C. Ceyhun ARSLAN

New book published by Edinburgh University Press:

The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures

By C. Ceyhun Arslan (Koç University)

Google Preview: https://books.google.de/books?id=zu8MEQAAQBAJ&printsec=frontcover&source=gbs_ViewAPI&redir_esc=y#v=onepage&q&f=false (You can read most of the introduction and Chapter 1)

Studies the intertwined manner in which Arabic and Turkish literatures took shape as national traditions

“In this eye-opening book, C. Ceyhun Arslan shows us the transformations of concepts and analytical paradigms in Middle Eastern literatures’ journey from multilingual Ottoman canon in the 19th century to monolingual Arabic, Persian and Turkish national literatures in the 20th century and translated world literature in the 21st century.”  – Wen-chin Ouyang, SOAS, University of London

“With an innovative focus on the late Ottoman and post-Ottoman Middle East, The Ottoman Canon traces a theoretically informed analysis of the multilingual Ottoman literary 'reservoir' as it informs mutually formative aspects of Turkish and Arabic national literatures. A well-researched study of multivalent cultural translation that will be of certain interest to specialists across multiple fields.” - Erdağ Göknar, Duke University

Hardback & Ebook | £90 / $120 | 248pp. | March 2024 | Edinburgh University Press

Find out more and SAVE 30% with code NEW30 at checkout: https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-the-ottoman-canon-and-the-construction-of-arabic-and-turkish-literatures.html

https://trafo.hypotheses.org/51895

C. Ceyhun Arslan introduces his recently published book “The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures” which challenges assumptions about the modernization of Arabic and Turkish literatures, examining their evolution into national literatures comparable to Western ones. The book explores how Ottoman authors navigated multilingual influences, shaping literary traditions and national identities in the Middle East and North Africa. It highlights how late Ottoman and post-Ottoman scholars integrated and reinterpreted classical texts, revealing the complex cultural and literary dynamics that formed modern Arabic and Turkish literary canons.

https://euppublishingblog.com/2024/05/02/qa-ottoman-canon-construction-of-arabic-and-turkish-literatures/
by C. Ceyhun Arslan
The author of The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures talks about his writing process, the inspiration behind his new book, and the surprises he encountered along the way.

This article shifts the emphasis away from debates on how to study the history of the Mediterranean. Instead, it examines the utopian perspectives that Mediterranean as a context and as a framework generates for artists and scholars. Arslan argues that the Mediterranean’s longue-durée history does not have to be thought of as a prison or a burden; rather, this history can provide new future visions. The article claims that artists can draw upon the Mediterranean’s history to simultaneously resist against Western imperialism and criticize discriminatory practices in their communities. Furthermore, recent works in Mediterranean studies can generate what the author calls a “disciplinary utopia,” wherein critics can engage with theoretical issues without foregoing attention to the languages and historical contexts of the traditions they study. The Mediterranean is not solely a sea in which narratives are produced; it is also a context in which they can be reassessed.

A study of literary representations of buildings leads to intersections of comparative literature and art history. This article uses two concepts from spolia studies, "reincarnation" and "afterlife" to argue that the forms that a building adopts in literature can be considered textual reincarnations. It analyzes, as a case study, descriptions of the Hagia Sophia in Constantinople/Istanbul in literary works from authors such as Paul the Silentiary (d. 575-580), Taşlıcalı Yahya Bey (d. 1582), and Edmondo de Amicis (1846-1908). The history seen through the Hagia Sophia's textual reincarnations constitutes an alternative to its mainstream history, which has often considered its conversions to a mosque and a museum as the sole turning points. Although they may have no overt connections to the building's original architectural structure, textual reincarnations of a building can still provide crucial insights into its reception in everchanging contexts.

The first section of this article will provide definitions of the terms spolia, afterlife, and reincarnation in art history scholarship and discuss various ways in which critics can employ these concepts for comparative literature. The second section analyzes textual representations of Hagia Sophia as a case study, since different political entities with diverse ideological visions have wanted to lay a claim on the building. Sometimes the Hagia Sophia is described as a wonder of nature that can undergo no spoliation; at other times, it is described as a person who defends Islam. It can also be reincarnated as a monument that gives information about earlier cultures and time periods. Each reincarnation can be studied as a new afterlife and avatar of the Hagia Sophia – a new reception of the building in a new context – to reassess our understanding of the Hagia Sophia’s history. Such a reassessment can help art historians to move beyond the current historiography that often studies the church, mosque, and museum phases of the building separately.

My article gives a close reading of Journey to the Sublime Porte (al-Fawāʾid al-sanīya fī al-riḥla al-madanīya wa-l-rūmīya) by Quṭb al-Dīn al-Nahrawālī (1511/12-1582). Journey to the Sublime Porte narrates the journey that al-Nahrawālī undertook from Mecca to Istanbul in 1557-1558. The earlier scholarship has analyzed this work as a historical source to generate insights on the sixteenth-century Islamic world or on al-Nahrawālī’s life. Instead, like a work of literary criticism, my article analyzes Journey to the Sublime Porte to flesh out important textual patterns in the travelogue. Al-Nahrawālī claims that cities such as Alexandria and Cairo have fallen into a ruinous state. He also notes that some ruins in Alexandria were transported into Istanbul so that they can be used for the construction of the Süleymaniye Complex in Istanbul. With its splendid constructions such as the Süleymaniye, Istanbul seems different from Cairo and Alexandria that have fallen into ruins. However, a close attention to descriptions of Istanbul reveals another picture. In Istanbul, al-Nahrawālī witnesses that prominent people like Hürrem Sultan and Ahmet Çelebi fall sick and even die. Al-Nahrawālī does not openly criticize the Ottoman Empire; however, his work suggests that the empire has not achieved an ideal order, because cities like Cairo and Alexandria fell into ruination and someone like Ahmet Çelebi who shows a high respect for Arabic language and poetry becomes embroiled within court conflicts. For a period often associated with order and control, my article pays attention to a travelogue that provides an alternative panorama of the early modern Ottoman Empire that foregrounds ruins and sickness.

The scholarship on world literature has often used a center/periphery model and analyzed how Orhan Pamuk’s works have been received by different cultures, especially the Western. Rather than analyzing Pamuk’s reception in other cultures, this study will examine how Pamuk overlooks and even sometimes undermines the hierarchies that shape the international literary domain by writing “as if in the center.” As a case study, a close reading of Orhan Pamuk’s Istanbul: Memories and the City (İstanbul: Hatıralar ve Şehir, 2003) will be given and the narrative techniques that Pamuk uses to upend the center/periphery dynamics will be examined. This article argues that Pamuk transforms elements that threatened to marginalize Istanbul, such as the Western gaze, into sources that nourish his artistic vision that endows Istanbul with a central status. The first section demonstrates that although Istanbul was marginalized within the international realm, Pamuk describes the act of writing as a means to endow Istanbul with a central status. It points out that Pamuk generates his vision of the city through a process that this study calls interweaving or artistic translation. The second section shows that the writer uses different mediums such as photography and painting to foreground the complexity of the city. Furthermore, it will claim that Ara Güler’s photos that are used throughout Istanbul further enriches Pamuk’s work by not always confirming Pamuk’s observations and sometimes even contradicting with them. The final section examines Pamuk’s perspectives on the Western gaze. Pamuk notes that the European gaze becomes a source of nourishment rather than a threat. He writes about the shortcomings of Edward Said’s theories and criticizes the tendency to view East and West as two well-defined regions.

An Imam in Paris (Takhlīṣ al-ibrīz fī talkhīṣ Bārīz, 1832), the famous travelogue that was written by Rifā'ah Rāfi' al-Ṭahṭāwī, has often been studied as a work that puts forth the observations of an Arab traveler about the Western culture that he had little familiarity with. However, East and West are not always described as two opposite poles in the travelogue. In fact, al-Ṭahṭāwī sometimes draws attention to similarities between the French and Arabs and emphasizes that Turks and Arabs are different from each other. In order to historically contextualize al-Ṭahṭāwī’s observations, this study will first examine various French sources. Most of these sources claimed that many students who came from Egypt to Paris such as al-Ṭahṭāwī were Turks. Furthermore, Edme-François Jomard and Pierre Nicholas Hamont, both of whom played a key role in al-Ṭahṭāwī’s education when he was in Paris, argued that Turks halt the progress of civilizations. The second section will give a close reading of al-Ṭahṭāwī’s work. In particular, sections in An Imam in Paris in which al-Ṭahṭāwī describes his views on Turks and the French will be examined. The conclusion of this essay will emphasize that critics need to examine how Arabic sources from the nineteenth century represent Turks to understand these sources’ vision of Westernization and modernization.

This article analyzes comparisons between Arabic and Turkish literatures in literary histories from the late Ottoman period, with a particular focus on works by Jurjī Zaydān (1861-1914). Drawing upon Alexander Beecroft’s concept of “literary biomes,” it argues that these comparisons overlooked intersections of Arabic and Turkish literatures in the “Ottoman literary biome” and depicted them as belonging to two separate “biomes.” I define the “Ottoman literary biome” as the transcultural space of the Ottoman Empire that allowed the circulation of a multilingual textual repertoire and cultivated a cultural elite. Through foregrounding the transcultural context of Ottoman literary biome, I demonstrate that modern Arabic and Turkish literatures morphed in a reciprocal entanglement. My work finally calls for the fields of Arabic literature and comparative literature to further flesh out the diversity of literary biomes in which Arabic texts circulated.

The Mediterranean did not receive enough attention in research and scholarship on Ottoman literature, which has often been studied either as the precursor of modern Turkish literature or as a part of Islamic Middle Eastern literatures. Likewise, Ottoman literature did not receive significant attention in those branches of Mediterranean studies that have foregrounded interactions between Europe and the Maghreb. This article calls for an examination of representations of the Mediterranean in Ottoman texts, as well as the envisioning of Ottoman literature as Mediterranean literature. As a case study, I will be analysing a late Ottoman travelogue, the Hac Yolunda (On the Hajj Route; 1909) by Cenab Şahabeddin (1870–1934), a pioneering figure in Ottoman literature. I argue that the Mediterranean as a heuristic device can orient critics of Ottoman literature toward comparative and theoretical approaches that engage with fundamental debates in postcolonial studies and world literature.

Roman türü Osmanlı İmparatorluğu’nda yaygınlaşmaya başladığında, Ahmet Midhat Efendi gibi pek çok yazar bu türün toplum için elzem olduğunu vurguladı. Bu yazarlar ayrıca tıp gibi “edebî olmayan”söylemlerden faydalanarak edebiyat için yeni bir değerler sistemi oluşturdu. Onların tıp ile etkileşimini ana hatlarıyla gösterebilmek için Ahmet Midhat Efendi’nin ve Fatma Aliye’nin ortak çalışması Hayal ve Hakikat (1891) eserinin yakın okumasını yapacağım. Makalem, Hayal ve Hakikat’teki “Histeri” kısmını
tahlil edecek ve bu kısmı on dokuzuncu yüzyılda yazılmış eleştiri yazıları ile tıp kitaplarını inceleyerek tarihî bir bağlama oturtacaktır. Böylece, eserin yazıldığı dönemde yaşayan bazı yazarların tıbbı ve/veya fenni edebiyatın ulaşması gereken ideal olarak tasvir ettiğini vurgulayacak ve bu tasvirlerin şiir ve roman gibi türler hakkındaki değer yargılarını şekillendirdiğini savunacaktır. Bu yazarlar, yeni edebiyatın “ciddiliğini” ön plana çıkarmak adına divan şiirini bir kadına veya hastaya benzetirler. Makalem, romanın şifa kaynağı olarak algılanabildiği bir dönemin bilim tarihi ve edebiyat tarihi arasındaki kesişimleri gösterecektir.

This article analyzes the introduction of Ziya Pasha's Ottoman anthology Harabat (AH 1291–1292 [1874/1875–1875/1876]), which provides a comparative history of Arabic, Turkish, and Persian literatures. I argue that Harabat compiles texts from diverse geographical and temporal origins and, instead of defining them as members of distinct national traditions, projects this compilation as what I call a literary “reservoir” that constitutes the multilingual Ottoman canon. My argument draws upon Ziya Pasha's characterization of the Ottoman culture as an “ocean” that encompasses Arabic, Persian, and Turkish “streams.” This description undermines the typical scholarly view that the Ottoman culture emerged and developed under Arabic and Persian influences. I then reframe our understanding of canonization through using the conceptual repertoire that the world literature scholarship has brought into literary studies—circulations, target culture, and source culture. Building upon John Guillory's work on the process of canon formation, I propose that each source text can be “deracinated” when its context is ignored in the target culture to facilitate this text's incorporation into a new canon, or “reservoir.” This article finally calls for rewriting the history of comparative and world literature by demonstrating that Harabat is constitutive of the nineteenth-century comparative literature paradigm.

This article reassesses the typical scholarly projection of Turk–Arab relations in the late Ottoman Empire as an imperial center hegemonizing the Arab periphery. The article demonstrates that early modern neoclassical Arab poets drew upon the Arab-Islamic heritage, turāth, to provide their interpretation and even critique of the late Ottoman period. As a case study, I give a close reading of Ahmad Shawqī’s poem on the Balkan Wars (1912–1913), “The New al-Andalus.” My reading departs from the common assumption that Shawqī’s pan-Ottomanist poems express uncritical admiration for the caliphate. Through revealing the nuanced interpretive dynamics in Shawqī’s poem, I draw upon translation theory and propose that early modern neoclassical poetry refracted rather than reflected political transformations of its period. This refraction played a crucial role in shaping the vision of nahda, because Shawqī, like other Arab thinkers, believed that the empire needed to go through “renaissance”
after the Balkan defeat.

The demise of the Ottoman Empire after World War I (1914– 1918) resulted in political and cultural transformations that many late Ottoman authors could probably not have anticipated. This study compares two works on the Ottoman defeat and the British victory in Iraq in World War I: Maʿrūf al-Ruṣāfī’s (1875– 1945) poem “Nuwāḥ Dijla” (The Lamentation of the Tigris), and Süleyman Nazif’s (1870– 1927) Firak- ı Irak (The Separation from Iraq, 1918), a compilation of writings on the Ottoman defeat in Iraq.1 Both works express the anxieties that resulted from this sudden political shift. Al-Ruṣāfī, like Süleyman Nazif, believed that the Ottoman Empire had to maintain its territorial integrity in order to protect its subjects against Western imperialism. Notwithstanding this similarity between the two authors, I focus on their different perspectives on the heritage of Arabic poetry. In particular, I first analyze a section in Firak- ı Irak in which Kaʿb ibn Zuhayr (d. ca. 646/ 7) and Ḥassān ibn Thābit (d. 674) lament the execution of the Ottoman poet Nefʿi (d. 1635). I then argue that even though al-Ruṣāfī expressed “Ottomanist” views that supported the Ottoman state, he would not share Süleyman Nazif’s imperialistic vision in which Kaʿb ibn Zuhayr becomes “an Ottoman poet” who weeps for Sultan Murad IV (r. 1623– 1640). As this study pays attention to representations of homeland and heritage in al- Ruṣāfī’s and Süleyman Nazif’s works, it calls for a reassessment of “Ottoman literature” and “classical Arabic literature” as categories of analysis.

Three Centuries of Travel Writing by Muslim Women recovers, translates, and provides annotations for excerpts from travel writing from Muslim women written over the past three centuries. These works have never been published before or their publications are no longer in press. The book chapter, “Amina Said: An Egyptian Feminist at an Indian Conference”, examines Amina Said’s Mushahadat fi’l-Hind (Observations from India, 1946) within its historical context. The introduction discusses Said’s contributions to Egyptian feminism and discusses how Mushahadat fi’l-Hind is different from other Arabic travel writings on India. It also emphasizes that Said’s work provides invaluable insights on global affairs at a time of key transitions in global history—right before India’s independence and Partition (1947) and the establishment of the Israeli state (1948)—especially as she writes about the eighteenth session of the All-India Women’s Conference (AIWC) in Hyderabad, Sindh, in 1945–1946. Afterwards, excerpts from Mushahadat fi’l-Hind on the AIWC conference are translated from Arabic to English. The final section, Notes, points out similarities between Said’s observations and the AIWC’s report. It also demonstrates how various socioeconomic shifts, such as the high inflation in India and the freedom struggle in Indonesia, find echo in Said’s work.

Frontier Orientalism and the Turkish Image in Central European Literature by Charles D. Sabatos traces the image of the Turk in works of Central European literatures that were written in different languages such as Czech, Slovak, and German from the early modern period to the present day. Sabatos employs the concept of “frontier Orientalism” to trace “[t]he evolution of the Turkish image from a historic threat to a mythical figure” and notes that this evolution played a key role in “the complex construction of modern European identities” (xii). The book is pertinent not only for specialists of Central European literatures but also for historians who work on sources that display complex transcultural relationships such as travel writings. Sabatos’s focus on the Central Europe contests much of the scholarly assumptions on the West that have often shaped earlier works on travel writing in Ottoman and Turkish studies. In particular, Frontier Orientalism demonstrates how current works on Orientalism sometimes generate a simplistic “West vs. Rest” dichotomy. Furthermore, Sabatos’s work provides crucial remarks about the discipline of history as his work builds upon literary critics such as Hayden White who have reflected on the nature of history writing. After providing a brief summary of the book and discussing its contributions to diverse disciplines, this review will end with new avenues of research that Sabatos’s book opens up and other researchers can further explore in depth.

E. Khayyat’s Istanbul 1940 and Global Modernity focuses on three authors, Erich Auerbach (1892–1957), Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar (1901–1962), and Halide Edib (1884–1964), who all taught at Istanbul University in the 1940s.  Khayyat demonstrates that their works provide “three different yet analogous accounts of the one and the same world historical moment drafted at the same time, in the same place” (p. xii). By contextualizing Auerbach, Tanpınar, and Edib within this moment, Khayyat successfully reorients both the fields of modern Turkish literature and comparative literature toward new directions.

For RSVP:

https://www.mei.columbia.edu/mei-event/the-adab-colloquium-the-divine-comedy-and-the-formation-of-modern-adab-646sl

Join us for a book talk with Professor C. Ceyhun Arslan on “The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures” accompanied Professor Yaseen Noorani .

Abstract: The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures fleshes out the Ottoman canon's multilingual character to call for a literary history that can reassess and even move beyond categories that many critics take for granted, such as 'classical Arabic literature' and 'Ottoman literature'. It gives a historically contextualised close reading of works from authors who have been studied as pioneers of Arabic and Turkish literatures, such as Ziya Pasha, Juri Zaydän, Marüf al-Rusäft and Ahmet Hamdi Tanpinar.

The Ottoman Canon analyses how these authors prepared the arguments and concepts that shape how we study Arabic and Turkish literatures today as they reassessed the relationship among the Ottoman canon's linguistic traditions. Furthermore, The Ottoman Canon examines the Ottoman reception of pre-Ottoman poets, such as Kab in Zuhayr, hence opening up new research avenues for Arabic literature, Ottoman studies and comparative literature.

Posted in Adab Colloquium
Tagged Spring 2024

https://cmes.fas.harvard.edu/event/ottoman-canon-and-construction-arabic-and-turkish-literatures

The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures

Date:
Monday, March 18, 2024, 5:00pm to 6:30pm

Location:
CMES, Rm 102, 38 Kirkland St, Cambridge, MA 02138
The Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations and the Center for Middle Eastern Studies' Sohbet-i Osmani Lecture Series present

The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures

A book talk by C. Ceyhun Arslan, Koç University, in conversation with William Granara, Research Professor of Arabic, Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, Harvard University

C. Ceyhun Arslan is Assistant Professor of Comparative Literature at Koç University in Istanbul. He is currently the Georg Forster Fellow at the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation in Berlin. He graduated from Williams College, magna cum laude in 2011, and received his Ph.D. from Near Eastern Languages & Civilizations at Harvard in 2017.

https://events.stanford.edu/event/ottoman_canon

C. Ceyhun Arslan’s book, The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures fleshes out the Ottoman canon’s multilingual character to call for a literary history that can reassess and even move beyond categories that many critics take for granted, such as ‘classical Arabic literature’ and ‘Ottoman literature.’ It analyzes how authors who have been studied as pioneers, such as Ziya Pasha (1829–1880) and Jurjī Zaydān (1861–1914), prepared the arguments and concepts that shape how we study Arabic and Turkish literatures today as they reassessed the relationship among the Ottoman canon’s linguistic traditions.

Audio recording:
https://www.forum-transregionale-studien.de/veranstaltungen/kalender/details/the-ottoman-canon-and-the-construction-of-arabic-and-turkish-literatures

Website link:
https://www.forum-transregionale-studien.de/veranstaltungen/kalender/details/the-ottoman-canon-and-the-construction-of-arabic-and-turkish-literatures

This talk provides an overview of C. Ceyhun Arslan’s forthcoming book, The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures (https://edinburghuniversitypress.com/book-the-ottoman-canon-and-the-construction-of-arabic-and-turkish-literatures.html).
The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures fleshes out the Ottoman canon’s multilingual character to call for a literary history that can reassess and even move beyond categories that many critics take for granted, such as ‘classical Arabic literature’ and ‘Ottoman literature’. It gives a historically contextualised close reading of works from authors who have been studied as pioneers of Arabic and Turkish literatures, such as Ziya Pasha (1829-1880), Jurjī Zaydān (1861-1914), Maʿrūf al-Ruṣāfī (1875-1945) and Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar (1901-1962). The Ottoman Canon analyses how these authors prepared the arguments and concepts that shape how we study Arabic and Turkish literatures today as they reassessed the relationship among the Ottoman canon’s linguistic traditions. Furthermore, The Ottoman Canon examines the Ottoman reception of pre-Ottoman poets, such as Kaʿb ibn Zuhayr (d. c. 646/647), hence opening up new research avenues for Arabic literature, Ottoman studies and comparative literature. It also discusses how the Ottoman canon perpetuated exclusions in terms of gender, language and religion.

https://liberalarts.utexas.edu/mes/events/the-ottoman-canon-and-the-construction-of-arabic-and-turkish-literatures

This talk provides an overview of C. Ceyhun Arslan’s forthcoming book, The Ottoman Canon and the Construction of Arabic and Turkish Literatures. The book fleshes out the Ottoman canon’s multilingual character to call for a literary history that can reassess and even move beyond categories that many critics take for granted, such as ‘classical Arabic literature’ and ‘Ottoman literature’. It gives a historically contextualized close reading of works from authors who have been studied as pioneers of Arabic and Turkish literatures, such as Ziya Pasha (1829-1880), Jurjī Zaydān (1861-1914), Maʿrūf al-Ruṣāfī (1875-1945) and Ahmet Hamdi Tanpınar (1901-1962). The Ottoman Canon analyzes how these authors prepared the arguments and concepts that shape how we study Arabic and Turkish literatures today as they reassessed the relationship among the Ottoman canon’s linguistic traditions. Furthermore, The Ottoman Canon examines the Ottoman reception of pre-Ottoman poets, such as Kaʿb ibn Zuhayr (d. ca. 646/647), hence opening up new research avenues for Arabic literature, Ottoman studies and comparative literature.


This talk is part of the New Perspectives on Middle Eastern Languages and Cultures series. The event is free and open to the public.

Humanities Institute support provided by Viola S. Hoffman and George W. Hoffman Lectureship in Liberal Arts and Fine Arts.



Sponsored by:
Center for Middle Eastern Studies | Department of Comparative Literature | Department of English | Department of Religious Studies | Department of History | Humanities Institute

IS Med - Interdisciplinary Studies on the Mediterranean: Submission
I.S. MED - Interdisciplinary Studies on the Mediterranean
Deadline for abstract submissions: May 3, 2024 Notification of acceptance: May 5, 2024
Deadline for complete article: July 12, 2024 Tentative publication date: December, 2024

I. S. Med is seeking contributions for a special issue focusing on the interdisciplinary practice of Mediterranean literary studies. Thinking of Mediterranean studies as a field whose seminal works have often overlooked its eastern and southern shores, and yet gathered over the decades meaningful questions escaping other theoretical frames, we invite papers that critically engage with the recent debate on Mediterranean literature. They can open new perspectives for texts that are studied as part of, or marginal to, national literatures and area studies departments, or intervene in any national literary field or period of time, applying reading practices in comparative literature, world literature, area studies, or postcolonial studies. We welcome papers that cultivate new politics of memory, counteract typical geopolitical assumptions, or question foundational narratives on selfhood and otherness in the region. They can point to overlooked genealogies in literary history and canonization practices, or explore how foundational texts in ancient studies are or were received in different Mediterranean contexts. They can also focus on relevant contemporary issues, examining questions raised in dialogue with other fields such as anthropology, history, and religion, and including the way in which literature contributes to the history of Mediterranean studies as a discipline in its own right.

The guest co-editors of I.S. Med: Interdisciplinary Studies on the Mediterranean, Drs. Martino Lovato and Ceyhun Arslan are seeking submissions in English of 5,000 to 8,000 words (word count includes bibliography), alongside a 400-word abstract, 5 keywords, and a 150-word bio to be forwarded by April 20, 2024. Contributors need to adhere to the Chicago style format, https://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/home.html.
Manuscripts and editorial communications should be sent via email and/or attachment (MSWord) to the Editors, martino.lovato@uniurb.it and cceyhunarslan@ku.edu.tr. Attachments should be marked with the last name of the contributor, followed by the name/subject of the paper. Contributors are asked to provide a cover page with their name, complete affiliation address, phone number(s), and email. I.S. Med is a peer-reviewed journal. All research articles submitted to the journal are double-blind refereed to ensure academic integrity. Strict anonymity regarding authors and referees is paramount. The editorial staff will remove the cover sheet from the manuscript before sending it for evaluation.
NOTE: Articles submitted should be entirely original and unpublished, should not be simultaneously under consideration by another publisher, should not have been published previously even in part by any other publication, and should not appear in blogs or other online sites. Proposals of English translations or edited versions of previously published works will not be considered.
For information on the journal, please contact I.S. Med’s editors in chief, Drs. Giovanna Summerfield summegi@auburn.edu and Rosario Pollicino POLLICIR@mailbox.sc.edu, or consult https://mimesisinternational.com/category/i-s-med/

Alternative Nahḍas & Tanzimats
Chair and Organizer: C. Ceyhun Arslan (Koç University)

This panel participates in the ongoing re-assessments of the founding assumptions underpinning the scholarly knowledge production of the Nahḍa (Arab modernity) and the Tanzimat (Ottoman modernity). While recent studies have challenged long-held perceptions about the period by offering new readings of canonical texts, this panel confronts the notion of “canonicity” itself; it tackles the accidental canonicity of the usual Nahḍa and Tanzimat suspects head on. Each paper contributes a comparative analysis of the processes propelling canon-formation; they move across intra-Ottoman language boundaries (Ottoman Turkish and Arabic), genres of literary practices (novelistic writing, translation and journalism), and conceptual history (crossing temporal and disciplinarian lines). As it looks beyond the canonized texts, genres, and concepts that have shaped our typical understanding of the Nahḍa and the Tanzimat, this panel undermines the tendency to analyze these two movements as the direct consequence of the “authentic” Arab or Turkish subject’s encounter with the “foreign” European other. The panel shifts the focus away from this encounter, situates both modernities with a shared Ottoman context, and seeks fresh approaches that will generate new avenues of research on these two movements. The panel will make key contributions to Arabic and Turkish literary studies as it will demonstrate that while the canonical texts often provide clear-cut definitions of the terms “literary,” “Arabic literature,” and “Ottoman literature,” non-canonized works as well as the paratexts of canonical translations reveal that these terms had diverse, and even contradictory, meanings. The panel will also address a wide range of specialists outside literature: As the panelists draw upon their disciplinary training in literary studies, they will also reveal how the political and the literary are deeply intertwined, focusing on issues related to political sovereignty and Ottoman imperialism. Furthermore, the papers will situate the works that they analyze within the history of socioeconomic and epistemological transformations that have shaped the communities in which these works were produced. Taken together, the papers provide new comparative perspectives on the shared history of literary modernity in the Arab and Ottoman spheres of the Ottoman Empire.

Panelists:
Oksana Prokhorovych (American University of Beirut)
AJ Naddaff (Stanford University)
Maha AbdelMegeed (American University of Beirut)
C. Ceyhun Arslan (Koç University)