John Berger’s Ways of Seeing  emphasizes that art serves as a bridge between history and the present, offering insights into the lived experiences of the past through visual representation. This dynamic relationship highlights how visual media encapsulates not only the creator's perspective but also the viewer's cultural and individual biases. Berger notes that the traditional authority of art has shifted in the age of mechanical reproduction. While reproduced images democratize access, they also dilute the uniqueness and perceived spiritual value of the original artwork. This transition reflects a societal shift from viewing art as an elite medium to integrating it into everyday life. Advertising, on the other hand, distills complex human experiences into material desires. It uses visual imagery not to elevate but to manipulate, perpetuating the notion that happiness stems from ownership. This stands in stark contrast to the role of art, which traditionally sought to connect individuals to broader human experiences or historical truths. Furthermore, Berger’s analysis of context and perception challenges the assumption of art’s timelessness. He argues that the meaning of images evolves with technological and cultural changes, demonstrating how our understanding of art is shaped by its context.

Adolf Loos argued that ornamentation represents a primitive stage of cultural development, unnecessary for modern humans. Loos saw it as a wasteful practice, squandering labor, time, and materials without adding meaningful value. To illustrate this cultural shift, Loos provided a striking example: “Mankind had reached the point where ornament was no longer a source of pleasure, where a tattooed face, instead of increasing people’s aesthetic pleasure as it does for the Papuans, diminished pleasure. People had reached the point where they liked a plain cigarette case, while they would not buy a decorated one, even if the price was the same.” This observation underscores the modern preference for simplicity and functionality over superfluous decoration, reflecting a broader cultural transformation. Loos's philosophy had a profound influence on modernist architecture, promoting austerity and functionalism as central tenets. However, it is essential to consider opposing viewpoints. Historical architecture demonstrates that ornament often serves as a narrative or symbolic expression, connecting structures to their era and culture.

As an architecture student, I spend most of my time in the studio, and honestly, studio work is what makes architecture education feel so unique. Thanks to a Handbook  we were asked to read in a few of our classes, I learned early on why the studio is such an essential part of our education. I’d like to share some of the things I’ve learned and a few of my experiences with you. The studio is not just a place where we design and work independently; it’s also where we collaborate with our peers, push our limits, challenge our creativity, and learn to think like architects. The architecture studio is where we transform ideas into reality. It’s where we dive into projects, from the first sketch to the final presentation. Unlike a regular classroom, there are no strict lectures or textbooks—it's all about hands-on work, getting your hands dirty with models, drawings, and digital designs. This is where we practice what we learn in theory, where we experiment, fail, and learn from it. It's a back-and-forth process. The studio environment is where we really feel we grow as designers, learning both the technical and creative sides of architecture. Nobody can learn architecture by just reading books or watching videos. The studio is where we apply everything we’ve been taught. We learn through doing physical models and creating relationships and organizations; we try to observe what is wrong and what is true. Of course,even in our lives we need to learn how to communicate. We have to defend our ideas, and that’s where communication becomes more importent for us.Every time we present our designs or get feedback, we’re forced to think critically about our choices. Why did we choose that material? Why is this form important? Whether it’s presenting our work or discussing it with classmates, we’re constantly practicing how to communicate our ideas effectively, which is key in architecture. The studio environment encourages us to think outside the box. It’s not just about following standard rules; it’s about creating something unique, pushing boundaries, and coming up with new ways to solve design problems. In the studio, we’re encouraged to be bold with our ideas and take risks. This is where our creative potential really shines. Architecture isn’t a solo profession. In the studio, we often work in groups, discussing ideas, sharing resources, and learning from each other. Collaboration is such an important part of the field, and the studio is the perfect place to develop those teamwork skills. It’s where we understand the value of different perspectives and how to combine them into a cohesive design. There’s a lot of trial and error, and deadlines are tight. In the studio, we learn how to balance all the tasks, manage our time, and stay organized throughout the entire process. From researching to sketching to finalizing models, we quickly realize that time management is everything in architecture. The studio isn’t just a place to work—it’s where we grow as designers and future architects. It teaches us how to apply our knowledge, how to think critically, how to communicate our ideas, and how to collaborate with others. Most importantly, it pushes us to be creative, take risks, and experiment without fear of failure. For me, the studio is the most exciting part of architecture school. It’s where the learning happens, and where we get to shape our own ideas and visions.

In architecture, the importance of taking proper photos lies in accurately capturing the design and details of the structure. Photography serves as a powerful tool for communicating architectural projects, and well-shot images effectively showcase proportions, light use, and material characteristics. A good composition clearly highlights the aesthetic and functional aspects of the building. Additionally, choosing the right angles and perspectives helps present the overall appearance of the structure more clearly. Architectural photography plays both an artistic and informative role. Designed by Emre Bolat, the Ankara Chamber Theatre is a prime example of modern architecture, serving as a cornerstone of the city's artistic and cultural heritage. This theatre reflects a philosophy of simplicity and functionality with its intimate and inviting atmosphere. The meticulous attention paid to acoustics in this theatre ensures that the sound experience is as impactful as the architecture itself, creating an intimate and immersive experience between the stage and the audience, forging a seamless connection. This building, with its minimalist approach, harmonizes with its surroundings while also serving as a vibrant cultural hub in the community. Designed by Şevki Vanlı in 1980, the Ankara State Opera and Ballet is an architectural landmark that stands out as a significant cultural center in the city. It is a structure with geometric forms that successfully combines concrete, glass, and metal. The building is acoustically designed for large-scale performances and features a grand main hall with a capacity of over 1000. Over the years, it has hosted national and international opera, ballet, and other classical art performances. This building enriches the city's cultural treasure by serving as a symbol of Ankara's unwavering commitment to culture and art and by providing a platform for artistic expression. The headquarters building of Türkiye İş Bankası in Ankara was designed by architect Vedat Tek in the early years of the Republic of Turkey. It was completed between 1929 and 1931 and is an important example of early modern architecture. The design features a symmetrical layout. Located on Kocatepe Avenue, the building's grandeur symbolizes both the architectural progress of the period and the importance of the İş Bankası, and is a central symbol of Ankara. Today, the building is still used as the headquarters of İş Bankası.

This course is incredibly engaging because it emphasizes the meanings of words and how crucial it is to use them correctly, especially in the field of architecture. In architecture, precise terminology is vital for clear communication. It allows architects, designers, and clients to share ideas, concepts, and visions effectively. By understanding the meanings of words, we can avoid confusion and ensure that our discussions are based on a solid foundation of shared knowledge. One of the key skills we learn in this course is how to make meaningful comparisons, whether it's between two paintings, buildings, or architectural styles. For example, when comparing two buildings, it’s not just about their size or aesthetic appeal; it’s about understanding and describing their form, function, materials, and historical context. The correct terms help in communicating these complex ideas clearly. Learning the right terminology also helps in creating constructive discussions. Whether in a classroom, a professional setting, or a design critique, using the appropriate language is crucial for engaging in productive dialogue. For instance, terms like “modernist,” “brutalism,” or “postmodernism” convey specific architectural movements and their underlying philosophies. Using such terms accurately allows us to dive deeper into discussions, leading to better insights and a more meaningful exchange of ideas. In essence, this course is important because it goes beyond simply teaching vocabulary; it teaches us how to communicate thoughtfully and purposefully. The ability to use the right words in architecture not only enhances our understanding of the built environment but also allows us to participate more effectively in shaping it. This is a valuable skill, both in academic and professional settings.

After becoming somewhat more accustomed to the relationships between the plans, our instructors must have decided that it was time for us to start exploring linear elements. This time, we tried to discover relationships and references using five squares and two linear elements in two different dimensions. When I realized that I hadn’t fully utilized the potential of the plans at the corners in my initial attempt, I created a model where I aimed to establish relationships between all the elements without creating any corners. Later on, we transitioned from squares to rectangles at a 1/3 ratio and tried to position the linear elements in reference to the rectangles, aiming to create a three-dimensional structure. Afterward, they asked us to create a structure with more elements to use the linear elements more effectively. Of course, they also wanted us to continue applying the references and relationships we had previously learned. Subsequently, we combined everything we had done so far and attempted to create a three-dimensional structure using squares, rectangles, and linear elements, with the dimensions determined by our own arrangement.

Although I had visited METU many times before, this time, the different perspective I learned about led me to view it from a completely different angle. I really enjoyed noticing the raw materials and how the design elements were placed. Our small but very exhausting tour mainly focused on the Faculty of Architecture, the Faculty of Physics, and the library area. Being able to notice the hinges and thresholds integrated into the buildings, observing the repetition of different elements, and beginning to understand why certain things were designed in certain ways truly felt amazing. At the same time, we drew the buildings around us and some of their parts in our notebooks, using the techniques we learned in class.

At the beginning of this course, where we tried to learn the fundamental rules of design through trial and error, we started by combining the ready-made pieces we had to understand certain principles. We were surprised to see how the same pieces could create very different forms. Additionally, we combined our pieces with those of our classmates to create larger and more complex structures. Finally, we used parts of these structures to build something even bigger, trying to grasp the concept of 'base.' Throughout this process, we observed how these planes connected and how they formed different relationships. Afterward, as two people, we tried to analyze the relationships between a total of 23 plans across four different templates on a broader scale.

We could all guess that the Architectural Communication Techniques course would be related to drawing techniques. However, I never expected it to be this abstract, nor did I realize how challenging abstract thinking could be. Creating a visual composition by drawing straight lines with different intensities and angles was so enjoyable."First, we practiced drawing these straight lines at school. Then, using this technique, we tried to abstract boxes and some important buildings. I especially loved this photo of Atakule and wanted to recreate it using this technique.