Rethinking Architecture and Urban Form in the Context of Power Discourse: Case Study Nicosia,North Cyprus

Abstract

This study investigates the symbolic attributes of power relations within the built environment of the walled city of Nicosia and contributes to the interpretation of generated meaning. The fundamental aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive explanation and description of how power as a socially constructed phenomenon aids in defining the language of the city and architecture. Studies of the built environment in relation to power discourse are a continuous process, and due to the subjectivity of interpretations, this study adopted the epistemological stance of constructivism. Based on deductive reasoning, this study hypothesises that power aids in defining the language and imageability of the city, and the results have verified the propositions. The case study of this research was diachronically analysed and focused on the socially-constructed symbolic meaning generation, within the framework of interpretivism. In order to analyse the city, a conceptual approach was developed. Two main approaches that support the research hypothesis were established: the language of the city; and imageability of the city. The imageability of the city was based on the five elements of the city, published in 1960. However, due to the context of this research, three of the elements that fully supported the research aim and objectives were selected, namely, landmark, district and path. The two main conceptual approaches were tied to power relations within the built environment based on the theoretical frameworks of: Markus; Dovey; and Njoh. In conclusion, the walled city of Nicosia exhibits symbols of ‘power over’ such as segregation, seduction, manipulation, and authority. The results have verified the proposition that power aids in defining the language and imageability of a city, thereby transforming the city and its inhabitants.

Keywords

Urban semiotics language imageability power discourse Nicosia

Introduction

By using the walled city of Nicosia’s built environment as a case study, the objective of this research is to identify how power as a discourse enters and shapes the built environment, through the analysis of the elements of power within the built environment at both architectural and urban scales. This research should assist in providing an understanding of how power discourse aids in defining the language of the built environment. Within the built environment, humans are articulated to subconsciously acknowledge anomalous information and respond to novelty. Such spontaneous response embraces generation of emotions (e.g., fear and curiosity), transferability of attention, and behavioural compulsion (Crowell, 2001). It mainly drives learning, specifically that of appropriate behaviour (Peterson, 1999). In the Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief, Peterson (1999) expresses that the world can validly be interpreted as a place of actions and signs. The world as a centre for actions is a place of significance assessment of what is real and perceptible, a place where all things have meaning (Jaworski and Thurlow, 2010). This meaning, which is moulded by social communication, insinuates activity, or at a more elevated level, the configuration of the interpretive outline of what produces the activity (Jaworski and Thurlow, 2010). This communication and generation of meaning takes place within social settings or society. Dovey (2009) describes society as an ordered structure of roles that are demarcated through institutions such as marriage, schools, government, etc. Based on symbolic associations, our activities and movements within a society presume a systematic organisation of the environment (Jackendoff, 1996). The more complex and differentiated an environment becomes, the more symbol systems are needed for understanding the environment and effective communication. The study of signs and symbols and their interpretation is termed as semiotics (Barthes, 1967). Within the built environment, semiotics is fundamentally concerned with the generation of meaning in addition to how those generated meanings are communicated (Barthes, 1967; Hjelmslev, 1943).

In semiotics, a text is defined as a system of signs which generates meaning by establishing syntagmatic/paradigmatic and diachronic/synchronic associations (Barthes, 1967; Hjelmslev, 1943). Signs of identity, memory, narratives, social, political, economic, and artistic consumption unify as an integral discourse in cities. Cities are persistently shaped and transformed by media language and text that contribute to define and redefine the city identity of urban space. In semiotics, cities are plural texts that are subject to various readings and practices. Space is confronted, recognised, interpreted, and with profound narrative logic, meticulously connected with social and subjective actions. In a complicated and convoluted semiotic reading of urban space, every form of space elaborates and defines relatively codified narrative paradigms of its use (Greimas et al., 1982). In this manner, perception plays a vital role in the acknowledgement of the built environment. Jackendoff (1996) expresses that visibility is an essential eminence of space, and subsequently, essential to the overall understanding of the built environment. Donougho (1987) notes that space expresses its intended and unintended meanings, yet the meaning is socially constructed and context bound.

Constructivists argue that knowledge is socially constructed, and yet distinct meanings are moulded by the intent of their users. Additionally, they note that the world is constituted of lived reality and certain situational meanings that form the overall object of exploration that is constructed by social actors (Fox, 2001; Martin, 2012; Schwandt, 1994). This research argues that power, as a socially constructed discourse, aids in defining the spatial organisation and morphological structure of a city, and in turn, its imageability and language.

Theoretical framework

The walled city of Nicosia was adopted as the case study of this research. The built environment of the walled city of Nicosia will be analysed based on power discourse at both architectural and urban scale and provide meaning and interpretation of connoted signs and symbols. Cities have been studied from different perspectives; the meaning and representation of the city have often played a major role in understanding the city. Possessing such a strong link between cities and semiotics would give a pivotal role in semiotic studies, which can be used as appropriate concepts that critically explain the character of the built environment.

Built environment and sign processes

Semiotics is fundamentally concerned with the generation of meaning and how that meaning is communicated. It is the study of existing, conventional communication systems. According to Greimas et al. (1982), the main aim of semiology is to examine any system of signs, regardless of their substance and limits; objects, sounds, gestures, images, and the compound relationship of all these develop the content that eventually forms a system of signs, signification, or language. According to de Saussure (2011), semiotics is not a function of the speaker. In this context, he was referring to human language. Rather, semiotics is a product that is passively assimilated by the individual (Hodge, 2014). Barthes expressed that an individual cannot handle speech except by drawing on language (Barthes, 1988). Consequently, working at the outset on a non-linguistic element, semiology needs a language not as a model but as a component and metapragmatic (Spitzmüller, 2015).

On the other hand, urban semiotics solely depends on material objects within the built environment which include streets, buildings, parks, etc., and the immaterial socio-cultural products in relation to a particular discourse. Eco (1972) and Sani et al. (2015) express that architecture or architectural objects are designed for functionality while semiotics is primarily concerned with communication. Eco (1972) defines semiotics as a science that studies all socio-cultural phenomena. Jakobson (1960) defines three functions for linguistic signs: (a) ‘expressive’, enabling the message producer to express his emotive states and attitudes; (b) ‘conative’, persuading the message receiver to perform a specific action or behaviour; and (c) ‘phatic’, establishing interpersonal communication. Therefore, to generate meaning from the city through semiotics, some urban landscapes and dimensions can be decoded using the Jakobson model. In this context, citizens can be regarded as authors of the text of a city, who translate and interpret subjective meaning and identity and the translation in the same way with the linguistic being decoded by the use of Jacobson’s conceptual model. Jakobson (1960) refers to this kind of decoding as ‘intersemiosis translation’ which means the interpretation of verbal signs through non-verbal signs, and vice versa. This kind of interpretation is characterised as dialectical and subjective due to its dynamism, and it is related to the discourse of the city. Phatic signs, in relation to identity, serve as an incentive for social interaction. They are indicators that establish the identity of a particular urban form. Similarly, Barthes expresses that an individual cannot handle speech except by drawing on language (Barthes, 1967). Consequently, working at the outset on non-linguistic elements, semiology needs a language not as a model but also as a component or a signal (de Saussure, 2011).

According to Barthes (1986), the city is a discourse and this discourse is truly a language: the city speaks to its inhabitants, we speak our city, the city where we are, simply by living in it, by wandering through it, by looking at it. Nevertheless, the problem is to bring an expression such as ‘the language of the city’ out of the purely metaphorical stage. The real scientific leap will be realised when we speak of a language of the city without metaphor. Accordingly, readings of the city should be multiplied instead of multiplying the surveys or the functional studies of the city. Furthermore, in contemporary semiotics, Eco (1972, 1976, 1986) developed one of the most important theories of signs. Eco (1972) describes semiotics as a science concerned with everything that can be taken as a sign. Eco (1972) finds the relationship between architecture (in a broad sense indicating industrial design, urban design and architecture) and semiotics challenging. The particular challenge in relating architecture and semiotics is that most architectural objects should function and not communicate. Eco (1972) notes that architecture is most challenged if semiotics is considered a science that studies all cultural phenomena as if they were systems of signs.

Within the built environment, every building is designed and built to visualise a mental image through its form, mass, scale, or proportion. Humans live in space and assign meaning to spaces by adding signs to them, thus this signifies an interactive association with space (Donougho, 1987). According to Dong (2018), the individual is represented in a world of symbols and signs. These signs and symbols substantially sway the perception and communication of the world by the subject of encounters, yet language is a means of communication and knowledge transfer an unambiguous interest for philosophical inquiry (Dong, 2018). Semiotics is not merely a science of sign systems; it deals with all aspects of cultural phenomena as a system of the whole and regards culture as communication. Social semiology relates semiology to a particular context through social practice (Hjelmslev, 1943). Social semiotics has accounted for the general experience of the built environment through the process of intersemiosis (Dong, 2018; Liu and O’Halloran, 2009).

Therefore, it can be considered to regard a sign on the substance of behaviour that it rouses objects to substantiate its meaning (Liu and O’Halloran, 2009). However, the sign is considered only by codified meaning that is grounded on cultural discourse (Spitzmüller, 2015). Even though the progression of codification belongs to the domain of social behaviour such as the spatial prosodic attitude, the codes are not under any circumstances subject to pragmatic substantiation (Dong, 2018).

Power and the built environment

According to Dovey (2014), the word ‘power’ is believed to originate from the Latin potere (to be able; the capacity to achieve some end). Rorty (1992) and Rouhana and Fiske (1995) define power as the competency and capacity to delineate and control situations and activities of an individual or group of people to influence things to work as one desires. Due to its nature and genesis, power has numerous forms as expressed by Cameron and Markus (2003).

There are discrepancies between terms of power. These terms are ‘power to’ and ‘power over’. ‘Power to’ refers to power as a capacity, while ‘power over’ refers to power as a relationship between individuals within a society, or in social discourse (Njoh, 1998, 2007, 2009a). The concepts of power, domination, authority, command, control, and influence are related and substitutable in some cases (Njoh, 2007). In reference to government and citizens, the term power may be substituted by another term such as domination, control, influence, or authority (Njoh, 2009b). This research employs power as a concept in the analyses of spaces. However, according to Njoh (2007) ‘power over’ is conventionally more apparent in practice, while ‘power to’ is more significant in daily affairs. Based on this context, Njoh (2007) and Dovey (2014) identify and frame the precise forms of ‘power over’ which are more palpable in daily affairs and expressively related to the built environment. These forms are ‘force’, ‘coercion’, ‘seduction’, ‘manipulation’, ‘segregation’ and ‘authority’.

‘Force’ deals with noncompliance, manipulating an individual or groups of people to conform to one’s desires without the provision of choice to act otherwise. In the built environment, force embraces all manners of enforced spatial internment as described by Foucault (Foucault’s 1975 book, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison) in terms of the notion of power in the discipline and punish (disciplinary institutions such as prisons, detention centres, etc.).

‘Coercion’ is an implied threat or force to ensure acquiescence. However, this form of ‘power over’ does not employ force; instead, it threatens to ensure compliance. Coercion enters the built environment through armed or unarmed uniformed guards of honour, exaggerated scales, and public monuments (Njoh, 1998, 2007, 2009a, 2009b). These structures intimidate or dominate, as can be observed in the development of huge monuments and buildings including governmental buildings, residential layouts, religious places, etc. For instance, when the British took over Cyprus, they maintained the location of the old palace in the capital city; however, they destroyed the old palace and erected a court building (Dovey, 2009, 2014).

‘Seduction’ is a complicated and sophisticated form of ‘power over’, which influences the interests and desires of individuals or groups of people. It is usually hinged to constructions of self-identity and desire, which have substantial repercussions in the built environment (Njoh, 1998, 2007, 2009a, 2009b). For example, colonial authorities established policies to enhance European middle-class living standards in environmental design, which were applied through urban planning and mass housing schemes. These strategies could be observed in almost all European colonies (Dovey, 2009, 2014).

‘Manipulation’ is another form of ‘power over’ which is closely related to coercion. It is operated principally by keeping the subject ignorant. For example, in North Cyprus, it manifested in the built environment through policies, especially the housing policy for servants, which helped colonial rulers establish ethnic segregation through zoning practices (Dovey, 2009, 2014).

‘Segregation’ is a form of ‘power over’ which enters the built environment through urban planning and spatial organisation. It is achieved by constructing boundaries to create a form of zoning which separates space by social class or status, race, gender, culture, etc. It can be mediated through boundaries and pathways (Njoh, 1998, 2007, 2009a, 2009b). Some places and spaces can be segregated by creating privileged access, facilities, and communities in certain districts (Dovey, 2009, 2014).

‘Authority’ is expressed with an absence of disagreement. It relies on command and order, in other words, unchallenged recognition and obedience (Njoh, 1998, 2007, 2009a, 2009b). Authority is legitimised through symbols. Symbols of authority are institutionally implanted in the form of family houses, corporate towers, public buildings, and urban design of the state (Dovey, 2009, 2014).

Research methodology

This research strives to provide an understanding of how power as a socially constructed discourse aids in defining the language of the walled city of Nicosia. As such, it is crucial to have a guiding philosophy and rationale in achieving the research goals. Therefore, it is significant to identify a primary research purpose that will enable the testing of hypotheses to discover and explore general principles or to explain and describe complex phenomena (Carr, 2006; Crossan, 2003).

Research rationale

Creswell (2009), and Yin (2009, 2017) express that effective and efficient research is based on certain philosophical assumptions about its validity and research method(s) that are best applicable to the development and contribution to knowledge in that area of study. Similarly, Yin (2009) expresses that research assumptions and requirements should be well comprehended before embarking on the research and its evaluation (Figure 1). Crowther and Lancaster (2012), and Robson and McCartan (2016) also argue that how research is conducted may be established based on the pattern, strategy and tools employed in order to attain the fundamental goals and objectives.

Figure 1.

Research rationale.

Epistemology (constructivism)

This research adopted the constructivist approach as its epistemological stance. The epistemological background of constructivism focuses exclusively on meaning-making through social practices of individuals (Schwandt, 1994; Vasilachis, 2009). Epistemology is concerned with how an individual perceives or makes sense of reality, what is perceived as knowledge, and how an individual grasps and utilises the perceived knowledge (Vasilachis, 2009). Constructivists claim that reality is socially constructed, noting that ideas and beliefs shape the perception of the space and that space changes the conception of the world (Bodner, 1986; Liu and Chen, 2010; Schwandt, 1994). Unlike realists, constructivists posit that concepts such as power are socially constructed. Grounded on power as a discourse within the built environment, the fundamental concern of this research goes beyond the inquiry of knowing what, to knowing how.

Theoretical perspective (interpretivism)

Fundamentally, interpretivism deals with the individual’s experience of society. Crotty (1998) notes that different manners of perceiving the world shape different ways of interacting with the world. This research is primarily interested in human experience and perception of phenomena, and it strives to analyse the meaning and connotation of such experience. Within the context of experience, the interpretivist approach fits in with the epistemological framework of constructivism. Interpretivist approaches seek for culturally and historically grounded interpretations of the social world (Gerring, 2011). Taylor (1971) notes that interpretivist studies assume that people create and associate subjective meaning through their interactions with the world. Therefore, an interpretivist researcher seeks to understand the meanings participants assign to phenomena (Schwandt, 1994). In this context, the researcher remains open to new knowledge throughout the study and lets it develop with the assistance of the informants. Hudson and Ozanne (1988), O’donoghue (2006), and Newman (2015) express that the essential goal of interpretivist research is to understand and interpret the meaning of human behaviour rather than to generalise and predict causes and effects like positivist or new modern science approaches do.

Methodology (case study)

The city of Nicosia, North Cyprus (Figure 2) has been selected as the case study of this research. This city has experienced many transformations at both architectural and urban level over the last decades. These transformations made the city suitable for analysis in this study. Rosenbaum (2002) and Duff (2012) define a case study as an intensive investigation of a unit under careful and detailed consideration. The fundamental aim of this study is to provide a comprehensive explanation and description of how power as a socially constructed phenomenon aids in defining the language of the city and architecture. As described by Zainal (2007), a case study is a comprehensive study of social practice, in this research context, power discourse in relation to the built environment of Nicosia. The city has experienced many regimes of power and that have affected the city in different dimensions: socially; religiously; economically; culturally; and politically. These dimensions have led the city to possess many traces of experiences and identities, thus, by resulting in hybrid experiences. Silverman (2016) notes that a case study requires empirical investigation of distinctive phenomena within its grounded context, based on evidence. Therefore, the built environment of Nicosia was explored based on the developed theoretical background of the image of the city (Lynch, 1960) and the Njoh (1998, 2007, 2009a, 2009b), Dovey (2009, 2014), and Markus (2013) theoretical background of power in the built environment. In this manner, the built environment of Nicosia will be examined as well as explored based on an observational study of the researcher and a developed theoretical framework.

Figure 2.

Map of Cyprus showing the location of Nicosia and the United Nations Buffer Zone.

Data analysis

In the context of this research, the data were basically collected from both primary (observational study and case study) and secondary sources (literature from books, journals, maps and pictures). For the analysis of the collected data, this research adopted the case study methodology. The built environment of Nicosia was selected as the research case study. In order to analyse the city, a conceptual approach was developed. Two main approaches that support the research hypothesis were established: the language of the city; and imageability of the city. The imageability of the city was based on the model of the five elements of the city described by Lynch in The Image of the City (1960). Nevertheless, due to the context of this research, three of the elements that fully supported the research aim and objectives were selected, namely, landmark, district and path. The two main conceptual approaches were tied to power relations within the built environment. Njoh (1998, 2007, 2009a, 2009b), Dovey (2009, 2014), and Markus (2013) defined how power can be related to the built environment. Qualitative data analysis is usually based on an interpretive philosophy, with the fundamental idea of examining meaningful and symbolic content in the qualitative data. In this context, the researcher views the collected data as an interpretation, without judgement, due to the subjectivity of the data in terms of individuality and context; as such, the data are subjected to many possible interpretations (Patton, 2005).

Data analysis approach (deductive)

Deductive reasoning deals with the conceptualisation and development of a hypothesis which is grounded on existing theory and leads to designing a strategy to test the research hypothesis (Goswami, 2002). It starts with the assertion of a general rule and proceeds to a guaranteed, specific conclusion. Sokhanvar Dastjerdi and Sani (2015) note that, when a generalisation is grounded on the deductive principle, the technical method is, to a certain extent, identical to that of an experiment. Thus, a hypothesis is formulated, and then testable implications result from deduction (Figure 3).

Figure 3.

Methodology structure based on deductive reasoning.

The deductive reasoning or deductive approach begins with the general and finishes with the specific. Researchers applying deductive reasoning work with a top-down approach, from theory to the hypothesis, to build on or contradict a theory (Goswami, 2002). Clark (1969) and Goswami (2002) note that researchers who adopt deductive reasoning develop a hypothesis grounded on existing theories and then collect relevant data related to the area of study.

Validity and reliability

In this type of research approach, the researcher is less concerned with the issue of reliability, since meaning or reality is considered to be dynamic and subjective. The emphasis in qualitative research is on genuinely understanding phenomena (Kirk et al., 1986). Nevertheless, considering the epistemological and theoretical perspective adopted in this study, the concept of reflexibility will not play a vital role. Drobot (2012) expresses that research with a constructivist and interpretivist approach is grounded on individual and contextual experiences. Accordingly, this study employed the case study methodology that requires an observational study and subjective perception of an experience (Table 1). Therefore, reflexibility is not an issue in this study; rather, it is embraced.

Table 1.

Inquiry roadmap.

Aim	To explore, describe, and explain how the notion of power as a discourse within the built environment aids in defining the language and imageability of the city
Stage	Objectives	Assignment	Method
1. Review	1. Current views and contextual information on themes which are related to the built environment and power discourse	Step 1: Cross-examination of pertinent literature through the process of synthesis and analysis of recently published data within the range of journals, articles, books, and internet-based resources	DA
1. Review	2. How meaning is generated and interpreted in society	Step 2: Identifying the notion of power discourse within the built environment	DA
2. Synthesis	3. Identification of power within the context of the built environment	Step 3: Rigorous literature review and observational studies	DA, TD OBS
3. Framework	4. Development of conceptual approaches	Step 4: Assembling of forms of power and element of city from the review	CS, TD
3. Framework	4. Development of conceptual approaches	Step 5: Developing the conceptual framework of the proposed criteria	CS, TD
4. Analysis	5. Understanding how power aids in defining the language and imageability of the city	Step 6: Analysis of a case study	DA, CS,
4. Analysis		Step 7: Conclusion	DA, CS,

Note: DA, documented analysis; TD, top-down; CS, case study; and OBS, observational study.

Analysis and discussion

Introduction: the city of Nicosia

The Greeks, Romans, Byzantines, Crusaders, Lusignans, Ottomans, and more recently the British, left imprints on what is now recognised as cultural heritage. Nicosia (Figures 4 and 5) currently serves as the capital city of both the Turkish Republic of Northern Cyprus and the Republic of Cyprus. The city has transformed at both architectural and urban levels. For the last ten centuries, Nicosia has been the capital city of Cyprus. As one of the island’s oldest legacies, Nicosia was declared a conservation area within the Master Plan of Nicosia in 1989 (Oktay, 2007). The walled city of Nicosia is the oldest part of the capital city, and it is one of the few examples of Renaissance town planning which dates back to the Venetian period (1489–1571) (Constantinides and Ozen, 2004; Oktay, 2007; Petridou, 2003). During this time, the concern was the entity of the urban form of the walled city, rather than the internal structure (Constantinides and Ozen, 2004; Oktay, 2007). The Renaissance walls of the city with their eleven bastions and three gates were built to consolidate the town, which reveals a dispersed character (Figure 4). According to Hadjichristos (2006), during the preceding periods of both Byzantine and Frankish rule, the city experienced prominent development. During that period, the city acquired and adopted a European city structure. The town was reinvigorated with walls attached to towers and gates (Michaēlidēs, 2012). The Frankish rule introduced Catholism as a new religion when compared with the indigenous orthodoxy, leading to the construction and development of churches and monasteries in the Gothic style (Oktay, 2007).

Figure 4.

Map of the walled city of Nicosia.

Figure 5.

Büyük Han (The Great Inn) built under the Ottoman rule in 1572.

On the other hand, the Ottoman rule (1571–1878) witnessed a transformation of the capital city (Mesda, 2011), even though the city was not divided then. The two major communities of Turks and Greeks were already living in distinctive residential areas, which was defined by their culture and religion. The Turks districts (Mahalles) were located around Mosques (Cami) and markets (Bazar), while the Greeks were living around the Greek Orthodox churches (Doratli, 2002; Oktay, 2007; Petridou, 2003). Subsequently, during the British colonial period (1878–1960), the capital city witnessed an increase in urban density, which led to the development of the empty areas within the city (Oktay, 2007; Petridou, 2003). Following the British rule, commercial, administrative and service functions led to the growth and development of the suburban area outside the city walls (Oktay, 2007).

The language of the city

The language of a city can be defined by the city’s buildings and their relationships. Connections and attachments between people and spaces have a significant role in the urban context. Such a relationship is influenced by symbols in urban forms. According to Metro-Roland (2016), ‘linguistic landscape’ is the material manifestation of language in place, such as the collection of street names, shop signs, notices, advertisements, graffiti, and other textual items. Urban semioticians tend to distort the peculiarity between linguistic and extra-linguistic traits of the city by emphasising language as a dominant trope in reading the denotative and connotative messages of architecture, facade styles, urban form, morphology, etc. (Jani et al., 2012). According to Gottdiener et al. (2003), similarly, Mark Gottdierner and Alexandros Lagopoulos promulgated a new version of the approach as ‘socio-semiotics’. In social semiotics, urban space is conceived of as a pseudo-text, produced by both materials (semiotic) and non-semiotic (material) processes. However, socio-semiotics contends that the metaphorisation of the city in semiotic expressions does not inherently lead to callous power and control status in relation to both the social and material worlds. Moreover, Foucauldian diachronic analyses of language and society in relation to power expresses the sensitivities of social semiotics discourse.

The urban context of the walled city is not only limited to residential housing; it includes the general development and transformation of the city throughout history. During the Venetian rule, an effective fortification structure was developed. After the Ottoman conquest, the major event that took place in terms of the urban development strategy was the re-use of the inherited structures, rather than the development of new ones. Some of the inherited structures were remodelled in accordance with the Ottoman architectural style. for example, minarets were added to the cathedral to convert it into a mosque (Figure 9). The Ottomans also introduced new building types in order to suit their cultural and religious needs, which include hans (Figure 5), baths, madarasa (islamic school) and markets (Bazar). The palace and administrative structures of the Venetians were adopted by the Ottomans and reused as their administrative offices. This kind of planning eliminated status-based segregation which existed during the Frankish and Venetian periods, by making the walled city accessible. Spitulnik (1998) expresses that the language of the city speaks of not only the city itself but also the general public that dwells in it, because the imageability of the city may be trivial, unique, or universal.

During the British rule, the walled city witnessed yet another transformation which also played a significant role in defining the language of the city today. The earliest social housing development was the Samanbahçe social housing project which was initiated during the Ottoman period and finalised during the British colonial period (Figure 11) (Oktay, 2007).

The British demolished the remains of the Frankish-Venitain- Ottoman palace but maintained the location, for the erection of new governmental offices at the exact location. Njoh (2007) interprets this action as an expression of power (seduction) to establish self-identity. This could be understood as a means of keeping and expressing power by the British, because the location of the Ottoman ‘Konak’ before the third royal Frankish court, was the seat of power from where the island was ruled for centuries. Therefore, developing a new governmental building was a bold sign and symbol of British presence, change of leadership, and the establishment of their power. Given (2005) noted that, in a bid to establish their presence, the British developed their first housing project, which was the government house for the British governor; however, it was burned down during the 1931 rebellion. Subsequently, the British government rebuilt the government house alongside some low-cost housing for their military (Given, 2005). The walled city became more accessible with its integration into the new urban expansion outside, and the planning structure of the city changed (Figure 8).

Imageability of the city

Lynch (1960) attempted to discover the image of a city. He referred to the city as a physical object which, when perceived, can induce an image in the observer’s mind. Based on this, Lynch developed a model of reading the city, which comprises five elements: path; node; landmark; district; and edge. From a critical point of view, Barthes criticised Lynch’s approach as equivocal in relation to semantics. To Barthes, Lynch’s approach lacked relation to language and semiotics. His work exclusively focused on denotive and neglected conative meanings. At the city scale, imageability plays an integral role in analysing urban spaces and forms. A city image is significant due to its ability to recognise an object within an urban form. Lynch (1960) expresses that, to some extent, the capability of a city depends on its ability to be readily perceptible. This is because a city’s capability is related to how subjects (people) perceive and comprehend or read the existence and essence of objects (environment) in context, in other words how they read the meaning. In relation to power as a socially constructed discourse, three of Lynch’s elements are explored in this study: ‘paths’ (directing someone to a particular space); ‘landmarks’ (self-identity); and ‘districts’ (social housing).

Paths

The walled city of Nicosia is bounded by city walls and gates. The most widely used street for access to Nicosia (from the north) is through the Kyrenia Gate. According to Lynch (1960), there are three features that enhance a path’s significance: identity; continuity; and quality. The main entrance to the city was through Paphos and Famagusta gate while during the British period, Kyrenia Gate was added which provides links to and continuity with other districts and the walled city (Figures 6 –8). According to Fyfe and Bannister (1998), and Fuller and Moore (2017), it is the street that welcomes people into a city or an urban space. Therefore, the first impressions of a city usually derive from the streets, because they provide the first imageability of the city. Also, streets may direct and guide the observer to a specific space of action, intended for control or expression of power, and in this context, the main street is Kyrenia street, while Paphos street on the west is secondary access when compared to Kyrenia street. These two streets both direct, guide and welcome the observer to the government/court, formaly the location of the Lusigan-Venetian- Ottoman palace and seat of power. Dovey (2014) described that the street can be employed as a means of providing accessibility to the desired place. In this context to the government offices.

Figure 6.

The Kyrenia Gate.

Figure 7.

Street view from the Kyrenia Gate.

Figure 8.

The main axis of the walled city and connectivity to outside urban expansion.

In the case of Nicosia, path as an element of the city, guides the visitor from the main gate of the city wall directly to the seat of power. Njoh (2007) notes that power in the form of segregation enters into the built environment through planning. Lawrence and Low (1990), Yeoh (2003), and Markus (2013) express that, in this manner of spatial planning, spaces are organised based on privacy, control, and visibility. Accessing the walled city from the Kyrenia Gate, the narrow street directs the observer to the British government offices where governmental power was concentrated in the past. The Kyrenia street from the Kyrenia Gate and the one from Paphos Gate axially direct the visitor to the centre of power. The streets serve as the main link and access from other districts. Confrontations and encounters are minimal along Kyrenia street and Paphos street which evoke certain desired perceptions in the observer.

Landmarks

Jacobs (1961) notes that landmarks are vital signs that orient people in cities. Within the walled city of Nicosia, there are prominent landmarks that help in orienting and defining the identity of the city. Nicosia has been the capital city of Cyprus for 1200 years. During the development of the Frankish era, Nicosia transformed into a city of catholic monasteries and churches, such as the famous Saint Sophia Cathedral (Figure 9). Between the 12th and 15th centuries, Nicosia developed and transformed into the capital city of the Frankish rule. Within that period, Nicosia transformed into the capital of the medieval Kingdom of Cyprus, the seat of Lusignan kings, administration, and the Latin Church. Until that period, the city had no significant fortification or defence structures. During this period, fortifications were developed then to defend and protect the capital city. According to Coureas (2016), the Lusignan period was the most influential period in terms of architecture and planning, as the city witnessed many constructions such as churches.

Figure 9.

Selimiye Mosque, Nicosia. Formally St. Sophia Cathedral (13^th-16^th centuries).

At the end of the 15th century, the Republic of Venice took over the control of the island. At the end of the Venitian era, the city began to envision the concept of an ideal city, which provided an effective fortification structure. The expansion of the Ottoman power was the fundamental reason for the new development in the capital city and the optimisation of the city’s fortification and planning. During the reconstruction of fortifications, some existing structures were destroyed, and their construction materials were reused in the construction of the new buildings. However, Venetians adopted and changed the functions of some Lusignan structures. In relation to the establishment of power within the Nicosia built environment, the adoptions and development of new structures were made in order to establish their presence and dominance. Njoh (2007) notes that forms of power such as authority, seduction, coercion, and manipulation may enter into the built environment and establish a city’s identity. Furthermore, during the Ottoman rule, existing religious structures – mostly Latin churches such as the St. Sophia cathedral – were adopted and transformed into mosques; in contrast to, Orthodox churches. For example, minarets and mihrabs were added in order to be used as mosques, such as the case of Selimiye Mosque (Figure 10). Additionally, other facilities such as Hans, baths, covered market places, etc. were constructed during this period.

Figure 10.

The British law courts building, on the site of the demolished lusignan, Venetian and Ottoman palace, early 20^th century.

Public monuments mostly involve memorialization that is related to the past use of force, to signify the future possibility of the same (Johnson, 2002). These structures coerce through intimidation or domination. Development of huge monuments and buildings which include governmental buildings, residential layouts, religious places, etc. is a form of intimidation or domination. In the context of this research, during the British establishment in the island, they tried to express their presence, resourcefulness and technological capability. They employed a built environment as a means of expression. In this manner, they replaced the Ottoman Konak with a government offices/court and post office around 1900 (Figure 10). The Ottoman governor’s mansion (konak) goes back to the Frankish–Venetian palace. The main law courts building is rectangular in shape, with an internal courtyard. Several buildings are attached to the main structure, while others stand separately, making for a sizable complex which is surrounded by a low sandstone wall with iron railings. On the southeast corner of this wall is the coat of arms of the British empire. This can be concretised by Dovey’s thesis (2014) – that spatial domination through exaggerated scale or dominant location can disparage the human subject – as it signifies the power obligatory for its production. The transformed mosque during the Ottoman era and the law court during the British era were regarded as landmarks within the walled city. These landmarks expressed the religious, political and spiritual power of the city, thus, the image of the city.

Districts

Njoh (2007) noted that seduction as a form of power within the built environment is all about influencing people’s desires. Usually, it is hinged to constructions of self-identity and desire, which have substantial repercussions in the built environment. An administration may establish policies to enhance the living standards of the working class within a (capitalist) society. This can be accomplished through urban planning and mass housing schemes. This strategy has been applied in Cyprus through the development of social housing at different locations within the island. Samanbahçe which is believed to be the first social housing complex is located within the walled city (Mesda, 2011). Njoh (2007) noted that another form of power is segregation, a form of ‘power over’, which is mostly practised in residential layouts which expresses socio-economic status in the built environment. In the case of Nicosia city, Samanbahçe social housing was one of the most significant social housing developments. It was initiated during the Ottoman period and finalised during the British colonial period. These two periods contributed to the development of trading and commerce. The social housing was designed based on European examples of housing estates during the Ottoman period, and it explicitly targeted low-income families (Mesda, 2011; Oktay, 2005). It was sponsored by the Evkaf Foundation (Figure 11). During the Ottoman and British era, the housing located around the administrative buildings was mostly the elites’ residents which were spatially segregated from the low-class residents (Oktay, 2005; Republic of Cyprus Department of Town Planning and Housing, 2004). Due to urban growth, population growth and infrastructural developments, the walled city evolved from a segregated city into a mixed-class society. Samanbahçe social housing which comprises 72 housing units, in five rows of buildings was developed for the low-income class, and its development gave the city a new image, by neutralizing the perception of segregation.

Figure 11.

Samanbahçe social housing development in Nicosia beginning of the 20^th century.

Later, other projects were modelled after Samanbahçe including the William Caruana’s Row Houses for social workers which are also known as the standard Kaymaklı Houses in the Nicosia District (Oktay, 2005; Republic of Cyprus Department of Town Planning and Housing, 1996). After that, public social houses were developed for the police in Kaymakli, also within the Nicosia District (Oktay, 2005). Some residential buildings from the Ottoman period were adopted during the British period. Mostly, these types of houses were utilised by the colonial rulers as personal residences of high-ranked officers (Gunnis, 1956), while the governor’s house was located outside the walled city where urban expansion was taking place (Gunnis, 1956; Republic of Cyprus Department of Town Planning and Housing, 1996). Roads and streets were created for accessibility and connection between the walled city and the new urban expansion (Figure 8). These residential developments at different scales of intervention and segregation in their discourse defined the language of the walled city of Nicosia.

Conclusion

This research meticulously investigated how power as a socially constructed discourse aids in defining the language and imageability of the walled city of Nicosia. The spatial attributes of the city were evaluated in relation to semiotic meanings. Both tangible and intangible attributes of the city reveal that meaning-generation is a continuous process that needs to be interpreted based on power discourse. This conceptual framework of exploring the city in relation to power is sufficiently flexible to cover a significant range of power forms within the built environment. The conceptual framework of this research expressed a mechanism of exploring the semiotic meanings of cities in relation to power, which can enhance subsequent inquiries within the scope of urban semiotics and power discourse within a built environment.

Power played an integral role in shaping and transforming Nicosia. The city holds distinctive attributes as a result of power relations. The analysis revealed that, as a result of socio-cultural, socio-economic, and socio-political factors in relation to power, the city conveys symbolic attributes that are based on power discourse. The spatial organisation of the city expresses specific hidden meanings such as manipulation, seduction, authority, coercion, and segregation based on social status which led to the development of mass housing projects. However, the perception and meaning of social housing in the city are different today. Despite the fact that power symbolically and spatially manifests in the city, power remains hidden; it can be expressed that individuals or groups of people can influence certain things to work in accordance with their opinions. In this context, the built environment reveals that society is structured in such a way that power exists but is concealed.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Abdulsalam I. Shema

Author biography

Abdulsalam I. Shema is a PhD candidate at Cyprus International University. Within different fields of architectural design and theory, his research interest is related to architectural theory, semiotics and identity in architecture and urban design.

References

Barthes

(1967) Elements of Semiology. New York: Hill & Wang.

Barthes

(1986) Semiology and the urban. In: Gottdiener

Lagopoulos

(eds) The City and the Sign: An Introduction to Urban Semiotics. New York: Columbia University Press, pp.87–98.

Barthes

(1988) The Semiotic Challenge. New York: Hill and Wang, p.11.

Bodner

(1986) Constructivism: A theory of knowledge. Journal of Chemical Education 63(10): 873–878.

Cameron

Markus

(2003) The Words between the Spaces: Buildings and Language. New York: Routledge.

Carr

(2006) Philosophy, methodology and action research. Journal of the Philosophy of Education 40(4): 421–435.

Clark

(1969) Linguistic processes in deductive reasoning. Psychological Review 76(4): 387–404.

Constantinides

Ozen

(2004) Nicosia Master Plan New Vision for the Core of Nicosia-Final Report. Nicosia: UNDP-UNOPS Programme Management Unit.

Coureas

(2016) The Latin Church in Cyprus, 1195–1312. London: Routledge.

10.

Creswell

(2009) Research Design: Qualitative, Quantitative, and Mixed Methods Approach. Thousand Oaks: SAGE Publications.

11.

Crossan

(2003) Research philosophy: Towards an understanding. Nurse Researcher 11(1): 46–55.

12.

Crotty

(1998) The Foundations of Social Research: Meaning and Perspective in the Research Process. London: SAGE Publications.

13.

Crowell

(2001) Husserl, Heidegger, and the Space of Meaning: Paths toward Transcendental Phenomenology. Evanston: Northwestern University Press.

14.

Crowther

Lancaster

(2012) Research Methods. London: Routledge.

15.

De Saussure

(2011) Course in General Linguistics. New York: Columbia University Press.

16.

Dong

(2018) Space, signs, and legitimate workers’ identities: An ethnography of a Beijing “urban village”. Social Semiotics 1–17. Epub ahead of print 11 October 2018. DOI:10.1080/10350330.2018.1532655.

17.

Donougho

(1987) The language of architecture. Journal of Aesthetic Education 21(3): 53–67.

18.

Doratli

(2002) Nicosia – The last divided city of Europe. Open House International 27(4): 57–70.

19.

Dovey

(2009) Becoming Places: Urbanism/Architecture/Identity/Power. London: Routledge.

20.

Dovey

(2014) Framing Places: Mediating Power in Built Form. London: Routledge.

21.

Drobot

(2012) Qualitative research in social sciences and education – basic paradigms and research methods. Research in Pedagogy 2(2): 11–20.

22.

Duff

(2012) Case Study Research in Applied Linguistics. London: Routledge.

23.

Eco

(1972) A componential analysis of the architectural sign/column. Semiotica 5(2): 97–117.

24.

Eco

(1976) A Theory of Semiotics, Vol. 217. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

25.

Eco

(1986) Semiotics and the Philosophy of Language, Vol. 398. Bloomington: Indiana University Press.

26.

Fox

(2001) Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education 27(1): 23–35.

27.

Foucault

(1975) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Vintage.

28.

Fuller

Moore

(2017) The Death and Life of Great American Cities. London: Macat Library.

29.

Fyfe

Bannister

(1998) The ’eyes upon the street’: Closed circuit television surveillance and the city. In: Fyfe

(ed.) Images of the Street: Planning, Identity, and Control in Public Space. London: Routledge, pp.254–267.

30.

Gerring

(2011) Social Science Methodology: A Unified Framework. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

31.

Given

(2005) Architectural styles and ethnic identity in medieval to modern Cyprus. In: Clarke

(ed.) Archaeological Perspectives on the Transmission and Assimilation of Culture in the Eastern Mediterranean. Oxford: Oxbow Books, pp.207–213.

32.

Goswami

(2002) Inductive and deductive reasoning. In: Goswami

(ed.) Blackwell’s Handbook of Childhood Cognitive Development. Oxford: Blackwells, pp.282–302.

33.

Gottdiener

Boklund-Lagopoulou

Lagopoulos

(2003) Semiotics, Vol. 2. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

34.

Greimas

Courtés

Crist

, et al. (1982) Semiotics and Language: An Analytical Dictionary. Bloomington: Indiana University Press, p. 278.

35.

Gunnis

(1956) Historic Cyprus. London: Methuen.

36.

Hadjichristos

(2006) Cyprus: Nicosia and its d-visions. Architectural Design 76(3): 12–19.

37.

Hjelmslev

(1943) Prolegomena to a Theory of Language. Madison, Milwaukee, and London: The University of Wisconsin Press.

38.

Hodge

(2014) Social semiotics. In: Miller

(ed.) The Routledge Companion to Global Popular Culture. New York: Routledge, pp.58–66.

39.

Hudson

Ozanne

(1988) Alternative ways of seeking knowledge in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research 14(4): 508–521.

40.

Jackendoff

(1996) Conceptual semantics and cognitive linguistics. Cognitive Linguistics (includes Cognitive Linguistic Bibliography) 7(1): 93–129.

41.

Jacobs

(1961) The Death and Life of American Cities. New York: Vintage.

42.

Jakobson

(1960) Linguistics and poetics. In: Sebeok

(ed.) Style in Language. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, pp.350–377.

43.

Jani

Lieven

Andrew

, et al. (2012) Language, Space and Power: Urban Entanglements. Studies across Disciplines in the Humanities and Social Sciences 13. Helsinki: Helsinki Collegium for Advanced Studies, pp.1–27.

44.

Jaworski

Thurlow

(eds) (2010) Semiotic Landscapes: Language, Image, Space. London: A&C Black.

45.

Johnson

(2002) Mapping monuments: The shaping of public space and cultural identities. Visual Communication 1(3): 293–298.

46.

Kirk

Miller

(1986) Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research, Vol. 1. Beverly Hills: SAGE.

47.

Lawrence

Low

(1990) The built environment and spatial form. Annual Review of Anthropology 19(1): 453–505.

48.

Liu

Chen

(2010) Evolution of constructivism. Contemporary Issues in Education Research 3(4): 63–66.

49.

Liu

O’Halloran

(2009) Intersemiotic texture: Analyzing cohesive devices between language and images. Social Semiotics 19(4): 367–388.

50.

Lynch

(1960) The Image of the City, Vol. 11. Cambridge, MA: MIT press.

51.

Markus

(2013) Buildings and Power: Freedom and Control in the Origin of Modern Building Types. London: Routledge.

52.

Martin

(2012) Elementary Science Methods: A Constructivist Approach. Belmont: Cengage Learning.

53.

Mesda

(2011) An analytical approach to the house design in the walled city of Nicosia in Cyprus. Design Principles and Practices: An International Journal 5(6): 389–430.

54.

Metro-Roland

(2016) Tourists, Signs and the City: The Semiotics of Culture in an Urban Landscape. London: Routledge.

55.

Michaēlidēs

(ed.) (2012) Historic Nicosia. Limassol: Rimal Publications.

56.

Newman

(2015) Culture and Critique: The Politics of Interpretivism in Social Policy. London: Routledge.

57.

Njoh

(2007) Planning Power: Town Planning and Social Control in Colonial Africa. New York: UCL Press.

58.

Njoh

(1998) The political economy of urban land reforms in a post-colonial state. International Journal of Urban and Regional Research 22(3): 408–424.

59.

Njoh

(2009a) Ideology and public health elements of human settlement policies in sub-Saharan Africa. Cities 26(1): 9–18.

60.

Njoh

(2009b) Urban planning as a tool of power and social control in colonial Africa. Planning Perspectives 24(3): 301–317.

61.

O’donoghue

(2006) Planning Your Qualitative Research Project: An Introduction to Interpretivist Research in Education. New York: Routledge.

62.

Oktay

(2005) Cyprus: The South and the North. In: Van Kempen

Vermeulen

Baan

(eds) Urban Issues and Urban Policies in the New EU Countries. Aldershot: Ashgate Publishers, pp.205–231.

63.

Oktay

(2007) An analysis and review of the divided city of Nicosia, Cyprus, and new perspectives. Geography 92(3): 231–247.

64.

Patton

(2005) Qualitative Research: Encyclopedia of Statistics in Behavioral Science. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

65.

Peterson

(1999) Maps of Meaning: The Architecture of Belief. London: Psychology Press.

66.

Petridou

(2003) Nicosia master plan: A bi-communal initiative to change the image of the divided city of Nicosia. In: Workshop on Sustainable and Healthy Urban Transport and Planning, Nicosia, Cyprus, 16–18 November 2003 pp.16–18.

67.

Republic of Cyprus Department of Town Planning and Housing (1996) Cyprus National Report. In: Habitat Conference, Istanbul, Turkey, 3–14 June 1996, pp. 205–231.

68.

Republic of Cyprus Department of Town Planning and Housing (2004) ‘Urban Policy in Cyprus’, unpublished report, Nicosia.

69.

Robson

McCartan

(2016) Real World Research. Chichester: John Wiley & Sons.

70.

Rorty

(1992) Power and powers: A dialogue between buff and rebuff. In: Wartenberg

T. E.

(ed.) Rethinking Power. Albany: SUNY, pp.1–13.

71.

Rosenbaum

(2002) Observational studies. In: Observational Studies. New York: Springer, pp.1–17.

72.

Rouhana

Fiske

(1995) Perception of power, threat, and conflict intensity in asymmetric intergroup conflict: Arab and Jewish citizens of Israel. Journal of Conflict Resolution 39(1): 49–81.

73.

Sani

Shotorbani

Doratli

(2015) Exploring the semiotic meaning of the first oil city in the Middle East: Masjed Soleyman. Social Semiotics 25(3): 342–363.

74.

Schwandt

(1994) Constructivist, interpretivist approaches to human inquiry. In: Denzin

Lincoln

(eds) Handbook of Qualitative Research, Vol. 1. Thousand Oaks: SAGE, pp.118–137.

75.

Silverman

(ed.) (2016) Qualitative Research. London: SAGE.

76.

Sokhanvar Dastjerdi

Sani

(2015) Linking the past and present through symbolic housing features: North Cyprus. Social Semiotics 25(5): 578–596.

77.

Spitulnik

(1998) The language of the city: Town Bemba as urban hybridity. Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 8(1): 30–59.

78.

Spitzmüller

(2015) Graphic variation and graphic ideologies: A metapragmatic approach. Social Semiotics 25(2): 126–141.

79.

Taylor

(1971) Interpretation and the sciences of man. The Review of Metaphysics 25(1): 3–51.

80.

Vasilachis

(2009) Ontological and epistemological foundations of qualitative research. Forum: Qualitative Social Research/Sozialforschung 10(2): 1–25.

81.

Yeoh

(2003) Contesting Space in Colonial Singapore: Power Relations and the Urban Built Environment. Singapore: NUS Press.

82.

Yin

(2009) Case Study Research: Design and Methods (Applied Social Research Methods). London and Singapore: SAGE.

83.

Yin

(2017) Case Study Research and Applications: Design and Methods. Thousand Oaks: SAGE.

84.

Zainal

(2007) Case study as a research method. Jurnal Kemanusiaan 9: 1–6.