The Dark Aspects of Modern Relationships: Romantic Ideology in The Lobster

Yıl 2021, Cilt: 17 Sayı: 38, 5631 - 5656, 15.06.2021

Selen Gökçem Akyıldız

https://doi.org/10.26466/opus.807052

Cited By: 1

Öz

Although the concept of love, which has been theorized in various ways throughout history, is one of the most attractive driving forces in human life, it has been seen as a psychic, unmeasurable and rebellious subject, a field envisioned by art, literature and philosophy, in other words, a field that is undesirable to be taken into the field of science, but an element of pleasure that has started to be emphasized day by day. The concept of love, which we are talking about today, took shape in the twelfth century, and evolved with social, cultural and especially ideological structures in the following centuries and started to contain different meanings. The Aristophanes legend, which can be regarded as the starting point of all ideologies of love, has taken its place among traditional romantic ideologies, based on the fact that each individual search for the other half and will be completed when they find them and by deeply affecting the cultural perception of romantic love, it has had an effect on the inability to experience the feeling of love freely. This study focuses on the points where the director Lanthimos tries to examine in The Lobster how love ideologies become absurd in a world where not leaving love to the preference of people is much more important than people's emotions. The Lobster movie, which tries to question natural human emotions by creating unnatural environments, underlines that the concept of love, which has gone through various interpretation processes in the face of changing romance and family politics, continues to change and transform with different ideological structures in the twenty-first century.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Cinema, Romantic ideology, Lanthimos, Concept of love

Modern İlişkilerin Karanlık Veçheleri: The Lobster Filminde Romantik İdeoloji

Öz

Tarih boyu çeşitli şekillerde teorileştirilmiş aşk kavramı, insan hayatındaki en cazip itici güçlerden olmasına karşın, psişik, ölçülemeyen ve asi bir konu, sanat, edebiyat ve felsefe tarafından öngörülen bir alan, diğer bir deyişle bilim alanına pek alınmak istenmeyen ancak zevk unsuru olarak üzerinde günden güne daha fazla durulmaya başlanan bir alan olarak görülmüştür. On ikinci yüzyılda bugün üzerine konuştuğumuz aşk kavramı şekillenmeye, takip eden yüzyıllarda toplumsal, kültürel ve özellikle ideolojik yapılanmalarla birlikte evrilerek de farklı anlamlar ihtiva etmeye başlamıştır. Tüm aşk ideolojilerinin çıkış noktası sayılabilecek Aristophanes efsanesinin her bireyin diğer yarısını araması ve bulduğunda tamamlanacak olması üzerinden şekillenmesi geleneksel romantik ideolojiler arasında yerini almış, romantik aşkın kültürel algısını derinden etkileyerek aşk duygusunun özgürce deneyimlenememesi üzerinde etkili olmuştur. Bu çalışma, Lanthimos’un yönettiği Lobster filmi üzerinden aşkın insanların tercihine bırakılmamasının insanların duygularından çok daha önemli olduğu bir dünyada aşk ideolojilerinin nasıl absürtleştiğini distopik bir evrende irdelemeye çalıştığı noktalara odaklanmaktadır. Doğal olan insan duygularını doğal olmayan ortamlar yaratarak sorgulamaya çalışan The Lobster filmi sonuç olarak değişen romantizm ve aile politikaları karşısında çeşitli anlamlandırma süreçlerinden geçen aşk kavramının yirmi birinci yüzyılda da farklı ideolojik yapılanmalar ile değişip dönüşmeye devam ettiğinin altını çizmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Sinema, Romantik ideoloji, Lanthimos, Aşk kavramı

Kaynakça

• Aron, A., Fisher, H.., Mashek, D., Strong G., Li H., Brown, L.L. (2005). Reward motivation and emotion systems associated with early-stage intense romantic love. Journal of Neurophysiol, 94, 327-337.
• Atwood, M. (1985). The handmaid’s tale. Anchor Books.
• Bahns, A., Crandall, C., Preacher, K. (2005). Similarity in relationships as Niche construction: Choice, stability and influence within Dyads in a free choice environment Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. https://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/psp/ 112 (2), 329-355.
• Beck, U., Beck-Gernsherim, E. (1995). The normal chaos of love. (Çev. Mark Ritter ve Jane Wiebel). Polity Press.
• Ben-Ze’ev, A. (2008). In the name of love: Romantic ideology and its victims. Oxford Scholarship Online.
• Berger, P., Berger, B., Kellner, H. (1973). The homeless mind. New York: Random House.
• Brucker, G. (2005). Giovanni and lusanna: Love and marriage in renaissance Florence. University of California Press.
• Bulcroft, K., Bulcroft, R., Smeins, L., Cranage, H. (1997). The social construction of the north american honeymoon, 1880–1995.” Journal of Family History 22 (4), 462-490.
• Buttler, J. (1997). Excitable speech: a politics of the performative. Psychology Press.
• Cancian, F. (1986). The feminization of love. Signs, 11(4), 692-709.
• Cole F.L. (1988) Content analysis: Process and application. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 2(1), 53–57.
• De Sousa, R. (2015). Love: A very short introduction. Oxford University Press, New York.
• Dowd, J.T., Pallotta, N.R. (2000). The end of romance: The demystification of love in the postmodern age. Sociological Perspectives, 43(4), 549-580.
• Fein, E., Schneider, S. (1995). The Rules: Time-tested secrets for capturing the heart of Mr. Right. New York: Warner Books.
• Fein, E., Schneider, S., Schneider, H. (1997). The rules II: More rules to live and love by. New York: Warner Books.
• Fischer, H. (2004). Why we love: The nature and the chemistry of romantic love. New York, NY: Henry Holt.
• Foucault, M. (1980). “The confession of the flesh,” in Michel Foucault: Power/Knowledge, ed. Colin Gordon (Hemel Hempstead, UK: Harvester.
• Foucault, M. (1988). “Technologies of the self,” in Technologies of the self, ed. L. H. Martin et al. London: Tavistock.
• Gadlin, H. (1977). Private lives and public order: A critical review of the history of intimate relations in the united states. G. Levinger, H.L. Raush (Eds). Close relationships: perspectives on the meaning of intimacy s. 33-72 Amhert: University of Massachusetts Press.
• Gasset, O.J. (2012). On love: aspects of a single theme. Martino Fine Books.
• Giddens, A. (1992). The transformation of intimacy: sexuality, love and eroticism in modern societies. Stanford University Press.
• Giordano, P. C. (2003). Relationships in adolescence. Annual Review of Sociology, 29, 257-281.
• Giordano, P.C, Longmore, M. A. ve Manning, W.D. (2005). Gender and the meanings of adolescent romantic relationships: a focus on boys. American Sociological Review, 71(2), 260-287.
• Glick, P. ve Fiske, S. (2006). The ambivalence toward men inventory: differentiating hostile and benevolent beliefs about men. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 23( 3), 519-536.
• Goode, W. T. (1959). The theoretical importance of love. American Sociological Review, 24(1), 38-47.
• Habermas, J. (1971). Toward a rational society: student protest, science and politics. Beacon Press.
• Heidegger, M. (2008). Being and time (Harper perennial modern thought). Harper Perennial Modern Classics; Reprint Edition.
• Holland, D.C ve Eisenhart, M.A. (1990). Educated in romance: women, achievement and college culture. University of Chicago Press.
• Hsieh, H. F., and Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277-1288.
• Illouz, E. (1997). Consuming the romantic utopia: love and the cultural contradictions of capitalism. Berkeley University Press.
• Illouz, E. (2007) Cold intimacies: the making of emotional capitalism. Polity Press, London.
• Illouz, E. (2012). Why love hurts: a sociological explanation of polity. Polity Press, Berlin.
• Irigaray, L. (1993). Je, tu, nouns: toward a culture of difference. (Çev. Alison Martin). New York, London: Routledge.
• Jackman, M. (1994). The velvet glove: paternalism and conflict in gender, class and race relations. University of California Press.
• Kierkegaard, (2013). Master Kierkegaard: The complete journals: summer 1847, fal/winter/spring 1847-1848, and summer 1848. Cascade Books.
• Kottak, C.P. (2004). Cultural anthropology. McGraw-Hill.
• Lasch, C. (1995). Haven in a heartless world: the family besieged. W.W. Norton and Company.
• Lynch K. (2009) Affective equality. love, care and injustice. Palgrave Macmillan.
• Maccoby, E.E. (1998). Family and public policy. The two sexes: Growing up apart, coming together. Belknap Press/Harvard University Press.
• O’Molly, S. (2016). The Lobster. 20.09.2020 tarihinde https://www.rogerebert.com/reviews/the-lobster-2016 adresinden erişildi.
• Paper, S. (2015). Writer/ director yorgos lanthimos exclusive interview-The Lobster. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2VsWWP4S-ZA
• Parsons, T. (1951). The social system. Glencoe, IL: Free Press.
• Plato (2003). The symposium. Penguin Classics; Revised ed. Edition.
• Ridgeway, C. (2011). Framed by gender: how gender inequality persists in the modern world. Oxford University Press.
• Rorty, A.O. (1987). The historicity of psychological attitudes: love is not love when alters not when it alteration finds. Midwest Studies in Philosophy, 10(1), 399-412.
• Rose, S.M. ve Frieze, I.H. (1993). Young singles’ scripts for a first date. Gender and Society, 3(2), 258-268.
• Shields, R. (1992). Lifestyle shopping: the subject of consumption. New York: Routledge.
• Szachowicz-Sempruch, J. (2015). Constructing family, understanding love: The precariousness of bonding and romance in Europe. Ed. Eszter Kovats. Love and Politics. Friedrich-Ebert Stiftung.
• U.S. bureau of the census, statistical abstract of the united states. (1998), 118th ed. Washington, DC: U.S.
• Weber, M. (1958). The protestant ethic and the spirit of capitalism. New York: Scribner.
• Weber. M. (1968). Economy and society. Totowa, NJ: Bedminster.
• White, M.D. ve Marsh, E.E. (2006). Content analysis: A flexible methodology. Library Trends, 55(1), 22-45.