Views of stigmatization in mind and out of mind dichotomy: Madness representations in popular Turkish cinema in and after 2000

Mind, while containing several epistemologies in its structure, being a matter of order, has been shaped by the continuous fight for domination in human history. This situation building up forms of normality has defined those that went out of the idealized system with anormality. Power relations can be said to have emerged with those defined by anormality being stigmatized, in the process of which those that went out of the idealized roles with their body or behaviour were pulled into an existential crisis. Because the ones that are stigmatized generally define the weak, and in the axis of stigmatization, the form of body, strenght and capability come into question. Especially the stigmatization types that occur as a result of the relation between health and discrimination include the mad and, as they usually don't fit the idealized common sense with their body or behaviour, they are placed in the ones that lost their mind category. This circumstance, is discussed in cinema, which is a social and cultural representation tool, and representation of madness is usually produced in the frame of stigmatizing expressions in cinema. Thus mad people stigmatized in cinemas are made visible by situations like being laughed at, mocked, humiliated, excluded, belittled, exposed to physical violence, pitied, lose of ability etc. and stigmatizations of madness are build anew in the frame of power relations. This study, in the axis of mind and out of mind dichotomy, aims to determine how madness is stigmatized in 2000's and after popular Turkish cinema. With this aim, most viewed movies between 2000 -2019 years that got into top three in which the mad character is the main role in turkish cinema is determined. In this direction, representations of madness in Vizontele (2001), Mucize (2015) and Yedinci Koğuştaki Mucize (2019) movies are examined with Goffman's theory of stigma. In regards to Goffman's not discussing domination over body in terms of power and capability relations enough, Turner, Bourdieu and Foucault's stances are also benefited from. Arised from a Hermeneuitical approach, qualitative research study design modal is used and findings are analyzed with multimodal critical discourse analysis in this study. As a result of the analysis, characters defined as mad in movies live in society; but seen to be belittled, mocked and stigmatized by power/able-minded that is built normal. Also, these mad people have been coded partially in different ways in the context of social structure; but the marks of stigmatization have almost always maintained their existence. At the same time these characters were portrayed as pure, innocent, helpless, powerless and in funny ways and this situation showed the normal ones' power and superiority, building the discrimination style. At the same time in these movies mad people are revealed to go through some kind of capability loss with being removed from limits of mind and a lose of masculine power , in terms of being both male and also representating a defective body. In addition to this, it is seen in some analyzed movies that disabled is stigmatized by being constricted to a general stereotype under the name mad and a wrong perception towards the disabled is formed. Hence in analyzed movies, madness, real symptoms in medical terms, aren't given enough place; in other words madness is discovered to not be used with the aim of informing, but more for offering ideas about social order and right or wrong. Besides this, in analyzed movies it is understood that controlling society is only possible by excluding the mad and the mad that went through stigmatization is determined to be metaphorically used for the construction of the normal.