Urban celebrations have long relied on illumination to transform the night into a space of legitimate collective experience.1This essay originated from the findings of the TUBITAK funded research project led by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu between 2020–2022, titled “Invention and Official Celebration of National Days in building of the nation-state in Turkey: Spatial Manifestations of Ceremonial Legitimization in Istanbul and Ankara (1908–1946).” The geo-mapping of the gathered data is available at the project website. This essay examines the “nocturnalization” of national day celebrations in early twentieth-century Turkey from a spatial perspective. The term “nocturnalization” was coined by historian Craig Koslofsky and describes how societies extend social and political life into the nighttime by reorganizing urban space and introducing new lighting practices.2Craig Koslofsky, Evening’s Empire: A History of the Night in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). In line with this definition, I argue that creative lighting installations not only inspired a sense of assurance and attraction but also actively shaped how citizens experienced nighttime urban space, guiding movement, orchestrating public behavior, and embedding national narratives.
Turkey underwent unprecedented political and social upheaval at the turn of the twentieth century, eventually transforming from an empire into a republic. Within two decades, the country experienced proto-democratization under the late Ottoman period, World War I, the War of Independence, and finally, the establishment of the modern Turkish Republic in 1923. At each turn, the state grappled with legitimacy crises, sometimes facing failure, and responded by implementing expansive nation-building policies.3Erik J. Zurcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 3rd edition (London and New York: IB Tauris, 2004). These efforts sought to unify a culturally diverse population into a single “imagined community”4Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism : Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 2006). through the creation of “invented traditions”,5Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, eds., The Invention of Tradition (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012). including national anthems, allegories, national days and overall cultural and social reforms, vastly utilizing architecture and media.6Sibel Bozdoğan, Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic (Seattle, Washington: University of Washington Press, 2002). Unlike static national symbols such as the flag or the national anthem, national days were “unstable signifiers”,7Michael E. Geisler, “The Calendar Conundrum: National Days as Unstable Signifiers,” in National Days: Constructing and Mobilising National Identity, ed. David McCrone and Gayle McPherson (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 10–25. performative, temporal, and fluid, shaped by the ways in which people engaged with each celebration.
Although the first national day originated in the Ottoman period, it was a parliamentary decision rather than an imperial decree. Liberty Day, celebrated on July 10, marked the restoration of the 1908 Constitution. Following the Republic’s proclamation in 1923, four additional national days were introduced within a decade, each highlighting a pivotal moment in the republic’s formation while engaging distinct societal groups, including children, youth, and the military.8These included the establishment of the Grand National Assembly and Children’s Day (April 23), the launch of Atatürk’s independence movement and Youth’s Day (May 19), Victory Day, which highlighted the role of aviation and the military (August 30), and, most significantly, the proclamation of the Republic (October 29), which became the defining celebration of national unity and republican values. Celebration programs of the national days followed a highly structured format, meticulously drafted by central and local governments, including official parades in which students, scouts, athletes, and soldiers marched through the city, often stopping at monuments for wreath-laying ceremonies and official speeches. Stadiums hosted performances, while state institutions — including People’s Houses, civic associations, schools, and public parks — organized a mix of educational and cultural events, from conferences to concerts and film screenings.9Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu, Elif Kaymaz, and Öykü Su Sezen, “Celebration of National Days in Ankara: Performative Forms of Publicity during the Early Republican Period,” Journal of Ankara Studies 10, no. 2 (2022): 203–28, https://doi.org/10.5505/jas.2022.38233; Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu, Elif Kaymaz, and Öykü Su Sezen, “Official Ceremonies as Social Control Mechanisms in Ankara, 1923– 1938,” 75st Annual International Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians (SAH), April 29, 2022, https://open.metu.edu.tr/handle/11511/97115. While daytime activities emphasized state propaganda and civic instruction, nighttime events transformed the cityscape through illumination, ornamentation, and festive displays. The nighttime atmosphere softened the didactic tone of the day, replacing structured formality with a more immersive, sensory experience of celebration, through orchestrated lighting strategies that redefined urban space.
Although spectacles of illuminations were not new to Turkey, their purpose and aesthetics underwent a significant transformation in the post-imperial period. In the Ottoman period, grand nighttime displays emphasized entertainment, spectacle, and excess. Imperial festivals, such as coronations and circumcision ceremonies, transformed the city into a theatrical stage through fire performances, pyrotechnics, and elaborate mechanical devices. A striking example is the fifteen-day circumcision festival of Sultan Ahmed III’s sons in 1720, as recorded in Surname-i Vehbi. This event featured extravagant displays, including a multi-headed dragon, a flaming stork, and a fire-spraying elephant. Floating platforms carried performers across the water, while “sea fires” submerged and resurfaced, creating a mesmerizing nocturnal spectacle.10Hakan T. Karateke, “Illuminating Ottoman Ceremonial,” in God Is the Light of the Heavens and the Earth: Light in Islamic Art and Culture, ed. John Bloom and Sheila S. Blair (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), 282–307. Although they carried similarities, in the early twentieth century, without the grandeur of the court, secularization of the notable days worthy of nationwide celebrations gave way to illumination practices a rather collective, tuned and structured character.
This paper focuses on temporality and spatiality in redesigning built environments through lighting for national day celebrations, drawing examples from İstanbul and Ankara (two capital cities). Using sources such as newspapers, magazines, architectural journals, celebration programs, film archives, photograph albums, and urban plans, I offer a critical analysis of lighting strategies from a historical and spatial perspective, rather than a chronological narrative. By tracing patterns in the celebratory lightscapes, mainly considering the kinetics, spatiality and intention of the light installations and performances, I propose three interpretive layers to examine different dimensions of illumination practices. While perceptive lightscapes communicated direct messages to the public; mobile lightscapes relied on the spectacle effect gathering people around, and activating lightscapes made public spaces accessible and engaging at night, touching upon the documentation practices as well. Rather than three different categories, these layers overlap to present a full picture of the nocturnal urban environments, allowing us to discuss how lighting functioned as a spatial medium of mass spectacle. Finally, I introduce the concept of nocturnal architectures of allure to discuss the positionality of temporary placemaking practices that evoked emotions of confidence, joy, and unity, while also subtly guiding social participation and spatial behavior. Unlike paternalistic efforts associated with nation-building practices that mold the ideal citizen through duty, sacrifice, and obligation, illumination produced a convivial yet structured nocturnal experience.11Mehmet Acikalin and Hamide Kiliç, “The Role of Turkish National Holidays in Promoting Character and Citizenship Education,” Journal of Social Science Education 16 (January 1, 2017): 73–82, https://doi.org/10.2390/jsse-v16-i3-1622; Ayhan Akman, “Ambiguities of Modernist Nationalism: Architectural Culture and Nation‐building in Early Republican Turkey,” Turkish Studies 5, no. 3 (September 1, 2004): 103–11, https://doi.org/10.1080/1468384042000270344.
Perceptive Lightscapes: Inscribing Ideology on the Urban Canvas
Perceptive lightscapes are illumination practices that convey direct ideological messages through words, slogans, and patriotic symbols. While these installations temporarily altered the architectural program of the city, turning streets into pedestrian thoroughfares, sidewalks into viewing platforms, and state buildings into illuminated symbols of authority, the urban morphology in the broader sense ultimately dictated the structure of the lightscape. Despite this momentary reordering, the spatial logic of the city remained intact, shaping how and where these illuminations were placed. City centers with institutional headquarters, urban squares and parks, main boulevards and streets that defined the arteries of the city added to the site-specificity of the illuminations. For example, state buildings, due to their symbolic significance and central locations, became the primary sites for these displays, thanks to their visibility and permanence within the urban fabric. An exemplary case was the illumination of Ankara’s first parliament building during the 10th-anniversary celebrations of the Republic. The display incorporated several national symbols: the Turkish flag, a map of the country, the six principles of the founding party (both textually and visually through the six arrows symbol), and numerical markers of the anniversary.12İzzet Kaya, Cumhuriyet’in 10. Yıl Hatıraları (1923-1933), 1933. These messages were not just conceived as political statements, but as visual affirmations of the linguistic transformation of the Republic. The building’s symmetry, its central location, and its historical significance amplified its role as a focal point of celebration, turning its illuminated façade into a direct manifestation of both ideological and linguistic modernization.
Mobile Lightscapes: Redefining Space Through Movement
Mobile lightscapes animated urban space through moving light sources, transforming familiar landscapes into dynamic stages for celebration. These illuminations engaged the public both as participants and spectators, directing attention to spaces, such as the air and the sea, not typically emphasized in urban lighting practices.
In İstanbul, the Bosphorus and the Golden Horn often served as stages for dynamic light displays. A notable instance occurred in 1910 during Liberty Day, when the official parade took the form of a naval maneuver.21“Celebration Plan on the Bosphorus for the Liberty Day,” Yeni Gün, July 23, 1910. Imperial boats carrying court members, including the Sultan, transformed the Bosphorus into a floating spectacle, while crowds gathered along the shores, particularly in the Golden Horn, a space historically reserved for the sultan’s viewings, where a festival ground had been assembled.22“La Fete Nationale Ottomane,” Stambul, July 21, 1910. As night fell, ships adorned with decorative lighting continued the display, their illuminations reflecting off the water, extending the celebratory atmosphere. Marine lights further enhanced the festival grounds, while small boat owners clustered along the waterfront near Dolmabahçe Palace, adding a communal layer to the nightscape.23“Les Illuminations,” Stambul, July 25, 1910. Not only the natural but also artificial water bodies were utilized in both İstanbul and Ankara. Illuminated fountains, pools, and sprinklers animated public squares, making water itself a spectacle. Viewing platforms along the Golden Horn,24“Sarayburnu Parkında Eğlence Tesisatı Yapılacak,” Cumhuriyet, September 7, 1931. the ponds of Beyazıt Square in İstanbul, and the electric fountains of Youth Park and Trust Square in Ankara became focal points, where spectators gathered to experience these orchestrated performances of movement and light. 25“Ankara’da Büyük Bayram Geceleri,” Cumhuriyet, October 31, 1937.
Firework displays became a staple of celebrations, often staged in city squares or around key landmarks already illuminated for the occasion.26“Şenlik Fişekleri,” Cumhuriyet, October 26, 1933. Period photographs captured the full spectacle, highlighting the interplay between light, architecture, and urban festivity.27“Ankara’da Büyük Bayram Geceleri”; “Bol Işıklı Ankarada Bayram Geceleri,” Cumhuriyet, October 31, 1938. Firecrackers, particularly popular among youth, became so widespread that İstanbul authorities eventually banned them, issuing public warnings that violators could face arrest. 28“La Fete Nationale Ottomane,” Stambul, July 22, 1910.
Torchlight processions formed another integral component of mobile lightscapes. Typically led by military troops, these processions included students, scouts, athletes, civil associations, and spontaneous participants. Their routes, published in newspapers ahead of time, mapped out a trajectory through the city, pausing at monuments, public squares, and government buildings for brief ceremonies or speeches. In Ankara, the presidential residence became a key destination, with stops at the homes of political leaders (such as the prime minister and chief of staff) where participants would cheer and sing patriotic marches. Some processions covered ambitious distances of up to 15 kilometers, continuing late into the night, demonstrating the endurance and enthusiasm of those involved.29“Bu Akşamki Fener Alayı,” Ulus, April 22, 1942.
Activating Lightscapes: Setting and Archiving the Scene
Activating lightscapes transformed public spaces into sites of collective inhabitation, using illumination to extend the city’s functionality into the night. Unlike perceptive and mobile lightscapes, which conveyed explicit messages or choreographed movement, activating lightscapes shaped the celebratory environment by making urban spaces more accessible, visually cohesive, and aesthetically pleasing.
National celebrations were framed as joyous occasions that connected Turkey’s past, present, and future. In early Republican Turkey’s single-party regime, where the central government dictated national narratives, these celebrations followed a carefully coordinated aesthetic and spatial framework. Standardized programs issued to cities across the country prescribed how urban spaces (particularly in the capital, Ankara) should be illuminated.30Cumhuriyet Bayramı Kutlulama Programı (Yozgat ili basımevi, 1935). Official directives outlined clear expectations: “Republic Days must be colorful and illuminated. On the days and nights of the holiday, all official institutions, municipalities, schools, businesses, residences, and public squares must be decorated and lit.”31“Büyük Bayrama Hazırlıklar Ilerliyor,” Ulus, 1025 1943. While not legally mandated, this directive served as a strong encouragement, influencing public and private actors alike. The private sector capitalized on the opportunity, with businesses such as Bourla Biraderler running newspaper advertisements ahead of Republic Day, urging citizens to purchase bulbs for their celebratory displays.32“Donanmalarda,” Cumhuriyet, October 14, 1938.
The role of activating lightscapes extended beyond aesthetics. These lighting strategies provided a backdrop for other festive events, framing parades, performances, and public speeches while also contributing to an immersive, unified spectacle. During the Liberty Day celebrations, the newspapers meticulously narrated all the illuminated buildings and areas in surprising detail.33“Les Illuminations.” Architectural journals from the period featured discussions on lighting advancements, emphasizing new techniques for illuminating buildings, monuments, and streets.34Ali Vehap, “Binaların Tenviri,” Arkitekt, 1934. The interest in nightscapes was further reinforced through photographic albums produced for milestone anniversaries, such as the 10th and 15th years of the Republic, which meticulously documented illuminated urban landscapes. Four photographers, Cemal Işıksel, İzzet Kaya, Jean Weinberg and Othmar Pferschy, played a crucial role in shaping the early Republican visual lexicon, producing widely circulated images of illuminated cityscapes.35Jean Weinberg and İzzet Kaya, 10. Yıl Albümü, n.d.; Kaya, Cumhuriyet’in 10. Yıl Hatıraları (1923-1933); “Album Prepared by Telgas for Ankara Governor Nevzat Bey.” These albums were also currency for prestige considering that the Electricity Administration of Ankara (TELGAS) prepared a special photo album to showcase the festival illuminations, presenting it as a gift to the city’s governor. Similarly, when a new monument was proposed in Ankara, its presentation to the public included an illuminated rendering, underscoring how nightscapes had become central to the cultural imagination of progress and national pride.36“Şehit Tayyareciler Abidesi,” Hakimiyet-i Milliye, April 21, 1932.
By making the built environment more legible and inviting at night, activating lightscapes expanded the potential for participation, drawing the public into spaces that were often inaccessible or underutilized after dark. Combined with perceptive and mobile lightscapes, they blurred the lines between the functional and the celebratory, creating an atmosphere where spectacle and sociability could coexist.
Towards Nocturnal Architectures of Allure
In 1932, a column titled Ankara ve Ankaralılar [Ankara and the People of Ankara], signed by Ankaralı [one from Ankara], appeared in a local newspaper just days after the 9th-anniversary celebrations of the Republic of Turkey.37Ankaralı, “Ankara ve Ankaralılar,” Hakimiyet-i Milliye, November 1, 1932. Rather than providing a straightforward account of the National Day festivities, the author paints a vivid portrait of the diverse crowd that took part: puzzled scouts visiting the capital for the first time, journalists scrambling for front-row seats, grumpy old women complaining about unruly children from the outskirts, young women slipping off their shoes in the tribunes for a better view, excitable children marveling at aerial maneuvers, policemen chasing after delinquents, and the restless crowd; pushing, walking, waiting. After this colorful depiction of the celebrations, the piece takes a markedly darker turn – both literally and figuratively. As night falls, people stroll along the boulevard, “admiring and gawking” at the illuminated buildings, their facades glowing with white, green, and red bulbs. They debate which building shines the brightest, yet for the author, both the lights and the spectators fall short. He laments the dullness of the crowd, who, in his eyes, fail to grasp any deeper meaning from the day, and the emptiness of the illuminations, which merely dazzle rather than educate. Without the voice of the intellectual, he argues, Republic Day celebrations have become nothing more than a fairground of lightbulbs.
This critique highlights the overarching nationalist agenda pushing the celebratory lightscapes, and the elitist expectations in terms of indoctrination and propaganda. At the same time, it encapsulates several everyday resistances signaled in this essay, the light in the darkness, the mundane in special occasions, the fun in seriousness. The inviting effect of lightscapes created nighttime environments of perception, mobility, and habitation where both the spectacle and functional coexisted.
The illumination of national celebrations in early Republican Turkey transformed urban space into a dynamic, multi-layered spectacle. Through perceptive, mobile, and activating lightscapes, the city was not merely lit but orchestrated to produce a sensory experience that blended ideology, festivity, and public participation. These lighting strategies reflected the broader ambitions of the Republican project, yet they also created unintended spaces of ambivalence, where individuals engaged with the spectacle in ways beyond the state’s intent.
This essay has conceptualized nocturnal architectures of allure as a framework for understanding the dual nature of celebratory illumination; a tool of attraction and a mechanism of spatial formation at once. Unlike daytime ceremonies that relied on disciplined participation, nighttime festivities encouraged an ephemeral conviviality shaped by light’s ability to captivate and enchant. These architectures did not impose meaning rigidly but invited diverse modes of engagement, from awe and admiration to indifference and critique, revealing the power of light to animate, structure, and transform the nocturnal city and its inhabitants.
Notes
| ↑1 | This essay originated from the findings of the TUBITAK funded research project led by Assoc. Prof. Dr. Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu between 2020–2022, titled “Invention and Official Celebration of National Days in building of the nation-state in Turkey: Spatial Manifestations of Ceremonial Legitimization in Istanbul and Ankara (1908–1946).” The geo-mapping of the gathered data is available at the project website. |
|---|---|
| ↑2 | Craig Koslofsky, Evening’s Empire: A History of the Night in Early Modern Europe (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2011). |
| ↑3 | Erik J. Zurcher, Turkey: A Modern History, 3rd edition (London and New York: IB Tauris, 2004). |
| ↑4 | Benedict Anderson, Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism : Reflections on the Origin and Spread of Nationalism (London: Verso, 2006). |
| ↑5 | Eric Hobsbawm and Terence Ranger, eds., The Invention of Tradition (New York: Cambridge University Press, 2012). |
| ↑6 | Sibel Bozdoğan, Modernism and Nation Building: Turkish Architectural Culture in the Early Republic (Seattle, Washington: University of Washington Press, 2002). |
| ↑7 | Michael E. Geisler, “The Calendar Conundrum: National Days as Unstable Signifiers,” in National Days: Constructing and Mobilising National Identity, ed. David McCrone and Gayle McPherson (Basingstoke and New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 10–25. |
| ↑8 | These included the establishment of the Grand National Assembly and Children’s Day (April 23), the launch of Atatürk’s independence movement and Youth’s Day (May 19), Victory Day, which highlighted the role of aviation and the military (August 30), and, most significantly, the proclamation of the Republic (October 29), which became the defining celebration of national unity and republican values. |
| ↑9 | Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu, Elif Kaymaz, and Öykü Su Sezen, “Celebration of National Days in Ankara: Performative Forms of Publicity during the Early Republican Period,” Journal of Ankara Studies 10, no. 2 (2022): 203–28, https://doi.org/10.5505/jas.2022.38233; Ahmet Erdem Tozoğlu, Elif Kaymaz, and Öykü Su Sezen, “Official Ceremonies as Social Control Mechanisms in Ankara, 1923– 1938,” 75st Annual International Conference of the Society of Architectural Historians (SAH), April 29, 2022, https://open.metu.edu.tr/handle/11511/97115. |
| ↑10 | Hakan T. Karateke, “Illuminating Ottoman Ceremonial,” in God Is the Light of the Heavens and the Earth: Light in Islamic Art and Culture, ed. John Bloom and Sheila S. Blair (New Haven: Yale University Press, 2015), 282–307. |
| ↑11 | Mehmet Acikalin and Hamide Kiliç, “The Role of Turkish National Holidays in Promoting Character and Citizenship Education,” Journal of Social Science Education 16 (January 1, 2017): 73–82, https://doi.org/10.2390/jsse-v16-i3-1622; Ayhan Akman, “Ambiguities of Modernist Nationalism: Architectural Culture and Nation‐building in Early Republican Turkey,” Turkish Studies 5, no. 3 (September 1, 2004): 103–11, https://doi.org/10.1080/1468384042000270344. |
| ↑12 | İzzet Kaya, Cumhuriyet’in 10. Yıl Hatıraları (1923-1933), 1933. |
| ↑13 | “Onuncu Yıl Tak ve Sütunları,” Arkitekt, 1933. |
| ↑14 | These installations and their environs can be observed throughout a short film available at the Library of National Film Archive under the title “Republic Day Celebrations, 29 October 1933”. |
| ↑15 | Geoffrey Lewis, The Turkish Language Reform: A Catastrophic Success (Oxford, 1999). |
| ↑16 | Samih Saim, “Yüksek Misafir Karşılama Takı: Haydarpaşa,” Arkitekt, 1933. |
| ↑17 | “Album Prepared by Telgas for Ankara Governor Nevzat Bey.,” 1931, VEKAM Library and Archives, https://libdigitalcollections.ku.edu.tr/digital/collection/FKA/id/5528/rec/1. |
| ↑18 | Server Bedi, “Bayram Takları,” Cumhuriyet, October 29, 1933. |
| ↑19 | İpek Türeli, “Nighttime Illumination in Istanbul,” 2014. |
| ↑20 | Süheyl Ünver, Mahya Hakkında Araştırmalar (Bürhaneddin Basımevi, 1940). |
| ↑21 | “Celebration Plan on the Bosphorus for the Liberty Day,” Yeni Gün, July 23, 1910. |
| ↑22 | “La Fete Nationale Ottomane,” Stambul, July 21, 1910. |
| ↑23 | “Les Illuminations,” Stambul, July 25, 1910. |
| ↑24 | “Sarayburnu Parkında Eğlence Tesisatı Yapılacak,” Cumhuriyet, September 7, 1931. |
| ↑25 | “Ankara’da Büyük Bayram Geceleri,” Cumhuriyet, October 31, 1937. |
| ↑26 | “Şenlik Fişekleri,” Cumhuriyet, October 26, 1933. |
| ↑27 | “Ankara’da Büyük Bayram Geceleri”; “Bol Işıklı Ankarada Bayram Geceleri,” Cumhuriyet, October 31, 1938. |
| ↑28 | “La Fete Nationale Ottomane,” Stambul, July 22, 1910. |
| ↑29 | “Bu Akşamki Fener Alayı,” Ulus, April 22, 1942. |
| ↑30 | Cumhuriyet Bayramı Kutlulama Programı (Yozgat ili basımevi, 1935). |
| ↑31 | “Büyük Bayrama Hazırlıklar Ilerliyor,” Ulus, 1025 1943. |
| ↑32 | “Donanmalarda,” Cumhuriyet, October 14, 1938. |
| ↑33 | “Les Illuminations.” |
| ↑34 | Ali Vehap, “Binaların Tenviri,” Arkitekt, 1934. |
| ↑35 | Jean Weinberg and İzzet Kaya, 10. Yıl Albümü, n.d.; Kaya, Cumhuriyet’in 10. Yıl Hatıraları (1923-1933); “Album Prepared by Telgas for Ankara Governor Nevzat Bey.” |
| ↑36 | “Şehit Tayyareciler Abidesi,” Hakimiyet-i Milliye, April 21, 1932. |
| ↑37 | Ankaralı, “Ankara ve Ankaralılar,” Hakimiyet-i Milliye, November 1, 1932. |
Elif Kaymaz is a Ph.D. candidate in Architectural History at Middle East Technical University (METU), where she also works as a research assistant. Her dissertation, Architectures of Anticipation, explores how the expectation of war transformed urban governance, spatial discourses, and public imaginaries in Turkey during the interwar and WWII years. She is the publishing editor of the Journal of the Faculty of Architecture. With a City and Regional Planning background, her research focuses on wartime urbanism, urban rituals, spaces and practices of film exhibition, and digital humanities within the scope of late 19th- to mid-20th-century architecture and urban history.
