Tag: Turkish Traditions

Turkish coffee house talk could teach the world a thing or two

As Turkey’s coffee culture arrives in London, it provides an opportunity for proper discussion about culture and politics

Kaya Genç

guardian.co.uk, Thursday 24 November 2011 10.30 GMT

A traditional Turkish coffee is served at a coffee house in Istanbul. A traditional Turkish coffee is served at a coffee house in Istanbul. Photograph: Fatih Saribas/Reuters

The coffee house was invented almost five centuries ago, in Istanbul. But it wasn’t Turks who turned the concept into a global business model, it was the Americans. While Turkish waiters kept on serving traditional coffee and water pipes to their loyal customers at cheap prices, Americans designed menus full of delicacies and calories, decorated their coffee houses with comfy chairs, and offered free Wi-Fi. Nevertheless they will still find it hard to convince loyal Turkish coffee addicts like me into giving up our die-hard drinking habits: for us, the siren logo represents terrible coffee consumed over comfortable furniture and the flavour of Turkish coffee remains indispensable.

It is good news for us, then, that Turkish coffee culture has now pitched up right in the centre of London: a few weeks ago, Kahve Dünyası (“The Coffee World”), our tardy response to the Starbucks model, opened in Piccadilly Circus. The chain was established as late as 2004 in Istanbul’s Eminonu district, where the first ever coffee house opened its doors in 1555. Many Turks have fallen for Kahve Dünyası’s traditional but also conveniently modern ways: there are 68 types of coffee on offer as well as an extensive chocolate collection. Orders are taken by a waiter and not at a counter, and the Turkish coffee will arrive at your table the way you like it: plain, or with little, medium or lots of sugar.

The Piccadilly branch even has a guidebook for those not sufficiently acquainted with Turkish ways of drinking coffee. The thick foam at the top you should enjoy at length, but avoid telve, the grounds left at the bottom of the cup. Many people drink the glass of water habitually served on the tray afterwards, but traditionally the water used to be drunk beforehand, in order to refresh your palate.

When I visited a Costa in Piccadilly last summer, I was struck – and annoyed – by the lack of attention paid to the customers. Of course, for US-style coffee chains, this has always been the deal: serve the customers with cheap coffee and leave them alone with their gadgets afterwards. But it is also easy to see what is lost when they are silently caressing their iPads: in Turkish coffee houses one finds a more noisy atmosphere, but also a real sense of community.

Once ideal places for Istanbul’s multicultural population who converged there to discuss current affairs, Turkish coffee houses are still spaces for conversation rather than work. Orhan Pamuk, Turkey’s Nobel laureate, made use of them in his monumental My Name is Red, where meddahs (storytellers) come together, telling vivid stories which make up chapters of the novel. Their stories are erotic, clever, funny and pointedly mocking of the country’s politicians. It is no surprise then that Istanbul’s coffee houses were closed by the authorities in the 16th century: spending too much time in them made people less virtuous, the authorities believed.

Turkey’s coffee houses are reminders of how liberty and conversation once triumphed in Ottoman culture, only to be suppressed later by authoritarian force. What a sight it would be one of these days to see the Turkish president Abdullah Gül, in London for a state visit, and his host the Queen discussing the future of Europe over a cup of Turkish coffee. Gül could tell a story or two about his own country’s experiences: how his prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, quickly became a symbol of resistance in geographies as diverse as Palestine, Egypt and Syria, and how the Turkish economy continued to grow in these troubled times. Not a single Turkish bank went bankrupt due to the euro crisis that struck Europe.

The older generation of Turkish diplomats used to have a peculiar way of dismissing popular demands in the country: they would label them “coffee house talk”. But Erdogan’s coffee house talk approach seems to have worked: over the past decade, national economic output tripled and average incomes doubled under a secular model that blends European and Islamic values.

Turks didn’t invent democracy, and there are plenty of signs that the country is still working out what the term really means (just look at the latest arrests of Kurdish politicians). But our coffee houses, in Istanbul or London, are good locations to discuss it, as they have been for the past five centuries.

via Turkish coffee house talk could teach the world a thing or two | Kaya Genç | Comment is free | guardian.co.uk.

November 25, 2011
Discussions on Achieving Millennium Development Goals (MDG) at Global-Local Approach Level and “Uzbek Model”: “Historical Experience, Contemporary Implementations and the Common Future”

Assoc. Prof. Dr. Mehmet Seyfettin EROL, Gazi University, Deputy Head of International Relations Department

The “Millennium Development Goals” (MDG) project which is being implemented under the leadership of the United Nations (UN) focusing
to solve the eight fundamental issues facing the human beings at the global level, regarded as a courageous step for the future. The realization of the goals
will be a historical turning point in terms of the great philosopher Immanuel Kant’s “Perpetual Peace” which is still regarded to be a utopia today without any
doubt. In other words, the UN has undertaken a mission issued by the leaders in the Millennium Summit 11 years ago and targeting a more prosperous, just and
peaceful world.

Well, how much is it possible to implement this project which is almost challenging the next millennium in the name of improving the welfare and quality of life of
the humanity? Especially, how will this issue be solved when materialistic perception of globalism that is being made dominate the world and subsequent
problem of evaluating moral-subjective values are considered? Will the UN be able to get over this paradox in an atmosphere in which quantity forestalls
quality and, with regard to this, “imposing” proposed solutions are put on the market as “standard” packages under
different names and an atmosphere in which all these “standard” packages cause more problems?

No doubt neither at present nor in the medium-term it is easy to answer these questions. Especially approaching to the issue in this way and seeking for
“yes-no” answers to the said questions will mean dynamiting the way to the solution. Anyhow, such an approach will go against both the spirit of social
sciences and the methodological understanding. Our goal here is, through this kind of questions, to bring up the matters that should have been asked and
raised in the first place and to ensure the development of possible solutions, may be by saying “the Emperor is bare.” For this reason, there is no need to
enter into philosophical discussions and very complex methods. Even putting the reality of the world and the statements in the published declaration will be enough
to depict a certain number of challenges in front of the process. Accordingly, although the MDG are launched as a project to find a common solution to the
problems of the humanity at the global level, in practice they are open to be attributed different meanings as long as a common road map cannot be introduced.

Especially after the post-Cold War era within a context where some local issues which could be solved locally are globalized over the concepts are brought into intervention tools,                                                                                                                     so it is inevitable for some nation-states to consider this type of UN based projects cautiously. Therefore, it seems that it wouldn’t be so easy for our world experiencing ebbs and                                                                                                                 flows between the globalization and nation-state process to realize the targets set in the MDG in terms of the implementing developments and practices
about “human rights-democracy- governance” understandings on national, regional and global basis. In other words, this cautious approach will endure unless the
mentality does not change and an objective viewpoint considering the local in many respects and in this context balancing the local-global with collaboration
is not put forth instead of top-down approaches and interventions. On the other hand, as it is partially mentioned above, this is not a problem that
cannot be overcome. The key to overcome it lies in listening the local, trying to grasp its realities, and taking its journey, experience, values and
sensibility into consideration. Hence, it is time to recognize the local as a solution partner rather than taking it only as the source and field of
problems. After all, the locals are global in total and today goals stated with regard to the MDG are predicated on the solution of the problem that grows out
of the locals within the pioneering powers of the globalization. Additionally, it should be accepted that the problems formed with regard to the MDG are not
belong just to the century or millennium we live and that their roots originates in centuries before.

As of today, it cannot be a coincidence that almost the whole of the problems which are on the spotlight of the world agenda and tried to be solved in the
context of the MDG are seen in the former colonial countries, too. As a matter of fact, the said problems’ moving away from their limited and local image,
spreading, deepening, gaining a global character and, at the end, turning into threats to and elements of instability for the future of the whole humanity
have their roots in the centuries before.

In such an environment how can geographical discoveries, colonialism and, as an inevitable outcome of these, imperialism together with the globalization be
kept out of all these? What can be said for materialism that tramples all moral values-beliefs by making material forestall meaning and what can be said for
distorted understanding of modernization that turns people into consumption slaves? Today how many of the problems emerging in the context of the MDG                                                                                                                                                        has followed a development process independent from these mentioned points?

We know that projects are represented as they are very much humanistic in the global manner. However, since they are kept limited to certain regions for
certain reasons and are launched as peculiar to these regions, they can face some challenges in practice. As a result, in resolution of such kind of
problems it is necessary first to have a clear and well-intentioned position and second to take steps accordingly. Then, what can be done at this point?

There is no need to go so far to find an answer to this question. To find an answer, it will be enough to look at successful approaches and practices that this
region contains within and implements in line with its realities and values, that have their roots in centuries before, that maintain their existence today,
and that take human as its base. In this context, two leading practices of civil society perception and solidarity in Uzbekistan are noteworthy. Focusing
on these practices shows that indeed they are successful models for a significant part of the problems drawn out of the MDG.

As a result of the historical practices and experiments, the civil approach understanding in Uzbekistan is based on the protecting the people from many
difficulties and threats and aiming social justice, equality and healthy social structure in such an unstable region like Central Asia. It is known that these
human based practices have the capacity to solve many interdependent social-individual problems with on time interventions. This nongovernmental
approach which is taking the family as the base and the woman and the children in the family as the focus and   imposing the necessity of all types of good education                                                                                                                                             is a successful practice within the power of the local completely. These practices are called “Makhalla System” and “Kamalat Youth Movement” and as mentioned above briefly                                                                                                                     they have got human based nongovernmental understanding, a deep history and tradition in the country.

The governing idea of the “Makhalla System” that has been implemented after the independence of Uzbekistan as one of the most concrete examples of participationary and direct
democracy is making the system, in which the basis of social structure is formed, the ground which prepares the youth for the future. With another words, “Makhalla is a big family”,                                                                                                        “Makhalla is the cradle of education” idea and together with “Economic development starts from the Makhalla” understanding constitutes the core of this model.

Constituting the first stage of the participatory administration, “Makhalla Foundations” started their activities in small Makhalla with 5000-7000 residents in which everyone knows each other.                                                                                         They have a spiritual, educational, informative and ability improving attitude. In this context, education, social assistance, environmental health and development; solution to social problems of                                                                                      the residents; help for the ill, aged and needy; employment and construction of social facilities for the youth; attachment of importance to women and their problems; and                                                                                                                             “Women Affairs Commission” working on a voluntary basis are outcomes of the “on-site and on time solution” perception of this model.

Moreower, “Kamalat Youth Movement”, formed in 2001, accepts young people aged between 14 and 28 as members and prepares them for the future with the necessary facilities.                                                                                                                     It is a civil society movement working actively on the issues such as unity of the youth, protection of their interests, improvement of their abilities, solutions to their problems, teaching them                                                                                                their social rights and guiding them in the way of entrepreneurship, and sport.

Therefore, as it is seen in this study primarily some problems emerged at the local-global basis from the aims put forth in the MDG and some concerns carried
by the local and ignored realities will be considered, firstly. Then, the importance and role of Uzbekistan will try to be emphasized in order to understand the
local very well and adaptation of successful practices of it into the global process. At this point, the contributions of “Uzbek Model” and its NGO understanding with “Mahalla System”                                                                                                        and “Kamalat Youth Movement” which are based on their historical depths, strong tradition, experience and human based dimensions can be considered as a
successful example and experience in terms of challenging with the fundamental issues facing the human beings at the global level.

November 22, 2011
Safranbolu & Traditional Turkish Houses

The known history of Safranbolu, located near the north western Black Sea coast of Anatolia, in Karabük nearby Zonguldak, dates back as far as 3000 BC. Once a city of Roman Province of “Paphlagonia”, Safranbolu has hosted many civilizations including the Roman, Byzantine, Seljuk and Ottoman Empires throughout its history. During the Ottoman era the town served as an important junction on the Kastamonu – Gerede (Bolu)- Istanbul route of the famous silk road. Safranbolu was at the same time a popular residence for Ottoman Royalty close to the Sultan and Grand Viziers. The city received its name from the saffron which is native in Safranbolu. The powder obtained from its flower is a very strong dye. Used in very small quantities, saffron adds a delicate flavor, distinct aroma and a very unique color to deserts and other food in the Turkish Cuisine. It is also used for some Turkish carpets as a unique dye. Also unique in Safranbolu is the famous Çavus grapes with its extremely thin skin and sweet flavor. Safranbolu displays its extremely rich historical and cultural heritage through 1008 architectural structures displaying a good example of Turkish architecture, all preserved in their original environment. These structures include the public buildings such as Cinci Hodja Kervansaray and Cinci Hodja Hamam, Mosques of Koprulu Mehmet and Izzet Mehmet Pashas, The Tennaries Clock tower, Old hospital premises, The guild of shoe makers, The Incekaya aqueduct, The old city hall and fountains as well as hundreds of private residences. Rock tombs and tumulus just outside the city are also of interest. Safranbolu was placed in the world Cultural Heritage list by UNESCO in appreciation of the successful efforts in the preservation of its heritage as a whole. Safranbolu has deserved its real name for its houses. These houses are perfect examples of old civilian architecture, reflecting the Turkish social life of the 18th and 19th centuries. The size and the planning of the houses are deeply affected by the large size of the families, in other words a total members of a big family living together in one house. The impressive architecture of their roofs have led them to be called as “Houses with five façades”. The houses are two or three storied consisting of 6 to 9 rooms, each room is entirely detailed and have ample window space allowing plenty of light. The delicate woodwork and carved wall and ceiling decorations, the banisters indoor knobs etc. all come together to form an unmatched harmony of architectural aesthetics and Turkish art.

Being strong and durable, functional, economical and aesthetic are the basic characteristics of the traditional Turkish house. The houses are built along the roads and on the edges of the squares in an order which reflects a strong respect for the neighbors. In most cases, the houses on both sides of the roads, which follow the configurations of the land, are separated with high walls and have overhanging sections on these walls, reaching towards the street. Entrance to the house is generally through an inner door which opens onto the garden. When household chores permitted, the lady of the house, whose privacy is ensured with the high walls, would go upstairs and look around and chat with neighbors from the overhanging windows of the hall which face either the street or the garden. The large windows of the upper floors protected with bars or grills allowed this outlet. Inside, the rooms were placed around a common space called sofa (hall), either on one or two sides or all around it. Sofas were in a sense interior court yards. It is an area which provides work space during the daily life as well as facilitating circulation among the rooms. They are opened to the outside sometimes completely on one side and sometimes on both sides. The rooms were arranged to meet all the needs of their occupants. There, one could sit and rest, sleep, eat, worship, work and even take a bath. The recessed cupboards, open shelves, storage cupboards and places for washing lining the walls functioned as built in furniture. The divans placed in front of the windows were both seats and beds and left centers of the rooms free. The main living area of the house was the upper floor while the ground floor was allocated to service spaces.The materials used in the houses varied according to the regions and climatic conditions. Wood and stone were used in the Black Sea Region, while it was stone and wood according to the locale in the West and the South and combinations of mud brick and wood in the Center and the Eastern parts of the country.

September 4, 2011
Village institutes’ (Köy enstitüleri)

In the 40s, Turkiye experimented with elevating the education level in the countryside. `Village institutes’ (Köy enstitüleri) were founded according to the ideas of philosopher-educator John Dewey, who had visited Turkey in 1924. In his opinion classical education had to be combined with practical abilities and had to be applied to local needs. However, it was the central government which regulated this by law. Mid September lessons started for the pupils of the village institutes. They took theoretical and practical lessons which were supposed to be useful for daily life in the village. There was also resistance against this secular and mixed education. It was feared that it would educate ‘the communists of tomorrow’. In 1953 the village institutes were closed.

August 10, 2011
Yoğurt “Yogurt”

The word is derived from Turkish yoğurt, and is related to yoğurmak ‘to knead’ and yoğun “dense” or “thick”. There is evidence of precultured milk products being produced as food for at least 4,500 years. The earliest yoghurts were probably spontaneously fermented by wild bacteria.The oldest writings mentioning yogurt are attributed to Pliny the Elder, who remarked that certain nomadic tribes knew how “to thicken the milk into a substance with an agreeable acidity”. The use of yoghurt by medieval Turks is recorded in the books Diwan Lughat al-Turk by Mahmud Kashgari and Kutadgu Bilig by Yusuf Has Hajib written in the 11th century. Both texts mention the word “yoghurt” in different sections and describe its use by nomadic Turks.

April 11, 2011
Lale “Tulip”

Everybody thinks that tulips come from Holland. Actually, Tulips are native to Central Asia and Turkiye. In the 16th Century they were brought to Holland from Turkiye, and quickly became widely popular.

The Tulip period or Tulip era is a period in Ottoman history from 1718 to the rebellion of Patrona Halil in 1730. This was a relatively peaceful period, during which the Ottoman Empire can be said to have begun to orient itself towards Europe.

The name of the period derives from the tulip craze among the Ottoman court society. Cultivating this culturally ambiguous emblem had become a celebrated practice. The tulip period illustrated the conflicts brought by early modern consumer culture and was a shared material symbolism. During this period the elite and high-class society of the Ottoman Period had established an immense fondness for the tulip, which were utilized in various occasions. Tulips defined nobility and privilege, both in terms of goods and leisure time.

The tulips begin to bloom around the end of March or beginning of April, depending on the weather. They bloom for several weeks and may delight the eye and the spirit for nearly a month.

March 28, 2011