Reflections of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel on Mid-century Hotel Buildings in Turkey

The 1950s indicate a period of America’s influence on the world economy and culture with its post-war power. Mobility increased with developing transportation networks and emerging consumer culture, so the number and importance of hotels increased as a result of this socio-political, economic and architectural condition of the period. In the 1950s, American chain hotels emerged, and soon spread overseas, following the dominant aesthetics of the country, a version of the International Style termed as “American Modernism”. The spread of International Style through modern hotels was most prominent in Hilton Hotels. The first modern hotel to arrive in Turkey was the İstanbul Hilton Hotel which influenced other hotel buildings in the 1950s to follow the International Style. The Hilton Hotel was frequently accepted as a model behind the tourism discussions and the initiatives that followed were compared with it, although the spread of its architectural language created a debate in architectural circles. For this reason, the focal point of this study is the hotel buildings designed in the International Style between 1950 and 1960, which possess architectural similarities with the Hilton Hotel. The influence of the Hilton Hotel on other hotel buildings in the 1950s is investigated along with the period’s tourism discussions to have a wider perspective of the Hilton Hotel’s influence on tourism. The hotels selected for the study are ones that carry the aesthetical principles of the Hilton Hotel, and were built or started construction in 1950s; Büyükada Anadolu Club Hotel, Çınar Hotel, Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel, Grand Efes Hotel, and Grand Tarabya Hotel. These examples illustrate the effects of the Hilton Hotel on the development of modern tourism architecture.


Introduction
The purpose of this study is to investigate the effect of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel on the construction of modern tourism and tourism architecture in 1950's Turkey. Studying 1950s tourism architecture in relation to the Hilton Hotel is of crucial importance, since this time period provided the most significant examples influenced by this prominent example of International Style. The influence of the Hilton Hotel and International Style on architecture starting from the 1950s is widely touched upon in academic studies 1 and hotels from this decade were largely compared with the Hilton example. However, its effect on tourism is rarely discussed, despite its key role in the development of modern tourism, via tourism architecture. The opening of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel is considered as marking the beginning of modern tourism in Turkey. As Gönlügür states, Hilton became a term synonymous with modern hotels. 2 Starting from this point of view, the study discusses the Hotel's effect on the development of modern tourism and, in parallel, tourism architecture. The reason for the parallel discussion of these two issues is to underline that, rather than being shaped independently by the political, social or economic context in which they are formed, buildings are clearly shaped by these dynamics. On the other hand, the work puts forward more examples of hotel buildings which were planned but not built, to provide a larger area of discussion. For this reason, this study focuses on the topic with a wider perspective by evaluating both the Hilton Hotel's influence on tourism discussions and hotel buildings, to understand the complete background picture that gave way to tourism architecture of the period.
While discussing the topic from the two main perspectives of tourism and architecture, one further objective is to address the larger issue of originality, which was a key issue in architectural discourse regarding the Hilton Hotel and 1950s architecture in Turkey. According to Akcan and Bozdoğan, the effects of the Hilton Hotel on Turkish architecture were considered mostly pejorative. 3 There was a widespread view that the Hilton Hotel's architectural language had disseminated regardless of function or context throughout the country, to the extent that the term "Hiltonism" (Hiltonculuk) 4 was coined to describe this tendency by architect Şevki Vanlı. For this reason, the scope of the work covers Büyükada Anadolu Club, Çınar, Eskişehir Porsuk, Grand Efes and Grand Tarabya Hotels, which were constructed in the 1950s and show generally similar characteristics in the main formation of the building with the Hilton Hotel. Selected buildings reflect the architectural image of the Hilton Hotel with a sculptural look, carrying the architectural principles as mentioned by Akcan and Bozdoğan, the honeycomb façade, rectangular prism raised on pilotis, and a transparent entrance block, topped with a roof terrace. 5 The study includes Grand Tarabya and Çınar Hotels as hotels of the 1950s, since their construction process started in this period, although they were completed later. These buildings are important as examples of the biggest complexes, which were close to the standards of the Hilton Hotel, in terms of building formation and extensive land use. The main analysis of these five hotels include their stories, as well as their analyses of architectural features, and discuss how they were influenced by the Hilton Hotel and differed from it.
The study employs a qualitative method comprised of a literature review, observations, analysis of visuals obtained from a variety of archives, supported by personal interviews. The exploration of tourism related debates was focused on the period's tourism journals such as Turing magazine and Turizm Alemi as well as the newspapers of the period. Parallel to this, architecture journals such as Arkitekt, and popular lifestyle magazines such as Hayat were also examined. At the same time, an extensive library research was conducted to access tourism brochures from the 1950s. Other data related to these buildings was obtained from online databases, personal and hotels' archives. Another important selection of data was collected from face to face interviews conducted with people such as Mukadder Sezgin (Former Undersecretary of the Ministry of Culture and Tourism between 1950s-1980s), Kadri Kalaycıoğlu (Architect of the Balin Hotel, one of the first modern hotels in the midcentury, 1953 Ankara), Gözen Küçükerman (Interior Architect worked in the 1960s and continues to do so) Esen Çetingil (Manager of the Çınar Hotel) and Emre Gönlügür (Architectural Historian, PhD).

The İstanbul Hilton Hotel
The construction of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel in Turkey was an event that affected political, social and architectural atmosphere. As Mukadder Sezgin, the former Undersecretary of Ministry of Culture and Tourism in the early 1960s states, "A single Hilton Hotel changed İstanbul, changed its lifestyle. A single Grand Efes Hotel changed İzmir". 6 It was the first 5-star hotel in Istanbul and Turkey, built as a result of the tourism development policy, according to the Prost Plan, on the "2 nd Park" which is the detached green area running through Gezi Park. 7  signed according to Hitchcock and Johnson's International Style 9 principles (Fig.1). The architecture was guided by horizontal rectangular volumes, a reinforced concrete skeleton reflected on the façade, a structure that was sometimes built on pilotis and a transparent entry floor, and a roof terrace, which were reminiscent of Le Corbusier. 10 The Hilton had placed the American suburb in the heart of İstanbul with impressive landscaped areas and swimming pools, supporting Conrad Hilton's comment that "Each of our hotels is a little America". 11 The Hilton became a building determining the aesthetic standards of the period, which became a symbol of American influence on architecture, a representation of International Style "a la Amerika", an American version of modernization. 12 The selection of the İstanbul for Hilton Hotel was guaranteed by the quality of the location provided by the state, a view of the Bosphorus from the top of the hill, an astonishing scenery to watch from hotels' rooms providing all American comfort. 13

İstanbul Hilton Hotel in Tourism Discussions
In general, the lack of modern hotels in İstanbul was a general criticism dating back to newspaper articles of the 1940s with headlines such as "City Without a Hotel" 14 or "İstanbul's Hotel Issue". 15 For Nayır, the existing hotels were converted mansions in the most congested places, in which, even for 1 st class hotels, hot water, service, cleaning was not available. Hotels did not have the modern qualities to be considered as " comfortable", "clean" or "peaceful". 16 In tourism discussions the scenic and historical beauties of Istanbul were praised, but the city's organization problems, lack of hotels and communication with tourism agencies were regarded as the main issues. 17 It should be noted here that, in mid-century İstanbul, the grand hotels of the 19 th century were still existent. As Gülersoy mentions, Pera Palas filled the need for a "palace" hotel similar to the examples seen in western countries. The hotel, which opened in 1895, combined the latest technology, with the comfort and luxurious mystique of an Eastern palace. 18 Pera Palas existed during the glamourous 19 years before World War I. By the time of the Republic, the dominant role of the wealthy foreigner had been replaced by a calmer and more egalitarian approach to entertainment. However, by the 1950s, the hotel could not compete with the newly-opened Hilton 19 , since 19 th century accommodation had lost its place in the search for new international standards of comfort. 20 Apart from the architectural language, another way in which the Hilton differed from the grand hotels of the Ottoman or the Republican era exemplified by Pera Palas or Ankara Palas, was that, it provided amenities such as sports areas, a large lobby and soda fountains in the increasingly popular American style. 21 Analyzing private sector development in Turkey in relation to the United States and Europe highlights the role of westernization, since Turkey was considered to be following western models. In the West, tourism was steered by the private sector, as opposed to countries such as Turkey, where state was involved in constructing extensive public works supporting the country's integration into the international arena. Even though the construction of tourism enterprises was not entirely in the hands of the state, it provided a new turn to change tourism activities after the 1950s. 22 For this reason, in 1950s, the promotion of investments in order to support tourism was one of the main agendas of the state, encouraged with the "Act for the Encouragement of Tourism" (Turizm Müesseselerini Teşvik Kanunu). Following this, in 1953, the Tourism Industry  The arrival of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel was announced early in Arkitekt journal in a 1952 article titled "Touristic Hotel" (Turistik Otel), featuring a detailed coverage of the building, and photographs of the upcoming building's model. 26 In 1955, the opening was a grand celebration in the newpapers, as seen in the article "Finally the Hilton Hotel, or a hotel" (Nihayet Hilton Oteli veyahut bir otel). The Hilton Hotel was referred to as "The Hilton Palace" in the news, the first modern hotel in terms of architecture, works of art or luxuries, such as metres of woven carpets or elegant rooms. Two important merits were at hand: first, it could accommodate the most discerning guest, and second, it was a work of art that proved hotel buildings have a place in architecture. News reports concluded that, the hotel would be a source of pride for Istanbul, and it was hoped that the hotel would grow to 1000 rooms. After the opening of the Hilton Hotel, the public promotion of future similar hotels by the Pension Fund was inaugurated by the General Manager, Nuri Kınık, who announced "There will be 6 more hotels in the Hilton standard" (Hilton ayarında 6 otel daha yapılacak). The article stated that "the anxieties of people over the construction phase, stating that these investments are dangerous for the Fund and only a dream for our country, should be at peace now". The article heralded the arrival of other hotels to be managed by foreign bodies. He continued that they signed the contracts with the state and started to launch the program after years of waiting, providing hotels in İstanbul, İzmir, Bursa, Antalya (cities full of natural beauty), to provide income to the country and the Pension Fund. These hotels, in the order of construction dates were; İzmir Hotel (German managed), Ankara Hotel (Swiss managed), 2 nd İzmir Hotel (American managed), and Florya Hotel (Austrian managed). 28 The foreign press also praised the Hilton Hotel and advised the Pension Fund to build a similar hotel which could be read as a means of encouraging foreign investments. According to visiting French tourism experts, the country was on the verge of a breakthrough in tourism, but the biggest problem was the lack of trained personnel and the education needed in this regard. According to the article, tourism developments continued, and the newly opened Hilton Hotel would provide a great contribution to this, 29 and to exceed the threshold, they advised a second hotel, similar to the Hilton Hotel, be built with French capital. 30 The Hilton Hotel created a great impact in modern tourism architecture. This importance was evident, as seen from a tourism brochure from 1958, published by the Ministry of Press, Broadcasting and Tourism, citing the Hilton Hotel as a landmark, along with mosques and palaces (Fig.2). 31 This effect was clearly evident in new hotel projects promoted in tourism and popular magazines, and discussions revolved around hotels comparing them to the Hilton. According to the article titled "New Hotels" (Yeni Oteller) published in Turing magazine in 1955, Istanbul continued to suffer from a hotel shortage after the opening of the Hilton Hotel, even while announcing the opening of four hotels (280 rooms to be built in Tarabya, the new Çınar Hotel to be built in Yeşilköy, the Tepebaşı Ambassador Hotel and a new hotel in the site of Taksim cinema), and mentioning the similarity of these new buildings to the Hilton Hotel. Each room would be en-suite, and at the same time, the rooms would be similar to those in the Hilton Hotel and could be used as a living room during the day. 32 Another article illustrated the importance given to the Hilton Hotel, as the writ-28 Aykut Görkey, "Hilton Ayarında 6 Otel Daha Yapılacak", Turing, December 1957, pp. 12-13. 29 It is also mentioned that two hotels similar to Divan, with modern equipment and a capacity of 100-120 beds would make a good contribution to tourism development.

The Influence of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel on 1950s Tourism Architecture in Turkey
The influence of the Hilton Hotel was present in the implemented and as yet unimplemented hotel projects of the time. The biggest controversy in architecture stemmed from the standardization of buildings following the Hilton Hotel's architectural language, with no consideration of context or function. The aesthetic culture created by the Hilton Hotel's architectural language and the spread of the prismatic block with a grid façade was criticized by architect Şevki Vanlı, who termed it "Hiltonculuk" (Hiltonism). Vanlı noted with disapproval that the scheme was subsequently employed by not only hotels but in housing and government buildings. He stated in 1958, "When we say Hiltonism, we think of buildings with a façade consisting of a series of balconies, as seen in Çınar Hotel or its children". He further stated that these are "easy" façades generated from the plan, and in order to provide character, it was necessary to add shell like structures or domes, unrelated to the overall design. 34 This aesthetic Vanlı called "a mediocre typology of local architecture", highlighting that local architects accepted this rationale without creative efforts or interpretation. 35  American architectural firm SOM, gave the following description "The silhouettes of building resembled a box, drawer, or radio. The buildings now have to be narrow with two blind sides and should sit on the pillars… Anatolian cities without defensive powers, after the cubic buildings, have been "invaded" by these pine and tin cans". 36 As Adalet puts forward, Vanlı's criticism not only addressed the organization of the façade, but also on the "eccentric, flamboyant touches" as he described the concrete shell structures resembling cupolas, domes or pavilions. In Vanlı's assessments, these touches were added onto the International Style building as an after-thought to give it character. 37 Asasoğlu states that the ease of construction of the modernist buildings also contributed to this paradigm. Modern architecture was spread via the rapid transfer of war technology, in order to revive civil architecture after World War II, since housing needs emerging in Europe needed a quick response. New technologies allowed easy and quick construction, and modern architecture was simple for the local building industry to comprehend. This is clearly illustrated by the tremendous difference between the workmanship of traditional wooden houses, which were built with traditional craftsmanship with accumulated knowledge over the years, and the ease of modern reinforced concrete constructions. This ease also brought with it the problem of "copying" that comes with modern architecture. 38 Regarding the planned projects, discussions were also present in the popular magazines of time. Hayat magazine published a photograph of the model of another planned hotel project in Fenerbahçe (Fig.3), with a very similar design language to the Hilton Hotel. The organization of the honeycomb façade, rectangular elevated main block with a roof top, and the transparent entrance were visible in the architectural language, albeit with minor alternations. It was stated that the hotel would be run by a local firm, which was in contact with firms and architects in Hungary. The 180-room hotel would be very luxurious and the furnishings and mechanical infrastructure would be imported from Hungary  In addition to architectural and popular publications, information about this architectural language was found in the works of local architects that were planned but never built. One hotel building that remained in the design stage, was the work of Rüknettin Güney. Kalamış Hotel (Fig. 5), planned by Güney in 1959 and never built due to financial problems, gives an idea of the influence of the Hilton Hotel. Similarly, another unimplemented hotel project, designed by Fazıl Aysu for Florya Beach Facilities, was created by bending the rectangular prism, sharing the design language of the Hilton Hotel (Fig. 6). Regarding the implemented projects, it could be stated that after the construction of the Hilton Hotel, its style spread extensively, becoming a common language in modern hotel architecture in Turkey. The basic prismatic main block, a grid system formed of reinforced concrete with balconies on the façade was reproduced several times with minor alterations. There was a large reception area, and bars and restaurants were placed on the ground floor, or in a more visible location -sometimes as an additional block with a distinctive roof, -and the hotel roof was a roof bar or a nightclub. These significant characteristics were clearly seen later on with the Çınar Hotel, which was situated on the Marmara shores, on an important newly opened axes between the airport and the city. Other examples were Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel and The Grand Efes Hotel in İzmir. A significant alteration of the grid block was the curved Grand Tarabya Hotel, on the edge of the Bosphorus, designed by Kadri Eroğan which started construction in 1957. 41 These 1950s hotels under the influence of the Hilton could be categorized into two distinct tracks. The majority were constructed by the Pension Fund and the contractor firm Dyckerhoff and Windmann, which was in charge of building the Hilton Hotel. After the Hilton Hotel, the fund needed its own construction company; Emek Construction resulted from the Fund's cooperation with Dyckerhoff and Windmann, and would later build the Grand Efes and Grand Tarabya hotels. Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel was also constructed by a competition opened by the Pension Fund. The second category was private initiations, such as the Çınar Hotel and the Büyükada Anadolu Club Hotel. The interesting point here is that the construction of the Çınar Hotel was also conducted by Dyckerhoff and Windmann, indicating their influence both on the private sector and the state's efforts.
A closer look at the these five hotels would be beneficial to understand the socio-economical and architectural atmosphere they were designed and built in. The aforementioned hotels will be examined in the order of their opening dates to the public. (

Büyükada Anadolu Club Hotel
A project similar to the Hilton Hotel won the national competition by architects Turgut Cansever and Abdurrahman Hancı. 42 According to Arkitekt journal, Büyükada Anadolu Club Hotel was started in 1953, and opened in 1957. Above a basement and a ground floor were 3 storeys with 57 apartment rooms. Each floor had an office and a lounge, with a bar on the terrace floor. The south facing corridor was shaded by sun breakers. A white volume with a modernist approach, it was considered to contribute to the island's scenic beauty. 43 According to Kortan, it was built in accordance with the Rational-International understanding and the effects of Le Corbusier, with clear parallels to the Swiss Dormitory Building located in Paris. With the same purist principle, the staircase and the elevator formed their own masses, which were connected to the main block by a distinct volume. Unlike the Corbusier effect, pilotis did not leave the ground floor empty and a multipurpose space was created for the use of the hotel. The white color of the building was a deliberate contrast with the environment, in accordance with the Rational-International style. Plastic concrete experiments were also in line with the architecture of Le Corbusier. The building was considered a prime example of the period, with calm horizontal lines and proportional language in the façade and dimensions of the masses. 44 As cited in Özorhon, Cansever pointed out the unique aspects of the building, stating that the most distinctive innovation was on the ground floor. In order to ensure the flow of land in the style of Le Corbusier, the building was carried on pilotis and the lower part was left empty. Cansever criticized not using this section since this garden area reflected a feature common in Turkish houses, which adjoined and overlooked the garden called "hayat" (life). For this reason, this type of variation was developed in the hotel building, with a seating area facing the sea. 45 Vanlı regards this building as an example of a successful rationalist architecture, one of the finest examples of Turkish modernism. 46 Kaçel also debates that every building created in the 1950s cannot be judged in the category of "Hiltonism". She states that inside the widely accepted and produced "common sense" architecture, there were examples of a "good sense", that was aware of its position inside the international language, but still in detail and understanding added a personal touch. 47 42 E. Akcan, S. Bozdoğan, op. cit., p. 122. 43 "Anadolu Kulübü Binası", Arkitekt, Vol. 295, 1959, p. 45-52. 44  The unique character of the hotel was also reflected in the façade. Bozdoğan asserts that, while the horizontal form with balconies on the seaside façade resembles the Hilton, the other façade has a different pattern, with wooden lattice sunscreens allowing a soft light into the corridor. Attached there is a vertical block of circulation ending with a Corbusian parasol. The sunscreens also give reference to traditional Turkish houses and Masharabiya in Islamic architecture. Büyükada Anadolu Club Hotel is an example reflecting Turkish architects' capability of interpreting international aestetic standards. Hancı, known as a follower of Corbusier, spent years in Paris, where he met Cansever, and implied cultural traces in a building that can not be categorized simply as "Corbusian, Tropical Modernist, Hiltonist or Islamic." 48

The Çınar Hotel
The Çınar Hotel was the first to show the evident influence of the Hilton Hotel, although this time with an investment of local capital. As Sayar Başaran states, on the site of the present hotel, there was initially the first Çınar Hotel, a small 15 room facility owned by Haydar Çınar in the early 1950s. Later, businessman Tevfik Ercan  and his brothers bought the hotel and land, demolished it to make way for the new Çınar Hotel. Sayar Başaran stated the hotel was "second only to the Hilton in popularity". 49 Çetingil states that it was the one and only airport hotel in Turkey. 50 Designed by the architects, Rana Zıpçı, Ahmet Akın, and Emin Ertam, the Çınar Hotel responded to the need for hotels in İstanbul ( Fig. 7 and Fig. 8). 51 A newspaper advertisement in 1958 52 specifically emphasized that it was totally funded by Turkish capital and labour, stating its importance in the increasing local tourism investments in the country (Fig. 9).  Çetingil, Personal Interview, İstanbul 2018. 51 "Çınar Oteli", Arkitekt, Vol. 297, April 1959 Rüçhan Ünver, "Haftaya Açılıyor", Milliyet, 07 July 1958, p. 3.

F. 7. A view of Çınar Hotel from the main entrance, from its early years (Çınar Hotel and Tuna
Ultav Archives)

F. 8. A view of Çınar Hotel from the sea side, from its early years (Çınar Hotel and Tuna Ultav
Archives) F. 9. News about the Çınar Hotel's opening ("İstanbul bir otel kazandı", Hayat, 29 August 1958) As stated in the project brief, the initial project was made up of one main block, and the beach facilities. On the ground floor, there was the reception, the bazaar and Bade Bar, while the mezzanine was reserved for resting, refreshments and ceremonies. The basement floor on the same level with the garden, accommodated recreation and service areas, such as restaurants, a pavilion, casino, a kitchen and laundry. 53 As Gönlügür states, the Çınar Hotel was often compared to the Hilton Hotel in terms of the building's character. The main mass of bedrooms, the service volumes attached, the grid layout of each room reflected on the façade, the glass clad lobby and lounge areas on the entrance floor, were all seen as an implementation of the Hilton's building character. Thus, the Çınar Hotel was called the "Small Hilton" (Fig.  10). 54 The resemblance was so close that Gönlügür highlights that the building on the cover of Hayat magazine in 1959, referenced by Kaçel 55 as the "İstanbul Hilton", was actually the Çınar Hotel. This confusion underlines the level of similarity in the distinct architectural qualities recognizable even from a small portion of a photograph. 56 (Fig. 11). 53  The hotel mainly followed the principles of Hilton aesthetics and the International Style. The main block with its honeycomb façade was raised off the ground on pilotis. The main entrance was a separate transparent double-height volume, which was connected to the mezzanine level with a grand staircase. The independent plan, and the use of the roof garden were employed in the hotel design. The guestrooms opened towards the view, with their own bathroom and balconies. As pointed out by Küçükerman, there was a bazaar downstairs, just like in the Hilton Hotel which sold various Paşabahçe products in the stores and local Anatolian products for foreign customers. 57 Kortan cites the Çınar Hotel as another example of Rational-International Architecture. The main block of the hotel was similar to the Hilton Hotel and did not display regional or specific features. It consisted of a raised rectangular prism on pilotis like the Hilton, in the same way, the larger rooms were placed at the two ends of the mass, changing the axis of the grid. The roof terrace was likewise considered as the Hilton Hotel. However, in the Çınar Hotel, the purism principle was broken with the service staircase placed at the end of the façade. Ceramic terracotta was used for the balustrade railings, in contrast to the teakwood balustrades at the Hilton. 58

Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel
After World War II, the building sector began to grow after a period of stagnation and Eskişehir's urban texture changed due to migration and new roads. In the 1950s, new typologies emerged in Eskişehir, such as business centers, hotels, cinemas and hospitals through the efforts of the state and the private sector. 59 The Hilton Hotel linguistically influenced other hotels -the Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel, a Pension Fund investment was also referred to as "Small Hilton". 60 ( Fig. 12) As stated in a newspiece in Milliyet, the hotel opened to the public in 27. 10.1959. 61 Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel was located on one of the busiest streets, on the banks of the Porsuk River. 62 The building designed by architect Vedat Dalokay was the winner of a competition by the Pension Fund in 1955. It was finished in 1958, and in 1961, it was bought by the Ministry of Defence for use as an Officer's Club. The reinforced concrete building consisted of seven floors and a ground floor, and was built by a German company. The language of the building followed the principles of International Style and modern architecture, similar to the Hilton Hotel. The rectangular block with a honeycomb façade, the use of the terrace roof, was also seen in this building. At the top of the entrance, the domed glass mass carried by the V shaped columns created an entrance eave, while the office entrance was from the other side. 63 As a variation of the Hilton model, the entrance was shaped rather differently. As Demirel Etli and Kurt state, the V-shaped columns at the bottom are thought to be the architect's signature feature (Fig.13). 64 F.12. Porsuk Hotel cited in the newspaper as the Hilton of Eskişehir (Bayraktar, 1959)

The Grand Efes Hotel
After the successful operation of the Istanbul Hilton Hotel, the Pension Fund decided to build a hotel in Izmir. The project started in the old fair area near Cumhuriyet Square, one of the most central areas of İzmir. 65 (Fig.14) F.14. The Grand Efes Hotel's construction (Kenan Kurtkaya Archive) The Grand Efes Hotel was developed in the 1950s to address the lack of a hotel and social venue in the city. Due to the limited municipality budget, Mayor of İzmir applied to the Pension Fund, to build a city club and hotel. The land was procured by the municipality, in the former fair area. The construction company, German firm Dyckerhoff and Windman undertook the construction and management on a basis of cost-plus profit. 66 (Fig.15 To build the hotel, setting up a trade firm inside the Pension Fund became essential. For this, the fund approached the Dyckerhoff and Windmann company, and Emek Construction Company became a corporation belonging to the Pension Fund (49%), Dyckerhoff and Windmann (49%), Ankara Real Estate Management. Co, and Dr. Raif Gürün, Tutum Bank. Emek Construction Co. soon became involved in the construction of The Grand Efes Hotel (1958), Grand Tarabya Hotel (1958, the annex building of the Hilton Hotel (1959) and the base construction of Grand Ankara Hotel (1959). The technical knowledge was provided by the German firm meanwhile architects and engineers were recruited locally. 67 Paul Bonatz was the main architect of the project, but after his death in 1957, Fatin Uran took over. 68 Due to the foreign exchange shortage in 1957, the required financial aid of 200 million francs was borrowed from Belgium. Dykerhoff and Windmann Company won the hotel construction contract, and started on September 16, 1957. The hotel, due to be finished in 1960 with an expenditure of 10.9 million liras, was not completed until December 30, 1963, and cost eight times the original estimate -97.6 million liras. For this reason, the lease signed in 1955 with Hotel Continental was canceled due to the excessive cost and since no other company was available, Emek Construction Company took over the management. 69 According to Arkitekt journal, the hotel covered an area of 36.000 m 2 . The accommodation consisted of 326 rooms with 495 beds. 22 were 2-room apartments, and 2 were 3-bed king-size suites with a living room, dining room and office. There was a 200-person restaurant, a rooftop restaurant, and a snack bar. For international conferences, there was a hall for 400, a night club for 200, an oriental Room for 50, Efe bar and roof bars, as well as various private lounges, souvenir shops on the ground floor and a swimming pool. 70 The Grand Efes Hotel was considered as the only Bonatz building in the international functionalist style. It was very similar to the Hilton Hotel with its architectural language consisting of a multi-storey rectangular prism. 71 However, Kortan as cited in Tozoğlu states that the popularity of rational architecture of the 1950s began to fade towards the 60s. In the Grand Efes Hotel, it could be seen that the masses were distributed to different units with different heights, rather than collected in a single volume. The main and secondary bedrooms were the highest masses, while the entrance and the ball room had only double storeys. The building was no longer limited to 90 degree angles. Grand Efes Hotel in this respect portrayed a different understanding from the Hilton Hotel. Thus, it was better adapted to the environment and closer to the human scale. New materials and technologies were also used in this hotel. 72 The differences from the Hilton Hotel was the use of different volumes for different functions, their separation in height and size, and their spatial variety. 73

The Grand Tarabya Hotel
The Grand Tarabya Hotel was built on the site of the Konak Hotel (historical Tokatlıyan Hotel), which was destroyed by fire in 1954. 74 When the new hotel's owners İbrahim Gültan and Paçitakis could not complete the building due to financial reasons, the unfinished hotel was purchased by the Pension Fund for 1.058.265 liras, and the remaining construction work and the management of the hotel was given to Emek Construction and Management Company. The building was originally planned to be finished in year 1961, but the construction took 7 years, until 30 November, 1965, increasing the cost from the original estimate of 19.2 million liras to 70.9 million liras. The hotel opened its doors on the first of April, 1966, the management was turned over to the Italian company SEAT. 75 The Grand Tarabya Hotel, was located in a total of 11.441 m 2 of land. It had 224 double rooms, 35 suites, 2 king suites, with a total 261 rooms and 522 beds. It had a 300 staff kitchen, a restaurant with a capacity of 4000, a banquet hall with a capacity of 200, a sauna, a tennis court, indoor and outdoor swimming pools. 76 According to the newspaper Milliyet in 1966, the furniture and building materials were brought from abroad, and the fixed and movable wooden furniture were made in the Technical Schools for Boys in Sultanahmet and Ankara. Each room had an ensuite bathroom and a telephone. 77 Kortan states that the architectural language followed the Rational-International approach. It had a "Curvilinear Plasticity" similar to Le Corbusier's applications in South America, with a curved form parallel to the shore line (Fig.16). Considering the surroundings, Grand Tarabya Hotel was unique to its region. The area around the Bosphorus had a regional and traditional architectural character with a high sensitivity to its nature, geography and the human scale. However, the Grand Tarabya Hotel, due to its size was not compatible with the location. Ocean side hotels in America were on a scale to compete with the ocean, but the Bosphorus had its own distinct character with an urban pattern respecting the environment. Before the Grand Tarabya Hotel the silhouette of the Bosphorus was preserved intact and its natural beauty was not damaged, but the hotel's massive volume was incompatible with the surrounding area. The result was a large wall that damaged the land-sea connection, and created a situation which coastal hotels should avoid. 78 F.16. The Grand Tarabya Hotel (Atatürk Library Digital Archive, Krt_024551)

Conclusion
The 1950s was a period when Turkey was taking its first steps towards modern tourism. The opening of the İstanbul Hilton Hotel was in that sense a turning point. Since it was the first modern hotel, it dominated the discussions in tourism and popular journals of the period. Some hotels of this period followed the International Style after the Hilton Hotel, so closely that they were even called "Small Hilton", as examplified in this study, showing close formations of the building character. It should be noted that, even though they were not analysed in this paper, a vast amount of buildings were influenced by the Hilton Hotel in the mid-century. As the architect of another hotel of the period (Balin Hotel, 1953), Kadri Kalaycıoğlu states, "The formation of the Hilton in front of us induced us to look for hotels in this sense, to see how hotels in the world are built. It directed our research, we were looking at such similar hotels ". 79 The process that emerged with the Hilton Hotel involved not only architectural features, but also the actors and the understandings that shaped other hotels. In the 78 Kortan, op.cit., 1971, p.54. 79 Kadri Kalaycıoğlu, Personal Interview, Ankara 2018.
1950s, the state was the first to promote tourism, and many laws and incentives were introduced in these years. The concept of a modern hotel was unfamiliar until the country welcomed foreign companies, architects and engineering firms, such as the Hilton Hotel's contractor company Dyckerhoff and Windmann. This company also built Grand Efes and Grand Tarabya Hotels in collaboration with the Pension Fund. The Pension Fund also constructed Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel. The ambition to build with local revenue and Turkish architects was revealed with the Çınar Hotel as one of the first grand hotels constructed totally with Turkish capital and local expertise. As well as these state funded hotels, the Çınar Hotel, as a family enterprise, was contracted to the same German firm, Dyckerhoff and Windmann, underlying the dominance of foreign companies in the making of these hotels. It is here important to state that, state funded or family enterprise hotels as in the example of the Çınar Hotel, not only shared the architectural language but also common actors in their making.
It is seen that the buildings examined in this study were designed in a similar architectural language in the International Style that shaped the Hilton Hotel. Manifested in these buildings are the elevated rectangular prismatic block, glazed entrance floor, the use of the terrace, and the language created by the grid façade with balconies. These examples contain different levels of spatial elements such as terrace bars, restaurants, American bars, large landscaped areas with swimming pools. As Tekin and Akpınar state, the International Style formula was repeated on new buildings, and the grid of the reinforced concrete frame became prevalent not only in Istanbul, but nationwide. 80 The mentioned hotels all share the main principles with the Hilton Hotel, but differentiations should be noted. The Grand Tarabya Hotel gained a plasticity due to the form of land. The Büyükada Anadolu Club Hotel was an example of a local interpretation within the same language, but using traditional elements and local habits associated with the Turkish traditional house. Eskişehir Porsuk Hotel differed in terms of the entrance with the elevated volume carried by V columns. The Grand Efes Hotel showed initial signs of breaking the rational attitude introducing the concept of breaking the volumes in different scales, and adapting to the environment with angular forms, which was beginning to emerge towards the 1960s.
Here it should be noted that this period between 1950-1960 was a time when Turkish architects applied modern architecture, which they learned through their own interpretations, inspired by western sources. 81 According to Tanyeli, due to the fact that the conditions and technologies of the day were not developed, the existing details were interpreted within the possibilities, but this driving force also caused the development of building methods. 82 According to Tekeli as cited in Özorhon and Uluslu Uraz "Form follows function was a clear and honest formula….exclusion of the ornament and the revelation of the structure… We searched for originality inside this doctrine.. the search for an identity maybe was not widespread but there was the quest to use the availability of circumstances and not to adapt to the environment but to belong to it". 83 The great influence of the Hilton Hotel, and American modern architecture generally, was visible in these examples. However, among these buildings, the Hilton had a unique status as the first modern hotel building, which was the leading example in a world characterized by developing tourism and architecture. These efforts could be seen as aimed at realizing ambitions to keep up with the rest of the world, within the conditions of the day. Bozdoğan also adds that, what is termed as "Hiltonism" (Hiltonculuk) was in a way a rational solution to hotel and apartment buildings that require repetition of spaces in building programs. These buildings signify how modern architecture was internalized and adapted to the country's conditions. 84 Tanyeli asserts that imitation as a concept encourages the production of the original in the newly encountered geographies, which is a natural course in development. The problem here is that the boundaries between a copy and an original are strictly divided, which makes it hard to trace the authenticity, although a closer analysis reveales the originality of the work. Thus, the architectural production of the 1950s, emerged as the result of the tendency of the period and Turkey following an international approach. 85 Uz expresses that architecture is built upon expanding previous knowledge so the "original" and the "copy" issue in architecture is senseless. Therefore, it is necessary to look at all processes and concepts that make up the result, not the end product. In this context, the term "originalcopy" comes out, which are products that show resemblences to another, however produced within a deep understanding and "conscious differentiation" that portray their own unique attributes. 86 In this sense, tourism architecture in the 1950s of Turkey should be considered as examples showing the reflection of an understanding of the world which developed in parallel.
All of the mentioned hotels are still standing, although some have undergone alterations and renovations in recent years. As Bozdoğan states, the Hilton has undergone many alterations, moving it away from the initial design, whereas Anadolu Club Building is aging in poor condition 87 , but still serves as a hotel run by Anadolu Club, a non-governmental organization. 88 The main block of the Çınar Hotel, despite many interior renovations, and annex building added in the 1970s, preserves its original character. The hotel is still run by the third generation of the founding Ercan family. 89 Efes Hotel was privatized in 2002 and management was transferred to the Swissotel chain. After a remodeling phase between years 2006-2008, it opened under the new name Swissotel Grand Efes İzmir and continues to operate. The interior was remodeled and there was an addition of rooms. 90 Porsuk Hotel serves as Officer's Club, and has had major alterations to the façade, as the balconies were incorporated into the rooms. It is here important to say that these hotels also functioned as well-established landmarks in the cities they served. For this reason, further research should integrate the study of these hotels into a wider discussion on their social value in everyday life, and the wide-ranging effects of tourism on social life in the mid-century.
We would like to express our sincere gratitude to Emre Gönlügür, Gökçeçiçek Savaşır, Müge Cengizkan and Simon Mumford.

Grant Support:
The author received no financial support for this work.