Kentin Tanımlanmasında Sosyolojik Yaklaşımlar: Toplumsal Süreç ve/veya Mekânın Çözümlenmesi

Yıl 2010, Cilt: 1 Sayı: 1, 44 - 77, 31.05.2010

Eylem Özdemir

Öz

Klasik
sosyolojiden bu yana kent, iki temel eksende tanımlanmaktadır: mekânsal olarak
ve toplumsal bir süreç olarak. Kentleri, toplumların evriminde içkin olan
çelişkilerin, çatışma ve uzlaşmaların siyasal, tarihsel ve sosyal olarak
biriktiği toplumsal ve mekânsal birimler olarak tanımladığımız vakit, kendiliğinden
sosyal bilimlerin de konusu, inceleme nesnesi haline getirmiş oluruz. Öte
yandan aynı tanım, kentlerin kendisinin de bir parçası olduğu makro toplumsal
olgulardan ve süreçlerden özerk sınırlarının olup olmadığı, varsa bu sınırların
nerede, nasıl ve ne pahasına kurulduğu konusunda bir güçlüğü de beraberinde
getirmektedir. Kenti çözümlemeye başladığımızda kaçınılmaz olarak belli
toplumsal durum ve ilişkiler hakkında da düşünmeye başlarız. Bu makalede kent
sosyolojisinin klasik ve eleştirel kuramcılarından bazıları seçilerek, kenti
tanımlayan belirli kavramsal çerçevelerin özetlenmesi amaçlanmıştır. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

kent, kent sosyolojisi, klasik sosyoloji, eleştirel teori, kent mekânı, kent teorisi, kültürel farklılık, kimlik

Sociological Approaches to the Definition of City: Analysis of Social Process and/or Space

Öz

Beginning
from classical sociology there have been two axes of urban definition: as
spatial and as a social process. When we define city as a social and a spatial
unit gathering contradictions, conflicts and compromises politically,
historically and socially, we automatically make it the subject of social
sciences. On the other hand, the same definition causes some difficulties when
deciding whether cities have autonomous borders from macro-social facts and
processes. When we begin to analyse urban we necessarily begin to think about
some certain social circumstances and relations. In this article it is aimed to
sum up certain conceptual frameworks on defining the city by  selecting some classical and critical
sociologists of urban sociology. 

Anahtar Kelimeler

city, urban sociology, classical sociology, critical theory, urban space, urban theory, cultural difference, identity

Kaynakça

• Bridge, G., (2005), Reason in the City of Difference: Pragmatism, Communicative Action and Contemporary Urbanism, London: Routledge.
• Castells, M., (2002), The Urban Ideology, In Ida Susser (Ed.), The Castells Reader on Cities and Social Theory, (34-44), Blackwell.
• Castells, M., (1997), Kent Sınıf İktidar, Çev. A. Erendil, Ankara: Bilim ve Sanat Yayınları.
• Dunleavy, P., (1982), Perspectives on Urban Studies, In P. Dunleavy, Andrew Blowers, Christopher Brook, Linda Mcdowell (Ed.), Urban Change and Conflict, London: Harper and Row.
• Fainstein, S. and Campbell, S. (Ed.), (1996), Introduction: Theories of Urban Development and Their Implications for Policy and Planning, In Readings in Urban Theory, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Fincher R., Jacobs, J. and Anderson, K., (2002), Rescripting Cities with Difference, In John Eade and Christopher Mele (Ed.), Understanding the City: Contemporary and Future Perspectives, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Frisby, D., (1992), Simmel and Since, Essays on Georg Simmel’s Social Theory, London and New York: Routledge.
• Frisby, D., (1985), Fragments of Modernity, Theories of Modernity in the Work of Simmel, Kracaue and Benjamin, Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Frisby, D., (2002), Georg Simmel, London and New York: Routledge.
• Giddens, A., (2000), Siyaset, Sosyoloji ve Toplumsal Teori, Çev. T. Birkan, İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
• Giddens, A., (1999), Toplumun Kuruluşu, Çev. H. Özel, Ankara: Bilim ve Sanat Yayınları.
• Gottdiener, M. and Budd, L., (2005), Key Concepts in Urban Studies, London: Sage Publications.
• Harvey, D., (2003), Sosyal Adalet ve Şehir, Çev. M. Moralı, İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
• Harvey, D., (1997), Postmodernliğin Durumu, Çev. S. Savran, İstanbul: Metis Yayınları.
• Harvey, D., (2004), The Right to the City, In Loretta Lees (Ed.), Emancipatory City? Paradoxes and Possibilities, London: Sage Publications.
• Jameson, F., (1991), Postmodernism or, the Cultural Logic of Late Capitalism, London: Verso.
• Kaesler, D., (1988), Max Weber: An Introduction to His Life and Work, Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Katznelson, I., (1992), Marxism and the City, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Kofman, E. and Lebas, E. (Ed.), (1996), Lost in Transposition : Time, Space and the City, In Writings on Cities, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Lefebvre, H., (1996), Right to the City, In E. Kofman and E. Lebas (Ed.), Writings on Cities, (122-132), Oxford: Blackwell.
• Lefebvre, H., (1991), The Production of Space, Oxford: Blackwell.
• Levine, D.N., Carter E.B and Gorman, E. M., (1976), Simmel’s Influence on American Sociology, American Journal of Sociology, 81, 813–45.
• Lindner, R., (1996), The Reportage of Urban Culture: Robert Park and the Chicago School, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Lofland, L. H., (1971), Analyzing Social Settings, Belmont: Wadsworth.
• Martindale, D., (1958), Martindale in Weber, In M. Weber, The City, Illinois: Glencoe Free Press.
• Merrifield, A., (2002), Metromarxism: A Marxist Tale of the City, London and New York: Routledge.
• Mumford, L., (2000), What Is a City?, In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Ed.), The City Reader, London and New York: Routledge.
• Park, R. E., (1915), The City: Suggestions for the Investigation of Human Behavior in the City Environment, The American Journal of Sociology, vol. 20, 5, 577-612.
• Park, R. E., (1967), On Social Control and Collective Behavior, Chicago: Chicago University Press, 1967.
• Park, R. E., (1950), Human Communities, Glencoe: The Free Press.
• Parker, S., (2004), Urban Theory and The Urban Experience, London and New York: Routledge.
• Saunders, P., (2005), Social Theory and Urban Question, London and New York: Routledge.
• Schnapper, D., (2005), Sosyoloji Düşüncesinin Özünde Öteki İle İlişki, Çev. A. Sönmezay, İstanbul: Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
• Simmel, G., (1950), The Metropolis and Mental Life, In K. H. Wolff (Ed.), The Sociology of Georg Simmel, Illinois: The Free Press.
• Smith, N., (2003), Foreword, In Henri Lefebvre, The Urban Revolution, Minnesota: University of Minnesota Press.
• Soja, E., (1989), Postmodern Geographies: The Reassertion of Space in Critical Social Theory, London: Verso.
• Sennett, R., (1996), Kamusal İnsanın Çöküşü, Çev. S. Durak ve A. Yılmaz, İstanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.
• Sennett, R., (1970), The Uses of Disorder: Personal Identity and City Life, New York: Norton.
• Şengül, H. T., (2001), Kentsel Çelişki ve Siyaset: Kapitalist Kentleşme Süreçleri Üzerine Yazılar, İstanbul: WALD Demokrasi Kitaplığı.
• Tajbakhsh, K., (2001), The Promise of the City: Space, Identity and Politics in Contemporary Social Thought, California: University of California Press.
• Turley, A. C., (2005), Urban Culture: Exploring Cities and Culture, New Jersey: Pearson Prentice Hall.
• Turner, B., (1996), For Weber, Essays on the Sociology of Fate, London: Sage Publications.
• Venkatesh, S., (2001), Chicago’s Pragmatic Planners/American Sociology and the Myth of Community, Social Science History, 25: 2, 275-317.
• Vergin, N., (1977), Kentleşme ve Siyasal Yaşam, Yayınlanmamış doçentlik tezi, İstanbul Üniversitesi.
• Weber, M., (1958), The City, Illinois: Glencoe Free Press.
• Wirth, L., (2000), Urbanism as a Way of Life, In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Ed.), The City Reader, (97-105), London and New York: Routledge.
• Wolff, K. H. (Ed.), (1950), The Sociology of Georg Simmel, Illinois: Glencoe Free Press.
• Zukin, S., (2000), Whose Culture? Whose City?, In R. T. LeGates & F. Stout (Ed.), The City Reader, London and New York: Routledge.