Polemics Debate of Old-New Kemal Ahmet's Case Against the Accusation That He Had Turned Bourgeois Against Leftist Pretenders Against the Accusation that He was a Nationalist The article Orhan Selim published in "Tan" a few days later was titled "An Old 'Friend' ": "Not all proverbs are correct. There are such among them that indicate not what is but what should be. Therefore there are numerous ones that express nothing but a poetic wish. "I believe the proverbial 'An old 'friend' will not turn into an enemy' belongs among them. One of the objects which we humans seek from the cradle to the grave, but rarely find, which we long for, is a friend and friendship. Precisely therefore, like wine, we prefer the friend that is old. It is the old friend we want to be able to trust. And this desire, we have made into a proverb. But friendship is not like wine. In most cases, its taste fails to improve as years go by. To the contrary, it becomes murky, mossy in time like still waters. Therefore, great enemies usually emerge from among old friends. An old friend will turn into an enemy - and how!" (10 June 1935) Peyami Safa did not seem offended; he was busy bothering Nurullah Ataç on his column at the newspapaer. Below is a part from his article entitled "Kıskançlık İlmi": "Brunetiére, who defined criticism as the science of jealousy may be right only in his own country. "In order for this maxim to become applicable in Turkey, it needs to be revised as follows: criticism is pure jealousy. Criticism with us is so steeped in jealousy that, when it failed to avenge itself, it committed suicide." ("Tan," 12 June 1935) Five days later, Orhan Selim wrote the following in his article "I Am on the Side of the Critic!" published in "Tan": "Most of those who shirk the critic are persons who bear on their shoulders a load that is fluffier, bubblier, jivier brou-ha-ha than even they themselves can bear. The artist who has self-confidence is not shy of the latter, he is also not aggressive toward him. Because aggressing and attacking, on the one side, and fearing on the other, are frequently nothing but two sides of the same emotional coin. [...] "The critic does not necessarily have to be dogmatic. The critic is as human as we are and he too, is in a state of evolution. Therefore, he may not like tomorrow what he liked yesterday. Happy he, who undergoes this change on a progressive path. "Now, as I was writing these, our one and only critic Nurullah Ataç came to my mind. Those who attack him target precisely this aspect of him. "I, for my part, am on the side of the critic." (17 June 1935) Finally, Peyami Safa published an oblique article called, "Flock Man," in response to the equally oblique series of articles which Nâzım Hikmet, who had felt where all the bar-talk would lead, had published. "There is the type who cannot be himself in any thought or deed. Whatever he thinks, whatever he does, and says, he does not represent himself, but the society, race, environment in which he lives and all that has been imposed on him from without. "He is never hit upon anything by himself. He defends ideas and norms borrowed from someone else's system, more vehemently than their progenitor and owner. [...] "Henceforward, no reality will prove capable of opening his eyes shut by the foreign teaching. Even though everything in life changes perpetually, doomed to remain within the bounds of the Sacred World of his bearded philosopher and economist sheikh, he is incapable of change and progress. "Lacking every trait of character because he fails to acknowledge every instinct, he is a human furthest removed from humanity. He is an individual, but he is not a person. [...] "Not even a hundred thousand of their number is not exchangeable for a person. A country wishing in fact to increase its population ought to start by decreasing their number and seek out the ways of constituting a society made up of not these individuals, but of persons."("Tan," 23 June 1935) Orhan Selim's reply came the very next day in "Tan," in the article called "Little Man": "There are these men: one of them is small, the other is sterile, and one suffers from smallness and sterility. He stands, fixed, like a stocky fruitless little tree. But because his chaotic branches have grown forth in every direction, he assumes himself to be within a boundless expanse and perpetual progress. *** "There are these men: one of them is small, the other is sterile, and one suffers from smallness and sterility. He is like a gramophone record. Albeit with the difference that while the gramophone record sings the song that has been recorded on it, it does not believe that it was the creator of that song." ("Tan," 24 June 1935) Zekeriya Sertel, who was feeling uneasy about the fact that two columnists on his paper were obliquely snatching at each other and, in phrases like, "to remain within the bounds of the Sacred World of his bearded philosopher and economist sheikh" were even informing on one another, summoned them separately to his office for a talk and pointed out that he did not welcome such language in his evening paper "Son Posta," either. Thereupon, Peyami Safa published an article "Once Again a Necessary Response" in the "Tan" dated 26 June 1935: "I have not failed to point out repeatedly in many of my writings, including the most recent in this column, how I abhor discussion become quarrel and thought become aggression. [...] "A colleague writing in an evening paper has expressed his distaste for such quarrel, adding that the mutual offenders have gone as far as informing on one another. "He fails to realise, in making this claim, that he himself has approached very near informing by the mere mention of informing. [...] "I shall not reply to the colleague in that evening paper, owing to a decision to analyse all the phases of this problem which have been included only between the lines of that paper and are inappropriate for its pages. [...] "Certainly this problem is soon going to find the place and time which will provide the context for its thorough elucidation." ^ Top | Next >