Cinema in Turkish-soviet relations in the Ataturk period

全文:

TURKISH-SOVIET RELATIONS AND CINEMA IN 1920S The cinema had been brought to Russia for the first time in 1896 by the Lumiere Brothers and the coronation ceremony of Tsar II. Nikola had been filmed. In the same year, the first film screening in Turkey had been made in the Ottoman Palace. [12, 2006: 202-203; 23, 1994: 11-13] After 1918, filmmakers in Russia began to use their arts in the service of the revolution. A broad propaganda work will have been carried out on the Soviet State and the mentality of its people. Soviet cinema which planning to educate the masses was looking for ways to provide general and political education. Cinema was an ideal tool for Soviet ideology commercially, aesthetically and politically. The first aim of Soviet cinema was to reflect and interpret a new social civilization in the process of its formation. [18: 13; 19, 1993: 25-29; 28, 2000: 156-157] In 1919, Lenin nationalized cinema in Russia by publishing a decree. Educational cinema, scientific cinema and animation cinema occupied a distinguished place in the cultural program that was implemented immediately after the nationalization process. Besides, documentary cinema, cinema for the villagers also existed. The regime also aimed to voice itself through films. [31, 2009: 130; 12, 2006: 207; 20, 1995: 119] In these years, when the National Struggle began in Anatolia May 19, 1919, conditions were pretty negative in Turkey. Ataturk considered Bolshevik Russia as an alternative to against the victorious big states, especially England, in these conditions. Because at that time, Soviet Russia, which was founded after the Bolshevik Revolution and the National Struggle movement led by Ataturk, was fighting against the same enemy. Thus, Turkish-Soviet friendship and rapprochement, which Ataturk called ‘friendship arising from natural conditions’ began. [14, 2018: 47] The Ankara government sent a delegation to Moscow on 11 May 1920 to ensure the friendship of the Soviets and, if possible, an alliance agreement with this state. The main purpose of this delegation, which entered into political relations with the Soviets officially for the first time, was to establish a friendship treaty with the Soviets and to provide the necessary financial support. The Turkish-Soviet Friendship Treaty was finally signed on March 16, 1921, after months of negotiations that faced various obstacles. [21, 1996: 19-27] This treaty signed between Soviet Russia and the new Turkey had a special place in the history of Turkish diplomacy. Because although the reasons and purposes were various for both states, this treaty made at a time when continuing war with the Western States, Turkey’s present borders drew with the Soviets and formed the basis of solidarity and the long-lasting friendship and cooperation with Russia. The treaty had articles that would reflect the socio-economic sphere as well as political. According to the article of the Treaty, the sides accepted to protect and to develop transport and communication, such as railroad and telegraph, to maintain ties between the two countries without interruption. The two countries undertook the necessary measures urgently to ensure the free passage of people and goods without any difficulties. [29, 2000: 27, 35] After 1923, on the matter of resolving the issues left over from Lausanne, the approaches of Western States against Turkey determined the Turkish-Soviet relations. About Mosul dispute which is one of the most difficulties remaining from Lausanne, while League of Nations’ attitudes were pushing Turkey to Soviets, Locarno System which prepared for adduct the victors of the First World War and Germany was also closing Turkey to the Soviet Union. This rappproachment resulted in the signing of a Neutrality and Non-Aggression Treaty on December 17, 1925. [21, 1996: 77] This treaty, which was originally signed for three years, was a document that ensured continuing the Turkish-Soviet friendship and cooperation which was laid the foundation with the 1921 Treaty of Moscow, in more or less harmony for 20 years. [29, 2000: 272] During this period, relations between the two countries reflected on the cinema positive generally. Actually, shortly before the Republic had been proclaimed there was a little roughness. The Soviet Attache who received the news that the movie Red Revolution or Around Death will be released in İstanbul reported to the situation to the Istanbul Office of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. At the end of the investigation, the Ministry of Internal Affairs in Turkey allowed the film to be screened because it did not degrade the Russian Government. [1; 27,2019: 31-33] In 1926, a letter forwarded to the Prime Ministry in Turkey from the Embassy in Moscow. The topic of the letter was exchange of ten of the films of Turkish and Russian. The films, foreseen for exchange, were watched at the Turkish Embassy in Moscow. Soviet empowered who visited the Soviet Embassy stated that the texts can be translated on films, changes can be made about the movies, even new films can be made at the request of Turkey. Turkey hadn’t got appropriate films that can be sent to the Soviet Union. But the films to be made by USSR and to be sent to Europa would be propaganda in favour of Turkey. Besides the USSR and Turkey would be closed to each other through film Exchange. [26, 2005: 36-41] Finally, the film exchange proposal, which was discussed at the meeting of the Council of Ministers on 28 July 1926, was approved. The precondition of exchange was the lack of propaganda nature directly or indirectly against Turkey’s order. [3; 27,2019: 34-39; 30,2004: 190] In 1920s, some Soviet films which some of them through this film exchange were screened in the Turkish cinema hall. Abrek Zaur, Namus (Honor), Stationmaster (Kollejski Registor) Abort, ‘The Heir to Genghis Khan" (Potomok Chingis-Khana or Storm Over Asia) were some of the Soviet films screened in Turkey 1920s. [30, 2004: 190; 27, 2019: 39-45] The Soviet film ‘Battleship Potemkin’ could not enter Turkish cinema hall due to its revolutionary nature. Battleship Potemkin was a propaganda movie which had been made with request of the Soviet Government in memory of the 1905 Revolution. This film, which made famous its director Eisenstein, was distinguished by its revolutionary qualities and propaganda elements. Therefore, notwithstanding the film liked by the authorities in Turkey it was not allowed to display. According to Turkish media press reports during this period, there were many cultural films produced by the Soviet cinema industry and attracted attention. Besides, the films against the revolution in the Soviet Union was finding the audience also in Turkey as the whole world. [27, 2019: 47-53; 30, 2004: 192] In these years Turkey did not have a remarkable film to be shareable with Soviets except ‘The Shirt Of Fire.’ Soviet Public Commissioner of Education Lunaçarski invited the director of this film, Muhsin Ertuğrul, to the Soviet Union in 1925. Ertuğrul firstly GOSKINO in Moscow, then VUFKU in Odessa worked.1 He met with geniuses such as Eisenstein, Stanislavsky and Meiherhold. During his two years in Russia, he made films such as Tamilla (1925), Five Minutes (1926), Spartakus (1926). It is said that Ertuğrul’s symbolism has GOSKINO effect, as in the selection of natural types. However, Ertuğrul's experiences in the Soviet Union are said to have been reflected quite partially in the films "A Nation Awakens" and "Aysel, the Daughter of the Swampy Roof". [17, 1949: 22; 24, 1962: 82-84; 30, 2004: 181-184] TURKISH-SOVIET RELATIONS AND CINEMA IN THE 1930S After 1930, the Soviet Union was no longer the only alternative for Turkey following a foreign policy in favour of the states of supporter the status quo. Turkey needs either both the Soviet Union and the Western States to fulfil the economic and social development and to increase its military power against the international developments, which began to be dangerous. Therefore, Turkey continued its good relations with the Soviet Union. Upon the invitation of the Soviet Government, Prime Minister of Turkey and Foreign Affairs Minister visited Moscow in April 1932. This visit provided a new ground for reconsidering political and economic relations between the two countries. [21, 1996: 108] TASS Agency (Telegrafnoye Agenstvo Sovetskogo Soyuza) published a notification on the visit of İsmet Pasha and his accompanying delegation to Russia. According to the notification, it was seen that the tight cooperation policy implemented until that time was correct. After that, it was necessary not only to maintain this situation but also to improve it. During the meetings, it was given special importance to the economic and intellectual relations between Turkey and Russia. The Turkish guests more closely witnessed the upliftment of Soviet Russia's in fields of the economic, public works and science. Thus, it was seen that the two countries faced similar issues and tighter cooperation was possible on these issues. A consensus was reached on measures to improve this practice. To this end, 8 million dollars long-term loan would be opened by the Soviet Government to purchase modern devices manufactured by the Soviets. It was found beneficial to strengthen cultural ties between the two countries and to make more lively and more direct interventions, especially among the scientific institutions. [32, 1932] This visit of İsmet Pasha, who was considered important in the relations between the two countries, was filmed. This film named 'What did Ismet Pasha see in Russia?' was brought to Turkey by Russian Embassy and particularly shown to some quests in Ankara and Istanbul. The Russian Consulate in Istanbul stated that they wanted to give this movie to the cinemas. In this case, the movie was examined according to the instructions. Major Rahmi, a military member of the delegation, who was in charge of film control in Istanbul, prepared a report about this film. Major Rahmi's claim about this silent and non-verbal film, consisting of six parts, was that it was a "very cunningly propaganda film" that presented communism vividly. According to Major Rahmi, even the name of the movie was meaningful. In general, it meant ‘See what's in communist Russia?’ It was within the authority of the film control committee to allow this film to be shown. However, a negative decision was not officially made about this film temporarily, with the idea that a political incident could occur. Because the film showed a trip of the Prime Minister and it was intended to be released by the Russian Embassy. It was noteworthy that this movie was brought by the Russian Embassy, not by a civilian, and wanted to be shown to the public. Despite these drawbacks determined by Major Rahmi, the Prime Ministry in Turkey permitted to be shown the film to avoid any political tension between Russia and Turkey. [4, 1933] After this visitation of Ismet Pasha, the Soviet Union and Turkey entered into a close cooperation between the years 1933-1936 circuits. The main reason for this situation was the grouping movement among the major states of Europe took a new look. Turkey and the Soviet Union were disapproving this grouping, which is one of the most dominant Quartet Pact, to be established between Germany, Italy, England, and France. Another important rapprochement reason was Turkey's proposal which about Lausanne's of the provisions of the amendment that disarm the Straits supported by the Soviet Union. In the wake of this rapprochement between the two states, a Soviet delegation headed by Voroshilov visited Turkey in 1933 and exchange of ideas was made. Eventually, on 17 November 1935, a protocol which stipulated extension of the Friendship and Neutrality Treaty dated 17 December 1925 and about extending its protocols and attachments for ten years until 1945, signed. [21, 1996: 109-110] The friendship which reflected international documents in this way was also encountered in many speeches of the leaders of the two countries. For example Comrades Molotov and Litvinov was talking about the exceptional value of the friendship between the Soviet Union and Turkey in the inaugural meeting of the Executive Committee. [34, 1934. ] The Zaindustralisation Magazine published a special issue and devoted it to Turkish-Soviet Friendship. This issue of the magazine included the words of leaders such as Atatürk, Inonu, Kalenin and Molotof about the Turkish Soviet friendship. [36, 1934] Atatürk also emphasized the good relations with the Soviets in the 1935 Congress, saying: ‘… Our friendship with the Soviets, as always, is solid and sincere. The Turkish nation knows this bond of friendship that remains from our dark days as an unforgettable precious memory. In all respects, values between the two countries are increasing and expanding… When we put forward the Straits Question, the fact that the Soviets reported the rightness and justifiability in our thesis caused deep feelings of friendship in the Turkish nation again… ’ [16, 2006: 826] But the Turkish-Soviet relations would not be continued in the same manner because of that Turkey cooperated with Britain in the conference in Montreux in 1936 and the following years. [21, 1996: 110] While the overall appearance of the relations between the two countries was like this, the 1930s when Turkey passed the stage of development by providing its security, for developments about cinema also could have been relatively suitable environment. In this sense, a development that could also be associated with the scope of Ismet Pasha's Russia trip in 1932 occurred at the end of 1934. It was reported that the sound cinema film machine and its accessories, which were presented to the National Economic and Savings Association by the Soviet Union, were at the port of entry and could not be removed because their tariffs were not paid. Thereupon, as a temporary solution, suspension of their tariffs for three months was approved on 5 December 1934. [5, 1934] Immediately afterwards, the draft law on the exemption of the tariffs and other taxes and duties of cinema machine, its parts and details which was presented to National Economic and Savings Association was submitted to the Assembly. According to the recital shown by the government; The National Economic and Savings Association had great service about spreading the economics and savings ideal to the public. Audio cinemas were one of the most valuable means of achieving this service. For this, a law was passed on the exemption of an audio cinema film machine and its parts and details which came from Russia and given to the association were exempted from customs duties and other taxes and duties. [10, 1934] In 1935, a memorandum was received from the Soviet Embassy in Ankara. The Soviet Union would organize an international cinema festival in Moscow due to the 15th Anniversary of Soviet cinema. Representatives of cinema, art and industry from various countries were invited to the ceremony. The opportunity to see the latest developments in Soviet cinema would have been given to the guests. The Soviets reported that they would be pleased to attend a person who was chosen by the relevant Turkish governance to represent Turkish cinema. However, the Party did not have an organization and preparation for joining this invitation, nor did it have a film. Despite this, the participation of a Ministry of Education Inspector with the delegation was approved to the invitation. [6, 1935; 7, 1935] In this period, the General Secretariat of the Republican People’s Party, which ruled the state, started to investigate the use of radio and cinema in the People’s Houses and party organizations for the first time in late 1932 and as a result, made some decisions. Upon there was no development in this area until the beginning of 1936, at the initiative of the 8th Bureau, responsible for cinema affairs of Republican People’s Party, this subject was reconsidered and a report was prepared. [8, 1936] In the report, the situation of Turkish cinema was compared with the examples of foreign countries and presented in detail. The number of audio and silent cinema was indicated in Soviet Russia, Britain, Germany, France and Turkey in 1933. It stated that while in Soviet Russia which has the most cinema there were 8.200 silent cinema and 1.800 audio cinema, in Turkey which has the least there were 36 silent cinema and 68 audio cinema. The theorists of the Russian regime, who understood that cinemas, which have a very important place compared to other representation tools, have become a kind of night schools, had loaded with a charge a methodical and very active instruction task to the cinema. As of 1936, there were 10,000 cinema hall and around 30,000 portable cinemas in Russia. [8, 1936] According to the report, Soviet cinema was the only example of cinematography that was not subject to the laws of capitalism. It was impossible to compare the Soviet products which are means of national industry, instruction and propaganda with the products of capitalist states. Because Soviet cinema was completely different economically and in terms of purpose. Although the state had great cash aids especially in Germany in making some films, there was no state cinema anywhere else than Russia. Of course, the states would not leave unchecked the enormous forces like cinema and radio. However, in all countries except the Soviets, the cinematography was already in the hands of private capital. [8, 1936] In the report, it was also mentioned that an organization should be made for the films to be made by the Party within the scope of the project, which we think was inspired by the Soviet example. It was recommended that the films provided through this organization should be screened in cinemas, People’s Houses, military dormitories and especially in the smallest villages by way of mobile audio film demonstrator machines. More than 14,000 mobile cinemas had been using for this work in Soviet Russia. [8, 1936] As can be understood from the report, we witnessed that Republican People’s Party, inspired by the Soviet example, made much more serious attempts in the 1930s than in the 1920s about the spreading educational (scientific-cultural) films. In fact, in 1923, the year in which the Republic was declared in Turkey, the subject become a current issue twice. Firstly, in the Congress of Economics, it had been thought that using of cinema-related to agriculture and education issues. [22, 1989: 22] In the same year, Kazım Karabekir Pasha submitted an official certificate on the establishment of sample places to the Turkish Grand National Assembly. In this certificate, due to the strong influence of cinema films, it was envisaged that scientific, technical, industrial cinema films should be shown to the public through sample places to be established. But the budget was not enough to open new cinemas. [2, 1923] While these intentions about using for the educational purposes of the cinema did not turn into practice in the 1920s, they would be reflected in Turkish-Soviet relations in various ways in the 1930s. Some of the films made by the Soviet cinema industry were intended to increase the professional knowledge of artisans, peasants and workers. For example, various scientific films, such as towards the harvest, beta vulgaris, tractors, were made to teach modern farming methods to Soviet villagers and it was compulsory to show them in cinemas. [27, 2019: 48] With a similar approach, a draft law prepared by the Ministry of Economy in line with the ideals of the national economy and savings was sent to the Assembly in 1935. In the justification of this draft law on the Instructional and Technical Films which came to the agenda in 1937; It was stated that export was one of the national issues for the national economic structure that was tried to be established and the economic development war of the country. A rational export needed organization, comprehensive information technics of planting, growing, collecting, separating, transporting, preserving, finding credit and sending them to the markets in a planned manner. The issue had to be spread to anyone who might be involved in this matter. It was not enough to use words and writing tools alone to ensure continuous development. The importance of the measures taken and the process followed was shown had to be vividly conveyed to the relevant sections. [11, 1937] It was given examples from several countries to convince the Assembly that this is the method should be followed. The examples given showed that the Soviets was not the only ones in this regard. According to the draft, the tools that were especially used in advanced cultured countries to achieve these goals were instructional films. Italy had set up mobile schools to show such films to villagers and explain them through conferences. Special cars which had an instalment of parlour, amplifier and sound film were formed. Canada had achieved a very fast agricultural development and a great industrial life at the same time. Canada had a ‘Government Pictures Bureau’ in its organization which was the counterpart to the Turkish Office (Foreign Trade Directorate). This bureau was interested in producing, distributing and displaying such films. There was a special section for films of this style at the Colonial Institut in England. In Australia, preparing and showing films about the sorting, packaging, growing, cultivation, orientation, and delivery of products was propounded as the strongest of commercial development tools. Various organizations were dealing with these jobs in Germany. Cinegraphique Internationale, which has its headquarters in Brussels, had an organization to show such films in many countries and especially in Latin countries within a plan. [11, 1937] In the past, it had been encountered similar examples in Turkey and Russia. In 1918, the agit-trains of the Soviets made their first journey. On these trains, on the one hand, the country was viewed, and on the other hand, film shows were held for the public. With the films shown, the public was informed and agitated. [12, 2006: 207] Also in Turkey, in 1933 the ‘Mobile Education Exhibition' initiative which implemented a working program of 44-days within a 1002-kilometre distance between Ankara-Samsun, held. In this exhibition, information on various topics was given to the teachers and the public, seminars and conferences were organized, painting exhibitions were opened and film shows were held. [13, 2005: 51] So that the law about Instructional and Technical Films was adopted in Turkey in 1937. According to the law, technical and instructional films brought by the government departments, the cars equipped with parlour amplifiers and sound films for showing these films, silent cinema and projection machines, machines and tools required for buying and making cinema films and also blank films would be inflowed to the country exempt from any tax and tariffs. Besides, it was made compulsory to show technical and instructional films along with the main films. The government would have been empowered to give the suitable ones produced by the government departments within the country or brought from abroad, to filmmakers free of charge. Filmmakers would have been compulsory to show these films instead of instructional and technical films like in the Soviets. [11, 1937] The law was enacted for instructional and technical films. But because the scientific or cultural films could not be made in Turkey, it was decided on films imported from abroad. Especially in the 1930s, agricultural educational films were imported from the USA and Europe by state institutions. In the selection of culture films imported from Soviet Russia was acted sensitively, as they were thought to contain direct or indirect propaganda of communism. [27, 2019: 49; 35, 1935] In the 1930s, the films that showed Lenin and Stalin as the founders of the new order were concentrated on in the Soviets. With a similar understanding, Soviet filmmakers attempted to make a movie that highlights Mustafa Kemal. Zahri, sent to Turkey by SOYUZKONO, came to Turkey in 1933, with the ready scenario of named ‘The Man Who Couldn't Kill’ film that animated the Turkish War of Independence and he wanted to make a film. The formed commission found the script reasonable and it was decided to shoot the film together. However, the Turkish side withdrew, stating that it was inconvenient to do business together because of the extreme revolutionism of the film’s topic. [30, 2004: 210] In 1934, Halil Kamil (HA-KA) started the preparations of the document film named ‘The Leaps Of Progress in Turkish Reforms (Tutsiya na podyome )’. The film, shot by Esther Schub, was completed in 1937. Likewise, In 1934, Soviet directors Sergei Yutkevich and Lev Arnshtam completed the document film ‘Ankara, The Heart of Turkey’ which for they prepared for the 10th Anniversary of the Republic. It is said that these two films are among the most widely shown in People's Houses. [25, 1968: 70-74; 15, 2011: 42] Yutkeviç came to İstanbul with Chicherin Boat on March 17, 1934, to hand over the film named ‘Ankara, The Heart Of Turkey’. This movie was at the disposal of the Ministry of Education. The Ministry gave the distribution and enterprise of the film in Turkey to HA-KA Film. [27, 2019: 73] Also, the first film centre (with laboratory), dubbing and montage repair shop were established with the help of Soviet filmmakers Esther (Esfir) Shub and her group who has been in Turkey. The USSR was interested in the training of the Turkish filmmakers and wanted to cooperate with Turks in the field of cinema and carry out projects in this field. Soviet filmmakers had done the shooting of the cities such as İstanbul, Ankara, İzmir for ‘The New Turkey Coming' film which had been likened the Advance Soviet (Sagay Soviet). For this work, which was initially successfully carried out, Soviet historians said that it was interrupted by the producer of documentary films, citing its commercial inefficiency. [30, 2004: 212] The film named 'Aysel, The Girl, From the Swampy Roof’ which was started to its shots in 1934 was completed in 1935 when there were trends such as emulation to Soviet village films and transferring foreign films. The subject of this film was taken from the life of the peasant, who made up 75% of the country. It is said that this movie bore traces of Muhsin Ertugrul experience in the Soviets. [25, 1968: 71-72; 24, 1962: 100-101] Apart from Ertuğrul, Abidin Dino was another Turkish artist worked in the Soviet cinema industry. Dino went to the Leningrad cinema factory in 1934 at the invitation of the Soviet director Yutkevic. The Miners film, which prepared its decoration by Abidin Dino, was shooted by Lenfilm in Moscow, then was introduced in Turkey. [30, 2004: 212-213; 27,2019: 99-101] Some of the Soviet films that were can be released by approving in Turkey in the 1930s were as follows: The ‘Mustafa’ film which its original name is the Life Path (Putyovka v zihn) was released in Turkey in 1932. [27, 2019: 54-55] Soviet productions were generally imported by HA-KA Film and were screened at the Majik Cinemas, also operated by the same company. The Storm (Groza) and Ukraine (Okraina) were two Soviet films which were released in the 1933-1934 cinema season in Turkey. These films were brought by director Sergei Yutkeviç who came to Turkey for surrendering the film of ‘Ankara, The Heart of Turkey’ and M. Vitkin who was one of the executives of the Leningrad Film. [27, 2019: 56] Among these, the film Okraina, along with some other with was also screened at the Soviet film night specially organized for Mustafa Kemal and the government officials in Ankara. [27, 2019: 59; 30, 2004: 211] The Chelyuskin which also shown in Turkey in 1935 and consists of the actual images was one of the Soviet documentary films. [27, 2019: 59-60] In 1938, the movie named ‘Petro I’ was screened at the Soviet Consulate in İstanbul. [33, 1938] Some of the films were also trouble between Turkey and Russia. In 1936, the German-movie Moscow-Shanghai (Moskau Schanghai) began to be screened after receiving approval from the Turkish censorship committee. However, the Soviet Embassy in Turkey requested from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to be banned from the show of this film which included the negative consequences of the Bolshevik Revolution. However, when the request reached the Ministry of Interior nearly a year later, the film's screenings in Istanbul, except Anatolia, had been already over. Although there was no juridical ground for banning the film, the screening of the film was banned to prevent a possible diplomatic crisis. [27, 2019: 83-85] Another film that disturbed Moscow was the British-made Red Scout (Knight without Armor), which was released at the end of 1937. Istanbul Consul of the USSR immediately took action. As a result of the USSR Embassy in Ankara stepped in also, The Turkish Interior Ministry banned the screening of the film. [27, 2019: 86-87] In 1938, it was made a complaint by Charge D'affaires of Russia because Stalin’s picture was removed from a movie to be screened in Turkey. The situation reported to the Foreign Ministry and the Prime Ministry by being inquired Governorship of Istanbul. In the reply, it was stated that the pictures of Stalin were not taken out in the Soviet films seen by the film control commission until now. However, this film, which came the latest one and was a short film of actuality, about ‘how the Russian children were raised’ had been seen as in propaganda nature, and only this piece was banned from being shown to the public in Turkey.[9, 1938] This controlled cooperation with the Soviet Union about cinema was not a single and premise alternative for Turkey. After a brief superiority of German Films, American films dominated the Turkish Film Market, although Western European and Soviet films were also importing. American companies began to dominate the Turkish film market after 1925, and this superiority continued during and after the Second World War, which European cinemas stumbled upon. [15, 2011: 42] THE CONCLUSION The cinema which entered Turkey and Russia at the end of the 19th century has had the chance to develop after the Bolshevik Revolution. At least, in 1918 when the war ended, while efforts to benefit from cinema for consolidation of the revolution began in Soviet Russia, Turkey was entering into a new war. Unofficial good relations with Soviet Russia that started in 1919 became official after 1920 and continued during Atatürk's period. Good relations with the Soviets also paved the way for cooperation on cinema. However, The Soviet Union made Turkey's cooperation in the field of cinema was not the only country. Also, we cannot say that the relations are completely unobstructed. The first leaders of Turkey who interested in creating a developed Turkey and prosperous Turkish society, particularly Ataturk, wanted to benefit from the Soviet example in this regard. Especially, the cooperation studies that started in the 1920s on the use of cinema for educational purposes continued in the 1930s. In these cooperation efforts, which also the Soviets could also provide political and economic interest in, one of the most sensitive issues on the Turkish side was that films containing propaganda for communism were not shown in Turkey. Conveniences such that Turkish artists gained experience in the Soviet Union, Soviet filmmakers came to Turkey to make films, and some technical equipment was provided by the Soviets can be seen as a result of the good relations with the Soviets in this period. However, as with all other issues, the sensitivity of Turkey against the communist politics of Soviet Russia, starting from the years of the Liberation War of Turkey, has always kept relations at a certain level.

作者简介

Meltem Tekerek

Başkent Public Education Center, Directorate General For Lifelong Learning, Ministry of National Education

Email: meltemtekerek@gmail.com
Dr. Sci. (Hist.), Assistant Director Ankara, Turkey

参考

补充文件