Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Turkish Cinema's Resurgence: The 'Deep Nation' Unravels

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Turkish Cinema's Resurgence: The 'Deep Nation' Unravels

    Turkish Cinema's Resurgence:
    The 'Deep Nation' Unravels

    Senses of Cinema
    Issue #39
    April-June, 2006
    by Catherine Simpson
    Catherine Simpson is a lecturer in the Media Department at Macquarie
    University, Sydney.

    "Istanbul is one of the coolest cities in the world", proclaimed the cover
    story of Newsweek's European edition in August 2005. The Istanbul Biennale
    (September-October 2005) was evidence of this dynamic, growing metropolis'
    emerging artistic self-confidence, and the embrace of its unique and
    fortuitous position at the juncture of many cultures. With Turkish films
    taking 38 percent and 60 percent of their domestic box office in 2004 and
    2005 respectively, the following essay is an attempt to outline some recent
    filmmaking trends, as well as situate the current cinematic resurgence
    within the broader social, political and cultural landscape.

    I will start out by focusing on the importance of Istanbul, Turkey's
    largest city; the cultural and artistic heart of the country that is giving
    voice to this renaissance. Unlike most countries' filmmaking cultures,
    which in recent years have suffered from the opening up of their economies
    and cultures to the so-called global free market, I argue that the opposite
    seems to be happening in Turkey. This is occurring in parallel with
    alternative voices providing a counter to Turkey's "hackneyed nationalist
    discourses" (1). In the past, those aspects deemed both antithetical and a
    threat to the integrity of the Turkish nation-state - free artistic
    expression of cultural and ethnic diversity, a developing transnationalism
    and a public re-imagining of (traumatic) historical events, combined with an
    open, dynamic media sector - now constitute the primary strengths of
    filmmaking in Turkey.

    Turkey's artistic renaissance and emergence on the broader European
    cultural stage has been acknowledged through numerous prestigious awards won
    in recent years. In 2003, Nuri Bilge Ceylan won the Golden Palm Award for
    his film Uzak (Distant, 2002). In that same year, Turkey (Sertab Erener) won
    the Eurovision Song Contest and, in 2004, Orhan Pamuk's novel, My Name is
    Red, received great critical acclaim after winning the one of the world's
    richest literature awards: Ireland's IMPAC Dublin award. Meanwhile
    high-profile director Fatih Akin, who often exploits his Turkish migrant
    background and Istanbul as a setting in his films, became the first German
    director in 20 years to win the Berlin Film Festival in 2004 with his film,
    Gegen die Wand (Head-On, 2004). Head-On has recently gone on to win the 2006
    Best Foreign Language Film award at the National Society of Film Critics in
    the United States. While this film is transnational in setting, moving
    between Hamburg and Istanbul, in terms of funding and origin there is no
    doubt it is German. However, through the exposure that Head-On, and his
    latest documentary, Crossing the Bridge: The Sound of Istanbul (2005), have
    received, Akin has evidently put Istanbul on the celluloid map. (2)

    Crossing the Bridge: the Sound of Istanbul is a metaphor for a city in the
    throes of re-imagining its destiny and identity. The film is a journey
    through Istanbul's rich musical traditions and powerfully evokes the raw
    energy, cultural dynamism and pluralism at the city's very heart. Istanbul
    is a rich sonic landscape, and this film revels in the musical (and
    political) possibilities that cultural fusion can produce. The narrator of
    the film is German musician Alexander Hacke, who discovers Istanbul's
    grunge (Duman) and hip-hop scenes (Ceza), Arabesque (Orhan Gencebey) and
    Romany music (Selim Sesler), a Sufi fusion band (Mercan Dede), Kurdish music
    (Aynur Dogan), Electronica (Baba Zula) and traditional wedding music (The
    Wedding Sound System), as well as covers of Western pop with Arabesque
    inflection (Sertab Erener). If Walther Ruttman's Berlin: Symphony of a City
    (1927) became the filmic expression of Berlin's cultural renaissance in the
    1920s, then I suspect that in future we may regard Crossing the Bridge: the
    Sound of Istanbul in a similar vein to how we now perceive Ruttman's film.
    However unlike Ruttman's film, which is often accused of being apolitical,
    Akin's film, through the voices of its interviewees, delivers a sharp
    political critique of Turkey's existing social and ethnic disparities.

    In a telling attempt to defy categorisation, Crossing the Bridge features
    the band Baba Zula playing its music on a fishing boat on the Bosporus -
    the historically strategic body of water which runs through the city and
    separates the European continent from Asia - because they believe their
    music transcends the categories of East and West. "I don't believe that
    Asia begins at the Bosphorus and ends in China and the West begins in Greece
    and stretches to Los Angeles." (3) Even the difference between the English
    and Turkish titles of this film displays acknowledgement of the way that
    films move through cultures in different ways. The English title of the film
    reflects Turkey's political/cultural/geographical position at the
    crossroads at this precise moment. While there is a literal bridge to be
    'crossed' by Hacke in Crossing the Bridge - the one that straddles the
    Bosphorus - on the eve of Turkey's accession talks to the European Union,
    Akin seems to be inviting western audiences, particularly Europeans, if they
    can 'cross the bridge'. In other words, embrace the huge gulf that has
    developed between the 'Occident' and the 'Orient', between Christianity
    and Islam, and ideologically embrace Turkey's difference as part of Europe?
    (In fact, Istanbul's hybrid identity is constituted through being on a
    'bridge' that produces a perpetual state of 'crossing'.) Interestingly,
    Akin's film was released in Turkey under quite a different title: Istanbul
    Hatirasi, literally meaning "Memories of Istanbul". This is also the title
    of the final haunting song of the documentary sung by Turkey's most famous
    female performer, Sezen Aksu, whose voice evokes an Istanbul laden with
    melancholy. The title and song conjure up a notion central to Turkish
    culture: huzun, which is best described as a kind of "collective
    melancholy". In his latest novel, Istanbul: Memories of a City (2005),
    Orhan Pamuk deals extensively with this concept and relates the huzun
    associated with the break-up of the Ottoman empire and modern-day
    Istanbul's mourning for the loss of its complex multicultural,
    multi-confessional and multi-linguistic identities that constituted this
    19th century Ottoman city, and of course previously. There's a sense that
    Akin is reminding his Turkish viewers of the loss of this pluralism that was
    silenced, repressed and disavowed for much of the 20th century, while at the
    same time acknowledging and celebrating optimism about the newfound cultural
    identities developing in this city. As one musician the film sings, "We're
    both ashamed and joyful ... These flowers have to see sunlight again." (4)

    It was only a decade ago that Turkey was perceived as just a poor neighbour
    to Europe, burdened by its imperial history, desperate to modernise and
    westernise, but plagued by irrevocable economic woes and political
    instability. This was coupled with an immense fear of its own internal
    cultural diversity, which it has often dealt with through oppressive
    measures, as well as maintaining a belligerent attitude towards the numerous
    countries it borders. In their study of Turkey's particular brand of
    authoritarian nationalism, Asu Aksoy and Kevin Robins adapt the Turkish term
    derin devlet (literally meaning "deep state'"). In the Turkish
    vernacular, derin devlet has come to refer simply to "the corrupt and
    repressive state implicated in mafia business and authoritarian politics"
    (5). However, Aksoy and Robins' usage encompasses Turkey's broader
    socio-cultural and political milieu of which corruption and repression is a
    fundamental part. They employ the term "deep nation" to describe the most
    fundamental or primordial aspect of belonging in a group, grounded in what
    Freud identified as:

    the mythological scene of the murder of the father, which provides the sons
    with a reserve of shared guilt that henceforth ties them to a communal
    'law'. The truth of this Freudian myth resides in the idea of a 'shock of
    origination' - a shock that is never 'really past' - an act of symbolic
    violence through which the group comes to have the experience of existing
    together [...] the 'deep nation' [...] provides the grounding for what is
    imagined as the ontological nation [...] that informs its act of imaginary
    closure. (6)

    In Turkey's case, this "shock of origination" came after the break-up of
    the Ottoman Empire, with the expedited formation of the Kemalist
    nation-state in the 1920s, and the process since that time which has worked
    against expressing cultural diversity and towards the normalisation of
    cultural homogeneity.

    When Mustafa Kemal Ataturk founded the modern Turkish Republic in 1923, he
    instituted a number of radical reforms which included the removal of Islamic
    practices from public life and the creation of a secular state; the
    introduction of the Latin alphabet; a program of westernisation that sought
    to both eradicate Arabic and Persian influences and suppress the empire's
    multicultural identity; and strict censorship regulations that lasted from
    1939 until 1986. (7) Aksoy and Robins argue that the important elements for
    understanding what binds a group together through this idea of "deep
    nation" are the valorisation of the national ideal (which in Turkey's case
    meant espousing to be western, secular and modern) through "the killing off
    the imperial past" that was deemed backward and corrupt, along with "the
    erasure of the multicultural legacy of the Ottoman Empire" (8). The
    repression and disavowal of difference through silence about particular
    traumatic events in the nation's history was also central to this process.
    They argue that adhering to these things are conditions for the membership
    of the nation, along with the denial of the possibility for change. However,
    the story of Turkish cinema, they maintain, "can be told in terms of the
    progressive disordering of the ideal of the Kemalist nation, which may be
    regarded as a productive disordering" (9). Now, more than ever, there are
    many indications that the "deep nation" is unravelling and, rather than
    just gazing whimsically westwards towards a better future and disavowing
    pluralism and change, Turkey is beginning to look all around and within it,
    and redeploying the narratives from its rich cultural and artistic heritage
    to further broader economic, political and social aims.
    European Union and creating space for a cacophony of voices

    The most recent political watershed for Turkey's (potential) identity came
    in October 2005, when, despite public opposition in many European countries,
    Turkey finally began accession talks with the European Union. (10) While
    Turkey was acknowledged as an associate member of the EU back in 1963, the
    long road to attaining full membership status will possibly take a further
    10-15 years. But before it becomes a full member, there are many issues to
    be resolved, such as the recognition of Greek Cyprus, the Kurdish conflict,
    Turkey's relationship with Greece and its human rights record. If it does
    achieve full membership, it will be the first Muslim country, as well as
    Europe's largest. It is currently the poorest country in Europe. But the
    benefits to the European Union of Turkey's membership are numerous, such as
    its geo-strategic significance in countering Islamic fundamentalism; the gas
    supplies that run through it and its central Asian neighbours; the
    demographic advantages of a much younger population to support Europe's
    ageing one; the dynamic economy which grew 9 percent last year; and securing
    Europe's eastern borders against drugs and people trafficking. (11) Some
    commentators have even suggested that Europe now needs Turkey much more than
    Turkey needs the EU.

    The prospect of a more vast European space encompassing Turkey has been one
    motivating factor for some remarkable socio-political improvements. These
    changes, which include loosening the control of the military over the state,
    the recognition of Kurdish civil rights and language, coupled with the
    softening of political censorship, have inspired, or at least enabled, a
    multitude of cultural products which now dare to engage openly with
    sensitive cultural and political issues. (12) For example, the Best Turkish
    Film from 2004's Antalya Golden Orange Film Festival was Ugur Yucel's Yazi
    Tura (Toss Up, 2004). (13) This film overtly criticises the wounds that
    compulsory military service and civil unrest in the South-East
    (Kurdish-dominated) region have wrought upon a generation of young
    Turk's/Kurd's futures. In an interview that I conducted in Istanbul in
    September 2005, Yucel stated that, even five years ago, this film could not
    have been made. The change is so stark, he said, that even the military
    liked the script after reading it. However, Toss Up is not the first film to
    broach the topic of Kurdish conflict. Yesim Ustaoglu's Gunese yolculuk
    (Journey to the Sun, 1999) is probably the most highly acclaimed film
    internationally since Yol (Serif Goren and Yilmaz Guney, 1982) to engage
    directly with state oppression of the Kurds. (14) Journey's lyrical and
    sensitive depiction of a friendship between a Kurd and a Turk, and the
    former's death at the hands of police, won it many awards throughout
    Europe. Given its topicality, this film and its director have attracted
    considerable Anglophone critical writing. (15) Since this film, other
    notable ones have engaged with Kurdish cultural repression, such as Handan
    Ipekci's Buyuk adam kucuk ask (Big Man, Little Love, aka Hejar, 2001),
    which received the Best Film award at the 2003 Antalya Golden Orange Film
    Festival. However, after the screening, it received a six-month ban in
    Turkey from the same Ministry which partly funded it, because of its
    representation of the constabulary. The film depicts a Kurdish girl's
    relationship with a retired judge, when he takes her in after her guardian
    is killed in a police raid on her home, and their attempts at communicating
    despite not sharing a common language. (16)

    Greek-Turkish relations are also being addressed in other politically
    ambitious, personal films that not so long ago would have been taboo, such
    as Dervis Zaim's Camur (Mud, 2003) and Yesim Ustaoglu's Bulutlari
    Beklerken (Waiting for the Clouds, 2004). In Camur, Cypriot-born Dervis
    explores the lives of four friends residing in contemporary divided Cyprus
    and the ways in which their involvement in the violent 1974 conflict
    continues to haunt them, and their efforts to reach out to their Greek
    neighbours on the other side of the divided island. Through a series of
    interviews, Zaim's documentary, Paralel Yolculuklar (Parallel Trips, 2004),
    a co-production with Greek director Panicos Chrysanthou, also explores
    Turkish and Greek Cypriot experiences.

    The expulsion of Greek families from the Black Sea region during and after
    World War II provides the background to Ustaoglu's poetic tale, Waiting for
    the Clouds, which concerns the friendship between an old woman and a young
    boy. Ayse (Ruchan Caliskur), aka Eleni, represses her Greek identity when
    rescued by a Turkish family during the Long March to Greece. Apart from her
    brother, the rest of her family perishes in the harsh conditions. The film
    begins with the death of Ayse's Turkish adopted sister in the twilight of
    their lives, provoking a reliving of earlier traumas. The re-exposure of her
    Greek identity forces her to go to Athens in search her only remaining
    blood-relative: her brother. Tragically, he does not want to know her;
    despite her Greek heritage, she is very much a foreigner in modern-day
    Greece. (17)

    While there are still many old wounds to heal and, of course, the issue of a
    divided Cyprus looms large on the political horizon, many recent films and
    documentaries (from both sides) demonstrate a public willingness to
    re-imagine and acknowledge of the complex intertwining of Greek-Turkish
    histories, identities and destinies. (18) Ugur Yucel states that one of the
    turning points in Greek-Turkish relations was the 1999 Marmara Earthquake,
    which devastated Turkey's Marmara region on the outskirts of Istanbul and
    left 30,000 people dead. The Greeks were the first to come to Turkey's aid.
    Yucel uses footage from this earthquake and the Greek response to great
    dramatic effect in the second story of his film, Yazi Tura. Following his
    harrowing military service, Hayalet Cevher (Kenan Imirzalioglu) attempts to
    recover his life by opening up a kebab shop on the outskirts of Istanbul.
    When the Marmara earthquake strikes, his shop is destroyed and his father
    critically injured. On hearing the news, Cevher's estranged Greek mother
    returns from Athens with her adult son. Unfortunately, the final scenes
    dissolve into hyper-melodrama, with the narrative realised in terms of a
    battle of masculinities as the 'macho' Turk fights it out with, but then
    comes to accept, his effeminate, gay, Greek half-brother.

    It is not only arthouse cinema exploiting this abundant storytelling
    material. On the more commercial front, a Turkish soap opera, Yabanci Damat
    (Foreign Son-in-Law, currently in its second series), which has been a
    runaway success in Greece, concerns a Greek guy falling in love with a
    Turkish woman. While rightwing ultra-nationalist groups have attempted to
    have it banned in Greece, the story evidently appeals to something deeply
    embedded in both cultures about their coupled desires and destinies. On the
    Turkish front, while it seems that recognition of minority groups rights is
    far more paramount than it once was, it's also evident that deconstructing
    the legacy of "deep nation" still has some way to go, because author Orhan
    Pamuk is facing trial in Turkey after his comments questioning the fate of
    Armenians at the end of the Ottoman empire. And, in October 2005, a Turkish
    court arrested the president of Van University, a man publicly known to have
    waged a war against radical Islam on his campus and who is at odds with
    Prime Minister Tayyip Erdogan's government. (19)

    While receiving critical acclaim at film festivals locally and abroad, and
    having respectable arthouse followings, none of these, loosely termed,
    'arthouse' films mentioned above, including Ceylan's Uzak, have captured
    the broader public's imagination domestically. In the remaining part of
    this paper, I will focus on the resurgence in popular cinema and some of the
    reasons for this.
    New Popular Cinema and its Yesilcam Roots

    With only 20-25 films mad annually since the late 1990s, most critics and
    filmmakers hesitate to call filmmaking in Turkey an 'industry' as such,
    but rather a loose collection of auteur directors telling their own personal
    stories. However, these critics and filmmakers are making comparisons with
    the time in which Turkey had an identifiable, and in some ways unique, film
    industry. In the 1950s, '60s and early '70s, Istanbul was home to the
    prolific Yesilcam, the popular feature film industry which, at its height in
    1968-74, pumped out 250-300 films per year, making it the third largest film
    industry in the world. (20) Yesilcam (literally "green pine") denotes a
    particular system of production-distribution-exhibition and takes its name
    from a street in the area of Beyoglu, Istanbul, where most of the production
    houses were located. (21) (During the darker days of the film industry in
    the '80s and early '90s, this area of Beyoglu became full of local
    soft-porn theatres. It is thriving once again as the cultural heart of
    Istanbul, with many production and distribution houses, along with cinemas,
    once again residing here.) Turkish film expert Nezih Erdogan has frequently
    noted that Yesilcam's distinctiveness can be characterised by its
    'plagiarism' of Hollywood cinema, or, to use his evocative phrase,
    "mimicry beyond innocent inspiration" (22). A dominant strand of Yesilcam
    cinema involved remakes or copies of Hollywood films produced in just a few
    days on meagre budgets and, of course, without Hollywood's technical
    sophistication.
    Eskiya

    Many Turkish film theorists (Erdogan, Suner, Gokturk) have commented on the
    enduring legacy and influence of Yesilcam that can often still be seen in
    contemporary filmmaking. Following the popular success of Yavuz Turgul's
    Eskiya (The Bandit) in 1996, which many say signalled the recent Turkish
    film revival, there has been a number of break-out film successes which in
    the past few years have regularly out-performed Hollywood at the box office,
    which I will discuss below. These commercial films often combine high
    production values with an ironic handling of Yesilcam themes (revenge,
    unrequited love, betrayal, city versus country) and character types
    (fish-out-of-water anti-heroes, gangsters, innocent-but-lovable villagers).
    Director Yavuz Turgul is often described as creating a bridge between the
    old directors from the Yesilcam days and the new generation of filmmakers.
    His Eskiya depicts a Kurdish outlaw emerging from decades in gaol and
    journeying to Istanbul to seek revenge on the man who betrayed him and stole
    his childhood sweetheart. In terms of narrative, themes and
    characterisation, Eskiya is heavily influenced by Yesilcam. However, it also
    breaks away from the technical lack often associated with this earlier
    period of Turkish cinema. Along with its high production values and
    sophisticated editing techniques never before harnessed in Turkish cinema,
    Eskiya was also the first Turkish production to use synchronous sound
    recording. Dubbing during post-production was a salient feature of the
    budgetary-challenged Yesilcam days and filmmaking in Turkey right up until
    the early '90s. (23)

    Yesilcam's demise is often accounted for by the coming of television to
    Turkey (rather belatedly in 1968 to urban areas and in 1974 in rural areas),
    the increasing production costs resulting from the transition to colour,
    combined with the political turmoil of the 1970s and 80s and severe economic
    crises. (24) The oppressive regime post the 1980 military coup also meant
    that Yesilcam was estranged from its seminal audience: families attending
    the local public open-air cinemas that once littered the country during the
    Yesilcam days. Indicative of a contemporary revaluing of Turkey's popular
    cinema history, posters from old Yesilcam film classics have now become
    collector's items and often sell for more than US$100 in backstreet stores
    in the historic cultural area of Beyoglu, a strange twist of fate as, not
    all that long ago, the term "like a Turkish film" used to be classified as
    an insult, synonymous with banality, excessive melodrama and bad taste! (25)

    Other more recent films that have evidently captured the public's
    imagination, including Yilmaz Erdogan's Vizontele (2000) and Vizontele
    Tuuba (2003), Turkey's second-biggest box-office success of all time with
    3.5 million viewers, have contemporary political and social resonance while
    still effectively managing to maintain a light comic and nostalgic tone.
    Vizontele Tuuba is a sequel to Erdogan's first success, Vizontele,
    co-directed with Omer Faruk Sorak. Before Vizontele, Erdogan was a famous
    thespian and writer, and this was his first foray into film. Vizontele
    comically heralds the coming of television - or "vision-tele", as the
    awe-inspired villagers dub it - to a remote Antalolian village, while
    lamenting the demise of the open-air cinemas, against the backdrop of
    Turkey's invasion of Cyprus.

    Vizontele Tuuba takes place in September 1980 - the year of Turkey's third
    military coup - in the same Anatolian village. Guner (Tarik Akan), a senior
    bureaucrat with socialist leanings, is exiled as a 'librarian' to a remote
    Anatolian village whose library is, notably, non-existent. The story
    revolves around the budding romance between the hilarious, idiosyncratic
    local 'fix-it' man of the village (played by the director, Yilmaz Erdogan)
    and the librarian's odd but beautiful wheelchair-bound daughter. Despite
    most of the village inhabitants being illiterate, Guner manages to construct
    a library and obtain some books to start teaching the locals how to read.
    However, as the final voice-over reveals, his efforts remain unrewarded by
    the local authorities and, not long after, the 1980 military coup takes
    place. Guner, along with most of the town's men with 'suspicious'
    political leanings (i.e., read socialist or leftist), are rounded up and
    taken away to gaol, some never to return. Vizontele Tuuba's strong finale
    is further emphasised by the fact that this violent period of Turkish
    history is in recent memory for most Turks.

    Eskiya, Vizontele and Vizontele Tuuba have been described by Asuman Suner as
    "popular nostalgia films" which yearn for the period prior to the
    neo-liberalisation and rapid transformation of Turkish society during the
    '80s and '90s, where "provincial small-town life, religious and folkloric
    traditions [are] reinvented as sites of collective fantasy and desire"
    (26). Suner critiques these films as regressive because, rather than present
    an authentic sense of home as myth, they focus on situations where 'home'
    is somehow threatened from the outside by an external force - the
    construction of a dam in The Bandit, the introduction of television
    broadcasting to a remote town and the televising of Turkey's invasion of
    Cyprus in Vizontele, or the looming 1980 military coup in the case of
    Vizontele Tuuba - and they "end up rescuing an imaginary sense of home as
    a site of integrity and virtue" (27). While there is no doubt that all
    these films have a nostalgic yearning about them, what I'd argue is that
    that part of their popularity resides in the fact that they enable the
    discourse of "deep nation" and the silence surrounding violent political
    events to be interrogated and articulated, even if it is only on a
    relatively superficial level. The cinematic public re-imagining of these
    traumatic events is not presented in an overt or didactic manner, thus
    enabling audiences to embrace the films as they evidently have done. It is
    also important to recognise that these two films are, in the first instance,
    comedies and, through their excessive costuming and caricatures, offer their
    audience pleasure through fond recognition.

    One recent success that evidently makes a distinct break from Suner's
    "nostalgic cinema" is the science-fiction parody, G.O.R.A. (2004),
    brainchild of Cem Yilmaz and directed by Omer Faruk Sorak. G.O.R.A. achieved
    an all-time box-office record in Turkey of more than 4 million viewers
    (US$18.3m) and its visual sophistication betrays Sorak's training as a
    director of photography and his 15 years spent as a television, commercials
    and video-clip producer. (28) A clever comedy full of eclectic cultural
    references, the film also stars its writer, popular stand-up comedian Cem
    Yilmaz. G.O.R.A. is about a carpet seller, Arif (Yilmaz), who is abducted by
    aliens and taken to the planet of GORA, where he falls in love with a local
    Goran and takes her back to earth. Not only does it parody Hollywood sci-fi
    movies such as Star Wars (George Lucas, 1977) and The Matrix trilogy (Andy
    and Larry Wachowski, 1999 and 2003), but it also retains a strong local
    flavour as there were a few sci-fi attempts during the ultra low-budget
    Yesilcam days. Possibly the most infamous is Dunyayi kutaran adam (The Man
    Who Saved the World, Cetin Inanc, 1982) that has become an international
    cult hit as the worst film ever made. In Nezih Erdogan's excellent analysis
    of the hybridity and mimicry of this film, produced during Yesilcam's dying
    days, he argues that, with its intercutting of excerpts and music from Star
    Wars, it became old Yesilcam's 'last stand', struggling to compete with
    Hollywood's emerging dominance and technical sophistication. (29) While The
    Man Who Saved the World can be regarded as a failed parody, G.O.R.A., on the
    other hand, has most certainly beaten Hollywood at its own game. At various
    points, it also satirises, to great comic effect, Turkey's political,
    cultural and economic weakness in the face of European and US domination.
    One hilarious scene involves a local Goran security guard who, after being
    offered a US100 dollar bill, literally devours it. When the puzzled Arif
    asks why, he replies that American money is not worth anything on planet
    Gora, they only take Turkish lira. (Up until the past few years, inflation
    in Turkey was annually running at around 80 percent, making it virtually
    worthless against currencies such as the euro and the US dollar.) (30)

    Rather than just exceptions to the rule, the success of these three
    mentioned features seems to signal some broader cinematic trends. In 2004,
    while producing only 19 features, Turkey received a 38 percent market share
    of their local box-office takings. (31) And, in the first quarter of 2005,
    Turkish films took a whopping 60 percent of the box, a far greater
    proportion than any other country in Europe. Most of these 'big-budget'
    popular films are made for between US$500,000 and US$2.5 million, with
    G.O.R.A. being an exception as the most expensive and technologically
    sophisticated film to date, at a cost of $US5m. (32)

    Another fascinating trend worth touching on here, given its relevance to the
    "deep nation" argument, is the critical and commercial success of a number
    of locally funded documentaries. Released on Zafer Bayram (Victory Day,
    celebrating the defeat of the allies at Gallipoli in World War I), on 18
    March 2005, Tolga Ornek's documentary, Gallipoli, became the highest-ever
    grossing documentary in Turkey's history. It retained its position at
    number one at the box office for five consecutive weeks, with audience
    numbers of 700,000. Before that, Ornek's Hittites (2003) held the record
    with 70,000 admissions. According to Ornek, Gallipoli is currently the
    fourth most-watched film of 2005. In an interview I conducted in Sydney in
    November 2005, Ornek protests against the "Turkishness" of this film and
    pronounces its transnational qualities: "It could equally be a New Zealand
    or Australian or British film", he claims. "The only Turkish thing about
    it is the fact that its director is Turkish." What fascinates me about this
    film is the way it problematises constructions of nationhood. For an
    Australian viewer, Ornek's film inevitably invites comparison with Peter
    Weir's extraordinary anti-war film, Gallipoli (1982), which, through its
    themes of mateship and its prevailing anti-British sentiment, constructs a
    particular type of Australian cultural nationalism. The Gallipoli battle is
    also extremely important in Turkish nation-building and mythmaking as it is
    the battle where Mustafa Kemal made his mark as an outstanding commander.
    Kemal then, of course, went on to establish the modern Turkish nation-state
    and the Ataturk legacy. Instead, Ornek downplays these nationalistic
    elements and, through his focus on a number of different soldiers'
    experiences of the same battle, he deconstructs the prevailing Kemalist
    discourses of 'deep nation'. This film's popularity is evidence of
    Turkish audience's thirst for more complex portrayals of historical events.
    Ornek's film puts a human face on the war and explores a number of
    individual's existential plights in the face of what were extremely brutal
    and barbaric conditions that the soldiers from both sides were forced to
    endure. In the process, the film also deconstructs a number of myths about
    such things as the friendship between the Turks and Australians, which he
    emphasises was not a friendship as such but rather a "mutual respect for
    the enemy". And, of course, the other dominant myth concerns British
    treatment of Australian soldiers, which is so often taken out of proportion
    in an attempt to suit prevailing anti-British discourses in Australia at the
    time Weir's film was released, in an attempt to establish a particular kind
    of national identity.
    Broader Media Sector, Film Investment and Film Culture

    After a hiatus of some 20 years, audiences are finally being drawn back to
    the cinemas. Mehmet Soyaslen, the head of one of Turkey's biggest
    distributors, Ozen Films (distributors of Fox product in Turkey), has said
    that foreign product is now feeling the competition from local films. (33)
    Initially, the new wave of local hits led to an overall increase in cinema
    ticket admissions. However, in the first part of 2005, admissions did not
    increase at all and the local films were eating into the market for foreign
    films. Local film critic Atilla Dorsay does not think the kinds of
    box-office figures seen in 2004-5 are just anomalies, but rather expects
    them to continue because of the capital investment in the technology and
    infrastructure of the media industries. (34) And he says, after witnessing
    healthy box-office returns, many more organizations such as television
    stations, corporate and banking institutions are now willing to invest
    money. Over the 2005 European summer, there were 30 new films in production,
    twice as many as there were two years ago and with much bigger budgets, and
    many more in the pipeline. In February 2006 came Kurtlar Vadisi - Irak
    (Valley of the Wolves - Iraq, Serdar Akar and Sadullah Senturk), a movie
    adaptation of Turkey's most popular television series, Kurtlar Vadisi. Made
    on a now-record budget of US$10 million, the film is based on an real-life
    incident in July 2003 when U.S. soldiers arrested and hooded 11 Turkish
    Special Forces' officers operating in northern Iraq. The film revolves
    around a Turkish secret agent, Polat Alemdar (Necati Sasmaz), avenging this
    incident. (35) As of late March 2006, the film has eclipsed earlier
    box-office records with 4.2 million tickets sold in Turkey. (36)

    It is important to put these critical and commercial successes in
    perspective because the dark days of Hollywood domination of Turkish cinema
    are only in the recent past. During 1988-1994, it was near impossible for a
    Turkish film to get a regular release in local cinemas. After the passing of
    the Law of Foreign Capital in 1988, the Hollywood majors moved in to
    dominate the distribution and exhibition sector that had previously been in
    the hands of local companies. (37) In a dramatic act of protest, director
    Korhan Yurtsever burnt his film, Zincir (The Chain, 1987), in front of a
    theatre that had halted its screening after just three days. Nezih Erdogan
    also makes the point that the few films that were released during this
    period (approximately 10 per year) primarily followed the conventions of
    European art cinema, thus being inaccessible for most Turkish audiences.
    (38) Even today, local films are rarely screened by local
    distributors/exhibitors. In an act of solidarity against the majors taking a
    roughly 15 percent cut of what these commercial films earn at the box
    office, the three big directors of Turkish commercial cinema - Yilmaz
    Erdogan's production company, BKM; Sinan Cetin's Plato Films; and Omer
    Faruk Sorak's Organize Isler - have got together to form their own
    distribution company simply called KenDa, which plans to release the future
    films of these directors.

    Most healthy film industries depend on a broader dynamic media sector to
    flourish. While the coming of television signalled the demise of the
    Yesilcam in the 1970s and '80s, interestingly it has been the re-emergence
    of a strong television sector that has provided one vital key to
    contemporary Turkish cinema's commercial success. (39) The Turkish media
    industries underwent massive upheaval during the late '80s and early '90s.
    The state-controlled television sector was de-regulated, which resulted in a
    rise of a plethora of private stations by the mid '90s. The directors of
    Turkey's popular commercial cinema, such as those mentioned above - Sinan
    Cetin, Yilmaz Erdogan, Yavuz Turgul and Omer Faruk Sorak - are themselves
    local stars appearing regularly on local talkback shows or, in the case of
    Cetin, hosting their own talkback programs and game shows. These directors
    then finance their films through their work in television production (often
    producing mini-series and soap operas, or "dizis", as they are
    appropriately called in Turkish) and, more important, through advertising.
    In fact, as Atilla Dorsay has stated, most of the filmmaking infrastructure,
    particularly studios and technology, has come from the investment in the
    television advertising industry in the 1990s. Without the expertise,
    technical skills and infrastructure, none of these bigger-budget commercial
    films could be made. It's not only the 'star' directors who receive
    widespread promotion in the local print and television media. The actors of
    these films are already established household names, reaching fame through
    sit-coms, dramas or entertainment shows. As television stars, they then make
    the cross-over to film. Turkey has more than 40 free-to-air channels with
    four of these being 24-hour news channels (TGRT Haber, TRT 2 (government
    owned), NTV, CNN Turk). If we include satellite and cable television, Turkey
    has over 300 channels, far more than any other country in Europe. (40) The
    publicity machine for commercial filmmaking also extends across the
    different media sectors. Turkey's newspaper market is also one of the most
    highly competitive in the world, with more than 20 daily national newspapers
    available. The national daily, Hurriyet (literally "freedom"), has the
    largest circulation with more than 850,000 in Turkey, while its German
    edition has daily circulations in excess of 70,000 in Europe. The highly
    competitive nature of print media in Turkey has also meant that it is
    fundamental to the promotion publicity of local films. Every daily newspaper
    seems to contain at least one news item or gossip column about a local film
    due to be released, or a scandal about one of its local stars. On the one
    hand, this rampant competition can be regarded as part and parcel of the
    perils of neo-liberalisation: with such a de-regulated sector, the "deep
    nation" has far less of a chance to wield its tentacles through a
    state-controlled media sector.

    Audiences for Turkish films also continue to increase beyond Turkey's
    geographical borders. Most of the Turkish diaspora, in excess of 5 million
    people, reside in Europe. Since the success of Eskiya, many popular films
    such as Sinan Cetin's Propaganda (1999) and Komisar Sekspir (uncredited,
    2001) have made it into multiplexes, particularly in Germany, where
    Turkish-Germans number more than 3.2 million. G.O.R.A. has so far taken more
    than US$3m outside of Turkey. These popular films even regularly make it to
    Australia. Following the first Turkish Film Festival in Sydney in 1998, the
    Greater Union multiplex in the western Sydney suburb of Merrylands regularly
    devotes one of its theatres to recent Turkish releases. (41) One of the
    recent releases mentioned above, Valley of the Wolves - Iraq, is purported
    to have had simultaneous releases in Germany, Belgium, The Netherlands,
    Austria, England, Denmark, Switzerland, Russia, Egypt, Syria, Kyrgyzstan,
    the U.S. and Australia in March 2006. (42)

    While there is some direct state support for individual films in Turkey, it
    is minimal. The Turkish Ministry of Culture invested 17million YTL (around
    AUS$17 million) of government loans in the industry in 2004. Any one film
    can receive a maximum loan of up to 500,000YTL (AUS$500,000) and, if the
    particular funded film happens to win prizes at a festival abroad, the
    film's producer is not required to pay back the loan! Another significant
    factor supporting Turkish-European co-productions is the emergence of
    Eurimages, an arm of the Council of Europe established in 1988 to promote
    and fund the co-production and distribution of audiovisual works. (43) Since
    Turkey became a member of Eurimages in 1992, more than forty Turkish films
    have qualified for this European Union funding scheme. (44)
    ]
    If the film festivals are any indication of the state of film culture in a
    particular region, then Turkey's seems to be thriving. Against a background
    of limited direct support for filmmakers, the mounting of the new Eurasian
    Film Festival and Market, beside its 42-year-old Golden Orange counterpart
    in the Eastern Mediterranean city of Antalya, indicates the willingness of
    the government to fund and promote broader film culture. (45) One of the new
    Festival's aims was to forge alliances between Turkish and foreign film
    producers, and inspire future co-production activity. The Turkish films at
    the Festival in November 2005 that harnessed most of the awards were those
    that were not so much politically taboo, but more socially audacious and
    stylistically adventurous. E. Kutlug Ataman's Iki genc kiz (Two Girls,
    2005) explores the complex social fabric of life in Istanbul through a
    relationship between two marginalised girls. The other film which took out
    the main award, Ulas Inac's Turev (Derivative, 2005), was stylistically
    similar to Two Girls, with its gritty hard-edged realism. Both films display
    a raw energy for life in contemporary Istanbul, a city in rapid transition.

    In an attempt to account for the diversity of voices that abound in Turkish
    cinema, from the "expressive alienation" of Nuri Bilge Ceylan's and
    Ustaoglu's work to the highly-charged dramatic elements of films like
    Yucel's Toss Up or Two Girls, Bilge Ebiri claims that

    Turkey, while part of the Middle East, also considers itself a part of
    Europe and the Balkans. As such, a certain cultural schizophrenia -
    simultaneously Eastern and Western, both coolly aloof and jarringly
    expressive - is a part of the very fabric of Turkish life. (46)

    If Turkish films can harness its rich cultural diversity, make the most of
    its healthier economy and stable political situation, exploit its dynamic
    media sector and its growing ties with Europe and central Asia and move
    towards a greater transnationalism, then the film industry has a bright
    future indeed.

    Research for this article was carried out with the support of Macquarie
    University's Outside Studies Program and the International Office, which
    enabled me to spend a few months in Istanbul from August-October 2005. Many
    thanks also to the organizations, Istanbul Kultur ve Sanat Vakfi (Istanbul
    Foundation for Culture and Art) and TURSAK (Turkish Foundation of Cinema and
    Audiovisual Culture), and individuals who shared their insights and
    knowledge of Turkish filmmaking with me: notably, Atilla Dorsay, Nezih
    Erdogan, Hakki Goceoglu, Defne Kayalar, Tolga Ornek, Serazer Pekerman, Tunc
    Sahin, Hulya Ucansu, Yesim Ustaoglu, Paxton Winters, Ugur Yucel, and local
    Beyoglu video-store owner Umut. Thanks also to readers Bruce Jeffreys, Noel
    King, Kathryn Millard and Renata Murawska.
    © Catherine Simpson, 2006
    This article has been refereed.

    Endnotes

    1. Asuman Suner, "Horror of a Different Kind: Dissonant Voices in the New
    Turkish Cinema", Screen, Vol. 45, No. 4, Winter 2004, p. 305.
    2. New German Cinema's success owes much to its 'Young Turks'. While
    Fatih Akin remains the most famous, a new generation of filmmakers and
    actors of Turkish background have emerged in the past 10 years, mainly based
    in Berlin and Hamburg, including Yuksel Yavuz Aprilkinder (April's
    Children, 1998), Aysun Bademsoy (Madchen im Ring, 1998) Yilmaz Arslan (Yara,
    1998), Hussi Kutlucan (Ich Chef, Du Turnschuh, 1998). See Deniz Gokturk,
    "Turkish Women on German Streets: Closure and Exposure in Transnational
    Cinema", in Myrto Konstantarakos (Ed.), Space in European Cinema
    (Exeter-Portland: Intellect, 2000), pp. 64-76.
    3. Petra Tabeling, "Grunge, Punk and HipHop on the Bosporus Fatih Akin's
    Crossing the Bridge", in Qantara.de.
    4. Ali Jafaar, "Report from Cannes", Sight and Sound, Vol., 15, No. 7,
    July 2005, p. 17.
    5. Kevin Robins and Asu Aksoy, "Deep Nation: The National Question and
    Turkish Cinema Culture" in Mette Hjort and Scott MacKenzie (Eds), Cinema
    and Nation, (London and New York: Routledge, 2002), p. 203.
    6. Robins and Aksoy, p. 203.
    7. Shohini Chaudhuri, Contemporary World Cinema: Europe, The Middle East,
    East Asia and South Asia (Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press, 2005), p.
    67.
    8. Robins and Aksoy, p. 206.
    9. Robins and Aksoy, p. 207.
    10. Even the way this event was reported in Turkey had all the hallmarks of
    a great Turkish melodrama. The talks were due to start on 3 October 2005,
    but Turkey refused to make any more concessions to the European Union. At
    the eleventh hour, the EU conceded and, in order for the Turkish foreign
    minister, Abdullah Gul, to sign the document before midnight, the state of
    Luxemborg stopped the clock to enable him to fly there in time!
    11. Madeleine Bunting, "Regime Change, European-style, is a test of
    civilization", Guardian Weekly, 30 September - 8 October 2005, p. 15. This
    article points out that 52 percent of EU citizens think that Turkey should
    not become a full member of the European Union.
    12. It is estimated that between 30,000 and 40,000 people have been killed
    during Turkey's 15-year-long war over Kurdish autonomy in the South-East
    region in the 1980s and '90s. The war abated after the capture of PKK
    (Kurdish Workers' Party) leader Abdullah Ocalan in 1999.
    13. Director Ugur Yucel, who is also a star from his long acting career, is
    extremely disappointed with returns for this film and claims it has "ruined
    him". This is his first film, which was mostly self-funded. While it made
    relatively healthy returns for an arthouse production, with 350,000 tickets
    sold, it has not recovered its (relatively expensive) US$2 million budget.
    Interestingly, one of the other (silent) investors for this film was a local
    private university. Some of the crew were from this institution. Despite its
    star cast, I suspect it may not have done as well as expected because of the
    rather confrontational nature of its material.
    14. For more information on director Yilmaz Guney, see Bilge Ebiri's
    article in Senses of Cinema, Issue 37, October-December 2005.
    15. Such as the articles and interview by Deniz Gokturk and Valentian
    Vitali-West, in Framework: The Journal of Cinema and Media, Vol. 43, No. 2,
    2002, pp. 196-212.
    16. The Kurdish question also lies at the centre of political filmmaker
    Reis Celik's films, most notably Isiklar sonmesin (Let the Lights Shine On,
    1997) and Hoscakal yarin (Goodbye Tomorrow, 1998). Atilla Dorsay, translated
    by Lale Can, "Back from Near Oblivion: Turkish Cinema Gets a New Lease on
    Life", Film Comment, Vol. 34, No. 6, 2004, pp. 11-2.
    17. Born and raised in the Black Sea city of Trabzon, director Yesim
    Ustaoglu made this film with Greek-Turkish-French-German finance. In her
    research for this film, she also shot a beautiful half-hour documentary
    about women's life in the Black Sea, Life on Their Shoulders (2004), which
    featured in the documentary section at the Antalya Film Festival.
    18. The ongoing issue of Greeks being 'at home' in Turkey has provided
    rich story-telling material for Greek directors too. Although made in a
    completely different vein, Tassos Boulmetis's Greek film, Politiki kouzina
    (A Touch of Spice, 2003), featured at the Altin Portakal Film Festival, is
    from the perspective of a young Greek boy living in Istanbul in the 1950s
    and '60s. He falls in love with a Turkish girl, but his family is forced
    out of Istanbul during the Cyprus crisis in 1973. The family is far from
    welcomed in Greece and their accent sets them apart as foreigners. This film
    is a swansong to the once shared heritage of Istanbul's Greeks and Turks.
    19. Burak Bekdil, "Why Mr Erdogan's Mindset Cannot Fit Europe's", in
    Turkish Daily News, Wednesday 16 November 2005.
    20. Burcak Evren, Turk Sinemasi (Turkish Cinema) (Beyoglu, Istanbul:
    Turkish Foundation of Cinema and Audiovisual Culture, 2005), p. 238.
    21. Nezih Erdogan, "Narratives of Resistance: national identity and
    ambivalence in the Turkish Melodrama between 1965 and 1975", Screen, Vol.
    39, No. 3, Autumn 1998.
    22. Nezih Erdogan, "Violent Images: Hybridity and Excess in The Man Who
    Saved the World", in Karen Ross, Deniz Derman and Nevena Dakovic (Eds),
    Mediated Identities (Istanbul: Istanbul Bilgi University Press, 2001), p.
    116.
    23. See Nezih Erdogan, "Mute Bodies, Disembodied Voices: Notes on Sound in
    Turkish Popular Cinema", Screen, Vol. 43 No. 3, Autumn 2002, pp. 233-49.
    24. Asuman Suner, "Horror of a different Kind: Dissonant Voices in the New
    Turkish Cinema", Screen, Vol. 45, No. 4, Winter 2004, p. 305.
    25. Bilge Ebiri, "How Does It Feel to Feel?: Recent Turkish Cinema", in
    CinemaScope. Asuman Suner also makes this point on p. 306
    26. Suner, p. 309.
    27. Suner, p. 323.
    28. Anna Franklin, "Local Pix boffo in Turkey", Variety, 25 April 25 - 1
    2005, p. 12.
    29. Erdogan, 1998, p. 118.
    30. It would be a worthwhile task to analyse G.O.R.A. in light of Tom
    O'Regan's adoption of Yuri Lotman's theory of cultural transfers in his
    analysis of Australian cinema in his Australian National Cinema (London and
    New York: Routledge, 1996). However, this is beyond the scope of this
    article.
    31. Franklin, p. 12.
    32. Ibid.
    33. Ibid.
    34. In an interview with me.
    35. Turks believe the hooding incident was in retaliation against Turkey
    for not allowing the US to use the Incirlik US airbase in eastern Turkey
    during the early days of the Iraq war. In the words of one reviewer, the
    level of anti-American sentiment displayed in this film "makes Graham
    Greene's ugly American appear like Mary Poppins' male cousin". Valley of
    the wolves - Iraq features American 'baddies' played by Billy Zane and
    Gary Busey. See Semih Idiz, "Brace yourself America, Polat is on the
    way!", in Turkish Daily News, Thursday 26 January 2006.
    36. Turkey's box office statistics are located at:
    http://www.beyazperde.com/box.asp?id=tr.
    37. Evren, p. 314.
    38. Erdogan, 1998, p. 261.
    39. When I was living in Istanbul in the early 1990s, the Alan Parker film,
    Midnight Express (1978), infamous in the West for its barbaric prison
    scenes, was still banned in Turkey. In a telling example of government
    impotence in the face of the emerging transnationalism and globalisation,
    one of the recently established television stations, illegally broadcasting
    from France, screened the film.
    40. Amin Farzanefah, "A Nation and Cinema Industry Divided", in
    Qantara.de, 2003.
    41. Catherine Simpson, "'Turkish Delights?': An Analysis of the Media
    Reception to the first Turkish Film Festival in Australia", Metro Magazine,
    No. 124-5, 2000, pp. 60-3.
    42. "Long-awaited Kurtlar Vadisi - Irak debuts Friday", in Turkish Daily
    News, Thursday 2 February 2006.
    43. The Eurimages website can be found at:
    http://www.coe.int/T/E/Cultural_Co-operation/E urimages.
    44. This information can be found at the Turkish Ministry for Culture and
    Tourism, here.
    45. See Catherine Simpson, "Turkish films and festivals: Glancing
    Eastwards", in RealTime, No. 70, 2005.
    46. Ebiri, op. cit.

    --Boundary_(ID_uR8DDVayQUPKgaZ+j1tStQ)--

    From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Working...
X