THE LOST BATTLE: REPRESENTATIONS OF THE INTELLECTUAL IN MARCH 12 NOVELS asses by Ali Murat Akser gI3se Submitted to the Atatiirk Institute in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts in the History of the Turkish Republic Bogazigi University 1999“The Lost Battle: Representations of the Intellectual in the March 12 Novels”, a thesis prepared by Ali Murat Akser in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts at the Ataturk Institute for the History Modern Turkey. This thesis has been approved and accepted by: Dr. Duygu KOKSAL (Thesis Supervisor) Prof, Zafer TOPRAK 7 bf: /- i Assoc. Prof. Niket ESEN Date of Approval:An abstract of the Thesis of Ali Murat Akser for the degree of Master of Arts in the Atatiirk Institute for the History of Modern Turkey to be taken June 1999. Title: THE LOST BATTLE: REPRESENTATIONS OF THE INTELLECTUAL IN THE MARCH 12 NOVELS In this study, the revolutionary intellectual, as portrayed in the March 12 novels, is discussed. First, the intellectual is defined and the qualities of the revolutionary intellectuals in March 12 novels discussed. It is argued that they had a persistent criticism of the bourgeois class and sympathy for the underprivileged people, They had a mission to civiise and protect their people. Second, revolution and revolutionary ideals were discussed. The revolutionaries shape their identity as a reaction to authority and to their parents who are usually of Kemalist origin. They are assisted by a local intellectual instead. it is also argued that the revolutionaries in fact cannot agree on a shared definition of revolution. Third, the psychological breakdown of the revolutionary intellectual is discussed. They experience paranoia and feel guilty and hopeless. It is argued that they also think their failure was result of their fragmentation and because were so removed from the people. And finally, revolutionary women are discussed. The role of women in nation building process is mentioned and it is seen that Turkish women are used as ideological markers of modemity and did not fight for citizenship rights like their European counterparts. Though they want to act on their own, they are prevented by a public patriarchy. Revolutionary women violate this code and are treated like prostitutes. Criticism of bourgeois women Is noted in their depiction as perfect consumers. Also the contrast between the rural and urban women is described. iiiOZET Yitiriimis Miicadele: 12 Mart Romanlarinda Aydinin Konumu Ali Murat Akser Bu tezin amaci, 12 Mart romaniarindan yola gikarak 1970’ yillarn aydininin tanimint yapmaktir, Entellektiie! iin genel tanimi yapilirken, 12 Mart romantanndaki devrimei Turk aydini da incelenmistir. Devrimei aydinin burjuva sinifina kari elestirel oldugu ve halkini sahiplendigi saptanmistir. Aynt zamanda aydin, halki editmeyi de kendine gérev bilmektedir. Devrimeilerin devrim tanimi ve fikirleri incelenmistir. Devrimcilerin kisilikleri olustururken, otoriteye ve genellikle Kemalist fikirleri agir basan evebeynlerine kargi giktiklari gériilmiistiir. Devrimeilerin bazen kendilerine aki! hocasi olarak ejjtimsiz ama bilge-kéylileri segtiklerine de rastlanmistir, Ayrica devrimcilerin tam bir devrim taniminda da birlesemedikleri saptanmistir. Devrimcilerin, 12 Mart askeri midahalesi sonrasi ruhsal cdkiisleri incelenmis; devrimcilerde paranoya, sucluluk duygusu ve Umitsizlik gértilmiistr. ‘Ayni zamanda devrimciler, bagarisiziklarinin sebebini dagimik ve halktan kopuk olmalarina bagjlamaktadirlar. Son olarak devrimci kadinlar tartigilmistir. Ulus-deviet kurma siirecinde kadinlarin roldine deginilmistir. Yeni kurulan Turkiye Cumhuriyetinde kadinlar, ideolojik olarak modernligi tanmlayan énemii unsurlardan biri olmuslardir. Ancak kadinlarin hareketlerine sinirlama getirilmis, bu sinirlan asan devrimcl kadinlara kétd kadin muamelesi yapiimistir. 12 Mart romantaninda burjuva kadinlan sadece tiketen kisiler olarak gérdlmektedir. Son olarak kéyili ve kentli kadinlar arasindaki farklara deginilmektedir.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to thank Prof. Halil Berktay, Prof. Sevket Pamuk and Prof. Zafer Toprak for renovating the graduate program of the Atatiirk Institute. With their efforts the Atattirk Institute has become a coveted center of learning and research on comparative social, economic, political and cultural studies on Turkey. | would like to thank my thesis adviser, Dr. Duygu Kéksal, who relentlessly read my draft and commented on various aspects of the study. 1 would also like fo thank my friends at the Atatiirk Institute Hilya Bate, Clineyd Okay, Dr. Bilent Aras, and Elif Akgetin- who made the quest for learning enjoyable. Final thanks goes to Kathryn L. Kranzler, who edited my thesis; Alpay Alicik, who helped me with the format; Zeynep Bagcr and Ebru Tiize! who translated the quotations; and Nuray Ozigik who was always willing to help and solve our administrative problems. | am also grateful to Deniz Yiirdr. Without her support the writing of this thesis would have been impossible.DEDICATION The idea of writing my graduate thesis on March 12 novels came to me after reading Berna Moran's Tiirk Romanina Elestirel Bir Bakig lll, And in the course of my study I was astonished by the dexterity of Sevgi Soysal's style in Safak. This modest study is dedicated to the memory of Berna Moran and Sevgi Soysal. viCONTENTS Chapter L INTRODUCTION The Social, Political and Cultural Background of the 1960s... ‘The March 12 Experience and the Novels .... Methodology ‘The Tradition of the Political Novel in Turkish Literature Il, THE INTELLECTUAL AND HIS MISSION .......--.0.-000-- The Intellectual ... ‘The Turkish Intellectual ... Critique of the Bourgeoise .. ‘The White Man’s Burden ‘The Good Intellectual..... Il, REVOLUTION AND THE REVOLUTIONARY... ‘The Revolutionary. ‘The Revolutionary Tradition in Turkish Politics . ‘The Formation of the Revolutionary Identity . .. ‘The Conceptualization of the Revolution in March 12 Novels ........+..++ IV, THE LOST BATTLE . Fragmentation ..... ‘The Distance between the Intellectual and the People. Paranoia . ‘The Feeling of Total Loss ... 4 18. 18 2 24 67 . 68 2V. WOMEN AND REVOLUTION 104 Women in the Nation Building Process ... ee .. 105 Revolutionary Women and March 12 Novels. 107 The Portrait of the ‘Revolutionary’ Woman as an Intellectual .... 109 ‘Woman as the Perfect Consumer. 118 Urban Woman vs, Rural Woman .... 124 ‘The Patriarchy 132 CONCLUSION é et) BIBLIOGRAPHY ...........0.- 143 vill1960 1961 1962 1963 1964 1965 1966 1968 1969 1970 1971 1972 CHRONOLOGY of the events leading to the March 12, 1971 intervention 27 May 9 July 17 Sept, 15 Oct. 22 Feb. 21 May 05 June 13 Feb, 27 Oct. 28 March Apr-Suly 17 July 6 Jan. 16 Feb. 11 Feb. 15/16 June 18 Nov. Military coup against the DP Menderes Government of. Referendum for the new constitution, Execution of Menderes, Polatkan and Zorlu. Elections held, inénii becomes PM, Giirsel becomes President. I. Talat Aydemir coup attempt. I1.Talat Aydemir coup attempt, leading to his execution. President Johnson’s letter to inénii concerning Cyprus. Vote of no-confidence for inénii government. Siileyman Demirel becomes PM. Former Head of Chief Staff Cevdet Sunay becomes President. Student boycotts. Assault on the 6th Fleet of the US navy, visiting istanbul. METU events. Torching of ex-ClA agent, US ambassador's car. “Bloody Sunday’ in Taksim Square, students and workers were attacked by right wing groups. Vote of no-confidence for the JP Demirel government. Workers’ march. Democratic Party, an offshoot of the JP opposing Demirel. 12 Feb.-3 M Kidnapping of US officers. 04 March 12 March 26 March Police and gendarmary clash with students at METU. Memorandum of 4 Generals, Demirel government resigns. I, Nihat Erim government March - June 40 articles of the 1961 Constitution amended, prohibition of 17 May 3 Des. 30 March 17 April 5 May hashish planting, the chief of general staff's place in state protocol is rearranged Kidnapping and assassination of Israeli ambassador Elrom. Beginning of ‘Operation Sledgehammer’ state terror against leftist intellectuals. Eleven reformist ministers resign, Kidnapping and death of British technicians Resignation of Nihat Erim ismet indnd resigns from the RPP and his posts. Billent Ecevit elected RPP leader.6 May Execution of Deniz Gezmis, Hiiseyin inan, Yusuf Aslan; leaders of student unions of universities. 1973 13 March — Ex-Admiral Fahri 8. Korutiirk becomes President in the place of General Faruk Girler. 25 Dec. _ Elections held.CHAPTER | INTRODUCTION The aim of this thesis is to study the representations of the Turkish intellectual in the so called ‘March 12 novels’ written between 1973-79, in the wake of the March 12, 1971 military intervention, and to dissect the mind of the republican intellectual during this particular era. What is understood by the word mind is the cultural, political and psychological position of the intellectual in relation to his ‘people’ and ‘mission". It should be mentioned that although there is a serious lack of attention and research on March 12th and its implications for Turkish society, several books and articles have been written on the political aspects of March 12 intervention. Individuals on both sides of the issue have published their memoirs but neither the discussions nor academic writing have discussed the role of the works of literature in shedding light upon the intellectual history of the era. The critiques of March 12 novels are either praise for literary merit or condemned for the misuse of literature for revolutionary propaganda.” The novels are being read once again by a young audience with a nostalgia for the romantic revolutionary past.> The reviews or ' The Turkish intellectual is known to have a special affinity towards the people of his country. The ‘Turkish intellectual believes that iti his mission to bring a beter life for the people and sacrifices himself for this cause, Therefore he thinks, works and fights for a corporate entity, which he names as his people. (‘He" also means ‘she’ inthis thesis unless itis specifically mentioned otherwise). 2 See Murat Belge, "12 Mart Romanlan", Birikim (12, February 1976), pp. 8-16; Murat Belge, "Bir “Edebiyat Malzemesi' Olarak 12 Mart Yagantisi", Birikim (14, April 1976), pp. 14-21, and also Fethi [Naci, 60 Tiirk Roman (Istanbul: OBak, 1998). in 1994, a TV documentary by the 32, Gin team of Show TV reignited the discussions of the execution of the three anarchist student leaders and the attitude of both political parties and forces like the military to restore democracy at that time, There always is an audience for this kind of writing incritiques of the novels (with the exception of Berna Moran) date back to the late 70s. After a quarter of a century, a new interpretation seems necessary. ‘The March 12th military intervention and the two-year-long military rule remain significant for republican Turkey for several reasons, the most important of which is that intellectuals in Turkey realized for the first time that any revolutionary action without mass support was doomed to fail. They also realized that the state apparatus and forces could in fact turn against those who wanted to utilize them in the absence of democratic tolerance. For the first time in republican history, the state and military bureaucracy totally isolated the technicians of knowledge, the intellectuals, and treated them as a threatening marginal group. The March 12th intervention and the policies implemented between 1971-73 were carried out not only against the perpetrators of terrorist activities but also against a group of people who had tried to use the democratic initiatives given by the May 27, 1960 constitution and ideals. ‘These ideals were the establishment of a democratic distribution of income, the creation of a national and independent economy, and the production of society and culture by the people's initiative. In this way the March 12, 1971 intervention marked the midway point between the May 27, 1980 and the September 12, 1980 interventions. It is usually agreed that the May 27 Turkey but there are some fundamental differences between the reader profiles. For example novels, like Yaralisin and Gillin Soldugu Akyam (by Erdal Oz) narrating the life and death of Deniz, Gezmig ‘and his friends have been bestsellers since 1986. Gezmig, a young revolutionary student leader, was caught after committing a series of bloodless illegal activities such as kidnapping ot bank robbery and ‘was executed along with his two accomplices. After his death he became a revolutionary martyr symbol. These books are currently being read by the generation bom after the September 12, 1980 military intervention who yearn for a past when young people had some hope of changing the world ‘them, In addition to the novels, a new film describing the events leading up to and including Denizintervention led to the spread of mass participation whereas the September 12 intervention tried to stop politicization and participation.’ But the masses and intellectuals had in fact been defeated long before the September 12 intervention. The ideals of the intellectuals and the revolutionaries had been defeated long before the closing down of all parties and the suspension of party politics in the 1980s. As mentioned, this thesis will analyze the psycho-social history of the revolutionary intellectual between 1971-73 as portrayed in March 12 novels, but first a brief, general backgroung to the era will be provided. Thus the introduction provides a brief historical background to understand why and how the military intervention occured. It also examines what made the March 42th era so unique and why its results remain significant for society today. Finally, the tradition ofthe political novel in Turkish literature and the place of the March 12 novels in this tradition are discussed. The second chapter examines the concept of the intellectual in March 12 novels, through a short discussion of the concept of leftist intellectual and how this concept has changed in meaning and content over the years. The Turkish intellectual and his mission since the beginning of the westernization process will be presented briefly. Finally, a close look will be taken at some of the qualities and bildung or formation of the leftist intellectual. This thesis seeks to define the qualities of the intellectual in March 12 novels, such as Gezmig’s death, Hoggakal Yarm, directed by Reis Celik, had just been released during the preparation of this thesis (spring 1999). 4 See Brich Jan Zacher, Turkey: A Modern History (London: 1.B-Tauris, 1993),his persistent criticism of the bourgeois class and sympathy for underprivileged people. In the third chapter, the revolutionary programs of the Turkish intellectual just prior to the March 12th intervention are dissected. The Turkish intellectual as a young revolutionary is discussed in terms of how he defined his program, aims and methods. The fourth chapter discusses the intellectual as a ‘loser’ and analyzes how and why the Turkish intellectual lost his courage and how he began to criticize the revolutionary mission, The fifth chapter focuses upon the role of women in March 12 novels. In the novels, revolutionary women are portrayed as having been treated worse than their male counterparts while under custody. They became twice victimized both for their sex and their revolutionary ideals. Women as revolutionary intellectuals experienced patriarchal hostility and the writers of March 12 novels describe this hostility. The novels analyzed in this study are Sevgi Soysal's Safak [The Dawn] (1975), Adalet Agaoglu’s Bir Dagiin Gecesi [A Wedding Night] (1979), Firizan's 47liler (Bor in °47] (1974), Pinar Kir’s Yarn Yarn [Tomorrow, Tomorrow] (1979), Erdal Oz’s Yaralism [You, the Wounded one] (1974), and Tank Dursun K's Gain Déndii [Sunflower] (1974). The three main criteria for the selection of these novels were as follows: The first condition was their publication as an immediate reaction to the military intervention. All of them were written during or just after the military intervention. Novels written after 1979 were not considered. The second condition had to do with the background and intention of the writers:All writers in this sample were either activists or sympathizers of the revolutionary movement. Finally, only novels that particularly dealt with the problem of revolution and intellectual were selected, Some novels, like Getin Altan's Bayik Gécaltt [The Great Arrest}, were excluded since they bear little or no reference to the problematique of intellectual and revolution, Before a more detailed discussion on methodology, a brief summary on the social and political context of the era is presented in order to set the stage. The Social, Political and Cultural Background of the 1960s After the authoritarian experience of the Democrat Party regime in the 1950s, aspirations for a more democratic society and legal control mechanisms emerged after the May 27, 1960 military intervention when the new constitution (accepted by a nationwide referendum in 1961) offered fresh hope. The new constitution guaranteed several rights and reorganized state institutions. Autonomous Radio-TV, an autonomous university system, a constitutional court, proportional representation and freedom of speech and expression led to an unprecedented social mobilization for Turkish society. The communications revolution and infrastructure investments of the DP period enhanced this mobilization and ted to the integration of market and cultural structure throughout Turkey. Between 1965-1970, the Demirel governments were able to achieve high growth rates in the economy. In these years of optimism, Turkey witnessed both a cultural and social transformation. A planned economy, fuelled by Demirel’s dream of 'Great Turkey’, led to appeals for a betterredistribution of the wealth among the public. The new regime tolerated activities and publishing with socialist tendencies, which led to a boom in the translations of Marxist and socialist writings in Turkey. A socialist party led by prominent academics, unionists and intellectuals institutionalized the socialist movement in the body of Turkish Workers Party (Tiirkiye Isgi Partisi). Also the Intemational context was suitable for the freedom cries of an ‘independent Turkey’ a Turkey free from US and USSR influence. ‘The fact that Kemalist ideology encouraged continuous revolutionism and left the protection of the republic to the youth encouraged socialist revolutionary activities in the 1960s. The time seemed to be ripe for a socialist revolution until the authorities inhibited the social mobilization of the youth revolutionary ideal with the decision of senior officers of the army to intervene in the March of 1971.5 The March 12 nce and the Novels Three days before the actual intervention some leftist junior officers, led by former coup maker of the 1960 intervention Lieutenant General Cemal Madanojlu, took measures to initiate a socialist coup. To avoid this, senior military officers prepared their own intervention and put it into operation. Meanwhile leftist intellectuals mistook the intervention as a socialist coup and "The political history and analysis of the March 12 military intervention can be found in the following sources: Ali Gevglili, Trkive de 12 Mart Rejimi (istanbul: Milliye, 1973), Ali Gevgilili,Ykselis ve Diy (Istanbul: BagJam, 1987), Suen Oztirk, 12 Mart 1971 ‘den Portrelr (Istanbul: Sorun, 1993); {than Selguk, Ziverbey Kashi (Istanbul: Caldas, 1989), Metin Toker, set Pasa in Son Villars (1965-1973) (Ankara: Bilgi, 1993), Also, see the choronology of the events leading to the March 12 intervention.welcomed it. The former prime minister, Sileyman Demirel, resigned directly after receiving the warning letter of the military, just to keep the parliament working. The conservative President Sunay appointed twelve technocrat ministers, an independent former Republican People's Party member Nihat Erim as prime minister, together with conservative representatives both from the Justice Party and the RPP. Sunay, head of chief staff Memduh Tahmag, and their appointed conservative politician, Nihat Erim, discarded revolutionary generals Faruk Giirler, head of the land forces, and Muhsin Batur, head of the air forces. The revolutionary journalists and revolutionary cliques thought that it was the revolutionary leftist clique of the army that had taken power and propagated for the legitimacy of the military intervention. The leftist circles, however, were unaware that this government had been formed especially to destroy both the illegal leftist guerilla forces, which spread chaos, and to suppress the legal leftist organizations. With the kidnapping and murder of Israeli ambassador Elrom, the government declared that it would destroy any resistance against state forces and initiated a ' sledgehammer operation’ to that end, People suspected of revolutionary / socialist or radical activity were imprisoned. A number of the fundamental rights given by the 1961 constitution were rescinded by several amendments. The election of a new president free from military circles in 1973 and the further elections later that year brought an end to this regime. It is argued in this study that the March 12th intervention and the military regime that followed for the next two years led to the defeat of the ideals of a generation with revolutionary aspirations. Although they hadinitially welcomed the military intervention, many of them were arrested, tortured and some even executed for their ideals. This was an utter shock for the revolutionaries. In prisons they had the opportunity to reconsider their ideals and thoughts. They met people from all over Turkey while incarcerated and began to understand how far their ideals had distanced them from the people. The March 12 novels reflect this self-criticism. The background of the revolutionary movement, these experiences, the position of the revolutionary with respect to the people at large, to the state, his fellow revolutionaries and himself as an individual are portrayed in detail in the novels analyzed in this study. Methodology In the fields of literature and the social sciences the methods used in the study of political events through novels have been under debate for years as no established method for analysis exists. What makes the use of literature plausible is the acknowledgment that history writing is in itself a literary enterprise, namely a reinterpretation of past events from the perspective of the historian who reflects the beliefs and values of his own milieu. This close relationship between literature and history is reflected even in the vocabulary of major European languages, as histoire in French and Geschicte in German, words that mean both story and history. As Fredric Jameson notes, ‘readings of the past are vitally dependent on our experience of the present.° The idea is that each new interpretation * Fredric Jameson, The Political Unconscious: Narrative as a Socially Symbolic Act (Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1981), p. 11adds something new to the mass of already unearthed knowledge about the historical text in question, but also challenges some of the earlier interpretations. It is vital to note that new interpretations are the result of changing attitudes of people towards the text in time. Jameson furthermore claims that though history is not a text ‘it is accessible to us only in textual form, and our approach to it and the Real itself necessarily passes through its prior textualization, its narrativization in the political unconscious.” That means that historical facts and events occur and are later narrated by someone who writes them from a certain perspective. So one can never be sure of what exactly happened before the textualization of history. A similarity emerges between the writers of literary and historical texts. Both narrate a subjective interpretation of the events. The former uses imaginary characters and the latter uses historical figures to narrate history. Every text, including history as a reinterpreted text over time, can have an unlimited number of interpretations. Interpretation is necessary because without interpretation, facts and events (here history as a text) are bare and simple artefacts with only a surface meaning. So it is accepted here that there are two levels of reality. On the surface, there are facts, events and descriptions of the relationships between people and objects and other people, but underneath there is a set of meanings associated with these events and these are the values, feelings, reasons and rationale behind the events. History writing is the interpretation of this second level. So there are two levels: facts and their interpretation, i.e. history as text. For example that "Wbid., p. 35.10 four generals presented an ultimatum letter to the Demirel government on March 12 1971 and that a period of repression and torture aimed at intellectuals are historical facts. But without interpretation, these events have simply no relevance or importance from today's perspective. To interpret how the generals, the government, the opposition groups and parties, the revolutionaries and intellectuals perceived these events is to write history from a certain perspective. This raises the critical questions of how realistically this representation interprets the events, if the history writer distorts reality for his purposes and whether this distortion is unavoidable. ‘Tzevan Todorov argues that a close relationship exists between a text and its enunciator. A text can ‘never reveal the totality of its meaning’ without an interpretation, There are always parts for which ‘one must unveil what is kept hidden® Interpretation is necessary to reveal and discuss the hidden system of meanings. Todorov goes on to make the following distinction between assertive and nonassertive texts: Assertive texts are those which are attributed directly to their author whereas nonassertive texts are those into which the writer inserts an imaginary character between himself and his discourse.” The extent to which the author relates his experience and ideas varies from time to time. In this distinction there is the reality the assertive text claims to represent fully and there is the reality the nonassertive text represents from the perspective of the author. The novels under examination in this study lie * Teevan Todorov, 7he Morals of History, trans. Alyson Waters (Minneapolis: University of ‘Minnesota Press, 1995), p. 122. ° Tid, pp. 119-120.ul somewhere in between these two concepts. They both reflect the period, events and cultural atmosphere of the time and are texts of fiction; that is to say, the characters in these texts also live in a fictional universe. But they are representations of the people of the era, including their writers. In most of the novels, torture scenes are depicted in detail, Reportedly, diaries kept by Deniz Gezmig, the symbol revolutionary student of the era, and his friends were passed to Erdal Oz'° just before their executions and published soon afterwards providing inspiration to many writers." Some of the writers themselves experienced imprisonment and torture. The frequent depiction of peasants and their backward life styles, comparison of urban and rural life, discussions of revolutionary ideals and the bitter sense of defeat are signs of the reflection of the mind of the intellectual and these are the themes chosen in these literary texts. Since ancient times, the role of literature in the representation of reality has been discussed. For Plato, poets or artists represent reality twice removed from its essence since what the poet represents is the imitation of the idea of the things and events.'? Because the aim of this study is to draw a map of the mind of the intellectual and his attitudes and reactions in the late 60s and early 70s, how realistically these novels represent historical facts is not an issue. Rather how these events affect the attitudes and reactions of the intellectuals, both depicted as characters created in the novels and as the writers of these novels is the main focus. "© A Joftist intellectual and also writer of one of the novels in this study. " Erdal Oz, Gihiniin Soldugu Akgam (Istanbul: Can, 1986), p. 7. ® Bema Moran, idebiyat Kuramlant ve Elestri(8.basks) (istanbul: Cem, 1991), p15.12 The issue of the use of fiction representation is still being discussed by scholars in terms of the function of literature. Is it for entertainment or can it have didactic purposes? Is fiction written only for pleasure or can it instruct in the manners, the times and the past through these texts? The central question is on how the text should relate itself to the context in which it is written. Two rough schools of literary criticism, namely historicism and formalism, submit answers to these questions. Critics who favor historicist approach claim that literary texts are the reflection of the era in which they are written. They reflect culture, society, politics and economic relations. Plot, themes, setting and characterization gain meaning only in relation to the historical background. So a host of historicist critics interpret the literary text only in relation to other historical texts. At the other extreme, formalist critics claim that a text is a closed universe in itself and an interpretation can only be made when one looks inside the text only. Literary discourse estranges and alienates the daily speech and this defamiliarizes the text from its context.'® Formalism neglects the social and historical background in which the writer formed the literary text. A combination of these two approaches to interpret these literary texts in this thesis is preferred since the texts under study are works of fiction but also written to narrate the events of a specific era, 1971-73. It has also been asserted by several scholars that the setting and characters, that is, ‘the social segment depicted’ in a novel reflects the © Terry Eagleton, Literary Theory: An Introduction (Minneapolis: The University of Minnesota Press, 1983), p. 4.13 ideological choice of the writer.'4So the setting reflects the characteristic aspects, values, morals, and behavioral patterns of the social segment described in a novel. Through their specific social identities, the characters in a novel reveal a broad political picture of the society.'> As for the richness in the variety of interpretations over time, as Todorov writes, no one and only correct interpretation for a text’® exists but obviously there can be and there are indeed false and forced interpretations. That means, over time, a certain amount of core interpretation that is almost undeniable and has true universal validity is accumulated. Each new interpretation adds to the existing body of interpretations and makes use of the former core or at least responds to it. Sometimes claims of new and completely different approaches to the text arise, nullifying the core interpretations but this happens rarely. March 12 novels are both works of fiction and representations of reality at the same time. But they are not the first Turkish novels to bring history and politics to the foreground. There is a rich tradition of political novel in Turkish literature that will be discussed with in the following section. ¥ Ahmet ©. Evin, “Novelists: New Cosmopolitanism versus Social Pluralism” in Metin Heper et al eds., Turkey and the West: Changing Political and Cultural Identities (London: LB.Tauris, 1993), p. 93; also see Rene Wellek (1963) “The Concept of Realism in Literary Scholarship” in Harry Levin d,, Concepts of Criticism (New Haven: Yale University Press, 1963). Evin, p. 94, * Todorov, p.122.14 ‘The Tradition of the Poli Since its early examples, the novel genre, like all other forms of writing, has depicted the views and life styles of people. The novelist conveys his political message implicitly or explicitly, Politics became a favorite topic of European and American novels in the nineteenth century, when writers began to comment explicitly on the political issues of their day. Russian novelists like Dostoevsky were among the first to use the form of novel to criticise social injustice and conservatism. In the early twentieth century, the greatest political novelist was Joseph Conrad, with his Under Western Eyes, Secret Agent and Nostromo. Later, John Steinbeck, John Dos Passos, André Malraux, Arthur Koestler and George Orwell increased the dose of social criticism in their novels.” In Turkish literature the novel genre first appeared in the late nineteenth century. In the west, the novel relied on bourgeois lives as the subject of narration, but since an autonomous national muslim bourgeois was non-existent in the Ottoman Empire, the Turkish novel began as an imitative form of narrative imported and used by a small number of the western- educated intelligentsia. These intellectuals were actively involved in state service and were preoccupied with the westernization of the empire. The novel form is introduced as a sign of modernization and thus issues related to westernization became primary concern of novelists. "® © Murat Belge,“ “Politik Roman’ Ustine", irikim 9 (November 1975), p. 40-47 ™ Fethi Naci, “Roman” in Cumhuriyet Dénemi Turkiye Ansitlopedisi (Istanbul: lletisim, 1983). p. oul,45 ‘The clash between old and new, eastern and western, that is a critique of modemization in Turkey, was a common theme in these novels, as seen in the works of Ahmet Mithat, Recaizade Ekrem, Halit Ziya and Hilseyin Rahmi"®. With the establishment of the Republic of Turkey, westernization became the ultimate state policy. The pseudo-westernized individual, discrepancies in the civil code, and unfortunate marriages were common topics of these early novelists.” Early Republican intellectual-novelists of the 1930s were influenced by Turkish nationalist ideology. Yakup Kadri, Halide Edip, Peyami Safa and Resgat Nuri Giiltekin wrote novels to support or to criticise this westernization movement and its social results from a nationalist perspective. With the 1950s, the Democrat Party came to power and followed a more rural-oriented policy of economic development. Now the intellectual novelist could come from humble rural origins and an increasing number of novels on village and peasant life were published. Yasar Kemal, Orhan Kemal, Fakir Baykurt, Kemal Bilbagar, Kemal Tahir, and Sabahattin Ali used the character of the noble savage in their novels. The noble savage in this case being the exploited peasant. He lived under terrible conditions, and was oppressed by religious conservatism, and the injustices of the state and the traditional local power, the agja. The emphasis in these novels was on the contrast between the powerful and the weak in an unjust feudal order.”Rural novelists Berna Moran, Tilrk Romanina Elestirel Bir Balus -I- (Istanbul: Hetigim, 1983), p. 17. ** Naci, “Roman”, p. 612. 2 Berna Moran, Tirk Romanina Elestirel Bir Bakig 1 ltanbut: leis, 1990), p. 21716 introduced the use of some traditional Turkish forms of narrative to tell their stories. The final chain in the political novel is in the form of novels written after military coups. These novels describe, compare and criticize the social conditions and change before and after these interventions. After the May 27, 1960 military intervention, Attila lihan, Vedat Tuirkali and Samim Kocagéz wrote novels which came to be known as ‘May 27 novels’. These novelists were primarily concerned with the continuity and rupture with the Turkish past after the Kemalist reforms and the meaning and importance of May 27 in the westernization process. 7 March 12 novels follow the political novel tradition but display their ‘own novelties and differences. Similar to the village novels of the 1950s and 1960s, the idealist characters in the Turkish novel and especially the noble savage are very active in changing their environment according to their ideals.”In later years the main characters were replaced with new ones, but the theme of exploitation continued. Instead of the unjust feudal order, exploited peasant and the savior bandit (egkiya), March 12 novels deal with the capitalist bourgeois class, the exploitation of the Turkish people, with the young revolutionary intellectuals as the saviors, Regarding the differences between the political novels before them, first, in March 12 novels the form is more secondary to content (though some ® Murat Belge, “27 Mayis’n Edebiyatimiza Yansimasi”, Politika (April 1976), pp. 25-29. Some of feat ace ttt mc as ge a It is worth noting that these novels were written after March 12 intervention and their aim may be to emphasize the more democratic military intervention in the face of a more authoritarian intervention. ® Berna Moran, Tiirk Romanina Elestirel Bir Bakis -JI- (Istanbul: lletigim, 1994), pp. 11-17.7 of the novels, like Safak and Bir Diigin Gecesi, are masterpieces of narrative) than most of the political novels before them. Content, more specifically, the lost cause, tortures and experiences of young revolutionaries, is predominant. These novels use direct and simple narrative and try to be as realistic as possible because they carry the mission of presenting the ideas of the suffering revolutionaries in prison. Second, the characters in March 12 novels are very self-critical. They are caught and imprisoned, therefore passive in relation to their captors. Their ideals have been defeated. The only thing they do is suffer and ruminate on what went wrong. So far the social and cultural backgrounds of the 1960s have been introduced. The 1960s were years of hope and political activity on the left. Then the military intervention of March 12, 1971 put an end to all hopes. March 12 novels reflect this feeling of disillusionment. As for the methodological questions on the writing of history through works of fiction, March 12 novels stand on the line between the fictional and the historical. When drawing conclusions, careful consideration will be paid to representation side of these novels. And last, the political novel tradition in the Turkish novel has been described in its major lines, Since its entrance to Turkish literary life, the novel form has been used by the intellectuals to comment on political currents. So March 12 novels are also representative of this tradition. Political novels in Turkey are usually the products of intellectuals. But what an intellectual is and what his mission in the Turkish context is are the questions to be explored in the coming chapter.18 CHAPTER II THE INTELLECTUAL AND HIS MISSION Since this study primarily deals with the representations of the intellectual in March 12 novels, a definition of the very concept of intellectual is required, This chapter provides common definitions of the intellectual and examines first some of the definitions of the Turkish intellectual found in the literature before looking at how the revolutionary intellectual is depicted, The Intellectual An intellectual is anyone who thinks, writes on and discusses human affairs, This broad definition can be applied practically to anyone; what makes the true intellectual different from the rest is that he is willing to stand for his ideas against a majority of opposing views and he does this for the prospect of an ideal world where people can live in better conditions. As for the classification of the intellectuals in the west, Gramsci divides intellectuals into two categories: traditional and organic. The traditional intellectual functions as the protector and instructor of knowledge and can be found among teachers, priests and administrators. The organic intellectual acts as the ‘organisers of a new culture, of a new legal system. He is ‘actively involved in society and constantly struggle to change minds and expand markets.“ In the modern age, the function of the intellectual has changed. In addition to his status as bearer of knowledge and teacher, the intellectual has % Antonio Gramsci, The Prison Notebooks (London: Edward Elgar, 1967), p. 12, quoted in Edward W. Said, Representations of the Intellectual (New York: W.W. Norton, 1993), p. 4.19 to form alliance with the bourgecisie since Gramsci explains that his position is critical most of the time and he is in need of support from different classes. This role of radical critic emerged from the bourgeois class in the age of empire and absolutism when the intellectuals helped in the creation of the bourgeoisie revolution as mass opinion moulders, that is, as the specialized technicians of ideas. French philosopher Julien Benda in The Betrayal of the Intellectuals, defines the intellectual in a different manner. For Benda, the intellectual lives up to the ‘disinterested principles of justice and truth’. He denounces corruption, defends the weak, defies imperfect or oppressive authority. He is in a state of permanent opposition against the established order.* The intellectual is described as a superhuman who should fight against all injustices and defend the weak and the neglected. This theory of the intellectual has proved hard to practice in this century. The intellectual has not always opposed the status quo but sometimes has even helped to defend it. Nationalist and even fascist ideologies have been produced and put into practice by a number of well known intellectuals. So the intellectual need not to be a (leftist) revolutionary although he may prefer to be one. It is generally accepted that since the French Revolution, intellectuals have been among the ranks of the bourgeoisie* as that class struggled against the old established order. But with the twentieth century, the bourgeoisie has emerged as the governing class; now it moves swiftly against any threat to its established order. At the beginning of the century the % Julien Benda, The Betrayal of the Intellectuals (Boston: The Beacon Press, 1955), p. 17. 2 The difference in the meaning of bourgeoisie in different contexts is crucial. In countries where the transformative middle classes are non-existent, the intellectuals fill this position,20 Russian revolution seemed to offer a plausible altemative to the established bourgeois order. Marxism, socialism and communism opposed bourgeois exploitation and oppression, and in them the intellectual found a new theoretical method. Also the rapidly growing Soviet economy presented an alternative method of economic development to the impatient intellectuals of newly founded nation-states.” Scholars make a distinction between the intellectual of western industrial societies and that of newly established former colony nation states. The western intellectual tends to stand out alone and produce his discourse without support or interference from the state because he gets his support from the civil society. But the intellectual of the less-developed country has a special affinity with authority. He is preoccupied with controlling the state apparatus and incorporating himself into the authoritative entity to realize his version of the ideal state.“Autonomous intellectual life is rare in newly founded nation-states.” The intellectual of the less-developed country usually admires western culture and has a western type of university education where he becomes politically active in universities. Student activism in revolutionary and unconstitutional politics is widespread Students in less-developed countries as a rule are already accepted as part of the intelligentsia in those ” Baward Shils, The Intellectuals and the Powers and Other Essays (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1972), p. 404. ® Shits, p. 396 » Ibid, p. 395. * Ibid., p. 393.24 countries because of the scarcity of educated people. They are respected as a lucky minority with the chances to move upward in society. Thus it is no surprise that all around the world, revolutionary intellectuals come among those who usually support and sympathise with the left, but in non-western contexts. By using the jargon of a non-native ideology, the intellectual faces a dilemma: if he wants to take a stand against the ruling system, he faces the possibility of being left without public support. His education and language, his use of intellectual and technical terms, alienates him from the very masses he seeks to help.”' Intellectuals in Turkey fit this description. The Turkish Intellectual The revolutionary intellectual represented in March 12 novels is the reflection of the post-Tanzimat intellectual who transformed his programs and attitudes over time but basically remained firm on the issues of modernization or east-west dichotomy™. In the Turkish language the word for intellectual is aydin, which literally means ‘enlightened’ but carries other connotations. The Turkish intellectual is ‘questioning’ and ‘criticizing’ like his European counterparts but he also speaks from within a group and acts as a spokesman of an ideal This aspect of his character puts him in another position with respect to the western intellectual, who can criticize social, economic and cultural events and the transformations of his society ™ Cemil Merig, Magaradakiler (Istanbul: lletigim, 1997), p. 38. 22-The first intellectuals can be Young Ottomans of 1860s, who tried to form publicity through press, ® Ahmet Oktay, "Tiirk Edebiyatinda Aydin" in Sabahattin Sen ed., Tirk Aydin ve Kimlik Sorumu Astanbul, Baar, 1995), p. 26522 independently and without commitment to any group or ideal other than his own. Cemil Merig, himself a critical-minded Turkish intellectual, divides this learned social group into two: the /iterati and intelligentsia. The literati are composed of those who learn and teach but do not criticise the knowledge passed down by others throughout the ages. The intelligentsia are those who want to question and even destroy the old order to create a better one It is this second which is called the modem intellectual in Turkey. The Turkish intellectual historically is a direct product of westernized state education after Tanzimat. He then served the state for decades; any drive for reform came directly from the modernizing state and the intellectual applied the given directions. With the proclamation of the Turkish Republic, the state-educated elite of the young republic gained full control over the state apparatus as the revolutionary technocrats and intellectuals were on the same side and functioned as the transforming elite of the Republic for over twenty-five years. The practice of using the state and its mechanisms to transform the society has become embedded in the Turkish intellectual tradition. It also makes it difficult for the intellectual to take a stand against the state.° A common criticism directed against the Turkish intellectual concerns the religious nature of his discourse. According to some scholars the Turkish intellectual acts both as a missionary and as a functionary and he is a Serif Mardin, " ‘Aydinlar’ Konusunda, Ulgener ve Bir izah Denemesi" in Serif Mardin, Tirkivede Din ve Siyaset (Makaleler 3) (Istanbul: Hletigim, 1991), p. 33. 3 Ibid, p. 34. °° For a detailed analysis of the origins ofthis populism, please see Zafer Toprak, “Tiirkiye’de Popiilizm” in Sabahattin Sen ed., Tirk Aydin ve Kimlik Sorunu (Istanbul: BagJam, 1995).23 missionary in that he believes in the sacredness of his mission, and a functionary in his relations with the state in that he may very well be a civil servant of the state, propagating the nation-state discourse from within the state apparatus.°” The Turkish intellectual is also known to orient his programs and attitudes in relation to his political opponents. In other words, in the absence of a civil society tradition, he defines his mission by using binary oppositions such as east vs. west, secular vs. religious, republic vs. monarchy and so on. For example, his discourse and ideals may be shaped as a reaction against, the conservative groups who reject the idea of a civilised country. The topics of controversy range from concepts such as social classes, class- consciousness, revolution, the people and their rights to justice, welfare and religion The Turkish intellectual wants to deepen the westernization process initiated by the Tanzimat and relentlessly applied by Kemalist forces though the 1930s. The disillusionment of the Turkish intellectuals in the March 12 era was the result of the unexpected reaction by the state forces and the military, institutions in which the intellectuals had felt deep trust. Unable to integrate with the authority and the people, the revolutionary intellectuals could not control the civil and military bureaucracy nor could they organize a civilian revolutionary movement. With the state forces turned against them, they could not insist on their ideals and thus surrendered. This disillusionment is expressed in the March 12 novels discussed in this paper. *' Mehmet Ali Kiligbay, “Tiirk Aydinmin Diinyasint Anlamak” in Sabahattin Sen ed., Tirk Aydin: ve Kini Sorunu (Istanbul Balam, 1995), p. 176 * Olay, ibid.24 Critique of the Bourgeoisie As said above, in Europe of the nineteenth century, some of the most radical revolutionary movements were led by the bourgeoisie, who financed and supported revolutionary intellectual activities and took active roles in the reshaping of the new democratic order. The bourgeoisie in Turkey, however, was not seen as a revolutionary force by the revolutionary intellectuals of the 1960s, although many of them came from wealthy families. Some scholars point out that there may be hostility from people from low-income groups towards the affluent classes in the cultures of less- developed, newly independent nation-states. In the east, this condition is partly traditional and partly a recent development as traditionally merchants are not treated as part of the nobility and the increase in access to Marxist writing and influence has led to a new hatred of the affluent classes.” Until the 1960s such dislike of the wealthy classes was not felt in ‘Turkey due to the absence of a strong muslim Turkish national bourgeoisie Until the 1950s, the bourgeoisie was weak and needed state support, so for Kemalist revolutionaries’ and their followers, seeking support from the bourgevisie was futile.® By the 1960s, the formation of a strong bourgeoisie had become reality as the business class had grown into maturity and won some modicum of independence from the state. The bourgeoisie began to employ a large number of workers, which attracted the attention of the revolutionary leftist circles. In orthodox Manxist theory, socialist revolution » Shils, p. 402, See Ayge Bugra, State and Big Business in Turkey (Albany: SUNY Press, 1994).25 must made against the bourgeoisie to free the proletariat, making it suddenly plausible for the socialist intellectuals to declare the bourgeoisie as the primary target in the revolutionary struggle.” This may explain why the bourgeois class is described as a negative and opposing force in March 12 novels. The revolutionaries have sympathy towards workers, peasants, and the military but are against the bourgeoisie and its extension into the governing structure, namely in the form of economically liberal right wing governments. Throughout the novels the luxurious life of the upper classes and the conscious control by the bourgeoisie of the media and ordinary people's lives receive criticism. The texts reveal that the revolution in the mind of the intellectual relies more on the leftist forces in the army and the working class than it does on civilians, thereby discarding any possible assistance from the affluent sectors of the society. Since he wants to realize equal distribution of income and better living conditions, the bourgeois class is the primary target. In March 12 novels several aspects of the intellectual mentioned above can be observed. A persistent criticism of the bourgeois class is made, for example. The bourgecisie is described as one unified class that always seeks pleasure, and wants to dominate the people and is ready to protect the unjust order at any expense. The discussion of the intellectual in March 12 novels begins with Pinar Kiir's Yarn Yarm [Tomorow, Tomorrow]. In this novel, the story of a revolutionary, Selim, is told. Selim, the son of a rich industrial businessman, receives his undergraduate education in Paris in the midst of the May 1968 Ibid,26 student uprisings and general boycott. He retums to Turkey with a revolutionary spirit. He lives in his cousin Oktay’s house and enters into an affair with Oktay’s wife, Seyda. Selim persuades her to join in revolutionary activities. Throughout the novel, he strongly criticizes the bourgeoisie: Moreover, this is a unified mass. Forty people who know each other...Yes, they do fight with each other at times but they know ‘very well to stand as one against a common enemy. Is there anyone who doesn’t know —at least feel- that self-benefit comes before everything? Carefree people who know the rules of the game very well having fun among themselves. Is this not typical? For those that violate the rules shall immediately be noticed and eliminated. The go on entertaining themselves as they did before, cherishing the wealth and happiness they possess, Selim claims the bourgeoisie act as a unified class that has standard tules for pleasure seeking and profit maximisation. Sometimes they may argue among themselves but in the face of a common enemy like the working class or the revolutionaries, they stand up united. Selim makes an insider's criticism. He has been in and out of this small circle and he now hates it. His ideas reflect the revolutionary intellectual’s discourse on the bourgeoisie. They are a unified class which wants to exploit the people. The revolutionary intellectual has to fight this enemy and warn his people against this threat. Here the intellectual with socialist tendencies defines his mission Pinar Kar, Yarmn Yarmn (Istanbul: Can, 1994), p. 33, “..Kaynagmns bir kitle bu istelik. Birbirin bilen kirk ig..Gerektiginde birbirleriniyeseler de _gereldiginde ortak dilsmana karst birlegmesini cok iyi blirler. Gikar kaygisinin hergeyin tistinde oldugumu bilmeyen, burn tam bilincine varmasa bile, sezmeyen var mudir? Oyunun kurallarim pek {yl bilen Rsilerin kendi aralannda tasasizca elenmeleri olagan degil mi yan? Kurallant sageranlar ‘ralarinda zaten, ter belli olu, fez silinir, kovulurlar. Kalantar eglenirler iste ble; hem varlikh: hem ‘mutlu olmanm fadim alabitdigine gtkararirtar...”27 in opposition to a socio-economic group. The bourgecis becomes the primary target of the intellectual and helps to define his identity as the ‘other’. In Fiiruzan’s 47 'liler [Bom in *47], the story of Emine and her friends is told. Born in 1947, she and her friends are the sons and daughters of first generation Kemalist idealists. Emine's father and mother are teachers and her childhood years pass in Erzurum where she witnesses the hardships faced by the people of the region. When she goes to Istanbul for her university education, she meets Haydar, Ziilkadir, and other students from the revolutionary circle. She actively participates in their activities. During a revolutionary parade, Emine’s revolutionary friend shouts out against the bourgecisie, He tells his supporters not to fear the wealthy class: “Are you afraid of that 500,000 or say 1,000,000 parasites? Our people are not corrupted. They don't have their stand behind them"®, For Haydar, the bourgeoisie consists of a small number of people compared with the rest of the population. He claims that people do not love and support the bourgeoisie. He calls them parasites and persuades his followers not to fear this class. Haydar's attitude is typical of a revolutionary intellectual speaking on behalf of the people as a self appointed representative. Here we see the intellectual claiming a mission to save his people. The intellectual treats the other, namely the bourgeoisie, as the enemy. The second point to be made is the tendency of the intellectual to speak on behalf of the people. The intellectual, in this case Haydar, claims that the people cannot (or should not) tolerate the bourgeoisie. © FGruzan, 47'liler (Istanbul: YKY, 1996), p. 307. “..$u bes yilz bin bilemedin bir milyon wyuzdan mm korkuporsunuz? Bizim halkimz yor bir halle degildin, Bunlarin savundugurun ardinda halkimz yoktur..""28 In Adalet Agaoglu's Bir Dagan Gecesi [A Wedding Night], the stories of several people disillusioned by the effects of the intervention are told through the eyes of Professor Omer on his niece's wedding night. Omer is an Oxford educated professor of economics at Istanbul University and a revolutionary intellectual. The son of an ambassador, he is married to a colleague, Aysel, also a revolutionary intellectual and the sister of Tezel and {ihan. They all meet at the wedding of Iihan’s daughter, Aygen, in early 1973. In the stream- of-consciousness technique we are exposed to the bitter memories of Omer, Tezel and Aygen, who feel lost after the intervention of 1971, Omer has been arrested and fired from his post in the State Planning Office and has discovered that his wife Aysel has been having an extramarital relationship with one of her students. His sister-in-law, Tezel, has lost her faith in the tevolutionary movement because two revolutionaries beat her ahd spit in her face. But in fact her loss of faith in the revolutionary intellectuals is the result of her disappointment in the performance of these intellectuals. The bride, Aysen, is forced to marry the son of a general; she agrees unwillingly as a means of self-punishment and protest because she was rejected by the revolutionary circles because of her bourgeois origin. At this wedding ceremony, Fitnat Hanim, Aysen’s grandmother also Aysel's, Tezel’s and lihan's mother recalls a bitter fight at dinner among her son and her daughter. In this fight, Ilhan, the businessman and brother of Aysel, criticizes her revolutionary ideas, and displays discontent with the people and their revolutionary supporters: Iinan: Well, young lady, such generously laid tables are no good for you. What you should do is to go out and eat onion -bread with your fellow workers!29 Aysel: I've had enough of youl... If you were in trouble tomorrow, you wouldn't hesitate to buy even the military's guns. After all this is a piece of land no one comes about, without an owner. Once you get used to buying or usurping you can even buy the military and turn the rifle on your own brothers and sisters! In response to Iihan’s rude comment, Aysel replies in an interesting manner. She speaks as if she predicts the coming intervention, She accuses Ithan of allying with the military, in her own words: buying the military's guns. She accuses the bourgecisie in the person of Iihan of stealing the land and resources of Turkey, illustrating the intellectuat’s hatred of the bourgeoisie, She describes the bourgevisie as a negative force and a very dangerous one if assisted by the military. Here several points need elaboration. First, lihan as the affluent bourgeois is portrayed as someone who hates the poor sections of society. This representation of the bourgeois goes well with the hatred of the intellectual towards the bourgeois in March 12 novels. Second, lihan accuses the intellectuals of hypocrisy: while eating at abundant tables, the very people the intellectuals want to help are starving. This illustrates the dilemma of the intellectual: he is in fact far above the people in every sense of the word and yet he wants to be among the people. ‘Tezel's comment on the armed forces is even more interesting. As an intellectual with socialist tendencies, Tezel criticizes the common economic. “ Adalet AgaoBlu, Bir Diggin Gecesi (istanbul: YKY, 1995), p. 129. “Iihan: Ooo kigi harm, biyle bol bulamag sofralar sizin igin degil efendim. Gidin siz iggi kardeglerinizle, kigt bokdu hallanizla sogan ekmek yiyin bakali.. ‘Aysel Yetin artik..artn cok stlagursantz askerinsilahunt bile satin alirsonz siz. Her sey salon alnaya bir kez alisinca, bu memleket sahipsiz, tapusuz bir toprak parcast inkl, bir kez el koymaya baslaynnca asker de alam ve namtularin ucuu 6 kardeslerinize bile gevirirsinlz)..”30 and political interests of the military and the bourgeoisie. The military intervention is the result of such a cooperation. In the March 12 novels the consumption pattems of the bourgeoisie are often criticized. Descriptions of home decoration, of women and their clothing in detail, the continuos mention of cars and other luxury items all appear. For example, during her wedding preparations, Aysen gets mad at her mother and condemns her consumption: You smell of hairdye. You smell of nail polish. You smell of makeup foundation. You smell of rich bath and massage. You smell of gold and diamond. You even smell of Semih. I'm not mistaken -you smell of generals, At the moment you smell of uniform most. You smell of blood! You smell of everything but of a mother®. Here in the person of Aysen’s mother, the consumption by the bourgeoisie is accused and convicted. Actually, at the time, people of modest means were able to afford the above-mentioned luxury items, but in her dual role of daughter of a wealthy family and a revolutionary, Aysen feels conflicted. She cannot accept the indifference of her mother towards everyday events. According to Aysen, her mother and other women of the bourgeoisie only consume. The association of the smell of diamonds and gold with the generals is yet another indication of the common bond of interest between the armed forces and the bourgecisie that the intellectuals want to criticize. Since revolutionary intellectuals demand a fair distribution of income, any case of excessive consumption becomes a target. “Ibid, p. 234, «$05 bayasfokuporsin, Tima clés kokyorsim.Fondatenkokorsin, Sain Kokayorsn, Masa) okuyorsun, Altin kokuyorsun, Elmas kokuyorsun. Semih kokiprrsun hatta—yanulmam., hatta Himgeneral, orgeneral kokugorsun. Su siralar en ¢ok iniforma kokwyorsun, Kan kokuyorsum, kan! Her {ey kokuyorsun, ama hig anne kokmayorsun.”