Nisan, 2009 arşivi

Notes from my trip to Barcelona: Day 1

Last October I went to Barcelona / Spain on a field trip with the firm I worked with. We were around 30 by number and were pretty much excited about the trip. Although the main focus of the trip was to attend the World Architecture Festival held in Barcelona between 22-25 October 2008, I knew that the opportunity to visit this beautiful city and Gaudi’s buildings was enough to make me happy. Our visit to Barcelona was very short, we were going to tour on our own and I had done very little preparation as to where to visit. I already knew many sightseeing spots, but because I had no time, I hadn’t studied the guide books or decided on any trip routes. Our trip was to be spontaneous, however as you will read we managed to create our own route and it was quite successful too.

Although I think 3 days is definitely not nough for Barcelona, you can use the notes on this post for a quick tour, especially if you are visiting Barcelona for business and you have limited time for seeing the city’s attraction points. 

DAY 1

We left Istanbul early Wednesday morning and checked into our hotel by afternoon. After a 1 hour’s rest, we left the hotel to begin sightseeing, since our stay in Barcelona wasn’t very long. We decided to go to the Aquarium because it was close to the hotel.
1. The Aquarium is located at the Port Vell close to the Port Olymipic. We took the subway and got off at the Barceloneta station. The building houses 35 different aquariums, 11,000 animals of 450 different species. It was a very relaxing tour especially after our flight.

A cheerful penguin at the Barcelona Aquarium

Beautiful fish at the Barcelona Aquarium

2. After the Aquarium, at around 9:00 PM we took a look at our maps and decided to have a quick tour of Las Ramblas, the street where the city nightlife takes place, and have somethings to eat. The street was full of tourists gift shopping and dining. The general atmosphere somewhat resembles Istiklal, (the street that never sleeps) in Istanbul. We strolled around looking for somewhere to dine and after 1 hour of searching we finally decided to eat piaella (local dish with rice and garnitures such as fish or meat of your choice) somewhere and ate. We ordered other local dishes as well, however nobody seemed to like the Catalan food served at the place we ate. Honestly speaking the food was bad. During our stay at Barcelona, neither the food we ate at restaurants, nor the breakfasts at the hotel were good. Maybe we didn’t know where to dine. But it shouldn’t be that difficult get a decent meal should it? Having had something to eat we left to our hotel. Since we were exhausted we decided to see Las Ramblas again the next day. We also decided to plan the rest of our trip that evening, so that we could make the best of Barcelona, otherwise we would waste much time wondering and deciding what to do next.

Because this is going to be too long, I’ll be writing about the rest of the trip in the following posts…

Share

, , , , , , , , , ,

2 Yorum

My Architect: The Documentary of Louis I. Kahn


This Documentary written and directed by Nathaniel Kahn paints a touching story of the search of his self identity through the investigation of the secret and public lives of his father, the famous architect Louis Kahn.
Nathaniel Kahn had little chance to know his father while growing up, and with this documentary his pursuit is completely devoted to learning from his father’s life, at getting to know him better, and by some means fill the void his father has left in his life.
Nathaniel elegantly combines his investigation of his father’s private life; Louis Kahn juggled between 3 families, and his exhausting proffessional standing. Nathaniel explores his family history with his interviews with his mother and 2 half sisters, from father Kahn’s wife and colleage. He is very sincere in trying to know them better, since he has grown up not knowing his father or of his other families very well.
With this documentary we see Louis Kahn as a man although very charming to women, not very successful with relationship or parenting issues, since he is completely devoted to his profession, architecture. He spends most of his time at his office nearly always sleeping there. But that is the price Louis Kahn pays to create timeless architectural masterpieces. He is consumed by his job and tries to find relaxation through the little time he spends with his 3 families.
Louis Kahn leaves several monumental architectural structures when he dies. One of them the Parliament Building of Bangladesh. He spends a lot his time travelling to Bangladesh and back during the process of this project.
Father Kahn dies in 1974, when Nathaniel is just 11 years old, ironically in a restroom at the Pennsylvania trainstation.
He leaves behind a heritage of great architectural buildings to be admired by new generation architects, a bankrupt office in 500,000$ in debt, and last but not least, a shattered life of 3 children one from his wife and 2 from 2 other long term relationships.

Share

, , , ,

2 Yorum

A trip to the Archaeology Museum in Istanbul

Last Saturday I went to the Archaeology Museum in Istanbul. This museum is located in the famous Sultanahmet District near Topkapi Palace.

Istanbul Archaeology Museum
After entering the Bab-Ali gate (The Imperial Gate) we strolled through the front garden of the Topkapi Palace. We passed by the Aya Irini (Haghia Eirene) Museum on the left, which is formerly a church, and by the Darphane (The Ottoman Mint).  Instead of heading towards the palace we took a left turn and went down the pretty street towards the Museum of Archaeology. Entering the main gate we found ourselves in the calmness of the courtyard among 3 significant buildings.

The History

This complex of the Istanbul Museum of Archaeology consists of 3 museums and a courtyard. Built in various periods the museum was closed for restoration in 1963 and reopened again in 1974.

Museum of the Ancient Orient

The first building we encounter as we enter the courtyard is the Old Eastern Works Museum. Built in 1883 by Osman Hamdi Bey, an artist and museum director, the building was intended to be a fine arts school (Sanayi-i nefise), later it was restorated and organised as a museum. You can find Anatolian, Mesopotamian, Egyptian and Arabic works of Art, among which exist exquisite pieces such as the Statue of Naramsin, the king of Akad, the Kadeş Agreement and Chained Statue. Also there are 75,000 cuneiform documents in the “Tablets Archive”.

Museum of Islamic Art (The Tiled Kiosk)

Sultan Mehmed the 2nd had the Tiled Kiosk built in 1472 to be a part of the outer gardens of Topkapi Palace. Later, in the 19th century it was converted into an imperial museum. And in 1953 it was added to the Archaeological Museum as a museum of Turkish and Islamic Art.

Archaeologiacal Museum (Main Building)

This building, designed by Alexander Vallaury was built in 1881, with the supervision of Osman Hamdi Bey. It is one of the few museum buildings which has originally been built as a museum. The Alexander Sarcophagus and the Sarcophagus of the Mourning Women, which are 2 of the masterpieces of this museum, are the sources of inspiration for the neoclassical facade. In 1998 a new modern wing has been added to the main building, and it has received the European Council Museum Award for the renovations and new displays.

Istanbul Archaeology Museum Photos

I have been to this complex several times and whenever I leave, I always feel that the day was not enough and I have to visit again. Even the courtyard itself being so serene, is a place where you can spend the whole day if you have the time to spare it’s definitely worth it.
Besides the archiecture the exhibitions also are absolutely astonishing.

The Exhibitions

Detail of  battle scene from Alexander SarcophagusAlexander Sarcophagus
The Alexander Sarcophagus is one of the most famous items in the museum. The facades are elaborated with bas-relief sculptures of the battles of Alexander the Great. The depictions on the facades are so vivid you can visualise the chaotic and brutal scenes of the battles all around the sarcophagus.
With the elaborations of Alexander all around the sarcophagus it appears to have been prepared for Alexander himself, however it is known that it is the burial tomb for Abdalonymus, the king of Sidon in Lebanon, who was appointed by Alexander after the Battle of Issus.

This item and the Sarcophagus of Mourning women were retreived by Osman Hamdi, who was the museum founder and director, and brought to Istanbul in 1887.
Both the Sarcophagus of Alexander, and the Sarcophagus of Mourning Women are from the 4th century B.C. and both are examples of Ionian architectural style, with all their elegance and artistic quality.

Detail of the Mourning Women Sarcophagus

Mourning Women Sarcophagus
The Mourning Women Sarcophagus is another beautiful item in the collection of the museum. As you can understand from its name the facades are elaborated with bas-relief carvings of 18 women mourning, all in different form and figures. This Sarcophagus is assumed to be the tomb of King Straton of Sidon and the woman are thought to be from his harem. Looking at every sculpture of the women grieving around the sarcophagus you feel that they have lost someone special, a person loved by many women.
These are only two of the most significant items. There are many other items worth seeing in the hall of sarcophagi at the Archeological Museum, such as the Sarcophagi of Tabnit and the Satrap, and the monumental Lycian tomb.
Throughout the museum you can also find glazed tile images from the Ishtar Gate of Babylon, many statues from the Roman era, busts of Alexander the Great and Zeus, one of the three known tablets of the Kadesh Treaty and many more items.

You can also have a look at the photos I have taken from my field trip either through the map above or click on my picasa web album on the left.
If you ever go to Istanbul, which you surely must do at least once in your life, be sure to visit this museum. It is, located at the Sultanahmet district which is the center of touristic attraction, easy to find, and most important of all it is one of the best museums in the world. Among all the other beautiful sites in the city, this tells the most of the cultural and historical heritage in Turkey.

For further reading go to:
Governorship of Istanbul Website
Ministry of Culture and Tourism Website
Wikipedia
The New York Times

Share

, , , , , , , , , , , ,

3 Yorum

Las Meninas: who is painting who?

What do you see when you look at this painting? It’s difficult to describe at the first glance isn’t it?

It isn’t a scene of a landscape or of some flowers, it neither describes a scene from history, nor is it a simple portrait. Well, what is this interesting painting, and what distinguishes it from it’s coevals?

Let’s have a look at the background of  this painting. This is one of the major works of  Diego Rodríguez de Silva y Velázquez (June 6, 1599 – August 6, 1660), painted in 1656. Velazquez was a successful painter in the court of the King Philip IV of Spain, but painting was accepted as a craft not as art such as poetry or music, therefore he worked hard to serve in other duties in the palace court. In 1651 he was appointed palace chamberlain, and had many heavy duties and not much time to paint. However, Velazquez was able to paint a few works, mostly portraits of the royal family.

The most famous of his works as a painter of royal portraits is this painting named “Las Meninas”. What creates its signnificance is the extra-ordinary composition of characters we find in this painting, which makes it an important turn-point in art theory. At the time it was painted it set an inconvenient example of art. Let’s see how this is so:

At a first look we see a little girl at the center of the scene, the Infanta Margarita is the daughter of the King Philip IV. The Infanta Margarita is surrounded by her entourage, maids of honour (Las Meninas) besides the infanta, two dwarfs and a dog at the front, and behind the Infanta’s maid to the right stand the Infanta’s chaperone and a bodyguard. To the left of the Infanta we see Velazquez the painter himself, and at the rear wall we see a mirror reflecting the King and Queen standing side by side as if they were posing for their portrait to be painted. Finally we see a man who is standing at the doorway, he is the queen’s chamberlain and is probably checking out what is going on in this chamber.

Now we know who is who in this painting, if we observe the interactions between the figures we can see that there are a lot of things going on.

1. Let’s start with the mirror that reflects the King and Queen who are looking towards us. Almost everybody in the scene are focused on the royal couple whose presence in the painting is missing. It seems that this painting was actually supposed to be a portrait of the royal couple. However, it turned out to be a painting depicting the royal couple being painted. The royal couple (objects of the painting) have been left out on purpose, and they are watching this scene through their own reflection. How did Velazquez come up with a plot such as this, I wonder?

2. The Infanta Margarita is at the center staring at us with her head turned to her left with a dignified look, too dignified actually for a little child. She is at the center of attention according to the depicted scene, it is as if she were posing for her own portrait, however she is not actually what this portrait is about. She seems to be watching us instead of her parents being portrayed.

3. The two maids of the Infanta (Las Meninas as in the title of this painting), on her left and right are leaning over towards the Infanta. The maid on the Infanta’s left takes a slight glance at the missing King and Queen. Their primary interest is not in who is being painted, they are carrying out their duty, to assist the Infanta.  They seem to notice us, but still go on with their duty, and do what they have been told.

4. The two dwarves at the front seem detached from the Infanta, one of them is staring straight at us out of curiosity wondering “what will happen next”, and the other is trying to catch the dog’s attention. They look like they are after some kind of mischief.

5. The Infanta’s chaperone and bodyguard seem to be talking to each other, maybe gossipping while taking place in the crowd. This doesn’t seem to be an appropriate thing to do in front of royalty. The Infanta and her maids, the two dwarves, the chaperone and the bodyguard all show an informal presence. Maybe Velasquez was trying to display the true characters of the royal entourage, we cannot know.

6. On the left Velazquez is working on a large painting, nearly twice his height, and he has taken a few steps back to take a good look at what / who he is depicting. As we know the King & Queen have been left out of the painting. We are standing where they were supposed to be. Is Velasquez painting a portrait of us? Could it be that we have become the objects / models of this painting? Instead of being an observer of a famous painting, the characters are actually observing us. We have become objects instead of subjects.

7. And finally the chamberlain is looking down through the doorway. He is passing by and spontaneously taking a glance at this scene. He doesn’t belong in the crowd. It is as though he wants to have control over what is happening from a distance, a distance that is neither too close to be present, nor too far to be ineffective. Something in the scene might happen that can get out of control, and he is there to fix it. He displays the omnipotent presence, the “gaze”, he is always and never there.

The power in visual interaction

Are we the real subjects experiencing this painting? Our power as observer or as being a subject has been thrown off course. We think we are observing a portrait, however we have replaced the King and Queen of Spain (the icons of power of the period) and have become objectified by the characters in the painting.

Michel Foucult begins his book “The Order of Things: An archaeology of the human sciences” with an interpretation of Las Meninas, where he investigates the visual structure of this painting, without considering the historical context. He simply analyzes the positionings of the characters. 

Relevant to what I have mentioned previously, Velazquez has left no space for any “visitor” to intervene in the scene. Therefore, any observer, who stands before the painting, experiences a dis-positioning of his / her own subject. Within this context, Foucult observes that:

Around the scene are arranged all the signs and successive forms of representation; but the double relation of the representation to its model and to its sovereign, to its author as well as to the person whom its being offered, this relation is necessarily interrupted. (Foucault: 1970:16)

As we now know that the author (Velazquez), model (King & Queen), observer (us – subject), and the visitor (the chamberlain) have all been dis-positioned. All have been deprived of their power to experience the expected outcome; to be portrayed, to paint, to observe, to visit…

Who is really in control of this scene? Actually no one. Not Velazquez, he is trapped in his own scene; Not the King & Queen; their reflection says more than themselves; Not the Infanta, the dwarves or the chaperone or bodyguard…  Even the chamberlain who is “passing by” does not have control. He maybe seeking control, but if he did actually have control, he wouldn’t need to pass by. Maybe the Maids of Honour have control over the scene, since they are applying their duties and the painting is named after them? Who knows…

Experiencing this painting means asking the question am I the subject (observer) of my experiences, or have I become the object?  And this question has set a primary discourse in art theory. Aren’t we still asking the same question?

Share

, , , , , , , , , ,

Yorum yok

A melodramatic visit: In Bruges

How can a film be increadibly gloomy, funny, touching, artistically fulfilling, and, catching at the same time? With “In Bruges” we see it is possible. The film is both; a visual fiest of medeival architecture of the well preserved city of Bruges, and a good example of English black comedy.

The scenes of the city create a sublime atmosphere in the film, and overwhelm you to go there, and the dialogues, contradicting the atmosphere of the city, are full of slang and comic remarks displaying the humanistic side of two Irish hitmen trying, however failing, not to catch attention.

The language is goofy and sly, to the extent of mocking midgets and the Americans, and the acting is touching; especially Brendan Gleeson who plays the mature hitman Ken always looking out for his rookie partner Ray (Colin Farrell), who are two Irish hitmen told to “lay low” in Bruges for two weeks by their boss’, after a job that has gone terribly wrong.

It’s not surprising that the Director Martin McDonagh is an Irish play-writer who has won the Oscar for his short film “Six Shooter” last year. McDonagh has done a well job with his fellow Irishmen Farrell and Gleeson. Finally, Ralph Fiennes also displays some surprising acting. After we have gotten used to his sophisticated English accent and role accordingly, we see him as a Cockney speaking gangster boss from London, reminding us of Michael Caine.

The only bad thing about the movie is the poster. It underrates the quality of the film by presenting it as a thrilling action movie (which is what I thought it was). The poster also doesn’t give Brendan Gleeson the credits he deserves since he plays the pivot role of the whole film. However, as much as I like surprises, despite the promotion, this film well overcame my expectations.

This is one of the most impressive movies I’ve ever watched. I sincerely recommend “In Bruges” as a film of both artistic and cinematographic quality.

Share

, , ,

Yorum yok