mr. flower vs. mr. cotton, and other turkish tales
Turkish surnames (which most people adopted in a hurry after a 1934 law requiring them) are frequently just everyday nouns, which occasionally lends amusement to my reading of the news. According to the Guardian, Cemal Çiçek (or, "Flower"), the rather un-flowery justice minister, has said that Orhan Pamuk ("Cotton") should make a public apology for his comments on the Armenian genocide and Kurdish issue. Now, since an İstanbul court kicked the legal matter upstairs last month (by ruling that Pamuk's case cannot be prosecuted under the new penal code, and therefore requires permission from the Justice Ministry to proceed, as per the terms of the prior code) it's basically up to Çiçek to decide whether or not to drop the case (which was filed by a local prosecutor, not the national government). I have a feeling he'll be under considerable pressure from other figures in the AK Party to do so regardless of whether or not Pamuk obliges, but Çiçek has behaved like a nationalist asshat in the past (most notably in comments last spring accusing the organizers of the groundbreaking conference in İstanbul about the Armenian genocide of "stabbing [Turkey] in the back") so I'm not sure.
Recently, Lebanon's Daily Star sent correspondent Paul de Zardain off to İstanbul in search of Orhan Pamuk's city (and the opinions of its inhabitants about the current controversy). An important note--de Zardain is surprised to find some wealthy inhabitants of the Şişli district vehemently against Pamuk, but he shouldn't be. Many among the country's older, privileged elite are fairly hard-core Kemalists, who resent both the more populist and religious AK Party government and the left-liberal intelligentsia represented by Pamuk--seeing them both as traitors to the past nationalist regimes that cemented the standing of said elites. I once had a memorable fight (er, 'heated exchange') with a Turkish student, a doctor from a posh, Westernised family, at some sherry party in Oxford a few years back. He was convinced the AKP was plotting to turn Turkey into a theocratic second Iran and wanted the army to step in and "save" the nation. I was pretty sure that the notoriously interventionist army was a far bigger threat to democracy (and that was before I'd met people whose friends and colleagues were murdered by the army after the coups of the 70's and 80's--now, believe me, I'm absolutely damn sure). Because Kemalist nationalism itself has always placed such a high priority on being "modern," while defining modernity as an essentially secular, "Western" phenomenon, it's not uncommon for the heirs of Kemalism to be privileged, well-educated, English-speaking elites--people one might expect to be liberal/progressive on matters like freedom of expression--and yet simultaneously be quite vehement nationalists of just the sort who are pursuing Pamuk.
In other depressing Turkey news, there are now 15 cases of kuş gribi--including some in Ankara--causing fear throughout the country, and several more journalists (Hrant Dink, again, and several others from the Armenian community newspaper Agos) are being charged by local courts under Articles 301 and 288, after complaints brought by right-wing activist Kemal Kerinçsiz and his cronies. I'm translating some reports about the latter issue at the moment and will link once they're online. However, it's very heartening to see a grassroots campaign against Article 301--301 Kere Hayir! or "301 Times No!"--gathering steam. The petition already has thousands of signatures from people all over Turkey, and some in the expat community. There are a lot of familiar names--writers, activists, academics, friends--on the featured list of original signatories. There's no English version of the website as far as I can tell, but I hope the No to 301 campaign gets some international coverage as well. Maybe I'll try to generate some.
Recently, Lebanon's Daily Star sent correspondent Paul de Zardain off to İstanbul in search of Orhan Pamuk's city (and the opinions of its inhabitants about the current controversy). An important note--de Zardain is surprised to find some wealthy inhabitants of the Şişli district vehemently against Pamuk, but he shouldn't be. Many among the country's older, privileged elite are fairly hard-core Kemalists, who resent both the more populist and religious AK Party government and the left-liberal intelligentsia represented by Pamuk--seeing them both as traitors to the past nationalist regimes that cemented the standing of said elites. I once had a memorable fight (er, 'heated exchange') with a Turkish student, a doctor from a posh, Westernised family, at some sherry party in Oxford a few years back. He was convinced the AKP was plotting to turn Turkey into a theocratic second Iran and wanted the army to step in and "save" the nation. I was pretty sure that the notoriously interventionist army was a far bigger threat to democracy (and that was before I'd met people whose friends and colleagues were murdered by the army after the coups of the 70's and 80's--now, believe me, I'm absolutely damn sure). Because Kemalist nationalism itself has always placed such a high priority on being "modern," while defining modernity as an essentially secular, "Western" phenomenon, it's not uncommon for the heirs of Kemalism to be privileged, well-educated, English-speaking elites--people one might expect to be liberal/progressive on matters like freedom of expression--and yet simultaneously be quite vehement nationalists of just the sort who are pursuing Pamuk.
In other depressing Turkey news, there are now 15 cases of kuş gribi--including some in Ankara--causing fear throughout the country, and several more journalists (Hrant Dink, again, and several others from the Armenian community newspaper Agos) are being charged by local courts under Articles 301 and 288, after complaints brought by right-wing activist Kemal Kerinçsiz and his cronies. I'm translating some reports about the latter issue at the moment and will link once they're online. However, it's very heartening to see a grassroots campaign against Article 301--301 Kere Hayir! or "301 Times No!"--gathering steam. The petition already has thousands of signatures from people all over Turkey, and some in the expat community. There are a lot of familiar names--writers, activists, academics, friends--on the featured list of original signatories. There's no English version of the website as far as I can tell, but I hope the No to 301 campaign gets some international coverage as well. Maybe I'll try to generate some.
posted by kitabet at 9:42 PM
2 Comments:
It's certainly not just the rich in Turkey, or even the ultra-right, who dislike Pamuk. Almost everyone does.
Those who raised their voices on the Armenian issue long before he did are annoyed with him for claiming to be the first to do so.
Those who want get into Europe--a dwindling number these days--feel that he has put himself before his country. Rightly or wrongly, many, probably most, ordinary Turks see him as someone who hates his country.
Others suspect him of being a mere self publicist. And remarkably few Turks like his books, especially perhaps "Istanbul" which no Turk seems to think much of.
Few, if any writers, have ever become so estranged from their own fellow countrymen. Perhaps Pamuk should switch to writing in English
hi anonymous (why? i'm curious to know who's commenting),
I'm quite familiar with all these complaints (go back to the archives and check on my prior posts about the issue, esp. in Sept and Oct). There are also plenty of Turks I know who don't hate Pamuk (although many of them don't care for his writing; my friends at Bogazici are always criticizing his "bad Turkish"). In fact, it seems to be quite faddish among literary types to disparage his work. But you're a bit disingenuous to make such sweeping claims about his unpopularity--people still buy his books. I can't stand some of them (Kar, especially), but there are others that I think are very good indeed (Kara Kitap, Benim Adim Kirmizi). He's quite a variable writer.
I've taken issue with his claims to be in the vanguard on the Armenian issue (tell that to Taner Akcam, or Hrant Dink...), but regardless of whatever self-aggrandizment is involved, I'm glad that he's pushing public discussion of the issue, and in further interviews and essays he's pointed out that he's only one of many people making these statements, and he only gets press coverage because of his high profile.
Absolutely none of these things, though, excuse his persecution by the likes of Kemal Kerincsiz. I don't care whether he's popular or not, he has the right to publish and say what he pleases, without fear of prosecution. So do all the others who have been persecuted under Article 301.
Post a Comment
<< Home