Atıf Sayısı
1
Görüntüleme
100
İndirme
32
Mitoloji bir edebiyatın yapı taşıdır. Bu bakımdan edebiyatın üzerine kurulacağı mitolojik zemin her zaman tartışma konusu olmuştur. Tanzimat senelerinde eski Yunan–Latin klasikleri etrafında ve sonrasında Nev-Yunanilik eğilimi bağlamında mitoloji görüşleri ortaya konulmuştur. Bunlar, Millî edebiyat eksenli görüşlerin, klasikleri reddetmeyen, özellikle dil ve yapı itibarıyla yeni Türk edebiyatına örnek gösteren, içerik konusunda ise eski Türk mitolojisini işaret eden ağırlığıyla 1940’lara taşınmıştır. 1940’ta eski Yunan–Latin klasiklerinin çevirisi ivme kazanır. Bu, hümanizmanın yükselmesine ve akabinde Mavi Anadolu hareketinin doğmasına yol açar. Böylece Batı edebiyatının temelini oluşturan Yunan mitolojisi, Batı etkisinde gelişen Türk edebiyatının da kaynağı olma yolunda en ileri aşamaya ulaşır. Bu ise kabullerin yanı sıra bir dizi karşı çıkışı da beraberinde getirir. Hayata insan merkezli görüş açısının egemen olması ilkesiyle hareket eden hümanizma benimsenir, İlyada ve Odysseia hümanizmanın kutsal kitabı olarak yüceltilir. Yunan mucizesi söylemine uygun olarak, Doğu medeniyeti mahkûm edilir, edebiyatımızın eski Yunan’a dayanması gereği kesin olarak ifade edilir. Bir yandan da eski Yunan’a ölçüsüz hayranlık tenkit edilerek, edebiyatımızın alanını genişletmede hümanizmadan yararlanma yolları gösterilir. Yunan mucizesi söylemini bütünüyle reddeden görüşlerle, mesele farklı boyutlar kazanır. Bunların başında Cemil Meriç gelir. Yunan mitolojisinin kaynağı olarak Anadolu’yu işaret eden Mavi Anadolucular; Anadolu’nun kültürel yapısını ortaya koyarken Osmanlı–İslam dönemini yok saymaları, Avrupai bir anlayışla seçkinci bir tutum sergileyerek gerçeklik çizgisinin dışına çıkmaları, bu bağlamda tezlerini sağlam olgularla temellendirmemeleri yüzünden eleştirilir. Genel anlamda mitoloji, özel anlamda Yunan mitolojisi dil ve edebiyat için zengin bir kaynak olması, tarih-dışı estetik anlayışına temel teşkil etmesi, yenileşmenin tamamlayıcısı olması bakımlarından savunulur. Eserde uyumsuz bir eklenti olarak görülmesi, yabancı bir etki uyandırması, sosyal gerçekçiliğe ve dine aykırı değerlendirilmesi nedeniyle reddiyeye uğrar.
The mythology is the structure of literature. The mythological foundation on literature has always been the subject of discussion. In the Tanzimat years, mythological views were revealed around and after the ancient Greek-Latin classics in the context of the Neo-Greek tendency. These have moved to the 1940s with the weight of the views of the National Literature axis, which do not deny the classics, especially the new Turkish literature in terms of language and structure, and the old Turkish mythology in terms of content. In the 1940s, the translation of ancient Greek-Latin classics gained impulse. This leads to the rise of humanism and the birth of the Blue Anadolu movement. Thus, the Greek mythology, which forms the foundation of Western literature, reaches the most advanced stage in the way to become the source of Turkish literature developed under the Western influence. This also brings with them a number of rejection. Humanism, which moves on the principle of the dominant perspective of humanity, is adopted, and is praised as the holy book of Illyada and Odyssey. According to the saying of the Greek miracle, the Eastern civilization is punished, expressed with certainty because our literature is based on ancient Greece. On the one hand, with an immense admiration of ancient Greece, we show ways to take advantage of humanism in expanding our literature field. With the opinions that completely refuse to say the Greek miracle, the issue gains different dimensions. In the beginning there will be a marshmallow. The Blue Anatolians, who point out Anadolu as the source of Greek mythology, are criticized because they do not count the Ottoman-Islamic period while showing the cultural structure of Anadolu, showing a selective attitude with a European understanding and out of the line of reality, and in this context they do not fundamentate their thesis on solid facts. In general, mythology, in particular, is defended in terms of the fact that Greek mythology is a rich source of language and literature, the basis for an out-of-historic aesthetic understanding, the complementary of renewal. It is seen as an incompatible add-on in the work, rejected because of its excitement of a foreign effect, social realism and anti-religious assessment.
Mythology is the building block of a literature. In this respect, the mythological ground on which literature will be based has always been a controversial topic. Views on mythology were proposed within the framework of Greek-Latin classics during the Tanzimat (Reformation) Era, and in the subsequent period within the framework of Neo-Grecism. These views carried over to the 1940s, which were dominated by views based on the movement of National Literature, which did not refuse classics but instead proposed them as examples to the new Turkish Literature with respect to language and structure while pointing to the Turkish mythology as far as content was concerned. Translations of the ancient Greek and Latin classics gained momentum in the 1940s. This led to the rise of humanism and then to the emergence of the Mavi Anadolu (Blue Anatolia) Movement. In this way, the Greek mythology, which formed the foundation of the Western Civilization, reached a culmination on its way to becoming the foundation of the Turkish literature, which had been developing under Western influence. This naturally brought about a series of objections as well as acceptance. Humanism, which is based on the principle that life should be dominated by a human-centered point of view, was adopted, Iliad and Odyssey were praised as the holy books of humanism. Oriental civilization was condemned in accordance with the prevalent discourse of Greek miracle and it was stated in no uncertain terms that our literature should be based on ancient Greece. On the other hand, excessive admiration for ancient Greece was criticized and ways of benefiting from humanism were demonstrated to expand the realm of our literature. The topic gained different dimensions when views that totally denied the discourse of Greek miracle began to be expressed. Cemil Meriç was the leading figure among those. The adherents of the Blue Anatolian Movement indicated Anatolia as the source of the Greek Mythology but they were also criticized due to the fact that they entirely ignored the Ottoman-Islamic period while revealing the cultural structure of Anatolia and going beyond a realistic stance by exhibiting an elitist attitude with a European leaning. In this context, they also failed to base their theses on solid ground through convincing arguments and phenomena. Mythology in general and Greek mythology in particular are advocated in that they are a rich source for language and literature, constitutes a basis for an understanding of non-historical aesthetics and they are complementary to modernization. On the other hand, they are rejected by virtue of the fact that they are seen as discordant annexes; create an alien effect and are regarded as contravening social realism and religion.
Alan : Eğitim Bilimleri; Filoloji; Güzel Sanatlar; Hukuk; İlahiyat; Sosyal, Beşeri ve İdari Bilimler; Spor Bilimleri
Dergi Türü : Uluslararası
Makale Detay 
Atıf Yapanlar
Benzer Makaleler
PDF Görüntüle
Dergi Bilgisi
Eseri Dinleyin
Bu Sayfayı Yazdırın
Paylaş
Mendeley
