JOHN FISKE VE POPÜLER KÜLTÜR: MARGARET TYLER’IN “OKUYUCUYA MEKTUP”UNUN ELEŞTİREL BİR OKUMASI

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 17, 101 - 122, 15.03.2021

Merve Aydoğdu Çelik

https://doi.org/10.20304/humanitas.789187

Öz

Bu çalışma, John Fiske’in popüler kültür teorisi ışığında, Margaret Tyler’ın yazınsal alandaki mağduriyeti ne şekilde alt ettiğini çevirdiği eser The Mirrour of Princely Deeds and Knighthood’un önüne eklediği “Okuyucuya Mektup” bağlamında inceler. Tyler bir kadın ve bir yazar olarak ataerkil Elizabeth dönemi toplumunda ve dönemin yayıncılık kültüründe ikincil konumdadır. Tyler, dezavantajlı durumuna rağmen, çeşitli taktikler aracılığıyla bu konumu savuşturur ve hem kendi eylemini hem de kadınların yazma hakkını savunur. Tyler yayıncılık kültüründe hüküm süren varsayımlara açıkça meydan okumaz fakat bu varsayımları kendi amacına hizmet edecek şekilde işletir. Tyler’ın sistemde kendine bir yer edinmek için türlü stratejiler kullanması ön sözün Fiske’in popüler kültür teorisi çerçevesinde değerlendirilmesini mümkün kılar. “Okuyucuya Mektup” ortaya koyduğu üzere, Tyler baskın kültüre başkaldırır ve muhalif duruşunu egemen söylemin kaynaklarından üretir; böylece Tyler’ın ön sözü bir popüler kültür ögesi işlevi görür.  

Anahtar Kelimeler

popüler kültür, direniş, kahramanlık romanı, yazın yazını, Elizabeth dönemi

JOHN FISKE AND POPULAR CULTURE: A CRITICAL READING OF MARGARET TYLER’S “EPISTLE TO THE READER”

Öz

This paper examines how Margaret Tyler overcomes literary inferiority in the “Epistle to the Reader” that precedes her translation The Mirrour of Princely Deeds and Knighthood. Tyler, as a woman and an author, is in a secondary position in the patriarchal Elizabethan society and print culture. Notwithstanding her disadvantaged status, she circumvents it through various tactics, and she defends both her act and women’s right to write. Tyler does not overtly challenge the assumptions prevalent in print culture but manipulates them to her own end. The fact that she employs several strategies to earn a place in the system renders it possible to evaluate the preface within the framework of John Fiske’s popular culture theory. As is evident from the “Epistle,” Tyler resists the dominant culture, and she produces her oppositional stance out of the resources of the dominant. Thus, Tyler’s preface functions as an element of popular culture.   

Anahtar Kelimeler

popular culture, resistance, romance, women's literature, elizabethan age

Kaynakça

• Arcara, S. (2007). Margaret Tyler’s the mirrour of knighthood: or how a Renaissance translator became ‘the first English feminist.’ Intralinea: Online Translation Journal, 9. 20 August 2020, http://www.intralinea.org/archive/article/1639
• Aughterson, K. (Ed.). (1995). Renaissance woman: a sourcebook. London: Routledge.
• Boro, J. (2014). Introduction. In J. Boro (Ed.). Margaret Tyler, Mirror of Princely Deeds and Knighthood. (pp. 1-36). Cambridge: Modern Humanities Research Association.
• Cooper, H. (2004). The English romance in time: transforming motifs from Geoffrey of Monmouth to the death of Shakespeare. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Gallagher, C. (2000). A history of the precedent: Rhetorics of legitimation in women’s writing. Critical Inquiry, 26(2), 309-327.
• Glenn, C. (1997). Rhetoric retold: Regendering the tradition from Antiquity through the Renaissance. Carbondale and Edwardsville: Southern Illinois University Press.
• Guy, J. (2009). A daughter’s love: Thomas More and his dearest Meg. New York: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt.
• Ferguson, M. W. (1996). Renaissance concepts of the ‘women writer.’ In H. Wilcox (Ed.). Women and literature in Britain, 1500-1700. (pp. 143-168). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Fiske, J. (1991a). Reading the popular. London and New York: Routledge.
• Fiske, J. (1991b). Understanding popular culture. London and New York: Routledge.
• Fiske, J. Cultural studies and the culture of everyday life. In L. Grossberg, C. Nelson and P. A. Treichler (Eds.). Cultural studies. (pp. 154-173). London and New York: Routledge.
• Hackett, H. (1992). ‘Yet tell me some such fiction’: Lady Mary Wroth’s Urania and the ‘femininity’ of romance. In C. Brant and D. Purkiss (Eds.). Women, texts and histories 1575-1760. (pp. 39-68). London: Routledge.
• Hackett, H. (2000). Women and romance fiction in the English Renaissance. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Knoppers, L. L. (Ed.). (2009). The Cambridge companion to early modern women’s writing. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Krontiris, T. (1988). Breaking barriers of genre and gender: Margaret Tyler’s translation of the mirrour of knighthood. English Literary Renaissance, 18(1), 19-39.
• Krontiris, T. (1992). Oppositional voices: Women as writers and translators of literature in the English Renaissance. London and New York: Routledge.
• Lamb, M. E. (1985). The Cooke sisters: Attitudes towards learned women in the Renaissance. In M. Hannay (Ed.). Silent but for the word: Tudor women as patrons, translators, and writers of religious works. (pp. 107-125). Ohio: Kent University Press.
• Lucas, C. (1989). Writing for women: The example of woman as reader in Elizabethan romance. Milton Keynes: Open University Press.
• Mendelson, S. and Crawford, P. (1998). Women in early modern England 1550-1720. Oxford: Clarendon Press.
• Newcomb, L. H. (2004). Gendering prose romance in Renaissance England. In C. Saunders (Ed.). A companion to romance from classical to contemporary. (pp. 121-139). Malden: Blackwell.
• Ortiz-Salamovich, A. A. (2014). Translation practice in early modern Europe: Spanish chivalric romance in England (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Leeds, Leeds.
• Relihan, C. C. and Stanivukovic, G. V. (2003). Introduction. In C. C. Relihan and G. V. Stanivukovic (Eds.). Prose fiction and early modern sexualities in England, 1570-1640. (pp. 1-12). New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Robinson, D. (1995). Theorizing translation in a woman’s voice: Subverting the rhetoric of patronage, courtly love and morality. The Translator, 1(2), 153-175.
• Sidney, P. (1890). The defence of poesy, otherwise known as an apology for poetry. Boston: Ginn & Company.
• Travitsky, B. (1981). The paradise of women: Writings by Englishwomen of the Renaissance. London: Greenwood Press.
• Tyler, M. (1985). From the translation of the first part of the mirrour of princely deedes and knyghthood: Dedication to the right honourable Lord Thomas Howard and epistle to the reader. In M. Ferguson (Ed.). First feminists: British women writers 1578-1799. (pp. 52-57). Bloomington: Indiana University Press.
• Uman, D. and Bistué, B. (2007). Translation as collaborative authorship: Margaret Tyler’s the mirrour of princely deeds and knighthood. Comparative Literature Studies, 44(3), 298-323.
• Vives, J. L. (2000). The instruction of a Christian woman: A sixteenth century manual. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Wall, W. (1993). The imprint of gender: Authorship and publication in the English Renaissance. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.