Varoş identity: The redefinition of low income settlements in Turkey

Middle Eastern Studies

Volumn 43, Issue 1, 2007, Pages 87-106

  Demirtaş, Neslihan ^a   Şen, Seher ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

INCOME DISTRIBUTION; SETTLEMENT PATTERN;

EURASIA; TURKEY;

EID: 33845569759     PISSN: 00263206     EISSN: 17437881     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00263200601079732     Document Type: Article

References (107)

1. Gecekondu is the name given to the informal low-income settlements in the periphery of the cities. Gecekondulu refers to the people living in these settlements. Varoş is a recent term that is used in place or with the term of gecekondu. Varoşlu is the person associated with varos culture.
2. We borrow the term 'dominant discourse' from G. Baumann, Contesting Culture: Discourses of Identity in Multi-Ethnic London (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996), p.22. It refers to the space of public debate where the representations of low income settlements and settlers have been produced. For a discourse to be dominant one would expect it to show four features according to Baumann, which are: 1) its conceptual make-up should be economical not to say simple; 2) its communicative resources should border on monopoly; 3) it should be flexible of application and should allow for the greatest ideological plasticity; 4) finally it should lend itself to established institutional purposes. The context where the discourse on gecekondu and varoş has been represented show very similar qualities with Baumann's definition of dominant discourse. First of all, the characteristics attributed to gecekondulu and varoşlu have been put forward in a very precise manner; hence, any possibility of developing a sense of everyday life in gecekondu is not permitted in these de.nitions by means of short-cut and definite labels. Secondly, particularly after the 1980s the main communicative resources, the media, have been to a large extent monopolized by a small number of large conglomerates. Thirdly, with respect to the representations of Varoş in the media, ideological plasticity from right-wing conservatism to liberalism even in the editorial discourse of a single journalist seems remarkable.
3. M. Heper, Gecekondu Policy in Turkey: An Evaluation with a Case Study of Rumelihisarüstü Squatter Area in Istanbul (Istanbul: Bogazici University Publication, 1978), p.12.
4. In an essay published in Cumhuriyet (Istanbul daily) on 28 September 1948, the journalist Metin Toker used degrading discourse to report on the presence of gecekondu settlements very close to Istanbul's most refined and beautiful neighbourhood Şişli, suggesting the natural response to be revulsion and horror. One year later, the same journalist, referring to Istanbul city governor Fahrettin Kerim Gökay, wrote in the following manner: 'Governor Gökay seems to protect gecekondu constructors; we have no words to say. However, there would be nothing surprising if the gecekondu who have their own laws, order and cabinet today created their own police forces or military tomorrow', quoted from T. Şenyapili, 'Cumhuriyet' in 75. Yili Gecekondunun 50. Yili' [The 75th Anniversary of Republic, the 50th Anniversary of Gecekondu], in 75 Yilda Degisen Kent ve Mimarlik [Changing City and Architecture in 75 Years] (Istanbul: Tarih Vak., 1998), p.308.
5. F. Ahmad, The Making of Modern Turkey (London: Routledge, 1993), p.116.
6. Şenyapili, 'Cumhuriyet'in 75', p.309.
7. N. Tok, 'A Critical Approach to Gecekondu Studies in Turkey with Reference to Modernization Theory' (unpublished MA Thesis, 1999).
8. Research conducted by Yasa in 1964 was full of stereotype images of migrants and degrading discourse about their rural lifestyles. See I. Yasa, 'Gecekondu Ailesi: Geçiş Halinde Bir Aile Tipolojisi' [Gecekondu Family: The Typology of a Family in Transition], ASBF Dergisi, Vol.25, No.4 (1970), pp.9-18. The women doing domestic work were referred to as junk dealers because of the fact that they wore the cast-offs of middle class families over their rural clothes, which Yasa viewed as an ugly look that threatened the modernist taste and aesthetic (ibid., p.11). According to the premises of the study, the gecekondu family had to integrate with city life in order not to threaten security in the urban environment, since gecekondu families who were in the middle of the process of transition caused social unease and insecurity in the city.
9. Tok, A Critical Approach to Gecekondu Studies, p.47.
10. See K. Görmez, Yerel Demokrasi ve Turkiye [Local Democracy and Turkey] (Istanbul: Vadi, 1997);
11. and M. Heper, Local Government in Turkey (London: Routledge, 1989).
12. There are two main religious sects in Islamic Turkey, Sunnism and Alevism. Sunnis constitute the majority of the population in Turkey. Alevism can be considered as the Shamanist interpretation of Islam, which mainly relies on oral cultural tradition. Sunnis are more conservative in their everyday practices compared to Alevis. Before the 1950s where Alevi and Sunni people lived in villages of their own, these identities although very di.erent did not lead to any con.ict between groups. However, after the 1950s, with the intense rural-to-urban migration, these identities came into close contact in gecekondu settlements constructed on the periphery of the cities. These close encounters turned into serious struggles in the 1970s where fights between leftists composed mainly of Alevi and rightists composed mainly of Sunni plunged the country into serious political turmoil.
13. See Yasa, 'Gecekondu Ailesi'; O. Türkdoǧan, Yoksulluk Kültürü [The Culture of Poverty] (Istanbul: Dede Korkut Yayinlari, 1977);
14. K. Kartal 'Kentlileş me Sürecinde Toplumsal Deǧis me Odaǧi Olarak Ankara' [Ankara as a Locus of Social Change in the Urbanization Process], in Türkiye Geliştirme Araştirmalari Vakfi (ed.), Kentsel Bütünles me [Urban Integration] (Ankara: Vakif Yayini, 1982).
15. Ç. Keyder, 'The Housing Market from Informal to Global', in Ç. Keyder (ed.), Istanbul: Between the Global and the Local (Lanham. MD: Rowman and Littlefield, 1999), pp.91-2.
16. See S. Erder, Umraniye: Istanbul'a Bir Kent Kondu [A City Disembarked to Istanbul Ümraniye] (Istanbul: Iletisim, 1996);
17. Kentsel Gerilim [Urban Tension] (Ankara: Um:ag, 1997);
18. O. Işik and Melih Pinarcioǧlu, Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk: Sultanbeyli Örneǧi [Poverty in Turn: Sultanbeyli Case] (Ankara: Iletişim, 2001).
19. Şenyapili, 'Cumhuriyet'in 75', p.312
20. Işik and Pinarcioǧlu, Nöbetleşe Yoksulluk, p.160.
21. Tok, A Critical Approach to Gecekondu, p.83.
22. A. Gunes-Ayata, 'Gecekondularda Kimlik Sorunu Dayanisma Oruntuleri ve Hemşehrilik' [Identity Problem, Solidarity and Hemşehrilik in Squatter Settlements], Toplum ve Bilim, Vol.51/52 (1990-91), pp.89-101.
23. Erder, Umraniye, p.36.
24. C. Keyder 'Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul', International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol.29, No.1 (2005), p.130.
25. Ibid., p.130.
26. Z. Etöz, 'Varoş: Bir Istila Bir Tehdit' [Varoş: An Invasion a Threat], Birikim, Vol.132 (2000), pp.49-53.
27. See the news in Hürriyet (Istanbul daily), 22 Jan. 1991, 18 May 1992, 6 Jan. 1995, 8 Aug. 1996
28. Cumhuriyet (Istanbul daily), 4 July 1991, 12 Feb. 1992, 15 Aug. 1996
29. Milliyet (Istanbul daily), 17 Feb. 1992, 24 April 1992.
30. See the news in Sabah (Istanbul daily), 28 Jan. 1997, 12 May 1997, 1 June 1997, 16 Sept. 1997, 2, 26 Nov. 1997, 29 Aug. 1998, 16 Sept. 1998, 1, 9, 27 April 1999, 17 Sept. 1999
31. Hürriyet, 13 Jan. 1999, 2 Feb. 1999, 26 May 1999
32. Milliyet, 14, 31 March 1999, 25 Nov. 1999.
33. Sabah, 1, 7, 20 Feb. 1994, 10 June 1992, 4 Nov. 1994
34. Milliyet, 24 Aug. 1993, 18 Feb. 1994, 13 Jan. 1994
35. Turkiye (Istanbul daily), 7 Feb. 1994, 15 March 1994, 15 Aug. 1996
36. Hürriyet, 15 Jan. 1994, 10 Feb. 1994, 3, 6 Aug. 1996
37. Cumhuriyet, 23 Feb. 1994, 15 Aug. 1996.
38. Cumhuriyet, 17 Feb. 1991.
39. Hürriyet, 8 Nov. 1995
40. Cumhuriyet, 29 Jan. 1994.
41. Turkiye, 3 Nov. 1994, 10 Aug. 1996.
42. Sabah, 30 April 1993, 10 Feb. 1994
43. Milliyet, 13 Jan. 1995, 26 May 1996
44. Cumhuriyet, 21 Sept. 1996.
45. Cumhuriyet, 18 Nov. 1992
46. Milliyet, 12 Aug. 1992.
47. Cumhuriyet, 17 Feb. 1991
48. Milliyet, 28 April 1992.
49. Milliyet, 23 May 1996.
50. Cumhuriyet, 29 Sept. 1991, 1 April 1994.
51. Cumhuriyet, 25 May 1994.
52. D. Sahin, 'Gazi Mahallesi Izlenimleri: Zorunlu Göçe ve Şiddete Baǧli Ruhsal Sorunlar' [The Impressions of Gazi Neighbourhood: Mental Disorders Related to Forced Migration and Violence], Ütopiya (2000), p.61.
53. Cemevi is the religious place of Alevi people.
54. Hürriyet, 15 March 1995
55. Sabah, 19 March 1995.
56. S. Işcan, in Aktuel (weekly Istanbul magazine), 16-22 March 1995.
57. See A. Insel editorial, Aktuel, 26 May 1994.
58. See editorials by A. Insel, Cumhuriyet, 19 March 1995
59. A. Kirca, Yeni Yuzyil, 14 March 1995.
60. See editoral by O. Ekinci, 'Illegal Kent: Sultanbeyli' [Illegal City: Sultanbeyli], Cumhuriyet, 28 Dec. 1993.
61. Ibid.
62. Tok, A Critical Approach to Gecekondu Studies, pp.81-3.
63. We borrow the phrase 'social spatialisation' from R. Shields, Places on the Margin: Alternative Geographies of Modernity (London and New York: Routledge, 1991), p.31. He uses the term to 'designate the ongoing social construction of the spatial at the level of the social imaginary (collective mythologies, presuppositions) as well as interventions in the landscape for example, the built environment'.
64. See editorials by M. Inceoǧlu, Yeni Yuzyil, 2 May 1996
65. Ş. Soner, Cumhuriyet, 2 May 1996
66. G. Göktürk, Yeni Yuzyil, 7 May 1996
67. A. Bayramoǧlu, Yeni Yuzyil, 2 May 1996.
68. S. Ayata, 'Varoşlar, Çatişma ve Şiddet', Görüş Dergisi, Vol.6 (1996), p.18.
69. See editoral by T. Akyol, Milliyet, 3 May 1996.
70. See editoral by A. Bayramoǧlu, Yeni Yuzyil, 2 May 1996.
71. Yeni Yuzyil, 3 May 1996.
72. I. Daǧi, 'Transformation of Islamic Political Identity in Turkey: Rethinking the West and Westernization', Turkish Studies, Vol.6, No.1 (2005), p.25.
73. I. Özler, 'Politics of the Gecekondu in Turkey: The Political Choices of Urban Squatters in National Elections', Turkish Studies, Vol.1, No.2 (2000), p.53.
74. M. Yalçintan and E. Erbas, 'Mekan ve Siyaset' [Space and Politics], Birikim, Vol.179 (2004), p.40.
75. What we refer to as urbanite particularly after the rise of political Islam is a 'loose group consisting of the radical bourgeoisie, state bureaucrats, the army, the urban middle classes, Kemalist intellectuals, the Second Republicans and some radical intellectuals', as quoted from M. Özbek, 'Arabesk Culture: A Case of Modernization and Popular Identity', in S. Bozdogan and R. Kasaba (eds.), Rethinking Modernity and National Identity in Turkey (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 1997), p.228. What mainly motivates the integration of this group is a common secular anxiety against political Islam.
76. Tarikat is a word of Arabic origin, which is defined as 'a method of moral psychology for the guidance of individuals directing their lives toward a knowledge of God' in The Encyclopedia of Religion, in Mircea Eliade (ed.) (New York: Macmillan, 1987).
77. F. Yaşli, 'AKP, Muhafazakar Demokrasi ve Yeni Saǧ' [JDP, Conservative Democracy and New Right], Birikim, Vol.180 (2004), p.43.
78. Welfare Party was banned by the decision of Constitutional Court in 1998 because of the accusation of becoming the centre of activities contrary to the principles of secularism.
79. Yaşli, 'AKP, Muhafazakar Demokrasi ve Yeni Sag', p.39.
80. Ibid., p.39.
81. See editorial by M. Yilmaz, Milliyet, 15 Aug. 2001.
82. See editorial by Ö.L. Mete, Sabah, 27 Nov. 2003.
83. Sabah, 6 Sept. 2004.
84. Keyder, 'Globalization and Social Exclusion in Istanbul', p.130.
85. Sabah, 1 Nov. 2003.
86. Zaman (Istanbul daily, Islamic in orientation), 27 Sept. 2005.
87. See editoral by M. Sabuncu, Milliyet, 22 Jan. 1999.
88. Hürriyet, 1 Aug. 2002.
89. Sabah, 9 Dec. 2004.
90. Zaman, 16 Feb. 2003.
91. See editorial by E. Katircioǧlu, Radikal, 24 April 2004.
92. Sabah, 30 Jan. 2005.
93. Hürriyet, 31 July 2002.
94. Etöz, 'Varoş: Bir Istila Bir Tehdit', p.51.
95. Therefore it mainly refers to the rural-to-urban migrants from the eastern and south-eastern parts of Turkey.
96. M. Kirikkanat, 'Halkimiz Eǧleniyor' [Our People are Enjoying], Radikal, 27 July 2005.
97. Baumann, Contesting Culture, p.21.
98. Baumann paraphrased the argument from P. Gilroy, 'The End of Racism' in J. Donald and A. Rattani (eds.) Race, Culture and Difference (London: Sage, 1992), p.53.
99. Baumann, Contesting Culture, p.21.
100. J. Perlman, The Myth of Marginality (Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976).
101. M. Çulhaoǧlu, 'Varoşlar ve Kent Yoksulluǧu' [Varoš and Urban Poverty], Sosyalist Politika, Vol.10 (1996), p.117.
102. Arabesk is a kind of hybrid music mixing Turkish classical and folk elements with those of the West and Egypt. It emerged at the end of 1960s and captured the passions of rural migrants living in gecekondu and described the entire migrant culture as paraphrased from Özbek, 'Arabesk Culture: A Case of Modernization and Popular Identity', p.211.
103. Ibid., p.220.
104. Ibid., p.227.
105. N. Dogru, Milliyet, 10 March 1999.
106. In opposition to this degrading usage there has recently appeared a new discourse that paves the way towards the affirmation of varoş culture. Varoş is used as a 'source of praise' by some influential people such as famous musicians who grew rich through popular culture. It can be accepted as a reaction to the class distinctions, which are, in the Turkish context, expressed mainly in cultural terms. See the discussion by J. White, 'The Islamist Paradox', in D. Kandiyoti and A. Saktanber (eds.), Fragments of Culture: The Everyday of Modern Turkey (London and New York: I.B. Tauris, 2002), pp.191-221. We should note that this new discourse is produced through the claim of being the voice of the 'urban other' in the cultural context rather than 'urban poor'.
107. Özbek, 'Arabesk Culture: A Case of Modernization and Popular Identity', p.228.