1839–1876
Abdulmecid I and Abdülaziz reign. A period of fiscal extravagance and irresponsibility inspires the Young Ottoman movement to push for democratic reform and the implementation of a constitutional monarchy.
1876–1909
Sultan Abdülhamid II reigns. Accepts the new constitution and allows for a parliament to form (1877) but dissolves it a year later, citing civil unrest as the primary cause. By the end of his reign, marked by fear, paranoia, and xenophobia, a police state manages a vast network of spies and censorship of the press.
1889
The Ottoman Union (Ittihad-I Osmanı) is founded by opponents of the Abdülhamid regime. It eventually becomes the Committee of Union and Progress (Ittihatve Terakki Cemiyet) the first political party in the Ottoman Empire.
1908
The Committee of Union and Progress (CUP), composed largely of members of the Young Turks movement, revolts, demanding that a parliamentary system replace the monarchy.
1909
Abdülhamid is forced to reinstate the constitution. He is deposed by the parliament and constitutional sovereignty is established.
1913
The Second Balkan War. The Balkan league dissolves over a dispute regarding the division of spoils. CUP seizes power through a military coup and rules until the end of the First World War.
1913
The assassination of Grand Vizier Mahmut Sevket is used as an excuse by the CUP to establish a military junta.
1914–1918
First World War. The Ottoman Empire enters the war on the side of Germany. CUP leaders are widely regarded as responsible for entering the war and for getting rich by controlling the trade of staple goods such as soap and sugar.
1909–1919
The reign of Mehmed V.
1918–1922
The armistice years. British mandate in Istanbul.
1919–1922
Turkish war of independence. Mustafa Kemal Atatürk repels foreign powers and establishes a Grand National Assembly in Ankara.
1923
Turkish Republic is founded and the sultanate is abolished.
1924
The Caliphate is abolished by the Turkish Grand National Assembly and the last Caliphate Abdulmecid II is exiled.
1923–1945
Period of single party rule. Rapid modernization from a top-down revolution dismisses the fledgling nation’s Ottoman past, absorbs minorities under a single ethnic banner, and gives birth to a highly bureaucratized state.
1945–2000
A tumultuous transition to multiparty democracy marked by four different military coups.
2002–present
AKP (Justice and Development Party) in power.
PART I
GREAT EXPECTATIONS
I
I have never cared much for reading or writing; anyone who knows me can tell you that. Unless you count Jules Verne or the Nick Carter stories I read as a child, everything I know can be traced to A Thousand and One Nights, A Parrot’s Tale, the armful of history books I’ve had occasion to pass my eyes over (always skipping the Arabic and Persian words), and the works of the philosopher Avicenna. Before we established our institute, when I was unemployed and spent my days at home, I would often find myself leafing through my children’s schoolbooks; at other times, when I was left with nothing to do but recite the Koran, I would whittle away my hours in the coffeehouses of Edirnekapı and Sehzadebası, reading articles in the newspaper or the odd episode of a serial.
I should also mention the psychoanalytic studies of Dr. Ramiz, who oversaw my treatment while I was under observation at the medical institute and who was so kind to me in later years. Lest I seem unworthy of the goodwill bestowed on me by this eminent scholar, I must assure you that I’ve read his entire oeuvre without skipping a single sentence. But while no doubt his work illuminates grave and important matters of mysterious origin, it did little to influence my taste in literature or my turn of mind. During my long conversations with Dr. Ramiz—always he would speak and I would listen—I often had occasion to profit from my many hours of reading, as they offered me, if nothing else, a way of masking my ignorance. (One never does lose the good manners one learns as a child.) My father was against our reading anything but our schoolbooks—though early on he made an exception of works on Arabic grammar and syntax, such as Emsile and Avámil—and it is perhaps because he censored, or rather forbade, our reading that I lost all interest in the written word.
Nevertheless there was a time in my life when I succeeded in writing a small book. This wasn’t an act of self-promotion—a form of posturing I abhor—for I didn’t write it in the hope that others might proclaim, “Look, our friend Hayri Irdal has written a book!” Nor can I say I was compelled by a restless ambition. In due course I shall explain just how this book came into being and the purpose it served; for now let me note simply that it numbered among the publications of the institute whose doors have now been closed, though it might be more accurate to say the institute has, thanks to Halit Ayarcı’s fortuitous intervention, been consigned to continuous liquidation. If I have received any praise for this book illuminating the life and work of Sheikh Zamanı, the patron saint of clock makers, all credit must go to the founder of our institute, Halit Ayarcı, the dear benefactor and beloved friend who plucked me from poverty and despair and made me the person I am today, for indeed his excellence knows no bounds. Everything in my life that is good, beautiful, and precious belongs to this great man who was taken from us three weeks ago in a car accident. I need only recall the moment when, having invited me to tell him everything I had learned about clock making while working alongside the muvakkit Nuri Efendi, he had a flash of inspiration as profound, perhaps, as that which led to the creation of the institute itself: for not only did Halit Ayarcı discover Sheikh Ahmet Zamanı Efendi at that precise moment; he also knew at once that this man belonged to the reign of Mehmed IV.
These were the two discoveries that allowed for our swift transfer to the headquarters where, in happier days, we were able to celebrate our “time” holidays with such success. My book was translated into several languages, and its critical reception abroad was as solemn and profound as it had been at home: this alone should prove that our dear friend Halit Ayarcı—may he rest in peace—was not at all mistaken when he divined our need for the illustrious Ahmet Zamanı to have existed, nor was he wrong when he assigned him to the century in question. The original idea was not my own, but when I think back on this book that bears my name, when I recall its translation into eighteen languages, and the reviews it received in foreign newspapers, and the great scholar Van Humbert, who traveled all the way from Holland to meet with me and visit the tomb of Ahmet Zamanı, I know I am remembering the most important events of my life.
This scholar, though, turned out to be rather irksome. Finding the tomb of a man who never existed in mortal form is more difficult than you might imagine, as is surviving vigorous debate with a foreign scholar, even with the aid of an interpreter. We were saved first by what the foreign papers called our “Sufi-like attitudes and detached—or, rather, indulgent—personalities,” and second by the fact that our forefathers had availed themselves of pseudonyms.
After wandering the graveyards of Edirnekapı and Eyüp for several days, and visiting the Karacaahmet Cemetery, we were bound to find an Ahmet Zamanı Efendi. And
so we did. I am not unduly troubled by the minor alterations I made to the identity of the actual deceased. If nothing else, the poor man had his tomb repaired and his name made known: glory and calamity are both at God’s mercy. Photographs of the tomb were printed in the press, first in Holland and then in other countries around the world, but always on the condition that I would be there with one hand resting on the tombstone and the other holding my raincoat, my hat, or perhaps a newspaper.
There is only one thing that saddens me when I remember this man who wrote such lovely things about my book, who introduced me to the world and spent so many days with me searching for the tomb: never once did I allow him to pose for a photograph leaning against Zamanı’s resting place. No sooner did Van Humbert ask the question than I turned him down, saying, “But you are a Christian—it would be a torment for Zamanı’s soul!” and insisting that he stand off to my right. Thinking about it now, I can allow myself to imagine he forgave me. And considering the months of trouble the lout brought upon me, it serves him right! What business did he have swooping in like that and causing such aggravation? We are people who live in a world of our own making! Everything is just as we like it. But as you will see in due course, Van Humbert had his revenge.
So I never was one for reading or writing. But here I am this morning, struggling to write my memoirs in the oversized notebook before me. In fact I woke up at five o’clock—much earlier than usual—with this very task in mind. All the good-natured and industrious employees at Clock Villa were still asleep: not just our maids, but also our chef, Arif Efendi, whose only flaw is that he isn’t from the town of Bolu, though he does whip up truly delightful dishes just the same, and our Arab kalfa, Zeynep Hanım, for whom we searched far and wide, suffering a thousand hardships, just to give our home that taste of the old world—how strange that blacks are now as rare as imported goods while in my childhood there were so many of them in Istanbul. So for better or worse I was left to make my own morning coffee, after which I ensconced myself in my armchair and began trying to imagine my life, sifting through all the things I would soon record—things that needed to be changed or embellished or omitted altogether. In short, I have tried to arrange the events of my life into some semblance of order, bearing in mind the many strict rules of what we might call sincere writing: these are never as indispensable as when one is composing a memoir.
For above all else, I, Hayri Irdal, have always argued for absolute sincerity. Why write at all if you cannot say honestly what you mean? A sincerity of this order—disinterested and unconditional—by its nature requires close scrutiny and constant filtering. You must agree that it would be unthinkable to describe things as they are. If you are to avoid leaving a sentence arrested in midthought, you must plan ahead, choosing only those points that will resonate with the reader’s sentiments. For sincerity is not the work of one man alone.
But please don’t assume from this that I set too high a value on my life or that I deem it too important to be left unrecorded. I number myself among those who believe that the Lord, our Creator, granted us this life to be lived, for either good or evil, and not for us to write it down. Besides, it’s already there in written form. I am alluding here to our fate as set down in the periodicals of the Divine Presence.
No, when I say I am writing my memoirs I don’t mean to say I have set out to describe my life. I simply wish to record a series of events I happened to witness. And in so doing to remember—to honor—the saintly man we laid to rest three weeks ago.
I may be the most humble and absurd man in the world and, as my wife says, the most slovenly creature you may ever meet—that is, before the founding of our institute—but I did come to know a truly great man who possessed a natural genius for invention. I spent years at his side. I watched the way he worked. I witnessed how an idea would suddenly catch fire in his mind and take shape, like a tree sprouting shoots and branches, before coming into being. It was in this spirit that I witnessed the Time Regulation Institute—perhaps the greatest and most important organization of this century—evolve from a sudden spark in his eyes to the splendor it enjoys today, or did, rather, yesterday. Without fear of ridicule or affectation, I now can say that—despite my pitiful shortcomings, I, Hayri Irdal—was able to play a vital role in the foundation of this institute, if only thanks to coincidence and a run of good luck.
It seems to me that my greatest obligation to future generations is to record all I have seen and heard. For only one person could have written the history of our institute better than myself, and that man, Halit Ayarcı, is no longer with us. Last night at the dinner table I found his chair empty once again. I will never forget the way my wife fixed her gaze upon it throughout the meal. She seemed a stranger in her own home. In the end she could bear it no longer and, wiping her eyes with a napkin, rose from the table and shut herself in her room. I’m quite sure she cried all night. And she was right to do so; for if Halit Ayarcı was my benefactor, he was her best friend. Just considering the prospect of a memoir will have provoked in her, as in me, a grief that matches the occasion.
I lay in bed, thinking, for quite some time. “Hayri Irdal,” I said to myself, “you have seen so much of the world, and you have witnessed so much as well. Although just sixty years old, you have lived the lives of several men combined. You have en-dured all manner of suffering and the misery of being shunned. You have bounded up the steps to your future, light-footed and never faltering. You’ve tackled problems that no one given only strength or time could ever solve. All this is thanks to Halit Ayarcı. He’s the one who rescued you from the asylum. All the enemies in your life, all those who plagued your thoughts and peace of mind—he turned them into friends. Once you were a man who saw in the world around you only cruelty, poverty, and misery, but suddenly you found yourself amid the noblest of pleasures and a happiness that ought to be the province of all creatures on earth, and you came to understand the nobility of the human soul. You discovered the meaning of intimate love, for it was he who revealed to you the exquisite beauty in the face of your wife, Pakize. You assumed that the great Lord had sent you a rabble of pitiful creatures bent on making your life miserable, when suddenly he contrived for you the gift and joy of God’s children. Must you not do everything in your power for the memory of this good, pure, and—in every sense of the word—exalted friend? Can you even contemplate the possibility of him sinking into oblivion, his memory buried in a pile of slander and scorn? Think about it for a moment: What was your life before you met Halit Ayarcı? And what are you now? Think about your house in Edirnekapı and the creditors who turned up at your door day after day, even pouncing upon you in the street. Remember how you once had to struggle to get hold of even a single piece of bread. Then behold the comfort and happiness of your life today!
II
I mentioned my life prior to meeting Halit Ayarcı. But can one really call it a life? If to live is to endure endless pain and destitution and to suffer humiliation so deep that it afflicts each and every fiber of one’s being, if it means fluttering ceaselessly against the walls of a cage that will never open, then there is no doubt that I and others like me did “live,” in the fullest sense of the word. But if the word encompasses a wealth of spirit and possibility, a modicum of rights, a few rare moments of inner bliss, with a dash of trust in the outside world, and a sense of fairness and balance in dealing with one’s fellow man and suchlike—well, then things are quite different. You might have noticed that I make no mention whatsoever of helping others or doing anything constructive. Until I met Halit Ayarcı, I was never even aware of such pleasures. Today, however, my life has meaning. I shall leave behind a work that I believe will more or less secure me a place in the annals of history. For ten years, I acted as assistant head manager of one of the most innovative and beneficial organizations in the world. I helped not only my own immediate family but also my close and distant relatives and my friends, even those who had once betrayed me, by provid
ing them with employment and a sense and source of well-being. In this regard I suppose it would suffice to highlight our contribution to urban development through the construction of a new district near Suadiye, as well as the services our institute provided to its workers, most of whom were in fact relatives of either myself or Halit Ayarcı. For as soon as the institute was established, Halit made the very important decision—from which we never strayed—that half the management positions and other important posts would be filled by members of our families and the other half by those who had the recommendation of a notable personage.
I am not sure if I need to mention the criticisms much aired in the papers long before it was decided to liquidate the institute or the ever more violent attacks that followed the institute’s dissolution. Life can be so strange. Ten years ago the very same papers delighted in everything we did, showering us with praise and holding us aloft as a model to the world. Though they attended our every press conference and never missed an official cocktail party, these dear friends of mine now do nothing but hurl abuse.
First they condemned the organization for its unwieldy size and inefficiency. Overlooking the fact that we created jobs for so many in a country where unemployment is rampant, they railed against our excesses: three management offices, eleven management branches, forty-seven typists, and two hundred seventy control bureaus. Then they ridiculed the names of our various branches, overlooking the fact that a watch or clock is indeed made up of hands for minutes and hours, a spring, a pendulum, and a pin, as if the thing we all know as time were not in fact divided into hours, minutes, seconds, and milliseconds. Later the papers called into question the training, expertise, and intellectual underpinnings of our licensed employees—who had garnered over ten years’ experience with us—before mercilessly denouncing my early book, The Life and Works of Ahmet the Timely, which had once delighted them.
The Time Regulation Institute Page 3
