Torture and pain in a spotlight on recent history

CORRECTION: An earlier version of this story incorrectly stated Aslı Tunç's name. This version reflects the correction and clarifies a quote by Tunç. 

One night, you come home after work, turn on the TV and start flicking through the channels. Flick, another talent show about singing or cooking. Flick, a talk show with famous guests chit-chatting. Flick, some series about something or other. Flick, another series, flick, flick, flick...

But hang on a second – flick back and prisoners are being tortured to death, forced to eat excrement and undergoing mock executions while others are protesting by setting themselves on fire.

As the shock wears off, viewers familiar with Turkey’s recent history realize the scenes are recounting the aftermath of the Sept. 12, 1980, military coup and are showing the real suffering endured at the infamous Diyarbakır Prison No.5.

A second shock comes as the episode ends and a dedication to those who lost their lives in the Diyarbakır prison – accompanied by a list of their names – flows across the white screen.

For those who do not know the recent history, seeing what happened during those tumultuous years can deliver a very strong jolt.

Although the initial shocks fade, a sense of astonishment soon dawns on the viewer: How can a weekday, primetime TV series relate all these true stories, given that it is still considered unusual to discuss how thousands of people were victimized by the military coup just 20 years ago?

“We can’t talk about the effects of the coup without telling about the damage it did to the left – especially the Diyarbakır, Mamak and Metris prisons. The prisons should not be disregarded in any way,” said Nilgün Öneş, scriptwriter for the series “Bu Kalp Seni Unutur mu?” (Can This Heart Forget You?).

The series takes its name from a famous song whose lyrics start with “Even though years pass, can this heart forget you?” The story of the series is based on real experiences from the 1980 military coup until the 2000s. The series is a continuation of “Hatırla Sevgili” (Remember Darling), which depicted events from the pre-1980 period and was also written by Öneş.

“When ‘Hatırla Sevgili’ ended, I thought about what would be told if the story continued, and Diyarbakır prison was on my agenda even that day,” she said. “We will see Metris prison too in the following episodes.”

Öneş does not believe, however, that broadcasting a list of names of people who died in the Diyarbakır prison is a matter of courage. “Is it possible to go on your way without commemorating those who died after you researched the prison, talked to people who stayed there and looked at what was written and even drawn?” she said. “This has nothing to do with courage. This is a list that has been published many places before.”

There was a large team behind the series, especially those involved in its creation. Prominent academics Murat Belge and Yasin Aktay, as well as journalists Fehmi Koru, Tuğrul Eryılmaz and Ertuğrul Kürkçü, are all advisers for the series.

“I took part in the project because I thought the series would aid in better understanding the political truths in Turkey,” said Kürkçü, who was heavily involved in the pre-1980 leftist youth movement.

Political atmosphere helps

According to Kürkçü and other experts, the present political atmosphere has facilitated the production of the series. For Kürkçü, the series’ production can alternatively be seen as courageous and not courageous. “It is possible to talk about these things amid Turkey’s current atmosphere, but there is still the risk of being outcast by some sections of society. For this, it can be considered courageous,” he said. “Ten years ago, however, you wouldn’t have been able to find even one channel willing to release this series.”

Esra Arsan, an academic from Bilgi University’s communications department, said: “Productions and scripts highly overlap with the atmosphere. Today’s Turkey should face its social memory and the present agenda is about the military’s anti-democratic coups and torture. A series on religious orders, for instance, would not find a place for itself today.”

Increasing awareness

According to Arsan, there are even university or master’s students who learn about these events for the first time and have their worlds shaken. “I find these kinds of productions positive because they draw attention to the events,” she said.

“The events did not happen just in movies, they were actually experienced. These kinds of series also trigger other things, like conferences organized at universities. They are important for awareness and for looking deeper into social memory,” Arsan added.

Orhan Miroğlu, a columnist at daily Taraf who experienced torture in the Diyarbakır prison, said he watched some of the torture scenes in “Bu Kalp Seni Unutur Mu?” He believes these kinds of series and books can help the public face up to realities that are covered up for many years. “But still, most of the people who were tortured in the Diyarbakır prison would find the torture scenes in this series very naïve, since the reality was much harsher,” said Miroğlu.

Polls conducted recently revealed that young generations are in the dark about the 1980 military coup and its aftermath. Coup leader Gen. Kenan Evren, who was also known for his dedication to painting, was more often identified as a painter by the younger generations when asked about him.

Communications professor Aslı Tunç from Bilgi University said her students began to show interest in contemporary Turkish political history after watching “Hatırla Sevgili.” Another issue of debate surrounding these kinds of TV series is whether they reduce the meaning of what happened by popularizing the issue. Tunç said that even though popular culture, by nature, is superficial and aims to entertain the masses, it still could be useful as a learning tool.

“We have to accept that there is a gigantic knowledge gap among youngsters because of their high school education, so popular culture conveniently fills this gap,” she said. “Unless the historical events and political incidents are distorted or portrayed within a certain ideological framework in these TV dramas, I think they can be used for educational purposes.”

Öneş also thinks the popular series is an effective way to instruct the public. For her, TV is a very significant medium for productions that have an issue to convey. “You can enter millions of homes in one night,” she said, adding that she does not understand criticism that says popularizing something makes it empty.

“Why would popularizing something mean emptying it when popular culture is in our lives so much?” she said. “History cannot be learned from one series, but a series can awake people’s interest.”

Tunç also opposes looking at popular culture in an elitist way. “I believe that every possible means should be used to achieve a collective catharsis in our society. We need to confront our past since we were unable to reach closure where justice has been served,” she said. “So, I am against looking down on popular culture with a simplistic or elitist attitude.”

“Today we know there is no way to analyze the Kurdish problem without knowing the brutality at the Diyarbakır prison,” Tunç added. “I think it is rather courageous to air such a production on national TV to reveal the dark years in our modern history.”

General Staff reacts against series

The series has drawn a reaction from the General Staff. At a recent press meeting, General Staff secretary Ferit Güler said, “In some media institutions, subjective, one-sided and irrational allegations have been leveled against military personnel who served in the Turkish Armed Forces for years or were killed by a terrorist organization.”

Esat Oktay Yıldıran, who was commander of Diyarbakır Prison No.5 during at the time when the torturing occurred, was shot and killed on a public bus in Istanbul at the end of the 1980s. His name was synonymous with torture among victims and witnesses. Those who survived the prison said Yıldıran’s dog was trained to attack if prisoners did not salute him as commander.

Daily Taraf columnist Orhan Miroğlu said he experienced torture in the Diyarbakır prison. He said one time, when Yıldıran came to visit the prisoners, the commander touched his arm and told officials to give him and about 50 other prisoners a shower, which meant torture.

“I heard on a TV program that Yıldıran’s family plans to file a suit against the producers of the series. I hope they do, so that I, and I believe many other people, will get involved in the court and the torture will be discussed before the court. I know that Yıldıran was responsible for torture, but he was not the only one,” said Miroğlu.

“Today I am 43 years old and I still feel detached from life when people talk about the Diyarbakır prison,” businessman Selim Dindar, who was held in the Diyarbakır prison for three years, told daily Radikal in an interview. “I can’t help myself; I want to yell and cry. I have a wife and a child, a big family and friends. I cannot stop myself and I cry in front of everyone.”