SavedAdd your journal

Journals / MSGSÜ Sosyal Bilimler / 2026 / Sayı: 17

Sonic Etiquette: Domestication of Acoustic Neighbourhood Relations in Istanbul1

Sessel Etiket: İstanbul’daki Akustik Komşuluk İlişkilerinin Ehlileştirilmesi

Meri Kytö(Faculty of Communication Sciences, University of Tampere)
Pages
164–181
Publication Date
2018-04-01
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)

The study emphasizes how the acoustic neighbor relations are defined by routines, expectations, and predictabilities involving spatial segregation and strategic intimacy

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:This article examines the dynamics of private and communal soundscapes in the Çengelköy neighborhood of Istanbul.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The study provides a sonic ethnography of the middle-class housing cooperative Ata-2, focusing on how the inhabitants operate as an acoustic community and the types of articulations that this community is made up of.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:The study emphasizes how the acoustic neighbor relations are defined by routines, expectations, and predictabilities involving spatial segregation and strategic intimacy
🔬Design:Makale
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Ses Ortamı · Siteler · Mahremiyet

Abstract

This article examines the dynamics of private and communal soundscapes in the Çengelköy neighborhood of Istanbul. The study provides a sonic ethnography of the middle-class housing cooperative Ata-2, focusing on how the inhabitants operate as an acoustic community and the types of articulations that this community is made up of. The study asks, how do people living in the housing cooperative form a sonic etiquette of their domesticated soundscape and how acoustic orderliness is maintained? The study emphasizes how the acoustic neighbor relations are defined by routines, expectations, and predictabilities involving spatial segregation and strategic intimacy

Özet

Bu makale İstanbul'un Çengelköy semtindeki kişisel ve toplumsal ses ortamın dinamiklerini incelemektedir. Araştırma Ata-2 sitesindeki orta sınıf yaşamının sessel bir etnografisini sunarken, site sakinlerinin bir akustik topluluk olarak nasıl davrandıklarına ve bu topluluğu meydana getiren ilişki biçimlerine odaklanır. Çalışma, bir sitede ikamet eden insanların içinde yaşadıkları ortama özgü soundscapeler ile ilgili sessel etiketi nasıl oluşturduklarını ve akustik düzenin nasıl sağlandığını sormaktadır. Çalışmada akustik komşuluk ilişkilerinin, mekânsal ayrım ve stratejik mahremiyet içeren rutinler, beklentiler ve öngörülebilirlikler çerçevesinde nasıl tanımlandığı vurgulanmaktadır

🔖

Cite This Article

Kytö, M. (2018). Sonic Etiquette: Domestication of Acoustic Neighbourhood Relations in Istanbul1. MSGSÜ Sosyal Bilimler, Sayı: 17, 164–181. https://ajindex.com/articles/1529842

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (45)

  1. Interviews Interview (2010). Istanbul, 17 May 2010. An Group Interview Of Three Ata-2 Housing Coopera
  2. tive Boards Members And One Member. Interviewer: Author. Recording in The Possession Of The Author.
  3. Recordings and Field Diaries Field Diaries 2 April – 6 June 2010, In The Possession of the Author. Field Recordings 2 April – 6 June 2010, In The Possession of the Author. Archives Complaints (2000–2008). Written Complaints Addressed to Ata-2 Housing Cooperative Du
  4. ring 2000–2008. The Archives Of Ata-2 Housing Cooperative, Istanbul. Web Sources Apartman Yönetim Planı (2011). Retrieved From Http://www.Ata2.Biz/Icerik/8-Apartman- Yonetim-Plani.Html.
  5. Konut Planları (2017). Retrieved From Http://www.Ata2yasam.Com/Yonetim/Site/Konutb02. Jpg. Kroki (2017). Ata 2 Ground Plan. Retrieved From Http://www.Ata2.Org/Aapage1.Aspx.
  6. Zaman (28.11.2007). Kentsel Dönüşüm Gecekonduculara Takıldı. Retrieved From Http://www.
  7. Haber3.Com/Kentsel-Donusum-Gecekonduculara-Takildi-308334h.Htm. Literature Akıncı, F. (2004). The Aftermath of Disaster in Urban Areas: An Evaluation Of The 1999 Eart
  8. hquake In Turkey. Cities, Vol. 21, No. 6, 527–536.
  9. Anderson, L. (2006). Analytic Autoethnography. Journal of Contemporary Ethnography 35(4): 373–395.
  10. Ayata, S. (2002). The New Middle Class and The Joys of Suburbia. In Fragments of Culture. The
  11. Everyday of Modern Turkey. Eds. Deniz Kandiyoti & Ayşe Saktanber. London: Tauris.
  12. Bartu, A. C.and Kolluoğlu B. (2008). Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: A Gated Town And A
  13. Public Housing Project In Istanbul. New Prespectives on Turkey 39/2008, 5–46.
  14. Bozdoğan, S. (2001). Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in The
  15. Early Republic. Washington, D.C.: University of Washington Press. BTS (2011). Türk Dil Kurumu Büyük Türkçe Sözlük. Retrieved From Http://Tdkterim.Gov.Tr/Bts.
  16. Çarkoğlu, A. and Toprak, B. (2006). Değişen Türkiye’de Din, Toplum ve Siyaset. Istanbul: TE- SEV. Feld, S. (1994). From Ethnomusicology to Echo-Muse-Ecology: Reading R. Murray Schafer In
  17. The Papua New Guinea Rainforest. The Soundscape Newsletter 8.
  18. Feld, S. (2003). Rainforest Acoustemology. In The Auditory Culture Reader. Eds. Michael Bull
  19. & Les Back. Oxford & New York: Berg. Göle, N. (2011/1991). Modern Mahrem: Medeniyet ve Örtünme. Istanbul: Metis.
  20. Habermas, J. (2004/1990). Julkisuuden Rakennemuutos. Tutkimus Yhdestä Kansalaisyhteis
  21. kunnan Kategoriasta. Tampere: Vastapaino. Hall, S. (1999). Identiteetti. Vastapaino, Tampere.
  22. Kytö, M. (2010). Kerrostalokodin Akustemologiaa – Yksityisen Äänitilan Rakentuminen. Elo
  23. re 1/2010, 41–59. Kytö, M. (2011). ‘We Are the Rebellious Voice Of The Terraces, We Are Çarşı’: Constructing A
  24. Football Supporter Group Through Sound. Soccer & Society, 12:1, 77–93.
  25. Lefebvre, H. (2004/1992). Rhythmanalysis. Space, Time and Everyday Life. Trans. Stuart Elden
  26. & Gerald Moore. London & New York: Continuum. Massey, D. (2005). For Space. London: Sage.
  27. Mcpherson, E. (2011). Political History and Embodied Identity. Discourse in The Turkish Call
  28. To Prayer. Music and Politics, Vol 5, No 1, Winter 2011, 1–20. Nippert-Eng, C. (2010). Islands of Privacy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Keyder, Ç. (1997). Whither The Project of Modernity? Turkey in The 1990s. In Rethinking Mo
  29. dernity And National Identity In Turkey. Eds. Sibel Bozdoğan & Reşat Kasaba. Seattle: University
  30. Of Washington Press, 37–51. Lehtonen, H. (1990). Yhteisö. Tampere: Vastapaino. Pink, S. (2009). Doing Sensory Ethnography. London: Sage. Räikkä, J. (2007). Yksityisyyden Filosofia. Helsinki: WSOY. Schafer, R.M. (1994/1977). The Soundscape. Our Sonic Environment And The Tuning Of The
  31. World. Vermont: Destiny Books.
  32. Simonsen, K. (2004). Spatiality, Temporality and The Construction of The City. In Space Ody
  33. sseys – Spatiality and Social Relations In The 21st Century. Eds. Jorgen Ole Baerenholdt & Kirsten
  34. Simonsen. Aldershot: Ashgate, 43–61.
  35. Toprak, B. and et. al, (2009). Being Different in Turkey. Religion, Conservatism and Otheriza
  36. tion. Research Report On Neighbourhood Pressure. Istanbul: Boğazici University, Open Society Foundation. Truax, B. (2001). Acoustic Communication 2nd Edition. Westport, CT: Ablex.
  37. Truax, B. (2009). Introduction to Five Village Soundscapes (1977). In Acoustic Environments In
  38. Change & Five Village Soundscapes. Eds. Helmi Järviluoma, Meri Kytö, Barry Truax, Heikki Uimo
  39. nen Of Noora Vikman. Tampere & Joensuu: TAMK University of Applied Sciences & University of
  40. Joensuu, 286–289. Uimonen, H. (2005). Ääntä Kohti. Ääniympäristön Kuuntelu, Muutos Ja Merkitys. Tampere
  41. Vikman, N. (2007). Eletty Ääniympäristö. Pohjoisitalialaisen Cembran Kylän Kuulokulmat Mu utoksessa. Tampere: University of Tampere.
  42. Öncü, A. (1999). Istanbullites and Others: The Cultural Cosmology of Being Middle Class In
  43. The Era of Globalism. In Istanbul Between the Global and The Local. Ed. Çağlar Keyder. New York
  44. Rowman Littelfield. Öztürk, G. (2010). Modern Insanin Yeni Kalesi: Siteler. TOKI Haber 3/2010, 48–52.
  45. Özyeğin, G. (2002). The Doorkeeper, The Maid and The Tenant: Troubling Encounters in The Turkish Urban Landscape. In Fragments of Culture. The Everyday of Modern Turkey. Eds. Deniz Kandiyoti & Ayşe Saktanber. London: Tauris.