Orhan Pamuk
Posted to www.marxmail.org on July 5, 2006
Many thanks to Gilles d'Aymery for
calling my attention to the exceptionally well-written and interesting article
("Orhan Pamuk: A
Novelist Where The Currents Cross") by Peter Byrne in the latest Swans on
Turkey's most famous novelist and his arrest last year for defending Kurdish
rights and for calling attention to the genocidal attack on the Armenians
during WWI. http://www.swans.com/library/art12/pbyrne07.html
When I was in
A lawyer had punched
the pink face of an elderly man who accompanied the accused. The same man,
leaving the court, was kicked by an excited spectator who had been shouting
"traitor." The presumed criminal was then set upon by a woman who
struck him with a rolled-up folder. The crowd surged as he stumbled toward a
waiting car. But the police stood back. Some of their number
in plainclothes were busy inciting the crowd. A banner called the
accused "a missionary child," an insult meaning foreign-bred, impure
Turk. Shouts came of "Get out of
Just today, Turkish newspapers and the NY Times reported the
arrest of Noam Chomsky's Turkish publishers for the same charge:
NY Times, July 5, 2006
by Sebnem Arsu
A publisher who
printed a book by the linguist Noam Chomsky was indicted on a charge of
"insulting the Turkish identity," which can carry up to six years in
jail. The book, "Manufacturing Consent," was written by Mr. Chomsky
and Edward S. Herman in the 1980's, but the indictment focused on a 2001
edition's introduction that analyzed coverage of the Kurdish conflict.
This is not the first time that Turkish publishers have
faced such a charge. In 2002, a publisher named Fatih
Tas was acquitted by a court
of promoting disunity after making Chomsky's "American
Interventionism" available in a Turkish language edition. The book was
critical of
Despite Pamuk's willingness to
stand up to Turkish chauvinism, I found evidence that at least one educated and
radical-minded Turk remained critical of him. In
My own exposure to Pamuk is
somewhat limited. I tried to read his highly regarded (at least in the NY Times
Book Review section) "My Name is Red" but found it unreadable. It is
a historical novel with all the preciousness that you find in Tariq Ali's well-intentioned but leaden historical novels,
but with the added annoyance of postmodernist cleverness. On the other hand, I
have his nonfiction "
Although Pamuk tends to steer
clear of making pronouncements on political issues not directly related to
Turkish society, he did speak out on the looming war in
The Guardian (
Inside story: 'I feel
despair':
by Orhan Pamuk
Before
In
Since the image of the
nation as a carpet- dealer upset everyone, Erdoan
produced a new trump card that would force
Erdoan's party asked the army to make an
announcement in favour of war to influence the
parliamentary decision before the rejection of the proposal, but the army did
not wish to grasp this thorny issue before parliament. When parliament, too,
evaded the thorny issue, the job fell on Erdoan and
the Turkish press, which had called on the army for help. The majority of the
Turkish press have no qualms about carrying on war
propaganda, despite the anti-war fury of the people, because most of their
financial clout comes not from newspaper sales but from bribes received from
the state by various subterfuges. Many nationalist Turkish columnists, whose
heart was broken by the representation in the west of
The truth that emerges
from all this irony and comedy is this: the Bush government's relentless desire
to launch a war against Saddam has nothing to do with establishing democracy in
the
The world should know
about the damage that has been done to Turkish democracy by the Bush
government, which, has bypassed the sentiments of the
Turkish people, preferring to cooperate with the army. Already, parliament's
"no" to war has been dismissed and the massing of American troops in
Turkish harbours is continuing as if nothing had
happened. In response to this scandalous disrespect for the parliament, its
president bravely declared that it made his hair stand on end, while his fellow
party member, prime minister Erdoan,
seemed quite undisturbed. The justified complaint that there is not enough
democracy in Turkey, which we have become accustomed to hearing from the US for
years has, thanks to the Bush government, been transformed into a grumble that
there is too much democracy in Turkey.
Unlike some, I am not
opposed to this war because I am opposed to globalisation.
I believe that globalisation can be beneficial,
opening the way for the free circulation of capital, goods, ideas, and even
people, and weaken local nationalistic states and dictatorships. But the Bush
government's idea of globalisation is not freedom of
goods and thoughts but the unconditional freedom of the American army to bomb
what it likes, when it likes. For this purpose, it has shown itself prepared to
undermine local democracies and spurn parliamentary decisions.
This approach, which
attaches little importance to the UN, makes no attempt to understand the
reluctance and indecision of its allies, and is intent on having the
cooperation of local national armies at any cost for the sake of its own
military victory, is not much different from that of Saddam, who recognises nothing but his own will.
Like the leaders of
many other countries, the Turkish prime minister is trapped between the
pressures of the Bush government and the indignation of the people. What
distinguishes Erdoan from Tony Blair is not only that
he has spent and enjoyed most of his political life in an anti-western and
anti-American culture and discourse. With a debt burden of Dollars 80bn to
international western lenders,
Another consequence of
the aggressive policies of the Bush government is, sadly, to see that in many
countries like Turkey now the art of politics, whether leftwing or political
Islamist, has been reduced to the skill of winning the popular vote and
combining it with American military interests. Finding himself in such a
predicament, Erdoan is telling courageous
journalists, who remind him of his former words, that he "was not then in
power". If we are to believe this pretext, which pro-state columnists find
convincing, we must draw the pitiable conclusion that the words of a Turkish
politician are not to be trusted if he is not in power. If he is in power,
If Erdoan
compels the Turkish parliament to change its decision to say no to the war and
enter it with the US, he will lose the trust of the people which he earned so
patiently over the years by his diligence, talent, outspoken honesty and time
spent in prison.