Instances of Emerging Agonistic Spatialities in the Contemporary City: The Production of Differential Geographies in the Public Space of Istanbul
Keywords:
Public Space, Differential space, Digital geography, Gezi Park, IstanbulAbstract
Today, the virtually deterritorialised digital public sphere produces recombinant effects on the increasingly fragmented physical and social urban environment. The Gezi Park Movement in Istanbul has produced an exemplary instance of resurgence of citizens in the struggle against the obliteration of participative engagement enacted by the augmented spectacle orchestrated by hegemonic economic powers. This instance has showed unprecedented collective spatial productions, liberating the potential of the pervading digital realm. This article discusses evidence found in the tensest moments of territorialisation of this situated urban movement generated by a contention on the subsistence of a key central public park – the oldest of the country. Evidence from digital media sources, supplemented by interviews with key stakeholders, is used to support a theoretical speculation on the changing role of public space in our society and the emerging paradox of centrality in the digital age. The exploration considers the movement at the wider city scale, evaluating the dialectic relations between its different parts and layers. The crucial role of new technologies in shaping spatial relations is foregrounded and evaluated as fundamental constitutive element of a hybrid public space, where differentiation is the leading force of urban transformation. Considering the complex meta-spatial dimensions of the new public realm, a new interpretations to the Lefebvrian notion of ‘differential space’ emerges. The ‘right to the city’ in the multi-layered networked habitat poses a new prominence on urban centrality that, in its reconfigured elaboration, triggers fundamental claims for the non-renounceability of genuine, reterritorialized, urban commons.
References
• Adanali, Y. A. (2013). # OccupyGezi: The Park Revolution-Reclaiming, rethinking, re-producing space and democracy in Istanbul. Topos: European landscape magazine, (85), 46.
• Aurigi, A. (2005). Making the digital city. Hampshire: Ashgate.
• Badiou, A. (2012). The rebirth of history: Times of riots and uprisings (G. Elliott, Trans.): Verso Books.
• Baykan, A., & Hatuka, T. (2010). Politics and culture in the making of public space: Taksim Square, 1 May 1977, Istanbul. Planning perspectives, 25(1), 49-68.
• Bey, H. (2003). TAZ: The temporary autonomous zone, ontological anarchy, poetic terrorism: Autonomedia.
• Bohman, J. (2004). Expanding dialogue: The Internet, the public sphere and prospects for transnational democracy. The Sociological Review, 52(s1), 131-155.
• Brenner, N., & Theodore, N. (2005). Neoliberalism and the urban condition. City, 9(1), 101-107. Castells, M. (1983). The city and the grassroots: a cross-cultural theory of urban social movements: Univ of California Press.
• Castells, M. (2000). Space of Flows, Space of Places: Materials for a Theory of Urbanism in the Information Age. In W. W. B. a. J. A. Hale (Ed.), Rethinking Technology: A Reader in Architectural Theory (pp. 440-456). New York: Routledge.
• Coyne, R. (2010). The tuning of place: sociable spaces and pervasive digital media: The MIT Press. Diamond, L. (2010). Liberation technology. Journal of Democracy, 21(3), 69-83.
• Dinçer, İ. (2011). The impact of neoliberal policies on historic urban space: Areas of urban renewal in Istanbul. International Planning Studies, 16(1), 43-60.
• Duben, A. (1992). The Middle Eastern City: An Urban Management Perspective: IULA-EMME. Eder, M., & Öz, Ö. (2015). Neoliberalization of Istanbul's Nightlife: Beer or Champagne? International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 39(2), 284-304.
• Elicin, Y. (2014). Neoliberal transformation of the Turkish city through the Urban Transformation Act. Habitat International, 41, 150-155.
• Erkip, F. (2000). Global transformations versus local dynamics in Istanbul: planning in a fragmented metropolis. Cities, 17(5), 371-377.
• Florida, R. (2004). The rise of the creative class: Basic books New York.
• Göle, N. (2013). Gezi--Anatomy of a Public Square Movement. Insight Turkey, 15(3). Goonewardena, K., Kipfer, S., Milgrom, R., & Schmid, C. (2008). Space, difference, everyday life: reading Henri Lefebvre: Routledge.
• Gunay, Z. (2012). Historic landscapes of exclusion in İstanbul: Right to the city? Paper presented at the Proceedings of the 15th International Planning History Society Conference: Cities, Nations and Regions in Planning History, Sao Paulo.
• Harvey, D. (2007). The freedom of the city. The politics of making. London: Routledge, 15-24.
• Houghton, K. (2010). Augmenting public urban spaces: the impact of the digital future on the design of public urban spaces. Queensland Planner, 50(4), 19-23.
• Howard, P. N., Agarwal, S. D., & Hussain, M. M. (2011). When do states disconnect their digital networks? Regime responses to the political uses of social media. The Communication Review, 14(3), 216-232.
• Howard, P. N., & Hussain, M. M. (2011). The role of digital media. Journal of Democracy, 22(3), 35- 48.
• Keyder, C. (2005). Globalization and social exclusion in Istanbul. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 29(1), 124-134.
• Kipfer, S. (2008). How Lefebvre urbanized Gramsci: hegemony, everyday life, and difference. Space, Difference, Everyday Life: Reading Henri Lefebvre, 193-211.
• Kirsch, S. (1995). The incredible shrinking world? Technology and the production of space. Environment and Planning D, 13, 529-529.
• Kuymulu, M. B. (2013). Reclaiming the right to the city: Reflections on the urban uprisings in Turkey. City, 17(3), 274-278.
• Lefebvre, H. (1991). The production of space (D. Nicholson-Smith, Trans. Vol. 30): Blackwell Oxford.
• Lefebvre, H. (1996). Writings on cities (Vol. 14): Oxford.
• Lefebvre, H. (2003a). Space and the State. State/space: A reader, 84-100.
• Lefebvre, H. (2003b). The Urban Revolution, trans (R. Bononno, Trans.). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
• Lefebvre, H., & Enders, M. J. (1976). Reflections on the Politics of Space. Antipode, 8(2), 30-37.
• Mayer, M. (2009). The ‘Right to the City’in the context of shifting mottos of urban social movements. City, 13(2-3), 362-374.
• Mayer, M. (2010). Social movements in the (Post-) Neoliberal city: Bedford Press. Mouffe, C. (2007). Artistic activism and agonistic spaces. Art & Research, 1(2), 1-5. Mouffe, C. (2013). Agonistics: thinking the world politically: Verso Books.
• Öz, Ö., & Eder, M. (2012). Rendering Istanbul's periodic bazaars invisible: reflections on urban transformation and contested space. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, 36(2), 297-314.
• Purcell, M. (2002). Excavating Lefebvre: The right to the city and its urban politics of the inhabitant. GeoJournal, 58(2-3), 99-108.
• Purcell, M. (2008). Recapturing democracy: neoliberalization and the struggle for alternative urban futures: Routledge.
• Ratti, C., & Townsend, A. (2011). The social nexus. Scientific American, 305(3), 42-48. Richards, G., & Palmer, R. (2012). Eventful cities: Routledge.
• Schmid, C. (2012). Henri Lefebvre, the right to the city, and the new metropolitan mainstream. In N. Brenner, P. Marcuse, & M. Mayer (Eds.), Cities for people, not for profit: Critical urban theory and the right to the city (pp. 42-62). Oxon: Routledge.
• Sennett, R. (2010). The public realm. The Blackwell city reader, 261-272.
• Soja, E. W. (1996). Thirdspace: Journeys to Los Angeles and other real-and-imagined places: Blackwell Oxford.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
- Papers must be submitted on the understanding that they have not been published elsewhere (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, or thesis) and are not currently under consideration by another journal published by any other publisher.
- It is also the authors responsibility to ensure that the articles emanating from a particular source are submitted with the necessary approval.
- The authors warrant that the paper is original and that he/she is the author of the paper, except for material that is clearly identified as to its original source, with permission notices from the copyright owners where required.
- The authors ensure that all the references carefully and they are accurate in the text as well as in the list of references (and vice versa).
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
- The journal/publisher is not responsible for subsequent uses of the work. It is the author's responsibility to bring an infringement action if so desired by the author.