Mutterzunge Transnational

8/19/2019 Mutterzunge Transnational

1/62

TURKISH-GERMAN LITERATURE: TRANSNATIONALVOICES AND THE QUEST FOR SOCIO-POLITICAL

AGENCY

An Evaluation of Works by Emine Sevgi Özdamar and Feridun Zaimo!lu

Andrew McGowan TuttleHonors Thesis

The Department of German, Slavic, and Romance Languages

The George Washington UniversityProfessor Mary Beth SteinFall 2007


2/62

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Introduction: Turkish-German Literature and the Search for Agency and Identity……….1

Globalization and Its Multicultural Implications………………………………………………..1

The Turkish-German Cultural Dynamic………………………………………………………... 3Turkish-German Literature Contemplating on Globalization…………………………………..3

Chapter I: The History of Turks in Germany………………………………………………….6

Gastarbeiter ………………………………………………………………………………………. 6 Immigrant Politics in Germany in the 1970s and 1980s……………………………………..….8 A History of Marginalization…………………………………………………………………… 11

Chapter II: Development of Turkish-German Literature………………………….………...14

Turkish-German Literature: Gastarbeiterliteratur, Betroffenheitsliteratur, Migrantenliteratur ......................................................................................................................... 14 Turkish-German Literature as Ethnic-Minority Literature……………………………………17 The German Cultural Tradition: Does Turkish-German Literature Belong?………………....19

Chapter III: Emine Sevgi Özdamar………………………………………………………..…..21

Biographical Overview……………………………………………………………..…………… 21 Mutterzunge................................................................................................................................... 23 Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn................................................................................................... 31Conclusion..................................................................................................................................... 36

Chapter IV: Ferdiun Zaimo!lu…………………………………………………………….…..38

Biographical Overview………………………………………………………………………….. 38 Liebesmale, Scharlachrot ……………………………………………………………………….. 40 German Amok …………………………………………………………………………………....46 Conclusion..................................................................................................................................... 50

Chapter V: Conclusion…….…………………………………………………………………………………53 A Look To The Future of Turkish-German Literature…………………………………………53

Works Cited……………………………………………………………………………………..57


3/62

1

Introduction: Turkish-German Literature and the Search for Agency andIdentity

Globalization and Its Multicultural Implications

The study of literature has long been categorized along lines of national origin and

language. Historically, these demarcations have been used to create canons of national literature

thought to be coterminous with countries of origin. In the age of globalization, however, the once

more clearly defined boundaries of nation-states, national citizens, and national cultures have

been blurred. The interconnectivity of people across the globe, through travel, communication,

and migration has created diverse multicultural and transnational societies. Accordingly, new

arenas of literature have developed, which embrace the cultural hybridity of the migrant/minority

experience and use new voices, which speak to the struggles of migration, otherness,

marginilization, the desire to belong, the nuances of multicultural identities, and the effort to

establish agency and legitimization.

While each migrant/minority/transnational experience is unique, a number of common

elements can be identified among works within ethnic-minority literature, whether it be

Mexican-American, Afro-French or Turkish-German, to name a few. Yiorgos D. Kalogeras,

professor of American Ethnic and Minority Literature, identifies some of these underpinnings of

ethnic literature in his work „Historical Representation and the Cultural Legitimation of the

Subject in Ethnic Personal Narratives.“ Kalogeras writes,

“What is primarily at stake in immigrant and ethnic personal narratives, because of the

subject’s ‘non-natural’ position within the hegemonic culture, is the issue of the text’sand subject’s ideological legitimation and consequent empowerment. … Thenarrativization of one’s ethnic history, to the extent that it reflects on one’s life story, isnot simply an act of establishing roots, an act of filiopietism attesting proudly to one’s


4/62

2

difference. It can be read as an act contributing to the empowerment of the subject and ofthe text.”1

At the core of his evaluation of ethnic literature, Kalogeras outlines the struggle of immigrants

and minorities for legitimacy within a new adopted culture. Immigrant and minority groups share

histories of discrimination, marginalization, and isolation. Their political voices are muted by

their outsider or “non-natural” status, and their social and economic opportunities for

advancement are limited by language barriers and intolerance. These realities are underscored by

a limited sense of belonging to the host country and struggles with new mixed cultural identities.

Through literature, however, socio-political participation and cultural agency become availableto those who seek greater acknowledgment and empowerment in their adopted land. Literature

thus becomes a vital platform from which to substantiate one’s transnational identity.

While the authors’ ownership over their ethnic origins is inferred by their minority status,

these groups are historically marginalized from their adopted societies. By exercising a

knowledge and mastery of the host language, narrating or discussing one’s ethnic history, and

showcasing one’s ability to navigate contemporary social and political topics through the

medium of writing, the author legitimizes himself as a political and cultural agent within his

adopted country. Therefore, by establishing themselves as political and cultural agents of both

their original and adopted heritage, these authors create a legitimized transnational identity,

which straddles two cultures effectively. Again, as Kalogeras posits, the implications behind

ethnic and immigrant narratives (works by ethnic minority authors) are rooted in efforts to find

empowerment in a marginalizing society.

1 Kalogeras, Yiorgos D. „Historical Representation and the Cultural Legitimation of the Subject in EthnicPersonal Narratives.“ College Literature. 18 (1991).


5/62

3

The Turkish-German Cultural Dynamic

In recent decades, Turkish citizens have made-up Germany’s largest ethnic minority. The

presence of Turks in Germany has its roots in the guest worker programs in the Federal Republic

of Germany during its periods of vast economic growth in the 1950s and 1960s. Among many

other European nationals, Turkish citizens were contracted to meet short-term labor demands,

and were not encouraged to remain in Germany. The following chapters will provide more in-

depth discussion of the Turkish-German tradition, however, it is pertinent to iterate that Turks

were offered little administrative support and resources in Germany, and were never exposed to

organized integration programs or even basic language courses. They were subjected toextremely poor working and living conditions, experienced severe discrimination and isolation,

and had little social opportunity or political voice. However, regardless of these social and

personal hardships, the economic opportunities in Germany proved more promising to many

Turks than the realities of the repressive autocratic rule in Turkey in the 1960s and 1970s. In

short, underscored by a troubled and marginalized history, the Turkish-German tradition has

been riddled with discrimination. These rocky beginnings set the stage for the development of a

unique cultural dynamic among Turkish-Germans, struggling with issues of identity, belonging,

and adaptation.

Turkish-German Literature Contemplating on Globalization

As Kalogeras describes above, the core of ethnic-minority literature is also rooted in the

author’s understanding and empowerment of his identity, especially within the joint context of

his ethnic history and his “non-natural” position in his current surroundings. In other words,

ethnic minority writers are seeking to understand and give expression to their multiple identities,

to find belonging, and to legitimize their social and political voice within the hegemonic host


6/62

4

state. Feridun Zaimo!lu and Emine Sevgi Özdamar are two prime examples of authors of

Turkish-German background whose works require such a socio-political reading. Their works

reflect the transforming agency of Turkish-German citizens and their desire to be acknowledged

as active contributors to contemporary German culture and society. Feridun Zaimo!lu

immigrated as an infant and spent his entire life growing up in Germany. Emine Sevgi Özdamar,

on the other hand, first came to Germany for a period of two years as a teenage guest worker,

only to return years later to reside permanently. I have chosen to analyze the works of these two

authors for a number of reasons. They represent two distinctly different immigrant experiences in

Germany, different literary styles, and different gender perspectives. However, when viewedthrough a socio-political lens, the literature of Zaimo!lu and Özdamar, while very different in

style and narrative technique, share a common contemporary viewpoint and critical position vis-

à-vis the continued social and political intolerance directed towards Turkish-Germans in

Germany. The common thread, which ties these texts together, is “their nature as contemplations

on a changing German society and cultural make-up in the age of globalization.”2

In Özdamar’s and Zaimo!lu’s works, I will examine how their unique use of language,

selective appropriation and rejection of traditional German literary style and structure, the use of

settings and locations, thematic choices, and historical parallels, validate a transnational identity

of Turkish-Germans. They seek to substantiate and legitimize the socio-political voice of

Turkish-Germans in a Germany that is trying to grasp the realities of globalization and the

multicultural society it has had a hand in creating. Authors like Özdamar and Zaimo!lu

contribute to the transformation of Germany’s “traditional” literary canon, by altering uniform

conceptions of “German” literature, and changing misinformed expectations of Turkish-German

2 Gerstenberger, Katharina. „Writing by ethnic minorities in the age of globalisation.“ German Literature in the ageof globalisation. Ed. Stuart Taberner. Birmingham, 2004.


7/62

5

citizens. They achieve this through the presentation of their own contemporary multicultural and

transnational visions and viewpoints.


8/62

6

Chapter I: The History of Turks in Germany

Gastarbeiter

Following the end of World War II, Germany experienced a period of radical political

change, mass internal and external migration, and a series of extreme social and economic

dislocations that would drastically change the country’s make-up. The Potsdam Agreement of

1945 determined that Germany would be divided into the Soviet-occupied German Democratic

Republic and the Federal Republic of Germany (FRG), occupied by the three western Allies.

Although divided, all of Germany was faced with the task of confronting a past riddled with war

and destruction. Reconciling that past with a weakened and dispirited status in a changing world

order was no small task. However, following this time of chaos and reorganization, a prevailing

period of economic expansion emerged in the Federal Republic of Germany during the 1950s

and 60s known as the Wirtschaftswunder (economic wonder).

Postwar Germany lacked the necessary male work force to meet its growing economic

demands as a result of the high level of German casualties during the war. While the German

Democratic Republic experienced an unprecedented influx of women into the work force, the

Federal Republic of Germany propagated a return to traditional family values (women were

expected to stay in the home) and began to look outside its borders for alternative labor options.

Treaties were negotiated with southern European/Mediterranean countries to grant temporary

work visas. These workers were given the title of Gastarbeiter (guest worker) and were expected

to fulfill a contractual working arrangement of roughly two to three years, after which they were

expected to return to their native countries. This was known as the Rotationsprinzip (principle of

rotation). Agreements were subsequently drawn up between the FRG and a number of European

nations, including, among others, Italy, Portugal, the former Yugoslavia, Greece, Spain, and


9/62

7

finally Turkey. The first contract was signed by the FRG and Italy in December of 1955. In July

of 1954, guest workers made up 0.4 percent of the German workforce. As more contracts began

to be signed and ratified, the influx of foreign employees increased dramatically in the late 1950s

and especially after 1960. In 1960, 1.5 percent of the workforce were guest workers, and by

September 1971 that number had risen to10.3 percent. Turkish-German Gastarbeiter contracts

were first signed in 1961. These agreements marked the last of the Gastarbeiter contracts to be

signed by the FRG, yet this group would prove to have the most momentous and lasting effects

on the future make-up of the country.

Although guest workers were seen as temporary labor, a number of factors differentiatedthe Turkish guest worker experience in Germany from their European counterparts. The 1960s

marked the fall of a number of political dictatorships in countries such as Greece, Portugal, and

Spain, as well as a time of ever-growing European integration. Workers from these countries

thus had greater economic incentive and political desire to return and participate in their newly

formed democratic governments. Additionally, their membership in the European Community

allowed more accessible travel to and from Germany. Accordingly, fewer guest workers from

these groups decided to stay in Germany. Turkey, on the other hand, continued to be dominated

politically by a repressive military dictatorship, and, in addition, occupied a marginalized

geographical status with disputed European/Asian/Near-Eastern boundaries.

In the mid 1960s the original rotation model came under criticism by German employers

who wished to save the training costs associated with the frequent cycling of new guest workers.

New laws implemented after 1964 eliminated the rotation requirements altogether and also

allowed guest workers to bring family members with them and/or send for them later. Remaining

in Germany became an attractive prospect for many Turks who saw the country as providing


10/62

8

promising economic opportunities. Many brought family members from Turkey, who established

their own families in Germany (2nd generation immigrant children).

By the beginning of the 1970s hundreds of thousands of Turkish guest workers were in

Germany, a number, which would continue to grow as family members followed. With the oil

crisis of the early 1970s, Germany’s period of economic growth came to an abrupt stop. The

Anwerbestopp (contracting halt) of 1973 was intended to reduce the presence of foreigners in

Germany. This immigrant presence and the issues of addressing their integration were often

referred to, politically, as the Ausländerfrage (the foreigner question). German political figures

during the 1970s began to see more vividly, the growing implications behind the ever-rising population of foreigners in Germany’s cities and workforce. They were less interested in

developing widespread and expensive integration programs for these groups, and instead hoped

to assuage the socio-political and economic obligations of answering this “immigrant question”

altogether by preventing any further influx of foreign workers. However, while the

Anwerbestropp marked the end of the guest worker program, it did not end Turkish migration to

Germany.

Immigrant Politics in Germany in the 1970s and 1980s

In the following decades, the number of foreigners in Germany continued to grow, in

some cases at higher rates than during the contracting periods. The political climate in Germany

in the late 1970s and 1980s was dominated by efforts to promote the return of immigrants

(especially those of Turkish heritage) to their respective homelands. Integration efforts remained

limited and above all else, promoted a re-assimilation into the Turkish culture. Ulrich Herbert

refers in his book, Geschichte der Ausländerpolitik in Deutschland , to this effort as Integration

auf Wiederruf (call-back integration) and writes „Die Kinder sollten in das deutsche Schulsystem


11/62

9

integriert werden, anderseits aber den Kontakt zur Kultur der Heimat ihrer Eltern nicht verlieren,

um die Rückkehroption offen zu halten.“3 Many significant political sentiments of the time are

reflected vividly in this quotation. While some opportunities for integration were supported, the

greater objective was to keep the option open, that Turks would return to their homeland. In

accordance with wide-spread German political sentiments, Chancellor Helmut Kohl’s political

agenda included limitation of further entry of foreigners to the Federal Republic of Germany,

reduction of the amount of foreigners already in Germany, avoidance of the naturalization

process, promotion of the continued association with the Turkish culture, and a limited and basic

Eingliederung (assimilation), not Integration (integration) of Germany’s current immigrant population.4

In this instance it is important to provide detail into the semantic and inherent difference

between these two approaches to immigration politics. From a sociological perspective,

integration and assimilation are often used interchangeably. “Integration,” however, suggests a

particular sociological process, which includes redefining and regenerating social and cultural

structures through processes that sustainably alter behavior and consciousness.

„The goal of any type of integration is the development of new social structures andsocial orders. It is not limited to a pure assimilation to an already existing whole, insteadit involves the combinational creation of a new whole through the introduction andincorporation of the values and cultural nuances of the entering group in the new society,essentially maintaining ones own identity.”

The integration of foreigners is, therefore, not only an effort of the immigrant group, but also of

the receiving population. Successful integration would result in the creation of a new type of

culture, which allows for both groups to harmonize while maintaining their respective identities

and histories. Eingliederung , on the other hand, requires the individual to adapt to an already

3 Herbert, Ulrich. Geschichte der Ausländerpolitik in Deutschland . C.H. Beck. München, 2001. 2384 Herbert 144


12/62

10

existing system. This means rejecting that groups’ otherness in hopes of encouraging adherence

to the already existing norm; in this case, adherence to the established German lifestyle and

culture.

Helmut Birkenfeld gives insight into the nuances of this critical immigration status in the

Federal Republic of Germany during the 70s and 80s and an essential question circumnavigating

the situation:

„Die türkischen Kinder und Jugendlichen, die hier sprachlich und kulturell entfremdetleben, sind als Pendler zwischen zwei Kulturkreisen anzusehen... Auf diesem Hintergrundsind die Möglichkeiten einer Reintegration der türkischen Immigrantenkinder von

besonderer Bedeutung. Aufgrund der Schwierigkeiten dieser Generation in der BRD stelltsich die Frage nach den Chancen einer Reintegration unter den Bedingungen der neuenWirtschaftspolitik in der Türkei.“5

Turkish youths residing in Germany were culturally and socially alienated and suffered from

blatant deficits in social, academic, and political equality and opportunity. Instead of offering

prospects for improvement, or even for a viable assimilation to the German culture,

contemporary German politics were promoting policy, the primary intention of which was to

encourage the return of Turks to Turkey and to support their successful reintegration into Turkish

culture and society. The Pendler , or commuter, between the German and Turkish cultures was

widely seen as impossible to integrate. They spoke neither perfect Turkish nor acceptable

German, which resulted in greater discrimination and thus a furthering of the sense of alienation

among Turks in Germany. Those who cannot express their needs and wants, are seen as helpless

foreigners, who have a better chance to find solace in their homeland than in Germany. In

addition, the darker features of these more southern-dwelling peoples were easily distinguished

from more typical German aesthetics or even western European looks from Spain and Portugal.

5 Birkenfeld, Helmut (Hrsg.). Gastarbeiterkinder aus der Türkei: Zwischen Eingliederung und Rückkehr . C.H. Beck. München,1982.


13/62

11

Turkey was also the only primarily Muslim country from which guest workers were recruited.

Traditional headscarves worn by many Turkish women became additional elements of

distinction, which further marked them as being different. The political focus in the Federal

Republic of Germany thus revolved around the abrogation of the immigrant question, not around

the acceptance of immigrants inside Germany’s borders.

A History of Marginalization

This combination of social, political, and economic intolerance would set the stage for a

rocky and marginalized future for Turkish immigrants in Germany. It wasn’t until the year 2000

that Germany amended its almost century-old naturalization laws. Based on the law of ius

sanguinus (law of the blood), dating back to 1913, German citizenship had been rooted in a

blood line of German heritage, only available to those who could prove a distinct lineage. The

German naturalization of foreigners or “non-Germans” was not a legal option. Even after 2000,

individuals born in Germany can only receive citizenship if both parents have resided

permanently in Germany for no less than eight years. Those who belong to this group are still

given the option, between their 18th and 23rd birthdays, to sacrifice their German citizenship for

the citizenship of their other nationality. In most cases dual citizenship is not allowed in

Germany. This policy still reflects a number of the original anti-immigrant sentiments of the

politics of the 1970s and 1980s in Germany. The window of opportunity to sacrifice one’s

German citizenship is large, and hints at Germany’s lingering desire to eliminate the “foreigner

question,” rather than address the growing necessity for more successful integration. By contrast

German Aussiedler , minorities in Eastern Europe (mostly Russian) with German heritage dating

back hundreds of years, were immediately naturalized without having to set foot on German soil,

or speak a word of the language. As one can see, the process of finding access to political rights


14/62

12

in Germany has been arduous and limited for many foreigners. Even today, naturalization

processes are bureaucratic nightmares, and foreigners continue to be faced with extreme

opposition in regards to acceptance in the “German” cultural mainstream.

The Turkish experience in Germany has subsequently been characterized by political

marginalization, resentment, economic disparity, social discrimination, high unemployment, and

suffering language abilities. This has resulted in issues of identity, cultural expression, and the

development of parallel social structures, immigrant/minority ghettos, youth gangs, and an

increase in violent behavior towards and among minority groups. These struggles are

additionally accompanied by a lingering yet arguably unstable sense of adherence to the Turkishnation and culture. These social, political, and economic underpinnings of the Turkish-German

experience have become the centerpiece of their social and artistic expression. Filmmakers,

artists, actors, musicians, and authors of Turkish heritage living in Germany have embraced their

struggles and histories of migration, not only to convey personal experiences, but to engage in a

social dialogue historically denied to them. Literature has proven to be one of the more dynamic

forms of this personal and political expression chosen by Turkish-Germans, and its

developments very closely parallel the trends and changes experienced by this group.

“In choosing the German language over their native Turkish, the writers demonstratetheir willingness, even eagerness, to be a part of the German-speaking community. It istheir goal to establish an identity not hampered by its linguistic trappings.”6

In closer examination, it will become apparent that the works of Turkish-German authors

encompass a vital component of Germany’s contemporary history and cultural make-up. These

writers straddle the languages, cultures, and traditions of two very different countries, a reality,

6 Veteto-Conrad, Marilya. Finding a Voice: Identity and the Works of German-Language Turkish Writers in theFederal Republic of Germany to 1990. American University Studies: Ser. 3, Comparative Literature; 48. Peter Lang, New York, 1996. 45


15/62

13

which has proved to discredit more than validate them. German perceptions of German culture

are narrow and limited, frequently opposing any notion that multicultural works should be

considered as legitimate contributions to contemporary “German” culture and history. Turkish-

German authors are not only seeking to share a story, but more importantly, to redefine the

existing constraints of this “German” normality. The nature of their cultural hybridity is a

product of a world growing ever more intertwined by border-crossing and migration. The growth

of globalization and the subsequent development of multicultural societies have fostered the

formation of new transnational realities, where people are no longer limited to the confines of

one national or cultural identity. Identifying closely with this hybrid profile, Turkish-Germansare on a search for legitimacy and identity, the core of which revolves around the advancement

of their social, cultural, and political agency and influence in Germany. It is through this lens, the

product of a troubled history and tradition of migration and marginalization, that the works of

contemporary Turkish-German authors need to be viewed and understood.


16/62

14

Chapter II: Development of Turkish-German Literature

Turkish-German Literature: Gastarbeiterliteratur, Betroffenheitsliteratur, Migrantenliteratur

Turkish-German literature, for the most part, can be traced back to native Turkish guest

workers in the mid 1960s, who used the German language as their medium of literary expression.

First generation Turkish immigrant authors primarily wrote poems and short prose, which

addressed their personal and fundamental migration experiences. Aras Ören, an important author

of this early period of Turkish-German literature, wrote such pieces as Was Will Niyazi in der

Naunystrasse, and Ich Anders Sprechen Lernen. Works of this generation dealt with a discussion

of the authors’ personal circumstances and were also closely related to the more encompassing

concept of a new life in Germany. One can glean, alone from their titles, the nature of the above

mentioned works. Was Will Niyazi in der Naunystrasse addresses the plight of Turks in Berlin’s

Kreuzberg district, and the hostility they faced from other working class groups in the 1960s and

1970s. Ich Anders Sprechen Lernen hints at the difficulties of language acquisition and the

primitive knowledge of German among Turkish guest workers. This Gastarbeiterdeutsch (guest

worker German), a primitive form of German, was comprised of limited vocabulary with no

grammatical structure, and developed quickly among guest worker circles. This basic means of

communication with German natives met essential needs of survival in the work force, but

provided limited opportunity for social and cultural contact within German communities. Turks

quickly became branded by their primitive speech and cultural otherness.

Gastarbeiterliteratur (guest worker literature), or Betroffenheitsliteratur (literature of the

afflicted), was quickly categorized as the collective social voice of the Turkish worker lamenting

Germany’s inhospitality. Gastarbeiterliteratur also included an emphasis on the working class


17/62

15

and the common folk, much resembling the proletariat literature of Brecht.7 These Turkish

authors revealed the daily realities of life in Germany, the economic motivations of Turkish

guest workers who hoped to earn money in a wealthy and prosperous Germany, and the

challenges of leaving their homelands. It was primarily intended to enlighten the masses as to the

marginalized plight of the Turkish guest worker,8 and was written in German primarily for a

German audience.

Even some native German authors turned their attentions to the plight of immigrants in

Germany. One such work was Ganz Unten, the sensational non-fictional account of the German

journalist Günter Wallraff. In this work Wallraff recounts his experiences disguised as an illegalTurkish worker in Hamburg, and the horrific instances of racism and discrimination as well as

the terrible living and working conditions he encountered. Marilya Veteto-Conrad notes,

however, in the book Finding a Voice: Identity and the Works of German-Language Turkish

Writers, that “Initially the descriptions of the misery of the Gastarbeiter were read avidly, but

once the element of novelty, or information, of a superficial assuagement of a collective German

bad conscience wore off, the audience dwindled.”9 Such accounts, exploiting the novelty of

Turkish otherness, failed to sustain a lasting and loyal audience.

Such ponderings, however, evolved over time into more philosophical discussions of the

struggles of the foreigner, confronting language barrier issues, and balancing the new language

and customs with Turkish cultural traditions. Turkish-German literature moved beyond “mere

protest… toward a more productive, more realistic goal; tackling the chore of adaptation.”10 The

early 1980s marked a rapid increase in the quantity of publications by German-speaking Turkish

7 Veteto-Conrad 188 Veteto-Conrad 69 Veteto-Conrad 610 Veteto-Conrad 28


18/62

16

authors. Partially responsible for this increase was a literature contest sponsored by the

Münchner Institut für Deutsch als Fremdsprache in 1979, soliciting “ Berichte, Erzaehlungen,

und Gedichte,” (Reports, Narrations, and Poems). As a result, a number of anthologies were

complied with titles such as In Zwei Sprachen Leben (1983) and Tuerken Deutscher Sprache

(1984).

Today there are a number of second and third generation Turkish-German authors.

Publications from these authors cover the entire spectrum of literature; children’s stories, novels,

short stories, non-fiction, scholarly articles, editorial pieces, journalistic pieces, etc. In general,

they reflect on the questions of identity and belonging in a foreign land and often mirror the lifeexperiences of a mostly bicultural/multicultural environment and reality. Some of the key

elements used by Turkish-German authors to reflect this multicultural background, include code-

switching, discussing migration experiences, highlighting instances of marginilization and

discrimination, breaking cultural stereotypes, and showing criticisms of mainstream German

culture. Overtime the multicultural background of these authors has become a self-evident

characteristic of their literature. One must keep in mind that the history of Turkish-German

literature is relatively short. It is, therefore, difficult to find clear delineations of style and

content. While some evolution has taken place within Turkish-German literature over the last 40

years, a number of common themes can be found, which span the entire range of its history.

Emine Sevgi Özdamar and Feridun Zaimo!lu represent very different immigrant

experiences within the context of Turkish-German literature. They, therefore, have very different

noteworthy literary approaches, but share some common social and political characteristics in

their writings, common to much of Turkish-German literature. Özdamar came to Germany as a

first generation guest worker, whereas Zaimo!lu was raised in Germany from infancy.


19/62

17

Özdamar’s writing foregrounds the vicissitudes of the migrant experience, whereas Zaimo!lu’s

literature assumes a self-evident multiculturalism. The following analysis will demonstrate,

however, how both authors, regardless of history and style, create an ethnic-minority literature

that expresses their uniquely defined social and political agency.

Turkish-German Literature as Ethnic-Minority Literature

Ethnic-minority literature refers to the literature of minority groups within a hegemonic

foreign culture, whose contributors share a common linguistic history, culture, and worldview,

determined by ethnic factors. This type of literature is also commonly referred to as multicultural

literature or minority literature, two interchangeable terms. Turkish-German literature fits wellwithin this classification and rests at the core of the field of multiculturalism within studies of

German literature. As mentioned before, Turkish-Germans represent the largest ethnic minority

group within Germany’s borders. Turkish-German authors share a common multilingual and

multicultural background, as well as a similar marginalized social history in Germany. As is true

of many ethnic-minority groups, these factors have shaped a relatively homogeneous social and

political viewpoint among Turkish-Germans, which becomes evident in their literature.

Johanna Watzinger-Tharp succinctly categorizes the dominant questions posed by the

Turkish-German reality and the implications surrounding the collision of these two cultures as

follows: “The discussion of Turkish German touches on issues of citizenship, identity, language

acquisition and maintenance, and the appropriation of ethnic varieties by speakers of the

dominant language.”11 It is within the scope of these fundamental issues that much of Turkish-

German literature can be understood. Regardless of the generational divide of different Turkish

immigrant groups in Germany, the topics of their prose consistently revolve around issues of

11 Watzinger-Tharp, Johanna. “Turkish-German Language: An Innovative Style of Communication and itsImplications for Citizenship and Identity.” Journal of Muslim Minority Affairs. 24.2 (2004). 1


20/62


21/62

19

Turkish-German experience, but also demonstrate contributions of this group to contemporary

German culture and society. Their hyphenated identity, which they share with America’s many

minority groups (African-American, Asian-American, Mexican-American, etc.), allows them to

function as minority writers who “affirm their metacultural point of view and acquire the role of

the critic of both cultures.”13 The notion of the hyphenated identity and the “critic of both

cultures” contribute to the empowerment of the ethnic subject within the hegemonic or hosting

culture, a key concept of ethnic-minority literature. This notion is mirrored by Özdamar and

Zaimo!lu in their literature and is used to help posit their argument for the social voice of

Turkish-Germans. They seek confirmation of both the Turkish and German cultural strands thatmake up their identity. By showing their ability to be critical of both pillars, they demonstrate

themselves as agents of the Turkish and German cultures.

The German Cultural Tradition: Does Turkish-German Literature Belong?

The German cultural tradition is one deeply rooted in its literary history, and thus

selecting the German language as a literary voice carries many cultural implications. Many “non-

natives” have faced opposition in their search for belonging to the “German” literary canon. “In a

country in which efforts toward linguistic and literary uniformity preceded political unification

by at least two centuries, the assertion of German authorship is a liberal challenge to definitions

of Germanness.”14 Turkish-German literature introduces many nuances of cultural otherness,

very distinct from the western European post-enlightenment tradition. Such differences require

an analysis of this particular immigrant literature from a contemporary perspective of increasing

globalization and multicultural social realities. The works of non-natives are components of

contemporary German literature that deserve acknowledgment for their differences in scope and

13 Kalogeras 1014 Gerstenberger 1


22/62

20

style, but should not be disregarded as “un-German.” Turkish-Germans are a necessary and vital

component of the discussion of Germany’s recent history, political climate, and social constructs.

Cultural inheritance in Germany, as is shown to us through the works of Turkish-German writers

is no longer a function of bloodlines but of inhabitations.15

Contemporary German literature no longer reflects a homogeneous canon of works with a

common theme, style, or ethno-historical perspective. Turkish-German literature, representative

of a particularly significant ethnic minority in Germany’s recent history, deserves attention

outside of the scope of any discussion of mainstream normality in German literature. Stuart

Taberner, professor of contemporary German literature at the University of Leeds, writes that,“Ethnic minority writers, may feel marginalized within a mainstream discourse ofnormality that turns obsessively and apparently exclusively on the question of how‘Germans’ are to relate to the Nazi past, or appears to be focused on trumpeting thevictory of the ‘west’ over the ‘east’ in the wake of unification – a triumph often stylizedas a harbinger of the victory of the ‘occident’ over the ‘orient.’” 16

The following chapters will reveal how the works of two authors, Feridun Zaimo!lu and Emine

Sevgi Özdamar, disrupt notions of ethnic normality in contemporary German literature. These

two authors refuse to remain marginalized and thus employ literature as a medium for social

empowerment. They embrace the above mentioned characteristics of ethnic literature in

Germany to redefine commonly misled conceptions of Turkish-Germans, and to pursue

individual and collective agency as transnational figures straddling the cultures and histories of

two distinct nations.

15 Mani, Venkat. “German Studies as Perpetual Difference: A Cosmopolitical Sketch.” The German Quarterly.Summer 2006.16 Taberner, Stuart. “From ‘Normalization’ to Globalization. German Fiction into the New Millenium: ChristianKracht, Ingo Schulze, and Feridun Zaimoglu.” In German Culture, Politics, and Literature into the Twenty-FirstCentury: Beyond Normalization. Ed. Stuart Taberner and Paul Cooke. Camden House. New York 2006.


23/62

21

Chapter III: Emine Sevgi Özdamar

Biographical Overview

Emine Sevgi Özdamar was born in Malatya, Turkey in 1946. This eastern province of

Turkey is itself a borderland, where Turkish, Kurdish, and Arabic are spoken. Her father, a

construction entrepreneur, moved Özdamar and her family, throughout much of her youth, from

the provincial Turkish countryside to Istanbul, then Bursa, and finally Ankara, in search of more

work. Özdamar made her first sojourn to Germany from 1965 to 1967 as a guest worker where

she was employed in a factory in Berlin. She worked for two years in Berlin after which she

returned to Turkey in 1967 to pursue her passion for stage performance, and attended an acting

school in Istanbul until 1970. Özdamar returned to Germany in 1976 and quickly became

actively engaged as an actress and stage director/producer in theaters in Berlin and Bochum. As a

visiting student she was first employed as a director’s assistant at the Volksbühne in Berlin,

which was followed by participation in the traveling production of “Kaukasischer Kreidekreis,”

which brought her to Paris and Avignon, France in 1978. From 1979 to 1984 Özdamar acted

under Claus Pemann at Bochum’s Schauspielhaus, as well as in Frankfurt, Munich, and Berlin

under a variety of other directors. Sponsored by the Bochum Schauspielhaus, Özdamar’s first

play “Karagöz in Alemania” began production in 1982, and she simultaneously began to make

her first film appearances. Özdamar has been an active freelance writer in Berlin since 1982. She

launched her literary career with the publication of her first novel Mutterzunge in 1990.

In her works, Özdamar continually reflects on her own biography, expanding upon her

experiences as a youth and as a woman, on the cultural divide between Turkey and Germany.

Accordingly, her novels incorporate a number of traditional elements of Turkish-German

literature. She addresses the issue of migration and of adaptation, the nuances of learning new


24/62

22

languages and forgetting old ones, the struggle to understand one’s emergent cross-cultural

identity, and most importantly, of making one’s transnational condition understandable and

identifiable to those in one’s new homeland. She problematizes the nature of language and the

link between languages and identity. Migration, history, and language are the centerpieces of her

aspirational literary and aesthetic program.

“Man muss sein Vaterland verraten und an einen anderen Ort gehen, damit mangleichzeitig an zwei Orten sein kann…Durch einen solchen Ortwechsel wird die eigeneGeschichte größer und magischer. Und wie Can Yuecel sagte, ist Literatur die Suchenach Identität. Die Suche nach Identität ist etwas anderes in einem fremden Land als imeigenen Land.“ -Özdamar 17

Two of Özdamar’s works, Mutterzunge and Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn, are prime

examples of Özdamar’s efforts to engage in a discussion of the identity of the Turkish-German

immigrant. She achieves this by addressing the challenges of Turkish natives in Germany to

reconcile their native language, tradition, and heritage with their new cultural reality. Özdamar,

above all else, views these challenges as enriching and empowering, inspiring growth and

tolerance. It is in this regard that Özdamar breaks from the tradition of some Turkish-German

literary predecessors whose works were solely designed to expose the injustices experienced by

Turkish minority groups in Germany. She rejects the ineffective and collective lamentation of

struggle and isolation. Instead she seeks to exhibit how a “search for identity” in a foreign land

can, in fact, lead to a successful personal reconciliation and redefinition. The resulting

transnational identity belongs to an integrated individual, without having been forced to sacrifice

his or her historical roots and qualities of otherness.

In Writing Outside the Nation, Azade Seyhan notes that „Özdamar’s writing is about

language in all its forms and manifestations, as speech and script, as language game and

17 Stiller-Kern, Gabrielle. „Ich drehte meine Zunge ins Deutsche, und plötzlich war ich glücklich!“http://www.culturebase.net/artist.php?630 (2003). 1


25/62

23

everyday practice, as ritual and performance, and as survival and mastery.”18 I will show,

through an analysis of Mutterzunge and Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn, how Özdamar’s unique

use of language, her method of remembrance, the drawing of historical connections, and use of

locations are employed to establish a foundation of dialogue and reconciliation between the

Turkish and German cultures, growing ever more connected by fibers of Turkish-German

transnationals.

Mutterzunge

Özdamar’s breakthrough novel, Mutterzunge, is a collection of four narrations, which

address, in many ways autobiographically, the problems of migration, linguistics, andmulticultural identity from the perspective of a Turkish immigrant in Germany. The four

narratives are titled “Mutterzunge,” “Großvaterzunge,” “Karagöz in Alamania, Schwarzauge in

Deutschland,” und “Karriere einer Putzfrau: Erinnerungen an Deutschland.” The first two

narratives recount the story of the narrator as a young first generation Turkish immigrant in

Germany, who attempts to re-discover the point at which she „lost” her native tongue. In her

moments of contemplation and remembrance the narrator recalls memories of important

instances in her linguistic transition. She can vaguely recollect Turkish sentences uttered by

friends and family members while she strains to recall walking the streets of Berlin and the

moments when her knowledge of her native tongue began to be blurred by her new surroundings.

The text consists primarily of a seemingly playful dialogue, switching frequently from direct

conversation between the narrator and her mother to more philosophical contemplations on the

nature of the narrators linguistic reality and history. Colorful images such as, „Ich saß mit meiner

gedrehten Zunge in dieser Stadt Berlin“ (9), accentuate Oezdemar’s creative and pictorial

approach to this and other narratives, and introduces to the reader the specific challenge of the

18 Seyhan, Azade. Writing Outside the Nation. Princeton University Press. Princeton 2001. 118


26/62


27/62

25

foreshadows the narrator’s intention of contextualizing her past and present, and coming to terms

with a changing and multi-faceted identity.

In the second narrative, “Grossvaterzunge,” the protagonist has decided on a process of

reconciliation with her now muddled linguistic past. “Vielleicht erst zu Großvater zurück, dann

kann ich den Weg zu meiner Mutter und Mutterzunge finden“ (14). Özdamar herself originally

from a region of linguistic crossroads helps guide her protagonist to her Turkish origins (her

“Mutter”) by first exploring their foundations and traditions (her “Grossvater”), namely, Arabic.

She must travel to West Berlin to the small and humble mosque of a linguist named Ibni

Abdullah. Ibni Abdullah functions as her mentor and teacher, instructing her in Arabic in aneffort to aid her in piecing together the fragmented memories of her Turkish heritage. Upon

meeting, the two greet each other in Turkish followed by this subsequent interjection from the

narrator: „Es ist eine Gemeinheit, mit einer Orientalin in Deutsch zu reden, aber momentan

haben wir ja nur diese Sprache“ (15). The application of archaic references like „Orientalin“ and

„Alemania,“ serve a number of purposes in the context of ethnic minority literature. By referring

to herself as “oriental,” the narrator identifies herself in her new surroundings in Germany by her

otherness and exoticness, the way a German might identify her “otherness.” This underscores her

feelings of marginalization in her adopted culture. Similarly, the use of the Turkish language, not

the German language, to identify the host country, “Alemania,” indicates a sense of distance.

Alemania is not her place of origin. The reference thus mirrors her reality as a migrant, assuming

the task of adaptation to the foreign culture.

Through the narrator’s interaction with Ibni Abdullah, the reader begins to see the

transformation in the narrator’s quest from a linguistic challenge to a more encompassing search

for identity. Her search for an understanding of her language, however, has brought her to not


28/62

26

only a language teacher but also a spiritual leader. Ibni Adbullah, accordingly, becomes not only

her Arabic and Turkish teacher, but her personal philosopher, mentor, and eventually her lover.

When studying the Arabic characters, the narrator becomes enveloped in their symbology. She is

preoccupied with their shapes and with their pictorial interactions, so much so that she begins to

react emotionally to them.

„Die Schriften sprachen miteinander ohne Pause mit verschiedenen Stimmen wecktendie eingeschlafenen Tiere in meinem Körper, ich schließe Augen, die Stimmen der Liebewird mich blind machen, sie sprechen weiter, mein Körper geht auf wie ein in der Mitteaufgeschnittener Granatapfel, in Blut und Schmutz kam ein Tier raus“ (26).

Confronting the roots of her mother tongue has “opened her body and let out an animal.” Thisconfrontation has released her chaotic inner contemplations and set the stage for personal peace-

finding and reconciliation. It becomes clear that her search for remembrance of the foundations

of her linguistic knowledge has evolved into a much more complicated task of addressing,

understanding, and reconciling her heritage, and most importantly, finding the means with which

to contextualize it in her current (German) surroundings.

As her lessons continue, her relationship with Ibni Abdullah becomes increasingly more

intimate. Her love for this Arabic Schriftgelehrter , whom she also refers to as grandfather,

signifies her desire to connect with her past and her heritage. It is through this interaction that the

narrator finds understanding in her identity. The end of this second short narration is marked by

the suicide of Ibni Abdullah. The narrator’s transformation is complete, however, and the passing

of Ibni Abdullah parallels the exhaustion of his utility to the narrator as a mentor. At the end of

the narration the protagonist is confronted by a young girl on the street who asks her what she is

doing in Germany? She replies:

„’Ich bin Wörtersammlerin.’ Und Ibni Abdullah, die Seele in meiner Seele, dachte ichund erinnerte mich noch an ein Wort in meiner Mutterzunge:


29/62

27

Ruh-„ Ruh heißt Seele,“ sagte ich zu dem Mädchen.„Seele heißt Ruh,“ sagte sie(48).

The narrator exhibits growth through this display of confidence and agency. Her preoccupation

with the search for the loss of her mother tongue instigated a process of greater personal self-

understanding. Her resulting identity (a cross-cultural “word collector”) is thus rooted in her

linguistic venture. As the centerpiece of her understanding, language aided the narrator in

coming to terms with her Turkish-German identity, and supported her transnational position

across these two cultures. Ibni Abdullah, representing the roots of her cultural heritage, has

become intertwined in the narrator’s soul, bringing full circle her reconciliation with her past.The final interaction with the young girl serves a more intricate purpose than a mere translation

of words. “Ruh,” is a false Turkish-German cognate, meaning “soul” in Turkish, but “quiet” or

“silence” in German. The words have different meanings in their respective languages but share,

however, similar contextual connotations. The quiet or silenced soul indicates the nature of the

narrator’s reconciliation with her chaotic inner struggle with her identity. This moment of

Turkish-German linguistic harmony mirrors the narrator’s own harmonious coming-to-terms

with her transnational context in Germany, both of which are used to support the notion of

accord between the Turkish and German cultures.

In the latter half of Özdamar’s Mutterzunge, Özdamar focuses less on the task and

process of integration within the German culture, and instead devotes her discussion to the guest

worker migration from Turkey to Germany. The narrative following “Grossvaterzunge” is

„Karagöz in Alamania Schwarzauge in Deutschland,“ which functions as a sort of Turkish guest

worker fairy tale. Here Özdamar discusses some of the principal struggles and challenges faced

by Turkish individuals and families in their search for economic prosperity in Germany. This


30/62

28

particular story brings to light the conditions and considerations of a poor rural Turkish family,

their desperate economic situation, and their willingness to separate themselves and venture to a

foreign land in hopes of realizing financial prosperity.

„Hast du nicht gehört? Es regnet in Deutschland Perlen. Eine Perle davon hat ins Ohr vondem Onkel des Bauern geregnet, und der Bauer geht nach Alamania Perlen sammeln“(59).

In her still very colorful language, Özdamar paints for the reader a picture of Germany from the

perspective of a rural Turkish farmer. Germany is perceived as a place of economic asylum and

opportunity, which has driven these characters to emigrate. The ensuing struggles of the Turkish

farmer reveal a number of key aspects surrounding the psychological, social, and cultural

implications brought on by the process of immigration.

The farmer leaves his wife in Turkey to find work in Germany. Upon his arrival he

describes the “door” of Germany as being clogged with bundles and suitcases (62). Much of this

narration includes images of these characters and other immigrants at Germany’s borders,

struggling with the personal decisions and obstacles of staying or leaving. For example, an illegal

worker disguises himself as a soccer player in hopes of fooling the border control officers into

thinking he is of German heritage. Another woman begs not be sent back to Turkey for fear of

losing her husband to a German woman. „Der Grenzpolizist sagte zu ihr [einer Frau]: ‚Ihre

Aufenthaltserlaubnis ist abgelaufen. Verstanden? Du zurück nach Hause. Alles klar?’ Sie musste

von der Alamania-Tür zurückkehren“ (68). The struggles of immigrants involved not only the

decision to leave their native homeland, but once in Germany to be able to stay. A return to

Turkey meant subsequent difficulties in ever being able come back to Germany again. This

posed guest workers with a social, cultural, political, and economic dilemma: stay or leave. Both

choices were riddled with individual consequences and collective implications for the future of


31/62

29

Turks in Germany. Özdamar’s use of the door motif helps to characterize the complexity of these

personal and collective meanings. „Wenn er einmal aus Deutschland-Tür rausgegangen wäre,

hätte er vielleicht nicht mehr durch diese Tür reinkommen können“ (78). Doors represent entry,

new opportunities, emergance, and advancement. Doors, however can also close one off from

previous eras and experiences. This right of passage becomes a decisive act of finality. The

threshold to “Alamania” would not forever remain open, and thus staying, regardless of social

discrimination, growing economic instability, and complete cultural dissimilarity, for many, was

the more promising of two difficult options.

The characters endure a great deal of hardship throughout the duration of the farmer’sguest worker experience in Germany. After bringing his wife to Germany she leaves, unable to

cope with cultural differences, only to return, unable to cope with her life in Turkey. The farmer

experiences a number of profound personal changes as well. Upon a return visit to Turkey he is

described as being unrecognizable. “Der Bauer kam mit seinem Esel aus Alamania. Der Bauer

war nicht mehr zu erkennen“ (81). These, just a few of the obstacles of immigration shown here

by Özdamar, embrace the roots of Turkish-German Literature. Early Turkish-German literature

focused on lamenting the collective struggles of the Turkish immigrant and their families in

Germany. Relationships suffered as families were separated, and Turks were met with adversity

and isolation in Germany, in addition to suffering profound losses of socio-cultural ties and

feelings of adherence with their homelands, as exhibited in the quotation above.

„Verzeihen Sie, sind sie Türke?“„Ich für Deutsche Türk,für Araber Deutsche,zusammen Tischtennisspielen“ (91).


32/62

30

This excerpt is the crux of Özdamar’s message. Mimicking the structure of the first two

narrations in Mutterzunge, a narrow quest for economic prosperity in Germany evolves into a

much more encompassing quest for personal redefinition. In Germany, Turkish immigrants are

categorized by their foreignness, and in what was once their native homeland, they are now

perceived as equally estranged and disconnected. The Turkish immigrant thus emerges as a

Pendler , a border-crosser, marginalized in both places and struggling to establish a secure

identity.

Özdamar paints a vibrant, autobiographical picture of the cross-cultural realities of many

Turkish-German citizens in Mutterzunge. However, beyond merely recounting events andchallenges with which any non-immigrant/non-minority would struggle to identify, she uses

language very rich in images and sensations to convey her message to a much larger audience.

Her topic matter is not limited to a discussion of cultural barriers and social injustices but instead

revolves around the tasks of adaptation and reconciliation. Her characters are not stagnant, but

instead ever-changing and growing. They do not seek retreat and isolation but instead

enlightenment and empowerment. For example, the narrator in the first two narratives of the

book pursues a quest of self-examination, which results in a personal

Vergangenheitsbewältigung and a successful social integration as a transnational agent. It is in

this respect that Özdamar’s Mutterzunge begins to function as a social commentary. Her Turkish-

German characters display capabilities and efforts in an attempt to inspire mutual understanding

among both Turkish and German nationals. “Özdamar points to the future… with signs of

renewal and hope,”19 indicating real opportunity for harmony between Germans and Turkish

minority groups.

19 Shafi, Monika. “Talkin’ ‘Bout my Generation: Memories of 1968 in Recent German Novels.” German Life and Letters. 59.2 (2006). 216


33/62

31

Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn

This work, the second book of Özdamar’s Berlin-Istanbul trilogy, is the autobiographical novel

of Özdamar as a young female Turkish guest worker and her experiences in a divided Berlin (and

other parts of western Europe) during the 1960s and 1970s. At the beginning of the 1960s, the

then 17 year-old woman boards a train from Istanbul to Berlin, where she is to fulfill a year-long

guest worker contract. She becomes proficient in German and is sought out by the large

electronics manufacturing company Siemens to be an interpreter/liaison between workers and

management. The first-person narrator experiences a personal transformation and develops a

sense of independence and emancipation during her time abroad in Germany. Historicallyspeaking, she experiences the first climax of the student movements in Berlin, shortly thereafter

returning to Turkey with a new politicized perspective. The second half of the novel (taking

place in 1967), draws attention to the now 23 year-old narrator’s experiences upon her return to

Istanbul. She is accepted into Istanbul’s premier acting school (mirroring Özdamar’s own

personal experience). Here she must reconcile the seemingly contradictory aspects of her life,

torn between cultural bohemia and political consciousness, while simultaneously being stifled by

the restrictions and expectations of her traditional and conservative surroundings. Her struggles

are reflected in the Bridge of the Golden Horn, a prominent bridge in Istanbul that connects the

two European sides of the city. It is a coming-of-age story, which addresses the plight of the

guest workers and the complex role of identity, language, sexuality, expression, and culture in

one’s development and emancipation. The story ends in 1975 as the narrator returns to Berlin

following the outbreak of Turkey’s military dictatorship, with its brutal repression and

executions.


34/62

32

In the first part of the book, Der Beleidigte Bahnhof (The Insulted Train Station),

Özdamar addresses a number of similar elements as in Mutterzunge. Again, language becomes

the starting-point and centerpiece from which to convey the experiences of her protagonist as a

guest worker in a Berlin factory. Having no knowledge of the German language, the

protagonist’s first attempt to begin understanding her new surroundings is to memorize

newspaper and magazine headlines, which she repeats regularly and ineffectually in

conversation. As her knowledge of the language improves, however, the depth of her

understanding expands. The acquisition of German language skills makes the immigrant (and

thus the narrator) more socially able, and provides for an improved dialogue between them andGermans. The ensuing interactions foster better mutual understanding and a greater possibility

for social integration. As we see here, the improvement of the protagonist’s German skills

introduces a variety of new concepts. „Die Türken sprachen in ihrer Sprache, die mit deutschen

Wörtern gemischt war, wofür sie in Türkisch keine Worte hatten, wie: Arbeitsamt, Finanzamt,

Lohnsteuerkarte, Berufsschule“ (77). As more time passes, the narrator becomes aware of the

social and cultural clefts which exist between her homeland and her new surroundings in Berlin.

She begins to learn new vocabulary, and thus new concepts, for example, social organizations

and programs that are non-existent in Turkey.

The narrator also elaborates on the living and working conditions for guest workers.

„Jeder stand allein vor seiner großen Maschine. Man hörte die lauten Geräusche in der Halle und

den Regen draußen, aber nicht die Menschen“ (99). Because of the temporary nature of the guest

worker contracts, social integration programs were never implemented to help these foreigners

learn German and become functioning members of society. The above quotation helps to

illustrate the resulting feelings of isolation experienced by guest workers in Germany. The


35/62

33

worker stands alone before a large abstract machine, while the loud noise drowns out the sounds

of those around them. As foreigners abroad, the guest workers, as illustrated here, become lost in

the anonymity of their work and their surroundings. Not only had Turks traveled the furthest,

their appearance and language was more different than that of any other European guest worker.

Accordingly, Turkish workers experienced a heightened degree of marginalization.

While enchanted by Berlin and her new experiences she simultaneously faces such

limitations as her work and difficult cultural and linguistic barriers. However, the narrator

resolves to become emancipated and integrated in her new surroundings. She returns to Istanbul

at Christmas time at the end of her first year in Germany. In an encounter with a man on the trainthe narrator describes: „Der Mann mit dem Schnurrbart schüttelte öfter seinen Kopf, lachte und

sagte: ‚Mädchen, wenn du ankommst, soll deine Mutter dich mit arabischer Seife waschen’“

(104). Even a perfect stranger notices the distinct changes she has undergone, so much so, in fact

that he recommends a “cleansing” of her new mentality in order to readapt to her “Arab” roots.

In Istanbul the narrator begins to face the challenges of a new multicultural perception as

her two worlds, Berlin and Istanbul, collide. Her mother comments, „Sie hat Deutsch gelernt.

Eine Sprache ist eine Mensch, zwei Sprachen sind zwei Menschen“ (179). Her parents struggle

to relate to her, they feel unwanted and unneeded. The narrator conversely struggles to

understand her own feelings and come to terms with a traditional past, now seen through

seemingly enlightened eyes. To help alleviate her sense of disconnect, the narrator begins to

pursue her passion for acting and matriculates at a local acting school in another part of Istanbul.

Özdamar uses the notion of location very often in Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn to mirror the

narrator’s struggle with her identity. Berlin and Istanbul are separate worlds. Istanbul is her past

and her origin, while Berlin is her growth and emancipation. The following observation


36/62

34

effectively illustrates some of the struggles the narrator is experiencing in attempting to cope

with this divide. The protagonist’s father says:

„’Meine Tochter, du bist ein Mann geworden. Du hast aus Deutschland eine neue Mode

gebracht. Du kommst in der Nacht nach Hause.’ Er sagte auch: ‚Meine Tochter, du drehstdich wie die Welt im All, hoffentlich gehst du nicht im Himmel verloren.’ Tagsüber gingich zur europäischen Seite zur Schauspielschule, dann zur Cinemathek, dann zumRestaurant Kapitän, und dann kam ich zurück zur asiatischen Seite von Istanbul zumeinem Elternhaus wie in ein Hotel. Ich schlief in Asien und fuhr, wenn der VogelMemisch am Morgen anfing zu singen, wieder nach Europa“ (221).

The struggle to reconcile her two realities is forced to the surface after her return home to

Turkey. The narrator is no longer the innocent Turkish girl her parents once knew, but instead

now straddles two cultural viewpoints, one of which she can not convey or make identifiable to

her family in Turkey. As shown in this quotation, Özdamar effectively projects this sense of

Euro-Asian/Enlightened-Traditional divide between Germany and Turkey, within the context of

the geographical structure of Istanbul. The western half of the city is considered part of the

European side of Turkey, while the eastern portion rests on the “Asian” side. The narrator’s

acting school and popular pastimes, in other words her passions and freedoms, are located in the

European part of the city. Her family and traditions are located on the Asian side, where she

must return at night to her parents home, “like a hotel.” Here she feels like a guest, anonymous

and temporary. As a woman embodying two contrasting perceptions and realities, the

protagonist’s internal divide is mirrored in her geographical surroundings.

In addition to Özdamar’s use of locations as a parallel of Turkish-German minority

challenges, a method and aspect of her ethnic-minority writing is the notion of historic-political

overlap. This is a concept used to introduce historical and political similarities between the

make-up of the visiting and hosting cultures. These connections are established in hopes of

providing an additional platform for dialogue and mutual understanding. As seen in an analysis


37/62

35

of Mutterzunge, Özdamar underscores moments of cultural and linguistic connectedness that

support the notion of multicultural harmony between Turks and Germans. In Die Brücke vom

Goldenen Horn, Özdamar introduces a new aspect of Turkish-German commonality, namely

their political histories. As a young guest worker in Berlin in the 1960s, the protagonist of this

story is witness to the political demonstrations in Berlin as a “curious but unaffected observer.” 20

Her contact with the political mentality of her German contemporaries in Berlin, however,

becomes an important part of her cross-boundary growth and emancipation. The second part of

the novel, given the same title as the book, includes an account of the persecution of political

dissidents in Turkey, the narrator among them.

21

Özdamar’s “[exploration of] the student protestsin Germany and Turkey within the wider European political context of Cold War politics and the

dictatorships of the 1960s and 1970s,” unequivocally connects her narrator’s experiences in both

Berlin and Istanbul.22 By establishing this connection, Özdamar establishes another foundation

of dialogue between the Turkish and German cultures, often thought to embody irreconcilable

cultural and social differences.

The 1968 student protests in Germany were born out of the intellectual youth’s response

to a changing political world, a transforming society, a coming-to-terms with a fascist past, and

an emancipation from a stagnant and silenced Second World War generation. The narrator’s

experiences and transformations in Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn share striking similarities

with these internal and social dilemmas. She is struggling with a difficult emancipation process

while becoming politically active in the protest efforts against the reigning fascist regime in

20 Seyhan, Azade. “From Istanbul to Berlin: Stations on the Road to a Transcultural/Translational Literature.”German Politics and Society. 74.23.1 (2005). 20221 Seyhan,“From Istanbul to Berlin” 16622 Shafi 202


38/62

36

Turkey. Turks and Germans were sharing much more similar social fates than most Germans

were prepared to acknowledge.

Conclusion

Özdamar’s social commentaries are subtle but effective. As a proponent of transnational

identity, Özdamar uses literature as a means with which to convey opportunities for successful

multicultural harmony and mutual understanding between Turks and Germans within the borders

of Germany. The characters in Mutterzunge and Die Brücke vom Goldenen Horn are voluntary

emigrants to Germany, who are active and engaged citizens seeking to understand themselves,

their identity, their surroundings, and their agency within those surroundings. Elizabeth Boacomments that, “In conveying a complex sense of transformative interchange between culturally

heterogenous countries under the impact of social and political change, [Özdamar’s novels]

combat fixed national or cultural stereotypes. “23 Özdamar’s position, however, is not limited to

just the rejection of fixed identities. As Boa notes, the core of Özdamar’s literature is a

discussion of transformation and interchange. Her works, therefore, become an assertion of and a

demand for the empowerment of multinational identities. She supports this claim by drawing

linguistic similarities between Turkish and German, by highlighting instances of commonality in

the political histories of Turkey and Germany, and by exhibiting the agency, independence,

competence, and ability to belong, capable of her Turkish-German constituency.

This viewpoint marks a controversial position in the contemporary debate on the nature

of German culture and history. Monika Shafi observes that, “The tension between a mono-

cultural and a multicultural perspective on German history and culture continues to influence a

number of current debates on German identity, offering us a prime example of how different

23 Boa, Elizabeth. “Özdamar ’s Autobiographical Fictions: Trans-national Identity and Literary Form.” German Lifeand Letters. 59.4 (2006). 526


39/62

37

agendas compete in shaping cultural memory.”24 Özdamar believes that the multicultural

perspective of Germany’s immigrant and minority groups, specifically Turkish-Germans,

embodies a necessary component of Germany’s contemporary social, political, and cultural

history and commentary. Özdamar’s own cross-boundary experiences are projected through her

protagonists. As a result, her works inform and enlighten her readers to the perspective and

contemplations of an achieved Turkish-German on contemporary German society. Özdamar

establishes legitimacy for her characters and therefore for this perspective by showing their

successful self-evaluations, quests for emancipation and belonging, and assertions of

transnational identity.

24 Shafi 204


40/62

38

Chapter IV: Ferdiun Zaimo!lu

Biographical Overview

Feridun Zaimo!lu was born in Bolu, Turkey in 1964. One year later he came with his

parents to Germany, living in Berlin and Munich for roughly 20 years. Since 1985 he has lived in

Kiel. Zaimo!lu’s academic background includes the study of medicine and art. He never

completed his degree, and after leaving the university he began work as a free lance writer and

author. He has regularly contributed literary critiques and essays to popular German periodicals

and publications such as Die Zeit , Die Welt , SPEX (a pop culture magazine) and Der

Tagesspiegel . It was with the 1995 publication of his provocative work Kanak Sprak: 24

Misstöne vom Rande der Gesellschaft that he made a name for himself in the German literary

and social world. In this work, Zaimo!lu colorfully exhibited the powerful speech characteristics

and attitudes of young men of Turkish heritage in Germany. Displaying this Tuerkendeutsch

(Turkish-German language) in all of its crass honesty was a bold attempt on Zaimo!lu’s part to

challenge ideas of romantic and harmonious multiculturalism and shed light on the truth behind

minority and immigrant conditions in Germany.

In Zaimo!lu’s works, the discriminated and marginalized become active agents of

culture. It is not only Zaimolgu’s goal to reform mainstream politics and provide greater social

empowerment and acknowledgment for Turkish-Germans and other minorities, but also to

subvert and destroy notions of fixed identity. In this sense, all characters, whether minority,

immigrant, or native become empowered and legitimized while simultaneously being objects of

criticism. Tom Cheesman, senior lecturer at the University of Wales Swansea’s Department of

German, and expert on diaspora writing and transnational communities, describes Zaimo!lu’s

approach in his work “Talking Kanak: Zaimo!lu contra Leitkultur,” as follows:


41/62

39

“Zaimo!lu’s strategy involves pseudo-ethnicity…with stylized language…, whichdisrupts the state-sanctioned dialogue between ‘Germans’ and ‘Turks.’…This strategy of pseudo-ethnicization effectively explodes the idea that any normative national cultureexists as the objective correlative of such concepts.”25

“Psuedo-ethnicization” refers, primarily, to Zaimo!lu’s satirical subversion of ethnic stereotypes.

Zaimo!lu promulgates images of Turkish otherness and marginalization while simultaneously

exhibiting ironic instances of multicultural integration and harmony. All of this is accompanied

by critical displays of German mainstream society and politics. This combination effectively

undermines any notions of a homogenous cultural make-up, and widespread contemporary

beliefs about minorities in Germany.Two works by Zaimo!lu that embody this departure from widely-adopted norms and

perceptions are Liebesmale, Scharlachrot and German Amok . In the first work, Zaimo!lu

portrays two German friends of Turkish heritage engaged in an exchange of letters while the

protagonist is on summer vacation in Turkey. Through the juxtaposition of two strongly differing

personalities, the author simultaneously confirms and subverts stereotypes of Turkish-German

youths in contemporary Germany. In German Amok , Zaimo!lu uses Berlin’s elitist art scene to

shed a critical light on the behaviors, perceptions, and motivations of both native and minority

groups in Germany, particularly in Berlin.

My intention is to show how Zaimo!lu claims socio-political agency and empowerment

in his literature by demonstrating authority over both Turkish and German culture. He commands

the German language to an impressively complex degree, thus legitimizing his position in the

German cultural mainstream, while simultaneously drawing on his experiences as a marginalized

Turkish immigrant. His works lay claim to both cultural groups. Instead of appealing to

commonality and multicultural harmony like Özdamar, Zaimo!lu is far more aggressive in his

25 Cheesman, Tom. “Talking ‘Kanak’: Zaimo!lu contra Leitkultur.” New German Critique. Telos Press. 84.


42/62

40

assertion of belonging and identity as a transnational citizen and ethnic writer. He is determined

to convey that multiculturalism in Germany should not be treated as a novelty, but rather as a

legitimate reality and objective, and he challenges both Turks and Germans to discard flawed

perceptions of immigrant stereotypes and prescriptive social roles and relationships. As you will

be shown, the nature of these narratives from Zaimo!lu do not warrant the more chronological

analysis given to Özdamar’s works. His stories follow less of a climactic or sequential literary

progression. Instead, the core elements of his writing, which pertain to his pursuit of socio-

political agency exist as foundations in the general structure, language, character, and style of his

prose.

Liebesmale, Scharlachrot

Liebesmale, Scharlachrot is an epistolary novel consisting of 42 letters, exchanged over

the course of a summer, which reveals the lives of two Turkish-Germans and their chaotic

border-transcending multicultural world in Germany. In an effort to portray the complex cultural

pressures within this group, Zaimo!lu develops two strongly contrasting personalities, who,

however, are fundamentally similar in their Turkish-German heritage. Hakan fulfills the role of

the hardened Kanakster gangster, while Serdar is an Assimil-Ali, or one who actively attempts to

„assimilate“ to the German culture and lifestyle. A Kanakster is a manifestation of the gangster

image often associated with German youths of Turkish heritage. Hakan is easily influenced by

peers and partakes in petty criminal activities, whereas Serdar is more courageous in his

convictions and is interested in a thoughtful and introspective analysis of his life, his identity,

and his principles. The interaction between these two characters raises a number of questions

about the nature and make-up of the Turkish minority group in Germany. In creating two

divergent characters Zaimo!lu sheds light on the problem of identity in the context of a more


43/62

41

holistic social and cultural Turkish-German spectrum. He simultaneously subverts and validates

both Turkish and German stereotypes, in an effort to authenticate and legitimize the unique

transnational identity of the individual Turkish-German. The exchange of letters uses a rather

masterful application of the German language, exhibiting linguistic elegance and authority, while

simultaneously showing complete control of crass colloquialisms that leave virtually nothing to

the imagination. While most of the letters are between Serdar and Hakan, Serdar also

occasionally corresponds with two former girlfriends, Dina and Anke.

At the beginning of the novel Serdar’s first letter reveals his emotional vulnerability,

overwhelmed with his life in Germany and the status of his relationships; he has traveled toTurkey to spend the summer with his parents as an opportunity to escape and evaluate himself.

Immediately, within the first two letters, Serdar and Hakan begin to establish their contrasting

personalities.

Serdar: „Ich muss mich also entscheiden, wie ich das Schreiben und das Lieben untereine Decke bringen kann“ (13).Hakan:„ich glaub du hast ein Projekt laufen von wegen: die Auswilderung des Tuerks insHeimische... „Verdammt, was werden die Ghettokollegas über mich denken, wenn ichihnen beichte, dass ich Seiten über Seiten vollgepinselt habe, Mann, bin ich nRomanmaler oder was...“ (27)

Serdar represents the introspective romantic, undergoing a journey and engaging in the

therapeutic act of writing in order to find answers to the conflicts he faces. He is concerned with

evaluating his feelings through his writing. Hakan, on the other hand, engages in this exchange

of letters under much more superficial pretenses. He is embarrassed at the thought of his kollegas

(friends) discovering his philosophical correspondence with Serdar, even though his accounts are

often limited to banal juvenile escapades and romantic crushes. Later in the novel, Serdar goes as

far as to describe himself as Hakan’s Imam, an Arabic term for a religious guide or mentor.


44/62

42

„’Du solltest in dich gehen und dich fragen, ob deine sexuellen Verfehlungen nicht Frevelwider den himmlischen Vater sind und ob es nicht an der Zeit ist, abzulassen vonSpielotheken-Tricks und dem Kanakentick, ständig und zur Selbstvergewisserung amPenis rumzunesteln’ –Werde ein besserer Mensch. Dein Imam im Gnadenstand derErkenntnis Serdar.“ (36)

Serdar provides Hakan with advice and guidance. He tries to encourage him to abandon the

lifestyle of his Kanakster friends. This further stratifies the maturity levels of the two characters.

Serdar emerges as the level-headed and independent leader and Hakan adopts the role of an

easily influenced follower, driven by peer-pressure and sexual instinct. If Serdar and Hakan are

on such different intellectual levels, one must ask, why are they such cl

Date post:	08-Jul-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dan-winch
View:	223 times
Download:	0 times

Mutterzunge Transnational

Documents