Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-s2hrs Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-08T18:29:46.039Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Emergence and equivocal autonomization of a Kurdish literary field in Turkey

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  20 November 2018

Clémence Scalbert-Yücel
Clémence Scalbert-Yücel*
Affiliation:
Institute of Arab and Islamic Studies, University of Exeter, United Kingdom
*
∗Email: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Drawing on field theory, this paper aims to shed light on the development and functioning of the Kurdish literary world in Turkey, characterized, in particular, by the use of a non-official language. It argues that this “small literary world” is to be understood in relation to a “double macrocosm”: the sphere of Kurdish politics and the national Turkish sphere, which provide specific constraints and resources. The paper argues that in such a context the emergence of a literary field, autonomous from other social fields and independent from political stakes, follows an unpredictable path, and will not always be achieved political dimension of the literary act stresses its dependency on political stakes and the field of politics. This however does not impede the emergence of autonomous literary institutions. The multilingualism of the actors involved drives also toward another heteronomy: this small literary world is also to be understood in relation to the Turkish literary field. The paper first presents the macrocosms in which Kurdish literary activities developed. It then examines the progressive integration of a field freeing itself from political constraints. Lastly, it focuses on the trajectories of a few writers, the analyses of which show the intertwining of the different worlds.

Keywords

literary fieldsmall literatureKurdish literatureTurkey
Type
Special Section: The Autonomy of Minority Literature
Information
Nationalities Papers , Volume 40 , Issue 3 , May 2012 , pp. 357 - 372
Copyright
Copyright © 2012 Association for the Study of Nationalities 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Apalategui, Ur. “Territoire linguistique et littéraire: adéquations et décalages.” Lengas 56 (2004): 17–46. Print.Google Scholar
Arì, Arjen. Ramŭsan min veşartin li geliyekì. Istanbul: Avesta, 2000. Print.Google Scholar
Arì, Arjen. Bakŭrě Helbestě. Antolojiya Helbesta Bakŭr. Duhok: Weşaněn Ekìtiya Nivìsarěn Kurd. 2007. Print.Google Scholar
Arjen, Arì. Destana Kawa ŭ Azhì Dehaq — Kawa Destana ve Azhi Dehaq. Istanbul: Evrensel, 2011. Print.Google Scholar
Bay, Yasemin. “Temiz bir şiir yazamam.” Milliyet, 5 January 2007. Web. <http://sanat.milliyet.com.tr/-temiz-bir-siir-yazamam-/edebiyatkitap/haberdetay/05.01.2007/533263/default.htm>..>Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. “Le champ littéraire.” Actes de la recherche en sciences sociales 89 (1991): 4–46. Print.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. “Existe-t-il une littérature beige? Limites d'un champ et frontières politiques.” Etudes de lettres 4 (1985): 3–6. Print.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. The Field of Cultural Production: Essays on Art and Literature. Cambridge: Polity, 1993. Print.Google Scholar
Bourdieu, Pierre. The Rules of Art: Genesis and Structure of the Literary Field. Palo Alto: Stanford UP, 1996. Print.Google Scholar
Bozarslan, Hamit. “Some Remarks on the Kurdish Historiographical Discourse in Turkey (1919–1980).” Essays on the Origins of Kurdish Nationalism. Ed. Abbas, Vali. Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda (2003): 14–39. Print.Google Scholar
Casanova, Pascale. The World Republic of Letters. Cambridge, MA: Harvard UP, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Cewerì, Firat. “Antolojiya bìra windabŭyì bi dest dixe.” Tìroj 6 (2004): 6–8. Print.Google Scholar
Cewerì, Firat. Antolojiya çìrokěn Kurdì: 1856–2003. İstanbul: Weşaněn Nŭdem, 2003. Print.Google Scholar
Cewerì, Firat. “Çend Gotin.” Nŭdem 1 (1992): 3. Print.Google Scholar
Cewerì, Firat. Ez ě yekì bikujim. Istanbul: Avesta, 2008. Print.Google Scholar
Cewerì, Firat. “Surgŭn ŭ Edebiyata Kurdì.” Nŭdem 33 (2000): 96–105. Print.Google Scholar
Ferguson, Charles. “Diglossia.” Words 15 (1959): 325–340. Print.Google Scholar
Fishman, Joshua A. “Bilinguism With and Without Diglossia, Diglossia With and Without Bilinguism.” Journal of Social Issues 23.2 (1967): 29–38. Print.Google Scholar
Gardy, Philippe, and Lafont, Robert. “La diglossie comme conflit: l'exemple occitan.” Langages 61 (1981): 75–93. Print.Google Scholar
Gauvin, Lise. Langagement. L'ěcrivain et la langue au Québec. Montréal: Boréal, 2000. Print.Google Scholar
Kemal, Yaşar. “Zimanekì gelekì (netewekì) diafirìne.” W 13 (2007): 91. Print.Google Scholar
Kızılkaya, Muhsin. Sen ŭ Ben Anılarla Mehmed Uzun'un Hayatı. Istanbul: İthaki, 2008. Print.Google Scholar
Lahire, Bernard. “Champ, hors-champ, contrechamp.” Le travail sociologique de Pierre Bourdieu. Ed. Lahire, Bernard. Paris: La découverte, 1999. 23–57. Print.Google Scholar
Lahire, Bernard. La condition littéraire. La double vie des écrivains. Paris: La découverte, 2006. Print.Google Scholar
Meillet, Antoine, and Cohen, Marcel, eds. Les langues du monde. Geneva, Paris: Slatkine, 1981. Print.Google Scholar
Saint-Jacques, Denis, and Viala, Alain. “A propos du champ littéraire: histoire, géographie, histoire littéraire.” Le travail sociologique de Pierre Bourdieu. Ed. Lahire, Bernard. Paris: La découverte, 1999. 59–76. Print.Google Scholar
Samancı, Suzan. Rezine Kokuyordu Helìn. Istanbul: İletişim, 2002. Print.Google Scholar
Samanci, Suzan. Korkunun Irmağında. Istanbul: Metis, 2004. Print.Google Scholar
Samanci, Suzan. Halepçe'den Gelen Sevgili. Istanbul: Sel, 2008. Print.Google Scholar
Sarıoğlu, Sezai. “Eşik te ve “Öte-bölge≫ de yazılan Şiirler.” Yasakmeyve 6 (2004): 112–119. Print.Google Scholar
Sarıoğlu, Sezai. “Metin Kaygalak ve Mehmet Butakin ile Dellileri Okumak.” Yasakmeyve 6 (2004): 120–128. Print.Google Scholar
Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence. “The Blurred Borders of Kurdish Literature in Turkey.” Middle Eastern Literatures 14.2 (2011): 171–184. Print.Google Scholar
Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence. Conflit linguistique et champ littéraire kurde en Turquie. Ph.D. diss., U Paris 4 — Sorbonne, 2005. Print.Google Scholar
Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence. “La diaspora kurde en Suède. Conservation, production et diffusion d'un savoir linguistique.” European Journal of Turkish Studies 5 (2006). Web. 24 May 2010.Google Scholar
Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence. “Les langues des Kurdes de Turquie: la nécessité de repenser l'expression langue kurde.” Langage et Société 117 (2006): 117–140. Print.Google Scholar
Scalbert-Yücel, Clémence. “The ‘Liberalization’ of Turkish Policy towards the Kurdish Language: The Influence of External Actors.” The Kurdish Policy Imperative. Ed. Lowe, Robert and Stansfield, Gareth. London: Chattam House, 2010. 116–129. Print.Google Scholar
Tejel Gorgas, Jordi. Le mouvement kurde en exil. Continuités et discontinuités du nationalisme kurde sous le mandat français en Syrie et au Liban (1925–1946). Bern: Peter Lang, 2007. Print.Google Scholar
Uzun, Mehmed. Destpěka Edebiyata Kurdì. Lěkolìn. Ankara: Beybŭn, 1992. Print.Google Scholar
Uzun, Mehmed. Hawara Dicleyě. Istanbul: Avesta, 2001. Print.Google Scholar
Uzun, Mehmed. Tŭ. Spånga: Dengě Komal, 1984. Print.Google Scholar
Uzun, Mehmed. Ronì mìna evìně, tarì mìna mirìně. Istanbul: Avesta, 1998. Print.Google Scholar
van Rees, Kees, and Dorleijn, Gillis J. “The Eighteenth-Century Literary Field in Western Europe: The Interdependence of Material and Symbolic Production and Consumption.” Poetics 28 (2001): 331–348. Print.Google Scholar
Werner, Michael. “La place relative du champs littéraire dans les cultures nationales. Quelques remarques à propos de l'exemple franco-allemand.” Philologiques III. Qu'est ce qu'une littérature nationale? Approches pour une théorie interculturelle du champ littéraire. Ed. Espagne, Michel and Werner, Michael. Paris: Maison des Sciences de l'Homme, 1994. 15–30. Print.Google Scholar