A Depiction of the Rise And

CEU eTD Collection

M T In partial fulfillment of the requirements for the requirements ofthe for fulfillment In partial HE ONUMENTALIZING R ISE AND Department of Sociology and Social Anthropology Social and Sociology of Department Supervisors: Central European University European Central D

EMISE OF FOR Budapest, Hungary Budapest,

Çiçek İlengiz Çiçek Submitted to Submitted

M THE 2014 Arts

By ADNESS

Prem Kumar Rajaram Prem Kumar Alexandra Kowalski Alexandra

L D EFT ERSIM ASA

A DEPICTION OF

degree of degree of Master

ENTER CEU eTD Collection argued is it fieldwork, ethnographic an ofdiscourses culturalization byleftistinhabitants of Dersim. on Based sponsored d’état. coup 1980 the of aftermath the in politics identity with Left the of encounter the depicts it figure, respected religiously a into madman a of transformation the of analysis gendered a offering Along past. the of loss ungrievable the for mourn to ground a opens Uşen Sey of statue the that argues in thesis this Republic, Turkish the Left of father founding the Atatürk, the of monument of centre a as Dersim of demise Depictin Turkey. the and and madness rise between the in portrays figure thesis a this Uşen, Sey holiness, of story the Following state. Turkish the and he the during (Tunceli), Dersim in 1994 in erected was which Turkey, in madman a of statue first the on focuses thesis This ABSTRACT

policy

g the ways in which the statue of Sey Uşen stands in negotiations with the the with negotiations in stands Uşen Sey of statue the which in ways the g f eoiiiain oad Aei i rpoue o a oa lvl through level local a on reproduced is Alevis towards depoliticization of

ight of the civil war between the Partiya Karkêrn Kurdistan Karkêrn Partiya the between war civil the of ight i

ht h state the that with - CEU eTD Collection Dersimmineending of while stories our smokingbreaks. I least, not but Last unforgettable of moment the me with sharing for Juli to thankful drawings should I ableto this not be thesis finishwriting assistance their Marlene Leyla, Dani, Armanc, friends My aninterest developed to my research topic. w academic inspiring their for Ahıska Meltem and Karaca thoughts my sp e untimely my responding and sincerely me supporting for them Rajaram Kumar Prem and Kowalski t Without in Dersim. way my find to me helping Badem Candan to and topic this on working me encouraging of sense Kerim, of Dersim product in a met was have data my I of that interpretation friends my to indebted am I realized. be not would project never my answer to contribute to willingness their Without project. this w interlocutors my to gratitude my express to want I all of First ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ecial debt to Vlad Naumescu, who allocated so much from his time and helped me shaping shaping me helped and time his from much so allocated who Naumescu, Vlad to debt ecial

Arzu,

the outcome of outcome the . also e norgmn ad theoretical and encouragement he They

o ol fr hs rjc bt lo o frhr research further for also but project this for only not Erbil, riuae y prcain o t to appreciation my articulate , . Without their intellectual contributions and psychological support I would would I support psychological and contributions intellectual their Without .

give meaning to the meaning tothe attributinggive theories agencytothe Mustafa

am grateful to Hakan for wearing a Kaypakkaya h Kaypakkaya a wearing for Hakan to grateful am Deniz, , my fieldwork. my

Ruthy, Gürçağ,

Doli,

Sertaç

Ezgi, Hazal, Uğur, Zeynep Uğur, Hazal, ,

this thesis could not have been written. I am thankful to thankful am I written. been have not could thesis this .

and my family, they they family, my and I am thankful to Bülent Bilmez and Şükrü Aslan for for Aslan Şükrü and Bilmez Bülent to thankful am I

aa, yohhlihhs Nobilis, Hypophthalmichthys Hakan,

a collective work and work collective a i e fetvns o Dn’ mte tea matte Dani’s of effectiveness he i

otiuin o m of contributions

and Wuşe and

orks. In the light of their works their of light the In orks.

were with me with were ho were as excited as me for for me as excited as were ho

last laugh last - the contribution of contribution the mails every time. I owe a a owe I time. every mails

sprios Alexandra supervisors y were were . non

at wn t tak Banu thank to want I -

ending questions this questions ending which evoked never evoked which essential - living objects. I am living I objects. whenever I sought sought I whenever and flying colors flying

Jo formaking n

n and boy y Ahmet . The The . her

- I , . CEU eTD Collection BIBLIOGRAPHY 5.0 Sey Uşen of Culturalization 5.5 a Budela UşenBecoming Sey a of New Identity: Constitution The 5.4 Uşen Sey as aMadman 5.3 Mad Becoming of PossibleReasons or Service Betrayal: Military The 5.2 at Home Uşen Dersim:Sey Before Comingto 5.1 THE STORY O 5.0 Sey Uşenof Aestheticization 4.3 asZombies Monuments Cult Public The Monumentalization: of 4.2 Uşen’s Sey 4.1 4.0 3.0 Dersim 2.7 Becomi Alevism Case:A Peculiar Dersim 2.6 AleviThe Awakening 2.5 Politics: 1990s Identity Riseof The 2.4 Entranc The 2.3 in 1970s LeftistThe Mobilization 2.2 Dersim (1938) the Genocide and (1915) Armenian The Genocide Catastrophes: Between Two the 2.1 2.0 1.0 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ABSTRACT Contents of Table ......

ENTRANCE TO THE CITY OF SOULS: HISTORICAL BACKGROUND HISTORICAL SOULS: OF THE CITY TO ENTRANCE INTRODUCTION CONCLUSION UŞEN SEY OF THE STATUE METHODOLOGY

...... Assassination e to a New World: The Coup of 1980 of Coup The World: aNew e to

...... ng the Specter of Turkish Politics Turkish Specterof the ng F SEY USEN F SEY ......

......

...... 1

......

17 16 14 13 12 11 10 52 50 46 41 39 36 33 33 29 23 22 19

8 8 3 ii

CEU eTD Collection Gola 5: Figure Çetu.Photograph from theDocumentary “Jiare”. ofOzanMunzur, The 4: of Figure Statue Atatürk The 3: Figure Inscriptions PhotographbyArmanc oftheStatue ofSeyUşen. Yıldız. 2:TheofSeyidFigure Statue Hüseyin. Photograph byArmanc Yıldız. The 1: ofSeyidFigure Statue Rıza.Photograph by Armanc Yıldız. Figures List of

. Photograph by Armanc Yıldız. 2

......

35 27 20

5 4

CEU eTD Collection strategic a has it seems It well. as 1938] [in Genocide the importance (laughing). for came they when point this near somewhere positioned were troops the that say people know, You […]again. started Protes Gezi the after but while, a for checks regular no were There there. stayed they [instopped2012]warhas until the then since coup[ofand 1980]after point the this deployed a was stopped Woman Çiçek Woman Çiçek Woman Çiçek the at entrance oftheprovinceandasked woman the me: next to sitting forces security by welcomed be to surprised was I so ongoing, still is PKK) Party, Workers’ P the and state Turkish the between Process Peace The happened. had nothing if as resumed, struggles and mountains about lyrics the bus, the left had man the After information. my retrieving while name my say not did and detail in mine b them giving while name everyone’s loud out repeating and quickly ID's checking just was he Although silence. complete by replaced was ago minutes few a just from song Maoist the ID’s, the checking was he While manner. indifferent an in wallets their ID's their taken already had passengers the of most words, his finished he Before IDs?” your I see Can warrant. search a have we and denunciation a is There Office. Branch Security pr and music the switch to driver were the for commuters time some After The ways. casual bus. their in the chattering and chuckling of player cassette the in playing still was Munzur Grup direct gun his vehicle, pointing armored an of top on positioned soldier the noticed I When bus. the approached policemen, and soldiers of composed forces, security of group mixed A stopped. suddenly tha showing sign the passed just had Tunceli), (officially Dersim and Elazığ between commuting in, were we that bus The 1.0

INTRODUCTION : No,I am not. : This timeis myfirst here. checkoris : Is this aregular there something ex : That is why the cop looked at your ID for so long. […] The place where we were we where place The […] long. so for ID your at looked cop the why is That : notfrom: So,youare here? how longhaven'tyoubeenhere? : For pr hs emt, mn nee te u sotn: W ae rm h Public the from are “We shouting: bus the entered man a permits, his epare eua cek point check regular

ly towards the bus, the song the bus, the towards ly

t we have reached the Tunceli provincial border, when it it when border, provincial Tunceli the reached have we t

uig h 8s bt n h 9s s el Atal they Actually well. as 90s the in but 80s… the during 3

İsyan Ateşi [The Fire of Rebellion] of Fire [The Ateşi İsyan traordinary going on?traordinary going artiya Karkeren Kurdistan (Kurdistan (Kurdistan Kurdistan Karkeren artiya

c, e investigated he ack,

ts they they ts from by CEU eTD Collection (1949 Kaypakkaya İbrahim of photo the with banner a was there photo, to next Elvan’s right Berkin hand; his in me for surprise a also had Rıza Seyid Rıza. Seyid of hands the t is Protests, Gezi the during 15 of age the at life his lost tear a by head the El Berkin of photograph encounter big actual the newspapers, a holding statue Rıza’s Seyid of photos seen Figure the of centre the at situated is which Genocide, Dersim 1938 the against resistance the of leaders (1863 Rıza Seyid of Just Rights. Human of Statue the road,acrossthe Atatürkaccompanying was youngwoman a ofrepresentationA [Lie] Square. Palavra the called informally Square, [Republic] Cumhuriyet in situated is which Atatürk, c the in us welcoming monument public first The

city.

1 This was another affectively loaded moment of “entering the field”. Although I had I Although field”. the “entering of moment loaded affectively another was This : The S

tatue of SeyidRıza.Photograph tatue of - gas canister fired by the police on his way of buying bread in Istanbul, and Istanbul, in bread buying of way his on police the by fired canister gas - 1938) (the erection of the statue: 2012), one of the significant religious religious significant the of one 2012), statue: the of erection (the 1938)

before reaching the point of arrival, we passed by the statue the by passed we arrival, of point the reaching before

was overwhelming. Berkin Elvan, who was fatally hit on hit fatally was who Elvan, Berkin overwhelming. was

by ArmancYıldız. 4

ity centre unsurprisingly was the statue of statue the was unsurprisingly centre ity hus placed at the centre of the city in city the of centre the at placed hus

a i the in van

- CEU eTD Collection Figure laughtercomingthe endofthecheckpoint the at story. Kayp Rıza, Seyit encountering after hand his in a cigarette holding man smiling a of statue a with Encountering effect. calming a had inhabitants, Dersim’s by called is he as Uşen, Sey of statue the with encounter first My Hüseyin. Seyid fron in right stopped bus the construction, under was terminal bus the Since generations of ghosts. Rıza, Seyid leader religious executed the of wings the under inhabitants Tunceli among influential so still are doctrines whose Kaypakkaya, of photo the and forces, police the by attacked was Istanbul mu Alevi youngest the Elvan, Berkin of photo the of installation The prisons. its in behind left state Turkish the that bodies dead young the of one became and Dersim of mountains the in 1973 in arrested was Leninist), TKP/ the of founder the Kaypakkaya, 1973).

2 A couple of minutes after passing by the ghosts’ ceremony, we reached the last stop. last the reached we ceremony, ghosts’ the by passing after minutes of couple A :The :The Stat

whose ue of Seyid Hüseyin. Photograph Hüseyin. Seyid ue of

ed oy ol nt even not could body dead

drd uig h Gz Poet, hs fnrl in funeral whose Protests, Gezi the during rdered 5

by Yıldız. Armanc

e uid ws ie crmn o different of ceremony a like was buried, be L Cmuit at o Turkey/Marxist of Party (Communist ML

akkaya and Berkin Elvan, was like like was Elvan, Berkin and akkaya

t of the statue of statue the of t - CEU eTD Collection to Sey Uşen’slifestory Chapter in Dersim, of loss ungrievable the voice to opens Uşen Sey of statue the that space the forward putting After Republic. Turkish the of father” “founding the Atatürk, IV Chapter forge Uşen Sey of statue the regime t and him of background historical brief a with Uşen Sey of story riseofidentitythe politics the after coupd’étatof1980. Sey of statue the Moreover, Turkey. in left the of centre a as Dersim of demise the and rise the us I tells Uşen Sey of story the that suggest words, other In d’état. coup 1980 the after experienced Dersim that change the capture story the Following 1994. in assassination his after year a statue a of form the in sphere public Dersim’s in place his find could Uşen Sey which in ways the illustrate to attempt I d’état. coup 1980 the after figure public respected religiously a became an 1960s, late the from starting Dersim of streets the on living was lineage, holy a from Dersimlis [peoplefromDersim]. the madness his appearance, on shabby his streets, life his about remembrances evokes rather Uşen Sey of statue the centre, city the in monuments the from different imprisonment, or torture massacres, as such events dramatic instance. first the in stories mostly pleasing tell people makes ghost, a as Uşen Sey However, ghosts. of ceremony the in part his takes also Uşen Sey that realized I how is That Hüseyin”. Seyid die not did “You called After a brief historical background and methodology chapter, where I outline the life the outline I where chapter, methodology and background historical brief a After coming is who Uşen, Sey research. my of point entry the is bus the of stop last The side lower the on written poem a noticed I closer, went I when However he way I approach the topic, the approach I way he a l s o

depicts the way his statue neg statue his way the depicts

examine howthe Seyway that shifted. closer Uşen wasperceived

Wie otaig h ashtczto o Sy Uşen, Sey of aestheticization the portraying While . Chapter IV Chapter nta o recalling of Instead

Uşen captures the way that the left interacted with interacted left the that way the captures Uşen , his miracles, and stories of how he was healing healing was he how of stories and miracles, his , 6 otiates with the monument of Mustafa Kemal Mustafa of monument the with otiates

seeks an answer to what kind of memory memory of kind what to answer an seeks

the political atmosphere surrounding surrounding atmosphere political the heroic stories of resistance or or resistance of stories heroic

of Sey Uşen, my aim is to to is aim my Uşen, Sey of

of the statue, the of V , I turn to turn I ,

d CEU eTD Collection ritualsAlevi asapartofnational folklore. r of decontextualization the through mediates reproduct the to contribute they contexts religious their from practice in rituals the eluding Instead, affiliations. political Dersimlis of eyes the in claims political voice to ground a as perceived not is it mourning”, of “impossibility the transgress to space a opens Uşen Sey of statue the although the with Left the of encounter the depict to attempt I coup, 1980 the after Left the of castration the with atrn te ycrnct o Sy şns eoig rlgosy epce figure respected religiously a becoming Uşen’s Sey of synchronicity the Capturing rising identity politics. Lastly linking with the previous chapter, I argue that that argue I chapter, previous the with linking Lastly politics. identity rising ion of the state sponsored cult sponsored state the of ion

eligious practices and targets the codification of codification the targets and practices eligious 7

u r alization policy of Alevism, which Alevism, of policy alization

having leftist leftist having CEU eTD Collection Dersi of population the 1915, Until 2009). (Aygün, Sunnify” “forcibly and “colonize” “conquer,” “discipline,” to place a as Republic, Turkish mid with st demographic the changed fundamentally that catastrophes 2005) (Aygün, Party] People’s [Republican CHP the from Dersim of member parliament a and lawyer researcher, independent an Aygün, Hüseyin Uşen Sey (1938) Dersim Genocide 2.1 conductedwhich I my ethnographic research. will which Alevism Dersim of peculiarity the describe to try I lastly and erected was statue the when time the of atmosphere pages Alevi demographic and city’s the identity makes identity ethnic religious Kurdish of intertwinement the past, Armenian The Alevi tradition. the in place peculiar a has Alevism Dersim chapter, the in later on elaborate will I i is population Alevi where Turkey in city only the is Dersim that noted be should It minorities. religious and ethnic of multiplicity a hosts still city the it, destroying of attempts the all Beside state. Turkish the and PKK) Party, Workers’ (Kurdistan in war civil the and 1980 of d’état coup the 1938, in Genocide Dersim the 1915, in Genocide Armenian the of stories the to listening c a throughout almost Dersim of history silenced the unpacking like was Uşen Sey of memories Collecting 2.0

Between the Two Catastrophes: The Armenian Genocide (1915) and the the and (1915) Genocide TheArmenian Catastrophes: Two the Between BACKGROUND HISTORICAL OFSOULS: CITY THE TO ENTRANCE

wl ty o eit h evrnet urudn Sy şn Teefe I ota the portray I Thereafter Uşen. Sey surrounding environment the depict to try will I - 19 -

th hs brh er s o witn n i gravesto his on written not is year birth whose

entury. While having conversations about the statue of Sey Uşen, I ended up ended I Uşen, Sey of statue the about conversations having While entury. century, Dersim was defined by the Ottoman Empire and its follower, the the follower, its and Empire Ottoman the by defined was Dersim century,

e olwd y h cneprr pltcl topee in atmosphere political contemporary the by followed be the the

1990s between the Partiya Karkeren Kurdista Karkeren Partiya the between 1990s 8

tutr mr cmlx I te following the In complex. more structure m was mostly composed of Alevi of composed mostly was m -

a br i te ide f two of middle the in born was n majority (Gültekin, 2010). As As 2010). (Gültekin, majority n ructure of Dersim. Beginning Beginning Dersim. of ructure e u acutd s 90 by 1930 as accounted but ne - Kurds n CEU eTD Collection perpetrators and helping themescape to to Caucasus through Erzincan (Kieser, 2005:561). 2 composed of 103.000 Kurdish 1 1938, in members family close other or mother his lost Uşen Sey how times several atrociti the witnessed village, Beydamı in born was (Bruinessen, culture” distinctive who Uşen, Sey intermingled. cultures Alevi Dersim’s and Kurdish Armenian, the which in of 1994:155) left is much “not change, demographic 69 2010: (Aygün, Turkey the by followed Alevi of relocation the and was settlements selected of evacuation Genocide The name. official the still is Tunceli Dersim, name the campaigns several are there and use in commonly is Dersim name the Although 2013). (Beşikçi, hand" "bronze means literally which Tunceli, as named was centre (450 region a as Dersim planned. implementin of way a as designed was itself Genocide the 1994), (Bruinessen exception of rule a of declaration the by also but paper; on drawn were Tunceli today’s of v of number the estimate others although figures, official to according bodies dead Dersimlis’ 13.806 behind left It 2013:3). &Hakyemez, (Ayata (1923) Greece with exchange population est newly the of policies engineering demographic the with continuum in seen be can 2013), (Ketsermanian, (Altınay & Türkyılmaz, Çetin,2014). 2011; “hidde became survived who tremendously Those was diminished. Turkey eastern of all and Dersim of population Armenian the Turks, and Armenians.

Dersimlis playeda peculiar role inthe Armenian Genocide by refusingto c Accordingto traveler ictims as 70.000 (Aygün, 2009). With the Tunceli Law issued in 1935, not only the borders borders the only not 1935, in issued Law Tunceli the With 2009). (Aygün, 70.000 as ictims h Dri Gncd i 13, hc “vras ih h Amna grief” Armenian the with “overlaps which 1938, in Genocide Dersim The 1 ablished Republic of Turkey, such as the Armenian Genocide (1915) and the and (1915) Genocide Armenian the as such Turkey, of Republic ablished

As a result of the Genocide andthedeportation bythegovernment oftheGenocide ofYoung As aresult accounts,the total population of the province in1878 wasapproximately 136.000and

- Alevis, 23.000 Armenians, and 10.000 Turks (Tosun & Bal 2013:139). - 3. riesn rus ht as that, argues Bruinessen 83).

- 0 km 500 2 2

ws iie it amnsrtv scin. The sections. administrative into divided was )

es of 1938 as a kid. Although I have heard have I Although kid. a as 1938 of es Amnas b cnetn t Islam to converting by Armenians” n

rsl o te etuto and destruction the of result a - Kurdish population to Western Western to population Kurdish oncedethe Armeniansto the

aiming to “get back” back” “get to aiming

wa was what g

CEU eTD Collection since the arrival ofholy lineages, 4 biggest leftist organizations ofthe time. Leninist and 3 dedelik, of institution the as such authorities religious Alevi the of weakening the witnessed period This Turkey. in Left the for centra the of one became and organizations leftist illegal and legal both hosted Dersim organizations. leftist among popular became struggle armed of idea the when period time people, of masses of lab of mobilizationcreation witnessed 70s frictions the words, and other conflicts In 2012). primitivity, (Ergüden, hope, and rebellion transformation, emancipation, revolutionar the of eyes the from However, 1980. of d’état coup the with fore the to came which violence sponsored state pre the narration, historical mainstream the In massacres Alevi the with resulted which Alevis and Sunnis between conflicts violent the as well as 2013) Ünüvar, 2012; (Ergüden, groups armed betweenleftist andrightistclashes violent ofnarrated time as the whichis d’état”period coup referre generally is decade This 1970s. late to back dated neoliberalization of attempts the to relation in considered be should movements leftist the of rise The Turkey. the from start streets the on living Dersimand of centre the to moving Uşen Sey of stories The service. military his finishing after family his left he chapter, next the in detail in explain will I As 1970s Mobilization in TheLeftist 2.2 listening to memories of1938from up grew he but relatives, degree first any lose not did he accounts, relatives’ his to according

“Originally For instance Türkiye Kurtuluş Ordusu (Communist Party ofTurkey/Marxist

late 1960s. The 1970s are an important decade in the history of leftist movements in in movements leftist of history the in decade important an are 1970s The 1960s. late dede Türkiye KurtuluşHalk Partisi r raiain ad oiia ognztos I sol b ntd hti i the is it that noted be should It organizations. political and organizations or

is a Turkish term t

(Peop ies of this period, this decade is associated with the atmosphere of atmosphere the with associated is decade this period, this of ies ocaks le’sLiberation Army Turkey, of THKO),

hat meanshat grandfather, which has been usedfor religious leaders in Dersim , inDersimthe course in of the 12thcentury.” (

which was officially banned in 1925 along with the Sufi Sufi the with along 1925 in banned officially was which the survivors. the - Cephesi - Leninist, TKP/ML, and its armedwing TIKKO) were the three ( People’sLiberation Party

10 - coup period is instrumentalized to justify the justify to instrumentalized is period coup

in Maraş (in 1978) and Çorum (in 1980). (in Çorum and 1978) (in Maraş in Türkiye Komunist Partisi Marxist - Front of Turkey, THKP Törne, 2012:73) d to as the “pre the as to d

- l cities l C), - 3 -

CEU eTD Collection to 1.000.000 by the1990s, without having any restriction of detention period. 229 people diedinthe passports and citizenship for being regarded as “suspect”: The numbers of people arrestedand tortured went up 5 e the (Boratav,2004).country banned and emergency of state the declared unions, labor and parties political the with parliamentalong the closed coup, the initiated authoritiesmilitary the smile, i place its found 2006) Wacquant, & (Bourdieu newspeak” “neoliberal the how illustrates reports TİSK in 44) 2013: (Ünüvar, strategy and efficiency profitability, on emphasis The Narin. of words social of abandonment export the to model Industry Substitution Import from transition rapid The 2013:34). Ünüvar, in (cited T Employers, of Unions the of Confederation [The Konfederasyonu Sendikaları İşveren Türkiye the of head the Narin, Halit said smile” to turn our is it now cried; we and smiled workers the years 20 “For 1980. 12, September 70 the during policies neoliberal to resistance The of1980 TheCoup World: New toa TheEntrance 2.3 recallgenerally himmadman, asa streets waslivingonthe without who money.needing belonged Uşen Sey about remembrance whose People, accounts. interlocutors’ my to according out hanging generally was Uşen Sey that bazaar) underground çarşısı, yeraltı (today’s park the to next was groups, wa which Square, 2008:285). lie] talk, (Dressler, [empty Palavra people” ordinary exploiting “charlatans as portrayed be to dedes the started 1970s, and 1960s the in ideologies leftist to turned generations Alevi younger seculariza the of part a as order) (Sufi tarikat and lodges Some can figures helpillustrate theeffect of the coup onindividuals in n the economical and political discourse in Turkey. In order to make the employers the make to order In Turkey. in discourse political and economical the n - led growth economical strategy in the early 1980, which resulted in the complete the in resulted which 1980, early the in strategy economical growth led

- state 5

policies (Ünüvar, 2013:33), was symbolically expressed in the in expressed symbolically was 2013:33), (Ünüvar, policies

the the 1970s, mostly do not associate him with religiosity. They religiosity. with him associate not do mostly 1970s, s one of the main gathering points of the leftist the of points gathering main the of one s 11 S] ih atr h dcaain f h coup the of declaration the after right İSK]

ws rkn y h cu déa of d’état coup the by broken was s tion of the Turkish Republic. While Republic. Turkish the of tion the formarrests, of torture, losing job,

xit from the the from xit

prisons.

CEU eTD Collection periodicals and newspapers were burned (Doğan, 2010). state violence. 23.677 associations were closed dow reports. Not only actorsbut also the publishedmaterials, cultural productions and associations were subjectedto service kept secret file prisoner’s death was reported as “natural death” along with 43prisoners’ deathas “suicide in prison”. Security Officially 171 people were killedby torture in prison. While the deaths of 300 people remainunreported, 73 the from suffered population the and evacuated were region the in 47). villages 417 2001: Moreover, (Bozarslan, Kurdistan Turkish in placed were chiefs, local their of command 1 the During 1984 years the between war civil the in bodies dead 37,000 behind left violence sponsored state the groups, rightist radical nationalist with collaborations Kurdish increasing the allianc repress The to mobilization. state the of 90s attempts early the in were services 2001:48) intelligence (Bozarslan, new the of establishment the with along autonomy” th OHAL, of declaration The 1990s. until 2003:199) (Leezenberg, foothold” firm a gained not had PKK the where Kurdistan Turkish of region only the was Dersim echelons, upper PKK’s in Dersimlis been to became underground, managed survive which PKK, the coup, the by movements leftist of castration the Following Politics:1990s Identity of TheRise 2.4 catch, could you?” didn’t the are “Where policeman: the asked and station police the to went street, the on anyone see not could who post the in place takes recurrently up th after violence physical and political sponsored state the by touched drastically been has “veins Turkey, in main Left” the to the blood ofpumping one as interlocutors my by described frequently was which Dersim, 990s, 300,000 soldiers and 95,000 village guards, who were only in the chain of chain the in only were who guards, village 95,000 and soldiers 300,000 990s, people? Did you do the same thing you did in 1938? You killed everyone you everyone killed You 1938? in did you thing same the do you Did people? s for 1 million 638thousand people. 230thousand people were put ontrial based onthese

Rgo o Etariay a i 18 wt “ get el of deal great “a with 1987 in Law Extraordinary of Region e es made with the Hizbullahi, a Kurdish Islamist group, and and group, Islamist Kurdish a Hizbullahi, the with made es an influential actor in Dersim. “Although there had always always had there “Although Dersim. in actor influential an - coup setting. After the declaration of curfew, Sey Uşen, Sey curfew, of declaration the After setting. coup e coup. One of the stories of Sey Uşen, which popped which Uşen, Sey of stories the of One coup. e

n andn 937movies were censoredand more than40tons 12

- 99 Bzrln 20: 45). 2001: (Bozarslan, 1999

CEU eTD Collection Turkish of appropriation the with appeared concurrently mobilization Alevi that noted be should It 2008). Dressler, 2010; Tambar, 1996; (Bruinessen, Alevism on working scholars the by Awakening or Revival Alevi the as called is period This 2010:655). (Kambar, identity communal a of basis the on appeared publications of wave new volunta Islam,Alevi Turkish of embracement the and associations on ban the of assuage the After 2008:286). self and freedom religious of rhetoric secularist and discourse “to began movements leftist with alliance in were who Alevis, formations”, identity for reference of point major a become having religion “the and place, taking was PKK the and Left the between conflict the While Awakening TheAlevi 2.5 butonly byscholars alsomostby m of not 2003:205) (Leezenberg, region” the in aspiration revolutionary Kurdish of representative legitimate sole “the become to attempt PKK’s the as interpreted is conflict This Dersim. of Ders in organization leftist local TİKKO, a as regarded still is which the between conflict The event: significant another witnessed 1994 of year The identity of rise the with coincides erection time the at mayor the Arslan, Mazlum of initiative the by year following the in erected was statue his and 1994, in teacher schizophrenic a by assassinated was he after club than ghosts living bodies. star Dersim that state to exaggeration an be not would it 1990s, in war civil into Taking 2003:207). the during and coup the after refugees political as Europe to going migrants the consideration (Leezenberg, repression military the with along embargo food While the civil war was becoming more brutal, Sey Uşen participated in the ghosts’ the in participated Uşen Sey brutal, more becoming was war civil the While ry associations spread up all over the country (Bruinessen, 1996: 7) and a and 1996: 7) (Bruinessen,country the all over up spread ry associations

assert Alevi identity within a universalistic human rights rights human universalistic a within identity Alevi assert y interlocutors. y interlocutors. - based demands voiced by both Kurds and Alevis. and Kurds both by voiced demands based 13

- im, and the PKK in the mountains the in PKK the and im, sa snhss s sae policy state a as synthesis Islam - eemnto” (Dressler, determination” ted to host more host to ted . The statue’s statue’s The . - CEU eTD Collection state does not recognize sectariandistin 6 statesKurdish identity andtheone other he that is asocialist 2012(Gezik, the and Turkishness with himself the identifies while father family; same the within appropriations identity different encountered I Gezik, Erdal to similarly instance, For identities. different between choosing started Dersimlis that way peculiar very a in resulted discourses diverse by targeted Being 2003:201). (Leezenberg, Dersiml that declared nationalists Zaza 2003:200) (Leezenberg, vernacular” Zaza distinct on “based hand, other the On 204). 2003: (Leezenberg, else” nothing and Kurds were really they that Kurds Alevi (Bru Turkish essentially are languages Zaza and Kurdish that prove to tried part Turkish the While narrations. own their of part a as identity Alevi politics the make to trying been have sides both from attempts Nationalist identity atmosphere. rising the in complicated doubly is still Kurdish of position The 2003). (Dressler. language)” Iranian northwestern (a Zazaki or dialect Kurmanci Kurdish the either rest the and Turkish, speaks them of third Alevis of population the estimate Scholars Alevism Case:Dersim A 2.6 Peculiar Safavid and Empires (Dressler,2008). Ottoman the between conflict the of result a as identity Sunni to opposition const is identity Alevi the that consideration into take we if the against concurrence this of nationalist sense make can We and 2003). (Yavuz, separatism religious secular ethnic, possible time; same the at but Islamic, is which modernism, toward ideology state Kemalist the readdressed synthesis This 1980. after

There is no census result showing the numbers of Alevis since Alevis are consideredto be Muslimthe and

s r Zz, hc i “ dsic pol, r vn dsic nation” distinct a even or people, distinct “a is which Zaza, are is

ctions (Tambar, 2010). inessen, 1997), the Kurdish part tried “to convince the convince “to tried part Kurdish the 1997), inessen,

in Turkey in 14

ohr ih lvs, one Alevism, with mother

between 15 to 20 per 20 to 15 between

utd hogot h tm in time the throughout ructed based contemporary political political contemporary based :9). :9). cent -

Alevis was and and was Alevis

conservative a

6 hl claims child

and “two and -

CEU eTD Collection Çetu and relocatedthe representati original place of Gola Çetu 9 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lKSlIw7 For 8 deaths. our of 2012:189) . souls The souls… the 7 it, above is what blood…and The daughter? my soil, this under is what know “You following: as reason the me to explained Dersim, Xızıri) (Gola Çetu Gola in met want, they that place any candles light can people that come how asked I When 2011:76). (Deniz, follow to path the enlightens it that believed is it since ceremony th and light the symbolizes which Candle, Rights/Zilan. Human the and Riza Seyid Uşen, Sey of statues the around city, the of corners small the candles in appear evening, Thursday Every 2011:67). (Deniz, belief Alevi the to according sacred Thurs Dersim. in practice in rituals widespread the of one is space public andsocializing. gatheringof points but also make and wishes candles (Gülte sources water lakes, rivers, caves, rocks, mountains, trees, person, holy a of grave the as such place holy a visiting to refers which jiyara/ziyaret, of ritual the in visible becomes religion (Deniz [miracle] keramet distinct have all they and ocaks those of one of descendants the are they that claim aşirets The 74). 2012: (Törne, Dersim” in arrived Daylam and Khorasan from coming “presumably ocaks, seyid and pir as regarded are aşirets those of [chief] reis the and center, the of outside placed are characte specific 2011:15) (Deniz, Alevism the are practices religious the into relations kinship (

Gultekin, 2010), enclose very peculiar elements. The integration of natural elements and the the and elements natural of integration The elements. peculiar very enclose 2010), Gultekin, The See Ozan Munzur’s short documentary called“Jiare”. Available online pir

and jiyare/ziyaret 7 rlgos edr. t s eivd ht i that believed is It leaders. religious , i, 2004:63 kin, n em o rlgos rcie, esm te ny iy hr Aei ae n majority in are Alevis where city only the Dersim, practices, religious of terms In seyid

ve of Kurdish movement inthe parliament)municipality decided tobuild a large park called Gola referto the holy figures theof families which aredescendents ofthe holy lineages (Gezik,

of of Gola Çetuis in not its original place. Duethe to Uzunçayır barrage construction, the jiyare/ziyaret - 4) iaazyrt r nt ny lcs o o o arfc aias light animals, sacrifice to go to places only not are Jiyara/ziyaret 64.)

jiyare/ziyaret . For instance, there are 100 a 100 are there instance, For .

in the park. 9 oe o one , was 21:4. h itgain f aua eeet it the into elements natural of integration The 2011:44). , - oC

submerged in2010. The BDP(Peace and Democracy Party, the E te ot infcn jyr/iae i tecne of center the in jiyara/ziyaret significant most the f

(accessed on10.06.2014)

15 n

the 12 th ş

iret [tribe] in Dersim, most of which which of most Dersim, in [tribe] iret etr, ie lv hl lineages, holy Alevi nine century,

e fire, is lit in every religious every in lit is fire, e 8

Lighting candlesin theLighting Zeliha ristics of Dersim Dersim of ristics da ys are regarded are ys , with whom I I whom with , CEU eTD Collection (07.06.2014). http://www4.cnnturk.com/2013/guncel/05/04/ahmet.turkten.tuncelililere.sok.sozler/706646.0/ 11 http://www.zaman.com.tr/mehm 10 Kurdish the makes which Kurdistan Turkish the movement unsecure feel bef in place peculiar a has still city the BDP), and (DTP parties Kurdish the electing by elections local two last the in syndrome this supporters BDP the AKP the by “diagnosed” openly be to started country, the of rest the to comparison in supported well considerably is CHP where Dersim, Afterwards, then. until silenced officially of knowledge the containing Box Pandora’s 2013:9 (Tuna&Orhan, cry” mothers make not let’s moment that at told one No cry? Gallipoli of Cyprus, of Dersim, of mothers the “Didn’t parliament the in n “do as such discourses softer of implementation the with compromising and terror, against fighting on consistent being not for government AKP the blamed CHP) Party, People’s (Republican Partisi Halk Cumhuriyet of deputy a Öymen, (1881 Atatürk Kemal Mustafa Kurds, Gre the targeting projects different of composed was initiative The 2010). Bakanlığı, Part (AK conditions groups’ religious and ethnic the to regards with democracy of standards the improving of discourse the with government Party] Development and [Justice AKP the by initiated süreci açılım Turkish in Process, Initiative Democratic the du happened arena political contemporary Turkish the of specter the becoming Dersim’s Politics Turkish theSpecter of DersimBecoming 2.7 corner isjiyara every in Dersim, livingwithsouls.” are we k without dying are we centuries

Demir, Ferit (04.03.2013). “Ahmet Türk’tenTunceliliere Sözler” Şok CNNTURKavailable online Kamış, Mehmet. (80.08.2010)“Celladına AşıkOlmak” k, rein ad lvs O the On Alevis. and Armenians eks,

with the so ca so the with et ore election ore - kamis/celladina

- 98, h “onig ahr o t of father” “founding the 1938), nowing whether we will have a grave or not. That is why is That not. or grave a have will we whether nowing lled Stockholm syndrome. Although Dersim “overcame” “overcame” Dersim Although syndrome. Stockholm lled s

. 10

- asik th

16 oebr 09 te 71 the 2009, November - olmak_1025254.html

Zaman h Dri Gncd (98, hc was which (1938), Genocide Dersim the ot let mothers cry anymore”. By stating stating By anymore”. cry mothers let ot

available online

accessed on07.06.2014. e uks Rpbi, Onur Republic, Turkish he - 0 Ömn pnd the opened Öymen 10) st

Tntm e Medya ve Tanıtım i et anvray of anniversary death

a ccessed

ring ring and CEU eTD Collection offered interviews Unstructured 1995:209). (Bernard, pace” own their in themselves “express (Navaro another over one prioritizing were unstructured (Bernard, 1995). semi two conducted I movement. Kurdish the or leftist in engaged either are they them of three except Dersim. of mayors the as such figures public of names the conceal not did I However, speech. their denote to pseudonyms used and anonymous names their kept I interlocutors, my of privacy the protect to order In 27 interviews onemonth andspent Istanbul, one in and weekinBerlin amonth Dersim. in I conducted total In seyid. a as and madmana as both Uşen Sey of story the reconstruct to me the me gave Istanbul, Uşen Sey of opens. statue the that negotiation for ground the capture to Syndrome, Stockholm t Kemal, Mustafa of monument the (Abu culture” against “writing of motivation the With Kurdistan. Turkish within Dersim of otherness the to St of label the how realized I Berlin and Budapest in living refugees political Kurdish with conversations having While Dersim. finally in up and ended Berlin and Istanbul in continued Budapest, in started fieldwork My 1997:5). from away stand writing of to area” process “bounded a as the fieldwork my framing on avoided I fieldwork, works doing and ethnography reflexive and critical the consideration into Taking 3.0

METHODOLOGY

As I was interested in interested was I As Dersim with conversation in Being - structured interview structured - Lughod, 1991) I focused on the relations between the statue of Sey Uşen and Uşen Sey of statue the between relations the on focused I 1991) Lughod, “ n vreemnd etn t dsoe o discover to setting overdetermined an

opportunity to catch stories from different temporalities which helped which temporalities different from stories catch to opportunity

s what is lacking as much as what is materially present without present materially is what as much as lacking is what Most of my interlocutors have Alevi have interlocutors my of Most

with the mayors of Dersim, while the rest of my interviews my of rest the while Dersim, of mayors the with

he so he - ahn 21) peerd o e m interlocutors my let to preferred I 2012) Yashin, - called “loved one” if we followed the logic of the the of logic the followed we if one” “loved called l is living outside of Dersim, both in Berlin and in and Berlin in both Dersim, of outside living is 17

ockholm Syndrome effectively contributes effectively Syndrome ockholm hres (ut & Ferguson, & (Gupta therness” - Kurdish b Kurdish ackground and ackground

CEU eTD Collection repression andthusthe confirmation ofahaunting” (Derrida, 1994:37). the organizes still “hegemony that illustrating examples concrete the of one is back Dersim u preferred I reason the is That operates. 1994:37), (Derrida, hegemony” every of structure “the to belongs which haunting, how portrayed I 2011:12) (Ahıska, artifact” an as itself poses state “the that form lead me waythat the stateoperates grasp inDersim the to themselv (Navaro for political” the meaning appropriating produce to attempt people where life, everday of sites “the as but persona” stately or institutions social “tangible as state the conceptualizing Not Uşen. chance the me me taking seriously the ghosts orin ghosts me the seriously taking The presence of the non the of presence The to catch the connections that my interlocutors establish with the statue of Sey Sey of statue the with establish interlocutors my that connections the catch to sing Dersim instead of Tunceli since the struggle around taking the name the taking around struggle the since Tunceli of instead Dersim sing

- present and the lost frequently appearing in the interviews the in appearing frequently lost the and present - ahn 20:3) te ntutrd neves helped interviews unstructured the 2002:135), Yashin, Zeliha 18 ’s ’s souls.Consideringwords, the the asa statue

l is’ expressions. is’

s by es CEU eTD Collection Lamb2006:289) ;(Ayata & Ayata, 2007:212). became afull member of the Socialist International. In 1995 SHP unif By receiving 24.8% ofthe votethe in 1987 elections SHP became themain opposition party. In1990SHP of “amajor splitthe among ra 13 12 Statueand the ofSeyid Rıza. Statue Rights/Zilan Human The statues: central two for case the is as wire iron the to next candles light people nights’ Thursday on especially plants, the around wire iron an is there (1999 Şahin Edibe of mayorship the during municipality BDP the by planted were statue the covering plants The time. that at built also was statue the to next right fountain A donor. the as Genç Kamer chairman deputy parliamentary Turkish contemporary the and statue the of erection the initiated who Arslan SHP Party, People’s Democratic (Social Parti, Halkçı Demokrat Sosyal from writt is municipality, the by organized competition the won which Hüseyin], Seyit Die not did [You Hüseyin” Seyit “Ölmedin poem Solmaz’s Diren soldiers. Turkish martyred or ineffective” t in time its in madness of trope the through mentioned was Tunceli) officially (today Dersim time first the Tunceli.” of centre the at person sick mentally a of statue a erect to order in 150.000TL “T such: as media mainstream the byreported 1995was contemplation. erectionstatue in the ofwhoin The seems lost and hand in cigarette his holding man a of time this but statue, a again sight: different a encounters one down a walking Yet Turkey. modern of ‘foundingfather’ the greeted is one river Munzur, the abovehillsides steep on spectacularly set of city Tunceli, the Upon entering 4.0

CHP along with other political parties was bannedafter the coupd’état of 1980. SHP was founded asa result From thedocumentary “İnsanın Deli Dediği”

THE STATUE OF SEY THE STATUE n n h oe pr o te tte ln wt tenm o te otmoay mayor contemporary the of name the with along statue the of part lower the on en – e antem ei ised f ubr o geils h wr “rendered were who guerillas of numbers of instead media mainstream he

as is true for any other Turkish city city Turkish other any for true is as

nks ofthesocial democrats after the return ofthe electoral competition in1983.

- 2004). Even though the statue is surroun is statue the though Even 2004).

UŞEN UŞEN urkish parliamentary deputy chairman Kamer Genç paid paid Genç Kamer chairman deputy parliamentary urkish

directed by

EgemenAdak –

by statues of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Atatürk, Kemal Mustafa of statues by ied with reformed CHP. (Docherty &

few lanes from the main square, main fromthe lanes few and Hira Selma Kalkan ded by plants and plants by ded 13 .

, Mazlum ), 12

For CEU eTD Collection of lap the on sit to going are they that mother their tell kids Now […] accessibility. its was Seyid of statue the commissioning “While them. on down looking of instead people the embraces artifact, this of form the in itself poses which government, local the where govermentality, of way alternative an proposes subtly Şahin Edibe it, with wish her expressing of number a “everyday words, Arslan’s t myof words. informant’s onebirds”in flying the “controlling even expressed as control,which is establish excessive to 1987, establishedin rule emergency the of result the is statue, the of position unreachable the in embodied is which time”, the hands.” his from water drink to able be would Uşe Sey of hands the of out come to statue) the to next right is (which it t the of mentality the reflects statue “The statue: Uşen Sey the of height the with discomfort Figure e rvne n te he o plc wr as present also were police of chief the and province he I but modification its at aiming project a had I erected. was it when ime

yet. I was planning to lower the statue down, and make the water flowing from the fountain the from flowing water the make and down, statue the lower to planning was I yet.

3 The statue of Sey Uşen was opened was Uşen Sey of statue The her mentioned Şahin Edibe mayor BDP previous the conversation, our During : The Inscription

s of the Statue of Sey Uşen. Photograph Uşen. Statue Sey s of the of reshape the statue in such a way that would allow people t people allow would that way a such in statue the reshape

when the the when

guerrilla

with a state ceremony at which the governor of governor the which at ceremony state a with 20

state attempted to establish its repressive forces repressiveforces its establish attemptedto state What she was referring to by “the mentality of mentality “the by to referring was she What

ope wr bogt no h ct” By city”. the into brought were corpses

n tm pro we, n Mazlum in when, period time a in

by Armanc Yıldız.

Rıza, my prior concern concern prior my Rıza, n statue, so that people that so statue, n

couldn't

o interact interact o

realize realize CEU eTD Collection 15 30.05.2014 14 t commission to Arslan Mazlum led that reasons are lament of ambiance heavy the funeral.” the in stranger a as felt h loved Dersimlis react. to how know couldn’t I upset very were who people saw I “When such: as funeral the at shock her expresses nephew his Uşen, Sey of life the about movie documentary to value attach the people what were honor to we wanted We belediyesiydik]. And halkın de [biz kimseydi]. people the bir of municipality olmuş mal [halka figure public a was Uşen “Sey that significant.member isquite SHP a of success the 1994) (Bruinessen, state the and “us” or enemies and friends but else anything for room no was there where Dersim, of atmosphere political conflictual intensively the of %44.84 votes, [16.615 population the of 44 % of votes the with elected was I democracy. wanted they that showed also public on the Then democracy. insisted I groups, different from coming threats those all of Despite polarized. totally a political “The different: quite is period this of account expected, Arslan’s be Mazlum would it As win.” easily could we that election an boycotted we solidarity, social of indication an As massacred. were comrades Our on. going war dirty a was “There 1994. in election local boycotted a of result a as elected was forces, security with city the in out hanging was who Dersim of mayor only BDP’s political different stance. the accentuate to Şahin Edibe states centre” the to go to permission get to grandfather their

From thedocumentary Yerel Seçim: While having While Mazlum im so much. Although we were from the same family, they were far closer to him. I him. to closer far were they family, same the from were we Although much. so im

http://eski.yerelnet.org.tr/secimler/il_secim.php?ilid=62&yil=1994&bbb=5284 ” n naı Dl Ddğ [ht ua Cls s Mda] te short the Madman], a as Calls Human [What Dediği Deli İnsanın In .” Arslan, who is remembered by some of my interlocutors as the first and the and first the as interlocutors my of some by remembered is who Arslan,

“İnsanın Deli Dediği” a conversation about the statue of Sey Uşen, Mazlum Arslan remarked Arslan Mazlum Uşen, Sey of statue the about conversation a

The massive participation of Dersimlis in the funeral and funeral the in Dersimlis of participation massive The

(2008)

21 directed by Zülfikar

Eg e rcut ti pro a follow as period this recounts Bey emen A dak

oa votes total

and Hira Selma Kalkan 14 mshr was tmosphere . I te 90s the In ].”

accessed he statue: he .

s: CEU eTD Collection 16 Halil aggressive.” very get would people know they since İbo, harm to afraid were They zone. clash the of outside İbo took protestor a until stopped them between clash the barricades protests, Elvan Berkin During them. attack would people mobilization, massive a be would there explicitly Uşen Sey killed have would they if actually, right be might you But […] days those in streets Se kill to teacher schizophrenic a with contact in get to bother JİTEM would “Why said: and bit a laughed driver, ambulance the of involvement possible JITEM’s a motivated JITEM a as Uşen Sey of assassination the narrated one no murder, the in involved as named commonly was methods, guerillacontra ofuse knownits for is which (JITEM),Organization Intelligence Gendarmerie knowledge ofasecret. the had he because police the by killed was Uşen Sey that thinks BDP, the with affiliated 2013). all, at (Akın tendencies conservative driven Islam Sunni He attack. fascist a of commonly is result which city a Konya, from was murderer the that a twice emphasized as murdered was Uşen Sey that stated member, Front) traged the death, Uşen’s narrations. different Sey in source of different a from feature originates tragic the on consensus a is there Although 4 got people so it tragic...” upset, wasso murdered was Uşen Sey that heard was it When Tunceli. of funeral crowded most the was “It

.1 Sey Uşen’s .1 SeyUşen’s İbo isone of thecontemporary a jo a , hra i m small my in Whereas rait Cni, h fre pry edr f Özg of leader party former the Cengiz, urnalist,

hn İbo when Assassination

16 madmen

asd ewe te oie arcds n te protestors’ the and barricades police the between passed - ak conversations talk Ue? hy ee iln pol o a al bss n the in basis daily a on people killing were They Uşen? y

living inDersim.

ction in Dersim. When I specifically asked about about asked specifically I When Dersim. in ction assassination, 22

ih esmi lvn i İtnu, the İstanbul, in living Dersimlis with Erdal Özgür

(40 ü

lk e eors Partisi Demokrasi ve rlük (30), a Parti Cephe (Party Cephe Parti a (30), ), who is working as an an as working is who ), Ali

3) a iiu driver minibus a (38), labeled with labeled y - - CEU eTD Collection Alevi cultural associations whichare not officiallyas accepted worship places. betweenthe 17 approac He name. his by him call to was fault only my and school high in was I (laughing). face the in me slapped he when the moment forget cannot I But detail. in events and things remember don’t I time, long been has Mazlum Uşen, Sey of memories his me telling While 4 a narration about death. his fixate even cannot Uşen Sey of statue the that illustrate assassination Uşen’s Sey of accounts the represents, it person the of life the in moments important of stories the forge to statue a from expect rightly can one Although crisis.” jealousy a is It guy. schizophrenic a cigarettes offers food, buys him, of care takes everyone figure, public a is them of One right? madman, are them of both “Look, Uşen: Sey of jealous was murderer the that forward puts Ministry forEducation removal his from they but responded.” hisduty never to petitions several wrote I etc. meetings secret has he or Russians the against fight should he as such excuses with up came he reason the for asked I Whenever dire the was I when room my to coming sometimes was “He follows: as situation murderer’s the describes administration school high of years his from personally teacher schizophrenic a threw teacher schizophrenic a that stone the by killed was Uşen Sey that recounted Arslan Mazlum and ÖDP), Party, Solidarity and (Freedom nd is happy when Sey Uşen comes and talks to them. But no one likes the other other the likes one no But them. to talks and comes Uşen Sey when happy is nd

.2 The Cult of Monumentalization: Public Monuments as Zombies as Public Monuments ofMonumentalization: .2 TheCult Dede ctor of Cumhuriyet High School, to ask for permission to leave early or being absent. absent. being or early leave to permission for ask to School, High Cumhuriyet of ctor

is a socio While t his head while he was sleeping on the street. Mazlum Arslan, who knew the the knew who Arslan, Mazlum street. the on sleeping was he while head his t dede Halil

- of the people andthe religious leader in Alevi communities.The phrase “halkın dedesi” implies a difference aog ih egz n Mzu Asa, nepes h assiain he assassination the interprets Arslan, Mazlum and Cengiz with along ,

dede

of thestate who hed me and slapped me.” I was surprised when I when surprised was I me.” slapped and me hed 23 Rıza

kon s dd o te people the of dede a as known , are paid bythestate as officers of Arslan stopped a moment and said: “It said: and moment a stopped Arslan

cemevi f National of

different s, the 17 and , CEU eTD Collection Jean In 2010:32). (Tekiner, land Ottoman the to entered them sculptur the and photograph the Republic, Turkish the of foundation the Until idols. to similarity their to due banned were 19 visual representation ofliving asanovelty bodies of Turkish Republic geography. the in this the with ground propagandist the share to started Religiosity 343). 1946: of (Weber, appeals” ground common “emotion of The practice the is him 342). for religiosity and 1946: aestheticization (Weber, rationalism” practical and theoretical of pressures increasing the from especially and life, everyday of routines the from salvation this a of function “the over taking art with resulted which raisond’être. its memor the from seems it 2 ( interpretation historical of form certain a fix to attempt the as seen generally th in Although 2007:21). (Pender, and memorialize to dead” be to it want they alive, be to wish it want don’t They other. or way some in monumentalize they monument; a into memory corral “to aiming authorities generations to be forgotten.new Iwanted knowlet abouthis life.” shouldn’t Uşen Sey that thought “I again: slap the mentioning without reason the explained a In whethe Uşen. asked I Sey way describe facetious to words first the of one as harmless of adjective the used Bey Mazlum interlocutors my of majority the with accordance in since slap the of story the heard 0 th 0 4

century, the sculpture as a form was debatable. Specifically three dimensional sculptures dimensional three Specifically debatable. was form a as sculpture the century, ), and a tool to mastering the past from the perspective of the present ( present the of perspective the from past the mastering to tool a and ), Although there were few figurative sculptures sculptures figurative few were there Although competition a as religion salvation and art between relation the construes Weber Max motiv the interprets Harvey David

ies of his assassination that the statue of Sey Uşen could not fulfill not could Uşen Sey of statue the that assassination his of ies e as artistic forms were considered problematic although a few of of few a although problematic considered were forms artistic as e r his decision to erect the statue had to do with the slap. He slap. the with do to had statue the erect to decision his r ltrtr cnenn pbi mnmns saus are statues monuments, public concerning literature e ation behind erecting statues as an attempt of of attempt an as statues erecting behind ation 24

produced in the Ottoman Empire in the in Empire Ottoman the in produced - worldly salvation” by salvation” worldly - Luc Nancy’s words, the idols, the words, Nancy’s Luc

l rpgna n mass and propaganda al A h ı s

k providing “a providing Crapanzano a ,

2 0 1 1 ), as ),

CEU eTD Collection was which Atatürk, of image the d’état coup 1980 after peaking and 1920s late the from 2010:190) (Tekiner, legitimacy for looking people of point reference the Atatürk made route” Atatürk’s on are we right, the on or left the on either are “We Atatürk. of route the established 1980 years the between regime military during State the of Chief the and Staff of General Chief the was who Evren, Kenan 2010:194). (Tekiner, Kemal Mustafa of anniversary profited generals The 1980. of d’état coup the after right country the over all statues Atatürk of spread the understand to 2011:12). with po playing state “[t]he and overtones”, “religious expression its and of nationalism form modernist a using simultaneously (Ahıska, statues By Atatürk of 2011:12). case the in god fabricated the of production the in involved that state to possible seems It sacredness. it with playing hand continues other the on and secularization, of product a hand one the on is Atatürk of statue the 343), 1946: (Weber, religiosity and aestheticization of ground propagandist common appro Weber’s with accordance In 2011:13). (Ahıska, sacred” equally as regarded “semi a as depictions his Atatürk, of cult and progress to reference with legitimized civil were statues Atatürk of spread the ideals, regime new the propagate To state. nation emerging newly the of expressions of forms in life Kemal’s Mustafa during appear to started which st nation with legitimacy gained traditions, religious several in banned were which god, fabricated ization (Ahıska, 2011:11 (Ahıska, ization Conceptualizing the statue of Atatürk as the embodied expression of the state helps us us helps state the of expression embodied the as Atatürk of statue the Conceptualizing ates (Nancy, 2005:31). In the Turkish case, the statues of Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, Atatürk, Kemal Mustafa of statues the case, Turkish the In 2005:31). (Nancy, ates

legitimacy of the military rule based on the claim that the military follows the the follows military the that claim the on based rule military the of legitimacy

well from the coincidence that the year 1981 was the hundredth the was 1981 year the that coincidence the from well - 12). Meltem Ahıska puts forward that along with the growing the with along that forward puts Ahıska Meltem 12). - god” figure, “contributed to his monuments being monuments his to “contributed figure, god” 25

the e isl a a atfc” (Ahıska, artifact” an as itself ses 90, ee h frt concrete first the were 1920s, both reason and affect are affect and reason both ach to the to ach Starting . - 1983, ’s ’s CEU eTD Collection and Anıtkabir to going by government the threatened who union trade a of leader the or AKP], from Ankara of mayor An of square central [the Carrefour Kızılay the at statue w Çeçen Ragıp sculptor of performance the instance, For monument. Atatürk the by ossified regime memory the transform to enough powerful not these However, characteristics. zombiesque its emphasizing monument Atatü an mini a name to practice widespread g its against memories evoking from free not is monument other any as monument significant element Turkish ofbanal nationalism. ps the me to seems respect that of in cult Atatürk The 2005:194). (Billig, reproduction” this of neglect a encountered have which nation which effe remembering double a have would nationalism banal the nation establishe “how analyze to forgetting and phenomenon” surplus a “to nationalism reducing th is neglect double as to refers he What flag. national the as such symbols with encounters day every practices, insignificant banal, is nation a reproduces what that suggests sch high and primary every in found fabrications quality low the the by Today, determined Institution. was Standards status Turkish Atatürk erect to how on standards of set new the 1994 In Ata of aestheticizations The public stateinthe Turkish sphere. the of representation the became representations, various through eternalized and sacralized - states daily reproduce daily states oee, eie t pwru ad s and powerful its beside However, rk monument is one of the attempt the of one is monument rk ool surround people of this country both mentally and physically. Michael Bilig Michael physically. and mentally both country this of people surround ool - states are reproduced is to be remembered,” along with “the habits of thought thought of habits “the with along remembered,” be to is reproduced are states türk’s image went hand in hand with the effort of standardization. of effort the with hand in hand went image türk’s

opann aot hm o Atatü to them about complaining nations” (Billig, 2005:193). He claims that taking into account into taking that claims He 2005:193). (Billig, nations”

- bus stop as Beton [concrete] beca [concrete] Beton as stop bus cesu etbihet f ttr cl; Atatü cult; Atatürk of establishment uccessful s 26

ci gu o Trihes hc i te most the is which Turkishness of glue ychic to reverse the memory regime evoked by the the by evoked regime memory the reverse to

o rce a mtr hg Atatü high meters 3 a erected ho kara] to protest Melih Gökçek, [the Gökçek, Melih protest to kara] ct: that of banal nationalism “by nationalism banal of that ct: rk illustrate clearly that the the that clearly illustrate rk use of its closeness to closeness its of use

kinds of reversals are reversals of kinds e tendency of tendency e rains. The rains. rk rk d CEU eTD Collection Figure name Palavra Cumhuriyet called officially is which city, [Republic] the of square main the at situated today is (Tekiner, 2010:191). thos for justification provides cult Atatürk

4 Unsurprisingly the monument of Atatürk was the first public monument in Dersim. It It Dersim. in monument public first the was Atatürk of monument the Unsurprisingly : The Statue of Atatürk. Photograph Atatürk. : Theof Statue and unofficially called Palavra [lie, empty talk] Square. When I asked where the the where asked I When Square. talk] empty [lie, Palavra called unofficially and comes Ireceived from, differentanswers.

by Armanc Yıldız. by e who are in need of it to voice political demands. political voice to it of need in are who e 27

CEU eTD Collection sentez.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=74&Itemid=154 18 4 in Symposium opening the gave Turkey, in minorities and nationalism on works his for known is who Oran, Baskın Dersim. on working academics those to also but Dersim about vision movement’s Kurdish the shaping in role in DersimStockholm(Beş asthe Syndrome CHP gets that contemporary support analyzedthe and Dersim 1938 Genocide about the wrote who one first the is propaganda considered were works his because years 17 for imprisoned to scholar approach Turkish first the is who Beşikçi, İsmail Dersim. movement’s Kurdish the about lot a say Tunceli and Amed between makes know(laughing).” never ri Tunceli, in are we here but [Concrete], Beton of statue the of because is it that tell would I Amed, in wouldbe it if know, don’t “I said: Kurdistan, Turkish of cultural capital the together,square Barış, reliability. loosing of process this of sign a is Palavra name The public. the of eyes the in credibility its lost Left the how was that and fractions into splits the square, the in out hanging leftists those of one as and talk city the ofmainsquare the at gathering were people 1970s, during actor local dominant the be to grew and Turkey in Left 1978 of years the of product a as Palavra name the of story the narrates published, is Dersim about commentaries Yeni of author an is who Çakmak, Hasan time. the of al politics about numbertalk and day all high square the in forth the and back pace who about people unemployed talked student, university a is who (27), Deniz instance, For Hasan Çakmak “Palavra Meydanı” Barış’s cynical comment, the use of Tunceli instead of Dersim and the comparison he comparison the and Dersim of instead Tunceli of use the comment, cynical Barış’s - Otbr 02, hr h itrrtd h fc ta te oe o CP in CHP of votes the that fact the interpreted he where 2012”, October 6 -

79. During the 1970s, when Dersim became an import an became Dersim when 1970s, the During 79.

a university[officiallyDiyarbakır], fromBDP Amed student supporter

Yeni Sentez

peh uig h “1 the during speech ed

accessed June 6, 2014 about politics the whole day. Çakmak, identifies who day. whole the politics about ikçi, 1990). Beşikçi did not only play a significant notonlyplaya ikçi, 1990).Beşikçi did 28

states that the public was concerned about about concerned was public the that states - Sentez, an online journal where writings, writings, where journal online an Sentez,

worked on the Kurdish issue and was and issue Kurdish the on worked st

http://www.yeni nentoa Tnei (Dersim) Tunceli International

hl psig y the by passing While - ant centre for the the for centre ant ght? You ght? l CEU eTD Collection s the time its of monumentalization of repertoire the against going sense, that In monument. a than rather memorial a as conceptualized be can Uşen Sey of statue the think I 1999:130). reconciliation, and symbolic remembrance of embrace a healing the about is former “the suggests that states them, between division who Rowlands, Michael helpful. be can monument and memorial inthepublic presence sphere ofDersim. social government the local the expressing as of mode new emerged a established CHP, which the of SHP wing democratic words, other In monumentalization. of repertoire differentiates Dersim in SHP the that fact the at points assassination, non produces rather but represents it person the about narrative any ossify cannot which statue Sey Erecting 2011:12). (Ahıska, artifact” an as itself poses state “[t]he that way the the in novelty Genç, a ushered Assembly, Kamer National Grand Turkish by the of president vice financed contemporary and mayor SHP the by commissioned was which statue Uşe Sey into above, illustrate Taking to tried centre. I that city monumentalization of the repertoire the in consideration monument public second the is Uşen Sey of statue The 4 ra story another us tells Uşen Sey of story the that, argue I However, Dersim. of inclination political peculiar the analyze to tend who people for ground suitable a offer presence, eternal falle The 2010). (Oran, Syndrome Stockholm of result a as country the of rest the to compared higher far is Dersim tatue of Sey Uşen does not celebrate anything that people should remember coherently but coherently remember should people that anything celebrate not does Uşen Sey of tatue .3 Aestheticization of SeyUşen of .3 Aestheticization ther thanthe for love theeternalexecuter. - coherent, unsure, open ended, unfixed stories about his life and even about his his about even and life his about stories unfixed ended, open unsure, coherent, In order to grasp the ch the grasp to order In hra te atr r uuly eertr ad rupait (Rowlands, triumphalist” and celebratory usually are latter the whereas ls to digi two last n ange in the mode of the state’s action a differentiation betweendifferentiation a action state’s the of mode the in ange

s f h ya o Aaüks dea Atatürk’s of year the of ts

t itself from the CHP’s CHP’s the from itself h wih ont his connote which ,

Uşen’s Uşen’s n CEU eTD Collection was “Beydamı 1938: experienced Beydamı, Uşen, Sey of village the how me telling started station,a police or Different you?” didn’t catch, at stones could throwing Uşen Sey as such accounts their you to motifs various integrated interlocutors everyone killed You 1938? in did you thing d you did “What soldiers: the at shouting up ended Uşen Sey that was narration various of point common the differently, no with encountering streets, the was The coup curfew. of The declaration the Genocide. by followed 1938 the and coup the between made he allegory the was life regime. memory coher a constructing without state Turkish of taboos constitutive the against go which stories tell to people for space a opens Uşen Sey of statue behindleaves non which state the ofeyes the in movement Kurdish illegitimacythe ofthe underlines thus statue Uşen’s Sey of erection the that argue I chapter, following the for grievable became Uşen Sey mourning for space a opens grievable Uşen’s becoming Sey banned, officially is bodies dead guerrillas’ for mourning where atmosphere govern local of participation the with event public op the and municipality the by organized being funeral his so, doing While recognized. officially or permissible the add, might we hence, and 1985:152), memothecommemorate only canmonuments forward,the puts Danto Arthur as because one, grievable a as body Uşen’s Sey officializing by mourn to space a opens it rather in a geography where Kurdish guerrillas’ dead bodies cannot be buried in public funerals, public in buried be cannot bodies dead guerrillas’ Kurdish where geography a in While talking about this specific event, specific this about talking While the memorial, a as bodies dead guerrilla’s of recognition public the obscuring While For instance, the story that I encountered most frequently about Sey Uşen’s Sey about frequently most encountered I that story the instance, For -

grievab crying for the loss of his mother during crying forthelossduring ofhismother the like. Genocideand the le deaths(Özsoy,le 2010). o to the people? Where are the people? Did you do the same the do you Did people? the are Where people? the to o - one but soldiers for a day. Although people accounted on accounted people Although day. a for soldiers but one

curfew meant for Sey Uşen, who was living on living was who Uşen, Sey for meant curfew 30

Mustafa for the “good dea “good the for

ors promote h promote ors ent narration, in other words a counter counter a words other in narration, ent

(50), who is a relative of Sey Uşen, Sey of relative a is who (50), ening of his statue becoming a a becoming statue his of ening im as a “good dea “good a as im d ”. Leaving the way that that way the Leaving ”. rable (Danto, (Danto, rable d

.” In an In .” CEU eTD Collection Navaro Yael states, possible be might time of which aresubtlystories challenging officialdiscoursethe state embodied Atatürkstatue. in mid w state the and PKK between war civil the of results the for and coup 1980 d’état of violence sponsored state the for 1938, Genocide Dersim Armenian the the for for 1915, Genocide mourning of criminalization by touched is which geography A level. a on mourning” of “interdiction the experienced Dersim Therefore, organization. says others” any to comparable not is witnessed mountains those What here… all are we Alevis communists, “socialists, region; the of oppressed the to mountains its opened which geography a connotes Dersim imagination interlocutors’ my of most In region. to links strong has evoke to stories celebratory or triumphalist any have not does who person a of statue Turkey. in mourning of prohibition the through constituted is state see it recently, until Turkey of policy state the of elements constitutive the were which 1938 Genocide Dersim and 1915 Genocide exchangesletter frommy childhood.” remem I died. they In until USA in those them.with contact in were people of village Beydamı one was grandfather my of dad the USA; to kids brought school missionary Christian the 1915, During (laughing)… similar look we that see you Can’t relative. my is Pitt Brad well. as 1915 of stories are there 1938, before And Genocide. the during Türüşmek in alive burned all were they uncle father’s my and aunt my sides, both from grandfathers l the of one - 1990, the statue of an ambivalent character became a suitable object for people to tell to people for object suitable a became character ambivalent an of statue the 1990, Doğan “If mourning allowed for grieving” overcoming the f the overcoming grieving” for allowed mourning “If Armenian the voices who anybody towards aggressiveness official the Considering , one of the founders of Munzur’un Delileri [Madmen of Munzur], an ecological an Munzur], of [Madmen Delileri Munzur’un of founders the of one , cy ilgs Te ilgs cos h ra wr cmltl dsryd My destroyed. completely were road the across villages The villages. ucky the “interdiction of mourning” (Nichanian, 2002) experienced in this specific this in experienced 2002) (Nichanian, mourning” of “interdiction the ms possible to state that the the that state to possible ms

31 - Yashin (Navaro Yashin

eeling of loss through the lapse the through loss of eeling - Yashin, 2009:15). In her work her In 2009:15). Yashin, sovereignty of the Turkish the of sovereignty I argue that erecting a erecting that argue I Armenians hich peaked at peaked hich n extreme n ber those ber Kurds, ,

CEU eTD Collection work worldwide mourningwhich the get 1994:101). of of”(Derrida, cannot rid the object, agonizing the as seen be can statue Uşen Sey the of existence the suggests, Uşen” Sey Die Not Did “You poem, the of title the As syndrome. Stockholm as such labels easy of instead lenses critical by interpreted that illustrates negotiation This street. parallel a in situated is which Atatürk of statue the with negotiates Uşen Sey of statue the Rebublic, Turkish the of taboos constitutive the challenging subtly are which stories evoking statue Uşen the about thinking suggest I story, this of sequences the capture to tries who collector loss the romanticizing Without process. healing the to contributes indirectly and monument a than rather memorial a as taken be can it why is That loss. unrecognized Dersimlis’ voice to space Howe body. grievable a recognized, officially an is he since object, melancholic a as taken be cannot Uşen Sey conceptualization, non and melan (Navaro lingering” and ambivalent, irredeemable, is loss the therefore, where, and mourner the of identity the generate can psych “a as melancholia it ritualized or registered not is loss of feeling the When 2009:15). Yashin, (Navaro over” grieved not is it therefore and ‘loss’, a as symbolized not is loss the ‘enemy’, one is lost been has who person that the “when asserts She conflict’. ‘ethnic to reference with melancholia discusses she Cyprus on r at or cholia cholia tempting to picture what is lost (Nichanian, 2002) in Benjaminian fashion, like a like fashion, Benjaminian in 2002) (Nichanian, lost is what picture to tempting - ua evrnet (Navaro environments human as an object onto which the which onto object an as and melancholic - ahn 20:6. utemr, h pooe te oin of notions the proposes she Furthermore, 2009:16). Yashin, ical subjective state where the object of loss is largely unconscious to unconscious largely is loss of object the where state subjective ical

objects ver, I think what the statue of Sey Uşen does is to open a open to is does Uşen Sey of statue the what think I ver, “persistence of a present past or the return of the dead the of return the or past present a of “persistence to show that melancholia mediates also through objects objects through also mediates melancholia that show to

melancholia in the air of Dersim is proje is Dersim of air the in melancholia h eetrl p electoral the who belongs to the community of the so the of community the to belongs who 32 - ahn 20:7. n Navaro In 2009:17). Yashin,

eeec o Drils hud be should Dersimlis of reference

cted. While cted. - Yashin’s - defined spatial spatial Sey - CEU eTD Collection of sorts some developed He before. aswell.obsessions. He hadsome jealousyattacks Hewas jealous than differently behaving was he much, talking not was “He returned he when But well. as boy a had they back came he when and service g before girl a had He service. military compulsory his before physically and mentally both person healthy a was Uşen Sey that once than more emphasized Teyze Çiçek Baki. and Yusuf Haydar, Ali brothers; three and Beser, sister, one had He Pertek. of v Beydamı the in living family modest a from comes Uşen Sey story, her to According that one only translation required since donotspeak I Kırmancki andshe speakTurkish. does not the was Çiçek with interview The myself. introduced I after Kırmancki in m with talk to directly starting were people why realized also I moment very this At region. the in name widespread a is Çiçek that realized I how is that and Dersim from one as me took form a (Aktuluk), andÇiçek,uncle with conducted interviews the t during me me accompanied introduced He Uşen. Sey of relative a is he that know not did I him, contacting Before 1938. Genocide Dersim the on the made documentaries of most to contributed He Dersim. on working researchers for figures key the of one and 75) (around Çiçek visited I members. family four with interviews conduct to chance the had I 5.1 5.0

Zülfikar Before Before USEN OFSEY THE STORY Çiçek lives in the same building with some relatives including relatives some with building same the in lives Çiçek

(55) in their house with house their in (55) Coming to Dersim: to Coming Mustafa er Armenian neighborhood (Antranik, 2012). When I told her my name she she name my her told I When 2012). (Antranik, neighborhood Armenian er ’s mother.’s

Mustafa Sey Uşen at Home at Sey Uşen

f o ti scey ol hv aohr trauma another And believe me, thelastthing we need. is this have would society this not If Mustafa

33 (50).

Mustafa : We should position Sey Uşen correctly. Uşen Sey position should We : Zülfikar to eaie o Sy şn and Uşen Sey of relatives two o , who ,

of hiswife.” is a minibus driver, became driver, minibus a is who is who Zülfikar oing to the military the to oing Mustafa

in Türüşmek in ’s maternal ’s

illage

e . CEU eTD Collection candles. light and animal(s), an sacrifice to jiyare/ziyaret Çetu Gola in gathers women, mostly group, point the at situated hismilitaryafter service, person.” hewasadifferent village the cameto ahealthyperson.he He Whenback kids. was one.He had aneasynot job, hard a is It worker. construction road a was Amca Uşen Sey service military compulsory his doing Before […] nothing... city, the to going for routes proper no electricity, no television, that community a Amca Uşen Sey about gossip of lot a is “There that: stated he service, military the from returned he when Amca Uşen Sey [uncle] event, that After right? life, human to regard they value the shows also it but village, our in gendarmerie the to go would one No Amca. Uşen Sey about complaint half got guy The [tribe]. same aşiret, the to belongs who villagers, the of [one head Amca’s İsmail at stone nev are a threw [uncle] Amca Uşen Sey clashes, daily there those of one In animals. and land over disputes societies feudal in know You […] etc. marriage their organized house. the left she then and once… wife his stabbed He person. aggressive an as him remember “I Çiçek: with narration overlapping an Zülfikar

I encountered I widespread the to Referring left theleft village.”

who has been living in Germany for years and came back to Dersim for holiday had holiday for Dersim to back came and years for Germany in living been has who

[uncle] - aaye, e olnt ak fewrs Can afterwards. talk couldn’t he paralyzed, os o poue ntig te ta gsi… mgn ta tee s no is there that Imagine gossip… than other anything produce not does , probably you heard about it already…. But what would you expect from expect you would what But already…. it about heard you probably , where the river Munzur meets the brook of Pülümür. Every Thursday a Thursday Every Pülümür. of brook the meets Munzur river the where Zeliha

(around 65) in Gola Çetu (Gola Xızıri) jiyare/ziyaret which is which jiyare/ziyaret Xızıri) (Gola Çetu Gola in 65) (around

uos ht e şncuh i wf ih i brother his with wife his caught Uşen Sey that rumors 34

Mustafa

s ut rais aunt ’s you imagine no one made a a made one no imagine you d hi to is she kids, two their ed er ending ending er

CEU eTD Collection is accepted asthemyth of origin of Kurêsan tribe (Deniz, 2011:121). fa his of presence the in miracles having of ashamed was he because saw and secretly him followed shaper a of story a from 19 chance a had I to. attached strongly feel people that point reference a become may betrayal of he broth his with wife his which caught in another by replaced is service military the about story the Dersim, of centre the in passed he time the from Uşen Sey knew who people many life, Uşen’s Sey in point thevillage, family,And thenheleft his twokidsandhiswife…” his more. any home at stay to unable was He mountains. the to resorted He wife. his hated he but mil his during Uşen Sey to happened” with accordance In 2011:45). (Deniz, system high a in tribe Kurêsan the places system, eternal the of is processor tribe Kurêsan the that Alevism Dersim in belief The Uşen. Sey of relative presented Çetu Gola in women abo research a conducting am I said, I When arrived. I before left and animals sacrificing for came who ones the about gossiping were Women Kırmancki. Figure

Dızgun Bawa Dızgun

5 Whereas his relatives bring to the for the to bring relatives his Whereas in chatting and rocks the of front in sitting women 15 were there Çetu Gola At : Gola Çetu. Dızgun/Duzgı is a mountain near to near mountain a is Photograph

who was able to turn the land green by his stick during winter. One day his father his day One winter. during stick his by green land the turn to able was who Şaheyder , 19

er.

from Documentary the hc i oe f h mos the of one is which Qıl/Kıl Zeliha Ali ’s miracle. At that day, that At miracle. ’s

’s narration is a good example to illustrate how the story story the how illustrate to example good a is narration ’s itary service. “After he came back, we don’t know why know don’t we back, came he “After service. itary

village of Nazımiye district. The holiness of the mountain comes mountain the of holiness The district. Nazımiye of village

o e s dsedn o te uêa tie tu a thus tribe, Kurêsan the of descendent a as me to - e the compulsory military service as the turning the as service military compulsory the e Zülfikar 35 oiin n h sca heacis f h tribal the of hierarchies social the in position

of Ozan Munzur, “Jiare”. OzanMunzur, of

and Çiçek, she told me that “something “something that me told she Çiçek, and Şaheyder t significant symbols in the belief belief the in symbols significant t ther, and he never came back. This legend This back. came never he and ther,

escaped from him to the mountain the to him from escaped ut the statue of Sey Uşen, a Uşen, Sey of statue the ut

CEU eTD Collection in but court the of front in only not narration plausible a offers cuckold a made being from mad going penalty, in reduction bestowed easily the to due required is it than less punished or unpunished generally goes and realm “private” the of concern as considered gendered specific is man a by woman a of murder the that have account into Taking society. Turkish in connotations coming mad going for reasons the both narratives, above the In 5.2 betrayal“ordinary” (bya before stranger) leaving. an and member family a of betrayal a between difference the and family the of significance While with contact broke I andmy brother Idivorced.erectmy Noonewould statue (laughing). No, mad? get I Did prison. in was I when AKP the for work to started was I betraying. is she whom with important Hüseyin morukimagine It wifewith yourbrother. isterrible. [dude],your Ali betrayal: of story a on based mad becoming of act the about talking were we left he before Just while. in culminating dispute a into transformed discussion the point the against r the to way the resistance on to told was I the story the to according 1938 started of Genocide troops Rıza’s Seyid where Bridge Harçik the nearby and Tunceli and Elazığ between commuting driver it. put he as wing, socialist its from movement), Kurdish of organization guerrilla parliament) the in movement Kurdish the of representative BDP the of supporter a as himself presents (38) and with conversation long a have to :

Hüseyin The Military Service or Betrayal: Possible Reasons ofBecomingMad Reasons Possible Service orBetrayal: The Military Besides all that, imagine you caught you imagine that, all Besides Hüseyin :

I don’t know don’t I

are close friends and they are both engaged in the Kurdish movement. Whilemovement. Kurdish the in engaged both are they and friends close are

Hüseyin was telling us his story of “betraya of story his us telling was

Ali (40) associates himself with the PKK (Kurdish Worker’s Worker’s (Kurdish PKK the with himself associates (40) , what is the difference? Cheating is a form of betrayal; it is not is it betrayal; of form a is Cheating difference? the is what , Ali

and his close friend close his and your wife with your brother… It is like dying. But dying. like is It brother… your with wife your

36 denounced to the cops by my brother. My wife wife My brother. my by cops the to denounced

Hüseyin l” Ali

Hüseyin started to shout to emphasize the emphasize to shout to started

is running a restaurant at Harçik, Harçik, at restaurant a running is

Ali

while having dinner. having while

evn te al fr a for table the leaving estaurant. At some some At estaurant. Party, the Party, t et is best at Ali

s a is

Ali Ali

CEU eTD Collection honor. of notion the around mobilization institution’s state the of reproduction perpetual the to contributes woman” the “protecting of discourse the how is That him. on cheated woman r the him providing by jurisdiction of level the on family the of honor the and woman the protecting of burden the carrying is who husband the privileges state The protected. be to object an as woman the of definition the in itself reflects t by dominated Being 2004:78). (Altınay, homeland the of machines, of wordsof knowledgeofthenation, other the arms, possesses the ofthebarracks,in knowledge cult This 2004). (Altınay, difference cultural “natural” a as propagated is army the from women political The The country. service. military the of experience se his military compulsory on based family the in dominance male (Koğacıoğlu, 2004). ignored stru institutional the and ignored is context political the “tradition”, as coded are crimes honor When them. to attributed tradition the in squeezed is life whose Kurds namely “other”, an of creation the in results and patriarchy from crimes de tradition or culture of realm the in it Conceptualizing Turkey. in “culture” and “tradition” of consequences the as considered are crimes honor that argues Koğacıoğlu to judge the allows codes civil adjud the 2004), (Koğacıoğlu, spouses equal by constituted society the of unit basic the as law Turkish by defined is family the Although women. over only not are murder and battery harassment, sexual rape, because political; the of out considered be can man a by cr any forward, puts (1995) Ulmschneider As well. as public ural difference is transformed into the superiority of the husband based on the fact that he that fact the on based husband the of superiority the into transformed is difference ural icate based on what is perceived as commonsensical or “tradition”. For instance, Dicle Dicle instance, For “tradition”. or commonsensical as perceived is what on based icate Ayşe Gül Altınay argues that the myth of the military nation serves establishing the establishing serves nation military the of myth the that argues Altınay Gül Ayşe

acts of violence, but the manifestation of the structural male domination domination male structural the of manifestation the but violence, of acts - iiay ifrne rdcd y h sae hog te xlso of exclusion the through state the by produced difference military rvice is associated with the cultural, national characteristics of the the of characteristics national cultural, the with associated is rvice

eduction in punishment in cases where a a where cases in punishment in eduction trs erdcn te ae therefore are them reproducing ctures ime against a woman perpetrated woman a against ime he male partner partner male he couples honor honor couples CEU eTD Collection family 1996).Kandiyoti, larger the on based fundamentally is which structure former the of hierarchies the carrying without state established newly the in actor political a become can subject an male the way this organization In family. nuclear hierarchical his of [leader] reis larger the becoming a of part a become to order in hierarchy social the in position gender and class ethnic, their transcend will they where army the of part th in roots on based procedureunknown period anunregulated (Öğünç, 2013). an for imprisonment or death social either is objection conscientious the declaring follows wh or and Turkey in recognized homosexuality officially not is objection “diagnosing” Conscientious deficiency. physical report doctor’s a get to order in humiliation to exposed holding least non at experienced has geography this of citizen male every 2010), (Hacısalihoğlu, army Ottoman of acceptation the with 1909, Since service. compulsory compulso the by country the of honor the protect to order in mobilized is honor, his purified he that claim the on based male The 2004). (Altınay, scientists social nationali racial the upon rose it and period republican early the during state the of discourse dominant the became nation military the of myth The military service. compulsorynamely maleworld the of trauma“ordinary” the to connected be his attachment tothe notion offamily. expresses which masculinity of performance a as read be can incest of significance the and that way the Moreover, Nükhet Sirman puts forward that the construction of masculinity in Turkey has strong has Turkey in masculinity of construction the that forward puts Sirman Nükhet f the to belonging trauma the [namus] honor of notion the Through e nation building process. What is expected from the male subject is first to be a be to first is subject male the from expected is What process. building nation e

a weapon if not making actual use of it, or it, of use actual making not if weapon a

Ali y iiay evc wih s o cnetbe o n ohr id of kind other any to convertible not is which service military ry

got a got ngry and left the table while discussing the honor of a man a of honor the discussing while table the left and ngry

subject, 38

who is granted a reduction of punishment of reduction a granted is who sm and its military nature introduced by introduced nature military its and sm –

if refusing to do so do to refusing if

- tutrs Sra, 2000; (Sirman, structures Muslim citizens into the the into citizens Muslim

emale sphere can sphere emale secondly d –

has been has at at CEU eTD Collection Elazığ, in the mental asylum years1970 the between in twice family his by hospitalized was He end. the at person schizophrenic a was he figure; appro to correct not is it but you mislead to want don’t I person. sick mentally a was He no? science, to little a stick should “We seyid: a as Uşen female relatives(Çiçek and the while Uşen, Sey mystifying to opposition in clearly are movements, leftist revolutionary to attachment their to due prison in years several passed and youth their during organizations in not are Uşen Sey Both new harmony. the about narratives their service, military the from returned he when knew they that Uşen Sey the longer no was he that agreed relatives the Although 5.3 process the of man.” becoming“real a finalize cannot this endure physically or psychologically to able not are who Those problems. psychological with cases many in results rank superior of soldiers divers from to coming violence subjected being army, strong a of existence the of justifications ideological the with indoctrinated being killing, for trained being months, 12 to 6 for barrack po the bearing and hierarchies military unquestionable the of part a successfully being requires man a Becoming married. get to or job regular a have to order in duty national his finish should (Altın man real a as counted not is service military of duty his finished yet not has who man a instance for well, as language Sey Uşen as a Mad asa Sey Uşen sbe ucms f hs tutr. h cmusr eprec o lvn i a military a in living of experience compulsory The structure. this of outcomes ssible At the very beginning of the interview the of beginning very the At everyday in itself reflects service military during masculinity of construction The Zülfikar

and man Zeliha Mustafa ay, 2004: 78). The structural reflection of this is that a man a that is this of reflection structural The 78). 2004: ay,

) believe that SeyUşen

wo ee ebr o ilgl revolutionar illegal of members were who , 39 Zülfikar

- 1980…”

stated the stated had spiritual power.had spiritual c Sy şn ma s god a as Amca Uşen Sey ach

R that I should not take Sey take not should I that

patcs of practices e leftist y - like like CEU eTD Collection etymological link between them. While 22 Alevi cultural associations whichare not officiallyas accepted worship places. betweenthe 21 http://eski.bianet.org/2005/08/26/65850.htm well. Aygün, Hüseyin. (2005) w 20 he because man” “real a as considered not is he clarify, To manhood. lacking signify can naïve and harmless being case, this In Turkey. in mad becoming for reasons plausible the to relation in naivety and harmlessness his on propose I Uşen. Sey describe to adjectives first the as innocent, life] similartoNietzsche’smadman.” half to his talk to in house wooden him visiting was he him, with relation special a had Nietzsche but him; feared they because living was he where forest the to going not were people him, of afraid This madman. Nietzsche’s called guy a is there know You mad. not was he but anyone, to values groundless any attributing of favor in not am I concerns. anyone’s with meddling not was He person. harmless completely completely was He scientific madness. the of to explanation fit doesn’t He actions. unconscious attacks, violent delirium restlessness, from means comes It madness… define you how is that violence, to resorted “common a of story a from different is Uşen Sey people] example, For in Uşen Sey of story the tell would power spiritual of sort some hospital. mental the in passed Uşen Sey time the mentioned to spoke I one no channels, news the to statue Uşen’s Sey the of erection the

InTurkish going madis Dede Hüseyin Aygün wrote anarticle aboutŞey Uşen right after hisdeath where mentionshe his clinical history as

is a socio Everyone I spoke to, except to, spoke I Everyone Except 21

and who is working as a state officer, makes a comparison to show how the case of case the how show to comparison a makes officer, state a as working is who and dede Rıza

- of the people Zülfikar religious leader in Alevi communities.The phrase “halkın dedesi” implies a difference

(40), who is referred among people as “halkın dedesi” [the dede of the of dede [the dedesi” “halkın as people among referred is who (40),

delirmek , Mustafa “Dersim’de BirSey Uşen”. Bianet. available online: him. […] I call Sey Uşen’s story rather as an aykırı hayat [counter hayat aykırı an as rather story Uşen’s Sey call I […] him. andthe

and madis

dede deli and a gy ae itsh s well so Nietzsche made guy mad Mustafa

comes from Uyghur Turkish delirium a has Latin root. accessed on 21.05.2014. of thestate arewho paid bythestate as officers of

Halil, a Halil, deli . Delirium and

and 40 journalist 20 t ec wt scey H ws nïe and naïve a was He society. with peace at

s eryd y i wf ad e ol not could he and wife his by betrayed as Zülfikar ntecnrr,pol h taht him to attach who people contrary, the On ” mad person: “He is someone who never never who someone is “He person: mad ” delirmek from , used the same words, harmless and harmless words, same the used ,

Dersim who made th made who Dersim

has asound similarit to think about this consensus this about think to

contrast with a mad person. mad a with contrast - nw. vroe was Everyone known. cemevi y but therey but is no e report of report e

22 s, the

which - built CEU eTD Collection o one were mountains Dersim’s instance, For areas. rural and urban the in both dominant became groups leftist of 1970s and1990s. an make to st the and possible Turkey of history the seemsbetween analogy It budela. or seyid as perceived being as such ways diverse in holiness with associated be to start Uşen Sey did 1980 after Only at. laugh to someone when 70s the During 1980s. the around happened perception in shift a that realized to I stories started Uşen’s I Sey When collect clothes”. bought newly his blade razor a with pieces to torn someone lau streets, the on living others towards behaving were they as him towards rudely behaving were “People person: mad a as perceived was Uşen Sey circle his to prophecies Uşen’s Sey mentioned I When 5.4 military service. Hisexistence was in awaytouching sensitive a masculinity.” of ground from his return on with someoneelse wife his caught remember he as I far “As his story: with st Uşen Sey that states Dersim, in passed childhood whose (50), interlocutors pity.” a is It […] say. they that, after mind his lost He say. they brother m a was “He such: as Uşen Sey describes centre, city the in father his from inherited he which studio, perceived is case Bein category. gendered existing the fill to inability an illustrating deficiency a is man real a becoming of instead mad Becoming soldier. a of requirement the fulfilling by nation the of part a become successfully The Constitution of a New Identity: Sey Uşen Becoming Becoming SeyUşen aNewIdentity: of The Constitution Starting from the mid the from Starting iserable man. I don’t know if it is just gossip or not but he caught his wife with his with wife his caught he but not or gossip just is it if know don’t I man. iserable

as a somber event. somber a as Ulaş te udmna pae fr üky İç Kyü utlş Ordusu Kurtuluş Köylü İşçi Türkiye for places fundamental the f g unable to complete the stages of becoming a man in Sey Uşen’s Uşen’s Sey in man a becoming of stages the complete to unable g

a a ih col tdn, S student, school high a was - 1960s, Dersim became one of the cities where the mobilization the where cities the of one became Dersim 1960s, Muzaffer 41 Ulaş

(40

ory of Sey Uşen for the period between the between period the for Uşen Sey of ory

), a photographer who runs a photography photography a runs who photographer a ), he was quite surprised and told me that in that me told and surprised quite was he y şn a msl prevd as perceived mostly was Uşen ey ghing at him etc. Once, etc. him at ghing a Budela Ulaş uk chord a ruck oe f my of one ,

CEU eTD Collection interpreted astheimplementatio 23 leftist diverse among groups. aftermath its and coup 1980 the of interpretation accepted widely of quotation above The release. provisional his after country Mustafa Both politics…” identity of period the is This individualization. apolitical the d its changed flow The movement. Now youth Kurdish patriotic rebelled. the into movementblood pumping is Kurdish Dersim radical the 80s the After […] coup. the after created Decisi 24 January the against resisting were We imperialism… of rules the establishing For what? For forces. capitalist and imperialist the of front in obstacles the us, clean to everything did t all know You started. period 12 September after But TİKKO.” of member a also was “I like something you tell will members CHP even little, a them with chat you If groups. hav today parties political different in people those all But this. show not would elections of results The Dersim. in [vein] damar leftist strong a is “There today: perceived is that way the in transformation the and experienced toDersim attached recently.” were whatsoever madness, superstitions, those All rebellion. of centre a as bravery, its with the of founders Zülfikar ofTKP/ML.In armedbranch the Army, Worker's (Turkish andPeasant'sLiberation TİKKO), irection; it is flowing towards the opposite side. People either join the PKK or they accept they or PKK the join either People side. opposite the towards flowing is it irection;

The package ofeconomic stabilitymeasures whichcame to be knownas theJanuary 24 (1980) decisions are ons. Mustafa

’s words “Dersim was pumping blood into the revolutionary movements. Look at the the at Look movements. revolutionary the into blood pumping was “Dersim words ’s

Bey spent several years in jail right after the coup d’état. d’état. coup the after right jail in years several spent Bey 23

ht a te is tig hy u i patc. n pltcl topee was atmosphere apolitical An practice. in put they thing first the was That ’s and ’s

big leftist organizations, you will find many Dersim many find will you organizations, leftist big

Zülfikar n ofneo

’s narratives were in accordance ab accordance in were narratives ’s hose horrible torture stories inside and outside prisons. They prisons. outside and inside stories torture horrible hose - liberal policies to Turkey (Ünüvar, 2013). 42 a at n oe f h rvltoay leftist revolutionary the of some in past a e

[referring the coup of 1980] another another 1980] of coup the [referring Zülfikar out the change that Dersim that change the out Zülfikar

l is. Dersim was known was Dersim is.

summarizes well the the well summarizes

had to leave the the leave to had Zülfikar

and CEU eTD Collection process started likethat.” to gosomewhere an recognition or you hadan in their dreams.Inthese dreams I guidedthem. they Then startedto consult withme. Çiçek: it Is only about this Çiçek: How didthis happen, how did people startto believe thatyouare a 24 others centre; city the to moved they since known in only not tribe, every in budelas are There him. in power spiritual a carrying is who and naïve is who someone is budela as call traditio long a is there Dersim “In budela: a as Uşen Sey describes well. as energy spiritual a masculine sensitivity man triggers who failed only the not was He 1980s. and that is when hewent to Dersim village the in long stay couldn’t He tortures. those all after calm was he remember I period, th to returned he Then, days. those in violence through people disciplining were They then. back hospitals the mental the were in applied These treatments contemporary nightsticks. by beaten being or bastinado electroshock, as such tortures Zülfikar well.” m were they cinema, watching were they if as angry him making were they [bastard] piç him calling by him, mocking were relatives degree first His aggression. his triggered society The centre. h of object an as perceived was he Dersim of centre urban the to came first he when 70s the During while. and Çiçek

Derivedfrom my interview with

Sey Uşen became a part of Dersim inhabitants’ life in a different way after th after way different a in life inhabitants’ Dersim of part a became Uşen Sey hospital. mental Elazığ the to family his by twice hospitalized was he decade this In Se of story the think I level micro the On aking fun. If you behave in that way to a normal person you will drive him crazy as crazy him drive will you person normal a to way that in behave you If fun. aking

narrates his process of hospitalization as follows: “He was subjected was “He follows: as hospitalization of process his narrates Zeliha umor. Zülfikar umor. d find someone. I went there and asked forthis guy, he was there. I talkedto him the and

recount that after leaving the house, Sey Uşen stayed in the mountains for a for mountains the in stayed Uşen Sey house, the leaving after that recount

ternal process as Rızawell? Rıza

Rıza narrates this period as follows: “People made him crazier in the the in crazier him made “People follows: as period this narrates

(40) who started to be perceived as dede as perceived be to started who (40) : “I don’tcall myself - centre 1980.”centre after Kurêsan 43 : sawI , the tribe of Sey Uşen. But Uşen. Sey of tribe the ,

dede are living in the countryside. […] We are are We […] countryside. the in living are Ue flos sr o smlr pattern. similar of sort a follows Uşen y yaradan[ . People startedto recognize me as

the creator] in my dream. He toldme dede ? Rıza ? vlae o a hr time short a for village e n of budelalık. What we What budelalık. of n : They start – 24

he was generating generating was he

Kurêsan when he was 24 was he when to all kinds of kinds all to ed to see me in dede

is well is e mid e . - - CEU eTD Collection 25 regulatingone ofthedominant actors everyday the lifeof Dersim coup. before the movements, leftist the of castration the with coincides person respectful a to humor of object castra the as interpreted be can practice everyday an becoming violence sponsored state the and arrests, massive security the forces, the by space public of domination The like. the and life everyday of occurrence curfews, imposing present of always vehicles forces’ security the making means the by domination forces’ security the with replaced were groups leftist and forces security between clashes everyday the street, the on I demonstrations transformed. also were roles gender in the not anymore were power operation state with encounters of forms previous the where atmosphere an In timeDersim second lifeinDersim forthe coup, everyday changed. the after hadsharply Uşen Sey When violence. of motif the with mostly channels media mainstream the in represented was Dersim of mountains the in and streets the on atmosphere dominant the hospital, mental Elazığ in 1970s the during tortured being was Uşen Sey While o police and soldiers both forces, security state the and organizations leftist between coming SeyUşen. see to accord people, Dersim many by known was Uşen Sey time that At 1993. in centre city the to moved he service, military his finishing After phenomenon. a yet not was Uşen Sey time that at that states He in was He situation. with clash or Uşen’s conversation constant Sey was That someone. to talking like feel don’t you love in are you When himself. with love in constantly was He [….] spirituality same the of parts

See the online archive of Milliyet national daily: http://gazetearsivi.milliyet.com.tr/ The news from Dersim belonging to the decade of the 1970s are mostly about clashes about mostly are 1970s the of decade the to belonging Dersim from news The

n t hm Fo Gray Sizrad See; Dersim Sweden; Switzerland, Germany, From him. to ing

tion of the Left in Turkey. Sey Uşen’s transformation from an an from transformation Uşen’s Sey Turkey. in Left the of tion

and lover of himself.” of lover and 44

in the street, making ID checks a regular a checks ID making street, the in Rıza

returned to Dersim in 1983. in Dersim to returned ohr od, h public the words, other n moved to the center of center the to moved

fficers. l s were is

CEU eTD Collection response totheir religious service (Gültekin, 2010: 85). 26 Si the left. the and of visibility castration Alevi of a rise simultaneous of the with becoming explained be Uşen’s can Sey figure respectful that argue I 2012:85). (Munzuroğlu, language Kırmancki for revolutionary of absence the in naked completely over left was Dersim coup, the After others.” the from fakes the separate didn’t They dedelik. of notion whole the refused fundamentally they But dedes. fake/false De In dede. themselves call to started dedelik practice collect to started Everyone abused. was system This hand]. [lending vermek el by transferred not is Dersim “In communities: religious the within corruption the prioritizing 1970s, the about talk to started he religion meansAlevism,it that Alevism so isdying.” about talking is everyone Now society. the damaging were they that aware not were They tradition. and feudalism of products a was system belief them For Rubbish… Atheism… imposed Left the 70s the “During such: as 1970s the in Alevism and Left the between relation the forward puts municipality, BDP the at working religion. of realm the in caused leftists the that damage the to relation th on recounted interlocutors My (Tambar,2010:645). religion” “public a as Alevism contemporary depict to commentators of chorus burgeoning a leading before, never mobi this of result a As 2003). (Yavuz, schooling and employment public in discrimination of end the and identity Alevi of recognition for Europe and Turkey both in Alevis of mobilization çıralıx lization, “Alevi ritual and religion acquired a degree of visibility in the urban milieu as milieu urban the in visibility of degree a acquired religion and ritual “Alevi lization, /çıralık W the with Along çıralıx hen I asked I hen

is asmall amount ofmoney, fo /çıralık

26 Rıza Te rbe ws ht epe h dd’ hv te ulfcto to qualification the have didn’t who people that was problem The . decline in the leftist movement, post movement, leftist the in decline c te essec o peiu frs f aclnte wud also would masculinities of forms previous of persistence the nce -

Alevism the institution of dedelik is transmitted by transmitted is dedelik of institution the Alevism , the dede of the people, about the positioning of the left towards left the of positioning the about people, the of dede the ,

e, h dsrdtd eiiu laes n is disappearing its and leaders religious discredited the ces, od, clothes, or valuable that is givento religious figures in

what Europe experienced 50 years ago. years 50 experienced Europe what rsim leftists were reacting against the the against reacting were leftists rsim - coup period also witnessed the witnessed also period coup Mehmet e Alevi revival in in revival Alevi e father to son. It It son. to father

(30), who is who (30), CEU eTD Collection hak 28 27 of codification the contributed visibility public the However, space. public the in visible became identity Alevi the events, cultural b and dance folkloric of form a as 1970s the ritual, religious Alevi central the of part of example the through process this exposes Tambar Kadir dema political the contribute not does sphere public the of citiesof 2013,indifferent Turkey. ki were who men young fire of pretext shots.” the warning on revolutionaries Armenians, Kurds, Alevis, massacre to continues our from migrate to us forcing were who houses, our marking were who Those lives. claim to continue control its under forces police the and government AKP the massacres, denial, assimilation, of tradition long sponsored state continuous by attacked the been have ofAlevis, “We, violence: part a as Turkey, in associations Alevi oldest the of one Association, Abdal Sultan Pir the by depicted is Kurt Uğur of murder The organizations. presen dominant the with known and Dersim from migrants cemevi the 22 in police, the by murderedwas (30) Kurt Uğur thesis, this writing was I While 5.5 figure amongrespectful onleftistkinship based his holylineage. relations with a a become could man” “lacking a as Uşen Sey leftists, of subjecthood the in “lacks” the reveal

Pir Sultan Abdal Kültür De Cemevi - ka Cultura - yurumustur.html As evident in the declaration of Pir Sultan Abdal association, the visibility gained in gained visibility the association, Abdal Sultan Pir of declaration the in evident As , whichliterally means a house of gathering, refersthe to worship place for AlevisTurkey. in 27

lization of SeyUşen lization of f ai ure, working a Quarter, Gazi of 28

h nn suslse mnind n h dcaain ees o ie Alevi nine to refers declaration the in mentioned souls/losses nine The

(

accessed on 10.06.2014 lled during the protests of the Gezi Park, which started in the summer the in started which Park, Gezi the of protests the during lled rneği, http://www.pirsultan.net/haberdetay

ad, lie or ie ol i te at er Te state The year. last the in souls nine our claimed lands,

semah ).

ig efre b yuh rus t etvl and festivals at groups youth by performed eing - ls Aei egbrod n sabl hosting Istanbul, in neighborhood Alevi class 46

cem

as a folkloric, thus non thus folkloric, a as the sovereigns for 1600 years. Inheriting the the Inheriting years. 1600 for sovereigns the

Through . nd for recognition of Alevi identity. identity. Alevi of recognition for nd - 214 semah semah e f ea ad lea leftist illegal and legal of ce - tum - , a dance performed as a as performed dance a , yoldaslarimiza s ouaiain around popularization ’s - religious performance. religious -

ugur nd

of May in May of - canimiz

- CEU eTD Collection context. from it separating by majority, Sunni the and is state which the by minority, attacked constantly religious a to belonging practice religious a protecting of sensitivity culture our is that tradition, our is “It father: his himfrom to transmitted was what pursue to wants he because but practices those of religiousity the in believes he because so doing not is he Yet, Hüseyin with discussing while instance, For Uşen. Sey culturalizing by discourse state the of reproduction the to contribute leftist as themselves identifying are st political opposite their Beside politics. Alevi government’s to toolone oftheeffective diversity. of the governing multi a of reminders nostalgic as Turkey in minorities most conceptualizes that multiculturalism “an of which notion in aestheticised framework a In 2013:167). (Karaca, diversity” of issues address to which ar notwithstanding, politics ground the on of state The claims. political from divorced clearly is that one diversity, of version tamed a “prefer institutions state that suggests Karaca Banu 2008:242). (Bilal, like the and house Rum the ritua Alevi the as such products consumable into reduced are productions cultural different the where frame theatrical a present which 2008:243), (Bilal, curiosity” c existing the to contributions communities’ different the voicing for space a opening than Rather 2010). (Tambar, nationalism promoted state the to threat a posing without folklore eluded way, this In ultural sphere, the visibility of decontextualized elements lead to no more than “touristic “touristic than more no to lead elements decontextualized of visibility the sphere, ultural

During my conversations, I expressions of disturbance were quite often when it came it when often quite were disturbance of expressions I conversations, my During and we shouldn’t let it be forgotten.” The example The forgotten.” be it let shouldn’t we and

stated that, he kisses the hand the kisses he that, stated

from its religious context, an Alevi ritual became a part of the national the of part a became ritual Alevi an context, religious its from - ethnic emp ethnic of dedes and pirs and lights candles in jiyare/ziyaret. in candles lights and pirs and dedes of ire” (Karaca, 2013:167), the culturalization became became culturalization the 2013:167), (Karaca, ire” 47

t has become the preferred platform on on platform preferred the become has t Hüseyin Ali ance, I argue that people who people that argue I ance,

about Sey Uşen’s holiness, Uşen’s Sey about

gives illustrates well the well illustrates gives ls, Armenian music, Armenian ls,

its religious religious its CEU eTD Collection point Özgür some at hour, an After changed. sharply discussion the of stream the superstitions, loo really not am I that express could I When Uşen. Sey to stuck superstitions legitimizing of accused was I like, the and Uşen Sey but martyrs revolutionary or statue Zilan not why for, working was I whom for as such questions including session Eğitim the by metreligion. I with are engaged leftist that relation ambivalent of leftists tryingwhatis tomakeinhandthe leftout after of peace coup. attempt the of illustration good a is realm religious in places their to referring without The here.” already always are dedes replac our but appear doesn’t he Marx, with meeting a haveto want we whenever Forinstance, acceptit. to we have others themreplacewith cannot nev perception, social this marginalized never I but relatives, as Engels and Marx with are we close how know don’t I Marxists… [poor] fukara We, him. see didn’t again They him. see won’t they didn’t they And ha it him. time see Another actually. won’t they that said and me warned he friends my to this tell to attempted I When tree. a on sitting beard snowy and long a has who guy old an describing; Muzu the in gather villagers all and village their of front in riverside the to go Villagers jiyare/ziyaret. our visiting by Newroz celebrate We Newroz. of notion the know You old. years six was “I him: to appeared man old wise tellin started he Uşen, Sey about narrating was Çiçek mother non and religious of zones mn o Mr ad ht e yblzs ih h eitn “aus o te locality the of “values” existing the with symbolizes he what and Marx of ement

started telling me how he was impressed when he first attended a cem. “Dedes were were “Dedes cem. a attended first he when impressed was he how me telling started My convers My with had I conversation The - Sen, university teacher’s trade union. After having an interrogation an havingAfter union. teacher’s trade university Sen, er arrogantly looked down on it. These are society’s common values. If we we If values. common society’s are These it. on down looked arrogantly er ation with a member of Parti Cephe (Party Cephe Parti of member a with ation ppened at home. He told me again to not tell it to people since since people to it tell not to again me told He home. at ppened - eiiu patcs While practices. religious Mustafa r River side. That day, I saw what everyone was everyone what saw I day, That side. River r

and 48

Zülfikar

Mustafa also demonstrates the intermingled the demonstrates also g me about the moment when a when moment the about me g - Front) presents an illustration an presents Front) Özgür

a tasaig ht his what translating was ig o wa h called he what for king

at a dinner organized dinner a at - li keinquiry CEU eTD Collection through culturalization of policy state in decontextualization local level. the reproduces destruction, even or ignorance embrac they that way the sovereign, the of opposition state the to contributes inconstructed is positionality political leftist process.Although decontextualization promoted values” “cultural on based claims making association, cultural c on insists and cemevi state of characteristics religious the the recognize While to refuses Dersim. in leftists as themselves identifies who people among Alevism tha andbecame Dersim.was agoodperson in acharacter all.” Thatis he think I grave. his to go still People from. comes holiness called so his where is that tribe Kureys from comes He (laughing). scientist were you thought I person, holy a was Uşen Sey that believe really you “Do Uşen: Sey about fascinating nothing was there that sure quite sp was a had he Uşen that Sey Once, believed People […] him. visit to cigarette. came people many my how imagine put cannot you and I hospitalized jacket my of pocket which in always s “If believer: Erdal While once”. happened what know you but things of kind this believe don’t “I that often so W else.” something is believing know, you but values, of sorts these protecting against not am “I person: religious a not is he that sure me making by well as limits his assuring was he excitement, his expressing While boi the of out meat taking and stove heating a licking t there is a tendency to culturalize Sey Uşen which goes hand in hand the culturalization ofculturalizationthe hand handin goes which Uşen Sey culturalize to tendency a is t there

a tlig i mmre aot e Ue h satd y lrfig ht e s o a not is he that clarifying by started he Uşen Sey about memories his telling was In the light of the ethnographic findings that I could only give a hint above, I argue argue I above, hint a give only could I that findings ethnographic the of light the In omeone else would told me this, I wouldn’t believe him, but Sey Uşen knew Uşen Sey but him, believe wouldn’t I this, me told would else omeone iritual power.” While power.” iritual

hile talking about Sey Uşen, it was surprising for me to hear to me for surprising was it Uşen, Sey about talking hile

Erdal

puts forward his hesitant fascination, Ferit was Ferit fascination, hesitant his forward puts 49

e the Alevi religiosity after a decade of decade a after religiosity Alevi the e ling cauldron. It was so impressive.” so was It cauldron. ling

ategorizing it as it ategorizing an CEU eTD Collection bilmediğimiz şehrem o 29 approach promoted state the reproduce leftist as themselves identifying interlocutors stance, political oppositional their despite that suggests it budela, a as Uşen Sey to meaning give in ways the Describing 1980. of d’état coup the of aftermath the in a into man” “lacking a madman, a of transformation the words, other in or Uşen, Sey popped that mad getting of reasons Reconstructing past. the of loss ungrievable the for mourning for space a opens figure grievible a as Uşen mon the between Chapter of focus main the the is after statue object his agonizing of erection an becoming Uşen’s Sey madness. and holiness of between ca to is attempt main therushwhat is Huseyin/ Seyit you thatare citywe goingto do notknow? marble the and grave beca readable barely were grave, the of façade the in written are which poem, Solmaz’s Diren of lines four Last artificialflowers. and th of participants old the of one was Uşen, Sey bodies. dead by organized demonstration a in marching like feeling was I graves, several Walkingmy fieldwork. right revolutionarybodies to amongflags ofdifferent planted next the aff the of one was located, is grave Uşen’s Sey where cemetery, me help and luck bring will candle theand soil This grave. fromhis soil of a piece take candleand a light grave,Uşen’s Sey visit advi and not or married am I whether ask to me approached woman a Çetu Gola In 5.0

Nasırlaşmış yüreğimize, buztut

CONCLUSION Sey Uşen’s place in the dead bodies’ parade is the central concern of this thesis. The thesis. this of concern central the is parade bodies’ dead the in place Uşen’s Sey Sey Uşen’s life story, Chapter Chapter story, life Uşen’s Sey ument of Atatürk and th and Atatürk of ument i gidiyorsun?

faded out: You are laughing at our/ callused hearts/ and frozen faces/ faces/ frozen and hearts/ callused our/ at laughing are You out: faded tr hw h lf o post of left the how pture

muş yüzümüze/ Bakıp gülüyorsun

up in the interviews. It depicts a shift in the perception of perception the in shift a depicts It interviews. the in up find s vstr hv be lighting been have visitors use e statue of Sey Uşen, Chapter Chapter Uşen, Sey of statue e e march and does not carry any flags but candles but flags any carry not does and march e

a proper husband. The visit visit The husband. proper a 50 V

- offers offers op eid el ih fgr ta i in is that figure a with deal period coup I / Sö V a gendered analysis gendered a Wie eitn te negotiation the depicting While . yle Seyit Hüseyin bu acele niye/ ectively loaded moment of of moment loaded ectively

which the interlocutors the which

ade aon his around candles 29 I V

argues that Sey that argues

of the possibl the of h municipal the sed me to me sed budela Yoksa e

CEU eTD Collection ofAlevismprocess level. inlocal pr religious decontextualizing by Alevism: to

cie, hy otiue h culturalization the contribute they actices, CEU eTD Collection Bozarslan, Bourdieu Boratav, Billig Bilal Beşikçi Bernard, ─── ─── Aygün Ayata Altınay, Ahıska, Akın, AK TanıtımBaşkanlığı. veMedya Parti Abu - , Lughod, . .

, Melissa 2010.

amt . n Mehmet and H. Mahmut , ReviewRights Vulgate", Wollman, Onay, Abdullah Approaches http://eski.bianet.org/2005/08/26/65850.htm 8/2:211 Turkey” Istanbul” thread.org/en/article.asp?a=46. Tophane, Üzerine BirAlgısı Uygulamalı Çalışma”, www. Birlik Milli ve Kardeşlik Projesi Press. Research Present, BIBLIOGRAPHY Michael , Sencer Hüseyin

Meltem

İsmail Ayşe Gül Korkut ,

usl H Russel Pierre 2005. Hamit Dersim 1938:Resmiyet Dersim ve Hakikat, akparti

. 2008. Lila . - & 2005. .

, 232. . 2004. 2013. 2011. . edited by . 2009. . New York: Palgrave.

Radical Philosophy & 184 . . 1991. . 2014. Ayşe

, 2001.

Loic WacquantLoic 1995. . .org.tr/upload/.../ RowmanAltamira.

“Türkiyeli Ermenileri“Türkiyeli Hatırlamak.” in

- Uşen”. Sey Bir “Dersim’de 3:1:45 Tunceli 196

- Türkiye İktisatTürkiye Tarihi:1908 Dersim 1938veZorunluDersim İskan 237 Bnl ainls” in Nationalism”, “Banal “Monsters that Remember. Tracing the Story of the Workers’ Monument in Monument Workers’ the of Story the Tracing Remember. that “Monsters üe Ayata Güneş

“Writing against“Writing Culture” in: “ Fox, Richard, . EdinburghPress University Hmn ihs n te uds Ise n uky 1984 Turkey in Issue Kurdish the and Rights “Human The Myth The Myth of the Military -

246. - 54. Research Methods in Anthropology: Qualitative and Quantitative Quantitative and Qualitative Anthropology: in Methods Research

Kanunu

Istanbul: Istanbul: Birikim Yayınları l Admr İrhm Nacak İbrahim Aydemir, Ali e Thread Red . 2006.

acilim 2007. . 10

(1935) ,

5: 2 137 2014. available online

"Neoliberal Newspeak: Notes "Neoliberal NewPlanetary Newspeak: onthe 220110.pdf - - 5. 162.

Te Center “The

Soruları veCevaplarıyla Demokratik Açılım Süreci:

Ankara: DipnotAnkara: Yayınları Dersim

Muhafazakâr Düşünce Muhafazakâr Santa Fe ain ad Nationalism and Nations

- -

Nation: Militarism, in Gender, andEducation 2009 52 , 3,

. Recapturing Anthropology. Working in Recapturing Anthropology. Workingin the

Ankara: DipnotYayınları2009.

Jenosidi , Ankara: , Ankara: İmgeKitapevi. - New Mexico et Parti Left Bir Zamanlar Ermeniler VardıBir ZamanlarErmeniler . available online online available

2010. . ,

İsmail Bianet, es in Turkey”, Turkey”, in es

: Sc “Konya’nın Muhafazakarlık Muhafazakarlık “Konya’nın 36

Beşikçi .

:145

h ed , ool of American - td by ited available 167.

Vakf

- http://www.red uks Studies Turkish 1999,” ı

Yayınları. Spence

, ed Human ited by online: and r

CEU eTD Collection ─── Gültekin Gupta Dressler Docherty Derrida Deniz, Danto Çetin, Crapanzano ─── ─── ─── ─── Bruinessen ───

. 1994. . 1996. . 1997. . 1994. . .

, , 2003. 2010.

Fethiye

Dilşa Akhil Arthur C Tetkiki PressCalifornia ScienceField Location in Anthropology,” in of Journal the American AcademyofReligion Press Newthe International Yayınları orial.pdf http://hettingern.people.cofc.edu/Aesthetics_Fall_2010/Danto_Vietnam_Veteran%27s_Mem Philosophical Anthropology Dimensions, Chemicaland the War the Kurds” Against Iraqi in :7 B Kellner in Alevis,” Jongerden, AleviTurkey’s Enigma: A ComprehensiveOverview , , , Jacques

, - Markus

Ahmet Kerim 10. JamesC. ,

Martin van Martin . 2012.

. “Genocide in Kurdistan? TheSuppression inofthe“Genocide Kurdistan? DersiminTurkey (1937 Rebellion “Kurd “Aslını İnkar EdenHaramzadedir! The of Debate EthnicIdentity on the Kurdish the “Nationalisme Kurde etEthnicités intra “Alevism Myths andthe ofResearch: TheNeedAgenda” for NewResearch a in Tunceli’de Tunceli’de Pertek’teSünni Olmak:Tunceli UlusalveYerel Etnolojik Kimlik Öğelerinin . Vincent

. 2014. , Istanbul: Berfin Yayınları & James Ferguson ., 1985. . 1994. . - . 2008.

Heinkele &A. Otter

3 s, TurksAlevi andthe Revival in Turkey”,

Syncretistic Syncretistic Religious Communities Near in the East.

RE/Yol Dersim İnançRE/Yol Dersim BirYaklaşım, Sembolizmi:Antropolojik - & ed , ed 16.

. 2004.

Anneannem Peter LambPeter ited by ited . 2011. .

. 2004. .

Specters of TheStateSpecters of Debt,Marx: the the Work ofMourning, and “The Vietnam Veterans Memorial,” ited by "Religio Laiden/Boston: Brill

“Remembrance.” “Remembrance.” in his ,

G.J. Andrepoulos, New York: Routledge.

Ağa, Şeyh ve DevletAğa, Şeyhve Tunceli’de Kutsal KültüTunceli’de Mekan Akhil . 1997. - Secular Metamorphoses: The Re , Istanbul: Metis Yayınları. , Istanbul: . 2006. ,

148

Gupta Anthropological Boundaries Locations: and Groundsofa -

Baujen, Leiden: Brill. “Discipline andPractice: asSite, ‘The Field’ andMethod, -

. 177 Historical Dictionary SocialismHistorical of

& . .

Chicago: Chicago: ofUniversity Chicago

James

Philedelphia: University of Press Pensylvania , I - Imaginative horizons: an Essay in Literary Imaginative horizons:anEssayinLiterary stanbul: İletişim Yayınları 53

Kurdes”

76.2 Ferguson

: 280 Genocide: Conceptual andHi , ed The Nation

Peuples Peuples Méditerranéens

Middle East Middle East Report , Ankara: , Ankara: Kalan Yayınları ited byited - , 311. 1 - - 46. Berkeley, LA: Making of Alevism." Turkish

Paul J. , edited by available online available ,

Oxford: Scarecrow White and

Press. .

I July K. Kehl stanbul: İletişim

University of University

- 68 September storical

. Joost

- 69:11 -

Bodrogi,

- - 38. 38)

CEU eTD Collection Rowlands Ö Öğünç Press. David L.Eng&Kazanjian Nichanian, ─── ─── Navaro Leezenberg Koğacıoğlu Kieser Ketsemanian Karaca, Kandiyoti Hacısalihoğlu, zsoy . 2009. .

, , 2012. ,

- Berg. in Sovereignty Kurdishin the Conflict in Turkey.” ofUnpublished PhDdiss., University Texas. Hra Press. University Knowledge”,Anthropological PressPrinceton University Boston:Leiden, Brill. AleviTurkey’s Enigma: ofFeminist Cult Journal revolution online available York: Routledge. 1980s. since Union European and culture in of capitals policies” cultural European of formation Yayinlari.Istanbul, Metis İstanbul: Bilgiİstanbul Üniversitesi Yayınları Siyaseti Güvenlik ve Devlet Ordu, Türkiye'de Hisyar Hans Pınar Yashin Banu The Art of Forgetting, of Art The , ,

nt DinkVakfı Yayınları Michael Marc , , Deniz

The Make

Michiel - , . 2013. . Dicle . 2013. .

Lukas Varak . 2010. .

, Afcie pcs Mlnhlc bet: unto ad h Pouto of Production the and Ruination Objects: Melancholic Spaces, “Affective

. 2010. M. Yae . 2002. - . in 2004. .

. 1999. . . 2005.

. 2014. - 1996. l

. 2003. “E, O Zaman Kimse Gitmez ki Askere” in Askere” ki Gitmez Kimse Zaman O “E, . 2002. the and initiative capital cultural Istanbul’s margins? the from “Europeanisation turkey/

“Between Gift and Taboo: Death and the Negot the and Death Taboo: and Gift “Between - Believe Space:Believe Affective Geography inaPostwar Polity

http://www.armenianweekly.com/201 “Catastrophic Mourning.” “Catastrophic In

“

Iskalanmış Barış

“Remembering to Forget. Sublimation as Sacrifice in War Memorials.” War in Sacrifice as Sublimation Forget. to “Remembering İem v Dşaa Omnı maaolğ'd Akr Am” in, Alma” Askere İmparatorluğu'nda Osmanlı Dışlama: ve “İçerme aiee, aia, Yu Bacilar, Cariyeler, “Dersim: A Facet oftheSilentRevolution AFacet “Dersim: in Turkey,”

h taiin fet faig oo cie i Turkey in crimes honor framing effect: tradition The “Kurdish Alevis and“Kurdish KurdishNationalist Alevis the Movement 1990.” inthe

Faces of the State: the Faces of SecularismandPublicTurkey in Life

A Comphrehensive OverviewA Comphrehensive ural Studies ural

edited by edited , 99 .

- 124 Journal the of Royal Anthropological . BerkeleyLos & CA:Angeles, University ofCalifornia Adrian Forty and Susanne Kuechler Susanne and Forty Adrian , 15(2): , Istanbul:İletişi

talr Kmilr e olma Dönü Toplumsal ve Kimlikler rttaslar; 118 54 . Loss: Loss: the of Politics Mourning

h Clua Pltc o Europe: of Politics Cultural The

ed - 152. td by ited mYayınları. , ed

3/09/09/dersim ed. Kiran Klaus Patel, London, New New London, Patel, Klaus Kiran ed. Asker Doğmayanlar Asker ited by

. . ae, İ Akça, İ. & Paker, B. E. iation of National Identity and Identity National of iation

J. WhiteJ. and Jongerden

Institute, - a - , 129, , facet London: Duke Armenian Weekly, ”, , , ed - -

146. New York: New 146. , of

12 15 ifrne: A Differences: New Jersey: - ited by ited - the : 23 1

- 18. - , Europ

silent

İstanbul: 79

, ümle - 103. - ean ean

CEU eTD Collection [Yeritsyan] Yavuz, White, Weber, Max. Sphere. 1946.TheEsthetic in Ünüvar, Ulmschneider Tuna Törne Tekiner, T Şahin Sirman ambar, , ,

Gürçağ , Doğan , M. Geoffrey Ethnologist Wright andC. Gerth Mills, 340 Suffolk UniversityLawReview PatikaIstanbul: Kitap. Kent: DersimEkonomi Üzerine Caucasus Pluralism inTurkey” http://www.psikiyatri.org.tr/uploadFiles/publicationsFile/file/1079_TPDB2_web.pdf online:Available and Early Turkish Novel”, Hakan M

Annika

Nükhet

Kerem Kabir Aylin , Turkey Antanik . 2010. . ,

. 2010. . 2010. & . . 2013. . 2000. G.W. 2012.

. 2003. Gözde Orhan 16:71 ,

31(3): 293 31(3): edited by . 2004.

. 2012. “12 Eylül’le Hesaplaşma”.“12 Eylül’le

Atatürk Heykelleri.Kült,Estetik, Siyaset “The of Aesthetic Public Alevi Visibility:

95 “ 1995.

“Dedes Dersim: ofViolence in Persecution, Narratives and “70'ler: '80'lerin öncesi'60'ların“70'ler: sonrası “G -

95. Islamic PoliticalIslamic Identity inTurkey ender Construction and Nationalist Discourse: Dethroning the Father in the

“National Septembersubjects: 11

Dersim: Dersim: Seyahatname F. Acar, and A. Comparative Studies inSociety andHistory Gender and Identity Construction: Women of Central Asia, the Caucasus

- ae n btee wmns self women’s battered and Rape 310. .

2013.

, 29(1). “Sunuş: DörtDağaSığmayan “Sunuş: Kent” in - - 343. Press.New York: Oxford University Politik Yazılar, Politik Yazılar, From Weber. Max Essays inSociology

Guneş

Türkiye PsikiyatriTürkiye Derneği Bülteni , İstanbul: , İstanbul: Aras Yayıncılık - Ayata Leiden:Brill. 55 ed Gür

Oxford: OxfordUniversity Press. and Pearl Harbor”. and Pearl .” çağ Tuna and Gözde Orhan, 9 çağ TunaandGözdeOrhan, . Istanbul: İletişim. Semah Toplum ve Bilim - ees til a “oiia trials”, “political as trials defense

and Paradoxes the of

52(3):652 .

Dört DağaSığmayan American

127 Iran and the . Edited byH.H. , 13 – 679. :30 :5, 6 -

47.

8. -