Читать книгу The Borders of Europe - Группа авторов - Страница 8

In the period 1908-18, prior to the proclamation of Ankara as Turkey’s new capital, the Young Turks initiated a modernisation of Istanbul’s technical infrastructure. By that time, moves to improve sanitation systems and the transport network were already underway in an effort to revitalise the Empire physically and restore the “sick man” of Europe, the Sultanate, to health. In the same period, new architectural aesthetics also began to appear in Turkey, an idiom which in many ways symbolised both the ideological aspirations and the cultural complexities of the Empire in its final years. Istanbul was still the capital of the Ottoman Empire, and it was there that a form of architecture emerged that was at one and the same time European, to some extent modern, and Ottoman. In the political climate of the period, it was also essential that architecture could be defined as Turkish.

Around the turn of the 20^th century, foreign architects were hired to tackle major projects in Istanbul. For instance, Alexander Vallaury (1850-1921), a Franco-Turkish architectural graduate of the Beaux-Arts Academy in Paris, designed the government building for public debt (Düyun-i Umumiye Idaresi, 1899) in Cağaloğlu, Eminönü; while the German architect August Jachmund designed the Sirkeci railway station, which was built in 1888-90.

This station was the terminus for the famous Orient Express, which ran between various European cities and Istanbul from 1883, initially with the support of interlinking forms of transport. The station building’s main façade is strictly symmetrical, with a portal motif that rises all the way to the cornice. The design of this motif is familiar from Ottoman palaces. The window openings have horseshoe arches and are shaped in a way that immediately evokes associations with Arabic architecture, while the whole structure is crowned with a type of roof that was common in both the French and the German baroque. The corners are emphasised with towers that are similarly reminiscent of Ottoman architecture. Both Vallaury and Jachmund used Islamic-Ottoman elements, especially in the building’s exterior. The two architects latched on to trends in the political climate that had the potential to be reflected in architecture: people preferred to speak of building upon and modernising the existing regime and the culture of the Ottoman Empire, rather than starting an architectural revolution and throwing all traditional values overboard.

The architecture represented institutions that were meant to serve Istanbul’s international relations, so it was not unnatural that it played on both European and Ottoman associations. Functional aspects and the treatment of volumes were influenced by Western architecture; while arches, columns, articulating features and wide overhanging eaves were inspired by the Ottoman architectural heritage. Even so, none of these buildings when viewed as a whole resembles the architecture we associate with pre-19^th century Ottoman society. New construction methods allowed for new shapes, a different organisation of architectural elements, and larger openings to let in light. Not least, there were innovations in the use of iron and glass in the construction of railway stations, shopping arcades, greenhouses and exhibition buildings in particular. In Istanbul this hybrid architecture with partly local roots was employed especially for buildings associated with Western culture and the development of international communications.

Turkish architecture of the early 20^th century bore many features of Ottoman influence, but it was also constructed using contemporary technology: reinforced concrete, iron and glass. In this sense it could also be called modern. One of the earliest examples is the Central Post Office in Sirkeci, Istanbul, designed by Mehmet Vedat Bey (1873-1942) and erected in 1908-09 – just as the European-educated Young Turks were rising to power in what was still the Ottoman Empire. To the extent that these buildings were meant to meet international standards and the needs of the modern era, the internal organisation of space and the distribution of functional areas generally reflected what was common practice for such buildings elsewhere in the Western and industrialised world.