Browsing by Subject "Turkish poetry 20th century History and criticism."

Now showing 1 - 3 of 3

Open Access
Behçet Necatigil ve şiirin ev hali
(2003) Şişmanoğlu, Şehnaz
Behçet Necatigil (1916-1979), one of few poets of Turkish poetry who could not directly be connected to a literary school or generation, is called as the “poet of homes” by some critics. This conception is partly related to his usage of “home” as the main metaphor, starting from his books entitled Çevre (1951) and Evler (1953). Home, being the fundamental space in Necatigil’s poetry, appears both in positive and negative connotations, as a nexus of felicity and boredom. Most critics explain this dual character of home within the tension between interior and exterior, or between insideness and outsideness of home. This thesis takes the same problematic of insideness and outsideness yet follows a different path, and attempts at resolving by the help of relations of difference such as intermingling, replacement, transition and permeability. Therefore, within the thesis, the altered meanings of home is mainly conceptualized in two contrasting spaces, i.e. “inner-home” and “outerhome”, through which it was argued how “doors” and “windows”, or the metaphors of “light” and “night” alter in poems, and how this alteration affects the conception of home. In addition, the enveloping spaces of home as the street and the city have also been taken into consideration for looking for how they influence the alterations in “inner” as well as “outer” homes. It is argued in the thesis that the inner-home has a positive connotation for it refers to a protected and warm conception of family, the traditional past and poet’s solitude. On the other hand, the outer-home refers to the economic difficulties of everyday life and a negative conception of family as a hindrance against poet’s free thinking. Thus, in Necatigil’s poetry, the individual appears to be divided between inner and outer home as well as in the in-world and the out-world. This may also define the very problem of individual in the modern life, divided between the public and the private spheres. Thesis offers to read Necatigil’s poetry as the metaphor of a poet who builds his “ideal home” with his poem to overcome the feeling of unhomeliness in modern times
Open Access
Cemal Süreya şiirinde bedenin yazınsallaşması
(2003) Ergül, Mehmet Selim
Cemal Süreya (1931-1990), one of Turkey’s major poets, explores the female body in his works. The bodies in Süreya’s poetry can be studied under three headings: Poems about the “other body” where the narrator is constructed as a libertine, about the idealized “perfect body” which is in love with the narrator and about the “imperfect body” which is not sexualized and thus can be depicted as imperfect. Different bodies are mentioned in almost all of Cemal Süreya’s early poems. Sometimes more than one body is encountered in the same poem. This issue has led us to explore the system of libertinism. The female body is represented as a perfect form in most of Cemal Süreya’s love poems, even if their focus is not on eroticism. This approach has similarities with the aesthetic ideal of ancient Greek art. The imperfect body represents the poor and oppressed woman in Cemal Süreya’s poetry. Physical imperfection also symbolizes the political views of the narrator. Eroticism has always been considered the distinctive feature of Cemal Süreya’s poetry. It can be argued that the literary body in Cemal Süreya’s poetry has four different dimensions: Allegorical, metaphorical, hidden and priapic. Nonetheless poems with the above characteristics have always existed side by side with naive, social and sentimental poems as well as with verses where a submissive poet expresses his dedication to one particular woman. Hence one cannot speak of a linear evolution in Cemal Süreya’s poetic discourse on eroticism. Even so, his discourse on libertinism has gradually changed and become marginal in his later work. Cemal Süreya’s poetry includes various discourses that include opposite and contrary elements.
Open Access
Turgut uyar`ın huzursuzluğu
(2006) Caner, Fırat
Turgut Uyar’s earlier understanding of poetry goes through a sudden change with Dünyanın En Güzel Arabistanı [The Most Beautiful Arabia of the World]. In his earlier style, the influence of “Garip Poetry” can be detected, but in Dünyanın En Güzel Arabistanı, Uyar approaches poetry with a new concep, similar to those of the other İkinci Yeni [The Second New] poets’, in which meaning is pushed to the background and figures of speech are brough to the fore. Dünyanın En Güzel Arabistanı is a modern work of art. The basic motivation that leads Uyar to write this book is the emotional pressures of modernity on the individual. Here, the poet focuses on two problems: First comes the pressure on the individual caused by religious morality, traditional ethics, and the social institutions which enforce these concepts. Second is the shock experience and discontents caused by modern civilization, urbanization, and the life style in urban the setting. Adverse affects of these experiences on the individual is not only the main theme of book, but it also determines the construction its whole design, the formal characteristics of the poems, and the dynamics of the imagery. In Dünyanın En Güzel Arabistanı, verses are not logically continuous, the narrative lacks the commonly expected form of linearity, and the construction that makes the book a whole is rather fragmented. Although these poems are meant to be read as independent pieces, they are connected to one another and constitute a coherent whole, because they are constructed within the framework of a common universe of symbols or fictional characters. The narrative events taking place in the poems do not display a chronological linearity. The poet/author hides himself behind the narrator of the individual poems and leaves the reader alone with the narrator. He employs various techniques of dramatic writing and story telling, which are not all that common in Turkish poetry. He backgrounds the meaning and expects the reader to bring together the pieces of the fragmented narrative by using various ambiguous relations between the imagery of the individual poems. The aesthetic choice of Turgut Uyar in this book is not Apollonian, but Dionysian, to refer to Nietzsche’s well-know dichotomy, one that the poet himself conceptualizes as “clumsiness”, something that makes the reader feel a sense of incompleteness before the whole work.