Wreck/debris:Reproduction

Transformation of the city atmosphere depends on causes related to, or independent from, people‟s activity. Especially, construction processes which continuously reproduce the cities we live in, either demolish the existing buildings or convert the empty spaces within the city into construction sites and then building structures, in order to produce these buildings. In terms of spatial change and expansion, cities are such dynamic that, within his/her life span, a person can witness this transformation‟s occurring several times, for the same settlement. These transformations, arousing a feeling of loss, cause crises within the memories of individuals as well as the society. Big and rapid changes -both in physical and sensory contexts- have negative influences on people‟s appropriation of the environments they live in. These influences can differ, in forms of not interacting with the environment as much as possible, or missing -even idealizing- the past, with a feeling of nostalgia. It is important, not only for the individual, but also for the collective memory, that there are other forms of activity, with the power to act, apart from (not in the middle of or in-between) these approaches, describing two opposite extremes, which have a passive character. Within the paradigm (storm) of progress, it is as challenging as important, to provide a basis for sustaining buildings which are physically weak and which don‟t have an important edge value, historically. The purpose of this study, is to establish the conceptual framework of the theory required for this basis.This conceptual framework will be supported with reproduction samples which are not included in the conventional circulation mechanisms. First of all, the suggestion to use within the study, categories of ruin, wreck and debris, for devastated buildings, aims to provide thinking on the words which have nuances, but which are mostly used without care in daily life. While classifying ruin, wreck and debris, a paradigmatic parallelism is established, with the help of etymological origins. This way, an awareness between these structures will be created. The chronological duality of ruin and wreck-debris, is caused by the distinction of Modern and Pre-Modern, where a paradigmatic change occurred. Chronologically, this distinction is dated to the Industrial Revolution. Ruin, explains the Pre-Modern, while wreck and debris explain the Modern and after. Even if wreck and debris are within the same context chronologically, they are different in terms of the intensity and duration of the forces devastating the buildings. Ruin takes part in the study, as a classification and reproduction case, however, it is not examined within the reasons and notions sections. Because, this study aims to create an awareness about the buildings, within the Modern period. Nevertheless, ruins which are reproduced theoretically, within this period, are also included in this study.In the second chapter, reasons which cause the buildings to be defined as wreck and debris, are investigated, examples are given. Investigating reasons devastating the buildings, is rather important for buildings on which the study aims to create an awareness. Examples are taken from not very known cases. Since, spread images of wreck and debris start to be part of the reproduction. Due to the fact that each reproduction case gains a quality, not only in terms of reasons, but also in terms of notions and phenomena, images prone to reproduction are avoided. Furthermore, samples are selected from different geographies, in such a way to abstain from a euro-centric perspective.One of the main reasons of the devastation of buildings, is the minor forces of nature acting on the building, when there is a lack of human interest and maintenance. In addition to this, large scale natural disasters can rapidly devastate the buildings. One condition for a building to be maintained, is its ability to continue its function, therefore, buildings with invalid functions are abandoned and unexploited. It is improbable for a building to be maintained regularly, when the resident is absent. However, human activity, voluntarily or not, can also cause the devastation of buildings. Unintended events such as accidents or technological disasters can devastate the buildings, but also, intentional events such as wars and struggles cans result in the transformation of buildings into wrecks.In the third chapter, qualities based on notions and phenomena, that wrecks and debris gains through the devastation they are facing, are explained, also with examples. While selecting the notions, their being conceptualized/conteptualizable, is taken into consideration. Since the reasons which cause the buildings to be devastated are also explained, relational patterns between the reasons and the notions are underlined, at the end of the chapter. The feeling that the wrecks and debris arouse in the individual, is first of all based on physical devastation of buildings, in other words, on the traces of time on the buildings. These traces are comprised of layers such as decay, patina, sub-nature and traces of life. Palimpsest can be considered as the result of the temporal superpositions caused by the differentiation of these traces. Temporal superpositions can also give the buildings a feature of porosity; while palimpsest includes the past seen from the present, porosity implies the present, the past and the future open to a variety of possibilities. Sign value of the physical devastation of buildings might correspond to notions of nostalgia, failure, ambivalence and sublime, while their components can be conceptualized under phenomena like dust and rubble. In the fourth chapter, reproductions of ruins, wrecks and debris are explained through examples. At this point, reproduction‟s relation with the memory, within the individual and collective scales, has also been mentioned. The relation in question, is established by using wrecks and debris as experimental space, suggestive indicator and/or resistance. The reproduction is obtained by means of three different approaches, even if there are no definite boundaries between them. These approaches can be classified as representational reproduction, mimetic reproduction and reproduction realized with spatial intervention. These approaches should not be seen as operations completely independent from each other, there are cases where they are intertwined. What makes the reproduction more important in terms of memory, is the effective interaction between processes causing the devastation of buildings and notions and phenomena implied by these buildings through their devastation.In addition to the importance of the relation expected to be discovered between the reasons, notions and phenomena which will be used within the context of reproduction, it is seen that some notions and phenomena are prone to some reproduction approaches. It is possible to say that notions that wrecks and debris gain through their physical devastation can be used more frequently for spatial interventions, while notions related to the sign value, for representational reproduction and notions based on the destruction of structural components, for mimetic reproduction. Still, it is not possible to talk about definite distinctions, valid under all circumstances, between notions and forms of reproduction.It is necessary to explain that, with ruins, wrecks and debris losing their functionality, form and function split. When the buildings in question are provided with new functions, other than their old usages, they are established this time in a psychological context.Devastated buildings that we perceive in the physical environment, shouldn‟t be seen only as temporary buildings, waiting to be part of the circulation. Buildings are sensory and experimental parts of the urban daily life. Disappearance of these parts results in the formation of voids within the memory. Procedures transforming the physical environment rather rapidly, make these voids expand in a continuous way. In terms of maintaining and developing theconnections between lived environment and memory, devastated buildings are able to create some alternative counter-regions by means of tactics. Reproduction does not show itself only as the physical reality of buildings, images and usage of buildings with mimetic purposes, have to be taken into account. Reproduction of wreck/debris realized with tactics , providing an ability to resist, can contribute to establish a solid ground, apart from the Modern world view and capitalist system‟s self-appointed narrative of spatial expansion. Reproduction of ruins, wrecks and debris includes conceptual approaches deeper than ruin aesthetics. Reproduction of buildings, either subject to continuous interventions of the nature in the human artifacts, or to capitalist creative destruction procedures, trying to maintain their positions under these circumstances, even if they are physically devastated, can provide important clues not only for the buildings within similar physical situations, but also for the whole physical environment. Eventually, the prerequisite for the common good that will be provided by means of the reproduction of wrecks and debris, is the increase in the awareness on these buildings. Following this, buildings and their devastation have to be reproduced, by an analysis based on the reasons and notions. A reproduction within the psychological context, can be considered as an effective tactic, only after the fulfillment of all of these conditions.