Xuyangên Neteweyê: Sînema, Huner û Nasnameya Neteweyî

Xuyangên Neteweyê: Sînema, Huner û Nasnameya Neteweyî*

ANTHONY SMITH – JI ÎNG: FEXRIYA ADSAY

Babeta min temsîliyeta dîtbarî ya nasnameya neteweyî ye. Îdîaya min ev e, di resmê de wek di fîlman de, em dikarin bibînin bê ka çawa ew nêrîna dîrokîhez1 a neteweyê, û kaniya wê ya etnîk a efsane, bîranîn, sembol û kevneşopan, bi awayê îfadeyeke ku her diçe bêtir xwezayî dibe li ber çavan tê raxistin, û çeşitdariyeke zêdetir a wate û hestan bi xwe re tîne her ku hunerên dîtbarî ji endamtiya neteweyî ya gelek berfirehtir re vedibin. Ev herî zêde destpêka vê sedsalê de bi îcada xuyanga livok û şoreşa sînematîk çêbû; lê gelek ji babetên sînemayê û awayên temsîliyetê di bin siya hunera dîtbarî ya sedsala berê de man. Di vê gotara ceribînî de, tenê dikarim teşebis bikim nîşan bidim ku, dema hin derhêner hewl didin di dîrokê de ewilî wechên nasnameya neteweyî bi bîr bixin û dû re biresmînin, ew uslûbên di resmê de hin babetên neteweyî û awayên dîrokîhez yên îfadekirinê di sînemayê de çawa manendên xwe dibînin.

Dîrokîhezî û neteweperwerî

Robert Rosenblum di nirxandana xwe ya klasîk ya hunera neo-klasîk Transformations in Late Eighteenth Century Art [Veguherînên Dawiya Sedsala Hijdemîn de] de îdîa dike bergeha nisbeten nû ya dîrokîheziyê:

Di sedsala me de zêde zêde qebe bû, heta ku gihişt encama xwe ya neçar, bi riya anîmasyon, şibîna fotografîk ya bi rastiyê re temsîliyeta derdorên cuda yên dîrokî. Îro lîsteya fîlmên dîrokî yên populer di nav hawirdorên herî zêde bêsînor de babetên herî zede sînorkirî pêşkêş dikin -Ice Age, Ancient Troy, Imperial Rome, Renaissance France, Colonial America, The Third Reichev hemû ji aliyê komek karmendên pispor ku îhtisasa wan ji arkeolojî û hunerên dekoratîf heta kuaforî û balîstîkê dikare bê rêzkirin bi rengên rewnaq bi baldarî ji nû ve tên sazkirin. Fîlmên bi vî awayî, ku tê de dibe ku temaşevan di rewşeke dramatîk a aşîna de konforê û di rasthatineke neaşîna lê bêje bi eşkereyî dîtbar a rastîn de macerayê bibîne, ji nifşê dawî yê pêkhînana hestên ku bi hêsanî tên îfadekirin û lêgerîneke bo teferûatên heqîqeta dîrokî ya dawiya sedsala hîjdemîn e. (Rosenblum 1967:49)

Em nêrîna wî ya normatîf deynin aliyekî, li vir dîroknasê hunerê hewl dide têkiliya qada xwe bi geşedanên dawî yên hunera sînemayê re ku kokek hevpar pêşniyaz dike bo manendiyên taybet ên armanc û rêbazê û bo nêrîneke nû ya çandî ku ew wek ‘dîrokîhezî’ binav dike, deyne. Di nîşeyekê de, Rosenblum rave dike ku:

Ev têgeha berfireh ku helwestên nû yên retrospektîf û arkeolojîk pêşniyaz dike bo rabirdûya dîrokî ya ku di nîvê sedsala hîjdemîn de peyda bûye û di dema me de jî li ser tê sekinandin û zelalkirin, pirî caran di xebatên almanî yên dîrokî yên modern de tê dîtin. (bnb.: 34, n. 106)

Ji dawiya sedsala hîjdemîn û vir de, di resim û mîmariyê de vê nêrînê destûr daye ‘livbariyeke kronolojîk û erdnigarî ku her diçe pêş ve diçe.’ Di heman demê de, kevneşopên kevintir ên xiristiyanî û klasîk ‘aktualiteya xwe ya zindî winda kirin û bûn parçeyek ji rabirdûya mirî ku encax dikaribû ji berbanga serdemek din a dîrokî ve bi awayekî retrospektîf bê dîtin’ (b.n.b.: 48).

Ev serdem dewra neteweperwerî û kapîtalîzmê bû, serdema par excellence (mukemel) a welatî-neteweyan. Di şîroveyên niha yên serdest ên modernîst ên vê serdemê de, netewe û neteweperwerî bi taybetî wek diyardeyên modern tên dîtin. Bi rastî, li gor Ernest Gellner, alîgirê deqerûtirîn ê vê nêrînê ye, netewe û neteweperwerî, digel ku bi mantiqî girêdayî modernîteyê ne, ji aliyê sosyolojîk ve pêkhateyên pêwîst ên modernîteyê ne. Netewe encama neteweperweriyê ye ku bi xwe îfadeyeke pêdiviya modernîteyê ya bo ‘çandên bilind’ e -çandên lîngûîstîk xwe dispêrin xwendin, nivîsandin û dibistanê, û ji aliyê bingeheke perwerdehî ya girseyî, giştî, standardkirî tê destekkirin. Encax di civateke livok, xwende, modernker ku piraniya kar semantîk in û çandeke lîngûîstîk lazim e da ku li bajarên mezin gelheyên bêkok û hevnenas bi hev girê bide, netewe û neteweperwerî pêwîst dibe, da ku sedeqat û bihevrebûna girseyî çêbikin. (Gellner 1964: beş 7; û 1983: beş 1–6).

Dîroknasên piştî-şer jî bi gelemperî ev riwange qebûl kirin. Eric Hobsbawm, wek mînak, netewe wek bertekek sedsala nozdemîn a piştî Şoreşa Frensî û Şerên Napolyonî dibîne. Destpêkê de, neteweperwerî tevgereke hewîner, girseyî-demokratîk û siyasî bû; lê piştî 1870ê, neteweperweriyeke bêtir belavker, qad-biçûk, bask-rast muracaatî ziman û etnîsîteyê kir. Vê serdemê tibabek ‘kevneşopên îcadkirî’ -mîtolojî, sembol, rîtuel û dîrokên neteweyî- ku bi saya wan bijarteyên desthilat armanc dikirin girseyên ku hê nû azadiya xwe bi dest xistine kontrol bikin û berê enerjiya wan biguherînin (Hobsbawm û Ranger 1983: Destpêk û beşa 7.; Hobsbawm 1990).

Têgeha Hobsbawm a ‘kevneşopa îcadkirî’ taybetî bo vir guncav e. Gelek babetên nû yên hunermend, nivîskar û muzisyenan ku zimanê helbest, drama, muzîk, resim û peykerê fireh û dewlemend kirine, dikare wek ‘kevneşopên îcadkirî’ bên xwendin ku hatine çêkirin bo pêdiviyên nû bi saya pratîkên sembolîk yên barekir (iterative) ku daxwaz dikin bi rabirdûya komunal re têkiliyeke dikare rewa bê dîtin deynin. Têkiliyeke wisa piranî çêkirî ye. Li gor Hobsbawm, hewlên bo peydakirina berdewamiya dîrokî bo neteweyên îngilîz, frensî û almanî bi rabirdûyên kevnar re bi riya Boadicea2, Vercingetorix3 û Arminius the Cheruscanên4 nîv-xeyalî ji îmalatên neteweyî yên muxayel ên ‘ji berdewamiyeke dîrokî ya karîger wêdetir’ ne zêdetirin(Hobsbawm û Ranger 1983:7).

Li gor Benedict Anderson jî, neteweperwerî di cîhaneke fanîbûna mirovî û çeşitdariya zimanî de neteweyan diafirîne. Lê ev tenê dema ‘kapîtalîzma çapê’, bi riya belavbûna pirtûk û rojnameyên di zimanê niştecih de, li ser bingeha zimanên çapê girseyên mezin ên xwende afirand dikare pêk bê. Ancex dema monarşiyên pîroz û şaristaniyên dînî ber bi hilweşînê ve çûn, û dema ku gengaz bû dem awayekî xêzî bi saet û salnameyê bê pîvan, ji bo ev girseyên xwende jî gengaz bû xwe wek netewe, yanê civatên siyasî yên wek serwer, bisînor, xwedî çîn û tebeqe ‘texeyul’ bikin (Anderson 1991: beş 1–4).

Bi kurtasî, li gor modernîstan, ne tenê netewe aîdî demên dawî û nû ye, ew encama modernîzasyon û modernîteyê, û entelîjensiya sekuler û modern ku efsaneyên dîrokî yên netewebûnê diafirînin û belav dikin. Ev nîskoka êrişên Elie Kedourie yên li dij dîroknûsî û antropolojiya neteweperwer bû. Îdîa dike ku neteweperwerî doktrînek e ku di destpêka sedsala nozdemîn de li Ewropayê, di bin bandora Roşenbîriyê de ji aliyê rewşenbîrên alman ên vederkirî û biyanîbûyî ve hatiye îcadkirin. Lê ev doktrîn li seransera cîhanê wek vîrusekê belav bû bi saya kirdariya rewşenbîrên dîrokîhez ku fikrên resen ên ewropî teqlîd kirin û li şertên xwe yên etnîk yên taybet tetbîq kirin û rê li ber teror û hilweşînê vekirin. Livdariya dîrokî ya van rewşenbîran û cîhanbîniya wan a dîrokîhez kir ku bikaribin ji bo neteweyên xwe efsaneya rabirdûyeke etnîk a muhteşem biafirînin û her wiha soza çarenûsa neteweyî bidin. Elbet, pirsgirêk îqnakirina girseyên gelheya ‘neteweyî’ ya diyarkirî bû ku ev neteweya wan e, û lazim e ew bi wê bên nasîn û wê biparêzin (Kedourie 1960 û 1971: Destpêk).

A rast, ev pirsgirêkek e li gor hemû îzahatên modernîst ên derheqê neteweperweriyê de, ne tenê derheqê rewşenbîrên neteweperwer de. Tiştê ku ev nêrînên bijartehez û îrohez5 gelek caran ji bîr dikin, analîza naverok û newaya peyama neteweperwer e. Ev peyam elbet xitabî texeyula bijarteyekê dike, lê jê bêtir xitabî vîna etîk, hest û bîranînên hevpar ên girseyan dike. Rosenblum bixwe jî bal dikşîne ser ev aliyên etîk û karîgerî, dema etîka sebrê ji aliyê resamên dîrokê yên dawiya sedsala hijdemîn û vir de tê pêşniyazkirin, nîqaş dike; di çavên neteweperweran de, netewe civateke dîrokî ya xwedî îradeya siyasî û armanca etîk e, cemaeteke pîroz e bo hemû welatiyan (Rosenblum 1967: beşa 2.).

Ji ber vê ye ku rewşenbîrên neteweperwer bi dû jinûvekişfkirin û piştrastkirina efsane, sembol, nirx, bîranîn û kevneşopên hevpar ên ‘gel’ dikevin, û ji bo ciyê neteweyê ‘kevn-nû’ tespît bikin bi du dikevin çarçoveya wê wêrarî ya etnîk vedijînin. Hunermend û nivîskar wek hev di navenda vê projeya temsîliyet û nûkirina neteweyî ya populer in, bi şêwazên şênber û dînamîk kirês li îdeala neteweyê û efsane, bîranîn û sembolên wê dikin da ku bikaribe bi hêsanî têkeve nav girseya endamtiya ‘neteweyî’. Û dema her ku hesta civata etnîk a ji-mêj-ve-hebûnê xurt dibe û benên etnîk ku ‘gel’ bi hev ve girê dide zexmtir dibe, peywira wan hêsantir dibe û bêtir jê tên bawerkirin (Smith 1986: beşa 8. û 1998: beşa 8.).

Fazîletên gişteyî (public morality) ya qehremaniya neteweyî

Lê ne tenê ev babetên exlaqî û sembolîk in ku aliyên hevpar ên temsîlên hunerî yên neteweyê ne. Analojî jî bibandor û estetîk in: eleqeya bo şibîna bi rastiyê ya (verisimilitude) arkeolojîk, ya bo restorasyonê û ya bo bibîrxistina atmosferîk a efsane, sembol, kevneşop û bîranînan ku her diçe zêde dibe. Ez ê ewilî li ser fazîletên gişteyî û peyamên dîdaktîk ku ji aliyê hunerên dîtbarî û sînemayê tên veguhêztin bisekinim, û dû re li hin aliyên bêtir bibandor û estetîk ên restorasyona dramatîk û ‘atmosfera etnîk’ bikolim.

Exemple virtutis6 klasîk û an ji kitêba pîroz, lê bêtir ên serdema navîn û modern, qe ne ji Ronesansê vir ve di resmê de alavên herî zêde eşkere bûn bo dîdaktîzmê; mirov li Davida Michelangelo an Death of Lucretia [Mirina Lucretia] ya Lorenzo Lotto difikire, weazên wêrektî û fazîletê didin. Dawiya sedsala hijdemîn de bo van fazîletan taleb zêdetir bû. Ligel Judith û David, Mûsa û Ilyas, lehiya heqîqî ya fazîletên greko-romen rabû ku li pêşangehên Eywana Parîsê û Akademiya Qraliyetê ya Londonê dihatin nîşandan: qehra Oedipus û xwe-qurbankirina Antigone, terciha Herkul, çûna Hektor bo şer, biryara aram a Sokrat bo vexwarina jehra zirgêjnokê, sonda Brutus li hemberî tîranên Tarquin, qehremaniya Regulus di vegera ji hêsîrtiyê bo Kartacayê, diya birayên Gracchi, qurbankirina jinên zewicandî yên romayî, û gelekên din (Smith 1979).

Di her mînakek van exemple virtutisan de, hunermend kêlîkek krîtîk a tengijîna psîkolojîk hilbijartiye ku tê de, di teswîra -wek ku zindî be- dramaya lehengan de, tercîheke exlaqî ya pir gişteyî pêk tê. Peyameke bi vî awayî ya resmeke ewil wek Choice of Hercules (1764) [Tercîha Hercules] a Benjamin West e, lehengê qeşeng di navbera temsîlên fazîlet û zewqê de teredud dike; an The Oath of Brutus (1764) [Sonda Brutus] teswîra Gavin Hamilton ku tê de leheng qasî yên rastîn mezin in, şexs ber bi pêş ve hevdu delk didin, sond dixwin Romayê ji Tarquin xilas bikin. Vêga, taliyê de, kêlîka sondxwarinê bûye mîhwera dramayê, ketiye dewsa xwekuştina Lucretiayê, kêlîkek di firehbûna dramaya siyasî de, geşkirina agirê ‘sehneyek’ê, tevî ‘aktorên’ li dor kombûyî bi xençerê ber bi jor ve, bi dengekî bilind ji guhdarên nexuyayî re sond dixwin Romayê ji tîran xilas bikin (Rosenblum 1961).

Dawiya sedsala hijdemîn de sond-xwarin babeteke berbiçav e. Fikrên hevpeymana welatiyan û xwe-qurbankirinê tîne ba hev. Mînakek pir berbiçav Oath of the Rütli (1778–81) [Sonda Rütli] ya Henry Füseli ku ji aliyê şaredariya Zurichê hatiye sîparîşkirin. Li vir sê şexsên Michelangwarî ku qama xwe ber bi ezmana ve dirêj dikin, li çolekê ku tabloyê tijî dike hatine bicîkirin, bedena wan a maskuler û destê wan î bilindkirî tevlî xençera li jor dibe li hemberî tîranê habsburgî û bo berevaniya azadiya kantonal. Fikrên şibîner di Oath of the Horatii (1784) [Sonda Horatii] ya Jacques Louis David de jî serdest in. Ev epîzodek ji şerê Romayê li hemberî Alba Longa ye, dema sê birayên Horatii li hemberî sê birayên Curatii yên mûadilên xwe dibin yek. Hêza derasayî û kûrbûna teswîra ‘spartayî’ya David ji elektrîka arezûya wan a ku dema ji bo welatên xwe bi ser xençerê destê bavê wan de ber bi jor ve bilindkirî ye sond dixwin, milên şidiyayî û dirêjkirî yên sê birayên Horatii tîne ba hev, û ji veqetandina wan hişk ji merivên xwe yî jin ên li rastê keserkûr û dilborîn, nikarin li ber qedera li pêş şervanên her du bajaran bisekinin, tê (Antal 1956:71–4 Brookner 1980: beşa 5).

Biryara exlaqî babetek din a berbiçav a resamên dîrokê ne. Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres di Joan of Arc at theCoronation of Charles VII (1854) [Joan de Arc di Bitackirina Charles VII de] de xuyangeke bîrawer (memorable) a şervana ezîz ku li ser qurbangeha Katedrala Rheimsê di nav zirxên biriqandî de senceq bilind rakiriye, çavên wê jî bi nêrînên sabit ber bi jor ve ne. Ingres ew wek modela dîndarî, sadebûn û wêrektiyê, lê wek leşkereke milîtana Dêrê û Fransayek vejiyayî jî teswîr kiriye; û bi saya aksesûarên dînî û niştimanperwer, di demeke ku pêla neteweperweriya dînî ya serdema navîn Fransa dabû ber xwe, reng û atmosfera sedsala panzdemîn jî ji nû ve afirandiye (bnr. Rosenblum 1985:160–3).

Ji bo resamên dîrokê xwequrbanîkirina bi qehremanî fazîleteke gişteyî ya sêyem e, û berztirîn e. Death of General Wolfe (1770) [Mirina General Wolfe] a West li deştên Quebecê di 1759an de yek ji ewilîn xuyangên nûçevaniya şerê hemdem bû; lê îkoneke xwequrbanîkirina niştimanperweriyê ye jî, di nav kompozîsyona xwe ya sê beşî de olan dide û Îsayê mirî ya di hembêza Meryemê tîne bîra mirov. Belkî niştimanperwerê şehîd ê navdartirîn Marat ye, di serşoka xwe de ji aliyê Charlote Corday hatiye kuştin, we ku piştî demek kurt ji aliyê David hatibe tomarkirin (Marat Assassine [Kuştina Marat]), 1793). Resam, li vir, cî daye teswîreke bi rastî jî naturalîstîk a bûyera nûqewimî, di nav atmosfereke bêje pîroz, û bêwext, û berzkirina qehremanekî ku mirov bêje bi şehîdbûnê bûye pîroz bo komarxwazan. Li jorî laşê Marat yê dirêjkirî valahiyek mezin heye ku ji me xemgîniyeke esîl, bêdengiyeke bihurmet û tefekureke berz niyaz dike, heman hestên ku di her serdemê de bo ezîz û şehîdên xiristiyan hatiye telkînkirin (Wind 1938–9; Rosenblum 1967: beşa 2; Brookner 1980: beşa 8, taybetî 112–16; Abrams 1985: beşa 8).

Heman hest sedsalek şûn de di xuyangên cuda yên sînematîk de jî hatin bikaranîn. Hin ji wan, elbet, wergerê deqên dramatîk û teswîrên şanoyî bûn, wek çendîn fîlmên brîtanî yên Shakespearien, ku tê de di şer de biryara exlaqî (Henry VûRichard III), an wêrektiya li hember fesadiyê (Antony di Julius Caesarde, û Hamlet), bi awayekî bîrawer dihatin veguhêztin. Ewilî, peyameke gelek zêde neteweyî-dîrokî tê de hebû ku dema Duyem Şerê Cîhanê de (1944) propagandayeke eşkere ya neteweperwer dihewand. Keza, rola Marlon Brando ya curetkar a Emiliano Zapata (di Viva Zapata [Bijî Zapata] dema Şoreşa Meksîkî de, qehremanê têkçûyî wek teceliya armancên neteweyî û fazîletên meksîkî yên gelparêz û mirina wî jî wek trajediya îxaneteke neteweyî nîşan dide. Bi heman awayî, di Alexander Nevsky de qehremanîkirina mîrzayê rûs di wexteke mezinbûna tehdîda faşîst (1938) de vegera bo neteweperweriya rûsî ya fermî nîşan dikir. Di qebûlkirina niyazên gelên Novgorodê de, Alexander, li dijî tehdîda tirsnak û zalimtiya wêranker a Şowalyeyên (rojavayî) Tötonîk, kevneşopên esîlzadeyên rûs ên destfireh û wêrek şênber dikirin. Peyam eşkere ye: ne tenê sîstema komunîst, lê jin û mêrên ‘kevn-nû’yên rûs jî wisa berztir in. Îma dikir ku çaktirîn sîstema siyasî di nav axa berhemdar a exlaqê berztir ê ruhê rûsî de, ku bi şerê çînî û bi exlaqê rojavayî nehatiye qirêjkirin, reh berdide. Ji vî alî ve, Sergei Eisenstein guh dide kevneşopeke aşîna ya slavîk (bnr.Thaden 1964; Taylor 1998: beşa 8; berawird. Perrie 1998).

Ev tenê çend mînakên fîlmên ji cureyê dîrokî ne ku peyamên gişteyî yên qehremanî, wêrekî û xwequrbanîkirinê pêşkêş dikin, muptelayên civateke vîn û armancê ne ku li ser navê wê qehreman cehd dike an dimre. Dixwaze di Mûsayê di The Ten Commandments [Deh Ferman] a Cecil B. De Milkde be anRuy de Bivarê di El Cida -Anthony Mannde be an St Joana di Gandhiya Richard Attenboroughde be, dramaya civateke vîn û armancê ye ku qehreman derdikeve û dide pêşiya civatê. Ev teswîrên sînematîk di wê kevneşopê de ku resamên dîrokê yên dawiya sedsalên hijdemîn û nozdemîn dabûn ser riya wê, xurt in, him di teswîrkirina fazîletên neteweyî ku tên telkînkirin û di bikaranîna exemple virtutis de.

Çandina ‘atmosfera etnîk’

Lê ji bo neteweperwerî û nasnameya neteweyî ji fazîletên giştî û nirxên welatperwer bêtir tişt hene. Di çavê dilbestiyên wê de, netewe xwedî hêz, hestyarî û îhtişameke efsanewî ya yekpare ye, ku fîlm dikare van taybetiyan, belkî ji resim an peykerê gelekî bêtir, bi awayekî zindî neqil bike. Di vî warî de, xuyangên livok bêtir dişibin muzîkê, ku karakter û nasnameya wî jî di rêzekêlîkên bisînor de li ber çavan radixe; û tê de wateya kompozîsyonê ancax encamê de eşkere dibe. Ji ber vê ye ku di teswîrkirina dramaya neteweyî de eleqeya bo rasteqîniya arkeolojîk û ‘atmosfera etnîk’ a ji yên din cuda her diçe zêdetir dibe. Ji aliyekî ve, ev encama pêşketinên di warê temsîla dîtbarî de ye, wek fotografî; lê ev ji ber daxwaza bikaranîna hestên qadeke firehtir û kûrtir e, heta mumkin be bi awayekî naturalîstîk bi riya gazîkirin û temsîlkirina panoramaya netewetiyê di nav çeşitdariya wê ya dîrokî û erdnigarî de.

Ev geşedanên di temsîla dîtbarî ya çawaniyên vexwîner û hestyar a ‘atmosfera etnîk’ û nasnameya neteweyî de, dikare di çend rehendan de bê dabeşkirin. Van dihewînin: geşkirina karakter, sazkirina dîrokî, tabloya resimkî, aksesûar, dîmena etnîk û ‘gel’. Ka ez bi dorê li ser wan bisekinim, bi binxêzkirina hevteribên di navbera hunerên dîtbarî û teswîrên sînematîk, û bi hûrbûna li ser hîma fîlmên Eisenstein yên dîrokî yên vê dawiyê, ku ev hevterîb zêdetirîn berbiçav in.

Geşkirina karakter

Di Ivan the Terrible [Îvanê Tirsdêr] de, Einsenstein ji peydabûna Çarê Yekem çendîn rûpelan teswîr dike: zarokatiya xeternak ku bi boyarên şerok hatibû dorpêçkirin; xortaniya dînamîk a bibiryar bo yekîtiya Rûsyayê, şer û serfirazî; tevî artêşa xwe Oprîçnîkiyan temenê dereng ê zalim, gûmanber û êşkêş. Di destpêka Beşa II de paşvebirinek taybet a bîrawer heye bo zarokatiya wî: Îvanê heşt salî li ber çavê wî diya wî tê jehrkirin û diçe di navbera du boyarên dêwîn, zordar û şerok de li ser textê xwe rûdine. Li lingên xwe dinêre; li hewa kil dibin, xwe nagihînin erdê (Eisenstein 1989:142, sehne 174). Ev xuyangek pir bi bandor a tirs, tenêtî û bêçaretiyê ye ku wê piştî demeke kurt veguhere, wek Îvanê xort di yekem kirina xwe-îspatkirinê de, wê Şuiskî bide girtin û kuştin. Beşa I Çarê nû li Moskowê û di şerê Kazanê de nîşan dabû, ku dû re hevalê wî Kurbsky bêbextî lê kiribû. Di dawiya Beşa I de, Îvan terka Moskowê dike diçe Aleksandrovê û di Beşa II de ‘pasevanê xwe yên hesinî’ Opriçnina dirust dike, ku bi ser boyaran ve diçin, heta ku temenekî dereng de Îvan dibe grozny (qewîn) û (di rengguherîna lipeyhev a binavûdeng) dek û dolabên Staritskî û yên din têk dibe. Di dawiya Beşa I de tabloyeke din a navdar heye, ku Îvanê bi rî, gopal di dest de, xwe xwar kiriye, di dartengeke qesra Aleksandrovê, li jêr li qeflê gel ku ‘wek marê li deştekê di ser berfê re here dimeşin’, dinêre (bnb: 119, sehne 780 û 120–1, sehne 791–806). Li vir, Eisenstein dike ku mirov ew resmê binavûdeng ê Victor Vasnetsov Ivan the Terrible (1897) [Îvanê Tirsdêr] bi bîr bîne, qeftanekî giran, biqomçe lê ye, ji dirênceyên Kremlînê dadikeve, gopal di desta de û awirên gûmanber dide dora xwe, di eniya wî ya qermiçî de azweriyên xurt xuya dike (Shanina 1979:110–13, ûtebeqe 87–9). Û belkî em, hê pêşdetir, tabloya îkonîk ya Ingres Napoleon on his Throne (1805)[Napolyon li ser Textê xwe] jî bînin bîra xwe, kêlîkeke tirsnak a desthilatdariya împeryal a sar, bêruh û biezamet (Rosenblum 1985:68–9, tbq. 7).

Di portreya Richard IIIa Olivier de ev heman taybetiyên kubir, zordarî û gumanberî, hema bêje, hatiye karîkaturîzekirin, bi taybetî di sehneya ku Richardê hê nû derketiye ser text, piştî ku jina xwe Anne hefs kiriye, bexşîşa erdên ku wî soz dabû Buckingham (‘ez îro ne di haletîruhiyeta dayinê de me’) red dike û bi tehdîdeke tund ziq li hember dinere. Lê di vir de, ji geşkirina karakterê ku Eisenstein, digel hemû astengên siyasî, hewl daye pêk bîne, û ku wî hewl daye di 1946an de di nameya xwe ya ji edîtorên Kultura i Thizn re rave bike, em gelek kêm jê dibînin:

Em hemû dizanin ku Îvanê Tirsdêr zilamekî xwedî-îrade û karakterekî pir xurt bû. Lê gelo ev di rewşên taybet de hebûna hin gumanan li derve dihêle? … Gelo ev e ku di nav ev teredud û gumanan de, an bêtir di nav vê rastiyê de ku ew bi riya lihevkirinê heq ji van hemûyan nehatiye, di berdewamiya çavbirçîtiya kiryarên wî de, em gewhera vî şexsê xwedanhêz ê sedsala 16mîn dibînin? (Eisenstein 1989:12; cf. Perrie 1998)

Nûveînşakirina Dîrokê

Di Ivan the Terrible û Alexander Nevsky her duyan de, wek di fîlmên wî yên ewil de, Eisenstein hewl daye vegotina dîrokî ya bûyeran ji nû ve înşa bike, heta wek di sehneya Alexandrov de ku bi wêrekî tevgeriyaye jî. Elbet, di hemû fîlmên dîrokî de, wek di deqên ku ew jê derdikevin, rêzêsehne çarçoveya esas dabîn dikin, ne ji bo îzaheteke musteqîl û ‘rastiyek’e wie es eigentlich war(berê çawa bû eyn wisa), lê ji bo temaşevanê îhtişama epîk a neteweyê, yanê, berê berê neteweyê xwe îqna bike. Taliya talî, ev armanca Shakespeare bi xwe jî bû di lîstikên wî yên dîrokî de ku xwe dispartin salnameyên Holinshed û yên din. Bi gotineke din, ger ev bi eşkereyî ne bo propagandaya neteweyî bin jî, berhemên bi vî rengî ‘nexşeyeke dîrokî’ ya rabirdûya neteweyî dabîn dikin da ku temaşevên bêtir bi nasnameya neteweyî ya niha ve girê bidin. Ev di fîlmên wek Alexander Nevsky û Henry F de wisa eşkere ye; lê ev di ew epîkên Hollywoodê de jî ku armanc dikin bûyerên ji rabirdûyên çend welatên cuda û şaristanên ji Ben Hur a Fred Niblo bigre heta Khartouma Basil Dearden ji nû ve biafirîne, derdikeve pêş me. Her carê, lêgerîna bo îhtişameke epîk li dor nûvesazkirina bûyerên kilît ku li ser rêzebûyerên qebûlkirî re dimeşe tê avakirin, da ku resmekî îqnaker yê neteweyê ku, wek Anderson dibêje, di nav ‘demeke vala û homojen’ de bi pêşve diçe, biafirîne. Li vir, Cecil B. de Mille û yên din dikaribûn li rabirdûyê li panomaraya hunermendên wek John Martin û Gustav Dore û sehneyên şerên Napolyonîk û yên şerên dû wan re yên hunermendên ji John Singleton Copley, Baron Gros û Horace Vernet heta Paul Nash û Stanley Spencer binêrin. Elbet, diyardeyên dîrokî têra xwe dihatin vezelandin. Di heman demê de, derhênerên baştirîn jinûveavakirinên dîrokî yên qanîker armanc kirine û heta dikaribûne bi awayê resamên dîrokê yên beriya wan hewl dane rastiya serdema mijara xwe derxînin holê (bnr. Rhode 1978:224–6; Fraser 1996: beşa 2., taybetî 24–5, 41–2).

Tabloya resimkî

Ji ber sedemên eşkere, mînak û bandora resmê dikare ancex bi saya tableauyê ku tê de sehneyek parçeyê rêzebûyereke dirêjtir tê razberkirin û temama rêzebûyerê tê xulasekirin, pêk were. Du mînak wê bes be. Yek jê Massacre of Chios (1824) [Komkujiya Chiosê] a binavûdeng a Eugène Delacroix e ku tê de hejarî û qehremaniya Şerê Serxwebûna Yewnanî di xuyangeke mezin a çespandina neteweyî û komkujiya etnîk de hatine xulasekirin. Li girava Chiosê komkujiya yewnanan ji aliyên tirkan ve, wek mirina Byron, dramaya neteweperweriyê û ‘şiyarbûn’a neteweyan sembolîze dike; lê dijheviya etnîk a di navbera yewnanên esîl, êşkêş, bi riya laşê wan î bedew î ‘klasîk’, û siwarên tirk ên hov, bêrehm, bi xencer jî sembolîze dike. Mînaka duyem, rêze tabloyên Diego Rivera yên Şoreşa Meksîkayê û rabirdûya Meksîkayê ye ku, tevî resamên din ên dîwaran, bi piştevaniya hikûmeta şoreşger li Meksîko City li dîwarên avahiyên gişteyî çêkirin. The History of Mexico: From theConquest to the Future (1929–30, Palácio Nacional) [Dîroka Meksîkayê: Ji Dagirkirinê ber bi Dahatûyê ve] a Rivera û freskoyên paşdetir ên şaristaniyên beriya Columb (1942-51) panoramayeke rastîn a rabirdûyê pêşkêş dikin bi riya rêze xuyangên sembolîk ên bûyer û çandan, bi vî awayî îluzyoneke ber bi dahatûyê ve çêdikin, ku bêyî qabiliyeta sînemayê ya efsûnkirinê ew hesta liva bi demê re dide (bnr. Eisenmann 1994:71–3; Ades 1989:151–79, taybetî 172–4).

Ev hest bi awayekî bîrawertirîn di du fîlmên mezin ên dîrokî de, ji bo bibîrxistina du bûyerên wek hev dûr, tê neqilkirin; her du fîlm jî bi muzîkê ku tansiyonê bilind dike û bo amadekirina lûtkeya di pevçûna artêşan de aksiyonê vedike, hatine dewlemendkirin. Di Henry Va Olivier de, bi taybetî di rêze sehneyên Agincourt de, muzîka Walton a bîrawer hesta hêvîdariyê û liva ber pêş ve ya her tabloyê zêde dike, dema artêşên îngilîz û frensî bi bêrehm ber hev ve diçin û di nav tîrên ji kevanan dibarin, dest bi şer dikin. Bi heman awayî, hêza hin sehneyên di Alexander Nevsky de piranî bi tirs û bedewiya muzîka Prokofiev hatiye xurtkirin. Sehneyên êrişa bo Pskovê ya Şowalyeyên Teutonik û zalimiya hukimdariya wan li wir mûadilê komkujiya Delacroix a serdema navîn (a modern jî) dide. Li gor teoriya xwe ya ‘typaffe’ (typecasting)7, Eisenstein, mirovatî û esîlbûna karakterên rûs bi nîşandana xedarî û xirabiyên êrişkaran derdixist pêş: ‘Alman rûyê wan xuya nake, gelek caran serê wan nixumandî ne an ji kêlekê ve tên kişandin bi zalimî û taybetiyên wek ên heywanan’ (Taylor 1998:90). Digel tenê hevterîbiyek qebe bi komkujiya Costes a Aztekan re, Battle on the Ice of Lake Peipius [Şerê li ser Cemeda Gola Peypusê] a navdar jî aqûbeta manend a xwînî di pevçûna şaristaniyan, û baş û xirab de, teswîr dike. Belkî jî li vir resim dide ser şopa vê xuyanga livok: Prince Igor leading outhis Host (1941) [Mîrze Îgor Mazûvanê xwe derdixe derve] a Nikolai Roerich li hemberî Kipçakan di sala 1185an de, ku dema êrişa naziyan bo Rûsyayê de hate bibîrxistin, me dibe serdemeke manend a Rûsyaya Kîevê û vedigere neteweperweriya rûsî ya muzîkal Prince Igor (1890), operaya gewre ya Borodin, da ku tabloya stîlîzekirî ya meşa artêşa rûsan tevî al û flamayên dînî li ber çavê me raxîne -her çiqas bişibe artêşên rûs û Teutonik ku bi flamayên xwe diçûn Gola Peypusê di 1242yan de (bnr. Korotkina 1976:10; Leyda 1974:124–33).

Aksesûarên Serdemê

Ji vejîna neo-klasîk û serdema navîn a dawiya di sedsala hijdemîn û vir de, hunermend, di teswîrkirina bûyerên dîrokî û dramayên neteweyî yên di serdem û warên dûr de, her çûye bêtir li pey manendiya bi rastiyê re (verisimilitude) ketine bi bikaranîna alavên malan, cil û berg, stîla por û çekan. Wek mînak, di berhemên David de, di Hector and Andromache (1783) û The Death of Socrates (1787) a wî de, em eleqeyek mezintir bo teswîra alavên malê, çek, cil û berg û tiştên malê yên serdema otantîk dibînin. Ev ji aliyê Ingres ve, ku, di tabloya xwe ya Joan of Arc de, wek di fanteziya ewil a bi dilwas a serdemanavînhez The Dream of Ossian (1813) [Xewna Ossian], û dîmena bi muşkulpesendî hatiye çavdêrîkirin Pope Pius VII in the Sistine Chapel (1814) [Papa Pius VII li Sistine Chapelê] de, bêtir bi pêş ve hatiye xistin û seba hûrgiliyên çek, libas, ferax û mobilya bi awayekî rasteqîn bi kar bîne gelek êş kişandiye (bnr. Rosenblum 1985:96–7, 100–3). Vê eleqeya bo sedeqata bi xwezayê re ji aliyê pêş-rafaelîstan ve gihişte dawiya hedê xwe, ewqas ku, dema cîhana xewna wî ya efsaneyeke kevn a brîtanî dixwestin biresmînin, dikaribûn wan bi saya xebateke bi hûrgilî û bikaranîna cil û berg, çek û alavên serdema navîn bi awayekî realîst û ‘otantîk’ bidin, di tabloyên wek La belle Iseult (1858) [Iseulta bedew] a Morris ya dişibe tejikên dîwêr û King Cophetuaand the Beggar-Maid (1884) [Qral Cophetua û Parsek-Xizmetkar] a Burne-Jones a bi xemla dewlemend û di The Dream of Sir Lancelot at the Chapel of the Holy Grail (1896) [Xewna Sir Lancelot li Chapela Tasa Pîroz] a wî de ku hema bêje safî gotîk e (Wilton û Upstone 1997:147–9, 250–1; Poulson 1999:162–3).

Eleqeyek manend bo sedeqata arkeolojîk di bikaranîna aksesûarên serdemî di epîkên Hollywoodê de jî bûye hêmaneke esasî. Cil û bergên Kitêba Muqades, yewnan, romayî, tudorî, stuartî, georgian û victoriyen û alavên wan bûye taybetiyeke sereke û nîşana epîkên dîrokî yên ‘rastîn’, carna jê re lêkolîneke berfireh lazim e, wek di Ben Hur de pêşbaziya erebeyên biteker. Hewesa Eisenstein a bo vejandina otantîk a alav, cil û berg û çekên serdemî belkî zêdetir e jî, bandorên wan kêmtir musrîf be jî; şahidiya çek û zirxên şowalyeyên Teutonik, alavên qesra Îvan, Kremlînê, abayên esîl ên Çar. Di Alexander Nevsky de, di sehneyên ku yekîneyên rûs def û zirnê dixin, û alman deng ji qiloçan derdixin, Eisenstein heta alavên muzîkal ên Prokofiev bo wî kişandine ku di montajê de teqabuliyet çêbibe -mînakek bo azweriya Eisenstein bo lêkolîna belgeyên dîrokî, amûr û atmosfera serdemê (Taylor 1998:93–4).

Welat û etnowar (ethnoscape)

Wek ku mirov texmîn dike, ‘atmosfera etnîk’ bi warên helbestkî yên civatên etnîk ên xwedî taybetmendiyên berbiçav (yên etnîk), an ‘etnowar’an re nêz ve girêdayî ye. Li vir ax civateke etnîk nîşan dide û bi bûyerên civatî û pêvajoyên ku bermayî û abîdeyên wan li ser dîmena wê belav dibin, tê dîrokîkirin, wisa ku ew war dibe aîdî gelekî eyn wek ku ew gel dibe aîdî warekî taybet -bi afirandina ‘welat’ekî bav û kalan (bnr. Smith 1997).

Sînema û fîlmên dîrokî, elbet, pisporên nûveavakirina etnowaran in -ji mabedên mezin ên Misra antîk û bazîlîka û abîdeyên împeretoriya Romayê bigrin heta deştên Rûsyayê yên li ber bê û gundên çolwar ên Îngilistana başûr. Lê di van mijaran de ew tenê didin ser şopa lingên dîrokê û resamên dîmenan. Dramayên pirtûka pîroz ên gerîneka mezin ên John Martin, bîrawerên dewasa yên festîval û rîtuelên romayî yên Jean Léon Gérôme, Thomas Couture û Lawrence Alma-Tadema, teswîrên bi hûrgiliyên dewlemend ên Misir û Babîla antîk ên Edward Poynter û Edwin Long, teswîrên zelal ên warên antîk ên Fînlandiyayê û mîtolojiya di Kalevala8yê yên Akseli Gallen-Kallela, rêze çiyayên Swîsreyê yên muhteşem, qada şerên giran û marîfetên qehremaniyê yên Ferdinand Hodler, xuyangên deştên Rûsyayê û Kremlîna serdema navîn ên Victor Vasnetsov û Vasily Surikov, rê li ber Griffith, de Mille û Broston -û Eisenstein vekirine û ne tenê riya ber bi pespayebûnê. Bi rastî ji aliyê hunermendiyê ve, û bîraweriya atmosfera etnîk, sehneyên Pskov û Novgorodê (di Alexander Nevsky de) û Kazan û Alexandrovê (di Ivan the Terrible de) hêja bûn bibin xelefên baştirîn dîmen û bajardîmenên Rûsyayê yên Vasnetsov, Surikov û Repin (Gray 1971: beş. 1–2; Harding 1979: beşa 2.).

Eisenstein, bi rastî, di warê manendiya bi rastiya arkeolojîk de mirovekî ewqas mukemelhez bû ku di Alexander Nevsky de ji bo sehneyên Pskov û Novgorodê li studyoyê li gor rêjeya wan a resen set dan çêkirin, ji ber ku qesir û dêrên kevn çendîn feet bi erdê ve çûbûn, rêje û perspektîfa wan jî guhertibû. Û şerê li ser cemedê, ji bo fîlm zû bê kişandin -di germa Moskowê de!- divê bi awayekî çêkirî bihata teqlîdkirin. Qadeke mezin hatiye ajotin, ser wê hatiye asfaltkirin, kils û neftalîna navhevxistî li ser rijandine (Taylor 1998:89, 92–3, nql. V.Shklovskii, Eisxnshtein, Moscow 1973:247). Armanc, û encam, etnowareke rûsî bû ku bi babeta neteweyî ya Eisenstein re, yanê berevaniya dayika niştiman, li hev bike û wê fireh bike: ‘Babeta niştimanperwerî û berevaniya neteweyî ya li dijî êrişkaran fîlma me tijî dikir’ (Taylor 1998:86, nql. Eisenstein,Selected Works, cild 3, r. 118).

Ev mînak, wek rêze sehneyên li deştên Odessayêdi Battleship Potemkin [Keştiya Potemkînê] de, xuyaye çêkirin an ‘îcad’a ku Hobsbawm û Anderson wek raxbeta neteweyê karakterîze dikin, piştrast dike. Dîsa jî, ev tenê amrazên teknîkî ne bo ‘otantîkbûn’a etnowar an welatê ku, bi temamî ji rastbûnê zêdetir, helbestkî û populer e. Rastiya li gor belgeyên dîrokî (ku derbarê Rûsyaya sedsala sêzdemîn de gelek kêm in) hîmê nûveavakirinê datîne, lê lêgerîna otantîkbûnê hestî û exlaqî ye; wek ku Eisenstein dema di resmê japonî de qala mirov û xwezayê dike, dibêje: ‘Dîmena hestan de her der vediguhêze dibe xuyangeke mijandina hevdu ya mirov û xwezayê, yek dikeve nav a din’ (Taylor 1998:89 û 226, n. 15, nql. S.M. Eisenstein, Nonindifferent Nature, wer. H. Marshall, Cambridge 1987:359).

Gel

Etnowar hêmanekê pêk tînin di ‘diyalogeke neteweyî’ de, ku yên din ji aliyê ‘gel’, xelk (Volk), an ‘gelheya etnîk’ a êşkêş, pesiner an şoreşger, lê her tim ‘bijartî’ ye ku gelek caran mihwer û kirdeya rastîn a dramayê ye, tê tayinkirin. Ne heta dawiya sedsala hijdemîn e, heyama şoreşê, ku ‘gel’ dest pê dike sehneya navendê dagir dike, bi pêşkêşkirina bi kelecan a David a Third Estate di The Oath of the Tennis Court (1791) [Sonda li Qada Tenisê]9 de dest pê kir û bi Liberty leading the People (1830) [Azadî rêbertiya gel dike] a Delacroix a serhildêr, The Morning of the Execution of the Strelstii Guard (1881) [Sibeha Înfazkirina Strelstii Guard] a Surikov a bi qasvet û di halekî bêtir vehêsandî, çolwar de Midsummer Dance (1897) [Dansa Çilêhavînê] a Anders Zorn, heta panoramaya zinde ya gelên Meksîkaya beriya Columb a Diego Rivera û rekreasyonên îngilîz ên vizyoner ên li gundê Cookham ê Stanley Spencer û Makedonyaya heyama şer de, salên 1920 û 1930an de.

Mirov dikare îdîa bike, ji destpêkê ve, sînema ne tenê populer bû, wê ‘gel’ kir mijara xwe ya sereke. Di komedî û belgefîlman de, ‘gel’ gelek caran ji ‘gelê etnîk’ bêtir ‘xelkê asayî’ îşaret dikir; lê di fîlmên dîrok, mîtolojî û şer de, ev motîf bi çanda etnîk a diyarker a ‘gel’ re hat ba hev -dixwaze cihû be, yewnan be, romayî be, îskoçî be, frensî be an rûs be. Belkî jî, Eisenstein ji bo qelebalixiya xwe ya niştimanperwer-dîndar sehneyên teswîra Repin a Religious Procession in Kursk Province (1880–83) [Li Parêzgeha Kurskê Meşa Qefleya Dînî] hatibû bîra wî, ku bi flama û emanetên pîroz seransera çolwarên Rûsyayê derbas dikirin -hewce nake em behsa alayên dîndar û sirûdên neteweyî yê gelê rûs ê êşkêş, ‘qehreman’ê heqîqî yê Boris Godunov (1868–74) a Mussorgsky bikin. Lê aliyên din î ‘gel’ jî hene: di Beşa I a Ivan theTerrible de gelê serhildêr isyankar (Eisenstein 1989:47–53, sehne 171–238), ku ji aliyê Simpleton ve -fîgurekî wêjeya rûsî yê aşîna ye, di Boris Godunov de jî heye- hatine teşwîqkirin ku dixwazin Çarê xwe bibînin da ku Glinskiyan, boyarên malbata jina wî Anastasyayê, bîne xwarê; an gelê bi-israr, welatperwer, wek gelê asayî yê Novgorodê di Alexander Nevskyde li hemberî bazirgan û Dêrê, gazî Alexander dikin da ku li dij Şowalyeyên Teutonik ên êrişker pêşengtiya wan bikin -bersiva bo gaziya parsekê şehîdbûyî, ku bûye sirûda şerê wan:

Rabe ser xwe, gelê rûs,
Bo şerê bişeref, şerê mirinê!
Rabe, mirovên azadiyê,
Ji bo welatê me yî xweşik! (Taylor 1998:90; Leyda 1974:103, 105)

Di her du rewşan de, Eisenstein ji David û Delacroix bigre heta Griffith beriya wî gelek emsal û Battleship Potemkin û Oktober de teswîrên wî bixwe yê şoreşê û gelê bibiryar hebûn. Û di nîşandayina ‘gel’ de wek hêzeke çalak, hişmendiyeke siyasî, ji rola pasîf, piştgir ku di gelek fîlmên dîrokî yên Hollywoodê de didin gel gelekî, dûr ketiye. (bnr. Rhode 1978: beşa 4.).

Encam

Li vir min dikaribû tenê qapaxa ser mijareke berfireh vekim -qadeke ku jê re nêzikbûnên pircureyî lazim in (bnr., wek mînak, Hayward 1997: Destpêk û beşa 2., taybetî 95-8, li ser fîlmên frensî yên Yekem Şerê Cîhanê wek J’accuse [Tawanbar Dikim] a Gance û Verdun, visions d’kistoirea Poirier, keza La merveilleuse vie de Jeanne d’Arc (1929) [Jiyana Muhteşem a Jeanne d’Arc] a Marc de Gastyne; û li ser J’accusea Gance, Zivistana 1995). Têkiliya di navbera dîrok (û dîmen û cure), resim û fîlmên dîrokî, ku ez li ser hûr bûm, lêkolînên akademîk ên bêtir bi hûrgilî, ji kesên di her du waran de jî xwedî tecrube bin, divê. Ji aliyê xebatên etnîsîte û neteweperweriyê ve, dikarim ancax binê çend mijarên teorîk û empîrîk ku di nîşankirina têkiliya navbera teswîrên sînema, huner û şîroveyên nasnameya neteweyî de derdikevin pêş, xêz bikim. Armanca min tenê ev bû ku nîqaşa hin hevterîbî û analojî, babetî û şêwazî yên temsîliyeta xuyangî ya nasnameya neteweyî bidim destpêkirin û çarçoveyek bo berawirdkirinên çandî yên wêdetir pêşniyaz bikim, li ser hîmê nêrîna ‘etno-sembolîk’ ku di çêbûna neteweyan de û di şikilgirtina nasnameyên neteweyî de rola hêmanên etnîk -efsane, sembol, kevneşop û bîranîn- derdixe pêş (bnr. Smith 1995).

Ger ez bi taybetî li ser rola yek derhênerekî kûr bûbim, ev ji ber ku di berhemên Sergei Eisenstein yên vê dawiyê de em îfadeyên zelaltirîn ên analojiyên hunerî û sînematîk û yek ji temsîliyetên qanihkertirîn ên babetên serekî yên nasnameya neteweyî dibînin. Ji ber ku em tenê bi ber encamên ‘bizavdariya dirokî ya her dem guherbar’ eleqedar nabin, lê ya girîntir em bi malzeme û rêbazên ku hunermend bi alîkariya wan bana civatên neteweyî, ku ew aîd in, diafirînin û ji nû ve hildiberînin, û her wiha fikra neteweyê bixwe, dîroka wê, geşedan û qedera wê diçînin û didin dewamkirin. Heta dema hunermend şaîbe bînin ser fazîleta kirinên ser navê neteweyê jî wek ku Nash di tabloyên xwe yî Şerê Mezin de kiribû, heta dema efsane, bîr an nirxên cuda an yên gerdûnîtir nîşanî me bidin wek ku Renoir di La grande illusion [Îluzyona Mezin] de kiribû, netewe û nasnameya wê ya kolektîf di texeyul û çalakiya heyama modern de li navendê dimîne. Tiştê ku hunermendan di xuyangên resimkirî an livok de ji bo piştrastkirin, daberkirin û belavkirina îdeal û pirsgirêkên neteweyê kirine, zêdetirî wan pir kêm tişt nehatiye kirin.

* Ev nivîs ji vir hatiye girtin: Mette Hjort, S. Maclenzie (ed.) (2000), Cinema and Nation, Routledge, Taylor & Francis Group, London & Newyork, r. 41-53. (ed.)

1 Historicism: Teoriya ku dibêje bûyerên îro ji şertên dîrokî bandor girtine an ji aktorên îroyîn bêtir ji aliyê şertên dîrokî ve hatine diyarkirin. (wer.)

2 Boudica (Boudicca an bi navê kevn wek Boadicea jî tê nasîn) (P.Z. 60 an 61), qralîçeya qebîleya Iceniyê ku li herêma Norfolkê li bakurê Brîtanyayê dijiyan. P.Z. sala 61ê de li hemberî hêzên romaya dagirker serhildan dan destpêkirin. (wer.)

3 Vercingetorix [vɛrtsɪŋˈgeːtorɪks] (B.Z. 82-B.Z. 46 Roma) serokê qebîleya Arveniyan ku yek ji qewmê keltiyan bû. Di sala B.Z. 52yan de civakên Galya (Gallia) Keltîkayê li hemberî Komara Romayê bo berxwedaneke giştî û şerê rizgariyê kire yek. (wer.)

4 Arminius the Cheruscan (Armen) (B.Z. 1718 – P.Z. 21) serokqebîleya Çerusker ku di şerê Varusê de artêşa Romayê li rojhilata Çemê Renê têk biribû. (wer.)

5 Presentist: Kesê ku diyardeyên rabirdûyê bi zanîn û baweriyên îro şîrove dike an bi riwangeyeke ku bi bawerî an helwestên roja xwe re sînorkirî ye li rabirdûyê dinêre. (wer.)

6 Exemple virtutis: berhemên hunerî ku babetên wan dersên exlaqî an mînakên fazîletê ne. (wer.)

7 Typecasting: pêvajoya dema ku lîstikvanek tenê bi karakterek an bi roleke taybet tê naskirin; an karakter her tim xwedî heman taybetiyan e an ji heman koma civakî an etnîk tê. (wer.)

8 Kalevala: Destana epîk a neteweyî ya Fînlandiyayê, yek ji girîngtirîn berhemên wêjeya fînî ye. Sedsala 19mîn de bi îstifadekirina ji çîrokên gelêrî ji aliyê Elias Lönnrot ve hatiye nivîsîn. (wer.)

9 Sonda li Qada Tenisê: (Pûşber 20, 1789) Sonda wekîlên Third Estate dema Şoreşa Fransayê de xwendine. Piştî ku Meclîsa Neteweyî ya nûava tê qedexekirin, eywana wê ya li Qesra Versaillesê deriyê wê tê girtin û nikarin têkevinê, endamên wê diçin li qada tenisê dicivin û sond dixwin ku heta makezagonek neyê nivîsandin wê ji wir neçin. Ev bûyer bû yek ji sembolên Şoreşê ku yekem car e gel li hemberî qrêl dengê xwe bilind kiribû. (wer.)

ÇAVKANÎ

Abrams, A.U. (1985) The Valiant Hero: Benjamin West and Grand-Style HistoryPainting, Washington, DC: Smithsonian Institution Press.

Ades, D. (ed.) (1989) Art in Latin America: The Modern Era, 1820–1980, London: South Bank Centre, Hayward Gallery.

Anderson, B. (1991) Imagined Communities: Reflections on the Origin and Spread ofNationalism, London: Verso.

Antal, F. (1956) Füseli Studies, London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.

Brookner, A. (1980) Jacques Louis David, London: Chatto and Windus.

Eisenmann, S. (1994) Nineteenth Century Art, A Critical History, London: Thames and Hudson. Eisenstein, S.M. (1989) Ivan the Terrible, London: Faber.

Fraser, G.M. (1996) The Hollywood History of the World, Film Stills from the KabulCollection, London: The Harvill Press.

Gellner, E. (1964) Thought and Change, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson.
———— (1983)Nations and Nationalism, Oxford: Blackwell.

Gray, C. (1971) The Russian Experiment in Art, 1863–1922, London: Thames and Hudson. Harding, J. (1979) Artistes Pompiers: French Academic Art in the Nineteenth Century,London: Academy Editions.

Hayward, S. (1997) French National Cinema, London: Routledge.

Hobsbawm, E. (1990) Nations and Nationalism since 1780, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hobsbawm, E. and Ranger, T. (eds) (1983) The Invention of Tradition, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Hosking, G. and Service, R. (eds) (1998) Russian Nationalism, Past and Present, Basingstoke: Macmillan.

Kedourie, E. (1960) Nationalism, London: Hutchinson.
——(ed.) (1971) Nationalism in Asia and Africa, London: Weidenfeld and Nicolson. Korotkina, L. (1976) Nikolay Roerich, Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers.

Leyda, Jan (ed.) (1974) Battleship Potemkin, October and Alexander Nevsky by Sergei Eisenstein, London: Lorrimer Publishing Limited.

Perrie, M. (1998) ‘The Cult of Ivan the Terrible in Stalin’s Russia’, in Hosking and Service (eds). Poulson, C. (1999) The Quest for the Grail: Arthurian Legend in British Art, 1840–1920,Manchester: Manchester University Press.

Rhode, E. (1978) A History of the Cinema, From Its Origins to 1970, Harmondsworth: Penguin. Rosenblum, R. (1961) ‘Gavin Hamilton’s Brutus and its Aftermath’, Burlington Magazine 103:8–16.

——(1967) Transformations in Late Eighteenth Century Art, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.

——(1985) Jean Auguste Dominique Ingres, London: Thames and Hudson.
Shanina, N. (1979) Victor Vasnetsov, Leningrad: Aurora Art Publishers.

Smith, A.D. (1979) ‘The “Historical Revival” in Late Eighteenth Century England and France’, Art History 2:156–78.
——(1986) The Ethnic Origins of Nations, Oxford: Blackwell.

——(1995) ‘Gastronomy or Geology? The Role of Nationalism in the Reconstruction of Nations’, Nations and Nationalism 1,1:3–23.

——(1997) ‘Nation and Ethnoscape’, The Oxford International Review 8, 2:11–18.

——(1998) Nationalism and Modernism, London: Routledge.

Taylor, R (1998) Film Propaganda: Soviet Russia and Nazi Germany, 2nd rev. edn, London: I.B. Tauris.

Thaden, E. (1964) Conservative Nationalism in Nineteenth Century Russia, Seattle, WA: University of Washington Press.

Wilton, A. and Upstone, R. (eds) (1997) The Age of Rossetti, Burne-Jones and Watts:Symbolism in Britain, 1860–1910, London: Tate Gallery Publishing.

Wind, E. (1938–9) ‘The Revolution of History Painting’, Journal of the WarburgInstitute II, 116–27.

Winter, J. (1995) Sites of Memory, Sites of Mourning: The Great War in EuropeanCultural History, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Xuyangên Neteweyê: Sînema, Huner û Nasnameya Neteweyî

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

Xuyangên Neteweyê: Sînema, Huner û Nasnameya Neteweyî

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