Milton’da Anne Bedeni ve Tenasül İmgelemi: Kayıp Cennet’teki Doğum ve Rahim İmgelerinin Kristevacı Bir Çözümlemesi

Yıl 2023, Cilt: 6 Sayı: 1, 69 - 85, 27.05.2023

Gökhan Albayrak

https://doi.org/10.53048/johass.1243366

Öz

Bu makale Milton’ın Kayıp Cennet adlı eserindeki tenasül imgelemini, doğum ve rahim imgelerini, Kristeva’nın semiyotik khora ve abjekt gibi kavramlarını kullanarak çözümlemektedir. Bu çalışma Milton’a özgü yaratım ve yıkım diyalektiğiyle, Kristeva’nın semiyotik ve sembolik diyalektiği arasında benzerlikler çizmektedir. Böylece, bu makale Havva’nın doğumu ve evrenin yaratılışı bölümlerinin semiyotik khorayı, Günah ve Ölüm alegorisinin ve Kaos tasvirlerinin de abjekt anne bedenini temsil ettiğini savunmaktadır. Bir taraftan, Havva’nın doğumu ve evrenin yaratılışı bölümlerinde olumlu tenasül imgeleri kullanılır. Bu da, ben ve öteki arasında kesin bir ayrımın olmadığı, katıksız bütünlüğün ve bolluğun olduğu semiyotik bir alana dönme arzusunu çağrıştırmaktadır. Bu makale böyle bir mekâna duyulan özlemin, masumiyetlerini yitirmiş insanların cenneti anımsatan bir ayrımsızlığa duyulan arzuya denk düştüğünü iddia etmektedir. Öte yandan, Kaos betimlemelerinde, Günah ve Ölüm alegorisinde olumsuz tenasül imgeleri kullanılır. Bu ise, yutan ve boğan ana rahminin tüm ayrışmış biçimleri, şekilleri ve sınırları çizilmiş kimlikleri tahrif ettiği için, bu çalışmaya göre, sınırların yıkıldığı, kimliklerin yok olduğu, devasa, gece karanlığı gibi tarif edilen rahme geri düşme korkusunu ve tiksintisini yansıtmaktadır. Bu semiyotik khoraya dönme arzusu ile yutucu rahimde özerkliği ve kendiliğini kaybetme korkusu arasındaki diyalektik salınım Kayıp Cennet’i tanımlamaktadır.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Milton, Kayıp Cennet, Kristeva, semiyotik, abjekt

The Maternal Body and Reproductive Imagery in Milton: A Kristevan Analysis of the Birth and Womb Images in Paradise Lost

Öz

This article analyses Milton’s reproductive imagery and the images of birth and womb in Paradise Lost by deploying Kristevan concepts such as the semiotic chora and the abject. This study draws parallels between the Miltonic dialectic of creation and destruction and the Kristevan dialectic of the semiotic and the symbolic. Hence, it argues that the nativity of Eve and the creation of the universe embody the semiotic chora, while the allegory of Sin and Death, and the description of Chaos represent the abject maternal body. On one hand, positive reproductive images are utilised in the description of the birth of Eve and the creation of the universe. This evokes the impulse to retreat into the semiotic chora, a realm of sheer fullness and opulence, where there is no clear division between self and other. The longing for this realm, this paper claims, corresponds to the fallen human beings’ desire to regress into heavenly oneness. On the other hand, negative images of birth and womb are employed in the accounts of the Chaos and the allegory of Sin and Death. This represents, this article asserts, fear and revulsion that one feels because of reverting into the giant nocturnal uterus, where identities are annihilated and boundaries are shattered as the engulfing and choking womb deforms all distinct forms, shapes, and distinctly defined identities. This dialectical oscillation between a yearning to relapse into the semiotic chora and a deep anxiety over losing one’s autonomy in the devouring womb characterise Paradise Lost.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Milton, Paradise Lost, Kristeva, the semiotic, the abject

Kaynakça

• Beardsworth, S. (2005). From revolution to revolt culture. In T. Chanter and E. P. Ziarek (Eds.), Revolt, affect, collectivity: The unstable boundaries of Kristeva’s polis (pp.37-56). Albany: State University of New York Press.
• Becker-Leckrone, M. (2005). Julia Kristeva and literary theory. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Creaser, J. (2014). The line in Paradise Lost. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 81-93). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Edwards, K. L. (2014). Cosmology. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 109-122). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Fallon, S. M. (2014). Milton as narrator in Paradise Lost. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge Companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 3-16). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Flannagan, R. (2002). John Milton: A short introduction. Oxford, UK; Malden, MA: Blackwell.
• Forsyth, N. (2014). Satan. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 17-28). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Fowler, A. (1998). Paradise Lost. New York, NY: Longman.
• Gardner, H. (1965). A reading of Paradise Lost. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
• Hopkins, D. (2013). Reading Paradise Lost. Malden, MA: John Wiley and Sons.
• Kermode, F. (1973). Adam unparadised. In A. E. Dyson and J. Lovelock (Eds.), Milton: Paradise Lost. Houndmills: Macmillan.
• Kilgour, M. (2014). Classical models. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 57-67). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Kristeva, J. (1980). Desire in language: A semiotic approach to literature and art. New York: Columbia UP.
• Kristeva, J. (1982). Powers of horror: An essay on abjection. New York: Columbia UP.
• Kristeva, J. (1984). Revolution in poetic language. New York: Columbia UP.
• Kristeva, J. (1987). Tales of love. New York: Columbia UP.
• Lechte, J. (1990). Julia Kristeva. London and New York: Routledge.
• LeComte, E. (1978). Milton and sex. London: Macmillan.
• Leonard, J. (2000). Milton, Lucretius, and “the void profound of unessential night.” In K. A. Pruitt and C. W. Durham (Eds.), Living texts: Interpreting Milton (pp. 198-217). Selinsgrove, PA: Susquehanna University Press.
• Loewenstein, D. (2004). Milton: Paradise Lost. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
• Margaroni, M. and J. Lechte (2004). Julia Kristeva: live theory. London; New York: Continuum.
• McAfee, N. (2004). Julia Kristeva. London and New York: Routledge.
• Milton, J. (2000). Paradise Lost. In Abrams M. H. (Ed.), The Norton anthology of English literature. Seventh Ed. Vol. I. New York: Norton.
• Oliver, K. (2002). Introduction. In K. Oliver (Ed.), The portable Kristeva. New York: Columbia University Press.
• Plato. (2008). Timaeus and Critias. R. Waterfield (Trans.). Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press.
• Raymond, J. (2014). Milton’s angels. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 138-151). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Reisner, N. (2011). John Milton’s Paradise Lost: A reading guide. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
• Ricks, C. (1973). Tincture or reflection. In A. E. Dyson and J. Lovelock (Eds.), Milton: Paradise Lost. Houndmills: Macmillan Education.
• Rumrich, J. (2014). Things of darkness: Sin, Death, Chaos. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 29-41). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Schwartz, L. (2009). Milton and maternal mortality. Cambridge, UK; New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Shoulson, J. (2014). Milton’s Bible. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 68-80). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Shullenberger, W. (2014). Imagining Eden. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 125-37). New York: Cambridge University Press. (pp. 125-137).
• Silver, V. (2014). The problem of God. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 42-54). New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Stevens, P. (2014). The pre-secular politics of Paradise Lost. In L. Schwartz (Ed.), The Cambridge companion to Paradise Lost (pp. 94-108). New York: Cambridge University Press. (pp. 94-108).
• Stocker, M. (1988). An introduction to the variety of criticism: Paradise Lost. Houndmills: Macmillan.