Tweet
AKP NO DIFFERENT WHEN IT COMES TO HISTORY
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Dec 11 2012
by SEMÄ°H Ä°DÄ°Z
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's attack on a television
dramatization of the court intrigues of Suleyman the Magnificent
clearly indicates that "official historiography" - which concerns the
writing of national myths rather than true history - is very much
alive in Turkey. For nearly 80 years, the Kemalist establishment
plugged its own version of historic events. In doing so, it ensured
that this version and the name of its principle hero, Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk, were protected by law.
A key element of Kemalist historiography, on the other hand, was the
discrediting of religion, which was seen as the main reason Turkey
had missed the industrial revolution and all that followed it. This is
why the Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power in 2002 with
an ingrained hatred of Kemalist historiography, and set to whittling
away at this by highlighting the negative aspects of the Republican
era; including previously taboo topics such as atrocities against
the Kurds in the 1930s.
This approach by the AKP also resulted in a more open reading
of Turkish history. Touchy topics, including subjects like the
Armenian massacres of 1915, started to be discussed in ways that were
previously unthinkable. Turkish liberals were among those praising
the new approach to history that was unfolding under the AKP, with
many believing that Erdogan was indeed moving the country toward the
freedoms he promised.
Meanwhile the AKP also worked to revive public interest in Ottoman
history, with special emphasis on the Islamic nature of the empire.
This interest in turn led to a succession of films and television
series depicting historic events to do with the Ottomans. One of these,
"The Magnificent Century" (MuhteÅ~_em Yuzyıl), dealing with the rule
of Sultan Suleyman, went on to become a blockbuster television series,
not just in Turkey but even in countries where the Ottomans remains
an object of cultural vilification.
"The Magnificent Century" proved in this way that an expensive
production with dazzling sets, flashy period costumes, and a plot
tinged with political intrigue and sexual innuendo will sell no matter
what. The British series "The Tudors" is, of course, another example.
The AKP, however, did not consider the possibility that this new
interest in Ottoman history would also lead to renditions that are out
of tune with its own version of history. But the tables have turned
now, and Prime Minister Erdogan, clearly disturbed by the depiction
of the Harem conspiracies and the sexual antics during the rule of
Sultan Suleyman, is now lambasting the "Magnificent Century."
"We do not have such ancestors. We do not recognize such a Sultan
Suleyman," he declared during a recent public event, calling on the
authorities to act against the series. It did not take long for AKP
sycophancy to kick in, with a deputy from Erdogan's party announcing
he would prepare a bill aimed at legally protecting Turkish history
against such series.
In short, the tendency towards "official historiography" has resurfaced
in Turkey under another guise, indicating that for all the government
talk about "expanding freedoms," little has changed in this country
when it comes to the basics. Most historians agree, of course, that
"The Magnificent Century" is rife with inaccuracies, and most British
historians said the same of "The Tudors."
It is, however, well known that the Ottoman court was a place of
intrigue where even fratricide, along side other mortal sins, was a
regular occurrence. But none of that is the point here, since we are
not dealing with history per se, but a fictional dramatization jazzed
up to bring in ratings.
One can criticize "The Magnificent Century" on aesthetic grounds,
of course. What is disturbing, however, is that the AKP should be
trying to ban even fictional accounts of historic events if they do
not fit with its own world view. In doing so, it shows that it is no
different to the Kemalists whose historiography it purports to detest.
December/11/2012
Hurriyet Daily News, Turkey
Dec 11 2012
by SEMÄ°H Ä°DÄ°Z
Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan's attack on a television
dramatization of the court intrigues of Suleyman the Magnificent
clearly indicates that "official historiography" - which concerns the
writing of national myths rather than true history - is very much
alive in Turkey. For nearly 80 years, the Kemalist establishment
plugged its own version of historic events. In doing so, it ensured
that this version and the name of its principle hero, Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk, were protected by law.
A key element of Kemalist historiography, on the other hand, was the
discrediting of religion, which was seen as the main reason Turkey
had missed the industrial revolution and all that followed it. This is
why the Justice and Development Party (AKP) came to power in 2002 with
an ingrained hatred of Kemalist historiography, and set to whittling
away at this by highlighting the negative aspects of the Republican
era; including previously taboo topics such as atrocities against
the Kurds in the 1930s.
This approach by the AKP also resulted in a more open reading
of Turkish history. Touchy topics, including subjects like the
Armenian massacres of 1915, started to be discussed in ways that were
previously unthinkable. Turkish liberals were among those praising
the new approach to history that was unfolding under the AKP, with
many believing that Erdogan was indeed moving the country toward the
freedoms he promised.
Meanwhile the AKP also worked to revive public interest in Ottoman
history, with special emphasis on the Islamic nature of the empire.
This interest in turn led to a succession of films and television
series depicting historic events to do with the Ottomans. One of these,
"The Magnificent Century" (MuhteÅ~_em Yuzyıl), dealing with the rule
of Sultan Suleyman, went on to become a blockbuster television series,
not just in Turkey but even in countries where the Ottomans remains
an object of cultural vilification.
"The Magnificent Century" proved in this way that an expensive
production with dazzling sets, flashy period costumes, and a plot
tinged with political intrigue and sexual innuendo will sell no matter
what. The British series "The Tudors" is, of course, another example.
The AKP, however, did not consider the possibility that this new
interest in Ottoman history would also lead to renditions that are out
of tune with its own version of history. But the tables have turned
now, and Prime Minister Erdogan, clearly disturbed by the depiction
of the Harem conspiracies and the sexual antics during the rule of
Sultan Suleyman, is now lambasting the "Magnificent Century."
"We do not have such ancestors. We do not recognize such a Sultan
Suleyman," he declared during a recent public event, calling on the
authorities to act against the series. It did not take long for AKP
sycophancy to kick in, with a deputy from Erdogan's party announcing
he would prepare a bill aimed at legally protecting Turkish history
against such series.
In short, the tendency towards "official historiography" has resurfaced
in Turkey under another guise, indicating that for all the government
talk about "expanding freedoms," little has changed in this country
when it comes to the basics. Most historians agree, of course, that
"The Magnificent Century" is rife with inaccuracies, and most British
historians said the same of "The Tudors."
It is, however, well known that the Ottoman court was a place of
intrigue where even fratricide, along side other mortal sins, was a
regular occurrence. But none of that is the point here, since we are
not dealing with history per se, but a fictional dramatization jazzed
up to bring in ratings.
One can criticize "The Magnificent Century" on aesthetic grounds,
of course. What is disturbing, however, is that the AKP should be
trying to ban even fictional accounts of historic events if they do
not fit with its own world view. In doing so, it shows that it is no
different to the Kemalists whose historiography it purports to detest.
December/11/2012