BCA Times
  ÖNE ÇIKAN HABERLER
  • <strong>Altın Kalem Ödüllü Yazar Metin ŞAHİN ile Röportaj</strong>
    Altın Kalem Ödüllü Yazar Metin ŞAHİN ile Röportaj
  • Kahramanmaraş’ta 7.4 büyüklüğünde deprem meydana geldi
    Kahramanmaraş’ta 7.4 büyüklüğünde deprem meydana geldi
  • Yazar Prof. Dr. Dr. Naim Derebaşı ile Röportaj
    Yazar Prof. Dr. Dr. Naim Derebaşı ile Röportaj
  • Yazar Rıdvan Serin ile Röportaj
    Yazar Rıdvan Serin ile Röportaj
  • Yazar İhsan Kutlu ile Röportaj
    Yazar İhsan Kutlu ile Röportaj
  • Yazar Ümmühan Yaşar ile Röportaj
    Yazar Ümmühan Yaşar ile Röportaj
  • Altın Kalem Ödülleri Sahiplerini Buluyor
    Altın Kalem Ödülleri Sahiplerini Buluyor
  • Hayatınızı Değiştirecek 20 İnanılmaz Paulo Coelho Sözleri
    Hayatınızı Değiştirecek 20 İnanılmaz Paulo Coelho Sözleri
  • Abdülhamid Han’ın Altın Saati Açık Artırmada
    Abdülhamid Han’ın Altın Saati Açık Artırmada
  • Berlin Indie Film Awards’tan ”Leyla Hanım” Filmine Ödül
    Berlin Indie Film Awards’tan ”Leyla Hanım” Filmine Ödül




YAZARLAR

Onur AKBAŞ / Yazar
Onur AKBAŞ / Yazar
Eklenme Tarihi: 11 Mayıs 2018, Cuma 01:12 - Son Güncelleme: 11 Mayıs 2018 Cuma, 01:12
Font1 Font2 Font3 Font4



 WHAT IS MEANING OF POPULİSM AND ACCORDING TO WHOM

 

      Populisms’ meaning is: “1- A political approach that strives to appeal to ordinary people who feel that their concerns are disregarded by established elite groups. 2-Support for populist politicians or policies.3- he quality of appealing to or being aimed at ordinary people.” According to “Oxford Online Dictionary”.  If you are an American or English (May be we can say like that: “İf you are living in western countries…”) There is no problem your point of view. But if you are eastern people who lives in this century, you have a conceptual problem. Because we may be confused meanings of modern. But it is not like that. So if you have a kind of a work and it is not important whether it is an art or it is not. If you mention about new things you are a popular…

 

       The problem is: if somethings have populist qualities; they can be old fashioned. So you can ready  for trade of old and sacred things.  Tarry Eagleton and other intellectuals make equality “populism and literacy” and their “history of literature”. While they are explaining populism, they are appealing word of ordinary. Because ordinary is mean:  simple, in context. For example Jonathan Barry says: “Literacy and literature have been fundamental in discussions of popular culture in the early modern period. On the one hand, popular culture, defined negatively in contrast to elite culture, has often been seen as the culture of the illiterate, a culture transmitted orally by customs and practice, not through the printed word. It has been argued that the growing literacy of the middling sort, and the sharp social distinctions observed in the ability to sign, created a growing divide between a literate, respectable culture and the oral world of popular tradition. Yet, at the same time, historians have sought to uncover the values of popular culture through the growing mass of ‘popular literature’, notably ballads, chapbooks and other ephemeral publications but also the radical and other writings of the minority of working people who recorded their views and experiences in print.” John Rule almost approach male/female’s point of view: “Few male workers spent less than twelve hours of most weekdays at work, whether this period of time was determined by the task in hand; by the number of pieces needed to be made to maintain a living; by custom or agreement; or even by Act of Parliament. For some work was not separated from home and individuals aggregated not so much into distinct workforces as into occupational communities. Even for those whose work was separated from home, the associations of the workplace could continue in out-of-work hours, centred for example, on particular public houses and manifested from time to time in public ceremony. Episodes such as riots or strikes can sometimes provide fissures revealing levels of working life otherwise submerged, but work was inevitably central to working-class experience, and the historian must try to go deeper in search of the everyday. High days and holidays too reveal the occasional: it is often harder to discover the ‘usual’. ‘Outsiders’ to particular worlds of work were simply that, while ‘insiders’ concealed as much as they revealed. Sometimes they did so deliberately (see below, p. 178); sometimes because they expected no interest in the ordinary, as in the case of working-class autobiographers who preferred to relate extraordinary moments such as a religious conversion or a political awakening.” And another intellectual Susan Dwyear Amussen says: “Popular culture has been one of the most fruitful areas of study in social history. As readers of this volume are by now aware, the concept of popular culture is not without its problems: it is too easily reined, it easily becomes static and unified, and it suggests too sharp a divide between elite and popular. Historians have sometimes made popular culture seem more coherent than it really was. We need to restore the complications, by looking at the divisions and conflicts it expresses. One way to do this is to focus less on the exceptional — popular festivals, rituals and the like — and more on a broader conception of culture which emphasises the values and norms of ordinary people as expressed in the course of their lives.1 Rather than being extraordinary, popular culture is everyday, and our task is to understand the ‘webs of meaning’ within which people lived and understood their lives.

 

        Shortly if you are thinking about yourself as a reader or intellectual people may be you can stumble. And maybe you have not a difference a buyer tomato, potato. And difference of literacy do awareness.                                                                  

 

» YAZARIN DİĞER YAZILARI


BU YAZIYLA İLGİLİ YORUM YAZIN