Dijital Çağda Somut Kültürel Mirası Mimar Sinan Gibi Yeniden Düşünmek: Çağlar Arası Bir Sentez

Öz

Bu çalışma, Mimar Sinan'ın günümüz dijital çağında yaşadığını varsayarak, günümüz ziyaretçilerinin istek, ihtiyaç ve beklentileri doğrultusunda Sinan'ın inşa ettiği mimari mekanların ziyaret deneyimini zenginleştirecek öneriler tasarlamaya çalışmaktadır. Multimedya geliştirme yönteminin adımları esas alınarak Sinan'ın inşa ettiği üç mimari mekan Süleymaniye Camii içi, hazire alanı ve türbe için teknolojiye dayalı öneriler geliştirilmiştir. Yerinde gözlem yöntemi ve gözlem formlarından yararlanılmıştır. Ayrıca Sinan'ın olağanüstü kişiliğini ve yapım tekniklerini ortaya çıkarmak için yazılı kaynaklardan (otobiyografi, kitap, makale, envanter vb.) ve görsel kaynaklardan (belgesel) yararlanılmıştır. Yerinde gözlemlerden elde edilen bulgulara dayalı olarak görsellerle zenginleştirilmiş şu aşamalar önerilmektedir. Birincisi, ziyaretçilerin, cami içerisinde ellerini havada hareket ettirerek sayfalarını çevirebileceği, 1,5x1 metre ölçülerinde, büyük boyutlu bir dijital kitap tasarlanması. İkincisi hazire alanı içerisinde, orada gömülü olan kişiler hakkında ve onların yaşamlarına ilişkin önemli bilgileri içeren bir matris barkod sisteminin geliştirilmesi. Son olarak Sinan'ın kendi hayat hikayesinin sesli anlatımıyla başlayıp, ziyaretçilere türbesinin yerini anlatarak rehberlik eden bir sanal gerçeklik uygulamasının ve simülasyonunun oluşturulmasıdır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Somut Kültürel Miras
• Ziyaretçi Deneyimi
• Dijitalleşme
• Mimar Sinan
• Süleymaniye Camisi ve Külliyesi
• İstanbul

Destekleyen Kurum

This research was funded by the Scientific and Technological Research Council of Turkey (TÜBİTAK) under the University Students Research Projects Support Program with the grant number 1919B012207314

Proje Numarası

1919B012207314

Rethinking about Tangible Cultural Heritage Like Architect Sinan in The Digital Age: A Synthesis between The Ages

Öz

The study is to endeavor to design proposals that will enrich the visiting experience of the architectural sites built by Sinan in line with the desires, needs, and expectations of modern-day visitors, assuming that Architect Sinan lived in today's digital age. Based on the steps of multimedia development method, technology-based recommendations have been developed for three architectural sites: the Süleymaniye Mosque, its cemetery area, and the tomb, all of which were constructed by Sinan. The on-site observation method and observation forms were utilized. Additionally, written sources (such as autobiographies, books, articles, inventories, etc.) and visual sources (documentaries) were consulted to explore Sinan's exceptional personality and construction techniques. Based on the findings from on-site observations, the following stages, enriched with visuals, are proposed as recommendations: designing a large-sized digital book, measuring 1.5x1 meters, where visitors can turn the pages by moving their hands in the air inside the mosque. Developing a matrix barcode system within the cemetery area, containing information about the individuals buried there, including important details about their lives. Creating a virtual reality application and simulation that starts with an audio narration of Sinan's own life story and then guides visitors to his tomb by describing its location.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Tangible Cultural Heritage
• Visitor Experience
• Digitalization
• Architect Sinan
• Süleymaniye Mosque and Complex
• İstanbul

Proje Numarası

1919B012207314

Kaynakça

1. Abduraheem, K., and Sheri, J. (2022). Significance of Digitization of the Cultural Heritage: In the Context of Museums, Archives, and Libraries. S. Abram, K. Ameen, R. C. Gaur, P. B. Magla, J. Pateman and B. J. Turock (Ed.), In Handbook of Research on the Role of Libraries, Archives, and Museums in Achieving Civic Engagement and Social Justice in Smart Cities (pp. 252-263). IGI Global.
2. Ahmad, I., Rahmanto, Y., Pratama, D., and Borman, R. I. (2021). Development of augmented reality application for introducing tangible cultural heritages at the lampung museum using the multimedia development life cycle. Ilkom Jurnal Ilmiah, 13(2), 187-194. https://doi.org/10.33096/ilkom.v13i2.859.187-194.
3. Arena, F., Collotta, M., Pau, G., and Termine, F. (2022). An overview of augmented reality. Computers, 11(2), 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers11020028.
4. Bekele, K., Pierdicca, R., Frontoni, E., Malinverni, E. S., and Gain, J. (2018). A Survey of augmented, virtual, and mixed reality for cultural heritage. Journal of Computing and Cultural Heritage 11(2). https://doi.org/10.1145/3145534.
5. Blake, J. (2000). On defining the cultural heritage. International & Comparative Law Quarterly, 49(1), 61-85. https://doi.org/10.1017/S002058930006396X.
6. Boboc, R. G., Băutu, E., Gîrbacia, F., Popovici, N., and Popovici, D. M. (2022). Augmented reality in cultural heritage: An Overview of the last decade of applications. Applied Sciences, 12(19), 9859. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12199859.
7. Bosone, M.; Nocca, F., and Fusco Girard, L. (2021). The Circular City Implementation: Cultural Heritage and Digital Technology. M. Rauterberg (Ed.), In Culture and Computing. Interactive Cultural Heritage and Arts. HCII 2021; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (pp.40-62). Springer.
8. Caserta, S., and Russo, A. P. (2002). More means worse: Asymmetric information, spatial displacement and sustainable heritage tourism. Journal of Cultural Economics, 26(4), 245-260.

9. Castro, J.C. Quisimalin, M., Córdova, V. H., Quevedo, W. X., Gallardo, C., Santana, J., and Andaluz, V. H. (2018). Virtual Reality on e-Tourism. IT Convergence and Security 2017, Seoul, South Korea.
10. Carreira, V., González-Rodríguez, M. R., and Díaz-Fernández, M. C. (2022). The relevance of motivation, authenticity and destination image to explain future behavioural intention in a UNESCO World Heritage Site. Current Issues in Tourism, 25(4), 650-673. https://doi.org/10.1080/13683500.2021.1905617.
11. Correia, A., Kozak, M., and Ferradeira, J. (2013), From tourist motivations to tourist satisfaction, International Journal of Culture, Tourism and Hospitality Research, 7(4), 411-424. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCTHR-05-2012-0022.
12. Chung, N., Lee, H., Kim, J. Y., and Koo, C. (2018). The role of augmented reality for experience-influenced environments: The case of cultural heritage tourism in Korea. Journal of Travel Research, 57(5), 627-643. https://doi.org/10.1177/0047287517708255.
13. Çoban, S., and Akoğlan Kozak, M. (2022). Kavramsal çıkarımlar üzerinden Frigya Vadisinin fijital tasarımı. Güncel Turizm Araştırmaları Dergisi, 6(1), 177-193. https://doi.org/10.32572/guntad.997495.
14. De Paolis, L. T., Chiarello, S., Gatto, C., Liaci, S., and De Luca, V. (2022). Virtual reality for the enhancement of cultural tangible and intangible heritage: The case study of the Castle of Corsano. Digital Applications in Archaeology and Cultural Heritage, 27, e00238. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.daach.2022.e00238.
15. Davis, F.D. (1989). Perceived Usefulness, Perceived Ease of Use and User Acceptance of Information Technology, MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319-339.
16. Denzin, N.K. (2009). Qualitative Inquiry Under Fire: Toward a New Paradigm Dialogue (1st ed.). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315421292.
17. tom Dieck, M. C., and Jung, T. H. (2017). Value of augmented reality at cultural heritage sites: A stakeholder approach. Journal of Destination Marketing & Management, 6(2), 110-117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jdmm.2017.03.002.
18. Eisner, E.W. (1991). The Enlightened Eye: Qualitative Inquiry and the Enhancement of Educational Practice. Macmillan, New York. NY.
19. Eser, S., Çakıcı, A. C., Babat, D., and Kızılırmak, İ. (2019). Turlarda teknoloji kullanımı: turistler ve turist rehberleri gözüyle bir değerlendirme. Balıkesir Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 22 (41), 465-480. https://doi.org/10.31795/baunsobed.581982
20. García-Muiña, F. E., Fuentes-Moraleda, L., Vacas-Guerrero, T., and Rienda-Gómez, J. J. (2019). Understanding open innovation in small and medium-sized museums and exhibition halls: An analysis model. International Journal of Contemporary Hospitality Management, 31(11), 4357-4379. https://doi.org/10.1108/IJCHM-03-2018-0260.
21. Han, D. I. D., Weber, J., Bastiaansen, M., Mitas, O., and Lub, X. (2019). Virtual and augmented reality technologies to enhance the visitor experience in cultural tourism. M. C. tom Dieck and T. Jung (Ed.) In Augmented reality and virtual reality (pp. 113-128). Springer.
22. Kulakoğlu, D. N. (2020). Turizm sektöründe sanal gerçeklik teknolojisinin kullanımına ve etkisine yönelik keşifsel bir araştırma. [Doktora Tezi]. İstanbul Üniversitesi.
23. Kunt, S. (2023). Dijitalleşme Çağında Kültürel Mirası Yeniden Yorumlamak. Kültürel Miras Araştırmaları, 4(2), 49-60. https://doi.org/10.59127/kulmira.1364908.
24. Not, E., Cavada, D., Maule, S., Pisetti, A., and Venturini, A. (2019). Digital augmentation of historical objects through tangible interaction. Journal on Computing and Cultural Heritage (JOCCH), 12(3), 1-19. https://doi.org/10.1145/3297764.
25. Hajirasouli, A., Banihashemi, S., Kumarasuriyar, A., Talebi, S., and Tabadkani, A. (2021). Virtual reality-based digitisation for endangered heritage sites: Theoretical framework and application. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 49, 140-151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2021.02.005.
26. Mah, O. B. P., Yan, Y., Tan, J. S. Y., Tan, Y. X., Tay, G. Q. Y., Chiam, D. J., and Feng, C. C. (2019). Generating a virtual tour for the preservation of the (in) tangible cultural heritage of Tampines Chinese Temple in Singapore. Journal of Cultural Heritage, 39, 202-211. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.culher.2019.04.004.
27. Nuryanti, W. (1996). Heritage and Postmodern Tourism. Annals of Tourism Research, 23(2), 249-260.
28. Okanovic, V.; Ivkovic-Kihic, I.; Boskovic, D.; Mijatovic, B.; Prazina, I.; Skaljo, E., and Rizvic, S. (2022). Interaction in eXtended reality applications for cultural heritage. Applied Sciences, 12, 1241. https://doi.org/10.3390/app12031241.
29. Olaz, X., Garcia, R., Ortiz, A., Marichal, S., Villadangos, J., Ardaiz, O., and Marzo, A. (2022). An interdisciplinary design of an interactive cultural heritage visit for in-situ, mixed reality and affective experiences. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 6(7), 59. https://doi.org/10.3390/mti6070059.
30. Özendi, M. (2022). Kültür varlıklarının yersel lazer tarama yöntemi ile dijital dokümantasyonu: Zonguldak Uzun Mehmet Anıtı örneği. Geomatik, 7(2), 139-148. https://doi.org/10.29128/geomatik.917528.
31. Öztemiz, S., and Yılmaz, B. (2017). Kültürel bellek kurumlarında dijitalleştirme: kültürel miras ürünlerine yönelik uygulamalar üzerine bir araştırma. Ankara Üniversitesi Dil ve Tarih-Coğrafya Fakültesi Dergisi, 57(1), 493-523.
32. Unesco, (2003). Text of the convention for the safeguarding of the intangible cultural heritage. https://ich.unesco.org/en/convention.
33. Unesco (2019). Thematic Indicators for Culture in the 2030 Agenda, Unesco, France.
34. Uzzell, D. (1998). Interpreting Our Heritage: A Theoretical Interpretation. In D. Uzzell and R. Ballantyne (Eds.), Contemporary Issues in Heritage & Environmental Interpretation. London: The Stationery Office, 11-25.
35. Rinaldi, A. M., Russo, C., & Tommasino, C. (2022). An augmented reality cbır system based on multimedia knowledge graph and deep learning techniques in cultural heritage. Computers, 11(12), 172. https://doi.org/10.3390/computers11120172.
36. Sutopo, A. H. (2003). Multimedia interaktif dengan flash. Yogyakarta: Graha Ilmu, 32-48.
37. Vacchio, E. D., and Bifulco, F. (2022). Blockchain in cultural heritage: Insights from literature review. Sustainability, 14(4), 2324. https://doi.org/10.3390/su1404232.
38. Wang, B., Dai, L. and Liao, B. (2023). System architecture design of a multimedia platform to ıncrease awareness of cultural heritage: A case study of sustainable cultural heritage. Sustainability, 15, 2504. https://doi.org/10.3390/su15032504.
39. Weng, F., Fu, T. T., and Sun, M. Y. (2021, July). The Effect of Applying Augmented Reality on Historical Site Destination Image and Behavior Intention. 2021 IEEE 4th International Conference on Knowledge Innovation and Invention (ICKII). Taichung, Taiwan.
40. Yilmaz, K. (2013). Comparison of quantitative and qualitative research traditions: Epistemological, theoretical, and methodological differences. European journal of education, 48(2), 311-325. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12014.
41. Yin, R. (1994), Case Study Research: Design and Methods, 2. Baskı, United States of America: Sage Publishing.