Duygularla Yüklü Bir Mekân Olarak Ev: Yaşayan Evlerin Programı “Daire”

Abstract

Evin duygularla yüklü sosyal bir mekân olarak ele alınması bize sosyal yaşamın görünür olmayan farklı bilgilerini keşfetme imkânı sağlar. Bu da duygular coğrafyası çerçevesinde farklı disiplinlerin kesişiminde çalışabilmekle mümkün olur. Duyguların birey ve kolektif arasındaki ilişkiye aracılık etmede önemli bir rol oynadıklarından hareketle, ev ve ev içi materyal dünya, duygu ve benlik ilişkisine dair önemli ipuçları bulabiliriz. Bu çalışma ile “Daire” adlı Youtube’da yayınlanan ev programının izleyenlerde ne tür duygular uyandırdığı, izleyenlerin evler hakkında ne hissettikleri sorgulanacaktır. Ev güzelleştirme pratiklerinin kişiler için ne ifade ettiği, başkalarının evlerini, beraberinde de yaşamlarını izlemenin izleyenlerde ne tür duygular uyandırdığı, son olarak da programa dair “imrenme, kıyaslama, arzu, öfke” gibi duyguların nasıl ortaya çıktığı, görüşmecilerin anlatımlarıyla değerlendirilip, tartışılacaktır.

Keywords

• Duygu
• Mekân
• Benlik
• Ev
• Daire Programı

Supporting Institution

MSGSU BAP

Project Number

MSGSU BAP 2022-03

Home as a Space Burdened with Emotions: The Apartment Program's Impact on Subscribers

Abstract

Considering the home as a social space full of emotions allows us to uncover previously hidden facts about social life. This is accomplished by collaborating across disciplines within the context of emotional geography. Given the importance of feelings in mediating the interaction between the individual and the collective, we can gain vital insights into the relationship between home and the domestic material world, as well as feeling and the self. This study will inquire into the feelings that audiences of the house program Daire, which is broadcast on YouTube, experience and how they feel about the houses they watch. What home beautification practices mean to people, what feelings are evoked in audiences by watching other people's houses and lives, and how feelings such as "envy, comparison, desire, anger" about the program emerge will be evaluated and discussed together with interviewee narratives.

Keywords

• Emotion
• Selfness
• Home
• Space
• "Flat" Program

Project Number

MSGSU BAP 2022-03

References

1. Ahmed, S. (2004). Collective feelings: Or, the impressions left by others. Theory, Culture & Society, 21(2), 25–42.
2. Aliefendioğlu, H., & Behçetoğulları, P. (2019). Displacement, memory and home(less) identities: Turkish Cypriot women’s narratives. Gender, Place & Culture, 26(10), 1472–1492.
3. Artan, S. Z. (2024). Evler görücüye çıkınca: “Daire” YouTube kanalı ve kültürel sınırların teşhiri”. P.M.Y. Parmaksız (der.) Ev: Tarihsel, toplumsal ve sembolik bir mekân Olarak Anlamı ve Dönüşümü içinde. Nika.
4. Baran, H. E., & Gülmez, N. Ü. (2020). ‘Home,’ The negotiated place: Narratives of transnational home-making practices of Turkish-Germans in Schleswig-Holstein. Home Cultures, 17 (2), 1–24.
5. Barbalet, J. M. (1992). A macro sociology of emotion: Class resentment. Sociological Theory, 10(2), 150-163.
6. Belk, R. W. (1988). Possessions and the extended self. Journal of Consumer Research, 15(2), 139–168.
7. Birkalan, H. (1999). Homemaking and story telling in a gecekondu in İstanbul. (Yayınlanmamış Doktora Tezi). Folklore Institute, Indiana University.
8. Blunt, A. (2005). Cultural geography: Cultural geographies of home. Progress in Human Geography, 29(4), 505–515.

9. Blunt, A., & Dowling, R. M. (2006). Home. Routledge.
10. Boccagni, P., & Baldassar, L. (2015). Emotions on the move: Mapping the emergent field of emotion and migration. Emotion, Space and Society, (16), 73–80.
11. Bourdieu, P. (2014, Bahar ). Simgesel Sermaye ve Toplumsal Sınıflar. Cogito., (76), 192-203.
12. Coşkun, M. K. (2023) Sınıfın duyguları. Dipnot.
13. Danto, A. C. (2003). The abuse of beauty: Aesthetics and the concept of art. Open Court Publishing.
14. Darke, J. (1994). Women and the meaning of home. Housing women içinde (ss. 9–26). Routledge.
15. Davidson, J., & Bondi, L. (2004). Spatialising affect; affecting space: An introduction. Gender, Place & Culture, 11(3), 373–374.
16. Davidson, J., & Smith, M. (2009). Emotional geographies. International encyclopedia of human geography içinde. (ss. 440-446). Elsevier.
17. Dovey, K. (1985). Home and Homelessness. Altman (Ed.), Home enviroments içinde (ss. 33–64). Springer.
18. Dowling, R., & Mee, K. (2007). Home and homemaking in contemporary Australia. Housing, Theory and Society, 24(3), 161–165.
19. Gilmartin, M., & Migge, B. (2015). Home stories: Immigrant narratives of place and identity in contemporary Ireland. Journal of Cultural Geography, 32(1), 83–101.
20. Geertz, C. (1973). The interpretation of cultures. Basic books.
21. Gurney, C. M. (1997). “… Half of me was satisfied”: Making sense of home through episodic ethnographies. Women’s Studies International Forum, 20(3), 373–386.
22. Hurdley, R. (2006). Dismantling mantelpieces: Narrating identities and materializing culture in the home. Sociology, 40(4), 717–733.
23. Kılıçkıran, D. (2013). Woman, home, and the question of identity: Kadın / Woman 2000, 14(1), 1–28.
24. Löfgren, O. (2014). The black box of everyday life. Cultural Analysis, (13), 77–98.
25. Lordoğlu, C. (2021). Ev kurarak güçlenmenin imkânları. Folklor/Edebiyat, 27(106 Özel Ek), 51-73.
26. Lordoğlu, C. (2023). Multiple homes, emotions, selves: Home narratives of women who abandoned unhappy homes in Istanbul. Gender, Place & Culture, 30(9), 1261–1280.
27. Luzia, K. (2011). Growing home: Reordering the domestic geographies of “Throwntogetherness”. Home Cultures, 8(3), 297–316.
28. Mallett, S. (2004). Understanding home: A critical review of the literature. The Sociological Review, 52(1), 62–89.
29. Massey, D. (1994). Space, place and gender. University of Minnesota.
30. Miller, D. (Ed.). (2001). Home possessions: Material culture behind closed doors. Berg.
31. Miller, D. (2002). Accomodating. C. Painter (Ed.), Contemporary art and the home içinde (ss. 115–130). Berg.
32. Murthy, D. (2011). Emergent digital ethnographic methods for social research. S. N. HesseBiber (Ed.),Handbook of Emergent Technologies in Social Research içinde (ss.158-179). Oxford University Press.
33. Neumark, D. (2013). Drawn to beauty: The practice of house beautification as homemaking amongst the forcibly displaced. Housing, Theory and Society, 30(3), 237–261.
34. Özbaş Anbarli, Z. (2020). Dijital etnografi: Dijital uzamı anlamak için bir yöntem. Global Media Journal: Turkish Edition, 10 (20), 87-113.
35. Peake, L. J. (2020). Gender and the city. In International Encyclopedia of Human Geography içinde (ss. 281–292). Elsevier.
36. Pink, S. 2009. Doing sensory ethnography. Sage.
37. Postill, J., & Pink, S. (2012). Social media ethnography: The digital researcher in a messy web. Media International Australia, 145(1), 123–134.
38. Rose, G. (1993). Feminism and geography: The limits of geographical knowledge. Polity.
39. Sharp, J. (2009). Geography and gender: What belongs to feminist geography? Emotion, power and change. Progress in Human Geography, 33(1), 74–80.
40. Thien, D. (2005). After or beyond feeling? A consideration of affect and emotion in geography. Area, 37(4), 450–454.
41. Tulum, H. (2021). 21. Yüzyılda ev kavramının sahneye dönüşmesinde görsel ve yeni medyanın Türkiye’deki etkisi: Tasarımcı ve kullanıcının rolü. Türk İslâm Medeniyeti Akademik Araştırmalar Dergisi, 16(32), 287-310.
42. Ureta, S. (2007). Domesticating homes: Material transformation and decoration among lowincome families in Santiago, Chile. Home Cultures, 4(3), 311–336.
43. Uslu, A. (2020). Duygu, his ve duygulanım ayrımına etkinleşimci çözüm. Feminist Tahayyül, 1(2), 144-184.
44. Young, I. M. (2005). On female body experience. Oxford University Press.
45. Warrington, M. (2001). ‘I must get out’: The geographies of domestic violence. Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, 26(3), 365–382.