TRANSFORMATION OF ANKARA BETWEEN 1935-1950 IN RELATION WITH EVERYDAY LIFE AND LIVED SPATIALITY A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL OF NATURAL AND APPLIED SCIENCES OF MIDDLE EAST TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY BY SERP İL ÖZALO ĞLU IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY IN ARCHITECTURE JUNE 2006 Approval of the Graduate School of Natural and Applied Sciences -- Prof. Dr.Canan Özgen Director I certify that this thesis satisfies all the requirements as a thesis for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Assoc. Prof. Dr. Selahattin Önür Head of the 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. Cânâ Bilsel Supervisor Examining Committee Members Assoc. Prof. Dr. Sibel Kalaycıo ğlu (METU-SOC.) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cânâ Bilsel (METU-ARCH.) Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nur Ça ğlar (GAZ İ-MİMARLIK) Assist. Prof. Dr. T. Elvan Ergut (METU-ARCH.) Assist. Prof. Dr. Nur Altınyıldız( BAHÇE ŞEH İR-GSMT) ii 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 : SERP İL ÖZALO ĞLU Signature : iii ABSTRACT TRANSFORMATION OF ANKARA BETWEEN 1935-1950 IN RELATION WITH EVERYDAY LIFE AND LIVED SPATIALITY Özalo ğlu, Serpil Ph.D. Department of Architecture Supervisor: Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cânâ Bilsel June 2006, 393 pages Being the capital of the young Republic, transformation of Ankara’s urban environment into a modern one was one of the objectives of the Early Republican period. In the study, the transformation of urban culture is traced through everyday life of the inhabitants and lived spatiality in the new and old/traditional parts of the city. Urban culture clearly manifests itself in urban public spaces by means of everyday life and lived spatiality. It is not only the elite but the humble income social groups which are the main agents/actors of the transforming urban culture. In Ankara, gradual appropriation of a modern life style takes place in the urban public spaces but these spaces do not have to be part of the grand narrative of nation-building. Cultural places (Sergievi, theaters, movie theaters, people’s houses), recreation places (parks, coffee shops, restaurants), shopping areas, streets and boulevards, districts are spaces of everyday life and new spatial and bodily practices flourish in these spaces. The reality of the city shelters both the new/modern, the old, and the spontaneously developing urban environments which equally participated in the transformation process. The research is based on memory in the study. Written documents, newspapers, literary constructions, memoirs and interviews with the old inhabitants of the city are the main sources. According to the analyses made on the obtained iv data, Ankara was a fruitful medium for creation of a modern urban culture during the mentioned period and middle social groups were the main components of this transformation process. Key words: Modernization, transformation, memory, lived spatiality, everyday life, bodily practices, middle social groups. v ÖZ ANKARA’NIN GÜNLÜK YA ŞAM VE MEKÂNSAL PRAT İKLER AÇISINDAN DÖNÜ ŞÜMÜ: 1935-1950 Özalo ğlu, Serpil Doktora, Mimarlık Bölümü Tez Yöneticisi: Doç. Dr. Cânâ Bilsel Haziran 2006, 393 sayfa Genç Cumhuriyet’in ba şkenti olan Ankara’da kentsel çevrenin modernle şmesi Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi’nin hedeflerinden biriydi. Çalı şmada kentsel kültürün dönü şümü, Ankaralıların günlük ya şamları ve mekansal pratikleri üzerinden ara ştırılmı ştır. Bu ara ştırmada hem yeni hem de eski veya geleneksel mahalleler/mekanlar yer almı ştır. Kent kültürü, günlük ya şam ve mekansal pratikler aracılı ğıyla, kendini kentin kamusal alanlarında açıkça gösterir. Kent kültürünü dönü ştürenler yalnızca elit bir kesim de ğil, mütevazı bir ya şam süren di ğer toplumsal gruplardır da. Modern ya şam biçiminin yava ş yava ş benimsenmesi yalnızca ulus devletin kurulu ş tarihinde yer alan mekanlar aracılı ğıyla olmaz. Kültürel mekanlar (Sergievi, tiyatrolar, sinemalar, halk evleri), e ğlence/dinlence yerleri (parklar, kahveler, restoranlar), çar şılar, “asfalt” ya da bulvarlar, mahalleler günlük ya şamın mekanlarıdır. Yeni mekansal ve bedensel pratikler buralarda ye şerir. Yeni/modern çevrelerin yanısıra, eski ve kendili ğinden geli şen bölgeler de dönü şüm sürecinde e şit derecede yer alır. Ara ştırmada bellek temel olarak alınmı ştır. Yazılı belgelerin yanısıra, gazetelerden, edebi kaynaklardan, anılardan ve 1935-50 arasını Ankara’da ya şamı ş eski Ankaralılarla yapılan söyle şilerden yararlanılmı ştır. Yapılan analize göre Ankara, seçilen dönemde modern kentsel bir kültürün vi yaratılabilmesine ya da var olanın modern bir kent kültürüne dönü ştürülebilmesine olanak sa ğlayan bir ortam sunmaktadır. Bu kültürün yaratılmasında en büyük pay, orta sınıfa ait oldu ğunu söyleyebilece ğimiz toplumsal gruplarındır. Anahtar kelimeler: Modernle şme, dönü şüm, bellek, mekansal pratikler, günlük ya şam, bedensel pratikler, orta sınıf toplumsal grupları. vii To my son Alp viii ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I express sincere appreciation to my supervisor Assoc. Prof. Dr. Cânâ Bilsel for her guidance and insight throughout the research. I am also grateful for the constructive and to the point critiques of Assist. Prof. Dr. Nur Altınyıldız and Assist. Prof. Dr. T. Elvan Ergut. I owe a particular debt of gratitude to the 17 interviewees who agreed to give of their valuable time and eager to share their memories with me for the study. Thanks go to my colleagues and friends who, by some means or other, took part in the long process of making this study. Finally I would like to thank to Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nuri Merzi, who helped me at the critical phases of the thesis by giving necessary tactics to overcome the difficulties. ix TABLE OF CONTENTS PLAGIARISM ..................................................................................................iii ABSTRACT.......................................................................................................iv ÖZ ......................................................................................................................vi ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ..............................................................................ix TABLE OF CONTENTS .................................................................................. x LIST OF TABLES .......................................................................................... xii LIST OF FIGURES ........................................................................................ xiv CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION ............................................................................1 1.1. Theoretical Framework and the Principal Concepts of the Thesis ..........................................................................................7 1.2. Everyday Life in Relation with Lived Spatiality, Public Urban Spaces and Bodily Practices: Urban Culture ..................7 1.2.1. Representational Spaces and Representations of Space .................................................................. 19 1.3. Bodily practices........................................................................21 1.4. Memory: Individual and Collective Memories and Their Relation to Space.......................................................................22 1.5. Memory History Relationship: Relevance of the Use Of Memory as a Method of Historiography of Urban Space...............33 1.6. Methodology of the Research and the Material Used..............36 1.6.1. Interviews.......................................................................39 1.6.2. Newspapers....................................................................44 1.6.3. Literary Sources and Published Memoirs.......................46 2. URBAN POPULATION AND THE OCCURENCE OF DAILY LIFE IN ANKARA ..........................................................................49 2.1. The Social Structure of Ankara in the Pre-Republican Period .....................................................................................49 2.2. Formation of Middle Social Groups .......................................53 x 2.2.1. Social Groups in Ankara Between 1935-1950 .............56 2.2.2.The Population Characteristics and Life Standarts of the Middle Income Groups in Ankara According to Statistics....... 62 2.3. Occurence of Daily Life in Ankara ......................................68 2.3.1. The Period of the Foundation of the Republic.......... ..70 2.3.2.The Period of 2nd World War: 1940s .........................72 3. TRACING OUT THE TRANSFORMATION OF EVERYDAY LIFE FROM THE SOURCES OF THE PERIOD (1935-1950) .................................................................................... 75 3.1. Tracing out the Transformation of Everyday life in the Ulus Newspaper..........................................................................75 3.1.1. An Attempt for Transforming Daily Life by Means of Nuclear Family Housing : Modern Housing .............................................................. 77 3.1.2. An Attempt for the Creation of Public Spaces for the Flourishing of Public Life: Modern Public Buildings .............................................................90 3.2. Delve of the Ulus Newspaper : Sub