Sanatçıların Yarattığı Pencereler Ve Kapılar

Abstract

Modernizm'e kadar kapının bir "eşik" olgu olarak önemini katlayarak sürdürdüğü, pencerenin ise, vitray sanatı dışında mekan oluşumunda kavramsal olarak çok büyük bir önem taşımadığı görülmektedir. Bunun nedeni eşiklerin ve geçiş mekanlarının dünyanın kendini değiştirdiği yerler olarak kabul edilmesidir. Pencere mekanlar arası bir iletişim yüzeyi olduğundan, pencerelerin öbür dünyanın referansları olarak yapılmalarının amacı, söz konusu yapının hangi büyük içte olduğunu göstermektedir. Marc Chagall, "Penceremin içinden Paris" tablosunda pencereden bakışı yorumlamıştır. Bu resimde, pencereden bakışta ki görmek eyleminin içinde her nesnenin, en hareketli olanında bile, nesnenin kendini dondurması gibi bir özellik vardır. Nesne pencere ile çerçevelenmiş olduğundan, artık üç boyutlu bir nesne değildir, ait olduğu çerçevenin içinde bir imge olarak iç mekanın bir parçası olmaktadır. Rene Magritte, "Kırların Anahtarı" tablosuyla pencerede görülenlerin iki boyutlu imgeler olduğunu göstermiştir. Le Corbusier için pencere evin en bağlayıcı organıdır, duvardan bağımsızlaşmıştır ve onun iradesini teslim almıştır. Mekanı tanımlayan artık büyük pencereler ve onların görüntüsü olmaktadır. Gözün kendisinin hareketli olması, gözü taşıyanın harekete geçirilmesi için bir araç olarak kullanılmıştır. Mies van der Rohe mekanı, kendi deyimiyle modern insanın mekansal ihtiyaçlarının birbiriyle karşılaşacakları şekilde organize etmek, çevreye açmak, manzarayla ilişkilendirmek olarak tanımlamaktadır. Cam duvardan dışarı bakışta, mekanla çerçevelediği boşluk ile, yani manzara arasında hiçbir ayrım veya görsel uzaklık izlenimi edinilemez. Hundertwasser'in resimlerinde bina imgeleri çoğu zaman yaşayan organizmalardır ve pencereler bu organizmanın gözü biçiminde belirmektedir. Hundertwasser'e göre binalarda pencereler ait olduğu odanın sahibinin, özgürlük alanıdır, bunda amaç kamuyu oluşturan insanların birey olmasıdır, bunun mimari ile olacağını düşünmektedir. Jean Nouvel, modern dünyanın olanaklarını tasarladığı binaların görsel kurgusu olarak kullanan, günümüz mimarlarının en başta gelenidir. Mimarlığında pencere nesnesi, aynı zamanda etki ve tepkinin gerçekleştiği, inter-aktif iletişim yüzeyidir. Modern Dünya'yı oluşturan nesneler, artık çerçevelenmiş olmalarından dolayı, kendilerine ait gerçekliklerini yitirmiş, ancak insan tarafından boyutlanan mekanda, insan tarafından yerleştirildiği yere göre varlık kazanmaktadırlar. Sonuç olarak Modernizmle birlikte mimaride kapının çerçevesinin öneminin kaybolduğu, tam aksi olarak pencerenin çerçevesinin önemsenerek, kavramsal bir hale geldiği görülmektedir. Pencereden (doğru) bakmak, yerini pencereye bakmak kavramına bırakmıştır. Pencerede ise önemsenen, içerisi ve dışarısı birlikteliğinden çok, dışın içi oluşturmasıdır. Günümüzde pencere yalnız iç mekanı oluşturan değil, dış mekan olarak tanımladığımız doğayı, bir iç mekan gibi yeniden oluşturan nesne olmaktadır.

This thesis investigates the fundamental symbolic meaning of doors and windows. As the subject is a vast one, this research has been focused upon the architectural concepts and components of some selected works of specific artists and architects. The results of this research address the fundamental qualities of the window and the door, so the form and concept of every door and window will exhibit some of the characteristics mentioned below. In ancient times there was no separation between the window and the door. In these early years the door, in addition to being used as an entrance, was also a way to bring light and ventilation into an enclosed space. The earliest window was probably the modification of doorway. Light was generally received from above where there is the smoke outlet in the roof. So the window as itself did not existed, it was a reproduction of the door. The window became a distinct entity, separate from the door, once glass became a viable construction material. But this early glass was not clear and had its value primarily as a picture, not as a transparent aperture. In spite of the fact that our oldest glass dates to the 10th century, still in the contemporary age, stained glass is being used for windows. In the symbolism of Filerate's drawings we find the first depiction of houses and it is evident here that the wall is depicted as having an immaterial quality. In the drawing the skeletal structure of the roofing system exhibits a number of concepts that we would identify today as examples of modernism. The wall exists without matter because the act of seeing and entering occur through time and within the vertical boundaries created on the horizontal axis of the earth. Since the boundaries define where one enters and where one stops, the existence of one delineation defines the existence of another. This is why windows and doors serve as vehicles of communication. Up until the Modern period, the importance of the door as a concept increased, whereas the window did not play a major role in architecture except for in works which used stained glass. This is because the gates and transitional spaces were accepted only as points where transition between spaces occurred. In the Middle Ages the door was not just an opening on a surface. It was very carefully formed and had a depth to it ; it also exhibited a dual symbolic meaning because it defined the limits of the exterior and the interior. Marc Chagall, in "Paris Through My Window" interprets the gaze out of a window. This work of art is special because it shows that even the most moveable item can be frozen by a gaze. Anything that is framed by a window is no longer three dimensional but becomes an object in the internal space of that frame. Everything one sees from a window appreas as a picture and Chagall recreates this phenomenon in his VI mind and adds a poetic dimension to the picture. Eiffel Tower, the square, the parachutist, everything is displaced, transposed into a poetic dimension. The metro runs upside down, a woman and a man fly above the road, The Eiffel Tower is insubstantial and skies are lit by strange colours. The observer has two different gazes in the picture. The outward looking gaze is more of an illusion whereas the cat seated on the fence with its human face is looking at the observer, or at the artist Chagall. This dream like creature is the key point of the picture, because it is situated on the frame of the window, in other words on the border between virtual and real. Naturally when someone is observing an object or person he is also being observed, whereas when you see something from a window, it becomes the image and the observer feels that he/she is not part of that image because it is framed by the window. One of the most important Surrealist painters, Magritte in his "Key to the Fields" shows that the objects seen through a window are two dimensional images. The images exist on the surface of the broken glass of the window and reveal the quality of two dimensionality. In this painting Magritte shows us the wall is a filter and we know through our instincts what is behind it. Everything behind the door is an image but when you walk through it the image become reality as the space is no longer framed; the duality of the visual experience is reformulated. The spherical form, the center in which we are located, thereby encircles us. Jean Paul Sartre seperates the perception itself and the image. For him the image that is being created in one's brain is selection of his experiences. If there is a certain perception of space, the primary rule is to reestablish the spatial releations. The process is like this; perception, created image and thinking through the image. In the Gothic cathedrals mysticism is provided by windows opening to the other world. Since windows are communicatory surfaces located between different spaces this reference to the other world reminds us of the vast interior space in which we exist. As Gotic interiours became by reason of the increased size and number of their windows, the picture glass paintings themselves not only contained a less quantity of colour and agreater proportion of white and yellow stained glass, but eventually became less intense of hue. In the Gothic cathedral, with the addition of the rose window motif, the window is transformed to define the architectonic nature of the space. We also see in the Fauvism movement, where the metaphor of light emanating from the object is employed, that the bordering wall which shapes space acquires a spiritual dimension. In the Chapel that Matisse designed in Vence, the window is the only object that adds this character to the space. It is "Nature" recreated. Le Corbusier, on the other hand, in the Ronchamp chapel creates an image of a window with a painting that employs words. The meaning of the words addan imagistic dimension to the structure and become visual in the mind of the individual. In the mind of Le Corbusier the window it the most determining organ of the house, independent of the wall. For him, the window is no longer a hole in the wall, it has taken over the wall. Now large windows define the interior as Ramussen said: "the walls give the impression of being made out of paper, the big window is a paper wall with a big picture on it, a picture wall, a movie screen." Beatriz Colomina defined the Villa Savoye as a moveable camera with its windows as lenses focused upon nature. The window stretches out lenghtwise and becomes panoramic and it is vn still adistributer of light. As Le Corbusier defines it, this house exists in a void and can be anywhere but what defines it is the image one sees from the window. The image of nature refrained with such elaboration become an object. The building has been designed for its interior but this interior is redefined as internal and external space and a new reality now exists. Roof went from being exteriour to interiour. Le Corbusier directs the observer to move within the space to see the objects that creates and define the architecture. The eye itself is mobile and has been used as a way of mobilizing the self. The image in the window is like a screen. It has been designed as a redefined area but our gaze can not conceive of the entire setting, but only a part of the series of images. Space, according to Mies van der Rohe must be organized according to the needs of the modern man and man must also be given an opportunity to relate to his outside environmentHis basic starting point is "space", how to organize it, open it, relate it to the landscape, so that the spatial needs of modern man might be met. His aim is to bring man, architecture and nature in a higher unity, and to break distinction between interiour and exteriour, and to create a situation in which both are perceived as portions of higher unity. In his architectural works Mies van der Rohe carries out what Bernard Cache has called the "art of framing" thus architecture escapes its traditional role of housing and grounding and becomes a practice of framing images in such a way that they induce new forms of life.Cache defined framing with two subjective terms: selective and elective. For him the first function of the frame removed us from the territory by means of the wall, and the second function reestablishes the connections selectively by means of the window. The probability of intented effect - isolating, selecting and arranging- interlocking these frames or joining up all these planes -wall section, floor section, slope section- is a composite system rich in points, hold up figures and intermigle with their upholding their own appereances. The border that defines the interior of Mies's creations is a glass wall. True transparency is one step removed from the lack of matter and in the Farnsworth House nature is the primary concept as it establishes the walls of the house. To experience the Farnsworth house one enters in stages from symbolic nature to real nature. Mies's defining frame, in its primary objective meaning where all surfaces are framed by voids and/or by Nature, has its origins in the Renaissance and we can see here the impact of Plato's Idea upon Mies van der Rohe. There is now only a trace of a "tying the space to the landscape" and looking from the glass wall, one is struck instead by an impression of an visual distance of detachment. The landscape here appears to the viewer no longer as a spatial frame, like Villa Savoye, but takes on a distinctly pictorial, almost stage like character that Mies attempted to make even more apperent by means of the strictly frontal reproduction in parallel planes of the panorama presented. The selection and arragement of the "picture" are already given by the architectonic framing elements and thus largely beyond the viewer's control. In Mies's settings all descriptive detail is removed and objects appear as representations of their internal ideas. Fine detail is not necessary and the minimum number of objects are depicted because of their essentialism. Looking out of a glass wall a distinction between this setting and what surrounds it becomes impossible. In Hundertwasser's paintings images of buildings are living organisms and the windows serve as the eyes of the organisms. But also for him, pictures are gateways vm through which when he succeeds, he can burst into a world which is very close to us and very distant, a world which we have no access, where we find ourselves but which we can not perceive, a world which is opposed to the real world and he thinks he has managed to open some "windows" into this world. By this definiation of his pictures, he also redefines the work of the window. In his Manifesto the "Window Dictates and Window Rights" section proclaims that buildings are made of and defined by windows. In his painting "Good Morning City-Bleeding Town" the building has human eyes which reflect upon itself. In one of his works the pictures acquire the quality of a passage into the innermost soul. According to him the windows provide the person the room with freedom, a freedom which is provided by architecture. In the SUo building in Krems the architecture helps the individual to realize the value of the window. In his "Slit Eye House" the window appears as a slit in Nature. Nature has been sliced open with the eye and the interior space follows. Jean Nouvel is one of the most prominent architects using modern day technology to create a visual setting for the buildings he designs. For him, architecture is first of all perceived by the eye. The window, in his hands, is an interactive communicatory surface, like media images, the cinema or TV, video media. The Arab World Institute building in Paris which is a rigorous geometrical design, is like a scenario created by a moving camera. This building can be redefined as a clear progression of seriated images. To be in this building means one is immersed in images. In his Carrier building in Paris, the window defines multiple settings and creates an intermediary space within a void, it is the the elusive screen of reality. The boundary has become virtual and that has something to do with being tactile. So we can see the sky thorough the building and we are never sure where the building begins, where it ends. Here transparency means incorporating the surrounding environment as an integral future of created space. The window is not defined by the mass of the building; the mass, rather, is framed around the window. Transparency here is multi valiant, multi layered. One of the layers is the screen that enriches the life of the street and this life is reflected back to the street itself. What is perceived is a mirrored image : two separate realities emanate from one space. In his individual architectural style, one moves in a visual procession; each step is surrounded by surfaces devoid of matter. For him the concept of modernity is a modern transformation of the exterior. Modernity is a virtual reality that becomes an indispensable part of daily life. Objects that create the modern world lose their individual meaning and acquire value according to where they are placed by man and what they are framed by. Without borders nothing can exist, or at least we can not know it. At the border something ends and something else begins, or can begin. A differance thus exists the moment, we became aware of a border. To be inside a space, as our definition of reality, is to touch six surfaces which we define as a cubic volume. An object which we can touch can also be perceived by our other senses, because to touch İs to contact or to communicate to the surface which is hiding the depths. The one who is conscious that he is in a something by contacting six surfaces, come to an adjudication like this: "I am in a something which is definitely real, and as I am inside I have always been here, or I was in an other place and I have come here." We become very curious to the depths of the six surfaces that we are in. We need a vehicle to K investigate the depth. The moment we reach the outer surface, we see that, this is also an other enclosed inside. The process goes on like this: a cubic volume that is inside an other cubic volume. The border is the watt, access as a vehicle is the door, and to be inside is according to the which side we are in. All of tese are real because we can touch them, but when we come to the surface that we can not cross its depth, our experience says us that cubic volumes are inside another. So our brain design the depth of the outer surface, although it is conscious that our body is still in his side, so we are never sure that the things we see in the outer surface are really existing or not. Because the window is only a visual pass. The look from a window is only a single part of reality, it is not the whole. Thus the name of the book 'The Doors of Perception" of Aldous Huxley is very important. The pass of Huxley to the other side happens in his brain. The other side is not a product of the medications, but the door is. The redefinition of the body is a vehicle in which there is the nerves and the receivers. The reality is in our brain. So the pass of Huxley to the other side is with his all senses in his brain. On the other hand the pictures of Hundertwasser is only visual, we have no access to their depths. That is why they are windows. Window is an infinite area for to research the border between virtual and the real. The concept of the window is more open. The criterias of our daily life nowadays is being defined by the technology. The name of the computer program is "Windows". When it is possible that the name of the computer program will be changed to "Doors", then it will be a new start for everything. But the fact we know is, there will be another window for this new door, the windows that open new perceptions. To summarize, the limits and perception of the space is redefined with the Modernism, and we can conceive mat with Modernism, the door frame has lost its importance in architecture, whereas the window frame has acquired a conceptual importance. "Looking out of the window" has been replaced by "looking at the window". What is important is not the unification of the internal and the external space, but that the external now defines the internal.