Cultural Hybridity and the Quest for Belonging in Turkish-German Cinema
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY WHERE IS HOME? CULTURAL HYBRIDITY AND THE QUEST FOR BELONGING IN TURKISH-GERMAN CINEMA CHRISTINA LANGHANS A dissertation in fulfilment of the requirements of Anglia Ruskin University for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Submitted: 31 January 2017 I declare that this work is my own and that the material contained herein has not been substantially used in any other submission for an academic award. This work may (i) be made available for consultation within the University Library or (ii) be lent to other libraries for the purpose of consultation or (iii) may be photocopied for such purposes. Signed: Dated: Acknowledgements I wish to thank all the members of my family, who have supported me during every step of this doctoral thesis with their unconditional love, their strength, their words of wisdom, and their humour: my mother, my grandmother, my sister, my aunts, and Pitt. My heartfelt thanks also to my dearest friends Laura, Jürgen, Teresa, Hesham, and Tomas for their support. I want to also acknowledge my debt of gratitude to Christian and my GOEUROPE! Team: you made this possible. Last but certainly not least I thank my supervisors Prof. Guido Rings and Dr Nina Lübbren for their guidance and support. i TABLE OF CONTENTS Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………......(i) Table of Contents....................................................................................................(ii) Abstract...................................................................................................................(iv) Introduction…………………………………………………………………..……1 1. Cultural Hybridity and Home 1.1 Preliminary Remarks……………………………………………………….......11 1.2 From Monoculturality to Transculturality…………………………………...…12 1.3 Cultural Hybridity…………………………………………………………...….15 1.3.1 Cultural Hybridity in a Postcolonial Context………………………........16 1.3.2 Cultural Hybridity and Identity……………………………….…….........19 1.4 Home…………………………………………………………………………....22 1.4.1 Heimat…………………………………………………………………....23 1.4.2 Why Home?................................................................................................26 1.4.3 Home and Collective Memory………………………………………........30 1.4.4 Dimensions of Home………………………………………………...........32 1.5 Searching for a Home in a Cultural Hybrid Context…………………………....37 2. From Turkish-German Cinema to Thomas Arslan 2.1 Preliminary Remarks…………………………………………………………....43 2.2 Turkish-German Cinema………………………………………………………..46 2.3 Thomas Arslan – a Turkish-German Filmmaker………………………………..59 3. Home between the Worlds in Brothers and Sisters 3.1 Preliminary Remarks……………………………………………………………68 3.2 Longing for Belonging between the Worlds……………………………………71 3.2.1 Erol and Ahmed – Searching for Belonging in Two Dichotomic Worlds..73 3.2.2 Modernity versus Traditionalism………………………………………...85 3.3 Home in Brothers and Sisters…………………………………………………...89 ii 4. Dealer – Questions of Belonging 4.1 Preliminary Remarks…………………………………………………………...93 4.2 Can’s Search for Belonging…………………………………………………….96 4.2.1 Can, the Father: The Family as a Place of Belonging…………………104 4.2.2 The Stereotypical Criminal Can: The Other Place of Belonging……....108 4.3 Belonging and Home in Dealer………………………………………………..113 5. A Fine Day – A ‘Modern’ Migrant Story? 5.1 Preliminary Remarks……………………………………………………….....117 5.2 Hybrid Homes in A Fine Day…………………………………………………119 5.2.1 Deniz – a Character in-between Spaces………………………………..127 5.2.2 Diego and the Potential of Hybridity…………………………………...135 5.2.3 Meeting the Stereotypical Other………………………………………..138 5.3 Home in A Fine Day…………………………………………………………..142 6. Vacation – The Heimat Idyll? 6.1 Preliminary Remarks…………………………………………………………..146 6.2 Deconstructing the German Heimat…………………………………………...149 6.2.1 The German Ideal Heimat………………………………………………154 6.2.2 Family as Home?......................................................................................162 6.2.3 Home as a Habit?.....................................................................................165 6.2.4 Love as Anchor of Belonging?.................................................................168 6.3 Home as Utopia – Utopia as Home?..................................................................172 Conclusion………………………………………………………………………...175 Filmography………………………………………………………………………183 Bibliography………………………………………………………………………188 iii ANGLIA RUSKIN UNIVERSITY FACULTY OF ARTS, LAW AND SOCIAL SCIENCES ABSTRACT WHERE IS HOME? CULTURAL HYBRIDITY AND THE QUEST FOR BELONGING IN TURKISH-GERMAN CINEMA CHRISTINA LANGHANS 31 January 2017 This study examines the cinematic portrayal of the interrelationship between the concepts of home and cultural hybridity within contemporary processes of migration in Thomas Arslan’s Brothers and Sisters (1997), Dealer (1999), A Fine Day (2001) and Ferien (2007) as prime examples of Turkish-German cinema. It argues that cultural hybridity offers the potential to construct new spaces of home apart from demarcating, essentialist polarities. While integrating critical discourse analysis and literary analysis of post-colonial (Said, 1978; Bhabha, 1994), transcultural (Welsch, 1999, 2010; Antor, 2010, Werbner, 2015), sociological (Castells, 1997; Gellner, 2006), and film theories (Deleuze, 1986; Elsaesser, 1999; 2015; Hickethier, 2001), this study consists of two stages. Firstly, it explores concepts of culture, cultural hybridity, home, and collective memory in order to provide a theoretical and conceptual framework for the film analysis and, subsequently, it contextualises Arslan’s oeuvre through the analysis of Turkish-German cinema. Finally, it explores the cinematic techniques used in four consecutive films by Arslan in order to examine the interdependence between these apparent antipodes: home and cultural hybridity. My study demonstrates that the concept of home in a cultural hybrid context must be re-evaluated.The rigid understanding that the concept of home feeds on exclusionary polarities can no longer withstand in today’s society that is marked by ever-increasing boundary-crossings and cultural hybridity. At a time in which increased migratory streams to Europe coincide with the flourishing of nationalistic movements throughout Europe it is essential to recognise the processual and transformative qualities of culture and home that questions habitual constants, such as cultural identity and memory, and refutes primordial givens and cultural categorising in order to pave the way to new spaces of home. Key words: cultural hybridity, home, belonging, collective memory, Turkish-German cinema, Thomas Arslan iv WHERE IS HOME? CULTURAL HYBRIDITY AND THE QUEST FOR BELONGING IN TURKISH-GERMAN CINEMA INTRODUCTION ‘There’s no place like home…’ Dorothy’s words in the Wizard of Oz entail a longing for home, a promise to herself that she will find her home someday and the implicit emotional significance that the word home conveys. Her words suggest that her understanding of the concept of home is unambiguous and connected to a specific place. Due to its associative nature, home has a myriad of individual meanings and expressions. It is an abstract concept that implies subjective associations and is tied to the need for stability. Today, however, flexibility and mobility have become dogmas, whether based on a necessity for life, a search for better living conditions, or lifestyle choices. The progressing process of globalisation1 and increased mobility challenge the spatiality of home and increase the necessity for a re-evaluation of the concept. Migration, whether forced or voluntary, involves leaving familiar surroundings to begin a new life in a less familiar, often foreign environment, city, country, and culture. Thus, migrants and their offspring especially face the consequences of dis- embedding and dislocalisation2 as they are forced to create a home in a foreign country and deal with their estrangement from and the physical distance to their home country. Although migration and mobility have always been a part of human history, the number of migrant workers, refugees3, exiles, and people who emigrate to find a better life and better living conditions has increased, especially in the recent years (see for example Bhabha, 1994; Papastergiadis, 2000; Kraidy, 2008; Castles, de Haas and Miller, 2014). In fact, we live in an era in which increased migratory streams (mostly forced) to Europe coincide with the flourishing of nationalistic movements throughout Europe4. Global societies and borders are rebuilt and reinforced, xenophobia gains legitimation through self-protection, and the notion of home is increasingly used as an 1 Globalisation is understood as process, not a final condition and therefore I follow Jürgen Habermas’ definition of the concept (2001), who claims that globalisation ‘characterizes the increasing scope and intensity of commercial, communicative, and exchange relationsbeyond national borders’ (Habermas, 2001, p.67). 2 With the term dislocalisation, I refer to both the physical and the mental aspect of mobility. 3 According to UNHCR, ‘Global forced displacement has increased in 2015, with record-high numbers. By the end of the year, 65.3 million individuals were forcibly displaced worldwide as a result of persecution, conflict, generalized violence, or human rights violations. This is 5.8 million more than the previous year (59.5 million)’ (UNHCR, 2016) 4 In Germany, the right-wing populist party Alternative for Germany (AFD) has had election success one after the other starting from 2015. Marine Le Pen and Front National