Onaylı Sokak Sanatının Fiziksel ve Sosyal Mekâna Etkileri Üzerine Bir İnceleme

Yıl 2020, Cilt: 11 Sayı: 30, 938 - 962, 31.08.2020

Gözde Kızılkan , Mehmet Ocakçı

https://doi.org/10.31198/idealkent.506696

Cited By: 4

Öz

Kamusal kentsel mekânlar, küreselleşme sürecinde durmadan dönüşmeye devam etmektedir. Sanatın yükselen değeri de şehirdeki kamusal alanlardaki ambiyans ve duyumsamayı arttırmaktadır. Onaylı sokak sanatlarının kentsel mekânlarla bütünleştirilmesi, başarılı fiziksel ve sosyal çevreler oluşturulmasını sağlamaya yardımcı unsurlardandır. Günümüz çağdaş sanat dünyasında, onaylı sokak sanatları kullanımı önemli bir adım olarak öne çıkmaktadır. Yetkilendirilen sanatsal üretimlerin kamusal açık alanlardaki stratejik yerleşimleri ise görsel olarak estetik ve duyumsal olarak anlamlı yerler oluşturulmasını sağlayabilir. Bu inceleme, kentsel alanlardaki onaylı sokak sanatlarının fiziksel ve sosyal mekâna etkilerini, kentsel dokuyla bütünleşmesini, izleyici ile karşılıklı etkileşimi ve sanatçı ile otoriteler arasındaki ilişkiler üzerinden çalışmak, araştırmak ve açıklamayı amaçlamaktadır. İnceleme, geleneksel grafiti işlerinin modern sokak sanatı uygulamalarına dönüşümü ve dünya çapında meşrulaştırılmış sokak sanatı ve etkinliklerinin kavramsallaştırılması konularında literatür taraması ile başlamaktadır. Çoklu araştırma yöntemleri aracılığıyla alan çalışması üzerinden anket sorgulaması ve derinlemesine görüşme tekniklerinden yararlanılmıştır. Onaylı sokak sanatlarının sosyo-fiziksel olarak yorumlanmasına ilişkin belirtilen demeçler, karşılaştırma tabloları üzerinden değerlendirilmiş ve bu sanat koluna ait eserlerin nasıl uzun sürelerce ve çevresi ile iletişim içinde olacağı irdelenmiştir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

kamusal açık alanlar, sokak sanatları, kullanıcı deneyimi, onaylı sokak sanatı, sosyo-fiziksel etkiler

A Survey about the Effects of the Commissioned Street Art on Physical and Social Spaces

Öz

Urban spaces are constantly transformed and revitalized in the process of globalization. The rising significance of art enhances the ambience and perception of the public areas in cities. The integration of commissioned street art in urban spaces can form a prosperous physical and social environment. The commissioned street artworks are being used as a favorable step as a part of the contemporary art world. The strategic distribution of the authorized artistic productions in the public open areas develops visually aesthetic and meaningful places. This survey aims to study, examine and reveal the effects of the commissioned street artworks on physical and social spaces, in order to disclose their current integration in the urban fabric, the mutual interaction with the viewers, and the relations between the artists and authorities. The survey begins with a literature review on the transformation of conventional graffiti to modern street art and continues with conceptualizing legitimate street art and events around the world. With the help of the mixed-method research, questionnaires and in-depth interviews were conducted in a field of study. By the comparison tables of the conceived statements, a conclusion was drawn about the socio-physical space interpretation of the commissioned street artworks, and how to make them long-lasting and in communication with their surroundings.

Anahtar Kelimeler

public open areas, street art, user’s experience, commissioned street art, socio-physical effects

Kaynakça

• Austin, J. (2001). Taking the train: How graffiti art became an urban crisis in New York City. Columbia University Press, New York.
• Austin, J. (2010). More to see than a canvas in a white cube: For an art in the streets. City, 14(1-2), 33-47.
• Bou, J. (2005). Street art: The spray files. Collins Design, New York.
• Brighenti, A. M. (2010). At the wall: Graffiti writers, urban territoriality, and the public domain. Space and Culture, 13(3), 315-332.
• Castleman, C. (1984). Getting up: Subway graffiti in New York. MIT Press, Cam-bridge, MA.
• Chmielewska, E. (2007). Framing [con] text: Graffiti and Place. Space and Cul-ture, 10(2), 145-169.
• Cresswell, T. (1992). The crucial ‘where’ of graffiti: A geographical analysis of reactions to graffiti in New York. Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, 10(3), pp. 329-344.
• Cresswell, T. (1996). In place/out of place: Geography, ideology, and transgression. University of Minnesota, Minneapolis.
• Curtis, A., (2016). HyperNormalisation, a BBC documentary by British filmmaker Adam Curtis. [Video Blog], Youtube. Accessed on 15.09.2019, https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=fh2cDKyFdyU
• Dickens, L. (2008). Placing post-graffiti: the journey of the Peckham Rock. Cul-tural Geographies, 15(4), 471-496.
• Ferrell, J. (1993). Crimes of style: Urban graffiti and the politics of criminality. Gar-land, New York.
• Forster, A. M., Vettese-Forster, S., and Borland, J. (2012). Evaluating the cultur-al significance of historic graffiti. Structural Survey, 30(1), 43-64.
• Frederick, U. K. (2009). Revolution is the new black: Graffiti/art and mark-making practices. Archaeologies, 5(2), 210-237.
• Hall, T., and Smith, C. (2005). Public art in the city: Meanings, values, attitudes and roles. Interventions. Advances in art and urban futures, p. 175-179.
• Halsey, M., and Young, A. (2006). Our desires are ungovernable: Writing graf-fiti in urban space. Theoretical criminology, 10(3), 275-306.
• Harcourt, B. E. (1998). Reflecting on the subject: A critique of the social influ-ence conception of deterrence, the broken windows theory, and order-maintenance policing New York style. Michigan Law Review, 97(2), 291-389.
• Ganz, N. and Manco, T. (2004). Graffiti world: Street art from five continents. Ab-rams. New York.
• Kaya, V. (2015). HipHop zwischen Istanbul und Berlin: eine (deutsch-) türkische Jugendkultur im lokalen und transnationalen Beziehungsgeflecht. Transcript Verlag. Bielefeld.
• Kızılkan, G. (2017). Kamusal alanda aykırı sokak sanatları uygulamalarının fiziksel ve sosyal mekâna etkileri. Yayımlanmamış yüksek lisans tezi. İTÜ FBE, İs-tanbul.
• Kolektif. (2014). Duvarların dili graffiti ve sokak sanatı. Çev. M. Şeyhun. Pera Müzesi Yayınları. İstanbul.
• Lachmann, R. (1988). Graffiti as career and ideology. American journal of sociol-ogy, 94(2), 229-250.
• Lewisohn, C. (2008). Street Art: The graffiti revolution. Abrams. New York.
• Macdonald, N. (2001). The graffiti subculture: Youth, masculinity, and identity in London and New York. Palgrave Macmillan, New York.
• Matell, M. S., and Jacoby, J. (1972). Is there an optimal number of alternatives for Likert-scale items? Effects of testing time and scale properties. Journal of Applied Psychology, 56(6), 506–509.
• McAuliffe, C. (2012). Graffiti or street art? Negotiating the moral geographies of the creative city. Journal of urban affairs, 34(2), 189-206.
• McAuliffe, C., and Iveson, K. (2011). Art and crime and other things besides. Conceptualising graffiti in the city. Geography Compass, 5(3), 128-143.
• McCarthy, K. F., Ondaatje, E. H., Zakaras, L., and Brooks, A. (2001). Gifts of the muse: Reframing the debate about the benefits of the arts. Rand Corporation. Santa Monica.
• McCormick, C., Schiller, M., Schiller, S., and Seno, E. (2010). Trespass: A history of uncommissioned urban art. CA: Taschen, Los Angeles.
• Miles, M. (1997). Art, space and the city. Public art and urban futures. Routledge. London.
• Merleau-Ponty, M. (2012). Phenomenology of perception. Translated by Donald A. Landes, Routledge. New York.
• Osgood, C. E., Suci, G. J., and Tannenbaum, P. H. (1975). The measurement of meaning (No. 47). 9th Printing. University of Illinois Press. Chicago.
• Ross, J. I. (Ed.). (2016). Routledge handbook of graffiti and street art. Routledge. New York.
• Sanders, B. (2005). Youth crime and youth culture in the inner city. Routledge. London.
• Schacter, R. (2008). An ethnography of iconoclash: An investigation into the production, consumption, and destruction of street-art in London. Journal of Material Culture, 13(1), 35-61.
• Schacter, R. (2014). The ugly truth: Street art, graffiti, and the creative city. Art & the Public Sphere, 3(2), 161-176.
• Schumpeter, J. A. (2010). Capitalism, socialism, and democracy. Routledge. Lon-don.
• Selwood, S. (1995). The benefits of public art: The polemics of permanent art in pub-lic places (Vol. 770). Policy Studies Institute. London.
• Skinner, J., and Jolliffe, L. (Eds.). (2017). Murals and tourism: Heritage, politics, and identity. Routledge. Abingdon, Oxon.
• Snyder, G. J. (2011). Graffiti lives: Beyond the tag in New York’s urban under-ground. NYU Press. New York, USA.
• Soysal, L. (2004). Rap, hiphop, Kreuzberg: Scripts of/for migrant youth culture in the world city Berlin. New German Critique, 92, 62-81.
• Watzlawik, M. (2014). The ‘art’ of identity development—Graffiti painters moving through time and space. Culture & Psychology, 20(3), 404-415.