Share:


Critical discourse analysis (CDA) of the 16th Venice Architecture Biennale manifesto

Abstract

The Venice Architecture Biennale emerged with post-modern thought in the late 1970s and early 1980s. It is a medium where political, economic and cultural transformations are experienced in the field of architecture and where mainstream global architecture is discussed and shared. Over time, the Venice Architecture Biennale has created a global focal point with the manifestos produced, while bringing together the architectural products and ideas in the ambiguity of the boundaries of local architecture. Biennial manifestos have an ideological structure that is oriented towards social relations in the field of architecture. Looking at the recent Venice Architecture Biennale, it can be said that knowledge production is at the forefront in discourses and products which develops critical thinking. In this context, the study deals with the manifesto1 of the 16th Venice Architecture Biennale. The 2018’s manifesto which was produced within the scope of the biennial; the curator’s ideology is worth examining because of its subjective and objective judgments. For this reason, Norman Fairclough’s critical discourse analysis (CDA) was used in the study to make a critical reading of the biennial manifestos. By using the characteristics of CDA, findings and conclusions were reached in the topics of ideology, interpretation and consistency of the discourse. Due to the nature of the analysis, the findings and conclusions have revealed a new discourse that is controversial in this field.

Keyword : Venice Architecture Biennale, discourse, critical discourse analysis, architecture, ideology

How to Cite
Topaloğlu, G., & Beşgen, A. (2023). Critical discourse analysis (CDA) of the 16th Venice Architecture Biennale manifesto. Journal of Architecture and Urbanism, 47(2), 106–113. https://doi.org/10.3846/jau.2023.18754
Published in Issue
Sep 11, 2023
Abstract Views
438
PDF Downloads
492
Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

References

Adorno, T. W. (2014). Kültür endüstrisi kültür yönetimi. İletişim Yayınları.

Bava, A. (2018, May). This is not an exhibition. https://www.e-flux.com/architecture/positions/202487/this-is-not-an-exhibition/

Binat, B. (2018). 16. Venedik Mimarlık Bienali’nden notlar. Arredamento Mimarlık, 322, 58.

Büyükkantarcıoğlu, S. N. (2012). Söylem incelemelerinde eleştirel dilbilimsel boyut: eleştirel söylem çözümlemesi ve ötesi. In Ö. Özer (Ed.), Haberi Eleştirmek. Literatürk Yatıncılık.

Çalışlar, H. (2018). 16. Venedik Mimarlık Bienali’nden notlar. Arredamento Mimarlık, 322, 59.

Çiçek, A. (2018, Temmuz-Ağustos). Sergileri gözetmek: venedik mimarlık bienali üzerine notlar. XXI Mimarlık Tasarım ve Mekan Dergisi. https://xxi.com.tr/i/sergileri-gozetmek-16-venedik-mimarlik-bienali-uzerine-notlar

Desiderio, A. (2013). Branding Stratford: Social representation and the re-making of place. Architecture_MPS, 2(3), 1–16. https://doi.org/10.14324/111.444.amps.2013v2i3.001

Dilekci, D. (2018). 16. Venedik Mimarlık Bienali’nden notlar. Arredamento Mimarlık, 322, 61.

Ebadi, H., Goudini, J., & Mohamadzadeh Goudini, Y. (2022). The role of architecture in the hegemony of urban discourse over rural discourse in Persian Poetic literature. The Monthly Scientific Journal of Bagh-e Nazar, 19(114), 17–26.

Ertaş, H. (2018, Temmuz-Ağustos). Sıkıntı yok! XXI Mimarlık Tasarım ve Mekan Dergisi. https://xxi.com.tr/i/sikinti-yok

Erzen, J. N. (2018). Bienalde özgür mekânlar. Mimarlık Dergisi, 404, 29–33.

Fairclough, N. (1989). Language and power. Longman Inc.

Fairclough, N., & Wodak, R. (1998). Critical discourse analysis, discourse as social interaction, discourse. In T. A. Van Dijk (Ed.), Studies: A multidisciplinary introduction. Sage.

Farrell, Y., & McNamara, S. (2018). Manifesto by Yvonne Farrell Shelley McNamara Freespace. https://www.labiennale.org/en/architecture/2018/introduction-yvonne-farrell-and-shelley-mcnamara

Glesne, C. (2010). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.). Pearson.

Graça, J. A. (2018, Temmuz-Ağustos). Mimarlık bienali nedir? XXI Mimarlık Tasarım ve Mekan Dergisi. https://xxi.com.tr/i/mimarlik-bienali-nedir

Gür, T. (2013). Post-modern bir araştırma yöntemi olarak söylem çözümlemesi. Journal of World of Turks, 5(1), 185–202.

Gürpınar, A. (2018). 16. Venedik Mimarlık Bienali’nden notlar. Arredamento Mimarlık, 322, 65–66.

Jupp, V. (1996). Documents and critical research. In R. Sapsford & V. Jupp (Eds.), Data collection and analysis (pp. 289–316). Sage.

Kats, A. (2018). How (not) to design a biennale: Is freespace free? https://www.archdaily.com/901304/how-not-to-design-a-biennale-is-freespace-free

Madra, B. (1999). Yeni Venedik Bienali. Arredamento Mimarlık, 100, 109–116.

Moore, R. (2018, May 27). Venice architecture biennale 2018: A joyous treasure trove. https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/may/27/venice-architecture-biennale-2018-review-mcnamara-farrell-grafton-architects

Narin, B. (2013). Yapısalcılık vs postyapısalcılık. Modern Fetva Makamı. https://bilgenarin.blogspot.com/2013/07/

Özkan, S. (2018). 16. Venedik Mimarlık Bienali’nden notlar. Arredamento Mimarlık, 322, 72.

Piciocchi, A. (2018, May 23). Venice Biennale, a guide. https://www.abitare.it/en/events/2018/05/23/guide-to-16-venice-architecture-biennale-2018/

Potter, W. J. (1996). An analysis of thinking and research about qualitative methods. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Ricoeur, P. (1971). The model of the text: Meaningful action considered as a text. Social Research Journal, 38, 529–562.

Schumacher, P. (2018, May 29). Architects must reclaim Venice Architecture Biennale from “arrogant” curators, says Patrik Schumacher. https://www.dezeen.com/2018/05/29/patrik-schumacher-venice-architecture-biennale-2018-attack-national-pavilions/

Sönmez, N. O. (2018). 16. Venedik Mimarlık Bienali’nden notlar. Arredamento Mimarlık, 322, 79.

Tavangar, M. R., & Habibi, M. (2022). Applications of the critical analysis of discourse in urban research. Soffeh, 32(2), 89–104. https://doi.org/10.52547/sofeh.32.2.89

Tezcan, E. (2018, Temmuz-Ağustos). Mekanın potansiyeline dair arayışlar. XXI Mimarlık Tasarım ve Mekan Dergisi. https://xxi.com.tr/i/mekanin-potansiyeline-dair-arayislar

The Hyatt Foundatıon. (2020). 2020 Pritzker Architecture Prize Media Kit. https://www.pritzkerprize.com/sites/default/files/inline-files/2020PritzkerPrize_MediaKit_4.pdf

Wainwright, O. (2018, May 24). Venice Architecture Biennale review – Take a seat for the “bench biennale”. https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2018/may/24/venice-architecture-biennale-grafton-yvonne-farrell-shelley-mcnamara

Wilkinson, T. (2018, May). Grafton’s Venice Biennale 2018: Freespace remains a nebulous concept. https://www.architectural-review.com/places/europe/venice-biennale/graftons-venice-biennale-2018-freespace-remains-a-nebulous-concept/10031670.article

Wodak, R. (Ed.). (1997). Gender and discourse. Sage Publications. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446250204

Wu, C. (2009). Biennials without borders. New Left Review, 57, 107–115.

Yacobi, H. (2004). Form follows metaphors: A critical discourse analysis of the construction of the Israeli Supreme Court building in Jerusalem. The Journal of Architecture, 9(2), 219–239. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360236042000230215