Kentsel Ses Peyzajında Bellek Arayüzleri: Trabzon Kent Merkezi

Öz

Geçmiş ile gelecek arasında bağ kurma noktasında, toplumun kolektif bilincini yansıtan kamusal mekânlar, kent kimliğini oluşturan unsurlar arasındadır. Kent kimliğinin bir parçası olarak sonik çevrenin tanımlanmasında ses peyzajı yaklaşımından yararlanılabilmektedir. Bu araştırmanın amacı, ses peyzajını tanımlayan “arka-plan sesler”, “ön-plan sesler”, “sembol sesler” ve kolektif bellek ile ilişkili olması yönüyle “kaybolan/yitikleşen sesler” ile geçmişten günümüze kadar “devamlılığı/sürekliliği olan seslerin” tespiti yoluyla Trabzon kent merkezinin sonik kimliğini ortaya çıkarmaktır. Araştırmanın metodolojisini, ses yürüyüşleri ve anket uygulamaları oluşturmaktadır. Atatürk Alanı, Kunduracılar Caddesi, Kemeraltı Sokağı ve Mumhaneönü Meydanı’na ait sonik bölgeler; ses yürüyüşleri ve belirlenen güzergâhlar doğrultusunda sonik çevre değerlendirmeleri yoluyla belirlenmiştir. Ses yürüyüşlerinden elde edilen bulgular, bölgelere ait sonik kimliklerin farklılaştığını göstermektedir. Bu sonuç, bölgelerin sonik imgelerini tanımlayan ve kendilerine özgü olan ses çevrelerinin varlığını ortaya koymaktadır. Araştırmanın sınırlılığını, Trabzon kent merkezini temsil ettiği düşünülen bölgelerde gerçekleştirilen ses yürüyüşleri ve kullanıcıların sonik çevre değerlendirmeleri oluşturmaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Kentsel mekân
• kolektif bellek
• ses peyzajı
• Trabzon

Memory Interfaces in Urban Soundscapes: Downtown Trabzon

Öz

Public spaces that reflect the collective consciousness of societies in establishing a bond between the past and the future are among the key determinant factors of urban identity. The soundscape approach can be used as a tool to define the sonic environment as a part of urban identity. This study aimed to reveal the sonic identity of downtown Trabzon by determining the elements of soundscape, namely keynotes, signals, and soundmarks, along with lost/disappearing sounds considering their association with collective memory, and continuous sounds that have remained unchanged from past to present. The methodology of this study consisted of soundwalks and surveys. Sonic regions belonging to Atatürk Square, Kunduracılar Street, Kemeraltı Street, and Mumhaneönü Boulevard were identified based on soundwalks and sonic environment assessments in line with the predetermined routes. The findings obtained from soundwalks showed that sonic identities differed by region, suggesting the presence of sui generis sound environments that define the sonic image of each region. The limitations of this study were the soundwalks performed in the regions that were considered to be representative of downtown Trabzon and the users’ sonic environment assessments.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• Urban space
• collective memory
• soundscape
• Trabzon

Kaynakça

1. Akbarishahabi, L. (2022). An evaluation of urban spaces designed at human scale and urban residents' sense of belonging. Urban Academy, 15(1), 136-154. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.991918
2. Akkaya, B. (2014). Urban soundscapes: Evaluating the sonic layers of Kadıköy Historical Bazaar and near surroundings [Unpublished master thesis]. Istanbul Technical University.
3. Amen, M. A., & Nia, H. A. (2021). The effect of cognitive semiotics on the interpretation of urban space configuration. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference of Contemporary Affairs in Architecture and Urbanism (pp. 260-274), Turkey: Alanya HEP University. https://doi.org/10.38027/ICCAUA2021227N9
4. Arendt, H. (1998). The human condition. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
5. Argan, A. (2019). The effects of aural and visual fiction on the sensation and management of space in landscape design [Unpublished master thesis]. Ordu University.
6. Asar, H. (2013). Examination of the analysis of perceptional experience in architectural space reading with the help of a method [Unpublished master thesis]. Eskisehir Osmangazi University.
7. Askarizad, R., & Safari, H. (2020). The influence of social interactions on the behavioral patterns of the people in urban spaces (Case study: The pedestrian zone of Rasht Municipality Square, Iran), Cities, 101, 102687. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2020.102687
8. Assmann, J. (2015). Kültürel bellek: Eski yüksek kültürlerde yazı, hatırlama ve politik kimlik. Istanbul: Ayrıntı Yayınları.

9. Atkinson, R. C., & Shiffrin, R. M. (1971). The control of short-term memory. Scientific American, 225(2), 82-91.
10. Aydın, D. Ç., Uysal, E., & Akça, Y. B. Ö. (2017). Diyarbakır tarihi Suriçi bölgesi akustik mirasının değerlendirilmesi. Dicle Üniversitesi Mühendislik Fakültesi Mühendislik Dergisi, 8(2), 255-266.
11. Berglund, B., & Nilsson, M. E. (2006). On a tool for measuring soundscape quality in urban residential areas. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 92(6), 938-944.
12. Bergson, H. (2015). Madde ve Bellek: Beden-tin ilişkisi üzerine deneme (I. Ergüden, Trans.). Ankara: Dost Kitabevi.
13. Boivin, N., Brumm, A., Lewis, H., Robinson, D., & Korisettar, R. (2007). Sensual, material, and technological understanding: Exploring prehistoric soundscapes in South India. Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute (N.S.) 13(2), 267-294.
14. Brambilla G., De Gregorio L., Maffei L., Can Y. Z., & Özçevik A. (2007). Comparison of the soundscape in historical centres of Istanbul and Naples. INTER-NOISE 2007 Proceedings, 5, 36th International Congress and Exhibition on Noise Control Engineering (pp. 3068-3075). New York: Curran Associates, Inc.
15. Brown, A. L. (2010). Soundscapes and environmental noise management. Noise Control Engineering Journal, 58 (5), 493-500. https://doi.org/10.3397/1.3484178
16. Bruce, N. S., Davies, W. J., & Adams, M. D. (2009). Expectation as a factor in the perception of soundscapes. Euronoise 2009, Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics Volume 31 Pt. 3 (pp. 1439-1446). New York: Curran Associates, Inc.
17. Cain, R., Jennings, P., & Poxon, J. (2013). The development and application of the emotional dimensions of a soundscape. Applied Acoustics, 74(2), 232-239. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2011.11.006
18. Carmona, M., & Tiesdell, S. (2007). Urban design reader. Oxford: Architectural Press.
19. Ching, F. (2007). Architecture: Form, space, & order. USA: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.
20. Çiçek, D. (2019). The evolution of audial and spatial perception at the special enviromental comfort [Unpublished master thesis]. Mimar Sinan Fine Arts University.
21. Cliffe, L., Mansell, J., Cormac, J., Greenhalgh, C., Greenhalgh C., & Hazzard, A. (2019). The audible artefact: Promoting cultural exploration and engagement with audio augmented reality. Proceedings of the 14th International Audio Mostly Conference: A Journey in Sound (pp. 176-182). https://doi.org/10.1145/3356590.3356617
22. Cüceloğlu, D. (2019). İnsan ve davranışı. Istanbul: Remzi Kitabevi.
23. Deng, L., Luo, H., Ma, J., Huang, Z., Sun, L., Jiang, M., Zhu, C., & Li, X. (2020). Effects of integration between visual stimuli and auditory stimuli on restorative potential and aesthetic preference in urban green spaces. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening 53, 126702. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2020.126702
24. Dubois D., Guastavino C., & Raimbault M. (2006). A cognitive approach to urban soundscapes: Using verbal data to access everyday life auditory categories. Acta Acustica United with Acustica, 92(6), 865-874.
25. Farina, A., Lattanzi, E., Malavasi, R., Pieretti, N., & Piccioli, L. (2011). Avian soundscapes and cognitive landscapes: Theory, application and ecological perspectives. Landscape Ecology, 26, 1257-1267. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-011-9617-z
26. Gehl, J. (1987). Life between buildings: Using public space. (J. Koch, Trans.). New York: Van Nostrand Reinhold.
27. Göregenli, M. (2018). Çevre psikolojisi: Insan mekân ilişkileri. Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi Üniversitesi Yayınları.
28. Gozalo, G. R., Carmona, J. T., Morillas, J. M. B., Gomez, R., & Escobar, V. (2015). Relationship between objective acoustic indices and subjective assessments for the quality of soundscapes, Applied Acoustics, 97, 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apacoust.2015.03.020
29. Guo, X., Liu, J., Albert, C., & Hong, X. C. (2022). Audio-visual interaction and visitor characteristics affect perceived soundscape restorativeness: Case study in five parks in China. Urban Forestry & Urban Greening, 77, 127738. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ufug.2022.127738
30. Halbwachs, M. (2018). Kolektif bellek (Z. Karagöz, Trans.). Istanbul: Pinhan Yayıncılık.
31. Hay, R. (1998). Sense of place in developmental context. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 18(1), 5-29. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.1997.0060
32. Hilgard, E. R., Atkinson, R. L., & Atkinson R. C. (1990). Introduction to psychology. Orlando: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich Publishers.
33. Hong, J. Y., Lam, B., Ong, Z., Ooi, K., Gan, W., Kang, J., Feng, J., & Tan, S. (2019b). Quality assessment of acoustic environment reproduction methods for cinematic virtual reality in soundscape applications, Building and Environment 149, 1-14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2018.12.004
34. Hong, X. C., Cheng, S., Liu, J., Dang, E., Wang, J. B., & Cheng, Y. (2022a). The physiological restorative role of soundscape in different forest structures. Forests, 13(11), 1920. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13111920
35. Hong, X. C., Liu, J., & Wang, G. Y. (2022b). Soundscape in urban forests. Forests, 13(12), 2056. https://doi.org/10.3390/f13122056
36. Hong, X., Wang, G., Liu, J., & Lan, S. (2019a). Cognitive persistence of soundscape in urban parks, Sustainable Cities and Society, 51, 101706. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2019.101706
37. Hummon, D. M. (1992). Community attachment: Local sentiment and sense of place. Human Behavior & Environment: Advances in Theory & Research, 12, 253-278. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-8753-4_12
38. ISO 12913-1 (2014). Acoustics-Soundscape-Part 1: Definition and conceptual framework. https://www.iso.org/standard/52161.html
39. Jeon, J. Y., Lee, P. J., You, J., & Kang J. (2010). Perceptual assessment of quality of urban soundscapes with combined noise sources and water sounds. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 127, 1357-1366. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.3298437
40. Jeon, J., & Jo, H. (2020). Effects of audio-visual interactions on soundscape and landscape perception and their influence on satisfaction with the urban environment, Building and Environment, 169, 106544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106544
41. Jo, H. I., & Jeon, J. Y. (2020). Effect of the appropriateness of sound environment on urban soundscape assessment. Building and Environment, 179, 106975. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2020.106975
42. Jorgensen, B. S., & Stedman, R. C. (2001). Sense of place as an attitude: Lakeshore owners attitudes toward their properties. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 21(3), 233-248. https://doi.org/10.1006/jevp.2001.0226
43. Kang, J., Aletta, F., Oberman, T., Erfanian, M., Kachlicka, M., Lionello, M., & Mitchell, A. (2019). Towards soundscape indices. In M. Ochmann, M. Vorländer, & J. Fels (Eds.), Proceedings of the 23rd International Congress on Acoustics (pp. 2488-2495). Germany: Deutsche Gesellschaft für Akustik.
44. Karakurt, E. (2006). Kentsel mekânı düzenleme önerileri: Modern kent planlama anlayışı ve postmodern kent planlama anlayışı. Erciyes Üniversitesi İktisadi ve İdari Bilimler Fakültesi Dergisi, 26, 1-25.
45. Kaya, Ç. (2018). Representation of urban space by soundscapes through sound collages and sound postcards [Unpublished master thesis]. Istanbul Technical University.
46. Kaymaz, I., Belkayalı, N., & Akpınar, N. (2013). Peyzaj mimarlığı kapsamında işitsel peyzaj kavramı: Ankara kent parkları örneği. Peyzaj Mimarlığı 5. Kongresi Bildiriler Kitabı. Ankara: TMMOB Peyzaj Mimarları Odası Yayınları, 182-194.
47. Krijnders, J., & Andringa, T. (2010). Differences between annotating a soundscape live and annotating behind a screen. Internoise 2010: Noise and Sustainability (pp. 1-6), Portugal: Sociedade Portuguesa de Acústica.
48. Lam, K., Marafa, L., & Chau, K. (2009). Spatio-temporal variation of soundscapes in the tranquil countryside of Hong Kong. Euronoise 2009, Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics Volume 31 Pt. 3 (pp. 3119-3128). New York: Curran Associates, Inc.
49. Lavandier C., & Defreville B. (2006). The contribution of sound source characteristics in the assessment of urban soundscapes. Acta Acustica united with Acustica, 92(6), 912-921.
50. Lee, P. J., Hong, J. Y., & Jeon, J. Y. (2014). Assessment of rural soundscapes with high-speed train noise. Science of The Total Environment, 482-483, 432-439. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2013.07.026
51. Lefebvre, H. (2009). State, space, world: Selected essays. (N. Brenner & S. Elden, Eds.) Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
52. Liu, J., Kang, J., Luo, T., Behm, H., & Coppack, T. (2013). Spatiotemporal variability of soundscapes in a multiple functional urban area. Landscape and Urban Planning, 115, 1-9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2013.03.008
53. Liu, J., Yang, L., Xiong, Y., & Yang, Y. (2019). Effects of soundscape perception on visiting experience in a renovated historical block. Building and Environment, 165, 106375. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.buildenv.2019.106375
54. Manahasa, E., & Manahasa, O. (2020). Defining urban identity in a post-socialist turbulent context: The role of housing typologies and urban layers in Tirana. Habitat International, 102, 102202. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.habitatint.2020.102202
55. Mianroodi, N. H., Majedi, H., Zarabadi, S. Z. S., & Ziari, Y. (2020). A comparative study of the memorability level of urban spaces using semiotic patterns; Case studies: Azadi and Hasanabad Squares. Armanshahr Architecture & Urban Development, 12(29), 241-255. https://doi.org/10.22034/AAUD.2020.103363
56. Özak, N. Ö. (2008). Relation of memory and architecture spatial elements in permanent memory [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Istanbul Technical University.
57. Özçevik, A. (2012). An approach on the evaluation of urban acoustical comfort with the soundscape concept [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Yildiz Technical University.
58. Özdoğan, H. (2019). Kentsel aidiyette meydanlar, Trabzon Belediye Meydanı örneği. Planlama, 29(3), 229-246. https://doi.org/10.14744/planlama.2019.60251
59. Özer M. N., & Ayten, M. A. (2005). Kamusal odak olarak kent meydanları. Planlama, 3, 96-103.
60. Özkan, D. G, Sarıışık, B., & Özkan, S. D. (2017). Trabzon kenti Kemeraltı bölgesi mevcut durum değerlendirmesi. TURAN-SAM Uluslararası Bilimsel Hakemli Dergisi, 9(36), 476-482.
61. Özkan, D. G. (2017). Kentsel rekreasyon alanı olarak alışveriş caddelerinin incelenmesi: Trabzon örneği. Uluslararası Bilimsel Araştırmalar Dergisi, 2(2), 444-453. https://doi.org/10.21733/ibad.365102
62. Pallasmaa, J. (2018). Tenin gözleri: Mimarlık ve Duyular. Istanbul: YEM Yayın.
63. Pérez-Martínez, G., Torija, A. J., & Ruiz, D. P. (2018). Soundscape assessment of a monumental place: A methodology based on the perception of dominant sounds. Landscape and Urban Planning, 169, 12-21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.landurbplan.2017.07.022
64. Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (2005). The child's conception of space (F. J. Langdon & J. L. Lunzer, Trans.). New York: Routledge.
65. Pijanowski, B. C., Villanueva-Rivera, L. J., Dumyahn, S. L., Farina, A., Krause, B. L., Napoletano, B. M., Gage, S. H., & Pieretti, N. (2011). Soundscape ecology: the science of sound in the landscape. BioScience, 61(3), 203-216. https://doi.org/10.1525/bio.2011.61.3.6
66. Raimbault M., & Dubois D. (2005). Urban soundscapes: Experiences and knowledge. Cities, 22(5), 339-350. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cities.2005.05.003
67. Rapoport, A. (1984). Culture and the urban order. In J. A. Agnew, J. Mercer & D. E. Sopher (Eds.), The city in cultural context. Boston: Allen and Unwin, 50-75.
68. Rossi, A. (1984). The architecture of the city. Cambridge: The MIT Press.
69. Sachs, J. S. (1967). Recognition memory for syntactic and semantic aspects of connected discourse. Perception & Psychophysics, 2(9), 437-442.
70. Sancar, C., & Acar, C. (2016). Türkiye’de kent peyzajının yeni yüzleri olarak meydanlar: Trabzon Ortahisar “Atatürk Alanı” dönüşüm projesi. İnönü Üniversitesi Sanat ve Tasarım Dergisi, 6(13), 57-73. https://doi.org/10.16950/iüstd.24456
71. Scannell, L. & Gifford, R. (2010). Defining place attachment: A tripartite organizing framework. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 30(1), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvp.2009.09.006
72. Schafer, M. R. (1977). Our sonic enviroment and the soundscape the tuning of the world. Rochester, Vermont: Destiny Books.
73. Schafer, M. R. (1994). The soundscape: Our sonic environment and the tuning of the world. Rochester, Vermont: Destiny Books.
74. Semidor C., & Venot-Gbedji, F. (2007). Soundscape in historical places: Genoa case study. INTER-NOISE 2007 Proceedings, 36th International Congress and Exhibition on Noise Control Engineering. New York: Curran Associates, Inc., 3058-3067.
75. Sherpherd, C., & Grimwood, C. (2009). Sound evaluations: The development of the concept of quiet zones within the city of London. Euronoise 2009, Proceedings of the Institute of Acoustics Volume 31 Pt. 3 (pp. 3000-3009). New York: Curran Associates, Inc.
76. Tokgöz, Ö. G., & Bilen, A. Ö. (2019). Kaybolan sesler: Erken Cumhuriyet Dönemi Eskişehir fabrikalar bölgesi işitsel peyzajı. 13. Ulusal Akustik Kongre ve Sergisi, 17-18 Ekim 2019, Diyarbakır.
77. Turkish Design Council (2019, August 15). Trabzon Mumhane Önü dolgu alanı (Moloz Bölgesi) Kentsel Tasarım Atölyesi Raporu, Trabzon. https://www.turkiyetasarimvakfi.org/media/Trabzon_Moloz_At%C3%B6lye_Raporu.pdf
78. Turkish Language Association (2023, August 15). https://sozluk.gov.tr/
79. Vardar, A. (1990). Meydansız kentler. Planlama, 90/3-4(8), 30-41.
80. Volcic, Z. (2005). Belgrade vs. Serbia: Spatial re-configurations of belonging. Journal of Ethnic and Migration Studies, 31(4), 639-658. https://doi:10.1080/13691830500109746
81. Wallace, M. Y. (2012). Acoustic ecology in landscape architecture: A case study in the soundscapes of İzmir [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Ege University.
82. Wright, T. (1999). New urban spaces and cultural representations: Social imagineries, social-physical space, and homelessness. In R. Hutchison (Ed.), Constructions of Urban Space (Research in Urban Sociology, Vol. 5) (pp. 23-57). Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1047-0042(00)80020-3
83. Yang, W., & Kang, J. (2005). Soundscape and sound preferences in urban squares: A case study in Sheffield. Journal of Urban Design, 10(1), 61-80. https://doi.org/10.1080/13574800500062395
84. Yılmaz, S. (2008). A design approach based on perceptual illusions for enhancing the “width” impact of zoo exhibition areas [Unpublished doctoral thesis]. Karadeniz Technical University.
85. Yu, L., & Kang, J. (2008). Effects of social, demographic and behavioral factors on sound level evaluation in urban open spaces. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 123, 772-783. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.2821955