NESNE DEĞERLENDİRMESİ: VİTRİNİN TÜRK EVLERİNDEKİ ROLÜ

Öz

Evsel mekanların oluşumu kültürel, fonksiyonel ve sembolik değerlere bağlıdır. Vitrin her Türk evinin karakteristik farklılıklarını belirleyen mobilyadır. Ayrıca, içindeki nesnelerle birlikte vitrin; bize kullanıcıların kişisel bilgileri hakkında ipucu verir. Çoğu yetişkin evinde sıkça rastlanan vitrin, yeni nesilde nadiren bulunmaya başlanmıştır. Araştırmanın amacı vitrinin Konya’daki Türk evlerinde baskın rolünü ve onunla ilişkili anlamları anlamaktır. Etnografik araştırma, dört adet 40 yaş üstü ve dört adet 40 yaş altı katılımcılar olmak üzere Konya’da bulunan sekiz eve uygulanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Vitrin Kullanımı,Nesnelerin Sembolik Anlamı,Katılımcıların Estetik Beğenileri,Nesne-Kullanıcı İlişkisi

OBJECT EVALUATION: THE ROLE OF SHOWCASE IN TURKISH HOMES

Abstract

The construction of domestic spaces is based on cultural, functional, aesthetic and symbolic values. Showcase is the prominent furniture that gives the differentiating characteristics to each Turkish home. In addition to that the showcase with its objects that gives clues about personal information. Although showcase is a common item in the homes of the elderly, it is becoming more and more rare among the in younger generations. This research aims to understand the dominant role of showcase Turkish homes in Konya and the meanings that are associated with it. The ethnographic research is applied to eight homes in Konya with four respondents under 40 years of age and four respondents over 40 years of age.

Keywords

• Use of Showcase,Symbolic Meaning of Objects,Aesthetic Taste of Persona,Object-User Relations

References

1. [1]. Tylor, E. B., (1871). Primitive Culture: Researches Into The Development Of Mythology, Philosophy, Religion, Art and Custom. (London: John Murray). [2]. Kluckhohn, C., and Kelly, H. W. (1944) The concept of culture. In R. Linton, The Science of Man in the World Culture, New York: Columbia University Press. [3]. Hofstede, G., (1984). National Cultures and Corporate Cultures. In L. A. Samovar, R. E. Porter, E. R. McDaniel & C. S. Roy, Communication Between Cultures, Belmont, CA: Wadsworth. [4]. Linton R., (1945). The Cultural Background of Personality. D. Appleton-Century Company, incorporated, New York. [5]. White, L. A., (1959). The Concept Of Culture, American Anthropologist 61, no. 2. [6].Lederach, J. P., (1995). Preparing for peace: Conflict transformation across cultures. Syracuse University Press, NewYork. [7].Chaney, D., (1994). Cultural Turn. Routledge, London. [8].Corin E., (1995). The cultural frame: context and meaning in the construction of health. Oxford University Press, New York. [9].Taskin, B., (2016). Dailylife Objects, Interaction of Cultures and the Selected Izmir Homes (MSc). Izmir Institute of Technology. [10]. Kopytoff I., (1986). The Cultural Biography of Things: Commoditization of The Process, in The Social Life of Things Arjun Appadurai 1st ed. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. [11].Bourdieu, P., (1987). Distiction a Social Critique of the Judgement of Taste, Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts. [12].Sadaf Rizvi, (2012). Multidisciplinary Approaches to Educational Research, Routledge, New York. [13].Spradley, J. P., (1979). The Ethnographic Interview,Waveland Press, Illinois [14].Gold, R. 1958. “Roles in Sociological Field Observations.” Social Forces 36: 217-223 [15].Junker, B. 1960. Field Work. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. [16].Hammersley, M., and Atkinson, P., (1994) Ethnography: Principles in Practice. Routledge, London. [17].Babbie, E. R., (1995). The Practice Of Social Research, Wadsworth Publishing, Belmont.