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 Satirical Essays on a Provocateur In a note to his article in the "Hafta" periodical on 9 September 1935, Peyami Safa clarified that he was proud of his characteristics that had been satirised in Nâzım Hikmet's poem: "I informed you before that Nâzım Hikmet began writing epic poetry since he entered a dead-end in ideological matters, and hastily scribbled a piece of verse about me; he strolled from shop to shop and read the poem. I saw this verse in a periodical. This clumsy boy tried to satirise my virtues which I am proud of, and which are only a few, rather than my innumerable faults. [...] "I am going to leave the word to Cingöz Recai. In one of our next issues, you are going to read his reply to his so-called colleague, Nâzım Hikmet. From now on, Server Bedi's hero is going to deal out resounding slaps to this reckless man who departed from ideological matters and carried the issue to the level of an inferior kind of fawning that is full of allusion without proof." The counter-satire, which was autographed by Peyami Safa as "Cingöz Recai, Copied by Server Bedi," was published in the "Hafta" periodical on 23 Sebtember 1935 under the title of, "From Cingöz Recai to Nâzım Hikmet." The conclusion of the introduction contained the following: "Nâzım Hikmet moved the debate to the level of unbecoming lowly satire and thus ceased to be a serious addressee. On our fifth page under the autograph of Cingöz Recai, the famous hero of Server Bedi, we are publishing Peyami Safa's reply to Nâzım Hikmet, which was sketched out in order to display that to speak in verse in his style is a simple game of writing." Peyami Safa, like those who thought that Nâzım Hikmet's style was "a simple game of writing" and who wanted to address him in this manner, became unsuccessful. The style that was under consideration was of the kind whose mystery is difficult to attain although it may be thought to be easy at first sight. Even poet with acknowledged worth in other poetic conceptions, came to be imitative when they tried to write in this style. It was clear that the debate would not remain as personal bickering between Nâzım Hikmet and Peyami Safa. There was a section about Namık Kemal in the "Bir Provokatör Üzerine Hiciv Denemeleri" (Satirical Essays on a Provocateur). This was a rare occasion to stir up righters. Nihal Adsız published a treatise and summoned youth to revolt: "It does not matter what has happened between the communist Nâzım Hikmetof and the novelist Peyami Safa. These two city authors, who were close friends up until yesterday and who were advertising each other for free, broke up and began flirting with each other. [...] But Comrade Nâzım Hikmetof used this debate as pretext to try to kick and stamp on Turkish nationalism. He accused one of the greatest men of Turkey, Namık Kemal, of wearing a pelt of lion. [...] "There is 'The National Union of Turkish Students' in Istanbul. [...] The Turkish poet is insulted but this Turkish youth union does not react in the least. What happened to the obsequies held for Namık Kemal? [...] "Is the Turkish proletariat going to be rescued by these utterances of nonsense, by these coquetteries, by these hysterical cries, and attain by their means wealth, fullness and health? No, Comrade Nâzım Hikmetof! Hungry men want to be nourished neither by orphan Safa's lute and his broken plectrum nor by Namık Kemal's corpse and bones. [...] Hungry men want jobs and welfare. [...] "Comrade Nâzım Hikmetof! If you drive the same argument as those yellow-faced, opium-addicted Chinese or those dark-faced cannibal Ethiopians, go join them... Have a good trip. You cannot defend the Ethiopians' case in Babıâli Avenue. [...]" Peyami Safa stated in his article, entitled "Namık Kemal and Youth" printed in "Hafta" on 11 November 1935, that the treatise published under the autograph of Adsız was in great demand and thus it was out of print immediately, and that according to a rumour it was suppressed and that was why he could not get one. After mentioning that he had seen the treatise and skimmed through it, he wrote the following: "Since that satire is far from being important in the sense that it would make one suspect the love of Turkish youth for Namık Kemal or their courage to express this love, I am among those who find enough the few discrete slaps that were or would be given on an insolent mouth. Because, everywhere in every period, one may encounter a few intellectual dandies who desire to urinate on the graves of the classics. [...] Two slaps and a kick remove the rowdies from the mausoleum. [...] "This duty had been realised and if there is anything missing, no doubt, it will be completed. [...] I am not among those who think it necessary for Turkish youth to be mobilised against a vain lad, about whom final judgment has already been cast." Hikmet Kıvılcımlı and Nâzım Hikmet's relations had been strained. The young leftists around Hikmet Kıvılcımlı disapproved of Nâzım Hikmet's attacks at Namık Kemal and had let him know their mind in a visit to his office at the printshop. Thus Namık Kemal became the hot issue of the day both on the left and right. Opinion polls were prepared and meetings held. To such an extent that Nâzım's friends began to fear that he might be attacked in the street. Against Atatürk's realistic understanding of 'nationalism' that aimed at independence based on the power to sustain national borders and to work for development and restoration of the country as well as for the people's happiness, there were those who defended an adventurous nationalism that was racist, Pan-Turanist and that aimed at gathering all the Turkic peoples of the world within one border. The latter understanding of nationalism was becoming increasingly powerful with supporting winds hailing in from Germany. Its defenders wanted to take a running start from Namık Kemal's position as a national poet and from his booming poetic voice. Likewise, in the beginning of the 1930s, Hamdullah Suphi (Tanrıöver) announced that both Mustafa Kemal and Namık Kemal's busts would be built at the Turkish Association. ^ Top | Next >