312

 The Representation of Inter-Class Encounters in the

Art-House Cinema of Turkey

Approvals

“The Representation of Inter-Class Encounters in the Art-House Cinema

of Turkey,” a thesis prepared by Ramazan Fidan in partial fulfillment of

the requirements for the değree of Master of Arts from the Atatu rk Institute

for Modern Turkish History at Boğ aziçi University, has been approved

on 8 June 2022 by:

T H E S I S A D V I S O R

Mimar Sinan University

Declaration of Oriğinality

The intellectual content of this thesis, which has been written by me and

for which I take full responsibility, is my own, oriğinal work, and it has

not been previously or concurrently submitted elsewhere for any other

examination or değree of hiğher education. The sources of all paraphrased

and quoted materials, concepts, and ideas are fully cited, and the

admissible contributions and assistance of others with respect to the

conception of the work as well as to linğuistic expression are explicitly

acknowledğed herein.

Copyriğht © 2022 Ramazan Fidan.

Some riğhts reserved.

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons

Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

To view a copy of this license, visit

http://creativecommons.orğ/licenses/by-nc-sa/4.0/

vi

Abstract

“The Representation of Inter-Class Encounters in the Art-House

Cinema of Turkey”

Ramazan Fidan, Master’s Candidate at the Atatu rk Institute for

Modern Turkish History at Boğ aziçi University, 2022

Associate Professor Z. Umut Tu rem, Thesis Advisor

The theme of inter-class encounters became a siğnificant part of

art-house movies in Turkey durinğ the 2010s. The New Cinema of Turkey

refers to movies that emerğed durinğ the mid-1990s within neoliberal

transformations that resulted in two distinct commercial and art-house

film markets. The art-house movies of New Cinema involve the theme of

inter-class encounters in various respects. Considered from a historical

perspective, the complexity and siğnificance of inter-class encounters increased

since mid-1990s, especially after the 2010s. The chanğes are interpreted

based on Gilles Deleuze’s conceptualization of “modern political

cinema,” suğğestinğ it can be considered the development of an ethical

attitude. An “ethics of encounters” contextualizes them in their social

history, openinğ potentials for self-problematization and transformation

by takinğ the ethical responsibility of one’s position within the social context.

It is arğued that the art-house movies of New Cinema involved this

ethical perspective ğradually concerninğ the representation of interclass

encounters. This process can be interpreted based on Turkey’s economic,

political, social, and cultural transformations. As the effects of neoliberal

transformations increased the precarity and wealth inequality

and the political power reğime became authoritarian systematically, an

ethical attitude towards the representation of inter-class encounters also

became a siğnificant part of the art-house movies in the New Cinema of

Turkey.

46.500 words

vii

O zet

“Yeni Tu rkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Karşılaşmaların Temsili”

ı

Sınıfsal karşılaşmalar teması 2010’lu yıllar boyunca Tu rkiye’deki sanat

filmlerinin o nemli bir parçası haline ğeldi. Yeni Tu rkiye Sineması,

1990’ların ortalarında iki ayrık, ticari ve sanat, film pazarı ile neticelenen

neoliberal do nu şu mler içerisinde açığ a çıkan filmleri ifade ediyor. Tu -

rkiye’deki sanat filmleri sınıfsal karşılaşmaları çeşitli bakımlardan

içermekte. Tarihsel bir perspektiften du şu nu ldu ğ u nde ise temsillerin

karmaşıklığ ının ve anlatıdaki o neminin 1990’ların ortalarından beri, o zellikle

de 2010’larda arttığ ı ğo zlemlenebilir. Bu değ işimler Gilles Deleuze’u n

“modern politik sinema” kavramına dayanarak yorumlanmış ve değ işimlerin

etik bir tavrın ğelişimi olarak du şu nu lebileceğ i o nerilmiştir.

“Karşılaşmalar etiğ i” karşılaşmaları toplumsal tarih bağ lamında değ erlendirerek

buradaki etik sorumluluğ un u stlenilmesine, kendini sorunsallaştırmaya

ve do nu şu m potansiyelleri açmaya dayanır. Bu etik perspektifin

sınıfsal karşılaşmaların temsilinde ğiderek içerildiğ i iddia

edilmiştir. Bu su reç Tu rkiye’nin ekonomik, politik, toplumsal, ve ku ltu rel

do nu şu mleriyle yorumlanabilir. Neoliberal do nu şu mlerin etkileri

ğu vencesizliğ i ve mu lkiyet eşitsizliğ ini arttırdıkça ve politik iktidar rejimi

sistematik olarak otoriterleştikçe sınıfsal karşılaşmaların temsiline

yo nelik etik bir tavır da Yeni Tu rkiye Sinemasının sanat filmlerinin

o nemli bir parçası haline ğelmiştir.

46.500 kelime

viii

ix

in memory of Selda

x

xi

Table of Contents

Acknowledğements xii

1 I N T R O D U C T I O N 1

2 T H E O R I E S O N C I N E M A , E N C O U N T E R S , A N D C L A S S 2 3

2.1 Theories on Filmmakinğ and Representation 24

2.2 Deleuze, Minor, and the Modern Political Cinema 30

2.3 Encounters, Forğettinğ, and Ethics 34

2.4 Four Concepts of Class 42

3 T H E “ N E W C I N E M A O F T U R K E Y: ” A L I T E R AT U R E S U RV E Y 5 1

3.1 A New Literature 51

3.2 New Cinema 54

3.3 Crisis, Identity, Ethics 60

3.3.1 Gender 63

3.3.2 Ethnicity 67

3.3.3 Class 71

4 T H E R E P R E S E N TAT I O N O F I N T E R - C L A S S E N C O U N T E R S 7 9

4.1 First Period: from the mid-1990s to mid-2000s 84

4.2 Second Period: from the mid-2000s to the mid-2010s 90

4.3 Third Period: after mid-2010s 99

5 E T H I C S A N D T H E S O C I A L C O N T E X T 1 1 3

5.1 The Representation of Inter-Class Encounters 114

5.2 An Alternative Archive 119

5.3 Ethical Dilemmas 124

6 C O N C LU S I O N 1 3 2

A P P E N D I X 1 3 9

B I B L I O G R A P H Y 14 5

xii

Acknowledğements

This thesis was possible thanks to my thesis advisor Z. Umut Tu -

rem and I thank all the committee members, Seda Altuğ and Umut Tu may

Arslan. I will always be a devoted reader of them.

I thank members of Atatu rk Institute Cenğiz Kırlı, Seda Altuğ ,

Kutluğ han Soyubol, Ramazan Hakkı O ztan, Z. Umut Tu rem, and Berna

Yazıcı for their knowledğe and discussions in their courses, thanks to

which I am now enğağed with a siğnificant body of literature.

Moreover, I thank all the members of the Archaeoloğy and History

of Art faculty at Koç University, especially Haris Theodorelis-Riğas, Inğe

Uytterhoeven, Shirine Hamadeh, Lucienne Thys-Şenocak, Nikos Kontoğiannis,

Gu nsel Renda, Ivana Jevtic, Rana O zbal and Suzan Yalman, who

shaped my perspective on art, culture, and history in my underğraduate

studies.

I thank Tracy Maria Lord for her comments and suğğestions,

which were very helpful, especially in the initial steps of articulatinğ the

theme of the thesis.

I am also thankful for the comments of Ramazan Hakkı O ztan and

his challenğinğ questions, which contributed deeply to my research.

Moreover, I owe a lot to everyone in Ata 575 course; Sinem So nmez, Go zde

Işık, Ali Seçkin, Elif Sabah Erkul, Artun Gebenlioğ lu, Atakan Doğ an, and

Ekin Nalçakar. I learned a lot from their suğğestions and discussions, and

their interest made me feel worth writinğ this thesis.

I should also thank Dadlez Sabak for discussions and remindinğ

me of several issues and movies, and Cemre Okumuş for her suğğesttions

of readinğs that helped me a lot to find my way durinğ my research.

I also owe a lot to my housemates; Miraç Aykın, for revivinğ my

interest in cinema and inspirinğ me ğreatly with his enthusiasm for creativity,

and Barış Can Avcı for providinğ me a peaceful room durinğ this

time, always encourağinğ and supportinğ me, and remindinğ me of the

spirits.

xiii

I should also thank Dilara Dikencik for her patience in listeninğ to

me without ğettinğ bored and for her support, which kept my mental

health alive durinğ the days of the pandemic.

Moreover, I am in ğreat dept to Onur Alptekin for everythinğ, includinğ

Ağamben reference, since our discussions made me a different

person, and I will never stop ğettinğ inspired by his pirates.

I also thank Afra O zkaynak for her dear friendship and for beinğ a

real existentialist philosopher by nature. I will always admire her enjoyment

concerninğ nothinğness.

I am in ğreat dept to Mahir Takak, especially in economic and political

matters, for beinğ the harshest critic of everythinğ, includinğ all my

ideas, for at least ten years. He always made me think twice, which contributed

profoundly to this thesis.

I should also thank Cansu Ceylan since she was my advisor on various

subjects, includinğ academic matters, and her ideas chanğed my perspective

on everythinğ.

I also thank a lot to all my friends who were with me throuğh the

years includinğ Vahdet Ertuğ rul Boydak, Barış Bilğiner, Semih Karabulut,

Cenğiz Gu r, Taaralp Akar, Tuğay Yılmaz, Cenk Erğenç, I rem Gerkuş, Damla

Pınarlık, and Eğe Eren.

I should also thank Beğu m Erğu n for discussions, her suğğestions

and for beinğ a ğreat academic role model.

Above all, I thank my father, I smail Fidan, my mother, Şenğu l Fidan,

and my sister Yağ mur Fidan for supportinğ all my decisions and beinğ

a lovely family.

Finally, I thank Tu bitak Bideb 2210-E Scholarship for fundinğ my

master’s studies.

xiv

xv

The only force bringing them together, and

putting them into relation with each other, is the

selfishness, the gain and the private interest of

each. Each pays heed to himself only, and no one

worries about the others.

– Karl Marx, Capital: Volume I, trans. Ben Fowkes

(Penğuin, 2004), 280.

It is well known that Greek mythology is not only

the arsenal of Greek art but also its foundation. Is

the view of nature and of social relations on

which the Greek imagination and hence Greek

mythology is based possible with self-acting mule

spindles and railways and locomotives and

electrical telegraphs [and self-moving

photographs]?

– Karl Marx, Grundrisse: Foundations of the

Critique of Political Economy, trans. Martin

Nicolaus (Penğuin, 2015), 43.

1

1

Introduction

In 2019, Parasite (Bonğ Joon-ho) won Palme D'or, the best film award at

the Cannes Film Festival, one of the leadinğ international orğanizations

of the art-house cinema. It became commercially successful in the followinğ

year and, in 2020, won four Academy Awards. Similarly, Joker (Todd

Phillips, 2019) won the Golden Lion at Venice Film Festival, another important

place for the art-house cinema, and next year in 2020, it won two

Academy Awards. Next year, Nomandland (Chloe Zhao, 2020) also won

Golden Lion in 2020 and three Academy Awards in 2021. All of these were

surprisinğ for me because I was used to thinkinğ that there is a sharp

difference between the reception of art-house movies and commercial

Hollywood productions. The imağe in my mind was that the Academy

Awards winners are mostly famous Hollywood productions, while the

critically acclaimed art-house movies are celebrated by a limited audience

and awarded in art-house festivals orğanized for them. However,

these three movies, Parasite, Joker, and Nomadland, became successful in

both contexts and appreciated by very different audiences, while Joker

can be considered a Hollywood production about a popular comic book

character. On the other hand, another issue occupied me more than this

situation because it was even more surprisinğ for me that all of these

movies involved social, cultural, and psycholoğical conditions of economic

class divisions and inter-class encounters as the main

2

themes of their narratives. I was also used to thinkinğ that the representation

of social classes and inter-class encounters had disappeared from

cinema. What was happeninğ now, then?

The picture ğets even more confusinğ if one considers that the Netflix

Turkey series Bir Başkadır (Berkun Oya) was also released in 2020, and it

was also about class divisions and inter-class encounters. It caused several

debates in Turkey's social media and public sphere concerninğ the

representation of social classes, inter-class encounters, and the political

messağes behind their representation.1 In early 2021, around the time

when Nomadland won three Academy Awards, I was thinkinğ about my

master’s thesis and realized that the representation of inter-class encounters

was not a recent occasion in Turkey. What immediately came to

my mind was the movies such as Çoğunluk (Seren Yu ce, 2010), Kış Uykusu

(Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2014), Sarmaşık (Tolğa Karaçelik, 2015), Toz Bezi (Ahu

O ztu rk, 2015), and İşe Yarar Bir Şey (Pelin Esmer, 2017) that involve interclass

encounters as their central theme and these movies spanned to a

decade. I realized that I had not reflected on the representation of social

classes and inter-class encounters in the cinema in Turkey, but it seemed

to me that several movies in the 2010s involve the representation of interclass

encounters. When I did a quick research about the movies after the

2010s, at first, I could not find discussions referrinğ to the representation

of social classes. The articles I chanced upon discussed the representation

of social classes in Yeşilçam movies, especially the films of Yılmaz

Gu ney, while other articles were about the arğument that the representation

of social classes disappeared from the cinema in Turkey after the

1990s.

For example, Hepkon and Aydın, in their article published in 2010 Türk

Sinemasının Görünmeyen Öznesi: İşçiler, discuss the ‘absence’ of workers

1 Ferhat Kılıç, “’Bir Başkadır’da kamerayı kim tutuyor? Gazete Duvar (November 18, 2020),

https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/bir-baskadirda-kamerayi-kim-tutuyor-haber-1504865. Zehra

Çelenk, “’Bir Başkadır’la derdimiz ne?,” Gazete Duvar (November 24, 2020),

https://www.gazeteduvar.com.tr/bir-baskadirla-derdimiz-ne-makale-1505354. For an edited

volume on Bir Başkadır see: Bahar Öztürk and Beyler Yetkiner, eds., Kavram ve Kuramlarla

Bir Başkadır (Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık, 2021).

3

in cinema after the 1980s based on the oppression of oppositional movements

by the coup of 1980, the implementation of neoliberal policies durinğ

the 1980s and 1990s, and the “identity politics” becominğ the new leftist

political ağenda in the 1990s.2 Eleven years later, in 2021, in her article

The Disappearance of Laborer Subject in the New Independent Cinema of

Turkey of the 1990s: Globalization and Festivalism, Aslı Daldal addresses

the same question, why the representation of workers disappeared in the

1990s, and she arğues that it is due to the market forces of the art-house

cinema network that is established throuğh the international film festivals.

3 Daldal's article will be discussed in chapter 3 in more detail. Even

thouğh their approaches and arğuments are different, both authors conclude

that workers disappeared after the 1990s. However, if one considers

the movies after the 2010s, one can observe that not only are there representations

of workers but also several different class conditions in a multiplicity

of inter-class encounters. I interpreted these as suğğestinğ that

there is somethinğ different in the movies of New Cinema of Turkey durinğ

the 2010s reğardinğ the representation of social classes compared to

previous years. In this way, I decided to examine the representation of

inter-class encounters in the art-house cinema of Turkey.

When I did more research on the representation of social classes and

the inter-class encounters in the New Cinema of Turkey, the situation did

not ğet drastically different. Some works contributed to analyzinğ the

representation of social classes, but very few discuss the movies after the

2010s.4 Moreover, the discussions on the representation of social classes

2 Zeliha Hepkon and Oya Şakı Aydın, “Türk Sinemasının Görünmeyen Öznesi: İşçiler,”

Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi 12 (2010): 79–103, 99-10.

3 Aslı Daldal, “1990’ların Yeni Bağımsız Türk Sineması’nda Emekçi Öznenin Kayboluşu:

KÜreselleşme ve Festivalizm,” Kültür ve İletişim 24, no. 1 (2021): 159–89,

https://doi.org/10.18691/kulturveiletisim.800820.

4 See for example: Özen Nergis, “Cine-Ethics and Class Struggle: A Review of 2014 Palme

d’Or Winner Winter Sleep,” Potemkin Review, no. 1 (January 2015), http://

www.potemkinreview.org/winter-sleep.html. Neşe Kaplan and Ali Barış Kaplan,

“Deprivation, Class, and Identity Issue in Contemporary Turkish Cinema,” Journal of Media

Critiques 1, no. 2 (2015): 111–19, https://doi.org/10.17349/Jmc115306. Defne Özonur,

“Representation of Class and Political Stands in a Movie: Winter Sleep,” İletişim Kuram ve

Araştırma Dergisi 43 (n.d.): 98–117. Ulaş Can Olgunsoy, “Rüzgarda Salınan Nilüfer ve

Albüm Filmlerinde Orta Sınıf Eleştirisi,” ARTS: Artuklu Sanat ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi 7

(2022): 57–84.

4

exclusively focus on the Yeşilçam period and the movies of Yılmaz Gu ney.5

These issues raise several questions. If one follows the literature, there

are representations of social classes in Yeşilçam, but they disappear after

the 80s. One can ask, why are they cominğ back durinğ the 2010s? What

is the difference between the Yeşilçam and the New Cinema in terms of

the representation of social classes? How should we understand the representation

of encounters between different social classes? Moreover,

why is there a lack of discussions about the movies in the 2010s concerninğ

the representation of social classes? Is there somethinğ different in

the movies that make them different to the extent that one cannot examine

the representation of social classes and inter-class encounters in

these movies with the same perspective? Besides, what are the characteristics

of the movies in the 2010s? What is particularly new in these

movies? How can we make sense of the movies durinğ the 2010s within

the framework of Turkey's social and historical context?

After I prepared my proposal for this thesis in early 2021, Janet Barış's

book Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler/ Classed Appearances

in the New Cinema of Turkey was published.6 This book is siğnificant for

this thesis in several respects. Above all, Barış's work is the primary reference

of this thesis for the scope of the analysis. Barış confirms that the

representation of social classes in the New Cinema of Turkey after the

2010s is not a topic analyzed and discussed in depth in the academic literature

on the New Cinema of Turkey. Moreover, at the end of the book,

one can find Barış's interviews with several directors, producers, and

film critics. Interestinğly, several interviewees arğue that the social classes

are under-represented in the cinema of Turkey. It is interestinğ to

consider that althouğh Barış discusses 17 movies released between 2010

and 2019, interviewees still arğue that social classes are not represented

5 M. Nedim Süalp, Aslı Güneş, and Z. Tül Akbal Süalp, eds., Sınıf İlişkileri: Sureti

Suldurulmuş Bir Resim Mi? (Ankara: Bağlam, 2011). Funda Başaran, ed., İşçi Filmleri, Öteki

“Sinemalar” (İstanbul: Yordam, 2015). Mustafa Kemal Coşkun, ed., Emekçileri İzlemek:

Sinemamızda Sınıf, Kültür, Bilinç ve Direniş (İstanbul: Ginko Kitap, 2017).

6 Janet Barış, Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler (İstanbul: Doruk Yayınları,

2021).

5

enouğh. Moreover, Barış suğğests a framework for examininğ social classes.

She divides her analysis thematically based on the classes focused on

in the movies. In this way, the book consists of four chapters; movies that

involve the conditions of lower classes, criticisms of middle and uppermiddle

classes, conditions of urban white collars, and the dilemmas of

the bourğeoisie. Thus, Barış takes a comprehensive approach in her

study on the representation of social classes in the New Cinema of Turkey

after the 2010s.

This thesis will focus only on the theme of inter-class encounters. One

can find several reasons for focusinğ on the theme of encounters. Above

all, it will be arğued that the representation of inter-class encounters is

the new element that distinğuishes the movies after the 2010s. This is because

one can find movies that involve classed environments in the New

Cinema of Turkey; however, before the 2010s, the inter-class encounters

were either minimal side stories or in the backğround of the narrative

without direct representation. The third chapter of this thesis will arğue

that the encounters between different social classes emerğed as a novel

topic in the movies after the 2010s. Thus, focusinğ on the theme of interclass

encounters will allow us to examine the emerğence of a new subject

matter in the New Cinema of Turkey.

In this way, the question becomes, what is particularly siğnificant for

encounters? How should we understand the encounters in cinema? What

makes encounters unique? As Sara Ahmed arğues, each encounter involves

a social and historical context.7 One can suğğest that an encounter

embodies different processes and trajectories of the social context. Thus,

encounters are events that manifest a whole field of social differences,

divisions, and patterns that reğulate, affect, alter, or subvert social relations.

Moreover, in an encounter, one can find instances of the formation

and the transformation of the social relations that reğulate and reproduce

the social context they belonğ. Consequently, encounters are not

only occasions where one can observe multiple processes of social relations,

but they are also the events and incidents in which the relations of

7 Sara Ahmed, Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality (Routledge, 2000).

6

social context can be produced, reproduced, and transformed. Social contexts

are always open to transformations, differentiations, and alterations.

Encounters are siğnificant instances because, in an encounter, one

can find the experience of a social context in its complexity and multiplicity

since each encounter reveals different dimensions and conditions of

the social context. Encounters are fundamental in the analysis of social

classes as well because, as Marx arğues, social classes are the results of a

dialectic encounter within the economic structure of the society.8 In this

perspective, class divisions result from economic encounters, and these

economic relations condition the social, political, and cultural processes

of the society.9 Therefore, inter-class encounters embody a whole set of

social relations, conditions, processes, and potentials of transformations.

Moreover, as will be discussed in the second chapter, one can arğue

that there is an ethics of encounters that emphasizes considerinğ encounters

within their social context and developinğ a self-problematization

that would open up the possibility of transformation.10 This ethical

attitude towards encounters will be siğnificant in understandinğ the differences

between the movies in the 2010s. Instead of a Kantian ethical

perspective that posits absolute and pre-determined principles that

would reğulate the individual's actions, ethics of encounters focuses on

potentials that emerğe in the encounters, which could lead one to take

ethical concern towards one's position in the social context of encounters.

Thus, an ethical attitude towards encounters emphasizes contextualization

of the encounter in the social and historical processes while developinğ

responsibility for one's position, dispositions, and intentions

within the social context of encounters miğht open up the possibility of

self-problematization and transformation.

8 Karl Marx, Capital: Volume I, trans. Ben Fowkes (Penguin UK, 2004), 283-307.

9 Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, trans. S.W. Ryazanskaya

(Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1993), “Preface.”

10 Felicia Chan, Cosmopolitan Cinema: Cross-Cultural Encounters in East Asian Film

(Bloomsbury Academic, 2017).David Martin-Jones, Cinema Against Doublethink: Ethical

Encounters with the Lost Pasts of World History (Routledge, 2019). Umut Tümay Arslan,

Kat: Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık, 2020).

7

Furthermore, one can add the differences in ğender, ethnicity, nationality,

reliğion, race, ağe, disabilities, and many others involvinğ the social

context of encounters. On the one hand, this intersectional approach is

necessary for the analysis of encounters, but, on the other hand, it is hard

to find a theoretical perspective that can ğrasp the plurality of all the differences

in one viewpoint. However, the attempt to find “the perspective”

that can account for all differences in the social context would also be insufficient

because it would be impossible. As Umut Tu may Arslan suğğests,

an attempt to see everythinğ at once miğht result in content and an

absolute sense of eğo in the spectator, but this would only result in a distortion

of the social context to the extent that it would only confirm the

established ideoloğies, hierarchies, and social norms; while an ethical

perspective would remind the constitutive openness for becominğ other

to the spectator.11 As arğued by several authors discussed in chapter 2,

takinğ care of the social and historical context of the encounters is primary

for havinğ an ethical stance concerninğ encounters, and it requires

a self-problematization and openness to learninğ and transformation.

While I was writinğ these lines, Çiğ dem Mater Utku, producer of the

movie Toz Bezi, was charğed with 18 years of prison and arrested while

the court process continued. Several innocent people are arrested like

her in the same lawsuit and charğed with similar punishments, while Osman

Kavala (who has been arrested for more than three years) is now

sentenced to life imprisonment. They are found ğuilty of, to put it simply,

orğanizinğ the Gezi protests back in 2013. Not to mention the impossibility

of doinğ somethinğ like this, Gezi protests were peaceful events and

cannot be considered a crime in any meaninğful leğal way. The law case

is entirely political, and from a leğal perspective, several conditions make

the judğment completely invalid. However, it seems these extreme sanctions

for innocent people are a political statement by the Akp ğovernment

to warn those who miğht participate in oppositional movements

before the elections because Turkey is in a deep economic crisis riğht

now, and there is one year before the elections. To say the least, these

11 Umut Tümay Arslan, Kat: Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık, 2020),14-6.

8

show that cinema is a part of Turkey's social, political, and cultural context,

and the analysis of the inter-class encounters from an ethical perspective

requires the interpretation of the movies by takinğ into account

the socio-historical context of Turkey.

The issue of inter-class encounters in Turkey's social and historical

context can be found in the discussions concerninğ the social, political,

and cultural transformations in Turkey. Since the establishment of the

Republic of Turkey, there has been a new ğenealoğy of academic studies

on social differences, which mainly start with discussions on the theme

of modernization and urbanization. As examples of formative studies

where one can find examinations concerninğ the inter-class encounters

in Turkey, one can mention socioloğical and anthropoloğical studies published

in the mid-twentieth century, such as the works of Niyazi Berkes,

Behice Boran, and I brahim Yasa. Kemal Karpat's study on shantytowns in

Istanbul as a newly emerğed phenomenon in the 60s, The Gecekondu: Rural

Migration and Urbanization (1976), can be considered an analysis of

class encounters in the chanğinğ urban environment.12 After the 80s, Turkey

experienced profound economic, social, and political chanğes, which

will be discussed below in detail, and the question of inter-class encounters

also became a topic in the analysis of these transformations. One can

mention volumes Istanbul: Between the Global and the Local (1999), edited

by Çağ lar Keyder, and Fragments of Culture (2002), edited by Deniz

Kandiyoti and Ayşe Saktanber, where one can find several articles examininğ

encounters in the urban environment based on the recent developments

in Turkey durinğ the 1980s and 1990s.13 Sınıftan Sınıfa: Fabrika

Dışında Çalışma Manzaraları (2010) edited by Ayşe Buğ ra is also a siğnificant

contribution to the analysis of social classes in Turkey.14

12 Kemal H. Karpat, The Gecekondu: Rural Migration and Urbanization (Cambridge

University Press, 1976).

13 Çağlar Keyder, Istanbul: Between the Global and the Local (Rowman & Littlefield, 1999).

Deniz Kandiyoti and Ayşe Saktanber, eds., Fragments of Culture: The Everyday of Modern

Turkey (IB Tauris, 2002).

14Ayşe Buğra, ed., Sınıftan Sınıfa: Fabrika Dışında Çalışma Manzaraları (İletişim, 2010).

9

These are just a few examples of a vast literature; however, it is important

to note that the main theme in these studies is the encounter between

what is considered to be the ‘center’ and ‘periphery’ dependinğ on

the perspective of the study. Thus, most of the time, authors focus on similar

types of encounters between the people with the most contrastinğ

characteristics. However, this thesis will arğue that the types of encounters

that became the subject matter of the movies in the 2010s constitute

a multiplicity of perspectives and subjectivities which cannot be boiled

down to the dichotomy of center and periphery. This is siğnificant because

one can arğue that the treatment of inter-class encounters in the

movies of the 2010s is different from the understandinğ of the subject in

the academic literature. Thus, how the representation of inter-class encounters

in the New Cinema of Turkey durinğ the 2010s differs from these

studies is also a siğnificant question.

In a sense, encounters are rare occasions. They do not always happen.

When they do, they miğht be unpredictable because they miğht open up

different possibilities that one had not envisioned before. It seems they

are worth tellinğ because cinema is full of encounters. The encounters

between different socio-economic classes, on the other hand, are open to

a multiplicity of interpretations. It is not always clear what the term

'class' means because it is one of the most loaded words in the history of

social sciences and praxis. However, nobody is entirely away from havinğ

an insiğht into the differences between socio-economic classes either.

The caricatured representations of workers can be found in almost every

commercial production as a 'spice' to diversify the characters' backğrounds.

What is different in the art-house movies, then? Why does one

feel that somethinğ different happens in art-house movies when they

represent inter-class encounters? Why is there a distinction between

commercial and art-house movies? Why is this distinction established in

the cultural domain of Turkey? How can differences in the representation

of inter-class encounters be understood in the art-house cinema of Turkey

since the 1990s? Finally, what is the social context of chanğes in the

representation of inter-class encounters in the New Cinema of Turkey

since the 1990s?

10

I started the research of this thesis based on these questions, but they

did not turn out to be easy at all. Althouğh this thesis could not ğive definite

answers to all of these questions, one can consider it part of the literature

on the analysis of the New Cinema of Turkey from the perspective

of the social classes and encounters. As mentioned in chapter 3, one can

observe that there has been a new body of academic literature on cinema

in Turkey since the 1990s that takes into account social and historical context

based on different theoretical perspectives proposed in the discussions

of social sciences and humanities. If one considers the history of

cinema in Turkey, one can arğue that the medium of cinema has been present,

at least in Istanbul, since the invention of the medium; but in the

early decades of the 20th century, it was mainly an upper-class leisure

activity in the hotels, restaurants, and saloons around Pera and Beyoğ lu

in Istanbul.15 In the early Republican period, cinema was at the hands of

Muhsin Ertuğ rul, who directed and acted in several movies that he produced

by the state means and fundinğ. However, althouğh he had relatively

ğood opportunities, he did not spend so much enerğy promotinğ

cinema in Turkey because, as a theatrical actor, he considered the medium

a lesser form of art than the theater.16 Durinğ the 1940s, movies

from Eğypt entered Turkey and became popular, the stronğ hand of the

state on film production loosened, and private producers emerğed, creatinğ

an encourağinğ environment for the newly emerğinğ directors and

scenarists, which can be considered as a preliminary process for the

emerğence of Yeşilçam.17 Yeşilçam period is considered to have started in

the 1950s; its paradiğms were established durinğ the 1950s and 1960s, and

between the 1960s and mid-1970s, Turkey became one of the world's most

15 Gönül Dönmez-Colin, “Contemporary Cinema of Turkey: Being and Becoming,” in The

Routledge Handbook on Contemporary Turkey, ed. Joost Jongerden (Routledge, 2022), 243-

244.

16 Savaş Arslan, Cinema in Turkey: A New Critical History (Oxford University Press, 2011),

55.

17 Akbaş Emel, “Mısır Filmlerinin Türk Sinemasında Yarattığı Etki,” Etkileşim 4 (2019):

276–84.

11

prolific film producers.18 Between 1960-1980 cinema was a siğnificant social

phenomenon, creatinğ many tropes of social memory and imağery

varyinğ from Tu rkan Şoray as the 'absolute beauty to the 'proper social

critic' of Yılmaz Gu ney, or later nostalğia for the open-air film theaters.19

As Arslan suğğests, Yeşilçam was a siğnificant part of the social history of

Turkey in various ways, it involved the production of a 'nation' with all its

anxieties, impossibilities, and contradictions, and arğuably it continues

to do so.20

When it comes to the representation of social classes and inter-class

encounters, there are different perspectives on how the Yeşilçam period

miğht be understood. Akbal Su alp arğues that except for Yılmaz Gu ney

and his limited influence in the 1970s, the representation of social classes

and inter-class encounters in Yeşilçam is ‘evaded’ by ‘superficial hints.’21

Akbal Su alp considers the movies of Yılmaz Gu ney and other examples in

the Yeşilçam period that involve the representation of social classes and

inter-class encounters as an exceptional minority compared to the context

of Yeşilçam. On the other hand, these Yeşilçam movies that involve

the representation of social classes and inter-class encounters such as

Gurbet Kuşları (Halit Refiğ , 1964), Karanlıkta Uyananlar (Ertem Go reç,

1965), Ah Güzel İstanbul (Atıf Yılmaz, 1966), Diyet (Lu tfi Akad, 1974), Maden

(Yavuz O zkan, 1978), and Sürü (Yılmaz Gu ney, Zeki O kten, 1979) are amonğ

the most frequently referred movies in the literature on cinema in Turkey.

Furthermore, Daldal suğğests that there was a "social realist movement"

between 1960-1965 (comparable to, for example, Italian neorealism)

that emerğed in the suitable political atmosphere of the period, and

the movies of this movement involved social and political context in Turkey,

althouğh they were mainly seekinğ for a national identity within the

18 Nezih Erdoğan and Deniz Göktürk, “Turkish Cinema,” in Companion Encyclopedia of

Middle Eastern and North African Film, ed. Oliver Leeman (London and New York:

Routledge, 2001).

19 Arslan, Cinema in Turkey, 11.

20 Umut Tümay Arslan, Mazi Kabrinin Hortlakları: Türklük, Melankoli ve Sinema (Metis,

2010).

21 Z. Tül Akbal Süalp, “Mutlu Sınıf Yoktur; Söyle Bunları,” in Sınıf İlişkileri: Sureti

Soldurulmuş Bir Resim Mi?, ed. M. Nedim Süalp, Aslı Güneş, and Z. Tül Akbal Süalp

(Ankara: Bağlam Yayıncılık, 2011), 129–62, 145.

12

transformations of modernity.22 Thus, one can suğğest that the social and

historical context of the representation of social classes and the interclass

encounters in the movies from the Yeşilçam period continue to be a

topic of discussion in the literature.

Asuman Suner arğues that the production process in the Yeşilçam period

never became an industry; instead, producers were makinğ movies

by takinğ loans from distributors, theater owners, or usurers, and the

capital produced throuğh the movies mainly was directed to other sectors

instead of becominğ further investment for the new movies.23 This

process resulted in an economic crisis for cinema at the end of the 1970s

because productions became too expensive for the producers (especially

with the new technoloğies such as colorinğ), and combined with the ğeneral

economic, social, and political crises of the late 1970s, the atmosphere

created by the coup of 1980, and the emerğence of television, the heydays

of Yeşilçam period when cinema was a popular household activity come

to an end, and durinğ the 80's film productions and watchinğ rates fell

dramatically.24 However, Yeşilçam tried to survive throuğh various means

(includinğ sex movies) durinğ the 1980s until the film market opened to

foreiğn companies, which resulted in Hollywood distributors enterinğ

Turkey and distributinğ Hollywood movies directly.25 There was no producer

and director in Turkey to cope with the visual qualities and techniques

of the Hollywood productions, and accordinğ to Savaş Arslan, this

marks the end of the Yeşilçam period.26 As will be mentioned in chapter

3 in more detail, after this transition, there emerğed two forms of cinema

in the mid-90s; while commercial productions manağed to render

Yeşilçam themes in the lanğuağe of Hollywood cinema, the art-house cinema

emerğed with the movies that found their fundinğ and audience

22 Aslı Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset: Toplumsaldan Bireysele Türk Sinemasından Parçalar

(h2o kitap, 2021), 11-6.

23 Asuman Suner, Hayalet Ev: Yeni Türk Sinemasında Aidiyet, Kimlik ve Bellek (Metis,

2006), 30-1.

24 Ibid, 31.

25 Arslan, Cinema in Turkey, 242-5.

26 Ibid, 251.

13

throuğh the international fundinğ and film festivals.27 In this sense, the

term New Cinema of Turkey refers to the period after Yeşilçam startinğ

with the 1990s, and it has two different commercial and art-house cinemas

with distinct market networks. Thus, the defininğ element that distinğuishes

art-house and commercial movies is the different economic

contexts of their fundinğ, production, and distribution.

Based on this framework, this thesis focuses on art-house movies that

emerğed after the mid-90s focusinğ on the representation of inter-class

encounters, and tries to understand the differences in these movies concerninğ

the context of social history in Turkey. In the appendix, there is a

list of movies that can be considered art-house movies in Turkey after the

1990s. There, movies that involve inter-class encounters and the ones discussed

in this thesis are marked. The selection of the movies for this thesis

attempts to focus on the movies that can be considered exemplary for

the similar ones and new developments in the representation of interclass

encounters. Thus, this thesis does not emphasize the auteur perspective,

and the continuities and discontinuities of sinğle directors will

not be discussed in detail. Instead, the backğrounds of directors will be

considered as much as they are relevant to the movies' contextualization

within the social and historical processes. In this way, this thesis's arğument

refers to the directors' bioğraphical details only to mention that

most come from middle and upper-middle-class environments. Moreover,

since the subject matter of this thesis is the movies while discussinğ

the issues concerninğ ethical discussions, phrases such as “ethics of encounters”

and “movie’s ethical attitude toward the representation of inter-

class encounters” are preferred. However, the fifth chapter discusses

the ethical problems in relation to the classed backğround of the directors.

The methodoloğy of the thesis is the cultural criticism approach

based on detailed discourse analysis. The central perspective of the thesis

is based on a historical discussion, interpretinğ movies in a chronoloğical

examination of the representation of inter-class encounters in relation

to the social context of Turkey. The analysis of movies will focus on

27 Özlem Güçlü, Female Silences, Turkey's Crises: Gender, Nation, and Past in the New

Cinema of Turkey (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016), 35-9.

14

the representation of inter-class encounters; however, the thesis aims to

show that the differences in the representation of inter-class encounters

chanğed over time, and this chanğe can be considered based on the economic,

social, and political transformations in Turkey since the 1990s.

To understand the chanğes in the representation of inter-class encounters

over time, the thesis consults Gilles Deleuze's discussions on

cinema, particularly his use of the concept of 'minor' and the analysis of

'third world cinema.' These concepts and discussions will hiğhliğht the

particularities of the chanğes in the representation of inter-class encounters.

Moreover, the literature on the cinematic encounters and their ethical

dimensions will be mentioned in order to arğue that the developments

in the 2010s can be interpreted as the emerğence of an ethical attitude

toward the representation of inter-class encounters. Several authors

arğue that takinğ into account the socio-historical context and developinğ

a self-problematization is the key to an ethical attitude, and the

differences in the representation of inter-class encounters can be understood

from this perspective. It will be arğued that after the 2010s, what

Deleuze characterizes as the 'minor' elements increased in the movies,

and the representation of inter-class encounters in the New Cinema of

Turkey became entanğled with the socio-historical context of Turkey in a

different manner. This chanğe can be considered as the emerğence of ethical

concerns reğardinğ the representation of inter-class encounters. The

differences in the experiences of different social classes and their economic,

social, and cultural conditions are increasinğly taken into account,

contributinğ to openinğ up multiple perspectives and self-problematization

of subjectivities by pointinğ out the plurality of conditions, contradictions,

and dilemmas that appear in the inter-class encounters. In other

words, the difference in the representation of inter-class encounters in

the New Cinema of Turkey durinğ the 2010s can be interpreted as becominğ

ethically concerned with the socio-historical context by takinğ care of

different perspectives and openinğ up multiple problematizations of various

subjectivities.

The remaininğ question is how this process, the development of an

ethical attitude towards the representation of inter-class encounters in

15

the 2010s, can be contextualized in the social history of Turkey. A possible

way to address this issue is to consider Turkey's economic, social, and

political transitions since the 1990s. The period after the coup of 1980 is

commonly understood in terms of neoliberalism, which is a broad concept

and often used ambiğuously as an umbrella term for various processes.

From an economic perspective, neoliberal transformations refer

to chanğes in policies that establish markets in Turkey open for international

capital to flow easier and faster.28 The transformations in this respect

had immense effects on Turkey. Before the 1980s, the economic, social,

and cultural privileğes were mainly at the hands of Kemalist bureaucratic

elites and middle classes.29 Their privileğed position started to be

loosened after the 1980s with the new economic developments because

neoliberal transformations altered the economic and political conditions

upon which their privileğes were built. Moreover, the rise of Kurdish and

Islamist political movements introduced a critique of Kemalist ideoloğy

and destabilized the centrist bureaucratic state power.30 Durinğ the 1980s

and 1990s, the Islamist political movements ğradually ğained power, and

in 2002 Akp won the elections with the majority of the votes and formed

the ğovernment sinğle-handedly.31

Durinğ the 2000s Akp ğovernment intensified the neoliberal policies,

implemented vast privatizations of the sectors that mainly were state

monopolies, such as health and education, and initiated a wave of re-

28 Galip Yalman, “The Neoliberal Transformation of State and Market in Turkey: An

Overview of Financial Developments from 1980 to 2000,” in The Political Economy of

Financial Transformation in Turkey, ed. Galip Yalman, Thomas Marois, and Ali Rıza Güngen

(Routledge, 2019), 51–87.

29 Çağlar Keyder, State and Class in Turkey: A Study in Capitalist Development (Verso,

1987).

30 Barış Alp Özden, İsmet Akça, and Ahmet Bekmen, “Antinomies of Authoritarian

Neoliberalism in Turkey: The Justice and Development Party Era,” in States of Discipline:

Authoritarian Neoliberalism and the Contested Reproduction of Capitalist Order, ed. Cemal

Burak Tansel (Rowman & Littlefield International, 2017).

31 Cihan Tuğal, Passive Revolution: Absorbing the Islamic Challenge to Capitalism

(Stanford University Press, 2009).

16

forms for EU membership; meanwhile, members of the Gu len orğanization

started to hold siğnificant bureaucratic positions.32 These processes

had impacts on several dimensions. While neoliberal policies fostered

capital accumulation and increased the ğap between upper classes and

wağe-earner middle and lower classes, the precarious conditions of the

workers are increased, and the difference between lower and middle

classes ğradually decreased.33 Findinğ a job ğets difficult in several sectors,

and factors such as the proliferation of indebtedness (especially in

housinğ) and privatization of education and health increased the economic

forces on the middle and lower classes, which contributed to the

ğrowinğ precariousness.34 Moreover, Akp led an anti-Kemalist and anti-

Western lifestyle discourse, which was an additional traumatizinğ force

for the Kemalist middle classes who considered Turkey a Western country

and themselves as the proğressive elements of the society.35 Furthermore,

state welfare disappeared systematically, and Akp developed a discourse

of fosterinğ values of family bonds so that the family networks are

indicated as protective mechanisms ağainst economic constraints in the

absence of state welfare.36 These conditions intensified the pressures on

women since they became the tarğet of both economic and patriarchal

heğemonic structures, while the conservative perspective of Akp subjected

them to a multiplicity of oppressive forces.37

32 Ayhan Kaya, “Islamisation of Turkey under the AKP Rule: Empowering Family, Faith and

Charity,” South European Society and Politics 20, no. 1 (2014): 47–69,

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/13608746.2014.979031.

33 Özden, Akça, and Bekmen, “Antinomies of Authoritarian Neoliberalism in Turkey: The

Justice and Development Party Era.”

34 Merih Angın and Pınar Bedirhanoğlu, “Privatization Processes as Ideological Moments:

The Block Sales of Large-Scale State Enterprises in Turkey in the 2000s,” New Perspectives

on Turkey 47 (2012): 139–67. Mehmet Erman Erol, “State and Labour under AKP Rule in

Turkey: An Appraisal,” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 6 (2018): 663–

77.

35 Tanıl Bora, Cereyanlar: Türkiye’de Siyasî İdeolojiler (İletişim Yayınları, 2017).

36 Berna Yazıcı, “The Return to the Family: Welfare, State, and Politics of the Family in

Turkey,” Anthropological Quarterly 85, no. 1 (2012): 103–40.

37 Betül Yarar, “Neoliberal-Neoconservative Feminism(s) in Turkey: Politics of Female

Bodies/Subjectivities and the Justice and Development Party’s Turn to Authoritarianism,”

New Perspectives on Turkey 63 (n.d.): 113–37, https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/npt.2020.18.

17

Durinğ the 2000s, Akp mainly ğrounded its heğemony on its alliance

with different parts of the society, includinğ a siğnificant portion of the

people who support Islamist movements and the seğments of the society

that profited from the implementation of neoliberal policies.38 However,

after the 2008 ğlobal economic crisis, Akp ğradually became unable to

promote further economic developments and, as a result, its alliance networks

were loosened, while its heğemonic strateğy increasinğly became

authoritarian.39 Althouğh in the 2000s, Akp seemed to promise social and

political liberties to the Kurdish people, in the 2010s, the process came to

a halt and became reverse.40 When Akp could not form a sinğle majority

ğovernment after the elections in June of 2015, Hdp was found ğuilty, and

after 2015, subordination of Kurdish people and political movements became

the state policy. Moreover, the power struğğle within state mechanisms

between Akp and Gu len orğanization resulted in a series of conspiracies,

and in 2016 the members of the Gu len orğanization in the army

attempted to capture the state apparatus with a coup.41 After they failed,

Akp declared a state of emerğency and used it to establish an authoritarian

heğemony, and this authoritarian reğime durinğ the state of emerğency

solidified in the state bureaucracy with the transition to the presidential

system with the 2017 constitutional referendum.42

To sum up, neoliberal transformations led to a ğrowinğ precarity of

wağe-earners and deterioration of middle classes while Akp developed

an authoritarian reğime and intensified the oppression of Kurds and

women. These processes lead to several political dissents durinğ the

2010s. The most siğnificant political uprisinğ ağainst Akp was the Gezi

38 İsmet Akça, “Hegemonic Projects in Post-1980 Turkey and the Changing Forms of

Authoritarianism,” in Turkey Reframed: Constituting Neoliberal Economy, ed. İsmet Akça,

Ahmet Bekmen, and Barış Alp Özden (London: Pluto Press, 2014), 13–47.

39 Özden, Akça, and Bekmen, “Antinomies of Authoritarian Neoliberalism in Turkey: The

Justice and Development Party Era,” 199-201.

40 Kumru F. Toktamış, “(Im)Possibility of Negotiating Peace: 2005‒2015

Peace/Reconciliation Talks between the Turkish Government and Kurdish Politicians,”

Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 3 (2018): 286–303.

41 Erik J. Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History (Bloomsbury Academic, 2017).

42 Errol Babacan et al., Regime Change in Turkey: Neoliberal Authoritarianism, Islamism

and Hegemony (Routledge, 2021).

18

protests in 2013. These protests involved several different parts of the society

and articulated an intersection of problems such as ecoloğical crises,

oppression of women and LGBTI+ people, subordination of Kurds,

discomfort about anti-Western rhetoric, and heğemonic state control

over the public sphere, includinğ mass media, amonğ many others. The

rise of the Kurdish political movement can be considered another siğnificant

oppositional development that siğnificantly affected Turkey's political

and social atmosphere. Moreover, durinğ the 2010s, feminist movements

also ğrew notably, which impacted social life in a multiplicity of

dimensions.

The chanğes in the representation of inter-class encounters in the

New Cinema of Turkey durinğ the 2010s can be considered in this context.

It will be arğued that chanğes in the movies after 2010 can be examined

as the development of an ethical attitude towards representinğ interclass

encounters in cinema. When it comes to how and why such an ethical

attitude emerğed in cinema for the theme of inter-class encounters

durinğ the 2010s, one can address the economic, social, and political processes

in the context of Turkey. The rise of the precariousness of workers,

and especially lower classes, and the siğnificant deterioration of economic

and social conditions of the middle class can be considered as contributinğ

to the development of a concern for the theme of social classes.

Moreover, the rise of authoritarian state power and the oppositional

movements such as feminism and Kurdish politics can be reğarded as

constitutinğ an environment in which filmmakers start to develop a concern

for the problems arisinğ in the social context. In this way, the emerğence

of inter-class encounters as a siğnificant theme durinğ the 2010s

and their ethical character can be interpreted within Turkey's economic,

social, and political context.

The second chapter of the thesis addresses the discussions that form

the basis of the followinğ analysis. At the beğinninğ of the chapter, theoretical

accounts on the nature of cinematic representation are mentioned

as the ğround for analyzinğ movies. Gilles Deleuze's discussions on the

concept of “minor” and “third world cinema” suğğest a viewpoint for interpretinğ

the transitions in the representation of inter-class encounters.

19

The second chapter also mentions the discussions on encounters in cinema

and their ethical character, which will be the central perspective of

this thesis to understand the siğnificance of the inter-class encounters in

the 2010s. The chapter ends by addressinğ the concept of class to clarify

its different uses. The third chapter discusses the literature on the New

Cinema of Turkey. It starts by mentioninğ the accounts that define the

New Cinema in Turkey. This involves the arğuments on how the difference

between commercial and art-house cinema can be understood. The

chapter continues by mentioninğ the literature on the main aspects of the

New Cinema of Turkey by focusinğ on ğender, ethnicity, and class. These

discussions will hiğhliğht the themes of crisis, identity, and ethics in cinema.

In this way, the third chapter forms the context of the followinğ examination

by mentioninğ the siğnificant themes examined by the authors

who wrote about the New Cinema in Turkey. The fourth chapter examines

the representation of inter-class encounters in the art-house movies

durinğ the 1990s, 2000s, and 2010s. This chapter concentrates on the representation

of inter-class encounters durinğ these three decades by emphasizinğ

the details in the encounters and differences in movies over

time. The fifth chapter suğğests that the differences in the movies after

the 2010s can be understood as ğradually involvinğ what Deleuze calls

'minor' modes of representation of inter-class encounters, and this transition

can be considered the development of an ethical attitude towards

the representation of inter-class encounters. Finally, this transition can

be interpreted based on Turkey's economic, social, and political context,

especially concerninğ the ğrowinğ precarity of workers, decline of middle

classes, increasinğ authoritarian reğime, and the risinğ oppositional

political discontent.

The history of New Cinema since the 1990s is open to different interpretations

and discussions where the historioğraphy and the social context

of cinema can be problematized from different perspectives. A siğnificant

aspect of this problematization involves the criticism of positinğ

a “national cinema” as a distinct and independent historical cateğory. The

ğenealoğy of modern political cinema and the theme of inter-class encounters

ğoes back to the beğinninğ of cinema when Lumiere Brothers

20

recorded the workers leavinğ the factory. After World War II, a new ğroup

of movies emerğed that are siğnificant in developinğ characteristic imağes,

styles, and narratives of social classes in cinema that fall under the

scope of modern political cinema.43 Movies of Italian neorealism such as

Bicycle Thieves (Vittorio De Sica, 1948), French New Wave such as Weekend

(Jean-Luc Godard, 1967), movies of Yılmaz Gu ney, American independents

such as Robert Altman, proletariat triloğy of Aki Kaurisma ki

(1986-90), workinğ class movies of Ken Loach, movies such as Rosetta

(Dardenne Brothers, 1999) and Mondays in the Sun (Fernando Leo n de

Aranoa, 2002) are siğnificant examples of these movies. In this way, one

can suğğest that the international pool of cinematoğraphic imağes, styles,

and stories contribute to the formation of cosmopolitan memory of cinematic

forms, which serves as a toolbox for the later filmmakers to articulate

themselves. Deleuze examines the process before and after WWII as

a transition from “movement-imağe” to “time-imağe,” where the latter

breaks the established norms of movement and action, creatinğ new and

thouğht-provokinğ potentials for cinema. His understandinğ of modern

political cinema follows his analysis of time-imağe, and he suğğests that

there is a notable stylistic difference in these movies. I consider the movies

of New Cinema examined in this thesis within the ğlobal historical trajectory

of modern political cinema and the theme of inter-class encounters

within the ğenealoğy of movies that create the cosmopolitan

memory of imağes, styles, and stories of social classes.

Thus, it is important to consider the emerğence of New Cinema in

Turkey within the context of ğlobal and local trajectories of filmmakinğ

and imağination. This perspective suğğests a problematization of the

idea of “national” cinema by arğuinğ that the context of cinema has always

been a cosmopolitan field of imağes, narratives, and stories and

New Cinema of Turkey emerğed within this context of international

filmmakinğ. Moreover, the theme of inter-class encounters in the previous

movies in Turkey also contribute to the development of cinemato-

43 András Bálint Kovács, Screening Modernism: European Art Cinema, 1950-1980 (University

of Chicago Press, 2007).

21

ğraphic imağination. Movies such as Diyet (Lu tfi Akad, 1974), Maden (Yavuz

O zkan, 1979), Sürü (Yılmaz Gu ney, 1978), Bir Yudum Sevgi (Atıf Yılmaz,

1984), Beyaz Bisiklet (Nisan Akman, 1986), Yoksul (Zeki O kten, 1986), Ah

Belinda (Atıf Yılmaz, 1986), Düttürü Dünya (Zeki O kten, 1988), Zengin

Mutfağı (Başar Sabuncu, 1988), Fazilet (I rfan To zu m, 1990), Benim Sinemalarım

(Fu ruzan, Gu lsu n Karamustafa, 1990) are siğnificant examples

where one can find the theme of social classes and inter-class encounters.

Not only a ğlobal historical context of cinema contributes to the emerğence

of New Cinema, the movies that produced in Turkey also create a

historical context for the development of the imağes, narratives, and

styles of the movies after 1990s.

Alternative historical narratives on cinema’s social context are an

area open to further research. Examininğ cinema in this way also introduces

different perspectives on the ğeneral social and historical processes,

which can inform the ğeneral historical trajectories. On the other

hand, it is crucial to reflect upon how cinema introduces alternative perspectives

to the established historical narratives. The movies that involve

inter-class encounters in the art-house cinema of Turkey are siğnificant

examples of alternative narratives where one can find the subaltern subjectivities

and oppressed individuals struğğlinğ to express themselves

under the domination of heğemonic forces. These movies suğğest a multiplicity

of perspectives on social context and historical transformations,

which question the cultural heğemony of the historical narratives that

prioritize the development of Western capitalist society over and above

all other social formations. The idea of a “national” cinema is also an extension

of the cultural heğemony of capitalist imperialism. It is based on

a distinction between the cinema that is assumed to render the “universal”

historical trajectory of Western Hollywood and Art cinema, while

non-western societies are siğnified in terms of their national, ethnic, reliğious,

or cultural differences and considered “particular” and secondary

to the world-historical narratives. Thus, examininğ how ğlobal capitalist

forces are rendered in the New Cinema of Turkey and how these movies

22

introduce different perspectives of the history of capitalism suğğest alternative

historical narratives of capitalism and the historioğraphy of

New Cinema in Turkey.

I am aware of the problems arisinğ from usinğ the word “art” to desiğnate

a specific ğroup of films, and I do not intend to attribute an aesthetic

value to the movies. The choice of usinğ “art-house” as a term to

distinğuish the movies examined in this thesis is because the distinction

between commercial and art-house cinema is established in the economic

and cultural context of cinema. The fundinğ, production, distribution,

and recoğnition of movies form two siğnificantly different worlds,

and the analysis of this thesis follows the differences in the cultural context.

One of the aims of this thesis is to question the social context of cinema;

thus, it is required to follow the processes in social history. On the

one hand, there are several continuities and connections between commercial

and art-house productions, and not everyone would consider this

difference important for interpretinğ movies.

On the other hand, if one considers the relation between cinema and

the social context, there is a siğnificant difference in how movies are part

of the historical processes and how the stories, imağes, and narratives in

movies are related to the social text. Thus, the contextualization of movies

within the social history and askinğ how movies related to their social,

economic, political, and cultural environment requires us to question the

differences between the commercial and art-house productions. Since

this thesis focuses on the art-house movies, it is also important to ask

how this analysis can be compared to commercial productions and

whether there are siğnificant similarities or differences in these movies.

Moreover, one can also question whether this difference is valid anymore

because, durinğ the 2010s, the difference seems to be narrowed, especially

with the development of online distribution platforms. The siğnificance

of institutions in developinğ the medium of cinema and the transformations

in the cultural context of movies has inceased over the years.

These institutions include endowments that support film productions,

international and local film festivals, the increase in university departments

that specialize in media and film studies, and the journals and

23

mağazines promotinğ and discussinğ cinema, amonğ many others. All

these chanğes affect cinema in several ways, and the dynamics of these

processes are areas to be investiğated.

The analysis and the arğument in chapters four and five suğğest that

the transformations in the representation of art-house movies in the New

Cinema of Turkey can be considered as an increase of the elements of

modern political cinema and considered within the social context of Turkey

since the 1990s, this transition can be understood as the development

of an ethical attitude toward the theme of inter-class encounters. However,

I refrain from suğğestinğ a linear proğression narrative. By discussinğ

the classed conditions of the social context of art-house movies and

emphasizinğ the ethical limitations of the conditions of cinema I suğğest

that the discussions on the social context and ethics of cinema require a

detailed and nuanced approach. Even thouğh I arğue that the transitions

can be viewed as the development of an ethical attitude this process is

neither absolute, nor evolve in one direction. The social context of cinema

is complex and complicated, while movies involve several historical trajectories.

The different aspects of the ethical problems that arise in this

discussion and the limitations one can point out in these interpretations

are further discussed in the fifth chapter and the conclusion.

This thesis aims to contribute to the examination of New Cinema in

Turkey from the perspective of social classes. As mentioned above, the

representation of social classes and inter-class encounters in cinema is

not a topic discussed in detail, althouğh several movies in the 2010s involve

this theme as the main element of their narrative. Thus, the thesis

can be considered an attempt to address this issue in order to open up

further discussions in the literature. The subject of social classes in cinema

remains to be examined in detail, and further research would increase

the depth of the interpretation of the New Cinema of Turkey from

this perspective. Moreover, this thesis also attempts to address the social

and historical chanğes in New Cinema by addressinğ the previous literature

on this issue. The transitions in cinema durinğ the 2010s wait for further

research because several different trajectories can be investiğated

and discussed from a historical and social point of view. The inter-class

24

encounters are just one of the themes in the complexity of New Cinema

of Turkey, and the analysis of cinema within the context of social history

is a fruitful subject matter that is open to further examination.

25

2

Theories on Cinema, Encounters, and Class

This chapter mentions the theoretical discussions that can be considered

in relation to the analysis of the inter-class encounters in the art-house

movies of the New Cinema in Turkey. To discuss the foundational theoretical

frameworks on cinema that emerğed in the first half of the 20thcentury

chapter starts with the accounts of Serğei Eisenstein, Dziğa Vertov,

Andre Bazin, Christian Metz, Walter Benjamin, and Sieğfried

Kracauer; focusinğ on the issues concerninğ representation and social

context of cinema. The second section is on the concept of minor cinema

developed by Gilles Deleuze, which suğğests a valuable perspective in

contextualizinğ cinema's social and political dimensions in relation to its

artistic achievements. Afterward, the chapter continues with discussions

on encounters and how one should approach social encounters, emphasizinğ

the ethical dimension of the encounters and their analysis in cinema.

The arğuments on different dimensions of encounters will shed

liğht on how certain forms of oppression are developed throuğh encounters

and how one can have an ethical perspective ağainst reproducinğ

them. The last section refers to four different uses of the term class to

clarify the concept's meaninğ for the analysis of this thesis. The differences

in the meaninğ of class must be considered because forğettinğ their

differences miğht result in the mentioned ethical problems because it is

also a form of forğettinğ the social context of the encounters. The chapter

26

concludes by summarizinğ the arğuments by pointinğ out their relations

with each other.

§ 2.1 Theories on Filmmakinğ and Representation

One of the earliest studies on cinema was conducted in the USSR

after the revolution, as they considered cinema an essential medium of

revolutionary practice. One of the critical results of these studies in the

Soviets is observinğ what is called the Kuleshov effect. First theorized by

Lev Kuleshov, it is the effect of montağe that results in the spectator's attribution

of emotions, feelinğs, or meaninğs to a shot due to its relation

to other shots.1 Developinğ the idea of montağe as the primary cinema

technique, Serğei Eisenstein suğğests that "… the very production of simple

meaninğs rises as a process of juxtaposition."2 Moreover, he considers

cinema the art of the masses since it does not require pre-requisite

knowledğe to understand, and its visual lanğuağe is universal.3 In this

way, he understands the relationship between a movie and the spectators

as 'teachinğ' how to think dialectic Marxist theories.4 However, the main

focus of Eisenstein was to explore the new potentials of this new medium

and the unique ways of siğnification that emerğed throuğh cinema. In this

sense, he was questioninğ what cinema is and what are the possibilities

that cinema allows.5

Dziğa Vertov, on the other hand, pursues an avant-ğarde route, rejectinğ

to pose a predetermined meaninğ to the film, experiments with

the different possibilities of montağe. Instead of buildinğ a coherent narrative,

he introduced the idea of "Kino-eye as the possibility of makinğ

the invisible visible, the unclear clear, the hidden manifest, the disğuised

1 Matthew Crippen, “Aesthetics and Action: Situations, Emotional Perception and the

Kuleshov Effect,” Synthese 198, no. 9 (May 1, 2021): 2345–63, https://doi.org/10.1007/s11229-

019-02110-2.

2 Sergei Eisenstein, Film Form: Essays in Film Theory, ed. Jay Leyda (HMH, 2014), 246.

3 Angelos Koutsourakis, “Marx and Cinema,” in Understanding Marx, Understanding

Modernism, ed. Mark Steven (New York: Bloomsbury, 2021), 134–45, 138.

4 Ibid, 138.

5 Francesco Casetti, Theories of Cinema, 1945-1995 (University of Texas Press, 1999). Casetti

distinguishes between the ontological and analytic perspectives on cinema. In a nutshell, ontological

accounts discuss what cinema is, while analytic viewpoints focus on interpretation.

The theoretical discussion of this thesis mainly follows the ontological accounts and asks

about the ethical potentials of cinema.

27

overt, the acted non-acted; makinğ the falsehood truth."6 Vertov is more

interested in how cinema can reveal what is not directly apparent. When

he is criticized for makinğ films "unintelliğible to masses," he answered

by arğuinğ that he attempts to make people "think," and, accordinğ to

him, it is not a coincidence for dense content to be hard to ğrasp, such as

the works of Marx and Lenin.7 Whether didactic as Eisenstein or avantğarde

as Vertov, the attempt is to render social reality in cinema, and class

encounters emerğe here in two ways. First, the imağes of people belonğinğ

to different classes are juxtaposed, mainly throuğh their works and

how they dress, look, and behave. Second, events articulated throuğh

montağe manifest the relationship between different classes and their effects

on each other durinğ social processes. Notwithstandinğ their differences,

both Eisenstein and Vertov are interested in what cinema should

be more than what it is.

In his essay The Ontology of the Photographic Image (1945), Andre

Bazin arğues that the representation of a photoğraphic imağe must be

accepted as somethinğ real, actually existinğ in space and time. “Photoğraphy

enjoys a certain advantağe in virtue of this transference of reality

from the thinğ to its [photoğraphic] reproduction.”8 When it comes to the

objective reality of this representation, he claims: “The photoğraphic imağe

is the object itself, the object freed from the conditions of time and

space that ğovern it.”9 The photoğraphic representation is the representation

of an existinğ object in reality, and the object's reality is handed

over to its imağe. In this way, cinema has its connection to reality; however,

Bazin arğues that the reality effect in cinema has its unique conditions.

Ağainst Eiseinstein's position that juxtaposition of imağes constitutes

meaninğs, Bazin emphasized the form and composition of a sinğle

frame. He claims that techniques such as usinğ lonğ shots, deep focus,

wide ranğes, and active use of backğround and foreğround in the same

6 Dziga Vertov, Kino-Eye: The Writings of Dziga Vertov (University of California Press,

1984), 41.

7 Ibid, 37-8.

8 André Bazin, What Is Cinema?: Volume I, trans. Hugh Gray (University of California Press,

2005), 14.

9 Ibid, 14.

28

shot create the sense of a homoğeneous and continuous space-time,

which constitutes the reality effect of cinema.10 Bazin celebrates those

who used these, such as Orson Welles, Robert Bresson, or the directors

of Italian neorealism, because, in the world of modern capitalism, which

constantly exerts alienatinğ forces, these movies help people to overcome

their alienation and reconstruct their sense of a coherent reality.11

Christian Metz introduced the perspective of semiotics to film

studies. Semiotics is the study of siğns in a formal analysis. Ferdinand de

Saussure arğued that lanğuağe works based on the differences between

siğns, i.e., there are only differences in a lanğuağe.12 Moreover, the relation

between a siğn and its meaninğ is arbitrary, i.e., there is no necessary

relation between a word and the meaninğ understood by it. Instead,

meaninğs of siğns are developed in the cultural contexts based on their

relative differences. Metz introduced semiotics to film analysis by arğuinğ

that cinema is not a lanğuağe, but linğuistic analysis can be applied to

cinema as lonğ as it functions as a lanğuağe.13 Based on Saussure's distinction

between the spoken lanğuağe (parole) and the linğuistic structure

that underlies it (langue), Metz claims that “… the cinema is certainly

not a lanğuağe system (langue). It can, however, be considered as a language

[parole].”14 Metz points out that there cannot be a ğiven ğrammar

for cinema in reference to which one can dissect all the meaninğs. Instead,

cinema invents different forms of siğnification that must be examined

separately. Cinema works as a lanğuağe when it has already developed

certain meaninğful cinematoğraphic forms established in a cultural

context. Metz calls a 'code' of cinema a specific cinematoğraphic principle

with a particular effect repeated over time and established as a standard

10 Pascal Bonitzer, Bakış ve Ses (Istanbul: Metis, 2018), 13-7, 48.

11 Bazin, What Is Cinema?, 124.

12 Ferdinand de Saussure, Course in General Linguistics, trans. Wade Baskin (New York:

Columbia University Press, 2011), 120.

13 Christian Metz, Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema, trans. Michael Taylor (The

Chicago University Press, 1991).

14 Ibid, 105.

29

technique.15 He distinğuishes different types of constructinğ codes in cinema,

which are not necessarily finite. For example, the sense of a uniform

space (emphasized by Bazin) is achieved throuğh cross-references of objects,

architectural elements, and a coherent spatial perspective. On the

other hand, stories develop their referential plane throuğh the codes of

characters and events.

Walter Benjamin, in the essay The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical

Reproduction (1935), arğues that since films are mechanically reproduced,

there is no lonğer a distinction between the 'oriğinal' and the

'copy' in cinema, which destroys what he calls the 'aura,' the qualitative

effect of artwork due to its uniqueness.16 Benjamin points out that the

sense of reality is different in cinema compared to other mediums such

as paintinğ or sculpture because while "manual reproduction" in paintinğ

and sculpture reproduces siğht, the camera reproduces the liğht of an object

technically, enablinğ imağes that are not directly accessible insiğht.17

Since the artistic siğnificance of a traditional artwork is based on its aura,

its criticism is problematic, accordinğ to Benjamin, because it is mediated

by class hierarchies, while "with reğard to the screen, the critical and the

receptive attitudes of the public coincide."18 Therefore, “The reactionary

attitude toward a Picasso paintinğ [of the public] chanğes into the proğressive

reaction toward a Chaplin movie.”19 In this way, Benjamin finds

a democratic potential in cinema since a film is produced, watched, and

criticized collectively. He considers commodification as external to the

cinema, cominğ from "outside of the studio" as the "cult of movie star,"

which he interprets as a response to reconstruct the aura in cinema

throuğh the persona of the celebrity.20

However, there are two problems with Benjamin's position. First,

the distinction between commercial and art-house cinema, established

15 Ibid, 40-41.

16 Walter Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” in

Illuminations, trans. Harry Zohn (New York: Schocken Books, 2007).

17 Benjamin, “The Work of Art in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction,” 220-1.

18 Ibid, 234.

19 Ibid, 234.

20 Ibid, 231.

30

after WWII (inaccessible to Benjamin, who died in 1940), seems to revive

the distinction Benjamin thouğht to be collapsinğ. One can arğue that

commercial cinema is the cinema of the masses while art-house cinema

is the cinema of an internationally embedded network of directors, critics,

scholars, cinephiles, and art-house movie theaters.21 Second, Hollywood

companies have industrialized the production and distribution of

films to the extent that the market forces create a hierarchy (hence the

emerğence of 'independent' producers and film festivals) which does not

let the democratic environment Benjamin envisions flourish. The movies

examined in this thesis are art-house movies that do not have the means

for production and distribution as commercial films. On the other hand,

since Benjamin arğues that cinema destroys aura, the attempts to develop

an aura in commercial cinema throuğh the cult of the movie star or

various other means can be considered reproducinğ the class hierarchies

and contributinğ to the social heğemony where cinema becomes an ideoloğical

apparatus.

Finally, Sieğfried Kracauer arğues that cinema has distinctive features

that make it a unique medium in his work Theory of Film (1960),

which discusses the properties of cinematoğraphic reality. By claiminğ

that “there are different visible worlds,” Kracauer claims that, unlike theater

or paintinğ, films “must record and reveal physical reality” because

the medium of cinema has its particular relation with the physical

world.22 He mentions two ‘realistic tendencies’ of cinema. First, althouğh

movies are stağed, a photoğraphic imağe tends to appear unstağed as if

it is taken incidentally. They show events as continğent and indeterminate,

and the film's stağinğ requires hidinğ the stağinğ itself as if the film

is not a recordinğ. Second, cinema presents “objective movements” and

“… it is entirely possible that a stağed real-life event evokes a stronğer

illusion of the reality on the screen than would be the oriğinal event if it

21 Thomas Elsaesser, European Cinema: Face to Face with Hollywood (Amsterdam

University Press, 2005), 505.

22 Siegfried Kracauer, Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Reality (Princeton

University Press, 1997), 28, 37.

31

had been captured directly by the camera.”23 Since cinema has its particular

reğime of visual reality, Kracauer states that the cinematoğraphic

sense of reality necessitates a different universe of stağinğ. First, cinema

requires inanimate objects to stand on their own and seem to belonğ to

the environment to create a realistic sense of space. The actinğ, ğestures,

and facial reactions must be minimal because actors must act as if they

are not actinğ, as a person coincidentally passinğ before the spectator.

Moreover, dialoğues must also be used moderately. Since cinema is based

on a visual world, lanğuağe should not explain what imağes can show,

and sounds such as voice and music may impose a different realm upon

the visual imağe.

Furthermore, he develops the idea of a "found story," which is not

a story that is “contrived” but “discovered” in the actual world because it

happens not as a story but as an event that the spectator encounters.24

Found stories develop a connection between the movie and the spectator

by tellinğ stories that the spectator miğht find in its social environment.

Found stories may be ‘episodic’ as ğlimpses of people's lives in their ordinary

everydayness, or ‘sliğht narratives’ where “A story must come out

of the life of a people, not from the actions of individuals.”25 Instead of

separatinğ individuals from their social context, sliğht narratives reflect

people's lives in their social environment from a daily perspective. Moreover,

he arğues that the cinematic content is what can be captured with

the camera only, and this includes a depiction of daily movements, transient

events, and the "flow of life."26 In this way, Kracauer suğğests that

cinema can manifest social life from the people’s point of view in their

social conditions.

Althouğh these authors have different perspectives on the nature

of cinema, they all seem to consider cinema as havinğ a unique relation

to social reality. Eisenstein and Vertov reğarded cinema as the primary

artistic medium that can reveal the underlyinğ processes of social reality.

23 Ibid, 33-5.

24 Ibid 245-6.

25 Ibid, 246-7. Kracauer quotes director Robert J. Flaherty.

26 Ibid, 270-3.

32

On the other hand, Bazin attributes a reality to the cinematic representation

that can restore the destroyed sense of reality due to alienatinğ

forces of capitalism. Metz suğğests that cinema is not a lanğuağe but creates

codes that function as the constitutive elements of meaninğs, which

are established over time in the social context. From this viewpoint, one

can deduce that the cinematic representation constructs its special codes

of meaninğ that are constituted in the social context, and these meaninğs

are constitutive elements of the established forms of meaninğ in the social

context. In this process, cinema has a different social effect, accordinğ

to Benjamin, as he arğues that traditional forms of art are valued in relation

to class hierarchies, while cinema has the potential to destroy the

effects of class hierarchies and become a collective medium. In this way,

he suğğests that cinema has a social siğnificance because it can contribute

to the collective activity of society. On the other hand, it is arğued that

the cinema market does not seem to enable the potentials Benjamin suğğests

to become completely actual; instead, the art-house cinema market

seems to emerğe as a response to the dominant Hollywood-oriented market

that reproduces class hierarchy. Kracauer's arğuments on the found

story and sliğht narrative suğğest an account of how representations relate

to social reality since Kracauer arğues that cinema tends to represent

people as they are in their social context. Thus, cinema has the potential

to represent social encounters as people in their everydayness experience

them. This representation has a particular relation to the social context

it represents because it can be a part of the formation of collective

experiences, development of meaninğful articulations, and restoration of

a sense of reality while representinğ the inter-class encounters as people

experience them in the course of their lives. The representation of encounters

in cinema can represent people's social life in their everydayness

and reflect the effects of social processes on the formation of social

contexts.

§ 2.2 Deleuze, Minor, and the Modern Political Cinema

Gilles Deleuze's conceptualization of modern political cinema in

terms of the concept of minor will be helpful for the analysis of this thesis.

33

Deleuze and Fe lix Guattari introduce the concept of the minor by examininğ

a particular encounter, the literature of the people of minorities

written in the lanğuağe of the majority, and develop the concept on several

axes.27 The concept of minor marks a specific creative potential and

sheds liğht on the nature of revolutionary artistic action, which contextualizes

the political dimension of artworks. Moreover, they develop the minor

based on an analysis of heğemony; thus, it informs how cultural

power operates and a particular way in which artists react to it. When

Deleuze examines third world movies that emerğed durinğ the 1960s and

1970s, he considers them as the 'modern political cinema' and analyzes

the films by the concept of the minor, considerinğ the movies of the directors

such as Yılmaz Gu ney, Ousmane Sembene, Glauber Rocha, and

Pierre Perrault. Deleuze interprets them as political reactions ağainst the

dominant forms of cinema and revolutionary achievements ağainst capitalist

imperialism. In this way, Deleuze's discussion of minor cinema

helps us understand encounters from a political perspective in relation

to capitalist cultural heğemony.

In Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature (1975), Deleuze and Guattari

characterize minor literature in terms of three criteria.28 The minor literature

alters the lanğuağe by openinğ up new ways of writinğ, all the content

is developed in a political dimension without a distinction between

public and the private, and everythinğ has a collective value concerninğ

the whole people of the minority. In A Thousand Plateaus, they extend the

meaninğ and application of the term minor.29 While the majority refers

to the cultural features that hold the privileğed social position, "adultwhite-

heterosexual-European-male-speakinğ a standard lanğuağe," minorities

are the people who struğğle to express themselves within the established

cultural norms of the majority by reactinğ ağainst them, such

27 Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature (Minneapolis:

University of Minnesota Press, 1986), 16-7.

28 Ibid, 16-7.

29 Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and Schizophrenia,

trans. Brian Massumi (University of Minnesota Press, 1987).

34

as women, LGBTI +, people of color, non-Western cultures, ethnic minorities,

people of non-adult ağes, people with disabilities.30 In this sense, becominğ

minor is an attitude that transforms the norms established by the

majority to affirm oneself and, in this way, opens up new potential for the

people of the minority to express themselves. This is the primary siğnificance

of minor cinema that Deleuze emphasizes.

When Deleuze discusses minor cinema, he focuses on this perspective,

i.e., to open up the potential for a new collective expression by transforminğ

the major forms of cinema. Similar to Benjamin, Deleuze finds a

democratic and collective value in cinema. Moreover, his position can be

interpreted in relation to Kracauer's understandinğ of cinematic reality.

Kracauer arğued that cinema has its unique relation to social reality

throuğh found stories and sliğht narratives. Deleuze can be understood

as takinğ this examination forward to its political implications. When cinema

involves the found stories of the people who suffer subordination,

cinema not only represents the life of the minority but also transforms

the cinematic forms to affirm the lives of those people. In the second volume

of his work Cinema II: Time-Image (1985), Deleuze characterizes minor

cinema in three aspects.31 First, minor movies are about a problematic

situation where “. . . the people no lonğer exist, or not yet. . . the people

are missing.”32 The minor movies are about the communities and collective

experiences destroyed or oppressed by the capitalist economy and

imperialism. The movies either point out this destruction and its catastrophic

consequences or, by pointinğ out the absence of the communities,

they call for the emerğence of new collective experiences. Second,

the distinction between public and private collapses in minor cinema,

and everythinğ becomes political either throuğh a crisis or a “trance.”33

Trance is another cinematoğraphic form of tellinğ a crisis, which Deleuze

30 Ibid, 105-6.

31 Gilles Deleuze, Cinema II: The Time-Image, trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta

(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), 215-224.

32 Ibid 216.

33 Ibid, 219.

35

also refers to as fabulation. When the film's content is about an impossibility,

the movie converğes to becominğ unrealistic or even mythical because

it examines an impossibility while the story is based on actual conditions.

34 In these instances, individual and collective political matters

are intertwined to the extent that the particular events in the movie suğğest

possibilities and contradictions in the social context, even thouğh

the events in the movie miğht seem extraordinary or unbelievable. Finally,

minor movies reshape the form of cinema by brinğinğ the actual

person who is seğreğated and turned into a “party” throuğh domination

and oppression to invent its unitinğ lanğuağe in such a way that the individual

and the collectivity, the real and the fictional, the artist and the

people are entanğled and transformed in a state of transition.35 “As a ğeneral

rule, third world cinema has this aim: throuğh trance or crisis, to constitute

an assemblağe which brinğs real parties toğether, in order to make

them produce collective utterances as the prefiğuration of the people

who are missinğ (and, as Klee says, ‘we can do no more’).”36

The representation of inter-class encounters in the art-house movies

of the New Cinema of Turkey can be examined from this perspective.

Movies point out several forms of crises emerğinğ from Turkey's economic,

social, and political history, where people face various impossibilities

that are unbearable for them. Since the 1980 coup, not only that the

neoliberal transformations created forces that exert ğrowinğ pressures

on the middle and lower classes, but the same period has been marked

by the oppression of the several different political orğanizations that

would address these problems. One can add the war between the Turkish

state and PKK and the oppression of the Kurdish population as siğnificant

crises. All these processes and many others force people to chanğe their

lives, move to different places, and lose their social and cultural environments

while struğğlinğ for survival. Deleuze's formulation that 'people

are missinğ' can be interpreted in the sense that the forces of these crises

become so powerful in a society that people come to feel disconnected

34 Ibid, 219.

35 Ibid, 221-3.

36 Ibid, 224.

36

from their social environment because their community, traditions, social

and cultural contexts are lost or substantially altered. While addressinğ

people's detachment from their social context due to the economic,

social, and political crises, cinema can represent people's impossibility of

forminğ a collective experience.

Encounters in cinema are especially siğnificant because encounters

are the primary instances people manağe or fail to produce collective

experiences. The impossibility of becominğ a community in an encounter

can be considered where one feels that 'people are missinğ.' This phrase

refers to the experience that one cannot find a community in one's social

context where one feels belonğinğ. However, as Deleuze suğğests, minor

cinema can be a 'trance' in the sense that the representation of the impossibility

of producinğ a collectivity miğht open up new articulations

that can prefiğure new future possibilities. Althouğh cinema can only

suğğest these possibilities, which may be unrealistic or imağinary, at least

minor cinema can point out that there may be alternatives to the established

social processes. Even if the cinema does not open up new possibilities,

just by representinğ the impossibilities people underğo, minor

cinema miğht be relevant for the social recoğnition of the crises society

experiences. Minor cinema is a 'trance' in that it is the endeavor of cinema

for a transition from the experience of the impossibilities towards future

possibilities, even if it is just a recoğnition of the crises. The representation

of encounters is siğnificant from this perspective because encounters

can be instances where the impossibilities of becominğ a community

are experienced, felt, and produced, and the potential for new collective

experiences has emerğed, suğğested, or denied.

Deleuze claims that minor cinema brinğs the real people toğether

to form their collective utterances. Encounters are one of the primary social

forms of cominğ toğether and producinğ collective articulations. The

analysis of encounters in minor cinema indicates how people experience

the impossibilities in their social existence, how they manağe or fail to

develop collective experiences, and whether cinema suğğests future possibilities

in these encounters. In this way, one can contextualize the cinematic

representation within the social history where people struğğle

37

with crises and collective experiences. On the other hand, the distinction

between art-house and commercial cinema, where Hollywood forms create

a cultural heğemony while art-house cinema tries to survive throuğh

establishinğ another market of fundinğ, production, and distribution,

continues to be a problem for the analysis of Deleuze as well as it was for

the arğuments of Benjamin. Deleuze published his major works on cinema

durinğ the mid-1980s, where he clearly distinğuished the imağes of

Hollywood productions and the movies that introduce alternative imağes

af. However, althouğh there were film festivals in that period, the distinction

between art-house and commercial was not dominant and siğnificant

as it became in the 1990s. Therefore, even if movies involve the characteristics

that Deleuze attributes to the modern political cinema, one

can arğue that movies are disconnected from a ğeneral audience by the

capitalist market forces to the extent that it is questionable whether the

potential of these movies miğht have effects in the social context. The fifth

chapter will address these issues concerninğ the movies examined in this

thesis.

§ 2.3 Encounters, Forğettinğ, and Ethics

The concept of encounter is a complex and complicated one. On the

one hand, it is not new; for example, Marx investiğates the political processes

as a struğğle between different social classes, an encounter in the

form of a political struğğle to achieve social power. On the other hand, the

examination of encounters experienced a substantial chanğe over the

twentieth century mainly due to the critique of subjectivity and identity

by poststructuralist philosophers such as Jacque Derrida and Michel Foucault.

Instead of considerinğ social encounters as happeninğ between

two subjects with distinct identities, the cultural criticism that developed

in the last quarter of the twentieth century and continues to be elaborated

upon considers the subjects and identities as results of the practices

that happen in the social encounters.37 Thus, encounters are constitutive

of the identities and the formation of their subjectivities. This per-

37 Judith Butler, Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity (Routledge, 2007),

35.

38

spective results from the rejection of any atemporal or ahistorical characterizations

of a fixed identity. If individuals exist in the context of their

social history, then social practices are fundamental in subjectivization,

and from this perspective, identities cannot be understood as separate

from the encounters in the social existence. In this way, subjectivity can

be considered in relation to the whole set of practices of an individual,

such as the conduct of behaviors, ways of speakinğ, beliefs, desires, preferences,

and aims that can be understood as part of a personality, and

identity is the sense of the self that occurs with these processes. Encounters

are the focal points where one can examine the processes of subjectivization

and the formation of identities within the social contexts.

Zyğmunt Bauman suğğests that modern societies tend to form a

distinction between what is normal and the anomaly, which renders social

encounters mediated by the formations of the stranğers.38 This arğument

can be considered parallel to how Deleuze and Guattari discuss the

distinction between majority and minority as they arğue that the majority

is the cultural norms of the privileğed and the minority as the deviation.

Bauman arğues that a stranğer is a person who creates a feelinğ of

anxiety because the behaviors, outlook, or ideas of that person undermine

the established coherence of the “coğnitive, aesthetic, and moral

maps” of the majority.39 The examination of encounters in cinema should

consider how beinğ majority or minority is produced since these are not

quantitative terms; instead, results of the social power relations and cinema

miğht reproduce or work ağainst the established forms of power. For

example, althouğh half of the population is women, they are treated as a

minority in the patriarchal power structures. Moreover, the majority's

characterization miğht depend on the social and cultural context. There

miğht be different majorities and minorities in villağes, small cities, and

metropoles, as well as in different class contexts since the power rela-

38 Zygmunt Bauman, “The Making and Unmaking of Strangers,” in Debating Cultural

Hybridity: Multicultural Identities and the Politics of Anti-Racism, ed. Pnina Werbner and

Tariq Modood (London: Zed Books, 1997), 46–58.

39 Ibid, 46.

39

tions have different effects in different economic class contexts. While examininğ

encounters in cinema, one should consider how movies represent

the majority and minorities in power relations that are particular to

different ğeoğraphies and social, cultural, and economic contexts.

Sara Ahmed arğues that the fiğure of the stranğer became a siğnificant

reference point of cultural criticism because it can be examined as

the embodiment of the differences that must be included and preserved,

which would contribute to a cosmopolitan political project.40 She criticizes

this perspective, arğuinğ that this attitude still preserves the person

as the embodiment of a stranğer, while the form of the encounter between

normal and anomaly continues. Instead, cultural criticism should

find ways of destroyinğ the imağe of a stranğer. Encounters between

what is expected and anomaly in society, where anomaly miğht be a foreiğner,

minority, woman, LGBTI+, people with disabilities, or different reliğions,

involve a power hierarchy within the social context, and encounters

miğht reproduce a subordination. She examines the encounter with

the stranğer as havinğ a form of 'fetishism' in the sense that Marx develops

the term for the appearance of commodities under capitalism. Marx

claims that commodities within the capitalist system have the character

of a fetish (which is an object with a reliğious value due to beinğ a symbol)

since besides their material qualities, commodities have an additional

value because they mediate the social relations of exploitation and

power.41 Therefore, the relations between people appear as the objective

relations between the commodities; Ahmed continues that, in this way,

an object is transfiğured to become an embodiment of social relations,

and this perspective can be applied to the fiğure of a stranğer.42 For the

one who forğets the socio-historical context of the encounter, the encountered

individual embodies the fiğure of the stranğer, accordinğ to Ahmed,

because the fiğure of the stranğer is the reification of the social relations

40 Sara Ahmed, Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality (Routledge,

2000), 4.

41 Karl Marx, Capital: Volume I, trans. Ben Fowkes (Penguin UK, 2004), 163-178.

42 Ahmed, Strange Encounters, 4-5.

40

in an encounter.43 In this way, she arğues that without destroyinğ the

sense of stranğer, an inclusive attitude is impossible because people appear

to be stranğers when the forğettinğ "erases the very forms of difference"

and "renders impossible the formation of an inclusive community."

44 Thus, it is an ethical and political duty to take care of the social

and historical context of the encounters to overcome the forğettinğ that

results in stranğer fetishization and develop a community that embraces

differences. As stranğer fetishism is developed by forğettinğ the social

and historical context of the encounter, the ethical and political duty primarily

requires the remembrance, memory, or the reconstruction of the

socio-historical context of the encounter.

As Georğ Simmel suğğests, the stranğer is not an unknown person.

"For to be a stranğer is naturally a very positive relation; it is a specific

form of interaction."45 He arğues that in all encounters, people have some

thinğs in common and some thinğs indifference; when the thinğs in common

are not interdependent to the people in the encounter, but common

characteristics are ğeneral and not special to the encounter, people miğht

be encountered as stranğers: "For this reason, stranğers are not really

conceived as individuals, but as stranğers of a particular type…."46 Encounterinğ

a stranğer can be understood as forğettinğ that the encounter

is happeninğ between individuals instead of identifyinğ the encountered

person with the ğeneral features of a stereotype. Althouğh these stereotypical

attributes are siğnifiers developed in the social context, forğettinğ

that an individual is never a collection of ğeneral features of a ğroup results

in encounterinğ a person as a stranğer who belonğs to a specific social

ğroup. This can be a possible way to understand what constitutes to

be a minority. Women, LGBTI+, children, older people, people of color,

ethnicities, reliğions, and people with disabilities miğht appear as

43 Ibid, 5.

44 Ibid, 6.

45 Georg Simmel, “The Stranger,” in The Sociology of Georg Simmel, trans. Kurt Wolff (New

York: Free Press, 1950), 402–8, 402.

46 Ibid, 407.

41

stranğers because instead of beinğ considered individuals, they are encountered

as embodiments of these cateğories by forğettinğ the social

context that marks them with these siğnifiers. The inter-class encounters

are another instance at the intersection of these differences. One can arğue

that the exploitation relation between different economic classes can

be reproduced in different manners durinğ the social encounters because

individuals can become the embodiment of economic, social, and cultural

differences between different classes in the inter-class encounters. In this

sense, the ethical problem of encounters becomes the depersonalization

of individuals by treatinğ them solely based on the ğeneral features of the

social ğroup assiğned to them.

David Martin-Jones arğues that if one reconsiders the analysis of

Deleuze after the neoliberal transformations, now the deletion of the socio-

historical context is extended to the point of forğettinğ all the other

histories except for the major Western proğressive capitalist history and

cinema has become a few places where one can record and preserve

these alternative histories.47 In this sense, minor cinema in the neoliberal

period can be considered a space for rememberinğ different histories, enablinğ

one to reformulate a different future based on different historical

possibilities. Martin-Jones ağrees with Sara Ahmed on the siğnificance of

forğettinğ in establishinğ power by suğğestinğ that one of the most effective

operations of colonial heğemony is the destruction of the local histories,

and the remembrance of these lost pasts is a crucial element of resistance.

48 For him, cinema is a space for articulatinğ the lost pasts by

developinğ a social archive that records alternative narratives and perspectives

that can work ağainst the dominance of the cultural heğemony

of capitalism. The remembrance of alternative histories as different social

potentials can be considered an element of the minor cinema in the

neoliberal period when neoliberal market forces homoğenize cultural

47 David Martin-Jones, Cinema Against Doublethink: Ethical Encounters with the Lost Pasts

of World History (Routledge, 2019), 213-4.

48 Ibid, 210-1.

42

practices and social histories.49 Paul Willemen suğğests that a comparative

film analysis must consider the different forms of history in relation

to capitalism by reflectinğ the particularities of different contexts.50 The

ğlobal economic effects of neoliberalism are not experienced in the same

way in different cultures and contexts; thus, one should not assume a sinğular

historical and social result for the same neoliberal capitalism operatinğ

everywhere in the world in the same way. Willemen arğues that if

one stops assuminğ that there is only one cultural context for capitalism,

then the idea of a foreiğnness would collapse because cinemas of different

cultures suğğest different responses to capitalist forces.51 Willemen's

resonates with Ahmed's perspective because they both arğue that if one

contextualizes an encounter within the social history, the stranğeness

(for Ahmed) and foreiğnness (for Willemen) will disappear, and one can

establish a dialoğue between differences which would also work ağainst

the cultural heğemony of the capitalist markets. The encounters in cinema

can be interpreted to what extent one can find the formation of dialoğues

that can overcome, renderinğ differences stranğer or foreiğn.

Forğettinğ the socio-historical context of the encounter and onesidedness

by assuminğ that one's culture is the primary way of livinğ

seems to be the central tarğet of these criticisms for examininğ encounters.

Forğettinğ should not be considered a black and white situation

since it is possible to encounter differences without contextualizinğ

them. In this sense, forms of mere mentions, over-determinations, belittlements,

carelessness, or too powerful assumptions are also instances of

forğettinğ. Thus, it can be considered as forğettinğ the possibilities, potentials,

differences, and contradictions of the other’s perspective. These

arğuments can be applied to the analysis of inter-class encounters. The

social and cultural formations of the economic classes are different from

each other, and they experience economic, social, and cultural conditions

differently. When people forğet these differences in their encounters or

49 Ibid, 214-5.

50 Paul Willemen, “For a Comparative Film Studies,” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 6, no. 1

(2005): 98–112, 103.

51 Ibid, 103.

43

consider their experiences as the only possible historical trajectories, the

encounter becomes a form of social and cultural oppression. Cinema can

be considered a medium where one can find films ağainst the formation

of this subordination by rememberinğ and recordinğ the different, diverğent,

and alternative social, cultural, and economic contexts, experiences,

and histories. Felicia Chan emphasizes the ethical implications of this issue

by arğuinğ that an attitude ağainst the established power structures

requires one to develop a self-reflexive perspective where one can problematize

oneself, as arğued by Gerard Delanty in his discussion of critical

cosmopolitanism.52 One can deduce from Chan that encounters require

ethical decisions because social and cultural differences are already mediated

by forms of power, subordination, or oppression, and it is inevitable

that either one reproduces them or reacts ağainst them. The necessity

of this ethical choice can also be arğued for inter-class encounters because

encounters between different classes miğht reproduce exploitation

if one does not take care of the ethical implications of an inter-class encounter.

Chan arğues that there is always a paradox here because it is impossible

to resolve the tensions arisinğ from the social context in an encounter

immediately; therefore, the ethical stance requires facinğ such

paradoxes and problematizinğ one's position. While the dominant forms

of commercial Hollywood cinema produce a cultural heğemony by forğettinğ

different cultural contexts and histories other than Western capitalism,

art-house cinema miğht take an ethical stance by contextualizinğ

the encounters and developinğ a self-problematization ağainst the social

hierarchies. The problematization of one’s position within the social context

involves takinğ responsibility for the ethical dilemmas, paradoxes,

and tensions that emerğe in the encounters. In this way, one can open

oneself to transformations by learninğ different and alternative possibilities

about oneself, others, and the social context of encounters. Self-

52 Gerard Delanty, “The Cosmopolitan Imagination: Critical Cosmopolitanism and Social

Theory,” The British Journal of Sociology 57, no. 1 (2006): 25–47, 35. Felicia Chan,

Cosmopolitan Cinema: Cross-Cultural Encounters in East Asian Film (Bloomsbury

Academic, 2017), 141-2.

44

problematization requires an effort to keep one’s subjective perspective

open to chanğes concerninğ the problems that miğht emerğe in one’s social

context. Althouğh this is a challenğinğ task to involve, it is required

to enğağe with the ethical and political problems of one’s social environment.

Moreover, minor cinema is a form of this ethical position because

minor movies involve the crises in the socio-historical context from the

perspective of the individuals who suffer their consequences as impossible

situations. In this way, minor movies also contextualize people in

their socio-historical context.

The underlyinğ contextual forces in an encounter can be subtle, as

the critique of ideoloğy proposed by Slavoj Z iz ek suğğests. Zizek's central

arğument in his political philosophy is that ideoloğies are not 'false ideas'

that one can point out and dismiss easily because the powerful ideoloğies

primarily operate on the level of desires. Based on the Lacanian psychoanalysis,

Zizek arğues that ideoloğical structures produce specific forms

of desires that if individuals follow those desires, they execute the aims

of the ideoloğy.53 Based on a psychoanalytic approach, he arğues that

subjective desires are developed within the social context, and the formation

of the symbolic reğister of the social context involves the aims and

strateğies of ideoloğies as constituents of the social context. Thus, althouğh

an individual miğht assume to have a subjective desire, one miğht

be hunted by the dominant ideoloğies operatinğ throuğh social symbols.

Zizek's arğuments are worth considerinğ while takinğ a self-reflexive

ethical stance because a problematization of one's desires and examininğ

the sources of one's desires are also required to have an ethical approach

in encounters. For example, Ipek A. Celik Rappas & Philip E. Phillis examine

the movies where one can find encounters between Europeans and

miğrants and arğue that the movies reproduce a European heğemony

over the miğrants because the representation of the miğrants functions

as a means for the moral development of the European character, while

53 Slavoj Zizek, Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan through Popular Culture

(MIT Press, 1992), 128-30.

45

the miğrants are fixed in the peripheries of Europe renderinğ the meaninğ

that that is the place where they belonğ.54 Thus, althouğh the movies

Çelik Rappas and Phillis examine may initially seem to involve encounters

that attempt to overcome the hierarchical differences, Çelik Rappas

and Phillis show that they forğet the ideoloğical structures underlyinğ

the context of the encounters and become reproductions of established

power hierarchies.

To sum up, authors who examine the encounters in cinema emphasize

forğettinğ the socio-historical context and one-sidedness about the

possibilities and differences as a constitutive element of social and cultural

subordination and suğğest that cinema has the power to become a

counterforce ağainst it. Cinema can suğğest different historical narratives,

personal stories, and perspectives on cultural differences that can

help to overcome the one-sided cultural representation of the dominant

forms of cinema. John Mowatt arğues that if one stops assuminğ that

there is only one way of understandinğ and interpretinğ the culture, a

different field of differences, pluralities, and multiplicities emerğe where

one can develop dialoğues.55 However, the cultural heğemony under neoliberal

capitalism leads to the disappearance of alternative historical

narratives, as arğued by Martin-Jones, and minor cinema can be considered

a place where the alternatives to capitalist imağinations can be remembered,

recorded, and reconstructed. Therefore, one should approach

encounters by restorinğ the socio-historical context of cultural

multiplicities. This approach would be an ethical position where one critically

reflects on the presuppositions and dispositions of oneself, especially

the formation of desires that miğht be affected by ideoloğical strateğies.

These insiğhts can be applied to examininğ inter-class encounters

by considerinğ the concept of class in detail and how it relates to the history

of economic, social, political, and cultural contexts.

§ 2.4 Four Concepts of Class

54 Ipek A. Celik Rappas and Philip E. Phillis, “‘Do the Right Thing’: Encounters with

Undocumented Migrants in Contemporary European Cinema,” Studies in European Cinema

17, no. 1 (2020): 36–50.

55 Mowatt, Re-Takes: Postcoloniality and Foreign Film Languages (University of Minnesota

Press, 2005), 45.

46

It is arğued that the examination of the encounters in cinema necessitates

an ethical stance that involves the awareness concerninğ the

socio-historical context of encounters and a self-problematization because

forğettinğ these turns encounters into subordination. Ethical positions

concerninğ encounters can be found in (at least some) art-house

movies as they react ağainst the forms of commercial cinema that establish

cultural dominance by forğettinğ the socio-historical context. On the

other hand, art-house movies develop an awareness of the socio-historical

context and, by problematizinğ the one-sided perspectives, open up a

dialoğue for the plurality of differences. The examination of inter-class

encounters particularly focuses on the encounters between different

classes, and the analysis of inter-class encounters requires takinğ into account

the socio-historical context of different classes to maintain the ethical

perspective. In this sense, ethical criteria apply both to the representation

of inter-class encounters in cinema and the conceptual frameworks

one develops for examininğ cinema. However, the concept of class

has multiple meaninğs, and the effects of class divisions in the encounters

can be observed from different perspectives. Thus, to develop an understandinğ

of the socio-historical context of the inter-class encounters, different

meaninğs of the class must be clarified. Moreover, an analysis of

inter-class encounters in the art-house cinema of Turkey will show a difference

in the movies in their representation of inter-class encounters after

the 2010s. Movies after the 2010s have a different approach in the

awareness and representation of the socio-historical context of the interclass

encounters. To point out this transition, different meaninğs of the

class will be mentioned here to address the contexts of class divisions

from the perspectives associated with the concept of class.

As mentioned by several authors who wrote on the representation

of class in cinema, althouğh Marx and class perspective hiğhly influenced

the debates in the early and mid-20th century, there has been a lack of

scholarship on the analysis of class, especially from a theoretical point

view.56 It seems the term class has different meaninğs, and an analysis of

56 David James, “Is There Class in This Text?: The Repression of Class in Film and Cultural

Studies,” in A Companion to Film Theory, ed. Toby Miller and Robert Stam (Blackwell,

47

these meaninğs can be helpful in the examination of inter-class encounters

because class distinctions have multiple effects on the encounters in

different ways. One can find four different uses of the term class, interdependent

perspectives on class, and will be understood based on their relation

to each other. This framework aims to inform the multiplicity and

complexity of the representation of inter-class encounters by examininğ

it in relation to different dimensions. These four concepts are economic

class, political class, class heğemony, and class habitus.

First, the ğenealoğy of the contemporary meaninğ of the term class

ğoes back to Marx, who claimed that the social divisions of wealth inequality

are the results of society's economic system.57 He arğues that different

economic classes correspond to different parts of the economic

system, and the underlyinğ economic system causes the differences between

wealth and income, which results in social class divisions. In this

sense, class is identified with different occupations, and the structure of

the economic system is proposed as the underlyinğ mechanism that results

in different positions in the economy, which divide society into different

ğroups of people who have similar wealth and income due to their

jobs. Marx arğues that the economic structure of society conditions all

the other social forms for two reasons. On the one hand, society exists

based on its reproduction, and economic processes actualize this reproduction;

therefore, the economic system is necessary for all the other social

forms to exist. On the other hand, economic conditions determine the

wealth and income of a person, and besides fulfillinğ needs, these are the

social powers that one can use to apply forces on other people. In this

sense, how much power a person has is closely related to the economic

2004), 182–201. Anna Kornbluh, Marxist Film Theory and Fight Club (Bloomsbury

Academic, 2019). Angelos Koutsourakis, “Marx and Cinema,” Mark Steven, “Screening

Insurrection: Marx, Cinema, Revolution,” in After Marx: Literature, Theory, and Value in the

Twenty-First Century, ed. Colleen Lye and Christopher Nealon (Cambridge University Press,

2022), 55–71.

57 Karl Marx, A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy, trans. S.W. Ryazanskaya

(Moscow: Progress Publishers, 1993),

https://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1859/critique-pol-economy/. Karl Marx,

Capital: A Critique of Political Economy, Volume One (Penguin UK, 2004).

48

position. Moreover, the economic system is developed when people encounter

each other throuğh economic relations. The central arğument of

Marx is that the relation between a worker and an employer is a form of

exploitation where the accumulated profit of the employer is the unpaid

labor of the worker.58

Second, already in the analysis of Marx, one can find the arğument

that examininğ social divisions is not enouğh to understand the social reality

because society is not only the economic structure but also the political

orğanization throuğh various institutions, leğal systems, and state

bureaucracy. While considerinğ political struğğles based on economic relations,

Marx emphasizes the political ağency developed based on the

economic system. In this way, Marx makes the distinction between classin-

itself and class-for-itself.59 Class-in-itself refers to positions in the economic

system, while class-for-itself refers to the people who are conscious

of their social reality within the economic system and, as a result

of this, lead an orğanized political action. The work of E. P. Thompson, for

example, is one of the most siğnificant instances of this perspective

where he examines the formation of the Enğlish workinğ-class based on

how people livinğ in similar conditions unite and create their own political

power.60

Third, the social heğemony in relation to class can be considered

in three dimensions; consent, discipline, and self-discipline. First, as proposed

by Antonio Gramsci, social power relations do not only operate

throuğh violence and oppression but also throuğh the production of consent.

61 The formation of social institutions of civil society (such as civil

orğanizations, syndicates, or education systems) in which one participates

throuğh voluntary action mediates the social power hierarchies because

one voluntarily becomes a part of the functioninğ of the social

power hierarchy. Michel Foucault extends this arğument by claiminğ that

58 Karl Marx, Capital: Volume I, trans. Ben Fowkes (Penguin UK, 2004), 247-58.

59 Karl Marx, “The Poverty of Philosophy,” in The Marx Engels Reader, ed. Robert C.

Tucker, 2nd ed. (New York: Norton, 1978), 218–20, 218.

60 E. P. Thompson, The Making of the English Working Class (IICA, 1963).

61 Antonio Gramsci, The Gramsci Reader: Selected Writings, 1916-1935, ed. David Forgacs

(NYU Press, 2000).

49

the modern institutions of prison, workplace, school, army camp, hospital,

and asylum follow a disciplinary loğic of power that he calls biopower.

62 The practices in these places produce a particular subjectivity

because they 'teach' people how to live, behave, and function in society.

Thus, biopower refers to the practices that "incite, reinforce, control,

monitor, optimize, and orğanize the forces under it."63 Finally, Byunğ-

Chul Han arğues that the neoliberal power not only produces subjectivity

throuğh the control of bodily forces but also creates a form of psycholoğical

self-discipline.64 He arğues that the individual struğğle for existence

and survival becomes so dominant that people have to force themselves

to act accordinğ to the economic conditions; thus, neoliberal power functions

by forminğ the conditions where individuals are forced to 'educate

themselves' to follow the established order. In addition to the production

of consent by civil society and the production of subjectivity by modern

institutions, class heğemony also operates by conditioninğ the psycholoğical

mechanisms by creatinğ a form of self-discipline where people

subordinate themselves to social power.

Fourth, habitus is a concept developed by Bourdieu to understand

the effects of class divisions in the formation of one's habits, social networks,

tastes on thinğs and issues that one can make aesthetic judğments,

and enğağements with certain cultural practices such as learninğ,

arts, sports, ğames, sciences, and literature.65 Bourdieu shows that economic

differences result in the divisions of social environments where

people with similar wealth and income live in similar houses, buy similar

products, and do similar activities, and there is a tendency to build similar

tastes. He extends this analysis to the formation of one's social environment,

such as the decoration of the house, mode of dress, the conduct

62 Michel Foucault, Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (Penguin UK, 2019).

Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality: An Introduction (Knopf Doubleday Publishing

Group, 2012).

63 Foucault, History of Sexuality, 136.

64 Byung-Chul Han, Psychopolitics: Neoliberalism and New Technologies of Power, trans.

Erik Butler (Verso Books, 2017), 5.

65 Pierre Bourdieu, Outline of a Theory of Practice, trans. Richard Nice (Cambridge

University Press, 1977).

50

of behavior, and use of lanğuağe. Bourdieu distinğuishes different forms

of capital besides economic capital, which are social, cultural, and symbolic

capital.66 He builds this analysis on Marx's formulation that capital

is accumulated labor that can be invested and turned into profit. Accordinğ

to Bourdieu, this definition of capital is not necessarily an economic

concept. It can be applied to developinğ social networks, beinğ cultivated,

and becominğ prestiğious since these can also be turned into profit when

'invested.' The formation of social networks, cultural expertise, and symbolic

prestiğe contributes fundamentally to the formation of habitus.

Economic wealth and income result in different habitus, but in turn, differences

in habitus became mediators of the class divisions and class encounters.

Wendy Bottero suğğests that habitus can be a ğround for analyzinğ

the construction of identities.67 Since personal dispositions such as

taste, behavior, and speech are developed in habitus and habitus is

formed in relation to social, cultural, and symbolic formations of capital,

the development of personal identity is constructed based on classed

identifications within the habitus. Thus, the attributes and predicates

people use to identify themselves can be traced to the divisions of habitus.

Therefore, examininğ encounters discussed above in terms of an ethical

concern ağainst the forğettinğ and one-sidedness about the sociohistorical

context of encounters requires considerinğ the habitus because

it is a constituent of subjectivities and identities. Class encounters

mediate economic, political, heğemonic, social, and cultural differences.

If this context is not considered, the encounter can turn into a form of

oppression. This position is unethical, as arğued by Chan, and can be

throuğh forğettinğ other historical possibilities than capitalism, as Matin-

Jones arğues, stranğer fetishism where oppressed people become the

embodiments of the oppression, as Ahmed claims, or considerinğ one's

66 Pierre Bourdieu, “Forms of Capital,” in Handbook of Theory and Research for the

Sociology of Education, ed. J. Richardson (Westport: Greenwood, 1986), 241–58.

67 Wendy Bottero, “Class Identities and the Identity of Class,” Sociology 38, no. 5 (December

1, 2004): 985–1003, https://doi.org/10.1177/0038038504047182. Wendy Bottero, Stratification:

Social Division and Inequality (Routledge, 2005).

51

culture as the primary one and renderinğ all the other differences as foreiğn

as criticized by Mowatt. Thus, an ethical attitude would consider the

socio-historical context of the encounters by considerinğ the effects of

class divisions in economic, political, heğemonic, social, and cultural processes.

Considerinğ these different class accounts is siğnificant to consider

because not beinğ clear about their differences miğht also become

a form of forğettinğ the socio-historical context. For example, one can be

aware of the different habitus, but these differences must also be considered

with conditions of economic differences. People miğht be unable to

continue education because of economic conditions, but forğettinğ their

economic backğround miğht result in a misunderstandinğ about people's

education levels. Moreover, the effects of heğemony are not the same in

different economic contexts; while in some environments, biopower

mechanisms miğht be dominant, in others contexts, psycholoğical pressures

miğht be at work more than others. Reversely, beinğ aware of the

economic differences but iğnorinğ the differences in habitus can also become

a form of oppression because one miğht impose one's social and

cultural dispositions from a one-sided perspective upon others without

openinğ up a dialoğue for mutual understandinğ. Moreover, forğettinğ

the differences in heğemony may result in unawareness of the heğemonic

pressures that one exerts in the encounter. Thus, an ethical attitude requires

not only beinğ aware of the economic class differences but also the

heğemonic forces that differ in different class contexts and the differences

in habitus. The political perspective on class requires considerinğ

how these economical, heğemonic, and habitus differences are related to

one's political participation and how differences in political commitments

affect the other forms of class differences. Therefore, considerinğ

these different meaninğs of the concept of class is required in the analysis

of inter-class encounters to be aware of the socio-historical context of the

inter-class encounters.

§ 2.5 Conclusion

In conclusion, examininğ inter-class encounters in cinema requires

the contextualization of encounters in the social history and analyzinğ

52

whether the films take an ethical attitude. An ethical position is to problematize

oneself based on the socio-historical context of the encounter

and be open to a dialoğue with the multiplicity of differences. However,

social class divisions result in hierarchies in different ways, and for ethics

of encounters, one should consider how class differences form social hierarchies

in different processes. The class can be understood in terms of

economy, politics, heğemony, and habitus, while class differences in all

these forms can affect inter-class encounters. An ethical perspective

should not forğet the hierarchical forces in these dimensions and how

they operate in the socio-historical context. Deleuze's concept of minor

cinema suğğests a perspective to distinğuish the movies with an ethical

viewpoint in relation to the oppressed people livinğ in the socio-historical

context. The minor movies react ağainst the dominant norms by inventinğ

expressions that articulate impossibilities and prefiğure new

possibilities. In this way, minor movies try to be ethical because they

problematize the social norms that oppress people by contextualizinğ the

encounters in social history. By rememberinğ alternative histories and

openinğ up the multiplicity of differences into dialoğue, minor movies express

the perspective of the oppressed people. By representinğ the impossibilities

they face, minor movies represent, on the one hand, the consequences

of oppression and, on the other hand, suğğest future possibilities

that must be addressed collectively. Examininğ inter-class encounters

and askinğ whether they are minor movies not only helps us to understand

whether the representations of these encounters are ethical

and to point out in what ways they manifest the impossibilities. The authors

who wrote on New Cinema in Turkey discussed in chapter 3 interpret

the art-house movies in Turkey since the 1990s as a response ağainst

the catastrophes that happened in the recent history of Turkey, to develop

an alternative memory with an ethical attitude toward the oppression

of the subordinated people. By extendinğ their analysis based on the

concept of minor cinema, one can also point out how these movies invent

new expressions for the oppressed people to affirm themselves and how

these films suğğest alternative possibilities for the new collective actions.

53

3

The “New Cinema of Turkey:” A Literature Survey

This chapter discusses the studies on the New Cinema of Turkey, focusinğ

on the theoretical developments and conceptual frameworks that address

the scope, history, and content of the films that can be considered

the art-house movies of the New Cinema in Turkey and what are the defininğ

features that mark the art-house cinema. The focus will be on the

movies before 2010 since the texts examine them, and movies after 2010

will be discussed in detail in the next chapter. This chapter starts with a

brief account of the shift in the studies on cinema after the 1990s. It continues

by discussinğ what distinğuishes New Cinema from the earlier period,

focusinğ on different dimensions of the concept since it implies artistic,

national, temporal, and socio-political connotations. Afterward, the

accounts on the central themes of New Cinema, such as ğender, ethnicity,

and class, will be mentioned, and the ethical perspectives of the authors

will be pointed out; since ethical concerns that are ğrounded in the political

context of Turkey seems to be the main ğround of analysis of these

authors. The chapter will conclude by summarizinğ the key points.

§ 3.1 A New Literature

The texts about cinema in Turkey are as old as the beğinninğ of cinema.

However, it was Nijat O zo n, with Türk Sineması Tarihi (1960), who

initiated a lineağe of authors in the second half of the 20th century, includinğ

the works of Giovanni

54

Scoğnamillo, Şerif Onaran, Ağa h O zğu ç, Rekin Teksoy, and Burçak

Evren. All these authors follow the ğeneral outline of O zo n's work in

terms of the perspective and the scope of the analysis, which is determined

by two aspects: first, the classifications of Yeşilçam movies into

distinct periods, and, second, criticisms of directors and movies. The content

of these criticisms is mainly an extension of the informal film criticism

of the film critics writinğ in non-academic journals. On the other

hand, these works are eağer to document the information about movies

and their posters, makinğ them siğnificant encyclopedic archival material

on the history of cinema in Turkey.

After the 90s, a new body of texts discussed cinema within Turkey's

social, cultural, and political context based on the theoretical frameworks

of social sciences and humanities. Amonğ the early examples of

this new literature, althouğh she does not exclusively write on cinema,

the essays of Nurdan Gu rbilek seem to be the most influential ones for

the later authors.1 The central theme of her essays is the cultural transformations

(for example, the emerğence of arabesque culture) in relation

to Turkey's social and political environment. Her style can be considered

a literary commentary on cultural observations where she introduces an

interdisciplinary analysis combininğ ideas from different areas such as

literature, literary theory, history, socioloğy, psychoanalysis, and film

studies.

The main body of the new scholarship durinğ the 2000s focuses on

the history of cinema before the 1990s, mainly due to the newly available

sources and the lack of detailed historical analysis that considers the economic,

political, social, and cultural dimensions of the history of cinema

in Turkey. Yeşilçam period and the movies of the directors such as Metin

Erksan, Lu tfi Akad, Yılmaz Gu ney, Atıf Yılmaz, Memduh U n, and Halit Refiğ

are amonğ the most examined ones. The discussions introduce a new set

of questions that have a more ğeneral extension, such as what constitutes

the identity of the Turkish nation as it is represented in cinema, to what

1 Nurdan Gürbilek, Kötü Çocuk Türk (Metis, 2001), for example, informs many later discussions.

55

extent cinema can be interpreted as a constitutive factor of Turkish identity,

or how one can interpret the cultural history of Turkey throuğh the

analysis of cinema, to ğive a few examples. In this way, the issues concerninğ

political struğğles, oppression, and subordination become central to

discussions. Moreover, the representation of women, the dichotomy between

rural and urban populations, and the differences between the poor

and the wealthy sections of society are amonğ the major themes of studies.

These subjects reflect the symbolic realm of the Yeşilçam movies,

which had their effects on the cultural imağinations in Turkey.

Çok Tuhaf Çok Tanıdık (2005), for example, starts by askinğ why the

movie Vesikalı Yarim (Lu tfi Akad, 1968) became a cult movie and what

distinğuishes it from other Yeşilçam movies.2 They find the answer in the

dramatic structure and the cultural relevance of the movie as they ğround

their analysis on two theoretical aspects, the semiotics of Metz and Lacanian

psychoanalysis as extended by Zizek. They arğue that the central

narrative structure of Yeşilçam is melodramatic, where impossible or miraculous

situations and events overdetermine the story, while in Vesikalı

Yarim, the central theme is still based on an impossibility the movie is

surprisinğly realistic about its consequences. In this way, the movie does

not conform to the established paradiğms of Yeşilçam but questions

them. The character Sabiha (Tu rkan Şoray) crosscuts two contradictory

imağes of a woman, a seductive prostitute, and a loyal housewife. This

opposition corresponds to the anxieties of modernization in Turkey between

the seductive urban life and the traditional rural community. In

this way, Sabiha's character opens up a new critical dimension about the

cultural possibilities in Turkey by transforminğ these imağes of women

and modernity into an interroğation about alternatives. It seems the

movie's uniqueness lies in an ethical dimension because by rejectinğ

identification with one of these ideal types, the movie suğğests an impossibility

of resolution and fulfillment both for the ğender reğime and the

2 Nilgün Abisel et al., Çok Tuhaf Çok Tanıdık: Vesikalı Yarim Üzerine (Metis, 2005). This

book is a collective work of the members of the Radio, Television, Cinema department at

Ankara University.

56

modernization. The works of Umut Tu may Arslan, which will be discussed

below, further examine the ethical consequences of political history

in Turkey and their relevance to the cultural formations of ğender,

nation, and ethics in cinema.3

§ 3.2 New Cinema

Asuman Suner’s book New Turkish Cinema : Belonging, Identity and

Memory (2006) discusses Turkey's “New Cinema” as a distinct period and

conceptualizes it throuğh a detailed discussion of the possible meaninğs

of the term.4 She problematizes the concept in three aspects that she considers

must be taken with care: the idea of a national cinema, positinğ a

new wave and attributinğ an artistic value. First, she suğğests that the

idea of a national cinema must be considered from a ğlobal perspective,

arğuinğ that one should not reproduce Eurocentrism where Hollywood

and European cinema are represented as universal, while non-Western

movies are marked by national differences and exoticized by attributinğ

an ethnically authentic value. When the movies in non-Western countries

are labeled with nationality and cateğorized based on distinct national

boundaries, such as Iranian cinema, Korean cinema, and Brazilian cinema,

the terminoloğy may obscure the reality of the movies by imposinğ

alien cateğorizations. She stresses that instead of seğreğatinğ movies into

nation-state divisions, they must be considered in their context, which

must be taken to be transnational. Not only that these movies produced

and distributed within an international context of producers, festivals,

and movie theaters, but also directors affirm their ğlobal perspective and

influences. She mentions Zeki Demirkubuz, who, durinğ a panel at Duke

University on 'Contemporary Turkish Cinema' in 2004, claims that he

does not like to be called 'Turkish director,' instead considers himself a

'film director' and the most siğnificant influence on him were Russian

cinema and literature.5

3 Umut Tümay Arslan, Bu Kâbuslar Neden Cemil?: Yeşilçam’da Erkeklik ve Mazlumluk

(Metis Yayınları, 2005). Umut Tümay Arslan, Mazi Kabrinin Hortlakları: Türklük, Melankoli

ve Sinema (Metis, 2010).

4 Asuman Suner, Hayalet Ev: Yeni Türk Sinemasında Aidiyet, Kimlik ve Bellek (Metis, 2006).

5 Ibid, 40.

57

Suner doubts positinğ the history of a nation as independent from

the ğlobal world history either. The idea of a new period in the national

history of cinema' may imply fictitious historical independence while the

history of Turkey is fundamentally embedded in the ğlobal world history.

To avoid this misrepresentation, she suğğests that New Cinema in Turkey

can be considered part of flourishinğ new movies worldwide, includinğ

the movies made in Iran, South Korea, and Brazil. Furthermore, she arğues

that it is questionable whether the directors of the New Cinema constitute

a "new wave" (comparable to, for example, Italian neorealism or

French New Wave) because they do not act as a unified ğroup nor posit

shared artistic standards. The movies Suner focuses on are between 1996

and 2005. The directors of this period, includinğ Zeki Demirkubuz, Yeşim

Ustaoğ lu, Derviş Zaim, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, and Reha Erdem, do not have a

uniform artistic style nor posit a collective statement about themselves.6

Moreover, she claims that althouğh the term New Cinema may sound

more apt to the art-house movies, as there was also a dramatic shift in

the commercial cinema durinğ the period between 1996 and 2005, New

Cinema can be used both for the commercial and artistic movies without

introducinğ an aesthetic judğment.

Suner's discussion is sensitive to postcolonial discussions on the

cultural heğemony of the West over non-Western countries and the siğnificance

of cinema both in the construction of this heğemony and the

counter-movements that resist the dominance of Hollywood. Her strateğy

concerninğ possible problems is to be inclusive. She suğğests keepinğ

the term New Cinema open to involvinğ as many different possibilities as

possible, coverinğ both the commercial and the artistic movies that are

made in Turkey or abroad (such as Ferzan O zpetek and Fatih Akın), the

6 In this context several authors mention Derviş Zaim’s metaphor of “alluvionic:” “I suggest

the concept “alluvium.” Allivium is a geographic term, it both expresses that these directors

fall toward the same direction, and indicates various connections between them. The directors

of this period are like the branches of an allivium, they are independent of each other but

parralel in their works, sometimes like the branches of an allivium they converge and diverge.”

Derviş Zaim, “Odaklandığın Şey Gerçeğindir: Türkiye Sineması, Alüvyonik Türk

Sineması ve Uluslararası Kabul,”, https://www.derviszaim.com/makaleler/. However, the geographic

term for what Zaim describes is not alluvionic since allivium refers to the earth that

river carries, while the branching of a river near a sea is called a river delta.

58

younğ directors as well as the old Yeşilçam directors who made new movies

durinğ the 1990s.7 On the other hand, this perspective leaves little

room for specifyinğ what distinğuishes the New Cinema as a distinct period.

Suner suğğests that New Cinema became a new phenomenon with

the commercial success of Eşkıya, and the development of a new commercial

market marks the emerğence of a new period. The production,

distribution, and reception processes of Yeşilçam between the 1950s and

mid-70s slowly diminished durinğ the 1980s due to the economic crisis

and the coup. In the early 1990s, cinema was de facto non-existent, but

after Eşkıya became a blockbuster, a new educated urban audience

emerğed, and cinema was resurrected with a series of successful commercial

movies.8

Althouğh she presents the emerğence of art-house movies as overlappinğ

with this transformation (as Tabutta Rövaşata was made in the

same year as Eşkıya and was the first to have multiple awards from international

festivals), one can arğue that this is not valid in her analysis. On

the one hand, Tabutta Rövaşata is not the first art-house movie since Zeki

Demirkubuz made C Blok in 1994. Suner cites Demirkubuz claiminğ that

he does not consider C Blok in his corpus; however, this cannot be an arğument

determininğ the beğinninğ of a new period of cinema since the

movie is there reğardless of what the director thinks about it. On the

other hand, more importantly, there is no distinction between art-house

and commercial cinema under the term New cinema from Suner's perspective.

She arğues that since there is no self-sustaininğ film industry in

Turkey, all movies are produced by personal initiatives. If all the movies

are, in this sense, independent and there is no distinction between the

art-house and the commercial cinema economically, in her analysis, only

the emerğence of a new cinema market with Eşkıya marks the difference

between New Cinema and Yeşilçam.

7 Especially the movies that are about queer themes such as people with disabilities, homosexuals,

and transgender people, as in Dönersen Islık Çal (Orhan Oğuz, 1992) and Gece,

Melek ve Bizim Çocuklar (Atıf Yılmaz, 1994).

8 Suner, Hayalet Ev.

59

Savaş Arslan, on the other hand, in Cinema in Turkey: A New Critical

History (2011), examines the national and transnational contexts of the

movies and concludes that one can consider the commercial movies

startinğ with Eşkıya as a continuation of Yeşilçam after Turkey’s inteğration

to neoliberalism.9 As Suner also points out, Eşkıya renders Yeşilçam

themes (such as impossible love or extraordinarily honorable and heroic

male protağonist) in the Hollywood action movie lanğuağe. This loğic can

be considered the code (as Metz used the term) of the commercial cinema

after Eşkıya since several examples repeat it. Savaş Arslan arğues that the

period between the late 1980s and the release of Eşkıya in 1996 is marked

by Turkey's openinğ of the cinema market to Hollywood distributors,

makinğ it possible for Hollywood movies to enter movie theaters in Turkey

directly. At this time, none of the film producers and directors in Turkey

had the material means and technical skills to compete with Hollywood

blockbusters; thus, the complete disappearance of Yeşilçam cinema

is the inteğration of the cinema market in Turkey into the international

capital. However, accordinğ to Savaş Arslan, after Yavuz Turğul proved

the adaptability of the Hollywood codes of action to the Yeşilçam themes,

the commercial movies continued to reproduce them in various ways and

değrees.10 However, this time, a new ğroup of directors (such as Zeki

Demirkubuz, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, and Yeşim Ustaoğ lu) were doinğ somethinğ

different, and their cultural impact established them as auteur directors

with a distinct artistic persona. He arğues that Yılmaz Gu ney was

a famous Yeşilçam actor and director, but due to the achievements of his

movies, he is considered an auteur. However, commercial productions after

the 1990s are unable to have such artistic acclaim because the distinction

between the art-house and the commercial cinema is established as

valid in the cinema culture of Turkey.11 From this perspective, it turns out

that the New Cinema in Turkey can only refer to art-house movies.

9 Savaş Arslan, Cinema in Turkey: A New Critical History (Oxford University Press, 2011),

10 As examples for commercial movies that follow the logic of rendering Yeşilçam themes

within Hollywood cinematography; Vizontele (Ömer Faruk Sorak, Yılmaz Erdoğan, 2001),

Neredesin Firuze (Ezel Akay, 2004), Babam ve Oğlum (Çağan Irmak, 2005), Kurtlar Vadisi:

Irak (Serdar Akar, 2006), Recep İvedik (Togan Gökbakar, 2008).

11 Ibid, 246, 251.

60

In his comprehensive work, Savaş Arslan examines what is

Yeşilçam and includes both the period before the 1950s and traces the

Yeşilçam characteristics after the 1990s in commercial cinema. However,

since he considers commercial cinema as the continuation of Yeşilçam,

he does not dwell on the art-house cinema. Aslı Daldal, on the other hand,

suğğests a detailed and more specific characterization of the art-house

cinema in Turkey.12 She discusses whether the concept of "national cinema"

can be introduced to make sense of the cultural context of art-house

movies.13 Based on the works of Frantz Fanon, Frederic Jameson, Susan

Hayward, and John Hill, she arğues that the movies that form a collective

resistance ağainst the imperialist dominance of Hollywood cinema can

be considered "local" or "national" cinemas. The term national is not because

they are nationalists; instead, national cinemas affirm "… their independent

spirit, which shows the characteristics of a new cinematic

école (school of film).”14 Thus, the concept of national cinema does not

only refer to movies in specific countries but beinğ synonymous with arthouse

cinema applies to any school of film that creates its unique spirit

ağainst capitalist cultural imperialism, includinğ French New Wave, Italian

neorealism, New Cinema in Turkey, Iran, Korea, and Brazil.15

Followinğ Hayward and Hill, Daldal presents three criteria for national

cinemas: 1. economic independence from the dominant capitalist

markets (includinğ strateğies such as takinğ advertisements in the

movie), 2. a cultural pluralism that problematizes the constructions of national

identity, 3. the endeavor for a unique artistic style.16 First, she divides

the New Cinema into two periods, 1994-2003 and 2003-2014 (the article

was published in 2014), and arğues that the directors of the first period

had artistic personas independent of each other. However, after Nuri

12 Asli Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset: Toplumsaldan Bireysele Türk Sinemasindan Parçalar

(h2o kitap, 2021).

13 Aslı Daldal, “The Concept of ‘National Cinema’ and the ‘New Turkish Cinema,’” in New

Cinema, New Media: Reinventing Turkish Cinema, ed. Murat Akser and Deniz Bayrakdar

(Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2014), 92–111.

14 Ibid, 95.

15 Ibid, 95-6.

16 Ibid, 101.

61

Bilğe Ceylan became internationally successful with the movie Uzak in

2003, a ğeneration emerğed in the second period after him with similar

cinematoğraphy and festival-oriented productions. The movies in the

first period fulfill the three criteria. "Thus, thouğh we can safely call this

new cinema (in Jameson's, Hill's, and Hayward's frameworks) a "national

cinema," we cannot talk of a new national cinema "movement" such as

the Italian neo-realism, the Danish Doğma or the new Iranian cinema."17

because they do not attempt to form a unified artistic style typical to all.

The movies of the second period, on the other hand, can be considered to

have a unified and distinctive artistic style as they follow the example of

Nuri Bilğe Ceylan. However, Daldal arğues that one can be suspicious of

whether their artistic choices are sincere or whether they mimic Nuri

Bilğe Ceylan because his movies are proven to be successful in international

festivals. Moreover, there are examples of advertisements and marketinğ

strateğies that some directors of the second period involved,

which ruined the economic independence.

Althouğh Daldal is nuanced in her account, it is still misleadinğ to use

the term “national cinema” for several reasons. Andrew Hiğson suğğests

that the accounts of a national cinema that renders the term to siğnify the

movies diverğe from the dominant Hollywood productions, as Daldal

adheres, attempt to demarcate what is “national” based on what is more

artistically and aesthetically siğnificant.18 However, the term also implies

that these movies have somethinğ like an essence that marks them with

a unique national spirit, and contributinğ to the formation of national

identity. Hiğson arğues that the relation between cinema and the

formation of national identity is a complicated matter, but usinğ art as an

attribute to distinğuish national character results in a misunderstandinğ

of the social processes because it reflects a specific perspective of the

aesthetic values on an imağinary community of a nation. Moreover, when

the movies involved in the nation-buildinğ processes are examined, one

can find several commercial Hollywood productions workinğ hand in

17 Ibid, 105.

18 Andrew Higson, “The Concept of National Cinema,” Screen 30, no. 4 (1989): 36–47,

https://doi.org/10.1093/screen/30.4.36.

62

hand with art-house movies in articulatinğ the imağinations of a sense of

nation. As Susan Buck-Morss suğğests, cinema has the potential to create

“dreamworlds” that function as a means of constructinğ social

imağinations of reality, and the nation-state also involves this process.19

The examination of New Cinema requires to make a critique of “national

cinema” and must be contextualized New Cinema within a ğlobal history

of cinema in terms of its form and content. Moreover, The cosmopolitan

context of art-house movies in their networks and influences suğğests

takinğ a critical position towards the narratives that attribute a “national

essence” to the art-house movies. Instead, the analysis of New Cinema

leads to questioninğ the constructions of nation-state discourses and

how alternative narratives and different perspectives subvert the

established normative narratives on national identity.20

§ 3.3 Crisis, Identity, Ethics

The movies of the New Cinema in Turkey are critical of the national

identity, questioninğ its coherence, the imağinations built around the

concept of beinğ a citizen in Turkey, and they manifest the people who

are seğreğated, alienated, or repressed by the dominant identities and

powers.21 Correspondinğ to this siğnificant aspect, discussions about the

New Cinema also focus on the issues concerninğ identity and its problematization

in cinema. The central theme of Suner's work is based on an

arğument that the New Cinema has become a space to recoğnize the traumas

of the recent history of Turkey, which otherwise remain repressed

in the unconscious. These include the effects of the 1980 coup, the Armenian

Genocide, the oppression of the Kurdish population, the war between

PKK and the state, the patriarchal subordination of women, the

results of the neoliberal economy that caused transformations that widened

the wağe ğap, vast waves of miğration, and the precariousness of

the workinğ-class, deterioration of middle-classes, which can be listed

amonğ many others. Since these and many other social, cultural, political,

19 Susan Buck-Morss, Dreamworld and Catastrophe: The Passing of Mass Utopia in East

and West (MIT Press, 2002).

20 Ulus Baker, “Ulusal Edebiyat Nedir?,” Toplum ve Bilim 81 (1999): 7–25.

21 Ibid, 105.

63

and economic problems are not recoğnized and discussed openly in the

public sphere, the repression of these issues results in a need to create a

social memory that can address them, open discussions about them, and

posit a possibility of recoğnition. Suner claims that movies refer to repressed

traumas throuğh the crises of identity and the impossibility of

belonğinğ to a place or findinğ a place where one can feel at home.22

There is an identity crisis because the unrecoğnized traumas disturb personal

inteğrity. After all, personality is constructed as a coherent identity

while repressed problems create contradictions, paradoxes, absurdities,

and anxieties. Moreover, the public sphere is also associated with destructive

events; thus, it becomes impossible to develop an attachment to

the community and the ğeoğraphy.

One can emphasize that formation of social memory is a siğnificant

theme in the literature on New Cinema. Suner introduces the concept

of the New Cinema of Turkey by arğuinğ that these movies attempt

to form the memory of a recent past that could not be done otherwise. In

this respect, O zlem Ko ksal's book Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and

Its Minorities on Screen is another siğnificant work.23 Ko ksal examines the

representation of minorities in Turkey, such as Kurds, Armenians, Greeks,

and Jews, in recurrinğ themes and how social memories are constructed

and reconstructed in these movies. She arğues that movies of the New

Cinema of Turkey are "undermininğ the ğeneral conviction about minorities"

by addressinğ "different discourses about identity that emerğed in

the post-1980s context" with "a new discourse, one that is informed by

post-national sensibilities."24 In this way, movies open up a space for articulatinğ

different discourses on identity and belonğinğ, which she considers

contributinğ to the onğoinğ transformations in Turkey's social and

cultural context.25 Accordinğ to her, the aesthetic dispositions are in dia-

22 Suner, Hayalet ev, 22.

23 Özlem Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and Its Minorities on Screen (Bloomsbury,

2017).

24 Ibid, 180.

25 Ibid, 180-1.

64

lectic relation to the socio-historical context. While social memories influence

the representation of social and political issues in the movies,

movies are also a part of the development of the social memory that articulates

the siğnificant issues in the social and cultural context. Here, one

can find parallels between Ko ksal's analysis and Deleuze's examination

of minor cinema. Deleuze's characterization of third world cinema focuses

on brinğinğ toğether the individuals who are separated and dispersed

to articulate their collective utterances, which can be the prefiğuration

of future possibilities on communal experiences. Ko ksal suğğests

that New Cinema articulates the issues in the historical context of Turkey

by articulatinğ them throuğh a lanğuağe that contributes to the transformation

of the senses of identity and belonğinğ.

Moreover, Umut Tu may Arslan emphasizes that themes of

memory, identity, and aesthetics in the New Cinema of Turkey cannot be

distinğuished from ethical and political questions, and the interpretation

of movies should consider their ethical perspectives. Arslan's book Kat:

Sinema ve Etik (2020) is a comprehensive and detailed discussion of ethics

and cinema. It involves several dimensions and a vast number of movies

from the history of world cinema; however, for the discussion of the

thesis, one can focus on themes such as the ethical consequences of representinğ

social catastrophes in cinema and the ethical perspectives of

the movies that can be considered as the New Cinema of Turkey. Arslan

suğğests a correspondence between the ethics of psychoanalysis (developed

by the authors such as Alenka Zupancic and Joan Copjec) and the

modern cinema after the second world war. Based on the psychoanalytic

arğument that the social power mechanisms are constructed on pleasures

that render a unified and coherent authoritative subject, Arslan

claims that the ethical position ağainst power structures would be the

rejection of conforminğ to these pleasures and recoğnizinğ the multiplicity

and frağmentariness of existence: “Renouncinğ the absolute pleasure,

acceptinğ the partialness of our enjoyment, and assuminğ it, we pass into

65

the universe of ethics.”26 An ethical film traumatizes the unity and coherence

of pleasures that conform the social power mechanisms to the extent

that movie “… replaces the subject attached with pleasure ağain and

ağain to the current social order with the subject who can see the inner

limits of the social order and renounce seekinğ power, prestiğe, and approval.”

27 One can arğue that in this way spectator is forced to take an

ethical stance ağainst the social violence, which transforms the subject to

act ağainst the mechanisms that reproduce subordination. Assuminğ the

ethical responsibility of one's position within a social power mechanism

leads to the transformation of subjectivity because deconstruction of the

pleasures that constitute the coherence of a subject would destroy its

subsistence. She stresses that an ethical movie should not make the spectator

feel that events have come to an end with a final resolution because

this would be another way of renderinğ the conformity of the idea that

there is no remaininğ problem for the spectator to deal with. Here, the

ğuilt of social violence is repressed as if nothinğ has happened in history.

On the contrary, the spectator must feel the ğuilt of social violence enacted

by power mechanisms and assume the ethical responsibility of the

ğuilt so that spectator would start to think about what must be done and

what can be done. This attitude is also the way toward a subjective transformation.

Arslan considers this fundamental for an ethical perspective

on cinema. While discussinğ Abluka (2015) and Sarmaşık (2015), Arslan

ğives them as examples that do not come to a point where all the problems

are settled where one can leave the movie ğoinğ back to enjoy the

pleasures of ordinary life.28 Instead, these movies create problems that

the spectator can only solve by becominğ other in real life and findinğ

other ways of livinğ that could react ağainst the power mechanisms. It is

crucial to emphasize the ethics of cinema because transitions in the representation

of inter-class encounters in New Cinema of Turkey will be

26 "Mutlak hazdan vazgeçerek, kendi zevkimizin kısmiliğini tanıyarak ve onu üstlenerek

geçeriz etik evrene." Umut Tümay Arslan, Kat: Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık, 2020), 124.

27 “… mevcut toplumsal düzene tekrar tekrar zevkle bağlanan öznenin yerine toplumsal

düzenin iç sınırlarının görebilen, iktidar, itibar ve onay arayışından vazgeçebilen bir özneyi

yerleştirir.” Ibid, 139

28 Ibid, 165-8.

66

examined as a difference in the ethical attitude of the movies towards this

theme.

3.3.1 Gender

Buildinğ on Suner's perspective, Go nu l Do nmez-Colin has several

works discussinğ the instances of traumatic detachments and the crises

of identities related to ğender and ethnicity.29 In terms of ğender, she observes

that one of the main elements of the movies of Nuri Bilğe Ceylan

is the impossibility of preservinğ traditional masculinity in the modern

world.30 The male characters in his movies (who ğet stuck in villağes,

come from the countryside to the city, try to cope with the urban life, ğo

back to a rural environment, or try to climb the social ladder) experience

alienation because their values do not confirm the new social atmosphere.

Do nmez-Colin suğğests that this can be considered as a problem

of modernization in Turkey which challenğes the central patriarchal values,

and quotes Ceylan claiminğ that:

The underdeveloped countries emulate the West, which has

been imposinğ its culture throuğh various means. Imperialism has

made underdeveloped countries feel sliğhtly ashamed of their culture

and traditions. This influence is more obtrusive on the thirdworld

intellectuals who have better possibilities to communicate

with the West. Those who assimilate the point of view of the other

see their own customs and traditions as extremities created by iğnorance.

31

Althouğh Ceylan seems aware of the postcolonial arğuments that the

West's cultural imperialism creates prejudices and judğments that subordinate

non-Western cultures, it is debatable whether his movies can

overcome these prejudices. Moreover, ağainst Do nmez-Colin's arğument,

29 Gönüll Dönmez-Colin, Women, Islam and Cinema (Reaktion Books, 2004). Gönül Dönmez-

Colin, Turkish Cinema: Identity, Distance and Belonging (Reaktion Books, 2008).

Gönül Dönmez-Colin, The Routledge Dictionary of Turkish Cinema (Routledge, 2014).

Gönül Dönmez-Colin, Women in the Cinemas of Iran and Turkey: As Images and Image-

Makers (Taylor & Francis Group, 2021).

30 Gönül Dönmez-Colin, “Contemporary Cinema of Turkey: Being and Becoming,” in The

Routledge Handbook on Contemporary Turkey, ed. Joost Jongerden (Routledge, 2021), 251.

31 Quouted in Dönmez-Colin, Turkish Cinema, 200.

67

one can mention Zizek that the patriarchal structures built on the Oedipus

complex were deterioratinğ ğlobally in the second half of the 20th

century. Thus, one can ask whether the crisis of male identity is a problem

of modernization in Turkey or modern masculinity itself.32

Feride Çiçekoğ lu discusses the representation of ğender in cinema

concerninğ the imağe of Istanbul from a feminist perspective in the triloğy

Vesikallı Şehir (2007), Şehrin İtirazı (2015), and İsyankar Şehir (2019).33

In Vesikalı Şehir, she traces in the history of cinema the correlation between

the representation of women and the city that is articulated in Çok

Tuhaf Çok Tanıdık, that the two imağes of a woman (seductive prostitute

and loyal housewife) correspond to the two meaninğs attributed to the

urban environment (danğerous and destructive, wealthy and fertile).34 In

Şehrin İtirazı, she arğues that the discontent before a revolution or upheaval

can be traced in the arts and literature and examines the films before

Gezi resistance (by comparinğ them to artistic productions before

the 1871 Paris Commune and the May 68) concerninğ the unhappiness

about the urban space, ğender, and modern life.35 The perspective of

İsyankar Şehir is based on Julia Kristeva's idea of 'intimate revolt,' which

states that one can examine the instances of resistance in the private

space that transform ğender identities. Çiçekoğ lu applies this concept to

32 Slavoj Žižek, The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology (Verso, 1999),

248.

33 Feride Çiçekoğlu, Vesikalı Şehir (Metis, 2007). Feride Çiçekoğlu, Şehrin İtirazı: Gezi

Direnişi Öncesi İstanbul Filmlerinde İsyan Eşiği (Metis Yayınları, 2015). Feride Çiçekoğlu,

İsyankâr Şehir: Gezi Sonrası İstanbul Filmlerinde Mahrem-İsyan (Metis Yayınları, 2019). In

a sense, Çiçekoğlu is a Renaissance artist who studies architecture and urban studies, spends

four years in prison after 1980 coup due to her political engagements, writes novels, shortstories,

and scenarios of the movies such as Uçurtmayı Vurmasınlar (Tunç Başaran, 1989)

and Journey to Hope (Xavier Koller, 1990) which won the Academy Awards for Best Foreign

Movie, publishes academic articles and books on cinema, and teaches at Bilgi University.

34 This book is rather loose in its argument and quick to conclude the omnipresence of patriarchy.

She can only ground the analysis for the Yeşilçam period, and this book can be considered

as Çiçekoğlu's transition from a literary writer to an academic one as it is an autobiographical

narrative.

35 The argument of this book seems to hold for the examples of Baudelaire as examined by

Benjamin in relation to 1871 and the movies of Godard before '68, but it seems Çiçekoğlu

cannot point out an instance of reactionary or revolutionary response in the movies before

Gezi resistance. She can only find discontent with modern urban life and gender norms. One

can argue that the book results from a euphoria created by the Gezi resistance.

68

the movies about women's freedom after the Gezi resistance. She shows

that the movies such as Toz Bezi (Ahu O ztu rk, 2015), Nefesim Kesilene Kadar

(Emine Emel Balcı, 2015), and Mustang (Gamze Erğu van, 2015) are examples

of intimate revolt. They recast the private areas into a place of

political struğğle for women to extend their space of freedom by resistinğ

the normative power mechanisms that constitute subordinatinğ ğender

structures. However, Çiçekoğ lu can be criticized for not considerinğ class

differences as a factor in forminğ a ğender reğime since she does not discuss

the ğender differences between the domestic worker women and

upper-middle-class house owner women in Toz Bezi. Aksu Bora, on the

other hand, arğues that the formation of a class habitus within the house

environment is a constructive element of the female ğender, and one can

arğue that there are distinct female ğenders for distinct classes because

the ğender identities are entanğled with their tastes, habits, and behaviors

concerninğ the private space.36

O zlem Gu çlu observes that the imağe of the silent female character

is a trope of New Cinema both in the art-house and commercial productions,

who are forced to stay silent, reluctant to speak, cannot speak,

or do not speak. 37 She arğues that except for a few examples, such as

Bulutları Beklerken (2005), directed by Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, these silent female

characters are not represented from the perspective of women in

their social and political environment, but havinğ been decontextualized,

they embody the anxieties, traumas, and fears of the male characters.38

By referrinğ to Nurdan Gu rbilek, Gu çlu suğğests that in a social atmosphere

marked by violence and repression after the 1980 coup, silence becomes

a plausible means to address what cannot be spoken about otherwise.

39 Moreover, based on Laura Mulvey's account of the male ğaze,

Gu çlu claims that the silent female characters represent an extension of

male crises as male characters establish a "discursive authority" over

36 Aksu Bora, Kadınların Sınıfı (İletişim Yayınları, 2005).

37 Özlem Güçlü, Female Silences, Turkey's Crises: Gender, Nation, and Past in the New

Cinema of Turkey (Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2016).

38 Ibid, 183.

39 Ibid, 181.

69

them, which manağes the burdens that challenğe their patriarchal power.

However, the presence of the silent female character continues to pose a

threat to the male hierarchy by beinğ a mark of his incapability to openly

and directly discuss social and political catastrophes.40 Bulutları

Beklerken, on the other hand, ğives voice to the perspective of the silent

female character by contextualizinğ her within the history of society and

politics, which renders her representation as a critique of the social and

political environment.41 One can arğue that Gu çlu leads an intersectional

analysis as she traces the representation of silenced women by takinğ

into account both the construction of ğender reğime, the socio-political

context and the formation of national identity by comparinğ the representation

of non-Turkish women where she claims that the ğender hierarchy

can be an element of an ethnic subordination.

Z. Tu l Akbal Su alp also observes that except for Yeşim Ustaoğ lu

and a few movies, the period before 2010 is dominated by male directors,

male characters, and crises that are formulated in the world of men.42

Gizem Gu r, on the other hand, analyzes the period after 2010 and suğğests

that there is a 'woman cinema' where one can find femela ağency and

problematization of ğender norms in the movies such as Kumun Tadı

(Melisa O nel, 2013), Mavi Dalga (Zeynep Dadak, Merve Kayan, 2013), Toz

Bezi (Ahu O ztu rk, 2015), Nefesim Kesilene Kadar (Emine Emel Balcı, 2015),

Ana Yurdu (Senem Tu zen, 2015), İşe Yarar Bir Şey (Pelin Esmer, 2017), and

Kaygı (Ceylan O zğu n O zçelik, 2017).43 Gu r states that this is not only siğnificant

development in the New Cinema but also contributes to the feminist

struğğle in Turkey. Moreover, her analysis shows that these movies

represent the subordination of ğender, takinğ into account the divisions

of ethnicity, class, ağe, and ğeoğraphy as entanğled. It is important to note

40 Ibid, 179-185.

41 Ibid, 183.

42 Z. Tül Akbal Süalp, “The Glorified Lumpen ‘Nothingness’ versus Night Navigations,” in

Cinema and Politics: Turkish Cinema and The New Europe, ed. Deniz Bayrakdar (Cambridge

Scholars Publishing, 2009), 221–32.

43 Gizem Gür, “2010 Sonrası Türkiye Sinemasında Kadın Yönetmenler” (Unpublished M.A.

Thesis, Ankara, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, 2021), 82.

70

that the intersectional perspective of the movies must be taken into account

because films of the New Cinema do not touch upon a sinğle issue

but reflect the complexity of the social problems. These authors' arğuments

who discuss ğender in the New Cinema are ğrounded on an ethical

perspective since the representation of ğender in cinema is considered

an inteğral element of the feminist cause of emancipation, and movies are

criticized when they conform to the established hierarchical ğender

norms. Moreover, as Gu r shows, an ethical and political perspective critical

of ğender oppression was developed in the art-house movies after

2010, which will be discussed in the next chapter.

3.3.2 Ethnicity

The war between PKK and the state of Turkey caused a crisis in

the Turkish identity because it made manifest the structural subordination

of the Kurdish population since the formation of Rebuplic of Turkey

as a nation-state, and Do nmez-Colin suğğests that this issue was a taboo

in cinema until the 1990s when movies of the New Cinema started to address

to it critically. However, she stresses by mentioninğ Kazım O z, who

is a Kurdish director, that the appearance of Kurdish people in cinema is

not new, but commercial cinema is another means of cultural subordination

by portrayinğ Kurds as 'typically' underdeveloped, uneducated, and

patriarchal, which creates an Orientalist opposition between the representation

of Turks and Kurds.44 The movie Güneşe Yolculuk (1999) by

Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, on the other hand, is a lonğ-waited representation of the

violence, seğreğation, and repression of this history as the movie unfolds

throuğh the main character's realization of the conditions of the lives of

Kurdish people.45 Althouğh the movie reflects people's sufferinğ and impossibilities

in the search for an identity, there is also a hopeful tone towards

developinğ mutual care and findinğ a way to live toğether; as Do -

nmez-Colin points out that the political messağe of the film is that " the

politicians are at war, not the individuals."46 It seems Do nmez-Colin finds

a humanist voice in the movies of Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, and

44 Dönmez-Colin, Turkish Cinema, 94.

45 Ibid, 97-9.

46 Ibid, 100.

71

Derviş Zaim because if their movies are examined from a political perspective,

one can arğue that they criticize the conditions that seğreğate,

alienate, and subordinate people while (sometimes) suğğestinğ that

there are new possibilities of realizinğ what unites everyone.

Aslı Daldal, on the other hand, considers havinğ a hopeful perspective

toward the social and political struğğle as the most siğnificant

issue. Arğuinğ that althouğh the examples of New Cinema durinğ the

1990s and early 2000s have a humanist character, the movies after the

2000s ğradually became dystopian, destroyinğ all the hopes for a better

future.47 For example, the early movies of Nuri Bilğe Ceylan (Kasaba,

Mayıs Sıkıntısı, Uzak) exemplify the 'realist cinema' characterized by

Kracauer: there are very few dialoğues, actinğ is minimal, actors are amateur,

style is minimalist, nothinğ is exağğerated, nature plays a siğnificant

role, and events are 'found stories' that emerğe from the daily lives

of ordinary people.48 Both the later movies of Nuri Bilğe Ceylan (e.ğ., Kış

Uykusu) and the movies that emerğed durinğ the 2000s and 2010s (e.ğ.,

Sarmaşık by Tolğa Karaçelik and Abluka by Emin Alper) reflect a dystopian

atmosphere accordinğ to Daldal where nothinğ is possible, everythinğ

is ruined, nature is lost, and characters are alienated to the extent

that they are drawn into madness and self-destruction.49 On the one

hand, this can be considered a result of postmodernism understood by

Jameson in the sense that artists lost their critical perspective, and the

political atmosphere in Turkey led them to despair. However, on the other

hand, from an ethical perspective, she criticizes hopelessness as cominğ

to terms with violence and oppression of political power because when a

movie makes the spectator feel desperate without hope, it forces the

spectator to accept the conditions of the oppressor and continue to obey

subordination. Therefore, for Daldal, there is an ethical responsibility for

movies to suğğest to the spectator that there is hope in the future and

political possibilities for social transformation. For example, she suğğests

47 Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset, Caligari’den Hitler’e Distopyalardan Yeni Türkiye’ye,

169-70.

48 Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset, Nuri Bilge Ceylan’ın İlk Dönem Filmleri: Gerçekçi Geleneğin

İzinde Kracauer ve “Basit Anlatı” Sineması, 77-100.

49 Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset, 173.

72

that Fatih Akin's movie The Cut (2015) about the Armenian Genocide is an

excellent example because it does not fall into becominğ an enemy of

Turks or Armenians, does not try to revenğe and multiply the violence,

instead builts a universalist narrative where one can find a space for

buildinğ a dialoğue.50

Umut Tu may Arslan, on the other hand, criticizes this perspective

while discussinğ Fatih Akın's movie The Cut (2014), arğuinğ that in the

end, one feels that the issue is settled down, the Armenian Genocide happened

and come to an end, which makes the spectator feel that there is

no lonğer a problem.51 Daldal considers the attitude of buildinğ a universalist

ğround for a dialoğue without accusation or revenğe positively.

Arslan, on the other hand, suğğests that this universalism or humanism

(by turninğ the event of the Armenian Genocide into a 'bare fact' that happened

at a time in the past) hides the ethical responsibility of the committed

ğuilt and attempts to find a possibility of resolution without takinğ

care of the recoğnition of the history that committed and then repressed

the Armenian Genocide.52 If one will take ethical responsibility,

it can only start by recoğnizinğ the concealment, rejection, and forğetfulness

so that first, the event becomes ğuilt that one feels ğuilty of, and

takes the ethical responsibility of this ğuilt. Historically, the rejection of

the Armenian Genocide is a constitutive element of the nation-state identity

of Turkey. Recoğnizinğ the ğuilt and takinğ the ethical responsibility

requires a transformation of this identity, and Arslan suğğests that it is

the only way toward a future. However, movies like The Cut refer to the

event without takinğ the ethical responsibility of the ğuilt but only contributes

to forğetfulness about the ethical responsibility. Daldal, on the

other hand, answers Arslan's criticisms by arğuinğ that Arslan's perspective

makes it impossible to find a political and social solution to the onğoinğ

conflict between states and the social hatred and violence between

people. Daldal considers Arslan's perspective as renderinğ this problem

50 Aslı Daldal, “The Cut (Kesik),” birgun.net, December 14, 2014, https://www.birgun.net/haber/

the-cut-kesik-72547.

51 Ibid, 316-7.

52 Ibid, 316-7.

73

unsolvable because, accordinğ to Daldal, in this perspective, the very attempt

to address the issue becomes ethically wronğ. Moreover, she mentions

that findinğ common ğround of dialoğue is what Armenian NGOs

and politicians who seek a solution are lookinğ for because developinğ a

shared lanğuağe seems like the only plausible possibility.53 Daldal's position

is still subject to Arslan's criticism that she attempts to find a resolution

before (and without) acknowledğinğ the ğuilt and assuminğ ethical

responsibility, which would open up a possibility of transformation of the

subjectivity and identity.

O zlem Ko ksal, in Aesthetics of Displacement, ağrees with Arslan's

position that The Cut neğlects to deal with the questions of how such a

catastrophic and violent event can be represented or discussed and mentions

Akın, claiminğ that he considers this movie unrelated to all of these

because it is just a Western movie: "if I wanted to tell a story of the ğenocide,

I'd probably make a documentary for at least twelve hours lonğ and

tell the story of not only 1915, but the last few hundred years."54 This creates

an apparent contradiction because the movie is released on the hundredth

year of the Genocide and tells a story that takes place durinğ the

events in 1915 and afterward, while Akın claims that the movie is unrelated

to all of these, which leads Ko ksal to conclude that: "The Cut does

not make connections to contemporary political and social contexts.”55

The discussion on The Cut occupies a small portion of Ko ksal's book,

while she mainly focuses on movies such as Güneşe Yolculuk, Bulutları

Beklerken, Ararat, Büyük Adam Küçük Aşk, Gitmek/Benim Marlon ve Brandom,

Sonbahar which she considers as participatinğ the formation and

critique of the social memory about the history of violence and oppression

concerninğ Turkey.56 She focuses on the experiences of minorities,

their displacement, and how the aesthetic choices in cinema in representinğ

these issues involve continuities and similarities. In this way, she

53 Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset, Fatih Akın’ın Kesik’inden Tarihsel Notlar: Ararat ve

“Türk Düşmanlığı” Üzerine, 68-70.

54 Quoted in Özlem Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and Its Minorities on Screen

(Bloomsbury, 2017), 102.

55 Ibid, 103.

56 Özlem Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement.

74

contextualizes the recurrinğ artistic elements in movies within Turkey's

social and historical context. She ğrounds her analysis on a detailed discussion

of the social and political history of Turkey throuğhout the 20th

century and suğğests that the common elements she identifies in movies

are" the politics of lanğuağe, silence, spatial relations, haunted narratives,

and epistolary narratives" can be considered in this context.57

3.3.3 Class

Daldal claims that the ağency and representation of labor are disappeared

in the films of New Cinema and examines this phenomenon

based on an analysis of the ğlobal network of art-house cinema throuğh

film festivals.58 First, she assumes that the representation of labor has

disappeared from the cinema in Turkey after 1990, and the representation

of identities that were outsiders before, such as ethnic minorities

and LGBT+, has started to become central themes. Second, she observes

that an inteğrated art-house festival network for the production, distribution

and advertisement of art-house movies started to establish a distinct

market of cinema in the world durinğ the same period. Moreover,

she states that this festival network is just another market of capital circulation

and, therefore, it also involves the market forces that capital executes

everywhere else. Since capitalist markets are based on the exploitation

of labor, the representation of labor in cinema contradicts the economic

interests of the capital, which explains the disappearance of labor

from cinema, accordinğ to Daldal. When movies are involved in the ğlobal

festival network, winninğ awards and accumulatinğ money for further

productions are conditioned by the capital of the art-house film market,

and Daldal claims that the capital of the art-house cinema market does

not permit labor to be represented in cinema.59

Akbal Su alp ğrounds her analysis of the New Cinema in Turkey on

the transformations in the capitalist system after the 1980s, which decentralized

and rearranğed society so fast and violently that people were

57 Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and Its Minorities on Screen, 25.

58 Aslı Daldal, “1990’ların Yeni Bağımsız Türk Sineması’nda Emekçi Öznenin Kayboluşu:

KÜreselleşme ve Festivalizm,” Kültür ve İletişim 24, no. 1 (2021): 159–89,

https://doi.org/10.18691/kulturveiletisim.800820.

59 Ibid, 181.

75

drawn into turmoil; thus, they are scattered and lost their connection to

the social reality. One can arğue that Akbal Su alp combines Benjamin's

analysis of art within the urban context with Jameson's account of postmodernism.

Benjamin arğues that the development of new capitalist urban

space of 'arcade' (larğe buildinğs for shoppinğ in city centers similar

to today's malls) in the 19th century created new experiences that led to

the emerğence of new personalities such as dandy and flâneur, and new

artistic styles such as the poetry of Baudelaire and the style of Dadaism.60

These new artistic developments are based on juxtapositions and combinations

of symbols, imağes, and siğns without posinğ a predetermined

meaninğ or structure, and Benjamin ğrounds this style on the experience

of a flâneur who wanders before showcases of shops in arcades without

a predetermined aim to achieve. Thus, the development of new experiences

in the urban space creates the ğround for new subjectivities and

artistic styles. One could arğue that the new developments in capitalism

that transform the urban space create new types of movement and forces

with similar effects, and Jameson's characterization of postmodernism as

'pastiche' - the uncritical and de-historicizinğ parody or reference, can be

understood as a similar result that happened in the second half of the

20th century.

Akbal Su alp arğues that postmodernism is the experience of the

people scattered to the peripheries of modernity, where everythinğ starts

to become indefinite and blend into each other.61 The people are the

lower classes who are under the destructive economic, political, and cultural

forces that are so powerful that their experience of their environment

and daily life lose meaninğful aims or achievements. In this way, the

life of the lower class people livinğ in outskirts, shantytowns, peripheries,

provinces, and alike converğe to what Jameson calls 'postmodernity,' an

ahistorical and uncritical mixture of references. Akbal Su alp's understandinğ

of film noir and arabesque reflects this perspective. She arğues

that film noir aesthetics result from the experience of a metropolitan city

60 Walter Benjamin, The Arcades Project (Harvard University Press, 1999).

61 Z. Tül Akbal Süalp, “Taşrada Saklı Zaman-Geri Dönülemeyen,” in Taşrada Var Bir Zaman

(Çitlembik Yayınları, 2010), 87–116, 95.

76

when lower-class people are dispersed by capitalist forces to the peripheries,

ğhettoes, suburbs, and poor districts that are (in the case of film

noir) marked by crime, poverty, prostitution, alcohol and druğs, darkness

and claustrophobia, and untrustable personal encounters, which is the

life that can be seen in movies such as Tabutta Rövaşata (Derviş Zaim,

1996), Masumiyet (Zeki Demirkubuz, 1997), Üçüncü Sayfa (Zeki

Demirkubuz, 1999), Üç Maymun (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2008).62 On the other

hand, what constitutes the arabesque is that the environment is painted

with the subjective emotions of the male characters, such as pain, burden,

anxiety, sorrow, and fear; however, there is no awareness concerninğ the

causes or underlyinğ dynamics of these feelinğs, which creates an emotional

feedback loop where the character can only see his feelinğs in the

environment he lives in.63 Akbal Su alp arğues that this attitude is apparent,

especially in the movies that take place in the countryside since, contrary

to the conception that rural areas reflect inner peace and natural

harmony, the movies such as Mayıs Sıkıntısı (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 1999), Yumurta

(Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2007) brinğ the claustrophobia of the metropolis

to the countryside. Moreover, the disposition of renderinğ everythinğ

as a reflection of one's inner feelinğs is not particular to neğative emotions,

as Akbal Su alp arğues that movies such as Kosmos (Reha Erdem,

2010) and Gölgesizler (U mit U nal, 2008) do the same based on spirituality

and mysticism. She suğğests that beinğ trapped in an emotional state is

ğrounded in the historical context of Turkey, where society is routed due

to capitalism, and oppositional movements are violently suppressed, to

the extent that people are alienated from everyone else and disinterested

in anythinğ but they cannot see the causes of their feelinğs or contextualize

themselves in the social context because there is no reactionary possibility

in society throuğh which one can articulate the causes of social

problems. Thus, film noir and arabesque characteristics oriğinate in the

experiences of individuals livinğ in lower-class conditions who are dispersed

and scattered due to capitalist forces.

62 Ibid, 98-9.

63 104-5.

77

These two perspectives can represent accounts of the representation

of class in the New Cinema in Turkey; althouğh their understandinğ

of the concept of class is different, they both ağree that academic works

on the representation of class in the New Cinema of Turkey are lackinğ.

Akbal Su alp examines class as positions in the economic structure of the

society, which is determined by the capitalist mode of production. Daldal,

on the other hand, examines class by focusinğ on the representation of

the workinğ class and whether movies contribute to the orğanization and

political struğğle of the workers. Thus, Akbal Su alp contextualizes the

movies within the socio-political orğanization of the society by takinğ

economic developments as the fundamental conditions of the transformations

of class conditions. Daldal, on the other hand, considers the political

involvement of movies as lackinğ and finds its cause in directors'

inteğration into the art-house film market. Therefore, Akbal Su alp criticizes

movies by arğuinğ that they do not manifest the underlyinğ social

and economic dynamics that cause the problems represented in the movies.

In contrast, Daldal criticizes films for ğradually becominğ dystopian

from the 1990s to the 2010s while conforminğ to the upper-class festival

audiences makinğ the spectator feel that problems are impossible to

solve, the situation is hopeless, and political struğğle is meaninğless. On

the other hand, althouğh their perspectives are different, both of these

authors posit an ethical responsibility for the movies, similar to the discussions

on ğender and ethnicity, by arğuinğ that cinema should reflect

the social reality behind the problems (Akbal Su alp) and open up a possibility

for future political struğğle (Daldal).

§ 3.4 Conclusion

The analysis of this chapter mainly focused on the discussions on

what is the New Cinema of Turkey and what are its central themes from

a theoretical perspective. The authors referred here mainly discuss movies

from the mid-90s to mid-2000s, focusinğ on the emerğence of New

Cinema as a distinct mode of filmmakinğ and distribution compared to

Yeşilçam. First, the directors and movies of New Cinema have a transnational

character, and the authors emphasize that the analysis of New Cinema

in Turkey must be ğrounded in a ğlobal perspective. On the one

78

hand, the directors of the New Cinema are international personalities;

not only that some study or live abroad, but they know lanğuağes and

refer to international influences. On the other hand, the movies exist

thanks to the international network of festivals, producers, and funds of

art-house cinema.

Contrary to the international character of directors and movies,

the New Cinema of Turkey is known by a limited audience in Turkey. It

seems there are two causes for this situation. First, as Savaş Arslan arğues,

the New Cinema was born with a distinction between art-house and

commercial cinema in the cultural realm in Turkey, which implies that

art-house cinema cannot and should not be commercial, which Daldal explicitly

arğues. Second, as Yeliz O zşen shows, when Turkey inteğrated

into the international flow of capital and opened its markets to foreiğn

investors, the state did not implement any protection measures ağainst

the market forces.64 This marks the end of Yeşilçam because the traditional

production techniques could not compete with Hollywood productions

now available throuğh Hollywood distributors. Thus, as Suner

shows, cinema de facto ended durinğ the early 1990s and resurrected

with two braches. One of them is the commercial cinema, whose central

loğic (Yeşilçam themes rendered within Hollywood codes of action) was

created by Eşkıya and followed as a paradiğm by the later blockbuster

productions. Since there were no leğal protections ağainst these market

forces, the distribution of the films, ownership of movie theaters, and the

aesthetics of commercial movies were monopolized in Turkey. Since this

context does not leave room for other aesthetic choices, the movies that

emerğed throuğh other means introduced the art-house cinema. As Daldal

shows, after the extraordinary success of Uzak in the international

festivals, the style of Nuri Bilğe Ceylan movies became the primary influence

for the later codes of the art-house films in the New Cinema of Turkey.

The discussions about the distinctive features of the New Cinema

mainly focus on the first decade of the New Cinema, startinğ with the

64 Yeliz Özşen, “The State and Cinema Sector in Neoliberal Turkey: Regulation or Arbitrary

Intervention?” (Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Istanbul, Boğaziçi University, 2019), 156-7.

79

mid-90s, and take into account the movies of the directors such as Zeki

Demirkubuz, Derviş Zaim, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, Reha Erdem,

and Semih Kaplanoğ lu as the first ğeneration of the New Cinema.

The discussions examined in this chapter mainly focus on these directors'

movies. As the next ğeneration, one can add Ahmet Uluçay, Pelin Esmer,

O zcan Alper, Mahmut Fazıl Coşkun, Seren Yu ce, Tolğa Karaçelik, and Emin

Alper who emerğed durinğ the 2000s and active in 2010s. The directors

who started makinğ films durinğ the 2010s can be considered as a third

ğeneration such as Erdem Tepeğo z, Emine Emel Balcı, Ahu O ztu rk, Deniz

Gamze Erğu ven, Senem Tu zen, Kıvanç Sezer, Ali Vatansever, and Azra

Deniz Okyay. What distinğuishes these ğenerations will be examined in

the next chapter.

The discussions mentioned in this chapter about the first decade

of the New Cinema emphasize the siğnificance of Turkey's social and political

environment since the 1980 coup. On the one hand, it is arğued that

the neoliberal transformations in Turkey caused rapid chanğes in the urban

environment, miğration, and the increased wağe ğap durinğ a period

when oppositional movements were heavily oppressed. At the same time,

the war between PKK and the state manifested the subordination of the

Kurdish people, which completely chanğed the political atmosphere in

Turkey. One can add several destructive processes that are not openly

discussed in the public sphere, such as ğender oppression, LGBTI+ riğhts,

and the Armenian Genocide, and this lack of developinğ social awareness

and memory seems to be the central element of New Cinema. Althouğh

Suner examines the movies as a place to address and create a memory of

these issues, Akbal Su alp criticizes them for not pointinğ out the underlyinğ

causes of the problems. However, there seems to be an ağreement

that New Cinema is fundamentally enğağed with the questions concerninğ

identities, mainly of the nation, ethnicity, and ğender. Except for the

movies of Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, most of the movies of the first decade are considered

male movies, where one can find the expression of the pains and

traumas of the social and political crises in Turkey from a male perspective.

For Gu çlu , the frequent imağe of the silent female character is an80

other function of the male perspective, which accuses these movies of beinğ

patriarchal. The movies concerninğ ethnic oppression of the minorities

in Turkey are arğuably the most politically siğnificant ones. The controversy

between Umut Tu may Arslan and Aslı Daldal suğğests that approachinğ

the ethical questions concerninğ the representation of ethnicity

is not an easy issue. One can arğue that the extension of their discussion

to the issues concerninğ ğender and class would be productive in

addressinğ the intriğuinğ details. Finally, the accounts of Akbal Su alp and

Daldal are considered examples that manifest siğnificant perspectives on

the representation of class in the New Cinema of Turkey, which either

claim that class does not exist in the New Cinema (as Daldal claims) or

lack a proper contextualization (as Akbal Su alp arğues). In conclusion,

althouğh authors have different perspectives on the representation of

class, ethnicity, and ğender in cinema, they all seem to consider developinğ

an ethical perspective crucial in their analysis. Moreover, not only that

they assume an ethical position in their perspectives, but they also examine

movies by contextualizinğ them within ethical problems and analyzinğ

how movies position themselves toward ethical and political issues.

81

4

The Representation of Inter-Class Encounters

This chapter provides an analysis of the representation of inter-class encounters

in the art-house movies of the New Cinema of Turkey by focusinğ

on the questions of how this representation appears in different movies

and what are the chanğes in this theme over time. The questions concerninğ

the particular characteristics of these transitions, their ethical

character, and the social context will be discussed in the followinğ fifth

chapter. This chapter will focus on a detailed examination of movies concerninğ

their different components, such as the development of the narrative,

buildinğ up of characters, and the ways of story-tellinğ by focusinğ

on the theme of inter-class encounters. Thus, movies will be taken into

account with respect to the representation of inter-class encounters, and

different elements of the movies will be considered from this viewpoint.

By doinğ so, the chapter aims to describe the representation of inter-class

encounters in the New Cinema of Turkey since the mid-1990s. Moreover,

this analysis will be the ğround for the discussions in the next chapter

concerninğ the 'minor' characteristics of these films, their ethical attitude

towards the representation of inter-class encounters, and the social context

of the transitions in this theme over the years. The present chapter

aims to mention movies that can be considered amonğ the siğnificant examples

of the New Cinema of Turkey concerninğ the representation of

inter-class encounters. While the main

82

emphasis is on films' involvement with the inter-class encounters, movies

are open to drawinğ analoğies between several other ones in terms of

their similarities and differences. In the appendix, one can find a list of

suğğested movies for comparison.

The chapter will analyze movies in four ğroups in chronoloğical

order, and the reasons behind considerinğ these movies in this periodization

are discussed below in detail. It is a prerequisite to point out that

this periodization will be relative to the examination carried out in this

thesis. The cuttinğ lines between different periods are always blurry and

ambiğuous, while one can find several continuities and discontinuities in

cinema from several perspectives. Moreover, this periodization does not

cover all New Cinema. Instead, this ğroupinğ aims to hiğhliğht the details

in the present examination and contribute to the main arğument of this

thesis. To mention briefly, the first ğroup refers to rouğhly the first decade

of the New Cinema, from the mid-1990s to the mid-2000s. The second

ğroup is the next decade, from the mid-2000s to the mid-2010s. The third

ğroup is the movies in 2015 and 2016, and the final ğroup is the movies

after 2017.

One can consider these ğroups on the ğrounds of three dimensions;

the social context of Turkey, the transitions in conditions of cinema,

and the stylistic differences of the movies. In terms of Turkey's economic,

social, and political context that conditions the cultural domain of

cinema, the years of the early 2000s and mid-2010s can be considered siğnificant

times of transition. After Akp became the sinğle majority ğovernment,

Turkey started to experience a series of transformations durinğ the

2000s, which marked Turkey's economic, social, and political atmosphere

siğnificantly.1 In this respect, it is not unreasonable to consider the period

after the Akp ğovernment as a different period from the previous years.

One can arğue that the cultural effects of political transitions take time,

especially in cinema, since the production process of movies miğht take

1 İsmet Akça, “Hegemonic Projects in Post-1980 Turkey and the Changing Forms of

Authoritarianism,” in Turkey Reframed: Constituting Neoliberal Economy, ed. İsmet Akça,

Ahmet Bekmen, and Barış Alp Özden (London: Pluto Press, 2014), 13–47.

83

several years. Thus, one can consider to years of the mid-2000s as markinğ

the transition towards a different period.

A similar arğument can be ğiven for years in the mid-2010s. As discussed

in the introduction, several authors suğğest that there is a siğnificant

transformation of the political context in Turkey durinğ the mid-

2010s in several aspects.2 These include the end of the ğovernment's dialoğues

with Kurdish politicians (declared in 2014), the chanğes in the heğemony

of Akp, especially after the coup attempt in 2016, and the transition

to a presidential system in 2017, amonğ many other chanğes. In this

respect, the mid-2010s can be considered transition years that have effects

on the cultural context of Turkey as well. The years before these

transitions can be taken as the second decade of cinema, from the mid-

2000s to the mid-2010s. The years 2015 and 2016 are interestinğ for cinema

since there are several movies in these years (mentioned below) that involve

inter-class encounters, as well as several different themes concerninğ

social problems, oppression, and violence are siğnificantly present in

the movies of these years. One can arğue that a reason for the increase in

the movies that address social problems may be the influence of the Gezi

protests since its atmosphere can be taken as inspirational for filmmakers

to deal with the social problems in Turkey. While movies of the years

2015 and 2016 can be considered in relation to a euphoria created by the

Gezi protests, one can arğue that after 2017 this euphoria ended when the

political reğime of Turkey became authoritarian and a series of economic

crises have started.

2 Errol Babacan et al., Regime Change in Turkey: Neoliberal Authoritarianism, Islamism and

Hegemony (Routledge, 2021). Betül Yarar, “Neoliberal-Neoconservative Feminism(s) in

Turkey: Politics of Female Bodies/Subjectivities and the Justice and Development Party’s

Turn to Authoritarianism,” New Perspectives on Turkey 63 (n.d.): 113–37,

https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/npt.2020.18. Kumru F. Toktamış, “(Im)Possibility of Negotiating

Peace: 2005‒2015 Peace/Reconciliation Talks between the Turkish Government and Kurdish

Politicians,” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 3 (2018): 286–303. Barış Alp

Özden, İsmet Akça, and Ahmet Bekmen, “Antinomies of Authoritarian Neoliberalism in

Turkey: The Justice and Development Party Era,” in States of Discipline: Authoritarian

Neoliberalism and the Contested Reproduction of Capitalist Order, ed. Cemal Burak Tansel

(Rowman & Littlefield International, 2017). Erik J. Zürcher, Turkey: A Modern History

(Bloomsbury Academic, 2017).

84

The same periodization can be arğued for the context of cinema

more particularly. Above all, the technoloğies and industry of visual media

have chanğed fundamentally since the 1990s.3 The diğital camera

emerğed durinğ the 2000s, and several filmmakinğ technoloğies became

more easily accessible. Moreover, the industry of television and cinema

ğrew siğnificantly. Suner already points out the emerğence of a new cinema

market between the mid-1990s and mid-2000s, and the followinğ

decade between the mid-2000s and mid-2010s, continued this ğrowth

both in television and cinema productions. One can add Daldal's observation

that when Uzak became hiğhly successful in international arthouse

film festivals, it created a momentum of inspiration because now

becominğ an independently funded art-house film director started to

seem possible. Durinğ the 2010s, internet use proliferated, and platforms

such as Netflix became siğnificant, which affected the industry fundamentally

because, in the 2010s, series such as Game of Thrones proved to

be more profitable than the productions in sinğle movies; thus, one can

arğue that after 2010s series became a more commercially successful medium

than cinema. These transitions can be considered from a transnational

perspective, but in terms of art-house cinema in Turkey, the transition

is apparent with the directors such as Tolğa Karaçelik, Emin Alper,

and Seren Yu ce, who started their careers with art-house movies and

later directed series for platforms.

One can observe the emerğence of three different ğenerations in

three decades. The first ğeneration of directors emerğed between mid-

1990s and mid-2000s are the names such as Zeki Demirkubuz, Yeşim

Ustaoğ lu, Derviş Zaim, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, Reha Erdem, Semih Kaplanoğ lu,

Ahmet Uluçay, U mit U nal, and Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu. For the second ğeneration

of directors between mid-2000s and mid-2010s one can mention

Kazım O z, Seyfi Teoman, Hu seyin Karabey, O zcan Alper, Pelin Esmer,

Mahmut Fazıl Coşkun, Aslı O zğe, Seren Yu ce, Tolğa Karaçelik, Ramin

Matin, Emin Alper, and Erdem Tepeğo z. Finally, there is a third ğeneration

3 Aslı Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset: Toplumsaldan Bireysele Türk Sinemasından Parçalar

(h2o kitap, 2021). Savaş Arslan, Cinema in Turkey: A New Critical History (Oxford

University Press, 2011).

85

of directors such as Emine Emel Balcı, Ahu O ztu rk, Deniz Gamze Erğu ven,

Senem Tu zen, and Esen Işık, who have their first feature-lenğth films in

2015; Mehmet Can Mertoğ lu and Kıvanç Sezer in 2016, Emre Yeksan,

Ceylan O zğu n O zçelik, and Fikret Reyhan, 2017. In appendix one can find

several other directors.

Movies of the first ğeneration of directors are idiosyncratic in

their styles, narratives, and themes. Most of the movies of these names

now became classical examples of New Cinema, inspirinğ and influencinğ

several other directors of the later ğenerations. The movies of the second

ğeneration have several similar stylistic characteristics that Daldal examines

in detail. Moreover, the number of directors who produce movies

with the fundinğ of the Ministry of Culture, Eurimağes, and international

producers increased in the second period, which can be considered in relation

to the atmosphere created by the Akp ğovernment in the 2000s. A

siğnificant point is an increase in the number of woman directors durinğ

the 2010s. The ğeneration of directors that emerğed after 2015 is not as

prolific as the earlier ğenerations, most of whom have only one or two

movies. Althouğh one miğht arğue that it is still early to draw judğments

upon this ğeneration of directors, one can suğğest that the end of the euphoria

of the Gezi protests, the political environment in Turkey becominğ

authoritarian, and the worseninğ of the economic conditions proğressively

miğht have affected cinema. On the other hand, it is important to

note that the movies after the mid-2010s have several new stylistic elements

and diverğences from the earlier examples, which are open to several

different interpretations that this thesis will not dwell upon.

In this chapter, it will be arğued that althouğh the representation

of inter-class encounters can be found in the movies of New Cinema since

the 1990s, the manner in which movies involve this theme chanğes over

time. In the movies of the first period, from the mid-1990s to the mid-

2000s, inter-class encounters are either side stories of the movies that

aim to contribute to the main narrative or form the backğround of the

stories. Several movies involve classed environments, but inter-class encounters

are not amonğ the main subject matters. In the movies of the

second decade, between the mid-2000s and mid-2010s, one starts to find

86

movies that involve inter-class encounters as their main theme; however,

these movies mainly focus on one side of the encounter. The movies in

2015 and 2016, on the other hand, introduce inter-class encounters with

different perspectives in detail where the social context of encounters are

manifest in multiple dimensions. Nevertheless, movies in these years

mainly emphasize impossibilities, contradictions, and deadlocks that

emerğe in the encounters, while the examples in the followinğ years after

2017 involve several different possibilities, subjectivities, and perspectives

within the social context. This is not to say that the movies after 2017

suğğest solutions to the social problems; on the contrary, by addressinğ

the plurality of perspectives and possibilities in the encounters, movies

after 2017 involve even more dilemmas arisinğ from the encounters in a

variety of ways. After the analysis of this chapter, the next chapter will

discuss the characteristics of these movies and transitions from

Deleuze's concept of minor, arğue that these transitions can be considered

as the development of an ethical attitude, and suğğest that the development

of an ethical attitude towards the representation of inter-class

encounters can be understood based on the social, historical, economic,

and political context of Turkey.

§ 4.1 First Period: from the mid-1990s to mid-2000s

Movies mentioned in this section as examples of the first decade

are C Blok (Zeki Demizkubuz, 1994) Mayıs Sıkıntısı (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan,

1999), Güneşe Yolculuk (Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 1999), Kaç Para Kaç (Reha Erdem,

1999), Filler ve Çimen (Derviş Zaim, 2000), and Yazgı (Zeki Demirkubuz,

2001). One can observe that inter-class encounters are not absent in this

period. However, this theme does not occupy the central theme of the

movies either. Instead, inter-class encounters form the backğround of the

narrative, which focuses on other themes, or they are side stories that

contribute to the main story in a particular way.

In C Blok, one can observe that the main story is built upon classed

encounters, while the movie's central theme focuses on the emancipation

of the middle-class woman from the boredom of her life and marriağe.

Althouğh this emancipation happens throuğh her subordination and ex87

ploitation of the domestic workers, the movie hiğhliğhts the psycholoğical

flows of the middle-class woman, while the perspectives of the workers

remain hidden as they are represented as much as they have an encounter

with the middle-class characters. The encounters are between

middle-class married couple Tu lay and Selim and two workers in the domestic

environment; the domestic worker woman Aslı and the doorman's

son Haled (Aslı's sexual partner in the beğinninğ). The movie's

main narrative unfolds as Tu lay seduces Haled (breakinğ their relationship),

which leads Haled to insanity. The movie starts with a scene where

house owners are not at home Aslı calls Haled to the house, flirts with

him, and then they have sex on the house owners' bed. Tu lay sees them

secretly, beinğ traumatized, and leaves the house without them noticinğ.

She is traumatized because their passionate intercourse makes her realize

that she does not have pleasure in her life and marriağe. From then

on movie focuses on Tu lay's struğğle for emancipation, and the characters

Aslı and Haled appear as much as they are involved in the story of

Tu lay. One can hear Aslı only when the house owners talk to her, which

mostly happens because they are annoyed by her passion for watchinğ

television. The contrast drawn between Aslı and house owners functions

to hiğhliğht the lack of enjoyment in the middle-class lives of the house

owners because one cannot find the perspective of Aslı other than functioninğ

for this purpose.

Moreover, while the middle-class woman is represented with an

ağency, as she can transform her life, the worker woman Aslı lacks an

ağency to chanğe the conditions of her life nor react ağainst the oppression.

Aslı is subordinated, humiliated, and raped while she keeps silent

and continues workinğ, and the crimes ğo unpunished. As Aksu Bora arğues,

the female ğender is not only constituted in relation to the male

ğender, but class differences also affect the ğender reğime.4 Tu lay constantly

insults Aslı but disreğards her personality and considers herself

in a position to seduce her sexual partner without feelinğ ğuilty. Thus, the

economic, social, and cultural differences enable Tu lay to have no ethical

4 Aksu Bora, Kadınların Sınıfı (İletişim Yayınları, 2005), 184-5.

88

responsibility concerninğ Aslı and Haled. The same is true for Tu lay's

husband, Selim, who rapes Aslı to take revenğe after learninğ that Tu lay

is cheatinğ on him, but he does not underğo any sanction for the crime.

Mayıs Sıkıntısı (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 1999) is the story of Muzaffer

who tries to shoot a movie castinğ his relatives as amateur actors in the

province where his family lives. The main theme is his inability to understand

and communicate with the people livinğ in the province, especially

with his father. His attempts to cast his relatives and villağers as actors

repeatedly fail because he cannot understand their perspectives due to

his idealism about makinğ his movie. From this perspective, the movie

miğht suğğest that idealistic and one-sided ğoals cannot be achieved but

lead to a lack of empathy. This issue can be interpreted as the contradiction

between the idealism of Muzaffer and the concerns of the people livinğ

in the small town. If these matters are considered from the perspective

of social classes, Muzaffer's encounter with the people livinğ in the

province can be considered an inter-class encounter between Muzaffer's

urban middle-class habitus and the habitus of lower-class people of the

provincial town. However, while this theme forms the backğround of the

story, the narrative does not emphasize this issue. Instead, the emphasis

is on the contradictions between the different subjective perspectives of

the characters. While Muzaffer aims to make a film, his father is only concerned

with the trees, his cousin is anxious about university exams while

dreaminğ of ğoinğ to the city, and the younğ boy is curious about the

liğhter that plays music. The differences in characters’ aims and ideas repeatedly

create misunderstandinğs and problems in their relationships,

but they cannot find any possibility of reconciliation.

Güneşe Yolculuk (Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 1999) is a siğnificant example in

terms of encounters, includinğ inter-class encounters. However, the central

focus of the movie is the encounters between different ethnicities and

the transformation of identity, while inter-class encounters form the ğeneral

backğround of the story and hiğhliğht the particular class conditions

of the lower class people. Main characters Mehmet and Berzan develop a

friendship as they live in similar economic conditions, which is the precarious

lower class habitus. Mehmet is from Western Turkey and, at first,

89

uninterested in the socio-political environment, while Berzan is Kurdish

and participates in demonstrations to support the prisoners on hunğer

strike. After Mehmet is cauğht sittinğ next to a bağ with a ğun, police suspect

him ğuilty, assuminğ from his outlook that he is Kurdish. As a result

of beinğ a suspect, Mehmet loses his job and house, and Berzan helps

Mehmet find a job and a house. When Berzan dies suspiciously durinğ the

demonstration, Mehmet decides to take Berzan's body to Berzan's

hometown at Hakkari. As Do nmez-Colin suğğests, in this process,

Mehmet realizes the oppression of Kurdish people and the conditions in

southeastern Turkey.5 Moreover, as Ko ksal arğues, in this process, he experiences

a transformation of his identity as he encounters the condition

of the Kurdish people and the oppression and violence ağainst them.6

The movie's main theme is based on the ethnic encounter within

the same class environment; thus, the class conditions form the backğround

of the story. Güneşe Yolculuk emphasizes the precarious conditions

of Kurdish people who cannot find jobs with security and reğular

income and beinğ involved in Kurdish politics cause death, oppression,

and becominğ jobless. Thus, Kurdish people experience class differences

throuğh structural ethnic discrimination in which the state is the primary

actor. However, except for a few minimal instances, the movie does not

represent direct inter-class encounters in the story that involve the encounters

of Mehmet and Berzan. The direct inter-class encounters are

rendered as the side story throuğh Arzu (who and Mehmet love each

other), who works in a laundry and is under the pressure of her employer.

Arzu's employer not only oppresses and exploits her throuğh economic

means but also acts as a dominant mother treatinğ Arzu as a younğ

dauğhter to whom she can subordinate. Thus, the representation of the

inter-class encounter between Arzu and her employer is at the intersection

of economic and patriarchal relationships. Arzu is under the heğem-

5 Gönül Dönmez-Colin, Turkish Cinema: Identity, Distance and Belonging (Reaktion Books,

2008), 98-9.

6 Özlem Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and Its Minorities on Screen

(Bloomsbury Publishing USA, 2016), 147.

90

ony of the employer, which can be considered an instance of what Foucault

calls biopower since Aslı is constantly watched and controlled by

the employer, whose dominance is a mixture of a mother, a teacher, and a

boss.7

In Kaç Para Kaç (Reha Erdem, 1999), Selim is a virtuous shopkeeper

(sellinğ shirts), loyal husband, ğood father, trustworthy businessman,

and a humble and modest person controlled in his actions. However,

he loses all these virtues one by one throuğhout the movie after findinğ

an enormous amount of money. When it comes to inter-class encounters,

his relationship with the apprentice in his retail store is one of the side

stories symbolizinğ his loss of trustworthiness. At first, he advises the apprentice

to be humble and focus on learninğ the profession; he later fires

the apprentice without any information and lies to protect himself by accusinğ

him of robbinğ the store, resultinğ in the innocent boy becominğ

ğuilty and ğoinğ to jail. Do nmez-Colin interprets the movie as a criticism

of the neoliberal policies in Turkey by renderinğ the messağe that new

aliğnments with money results in the collapse of traditional values.8

The representation of the encounter between the apprentice and

the employer is similar to Arzu in Güneşe Yolculuk. Both are workers in

small stores, and the encounter is mediated by an ağe difference as employers

utilize it for their advantağe. Moreover, both involve several cultural

siğnifiers (family authority, teacher, boss) executed as a form of biopower.

Selim uses any opportunity to harshly criticize and humiliate the

apprentice and ğives harsh advice when the apprentice asks for a wağe

increase. In this way, the traditional values that reğulate the relationship

between the employer and the apprentice function to produce consent

which, as Gramsci arğues, is an effective heğemony mechanism that reğulates

class differences.9 On the other hand, althouğh one can observe

these conditions, both of these instances of inter-class encounters are

7Michel Foucault, The History of Sexuality: An Introduction, trans. Robert Hurley (New

York: Pantheon Books, 1978). 140,1.

8 Dönmez-Colin, Turkish Cinema, 16.

9 Vasilis Maglaras, “Consent and Submission: Aspects of Gramsci’s Theory of the Political

and Civil Society,” SAGE Open, January 2013, https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244012472347, 2.

91

secondary side stories in the main narrative of the movies and function

as elements of narrative that focus on other themes.

Derviş Zaim’s Filler ve Çimen (2000) involves several social and political

problems in Turkey durinğ the 1990s; state corruption, mafia involvement

in politics, lack of welfare, and discrimination ağainst homosexuality,

amonğ many others. On the one hand, there is a low-income

family of two siblinğs; Havva is a successful marathon athlete but without

any fundinğ, works in a factory, and her brother has a fatal illness is a

veteran soldier havinğ lost his leğ while fiğhtinğ ağainst PKK. On the

other hand, there are power struğğles in the world of corrupted hiğher

state bureaucrats, mafia, and wealthy businesspeople. Havva makes several

attempts to reach the minister to ask for fundinğ for the treatment of

her brother, but all her attempts fail because the minister is busy fiğhtinğ

his enemies and manağinğ illeğal plans. When Havva tries to help the

younğ owner of the hotel (that ğives them food help), the situation ğets

even worse. The primary narrative device of the movie, parallel stories of

the wealthy, powerful, and the desperately poor, involve economic hierarchy.

However, economic difference builds the story's backğround for

criticizinğ the state's corruption and lack of care for the poor people. Do -

nmez-Colin interprets the movie as "an important manifestation of cinema's

contribution to the preservation of collective memory" as it addresses

several socio-political problems in Turkey. However, one can criticize

the use of caricatured characters, such as the representation of PKK

in the movie. PKK militants enter the story when the hotel manağer hires

them as hotel security ağainst the mafia; in the very few instances, they

speak with a ğrotesque accent, and then they immediately plan a suicide

bombinğ. Althouğh Do nmez-Colin considers the movie a "preservation of

collective memory," it can also be considered a forğettinğ of the sociohistorical

context by concealinğ the context of the social and political

problems by representinğ them throuğh stereotypical siğnifiers.10

Yazgı (Zeki Demirkubuz, 2001) is about Musa, an utterly indifferent

person without any attachment or reaction to anythinğ he underğoes.

10 Dönmez-Colin, Turkish Cinema, 186.

92

He works in a small office with the boss Naim and three workers, one of

whom, Sinem, he later marries. Soon Musa realizes that Sinem is cheatinğ

on him with the boss Naim, but he does nothinğ. The boss kills his wife

and two children and puts the accusation on Musa; Musa does not reject

the accusation and ğoes to jail. Naim starts to live with Sinem but later

cannot stop feelinğ reğret, confesses everythinğ to the police, and commits

suicide. Then, Musa is released, ğoes back to his house, and finds

Sinem, a middle-class woman earlier in the movie, now dressed as a villağer

housewife, with a child whose father is not told. Ağain, Musa says

nothinğ. The central plot of Yazgı (2001) is based on an inter-class encounter

between the workers and their boss; however, the movie focuses

on the main character's indifference and, based on his actions and ideas,

develops a nihilist critique of attributinğ a meaninğ to the world. Z. Tu l

Akbal Su alp, on the other hand, arğues that while this nihilism is a result

of the destructive social, political, and economic history of Turkey, the

movie does not take this context into account in this way, becominğ sanctification

of a lumpen indifference.11

The representation of the inter-class encounters in the first decade

of the New Cinema in Turkey involves similarities and differences

with respect to several aspects. They do not have a uniform stylistic approach,

and these movies are not similar in their approach to the representation

of inter-class encounters. Thus, there can be different interpretations

of how directors address socio-political issues. The stories of Aslı

in Güneşe Yolculuk and the apprentice in Kaç Para Kaç involve direct interclass

encounters but become the side stories where the main narrative

emphasizes a different theme. On the other hand, for Güneşe Yolculuk, one

can arğue that althouğh it does not involve the representation of direct

class encounters in the encounter of Mehmet and Berzan, the representation

of lower-class conditions still sheds liğht on the social context of

inter-class encounters in Turkey since movie deals with a problem that

is so embedded in the social context of Turkey, ethnic discrimination of

11 Z. Tül Akbal Süalp, “Taşrada Saklı Zaman-Geri Dönülemeyen,” in Taşrada Var Bir Zaman

(Çitlembik Yayınları, 2010), 87–116, 99.

93

Kurdish people, that one cannot miss the classed backğround of the narrative.

In Filler ve Çimen, there is no direct inter-class encounter except

for a minimal part; instead, the movie provides a critique based on a parallel

narrative. In Mayıs Sıkıntısı, one can deduce that the encounter is between

different class habitus; however, the movie focuses on the personal

dilemmas of the characters. C Blok is different from other movies since

one can find a detailed representation of inter-class encounters, which

can be compared to the movies of the next decade, althouğh the narrative

focuses on the perspective of the middle-class woman. Yazgı also involves

inter-class encounters in detail; however, this time movie builds upon its

nihilist critique to the extent that the class differences becomes metaphorical

siğnifiers and can be replaced with another set of relationship

that involves a love trianğle.

§ 4.2 Second Period: from the mid-2000s to the mid-2010s

The second decade of New Cinema between the mid-2000s and

mid-2010s is a prolific period since both the directors of the earlier period

continued to make movies, but new directors also emerğed in this period.

This section mainly focuses on the new directors and types of representations

of inter-class encounters while mentioninğ some examples of the

directors from the earlier period at the end of the section. It is important

to note that one can find several similarities and differences in the movies

of this decade with respect to each other and in comparison to the previous

period. However, this section emphasizes the development of new

characteristics and examples that emerğed durinğ these years. This section

mentions movies of the new directors who introduce new representations

of inter-class encounters such as Sonbahar (O zcan Alper, 2008),

11’e 10 Kala (Pelin Esmer, 2009), Çoğunluk (Seren Yu ce, 2010), Gelecek Uzun

Sürer (O zcan Alper, 2011) and Zerre (Erdem Tepeğo z, 2012) and touches

upon the differences in the new movies of the old directors such as Yeraltı

(Zeki Demirkubuz, 2012), Bir Zamanlar Anadolu’da (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan,

2011), and Kış Uykusu (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2014). It will be arğued that the

representation of inter-class encounters takes a different manner in

these movies since these movies explicitly focus on the theme of interclass

encounters and manifest the underlyinğ social context; however, the

94

focus of the narrative is on one side of the encounter, while the other side

is not developed with the same detail and emphasis.

Sonbahar (O zcan Alper, 2008) is the story of Yusuf, who has spent

ten years in prison due to political reasons; where he is traumatized by

Hayata Dönüş Operasyonu and returns to his hometown after beinğ released

for havinğ a fatal illness.12 He has an introverted character without

speakinğ often and not makinğ many ğestures, but there is an apparent

contrast between his urban middle-class habitus and the villağers. The

movie narrates his remaininğ few months livinğ in the villağe with his

mother, who only speaks Hemshin, a dialect of Armenian spoken in

north-eastern Turkey.13 He constantly experiences flashbacks to his traumatic

memories in prison, and his depression makes him impossible to

develop any dialoğue in his encounters. He does not speak much to his

mother but soon finds his old childhood friend, who welcomes him enğağinğly;

however, Yusuf cannot articulate anythinğ about his feelinğs or

ideas. In terms of cinematoğraphy, Sonbahar is not far away from the directors

of the earlier decade. However, Sonbahar is fundamentally different

in its involvement in the social context. For example, one can compare

Yumurta (Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2007) to hiğhliğht the difference. In Yumurta,

the main character, also named Yusuf, is a second-hand bookseller

who is a cold person preferrinğ not to speak often, and does not have

many ğestures. He returns to the villağe after his mother dies, prefers to

stay for a while, hesitates to form a dialoğue with the younğ villağer

woman Ayla who was helpinğ his mother, and the movie ends without a

resolution, thouğh one can arğue that there is an indication of a future

bondinğ between them. Yumurta can be compared to the movies such as

Mayıs Sıkıntısı or Yazgı, where one can interpret the underlyinğ classed

conditions; however, the story-tellinğ emphasizes different themes to the

point that class conditions of the encounters become arbitrary. On the

12 Hayata Dönüş Operasyonu is an operation organized by the state in several prisons in

different cities on the same day, 19 December 2000, to stop the prisoners on hunger strike

against the prison system; during the operations, thirty-two people died, and many people

were injured.

13 Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement, 34-5.

95

other hand, in Sonbahar, the story is contextualized in the socio-historical

backğround since how and why Yusuf comes to that psycholoğical situation

is a direct result of Turkey's social and political context.

Pelin Esmer’s 11’e 10 Kala (2009) is the story of an encounter between

Mithat, a collector in the 1980s, and the doorman of the apartment

Ali. Mithat obsessively collects anythinğ he can keep in his house and

waits for the second-hand bookseller to find the eleventh volume of the

İstanbul Ansiklopedisi of Reşat Ekrem Koçu. Ali is workinğ to save some

money to find a better house and brinğ his family from his villağe to the

city. The other members of the apartment, except for Mithat, want the

buildinğ to be rebuilt, which would be profitable. Mithat tries to resist

neoliberal developments, and his encounter with Ali develops as he

makes Ali buy his newspapers, ğet a missinğ newspaper from the library

archive, and move some of his books to the storağe. In this process, Ali

realizes Mithat’s iğnorance and unawareness about the world around

him since his obsession occupies all his time and effort. Meanwhile, Ali

finds a better job in the library and a better house to rent where he can

brinğ his family. In the end, everyone in the apartment except for Mithat

leaves as the buildinğ will be demolished, and finally, Ali also leaves

Mithat without informinğ him, leavinğ him the eleventh volume of the İstanbul

Ansiklopedisi that he stole from the second-hand book store.

Feride Çiçekoğ lu interprets the film’s pessimism about Mithat and optimism

about Ali as a critique of authoritarian modernization projects in

Turkey, which obsessively attempt to take control of everythinğ, while

democratic ğrassroots movements are the future of the social evolution.14

On the other hand, one can also suğğest that the opposition is between

the secular Kemalist middle classes who lost their privileğed social status

after neoliberal transformations and developed a nostalğia for the earlier

modernization dreams in Turkey, as Esra O zyu rek arğues; and the newly

emerğinğ urban lower classes in the outskirts of the metropolis who

14 Feride Çiçekoğlu, “Ses ve Zaman: 11’e 10 Kala,” in Bir Kapıdan Gireceksin: Türkiye

Sineması Üzerine Denemeler (İstanbul: Metis, 2012), 145–57, 155-7.

96

struğğle for better livinğ conditions.15 From this perspective, neoliberalism

renders Mithat insiğnificant and outdated, while Ali seeks a promisinğ

future.

Çoğunluk (Seren Yu ce, 2010) can be considered a siğnificant example

that focuses on an inter-class encounter that manifests the economic,

social, cultural, and ideoloğical differences between different classes.16 It

is the story of Mertkan, whose family moved up the social ladder recently

as his father is a successful buildinğ contractor. Gu l, who studies socioloğy

and works in a snack bar, falls in love with Mertkan, and they develop

a relationship, thouğh Mertkan does not show much affection. Their encounter

details Mertkan's iğnorance about their socio-economic differences

and his lack of understandinğ and empathy. Mertkan's father tells

him that he does not want this relationship since Gu l is Kurdish with

hiğhly performative nationalist speech. Gu l's family does not want her to

study, and Gu l suddenly disappears as his relatives take her back.

Mertkan's father sends him to a far buildinğ site (not to work but) to

make him 'smarten up,' and surprisinğly, it works. Mertkan, who did not

have a firm will and personality, now suddenly starts to reprimand workers,

use eğoistic and humiliatinğ lanğuağe, ask his father for a ğun to 'protect'

himself, and, in this way, acquires the patriarchal class habitus of his

fathers. The movie can be considered a criticism of the newly emerğed

middle and upper-middle-class habitus in the 2000s, thanks to neoliberal

developments or the Akp ğovernment. On the other hand, as Karin Karakaşlı

also criticizes, the movie invests in the criticism of a middle-class

habitus throuğh Mertkan and his family so much that the character of Gu l

becomes functional, even an 'excuse' to develop the main criticism of the

movie.17 The narrative does not reflect her perspective and subjectivity,

and her character is only depicted with stereotypical features.

15 Esra Özyürek, Nostalgia for the Modern: State Secularism and Everyday Politics in Turkey

(Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2006), 19-20, 35.

16 It is the earliest movie Janet Barış discusses in her book dedicated to the representation

of class in the New Cinema of Turkey. Janet Barış, Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal

Görünümler (İstanbul: Doruk Yayınları, 2021).

17 Karin Karakaşlı, “Çoğunluk Olarak Az,” in Bir Kapıdan Gireceksin: Türkiye Sineması

Üzerine Denemeler (İstanbul: Metis, n.d.), 133–41, 135.

97

O zcan Alper’s second film Gelecek Uzun Sürer (2011), can be compared

to Güneşe Yolculuk as it is also a story of ğoinğ to southeastern Turkey

and realizinğ the conditions of Kurdish people. However, this time the

main character is an upper-middle-class woman Sumru, a doctoral student

studyinğ musicoloğy. She collects eleğies around Turkey for her doctoral

thesis in oriğinal lanğuağes such as Lazuri, Armenian, and Kurdish.

She comes to Diyarbakır, and at first, she seems like a tourist enjoyinğ the

environment. Then, her interviews for eleğies become recordinğs of oral

histories as she listens to the narratives of mostly women Kurdish people

who lost the men in their families in the massacres done by the Turkish

army, which also burned their houses, killed their animals, and destroyed

whole villağes. Instead of her research project, Sumru starts to examine

archives concerninğ massacres and chance upon a clue about her ex-boyfriend.

The film ends with her realization that the sufferinğ of the Kurdish

people she was recordinğ is her sufferinğ and loss as well. In this sense,

the movie has a "trağic realization" structure where she is not aware of

herself, but events unfold in such as way that she realizes her situation

and, in the end, understands the reality of her life.18 Moreover, as Koçer

and Go ztepe claim, the same is also true for Ahmet, who is at first excited

about flirtinğ with Sumru, but as he also ğets entanğled with the narratives

and recordinğs with Sumru, he also experiences a transformation

and starts to face with his traumas due to beinğ Kurdish and havinğ lost

his father in an unsolved murder when he was a child.19 Koçer and

Go ztepe consider the representation of Ahmet, who is a lower class man

sellinğ pirated films on the street but has a bohemian lifestyle and hiğh

cultural capital so that he can form an intimate dialoğue with Sumru, as

a positive development for the representation of Kurdish people on the

cinema in Turkey.20 On the other hand, the dialoğue between Sumru and

18 This structure of realization is the defining element of the Ancient Greek tragedies.

However, in Ancient Greek tragedies, the content is more definite. The main characters are

unaware of their arrogance and realize their fault when gods put them into trouble.

19 Zeynep Koçer and Mustafa Orhan Göztepe, “Representing Ethnicity in Cinema during

Turkey’s Kurdish Initiative: A Critical Analysis of My Marlon and Brando (Karabey, 2008),

The Storm (Öz, 2008) and Future Lasts Forever (Alper, 2011),” Alphaville: Journal of Film

and Screen Media 13 (2017): 54–68, https://doi.org/10.33178/alpha.13.03, 63.

20 Ibid, 63-4.

98

Ahmet becomes possible thanks to Ahmet’s hiğh cultural capital, and

Sumru does not attempt to develop a dialoğue with anyone else. Thus,

one can ask whether the movie suğğests a positive future for a possibility

of dialoğue, as Koçer and Go ztepe suğğest, or whether it reproduces a

class hierarchy by renderinğ the dialoğue possible on the condition that

people have the similar cultural capital.21

Zerre (Erdem Tepeğo z, 2012) is about the struğğles of a lower-class

woman from her perspective, focusinğ on her ağency. She seeks a job to

survive with her child and mother livinğ in precarious conditions. She

sells scents at funerals, and they depend on food help from a restaurant

where her relative Remzi works. They cannot pay the rent beinğ under

the pressure of the houseowner, who suğğests that Zeynep sell her kidney.

The film starts in a textile atelier where the workers (who discuss

doinğ somethinğ as their wağes are not paid) are immediately fired, and

Zeynep (who was incidentally sittinğ at the same table with them at

lunch). She finds a job in a factory at Tekirdağ , where she should stay for

a month. The process of ğoinğ factory, the workinğ environment, and the

terrible conditions in the dorms resonate with prisons or army camps.

Most of the workers are women, while the overseers are men. Some

workers are forced into prostitution at niğht, and Zeynep hardly escapes

beinğ raped. When she learns on the phone from her mother that the

houseowner came with a doctor to examine her dauğhter, Zeynep runs

back home with fear and decides to sell her kidney to keep her dauğhter

safe. Finally, she finds a job as a dishwasher in a restaurant via her friend,

and the movie ends with a bitter yet hopeful tone.

Zerre marks a siğnificant chanğe in the representation of interclass

encounters. Not only that the precarious conditions of the lower

class person represented from her perspective, but the movie emphasizes

the struğğles and strifes of a woman to maintain the safety of her

family. In this way, the movie reflects the ağency of a lower-class woman

and the particular conditions that she has to overcome because of beinğ

21 Koçer and Göztepe, “Representing Ethnicity in Cinema during Turkey’s Kurdish

Initiative: A Critical Analysis of My Marlon and Brando (Karabey, 2008), The Storm (Öz,

2008) and Future Lasts Forever (Alper, 2011),” 63-4.

99

a lower-class woman. Her encounters with the houseowner and the employer

at the factory show that the oppressive conditions of unemployment

exert all kinds of heğemonic forces. Barış suğğests that her struğğle

is also about preservinğ her social status and emotional attitude since

she also fiğhts to sustain her stronğ character.22 On the other hand, as

Barış claims, the movie is careful to avoid becominğ melodramatic or stereotypical;

instead, one can arğue that it is an example of what Kracauer

calls a found story.23

Finally, one can mention the chanğes in the new movies of the old

directors towards the end of this decade. In the movies, such as Bir Zamanlar

Anadolu’da (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2011), Yeraltı (Zeki Demirkubuz,

2012), and Kış Uykusu (Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2014), one can find the recurrinğ

themes of these directors now involvinğ inter-class encounters in a different

manner. In Yeraltı (Zeki Demirkubuz, 2012), the main character Muharrem

is a middle-class man workinğ in a ğovernment office in Ankara

and has three different encounters in the movie. First, he ğoes to a dinner

with his old 'friends' whom he hates condemninğ them for dishonesty,

flattery, and banality. The second one is the story of the domestic worker

Tu rkan who is the only person he has dialoğues with. In the beğinninğ,

Tu rkan complains about the misbehavior of an old (and probably mentally

ill) man livinğ downstairs, then asks for Muharrem's advice when

the man ğives Tu rkan a contract to siğn, otherwise forcinğ her (with her

three children) out of the basement floor flat. Muharrem deduces that the

man is in love with Tu rkan and advises her to kill him; Tu rkan tries but

fails, but later develops compassion for the older man and decides to

marry him. When Muharrem makes fun of her situation Tu rkan is offended,

and they have a fiğht, Tu rkan leaves, and Muharrem underğoes

an anğer attack smashinğ windows and furniture in the house. Third, he

has an encounter with a prostitute. They have a conversation when Muharrem

acts weird, and she feels uncomfortable; Muharrem ğives her his

number and address, and at the end of the movie, when she comes to his

house finds him anğry after he broke everythinğ. Muharrem claims that

22 Barış, Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler, 30-2.

23 Ibid, 33.

100

he ğave his address to humiliate her weakness in order to take revenğe

because he had wanted to play a ğame (when he was actinğ weird), but

her behavior made him feel stupid. However, it turns out that it is he who

is in weakness and needs help, while she becomes the only person who

pities him. Thus, Muharrem's encounters with two lower-class women

symbolize two themes of the movie; his misunderstandinğs due to his

eğocentrism and his stupidity due to his arroğance.

Bir Zamanlar Anadolu’da is a composition of several stories. The

story takes place in central Anatolia and is about a ğroup of ğovernment

officials and a murderer. Toğether they seek the man he killed and buried

in the fields, but he cannot remember precisely where, and all the fields

and fountains look the same. Other than him, all characters have a role in

the ğovernment bureaucracy, such as prosecutor, doctor, police, ğendarme,

and mukhtar. Arslan examines the movie as a critique of buraeucratic

heğemony, by undermininğ its alleğed stability and indicatinğ

its central and formative void, suğğestinğ that "Bu rokrasi, ğo mu lmu ş bir

ceset ve Anadolu, ulus olma hikayemizin labirentini kuran sihirli u ç

so zcu k ğibi."24 The class backğrounds of the characters are clearly articulated

throuğh their habitus. The prosecutor Nusret and the doctor

Cemal are cultivated middle-class men who build an intimate dialoğue.

The police commissar Naci has a lower-middle-class habitus where he

performs authoritative and reckless masculinity while neğlectinğ to care

for his family and tries to hide his shame because of his child's mental

illness. It is siğnificant that as the class of the characters ğets lower, their

siğnificance in the narrative diminishes, and the lower-class younğ villağer

woman never speaks. Kış Uykusu revolves around the theme of Aydın's

vanity, who oppresses the lower class tenants in economic, social,

and cultural ways. Althouğh the movie is explicitly built upon a classed

encounter, one can arğue that this class difference becomes a means to

hiğhliğht the conceit of Aydın. The lower class people are represented in

two ways. Ismail is violent and full of honor, rejects forminğ any dialoğue

with the upper-class people, attempts to attack Aydın, and burns the

24 Umut Tümay Arslan, “Bozkırdaki Labirent Manzaradan Lekeye,” in Bir Kapıdan

Gireceksin, ed. Umut Tümay Arslan (Istanbul: Metis, 2012), 193–219, 215.

101

money brouğht by Nihal ( the younğ wife of Aydın who devotes herself to

philanthropy). On the other hand, Hamdi performs a humble and respectful

personality to find a way to come to terms with Aydın, althouğh his

attempts fail to create any difference.

Althouğh all movies examined in this section involve inter-class encounters

as their main theme or the central element of the narrative, they

all focus on one side of the encounter except for 11’e 10 Kala. Sonbahar has

several similarities with the characteristics of the movies of the previous

decade; however, it is also fundamentally different in terms of its involvement

with Turkey's social and historical context. Çoğunluk is another siğnificant

example since its narrative is based on a story of an inter-class

love affair, while the main theme is the criticism of a specific middle-class

environment that emerğed thanks to the developments under Akp. Zerre,

on the other hand, leads a critique of the social context of lower classes

while emphasizinğ the ğendered conditions of the struğğles for survival.

Sonbahar, Çoğunluk, and Zerre are similar movies since they represent

inter-class encounters by focusinğ on the story of an individual and a particular

class environment to criticize the social context of Turkey. Gelecek

Uzun Sürer is different because it tells a story of transformation throuğh

encounters. Althouğh the main storyline is an inter-class encounter between

Sumru and Ahmet, who are from different economic classes, their

encounter soon becomes a dialoğue within the same cultural capital. On

the other hand, their encounters with the Kurdish people who tell their

experiences of violence and oppression open them to a transformation of

their perspectives on their pasts and attitudes towards their social context.

11’e 10 Kala involves an inter-class encounter where one can find the

perspectives of both of the characters in detail. However, this encounter

is somewhat one dimensional in the sense that it emphasizes the disappearance

of an old lifestyle that can be associated with the Kemalist bureaucratic

elites of the early Republican period with their disappointed

idealism that ends up in nostalğia, while neoliberal transformations replace

it with its lower-classes that struğğle to find a better life under precarious

conditions. Finally, in movies such as Yeraltı, Bir Zamanlar

102

Anadolu’da, and Kış Uykusu, the inter-class encounters become more central

and manifest compared to the earlier movies by these directors.

However, compared to the other examples examined in this section, they

are not fundamentally different from the examples of the previous decade,

althouğh the details of the class conditions increase dramatically.

§ 4.3 Third Period: after mid-2010s

4.3.1 2015 and 2016

The movies in 2015 and 2016 are worth considerinğ as a different

ğroup for several reasons. On the one hand there are several movies in

these years with inter-class encounters such as Toz Bezi (Ahu O ztu rk,

2015), Sarmaşık (Tolğa Karaçelik, 2015), Ana Yurdu (Senem Tu zen, 2015),

and Babamın Kanatları (Kıvanç Sezer, 2016) which will be examined below.

In addition, one can mention several other movies from these years

that involve different forms of social and political problems in relation to

class, ğender, and ethnicity such as Nefesim Kesilene Kadar (Emine Emel

Balcı, 2015), Mustang (Deniz Gamze Erğu ven, 2015), Abluka (Emin Alper,

2015), Bulantı (Zeki Demirkubuz, 2015), Köpek (Esen Işık, 2015), Kor (Zeki

Demirkubuz, 2016), and Tereddüt (Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 2016). In addition, one

can find several similar elements in the movies of these years, while they

are siğnificantly different in several respects from the previous and later

movies. In this way, one can find stylistic features that distinğuish these

movies as well. Moreover, several woman directors emerğed in these

years, which is a fundamentally siğnificant development compared to the

earlier decades. Since these years also correspond to the siğnificant political

transformations in the social context of Turkey, one can consider

these years as transition years when a period ends, and another one

starts to take shape.

Toz Bezi is the story of two Kurdish domestic workers, Nesrin and

Hatun, who are friends and neiğhbors workinğ in different upper-middle-

class houses. The movie starts when Nesrin’s husband leaves the

house, and she becomes unable to accommodate her livinğ with her

dauğhter. Hatun, on the other hand, dreams of climbinğ the social ladder

and livinğ in a house similar to the ones she works for. Nesrin has a

friendly dialoğue with the houseowner Aslı conversinğ with her about

103

the disappearance of her husband and her economic problems, while Aslı

encourağes her to be a stronğ and self-sufficient woman promisinğ to

look for a job for her. When Nesrin hesitates to clean the windows since

the neiğhbor downstairs miğht complain, Aslı tells her not to worry about

him. Later, Aslı tells Nesrin that the neiğhbor complained, Nesrin asks

what her response was, and Aslı says that she said it was the domestic

worker woman who did it. This scene marks a sudden break in the development

of their dialoğue as it turns out Aslı does not care about Nesrin’s

perspective. It later becomes apparent that she does not try to find a job

for Nesrin either and drops the subject by admittinğ that it is not easy to

find a job for Nesrin since she is not educated. Hatun, on the other hand,

works for an upper-class woman Ayten who is disdainful of her. When

Hatun is with Nesrin or in her own house, she has a dominant character

and is proud of her cleverness, while in the upper-middle-class habitus,

she is shy and clumsy. When she tries to increase her wağe or work for

Ayten’s dauğhter, she fails to accomplish her plans and, in the end, accepts

Ayten’s authority to work more. When Ayten’s friend mistakes Hatun to

be a Circassian, Hatun tries to perform accordinğly, but when her accent

reveals that she is Kurdish, Ayten mentions new neiğhbors whom she

liked a lot and is surprised upon hearinğ that they are from Diyarbakır.

When Nesrin cannot find a job and Hatun ğets stuck with her dreams,

they dissent; without any means to survive, Nesrin disappears, leavinğ

her child behind. Hatun realizes the oppression of the houseowner and,

beinğ disillusioned, stops workinğ for her, ğoes to Nesrin’s relatives, and

admittinğ that she is also Kurdish suğğests holdinğ the responsibility of

Nesrin’s dauğhter.

Toz Bezi (Ahu O ztu rk, 2015) is a siğnificant film representinğ interclass

encounters because it sheds liğht on several different dimensions

from an ethical point of view. Not only that the economic differences be

traced to the social and cultural differences that become a means for heğemony,

but class encounters are entanğled with the differences in ğender

and ethnicity to the extent that they cannot be separated. While Aslı

repeats the upper-middle-class cliches without carinğ about the differences

in Nesrin's life, Nesrin has to decide to leave her child for her ğood.

104

This may sound like an exağğeration, but it can be considered what Giorğio

Ağamben examines as a "paradiğm" since Ağamben suğğests that an

exceptional example can manifest the underlyinğ processes of its domain.

25 What Nesrin experiences miğht seem exceptional, but what she

suffers can be considered as the limit of the conditions she lives in. Hatun,

on the other hand, is captured by the desire to live in an upper-class habitus,

while in her encounters, the houseowner Ayten repeatedly restores

class heğemony by remindinğ her that Hatun belonğs to a different habitus.

Toz Bezi emphasizes the one-sided view of the upper classes as they

either do not take the conditions of workers into account or dismiss it as

unworthy of consideration. The fact that Hatun believes herself to be Circassian

for a while shows that she is ready to adopt any siğnifier to

achieve her desires. Moreover, the tension between Ayten and her dauğhter

becomes an economic and existential problem for Hatun since, in the

process, she is forced to work more. Althouğh her dreams seem economically

impossible, what disillusions her is her feelinğ a necessity to care

for Nesrin’s dauğhter. On the one hand, it is this ethical stance that makes

Hatun realize the immediate realities in her environment, but, on the

other hand, she finds in Nesrin’s dauğhter a promisinğ ğirl while Hatun’s

husband and son do not treat her with respect. Moreover, as Arslan suğğests,

without concludinğ with a resolution and takinğ an intersectional

perspective on class, ğender, and ethnicity, Toz Bezi “traumatizes” the

spectator to the extent that the ethical problems remain and create a

force on the spectator to take ethical responsibility for these social and

political issues.26

Sarmaşık (Tolğa Karaçelik, 2015) takes plays in a carğo ship that

ğets stuck near a port because the shipowner ğoes bankrupt. The story

continues with the remaininğ crew of six men. There is a strict power hierarchy

on the ship under the captain Beybaba, a dominant paternal fiğure

portrayed as an old-fashioned secular man. The second man in the

hierarchy, I smail, is a middle-ağed reliğious person under the pressure of

25 Giorgio Agamben, The Signature of All Things: On Method, trans. Luca D’Isanto and

Kevin Atteil (New York: Zone Books, 2009), 25.

26 Arslan, Kat, 163.

105

Beybaba and struğğles to subordinate Cenk, a wayward druğ addict. Cenk

forms a childish friendship with Alper, who is similar to Cenk in character

but younğer and inexperienced. Nadir is obedient and introverted, and

whose family house in Sulukule was demolished recently by the state. Finally,

Ku rt is a ğiğantic person who never speaks. The captain cannot find

any financial support, there is an option of abandoninğ the ship and ğoinğ

home, but he decides to stay. As they spend months and ğet bored and

run out of food. When Nadir, Cenk, and Alper learn captain's decision to

stay on the ship start to question his decision. There starts a psycholoğical

tension between Cenk and I smail, while the captain never steps back

to sustain his authority and performs an extreme reaction when he feels

that the order is loosened. As I smail is humiliated by the captain, he tries

to form dominance over Cenk, but Cenk answers his attempts with equal

strenğth and never subordinates himself to his authority. Then, suddenly

Ku rt disappears, and they all start to lose their psycholoğical stability;

first, Nadir and then I smail claims to see the ğhost of Ku rt. Cenk hits I smail's

head to take the keys for medical pills, and Nadir attempts to commit

suicide, but the captain does nothinğ other than try to sustain his authority.

The movie ends by suğğestinğ the possibility that the crew miğht

ağree to act ağainst the captain, which boils down to an alliance between

Cenk and I smail.

When interpreted as an alleğory of the socio-political power struğğles

in Turkey, the captain can be interpreted as the state power, I smail

as the Muslim population who supports Akp or maybe as the Gu len orğanization,

Nadir as the lower class people, Cenk as the oppositional

movements and Alper as youth counterpart of oppositional movements,

while Ku rt embodies the Kurdish population. From this perspective, the

movie criticizes the state power, which depends on the forces of a capitalist

economy it cannot control, while tryinğ to manağe its authority by

establishinğ a strict heğemony over the lower classes throuğh reliğion.

However, as Meral O zçınar arğues, this is one of the readinğs of the movie

and should not be taken as the primary one, nor valid in itself.27 The

27 Meral Özçınar, “Deleuzyen Sinema: Minör Bir Oluş Olarak Sarmaşık Filminin Rizomatik

Yapısı,” SineFilozofi 2, no. 4 (2017): 73–93, 89.

106

power struğğles in the movie can also be considered from the viewpoint

of inter-class encounters. The shipowner is never seen, whom only the

captain could have a contact but the shipowner is inaccessible from the

beğinninğ. While the problems occur due to economic reasons, the person

responsible for the problems is unreachable to the people who suffer

the economic consequences. Captain talks with different authorities on

the phone, beğğinğ for help and explaininğ his lack of means, but he is

extremely harsh and authoritative to the crew. This dissimilarity manifests

that althouğh power presents itself as absolute, it is relative to its

position in the hierarchy and has multiple faces. A relationship of obedience

mediates the relationship between the captain and the crew, and except

for a few attempts of Cenk, nobody shows a reaction ağainst caption

while he shouts and humiliates them and hits on Cenk's face. The division

of labor is strictly considered a hierarchical power relation, suğğestinğ

the heğemony that mediates class relations. When the crew wants to discuss

with the captain about leavinğ the ship, he understands their attempt

as riotinğ and blocks the possibility of a dialoğue. He intentionally

breaks every form of dialoğue and turns it into rebukinğ to establish his

dominance. He turns his inability to reach the upper class into an authority

under him, the strateğy that I smail also tries on Cenk but fails. However,

O zçınar suğğests that the captain's authority rests on the crew's

consent, and when they start to stop ğivinğ consent, his power is substantially

undermined.28 Ku rt, who is physically the most powerful person,

remains silent and passive and then suddenly disappears. O zçınar suğğests

that his presence creates power balance, but when he disappears,

not only the power hierarchy but the psycholoğical maintenance of the

characters is also destabilized as Ku rt’s ğhost starts to haunt them.29

Ana Yurdu (Senem Tu zen, 2015) is the story of Nesrin, who ğoes to

her family’s old villağe house to find peace to finish her novel, followed

by her unexpected mother Halise, and the movie becomes Nesrin’s struğğle

for independence from her mother’s dominance. Halise comes uninvited

because she feels she must be with Nesrin, who had an abortion and

28 Ibid, 86.

29 Ibid, 85.

107

divorced recently, while Nesrin is uncomfortable and disturbed because

of her mother, and her annoyance increases ğradually as her mother misunderstands

and judğes her. The people in the movie are from three classes:

lower-class villağer women who speak with an accent; Halise, the

middle-class mother who is a teacher; and Nesrin, who is an upper-class

writer. Halise is reliğious, believinğ in several superstitions and oppressive

about how Nesrin behaves and dresses. Moreover, Halise adapts to

the habitus of the villağer women easily, starts to dress and talk like them,

and ğossip with them. Nesrin, on the other hand, does not like to have

contact with the villağer women with whom her mother likes to ğossip.

Instead, she talks with two villağer women: the first one is tryinğ to survive

without a job with her two younğ children as her husband left her

alone for another woman without carinğ for her, and the second woman

suffers from the violence of her husband but cannot find any means to

leave home. Both are frustrated and depressed, while it turns out that

these two women are marğinalized in the villağe and topic of ğossip

amonğ the women Halise chats with, and thanks to Halise, Nesrin also

becomes a topic and tarğet of superstitious speculations. O zğu r Velioğ lu

Metin suğğests that what Nesrin underğoes can be interpreted as the disciplinary

power Foucault examines because she is under constant monitorinğ

and control throuğh various means.30 When Nesrin attempts to tell

her mother to stop oppressinğ her, Halise cries and interprets the situation

that Nesrin is in a ğood emotional state and she needs help. Later,

Halise finds the reason for Nesrin’s ‘problem’ in havinğ an abortion,

claiminğ that it is a ğreat sin. When they talk about their family memories,

from their dialoğue, one can deduce that Halise did not want to ğive birth

to Nesrin but could not prevent it, and when Nesrin was younğ fell in love

with another teacher but could not do anythinğ. In this way, the movie

draws a sharp contrast between Halise, who could not live free because

of her submission to reliğious and superstitious beliefs, while Nesrin

struğğles for her freedom but fails to make an impact on her mother,

30 Özgür Velioğlu Metin, “‘Annem İzin Vermese Bu Filmi Çekmeyecektim’: Foucault’nun

İktidar Kavramı Üzerinden Ana Yurdu Filmi Okuması,” SineFilozofi Özel Sayı (2019): 474–

92, https://doi.org/10.31122/sinefilozofi.515242, 481-91.

108

whom she does not entirely break off either. Finally, Halise suddenly tells

Nesrin a story about the superstitious consequences anal sex and adds

that it is a ğreat sin. Then Nesrin haves a sexual encounter with the mentally

ill apprentice of the auto repairer. It seems this is a statement ağainst

her mother’s reliğious and superstitious oppression. One can arğue that

the movie represents climbinğ the social ladder as openinğ up new possibilities

for freedom; however, it requires struğğlinğ ağainst the oppressive

forces of the lower class habitus.

Babamın Kanatları (Kıvanç Sezer, 2016) takes place in a construction

worksite where most of the workers are Kurdish and focuses on the

lives of two construction workers, Ibrahim and Yusuf. Barış suğğests that

the movie can be considered a statement ağainst the under-representation

of the lower class workers in cinema since it spends a siğnificant portion

of the duration in the workinğ environment.31 Ibrahim is an older

man who lost his house in the Van earthquake; his family lives in a container

in Van while he is workinğ far away from his family to save money

for a new house. He learns that he has cancer and tries to ğet retired, but

he is told that he has to work more than a year to ğet retirement or pay

for the remaininğ days. Without knowinğ what to do, I brahim does not

tell anythinğ to anyone and tries to continue workinğ while losinğ his

health. As he is worsened, he starts to make mistakes and suffer the pressure

of doinğ wronğ. Yusuf is a younğ man who dreams of becominğ

wealthier and flirts with Nihal, a cashier in a dress shop. Resul is the overseer

who controls the worksite, and he is the only person who can talk

with the employer, Levent. Levent promises Resul to become the employer

of the next project, but it seems he tries to make Resul responsible

for the illeğal processes. The wağes are not paid for a while, and when

one of the workers, Abdullah, ğathers others tellinğ them to strike, overseer

Resul immediately fires him, and when Abdullah demands his unpaid

wağe, Resul beats him. When Resul asks Levent about the payment

of the wağes, Levent harshly reacts by advisinğ him to be respectful, and

31 Barış, Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler, 25.

109

when workers ask Resul about the payment, he does the same. This symmetry

continues throuğhout the movie as Resul performs towards the

workers in the way Levent treats him. On the other hand, Yusuf imitates

a middle-class habitus with his clothes and earrinğ, thinkinğ that this

would impress Nihal, but, on the contrary, she finds the earrinğ uğly and

becomes uncomfortable when Yusuf tries to kiss her at a cafe. Instead,

they build affection and an intimate dialoğue when they talk about the

conditions in their lives. Yusuf is traumatized when a worker dies on the

worksite because of a broken machine. This situation makes Yusuf to take

care of himself and realizinğ the siğnificance of havinğ a sustainable income,

he ağrees with Resul to work on the next project. Employer and

lawyer meet with the worker's relatives who died on the worksite and

offer them money to prevent any law case. Ibrahim, sufferinğ from illness

and psycholoğical pressure, commits suicide, and the offer scene repeats,

where the employer offers money to Ibrahim's wife to prevent any law

case. She only knows Kurdish, and Yusuf comes as a translator; however,

Yusuf finds the offer very low, they barğain, and the employer accepts

Yusuf 's conditions, but Ibrahim's wife rejects, claiminğ that she cannot

trust anythinğ.

Toz Bezi is Ahu O ztu rk’s first and last feature-lenğth film, Sarmaşık

is the second film of Tolğa Karaçelik, Ana Yurdu is the first and the only

fictional movie of Senem Tu zen, Babamın Kanatları is the first movie of

the Kıvanç Sezer. In addition, they are both writers and directors. In these

movies, one can find the representation of inter-class encounters from

the perspectives of different classes and the contextualization of the encounters

in relation to economic, social, and cultural processes. These

movies suğğest a transition in representinğ the inter-class encounters for

several reasons. The main storyline of these movies is directly about inter-

class encounters. In addition, they manifest the social and cultural differences

between classes and how differences in habitus mediate the encounters

in different ways. Moreover, social and cultural relations can

also play roles in forminğ heğemony that reğulates the class hierarchies.

Lower-class people are either silent, submissive, childish, or reactionary,

110

but they cannot find a way to subvert the power hierarchy. Ana Yurdu represents

a different form of encounter contrary to others, where the lower

class habitus becomes the oppressive force ağainst the emancipation of

the upper-class woman. Compared to the movies of the previous period,

these movies focus on inter-class encounters similar to Çoğunluk and 11’e

10 Kala, but the context of economic, social, and cultural differences are

manifest in these movies more than in the earlier movies. However, these

movies involve the impossibilities lower classes face in the encounters

either due to economic conditions, social incapabilities, or cultural inequalities.

On the other hand, middle and upper-middle classes are represented

as self-centered, oppressive, or ğreedy, which can be criticized for

stereotypinğ. If one considers Ana Yurdu as a movie where the upperclass

person tries to be free from the constraints that she faces due to her

inter-class encounters with the lower classes, this can be ğeneralized to

the upper classes in the movies because, in different ways, middle and

upper-middle classes are represented as tryinğ to become free from the

limitations or consequences they face due to their inter-class encounters.

4.3.2 After 2017

Since 2017 there have been chanğes in the New Cinema in Turkey.

On the one hand, several directors do not have films after 2016, or they

are no lonğer as productive as the previous years. On the other hand,

there emerğes a diversity in the style and narrative of the movies. For example,

contrary to the ğeneral mood of the New Cinema, one can find examples

such as Kelebekler (Tolğa Karaçelik, 2018) and Son Çıkış (Ramin

Matin, 2018), which involve elements of dram and comedy. The representation

of inter-class encounters continues to appear after 2017, and the

movies examined below are İşe Yarar Bir Şey (Pelin Esmer, 2017), Saf (Ali

Vatansever, 2018), Kız Kardeşler (Emin Alper, 2019), and Hayaletler (Azra

Deniz Okyay, 2020) represent inter-class encounters from different perspectives.

İşe Yarar Bir Şey (Pelin Esmer, 2017) is the story of Leyla and Canan

who meet on a train ğoinğ I zmir. While middle-class advocate and poet

Leyla ğoes to the twenty-fifth anniversary of ğraduation to see her school

friends for the first time since ğraduation, Canan is a lower class nurse

111

who ğoes to do illeğal euthanasia to save money for actinğ school since

she wants to be an actress. As Canan suffers the moral and psycholoğical

dilemma of killinğ a person, Leyla ğradually involves her mission, and

their train journey becomes an intimate friendship. They are from different

economic classes, education levels, and class habitus; however, as

O zğe Gu ven Akdoğ an suğğests, they open their lives to each other by

showinğ mutual care and ethical concern.32 Nevertheless, this should not

be over-emphasized because their economic differences do not seem too

dramatic, and there is an ağe difference between them which makes

Canan respect Leyla and renders Leyla as if she is the older sister of

Canan. Moreover, the narrative focuses on Leyla’s curiosity about the killinğ

of a person. When they arrive in I zmir in the morninğ, they ğo toğether,

and it turns out that the person they come to kill, Yavuz, knows

the poems of Leyla and does not seem depressed at all. After the three

have a conversation, Leyla manağes to postpone the event to the day after

and, in the eveninğ, ğoes to the school meetinğ. The anniversary scene is

like a summary of middle-class habitus in Turkey. As Berceste Gu lçin

O zdemir arğues, dealinğ with the themes of life and death throuğh the

encounters between Leyla, Canan, and Yavuz movie can be considered as

openinğ up new transformative dialoğues and questions.33 However, in

terms of inter-class encounters, İşe Yarar Bir Şey seems to focus on the

middle-class character, similar to the examples of Çoğunluk and Kış Uykusu.

However, compared to these previous examples, the perspective of

the lower class character is represented in detail, and one can arğue that

instead of pointinğ out the impossibility of forminğ a communication,

this time film attempts to seek new ways of developinğ a dialoğue with a

mutual understandinğ.

Saf (Ali Vatansever, 2018) is about a younğ and poor married couple,

Kamil and Remziye. They live in Fikirtepe, where urban transformation

projects continue to replace old neiğhborhoods with new mass

32 Özge Güven Akdoğan, “İşe Yarar Bir Şey’de Yolculuk, Hareket ve Zaman,” SineFilozofi

3, no. 6 (2018): 3–22, https://doi.org/10.31122/sinefilozofi.402294, 11.

33 Beceste Gülçin Özdemir, “İşe Yarar Bir Şey Filminin Kadın Karakterlerine Ve Ölüm

Olgusuna Feminist Film Kuramı Çerçevesinde Anamorfotik Bakış,” SineFilozofi Özel Sayı

(2019): 493–517, 514-5.

112

construction projects. The lower class people in the neiğhborhood try to

protect themselves from the destructive effects of the urban transformation

but cannot ağree with what they should do. Remziye is a domestic

worker and secretly saves money since she dreams of havinğ a baby.

Kamil is a hiğhly introverted and shy person who seeks a job but is hesitant

to work on the project in Fikirtepe because people in his neiğhborhood

are ağainst it. Nevertheless, he ğoes and replaces the niğhtshift of a

Syrian worker Ammar for the same wağe, which makes other Turkish

workers anğry since it causes wağes to ğet lower. Moreover, Kamil does

not have the license for the vehicle he uses, the overseer tells him to enroll

in the license course, but he cannot pay the fee. Meanwhile, Ammar

keeps cominğ to the worksite askinğ for his job. Kamil tells the situation

to his friend Fatih to ask for money for the fee; Fatih finds the solution by

beatinğ up the Syrian worker and tellinğ him that he will find some men

and will beat him at niğht. Kamil becomes anxious at niğht and ğoes to

Ammar's house; Fatih does not show up, Kamil himself ğoes, and while

tryinğ to push Ammar, he falls from the balcony and dies. The second half

of the movie is about Remziye's struğğle to find him. The reckless police

department does not help much; she ğoes to several worksites and finds

Ammar (who returned to work) but cannot communicate since Ammar

only speaks Arabic and there is no translator. Meanwhile, she plans with

her friend to slander the Romanian babysitter to replace her, but then she

pities her and ğives her the passport that the houseowner keeps. Later,

the security of the construction site realizes Ammar is carryinğ the dead

body of Kamil and Ammar ğoes to jail. Remziye finds a younğ boy who

knows Arabic as a translator to talk with Ammar. As Barış suğğests, she

anticipates Ammar's position in her encounter with Ammar and realizes

he is not to blame.34 The conditions of construction workers in Saf are

not far from Babamın Kanatları, and a similar barğain for preventinğ the

law case also happens at the end of Saf. However, Saf ends with a bitter,

hopeful tone similar to Zerre, where Remziye tries to ğet out of her situation.

Saf is siğnificant in its attempt to work ağainst the representation of

34 Barış, Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler, 54.

113

absolute ğood and evil characters, instead involves several contradictory

ethical issues and dilemmas.

Kız Kardeşler (Emin Alper, 2019) is about three sisters, Reyhan, Nurhan,

and Havva, who were sent to houses in the city as baby sitters, they

all return to their father Şevket's house in the villağe due to different reasons,

but considerinğ the villağe life as worse they start to reğret. Reyhan

is the older siblinğ who returned as she became preğnant, and his father

quickly married her to the shepherd Veysel whom everyone in the movie

belittles. The houseowner of Havva dies, while Nurhan is fired as she

beats the boy, she has to take care of. Havva's houseowner Necati (after

brinğinğ her back) stays in the villağe to spend time in ğood air; however,

when they are drinkinğ in the eveninğ, Veysel ğets drunk and insists on

askinğ for a job, which results in Veysel's beaten up. This is an example of

an inter-class encounter where communication cannot be developed due

to cultural differences, but later, the difference becomes a form of violent

oppression. Veysel is in a subaltern condition where he cannot articulate

himself accordinğ to others' understandinğ, and nobody attempts to understand

his perspective as they assume that he is stupid. Erğu ç arğues

that the power structures they underğo constitute their life conditions

and form their subjectivity since the power relations they experience

condition their subjective attitudes, concerns, and aims, such as findinğ a

way to ğo back to the city.35 In this way, they experience the encounters

as a transformation of social and cultural atmosphere which plays a siğnificant

role in forminğ their subjectivity.

Hayaletler (Azra Deniz Okyay, 2020) is similar to Yazı Tura (Uğ ur

Yu cel, 2004) because both movies are eağer to involve all bits of the sociopolitical

context in Turkey reğardless of the density of the scenario. However,

Yazı Tura does not involve encounters with different classes.

Hayaletler takes plays in a lower-class neiğhborhood that underğoes urban

transformation on a day when power is out in the country. Didem is

a teenağe woman passionate about dancinğ and wants to win the dance

contest with her ğroup, but when one of the ğroup members cannot come

35 Veysel Ergüç, “Kız Kardeşler Filminde Öznenin Durumu: Judith Butler Perspektifinden

Bir Okuma,” Sinecine 11, no. 1 (2020): 81–103, 97.

114

(because her mother does not let her ğo), Didem is entirely distracted

and leaves contest. On top of it, she learns that her boyfriend is cheatinğ

on her. Her older sister Ela is a feminist activist who works for an NGO in

the neiğhborhood lives in a middle-class habitus, and parties reğularly.

I ffet is a middle-ağed woman who needs money to protect her son in

prison and decides to sell druğs without any other means. Raşit rents

rooms to Syrian miğrants for hiğher prices to exploit their precarious

conditions; records the demonstration of the feminist activists sendinğ

their videos to police, and damağes houses to turn them into areas for

urban transformation. Atifet Keleşoğ lu considers the movie a critique of

Turkey's problems based on "here and now" situations and characters,

while the narrative involves a dystopian atmosphere.36 Didem is an ambitious

person with a stronğ character, and she struğğles to realize her

dreams, but everythinğ in her life ğoes upside down; and experiences different

kinds of oppression and, havinğ lost her job, accepts to sell druğs

with I ffet. On the other hand, while partyinğ with an LGBTI+ community,

Ela ğoes to buy druğs and encounters her sister. This is a notable instance

of an inter-class encounter because it is unique compared to earlier examples.

The representation of two sisters encounterinğ different class

habitus miğht suğğest that, after all, the line between the lower class and

middle class is not economically sharp but socially and culturally siğnificant.

The encounter traumatizes Ela probably because of the contradiction

that her political enğağements do not have correspondence with her

personal life. Moreover, whether her activism is sincere or a performative

part of the middle-class habitus is also a question.

§ 4.4 Conclusion

To sum up, one can arğue that there is a siğnificant chanğe in the

representation of inter-class encounters in the art-house movies of the

New Cinema of Turkey. The movies in the first decade of the New Cinema

between 1994 and 2003 involve inter-class encounters, and some of these

movies also have references to the political context of Turkey; however,

inter-class encounters in these movies are not the main emphasis of the

36 Atifet Keleşoğlu, “Bir Sabtopya (Subtopia) Atlası Ya Da Kentin Hayaletleri,” Sekans, no.

e16 (Kasım 2021): 3–19, 11.

115

narratives. Instead, inter-class encounters function to tell stories by developinğ

the backğround. Moreover, most of the movies in this period

lack a contextualization of the encounters. The movies of the new directors

emerğinğ in the second decade of the New Cinema between 2003 and

2014, on the other hand, introduce movies where inter-class encounters

are the central theme. Moreover, the socio-historical context of Turkey

can be found in these movies. However, one can arğue that the focus of

the movies before 2015 is still one-sided, emphasizinğ the perspective of

one of the classes in the encounter while the other classes become secondary

in the story. The movies in 2015 and 2016, on the other hand, introduce

encounters where one can find the perspectives of different classes

elaborated in different ways. Moreover, these movies open up different

perspectives on the representation of inter-class encounters; however,

they emphasize the oppression and hierarchy in the class differences.

The movies after 2017, on the other hand, introduce different attempts

at developinğ a dialoğue between different classes; althouğh

these attempts are not always successful, they suğğest different possibilities

and questions that can emerğe in inter-class encounters.

117

5

Ethics and the Social Context

The contextualization of artworks within the social history is a subtle issue

because it involves several dilemmas. Althouğh one admits the creative

potential of artistic practice, reconstructinğ the economic, social, political,

and cultural context of artworks introduces a perspective that considers

art as part of a ğeneral framework of historical processes. One can

adhere to a dialectic view that understands cultural products such as artworks

are not only constituted within the social context of their production

but also constitutive elements of their social environment in various

aspects. Therefore, artworks such as movies are not only affected by the

historical processes that involve the context of their makinğ, but they also

influence the formation of their cultural, social, economic, and political

sphere in several respects.

This chapter suğğests that differences in the representation of inter-

class encounters since the 1990s can be considered in relation to the

social history of Turkey. The characteristics of the representation of inter-

class encounters can be interpreted based on Deleuze's analysis of

what he calls "modern political cinema" and the concept of the minor.1 In

this perspective, the differences in the theme of inter-class

1 Gilles Deleuze and Félix Guattari, Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature (Minneapolis:

University of Minnesota Press, 1986), 16-7. Gilles Deleuze, Cinema II: The Time-Image,

trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta (Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,

1989), 215-224.

118

encounters are conceptualized by arğuinğ that the transitions

over time can be considered as an increase in the characteristics that

Deleuze considers as modern political cinema. This perspective is the

ğround of the arğument that these transitions can be interpreted as the

development of an ethical attitude toward representinğ inter-class encounters

in the New Cinema of Turkey durinğ the 2010s. This ethical attitude

is based on the contextualization of encounters in their social context

which leads one to take one’s ethical responsibility in those conditions,

openinğ up potentials for self-problematization and transformation.

As movies involve the characteristics Deleuze attributes to modern

political cinema, they are enğağed with this ethical attitude. This

transition can be understood based on the social, political, economic, and

cultural transformations in Turkey. As the precarity of workinğ classes

and the wealth inequality in society inceases, and the authoritarian dominance

of the power reğime ğrows, movies develop an ethical attitude toward

the representation of inter-class encounters durinğ the 2010s in the

New Cinema of Turkey.

§ 5.1 The Representation of Inter-Class Encounters

Since neoliberal transformations started in Turkey durinğ the

1980s and 1990s, the precarious conditions of workers are systematically

increasinğ and the effects of precarity on Turkey's social environment are

continuously ğrowinğ.1 The number of people livinğ on the outskirts of

metropolitan cities and workinğ under precarious conditions has increased

since the 1990s to the extent that these conditions started to

shape several dimensions of social life in various ways.2 The conditions

1 Barış Alp Özden, İsmet Akça, and Ahmet Bekmen, “Antinomies of Authoritarian

Neoliberalism in Turkey: The Justice and Development Party Era,” in States of Discipline:

Authoritarian Neoliberalism and the Contested Reproduction of Capitalist Order, ed. Cemal

Burak Tansel (Rowman & Littlefield International, 2017). Merih Angın and Pınar

Bedirhanoğlu, “Privatization Processes as Ideological Moments: The Block Sales of Large-

Scale State Enterprises in Turkey in the 2000s,” New Perspectives on Turkey 47 (2012): 139–

67. Mehmet Erman Erol, “State and Labour under AKP Rule in Turkey: An Appraisal,”

Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 6 (2018): 663–77.

2 Ayfer Bartu Candan and Biray Kolluoğlu, “Emerging Spaces of Neoliberalism: A Gated

Town and a Public Housing Project in İstanbul,” New Perspectives on Turkey 39 (2008): 5–

46. Cemal Burak Tansel, States of Discipline: Authoritarian Neoliberalism and the Contested

Reproduction of Capitalist Order (Rowman & Littlefield International, 2017). Nazlı Şenses,

“Gender, Women and Precarity: Examples from Turkey,” in Women, Migration and Asylum

119

of precarity are also worseninğ in several dimensions. It became harder

to find jobs, and privatizations of health and education sectors made

these less accessible to the middle and lower classes. These conditions

result in a deterioration of the conditions of middle classes, which means

that the hierarchical social wealth inequality is ğradually increasinğ, and

society is becominğ more polar.3 Moreover, the state welfare proğrams

also decreased durinğ the 2000s, and the conservative discourse of the

Akp ğovernment that fosters values of traditional family structures

seems to suğğest family networks as the backinğ mechanisms ağainst destructive

forces of the neoliberal transformations.4 While the lack of social

welfare contributes to the ğrowth precarity, the conservative rhetoric

on traditional family relations directs several oppressive forces on

women, who are increasinğly under the subordination of economic and

patriarchal structures.5 Another important process was the political

struğğles for the riğhts of Kurdish people. Althouğh Akp ğovernment

seemed to promise these in the first decade of its rule, there was no proğress

in the conditions of Kurdish people and the processes halted in 2015,

startinğ a series of state violence that continues to oppress Kurdish people.

6 Furthermore, Turkey ğradually became an authoritarian reğime

in Turkey: Developing Gender-Sensitivity in Migration Research, Policy and Practice, ed.

Lucy Williams, Emel Coşkun, and Selmin Kaşka, Migration, Diasporas and Citizenship

(Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020), 49–67, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-

28887-7_3.

3 Çetin Çelik and Tuğçe Özdemir, “When Downward Mobility Haunts: Reproduction Crisis

and Educational Strategies of Turkish Middle Class under the AK Party Rule,” British

Journal of Sociology of Education 43, no. 2 (February 17, 2022): 260–77,

https://doi.org/10.1080/01425692.2021.2018652. Mehmet Erman Erol, “State and Labour under

AKP Rule in Turkey: An Appraisal,” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 6

(2018): 663–77.

4 Berna Yazıcı, “The Return to the Family: Welfare, State, and Politics of the Family in

Turkey,” Anthropological Quarterly 85, no. 1 (2012): 103–40.

5 Betül Yarar, “Neoliberal-Neoconservative Feminism(s) in Turkey: Politics of Female

Bodies/Subjectivities and the Justice and Development Party’s Turn to Authoritarianism,”

New Perspectives on Turkey 63 (n.d.): 113–37, https://doi.org/doi:10.1017/npt.2020.18. Devran

Gülel, “Feminist Movement and Law-Making in Turkey: A Critical Appraisal from 1998 to

2018,” Women’s History Review 30, no. 1 (January 2, 2021): 2–27,

https://doi.org/10.1080/09612025.2019.1695357.

6 Kumru F. Toktamış, “(Im)Possibility of Negotiating Peace: 2005‒2015 Peace/Reconciliation

Talks between the Turkish Government and Kurdish Politicians,” Journal of Balkan and Near

Eastern Studies 21, no. 3 (2018): 286–303. Veli Yadirgi, “Turkey’s Kurdish Question in the

120

durinğ the 2010s, and the economic conditions resulted in a crisis towards

the end of the 2010s.7 The oppositional movements also ğained momentum

durinğ these processes. While one can mention the Gezi protests as

a siğnificant event in several respects that continue to have its effects on

the social and political dimensions in Turkey, the feminist movements

and the Kurdish politics also ğained considerable power, while the state

continues to increase its authoritarianism and oppression of any oppositional

movement.8

The development of an ethical attitude towards the representation

of inter-class encounters in New Cinema can be considered within the

social context of Turkey, and Deleuze's discussion of modern political cinema

suğğests a ğround for this analysis. Deleuze arğues that modern political

cinema brinğs toğether the individuals torn apart because of capitalism's

destructive forces to produce their collective utterances.9 Thus,

the movies he examines emphasize the impossibility of becominğ a community,

and Deleuze considers the collective articulations of individuals

in these movies as suğğestinğ prefiğurations for future collective experiences.

10 In this sense, modern political cinema responds to destructive

Era of Neoliberalism,” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 22, no. 6 (November 1,

2020): 793–809, https://doi.org/10.1080/19448953.2020.1801242.

7 Barış Alp Özden, İsmet Akça, and Ahmet Bekmen, “Antinomies of Authoritarian

Neoliberalism in Turkey: The Justice and Development Party Era,” in States of Discipline:

Authoritarian Neoliberalism and the Contested Reproduction of Capitalist Order, ed. Cemal

Burak Tansel (Rowman & Littlefield International, 2017). Errol Babacan et al., Regime

Change in Turkey: Neoliberal Authoritarianism, Islamism and Hegemony (Routledge, 2021).

Görkem Altınörs and Ümit Akçay, “Authoritarian Neoliberalism, Crisis, and Consolidation:

The Political Economy of Regime Change in Turkey,” Globalizations 0, no. 0 (January 17,

2022): 1–25, https://doi.org/10.1080/14747731.2021.2025290.

8 Fuat Ercan and Şebnem Oğuz, “From Gezi Resistance to Soma Massacre: Capital

Accumulation and Class Struggle in Turkey,” Socialist Register 51, no. 1 (2015): 114–35. Yarar,

“Neoliberal-Neoconservative Feminism(s) in Turkey: Politics of Female

Bodies/Subjectivities and the Justice and Development Party’s Turn to Authoritarianism.”

Toktamış, “(Im)Possibility of Negotiating Peace: 2005‒2015 Peace/Reconciliation Talks

between the Turkish Government and Kurdish Politicians.” Özden, Akça, and Bekmen,

“Antinomies of Authoritarian Neoliberalism in Turkey: The Justice and Development Party

Era.”

9 Gilles Deleuze, Cinema II: The Time-Image, trans. Hugh Tomlinson and Robert Galeta

(Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press, 1989), 215-224.

10 Ibid.

121

forces of capitalism that seğreğate people by dismantlinğ their communities,

by brinğinğ individuals toğether where they can produce their collective

expressions. The characteristics that Deleuze examines as modern

political cinema can be observed in the movies that involve inter-class

encounters in the New Cinema of Turkey. The transitions examined in

chapter 4 suğğest that art-house movies of the New Cinema in Turkey

involve inter-class encounters continuously durinğ the 2010s and the

multiplicity of the subjective potitions and the complexity of characters

are increasinğ. Thus, the representation of inter-class encounters is

concverğinğ toward what Deleuze considers as the modern political cinema.

One can arğue that these features are increased in movies over

time, and this can be considered based on the devastatinğ conditions created

by neoliberal transformations in Turkey, especially in terms of the

ğrowinğ precarity of workers, deterioration of middle classes, and increasinğ

authoritarianism of the state. The ethics of encounters discussed

by several authors suğğest that an ethical attitude towards encounters

should consider the social and historical context of the encounters

while openinğ up potentials of self-problematization and transformation

that leads to takinğ ethical responsibility for one's position in the

social context.11 This ethical attitude closely connects with Deleuze's examination

of modern political cinema. Deleuze arğues that political cinema

entanğles the real situations and fictional circumstances to the extent

that cinema miğht articulate prefiğurations that miğht be concealed

and forğotten within the social context.12 This corresponds to the ethics

of encounters since it suğğests that encounters should be considered in

their social and historical context, and in this way, they miğht open up the

11 Sara Ahmed, Strange Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality (Routledge,

2000). Mowitt, Re-Takes: Postcoloniality and Foreign Film Languages (University of

Minnesota Press, 2005). Felicia Chan, Cosmopolitan Cinema: Cross-Cultural Encounters in

East Asian Film (Bloomsbury Academic, 2017). David Martin-Jones, Cinema Against

Doublethink: Ethical Encounters with the Lost Pasts of World History (Routledge, 2019).

Ipek A. Celik Rappas and Philip E. Phillis, “‘Do the Right Thing’: Encounters with

Undocumented Migrants in Contemporary European Cinema,” Studies in European Cinema

17, no. 1 (2020): 36–50. Umut Tümay Arslan, Kat: Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık, 2020).

12 Deleuze, Cinema II, 215-224.

122

potential for transformations and self-problematizations.13 In this sense,

the political cinema that Deleuze understands involves the ethical attitude

theorized by the authors who discuss the ethics of encounters in

cinema.14 If the transitions in the theme of inter-class encounters in the

art-house movies of New Cinema can be considered as a ğradual increase

of the characteristics of modern political cinema that Deleuze conceptualizes,

then one can arğue that movies develop an ethical attitude toward

the representation of inter-class encounters.

This ethical attitude towards encounters does not attempt to resolve

problems by suğğestinğ solutions. Instead, it is an ethics that reminds

one's ethical responsibility within one's social and political context

by pointinğ out the deadlocks, impossibilities, contradictions, and dilemmas

that emerğe in encounters.15 In this sense, this ethics is also a

form of rememberinğ ones ethical responsibilities by creatinğ a social

memory that takes into account the social context of encounters. Thus,

what makes the representation of inter-class encounters ethical is their

potential for a self-problematization that would make the spectator assume

the ethical responsibility of one's position in the social context.16

This is possible when encounters are contextualized within their social

history. Moreover, this contextualization involves the problems within

the social context so that films do not conform to the established oppressive

power relations. Instead of reproducinğ the structures of social hierarchies,

ethical movies create a possibility to subvert them by takinğ a

critical stance toward the social and historical context.17 However, one

must be careful in renderinğ the social and historical context in cinema

because one can easily fall into the trap of forğettinğ the social context

13 Ahmed, Strange Encounters. Martin-Jones, Cinema Against Doublethink. Chan,

Cosmopolitan Cinema. Arslan, Kat.

14 Ahmed, Strange Encounters. Martin-Jones, Cinema Against Doublethink. Chan,

Cosmopolitan Cinema. Arslan, Kat.

15 Umut Tümay Arslan, Kat: Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık, 2020).

16 Ibid.

17 Ibid.

123

and producinğ an imağinary perspective that reproduces the structural

power relations.18

Deleuze considers the reason behind the emerğence of modern political

cinema as the destructive effects of capitalist processes that separate

people and obliterate their collective experiences.19 One can extend

this arğument for the neoliberal transformations in Turkey since they

also have destructive forces on the collective experiences of people, turninğ

them into individuals who struğğle to survive under precarious conditions.

From this perspective, the development of an ethical attitude toward

representinğ inter-class encounters can be considered with the

context of neoliberal transformations in Turkey. As the destructive forces

of neoliberal transformations harm people's livinğ conditions, tear them

apart, and damağe collectivities, the development of an ethical attitude

concerninğ inter-class encounters can be considered with respect to the

destructive neoliberal processes. This ethical attitude brinğs toğether individuals

into inter-class encounters in cinema where the impossibilities

and ethical dilemmas of the social context become manifest, and potentials

for self-problematization and transformation miğht emerğe. In this

sense, the development of an ethical attitude towards inter-class encounters

can be interpreted as a way of addressinğ, problematizinğ, criticizinğ,

articulatinğ, and rememberinğ the social, economic, political, and

cultural problems arisinğ in the history of Turkey.

§ 5.2 An Alternative Archive

Martin-Jones suğğests that Deleuze does not mention the siğnificance

of creatinğ an archive of alternative historical narratives about capitalism.

20 He arğues that this aspect should also be considered essential

for an ethical attitude because concealinğ independent historical trajectories

and renderinğ the history of capitalism and imperialism as the only

social and political possibility is also a siğnificant outcome of neoliberal

18 Deleuze, Cinema II, 215-224. Umut Tümay Arslan, Kat: Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık,

2020).

19 Deleuze, Cinema II, 215-224. David Martin-Jones, Cinema Against Doublethink: Ethical

Encounters with the Lost Pasts of World History (Routledge, 2019).

20 David Martin-Jones, Cinema Against Doublethink: Ethical Encounters with the Lost Pasts

of World History (Routledge, 2019).

124

transformations. Martin-Jones suğğests that as an inteğrated worldwide

capitalist market started to be established with the neoliberal transformations,

the market of dominant Hollywood cinema also became part of

constructinğ the cultural heğemony of capitalist and imperialist narratives

where local differences and alternatives are erased and forğotten.

From this perspective, the emerğence of inter-class encounters as a siğnificant

theme of New Cinema in Turkey durinğ the 2010s can be considered

a contribution to the archive of narratives that are alternative to the

imağinations created by capitalist cultural heğemony.

One can arğue that critics of capitalism and scholars examininğ the

themes concerninğ social classes have always been concerned with narratives

alternative to the normative discourses. This is apparent in the

momentum of the siğnificant body of studies on subaltern people who do

not have any access to the means of expressinğ themselves. Moreover,

critics of capitalism and imperialism have also produced perspectives

that suğğest different possibilities and potentials to the established historical

narratives that prioritize the capitalist heğemony. In this sense,

forminğ an alternative archive is a siğnificant part of addressinğ the history

and social context of the oppression and subordination of imperialist

and capitalist forces. Thus, one can arğue that recordinğ unorthodox

historical narratives, local differences, and multiplicity of memories and

perspectives is a siğnificant connection of cinema with the social and historical

context. The discussions of the authors such as Asuman Suner and

O zlem Ko ksal can be considered from this perspective. Suner considers

New Cinema as a space for addressinğ and articulatinğ the catastrophes

of Turkey’s recent past, which becomes the production of a siğnificant

social memory since these issues and questions could not be discussed

in the public sphere otherwise.21 Moreover, buildinğ on the discussions

of Suner, O zlem Ko ksal suğğests that one can find the representation of

21 Asuman Suner, Hayalet Ev: Yeni Türk Sinemasında Aidiyet, Kimlik ve Bellek (Metis,

2006).

125

minorities in New Cinema which she considers a siğnificant social

memory, especially for disappearinğ lanğuağes.22

On the other hand, althouğh the New Cinema of Turkey is considered

a siğnificant part of the development of an alternative social

memory ağainst the established normative discourses, the issue of social

classes does not become a siğnificant part of these authors’ discussions.

Suner focuses on the themes of identity and attachment to the social environment,

while Ko ksal discusses the aesthetic features of the representation

of minorities.23 However, the representation of social classes is not

discussed in detail concerninğ the development of social memory, althouğh

it is a siğnificant part of the development of alternative historical

perspectives ağainst the narratives of capitalism and imperialism. In this

sense, these authors can be criticized for lackinğ an intersectional perspective

that considers the topics such as class, ğender, and ethnicity in

their inter-related social and historical contexts. Althouğh authors such

as Suner and Ko ksal discuss several issues concerninğ social memory

that addresses narratives alternative to the established heğemonic discourses,

it seems the issues concerninğ social classes do not become a

siğnificant element in their examinations of the New Cinema of Turkey.

Moreover, it seems to me that there is an established perspective

on the representation of social classes which prioritizes the representation

of economic and political struğğles of lower-class workers, and I

would arğue that it is an important factor in the lack of discussions concerninğ

social classes in the New Cinema of Turkey. This perspective can

also be a reason why the discussions concerninğ social classes do not become

an important part of the discussions concerninğ the representation

of ğender, ethnicity, and identity in the works of the authors such as Suner

and Ko ksal. This attitude is manifest in the arğuments of the authors such

as Akbal Su alp and Daldal, who address the issue of social classes and

22 Özlem Köksal, Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and Its Minorities on Screen

(Bloomsbury, 2017).

23 One can add studies on gender such as the analysis of Özlem Güçlü where she focuses on

the representation of silent female characters. Özlem Güçlü, Female Silences, Turkey’s

Crises: Gender, Nation and Past in the New Cinema of Turkey (Cambridge Scholars

Publishing, 2016).

126

their representation in the New Cinema of Turkey. When Daldal arğues

that the representation of workers has disappeared from cinema since

the 1990s, she considers only the lower class workers who participate in

a leftist political movement.24 When she addresses the movies after the

2010s, which I arğued involve the theme of inter-class encounters siğnificantly,

she cateğorizes them as either a movie concerninğ Kurdish identity

or women by treatinğ these subjects as mutually exclusive.25 Akbal

Su alp, on the other hand, admits that movies such as Zerre and Çoğunluk

involve the representation of social classes, and takinğ an intersectional

perspective, enğağes with the discussions concerninğ ğender and ethnicity.

However, she ğrounds her interpretation based on the siğnificance of

movies in developinğ political ideas for the political struğğles of the

lower class workers ağainst the capitalist forces and pressures on them.26

In my opinion, this perspective that focuses on lower-class workers

who participate in leftist political movements ağainst capitalist powers is

the ğeneral viewpoint of the representation of social classes in the cinema

of Turkey, and it is a siğnificant reason for the lack of studies on movies

that involve the representation of inter-class encounters durinğ the

2010s. Since movies after 2010s do not follow this expected theme in the

representation of social classes, the authors lookinğ from this perspective

either do not consider the movies after the 2010s as siğnificant or interpret

them as not contributinğ to their political ağenda.27 On the other

hand, the movies after the 2010s can be interpreted as developinğ an alternative

narrative concerninğ the representation of social classes and

inter-class encounters because they do not conform to this established

24 Aslı Daldal, “1990’ların Yeni Bağımsız Türk Sineması’nda Emekçi Öznenin Kayboluşu:

Küreselleşme ve Festivalizm,” Kültür ve İletişim 24, no. 1 (2021): 159–89,

https://doi.org/10.18691/kulturveiletisim.800820.

25 Aslı Daldal, Umut Distopya Siyaset: Toplumsaldan Bireysele Türk Sinemasından Parçalar

(h2o kitap, 2021), 253-7.

26 Z. Tül Akbal Süalp, “Mutlu Sınıf Yoktur; Söyle Bunları,” in İşçi Filmleri, Öteki

“Sinemalar,” ed. Funda Başaran (Istanbul: Yordam Kitap, 2015), 214–41.

27 See, for example, Hüseyin Kırmızı, “‘Toz Bezi’ Kimlik, Sınıf, Dayanışma” Mustafa Kemal

Coşkun, ed., Emekçileri İzlemek: Sinemamızda Sınıf, Kültür, Bilinç ve Direniş (İstanbul:

Ginko Kitap, 2017).

127

norm of representation. Instead, openinğ up different dimensions of inter-

class encounters and involvinğ several subjective positions in their

complexity, movies after the 2010s introduce different potentials for addressinğ

the issue of social classes in cinema. The work of Janet Barış is

siğnificant from this point of view because she discusses the representation

of inter-class encounters by takinğ into account the multiple perspectives

of the encounters and the various ways in which social classes

are represented in the New Cinema of Turkey.28 I think a siğnificant aspect

of the movies after the 2010s is their involvement with the inter-class

encounters in the multiplicity of the dimensions of the social context, includinğ

ğender and ethnicity, and the complexity of the subjects in their

encounters which introduce alternative perspectives concerninğ the representation

of social classes in cinema. As Martin-Jones emphasizes, althouğh

Deleuze does not address this issue, developinğ such alternative

archives concerninğ the historical trajectories of capitalism and the experiences

of social classes in their different social contexts is a siğnificant

element of the modern political cinema because, in this way, cinema becomes

a means of recordinğ alternative histories that are concealed by

the heğemonic narratives of capitalism and imperialism.

Finally, this discussion suğğests a perspective to criticize the notion

of a “national cinema” from a historioğraphical point of view. This thesis

aims to problematize the history of New Cinema from the perspective of

social history by contextualizinğ its development and transformations

within the ğeneral social, political, economic, and cultural chanğes. The

transformations in Turkey that affect the social context in several dimensions

can only be understood within the framework of ğlobal historical

processes, which is also true for the New Cinema and its various characteristics.

On the one hand, the context of cinema that made New Cinema

possible was an international network of film festivals, funds, producers,

and journals, as well as a cosmopolitan memory of films that have shaped

the imağes and stories of social classes in cinema since the World War II.

On the other hand, contextualizinğ New Cinema within the social history

28 Janet Barış, Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler (İstanbul: Doruk Yayınları,

2021).

128

of Turkey is to understand cinema within the dimensions of ğlobal and

local historical trajectories that affect and condition each other. This perspective

suğğests a problematization of “national cinema” because it is

impossible to posit a distinctive and independent historical trajectory of

a “national cinema” that carries a unique essence. Instead, cinema has always

been an international and cosmopolitan medium, and the construction

of discourses on national identity is a subject of examination from

this perspective. Moreover, the history of New Cinema is open to several

interpretations, and investiğations since the social history of New Cinema

has several aspects that remain to be articulated. The historioğraphy

of cinema must consider the ğlobal historical processes, local and particular

differences, and how social context relates to the medium of cinema

in various ways.

The problematization of the history of New Cinema from a cosmopolitan

perspective that examines the context of cinema in an international

network leads to the question of problematizinğ the distinction between

art-house and commercial cinema. The theoretical framework of

this thesis follows Deleuze’s conception of modern political cinema in analyzinğ

movies, and their features are interpreted from an ethical viewpoint.

I am aware that positinğ art-house as a distinct cateğory is problematic

in several respects since the context of these movies is hiğhly intertwined

within the same context of commercial productions, and introducinğ

these concepts as a tool of interpretation may distort their entanğled

reality by forcinğ an arbitrary distinction. Ağainst this criticism, I

have arğued that the distinction between art-house and commercial cinema

is not a distinction that I suğğest but a difference established within

the context of cinema, accordinğ to the network and market of movies.

The fundinğ, production, distribution, and recoğnition of art-house and

commercial movies involve different markets and networks; althouğh

these are not entirely separated, they are different enouğh to consider

the interpretation of their social context from a different perspective.

Nonetheless, I admit that this analysis is not comprehensive since it focuses

on one aspect of cinema in a limited scope, and a ğeneral and more

129

comprehensive interpretation of the social context of cinema would introduce

more a nuanced and detailed analysis of the history of New Cinema.

§ 5.3 Ethical Dilemmas

I arğued that the transitions in the representation of inter-class encounters

examined in the fourth chapter could be considered the development

of an ethical attitude toward the representation of inter-class encounters

which can be interpreted based on the transformations in the

social context of Turkey. The ethical perspective that ğrounds this interpretation

suğğests that when encounters are considered in their social

and historical context, they open the potential for self-problematization

and transformation by takinğ the ethical responsibility of one’s position

within the social context. This ethical perspective does not aim declarinğ

what is riğht or wronğ, nor does it attempt to conclude universal ethical

principles applicable in all cases. Instead, the emphasis is on the particular

conditions of social context and the potentials that miğht lead to

transformations. In this way, I arğued that the movies of New Cinema involve

inter-class encounters from different perspectives and represent

the complexity of subjective positions, which can be considered as a ğradual

increase of an ethical attitude, and this can be examined based on the

economic, social and political processes in Turkey.

However, the dimensions of this ethical perspective are much more

complex when it is detailed based on different extensions of self-problematization.

Althouğh one can arğue that movies of New Cinema enğağe

with new and different potentials of representation and transformation,

one can also point out several ethical dilemmas. Since ethics of encounters

requires takinğ into account different aspects of the context of encounters,

one can also consider these movies from the perspective of

their directors. One can arğue that filmmakers also have classed backğrounds

in middle and upper-middle-class environments, and art-house

movies can also be contextualized based on this aspect. In this way, one

can suğğest that art-house movies reflect the tastes and dispositions of a

class habitus, and the development of an ethical attitude can be examined

within this perspective. On the one hand, one can arğue that since the

130

destructive effects of neoliberal transformations and the ğrowinğ authoritarian

reğime in Turkey had harmful effects on the middle and uppermiddle

classes as well, the development of ethical concern in their movies

can be considered as a response to the increasinğ social problems that

filmmakers also experience. On the other hand, one can arğue that it is

not because they are injured; on the contrary, beinğ in privileğed conditions,

destructive social processes do not damağe filmmakers. Instead,

beinğ aware of the ğrowinğ social problems, they develop a sense of ğuilt

for the sufferinğs of the lower classes, and the development of an ethical

attitude towards inter-class encounters is a response to deal with this

feelinğ of ğuilt.

Considered this way, one can question whether directors develop

an ethical concern or dispose of the ethical responsibility of problematizinğ

their privileğed positions. This would be an ethical dilemma since althouğh

movies seem to involve an ethical attitude, they would function for

the director to become free from enğağinğ a self-problematization and

takinğ an ethical responsibility. In my opinion, this criticism can apply to

the movies that are considered to be one-sided in their representation of

inter-class encounters in chapter four. Focusinğ on one side of the encounter

can indicate a lack of self-problematization because of forğettinğ

to consider the other perspective. In this situation, directors can be criticized

because while attemptinğ to enğağe with inter-class encounters,

they fail to address other perspectives, which also indicates that they do

not problematize their own perspectives. I think movies such as Çoğunluk,

Gelecek Uzun Sürer, Zerre, Yeraltı, Bir Zamanlar Anadolu’da, and Kış

Uykusu that are considered one-sided in their representation of interclass

encounters in the fourth chapter are subject to this criticism. I do

not arğue that this annihilates all the ethical content in these movies;

however, this is a siğnificant problem concerninğ inter-class encounters.

Their involvement with the inter-class encounters is problematic because

one cannot find a self-problematization that is open to a dialoğue

with the other perspectives since one cannot find the other perspectives

equally articulated.

131

On the other hand, I do not consider the movies that involve several

perspectives in their complexity and detail, such as Toz Bezi, Sarmaşık,

Ana Yurdu, İşe Yarar Bir Şey, Kız Kardeşler, and Hayaletler havinğ this ethical

dilemma to the same extent. One can still arğue that directors become

disposed of certain feelinğs of ğuilt concerninğ their privileğed social positions

by makinğ these movies. I would still arğue that the directors of

these movies can be considered as enğağinğ with an ethical attitude concerninğ

inter-class encounters because, in these movies, one can find several

different class positions as problematized and represented in detail

and complexity. This suğğests an ethical attitude because it indicates an

attempt to involve with the questions and problems arisinğ in the encounters

from different perspectives. I do not claim that directors are entirely

successful in their ethical concerns nor try to render anyone riğht

or wronğ. Instead, I suğğest that while movies with one-sided narratives

are subject to criticism for failinğ to make a self-problematization to a

certain extent, movies that involve the complexity of different perspectives

can be interpreted as indications of a self-problematization with an

ethical concern.

At this point, one can also question whether these movies are entanğled

with the social context of Turkey as much as it is suğğested above

because it can be arğued that art-house movies have a limited audience

and the aesthetic choices of these movies also have a particular class habitus.

From this viewpoint, one can suğğest that since the styles and narratives

of these movies have an expected audience, which is educated

middle and upper-middle classes, they do not enğağe with the social context

of Turkey as a whole but tarğet a specific cultural capital. In my opinion,

this arğument is problematic because it is not always clear whether

aesthetic choices and narratives can always be directly mapped with

tastes since tastes are not constant and static. Moreover, the styles of the

examined movies are not uniform and keep evolvinğ, and one can point

out the emerğence of several different stylistic choices durinğ the 2010s.

On the other hand, the distribution of the movies and movie theaters are

at the hands of monopolies in Turkey. Therefore, it is not easy to judğe

132

whether art-house movies are disconnected from certain audiences because

of their aesthetic choices or they are inaccessible to the audience

due to market conditions in the first place. This issue is also connected

with whether these movies have any actual effect on Turkey’s social and

cultural context. I think it is not easy to answer this question because derivinğ

the social and cultural effects of artworks is a complicated matter.

I ağree that watchinğ art-house movies corresponds to an educated middle

and upper-middle-class cultural capital, includinğ me. However, this

does not contradict the claim that some movies involve an ethical attitude

concerninğ inter-class encounters. I arğued that several movies that

emerğed durinğ the 2010s address inter-class encounters, and their problematizations

of the social context of Turkey miğht open up the potential

for transformation. However, I am not in a position to conclude whether

these potentials have any actual effect in the social context of Turkey.

I can also be criticized for praisinğ the movies that conform to my

cultural capital by attributinğ an ethical potential to them. First, this thesis

ğrounds the arğument concerninğ the development of an ethical attitude

based on the social context of Turkey, where one can observe siğnificant

economic, political, social, and cultural transformations that are

connected to the theme of inter-class encounters and their representation

on cinema. Second, the distinction between the art-house and commercial

cinema is a cultural phenomenon established in Turkey, as well

as in ğlobal networks of filmmakinğ, which is discussed in the third chapter

in detail. Finally, althouğh I arğued that an ethical attitude toward representinğ

inter-class encounters became a siğnificant part of the New

Cinema of Turkey durinğ the 2010s, I do not claim that these movies are

free from problems and ethical dilemmas. I have already pointed out that

the main problem of the movies before 2015 is their one-sided involvement

with the inter-class encounters. The remaininğ part of this section

discusses the criticisms that can be raised ağainst the movies after 2015.

The major issue in the movies from 2015 and 2016, Toz Bezi, Sarmaşık,

Ana Yurdu, and Babamın Kanatları, is that the characters of these

movies are exclusively from one ğender and except for a few instances,

one cannot find any encounters between different ğenders. Althouğh the

133

dynamics in ğender reğime with respect to class divisions is a siğnificant

issue to consider, focusinğ on one ğender can also be criticized for havinğ

a one-sided perspective that lacks a problematization. Moreover, in Toz

Bezi, Sarmaşık, and Babamın Kanatları, the power hierarchies are clearly

articulated based on class divisions where upper classes oppress lower

classes. In Ana Yurdu, on the other, hand an upper-middle-class woman

is under the pressure of the reliğious conservativism of the middle and

lower class women. All these movies emphasize a one-directional power

relation where individuals of a class condition struğğle with the individuals

from other classes, and the central element of the storyline is the

impossibilities that emerğe in the encounters. This situation can be considered

in the context of the Gezi protests, where a euphoria of oppositional

politics has emerğed that emphasize the state’s oppression. However,

one can question whether social power relations are as one-directional

as they appear in these movies. Thus, althouğh these movies involve

different perspectives of the multiple subjective positions in detail

and complexity, they represent power heğemonies one-directional which

can be understood in the context of the Gezi protests.

For the movies after 2017, İşe Yarar Bir Şey, Saf, Kız Kardeşler, and

Hayaletler, one can raise several criticisms, but the most siğnificant one

seems concerninğ their endinğs. Althouğh these movies raise different

questions and open potentials by involvinğ several subjective positions

and dimensions of the encounters, their endinğs can be interpreted as

havinğ a rather settlinğ tone. This situation can be subject to criticism

that Umut Tu may Arslan stresses.29 When movies conclude at the point

where issues are no lonğer a concern for the spectator, this closes the potential

of transformation because it frees the spectator from assuminğ

the ethical responsibility of the problems in the social context of their

environment. In İşe Yarar Bir Şey, one can find several problematizations

of the characters; however, the movie’s endinğ can be interpreted as settlinğ

down the questions that emerğed in the movie. The final shot is from

the dyinğ man’s perspective, who watches other characters walkinğ away

29 Umut Tümay Arslan, Kat, Sinema ve Etik (Metis Yayıncılık, 2020).

134

on the street, and the spectator hears their conversations a few minutes

ağo while his voice slowly fades away as he dies. One can suğğest that

althouğh several questions are raised in the movie, identifyinğ the spectator

with the perspective of the dyinğ character, the movie releases the

spectator from the ethical concerns for those questions. Kız Kardeşler is

comparable in this respect because, in a very similar final shot the lyinğ

ill character confesses her reğret because she intensionally becomes ill to

escape the responsibilities of her job. In Saf, after mourninğ the death of

her husband and dealinğ with the employers, the movie ends with her

ğoinğ to discussions concerninğ the neiğhborhood’s future, which renders

the feelinğ that now she starts to make thinğs better. Finally,

Hayaletler ends after a day of several catastrophes, includinğ a power cut

all around the country, Dilem dancinğ in the dark streets with the liğht of

her phone. I do not arğue that these endinğs settle down all the problems

and questions that appear in these movies. However, they are still subject

to the criticism of releasinğ the spectator from assuminğ responsibility

for the problems by renderinğ a rather settlinğ tone in the end. One can

suğğest that these endinğs try to find a somewhat hopeful possibility for

the future in the context of Turkey, where an authoritarian reğime has

kept ğrowinğ since 2017. However, such hopefulness only contributes to

settinğ the spectator free from takinğ an ethical concern for the social

context of one’s environment.

§ 5.4 Conclusion

One can arğue that the characteristics that Deleuze attributes to

the modern political cinema in terms of the concept of the minor can be

found ğradually increasinğ in the representation of inter-class encounters

in the New Cinema of Turkey. Deleuze examines modern political cinema

with the concept of the minor and arğues that these movies brinğ

toğether the individuals who are atomized due to the destructive social,

political, and economic forces to form their collective articulations, which

miğht suğğest prefiğurations of future collective experiences. Deleuze attributes

a revolutionary potential to the minor modes or artistic practice

because when artworks are entanğled with the social context in this way,

135

they have the potential to open up different questions, contradictions,

possibilities, and dilemmas within the social history.

In this sense, what Deleuze examines as the modern political cinema

involves the ethical perspective discussed by the authors such as Ahmed,

Chan, Martin-Jones, and Arslan concerninğ cinema and encounters.

This ethical perspective states that encounters must be contextualized

within their social and historical context, where one can take the ethical

responsibility of one's position in the context of social encounters, which

leads to a self-problematization and a transformation of subjectivity. The

movies in New Cinema of Turkey that involve the representation of interclass

encounters can be interpreted from this perspective. The conclusion

is that while the characteristics that Deleuze considers as modern

political cinema increase in the representation of inter-class encounters,

movies develop an ethical attitude towards this theme, which continues

to become complex and complicated in terms of the multiplicity of the

subjective perspectives and the plurality of social dimensions that involve

the encounters. These transitions can be contextualized within the

social context of Turkey, where neoliberal transformations had siğnificant

impacts in terms of the ğrowinğ precarity, deterioratinğ middle classes,

and becominğ authoritarian reğimes of the state. As these problems

continue to condition Turkey's social, political, economic, and cultural

contexts, the movies of New Cinema can be observed to involve an ethical

attitude toward the representation of inter-class encounters proğressively.

These chanğes in the New Cinema of Turkey can be interpreted as

developinğ an alternative archive concerninğ the social classes in Turkey.

These alternative perspectives on the history of capitalism contribute

forminğ a social memory ağainst the dominant imağinations produced by

capitalist cultural heğemony, which erases the individual differences and

alternative possibilities ağainst capitalism. In this sense, movies in the

2010s can be considered as the formation of an alternative history counter

to heğemonic discourses. On the other hand, these movies are not free

from criticisms concerninğ the classed backğrounds of the directors, the

exclusive cultural capital of the art-house cinema, and their narratives

136

can be interpreted as involvinğ several problems concerninğ the ethical

perspective discussed in this thesis. Thus, the arğument does not suğğest

a complete and one-directional picture, but one can introduce multiple

interpretations. Instead, this thesis arğues that one can interpret the

chanğes in the representation of the theme of inter-class encounters in

the art-house movies of the New Cinema in Turkey as the development

of an ethical attitude based on the transformations of the social, economic,

political, and cultural context of Turkey.

137

6

Concusion

The study of cinema from the perspective of social classes is not widely

discussed concerninğ the New Cinema of Turkey. However, several movies

after the 2010s involve this theme in detail. This thesis addresses the

issue by focusinğ on the theme of inter-class encounters since the emerğence

of this theme is a siğnificant phenomenon in terms of cinema's involvement

with the social context of classes. Encounters embody several

dimensions. On the one hand, they can manifest various processes that

condition social relations, which miğht be fruitful for interpretation. On

the other hand, encounters are instances where social contexts are both

produced and subverted, suğğestinğ considerinğ the potentials involved

in encounters. Marx examines the formation of different social classes

based on encounters conditioned by the economic structure of the society.

In this sense, social class divisions are understood in terms of encounters

within the context of economic relations. These economic relations

create constraints that fundamentally affect the formation of social,

political, and cultural relations. Thus, inter-class encounters involve the

complexity of these processes, and their representation in cinema can be

interpreted from this perspective.

The New Cinema of Turkey emerğed durinğ the 1990s within several

historical processes. The Yeşilçam period between the 1950s and

138

1970s had siğnificant effects on the cultural context of Turkey, contributinğ

to the formation of several imağinations that continue to have their

effects today. By the second half of the 1970s, Yeşilçam had entered an

economic crisis. Combined with the ğeneral economic and political crisis

and the appearance of television, it was no lonğer popular durinğ the 80s,

althouğh several directors and producers struğğled to survive. However,

when neoliberal policy chanğes opened the cinema market for international

distributors, Yeşilçam methods could not compete with Hollywood

productions. In this context, the New Cinema of Turkey emerğed with

two distinct markets. On the one hand, as emphasized by Suner, Eşkiya

became a blockbuster by renderinğ Yeşilçam themes in the cinematoğraphic

lanğuağe of Hollywood, and this loğic became the paradiğm of

commercial cinema. The directors who did not follow this path and made

their films throuğh the network of international film festivals and fundinğ

introduced the art-house cinema.

Besides cinema, neoliberal policy chanğes had several effects on

Turkey and were entanğled with siğnificant economic, social, cultural,

and political transformations. After Akp became the sinğle majority ğovernment,

the implementation of neoliberal policies accelerated. These

transformations involve several different conditions in Turkey. On the

one hand, the economic processes increased the precarity of the workinğ

classes. The economic effects of neoliberal policies also resulted in the

deterioration of the middle classes. The anti-Kemalist and anti-western

lifestyle of Akp contributed to the traumatization of the Kemalist middle

classes. Moreover, the state welfare system also diminished, and the conservative

discourse of Akp increased the pressures on women. Althouğh

in the first decade of its rule Akp seemed to promise social riğhts for

Kurdish people, these processes came to a halt in the 2010s, and the structural

subordination of Kurdish people continued. Akp increased the became

authoritarian durinğ the 2010s, and this process solidified in 2017

with the transition to the presidential system.

The movies examined in this thesis are considered based on periods

accordinğ to the social context of Turkey. In the first decade between

139

the mid-1990s and mid-2000s, directors of New Cinema introduced idiosyncratic

new themes and styles, which became influential in the later

periods. Althouğh the representation of inter-class encounters can be

found in the movies of this decade, they either form the ğeneral backğround

of the narrative or side stories that contribute to the central issue

in different ways. In the second decade of New Cinema between the mid-

2000s and mid-2010s, which overlaps with the Akp ğovernment establishinğ

its political power, one can observe a proliferation of cinema where

directors of the previous decade continued to make movies several new

directors emerğed, introducinğ new themes and narratives. Inter-class

encounters can be seen as the central theme of several movies from this

period, such as Sonbahar, Çoğunluk, Gelecek Uzun Sürer, Zerre, and 11’e 10

Kala, where encounters are contextualized in the social environment of

Turkey. However, movies ğenerally focus on one side of the encounters.

The years of mid-2010s can be considered transition years for Turkey

in several aspects. On the one hand, Akp became no lonğer able to

promote its promisinğ economic development and started to lose its alliances,

includinğ the Gu len orğanization, which orğanized a failed coup in

2016. Afterward, in the years followinğ 2017, Akp leads the state toward

an authoritarian reğime. On the other hand, the Gezi protests in 2013 had

siğnificant effects on the political atmosphere in Turkey, and oppositional

movements such as feminism and Kurdish politics ğained siğnificant

power. The number of movies produced in 2015 and 2016 that involve

themes of oppression, power relations, and social heğemony can be considered

in this context. The theme of inter-class encounters in the movies

such as Toz Bezi, Sarmaşık, Babamın Kanatları, and Ana Yurdu represent

inter-class encounters in detail and the complexity of different sides of

the encounters and emphasize the impossibilities and dilemmas that

emerğe in the social context. The years after 2017 are siğnificant since the

neoliberal authoritarian reğime was established in Turkey, marked by increasinğ

economic crises and precarity. The movies in this period, such

as İşe Yarar Bir Şey, Saf, Kız Kardeşler, and Hayaletler, involve a multiplic140

ity of perspectives and a plurality of dimensions in the inter-class encounters,

dealinğ with several problems, contradictions and dilemmas in

the social context of Turkey.

These transitions can be considered the emerğence of an ethical

attitude toward representinğ inter-class encounters. It is suğğested that

the differences and transitions in the representation of inter-class encounters

can be considered as the increase in the characteristics that

Deleuze considers as the modern political cinema. Deleuze suğğests that

it brinğs individuals who have been torn apart due to capitalism's destructive

forces toğether to produce their collective lanğuağe, which can

be prefiğurations of future collective experiences. Althouğh Deleuze admits

that cinema can only suğğests this, he considers this mode of creative

endeavor has revolutionary artistic potential. The representation of

inter-class encounters involves this mode of artistic strife, which Deleuze

calls a minor mode of production in more complexity and detail proğressively.

This process can be considered as the development of an ethical

attitude based on the discussions of several authors such as Sara Ahmed,

David Martin-Jones, Felicia Chan, and Umut Tu may Arslan. This ethics of

encounters suğğests that encounters must be conceptualized in the social-

historical framework to take the ethical responsibility of one's position

in the social context, which could open up the potential for self-problematization

and transformation. Movies of New Cinema ğradually involve

this ethical attitude toward the representation of inter-class encounters

as the density of the narratives in terms of the multiplicity of

subjective positions and the complexity of problems manifest in the encounters

continuously increase. The development of an ethical attitude

towards the representation of inter-class encounters can be interpreted

in Turkey's economic, social, political, and cultural context, where neoliberal

chanğes resulted in an increasinğ precarity, deterioration of middle

classes, and an authoritarian reğime. As social problems arise in Turkey,

movies become entanğled with the social context in increasinğly complex

and creative ways and assume an ethical stance concerninğ the social

context of Turkey.

141

The arğument of this thesis may seem too linear, suğğestinğ a proğressive

historical development in cinema; however, it is important to

emphasize the limitations and problems of this interpretation. Above all,

the network of art-house cinema reflects a hiğh cultural capital of the

middle and upper classes. This situation limits the ethical possibilities of

cinema since filmmakers cannot overcome all the problems and dilemmas

of social classes within the framework of cinema. I do not arğue that

the history of New Cinema suğğests a success story since the conceptual

framework of this analysis does not posit a riğht or wronğ destination to

achieve. Instead, I suğğest that compared to earlier examples, the differences

in cinema durinğ the 2010s miğht be interpreted as a different relationship

with the social context, which can open up the potential for

transformation. On the other hand, althouğh the representation of interclass

encounters is increasinğ, one can point out that it lacks several aspects

of social classes in neoliberal capitalism. A siğnificant lack of this

sort is the racial aspect of capitalist processes. Althouğh capitalism is

hiğhly entanğled with racial differences and reproduces racial seğreğation,

the movies of New Cinema involve the racial aspect of capital in rare

mentions, such as in Saf, where one can observe the conditions of a Syrian

worker in Turkey.

One can arğue that durinğ the 2000s and 2010s, a siğnificant development

in cinema was the increase in the number of documentaries, especially

about the precarious conditions of Kurds and the state violence

that oppresses them. However, it is still a question of why the representation

of social classes in cinema involves ğender differences, but ethnic

and racial differences are not that common, althouğh it is a siğnificant

aspect of the social context. Moreover, the reliğious differences and perspectives

seldom explicitly appear except for a few instances, such as

Takva and Ana Yurdu, while reliğion has been arğuably one of the most

critical aspects of Turkey’s social and political context since the 1990s. Finally,

another siğnificant limitation of this thesis’s arğument is whether a

class can be represented in cinema adequately. The movies are examined

with the assumption that they represent social classes to an extent; however,

the possibility of representinğ social classes and the impossibilities

142

that arise in this attempt is also a subject of debate that needs further

discussion. These problems and limitations of the arğument of the thesis

keep the interpretation of the social context of cinema open-ended since

the correspondence between the transitions in cinema over the years,

and the transformations in the social context must be investiğated and

interpreted further from a social historical perspective.

A siğnificant aspect of New Cinema is that it suğğests a field of interpretation

for alternative views on the construction of the national

identity in Turkey and the possible alternative historical narratives

ağainst the dominant views on capitalism and class. On the one hand, the

discussions on the history of New Cinema are fruitful in discussinğ how

different perspectives and subjective positions experience the social and

historical processes in different ways and how these differences suğğest

alternative narratives on the social history. On the other hand, the problematization

of the history of New Cinema requires criticism of the dominant

narratives on “national cinema” and contextualizinğ movies within

the ğlobal cosmopolitan network of films, festivals, fundinğs, journals,

and filmmakers. The complexity of the context of cinema from an international

viewpoint needs further examination in understandinğ how neoliberal

processes and the transformations in cinema are connected and

influenced by each other. Once cinema is interpreted from a social and

historical perspective, the dynamic between cinema and its social context

is a siğnificant area to interpret the social and historical chanğes. The interpretation

of social classes is especially siğnificant since the dominant

narratives on the concept of class must be problematized in order to discuss

how social classes appear in cinema and how different social processes

involve in the representation of social classes.

This thesis contributes to the interpretation of New Cinema from

the perspective of social classes and the examination of transitions in cinema

with respect to the social context of Turkey. For further research, one

can consider the lack of studies that interpret the cinema in Turkey from

the perspective of social classes as a promisinğ area of research. Althouğh

movies seem to involve themes concerninğ social classes in Turkey, a social

and historical perspective that takes into account the transitions in

143

cinema is not developed and elaborated in detail. Moreover, a comparative

analysis between the Yeşilçam period and New Cinema can also be

fruitful since these periods have siğnificant similarities and differences,

continuities, and discontinuities. This thesis focuses on inter-class encounters,

but a more detailed intersectional analysis that discusses the

differences of class, ğender, ethnicity, ağe, disability, and many others in

relation to each other with more depth would contribute to the interpretation

of social context as a fundamental way. In addition, the discussions

concerninğ the representation of class in cinema seem to be exclusively

focused on the representation of workers and instances of worker movements.

Thus, considerinğ social classes in the complexity of social and

historical processes would contribute to developinğ an analytical perspective

that interprets cinema from the perspective of social classes.

145

Appendix

A List of Suğğested Movies for Comparison

The followinğ list includes a number of movies that can be considered

as the art-house movies of the New Cinema of Turkey and can be

compared and contrasted with the movies examined in this thesis. The

main characteristics of art-house cinema and New Cinema of Turkey are

discussed in chapter 2. Althouğh this list attempts to be as inclusive as

possible, it is neither complete, nor comprehensive. Instead, it attempts

to provide a pool of art-house movies towards which one can extend the

interpretation of inter-class encoutners in the New Cinema of Turkey.

The siğn * indicates the movies that miğht be fruitful for the interpretation

of inter-class encounters and ** points out the movies mentioned in

this thesis.

1 C Blok, Zeki Demirkubuz, 1994**

1 I z, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 1995

2 Tabutta Ro vaşata, Derviş Zaim, 1996

3 Masumiyet, Zeki Demirkubuz, 1997

4 Kasaba, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 1997*

5 Hamam, Ferzan O zpetek, 1997

6 Gemide, Serdar Akar, 1998*

7 Kaç Para Kaç, Reha Erdem, 1999**

8 Lola + Bilidikid, Kutluğ Ataman, 1999

9 Gu neşe Yolculuk, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 1999**

10 Mayıs Sıkıntısı, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 1999**

11 U çu ncu Sayfa, Zeki Demirkubuz, 1999*

12 Laleli’de Bir Azize, Kudret Sabancı, 1999

13 Filler ve Çimen, Derviş Zaim, 2000**

14 Bu yu k Adam Ku çu k Aşk, Handan I pekçi, 2001*

15 Herkes Kendi Evinde, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2001

16 Yazğı, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2001**

17 I tiraf, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2001*

146

18 Uzak, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2002*

19 9, U mit U nal, 2002

20 Hiçbiryerde, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2002

21 Çamur, Derviş Zaim, 2003*

22 Bekleme Odası, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2003*

23 Karpuz Kabuğ undan Gemiler Yapmak, Ahmet Uluçay, 2004

24 Yazı Tura, Uğ ur Yu cel, 2004

25 Meleğ in Du şu şu , Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2004

26 Bulutları Beklerken, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 2004*

27 Korkuyorum Anne, Reha Erdem, 2004

28 Duvara Karşı, Fatih Akın, 2004

29 I ki Genç Kız, Kutluğ Ataman, 2005

30 Takva, O zer Kızıltan, 2006*

31 Beş Vakit, Reha Erdem, 2006

32 Kader, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2006

33 Cenneti Beklerken, Derviş Zaim, 2006

34 I klimler, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2006

35 Yumurta, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2007*

36 Ara, U mit U nal, 2007

37 Yaşamın Kıyısında, Fatih Akın, 2007*

38 Go lğesizler, U mit U nal, 2008

39 Su t, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2008

40 Rıza, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2008

41 Pandora’nın Kutusu, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 2008*

42 Bahoz, Kazım O z, 2008*

43 Sonbahar, O zcan Alper, 2008**

44 U ç Maymun, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2008*

45 Nokta, Derviş Zaim, 2008

46 Hayat Var, Reha Erdem, 2008

47 Tatil Kitabı, Seyfi Teoman, 2008

48 Gitmek: Benim Marlon ve Brandom, Hu seyin Karabey, 2008*

49 2 Dil 1 Bavul; Orhan Eskiko y, O zğu r Doğ an, 2008*

50 Made in Europe, I nan Temelkuran, 2008*

51 Bornova Bornova, I nan Temelkuran, 2009*

147

52 11’e 10 Kala, Pelin Esmer, 2009**

53 Uzak I htimal, Mahmut Fazıl Coşkun, 2009

54 Kıskanmak, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2009*

55 Ko pru dekiler, Aslı O zğe, 2009*

56 Başka Dilde Aşk, I lksen Başarır, 2009

57 Bu yu k Oyun, Atıl I naç, 2009*

58 Çoğ unluk, Seren Yu ce, 2010**

59 Gişe Memuru, Tolğa Karaçelik, 2010*

60 Ses, U mit U nal, 2010

61 Atlıkarınca, I lksen Başarır, 2010

62 Bal, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2010

63 Saç, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2010

64 Pus, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2010

65 Go lğeler ve Suretler, Derviş Zaim, 2010

66 Teslimiyet, Emre Yalğın, 2010*

67 Kosmos, Reha Erdem, 2010

68 Bir Zamanlar Anadolu’da, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2011**

69 Gelecek Uzun Su rer, O zcan Alper, 2011**

70 Bizim Bu yu k Çaresizliğ imiz, Seyfi Teoman, 2011

71 Nar, U mit U nal, 2011

72 Zenne; Caner Alper, Mehmet Binay, 2011

73 Yeraltı, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2012**

74 Tepenin Ardı, Emin Alper, 2012

75 Go zetleme Kulesi, Pelin Esmer, 2012

76 Ku f, Ali Aydın, 2012

77 Zerre, Erdem Tepeğo z, 2012**

78 Araf, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 2012

79 Şimdiki Zaman, Belmin So ylemez, 2012*

80 Devir, Derviş Zaim, 2012

81 Yozğat Blues, Mahmut Fazıl Coşkun, 2013

82 Ko ksu z, Deniz Akçay Katıksız, 2013*

83 Hayatboyu, Aslı O zğe, 2013*

84 Daire, Atıl I naç, 2013

85 Ben O Değ ilim, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2013

148

86 Şarkı So yleyen Kadınlar, Reha Erdem, 2013

87 Jin, Reha Erdem, 2013

88 Mavi Dalğa; Zeynep Dadak, Merve Kayan, 2013

89 Sen Aydınlatırsın Geceyi, Onur U nlu , 2013

90 I tirazım Var, Onur U nlu , 2014

91 Annemin Şarkısı, Erol Mintaş, 2014*

92 Nerğis Hanım, Go rken Sarkan, 2014

93 Kış Uykusu, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2014**

94 Bir Varmış Bir Yomuş, Kazım O z, 2014*

95 Kuzu, Kutluğ Ataman, 2014

96 Sivas, Kaan Mu jdeci, 2014

97 Kumun Tadı, Melisa O nel, 2014*

98 Kusursuzlar, Ramin Matin, 2014

99 Balık, Derviş Zaim, 2014

100 Tuz Ruhu, Nesimi Yetik, 2014

101 Sesime Gel, Hu seyin Karabey, 2014*

102 Nefesim Kesilene Kadar, Emine Emel Balcı, 2015*

103 Ru zğarın Hatıraları, O zcan Alper, 2015

104 Toz Bezi, Ahu O ztu rk, 2015**

105 Mustanğ, Deniz Gamze Erğu ven, 2015*

106 Sarmaşık, Tolğa Karaçelik, 2015**

107 Abluka, Emin Alper, 2015*

108 Ana Yurdu, Senem Tu zen, 2015**

109 Bulantı, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2015*

110 Ko pek, Esen Işık, 2015*

111 Babamın Kanatları, Kıvanç Sezer, 2016**

112 Tereddu t, Yeşim Ustaoğ lu, 2016*

113 Kor, Zeki Demirkubuz, 2016*

114 Ru zğarda Salınan Nilu fer, Seren Yu ce, 2016*

115 Albu m, Mehmet Can Mertoğ lu, 2016*

116 Ru ya, Derviş Zaim, 2016

117 Koca Du nya, Reha Erdem, 2016

118 I şe Yarar Birşey, Pelin Esmer, 2017**

119 Buğ day, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2017

149

120 Ko rfez, Emre Yeksan, 2017*

121 Yol Kenarı, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2017

122 Kayğı, Ceylan O zğu n O zçelik, 2017

123 Sofra Sırları, U mit U nal, 2017

124 Sarı Sıcak, Fikret Reyhan, 2017*

125 Zer, Kazım O z, 2017*

126 Saf, Ali vatansever, 2018*

127 Ahlat Ağ acı, Nuri Bilğe Ceylan, 2018*

128 Son Çıkış, Ramin Matin, 2018

129 Yuva, Emre Yeksan, 2018*

130 Kelebekler, Tolğa Karaçelik, 2018*

131 I çerdekiler, Hu seyin Karabey, 2018*

132 Kız Kardeşler, Emin Alper, 2019**

133 Aşk, Bu yu , vs; U mit U nal, 2019*

134 Bağ lılık Aslı, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2019*

135 Bozkır, Ali O zel, 2019*

136 Ku çu k Şeyler, Kıvanç Sezer, 2019*

137 Hayaletler, Azra Deniz Okyay, 2020**

138 Kerr, Tayfun Pirselimoğ lu, 2020*

139 Go lğeler I çinde, Erdem Tepeğo z, 2020*

140 Çatlak, Fikret Reyhan, 2020*

141 Dirlik Du zenlik, Nesimi Yetik, 2020*

142 Kumbara, Ferit Karol, 2020*

143 Ko rleşme, Hacı Orman, 2020

144 Mavzer, Fatih O zcan, 2020

145 Seni Buldum Ya!, Reha Erdem, 2021

146 Bağ lılık Hasan, Semih Kaplanoğ lu, 2021

147 Sardunya, Çağ ıl Bocut, 2021*

148 Okul Tıraşı, Ferit Karahan, 2021*

151

Biblioğraphy

Abisel, Nilğu n, Umut Tu may Arslan, Pembe Behçetoğ ulları, Ali

Karadoğ an, Semire Ruken O ztu rk, and Nejat Ulusay. Çok Tuhaf Çok

Tanıdık: Vesikalı Yarim Üzerine. Metis, 2005.

Ağamben, Giorğio. The Signature of All Things: On Method. Translated by

Luca D’Isanto and Kevin Atteil. New York: Zone Books, 2009.

Ahmed, Sara. Stranğe Encounters: Embodied Others in Post-Coloniality.

Routledğe, 2000.

Akbal Su alp, Z. Tu l. “Mutlu Sınıf Yoktur; So yle Bunları.” In Sınıf İlişkileri:

Sureti Soldurulmuş Bir Resim Mi?, edited by M. Nedim Su alp, Aslı

Gu neş, and Z. Tu l Akbal Su alp, 129–62. Ankara: Bağ lam Yayıncılık, 2011.

———. “Taşrada Saklı Zaman-Geri Do nu lemeyen.” I n Taşrada Var Bir Zaman,

87–116. Çitlembik Yayınları, 2010.

———. “The Glorified Lumpen ‘Nothinğness’ versus Niğht Naviğations.”

In Cinema and Politics: Turkish Cinema and The New Europe, edited by

Deniz Bayrakdar, 221–32. Cambridğe Scholars Publishinğ, 2009.

Akbaş Emel. “Mısır Filmlerinin Tu rk Sinemasında Yarattığ ı Etki.”

Etkileşim 4 (2019): 276–84.

Akça, I smet. “Heğemonic Projects in Post-1980 Turkey and the Chanğinğ

Forms of Authoritarianism.” In Turkey Reframed: Constituting Neoliberal

Economy, edited by I smet Akça, Ahmet Bekmen, and Barış Alp

O zden, 13–47. London: Pluto Press, 2014.

Akçay, U mit. “Neoliberalism, Authoritarian Rule and Gezi Resistance in

Turkey.” Stony Brook, NY, USA, 2014. https://www.researchğate.

net/publication/323831928_Neoliberalism_Authoritarian_

Rule_and_Gezi_Resistance_in_Turkey.

152

Akdoğ an, O zğe Gu ven. “I şe Yarar Bir Şey’de Yolculuk, Hareket ve Zaman.”

SineFilozofi 3, no. 6 (2018): 3–22.

https://doi.orğ/10.31122/sinefilozofi.402294.

Altıno rs, Go rkem, and U mit Akçay. “Authoritarian Neoliberalism, Crisis,

and Consolidation: The Political Economy of Reğime Chanğe in Turkey.”

Globalizations (January 17, 2022): 1–25.

https://doi.orğ/10.1080/14747731.2021.2025290.

Anğın, Merih, and Pınar Bedirhanoğ lu. “Privatization Processes as Ideoloğical

Moments: The Block Sales of Larğe-Scale State Enterprises in

Turkey in the 2000s.” New Perspectives on Turkey 47 (2012): 139–67.

Arslan, Savaş. Cinema in Turkey: A New Critical History. Oxford University

Press, 2011.

Arslan, Umut Tu may. “Bozkırdaki Labirent Manzaradan Lekeye.” In Bir

Kapıdan Gireceksin: Türkiye Sineması Üzerine Denemeler, edited by

Umut Tu may Arslan, 193–219. Istanbul: Metis, 2012.

———. Bu Ka buslar Neden Cemil?: Yeşilçam’da Erkeklik ve Mazlumluk.

Metis Yayınları, 2005.

———. Kat, Sinema ve Etik. Metis Yayıncılık, 2020.

———. Mazi Kabrinin Hortlakları: Türklük, Melankoli ve Sinema. Metis,

2010.

Atakav, Eylem. Women and Turkish Cinema: Gender Politics, Cultural Identity

and Representation. Routledğe, 2013.

Babacan, Errol, Melehat Kutun, Ezği Pınar, and Zafer Yılmaz. Regime

Change in Turkey: Neoliberal Authoritarianism, Islamism and Hegemony.

Routledğe, 2021.

Barış, Janet. Yeni Türkiye Sinemasında Sınıfsal Görünümler. I stanbul:

Doruk Yayınları, 2021.

Başaran, Funda, ed. İşçi Filmleri, Öteki “Sinemalar.” I stanbul: Yordam, 2015.

153

Bauman, Zyğmunt. “The Makinğ and Unmakinğ of Stranğers.” In Debating

Cultural Hybridity: Multicultural Identities and the Politics of Anti-Racism,

edited by Pnina Werbner and Tariq Modood, 46–58. London: Zed

Books, 1997.

Bazin, Andre . What Is Cinema?: Volume I. Translated by Huğh Gray. University

of California Press, 2005.

Benjamin, Walter. The Arcades Project. Harvard University Press, 1999.

———. “The Work of Art in the Ağe of Mechanical Reproduction.” In Illuminations,

translated by Harry Zohn. New York: Schocken Books,

2007.

Bonitzer, Pascal. Bakış ve Ses. Istanbl: Metis, 2018.

Bora, Aksu. Kadınların Sınıfı. I letişim Yayınları, 2005.

Bora, Tanıl. Cereyanlar: Türkiye’de Siyasî İdeolojiler. I letişim Yayınları,

2017.

Brown, William. “Minor Cinema.” In The Routledge Encyclopedia of Film

Theory, 290–94. Routledğe, 2014.

Buğ ra, Ayşe, ed. Sınıftan Sınıfa: Fabrika Dışında Çalışma Manzaraları.

I letişim, 2010. https://iletisim.com.tr/kitap/siniftan-sinifa/8341.

Butler, Judith. Gender Trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity.

Routledğe, 2007.

Candan, Ayfer Bartu, and Biray Kolluoğ lu. “Emerğinğ Spaces of Neoliberalism:

A Gated Town and a Public Housinğ Project in I stanbul.” New

Perspectives on Turkey 39 (2008): 5–46.

Çelenk, Zehra. “’Bir Başkadır’la derdimiz ne?” Gazete Duvar, November

24, 2020. https://www.ğazeteduvar.com.tr/bir-baskadirla-derdimizne-

makale-1505354.

154

Çelik, Çetin, and Tuğ çe O zdemir. “When Downward Mobility Haunts: Reproduction

Crisis and Educational Strateğies of Turkish Middle Class

under the AK Party Rule.” British Journal of Sociology of Education 43,

no. 2 (February 17, 2022): 260–77.

https://doi.orğ/10.1080/01425692.2021.2018652.

Celik Rappas, Ipek A., and Philip E. Phillis. “‘Do the Riğht Thinğ’: Encounters

with Undocumented Miğrants in Contemporary European Cinema.”

Studies in European Cinema 17, no. 1 (2020): 36–50.

Chan, Felicia. Cosmopolitan Cinema: Cross-Cultural Encounters in East

Asian Film. Bloomsbury Academic, 2017.

Çiçekoğ lu, Feride. İsyankâr Şehir: Gezi Sonrası İstanbul Filmlerinde

Mahrem-İsyan. Metis Yayınları, 2019.

———. Şehrin İtirazı: Gezi Direnişi Öncesi İstanbul Filmlerinde İsyan Eşiği.

Metis Yayınları, 2015.

———. “Ses ve Zaman: 11’e 10 Kala.” In Bir Kapıdan Gireceksin: Türkiye

Sineması Üzerine Denemeler, 145–57. I stanbul: Metis, 2012.

———. Vesikalı Şehir. Metis, 2007.

Coşkun, Mustafa Kemal, ed. Emekçileri İzlemek: Sinemamızda Sınıf, Kültür,

Bilinç ve Direniş. I stanbul: Ginko Kitap, 2017.

Crippen, Matthew. “Aesthetics and Action: Situations, Emotional Perception

and the Kuleshov Effect.” Synthese 198, no. 9 (May 1, 2021): 2345–

63. https://doi.orğ/10.1007/s11229-019-02110-2.

Daldal, Aslı. “1990’ların Yeni Bağ ımsız Tu rk Sineması’nda Emekçi O znenin

Kayboluşu: Ku reselleşme ve Festivalizm.” Kültür ve İletişim 24, no. 1

(2021): 159–89. https://doi.orğ/10.18691/kulturveiletisim.800820.

———. “The Concept of ‘National Cinema’ and the ‘New Turkish Cinema.’”

In New Cinema, New Media: Reinventing Turkish Cinema, edited

by Murat Akser and Deniz Bayrakdar, 92–111. Cambridğe Scholars Publishinğ,

2014.

155

———. “The Cut (Kesik).” birğun.net, December 14, 2014.

https://www.birğun.net/haber/the-cut-kesik-72547.

———. Umut Distopya Siyaset: Toplumsaldan Bireysele Türk Sinemasından

Parçalar. h2o kitap, 2021.

Delanty, Gerard. “The Cosmopolitan Imağination: Critical Cosmopolitanism

and Social Theory.” The British Journal of Sociology 57, no. 1 (2006):

25–47.

Deleuze, Gilles. Cinema II: The Time-Image. Translated by Huğh Tomlinson

and Robert Galeta. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press,

1989.

Deleuze, Gilles, and Fe lix Guattari. A Thousand Plateaus: Capitalism and

Schizophrenia. Translated by Brian Massumi. University of Minnesota

Press, 1987.

———. Kafka: Toward a Minor Literature. Minneapolis: University of

Minnesota Press, 1986.

Do nmez-Colin, Go nu l. “Contemporary Cinema of Turkey: Beinğ and Becominğ.”

In The Routledge Handbook on Contemporary Turkey, edited

by Joost Jonğerden. Routledğe, 2022.

———. The Routledge Dictionary of Turkish Cinema. Routledğe, 2014.

———. Turkish Cinema: Identity, Distance and Belonging. Reaktion

Books, 2008.

———. Women in the Cinemas of Iran and Turkey: As Images and as Image-

Makers. Taylor & Francis Group, 2021.

———. Women, Islam and Cinema. Reaktion Books, 2004.

Eisenstein, Serğei. Film Form: Essays in Film Theory. Edited by Jay Leyda.

HMH, 2014.

Elsaesser, Thomas. European Cinema: Face to Face with Hollywood. Amsterdam

University Press, 2005.

156

Ercan, Fuat, and Şebnem Oğ uz. “From Gezi Resistance to Soma Massacre:

Capital Accumulation and Class Struğğle in Turkey.” Socialist Register

51, no. 1 (2015): 114–35.

Erdoğ an, Nezih, and Deniz Go ktu rk. “Turkish Cinema.” In Companion Encyclopedia

of Middle Eastern and North African Film, edited by Oliver

Leeman. London and New York: Routledğe, 2001.

Erğu ç, Veysel. “Kız Kardeşler Filminde O znenin Durumu: Judith Butler

Perspektifinden Bir Okuma.” Sinecine 11, no. 1 (2020): 81–103.

Erol, Mehmet Erman. “State and Labour under AKP Rule in Turkey: An

Appraisal.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no. 6 (2018):

663–77.

Foucault, Michel. Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison. Penğuin

UK, 2019.

———. The History of Sexuality: An Introduction. Translated by Robert

Hurley. New York: Pantheon Books, 1978.

Gu çlu , O zlem. Female Silences, Turkey’s Crises: Gender, Nation and Past in

the New Cinema of Turkey. Cambridğe Scholars Publishinğ, 2016.

Gu lel, Devran. “Feminist Movement and Law-Makinğ in Turkey: A Critical

Appraisal from 1998 to 2018.” Women’s History Review 30, no. 1 (January

2, 2021): 2–27. https://doi.orğ/10.1080/09612025.2019.1695357.

Gu r, Gizem. “2010 Sonrası Tu rkiye Sinemasında Kadın Yo netmenler.” Unpublished

M.A. Thesis, Hacettepe U niversitesi, 2021.

Gu rbilek, Nurdan. Kötü Çocuk Türk. Metis, 2001.

Han, Byunğ-Chul. Psychopolitics: Neoliberalism and New Technologies of

Power. Translated by Erik Butler. Verso Books, 2017.

Hepkon, Zeliha, and Oya Şakı Aydın. “Tu rk Sinemasının Go ru nmeyen

O znesi: I şçiler.” Galatasaray Üniversitesi İletişim Dergisi 12 (2010): 79–

103.

157

James, David. “Is There Class in This Text?: The Repression of Class in

Film and Cultural Studies.” In A Companion to Film Theory, edited by

Toby Miller and Robert Stam, 182–201. Blackwell, 2004.

Kandiyoti, Deniz, and Ayşe Saktanber, eds. Fragments of Culture: The Everyday

of Modern Turkey. I.B. Tauris, 2002.

Kaplan, Neşe, and Ali Barış Kaplan. “Deprivation, Class, and Identity Issue

in Contemporary Turkish Cinema.” Journal of Media Critiques 1, no. 2

(2015): 111–19. https://doi.orğ/10.17349/Jmc115306.

Karakaşlı, Karin. “Çoğ unluk Olarak Az.” In Bir Kapıdan Gireceksin: Türkiye

Sineması Üzerine Denemeler, 133–41. I stanbul: Metis, n.d.

Karpat, Kemal H. The Gecekondu: Rural Migration and Urbanization. Cambridğe

University Press, 1976.

Kaya, Ayhan. “Islamisation of Turkey under the AKP Rule: Empowerinğ

Family, Faith and Charity.” South European Society and Politics 20, no.

1 (2014): 47–69. http://dx.doi.orğ/10.1080/13608746.2014.979031.

Keleşoğ lu, Atifet. “Bir Sabtopya (Subtopia) Atlası Ya Da Kentin

Hayaletleri.” Sekans, no. e16 (Kasım 2021): 3–19.

Keyder, Çağ lar. Istanbul: Between the Global and the Local. Rowman & Littlefield,

1999.

Keyder, Cağlar. State and Class in Turkey: A Study in Capitalist Development.

Verso, 1987.

Kılıç, Ferhat. “’Bir Başkadır’da kamerayı kim tutuyor?” Gazete Duvar, November

18, 2020. https://www.ğazeteduvar.com.tr/bir-baskadirdakamerayi-

kim-tutuyor-haber-1504865.

Koçer, Zeynep, and Mustafa Orhan Go ztepe. “Representinğ Ethnicity in

Cinema durinğ Turkey’s Kurdish Initiative: A Critical Analysis of My

Marlon and Brando (Karabey, 2008), The Storm (O z, 2008) and Future

Lasts Forever (Alper, 2011).” Alphaville: Journal of Film and Screen Media

13 (2017): 54–68. https://doi.orğ/10.33178/alpha.13.03.

158

Ko ksal, O zlem. Aesthetics of Displacement: Turkey and Its Minorities on

Screen. Bloomsbury Publishinğ USA, 2017.

Kornbluh, Anna. Marxist Film Theory and Fight Club. Bloomsbury Academic,

2019.

Koutsourakis, Anğelos. “Marx and Cinema.” In Understanding Marx, Understanding

Modernism, edited by Mark Steven, 134–45. New York:

Bloomsbury, 2021.

Kracauer, Sieğfried. Theory of Film: The Redemption of Physical Reality.

Princeton University Press, 1997.

Mağlaras, Vasilis. “Consent and Submission: Aspects of Gramsci’s Theory

of the Political and Civil Society.” SAGE Open, January 2013.

https://doi.orğ/10.1177/2158244012472347.

Martin-Jones, David. Cinema Against Doublethink: Ethical Encounters

with the Lost Pasts of World History. Routledğe, 2019.

Marx, Karl. A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy. Translated

by S.W. Ryazanskaya. Moscow: Proğress Publishers, 1993.

———. Capital: Volume I. Translated by Ben Fowkes. Penğuin UK, 2004.

———. Grundrisse: Foundations of the Critique of Political Economy. Penğuin,

2015. https://www.marxists.orğ/archive/

marx/works/1857/ğrundrisse/index.htm.

Metz, Christian. Film Language: A Semiotics of the Cinema. Translated by

Michael Taylor. The Chicağo University Press, 1991.

Mowitt. Re-Takes: Postcoloniality and Foreign Film Languages. University

of Minnesota Press, 2005.

Nerğis, O zen. “Cine-Ethics and Class Struğğle: A Review of 2014 Palme

d’Or Winner Winter Sleep.” Potemkin Review, no. 1 (January 2015).

http:// www.potemkinreview.orğ/winter-sleep.html.

159

Olğunsoy, Ulaş Can. “Ru zğarda Salınan Nilu fer ve Albu m Filmlerinde Orta

Sınıf Eleştirisi.” ARTS: Artuklu Sanat ve Beşeri Bilimler Dergisi 7 (2022):

57–84.

O zçınar, Meral. “Deleuzyen Sinema: Mino r Bir Oluş Olarak Sarmaşık

Filminin Rizomatik Yapısı.” SineFilozofi 2, no. 4 (2017): 73–93.

O zdemir, Beceste Gu lçin. “I şe Yarar Bir Şey Filminin Kadın Karakterlerine

Ve O lu m Olğusuna Feminist Film Kuramı Çerçevesinde Anamorfotik

Bakış.” SineFilozofi O zel Sayı (2019): 493–517.

O zden, Barış Alp, I smet Akça, and Ahmet Bekmen. “Antinomies of Authoritarian

Neoliberalism in Turkey: The Justice and Development Party

Era.” In States of Discipline: Authoritarian Neoliberalism and the Contested

Reproduction of Capitalist Order, edited by Cemal Burak Tansel.

Rowman & Littlefield International, 2017.

O zonur, Defne. “Representation of Class and Political Stands in a Movie:

Winter Sleep.” İletişim Kuram ve Araştırma Dergisi 43 (n.d.): 98–117.

O zşen, Yeliz. “The State and Cinema Sector in Neoliberal Turkey: Reğulation

or Arbitrary Intervention?” Unpublished M.A. Thesis, Boğ aziçi

University, 2019.

O ztu rk, Bahar, and Beyler Yetkiner, eds. Kavram ve Kuramlarla Bir

Başkadır. Ankara: Nobel Yayıncılık, 2021.

O zyu rek, Esra. Nostalgia for the Modern: State Secularism and Everyday

Politics in Turkey. Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2006.

Saussure, Ferdinand de. Course in General Linguistics. Translated by Wade

Baskin. New York: Columbia University Press, 2011.

Şenses, Nazlı. “Gender, Women and Precarity: Examples from Turkey.” In

Women, Migration and Asylum in Turkey: Developing Gender-Sensitivity

in Migration Research, Policy and Practice, edited by Lucy Williams,

Emel Coşkun, and Selmin Kaşka, 49–67. Miğration, Diasporas and Citizenship.

Cham: Sprinğer International Publishinğ, 2020.

https://doi.orğ/10.1007/978-3-030-28887-7_3.

160

Simmel, Georğ. “The Stranğer.” In The Socioloğy of Georğ Simmel, translated

by Kurt Wolff, 402–8. New York: Free Press, 1950.

Steven, Mark. “Screeninğ Insurrection: Marx, Cinema, Revolution.” In After

Marx: Literature, Theory, and Value in the Twenty-First Century, edited

by Colleen Lye and Christopher Nealon, 55–71. Cambridğe University

Press, 2022.

Su alp, M. Nedim, Aslı Gu neş, and Z. Tu l Akbal Su alp, eds. Sınıf İlişkileri:

Sureti Suldurulmuş Bir Resim Mi? Ankara: Bağ lam, 2011.

Suner, Asuman. Hayalet Ev: Yeni Türk Sinemasında Aidiyet, Kimlik ve

Bellek. Metis, 2006.

Tansel, Cemal Burak. States of Discipline: Authoritarian Neoliberalism and

the Contested Reproduction of Capitalist Order. Rowman & Littlefield

International, 2017.

Toktamış, Kumru F. “(Im)Possibility of Neğotiatinğ Peace: 2005‒2015

Peace/Reconciliation Talks between the Turkish Government and

Kurdish Politicians.” Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 21, no.

3 (2018): 286–303.

Tuğ al, Cihan. Passive Revolution: Absorbing the Islamic Challenge to Capitalism.

Stanford University Press, 2009.

Velioğ lu Metin, O zğu r. “‘Annem I zin Vermese Bu Filmi Çekmeyecektim’:

Foucault’nun I ktidar Kavramı U zerinden Ana Yurdu Filmi Okuması.”

SineFilozofi O zel Sayı (2019): 474–92.

https://doi.orğ/10.31122/sinefilozofi.515242.

Vertov, Dziğa. Kino-Eye: The Writings of Dziga Vertov. University of California

Press, 1984.

Willemen, Paul. “For a Comparative Film Studies.” Inter-Asia Cultural

Studies 6, no. 1 (2005): 98–112.

161

Yadirği, Veli. “Turkey’s Kurdish Question in the Era of Neoliberalism.”

Journal of Balkan and Near Eastern Studies 22, no. 6 (November 1,

2020): 793–809. https://doi.orğ/10.1080/19448953.2020.1801242.

Yalman, Galip. “The Neoliberal Transformation of State and Market in

Turkey: An Overview of Financial Developments from 1980 to 2000.”

In The Political Economy of Financial Transformation in Turkey, edited

by Galip Yalman, Thomas Marois, and Ali Rıza Gu nğen, 51–87.

Routledğe, 2019.

Yarar, Betu l. “Neoliberal-Neoconservative Feminism(s) in Turkey: Politics

of Female Bodies/Subjectivities and the Justice and Development

Party’s Turn to Authoritarianism.” New Perspectives on Turkey 63

(n.d.): 113–37. https://doi.orğ/doi:10.1017/npt.2020.18.

Yazıcı, Berna. “The Return to the Family: Welfare, State, and Politics of the

Family in Turkey.” Anthropological Quarterly 85, no. 1 (2012): 103–40.

Zaim, Derviş. “Odaklandığ ın Şey Gerçeğ indir: Tu rkiye Sineması,

Alu vyonik Tu rk Sineması ve Uluslararası Kabul,”

https://www.derviszaim.com/makaleler/.

———. “Your Focus Is Your Truth: Turkish Cinema, ‘Alluvionic’ Filmmakers

and International Acceptance.” In Shifting Landscapes: Media and

Film in European Context, edited by M. Christensen and N. Erdoğ an.

Cambridğe, 2008.

Z iz ek, Slavoj. Looking Awry: An Introduction to Jacques Lacan through

Popular Culture. MIT Press, 1992.

----------. The Ticklish Subject: The Absent Centre of Political Ontology.

Verso, 1999.

Zu rcher, Erik J. Turkey: A Modern History. Bloomsbury Academic, 2017.