Author(s): Fahri KAPLAN
The work named “Tezkiretü’?-?uarâ ve Tabs?ratü’n-Nuzamâ” of Latîfî which has an important place among poet tezkires (collection of biographies), has remarkable features in terms of coherency in evaluation of poem and poet and reflect the poetry of that period. Before evaluations of poets in preamble, Latîfî mentioned about poetry atmosphere of the period under different titles, he divided poets into two groups as capability of writing poetry and difference of methods that applied in result of these capabilities under the title of “Der Beyân-? Merâtib-i Aksâm-? ?u‘arâ” (Declaration of parts of degrees of poets). First part is “mâhir-i mübdi‘” (ingenious creator) poets, second part is “mukallid” (imitator) poets. Latîfî doesn’t find reasonable the poems of poets who were described as “Mukallid” (imitator), he divided these poets into five groups. In this classification, Latîfî ranged the “mukallid” (imitator) poets; start with poets who have not ability of writing poems and steal the poems of the others and continue with the poets who have high capacity of writing poems and could find new meaning and imaginations. The interpretations and stuations which are stated about evaluations of these stages of poets by Latîfî, have parallels with various notions which considered under the head of “intertextuality” nowadays. What do the group of “mukallid ve düzd” (imitator and stealer) which is steted by Latîfî at first stage, terms of intertextuality correspond with “hidden quotation/ snaffling”; “suhân-çîn” (who collect the words) at the second stage and group of "sarîk-ikelâm ve düzd-i hâm u mukallid-i 'avâm” (word stealer and absolute stealer and commons imitator) follow a way of between “hidden quotation and imitation”. Poets who is at the fourth stage use the way of “ translation” and “ shave”. The methods that applied by those, look like “rewriting” and “collage” from the terms of intertextuality. The poets who are at fifth and last stage, are “?âir-i mübdi’ler” (creator poets) and their methods are “rewriting” but “this rewriting” has higher quality than the former poets; rather than imitation of a text, create a new text from this text, a “rewriting” that based on “transfrom a text”. In this work, there is a comparative reading - via a text that is important according to history of classical Turkish poem critic – between classical period poem critic and terms with modern text critic and terms.
The Journal of International Social Research received 8982 citations as per Google Scholar report
