES,

THE RELATION WITH THE EXTERNAL WORLD

HAS BEEN PROVIDED WITH A TRANSPARENT

FAÇADE, WHICH WE INSTALLED BETWEEN

INTERIOR AND THE EXTERIOR BEHIND OF

WHICH THE INTERNAL CIRCULATION IS

LOCATED, AND WHICH EXTENDS TO BOTH

SIDES.

PAGE 44

PAGE 80

PAGE 82


PROJECT: THE ECONOMY BANK N.V. (TEBNV)

LOCATION: AMSTERDAM, NETHERLANDS



TO BRING THE WATER TO THE BUILDING,

SINCE NOT ABLE TO GO TO THE WATER.

TO APPROACH THE BUILDING FROM BEHIND.

TO REPEAT. TO TRANSFORM THE SMALL

PROGRAM INTO A BIG BUILDING.PAGE 88

PAGE 90

PAGE 66

PAGE 66


AKINNALÇA

TANITIM

VETASARIMH‹ZM

ETLE

R‹LTD

T:+90216

3431018

F:+90216

3107415

www.ak›nnalca.com

.tr


Documents

Searching for Zero Point in Architecture?