Dialogues on Tophane: a case of cultural gentrification

EURAU 2014 I COMPOS ITE C I T I E S I Novembe r 1 2 -‐ 14 , 2 014 , I I s t anbu l -‐ Tu r key

DIALOGUES ON TOPHANE: A CASE OF CULTURAL GENTRIFICATION

Eleonora Castagna¹, Claudia Castaneda¹, Elena Malara¹, Michela Estrafallaces², Alessio Ferru²

1:Department of Visual, Performative and Multimedia Arts School of Visual Arts and Curatorial Studies

NABA Nuova Accademia di Belle Arti, via Darwin 20, Milano, Italy e-‐mail: {eleonora_castagna, claudia_castaneda, elena_malara}@studenti.naba.it

2: Department of Architecture and Design

School of Architecture (Sustainability), School of Ecodesign Politecnico di Torino, Corso Duca degli Abruzzi 24, Torino, Italy

e-‐mail: {michela.estrafallaces, alessio.ferru}@studenti.polito.it Abstract

The noun gentrification has lately gained its place as a common-‐speech word thanks to its wide use by the Media in news and articles about urban development and architecture. This concept seems to fit the peculiar urban transformation occurring in the city of Istanbul since the 80’s. The city possesses an urban structure and geology that naturally creates distinct areas; this conformation has led to the heterogeneous development of gentrification, particularly in the district of Beyoglu, and more specifically in Tophane. Historically the Tophane neighborhood has been characterized as the pole of Western Istanbul inhabited by a more traditional population since the foundation of the Republic. Nowadays, the main external agent triggering gentrification in the area seems to be the ecosystem of contemporary art, which has moved to the neighborhood due to its strategic position: its main streets, in fact, connect the microcosm of galleries and art institutions existing on Istiklal Street to the blossoming pole of the Istanbul Modern. In 2010, the tension between the two different communities -‐ traditional Muslim and secular western -‐ clashed, sparking discourse, which even lead to the destruction of windowed displays of exhibition spaces. The sudden migration of few galleries closer to the center of Istiklal drew attention over the dilemma of coexistence of these two realities. The presence of exhibition spaces has though not diminished, and nowadays the area presents a vibrant 'second generation' of galleries contributing to the gentrification movement: the art system hence works as a generator of both cultural and urban discontinuity. Given the complexity of the panorama under analysis, our team had the privilege to be in direct contact with some of the protagonists of this scenario: our research activity has resulted in the production of several video interviews with cultural and professional figures living and experiencing Tophane. Eventually resulting in the collection of up-‐to-‐date and popular visions over gentrification, gathering the notional knowledge about the phenomenon in a more humane and realistic perspective. This research project starts as a reflection over the precariousness of coexistence in Tophane, and the deepening interrelation among its social and urban transformation; as one of its final outcomes presented here is a project of systemic design, which would foster the confrontation over the possible alternative scenarios of social and economical interaction among the main actors of the neighborhood.

Keywords: gentrification, heterogeneous urban development, art system, cultural discontinuity, video interviews.

045:001

Eleonora Castagna1, Claudia Castaneda1, Elena Malara1, Michela Estrafallaces2, Alessio Ferru2

2

Our research has been driven by inescapable key questions; to return the sense and reasons of its final orientation, we decided to report these questions as possible titles and starting points of the dissertation. Which are the critical urban transformation phenomena and what social and urban issues does gentrification imply?

It is important to shed light on the phenomena that surround us every day and change the morphology of the cities in which we live. These changes are indeed the mirror of the constant changes in politics and economics and thus symptoms and signs of the cultural level of the community they represent. The forms of the city have always materialized the avant-‐garde that anticipates major social changes: there are different types of intervention, more or less attentive to the needs of the area and more or less sensitive to the context and history of the city. In some urban transformations, like urban regeneration, the scenario includes a large surface area of urban agglomeration, the scale decreases telling and observing the physical, economic, and social development of a portion of land in the city, organized into networks and relations that are fundamental for the success of the intervention; that provide for the recovery of a portion of the housing stock and usually act on a portion of the city already built and fallen into disuse or into a serious state of decay. These phenomena are aimed at reducing land consumption and to ensure residents with safety and a better quality of life: in this case, they are consistent, at least theoretically, with guidelines for the design of sustainable urban spaces (Zingarelli, 2013). Another form of intervention is the one of urban renewal, of which main practices are based on rebuilding from scratch after the demolition of the existing fabric. This is probably the most invasive phenomenon, which clears the architectural setting of the examined area (Zingarelli, 2013). Even gentrification works on differing scales, from the single road to the neighborhood or the district, but has its own characteristics that make it very recognizable compared to other urban interventions. Firstly its peculiarity provides for the transition from an industrial economy to a post-‐industrial one; being a very recent phenomenon, first identified in 1964 by Ruth Glass in London, and initially only seeming to affect global cities, with the involvement of large private investment. Daughter of liberal policies, gentrification affects the central areas of London, New York, Paris and Sydney, bringing a change in the physical-‐spatial, economic and social development of the most deprived areas (Ilkuҫan, 2004). Another trait that characterizes every phenomenon of gentrification is the area of interest, which usually has a strong discrepancy between the high value of land-‐use and low real estate value of the buildings, usually inhabited by marginalized and low-‐income social classes, which do not do routine maintenance and repairs. This leads to a general sense of deterioration in the affected area, usually located in the vicinity of a business district or in a central node of the city, and thus becoming an opportunity for profit for private capital. This interest is manifested through local institutions that initiate processes of urban transformation in the attractive areas, resulting in the increase in property prices, in the expulsion of lower social class inhabitants and in the transformation of the social fabric from predominantly production-‐manufacturing to finance (O’Loughlin et al., 1979). The demolitions often involve blocks of buildings, rich in historical heritage, shared memory, and witness to the changes of the city, destroyed only to be replaced by an international language too often oblivious to the cultural and stylistic features of the site (Romeo, 2008). Demolition is not the only type of destruction: the arrival of pioneers, often young couples or members of the so-‐called Creative Class, alters the given social ecosystem, sometimes leading to

045:002


premature rupture of the closed system of the district, or instead, sometimes increasing the cultural richness of the community without creating integrating barriers and hardships. If this insertion does not happen, the social structure would begin to weaken until it breaks with the transfer of low-‐income inhabitants elsewhere, due to the inaccessibility of the rents that rise inexorably. The new tenants will have greater spending power: the proximity to strategic areas and the quality of the new buildings will justify rising rents preferring middle and high-‐income classes (Islam et al., 2006). The perception that one has is mainly that of social exclusion, in fact the etymology of the word encloses this sense inherently, both in English gentrification from "gentry”, which later became the bourgeoisie, and in Turkish with mutenalaştirma, which keeps the same Anglo-‐Saxon division: "mutena" which recalls the noble nature, refined and exclusive, and "laştirma" that, like "-‐cation" refers to the process of transformation (Ammeraal, 2012). What are the main facts of interest about the gentrified area of Tophane, Istanbul?

The events of Tophane are emblematic of the complex history of Istanbul and of the whole Turkish nation. The vicissitudes of political and economical environment and socio-‐cultural factors that have shaped the history of the district derives from the political ambivalent balance, which, over the centuries, has dominated the development of the urban center of the Bosphorus and has shaped the destiny of the modern nation. The neighborhood of Tophane occupies a key position in the historic center of ancient Pera (now Beyoğlu), historically the ''Western'' area of the city, along with the districts of the Golden Horn. The Pera area has ancient origins, but it fully develops as a trade settlement under the Byzantine Empire. Over the years of Byzantine rule and during the first centuries of the Ottoman Empire the population of the district is predominantly Levantine (descendants of European Catholics: the Genoese, Venetians, French), but, with the entry into modernity and with structural changes of the reforms inaugurated with the period of Tanzimat, the already diverse demographic landscape of the district is enriched by the presence of Armenians, Jews, Greeks Catholics and other ethnic minorities from Eastern and Southern Europe, attracted by the overtly pro-‐Western policy and by the powerful economic development brought from foreign investment on the urban fabric (Keyder, 1999; Nocera, 2012). The neighborhood of Tophane, in particular, becomes home to the Greek and Armenian communities, whose members animate the different professions protagonist of the economic life of the city, such as the owners of commercial and craft shops, merchants and businessmen. The coexistence in the Pera district between the -‐ albeit temporarily -‐ majority non-‐Muslim population and the pro-‐Islamic ethnic groups, in this period, is characterized by a clear separation of the space and of the daily activities. The long period of repression of non-‐Muslim stanbuliote ethnicities opens with the persecution of the Armenians by Sultan Abdul Hammid II and the Ottoman Turks, and runs throughout the whole war of independence. The expulsion of the Armenians from the city leaves entire buildings completely empty, partially occupied by refugees from the Second Balkan War. The foundation of the Republic of Turkey, in fact, emphasizes the policy of ethnic and cultural intolerance. The Kemalist vision contemplates the Muslim religion as the only true faith of Turkish culture, and perpetrates the adoption of secular philosophy without living the exclusion of other faiths as a contradiction. The Turkish citizen is the son of other Turkish people, Muslim but used to secular costumes, morally upright and open to the progress for the development of his nation (Keyder, 1999). In this context, Istanbul and its citizens lose the prestige enjoyed up to that point: the

045:003


4

city becomes a cumbersome bequest since the Ottoman legacy, the emblem of the corruption of 'Turkishness' by the Western 'invaders'. Already since 1923, the urban fabric undergoes a process of 'Turkification' with the replacement of the nomenclature of streets, squares and entire buildings; moreover the tension between the different communities of the population grows, leading to conflict and violence as well as acts of vandalism to the property held by non-‐Muslim communities (mainly theaters, churches and buildings). The effective application of the nationalist policies results in the massive emigration of Greeks, Jews, Levantine and Armenians, depriving Istanbul of its cosmopolitan character, and robbing neighborhoods, like Tophane itself, of their main socio-‐economic classes and, hence, wealth sources, erasing craft shops, businesses, as well as places to meet and to work for businessmen and merchants, like the modern European-‐style cafes and theaters. Rural people who later settle there are not able to replace the old economic class, leaving disused shops and stores for a long time; the 'villagers' recreate the socio-‐cultural ecosystem of their villages of origin, and base their livelihood on the role of the non-‐specialized workforce implied in the national industry (Nocera, 2012). Together with the other neighborhoods of the 'European side', Tophane has reached the contemporary era with a contradictory demography: communities of immigrants from Anatolia, east of Turkey and the Black Sea region, are living there since the early 20th century, but historical memory of the city is still alive in its previous incarnation as principal neighborhood of economic and socio-‐cultural life of the ''Western'' Istanbul, that recent urban regeneration policies -‐ as well as the painstaking work of city marketing faithful to the title of ''Europe's Hippest city'' attributed to Istanbul by Newsweek Magazine in 2005 -‐ are planning to return to the center of the scene with a slight makeover: from the center of commercial activities to the main focal point of the cultural industry in the Third World Metropolis of the Middle East. What scenario arises from the in-‐depth analysis of the current incarnation of the Tophane neighborhood?

Tophane is lately renowned as the place in Istanbul where one can find and experience the main events and happenings related to Contemporary Art. Thanks to its role as connector between the art spaces of Istiklal Caddesi and the flourishing art scene of Karaköy, it has rapidly gained fame as an inexpensive and well-‐placed location to establish any kind of cultural space activity. Our attention has been attracted from the possibility to study the mechanisms and implication of Cultural Gentrification, but even more from the chance to comprehend the actual condition of its protagonists through our personal experiences and the collection of living testimonies and dealings with the neighborhood. We have considered the method of oral tradition as the most ancestral and intimate way to preserve the knowledge itself; the opportunity to come into direct contact has given us the possibility to collect extremely valuable information and gave the respondents the opportunity to shed light on their ideas once it was required to expound them in the clearest way possible. We realized that although the term Gentrification is known, they had never been placed in relation to it, to the process that this entails and what it feels like to be part of it. The gallery owners, who made themselves available to present their experiences, are in six and the testimonies were collected between August 2013 and June 2014. Most of the surveyed art dealers are Turkish and, before the space they own in Tophane, most of them owned spaces in a nearby neighborhood. The choice to move and settle in Tophane was dictated by the desirability of the central zone and the low cost realty. The first settlements of art spaces in Beyoğlu dates back to the 80’s, but it is during the first decade

045:004


of the new millennium that the migration of galleries in Tophane becomes massive. "As we entered the 21st century, the first decade, there were different openings: new museums were built, like Istanbul Modern, and also the Biennial: so here there was another raise of culture. Many events followed each other. Within 10 years galleries started to open, following this new cultural wave."

(Nuran Terzioğlu, Apel Galeri) This "cultural wave," as it was called by Nuran Terzioğlu, not only enriched the district of events and exhibitions, but also of new permanent residents and new, many, temporary visitors. In 2010, the first friction was reported in national newspapers during an inauguration at the space of Pilot Galeri: some people targeted it and provoked disorder, damaging the structure of the art space itself. “Before the main attack we didn't have big problems. We, as all the galleries there, to have a best integration with the locals, used to go and buy materials from the local shops. But instead we wanted to create a relationship with the district; the residents still didn't want us. During the biggest opening, I remember, that locals were passing by, shouldering and staring at the guests with an hostile look. They were looking so unhappy but we, I mean, the directors and workers of the galleries, thought that things always changes so maybe this initial hostility could change with the passing of time. We tried to involve the children with workshops and art laboratories, because they're are more or less incapable to have prejudices, but their parents didn't let them to come in. They told them to stay away from the galleries. After the attack there was a sort of crisis cause our collectors stop coming and the openings were not full of people because visitors were scared to get together and shape a crowd that could irritate the locals again. After the attack I was capable to let people come, actually 400 people came that time, to see an artist that chose Istanbul as the first place to perform his new work. Again during the opening there were people that were shouldering passing by. It was just not pleasant. You could feel the tension.”

(Yesim Turnali, Pi Artwork Galeri) The years immediately after the 'attack', as it was defined by Yesim Turnali, a massive shift of galleries took place -‐ which we define as "first generation galleries" -‐ to Istiklal Caddesi: many of them are now crowded into the structure of Mısır Apartments and, thanks to the reputation previously obtained with their location in Tophane, the galleries there are able to maintain high expectations and increase the number of visitors. “I think Tophane represented a transition period for bigger opportunities. Lots of galleries obtained larger spaces after they stayed in Tophane. Pilot Galeri, now Outlet Galeri, moved to a bigger space like Non Galeri that is actually in this building. They gained visibility during the period in Tophane so they can reach higher renting standards afterwards. That was a period of transition for galleries that wanted to save money at the time and to rent cheaper spaces.”

(Yesim Turnali, Pi Artwork Galeri) “I decided to move in Tophane after the attack because the rent was still lower than Cihangir. This is a space very big and it's convenient because I'm paying, actually, half of the rent I paid in Cihangir. Now I'm in the core of Tophane Art Walk and I'm in the middle of Boğazkesen Caddesi that is a link between Beyoğlu, Istiklal Caddesi where there are lots of galleries (like in Mısır Apartment building)

045:005


6

and Fındıklı, Galata New Port, Karaköy area, where Istanbul Modern is.” (Selin Sol, Daire Sanat Galeri)

The galleries, which decided to remain in the Tophane area, are those that express a greater desire for integration and cooperation with the local population. Those who had settled in the early nineties remained stable in the district despite realty prices rising after 2010. The gallery owners who landed there after 2010 have also been trying to keep this collaborative line, and the gathered information told us that more and more of the art dealers manifested a desire of mutual knowledge: this happens through the support of the galleries to local trade in order to obtain materials for the exhibition space and by offering workshops and training experiences to all the local residents of the district. “(...) during the time I stay there I tried to make a statement, I tried to let me know [the neighbors] and let know the other people who are living there what means to work into the art world. So I tried to build bridges, and for example, the children project is one of the main bridge I build with the neighborhood. (...)Through these workshops people became conscious on what the gallery represents and what is going on in there. (...) My intention is to take people in, not to speak out. The dialogue begins if they walk in. If you try to enter with force with them it doesn't work. (...) This is not a public space where you can stand and make your statement clear. This is a neighborhood and you have to respect this kind of environment with its inputs and outputs. You have to respect each other."

(Dilara Akay, Ayaka Arti Galeri) How to rethink and to set the role of the recent ecosystem of Contemporary Art into the organic system of the gentrified neighborhood?

Taking into account the fact that Gentrification is defined by the gallerists themselves as an "inevitable process" (Regis Krampf, Galeri Krampf), it was decided to apply, as an experimental proposal, a study of the gallery system inspired by the practices of Systemic Design, a new discipline that bases its foundation on N. Wiener’s Cybernetics, Complex Mathematics and Chaos Theories of Poincaré and finally on Generative Science. It is about the design of a new economic model, which is based closely on the territory, activating a network of relationships among local productive activities. The goal is to meet the needs of the people, improving the quality of life; this means the food we eat, the water we drink, the air we breathe, rather than the accumulation of material goods. It aims to a world in which all people are equally well off, avoiding monopoly of multinational companies, where all are aware of being closely linked in the long-‐term according to natural mechanisms. To achieve this objective, the production systems are interdependent, meaning that the waste (OUTPUT) of each should be treated the same way as the products in sale, enhancing their qualities as resources (INPUTS) to another production system. The main consequence is that there would be no interest of abuse or monopoly, simply because every production system needs the other to survive; another important consequence is the tendency to achieve zero emissions, since the waste becomes raw material to others or is converted into energy, even opening new employment scenarios (Bistagnino, 2011).

045:006


Figure 1. Actual Life Circle of the Gallery: Linear approach

Daire Sanat was taken into account as a case study, as one of the many art galleries that one encounters while walking along the main street of Tophane, Boğazkesen Caddesi. In terms of Exhibit Design, it presents itself as a small reality being organized in a small architectural space, but this does not affect or limit its range or full scope. Directed by gallerist Selin Sol, it offers room for a small number of works of art that are in need of popularity and recognition in order to sell, which is the ultimate goal. To achieve this end, the openings and publicity are the best chance for a gallery to improve its visibility and growth. The organization of such events directly and/or indirectly involves different actors of logistics processes that go beyond the territorial boundaries. It is not possible to transcend the primary purpose of the gallery, the sale, but it is possible to re-‐dimension the scope of the flow of INPUT and OUTPUT connected to it. Taking into consideration the launch of an event we can deduce how much INPUT the gallery has taken in, and in turn, how much OUTPUT it has created and how much of that comes from local and regional relations. Today's current widespread culture pushes developers, designers and entrepreneurs to focus on the creation of products with a special attention to the refinement of their perceptual and emotional peculiarities; less care is dedicated to the features related to product management, fruition and

045:007


8

successive reuse. The habit to not consider such qualitative issues arises in the occasion of Event Design, in which attention is focused on the message offered to the visitor/consumer, delivered through engaging temporary installations and activities; their ephemeral nature does not favor a qualitative approach to production and management design (Bistagnino, 2011).

Figure 2. Alternative Life Circle of the Gallery: Systemic approach

By addressing and studying the phenomenon through the lens of Systemic Design we do not focus only on the primary purpose of the Gallery, rather we try to understand how it defines its interactions and trades in terms of raw material and/or relationship exchanges with the given social and urban context. The Gallery can presently commit itself to a keep strong connection and relationship with neighbors and with inhabitants of the district, following the strong ethical and moral character of the city based on trust and mutual aid. This intensifies and strengthens not only the integrity of the neighborhood, where everyone plays a part in its everyday life, but also the integrity of the Gallery, since it is subjected as well to the urban renewal dynamics involving the district. Nevertheless, the participation of local people in the Gallery’s one-‐shot events is not enough to overcome the prevailing diffidence towards it and favor a collective participation in the entire

045:008


district. The sense of community is not just acquirable with a simple invitation to participate, but it must be ubiquitous in the everyday lifestyle of the neighborhood. The fast urban transformation of the area and hence the alteration of its social ecosystem is leading the popular communities of Tophane to isolation and estrangement, with the weakening of important relational habits and the loss of local identity suffered from the successors of the rural immigrants. The relationships have to be intensified, enhanced, managed and respected not only for the good of the Gallery and/or the inhabitants, but for the goal of a common ethical and moral identity that improves the lives of the entire collective habitus. The Turkish culture, full of tradition and pride, has an innate sense of collaboration that is somehow denied by the ostentatious Westernization, which the art gallery brings with it. Walking just off the main road, Boğazkesen Caddesi, one realizes how alive it is from a microeconomic and eco-‐systemic point of view: shops, small businesses, street traders are the actors in the district, without forgetting the inhabitants and all the informal activities, which are no less important. It is a network of relationships that reaches far beyond daily pleasantries. An estranged relational network, apparently cut off from the net of the wider urban pulse. The world of Exhibit Design, in which the Gallery Daire Sanat can inserts itself, automatically involves and engages other worlds and realities into the gallery vital system, from the inner organization of the space to the management of the works on display and the event design, and so on. By focusing on what the Gallery routine, which can at first be considered as superfluous and irrelevant, such as its current socio-‐economical position and the exchanges fluxes of INPUT and OUTPUT, we realize how little it contributes to the life of the neighborhood compared to its actual potential. From these issues, addressed as the levers for change, it is possible to generate a systemic vision of the Gallery and conceive the several innovations, which could be implemented in order to improve the vital networks in the neighborhood of Tophane. CONCLUSIONS

Outlined and scheduled, the flow of INPUT and OUTPUT between the gallery and the neighborhood arrives at a continuous metabolism, which intensifies the relational and economic relationship of the latter, and moreover, decreases the ecological footprint. In a systemic approach, expanding the scenario of Tophane is evident how the galleries create a real network of relationships with each other and with existing small craft and commercial activities, and how the district can relate in a similar way to the large future plans of urban transformation. Analyzing all the organizational parts within the ecosystem of Tophane means that each can evolve in line with each other, without sacrificing dialogue with respect to a new cultural context. In this scenario, one adds the evolution of an urban context. The Galata Port Project represents a critical intervention, capable of upsetting the relationships between all organisms of the neighborhood: residents, craftsmen, and practitioners in the art world are exposed to the uncertainties of the radical structural and urban changes of the area for the purpose of an optimal functionality for the needs of global tourism. With the aim to restore the relationship between the city, the harbor, and the waterfront, it is possible to find -‐ on this important construction site on the shores of Karakoy -‐ an extraordinary opportunity to experience the systemic approach in key urban areas. The interaction between the urban context, the port area and the natural landscape raises infrastructural, cultural and economic issues that a systemic restructuring project of the area could rebalance, maximizing integration and

045:009


10

compatibility between the different components of the coastal landscape. In fact, it is not possible to overlook as any artifact of urban value, when only self-‐referential and alien to local quality, can endanger that very "territorial capital" on which any effective regional marketing initiative should be based. For the urban and natural backdrop of a city such as Istanbul, the harbor is a "common good of its territory, fixed in it and not usable out of it" (De Matteis et al., 2005), which arises as a strategic element of capital and territorial marketing (Ridoux, 2008). The urban homogenization generated by global competition, the complicit star system of architects and multinational franchising, is just beginning to show some signs of slowing down. Some cities, mainly in northern Europe, port towns such as Bristol, Copenhagen, Bergen, etc., have triggered communication strategies and territorial development based on local identity, not only of a historical but also of an economic nature, for example exalting the high proportion of independent retailers in the restaurant, trade, and recreational and leisure sectors. In an urban setting sensitive to new issues of social and environmental sustainability, it is not, therefore, such a visionary idea of a collaboration and an interrelationship between existing activities in the area such as galleries, local craft shops and the new poles of attraction and tourism in Galata Port, where the latter has as its objective in developing a local identity and the respect of an exchange of systemic flows with the neighborhood. All activities take life from each other's input and output, creating a reality that yields image and money to the city while at the same time creating a dynamic internal life, leading to the growth of the fundamental relational network which otherwise is threatened. The question: is Istanbul ready for that responsibility and effort? References Ammeraal, E., Does Art divide people? Gentrification in Tophane, Inner-‐City Neighbourhood in Istanbul, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands, May 2012.

Aksoy, A., Istanbul: Dilemma of Direction, http://www.europanostra-‐tr.org/files/file/ Asu%20Aksoy_Istanbul_Dilemma%20of%20Direction.pdf.

Aytar, V. , Istanbul: da ''principessa spodestata'' a tardiva ''città globale'', DI – Dialoghi Internazionali, vol.17: 74-‐89, 2012.

Bistagnino, L., Design Sistemico. Progettare la sostenibilità produttiva e ambientale, Cuneo, Slow Food Ed., 2011.

Nocera, L. -‐ Kozmopolit Istanbul? La trasformazione di Istanbul da capitale Imperiale a città Globale, in Bonito Oliva, R. Identità in dialogo, Milan, Mimesis ed., 2012.

Capra, F., La rete della vita, Milan, Rizzoli ed., 2010; or. ed. The Web of Life: A New Scientific Understanding of Living Systems, New York, Anchor pub., 1997.

Coskun, N., Yalcin, S., Gentrification in a globalising world, case study: Istanbul, EHNR International Conference, Rotterdam, June 2007.

De Matteis, G., Governa, F., Territorialità, sviluppo locale, sostenibilità: il modello slot, Milan, Franco

045:010


Angeli pub., 2005.

Enlil, Z. M., The Neoliberal Agenda and the Changing Urban Form of Istanbul, International Planning Studies, vol. 16 (1): 13-‐25, 2011.

Ilkuҫan, A., Gentrification, Community and Consumption: Constructing, Conquering and Contesting "the Republic of Cihangir" , Bilkent University, Ankara, Turkey, February 2004.

Islam, T., Enlil, Z. M., Evaluating the impact of gentrification on renter local residents: the dynamics of displacement in Galata, Istanbul, 42nd ISoCaRP Congress, Istanbul, 2006.

Keyder, Ç., Istanbul between the Global and the Local, Lanham, Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, inc., 1999.

Lanzavecchia, C., Il fare ecologico. il prodotto industriale e i suoi requisiti ambientali, Turin, Time&Mind ed., 2004.

O’Loughlin, J., Munski, D.C., Housing Rehabilitation in the Inner City: A Comparison of Two Neighborhoods in New Orleans, Economic Geography, vol.55(1): 52-‐70, 1979.

Mancini, G., Progetti Folli, Limes, vol.6: 41-‐47, 2013.

Ridoux, N., La decrescita per tutti, Milan, Jaca Book pub., 2008.

Romeo, E., Problemi di conservazione e restauro in Turchia, appunti di viaggio, riflessioni, esperienze, Turin, Celid ed., 2008.

Tuğal, C., The greening of Istanbul, New Left Review, vol.58: 65-‐80, 2008.

V.A., Il mare e la città, TRIA -‐ Territorio della ricerca su insediamenti e ambiente, rivista internazionale di cultura umanistica, vol.6(2), 2013.

Zingarelli, N., Lo Zingarelli 2014. Vocabolario della lingua italiana, Rome, Zanichelli ed., June 2013 Eleonora Castagna is graduated in Modern Italian Art and Humanities, and has recently gained a MFA in Visual Arts and Curatorial Studies at NABA Fine Arts Academy in Milan. The fields of research embrace the practices of public art and the politics of commons. Claudia Castaneda is currently completing her MFA in Visual Arts and Curatorial Studies at NABA Fine Arts Academy in Milan. Predominantly uses archives in artistic projects and focusing on collective memory and remembrance. Michela Estrafallaces is graduated in Civil Architecture in Milan, and currently completing the M.Sc. in Architecture (Sustainability) at Polytechnic of Turin. Focused on experimental practices for cultural and social integration through the conception of innovative urban structures. Alessio Ferru is graduated in Industrial Design and now completing the M.Sc in Ecodesign, Thesis on Systemic Design with the mentorship of prof. Luigi Bistagnino, at Polytechnic of Turin. Heedful and passionate of Environmental Policies and their relation to economic, social and cultural problems. Elena Malara is currently completing the MFA in Visual arts and Curatorial Studies at NABA Fine Arts Academy in Milan. Observer and interpreter of the public sphere, promoter of a socially committed application of the artistic practice.

045:011

Dialogues on Tophane: a case of cultural gentrification

Documents

Transcript of Dialogues on Tophane: a case of cultural gentrification