Emergence and equivocal autonomization of a Kurdish literary field in Turkey

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 field
• small literature
• Kurdish literature
• Turkey

Notes

I wish to thank the two anonymous referees for their insightful comments on the first version of this article.

With the exception of Bourdieu's short article dealing with Belgian literature in which he lays out his conception of this field (“Existe-t-il une littérature belge?”).

The field is a “microcosm” with its own rules and values, more or less independent of the “macrocosm” in which it is situated (Lahire, “Champ, hors-champ” 24–25).

The specificity of the literary universe with highly blurred borders is underlined by Lahire, who stresses the fact that there is no such profession as writer and there is no definitive sanction on who belongs or not to this universe (diploma). Instead of the field, Lahire extends the metaphor of the game to describe the literary condition (“La condition littéraire”).

The Kurdish language is not unified, being composed of two main languages or dialects (according to definitions and points of view). Kurmanci is spoken in all parts of Kurdistan (Turkey, Syria, Iran, and Iraq); Sorani is only spoken in Iraq and Iran. According to some Western classifications, Zazaki, which is spoken only in Turkey, is not a Kurdish language (e.g. Meillet and Cohen) while others consider it a Kurdish language or dialect. This said, most Zazaki-speakers consider themselves to be Kurds. Kurmanci and Zazaki are usually written in the Latin alphabet while Sorani is usually written in the Persian-Arabic script. On the question of the uses of the terms “Kurdish languages” or “Kurdish dialects,” see Scalbert-Yücel, “Les langues des Kurdes.”

Field research was conducted in Turkey (mainly Istanbul and Diyarbakir) from 2001 to 2005 and in Sweden in 2003, and has been completed by other field work in Turkey in the second half of the 2000s. It is based on interviews with publishers and writers (any individual who has published at least one book is considered a writer), observations (publishing houses, bookshops, literary fairs, and festivals), and analyses of written sources (journals and magazines).

Diglossia refers to a social situation in which two language varieties (or two languages) coexist but with different functions, and, according to some authors, with different values and status, and different degrees of standardization (Ferguson; Fishman). Language conflict is a situation where two languages confront one another, one being politically dominant and the other politically dominated (Gardy and Lafont).

Kurdish literature is said to have emerged in the eleventh century with Elî Herîrî. The apogee of classical Kurdish literature is situated around the fifteenth to seventeenth centuries with Melayê Cizîrî and Ahmedê Xanî.

This term builds on Hamit Bozarslan's notion of the “nationalist historian” – “who is rarely only an historian.” We should note that such intellectuals appeared first in the 1930s in the Kurdish diaspora in Syria, around the journal Hawar.

The appearance of such a generation is made possible by the hegemony of the PKK in the political sphere but also in the cultural one: an important movement grew around the PKK, hegemonic in the different spheres of the struggle – even the cultural one. One should not neglect, however, literary works produced by writers either hostile to this movement (thus refusing to publish in its journals) or from different ideological backgrounds (Islamist for instance) with different ideological-cultural institutions.

Nubihar means “New spring” and is also the name of a work by Ahmedê Xanî (1650–1707).

These three authors also have prominent para-literary positions in the Kurdish sphere. Selahattin Bulut owns the only Kurdish bookshop in Istanbul and as such is at the heart of the Kurdish literary network; Lal Laleş is a poet and an editor at Lîs (a growing publishing house in Diyarbakir); Şener Özmen also works for Lîs and is a young artist participating in international exhibitions. Parıltı, Abidin. “Dağınık hayatlar, parçalanmış hikâyeler.” Radikal Kitap, 7 November 2008. Web. <http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalEklerDetayV3&ArticleID=906948&Date=19.08.2011&CategoryID=40> Parıltı, Abidin. “Dışardaki hapishane.“ Radikal Kitap. 21 November 2008. Web. <http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalEklerDetayV3&ArticleID=909114&CategoryID=40> Parıltı, Abidin. “Bir ruhun pesinden kosmak.” Radikal Kitap. 10 April 2009. Web. <http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalEklerDetayV3&ArticleID=930296&CategoryID=40>. A few more recent articles deal with Diyarbakir's authors (Parıltı, Abidin. “Diyarbakır yeniden nefes alırken.” Radikal Kitap. 14 May 2010. Web. <http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalEklerDetayV3&ArticleID=996443&CategoryID=40)> or the Kurdish literary world in general, including Turkey (Parıltı, Abidin. “Kürtçe yayın dünyasının dünü bugünü.” Radikal Kitap. 13 May 2011. Web. <http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=RadikalEklerDetayV3&ArticleID=1049304&CategoryID=40&Rdkref=1>. For all Parıltı's articles published in Radikal Kitap see http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx?aType=MuhabirArama&Keyword=AB%DDD%DDN%20PARILTI

Extra-literary factors like friendship or family networks are important to consider in explaining translation choice.

Translation is indeed not a simple change of language (horizontal) but a form of literary consecration (vertical) since it gives “access to literary visibility” (Casanova 198–202).

This is well underlined by Mehmed Uzun (Destpêka Edebiyata Kurdî, 1992, 96). For the young generation, see for instance the special issue of Yasak Meyve (number 6, 2004) which deals with “Kurdish poets writing in Turkish”. The special issue of Yasakmeyve (number 6, 2004) deals with “Kurdish poets writing in Turkish.”

See for instance the special issue of Yasak Meyve on “Kurdish poets writing in Turkish” (number 6, 2004).

This approach is strongly influenced by the one of Chypriot poets like Mehmet or Neşe Yaşin.

This is not without difficulties: one of his translators, Muhsin Kızılkaya, wrote that all the big publishers in Turkey had rejected the translation of his first novel (Kızılkaya).

One of his works of poetry has been published in Kurdish and Turkish by Evrensel (Arî. Destana Kawa). Another writer living in Turkey has also recently been translated into Turkish (Bulut. Hadim).

The example of Yasar Kemal is the most significant. Though he positioned himself as a sort of godfather for Kurdish writers (and especially for Mehmed Uzun), though he also recognized his Kurdish origins and is sympathetic to the Kurdish cause, and though his works are strongly inspired (among other sources of inspiration) by Kurdish culture and regions, Kemal however clearly stated: “I am Kurd too. But I am not a Kurdish writer” (91).

Halabja is a town in Iraqi Kurdistan that was completely destroyed and its population gassed by Saddam Hussein's army in March 1988. Newroz, celebrated 21 March, is the Kurdish New Year. It has become a symbol of the Kurdish rebellion. Its celebration was banned in Turkey until the late 1990s.

She is the only writer of non-Kurdish language who has a place in the anthology. Firat Cewerî explains how he decided to include Samancı (“Antolojiya bîra windabûyî”). He distinguishes between two kinds of writers of Kurdish origin: those who do not know Kurdish and do not wish to go back to this literary language, and those who know Kurdish and wish to go back to this language. According to him, Samancı belongs to this last category. It was to encourage her that he included her in the anthology, acknowledging her belonging to the Kurdish literature.