Mustang: A Deep-Dive Into the Public Response to Art in Turkey

“Everything changed in the blink of an eye,” says Selma gently before letting you on an emotional rollercoaster that, perhaps, leaves you with a lot to think about. Mustang, a Turkish language film directed and co-written by Deniz Gamze Ergüvan, was undoubtedly one of the most talked about films during the 2015 award season. The French-Turkish co-produced drama boasted 63 impressive nominations. It secured 43 wins, topping its success with a Label Europa Cinemas award from Cannes and a nomination for Best Foreign Language Film of the Year at the 87th Academy Awards. Despite its global recognition and success, the public reaction in Turkey was quite conflicted, sparking a significant controversy around the film's portrayal of the country. As Erguvan says, “Everywhere else, people have really embraced the film. In Turkey, the reactions were extremely diverse.”

The film mainly focuses on the conservative social life in rural Anatolia and the consequent oppression against women. Erguvan does nothold back from tackling the harsh realities of her homeland as she tells a compelling story of five sisters and their experiences with arranged marriages, sexual abuse, virginity tests, and more. The critique of “honor” and “purity” in the film sheds light on the traditionally patriarchal structure of Turkish society. While some critics like Atilla Dorsay labeled the film a “masterpiece,” others, such as Ali Ercivan, thought the film was “a work designed for the Western world in the most annoying, calculated way.” The argument of the latter was a common opinion. The perception among some in Turkey is that the film was created with a Western audience in mind, potentially damaging the country's reputation on the global stage. However, this criticism is not unique to Mustang – many other Turkish artists with global recognition, such as Nobel Literature Prize winner Orhan Pamuk and Women's Prize for Fiction nominee Elif Şafak, have faced similar backlash in the past. The negative public response to Turkish artists with worldwide fame almost seems like a recurring trend. So, one might ask, what is the reason behind this peculiar pattern, and why are Turks not embracing their very own artists? 

To answer this question, we must remember that when politics is the subject of art, art becomes the subject of politics. In the case of Mustang, Erguvan’s socio-political expression in the film challenges the image of a fully modernized Turkey. The film offers a social and political commentary on the state of Turkish women's rights and gender equality. Moreover, it implies that these issues are still significant concerns in certain parts of the country, which can be seen as a critique of the government's policies and societal norms. This gave an opportunity for extreme right-wing parties like the Justice and Development (AK) Party to polarize society by turning the artist into a public enemy. Then-Deputy Prime Minister Bülent Arınç expressed his disappointment with the film, stating that it “didn't accurately represent Turkish society and culture,” while also claiming that the film had “an agenda.” As a result, local authorities in Turkey reportedly faced pressure not to screen the film in their theaters. Even though the government’s response to the film may align with some people’s views, it does not  fully reflect the reason behind the public reaction, demonstrating why examination of cultural authenticity is necessary.

The most common criticism towards Erguvan, Pamuk, and Şafak’s work is the superficiality of their products. We must note that life in rural Anatolia is completely distinct from metropolitan cities like Istanbul and Izmir. Rural Anatolia is not only socio-economically but also culturally unique with its traditional lifestyle. This puts a huge responsibility on the artist's shoulders as they need to showcase a very nuanced reality. However, when the artist is a stranger to these customs, the artwork loses its essence. The script of Mustang, for instance, lacks an extremely significant aspect: cultural authenticity. The film shows that Erguvan is clearly aware of the underlying issues in Anatolia, but, at the same time, you can also see how she fails to execute the many layers of these problems. The lack of details leaves viewers unsatisfied with a one-dimensional story.

On the contrary, Yaşar Kemal, who was nominated for a Nobel Literature Prize, has always been an embraced artist in the Turkish community despite his focus on the social injustices in rural Anatolia. Having been raised in Southern Anatolia himself, Yaşar Kemal knows the Taurus Mountains and Çukurova so well that he is able to build a story around this natural tension in his most well-known novel, Memed, My Hawk. His descriptions are subtle and nuanced, and his storytelling has the perfect balance between fiction and reality, which you cannot find in either Erguvan, Pamuk’s, or Şafak’s work.

Overall, Erguvan’s Mustang provides an illustrative example for examining the public reaction to art in Turkey. We can see that an intriguing plotline and strong visuals are, of course, crucial factors for a successful movie, but insufficient  on their own. Among many reasons, cultural authenticity is what makes the movie stand out. Hence, we can conclude that for a society to embrace art, the artist should come from within, deeply connected to the culture and traditions they portray in their work.