Daniel Libeskind and Turkish Architects
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
BETWEEN DECONSTRUCTIVIST ARCHITECTURE AND HYPER-HISTORICISM: DANIEL LIBESKIND AND TURKISH ARCHITECTS A Thesis Submitted to the Graduate School of Engineering and Sciences of İzmir Institute of Technology in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE in Architecture by Feray MADEN June 2008 İZMİR We approve the thesis of Feray MADEN ___________________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. Deniz ŞENGEL Supervisor ___________________________ Prof. Dr. Gürhan TÜMER Committee Member ___________________________ Assist. Prof. Dr. Koray KORKMAZ Committee Member 2 June 2008 ___________________________ Date ___________________________ ____________________________ Assoc. Prof. Dr. H. Murat GÜNAYDIN Prof. Dr. Hasan BÖKE Head of the Architecture Department Dean of the Graduate School of Engineering and Sciences ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am very much indebted to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Deniz Şengel for her supervision and her constant encouragement and attention, for her patience and efforts to broaden the horizons of this study and for providing a suitable atmosphere throughout the study. I thank the members of the thesis defense committee, Prof. Dr. Gürhan Tümer and Assist. Prof. Dr. Koray Korkmaz for inspiring discussion and comments, and to Assist. Prof. Dr. Selim Sarp Tunçoku and Assist. Prof. Dr. Zeynep Aktüre for their interest and input. I am equally grateful to Prof. Dr. Hilde Heynen, who has read early drafts of the chapters on Libeskind and deconstructivist architecture and offered valuable insights during my sojourn in fall 2006 at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven as an Erasmus Student. Thanks go to architects Emre Arolat, Nevzat Sayın, Durmuş Dilekçi, Gökhan Avcıoğlu, Yavuz Selim Sepin, Deniz Aslan, Emin Balkış, Elvan Çalışkan, Hakkı Yırtıcı, Murat Soygeniş, Nur Esin Altaş, Arda İnceoğlu and İpek Yürekli İnceoğlu for their very attentive responses to my questions and their participation in the study. They all also supported this research by providing printed and visual documents that constitute an important part of this thesis. I would like to thank Eva Söderman, head of press and public relations at the Jewish Museum, Berlin, for permission to take interior photographs of the Museum. Permission by the following museums and collections is gratefully acknowledged for reproduction of works: Museum of Modern Art, A. V. Shchusev State Research Museum of Architecture, Iakov Chernikhov International Foundation, State Russian Museum, The State Hermitage Museum, Musée National d’Art Moderne, Bauhaus- Archiv Museum für Gestaltung, the administration of the Santa Maria Novella and The Israel Museum and Istanbul Museum of Architecture. This study has been financially supported by a grant from the Institute’s Research Fund (Project No. 2007 İYTE 20), which enabled ordering of archival materials and reproductions. Finally, I would like to express my gratitude to my parents Ali and Yeter Maden and my sister Gonca Maden for their encouragement, help, immense patience and trust throughout my education and in every moment of my life. ABSTRACT BETWEEN DECONSTRUCTIVIST ARCHITECTURE AND HYPER-HISTORICISM: DANIEL LIBESKIND AND TURKISH ARCHITECTS Having its origins in the discipline of philosophy and the work of Jacques Derrida and emerging from the architectural concerns of the late twentieth century, deconstructivism has profoundly affected architectural theory and practice. In contrast with extant analyses of deconstructivist architecture in formalistic and stylistic terms, this thesis undertakes in Part I in three chapters a survey of the pre-history of deconstruction starting with the early twentieth-century avant-garde movements, and modernism and postmodernism, demonstrating debt and difference, and describes in detail the paths by which deconstructive philosophy was assimilated into architecture, including an extensive reading of Derridean concepts and their implementation in architectural discourse. In two chapters, Part II undertakes demonstration of how and why Libeskind’s architectural design derives from a deconstructivist position and proves his difference from architects like Eisenman, Hadid, Tschumi, Koolhaas, Himmelb(l)au, and Gehry who have been classified as deconstructivist. The thesis identifies Libeskind as the paradigmatic deconstructivist architect by criteria obtained through close reading of Three Lessons, Micromegas, Chamberworks, and the Jewish Museum Berlin. He is shown to differ from his contemporaries by a design approach that attaches fundamental importance to ‘memory’ and ‘history’ as well as a systematically developed alternative to conventional architectural drawing. Part III, in two chapters, offers an overview of Turkish architectural history in the twentieth century in order to identify some contemporary Turkish architects as test cases for descriptive classification as deconstructivist and undertakes analysis of five architects with reference to criteria established in the Libeskindean context. iv ÖZET DEKONSTRÜKTİVİST MİMARLIK VE HİPER-TARİHSELCİLİK ARASINDA: DANIEL LIBESKIND VE TÜRK MİMARLAR Kökeni felsefe disiplini ile Jacques Derrida’nın çalışmalarına dayanan ve yirminci yüzyıl sonlarının mimarî sorularından kaynaklanan dekonstrüktivizm, günümüz mimarî kuram ve uygulamasında önemli farklılıklar üretmiştir. Ancak, dekonstrüktivist mimarinin mevcut çözümlemeleri salt biçimsel ve üslûpsal temellere oturmaktadır. Bu tezin I. Ünitesi, üç bölüm halinde, dekonstrüksiyonun erken yirminci yüzyıl döneminin avangard hareketlerinde yer alan kökenleri ile, yine dekonstrüktivizmin tepki olarak meydana geldiği modernizm ve postmodernizm hareketlerinin çözümlemesini gerçekleştirdikten sonra, dekonstrüktivist felsefenin mimariye devşirilerek bir mimarî kurama dönüştürülmesini tartışmaktadır. Ünite aynı zamanda, Derrida’nın geliştirdiği ve mimarî kurama dahil edilen belli başlı kavramların analizini gerçekleştirmektedir. II. Ünite, Daniel Libeskind’in mimarisinin dekonstrüktivist bir duruşta kaynaklandığının sistematik kanıtı ile bu mimarın, ‘dekonstrüktivist’ olarak betimlenen Eisenman, Tschumi, Koolhaas, Hadid, Himmelb(l)au ve Gehry gibi mimarlardan farklarını sunmaktadır. Ünite, Libeskind’in paradigmatik dekonstrüktivist mimar olduğunu kanıtlamayı ve, iki bölüm halinde, gerek mimarî çizim dizilerinden gerek mimarlık tarihini konu alan yerleştirme eserlerinden oluşan Three Lessons in Architecture, Micromegas ve Chamberworks’ün ayrıntılı okuması ile Berlin, Yahudi Müzesinin ampirik incelemesinden oluşmaktadır. Libeskind’in, çağdaşlarından asal farkının; ‘bellek’ ve ‘tarih’ konularında kendini özellikle gösteren farklı bir tasarım yaklaşımı ile mimarî çizim geleneğine ürettiği radikal alternatiflerden oluştuğunu kanıtlamaktadır. İki bölümden oluşan III. Kısım önce, yirminci yüzyıl Türk mimarlık tarihinin ayrıntılı bir özetini sunmakta, çağdaş Türk mimarlarının ne tür bir tarihin içerisinden çıkarak ürettiklerini anlatmaktadır. Bu ardplan üzerine, gerek mülâkatlar gerek proje değerlendirmeleriyle incelenmek üzere seçilen Türk mimarları, Libeskind çerçevesinde tanımlanmış bulunan ölçütlerle dekonstrüktivist olarak betimlenip betimlenmeyecekleri sorusu bağlamında tartışılmaktadırlar. v TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF FIGURES ......................................................................................................... ix LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS......................................................................................xviii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION..................................................................................... 1 PART I. THE HISTORY OF A THEORY..................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 2. DECONSTRUCTION BEFORE DECONSTRUCTION: EARLY FORMALISMS....................................................................................... 12 2.1. Avant-Garde: The Origins and Development of the Term ................... 13 2.2. Avant-Garde against the Bourgeois...................................................... 16 2.3. The Architecture of the Avant-Garde ................................................... 18 2.4. Konstruktsiia: Russian Constructivism................................................. 20 2.5. The Avant-Garde Movements in ‘De-Constructivist Architecture’ ..... 26 CHAPTER 3. MODERN AND POSTMODERN ARCHITECTURE: AN OVERVIEW..................................................................................... 42 3.1. Modern Architecture............................................................................. 42 3.2. The Problem Emerging at the Heart of Modernism.............................. 47 3.3. The Postmodern Moment...................................................................... 53 CHAPTER 4. DECONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECTURE.................................... 59 4.1. The Concept of Deconstruction............................................................ 59 4.2. The Philosophy of Deconstruction ....................................................... 62 4.3. Architecture and Deconstruction .......................................................... 67 4.4. Deconstructivist Architecture ............................................................... 70 4.5. The Turn of History .............................................................................. 78 vi PART II. DANIEL LIBESKIND.................................................................................... 83 CHAPTER 5. LIBESKIND’S OEUVRE: THE ARCHITECTURE OF HISTORY AND MEMORY ....................................................................................