Sînemaya Kurdî wek Cureyek Rabêja Neteweborî: Dîtbariya Sînematîk, Berxwedêriya Çandî û Aktoriya Siyasî

Sînemaya Kurdî wek Cureyek Rabêja Neteweborî: Dîtbariya Sînematîk, Berxwedêriya Çandî û Aktoriya Siyasî

SUNCEM KOÇER – JI ÎNG: FEXRIYA ADSAY

Puxte: Li Tirkiyeyê di çend salên dawî de, “sînemaya kurdî” wek yekane kirdeya rabêjî peyda bûye. Piştî û di nav hewlên lihevcivandina hilberîna kurdan a çandî ya li diyasporayê, rewşenbîrên kurd cehd kirin naveroka sînemaya kurdî pênase bikin û çarçoveya wê diyar bikin wek çarçoveya beralîkirina hilberîn û pêşwazîkirina fîlmên ku kurd çêdikin û derheqê wan de tên çêkirin. Di vê gotara min de, gotina min sêparçeyî ye. A yekem, sînemaya kurdî li warê neteweborî (transnational) wek sînemayeke neteweyî peyda bûye. A duyem, wek hemû deqên medyayê, fîlmên kurdî jî di rabêjê de tên neteweyîkirin. A sêyem, stratejiyên ragihandinî ku bo neteweyîkirina sînemaya kurdî tên bikaranîn divê him di nav peywenda hêzên dîrokî yên neteweperweriya tirkî de û him li hember zemîna siyaseta hevdem a Tirkiyeyê, bi taybetî rabêj û siyasetên dewleta tirk ên derheqê kurdan de, bên dîtin. Daneyên empîrîk ên bo vê gotarê ji lêkolîna etnografîk a li Tirkiye û Ewropayê ku di navbera 2009-2012yan de hatiye kirin, hatine peydakirin.

Li Tirkiyeyê di çend salên dawî de, “sînemaya kurdî” wek yekane kirdeya rabêjî peyda bûye. Fîlm û fîlmçêkerên kurd li festîvalên neteweyî her diçe bêtir cî digrin û di panelên sînemaya tirkî, festivalên fîlman û televîzyonan de bêtir bal dikşînin. Bo vê ra’beta rabêjî çend sedemên bihevgiredayî hebûn. A herî nêz “Reforma Kurd” (Kürt Açılımı) bû, projeyek ku ji aliyê Partiya Dad û Geşedanê (AKP) di sala 2009an de, li gor armanca li ber çavan, bo pêşdexistina mafên çandî yên kurdan hat destpêkirin.1 Pirsgirêkên kurdan û pozisyona nû ya hikûmeta tirk a li hemberî kurdan, fîlmên kurdan û yên derheqê kurdan de jî tê de, ku nîqaşên derbarê “sînemaya kurdî” ya mihtemelen cihê dan destpêkirin, di çanda populer de her diçe bêtir eleqeyê dibîne.

Fîlmên kurd, heta beriya ku qada neteweyî de dengê xwe bilind bikin, taybetî ji destpêka 2000an û vir de, her diçe bêtir dikevin nav geran (geran) û dîtbariya navneteweyî. Wek mînak, Behmen Qubadî, kurdekî ji Îranê, bi fîlma xwe yî sala 2000an Dema Hespên Serxweş (Zamani Baraye ́ Masti Asbha) li Festîvala Fîlman a Cannesê xelata bi prestîj Camera d’Or wergirt. Di 2001ê de, koçberên kurd ên ji Tirkiyeyê ku li Brîtanya dijîn ji vê serkeftina Behmen Qubadî ya navneteweyî feyz girtin û yekem Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî bi rêk xistin. Di salên pê re, Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê ji komên diyasporaya kurd ên li Ewropa, Amerîka û bajarên Awistralyayê re bû model.2

Piştî û di nav hewlên lihevcivandina hilberîna kurdan a çandî ya li diyasporayê, rewşenbîrên kurd cehd kirin naveroka “sînemaya kurdî” pênase bikin û çarçoveya wê diyar bikin. Di 2009an de, berheveke gotaran ku ji aliyê nivîskar û fîlmçêker Müjde Arslan hatibû amadekirin bi navê Sînemaya Kurdî: Bêwarbûn, Sînor û Mirin3çap bû. Piştî çapbûna pirtûkê, di vî warî de li Tirkiyeyê yekem bû, şaredariya Diyarbekirê, bajarekî ku wek paytextê sembolîk ê tevgera siyasî ya kurd tê pejirandin, konferansek li ser sînemaya kurdî li dar xist. Di Mijdara 2010an de, şaredariya Batmanê, ew jî li herêma kurdan e, sponsoriya festîvaleke fîlmên kurdî kir, ev jî li Tirkiyeyê yekem bû. Van xebatan kir ku çandeke sînemaya kurdî çêbibe û dû re li Tirkiye û derveyî wê mirovên ciwan bo hilberîna fîlm û vîdeoyan teşwîq kirin. Van çalakiyan erka mekanên rabêjî dîtin ku tê de çêker û mezêxerên medyayê, rewşenbîr û akademîkan li ser qaîdeyên sînemaya kurdî nîqaş kirin. Di vê rabêja neteweborî de, sînemaya kurdî wek tewrek cihê krîstalîze bû, bû prîzmayeke ku bi wê fîlm hatin hewandin an li derve hatin hiştin.

Hêzên civakî û siyasî ne tenê pratîkên fîlmçêkirina kurdan lê aktorên wê fîlmên kurdî ji aliyê rabêjî çawa pênase bikin, wan çawa neteweyî bikin girê an valahiyên navbera wan çawa eyar bikin, van jî bisînor dike, derfet dide û tevlihev dike.4 Di vê gotarê de argumenta min sêparçeyî ye. Yekem, sînemaya kurdî wek sînemayeke neteweyî li warê diyasporayê peyda bûye. Wek mînak, min li Festivala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê kola ku çawa ji aliyê rewşenbîrên kurd ên li Brîtanyayê hatiye birêkxistin, ku fîlmên kurdî li ser xaçerêya çandên taybet ên neteweborî neteweyî bike kar kiriye. Wek ku Susan Hayward nivîsiye, “di pênasekirin/çarçovekirina sînemayeke neteweyî de, an tespîtkirina neteweyîbûna sînemayekê de tişta ku rê nîşan dide, rabêjên ku hatine seferberkirin… wê çi di nav xwe de bihewînin û çi li derve bihêlin; meseleyan çawa bi çarçove bikin; farazî an pêşbîniyên ku dikin.”5 Ji bo ravekirina vê pêvajoyê mînakeke ku ez bi kar tînim fîlma 1926an Zarê ye ku gelek caran wek yekem fîlma kurdî tê pênasekirin digel ku ji aliyê derhênerekî kurd nehatiye çêkirin. Sêyem, stratejiyên ragihandinî ku bo neteweyîkirina sînemaya kurdî tên bikaranîn divê him di nav peywenda hêzên dîrokî yên neteweperweriya tirkî de û him li hember zemîna siyaseta hevdem a Tirkiyeyê, bi taybetî rabêj û siyasetên dewleta tirk ên derheqê kurdan de, bên dîtin. Analîz dikim ka çawa û ji bo çi fîlm di nav tewra sînemaya kurdî de tên bicîkirin. Hewildanên çalakgerên kurd bo tespîtkirina ciyê kurdan di dîroka dîtbarî de rabêja wan a ku bo neteweyîkirina fîlman berdest dike. Di vê rabêjê de, zimanê kurdî wek zimanê diegetik* ê fîlmên hemdem wek manîfestoyeke dîtbariya dîrokî, aktorbûna siyasî û berxwedêriya çandî derdikeve pêş.

Daneyên empîrîk ên bo vê gotarê ji lêkolîneke etnografîk a ji sê salan dirêjtir derketine. Di festîvalên fîlman de, panelên sînemayê de û temaşekirinên li Stenbol, Diyarbekir, Batman û Londonê yên navbera 2009 û 2012yan de min çavdêriya beşdaran kir. Bi fîlmçêker, beşdarên festîvalan, rêkxistinerên festîvalan, rewşenbîrên gişteyî (public) û şaredarên kurd re ji pêncî zêdetir hevpeyvînên kûr, nîv-plankirî û tomarkirî çêkirin. Di beşên pêş de ez li şêwaza neteweborî a hilberîna kurdî ya çandî dinêrim, Zarê çawa di dîrokê de wek yekem fîlma kurdî hatiye pênasekirin û bi analîzeke rabêja li dor sînemaya kurdî wek nîşana tengijînên niha yên derbarê siyaseta nasnameyî ya li Tirkiyeyê, dawî lê bînim.

Texeyulkirina neteweyê li warê neteweborî

Kurd, wek koleftîvîteyeke cihê ji mafên xwe yî siyasî bêpar û bi sînorên netewe-dewletên qebûlkirî hatine parçekirin, piranî bi saya hilberîna li diyasporayê xwe wek neteweyek yekgirtî îlan kirine. Di çend deh salên dawî de li diyasporayê şertên texeyulkirina netewetiyeke yekgirtî encama sistbûna sînorên netewe-dewletan û gerana medyayê bûn ku her diçe zêde dibe û lawazbûna yekdestiya dewletan a li ser awayên ku subjektîvîte tên texeyulkirin. Ji nîvê duyem ê sedsala bîstem vir de, livbariya (mobility) neteweborî û medyaya elektronîk ji bo takekesan warên nû yên muxayel vekirin, ku bi saya wan dikaribûn sînorên rabêjî yên netewe-dewletan li ser wan ferz kirine bidin ber pirsan û îtiraz bikin. Wek Arjun Appadurai jî diyar kiriye, sistbûna qeydên navbera mirovan û axa neteweyî alî kir ku bingeha hilberîna çandî ji projeyên netewe-dewletê ber bi muxayileyên netewe-borî ve veguhere.6 Appadurai van peyvên firehbûyî yên texeyulkirinê vediçirîne û destnîşan dike ku “medyaya elektronîk û koçberiya girseyî mora xwe li cîhana vêga dixin ne tenê wek hêzên nû yêk teknîk lê wek ên ku karê texeyulkirinê teşwîq dikin (û carna jî mecbûr dikin). Herdu bi hev re, nerêkitiyên (irregularities) taybet diafirînin ji ber ku bîner jî û xuyang jî [û hilberîner] di nav geraneke hevdemî de ne.”7 Lê, warên nû yên siyasî ku bi riya texeyulên neteweborî hatine afirandin nikare ji netewe, netewe-dewlet û neteweperweriyan azade bên nirxandin. Wek Mike Featherstone dibêje, “Wê şaş be ku mirov bêje çanda global ilhez wê serweriya netewe-dewletan ku bêje nebêje wê di nav yekeyên mezintir de bihele û talî bibe dewleteke cîhanî ku çandeke homojeniyê û entegrasyonê hilberîne, lawaz bike.”8 Teoriyeke dagirtî ya derbarê cîhana neteweborî de, li ser disekine ka “ew xêzika navbera [netewe û dewlet] de bi livbariya sermiyan û koçberiyê çawa ji nû ve hatiye dirustkirin” ne ku rasterast bifikire livbarî û koçberiyê, wek qaideyên çêker ên kolektîvîteyan, mûteberiya neteweyan red kirine.9

Hilberîna çanda kurdî ya li diyasporayê texeyulên neteweborî bi mînak dikin ku ji rabêjên heyî yên neteweyê xeberdar in. Medyaya kurd a li Ewropayê bi riya hin texeyulên kolektîvîteya siyasi yên bi saya satelaytê di ser sînoran re bo Rojhilata Navîn hatin veguhêztin, kolanên mezin ên berhemdar ava kirin. MED-TV, kanala televîzyoneke kurd e ku ji aliyê komek koçberên kurd li Brîtanyayê sala 1994an de hat avakirin, mînakeke eşkere ye bo vê.10 Bi weşandina naveroka medyayî bo piraniya Ewropa û Rojhilata Navîn di navbera 1994-1997 bir riya satelaytê, bernamegeriya MED-TVyê hewl da di navbera kurdan de yekîtiya çandî û zimanî biafirîne û hesta serweriya netewe-dewleteke kurd a muxayel, her çiqas li warê neteweborî be jî, çêbike. Amir Hassanpour peyva “serweriya li ezmanan” çêkir da ku di tunebûna dewleteke kurdî ya fermî de hewldanên kanalê yên bo netewetiya kurdan bi riya satelaytê saz bike, pênase bike: “hebûna al û sirûdeke kurdî ya neteweyî [li ser ekranê] tê wê wateyê ku MED-TV xwediyê wê hêzê ye ku kurdan ne wek temaşevan lê wek welatiyên dewletek kurd bibîne.”11 Piştî ku MED-TV li Brîtanyayê ji ber zordayina dîplomatîk a Tirkiyeyê mafê xwe yê weşanê winda kir, kanalê navê MEDYA TVyê li xwe kir û ji studyoyên Belçîkayê dest bi weşanê kir. Piştî ku MEDYA TV jî mecbûr ma bê girtin, îjar ROJ TV dest pê kir, vê carê li Denmarkê bi cî bû. Digel zordayina dîplomatîk a Tirkiyeyê ya li ser dewletên ewropî ku dawî li weşana kurdî ya ji Ewropayê bîne, rêxistinên diyasporayê nesekinîn istasyonên nû ava kirin, ku ev avahî bo warê kurdan ên gişteyî pir girîng bûn, ji ber ku li çendîn navendên diyasporayê sînorên neteweyî derbas dikirin.12

Festîvalên fîlmên kurdî yên li Ewropayê jî tam mînaka vê nerêkitiyên berhemdar in ku li warê neteweborî han didin texeyulên neteweyeke kurd. Wek MED-TV û kanalên pey wê re, festîvalên fîlmên kurdî13 (yekem car li Londonê û dû re li bajarên din ên diyasporayê wek Hamburg, Wien û Parîsê) jî wek encama him bêwarî him neteweboriya kurdbûnê bûn. Komek koçberên kurd ên ji Tirkiyeyê yekem Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê bi fînansekirina navenda civatî ku li Londonê ji aliyê dewletê tê sponsorkirin da destpêkirin. Dema min ji avakar û rêvebirê Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê Mustafa Gündoğdu pirsî ka festival çawa çêbûye, wî awayên ku jiyana diyasporayê di pêkanîna vê projeyê de rol leyistiye destnîşan kirin. Digot, “dema sala 2000an de koçî Brîtanyayê kir, min dît derfetên bêsînor hene li vir. Ew demek wisa bû ku gel [kurd], taybetî li Ewropayê hay ji nasname û zimanê xwe hebû û hesas bûn bo wan.”14 Bi “derfetên bêsînor” ên li Londonê, li gor yên li Tirkiyeyê, Gündoğdu behsa mekanên çandî û çavkaniyên madî dikir ku dewleta Brîtanyayê dabîn dikir bo siyaseta pirçandîtî û rojeva entegrasyonîst bo civatên koçber. Wek ku Christian Joppke diyar dike, modela welatîbûnê ya dewleta brîtanî ya derbarê koçberan de mecbûr dike dewlet siyaseta ku derfetên zêde bide civatên koçber da ku çalakiyên çandî ku bi saya wan di nav civaka brîtanî de cî bigrin, destek bike.15 Li Qraliyeta Yekbûyî koçberên kurd ku li navendên çandî û civatî bi rêxistin bûne, li gor siyaseta fermî ya pirçandîtiyê piranî ji aliyê dewleta brîtanî tên fînansekirin.16

Lê fikra bo festîvala fîlman ne encama xwegihandina çavkaniyên dewleta brîtanî bû ku ji bo rojeva xwe ya pirçandîtiyê dabîn kiribû. Ji bo civata kurd a li Londonê, mekaneke çandî ya firehkirî cî vekir bo erkek xurt a siyasî ji ber ku ew ji aliyê civata kurd ku bo neteweyîkirina çand û zimanê kurdî têra xwe polîtîze bû, hate bikaranîn. Koça mezin a kurdan bo Qraliyeta Yekbûyî di dawiya 1980an de dest pê kir û di salên 1990î de dewam kir.17 Li Tirkiyeyê piştî darbeya leşkerî ya di 1980yî de, û ji ber şerê li rojhilata welêt, gelek kurdên ku hatin Qraliyeta Yekbûyî penaberên gelekî polîtîze bûn û wek qadeke pêşdebirina dawa xwe ya siyasî li diyasporayê dinêrîn. Ji bo gelek çalakgerên kurd, tişta çandî siyasî bû û berevajiya wê. Gündoğdu ev wisa rave dikir: “Ez nabêjim diyaspora bo kurdan tenê dihate wateya tiştên baş. Tişta ez dibêjim, kurdan li diyasporayê bi saya çalakiyên çandî dikaribûn hebûna xwe nîşan bidin.” Li gor Gündoğdu, li diyasporayê çalakiyên çandî “parçeyek ji têkoşîna siyasî ya kurdan bû.”18

Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê ji têkiliya tekane ya di navbera du “çandên geranê.”19 derket. Ev têgeh, bi bikaranîna Lee û LiPuma, geranê wek “pêvajoyeke çandî ya tevî şêwazên xwe yê razberkirin, nirxandin û kurtkirinê, ku ji aliyê hevbandoriya navbera cureyên taybet ên şêwazên geranêr û civatên şîrovekar ku li dora wan kom dibin tê afirandin”20 rave dike. Lee û LiPuma taybetî bal dikşînin ser tebîeta performatîf ya geranê. Çandên geranê “ji aliyê şêwazên çandî ku bi wan re dikevin geranê tên afirandin û zindîkirin.”21 Lihevaliqîna du çandên cuda yên geranê rê li ber fikra Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê vekiriye. Yek ji van Mustafa Gündoğdu ji Tirkiyeyê aniye Ewropayê. Gündoğdu, piştî ku ji welatê xwe Dêrsimê, li Kurdistana Tirkiyeyê veqetiyaye, di salên 1990î de li Stenbolê bi cî bûye û dû re wek koçber çûye Londonê. Appadurai, ji bo pêvajoya livbariya mirovan û li cîhaneke neteweborî gerana li ser sînorên sist ên dewletan ên wisa pênase bike têgeha etnowar (etnoscapes) îcad kiriye. Etnowar “warê şexsên ku cîhana guherbar, ku em tê de dijîn, pêk tînin: tûrîst, koçber, penaber, sirgun, karkerên mêvan û kom û şexsên din ên livbar taybetiyeke gewherî ya cîhanê pêk tînin û heta asteke nedîtî li siyaseta (û navbera) neteweyan bandor dike.”22 Rêwîtiya Gündoğdu ya ji gundekî kurd î biçûk heta Londonê bandor kiribû li awayên ku wî pê aîdiyeta xwe ya bo kolektîvîteya kurd, ku li Kurdistan, Stenbol û Londonê ji hev cihê bû, texeyul û tecrube kiribû.

Tevî tecrubeya wî ya şexsî ya etnowara kurdî, bûyereke çandî ya din a neteweborî daxilî qewimî ku Gündoğdu û hevalên wî bi wê dest bi texeyula neteweyeke kurd kirin: nîşandana fîlma Behmen Qubadî Dema Hespên Serxweş li Festîvala Fîlman a Cannesê di 2000î de. Gündoğdu diyar dikir: “Wê salê, Behmen Qubadî li Festîvala Fîlman a Cannesê xelat wergirt. Em çend heval hatin ba hev û me got ka em dikarin çi bikin. Fikra festîvala fîlmên kurdî derket.”23Behmen Qubadî fîlmçêkerekî kurd û welatiyê Îranê ye. Di 2000î de, fîlma wî yê ewil li Cannesê, bûyera sînemayî ya prestîjtirîn û zêdetirîn tê miraqkirin, xelata Camera d’Or prize wergirt. Fîlm serpêhatiya trajîk a zarokên kurd ku debara xwe bi malên qaçaxiya ser sînorê Îran-Iraqê dikin, vedibêje. Wê salê piştî ku tevlî festîvalên din jî bû, Behmen Qubadî li derdora sînemayê ya navneteweyî de baş hat naskirin.24 Appadurai vê gerana çandî ku di vir de, bi etnowara kurdî ku han da rabêja sînemaya kurdî ku tenê dihate telafuzkirin, li hev qelibîn, wek medyawar (mediascape) bi nav dike. Festîvalên fîlman ên navneteweyî, wek medyawar,25 riya hilberîn, belavkirin û mezaxêrê vekir û derfet afirand bo livbariya neteweborî a xuyangan.

Wek Goankar û Povinelli dibêjin, gerana çandî ne tenê “tevgera mirov, mal, fikr û xuyangan a ji deverekê ber bi devereke din,”26 e lê demajoyek e ku di nav dem û mekanê de tevdigere û ji objeyan derbas dibe. Xelata Behmen Qubadî ya li Cannesê, û şohreta dû wê re, qedrê wê yî hunerî da tespîtkirin û ji çilî zêdetir festîvalan de nîşandana wê hêsan kir. Rabêja Behmen Qubadî bixwe ya derbarê nasnameya etnîk di van festîvalan de kir ku xortên kurd li dora çandeke sînemayî ya li ser siyaseta nasnameyî birêkxistin bibin. Her tim nasnameya xwe ya kurd û hebûna kurdan a wek gelekî parçekirî, bindest ku statuya wan a siyasî serpêhatiyên trajîk welidandiye binxêz dike û fîlmçêkirinê wek alava guncavtirîn û bi bandor pêşkêş dike. Wek ku rave dike: “Kurd her tim di nav liv û tevgerê de ne. Tiştekî wan î hevpar heye bi sînemayê re ku hunera bizavê ye.”27 Fîlmçêkirina xwe, di erdnîgariyeke bi siyasetê barkirî de, wek amrazeke belgekirina hebûna kurdan pênase dike û tevkariya sazîmanbûna taybetiyên rabêjî yên sînemaya kurdî dike û xwe dike şexsekî navendî di vî cureyê di peydabûnê de ye. Çandên geranê derfet, qaide û mecbûriyetên taybet him diafirîne him ji aliyê wan tê afirandin. Koçberiya neteweborî û medyaya elektronîk li hev dialiqin û bo gelek komên madûn, kurd jî tê de, “çavkaniyên nû û disiplînên nû dabîn dike bo sazkirina xweyên muxayel û cîhanên muxayel.”28 Gündoğdu di hevpeyvînê de digot: “bi awayekî, kurdan bi xêra çalakiyên li diyasporayê hay ji dewlemendiya xwe ya çandî çêbûn. Encax li diyasporayê beyî sînorên nav me de me hevdu naskirin.”29 Di wê baweriyê de ye ku sînema kapasiteya wê taybet heye neteweya kurd bîne ba hev; dema kurdekî ji Iraqê li Ewropayê li sînemayekê li ba kurdekî ji Tirkiyeyê rûdine û li fîlmekî ku cenaze an daweteke kurdan a li Îranê vedibêje, temaşe dike, ev tecrube qelaştinên dem û dîrokê yên di zanîna çandî, bîra dîrokî û nasnameyê de rihet dike.30 Kurd ku ji welatên xwe hatine dûrxistin û li metropolên diyasporîk belav bûne wek karkerên koçber an penaberên siyasî, li dor çalakiyên wek festîvalên sînemayê kom dibin, ku ji wan re dibin mekanên gişteyî bo texeyulkirina civateke siyasî ya yekgirtî û li ser perdeya spî hesta sembolîk a serweriyê çêbikin.31

Di nav vê peywendê de bû ku Gündoğdu Zarê (1926), fîlmekî ji aliyê derhênerekî ermen derbarê jiyana li gundekî kurdan hatiye kişandin, anî xist nav mîrata çanda kurdî. Dema Gündoğdu û karhevalên wî di 2001ê de plansaziya Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê dikirin, ligel rakirina sînorên ku kurd parçe kirine, bi teşwîqkirina hilberîna sînematîk û bi dûketina fîlmên “aîdî kurdan”, dixwestin li ser perdeya spî kurdan bidin xuyakirin. Dema ravekirina vê de, Gündoğdu got, “me xwest nasnameya wan bide fîlmên kurdî.” Bi gotinên wî, festîval “bersivek bû li hemberî împeryalîzma çandî ku bi awayekî sîstematîk ji xwe re kiriye hedef bo mîrata kurdî ji ser rûyê erdê rake.” Piraniya fîlmên derheqê kurdan de û yên ji aliyê kurdan ve hatine çêkirin, wek berhemên çandî yên din ên kurdan, di bin darê netewe-dewletên ku hilberînerên berheman welatiyê wan in, wek Tirkiye, Îran, Iraq û YSSRa berê. Li gor birêkxistêneran, di festîvala fîlmên “kurdî” de lihevcivandina van fîlman “parçeyek ji têkoşîna mezintir a kurdan bo hebûn û xuyakirinê bû.”32 Bi armanca ku wan bikin parçeyek ji mîrata çanda kurdî, li dû fîlmên derheqê kurdan de û ji aliyê kurdan ve hatine çêkirin, geriyane. Piştî di arşîveke online de li Zarê rast hatiye, Gündoğdu bi rayedarên ermen re ketiye têkiliyê ku li fîlm bipirse. Di 2006an de piştî manewrayên zehmet ên burokratîk bi dewleta ermen re, dikaribûye kopiyek fîlm ji arşîvên neteweyî yên Ermenistanê wergire. Di çaremîn Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê di nîşandaneke ku nasandina wê baş hatibû kirin, temaşevanan tişta ku wek yekem fîlma derbarê kurdan de hatiye çêkirin hatibû îlankirin, dîtin. Bidestxistina Zarê ji arşîvên neteweyî yên Ermenistanê, li gor Gündoğdu piştrast dikir ku Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê misyona xwe ya damezirêner bi cî aniye: di nav rûpelên dîrokê de kurdan bide xuyakirin. Festîval, li warê neteweborî bi destpêkirina sînemayeke neteweyî, platformeke girîng bû ku sînemaya kurdî wek çêbûneke rabêjî krîstalîze bû. Zarê di vî cureyî de ciyekî mezin dagirt.

Zarê: Ji arşîvên ermenistanê ber bi kokên sînemaya kurdî

Sala 2011an de, Festîvala Fîlmên Serbixwe ya Stenbolê (!f İstanbul), festîvaleke ku ji Tirkiyeyê û derveyî Tirkiyeyê fîlmên serbixwe himbêz dike, mazûbaniya paneleke derbarê sînemaya kurdî de kir. Bi tevkariya Gündoğdu, lijneya festîvalê çar fîlmên dirêj û belgefîlmên derbarê kurdan û ên ji aliyê kurdan ve hatine çêkirin, neqandibûn. Bi îmakirina pevçûnên li rojhilata Tirkiyeyê, birêkxistinêran di fîlmên neqandî de wek babeteke hevpar “ew ên li ser çiyan” binxêz kiribû. Di her çar fîlman de, “çiya” wek babetekê ciyekî girîng zevt dikirin.

Fîlmên neqandî yên bo vê beşa taybet a festîvalê Zarêya sala 1926an dihewand; çîrokekek evînî ku li gundekî çiyayî yên kurdên êzidî li Ermenistana Sovyetan derbas dibe û li dora evîna hêvîşikestî ya navbera keça bedew a gund Zarê û şivan Seydo, digere. Fîlm, bi awayekî hiciwî jiyana kurdan a “otantîk” ku hejarî, nirxên feodal û kevneşopîtiya li hember zemîna I. Şerê Cîhanê niziliyê, teswîr dike. Bi gotinên Mustafa Gündoğdu, Zarê, di nav dîmeneke xweş de “diyariyeke tekane û bêdeng e ji Hayastanê bo Kurdistanê… li Stenbolê 85mîn temenê xwe pîroz dike.”

Êvareke sar a Şemiyê de, beriya ku nîşandana Zarê dest pê bike, hêwirzeyeke curbecur ku ji hunermend, rexnegirên sînemayê, rojnameger û xwendekaran pêk dihat li navenda Stenbolê hêwana şanogeha fîlman tijî kiribû. Zarê ji fîlmên din ên desteyê de gelekî bêtir bal kişand ser xwe. Gündoğdu, li her derê wek bûyerek mezin bo kurdan bi îlana ku ew ji arşîvên Ermenistanê hatiye bidestxistin, da naskirin. Digot, Zarê ku heştê û pênc sal berê hatiye kişandin, yekem tovên sînemaya kurdî çandine. Wek hîmê dîroka dîtbarî ya kurdan, Zarê girîngiyek wê yî taybet hebû.

Digel nihiçkên nêz-kurd ên li pey vê vejînê, ev ciyê taybet ku Gündoğdu li Stenbolê dida Zarê xuya ye bi qaideyên rexneyî yên sînemaya kurdî re ku di nîqaşên navbera fîlmçêker û rexnegiran de hatibû tespîtkirin li hev nedikir. Di van nîqaşan de, ku di xebata min li qadê ya navbera 2009 û 2012yan de gelek caran bûm şahidê wan,33 axivêr hema her tim sê pîvan datanîn dema fîlmên kurdî tesbît dikirin an dixistin dorê. Yek ji van, ziman kurdî ye an na, an heta çi radeyê kurdî ye. A din, nasnameya etnîk a fîlmçêker, û li kurdayetiya xwe xwedî derdikeve an guh nadê. A sêyem, mijara fîlm e, an bi taybetî kurd çawa tê de hatine şayesandin. Di tedbîqkirina van pîvanan de, axivêran gelek caran hewcedariya lihemberderketina xuyangên kurdan ên di fîlmên tirk, faris û ereban de û texeyulên populer ku piranî kurdan wek paşverû, nezan, feodal û folklorîk diresmînin, binxêz dikin. Ev pîvan bi tu awayî ne tekûz in û gelek caran ji lihevkirinekê bêtir rê li ber nelihevkirinê vedikin. Lê, rexnegir qe ne yekî ji wan û gelek caran kombînasyona wan, wek prîzmayekê ku tê re fîlman li gor “kurdbûn”a wan dinirxînin an dixin dorê.

Li gor van pîvanên tesbîtkirî, xuya ye Zarê têra xwe li dûrî qada cureya sînemaya kurdî dimîne. Fîlmekî dirêj î bêdeng e û nivîsên di navbera beşan de derdikeve bi ermenkî ne. Nivîskar û derhênerê wê, Hamo Beknazaryan, navdarekî ermen e û wek damezirênerê sînemaya ermen tê naskirin, ne kurd bû.34 A din, Zarê, wek fîlmên din ên ermen ku jiyana kurdan tomar kirine, li Ermenistana Sovyetan de di eslê xwe de wek amrazeke neteweyîkirina çanda gelêrî hatine bikaranîn. Di Zarê de, kurd wek wehşiyên esîl tên nîşandan ku bi cil û bergên kevneşopî û jiyana gundewar ku ji aliyê bavsalariya feodal tê îdarekirin, tên şayesandin. Wek ku dîrokzan Rohat Alakom destnîşan dike, Beknazaryan di hevpeyvînan de piranî kurdan wek nezan, zordar û wek zarokan teswîr kirine, ku ev taybetî di şayeseya fîlma wî de tên nîşandan. Zarê siyaseta sovyetan a dewra xwe daye nîşandan, ku armanc dikir qaşo gelê hov û jihevnecuda kedî bike û wan daxilî nav rêgeha Stalîn bike.35

Çawa û ji bo çi Zarê gihiştiye statuya xwe ya wek hîmê sînemaya kurdî? Bill Nichols dibêje ku “xuyang bûyera dîtbar temsîl dike, ne sedemê. Subjektîvîte ji îdraqa xwe direve.”36 Jinûvepeywendkirina Zarê ya di nav rabêja kurd a sînematîk de mînakekê dabîn dike ku subjektîvîte pirhejmariya şîroveyên xuyangekê çarenîn dike. Deqeke medyayê karaktera xwe ya neteweyî di nav rabêjê de bi dest dixe. Rabêj ku deqekê wek “neteweyî” ji nû ve dixe navendê, ew prensîbên sereke yên kolektîvîteyek siyasî ku girêdayî tecrubeyên dîrokî û binemayên civakî ne, eşkere dike.37 Xuyang “tenê taybetiyên sabit ên çandeke neteweyî temsîl nakin an îfade nakin lê ew bi xwe wargehê nîqaşên derbarê prensîbên sereke, hedef, mîrat û dîroka neteweyê de ne.”38 Bi vî awayî, xala girîng a bê vekolandin, ne ku deq bixwe derheqê kolektîvîteya gelekî de çi îfade dike lê hin deq çawa û çima tên nasnameyên wan î “neteweyî” saz dike, taybetî di peywendên dîrokî û sînematîk de. Mîna vê, dema rewşenbîr, çalakgerên çandê, û çêker û mezêxerên medyayê yên kurd sînemaya kurdî dîrokî dikin, dîrokeke bi vî awayî, ku di dema niha de bi neqandin tê afirandin, bi qasî rojeva îro endîşeyên kolektîv ên demdirêj jî dihewîne.

Rabêja ku Zarê bi awayekî berbiçav xist navenda sînemaya kurdî, nîşaneya du pêvajoyên sosyo-polîtîk e. Belkî, Zarê girîngtirîn kapasîteya xuyangan bo kurdan tekûz dike: bi saya belgekirinê kapasîteya wan a bo anîna texeyula kolektîvîteyekê nav qada hebûnê (into realm of existence), halê xuyakirî. Di bin darê netewe-dewletên serwer de li dijî zemîneke nenaskirin û nexuyakirinê, di texeyulkirina civateke xwe ya siyasî de medyaya dîtbarî bi taybetî bû alîkar bo kurdan. Zarê, bi nîşankirina kurdan wek gelekî, hedefeke girîng a civakî û siyasî pêk anî. Nîşankirineke wisa, di demeke ku kurd di nav texeyulên neteweyî yên serdest de bi xîretkêşî dihatin qelihandin, kurd ji wir derxistin û anî nav qada hebûnê. Fîlm ji bo kurdan îşaretî hebûneke kolektîf dike û bi nivîsandina jêrenotekê li bin dîrokên fermî bi dij-texeyulekê, bo wan lieux de me ́moire (qadên bîrê-sites of memory) çêdike.39 Pierre Nora dibêje lieux de me ́moire alternatîvên dîroka fermî ne û wargehên ku bîr krîstalîze dibe û xwe vedişêre. Zarê mînakek wisa ye bo wargeheke bîrê ku di nav dijderketinek diyalektîk e li hember dîroka ku berê xwe dayê bîrê bifetisîne û ji holê rake. Li lihevaliqîna pirjimariya rejîmên zanînê, Zarê jî mînakeke sînemaya navçandî ye, em formulasyona Laura Marks a bo fîlmên diyasporîk deyn bikin, ji ber ku ew di nav xurdeyên ku bi bêcihkirina çandî hatine afirandin neqandinekê dike û wataya tişta ku dîroka fermî paşguh dike, dixwîne.”40Zarê, bêyî ku li naveroka wê bê nêrîn, ji ber ku di salên 1920î de hebûna kurdan bi awayekî dîtbar nîşan dide, dibe nîşaneyeke îkonîk a kurdan û wek gelekî bo temsîliyeta dîtbarî ya kurdan dibe werçerxek. Zarê, bi jidûrvedîtina dîrokeke dîtbar, jêkêmhiştina din a kurdan di warê civakî û texeyula çandî ya netewe-dewletên de ku ew lê dijîn, binxêz dike. Bi vî awayî, fîlm alîkariya me dike da ku em îro hilberîna berhemdar a fîlmên li ser esasê siyaseta nasnameyê ronî bikin.

Neteweyîkirina Zarê di rabêjê de

Li Tirkiyeyê hilberîna fîlmên kurdî piranî di nav û saya qadên ku di nav bîst salên dawî de ji aliyê tevgera siyasî ya kurdan ve hatiye bidestxistin geş bûn. Yekeya sînemayê ya Navenda Çanda Mezopamyayê (NÇM), navendeke civatî ku navenda wê li Stenbolê ye, mînaka vê ye. Di 1992yan de ji aliyê komeke rewşenbîran ve hat destpêkirin, navendê ji xwe re Enstîtuya Kurdî ya Parîsê wek model girtibû. Piştî demeke kurt di yekeyên cuda de şax da ku bi navên taybet ên medyaya hunerî wek muzîk, şano û sînemayê dihatin pênasekirin, û beşdarên tê de atolye, semîner û performans organîze dikirin. Yekeya sînemayê ev çalakî bi malzeme û kapasîteya xwe ya bisînor tomar dikir. Ibrahim Gürbüz, yek ji damezirênerê NÇMyê di hevpeyvîneke min de diyar dikir ku di salên 1990î de li NÇMê hewildanên amator ên fîlmçêkirinê dişibiyan bizavên sînemayî yên neteweyî yên li her welatên mêtinkirî û gelên feqîr.41 Sînemayên neteweyî yên bi vî awayî, digot, “gelek caran di bin konan de dest pê kirine.” Digel ku xebatên NÇMyê bi alavên kevn û ruhekî amator dest pê kir jî, bi çêkirina fîlm û videoyên curbecur û pêşkêşkirina kargehên sînemayê bo nifşên nû yên kurd, yekeya sînemayê ya NÇMyê alîkariya dêstpêkirina sînemayeke kurdî ya neteweyî kir. Derhênerên wek Kazım Öz û Hüseyin Karabey, ku navê wan her tim di nîqaşên li ser sînemaya kurdî de derbas dibin, di salên 1990î de ji yekeya sînemayê ya NÇMyê derketine.42

Çalakgerên kurd ên sînemayê mezinbûna hilberîna fîlmên kurdî, li hemberî helwesta dewleta tirk a niha û siyaseta dîrokî ya dijkurd, wek rûdaneke kolektîvîte û aktoriya siyasî ku ji aliyê saziyên tevgera kurd hatibû afirandin, şîrove dikin. Analîza Müjde Arslan a derbarê teqdîma sînemaya kurdî de awayên ku endîşeyên demdirêj û hemdemî yên çalakgerên çanda kurdî sînemaya kurdî dorpêç kirine, û navdeqiya stratejîk ku ji aliyê axivêrên rabêja sînemaya kurdî tê bikaranîn vî cureyî çawa ji nû ve dirust dike, nîşan dide. Arslan, fîlmçêker û rexnegira fîlman a dengbilind, di çendîn panelan de axiviye û li ser sînemaya kurdî gelek gotar nivîsandine.43 Belgefîlma wê ya dawî serpêhatiya wê ya şexsî ya li Çiyayê Qendîlê li dû gora bavê xwe, şervanê gerîla vedibêje.44

Arslan, axivêreke mêvan bû di rêze semînerên li ser sînemaya hemdem ku di sala 2010an de li navenda Stenbolê hatibû birêkxistin. Di pêşkêşiya yek seatî ya bi sernavê “Sînemaya Kurdî: Arezûya Gelekî ya bo Xuyakirinê (become visible)” de Zarê xist nav fîlmên kurd ên neteweperwer û di xuyakirina kurdan de girîngiyeke taybet bexşî wê kir. Arslan, wateyeke siyasî û mîsyoneke performatîf jî li fîlmçêkirinê zêde kir. Wê îdîa dikir fîlmçêkirin amrazeke xwedî kapasîte ye ku bikaribe bide xuyakirin: amrazek ku, di mînaka Zarê de, bi saya dîmenê kurdan ji nav tunebûna siyasî derdixe dixe nav qada naskirinê. Stratejiyên rabêjî ku wê bi kar dianî, sînemaya kurdî wek cureyek fîlmçêkirina siyasî û “şoreşger” û tevgera siyasî ya kurdan jî wek aktorê vê qada hilberîna çandî bi cî dikir.

Arslan destpêka axaftina xwe de ku bi tirkî dikir, çend pirs danî ber guhdaran: “Gelo, sînemaya kurdan heye? Û ger hebe, çi ne dînamîkên wê? Pirsa Arslan bo guhdarên hatine li axiftina wê ya derbarê “sînemaya kurdî” de guhdarî bikin, ka sînemaya kurdî heye an na, ne tenê pirseke retorîk bû, bi erkek metarabêjî delaletî tunebûna netewe-dewletek kurdan ku hebûna sînemayeke neteweyî xarantî bike, dikir. A rastir, bi nûveşikildayina sînemaya kurdî, dema wê pêwendiyên rabêjî yên navbera kevneşopên sînemaya neteweyî saz dikir, Arslan tercîha xwe bo eşkerekirina taybetiyeke amraza sînemayê kir: kapasîteya wê ya bo kaşkirina kurdan ber bi dîtinbariyê ve. Wek mînak, wek platformeke ku hebûna filistîniyan a li welatekî dagirkirî de kiriye dîtinbar, behsa sînemaya filîstiniyan kir. Pirsa din a Arslanê alaveke metapra ̇gmatîk bû: “Heta niha, ka em bêjin heta vê panela di sala 2010an de, di dîroka sînemaya kurdî de çi bûye?” Beriya ku, ji bo “niha”ya sînemaya kurdî baştir nîşan bide, li ser ‘çi bûye’ bi hurgilî biaxive, kronolojiya fîlmên kurdî pêşkêşkir ku bi Zarê dest pê dikir. Bi pêşkêşkirina wêneyên danasîna fîlman bi slaytên PowerPoint, dîroka sînematîk a kurdan da rûniştandin û hunera sînemayê di nav têkiliya arezûya gelekî ya bo dîtinbarbûnê (become visible) de watedar kir. Li vir, Zarê bi awayekî parapragmatîk hat binê kêmasiyeke bi dehan salan a li welatên kurd lê dijîn xêz kir. Piştî 1926an bi dehan salan kurd li qada sînematîk xuya nedikirin.45 Li ser nedîtinbariyake (unvisibility) wisa, Arslanê bi qerfokî binxêz kir ku “ger Zarê yekem fîlma derbarê kurdan de be, ewçax divê piştî Zarê erd veqelişî be û gelek [kurd] bi temamî ketibin bin erdê! Belê, mesele ne ev e. Ji vê bêtir, tunebûna fîlmên derbarê kurdan de zordarî û pişaftina ku kurd di van deh salan de rû bi rû mane, nîşan dide.” Zarê, him wek “yekem fîlma kurd” piştî çêkirina wê bi dehan salan tunehisabkirina kurdan di qada sînematîk û him berovajî vê rewşa berhemdar a niha ya çêkirina fîlmên kurdî îma dike.

Arslan, di axaftina xwe de angaşt kir ku di salên 1990î de jinûvepeydabûna kurdan li ser perdeya spî girêdayî tevgera siyasî ya kurdan e. Bi binxêzkirina girîngiya tu saziyên kurd ên çandî, sînemaya kurdî û vejîna çanda dîtbar a di salên 1990î de bi tevgera kurdan a mezintir ve girêda.

Di salên nodî de, em bûn şahidê werçerxeke girîng: vebûna MED-TV [Kanala kurdî ku ji Ewropayê weşan dikir]. MED-TVyê kir ku kurd bên dîtin û bihîstin. Di heman salê de, di 1995an de, yekem kargeha sînemayê vebû li Navenda Çanda Mezopotamyayê [yekem navenda çandî li Stenbolê]… Di 1999an de, Ax, yekem fîlma bi temamî kurdî46 hat çêkirin ji aliyê Kazım Öz û Sînemaya Mezopotamyayê. Ev pir girîng e.

Dawiya mayî ya axaftina wê li ser rewşa niha ya sînemaya kurdî bû û pirseke berfireh pirsî ka selahiyeta kê heye kurdan temsîl bike (ji aliyê dîtbarî ve), yanê, fîlmên kê dikeve nav sînorê sînemaya kurdî. Bi xulasekirina sînemaya kurdî ku bi saya saziyên tevgera kurd krîstalîze bûye, axaftina xwe bi pîvanên nû yên bo nirxandina fîlman dewam kir. Wek mînak, piştî nîqaşa wê ya li ser Zarê, ku piştî 1926an dihat wateya berxwedana çandî ya kurd dema îhmalbûyîna kurdan di qada sînematîk de, zimanê kurdî bû pîvaneke girîng di tespîtkirina têkiliyên navdeqî yên bi cureyê re.

Arslan ji bo nûvedirustkirina uslûba rabêjî ya firehtir a sînemaya kurdî, û nûvepeywendkirina Zarê ku di nirxandina fîlmên îro de bi kêrî rewakirina meylên angaştkirî tê, ji deqek medyayê îstifade kir. Weku Briggs û Bauman destnîşan dikin, “cure ne nexşerê ne bo deqên taybet. Îcrakirina cureyê bêtir selahiyetê dide nûvesazkirina polên deqan… Bi eşkerekirina hin taybetiyên hilbijartî (û bi taybetî bi dubarekirin û serbana metapragmatîk derxistina pêş a hin hêmanan), hilberînerên rabêjê bi awayekî çalak cureyan (ji nû ve) saz dikin û dişêwînin.”47 Li ser şopa vê mantixê, sazkirina Arslanê ya Zarê wek yekem fîlma kurdî stratejiyek serkeftî bû. Endîşeyên dîrokî yên derbarê dîtinbariya kurdan bi me dide famkirin ka çima Zarê di navenda rabêja sînematîk a kurd de hat bicîkirin. Ev bicîkirina Zarê wek damezirênera rabêja sînematîk a kurd, wek stratejiyeke alîkar a bo rewakirina pîvana ku pêşniyaz dikir nirxandina kurdbûna fîlmên hemdem, ku berê berê xwe bispêre dereceya ka fîlm kurdan çiqasî “dîtinbar” dike, kar dike.

Wek nîşaneyek berxwedana çandî û aktoriya siyasî

Di 2009an de, vê carê li Diyarbekirê çalakiyek din bo sazûmankirina sînemaya kurdî pêk hat. Şaredariya mezin a Diyarbekirê navbera 4 û 13ê Kanûnê de Yekem Konferansa Navneteweyî ya Sînemaya Kurdî li dar xist. Bi sponsoriyek mezin a konsolosiya Swêdê, ku civateke mezin a diyasporaya kurd lê dijî, konferansê mazûbaniya mêvanên sînemager, akademisyen û rojnamegeran kir. Piştî hefteyekê ku fîlm hatin nîşandana, guhdaran eywana avahiya şaredariyê tijî kirin bo panel û nîqaşên li ser sînemaya kurdî. Van semîneran bi pirsên wek “Sînemaya kurdî çi ye?,” “Fîlmekî kurdî çi pênase dike?” “Çi wê dike yek?” hewl dan çarçoveyekê deynin bo sînemayeke neteweyî ya nûpeyda.

Di navbera piştî yekem rûniştina konferansê de, Hesen, çêkerekî medyayê yê kurd bi temenê xwe yî nêzî çilî, xuyaye ji ber nîqaşan ketibû nav kelecanekê û ji ber bersivên bêkêr ên panela fîlmçêker, nivîskar û akademisyenan hêrs bûbû, bersivên xwe ji min re vegot:

Xala herî girîng nabînin. Tişta nasnameyê dide fîlmekî ne babet an karakterên wê ne. Ma em dikarin bêjin Midnight Express fîlmekî tirk e, tenê ji bo ku çîrok li Tirkiyeyê derbas dibe û tê de karakterên tirk hene? … Tişta neteweya fîlmekî diyar dike ji zimanê wî fîlmî pê ve ne tu tiştek e.

Derhênerê amerîkî yê Midnight Expressê (1978), Alan Parker tirk bûya jî, li gor Hesen, zimanê vî fîlmî wê neteweya fîlm diyar bikira. Li gor Hesen, ger fîlmek ne bi kurdî be, çi dibe bila bibe, ew nikare wek parçeyek ji sînemaya kurdî bê pejirandin. Di binavkirina fîlmekî wek “heqîqî kurdî,” de, Hesen zimanê kurdî wek sembolekê dide rûniştandin li gor pêvajoya semiyotîk a sembolîkirinê (iconization), ku hin taybetiyên kom an çalakiyên civakî tesnîf dikin (index) û ev “dibin temsîliyeta wan a sembolî, wek ku taybetiya zimanî bi awayekî çawaniya irsî an gewhera komeke civakî teswîr an teşhîr bike.”48 Hesen, di senifandina fîlman de yek taybetî di ser ên din re digirt, bi sînorkirina neteweya fîlmekî bi zimanê axaftinê di nav cîhana xwe ya diyegetîk (diegetic) de, her wiha bi hilbijartina vê tesnîfê wek remza sembolîk a kurdbûnê.

Ligel hebûna tesnîfeke sembolîzekirî ya derbarê neteweya fîlman de, di nav rabêja sînemaya kurdî de zimanê kurdî û nîqaşa zimên bi gelek awayan pêk tê. Yekem, nîqaşên derbarê sînemaya kurdî hema bêje her tim bi tirkî çêdibin. Zimanê kurdî, bi tunebûna xwe, bi awayekî metalîngûîstîk çarçoveya rabêja derbarê sînemaya kurdî diyar dike. Wek mînak, li Diyarbekirê moderatorê panelekê Kemal Yıldızhan, di destpêkê de bi tirkî wiha got: “Ez pir kêfxweş im ku xêrhatina we ya bo yekem konferansa navneteweyî ya sînemaya kurdî dikim. Mixabin, ez nikarim bi kurdî xêrhatina we bikim.”49Hema bêje temama axiverên panelê, di axaftinên xwe de bi awayekî kêmasiya zimanê kurdî binxêz kirin. Ev derbiranên metalîngûîstîk bûn navenda rabêjê, girêdayî vê û meseleyên li ser ziman û nasnameyê, û ev dibû îşareta terkên di texeyula neteweyî ya axivêran de ku ji ber siyaseta netewe-dewlet û dîrokên fermî vebûne

Duyem, ligel wan terkan ji bo tesnîfkirina berxwedana çandî ya kurdan, beşdaran di fîlman de ciyê meseleya zimanê kurdî diyar dikirin. Di gelek axaftinan de, zimanê kurdî wek xwedî potansiyeleke irsî hat şayesandin ku dikare ji şikestinên tecrube kirine xilas bibe. Şîrovekaran jî di geşkirina tebîeta berxwedêr a zimanê kurdî de girîngiya warên çandî ku ji aliyê tevgera siyasî ya kurd hatiye afirandin û firehkirin, destnîşan kirin.

Di geşkirina berxwedêriya zimên, û rola zimanê kurdî ya di îlankirina pêşketinên siyasî û çandî yên kurdî li hemberî zordariya dewletê, gelek mînakên rola warên çandî yên kurdî çêbûne. Yek ji mînakên wisa piştî konferansa Diyarbekirê çêbû, di şeva rêwresma vekirina festîvaleke fîlmên kurdî ya şaredariyê ku li bajarekî kurd î biçûk Batmanê hatibû birêkxistin. Ji ber ku ev çalakî ji aliyê şaredariyan ve tên sponsorkirin, adet e ku di vekirina resepsiyona bixêrhatina mêvanan de şaredar axaftineke kurt bike. Şaredarê Batmanê Nejdet Atalay nikaribû vê adetê bi cî bîne ji ber ku berê di nav wê salê de di nav zextên hemberî Koma Civakên Kurdistan an KCKê de hatibû girtin.50 Ji dêvla vê, Atalay ji girtîgehê nameyek şandibû da ku bê xwendin:

Di demeke zimanê kurdî wek “zimanê nayê zanîn”51 tê bêrûmetkirin, ev festîval meydanxwestineke cidî ye bo sînemaçêkerên xort ên kurd … Di wê baweriyê de me ku zimanê kurdî, digel ewçend bêrûmetkirin û înkarkirinên rû bi rû maye, wê ji sînoran bibore û di sînemayê de ciyê ku heq dike wê bibîne wek di hemû qadên din de.

Atalay digot, her çiqas saziyên dewleta tirk dewam dikin kurdî reş bikin û paşguh bikin, birêkxistinkirina festîvaleke fîlmên kurdî bixwe berxwedêrî û kapasîteya qewîniya kurdî nîşan dide. Tevî binxêzkirina tebîeta wê ya berxwedêriya wê, peyama Atalay zimanê kurdî wek qadeke şer û çekek ku kurd bikaribin wê bo bidestxistina dîtinbarî (visibility) û nasandina xwe bi kar bînin.

Rehenda zimanî ya cureyan lazim e “ji aliyê têkiliyên bi navbeynkeriya îdeolojîk ên bi komên civakî û ‘qadên çalakgeriya mirovî’ di nav riwangeyeke dîrokî de bên dîtin.”52 Etnoneteweperweriya zimanî çarçoveya hilberîna çanda kurdî, ji vir jî di rabêja kurd a sînematîk de referansên bo zimên diyar dike. Stanley Tambiah, etnoneteweperweriya zimanî wek pêvajoyeke sedsala 20mîn rave dike, ku bi taybetî delaletî hebûna “nasnameyeke ji eynî tebîetî di navbera kolektîvîteya gelekî û zimanê ew dipeyivin û vediguhêzînin.” dike.

Etnoneteweperweriya zimanî, di sedsalên nozdemîn û bîstemîn de li seranserê cîhanê hander û piştevaneke xurt a siyaseta bo daxwazên kolektîf ên binavkirin û biîmtiyazbûnê, derbarê van pirsan de ka zimanek çawa bi cîhanê (realîte) re dikeve têkiliyê û bi axiverên xwe re jî çawa dikeve têkiliyê, pêwendiya navbera peyv û tiştan û navbera peyv û benî ademan, barekî giran li ser piştê ye.53

Li gor Tambiah, etnoneteweperweriya zimanî wek bertekek li dijî projeyên netewe-dewletan ku nasnameyên etnîk dixin bin serbana nasnameyeke normatîv û “hesteke xurt bi mirovan re çêdikin ku zimanê wan û berhemên wan î devkî û nivîskî -helbest, efsane, folklor, çîrçîrok û deqên felsefî, dînî/dîrokî/zanistî- ji nêzik ve, bi temamî, û bi awayekî gewherî wek xwedî, afirîner û hevpişkên vê mîratê bi wan re eleqedar in.”54 Ji riwangeyeke dîrokî, sazkirina zimanê kurdî wek îkona neteweyê piştî hêzên neteweperweriya tirk tê. Di salên ewil ên komarê de, wek terîbê efsaneya ku tirk berztirîn nijad e, efsaneyek jî bo kurdan hat çêkirin. Di vegotina fermî de, kurd wek tirk dihatin pejirandin lê bi awayekî rêşaş û xirabbûyî. Gunter vegotina fermî wisa kurte dike:

Li deverên çiya û dûr îzolekirî, kurdan zimanê xwe [tirkî] ji bîr kiribûn. Tê gotin di “kurdî” de ji heştsed peyvî kêmtir peyv hene û lewma ne zimanekî heqîqî ye. A rast, peyva “kurd” ji halê guhertî yê dengê şikestinê (kirt, kart, an kurt) ku dema li başûrê-rojhilat yek li ser çiyayên biberf dimeşe derdikeve, pê ve tu wateya wê tuneye.55

Mesut Yeğen dewleta tirk a nûava kurd wek tirkên mustakbel dît û hewl da kurdan di nav tirkbûnê de medenî bike bi riya taximek polîtîkayên dewletê, ji jinûvebicîkirinê bigre heta qedexekirina zimanê kurdî.56 Peywenda nêz a festîvalê, ku dadgehkirina girtiyên KCKê û hevdîtinên bi serokê Partiya Karkerên Kurdistanê (PKK) mohra xwe lê xistibû, li aliyekî din, bi bibîrxistinên zimanê ji heman gewherî wek nîşaneya him berxwedêriya çandî him a aktoriya siyasî hatibû çarçovekirin. Bi diyarkirina di qadên cuda yên siyaseta çandî de û krîstalîzekirina di dadgeh an bi fîlman daxwazên bo zimanê kurdî dibe qadeke berxwedêrî û aktoriyê.

Encam

Di çend salên dawî de, “sînemaya kurdî” li Tirkiyeyê li derdorên sînemayê geraneke rabêjî bi dest xist. Her ku xwebicîkirina hikumetê ya li hemberî kurdan di nîqaşên siyaseta tirk de serdest dibû, kurd, zimanê kurdî û çanda kurdî jî di çanda populer de ewqas zêde bal dikişandin. Çawa ku fîlmên derbarê kurdan û yên ji aliyê wan ve hatiye çêkirin ketin nav meseleya kurd, zêdebûna xuyakirina fîlmên kurdî û fîlmçêkeran jî di nav çalakgerên kurd de rabêja derbarê sînemayeke kurdî ya cuda da destpêkirin. Dema fîlm û sînemagerên kurd di festîvalên fîlman ên neteweyî de bêtir cî girtin û di nav derdorên sînemaya tirk a lîberal bal kişandin, rewşenbîr û medyaçêkerên kurd dest bi hewildanên bo tarîfkirin, çarçovekirin û sazûmanîkirina sînemaya kurdî dest pê kirin. Digel ku rabêja sînemaya kurdî li Tirkiyeyê di çand salen dawî de dest pê kir jî, ew di pê re û li ser xeta hewildanên neteweyîkirina fîlmên kurdî li diyasporayê destpêka salên 2000î de dest pê kir. Sînemaya kurdî wek warekî rabêjî, di tunebûna dewleteke fermî ku bikaribe endustriyeke sînemayê ya neteweyî bo hilberîna fîlman biafirîne û durist bike, her tim bi tebîata xwe neteweborî bû. Tevî xebata di nav endustriyên fîlman ên tirk, îranî û iraqî, sînemagerên kurd amrazên global ên hilberîn û belavkirinê bi kar anîn ku bi pratîkên xwe yî medyayê ve rabin. Bi rastî, bûyerên neteweborî, bi qismî, şertên neteweyîkirina çand, ziman û hunera kurdî afirandin. Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê, li warê neteweborî qadeke girîng a rabêja sînematîk a kurdî, vê destnîşan dike. Şêwazên ku rewşenbîrên kurd ên li Londonê li dora çandeke sînematîk xwe birêkxistin kirin û Zarê ji arşîvên neteweyî ya Ermenistanê anîn, ku bû bingeha sînemaya kurdî, rola şertên neteweborî di neteweyîkirina fîlmên kurdî di lihevaliqîna gerana çandên cuda de eşkere dike.

Rewşenbîrên kurd, çalakgerên çandê û hilberîner û mezêxerên medyayê ku bi awayekî çalak beşdarî nîqaşên li ser sînemaya kurdî dibin hewl didin sînemaya kurdî dîrokî bikin. Dîroka bi vî awayî ku dema niha di encama neqandinekê de hatiye çêkirin, qasî qayişkêşiya dema niha endîşeyên kolektîf ên demdirêj jî nîşan didin. Tê pejirandin ku Zarê destpêka sînemaya kurdî ye. Rabêja ku Zarê neteweyî dike, di “dîtinbar”kirina kurdan de kapasîteya girîng a medyaya dîtbarî îşaret dike, valahiya di navbera 1920 û 1990î de berbiçav dike û di salên 1990î de di vegera kurdan a bo qada dîtbar de aktoriya teb’î ya siyasî destnîşan dike. Dema bi dû kokan dikevin, çalakgerên kurd ên sînemayê îdîaya kurdbûna hin fîlman dikin, wan bi yên din ve girêdidin û bi tarîfkirina qaîde, danîna sînoran û hewandin û vederkirinan sînemayeke kurdî çêdikin. Wek mînak, di diyarkirina kurdbûna fîlmekî de zimanê kurdî wek pîvaneke sereke derdikeve pêş. Zimanê kurdî xaleke demildest a referansa bo nîşankirina kurdbûna deqek medyayê yelê cîhana diegetic a fîlmên kurdî ku gelek caran ji tecrubeyên kurdan derdikevin pirî caran li gel kurdî zimanên din jî dihewîne. Her çi be jî, qasî naveroka siyasî ya nêz endîşeyên dîrokî jî zimanê kurdî wek wechekî girîng ê vê cureyê îşaret dikin.

“Sînemaya kurdî” wek cureyek ku çarçoveyeke beralîkir bo hilberîn û wergirtina fîlmên derbarê kurdan de û yên kurdan çêkirine, û wek rabêja ku vî cureyî di heman demê de li hev dicivîne û parçe dike, peyda dibe, û li aliyekî lihevkirin û nelihevkirinên derbarê rabirdû û îroya sînemaya kurdî materyalîze dibin.57 Di van nîqaşan de, axivêr fîlman ji nû ve dixin nav peywendekê û di navbera wan de têkiliyan tesbît dikin û dibînin. Pîvandina aktorên rabêjê ya di girêdanên hin deqên taybet bi cureyek firehtir de, vî cureyî mevzûbehîs ji nû ve dişêwîneû ji nû ve saz dike. Ev stratejiyên jinûvepeywendkirinê, ku di hilberîna rabêja derbarê fîlmên kurdî de aktor bi kar tînin, alîkariya peydabûna cureyekî ku li ber çêbûnê ye dikin, di sînemaya kurdî de qaîdeyên şêwandina rabêjî xulase dikin, û di xaçerê û dijberiyên ku di rabêjeke wisa de bi encam dibe, çi di nav xeterê de ye derdixe holê.

Nîşeya nivîskar: Lêkolîna ku ev gotar xwe dispêrê ji aliyê Weqfa Wenner Gren (Wenner Gren Foundation), Ofîsa Zanîngeha Indianayê ya Bernameyên Navneteweyî (the Indiana University Office of International Programs) û Bursa David C. Skomp a bo Xebata Qadê (David C. Skomp Fieldwork Grant) hatiye piştevanîkirin. Ez minêkar im bo nirxandinên gelek heval, karheval û bi taybetî rexnegir û edîtorên vê kovarê. Hemû berpirsiyariya nêrîn û materyalên di vê gotarê de li ser min e.

1 Projeya “Vebûn”ê, tê de vekirina beşên zimanê kurdî di zaningehên dewletê de, lêvegerandina navên gundên kurd ên kurdî, û vekirina kanaleke televîzyonê ya kurdî bi destê dewletê, TRT-6 hebû. Bnr. Demokratik Ac ̧ılım: Soruları ve Cevaplarıyla Demokratik Ac ̧ılım Su ̈reci (AKP Tanıtım ve Medya Bas ̧kanlıg ̆ı, 2010), http://www.demokratikacilimkitabi.com/ (gihandin 20 Îlon 2010). Gelek çalakgerên kurd bi awayekî hişk vebûna kurd rexne kirin ku, di demeke ku zemînê siyaseteke nû tê çêkirin jî hikumetê girîngî nedaye saziyên tevgera kurd a neteweperwer, partiya siyasî nêz-kurd a di parlamentoyê de jî tê de. Bi girtina gelek siyasetmedar, rewşenbîr û rojnamegerên bi îdîaya endamiya KCKê (Koma Civakên Kurdistan) ku wek baskê PKKê yê li bajaran dihat dîtin, rexne zêdetir bûn. Ji ber helwestên siyasî yên nakokbar ên li aliyê hikûmeta AKPê, vebûna kurd pir caran wek hewleke pişaftina kurdan ji aliyê dewletê tê dîtin.

2 Ji bo lîsteya festîvalên fîlmên kurdî yên li Ewropa û Amerîkayê, bnr. “Kurdish Fîlm Festivals across the World,” http://www.kurdishcinema.com/Festivals.html (gihandin 25 Adar 2014).

3 Müjde Arslan, ed., Kürt Sîneması: Yurtsuzluk, Sınır ve Ölüm [Sînemaya Kurdî: Bewarbûn, Sînor û Mirin] (İstanbul: Agora Kitaplıg ̆ı, 2009).

4 Charles L. Briggs û Richard Bauman, “Genre, Intertextuality, and Social Power,” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 2 (1992): r. 149.

5 Susan Hayward, “Framing National Cinemas,” di nav Cinema and Nation, ed. Mette Hjort and Scott MacKenzie (London and New York: Routledge, 2000), r. 91.

* Diegetic: Hemû tiştên aîdî cîhana di fîlm de, zimanê diegetic, zimanê aîdî cîhana di fîlm de ye, leheng bi wî zimanî dipeyivin. An wek mînak, muzîka diegetic ew e ku lehengê di fîlm de wê muzîkê dibihîze an lê guhdar dike ne tenê temaşevan. (wer.)

6 Arjun Appadurai, Modernity at Large: Cultural Dimensions of Globalization (Minneapolis, Minn.: University of Minnesota Press, 1996), 49.

7 Bnb., r.4.

8 Michael Featherstone, ed., Global Culture: Nationalism, Globalization, and Modernity (London: Sage, 1990), r. 1.

9 Aiwa Ong, Flexible Citizenship: Cultural Logic of Transnationality (Durham, N.C.: Duke University Press, 1999), r. 11.

10 Bilgin Ayata, “Kurdish Transnational Politics and Turkey’s Changing Kurdish Policy: The Journey of Kurdish Broadcasting from Europe to Turkey,” Journal of Contemporary European Studies 19 (2011): r. 526.

11 Amir Hassanpour, “Satellite Footprints as National Borders: MED-TV and the Extraterritoriality of State Sovereignty,” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 18 (1998): r.58.

12 Bnb., r.530.

13 Analîza Hamid Naficy a li ser festîvalên fîlmên etnîk ên neteweborî behsa festîvalên fîlmên kurdî yên li Ewropayê dike. Naficy dibêje “di demek kurt de bi nîşandana çendîn fîlman bo temaşevanên ji malê û yên derve, û lihevcivandina fîlmçêker, hilberîner, fînanskar û rexnegirên medyayê [festîvalên fîlmên etnîk] li ser hişmendiya gişteyî dawa îdîayekê dikin, çêbûna nasnameya kolektîf hêsan dikin û toreke rabêjî û aborî bo berhemên pêşdetir gengaz dike.” Hamid Naficy, An Accented Cinema: Exilic and Diasporic Fîlmmaking (Princeton, N.J.: Princeton University Press, 2001), r.65.

14 Mustafa Gündoğdu, hevpeyvîn, 13 Kanûn 2009, Diyarbekir.

15 Christian Joppke, “Multiculturalism and Immigration: A Comparison of the United States, Germany, and Great Britain,” Theory and Society 25 (1996): rr.449–500.

16 Ji bo bêtir agahî derheqê rêxistinên kurdî yên li Qraliyeta Yekbûyî, bnr. Bahar Başer, “Kurdish Diaspora Political Activism in Europe with a Particular Focus on Great Britain,” di nav Diaspora Dialogues for Development and Peace, Berghof Peace Support and Center for Just Peace and Democracy (Berlin: Berghof Peace Support, 2011).

17 Bnr., r.19.

18 Gündoğdu, hevpeyvîn, Diyarbekir.

19 Benjamin Lee and Edward LiPuma, “Cultures of Circulation: The Imaginations of Modernity,” Public Culture 14 (2002): rr. 191–213.

20 Bnb., r.192.

21 Bnb.

22 Appadurai, Modernity at Large, r. 33.

23 Mustafa Gündoğdu, hevpeyvîn, 5 Mijdar 2009, London.

24 Ji bo nîqaşeke li ser fîlmçekirina Behmen Qubadî a lihevaliqîna endustriyên sînemayê yên neteweyî û global, bnr. Asuman Suner, “Outside In: ‘Accented Cinema’ at Large,” Inter-Asia Cultural Studies 7 (2006): r.363–82.

25 Appadurai, Modernity at Large, r.35.

26 Dilip Parameshwar Goankar and Elizabeth A. Povinelli, “Technologies of Public Forms: Circulation, Transfiguration, Recognition,” Public Culture 15 (2003): r.391.

27 Quoted in Chris Kutschera, “Iran Kurdistan: Bahman Ghobadi and the Pain of Giving Birth to Kurdish Cinema,” Kutschera 30 Years of Journalism (2003), http://www.chris-kutschera. com/A/bahman_ghobadi.htm (gihandin 15 August 2012).

28 Appadurai, Modernity at Large, r.3.

29 Gündoğdu, hevpeyvin, London.

30 Faye Ginsburg erkên civakî û siyasî yên sînemayê di ser civatên Aborigin ên Awistralyayê re nîqaş dike. Bnr. Faye Ginsburg, “Indigenous Media: Faustian Contract or Global Village?,” Cultural Anthropology 6 (1991): 104; û wek li jor, “Embedded Aesthetics: Creating a Discursive Space for Indigenous Media,” Cultural Anthropology 9 (1994): 365–82.

31 Amir Hassanpour, “Satellite Footprints as National Borders: MED-TV and the Extraterritoriality of State Sovereignty,” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs 18 (1998): r.53–72.

32 Mustafa Gu ̈ndog ̆du, hevpeyvîn, 20 Nîsan 2012, İstanbul.

33 Ev ciyên ku min lê çavdêrî kirine ev in: Li Diyarbekirê Konferansa Sînemaya di 2009an de, li Batmanê Festîvala Kurtefîlmên Kurdî ya Yilmaz Güney di 2009an de, li Dêrsimê Festîvala Fîlmên Mafê Mirovan di 2011ê de, Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê di 2009an de, kargehên sînemayê li Sînemaya Mezopotamyayê di 2010 û 2011an de, û nîşandan fîlmên din, panel û axaftinên nefermî navbera 2009 û 2012an de.

34 Arstvi Bakchinyan, “Ermenistan Sînemasında Ku ̈ rt Renkleri,” di nav Ku ̈ rt Sîneması: Yurtsuzluk, Sınır ve Olu ̈m de, ed. Mu ̈jde Arslan (İstanbul: Agora Kitaplıg ̆ı 2009), r. 43. ala Fîlmên Mafê Mirovan di 2011ê de, Festîvala Fîlmên Kurdî ya Londonê di 2009an de, kargehên sînemayê li Sînemaya Mezopotamyayê di 2010 û 2011an de, û nîşandan fîlmên din, panel û axaftinên nefermî navbera 2009 û 2012an de.

35 Rohat Alakom, “Kürtleri Anlatan İlk Fîlm Zarê,” Kürt Sineması: Yurtsuzluk, Sınır ve Ölüm, ed. Müjde Arslan (İstanbul: Agora Kitaplığı, 2009).

36 Bill Nichols, Representing Reality (Bloomington, Ind.: Indiana University Press, 1991), r.153.

37 Hayward, “Framing National Cinemas,” r.91.

38 Mette Hjort and Scott MacKenzie, “Introduction,” di nav Hjort and MacKenzie de, Cinema and Nation, 4.

39 Pierre Nora, “Between Memory and History: Les Lieux de Memoire,” Representations 26 (1989): rr.7–24.

40 Laura Marks, The Skin of the Fîlm: Intercultural Cinema, Embodiment, and the Senses (Durham and London: Duke University Press, 2000), r.28.

41 İbrahim Gürbüz, hevpeyvîn, Çile 2009 û Pûşber 2010, İstanbul.

42 Xebaten akademîk ên li ser sînemaya kurdî kêm in. Lê, Tim Kennedy sînemaya kurdî bi riwangeyeke dîrokî û berawirdî nîqaş dike, di “Cinema Regarding Nations: Re-imagining Armenian, Kurdish, and Palestinian National Identity in Fîlm” (Teza doktorayê, University of Reading, 2007). Ji bo analîzên babetên hevpar û meylên estetîk di sînemaya kurdî de, bnr., wek mînak, Özgür Çiçek, “The Fictive Archive: Kurdish Fîlmmaking in Turkey,” Alphaville: Journal of Fîlm and Screen Media (2011); û Ayc ̧a C ̧ iftc ̧i, “Tahakku ̈mden İktidara: Tu ̈rkiye’de Ku ̈rt Sînemasının Dog ̆umu” (teza masterê, Istanbul Bilgi University, 2008).

43 Wek mînak, Müjde Arslan, Kürt Sîneması: Yurtsuzluk, Sınır ve Ölüm [Sînemaya Kurdî: Bêwarbûn, Sînor û Mirin] (İstanbul: Agora Kitaplığı, 2009); û wek li jor, “Kürt Sînemasının Cesur Kadınları” [Jinên Wêrek ên Sînemaya Kurdî], Yeni Özgür Politika (2013), http:// yeniozgurpolitika.org/ index.php?rupel=nuce&id=25261 (gihandin 27 Adar 2014).

44 Müjde Arslan, Ez Firiyam Tu Ma li Cih (İstanbul: Asi Fîlm, 2012).

45 Müslu ̈m Yu ̈cel gengeşe dike, ji 1950 vir de kurd di sînemaya tirkî de çawa hatine dîtin, fîlmên Yılmaz Güney ên efsanewî jî tê de, ne wek kurd lê wek feodal, gundî hatine dîtin. Mu ̈slu ̈m Yu ̈cel, Tu ̈rk Sinemasında Ku ̈rtler (İstanbul: Agora Kitaplıg ̆ı, 2008).

46 Ax fîlmekî 27 deqeyî ye ku derheqê valakirina gundekî kurdan ji aliyê artêşa tirk de ye û li dora zilamekî extiyar ku naxwaze terka gundê xwe bike. Kazım Öz, Ax (İstanbul: Yapım 13, 1999).

47 Charles L. Briggs and Richard Bauman, “Genre, Intertextuality, and Social Power,” Journal of Linguistic Anthropology 2 (1992): r.148.

48 Judith Irvine û Susan Gal, “Language Ideology and Linguistic Differentiation,” di nav Regimes of Language: Ideologies, Polities, and Identities de, ed. Paul V. Kroskrity (Santa Fe, N.Mex.: School of American Research Press, 2000), r.37.

49 Kemal Yıldızhan, 5 Kanûn 2009, Diyarbakır.

50 Destpêka 2009an de, çendîn şaredarên kurd bi tawanbariya endamtiya KCKê, ku wek rêxistina PKKê ya li bajaran tê zanîn, hatin girtin. Van siyasetmedaran îlan kiribûn ku wê îfade nedin heta ku destûr neyê dayin vê bi zimanê xwe yî xwemalî bikin. Digel ku tawanbarkirinên resen ne di warê bikaranîna wan a zimanê kurdî bixwe bû, gelekan bawer dikirin ku ew bo ku beşdarî saziyên tevgera kurd bûne hatine girtin lewma dixwestin zimanê kurdî meşrû bikin. Bi saya çalakiyên bêîteatkariya sivil wek redkirina îfadedayina bi tirkî, zimanê kurdî careke din bo tevgera kurd bû qadeke sembolîk a şer û amrazên hilberîna aktoriya siyaseta kurd.

51 Dema dadgehkirinên KCKê, ku bertawanan red dikirin bi tirkî îfade bidin û ku li dadgehê bi kurdî bipeyivin, zabitnameyên dadgehê gotinên wan wek “zimanê nayê zanîn” tomar kirin. Qanûndanîna niha qeyrana axaftina kurdî a li dadgehan hinekî sivik kiriye, bertawan niha dikare bi zimanê xwe yî xwemalî îfade bide ger ew wergêrekî bigre û li wir be. “KCK davasında ‘bilinmeyen dil’ krizi” [Qeyrana Zimanê nayêzanîn di Daweya KCKê de], Radikal, 4 Mijdar 2010, http://www.radikal.com.tr/Radikal.aspx? aType=RadikalDetayV3&ArticleI- D=1027417&CategoryID=77 (gihandin 15 Tebax 2012).

52 Briggs û Bauman, “Genre, Intertextuality, and Social Power,” r.145.

53 Stanley Tambiah, “The Nation-State in Crisis and the Rise of Ethnonationalism,” di nav Politics of Difference, ed. Wilmsen and Patrick McAllister (Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2001 [1996]), r.131.

54 Bnb., r.132.

55 Michael M. Gunter, The Kurds and the Future of Turkey (New York: St. Martin’s Press, 1997), r.6.

56 Mesut Yeğen, “Prospective-Turks or Pseudo-Citizens: Kurds in Turkey,” Middle East Journal 63 (2009): r.599.

57 Bnr. Briggs û Bauman, “Genre, Intertextuality, and Social Power”; û bi taybetî Jane E. Goodman, “Writing Empire, Underwriting Nation: Discursive Histories of Kabyle Berber Oral Texts,” American Ethnologist 29 (2002): rr.86–122.

Sînemaya Kurdî wek Cureyek Rabêja Neteweborî: Dîtbariya Sînematîk, Berxwedêriya Çandî û Aktoriya Siyasî

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

Sînemaya Kurdî wek Cureyek Rabêja Neteweborî: Dîtbariya Sînematîk, Berxwedêriya Çandî û Aktoriya Siyasî

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