Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture
В работе рассматриваются проблемы становления турецкой скульптуры как жанра искусства, которые пocлe ислaмизaции получили coциологичecкоe нaпрaвлeние и приобрели идeoлoгичeский xapaктep....
Gespeichert in:
| Datum: | 2012 |
|---|---|
| 1. Verfasser: | |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | English |
| Veröffentlicht: |
Кримський науковий центр НАН України і МОН України
2012
|
| Schriftenreihe: | Культура народов Причерноморья |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online Zugang: | http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/108191 |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| Назва журналу: | Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| Zitieren: | Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture / Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan // Культура народов Причерноморья. — 2012. — № 239. — С. 83-86. — Бібліогр.: 7 назв. — англ. |
Institution
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine| id |
irk-123456789-108191 |
|---|---|
| record_format |
dspace |
| spelling |
irk-123456789-1081912016-11-01T03:02:08Z Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ В работе рассматриваются проблемы становления турецкой скульптуры как жанра искусства, которые пocлe ислaмизaции получили coциологичecкоe нaпрaвлeние и приобрели идeoлoгичeский xapaктep. 2012 Article Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture / Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan // Культура народов Причерноморья. — 2012. — № 239. — С. 83-86. — Бібліогр.: 7 назв. — англ. 1562-0808 http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/108191 75.049 en Культура народов Причерноморья Кримський науковий центр НАН України і МОН України |
| institution |
Digital Library of Periodicals of National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine |
| collection |
DSpace DC |
| language |
English |
| topic |
Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ |
| spellingShingle |
Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture Культура народов Причерноморья |
| description |
В работе рассматриваются проблемы становления турецкой скульптуры как жанра искусства, которые пocлe
ислaмизaции получили coциологичecкоe нaпрaвлeние и приобрели идeoлoгичeский xapaктep. |
| format |
Article |
| author |
Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan |
| author_facet |
Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan |
| author_sort |
Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan |
| title |
Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture |
| title_short |
Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture |
| title_full |
Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture |
| title_fullStr |
Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture |
| title_full_unstemmed |
Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture |
| title_sort |
terlan developmental stages of contemporary turkish sculpture |
| publisher |
Кримський науковий центр НАН України і МОН України |
| publishDate |
2012 |
| topic_facet |
Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ |
| url |
http://dspace.nbuv.gov.ua/handle/123456789/108191 |
| citation_txt |
Terlan developmental stages of contemporary Turkish sculpture / Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan // Культура народов Причерноморья. — 2012. — № 239. — С. 83-86. — Бібліогр.: 7 назв. — англ. |
| series |
Культура народов Причерноморья |
| work_keys_str_mv |
AT mehdiyevaazizzadeterlan terlandevelopmentalstagesofcontemporaryturkishsculpture |
| first_indexed |
2025-07-07T21:06:03Z |
| last_indexed |
2025-07-07T21:06:03Z |
| _version_ |
1837023744504102912 |
| fulltext |
Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ
83
Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan УДК 75.049
DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES OF CONTEMPORARY TURKISH SCULPTURE
ПЕPИOДЫ PAЗВИТИЯ СOВРEМEННOЙ TУPEЦКOЙ CКУЛЬПТУPЫ
В работе рассматриваются проблемы становления турецкой скульптуры как жанра искусства, которые пocлe
ислaмизaции получили coциологичecкоe нaпрaвлeние и приобрели идeoлoгичeский xapaктep.
Introduction. “Condition of sculpture has always been problematic in Turkish depiction. Architecture and
sculpture which has common features with Turkish urban culture had to expose itself in rather indirect ways. These
fields could only produce within the sphere of small handcrafts. Turks have always been successful in masonry.
The first examples of it can be found in Middle Asian Art. Orhon monuments should be considered as monumental
sculpts. Balbals are the primitive monuments sculpted from stone and in the figure of human. Turks’ conversion to
Islam turned sculpture to an ideological issue. Then, sculpture had been associated with idols which was the source
of ancient Jewish fear. Thus it had to compromise with the strict rules of depiction in Islamic faith. Although it had
been possible to observe a naive development of small handcrafts in the spatial contexts such as the reliefs on the
Seljuk castles or on the Ottoman graves, it could not be called sculpture in a proper sense; it was not forming the
space in a proper artistic way” (internet 10.04.2012). As it is well known, art of sculpture integrates with settled,
local life styles and has an important place in the urban texture. This is obviously rather difficult to generate and
improve in a nomadic culture. Before reaching Anatolia, Turks were sovereign in Asia as a nomadic people. Thus it
was simply not suitable for art of sculpture to form a permanent and rooted tradition within a societal context as
such. Therefore the artistic creation of Turks, who were shaman worshipers before arriving to Anatolia, were
limited to portable ornaments and reliefs on tools to operate in the nomadic lifestyle. Figurative features can be seen
on some of these creations but it would be more correct to consider them as stylized forms to make the thing look
decorative. “Constructions made by Anatolian Seljuk’s contain some reliefs with human and animal figures. Tomb
stones were also the structures of Ottoman period engraved and ornamented with a very fine work. Fountains and
pools can also be included to these kinds of structures. Personal interests of sultans like Mehmet the Conqueror,
http://www.turania.org/az
Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan
DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES OF CONTEMPORARY TURKISH SCULPTURE
84
Murat the 2
nd
and Abdul-Aziz never got expanded to the masses. Even the beginning of westernization movement
in Ottoman society did not help sculpture to develop. Art of sculpture had been ignored until the establishment of
Sanayi-I Nefise Mektebi (the first school of fine arts)” (internet 10.04.2012). “The reason behind the reactions
against sculpture rather than painting is the stronger resemblance between idols and statues. Statue shadows earth.
In the 15
th
century Ottoman fountains, grave stones and architecture works which contain sculpture with abstract,
schematic elements are replaced with rococo style in the 18
th
century. Atmosphere of 18
th
century paves the path for
interactions that lead to westernization in the 19
th
century (Ebru N.Sülün, April-May, 2011:77)”.
Relations between Sculpture and Turkish Society in the Period of Republic.
Pre-republic period of Turkish society, except some weak attempts, could not develop an understanding of
sculpture. Art of sculpture was almost non-existent. That’s why the implementation of the each program concerning
art had to raise awareness for the masses in order to trigger the need for art instead of improving the existing poor
reception of art (Google, 10.04.2012)”. Thus, Mustafa Kemal Ataturk attached great importance to the development
of sculpture as well as other kinds of art. “Turkish people were not ready to embrace sculptures. As a matter of fact,
they had no such expectations at all. Yet it did not take long for the people to get familiar with it. People whose
perception about statues were very poor, were surrounded statues of Ataturk erected on the city squares. This was
how they got introduced to sculpture as the last branch of art to enter in Turkey. Starting the sculpting activities had
the character of revolutions which are enforced in society by the decision makers above the society. Entrance of
sculpture in Turkey and beginning the training of it in western terms had no other possible way. For there were no
qualified sculptors in Turkey, activities had to launch the art of sculpture beginning from the most basic level
(Internet, 10.04.2012)”.
Generation of art training and related institutions in Turkey came very late in comparison with the west. Strong
traditions in Turkey suppressed the free formation of art and sculpture in particular. Attempts to improve art’s
condition in Turkish society were very valuable and efficient. However they were limited to the pursuit of
promotion of art.
İmplementations to Improve Sculpture. On the way to the realization of the ideals of civilization, social
awareness was aimed to be generated through the option of instrumentalizing the art of sculpture. This was going to
be a difficult process inevitably. Public territories were spotted to be the arenas of making people used to seeing
statues. All squares had begun to have at least one Ataturk statue on it. However erecting big sized monuments
required technical expertise. Besides, it was impossible to undertake the iron works of these giant monuments. This
led to the invitation of the artists from abroad. First monuments of the republic had been made by some European
artists. They were Heinrich Krippel, Pietrocanonica, Josef Thorakand, Anton Hanak (Gezer 1973: 14).
“Some programs for the promotion of sculpture were planned in addition to Ataturk’s series of revolutions
which aimed to raise the country to the modern civilized level. Thus artistic productions as a whole needed to be
supported. While working on the integration of sculpture with people’s perception, it was important to reach the
people in Anatolia. On the other hand, in order to ground the infrastructure to reach the goals, crucial investments
were launched. Obviously, the adventure of sculpture which was only going to begin by the foundation of Republic
required a proper education system in western style. The only educational institution Sanayi-i Nefise Mektebi
which was preserved in the transition from Ottoman to the Republic, named after State Academy of Fine Arts in
1926, did not have the satisfactory structure for the need. Therefore, this institution was going to be re-arranged and
improved to meet the needs. But being the only institution in Turkey and not having sufficient number of sculptors,
the Fine Arts Academy was incapable of raising the level. Therefore some extra measures needed to be taken and
the education of sculptors was given priority with some implementations. One of the most important
implementations was sending one graduate student of the Academy to Europe every year. Until the outgoing
students finished his/her education in Europe, European sculptors were requested to sustain the education in the
Academy. In this respect, Ratip Aşir was the first to go to Paris in 1925. In the following years Ali Hadi Bara,
Zühtü Müridoğlu and Nusret Suman followed him to go to Paris or Munich which were the important centers of
any kind of art” (Internet, 10.04.2012). Modernism project of the Republic was subjected to people of Anatolia
instead of the educated, intellectual population in Ankara or İstanbul and it aimed to create civilized Turkey with
the inclusion of people of Anatolia. The role of sculpture to serve this project was irrevocable. Thus the placing the
monuments of Ataturk or the ones depicting national independence war all around Anatolia were very efficient and
functioning to invoke national awareness as well as breaking the taboos regarding sculpture. As a result of these
implementations, integration of sculpture with people was soon achieved and on the other hand artistic environment
was revived by the strong governmental support. Thus the development of sculpture in Turkey had a journey from
two different directions towards the shared destination.
“1930-s was influenced by the first generation that completed their education in Europe and turned back to
Turkey. Their return animated the aesthetic environment even though it was limited. This period is distinguished
with the formation of an argumentative ground which voiced the problems related to art and artistic education. This
period is also registered as the achievement of direct contact with people through the informative and influential
activities such as exhibitions, publications of articles and translated works. Newly established galleries, educational
institutions, and community centers must all also be mentioned regarding this period. Zühtü Müridoğlu displayed
his and Turkey’s first individual exhibition in 1932 and community centers which opened in 1932 organized several
exhibitions to support the skilled youngsters. Community center in Ankara started the first of the Paint ing-Sculpture
Exhibition in 1936. Painting-Sculpture Museum was opened in the following year and “1
st
State Exhibition of
Painting-Sculpture” was organized in 1939 (Internet, 10.04.2012). “1937 was an important year concerning the
development of sculpture in Turkey. A world famous sculptor Rudolf Belling was appointed to the head of the
Вопросы духовной культуры – КУЛЬТУРОЛОГИЯ
85
administration of the sculpture education at Academy of Fine Arts. Belling’s academic activities were great steps
forward for Turkish sculpture. Belling’s program of sculpture education allowed modern trends and it wasn’t
limited to academism but had an open attitude thus let a new era to being concerning sculpture in Turkey. He
encouraged Turkish artists to use the new methods. He had many students as well. They were in a sense second
generation sculptures; Hüseyin Anka Özkan, Hakkı Atamulu, Yavuz Görey, İlhan Koman, Zerrin Bölükbaşı,
Hüseyin Gezer, Turgut Pura and Şadi Çalık. Now I will try to depict the visual context of that period by the help of
Şadi Çalık and İlhan Koman.
Şadi Çalık is an artist who internalized the principles of balance, composition, planning and classical plastic
elements. His lines or forms generally begins with neo-classic patterns, they gradually get thinner or complicated
thus forms its own dynamism” (Olcay Ataseven 2011: 135)
“Ilhan Koman is another important artist who integrated some mathematical facts with sculpts thus gained his
unique artistic identity which got known world-wide. He was born in Turkey but lived in Stockholm. He lectured in
Stockholm Academy of Applied Arts in 1960s. He defines his sculptures “embryonic” because each part grows
news ideas and new knowledge which can be used to improve the same genre. He challenges the ordinary and the
theories which seem to be unarguable (Olcay Ataseven 2011: 137)”. Koman forces the limits of the material he
works with and can really influence it. “The first generation who went to Europe for artistic education came back
home as adopted the settled and conventional styles rather than new trends in art and the artistic inquiries of the
age. Development of Turkish sculpture until the 1950s was unfolded as a process of solving formal and technical
issues with an understanding of classical interpretation of nature. Beginning with 1950s artistic environment of the
republic stepped into an appreciable innovative period which could also be felt as a fast improvement for the art of
sculpture. Through the trips to abroad or with the means of technology the new developments in the world of art
could enter in the country faster than before, thus the artists could be free from the narrow limits of the academy
and they could form their creations in line with contemporary art which allows many sorts of innovative attitudes.
These movements managed to carry the young generation beyond the classical tendencies of Belling in the
education of sculpture. Zühtü Müridoğlu and Hadi Bara brought about totally new dynamism to the academy. These
artists established a workshop different than Belling’s. These formations caused other formations outside academy
as well. Thus Turkish sculpture had a new phase begun which has classical, naturalist creations on one side and
individual, independent and contemporary creations on the other” (YasaYaman, Z.2002: 165).
Hadi Bara has a privileged place for Turkish sculpture. His abstract work towards the end of his life proved
how consciously, systematic, serious and intensive stages he had in the development of his profession. Even the
sharp transformations in his creativity follows a characteristic line which indicates that he was a true sculpture that
brought forward strong and permanent works. Sculpture of 1960s, although it did not have a long history, was quite
improved and dealing with formal and technical issues as well as conceptual and artistic dimensions. This provided
all the artists to create universally and bring forward their own unique styles.
Outdoor Activities of Contemporary Turkish Sculpture. Free creative sculptures distinct from the
monumental sculpture began appearing in 1970s in Turkey. Statues placed in different spaces of Istanbul on the 50
th
Anniversary of Republic are the first examples to this period. Yet some of these were damaged or removed by the
current political authority of the time. Concerning the subject and reflection sculptors of the period had the chance
to create freely, in the outdoor activities. 70s were also important for conceptual, minimal and feminist tendencies
entered in the artistic atmosphere. The first female sculptor Füsun Orda, witnessed the development of new
sensitivities and contributed to the formation of a new tradition. Her work expanded the limits of sculpture with
respect to the form and content and brings about new enriching discussions. Her first exhibition in 1970s displayed
geometrically planned light spaces around the theme of fullness-emptiness. This was beyond the traditional
understanding. Towards the end of 1970s everyday objects loaded with memories and values were centralized in
her work. She attempted to re-view, thus built a new dialog with them.
The activities in 1980 are also quite attractive. Sculpture instructors from Ankara Gazi High School of
Teaching Burhan Alkar, Remzi Savaş and Metin Yurdanur who were trying to promote their abstract work in the
society made a statue each. Another activity was carried out by Istanbul Metropolitan Municipality in the frame of
“Placing Three Dimensioned Contemporary Art Works in the Outdoor”. Artists like Meriç Hızal, Seyhun Topuz,
Rahmi Aksungur, Vedat Somay, Ertug Atlı, Ayşe Erkmen participated with their free reflections to this placing
sculptures to the outdoors of Istanbul.
Conclusion and Final Evaluations. History of art, art and other disciplines related to them had their
questionings, propositions and refusals in the most rigorous and evolutional way all in 20
th
century. This period also
witnessed art’s sharing the authority of philosophy over the intellectual realm through expansion of its basic
definitions and fundamental issues. Art of sculpture which led “Constructivism and Minimal Art” manifested its
subjective existence among the other artistic fields in this revolutionary process. “Certain movements in the general
artistic atmosphere of the 1950s of Turkey influenced art of sculpture as well. Artists who oppose the traditional
education in the academy achieved the level to follow and even apply the new styles and materials. Additionally,
contrary to Belling, Zühtü Müridoğlu and Hadi Bara who had profession over materials and followed innovative
sculpture trends, established their own workshops which provided an alternative dynamic compared to Belling’s
orientations (Ebru N.Sülün, December /January, 2011/2012,73)”.
The “space” which comes forward as the common element and a problematic in the interdisciplinary transitions
of “Conceptual Art” of the post 60s, is one of the basic issues of sculpture. In this regard “space” element expands
the interest, reproduction and definitional aspects of sculpture. Discipline of “sculpture” contains various
difficulties in the process of reproduction and development because of its specific needs such as heavy labor, well
settled workshops and the interaction it requires with industry and technology.
Mehdiyeva Azizzade Terlan
DEVELOPMENTAL STAGES OF CONTEMPORARY TURKISH SCULPTURE
86
Literature:
1. Panorama 1453. Tarih Müzesi : 2009 : katalog. – İstanbul : Kültür A.Ş., 2009.
2. Polat O. Bence / O. Polat. – İstanbul : Ulusal Yayınlar, 2001.
3. Polat O. Sanat ve Estetik Üzerine Notlar / O. Polat. – Antalya : Akdeniz Yayınevi, 2003.
4. 2010 İstanbul Uluslar arası BİENAL’İ. Rehber.
5. Russell Jacoy. Belleğini Yitiren Toplum / Russell Jacoy. – Beacon Press, 1976.
6. Giderer H. E. Resmin Sonu / H. E.Giderer. – Ankara : Ütopya yayınevi, 2003.
7. Batur E. İmgeleri Kim Dinler / E. Batur. – İstanbul : YKY, 2004.
|