土耳其和奥斯曼帝国的通信:Burçe Çelik撰写的《一部批判性的历史》(评论)

IF 0.8 3区 哲学 Q2 HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE
Sirri Emrah Üçer
{"title":"土耳其和奥斯曼帝国的通信:Burçe Çelik撰写的《一部批判性的历史》(评论)","authors":"Sirri Emrah Üçer","doi":"10.1353/tech.2024.a933114","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History</em> by Burçe Çelik <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Sirri Emrah Üçer (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History</em><br/> By Burçe Çelik. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2023. Pp. 254. <p>Burçe Çelik’s book represents a novel and bold contribution to the field of Turkish studies by providing a comprehensive two-century-long history of telecommunications. Instead of focusing on individual networks, she introduces a conceptual framework that unifies singular networks within a temporal continuity. This contribution brings to mind Horwitz’s <em>Communication and Democratic Reform in South Africa</em> (2006), as Çelik adds topics of ownership and the development of material telecommunications infrastructure to the discursive analysis of communication. Her study is also in close resonance with the accounts of other critical Turkish communication scholars like Haluk Geray and Funda Başaran. The strength of the book comes from its long-term and multinetwork approach to Ottoman/Turkish communications/telecommunications history. However, this also exposes some areas open to criticism.</p> <p>Çelik’s analytical framework comprises both geopolitical and social elements. The geopolitical aspect encompasses topics such as the peripheralization of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey in the global capitalist division of labor, the material development of the telecommunications network, and the shift in ownership from the government to international companies. The social element of Çelik’s analysis divides Ottoman/Turkish history into two periods: what she calls the “non-capitalist modernization” before 1950 and the “transition to capitalism” after World War II. The social element also introduces “silenced communities,” including Armenians, Kurds, women (particularly working-class women), and progressive youth, as key actors in communication history, beyond the more prominent “noisy actors” such as the state, military, political elites, and “top-down” modernizers. Çelik argues that the “non-capitalist modernism” of the late Ottoman and early <strong>[End Page 1015]</strong> Republican periods was closely linked to reform efforts aimed at restoring the “circle of justice” within a social context characterized by an “oriental political society” where communities opposed the government, rather than a “Western-style civil society” with individuals opposing the government.</p> <p>Çelik introduces the concept of “capitalist imperialism” and mentions “noisy actors” such as international companies and organizations. However, her proximity to a political stance that views the late Ottoman Empire and early Turkish Republic as a militarist colonizer rather than a passive periphery limits the role assigned to international capital markets, companies, and organizations in the geopolitics of telecommunications within the book’s narrative—from the International Telegraph Union (later International Telecommunications Union) to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. This limitation stems from the book’s tendency to isolate Ottoman/Turkish modernism from global capitalism until the 1950s, reflecting a theoretical position with a narrow definition of capitalism and adherence to the outdated circle of justice argument.</p> <p>Çelik’s book provides an illuminating analysis of the challenges faced by Turkish import substitution in developing a national informatics industry. By tracing the trajectories of NETAŞ and Teletaş from their inception in the 1960s and 1970s to their privatization during the Özal period in the 1980s (pp. 105–12, 125–27), readers gain insight into the historical constraints of Turkish developmentalism through the lens of telecommunications history. However, the book does not consistently align the geopolitics of communications with the general narrative of Turkish history. In essence, the book presents a history of Turkey with short, separate fragments of communication history. In other words, the book falls short of renarrating Turkish history through the prism of communication history.</p> <p>When discussing the recent period, the book surprisingly overlooks the role of mobile telephones, a notable shortcoming. The mobile telephone network stands out as the first communication network initiated by the private sector rather than the government. Furthermore, with the integration of the mobile telephone into the internet as a mutant smartphone, it has evolved into a significant medium of popular culture. In Turkey and the broader peripheral world, the true popularization of the internet surged through mobile telephone networks. In Turkey, a small portion of the population has access to the internet via fixed lines, while for the majority, the internet experience—encompassing social media, digital platforms...</p> </p>","PeriodicalId":49446,"journal":{"name":"Technology and Culture","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History by Burçe Çelik (review)\",\"authors\":\"Sirri Emrah Üçer\",\"doi\":\"10.1353/tech.2024.a933114\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p> <span>Reviewed by:</span> <ul> <li><!-- html_title --> <em>Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History</em> by Burçe Çelik <!-- /html_title --></li> <li> Sirri Emrah Üçer (bio) </li> </ul> <em>Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History</em><br/> By Burçe Çelik. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2023. Pp. 254. <p>Burçe Çelik’s book represents a novel and bold contribution to the field of Turkish studies by providing a comprehensive two-century-long history of telecommunications. Instead of focusing on individual networks, she introduces a conceptual framework that unifies singular networks within a temporal continuity. This contribution brings to mind Horwitz’s <em>Communication and Democratic Reform in South Africa</em> (2006), as Çelik adds topics of ownership and the development of material telecommunications infrastructure to the discursive analysis of communication. Her study is also in close resonance with the accounts of other critical Turkish communication scholars like Haluk Geray and Funda Başaran. The strength of the book comes from its long-term and multinetwork approach to Ottoman/Turkish communications/telecommunications history. However, this also exposes some areas open to criticism.</p> <p>Çelik’s analytical framework comprises both geopolitical and social elements. The geopolitical aspect encompasses topics such as the peripheralization of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey in the global capitalist division of labor, the material development of the telecommunications network, and the shift in ownership from the government to international companies. The social element of Çelik’s analysis divides Ottoman/Turkish history into two periods: what she calls the “non-capitalist modernization” before 1950 and the “transition to capitalism” after World War II. The social element also introduces “silenced communities,” including Armenians, Kurds, women (particularly working-class women), and progressive youth, as key actors in communication history, beyond the more prominent “noisy actors” such as the state, military, political elites, and “top-down” modernizers. Çelik argues that the “non-capitalist modernism” of the late Ottoman and early <strong>[End Page 1015]</strong> Republican periods was closely linked to reform efforts aimed at restoring the “circle of justice” within a social context characterized by an “oriental political society” where communities opposed the government, rather than a “Western-style civil society” with individuals opposing the government.</p> <p>Çelik introduces the concept of “capitalist imperialism” and mentions “noisy actors” such as international companies and organizations. However, her proximity to a political stance that views the late Ottoman Empire and early Turkish Republic as a militarist colonizer rather than a passive periphery limits the role assigned to international capital markets, companies, and organizations in the geopolitics of telecommunications within the book’s narrative—from the International Telegraph Union (later International Telecommunications Union) to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. This limitation stems from the book’s tendency to isolate Ottoman/Turkish modernism from global capitalism until the 1950s, reflecting a theoretical position with a narrow definition of capitalism and adherence to the outdated circle of justice argument.</p> <p>Çelik’s book provides an illuminating analysis of the challenges faced by Turkish import substitution in developing a national informatics industry. By tracing the trajectories of NETAŞ and Teletaş from their inception in the 1960s and 1970s to their privatization during the Özal period in the 1980s (pp. 105–12, 125–27), readers gain insight into the historical constraints of Turkish developmentalism through the lens of telecommunications history. However, the book does not consistently align the geopolitics of communications with the general narrative of Turkish history. In essence, the book presents a history of Turkey with short, separate fragments of communication history. In other words, the book falls short of renarrating Turkish history through the prism of communication history.</p> <p>When discussing the recent period, the book surprisingly overlooks the role of mobile telephones, a notable shortcoming. The mobile telephone network stands out as the first communication network initiated by the private sector rather than the government. Furthermore, with the integration of the mobile telephone into the internet as a mutant smartphone, it has evolved into a significant medium of popular culture. In Turkey and the broader peripheral world, the true popularization of the internet surged through mobile telephone networks. In Turkey, a small portion of the population has access to the internet via fixed lines, while for the majority, the internet experience—encompassing social media, digital platforms...</p> </p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":49446,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Technology and Culture\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-19\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Technology and Culture\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"98\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2024.a933114\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"哲学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Technology and Culture","FirstCategoryId":"98","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1353/tech.2024.a933114","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"哲学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HISTORY & PHILOSOPHY OF SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

评论者: 土耳其和奥斯曼帝国的通信:Burçe Çelik Sirri Emrah Üçer (bio) 《土耳其和奥斯曼帝国的通信:一部重要的历史》:布尔切-切利克著。香槟:伊利诺伊大学出版社,2023 年。第 254 页。Burçe Çelik 的这本书为土耳其研究领域做出了新颖而大胆的贡献,提供了一部长达两个世纪的全面电信史。她没有将重点放在单个网络上,而是引入了一个概念框架,将单个网络统一在一个时间连续性中。这一贡献让人想起霍维茨的《南非的通信与民主改革》(2006 年),因为 Çelik 在对通信进行话语分析的基础上,增加了所有权和物质电信基础设施发展的主题。她的研究还与其他批判性土耳其传播学者,如 Haluk Geray 和 Funda Başaran 的论述产生了密切共鸣。该书的优势来自其对奥斯曼/土耳其传播/电信史的长期和多网络研究方法。不过,这也暴露了一些值得批评的地方。Çelik的分析框架包括地缘政治和社会两个方面。地缘政治方面包括奥斯曼帝国和土耳其在全球资本主义分工中的边缘化、电信网络的物质发展以及所有权从政府向国际公司的转移等主题。Çelik分析的社会因素将奥斯曼/土耳其历史分为两个时期:她称之为1950年前的 "非资本主义现代化 "和二战后的 "向资本主义过渡"。社会元素还引入了 "沉默群体",包括亚美尼亚人、库尔德人、妇女(尤其是工人阶级妇女)和进步青年,他们是传播史中的关键参与者,超越了国家、军队、政治精英和 "自上而下 "的现代化者等更为突出的 "喧闹参与者"。Çelik认为,奥斯曼帝国晚期和共和国早期的 "非资本主义现代主义 "与旨在恢复 "正义圈 "的改革努力密切相关,当时的社会环境特点是社区反对政府的 "东方政治社会",而不是个人反对政府的 "西式公民社会"。Çelik引入了 "资本主义帝国主义 "的概念,并提到了国际公司和组织等 "喧闹的参与者"。然而,她的政治立场接近于将奥斯曼帝国晚期和土耳其共和国早期视为军国主义殖民者,而非被动的边缘国家,这限制了书中叙述的国际资本市场、公司和组织在电信地缘政治中的作用--从国际电报联盟(后来的国际电信联盟)到世界银行和国际货币基金组织。这种局限性源于该书倾向于将奥斯曼/土耳其现代主义与 20 世纪 50 年代之前的全球资本主义隔离开来,反映了一种狭隘的资本主义定义和坚持过时的正义圈论点的理论立场。Çelik在书中对土耳其在发展民族信息产业过程中进口替代所面临的挑战进行了富有启发性的分析。通过追溯 NETAŞ 和 Teletaş 从 20 世纪 60 年代和 70 年代成立到 80 年代厄扎尔时期私有化的轨迹(第 105-12 页、第 125-27 页),读者可以从电信史的角度深入了解土耳其发展主义的历史制约因素。然而,该书并没有将通信地缘政治与土耳其历史的总体叙事保持一致。实质上,该书以简短、独立的通信史片段介绍了土耳其的历史。换句话说,该书没有通过通信史的棱镜重新叙述土耳其历史。在讨论近代史时,该书出人意料地忽略了移动电话的作用,这是一个明显的缺陷。移动电话网络是第一个由私营部门而不是政府发起的通信网络。此外,随着移动电话作为变种智能手机融入互联网,它已发展成为大众文化的重要媒介。在土耳其和更广泛的周边国家,互联网的真正普及是通过移动电话网络实现的。在土耳其,一小部分人通过固定线路接入互联网,而对于大多数人来说,互联网体验包括社交媒体、数字平台......
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History by Burçe Çelik (review)

Reviewed by:

  • Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History by Burçe Çelik
  • Sirri Emrah Üçer (bio)
Communications in Turkey and the Ottoman Empire: A Critical History
By Burçe Çelik. Champaign: University of Illinois Press, 2023. Pp. 254.

Burçe Çelik’s book represents a novel and bold contribution to the field of Turkish studies by providing a comprehensive two-century-long history of telecommunications. Instead of focusing on individual networks, she introduces a conceptual framework that unifies singular networks within a temporal continuity. This contribution brings to mind Horwitz’s Communication and Democratic Reform in South Africa (2006), as Çelik adds topics of ownership and the development of material telecommunications infrastructure to the discursive analysis of communication. Her study is also in close resonance with the accounts of other critical Turkish communication scholars like Haluk Geray and Funda Başaran. The strength of the book comes from its long-term and multinetwork approach to Ottoman/Turkish communications/telecommunications history. However, this also exposes some areas open to criticism.

Çelik’s analytical framework comprises both geopolitical and social elements. The geopolitical aspect encompasses topics such as the peripheralization of the Ottoman Empire and Turkey in the global capitalist division of labor, the material development of the telecommunications network, and the shift in ownership from the government to international companies. The social element of Çelik’s analysis divides Ottoman/Turkish history into two periods: what she calls the “non-capitalist modernization” before 1950 and the “transition to capitalism” after World War II. The social element also introduces “silenced communities,” including Armenians, Kurds, women (particularly working-class women), and progressive youth, as key actors in communication history, beyond the more prominent “noisy actors” such as the state, military, political elites, and “top-down” modernizers. Çelik argues that the “non-capitalist modernism” of the late Ottoman and early [End Page 1015] Republican periods was closely linked to reform efforts aimed at restoring the “circle of justice” within a social context characterized by an “oriental political society” where communities opposed the government, rather than a “Western-style civil society” with individuals opposing the government.

Çelik introduces the concept of “capitalist imperialism” and mentions “noisy actors” such as international companies and organizations. However, her proximity to a political stance that views the late Ottoman Empire and early Turkish Republic as a militarist colonizer rather than a passive periphery limits the role assigned to international capital markets, companies, and organizations in the geopolitics of telecommunications within the book’s narrative—from the International Telegraph Union (later International Telecommunications Union) to the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. This limitation stems from the book’s tendency to isolate Ottoman/Turkish modernism from global capitalism until the 1950s, reflecting a theoretical position with a narrow definition of capitalism and adherence to the outdated circle of justice argument.

Çelik’s book provides an illuminating analysis of the challenges faced by Turkish import substitution in developing a national informatics industry. By tracing the trajectories of NETAŞ and Teletaş from their inception in the 1960s and 1970s to their privatization during the Özal period in the 1980s (pp. 105–12, 125–27), readers gain insight into the historical constraints of Turkish developmentalism through the lens of telecommunications history. However, the book does not consistently align the geopolitics of communications with the general narrative of Turkish history. In essence, the book presents a history of Turkey with short, separate fragments of communication history. In other words, the book falls short of renarrating Turkish history through the prism of communication history.

When discussing the recent period, the book surprisingly overlooks the role of mobile telephones, a notable shortcoming. The mobile telephone network stands out as the first communication network initiated by the private sector rather than the government. Furthermore, with the integration of the mobile telephone into the internet as a mutant smartphone, it has evolved into a significant medium of popular culture. In Turkey and the broader peripheral world, the true popularization of the internet surged through mobile telephone networks. In Turkey, a small portion of the population has access to the internet via fixed lines, while for the majority, the internet experience—encompassing social media, digital platforms...

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Technology and Culture
Technology and Culture 社会科学-科学史与科学哲学
CiteScore
0.60
自引率
14.30%
发文量
225
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Technology and Culture, the preeminent journal of the history of technology, draws on scholarship in diverse disciplines to publish insightful pieces intended for general readers as well as specialists. Subscribers include scientists, engineers, anthropologists, sociologists, economists, museum curators, archivists, scholars, librarians, educators, historians, and many others. In addition to scholarly essays, each issue features 30-40 book reviews and reviews of new museum exhibitions. To illuminate important debates and draw attention to specific topics, the journal occasionally publishes thematic issues. Technology and Culture is the official journal of the Society for the History of Technology (SHOT).
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信