Seclusion boundaries as interface in contemporary Istanbul housing

2Citations
Citations of this article
10Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Purpose: The purpose of this paper is to test and present the level of introversion/extroversion of the urban housing in Istanbul in three periods – traditional, modern and contemporary. It intends to examine changes in the boundaries between housing and urban environment in the city by evaluating housing interfaces and their components. Design/methodology/approach: By adopting literature review, observation and comparison methods, the hypothesis that houses in Istanbul are becoming introvert in contemporary period is stated and tested. The qualifications of housing interfaces and their components are examined in the context of three different periods of housing – traditional, modern and contemporary. Common components of interfaces in all periods are identified and different housing types from all periods are compared accordingly. Findings: The results of the comparison made within the study shows that contemporary housing units are much more introvert than previous periods in Istanbul, while housing units of modern period have the most potentiality to be extrovert. It is seen that the analysis method comparing interfacial components and its results are compatible with the hypothesis of the study. Originality/value: Considering recent and great number of urban problems in Istanbul, the subject of introversion–extroversion in contemporary urban housing gains importance, which lacks in the literature and needs studying. Introversion of housing units affects both domestic life and their urban environment. Developing contemporary housing projects with a human ecological perspective would cure both interior and exterior of urban boundaries.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Tunçer Yıldırım, C. (2020). Seclusion boundaries as interface in contemporary Istanbul housing. Archnet-IJAR: International Journal of Architectural Research, 14(1), 31–44. https://doi.org/10.1108/ARCH-04-2019-0086

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free