“Grant Neither Equality Nor Freedom” Yahya Kemal and Power
Mehmet SamsakçıLike other branches of fine arts, literature, and power have always had elbow contact. Over the centuries, Turkish poets established poetic relations with the then-rulers, the sultans, and high-ranking statesmen. They often wrote poems of praise, and sometimes they wrote critical poetry. However, since the beginning of the westernization period, that is, from the gradual decline of central authority, after the demise of the empire and the establishment of the nation-state, these relations gained a completely different dimension. The relation with the power of Yahya Kemal, who was born during the period of Abdülhamid, and who witnessed the Constitutional and National Struggles and the establishment of the Republic, became a matter of debate. Some poets, researchers, and literary historians have heard quite speculative opinions about Yahya Kemal’s attitude over political power. In this study, we critique these comments and evaluations, and we emphasize the neutral position of the poet in relation to the state and its policies.
“Ne Müsâvâtı Ne Hürriyeti Ver” Yahya Kemal ve İktidar
Mehmet SamsakçıGüzel sanatların diğer şubeleri gibi edebiyatın da iktidarla daima dirsek temasları olmuştur. Yüzyıllar içerisinde Türk şairleri de iktidarla yani padişah ve yüksek dereceli devlet adamları ile poetik ilişkiler kurmuşlar, çok defa övgü bazen de yergi şiirleri kaleme almışlardır. Batılılaşma döneminin başından beri, yani merkezî otoritenin derece derece azalmasından, imparatorluğun yıkılıp ulus-devletin kurulmasından sonra ise bu ilişkiler bambaşka boyutlar kazanır. II. Abdülhamid devrinde doğan, Meşrutiyet ve Millî Mücadele süreçlerinin bizzat içinde olan, Cumhuriyet’in kurulmasına şahitlik eden Yahya Kemal’in de iktidarla ve devletle münasebetleri tartışma konusu olmuş, bazı şairler, araştırıcılar ve edebiyat tarihçileri Yahya Kemal’in siyasal iktidar karşısındaki tutumları hakkında oldukça spekülatif satırlar kaleme almışlardır. Bu çalışmada önce bu yorum ve değerlendirmelerin bir eleştirisi yapılacak ve tarafsız şekilde şairin devlet ve politika karşısındaki duruşu üzerinde durulacaktır.
As in other fields of fine arts, literature has always been associated with power. Over centuries, Turkish poets established poetical relations with the then-rulers, the sultans, and the high-ranking statesmen, many times in praise of them and occasionally in creating satire about them. Since the beginning of the westernization period, that is, since the gradual decline of the central authority, after the demise of the empire and the establishment of the nation-state, these relations acquired completely new and different dimensions. Yahya Kemal was born during the reign of Abdulhamid II, and lived through the Constitution and the National Struggle. An important subject of current debate is the relationship of power and state with Yahya Kemal, who witnessed the establishment of the Republic. Some poets, researchers, and literary historians have heard quite speculative opinions about Yahya Kemal’s attitudes toward political power. In this article, we critique previous comments and evaluations, and we impartially examine the poet’s position in relation to state and politics. By Ece Ayhan’s description, Yahya Kemal “stood like a stone.” After the declaration of the Republic, he embraced the language he had blessed as “mother’s milk in my mouth.” He encouraged the adoption of the civilization’s language without submitting to any modalism, singularity, or insistence. Yahya Kemal neither supported the Constitutional Revolution nor the National Literature, especially that of Ziya Gökalp, in the language. He did not force Turks in Central Asia to use it, nor did he insist on the simplification which is a consequence of the Turkish language’s natural structure. He noticed that the words are not etymologically derived from the root, but rather an expression and product of the nation, and of civilization. To be objective, let us emphasize that Yahya Kemal lived in fear of being called conservative. In fact, he did not publish his gazel “Söz Meydanı” for Hz. Muhammad with this title. That is, he did not show a hard, radical opposition during the years when very serious changes and transformations took place in Turkey. But it should not be forgotten that Yahya Kemal’s thought and aesthetics were never involved in actual politics; he preferred to dissolve his ideas and acceptances within the mood of his art. Secondly, the appointment of Yahya Kemal as deputy and ambassador should be seen as an honorable state obligation. It is obvious that it is not appropriate for a poet to describe himself as a “poet of the state” in a negative way because of his duty to the state. In addition, the concept of the state was very difficult to communicate. Ece Ayhan, a graduate of the Faculty of Political Sciences, always criticizes the state in a negative way, and is regarded as the guardian of the order. This has never been applied in a negative sense about the works of Yahya Kemal, because he understands the state and knows that to lose it would mean disaster. Yahya Kemal, who accuses some poets and critics of being “Ottoman lovers,” “enemies of the Republic,” and even some of them “poets of the republican regime,” represents neither the epicenter of Ottoman history nor the Republican enemy. Yahya Kemal is a neo-classical person who knows that it is not possible to understand today and the future by denying history. He is trying to seek the correct sources of Turkish nationality and civilization on the verge of the 20th century. The works of Yahya Kemal are not related to the current policy of Turkey, which has experienced very rapid changes during the first half of the 20th century. These artifacts are the aesthetic interpretation of the foundations of a civilization that has dominated various parts of the world since 1071, and that has left deep traces in science, art, and culture. In fact, as with many intellectuals of the time, and necessarily in various units of the state, Yahya Kemal did not give his art or his thought to the emancipation of politics or politicians. He did not contribute poetry of straight and hard political ideas or philosophies. Moreover, Yahya Kemal opposed his understanding of art being expressed in the work as if it is concrete reality. Yahya Kemal’s poems are based on an aesthetic interpretation of reality, not concrete reality. It may contain words or concepts used by Yahya Kemal’s art, politics, or government, but these words and concepts lose their everyday and political meanings in his poetry. These words and concepts are a matter of history of civilization and culture. In light of all these comments and information, we have tried to evaluate Yahya Kemal’s interpretations of relation to “power” and reveal the aspects of the subject that have not been discussed before.
