Karnavala Mîxaîl Baxtîn û Gengeşeyên Derbarê Wê de

Karnavala Mîxaîl Baxtîn û Gengeşeyên Derbarê Wê de

UMRAN ARAN

Puxte: Mîxaîl Mîxaîlovîç Baxtîn (1895-1975) yek ji teorîsyenên giring ên sedsala bîstem e. Xebatên wî ji felsefeyê, fenomenolojiyê, heta dîroka çandê, antropolojî û zanista edebiyatê belav dibin. Teoriya wî ya karnavalê di nav xebatên wî de cihekî giring digire. Li vir bi wateya berteng bi tenê karnavalên normal, ne mijara Baxtîn e; herwiha şahî û pîrozbahiyên bi wî rengî jî mijarên wî ne. Baxtîn di karnavalên normal û di şahînetên di rengê karnavalê de, ji hêla civakî ve ruhekî dijber û hêzeke şoreşgerane dibîne. Li gorî wî di karnavalê de hiyerarşî dihên şikenandin, rutbe tên betalkirin û ji her koma civakê mirov bi awayekî serbest tên ba hev. Di vê nivîsarê de em ê pêşî bi awayekî kurt behsa feraseta Baxtîn a karnavalê bikin û dûre jî hin gengeşeyên li ser hin aliyên wê hilsengînin.

Peyvên sereke: Karnaval, Stalînîzm, hiyerarşî, dêr, şiddet, Femînîzm

Dema ku Baxtîn hewl dide xweserî û bêmanendiya Rabelais nîşan bide, dide pey şopên karnavalê û ji antîkîteyê heta demên modern wêneyekî xêz dike. Li gorî wî xetek ji serdema antîk û xetek ji serdema navîn hatibû û di Ronesansê de gihîştibû astekê ku kiribû nivîskarên mezin ên wek Rabelais û Cervantes derkevin. Di ber vê yekê re bi taybetî li ser karnavalên serdema navîn disekine ku li gelek bajarên mezin ên serdema navîn salê sê meh bi wan dibuhurîn.

Li gorî Baxtîn, karnaval temaşayek e ku sehneya wê tune ye, di navbera temaşevan û îcrakeran de cudahî tune ye. Di karnavalê de herkes beşdarekî çalak e, di kiryara karnavalê de her kes dihê nik hev, dibe yek. Karnaval nayê temaşekirin heta bi gotineke hişk nayê îcrakirin jî; beşdarên wê di karnavalê de dijîn, heta ku di meriyetê de be li gorî qanûnên wê dijîn; yanî, jiyaneke karnavalê didomînin. Jiyana karnavalê ji ber ku li derî tiştên fêrbûyî ye, “jiyaneke berevajîkirî” ye, “rûyê cîhanê yê wergerandî” ye. Hemû qanûn, qedexe û astengiyên jiyana derî karnavalê bi dirêjiya karnavalê dihên ragirtin [suspend/askıya almak]. Mesafeyên navbera mirovan dihên ragirtin û di navbera mirovan de temaseke azad û semîmî pêk dihê. Di karnavalê de ji ber ku terzeke nû ya têkiliyên navbera mirovan li dar e, ev yek ji riwangeha jiyana derî karnavalê seyr dixuye. Karnaval, ya pîroz û ya dinyewî, ya rajor û ya rajêr, ya giring û ya negiring, zana û ehmeq tîne nik hev, wan dike yek, têkildar û pêwendîdarî hev dike, ev kategoriya karnavalê pêkvebûnên neguncaw ên xweserî karnavalê ye. Di karnavalê de Bêhurmetiya dînî, bitackirina qralê karnavalê bi tinazî/henekî û dûre bêtackirina wî, patosa guherîn û guhertinan, mirin û nûbûnê zal e. Karnaval şahîneta demê ye ku her tiştî ji nav dibe û her tiştî nû dike. Kesê ku dihê sertackirin ziddê qralekî rastîn e, an koleyek an jî qeşmerek e; ev kiryar cîhana berevajîkirî ya karnavalê diafirîne û wê pîroz dike. Karnaval tu tiştî mûtleq nake, rolatîviya şeng a her tiştî îlan dike. Kenê xweserî yê karnavalê berê xwe dide tişta berz, tişta pîroz; berê xwe dide guherîna desthilat û heqîqetan, guherîna pergalên cîhanê.1

Baxtîn xebata xwe ya sereke ya di vî warî de wek tezekê di 1940î de pêşkêşî Enstîtuya Gorkî kir û ancaq di 1947an de ji bo parastinê hat vexwendin. Tez jî ancaq di 1965an de bi navê Rabelaîs û Cîhana Wî2 wek pirtûk hat çapkirin. Bunasa vê yekê karîgerî û pesta Stalînîzmê ya li ser akademiya Rûsyayê bû. Di kongreya yekem a Yekitiya Nivîskarên Sovyetê de ku 1934an de kom bûbû, dihat xwestin ku lehengên folklorê bi awayekî pozîtîf bihên şayesandin. Piştî vê mêjûyê folklora Rûs ket nav Stalînîstbûneke lezûbez. Piştî wê kongreyê tekane têgihîştina edebî ku dihat pejirandin “realîzma sosyalîst” bû. Hêmaya gel a li cem Baxtîn dijberî vê yekê bû. Herweku Holquist3 jî destnîşan kiriye “realîzma grotesk” a di vê pirtûkê de pênasekirî, tam dijberî kategoriyên pênasekirina “realîzma sosyalîst” a wê demê bû.

Dema ku em li atmosfera tirsê ya wê demê li Rûsyayê zal e, bifikirin hingê em dikarin kenê ku Baxtîn behs dike, ew ê ku tirsê têk dibe baştir fam bikin. An jî em Stalînîzma ku hewl dida her çîn û tebeqeya civakê veguherîne milîtanan û ji hêla îdeolojiyê ve homojen bike, bînin ber çavên xwe em dikarin gelê Baxtîn ê serbixwe û karnavala wî ya li dij desthilat û heqîqetên hazir, baştir fam bikin. Lê belê dîsa jî bi me wisa dihê ku di mijara dîn û gelê îdealîzekirî de Baxtîn hinekî hewl daye nosyonên Stalînîzmê jî bi kar bîne. Di vê mijarê de ramana Robert Stam balkêş e. Li gorî Robert Stam4 Baxtîn rola dêrê wek hêzeke pestker bi awayekî îronîk an du-deng bi kar tîne da ku weku bi dij-dêriya Stalînîst re hevaheng xuya bibe, lê di rastiyê de ew li dij wê dipeyive. Stam destnîşan dike ku “hunera gel,” “gel” û “pestkeriya dêrê” jî di nav de, Baxtîn babetên favorî yên Stalînîst werdigire û wan wek bûmerangekê li dij fermîtiya Sovyetê bi kar tîne. Dîsa Eagleton jî difikire ku Baxtîn di vê mijarê de bi awayekî dualî tevgeriyaye. Eagleton dibêje: “Baxtîn belkî di dîroka ‘rexneya Marksîst’ de bi bizava herî wêrek û xasûk, siyaseta teqîner a bedenê, erotîkê, doxînsistiyê û semiyotîkê datîne dijberî ‘desthilatdariya fermî, teşeparêz û mantiqî’ ku navê wê yê negotî Stalînîzm e.”5 Halbûkî Mikhail K. Ryklin wek wan nafikire û bawer dike ku Baxtîn di karîgeriya Stalînîzmê de maye. Mikhail K. Ryklin6 dupatkirina Baxtîn a ji bedena ferd bêtir li ser bedena komunal, bi pirsgirêk dibîne. Li gorî wî di serdemekê de ku mirov di bin êşkenceyan de dihatin kuştin, ev dupatkirin mirov li hember mirinên ferdî kor dike. Ryklin angaşt dike ku Baxtîn hiştiye ku îdeolojiya Stalînîst nifûzî teoriya wî bike û wê deforme bike.

Di 1935an de Anatoli Lunaçarski, Komîserê Perwerdeyê yê berê yê Stalîn, nivîsek nivîsîbû ku tê de angaşt dikir ku gengaz e ku karnaval ji bo rageşiyên civakê wek walfa ewlehiyê bihê bikaranîn.7 Muhtemelen Baxtîn li dij vê angaştê aliyê dij-desthilat û dij-fermîtî yê karnavalê cext kir. Lê belê derbarê vî aliyê karnavalê de gelek gengeşe hene. Bo nimûne Eagleton karnavalê wek meseleyeke bi îcazet dibîne ku li gorî wî karnaval ji qelşeke hegemonyayê ya destûrdayî pê ve ne tiştek e; sînorên wê diyar in û ancaq bi qasî berhemeke hunera şoreşger, desthilat aciz bikira; ew dafisandina tansiyona civakê bû.8 Helbet ev mesele ne ew qasî hêsan e. Li gorî Holquist karnaval çemkeke şoreşger e û herçend papaz û qralan wisa didan xuyakirin weku ew bixwe destûrê bidin karnavalan jî, di eslê xwe de wan ji mecbûrî li ber hêza ku karnaval jê diza serî diçemandin.9 Dîsa Baxtîn jî di vê mijarê de diyar dike ku bi dirêjiya serdema navîn, dêr û dewlet mecbûr man ku kêm zêde tawîzan bidin û meydana bazarê ya karnavalê tetmîn bikin.10

Derbirînên Peter Burke yê ku xebateke dîrokî li ser karnavalê kiriye, meseleyê hinekî din aloz dike. Peter Burke destnîşan dike ku gelek mînakên karnavalê hebûn ku derbirînên rîtualîzekirî yên serhildêr di wan de vediguherîn aloziyeke fiîlî. Lewma li hember ihtîmala derketina serhildanekê, gelek caran ji bo hilnegirtina çekan belavok dihatin belavkirin û bi rastî jî di demên din de nedihiştin karnaval pêk bihên.11 Humphery ê ku hewl dide çemka karnavalê wek kategoriyeke dîrokî û analîtîk hinekî rafîne bike, meseleyê tîne cihekî maqûltir. Humphery dibêje ku belê rast e aliyekî karnavalê heye ku tiştên jiyana rojane berevajî dike, lê belê em nikarin vê yekê yekser wek hêzeke dijber a civakî hilsengînin. Herwiha destnîşan dike ku karnaval bi armancên cuda ji mecazên berevajîkirin û wergerandinê sûd werdigire; ev armanc ji derbirîna peyameke dînî ya ortodoks, digihên heta antagonîzm û destwerdaneke yekser a siyasî.12 Humphery, diyar dike ku hem ramana radîkal a ku karnavalê li dijî pergala serdest dibîne û hem jî ramana ku wê wek subaba ewlehiyê dibîne, herdu jî meseleyê redukte dikin; ji ber ku têkiliyên tevhev dadixin asteke besîd a duserî: Hilweşandin an parastina pergalê.13 Li vir em dikarin bibêjin ku Humphery xala dawî datîne di mijara dij-desthilatiya karnavalê de. Ji ber ku Baxtîn gelek caran dubare dike ku bi tenê demên diyar ên salê ev jiyana duyem li dar bû, derfeta şîrovekirinên wek subaba ewlehiyê zêde dibe. Lê belê weku mînak jî nîşan didin ev bi tenê aliyekî meseleyê ye û nabe ku wek temamê wê bihê pejirandin.

Baxtîn bi dirêjiya pirtûkê gelek caran diyar dike ku dema karnavalê hemû milmilaneyên siyasî û rojane dihên ragirtin. Heta Baxtîn xweseriyeke taybet dibexşîne gel û dibêje ku qelebalixiya karnavalesk a li meydanê û kuçeyan, ne qelebalixiyeke salt e. Ev wek yekpareyekê gel e; rewşa gel e ku bi rêbazên wî hatiye birêkxistin.14 Li gorî Baxtîn ev li derî û li dijî hemû rêxistinên sosyoekonomîk û siyasî yên zextker e; ji ber ku ev rêxistinên han di dema şahiyê de dihên ragirtin. Dema ku bi awayekî dîrokî û li ser mînakên serbixwe xebat hatine kirin derbarê rastiya vê yekê de hin guman derketine holê. Mîsal Le Roy Ladurie yê ku li ser karnavalên Romayiyan xebitiye, diyar dike ku berî dema karnavalê yek jê cotkar û esnaf, yek jê torin û esilzade du komên eşkere hebûn û di dema karnavalê de di navbera van her du koman de şer, carinan ji asta sembolîkbûnê derdiket û digihîşt wê radeyê ku cihê karnavalê dibû meydana qetlîamê. Helbet ne şert e ku ev dualîtî, modela zal a karnavalên din be jî, lê belê Ladurie angaşt dike ku gelek caran karnaval dibû meydana şerê rîtuelîzekirî yê du partiyan.15 Ev mînak nîşanî me dide ku di rêxistina karnavalê de gel ew qasî ne otonom bû û di karnavalê de hemû dijayetiyên rojane nedihatin ragirtin. Helbet dema ku em vê yekê dibêjin jî em angaşt nakin ku hemû karnaval wisa ne. Lê belê em dibînin ku Baxtîn carinan rastiyên ampîrîk ji bo xatirê xurtkirina teoriya xwe paşguh kirine an jî çavkaniyên li ber destê wî di şertê wî yên siyasî yên wê demê de derfet nedanê ku berfirehtir bixebite.

Mijareke din ku bûye cihê gengeşeyê, têkbirina hiyerarşiyan û bitackirina qralê sexte ye. Baxtîn ji bo qralê ku di karnavalê de ji bo demekê dihê sertackirin dibêje “kesê ku dihê sertackirin ziddê qralekî rastîn e, an koleyek an jî qeşmerek e; ev kiryar cîhana berevajîkirî ya karnavalê diafirîne û wê pîroz dike.”16 Gelo bi rastî jî kesên ku di karnavalê de derdikevin ser text kesên wisa ne? Dema ku Roberto da Matta Karnavala Brezîlyayê û Mardi Grasa New Orleansê berawird dike, tesbît dike ku di Karnavala Brezîlyayê de hiyerarşî dihên binpêkirin, lê belê di Mardi Grasa New Orleansê de berevajî vê yekê hiyerarşî dihên vejandin. Berevajî Karnavala Brezîlyayê di Mardi Grasê de, ne xizanek an xebatkarekî derkenar, lê belê milyonerekî çerm-spî qralê karnavalê ye. Matta dibêje ku “li civakeke ku angaşt dike ku hiyerarşiya nav xwe ji nav biriye, wisa dixuye ku di asta rîtuelê de Karnavala New Orleansê heqîqetên kûr ên cudatiya çînî ji nû ve hildiberîne.”17 Ev mînaka balkêş nîşan dide ku di nimûneya duyem de hiyerarşî dihên vejandin.

Dîsa li gorî hin kesan mînak wek Carl Lindahl, Baxtîn giringiya nêrîtê [tradisyon] di avakirina karnavalê de paşguh kiriye. Li gor Lindahl karnaval pergala heyî pesend dike û çînên jêrîn bi dubarekirina binyada hêzê ya lîderên xwe, bindestiya xwe ji nû ve piştrast dikin.18 Ev angaşt ji alî gelek kesan ve hatiye bilêvkirin, ev xwe dispêre ramana karnavala bi îcazet. Li vir girîmane [varsayım] ew e ku piştî wê rewşa awarte, bi vegerîna rewşa berê herkes cihê xwe qewîtir dinase. Halbûkî meriv dikare li dij vê angaştê vê yekê jî bibêje: Bi wergerandina pergalê rolatîviya sazûmanê dihê dîtin anku ihtîmala duyem dihê dîtin. Baxtîn belkî lewma ew qasî aliyê rolatîv ê cîhana karnavalê bi çemka “rolatîviya şeng” dubare dikir. Jixwe Baxtîn angaşt dike ku ev cîhanbîniya ken û rolatîviya şeng a karnavalê di Ronesansê de gihîşt qonaxeke bilindtir. Vê cîhana hanê herî baş di cîhana edebî ya Rabelais de tezahura xwe dît. Belkî lewma “Rabelais xwedî behremendiyeke awarte bû di warê hîskirin û pêşandana cîhana ku hildihat.”19

Peter Burke bi awayekî pir mafdar rexneyeke din li Baxtîn dike. Peter Burke destnîşan dike ku sê babetên sereke hebûn di karnavalê de: Xwarin, seks û şiddet.20 Baxtîn li ser babeta ewil beşeke sax nivîsiye, di mijara bedena grotesk de jî têra xwe li ser seksê sekiniye, lê belê şiddet paşguh kiriye. Weku Taylor jî dibêje belê dibe ku muphem bin ev kiryarên şiddetê, lê belê aliyê wan ên neyînî yên rasterast jî hebûn. Mesela di nav karnavalên Romayiyan da beşin hebûn ku heqaret li cihûyan dikirin. Dîsa li charivariyan kesên ku normên cinsî yên civakî binpê kiribûn, bi zorê paşopê li keran dihatin siwarkirin û bi vî awayî dihatin şihurandin-qurbanên vê yekê yên tîpîk ew jinebî û mêrebî bûn ku bi kesên ji xwe biçûktir re zewicîbûn.21 Bi rastî jî di vê mijarê de Baxtîn xala şiddetê bi temamî paşguh kiriye. Hemû bûyerên şiddetê bi awayekî erênî şirove kiriye. Mesela avêtina pîsiyê bi ser mirovan de, li gor wî erênî ye ji ber ku pîsî amajeyê bi hilberînê (gubre) dike. An jî lêxistina mirovan erênî ye ji ber ku ew wek nûnerên cîhana berê, ji hêla şengiya dema nû ve dihên kutan.

Li vir xala dawî ku em dixwazin behs bikin, derbarê femînîzmê de ye. Esas dema ku mirov li lîteraturê dinere, mirov dibîne ku bizavên femînîzmê ji teoriyên Baxtîn baş sûd wergirtine an jî ev teorî ji bo wan bûye îlhameke mezin; tevî ku wî bixwe derbarê femînîzmê de tiştek negotiye. Li gorî Nancy Glazener ji riwangeheke femînîst bi kêmanî du cazîbeyên mezin ên projeya Baxtîn hene. Yek jê ev e ku teza wî ya ku li gorî wê edebiyat têkoşîna navbera zimanên sosyo-îdeolojîk dinimîne, hîmê wê mîta pederşah dihejîne ku li gor wê dibe ku zimanekî heqîqetê hebe ku ji têkiliyên hêz û arezûyê wêdetir diçe. A duduyan jî ew e ku pêdagiriya Baxtîn a li ser wê yekê ku gotin û gotar xwedî watayên cudabar in, wê yekê îma dike ku formên zimannasî û edebî bivênevê ji hêla têkiliyên cinsî dihên şêwedan ku civatê direxsînin.22 Herçend teoriyên Baxtîn ên derbarê civakîbûna zimên de ji bo rexneya femînîst mefadar bûbin jî, wer xuya ye ku di mijara karnavalê de hin dijberî hene. Mînak di bedena grotesk a Baxtîn de lebata herî serdest malzarok e. Ji vê hêlê de rengekî jinparêz xuya dibe, lê belê di vî warî de hin rexne hene li dij Baxtîn. Xwediya yeke ji van rexneyan Ruth Ginsburg, dibêje tevî ku hêmaya jinê (an bi gotineke rastir a makê) di têgihîştina groteskê de xwedî girîngiyeke navendî ye, bedena jinê ji bo xatirê gel dihê marjînalîzekirin, mîsal ev bedena gel a yekpare di hêmaya supermêrekî ciwan, Herakles23 de derdikeve holê.24 Weku me dîtibû hin rexne hebûn ku Baxtîn ferd dike qurbana gel, li vir jî rexne li ser wê yekê ye ku Baxtîn jinê dike qurbana gel.

Baxtîn ji bo fîgurên pîrejinên avis ên li koleksiyona terakotayên ji Kerchê mayî, vê şiroveyê dike: Ev pîrejin ligel avisbûna xwe dikenin jî. Ev groteskeke tîpîk û pir bi xurtî derbirandî ye. Muphem e. Ev, mirineke avis e, mirinek e ku dizê. Di bedena van pîrejinan de tiştekî temambûyî, hêmin û stabîl tune ye. Ev beden goştê çilmisî, riziyayî û deformebûyî bi goştê jiyaneke nû, dolgirtî lê hîn teşenegirtî re tîne cem hev.25 Mary Russo vê yekê bi pirsgirêk dibîne ji ber ku hemû amajeyên tirs û kerixînê li ser bedena jinan bi pîrbûnê ve dihê têkildarkirin, lewma jî ew girîmaneyên pederşahî derbarê jinan de ji nû ve hildiberîne.26 Ji bilî van em dikarin bibêjin ku dema ku Baxtîn behsa bedena grotesk a li ser şêmûgê dike, dibêje ku “li wir êdî ne yek bedenek heye, ne jî dudu hene. Hilkuta du dilan pêkve dihê bihîstin; yek ji van ê dê ye ku êdî hinekî giran bûye.”27 Li vir a ku dimire dê ye ku ji riwangeheke femînîst pirsgirêk e ev yek.

Bêguman dibe ku ji gelek aliyan de teoriya karnavalê ya Baxtîn bihê rexnekirin, lê belê Baxtîn ji gelek aliyan de riwangeheke nû dide mirov. Yek ji nûbûnên wî ew e ku karnavalê ji sînorên berteng ên folklorê derdixe û wê dike pirsgirêkeke dîroka çandê û di ber ronahiya vê pirsgirêke de, ne tenê dîroka çanda Ewrûpayê ji bo ya hemû mirovatiyê bi nêzîkbûneke antropolojîk ramanên nû derdixe holê. Bo nimûne di ber ronahiya vê teoriyê de êdî mirov dikare bi awayekî din li sersalên kurdan binere ku di wan de lîstika Kose dihat lîstin û di vê lîstikê de mêran cilên jinan li xwe dikirin û eyn wek qralê karnavalê rayeya wan hebû ku çi bixwazin bi zor ji gundiyan bistînin. An jî em dikarin bi awayekî din li agirê Newrozê28 binerin ku Baxtîn taybetiyeke hilweşîner û nûker dibexşîne êgir. Herweku vê em dikarin di çîrçîrok û dengbêjiyên kurdan de hebûna gotin û hêmayên erotîk hetta pornografîk baştir fam bikin; ji ber ku Baxtîn mifteyeke nû daye destê me: Ew cîhan ne wek a me ya modern û mahrembûyî ye ku ew tişt wisa bihêne şirovekirin, li wir fonksiyona lebatên genîtal berê berê hilberandin e. Û ev zimanê gel ê li derveyî navendên fermî yên wek dîn û dewletê, xwedî dînamîzmekê ye. Ew li dij zimanê fermî ye û mesafeyên navbera mirovan nas nake; lewma cihê wî û cihê tirsê, xişûyê ji hev cuda ne. Belê bêguman pirsgirêkên teza Baxtîn hene lê belê dîsa jî hem ji ber ku pênaseyeke dîrokî ya karnavalê dide û hem jî ji ber rehenda wê ya utopîk a xwedî potansiyela rexneyane, riwangeheke afirîner dibexşîne.

1 Mihail M. Bahtin, Dostoyevski Poetikasının Sorunları, wer. Cem Soydemir, weş. Metis, İstanbul, 2004, r. 184-189.

2 Mihail Bahtin, Rabelais ve Dünyası, wer. Çiçek Öztek, weş. Ayrıntı, İstanbul, 2005.

3 Michael Holquist, pêşgotina Rabelais ve Dünyası, r. 20.

4 Robert Stam, Subversive Pleasures: Bakhtin, Cultural Criticism and Film, weş. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland, 1989, r. 158. vgz. Sue Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, weş. Manchester University Press, Manchester and New York, 1997, r. 150.

5 Terry Eagleton, Walter Benjamin ya da Bir Devrimci Eleştiriye Doğru, wer. Ferit Burak Aydar, weş. Agora Kitaplığı, İstanbul, 2013, r. 224.

6 Mikhail K. Ryklin, “Bodies of Terror: Theses Toward to Logic of Violence”, NLH 24 (I), zivistan, 1993, r. 54. vgz. Sue Vice, Introducing Bakhtin, weş. Manchester University Press, Manchester and New York, 1997, r. 153.

7 Ben Taylor, Bakhtin, Carnival and Comic Theory, Teza Doktorayê, University of Nottingham, 1995, r. 66.

8 Eagleton, h.b., r. 230.

9 Holquist, h.g., r. 20-21.

10 Bahtin, Rabelais ve Dünyası, r. 117.

11 Peter Burke, Popular Culture in Early Modern Europe, London, 1978, r. 203-294. vgz. Taylor, h. b., r. 49.

12 Chris Humphery, “Bakhtin and the Study of Popular Culture: Re-thinking Carnival as a Historical and Analytical Concept”, di nav: Materializing Bakhtin: The Bakhtin Circle and Social Theory, ed. Craig Brandist and Galin Tihanov, weş. Palgrave Macmillan, 2000, r. 169.

13 Humphery, h.g., r. 170.

14 Bahtin, Rabelais ve Dünyası, r. 283.

15 E. Le Roy Ladurie, Carnival: A People’s Uprising at Romans 1579-1580, wer. Mary Feeney, weş. Scolar Press, London, 1979, r. 201, 313-314. vgz. Taylor, h.b., r. 37-18.

16 Bahtin, Dostoyevski Poetikasının Sorunları, r. 186.

17 Roberto da Matta, Carnivals, Rogues, and Heroes: An Interpretation of the Brazilian Dilemma, University of Notre Dame Press, Notre Dame, 1991, r. 129. vgz. Shanti Elliot, “Carnival and Dialogue in Bakhtin’s Poetics of Folklore”, Folklore Form, j. 30: 1/2 (1999), r. 134.

18 Carl Lindahl, “Bakhtin’s Carnival Laughter and the Cajun Country Mardi Gras”, Folklore 107: (1996), r. 57-70. vgz. Elliot, h.g., r. 134-135.

19 Bahtin, Rabelais ve Dünyası, r. 487.

20 Burke, h.b., r. 186. vgz. Taylor, h.b., 36.

21 Simon Dentith, Bakhtinian Thought: An introductory reader, weş. Routledge, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005, r. 72.

22 Nancy Glazener, “Dialogic subversion: Bakhtin, the novel and Gertrude Stein”, di nav: Bakhtin and Cultural Theory, ed. Ken Hirschkop and David Shepherd, weş. Manchester University Press, New York, 2001, r.155-156.

23 Baxtîn ji bo jidayikbûna Gargantua ji Gargamelleyê, dibêje ku tiştê ji malzaroka Gargamelle bi wê de xuya dibe, malzaroka rûzemînê ye ku her daîm dixwe û dadiqurtîne û dihê xwarin, û bedena gel e ku her tim vedinuhure. Lawikê welidî, lehengê xurt ê gel e, Heraklesê fransiz e. Rabelais ve Dünyası, r. 253-254.

24 Ruth Ginsburg, “The Pregnant Text. Bakhtin’s Ur-Chronotope: The Womb”, di nav: Bakhtin: Carnival and Other Subjects: selected papers from the Fifth International Bakhtin Conference, ed. D. Shepherd, Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1993, r. 174. vgz. Taylor, h.b., r. 44.

25 Bahtin, h.b., r. 53.

26 Mary Russo, “Female grotesques: carnival and theory”, di nav: Feminist Studies / Critical Studies, ed T. de Lauretis, weş. Indiana University Press, Bloomington, 1988, r. 219. vgz. Taylor, h.b., r. 45.

27 Bahtin, Rabelais ve Dünyası, r. 54.

28 Karnavala Mîr Mîran an Mihrîcana Mîrê Şaş, heta ku di sala 1922a de ji aliyê Brîtanyayê hate qedexekirin li başûr û rojhilata Kurdistanê di her destpêka sala nû de, yanê Newrozê de pêk dihat. neşop dikare li gor teoriya Baxtîn ji nû ve bê nirxandin. Ji bo bêtir agahî bo Mîr Mîran bnr. Mahro Raşidîrostramî, “Destpêka Şanoyê li Başûrê Kurdistanê”, Zarema, hej.2, r.128-139. (ed.)

ÇAVKANÎ

Bahtin, Mihail M.: Dostoyevski Poetikasının Sorunları, wer. Cem Soydemir, weş. Metis, İstanbul, 2004.

Bahtin, Mihail: Rabelais ve Dünyası, wer. Çiçek Öztek, weş. Ayrıntı, İstnabul, 2005.

Dentith, Simon: Bakhtinian Thought: An introductory reader, weş. Routledge, Taylor & Francis e-Library, 2005.

Eagleton, Terry: Walter Benjamin ya da Bir Devrimci Eleştiriye Doğru, wer. Ferit Burak Aydar, weş. Agora Kitaplığı, İstanbul, 2013.

Elliot, Shanti: “Carnival and Dialogue in Bakhtin’s Poetics of Folklore”, Folklore Form, j. 30: 1/2 (1999), r. 129-139.

Humphery, Chris: “Bakhtin and the Study of Popular Culture: Re-thinking Carnival as a Historical and Analytical Concept”, di nav: Materializing Bakhtin: The Bakhtin Circle and Social Theory, ed. Craig Brandist and Galin Tihanov, weş. Palgrave Macmillan, 2000, r. 164- 172.

Nancy Glazener, “Dialogic subversion: Bakhtin, the novel and Gertrude Stein”, di nav: Bakhtin and Cultural Theory, ed. Ken Hirschkop and David Shepherd, weş. Manchester University Press, New York, 2001, r. 155-176.

Taylor, Ben: Bakhtin, Carnival and Comic Theory, (Teza Doktorayê), University of Nottingham, 1995.

Vice, Sue: Introducing Bakhtin, weş. Manchester University Press, Manchester and New York, 1997.

Karnavala Mîxaîl Baxtîn û Gengeşeyên Derbarê Wê de

Vejandina Zimanê Îbranî

Nûrealîzma Îtalî, Yilmaz Guney û Hêvî

Tehlîlek di Peywenda Teorîya Monomîtê de li ser Çîroka “Meymûn Xanim û Mîrze Memûd”

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply

Karnavala Mîxaîl Baxtîn û Gengeşeyên Derbarê Wê de

Related Posts

Vejandina Zimanê Îbranî

Nûrealîzma Îtalî, Yilmaz Guney û Hêvî

Tehlîlek di Peywenda Teorîya Monomîtê de li ser Çîroka “Meymûn Xanim û Mîrze Memûd”

Leave A Reply Cancel Reply