Koca Dünya (2016) Filminin Toplumsal Ekoloji Bağlamında Çözümlenmesi
An Analysıs of the Movıe Big Big World (2016) In the Ecologıcal Discourse

Summary/Abstract: According to the philosophy of “Social Ecology”, today’s society is anti-ecologic. Nature has become an object of exploitation. Also, the nature-human relationship is an intertwined, unbreakable structure that is in continuity, following social ecology. A similar operation of the power and domination relations within the social sphere is oppressed upon nature as well. The founder of Social Ecology, Murray Bookchin conceives two different concepts of nature. Hence, the “first nature” is the savage/uncivilized in which the human does not exist. The “second nature” is the one that has been created by humans. The social sphere and culture are elements of the second nature. As time passes, second nature begins to dominate the first nature. This demand for sovereignty is the beginning of ecological problems. In collaboration with Bookchin, Lewis Mumford, and Rene Dubos’s views, the philosophy of social ecology has become even wider. These three thinkers emphasize that human beings are a part of nature, just like other living organisms, and that there must be a common life that encompasses a dialectical process, not dominance or supremacy. In this sense, the philosophy of social ecology rejects the inequality that human beings have established upon nature. Thus, such volition for sovereignty initiates ecological problems. In Reha Erdem’s movie Big Big World (2016), nature is not portrayed as a place of safety and serenity. There is tension between nature and humans. Accordingly, Reha Erdem’s Big Big World will be analyzed by a qualitative and descriptive film analysis technique, in the scope of the philosophy of social ecology. The nature in the movie has an inward-looking structure. The main reason for this is the artificiality created by humans. In the basis of binary oppositions that modernism created, the nature-human dichotomy has resulted in extraction of nature away from the human. In this case, nature also externalizes the human. In other words, nature denies humans. Places that people can live in are modern cities. However, the chaotic structure of cities includes obscurity and danger. Youngsters who escape from the city try to hide in nature, which has been fetishized by the modern human. Nevertheless, nature does not contain the described tranquility. In the universe of quantity, there is a “big big world” but quality vise, there is “so little to live”. Thus, the “first nature” is being destroyed by the “second nature” which was created by human beings.

• Details
• Contents