Burak Mert

Undoubtedly, prioritizing humanitarian aid and meeting urgent basic needs as quickly as possible is of utmost importance. In an environment where food, shelter, and hygiene needs cannot be met, initiating efforts to protect cultural heritage would be considered a luxury and a non-essential service.

The critical element here is to address the most essential steps of the hierarchy of needs as quickly as possible. Prolonging this process could lead to human rights violations and pave the way for strategic problems.

Considering the earthquake’s destructive impact and the vastness of the affected region, it would be beneficial. The outcome, of course, brings significant logistical and operational challenges, along with the strain on intervention capacity. Evaluating the current situation, it’s evident that the first 90 days are crucial for the government. Preparing concrete actions within a specific timeline can offer a controlled and determined governance model.

Particularly, the first 45 days of this timeline are critical for rescue operations and meeting urgent needs. Efficient use of the first 72 hours of rescue efforts can minimize destruction and loss. Following that, it’s clear that a rapid shift to addressing other basic needs in collaboration with civil society and public institutions should be planned, leading to the phase of preserving intangible elements.

All movable or immovable elements that fall under cultural heritage play significant roles in helping us make sense of our environment, cope with difficult situations, and ease the process. The issue shouldn’t be viewed solely as preserving destroyed structures; rather, it should be positioned as a critical element for the rapid re-establishment of life, viewed as maintaining a culture of living, solidarity, and the established social fabric.

Clinical psychologists emphasize that the ‘continuity’ and ‘resilience’ of communities affected by natural disasters lie in preserving cultural heritage. How do you evaluate this?

By recalling that cultural heritage is not solely composed of movable and physical elements, I believe that intangible cultural heritage plays a critical role in the “healing” process.

I would like to expand on this topic with a few examples. First, I attended a commemoration event on March 15th at İstos Publishing House, marking the 40th day since our loss. I listened firsthand to the stories of people who were directly affected by the earthquake, who lost dozens of loved ones, sometimes entire families, and who emerged from the rubble. I find it difficult to imagine how long it will take to manage and heal from such a heavy experience. We read social media posts of individuals trying to survive alone after losing all their family members. The use and continuation of intangible cultural elements to heal the trauma caused by the sudden loss of a primary support mechanism like family can be one of the main pillars of building a relationship and social support-focused solidarity mechanism.

At this point, I want to quote from an interview I conducted as part of the project we have been preparing at Gate 27. I spoke with Kemal Vural Tarlan, the General Coordinator of Kırkayak Kültür, which operates in Gaziantep. He conveyed that individuals who experienced this ordeal and suffered numerous losses, despite over forty days passing, still could not fully comprehend what they had gone through, could not fully accept the losses they had experienced, and were trying to continue life with the feeling of “they will return one day,” as if it wasn’t a loss.

Many people were unable to bury their family members and could not experience the physical farewell, a critical part of the grieving process. They couldn’t achieve this closure internally. The inability to achieve this closure will deepen the damage.

At this point, culture and art can undertake a cathartic mission. Continuing daily life routines, reviving the region’s local life dynamics, and using tools like art therapy can allow the expression of emotions that may not be verbally or textually expressed today. We must remember that a significant part of cultural elements plays a critical role in enabling us to continue our lives by making the “state of nature,” which is heavily characterized by uncertainty, into a more defined and manageable state. It helps us achieve resilience and endurance collectively, drawing strength from one another.

What do you think about the idea that delivering only humanitarian aid to the affected region reduces humans to mere biological beings and that this will never lead to healing?

My responses to the two previous questions are pretty clear. Both physical and intangible support mechanisms are equally important. Just as it’s impossible to protect intangible cultural heritage without protecting physical reality, it’s also unreasonable to expect an emotionally driven human being to survive healthily and sustainably without a emotional support mechanism.

Even without the occurrence of a natural disaster, we can observe how critical role art plays as a tool for externalizing the human inner world, especially when looking at artistic practices. Of course, it’s unreasonable to expect every person to engage with their inner depths like an artist. Still, it’s crucial to ensure this right is accessible to everyone in need in the face of this devastation. Framing this support as a right to physical and mental health might make it more understandable for many people.

How would you interpret the idea that exhibitions and concerts should urgently be brought to the earthquake region and that this would help earthquake victims heal?

Cultural and artistic activities could be beneficial if they were positioned to be used more for mental support purposes. Seeing an exhibition or listening to a concert in an environment where the events have not been fully internalized might result in a negative reaction due to the experience it presents at two extremes.

I think there are additional issues we should consider. For instance, many of our citizens rescued from the rubble lost their limbs or suffered permanent damage to some of their organs due to dehydration and starvation, in addition to losing family members. In such a situation, while physically healthy people try to re-establish their living spaces and income opportunities, physically unwell individuals will also need to undergo the process of accepting their new condition. Again, when it comes to meeting the most urgent and immediate needs, it would be more appropriate to position such activities in creating mental health opportunities alongside physical health.

The earthquake also damaged traces of humanity’s shared history in the region. How should the collective consciousness and lifestyle that have persisted for centuries in the region be preserved, and why is this important?

We can preserve collective consciousness and lifestyle by continuing these practices and ensuring they are not forgotten. Every abandoned routine and practice will inevitably fade into obscurity. The continuation of a multicultural, respect-based model of living, as seen in the case of Hatay, is not only important for the region but also provides a significant example worldwide. As the approach of multiculturalism is embraced and celebrated in countries like the United States, where it is a key aspect of their richness, promoting a participatory structure and uniting on the basis of tolerance is crucial for our country not only economically but also culturally.

As I will reiterate, the current need should be to protect and ensure the physical and mental integrity of all individuals directly affected by the earthquake. Cultural life should be positioned as an active stakeholder in this healing process, reinforcing the support mechanism and maintaining mental health balance, while also ensuring the preservation of these elements by keeping them alive.

More comprehensive efforts, on the other hand, can be initiated after the emergency period ends. Museums, archaeological sites, civil society organizations, universities, individual researchers, and policymakers should continue their work on less urgent issues in the long term.

Considering the scale of the destruction, it’s clear that we have many years ahead to work on this issue.

What kind of roadmap should be drawn for the preservation and restoration of cultural heritage?

Collaboration between public administration and civil society is crucial in this regard. First and foremost, the reconstruction of the region, the re-establishment of life in the region, the reversal of migration from the region, and the return of the people who played a role in shaping the culture of that region require the development of comprehensive strategies at the public level. It’s not a situation that can be left solely to civil society or international organizations without public will.

The strategy and planning to be implemented in this restructuring should be prepared by considering the geographical and cultural texture of the region. Constructing large-scale buildings that do not fit the fabric of the region can cause deep damage to the city’s identity, and careful consideration is required when deciding where these buildings will be constructed. If agricultural lands in regions where a significant portion of the country’s agricultural production is carried out are allocated to mass housing, this will create another sustainability problem and bring different issues to the agenda. The destruction of agricultural lands will force farmers to turn to other economic fields, but as agricultural producers acquire new skills, they may encounter different individual and social obstacles in adapting to new conditions. This will naturally lay the groundwork for the emergence of new social problems.

Organizations like the United Nations and UNESCO quickly created funding sources for the protection of physical cultural heritage and made them accessible to the public. There’s no doubt that these will provide benefits. However, it’s crucial for public institutions to implement these resources in a permanent and sustainable manner, to structure protective and preventive activities accountably, to ensure sustainability, to address any personnel competency deficiencies, and to establish an active monitoring system.

After this stage, transparent reporting systems should be established to allow individuals to monitor these practices, and a participatory governance model should be adopted with active citizen participation. This way, the issue of whether cultural heritage should be prioritized for protection can be removed from the discussion agenda, making it a natural part of life. Two concepts that do not need to be separated are thus united.