The dualistic paradigm and the myth of 'progress and development' sustained itself in the XX century since binary oppositions between the Ottoman Empire and the Republic as well as the Eastern and the Western, the 'imperial' and the 'national' identities also defined in terms of their representations in literary works and criticism. The birth of the novel in the Ottoman-Turkish context provides an excellent opportunity to explore how the myth of progress and the separation among classical period of the Ottoman Empire, XIX century Ottoman and XX century Republican modernities were distinguished from each other through the utilization of historical narrative of literary progress and modernization. The historical narrative of XIX century Ottoman literary transformation declares The Love Affair between Tal’at and Fitnat to be the 'first novel of European style' novel, The Awakening to be the first 'novel of literary value' and The Carriage Affair to be the first 'realistic and European-like' novel. There is, yet, Akabis Story which was not mentioned in the core texts of literary history although it was the first serialized novel, in Ottoman language written in Armenian script, in historical timetable, in addition to The Forbidden Affair published in 1900 and considered to be the first novel produced by the 'imaginary faculties of a genuine novelist' to bridge the gap between the mere replicas of incapable Ottoman novelists and the genuine talent of a modern novelist, Halit Ziya, who continued his literary endeavor in the Republican period as well. The penetration of Ottoman classical literature, the inability of XIX century novelists to get rid of literary and technical influence of Ottoman classical poetry became the aesthetic criteria of defining an 'authentic' novel based on premises of French realism and of determining the imitative nature of the old/the traditional/the Ottoman/the Eastern against authenticity of the new/the modern/ the Republican/the Westernized novels. It helps to set up strict borders and to stress the differences rather than commonalities between the terms of such series of binary oppositions. Historical narrative of the birth of Ottoman-Turkish novel turns into the basic realm of determining and maintaining political identities of the empire and the young nation-state. This ultimately results in a linear, teleological understanding of history spreading itself between the point of origin (Divan poetry) and the final destination ('authentic' novels of Westernized realism), and furthermore, the myth of progress and development both in the political and literary realms becomes visible.
Historical periodization of the literary and political progress, on the other hand, is of vital importance as it provides the substance which fuels the historical narrative of modernization. The age of 'modern'/ 'new' literature was subdivided into periods, each being identified with the degree of authenticity and achievement, paradigms and purposes of successive periods. The degree of aesthetic achievement and 'authenticity' increases, and the paradigm shifts in consecutive periods. The first period had essentially instrumentalized literary production for the sake of promoting various formulas of'proper' modernization. 'Servet-i Fiinun', was influenced by the 'scientific' education provided in newly established Ottoman military schools of medicine, and the purpose was to determine the real cause of social and political backwardness and to show how it must be scientifically dealt with. The 'Fecr-i Atť distinguished itself by claiming the superiority of its aesthetic quality, and declared literary production as a 'personal and a meritorious’ activity. 'Republican Literature’ had similar characteristics, but put a rather strong emphasis on the differences between the backwardness and imitative characteristic of Ottoman versus the genuine progress, the correct understanding and development of the Republican modernizations. The image of the 'novelist’ or the 'intellectual’ fabricated through various novels was important, and differed in each period. The novelist adopted the role of a teacher, a doctor, a sophisticated individual, a political forerunner and a 'modern’ intellectual in consecutive periods. This imagery provided the qualities of the properly 'modernized’ subjects of the Empire and citizens of the young Republic.
* * *
УДК 94(560) + 82(091)
СЕЙДА БАШЛИ. PhD, Доцент, Университет Артуклу Map дин, Мар дин, Турция.
ŞEYDA BAŞLI. PhD, Assistant professor, Mardin Artuklu University, Department of Turkish Language and Literature, Mardin, Turkey.
E-mail: seyda.basli(o)gmail.com
ИСТОРИЧЕСКИЙ НАРРАТИВ МОДЕРНИЗАЦИИ И РЕПРЕЗЕНТАЦИИ ПОЛИТИЧЕСКИХ ИДЕНТИЧНОСТЕЙ В ОСМАНСКО-ТУРЕЦКОЙ ЛИТЕРАТУРЕ
Процесс превращения Османской империи в современное национальное государство в XX в. связано с многочисленными дискуссиями. Девиз создания "единого народа без привилегий и социальных классов" разъясняет официальную республиканскую политику модернизации, которая подчеркивает однородность молодой "страны" в противоположность многонациональной и мультирелигиозной структуре имперского общества. Этот девиз подразумевает государственность главным элементом идентичности, а наследие Османской империи, достигшей пика модернизации в XIX в., нивелируется. "Государственность" маркируется как источник современной идентичности, что подразумевает существование сферы помимо "современности" (modernity), включающей этническую принадлежность, пол, религию и традицию. Современные дискуссии по множественным современностям (multiple modernities), с другой стороны, сосредотачиваются на взаимодействии между государственностью, этнической принадлежностью, религией и полом, чтобы найти ту точку зрения, которая помогла бы исследователю понять их взаимоотношения. При этом формирование идентичности рассматривается как процесс продолжающихся учреждений и воспроизведений и как сфера постоянного столкновения различных, порой конфликтующих, элементов. Государственность, этническая принадлежность, религия и пол, поэтому уникально разграничивает формирование идентичности друг относительно друга в постоянном процессе преобразования.
В статье мы сконцентрируемся на историографии, осмысляющей османскую и турецкую литературу, с целью критически сравнить различные этапы процессы модернизации и пред-модернизации с точки зрения осмысления таких концепций как "государственность", "этническая принадлежность" и "современность". Обсуждение затрагивает различные периоды, включая первые дипломатические миссии посольства в XVII в. ("Sefaretname") вплоть до движения ‘национальной литературы’ в XX столетии. Следовательно, становится возможным проследить отношения между ранними представлениями национального самосознания и стимулировать обсуждение теоретической структуры "множественных современностей" на примере османо-турецкого опыта.
Ключевые слова: османская модернизация; турецкая модернизация; национальное самосознание; множественные современности.
HISTORICAL NARRATIVE OF MODERNIZATION AND REPRESENTATION OF POLITICAL IDENTITIES IN OTTOMAN-TURKISH LITERATURE