any recs for Orhan Pamuk books? plus tho'ts on genre of Literature

[Fi Webster]

I'm captivated by this review of Nights of Plague by Turkish Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk. I feel ignorant that I haven't read any of his fiction. Anyone have suggestions for which works by Pamuk to start with?

BTW, why is there no forum here for the genre called Literature? Contemporary fiction is not necessarily literary, and vice versa. For example, E. L. James's Fifty Shades of Grey is contemporary, but I'd be hard-pressed to call it literary. Tolstoy's War and Peace is literature, but obviously not contemporary.

Plus, a great deal of the recently published nonfiction I read, like personal essays, counts as literature. Jorge Luis Borges, Roland Barthes, and Walter Benjamin are prominent examples of authors who wrote literary nonfiction. Today, so are Rebecca Solnit and Mary Oliver, just to pick a couple. And where do we discuss non-contemporary plays and poetry?

Even before a book garners critical acclaim, prizes, etc., (if ever) it's pretty easy to tell the difference between what's literary and what's not. If course there are overlap areas between genres—all genres—but Literature is still identifiably distinct.

Apologies if this is a dead horse already beaten here ad nauseum.

I read the FAQ, but it says, "This room is not about theory or theory only. Oh, no, it's for discussions of our favorite novels, short stories, poems, and plays."

Three reactions to that:
(1) Sometimes theory is so well-written it counts as literature. Think Susan Sontag, or the aforementioned Walter Benjamin.
(2) The emphasis is on post-WW2 works. So where do we discuss Shakespeare? Or William Blake?
(3) Why no mention of literary nonfiction? Doesn't the work of Annie Dillard, for example, belong in that category?

 

[Lakey]

I think you're overthinking. No classification system -- whether in a forum, a bookstore, a library, or anywhere else -- is going to match everyone's mental model of how things should properly be classified. It will not be granular enough, or too granular, or it will be granular in some ways but not granular in other ways, it will have overlaps and ambiguities, it will have gaps. That is a fortiori true of a classification system like AW's forum rooms, which grew and changed organically over many years as the community grew and changed. It's not like it was designed top-down so that each written work would fall into one and only one category. And even if it were -- there would still be room for debate on the margins.

So, don't worry so much about what the right room is. If you have in mind a work you want to discuss, the thing to do is find a room that sort of makes sense, and start a discussion. The very worst that happens is that someone else disagrees with you about where you chose to put the thread, and maybe (but also maybe not) a moderator decides to move the thread.

ETA: I am sorry to say I also haven't read any Pamuk. I think I started a nonfiction of his once but it fell by the wayside. I have a copy of one or two of his novels, but I've been hesitant to start them. Something else has always been more appealing in the moment when it's time to choose the next book to read.

 

[Tocotin]

Hello! Im a bit confused about this Literature thing. Aren’t all books, fiction and nonfiction, literary and genre, prose, poetry, plays, cookbooks – aren’t they all literature anyway?

Even before a book garners critical acclaim, prizes, etc., (if ever) it's pretty easy to tell the difference between what's literary and what's not. If course there are overlap areas between genres—all genres—but Literature is still identifiably distinct.

I’m not so sure. For example, you mentioned Tolstoy, but for me Tolstoy doesn’t feel like literary fiction; I don’t read him for the language (or philosophical insights, or for experiments with form), but rather for the story and the characters. Tolstoy is very dramatic and soap opera-ish, or kabuki-esque if you prefer, and Dostoevsky or Trollope or Zola even more so.

About Pamuk: I have read three books of his, first The White Castle, which I liked, then My Name Is Red, which I liked less, and then The Museum of Innocence, which I straight up disliked. It might have something to do with the very flat, instrumental way in which female characters were portrayed in the latter two. The White Castle didn’t have any women (I think), so I was able to enjoy the story. All three books were historical, which is the genre I like, and I am interested in Turkish history, so I was fully prepared to love My Name Is Red. Alas. It’s a very colorful and interestingly constructed book, and I know some AW folks had more good things to say about it, so it might be just me. I did like The White Castle though, and as it’s the most literary of the three, you might like it too.

 

[Chris P]

Pamuk fan here. I'm looking forward to next week when Nights of Plague comes out.

The first I've read of his was Snow, and it's one on my ten favorite books I've read in the past ten years. I've not read all of his, but of those I've read I would place Snow first, then A Strangeness in My Mind, the My Name is Red and finally The Red-Haired Woman. Snow and ASIMM are more or less contemporary, while MNIR is centuries ago historical, and TRHW is mid-20th-century to nearly modern. I would say Pamuk's main themes are the dances conflicting cultures go through when the come in contact, and the individual's or society's identity crisis as a result. With TRHW, the conflict was generational.

Imma stay out of the genre/classification discussion, because my own descriptions fail to describe why I call Pamuk "literary."

 

[Fi Webster]

So, don't worry so much about what the right room is. If you have in mind a work you want to discuss, the thing to do is find a room that sort of makes sense, and start a discussion. The very worst that happens is that someone else disagrees with you about where you chose to put the thread, and maybe (but also maybe not) a moderator decides to move the thread.

Thanks. I guess I'll head for the "General Writing Interest" forums instead of those under "Writing Genres." At least those do have Poetry separated from Nonfiction, etc.

 

[ChaseJxyz]

Yeah, tbh, I kind of hate "literature" as a genre, because what does that even mean? We've decided stuff like The Great Gatsby and War and Peace are "literature" because they are "good" and "required reading," but none of it was that at the time they were released. They were "contemporary" or maybe even "historical." Farenheit 451 and 1984 were "science fiction." But also strict genres in that sense really didn't exist at the time most of these were published, either. Since Barnes and Noble and Amazon didn't exist.

Yes, 50 Shades is contemporary...but people don't go into B&N saying "ooo I want to read a book set in the modern day!" They say "I want to read a book about two people getting to know each other, biblically speaking," and they go to whatever is the equivalent of the hentai section for normal books is. Also, everything that is "contemporary" is going to be "historical" eventually. We don't keep a book in "contemporary" just because it was "contemporary" when it was published. But when does it get moved over to historical? An interesting question!

 

[lizmonster]

Yeah, tbh, I kind of hate "literature" as a genre, because what does that even mean?

Marketing-wise, I believe "literary" is a category, like YA, rather than a genre. There is literary SF, literary romance, literary mystery, etc.

As for how it's defined, for me, it's a bit of "I know it when I read it." Station Eleven is widely regarded as literary, so one could assume literary SF is slow and atmospheric. On the other hand, I believe Sourdough is also considered literary, and that's fantasy/urban fantasy and is a quick, dynamic read.

What survives from decades and centuries past is a different conversation. IME there are two pieces to it: what's been (somewhat blindly) accepted by academia as "important" literature, and remains on reading lists unquestioned; and books with historical significance. Of Mice And Men, for example, is, in many ways, only relevant today because it's written around and about a major historical event.

But of course it's also deeply subjective. Dickens is almost always fun to read, even today. Gatsby is a very accessible novel - not my cup of tea, but stylistically it reads very modern. Parts of Candide are genuinely funny, and I still think King Lear is sad and gorgeous.

Who draws the lines? I don't know.

 

[Unimportant]

BTW, why is there no forum here for the genre called Literature? Contemporary fiction is not necessarily literary, and vice versa. For example, E. L. James's Fifty Shades of Grey is contemporary, but I'd be hard-pressed to call it literary. Tolstoy's War and Peace is literature, but obviously not contemporary.....

Perhaps there hasn't been sufficient demand for a separate area for this kind of writing. Perhaps because the moderators are already so overworked that none of them has the time to take on yet another subforum. Perhaps because increasing the size of the forum costs more money and they're already running on a negative shoestring.

You only get out of a forum what you're willing to put into it.

 

[Mutive]

As far as Pamuk goes, I'd second Chris P's recommendation to start with Snow. While I hate to say that it's his finest work (who am I to know?), it was my favorite.

In increasing order, I liked My Name is Red, The Red Haired Woman, and Museum of Innocence. I'll agree that his depictions of women can be...interesting. With that said, I felt like it was less Pamuk's view than those of his (often fairly shallow and male) narrators. (And personally felt like the depiction of Fusun in Museum of Innocence was deliberately shallow, to show what an unreliable narrator Kemal is throughout the novel. Although, as always, YMMV.)

 

[Chris P]

As far as Pamuk goes, I'd second Chris P's recommendation to start with Snow. While I hate to say that it's his finest work (who am I to know?), it was my favorite.

One thing I really enjoyed about Snow was the use of the omniscient POV. It makes total sense in the context, that the narrator who never appears in the story is reporting out the reconstruction of his friend's final months. It felt more like reading non-fic, in a tell-all but matter-of-fact way. The setting was also compelling, the whole book felt like it took place at about 11:30 on a blizzardy night. I noticed that any time the weather was mentioned, it was actively snowing. It had never just started, never just stopped, but was always in progress. I'm sure Pamuk meant something by that, I just can't figure out what.

Finally, and it was this that brought me to the book, was the east-meets-west conflict. I had read in a separate book (can't remember which one, it could have been Civilization by Niall Ferguson or The Finish by Mark Bowdon; Ferguson seems to ring more true) that the main radical Muslim's diatribe to one of the other characters was a perfect summation of the rise of radical Islam in that part of the world. I also don't know very much at all about that part of the world, so every insight was new.

 

[Iustefan]

I think the ‘literature’ forum request should be considered, mainly because we have a SYW section for it. But also because of how large of a category it is, encompassing everything from Don Quixote, to Ovid, to Kafka, to Pynchon and Orhan Pamuk. That’s a large swath of work which doesn’t really have a space here, and I think when users join, if they aren’t very genre minded, they may turn around and leave based on layout alone.

To me it’s a chicken and egg situation—we don’t need it because we don’t get many ‘literature’ threads posted; but also we don’t get many ‘literature’ threads posted because we don’t have a section.

I think most of what I read would be labeled as ‘literature’, and as a user of the site I find myself a little lost clicking around. We have the lit fic thread, but it’s so limiting to have only a single thread, and also a little daunting to post in (maybe that’s just me), not to mention it’s inactive at the moment (yes, that’s partially on us the users).

Anyways, there’s my 2c, I know the admins and mods are working hard, and there are places for literature posts… this isn’t meant to be an argument, but maybe just a data point to be considered.

Then again… there is a likely chance it wouldn’t get enough threads to even justify its existence…

 

[Siri Kirpal]

Sat Nam! (Literally "Truth Name"--a Sikh greeting)

This used to be the Literary Fiction section of the Forums. Not sure why they changed the name.

Haven't read anything by Orhan Pamuk, so I won't give recommendations.

Blessings,

Siri Kirpal

 

[DarkWriter223]

Thanks Fi now you got wanting to read Orhan too! (in a positive way of course).

 

[Chris P]

I'm captivated by this review of Nights of Plague by Turkish Nobel Prize winner Orhan Pamuk. I feel ignorant that I haven't read any of his fiction. Anyone have suggestions for which works by Pamuk to start with?

5% in, and Nights of Plague is a slow starter. Like, really slow. "Scrap and redo the preface and first chapter" slow. I do recall Snow taking a bit to get going, and it ended up being one of my favorites.

 

[Fi Webster]

I do recall Snow taking a bit to get going, and it ended up being one of my favorites.

Thanks for the tip. I'm immersed right now in reading the French writer, Annie Ernaux, who also just won the Nobel Prize, but will get to Pamuk soon!

 

[Chris P]

Thanks for the tip. I'm immersed right now in reading the French writer, Annie Ernaux, who also just won the Nobel Prize, but will get to Pamuk soon!

I recommend AGAINST Nights of Plague being the first Pamuk you read. I'm 22% in and it's heavy, slow going. He's taken a pretty unconventional approach of writing in the voice of a historian who has written a novel based on her research, and I don't think it's paying off. Like he's writing a novel about a bad novel, or knew he had a bad novel and is blaming it on his fictitious historian. Unrealistic and stilted dialog, too many bit characters who cycle through too quickly, main characters introduced early almost completely absent, lots of explaining and little action, and the writing is very straightforward and not interesting. The up side is it's a murder mystery with the trappings of the political east-meets-west, crossroads of the world perspective I like about Pamuk.

 

[ap123]

I think the ‘literature’ forum request should be considered, mainly because we have a SYW section for it. But also because of how large of a category it is, encompassing everything from Don Quixote, to Ovid, to Kafka, to Pynchon and Orhan Pamuk. That’s a large swath of work which doesn’t really have a space here, and I think when users join, if they aren’t very genre minded, they may turn around and leave based on layout alone.

To me it’s a chicken and egg situation—we don’t need it because we don’t get many ‘literature’ threads posted; but also we don’t get many ‘literature’ threads posted because we don’t have a section.

I think most of what I read would be labeled as ‘literature’, and as a user of the site I find myself a little lost clicking around. We have the lit fic thread, but it’s so limiting to have only a single thread, and also a little daunting to post in (maybe that’s just me), not to mention it’s inactive at the moment (yes, that’s partially on us the users).

Anyways, there’s my 2c, I know the admins and mods are working hard, and there are places for literature posts… this isn’t meant to be an argument, but maybe just a data point to be considered.

Then again… there is a likely chance it wouldn’t get enough threads to even justify its existence…

The Contemporary section used to be called Lit Fic, I don't remember why it changed. I do remember how many of the threads devolved into arguments about what Lit Fic is, whether or not anyone should reference their work as lit fic, genre folks beginning many replies with I don't read lit fic because it's boring/has no plot, lit fic folks offering not-so-veiled references to how/why lit fic is superior to genre, etc, and how many of those threads ended up locked.

I'd be happy to see more action in that section, for the same reasons every section isn't a general fiction forum. There are commonalities across all genres and categories, but also different, specific reader expectations and questions in each. Yes, literary is a marketing category, but also used to define work/expectations when querying, ie: My So-so Novel is 82,000 word literary fiction.

Lit fic is of course a different term than literature, and there is a non-fic forum, as well as a poetry forum, and I'm pretty sure there is a plays/screenwriting forum.

I'd say post your threads/questions/topics for discussion where they seem to fit best, interested members will notice and jump in, and if the forum it's posted in misses the mark wildly mods will move. I don't know anything about the technical aspects of running/maintaining forums, but AW is already huge, and I'm guessing the more individual forums/sections the more difficult it is to maintain (maybe I'm wrong, I dunno).

 

[Fi Webster]

The Contemporary section used to be called Lit Fic, I don't remember why it changed. I do remember how many of the threads devolved into arguments about what Lit Fic is, whether or not anyone should reference their work as lit fic, genre folks beginning many replies with I don't read lit fic because it's boring/has no plot, lit fic folks offering not-so-veiled references to how/why lit fic is superior to genre, etc, and how many of those threads ended up locked.

FWIW, there is an alternate term that encompasses both Contemporary fiction and Lit Fic: Mainstream. I have no idea if it's used anymore, but when I was writing professionally about horror fiction in the '90s and '00s, that was the marketing term for authors who'd written works that were dark in subject matter—ranging from past greats like Franz Kafka and Joseph Conrad to contemporary masters like Cormac McCarthy and Patrick McGrath—but who were not considered horror writers per se. I published a rather muddy essay examining whether or not the distinction had merit, titled "Dark Currents in the Main Stream" (still up on my ancient website, if anyone's interested).

For the most part I can tell the difference between genre horror and dark mainstream. But I also heartily agree with Damon Knight's famous dictum about genre: "Science fiction is what we point to when we say it." For that reason I enjoy making apparently counterfactual statements like "Cormac McCarthy's Blood Meridian is the best horror novel ever written." (Stephen King himself has echoed that same assessment.)

The word Mainstream has at least the advantage over Lit Fic of avoiding arguments over whether lit fic is superior to genre, which I abhor.

Another dichotomy people use, the terms "popular" vs. "serious" fiction, is extremely problematic. Look at Pop Art: Roy Lichtenstein and Andy Warhol are pop artists, and popular artists, but no art critic I respect considers their work to lack seriousness. In any case, the usual antonym for "serious" is not "popular" but "humorous." Humor is, of course, a high art. Plus, very good art can be serious and humorous at the same time—e.g., Jonathan Swift.

I do think quality is a thing: we find some writers better than other writers, just as we think some scientists are better than others. There's a reason why Darwin is credited with an important paradigm about how species change over time, whereas Lamarck is not. But those assessments, in the realm of fiction (culture in general) are opinions on the part of readers and critics, to be defended with proper arguments, not erroneous calls to authority. Is such-and-such Nobel or Booker or Hugo or Bram Stoker Prize winner really a better writer than one who hasn't been given that honor? Matter of opinion. Certainly, whether one author's of a higher quality than another has absolutely nothing to do with what genre, or lack thereof, their work is classified under.

I'm not suggesting anything about how AW is structured needs to change. (Thanks, @Lakey.) I get it that all categorizations of anything are super fluid and arbitrary—viz. taxonomy, in which for a while birds (Aves) got lumped under dinosaurs (Dinosauria), then were separated out again. I'm just reminding y'all that "Mainstream"—which, unlike "Contemporary," isn't time-limited to post-WW2—used to mean "whatever we consider to be non-genre." Maybe it still does? You tell me.

At least 75% of what I happen to read is Lit Fic/Mainstream, not genre. That's the category under which I aim to query my nonfiction WIP. Not because I think Lit Fic/Mainstream is inherently superior. No, not at all. It's just what I prefer—just as Tex Mex is the cuisine I prefer. (But obviously I also dig Horror.)

But I do find some Tex Mex superior to other Tex Mex. So it goes... round and round... ever uncertain about how to defend personal opinions, category divisions, etc. I happen to find such discussions both illuminating and entertaining. I love sitting around with fellow Texans talking about what's the best recipe for frijoles refritos, or whether Mexican food served with sour cream counts as Tex Mex.

Your mileage may vary. (What a great saying!)

 

[Chris P]

There used to be a Forum here called "Mainstream/Contemporary" and a separate one for "Lit Fic." I always took M/C to mean books like Crazy Rich Asians, Where'd You Go, Bernadette? etc. Stuff that took place in the current time but didn't fit into the thriller, romance, YA, etc. categories. Lit Fic was then things like Umberto Eco, Orhan Pamuk, and other such that could be older, but maybe not "classics" in the Charles Dickens, Oscar Wilde, etc. sense.

What fell in between was "upmarket" fiction. A Man Called Ove, The Last Painting of Sara de Vos, and other books that were "headier" and more "booky" than M/C, but more appealing to general audiences than Lit Fic.

It's a moving target at best, and fun to discuss now and then. But, I'll wear it like a loose overcoat and adjust it as I need to.

 

[DarkWriter223]

5% in, and Nights of Plague is a slow starter. Like, really slow. "Scrap and redo the preface and first chapter" slow. I do recall Snow taking a bit to get going, and it ended up being one of my favorites.

Favourite you mean?