Tweet
AN INVENTED HISTORY FLOGGED ON THE NATION'S GOSSIP PAGES
by ETYEN MAHCUPYAN
Today's Zaman
Jan 14 2011
Turkey
Last week, every television channel in Turkey was in hot pursuit of
two events in particular, with an effort by the media to unearth as
many gossipy dimensions to these stories as possible.
One of these events was the broadcast of the television series
"MuhteÅ~_em Yuzyıl" (The Magnificent Century), which takes as its
focus the palace and times of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent in the
16th century. The other "event" was a statue by sculptor Mehmet Aksoy
named "İnsanlık Abidesi" (Memorial to Humanity), whose construction
began in the city of Kars but was left to stand unfinished for two
years. It became clear last week that the media felt bored by the
almost tortuous meanderings of news concerning the Kurdish issues
and/or the economy. And so it turned to stories about a new TV series
and the unfinished statue in Kars. Needless to say, these pieces of
news spilled over easily into the gossipy, more paparazzi aspects of
the news, and thus also easily tampered with the subconscious of the
Turkish people.
History has never belonged to the "civilian" arena in this country.
When the elite cadres that formed the republican regime decided
to create the "modern citizens" who would complement their own
sense of legitimacy, a new intellectual effort aimed at Turkicizing
Muslims emerged, and all of history was then rewritten through this
perspective. The positivism embraced by this elite cadre viewed
everything connected with religion as a possible ball and chain
and thus began to view the Ottoman world as somehow outside "real
history," instead treating it as some sort of auxiliary period of
time. In line with this, the Turks were an ethnic group that had come
out of Central Asia, spread across the world and never lost any of
their ethnic characteristics.
As they saw it, the Turks had acted as protectors of Islam and turned
it into a great civilization, but it was their Turkishness that
held precedence above all else. Islam and the general order of the
Ottoman Empire were perceived by this intellectual effort as having
prevented Turkishness, and as they told it, there thus came a point
at which the Turks reared up and were in a sense reborn from their
own ashes. This period of rebirth is expressed in the cleansing of
Anatolia and the clearing out of different ethnicities. There was
no room for non-Muslims amongst the Turks; non-Muslims were seen as
extensions of Christian Westerners, people who had betrayed the Turks
and who received their punishment.
Not only did this version of events, created originally for children,
become standard material for teaching in schools in Turkey, it also
began to be constantly imposed by the media. And so the people of
the nation, almost completely Muslim themselves, reacted in different
degrees to this story according to their own levels of secularity. For
secular citizens who felt close to the state, there was absolutely no
problem whatsoever with this version of events. In fact, if anything,
they might complain it lacked more details. As for the wider society
at hand, which possessed Islamic sensitivities, there was a perception
of this story that split the story itself into two parts: It outright
rejected the judgment of the part of the story related to the Ottoman
period. As Muslims saw it, the nearly flawless systems of justice,
mentality and morality that reigned during that period were rewritten
as having been simply figurative, while the symbolic Sultan Suleiman
was remade as some sort of "sacred carrier."
At the same time, Muslims also failed to embrace the judgments put
forth by the state's version of the history of the final period: that
non-Muslims were traitors who had sowed discord, and that whatever
thus happened to them was the natural result of this behavior. In
addition, the Ottomans had still behaved tolerantly, and even in the
final period of the empire, supported them as much as possible.
And thus emerged a society which sought its own identity through a
shared history but which was at the same time separated from reality,
the result of which was that everyone began to pursue their own version
of invented histories. And so what this new TV series "MuhteÅ~_em
Yuzyıl" did was to bring together this splintered fantasy of the
past with the world of paparazzi. Two very different perspectives
on history were combined, and it was a very good thing because what
became immediately clear was just how unhealthy and insufficient each
of these versions really was.
As for the previously referred to piece of news about the unfinished
"İnsanlık Abidesi" statue, it did not provide as wide encompassing
a function as the TV series. The argument surrounding that statue took
place within a narrower circle of people, one primarily concerned with
civil rights. Interestingly, when the topic turns to non-Muslims --
the Armenian issues, for example -- the distance separating Muslims
from secularists closes quickly. Basically, there is no question in
most people's minds that it was really the Armenians who were guilty
and that the Turks acted with high-mindedness and much esteem.
The only reason for the statue to even be in the news lately is that
the government was damaged by words spoken by the prime minister about
the statue itself and the fact that these words were used to try and
portray the government as being opposed to modernity. The real goal
in the presentation of that particular piece of news is to try and
make Muslims appear opposed to statues in general. Outside of that,
no attention is paid to the statue as a symbol of friendship between
the Turkish and Armenian borders, and the fact that it was designed
to be such a symbol.
Turkish society is still stuck in the identity template created for
it by the state. What's more, an ideologically driven view of history
does very much act as a source of nurture for this sense of identity.
For that reason, politics can only really spread out and take up space
in the world of gossip and paparazzi, and the world of thought cannot
get beyond its basic needs.
From: A. Papazian
by ETYEN MAHCUPYAN
Today's Zaman
Jan 14 2011
Turkey
Last week, every television channel in Turkey was in hot pursuit of
two events in particular, with an effort by the media to unearth as
many gossipy dimensions to these stories as possible.
One of these events was the broadcast of the television series
"MuhteÅ~_em Yuzyıl" (The Magnificent Century), which takes as its
focus the palace and times of Sultan Suleiman the Magnificent in the
16th century. The other "event" was a statue by sculptor Mehmet Aksoy
named "İnsanlık Abidesi" (Memorial to Humanity), whose construction
began in the city of Kars but was left to stand unfinished for two
years. It became clear last week that the media felt bored by the
almost tortuous meanderings of news concerning the Kurdish issues
and/or the economy. And so it turned to stories about a new TV series
and the unfinished statue in Kars. Needless to say, these pieces of
news spilled over easily into the gossipy, more paparazzi aspects of
the news, and thus also easily tampered with the subconscious of the
Turkish people.
History has never belonged to the "civilian" arena in this country.
When the elite cadres that formed the republican regime decided
to create the "modern citizens" who would complement their own
sense of legitimacy, a new intellectual effort aimed at Turkicizing
Muslims emerged, and all of history was then rewritten through this
perspective. The positivism embraced by this elite cadre viewed
everything connected with religion as a possible ball and chain
and thus began to view the Ottoman world as somehow outside "real
history," instead treating it as some sort of auxiliary period of
time. In line with this, the Turks were an ethnic group that had come
out of Central Asia, spread across the world and never lost any of
their ethnic characteristics.
As they saw it, the Turks had acted as protectors of Islam and turned
it into a great civilization, but it was their Turkishness that
held precedence above all else. Islam and the general order of the
Ottoman Empire were perceived by this intellectual effort as having
prevented Turkishness, and as they told it, there thus came a point
at which the Turks reared up and were in a sense reborn from their
own ashes. This period of rebirth is expressed in the cleansing of
Anatolia and the clearing out of different ethnicities. There was
no room for non-Muslims amongst the Turks; non-Muslims were seen as
extensions of Christian Westerners, people who had betrayed the Turks
and who received their punishment.
Not only did this version of events, created originally for children,
become standard material for teaching in schools in Turkey, it also
began to be constantly imposed by the media. And so the people of
the nation, almost completely Muslim themselves, reacted in different
degrees to this story according to their own levels of secularity. For
secular citizens who felt close to the state, there was absolutely no
problem whatsoever with this version of events. In fact, if anything,
they might complain it lacked more details. As for the wider society
at hand, which possessed Islamic sensitivities, there was a perception
of this story that split the story itself into two parts: It outright
rejected the judgment of the part of the story related to the Ottoman
period. As Muslims saw it, the nearly flawless systems of justice,
mentality and morality that reigned during that period were rewritten
as having been simply figurative, while the symbolic Sultan Suleiman
was remade as some sort of "sacred carrier."
At the same time, Muslims also failed to embrace the judgments put
forth by the state's version of the history of the final period: that
non-Muslims were traitors who had sowed discord, and that whatever
thus happened to them was the natural result of this behavior. In
addition, the Ottomans had still behaved tolerantly, and even in the
final period of the empire, supported them as much as possible.
And thus emerged a society which sought its own identity through a
shared history but which was at the same time separated from reality,
the result of which was that everyone began to pursue their own version
of invented histories. And so what this new TV series "MuhteÅ~_em
Yuzyıl" did was to bring together this splintered fantasy of the
past with the world of paparazzi. Two very different perspectives
on history were combined, and it was a very good thing because what
became immediately clear was just how unhealthy and insufficient each
of these versions really was.
As for the previously referred to piece of news about the unfinished
"İnsanlık Abidesi" statue, it did not provide as wide encompassing
a function as the TV series. The argument surrounding that statue took
place within a narrower circle of people, one primarily concerned with
civil rights. Interestingly, when the topic turns to non-Muslims --
the Armenian issues, for example -- the distance separating Muslims
from secularists closes quickly. Basically, there is no question in
most people's minds that it was really the Armenians who were guilty
and that the Turks acted with high-mindedness and much esteem.
The only reason for the statue to even be in the news lately is that
the government was damaged by words spoken by the prime minister about
the statue itself and the fact that these words were used to try and
portray the government as being opposed to modernity. The real goal
in the presentation of that particular piece of news is to try and
make Muslims appear opposed to statues in general. Outside of that,
no attention is paid to the statue as a symbol of friendship between
the Turkish and Armenian borders, and the fact that it was designed
to be such a symbol.
Turkish society is still stuck in the identity template created for
it by the state. What's more, an ideologically driven view of history
does very much act as a source of nurture for this sense of identity.
For that reason, politics can only really spread out and take up space
in the world of gossip and paparazzi, and the world of thought cannot
get beyond its basic needs.
From: A. Papazian