The Fez–Hat Struggle in the Context of Symbolic Values in the Turkish Novel
Mehmet DoğanDress has a symbolic value and meaning that can be an indicator of the civilization, identity, political preferences, position or economic status of the person. Although this decisiveness is sometimes misleading as there is a relative uniformization of dressclothing with globalization, it can be said that the sharpest distinction is seen through dress-clothing in periods and countries where civilizations are separated from each other by sharp lines. Especially in traditionalist societies that resist change, clothing preserves its symbolic value and meaning as a taboo. The most important garments that carry a symbolic meaning and value, at least in the late 19th and early 20th centuries that this article is about, are undoubtedly the headdresses. Attempts to change the headlines were actually seen as symbols of radical changes and a sign of obedience to power. In this article, we will try to determine the perception, meaning and values of the turban worn by the madrasians and Sufists, the fez, the headdress of the Muslim Ottoman community, the kalpak used by the supporters of the Kuvveyi Milliye, and the hat taken from the West in the Turkish society based on literary works.
Türk Romanında Sembolik Değerleri Bağlamında Fes-Şapka Mücadelesi
Mehmet DoğanKılık-kıyafet kişinin mensup olduğu medeniyetin, kimliğinin, siyasi tercihlerinin, mevkiinin veya ekonomik durumunun göstergesi de olabilecek sembolik bir değere ve anlama sahiptir. Küreselleşmeyle birlikte kılık-kıyafette nispi bir tek tipleşmeye doğru gidildiğinden bu belirleyicilik kimi zaman yanıltıcı olsa da, medeniyetlerin keskin çizgilerle birbirlerinden ayrıldıkları dönemlerde ve ülkelerde, denilebilir ki, en keskin ayrım kılık-kıyafet üzerinden görülür. Özellikle gelenekçi, değişime direnen toplumlarda giyim, tabu olarak sembolik değer ve anlamını korur. Sembolik bir anlam ve değer taşıyan, en azından bu makalenin konu edindiği 19. yüzyıl sonu ile 20. yüzyılın başlarında, en önemli giysi ise şüphesiz ki başlıklardır. Başlıkların değiştirilme girişimleri aslında radikal değişimlerin birer sembolü ve iktidara itaatin göstergesi olarak görülmüştür. Kimliğin, zihniyetin, statünün ve dinin sembolü olarak görülen başlıklar zihniyet değişiminin hem en sancılı süreci olmuş; hem de en belirgin göstergesi olarak toplumsal yaşama ve edebi eserlere yansımıştır. Bu makalede, edebi yapıtlardan hareketle medreselilerin ve mutasavvıfların sardığı sarık, Müslüman Osmanlı halk topluluğunun başlığı olan fes, Kuvâ-yı Milliye taraftarlarının kullandığı kalpak ve Batı’dan alınan şapkanın Türk toplumundaki algısı, anlam ve değerleri belirlenmeye çalışılacaktır. Makale, festen şapkaya geçişi yaşayan edebiyatçıların eserleriyle sınırlandırılmış, ele alınan yazarların bu değişimin izlerini taşıyan değerlendirmeleri ortaya konulmaya çalışılmıştır. Makalenin amacı edebiyat sosyolojisi yönteminden hareketle toplumun şapka karşısındaki reaksiyonlarının nedenlerini belirleyebilmektir.
The greatest factor in Fez reaching large masses in the Muslim Ottoman society was II. It is the decree issued by Mahmud (1826). It is stated that the main reason for the popularization of the fez, which is accepted as the official “clothes” after the abolition of the Janissary House, is “Sultan Mahmut Han’s determination to leave no memories and works resembling the old age in order to eradicate the janissary” (Pakalın, 1993: 611). Since there is no unity of dress in the Ottoman society, fez is assigned as a common heading for “members of every religion and community in order to eliminate the dressing difference between Muslims and non-Muslims” (Pakalın, 2013: 614). Fes was first imported from Tunisia and France (1826), and later from Austria (1832). Austrian goods are boycotted because Austria, from which the fezes were imported, attacked Bosnia-Herzegovina. Due to this boycott, fezes were removed and thrown on the ground.
The greatest factor in Fez reaching large masses in the Muslim Ottoman society was II. It is the decree issued by Mahmud (1826). It is stated that the main reason for the popularization of the fez, which is accepted as the official “clothes” after the abolition of the Janissary House, is “Sultan Mahmut Han’s determination to leave no memories and works resembling the old age in order to eradicate the janissary” (Pakalın, 1993: 611). Since there is no unity of dress in the Ottoman society, fez is assigned as a common heading for “members of every religion and community in order to eliminate the dressing difference between Muslims and non-Muslims” (Pakalın, 2013: 614). Fes was first imported from Tunisia and France (1826), and later from Austria (1832). Austrian goods are boycotted because Austria, from which the fezes were imported, attacked Bosnia-Herzegovina. Due to this boycott, fezes were removed and thrown on the ground.
The socio-cultural clues behind the biggest reaction of the reforms against the Hat Revolution can be captured from these narratives. Historical texts are insufficient to explain the dimensions and reasons of this social reaction. On the other hand, the presence of some details in the relevant literary texts that provide material for sociological readings partially gives clues to the mysteries of this social reaction. Looking at today’s value judgments, it is not possible to understand neither the hat revolution nor the reaction against this revolution. Historical texts are far from giving this to us. Although it is not reflected in literary texts in a neat way, it is possible to trace the symbolic value that the people of the period attributed to the hat and fez from some scraps scattered among them.
The novel is open to sociological readings; Therefore, they are the reference sources for the enlightenment of the periods, mentalities and events. Of course, this determination should be made, considering that fiction-based genres are not exactly history or sociology. So what; Sometimes and events based on fiction gain more importance than historical documents, sometimes they can be a source almost alone for sociological determinations. In this context, the novels of the period are important sources for understanding the reforms of the Atatürk period and evaluating them with a more accurate expression. Although it caused mass reactions, as far as we can see, we have not encountered any novel that tells about the effects of the Hat Law, or at least partially that deals with these reactions. However, we tried to reach a whole based on the information given in one or a few sentences in some novels.
Halide Edip, one of the authors discussed in the article, had negative feelings towards the hat. Halide Edip’s “assimilation of the Eastern-Islamic culture with his heart, though he is Western with his mind” is effective in this. However; he seems to have adopted the hat in his later novels. Yakup Kadri drew attention to the hat with a story in a very early period among the writers discussed, and stated indirectly, even if not directly, that the society found the hatred of the hat as exaggerated and unnecessary. However, the fact that the fez, whose symbolic value came to the fore during the years of the War of Independence, was not digested by the occupying officers, also reflected in his novel. On the other hand, Peyami Safa; He mentions in his novels that being headless was not accepted for a man during the Ottoman period. From his narrative there is the impression that he finds this imposition of tradition unnecessary. Hat or fese, on the other hand, does not impose symbolic meanings and values that go beyond their own. Although Refik Halit Karay reflects the symbolic meaning attributed to the fez and hat by the society, it does not express a value judgment in his expression. Kemal Tahir sees the hat as an indicator of a mentality change.
