When Zehra leans toward Harun, it is never without hesitation. When Harun drifts back toward her, it is never without restraint. Together, they form a rhythm of closeness and distance that feels less like a defined relationship and more like a storm — unpredictable, magnetic, and unforgettable.
Their connection in Netflix’s Istanbul Encyclopedia is not the neat romance of labels, nor the clean break of distance. It is something far more familiar — a bond filled with contradictions, where affection collides with avoidance.
Psychology gives us language for this dance. Attachment theory shows us why Zehra and Harun pull at each other with such uneven intensity, and cognitive dissonance reveals how they — and we — manage to live inside contradictions without shattering.
Together, these frameworks explain why undefined love is not a flaw of character but a profoundly human experience.
A Dance Of Attachment
Attachment theory, first shaped by John Bowlby, suggests that the ways we connect in adulthood are echoes of our earliest bonds (Bowlby, 1988). Some of us crave closeness, fearing abandonment; others guard independence, fearing entrapment.
When these two styles collide — the anxious and the avoidant — the result is a push-pull dynamic that feels both irresistible and exhausting.
Zehra embodies the anxious side of this spectrum. Her draw toward Harun is laced with vulnerability, as if each moment with him could confirm or threaten her sense of worth.
Harun, by contrast, often withdraws. His pullback is not the absence of feeling but the shield of avoidance: intimacy brings him close, yet closeness awakens fear.
Together, they become a textbook without ever being typical. Their bond mirrors what psychologists call the “anxious-avoidant trap”, where one partner reaches and the other retreats, each reinforcing the other’s fears (Fraley & Shaver, 2000).
But calling it a “trap” misses its emotional truth: the very friction creates intensity. Their story feels alive because it feels unfinished — and in unfinished love, our minds find fuel.
Living With Contradictions
But how do people remain inside a bond so riddled with conflict?
This is where Leon Festinger’s theory of cognitive dissonance steps in.
Cognitive dissonance is the mental discomfort we feel when our beliefs and actions clash, and the subtle ways we justify contradictions (Festinger, 1957).
In bonds like Zehra and Harun’s, the tension between desire and restraint is constant. People often rationalize contradictions to reduce discomfort, creating narratives that make the uncertainty bearable (Knee & Canevello, 2006).
This mechanism allows relationships to persist even when they lack a clear definition. By justifying the ambiguity, the mind transforms potential unease into emotional survival.
The Comfort Of Unfinished Love
There is also something magnetic about incompleteness itself.
The Zeigarnik effect — the tendency to remember unfinished experiences more vividly than completed ones — suggests that what is unresolved occupies more mental space (Zeigarnik, 1927).
Zehra and Harun’s undefined love lingers not despite its ambiguity, but because of it.
This helps explain why viewers find themselves drawn to their story: it echoes the ache of our own unfinished relationships.
Many of us have known the comfort of half-love — the late-night texts, the closeness without promises, the intimacy that feels both real and suspended.
While research shows that prolonged uncertainty can heighten stress and reduce well-being (Monroe et al., 1999), people often return to it because fragments of connection feel safer than the risk of absence.
Why It Matters
Zehra and Harun are more than fictional characters; they are reflections of human relational patterns.
Attachment theory explains the magnetic tension between desire and avoidance, while cognitive dissonance demonstrates how the mind accommodates contradictions to maintain bonds.
The Zeigarnik effect highlights why unresolved relationships linger in memory and emotion, giving them lasting psychological resonance.
Their story reveals why “half in, half out” is not a flaw but a form of emotional survival.
Relationships rarely follow clear lines, and contradictions often serve as the scaffolding for connection.
In understanding these dynamics, viewers see more than a narrative; they glimpse the ways the mind protects the heart, and why the tension between closeness and distance feels so compelling.
References
Bowlby, J. (1988). A Secure Base: Parent-Child Attachment and Healthy Human Development. Basic Books.
Festinger, L. (1957). A Theory of Cognitive Dissonance. Stanford University Press.
Fraley, R. C., & Shaver, P. R. (2000). Adult romantic attachment: Theoretical developments, emerging controversies, and unanswered questions. Review of General Psychology, 4(2), 132–154.
Knee, C. R., & Canevello, A. (2006). Implicit theories of relationships and coping in romantic relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32(5), 617–628.
Monroe, S. M., Rohde, P., Seeley, J. R., & Lewinsohn, P. M. (1999). Life events and depression in adolescence: Relationship loss as a prospective risk factor for first onset of major depressive disorder. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 108(4), 606–614.
Zeigarnik, B. (1927). Das Behalten erledigter und unerledigter Handlungen. Psychologische Forschung, 9, 1–85.