Architectural criticism in periodicals: The case of Mimarlik

This study examines the contributions of periodical publications to the field of the criticism of architecture within the context of the journal of "Mimarlık". Periodical publications establish and disseminate architectural discourse within the framework of the tendencies of the editorial boards and the expectations of the readers. In this sense, the ways of approaching the problems are changing, their content and the titles of topics they discuss differ. The aim is to try to understand the potentials of architectural criticism and to see their potential. Two main axes were formed through the overall set up of the study; which are architectural criticism and architectural periodicals. Architectural criticism, which constitutes the first main axis of this study, is approached through the historical context, and examined through shifts in the processes regarding the knowledge of architecture and its discourse. Moreover, the participation of the architectural media to criticism was approached thorugh a general framework and the position of the periodical publications in the architectural media has been examined through these processes. Architectural publications are considered as one of the basic tools of critique, where all phase of architectural knowledge and thought discussed and evaluated. They also seem to be important in terms of determining the conceptual framework of a particular period and understanding what was problematized in the field of architecture during those periods. In the periodical review of architectural criticism, critically acclaimed journals, that have a prominent place in the world literature have been included in the process of social change and transformation in the framework of the contributions to criticism and architecture criticism. In this section, a classification was given according to the contents of architectural magazines. Many of these magazines are European and American journals that have become active in the first decades of the 20th century. After the Second World War, the destruction brought by the war deeply affects the present architectural discourses. The existing values of modern architecture began to be questioned in this period. In this period when the values of modern architecture began to be questioned, architectural periodical had a primary positions in the representation of the architectural discourse. After the 1960s, they have played an important role in architectural theory and criticism. Most of the important theoretical articals that direct the architectural discourse were published in periodicals. Following this, architectural periodicals in Turkey and their critical position were also examined in a similar manner. Architectural periodicals in Turkey have first emerged in the Republican period, a period which emphasized and increased the discourse of modernization and westernization. These journals have helped architectural diciplines represent republican ideology. Becasuse of this, criticism about architectural products was not deliberately preferred in this period. In the following years, the number of architectural and architectural education institutions in the country increased. Accordingly, the number of periodics increased. This seems important to provide pluralistic environment and the critical activity. The 1980s define a threshold for architectural publishing. The economic troubles and political events in this period had a bad influence on the periodicals in the country. Most of the magazine had to close or they broke the publication life. In the nineties, a new type of magazine called 'popular' has emerged. But these magazines are an institution-sponsored publication that does not include theoretical issues and debates. Therefore, the discussion in theoretical field in the nineties did not see an interest in Turkey. Although there were all delays and breaks throughout its life, only Mimarlık has managed to survive with the devotion of its contributors and the Chamber of Architects. The most important actors that define the content of the magazine are editors and editorial boards. For each publication, the relationship between the editors and the journal is different. Some of them are identified with the editors of the magazines. For this reason, in this section, the actors who are representatives of the discouse of the magazine - editors and editorial commities- were studied by means of some examples of the relationship with the journal. In the next part of the study, "Mimarlık" journal was analyzed as a case study. Mimarlık is a long standing magazine which has been published since 1963 by the Chamber of Architects. It is the only institutional journal among the architectural publications that exist today in Turkey. Mimarlık has been financed by the dues of the members of the chamber and it is sent free of charge to the members of the chamber who are paying their dues. Because of this reason, the numbers of sales and readers expectations considered as issues to be acted upon. The publication committee, which is assigned by administration of the Chamber of Architects, has an important role in determining the content of the journal. The Chamber of Architects determines the contents of the magazine according to their policies. The relations of the administrative committee and the publication committee varied in different periods; and the magazine was sometimes independent from the activities of the Chamber and at other times can be representative of the Chamber. And the journal's stance changes due to the relationship between the administration and the publication committee. Moreover, it has witnessed many social and political events during its publishing life. Most of the time these social and political changes that determine the tendencies of the editorial committees. For all these reasons, it is possible to say that the magazine discourse differs in certain periods. The main approach in the analysis of the journal is to focus on these periods differentiated within the chronological time series. In such a review, some formal elements of the journal such as the logo, the cover or the masthead are the prominent and most obvious to reveal differences. These elements often reflect changes in the content of journal. Indentify the formal changes is also important in this kind of a review. Because, there is no specific principles and representation of architectural thinking. Many of the journals had a critical position, has represented its discourse graphically as well as its content. In this study, all of the magazines were examined according to distribution of content and translations.These periods that were determined analyzed under the title of "chronology and breaking points" (kronoloji ve kırılmalar) are Turkey's historical, political and publications thresholds established in the framework of relations with editorial boards, 1963-1971, 1971-1980, 1980-1986, 1986-1996, 1996-1998, and lastly, 1998-2000 and after. In the last section of the study, the critical effectiveness of "Mimarlik" is examined and debated in the framework of general tendencies in Chambers' institutional identity and the periods indicated. The magazine has been seen as part of the institutaional structure of the Chamber of Architects. For this reason, the content of the magazine is determined by the agenda and activities of the Chamber of Architects. But but this attitude inhibitis to produce critical discourse. For example, in the some periods, the magazines reacted by the members of Chamber of Architects. Because of the its content was different. Criticism that is included in this study and dealt with by the autonomy expansions seems possible by the abandonment or interrogation of the established existing values and thoughts. Because, only in this way of 'thinking' can be developed. In this sense, it can be seen that during the period between 1980-1996 and 1996-1998, the publishing committe could be distanced to the existing values of architecture and the existing paradigms of architecture could be questioned.