Examining “Eclektic”, “Kitch” “Neoclasic” and “Orientalist” architectural production methods on university structures
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v18i1.6143Keywords:
postmodernism, kitsch, eclecticism, neoclassicism, orientalism, university structures and portalsAbstract
Postmodern architectural products that can be described as kitsch have become rapidly consumed objects because they have appealed to the whole society. As a demand stimulating, easily comprehensible, and rapidly consumable product, kitsch has gained an important place in postmodern culture and architecture. These features of kitsch have easily made it a paradoxical part of consumption culture. After the Neoclassical boom in the 18th century, architectural movements such as Eclecticism, Orientalism, and Historicism became widespread in the 19th century. Towards the end of the 20th century, these tendencies came to the fore again within the Postmodern paradigm, and new kitsch architectural structures have begun to be produced in these undertakings in accordance with the spirit of the period. Eclecticism which has become prominent again in postmodern architecture has been referred to as neo-eclecticism or eclectic populism and has been defined as a style that ‘complexity, uncertainty and contradictions’ are expressed, ‘references from history and symbolic elements are used. Together with various historical forms in the postmodern period, orientalist images have been also used. Images consisting of stylized views of the Western culture on the Orient and that are not based on an authentic eastern depiction have been used in the production of orientalist architectural form.
In recent years, eclectic, kitsch, orientalist, neoclassical forms that are independent of context and time have been frequently encountered in architectural applications in also Turkey. On one hand, elements from Turkish culture have been used and on the other hand, architectural elements from foreign cultures have been preferred. It is seen that there have been contradictions between form and meaning in educational structures built in Turkey during the period that the paradigms of the Postmodern era have been dominant. In this study, it is aimed to read and analyze the concepts of kitsch, eclecticism, neoclassicism, orientalism in the postmodern paradigm on recent university buildings and campus portals. In line with this purpose, an extensive literature research was conducted within the scope of the study; in the case study, recent university buildings and portals were analyzed in terms of postmodernism, the historical periods and architectural elements they derived were determined.
Downloads
Metrics
References
Berman, M. (2010). Katı Olan Her Şey Buharlaşıyor. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
Bozdoğan, S. (1988). Journey to the East: Ways of Looking at the Orient and the Question of Representation. Journal of Architectural Education, 38-45.
Broch, H. (1969). Notes on the Problem of Kitsch. G. Dorfles in, Kitsch: An anthology of bad taste (s. 49-76). London: Studio Visto London.
Calinescu, M. (2010). Modernliğin Beş Yüzü: Modernizm, Avangard, Dekadans, Kitsch, Postmodernizm. (S. Gürses, Çev.) İstanbul: Küre Yayınları.
Dostoğlu, S. (1985). Modemizmin Ötesi Tartışmalarında Klasisizm Sorunu. Mimarlık(85), 19-24.
Eaglaton, T. (1999). Postmodernizmin Yanılsamaları. İstanbu: Ayrıntu Yayınları.
Ergüven, M. (2002). Yoruma Doğru. İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
Featherstone, M. (1996). Postmodernizm ve Tüketim Kültürü,. İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
Frampton, K. (1992). Modem Architecture: A Critical Hstory. Londra: Thames & Hudson.
Greenberg, C. (1939). Avant-Garde and Kitsh. Partisan Review, 6(5), 34-49.
Güzer, A. (1996). Derleyenin sunuşu: 1970 sonrasında Mimarlık. 70 Sonrası Mimarlık Tartışmaları (s. 7-11). in Ankara: Mimarlar Derneği Yayınları.
Jencks, C. (1991). The Language of Post-Modern Architecture. London: cademy Editions.
Joedicke, J. (1980). Günümüz Mimarlık Eğilimleri Hassas Bir Denge. Yapı, 25-41.
Kazmaoğlu, M., & Tanyeli, U. (1986). 1980'li Yılların Türk Mimarlık Dünyasına Bir Bakış,. Mimarlık Dergisi(86), 31-48.
Korcan, E. (1999). Mimarlıkta Estetik Değerler. Yapı(211), 63-69.
Kulka, T. (2014). Kitch ve Sanat. İstanbul: Altıkırkbeş Yayınları.
Kundera, M. (1986). Varolmanın Dayanılmaz Hafifliği. İstanbul: İletişim Yayınları.
Lyotard, J. F. (1994). Postmodern Durum. Ankara: Vadi Yayınları.
Rapoport, A. (1990). The Meaning of the Built Environment: A Nonverbal Communication Approach. Tuscon: The University of Arizona Press.
Riout, D. (2014). Kitsch. B. Cassin in, Dictionary of Untranslatables: A Philosophical Lexicon. Princeton: University of Princeton Press.
Said, E. W. (1995). Orientalism. London: Penguin Books.
Tanyeli, U. (1988). Sanat ve Tasarımda Geçmişe Yönelme Sorunu Üzerine. Grafik Sanatlar Üzerine Yazılar.
Tanyeli, U. (1990). Aslolan ‘Kitsch’tir. Arredamento Dekorasyon(21), 103-108.
Tanyeli, U. (1997). Postmodernizm. Eczacıbaşı Sanat Ansiklopedisi. in İstanbul: Yapı Endüstri Merkezi.
Trachtenberg, M., & Hyman, I. (1986). Architecture from prehistory to post-modernism / The Western tradition. The Netherlands: Harry N. Abrams Inc.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2021 Journal of Human Sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors can retain copyright, while granting the journal right of first publication. Alternatively, authors can transfer copyright to the journal, which then permits authors non-commercial use of the work, including the right to place it in an open access archive. In addition, Creative Commons can be consulted for flexible copyright licenses.
©1999 Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
