/ .
THE RELATIONSHIP OF POETRY AND IDEOLOGY IN TURKEY: THE INFLUENCE OF ZIVA GOKALP ON THE POETRY OF THE (
BE? HECECI LER 0 , '" ... .. BY ® MARY CATHERINE MliRRA Y• •
A THESIS SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF GRADUA~E'STUDIES AND RESEARCH OF MCGILL UNIVERSITY IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUI~EMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF MASTER OF ARTS IN ISLAMIC' STUDIES
" INSTI1UTE OF ISLAMIC STUDIES 1 MCGILL UNIVERSITY MONTREAL L' 1982
"
"
J ~ . . .
. ,
, "
A~STRACT_
, Ziya GOka1p's influence on the ideology of the Turkish revolution \ has generally been unquestioned. Yet, few sy;temàtic an~lYSeS of the , direct impact of his work have been completed. -Thi s thes i 5 wi 11 s tudy hi s thought in order to di séover a sys tem that can serve as a model against which the poetry of ~he Be~ Hêceciler, members or the national poetic movement, can be examined fo~ the purpose of determinin~ the Qature of GDkalp's influence on both ~orm and theme. This study introHuces the issue of certain cOlexisten~ bJt contra- t dictory elements tn ~Okalp's'philosophy which underl~y the interaction of form and theme in the wo;ks of these poets and shows how"consequently, y~ attempts ta diversify poetic themes, ta approach poetic realism or even ~~,>f- to fulfil the Turkist requirement that form and theme reflect the • culture of the people, were'fraught with fundamental problems.
!
..
i ,.-
(
, ' , (
. 'r) RESUME
L'influence de Ziya GVkalp sur l'idéologie de la révolution tu~que est généralement incont~stée. Cependant, des analyses r" ,\ systematiques sur la nature de cette influence sont peu nombreuses. Cette thèse exami nera 1 es oeuvres de Gljka 1 p pour découvri r un syst~me qUl pourrait servir comme modèle de comparaison pour la ... . poésie des Ber Hececiler, qui sont eux-mêmes représentants du mouvement national de poésle, avec l'intention de déterminer la / mesure de son lnfluence. Ceci démontrera que certalns éléments co-existents mais - contradictoires sont contenus dans la philosophle de Gëkalp et ,que ceux-ci sont à la base'de l'interaction entre les formes et thèmes util i sés par ces poètes. Dans 1a suite, \a thèse i ndi quera que 1 es efforts de ces poètes a di versifi er leurs' thèmes poètiques, à écri re de mani~re r~allst~ et même ~ rêaliser les demandes Turquistes que la forme et le thème tous deux salent lnspirés par ceu.~ utilisés par 1~' peuple, conf~ontalent des problèmes fond~mentâux . .d' ,
/
.,
(
\ 1 J " , 1 / " 1
( t, "
-,
For my grandfather.. Sir , Robert Urquhart and For James
/ '
\
..
) ( ,~ 1 [\ '" ','1 1 ,.
.' ( "
('" 1\ TABLE OF CONTENTS \\ 1 INTRODUCTION . " o "
Chapter j' 1. lIYA GtlKALP' S PHILOSOPHY OF IDEALS . . , 3 1. Form: Ttl".e Relationshi p of Language and Poetic Reform to National Consciousness' in ~. Ziya G6kalp's Philosophy of Ideals ... 3
',' 2. Theme: The Relationship of lndividual to Nation in liya GOkq.lp's Philosophy of IdeSlls ?1
II. THE POETRY OF THE BE~ HECEC ILE~ ...... 33 ~ , , ~. ,..- )) \ , 1. Form in the Poetry of thê Be~ Hececi 1er . 33 2. Theme in the Poetry of the Be~ Hececil er. 31
III. lIYA GOKALP, THE BES HECECILER AND THE INTERACTION
OF FORM AND THEME ...... '...... ~ 1 82 1. Contradictions in Form and Theme in the . 6 "', Pqetry of the Be~ Hececiler as a Result of the Infl uence of the Philosophy of Ziya GOkal p .;. " 82 • 7-tr, CONCLUSION . 105'
BIBL IOGRAPHY ~ 109 " " • <",
\
.' 1
" " ( - ,.. " . ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS,
The supervision of my thesis advisor, Dr. A. Oner Turgay, and • 0 the assistanc.e provided to me by the Institute of Islamic $,tudies, McGill University, are 'acknowledged with thanksl Ors. Robert Polzin and Leonard Librande read the thesis and provided valuable cnticism. Their interest and support are muc~ , 1 appreciated.- -
finally, ( am especially grateful to Ahmet Karamustafa without, whose patJent help and encouragement this thesis,would not have been .' " compl eted.
'.
fo'
, r 4
..,
, .
( , Cc.
{
INTRODUC"fION
,Ziya Go~alp is most commonly recognized as the ideologist whose thought stands behind the principles and,reforms of the nationalist regime under AtatUrk. Vet, the degree to WhlCh his philosophy actually influenced ldeology, po1itlca1 and socid1 thinklng and touched a11 aspects of the Turkish commitment to national renewal and reconstruction ,...- has hardly been studied. :Certalnly, there has been little analysis of his thought for the purpose of discoverlng the nature of the system that underlay his various and diverse works spannin~ a per'iod from 1911 ta 1924. One of the areas that Gokalp most ,nfluenced~ as a result of his -v 9 philosaphy and hls,own predilectipns, was that of 1iterat~re, and especial1y poetry: It;s the pUli'"pose of thlS .study tb establish a , " framework based on GHkalp's works in order that~hey might be established as ~ cohesiv~ unit ~r mode1, against WhlCh Turkist cultural principles and th~ applicatlon of these principles wlthln the Natlonal Llterature movement can be'compared. The thesis will show how G5kalp's philo~ophy was ref,l ected bath in terms of "farm and theme in the works of the prime . , • representatives of the national poetlc movement, the Bes Hececiler • 'and then, how assumptlons and inconsis~encies, only implicit in his 1 thought, revealed themselves upon 'applicat,~n wlthin the works of thes~ poets and created a situation where trends ln theme inevltably resul~ed in a betrayal of the lnten~tion motlvating lnnovatlOn ln form. The study will conslst of three parts. Chapter l will trace the development of Gokalp's ~hought on the relationshlp of ldeals, values anq social evolution and devèlo p a framework, on both a general level and "...... ("- a parallel national level, against which Turklsh reform strategies, involving issues as disparate as language, law and economics, can be 1. seen as an lndlvlsible unit.
, . 2 The IIHa 1 ka Dogru" (Towards the People) movement exemp 1 ifi ed the impact of Gëkalp's ph,i1osophy on culture and lnitiated revolûtionary trends in' llterary language and form, among other things. Yet,' this
t movement, baslcally individualist and liberal in nature, in terms of its treatment 'of theme, was also influenced by aspects of Gëkalp's thought involvlng the relationship of individu~l to natlon. These particular concepts are therefore also investigated ln Chapter I. , Chapter II demonstrates the influence of Ziya Gôkalp's philosophy of ldeals o~ form in the poetry of the Be~ Hececiler by showing how t~ey attempted as required by Turkist principles 'of, cultural reform, to pattern their poetry according to -folk forms' of versification, popular metre and vernacular Turklsh. It then lndicates by an examina ti on of repres,~ntati ve extracts of poetry of the Be? Hececil er. how Gokalp's concepts of the creation of the natlon by individuals and thelr subsequent re-creation of soclety within themselves and resulting l • ' embo.diment of social va'lues by their function as ful1y socialized i ndi vi duà l s i nfl uenced and Wère refl ected i,n the themes of these poets. Chapter III examines certain problems and contradicti9ns that qrose in the poetry of the Be~ Hececiler, not l~ terms of thelr artistic, method but rather as a ,result of thei r adhérence to "'assumptions undér- . " . . . , lying Gokalp's philosgphy, and particularly~his thought on the relation- ", Shlp of i'ndividual to nation, that were lnherently lnconsistent with those concepts that precipltated changes in form. It wll1 show how GBkalp's advocacy of the necessary-irnmersion "of indlvlduality in the l ' callectivity and the consequent requirement of ?oclal homogeneity cantributed ta inherent limitations of poétic theme which the poets were unable to overcome and WhlCh contradicted and belled the intention behind trends i~ form. The overa 11 purpose of thi ~ thes i s l S to examl ne Goka l p' s work and' () ta study one specifie area among the many that were subJect ta the .appllcatlon of hlS philosophy in arder to determlne the degree ta 'which -1" the proponents ot his philosophy adhered ta his concepts and to trace the nature of the problems which, ~rose as a result of this application.
(
1 CHAPTER l
ZlYA GOKALP'S PHILOSOPHY OF IDEALS
The Relationship of Language and Poetic Reform te National Consciousness ln Ziya GÔkalp's Philosophy of Ideals
In 1911, Ziya Gokalp wrote the followil1g words in "Yeni Hayat ve Yeni Klymet1er" (New Life and New Values): "We have athieved the politlcal revolution; now we are confronted with yet another task: to prepare for" the social revolution!"l . His conviction that mere politlcal change was meaningl~ss unless followed by a culturaJ-tand social revolution is at the foundation of his soc1,51l and political • phil osophy, In the same article, he wrote: The political revolution was easy to realize because lt meant merely applying the machinery of the J ... constitutional regime to government. , , . In qrder to put the politlcal revolution into practice. it was enough to di ssemi nate certai n idées-forces, 'such as liberty, equality, and fraternity which symbolize the spirit of the constitutional regime. 2 ' "The social revolution cannot be attained by a mere mechanical action. 1 t wi 11 be di ffi cult to achi Eve because it must be the product of a long process of organlc evolution,,,3 The soclal revolutlOn
i s dependent upon the gr~wth and consumma t i on of . certa in sentiments-forces\ Acceptance or rejecti on of the ideas is within the power of reason. The sentiments, on the other hand, cannot evolve easily because they are the product of social habits developed in the course o,f several' centuries,4
The social revolut1on was to be effect~d by d1s-câ:rding the old life
and values and creating a New Life, wi~h new economie, domestic,
aesthetic, philosophlcal and let,9{ll features. ~
( . 3 /1 /
4
Thi s secti on of the chapter will attempt to trace the development of Gôkalp's ideas on the relationship of ~deals, values and social evolutian, .thereby, ta formulate à' general framework for these relation ships and then a parallel framework on a national level against which the Turki st, cultural principl'es', parti cularly that of the positi'On of linguisti~ and poetic reform, can be compared....-and clarified.
'Relationship of Ideals, Collective Representations and Values in Gokalp's Philosophyof Ideals
Values and ideals are often synonymous in Gokalp's early works, although they are later treated as quite different elements. Yet,' even in his early articles, he did occasionally make the distinctions. between them that later became commonplace. GBkalp identified ideals in 1911 as being the real factors, the motivating forces in the evolution 'Of humanity and defined them as "those and unknown ends which hav.e driven human belngs only vague o through the attrac.tion of thei r vagueness, 6y the mys tery of their ambiguity, 'and have led them toward,s progress. 1I5 Yet, he was convinced that any attempt to .apj>roach these nebulous ends as pre- defi ned goa l s wi th preconcei ved programmes was utopi an. Rather, the emphasis of the followers of ·the New L ife would be on method. They would eva1uate the values relating to each sphere of lite and, by following disciplined methods, would' discover the truth's in the cour;se of their investigation. 6 ~
- ç The relationship between values and idea1s in'G6kalp's thought during th'Ïs period, although hazy, is refer,red to perhaps most clear1y in an article entitled "Bugünkü Felsefe" (The Philosophy Today) written earlier the same year. In H, in relation to values, he sta ted: Value is not something stati,c llke quantity, nor is it somethlng incapable of evolutlon 1ike quality. It acquires a desired perfection\, and it is subject ta evaluation. It may not h4ve an objective existence, but its existence in the mind is sufficient, because metaphysics has _proved that the mi nd. too, has a rea 1 ity of its own. And again.the discoveries of psychology and metaphysics have shawn that this existence does not consist of an inert being, but is an actlve 5 - .. , .. û ( power. This force definitely shows its effects'in the external world. . . . They [val uesJ appear at first to be of an intellectual nature, then acquire a psychological character, and at last became an , externa 1 rea n ty, on condition that they corresparlti ,,\, to what ;s ~ossibJe in the actual situat10n. 7 ..... Ideals, on the other hand, are "the aspirations ta perfection pointihg to the ends in the eva 1 ut i on of externa 1 and interna 1 rea li ty. ,,8
In his early works, Gôkalp called for the crea~ion of new ~alues and ideals. Vet, the idea thât they were, in fact, already in existence and needed anly ta be discovered was a1ready eV1dent in his . work, '(Muhiddin - i Arabi," p~bl;shed in 1911. Here. he identified ideals with ibn' al-'Arabi 's 'eternal essences'. He stated that: The will ;s the most absolute, the most real part'
) of the be1ng which, not content with existing perfections, strives ta perceive and construct those perfecti ons Whl ch aught ta exi st, Muhyi '1 - din calls these perfectlons in'herent in·things which ,pu~ht ta exist, the 'eternal'essences' ('a 'yan-i- thâbita 1. These rea l goa l s of the will, wh i ch are rea l ex i s tents a re the rea l motives and factors of univer.sal.evolution, of the unrVersal apogee of perfection. 9 And he continued: • EverybQdy carries an ideal perfection ln his thinking, opinion, and beliefs .... He follows the evolutionary path 01' a universal zenith, set out towa,rds an ideal perfection., ... J If there is something unchanglng, it is the ideal perfection which i5 the end of evolution. Muhyi' l - din al 'Arabi cal1ed thlS ideal perfect ion 'eterna 1- ès sence' • whi ch corresponds r to our term 'ideal'.l 0 The concepts that ideals were not only al.ready in existence but were products of the social consciousness and that they had to corres pond to real1ty in order to exist were also expresseêi in articl~s written for Fe1sefe Mecmuas1 (The, Review of Phi1osophy) in 1'911. The idea that ideals actually existed as products of the social cQnscious
ness, although possibly undi5co~ered, and had tg correspond to the reality of current evolution, was significant in that it necessitated a study of existing society or collectlvity as op,pused to the individual. The method of this study involved the evaluation of those elements and va1ues-~hat were capable of being' defined in an attempt to determine which were genuine and which were not.
1 J 6
Géika1p's New Life, then, had two maln functions: an investigative , ~ \ one, which aimed at the discovery of ide~14ljhroug~ the study and identification of genuine ,values, and a llurturing aspeçt which, by fostering those values and institutions identified as natural, would awaken and re;nforce nœtional ideals. This twofold purpose of the New Ufe movement was deflned in its ear.liest form in 1911 in a statement made in "Yen; Hayat ve Yem K1ymetler" (New Life and New Values): "To attempt the creation of a New Life necesshates the discovery and the fosteting of genuine values with respect to each sphere of life."ll --' The investigative aspect became clearer in G5kalp's later works, as he increasingly defined the re]ationship and functions of ideals, collective representations, values and value Judgements and their counterpa rts on a na t,i ona l l eve l . The nurturing aspect is most evident in the Turkist policies based upon these definitions, involving ·areas as disparate as language, literature,·ethics, law, religion, economics, philosophy and po1itics, as set out ln Go ka1p's ft TQrkçalügOn Esaslan (Principles of Turkism) publlshed in 1923. TITe relationship of values and ideals became clearer in GOkalp's later works, as his studies increasinglY defined their nature and social function. A general framework of this relationshlp, as it developed 'between 1911 and 1923 follows. In 1914, GOkalp stated that "an ideal is noth;ng but society or an intensive expeneflcing'of social lite." 12 His, article, "Milliyet Mefkûresi" (The Ideal of Nationalism), written in l 91 SC, echoeèl and, at the same' time, expanded upon thi's view: "Essentially an ideal is the actualization of the existence of a sad a l group by its members. ,,13 Yet, GOkalp stressed tha't values and ideals do not live" on their own, but are a function of an awareness of COTTiTlOn consciousness. In
other wo~ds, a group lS not a social group un1ess it sees itself to
be a social gro~p, unless its existence has been felt in the common consciousness of indiv;duals. Social facts exist only when and if they are experienced as conscious realizations in the collective conscious- " 14 ness of the groups to which they belong. In 1913, G3kal.p called'this stag'e the germination period. 1S 1n l 923, he defi ned thi s common awarenes, s of ex i s tenee, these con se; ous ( real izations in the collective conseiousness as collective representations.
A \ 7
They are "mental patterns whi ch are common te) the members Of\ soci ety , ( '~nd which are conscious1y rea1ized in the collective consciousness.,,16 L A social group must have a common awareness of its exiJtence in order " for that existence to be intensified in the consciousness of its , membe'rs. As 'G~ka1p stated: "No crowd situation or condition of social agitation can "create a group from nothing ... 17 The actua1ization of the common awareness of existence, the idea1. develops from the collective representation in a crowd situation, often" with a social criS1S as cata1yst. GOkalp explained the"process as follows: " The group i s unab 1 e by itse lf to manifes t its ~sat:redness' unless it reaches a stage of social combustion. Th; s 'sacredness " even before ; t has reached cansc i ousness, exi s ts in an unconscious state in the psycho1oglCa1 unity of the social group. . . . The functlOn of the crowd situation is to make this reality mamfest 'to the members of the group by transfo.rmi ng the latter amorphous eXlstence into a clearcut form. Social qgitatlon becomes a source of ideals by its capacity to transform the group, which'until now has been in a loose state, into a compact body. The emergence of an i dea 1 means its rise from. the subconsclOus ta the conscious .v1eve1. 18 It can a1so mean that ta collectlve representation 1 imited "to a portion of .a collectivity is extended to the who1e collectivity. For examp1e, G5ka1p considered the idea of Turklsm to have originally be~n mere1y' a representatlOn shared by a part of the you~h. However,
the crises f~l1owing the Tripolitanian and Balkan wars spread this collective representation to the entire natlOn and then made lt into a , nati ana 1 i dea 1 .19 Gè1ka 1 p be l i eved that co 11 ecti ve representa ti ons became a source of genulne revo1utions only when they became ideals. 2,O On the qne hand, then, idea1s deve10p as an intensi,ficatlOn of ~ co 11 ecti\ve representa tl ons. On the other hand, co 11 ecti ve representa ti ons', that is,\the group's awareness experienced collectively that lt is a group or simp1y., group concepts, are charged with value judgements:
For instance, social insti tut; ons are seen as bei ng 'good' Of' 'sacred', in othe~ words, exhibiting cwtain qualiti.;s superimpose'd or attached to them by society that are not ·inherent in their nature. A value ( 8
( judgement imp1ies an attachment of a quality to something, Tor example, that an abject ;s 1 sacred ' . V?lue imp1 ies an acceptance of the
1 sacredness 1 of that abject. In 1914, Gl:Ska1p stated that the va1idity of a value judgement was not determi ned by i ts correspondence to a phys i ca 1 object in the externa1 wor1d, but by its correspondence to a social rea1ity which exis'ts in the minds of the pe,ople that participate in that society.21 In 1917, he wrote that: Soci ety . . . does not acqui re va lues from any source outside itse1f. The only source of values is the society ltself. In facto the rea1 ess5!nce of society is nothing but the sum 1;ota1 of values. Whenever an emotiona1 crowd stt~tion arises by the gathering of individua1s, the immedlate result lS the creation of a feellng of value. Common sentiments arising out of, interaction within the crowd are nothlng but sentimental attachments to the objects regarded as sacred or gl ori ous or good, etc. Thus, values are social lnstitutions, externa 1 to the l ndi Vl dua l but interna J ta the soci ety .22 • t The significance of values lies in their social nature and their capacity to be evaluated as ref1ections of social rea1ity. The externa1 rea 1 ity of va lues is called social reality and has its own nature. ~ Just as Judgements of fact refl ect an externa 1 reality, so do value judgements. As indîviduals c by themselves cannot invent the properties of things, so they cannot invent the values of thlngs. As properti es ori gl na te fram the, phys i ca l nature, sa values are natural praducts of social reality. Individua1s discover properties or values, but cannot create them. Men who di scover the 1 aws of nature can control natural forc~s; those who learn the 1aws of soclety can regulate and lead social forces. 23 This connection between the discovery of values and the regulation of social forces sterrmed from Gakalp's conviction that the institutions which made up a society wére based on values that were derived neither fr.om physical rrality nor manls nature but from social beliefs and that were curre~tly alive in the social consciousness. And. therefore, ~ecause societies exist in different species and genera, value systems d\!fer accordingly.24 ( .. /
, . 9 "
This relationship,is evident'from Gakalp's statement that collective representations and, by definition, ideals and value systems' are functions of social morpho1ogy, their existence and development thereby being dictated by·such elements as the degree of density, the state of conflict or homogeneity within the population 'and the stage of development of the divislOn of labour, all factors which he identified as being central to social prOgreSsion. 25 As the stages , in the progress.ion of species and genera of societies are identifiable , and as value systems differ according to these species and genera,
the genuineness 'and r validity of existlng values can be gauged by their adherence ta the requirements of social morphology and the current state of evolution, factors which Gokalp çlassified in his articles on / the evolution of societies. In an article written ln 1915, Gôkalp explained that once the genera and species of people are estab1ished, it is possible to deter:: mine which elements of the socia,l structure, as well as institutions, are of a patho10gical nature, that is. which have not adapted to new conditions and no longer perform a specifie function in society.26 . Therefore. identification of the progresslve stages of s.ocieties and discrimination between those values and institutions which were pathological and those which were natural to a soclety in its current state of evolution wou1d enable the elimination of pathological elements and the nurturing of naturat-- ones for the purpose of ending the coexistence of social dichotomies and their destabilizing influence.'
o Re1atiodship of National Ideals, Nati ona 1 Coll ectlVe Representati ons and "Mores in Goka1p's Philosophy of Ideals
Ideals, collective representations, values and value ,judgements al1 ex~provided they are experienced by and emanate from a co11ectivity. G~kalp, in 1915, defined a collectivity simply as a, number of individuals gathered together, having a sense of themselvas as a collectivity.2,7 A collectivity, therefore, can be anational, supra-national .. or stand within the national unit. Heyd has suggested that G~kalp arbitrarily substituted 'nation' .J f~J Ourkheim's 'society', in his discussion of the' sacred', ideal 10
character of society.28 But G~kalp's philosophy simp1y emp~asized & the nation because that is the group or collectivity with which he happened to be most concerned. His position was that where members of a group, gathering in places of wor~hip, were conscious of belonging to a nation, these gatherings assumed a national character. Collectivity or society, then,does not equal nation, but nation is on~ manifestation of collectivity, one which Gëkalp believed current evolutionary trends made necessary and lnevitable. Therefore, the framework of ideals, collective representations and values applying to a collectivity had a paralle1 in the natlonal collectivity.
In 1911, Gë5kalp wrote: Il Humanit y today is exemp1ified in the nation. 1129 In 1913, he echoed this sentlment, saying: ," TOdày the West as wel1 as the East shows unmistakably that our age lS the Age o~ Nations. The most powerful force over the mind of this age is the ideal of nationallsm. States, which have to govern on the basis of national conscious ness, are doomed to failure if they ignore the existence of thlS important social factor. 30 A statement made by him in 1918 reflects the reJection of the pan Ottomanist policies that he had origlnally held: · .. Today a 11 ~f us rea 1i ze tha t the i dea of "'-- a state or homel and supposedly common to diverse nationalities, is nothing but a mere concept, devold of any zea1, enthuslàsm, and devotj on. Jus t as l t i s l nconcel vab le for more than one person to win the love of one indlVidual, sa there can be no real common home and fatherland for dlverse peoples. Astate that is not based on a united Splrlt can on'ly be a common source of subsistence and nothing more. A land that.is not the home of a nation is like a public kltchen ,where everyone merely feeds hlmself. 3l ft Furthermore, he belleved that astate had to be founded on national ideals if it was to have any basis for permanent existence. 32 These statements were supported by GOkalp's studies on the evo1ution of society in which be showed that communities are divided into two genera, primitive commvnities and what he termed nations, although he qualifie9 this term.
/ J 11
( The 'nations' are divided,.into species. The first is the theocratic 'nation' where the common sense of existence is expressed in a cOlTlllon deity and public authority and where the ruler is only an adh1inistrator, due to the fact that the interpretation of the' law lies . ~r 33 ' in the hand~ of representatives of religion. In his article, "Millet Nedir?" (What is a Natlon?), published in 1917, Gôkalp identified this stage as 'ümmet' society. 34 The second stage ln the progression of societies ;5 the legislative nation, where the ruler acquires a legislative authority and secular law
~ cornes into 'being. Government is no longer'based on divine law but on the S overei gn ty of the peop le. 35 This was identified as the 'empire' stage of evo 1 uti on. 36 The third type ;s the culture-nation. "As soon as a nati on puts the stamp of i ts own language and ethos on the i nstituti ons of an inter national civillZation and adapts them to its own spirit, it becomes a nation having an independent and natlonal civilization; that is, a culture, ,,37 Gôkalp's qualification of the_ term 'nation' is obvious, in this context, by h;s insistence that a community could only beçome a nation in its re~f sense- by having this type of indepentt culture. 38 However, before atta i ni ng thl s i ndependent culture. the c un; ty must pass through a stage of common civilization where many of i s institu tions are shared commonly by several nations. Gôkalp saw the ümmet, empire and common civilization stages as necessary levels of evolution prior to the rlse of the true 'nation', He believed that primltive ethnie communities lose their identity with .the passage of tlme by beeoming a part of larger religi.ous or politiea( communities and of a larger civilization ~hich itself is common to'the-'
various ethnie units collected withln it. These"units emeyger_once r again, after time, as nations by distinguishing thelr essential character and removlng lt from the bonds of the three larger unities. But they urmergo important changes during their period of lmmerSlon in
the three universal communities. Therefore,~when a nation is reborn, it can no longer be the same ethni c unit that it had been before it had entered the larger conununities. Rather, it has undergone a trans ." forma ti on and can not attempt to return ta its ethni c past in toto. 39 ..
12 ( A nation, therefore, must originally have had an,,! ethnic basis,, have undergone a transformation within supra-nati~nal formations and must"experience the actualization of its existence as a nation, or a ! national ideal, in a period of crisis. But the nation's awareness of its~lf as nation, its collective representation,can not be based exclusively upon its past existence as an ethnie unit. Because it has been transformed during the period of its involvement in the ümmet, empire and common clvilizatjon communities;' it can no more return to original ethnlC conditions and values WhlCh are now pathological than to those represented exclusively by the three universal communities.p" The basis of a group's collective representatlon of itself as a nation stems from its ethnic identity, transformed by this passage through the levels of universal religion, empire and civilization 50 that it is 'no longer purely an ethnlc identity but one based, rath~r, on a cGmmon culture, or the sum of parts composed of language, education, religion, morality and aesthetics peculiar ta ~hat collectivity. 40 National ideals are the intensification of these collectlVe
representations, actualized during periods of cri sis. G~kalp described the process as follows: Ideals "are 'born'in hearts in communion - hearts unified by natlonal disasters which create one single heart.,,4l And he conti nued,
Once a nation crea tes its oW~ldeals, it never turns its face towards a dark futurè'; on the _contrary. a promised land, a heralded ,foarden of Eden, unfolds itself, day by day, in ar/ever-clearer ano more inviting prospect: Nations without ideals think they are doomed to catastrophies; nations with idea l s ~ on the other hand, are desti ned for resurrection even if they are politically dea~. A nation with a resurrecting and creative ideal never dl es. 42 The relationship of national collective representations and culture is clear when seen as parallel to the general framework proposed earlier in the paper. Just as collective representati6fis can be intensified into ideals by a collectivity, national colle~ive representations are lntensified into national ideals. In the·same way that all collective represen~ations are charged with value judgement1' 50 also those collective representatiorrs unique to a group that ~ identifies itself as a nation are charged with value judgements petuliar
/ \
13
ta that nation a1one. GOkalp termed these natjonal value judgements mores. The mores are those social rules of conduct, a combination of / customs and innovations pecu1iar ta a 'corrnnunity which are, at any given 1 / time, camplete1~ accepted by that community. They spring from the social conscience and are spontaneaus. 43 GBkalp stated that The forces which make a nation conslst of association (ta'âruf) among its own members, and of dissociation '(tanokur) between them, on the one side, and the members oi other nations, on the other. Association (ta'aruf) 'is a partlcipation in common mores ('urf), and dissociatlon (tanakurr means divergence in mores. . . . The rea1 ethos 'of a nation is reflected in its mores and institutlons. 44 National instltutio'ns or values derlved from the congruence of traditions or value Judgements common ta dlfferent societies'and, therefore, international, and· mores, those value judgements entirely ,', peculiar ta the natlon. Where traditions remain from the pasi but play no part in the llfe of the nation, they are fossils of preVlOUS extinct civilizatlons through which the natlon has passed. When they remain as continuations -of the past in the present but are not congruent.. with the mores, they are called survivals. Only those traditions that arë congruent with the mor~s and fonm llvlng, vital instltutlons or values are genuine. All others are patholog~cal. The sum total of'the institutlons of a nation, WhlCh are actually alive in lts mores, constitutes its culture. Llke mores and lnstltutions, culture is, therefore, of an entirely natlonal character.45
G~kalp stated that this national culture, even ln thosE-CaSes where it has not yet become consciously recognized, always exists in. that the tradltions taken from among internatlonal traditions are assimilated by the natlonal consciousness lnto the form of institutions and that these institutions are always baslcally différent from the international forms of the tradition,46 To brlng national culture ta consciousness, one must simply distinguish it from lnternational civilization. And. in order to do 'this, it is necessary to dlstinguish the living institutions of the mores "from survivals which no longer 47 ( live in the mores. This is of central importance to ~5kalp-in terms 14
( , of nation-building because of his belief that "in· culture-nations, the people are personified by the represèntation of their culture because culture consists of a concrete manifestation of the national conscious ness expressed in various forms of institutions.,,48 Culture, then, lS defined as the complex of those values. institutions and value judgements peculïar to·a soclal group that identifies itself as a nation. Civilization is the complex of values. traditions and value judgements common ta different'sacieties and, therefore. has a supra-na tiona l character .. Mores as a Basis for Turkism
Gëkalp's philosophy was concerned with distin~g t~e li~ing mores and the institutions Wh1Ch developed from them as a result of a common awareness of q national identity. and those which, unasslmllated by current mores, had remained either as fossils or survivals from the nation's previous passages through the ümmet, empire and common Clvlliza- ,tion stages. ThlS con,cern is two-fàld. On the one hand. G6kalp believed that if a natlonal culture did not disentangle itself fram international civilization. the~ national life cauld not be started. 49 Therefore. a nation had first to recognize its own culture and then develop it by dissociating it from past civilizational elements that had not been assimilated.
G~kalp isolated the problems lnvolved in this discussion: When we look at any aspect of our social life,'we can observe two conflictlng attitudes: radi~alism and conservatism. These two attitudes represent"two ways of thinking that are usually'thought to conflict with each other. whereas, in fact, both are based on the same principle: formalism. The conservative tends to see an existing social convention as ~n unchangeable truth, and regards any attempt to revl'se lt as blasphemy. The radical, on the other hand. makes the rationall~ing of a convention an absolute formuls, and regards those who do not accept it as reactî ona rî es. Ne; ther ever'attempts to questlon the origin and growth of the old or of the new, or the way in which norms adapt themselves to dlfferent environments at different times. Bath believe that the ~ule, or convention. is something above time and space. that it exists by itself. For ~oth. a ruTe is
• 1~ ,not mere1y the product of a stage, an intermediary sta~e, in the evolution of society. To them it is a~ eternal truth or principle, definite and fixed in an objective reality above timè and space. '0' . However, as soon as a rule is taken in thlS way, as~a fixed and inflexible entity,·lt assumes th~ character of a lifeless skeleton, whereas " \ the essence of life is a creative evolution. On1y lifeless things are outside of cr~~tive evalution. The formalist then mlstakes the -effect for the cause. The rule is oOly the temporary product of a protess. The formalist, however, tends ta 'thlnk ôf the rule as the cause of the process, and thus, as the cause is knawn 1 ta him, heGdoes nat care to study the pr6ces~ itself.50 Gllkalp identified the conservatives as the Islamist~ who,;,by refusing ta view rellgion as a sphere of l1fe Whlch,changes àlongslde the mores and by identifying it with figh, the law, which"GOkalp saw (' as nothing but a crystallization of the mares of a particular period, were caninltted to the malntenance of the ümmet stage of clvilizatton. He saw the radicals as the Ottomanlsts and Tanzlmatists who w9rked ta retain the empire level of civili2ati~n and to effect refotm by """ neglecting the national culture, equating Civlllzatlan with culture and therefore, by attem~tlng to reconci1e what were, in effect, two civi1izations, ta impose clvilizational ry~es incongruous with the mores or ru1es unl~ue ta the people. 51 ~ . This had resulted in a state of dlchotomy in all ~~institu- . / tlons. The language, llterature, morallty, law, economics and organi- zations bf the people were seen as entirely different from their
formal or official counterparts. G~kalp saw the reaso~ for this dichotamy in the fact that the Turks had borrowed the institutions of other societies, superlmposed them on thelr own society and created an artificial civilization out of them instead of developing thelr own . -1, l culture by lncorporating these lnstltutlor"l-sinto their own mores .. He stated that "the officldl leaders of the Turkish people forgot . national traditions for the sake of their court life. , .. Fortunately, the folk elite preserved their oral traditions and saved the nation from total extinction. ,,52 '
1 , 16
For GOkalp, the mores and genuine institutions of the Turkish
nation existed,- only in the folk organizations. He identified these as constituting the spirit of the nation and believed that the decline of nations lay in the eXlstence of formal institutions separate from their' folk culture a'nd their rejuvenation lay in the revlval of this' S3 culture. " It' is from this' conviction that his famous phrase "Halka Dogru" (Towards the People) and the cultural movement associated with it stem. Once a natlon had recognized and stabl1ized lts own culture by' 11;n9 lts~lf from previous patho1ogical civilizational elements, Gôka 1p' $ ph 11 osophy s tressed the need for 1 t- to i nco'rpora te lnto its institutions certa1n modern civillzatlonal elements, ln order for it ta thrive. These elements would be llmlted to techniques of applled science and technology. Gokalp explalned the process best in hlS ,articl e, "i nkil âP~lll k ve Muhafazakarll kil (Revo 1utlonl sm and. Conservati sm), written in 1923. Accordlng to this article, the incorporatlon of 1ingulstics into national culture would contribute to the sophlstlcation of the national language spoken by the masses, Western methods of aesthetics would benefit national art and a European sClenC',e of ethics would complement the natlonal mora1iry.54 The alm of the Turklst phi1osophy, therefore. was to distlngulsh and remove pathologlcal Clvllizatlonal aspécts from the area of natlona1·culture and, having ldentified and developed those \ genuine elements, institutions and values congruent wlth mores in order to form an lntact, llving, national culture, to ,incorporate into it those elements of modern civilization necessa~y for the natlon's survival as an independent unlt. G~kalp explalned the urgency of the Turkists' task ln 1917. As tlme passed, we began ta see that internatl0nal civilizatl0n and"national culture are dif~ferent fram one another. We realized that the 9 uine values WhlCh the proponents of the New Li e were ta crea te were not unlversal values to be valid for all men, but the natlonal ideals pecullar only to the Turkish people. . As these • 1 points were now clarified. it automat~ca11y appeared that the New Llfe meant nothing other /1 than the National Life.
1. .. . ' However, one would say th'at i1= National Life is one which lS already.being experienced, why , take pains to discover 1t? Somethi'ng existing evidently exists even if it is not discovered. Ideals that exist in the unconscious are still motivatlng forces even though they are not conscious. It is true that we believed in the existence of the National Life which we are after, as existing unconsciously'in the soul of the people and that we gave the name 'Turkism' to the work of making this unconscious conSClOUS. If our people were not consciously presented with 'cultures' other than our own, lt would not be 50 urgent ta make natiQnal Culture conscious because only the unconscious Culture of the natlon would affect our life. But, since our national Culture has been in a state of unconscious stupor, and since non national 'cultures' - elther as survivals of the past or as imported new elements - have reigned over our life as our national conscious ness, we had to proceed urgently. 55 In its concern wlth the means of revitallzing the Turk~sh nation by first identifying and nurturlng lts national culture'as a prerequislte
ta incorporating new civ~lizational elements lnto lt, thus creating new institutions through their congruence with national mores, Gokalp's philosophy was very much a transitlonal one that spanned the chasm between' the Ottomanist ldeas of the Young Turks and the natlonal ideology of the revolutlonary period. Its central and perhaps most influential theme lies in the distlnction between culture and Clvllization, WhlCh laid the ground rules for their coexistence. In 1911, in "Yem Hayat ve Yeni Klymetler" (New Llfe and New Values), Ziya Gôkalp presented the problems involved ln the need for social revolutlon to follow po1itica1 revolutlon. In 1917, he effective1y summarized the results of his investigation of the issues. In 'New 11fe and New Va1ues ' we had stated that the polltlca1 revo1utlon would be based on idées-forces, whereas the social revolutlon c would be based on sentlments-forces. Po11tlcal revolutions everywhere have'been the products of the dissemlnation of new international legal ideas. In other words, pol itîca1 revolutlons are products of Civllization and progress. Soclal revo1utions, on the other hand, symbo 1i ze the vi ctory of the li Vl ng values of a natlon over against the dead ones.
[, 18
And this lS rea1ized on1y with the awakening of the national Culture to replace imitative and conventional 'cultures'. Since the values constituting a national Culture inspire enthusiasm and excitement in the soul, they are aptly called sentiments-forces. And since scientific and technical concepts, ,on the other hand, are only cold truths free from any attachment ta the emotions, they are by them selves only 'shadow ideas'. They become idées-forces only lf they combine with the sentiments-forces of a p~rticular Culture. Therefore, unless the elements of a civillZation are absorbed by the Culture of a nation, they never penetra te into the life of the people. Unless the ?cience and techniques of the West are appropriated by our natlonal mores, they will not take a place ln our schools or ln our 1 ife. That is why a nation does not become Civllized if it,has not attained Cultural consci ousness. Ci vll i zatlOn produces frul ts only when lt is grafted on the tree of the national Culture. 56 " ( This section of the paper has examined the investlgative aspect of Gôkalp's work which defined the relationship and functl0ns of idea1s, collective representatlons, values, value Judgements and their counter parts on a national level. However, inherent in the results of that 1 ,investigation is the assumption that sïnce1ldeals are at the basis of the value structure of soclety, change in the value system of a co 11 ecti vity l s rel ated to charge in thei r coll ecti ve i dea l s. On the other hand, by identlfying and relnforcing values genuine to that collectivity, one can, at the same time, awaken and reinforce collective ideals. This relationship lS expressed in an article written by Gokalp .. in 1914, where he stated that only by replacing the formal traditlons of the formal civilization by a natlonal educat10n that would instill genu1ne rel1gious, moral, legal, aesthetic and other values which are fundamental to the nation into the members of that nation, would thoroughly national personalities be produced. 57 The creation of such types means the creation of a nation. And it also means the creation of individual perso'na li ti es because the i ndi vi dua l acqui res genui ne personality only as he becomes a genuine representative of his culture. The lndividual has' a genulne
[. 19 personality in direct relation to the degree to which he has incorporated the culture in himself. 58 ~ ~This, then, is the premise underlying the Turkist policies prev sented by GÔkalp throughout his ~orks and summarized in his TOrkçülügün Esaslarl (Principles of Turklsm). These policies involved lssues as disparate ps language, law and economics, and these can be seen to comprise a cohesive unit only when they are vlewed in terms of their function as lnstitutions wit'hln society and the commitment of the Turkists ta ~revent the revival of fossils, ellminate survivals and strengthen those lnstltutlons congruent with national mores. /' Therefore, for the Turkists, lnstitutlonal reform ln all spheres l' was dependent completely upon lts adherence to the requlrements of national mores. In thlS sense, the Turkists were equally opposed ta the purists who wanted to reVlve elements of their ethnic past, no .' longer current among the people and to those groups that attempted to equate clvilization with culture, thereby imposlng elements incongruent wlth national mor~. In the determlnation of reforms proposed by the Turkists, there exists a single factor, the congruence of a particular institution, be it legal, economic, politlcal or other, with national mores, in other words, its function as a genuine institution. Therefore, legal, economic, polltical and other values had impact on and were affected by ldeals only in thelr function as institutions. Mores as a Basls for the Turklst Policles of Linguistlc and Poetlc Reform Language, as with all the other institutlons, was a function of mores. 59 GOkalp describes thlS re]atl0nship as follows: Just as plants and animals grow naturally, so the elements of a culture rise and grow spontaneously. Language, for example, 1S noi made lndividually and rationally. We cannat change the words of a language, and put new ones, lnvented arbitrarily, ln their places. We cannot change the grammatlcal rules wnich have grown by themselves. The rules and words of a Janguage change, but ,they change by themselves. We are Just spectators of these changes . .Jndividuàls can lntroduce certain terms into a language. But these words can only become a part of the language when they are appropriated by speclalized groups as speclfic terms. Even ( 20 therr. they remaln the property of only a eertaln' group. It 1s only when they are aecept~d by the peop le ttta t they become a pa rt of everyday language. The acceptance or reJection of a new term by a peop le does not depend on the wi 11 of. ltS originato'rs. 60 ,
G~kalp identif~d the language of the eommon people, what had been l disparaged as 1 slang • as the real and natural language of the natlon, whereas the Ottoplan language, WhlCh he described as .an artiflClal mixture of the grammar. syntax and voeabulary of Turklsh, Arabic and Persian, a language consciously and ratlonally created by certaln indiviçluals, that had never permeated Turkish culture and-, therefore, was not an lnstitutlon, was the language of the Clvllizatlon of the Ottomans. §ubJeet to ellmlnatlon. 6l He advoeated a revival of the language of the masses ln order to reallZe a modern llfe. 62. The relationshlp of language and llngulstic mores lS clearest ln • an artlcle wntten ir;l 1917, IIMillî fçtlmalyat" (Natlonal Soclology).
wher~ G~kalp pointed out that not all origlnally Turklsh words had been assimilated into Turkish. Several words which the lingulstlc mores did not ass4milate had been reJected from the language and had slmply become fossils. Others were only incorporated after undergoiyg modificatlon in spelllng or meaning. Arable, Perslan and European words incorporated lnto Turklsh also. in most cases, underwent considerable change. In GOkal~ls oplnlon, whereas the origlnal words, unlncorporated into the mères. had become fOSSlls. those which had undergone change and were in common use among the people Were living lnstitutions. 63 In this respect. ln terms of linguistic reform, the Turklsts were opposed to those people who attempted to introduce fOSSll words. rejeGted by the mores of the people, as well as to those who inslsted that the original spelllng or meanlng of the words, whether Arablc. Persian or European, be reinstituted and thus denled the assimilative nature of the Turkish language. 64
In terms of poetlc reform, G~kalp stated that the Tur-kists, having ended the llnguistlc dlchotomy, could not remain indlfferent either to the dichotomy in poetlc metre, which had been malntained. as a result of the coexlstence of the court aruz 'and folk syllablc metres, for centuries. 65 Since, on the one ha~d. the contrived }anguage eliminated \ , . 21 by the Turkists and the aruz metre were perceived ta be indistinguishable' and, on the other hand, there was a rea1 re1ationship between the peaple's syllabic metre and the.1r slmple langu.age. the Turkists 'were committed as well to the e1imination of aruz'metre and a11 the fossilized poetic conventions WhlCh were associated with it. 66
The Turk~st criterian for 1inguistlc and poetic reform ln particular and cultural reform in general is best expressed ln a verse fram "Lisan" (Language). a poem published by Ziya Gokalp in 1918: "Tarkçele~mi~ TQrkçedlr," "What has become Turkish is Turklsh.,,67
The 'Re1atlonshl~ of Individual to Nation in Ziya Gôkalp s Philosophy of Ideals
Gôkalp's phi1osophy of ideals and the mo~ement of cultural populism associated with lt lnsplred a whole new era of Turkish litera ture. 8y lncluding language and metre ln the mores WhlCh he dlscussed and by hlS personal wterest in poetlc reform, he contributed to the initiation of a new movement in poetry which based its themes, form, versificatlon and metre On that of the people, in essence, a poetry intimately connected to his natlonalist ideology. This movement reached its peak with the works of the Be~ Hececller or Five Syllablsts, Halit Fahri Ozansoy, Orhan Seyfi Orhon, Yusuf Ziya Ortaç, Enls Behiç. and Faruk Nafiz Çamllbel. Yet, in their portrayal of the people, their use of the forms of
folk poetry and natlonal ist themes, these poets were subJect to a le~s obvious influence which underlay GOkalp's philosophy and WhlCh mani fested itself in their poetry: his thought on the relationship of the individual to society. In order ta establish the nature of this relationship of the individual to th~ nation in GOka1p's thought, we must first study how G~kalp relates society ta nation, and, then, the i~div;dual's relation ship tp socOiety.
,
, r 22 ~ Relationship of Society to Nation
Over the period 1913-1926, Ziya G~kalp developed his philosophy of ideals and showed that social groups could not exist without collectlve
consciousn~ss and that social factors or values existed only when and lf they were experienced as conscious realizations in the collective conSClousness of the groups.
G~kalp defined the soclal group in an article written in 1915: "l- A social group is a totality. of 'lndlViduals connected with each other by a special solldarlty, such as a famlly, a village community, a tribe, a class, a caste, a corporation, a Church (ammet), a state, or a nation, A social institutlOn---,--s-- a pattern of thlnklng or actlon, such as rellglous beliefs and ntual, norms of mora1ity and law, the rules of language and aesthetlcs, economlC methods, or scientiflc techniques, lmposed by these groups upon thei r members, who accept l t vol untari ly or, because of const~alnt.68 In 1926, however, he made a distinction between 'soclal groups' and 'society': All soclal groups are made up of concentrlc circles of varying sizes. From the point of view of (the degree of) social conSClousness, solidarity, and organizatlOn, there is on1y one which is mOre fundamental th~n either the larger or the,smal1er circles; we call this group 'society'. The group that is larger than socletles and that includes . Soci~tles we call 'commumty', and the groups that are narrower than socletles and lncluded in these we call 'secondary groups'. Only 'society' may be likened to a soclal organism. Secondary groups are merely varlOUS organs wlthln thlS organism, and communltles are unlons made up of several societies. The collectlve conSClousness in communities lS always ~too weak as compared to that WhlCh exists ln societies. 69 . , This enabled G~kalp to ldentlfy the current manifestatlon of 'society', which he belleved current evolutionary trends made necessary and inevltable, as nation,70 the 'community' as clvilization group , " . and the 'secondary groups'e as those sub-groups withln... society, such as famlly, vlllage, district and occupational group to which one owes allegiance but WhlCh are overshadowed by the nation as the focus of supreme allegiance. r l· ..... 23 GOkalp outlined this priority of al1egiance in his article 6n '" mora1ity in TQrkçOlügOn Esas1an (The Princip1es of Turkism), written in 1923, where he, once again, used the 'social organism ' ana10gy but, this time, specifica11y in reference to the nation. The nation and its soi lare ul'timately the only lndependent and self-existent unit. The fami1y and occupational groups constitute only the cells and organs of thlS whole, whi1e rellgious and internatlonal federations, although wider in scope than national unl0ns, constitute no real social organlsms but only co11ectlons of socleties. These groups cover only particu1ar aspects of the 1 i fe of the; r members, whereas the nation 15 the group that lS all-lnclu5ive with respect to the llfe of ltS members. Therefore, the ldeal of' the nation is above the i dea 1s sought by other soci a 1 groups, such as the family, professlonal group, church, and . international unlon. 7l Soclety and, therefore, its values and rules cannat exist unless o it5 existence has been felt in the common consciousness of individuals. Vet, once created, it has a nature of ltS own, irreducible to its 72 component parts, whose ideals and values staffd above the individua1. ( How, then, does the individual fit into this naw'social reality? It is in the resolution of thlS issue that we can catch a gllmpse of GOkalp's concept of the 'sacred' nature of society, the necessity for natidna1 homogeneity and, consequently, the need for the individual's subJection to the nation.
Relationship of the Indivldual to Nation - The Creation of Society by Individuals, The Re-creation of Society Within Individuals
As described in the previous section, individuals, through collective representations and the ideals which stem from them" create society. But society alone can create values. Values are mental facts in relation to society but externa1 to the indivldual. An asocial, wdividual self is capable onlJf of perceiving facts and the properties of things and, consequently, lives on1y on an instinctive, animal level. Only the social ized individual, subject to and partici pating fully in collective experiences, can internalize these 73 externel values. ) 24 GOkalp discussed the different faculties of asocial and socialized '" individuals in an article written in 1917. Consciousness means perception of sensations, through our senses, of pains and pleasures within our organism, or of qualitles outside of us, such as colour, smell, sound, taste, warmth, cold, etc. This faculty, which is also shared by animals, is of an lndivldual and orgamc nature. Conscience, on the other hand, is the faculty which perceives, not material quallties but values WhlCh are splritual .... Values of whatever kind they may be, are basically subjective and not objective. This sUbJectivity, however, is wlth respect to society and not to the indivldual. The 1ndiv1dual experiences values as external rea l ity, i ndependent of hi s fee 11 ngs and des ires. He i s a l ways under the impact of va lues. When an indiv1dual comes lnto this world, he does not bnng wlth h1m any 1nnate idea about values. He acqu1res them through educat10n and h1S social enVlronment. $oc1ety, however, does Hot acqUlre values from any source outside ltself. In fact, the real essence of society i s noth1 ng but the sum tota 1, (}f va 1ues. . . Values are soclal inst1 tution~, external to the lndlvidual but internal to soclety. Conscience is the internalizatlon of these external values by the lndiv1dual minds. 74 Therefore, the lndivldual can only internal1ze values when he participates ln society. Otherwise, he iS only able to make material Judgements. As these values are of an ldeational nature, the individual can only attempt to attain them in his actions and, the success of his attempt is dependent upon the degree of his socialization.· The.ideal values set by so~iety are incons1stent with the individual ego and ambitions. Social values, therefore, exercise their influence by the appeal of the1r beauty and the sanction of their majesty, ln other w'ords, either by the sociallZed individual's desire to approach i dea 1 values and the approva 1 whi ch hi s acti ons wi n or by the sanctions placed on those whose actlons are incongruent with social values by more fully socialized 1ndividuals. 75 GOkilp stated that "ta fulfill these duties, one,has to develop a will powerful enough to overcome indivldual ambitions. In short, the individual has to 'negate' himself in community 8efore he may 'survive' .. 2~. • 76 in it." GOkalp described the elevation of the individual to the status of a "genuine human being,,,77 in an article discussing the sacred, and the profane and the' functi ons of negati ve and pos iti ve ri tua l sin 78 religion. This article is centrally important to understanding GOkalp's ideas regarding tile relationship of the individual to society in that its discussion of this process of individual elevation is coucned in mystical symbols and language that reproduce images which he uses elsewhere to describe society and nation. In other words, for GOkalp;the individual had to reproduce . ~ .. ~ the sacred nature of soc1ety within himself by participating in a r',itual parallel to that by which society was first created. Tbis parallelism is also evidenced in GOkalp's comparison of the child's experience of his social personality, his I, w1th the nation's experience of its l, its collective representation of itself as nation. 79 G"kalp identified negative ritual as the distancing of oneself from ,profane things and positive ritual as the ach1evement of sacredness and the presentation of one's spirit to the deity.80 However, these
purely relig10us functions are par~lleled with the discarding of " individuality and collect1ve consciousness, which arises as a result of the interacti'on of individual souls. Anything individual is profane. Therefore, the aim of negative ritual is to isolate the individual from his 1ndiv1dual1ty, ta elevate him to the status which ,. is 'the negation of 1ndividuality', that 1S, "forsaking the world'. . . . Man, looked at from a physiological point of view. is only an ego1stic animal. To have . society. it i s. above everythi ng, necessary to weaken this love for the ego. SA long as man remains unable to control his lndividual desires and egoistic ambitions and sa long as he is trained not ta be ready to make great sac~1fices of his 1ndividuality. he cannot be 'civil1zed by nature' .... Negative ritual transforms the lndividual inta a social being by continuous and effectlve trainlng_~ .. They [negati ve ritua 1 sJ aroP. in a sense, noth i ng but means attaining positive rituals.~l The worshipper, ln arder to approach the sacred, must free himself from his individual1ty, his profane state. But, he must also make " himself sacred. GOkalp stated that this facul ty does not exist in the individual state, that to became sacred, to perform the positive ritual,
( 26 it is necessary to become social, to ~ome into a state of collectivity.82 ~ l And Uit is only when a person frees himse 1 f from p rofani ty and acqui res a sacred nature that he can enter into that audi.ence ~which he longs u83 50 much. Just as the negative ritual, in this context, is the abandonment of individuality, and the positive ritual, the en1:.ering into a state of collectiyity, one is te'mpted to interpret Gokalp's reference to the sacred deity, which the worshipper approaches, as nothing other than the national ideal. This, is supported by his following statement: "In shor't, the social function of rituals expresses itself as the renunclation of r individuality, and the social function of positive ritual as the fulfilment of national ity. ,,84 Because Gakalp defined culture as the'sum total of the precipitations of society in indivldual sou.ls and, therefore, not individual but social,85 the individual who does not internalize soclety's values, who does not make himself sacred through society, falls beyond the pale of culture and moral obligation. Society, then,, makes the individual. human, Vlrtuous, distances him from his bestial emotions and his state of moral indifferen~~, endows him
with faith, hope and optimism and creates hlS personality through its ~ culture, a personality which carries a permanent sacredness in the soul. 86 Socializatlon, therefore, in Gokalp's terms, makes the individual a cul tura 1 bei ng. Because, accordi ng to G~ka 1p, civil i za t i on can on ly
be incorporated through culture, the non-socialized being, quantitativ~ly,
by not being a member of a group, and qualitatively, because ~e does not possess the faculty to discriminate value, is totally incapable of availing hlmself of either. In ,short, the individual, as a member of a collectivity, creates society through collective representations and the ideals which stem from them. Society, once created, is ~ separate entlty, not simply the sum total of individuals, nut with a reality of its own, a product of the interaction of individual minds. To participate in society, the individual, therefore,' must reproduce the ~acred l')ature of society wlthin • himself by fulfilling the ritual of discarding hi~ individuality and all that implies, and entering into a sacred, collective state, in a re enactment of the creation of society. 27
-Notes
lZiya Gôkalp, "Yen; Hayat velen; Klymetler," GenCj Kalemler, no. 8 (1911); rpt. in Turkish NatîÔnalism and Western ClVilizatian. Selected. Essays of Ziya GOkalp, trans. and ed. Niyazi Berkes ('London: George All en and Unwi n, '959), p. 55. ! 2 . Ib,d., PP: 55~56. Ide'es-forces is a ~enn derived from Albert FouUlée's works. They are ideas conceived by the human mind that, provided they fit into the trend of material and psychic evolution, 'can influence the rnaterial warld.
3 Gôkalp, "Yen; Hayat," p. 55. 4 . Ibld., p. 56. The sentiments-forces are distinct from the idées-;ols i) that they alone can influence social 1ife.
Gôk lp.( "Yeni Hayat," p. 57.
6 • Ibld., p. 58.
7Ziya GOkalp, "BugOnkü Felsefe," Genç Kalem1et;, no. 2 (1911); rpt. in Gakalp, Turkish Nationalism, 49. p. \
9Ziya GlSkalp, "Muhiddin-i Arabi," Genç KaTemler, no. 8 (l~11); rpt. in Gôkalp, Turkish Nationalism, p. 51. 10. Ibld., p. 52.
11 GOkalp, "Yeni Hayat," p. 56.
~ 12 t . . Ziya GOkalp, "Ahlak çtimai' Midir?," I~timaiyat Mecmuasl 1, no. 3 (1~14); rp~. in G~ka1p, Turkish Nation,il'llsm, p. 152. , 13 ~ Ziya G~kalp, "Mi11iyet MefkOresi," Torkle~rœk, !slâmla~mak, MuaSlrla~mak (Istanbul: n.p. 1918); rpt. in GOka p, Turkish Natianalism, p. 79. /
( ./
l
.1 28 ,, ( .,. 14ziya Gl)kalp, "Tarihf Maddecilik ve içtimai MefkQrecilik," Yeni GOn,. 8 Mar. 1923, n. pag.; rpt. in G~kalp; Turkish Nationa1ism, p. 62. ' 15 Ziya GOka1p, "MefkOre," TOrk Yurdu 5, no. 32 (1913).; rpt. in Gëka1p, Turkish Nationalism, p. 67. 16 Gàka1p, "Tarihî," p. 63. li G~ka1p, "Mil1iyet," p. 79. 18 ' Ibid. 19 Gôka1p, "Tarih''''," pp. 63-64. 20 Ibid., p. 63. 21 , Ziya ~kalp, "K,ymet HOkQm1eri," îslâm Mecmuasl l, no. lB (191,4); rpt. in GOkalp, Turkish Nationalism, p. 148.
22 • Ziya GOkalp, "1çtimaiyat ve Fikriyat: Cem\yette BDy.(]k Adamlarln Tesiri," fçtimaifat Mecmuasl l, no. 2 (1917); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationalism, p. 62. .. 23 \ G15ka1p, "K,ymet," pp. 148-149. 24 Ibid., p. 149.
25 ... GOkalp, "Tarih, ," p. 64.
26 See Ziya ~kalp, IIBir Kavmin Tetkikinde TAkibo1unacak Us01 ," Milli Tetebbüler MecmuaSl l, no. 2 (1915); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationa1ism, pp. 113-123.
27 See Ziya GO~a1p, IIDinin tçtimai Vazife1eri," islam MecmuaSl 3, nos. 34 and 36 (1915); rpt. in GOkalp, Turkish Nationa1ism, pp. 184,. 189-190.
28Urie1 Heyd, Foundations of Turkish Nationa1ism. The life and Teachings of Ziya G~ka1p (London: Luzac and Co. Ltd., 1950), p. 57. · .
29 \. 29 GOka1p, "Yeni Hayat," p. 58.
30 Ziya Gllka 1 p, "Ur.. Cereyan," TOrk• Yurdu 3, no. 35 ( 1913); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationa1ism, p. 72.
~ 31 Gaka1p, "Milliyet," p. 81. 32 lb id., p. 82.
33 GOka1p, "Bir Kavmin," p. 119.
34 Ziya GOka1p, IIMi'llet Nedir?,11 t~timaiyat Mecmuasl l, no. 3 (1917); rpt. in GOkalp, Turkish Nationa ism, p. 132.
35 GOka1p, "Bir Kavmin," p. 120.
36 Gaka1p, "Millet," p. 132. 37 Gi:5ka1p, IIBir Kavmin," p. 120.
38 Ibid . See a1so G<5ka1p,- "Dini~," p. 184.
39GëkalP, "~il1et,!'·p. 132.
40 See Ziya GOkalp, "Millet Nedir?,i. Yeni Mec'mua 4, nos. 70-74 (1923); rpt. in Gl1ka1p, Turkish Nationalism, pp. 134-138.
41 GOka1p, "MefkOre," p. 67.
42 . 1bld., p. 68.
43 1 Ziya GOkalp, "Crf Ne~ir?," islAm Mecmuas" l, no.~14 (1914); rpt. in GOkalp, T~rkish Nationalism, pp. 153-155.
44 Ziya GOka1p, IIM;ll; f~t;ma;yat," lçtima;yat MecmuaSl 1, no. 1 (1917); rpt. in Gôka1p, Turkish Nationalism, pp. 171-172.
45 rbid.,P.172.
46 r bld.,. p. 17 9. 30
47 Ibid .
48 A GOka1p, "Bir,. Kavmin," p. 12l. --""" 49 GOka 1 p, "Mill et, Il p. 133.
50 Ziya GOkalp, "An'ane ve Kaide," rOrk Yurdu 4, no. '39 (1913); rpt. in GOkalp, Turkish Natienalism, pp. 92-93.
51 ziya Gakalp, "TOrkç01ak Nedir?," Yeni Mecmua, no. 28 (1917); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationa1ism, pp. 286-287.
52 Ziya GBka1p, "Halk Medeniyeti," Halka Dogru l, nos. 14-15 (1913); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationa1ism, pp. 89-90.
53 Ibid., pp. 91-92.
54ziya GOkalp, "tnkilâpçlllk ve Muhafazakarllk," Yeni GDn, 17 May 1923, n. pag.; rpt. in Goka1p, Turkish Nationa11sm, p. 267. ----J- -'---~--55 --- GOkalp, "TOrkç01ak," pp. 284-285. In the footnote to this article, 8erkes has stated that, in Gl1ka1p's terminology, the ward 'i rfan' shoul d not be trans l ated as 'culture' because he used it pre viously in the more general and ambiguous sense of 'lore', the who1e body of knowledge possessed by a people, or of 'learning', 'knowledge' possessed by the intel1ectua1 elite pertaining to particular subjects. In this essay, therefore, he puts this word in quotation marks on1y when it is ~sed as the equivalent of 'irfan' an~has used 'Culture', with a capitalized 'C', for 'hars'. 56 GOka l p, "TürkçOl Ok ," p. 288. 57 . Ziya GOkalp, "Millf Terbiye," Muallim, nos. 1-4 (1916); rpt. in GOkalp, Turkish Nationa1ism, p. 242. 5f! ( .Qol Ibid., p. 243. 59 Language, in its relation to national idea1s, was more important to GOka1p's philosophy than simp1y in its function as a national institution. GOkalp saw it as the basis of the nation's collective, representation of itself ,as a nation. The awareness of the language group as the baslc social organism in the common consciousness of the collectivity presupposed the language's reviva1 and its independence from the accretions of the universal civilizations as a precondition ..
31
for the existE;!nce of natïon. See Ziya GOkalp, "Cemaat ve Cemiyet,1I TOrk Yurdu 4, no. 41 (1919); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationalism, p. 100; GOka1p, "Mi1let,1I p. 129; G~kalp, "Tarihf," pp. 65-66;, GlSka1p, "Mil1iyet," pp. 80-82.
60Ziya GOka1p, IIHars ve Medeniyet," TOrk 61 Ibid., p. 105. See a1so Z;ya Gokalp, rOrkiye Asr,· Bir Cemiyet mn," Dogu, nos. 5-6 (1943); rpt. in GOka1p, Turkish Nationa1ism, p. 143. 62 Ibid. 63 GOka 1 p, "Mil Tl'" ," pp. 178- 1 79. J 64 It is in this co~text, then, in terms of their re1ationship to roores that the principles of linguistic Turkism, sunmarized by G~ka1p in TQrkçü1ügOn Esas1arl in 1923, can be seen as a cohesive unit. See Ziya GOkalp, The Principles of Turkism, tran~. Robert Devereux (Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1968), pp. 93-94. 65 For information on the Ottoman divan literature, aruz and its poetic conventions in Turkish see Walte~Andrews, Jr. ,~Introduction to Ottoman Poetry (Chicago: Bibliotheca Islamica, 1976); M. Fuad KOprQla, "La rrétrique 'aruz dans la poesie turque," in Phi1010giae Turcicae Fundamenta, 2, Louis Bazin, Alessio Bombaci et al. (Weisbaden: Franz Steiner, 1965), pp. 253-266. 66 " GOka 1 p, Pri nc; p1es, p. 96 6Z C. Kudret, Ziya Gl1kalp (Ankar,a; Ankara Universites; Baslmev;·, 1963), p. 38. 68 ~ GOkal p, "Bi r Kavmi n," p. 117 . •• 69ziya GOkalp, "A~iret1er Hakklnda Sosyolojik Tetkik1er," Dogu, nos. 9-11 (l943); rpt. ln Gr,kalp, Turkish Nationalism, pp. 125-126. 70 Grlkalp, "Mi111" Terbiye,1I p. 245. 71 Ziya GOka1p, "Vatan; Ah1âk,1I rOrkiol..09an Esaslarl (Ankara: n. p. , 19~3), pp. 138-141; rpt.~in GOka1p, Turkish Nationa1ism, p. 302. \ 32 t . 0 72 "k 1 IIOrf," p. 154. A1so see GOka1p, "Ah1âk,lI· p• 151- ( . Go a p, '" t; 73G1)ka1P, "Klymet,1I pp. 148-149. b 74 GOka 1P: Il fçti maiyat, Il pp. 161-162. 75GOkal p , "Orf ," p. 155. 76GOkal p, "Di ni n, If p. 188. 77 lbid. 781 b'id. , pp. 186-193. 79 GOka 1p, "Mefkare," p. 69. 80G5ka 1p, "Dïnin," p. 187. 81 Ibid .• pp. 187-188. 82Ibid .• PP','189, 191: " ,.~ 83 , , 19l. " Ibid p. ... • ~',: 841bi d. , p. 192. '" 85GOka 1 p, "Ahrak, Il p. 152. 86GOkal p, "Dinin,u pp. 188, 190, Also GOka1p, "LJrf, Il p. 156: !, .. ' . \ . , '. ,f CHAPTER II THE POETRY OF THE BE? HECECILER Form 1 n the. Poetry of the Bei Heceeiler The preVlOUS chapter has 'studied Gokalp's philos,ophy of ldeals ln order to derive from it a framework which will serve as a madel or theoretlcal pattern of form and theme WhlCh can then be 1!ransposed anto the works of speclfic poets ln order to examlne actual-trends ln form and development of theme. In thlS context, ln terms of fomi, Gl>kalp's ideas regardlng the relatlOnshlp of national llterature to the mores of the people lnflueneed a whole generatlOn of wnters. His insistenee that language, metre and verslfication be conslstent with and refleet the mores of the people contributed ta the development of a new national poetic movement. the prlme representatives of which were the Be~ Heeeciler, or Flve -Syllabists. ' The lnfl uence of Zlya Gôkalp on Form in the Poetry of the Be? Hecec il er G15kalp's own concern with lingulstic and poetlc reform was expressed in a poem that he wrote ln 1918: If aruz is yours, he ce is ours. The Turkish spokenbYthe people is ours: ~ is yours, ~ is yours, gece is ours. One meani ng does not need three names. l, . Th; s short poem ~urrma ri zes suce; nctly the essentl al requi rements of the new 1 iterature movement: a reJectlOn of the quanti taÜve aruz metre, .slmplification of the language and 'adherence to the {rue mores of'.the natlon WhlCh, given the cultural cl'f'cumstances of the,Ottoman Empir@, could be found only in the fol~ hentage of the people. <> 33 , , , 1 34 The Be? Hececiler, under the lnfluence of Zlya Gbkalp, abandoned l, aruz metre and the language, themes and conventlons WhlCh lt required, adopted syllablc metre, slmplifled Turkish and wrote many of thelr poems according to or lnsplred by folk forms of verslflcatlOn. Halit Fahn Ozansoy, in an lntervlew in 1960, sald that the Be? Hececiler moved from aruz to hece (syllabic metre) because they were following a natlonallst cause. He contended that thlS cause was ~ the reason that he had JOlned the group and added that dunng the Balkan wars and wlth the paln and agony of the FHst World War, the ldeology of Zlya Gokalp, hlS wn tlngs and dlScusslons about natlonal sentlment and culture'and hlS attempts to lnfluence accordlngly became a source of lnsplration ta all who went on ta Joïn the NatlOnal Llterature movement. He malntalned that the Be? Hececller reallzed that, desplte thelr success ln aruz, lt no longer satlsfled them. They came to recogn l ze tha t syllablc metre was thel r aesthetlc as well a~ thelr natlonal metre. 2 Hal it Fahn also suggested that the earllest natlonallst poems, notably those of Mehmet Emln Yurdakul, were, ln fact, due to thelr lack of lyriclsm and rhythm, 'closer to prose than verse. In contrast ta thlS, he states that the Be~ Hececller reJected Mehmet Eml n' s parmak hesabl (finger countlng), hlS stllted, formal use of syllablc metre, and adhered ta the more common metres of the peop 1 e, Whl ch he 11 kened ta "the power WhlCh enables people ta discover the ·lnner sound," and described as "our own aesthetic metre. ,,3 . , Some of these metres, whfch appear most 'prominently ln the poetry of the Be~ Hececiler, include those whère each verse or kanat contalns seven syllables wlth a sub-rhythm of ,4+3,3+4 or a comblnation of these and other breakdowns, durak, which lS therefore termed durakslz (without stop or break). ThlS lS often used ln conJunctlon Wlth a common type of verse form known as m~nl, WhlCh conslsts of four verses, havlng a rhyme pattern of AABA, where the essentlal theme of the poem lS usually contalned in the two flnal verses. Examples of the use of thlS metre in the wor.l Thé most common metre used seems to have been that of eleven syllables subdivided into ~+4+3, 6+5 or a combination of the two. ThlS was very popular and prevalent among the folk minstrels and, therefore, was natura 11y favoured by the Na tlOna l L1 terature movement. It was often used 1n eonj unetl on wlth verse forms such as ko;;ma and türkU. The ko?ma form generally contained a minimum of three and a maximum of SlX quatrains or dortlUk wlth a rhyme pattern of ABAB CCCB )DDDB etc. The türkü was slm1lar ln form to the kOjma,'with the. only d1fferenee being that the fourth verse of each quatra1n was repeated. ThlS partieular verse was calNed a kavu~tak and could be a refra1n, or r1ft kanatll, conta1ning two llnes. Ha 1 it Fahn' s "Akisler" (ReflectlOns), Orhan Seyfi's "Anadolu Topra~l" (The Land of Anatol1a), "Çoban, Sürün Dagllmas1n" (Shepherd, Do Not Let Your Flock Scatter), En1s Behif's "Çanakkale ?ehit1191nde" (At the Martyrdom of the Dardanelles) and "Tuna Kly1s1nda" (On the Shore of the Danube), Yusuf Zlya's "?airler" (Poets)"and "lnOnO" and Faruk Nafiz's "Denllden Bekledl~im" (The One l Await From the Sea), 'IMa~ara" (Cave) and "Memleket TQrkUleri" (Sangs of the Country) are only a fewexamples \ of the use of thlS metre in the works of the Bes• Hececller. The kosma verse form was fairly popular am0ng these poets, as eVldenced in -----its use ln Yusuf Ziya's "Ko~ma", Faruk Naf;z's "Dinle Neyden" (Listen to the Flute), "Çoban CerrfleSl" (The Shepherd's Fo~,ntaln). and "Ko~ma", and Orhan Seyfi 's "Har;p'icinde Bahar" (Spring During War) and "Dusünce" ) , (Thought), to name but a few. An example of the turku form can be found in 01an Seyfi' s "Türkù". The metre compris~ng thlrteen syllables with a 4+4+5 rhythm was quite commonly used. Examples of th1S are Orhan Seyfi 's "K1Ji Gecelennde" (On Wlnter Evenlngs), Yusuf Ziya's "Ak1ndan Aklna A (From Raid to Rald), ( "Giden Gelmez" (What 1S Lost Will Not Return), "Zeybekler" (The Zeybeks) and Faruk Naflz's "Turan K1Z1arl" (Maidens of Turan) and "Ey Türkeli" (Oh, Land of the Turk). , . En;s Behiç: and, partleularly, Faruk Naf;z seem ta have favoured a metre of fourteen syllables, with a 7+7 breakdown. The prime example Qf thlS ;5 Faruk Nafiz's "Han Duvarlan" (The Inn Walls) but other illustratlons of the use of this metre include Enis Behle's "Bir Cenâze J 36 Alay1" (A Funeral Procession) and "ikinci Varllk" (Second Being), Yusuf Zlya's "Bir Ïlkbahar Aksaml" (A Spring Evening), Faruk Nafiz's t "Hayat" (Lite). "Annesiz Olü" (Motherless Dead). "Gurbet" (Exile), "Klskanf" (Jealousy), "Olümü Hatulatan Kadln" (The Woman Who B'rlngs Death to Mind). "Akln" (The Rald), "Garipler" (Strangers) and "Mustaripler" (The Suffering Ones). Free versé, wlthin the framework of the system of syllablc metre, was also used, malnly ln the poets' later works and most notably and successfully by Em s Behl ç, as evi denced 1 n hl s poems "Süvaril er" (Cavalrymen), "Gemiciler" (Soldlers), "S eblP (The Fountaln) and ;. portlOns of "Ul1ursuz Baskln" (The Unlucky Rald). Nlhad Saml Banarll has suggested that, because little research had been completed on folklore and the saz ralrlerl, folk minstrels of Turkey, as a result, the young poets of the natlonal llterature movement were not familiar wlth the poetlcs. forms and speclfics of expresslon of Turkish folk poetry. Consequently, they were not capable of encompassing ln thelr own works the metre, form and rhyme that were reflected ln folk literature and appealed ta the tastes of the peopl~. 5 Therefore, he concludes that they could neither intellectually nor culturally fulfll the poetry of ldeology expected from the 11terary current with WhlCh they were associated and states that, in fact, thlS current did not progress beyond a nationalism dedicated to metre and form and, despite the best intentions of those who participated ln it, remained lnadeq~ate from the point of Vlew of natlonal culture. 6 The degree to which the Be? Hececiler adhered faithfully to folkloric patterns is difficult to détermine in view of the dearth of research done to date on Turkish folk poetry. Whatever the case may be. the central issue, as far as this paper is concerned, is that they claimed a commitment and attempted to approach folk patterns and " themes i,n order to revive what they, by their adherence to Ziya Gtlkalp's ideology, believed'to be fundamental Turklsh values and aesthetlcs WhlCh, in turn, would regenerate the natlon. There is no question that their language was simplified and their themes 11berated from the conventions of the Divan perlod. The metre they used was syllabic and J" • 37 versification, at ~he very least, was modelled on customary patterns. Thei r poetry was fa r 1ess res tri c ted by i ts nature than tha t of the earlier period and, therefore, at least in part, in terms of form, achleved Ziya G~kalp's original purpose. Theme in the Poetry of the Be~ Hececiler Gakalp's philosophy of the relationshlp of national collective representatlons, ldeals and mores lnfluenced trends in the types of poet;c form and language used by the National Literature movement. But it is the reflectlon of his ldeas on the rélationship of indlvldual to nation and the lmpllcations of this relationship which aremost predominant ln the natlonallst themes of the movement. Kemal Karpat has.Jitated that "Ziya Gtlkalp' s idea that the lndivldua1's happiness 11es in emotiona1 subservience to the group becamé natlona1ism's chlef feature, and the trend was to emphasize thlS idea rather than soften lt. ,,7 Thü paper has attempted to show that, ln fact, ln Gtlka1p's thought, not on1y did the lndivldua1 's happlness lle in emotlonal subservience to the group, but that his veryexlstence on1y became meaningful by vlrtue of his relatlonship to the group. These same elements underlying Gtlkalp's phllosophy that influenced ~ the course of Turkish nationalism were mirrored in the poetry of the Natlonal Literature movement and, particula~ly. that of the Be~ Hececiler. ThlS paper will examine specifie poems which are representative of the treatment of theme in those works of the "Bei Hececiler that deal with national issues and which exhlbit certain features common to th~ whole corpus of their poetry. These include the use of parallelism and contrast, the lnteractlon of verb moods and tenses, the positioning of verbs, the use of vocatives, the interplay of datlve and ablatlve, the use of symbols identlfied with the nation, unexpected shifts in punctuation and the use of terms ordinarily used in a mystical context, all of which wlll be shown to contrlbute ta the development of these nationalist themes. 8 Therefore, the analysis in this section of the paper will be limited to a thematic one, within the context of the model estatlllshed in the previous chapter that deals with .Gtlkalp's definition of the relationship"of individual ta nation. 38 The study of the treatment of this relationship in the works of the Bei Hececiler will consider this aspect of G6kalp's thought specifi cally in terms of the creation of the nation by individuals through their collective representations and the subsequent re-creation of society • withln indlviduals and their socializatlon as a result of the internal ization of national values. The Influence of Ziya ~6kalp on Theme in the Poetry of the Be~ Hececiler Al though Yusuf Ziya Ortar, in such poems as "Bemm yarim" (My Beloved) and lI~airlerll (Poets), Faruk Naflz Camllbel in "Gurbet" (Exile) ~ and Orhan Seyfi Orhon ln "S 1ya h Sanca~" (The Black Flag) and Mnadolu Topragl" (The l..and of Ana to li a) addres'sed themse l ves to the i ss ue of. the relationshlp of lndlvldual to nation, it is ln the works of Ems Behiç that these elements dre dealt wlth mast explicitly. Therefore, lt ,lS to hlS poems that we shall turn to trace the development of the theme ln order to achleve a sense of the degree ta WhlCh G6kalp's phllosophy was refl ected 1 n the wo,rks of the Be~ Hececil e~. GOkalp, ln reference ta the development of ideals, stated ln "MefkOre" (Ideals) that national crisls, the experlence of calamlty lS a 'Soclal Gabrlel' WhlCh breathes the spirlt of nationality, a feeling of family unity into a dispersed people. Once infused wlth this spirit, a natlOn awakens ta lts ldentity, its origin, lts destlnation and lts hlstorical mission and sets about pursulng them. 9 Behif's "Ey Türkell" (Oh, Land of the Turk) introduces this theme of the creation of the nation by individuals and of the development of unity precipitated by crisis. 10 Ey Türkell ... A Ey Türkell, ben uzaktan gelen yorgunum. Dinle beni, ben de senin bir 6z o~lunum: B Geceleyin çBlde yalnlz kalan yolcu bir - Solgun l?lk farkedince nasll sevinir, Nasll bQtUn Omidlni ba~l~rsa ona, Ben de ~yle yadelinden baktlm vatana. c Sen uzaktln benden, fakat kalbim senindi. Ey Türkell, hasretln t~ ruhuma sindi. * 39 D Bir kaslrga alt üst ettl dünyaYl bütün. la Kanl1. viran mabedinde tarih'ln bugün Kaç hükümdar tacl kandll olup aslldl. .. . Kaç istiklal glJ{11Jlek lçin mezar kaZlldl ... . Bu kazl l an me>zarl ardan bi rl en der; n. Bu en derin mezar senin, ey vatan sen1n~ 15 K1Zll g6kten çalacaktl ayla YlldlZl ÔlümUnden ienllk yapan kefen hlrS1Zl. a karanllk gOnlerinde, gonlUmUz kara, Ba~rlmlida Seflllerln a~tl~l yara, Ellerimlz ba~ll matem zlnclrlerile, 20 Neslimizln bezgln llmrü bütUn haile, Sehld olan emellere hep hazin~hazln A~lamaktan nuru s~ndU g~zlerimlzln. Dlnliyerek bayku?larln kahkahaSlnl Millet kara bayraklarla tuttu yaslnl. * E 25 Bugün kl blZ hak yol unda kanlnl doken, Bugün ki bl Z bl n kahnl e hurdaha~ i ken Yekpare blr çelik olmu~ Slne sanibi Bir mi lletlz, kükrem;~lz yanarda~ gibi. .. Bugün kl biz, alçaklarln hakaretlnden 30 Varll~lnda klyametler kopup ca~eden Ylldlrlmll blr ummanlZ, u~ulduyoruz; Zulme kar~l Tann hl?ml oldu ordumuz. 'fi. * F Biz daha dUn ~yle bedbaht olanlarlz kl, (:fyle gogsü hicran lle dolanlarlz ki, 35 Ruhumuzun zlrhl oldu lztlrablmlz ... Bahtlmlzla budur, dedlk, son hesablmlz. Varsln gelsln arZln daha bin beliyyesl~ OcOmUzün sayhasldlr toplarln sesi. Fel~ke'ler pençemlzde oyuncak oldu ... 40 Yanginlarla bUtun vatan alsancak oldu ... Bir klrllmaz yallnklllç glbi hlnclmlz, tmanlnl kalkan ett; her aklnclmlZ ... Tayfunlara yolda~ oldu nâra salan Tark~ ... Hey koca TUr.k, Tanrlslndan kuvvet alan TUrk~ ... * G 45 'Zafer' azgln bir kUheylân; ko~ar, ~ahlanl'r; S 1ftl ndaki ~ehsuvarl pek çabuk tanl r. Bu iehsuvar, kÜheylâna dana binerken Yelesinden bir tutar ki, azgln at hemen llk mahmuzda anlar nasll blnicisl var. 50 Yol ver artl k kÜhey13na, ~anll ~ehsuvar~ Sen korkusuz, gUçlU, h~kim oldukça ata Atln seni erdirecek her saltanata. O~u ne da~, ne de den;z durduracaktlf, 'Zafer' senl uf-uracak... Uçuracaktlr ... ,. 40 . H 55 Fakat bil ki: Îradende sars1nt1 varsa, G~nlünU bir l3hza lçin korku sararsa, Ya gazlerin karar1rsa boyle uçu?tan, , Veya biraz mestolursan, dalg1nla~lrsan 'Zafer' sen; birdenbire slrt1ndan atar; 60 Attan dUje'1 \allarlnl: alt1nda yatar .•. iite b;z k1 ta ezelden beri atllylz, ASlrlarln gtlklerinde biz kanatllylZ. Kan1mlZln ate~lnden ~im?ek yarattlk; Bu ~im~ekle kÙheylâna bir k1rbaç attlk. 65 "Allah." diye hayklrarak 'Zafer" imize Huru?ettlk 'Sakarya' dan tâ 'Akdenlz' e ... Atîlere ko?uyoruz gençllkle, ~anla ... ~an beraber ko?ar Hakka do~ru ko~anla. Oh Land of the Turk ... A Oh Land of the Turk, 1 am the t1red one who has come from far. Listen to me, 1 too am your own son: B Just as a traveller left alone in the desert at nlght ReJoices upon seeing a pale light, 5 And attaches hlS hope to it, So 1 too saw the homeland from strange lands. 1 m C You were far from me but my heart was yours. Oh land of the Turk, longing for you filled my very soul. * o A whirlwind turned the world upside down. 10 In history's bloody ruined temple today How many monarch's crowns have been hung as oil lamps ... How many graves have been dug to bury lndependence ... Of all these graves, one is the deepest. This deepest grave lS yours, oh homeland, yours~ 15 The grave robber who rejolced ln your death Was going to steal the 'Star and Crescent' from the red sky. In your days of darkness, our hearts are dark, The wound opened by the destltute lS ln our breasts, Our hands are bound wlth the fetters of mourning, 20 The discouraged life of our generation lS a tragedy, The light of our eyes has been extingulshed From sad weeping for martyred hopes. While listenlng ta the awls' bitter laughter The nation mourned yo~ Wi~k flags. : 1~, 41 E 25 Today, we'who shed blood in the path of Gad, Today, we, although afflicted by a thousand troubles Are a nation wjth a breast like a single piece of steel, Roaring like a volcano ... Today, we, ln whose being disaster5 unfurl and bail 30 Insulted by the vile Are an ocean with lightening, howling; Our anny became the anger of God against tyranny. * F We that only yesterday were so unfortunate, Are those whose breasts are so full of longlng, . 35 Our paln became our souls' armour ... This is, we said, our last reckoning wlth fortune. Let even a thousand more curses of the earth come! The sound of cannon lS the howl of our revenge. In our hand, disasters were a tnf1e ... 40 The whole country ln flames became a red flag ... Our hatred is llke an unbreakable naked sword. Our every soldier made hlS falth hlS shield ... The shouting Turk became a fellow traveller to the whlrlw1nd! ... Oh great Turk, Turk taking strength fram God! '" * ~ G 45 'Victory' is a furious horse; lt runs, rears; It quickly becomes famillar w'ith the horseman on lts back. This horseman, even before mounting the horse Holds its mane so that the furious horse 1mmedlately At the first spur, knows what kind of rlder h~as. 50 Glorious horseman, let the horse have hlS way now! As long as you are fearless, strong and control the horse Your horse will cause yau ta reach every domlnion. Neither mauntain nor sea will stop hlm. 'Vlctory' will cause you ta fly ... He will fly ... H 55 But know that: If in your command there is a hesltation, If for a moment, fear causes your heart to pale, Oh, if you become dizzy from such a flight, Or if you become even slightly enraptured or lost in thought 'Victory' will throw yau suddenly from his back; 60 He who is th~own from the horse is tradden underfoot ... * 1 Now we that also Slnce eternity have been rlding, Are winged in the skles of centuries. From thEL fire ln our hearts we have created lightening; With 1;.hi:s lightenlng we have whipped the horse. , 65 Crylng ,"A1Jah!" to our 'Victory' We have sAouted from Sakarya to the Mediterranean ... We are galloping into the future wlth youth, with glory ... Glory accompanies those who pursue the Truth. 42 Stanzas A, ,B and C, sedtion 1, define the poet's sense of his own connection to hlS home1and as a preface to his deve10pment of the theme of national unlty through crisis. He is essentia11y p1aclng himse1f wlthln the nation, whose historica1 and ideo1ogica1 progress he then proceeds to descrlbe. Verse l, Stanza A, introduces the trave~ler metaphor by which this re1atlonship is presented and the 1ink to home1and lS made. This lS underscored by the simi1ar structure of verses 1 and 2 and the relatlve strengthenlng of the statement in verse 2, evidenced particu1ar1y ln the use of "ben de seni n bi r oz 0~11 unum" (1 too am your own son), where "èlz" imp1 ies 'essential'. Verses 3, 4 and 5, Stanza B, form a prolonged metaphor, wnlch lS assoclated wlth and exp1alned by verse 6 wlth the use of "ben de oyle" (sa 1 tao, in this way). The "yolcu" (traveller) then, lS equated ta "ben" (1), the "ça1" (desert) is "yade1" (strange or forelgn lands) and the "l~lk" (llght) which causes reJoicing and hope lS the "vatan" (homeland). Verses land 2 present the opposing lmages of physlcal dlstance on the one hand, ~d re1ationship or a1leglance on the other. Verses 3-5 e1aborate the traveller metaphor , and verse 6 connects thlS metaphor ta the home1and and persona1 identifi (J cation with the home1and. , Verse 7, Stanza C, is significant in that its syllablc rhythm lS unlque ln the poem. It contalns both opposing images, thereby restating those of verses land 2, but by the use of "fakat" (but), it reso1ves this apparent contradlotlon by describing the relationship as one of physlcal distance but emotiona1 c10seness or ldentlty. In verse 7, wlth "kaJblm senindi" (my heart was yours), the relationship between the poet and the 'land of the Turk' lS one- of virtua1 identity. ThlS condltlon lS reinforCt~further ln verse 8 with the statement "hasret.ln tâ ruhuma slndl"rlonging for you fil1ed my very sou1). The dec1aratlon "ben de senln blr oz o~lunum" (I too am your own son) ln verse 2 is therefore vindicated by the degree of interaction established ln verses 7-8, which, by their association with verbs in the past perfect tense, express a condition of the poet which precedes and Justifies that of the statement ln verse 2. 43 In the first section of the poem, then, the poet establishes the nature of his personal affiliatio~ to the homeland as a prelude to the , following sections where he uses the first person plural ln reference to the homeland and the natlon~ By virtue of Stanzas A, Band C, the poet clearly includes hlmself as a member of that group of indivlduals that ldentifies with the p1ight of the natlon. Stanza 0 presents the lssue of crlsis in verses 9-16 and the response of individuals to the crisls ln verses 17-22. It th en identlfles the re1atlonshlp of that group of lndlvlduals of which the poet was a member, descrlbed as 'we' in the poem, to the hom~land as one of natlon ln verses 23-24. The impression of crlsis and help1essness ln verses 9-16 lS created by the lillage of the devastating "kaslrga" (whlrlwlnd), the use bf such passlve verbs as "aslldl" (have been hung), "kazlldl" (have been dug), the death imagery and the Juxtaposition of the incongruous lmages of "hûkùmdar tacl" (monarch's crown) and "lstik1âl" (lndependence) wlth "kandll" (oi1 lamp) and "mezar" .(grave). Yet, all these universal crises pale by comparison to that of the homeland. The crisls progresses from universal to speclfic, from wor1d and history (verses 9-10) to homeland and flag (yerse 15). In verse 17, darkness 11nks the homeland and lndlviduals. Hearts are identlfied with the country through thlS common darkness. In the following verses, the connection of, national conditlons and elements, to personal dlstress is accentuated by the positiomng of "ba~nmlZda" (ln our breasts, verse 18), "ellerimiz" (our hands, verse 19) and ,f\, "nes1imiz" (our generation, verse 20) at the beginning of the verses. The intensity of thlS distress 15 emphasi,zed by the use of the lmmedlate, physlcal lmages of "gonlümüz" (our hearts, verse 17), "bagnmlz" (our breasts, verse 18), "ellerimiz" (our hands, verse 19), "omür" (life, verse 20). "a~lamaktan" (from weeping) and "gozlerimiz" (our eyes, verse -22). In verse 24, the link between national and ,ndividu~ is c explicitly stated. The "millet" (natlon) lS equated to the 'we' of the prevlous verses by virt~f the act of mournlng in which it particlpates. 44 At no point in Stanza D is the prevalling mood of depression and pessimism lifted. In fact, the image of "baykujlann kahkahasl" (the owls' bitter laughter), traditionally a bad omen, serves to under llne the gloomy tone of the previous verses and negate any possibility of positive lnterpretation. Stanza E, though, introduces the theme of unity through crisis. "Bugün ki biz" (we, today) is repeated three tlmes withln the stanza and seems to represent a turni ng poi nt ,in the fortune of.e nation. But it also echoes the 'today' of verse 10. The crlsis and the condition of unlty, then, are not distinct ln terms of time. Rather, they occur simultaneously. The crlsis preclpltates a sense of national unlty, in Gokalp's terms, a national ldeal. The product of thlS ldeal is des cribed by the lmag~ "ye kpare bir çelik olmu? Slne sahlbl blr millet;z" (we are a nation with a breast llke a single plece of steel, verses V-" 27-28) and those of "kukremi?lz yanardag 91bl (roanng llke a volcano, verse 28) and "yl ldlnmll bir ummamz ugulduyoruz" (we are an ocean with lightening, howling, verse 31). These impart a sense of multiplicity submerged within unity and the resulting de~lopment of 5trength and anger, which represents a progression from the overwhelmlng resignation of Stanza B. / Stanza F underscores the effect of this natlOna 1 unity , the commitment to struggle. This is emphasized by the use of words such as "zlrh" (armour, verse 35), "ocümüz" (our revenge, verse 38), "toplar" (cannons, verse 38), "yanglnlarla bütün vatan" (the whole country ln flames, verse 40), "hlnclmlZ" (our hatred, verse 41), "yallnklllç" (naked sword, verse 41), "akl nCl Il (501 di er,. ra i der, verse 42) and "kalkan" (shield, verse 42). The punctuatlOn of verses 36-44 supports the milltary nature of the stanza by creating a sense of urgency and speed . ... Inverse 42, the 'we' of the prey i ous verses i s 11 nked to the image of the 'essentlal' or 'universal' Turk of verses 43-44. The Turk as a fellow traveller with the whlflwind, is a customary raiding or military image. But, withln the context of this poem, in relation to the "kaslrga" (whirlwind) of verse 9, the implication is that, additionally, the Turks are no, longer in a helpless state, impacted upon by the whil"'lwind, but have regained their proper place in the r • 45 world order. Verses 43-44, then, are connected to both past and - present images. The image of the 'universal' Turk is reinforced by the references ta "koca TLirk" (grea t, anc i ent Turk) and "Tann 5 l ndan kuvvet alan Türk" (Turk taking strength from God) in verse 44. The progression from struggle to victory as a result of nat10nal unity is described in Stanzas G, H and 1. The sense of nation united is maintained by the image of the single horseman ridlng Victory, f{ • ' portrayed as a horse. The 'we', or nation /1s linked to thlS single horseman lmage most nota~ly in vetses 63-~4. The 'universal' Turk image' continues in verses 61-62 and 67-68, with the merging of past and present lmages. Withln the poem, then, generally, there is a movement ln the relationship of individual to nation from -the poet as individual to his / definitlon of himself ln relation to hlS homeland; from the group of indiv1duals, lncluding the poet. who identlfy_~_ themselvest with the condition of the homeland to their perception of themselves as a nation; from nation resigned to nation united by cr1sis; and, finally. from natlon unlted to the 'universal' or 'essential' Turk lmage that transcends time. Allied with this progression is the complementary movememt from defeat and chaos to struggle and victory. The two are not al,lied coincidentally, but rather victory is portrayed as a direct result of national unlty. This is more than reminiscent of. Gtlkalp's statements,that natlons with ideals are destined for resurrectlon even if they are polltlcally dead and that a nation with a resurrecting and creative ideal can never die. ll In the first phase of Gtlkalp's definitlon of the relationship of individuals to nation. the individuals create the nation by elevating national realizatioDs in their collective consciousness to the level of national 1deals during periods of crisls. The second phase is that of the re-creation of the nation and ltS lnternallzatlon by individuals who thereby em~ody national values by thelr functlon as fully soclalized .individuals. It is the issue of poetic insplration and its connection to such national symbols that is central to Enis Behiç. He deals with it in "Çanakkale Sehitliginde" (At the Martyrdom of the Dardar;telles) and als~ il1' "Tura~ KlZlarl" (Maidens of Turan).12 ~ 1 / 48 ..... - Turan K1Z1arl A ilhamlmln gdklerinde do~d~ bir hayal. Sairli~im Umidimde bu1du ~aheser. Kafiyemin goncaslnl açtl îstikbal'. Geldi rüya Ulkesine nazll peri 1er; 5 Bakl~larl ?airane birer mücevher, Siir1erin bU1bü1üdür gU1 aglZ1arl; ~ek sevim1i ba?larlnda menek~e efser, Dalga da1ga uzun saçll Turan klz1arl! ... B ~irim için 'esatlr' l etmem lntihal; la Ëfsaneler zamanlnda istemem haber. Sanihaml süs1iyecek en güzel timsal: 'AY-YlldlZ' ln dlyannda bin1erce 'Olker' Duygu1anm bir 'Zühre' ye olmasln heder; Saylslzdlr ufkumuzda a~k yl1dlzlarl. 15 Vatanlmda sizler açln penbe bir seher, Da1ga da1ga uzun saç1l Turan klzlarl! * c Kal.lerinl aydlnlatlr mukâddes 'hilâl'; Gelir vatan sevglsinden gtlzlerlne fer. Allnlarda tarihimden kalma bir me'al, 20 _ Al bayra~a narin eller iJileyor zafer. , Uzaklarda yaralanlr kahraman nefer; Yorgun dü~üp derwle?ir bo~. nablZlan ... Ba~ucunda, melek gi bi, her gece bekler. Dalga dalga uzun saçl, Turan klzlarl! -* . -Ba~l ama- '-- o 25 Getirirler' hepsi birer demee'hllüfer; - Ah, onlarln yoktur asla vefaslzlafl. Sehidlerin mezannda duâ ederler :' Dalga dalga uzun saçll Turan klzlarl! ... Mai dens of Tura'n A 1 In the- skies of my insplration an image was'born. My poethood found a masterpiece fn my. hope. ,-_ 'Future' opened the bud of my rhyme. , _ Coy fai rl es came to the dream coun.try,.: 5 Each as poetlca1ly bejewel1ed, The r rose mouths were the nightingales of poems; On thelr.beloved heads were violet crowns, Lo 9 wavy haired maldens of Turan! ... ,. .. 47 ( B l do not p1agiarize ~tho109Y' for my poetry; 10 l do not seek know1edge from the time of 1egends. The most beautifu1 model adorns my inspiration: In the country of the 'Star and Crescent' are a thousand 'Pleiades' Let my feel ;ngs not be wasted on one 'Venus'; The stars of love on our horizons are number1ess. 15 A rosy dawn spreads in my country,' Long wavy haired maidens of Turan! * C The sacred 'crescent' enlightens their hearts; Love of the country bn ngs sp1endour ta the1 r eyes. On their foreheads, a message rema1ns from my hlstory. 20 Slender hands embralder vlctory on the scarlet flag. ln the distance, a brave soldler lS wounded; His empty pulse tlres and disappears.,. At his head, 11ke ange1s, every n1ght await Long wavy halred maidens of Turan! * - Ba~lama - Refraln - D 25 Each one brings a bunch of waterlilies; - Oh, they are never falth1ess. They pray at the tombs of the martyrs Long wavy haired maldens of Turan! ... In the first three verses of Stanza A of thlS poem. the initial l i 1 words are all in the genitive case as members of a possessive relation ~ ship and al1 are lntimate1y related to the poet, or 'me': "ilhamlm" (my inspiration, verse 1), "iairligim",(my poetho~d, verse 2) and "kafiyem" (my rhyme, verse 3). There is a'progress'ion from insplration to poethood to rhyme, fr'om abstract ta concrete, universa1 to partiçular. Each verse supports and expands upon the previous one. There lS, also, a strong sense of 'me' and a relation of 'me' to the dawning of a new age with the use of "11hamlmln gtlkleri" (the skies of my inspiration, verse 1), "Umidim" (my hope, verse 2) and "istikba1" (future. verse 3). This sense ;5 supported by the verbal progression from "do~du" (was born or dawned, verse 1) ta "buldu" (dlscovered, verse 2) and to "aç:tl" (opened. verse 3). \\ Converse1y, ln verses 4-8, there lS no mention of 'me'. The maidens Of Turan are described nqt as women but as coy fairies. The, on ly- li nk between verses 1-3 and 4-8 ; s through poetry: "~a i rl i ~im" { 1 --- : -:. t~'P 48 (my p0ethood, verse 2), "kafiyem" (my rhyme, verse 3), "j>a1rane mücevher" (poet1cally beJewelled, verse 5) and "~llrler" (poems, verse 6). Yet, the s'd'urce of the poet's lnsplratlOn lS not 1dentified. Verses 5-8 ~re slmply a phys1cal descrlptlon, albeit highly idealized. of women,- wlth "bakl 11arl mUcevher" (looks beJewelled, verse 5), "gül a~1Z1ar1" (rose mouths, verse 6), "pek sev1ml1 ba~lar" (very beloved heads, verse 7) and "dalga dalga uzun saÇ" (long wavy hair, verse 8). The poet glves no hlnt ln Stanza A of what 1t 1S about 1 these women that actually .1nSplreS hm. In fact, the only suggestlon that these 'coy falrles' are connected to hlS lnsplratlon at all stems from the Juxtaposltion of thelr physlcal descrlptlon and the lssue of 1nSplratlOn maln1y ln the reference to "rüya ülkeslne" (to the dream country) ln verse 4, and from the llnk regardlng poetry. In verses 1-3, the poet states that he has been 1nsp1red. In Stanza B, he then prbceedsf ' to descrlbe the source of hlS lnspiratl0n. Verses 12 and 13 are llnked ln a causative relatlonshlp. Because, ~n Turkey, there are a thousand stars (verse 12), therefore, the poet's feellngs wll1 not be wasted on"one Venus (verse 13). The poet, then, is J not concerned with wrltlng love poetry on' tradltlona1 terms, for one 1 -..J woman or praising one woman alone. The love poetry and the source from which the poet draws hlS vision have èxtended beyond al1 traditlona1 boundaries. In verse 14, thlS 'star' lmage lS deve10ped further: Not only are there a thousand Plelades but the stars of love on the Turklsh horizons are number1ess. As ln'verse 12, the stars, or women, are llnked ta the country of the 'Star and Crescent' which becomes particularized, ta 'our' country by the use of "ufkumuz" (our horizon) ln verse 14 and 'my' country, "vatamm" 'in verse 15. : , The punctuation of verses 15 and 16 connects the women to the spreading dawn and the country. Because the image of dawn and the sun's blrth is used by Behlç and the Be~ Hececl1er in ,thelr poetry ~o denote hope and victory as oppose~ to the red sun set which is generally . 19 assoclated wlth .bloodshed and defeat, the sense of the dawning of a ,~w ag~ lS developed ln thlS stanza wlth the image of stars on the horizon (verse 14) and, more particu1arly, the rosy dawn spreading (verse 15). '. 49 In Stanzà B, the women, associated with the country, are a source of 1nsplration anC! they are bot_h Joined ta 'me' ln verses ·13 and 15. Yet, the nature of this bond between the women and the country 1S on1y fully deflned in Stanza C. Here, 1t becomes c1ear that the women are the source of the poet's inspiration but that the country, ln turn, inspires thelJ1~ "Kalblenni aydln1atlr mukaddes 'hilâ1'" (The sacred 'crescent' causes their hearts ta be.enlightened, verse 17), "Ge1ir vatan sevgislndetgoz1erine fer" (Sp1endour cornes to thelr eyes from '-love of the country, verse 18), "A11n1arda tanhimden ka1ma blr me'al" (On thelr foreheads a message rema1ns from my hlstory, verse 19).14 • It 1S, ln fact, ln these qualitH~s, endowed upon the women by the country, that the ~oet finds his ideal. The punctuation of verses 19 and 20 links the fate of the country to vlctory on the scar1et flag, wlth the women as effectors or lnter- .. mediarles. And, in verses 21-23 and the refraln, the women, enllvened by the country, interact with an lmportant symbol of the natlOn, its ma rtyr-heroes. The lssue of inspiration, then, in this poem, is clanfied when one reallzes that the womerr who inspire the poet have become sources of inspiration only by virtue of the fact that they have themselves been 1nsplred by the country and then, as a result of this, pa~icipate as intermediaries ln the process of the nation's renewa1. In JJther words, they acqulre meaning in the poem only through the nature of their affi11ation to the country and their resulting particlpation in the national. purpose, in this case, strugg1e and vlctory . In "Süvarller" (Cavalrymen), Behiç touches on this lssue of the investment of meanlng through ldentificatlon with the natlon and commit ment to national purpose wlthin the larger issue of the transmutatlon of earlier, tradltional allegiances and identities into the new . national identity.15 ..... <, 50 ;p... Süvariler A BlZ kaslrga ogullarl, blZ kanatll süvariler, Slnlrlarda akln eden tamam yedlbln nefer! Ordumuzun dolu dlzgln hücumundan Dalgalanlr blr kahraman u~ultu. 5 Sim~ek gibi kll1Ç çalan, VorUlmlyan bu ordu Hep muzaffer Cenk eder. B Bu asker, 10 Ero~luer ~ehleventler f1rkasl! Bulutlardan blZ; sorar Varllmlyan ufuklann arkasl. Uzak degil varl1mlyan ?u ufuklar! 15 Blzim lçin yenazünde yoktur asla uzak yer; Blzim lçin büfün yollar ~ereflere dogtu gider ... Ak~am Ustü, alaylarla'biz geçerken bu yollardan, MlZraklan garen sanlr: Yerde uçan bir arman! Kabardlkca klr atlarln yelelerl, 20 Naralarla kijnemeler ne korkunç! ... Korkusuzlar, ar~ 11en~... ~ Gün batlsl klZll tunç! ... Ova: Tufan! .. . -Gëk: Duman! .. . ç D 25 Ey vatan! Güze 1 Turan! Sana feda biz varlZ. Dü~man oglu, meydana çlk! - Kahramanllk klmde ise anlarlz. 30 Il garl arda y1 gitl eri n bahtl açlk, Hak yolunda gazilerin klll~larl bütUn kan! Her zaman kan! ... Fakat blzim bayra~a ~an, bayra~a ?an!. Cavalrymen "-./ A We are sons of the whlrlwlnd, we are wlnged cava1rymen, Fully seven thousand soldlers Niding the frontlers! A heroic. ·sound undulates From the galloplng assault of our army, 5 Wlelding a sword like llghtening, This army, never tlring Always victorious Makes war. t: 51 B This soldier, 10 So1dier son of a soldier A party of tall ..strong men~ The spaces beyond the' unreached horizons . ' Ask the clouds about us. These unreached horlzons are not far! 15 For us, there is no dlstant place on the face of the earth; For us, all roads lead stralght to glory ... c At twilight, while we travel these roads with the troops, Those who see the lances think: A forest flies an the ground! As the manes of the grey horses swel~ 20 What fea rful cri es and nel ghl ng! ... '-vJ Fearless men, forward march! ... Sunset a red bronze! ... Valley: Flood! ... Sky: Smoke!. t. D 25 Oh home 1 and! Beautifu 1 Turan! We are the sacriflce to you. Enemy, come into the open~ We wi 11 see who l s heroi c. 30 In the charge, fortune beckans ta heraes. - The swords of the gazls are bloody in the path of Truth! Always bloody... But glory to' our flag, glory to the flag! ... Verse 1 connects the "kaslrga" (whirlwlnd) lmage, wlth its qualities of movement, flight and devastation to "süvariler" (the cavalrymen) and, by punctNation, te "ne ferll (soldiers) of verse 2. The image conveyed, especiaTly by reference te the whirlwind and raiding, by the use of "a kln eden" (raiding) in verse 2, lS related" to the aklncl, or Turkish 1 raiding, traditlon. The army is ldentified with the powers of'nature, "kaslrga" (the whirlwind, verse 1), "kanatll" (winged, verse 1), "dalgalanmak" (of waves, to undulate, verse 4)-, "?lm~ek" (lightening, verse 5), and takes on a vi rtua 11y mythl ca l, superhuman 'qua l i'ty, accentuated by the use of "yorulmlYan bu ordu" (thlS army ,never tiring, verse 6) which is coupled with "hep muzaffer" (always victorious, verse 7) almost ln a causative way. At the very least, there is a sense of progression between the two verses. Stanza A, therefore, connects 'we' and 'army' and' crea tes an image of the army in abstract without reference to conditions, people, purpose or surroundings. The description, rather, draws on tradltional aklncl images and, in its treatment of the army as superhuman, links man and natural elements. , \ 52 The use of "~ehlevent" (ta11, strong, handsome ~n) in verse 11 ma1nta1ns this 1dea1ization of the soldiers and ~he thematic progression of verses 12-16 heightens this sense of idealization. Even the natura1 elements, the unreached horizons, are aware of and concerned with the movements of the army. Verse 14 states that these unreached hor1zons are eas11y atta1nable. There 1S a deve10pment in verse 15 from the attalnability of these speclfic horizons to that of al1 horizons, with the phrase "yerlJzünpe yoktur asla uzak yer" (there 1S no distant place on the face of the earth). In verse 16, the sense of the inevitab11ity of all roads 1eading to glory lS conveyed by the use of the present , aor1st tense. Th1S is cons1stent with the reference to the army as "hep muzaffer" (always v1ctorious) in verse 7. The ak1nc1 1mages and the 'we'jarmy 1ink are susta1ned in Stanza B. The 1mage of the army, though, 1S 1ess abstract than prev'lously. It lS re1ated to Hs surroundings ln terms of "bu1utlar~: (clouds, verse 12), "ufuk1ar (horlzons, verses 13-14) and "yer" (earth, verse 15) but, still, these are slgnif1cant ln the1r re1ationsh1p to the nature rather than to ,}he acti ons or purpose of the arrny and proce~d qui ck1y to the more unlversa1 concepts of "îeref" (glory, verse 16) and the tfievitability of the cavalrymen's ach1evement of glory., In Stanza C, by the use of'''bu yollar" (these roads, verse .17) which recalls "bütün yollar" (all roads) of verse 16, the poet maintains the spir1tual, universal sense of 'roads' while, at the same time, rendering the 1mage more concrete by the use of "ge~erken" (while travelling, verse 17). This shift lS supported by the introduction of e1ements foreign to the army, "mlzraklar1 gljren" (those who see the lances, verse 18) but, 'more particu1ar1y, by images that create a sense of batt1e in verses 19-24. This sense of struggle is a1so supported by the punctuation of these verses and the intensity and speed conveyed by the structure of this sect10n of the poem. In Stanza C, the cavalrymen still retain their supernatural quality in terms of their relatlOn to e1ements of nature: "bir orman" (a forest, " verse 18), "gun bat1S1" (sunset, verse 22), "ova" (valley) and "tufan" (flood, verse 23), "gok" (sky) and "duman" (smoke, verse 24). Vet, they are no longer presented ln as abstract a fashion as ear1ier in • • 53 the poem. They are related to external elements, 'others', and are .described ln terms of the1r funct1on, battle. although th1S battle is still stylized, as one m1ght expect from the use of "bu yollar" (these roads) inverse 17. The next stanza dlrectly relates the army to its function and connects the rai ding and Islamic ghazï images to the national purpose. 'Homeland' and 'Turan' are 1ntroduced in verses 25-26 and the relation Sh1p of 'we', the cavalrymen, to the nat10n is defined ln verse. 27: "Sana feda b1 z van ZIf (We are the sacrif1 ce to you) . The emphasis on "kahramanllk" (heroism) and 'yi~itler' (heroes) in verses 29 and 30 extends 1nto verse 31 where the-Islamic concept of ghazï is superimposed on the ak1nc1 images. "K1l1çlar" (swords) lS the subJect of the verse and is connected to the next verse and, therefore, to the flag, the symbol of the nat1on, by the repet1tion of "kan" (blood). With the movement from "~zlm bayrak" (our flag) to "bayrak" (the flag) in verse 32, there 15 a Shlft from posseSSlve to universal. ThlS is consistent with the representation of the army as a sacr1fice to the nation. The nation and its symbol, the flag, transcend the possessive rel atlOnS.fll p. Everything, includlng the army, is subordinate to the nation. " Stanza D links the aklncl and ghazi tradltions ta the national purpose and lt is this linkage that finally defines the nature of the army and mak'es its existence and actions meamngful. This is complemented by the relative reduction of the incidence of "biz" (we) vls-a-vis that t• of the more universal images, lncluding that of nation, as the poem • progresses. This,ctherefore, represents a movement from individual to universal that parallels the thematic development of the poem. The next two poems deal with Behir's deflnition of his own \ relat10nshlp to the country and to national symbols. The issue of the nature and different dimensions of alleglance and identification with U the nation lS central to the poet's "Tuna Klylslnda" (On the shore of the Danube). This poem is divided into two sectlOns. The first one - contains four qua-trains and the second, eight. 16 54 Tuna Klylslnda \ -1- A Evimden uzakta, annemden uzak, Kimsesiz ka1m'~lm yad ellerlnde. Bir vefa aranm kalbe dolacak Gurbetln yabancl güze1lerinde. B 5 'Tuna' nln Ustünde güne? batarken Sevgi 11 yurdumu andl rl r bana. Blr hayal isterlm 'Bogaziçl' nden; Bakanm "1stanbu1~" diye her yana. C Istanbul:· Ey, sedef mehtaplanndan 1'0 Hü1ya gtlzlerime ilk l?lk veren! Buranln ufkunda yanlp toz1anan En muni 5 renge de bigâneyim ben! ... o Ah, orda renk1erin - ~ark güne~lyle Naz eden - Slhirbaz ânengl vardlr'. 15 Bu ak~am yurdumu andlrsa bl1e Ah, orda akJamln b1n rengl vardlr. -II- E Bu gece gokyüzU ne kadar süs1ü! Bir ma v i k1 v11 c, m san k i he r y 11 d 1Z • Ba~,nda Slrma tü1, gOk1.erin g'ù1ü, 20 Do~an ay ne gUze1 Turan1l bir klZ! F Bak, 'Tuna' karanl1k p1r11tl1arla Titreyen bir siyah elmas yol olmu~. ÜstUnde, bir a1tln kürekli sala Bi nerek, tan h lm yo 1a koyu1mu? .. G 25 OnUmde bu atlas, muhte?em 'Tuna'; Kar~lda gôz klrpan 'Budin' ev1eri. Baktlm da 'Pe~te' nin ufuklarlna, Gijrdüm ki her Macar yurdunun eri. H Kabarlp lftihar ile slneler 30 Onlarln bir "Macar!" deYl~lerl var. Vatana gBzya} 1 dllktOnse eger Varl1gln bu yüksek yururu anlar. Ne zaman duydumsa bu sayhalarl, Bir büyük a?k i1e tutU?tu kanlm. 35 Benim de sesimi i§itti Tanrl: - "Va benim va tamm" ... Benim vatanlm? .. Il 55 J Karanllk bahtlyle yllla~ca yanan, Ylllarca zamandlr hak nidaSlnl tnleyip bin türlü zulme katlanan, 40 Ylllarta dUfmanln ihtira~lnl K Tali 'siz ba~ln1n üstünde garen, . Ey benim vatanlm, benim vatanlm! Ben kimim?.. Ben sana kafiye oren, Ben seni yürekten se ven insanlm. L 45 ~irlmi yükselten asklnsa seriin, Ben seni ~irimde yÙkselte bilsem. lstemem, ilhamln bana gelmesin, Sana lâylk olan ~air degilsem. On the Shore of the Danube -1- A Far from my home, far from my mother, l have been left friendless in strange lands. l search for a loyalty to flll the heart In the strange beauties of exile. B 5 As the sun sets above the Danube l t renri nds me of my bel oved country. l want an image of thecBosphorus; l look to all sides, crying "Istanbul!". C Istanbul! Oh, the first to give light from your mother-of- pearl moonlight ~ 10 To my dream eyes! l am foreign to even the tamest colours That bu~n on this horizon! ... D Oh, there is a magical harmony in the colours'there - Flirting with the sunrîse -. 15 But even if this evening reminds me of my country Oh, there the evening has a thousand colours. -Il- E How the he avens are bejewel1ed tonight! Every star is like a blue spark. With a gold lace veil on her, head, the rose of the skies, 20 What a beautiful woman of Turan the new moon is! F Look, the Danube is a black diamond path Shiverfng wlth glltterlng darkness. On it, riding a golden-oared raft () My history began its journey ... j 56 ,. G 25 Before me lS this magnificent satin Danube; Across from me the houses of Buda wink. l looked ta the horizons of Pest, 1 c And saw that every Hungarian was a soldier of his country. H With their chests swelling in pride 30 They have a way of say1ng "Hungarlan!". If you have ever wept for the country Your being will'understand this mighty pride. Every ti~'~1 heard these cries, My blood"was fired with a great love. 35 God llstened ta my V01ce as well: - "And my country?. My country? .. " J . Oh my country, my country, That has burned for years with its dark fortune, That, for years, has suffered a thousand cruelties 40 Moamng a cry for Justice:' K That has witnessed for years the ambition of the enemy Over its unfortunate head! Who am 1?.. 1 am a man who weaves rhymes for you, Who loves you from the heart. L 45 If my love for you i 5 wha t i nspi res my paetry, In my poetry, l hope to praise you. l do not want you to i nspi re me, If'r am not a poet worthy of you. Stanza A of the first section introduces the- issue of the poet's exile or separation from his home1and and search fQr loya1ty. This search lS on1y really di,scussed in detail in the second section of the poem, although the former does deal with the emotional ties 11nked to vlsual differences; in a sense, ~epresentative of the deeper, more emotional relationship of the poet to hlS country in the latter. The ~~~ poem is one of search for and discovery of loyalty and it is this that provides the movement through the descriptive and historic~l phases ta the deeper, emotional leve1 of section 2. The sense of separation from home and loneliness is clear in the first two verses of Stanza A. In verse 1, the repetition of the ablative and "uza k" (far) add to the sense of distance and 10ngin9 ~ , conveyed by the emotiona11y charged e1ements of home and mother. Verse 2 carr1es a strong impact, when considered in j~xtaposition with the elements of home and mother, by its use of "kimsesiz" ,(without anyone) 57 and "kalmljlm" (1 have been left), which is powerful both by the image of being abandoned and by the use of the past dDbitative tense, which creates an impresslon of the poet's lack of control over ~he circumstances of hlS eXlle and lmparts a sense of the unchangeable nature of the 1 poet's conditl0n. The use of "yad ellerinde" (in the lands of strangers) also implles a certain degree of allenation. Therefore, thlS verse opposes the image of home and mother strongly, creating a sense of exile, referred to ln verse 4, and the background against which the search for loyalty in verse 3 1S 1n1tiated. All the verbs, with the except10n of "and lrS~" (if it remi nds) 1 n verse 15, are in the present aor1st tense. Therefore, the use of the past tense sets the background to the poet's search, but the search itself has an on901ng character. "BH vefa" (a loyalty) in verse 3, lS slgniflcant by 1tS lack of definltion. It 1S thlS vagueness that prompts the poet to carry h1S search through var10us different dimensions of attachment in the poem. Verse 3 links to verse 1. In the absence of home and mother, the most essential 10yalt1es, the poet must search for a new loyalty ta f111 hlS heart. "Dolacak" (that wlll fill) glves a sense of futurity which compounds the ongo1ng nature of the present aonst "aranm" (1 search). The opposition of eX11e to home, of the Danube to Turkey, is stressed in Stanza B, verse 5, by "güne~ batarken" (as the sun sets). The Danube, in this ~erse. is significant only in that it reminds the poet of Turkey. ThlS is not a descriptive poem, as such. but one of identlty. The sun, then, acts as the catalyst that links and, at the same time, contrasts the Danube and the poet's own country. ThlS sense of contrast is heightened by the use of the impefsonal "Tuna" (Danube) in verse 5 in Juxtaposition with :'sevgili yurdum" (my beloved country) inverse 6. , Verses 7 and 8 derive the1r effectiveness ln portraying a developlng strength of emotion from the comb1ned use of the ablatlve and dative cases, as well as the chai ce of verbs, which consecutlvely create a sense of movement away from, combined with the verb "isterim" (I want) and a movement toward. combined with the verb "bakanm" . .... (1 look). There~ore, the poet i5 placed at the centre of the movement. 58 He wants an image from "Bo~aziçi" (the Bosphorus, verse 7) but this is strengthened by the description of hiS looking to all sides, crying "Istanbul" (verse 8). The verbs, then, strengthen and reinforce that movement of searching defined by the use of ablative and dative. __ ' In verse 8. the emotion of the poet i5 emphasized by the direct, exc1amatory statement "Istanbul!" and the use of "her yana" (every slde) which, with "bir haya1 'Bo~aziçl' nden" (an image'of the Bosphorus) in verse 7, renders the concept of the search more c,oncrete and extends it beyond the vague "bir vefa" (a loyalty) of verse 3. , The direct reference 'to Istanbul is cantlnued ln Stanza C, verse ------g:---The use of the vocative "istanbul!" and the direct reference ta 'you' ln "sedef mehtaplanndan" (from your mother-of-pearl moonlight) 11nks Istanbul and the paet ln an lmmediate fashion. ThlS link is developed by the re1ationship of the ablatlVe "mehtaplanndan" to the dative "gèizlenme" (ta my eyes, verse 10). The poet, therefore, first saw the 1ight or, ln other words, was born in Istanbul and verses 11 and 12 contrast, ln terms of light, thlS original attachment to his mother cuuntry to his forelgnness ("bigâne!', verse 12) which a1so implies a100fness from and dislnterest in the co1ours and attractlons of the llght ln Hungary, The use of "buramn ufkunda" (the h~rizon" of this place) in verse 11, when compared to the emotion expressed in the vocative "istanbul!" of ~ verse 9, supports the interpretation of "blg~ne" as disinterest in verse 12. The statement "bigâneYlm" (1 am foreign or lndifferent to) i s hei ghtened by th~ use of "en muni s renge de" (even the mos t tame colours). Therefore, with the direct evocation of Istanbul, the linkage between 'you' and 'me' in verses 9-10, by the contrast of "buramn ufkunda" (the horizon of this place, verse 11) and "bigâneyim" (1 am forei gn, verse 12), with the use of "en muni s renge~' (even the''" most tame colours) and the de1iberate 1ack of association between 'me' and Hungary's horizon in verses 11-12, the opposition of HU0gary ~nd Turkey is complete. Stanza B introduced the opposltion of the Danube and the Bosphorus. where the Dan~be was significan~ on1y by virtue of the fact that it recalled the Bosphorus. Stanza C contrasts the two and defines the nature of the poet's attachment to his mother country by comparison to hlS feeling for his country of exile. In Othis secti-on of the poem. the h Î4 t 59 relationship of Hungary and Turkey is a visual one, the visual impact of the scene before the poet and the emoti ons and memori es whi ch W evokes culminate in a sense of visual and, perhaps, deeper loyalty to Turkey which fulfils, in this limited sense, the search for loyalty introduced in Stanza A. In Stanza 0, verse 13, there occurs again, in relation to Istanbul, a di rect reference to 1 you' wi th Il renk 1 eri n" (your col ours) . The use of "Ah" i ncreases the sense of emoti ona l i nvo l vement aRd even of loss or sorrow, as lt can a1so be interpreted as talas'. Verses 13 and'14 are directly linked by the insertion of "?ark güne?iyle naz eden" (flirting with the su'nrise), the placement of which wou1d seem te suggest that tne magicàl harmony of colours ln Istanbul is due to thelr f1irtation with the sunrise and, by analogy, that this quallty does not eXlst in the poet' s country of eX11e. This 1S under~cored by the structure of v~rse lp which, wlth the exception,of the 1nsert10n mentioned above, paralle1s verses 13-14 exact1y. Verse 15 presents the contrasting image of Hungary and Turkey by the use of "bu akiam" (th1S evening) which recalls "buramn ufkunda" (the horizon of this place) of verse 11, and "bile" (even lf) and the • verb "Èlndlrmak" (ta remind) which recall the use of thé same verb in verses 5-6. The movement has progressed from verses 5-6, which lntrQruced a linkage between two equa 1 visua 1 experi en&s, to verses 15-16, wher~~ this linkage is one of contrast. The two experiences are now recognized ta be unequal. The poet's 10yalties have been defined to a certatn extent. In verse 16, there is a sense of a causative statement concerning th~ visual importance o~ co10urs and light to the poet. Therefore, not only is therê a maglcal harmony to the colours in Istanbul (verses 13-14) but there a re a thous~nd col ours to the evem ng there (verse 16). 1 n this way, the poet suggests that the co1ours and the evening in Istanbul can not be matched or even approached by anything ln Hungary. The relationshlp of contrast is signifièant ln this section of 'the poem and it is this interplay which allows the poet to make his Q search and define his loyalty but .there is a movement to this contrast. The interplay 1$ consistent but the-increasing inequality of the ,elements being contrasted is notable. -- /' /~ 60 ( The first stanza intrqduces the contrast of home and exjle and the consequent need to search for' a loyal ty. Th~ séc9nd stanza presents . a contrast of equa1s. It is basically non-judgementa1 but there is a sense of ri si ng emotion. In the thi rd stanza, thi s sentiment resul ts " in---the use of... 'the vocative in relation to Istanbul and disinterest and a sense of being foreign to Hungary. The two are contrasted in arder toc create the conditions fo~ the stafement of loyalty ln the fourth stanza where, finally, unequal e1ements are contrasted, the sèarch i s complete and Uie s ta temen t of 1 oya lty ; s made. In verse 17 of Stanza E, Section 2. "bu gece" (tonight) continues the 1ink to "bu ak~am -.orda akjam" (this evening - the eveniJf~f'.... there;) of verses 15-16, SectlOn 1. But there is a1so an 1mpression of dis connectio/1 given by the exclamatory nature of this verse and the reversion from the contemplat1ve quality of the last verses speaker. Therefore, through the descnption of the evening in verse~ 17-18, there is a thematic cont1nuation from the preV10l,lS verses but, at the same time, there has developed a movement away from the value laden judgements contained in them. " Verses 19 and 20 describe the moon as the rose of the skies wit-h-- a gold lace veil on her head, as a beautiful woman" o.f Turan. The location , of the descriptlon, by the use of "bu gece" {toni,ght, this'"night) in verse, 17, is clearly Hungary but"the moon is tdentified as a Turkish woman. Therefore, the need for contrast apparently no longer exi sts in , J .. - ., this sectlOn of the poem. The moon' is a Turkish woman': the) poetls 10yalty is evident. The Danube and Hungary ~ecome linked rather than a . -' contrasted ta Turkey. This connection lS most notable in verses 21-24. In verses 29-32, the poet suggests that the pres'ent Hünganan strength" is derived from t)\e commitment of its people to their country, a • "1.. commitment which he uses as an examp1e for an appropnate relationship to hl"s own country. Hungary, then, seems ta represent a tauchstone, both in terms of its conquest 111 the past and its contrast with the Turkish state of defeat in the present, WhlCh then precipitates the issue of Turkey's current condition and the individua1 1 s re1at10nship to hi s country. , , ) 61 The use of the ;mperative "bak" (look) in verse 21, Stanza F, is sigmflcant in that 1t addresses the readers directly, invo1ving them more irruned1ate1y in the expenence of the description but, also, in the linkage to come between descrlption and history and the poet's search for ldentity. The presence of "bak'" (look) in verse 21 and the description follow1ng in verses 21-22 1mp1y the visual state of the Danube as it exists in the present, whereas Il ÜS tünde " (on it) in verse 23 llnks present and past images, vlsua1 and hlstorical. Verse 24 introduces 'me' wlth "tanhim" (my history). The slgnlf1CanCe of thls 15 that the Danube represents a high point of an emplre in the process of expanslOn and at the peak of ltS C1vllization. This 15 highlighted by the lmage of "blr alt1n kürekli sala" (a golden oared raft). Thl S i 5 contras ted 1 a ter 1 n the poem to the dark fortune of con tempora ry Turkey. The sense given by the references to the Danube in verses 21-24 and 25-28 lS that lt 15 a deflnlng pOlnt for 'my hi5tory" in verse 24, and for 'me' ln verse 25, Stanza G. It lS only then; in verses 26-2"8, that "Bua1n evleri" (the houses of Buda, verse 26), "Pe~tenin ufuklarl" (the hOrlzons of Pest, verse 27) and "her Macar" (every Hungar1an, verse 28) are re1ated to 'me'. It fonns the link between the external and the lnternal, the purely visual and the historical, for lt spans bath space and tlme as a symbol. The poet's pas;tlomng vis-a-vi's the Danube ;s evident from the ""- use of "tlnUmde" (ln front of me, verse 25) and "kaqilda" (opposite me, verse 26). ThlS emphasls on the poet and his positionlng is a1so "7 indlcated in the use and pasitlOnlng of "baktlm" (1 looked) -in verse 27 and "gl:irdUm" (1 saw) in verse 28. The use of' "bak~lm" in verse 27 creates a sense of looklng as one mlght look at a landscape~ whereas "gl:lrdüm" in verse 28 also carries a 'deeper sense of realizat10!) of that which ;s not 1lll1lediately visible. Therefore, the parallelism of verses 27 and 28 and the use of "'baktm" and "gèlrdüm" create the link between that WhlCh is externally perceptlble, the landscape, and that which is recognized internally, the 1nternal condition of the country and the-'· relationship of individuals ta the country. 62 Therefore, the emphasls in the prevlOUS section of the poem on . , the external cond~tlOns of the sky and landscape and the contrast between those of Hunga ry and Turkey has moved to a l ad of contrast as a result of judgement made and loyalty defined. ThlS, thefl, has penmtted the Danube to transcend ltS immediate v1sual realm, to deflne ~the poet's physical and lnternal positlon accordlngly and to make the link w~ich d,]flows a progress1on from external landscape to internal 1 conditlons.)This, ln turn, wlll perm1t the poet to complete hlS search for loya l ty 'on a deeper level. (The "Macar!" (Hunganan!) of verse 30, Stanza H, lS· reminiscent of the vocatlve "Istanbul:" of Sect10n 1, verse 8. In verses 31-32, the deeper level of loyalty 15 lntroduced as lS the llnk between the Hungarian's relatlonshlp t' hlS country and the Turks' relatlanship to thelis. ThlS is lntenslfled by the use of "go'zya?; dôktünse" (lf yau have wept) and "varl191n" (YQur belng) WhlCh ?ppeal dlrectly ta the feellngs and loyaltles of the readers. ThlS deeper level of loyalty is to the country. 1t lS no longer slmp1y an lssue of allegiance ,ta . / something external, as ln section 1, but of "yUksek gurur" (a mlghty pnde, verse 32) that touches one's "var'llk" (belng or essence, verse 32). These verses form'an i ntermedi ate 1i nk between "Macar!" in verse 30 and "benlm vatamm" (my country) inverse 36. Yet, the fact that the inner landscape of Hungary and the pride- of Hunganans ln their country is only important ln lts relationship to circumstances of the poet's own country ln elear ln verse 33, Stanza 1, wl,th the use of "bu sayhalan" (these cries) WhlCh refers directly ta "deYl~ler1" (sayings) of verse 30 and the fact that the verses ilTlTlediately followlng verse 33 introduce an ·internal quality of reflection and relationshlp to the country, ThlS is eVldenced by the use of "kal1lm" (my blood, verse 34), "bemm seslf (my VOlee, verse 3?) Fd, most notably, "bemm vatanlm" (my country, verse 36). This llnk of "ben" (I) and "vatan" (country, homeland) ln verse 36 introduces the flnal lssue of the relatlOnship of the poet to his country, Whlch 15 deait with speclfically ln the verses follow1ng. In these verses, the homeland is addressed directly, The interaction of 'me', the poet and 'you', the country, increases ln intensity. The relation Shlp of the poet to his country is made more immediate by this device. 63 Verse 37, Stanza J, verses 38-39 and verses 40-41 a re a 11 present partlciple clauses m04ifying "benim'vatamm" of verse 42. The use of "Yld~rca" (for years) in verses 37, 38 and 40 serves ta link these verses ta verse 42 and ta each other but, perhaps more s.ignificantly, it is connected by lts theme ta verse 24 and "tarihim" (my hlstory). History past and present, therefore, are contrasted. The listlng of causes for distress linked by "Ylllarca" gives a strong sense of the inescapable quality of that dlstress. The punctua tlon that spans Stanzas J and K supports thls sense of lncreaslng tribulatlon. But, more particularly, in thlS context, there is a movement from 'burning wlth dark fortune' ln verse 37, where the participle lS neither particularly active nor passive ln terms of its lmpact upon the subject, 'my country', and where 'dark fortune' lS a universal, general lmage, to 'suffering a thousand crueltles' where the particlple becomes more actlve, with a sense of the subJect being more impacted upon and where 'cruelties" ;s a more speclf1c lIn.age. ,This then pr0t/resses ta 'moaning a cry for Justice' Wh1Ch, again, creates a sense of lack of control and the inev1tability of suffering, to 'witnessing the ambi"tion of the enemy', where the part1clple implies a total ross of control over events and the capaclty only ta be a witness ta them. The lmage of the 'ambition of the enemy' lS also more speclfic than the previous ones. The movement in these verses is not cOlncidental but, rather, parallels the historlcal condltlons of the Ottoman Empire fi that culminated in its complete loss of control over its own destlny. , The use of "ylllarca" (for years) is most slgnificant in this context, as it provi des the li nk th~ t a 11 ows these verses to be read as a historical contlnuum. With verse 42, Stanza K, the emphasis shifts ta "ben" (me). There is no further description of the state of the nation. The lssue from this point on is the poet's definition of hlS positlOn and his identity vis-a-vis the nation. The thematic l ink between poet and nation lS highlighted by the parallel structure of verses 41-42 and 43-44, supported by the rhyme. In verses 41-42, the present participle "gb"ren" (witnessing) modifles and is followed by "benim vatanlm" " (my country)., In'verses 43-44, the partlclple "oren" (weaving) J 64 modifies and is followed by "seven insammll (a man that loves). Also, wlth the juxtaposition of "benim vatanlm" and "ben klmim" (who am 1) ln verse 43, the poet's identlty is clearly directly linked to h15 country, slmply by the positloning and structure of the questlOn. The answer defines the relationship even more clearly with the Juxtaposltlon of 'me' and 'you' in verse 43: "ben kimim? .. ben sana kafiye oren" (who am I? .. l am a man who weaves rhymes'for you). In verse 44. again, "ben" (I) and "sen" (you) are Juxtaposed and the qual i ty of the relati onship i s emphaslZed by "yürekten seven" (loving you from the heart). The use of the vague term ";nsanlm" (1 am a man) 15 notable here. The statement '1 am a man' is meanlngless ln ltself. The characterlstlcs which define the poet ln verses 43-44 are those whi ch relate to "sen" (you) or the country. Even hlS functlOn as a weaver of rhymes 15 deflned by hlS relatlOnshlp to the country. These characterist1cs glVe the man h1S 1dentity and answer the questlon 'Who am I?'. The poet's identity, then, 1S defint!d. In Stanza L, he turns to the consequences of that definitlon, his actions, h1S act1ve relatlOnship to hlS country, completing h1S search for allegiance. The significance and ldentity of the poet as poet, defined by his relationship to the> country, is the lssue dealt w1th in verses 45-48. Even hlS poethood,' which ;n verses 43-44 1S descrlbed as a central element of his ldentity, is meaningful only in terms of hlS capacity ta glarify the country. The country is the man's ldentity. He exists and lS meaningful only in relatlon to the country. In verses 45-46, his poetry lS qUQ11f1ed, lim1ted by the quality of hlS 1ntention toward his country. His 1nspiration must come from hlS love for the country and that love must be pure. In verses 47-48, the poet states that he never wants to be inspi red by the country and, therefore, to wrlte poetry or malntain his ldentlty as a poet, lf he is not worthy of the country. Therefore, he 1S a poet only by vlrtùe of h1S relationship to the country but, furthermore, his relationsh1p to the country is not only dictated by h1S abllity, hlS profess10nal worthlness in relat10n ta the country but by the quality and pUrlty of hi 5 love for the country. 65 His loyalty is defined in response to Stanza A, Section l, but has been def'ined throughout the poem on different levels: by his external allegiances, his concern for and relationst\ip to the country, h1S interna1 allegiances and even his identity, and, as a. result, his active relationship to the country 'through his paetry. Stanza L, then, is the final phase of the quest presented in Stanza A. Th.a t ques t for a sense of 1oya 1 ty has transcended both the externa1 and the historical to appeal to the intensely' 'l'Vlternal and qual1 tat1ve relationships of the poet to his country. "Je poet, there fore, has not on1y found an exter:nal loyalty but has discovered his own internal identity in his country. A study of Beh1ç's "Çanakkale ?ehitli~inde" (At the Martyrdom of the Dardanelles) is ind1spensable to understanding the development of the theme of the relationship of 1nd1v1dual to nation in h1S poetry and that 17 of the Be~ Hecec1ler. The martyrs ln th1S poem are the ult1mate representatives of Gokalp's socialHed 1nd1viduals. They have performed the negative ritual of distancing themselves fram profane things to o perfection, by thelt' act of martyrdom, the forsaking of the world in the most rea1 of terms. This, then, has permitted them to achi~ve a state of sacredness, the pos1t1ve ntual, and unity with God, or nation. The poem consists of an interplay between what the poet perceives ta be the subl1me, ideal state of the martyrs and, by contrast, his own crlsis of individuality. Çanakka l e ~ehitl i ~i nde -1- A Ey ~lmdi 1<ëyUnden pek çok uzakta, Ey ~imd1 bir y191n kara toprakta Uyanmaz uykuya da l an yi ~itler! ?ehitl1k ?anlnl alan yi~itler! * B 5 Yan yana dizilen mezarlarlnlz Zem1ne semavi iftihar olmus. DOnyaya kapanan nazarlar1n1z Tanrln1 n ma~firet nuriyl e dolmu? * 66 c Ne alçak gorunur ~u fâni hayat. 10 Baktl f<ça samimi uzl eti nl ze. Bir anda co~arak a~larlm; heyhat!. Günahk~r gozya?lm lâYlk ml size? * o HaYlr, sanmayln ki bu gozya~larlm Kirletmek lstlyor merkadinizi. 15 Ey benim kaybolan arkada~larlm. Ben gljrmek lsterim bir daha SiZl. E Lanet. gozlerlmde duran gBlgeye! A~larlm bu gëlge sllinsin dlye. t" F Ah. a géilgedir ki hayata tapar.; 20 Gozümün nurunu sizlere kapar; Benl blr vefaslz, riyakâryapar! ... -11- G Ey ~imdi sevglll âlleslnden, Ey $imdl ge,nçli~in her hevesinden Aynllp bayra~a kavu~an erler~ 25 Ah,·o bayrak lçin 151en neferler! * H Yurdumun derdlnl dl nlesem de ben. ~ir;mle ebedî lnlesem de ben Rebablm sizlere in' ik~s etmez; Fânilik sesim beka i~ltmez. * 30 Sizler ki bll1nmez iSlmlerinlz, Bu ta?slz mezarlar de~i1 yeriniz; 'Türklü~ün tarihi' türbeniz slzin, Kandili 'hllâl' dir bu türbenizin. * J DÜj>ündüm sizlerl anlatabi len 35 Bi r ilhama sahip olmak istedlm. Sanat incileri sahtedir, sizden . ~i rime bi r avuç toprak i 5-hfdim. * K Bu toprak tltriyen elimi yaktl; Ve beni kalbimle yaln1z blraktl. L 40 Utandlm bu âciz .?airll~imden. Mlaya, a~laya anladlm kl ben: M Hayalim olsaydl .?eref yolda~l GlSklerin yolunda pek yorulurdum. Omrümde en y'ùksek ~ l rl bul urdum 01 saydl sani ham bi r mezarta~ 1. 67 At the Martyrdom of the Dardanelles -1- A Oh now very far from their villages Oh now ln a heap of black earth Heroes sleeping, never to awake~ Heroes in the g l ory of ma rtyrdom ~ * B 5 Y9ur graves 1ined up slde by slde ,... Have become the earth's heavenly pride. Your slght c10sed ta the world 15 full of the llght of God's forglVeness. * c How vile thlS perlshable life seems, 10 Compared with your Slncere secl~ion. In a moment l am moved and weep, alas~. Are my slnful tears worthy of you? * o No, do not thlnk that l want To soi l your grave Wl th these tea rs of ml ne. 15 Oh my lost frlends, l want to see you agaln. E God curse the shadow in my eyes: l weep to erase thi s shadow. F Alas, lt is that shadow that worshlps llfe; 20 l t vei 1s the 1 i ght of my eyes from you; And makes -me a falth less hYPocrl te! ... - II- G Oh now men that have attained the flag, abandoning Their beloved famifies, Every deslre of youth~ 25 Ah, soldiers that die for t.hat flag: * H Even lf l listen ta the paln of my country, Even lf l bewall eternally ln my poems My 1 ns trument never reaches you; What is permanent never hears the transltory voice. * l 30 Vou whose names wi 11 never be known, These graves wlthout stones 'are nct your place; Your tomb is the 'history of Turkishness', And your tomb's lamp is the 'crescent'. * \ 68 J l thought l wanted 35 An inspiration that could describe you. The pear1s of art are false. l wanted A handful of earth fram j'OU, for my poetry. * K ThlS earth burnt my trembling hand; And l eft me a 1one wi th my heart. L 40 l was ashamed of my lmpotent poethood . .,!:rying, l underst00d that: M If my lmaglnatlOn were an honourable fellow trav.eller l would have been very tned ln the patt]. of the skles. l would have found the highest poem of my llfe Had my lnspiratlon been a tombstone. Stanza A beglns wlth "Ey ~lmdi" (Oh now) WhlCh 15 echoes ln verse 2 . . \. " 'Wlth the parallellsm of "ey ~imdl" and the locatlve "uzakta" (ln the dlstance) in verse 1 and "ey ?lmdl" and "toprakta" (ln the earth) ln verse, 2, there i s a sense of con tras t crea ted between 11 Vl ng and dead WhlCh lS then amp11fled ln verses 3 and 4 wlth the progresslon from sleeplng to martyred heroes. Verse 5, Stanza B, addresses these heroes dlrect1y by the use of "mez q,r1annlZ" (your graves). But there lS an evo1ution ln verse 6 from thlS dHect address to the 1arger all-encompasslng concept of "semav't iftlhar" (ce1estla1 pride). Verse 7 reverts back to the second person plural but the heaven-earth opposition of verse 6 is restated ln both verses 7 and 8, where the slght of the martyrs lS c10sed to the wor1d and thereby, by reJectlng or abandonlng the world, lS open to God. Therefore, there is a progression ln thlS stanza from the soil-bound image of graves ln verse 5 to that of 'earth's heavenly pride' ln verse 6 which links earth and heaven. ThlS development 15 facil1tated by the use of "zemin" (ground or wor1d) ln verse 6 that connects "toprak" (earth, 5011, verse 2) and "dünya" (wor1d, verse 7). ThlS then progresses to the lmage of the martyrs' slght closed to the world and open to heaven. Therefore, there 15 both a spatlal and a qua1ltative evolution ln the poem from soi 1 to world and then to abandonment of the world culmlnating in umty with God or heaven. 69 The alternatjon of 'you'. the martyrs and the earth, or world, and 'you' and God, or heaven, emphasizes the shiftlng relationshlp of the martyrs and the world in the poet's perceptlon. And, particularly, by this alternation of 'you' and the ,more universal concepts of "semav1" iftihar" (heavenly or celestial pride, verse 6) and "Tannnln ma~firet" (forgiveness of God, verse 8), the poet depicts th~ martyrs as being increasingly remote from their villages and the world. Furthermore, by their process of abandoning the world and unltlng wlth' God, the martyrs serve to emphasize the reality of the -barrler between heaven and the world and, more particularly, between heaven and those who remaln on earth, deprived of martyrdom, who are thus lncapable of achleving a similar state of sacredness. In verse 9, Stanza C, the world, or earth, 15 descrlbed as penshable. The word "fânl" (perishable, transltory) characterlzes a state of opposlt1on to the abandonment of worldly attrlbutes and unlon wlth God referred to ln the previous sta~za, by lts common use as a mystical term denohng the condition of all that is dlstlnct from the permanent, unchangi ng nature of uni 0 n with God. l t 15 associ a ted here with "alça k" (vile) and is contrasted by the image of "samlmi uzlet" (sincere sec'luSlon) ln verse 10. These two verses reinforce the eXlstence of the barrler between the world and heaven; those, left behind who remain attached to worldly things and those who have abandoned them and achieved unity in the mystical sense; those for whom thlS mystlcal experience is a metaphor, as indicated by the tltle, the people who have not performed the negative ritual of forfeltlng thelr individua1ity for the sake of the nation and those who, by thelr actions, represent the ult1mate degree of sociallzation, who have achieved unit y with God by dying for the natlon. Union with God and union with the natlon are suggested to be one and the same, wlth all the lmplications and values implicit ln such a statement although this theme lS on1y fully developed iJl the second section of the poem. Verse 11 introduces the poet as 'l'. The vlle nature of 11fe ln verse 9 has become personalized and internaïized. The remalning portion of this section of the poem deals with the lmmediate anxiety of .. \ J 70 the poet about his own base condi tion in relation to the perfection of the martyrs. 'l', the poet,and thfis state of 'vileness' are more c1early assoc1ated in verse 12 by the juxtaposition of Igozya~1m" (my tears), "günahkàr" (s i nfu J) and "Hyi k" (worthy)' Stanza C contains a progression from general to particular,which 11nks 1t, by opposit10n, to the previous stanza. This movement shifts from a sweeping assertion about the qua1ity of 1ife to 'you', the martyrs, ln verses 9-10 and from 'you' to the immedi acy of the poet' s concerns and the contrast between the intrinsic nature of the martyrs and that of the poet hlmself ln verses 11 and 12. The essential movement, then, is from v11e, perishable llfe ln general to s1nful 'me' in particu1ar with 'you', the martyrs or the state of martyrdom as the condition against which these qualit1es are measured. The 1mpression conveyed is one of 1ncreasing devaluat10n of worth as one maves fram the general lmage of life ta the partlcular 'me' as opposed to an lncreaslng valuation of worth as one moves fram 'life' to the particular 'you', representing the martyrs. This, thereby, strengthens not only the barrier between the state of worldly eX1stence and that of the martyrs in union with God, but between the world and < s1nful 'me', the poet and, consequent1y, between the m?rtyrs and the poet. The syllab1c rhythm of the first half of verse 13 distinguishes it from all preced1ng verses. Whereas the prevlOUS verses were divided essentia1ly 1nto 3+3/2+3 or '3+3/,3+2 rhythms, this one 1S 2+4/3+2. Therefore,• a1thaugh the overall rhythm of 6+5 rema1ns the same, 1that established in the first half of all previous verses is disrupted in this verse and, notab1y, in the first verses of the follow1ng two stanzas, which supports a .comp1ementary themat1c linkage. It also creates a break between this verse and the previous ln the sense that ,..~ the impact of the statement is increased."\Y In other words, in all three cases, thlS sy11abic structure is comb1ned~with a direct statement such '''J as "Hay1r, sanmay1n k1" (No, do not think, verse 13), "Lânet" (Gad curse, verse 17), "Ah, 0 gtllgedir" (Ah, a1as, 1t is this shadow; verse 19). Therefore, these verses are rendered more direct, more lmmed1ate by the variation of sy11abic breakdown from the rhythm 1 1. 71 \ established in the rest of the poem and this complements the distlnct nature of the statement. These verses are more self critica1 than those lmmedlate1y preceding them. They all point ta the fai1ings and hYp'ocrisles of the ?eSlreS expressed just previous1y and cu1mlnate ln the final statement of verse 21. Verses 13 and 14, Stanza D, \ are connected thematlca11y to verses 11 and 12 by the tears and 'sinfu1' 'soi1ing' lmages and, par'ticu1arly, by the use of "bu g(jzya~lar1m" (these tears of mine) WhlCh recal1s the "gt1zya?1m" (my te~ of verse 12. With verse 14, the emphasis again is on the vl1e nature of the poet. This is relnforced by the image of "kirletmek merkadinlZi" (to soi1 your grave).c The lnterplay of 'you', the martyrs. and 'me', the poet, continues here with "sanmayln" (do not thlnk, verse 13), "bu gêlzya?larlm" (the.se tears of mlne, verse 13) and "merkadlnlzl" (your graves, verse 14). ThlS lnteractlon is contlnued ln verses 15 and 16 with the Juxtaposltion of "bemm arkada~lar1m" (my frlends) in verse 15 and "ben lsterim" (I want) ln verse 16 and that of "ben" (I) and "SiZl" (you) ']n verse 16. Verses 13-14 and 15-16 aPè>opposed to each other by the negative image of soiling and the positive deslre to see friends, wlth the 11nk between the two being "lstlyor" (want, verse 14) and "1sterlm" (I want. verse 16). The tears can then be seen as possessing two possible functlons: a negatlve soiling one and a posltive one that mlght a1low the poet to c1ear his own eyes, presumab1y to see th~ 11ght a11uded to in verse 8. The contrastlng lmages of shadow and 1ight ln verses 17-20 are significant in this context. Therefore, verses 13-14 are associated wlth the seeing-eyes-tears lmage ln its negatlve function suggested ln verses 11 and 12. Verses 15-16 are related to the same image in its posltive function. This is developed further in verses 17-18 where the correlation of this positive function to the mystica1 lmages of seeing, light and the banishing'of shadow is clarified. St?nza E represents the height of the poet's indlvidual concer~s. The movement in the poem from third person slngular to an interplay of second and first persons ta first exclusive1y is comp1ete-h..ere... The issue of the relationshlp between the poet and the martyrs stl11 exists .. 72 but it has been particularized from the .universal martyrs of Stanza 'A l to the particular Iyou , or martyrs addressed directly in Stan~as B, C and 0 and, from there, to the poetls own individual concerns. It has become a highly introspective poem where Iyou l , the martyrs, serve only to highlight, ~ontrast, the position of the poet. The anxiety expressed, as it delle lops, i s not for the martyrs but for the poet himself, with the martyrs and their sacred state of union only accentuating his own hypocrisy and wor1dly concerns separate from God or Nation. ThlS is reinforfed by the structure of the rhyme repetition within this stanza and the next. Verses 17 and 18 are connected to 19 and 20 by the continuation of the' image of eyes seei ng and the vell or shadow associ a ted wi th the world which is contrasted by the 11ght seen by the martyrs, or those who have abandoned the world. Weeplng as a means of erasing the shadow and approaching the light is a common mysti~al symbol. Verses 19 and 20 of Stanza F both end wlth a seml-colon, and the para 11 el pos i ti oni ng, aori st tense and rhyml ng of the verbs 1 n verses 19-21 create a re1ationshlp among the verses that may be interpreted as cl causative one. It conveys a se.nse of inevitability cu1minating ln the emotiona11y charged statement of verse 21. It is in Stanza F that the re1atlonship of the poet and the martyrs is complete. The martyrs in vé~ses 7-8 have closed their ey~s to the world and, as a result, are filled with the llght of God, whereas the poet lS incapable of c10sing his eyes to the world because they are covered by a shadow that worshlps life in verse 19, making abandonméflt of the world, the prerequisite to umon, impossible. The shadow veils the 1ight in verse 20 and, as a result, there is no possibillty, despite the expressed desires of the poet, of a'pproaching the martyrs in their sacred state and, consequent1y,.of presenting hlmself as a participant in the positive ritual of unity with God or nation. Therefore, by his refusa1 to abandon his indiV'idua1ity and world1y desires, he is a °hypocrite (~erse 21). Section 2 of the poem begins with the same introduction as Section 1: "Ey ?imdi" (oh now, verse 1), "ey ?imdi" (verse 2), "erler" (men", verse 3), "nef~rler" (soldiers, individuals, verse 4) with the " 73 .. result that a simi1ar background' is set. There is a continuation of mystical images in this sectiàn, but a1so that which is only hinted at in Section 1, the relationship of the martyrs and Gad ta nation, is here clearly de1ineated. , . The structure of this section'of the poem is basically a repeti tion of the prevlous one. Wi th the movement from 'uni versa l 'men' or 'soldiers' to 'you' addressing the, men directly, to 'me', the poet, the thematic deve10pment of the previous section i~ paralleled, but in thi s case, i s "even more forceful. " Verse 22,- Stanza G, consists of an interruption in theme from a highly personal', emotionally charged statement t%ne which reverts to more universal images. Verses 22-23 are remlniscent of the images of Stanza A ln terms of t~eir refer~nce to "Alle" (fami1ies, verse 22) and "heves" (youthfu1 desires, verse 23) which recall the "k5yünden' pek çok uzakta" (far fram . their vl11ages) of verse 1, but which, l~ anythlng, emphaslze the more emotlonal, stronger attractlons which the worl d has to offer but Whl ch have been abandoned\ by the martyrs.' It is significant that the ablative in verses 22 and 23renders the verses meanlngless until their comp1etipn by "aYrlllp" (abandaning) ln verse 24, WhlCh Juxtaposes the attractive aspects cff the world wlth abandonment, in a sense, suggesting that they are meaningless unless aba~doned. ,The image conveyed by this relation ship of ablative to presen1J/.participle is much stronger than that of t~ th.e parallel verses land 2 'of Section 1, which bath form meaningful ~ phrases modlfyi~g "'yi~itler" (heroes or brave men). Verse 24 intraduces "bayrak" Jthe flag) which the soldiers have attained by abandoning the world. This is paralleled to the unity wlth God which the martyrs in the preVlOUS sectlon of the ·poem had attained. The f1ag symbolizes the nation and, therefore, attalnment of the flag 'is equiva1ent to attainment of unity with God. The mystlcal re1ationship of martyrs to God, following their abandonment of the world, is here brought to the 1eve1 of nation. The men abandon their families and desires and die for the,standard, thereby attainment union with the standard, the symbol of the nation. "Kavu~an" in verse 24 can a1so be translated as reaching or joining. "A11ahlna , ( 74 ( kavu~mak" ;s to meet or unite' with Allah. Therefore, the word itself has mystical, religious lmplications and, by its connection to "bayra~à." c , (the flag) in verse 24, supports this interpretation of the mystical nature of the indi~idual's relationship to the nation. This is reminiscent of Gtlkalp's identlfication of the sacred deity, wh;ch the worshipper approaches in'th,e process of positive ritual, with the nat; ona l i dea 1. ------. Although "neferler" ;n verse 25 is trans,lated as ·soldler~, it a1so means individual~. Consequently, the connection of the soldiers or martyrs to the nation also extends to the individua1 and the issue of the i ndi vi dua 1 "s progress ta unity with the' nati on. Therefore, the movement evident in Stanza A, Section 1. is heightened in Stariza G: the worldly desires are more attractive, making the abandonment more meaningful j th~ religlous has become the natlona1j, the martyrs are now simply soldiers and even 'lndividuals'. The process of urfion has been brought ta the level of ,nation and the use of " neferler" brings the relationship of indlVidua1 to nation __ i nto focus. lt i s preqse ly thi s issue that concerns the poet. The martyrs are no longer people removed from the mainstream of the country but men, soldiers, individuals. As a result, the issuejof each individual 's immerslon into and identlty with the nation is brought into question and precipitates-the poet's own CrlS1S. Verses 26 and 27 are optative statements, connected' by their rhyme, "Dinlesem de ben" (even if l llsten, verse 26) and "inlesem de ~ ben" (even if l bewaiî, verse 27) which, ln combination, create a strong. sense of expectation fulfilled in verse 28. They are also significant in tha t they rei nt roduce the 'l', the poet, with the use of the terms "dinlesem" (if l listen), "ben" (1) and "yurdum" (my country) i~ verse 26 and "inl~sem" (if l bewaH); "ben," and "~irim" (my poetry) in verse 27. • 1 These verses, li nke,d to verse 28, provi de a con,trast expressed in the shift from the optativ~ in verses 26-27 to the aorist negative in verse 28, and between the 'l' and the 'you', the so.ldiers, presented in verse 2& by the u.se of ~'s.izlere" (to you). The dative form of "siz1ere" implies a"movement towara 'you· which, in combination with 1 75 \1 the aonst negatlVe "ln 'lkâs etmez" (never reaches) is clearly lmposslble for the poet to complete. The dlstance, then, the barrler between 'l'and 'you' established ln the prevlous sectlon of the poem, lS accentuated here. Whereas in Sectlon l, at least the deslre for contact was expressed, wlth the poet weeplng to erase the shadow ln an attempt to approach the llght, here contact has clearly become lmposslble. And the reason for thlS /- condlt10n lS clanf1ed ln the follow1ng verse: "Fânî1lk SeS1n1 beka l~ltmez".. (What 15 permanent never hears the trans1tory vOlee). The Juxtapos1t10n of "fân1" (transltory) and "beka" (permanent) is slgnificant ln terms of the1r use ln describ1ng the contrast1ng states of mystica1 unity with God and the lack of that un1ty. Therefore, ln this verse, J the connect10n bètween unlon w1th God and un10n with nat10n lS most cl early expressed. The fo1low1ng stanza proceeds ta descr1be the relat10Qship between. martyrs and l)at10n or nat10na1 symbols, Wh1Ch, ln turn, by repre5enting "beka", or permanence, are then contrasted w1th the poet's own state of "fân1'l i k", l~permaneQce. In Stanza l, the 1mportance of the 1055 of the martyrs' 1nd1v1dua1lty, exemp1ifled by their names being unknown 6 and the1r tombs unrecognlzed,ls dlscovered,to be an i1lus1on. Rather, th1S 105S of lnd1v1duallty, ln.. GOka1p'sbterms, the fulfl1ment of the negatlVe ntua1, assoc1ated,wlth "beka", the state of sacr.edness or permanence, is connected ta nat10na1 symbo1s, "TUrkçU1Ugün. tarlh1" (the hlstory of Turklshness)' and "hllâl" (the crescent). The connéct10n between Stanzas land J lS tenuous. Verse 34 moves qU1ck1y from universal symbols to 'l' with "diJ?Undu~" (I thought). Th1S may be lntended to prov1de an 1mpress1on of contra,st. This inter- n pretation would seem to be Justified by the shift from aorlst verbs in , . '~ reference to the martyrs to past perfect tense verbs when referr1ng to 'l', the poet, throughout the .remalnder of the poem. This, then, serves to underscore the d1stinct10n between the universal and the perso~al, the martyrs, those who have ach1eved a state of unity w1th God or nation and those who have not, spee1f1eally, the "poet. Verses 36 and 37 maintain the 'self crltical style of the first sect1on. The poet ln versas 34-35 states that he bel ieved he wanted an 1nspirat10n from the martyrs but his increasing awareness ôf the \ 76 fa1slty of hlS art lS helghtened by the lnsertlon of " sanat lnc.1er; sahtedH" (the pear1s of art are fa1se) ln verse 36. ThlS is vln.dlcated by verse 37 where the poet states that, ln fact, all he wanted was t@ have a handfu1 of earth, ln other words, to exp101t the martyrs for hlS own purposes. Therefore, not on1y does the poet's state of "fânî1ik" (transltorlness) prevent hlm from approachlng the martyrs, but even his lntentlons and deslres, the quallty of wh;ch was central to the theme of Sectlon l, are prov1ng to be fa1se. ;.. The leve1 of self cntlclsm lS lntens1fled ln verse 38. ThlS sustalns the trend begun in verses 13, 17 and 19 of Sectlon l, but here the crltlclsm lS more conslstent and the statement of hypocrlsy ;s based on a recognlzed condltlon of false and hypocrltlcal lntentlon. There fore, the fo11owlng verses complete the poem by malntaimng th1S 1eve1 of self cntlcism and deflmng, by distinctlOn, the approprlate relatlon- ShlP of lndivldual to nat1on. The slgniflcance of th1S rea1izatlon lS emphaslzed ln verse 40. Stanza L, wlth the use of the ablatlve "~alrll~lmden" (my poethood) and the lmpreSSlOn of removedness WhlCh it sugges~s,. comp1emented by lts conJunctl0nJ'llth 'Jutand1~" (1 was aShamed). Verse 41 uses the 1mage of weeplng WhlCh recalls that of verse 18 of Sectlon 1. These two verses ar~ paral1e1 ln terms of their position lng wlthln the poel)1, precedlng the'final stanzas of their respective sectloflS. Therefore, the weeplng referred to in verse 18, by Wh1Ch the poet wants to erase the shadows in his eyes, by Juxtaposition wlth "an l adlm" (I understood) ln verse 41, at least partially fulfils ltS purpose by glving hlm an uQderstanding of the mechanlcs o~ union and why the barrler exists between hlm and a state of unlty with the nation. He has at least seen the fals1ty of hlS poetry and his worldly attach- , '" t" ~ ments and unders,tands that the way to union is through immers10n in the nation, exempllfled most perfectly by the martyrs. In a sense, by the realization of this most appropriate of re1atlOnshlps, ln conJunctlOn wlth the use of the verb in the past perfect tense, the poet is emphasizing the present lnsurmountabillty of the barrler between himse1f and a slmi1ar state of un1ty. In verse 43, "g.~klerin YOlu" (the path of the Skies) is presumably \ the path of the martyrs, or death. This interpretatiol1 is supporte 77 The final verse contalns a verb ln the optat1ve mood. It expresses a deslre, but thlS des1re 15 ln the past tense. It no longer carries any hope of fulfllment. :'Sanlham" (my 1nsplratlon) and "mezarta?l" (tombstone) are both ~ strong 1mages and, by thelr Juxtaposltlon, complete the search ~or the 1deal relatlonshlp of indivldual to nation. "Samham" conveys a sense of that which lS hlghly lndlvidual and personal and "mezartal1" lS a metaphor for the abandonment of indlvldual des1res and lmmerS10n of oneself into the nation even to the pOlnt of acceptlng martyrdom. The hjghest poem of verse 44 15 contrasted to the poet's lmpotent --- , poethood and the 'false poe~ry' of verses 40 and 37 respectively, thereby dl s ti nguishi ng, 1n the poet 1 s terms, his worl dly poetry from the true poetry of union wlth God or nation. The .poet's relatlOnshlp to the nation in the poem is therefore clear. It. represents the deslre of fulfilment of the icdeal relationship of lndlvldual to natlon, exemplifle~ by the martyrs and remlniscent of Gl.1kalp's negative and pos1tlVe ntuals, but one WhlCh the poet has recognlzed, on a personal level lS, for the moment, lmpossible to fulfil because of hi 5 own attachment to vlle, worldly and individual concerns. 78 Notes l Kudret, Ziya GOkalp, p. 39. ~ is Arable, m, Perslan, and geee, Turkish. All three words signify night. 2Mustafa Baydar"Edeblyat~11ar1mlZ Ne Diyorlar (istanbul: Ahmet Hallt Ya~aroglu, 1960), p. 162. 3Ibid ., p. 163. Mehm~t Emin Yurdakul was an early nationalist poet whose work first eame into promlnence dunng the Turco-Greek war of 1897. His poems were neither lntrospective nor descriptlVe but, rather, purely commltted to soclal utllity and the natlonalist cause. Kenan AkyQz ln "La 11ttérature moderne de Turquie," in Phllologlae, p. 551, says that although he used a simplifled Turklsh vocabulary, it was not derived from the language of the people and, therefore, was awkward and without charm. Also, although he never used aruz but rather syllabic metre, he was not aware of ltS subtleties as used among the people. He used the sonnet verse form and a free verse vanatlon of the müstezad rather than folk fonns of verslflcation. Desplte all thlS, when one considers that he was writlng thls type of poetry at a tlme when the established schools advocated the use of hlgh1y lntrospectH;,e themes and fonnal styles, it is c1ear that he was a precursor of a later form of poetry and an 1 nsplration ta those who fo 11 owed hm. 4These and all other poems referred to ln the paper can be found in the followlng works: Orhan Seyfl Orhon, G6nU1den Sesler (lstanbul:' Sebat Matbaasl. 1934); Nihad Saml Banarll, Faruk Nafiz, Hayatl, Sefme iir1en (Istanbul: SOhulet Kltabevi ve Semih Lûtfi Matbaasl Sahibl, n.d. ; Enis Behiç. MHas ve GOnelln OlOmO (Ankara: Gane~ Matbaaclll~ T.A.O., 1951); Dr.pTeveto~lu, Enls Behi Kor Orek, Ha atl ve Eserleri (Ankara: Güne~ Matbaacll1k T.A.O., 1951 ; Kenan kyaz, Batl Tesirinde . Türk fliri AntoloJisl (Ankara: Ankara Oniversltesl oil ve Tanh Cogra ya Fakaltesi YaYlnlarl, 1953); All Canip, TOrk Edebiyatl AntoloJ1Si (!stanbul: Devlet Matbaasl, 1934). 5Nihad Saml Banar.. l1, Metinlerle TOrk ve Bat1 Edebiyatl, 3 (Î~tanbul: Remzi Kitabevi, 1973), p. 386. 6 lb id. 1 p. 387. '1 7Kema1 H•• Karp(it, Turkey's Politics. The Transition to a Multi- Party System (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1959), p. 252. \ 79 .. 8In a study pf this nature, i·~;"It"0uld be ideal if one could determine a model of structural and grammatical features predominant in the whole corpus of the works of these poets and transpose this model onto certain representative extracts. One could show ln these cases how the use of these ·'ea tures was connected ta the deve lopment of theme and how thesê themes were re l a ted ta GOka l piS i deo l ogy. One could then demonstrate by a study of other poets or movements that either differed ideologically or rejected the relationshlp of poetry and ideology espoused by the Be~ Heciciler, how each group was distinct by their use of these features or, in other words, how the use of specifie structural and grammatical features in the works of the Be, Hececiler were linked directly ta their given ideology. However, this would be a massive task and lies beyond the scope of thi s paper. 9Gôkalp, "MefkÛre," p. 70. \ -' lOThe translations of a11 poems studied in this chapter are mine. Please note that these transl ations are not mea."t tD reproduce the rhythm or rhyme of the originals, only the meaning. l have numberep the translations as well as the original poems for the reader's convénience. In some cases, though 1t should be noted that, due to the different grammatical structures of Turkish and English, the positioning of given verses in the translations may not correspond exactly ta those cited in the text of this thesis in reference ta the original Turkish. Behiç's "Ey TUrkeli ll is divided into six sections. Section l contains eight verses, subdivided into 3 stanzas of 2-4-2 verses; Section 2 contains sixteen verses; Section 3, eight; Section 4, twelve; Section S, sixteen verses, subdivided into 2 stanzas of 10 and 6 verses each and Section 6 contalns eight verses. The poem is written in syllabic metre, all verses cDntaining 13 syllables, wlth a 4+4+5 rhythm, wlth the single exception of verse 7 which has a 6+7 rhythm. The rhyme pattern is AA BB CC etc. The original of the poem as it appears in the Appendix is contained in Behiç, Miras, pp. 71-7~~ llGi)kalp, "MefkOre," p. 68. l2This poem is divided into four stanzas. Stanzas A, Band C a11 contain eight verses while Stanza 0 has four verses; It i5 presumably a refrain. The poem is written in syllabic metre. All verses contain thir~en syllables, with a 4+4+5 rhythm. The'rhyme is as follow5: Stanzas A, B. C: ABAB BCBC Stanza 0: BCBC. The original poem,fs contained in B~hiç, Miras, pp. 88-89. l3The image of the sunset in this context is also used in Behiç's "Buhrân" (Cris;s), "MaglOblar ve Gurûblarll (Jhe Defeated and the Sunset), Orhan Seyfi li "Harp içinde Bahar" (Spring During War) and Yusuf Ziya's "~airler" (Poets).,.. among others.' , , t 80 14 ' This refers to the traditiona1 idea that a person's fa te was wri tten on hi s forehead. ('. 15The poem is divided into four stanzas, each containing eight verses. It;s written in free verse within the syllabic system. The metre. rhythm and rhyme are as fo II ows: Stanza A: Verse 1 - 16 (4+4+4+4) A Verse 2 - 15 (4+4+4+3) A Verse 3 - 12 (4+4+4) B Verse 4 - 11 (4+4+3) C Verse 5 - 8 (4+4) B Verse 6 - ,7 (4+3) C Verse 7 ~ 4 (4) A Ve rse 8 - 3 (3) A Stanza B: Verse 9 - 3 (3) A Vers e 1a - 4 (4) A • Verse 11 - 7 (4+3) 0 Verse 12 - 8 (4+4) E Verse 13 - 11 (4+4+3) 0 Ve rse 14 - 12 (4+4+4) E Verse 15 - 15 (4+4+4+3) A' Verse 16 - 16 (4+4+4+4) A Stanza C: Verse 17 - 16 (4+4+4+4) F Verse 18 - 15 (4+4+4+3) F Verse 19 - 12 (4+4+4) G Verse 20 - 11 (4+4+3) H Verse 21 - 8 (4+4) G Verse 22 - 7 (4+3) H Verse 23 - 4 (4) F Verse 24 - 3 (3) F Stanza 0: Verse 25 - Verse 26 - l ~ ~~ ~ Verse 27 - 7 (4+3) 1 Verse 28 - 8 (4+4) J Verse 29 - 11 (4+4+3) 1 Verse 30 - 12 (4+4+4) J Verse 31 - 15 (4+4+4+3) F 1 Verse 32 - 16 (4+4+4+4) F . The orjginal poem is contained in Behiç, Miras, pp. 112-113. \ 16All the verses of this poem are written in sy11abic metre and contain eleven syllab1es with a 6+5 rhythm. The rhyme is ABAB CDCU ... WXWX. The original poem as contained in the Appendix can be found in Behiç, Miras, pp. 84-87. 81 17The poem is divided into two sections. 0 The first section is divided into four sub-secti6ns as follows: l. Stanza A: 4 verses - MSB 2. Stanza B: 4 verses - COCO 3. Stanza C: 4 verses - EFEF 4. Stanza 0: 4 verses - GHGH Stanza E: 2 verses - II Stanza F: 3 verses - JJJ The poem is written in syllabic metre. all verses containing elevèn syllables with a 6+!5 rhythm. The second section is divided into five sub-sections as follows: ~ l. Stanza G: 4 verses - KKLL 2. Stanza H: 4 verses - MMNN 3. Stanza l : 4 verses - oopp 4. Stanza J: 4 verses - QRQR 5. Stanza K: "2 verses - SS Stanza L: 2 verses - TT Stanza M: 4 verses - UVVU The origirral of thi s poem is in Behiç, Mi ras, pp. 77-80. ~ ( / ." -. • CHAPTER III ZIYA GOKALP, THE BE~ HECECILER AND THE INTERACTION OF FORM AND THEME Cont~adictions in Form and Theme ln the Poetry of the Be~ Hececiler as a Result of the Influence of the ~ Philosaphy of Zita GOkalp The preceding chapter has attempted to demonstrate that the requlrements of Zlya Gôkalp's phllosophy of ideals ln relatlon to llngulstic and poetlc mores lnfluenced the form of the new national poetry.~ Equally, hlS concepts of the role of lndivlduals ln the creat10n a.f nation and natlonal ldeals and thelr partlcl,pation ln the re~creation of society by the dlscardlng of thelr indlvlduallty and thelr ~ll1l1ersion in the social collectivity, resultlng ln thelr emergence a,s fully soclalized individuals, were reflected and developed ln the poetlc themes of the Be~ Hececiler. - However, certaln trends ln poetic theme, due to assumptions only ;mpllcit ln GOkalp's thought on the relationship of the individual to soclety, belied the lntention behlnd the changes ln form, the Turkist commltment to papular mores. Ziya Gôkalp's Thought on the Underlying Aspects of the RelatlOnship of Ind'lvidual to Nation This contradlction stemmed from the impllcatlons underlYlng the \ .. \ issue .of negative and po~itive ritual in soclety, that society, or the fi nation, must be in a constant state of re-creatlon and that national ldeals must be constantly maintained and nurtured in order to ensure and maintain the tistence of the natlon. In other words, for the sake of ., ~he natlon, in6ividuals had ta unendingly discard thelrtindivlduality and lJTJnerSe themselves in the collectivlty. This is çlear in GOkalp's philosophY,of ideals fram hlS earliest works on. .. 82 1 83 It is explicit in statements such as the followlng, wrltten ln 1913. When a natlOn fac"es danger, lndivldu.als cannot save 1t. The natlOn ltself becomes ltS own saVlour. At these tlmes the 1ndlvldual lS enchanted by the spell of a supra-mundane spirit; hlS wlll becomes sllent; \ a general wlll becomes the only l ln every ----' consciousness. The natlOn then appears to ltS members as a dlvlne or collective ldeal, and lnvltes them to a pronnsed vlctory or to a heralded paradise. It lS the nation that creates self sacrificlng fighters out of egolsts and danger seeklng heroes out of cowards. It lS the nation "...-t:hat glves lntelllgence to the du", dlligence to the lazy and zeal t,o the lndlfferent. When the time of dlsaster and crlS1S has passed away, the fire of the 1deals 15 not ext1nguished in thelr hearts; it continues to motlvate the people constantlyas lf lt were a sprlng lnslde them. l The theme of re-creation 15 clear ln GOkalp's dlScusslon of the ~ powers of sanction and popular appeal of the 1deals, which affect everyone over a perlod of tlme and merge all 1ndivlduals lnto a "united, homogeneous moral oneness," permlttlng the natlOn to, among other things, pursue its hlstorical mlsslon. 2 It lS also eVldent 1n an artlcle wrltten ln 1918 where Gôkalp stated that the institutions of state and fatherland achlevE permanent life only when based on a national ldeal, but they are destlned te fall lf they are based only on indlvidual lnterests. Men without ldeals are egoistlc, self-seeklng, pesslmlstlc, falthless "and cowardly; they are lost souls. A state must be founded on natlonal ldeals, a country has to be the home of a natlonallty lf lt is ta have permanent existence. 3 ''\ Agaln, it is clearly contained in an article written ln 1923, "At the present-day st~ge of evolutlon, social solidarity rests on cultural unity," "The means for,the transmlssion of culture is educatian,,,4 as well as G~kalp's concern with national education and the development of national types. 5 The theme of re-creation is also implicit in G~kalp's dlScusslon of moral values and society, and, in particular, tM followlt'lg statements: "The basis of the duties towards the self is sacrificing lndivlduallty for society," and "lndividuals become moral objects because, and inso far as, they are s-ocialized."6 84 Perhaps most lmportantly, the theme of re-creatlon lS implicit ln the structure of GOkalp's phllosophy of ldeals, and thlS bears on all preVlOUS statements. Because indlviduals create soclety, which G~kalp deflned as the sum total of v~lues, and on1y soclallzed .. lndlvlduals can lnternalize and participate in socBl values, the contlnued eXlstence of that society is dependent upon thelr partlclpatlon . . By GOkalp's identification of soclety with natlon, the same applles to natlon and natlonal values. The individual must,continue to sub merge hlS lndlvlduality in the .cOllectivity of nation or lt will fail . SOclety, then, must be in a constant state of regeneration, but this regeneration is only possible through the partlcipation of soclalized lndlvlduals. Furthermore, the unspoken corol1ary to this assumption underlYlng GOka1p's philosophy was the need for the partlcipation of all lndivlduals in this regeneratlon and, therefore, social homogenelty, for the maintenance of the nation's existence. As a result, it was the lnteraction of conflicting trends in form, lnfluenced by Ziya GOkalp's' phl10sophy of ldeals, and theme, insplred by his thought on the relatlon ShlP of indlvldual to nation or, more s~ecifically, the necessary immersion of lndividuality ln the collectivity and th~ consequent requlrement of socia1 homogeneity, that led to certaln lnevltable contra dlct10ns ln the poetry of the Be? Hececller. Contradlctions in the Poetry of the Be~ Hsceciler as a Result of the Influence of Ziya GOka1p's Philosophy The Be~ Hececiler, inspired'by Zlya GOkalp, used the metre, vers1ficat1on and language of the people because they firm1y bel1eved that culture, the seeds of the Turklsh essence upon which a sense of na tl ona 1 i dentl ty cou 1d be bUllt, ex i s ted on ly among the people and tha t • the regeneration of the natiOh depended upon its revlval. They attempted ta reorient Turkey's literature away from the elitism of the Divan period and toward the people, both in terms of form and theme, ~by uSlng folklore and vernacu1ar Turkish as sources of 1nspiration. Vet, at the same time, due to the emphasis of GOkalp's philosophy o~ the necessary nature of the ,immersion of individuallty ln the social cOl1ettivity for the sake of that collectivlty and the individual's 1 acquisition of genulne personality on1y through this immerslon, lndlvl~uals ~ • 85 - became meanlngful only ln the degree ta which ~ey reflected natlonal ldeals. Therefore, ln thelr themes, the~Be~ Hececiler, whose treatment of theme was dellmlted by these aspects of GOkalp's philosophy, could not portray Anatolla, and 1,tS people ottler .than ln thelr functlOn as . representatlves of natlOnal values and ldeals. In other words, their lndivldual~ty and the reality of their conditlon were lnevitably SaCrlflCed to thelr function as national symbo~s. ThlS two-dimenslonal treatment of ~tolia and ltS people lS eVldent ln Behlç's "Turan K1Zlarl" (Maidens of Turan) and "Süvariler" (Cavalrymen) discussed in the prevlous chapter. It is also found in hlS "Gemicller" (Sallors), Yusuf Ziya Ortaç's "Aklndan Aklna" (From Rald to Raid) and Faruk Nafiz Çamllbel' s "5anat" (Art) among other poems. Faruk Nafiz Çamllbel's "B1Z1m Memleket" (Our Country) clearly portrays the Anatolians as representlng characterlstics and values percelved by the natlonallst poets to be dlstlnct to the Turk and lnherent ln his nature and therefore merlts an intensive study.7 \. B;z;m Memleket ~ .' A l tçinden tanlrlm ben 0 ellerl Onlar kl zAhirde Vlran olurlar, Ar'd1 l1 da~lan, çam11 bel1eri A~an 1ar ~lrine hayran olurlar. B 5 DOkalOr kOpOk10 su1ar yarlndan, Baharlar yaratlr kl~ln karlndan~ tçenler slhlr11 plnar1arlndan ~oyle blr silklnir, ceylan olurlar~ .. C Orada ya~lyan erlerln lçi 10 Bir tasta yu~urur derdl, sevinci, Onlar kl sapanS1Z, tar1aslZ çlftçi, DavarslZ, kavalslz çaban olurlar. 0 Ba~l bo~ klr1ara sa1ar taylnl, Elinden da~armez ok1a yaylnl, 15 Ellere blraklr zafer paylnl, Memleket yolunda kurban olurlar~ {e"'. 86 Our Country A 1 know this land from the lnslde That, in appearance, seems ruined, Those who traver.se mountalns of Junlper, passes of plne Are overcome by ltS poetic beauty. B 5 From its p'reclplc'ès foaming waters are poured, It creates ,Sprlngs from Winter's snow, Those who drink from ltS enchanted fountains Shake, and at once become gaze11es~,. C The essence of the men tha t 11 ve there 10 Kneads paln and JOY in the same bow1, They are farmers without p10ws or fields, 'Shepherds wlthout flocks or pipes. D They set thelr colts free ln the fields, They never let thelr bows and arrows fa11 from their hands, 15 They leave the c1aim for vlctary to others. / They sacrifice themse1ves for the country! Wlth the occurrence of uiçinden tanlf1m ben 0 elleri" (1, know this land fram the i~side, verse 1), the poet presents himse1f as the inter preter of rea1ity vis-a-vis the outward appearance of verse 2. This is the an1y instance of the flrst person singular ln the poem. The remaining verses consist of a des~ription of conditlons. Stanzas A and B set the theme against which Stanzas C and 0 are presénted as a counterpoint. The land lS a metaphor for the people or in another sense, Stanzas A and B are a pre-image against WhlCh the . image of the peop/le is to be set. Theref?~~ the, th:mes are stated in the first eight-verses and they are either rep~ated or oblique1y referred to in verses 9-16. . Verse 4 introduces the actlve qua1ity of the land, its capacity ta averwhe1m trave11ers. ThlS active nature is high1ighted by the verb "dOkü10r" (are poured) in verse 5, Stanza B, which contlnues the theme of verses 1-4 by virtue of the ,genitive re1ationshlp of "yanndan", (from its precipices) and implies that sorne element, presumab1y the land, is causing the waters to be poured. ThlS interpretation is supported by the use of the causative verb "yaratmak" (to create) ln verse 6. 87 "DOkUlmek" (to be poured) in verse 5 also connotes a conditlon of change. This introduces the image of transformation central to the rest /' of the stanza. The images of "sular" (water) and "baharlar" (spnngs) inverses 5 and 6 also contribute to a sense of activity and metamorphosis , from a state of death to lite. Th1S is accentuated ln verses 7 and 8 where the Jand's transfonnational nature takes on mag1cal qualit1es with "sihirli plnarlar" (enchanted fountains) that can change people into "cey lânlar" (gazelles). In Stanzas A and B, then, the land appears to be ruined. But this ;s an il1uslon. In essence, it lS not. Rather, the transformational, even magicàl, poetic nature of the land is introduced. The thematic division between Stanzas A-B and C-D is emphasized by the punctuation of verse 8 and by the conclusion of the use of present participles as subJects of the verses. Verse 9, Stanza C,repeats "iç" (inside. essence) which dup1icat~s the use of'"içinden" (from the inside) in verse 1. In conJunction with the theme of the people that belong to the land, thlS device serves to introdùce the new section. The issue of essence also obllquely recalls the 'l', the poet of verse 1, who 1nterprets reality ~is-a-vis appearance. The two portions of the poem are 1inked by the use of "orada" (there} , . ln this verse. "0nlar·kl" (those who) ln verse, 11 and the paralle1 structure of verse 12, recalls the "onlar ki" of verse "2 and. therefore, maintains th;'s sense of Jl1usory appearance as distinct from reallty. Therefore, the themes o~ verses 9-16 repeat those of verses 1-8. Verses 13-16 present the transformational, nomadic, military qualities of the people. Whereas earlier ln the poem, in the context of the land. this quality took on maglcal characteristics, in this section it takes on historical, martial characterlstlcs, those intrinsic to the nature 'of the 'essentlal' Turks who let their horses run free, never set down their arms. who are essential1y modest ln the face of vi ctory and sacrifi ce ~hemse l ves will i ngly for the country. These qualities, by parallelism,retain that maglcal nature assoclated with the land in the previous sectlon. The inference, then, is that the , . character1stlcs of the Turkish essence are also almost magical ln nature. In the sa1e way that the land's ruin can be transformed lnto poetry, / re-created as with winter to spring, the people's external ruin and deprivation can be transformed into victory. Even the description Of~ 1 88 . - them as "tar1aslz çiftçi" (farmers wi~hout fields: vèrse 11) and' "ka va 1s 1 z roban Il (shepherds wi thout fl ocks, verse 12) hearkens beyond a,n apparent state of destitution to the nomadie qua1it"les of the 1 es senti a 1 Turk l, thereby becomi ng in i tse 1f somethi ng with the potential for transformatlon. The verbs in Stanzas è and 0 are more aeti ve an'd dlrected than l\n the preceding stanzas. This. is eomp1emented by the' interconnection of vers'es 13, 14 and 15, emphasized by the pos1tioning of the direct objeèts, "taylnl" (colt, verse 13), "yaylnl" (bow, verse 14) and Il payl mil (e 1aim. verse 15) as the fi na 1 words in each of the verses and their culmination in' verse 16 which lS c1ea-r1,Y, by its structure, distinct from those prececting it. This emphasis on directed activity in the final stanzas ,heightens the sense of the peop1e's control of the transformation, whereas, in reference to the land, the actlVity and , the subjects were more diffuse. The di stinct naturè.," emphas i sand pounctuation of verse 16 suggests that, of all a«tlvlties outl ined ln the poem, it is this particu1arly, the peop1e ' s wi11\ngness ta sacrlfice themse1ves for the nation. that per"lits the transformation and creates the poétic qua1ity of the people. In th~ poem, therefor:, ·the Anat~ë,ms are portrayed as representihg \ 5.. the Turkish essence and, more lmportantly, lt is from this essence alone ,. ,1 that thelr capacity to transform the nation from ruin ta v1ctory st{:ms, 'Orhan Seyfi Orhan, of all the Be~ Hececiler, was perhaps the one who most idea1,ized hls coùntry, for whom Anatoll? stood most as a national symbo1. evidenced in his description, of Anatolia as paradise on earth~in "Clnaraltl" (Under the Plane Tree).8 This image recurs i~, ~ 9 "Anado1~ Topra~l" (The' La!1d of Anato1ia). Anadolu Topragl A Sene1erce sana hasret ta~lya" Bir gonal1e kollanna at11sam. Ben de. bi r gUn kuca~l nda yasayan . . Baht'iyar1ar.aras1na kat11sam. B 5 En baklms1z, en kuytu blr buca~ln Bence 1 1rem ba~l' gibi gQze1di r. Bir Ylkl1ml~ evin, harap ocagln ~u heybet1i saray1ara bede1dir. , r - , ~ . } • r, " ; 89 .. ,) - C , Kadir me~lam, e~er senden uzakta C! ~l a Bana .taktir ey]emi~se olOroO; . Rahat etmem bu yabancl t9prakta, f Cennette de avutamam gOnlOmO. n 0 ~Jadlm ki: Sèvda, genç1ik, ~eref, ~an •. • 11slzmis ,U yalancl dDnyada. ' 15 Hasretinlè yadellerde dola~an Hlzrl bulsa yine ermez murada. , '. 0\ E Yalnl~'senin tatl1 esen havanda Kendi millî gijrurumu sezerim. ValnlZ seni,n da~1nda, ya ovanda 20' Ba~lm gOkte, alnlm açlk gezerim. " F HOrOm, 'derim, eskisinden daha har, Zincirinle baglansa da ayaglm . îimdikinden da ha ferah gOrOnQr . i~anlnda olsa qile dura~,m. G 25 ~ir gOn olup kucag1na ula,sam, GOllerimden uOksem ,sevi nI ya~lnl. r ~., Sancaglnln gOlgesinde do a~sam, Opsem, op~em topraglnl, ta~Hll!' --- The Land of Anato1ia A l, If only 1 could throw myself into your arms with 'a ~eart 't That has 10nged for you ,for years. JfI 1> If only 1 CGuld join one day the hap people . 1 Who live in your em~race • B 5 Your most neg1ected, most obscure corner . ) Is ta me as beaut'ifu1 as the 'Garden of Eden', Everyone of your decrepit houses, devastated hearths Is worth/as much as these majestic.pa,laces. C If mighty God ordained ~->. ~ 10 That 1 should die in exile far from you; 1 would never rest easy in that\foreign sail, 1 could never console mY·heart even in P~radise. 0 1 unders tood tha t: Love, youth, hon,!)ur, f~me .. ' Were without roots in that deceitful wor1d. , 15 Even if he who wanders foreign lands 10n9ing for you ,1, ,; Finds Hlz1r he will never attain his desire. , , ; E Only in your gently blowing wind Do 1 find my national pride. Only in your mountains or va11eys 20 Do 1 wander freely, my head in the sky., C'" , ~. ". '0 1: -~--~------:-----:---::_-=---- ~ - ---- _. - -- .-- '- .. • 90 ( , l am free,' l say,' freer than ever bdore, ,- Even if my feet are bound with your fetters. Everyth1ng 'would appear more" spacious than now 1 Eyen if my place ,of rest was in your qungeo,D. '-, G . 25 If only 1 could reach your embrace someday, And weep' wi th tears of j oy in my eyes. l"f only 1 cO!,.lld walk,in the shadow of your flag, Anèf kiss, kiss your earth, YÇ>ur stone! , , - In this poem, verses 1-4 of'Sta~za A establish a relationship between 'me', 'th~ poet and 'you', the p,ersonification of Anatolia with the use of "sana hasret ta~lyan" Jthat has longed'for you, verse 1),' "kol1arlna atllsam" (if on1y l tou'ld throwmyself into your anus, verse 2), "kucag'lnda ya~ayan" (those who live i'n your embrace, verse 3) and Il katl1 sam" (if only l could'join, verse 4). The verbs used are } ; \,' optative and speak of union and joining others within the country's embrace, reminiscent ~f GOkalp's concept of multiplicity submerged' within unity . The desire here is stat,ed simply, with the parallel , , structure of verses 1-2 and 3-4 underl i ni ng the movement from 1ong1 n9 ta action~ from desire te fulfilment of union and from isolation to union alongside others who themselves have achieved fulfilment in Anatdlia. Verses 5 and 6, Stanz~ B, introduce a .5tatement of a relationsh;p of equiv.alence between two opposites with liEn baklmslZ, en kuytu bir buca~ln bence '!rem bagl' gibi .gOze1di r" (Vour most neg1ected, most obscure - ' ) - corner is to me as beautiful as the 'Garden of Eden'). This structure " and comparison ;s repeated in verses 7-8. f Stanza B moves from an affirmation of desire to a descriptive stat~m~t for the purposes of making a value judgement, by comparing Anatolia to other e1ements. This serves to remove the poem from the leve1 of a dec1aration of relationship purely limited to ~me', the poet and 'you', Anatolia. This introduction of the element of 'otherness" 1 is reinforced in Stanzas C and D, with the discussion of foreign lands, 'against which Anatolia i5 compared in the final stanzas. The tense of the verbs used in this stanza set it apart from the optative stanza A and emphasize its descriptive factual quality... . c 1\ 1 " 1" 91 " ( \ Verses 11 and' 12, Stanza C, ~se of aori st negative verbs !i comp1.ete the optative,verses 9 and 10 in n9 unQertain terms. The poet 1 ~tates that, in the event of his death in e:i1e, neither" ~ou1d his body re~t easy in that foreign land or soi1, nor wou1d he be able to console 1, his heart even in Paradise. T~e use of aorist negative in conjunction with the, optative verbs links this stanza to the following one where the' • same combinat'io~ of verbs underscores their connection to foreign lands. 1 Foreign lands, therefore, are compared to Anatolia with a resulting 1 negative value judgement. Further~ore, even Paradise i tself is 1mpl ied j to be- les~ beautiful and fulfilling than Anatolia. 1 \ i 1 . The punctuation of verse 13, Stanza D, suggests that the positive i qualities listed are not 1imited to the four designated there. That the "yalahcl dOnya" (deceitfu'l world) of verse 14 is identified with l ' , t~e foreign lands of verse 11 is indicated by the use of J'~UIl (that) and, also by the use of "yadellerde" (in 'foreign 1ahds) in verse 15. This interpretation is consistent with the pattern of statement and reinforcement of statemeot established by the parallelism of verses. 1-2 and 3-4, 5-6 and 7-8 and ~mphasis by oyposition of. verses 11 and 12. Verses 15 and 16 are sigrl'ï'ficant thema.tically'in that the poet implies that no degree of 10nging a10ne can effect comp1etion or fu1filment'of de.sire 'for un10n with Anatolia. Rather, that desire can only be ful filled in Anato1ia itsè1f. Therefore, the negative aspe~ts or foreign lands~ expressed in p 'relation to 'me', the poet, in verses 9-12 t are intens'ified and expanded , to include an other people and evel'! all positive qualities. In other word~. all positi~e qualities are stated to be. without roots, i11usory, in 'that deceitfu1 world', which implies that they eX,ist on1y in Anatelia. Furthermore, a11 people who wander in foreigri lands, despite the fact that they long for Anatol ia and find themse'lves in' the most . 10 propitious of circumstances, will never ~ain their desife. This is supported by the use of the negative aorist ,uermez murada" Jwill n~ver: \ . attain.their desire) and the opposition of the gramm~tical components o~ verse 16 exemp1ified by the positive optative', , and negative aorist ,verbs. , . '" , 92 This,negative relationship exists not on1y fo~~tné poet but ~or all positive aspects of life and all pe~ple. It is against this back ground, then. that the desire 'for unionlexpressed in Stan~a A mU,st be set. ,And it i~ .as a result of this contrast of value judgements. that disti~guish Anatolia and foreign lands that the fol10wing stanzas return to expand upon the direct relationship of the poet to his own country and reinterpret with even more inten'sity.. his des,ire /~r union." The use of "Ya'lmz" (only) in ye'rses 17 and 19 and of positive aorist verbs in Stanza E as opposed to the negative aorist of the previous two stanzas heighten the _sense'of contrast between Anato1i& and foreign lands as do the images of the positive qua1ities such as na~iona1 pri de and freedom. that the poet cl aims exi st only in Anatoli a. Therefore. verses, 17-20'reintrod~ce the'poet:s relation~hip to Anato1ia in a more significant manner~ against the background of the diametric opposition of Anatolia and foreign lands in verses 5-16. Vers~s 21-24 t Stanza F, carry this relationship to its conclusion by the suggestion that. for the poet, not 2fly are pride and freedom found excl~sively in Anatolia but that, even in its worst conditions, these , : qua1ities exist to a great-er degree than-anywhere else. Agét'in. the pattern of statement and reinforçement of statement is evident in both Stanzas, Ee and'F where the statement contained in the first two verses , i is reinforced in the second two. : This pattern also occurs between stanzas. In this way, verses 17-20 represent the result of the opposition of value judgements in terms of desire, and verses 21-24 reinforce this " result. The interaction of the optative and aorist tens~s makes the ,1 transition from t~e wholly aorist Stanza E to the. optative Stanza G. tt !, Q f Stanza G is lin-m., to Stanza A by this ~se of the optative. the , repetition of "bir gOn" '(one da'y, sorne day, verse '25) and the image of '/ 1 ! "kuca~,na ula~mak" (to'reach your embrace, verse 25) but, in this case, l the desire expressed in Stanza A is intensified by the image of "sevinç ya~,m" (tears of joy, verse 26). the number, and nature of the verbs , and the background of the extremely negative value judgements about foreign lands in contrast'to thase relating to Anatolia. The relation ship of tHe poet ta his country, the 1ntensity of his vocabulary and l ernotion and his expressed desire for union approaching spiritual union i • 1 is,significant in this poem. Anatolià, in Orhan Seyfi's idealized form. i o -- ~ ------ ~ \ . " 93 is no longer a country attainab1e. in 'time and space- faut rather a quality, an ideal, a nation 'to whose essence the poet longs to commit ", / himself, ' ". . ,J' There e.xisted, therefore~ in the poetry of the Be~ Hèceciler a , " ., fundamenta" contradi~tion be~ween fo~m and th~me; - This'proô~m did not lie in the ïdealitation of the people and the country per se but rather . . . .. ~ :.- in th.e fact that ~he constantirrrnersi,on of indivitfuali~y ioto nation advocated by Ziya GOkalp·s philosophy to which the poets adhered Il J" 1 requi red a conditi on of soci al homo ge'rte ity tha t di d not a 11 ow them to transcend this rigid re1ationship Qf individua1"to nation. In other w~~s, there was no infrastructure within that philosophy that could toWra.te or cope with dissent or multiplfcity without calling into question its, own underl;linnings. Therefore, efforts to diversify poetic 'themes, to approach a more realistic portraya] of the ,people' and i conditions of Anatolia, most notably evi~ent on the part of Faruk Nafiz 1 ~ Çaml1bel, were fraught w;th fundamental problems and ultimately eould, not be successful,. Çamllbe1· s IIHayat li (Life) is an examp1e of this prob 1em', 12 .' 1 'Hayat , '0 1 A~zl~da ,ark111ktan çlkml, ini1ti1er1e Da~, ta~ deme, Arkada~, gOn batmadan i1er1e!, Yara açsln kayalar ayaklarln~a, vars1n~· _-( VarS1" omuz ba,larln kamçl I~rdan k1zarsln, 5 Bu a~rl1ar duyurmaz sana Yalnlz11~lnl. Kl zll dudak l arl ndan bl rakma 1S 11 gl n..:I , Agzlnda larklllktan çl~ml, in;ltilerle . Da~, ta, deme, Arkada~, gUn batmadan i1er1e! '" Slrtlnda oir tUy g;bi ta~l ta~tan yOkOnO, 10 GOrmes;n1er belin;n, sakpn, bOkaldO~anO ... - - Ba'lnda ,akladlkça atlllarlD klrbaCl Anla k; hergUn sana hlZ, veriyor bir ael! ' Yara açSln kayalar ayak1arlnda, varsln, VarSln, omuz bal1arln kamçl1ardan klzarsln, • i t5 ~ayda, sarl1 yollara ... Ardlna bakma, hayda! Sen yOk a1tlnda hayklr, yatsln eller sarayda 1 ( Ifl~e bir iz blraklr yere slzdlkça k~nlar, i Sen; bulur izinden lsll~lnl duyanlar ... . 1 / 1 J , <, l '. t -....\ < , , 94 " Bu a~rllar duyurmaz sana yalnlzl,glnl, 20 K1Z,l dudaklanndan blrakma lsl1~1n1, : " Flrt,na, yagmur, s6~uk... Ne varsa' üstüne çek! Bu ÇetilLyolculugun sonuJlda, gOn gelecek, Slrma sa~lar saracak her kan akan yerini, GUl dudaklar (lpecek 0 k'l.rbaç izlerin;' .. ~ , 25 A~zlnda ~arl , . Life 1 With dissonant moans in your mouth Do not heed mounta in or stone, Fri end" ad vance before ,the sun sets! 1 'Let the rocks open, wounds in your feet, l, Let your shoulders redden under the,whip, 1 5 These pains will make you forget your 1one 1j ness. Do not stop whistling with your 17..ed lJps, With dissonant moans in your mouth \, ... Do not heed mountain or stone, Friena~ advance before the ,- sun sets! C' .Ii " r) . Cafry your stone load on ypur Qçck as if it werf feathers, .. r 10 Take care, don 1 t 1et them see yo'ur back bend ... . ! '. As the horseman's whip cracks over your head Know that every day pai n gi ves you speed! \ 1 Let the rocks open wounds in your feet, .... L" 1 Let your shoulders redden under the whip, 15 Come on, embrace the path ... Do not look baCk, come on! You cry under the heavy load, le~ the strangers sleep in the pal ace "'- i As blood tri ckles to the ground, it leaves a thi n track, 1 1 .Those who hear your whistle find you-from your track ... , 1 1 These pains will make you forget your loneliness, , 20 Do not stop whi~~ling,With,YOur red lips, . Storm, rain, ,cold ... Caver yoyrself with them all! At the end of this difficult journey, the day wi 11 come when, , f Golden hair will wrap all your pârts dripping with blood~ t Rosy 1 ips wi 11 kiss the traces of that whip: .. .. 25 With dissonant'moans in your mouth Do not heêd mountain or stone, Fri~nd, advance b'efore the sun sets! ~ - - __ -J! ._ ..... _ .. ~ ~ .. . - ./ r 95 I- ( This poem deals with social ,inequaiity and oppression and with r / thè issue of the i ndiv; dua 11 s impotence in the face of this ty:ranny. y /; The man1s helplessness is emphasized by 'his apparent inabil;ty to' / ! control .. external elements. This impr~ssion, heightened by the poet·s use of sarcasm, is conveyed largely by the jux,taposi.tion of incongruous images an,d grammatical parallelism ~r opposition w'ithin ve~ses. It is also underscoredCby the very structure of the poem. 1 , 1 The fi rs t refrai n occut's a t the begj nni n9 a~d end' of the poem and , \ ~ . , . , consists of verses 1 and 2 and verses 25 and 26 distinct. bath grammat- . J iGa11yand ;n terms of their pasitioning. 'from the rest of the poem. l ,- 1 The first eight verses of the poem comprise the' three refrains, . with the first being repeated in verses 1 and 2 and yers.es,]. and 8. o These verses could'structurally. grarrmatical1y and thematica11y make.up a single independent poem but verses 9-12, 15-18 and 21-24 are groupings of four verses eaeh which are interposed among the three -refrains, the only 'difference among them being that verses 9-12 qre nôt linked to the preceding refrain and verses 21-24 are not connected to that which fo11aws. '1;" ,1 .,bath of whi ch are repeat refrains of verses land ,2 .. , i . . 1 These interposed verses, in combination with chan~es in the punctuation of the refrain verses, thereby alter and expand the meaning of the original refrains. They heighten the sense of sarcasm and also, by.t~eir positioning and punctuati~n. give added significance and greater impact to the original refrain. The interposed verses most 1 : notable in this context are those i/TJllediately preceding and followi-ng , ' "" .refrains 2 and 3, in other words~ verses 12, 15, 18 and 21, which are . . all either vocative or general statements. These will' be noted in the , ' discussion of the poem as they oceur.o Verse 2 introduces the use of opposition for the purpose of CO,tbvey; ng a sense of sarcasm wi th the i nci dénce of ~mperati ve negati ve an~ positive verbs within th~ verse separated by,the vocative ."arkada~" (friend),' Verses 3 and 4 are also placed in grammatical opposition ta each'" other for emphasis. The po.sitioning of "varsln" (let, verses .,3-4) 1;) ~ . is s-ignificançj;. in this context,as a link between thé two verses that l < ' \ ' assists. in the cOll1T1unication Çlf a sense of progression. In verse,3, "kayalar" (the rocks) i~ the subject and the yerb lIaçmak" (to open)' 1 ( " -, - ' , . .. ' - .,~- .. .. '. (t :"'. ,.. f : •• " ... p "'v~lP'---t!ï"'f't,N""f"~'. '\, .. ' .. , '. ( j s '0 ac t 1ve D~~ whereas j n 've~: e 4. ,:Dmu zba'~ 1a r1 n~' (yo"" s;O "-1 ders ) ./ i5 the subject the verb, ;s more passive .. Pain is therefore being 1 , I~nd 1 . inflicted upon the individual 'by external elements, and these verses, " J by their order and opposltion, empnasize the increasingly desperate l , nature of thfs ~e1plessness in the face of exter'na1 oppression . .,. The "bu a~ir,larll (these pains) àf verse 5 refer back to the pains' ôf the previous ~erses .and have,\~n a sense, become personified. This' verse, then, com~letes the deve1o~ent of the previo~s two: the man's condition ,has de~~riorated to such an extent that pain has become hif!Y only a11y. , , \\ ' Verses 6 and 7 are re1ated thematically·by the use of "'dudaklarll' (lips, verse 6) and lIa91Z/' (mouth, verse 7). Yet, it is notâble that , l 1 the positive image of whistling with red 1ips has deteriorated into"a negati ve one of di ssona~i mOà(l~ em,ana t i ng from the man' s mou th. Verse 8 completes, the S~~ion of original refrain verses.' In . Banarl,'s text, verses 1 .. 2 and .25-26 are detached from the rest of the texte But the distinct nature of\h'ese verses is a1so emphasized ' grammatica1ly in this section of th~ poem by the exc1amatory nature of verse 2 and the lack of continuity bet*e~r verses 1-2, verses 7-8 and , ~ -'~f" t , , those fo11owing. With these exceptions,' the other refrai'ns, as they occur 1ater in the poem, are al1 connected by punctuation to the verse ~ wnich follows them. There is, therefore, a break grammatica11y between verses 8 and 9 a1though there cou1d arguab1y be a thematic 1ink between "da~, ta~" (mountain, stoné, verse 8) an~ "ta~" (stone, verse 9). , , Verse 9 introduces the section of the poem where four verses are inter- posed between each repeated refrain. Verses 10 and 11 are re1ated ta verse 9 by their reference to various parts of the body, "s1rt" (back, verse 9), IIbe1" (waist, verse 10) and "ba~ Il (head, verse 11). The images descri bi ng the man' 5 'condi ti on in the same verses degenerate from "yOk" (burden, verse 9) to "be1inin 'bOkOldOgU" (your back bending. v.erse 10) to "kHbac ~ak1adlkça" (as the whi I? cracks, verse 11). In verse 11, the whip is imbued with character- istics that are virtually human, recalling verses 3-5 where the man is ." similarTy impacted upon by externa1 e1ements:u the rocks open wound~ i'n his feet., the whip reddens"his shoulders 'and' pains cause him to \ ( ... , f 1 L...... ~ _ .:. -_ !. ___ ' __ ~~ ~ ~ H_ .... ------~-'.~--. ~-- ~._", . ~ t·1 ~ 1 • , , .. . -. " 0 " , . , l' , ( forget his condition. But, moreover, verse 11 serves to 1ink verse 5 l , .... r .. to'verse 12" he-ighteningtthe poetJs sarcastic treatmèpt of pain by' l! , . presenting it as giving.the man speed. AdditionallY, verse 12 intr:o 1. : duce'S new meani ng to' the fo 11 awi ng refra i, n of ve~se~ 13-14 in. a causative sense. ' In other words, it imparts the impression that \ • f because pa'tn gives speed and is an ally therefore the suffering man , ' should, in fact, welcome the pain created by the rocks and whips and submit 'to it. The two ha1ves of verse 15 are in perfect opposition both ll structurally and gralTUl1atically. "Sclr1 1mak. is a passive verb that i'nfers absorption into or a state of giving onese1f up to something. Therefore, thematically, the refrain of verses 1)-14 i5 preced.ed by a str.ong1y sarcastic verse ana comp1eted by a structural1y and grammatica11y powerfu1 one, vocative and exc1amatory in nature, that advocates the abandonment of a11 resistance, both to the e1ements of oppression and • 1 ,to the source of the imperatiye verbs in the poem. The use of paralle1 1 images for th~ purposes,of sarcasm is maintained by t~e poet in verse 16. 'I These serve to emphasize the distinct conditions of the oppressed and, ,1 presumab1y; the oppressors, although this theme is not deve1oped. 1 Although the refrain verses 19-20 are grarrunatically independent fram verses 17:"18, the use of IIbu agr11arll (these pains, vérse .19) refers back to "yük a1tlndall (under the heavy load, verse 16) and llyere sizdlkça kan1arll (as blood trick1es to the g'round, verse 17) whereas 1I 1s 1lk" (whistling, verse 20) is a repetition of its occurrence in'verse 18. As a r~sult, the refrain is given added significance by t; .' the precedence of these verses, thereby emphasizing the sarcastic ~ quality of verse 19, heightened particu1ar1y by the juxtaposition ~f the incongruous images of "kan" (b1ood, verse 17) and "klZ11 d"udaklanndan ls11k" (whist1ing with red 1ips, verses 18, 2b).' Verse 18, then, ama1gamates the images of whist1ing and a track of b100d from the previous verses. The pains are intensified from those described prior to the original refrain in, verses 5-6 and the 'ab'surdity and crueHy of ,the juxtaposition of the images of pain and whist1ing is heightened by the di fferent punctuation in the refrain verses 19-20 as opposed to the same verses as they occ~r in verses 5-6. This re-emphasizes, by ( , , '", , - , ' . () • 0 98 -' comparison, the independent quality of the refrai,n' verses 1 ar'rd 2 which do not chang~ their punctuation when repeated thro~gho~f the poem. This change ,in punctuation also links verse·19 to vel;\se 20 grammaticaliy and would seem to suggest a thematjc link. When rela~ed to verses 21 and 18, these verses a~quire a~new mean~n9, one advocating resignation and·submission. In other.words, because the pains or bleeding will cause man to forget his loneliness 'therefore he must not stop whistling ... 1 ' • • but .rath,er ,should coyer hims,elf, submit himself "to all s?urcef of pain, and difficulty, storm, rain and cold, to which he is subjecte~. J " - J, Verse 21 ~ by its form, pun'Ctuation and the use of "ne varsa'" . ' , (\,'Ihatever, all).supports this interpretation, including all,the previous 1 - elements of oppression in its advocacy of submission. This is, in fact, .) /." , ' emphas i zed tnroughout the poem by the ~e" oi imperati ve V~Tbs il) those cases where the speaker addresses th~ ma~, lnd pa~sive verbs in relation j to the suffering man's condition and r~sponses.which complement the 1 presenta.tion of external elements as being v1ftually persontified, 1 , 1 having the capacity to impact upon'the suffering man, rendering him 1 i l " :helpless. tA '1 1 Verses 22-24 'are separàted from the rest of the poem by the use l . -of the future, tense. These. the~, a~e the c01fditions provide him with relief and justice, that will resolve his position, ,r' ( u- which the poet cl~arly:perce}-ves to be untenable. Yet, despite the. , . poet' s concern wi th 'soci a l ti ons, these verses do not even dea l . ~o'ndi . .. with the issue in real terms, falling far short of advocating any ~ype of social reform. Rather,.they regress to purely romantic idealizations which are inconsistent with the ·tone and theme of. the' rest of the poem .. Moreover; and perhaps more importantly, th~se verdes maintain the image of submission. The suffering mari is ';f\,a state of capitulation 'to external conditions. In other words, the situation has been' altered , but his attitude of passivity hasonot. Furthermore, the open-ended punctuation of verse 24 contributes to the weakness of this vision 'bf ~alvation partlcularly when, completed by verses 25-26 which resume the 1 same ~one as that used vi~-a-vis the suffering man earlier in tfe poem. In aisense. this separation of the final refrain verses from the rest ( f - 1 .'- , . \ \~" 99 of the poem creates a distinct impression of a reversion to the original conditions of the poem, only heightening the hope1essness of the individual IS ~osition. As a result, verses 22-24, de~pite the poet's con cern with the p1ight of the unfortunate, are a fantasy, unfu1fillable and idyllic,. h~ving no relation ta reality . ,Faruk Nafiz, of a1l the Be~ Hececiler, seems to have Qee~ the mos~ Ct concerned with social inequity. "Vet, at best, he simply pointed out the , . issues and conditions without really addressing the problems. Therefore, ' 1 ,although he often, in his poems, presented Anatolians and their conditions '. 1 Of life other than in their function as national symbols, representing ! 1 positive national values or the Turkish 'essence' yet they, in their suffering as well, continued to be seen as an undifferentiated unit. This is not a function of his artistic method but is due to the fact ,that his poetry as well as that of all who adhered to GOkalp's philosophy cQuld not carry a realistic evaluation of conditions in Anatolia through , to its logical conclusion without threatening the homogeneity and unity 1 of nation~l ide~ls, the national perception. Therefore, it was forced i· 1 by its very nature to revert ,to personal, idealized and often highly 1 introspective themes, in the absence of any other outlet for development. ! '. \ i There is no question that much of the poetry of the National Literature movement was highly individualistic as a fesult of the linger ing influence of previous poetic conventions and the lack of consensus within the new movement about the elements that constituted a truly . national literature. Of t~e Be~ Hececiler, the works of'Halit Fahri J Ozansoy, particula~ly, exemplify this type of introspective p~etry. o However, it is not this poetry that is being subjected to scrutiny in,this context but rather that which claimed to deal ~ith national themes. Much of this dealt with nattonal issues in an intro spective manner or progressed from national or univ~rs~l to internal, pe-rsonal images and concerns. Enis ~ehiç's "Tuna K1Ylslnda" (On the ~ Shore of the Danubè) and "çanakkale ~ehitliginde" (At the Martyrdom of the Dardanelies) are prime examples.of the former approach while the latter is evident in Faruk Nafiz Çam11be1's "Gur~et" (Exile).13 Gurbet, the sense of which js 10nging for the home1and from foreign lands, is a recurring theme with the Bes Hececiler. certainly in part ( because of Anatolia's function as a national symbo1. . . \ 100 Gurbet , . Bu k~y lSSlZ b;r diyâr, mUnzeviler be1desi. .. Kayalardan yOkselen co~kun bir kaval sesi Sâhilleri kapllyan bir gUmQ~ten bugudur. ~ GOzlerimin daldlgl ufuk bu engin sudur: ,Ji Ne yarlannda' galler. ~afaktan ziyâ diler, Ne QstUnde klmlldar ince, nârin gemiler ... Deniz gOkten lekesiz, bugUn yarlndan gUzel, B,u iklîmin sabâhl ak~amlar,ndan,gazel. ' 1 Klrlarl gOlgemle ben dola~lrken yan yana 1 10 . Benzeti rim kendimi bi r sUrUsUz çobana. l ' Burda garib rQhumun sondU batOn hevesi: Bu kt1y lSS1Z bir diyâr, mUnzevîler beldesi. 1 1 1 Exil e • 1 ·1 This vil1age is a desolate spot, the city of hermits •.. .. The exuberant sound of a shepherd' s pi pe wh i ch ri ses from the cliffs Is ~ 'silver mist s}Jrrounding the shore. This boundless watèr i s the horizon at which l stare: • 5 Neither do roses on its cliffs wish for dawn's light, Nor;do slender, delicate ships move on it.:. The'sea is more immaculate than the sky, today is more beautiful than tomorrow, The morning in this climate is .more beautiful than its evenings. Whil e trave 11 i ng the country from si de t~ 5 ide with my shqdow . 10 l compare myself.to a shepherd without a flock. -'Here every des i re of my lost soul has di ed: This· v,illage is a desolate spot, the city-of hermits .. ln this poem, the poet's surroundings, from which he.is alienated as a result of..-..his sense of being exiled from hlS, homeland, his nation, are internalized,to the extent that'they become indistinguishable from the condition of his own sou',. ~ \ In verse 1, the poet descri bes hi s surroundings as "1 SS l z bi r o \ diyâr, mOnzevil er beldes i" (a desolate spot, the city of hermits). With ~ \ the use of "bu engin sudur" (this boundless water) in verse 4 and "g!lzlerimin daldlgl" (at which 1 stare, verse 4), he develops a sense of immediacy in time and place, combined with a movement from general description to personal involvement while maintaining continuity with the prev;ous two verses by the continuation of a si,milar gralTlllatical ( structure ·telescoped into one verse. \ j 101 Verses 5 and 6 rei nforce thr imagery of the poet 1 s des cri ption of his lOGation in tre 'preceding verses ,and contribute a sense oi .." ' ,l' . " . ~mptiness and an un7hangeable qua~ity to that description both by this imagery and Dy the similarit)( of their structure," Verses 7 and 8 elaborate on verse 4 but in ,specifie, personal and judgemental terms and also oppose'" by their structure. the grammatical contraction or compress i on .of verses 2 and 3 found inverse 4. The use of the : . colourless words "lekesiz" (irnmaculate, spo·tless, verse 7) and "gUzel" (beautiful. yerses 7 and 8) and th~ repetition"of the same gralTl11atlcal structure three.' times in these. verses underlines the unchangeable, ~mpty, depressed imagery while simultaneous1y extendi ng it from its general \ , ' ,.~ descripti.ve sense to a more intimate, judgemental 1evel. This is reinforced by the following two verses which 'are h'ighly pèrsonal blft. at the same time. expand in terms of geographi ca 1 bound~ries with "k1riarl ben dola~lrken" (while l travel the country, verse 9). Verses, 9 and 10 convey a sense of the poet's widened horizons in terms of his travel through the rest. of the c61Jntry yet fnïPly that the sterile immutability of1the previous.description still continues ta apply. 1 • • This is supported by the reference to "çoban" (shepherd) which lin,ks the J images of verses 2 and la. As well, with the use of "gOlgemle ben" , (W,ith my shadow 1, verse 9) and "benzetirim kendimi" (I compare myself. "verse 10), there is a strong emphasis on personalization of the theme. Verse 11, by combining the issues of the location in terms of place with the use of "burda" (here) and personal involvement with - ~ "rQhumun hevesi" (the desire' of my soul) echoes verse 4. Verse 4 was a 'preparation for the description following and the movement from genéral to particular. Verse 11,'by its similar structure and fun~tion, in conjunction with the pas,t tense of its verb "sOnda" (has died), and its unique punctuation can be cons·idered a preparati,on for a l redefinition of the following verse, a repetition.'of verse l' where the' . progression from general description to a personal, ju,d.gemental level is carried to its final limit. Verse 12, then, reinterprets and completes the poet's first statement in a totally internal and devastating way. \It is an example, of, the ul timate i nteriori zati on of externa l surroundi n~s in the treatment \ \ (l , . "--"" ".. _. -.----=-J"- . ... ~. " 1 " "_.... " - - ""' .' ,0 t f • f 102 ! '., . -. ( of a national theme. Gurbet here represents a condition of personal devastation. àn int~rnalization of outward emptiness. In other words, i the' description, "bu' ~Dy lSSlZ bir diyar, manz~vner berdesi/l (this village is a desolate'spot, the city of hennits) becomes one of the poetls,own soul in exile. In conclusion, then, Ziya GO~alp's philosophy of ideals, by its ins'lstence that language, metre, versifièation and theme be consistent . , with 'the mores of the people, initiated a new national poetic movement whose corrmitJftent to the, use of folk1oric themes. vernacu1ar Turkish and popular forms of -versification was inspired by their conviction that. the nation's regeneration was linked 'to ~he revival of popular culture and a renewed respect for the values, concerns and traditions of the people. Yet, at the same time, because; in GOkalp's thought, for the sake of " . .. the n~tion, individua1s had to unendingly discard their individua1ity and immerse themse1ves in the collectivity and because tbis implied , 0 the participation of all individuals in national regeneration and the'refore, social homogeneity, individua1 conditions, including the • actual 'plight of the people of Anato1ia, social inequities and all ') 1 . allegiances other than to the monolithic national ,'ideal' defied the . , unity of that ideal. Theréfore, due to these contradictions 'underlying • 1 ,GD1 ., f '. '. i 1 ..... ! , i ....,.. 1 1 .( 1 ., " 103 No1;,es l GOka l p ~ "MefkQre, Il p. 68. 2Ibid., p. 69. 3GOkalp, "Milliyet," pp. 81-82. 4GOkalp, "Millet Nedir?," p. 135. . , 5see GOkalp, "Millf Terbiye," pp. 235-247. 1 6GOkalP, "Ah1ak," p. 152. -1 7This poem is written in sy11abic metre. All verses contain 11 sy11ables with a 6+5 rhythm. It consists of four quatrains with a rhyme pattern of ABAB CCCB ODOS EEEB. The original in the Appendix is from Banarll. Faruk Nafiz. p. 43. 8Kema1 H. Karpat, "Social Themes in Contemporary Turkish Literature," Middle East Journal 14 (1960): 34. 9uAnadolu Topragl 11 (The Land of Anatolia) is wri~ten in syllabic metre, al1 verses containing eleven syllables, with a 4+4+3 rhythm, with , '1 i the exception of verses 6 and 7 which both have a 6+5 rhythm and ver~e ! 19 which has a 4+3+4 rhythm. It consists of seven quatrains with a ,rhyme pattern of ABAB COCO.'.. MNMN. The original poe~ in the Appendix l' is from Orhon, GDnD1den, pp. 163-164. jl - , lOH1Z1r, in verse 16, refers ta a legendary p'erson who was repuJ:ed ta arrive and he1p in critical màments. ~ . . 11 This interpretation of desire ~s,~eing one for union is supported by the use of "ermek" in verse lq which impl ies the attain- ment of religious perfection. \ \ .' ) 12l1Hayat" (Life) is written in syllabic metre, a11 yerses o containing fourteen syllables with a 7+7 rhythm. Its rhyme:-is as follows: 1 'A J.., Refrain ( l A ( , . !)'-_:...... ~ ... ~ -;- i""'''- u, --.._-"-~\-'- __._ ...... -..~ .. ~ _____1-:_' _, _'___ ._ .. l' r \ 104 Refrain . ( B ,2. -, B Re'frain 0' <3 Refrain 1 Refrain 3 1 Refrâin l 1 .13I1Gurbet" (Exile), 1s -written 1n syllabic metre. All verses contain , fourteen syllables with â 7+7, rhythm., The poem contains twelve verses with a rhyme pattern of AABBCCDDEEAA, where the last verse is a ' repetition of the first. The original of this p~em can be foun~ Akyllz,' Batl, p. 687.' . c' • . ,- '._ ü 1 1i i 1 l' 1 j (, 1 CONCLUSION Thi s paper has studi ed one speci fi c area i nfl uenced by Gllka l p'S philosaphy of ideals. Yet,the para~lels between Gllkalp's influences , '. on li,terature and on the ideologi.cal principles of early Republican Turkey, most notably that of populism, are tao numerous to be over looked and deserve further study at sorne point. Briefly, however, the • more obvious parallels are as follows. Populism, as pointed out by Kemal Karpat, ~stab1ished the sovereignty of the people and the equality of al1. It attempted ta involve the people in the political process of the state, to broadan their sense of individual rights and authority and. through education, te adapt the individ.ual to the requirements and libe-rties a(forded by modérn life. Its goals were basically individualist and lïberal. Yet, . , f at the same time, it demanded from the individual "total identification ?\J wi th the na ti o'n and the renunci a ti on of persan.a 1 goa l s. 111 ' ! . The Be~ Hececiler, inspired by Ziya GOkalp, used the metres, verse 1 forms and langtlage of the people because they believe.d that'-culture~ . 1 existed on1y among the people. Yet, both in th~ir individualist and nationalist poetry,' they remained fundamentally alienated from the " , 1. people, ·limited ta praising the nation in a spirit of total individua1 " sacrifi ce. This ~lienation f-ram the people, both in the po1itical- and literary , spberes, was inevitable. It was not a factor of the way in which the doctrine or ideology was applied'but rather one of premises inherent in the ideol~gy itself whose contradictiohs were intensified upon'that application. This was due ta the adherencè. of Kemalist popu1ism,. on 'the one hand, and the National Literature movement, represented by the fe~ Hececi 1er, on the other, to the themes of the constant re-creation of society ;n the individual and consequent need for social homageneity, -. underlying Ziya GOkalp',s philosophy . • 105 ._._~-, ..-.".-. -, f ., ____------..-----.-. __ \ 106 !' l' The resolution of these contradictions, could only ~be e1Jected by a " 'rejection of these underlying inconsistencies and it was basically this aspect of GlJka lp' s philosophy tha t was repudiated bath in the pol itica l arena, with the development of opposition parties and the overwhe1ming sopport that they received, and in the area of poetry; as evidenced by , . the impact of the socia1-realism of Orhan, Veli Kanlk, Oktay Rifat and 1 Melih Cevdet Anday's New Movement established in 1941, the;r abandonment l' r> of conventional form, their use of free verse'and the rhythms and idioms of colloquial" speech, their rejection' of poetic and ideologically inspired stereotypes and 9mphasis on the common man. 1 The, degrer to which this New Movement was revoluti~nary is \ ~ e~idenced in 'their contrOversial democratization ,of poetry and their commitment to making the people's tastes reign supreme over art in theme as well as form, expressed in the following quotation from the introduction to their first volume of poel11s, Garip ~Strange). Squeezing certain theories into familiar ald molds cannpt be a new artistic thrust forward. We must alter the who1e structure fram the foundation Up. In order to rescue ourselves from the stifling , effects of the 1i te'ratures whi ch have di ctated and shaped our tas tes and judgements for too ~any years, \ we must dump overboard everyt-hing that .those ' it li teratures have taught us. We w; sh were , pQssible to dump even language itself. because ,1 • it th~eatens our creative ~fforts by forcing i.ts vo.cabulary on us when we write poetry.2 Yusuf Ziya Orta~ denounced Orhan Veli 's now famou$; poem,· "Kitabe-i -Sen'g-i Mezar' ri (Epitaph 1) which was publ ished in Garip, in the '"' • <> fOllowing tenns: ' . Meters are gone, rhymes are gone,. meanings are gone.'· They have been applaudi ng the li ne l ' l t 1 S a pi;ty , SUleyman Efendi had to die' as the :most beautiful line of Turkish poetry ... The ;ns~ne asylum and the flop-house 0t art are now jOined hand in hand •.. o Turkish Youth! 1 appeal ta you to spit in . the face of such shamefulness!3 And it is perhaps in the vi rulence of this denunciation that one can 1 find the most convincing evidence that the Garip manifesta, with its 1 1 rejection of the conventions" of theme and, ta a certain degree, lang~age, was a repudiation of the stulifying limitations experienced ( , l' • J07 by the_-earlter national poetic movemént, that it cQnstit~ted, ~n fact, a djstancing from the earlier relationship ·of pOetry and ideology. , - 1 •...,, , .. • 1 \ , , 1) , - , , \ , 7, '1 ! ' 1 ! - ' . , . 1 ! 1" 1 . '• .' ,,.1 \ , , ( ,- , J , 1 ..... - /.-... -.., '.-.. .. 1 T1 '------~, r- ~ .. ~illll['""'""~I,,i oP",,,,,,!,,, ..__ ., ... ~w .... \2 , . \ .... 108 r (.~ • " Notes 1Karpat., ' "Social Thèmes,," pp. 33-34. -2Kan~k,' Orhan Veli, l Am Listening to Îstanbul, trans. Talat Sait Halman' (rtew Y~rk: Corinth Books, 1971), p. xv. 'i; 1 3Ibid ., p. xix .. . 1 .. 1 1 " 1 1 1 1 . J i •• 1 \ , 1 ~'I •• , > , 1 , l ' t ., .. j i- . , (: ""',1 1 1 ,,' 1 '.,--__1 :fi_; ..~ .., , f . ., - , #0" BIBLlOGRAPHY "-.., , / Açem, M. ~Balhassari OgTou Nedj;b. IILa versification nati ___. IILa 1 ittérature,moderne de Turquie. 1I In Philoloyae Turcicae Fundamenta. Vo'l. 2. Ed. Louis Baz;n, Alessio Bombaci et al. , Wei s6aden: Franz Ste; ner, 1965, pp. 465-625. Anciaux, Robert. ilLe 'Réalisme Social' dans la littérature turque contemporaine. Il Correspondance d'Orient 19-20 (l972): 111-1751. Andrews, Walter G. Jr.. An Introduction ta Ottoman Poetry. Chicago: l' Bib1iotheca Islamica, 1976. '\ - ' Atatürk~ Mustafa Kemal. A Speech Del ivered-by Mustafa. Kemal Ata târk 1927\. '\ '>' IS'"tanbul: Ministry of Education Printihg Plant, 1963. ~Banar11, Nihad Saml. Faruk Nafiz, Hayatl, Seçme Siirleri. Istanbul: , SOhulet Kitabevi ve Semih Lûtfi Matbaasl Sahib;, n.d. __-:--' Metin1erle TQrk ve Batl Edebiyatl. Vol. 3. ,!stanbul: ,- Remz; Kitabevi, 1973. Batur, Sabahattin, ed: Yeni ~;irimiz. Istanbul: Varl"lk YaYlnevi, 1971. ' , ,Baydar, Mustafa. EdebiyatçllanmlZ ne diyorlar. Istanbul: Ahmet . Halit Ya~aro~'.u; 1960. ,~<- Behiç, Enis. Miras ve GQne~in Ô10mO. Ankara: Gane~ Matbaacl11k T.A.O., 1951. Berkes, ,Niyazi. The Deve10pment of Secularism in Turkey. Montreal: MèGill University Press, 1964. ---.;0--' ilL iterary Developments in ~1cJjern Turkey. 1\ University of Toronto Quarterl y 29 (1960): 2251:242, "50cio109Y in Ttlrkey. Il The American Journal of Socidlogy 42, no. 2 (1936): 238-246. ' __..,.,.-,' "The Two Facets of the K~ma 1; st Revo 1 ut'; on. 11 ,-"MU;;";;S-lO:lllti"'i ~-..:r...:.l..;;;..d ·64 n974): 292-306. . "The Turkish Novel: A Survey.1\ Bulletin of 'he Ihstitute of ( , ---::r"""slamic Stl,ldies nos. 2-3 (1958-59): 26-48. , ' .. 109 ~ • t .. ,. , ' , . r, J 110 Boratav, ~rtév Nail;., "La littérature des 'asiq.1I In Philolog;ae Turcicae Fundamenta. Vol. 2. Ed. louis Bazin, Alessio Bombaci et a 1• Wei sbaden: Franz Stei ner, 1965, pp. 129-146. __....,.,...,. IILa 1i ttérature popul aire turque contempora i né'. Il Turc; ca 5 (1975),: 47 .. 67. " . "La poésie folklorique. Il ·In Phi101ogiae Turcica'e Fundamenta. ---.....Vo.... l. 2. Ed.Louis Bazin, Alessjo Bombaci et al., Weisbaden: Franz Steiner, 1965, pp. 90-128. .. .. -----, Broshanan, Thomas. "Orhan Ve li Kam k and the Beg i nri; ngs of Modern Turkish Poetry." Humaniora Islamica 1 (1973):! 219-231. l ' Canip, Al i. TOrk Edebiyatl Antolojisi. istan~ul: O~vlet Matbaasl, 1934. Dumont, Paul. 'les orig-fnes de la 1ittérature. villageoise en Turquie." . Journal Asiatique 266 (1978): 67-95. Es, Hikmet Feridun. BugOn de Diyorlar Ki. fstanbu1: Remzi Kitaphanesi, 1932. ...J{) Fahri, Flndiko~lu Ziyaeddin. Ziya G~ka1p, sa vie et sa sociologie. Pari s : Editions Berger-levrault, 1936. Frey~ Frederick. "Educatlor in Turkey. Il In Political Modernizatjon in . Japan and Turkey. Ed;-Robert ·E. Ward and Dankwart A. Rustow. Princeton University Press, 1964. Gencan, Tah'ir Nejat. Di1bi1gisi. Ïstanbu1: Ahmet Sait Baslmevl, 1966. Gibb, E.J.W .. A History of Ottoman Poetry. Val. 1. London: Luzac and Ca.. 1900. . Ottoman li terature. The Poets and Poetry of Turkey. New --""'y""'ork: Theodore' P. Ion, , 901 . GOkalp, Ziya. The Principles of Turkism. Trans. Robert Devereux. Lei den: E. J. Br;", , 968. • __----,... Turkish Nationa1ism and Western Civilization, Selected Essays of Ziya Gokalp. Trans. and ~d. Niyazi Berkes. London:' George Allen and Unwin Ltd., 1959. \ GOksel. AH NCzhet. Ziya G~kalp, Hayatl! Sanatl, Eseri. Istanbul: .. , Var11 k VaYl nev;, 1952. Ha1man. Talat Sait. "Turkish literature: Mqdes of Modernity.1I Literature East and West 17 (1973): 3-10. Heyd, Uriel. Foundations of Turkish Nationa1ism, The Life and Teachings of Ziya Gl5ka1p. London: Luzac and Co. Ltd., 1950. ... , ' 111 ( ( . · language Reform in Modernv'Turkey. Jerusa-lem: The Israel --""O-ri enta 1 Sod ety , 1954. , ; . Kabakl,~ Ahmet. TOrk. EdebiYat,. Vols. 1, 3. îstanbul: Türkiye YaY"levi, 1965, 1966.: "'1 l ',/ Karal, Enver Ziya. Atatork'ten,Da~Onceler. Ankara: Turk'~h Kurumu Baslmevi, 1956. Karpat, Kema 1 H. "The Impact of the People 1 s' Houses on the Oevel opment of Conmunication in Turkéy - 1931-1951.') Die Welt des Islams 15 (1974): 69-84. , --4----=-. "Omer Seyfeddin and the Transfprmation of Turkish Thought." Revue des études sud - est européenes 10 (1972): 677-691. .. · "The People ' s Houses in Turk~y, Establishment and Growth." , -----'1M-r:'iddle East Journal 17 (1963): 55-67. ---;-;-r' "Social Themes in Contemporary Turkish Literature." -, Middle East Journal 14 (1960): 29-44, 153-168. c' .. · "The Transformation of the Ottoman State, 1789-1908." --'t-nt'ernat i ana 1 Je'urna 1 of Mi ddl e East Studi es 3 (1972): 243-.281. __~. Turkey,' s Pol ities, The Transition to a Multi -Party System. Pri nceton: Pri nceton Uni versHy Press, 1959.' • j Key, Kerim K. "Trends in Modern Turkish Literature." Mus1im Wor1d 47 '" (1957) : 318-328. 1 Kili, Suna: Kemalism. Istanbul: Mentes Matbaasl, 1969. f 1 KOpr01a, M. Fuad. "La·métrique larOz dans la poésie,turque." In ,Philo~og;ae Turcicae Fundamenta. Vol. 2. Ed. LGuis Bazin" Alessio Bombaci et al. Weisbaden: Franz Steiner; 1965,·pp. 252-'266. Kortepeter, Carl Max. IITurkish Language Reform: A Step in the Modernization of Islam in Turkey. Il M.A. Thesis't McGill UniversitYt 1954. ' Kudret t Cevdet. TOrk Edebiyatlndan Seçme Parçalar. Istanbul: ,InkiUp ve Aka Kitabevleri, 1973. , --i-l _. Ziya ~ka1p. Ankàra: Ankara Universitesi Baslmevi, 1963. Kura~, ErcOmend. "The Impact of Nationalism on the Tùrkish Elite in the i Nineteenth Century. In Beginnings Of Modernization in the Middle 'East. The Nineteenth Century. Eds. Willi.am R. Polk al1d Richard L. Chambers. Chicago: University of Cnicago Press, 1968, pp. 109-117. Kushner, David. " The Rise of Turkish Nationalism, 1876-1908. London: Frank Cass and Co., 1977. -. l 'f ~ , , t . t " . 1 112 ~ ·1 ,,.. 1 ( ! Lewis, Bernard. The Emergence of Modern Turkey. London: Oxford University Press, 1968. • . . "History-writing and National Revival in Turkey."· Middle ---"Er-astern Affairs 4 (1953): 218-227. . " Levend, Agâh Sl rn . "Language Reform in Turkey and its' Relevance ta < Other Areas. II Mus 1i m Wor 1d 45 (1955'): 53-60. . \ __-==' TOrk Di1inde Gelisme ve Sade1e~me Safhalan. Ankara: TOrk Tarih Kurumu Bas1mevi, 1949. '.' Melzig, Herbert, ed. AtatOrk Dedi Ki. Ankara: Samer Matbaasl, 1942. " 0, ---'e-' Thus Spoke Atatark: Hi s Sa.}'i ngs, Thoughts and Merinri es. Istanbul: Kenan Matbaasl; 1943. ' . Menemencio~lu, Nermin. "Modern Turkish Poetry." The Western Review 23 l, , (1959): ,199-223. i Meredith-Owens, G.. "'Arad. • In EnCYC10 9dia of Islam. V.pl, ,1. Ed. H.A.R. Glbb, J.H. Kramers et a.r Lelden: E.J. Bnll, 1960, pp. 667-677. ) . Mutluay, Rauf. 100 Soruda Çagda~ TOrk Edeblyatl 1908-1972. tsqtanbul : Gerçek Yaylnevi, n.~ Nimet. Anthologie des poetes turcs contemporains. Paris: . Gallimard , 1 1953. . 1 • v Nour; Riza. "les'formes et les noms de la poéSie turque. Il Revue' de ~ Turcologiel (193]): 11-65 . ~I . ,"La métrique basée sur la quantité (arouz)." Revue de --,~T~urcologie 1 (1931): 66-74. . "La métrique de la poésie populaire turque." ,Rev\le de --'r"'-urco 1ogi e 1 (1931): 74-8~. \ ... l ' ,1 . Orhon, Orhan Seyfi. GOnalden Sesler. Istanbul: 'Sebat Matbaas"1, 1934. Pool, Jonathon. "Developing the Soviet Turkic Tongues: The Language of the Poli,tics of Language. Il Slavic Review 35 (1976): 425-442. ~apolyo, Enver BW1nan. Ziya GOkalp. tstanbul: GOven Ba.s1mevi, .1~43. , . ,1 Saussey, Edmond, ed., trans. Prosateurs tu~s contemporains. Paris: E. De Boccard. 1935. c: Shaw, Stanrord J., and Ezel Kural Shaw. Reform, Revolution and Republic: vhe Rise of Modern Turkey, 1808-1975. Vol. 2 of History of the ( Ottoman Empfre and Modern Turkey. Cambri dge : Cambri dge Uni vers i ty Press. T977. , ,~: . .... ~ ...... - .. \ .... -- ~.~. !I.oo ...l." .... ~.,.._· ...... , " ...... - '- / 113 . - Spencer, Robert F. "Culture Process and· Intel1ectua1 Current: Durkheim !, c· and AtatOrk." American Anthropol agi st 60 (1958): 640-657. • r Stebleva, LV .. "De quelques particuliarités du vers turc. Il Turcica , 1 3 (1971): 117-127. Tachau, Frank. "The Search for Nation~l Identity Among the'-Turks," Oie Welt des Islams 8 (1962-63): 165-176. 'Tamer, Olkü. Var11k Siir1eri Antoloj;si, 1933-1966. ,Ïstanb4-1: Var11k Vay' nev;, 1966. Teveto~lu, Dr. Enis Behiî KoryUrek, Hayat, ve Eser1eri. Ankara: 4 GOne~ Matbaaçl1, kT.. O., 1951. ) Tietze, Andreas. "The Generation Rhythm in the Literature of Republican r Turkey. /1 Bogazici Un;versites;, Dergisi 2 (1974): 117-121. Toygar, Beh1U1 S. Fiftèen Turkish Poets. Ïstanbu1: Iskender Ma~b~asl, ~ 1969. ' OHen, Hilmi /;ya. Ziya Gi5ka1p. Ankara: Kanaat Kitabevi,' n.d. , " • r , Ve1i, Orhan. BUtOn ~iir1eri. Istanbul: Var11k YaYlnevi, ,g59. Webster, Donald E. The Turke* of Ataturk: Social Process in the TurkiS'h Reformatron. P iladelphia: The American Academy of Po1itical ami Soçial Science, 1939,~ . Vazar~ _r;t."Beh'çet. Edebiyatç,lanmlZ ve Tark Edebiyat1. Istanbul: ~anaat Ritabevi, 1938. . Yazba~,oglu, Muarrrner. Edebiyatlmlz. Istanbul: çeltOt Matbaa~,',k, / 1967. Zimova, Nada. "On the Character'and Ideas of the Kemalist Movement. 1I Arch{v Orient~ln1 45 (1977): 97-l05~ , 0 ., .. '. , \ 1 / o