The Representation of Prison and Prisoners in Ngugi’s Detained: A Writer’s Prison Diary and Orhan Kemal’s 72nd Ward

Yıl 2022, , 107 - 118, 29.10.2022

Eren Bolat

https://doi.org/10.54600/igdirsosbilder.1076861

Öz

The purpose of this study is to examine how two distinct authors, Ngugi wa Thiong’o and Orhan Kemal, express their experiences in prison as a result of being imprisoned by their own states due to their opinions, as well as how they portray the conditions of the prison and prisoners. Ignoring the fact that both works are written in different literary forms, the events recounted by both authors are completely encountered and witnessed by themselves. Ngugi’s work focuses on the plight of political prisoners, detailing how the prison administration treated them horribly through government indoctrination, as well as how the inmates coped with these circumstances. On the other hand, Orhan Kemal portrays the prison life he witnessed while imprisoned for political reasons, focusing particularly on the lives of the impoverished, poor, and outcast prisoners. In his story, he discusses not only the life of the prisoners, but also the prison atmosphere and the warders’ degrading attitude toward them. In light of these considerations, Kenyan writer and scholar Ngugi wa Thiong’o ’s work, which he composed in the form of a diary, and Orhan Kemal’s story 72nd Ward, in which he tells the events he witnessed, were compared and contrasted, accordingly, the parallels and differences between the two writers were explored.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ngugi, Orhan Kemal, Prison, Prisoners, Representation

Ngugi’nin Tutsak: Bir Yazarın Hapishane Günlüğü ve Orhan Kemal'in 72. Koğuş Adlı Eserlerinde Hapishane ve Mahkûmların Temsili

Öz

Bu çalışmada iki farklı yazarın, Ngugi wa Thiong’o ve Orhan Kemal, düşünceleri yüzünden kendi devletleri tarafından hapse atılmaları sonucu deneyimledikleri hapishane hayatını ve mahkûmların durumlarını nasıl betimlediklerinin incelenmesi amaçlanmaktadır. Seçilen bu eserler farklı edebi türlerde yazılmış olmasına rağmen her iki yazarın bahsetmiş olduğu olaylar tamamen yaşanmış ve kendilerinin de tanıklık etmiş olduğu olaylarladır. Ngugi çalışmasında özellikle politik mahkûmların durumuna vurgu yaparak hapishane yönetiminin hükümet telkini ile mahkûmlara kabul edilemeyecek bir şekilde nasıl davrandığını, mahkûmların bu şartlara nasıl göğüs gerdiğini ve hayatta kalabilmek için göstermiş oldukları çabayı anlatmaktadır. Bu makaleye konu olan diğer çalışmada ise, Orhan Kemal politik nedenlerden dolayı hapse atıldığında deneyimlemiş olduğu hapishane hayatını özellikle yoksul, gariban ve kimsesiz bireylerin hayatlarına odaklanarak anlatmaktadır. Eserlerinde genellikle sosyalist gerçekçi bir tavır sergileyen Orhan Kemal, bu anlatımında sadece mahkûmların hayatlarını değil aynı zamanda hapishane ortamını ve gardiyanların mahkûmlara karşı olan aşağılayıcı tavrını da canlı bir şekilde betimlemiştir. Tüm bunlar göz önünde bulundurularak, bu çalışmada Kenyalı yazar ve düşünür Ngugi wa Thiong’o’nun bir günlük türünde kaleme aldığı eseri ile Orhan Kemal’in bizzat şahitlik etmiş olduğu olayları aktardığı 72. Koğuş adlı eseri karşılaştırmalı bir şekilde incelenmiş ve her iki yazarın benzer ve farklı yönlerinin ortaya konması amaçlanmıştır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Ngugi, Orhan Kemal, Hapishane, Mahkûm, Temsil

Kaynakça

• Ahnert, R. (2013). The rise of prison literature in the Sixteenth Century. Cambridge University Press.
• Anselment, R. A. (1993). “Stone Walls” and “I’ron Bars”: Richard Lovelace and the Conventions of Seventeenth-Century Prison Literature. Renaissance and Reformation / Renaissance et Réforme, 17(1), 15–34. http://www.jstor.org/stable/43444945
• Boethius, A. M. S. (2008). The consolation of philosophy. (D. R. Slavitt, Trans.). Harvard University Press.
• Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia (2009). Wole Soyinka. Retrieved June 29, 2022, from https://www.britannica.com/biography/Wole-Soyinka#ref162245
• Britannica, T. Editors of Encyclopedia (2017, August 4). The Ballad of Reading Gaol. Encyclopedia Britannica. https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Ballad-of-Reading-Gaol
• Cooke, M. (2001). Ghassan al-Jaba’i: Prison Literature in Syria after 1980. World Literature Today, 75(2), 237–245.
• Davis, A. Y. (1989). Angela Davis: An autobiography. New York: International Publ.
• Davis, A. Y. (2003). Are prisons obsolete? Seven Stories Press.
• Foucault, M. (1977). Discipline and punish: The birth of the prison. (A. Sheridan, Trans.). Vintage Books.
• Freely, M. (2009). The Prison Imaginary in Turkish Literature. World Literature Today, 83(6), 46–50.
• Freeman, T. S. (2009). The Rise of Prison Literature. Huntington Library Quarterly, 72(2), 133–146.
• Gikandi, S. (2009). Ngugi wa Thiong’o. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Gomez, G. (2019, September 1). Ngugi wa Thiongo: “prison was a school to me”. - news & views from emerging countries. News - News WordPress Theme. Retrieved January 31, 2022, from https://www.southworld.net/ngugi-wa-thiongo-prison-was-a-school-to-me/
• Hooks, A. R. (2020). Diary as literature: Through the lens of multiculturalism in America. Vernon Press.
• Kelly, M., & Westall, C. (2020). Prison writing and the literary world: Imprisonment, institutionality and questions of literary practice, Routledge.
• Kemal, O. (2021). 72. Koğuş. Everest Yayınları.
• Lovelace, R. (n.d.). To Althea, from prison by Richard Lovelace. Poetry Foundation. Retrieved June 28, 2022, from https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/44657/to-althea-from-prison
• Lovesey, O. (2015). The postcolonial intellectual: Ngugi wa Thiong'o in context. Routledge.
• Mendil, İ. (2016, February 29). Mehmet Raşit Nasıl Orhan Kemal Oldu? İPEKLİ MENDİL. Retrieved June 30, 2022, from https://ipeklimendil.wordpress.com/2015/09/15/mehmet-rasit-nasil-orhan-kemal-oldu/
• Thiong’o, wa. N. (1981). Detained: A writer’s prison diary. Oxford: Heinemann.
• Thiong’o, wa. N. (1987). Decolonising the mind: The politics of language in African literature. Harare, Zimbabwe: Zimbabwe Pub. House.
• Thiong’o, wa. N. (2009). Something torn and new: An African renaissance. New York: Basic Civitas Books.
• Öğütçü, I., & Kangül, Ö. (2010). Yazar Orhan Kemal web sitesi. Retrieved June 30, 2022, http://www.orhankemal.org/links1/816.html
• Roberts, S. (1986). Breyten Breytenbach’s Prison Literature. The Centennial Review, 30(2), 304–313. http://www.jstor.org/stable/23738721
• Schwan, A. (2011). Introduction: Reading and Writing in Prison. Critical Survey, 23(3), 1–5. http://www.jstor.org/stable/41556427
• Soyinka, W. (1972). The Man Died: Prison Notes of Wole Soyinka. Harper & Row.
• Stastny, C., & Tyrnauer, G. (1982). Who rules the joint: The Changing Political Culture of Maximum Security Prisons in America. Lexington Books.
• Sykes, G. M. (1971). The Society of Captives. Princeton University Press.
• Whalen, L. (2007). Contemporary Irish Republican prison writing: Writing and resistance. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Zimmermann, P. (2015, September 25). On the diary as a literary genre by Peter Zimmermann. European Literature Network. Retrieved June 29, 2022, from https://www.eurolitnetwork.com/on-the-diary-as-a-literary-genre-by-peter-zimmermann/