Sahneden Beyazperdeye: Kraliçe Lear’da Medyalararasılık ve Toplumsal Cinsiyet Performansı

Yıl 2025, Cilt: 5 Sayı: 2, 130 - 153, 27.10.2025

Cansu Yılmaz

https://doi.org/10.59597/akademikaci.1796110

Öz

Medyalararasılık, sinemanın diğer sanat formlarıyla sınırlarını nasıl müzakere ettiğini görünür kılarak çağdaş film ve medya çalışmalarında en önemli kavramlardan biri haline gelmiştir. Pelin Esmer’in Kraliçe Lear (2019) filmi, Shakespeare’in kanonik tragedyasını Toros Dağları’ndan beş kadının yaşam deneyimleriyle diyaloğa sokarak bu müzakereyi örnekler. Hem belgesel hem bir performans kaydı hem de sinemasal bir yeniden tahayyül olarak film; tiyatro ile sinemanın kesiştiği, üst üste bindiği ve birbirini yeniden şekillendirdiği bir mekâna dönüşür. Bu makale, filmi sinemasal medyalararasılığın bir örneği olarak ele almakta; Esmer’in kamerasının kadraj, kurgu ve ses aracılığıyla tiyatral performansı nasıl dönüştürdüğünü ve aynı anda yeni anlam ufukları açtığını incelemektedir. Ne var ki Kraliçe Lear yalnızca medyalararası geçişlerle ilgili değildir; toplumsal cinsiyetin nasıl sahnelendiği, bedenselleştiği ve tartışmaya açıldığıyla da ilgilidir. Judith Butler’ın performativite kavramına dayanarak, kadınların Kral Lear sahnelemesinin ikili bir performans ürettiği tartışılmaktadır: Shakespeare’in karakterlerini canlandırırken aynı zamanda kendi emek, mücadele ve direniş hikâyelerini dile getirmek. Bu bağlamda Esmer’in filmi Shakespeare’i yalnızca uyarlamakla kalmaz; onu marjinal bir bakış açısından yeniden görür, kültürel hiyerarşileri sarsan ve tragedyayı yerel ile kolektif sesler üzerinden yeniden çerçeveleyen feminist bir müdahale sunar. Sonuçta Kraliçe Lear, sinemanın hem medyalararası bir müzakere alanı hem de toplumsal cinsiyet direnişinin mekânı olabileceğini göstererek dönüştürücü potansiyelini ortaya koyar.

Anahtar Kelimeler

sinemasal medyalararasılık , toplumsal cinsiyet performansı , Shakespeare uyarlaması , performatif belgesel , film çalışmaları

From Stage to Screen: Intermediality and Gender Performance in Queen Lear

Öz

Intermediality has become one of the most significant concepts in contemporary film and media studies, highlighting the ways cinema negotiates its borders with other art forms. Pelin Esmer’s Queen Lear (2019) exemplifies this negotiation by bringing Shakespeare’s canonical tragedy into dialogue with the lived experiences of five women from the Toros Mountains. At once a documentary, a record of performance, and a cinematic re-imagining, the film becomes a space where theatre and cinema intersect, overlap, and reconfigure one another. This article explores the film as a case of cinematic intermediality, tracing how Esmer’s camera reshapes theatrical performance through framing, montage, and sound, while simultaneously opening new horizons of meaning. Yet Queen Lear is not only about intermedial crossings; it is also about how gender itself is performed, embodied, and contested. Drawing on Judith Butler’s notion of performativity, the article examines how the women’s staging of King Lear produces a double performance: enacting Shakespeare’s characters while voicing their own stories of labor, struggle, and resilience. In this sense, Esmer’s film does not merely adapt Shakespeare but re-visions him from the margins, offering a feminist intervention that destabilizes cultural hierarchies and reframes tragedy through local and collective voices. Ultimately, Queen Lear demonstrates the transformative potential of cinema as both a medium of intermediality and a site of gendered resistance.

Anahtar Kelimeler

cinematic intermediality , gender performance , Shakespearean adaptation , performative documentary , film studies

Kaynakça

• Altman, R. (1992). Sound Theory, Sound Practice. Psychology Press.
• Auslander, P. (1999). Liveness: Performance in a Mediatized Culture. Psychology Press.
• Bazin, A. (2004). What Is Cinema? Volume I. (H. Gray, Trans.) University of California Press.
• Benjamin, W. (1999). The Arcades Project. (H. Eiland, & K. McLaughlin, Trans.) Harvard University Press.
• Bourdieu, P. (1986). The Forms of Capital. In J. G. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of Theory and Research for the Sociology of Education (pp. 241-258). Greenwood Press.
• Brode, D. (2000). Shakespeare in the Movies: From the Silent Era to Shakespeare in Love. Oxford University Press.
• Browne, V. (2014). Feminism, Time, and Nonlinear History. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Bruzzi, S. (2006). New Documentary: A Critical Introduction. Routledge.
• Bullough, G. (Ed.). (1975). Narrative and Dramatic Sources of Shakespeare, Vol. 7: Major Tragedies. (G. Bullough, Trans.) Routledge.
• Burch, N. (1981). Theory of Film Practice. (H. R. Lane, Ed., & B. Brewster, Trans.) Princeton University Press.
• Butler, J. (1999). Gender trouble: Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. Routledge.
• Cartmell, D., & Whelehan, I. (2010). Screen Adaptation: Impure Cinema. Macmillan Education UK.
• Chakrabarty, D. (2000). Provincializing Europe: Postcolonial Thought and Historical Difference. Princeton University Press.
• Cixous, H. (1976). The Laugh of the Medusa. Signs, 1(4), 875-893.
• Çiçekoğlu, F. (2020). Female Agency in Pelin Esmer Films: The Play (2005) and Queen Lear (2019). In D. Sezen, F. Çiçekoğlu, A. Tunç, E. T. Diken, D. Sezen, F. Çiçekoğlu, A. Tunç, & E. T. Diken (Eds.), Female Agencies and Subjectivities in Film and Television (pp. 27-44). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Çiçekoğlu, F., & Nuhrat, Y. (2021). Tiyatronun “Çevirme İşi”: Pelin Esmer Filmleri Üzerinden Cinsiyetlendirilmiş Duygusal Emek. Reflektif Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2(3), 513-525.
• Diamond, E. (1997). Unmaking Mimesis Essays on Feminism and Theatre. Routledge.
• Eisenstein, S. (1949). Film Form: Essays in Film Theory. (J. Leyda, Ed., & J. Leyda, Trans.) Harcourt.
• Elleström, L. (2010). The Modalities of Media: A Model for Understanding Intermedial Relations. In L. Elleström (Ed.), Media Borders, Multimodality and Intermediality (pp. 11-48). Palgrave Macmillan.
• Esmer, P. (Director). (2019). Queen Lear [Motion Picture]. Türkiye.
• Fischer-Lichte, E. (2008). The Transformative Power of Performance: A New Aesthetics. (S. I. Jain, Trans.) Routledge.
• Freeman, E. (2010). Time Binds: Queer Temporalities, Queer Histories. Duke University Press.
• Gaudreault, A., & Marion, P. (2004). Transécriture and Narrative Mediatics: The Stakes of Intermediality. In A. R. Robert Stam, A Companion to Literature and Film (R. Stam, Trans., pp. 58–70). Blackwell Publishing.
• Genette, G. (1997). Palimpsests: Literature in the Second Degree. (C. Newman, & C. Doubinsky, Trans.) University of Nebraska Press.
• hooks, b. (1992). Black Looks: Race and Representation. South End Press.
• hooks, b. (1989). Talking Back: Thinking Feminist, Thinking Black. South End Press.
• Hutcheon, L. (2006). A Theory of Adaptation. Routledge.
• Huyssen, A. (2003). Present Pasts Urban Palimpsests and the Politics of Memory. Stanford University Press.
• Jackson, R. (2014). Shakespeare and the Cinema. Oxford University Press.
• Johnston, C. (1999). Women's Cinema As Counter-Cinema'. In S. Thornham, Feminist Film Theory: A Reader (pp. 31-40). Edinburgh University Press.
• Kaplan, E. A. (1988). Theories and Strategies of the Feminist Documentary. In A. Rosenthal, New Challenges for Documentary (pp. 78-102). University of California Press.
• Kennedy, D. (1993). Foreign Shakespeare: Contemporary Performance. Cambridge University Press.
• Knowles, K., & Schmid, M. (Eds.). (2021). Cinematic Intermediality: Theory and Practice. Edinburgh University Press.
• Kristeva, J. (1985). Revolution in Poetic Language. (M. Waller, Trans.) Columbia University Press.
• Kristeva, J. (1986). Women’s Time. In J. Kristeva, & T. Moi (Ed.), The Kristeva Reader (pp. 187–213). Columbia University Press.
• Kırel, S. (2010). A Struggle to Change the World: Pelin Esmer’s Documentary The Play. Cultura, Lenguaje y Representación / Culture, Language and Representation, VIII, 97-113.
• Loomba, A. (2002). Shakespeare, Race, and Colonialism. Oxford University Press.
• Loomba, A., & Orkin, M. (Eds.). (1998). Post-Colonial Shakespeares. Routledge.
• Minh-ha, T. (1991). When the Moon Waxes Red: Representation, Gender and Cultural Politics. Routledge.
• Mulvey, L. (1975). Visual Pleasure and Narrative Cinema. Screen, 16(3), 6-18.
• Nichols, B. (2001). Introduction to Documentary. Indiana University Press.
• Özsoy, A., & Öztürk, S. (2017). Interview with Pelin Esmer. Sinefilozofi, 2(4), 161-184.
• Özön, N. (2010). Türk Sineması Tarihi: 1896-1960. Doruk Yayınları.
• Pethő, Á. (2011). Cinema and Intermediality: The Passion for the In-Between. Cambridge Scholars.
• Rajewsky, I. O. (2005). Intermediality, Intertextuality, and Remediation: A Literary Perspective on Intermediality. Intermédialités: Histoire Et Théorie Des Arts, Des Lettres Et Des Techniques/Intermediality: History And Theory Of The Arts, Literature And Technologies, 43-64.
• Sanders, J. (2006). Adaptation and Appropriation. Routledge.
• Sobchack, V. (2004). Carnal Thoughts: Embodiment and Moving Image Culture. University of California Press.
• Spivak, G. C. (1988). Can the Subaltern Speak? In C. N. Grossberg (Ed.), Marxism and the Interpretation of Culture (pp. 271–313). University of Illinois Press.
• Taylor, D. (2003). The Archive and the Repertoire: Performing Cultural Memory in the Americas. Duke University Press.