Walking through Istanbul, a transit city, in continual transition, our exhibition aims to introduce alternative views of the two cities, redeined by artists’ point of view, enriched with archaeological objects and historical material. The digital works basically appear on the inner walls of the light white construction, an abstraction of the shoreline of Istanbul. —Murat Tabanlıoğlu PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. The narrative of this exhibition is based on discovering the relations between the port and its hinterland by spotting on landmarks and naval entities of Istanbul and Antwerp, simultaneously. Works produced largely by young artists, the exhibition- in which objects are placed in a multimedia setting- explores what a port and the presence of water means for the two cities. PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. ISBN 9789085867142 9 789085 867142 > MAS BOOKS for the exhibition curated by Murat Tabanlıoğlu for the occasion of the PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. exhibition curated by Murat Tabanlıoğlu PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. MAS BOOKS TABLE OF CONTENTS _INTRO 14 ISTANBUL-ANTWERP: PORT CITY TALKS by Murat Tabanlıoğlu 17 ON PORTS AND CITIES A conversation with Murat Tabanlıoğlu by Hou Hanru 26 ANTWERP, A MERCANTILE METROPOLIS THAT AMAZED THE 16th CENTURY WORLD by Jan Permantier _WHAT DOES A PORT MEAN FOR A CITY? 38 PORT AS MEMORY AND REALITY by İhsan Bilgin 01_CHANGING SKYLINES 48 ISTANBUL SILHOUETTES: A CRITICAL INVESTIGATION by Atilla Yücel 60 ISTANBUL’S IDENTITY AS A CINEMATIC CITY by Alican Pamir 64 FISH OF BOSPHORUS by Murat Belge 70 CANAL CITIES, RIVER CITIES, SEA CITIES AND ISTANBUL by Burak Boysan 02_EMBARKING AND DISEMBARKING 74 WATCHING TANKERS GO BY by Aslıhan Demirtaş 80 GOODWILL COMPANY AND THE BOATS OF ISTANBUL by Burak Boysan & Elif Simge Fettahoğlu 03_BRIDGES AND TUNNELS 88 BRINGING THE TWO SIDES TOGETHER Pelin Derviş interview with Haluk Gerçek 94 IN BETWEEN by Ömer Kanıpak 04_OLD BUILDINGS, NEW FUNCTIONS 100 GHOSTS OF THE NINETEENTH CENTURY HAUNT THE CITY by Korhan Gümüş 108 MARMARAY METRO PROJECT AND YENIKAPI ARCHAEOLOGICAL RESCUE EXCAVATIONS by Zeynep Kızıltan _HISTORICAL CONTEXT 05_ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. 120 STREETSCAPES OF ISTANBUL’S WATERFRONT by Murat Güvenç 138 ANTWERP: A PORT IN A STATE OF CONTINUAL REINVENTION by Jef Vrelust WHAT DOES A PORT MEAN FOR A CITY? 36 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. CHANGING SKYLINES EMBARKING & DISEMBARKING BRIDGES & TUNNELS OLD BUILDINGS, NEW FUNCTIONS 37 CHANGING SKYLINES 01 48 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. Where water and land touch, cultures meet. Ports are not only places where people trade goods. It is also where they have access to other worlds, exchange ideas and get to know new things. This exchange plays an important role in the development of a port city and its surroundings. In Istanbul and Antwerp the port industry and infrastructure have left the city centre, but their traces remain, as can be seen in the changing skylines and panoramas. The inhabitants of Istanbul no longer have a direct contact with their port and its maritime activities. But the view on the Bosporus and its silhouette with passing ships, minarets and waterfront houses remains iconic. The inhabitants of Antwerp are still very much connected to their port, but shipping on the River Scheldt in front of the city centre has nearly disappeared. Panoramas and views of the Antwerp skyline have been used on numerous occasions to promote the city across the world. Istanbul was well known all over the world. Paintings, drawings and photographs showing a panorama of the city were usually the work of western travellers. 49 ISTANBUL SILHOUETTES: A CRITICAL INVESTIGATION Atilla Yücel Translated from Turkish by Victoria Holbrook “Despina can be reached in two ways: by ship or by camel. The city displays one face to the traveler arriving overland and a diferent one to him who arrives by sea. When the camel driver sees, at the horizon of the tableland, the pinnacles of the skyscrapers come into view, the radar antennae, the white and red windsocks lapping, the chimneys belching smoke, he thinks of a ship; he knows it is a city, but he thinks of it as a vessel that will take him away from the desert, a windjammer about to cast of, with the breeze already swelling the sails […] In the coastline’s haze, the sailor discerns the form of a camel’s withers, an embroidered saddle with glittering fringe between two spotted humps, advancing and swaying; he knows it is a city, but he thinks of it as a camel from whose pack hang wineskins and bags of candied fruit, date wine, tobacco leaves, and already he sees himself at the head of a long caravan taking him away from the desert of the sea, toward oases of fresh water in the palm trees’ jagged shade, toward palaces of thick, whitewashed walls, tiled courts where girls are dancing barefoot, moving their arms, half-hidden by their veils, and half-revealed. Each city receives its form from the desert it opposes; and so the camel driver and the sailor see Despina, a border city between two deserts.” 1 These lines are from Italo Calvino’s Invisible Cities. Calvino shows how perception of the city changes according to whether it is approached by land, via a caravan route, or from the sea by ship, and how it changes depending on the individual and their point of view. Throughout history Istanbul has been open to both, depending on the direction one takes: from land, one’s view is met by the Yedikule walls, and beyond them the silhouette of the Porta Aurea; from the sea it is met by the sea walls, the topography of the city rising behind them and the monuments that crown it. If the approach from land is from the Asian side, the silhouette is like that seen when approaching from the sea. Perception according to the viewer is more varied: travellers see the city in one way, and those who live there in another. The nineteenthcentury orientalist view is a westerner’s idea of a ictional image of the East; urban elites of the same period were, on the other hand, occupied with a ‘westernist’ pursuit of new and imported cultural forms. As in the allegory of the camel driver and the sailor, people dream of what they do not have. Also, perceptions have not been the same in every period, or from every distance or vantage point. In Byzantine times the seaside silhouette was dominated by the sea walls, the palaces behind them and the supreme prominence of Hagia Sophia, followed by the Church 50 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. TENSION by Ali Emir Tapan “That corpse you planted last year in your garden, has it begun to sprout? Will it bloom this year?” — T.S. Elliot, The Waste Land Ali Emir Tapan’s video Nowhere presents the viewer with city seemingly made of stars, an unreal city, located forever beyond the horizon. It opens with sunrise over Marmara Sea, into which the Bosporus lows and forms the entrance to the city of Istanbul. As the horizon appears, the sea and the sky detach, desynchronise, lights of diferent hours bleed into each other as the stars reveal themselves to be lights of housing projects, that have grown, invasively in number over the last decade in the city. The utopian presentation becomes self-defeating. As the lights drown out in the sky, all images dissolve into hungry white-noise. 51 of the Holy Apostles and others in the background. In the Ottoman period, Hagia Sophia’s silhouette was changed by the addition of minarets; Topkapı Palace put forth its powerful presence, making a radical intervention in the city topography as it continued the line of Ancient Roman and Byzantine monuments and palaces; and to all this were added the stepped masses of the monumental complexes – the mosques of the Sultans and their attendant buildings – built on the slopes and hilltops of the city. However much one may wish to freeze a silhouette using tools of description, it is not really a ixed thing: reality changes in perception according to distance and motion. The camel driver approaching from land sees irst the horizontal line of the walls; coming closer, the towers and monumental gate between them comes into view. From the sea – after crossing the Aegean geography broken up by islands and leaving behind the irst gate of the Canakkale Straits corridor and the stopping points provided by the Marmara islands, large and small – one sees from afar a powerful spatial unity dominating even more geographies within a wide frame, which takes in the Istanbul islands to the east and the hilltops of Asia facing them: two pieces of land, one at the left and one at the right, and a channel – the Bosphorus – that opens between them. As one comes closer, details begin to appear and that unity is broken up according to one’s position and viewpoint. Asia begins to become secondary; the irst silhouette one sees is that of the Historical Peninsula; Galata and Beyoğlu on the European side, with their dominant triangular element, the Galata Tower, appearing in counterpoint to the peninsula. And among the slopes and structures of the two bodies of land one sees a second channel, the Golden Horn. The port, node of the entire silhouette perceived from sea level all at once, is the focal point of the urban landscape. With time new perceptions have been added to those of the camel driver and sailor. The aeroplane provides, in continuous and consecutive sequences, a new unity that cannot be grasped even from the highest hilltop; underground trains bring passengers to points in the city without allowing experience of a silhouette: you descend through one hole and exit through another, and although you are somewhere in the city, the experience of its silhouette has been erased. Compared with the slow, rhythmic, ceremonial excitement of former travellers by land and sea, these effective, speedy modes of transport that are becoming more widespread as time goes on make the silhouette, as a lived experience, secondary. Even the bridges, due to their conspicuous proiles and the speed of motion over them, do not much allow for the excitement of the aerial view. Depiction itself provides meaningful proof of this. Starting with the Byzantine period, iconic images of the gaze directed at Istanbul offer different modes of seeing in different eras and different images of the city. In most of the depictions dating from the Byzantine or early Ottoman period, beginning with those of Hartmann Schedel, Cristoforo Buondelmonti and Giovanni Andrea Vavassore, silhouette and map are united in the same visual imagery. This mode of seeing is widespread not only in depictions connected with Istanbul, but of other cities as well. While the geographical form of the city is usually given from above from an oblique viewpoint, walls and important monuments, and sometimes groups of houses symbolizing neighbourhoods, are expressed with facades placed within the plane of the painting. The city portrayed with this kind of irregular military perspective technique is expressed in a way that brings to the fore not its visual reality but elements considered signiicant, such as shorelines, walls, important structures and, in some cases, persons or ships. The gaze in these depictions, almost all of which were done by European travellers or oficials who stayed in the city for speciic periods, is in its geometrical orientation not much different from the miniature and miniature-based maps carried out in later years by the Ottoman car- 52 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. PANORAMA by Pascal Sebah It is not purely geography and structural elements that deine a silhouette; more precisely, as in Calvino’s story of the sailor and the camel driver, the perception and image of a silhouette does not consist of natural and built elements alone. What ixes a silhouette is the meaning we give to it and the depictions that transform that meaning into images: irst via engravings, miniatures and paintings, and later photographs. The moving picture is like the sum of all these expressions: video is not the complete and objective technique of relection it is supposed, but rather the tool of a form of seeing that changes according to the view of the person who holds the camera and the rhythm of ilming and its sequences. In other words, the silhouette is not a thing ixed as an image and concept, but the construction of a new cultural reality that is the product of how we see it, combining depiction, design and representation. Its existence is not independent of the meaning we give it. 53 54 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. PANORAMA The exhibit shows historic and current panoramas from Istanbul. The historic panorama was made by Sebah and Joaillier between 1880 and 1889 from the Galata tower: Panorama de Constantinople, pris de La Tour de Galata. More than one hundred years later Istanbul and its, in the meantime, transformed cityscape are photographed from the same tower. Created as a 360 degree panorama, with the spectator at the centre. tographers and miniaturists Matraki, Nakkaş Osman and Levni. The element of topography, important in geography and silhouette, does not ind much expression within the city walls until engravings of the later period: here the elements that are emphasized are expressed within a lat plane; topography is found more often in the margins of paintings, as schematic hills and green spaces in the unbuilt environs of the city; in most of the depictions, greenery – except for the gardens of the Topkapı Palace – does not appear within the city anyway, being either absent or not considered important in a city where houses and walls abut roads. The focus within the city is not on nature but geography, architecture and occasionally human life. Iconic depiction relects a topological rather than a geometrical expression and a gaze that is impressionistic and narrative, as much as it is pictorial. In the engravings and paintings of the seventeenth century and after appears a relatively more realistic, romantic and orientalist view that gives more attention to detail and becomes more fantastical as time goes on, the engravings of Thomas Allom being a prime example. Engravings and miniatures of the early period view the city mostly from the south or the east, seeing Istanbul and Galata from the sea or the Asian shore, but over time the viewpoint shifts its place within the geography of the city. It begins to examine the silhouette of the Asian shore from the depths of the Golden Horn, from the heights of Galata and Pera and the terraces of its foreign embassies, or from the hills of the Golden Horn and the Bosphorus, or through the impressions gained from caique excursions taken on these waters. The western painter’s eye projects snapshots of lived experience in the city as well. Furthermore, as in the examples provided by Cornelis de Bruijn, Petrusier, Bartlett, Aveline, Joseph Schranz, Choiseul-Goufier and Barker, from time to time this gaze attempts to take in the entire geography of the city: with a representational technique mixing map and miniature, it also produces wide-angle views including the Historical Peninsula, Galata and Pera, the Anatolian shore and the Princes’ Islands. We ind the same comprehensive view in depictions of other port cities: for example, Venice, which has special signiicance for Istanbul. However, while in most depictions of Venice – or of cities where a waterway joins the sea, such as Antwerp, Lisbon, London or Saint Petersburg – the eye moves along a gulf, river or canal because the city withdraws from the sea into its interior network of waterways, the characteristic structure of the geography and topography in Istanbul encourages an overall perception, approaches and views from the sea, from various general angles and from different altitudes. Close-up views turn attention towards particular elements of the silhouette, architectural details, palaces along the shore and the city walls. The engravings of Antoine Ignace Melling, which include both general panoramas and close-ups, are the most effective examples of this phenomenon. That Melling stayed in the city for a considerable time and that he was the architect for the imperial palace have a share in his approach. We also see these wide-angle, panoramic impressions in nineteenth-century orientalist depictions and, at the start of the following century, in the stylized pencil drawings and photographs of Istanbul by the young Le Corbusier. He especially uses the word ‘silhouette’ in his captions to these drawings, and turns into paintings only the sketches in which the obvious elements of the silhouette have been emphasized. These inal abstracted representations are the expression of a new way of seeing, which abstracts the silhouette and reduces it to the main elements between the shore and the horizon; in a sense they recall the selective way of seeing characteristic of early maps, engravings and miniatures. They would be reproduced throughout the century in architectural plans, photographs and even line graphs. ‘Geography is destiny.’ Although this saying might well suit a modern historian, such as Fernand Braudel, who emphasizes the importance of geography in historiographical theory, it comes from Ibn Khaldun, a fourteenth-century historian and philosopher. The example of the cities mentioned above, and others, shows the meaning it has from the point of view of the production of urban space and urban silhouette as well as urban history. As a reality composed of geography and structural elements, buildings and monuments gathered over time, geographic givens are the inalterable foundations of the ‘urban landscape’ represented in the city silhouette, and in the depictions of the city and its silhouette that are its reproduction as a mental map. The silhouette and its depiction acquire identity and meaning in the context of this geography. The city and the city silhouette are formed through the historical process that makes this geographical foundation cease to be a thing of nature, adding structures built by man and transforming it into urban geography and urban landscape. And, except for cities that have died, the process is continuous. It holds within it historical memory and structural logic. And 55 whatever we wish to see in the layers of this archaeological repertoire, we ind it: whether we see in Yenikapı a lost Roman port or the present government’s skill in creating mass transport depends on our preference. When we look at the city from the sea, there is a silhouette ixed for today: we can choose to see the walls and the massive bulk of Hagia Sophia behind them, and thus the city’s Byzantine past; or to pay attention to the minarets of the same structure, the adjacent Sultan Ahmed Mosque (Blue Mosque) and Topkapı Palace, and the magniicent contours of Süleymaniye Mosque completing the urban landscape beyond, making another historical – and ideological – choice. When we draw back a bit and view the entire outline, it is possible to see the skyscrapers, product of the new urban development stretching from the Taksim area to Maslak, as a dagger plunged into the heart of the historical silhouette; but others may see this capitalist urban reality as the successful coexistence 56 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. PLANAR SECTIONS by Emre Dörter & Elif Simge Fettahoğlu Istanbul is divided into three by water; Historical Peninsula, Pera and Asia. The water leads to the creation of typical urban forms, and the intimate relationship between the city and the sea is to be observed in the variety of transport means and also in city life. The aerial top view provides a new perspective to the ships, bridges, public spaces that form those relationships. 57 of the traditional and the modern, and the modernization, dynamism and capital accumulation of the nation. On the whole it is possible, and legitimate, to deine the silhouette by reducing it to its ixed elements – geography, shoreline, topography and the architectural additions that crown (or tarnish) it; this is what is generally done. But as we see in the depictions of old, it is not impossible to view it as a tableau in which moving parts, ships or caiques, also take the stage. If we think in terms of the present day, we cannot ignore the contribution made to the shoreline by cruise ships, containers and cranes. What adds dynamism to the silhouette over time is, on the one hand, the dynamics of urban change and the transformation of space by economics, and, on the other, the animated structure of the port in front of this tableau. In addition, in a coastal city one must not forget the natural developments that change this perception from moment to moment: in modern times, with the spread of electric lighting and the growth of the city, the urban silhouette is different at night from during the day; in coastal cities, including Istanbul, the effects of the northeasterly trade winds, of fog, torrential rainfall and hail, add signiicant dimensions to the silhouette; we may also add to these primarily visual effects the sounds of the port and ships’ sirens. The silhouette multiplies its meanings within varied perceptions bound to the world of sensation. Nineteenth-century travellers viewing the Historical Peninsula from embassy terraces, from Pera and the heights of today’s Levent, saw it as a dreamland in which green gardens – which did not appear in the older engravings and miniatures – nestled among homes and monuments, seemingly higher than the minarets, and they projected this naturalist and orientalist picturesque in their depictions. But it is also true that these same travellers, or the embassy oficials who spent part of their lives here, complained of the city’s lack of conveniences and everyday comforts. The twentieth-century poet Joseph Brodsky, with a ‘Byzantine-philiac’ gaze bound to strong Orthodox belief, rained down curses on the post-Ottoman conquest city when he viewed the silhouette in the shadow of Istanbul’s minarets that Pierre Loti praised with the same orientalist motivation. When the Istanbul silhouette is mentioned in our day, most intellectuals irst assert its uniqueness, then admit that this unique value has been ruined, and by them. This is followed by endless discussions on preservation and sustainability. The claim to uniqueness of the silhouette and the judgement that it is ruined both contain the idealization of the silhouette as the ‘most superior point that could be reached’ in an era. Generations alive today have never seen that golden age; if it remains, it is as the last crumbs of the youth or ‘ictive memory’ of their elders. But that it is being ruined more as time goes on is a reality on which there is general agreement. The older depictions discussed above and the black and white photographs of the early twentieth century are frozen images that keep alive the longing for a lost paradise. But when this paradise began to be lost is not clear. Is this ‘original’ that of the nineteenth century when – after centuries during which the city came into being spontaneously, within the framework of the traditions of production of space, social consensus and the building of monuments whose perfection is indisputable – it came to know other forms and western norms, some of which began to become principle elements of the silhouette, the building of the railway damaging the shoreline walls, abandoned summer palaces gradually disappearing and the Galata walls being torn down? Or is this ‘original’ that of the start of the twentieth century, when industry began to alter urban space, and workshops and depots appeared on the Golden Horn and the Bosphorus? Or is it that of the mid-twentieth century, when shore roads and bridges began to bring to the fore the silhouette of the Historical Peninsula, the port and Galata? Or is it that of the end of the twentieth century and today, when dense multistorey development, an urban topography of new skyscrapers, is springing up every day, and the new and ruinous appearance of the past form the background? There is no deinite and objective answer to this question. Even the plan produced by a city planner towards the mid-twentieth century, which limited the height of new buildings in the historical city to forty meters, had little meaning for the silhouette of the ifteenth or even sixteenth century. In fact is there is little meaning in the search for a deinite answer to this question. The myth of the ‘most superior point that could be reached’ has no meaning for a historical phenomenon like a city, which lives on. It is at most an expression of ‘our cultural and intellectual belief system’. The ages when the city – and its silhouette – was bordered by the old walls, with what lay outside virgin wilderness, are gone for ever. To a signiicant degree, by virtue of the same geographical determinism, for the new city on which capital has left its stamp, in a social environment where utopias could not be produced and far-sighted futures could not be imagined, whatever the new silhouette may be, so it is. Here at most one 58 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. may think to develop scenarios and strategies for keeping the old city – now one small point, albeit with symbolic and semantic value, within the gigantic metropolitan sprawl – alive as a historical witness, a memory and repertoire. The silhouette is a visible part of this strategy: the walls and monuments are still effective visual elements within it. Keeping this urban fabric alive as an archaeological whole in itself, among the archaeological layers, fragments and visible elements, is a realistic goal of preservation and sustainability; it is not necessary to see the entire city as decor or museum object, whose sole purpose is spectacle. Beyond this realistic acceptance, all romantic, nostalgic dreams are consoled by ictive fantasy and anachronism, no different than unconditional failure. Like most extremes, these feed on and legitimize one another. Leaving, following a planning decision, the overall contours of the old city as they are, more or less preserved in terms of height, and turning history into a ilm decor with pathetic restorations; building on top of historical graveyards and gardens in the environs and beside them sticking up crude skyscrapers that destroy all historical meaning; extending the shoreline with gigantic coastal landills, further ruining the old city–walls–shore relationship already compromised by the shore roads – all these stand in memory as errors not to be repeated. Beyond the visuality of a silhouette purely for the purpose of viewing, the irst tasks to be done in the name of preservation are to keep the fabric behind this image alive and in good order, and ensure its sustainability by raising the quality of life. For the rest, there is little to be said not to do with history and silhouette that is not political. The idea of preservation does not go that far back: before a cultural and scientiic discipline was established, ‘the love of ruins’ began in the nineteenth century as an avocation related to romanticism and orientalism. Just as the barbarian invaders and Carolingian kings carried off architectural fragments from the Roman buildings they had pillaged, taking them back to their own simple palaces, and the Venetians and others decorated their cathedrals and cities with the riches they imported from Constantinople after they had occupied it, the eighteenth-century archaeologists, beginning with Johann Winckelmann and others, took to European museums the valuable objects – sometimes entire temples – discovered during their irst excavations. There was a close connection between early archaeology and the foundation of museums on the one hand and pillage and colonialism in the name of preserving culture on the other. The culture of replicas is another deformation of that colonialism and of the aestheticization of history. In certain cultures – in that of the Chinese for instance – imitation is legitimate and the idea of originality, despite all universal conventions, is today different from that of the West. To this way of thinking even a silhouette can be copied and it may be constructed within a similar geographical decor. So we might have a Tyrolean village constructed within a totally different context, visited by Austrian tourists curious to see this so-called ‘Austrian village’. With the advent of postmodernity, ‘all that is solid melts into air’. We do not know what tomorrow may bring, how far the borders of the city will spread, what kinds of spaces will be produced, where and with what justiication, or whether virtual simulations – even in the sphere of cultural and aesthetic consumption – will take the place of reality. So, we cannot in any way predict whether the Istanbul silhouette with whose uniqueness we ally ourselves will be cloned or not. Today perhaps the only thing that can be done is to begin with the last pieces of greenery left in the east, which are still an important part of the silhouette, and in the name of dignity and respect for the future, at the very least, hand them over with all their speciic and original values to the next generation. As always, the decision will be made in history. From the irst colonies – Konstantinoupolis and Kostantiniyye – to the Gate of Felicity, today Istanbul is still a city around a port that is its articulation point. But the city and its silhouette bear the stamp of the reality of the 100,000-fold growth. The new silhouette that today some see as a disaster, and others as a success story, will be a document of the history of the capitalist period; what now exists will take on new meaning, and new things will be added. And the stratiication that has gone on for centuries will continue to produce both beauty and ugliness, bearing towards a future we cannot now predict. 59 60 PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL. ANTWERP. “More decadences, more burgeonings have followed one another in Clarice. Populations and customs have changed several times; the name, the site, and the objects hardest to break remain. Each new Clarice, compact as a living body with its smells and its breath, shows of, like a gem, what remains of the ancient Clarices, fragmentary and dead. There is no knowing when the Corinthian capitals stood on the top of their columns: only one of them is remembered, since for many years, in a chicken run, it supported the basket where the hens laid their eggs, and from there it was moved to the Museum of Capitals, in line with other specimens of the collection. The order of the eras’ succession has been lost; that a irst Clarice existed is a widespread belief, but there are no proofs to support it. The capitals could have been in the chicken runs before they were in the temples, the marble urns could have been planted with basil before they were illed with dead bones. Only this is known for sure: a given number of objects is shifted within a given space, at times submerged by a quantity of new objects, at times worn out and not replaced; the rule is to shule them each time, then try to assemble them. Perhaps Clarice has always been only a confusion of chipped gimcracks, ill-assorted, obsolete.” 2 1. Italo Calvino, Invisible Cities, ‘Cities and desire. 3.’ 2. Calvino, ‘Cities and names. 4.’ STILL by Sabit Kalfagil The photos, taken by the famous Turkish architect/ photographer Sabit Kalfagil, show a distant but still secluded past. They show an Istanbul that is, on the one hand, strangely familiar but at the same time not at all. The chosen images display the ‘holy trinity’: the Propontis, the Golden Horn and the Bosphorus. All this at a time when the water and harbour were more closely connected. A time when the city’s ‘coasts’ served as a port, with many mooring places and docks. Each shot shows a whole variety of ships: large ships and small vessels, steamboats and rowing boats... 61 ELIF SİMGE FETTAHOĞLU Contributing Artists & Authors Architect. Born in Istanbul in 1984, she graduated with a BArch degree from Yeditepe University in 2007, followed by a MArch degree in 2009 from Istanbul Bilgi University Architectural Design Masters Program. She was assistant curator for the exhibition ‘Istanbul 1910–2010, City, Built Environment and Architecture’, which was part of Istanbul’s European Capital of Culture campaign in 2010. Later, as a member of the Faculty of Architec- REFİK ANADOL ture in Istanbul Bilgi University, she has participated in numerous research projects and courses relating mainly to urbanism. Media artist, director and designer, born in Istanbul. He is cur- She continues her PhD studies at Istanbul Technical University, rently living and working in California, USA, where he is a lec- focusing on Istanbul’s urban development and speciically north- turer in UCLA’s Department of Design Media Arts.He has been ern Istanbul. granted awards, residencies and has served as a guest lecturer. His site-speciic audio/visual performances have taken place in prestigious venues including Walt Disney Concert Hall, USA. Working in the ields of site-speciic public art based on parametric data sculptures and live audio/visual performances through immersive installations, his works particularly explore the space among digital and physical entities by creating a hybrid relationship between architecture and media arts. HASAN DENİZ SABİT KALFAGİL Photographer, born in Elazığ in 1934. He graduated from the Istanbul Technical University Faculty of Architecture. He worked as a councillor, director of development and vice councillor for the Istanbul Municipality until 1980. His photographic journey began in 1960, initially documenting archaeological and architectural heritage, but then evolving into culture, nature and people of Anatolia. Having devoted ifty-ive years of his life to photography, Sabit Kalfagil is one of the most reputable photog- Photographer and artist. Born in Istanbul in 1972, he attended raphers in our country. He carefully studied his hometown of the Cinema-Television department at Marmara University’s Fac- Istanbul through the eyes of an architect, then transferred those ulty of Fine Arts after graduating from Galatasaray High School. unforgettable moments to still images using black and white In 1996 his student work Cin was named ‘the best experimental ilm. Over time, he has expanded his archive to also include im- short ilm’ at the Adana Film Festival. His photographic career, ages of Turkey and the world. started very early during his high-school years, continued with collaborations with renowned magazines and agencies as well as his work as a freelance photographer in the advertising sector. He focuses on the images that deal with time and timelessness, place and placelessness, complementing each other. Devoid of the descriptive information of where they were taken, within an undeined frame they evoke feelings of forlornness, desolation, and being left behind. EMRE DÖRTER ÖMER KANIPAK Ömer Kanıpak received his professional degree from Istanbul Technical University’s Department of Architecture in 1995. After taking his master’s degree at MIT’s School of Architecture, History Theory and Criticism department, in 2000 he founded Arkitera Architecture Center together with his partners. He held his position as one of the general directors of the center until 2011. He participated in the foundation of Design Atelier Kadikoy and worked as one of its coordinators until mid-2014. Currently he Photographer. Emre Dörter took his master’s degree in Fash- is a freelance architect with his own oice, Masa Architecture, ion Photography at Accademia Italiana, Florence, in 2007 and working on urban and architectural research projects of various started his professional carrier at Quagli’s Studio in Florence. scales. Kanıpak is the co-founder of Yercekim Architectural Pho- In 2008 he established his studio in Istanbul. His architectural, tography and works as a professional photographer. He frequent- life-style and interior photography and published travel photos ly writes in various national and international publications, acts as a photo journalist are published in architecture and style mag- as a jury member or consultant for national and international azines and books. He has carried out photo and video shoots architectural awards. focused on places, people and cultures. Based in Istanbul, he continues to work on architectural, interior, still-life, life-style and travel photography. ALİCAN DURBAŞ VOLKAN KIZILTUNÇ Photographer. Born in Ankara in 1976, Volkan studied photography at Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University, from where he graduated in 2005.That year he was chosen for his project ‘In Filmmaker, born in Instanbul in 1986. He works on ilm, video Situ’’ for the Young Talents in Turkish Photography Exhibition, and photography. He is one of the collaborators of the Plastic organized by Geniş Açı Photography Magazine. In 2006 he took Crowds artistic collective. As a ilmmaker, he has made six short part in ‘Last & Lost – Pictures of a Vanishing Europe’, an inter- ilms, which have been screened in various national and interna- national exhibition and book project that was shown in Germany tional ilm festivals. He is an alumnus of Sarajevo Talent Campus and Austria. In 2013 he was selected as Turkish Winner and VIG (2011). He made documentaries for the ‘City and Art Project’ in (Vienna Insurance Group) Exhibition Invitation Winner of Essl 2009, as well as some feature ilms. He has worked in the AD and Art Award CEE, organized by the Essl Museum, Vienna. In the props departments of international ilm projects such as Taken 2 same year he was shortlisted as a inalist in the video art section and 007 Skyfall. He lives and works in Istanbul. of the Arte Laguna Prize and exhibited in the Arsenale, Venice. Since 2009 he has been working as a research assistant in the Department of Photography at Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University. He continues to make photography and video projects, and lives in Istanbul. ELS VANDEN MEERSCH MURAT BELGE Born in 1943 in Ankara, Murat Belge is an outspoken left-liberal Turkish intellectual, academic, translator, literary critic, columnist and civil rights activist. From his student years in the 1960s until the early 1980s, he was an active participant of a close-knit left-wing group of scholars at Istanbul University’s Els Vanden Meersch lives and works in Antwerp. She studied Department of English Language and Literature. He has been visual arts at the Sint-Lukas Hogeschool Brussels, was a post- Professor of Comparative Literature at Istanbul Bilgi University graduate student at HISK, Antwerp, and was a participant at since its foundation in 1996. Belge has translated into Turkish the Rijksakademie voor Beeldende Kunst Amsterdam (2001–2), the works of James Joyce, Charles Dickens, D.H. Lawrence, Wil- at Platform Garanti, Istanbul, and at the Bellagio Center of the liam Faulkner and John Berger. He is an active member of the Rockefeller Foundation, Italy (2012). She has published three Helsinki Citizens’ Assembly. photobooks: Transient constructions (Genk Flac©, 2003), Paranoid Obstructions (Leuven University Press, 2004) and Implants (Mer, paper kunsthalle, 2006). In her work she explores the relationship between politics and architecture. PATTU – Sumerian; a ield, ready to be cultivated Founded by Cem Kozar and Işıl Ünal in 2009, they are active İHSAN BİLGİN Born in 1953, İhsan Bilgin received his master’s degree in Architecture in 1980 and his PhD in 1990, both at Istanbul Technical University. In 1994 he was appointed Associate Professor at Yıldız Technical University, where he became a Full Professor in 2000. Between 1982 and 2004 he was also a lecturer at in the ields of architecture, urban research, exhibition design Yıldız Technical University. Researching and teaching the his- and graphic design. They have worked for organizations such as tory of modern housing, settlement and urban development, IKSV, Istanbul Archaeology Museums, VitrA, Koç Foundation, plus twentieth-century architecture, he also conducted the 6th Anamed and SALT, taking part in numerous exhibitions and Project Workshop. He taught Everyday Life and Urban Culture events. The core of each of their projects consists of extensive at Istanbul Bilgi University’s Faculty of Communication. At the research, interpretation of the subject, content design and de- same university, he founded the Master’s Program in Architec- velopment. Much time is invested in incorporating these into tural Design (2004) and later the Faculty of Architecture (2009). the design of the space and experience. Pattu experiments with Since 1985 he has produced many architectural projects and con- unconventional, new and fun ways of approaching design. Some- structed work. times this is achieved on a simple scale (Key Buildings), using collage (Ghost Buildings), computer software (Istanbul-o-matik) or a smartphone app (Invisible Istanbul). They work with multidisciplinary teams including programmers, musicians, sound designers, video and computer graphics artists, urban designers and landscape architects. This approach allows them to have lexibility in creating communicative and interactive spaces, whether it be the design of a small object or the spatial planning of a cultural quarter. ALİ EMİR TAPAN As a student of Istanbul’s German High School, Ali Emir Tapan BURAK BOYSAN Architect, born in 1954 in Istanbul. Burak Boysan graduated from Istanbul Technical University in 1980 with an MArch. He worked as a teaching assistant at Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University and UC Berkeley, researching History of Architecture and Urban Planning until 1986, and collaborating with Spiro Kostof on Istanbul in the 1950s. He has published several articles about Istanbul. He worked as a partner/architect at Mile Mimarlık and Boysanyapı. From 2002 onwards he has worked as an expert/architect on EU-inanced projects in Turkey. He was one of the curators of the ‘Istanbul 1910–2010 Exhi- grew up with rock ‘n’ roll, cofee house and tavern cultures in bition’ and co-writer of the book İki Nesil Bir Şehir (Two Genera- the Beyoğlu district, which was the meeting place of people from tions One City), about Istanbul, published in 2012. diverse cultural backgrounds. After studying Intellectual History at Connecticut College from 2003 to 2007, he held his irst solo show, ‘Discreet Intimacy’, in 2008. His works have also been included in Art Athens and ‘Minor Truths’, a group exhibition curated by Elif Kamışlı. Tapan’s imagery possesses a wild originality that refuses to reconcile with both everyday reality and the reality of the artist. Referencing his inspirational sources from music, cinema, literature and philosophy, the artist characterizes the cultural and visual ‘bastardness’ in his works as a deliberate ‘ancestoral adoptation’. He emphasizes the ‘slip/accident’, the potential for change through violence in his works and explains that ‘even a process that is naturally violent can be applied with grace’. ASLIHAN DEMİRTAŞ Aslihan Demirtaş is an architect and the principal of the interdisciplinary studio Aslihan Demirtas Design & Research Ofice, based in New York and Istanbul. Her practice purposefully crosses territories and boundaries of disciplines in the forms of building, landscape and installation projects, exhibitions, and art projects, as well as research. She holds a Master of Science in Architectural Studies from Massachusetts Institute of Technology and a Bachelor of Architecture from the Middle East Technical University, Turkey. Before establishing her own practice she worked with I.M. Pei as the lead designer for the Museum of Islamic Art, Doha, Qatar, and the Miho Chapel in Kyoto, Japan. She currently teaches design workshops at Parsons School of Constructed Environments and Istanbul Bilgi University. She is a recipient of a grant (2013) from the Graham Foundation for Advanced Studies in the Fine Arts. PELİN DERVİŞ Architect, born in 1967 in Ankara. Pelin Derviş lives and works in Istanbul as an independent editor and curator. She graduated from Istanbul Technical University and completed her master’s degree in the History of Architecture Program of the same institution. Her ields of interest are the documentation of modern architectural production in Turkey and the contemporary urban issues of Istanbul. Public Program and Chair of Exhibition and Museum Studies at San Francisco Art Institute from 2006 to 2012. He has curated numerous exhibitions including the 10th International Istanbul Biennial (2007) and he has been consultant and advisor to many international institutions. He is currently the Artistic Director of MAXXI in Rome. ZEYNEP KIZILTAN Zeynep Sevim Kızıltan, received her Bachelor degree from the HALUK GERÇEK Born in 1948 in Istanbul, Haluk Gerçek lives and works in Istanbul as an Emeritus Professor of Civil Engineering. His speciic areas of interest are transportation planning and policy, sustainable urban mobility, economic and inancial assessment of transportation projects, and transportation demand analysis. He has conducted a large number of transport project appraisals as well as urban and regional transport planning studies and traic forecasts. MURAT GÜVENÇ Istanbul University, Protohistory and Near Eastern Archaeology Department and she worked on various departments at the General Directorate of Antiquities and Museums and Turkish Ministry of Culture and Tourism between 1978 and 1986. Kızıltan attended to numerous excavations and surveys as a committee member and state representative in Turkey Since 1986 she has worked at the Directorate of Istanbul Archeology Museums as a Museum Researcher, Archaeologists and Section Chief. She was appointed Deputy Manager of Istanbul Archaeological Museums in 2003 and her current position Director of the same museum in 2009. During her carrier at the Istanbul Archaeological Museums she has played an active role in preparations and publi- City Sociologist at Kadir Has University, born in Istanbul in cations of several exhibitions and their catalogs in Turkey and 1953. He graduated from Istanbul St Joseph French High School, abroad. From 2004 to 2014 she conducted the “Rescue Excava- and completed his bachelor’s and master’s degrees at Middle tions of Marmaray and Metro Projects. Besides her attendance to East Technical University’s School of Architecture, City and several national and international conferences and symposiums Regional Planning Department in 1976. From 1978 to 2005 he she also has various publications on this subject. Kızıltan is a served as an academician in the City and Regional Planning De- member of the German Archaeological Institute and the Turkish partment. His PhD project on Istanbul’s industrial geography Institute of Archaeology. was awarded the METU Mustafa Parlar Thesis Award. Murat Güvenç, as part of the 2015 Ankara Structural Team, attended the Architectural Design Post-Graduate Program founded at Istanbul Bilgi University in 2005. He taught Urban Sociology and Data Processing in Bogazici University’s Sociology Department, as a visiting professor, from 2006 to 2011. He is the Chairperson of the Board of Directors of the History Foundation. Professor Güvenç worked as the social and economic geography theme curator of the ‘Istanbul 1920–2010 Exhibition’. He is the director of the Istanbul Research Institute at Kadir Has University. He has published works on Data Imaging, Urban Geography, Sociology and Institutional History. KORHAN GÜMÜŞ ALİCAN PAMİR Alican Pamir holds an MPhil in Film Studies from the University of Southampton. He received his BA in Film and Television and MA in Scriptwriting from Istanbul Bilgi University. His MPhil thesis, which was supervised by Professor Tim Bergfelder and Professor Lucy Mazdon, of the University of Southampton, focuses on Istanbul’s representation as a cinematic city in ilm and the brand values of cinematic representations of cities. Cinematic cities, genre theory, branding, ilm history, scriptwriting, ilm adaptations and historical context in ilm production are among his academic interests. In addition to his research and academic background, he is also working as a scriptwriter and in the past he has worked in television and publishing. Born in 1954 in Istanbul, Korhan Gümüş graduated from St Joseph High School in 1975 and continued his studies in Architecture at the State Institute of Fine Arts (DGSA) in 1981. He founded the Civic Coordination Center and also worked as Project Coordinator for Disaster Housing (1999) and the Society for Human Settlement; Project Manager for the Rehabilitation of Galata (2001); and as the Director of Urban Facilities for the Istanbul 2010 European Capital of Culture. He has published numerous articles in periodicals and also produces a show broadcast on the independent radio station Açık Radyo. HOU HANRU ATİLLA YÜCEL Born in 1942 in Istanbul, Atilla Yücel graduated in 1965 from Istanbul Technical University’s Faculty of Architecture as an advanced architect and engineer. He both taught and participated in conferences and juries at various Turkish and foreign universities and programmes in addition to those at ITU. Yücel has participated in various professional and scientiic organizations, including MO, UIA, UNESCO, CIB, AKAA, UNDP, UNCHS and CEAA. He has conducted much research and has many publications to his credit, both nationally and internationally, on the subjects of architectural theory and housing and urban space. Born in 1963 in Guangzhou, China, Hou Hanru is an art curator Since 1983 he has worked on projects on housing, public build- and critic. Having made his homes in Paris and San Francisco, ings, tourism, restoration and conservation, most of which have he currently lives in Rome. He received degrees from the Cen- been published. From December 2000 onwards he has served tral Academy of Fine Arts in Beijing and moved from China to as manager of the Project for Urban Participatory Rehabilitation France in 1990. He lived in Paris for sixteen years before moving in Mardin, run by UNDP, the Southeastern Anatolia Project Re- to San Francisco in 2006. He was Director of Exhibitions and gional Development Administration, and ITU. Murat Tabanlıoğlu Murat Tabanlioğlu (RIBA Chartered, AIA Int.) studied architecture at Vienna Technical University and graduated in 1992. He founded Tabanlıoğlu Architects in cooperation with Dr. Hayati Tabanlıoğlu in Istanbul in 1990. Winner of several prizes such as RIBA International, AIA Europe and WAF Awards, with projects like Bodrum International Airport, Loft Gardens, Dakar Congress Center, Astana Train Station and many others, Tabanlıoğlu Architects is based in Istanbul with branches in Ankara, Dubai, Doha and London. Besides his atelier program at Istanbul Bilgi University, he lectures at universities and various international platforms. In addition to his national and international contributions as a jury member, such as at AIA and WAF, Mr. Tabanlioglu served on the Master Jury for the 2013 Cycle of the Aga Khan Award for Architecture. He was the curator of the irst Pavilion of Turkey at the 14th International Architecture Exhibition at the Venice Biennale, in 2014. Under the High Patronage of H.E. Mr. Recep Tayyip Erdoğan, President of the DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL Republic of Turkey and His Majesty the King of the Belgians Ömer Faruk Belviranlı PROGRAMME & ORGANISATION OF EUROPALIA TURKEY Ayça Yıkılmazoğlu CULTURE AND TOURISM EXPERTS Kübra Sevim Güleç IN TURKEY ARCHAEOLOGY AND ART HISTORY FIELDS MINISTER OF CULTURE AND TOURISM Director General H.E. Mr. Yalçın Topçu Abdullah Kocapınar GENERAL COMMISSIONER DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL Dr. Erman Ilıcak Zülküf Yılmaz AMBASSADOR OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY IN BRUSSELS HEAD OF DEPARTMENT H.E. Mr. Mehmet Hakan Olcay Gökhan Bozkurtlar PROJECT ADMINISTRATIVE COORDINATOR EUROPALIA TURKEY DIRECTOR OF CULTURAL ACTIVITIES Dr. Sefer Yılmaz Nilüfer Ertan CULTURE AND TOURISM EXPERTS DIRECTOR GENERAL Olcay Kabar İrfan Önal Burcu Bilir COUNSELLOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Dr. Murat Alıcıgüzel PROJECT OFFICE & ASSISTANTS TO DIRECTOR-GENERAL MUSIC CURATOR Assistant Professor Adnan Çoban Pınar Bilgen Ermiş MUSIC ART DIRECTOR Sadettin Taşcı Mustafa Erdoğan İSTANBUL BRANCH PERFORMING ARTS CURATOR Aysun Arslan Beyhan Murphy ARTISTIC DIRECTOR Performing Arts Assistant Curator Prof. Dr. Hasan Bülent Kahraman CINEMA FIELD DEPUTY DIRECTOR GENERAL Erkin Yılmaz HEAD OF DEPARTMENT M. Selçuk Yavuzkanat CULTURE AND TOURISM EXPERTS Kemal Uysal Miraç Nizamoğlu LITERATURE FIELD DIRECTOR GENERAL Hamdi Turşucu CULTURE AND TOURISM EXPERT Osman Akkil PERFORMING ARTS FIELD DIRECTOR GENERAL Selman Ada DIRECTOR AND ART DIRECTOR AT ANKARA STATE OPERA & BALLET Metin Turan BRANCH MANAGER Şahin Yiğit MUSIC FIELD Director General Doç. Dr. Murat Salim Tokaç Şafak Uysal CINEMA CURATOR Alin Taşçıyan LITERATURE CURATOR Prof. Dr. İskender Pala MULTIMEDIA CURATORS Ceren & Irmak Arkman CURATOR ANATOLIA. HOME OF ETERNITY Zülküf Yılmaz CURATOR IMAGINE ISTANBUL R. Paul McMillen CURATOR PORT CITY TALKS. ISTANBUL - ANTWERP Murat Tabanlıoğlu CURATOR ARCHETYPES. THE ARCHITECTURE IN TURKEY THROUGH THE AGES Sinan Logie Ali Atlıhan, Deputy Director General of Copyrights BOARD OF DIRECTORS Yaprak Ece, Counsellor, Embassy of the Republic of Turkey in Brussels EUROPALIA INTERNATIONAL Ayşe Erdoğdu, Director of Topkapı Palace Museum Zeynep S. Kızıltan, Director of İstanbul Archeological Museums CHAIRMAN Dr. Selin İpek, Museum Researcher Topkapı Palace Museum Count Georges Jacobs de Hagen Mine Kiraz, İstanbul Archeological Museums Bengi Lostar Özdemir, Culture and Tourism Expert, Oice of the Counsellor for Cultural Afairs and Promotion, Embassy of the Republic of Turkey in Brussels SylvieAnne Bouché, Bureau du Conseiller aux Afaires culturelles et d’information, Ambassade de Turquie à Bruxelles Murat E. Gülyaz, Director of Nevşehir Museum Ahmet Özyurt, Photographer Prof. İlknur Özgen, Bilkent University Yekta Kara, Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University Prof. Dr. Mehmet Birkiye, İstanbul Aydın University MEMBERS Baron Paul De Keersmaeker, Honorary Chairman Viscount Etienne Davignon Philippe Delaunois Baron Jean Stéphenne Baron Rudi Thomaes Baron Bernard Snoy Count Paul Buysse Regnier Haegelsteen Véronique Paulus de Châtelet Dirk Renard Baron Herman Daems Freddy Neyts Pierre-Olivier Beckers Baron Pierre Alain De Smedt Baron Jan Grauls IN BELGIUM GENERAL COMMISSIONER EUROPALIA TURKEY Baron Luc Bertrand GENERAL MANAGER Baroness Kristine De Mulder Alexis Brouhns Baron Philippe Vlerick Count Herman Van Rompuy BNP Paribas Fortis Bank Brussels-Capital Region Council of Europe Belius Bank PROJECT OFFICER AND ASSISTANT TO GENERAL MANAGER National Lottery Marie-Ève Tesch FPS Foreign Afairs Fédération Wallonie-Bruxelles ARTS Belgian Science Policy Dirk Vermaelen, Artistic Director Vlaamse Gemeenschap Eva Bialek Deutschsprachige Gemeinschaft Bożena Coignet National Bank of Belgium Marleen De Baets European Parliament Christoph Hammes Julian Richard ACKNOWLEDGMENTS INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS THE FPS FOREIGN AFFAIRS AND ITS DEPARTMENT EAST AND Pablo Fernandez Alonso SOUTH EAST EUROPE, CENTRAL ASIA Marc Mullie, Deputy Director, Cabinet of Didier Reynders, Deputy Prime COMMUNICATION Minister and Minister of Foreign Afairs Colette Delmotte Sabine Capart, Attaché, East and South East Europe, Central Asia Aurore Detournay-Kaas Marie Depré THE EMBASSY OF BELGIUM IN ANKARA Valentine Swanet H.E. Mr. Marc Trenteseau, Ambassador PRESS & SPONSORING THE CONSULATE GENERAL OF BELGIUM IN ISTANBUL Inge De Keyser H.E. Mr. Henri Vantieghem, Consul General Astrid Laming THE EMBASSY OF THE REPUBLIC OF TURKEY IN BRUSSELS FINANCES, HUMAN RESOURCES & GENERAL ADMINISTRATION All our national and international partners and artists, the numerous Stefana Ciubotariu, Director contributed to the success of the festival. Anne Doumbadze Julie Erler Van Ly Nguyen experts, connoisseurs and enthusiasts who helped us, all the volunteers who PORT CITY TALKS. LIGHTING ISTANBUL – ANTWERP. Chris Pype GENERAL COORDINATION REALISATION Chris De Lauwer, Marieke van Bommel Heijmerink Wagemakers vormgeversatelier bv CURATORS CONTEMPORARY ARTISTS Murat Tabanlıoğlu, Reik Anadol, Hasan Deniz, Emre Dörter, Alican Durbaş, Çiğdem B. Erdoğan, Jan Parmentier, Jef Vrelust Sabit Kalfagil, Ömer Kanıpak, Okan Kaya, Volkan Kızıltunç, Cem Kozar- Işıl Ünal, Els Vanden Meersch, Tempora, Ali Emir Tapan, SCENEOGRAPHY Tabanlıoğlu Architects: MAPPING & URBAN RESEARCH Murat Tabanlıoğlu, Sena Altundağ, Çağrı Akay, Gonca Arik Caliskan Prof. Dr. Murat Güvenç, Director of Istanbul Studies Center (ISC), Kadir Has University ARCHITECTURE Tabanlıoğlu Architects: Murat Tabanlıoğlu, Çağrı Akay, Onat Müftüoğlu, Zeynep Burçoglu, Ayşegül Özarmut, Oktay Murat DESIGN & GRAPHICS Tabanlıoğlu Architects: Murat Tabanlıoğlu, Yusufcan Akyüz, Elif Simge Fettahoğlu, Gabriela Schweizer OPERATING COMMITTEE EUROPALIA TURKEY Luc Bertrand, General Commissioner DISPLAY TEXTS Sena Altundağ, Chris De Lauwer, Jan Parmentier, Jef Vrelust, Tammy Wille PUBLIC AND EDUCATION Cathy Pelgrims, Tammy Wille MAS CITY COOPERATION Vera De Boeck COPY-EDITING & TRANSLATIONS Patrick De Rynck, Vertaalbureau Oneliner Kristine De Mulder, General Manager MARKETING & COMMUNICATIONS Dirk Vermaelen, Artistic Director Karen Vandenberghe, Fara Deburchgrave, Nadia De Vree, Gerrit Van Dyck Julian Richard, Project Coordinator Inge De Keyser, Colette Delmotte PROJECT COORDINATION ISTANBUL OPENING & EVENTS Tabanlıoğlu Architects: Barbara Matthys, Charlotte Zarah Schram Gonca Arik Çalışkan, Sena Altundağ FACILITIES & LOGISTICS PUBLIC RELATIONS ISTANBUL Wim Audiens, Guy Boiy, Ronald van Boom, Diana Verbeeck Tabanlıoğlu Architects: Semah Akdoğan, Esra Beray Göktuğ, SECURITY Bruno Aernouts, Wim Van Damme (team leaders) and their team PROJECT & PRODUCTION COORDINATION ANTWERP Julia Rossow, SECRETARIAT Bram Janssens, Annelies Valgaeren, Mirjam Wagemans, Louis De Peuter, Frank Wouters Vicky Dechamp, Karin Vetters MULTIMEDIA COORDINATION Timothy Goetmaeker (Digipolis), Play, Tempora BUSINESS MANAGEMENT Guy Colman, Veronique Van den Berghe, Farida Martens, Veerle Quintiens CONSERVATION AND COLLECTION MANAGEMENT Dirk Aerts, Martijn Breunesse, Marina Christiaens, Fred Deckers, Riet De MINISTRY OF CULTURE AND TOURISM, TURKEY Coninck, Geert Geysen, Astrid Hendrix, Frederik Lansu, Marc Leenaerts, Pınar Bilgen, Mert Demiral, Burcu Bilir, Nilüfer Ertan, Guy Moorthamer, Hanne Moris, Louis Prenen, Elke Van Herck, Fred LENDERS Agentschap Onroerend Erfgoed, Brussel; Deutsches Archäologisches Institut, Verbeeck ART TRANSPORT Istanbul; Erfgoedbibliotheek Hendrik Conscience, Antwerpen; Gemeentelijk Art Transport Team of Conservation and Collection Management, Mobull, Havenbedrijf Antwerpen; Hizkia van Kralingen, Julia add name Turkish art handler BENİCE Hans van der Meer; Heemkundige Kring Hobuechen; Istanbul Archaeological Museums; Istanbul Naval Museum; Koninklijk Museum voor Schone Kunsten, Antwerpen; Letterenhuis, Antwerpen; Maritiem Museum, Rotterdam; Murat Tabanlıoğlu Collection; Museum Plantin-Moretus / Prentenkabinet, Antwerpen; Rahmi M. Koç ART INSTALLATION Aorta+ bvba, PATTU INSURANCE AXA Group (Jean Verheyen) Museum, Istanbul; SPONSOR Rijksarchief Antwerpen, Beveren-Waas; Stadsarchief Antwerpen THORNTON & Co N.V; Probably 3 names or logo’s need to be added We wish to extend our thanks to all of the volunteers and trainees at XXX for their kind assistance (in preparation of this book) Museums and Heritage, all our colleagues from the City of Antwerp and, in particular, the staf of the Culture Department under Vice Mayor Philip Heylen. CATALOGUE PUBLISHED BY BAI (Kontich) for MAS | Museum aan de Stroom DESIGNED BY + standard MAS logos Tabanlıoğlu Architects: Murat Tabanlıoğlu, Yusufcan Akyüz + logos Europalia EDITED & COORDINATED BY + logos sponsor / will be delivered tomorrow ‘Wednesday’ 30/09/2015 Tabanlıoğlu Architects: Elif Simge Fettahoğlu, Sena Altundağ, Gonca Arık Çalışkan Chris De Lauwer, Marianne Thys, Lisa Connelan AUTHORS AND CONTRIBUTORS: ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Murat Belge, İhsan Bilgin, Burak Boysan, Eylül Cavaç, Aslıhan Demirtaş, We would like to thank Pelin Derviş, Elif Simge Fettahoğlu, Haluk Gerçek, Korhan Gümüş, Murat Yalçın Balcı, Cemal Emden, Nezih Erdoğan, Turgay Erol, Melih Görgün, Alican Pamir, Jan Parmentier, Jef Vrelust, Atilla Yücel Güvenç, Hou Hanru, Victoria Holbrook, Ömer Kanıpak, Zeynep Kızıltan, Korhan Gümüş, Murat Güvenç, Phlip Heylen, Hou Hanru, Hasan Bülent Kahraman, Zeynep Kızıltan, Ufuk Şahin, Bora Akgül….. ……. for their dedicated contribution. Great National Assembly of Turkey_ Archive of National Palaces, İstanbul University Library Rare Book Collection, Directorate of Ottoman Achieves of the Prime Ministry of Turkey, DAI_Deutsche Archeological Institute, TRT Archives, Kalebodur….. for their kind support PRINTED BY …………………..