11 Oca. 08
Bugün aslında anlatacak biraz bir şeyim var dünkü kadar boş değilim en azından dün yaşadığım somut bir olay var elimde beni şok eden. Onu anlatmayacağım da sonuçlarına bir bakalım:
İnsanlara nasıl davranacağımı hiçbir zaman bilmedim ve öğrenemedim. Bir zamanlar çok sevdiğim insanlarla şu an hiçbir şey paylaşamıyorum ya da çok az şey paylaşabiliyorum. Onlar da değişti ben de değiştim. Hayatlarımız ayrıldı farklı şeyler yaşıyoruz. Çok az şeyler paylaşmamıza rağmen kopamadık, bir şekilde birbirimizin hayatlarına müdahale etmeye devam ediyoruz. Aslında eskisini yenisini bir kenara bırakayım, şu anda da bir şekilde birileri var etrafımda.
İnsanlar demişken aklıma şey takıldı: biz birbirimize ne kadar bağlıyız? Ben annemden ne kadar bağımsızım, babamdan ne kadar bağımsızım/bağımsız mıyım, değilim bence. Hadi onlarla dayatılmış ilişkiler var peki şu meşhur sokakta yürüyen adamdan ne kadar bağımsızım/bağımsız mıyım, değilim bence.
Özgürlük nedir diye sormadan, hiçbirimiz özgür değiliz, diye koskocaman bir önerme attığımda ortaya kim bilir kaç tane filozof kalkıp bana argüman üretmeye çalışır? Eğer ben bugün dışarıya istediğim kıyafeti giyip çıkamıyorsam, eğer istediğimi giydiğimde üzerimde belli kaygılar taşıyorsam, eğer ben bugün istediğim şeyi söylemekten, sırf aman bütünden ayrışmayayım ya da yeri değil şimdi tepki almayayım diye kaçıyorsam, demek ki var birilerinin kontrolü üzerimde.
Tanrıyı (absolute perfectness olarak varsayıyorum) yok saydığımda özgürleştiğimi zannetmiştim ama öyle değilmiş meğer. Doğanın sınırları ve sınırlayıcıları içinde tanımlanan bir özgürlüğe bile ulaşamadım çünkü insan sosyal bir varlık olarak kabul ediliyor ve sosyalleştiği alanda kendine özgürlüğünü kısıtlayan yeni sınırlar çiziyor. (Burada yeni bir soru var; insanın sosyal olması doğa dışı mıdır? Kadın - erkek ilişkileri, etnik kimlik- devlet ilişkileri gibi ilişkiler sosyalleşmenin getirdiği ve özgürlüğün sınırlarını yeniden belirleyen ilişkiler. Ben bu ilişkilerin dışındayım dediğinde bile bir taraftan sen o meşhur çemberin içindesin.
Emperyalizme karşıysan, o zaman yemek yeme mesela, hangi ürün emperyalizmin sınırlarının dışında? Ya daa milliyetçiliğe karşıysan hadi bakalım, nüfus cüzdanını çöpe at, atabilir misin, at bakalım n’oluyor? Olmadı en basitinden, devlete karşıysan bile devletin içindesin.
E bunları hepimiz biliyoruz zaten, kurtuluşumuz yok, ama daha küçük ilişkileri düşünelim asıl beni onlar korkutuyor. Bir arkadaşından nasıl kurtulabilirsin? Hoppala neden kurtulmak isteyeyim ki? Hayır, kurtulmak derken artık bir şey yaparken ona danışmaktan sıkıldın, ya da sana kelek attı diyelim. N’aparsan hayatından çıkar hele sürekli aynı ortamda bulunmak zorundaysan. Çoğumuzun yaptığı görmezden gelmek olsa da onu yaparak da o insandan bağımsızlaşmıyoruz/kurtulmuyoruz ki…
Böyle böyle bu gibi durumlarla etrafındaki insanlar çoğalınca n’aparsın? Yalnızlığını, kendini dinle dur o zaman, kim anlar ki seni kim dinler, hoş zaten kimsenin dinlemesini de istemezsin ama… Neyse…
Keşke dünya ipini koparanın geldiği bir yer olsa…
10 Ocak 2008 Perşembe
9 Ocak 2008 Çarşamba
“Bugün Kendimi Kuru Yapraklarla Kaplı Çıkmaz Bir Sokağa Benzetiyorum…”
Aslında anlatacak çok şeyim var, ama neyi nasıl anlatacağımı, nerden başlayacağımı hiç bilemiyorum. Kendi yaşadıklarımızın yanında çevremizdeki insanların yaşadıkları ve onların anlattıkları da eklenince söyleyecek o kadar çok sözümüz oluyor ki…
Hayat nedir? Gibi bir basit bir soruyu cevaplayabilir misiniz? Sadece benim yaşadıklarım mı benim hayatım? Yoksa hepimiz bütün bir hayatın bir parçası mıyız? Bir hayat hikâyesi anlattığımızda, o ne kadar bireysel ya da ne kadar bütün olur? Neleri bu hikâyenin içine katabiliriz, neleri ‘hayır yaşamadım/yaşamadık’ diyerek atabiliriz, ya da atabilir miyiz? Hayatımız dediğimiz şey ne kadar bizim, ya da bizim mi? Yoksa çoğumuzun bir türlü içinden çıkıp tanımlayamadığı bir tanrının mı, ya da başka birinin başka bir şeyin mi?
Neden yaşıyoruz? Neden bir sürü şeye ihtiyaç duyuyoruz; kim, niye, neyin çabasında, hayat mücadelesi ne demek, hayatı bile tanımlayamazken neyle mücadele ediyoruz ya da edebiliyor muyuz, örneğin ölüme karşı kim ne yapabilir? Yoksa mücadele etmiyor muyuz, yaşamaktan bıktık, sadece dünyada takılıyor muyuz, yoksa yaşam bir mücadele değil mi?
Bu kadar soruyu neden sorduğumu bile bilmiyorum, her şey o kadar anlamsız geliyor ki son günlerde, neyi neden yaptığımı/yapmadığımı bilmiyorum. O kadar hızlı bir hayat yaşarken, her akşam yattığımda yarın yapacağım bir sürü şey olacağını bilirken, bir anlık düştüğüm bu boşluk niye? Örneğin bu yazıyı neden yazıyorum, neden dersi geçmek okulu bitirmek, büyük insan olmak, bir geleceğe sahip olmak vs vs.. sürekli istiyorum ya da istemiyorum? Neden sıkılıyorum, seviniyorum, gülüyorum, üzülüyorum, çabalıyorum ya da esgeçiyorum? Sonunu şu an sadece ölüm olarak görebilmek, gerisinden emin olamamak beni korkutuyor, eğer yok olacaksam, yaşamın anlamı nerede?
İllaki bir anlamı olması gerekmiyor tabi ki, ama şu yaşadıklarım/yaşadıklarımız beni sürekli bir çıkmaza sürüklüyor. Bir yanda barlarda diskolarda coşan, bir yanda savaşta oraya buraya koşan insanlar... Bir yanda güzel binalar evler, bir yanda depremler, seller… Bir gün gülen ağlayan bir ben, yarın belki cansız bir beden…
Bir labirentte yolumu bulmaya çalışır gibiyim ama içinde bulunduğum bir labirent değil her tarafı kapalı bir kutu sanki. Bazen zayıf bir yerinden delik açmaya çalışıyorum ama ya sanki biri gelip kutuyu deviriyor ya da ben sarsılıyorum tam içinden çıkacakken.
Çok yorgun hissediyorum kendimi yazı yazmaya devam edemeyecek kadar yorgun, ama bakıyorum önümde başka seçenek yok. Diyelim yazmadım, eee sonra? Diyelim yarın okula da gitmedim, yemek yiyip su da içmeyeyim bari oldu olacak. Ama bunun sonu yok ki, bir şeyler yapmak zorundayım. Ölsem ne olacağını bilemiyorum bunu da yapamam, öyleyse yaşamalıyım ama nasıl? Herhalde yaşarken öğreneceğiz…
Aslında anlatacak çok şeyim var, ama neyi nasıl anlatacağımı, nerden başlayacağımı hiç bilemiyorum. Kendi yaşadıklarımızın yanında çevremizdeki insanların yaşadıkları ve onların anlattıkları da eklenince söyleyecek o kadar çok sözümüz oluyor ki…
Hayat nedir? Gibi bir basit bir soruyu cevaplayabilir misiniz? Sadece benim yaşadıklarım mı benim hayatım? Yoksa hepimiz bütün bir hayatın bir parçası mıyız? Bir hayat hikâyesi anlattığımızda, o ne kadar bireysel ya da ne kadar bütün olur? Neleri bu hikâyenin içine katabiliriz, neleri ‘hayır yaşamadım/yaşamadık’ diyerek atabiliriz, ya da atabilir miyiz? Hayatımız dediğimiz şey ne kadar bizim, ya da bizim mi? Yoksa çoğumuzun bir türlü içinden çıkıp tanımlayamadığı bir tanrının mı, ya da başka birinin başka bir şeyin mi?
Neden yaşıyoruz? Neden bir sürü şeye ihtiyaç duyuyoruz; kim, niye, neyin çabasında, hayat mücadelesi ne demek, hayatı bile tanımlayamazken neyle mücadele ediyoruz ya da edebiliyor muyuz, örneğin ölüme karşı kim ne yapabilir? Yoksa mücadele etmiyor muyuz, yaşamaktan bıktık, sadece dünyada takılıyor muyuz, yoksa yaşam bir mücadele değil mi?
Bu kadar soruyu neden sorduğumu bile bilmiyorum, her şey o kadar anlamsız geliyor ki son günlerde, neyi neden yaptığımı/yapmadığımı bilmiyorum. O kadar hızlı bir hayat yaşarken, her akşam yattığımda yarın yapacağım bir sürü şey olacağını bilirken, bir anlık düştüğüm bu boşluk niye? Örneğin bu yazıyı neden yazıyorum, neden dersi geçmek okulu bitirmek, büyük insan olmak, bir geleceğe sahip olmak vs vs.. sürekli istiyorum ya da istemiyorum? Neden sıkılıyorum, seviniyorum, gülüyorum, üzülüyorum, çabalıyorum ya da esgeçiyorum? Sonunu şu an sadece ölüm olarak görebilmek, gerisinden emin olamamak beni korkutuyor, eğer yok olacaksam, yaşamın anlamı nerede?
İllaki bir anlamı olması gerekmiyor tabi ki, ama şu yaşadıklarım/yaşadıklarımız beni sürekli bir çıkmaza sürüklüyor. Bir yanda barlarda diskolarda coşan, bir yanda savaşta oraya buraya koşan insanlar... Bir yanda güzel binalar evler, bir yanda depremler, seller… Bir gün gülen ağlayan bir ben, yarın belki cansız bir beden…
Bir labirentte yolumu bulmaya çalışır gibiyim ama içinde bulunduğum bir labirent değil her tarafı kapalı bir kutu sanki. Bazen zayıf bir yerinden delik açmaya çalışıyorum ama ya sanki biri gelip kutuyu deviriyor ya da ben sarsılıyorum tam içinden çıkacakken.
Çok yorgun hissediyorum kendimi yazı yazmaya devam edemeyecek kadar yorgun, ama bakıyorum önümde başka seçenek yok. Diyelim yazmadım, eee sonra? Diyelim yarın okula da gitmedim, yemek yiyip su da içmeyeyim bari oldu olacak. Ama bunun sonu yok ki, bir şeyler yapmak zorundayım. Ölsem ne olacağını bilemiyorum bunu da yapamam, öyleyse yaşamalıyım ama nasıl? Herhalde yaşarken öğreneceğiz…
7 Ocak 2008 Pazartesi
Impersonating of Women/Men on the Stage
Dressing is one of the attributed things for women and men and it can be thought as the costuming of them which they use it while performing their gender roles in social life. However, people perform their gender roles not only in social life but also on the stage. As it can be seen in the society, throughout the history we faced with some men who dressed in woman clothes and women who are in male clothes in the art, namely we see people who perform their cross gender roles. In cinema, in music, in theatre and so on… all kinds of arts include transvestites.
In this paper, I will try to mention about the subject transvestism in performing arts, especially in music. Because there are so many aspects/definitions of transvestism and there are various shapes of it on the scene, this article will be only an overlook. I will keep a historical order to explain the subject but firstly, some key terms must be defined.
Transvestism is a term basically means dressing the opposite sex’s clothes but it has some additional concepts/meanings. To make clear the term we can look at its origins: the word transvestism, firstly propounded by Magnus Hirshfeld. Magnus Hirschfeld coined the term ''transvestism'' (from Latin ''trans-'', "across, over" and ''vestere'', "to dress or to wear") in 1910 in his book "Die Transvestiten. He thinks there is a psychological background behind the transvestic behavior such as being the member of the opposite sex, but there are also people who see it as a kind of fetishism.
As I mentioned above there are transvestic elements in the arts but the name of dressing cross gender clothes changes from performance to performance (from performer to performer) and also from culture to culture. Drag queen, drag king, zenne, onnagata/oyama are some example of the terms which is attributed to the performers who are transvestites. In the following of the writing, I will explain these terms conceptually in the cultures they belong. On the one hand, some of these transvestites see transvestism as a way of criticizing gender roles, on the other; others perform as transvestite because of absence of women/men performer or as a part of a performance’s theme.
First transvestites on the scene were seen, because of the forbidden scene for the women. Because of the rules of the churches, the women cannot take to the stage for a while. To solve the problem of women absence in the performances many men performed as women. One striking example of this prohibition based transvestism is seen Japanese Kabuki Theatre. Although, Kabuki has religious background, as time goes, it got a sexual manner. Dances and lyrics became all inflammatory and as a result, women performers were prohibited. For a while, men performed female roles but men’s impersonating of women was seen inconvenient for the reason that two men’s close/homoerotic relationship on scene was thought immoral. The male performers who acted as women called as onnagatas.
Some Shakespeare comedies have also transvestic elements. Twelfth night, As You Like It, the Merchant of Venice are examples of these comedies. Differently from many performances in history, we see females who disguise themselves in men clothes in the plays. There are various criticizes which is focusing on the transvestism in Shakespearean plays. Lawrence Danson says that there is something which is unknown and be waited to be known in Shakespeare’s plays and he asks that is which thing been aware of at the last scene of the Shakespearean plays? We say shortly the answer is “identity”. The person who is Cesario in fact is Viola and the person who we think Cesario is in fact Sebastian. Namely, Shakespearean comedy plays based on changing identities and so often men becomes women or vice versa in the plays.
Transvestites in music may be revealed first by the operas. Although distinction between male and female voices, there are some parts in compositions which is written for women but the role of this women in opera is a men or vice verse. Namely, there are transformations in some operas between gender roles. In Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro this kind of acting can be seen.
The examples of transvestism which I gave above are compulsory for theatre or opera but transvestism is used all by itself as a performance style in 1970s. Performers who are called drag queens and drag kings became prominent in Western Culture. While drag queens are (mostly gay) male cross-dressers, drag kings are female ones. There are two important aspects of drag queens/kings, one of them is entertaining, and the other is protest manner of them against gender roles. Although former is criticized by many (especially feminist) authorities, the latter make a striking point of LGBTT movement in history.
In 1969, Police make a raid to the Stonewall Inn Bar which is in New York and a resistance movement began against police. In this rebellious movement, drag queens played a great role because they are especially became mistreated ones by the police. However, before Stonewall Riots, drag queens had been an important part of Western LGBTT culture and the parties and bars did not use to be thought without drag queens, after the riots, they also got a traditional aspect in LGBTT movement, especially in the Gay Prides, which is celebrated for recalling the Stonewall Riots and expressing the pride of being homosexual/transsexual all over the world.
What kind of shows do drag queens make? There is a controversy in this question’s answer, because we cannot say a defining drag queen performance, they vary from country to country or from performer to performer, but their common features are singing (particularly lip synching) and dancing. The songs they sing are especially are famous female singers’ songs; they perform as if they are that singer. These female singers imitated by drag queens are mostly the ones who are commonly icons/idols of LGBTT individuals. However drag queens, sometimes also prefer making theatretical performances.
Although drag queens have an importance in the history of LGBTT movement, they are criticized by the reason that they repeatedly justify the gender roles which are given to the women. This is an argumentative point and there are various opinions about this assertion, in my opinion, because of the various kinds of drag queen performances and because of the various people who define themselves as drag queens, there can be cases like that, but we cannot say all drag queens are performing by justified gender roles, for example, there are the ones who are in so blur dressing or in a vague makeup that we cannot attribute any kind of sex/gender role for them.
In 1970s when feminist movement got its power and Stonewall Riots emerged and drag queens became prevalent, a new kind of music created and rebellious attitude of especially LGBTT people are reflected. This music genre was Glam rock. The time which I mentioned, there is a strict change in the popular music performances especially in English rock bands and singers. Glam rock is mostly defined with glamorous effeminate clothes and makeup of its singers. Especially shoes with high heels are very prevalent. Exaggerated glitter makeup and bright clothes are also significant elements of this music’s performers. They use this kind of transvestite dressing to blur the gender roles. There is also a science fiction theme in songs and on the clothes.
The glam rock singers and bands are includes David Bowie, T-rex, Queen, Gary Glitter and so on. Especially David Bowie can be attributed as the lead singer of the Glam era. He explained that he was a gay (although he is bisexual) and got a political attitude to the gender roles and reflected this attitude to his music and made a protest scene shows in 1970s.
Moreover with the lyrics, not only science fiction themes or characters but also transvestism is mentioned by some glam rockers. For instance, David Bowie, in his song Rebel Rebel, narrates a boy who rebels against his mother wants makeup. However, the lyrics are also based on the vagueness of the boy’s gender. He mentions a dilemma that whether the boy is a boy or he is a girl:
…Got your mother in a whirl
She is not sure if you’re a boy or a girl….
The glam rock genre musically is not so separately from hard rock, its distinctive aspect is its theatrical or performance based manner. Namely, it can add a different protest attitude for the rock music. Singers become effeminate as an opposition and the songs have been written on the subjects like gender. However glam rock is only a music genre, it created a social and
artistic mobility, too. Many films are produced concerned with it. Velvet Goldmine is one of these films and reflects the glam rock era or the glam singer’s lives. It begins a boys’ desire to have a pop idol, and then he grows up and we see him while making up and dressing the glamorous clothes and high heeled shoes. Then he takes on the stage… The film includes some references to the glam rock singers in 1970s.
In the last part of the essay I want to mention some cases in Turkey about transvestism. Firstly we faced with dancers who are men and wears women clothes for dancing in history of Turkey, they are called Köçeks. They are very popular in the Ottoman palaces for entertainment and however now there are some researches on various aspects of this subject because as far as I know there was a kind of dance education for Köçeks and also many of them were bisexual.
In some LGBTT bars there is also drag queen tradition, in addition to it there are drag queens whose only aim is entertainment. I only watch Nesrin who is a drag queen in Istanbul. I also watch her preparation for the performance. S/he firstly determines a concept for the performance and chooses her clothes and music according to this concept. In the performance which I saw, she sang a song from Hande Yener . The song was very well-known between LGBTT individuals, but in the performance Nesrin preferred to change the lyrics and she made some recalls about the problems of LGBTT people in a humorous way. After the singing, she made improvisatory by adding some audiences to her performance. She explained an event which she had experienced and she asked some audiences whether they experienced something like that and she commented the cases which audiences mentioned, in a humorous way. After that, she made a competition based on who is frumpish and who is smart, and by this competition, she make some attributions to gender roles with dresses of audiences.
Besides Nesrin’s performance, there are some performances which are for only entertaining. Hala’s performance is one of them. I do not see her show but as far as I know, she imitates some popular singers such as Gloria Gaynor and Marilyn Monroe and use dance and theatrical elements in these shows. Hala defines herself as a drag queen, but she does not accept the term transvestite for her. She says: there are people who say transvestite for us. Sometimes we faced with some difficulties. We must explain there is no sex in our job, we make the art. These sentences in fact, show us the people’s understandings of the word transvestite in Turkey. Because of some prejudices against transvestites, all of them are thought as sex laborers. Hala also performed in two music videos: one of them is İzel’s Aşk Hakları and the other is Demet Akalın’s Tamamdır.
In fact, nowadays, transvestism is in country’s agenda; because of the case of Huysuz Virjin. Huysuz Virjin is a women character who is performed by Seyfi Dursunoğlu. Dursunoğlu became performing as Huysuz Virjin firstly in small clubs, then he attended a program in TRT 1 and then he became famous and he prepared a show and got an effective manner in public. Huysuz Virjin can say every thing; everybody was entertaining her humorous answers to people, and with her cheerful songs and dances. Sexuality was mentioned in public in a humorous way by Huysuz’s shows, but in recent days, she was prohibited for the reason that she damages the moral structure of Turkish families by RTÜK. Now Seyfi Dursunoğlu is acting with ‘’his own identity’’. By changing dresses she was become he and become ‘’moral’’.
I firstly want to say in concerned with the performances of Huysuz Virjin. She is a middle aged, unmarried woman who is dominant over all people. She is a repartee, this repartee adds her protest attitude, but Huysuz Virjin criticizes what? The middle aged women? The patriarchy? Or is she only an entertaining performer? I have a controversy to answer this question. These various kinds of answers come to my mind not only by the performance, but also some expressions of Seyfi Dursunoğlu about homosexuals and after the prohibition of Huysuz Virjin his obedience of this prohibition rule and now his presentation of a competition as “himself”.
Secondly, I mention the performance of Seyfi Dursunoğlu. Now, he is not wearing “men dresses” but have a crazy hair style and a glitter jackets on him similar to singers from glam rock era. With different clothes, he is acting as the same as Huysuz Virjin. I think he did not lose her protest manner. He is still refusing and protesting something between the determining walls of the RTÜK. By not protesting directly the prohibition, he tries to do something by his art in a given space indirectly by not be marginalized. Maybe his aim is the same with my thoughts, maybe not but his/her impact on society is undeniable.
As a result, I tried to mention various kinds of transvestism in the arts; this paper can only be an abstract for this subject, because different definitions of transvestism in the cultures/in different art forms and different purposes for being transvestite on the stage makes a great literature to search.
Dressing is one of the attributed things for women and men and it can be thought as the costuming of them which they use it while performing their gender roles in social life. However, people perform their gender roles not only in social life but also on the stage. As it can be seen in the society, throughout the history we faced with some men who dressed in woman clothes and women who are in male clothes in the art, namely we see people who perform their cross gender roles. In cinema, in music, in theatre and so on… all kinds of arts include transvestites.
In this paper, I will try to mention about the subject transvestism in performing arts, especially in music. Because there are so many aspects/definitions of transvestism and there are various shapes of it on the scene, this article will be only an overlook. I will keep a historical order to explain the subject but firstly, some key terms must be defined.
Transvestism is a term basically means dressing the opposite sex’s clothes but it has some additional concepts/meanings. To make clear the term we can look at its origins: the word transvestism, firstly propounded by Magnus Hirshfeld. Magnus Hirschfeld coined the term ''transvestism'' (from Latin ''trans-'', "across, over" and ''vestere'', "to dress or to wear") in 1910 in his book "Die Transvestiten. He thinks there is a psychological background behind the transvestic behavior such as being the member of the opposite sex, but there are also people who see it as a kind of fetishism.
As I mentioned above there are transvestic elements in the arts but the name of dressing cross gender clothes changes from performance to performance (from performer to performer) and also from culture to culture. Drag queen, drag king, zenne, onnagata/oyama are some example of the terms which is attributed to the performers who are transvestites. In the following of the writing, I will explain these terms conceptually in the cultures they belong. On the one hand, some of these transvestites see transvestism as a way of criticizing gender roles, on the other; others perform as transvestite because of absence of women/men performer or as a part of a performance’s theme.
First transvestites on the scene were seen, because of the forbidden scene for the women. Because of the rules of the churches, the women cannot take to the stage for a while. To solve the problem of women absence in the performances many men performed as women. One striking example of this prohibition based transvestism is seen Japanese Kabuki Theatre. Although, Kabuki has religious background, as time goes, it got a sexual manner. Dances and lyrics became all inflammatory and as a result, women performers were prohibited. For a while, men performed female roles but men’s impersonating of women was seen inconvenient for the reason that two men’s close/homoerotic relationship on scene was thought immoral. The male performers who acted as women called as onnagatas.
Some Shakespeare comedies have also transvestic elements. Twelfth night, As You Like It, the Merchant of Venice are examples of these comedies. Differently from many performances in history, we see females who disguise themselves in men clothes in the plays. There are various criticizes which is focusing on the transvestism in Shakespearean plays. Lawrence Danson says that there is something which is unknown and be waited to be known in Shakespeare’s plays and he asks that is which thing been aware of at the last scene of the Shakespearean plays? We say shortly the answer is “identity”. The person who is Cesario in fact is Viola and the person who we think Cesario is in fact Sebastian. Namely, Shakespearean comedy plays based on changing identities and so often men becomes women or vice versa in the plays.
Transvestites in music may be revealed first by the operas. Although distinction between male and female voices, there are some parts in compositions which is written for women but the role of this women in opera is a men or vice verse. Namely, there are transformations in some operas between gender roles. In Mozart’s Marriage of Figaro this kind of acting can be seen.
The examples of transvestism which I gave above are compulsory for theatre or opera but transvestism is used all by itself as a performance style in 1970s. Performers who are called drag queens and drag kings became prominent in Western Culture. While drag queens are (mostly gay) male cross-dressers, drag kings are female ones. There are two important aspects of drag queens/kings, one of them is entertaining, and the other is protest manner of them against gender roles. Although former is criticized by many (especially feminist) authorities, the latter make a striking point of LGBTT movement in history.
In 1969, Police make a raid to the Stonewall Inn Bar which is in New York and a resistance movement began against police. In this rebellious movement, drag queens played a great role because they are especially became mistreated ones by the police. However, before Stonewall Riots, drag queens had been an important part of Western LGBTT culture and the parties and bars did not use to be thought without drag queens, after the riots, they also got a traditional aspect in LGBTT movement, especially in the Gay Prides, which is celebrated for recalling the Stonewall Riots and expressing the pride of being homosexual/transsexual all over the world.
What kind of shows do drag queens make? There is a controversy in this question’s answer, because we cannot say a defining drag queen performance, they vary from country to country or from performer to performer, but their common features are singing (particularly lip synching) and dancing. The songs they sing are especially are famous female singers’ songs; they perform as if they are that singer. These female singers imitated by drag queens are mostly the ones who are commonly icons/idols of LGBTT individuals. However drag queens, sometimes also prefer making theatretical performances.
Although drag queens have an importance in the history of LGBTT movement, they are criticized by the reason that they repeatedly justify the gender roles which are given to the women. This is an argumentative point and there are various opinions about this assertion, in my opinion, because of the various kinds of drag queen performances and because of the various people who define themselves as drag queens, there can be cases like that, but we cannot say all drag queens are performing by justified gender roles, for example, there are the ones who are in so blur dressing or in a vague makeup that we cannot attribute any kind of sex/gender role for them.
In 1970s when feminist movement got its power and Stonewall Riots emerged and drag queens became prevalent, a new kind of music created and rebellious attitude of especially LGBTT people are reflected. This music genre was Glam rock. The time which I mentioned, there is a strict change in the popular music performances especially in English rock bands and singers. Glam rock is mostly defined with glamorous effeminate clothes and makeup of its singers. Especially shoes with high heels are very prevalent. Exaggerated glitter makeup and bright clothes are also significant elements of this music’s performers. They use this kind of transvestite dressing to blur the gender roles. There is also a science fiction theme in songs and on the clothes.
The glam rock singers and bands are includes David Bowie, T-rex, Queen, Gary Glitter and so on. Especially David Bowie can be attributed as the lead singer of the Glam era. He explained that he was a gay (although he is bisexual) and got a political attitude to the gender roles and reflected this attitude to his music and made a protest scene shows in 1970s.
Moreover with the lyrics, not only science fiction themes or characters but also transvestism is mentioned by some glam rockers. For instance, David Bowie, in his song Rebel Rebel, narrates a boy who rebels against his mother wants makeup. However, the lyrics are also based on the vagueness of the boy’s gender. He mentions a dilemma that whether the boy is a boy or he is a girl:
…Got your mother in a whirl
She is not sure if you’re a boy or a girl….
The glam rock genre musically is not so separately from hard rock, its distinctive aspect is its theatrical or performance based manner. Namely, it can add a different protest attitude for the rock music. Singers become effeminate as an opposition and the songs have been written on the subjects like gender. However glam rock is only a music genre, it created a social and
artistic mobility, too. Many films are produced concerned with it. Velvet Goldmine is one of these films and reflects the glam rock era or the glam singer’s lives. It begins a boys’ desire to have a pop idol, and then he grows up and we see him while making up and dressing the glamorous clothes and high heeled shoes. Then he takes on the stage… The film includes some references to the glam rock singers in 1970s.
In the last part of the essay I want to mention some cases in Turkey about transvestism. Firstly we faced with dancers who are men and wears women clothes for dancing in history of Turkey, they are called Köçeks. They are very popular in the Ottoman palaces for entertainment and however now there are some researches on various aspects of this subject because as far as I know there was a kind of dance education for Köçeks and also many of them were bisexual.
In some LGBTT bars there is also drag queen tradition, in addition to it there are drag queens whose only aim is entertainment. I only watch Nesrin who is a drag queen in Istanbul. I also watch her preparation for the performance. S/he firstly determines a concept for the performance and chooses her clothes and music according to this concept. In the performance which I saw, she sang a song from Hande Yener . The song was very well-known between LGBTT individuals, but in the performance Nesrin preferred to change the lyrics and she made some recalls about the problems of LGBTT people in a humorous way. After the singing, she made improvisatory by adding some audiences to her performance. She explained an event which she had experienced and she asked some audiences whether they experienced something like that and she commented the cases which audiences mentioned, in a humorous way. After that, she made a competition based on who is frumpish and who is smart, and by this competition, she make some attributions to gender roles with dresses of audiences.
Besides Nesrin’s performance, there are some performances which are for only entertaining. Hala’s performance is one of them. I do not see her show but as far as I know, she imitates some popular singers such as Gloria Gaynor and Marilyn Monroe and use dance and theatrical elements in these shows. Hala defines herself as a drag queen, but she does not accept the term transvestite for her. She says: there are people who say transvestite for us. Sometimes we faced with some difficulties. We must explain there is no sex in our job, we make the art. These sentences in fact, show us the people’s understandings of the word transvestite in Turkey. Because of some prejudices against transvestites, all of them are thought as sex laborers. Hala also performed in two music videos: one of them is İzel’s Aşk Hakları and the other is Demet Akalın’s Tamamdır.
In fact, nowadays, transvestism is in country’s agenda; because of the case of Huysuz Virjin. Huysuz Virjin is a women character who is performed by Seyfi Dursunoğlu. Dursunoğlu became performing as Huysuz Virjin firstly in small clubs, then he attended a program in TRT 1 and then he became famous and he prepared a show and got an effective manner in public. Huysuz Virjin can say every thing; everybody was entertaining her humorous answers to people, and with her cheerful songs and dances. Sexuality was mentioned in public in a humorous way by Huysuz’s shows, but in recent days, she was prohibited for the reason that she damages the moral structure of Turkish families by RTÜK. Now Seyfi Dursunoğlu is acting with ‘’his own identity’’. By changing dresses she was become he and become ‘’moral’’.
I firstly want to say in concerned with the performances of Huysuz Virjin. She is a middle aged, unmarried woman who is dominant over all people. She is a repartee, this repartee adds her protest attitude, but Huysuz Virjin criticizes what? The middle aged women? The patriarchy? Or is she only an entertaining performer? I have a controversy to answer this question. These various kinds of answers come to my mind not only by the performance, but also some expressions of Seyfi Dursunoğlu about homosexuals and after the prohibition of Huysuz Virjin his obedience of this prohibition rule and now his presentation of a competition as “himself”.
Secondly, I mention the performance of Seyfi Dursunoğlu. Now, he is not wearing “men dresses” but have a crazy hair style and a glitter jackets on him similar to singers from glam rock era. With different clothes, he is acting as the same as Huysuz Virjin. I think he did not lose her protest manner. He is still refusing and protesting something between the determining walls of the RTÜK. By not protesting directly the prohibition, he tries to do something by his art in a given space indirectly by not be marginalized. Maybe his aim is the same with my thoughts, maybe not but his/her impact on society is undeniable.
As a result, I tried to mention various kinds of transvestism in the arts; this paper can only be an abstract for this subject, because different definitions of transvestism in the cultures/in different art forms and different purposes for being transvestite on the stage makes a great literature to search.
27 Aralık 2007 Perşembe
Tango with Different Effects
Tango is a dance style which we cannot think independent from the word passion. Last night, I attend a concert which justified the relationship between tango and passion. I flied away from the concert hall and found myself between the clouds with my darling who I imagined (!) Although this impact arouses on me, there are a lot of opinions on my head about the performers and content of the concert.
It was a special event which includes Tangos throughout the history in Turkey. The orchestra was Band-O-Neon, “Orchestraz Tipica de Tango. The concert began with the song El Once, which was composed for a graduate day of a medical faculty. Then Ertuğrul Sevsay who is the chairman of Viana Music University Orchestration Department, make a speech and mentioned about the Tango. He said Tangos have various themes such as love, nature, poverty and so on and then, he explained the program of the concert. Throughout the concert, in some breaks, he also shortly narrated the stories of each song. As an instance of these stories the following can be given; one night, E. Saborido plans composing something and he says no to his wife who wants to go outside with him. After that, the wife gets angry and the following day she does not even prepare the breakfast for her husband. But E. Saborido softens her heart by composing the Fellici for her. There is other interesting stories about each performed song and during the concert I paid attention to note them not to forget and so the songs seem more meaningful for me. I listened to them in a different manner.
In concert, there were songs which are performed by the soloist Bağdasar Bayvertyan. They were Tangos which has Turkish lyrics. Although the performance of Bayvertyan was great, some questions were aroused in my head. In my opinion, much Western music which is performed in Turkish lyrics, there are some incompatibilities between lyrics and the orchestra, they are heard artificially and in some parts they may be disturbing the ear. Of course, this point which I thought is argumentative and may be another essay subject.
The questions which arouse in my head did not end up during the concert. In the songs which are performed by the dancer made confused me by new things. In the concert, there are two couples which are well-known and successful all around the world and their dances are exactly compatible with the music and although Tango dance movements are quite hard to perform, they did it successfully. But, my confusion is about the content of the dance. What is the dramaturgy of Tango? There is a man a woman in all Tangos and the performances have specific beginnings and endings (for example, men always makes way for the women after performance) or there are movements which requires the ‘’power” of men and they never performed by a women (for example, lifting the women performer by embracing.) Namely, in fact, I want to questionnaire, what the relationship between gender roles and Tango is but this may be another essay subject (!)
As a result, however the fascinating atmosphere of Tango, I leave from the concert hall with all of my questions, and that made me happy, because I found new questions to answer. Shortly, the concert affected both my head and my heart, but affected them differently.
Tango is a dance style which we cannot think independent from the word passion. Last night, I attend a concert which justified the relationship between tango and passion. I flied away from the concert hall and found myself between the clouds with my darling who I imagined (!) Although this impact arouses on me, there are a lot of opinions on my head about the performers and content of the concert.
It was a special event which includes Tangos throughout the history in Turkey. The orchestra was Band-O-Neon, “Orchestraz Tipica de Tango. The concert began with the song El Once, which was composed for a graduate day of a medical faculty. Then Ertuğrul Sevsay who is the chairman of Viana Music University Orchestration Department, make a speech and mentioned about the Tango. He said Tangos have various themes such as love, nature, poverty and so on and then, he explained the program of the concert. Throughout the concert, in some breaks, he also shortly narrated the stories of each song. As an instance of these stories the following can be given; one night, E. Saborido plans composing something and he says no to his wife who wants to go outside with him. After that, the wife gets angry and the following day she does not even prepare the breakfast for her husband. But E. Saborido softens her heart by composing the Fellici for her. There is other interesting stories about each performed song and during the concert I paid attention to note them not to forget and so the songs seem more meaningful for me. I listened to them in a different manner.
In concert, there were songs which are performed by the soloist Bağdasar Bayvertyan. They were Tangos which has Turkish lyrics. Although the performance of Bayvertyan was great, some questions were aroused in my head. In my opinion, much Western music which is performed in Turkish lyrics, there are some incompatibilities between lyrics and the orchestra, they are heard artificially and in some parts they may be disturbing the ear. Of course, this point which I thought is argumentative and may be another essay subject.
The questions which arouse in my head did not end up during the concert. In the songs which are performed by the dancer made confused me by new things. In the concert, there are two couples which are well-known and successful all around the world and their dances are exactly compatible with the music and although Tango dance movements are quite hard to perform, they did it successfully. But, my confusion is about the content of the dance. What is the dramaturgy of Tango? There is a man a woman in all Tangos and the performances have specific beginnings and endings (for example, men always makes way for the women after performance) or there are movements which requires the ‘’power” of men and they never performed by a women (for example, lifting the women performer by embracing.) Namely, in fact, I want to questionnaire, what the relationship between gender roles and Tango is but this may be another essay subject (!)
As a result, however the fascinating atmosphere of Tango, I leave from the concert hall with all of my questions, and that made me happy, because I found new questions to answer. Shortly, the concert affected both my head and my heart, but affected them differently.
25 Aralık 2007 Salı
Different Melodies from Different Lands
In this paper, I will try to explain a classical music concert which I went beginning of the fall term in the Albert Long Hall classical music concerts. This concert was an extremely wonderful; although I lose its program booklet, I want to mention all feeling which concert aroused on me.
To begin with, it was a multicultural performance which includes composers from Turkey, Azerbaijan and Russia. Although it is performed with only Turkish musicians, I could catch the cultural differences and interaction in the concert. However there were slide shows which support the cello and piano as a third element of the performance. The performers were Ozan Tunca and Zöhrap Adıgüzelzade. Ozan Tunca began its music life in 1984 in Hacettepe University State Conservatoire and in this performance, he played cello. The piano was played by Adıgüzelzade who is a professor in Eskişehir Anadolu University, he is also a piano virtuoso. As far as I know, they come together with some other performances, namely this is not their first work together.
As I mentioned above there were Turkish, Russian and Azerbaijani. They are Kamran İnce, Alexander Ğlazunov, Ahmet Adnan Saygun, Fikret Amirov, Kara Ebulfezoğlu Karayev ve Sergey Vasil'yevich Rachmaninov. İnce and Saygun are Turkish ones, former was born in 1960 and his compositions were performed by famous orchestras and the latter is an ethnomusicolog and named a state artist first in Turkey. Amirov and Karayev are Azerbaijani composers; former has compositions influenced by Azeri folk music and the latter made compositions which has a traditional impact and western style. Ğlazunov and Rachmaninov are Russian composers; former
grows in a family which is closely connected with music and he wrote several works in several genres, and the latter is most influential pianist in 20th century. Namely, in short all composers whose compositions performed in concert were successful ones in their country and they are also well-known around the world.
I was very curious before the concert began because I wondered how music from different cultures comes together, however I had been thinking that they were independent from each other and it is not so complementary performance, it will be pert by part, but the performance was not as the way I thought, the pieces were linked by the visual things.
In conclusion, I want to say this concert fly away me from the seat I sat. Too many times I found myself dreaming. The concert’s this impact on me aroused, I think mostly by the great performance of the performance.
In this paper, I will try to explain a classical music concert which I went beginning of the fall term in the Albert Long Hall classical music concerts. This concert was an extremely wonderful; although I lose its program booklet, I want to mention all feeling which concert aroused on me.
To begin with, it was a multicultural performance which includes composers from Turkey, Azerbaijan and Russia. Although it is performed with only Turkish musicians, I could catch the cultural differences and interaction in the concert. However there were slide shows which support the cello and piano as a third element of the performance. The performers were Ozan Tunca and Zöhrap Adıgüzelzade. Ozan Tunca began its music life in 1984 in Hacettepe University State Conservatoire and in this performance, he played cello. The piano was played by Adıgüzelzade who is a professor in Eskişehir Anadolu University, he is also a piano virtuoso. As far as I know, they come together with some other performances, namely this is not their first work together.
As I mentioned above there were Turkish, Russian and Azerbaijani. They are Kamran İnce, Alexander Ğlazunov, Ahmet Adnan Saygun, Fikret Amirov, Kara Ebulfezoğlu Karayev ve Sergey Vasil'yevich Rachmaninov. İnce and Saygun are Turkish ones, former was born in 1960 and his compositions were performed by famous orchestras and the latter is an ethnomusicolog and named a state artist first in Turkey. Amirov and Karayev are Azerbaijani composers; former has compositions influenced by Azeri folk music and the latter made compositions which has a traditional impact and western style. Ğlazunov and Rachmaninov are Russian composers; former
grows in a family which is closely connected with music and he wrote several works in several genres, and the latter is most influential pianist in 20th century. Namely, in short all composers whose compositions performed in concert were successful ones in their country and they are also well-known around the world.
I was very curious before the concert began because I wondered how music from different cultures comes together, however I had been thinking that they were independent from each other and it is not so complementary performance, it will be pert by part, but the performance was not as the way I thought, the pieces were linked by the visual things.
In conclusion, I want to say this concert fly away me from the seat I sat. Too many times I found myself dreaming. The concert’s this impact on me aroused, I think mostly by the great performance of the performance.
24 Aralık 2007 Pazartesi
A Journey to A Mass from Baroque
On 18 December Tuesday, with an invitation of one of my friends, I went to a classic music concert second time in this year, in this paper I want to mention about this concert in which my friend sang in choir part. The concert was Austrian Culture Office which is located in Yeniköy.
In fact I do not go classical music concerts so much but I could not forget the concerts which I went. Especially the spectators, who are in the concert, arouse interest on me. In my point of view, they attribute special attention for this kind of concerts and they went them with their best clothes and especially women went by dressing their hair. This special care on spectators make excited me every pre-concert time, and a magical atmosphere is created by this way. But in this time, I faced with two people which got me angry and broke my excitement. One of them is a middle-aged woman who continuously spoke during the concert and the other is a man who began to speak with me during the cocktail and disturb me with some mathematic questions (!). The cocktail was quite rich; there were various kinds of cookies, white/red vine and fruit juice.
After an half hour cocktail, the concert was started. It was performed by Boğaziçi University Music Club Classical Music Choir and the Kopuz Orchestra. The program includes Antonio Vivaldi’s Konzert für Cello in F- dur (RV 411) and Gloria in D-dur (RV 589).
Before evaluating performance, I want to give some information about Vivaldi and about the composition. Vivaldi is one of the Baroque Music composers, borned in Venice in 1968 and firstly educated by his father in music. He composed several concertos, sonatas and some operas. The composition, Gloria is a popular piece from Vivaldi’s choral and sacred music, and it was actually written for female voices.
The performance of choir and the orchestra was quite good. On one hand, I really affected from it, but on the other, in some parts there were incompatibilities between choir and the orchestra. I do not know so much about technical information about music, but it is heard so for me. The composition was performed in the middle of the spectators and this created an intimate relationship between watchers and being watched.
I want to also say some observations about the hall, which concert performed. It was reflecting the atmosphere of the churches from the baroque. It was very huge and there was an ostentatious ceiling lamb and there were balconies up. I felt during the concert as if I am in a church and attending a mass.
In conclusion, it was a different experience for me. The performance consisted of several elements (the design of the performers in the middle, the structure of the hall and so on) and they were completing a whole. I like this whole and leave happy from there with my friends.
On 18 December Tuesday, with an invitation of one of my friends, I went to a classic music concert second time in this year, in this paper I want to mention about this concert in which my friend sang in choir part. The concert was Austrian Culture Office which is located in Yeniköy.
In fact I do not go classical music concerts so much but I could not forget the concerts which I went. Especially the spectators, who are in the concert, arouse interest on me. In my point of view, they attribute special attention for this kind of concerts and they went them with their best clothes and especially women went by dressing their hair. This special care on spectators make excited me every pre-concert time, and a magical atmosphere is created by this way. But in this time, I faced with two people which got me angry and broke my excitement. One of them is a middle-aged woman who continuously spoke during the concert and the other is a man who began to speak with me during the cocktail and disturb me with some mathematic questions (!). The cocktail was quite rich; there were various kinds of cookies, white/red vine and fruit juice.
After an half hour cocktail, the concert was started. It was performed by Boğaziçi University Music Club Classical Music Choir and the Kopuz Orchestra. The program includes Antonio Vivaldi’s Konzert für Cello in F- dur (RV 411) and Gloria in D-dur (RV 589).
Before evaluating performance, I want to give some information about Vivaldi and about the composition. Vivaldi is one of the Baroque Music composers, borned in Venice in 1968 and firstly educated by his father in music. He composed several concertos, sonatas and some operas. The composition, Gloria is a popular piece from Vivaldi’s choral and sacred music, and it was actually written for female voices.
The performance of choir and the orchestra was quite good. On one hand, I really affected from it, but on the other, in some parts there were incompatibilities between choir and the orchestra. I do not know so much about technical information about music, but it is heard so for me. The composition was performed in the middle of the spectators and this created an intimate relationship between watchers and being watched.
I want to also say some observations about the hall, which concert performed. It was reflecting the atmosphere of the churches from the baroque. It was very huge and there was an ostentatious ceiling lamb and there were balconies up. I felt during the concert as if I am in a church and attending a mass.
In conclusion, it was a different experience for me. The performance consisted of several elements (the design of the performers in the middle, the structure of the hall and so on) and they were completing a whole. I like this whole and leave happy from there with my friends.
22 Aralık 2007 Cumartesi
priority of actuality over potentiality
As we look at Aristotle views on metaphysics and read his Metaphysics, we can simply conclude that one of his main questions is what being is and what the things that are. Trying to answer this question; to make clear his understanding, he draws a broad perspective about the subject by using some certain and also key terms. In this essay, I will mainly focus on two of these terms which are actuality and potentiality, and their positions in the universe/in the nature.
Because both potentiality and actuality have various aspects; it is, in fact, not so completely true to give certain definitions for these terms; instead, they can be understood extensively with the examples or with certain cases. To illustrate, we can go on with this sentence: bricks has the potentiality to become houses (actuality). By this example, maybe it can be concluded that; potentiality is an aspect, which refers to beings (the bricks), that have the capacity, capability or power to be actuality (houses). Namely with potentiality, beings produce a being (or it may be also an action) which may considered as an ‘end’, and refers to the actuality. But by saying ‘end’, it must NOT be understood as a certain result which will not be a new beginning (or which will not has a potentiality for any other actuality) , or the actuality, the house, must not be seen as the unchangeable result of bricks, rather being actual of a potentiality is only a change in process.
Aristotle has a conception of world as a process.[1] According to him, there is a process in the world and this process includes changes with beings which have potentiality or actuality. The idea of process, in fact, a distinctive notion which determines Aristotelian understanding of metaphysics and make both Aristotle and us ask further questions: what has priority in this process? In Aristotle’s point of view, the answer is: actuality is prior to potentiality.(Metaphysics,272) He explains his theses in three ways, by claiming it in thought, in time and in substance.
To make clear Aristotle’s claim on priority of actuality over potentiality in time we can suppose that, we have a circular material thing, but we have not seen it before, we do not call it even with a name. It is something which is given us in some way (by not questionnaire how it is given). For one last thing, also the knowledge of this thing is given that it is a potential being. Can we know what this thing will be in actuality?
In Aristotelian perspective, because actuality precedes potentiality, we cannot answer this question with an answer like that it will be a man or it will be an apple. Because, we do not see its actuality in advance. There is no thought in our minds about that thing.
Now, we assume that the thing which we mentioned above is an egg. If we ask repeatedly the same question that how we know it will be what, this time we can say it will be a chicken, because we saw a chicken before, namely before see the potential thing (egg), we see the actuality (the chicken). Actuality must be prior, because we have the thought of it in our minds to say for a thing that it is a potential being.
To explain actuality in time we can go on with the same example: chicken-egg. As we mention above, there is a process in the world. Aristotle says in his book Theta 8 that: “In all cases, there is some primary initiator of the process, and this process-initiator already is in actuality.” (Metaphysics,272) By this citation, we understand the initiator of the process must be the egg, but how? The priority of actuality in time is thought by species rather than individual chicken by Aristotle. He suggests that the species of chickens has a priority over a chicken.
One more explanation is given by substantial priority of actuality. He raises two reasons for this. One of them is that substance includes also form and it must be a model for the potential being. (For example a chicken has its form/its substance, so it has the priority.) Secondly, he mentions about coming to an end (actuality). In relation to this, he says purpose of potentiality. It is not in order to possess sight that animals see, but in order to see they possess sight.[2] With this sentence we can see that the determining thing is the actuality in the causation, so it is prior.
By the way, Aristotle establish his theses with three kinds of different based arguments, it can be clearly seen some interrelated points behind them. Firstly, the notion of process is the dominant theme in all of these arguments. Priority of actuality is in time, in substance and in thought is explained around the process. Secondly transition from potential to actual is another determining and common characteristic of Aristotle’s arguments. Thirdly, we can say that there is priority of existence in all three arguments.
To make clear this intersection points, I want to explain them in our example: the initiator thought of a chicken before egg and chicken species’ priority in time, and knowing substantial/formed thing, chicken, first direct us towards the idea of process. We can conclude that actualization realized in process, and also the actuality initiates it. We can also see that there is a transition from potential to actual in every argument, this also give sufficient argument for diversity of these terms. Lastly, the existence is another factor which determines the priority. The actual thing must be in existence all in time, in substance and in thought firstly.
Now, in the following of the paper, I will disscuss about Aristotle’s argument in terms of strengths and possible weaknesses. Initally, it is said that this is strength argument which effect the metaphysical thought even today, we study not only some basic metaphysical questions, but also Aristotle’s arguments which is constructed many years ago.
Similar to all philosophical arguments, it can be objected in some way. For example by philosophers who are close to platonic thought, accepts, the form of ideas, namely some eternal beings or also monists could be reject the ideas of Aristotle.
In my point of view, Aristotle’s metaphysics depends on the experiences of him, especially on his observations, as a result of this, he sees a causation and so he generalize it and also he make a unity between philosopher which are prior to him. According to me, the diversity between potentiality and actuality may not be accepted, and also the idea of substance. Because same thing can be both actual and potential, but they are so in the process, what is the initiator, if it is actuality how it is reveal? I could not answer this question at the end of the argument. And also several arguments about possibility of beings, we may be dreaming now everything around us may only images not materials. Or there are arguments about the knowledge of things and their perception. So we cannot trust our observation or reality of thing around us.
Eventually, according to Aristotle, there are actual and potential beings in the world and they are n process. In this process, actuality has a priority over potentiality, it can be seen by thinking it in relation to time, thought and substance. There are several intersection points between them and there are some objectoins to this argument.
[1] John Watson, (1898)The Metaphysics of Aristotle The Philosophical Review , http:\\links.jstor.org vol.7 no.4 337-354
[2] John Watson, (1898)The Metaphysics of Aristotle The Philosophical Review , http:\\links.jstor.org vol.7 no.4 337-354
As we look at Aristotle views on metaphysics and read his Metaphysics, we can simply conclude that one of his main questions is what being is and what the things that are. Trying to answer this question; to make clear his understanding, he draws a broad perspective about the subject by using some certain and also key terms. In this essay, I will mainly focus on two of these terms which are actuality and potentiality, and their positions in the universe/in the nature.
Because both potentiality and actuality have various aspects; it is, in fact, not so completely true to give certain definitions for these terms; instead, they can be understood extensively with the examples or with certain cases. To illustrate, we can go on with this sentence: bricks has the potentiality to become houses (actuality). By this example, maybe it can be concluded that; potentiality is an aspect, which refers to beings (the bricks), that have the capacity, capability or power to be actuality (houses). Namely with potentiality, beings produce a being (or it may be also an action) which may considered as an ‘end’, and refers to the actuality. But by saying ‘end’, it must NOT be understood as a certain result which will not be a new beginning (or which will not has a potentiality for any other actuality) , or the actuality, the house, must not be seen as the unchangeable result of bricks, rather being actual of a potentiality is only a change in process.
Aristotle has a conception of world as a process.[1] According to him, there is a process in the world and this process includes changes with beings which have potentiality or actuality. The idea of process, in fact, a distinctive notion which determines Aristotelian understanding of metaphysics and make both Aristotle and us ask further questions: what has priority in this process? In Aristotle’s point of view, the answer is: actuality is prior to potentiality.(Metaphysics,272) He explains his theses in three ways, by claiming it in thought, in time and in substance.
To make clear Aristotle’s claim on priority of actuality over potentiality in time we can suppose that, we have a circular material thing, but we have not seen it before, we do not call it even with a name. It is something which is given us in some way (by not questionnaire how it is given). For one last thing, also the knowledge of this thing is given that it is a potential being. Can we know what this thing will be in actuality?
In Aristotelian perspective, because actuality precedes potentiality, we cannot answer this question with an answer like that it will be a man or it will be an apple. Because, we do not see its actuality in advance. There is no thought in our minds about that thing.
Now, we assume that the thing which we mentioned above is an egg. If we ask repeatedly the same question that how we know it will be what, this time we can say it will be a chicken, because we saw a chicken before, namely before see the potential thing (egg), we see the actuality (the chicken). Actuality must be prior, because we have the thought of it in our minds to say for a thing that it is a potential being.
To explain actuality in time we can go on with the same example: chicken-egg. As we mention above, there is a process in the world. Aristotle says in his book Theta 8 that: “In all cases, there is some primary initiator of the process, and this process-initiator already is in actuality.” (Metaphysics,272) By this citation, we understand the initiator of the process must be the egg, but how? The priority of actuality in time is thought by species rather than individual chicken by Aristotle. He suggests that the species of chickens has a priority over a chicken.
One more explanation is given by substantial priority of actuality. He raises two reasons for this. One of them is that substance includes also form and it must be a model for the potential being. (For example a chicken has its form/its substance, so it has the priority.) Secondly, he mentions about coming to an end (actuality). In relation to this, he says purpose of potentiality. It is not in order to possess sight that animals see, but in order to see they possess sight.[2] With this sentence we can see that the determining thing is the actuality in the causation, so it is prior.
By the way, Aristotle establish his theses with three kinds of different based arguments, it can be clearly seen some interrelated points behind them. Firstly, the notion of process is the dominant theme in all of these arguments. Priority of actuality is in time, in substance and in thought is explained around the process. Secondly transition from potential to actual is another determining and common characteristic of Aristotle’s arguments. Thirdly, we can say that there is priority of existence in all three arguments.
To make clear this intersection points, I want to explain them in our example: the initiator thought of a chicken before egg and chicken species’ priority in time, and knowing substantial/formed thing, chicken, first direct us towards the idea of process. We can conclude that actualization realized in process, and also the actuality initiates it. We can also see that there is a transition from potential to actual in every argument, this also give sufficient argument for diversity of these terms. Lastly, the existence is another factor which determines the priority. The actual thing must be in existence all in time, in substance and in thought firstly.
Now, in the following of the paper, I will disscuss about Aristotle’s argument in terms of strengths and possible weaknesses. Initally, it is said that this is strength argument which effect the metaphysical thought even today, we study not only some basic metaphysical questions, but also Aristotle’s arguments which is constructed many years ago.
Similar to all philosophical arguments, it can be objected in some way. For example by philosophers who are close to platonic thought, accepts, the form of ideas, namely some eternal beings or also monists could be reject the ideas of Aristotle.
In my point of view, Aristotle’s metaphysics depends on the experiences of him, especially on his observations, as a result of this, he sees a causation and so he generalize it and also he make a unity between philosopher which are prior to him. According to me, the diversity between potentiality and actuality may not be accepted, and also the idea of substance. Because same thing can be both actual and potential, but they are so in the process, what is the initiator, if it is actuality how it is reveal? I could not answer this question at the end of the argument. And also several arguments about possibility of beings, we may be dreaming now everything around us may only images not materials. Or there are arguments about the knowledge of things and their perception. So we cannot trust our observation or reality of thing around us.
Eventually, according to Aristotle, there are actual and potential beings in the world and they are n process. In this process, actuality has a priority over potentiality, it can be seen by thinking it in relation to time, thought and substance. There are several intersection points between them and there are some objectoins to this argument.
[1] John Watson, (1898)The Metaphysics of Aristotle The Philosophical Review , http:\\links.jstor.org vol.7 no.4 337-354
[2] John Watson, (1898)The Metaphysics of Aristotle The Philosophical Review , http:\\links.jstor.org vol.7 no.4 337-354
Kaydol:
Kayıtlar (Atom)