Özet:

Almost everybody who is interested in literature and poetry has an idea in terms of rating a poet as a ​​good poet or a bad poet in his mind. However, the same is not the case with respect to which criteria this rating is performed. If there are no criteria and concrete references in the mind of the person in terms of a rating or evaluation, the rating or evaluation in question will be unhealthy. This also indicates that the person does not have the necessary consciousness and accumulation of knowledge when evaluating a literary work. Because, if the person regards a literary text as superior to another literary text based on some criteria, his criteria or provision, which is the result of these criteria, even if they are wrong, can provide important data concerning the nature of the text. In this study, the criteria and concrete references that distinguish a literary text from another literary text, or a poet from another poet were put forward specific to the case of the divans of Adli (Adlî) and Ahmet Pasha. The aim, however, was both to demonstrate the role of the method of comparison in achieving the true character of a literary work, and to encourage people to turn to concrete references when two poets or literary works are compared or evaluated. The reason behind the selection of Ahmet Pasha and Adli as poets was to believe that it was necessary to compare Ahmet  Pasha – being considered by many researchers to be the best poet of his time and the founder of the classical Turkish poetry, but not much concrete data have been presented to support this – and Adlî – relatively having remained in the shadows – based on concrete data. Accordingly, it was one of the most important goals of this study to suggest criteria to consider when a poem is said to be good or bad. In this direction, the materials that the poets possessed and the way they used these materials constituted the basic action points of this study.

Anahtar Kelimeler: