The Time Regulation Institute

 
    This long paper that I have written for my World Lit. course where we discovered literature of different countries mostly the colonized parts of the world but we had Turkish writers also and discussed the issue of modernity, modernism etc. I have chosen Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar as my paper and oral presentation assignment. I thought it would be easy because it was written in my mother language but it was more difficult to write about than english ones. I had to use secondary sources at least 5 and all of them were Turkish so I had to translate every one of them unfortunately. Anyway it was the longest assignment I wrote till the end of this semester. Hope it helps someone.

                                            The Time Regulation Institute

      Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar is known one of the most important modern novelists and poets of Turkish literature. In fact he wanted to be known with his poems but his novels are more popular than his poems. He lived in the time of transition period of Turkey, so in his novels we see influence of this period a lot. Actually, he criticizes this period and the people who lived at the time, in terms of changing everything, accepting anything as the right one for the sake of being modern which is came from West, although he was not against to Modernization. By virtue of his criticism of this time most of people especially who was known as intellectual did not like him much, in fact Tanpınar was isolated by these intellectuals and they presented him like retrograde person because of his ideas. Of course it was a misunderstanding of Tanpınar’s idea, he was not against to Modernization but he defended not to lose of all Ottoman and Islamic heritage. He was right in his defence because most of people of that time thought that modernization means throw out past and all heritage than to take everything from West instead of them which most probably ends with identity problem. When we look at the history of world we can easily see many examples of physical colonialism, in all of them the superior side which means colonizer wants to make colonized people forget of their past finally their identity in order to divide and rule them easily. Turkey has never been colonized physically but, with the  begining of modernization process Turkey and citizens of this country start to lose something, something belongs past and identity even today it goes like this. In this point, Tanpınar criticizes Turkish society, not for only The Time Regulation Institute in another his novels are also based on same point. In The Time Regulation Institute which is the base of this paper Tanpınar specifically shows us that every change does not mean an improvement. Rest of the paper will prove this thesis with the help of primary and secondary sources.

     Before going through the novel with examples we need to understand that what modernization means.

There is an essential difference between the two of the words, modernity and modernisation, which has been intended by Habermas. This difference identifies historical evolution, not only the western societies  but also non-western ones. We can say shortly, modernity marks a Project or reflection, but the modernisation marks   instituonal and structural evolution which can be facilitated by modernity. .Another subjectional judgement In this context, non-western societies are able to modernize but not to be modernWesternizing  includes the colonizational and capitulational relations and beside of this capitalist market growth. Because of this point, westernizing also includes and cause the unequal historic evolutional improvements.“Modern” pratics, which has been executed on the non-western countries,  have never any humanistic virtues and benevolent characteristics.Westernizing has contructed itself as an compensational  idelogy and remover of the historical belatedness as a negotiator.

With the Angle of the political wiew, modernity and modernisation explains the evolution of normative and instituonal seperations.Modernity can be defined as a process like an individual discipliner and educater. But modernisation establishes the infrastructural basement of this kind of education. In other words, modernisation identifies the conceptual and political framework. Modernity in the meaning of “To westernize” or we can rather to call “make someone westernize” couldn’t have surpassed the resistance. But it caused many important irreversible changes in the way of modernisation for many societies in the world. (Çiğdem 68)

   In the novel Tanpınar chose the characters on purposely to show circumstances of that time with an ironic and satiric way. This transition period and its dilemma is the base of Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar. Most of his writings we see the same point.

Tanpınar’s writings vocalise a criticism of such a combination of nationalism and cultural conservatism… Indeed, the major crux of Tanpınar’s vision is this: how to reconcile the European ideals with a restored cultural tradition and historical continuity. True, in some crucial respects, Tanpınar explicity criticises the positivistic and atomistic moral and political outlook of some of the boosters of modernity. This strain in Tanpınar’s thought comes out very clearly when he expresses the existential  significiance of some of his crucial terms such as “continuity” and “tradition”. But in some other important respects, Tanpınarcontinues with the political legacy of European modernity. This manifestly distinguishes Tanpınar’s thought from Safa’s cultural conservatism, a perspective replete with cultural essentialism and romantic deceit. In no account Tanpınar’s view of cultural tradition can be construed as to refer either to some sort of an aggressive political nationalism that can be used as an instrument of social and political mobilisation or an epistemological essentialism concerning the Notion of culture and tradition. Nonetheless, some of Tanpınar’s important concepts and writings have invited, with some justification, the interpretation that Tanpınar’s work expresses yet another romanticisied version of conservatism or traditionalism. Many commentators, bothhis proponents and opponents, have stressed this ambivalence in Tanpınar’s writing. (Sezer 428)

 

 For Tanpınar himself his expression is that;

When the idea of society is introduced, the tragedy of fate diminishes, because unlike fort he individual, there is no death for society. Cotinuity exists there. The chain continues for all eternity.. History, art, Works, traditions – all of these are society’s consciousness of contiunity.. As individuals – that is, as people diverge from the cosnciousness of society – they are nothing but an aggregate of weaknesses. As they enter into and adopt the life of society, they overcome these weaknesses.. What is going to liv efor all eternity is netiher the individual nor even generations, but rather society. Only society, and its historical manifestion, the nation, can withstand fate and time. Only the oak tree that has put pout its roots into the depths of the earth, not the individual leaf, can endure the storm. ( 22-23)

   In the novel Tanpınar uses an irony and shows us oddness of the people at that time with the little details through the characters of the novel. For instance in the home of father of Hayri İrdal is the protagonist of the novel they a Wall clock named as Mübarek and fort hat clock İrdal describes it as a human being also everyone who lives in that home is so respectful fort he clock, Mübarek. Being respectful for an old clock represents dependence of past which in spite of teh modernization process still they are bound their past, their heritage. Another example is wives of Hayri İrdal, first one Emine is a faitful, a good house wife who represents house wives in old time, in Ottoman time but, when we come to Pakize the second wife of İrdal, he meets with her after meeting with Halit Ayarcı who changes his life a lot. For Pakize, she is not a faitful woman, she is not like Emine at all. She cheats Hayri with Halit Ayarcı also they have a child but she does not regret at all. She is a kind of light woman like she likes parties, drinking etc. In terms of this representation I can easily say that Pakize signifies to the Western women. Of course I do not humiliate or blame western women but this example shows us that modernization is understood wrong. There is a misunderstanding at that time because for people who live the time was thinking that who behaves like the women in the movies or like the women in the West makes them modern. This is the wrong perception of modernization in our country. To support the thesis, I can say that two have new habit like Pakize, it is a changes but it is not an improvement at all.

   One of another important points in the text is the corruption of government and foundations. In the novel Hayri and Halit Ayarcı set the Time Regulation Institute and they get employees fort he institute. The funny and ironic point is that they choose employees from their relatives and suggestions of their friends. They do not think about anything the education or qualification of them. The significant thing is for them to be relative or friend. This circumstance criticizes of foundations and their working system in Turkey. Eventhough absurdity of existence of the institute, governer visits the institute and congrulates them to do such works. This is another ironic point in the novel.

Prominent Tanzimat novelists such as Ahmet Mithat Efendi and Namık Kemal welcomed Western technology while preserving theestablished cultural texture in their novels. The republican novel, on theother hand, seems to serve the purpose of building a nation–state. AhmetHamdi Tanpınar is one of the outstanding novelists of this epoch. A careful analysis of his novels, which problematize the major social and cultural transformations from Tanzimat to Republic, may serve to understand beter the Westernitation process in Turkey. Modernisation achievements which has been made Ottoman era, imitates western but the main goal of these activities is keep the empire permanent. But republic changes the ideas. Now and then, the main purpose is,”improvement for social order” In this era, we saw radically hiatus from traditions and policies. Revolutions punctuate the speech with cheers and make the end forever. (Gündüz 14)

   Halit Ayarcı seems to the antagonist of the novel because whenever he wants something İrdal does it without questioning. Of course Ayarcı influences İrdal’s life in a bad way. After meeting with Ayarcı, İrdal’s life changes a lot in a bad way. He behaves like so called modern people. He cehats his wife also and somehow he know the relationship between his wife and Halit Ayarcı but he does not do anything even does not say any word. Maybe it can be criticism of the proceeds of being modern in a bad way.

İrdal performed all the things that has been told by Ayarcı without questioning. But the author criticize the obedience and acceptions without any investigation. On the other hand, useless activities that made by Ayarcı who says “beliefs are necessary for success” has been criticize also. All of two behaviours are nonsense fort the author. Imperious manner of Ayarcı and thoughts about  modernisation symbolizes western life style. İrdal symbolizes the last term of the poor Ottoman Empire and the conservative policy. (Günday 84)

  To sum up, in this novel Tanpınar shows the situation of the people at the transition time. Misunderstanding of Modernization, identity crisis and corruption of belief somehow traditions which means, with the begining of Tanzimat a Modernization process stars and it still cotinues, this process has taken something from our lives because it does not fit on us. In terms of this perspective, Tanpınar defends that, we should protect our İslamic and Ottoman heritage, we should not take everything from West. Of course it does not mean that Tanpınar does not like West but he just wanted to make us protect our past if we do not then it turns identity crisis, nothing at all.

Works Cited

    Çiğdem, Ahmet. "Batılılaşma Modernite ve Modernizasyon." Modern Türkiye'de siyasî düşünce. 1. baskı. ed. Cağaloğlu, İstanbul: İletişim, 20012009. . Print. 

    Gündüz, Olgun. "Türkiyede Batılılaşma Serüveninde Özgün Bir Portre: Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar." U.Ü. Fen Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi 1 Jan. 2002: 14. Web. .

   Günday, Rıfat . "Saatleri Ayarlama Enstitüsü'nde Toplumsal- Eleştiri ve İroni." İlmi Araştırmalar 1 Jan. 2007: 79-102. Print

     Sezer, Devrim . The anxiety of cultural authenticity in Turkish communitarian thought: Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar and Peyami Safa on Europe and modernity, History of European Ideas. :  2012. Print.

   Tanpınar, Ahmet Hamdi, and Maureen Freely. The Time Regulation Institute. New York: Penguin Classics, 2013. Print.