Jungian Edebiyat Eleştirisi Bağlamında Cemal Süreya Şiirinde Kendini Gerçekleştirme BiçimleriAli Karahan, Tuğrul Bakır
İkinci Yeni, Türk şiirinde bireyselleşmenin önemli nirengi noktalarından biridir. 1940’lı yılların şiiri araçsallaştıran Toplumsal Gerçekçi ekolüne karşı ortaya çıkan hareket içerisindeki şairler, kişisel konuları, değişimleri ve varoluşsal sorunları imge yoğun bir dille işlemiştir. Bu durum şiirlerde kapalılığı ve anlama zorluğunu ortaya çıkardığı için yapısalcı eleştiri, metinlerarası ilişkiler ve Jungian edebiyat eleştirisi gibi farklı kuramsal yaklaşımların kullanılması şiirleri çözümlemede zorunludur. Cemal Süreya, şiirinde bir İkinci Yeni şairi olarak imge ve sembolleri yaygın bir şekilde kullanmıştır. Dolayısıyla kullandığı imgeler ve karakterler, bilinçdışından gelen semboller şeklinde açığa çıkan bir yapıya sahiptir. Bu, şairin istemli olarak tasarladığı bir olgu olmaktan çok Carl Gustave Jung’un ifadesiyle kolektif bilinçdışından gelen birtakım itkilerin, şiir yazma sürecinde şairi yönlendirmesinin sonucudur. Cemal Süreya şiirini inceleyen araştırmacılar, arketipsel eleştiri yöntemini kullanarak şiirlerdeki arketipal tarzları irdelemiştir. Ancak Cemal Süreya’nın şiirlerindeki arketiplerin bir birey olarak kendini gerçekleştirmede ve selfe/aşkınlığa/erginlenmeye ulaşma yolunda nasıl bir etki oluşturduğu sorusu henüz cevaplanmamıştır. Bu çalışma, Cemal Süreya şiirini arketipsel eleştiri yöntemiyle incelerken, şairin şiire bakışını ve şiirini kendi psişesini yansıtma biçimi olarak hangi itkilerle oluşturduğunu ortaya çıkarma amacı ile kaleme alınmıştır.
Forms of Self-realization in the Cemal Süreya Poetry ın the Context of Jungian Literature CriticismAli Karahan, Tuğrul Bakır
The Second New Poetry movement is one of the important periods in Turkish poetry, with a focal point of individualization. The poets handled personal issues, changes and existential problems with image-intensive language during this movement, which emerged in opposition to the instrumentalizing of poetry by the social realist school of the 1940s. Since this situation reveals the difficulty of understanding poetry, it is necessary to use different theoretical approaches, such as structuralist criticism, intertextual relations, and Jungian literary criticism, to analyze poems of the period. As a member of The Second New poetry movement, Cemal Sureya makes great use of images and symbols in his poetry. As such, images and characters used in the poems are presented in the form of unconscious impulses. Rather than being a phenomenon purposefully designed by the poet, this process is, as Jung puts it, the result of impulses from the collective unconscious directing the poet during the writing process. Jung has already examined the archetypes found in Sureya's poems via the archetypal criticism method. However, the question of how the archetypes of Sureya's poems affect the self-realization of an individual and the way to reach self-transcendence/initiation remains unanswered. The present study has been prepared to reveal the poet’s view of poetry and the impulses of his poetry as a way of reflecting his psyche by through the archetypal poetry criticism method.
According to Carl Jung, archetypes are a collective reflection of the experiences of the human being on the unconscious over different periods. These archetypes can emerge from the psyche of the person for various reasons, and they can be involuntarily processed by an artist when producing art. In the 1920s, Jung began to espouse different views than his contemporary and friend Sigmund Freud. Jung moves away from Freud’s literary analysis with his works. According to his ideas and contrary to Freud’s thinking, symbols do not originate from the reflection of sexual fantasies but instead come from the collective unconscious, which is an realm of the unknown. After abandoning Freud’s ideas, Jung began to analyze artistic works through his newfound perspective, including Picasso’s paintings and the novel Ulysses. Jung believed that all art can be divided into two major categories: psychological works, in which the psychological implications are fully explained by the author, and visionary works, in which humanity’s deep fears, anxiety, and expectations are expressed without any intention. Based on Jung’s categorization of artworks, we would say that Sureya’s poetry belongs to the second category of works. In order to understand his fear, desire, hopes, and thoughts, we need to deeply examine all of his poems.
Both in Turkish literature and the literature of other cultures, it can be seen that fairy tales, myths, poems, and novels are directed by archetypal patterns. Therefore, Jungian criticism helps us understand the work in question by revealing the motivation of the artist when producing their work, through such notions as intertextuality, structuralism, and a critical analysis of the work. The Second New Poetry literary movement stands out in terms of individuality and an intense usage of image, reflecting the artist’s hopes, emotions, thoughts, fears, and desires. In this way, these works also reflect the manners/approaches of the poets found in their psyche. Based on the view that each person strives to achieve self-realization and that their paths are differentiated, Sureya also conveys the path of self-realization in his poems in a unique way.
Researchers who have examined the poetry of Sureya have already examined the archetypal styles in the poems through the archetypal criticism method. However, the question of how the archetypes of Sureya’s poems have an effect on the self-realization of an individual and on reaching self-transcendence/initiation remains unanswered. This study, while examining the poetry of Sureya with the method of archetypal criticism, was produced with the aim of revealing which impulses the poet tried to convey in his poems as a way of reflecting the poet’s view of the poem and his own psyche.
In the poems of Sureya, sexual intercourse and the act of being with a woman synchronize with initiation and transcendence. Most of the female characters in his poems take on a guiding role or accompany the protagonist/individual on the journey. The subjects of the poems affirm the woman who attempts to break through social norms in the same way the protagonist/ individual/poet does. The poet connects the traits of these females to goddess figures.
On the other hand, people who conform to social norms are criticized in Sureya’s poems. It appears that Sureya moved away from such ideas as human beings oscillating between the thought of survival and giving up on life and became obsessed with darkness and persona in the process of being with women. In this way, the subject of the poems, who take togetherness as their path to self-realization, are inspired by the societal, religious, historical, and political personalities who lived at different stages of human history. Thus, it became easier for the poems to be adopted by the masses they addressed. Through his poetry, Sureya strengthened the love archetype which he embodies by borrowing from some aspects of characters in legends and folktales. While some of these selections are voluntary, in others, the unconsciousness directs the subject of the poem by getting involved in the processes. In this way, it can be considered that similarly-qualified women interact with the subject of the poems with the guidance of the poet’s anima archetype. The way the poetic subjects reach the self is similarly handled: by them being with a woman. The same idea is seen in the desire to continue living after being helped by women, thus having the subject of the poem overcome the desire to die.
The present work has been prepared to explain the history of archetypal criticism and archetypal manners in both Turkish Literature and the literature of other cultures. In addition, this study will be seek the archetypes of Sureya’s poems in light of Jung’s four major archetypes found in his categorization of analytical psychology