A Diachronic Approach on Heterochronic Urban Space

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • 159-173 A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space

İlgi TOPRAK1, Alper ÜNLÜ2 1 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey 2 [email protected] • Department of Architecture, Faculty of Architecture, Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey

Received: May 2015 Final Acceptance: October 2015 Abstract As the fourth principle of heterotopias defned in Foucault’s controversial yet inspiring text named “Of Other Spaces”, heterochronies defne places that accumulate time, as well as temporary spatial formations. Tis study interprets urban spaces with historical backgrounds, which can accommodate both the accumulation of time and the temporariness, as heterochronic urban spaces. Tis study aims to evaluate the refection of socio-cultural background of historical neighbourhoods on the morphological and semantic change of their heterochronic elements throughout history. Te deconstructive methodology of the study consists of a diachronic research involving three parts: deconstructing, analysing and reconstructing history. By “deconstructing history” through a multi-layered “timeline” developed with important historical thresholds and a “zoning”, morphological or socio-cultural changes and “situations” are defned. “Analysing deconstructed history” involves the syntactic analyses of these “situations” in terms of historically persistent elements and temporary formations, to grasp the morphological and socio-cultural evolution of the heterochronic urban space. “Reconstructing history”, as a synthesis, semantically interprets syntactic fndings signalizing accumulations, discontinuities, shifs or losses of meaning. Te case study is Kuzguncuk neighbourhood, a heterochronic urban space on the Asian side of Istanbul, an old Bosphorus village, which mainly used to consist mostly of a welcoming and peaceful residential area co-inhabited by Jews, Chris- tians and Muslims, later by Black Sea migrants. Te area is gentrifed within the last thirty years. Te fndings of the case study show that Kuzguncuk is one of the heterochronic urban spaces, as well as a palimpsest where a majority of meanings perish, leading to fake re-valuation. Keywords Diachronic research, Heterochrony, Kuzguncuk, Space syntax. 160

1. Introduction a heterochronic urban space. As the f- Heterochronies, as in Foucault’s nal step of the three-fold methodology, fourth principle of heterotopias, defne this holistic interpretation attempts to multiple temporalities in a single place. do a synthesis of the case study. Besides architectural interpretations such as libraries and museums, heter- 2. Heterochrony: Temporality in ochronies can also defne urban spaces Foucault’s heterotopias and its trans- in smaller or bigger scales, collecting lation into urban spaces various morphological and socio-cul- Heterotopias are closely linked to tural traces of time. In fact, so-called concerns about time, notably time “heterotopic urban spaces” construct intervals, breaks, accumulations and a perpetual time accumulation and be- transitions. Between the eternal and come timeless. the temporary, heterotopic spaces re- Te frst section of this paper aims fer to temporal formations in diferent to discuss how temporality is handled contexts. Among the principles of het- in Foucault’s heterotopias in “Of Other erotopias in Foucault’s highly contro- Spaces” and defne what heterochrony versial text “Of Other Spaces”, it is indi- means as a spatio-temporal notion in- cated that there is not a universal form terpreting similar and following studies of heterotopia; functions of heteroto- mainly about architectural and urban pias are variable, and that heterotopias heterochronic spaces, notably the ones can gather multiple incompatible spac- of Heidegger, Sartre, Merleau-Ponty, es together. Tey have an opening-clos- and Rossi. Tis part of the work con- ing system, and are generally not freely centrates in theoretically describing accessible like public spaces. Tey al- “heterochronic urban space”. ways have a function relating to exter- Te second section explains the nal spaces (Foucault, 1986). According deconstructive methodology that is to the fourth principle of heterotopias, adopted in this study to examine het- which is the main concern of this pa- erochronic urban space in depth. Te per, heterotopias linked to “slices of methodology consists of three parts: time” named as “heterochronies”. Het- deconstructing, analysing and recon- erotopias are working at full capacity in structing history. Tis methodology case of rupture of the traditional time aims to uncover the history by decon- for humans, as in the case of a ceme- structing and layering historical data tery, an intersection of loss of life and of a heterochronic urban space within eternal rest. Te frst signifcant type of a “timeline”, analyse layered historical heterochrony is indefnite time accu- components using Space Syntax, and mulation as for libraries and museums. fnally holistically reconstruct history, It is an endless gathering of things, ac- as today’s reality, with a synthesis of cumulating and archiving in a specifc syntactic fndings and their semantic place, a place that becomes itself out interpretation. of time. Another type of heterotopias Te third chapter concentrates on stands out as quite the opposite of the the case study. Te case study involves previous one, defning spaces as tem- the historical evolution of the Kuzgun- porary structures, fugacious and fnite cuk neighbourhood, an old Bosphorus occurrences. Tese heterochronies are village on the Asian side of Istanbul strictly temporal and can be translat- using Space Syntax, diachronically ed to many architectural and spatial analysing changing syntactic values of experiences such as fairgrounds, vaca- heterochronies: historically persistent tion villages or Olympic villages. Tese elements as “heterochronic constants”, two entirely opposite sides of heter- gatherings and “situations” as “heterochronies refect the eternal and the ochronic variables” between the years temporary at the same time (Foucault, 1932 and 2014. 1986). Finally, the conclusion of the study Can urban spaces really be studied focuses on the semantic interpretation as heterochronies? Mc Leod (1996) of the current state of the neighbour- criticizes Foucault for having forsak- hood to answer the question to what en the “messy and in-between ur- extents Kuzguncuk can be defned as ban spaces” such as the residence, the

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 161 workplace, the street and many others. “situation” such as Sartre and Mer- Te limited illustration and descrip- leau-Ponty who primarily investigat- tion of spaces depicted as heterotopias ed the anthropological depth and the in “Of Other Spaces” seem to restrain conception of embodiment of “situa- the boundaries of the concept, refer- tion” (Ha, n.d.), according importance encing pre-defned spaces. However, to personal and sociological insights the idea of heterochrony itself can be of what embodies the self. However subject to defne a double-sided reality Heidegger diferentiated the concep- of permanence and transience of the tion of “situation” from the general actual urban pattern. It can be assumed situation depicting inauthentic spatial- that heterochronies create a bridge be- ity of the “Tey” (das Man) therefore, tween time and space. Te combina- “situation” has a more socio-cultural tion of accumulation of time and fu- potential (Heidegger, 1996; Ha, n.d.). gitive experiences form them, and like Each situation has its own characteris- in every heterotopic case, they show tics and cultural phenomena related to several inconsistencies. Heterochronic it, defning moments and slices of lived urban spaces refect continuity and it- spaces. In architectural thought, “sit- eration, depicting history and present uation” might be equivalently studied at the same time. Everyday experiences with the idea of “urban artefact” (Ros- actualize together in urban spaces with si, 1982). An urban artefact can appear references to the past. In that way ur- as a square, a building or a street that ban space as heterochrony, can verify signifes a certain moment in history, Foucault’s argument that urban spaces in a constantly changing urban pattern as heterochronies are sources of imme- (Rossi, 1982). Urban artefacts coexist diate knowledge. Like museums and and therefore form a city, which brings libraries, they ofer fnite, compiled back the argument of the Collage City and quick information. However, the (Koetter & Rowe, 1978) suggesting a everydayness of heterochronic envi- theory of urban fragmentation. An- ronments is not to be undermined. other conception, “palimpsest” that Because places such as library, a muse- means writing, erasing and rewriting um, a fairground or a farmers’ market on parchment; describes a “non-con- welcome everyday strollers, readers, temporaneity with itself of the living contemplators, chatters and shoppers. present” in Derrida’s words (Derrida, Two-sided experience of the urban 1994). Its urban interpretation “urban space as heterochrony, constructs a palimpsest” (Huyssen, 2003; Bjur&Az- bridge between accumulation/deletion imzadeh, 2007) explains the multi-lay- of historical traces through time and ered and diachronic attributes of urban everyday “situations” involving cultur- environments, and especially the need al, social changes, not in a way that a to explore present pasts in order to un- museum exposes an agglomeration of derstand past and present experiences time segments, but experiential space and sensibility of time, from both his- through which diferent indicators torical and phenomenological view- of time accumulation fnd a place for points. Sometimes in urban palimp- themselves. sests, urban artefacts or their cultural In respect of the communities and and sociological “situations” cannot the situations that defne them, heter- overcome decay. At this point, it is also ochronies are surrounded by disconti- relevant to talk about temporal and nuities, altering and sometimes decay- spatial discontinuities; especially “his- ing meanings. Te changing nature of torical discontinuities” (Teyssot, 1980) heterochronies appears more clearly, that can refect the segmented nature especially with everydayness, collec- of heterochronies, especially when so- tive experience of co-habitant com- ciological or cultural corruptions afect munities. Otherness becomes valuable, some “situations”, and let them become in most of the circumstances, as each new “situations”. In historical urban ar- moment in history and the collective eas, migration and gentrifcation tend memory associated to it become a to shif “situations”. In postmodern particular “situation” of its own. Many urban landscapes, historical architec- philosophers studied the spatiality of tural forms are amalgamated into new

A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space 162 buildings, to recall a collective memory the change of urban pattern; given that (Boyer, 1996, Mills, 2004) however in the historically permanent elements do case of shifing situations, amalgams not always evolve but they sometimes can appear fake and without identity, perish as well. resulting in a decay of meaning. Time collection is the most signif- 3. Methodology icant issue that constructs the idea Any urban space can accumulate of heterochrony in urban spaces. Al- time, as Doreen Massey (1995) argues, though Foucault’s approach seems “Te past of a place is as open to a mul- to involve a relatively artifcial time tiplicity of readings as is the present”. accumulation, as time accumulating However, historical urban spaces are heterochronies are defned as artifcial more likely to host several periods of collections that have been gathered time with diferent social, cultural as from diferent periods in history and well as morphological settings where put in a context to which they do not their changes and breaks are more belong; a majority of heterochronies apparent and easier to compare than in urban context has a steady and nat- they are in newer urban environments. ural time accumulation. For instance, Historical backgrounds are suitable to urban spaces gather diferent slices of uncover diferent fashions, interrelat- time together, with buildings and street ed slices of time and signifcant events, patterns that belong to various times- transformations, thresholds and mile- capes, and not at once, but in a long stones. term, they ensure the accumulation of Tis research aims to make a dia- time in themselves. According to Rossi chronic research on shifing “situa- (1982), urban artefacts sometimes re- tions” and permanent elements of his- main as they are, however sometimes torical neighbourhoods with syntactic they decay, and then their forms, their analysis. In order to achieve this, a physical marks stay persistent. Tis three-fold deconstructive methodolo- permanence is called “locus” and it gy is adopted: solidifes with collective memory. Lo- • Deconstructing history through a cus ‘emphasizes the conditions and “timeline” qualities within undiferentiated space • Analysing deconstructed history which are necessary for understanding through “Space Syntax” an urban artefact’ (Rossi, 1982). Tere- • Reconstructing history through a fore, locus witnesses many ‘situations’ “semantic interpretation”. and is the most interesting pathway to Te methodology is schematized in the exploration of an urban artefact. relation with the theoretical section Rossi (1982) also points out the impor- and the case study in Figure 1, and tance of rituals and collective nature then each step is explained in detail. of religious activity in the formation of historically permanent elements 3.1. Deconstructing history through (monuments), as they determine the “timeline” and “zoning” initiation of a certain religious and so- Heterochronic neighbourhoods can cio-cultural activity in an urban pat- have a chaotic and multi-layered his- tern, and provides a key to understand torical background. Terefore, an ex- urban contexts. “Te theory of perma- nences” suggests that it is incorrect to think of a persistent urban artefact as it is related to only one historical period. Te dynamic nature of the city leans towards an evolutionary process that not only helps the preservation of historically permanent elements but also presents them as promoters of evolution (Rossi, 1982). Tis view of evolutionary process somehow contradicts with the idea of “palimpsest” which supports a more realistic viewpoint on Figure 1. Schematic representation of the methodology. ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 163 tensive historical research about the ses concerning “heterochronic con- history of the neighbourhood is indis- stants” and “heterochronic variables” pensable in order to understand the will be put forward. Heterochronic temporal interrelations of important constants are historically persistent events, shifing situations, architectur- elements (ex. cultural buildings, ritual al and urban changes. Tis deconstruc- buildings, monuments) and heteroch- tion will be made through a multi-lay- ronic variables are more temporary ered timeline that aims to represent formations (ex. cultural gatherings and several aspects of time relating to the their housing zones) both found in ur- neighbourhood. Multiple temporali- ban heterochronic spaces. ties are investigated with historically Te frst step is to detect “heteroch- persistent elements, temporary forma- ronic constants”. According to Levy this tions, and socio-cultural and morpho- kind of diachronic research “focuses logical thresholds. Terefore, the time- on the role of constants, or historically line is crucial in order to understand persistent elements, in the fabric as the the dynamics of the current state of the city evolves from one stage to the next. neighbourhood, as many diferent cul- Tese elements play an important role tural and social backgrounds are inter- in the determining the present con- mingled. Te “timeline” concentrates fguration of the city” (Levy, 1999). In on historical events, thresholds and this study, these historically persistent periods (if any), maps, aerial photos, elements are called “heterochronic and the construction culturally signif- constants”, buildings or monuments cant buildings later used in the study as having cultural, ethnic or religious sig- “heterochronic constants”. nifcance, associated with urban arte- Te “zoning” represents the tem- facts and their underlying meanings, porary patterns of formations such as similar to the concept of “monuments” cultural gatherings or functions on a in “Te Architecture of the City” (Ros- map. Te zoning of residential patterns si, 1982). Tey signify the locus, the of diferent cultural gatherings is later time accumulation, and one or sever- used in the syntactic integration as- al related urban artefacts throughout sessment of “heterochronic variables” their entire existence. Places of rituals, in this study. as the key to understand urban context, a reference to the foundation of a city, 3.2. Analysing deconstructed history possess a collective nature and most through “space syntax” importantly signify an unchanging A morphological-syntactical study reality remaining out of time (Rossi, (Grifths, 2012) on the deconstructed 1982). Tat is why as houses of myths history will be presented in two difer- and rituals, religious buildings’ time ent methods: Te frst method involves accumulation and locus would be sig- the axial map analysis, in order to nifcant to understand the alteration of analyse visual interrelations and depth their syntactic values, especially their for comparing maps in which urban integration on a global scale. Average morphology changed signifcantly. depth of morphological and function- Te axial map analysis will include the al imprints on the historical area, their comparative general intelligibility (lo- comparative values and mutual efects cal-global scattergram and regression of integration/segregation degrees and analysis) and integration grid analysis sociological/cultural meanings are an- of diferent maps referring to distinct alysed. Isovists (area and perimeter maps throughout history, to under- values) are equally important to understand the overall evolution of the syn- stand their impacts and visibility from tactical pattern and intelligibility and surroundings, as well as their strategic to make inferences on the change of lo- location and the amount of visible area. cal/global integration levels of the area Teir syntactic signifcance can be and their correlations through time. measured according to the interrelat- Te second method will involve two ed alterations of integration and isovist diferent kinds of analysis: In order to values. If they both rise, visually, func- understand the “situations” given in the tionally and meaningfully, those ritual timeline, isovist and integration analy- spaces become more integrated in the

A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space 164 area. If they both decrease, those ritu- ues of respective heterochronic “vari- al spaces become more segregated. In able” (gathering) and “constant” (ritual both circumstances, the social and cul- place). tural context and historical data will be All syntactical analyses in this study investigated in order to understand any will be made with the sofware “Syn- enhancement or decay of meaning. If tax2D” developed in University of integration values and isovist values al- Michigan using the parameters area, ter inversely proportional, that means perimeter, circularity to determine either the building is more integrated isovist characteristics of space, and but less perceivable or vice versa. Tis the ease of spatial perception in het- shows that there may be complex is- erochronic constants; and integration sues with the building, its surround- parameter to analyse both heteroch- ings and its users. Te historical data ronic constants’ and variables’ degree about the building will be explored to of adaptation in terms of integration/ explain this complexity. Te other iso- segregation to the global system. vist-based parameter that is used for measuring in order to understand the 3.3. Reconstructing history through a convexity of spaces is circularity. High “semantic interpretation” circularity levels accentuate the shape In the conclusion section of the of a circle in a space, but the centrali- study, the fndings of the case study ty of the viewpoint also a determinant will be semantically interpreted. Te (Edgü et al, 2012). Terefore, in small- aim of this interpretation is to holisti- er urban settings, circularity is a pa- cally evaluate what has really happened rameter that promotes enclosure and in the heterochronic urban space. Te embodiment, determining a level of frst step is to concentrate on “situa- perceptive inclusion. tions”. Situations are discovered while Another way to examine “situations” creating the timeline and the zoning, is to reveal more temporary formations or while examining heterochronic and their evolution. Tese types of constants and variables. Te idea is to buildings are secondary elements con- retrieve useful information from syn- structing urban form, however their tactic fndings, and to make a commen- meanings remain very crucial for the tary with the aid of current and past society and the collective memory of “situations”. A more general synthesis citizens. In this study, they are called can be retrieved from the semantic in- “heterochronic variables”. Tey form terpretation of the case study. Te aim the everyday experiences of neigh- of this synthesis is not to generalise all bourhood life, and according to shif- similar cases, but to create an opening ing “situations”, they can change ap- to discuss the resilience of multi-cul- pearance, function or even disappear. tural heterochronic urban spaces. Teir mutual relations and patterns can alter. Te frst category of these less 4. A heterochronic case in Istanbul: persistent formations is “gatherings”, history and evolution of Kuzguncuk having a rapidly changing housing pattern, as they are subject to restoration 4.1. Kuzguncuk as a heterochronic and renewal, or even abandonment, urban space resulting from many reasons but main- Kuzguncuk can be described as a ly social and cultural changes in the heterochronic urban space because community using them, such as migra- it involves many properties signif- tion and gentrifcation. Tis study ex- cant to the accumulation of time, as amines cultural gatherings as changing well as feeting aspect of temporality. aspects of “situations” and analyse the We can mention several heterochron- integration values of their settlement ic elements in the area, mainly of two localizations in order to explain the so- diferent types: frst, called “heteroch- cial integration, daily lives and perma- ronic constants” in this study, mainly nence in the area, comparing integra- investigate strategic places that remain tion values with each other, examining intact over centuries. As ritual places every gatherings’ relation with its ritual witness the entire existence of a cul- space(s) according to integration val- tural gathering in an urban space, re-

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 165 ligious buildings of Kuzguncuk (Greek and was constructed in 1821 on İcadiye and Armenian churches, a synagogue Street (Tonguç & Yale, 2012). Another and a mosque) compose the only ty- Greek Church, Hagios Pantalemion, pology of “heterochronic constants” in was built in 1831 and its bell tower was this study. “Heterochronic constants” added in 1890. Armenians had built symbolize the cultural gathering spac- the Surp Krikor Lusavoric Church in es and ensure the existence of those 1831, which was later rebuilt in 1861. gatherings, however they can lose im- Two synagogues were built, one in pact with changing “situations”, and 1878 (although other sources indicate dying urban artefacts. Second, called 1818) named Beth Ya’akov Synagogue, “heterochronic variables” include the also known as the Big Synagogue on temporary characteristics and chang- Icadiye Street, along with a smaller one ing aspects of urban space, especially in Yakup Street named Kal de Ariva “situations” and diferent social and Synagogue built in 1840. Finally, there cultural gatherings deriving from those are two mosques, the older one named “situations”. Greeks, Armenians, Jews, Üryanizade Mosque with the simple Muslims, migrants and gentrifers are building but with an interesting wood- some of the gatherings in Kuzguncuk en minaret, built in 1860 on the shore- throughout history, and the arrival of line, and the new mosque built in 1952, some of these gatherings are interrelat- named Kuzguncuk Mosque. ed with new situations. For example, Other important landmarks are two when gentrifers entered the neigh- baths: Small Bath and Mountain Bath; bourhood, “gentrifcation” became a three fountains: İsmet Bey Fountain, new situation. İskele Fountain and Hacı Ahmed Efen- di Fountain (destroyed); Kuzguncuk 4.2. Deconstructing the history of Pier and fnally Old Police Station (de- Kuzguncuk with “timeline” and stroyed). Tere are three cemeteries in “zoning” Kuzguncuk: Jewish Cemetery, Greek On the Asian shore of the Bospho- Orthodox Cemetery and Nakkaş Baba rus, one of the small neighbourhoods Muslim Cemetery. Housing patterns in along the shoreline, Kuzguncuk was Kuzguncuk are also worth mention- once known as a mixed communi- ing. According to Bektaş (1996) be- ty of Greeks, Jews, and Armenians sides important mansions by the shore (Akin, 1994). Although many sources (yali), the housing pattern that address indicate that Kuzguncuk’s name once to people with middle income are very was Chrysokeramos, many historians interesting. Greek houses commonly have not agreed this idea, as it stood used timber frame and wood, while for neighbourhood and church names Armenians preferred masonry hous- in three adjacent Bosphorus villages es. A very special housing pattern is Kuzguncuk, Beylerbeyi and Çengelköy found in Üryanizade Street, consisting (Bektaş, 1996). According to İncicyan, of row houses with small jetties, wood- the name Kuzguncuk is a derivation en houses with embellished façades in from “Kosinitsa”, the old name of the Simitçi Tahir Street and are some of district (İncicyan, 1976; Bektaş,1996). most famous patterns in Kuzguncuk Kuzguncuk was a Jewish neighbourhood in the beginning, although when Jews settled is still unknown. Tere is a strong possibility that they settled into the area afer emigrating from Spain in 1492. In 18th century, Arme- nians started to move into the area and started to grow their community in the 19th century (Bektaş, 1996). Start- ing from 18th century, mostly Jews, Greeks and few Armenians were residents of Kuzguncuk. Hagios Georgios Church was one of the churches that belonged to the Greeks in Kuzguncuk Figure 2. Current state of Kuzguncuk neighborhood. A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space 166

(Figure 2). stantin Kaminar Map (1813) as well as Non-Muslim “minorities lef Istan- Moltke Map (1837). With Stolpe map bul in response to the frightening po- (1863-1880), connections of the area litical climate between the 1940s and with Üsküdar and İcadiye become more the 1960s. During this same period, visible (Bektaş, 1996). Starting from the rural-urban migration from Anatolian frst quarter of the 1800’s, many heter- villages created a cultural shif in the ochronic constants, especially religious old mahalle (neighbourhood)” (Mills, buildings have been constructed and 2004). Te main crisis was about an a majority of them survived until our incident on 6th and 7th of September days. Tresholds are related to the start 1955. Greeks, Jews, and Armenians of diferent housing developments oc- who had not lef the area afer this in- cupied by distinct cultural groups, and cident, moved to newer areas in Istan- important events signifcant to the cul- bul. According to Tümertekin (1997), tural or morphological change of the in a research he conducted during 60’s area. Diferent maps, thresholds and and 70’s, Kuzguncuk’s residents mainly heterochronic constants of Kuzgun- consist from Istanbulians with 46% of cuk and their dates can be seen on the the total residents, the majority of them timeline (Figure 3). live closer to the shoreline, whereas mi- Kuzguncuk has seen many changes, grants settle in the rear side of the area ruptures and historical discontinuities, (Figure 4). Black Sea migrant commu- that is why gatherings symbolizing nity forms the majority of Kuzguncuk diferent “situations” have locational (İcadiye) residents today, and has since importance, and their integration to late 1930s when they migrated to larger the system is crucial in order to under- cities. Presently, non-Muslims form a stand their subsistence. Te mapping minority of the residents. (Mills, 2004). of these gatherings is made with refer- In the 1980s, with the frst process of ence to memories of a very small sam- gentrifcation in Istanbul, Kuzguncuk ple of interviewees in books and theses become a popular place (Ergun, 2004). (Bektaş, 1996, Mills, 2004). According Many Turkish architects, poets and to the zoning, along the main street artists followed famous architect Cen- (İcadiye Street) there are mainly shops giz Bektaş, who frst bought a house and residential area, however wealthy in Kuzguncuk that he renovated afer- Turkish residents are situated along the wards and made a participative plan- shoreline road (Paşalimanı Avenue). ning and renovation process without Tere are two large residential areas, any charge during the following years one in the centre of Kuzguncuk, where in the area (Ergun, 2004; Uzun, 2002), residents from all backgrounds live to- making possible the frst wave of gen- gether; another in the outskirts of the trifcation in Istanbul (Ergun, 2004). neighbourhood towards İcadiye, most- Te frst morphological fndings ly occupied by Black Sea migrants. Fi- about Kuzguncuk show that a few nally, Üryanizade Street is known with buildings are present close to the shore- the start of gentrifcation in Kuzgun- line and a triangular street pattern is cuk. Te area around Üryanizade Street depicted on Kaufer Map (1776), Kon- still welcomes many new residents as a

Figure 3. Timeline: thresholds, maps and heterochronic constants.

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 167

1. Axial line analysis shows the most integrated streets, and grid integration analysis shows the most integrated areas in the system. Intelligibility is the correlation between connectivity and integration, which permits the understanding of the global relation of space from what can be observed (Klarqvist, 1993). Looking at the intelligibility values of three maps, the r-squared value of the total system changes slightly according to the axial lines of three subse- quent periods. In 1932, r-squared value is 0.96 and according to axial lines and integration values the void space towards the west is generally integrated in the system. In 1966, r-squared value slightly increases to 0.97, and the system becomes slightly more intelligible as well, and the shoreline and all heterochronic constants through it is more integrated in the system. In 2014, however, there was a decrease in the r-squared value to 0.94; the system becomes less intelligible, leaving only the intersection of the main street and the shoreline as the most integrated area in the system. According to axial line analysis, the secondary street in the east is more visually integrated than it Figure 4. Zoning of Kuzguncuk neighborhood. was in the past (Table 1). result of gentrifcation (Figure 4). Table 2 investigates the alterations of heterochronic constants and variables 4.3. Analysing deconstructed history during the defned period. Te com- of Kuzguncuk through “space syn- parative syntactic analysis of heteroch- tax” ronic constants is made referring to From the timeline, three maps are fve religious buildings that are found used for syntactic analysis. Tese maps in the spectrum of the map boundary: and aerial photos are chosen accord- Hagios Panteleimon Greek Church, ingly to important dates in history and Hagios Georgios Greek Church, Beth morphological and sociological chang- Ya’akov Synagogue (Main Synagogue), es in the area. 1932 Pervititch insurance Kuzguncuk Mosque and fnally Surp map shows all heterochronic constants Krikor Armenian Church. except the mosque, and all non-Mus- Hagios Panteleimon Greek Church lim gatherings are present. 1966 aerial has still a great imprint on the area, photo shows a situation afer the 1955 due to its bell tower as a special feature, incident when many non-Muslims lef although its integration values severe- and migrants settled. Finally, 2014 map ly decrease from 851 to 405 then to is a refection of the present where all 352. Its isovist area and perimeter re- heterochronic constants are present spectively decrease in 1966, and rises and residents, migrants and gentrifers again in 2014. Hagios Georgios Greek live together. Te boundaries of the an- Church similarly becomes less inte- alysed area are based on the Pervititch grated by time, however its isovist (area insurance map and are exactly applied and perimeter) values stay steady. Te to the other two sources. reason behind this might be the decline To understand the area globally, frst of the main avenue’s overall integration axial line and grid integration analyses statistics. Te circularity also decreases of the whole system are shown in Table gradually for both Greek churches, de-

A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space 168 riving from the dominant linearity of shoreline axis, whereas in 2014 it de- the main avenue. creases to 235, as the system’s highest Beth Ya’akov Synagogue entry has integration values concentrate on the very close integration values to Hagios main road/shoreline intersection (Ta- Georgios Greek Church, showing ap- ble 2). Its isovist area decreased from proximate fashions with it as they are 2707 in 1966 to 2522 in 2014, although neighbouring (Table 2). However Beth its perimeter increased from 499 to Ya’akov Synagogue’s isovist area and 608, as well as circularity rising from perimeter values decrease respectively 91 to 146, less perceivable and less em- from 3.674 and 620 in 1932, to 3.382 bodied as a result of the reconstruction and 544 in 1966, and then increase to across the road (Table 2). 3.625 and 585. Its circularity values frst Te most important increase in in- decreased from 104 to 87 then went up tegration values are marked with Surp to 94. Beth Ya’akov Synagogue and Ha- Krikor Armenian Church, which from gios Georgios Greek Church entrances 1932 to 1966 has tripled its integration seem visually hidden from the main values, followed by a slight decrease in street, and do not appear at frst to ev- 2014. Same fashions for isovist area/ eryday stroller unless they are searched perimeter/circularity values: the in- for. Te reason behind this fact could crease in 1966 may have been resulted be that the actual religious buildings from the widening of the coastline road are behind the entrance walls, which and the demolition of the old wooden separate the street from the buildings. house on the coast, but both buildings Te mosque did not exist in 1932, (Armenian Church and Mosque) be- thus the slightly larger building in its came more likely to be perceived and place had an integration value of 268, situated in a more embodied space (Ta- which in 1966, afer the construction ble 2). of the mosque in 1952, rises to 293 be- Although according to axial line coming more integrated as well as the analysis (Table 1), the main (İcadiye) Table 1. Integration, axial line analysis and intelligibility of Kuzguncuk.

1932

1966

2014

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 169

Table 2. Syntactic values of heterochronic constants and variables of Kuzguncuk. HETEROCHRONIC CONSTANTS 1932 1966 2014

1932 1966 2014 Integration 1 Hagios Panteleimon (GC) 851 405 352 2 Hagios Georgios (GC) 604 380 317 3 Synagogue 601 386 335 4 Mosque 268 293 235 5 Surp Krikor (AC) 136 442 357 Area 1 Hagios Panteleimon (GC) 5408 3726 3996 2 Hagios Georgios (GC) 3612 3387 3439 3 Synagogue 3674 3382 3625 4 Mosque 1796 2709 2522 5 Surp Krikor (AC) 1056 4079 3839 Perimeter 1 Hagios Panteleimon (GC) 1014 632 663 2 Hagios Georgios (GC) 631 560 524 3 Synagogue 620 544 585 4 Mosque 594 499 608 5 Surp Krikor (AC) 361 874 682 Circularity 1 Hagios Panteleimon (GC) 190 107 108 2 Hagios Georgios (GC) 110 92 79 3 Synagogue 104 87 94 4 Mosque 196 91 146 5 Surp Krikor (AC) 123 187 116 HETEROCHRONIC VARIABLES 1932 1966 2014

1932 1966 2014 Mean integration residents Jews 191,94 Turks 490,26 Armenians 216,51 Greeks 240,27 +movers Residents 284,74 253,77 272,86 Migrants 157,09 90,81 Gentrifers 127,70

A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space 170 street becomes highly integrated by 253,77. Many non-Muslims moved and time, isovist analysis (Table 2) shows lef their places to Black Sea migrants, that locally, heterochronic constants’ whose locations have a mean integra- integration values decrease regular- tion of 157,09 which seems quite in- ly, with some small exceptions show- tegrated, probably resulting from the ing improvement closer to 2014. Te moving decisions of non-Muslims and shoreline is more and more integrated selling their properties to migrants be- over time according to axial line anal- low their value. In 2014 however, mi- ysis. However strategic importance of grants had a lower mean integration the Armenian Church and Mosque and of 90,81 and residents rise to 272,86 the alteration of the building erections in consequence of the increasing eco- around them result in the elevation of nomic gap between them. Te integra- integration values around 1966, fol- tion of the mosque slightly drops in lowed by a slight decrease in 2014. Te 2014 as well as the migrants’ gathering increase in the integration of the axial mean integration. Te “gentrifers”, line along the street near the Armenian more integrated than migrants but less Church, perpendicular to the shoreline integrated than residents with 127,70, is very important for these two build- probably prefer to rejuvenate more ings to become more integrated into segregated places, but still be global- the system. ly integrated and close to main street. Heterochronic variables of 1932 Tey especially are numerous in Üry- consist of the cultural mosaic once anizade Street. found in Kuzguncuk that symbolized the mutual tolerance of the cultural 5. Conclusion: Reconstructing his- gatherings. Jews are generally locat- tory through a “semantic interpreta- ed in the rear parts of the main street, tion” according to some witness memories Today, Kuzguncuk known as a so- (Bektaş, 1996). Te mean integration of cially inclusive neighbourhood can still the area they lived is 191,94 a relatively be considered as a welcoming urban low integration value, which may ap- space. Te axial analysis approves that prove the fact that lower-income Jews the main perpendicular lines along settled in Kuzguncuk. Te main syna- the shoreline and the neighbourhood, gogue’s integration value however was create an integrated space. Trough 601, one of the highest values in heter- many changes and accumulations of ochronic constants in 1932, which may the sociological and cultural patterns; mean that Jews in Kuzguncuk attach Kuzguncuk acquires syntactical-mor- importance to their ritual places’ loca- phological and phenomenological tion more than their homes, although multi-layered structure, which can be the second synagogue (not included called in this case an urban palimpsest in the map) is located in a relatively through which several heterochron- segregated place. Turks living mostly ic constants are collected along with along the coastline are wealthy people, many sociological “situations” as het- their integration is highest (490,26) erochronic variables. among others. Armenian and Greek Looking from today, Kuzguncuk’s settlements have similar integration heterotopic constants are crucial for values, 216,51 and 240,27 respectively, the richness of the area, as they contrib- although Greek churches are more in- ute to its positive reputation and to the tegrated with 851 and 604, the Arme- idea of an inclusive neighbourhood. nian church is even more segregated However, many of these heterochron- than Armenians’ settlement mean in- ic constants became less integrated tegration, with 136. Today, Surp Krikor in 1966, then slightly ameliorated in Armenian Church is as integrated as 2014, Tey show that their meanings all other ritual places in the system, are determined by shifing “situations”, despite the reduction in the number of which in this case are the desertion of Armenian residents. non-Muslims and arrival of migrants In 1966, probably the political cli- just before 1966 resulting in the seg- mate afected the integration of current regation; however re-appropriation residents decreasing from 284,74 to and valuation of religious buildings by

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 171 gentrifers before 2014 resulted in the presented at the Sixth International higher integration of the heterochronic Space Syntax Symposium, İstanbul. constants. In 2014, the integration val- Boyer, C. (1996). Te City of Collec- ues of heterochronic constants become tive Memory: Its Historical Imagery and closer; objectifed and clarifed of un- Architectural Entertainments. Boston: derlying meanings; only their “locus” MIT Press. is now present. When we look at the Derrida, J. (1994). Specters of Marx: overall picture for heterochronic con- Te State of the Debt, the Work of stants, their syntactic values seem to Mourning and the New International. make sense with changing “situations”, Oxon: Routledge. however heterochronic variables have Edgü, E., Ünlü, A., Şalgamcıoğlu, internal dynamics as well, such as the M.E., Mansouri, A. (2012). Tradition- segregation of migrants’ settlements al Shopping: A Syntactic Comparison of relation with their identity and social Commercial Spaces in Iran and Turkey. belonging issues. Paper presented at the Eighth Interna- From a wider perspective, through tional Space Syntax Symposium, Santi- morphological or sociological inter- ago de Chile. ventions to the urban pattern, het- Ergun, N. (2004). Gentrifcation in erochrony as a notion is reinforced: Istanbul. Cities, 21(5), 391– 405. heterochronic spaces have indicative Foucault, M. (1986). Of Other Spac- traces of palimpsest environment. Te es. [Des Espaces Autres] transl. by Mis- defnition of palimpsest is a highly so- kowiec, J., Diacritics, 16(1), 22-27. ciological issue, depending on lives and Grifths, S. (2012). Te use of space lived experiences accorded with slices syntax in historical research: current of time. Heterochrony has a fuzzy na- practice and future possibilities. Paper ture, dealing with both permanent and presented at the Eighth International feeting aspect of time and space, at Space Syntax Symposium, Santiago de this point; this study shows that even Chile. constant elements of the urban pattern Ha, P. (n.d.). Heidegger’s Concept result in “the loss and shif of meaning”. of the Spatiality of Dasein: Te phil- Te loss or shif of meaning in heter- osophical discourse on the localiza- ochronies afect the urban fabric as a tion in the global age [pdf]. Retrieved palimpsest as well, since the ageing ur- from http://www2. ipcku.kansaiu.ac. ban palimpsest seem to accumulate a jp/~t980020/Husserl/ appliedPhenom- collection of memories and meanings enology/ha.pdf relating to places, however in reality, Heidegger, M. (1996). Being and a majority of these meanings perish, Time: A Translation of “Sein und Zeit”. only their “locus” persist in heteroch- Albany: State University of New York ronic constants, giving opportunity Press. in cases like gentrifcation to “fake Huyssen, A. (2003). Present Pasts: re-valuation” of the aura of these traces Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of amalgamated in the palimpsest, inde- Memory. Stanford: Stanford California pendent of lived experiences. Press. İncicyan, P. G. (1976). 18. Asırda References İstanbul [Istanbul in 18th Century]. İs- Akın, N. (1994). Kuzguncuk. Dün- tanbul: İstanbul Enstitüsü Yayınları. den Bugüne İstanbul Ansiklopedisi. Klarqvist, B. (1993). A Space Syntax [From Yesterday to Today: Istanbul En- Glossary. Nordisk Arkitekturforskning, cyclopedia], Istanbul: Türkiye Ekono- 1993(2), 11-12. mik ve Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı, 145-146. Koetter, F., Rowe, C. (1978). Collage Bektaş, C. (1996). Hoşgörünün Öte- City. Boston: MIT Press. ki Adı: Kuzguncuk [Te Other Name Levy, A. (1999). Urban morphology for Tolerance: Kuzguncuk]. İstanbul: and the problem of the modern urban Tasarım Yayın Grubu. fabric: some questions for research. Ur- Bjur, H., Azimzadeh, M. (2007). Te ban Morphology, 3(2), 79-85. urban palimpsest: the interplay between Massey, D. (1995). Places and Teir the historically generated layers in ur- Pasts. History Workshop Journal, 39, ban spatial system and urban life. Paper 182-192.

A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space 172

McLeod, M. (1996). Everyday and Architecture Teory since 1968 (pp. “Other” Spaces. In D.L. Coleman, E.A. 296-305). Cambridge: Te MIT Press. Danze, C.J. Henderson (Eds.), Archi- Tonguç, S. E., Yale, P. (2012). İstan- tecture and Feminism (pp. 1-37). New bul Hakkında Her Şey [All About Istan- York: Princeton Architectural Press. bul]. Istanbul: Boyut Publishing. Mills, A. (2004). Streets of Memory: Tümertekin, E. (1997). İstanbul İn- Te Kuzguncuk Mahalle in Cultural san ve Mekan [İstanbul People and Practice and Imagination (Unpub- Space]. İstanbul: Türkiye Ekonomik ve lished doctoral dissertation). Universi- Toplumsal Tarih Vakfı. ty of Texas at Austin, Austin. Uzun, C. N. (2002). Kentte Yeni bir Rossi, A. (1982). Te Architecture of Dönüşüm Süreci ve Yasal Düzenlem- Te City. Boston: MIT Press. eler [A New Transformation Process Teyssot, G. (1980). Heterotopias and in the City and Legal Organizations]. the History of Spaces. In M. Hays (Ed.), Planlama, 2002 (1), 37–44.

Heterokronik kentsel mekanların leme, heterokronik kentsel mekanın artzamanlı yaklaşımla irdelenmesi iki şekilde, yani tarihte iz bırakan kalıcı Foucault, pek çok düşünüre esin öğeler ile geçici oluşumlar üzerinden kaynağı olsa da aynı zamanda tartışma değerlendirilmesini, ve mekandaki konusu olan “Başka Mekanlara Dair” morfolojik ve sosyo-kültürel evrimin adlı metninde tanımlanan heterotopya anlaşılmasını sağlamaktadır. Tarih- kavramının dördüncü özelliğine göre, te iz bırakan kalıcı öğeler bu çalışma heterokroni kavramı ile zaman birik- kapsamında “heterokronik sabitler” tiren yerlerin yanısıra geçici mekanla- olarak değerlendirilmiştir, ve sadece rı da tanımlamaktadır. Bu çalışmada, farklı kültürel gruplara ait dini binalara hem zaman biriktirme hem de geçicilik indirgenmiştir. Morfolojik ve sosyo- özelliklerini birlikte barındıran tarihi lojik değişimleri oluşturan farklı “du- mahalleler, heterokronik kentsel me- rumlar” (situations) ise “heterokronik kanlar olarak irdelenecektir. değişkenler” olarak adlandırılmıştır, Bu çalışma sosyo-kültürel etkilerin ve bu çalışmada farklı sosyo-kültürel tarihi mahalleler üzerine yansımaları- toplulukların yerleşim dokuları üze- nı, mahallelerdeki heterokronik öğele- rinden değerlendirilmiştir. Üçüncü rin morfolojik, sentaktik ve semantik aşama, “tarihin yeniden inşası”, parça- değişimini inceleyerek değerlendir- lara ayrılarak sentaktik irdelemesi ya- meyi amaçlamaktadır. Bu amaçla, ça- pılan mekanların, zaman çizelgesinden lışmada heterokronik kentsel mekanı yararlanarak, semantik bir okuma i le derinlemesine i rdelemek için, yapısö- holistik bir şekilde yorumlanmasıdır. kümcü bir metodoloji kullanılmıştır. Sentaktik bulgular, morfolojik veya Metodolojik kurgu, tarihin yapısökü- sosyolojik değişimlere, anlam kaybı, mü, mekansal dizim ile sentaktik irde- anlamsal kayma, devamsızlık ve birik- leme ve tarihin yeniden inşası (sentez) melere işaret edebilir. Bu nedenle “tari- olmak üzere üç aşamadan oluşmakta- hin yeniden inşası”, çalışmada sentak- dır. Birinci evrede, heterokronik kent- tik ve semantik anlamda bir bütünlük sel mekana ait önemli tarihi olaylar, oluşturmayı, ve heterokronik kentsel binalar, çeşitli dönemleri yansıtan ha- mekanların artzamanlı evriminin sen- rita ve hava fotoğrafarı, çok katmanlı tezini yapmayı hedefemektedir. bir zaman çizelgesi yardımıyla parça- Alan araştırması, Kuzguncuk ma- lara ayrılmıştır. Zaman çizelgesi hete- hallesinde yapılmıştır. İ stanbul’un rokronik kentsel mekanın tarihindeki Anadolu Yakası’nda bulunan bir boğaz eşiklerin, morfolojik ve sosyo-kültürel köyü olan Kuzguncuk, çalışmadaki değişimlerin ve bu değişimlerin ara- heterokronik kentsel mekan özellikler- sında kalan zaman dilimlerinin belir- ine uyan bir mahalledir. Genel olarak, lenmesinde rol oynamaktadır. İkinci huzurlu ve yaşanılır olarak nitelendi- aşamada, parçalarına ayrılmış zaman rilen mahallede, geçmişte çok sayıda çizelgesinden yararlanarak, heterokro- Musevi, Ermeni, Rum ve Türk birlik- nik bölgenin sentaktik irdelemesi ger- te yaşamışlardır. Yakın geçmişte Ka- çekleştirilmektedir. Bu sentaktik irde- radeniz Bölgesi’nden çok sayıda göç

ITU A|Z • Vol 12 No 3 • November 2015 • İ. Toprak, A. Ünlü 173 alan mahalle, son otuz yılda ise soylu- Palimpsest yapıdaki kentsel mekanda, laştırma (gentrifkasyon) yolu ile so- yaşanmışlıktan ziyade, anlamsal bir syo-kültürel değişime uğramıştır. Alan birikme söz konusu olmuştur. Birçok çalışmasının sonuçlarına göre Kuz- anlam de geçicilik göstermiş, kay- guncuk Mahallesi, bulanık bir kavram bolmuş veya değişmiştir. olan heterokroniyi güçlendirmektedir.

A diachronic approach on heterochronic urban space