Cf. Bachelard: “The old house, for those who know how to listen, is a sort of geometry of echoes. The voices of the past do not sound the same in the big room as in the little bed chamber, and calls on the stairs have yet another sound” (1994: 60).
13. “Kemal Türkler davası düştü,” Hürriyet, 12 January 2010, accessed 20 December 2018. http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/gundem/kemal-turkler-davasi-dustu-16423709,
14. “Kemal Türkler cinayet davası yeniden başladı,” Posta, 27 February 2013, accessed 12 January 2018, http://www.posta.com.tr/yazarlar/nedim-sener/kemal-turkler-cinayet-davasi-yeniden-basladi-164407, ().
15. One exception to ex-activists’ general unwillingness to commemorate their past is the celebration of 1 Mayıs (Labor Day) in Taksim Square, which in 2010, 2011, and 2012 attracted huge crowds. Since 2010 a wreath-laying ceremony mourning the 1977 massacre has become an integral part of Labor Day demonstrations. Despite this common front there has been no definitive agreement concerning the identity of the perpetrators of the 1977 killings, and differences between leftist factions concerning events on that day still linger amongst ex-militants.
16. One typical example, from Tercüman newspaper (19 November 1980), reported on one of the mass trials of the “illegal” (yasadışı) organization Dev-Yol. The headline read, “Death penalty requested for 30 Dev-Yol members.” The military prosecutor charged them with being members of an illegal organization “whose aim is to change constitutional law and institutions, and the constitutional order by armed force and to bring in a society founded on the dictatorship of a single class.”
17. For example, see Alişanoğlu’s (2005) Netekim 12 Eylül’de geldiler: Bir idamlığın trajikomik anıları; Mavioğlu’s (2008) Bizim çocuklar yapamadı: Bir 12 Eylül hesaplaşması; Öztunç’s (2008) Ülkücüler 12 Eylül’ü anlatıyor; Küçükkaya’s (2011) Darbe şakacıları sevmez: Bir ailenin 12 Eylül günlüğü; Görsev’s (2011) 3 yılda 6 tutukevinde: 12 Eylül anıları; Asan’s (2010) 12 Eylül sabahı; and Saymaz’s (2012) Oğlumu öldürdünüz arz ederim: 12 Eylül’ün beş öyküsü).
18. See the website, http://www.memorializeturkey.com/en/memorial/309/.
19. Interestingly, in its focusing on the gross human-rights abuses of the Turkish government and military against the leftist movement of the 1970s, ’80s and ’90s, the museum of shame “forgets” the intense factionalism in those years that perturbed so many activists in the interviews.
20. C. Solgun, “12 Eylül utanç müzesi,” Taraf, 23 September 2013.
21. The verb flash up references Walter Benjamin’s Thesis VI: “To articulate the past historically does not mean to recognize it ‘the way it really was.’ It means to seize hold of a memory as it flashes in a moment of danger” (1940).
3
De-Ottomanization,
Modernism, Migration
A Selective History of Istanbul, 1923–1974
As one of the great cities of the planet, Istanbul has properly been the subject of a vast body of writing. A proportion of it sits on shelves in the Greater Istanbul Municipality bookshop beside the funicular railway exit in Galata, groaning under the weight of local histories of each of the city’s older neighborhoods, supplemented by exegeses of their representations in a thousand and one novels, songs, films, and poems. More recently established suburbs are less well celebrated. Almost every issue of any Middle East journal reviews new material on Istanbul’s social history, provisioning, political institutions, labor relations, socio-spatial differentiation, sexual practices, religious governance, architecture, consumption habits, sartorial dress, and aesthetic traditions, from any of its many ages. Then there are the centuries of writings from its own inhabitants and of travelers from eastern and western origins, captivated or overwhelmed by its size and complexity.
Sedimented with the detritus of two empires and dense with Muslim and non-Muslim places, four hundred fifty years of Ottoman rule resulted in a peninsula dotted with buildings, fountains, mosques, libraries, and so on, inscribing in place the benevolence and power of the dynasty.
To spite this endless archive, in this third chapter I want to compose from a range of sources a selective history of the “violence of architecture” in Istanbul from the founding of the Turkish Republic in 1923 up until the mid-1970s.1 In so doing, I hope to give the reader some idea of the origins and frictional development of the city’s key morphology and environments that a multitude of political activists in the late 1970s sought to control or revolutionize. What was Istanbul, theater and crucible of political conflict, like in 1974, and how did it get to be like that? Radically remade through neoliberal economic policies in the decades after the 1980 coup, Istanbul is a city whose built environment in the nineteenth century alone had already been reassembled by world-scale processes, both by reforms in institutional practices of government and by escalating flows of European capital that greatly extended the city’s urban footprint in the late-Ottoman years. After the establishment of the Republic, four processes transformed Istanbul again: first, a nationalist project aimed at the expulsion of its non-Muslim population (Aktar 2000); second, modernist urban planning initiatives, new architecture, and Marshall-plan money; third, on-again, off-again state policies of national developmentalism that characterized not just the first fifty years of the Republic (1929–1979) but a global system of partially self-regulating and only “banally” different nation-states (Keyder 1987); and fourth, mass migration that swelled its population, size, workforce, and wealth.
Конец ознакомительного фрагмента.
Текст предоставлен ООО «ЛитРес».
Прочитайте эту книгу целиком, купив полную легальную версию на ЛитРес.
Безопасно оплатить книгу можно банковской картой Visa, MasterCard, Maestro, со счета мобильного телефона, с платежного терминала, в салоне МТС или Связной, через PayPal, WebMoney, Яндекс.Деньги, QIWI Кошелек, бонусными картами или другим удобным Вам способом.
