Tweet
Zaman, Turkey
Oct 21 2006
Internalizing Orhan Pamuk
ETYEN MAHCUPYAN
10.21.2006 Saturday - ISTANBUL 22:33
Societies which are unable to get out of their communal mentality
have always had trouble grasping the concept of the individual,
created by modernity, because being an individual requires, above
all, looking at oneself from out of one's community.
This is already the very definition of the intellectual and this
difference also points out why the "enlightened" in Turkey fail to
become intellectuals. As for communities, they only create
"enlightened." These are people who think they know what is true and
assume a mission of promoting the progress of society toward these
right goals. While doing so, they also pursue a goal of making the
values of their community dominate the demands of others. Such people
would not be awarded a Nobel Prize, for instance. All those who have
been awarded Nobel Prizes so far are people who succeeded in
developing a critical viewpoint toward their lands and created a new
localism out of this criticism. Therefore, it is not surprising that
Orhan Pamuk is perceived as a stranger because of the communal
perception in Turkey. In fact, Pamuk is even on the margins of the
secular circles in Turkey, not to mention the conservative ones.
However, for this very reason, his critical view toward every point
about himself made him real and enabled him to raise a localism with
a universal meaning to an intellectual level. In his book Istanbul:
Memories and the City, the author deals with his childhood, family
and the cultural structure around him. He describes the background of
Istanbul in such a way that he alienates and marginalizes while
localizing himself by making it a part of the world he is talking
about.
This novelist was awarded a Nobel Prize in literature for his ability
to handle his novels with this deep point of view. Those who say
Pamuk was awarded this prize for political reasons probably think his
books were translated into so many foreign languages and became
best-sellers as a result of lobbying activities. A parvenu culture of
keeping books on shelves instead of reading them is widespread in our
society but such a custom almost never existed in Western societies.
For over a decade Pamuk has been regarded as a "pioneering" writer,
in Western literary circles, reflecting the futuristic novel on the
present day. Hadn't he dealt with political issues that much, perhaps
Pamuk would have already been awarded this prize because Pamuk's real
strength lies in his distance from his objects and the courage to
declare this openly, as well as his ability to unite his high
intelligence, power of observation and expression within a literary
tradition. Pamuk also pushes the limits of the novel while doing so.
The remarks of those who criticize him show the abysmally low number
of people who possess the same intelligence and courage in our
society and how hard it is for a man of letters to look at himself
and things from out of his community.
Being a universal man of letters does not only imply an ability to
write well. Even intelligence and courage are not enough.
Synthesizing this in a way to address people's minds and hearts also
requires honor. As for honor, it does not mean an official discourse
charged with preserving the national outlook as some people consider
it to be. It requires dealing with the society and history in a
conscientious way. Those claiming that Pamuk was awarded the Nobel
Prize because he had said a million Armenians were killed in this
country are apparently trying to say that this statement should not
be made by a "good" man of letters because a person with a conscience
cannot say the opposite. There may be various views on why these
events took place but rejecting the existence of the event just
reveals one's fear in confessing his or her lack of ideas.
Pamuk is not that kind of a man. He is an honest person who combines
his extraordinary talent with intelligence, courage and conscience.
It is certainly difficult for communities to "internalize" such
people.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress
Oct 21 2006
Internalizing Orhan Pamuk
ETYEN MAHCUPYAN
10.21.2006 Saturday - ISTANBUL 22:33
Societies which are unable to get out of their communal mentality
have always had trouble grasping the concept of the individual,
created by modernity, because being an individual requires, above
all, looking at oneself from out of one's community.
This is already the very definition of the intellectual and this
difference also points out why the "enlightened" in Turkey fail to
become intellectuals. As for communities, they only create
"enlightened." These are people who think they know what is true and
assume a mission of promoting the progress of society toward these
right goals. While doing so, they also pursue a goal of making the
values of their community dominate the demands of others. Such people
would not be awarded a Nobel Prize, for instance. All those who have
been awarded Nobel Prizes so far are people who succeeded in
developing a critical viewpoint toward their lands and created a new
localism out of this criticism. Therefore, it is not surprising that
Orhan Pamuk is perceived as a stranger because of the communal
perception in Turkey. In fact, Pamuk is even on the margins of the
secular circles in Turkey, not to mention the conservative ones.
However, for this very reason, his critical view toward every point
about himself made him real and enabled him to raise a localism with
a universal meaning to an intellectual level. In his book Istanbul:
Memories and the City, the author deals with his childhood, family
and the cultural structure around him. He describes the background of
Istanbul in such a way that he alienates and marginalizes while
localizing himself by making it a part of the world he is talking
about.
This novelist was awarded a Nobel Prize in literature for his ability
to handle his novels with this deep point of view. Those who say
Pamuk was awarded this prize for political reasons probably think his
books were translated into so many foreign languages and became
best-sellers as a result of lobbying activities. A parvenu culture of
keeping books on shelves instead of reading them is widespread in our
society but such a custom almost never existed in Western societies.
For over a decade Pamuk has been regarded as a "pioneering" writer,
in Western literary circles, reflecting the futuristic novel on the
present day. Hadn't he dealt with political issues that much, perhaps
Pamuk would have already been awarded this prize because Pamuk's real
strength lies in his distance from his objects and the courage to
declare this openly, as well as his ability to unite his high
intelligence, power of observation and expression within a literary
tradition. Pamuk also pushes the limits of the novel while doing so.
The remarks of those who criticize him show the abysmally low number
of people who possess the same intelligence and courage in our
society and how hard it is for a man of letters to look at himself
and things from out of his community.
Being a universal man of letters does not only imply an ability to
write well. Even intelligence and courage are not enough.
Synthesizing this in a way to address people's minds and hearts also
requires honor. As for honor, it does not mean an official discourse
charged with preserving the national outlook as some people consider
it to be. It requires dealing with the society and history in a
conscientious way. Those claiming that Pamuk was awarded the Nobel
Prize because he had said a million Armenians were killed in this
country are apparently trying to say that this statement should not
be made by a "good" man of letters because a person with a conscience
cannot say the opposite. There may be various views on why these
events took place but rejecting the existence of the event just
reveals one's fear in confessing his or her lack of ideas.
Pamuk is not that kind of a man. He is an honest person who combines
his extraordinary talent with intelligence, courage and conscience.
It is certainly difficult for communities to "internalize" such
people.
From: Emil Lazarian | Ararat NewsPress