Landscapes and national imagination: The role of national parks in the formation of national belonging in Turkey

Asya Ece Uzmay,V Capresi,S Bell,C Pallini,A Fisher,M.H Maia

doi:10.1051/shsconf/20196312001

Abstract

When the concept of a national park idea was first established in the USA, it was promoted as the ownership of the landscape for the use of the people while emphasizing national identity through nature. As a latecomer to this movement, this paper describes part of the journey of the establishment of national parks in Turkey, with a focus on the period between 1950 and 1975. In this paper I argue that the national parks were a means of constructing a national identity through the transformative power of modernism on the countryside. Focusing on different national parks from Turkey, I interrogated the role of these so-called pristine and primitive lands in the construction of national identity through different forms. Under the threat of neoliberal economic policies and new approaches to understanding of nature these protected and reserved pieces of “nature” deserve more attention.

Highlights

National Parks were originally defined by the US Congress as “a great breathing-place for the national lungs” [1]
National parks include the “preservation of the nature” idea which can be found within Modernism as well as having a role in the formation of national identity – stunning dramatic scenery defining the unique character of the USA
In this paper I interrogate this relationship between the landscape and the national identity within the scope of Turkey by discussing how national identity is built through nature, especially in the case of national parks which tame and rationalise nature through a modernisation process

Summary

Introduction

National Parks were originally defined by the US Congress as “a great breathing-place for the national lungs” [1] (quoted by [2]). The national park idea defines a landscape preserved for a nation protected from the developmental ideas of modernism and modernisation. Scott’s idea of controlling the landscape in nation-building [5] as well as William Cronon’s questioning of constructed nature [6].

Results

Conclusion