SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Amme İdaresi Dergisi / 2016 / Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 3

Importance of Space in Reproducing Administrative Legitimization

Meşruiyetin Yeniden Üretilmesinde Mekanın Önemi

BAYRAM ÜNAL
Pages
41–57
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

While the space has been discussed as an active state of subject and of object, we also want to highlight the space as a form of societal change itself meaning itself a culture, history and an ideology other than it has its' own culture, history and ideology

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Space is a conceptual issue without a consensus.
📊
Key Findings & Data:This issue is not only about the meaning of space, but also about the formation of space, further entailing the discussion on what the functions of space are.This paper focuses on the reproduction of dominant ideology and on the importance of hegemony in reproduction of social memory.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:While the space has been discussed as an active state of subject and of object, we also want to highlight the space as a form of societal change itself meaning itself a culture, history and an ideology other than it has its' own culture, history and ideology
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Space is a conceptual issue without a consensus. This issue is not only about the meaning of space, but also about the formation of space, further entailing the discussion on what the functions of space are.This paper focuses on the reproduction of dominant ideology and on the importance of hegemony in reproduction of social memory. While the space has been discussed as an active state of subject and of object, we also want to highlight the space as a form of societal change itself meaning itself a culture, history and an ideology other than it has its' own culture, history and ideology

Özet

Mekan, kavramsal olarak üzerinde anlaşılamayan bir sorun olarak karşımızda durmaktadır. Bu sorun sadece mekanın anlamı üzerine değil mekanın oluşumu üzerinedir de. Bu oluşum mekanın işlevlerinin ne olduğunun tartışılmasını zorunlu kılmaktadır.Çalışma mekan aracılığıyla egemen ideolojinin yeniden üretilmesine ve sosyal hafızanın bu yeniden üretiminde hegemonyanın önemine odaklanmaktadır. Bir yandan, mekana atfedilen pasif değerlerin yanı sıra mekanın aktif bir kültürel özne durumu olması tartışılırken, diğer yandan mekanın kendisinin toplumsal ve kültürel değişme anlamında bir oluş olduğunu da tartışmak istiyoruz. Bu aslında mekanın bir kültürünün, tarihinin veya ideolojisinin olduğunu iddia etmek yerine mekanın kendisinin bir kültür, tarih ve ideoloji olduğunun söylenmesidir aynı zamanda

🔖

Cite This Article

ÜNAL, B. (2016). Importance of Space in Reproducing Administrative Legitimization. Amme İdaresi Dergisi, Cilt: 49 - Sayı: 3, 41–57. https://ajindex.com/articles/148429

References (29)

  1. Althusser, L. (2003), İdeoloji ve Devletin İdeolojik Aygıtları, İthaki, Istanbul. Althusser, L. (2006),
  2. Felsefe, İthaki, Istanbul. Althusser, L. (2007),
  3. Kapitali Okumak, İthaki, Istanbul. Althusser, L. (2008),
  4. On İdeology, Verso, LondonNew York. Assmann, J. (2008), "Communicative and Cultural Memory", Erll, A. ve Nünning, A. (Ed.), Cultural Memory Studies. An International and Interdisciplinary Handbook, Berlin, New York, p. 109-118.
  5. Azaryahu, M. (1996), "The Power of Commemorative Street Names", Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, Vol. 14, p. 311- 330. Backhaus, G. ve Murungi, J. (2009),
  6. Symbolic Landscapes, Springer, New York. Bourdieu, P. (1989), "Social Space and Symbolic Power", Sociological Theory, Vol. 7, No: 1, p. 14-25.
  7. Bourdieu, P. (1992),
  8. An Invitation to Reflexive Sociology, University of Chicago Press,
  9. Chicago. Bourdieu, P. (1995), Sociology in Question (Translated By R. Nice), Sage Pub, London. Bozdogan, S. (2001),
  10. Modernism and Nation Building, University of Washington Press,
  11. Seattle. Braudel, F. (1980),
  12. On History, University of Chicago Press,
  13. Chicago. Castells, M. (1978),
  14. City, Class, and Power, Macmillan Press,
  15. London. Cosgrove, D.E. (1998), Social Formation and Symbolic Landscape, The University of Wisconsin Press,
  16. Wisconsin. Dandekar, H.C. (1998), "City Space + Globalization: An İnternational Perspective. Perspective", Proceedings From an International Symposium, College of Architecture and Urban Planning, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Durkheim, E. (1964),
  17. The Division of Labour in Society, Mcmillan, New York. Edensor, T. (1997 ), "National Identity and The Politics of Memory: Remembering Bruce and Wallace in Symbolic Space", Environment and Planning D: Society and Space, Vol. 15, p.175-194.
  18. Geuses, R. (2013),
  19. Eleştirel Teori, Ayrıntı Yayınları,
  20. İstanbul.
  21. Giddens, A. (1979), Central Problems in Social Theory: Action, Structure and Contradiction in Social Analysis, University of California Press,
  22. Berkeley. Goonewardena, K., Kipfer, S., Milgrom, R., ve Schmid, C. (2008),
  23. Space, Difference, Everyday Life: Reading Henri Lefebvre, Routledge, New York. Gramsci, A. (1971),
  24. Selection From the Prison Notebooks, Lawrence And Wishart, Londra. Halbwachs, M., Coser, L.A. (1992),
  25. On Collective Memory, University Of Chicago Press,
  26. Chicago. Harvey, D. (2003),
  27. Sosyal Adalet ve Şehir, Metis Yayınları,
  28. İstanbul.
  29. Hasol, D. (1987), "Kocatepe Camisi ve İlyas Bey Camisi", Yapı Dergisi, Cilt: 75. Ives, P. (2004), Language and Hegemony in Gram