inşaat falan demeyip geldiniz demek:) hoşgeldiniz... altıncı cadde mi?

Kumgüzeli

Ulus Baker
(altını falan çizmedim, basbayağı hepsini koydum buraya...)

En elde edilmemiş şiirdin sen. Kuşluk vakti yazılanlardan... Bıkkın bir rahibin, bir sabah, yorgun bir vezirin akşamın alacakaranlığında muhtemelen yazacağı... Masadan doymadan kalkmış gibi okunmalı... güzelsin...

Uzaktan zor seçilebilir bir harf... Hayır hayır! Şimdi anlıyorum... Gizli bir rakam, Kabala'dan... kumun üzerine çizilen... Çöldeyiz ve başka bir yerde değiliz... ama güzelsin...

Dansederken göğüsleri sallanan kadınlardan, karadelikleri saatlerce uçuşup duranlardan, sessiz sitemleri kargaşada bile belli olanlardan tırsma öyle kolay kolay... Öyleyse bu bir nasihat... çünkü güzelsin...

Onlar bitecekler: Çizgi roman gibi kolayca, tatile çıkarken boşanan yağmur gibi apansız, menemen pişirmek gibi aceleyle... hâlâ güzelsin...

İskemle hasır ve ayaklarında yatay, ayaklarını dizlerini böğrüne çekmeye razı olarak basabileceğin yatay tahta çubuklar... Rahatına düşkün keyiften uzak Osmanlı "effendi"sinin (ephendi?) garip kahvehane illeti bu iskemleler... Otur o illete gerçekten, çekinmeden, sereserpe... orada güzelsin...

Yılgın geçilir sokaklardan, kuş gibi değil, işportacı kertenkeleler gibi de değil... Ağır aksak, akşam dörtten sonra yaz günü... Akşam mı? O kayıtsızdır... Bildiği gibi değişir, geçer, gider... güzelsin...

Kes kulakları, geçir bir sicime... Ama kaybetme... Başka ne göstereceksin savaşa dair? Kara delikler işitmiş bu öyküyü... Islanarak... Ama güzeller...

Kalp kalbe karşı... Bir arkadaşın evinde... Çiçekmiş... Hemen uzmanı geçindim. Ah! O güneş ister. Ah! Bol su asla olmaz. Oysa hiç anlamam çiçekten... Devetabanını pazı sanabilirim... Neden yaptım bunu? Çiçeğin adı sardı beni... Çünkü güzelsin...

Sözlerine delik kulağım... Özürlere sağır... Kör bir kuyu olacağım... Sen ise, güzelsin...

Güzel sözcüğünü senden başkasına lâyık göremem... Ama bir önceki cümlede görmüş olabilirim... Aldırma, güzelsin...

Mikroskop mucidi Leeuwenkoek dostu ressam Vermeer'e "su böyle işte ve başka türlü değil" demiş... Bir öpüş damlasında milyarlarca gözle görülmez yaratık... Ressamın tarafını tutuyorum... Çünkü, güzelsin...

Birkaç tel beyaz... Bizi gazlamaz... Sakınmazsın görüntünü, biliyorum... Çünkü güzelsin...

Mikroskopun mucidi Leeuvvenhoek, aynı günde doğdukları, hep komşuluk yaşadıkları dostu ressam Vermeer'e bir su damlası gösterip, "su işte böyle ve değil başka türlü" demiş... Bir öpüş damlasında kanyuvarları... Mucidin tarafım tutsam da... Sen güzelsin...

Teleskopla bulamadım... Mikroskopla bulacağım... Ayın yüzeyinin de bir dokusu var elbet... Gözenekler, sivilceler... Onlarla çok güzelsin...

Neo-liberalizm, ruhçuluk, tarikat, entellektüel, ordu, çok-insansız şirketler, öykü yazarları, kestaneyi çizdirenler, uzaktan bakanlar, Şemdinliler, tavşan falcıları, kurban sömürgenleri, onmaz kuşkuculuk, araba tamircileri, taksitle alın tutkumu, hadi... Kazık ve pazarlık... Ama son kumarım sensin... Sen, güzelsin...

Sen, güzelsin... Kuraldışı... Bastıbacak... Minicik... Ama sen, güzelsin...

Kapımın eşiği, gözümün bakışı, son ruhsal tatil, duruşum, bozuluşumsun... Pazarlık etmem... Markette yoksun... Reklamın yok! Gerçekten... Güzelsin...

Kedi sakladım senden, öykü sakladım, belki bunu da saklayacağım... İhanet... Ama sen, güzelsin...

Ruhumu saran sacayağı, gözümün bağı, son ruhsal kaatil, ölümüm, mahvoluşumsun...

Cazgırlık etmem... Gönlünde yokum... Aşkımız, yok! Gerçekten... Güzeldin...

firavunun edalı fincanıydım
fareler kulbumu kemirirken dahi

kasvet saçan kasırgalarına
yelkenlim dayanabiliyorsa
kıpır kıpır deniz fenerinin
marifetidir o...

zaman

Özünde bir ışık kaynağının yeğinliğinden meydana gelmekteydi, tüm bu olup biten. Karşılığında ise takvimden -senden- bir günü daha götürüyordu.

Bu ise basit bir uzlaşmaydı (evrensel zamana ayak uydurabilmen için basit bir kabul) yine de bu yiten zamana karşı tahammülün kalmamıştı. Neydi ki bunun ederi? Gittikçe berraklaşan zihnin ve netliğe kavuşan düşünce sistemin mi, her bir şeye bir tanı ve bir tavır koyabilme becerin mi. Hiçbiri değildi. Sadece çok olan her şey önce azalıyor, sonra zamanla yitiyor ve yerinde bir takım sanallıklar bırakıyordu, küçülüyordun. Küçüldükçe dinginliğin ve huzurun büyüyordu. Nihai sonda, elinde kalan tek şey de -sen- yitecek ve bu senin için radikal – kökten - bir değişim olacaktı. 27.07.1997

iki arada

aranızdan su sızmazken, arada bir aranız bozulabilir. arabulucular aranızı bulabileceği gibi aranızı daha da açabilir. onlara bu nedenle arabozan da diyebilirsin. arasöz: arabulucu & arabozanları aradan çıkar. böylece kimse hem araya gitmemiş hem de araya girmemiş olur. sen de kimseleri araya koymamış olursun. arada kalan, arada kaynayan olmayacağı gibi arada vermemiş olursunuz. 14.12.1998

gündüz yüzünü dönene kadar

.....gündüz yüzünü döndüğünde ağlarsın (ki) onikiyeçeyrekkalasında kentin en anılmaz şeyleri bulup çıkaran, yerini boş bırakansın. yalın yürek kalakalırsın gün yüzünü gösterdiğinde. anlam arar bulamazsın ta ki eski anlamları zamansızlayıp yoklayana kadar, gündüz yüzünü (tekrar) dönene kadar.........temmuz 97'den önce

matpum

MATPUM

(ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Araştırma Tasarım Planlama ve Uygulama Merkezi)
kurumsal kimlik çalışmaları (logo, kartvizit, antetli kağıt, broşür ve web sitesi...)

tm (tasarım merkezi)

tasarim merkezi (tm) eylül 2007-ağustos 2008

aylık periyodla sekiz sayı çıkan derginin, grafik tasarım ve uygulaması.
(ilk 5 sayı gülnur özdağlar ile birlikte, derginin son 4 sayı kapak tasarımları ise emrah yücel'e ait)

tm 8'den bazı sayfalar...

mavi proje

scala hotel, ukrayna - 2006
otelin "oyun salonu" ve çatı terasındaki "lokantası"nın 3d modellenmesi ve uygulama projeleri.
dekorasyon projesi ff&e dosyalarının hazırlanması.
http://www.maviproje.com.tr/


tsk haydarpaşa yurdu -2006
yurdun kafeterya ve kütüphanesinin 3 boyutlu modellenmesi
http://www.maviproje.com.tr/

mimarlar odası

ulusal mimarlık ödülleri türkiye, 1988-2004
katalog tasarımı - haziran 2005

aydan balamir'in editörlüğünde hazırlanan ulusal mimarlık ödülleri kataloğunun grafik uygulaması
(gülnur özdağlar ile)

mimarlar derneği 1927

broşür tasarımı - haziran 2005

mimarlar derneği 1927 için UIA 2005 istanbul kongresi'nde sunulmak üzere broşür tasarımı
(gülnur özdağlar ile)

mustafapaşa - sinasos

mustafapaşa koruma amaçlı imar planı sergi paftası tasarımı - kasım 2005

mustafapaşa'yı korumak için bilmemiz gerekenler broşürü tasarımı - 2006
(gülnur özdağlar ile)

giant’s causeway visitor center

yarışma projesi - ağustos 2005
(ihsan duygulu, gülnur özdağlar ve fatih kaplanoğlu ile)

rapordan:

A building, which aims to enrich and support a natural phenomenon, must be modest in the manner, but impressive for the visitors. Unusual materials and lightweight structures are used to imply the infinite presence of the rocks to temporality of the man made.The building is designed as a limited intervention in to the nature; an elevated position on stilts makes it possible to minimize the contact to ground and to cover fewer surfaces. Being transparent both horizontally and vertically, the building transfers the daylight first to the inner spaces, then to the ground through the transparent floor. So existing landscape and local qualities of flora is supported as an ecological aspect. The approaching visitor has a transparent wall in front of the sky and the coast line which softens the visibility without interrupting it.

mesa

mesa riga konutları - nisan ve temmuz 2005

broşürün grafik tasarımı, konut planlarının sunuş için hazırlanması
(gülnur özdağlar ile)

mesa yalıkavak evleri - nisan 2005

broşürün grafik tasarımı, konut planlarının sunuş için hazırlanması
(gülnur özdağlar ile)

persephone garden villas

persephone garden villas - 2005

mimari projesi atölye 5 taraından tasarlanan projenin 3d modellemesi ve grafik tasarım işleri (gülnur özdağlar ile birlikte) bir de web sitesi var:

http://www.persephonesgardenvillas.com/

mimarlar odası ankara şubesi 02-05

2020 ankara:
proje yürütücülüğü, sekreterya çalışmaları, bülten editörlüğü

ankara üzerine düşünürken, konuşurken ve çalışırken; karşımıza çıkan sorunlar ve gündem üzerinden hareketle bir şeyler söylemenin ötesinde bir proje olarak tasarlandı.her şeye rağmen başka bir geleceğin olabilirliği üzerine bir inancı sıcak tutabilmek, heyecanı yaygınlaştırabilmek projenin amacıydı. sivil bir oluşum, bir hayal / tartışma platformu arayışıyla çeşitli atölyeler oluşturuldu, toplantılar düzenlendi, proje mayıs 2003 – bülten 11’de dosya konusu olarak ele alındı.

ankara kent merkezi:
proje yürütücülüğü, sekreterya çalışmaları, yayın hazırlığı

şehir plancıları odası ankara şubesi’nin güvenpark üzerine ortak bir çalışma yapılması ile ilgili başvurusu sonucunda dönüştürülen, geliştirilen ve yoğun çalışmalar üreten bir proje. iki meslek odasının kent merkezi kızılay üzerine sorun tespitleri yapan, öneriler geliştiren çeşitli başlıklarda çalışmalar yapması planlandı; bunlardan “kızılay ve yaya” konusu üzerinde çalışmalar tamamlandı. çalışma grubu yayalık üzerine kentsel eylemlilikler düzenledi ve sonuçta hazırlanan rapor kızılay’da yayalar ve yaya ulaşımı: sorunlar, sebepler, süreçler başlığıyla yayınlandı.

bina kimlikleri ve envanteri:
proje yürütücülüğü, sekreterya çalışmaları, yayın hazırlığı-grafik uygulama

tarihimizi, kültürümüzü, mimarlığımızı belgelemek ve kentlilerle paylaşmak amacıyla tasarlanan bir proje. çalışmaları inci aslanoğlu’nun akademik direktörlüğünde ve geniş bir çalışma grubu ile 2,5 yıl sürdürüldü. bu proje ile; binalara ait tarihi, mimari bilgilerin, binanın planlarının-projelerinin, eski ve güncel fotoğraflarının elde edilmesi sonucunda oluşan bilgi toplamının sergiler, kataloglar ve broşürler, bina plaketleri, web sitesi gibi araçlarla kamuoyuna sunulması amaçlandı. ankara: cumhuriyetin 25 yılı sergisi ve sergi broşürü hazırlandı, 2003 ve 2004 yılı mimarlık haftasında kentlilerin bilgisine sunuldu. temmuz 2005’de istanbul’da gerçekleştirilen 22. uluslararası mimarlık kongresi’nde sergilendi.

ankaram platformu (sekreterya çalışmaları)

kızılay'daki hemzemin yaya geçitlerinin kapatılması sürecinde oluşan platformda 40'a yakın sivil toplum örgütü ankara için çalışmalar yürüttü.

öteki ankara (proje koordinatörlüğü)

proje "öteki" kavramının çok yönlülüğünden hareketle fotoğraflar üzerinden ankara okumaları olarak tasarlandı. şubat 2004-bülten 18'de dosya konusu olarak ele alındı.

papazınbağı (sekreterya çalışmaları)

papazınbağı'nın üst parselinde yapılması planlanan çok katlı yeraltı otoparkının 1. derece doğal sit olan papazınbağı'na vereceği zararlar nedeniyle çalışmalar yürütüldü. hukuki süreçlerin başlatılması için dava metni ve dava dosyası hazırlandı, kentsel eylemlilikler organize edildi.

mimar sinan haftası 2004 (sekreterya çalışmaları, grafik tasarım)

çalışma grubu tarafından kurgulanan konferans, panel ve gezi’den oluşan hafta programının organizasyonu yapıldı ve y.mimar sedat çetintaş rölöveleri sergisi hazırlandı. etkinliğin yayın çalışması sürüdürüldü ancak basılamadı.

yarışmalar dizini 1930-2004 (yayın destek çalışmaları)

referans kontrolü ve araştırma grubunda yer aldığım yayın; türkiye’deki 70 yıllık yarışamalr tarihini gözler önüne süren bir referans kitap.

mimarlık+teknik I (yayın destek çalışmaları)

şubenin teknik içerikli, 3 aylık süreli yayını olan mimarlık+teknik’in “fen defteri” bölümü yayına hazırlandı.

mimarlık haftası 2003 ve 2004 (sekreterya çalışmaları)

2003 yılında kentte mimarlığın gündem olması amacıyla yola çıkıldı; ilan tahtalarına reklam verildi, radyo-tv konuşmaları ve mimarlık balosu düzenlendi, pek çok sergi açıldı. 2004 yılında da “ankara’nın söküklerini dikelim” temasından hareketle atölye çalışmaları, film gösterimleri, sergiler, sunuşlar ve söyleşiler düzenlendi.

37. dönem çalışma raporu (sekreterya çalışmaları, grafik tasarım)

şubenin 2002-2004 dönemine ait tüm çalışmaların derlendiği raporu içeriğinin oluşturulmasında ve grafik tasarımında çalışıldı. sayısal raporun da içeriği hazırlandı.

yapı fuarı ankara’ya katılım 2003 ve 2004 (sekreterya çalışmaları)

çalışma grubu ile birlikte tasarlanan içerikte yapı fuarına, şube standında katılım sağlandı. 2003 yılında “açık proje alanı” ile “çocuk ve mimarlık” projelerinin tanıtımı yapıldı. 2004 yılında ise stand, ağırlıklı olarak yayın tanıtımı çerçevesinde hazırlandı.

grafik tasarım çalışmaları

şubede yürütülen pek çok çalışmanın afiş, sergi paftası, katılım beratı vb. dokümanları tasarlandı. açık proje alanı kapsamında yürütülen ankara’nın bacaları çalışmasının sergi paftalarının grafik uygulaması…

elbe mobilya 01-02

ibni sina hastanesi mobilya yerleşimi

3d mobilya arşivi oluşturulması

çarpıüç mimarlık 99-01

teskomb binası ulusal mimari proje yarışması

oğuz aldan şehir planlama bürosu 97-98

bursa kent girişi: hazırlanan imar planına destek olarak yol ve metro istasyonu üzerine “köprü yapı” tasarımı.

bedri rahmi delifişek'den...

Kocaman Bir İngiliz Anahtarı!
Sözün burasında da bizim Mernuş elinde kocaman bir İngiliz anahtarı ile çıkageldi. İlk bakışta öyle sandım. Şimdiye kadar hiç görmediğim bir alet.
"Ne güzel değil mi?"
"Güzel ama ne işe yarar bu? Niçin aldın?"
"Ne işe yaradığını daha öğrenemedim, ama şu çizgilerin güzelliğine, şu açılış kapanışın tereyağlığına bak."
İkimiz de anahtarın neyi sökmek, neyi sıkıştırmak için kullanıldığını bilmiyorduk, ama bu parlak çelik parçasına ikimizin de kanımız kaynamıştı. Öyle rahat, öyle sade bir biçimi vardı ki, insana derhal elini uzatmak, okşamak arzusu aşılıyordu. Mernuş,
"Bir de kargaburun vardı. Ama çok para istediler; vallahi görsen alır heykel diye rafa korsun. Kargaburun değil, mübarek Mısır heykeli!."
.....................................................................................................................

İlahi Orhan Veli!
Peki ya siz bazı külhanların Mahmutpaşa'da sutyen satarken ne diye bağırdıklarını duydunuz mu? Hani şu bayanların göğüslerini onarmak için kullandıkları torbalı kemer canım. Edebiyat adamları kırk yıl düşünseler zor bulurlardı:
"İkizlere takke, ikizlere takke!"
İlahi Orhan Veli!. Şu ikizlerin takkesi hakkında birkaç söz söylemeden geçip gidecek ne vardı?
Bu kadarcığı birkaç sene daha yaşamaya değmez miydi?
.....................................................................................................................

Yeşil!
Yeşil hazretlerinin ocağına düştük. Güya burada resim yapacaktık. Sabahın sekizinden öğleye kadar boya kutularımızın önünde yeşil yeşil düşündük durduk. Ormana baktıkça yeşil bir kat daha derinleşiyor... Bu yeşil, gün görmüş bir sonbahar yeşili değil, körkütük, azılı; yaz başı yeşili idi...
.....................................................................................................................

Ufak Tefek Şeyler
... Bütün resimlerde yer alan periye gelince, onun gördüğü iş hepsini bastırdı: Önemsiz, sahipsiz, ufak tefek şeylerin perisiymiş meğer...
... Olayların çok önemlisini az çok hepimiz anlatabiliriz. Olayın dehşetinden dilimiz bile tutulsa onu ne yapar yapar elimizle, kolumuzla, kaşımızla, gözümüzle, anlatırız, ama deminden beri adını ettiğim incir çekirdeği doldurmayan şeyleri bize yalnız sanat adamları anlatabilirler. İşin tuhafı yaşarken metelik vermediğimiz bu şeylere sanat eserinde rastladığımız zaman çocuklar gibi sevinir güleriz. Ağladığımız da olur. Sanat adamı bizim yaşamadan geçtiğimiz çeşitli hayat parçacıklarını ele almış, bizim en önemli günlerimize verdiğimiz değerle onları incelemesini bilmiştir...
..."Vay canına yandığımın işi!" dedi. "Baksana şu kadar ay geçmiş. Bu müsibet yerde aylar, yıllar geçiyor geçmesine de, bir türlü saatler ve dakikalar geçemiyor..."
.....................................................................................................................

ışıklar pazarlama a.ş. 96-97

pres ve taban tuğla projelendirmeleri ve uygulamaları

gazi mimarlık 92-97

temel eğitim gazi mimarlık 92-97:

atölye içi çalışmalara bir örnek. oasis kütlelerinin boşaltılması ile bir kompozisyon oluşturulması ve oluşturulan kompozisyonun(modelin) kağıda aktarılması.

mimari proje 201 gazi mimarlık 92-97:

çocuk yuvası. çalışan anne ve babaların çocuklarını bırakabilecekleri, sosyal hizmet, çocuk gelişimi, eğitimi, sağlığı, psikolojisi ile sevgi ve şevkate dayalı sistemde hizmet verir.
45 çocuk kapasiteli bir yuva tasarımıdır. çocuklar 3-4, 4-5, 5-6 olmak üzere 3 yaş grubuna ayrılır.
hedef: bütünsel ve eğlendirici mekan...

yapı projesi 212 gazi mimarlık 92-97:
kafeterya tasarımı, projede kullanılacak yapım sistemi ve malzeme seçimi, 1/50 proje, 1/20 sistem kesitleri, 1/20 çatı, merdiven, ıslak hacim detayları, 1/1 kapı, pencere ve nokta detaylar ile birlikte sunulmuştur.

mimari proje 302 gazi mimarlık 92-97:
kapadokya'da kaya içi motel projesi: bir ya da iki yardımcı ile birlikte, bir ailenin çalıştırabileceği kapasitede, çoklukla dış turiste hizmet vermek üzere inşa edilecek bir işletmedir.
boşaltma yoluyla hacim-mekan oluşturulması nedeniyle farklı bir çalışmadır.

mimari proje 402 gazi mimarlık 92-97:
yaşlılar köyü: yaşlı insanların, kendi yaşlarına ait eylemlilikleri kendi yaşıtlarıyla birlikte gerçekleştirecekleri, aynı zamanda sağlık ve bakım hizmeti de görebilecekleri bir ortam tasarımıdır.
programda konaklama üniteleri, konut, pansiyon, yurt, otel gibi sınıflandırılıp tanımlanmıştır. ayrıca program, tedavi ve yataklı bakım ünitelerini, sosyal merkezi, personel lojmanlarını ve teknik servisleri de içermektedir.
proje raporundan: tek bir merkeze, ki bu merkez 750 kişiye hitap eden bir merkezdir, yaşlıların hakim olamayacağı ve içinde ezilip kaybolacakları düşüncesinden hareketle insa ilişkilerinin hiyerarşisiyle oluşan, üç aşamalı kamusallık tasarımın ana temasıdır.
I. ölçek-insan ölçeği- mimaride saçak
II. ölçek-ara ölçek- mimaride kolonat
III. ölçek-üst ölçek- mimaride mecazlaşan elemanlar.

ex-libris

griet, asta ve thomas için 2008 takvimi... yeniyıl hediyesi

işte böyle:)

Mimarlar Odası Ankara Şubesi Eylül 2003 takviminin arkası.
Gülnur benim çizdiklerimi desen olarak kullanmıştı çok ama çok mutlu olmuştum...

19th Century Libraries: A Short Survey of Architectural Developments

May 16, 2007

(Seminar in Cross-Cultural Studies: 19^th Century Developments Prof. Dr. İnci Aslanoglu Asst. Prof. Dr. Elvan Altan Ergut)

First libraries, actually regarded as archives today, resulted from the idea or the necessity of entering information in a register. Findings from the ancient cities showed that clay tablets of Sumer and papyrus of Acient Egypt were used for this purpose. It is also known that personal libraries first appeared in classical Greece nearly the 5^th century BC. The library of Aristotle, the library at Pergamon with parchment scrolls, Library of Alexandria and Constantinople were best-known examples of the great libraries. Little is known about early Chinese libraries, but it is known that keeping records was traditional activity in China. It is also thought that the first library classification system was established for the imperial library in China. There were also libraries in Persia and in Iran. Moreover, the Roman Empire established the first public libraries. Unlike previous examples, readers had right to use records which were reserved on shelves. The transformations especially in social structure, which were come out by the Renaissance, affected the importance and the function of libraries. The invention of press or printed material, by Gutenberg in the 15^th century, was the most prominence contribution that the library became a special building type. Increasing number of the private libraries in the 17^th and 18^th centuries brought about today’s great libraries. Today, libraries are various according to materials they hold, institution that supports them or the users they serve. For example, digital libraries, picture libraries, slide libraries, tool libraries or school libraries, national libraries, military libraries can be mentioned.[1] In this context, the aim of this paper is to examine 19^th century libraries in their architecture.

To begin with I will want to give brief information about the organization of the space in libraries. Michael Brawne stated that there were two traditions in history to affect library planning.[2] The first one is a single large-room approach. In this system books were kept in walls. Library at Ephesus in Asia Minor is regarded as an example of this system (Figure 1). The other one gave an emphasis to the reader. Gloucester Cathedral, for instance, housed reader niches. We can see in this example, the definition of the space of reader, and the relation between the reader and the light were designed (Figure 2).
Figure 1. Library at Ephesus, Asia Minor, c. A.D. 115 (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.10)

Figure 2. South walk of the cloister, Gloucester Cathedral, late 14th or early 15th century (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.12)

During the Middle Ages the organization of the space in libraries mainly based on this approach. The arrangement of furniture created carrel-like spaces in libraries. Library of Queens’ College and University Library of Leyden showed us this system (Figure 3a, 3b).

Figure 3a. Library of Queens’ College, Cambrige, 1448 (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.12)

Figure 3b. University Library, Leyden, 1610 (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.13)

When the number of books and users were increased, carrel-like spaces in libraries didn’t work. So, the system of the library with a single large-room whose walls hold books, as we see at Ephesus, was again used from the very beginning of the 16^th century to 18^th century.

Due to the interest of having knowledge and the increase in number of books, libraries get new symbolic importance in the 18^th century. The organization of the space in libraries was searched. French architect Boullée, for instance, explored the rationalization of the space in his projects for the Bibliothèque Nationale de France. It can be said that these projects shown both the desire for monumentality and the attempt on rationalization of book collections (Figure 4a, 4b).

Figure 4a, 4b. Design for Bibliothèque Nationale, Paris, 1785, by Etienne-Louis Boullée. (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.16)

It was in 1816; however, the solution of library space was designed by Leopoldo della Santa, an Italian. That is, offices, stack area and reading room were separated as we can see in the plan (Figure 5). Readers and offices are in the middle, stacks are on either side. According to Michael Brawne, “This three zone separation was to become the accepted organization of library space for very many of the large libraries which were to be built during the next hundred years.”[3] This division was used not only horizontally but also used vertically.

Figure 5. Plan for a Library by Leopoldo della Santa, 1816 (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.18)

One of the greatest library buildings of the nineteenth century was the Bibliothèque Sainte Geneviève in Paris (Figure 6a- 6f). It was designed by Henri Labrouste in 1843, and built 1845 to 1851. Della Santa’s separation was seen on section.[4] Stacks occupied the ground floor which is placed over an upper reading room. Monumental long vaulted reading room was supported by iron arches and slender cast-iron columns. Labrouste’s design was in Neo-Classicist manner. The building dressed stone. Moreover, Frampton indicates that the primacy of structure, also seen Henri Labrouste’s later works, is defined the Structural Classicism.[5]

Figure 6a. Bibliothèque Sainte Geneviève, Paris, 1843-51, by Henri Labrouste. (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.18)Figure 6b. Bibliothèque Sainte Geneviève, Paris, 1843-51, by Henri Labrouste.

(From http://www.answers.com/topic/biblioth-que-sainte-genevi-ve)

ground floor plan (hall)

main floor plan (reading room)

hall and reading room elevation - façade

Figure 6c, 6d, 6e,6f. Bibliothèque Sainte Geneviève, Paris, 1843-51, by Henri Labrouste.
(From http://www.answers.com/topic/biblioth-que-sainte-genevi-ve)

The Bibliothèque Nationale de France: The National Library of France founded as a royal library in 14^th century and became the Imperial National Library. New building was designed by Henri Labrouste in 1868 in Paris (Figure 7a, 7b, 7c, 7d). A large reading room and a multi-storey stack were divided reminding us Della Santa’s separation again. Sir Bannister Fletcher describes the National Library of France as "The Reading Room is covered with a series of nine pendentived simple domes of terra-cotta, supported by twelve slender columns of iron, arranged in four rows, the outer columns standing close to the walls."[6] Great reading room demonstrated the shift from the large-room covered by books to the importance of the space of reader.[7] The building had very decorated façades with stone.

Figure 7a, 7b. Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris, 1868, by Henri Labrouste. (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.20)

Figure 7c, 7d. Bibliothèque Nationale de France, Paris, 1868, by Henri Labrouste.
(From http://www.insecula.com/salle/MS01326.html)

The British Museum in London includes one of the world’s great reading rooms. The neoclassical British Museum designed by Sydney Smirke in 1850s housed art and historical museum and a library (Figure 8a, 8b). Smirke, working with librarian Panizzi, created round reading room surrounded by stacks. Domed-reading room placed the middle of the courtyard. According to Michael Brawne, the British Museum exemplified horizontal separation.[8] The building had Victorian Ionic façade and represented Classic Revival.

Figure 8a. British Museum, London, 1854-56, by Sydney Smirke
(from http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings /The_British_Museum.html)

Figure 8b. British Museum, London, 1854-56, by Sydney Smirke (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.19)

Oakes Ames Memorial Hall or Ames Free Library is designed by Henry Hobson Richardson in North Easton Massachusetts in 1879 (Figure 9a-9e). It was considered the one of Richardson’s finest designs.[9] The building had picturesque asymmetry and variety of materials. The library is mainly rectangular in plan. The stack wing and the reading room designed longitudinally.[10] Wooden barrel vault used the stack wing ceiling. The library had load-bearing brick walls covered with stone on the exterior and wood and plaster on the interior.[11] Edward R. Ford states that “At North Easton there is no sense of naiveté; rather, there is a systematic contradiction of the visual structural order of traditional design.”[12] Furthermore, there is a distinction between massive stone exterior and wood interior with decorated furniture. Although there are some suspicions in order to generalize his all buildings, the architecture of H. H. Richardson was characterized as “Richardsonian Romanesque”.[13]

Figure 9a. Oakes Ames Memorial Library, North Easton, Massachusetts, 1877-79, by H. H. Richardson (From Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York p.21)

wall section at stack wing

Figure 9b. Oakes Ames Memorial Library, North Easton, Massachusetts, 1877-79, by H. H. Richardson (From Ford, Edward R. (1997) The Details of Modern Architecture, The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts- London, England p.22)

interior of stack wingexterior of stack wing

Figure 9c, 9d. Oakes Ames Memorial Library, North Easton, Massachusetts, 1877-79, by H. H. Richardson (From Ford, Edward R. (1997) The Details of Modern Architecture, The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts- London, England p.24)

roof framing axonometric

Figure 9e. Oakes Ames Memorial Library, North Easton, Massachusetts, 1877-79, by H. H. Richardson (From Ford, Edward R. (1997) The Details of Modern Architecture, The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts- London, England p.24)

Boston Public Library, by McKim, Mead and White, built in 1895 in Boston Massachusetts (Figure 10a-10k). Boston Public Library, founded in 1848, was the first large free municipal library in the United States.[14] Due to the expansion of the Library, the new building, designed by Philip Johnson, erected next to old building in 1972. The building is rectangular and symmetrical in plan. The courtyard is formed at center of the building. The wall of the Main Staircase takes sides the courtyard. The courtyard is surrounded by blocks in which various rooms and galleries occupy. The well-known one is Bates Hall, located on the upper floor of the building. It has barrel vaulted ceiling enclosed by half domes on each end and a richly carved limestone balcony. High arched windows illuminate the space. Edward R. Ford indicates that “A stone form, the vault is imitated in iron and plaster. A structural form has become an ornamental form.”[15] The triple-arched main entrance decorated wrought-iron lanterns. It can be said that the façade with the magnificent arched windows represents ‘Renaissance Revival’ or ‘American Renaissance’ style. The tablets underneath the window decorated with the names of masters of art and science.

Figure 10a, 10b,10c. Boston Public Library, Boston Massachusetts, 1895, by McKim, Mead and White (from http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings /Boston_Public_Library.html)

ground and upper floor plan

Figure 10d, 10e. Boston Public Library, Boston Massachusetts, 1895, by McKim, Mead and White (from http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings /Boston_Public_Library.html)

Bates Hall

Figure 10f, 10g, 10h. Boston Public Library, Boston Massachusetts, 1895, by McKim, Mead and White (from http://www.bpl.org -The official web site of Boston Public Library)
Figure 10i, 10j. Boston Public Library, Boston Massachusetts, 1895, by McKim, Mead and White (from http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings /Boston_Public_Library.html)

Figure 10k. Boston Public Library, Boston Massachusetts, 1895, by McKim, Mead and White (from http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings /Boston_Public_Library.html)

Beyazıt Umumi Kütüphanesi or Beyazıt Devlet Kütüphanesi is the first library which was established by the state in 1882.[16] In the Ottoman Empire, each medrese generally had a library. It is known that not only in Istanbul but also in Amasya, Edirne, Bursa, Yozgat, Manisa, and Trabzon medrese libraries were founded.[17] Books and collections were kept in a room or bookcases in mosques or tekkes. Founding Saray Kütüphanesi, palace library, was traditional activity in the Ottoman Empire. The library of the palace was expanded especially in the Ahmet III and Abdülhamid II reigns. Hovewer, İstanbul didn’t have a big and central library. Muzaffer Gökman explains that the Empire couldn’t afford the new and modern building due to the bad economic situation of the period.[18] So, the library placed in imaret of the Beyazıt Külliyesi. The devastated condition of the imaret brought about the restoration. Moreover, the space didn’t have the necessary features in order to function as a library. Gökman describes the restoration process as follows:

“400 metre kare olan ve iki fil ayağına istinadeden, altı cesim kubbeyi muhtevi bu bölümün, ön ve arka cephesi dıvarlarında muhdes olarak geniş pencereler açılıyor ve yine muhdes olarak salonun ön cephe dıvarına istilâktikli mermer kaplama yapılıyor ve altı kubbeden iki merkez kubbeye de dörderden sekiz yuvarlak pencere açılmak suretiyle salonun daha ziyade ışıklandırılmasına çalışılıyor. Salon zeminine Fransa’dan bilhassa getirilmiş ağaç parke kaplandığı gibi, çevre dıvarlarına ve fil ayaklarına da kitap camekânları yerleştiriliyor. Kütüphane cephesine bugün yerinde bulunan iki kitabenin de yerleştirilmesinden sonra, bina İstanbul’un en büyük kütüphanesi olarak açılmaya hazırlanmıştır.”[19]

Figure 11. Beyazıt Devlet Kütüphanesi , İstanbul http://tarihvedusunce.esmartweb.com/body_saib.html

To conclusion, I gave some examples of 19^th century libraries from Europe, America and Ottoman Empire in order to see the organization of space in libraries and architectural developments. It can be said that growing interest in collection of information and technological transformations in relation to both architecture and documentation system affected library design. In 20^th century, for instance, new visions searched by the Finnish architect Alvar Aalto emerged library architecture. Moreover after the computer age and the emergence of the internet, new types of materials and new types of libraries are available today. It can be thought that libraries will become more and more varied form in future.

Bibliography:
Ana Britannica Genel Kültür Ansiklopedisi (1989) İstanbul: Ana Yayıncılık A.Ş.
Brawne, Michael. (1970) Libraries: Architecture and Equipment, Praeger Publishers: New York
Ford, Edward R. (1997) The Details of Modern Architecture, The MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts- London, England
Frampton, Kenneth. (1980) Modern Architecture: A Critical History, Oxford University Press: New York and Toronto
Gökman, Muzaffer. (1956) Beyazıt Umumi Kütüphanesi, Maarif Basımevi: İstanbul
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library
http://www.bpl.org (The official web site of Boston Public Library)
http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings
Ochsner, Jeffrey Karl and Dennis Alan Andersen (2003) Distant Corner: Seattle Architects and the Legacy of H. H. Richardson, University of Washington Press: Seattle and London

---

[1] The information given this paragraph summarized from Ana Britannica Genel Kültür Ansiklopedisi and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library

[2] Brawne, Michael. (1970) p.10
[3] Brawne, Michael. (1970) p.14
[4] ibid p.16
[5] Frampton, Kenneth. (1980) pp.17-18
[6] http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings quotes from Sir Bannister Fletcer, A History of Architecture, p.1206
[7] Brawne, Michael. (1970) p.17
[8] Brawne, Michael. (1970) p.16
[9] Ochsner, Jeffrey Karl and Dennis Alan Andersen (2003) p.97
[10] http://www.greatbuildings.com/buildings quotes from Jeffrey Karl Ochsner. H.H. Richardson: Complete Architectural Works. p.183
[11] Ford, Edward R. (1997) p. 23
[12] Ibid p. 27
[13] Ochsner, Jeffrey Karl and Dennis Alan Andersen (2003) pp.x-xi
[14] http://www.bpl.org/guides/history.htm
[15] Ford, Edward R. (1997) p. 55
[16] Gökman, Muzaffer. (1956) p.1
[17] Ana Britannica Genel Kültür Ansiklopedisi (1989) v.14 p.195
[18] Gökman, Muzaffer. (1956) p.4
[19] Ibid p.6

Moscow

March 30, 2007
(Seminar in Cross-Cultural Studies: 19th Century Developments Prof. Dr. İnci Aslanoğlu, Asst. Prof. Dr. Elvan Altan Ergut)
Figure 1: From http://earth.google.com

Located the eastern part of the country, Moscow is the capital city of Russia. The city has played an important role in several historical periods due to its geopolitical background. It can be said that the history of Moscow and Russian history can’t be separated. Moreover, today Moscow is not only the biggest city in the country but also the political, industrial, cultural, and educational center of Russia. Although Moscow officially became the capital city of Russia in 1432, it had begun to function as a capital city in early fourteenth century.[1] The ring-radial structure of Moscow shows the historical stages of Moscow's growth.

Figure2: From Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten. 2000 “Moscow and St. Petersburg, a sequence of capitals, a tale of two cities”, in GeoJournal 51: 33-45, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

The center of the rings is the Kremlin, the symbol of orthodox Russia and the historical centre of the city. Caroline Brooke indicates that although “The word kremlin simply means a fortress”[2]; the Moscow Kremlin has acquired the symbolic and the important meanings in time. Dealing with the Moscow Kremlin’s history, architecture and art treasures in his book, Arthur Voyce argues that “the history of the Kremlin can be divided into three principal stages: the primitive wooden Kremlin, the ‘Italian’ Kremlin of the times of the Renaissance, and the modern Kremlin.”[3] Yury Dolgoruky constructed the first wooden fortress in the mid-twelfth century. The east of the Kremlin is the Kitay Gorod. (Gorod means fenced-in town or the settlement.) There were the residences of merchants, artisans and labourers[4]. The development of town caused the new settlement, and the Belly Gorod or White Town was formed. In the sixteenth century the Kremlin, the Kitay Gorod and the Belly Gorod were all walled as a defensive purpose.

Figure 3: Wooden Kremlin: Meeting of Suzdal Prince Yuri Dolgorukiy and Prince Svyatoslav on April, 4th, 1147 in Moscow From http://www.kremlin.museum.ru/en/main (Miniature of a manuscript corpus. XVIth century)

Figure 4: Wooden Kremlin: Construction of fortifications in the time of Yuri Dolgorukiy
From http://www.kremlin.museum.ru/en/main (Reconstructed by M.G.Rabinovich and D.N.Kulchinski)

Figure 5: Stages in the early growth of Moscow; built up area as in the 1830s. From French, R. A. 1984 “Moscow, the Socialist Metropolis”, in Anthony Sutcliffe eds. Metropolis 1890-1940, Mansell-London: An Alexandrine Press Book, pp. 355-379

Figure 6: Ivan the Great (1462-1505) was the builder of the masonry Kremlin. From Voyce, Arthur. 1954 “The Moscow Kremlin: Its History, Architecture, and Art Treasures” Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press

In the late fifteenth century Ivan III, Ivan the Great, invited famous Italian architects and artists to build new palaces, cathedrals and fortifications. The Kremlin has nineteen towers all of which are different in design: three circular towers, five gate towers and eleven watch towers.[5] Voyce argues that towers’ square or circular base was built in the reign of Ivan the Great, and a superstructure added later at the end of the seventeenth century.[6] There are also cathedrals and palaces in the Kremlin.

Figure 7: (Left) The Secret Tower (built in 1485 by Anton Fryazin) - (Middle)The Beklemishev (Moskvoretskaya) Tower (built in 1487-1488 by Italian architect Marco Fryazin - (Right) The Borovitskaya Tower (built in 1490 by Pietro Antonio Solari) From http://www.kremlin.museum.ru/en/main

Figure 8 (Left) The Sts. Constantine and Helen Tower (built in 1490 by Pietro Antonio Solari) - (Middle) The Saviour (Spasskaya ) Tower (built in 1491 by Pietro Antonio Solari)- (Right) The Trinity (Troitskaya) Tower (built in 1495-1499 by Aleviz Fryazin ) From http://www.kremlin.museum.ru/en/main

Figure 9: (Left) The Assumption Cathedral (built in 1475-1479 by Italian architect Aristotle Fioravanti) – (Right) The Annunciation Cathedral (built in 1484-1489 by the team of Pskov)
From http://www.kremlin.museum.ru/en/main

Due to the development of Moscow, a new ring emerged, called Zemlyanoy Gorod or Earthen Town. These sixteenth century fortifications later replaced by large avenues; the Boulevard and the Garden Rings. Several roads which connected Moscow with other cities crossed these rings. In addition to the capital and trading functions, factory manufacture began to operate in Moscow in the seventeenth century, especially in metal-working and textile production.

Figure 10: Central Part of Moscow From Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten. 2000 “Moscow and St. Petersburg, a sequence of capitals, a tale of two cities”, in GeoJournal 51: 33-45, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

At the beginning of the eighteenth century, the important event was occurred. Peter the Great moved the capital to St. Petersburg in 1712. Gritsai and Wusten argue that relocating the capital city to the western periphery of the country shown the importance of external political functions.[7] The new capital was modeled different from Moscow. For example, the construction of stone buildings was forbidden in the country apart from St. Petersburg.[8] Unlike the wooden buildings of Moscow, the new capital city had to be built of stone, like successful European cities.

Figure 11: Russia/Soviet Union plus Moscow and Petersburg (Leningrad) From Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten. 2000 “Moscow and St. Petersburg, a sequence of capitals, a tale of two cities”, in GeoJournal 51: 33-45, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

But even during Peter’s reign, Moscow didn’t misplace its significant role. New factories were founded by not only the state but also private enterprise. The population of the city was also increased. Moreover, some changes or developments were seen in cultural and educational life in Moscow. Russia’s first university, for instance, was founded in 1755. Because of the expansion of the city, new city boundary was established, [figure 5] the Kamer-Kollezhskiy Wall, in 1742. Unlike former fortifications, the wall was to function as a custom barrier until the end of the nineteenth century.

It was in the 1775 that the first master plan of Moscow was produced by the Commission of St. Petersburg and Moscow, established in 1762. According to R.A French, the plan was never accomplished.[9] The 1775 plan was regarded the classical revival in the sense that to suggest wide squares, boulevards etc.

In 1812 Napoleon’s invasion brought the great fire to Moscow, in just four days over 70 percent of the buildings were burnt down. This destruction showed the way of large-scale city planning. The Commission for the Building of the City of Moscow was founded in 1813. R. A. French talks about some of the important features of this plan as following: “The Moskva was embanked, the Neglinnaya River north of the Kremlin was converted into an underground culvert, and the lines of the old fortifications were widened into broad boulevards (as I mentioned before). The rebuilding of housing, however, was left to individuals. Within two years, 90 percent of the lost houses were replaced, but it was largely an unplanned and unsupervised process…”[10]

Meanwhile, Moscow was rapidly industrialized. Some of the important changes to facilitate the growing industry were summarized as following:

• in 1837, the opening of the Moscow stock exchange

• in 1851, the opening of the railway to St. Petersburg

• during the 1860s, the linking of the radiating railways

• in 1870, the opening of the trunk route

• in 1861, the Emancipation of the Serfs

• in 1872, the construction of the horse-tram lines.

For these reasons, Moscow easily reached energy resources, raw materials and the market. Actually, The Main Society of Russian Railroads founded in 1857.[11] The aim of facilitating foreign export and transportation of internal production led to general network plan, we can call it the transportation revolution. According to Daniel Brower, “Government approval of this network of railroads remade the economic map of the country.”[12] Moscow was the very center of this network. Due to the growing industry, passenger movement, and the Emancipation of the Serfs led to in-migration.

Actually the evolution in industry affected the neighbor cities and east and north-east of Moscow called the Central Industrial region, especially in textile industry. R.A. French describes as “… the Central Industrial Region possessed 20.9 percent of all factories in the Russian Empire, but they accounted for 38.1 percent of production by value and employed 47.3 percent of the work force in manufacturing.”[13]

The end of the nineteenth century brought an industrial boom. In addition to textile industry, heavy engineering and machine-tool industry increased. Because of the industrialization, the new railway network was formed. The building of the railway network led to both facilitate the transportation and need the man-power. So, urban population of Moscow accelerated. [Figure 12] For instance, the population, which had been 336,538 in 1852, improved 1,175,673 in 1902.[14] In this sense poorer areas of the city were emerged. According to R.A. French “on average there were nine person per apartment, as against 3.6 in Berlin, 4.2 in Vienna and 2.7 in Paris.”[15] Workers’ dwellings were very pure conditions. Even in 1913, they didn’t have sanitation or water supplies. On the other hand banks, commercial and trading organization with their rich office buildings represented the civic wealth. In this context, Gritsai also indicates[16] that spatial inequalities, the pattern of rich and poor districts, were seen in the city.

Figure 12: Growth of Moscow’s populatian 1800-1980 From French, R. A. 1984 “Moscow, the Socialist Metropolis”, in Anthony Sutcliffe eds. Metropolis 1890-1940, Mansell-London: An Alexandrine Press Book, pp. 355-379

It can be said that palaces, residences, cathedrals and buildings erected in the eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries typified neoclassical order, reflecting the imperial idea.[17] Furthermore the examples of eclecticism, historicism, and the revival of Russian vernacular had underlying architectural styles in Moscow during the nineteenth century.

I want to show you one of the examples of the revival of a Russian vernacular style. Pogodin Izba designed by Nikolai Nikitin in the 1850s.

Figure 13: Pogodin Izba (hut), Moscow. 1850s. Nikolai Nikitin (1828–1913) From Brumfield, William Craft. 1991 The Origins of Modernism in Russian Architecture. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft1g5004bj/

Figure 14: Historical Museum, Moscow. 1874–1883. Vladimir Shervud (1832–1897). From Brumfield, William Craft. 1991 The Origins of Modernism in Russian Architecture. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft1g5004bj/

The search of Russian nationalism in architectural sense can be seen the winner of the competition to design the Historical Museum. Brumfield interprets the Historical Museum as following “Under pressure to create an emblem of national identity, Shervud designed these facades as an architectural "text" with as many historical (archaeological) references as possible.”[18]

Figure 15: Upper Trading Rows, Moscow. 1889–1893. Aleksandr Pomerantsev (1848–1918) From Brumfield, William Craft. 1991 The Origins of Modernism in Russian Architecture. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft1g5004bj/

The growing industry influenced architecture in many sense. In fact, the role of private capital expanded. Moreover, new building methods and advanced technologies were used by Russian architects. Upper Trading Rows building -Brumfield describes- was to play a key role in the search for a national style.[19] The winning project, the competition was held for the design, was by Aleksandr Pomerantsev. There were motifs on facades, borrowed from the sixteenth and seventeenth century architecture. The main entrance with two towers reminds us the towers of the Kremlin. 242 meter long façade divided windows and arched to emphasize horizontality. Iron and glass arched skylights used for lighting.

Figure 16: Upper Trading Rows, Moscow. 1889–1893. Aleksandr Pomerantsev (1848–1918) From Brumfield, William Craft. 1991 The Origins of Modernism in Russian Architecture. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft1g5004bj/

To conclude, the history of Moscow is complex and multi-layered. The social and economic transformations change not only the urban structure but also the urban life. Furthermore, the urban structure and architecture was mainly dependent on the official ideology, the personal position of the emperor.

So, coming to power, Bolchevicks moved the capital to Moscow in 1918.

Bibliography:

Ana Britannica Genel Kültür Ansiklopedisi (1989) İstanbul: Ana Yayıncılık A.Ş.
Brooke, Caroline. 2006 “Moscow: A Cultural History” Oxford University Press.
Brower, Daniel R. 1990 The Russian City Between Tradition and Modernity, 1850-1900. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft4m3nb2mm/
Brumfield, William Craft. 1991 The Origins of Modernism in Russian Architecture. Berkeley: University of California Press. http://ark.cdlib.org/ark:/13030/ft1g5004bj/
French, R. A. 1984 “Moscow, the Socialist Metropolis”, in Anthony Sutcliffe eds. Metropolis 1890-1940, Mansell-London: An Alexandrine Press Book, pp. 355-379
Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten. 2000 “Moscow and St. Petersburg, a sequence of capitals, a tale of two cities”, in GeoJournal 51: 33-45, Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
http://www.kremlin.museum.ru/en/main/kremlin/
Rice, Christopher & Melanie 2004 “Moscow” United States: DK Publishing
Voyce, Arthur. 1954 “The Moscow Kremlin: Its History, Architecture, and Art Treasures” Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press

---

[1] Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten (2000) pp. 33-34
[2] Brooke, Caroline. (2006) pp. 1
[3] Voyce, Arthur. (1954) pp. 10
[4] French, R. A. (1984) pp. 356
[5] Voyce, Arthur. (1954) pp. 5
[6] ibid pp. 25
[7] Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten (2000) pp. 35
[8] ibid pp. 35
[9] French, R. A. (1984) pp. 357
[10] Ibid pp. 358
[11] Brower, Daniel R. (1990) pp.42
[12] Ibid pp.43
[13] French, R. A. (1984) pp. 361
[14] Ibid pp. 358
[15] Ibid pp. 362
[16] Gritsai, Olga and Herman van der Wusten (2000) pp. 35
[17] Brumfield, William Craft. (1991) pp. 1
[18] Brumfield, William Craft. (1991) pp. 11
[19] Ibid pp. 20

Ankara Sugar Institute

May 29, 2006
(Architectural History Research Studio- Ankara, 1950-1980 Asst. Prof. Dr. Elvan Altan Ergut, Res. Asst. Bilge İmamoğlu)

Turkish Sugar Industry was established in 1926 only 3 years after the foundation of Turkish Republic. Due to First World War and the War of Independence, it was noticed that there was hardly any economic situation in the country. Sugar industry is preferred by the government of developing countries because it improves both agriculture and industry at the same time.[1] To illustrate, Afife Batur described the early Republican period in Turkey as, “Further, rapid improvement was experienced based on the increase of agricultural production during the period between 1923 and 1926.”[2] Home product was underlined to attach much importance of the consumption based on raw material, which was abundant in the country. Moreover, the slogan of “white trio (üç beyazlar); flour, sugar, cotton” and “black trio (üç karalar); coal, iron, oil” summarized state’s needs.[3]

In the situation of those days, Uşak Sugar Factory was laid the foundation in 6.11.1925 and constructed by Czechoslovak Skoda Company. Sugar production began in 17.12.1926.[4] Alpullu Sugar Factory was constructed by German Bukau R. Wolf Company and started to operate in 26.11.1926.[5] As a result, first sugar was produced in Alpullu Sugar Factory (fig. 1, fig. 2).

Fig. 1. Sweet End, 1927 (from Sugar Company’s web site)

Fig. 2. Sugar Beet Transportation by Ox-cart, 1927 (from Sugar Company’s web site)

Although two sugar factories were private enterprise[6], the new Republic facilitated the improvement of sugar industry by economic policies and programs[7]. Soon after, in 1933 Eskişehir Sugar Factory (fig. 3) and in 1934 Turhal Sugar Factory was established. We may say that Sugar Industry was one of the most important industrial movements in the early Republican period.[8]

Fig. 3. Eskişehir Sugar Factory (from Sugar Company’s web site)

In addition to the impact of economic depression in the world and limited financial condition of Turkish people, troubles began in sugar industry. Thus; Sugar Rationalization Committee was charged with the solution of this situation by Ministry of Finance. It was 6.7.1935 that Türkiye Şeker Fabrikaları A.Ş. (Turkish Sugar Factories Corporation) was founded by the equal partnership of İş Bankası (İş Bank), T.C. Ziraat Bankası (Bank of Agriculture) and Sümerbank. So, these four factories were united under one company and Kazım Taşkent was the first General Director (fig.4).[9]

Fig. 4. Kazım Taşkent (from 30. Yılında Türkiye Şeker Sanayii)

Besides sugar production, sugar industry has valuable by-products especially molasses and molassed dried puld for breeding animals. In this context, it was noticed that farmers preferred the participation of sugar industry due to the contribution of stock-breeding. During the period between 1953 and 1956 Sugar Company founded eleven factories[10] to meet the increasing sugar need of the country. The other and more prominence reasons were; on one hand, the planting of sugar beet was widened; on the other hand, the sugar beet yield level was increased due to learning. For instance, the production of sugar beet on Adapazarı yield became enough to serve itself one sugar factory.[11]

We may also look at the achievement of sugar industry in a statistical context. For example, in 1926 the amount of sugar production per people was 4.8 kg; in 1956 9.9 kg; in 1966 15.6 kg and in 1976 22.9 kg. The increase was 477% in fifty years; it was 453% for the yield of sugar beet per hectare and 450% for the yield of sugar per hectare. The annual endorsement of sugar industry was increased 50.000 times in fifty years.[12] No doubt the company’s success was caused by their organizational approach for their multi-faceted targets. For example, Pancar Ekicileri İstihsal Kooperatifleri (Beet Farmers Cooperative) was formed to buy agricultural machines cheaply for farmers.[13] The other example is Pancar Kooperatifleri Bankası (Beet Cooperatives Bank, named as Şekerbank later) for supplying loans to farmers was established in 1953.[14]

Today, Sugar Company has 25 sugar factories, 4 ethyl-alcohol factories, 5 machine factories, an electro- mechanical instruments factory, a seed processing factory, an agricultural enterprise and an institute.[15]

In addition to contribution of both industry and agriculture, Sugar Company is regarded as giving importance of research, training, and social life. To illustrate, sugar factories have organized training courses for farmers’ children.[16] Each factory campus with a green structure has got workers’ houses, school building, infirmary, sport complex, dining hall and cultural activities buildings (fig. 5, 6, 7).

Fig. 5. Alpullu Sugar Factory Social Complex-Hospital, 1926 (from Sugar Company’s web site)

Fig. 6. Alpullu Sugar Factory Social Complex-Fire Brigade, 1926 (from Sugar Company’s web site)

Fig. 7. Alpullu Sugar Factory Social Complex-School, 1926 (from Sugar Company’s web site)

Pancar, a monthly periodical, was first printed in October 1951, in order to inform farmers about everything from seed planting to harvesting. Besides increasing the consciousness about agriculture, it gave information about health, stock-breeding and social issues. As a technical magazine, Şeker was first published in 1951 for the communication with the personnel who were working in different sections of the industry. Additionally, more than 300 various kinds of books were published by Sugar Company.[17]

I think Sugar Company’s this approach, giving prominence of training, research and knowledge, affected their built environment in the way of obtaining architectural project. Company’s General Management Building (fig. 8, 9, 10) was designed in ‘50s. Although Ali Mukadder Çizer signed the project, Doğan Tekeli[18] remembers that Paul Bonatz won the competition between the well-known architects Orhan Safa and Emin Onat. When he was a student, all of them were academicians at Istanbul Technical University the Faculty of Architecture. Uğur Tanyeli noted that, in those years, whenever work appeared, each academician room looked like an architectural office.[19] Tekeli, also, states that Bonatz and Çizer thought to be partners at the time being. According to application project, drawn in 1954, this reinforced concrete office building had 1075 sqm total area, 2.000.000 TL construction cost, and four-storey with a basement and ground floor. Three storeys added later to the building (1970s) (fig. 11). It is interesting that there wasn’t any announcement about new General Management Building in Sugar Company’s periodicals. Little is known about the previous general management office or building; however, it must have been located on Atatürk Bulvarı according to communication addresses in Pancar and Şeker magazines.

Fig. 8. General Management Building (from 30. Yılında Türkiye Şeker Sanayii)

Fig. 9. General Management Building (from 30. Yılında Türkiye Şeker Sanayii)

Fig. 10. An Artwork on the Entrance Hall’s Wall, General Management Building (from 30. Yılında Türkiye Şeker Sanayii)

Fig. 11. General Management Building, 1980s (from Türkiye Şeker Sanayii 60 Yıl 1926-1986.)

In 1960s, Turkey’s planned economy aiming rapid industrialization[20] was reflected by the improvement of industrial buildings in Ankara. Tekeli also stated that without war industry, there had been no large scale of industrial investment in Ankara until the mentioned industrial period, and war industry was located at near the railway.[21] In 1952 Et Balık Institution on Ankara-İstanbul highway, in 1953 Ankara Cement Factory, in 1954 Tractor Factory, in 1957 Milk Factory, in 1958 Feed Factory were founded. Finally, Ankara Sugar Factory was constructed in 1962. [22]

Ankara Sugar Factory is located in the west of Ankara, which was expropriated in 1958[23], on the Ankara-Ayaş highway. Factory was located this area according to Uybadin-Yücel Plan (fig.12) (1957). The reasons for choosing this site, which were explained in the report[24], may be summarized as:

• Due to the plain topography, buildings were easily constructed,

• Because of low altitude, no pollution,

• Closeness of both railway and highway,

• And the presence of water supply.

Even though the aim of locating factories and industrial complexes at remote areas in order to separate city center, in 1980s, Altaban argued that this area is inappropriate for settlement due to loose soil and high level of underground water.[25]

Fig. 12. Uybadin-Yücel Plan, 1957

The campus contained a sugar factory, a machine factory, an electro-mechanical instruments factory, a seed processing factory, an institute building, workers’ houses, a school building, sport complex, cinema-restaurant building, a guesthouse, a nursery and many other buildings (fig. 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18) besides closed Kieselguhr Factory and farms. It can be said that there is continuous construction at the campus since the beginning of the 1960s.

Fig. 13. Ankara Sugar Factory Campus, Site Plan

In 1977, Sugar Company organized a competition to find a designer for its training center; including sport complex, dormitories, workers’ houses. Gönül Tavman and Edip Önder Us won the first prize; however, project, approximately 15.000 sqm, wasn’t applied.[26]

Fig. 14, 15, 16. Ankara Sugar Factory Campus, General View, The Details from Houses, 2006

Fig. 17, 18. Ankara Sugar Factory Campus, Sport Complex Interior View, The View from Administrative Block, 2006

Sugar Company was especially proud of Ankara Factory (fig. 19), which was opened with a magnificent ceremony in 19 October 1962. Because, 70% of its construction was produced in Turkey and it was applied by Turkish engineers and workers. All fifteen factories before Ankara were constructed by foreign entrepreneurs. The chief of team was chemical engineer Hicri Baysal. The steel construction of factory was produced by Karabük Iron and Steel Factory (Karabük Demir ve Çelik Fabrikası).[27]

Fig. 19. Ankara Sugar Factory

In 1933, machine and equipment production started as a repair work in Eskişehir Sugar Factory. In the course of time, the need of production units growing in parallel to economic capacities reaching higher values and to technological demands increasing in either its own structure or in other industrial brunches Ankara Machine Factory (fig. 20) established in 1968. Complete machinery for sugar factories, various kinds of machineries for cement factories, high pressure steam boilers for big industries, heavy duty machine tools are being produced in this factory.[28]

Fig. 20 Ankara Machine Factory, 2006

Spread control units, various control and energy distribution panels are being produced in Electro Mechanical Instruments Factory (fig. 21) since 1965 in order to supply the needs of sugar factories and other industrial establishments.[29]

Fig. 21 Electro Mechanical Instruments Factory (EMAF), 2006

During this period (1960s) the architects designed industrial buildings. According to Afife Batur, “The experience and background in subject have led to some architects and groups to become prominent in relation to industrial buildings with time. The Tekeli-Sisa Group, the AFA Group or the architect A. Boysan can be mentioned among them.”[30] In fact, Tekeli&Sisa designed Knitted Goods and Ready-Made Factory[31] in 1963-1964 and Chrysler Truck Factory[32] in 1963.

Little is known about some buildings in the campus. Most of them were designed by architects or technicians, working for Sugar Company. It is noticed that there were too many architects or technicians in the Company, such as Artin Yöntem, Hamit Emen, Abdullah Altat, Orhan Reisoğlu. But some of the buildings were designed by freelance architects. For example, the cinema-restaurant building and guestroom building (fig. 22, 23, 24, 25, and 26) were designed by Naim Bekitoğlu in 1958.

Fig. 22 Cinema-Restaurant Building Entrance, 2006

Fig. 23 Guesthouse, 2006 Fig. 24 Cinema-Restaurant Building Detail, 2006

Fig. 25, 26 Cinema-Restaurant Building Interior View

As mentioned before, Sugar Company realized that a series of experiments had to be done on production and processing of sugar beet. Furthermore, some problems of the practice had to be also solved and the personnel had to be trained.

In this context, the Sugar Institute has been founded in 1932 as an “Experiment and Plant Protection Laboratory” in Uşak under the management of two German scientists. In 1935, the management of factories was united under one company; the laboratory was moved to Eskişehir. During the period between 1935 and 1960, due to the participation of new scientists, who have completed their postgraduate degrees in foreign countries, new departments were formed.[33]

In 1965, the Institute was moved to Etimesgut in a modern research center (fig. 27) so as to realize close collaboration with the universities. In fact, as Afife Batur stated, in parallel with the increase and variations in production, national and international structures and institutions were formed.[34]

Fig. 27 Sugar Institute A Block (from Tekeli&Sisa)

For example, Yapı Endüstri Merkezi (The Construction Industry Center) was founded in 1968. One year later, Yapı Araştırma Enstitüsü (The Construction Research Institute) started to operate, founded within the body of TÜBİTAK (Turkish Scientific Technical Research Institution). Similarly, Middle East Technical University Department of Chemical Engineering was found in 1958.[35] It is clear in its annual report that Sugar Institute, universities and TÜBİTAK work together.[36]

The Institute is responsible for research, development, technical aids, production, training, publication and collaboration with other research organizations both in Turkey and in other countries.

The Institute buildings were designed by Doğan Tekeli and Sami Sisa (for other projects Ethem Mağden and Eralko Betonarme). But Tekeli said that Metin Hepgüler was regarded as one of the authors, although he was going abroad those days. [37] The project was awarded on first prize in a limited competition in 1961. Unfortunately, Tekeli couldn’t remember either the other teams or jury members.[38]

Tekeli&Sisa trained at Istanbul Technical University the Faculty of Architecture, and graduated in 1952. They are also the designers of many important works, such as Complex of Retail Shops (Manifaturacılar Çarşısı), İstanbul, 1959, Stad Hotel (Stad Oteli), Ankara, 1964-1970, Lassa Tire Factory (Lassa Latik Fabrikası), İzmit, 1975-1977, Halk Bank Headquarters (Halk Bankası Genel Müdürlüğü), Ankara, 1983-1991.

To quote their books: “The program required by the Institute providing the research and the educational functions of the Turkish Sugar Industries was completed in three separate blocks through maintaining a sense of unity”(fig. 28).[39]

Fig. 28 Site Plan (from Tekeli&Sisa)

The flat-roofed cubic blocks were dominated by horizontal lines (fig. 29, 30). All blocks have reinforced concrete frame structures. The elevations are of white plaster. The construction cost of the building was approximately 11 million Turkish Liras, an expensive cost for the time due to the electrical and plumbing services.[40]

Fig. 29, 30 Sugar Institute General View of B Block and A Block (2006)

Block A contains administrative offices, research library, classrooms and a multi-purpose hall. The two-storey central core was designed as a multi-purpose hall but it is used for a different purpose today, functions as a part of sugar museum (fig 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37).

Fig. 31 A Block Ground Floor Plan (from Tekeli&Sisa)

Fig. 32 General View of A Block (2006)

Fig. 33, 34, 35 Details of A Block and Classroom (2006)

Fig. 36, 37 Detail of A Block and Library (2006)

The other buildings were planned as laboratories. The authors pointed out that “In these two blocks a 1.75 m. structural module was used, dictated by the working dimensions of the laboratories. Above the corridors on the roof, an installation gallery was built along the whole length of the building to house the main distribution system of the installation and ventilators for the large number of fume-cupboards” (fig. 38).[41]

Fig. 38 Cross Section from The Laboratory Blocks (from Tekeli&Sisa)

Block B, with a basement and two-storey, is used for agriculture research and contains specialist and assistants’ offices, and various laboratories (fig. 39, 40).

Fig. 39 B Block Ground Floor Plan (from Tekeli&Sisa)

Fig. 40 Interior View from Laboratories (2006)

Block C, with a basement and two-storey, is used for technological research and also contains specialist and assistants’ offices, various laboratories and a pilot-plant (fig. 41, 42).

Fig. 41 Interior View from A Pilot-Plant (2006)

Fig. 42 C Block Ground Floor Plan (from Tekeli&Sisa)

Three blocks are visually and physically connected by pedestrian walkway, with slender columns and an arcade, creating effects of light and shade (fig. 43, 44). It can be thought that it indicates Tekeli&Sisa’s the idea of design concerning human scale.[42]

Fig. 43 A Pedestrian Walk Way (2006) Fig. 44 A Pedestrian Walk Way (from Tekeli&Sisa)

There are also green houses behind the blocks (fig. 45, 46). They are used by agricultural chemistry, soil, phytopathology, and plant breeding departments. Additionally, there are field experiment stations for field experiments and plant breeding studies and some regional experiments are done in the factory farms.[43]

Fig. 45, 46 Green Houses (2006)

Tekeli said that they were not charged with the position as controllers of the application.[44] Sugar Company’s architects and engineers[45] both checked the works and designed or chose the simplistic furniture (fig. 47, 48).

Fig. 47, 48 Two Examples of Furnitures (2006)

In spite of little changes, it can be said that Sugar Institute is in good condition today. Finally, this project displays the typical characteristics of other Tekeli-Sisa buildings, especially Dormitory in Ankara[46], in terms of its unity of color and material, modern approach to elevation design with geometric lines, general layout, and its massing and general appearance. So, the building is a good example of functional architecture with a plain, simplistic manner (fig. 49, 50).

Fig. 49, 50 Sugar Institute (2006)

In conclusion, it can be said that the role of Sugar Institute in general scene, summarized above, is important, valuable and meaningful. It is clearly seen that Sugar Institute represents the contemporary way of thinking. On one hand, Institute can be considered as one of the valuable contributions, made by Sugar Company, in the training of young generations. On the other hand, there is no doubt that Institute symbolizes the spatial and structural perfection of design and the respect shown for people and industrialization.

Bibliography

“Ankara Şeker Fabrikası Hizmete Girdi”. 1962, in Pancar, year 12, n. 123
Ahmad, Feroz. 1993. The Making of Modern Turkey, London: Routledge.
Altaban, Özcan. 1987. “Kent Formunu Belirleyen Faktörler”, in Ankara 1983’den 2015’e. Ankara: EGO Genel Müdürlüğü Yayınları, Ajans İletişim.
Ankara Şehri Yeni İmar Planına Ait İmar Komisyonu Raporu. 1954. Ankara: Doğuş Ltd. O. Matbaası.
Aydın, S., K. Emiroğlu, Ö. Türkoğlu & E.D. Özsoy. 2005. “Ak Devrimden Darbelere”, in Küçük Asya’nın Bin Yüzü: Ankara, pp.529-595. Ankara: Dost Kitabevi.
Batur, Afife. 2005. A Concise History: Architecture in Turkey During The 20th Century. Chamber of Architects of Turkey Publications. İstanbul: Çizgi Basım Yayın.
Cumhuriyetimizin 50. Yılında Türkiye Şeker Sanayii, Ankara: Türkiye Şeker Fabrikaları A.Ş. Yayınları, Mars Matbaası.
Cumhuriyetin 80. Yılında Türk Şeker Sanayi. 2003. Ankara: Türkiye Şeker Fabrikası A.Ş. Yayınları, Mars Matbaası.
Çelikbaş, Fethi. 1962. “Ankara Şeker Fabrikası’nın 19 Ekim 1962 Cuma Günü Yapılan İşletmeye Açılış Töreninde Sayın Sanayi Bakanı Prof. Dr. Fethi Çelikbaş Tarafından Yapılan Konuşma”, in Şeker, year 11, n.45. pp.3-4
Ekincoğlu, Meral. (ed.) 2001. Çağdaş Türkiye Mimarları Dizisi, 2. Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa. İstanbul: Boyut Matbaacılık.
Holod, R. & Evin, A. 1984. Modern Turkish Architecture. University of Pennsylvania Press
[http://www.turkseker.gov.tr]
Interview with Doğan Tekeli by phone, 18 May, 2006.
Karaaslan, Merih. 1977. “Türkiye Şeker Fabrikaları A.Ş. Eğitim Merkezi Proje Yarışması”, in Mimarlık, 77/03. pp. 89-95
Kazmaoğlu, Mine. 1997 “Paul Bonatz, Yaşam ve Mimarlık Üzerine-1950”, in Arredomento Dekorasyon, 1997/07-08, pp.82-86
Mutluay, Fahrettin. 1962. “Ankara Şeker Fabrikası’nın İşletmeye Açılış Töreninde (19.10.1962) Türkiye Şeker Fabrikaları A.Ş. Genel Müdürü Fahrettin Muluay Tarafından Yapılan Konuşma”, in Şeker, year 11, n.45. pp.7-9
Sisa, S.& Hepgüler, M. & Tekeli, D. 1968. “Etimesgut’ta Şeker Araştırma Enstitüsü”, in Mimarlık, Vol. 52, pp.26-27
Şeker “70. Yıl Özel Sayı”, 26 November 1996
Şeker Enstitüsü Çalışma Yıllığı. 1974. n.1, Ankara: Türkiye Şeker Fabrikaları A.Ş. Yayınları, Mars Matbaası.
Şeker Enstitüsü, 1988. Ankara: Mars Matbaası (Pamphlet).
Tanyeli, Uğur. 2001 “Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa: Bir Kurumlaşma Öyküsü”, in Ekincoğlu, M. (ed.) Çağdaş Türkiye Mimarları Dizisi, 2. Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa. İstanbul: Boyut Matbaacılık. pp.8-17
Taygun, Nazım. 1993. Türk Şeker’in Öyküsü, Ankara: Mars Tic. ve San. A.Ş.
Tekeli, Doğan. 1981. “Mimarlık Nedir?”, in Yapı, n.41, pp.41-44
Tekeli, Doğan. 1990. “Mimarlar Yapılarını Anlatıyor-Düşündüklerimiz Yaptıklarımız”, in Yapı, n.100, pp.78-94.
Tekeli, Doğan. 1994. Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa, 1954-1994: Projeler, Yapılar. İstanbul: Aksoy Basımevi.
Tekeli, İlhan. 1994. “Ankara’da Tarih İçinde Sanayiinin Gelişimi ve Mekansal Farklılaşması”, in E. Batur (ed.), Ankara Ankara, pp.171-199, İstanbul: Yapı Kredi Yayınları.
Tekeli. D. & Sisa, S. 1974. Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa, 1954-1974: Projeler, Uygulamalar-Architectural Works. İstanbul: Apa Ofset Basımevi.
Türkiye Şeker Sanayii 60 Yıl 1926-1986. 1986. İstanbul: Apa Ofset Basımevi
Türkşeker (Catalogue of Products, Goods and Services of Turkish Sugar Factories Corporation), 1993. Ankara Mars Matbaası
Uybadin, R. & Yücel, N. “Ankara Nazım İmar Planı Raporu”, unpublished report.
Üçok, Orhan. 1973. Cumhuriyetin 50. Yılında Şeker Sanayimiz. Ankara: Türkiye Şeker Fabrikası A.Ş. Yayınları.
Veldet, Turan. 1958. 30. Yılında Türkiye Şeker Sanayii Ankara: Doğuş Ltd. Şirketi Matbaası.
Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V., 1976. Türkiye Şeker Sanayii Yurt Hizmetinde 50 Yıl 1926-1976. Ankara: Mars Matbaası
Yıldırım, Hakkı. 2001. “Ankara Sanayiinin Gelişimi ve Mevcut Potansiyeli”, in Y. Yavuz (ed.), Tarih İçinde Ankara II, pp.3-8, Ankara: ODTÜ Mimarlık Fakültesi Yayınları.
Yücel, Atilla. 2001 “Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa ile Konuşma”, in Ekincoğlu, M. (ed.) Çağdaş Türkiye Mimarları Dizisi, 2. Doğan Tekeli-Sami Sisa. İstanbul: Boyut Matbaacılık. pp.39-57

---

[1] Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V. 1976. pp.7
[2] Batur, Afife. 2005. pp.5
[3] Taygun, Nazım. 1993. pp.11
[4] ibid. pp.90, Exact date is different according to Sugar Company’s various publications. (See Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V., 1976. pp.74)
[5] ibid. pp.97
[6] Nuri Şeker is the founder of Uşak Sugar Factory. Alpullu Sugar Factory is established by İstanbul ve Trakya Şeker Fabrikaları Türk Anonim Şirketi.
[7] “Şeker Fabrikalarına Bahşolunan İmtiyaz ve Muafiyet” hakkındaki 601 numaralı kanun, 724 sayılı “Şeker İnhisar Kanunu”
[8] Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V. 1976. pp.51
[9] Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V. 1976. pp.82
[10] Adapazarı (24.09.1953), Konya (19.09.1954), Amasya (08.09.1954), Kütahya (04.11.1954), Susurluk (07.09.1955), Burdur (07.09.1955), Kayseri (02.10.1955), Erzurum (24.09.1956), Erzincan (30.09.1956), Elazığ (01.10.1956), Malatya (01.10.1956)
[11] Taygun, Nazım. 1993. pp.130
[12] Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V. 1976. pp.11, 19
[13] ibid. pp.46
[14] ibid. pp.132
[15] From Sugar Company’s web site.
[16] Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V. 1976. pp.162
[17] Taygun, Nazım. 1993. pp.194
[18] Interview with Doğan Tekeli by phone, 18 May, 2006.
[19] Tanyeli, Uğur. 2001 pp.12
[20] Ahmad, Feroz. 1993. pp.133
[21] Tekeli, İlhan. 1994 pp.177
[22] Yıldırım, Hakkı. 2001. pp.4
[23] Tekeli, İlhan. 1994 pp.183
[24] Uybadin, R. & Yücel, N. pp.14
[25] Altaban, Özcan. 1987. pp.12
[26] Karaaslan, Merih. 1977
[27] Mutluay, Fahrettin. 1962
[28] Velidedeoğlu, Turhan V. 1976. pp.158, 159
[29] Cumhuriyetin 80. Yılında Türk Şeker Sanayi. 2003. pp.91
[30] Batur, Afife. 2005. pp.57
[31] Tekeli, D. & Sisa, S. 1974. pp.108
[32] Yücel, Atilla. 2001. pp.49
[33] Şeker Enstitüsü Çalışma Yıllığı. 1974. pp. 9, 10
[34] Batur, Afife. 2005. pp.55
[35] Aydın, S., K. Emiroğlu, Ö. Türkoğlu & E.D. Özsoy. 2005. pp. 576
[36] Ankara University Agriculture and Veterinarian Faculty was founded in 1948. (ibid. pp.575)
[37] Interview with Doğan Tekeli by phone, 18 May, 2006.
[38] According to conversation with Orhan Dinç at METU, 24 May 2006; Orhan Dinç and Fikret Cankut were one of the team attending this competition.
[39] Tekeli, D. & Sisa, S. 1974. pp.104
[40] Sisa, S.& Hepgüler, M. & Tekeli, D. 1968.
[41] Tekeli, D. & Sisa, S. 1974. pp.104
[42] Tekeli, Doğan. 1990. pp.80
[43] Şeker Enstitüsü, 1988. pp.14
[44] Interview with Doğan Tekeli by phone, 18 May, 2006.
[45] Tekeli remembers two of them as controllers, namely Yüksel Onaran and Tacettin Taluy.
[46] Tekeli, Doğan. 1990. pp.81, 82