MÁS DE TRES AÑOS DE GRADUADOS: EGRESADOS ENTRE 2001 Y

Supported by industrial and technical developments as well as capital power, the middle class became a leading group not only for the emergence of a liberal society but also for shaping cities in the West. In the western cities, there had been close links between the emergence of the capitalism and development of urban services, and this is directly reflected in the new built environment.

542 Behçet Ünsal, a member of the Higher Preservation committee, gave in his report of 1960 a detailed list and schematic maps prepared according to the official applications for demolitions; “Istanbul’un Iman ve Eski Eser Kaybi”. Güzel Sanatlar Akademisi Dergisi, 8-60.

In the context of the Turkish politics of the mid-20'^ century, the economic developments gained wider meanings and implications. Surrounded by the discourse of the free world and Keynesian economy (production, foreign investment, consumption), marketing a city as a national and international space was in practice similarly to the ones in the European and American contexts. Istanbul witnessed the transformation of urban identity bringing diversity and contradiction. In terms of commodity, better service, improvement of the urban life-services were observed. In terms of participation to the urban life, Istanbul became open for the first time to all its citizens, and people from nationwide. So that masses met a new life style, a new way of living. With the process of modernisation, not only the urban identity but also the individuality had changed in Istanbul.

Similarly, the transformation of the economic policies were physically reflected into the daily life, municipal services, investments. In this context, the aspiration of the making the Little America soon combined with the emergence of housing complexes in suburb was represented as the ideal home in Istanbul likewise the one in the Western Europe. In fact, the ideal home was politically presented as “the locus of the middle class identity and culture since the beginning of the 19*^ Century and the early 20*^ Century. The notion of the ideal home became part of the distinction of the white-collar groups in the Western w o r l d , a s well as in the postWWII era:

“Cultural spaces as emblematic of the middle class - family and neighbourhood - were translated into the physical space of mass-produced suburbs and transposed on television ."^

Ôncü compares between the residential developments of the 1990s in Istanbul to the one in the 1950s in the North American cities, and indicates that the myth of “the ideal home travels across cultural borders to Istanbul.”®^® However, the roots of the myth of the ideal home dominating the politics of space as well as the politics of identity existed in the post-WWII era in Istanbul to pursue a new, modem, and, in particular, better Wfe,

different from the traditional one. So, in Istanbul, large-scale residential areas, built for middle class families, were presented as the main achievement of the Turkish urbanisation process and the making of the Turkish bourgeoisie, reflecting the spirit of the era in the urban space. In other words, the^ new suburbs - garden city type - became the physical appearance of the economic and social policy based on the making of a Turkish middle class. In this respect, the middle class housing complexes in urban suburbs (such as Levent, Atakoy, Ko§uyolu, Zincirlikuyu, Etiler, Küçükçekmece) were the emphasis of the agenda in the 1950s (FIG.5.2). Political and

543 Ayçe Ôncü, ‘The Myth of the "Ideal Home" Travels across cultural borders to Istanbul,” Space, Culture and Power, Ôncü and Weyland, eds. London: Zed Books, 1997:56-72, here 60.

544 ôncü, 60. 545 Ôncü, 60.

urban modernisers believed that low-density American-type suburb was the way to create a middle class in Turkey. Presented with the motto of American dream by the press and politicians, upper middle class residential areas such as Levent and Atakoy were seen as instruments to create a Turkish bourgeoisie by the moderniser policy maker (see Chapter 6).

Although housing was one of the main municipal targets in the beginning, Istanbul’s growing lack of social housing remained almost untouched - except for a couple of examples: Rami Houses at the Golden Horn, built in a couple of months surrounded with a nationalistic discourse due to the emigration of Bulgarians of Turkish Muslim origin from Bulgaria to Turkey; Workers’ Houses at Koçuyolu at the Anatolian side, and Zincirlikuyu. For the increasing problem of housing shortage as an essential problem due to the immigration to Istanbul as mentioned in Chapter 4, private Housing Associations were established to construct "proper examples of new architecture and a new life” in Istanbul, in urban peripheries in particular, represented by schematic drawings constituted the house myth in Turkey. In this context, advertisements in magazines and daily news revealed how new modern houses and new life styles were

made for the main aspiration for the Turkish society by an effective marketing strategy. The architectural vocabulary of clean and hygienic houses, with modern facades that was used in the early republican era, were presented as a brand new vocabulary to symbolise the spirit of the 1950s and the DP government. These visualised the aspiration of being the Little America with a new life style and a new space. Old traditional houses/neighbourhoods represented the past. It became so popular and excepted by the public to such an extend that there was not a day that newspapers did not publish advertisement of a bank giving a house with garden or a flat in the lottery open for its clients who open an account. Banks used the image of “new life” and “ideal home” for attracting clients (FIG.5.3). In this context, “beautiful, clean, and hygienic” atmosphere of “modem houses” for the Istanbulites were the basic representation of the new life style in Istanbul. Therefore the myth of house became a fictive and abstract

representation revealing social aspiration for a new life style. Accordingly, “new life” should be accompanied by the American or western goods or products in the new home, with the motto of “do what Americans do” (FIG.5.4).®"® And the new life style can only be completed by an imported car or a speedboat, visualising a prosper and happy life in abstract drawings (FIG.5.5.) Even courier services were set up to carry these products to the other cities.^^ The nationalistic mood of citizens which can be explained with the motto of “citizen, use national product, and save money”^® of the

546 Civils servants in Ankara started to buy refrigerator and oven from the American diplomats returning to the USA; from the memories of my family.

547 Cumhuriyet, 27.11.1951. 548 Cumhuriyet, 12.12.1930.

early republican years had been turned into consum erism which was represented by purchasing western products and imported goods of better quality they used to have. Moreover, the prosperous future was reflected in a new modern environm ent such as the Hilton Hotel and the Municipality Palace which were the exam ples of the High- Modernist approach in Istanbul. The Hilton Hotel, a symbol of Am erican investm ent and development of tourism and business with the indication of new liberal econom ic policy, also a political message against the Soviets in the bi-polarised WWII.^'^^ Newspapers and annual albums visualised this significant change from the beginning of the construction in April 1951 to its end in May 1955, and a honorary citizenship of Istanbul rewarded to Conrad Hilton in June 1955 symbolises the political agenda (FIG .5.6).^^°

VilÔYQÜ is ia n b u l

SemU B o g a ziç i - T a r a ijy a

M e v k ii B ü lbü l T u v a s i

T a k s lm o tf Y s r li d o lc p h y a ia k o d a s i - goraineli m ia c - fir v e Y e m e k s a lo n u - genig hoi - b a n y o - si- rin m u lfa k

K u su s iy erl Asu.de b a h ç e li/ m cui-'y

z a r a li ie ra s

M u h iii K o ru luk, incir bcdiçQ- leri, ç ile k ia r la la n

Fig.5.2. “New architecture for the prosper future:” housing complex at Zincirlikuyu, designed by Turgut Cansever at the northern part of Istanbul, 1952.

Bfi^ e u s a /t^ l ik i ninlenm e aqf, Türkiijé, /f Bankssinm 23 Aij.uatoo ç e M Ift. Utramiuelerlfidendlr. A ynoa 1 a d d 20.000 I t r a - l ' a d c t 10.Q 0 O :liri.4 0 adet 1.000 lira ue 890 hi^iye çnfiUl uc zonyin nara

150 U i d y a 1 k u r 'a n u m a ia s >