ROMANTİKTEN POSTMODERNE BİR İNSAN OLARAK ROMAN KAHRAMANININ ÖLÜMÜ
Küçük Resim Yok
Tarih
2015
Yazarlar
Dergi Başlığı
Dergi ISSN
Cilt Başlığı
Yayıncı
Erişim Hakkı
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess
Özet
Her kuşak kendi tercümesini yapar. T.S. EliotBu çalışmada tarihsel süreç içerisinde hayatla edebiyat ilişkisi gerçeklik bağlamında değerlendirilmiş edebiyat metninde insanî duruş ve insanın varlığı problemi irdelenmeye başlanmıştır. Neredeyse insanlık tarihi ile eşzamanlı olarak ortaya çıkmış olan sanatsal etkinliklerin insanın insanla, insanın doğayla ve insanın eşyayla ilişkisinde yaşanan değişime paralel olarak yaşadığı etkileşimin sonucunda uğradığı dönüşüm tespit edilmeye çalışıldı. Sonuç olarak Tanrı merkezli dünya algısından aklın öncelendiği insan merkezli dünya algısına ve insanın merkezi konumunu kaybettiği bugünkü duruma geçiş sürecinde genelde sanat eseri özelde ise edebiyat metninin insan aleyhine gelişen yeni duruma çok kolay uyum sağladığı iddia edilmiştir. Her geçen gün insanî olanla ilişkisi zayıflayan edebiyat ve daha özelde bir edebi tür olarak roman genel edebiyat okurundan da uzaklaşmış daha elit bir okur kitleye hitap eder hale gelmiştir. Gasset'in "sanatın insansızlaştırılması" diye ifade ettiği bu durum özellikle roman türü için roman kahramanları üzerinden kolaylıkla takip edilebilecek bir süreçtir. Bir anlamda insanın itibar kaybı olarak değerlendirilebilecek bu süreç insan merkezli dünyanın insanlığı mahkûm ettiği acılarla doğrudan ilgilidir ve bu acı tecrübelerin insanın kendi türüne karşı geliştirdiği güvensizlik duygusunu körüklemekle sonuçlanmıştır. Romanın insani olandan ve dolayısıyla insandan uzaklaşmasının arka planında yatan temel gerekçe de bu acılardan, gerçek dünyanın onu sürüklediği bunalımlardan uzaklaşma duygusudur. Bir anlamda kendisine, kendi türüne yabancılaşan insana bir edebi tür olarak roman da yabancılaşmıştır. Bu yabancılaşma sürecinin sonunda bir edebi tür olarak romanın insansızlaşması sonucu beraberinde "roman öldü mü?" sorusunu gündeme getirmiştir. Geleneksel romanın insan merkezli yapısının çökmesi bu sorunun sorulmasının temel kaynağını oluşturur. Elbetteki roman ölmemiştir. Ama rahatlıkla ifade edilebilir ki bir roman kahramanı olarak insan ölmüştür. Bu ölüm ilanı bir edebi tür olarak romanı öldürmese de çok farklı bir forma sokmuştur. Bir anlamda insanı kendi yaşam alanından dışlayan roman türü hayata tuttuğu aynayı kendisine çevirmiş, kendi kendini konu edinir olmuştur. Bu değişim süreci sadece roman kahramanını değil genel anlamda sanatçı özel anlamda ise roman yazarını da değişime uğratmıştır. Bir anlamda büyük iddiaların adamı, toplumu kendi dünya algısı yönünde eğitme ve değiştirme amacındaki roman yazarı, romanda olduğu gibi kendi dünyasına dönüş biçiminde bir kaçışa yönelmiştir. (Şaylan, 2009: 112) Aslında bu durum aydınlanma düşüncesinin yazara yüklediği misyonun iflas etmesinin bir sonucudur. Bir anlamda bu sonuç, tanrı merkezli dünyadan insan merkezli dünyaya geçiş sürecinde insana yüklenen ağır sorumluğun altında kalan insanın yaşadığı travmatik bir sonuçtur. İnsana aydınlanma düşüncesi ile vadedilen mutluluk ve refah gerçekleşmemiş aksine insanlık yaşanan iki dünya savaşının neticesinde acılara mahkûm olmuştur. Vadedilen ve yaşanan arasındaki makasın açılması aydınlanma misyoneri gibi çalışan yazarların aydınlanma düşüncesi ve kendi kendileriyle yüzleşmeleri sonucunu doğurmuş bu yüzleşme süreci öncelikle hayal kırıklığı ve ardından yazarın bir fetih ve mühendislik alanı olarak gördüğü gerçek hayattan geri çekilmesi, kendine ve doğal olarak eserine dönmesiyle sonuçlanmıştır. Bütün bu süreç neticesinde yazar hem güven hem de özgüven kaybına uğramıştır. Güven kaybı okurla yazar arasındaki ilişkiyi yazar aleyhine bozmuş, bir anlamda yazarı kendi yalıtılmış dünyasında yalnızlığa mahkûm etmiştir. Neredeyse geleneksel romanın tanrı yazarı yazdıklarına muhatap bulamaz hale gelmiştir. Aslında bu süreç yazarın da aydınlanma düşünürlerinin ihanete uğramasıyla doğrudan ilgilidir. Aydınlanma düşünürlerinin sözcüsü ve misyoneri gibi çalışan geleneksel yazarın, onlardan ilhamla okura vadettiklerinin gerçekleşmemesi aksine insanlık açısından daha fazla acılı, daha fazla ölümlü açlığın ve güvensizliğin hüküm sürdüğü bir dünya insanlığı bunalıma sürüklemiştir. Bu bağlamda popüler romanın yaygınlaşmasını bir anlamda yazarın genel geçer okurla barışma, onu dikkate alma fildişi kuleden feragat edip insan içine çıkma gayreti olarak da değerlendirebiliriz. Bu süreç yazarın kendi türüyle arasında açtığı mesafenin kapanması, kendisinin de bir insan olduğunu hatırlaması, özüne dönüş sürecidir. Fakat bu öze dönüş süreci, yazarın bireyselleşmesini de beraberinde getirmiştir. Bu bireyselleşme ise yazar ile okur arasında farklı sorunların ortaya çıkmasına sebep olmuştur. Yazarın bireyselleşmesinin ortaya çıkardığı en önemli sorun edebiyat eserinin anlam(sızlık)ı sorunudur. Okur, yazarın bireysel dünyasından devşirdiği ve bir bakıma şiirin diliyle imgeleştirdiği dünyayı anlamakta zorlanır, o dünya içerisinde kendine yer edinme imkanı bulamaz hale gelir. Özgüven kaybı ise -ki bu özgüven zaman zaman kibre, kendini insanüstü bir varlık konumuna oturtmaya (tanrı yazar) kadar varmıştıryazarı insanileştirmiştir. Kibir mütevazılığa, tanrılık iddiası insaniliğe dönüşmüştür. Artık o büyük iddiaların kahramanı, bir toplum mühendisi değil, kendi sıradan yaşamının, özlemlerinin ve bunalımlarının yazarıdır. Kendi türünü oluşturan diğer herkes gibi dünyaya karşı güvensiz, dünyanın verdiği acılardan rahatsız, gelecekle ilgili kaygı taşıyan bir "insan"dır. Dünyada işlerin insan adına iyi gitmediğini farkındadır. Modernleşme sürecinin tartışılmaz kıldığı yeni insanlık değerlerini sorgular, gelenekle yeniden ve sağlıklı bir ilişki kurmanın derdindedir. Ancak, toplumsal hayattan uzaklaşması, kendi iç dünyasına yoğunlaşması onu okurdan iyice uzaklaştırmış, edebî faaliyetlerinin küçük bir azınlığa hitap etmesinin önüne geçememiştir. Bu sonucun ortaya çıkmasında televizyon ve sosyal medya gibi iki güçlü rakiple baş edememesinin de etkisi büyüktür. Yazılı olanın görsel olanla mücadelesi sürekli görsel olanın lehine gelişmiş, yazılı olan sürekli değer kaybetmiştir. Sonuç olarak roman kahramanının, yanında anlamın ve ortak dilin de ötelendiği, kaybolmaya yüz tuttuğu bir dönemin içindeyiz. Artık 20. yüzyılın sonlarından itibaren ortaya çıkmış çok farklı edebiyat eserleriyle karşı karşıyayız. Okurun kafasını allak bullak eden bu eserler okura yeni bir dünyanın kapılarını aralıyor. Postmodern edebiyat ise bu kafa karışıklığını artık bir üslup özelliğine dönüştürmüş, çelişkileri kabullenmiş, yaşanmakta olan kaosu olduğu gibi sergilemekle yetiniyor. İdeal insan yerine yaşanan bu kaosu en derininde hisseden kafası karışık sıradan insanların boy gösterdiği, çelişkileriyle beraber yaşadığı bir yer romanın dünyası. Bu insanlar, dünyayı değiştirmek gibi büyük iddiaların yanına yaklaşmadan kendi küçük hayatlarında, gelgitler içinde ve kafası karışık bir şekilde yaşamaya devam ediyor. Ki uzun zamandır ortaya konan örnekler bu değersiz konumunu bile kaybetmek üzere olduğunun sinyallerini veriyor. Uzun zamandan beri Gasset'in de ifade ettiği gibi resim sanatı üzerinden gidersek amaç insandan, evden ya da dağdan apayrı bir şey değildir ancak çizilen adam insani özellikleri neredeyse tamamen yok edilmiş bir adam, ev gerçek hayatta içinde kendimizi güvende ve rahat hissettiğimiz ev değil, dağ bildiğimiz dağ değil. Tarihi, bilimkurgu ve fantastik romanların ağırlık kazandığı edebiyat dünyasında zamanın ibresi de geçmişten ve gelecekten yana. Bugünü bir anlamda realiteyi temsil eden "şimdi" bir kayıp zaman olarak siliniyor hafızalardan. Zamansal kaçışı temsil eden bu süreç insanî olandan uzaklaştırıyor romanı. Piyasa ilkelerinin her alanında hâkim olduğu bir dünyada itibarını kaybeden insanın dramını edebiyat eseri üzerinden takip edebilmek mümkün. İnsansız bir sanatın ve özelde edebiyatın yaşayıp yaşayamayacağı veya kendisine nasıl bir çıkış yolu bulacağı ise ayrı bir tartışma konusu
In this study, the relationship between life and literature within the historical process was assessed in the context of authenticity and the problem of human existence and human presence in literary texts were discussed. The evolution of artistic activities, which emerged simultaneously with the history of mankind, as a result of the interaction in parallel with the changes in the relations between man and man, man and nature and man and object was tried to be identified. As a result, it was asserted that a work of art, a literary text in particular adapts very easily to the new situation growing against man in the transition phase, from God-centred to anthropocentric perception of world where reason is prioritised and man lost his central position. Literature, novel as a litarary genre in particular, the relation with human of which is weakening each day has diverged from the ordinary reader and it has become addressing to a more elite audience. This situation, which Gasset describes as “dehumanisation of art”, can be seen easily through the protagonists, especially in the novel genre. This process, which can be described as man’s loss of reputation in a sense, is directly related to the sufferings that mankind was doomed by anthropocentric world, and it resulted in fueling the mistrust against his own kind, developed by those sufferings. The rationale of novel’s alienation of humanitarian values and thus man is the sense of escape from the sufferings and depressions that he was dragged into by the real world. In a sense, man who alienated himself and his own kind was also alienated by novel as a literary genre. It evokes the question “Has the novel died?” as a result of dehumanization of the novel as a literary genre in the end of the alienation process. The collapse of the anthropocentric structure of the traditional novel constitutes the fundamental source of this question. The novel certainly is not dead. However, human as a novel character can easily be claimed to be the dead. The announcement of this death changed the novel into a new form though it does not kill the novel. In this sense, the novel excluding human from his own living space repositions the mirror toward itself and begins to handle itself as a subject. This process of change not only affected the novel character but also the artist in general terms and the author in specific terms. The author who is, in one sense, a man of huge claims and aims to educate and change the society in the direction of his world of perception tends to escape into his own world as in the novel. (Şaylan, 2009: 112) Actually, this is the result of failing the mission assigned to the author by the thought of enlightenment. In other words, this is a traumatic consequence experienced by man who is overwhelmed by the heavy responsibility in the process of transition from god-centred world to the human-centred world. The happiness and wealth promised through enlightenment process come to nothing, contrarily, humanity suffered from two world wars. Getting bigger the difference between the promised and the experienced enable the authors who work like enlightenment missioners to face themselves and the thought of enlightenment. The confrontation results in the disappointment, the withdrawal from the real life seen as a field of conquest and engineering and return to him and his natural work. As a consequence of this process the author loses confidence and self reliance. The loss of confidence does harm to the relationship between author and reader, that is, it sentences the author to the loneliness in his isolated world. The god-like writer of the traditional novel almost comes to the conclusion that he cannot find someone to address. This process has direct relationship with the betrayals of both the authors and enlightenment philosophers. The fact that the promises given by the traditional authors who are inspired by the enlightenment philosophers and work as a spokesman and a missioner of them come into nothing drags the human into a world including more pain, death, hunger and mistrust. In this sense, popular novel’s becoming widespread can be handled as the author’s reconciliation with the readers, taking the reader into consideration and as an effort to go out in public by leaving ivory tower. This is the process that enables author to close the gap between his genre and himself, to remember himself as a person and to return to his self. Yet, the process of returning to his self triggers the individualization of the author. This individualization causes the existence of different matters between the author and the reader. The most important problem for the individualization of the author is the meaning(less) of a literary work. The reader has difficulty in grasping the world that is conveyed by the author’s own world and imaged via the language of the poem; he cannot find a possibility of placing himself into that world. The loss of self confidence – which extends to pride, to the position of superhuman (god-like author) - humanizes the author. The pride turns into lowliness and god-like allegation to humanization. The hero of these huge claims is not a community engineer any more but the author of his ordinary life, his longing and depression. He is a “human” worrying about the future, disturbed by pains of the world, having no faith in the world like everyone forming his own culture. He is aware of the fact that nothing goes well in the name of individual. He questions new value of humanity made indisputable by modernity process and makes an effort to be in a healthy contact with the tradition again. However, his breakthrough from social life and concentration on his inner life make him far away from the reader and he cannot prevent his literary works from addressing the minority. The effect of his failure on coping with the two powerful rivals like television and social media is significant for revealing this result. The struggle of the written with the visual always develops in favor of the visual and the written always loses its value. Consequently, there exists a period in which meaning and common language along with the characters of the novel are ignored and lost. The readers face quite different literary works having emerged only after the end of twentieth century. These works making the readers confused open the doors of a new world. Also, postmodern literature transfers this confusion into a style, accepts the contradictions and is contented with portraying the chaos as it is. The world of novel is a place where complicated and ordinary people- feeling the chaos deeplylive together with their contradictions instead of ideal people. These people keep living in their small worlds complicatedly and confusedly without approaching the claims like altering the world. The examples discussed for a long time indicate that he is about to lose even his worthless position. To mention about painting art, as Gasset claims, the aim is not apart from man, home or mountain; yet, the man portrayed is the one whose humanistic characteristics are nearly destructed, the house portrayed is not the place in which people feel secure and comfortable in real life and the mountain is not the mountain as it is. In literary world where historical, science fiction and fantastic novels gains importance, the cursor of the time is in favor of past and future. “Now” representing today and, in one sense, reality is erased from the memories as a lost time. This process symbolizing temporal escape estranges the novel from the human. A literary work makes it possible to follow the dram of human losing his respect in the world dominated by market principles. Whether the art without man and specifically literature keeps alive or how it finds a way out is another issue of conflict.
In this study, the relationship between life and literature within the historical process was assessed in the context of authenticity and the problem of human existence and human presence in literary texts were discussed. The evolution of artistic activities, which emerged simultaneously with the history of mankind, as a result of the interaction in parallel with the changes in the relations between man and man, man and nature and man and object was tried to be identified. As a result, it was asserted that a work of art, a literary text in particular adapts very easily to the new situation growing against man in the transition phase, from God-centred to anthropocentric perception of world where reason is prioritised and man lost his central position. Literature, novel as a litarary genre in particular, the relation with human of which is weakening each day has diverged from the ordinary reader and it has become addressing to a more elite audience. This situation, which Gasset describes as “dehumanisation of art”, can be seen easily through the protagonists, especially in the novel genre. This process, which can be described as man’s loss of reputation in a sense, is directly related to the sufferings that mankind was doomed by anthropocentric world, and it resulted in fueling the mistrust against his own kind, developed by those sufferings. The rationale of novel’s alienation of humanitarian values and thus man is the sense of escape from the sufferings and depressions that he was dragged into by the real world. In a sense, man who alienated himself and his own kind was also alienated by novel as a literary genre. It evokes the question “Has the novel died?” as a result of dehumanization of the novel as a literary genre in the end of the alienation process. The collapse of the anthropocentric structure of the traditional novel constitutes the fundamental source of this question. The novel certainly is not dead. However, human as a novel character can easily be claimed to be the dead. The announcement of this death changed the novel into a new form though it does not kill the novel. In this sense, the novel excluding human from his own living space repositions the mirror toward itself and begins to handle itself as a subject. This process of change not only affected the novel character but also the artist in general terms and the author in specific terms. The author who is, in one sense, a man of huge claims and aims to educate and change the society in the direction of his world of perception tends to escape into his own world as in the novel. (Şaylan, 2009: 112) Actually, this is the result of failing the mission assigned to the author by the thought of enlightenment. In other words, this is a traumatic consequence experienced by man who is overwhelmed by the heavy responsibility in the process of transition from god-centred world to the human-centred world. The happiness and wealth promised through enlightenment process come to nothing, contrarily, humanity suffered from two world wars. Getting bigger the difference between the promised and the experienced enable the authors who work like enlightenment missioners to face themselves and the thought of enlightenment. The confrontation results in the disappointment, the withdrawal from the real life seen as a field of conquest and engineering and return to him and his natural work. As a consequence of this process the author loses confidence and self reliance. The loss of confidence does harm to the relationship between author and reader, that is, it sentences the author to the loneliness in his isolated world. The god-like writer of the traditional novel almost comes to the conclusion that he cannot find someone to address. This process has direct relationship with the betrayals of both the authors and enlightenment philosophers. The fact that the promises given by the traditional authors who are inspired by the enlightenment philosophers and work as a spokesman and a missioner of them come into nothing drags the human into a world including more pain, death, hunger and mistrust. In this sense, popular novel’s becoming widespread can be handled as the author’s reconciliation with the readers, taking the reader into consideration and as an effort to go out in public by leaving ivory tower. This is the process that enables author to close the gap between his genre and himself, to remember himself as a person and to return to his self. Yet, the process of returning to his self triggers the individualization of the author. This individualization causes the existence of different matters between the author and the reader. The most important problem for the individualization of the author is the meaning(less) of a literary work. The reader has difficulty in grasping the world that is conveyed by the author’s own world and imaged via the language of the poem; he cannot find a possibility of placing himself into that world. The loss of self confidence – which extends to pride, to the position of superhuman (god-like author) - humanizes the author. The pride turns into lowliness and god-like allegation to humanization. The hero of these huge claims is not a community engineer any more but the author of his ordinary life, his longing and depression. He is a “human” worrying about the future, disturbed by pains of the world, having no faith in the world like everyone forming his own culture. He is aware of the fact that nothing goes well in the name of individual. He questions new value of humanity made indisputable by modernity process and makes an effort to be in a healthy contact with the tradition again. However, his breakthrough from social life and concentration on his inner life make him far away from the reader and he cannot prevent his literary works from addressing the minority. The effect of his failure on coping with the two powerful rivals like television and social media is significant for revealing this result. The struggle of the written with the visual always develops in favor of the visual and the written always loses its value. Consequently, there exists a period in which meaning and common language along with the characters of the novel are ignored and lost. The readers face quite different literary works having emerged only after the end of twentieth century. These works making the readers confused open the doors of a new world. Also, postmodern literature transfers this confusion into a style, accepts the contradictions and is contented with portraying the chaos as it is. The world of novel is a place where complicated and ordinary people- feeling the chaos deeplylive together with their contradictions instead of ideal people. These people keep living in their small worlds complicatedly and confusedly without approaching the claims like altering the world. The examples discussed for a long time indicate that he is about to lose even his worthless position. To mention about painting art, as Gasset claims, the aim is not apart from man, home or mountain; yet, the man portrayed is the one whose humanistic characteristics are nearly destructed, the house portrayed is not the place in which people feel secure and comfortable in real life and the mountain is not the mountain as it is. In literary world where historical, science fiction and fantastic novels gains importance, the cursor of the time is in favor of past and future. “Now” representing today and, in one sense, reality is erased from the memories as a lost time. This process symbolizing temporal escape estranges the novel from the human. A literary work makes it possible to follow the dram of human losing his respect in the world dominated by market principles. Whether the art without man and specifically literature keeps alive or how it finds a way out is another issue of conflict.
Açıklama
Anahtar Kelimeler
Kaynak
Turkish Studies (Elektronik)
WoS Q Değeri
Scopus Q Değeri
Cilt
10
Sayı
4
