Cultural Production and Urban Locality in the Fields of Jazz and Fashion Design: the Case of Kuledibi, Istanbul
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
CULTURAL PRODUCTION AND URBAN LOCALITY IN THE FIELDS OF JAZZ AND FASHION DESIGN: THE CASE OF KULEDİBİ, İSTANBUL A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF SOCIAL SCIENCES OF THE MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY ALTAN İLKUÇAN IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN THE DEPARTMENT OF SOCIOLOGY SEPTEMBER 2013 Approval of the Graduate School of Social Sciences Prof.Dr. Meliha Altunışık Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Prof. Dr. Ayşe Saktanber Head of Department This is to certify that we have read this thesis and that in our opinion it is fully adequate, in scope and quality, as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Helga Rittersberger-Tılıç Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assist. Prof. Dr. Eminegül Karababa (METU-MAN) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Helga Rittersberger-Tılıç (METU-SOC) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tahire Erman (BİLKENT-POLS) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sibel Kalaycıoğlu (METU-SOC) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Erdoğan Yıldırım (METU-SOC) I hereby declare that all information in this document has been obtained and presented in accordance with academic rules and ethical conduct. I also declare that, as required by these rules and conduct, I have fully cited and referenced all material and results that are not original to this work. Name, Last name: Altan İlkuçan Signature : iii ABSTRACT CULTURAL PRODUCTION AND URBAN LOCALITY IN THE FIELDS OF JAZZ AND FASHION DESIGN: THE CASE OF KULEDİBİ, İSTANBUL İlkuçan, Altan Ph.D., Department of Sociology Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Helga Rittersberger-Tılıç September 2013, 230 pages This study aims to analyze the relationship between cultural producers in Istanbul and the wider processes of neoliberal urban restructuring that takes in their surroundings. The study uses a Bourdieusian framework to uncover such relationships between cultural producers and external influences on their respective fields. By focusing on the case of two fields (jazz and fashion design) as located in Kuledibi, Galata, the study aims to establish a localized perspective to the relationship between the cultural producers and broader field of power. With 30 in-depth interviews with cultural producers and participant observation as the main data collection methods, the perspective of the cultural producers is reflected in their relationships with a multiplicity of actors within and outside their respective fields. This study tries to explicate both fields in order to uncover positions, and strategies as well as forms of symbolic profit in each field This study establishes the presence of an ‘artistic mode of production’ in a neoliberal background. This introduces new actors (corporate and real estate capital, as well as local government) to field of power, and its relationships (in the form of sponsorships or local state support for cultural activity) to fields of cultural production in question. Moreover, these relationships are mediated by the use of urban space, and cultural producers’ strategies are also contextualized in the urban space. Finally, despite the various interventions from a local political and business elite, each field (of cultural production) in this analysis manages to reflect the internal demands of their respective fields in formulating their strategies. Keywords: artistic mode of production, the field of cultural production, fashion design, jazz, Kuledibi/Galata/Istanbul iv ÖZ CAZ VE MODA TASARIMI ALANLARINDA KÜLTÜREL ÜRETİM VE KENTSEL MEKAN İLİŞKİSİ: KULEDİBİ, İSTANBUL ÖRNEĞİ İlkuçan, Altan Doktora, Sosyoloji Bölümü Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Helga Rittersberger-Tılıç Eylül 2013, 230 sayfa Bu çalışmada İstanbul’daki kültürel üreticiler ve çevrelerinde meydana gelen neoliberal kentsel (yeniden-)yapılanma süreçleri arasındaki ilişki incelenmiştir. Bu ilişkilerin kültürel üreticiler ve ait oldukları alanlar üzerindeki dışsal etkileri Bourdieuvari bir çerçeve kullanılarak ortaya çıkarılmıştır. Bu çalışma, Kuledibi (Galata) bölgesinde yer aldıkları haliyle, caz ve moda tasarım alanlarına odaklanarak kültürel üreticilerin daha kapsamlı güç alanı ile ilişkilerine yerelleşmiş bir bakış açısı getirmektedir. Otuz adet derinlemesine mülakat ve katılımcı gözlem yöntemleri ile toplanan veriler, kültürel üreticilerin, kendi alanlarında ve diğer alanlar bulunan çok sayıda aktör ile ilişkilerine bakış açısını yansıtmaktadır. Bu çalışma her iki alanda mevcut konum, stratejiler ile sembolik kar biçimlerini ortaya çıkarmayı hedeflemiştir. Bu çalışma neoliberal bir arka planda ‘sanatsal üretim biçimi’nin varlığını ortaya koymaktadır. Bu üretim biçimi güç alanına sermaye ve yerel hükümet gibi yeni failler dahil etmekte, bu alanın sözkonusu kültürel üretim alanlarıyla sponsorluk ya da yerel hükümet desteği gibi yeni ilişkilerini tanımlamaktadır. Dahası, bu ilişkiler kentsel mekânın kullanımı üzerinden gerçekleşmekte ve kültürel üretim alanındaki faillerin stratejileri de kentsel mekân üzerinde gerçekleşmektedir. Yerel politik ve ekonomik elitin müdahalelerine rağmen, konu alınan kültürel üretim alanlarının her biri kendi içsel taleplerini stratejilerine yansıtabilmektedirler. Anahtar Kelimeler: sanatsal üretim biçimi, kültürel üretim alanı, moda tasarım, caz, Kuledibi/Galata/Istanbul v ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I am thankful to TÜBİTAK-BİDEB for awarding 2211 Ph.D. scholarship, which gave me motivation and concentration in my study. I would like to thank my advisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Helga Rittersberger-Tılıç for helping me to clear my mind a put this study together with her valuable and equally efficient directions. I also would like to thank Assoc. Prof. Dr. Tahire Erman from Bilkent University for her valuable support throughout my graduate study starting from my years in Bilkent University and sparing her valuable time to help me with her guidance. I also would like to thank other members of the thesis committee Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sibel Kalaycıoğlu, Assoc. Prof. Dr. Erdoğan Yıldırım, and Asist. Prof. Dr. Eminegül Karababa from Middle East Technical University for their valuable comments and criticisms. I would like to thank my family and friends for being very patient with my painful stress throughout my study. I also would like to thank all the respondents for sparing their valuable times for lengthy interviews. I also appreciate the staff of Department of Sociology and Institute of Social Sciences for their help, especially Selma Şahindokuyucu and Sündüs Aydın for their support and guidance throughout the program. vi TABLE OF CONTENTS PLAGIARISM ...................................................................................................... iii ABSTRACT ..........................................................................................................iv ÖZ .......................................................................................................................... v ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..................................................................................... vi TABLE OF CONTENTS ..................................................................................... vii LIST OF SYMBOLS/ABBREVIATIONS ......................................................... viii CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................... 1 1.1. Aim and Scope of the Study .................................................................. 7 2. CITY AND CULTURE ............................................................................... 10 2.1. Defining Urban Culture ..................................................................... 11 2.2. Cities as Centers of Cultural Production .............................................. 15 2.3. Defining the Cultural Economy........................................................... 20 2.4. Cultural Policy, Planning and City Marketing .................................... 27 3. NEOLIBERAL URBANISM ...................................................................... 32 3.1 Gentrification as a Neoliberal Tool ..................................................... 41 4. ARTISTIC MODE OF PRODUCTION AND THE FIELD OF CULTURAL PRODUCTION ................................ 43 4.1. Artistic Mode of Production ................................................................ 43 4.2. The Field of Cultural Production ........................................................ 52 4.2.1. Relationships with the Field of Power: Autonomy of the Field ........................................................... 55 4.2.2. Position, position-takings, and strategies .................................. 56 4.3. Artistic Mode of Production as a Field ............................................... 62 5. GENTRIFICATION OF KULEDİBİ, ISTANBUL AND NEOLIBERALISM.......................................................................... 67 5.1. Gentrification of Kuledibi ................................................................... 67 vii 5.2. Building the Neoliberal Regime in Istanbul......................................... 85 6. THE RESEARCH ....................................................................................... 99 6.1. The Field .......................................................................................... 101 6.1.1. The Selection of the Research Site ....................................... 102 6.1.2. The Selection of the Informants ............................................ 102 6.2. The Difficulties and the Limitations of the Field Study ..................... 106 7. THE FIELD OF JAZZ..............................................................................