The Myth
According to Claude Lévi-Strauss, each society creates an image of itself using the past, which mostly has characteristics of a myth. The main function of the myth is to legitimize a certain social order and world view and to imagine the future in relation with both the present and the past (Zeybek, 2014:157).
------
Değirmencioğlu (2014) uses the subtitle "Martyrdom Myths in Turkey" for a great collection of writings about the political discourse, history and practices on martyrdom and militarism in Turkey. However he does not give a definition of the term 'myth' throughout the book, probably because of the well-known public usage of the term: 'the myth of x' implies mostly a collective delusion, a non-truth accepted by the majority of the people. Zeybek (2014), the writer of the chapter "Re-writing the Wars: Martyrs and the Selective Memory of the Power", gives a definition from Claude Lévi-Strauss: "Each society creates an image of itself using the past, which mostly has characteristics of a myth. The main function of the myth is to legitimize a certain social order and world view and to imagine the future in relation with both the present and the past." (Zeybek, 2014:157). Zeybek interprets the function of the myth of martyrdom basically as 'homogenizing the society" in order to create a unity of nation/ummah. In order to constitute this organic and corporatist worldview, it clearly separates the ally from the enemy (by creating enemies) and eliminates possible differences through enunciation, historiography, mnemonic practices, legal regulations etc.
bunu bir yere ekle çanakkale savaşıyla ilgili: (The deconstruction of the myth of Çanakkale War and the re-construction of it as (critical) history.)
------
öneri başlık: Myth, Collective Memory and Subjectivization (or enunciation): The Problem of Autonomous Individual Action
While meditating on monuments, the main concern is about the 'subjectifiying power' of spatial arrangements. How can a piece of stone determine or affect the cognitive and emotional processes of a free individual? And if we are talking about a group of people or a society, then should we talk about a collective memory or a collective mind? Does the claim that a martyrs' cemetery or a patriotic military monument reproduce the myth of martyrdom in everyday life, leave no space for free will or autonomous action? In order to provide a theoretical background, this chapter will analyze the relations between myth, collective memory and enunciation.
Değirmencioğlu, S. (2014)......
Cassirer, E. ( ) The Myth of the State
According to Barash (2008) Cassirer's essential argument is that in extreme situations, emotional dispositions give rise to myth. Both magical/religious and modern myths subordinate the individual in this way to collective modes of existence. Here, the main problem is the loss of individual moral judgment and freedom.{heideggerin eleştirisini dipnota koy]
Barash, J. A. (2008) "Ernst Cassirer’s Theory of Myth: On the Ethico-Political Dimension of His Debate with Martin Heidegger", The Symbolic Construction of Reality: The Legacy of Ernst Cassirer, Jeffrey Andrew Barash (ed.), The University of Chicago Press, pp.114-132.
------
Değirmencioğlu (2014) uses the subtitle "Martyrdom Myths in Turkey" for a great collection of writings about the political discourse, history and practices on martyrdom and militarism in Turkey. However he does not give a definition of the term 'myth' throughout the book, probably because of the well-known public usage of the term: 'the myth of x' implies mostly a collective delusion, a non-truth accepted by the majority of the people. Zeybek (2014), the writer of the chapter "Re-writing the Wars: Martyrs and the Selective Memory of the Power", gives a definition from Claude Lévi-Strauss: "Each society creates an image of itself using the past, which mostly has characteristics of a myth. The main function of the myth is to legitimize a certain social order and world view and to imagine the future in relation with both the present and the past." (Zeybek, 2014:157). Zeybek interprets the function of the myth of martyrdom basically as 'homogenizing the society" in order to create a unity of nation/ummah. In order to constitute this organic and corporatist worldview, it clearly separates the ally from the enemy (by creating enemies) and eliminates possible differences through enunciation, historiography, mnemonic practices, legal regulations etc.
bunu bir yere ekle çanakkale savaşıyla ilgili: (The deconstruction of the myth of Çanakkale War and the re-construction of it as (critical) history.)
------
öneri başlık: Myth, Collective Memory and Subjectivization (or enunciation): The Problem of Autonomous Individual Action
While meditating on monuments, the main concern is about the 'subjectifiying power' of spatial arrangements. How can a piece of stone determine or affect the cognitive and emotional processes of a free individual? And if we are talking about a group of people or a society, then should we talk about a collective memory or a collective mind? Does the claim that a martyrs' cemetery or a patriotic military monument reproduce the myth of martyrdom in everyday life, leave no space for free will or autonomous action? In order to provide a theoretical background, this chapter will analyze the relations between myth, collective memory and enunciation.
Değirmencioğlu, S. (2014)......
Cassirer, E. ( ) The Myth of the State
According to Barash (2008) Cassirer's essential argument is that in extreme situations, emotional dispositions give rise to myth. Both magical/religious and modern myths subordinate the individual in this way to collective modes of existence. Here, the main problem is the loss of individual moral judgment and freedom.{heideggerin eleştirisini dipnota koy]
Barash, J. A. (2008) "Ernst Cassirer’s Theory of Myth: On the Ethico-Political Dimension of His Debate with Martin Heidegger", The Symbolic Construction of Reality: The Legacy of Ernst Cassirer, Jeffrey Andrew Barash (ed.), The University of Chicago Press, pp.114-132.
Comments
Post a Comment