Identities in Turkey

The book, Modernity, Islam, and Secularism in Turkey, By Alev Cinar outlines the different identities of modern day Turkey. On one hand, political Islamists relating their identity to the Ottoman Empire, and on the other, secularists constructing their own in 1923 when the republic of turkey came into being. Both groups constructed their own realities causing contentions in issues like; headscarf, public space, and even history.

Although the points of confrontation lead to the formation of new positive elements, the differences in their views led to conflicts and divisions within Turkey itself. Both identities represented themselves as modern rejecting the modernization of the other identity; the Secularists viewed Islamists to remain backward, while the Islamists viewed the Secularists to be corrupt.

An important question about Islam and modernization has been questioned frequently. While the author of the book argues that since they were able to change the public sphere, modernization is adequate, the Secularists would argue that the Islamist/Ottoman Identity regarding change was based on backward ideologies and therefore their modernization is irrelevant.

According to the author’s definition of modernization, both identities were successful in changing the public sphere. For instance, the controversy regarding the headscarf, when the republic of turkey came to existence, the leader Mustafa Kamal AtaTurk, banished many taken for granted ideologies including wearing the headscarf in public. In his point of view, the headscarf was promoting backwardness rather than modernization and therefore banned wearing it in public places. On the other hand, during the 1980s, the Islamists promoted the headscarf as a symbol of decency and tradition rather than backwardness. Moreover, while the Islamists did not like the way people viewed the headscarf and tried to change it fashionably, the Secularist saw it as a way to put Islam into context with modernization.

 Likewise, the conflict was not restricted to social ideologies but extended to ideologies concerning the appropriateness of public entertainment. The Islamists took charge of the entertainment sector and influenced its theatre greatly; they were able to blend in several customs (the secularists Jazz band and the traditional music of Turkey of the Ottoman Empire) to create traditional music that can relate well to their Ottoman context and to the Turks in general. However, the Secularists disapproved their decision and thought it represented backwardness rather than modernization.

            In my Colonialism, National, and Identity class, I had the privilege to listen to a Turkish speaker talking about her Turkish identity and what it means to be Turkish. In her speech, it was clear that she was one of the Secularists because she did not only exclude the Islamists Ottomanists’ point of view, but incorporated a history well before their existence. In regard to the book we read for this class, the author of the book includes that in order for a successful nationalist project to succeed, its history must not date back further than where their history started. And this was clearly evident in her speech where according to her the Garden of Eden was in Turkey.

-OMG