![Sample our Arts journals, sign in here to start your access, latest two volumes FREE to you for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/110799/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Arts.jpg"})
Abstract
Parallel to its reconstitution as a global city, Istanbul has experienced an expansion of the arts through the foundation of new institutions, such as museums and galleries, and the dissemination of art events and exhibitions related to the city. The role of the arts and arts institutions in Istanbul's renewal is central to understanding the relationship between the material and immaterial dynamics of this process. The contemporary art world has both invented new strategies for the city's representation, where issues, such as tourism, consumerism, public space, democracy, and identities, are tightly interwoven, while simultaneously revealing conflicts and contestations. In the hands of contemporary artists and arts professionals, the city's “urban imaginary” has become an analytical vehicle that both exposes the tensions of global dynamics and presents the city as spectacle. Thus, this imaginary also serves to document the forces that affect the arts and the city, and a close study of it can enrich our understanding of the reconditioning process.
Notes
1 Maros Krivý, “Industrial Architecture and Negativity: The Aesthetics of Architecture in the Works of Gordon Matta-Clark, Robert Smithson and Bernd and Hilla Becher,” Journal of Architecture 15, no. 6 (2010): 831.
2 For a detailed discussion of urban entrepreneurialism, which reveals the transformation in urban governance in the neoliberal era, see David Harvey, “From Managerialism to Entrepreneurialism: The Transformation in Urban Governance in Late Capitalism,” Geografiska Annaler: Series B, Human Geography 71, no. 1 (1989): 3–17.
3 Sharon Zukin, The Culture of Cities (Oxford: Blackwell, 1996).
4 Susanne Hauser, “On Cityscapes,” in Stefanie Bürkle, ed., Kunst–Raum–Stadt / Art–Space–City (Munich: Deutscher Kunstverlag, 2013), 25.
5 Andreas Huyssen, Other Cities, Other Worlds: Urban Imaginaries in a Globalizing Age (Durham, NC: Duke University Press, 2008), 3.
6 Hauser, “On Cityscapes,” 26.
7 Hauser, “On Cityscapes,” 26, quoting Vidler.
8 The neoliberal reconfiguration in Turkey is usually conceptualized in three different stages: the liberalization phase in the 1980s; the implementation of neoliberal reforms in the post-1990 period; and, after the year 2000, configuring a new, market-friendly, coordinated state and abandoning the institutions of the old state. İclal Dinçer, “The Impact of Neoliberal Policies on Historic Urban Space: Areas of Urban Renewal in Istanbul,” International Planning Studies 16, no. 1 (2011): 44.
9 For an analysis of Istanbul's transformation since the 1980s and the shock of rapid integration into transnational markets, see Çağlar Keyder, “Istanbul into the Twenty-First Century,” in Deniz Göktürk, Levent Soysal, and İpek Türeli, eds., Orienting Istanbul: Cultural Capital of Europe (London: Routledge, 2010), 25–35.
10 Asu Aksoy, “Istanbul's Choice,” Third Text 22, no. 1 (2008): 71–83.
11 Aksoy, “Istanbul's Choice,” 75.
12 Nevzat Bayhan, “İstanbul'u marka yapan da, yapacak olan da kültür ve sanattır,” in Deniz Ünsal, ed., İstanbul Kültür ve Sanat Sektörü [Istanbul's Arts and Culture Sector] (Istanbul: İstanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları, 2011), 35.
13 One recent contemporary art exhibition on Istanbul multiplied the urban imaginaries of Istanbul by presenting the city as a heterogeneous space through a mixture of references to both its unique mode of modernization and its difference in its exoticness and authenticity. For a discussion, refer to Ayşe Nur Erek, “Exhibition: ‘Signs Taken in Wonder: Searching for Contemporary Istanbul,’” Journal of Architecture 19, no. 2 (2014): 292–99.
14 Ünsal, İstanbul Kültür ve Sanat Sektörü, 55.
15 Ünsal, İstanbul Kültür ve Sanat Sektörü, 55.
16 Actually the first biennial set the standard for the urban imaginary of Istanbul as a bridge, an image that was then adapted by its followers. Conceptualized as “Contemporary Art in Traditional Spaces,” curated by Beral Madra, the first exhibition (in 1987) addressed the multicultural aspects of Istanbul, which faces both East and West, and combined contemporary art exhibitions with a very rich variety of events displaying Istanbul's urban heritage from various civilizations.
17 See “Curator: René Block,” website of the Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts, http://bienal.iksv.org/en/archive/biennialarchive/213, accessed June 13, 2014.
18 See “Curator: Rosa Martinez,” website of the Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts, http://bienal.iksv.org/en/archive/biennialarchive/209, accessed June 13, 2014.
19 See “Curator: Paolo Colombo,” website of the Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts, http://bienal.iksv.org/en/archive/biennialarchive/208, accessed June 13, 2014.
20 See http://7b.iksv.org/framesettr.htm, accessed June 13, 2014.
21 See “Concept,” website of the Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts, http://9b.iksv.org/english/?Page=Concept, accessed June 15, 2014.
22 ”Concept.”
23 “Concept.”
24 Elena Filipovic, “The Global White Cube,” in Barbara Vanderlinden and Elena Filipovic, eds., The Manifesta Decade: Debates on Contemporary Art Exhibitions and Biennials in Post-Wall Europe (Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 2005), 329.
25 “Dünyanın gözü Istanbul'da” [The World is Watching Istanbul], Sabah, September 10, 2005, http://arsiv.sabah.com.tr/2005/09/10/cp/gnc116–20050910–101.html, accessed May 20, 2014.
26 “Istanbul Modern is Open,” Hurriyet, December 12, 2004, http://hurarsiv.hurriyet.com.tr/goster/haber.aspx?id=280723, accessed August 23, 2014; “‘İstanbul Modern’ açıldı” [Istanbul Modern Opens its Doors], December 12, 2004, http://www.radikal.com.tr/haber.php?haberno=137108, accessed August 23, 2014.
27 Yaprak Aras, “Interview with Vasıf Kortun and Charles Esche,” Milliyet, August 21, 2005, http://www.milliyet.com.tr/2005/08/21/cumartesi/axcum02.html, accessed May 21, 2014.
28 According to the curators of the biennial, the fact that Istanbul was transformed into a metropolis in the 1980s “also involved a turning back to its nineteenth century model.” See Ayşe Nur Erek, “Reinventing the 19th Century City: Istanbul Exhibitions and Urban Imaginary,” in Hilde Heynen and Janina Gosseye, eds., Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference of the European Architectural History Network, Brussels, May 31–June 2, 2012 (Wetteren: Universa Press, 2012), 159–64.
29 For more on the transformation of the biennial in relationship with private sector and globalization, see Sibel Yardımcı, Kentsel Değişim ve Festivalizm: Küreselleşen İstanbul'da Bienal [Urban Transformation and Festivalism: The Biennial in Istanbul] (Istanbul: İletişim Yayınları, 2005).
30 For a recent challenging critique, see Angela Harutyunyan, Aras Özgün, and Eric Goodfield, “Event and Counter-Event: The Political Economy of the Istanbul Biennial and Its Excesses,” Rethinking Marxism: A Journal of Economics, Culture & Society 23, no. 4 (2011): 478–95.
31 Actually the increase in political art and activism was also criticized as a symptom of a spectacular event culture designed to legitimize the industry. Julian Stallabras talks about “biennial art with its spectacular inflation of size, gestures towards political themes, and fairground air.” He claims the art could be critical, political, and edgy as long as artists' creative production remained within the system of biennial as event. For criticisms about this increase in political art as a new strategy, see Julian Stallabras, “The Fracturing of Globalization,” in Now Is the Time: Art & Theory in the 21st Century (Rotterdam: Nai Publishers, 2009), 68; and Hito Steyerl, “Politics of Art: Contemporary Art and the Transition to Post-Democracy,” E-Flux 21 (2010), http://www.e-flux.com/journal/politics-of-art-contemporary-art-and-the-transition-to-post-democracy/, accessed June, 2, 2014.
32 The title of the 2013 Istanbul Biennial, “Mom, am I Barbarian?” is a quote from the Turkish poet Lale Müldür's book of the same title, and was a metaphor for struggles over rights to public spaces to question contemporary forms of democracy. Fulya Erdemci, “Mom, Am I Barbarian?” E-Guide (Istanbul: İKSV, 2013), http://cdn.iksv.org/media/content/files/13BGuide_final.pdf, accessed May 18, 2014.
33 “The conceptual framework of the Istanbul Biennial was announced: ‘Mom, am I barbarian?’” website of the Istanbul Foundation for Culture and Arts, http://bienal.iksv.org/en/archive/newsarchive/p/1/622, accessed May 18, 2014.
34 On May 31, 2013, Gezi Park near Taksim Square, was occupied by a small group protesting the planned removal of some trees for the redesign of the square. The small group increased into a crowd of thousands, and the police tear-gassed and beat those few hundred demonstrators. Despite the protests then spreading across the whole of Turkey, by the middle of June, the Gezi occupation had been violently suppressed.
35 See “Türkiye'nin En Çok Gezilen Sergisi Istanbul Bienali” [The Most Visited Exhibition, Istanbul Biennial, in Turkey], Radikal (İstanbul), October 20, 2013, accessed September 3, 2014, http://www.radikal.com.tr/hayat/turkiyenin_en_cok_gezilen_sergisi_istanbul_bienali-1156280.
36 The Bilbao Effect refers to the strategy of employing “starchitects” to build iconic architecture to attract tourism and create economic impetus for cities. The term emerged to describe the Guggenheim Museum case in Bilbao (1997), which brought prestige and financial growth to a rundown area in the Spanish city, transforming it into a commercial and cultural zone. Indeed, it is Frank Gehry's iconic building, rather than the collection of the Guggenheim Museum itself, which has become the main attraction point. Visitors came in such numbers that in the first three years the museum generated about $500 million in economic activity and raised over $100 million in taxes. Witold Rybczynski, “The Bilbao Effect,” Atlantic (September, 2002); https://www.theatlantic.com/past/docs/issues/2002/09/rybczynski.htm, accessed August 20, 2013. For a historical analysis of the architecture of museums, see Andrew McClellan, The Art Museum: From Boullée to Bilbao (Berkeley: University of California Press, 2008).
37 Indeed, the first modern art museum of Turkey was the Istanbul Museum of Painting and Sculpture, founded in 1937 as a modernization project of the Republican era. Being the only art museum until the 1970s, it operated as the national gallery of Turkey, with a collection covering modern Turkish art from 1900s. Supported by state, it was active until the 1970s, when the museum gradually started to be neglected until its closure in 2000s. Istanbul Modern, a product of global era, has now taken over the role of national identity-making from the Istanbul Museum of Painting and Sculpture and adapted it into a global imaginary process. For a historical analysis of the subject, see Ayşe H. Köksal, “National Art Museums and The Modernization of Turkey,” in Simon Knell, Peter Aronsson, Arne Bugge Amundsen, et al., eds., National Museums: New Studies from Around the World (London: Routledge, 2011), 163–79.
38 Tabanlıoğlu Architects, one of Istanbul's “starchitects,” is known for their works that represent “their innovative approaches” and “spirit of global alliance”; see “About,” website of Tabanlıoğlu Architects, http://www.tabanlioglu.com/ABOUT.html, accessed August 23, 2014. Turkey's pavilion at the Fourteenth International Architecture Exhibition in Venice, “Places of Memory,” curated by Murat Tabanlıoğlu (a co-owner of the group) and presenting selected projects of the Tabanlıoğlu Group, clearly reflects their effort in participating in the global Istanbul project. See “‘Places of Memory’: Turkey's Pavilion at the Venice Biennale 2014,” Arch Daily website, http://www.archdaily.com/516378/places-of-memory-turkey-s-pavilion-at-the-venice-biennale-2014/, accessed August 23, 2014.
39 “Istanbul Modern Art Museum,” website of Tabanlıoğlu Architects, http://www.tabanlioglu.com/MODERN.html, accessed June 13, 2014.
40 Tom Dyckhoff, “Turkey's New Delights,” Times Online, http://entertainment.timesonline.co.uk/, accessed July 10, 2014.
41 As then co-curator Levent Çalıkoğlu asserted, “Chronological order is a bequest of the Republican period and was appropriate for its ideology and its perspective on modernity. But today, this perception seems problematic.” Müjde Yazıcı, “Modernleşmenin tarihi” [History of Modernization], Radikal, January 17, 2006, http://www.radikal.com.tr/haber.php?haberno=175868, accessed April 24, 2014.
42 The performance was developed as a part of the Istanbul map project. After a long period of workshops and discussion involving researchers, architects, and artists, the most relevant one to contemporary Istanbul was found to be a gentrification map; in other words, a map that showed the neighborhoods under rapid transformation. The map supplied yet another representation of the city, with reflections on current changes. Imitating the form of a touristic map in its material and structure, the map presented the urban imaginary highlighting contested zones of building activity and challenging the symbolic systems that the gentrification process produced.
43 Ayfer Bartu, “Eski Mahallelerin Sahibi Kim? Küresel bir Çağda Tarihi Yeniden Yazmak” [Who Owns the Old Neighbourhoods? Rewriting History in an Age of Globalization], in Caglar Keyder, ed., Istanbul: Kuresel ile Yerel Arasında [Istanbul: Between Global and Local] (Istanbul: Metis Yayınları, 2000), 43–59.
44 From our interview with Güneş Terkol and Güçlü Öztekin of Ha Za Vu Zu, August 18, 2014, Istanbul.
45 Jacques Rancière, The Politics of Aesthetics (London: Continuum, 2006), 23.
46 Rancière, The Politics of Aesthetic, 23.
47 For more on Ahmet Ögüt's exhibition, Apparatuses of Subversion, at the Horst Janssen Museum, Oldenburg, July 26–October 6, 2014, see “Ahmet Ögüt: Apparatuses of Subversion,” website of the Horst Janssen Museum, http://www.horst-janssen-museum.de/index.php?id=191&L=1, accessed August 12, 2014.
48 “Ahmet Ögüt: Apparatuses of Subversion.”
49 Irit Rogoff, “The Regional Imaginings,” in Hossein Amirsadeghi, ed., Unleashed: Contemporary Art from Turkey (London: Thames and Hudson, 2010), 48.
50 For instance, e-mail groups have been formed in order to highlight censorship [sanattasansür] and to support the rights of the cultural producers [sanatçıbirliği] or for the claims of women artists [kırmızıkart]; a group of artists has expressed support for the occupying workers of the Kazova textile factory forming a cooperative in terms of design; several communal gatherings have relied on artistic strategies in order to resist the rules of the market; the Gezi protests marked a peak in artistic strategies; and a group of cultural producers, including artists, are working with different groups of collaborative urban gardening collectives.
Additional information
AYŞE N. EREK is an art historian and an assistant professor at Yeditepe University, History Department, in Istanbul, Turkey. She recently conducted her post-doctoral research at the Georg-Simmel Center for Metropolitan Studies of Humboldt University in Berlin and was a visiting professor at the Institute of European Ethnology at the same university. Her research project “City Between History and Change: Reinventing the City through Visual Representation” focuses on the representations of space and the city in contemporary artistic production and exhibition practices, under the current regimes of culture and politics in Istanbul and Berlin. She has written extensively on contemporary art and urban visual culture and has been a member of the editorial board of the quarterly Istanbul, a journal on urban transformation, architecture, and art in Istanbul. Her publications and reviews include “Signs Taken in Wonder: Searching for Contemporary Istanbul” in The Journal of Architecture (2014) and “Güncel Sanatta Kentsel Mekân: Aydan Murtezaoğlu, Banu Cennetoğlu ve Sarkis'in İşleri Üzerinden Bir Değerlendirme” [Urban Space in Contemporary Arts: An Evaluation through the works of Aydan Murtezaoğlu, Banu Cennetoğlu, and Sarkis], in Sanat Yazıları (2012).
AYŞE H. KÖKSAL is an art historian and an assistant professor in the Industrial Design Department at Özyegin University in Istanbul, Turkey. She held a Fulbright Fellowship as a visiting researcher at the Department of Art History,Tufts University (near Boston, Massachusetts) and she was a visiting scholar at the Deparment of Art History, Technische Universität Berlin. Her forthcoming book is an inquiry on the sociocultural history of the first modern art museum of Turkey and its relations with the art world in the long durée. Her recent publications include “Museums as a Transnational Space for National Identities,” in The Museum is Open: Towards a Transnational History of Museums 1750–1940, edited by Andrea Meyer and Benedicte Savoy (2013) and “National Art Museums and the Modernization of Turkey,” in National Museums: New Studies From Around The World, edited by Simon Knell, Peter Aronsson, Arne Bugge Amundsen, et al. (2011).