Özkanlar Apartmanı by Danyal Tevfik Çiper (Gemi Ev)

          Özkanlar Apartment, also known as Gemi Ev, was designed in 1968 and constructed in 1969. It is located in the corner of Fuar Street, Çankaya district. It is recognized by the people who are living in the district. It has an influential aspect to it because of its exceptional shape, making it different from the neighboring edifices. The reason why this edifice has such an exceptional mass can be explained when the interior and the design process is examined. As a rule of thumb, a normal apartment would have the same flat repeating itself, having little to no difference. But in Özkanlar Apt. each flat has a different mass composition from each other.

The aerodynamic structure of the edifice has gone to a point which the name of it has begun to be memorialized as Gemi Ev (Ship House) But this resemblance was not the architect's intention. “Bu yapı aerodinamik bir çalışmadır. Aerodinamik olduğu için diğer aerodinamik kalıplara benzer. Pek çok kişi binayı gemiye benzeterek aerodinamik olduğunu vurguluyor. Çünkü aerodinamiği gemiden tanıyorlar. Böyle anımsanmasında benim açımdan bir sakınca yok. (Çiper, 1995)” This anecdote is important, as Riegl advocated, it is crucial to recognize the intention behind a monument to further examine its historical value. Rather than defining the value of unintentional monuments ourselves. When Çiper was alive, these sorts of detailed information were obtained and documented for newer generations to conserve the edifice in a respectful and honorable manner.

Often compared to Frank Lloyd Wright, Çiper was critiqued for the similar geometries used in his work. Çiper has taken the criticism in a light hearted manner, proudly accepting that he is influenced by Wrights ‘Organic Architecture’ ecole. Çiper, for Wright; “...Ustadan başka mimar sevmedim hayatım boyunca. Tabii ki asla kopya değil, mümkün de değil zaten. Bağırır, sırıtır.” Being a great example of modern architecture, some modernist architects have criticized the building for being too consumed with form and neglected the function. It can be observed that, in this edifice, form meets both the structural design and the function. Building was constructed in 1970, around the beginning of postmodernism. So the reasoning behind these criticisms can be understood when the period is studied.

As it can be seen on Fig. 1 and Fig. 2, use of vertical stripes that collide with an elliptical mass is certainly similar. The edifices are very legible, not aiming to be complex. The volumetric expressions are conducted in a likewise manner. It can be observed  that the window casing and cornice and the fences have a similar design. But the design on the window cornices have been changed by the new owners of the building (Fig. 3) Material is reinforced concrete topped with a white paint which gives them the same smooth texture. Both of the structures do not aim to be unified. Rather existing in a separate but still intact manner. A hierarchy is not observed but the elliptical masses govern. Structure brings two prismatic masses together from their long sides by shifting and forming by adding circular forms to the edge. The unity, simplicity and the harmony of both buildings can be reconciled. 

Often mistaken to be a villa belonging to an upper class family, Özkanlar Apartment is actually an apartment consisting of 6 flats. Both the ground floor and the first floor have 2 flats, after the second floor there are two duplex apartments that are using the terrace. Two flats located on the ground floor were being planned on being rented, meanwhile the remaining flats were meant to be used by the Özkan family. There are five floors when the basement and the usable terrace is counted.  The interior design was made according to the habitants needs. First floor flat that is facing the main street's facade facing south was designed to have large windows, creating a spacious room that contains a kitchen and a closed, circular space. This space was designed to be laminated using a slim light tape but this detail was neglected during the construction works.

            After the economic depression that took place after the 1980s, unfortunately the original owners, Özkan Family, of the building had to sell their property except one of them. The new owners of 6^th and 7^th apartments made such alterations that resulted in building losing its artistic value on the interior. The modification that has taken place on the 6^th apartment has been partially restored. On the top floor, roof is leaking so the water insulation membrane is in bad condition. Because of the fire that took place 2 years ago, caused by the sauna added into the top floors bathroom.

            Designing a cantilever slab that has this much of a space was not very common for its time. (Circular balcony has a diameter of 3,5 meters, and the rectangular one has a 5 meter width.)  The main structural elements of the building are located near the staircase and wet areas as shear walls, rather than placing a column on every wall intersection. This creates an open plan for the flats. Civil engineer that designed the structural system was Eral Soner. There were no contractors involved in the project, which gave Çiper freedom to create the dynamic environment and the desired flow scheme for the apartment. Çiper also designed the interior elements of the apartment including the furniture. 

Guggenheim Museum ( Source: https://birgunbiryerde.blogspot.com)

Özkanlar Apartmanı (Source: http://www.arkiv.com.tr)

BIBLIOGRAPHY:

-CENGİZKAN, M, (2013), Tavizsiz bir Modernist Mimar: Danyal Tevfik Çiper, Arkadaş Yayınevİ

-BAYRAKTAR,N, (2014), Sivil Mimari Bellek: Ankara 1930-1980

-Real estate supervisor of the building.

Comparative Essay on Modern Cult of Monuments by Alois Riegl

    Purpose of a monument is ideally transferring a work to younger generations through fine arts. But not all cases have an aim, which does not stop newer generation to speculate about older generations lifestyle, way of living or any information that could be useful. When the monument has no aim conducted to it by the artist there can only be speculations about its real aim and purpose. Because history can only be speculated, there is no way of knowing anything for sure. Even a random object as unnecessary as a piece of paper with some writing on it has a significance. The material of paper, material used for ink, text style, etc. But there is still a school of thought, considering the elements of art in the random historical object. In ancient times, there is a stylistic unity that excludes many works of art because they do not fit into the standards of this stylistic unity. As time progresses this unity is demolished because each work of art has a meaning of its own and it does not have to be fitting into any criteria. Monuments that have age value usually contains characteristics such as; outmoded, imperfect, lack of completeness, dissolving shape and color, contrasting with contemporary characteristics. This criteria is rather uniting, since it has a very vague and simple rule that can be acknowledged by everyone. “Historic value is based on scientific basis, can only be achieved through intellectual reflection.” 

“A monument's historical value increases the more it remains uncorrupted and reveals its original state of creation.” The natural deformations and decay is not a concern, but finding the original documents for a possible restoration is a concern. Disintegration caused by natural factors cannot be undone but it should be avoided to protect the “original state of a work of man.” Age value postulates these sort of disintegrations. While examining restoration theories through 19th and 20th centuries, age value is the priority for many people including John Ruskin and William Morris. Deliberate commemorative value conflicts with age value. “Deliberate commemorative value simply makes a claim form immortality an eternal present, an unceasing state of becoming.” To prioritize this value, decaying forces of nature should be fought, fundamental requirement must be restoration. “The strongest resistance to this system occurred when the cult of age value came into existence, since the latter concerned itself neither with stylistic originality nor with completeness but, on the contrary, sought to break with both of them. ln this case, according to the cult of age value, what is required to keep a monument "alive," in use, is not necessarily concessions to either use value or its aesthetic counterpart, newness value, but rather a sacrifice of virtually everything that constitutes age value in a monument”