Category: Culture/Art

  • Why Is Turkey’s Prime Minister at War with a Soap Opera?

    Murad Sezer / Reuters

    An egg-stained and damaged billboard advertising the Turkish soap opera Magnificent Century in Istanbul on Jan. 9, 2011, following a pro-Islamist protest against the popular TV series

    Crammed with trinkets, eunuchs, wine, giggly harem girls, seduction and intrigue, Magnificent Century — a Turkish soap opera based on the life and reign of Suleiman the Magnificent, the 16th century Ottoman sultan — might at times appear gaudy, predictable and rife with historical inaccuracies. To the show’s estimated 150 million viewers, spread across Turkey, the Balkans and the Middle East, however, it’s nothing more than good entertainment. To Turkey’s Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan, though, it’s blasphemy.

    During a speech in late November, Erdogan rained fire and brimstone on the show’s makers. “That’s not the Suleiman we know,” he said, referring to the depiction of the Ottomans’ great ruler as a drinker and womanizer. “Before my nation, I condemn both the director of this series and the owner of the television station. We have already alerted the authorities, and we are awaiting a judicial decision.”

    (MORE: Turkish P.M. Erdogan: We Cannot Deny Our Ottoman Past)

    Erdogan has had little reason to complain about the wave of Ottomania that has propelled programs like Magnificent Century to record ratings. Intent on restoring Turkey’s links with the Balkans and the Middle East, and just as keen to use his country’s newly assertive foreign policy to win votes at home, the Prime Minister has probably done more than anyone else to rekindle Turkish nostalgia for the age of empire. (Critics allege that he likely fancies himself a modern-day sultan.) What Erdogan appears to resent, however, is any interpretation of the Ottoman past that is less than adulatory — or at odds with Islamic values. A sultan on horseback is fine. A sultan on a bender is not.

    Within days of the Prime Minister’s remarks, Turkish Airlines, the national air carrier, reportedly scratched Suleiman and his dancing girls from all of its in-flight programming. At roughly the same time, Oktay Saral, a lawmaker from Erdogan’s mildly Islamist Justice and Development Party (AKP), announced that he would table a law banning programs that infringe on “national values” by “insulting, denigrating, distorting or misrepresenting” historical personalities and events. (An existing law already prescribes prison terms for those guilty of “denigrating the Turkish nation.”) “Magnificent Century will be banned from the airwaves in 2013,” Saral gravely announced.

    To Ihsan Dagi, a columnist at Today’s Zaman, a newspaper that until recently tended to toe the government’s line, the Turkish leader’s vendetta against Magnificent Century is emblematic. “The very top of the [ruling] party, Erdogan, acts as if he is entitled to interfere in the lives and choices of the people, as if he is responsible for their choices,” Dagi wrote in a recent article. “The mandate to rule seems to have been interpreted as a blank check to transform the identities and lifestyles of the people.”

    Fittingly, the day that Dagi’s article appeared, news broke that Turkey’s media watchdog had decided to fine a private channel $30,000 for airing an episode of The Simpsons in which God was depicted as being under the sway of the devil. The program “made fun of God” and “encouraged young people to drink alcohol on New Year’s Eve,” the Radio and Television Supreme Council said in a statement.

    Erdogan is not the first to express his criticism for Magnificent Century. Since the show first aired two years ago, thousands of Turks — conservative Muslims and nationalists alike — have protested its irreverent portrayal of Suleiman. Now, however, the row, while still about values, is also about power — or, more specifically, about the degree to which Erdogan has begun to rule Turkey by fiat.

    (MORE: Fetih 1453: Turkish Epic Revels in Ottoman Past)

    Several years ago, it was still possible to argue, as some did, that it’s not what Erdogan said that mattered, but what his government actually did. Today, the two are slowly becoming indistinguishable. What the Prime Minister says, or thinks, is what goes.

    The chemical reaction that began with Erdogan’s contempt for Magnificent Century and ended in his associates’ bid to pull the plug on the show is just the latest example. Two years ago, during a visit to the eastern province of Kars, the Prime Minister called a local statue to Turkish-Armenian reconciliation a “monstrosity.” A year later, the statue was torn down. Earlier this year, Erdogan declared that abortion was tantamount to “murder” and cesarean births were “a procedure to restrict Turkey’s population.” Within a week of the speech, the Health Ministry announced that a regulation placing new curbs on abortion was in the works. (After a public outcry, the draft law was eventually shelved.)

    Protests notwithstanding, Erdogan has also pushed ahead with a number of pet projects, including the construction of a mosque in the middle of Istanbul’s entertainment district and another, a much larger one, on a hilltop overlooking the city. He hasn’t taken kindly to criticism either. Journalists who knock or lampoon the Prime Minister routinely face lawsuits, fines or dismissals — this in a country that jails more reporters than China and Iran, according to the Committee to Protect Journalists.

    Erdogan’s popularity, boosted by a decade of rapid economic growth, shows few signs of abating, however. Having pledged not to run for another term as Prime Minister, Erdogan is now attempting to consolidate his legacy by transforming Turkey into a U.S.-style presidential system. Well short of an absolute majority in parliament and facing resistance from the sitting President himself, he may be facing his toughest challenge to date. Undaunted, the Turkish leader doesn’t shy from suggesting that he has found a perfectly suitable candidate for the 2014 presidential election — himself.

    Read more:
  • Israel Matzav: Turkey dropping Greenwich in favor of Mecca

    Israel Matzav: Turkey dropping Greenwich in favor of Mecca

    Turkey dropping Greenwich in favor of Mecca

    The four-faced Mecca Clock Tower is seen in the holy city of Mecca

    In a further sign of its growing Islamization, Turkey is switching the meridian it uses to set its clocks from Greenwich Mean Time to Islamic Mean Time. It will be using the clock tower pictured above, which is located in Mecca (Hat Tip: Joshua I).

    According to a law passed in 1925, Turkey uses the 30th meridian east of Greenwich to set its time. This meridian, which passes through Izmit, puts Turkey in the same time zone as many European countries and is identified as GMT+2. The meridian our ministry wants to use now is 40th, which passes through eastern Turkey. If we adopt that, then Turkey will be GMT+3, which will distance us from Europe one more hour.

    As the 40th meridian also passes through Saudi Arabia, it will mean Turkey will be twinned with Riyadh instead of Athens, as it is now.

    Then I noticed something else relevant. It was a news report about the Mecca Kingdom Clock that is being installed in Zem Zem Towers Building, close to the Kaaba. Six tons of gold were used in that impressive structure.

    The Saudi Kingdom is now calling on Muslim countries to use Islamic Mean Time (IMT), which will based on this clock tower as a reference, and abandon Greenwich Mean Time (GMT). According to reports, many Arab media outlets, led by Al-Jazeera, are now arranging their programs according to the new time reference.

    Our ministry said it postponed the ending of winter time for “technical reasons.” We have not been told why, and the proposed dropping of winter time will take place in 2014 instead.

    We hear that the ministry is determined to use the 40th meridian. This will mean we will have to set our time according to IMT — that is, the Islamic time — from now on. Remember when the idea was first floated, and how international traders and financial concerns in this country had risen against it on grounds it would negatively affect Turkey’s foreign trade?

    So when will they be adding ‘Islamic’ to the name Republic of Turkey? What could go wrong?

    via Israel Matzav: Turkey dropping Greenwich in favor of Mecca.

  • Turkey to push for return of ‘stolen’ artefacts

    Turkey to push for return of ‘stolen’ artefacts

    hurriyet-mWestern museums are in a “panic” over the repatriation of “stolen” artefacts to Turkey, the country’s Culture and Tourism Minister Ertugrul Gunay has said, adding that he hopes regional neighbours also reclaim their ancient treasures.

    Turkey will continue putting pressure on museums, especially many in Western Europe, to return the country’s illegally removed ancient treasures, Culture Minister Ertugrul Gunay has warned.

    Gunay told the Hurriyet Daily News that Ankara’s new art repatriation policy has caused “panic” among Western museums, but that the effort had been largely successful and would continue. He added that the he hoped Greece, Iraq and Syria would also act to recover “stolen” art.

    via Turkey to push for return of ‘stolen’ artefacts – FRANCE 24.

  • Hands-off style of exploring Istanbul is ancient history

    Hands-off style of exploring Istanbul is ancient history

    ISTANBUL — That museum-schooled “look, don’t touch” detachment from the artifacts of history won’t get you anywhere in a place like Istanbul, an intricate, crafted quilt of multilayered pasts and a thronging, multicultural present.

    The philosophy can’t help but be a little different here. The Turks know what the Romans know and what the citizens of any of the world’s ancient cities have long since figured out: Archaeology is everywhere, folks. Respect for the past can’t be allowed to get in the way of the working metropolis.

    Istanbul is, indeed, the “Please Touch Museum” of archaeology.

    My own introduction to this mind-set came as soon as we checked into our hotel. The Eresin Crown Hotel is an obscenely luxurious modern establishment located smack in the middle of the historic heart of Istanbul — in fact, on the very site of the Byzantine emperors’ Imperial Palace.

    Like every other project in Istanbul, down to the most humble sewer repair, the Eresin Crown’s construction in the 1990s doubled as a serious archaeological dig. The results are on display for you to see. Many pieces of ancient Byzantium are behind glass in stately looking cases as you would expect, but many others simply stand around the main lobby and the ground-floor bar. I walked over and placed my hand on a sixth-century marble column, tracing my fingers over a low-relief cherub sculpted there millennia ago by some Greek artisan employed by a Caesar.

    History in my hands. My Midwest museum-patron mind reeled.

    Some days later, my daughter and I ventured out to the ancient land walls of Constantinople, breached by the Ottoman Turks in 1453 at one of history’s most fateful turning points. Destroyed and rebuilt at intervals over the centuries since, the walls are still there to see; the workaday Turks don’t take much notice of them. And indeed, our Istanbul-native guide had some difficulty figuring out how to even access them from the roaring superhighways that now crisscross the walls and trace their 1,600-year-old course.

    As a first taste, we explored what remains of the Yedikule Fortress, a seven-towered medieval bastion anchoring the southern junction of ancient Constantinople’s land and sea walls in what is now the working-class Fatih neighborhood of Istanbul.

    Built up over the centuries, this fortress marks the site of what was once the principal ceremonial entrance to the Byzantine Imperial City.

    12017945 large

    We decided to scale the parapets of one of the towers added a bit later by Ottoman Sultan Mehmed II in the 15th century.

    That’s right. My teenage daughter and I took to the steep, centuries-old masonry steps and went to the rooftops.

    This is technically a state-run museum, and there were a couple of sleepy attendants in a booth somewhere, but what we chose to do inside this otherwise deserted Byzantine-Ottoman fortress was no concern of theirs.

    At the summit of the tower, I immediately made my way to one of the battlements and caught my breath at the astonishing view across the sprawling Istanbul skyline and the Sea of Marmara spread out before me.

    My hand came to rest on the corner of one of the crenellations piercing the battlement wall. To my horror, the entire heavy block of centuries-old masonry shifted beneath my arm.

    I peered down at the grassy area six or seven stories below me and noticed more than a few similar pieces of dislocated Ottoman-period masonry half buried there. One easy shove was all it would take — I would leave off studying the processes of history and, instead, for what would surely be one of the only times in my life, participate in them.

    I carefully replaced the chunk of masonry and made sure it was secure.

    History might lie in my hands, but after all, it was the respect and admiration for it that had brought me halfway around the world to the parapets of the Yedikule Fortress in the first place.

    We resumed our survey of the fortress and the rest of the Walls of Constantinople, using, as our principal tools, our eyes — and of course our imaginations.

    via Hands-off style of exploring Istanbul is ancient history (gallery) | cleveland.com.

  • Sarah Brightman ♫♪ HareM

    Sarah Brightman ♫♪ HareM

    4988006883147Harem is a 2003 album by English singer Sarah Brightman. It mixes her operatic voice with Middle-Eastern and Indian rhythms and vocals. Thanks to an idea of Frank Peterson, the producer of this album, in the song “Mysterious Days”, they included the vocals of the late singer Ofra Haza, who worked with Peterson in 1997 on her eponymous album.

    Following the release of Harem, Brightman launched the Harem World Tour and the DVD The Harem World Tour: Live from Las Vegas.

    Contents

    • 1 Track listing
      • 1.1 Bonus/Unreleased tracks
    • 2 Charts, sales and certifications
      • 2.1 Charts
      • 2.2 Sales and certifications
    • 3 References

    Track listing

    1. “Harem” – 5:45 (cover of “Canção do Mar” by Amália Rodrigues and Dulce Pontes)
    2. “What a Wonderful World” – 3:40 (originally sung by Louis Armstrong)
    3. “It’s a Beautiful Day” – 3:56 (adapted from the Un Bel Di Vedremo aria from Giacomo Puccini’s Madama Butterfly) (Cover of “Ein Schöner Tag” by Schiller)
    4. “What You Never Know” – 3:24
    5. “The Journey Home” – 4:56 (cover of song from Bombay Dreams by A.R.Rahman)
    6. “Free” – 3:45
    7. “Mysterious Days” – 5:17 (featuring Israeli singer Ofra Haza)
    8. “The War is Over” (featuring Iraqi singer Kadim Al Sahir and English violinist Nigel Kennedy) – 5:15
    9. “Misere Mei” – 0:54 (from Gregorio Allegri’s “Miserere”)
    10. “Beautiful” – 4:35 (cover of “Beautiful” by Mandalay)
    11. “Arabian Nights: Scimitar Moon/Voyage/Promise/Hamesha/Alone” – 8:50 (featuring Natacha Atlas)
    12. “Stranger in Paradise” – 4:27 (adapted from Alexander Borodin’s Polovetsian Dances)
    13. “Until the End of Time” – 4:32

    Bonus/Unreleased tracks

    1. “You Take My Breath Away” (American version) – 6:50 (originally released on Brightman’s 1995 album, Fly)
    2. “Guéri De Toi” (International version) – 3:50 (French version of “Free”)
    3. “Tout Ce Que Je Sais” (Canadian version) – 3:28 (French version of “What You Never Know”)
    4. “Sarahbande” (Japanese version) – 3:60
    5. “Namida: When Firebirds Cry” (Harem Ultimate Edition) – 4:10
    6. “Where Eagles Fly” (unreleased song with Eric Adams from Manowar) – 3:53

    Note: This album has been released with the Copy Control protection system in some regions.

    Charts, sales and certifications

    Charts

    Chart (2003) Peak
    Position
    U.S. Billboard Top Classical Crossover Albums 1
    Swedish Album Chart 1
    Greek Albums Chart[2] 3
    Canada Top Albums 7
    Japan Oricon Top Albums 8
    Mexico Top 100 Albums Chart 10
    Portugal Albums Top 30[3] 12
    Germany Media Control Albums Top 100 12
    Australia Albums Top 50s[3] 16
    Hungary MAHASZ Top 40 Album 20
    Austria Albums Top 75[3] 22
    Finland Albums Top 50[3] 25
    Dutch Albums Top 100[3] 27
    New Zealand Albums Top 40[3] 29
    U.S. Billboard Top 200 Albums 29
    U.S. Billboard Top Internet Albums 29
    Denmark Albums Top 40[3] 35
    Norway Albums Top 40[3] 36
    Swiss Albums Top 100[3] 53
    UK Albums Chart 172
  • The Fall And Rise Of Turkey At Eurovision

    The Fall And Rise Of Turkey At Eurovision

    Posted by John Kennedy O’Connor on Dec 20th, 2012 in Articles | 1 comment

    The Fall And Rise Of Turkey At Eurovision

    In the last week, TRT have announced they are withdrawing Turkey  from the 2013 Eurovision Song Contest. The nation that once struggled at Eurovision until televoting and diaspora kicked in have decided enough is enough, and are criticising some of the core rules of the Song Contest in the 21st century.

    Can their arguments be justified, or is Turkey simply taking their ball away and not letting anyone else play? John Kennedy O’Connor looks at the rise and fall of Turkey at Eurovision.


    So farewell then Turkey.“We’ve had enough”, yes that is your catchphrase. Unless there is a miracle, the 2014 Eurovision Song Contest will not be staged in Istanbul, Ankara, or indeed anywhere on Turkish soil. The Turks have taken their key changes away and have withdrawn from Eurovision 2013, following in the steps of Bosnia-Herzegovina, Portugal and Slovakia.

    The latter three countries have never won the contest, nor indeed made any real impact on the scoreboard at all, so their absence probably lessens the blow to the contest line-up. Indeed, the Slovaks haven’t been seen in the Saturday night show since 1998, when they placed 21st. Over 48 years the Portuguese have always had a very dubious relationship with the Eurovision voters, never having placed in the top five at all, the only country from the pre-expansion of 1993 to suffer that ignominy. And if it wasn’t for Hari Mata Hari’s 3rd place in 2006 there wouldn’t be much for the fans to remember about Bosnia & Herzegovina either.

    Magdalena Tul

    Magdalena Tul, Poland 2011 (Photo: Pieter Van Den Berghe (EBU))

    Many people have added Poland to the list of withdrawing countries as well, even though they are technically continuing their AWOL run from 2012. Their impressive debut in 1994 (scoring a splendid 2nd place) has never been matched and only one further top ten finish ever occurred for them, with seven of their last eight entries failing to qualify.

    If we’re including Poland, then we can’t forget  previous entrants Monaco, Morocco, Andorra, Luxembourg and the Czech Republic, who are all staying away from Malmö in May. Luxembourg and Monaco are sorely missed in some quarters, both having triumphed in the Contest back in the days when it was largely a Western European event. Six wins between them is the same as the ex-Soviet Union and Yugoslav bloc can boast combined. Yet by the time those two departed the competition, neither was enjoying particularly good results. Monaco’s return was short lived when they failed to progress beyond the semi-final stage.

    It may smack of bad sportsmanship, but you can understand really why these countries have given up the ghost.

    But not so Turkey.

    From Zero To Hero, Every Way That They Can

    Like Portugal, the Turks had a very dodgy start to their Eurovision story, finishing last upon their debut in 1975. Certainly, with only Israel and Yugoslavia for company amongst countries outside the traditional Western and Nordic European geography, all three countries entries seemed at odds with the music being submitted by everyone else.

    Turkey had another problem… their mutually antagonistic relationship with the Greeks next door. Greece got a one year start on the Turks in the contest and withdrew when Turkey entered the following year. The Turks did the same in 1976 when Greece opted for a Cypriot singer singing (or some might say wailing) an impassioned plea for her homeland, so recently occupied by the Turkish army. It wasn’t until 1978 that the two countries felt comfortable enough to share the Eurovision stage and despite the odd withdrawal on both sides for varying reasons, the two settled down to be familiar Eurovision nations over the coming decades; despite neither nation finding much appreciation for their efforts.

    Then the voting system began to shift away from the reliance on national juries. Turkey found they were to be one of the biggest surprise beneficiaries of the embryonic tele-voting instigated in 1997. Prior to this year, the Turks had grazed the top 10 only once, when in 1986 they found themselves at a high of 9th out of the 20 songs. Otherwise, their track record was grim. 17 entries on the bottom half of the scoreboard, including three last places, two with no points at all.

    All that changed in 1997 when to the astonishment of most, including the Turks themselves, they soared up the scoreboard to finish 3rd, with four countries awarding their song ‘Dinle’ douze points! Remarkable, particularly when considering that their previous eighteen entries had amassed just three 12 points between them! Turkey’s new found popularity was something of a blip, but there was clear evidence that a rosier, nay, more golden, Eurovision future lay ahead. Five countries tele-voted in 1997 and all had the Turks on their score sheet; the Germans putting them at the very top for the very first time.

    Despite this excellent result (perhaps made even more remarkable as the Turkish entry was performed in the cursed second place in the running order), it didn’t immediately spark a particularly great new future for the continually failing Eurovision nation. The next couple of years didn’t bring top ten finishes, but they did bring a regular ‘douze points’ from the tele-voters of Germany. A nation with a very high population of Turkish expats, it was clear that a sense of national pride was prevailing and the German votes were being heavily influenced by this loyalty.

    Things began to get better again for the Turks from 2000 when they started experimenting with English songs. Now it wasn’t just the expats in Germany, but those in the Netherlands and France who were willing to show their support year in, year out. Despite a couple of slip backs, it seemed that with heavy diaspora support through tele-voting, Turkey were finally getting the knack of the Contest and this proved the case when at last they took gold in the 2003 contest in Riga, with the belly-dancing Sertab Erener squeaking home in 1st place, bringing the contest to Istanbul and putting a Eurovision Song Contest trophy on the TRT Executive’s shelf.

    From that moment on, there really was no looking back. Although another victory has so far eluded the Turks, generally speaking, they’ve had one of the most consistent records of any country since the turn of the century. Indeed, since winning in 2003, only three of their entries have failed to place in the top seven in the final. Pretty remarkable for a country that had such an arid period of failure for so very long. But all of a sudden, TRT appear to have fallen out of love with the contest they had become to be so apparently good at. Why?

    Failing To Live It Up

    According to the press release issued by the station, the Turkish TV executives are unhappy with both the current voting structure (50% jury/50% tele-voting) and that the Big Five nations (France, Germany, Italy, Spain, and the United Kingdom) are given automatic places in the Saturday night Grand Final. Both are reasonable arguments that have been raised by many fans. But are they reasonable for the Turks?

    Yuksek Sadakat (Turkey 2011)

    Yuksek Sadakat, Turkey 2011 (Pieter Van Den Berghe (EBU))

    Prior to 1993, every country that wanted to enter could do so, simply by complying with the EBU rulebook. From 1993 until 1999, every country was vulnerable to qualification procedures, based largely on their previous results. Since 2000, this has not applied to any of the Big Five. So what? What impact has this had on Turkey? In this period, the Turks have only once failed to qualify for the final of the Eurovision Song Contest. That was in 2011 in Düsseldorf, when they placed 13th in their semi-final.

    But was this failure now due to the imposition of the 50/50 voting split that had served them so well in 2010? Clearly, not. In Oslo, the Turks had done very nicely; their second best finish, ever in fact. Even if there hadn’t been a 50/50 split in the 2011 semi-final, neither the jury nor the tele-voters put the Turks in their top ten, so regardless of which method was used, they wouldn’t have qualified. Both sets of judges simply didn’t rate the song and lest we forget, it is a Song Contest after all.

    Love Me Back?

    Since the Big Five nations don’t participate in the semi-finals, but they do vote, they can hardly be blamed for the failure of Turkey’s 2011 entry either. Do the Turks perhaps think that had they not had to qualify at all, their result in the 2011 Final would have been better? Hard to imagine based on the 13th place out of the 19 entries in their semi that an automatic qualification would have produced something particularly special from Yuksek Sadakat (who were an internal selection). But being in the final directly, even if you ultimately finished last, is a big difference than being knocked out in the semi.

    Does the Big Five rule create an unfair advantage for those who enjoy that status, particularly to the detriment to those that don’t? Apparently not. Since their win in 2003, only when Germany won the contest convincingly in 2010, have Turkey ever been bettered in the final by one of the Big Five, with Italy scoring 2nd the following year when the Turks were relegated.

    Can Bonomo, Turkey 2012

    Man-boat, Man-boat, you have made a Man-Boat! (Andres Putting (EBU))

    Maybe that’s the point. Since being given automatic passage, the record of the Big Five isn’t particularly impressive. The point could be argued therefore that since they aren’t generally coming up with songs that are deemed of particularly high quality by those judging them (the viewers or the jury) that putting them straight through to the final is unfair on countries that are only narrowly missing out on a place in the final. That’s a strong argument indeed. If you take certain examples (‘Even If‘ in 2008 and ‘Love Will Set You Free‘ in 2012, both for the United Kingdom), it’s impossible to imagine some of the Big Five entries coming through a semi-final in a million years, based on their low scores achieved in the Grand Final.

    But without the Big Five’s viewing figures on the Saturday night attracting sponsors, without their entry fee offsetting that cost for the smaller countries taking part, and without their presence legitimising the Contest, there would be no Eurovision Song Contest. Indeed there would be no EBU. Twenty songs are still given the chance to compete in the Eurovision final every year, the same number generally speaking that has competed each Saturday night since the late 1970’s. It’s a tricky argument with fair play on one side and economic reality on the other.

    Shake It Up?

    Qualification began in 1993. Twenty Contests have now been held under a number of qualification systems. Thirteen of them have been staged with the ‘big’ nations removed from the procedure. Turkey failed to qualify twice: Once with the Big Five (then the Big Four) also having to navigate qualification, in 1994 under a questionable system that wasn’t revealed until after their 1993 result was deemed insufficient; and once more in 2011 as discussed. It isn’t at all clear that the Big Five rule has impacted Turkey in any way shape or form. If they’re implying that the Big Five songs simply aren’t good enough and should be tested in qualification, then that’s a reasonable argument indeed and one that I am sure many other nations ponder. Certainly the fans and viewers do. If this is the reason Turkey have left, it’s not an argument that’s easily refuted.

    There can be no Ley with no Rimi Rimi, but can there be Eurovision without Turkey? It would seem so. Can there be a Eurovision without the Big Five? I would suggest not. Yes, it survived 1982 when neither France nor Italy turned up, but perhaps the saving grace came from the global mega-hit that won that year. Did anyone really notice that Germany weren’t there in 1996 or that Italy was missing in action over an extended period? I did, but who can say if the wider audience cared?

    Kenan Doğulu Shaking It Up, Turkey 2007

    Kenan Doğulu Shaking It Up, Turkey 2007

    Turkey has benefitted from the introduction of tele-voting more than most. You only have to compare their record prior to 1997 and since to pick up on that. Arguably, you could also point to the expansion of the Contest as having been favourable to the Turkish entries. The arrival of their ex-Soviet neighbours did certainly help their fortunes. Could it be that switching to English made all the difference? Or that their entries just got better? Who knows? Whatever the reason, Turkey has been one of the most consistently high scoring nations over the past decade. It’s a shame they are now leaving, just as it’s a shame when any country leaves the contest.

    Turkey’s Withdrawal Is A Loss To The Contest

    I’m all in favour of a smaller Eurovision final. Writing as a fan, I really dislike that the final has become so huge. When it first increased to 22, then 23, then 25 nations, I was thrilled; but not anymore. It should shrink. Alas, I can’t put forward any meaningful way of doing this; at least not one that would likely gain universal acceptance and besides, nobody has asked me. Nations withdrawing is not the answer; particularly as this diminishes the semi-finals, not the final itself.

    Personally, I won’t miss Turkey at Eurovision. I know I’m generally out-of-step with the masses of fans who seem to adore the Turkish entries, but their entries have always left me cold; or indeed, sometimes quite hot under the collar. I’ve sat with gaping jaw and bulging eyes on many occasions as Turkish entries I’ve truly despised have rocketed up the final scoreboard, punching way above their weight, largely in my mind anyway, thanks to their reliance on their tele-voting diaspora. There, I’ve written it. 2003, 2004, 2008 and 2010 particularly spring to mind as results that left me silenced. However, I fully accept that music (perhaps more so ‘Eurovision’ music) is totally subjective and one man’s Après Toi is another man’s Diggi-Loo, Diggi-Ley. I always bow to the result.

    TRT have taken the decision to withdraw from the Eurovision Song Contest, but the reasons given simply don’t add up. They won’t be in Malmo and that diminishes the Contest as a whole; as indeed does the absence of Luxembourg, Monaco, Poland, Portugal and every other nation not taking part. I hope they come back soon, but for now it’s farewell and the end of this Eurovision chapter for Turkey.

    Source :

    magdalanatul