Perched over Taksim is a gym whose panoramic glazing is lined with treadmills seeking a view. Below is the public square will all its noise, anger and intention. The absurdity of both activities happening simultaneously yet in total programmatic, ideological and atmospheric isolation illustrates the complexity and contradiction of contemporary urban living. Can treadmillers be considered participants by any stretch of the term?

thin-space perspectives appear both up and down simultaneously. here they are mentally rearranged.

students of ITU informed their guest collaborators not to go to “kizilkayalar” because they attacked protestors. Tourists, like myself, may have gone there unknowingly and supported it. This is one example of how the tourist is may not be considered a legitamate “participant” in agonistic practices. this also illustrates how boycotting a non-state entity can become a piece of the ‘participation puzzle’. Read through Habernas, a single shop, like the state, works to negatively defines the “public sphere”.

while dangerous and politically and legally complex, the pure energy of public participation leading into Taksim Sq infects everyone including tourists and kids. Could this already be counted as part of the success of a public space? If so, can it help make a case for the more flight by more conscious users?