21st Century Literature discussion
This topic is about
My Name Is Red
2016 Book Discussions
>
My Name Is Red [Retro Read] - Chapters 43 - Onward and Whole Book Discussion, Spoilers Allowed (November 2016)
date
newest »
newest »
message 1:
by
Hugh
(new)
-
rated it 5 stars
Nov 01, 2016 01:42AM
Mod
reply
|
flag
I've just finished. I gave it 4 stars which was me being generous with my 3.5 stars rather than mean. I found the whole discussion about eastern vs. western art interesting and thought provoking, but I felt it went on a bit in the middle part of the book. To me, it felt like the men in the book behaved like a group of spoiled children, albeit with slightly more adult consequences. I got quite cross with Shekure at times which put me off the book a bit. Overall, though, I am glad I read it as it gave me quite a bit to think about.
Done. The last 50 pages were painful. I did not think they added anything to the story or to the information about Eastern art styles, which I was quite tired of by the end. As far as enjoyment level, I found it OK. The writing was quite good and I liked the style of multiple narrators. But, since I know little of the history and the lore associated with the various leaders (and had no desire to find out more), the discussion of the various rulers, the books associated with them, and the artists associated with the books made the book drag.
Mod
Me too! I did like the author's style. Eventually I will read Snow, which is on one of my too many shelves of books to be read!
I only just finished the book earlier today. Quite unexpectedly, I ended up reading it at the same time as this book club - but this has been a pleasure, as I have been able to read some of the responses others have had while I've worked my way through. I've never done that with this group before, but based on the pleasure I've had thus far I'll be doing it in the future with greater intention. As for this book. Well, I've got more to process about it, but I think it was weaker than I was hoping it would be, but sometimes it was also remarkably beautiful. The weak part was the plotline, which at times moved beautifully and at times felt like it wasn't all that well connected to the central theme of the book - the role of art in society and the role of the artist in making art for society, and maybe even the role of society in prescribing art.
I think this central theme was handled beautifully, if the final pages didn't necessarily give me a sense of closure. I tend not to like the argument that "this is the point of the ending!" - I prefer when a writer takes a stand - but I can accept it in some cases. Here I can, kind of. Because the discussion of art is so beautiful and so wide and expansive.
But the plotline, the murder mystery, doesn't excite me quite in the way that I think it is intended to. I mean, it is good and interesting at times, but I don't quite understand what makes it all so important. I wasn't convinced by it as an essential tool I suppose. And maybe that comes down to a pacing issue - which I think this book as in spades. There are moments in the book which would have benefitted a good deal from having substantial editing.
That said, when the writing reaches its highest heights, it is nothing short of marvelous. Splendid. A revelry of words and images. He can definitely write, Mr. Pamuk. I'll definitely be back to reading more of his word celebrations, and maybe with some of his other books - almost all of which seem to be more contemporary in their content - I'll be able to find something that rings a bit more consistently wonderful. A Strangeness in My Mind, for example, looks wonderful and more up my alley.
Out of curiousity, who were some of your favourite narrators? I really enjoyed Esther, the colour Red, and the Tree as well. The murderer was wonderful right up until the second last chapter...
Neil, I agree that Esther was a great narrator. I also liked Red and the Tree, but perhaps my favorite non-human narrator was the Coin.
Neal wrote: "Out of curiousity, who were some of your favourite narrators? I really enjoyed Esther, the colour Red, and the Tree as well. The murderer was wonderful right up until the second last chapter... ..."Hi Neal (with only one letter different in our names, this could get confusing). I'm not so sure now that the book has had a week and a half to settle in my mind. I still think the discussions about eastern vs. western art were interesting (if a bit long-winded at times), but I'm less convinced, at a distance, by the different narrative voices. Somehow, my memory of them has them all as rather spoiled children! I think that might be due to the author's writing style. The inanimate/non-human narrators are probably the ones I like best looking back, but mainly because they gave food for thought rather than progressing the story. I gave this 4 stars when I finished it, but I am already thinking that might be a bit generous.
I waffled on how to rate it as well Neil (yep - might get difficult!), but settled on 3 even if it was at times much more deserving. I don't think it will go higher in my rating, but I do think it is worthy of a second reading. I trust there is a lot more in here than I found on my first reading. Like you, though, I often found many of the voices a bit too similar. Even now I have a hard time making sense of the different voices for the different miniaturists - but perhaps that is the point? I mean, there was a big discussion on the role of the individual in the making of art and style, so perhaps the individuals, as much as they were an important factor in the plotline, was partially erased in the voicing?Linda - yes! That Coin section was lovely! I would love to read sections written only be inanimate objects, to be honest. Their voices and their "food for thought" purpose was really fulfilling.
It is clear to me that this book wasn't written with me, or anybody like me, being one of the primary readers. I know nothing of the history or the context it is written in or about, and understand very, very little of the contemporary politics of place. My friend, who happens to be Turkish and a huge fan of Pamuk, tells me that this book is a very, very political piece of art, as engaged with the past as it with the present, and so all of the discussion about the role of art and the church, of the east versus the west, which feels very historical, is also very very contemporary. He is indicting that part of Turkish society that thinks it is best to remain traditional, I think. It is hard for me to really be certain - again, that uncertainty makes it only ever so difficult to really get a sense of what he is talking about. Maybe if the separate voices and opinions of the different characters were more easily dissected from each other I would have a better sense of what to take out of the book.
To that end, though, my friend has told me this book is very much so written in the language, function, and form of illuminated transcripts from the height of the early Ottoman Empire. That's interesting, and worth noting - again, making this book more difficult for the Western Audience to fully appreciate and admire. His others books, I have been told, are more accessible if only because they are more contemporary in their content.
Neal wrote: "To that end, though, my friend has told me this book is very much so written in the language, function, and form of illuminated transcripts from the height of the early Ottoman Empire ..."That IS interesting! I also wondered if the similarity of the voices of the miniaturists was deliberate. All your comments about the political nature of the work and its form etc. are fascinating. I think they definitely suggest people like me who read it will miss out on a lot of the significance. I'm not sure that makes me want to read it again, though!
Mod
The writing was beautiful, but I found myself getting lost in it. I'm glad to hear his other books aren't like this one, if it grants me a more accessible reading experience.
Mod
Hugh wrote: "None of his other books is like this one stylistically, but some of them are very long - The Museum of Innocence tested my patience but parts of it are very good, and A Strangeness in my Mind is si..."Hugh, I know it's all down to personal taste, but I enjoyed A Strangeness in My Mind much more than I enjoyed this one. I think the main character in Strangeness was very well developed and I found myself really sympathetic towards him. Also, the city of Istanbul is almost as much of a central character as the actual central character, which I really enjoyed reading. In this one, several of the characters annoyed me for reasons that I am now coming to realize are probably stylistic choices made by the author.
Mod
A Strangeness In My Mind is his other book I've read - it reads fairly easily for its 600 pages, and while it too drags at times, it's a very interesting view of Istanbul in our times.
I read A Name is Red too long ago (14 years) to have been able to properly join in this discussion, although I've enjoyed following it. It was the book that first introduced me to Pamuk, now one of my favourite authors.Neal's points about the contemporary political relevance of what seem to be historical themes are very well made, and key not just to this novel but much of Pamuk's work which is often quite political at heart. The Nobel Committee described him “who in the quest for the melancholic soul of his native city has discovered new symbols for the clash and interlacing of cultures.”
As he's become more internationally famous, he has acknowledged that he now writes books with more of an international audience in mind, so his more recent works tend to explain themselves more in terms of the cultural background.
I've read all of those so far translated, and my personal favourite is Snow. The Museum of Innocence is relatively straightforward as a novel but stunning as an artistic project when one realises the museum itself actually exists - I was lucky enough to see part of it when it was temporarily moved to London.
Finally done with this book, I need the extra time in the holidays (Thanksgiving) to finish it. The last 100 pages or so dragged a bit too much for me, specially the descriptions in the Treasury. Overall I enjoyed this book very much, even without knowing much of it's historical background gave me a lot of things to think and google about. I will definitely be reading other of his books, probably start with Snow as a lot of you mentioned it was great. I did enjoy the different plots, the murder, the search of the murderer, the love story, the art. I am so happy Black survived and did live with Shekure in the end, for a while I was not sure this would happen, poor guy didn't have the best of luck hehe.
Neal wrote: "I waffled on how to rate it as well Neil (yep - might get difficult!), but settled on 3 even if it was at times much more deserving. I don't think it will go higher in my rating, but I do think it ..."Thanks for your comment, it is very interesting to know how this book was perceived in Turkey and it's political and religious influence and impact. I am not surprised to see it have a contemporary impact as well.
As for my favorite narrators, I enjoyed the murderer as he felt a bit more different than everyone else, from the inanimate ones I liked the coin, the color red and death. One question though, wasn't the storyteller of the coffee shop really the narrator in all these inanimate objects?
Linda wrote: "Neil, I agree that Esther was a great narrator. I also liked Red and the Tree, but perhaps my favorite non-human narrator was the Coin."I am reading this very slowly, almost a single chapter at a time. I just reached the Coin today. Definitely one of my favorites! I laughed and laughed, wondering how did Pamuk write it. In a torrent, one phrase toppling on the previous ones? Or did something later send him back to add an earlier startling contrast that he had "missed" the first time through? Did it come in the sequence of the story? Or was it a piece developed from some writer's symposium with some long lost prompt and direction to use an inanimate object as the narrator? Then, why so much use of inanimate narrators in this text -- how consistent is their use with the stasis of illumination?
Ironically, my reactions in my first two reads (which were mostly "listens") were close to those described here -- pluses and minuses, is it really worth the investment of more time, ....I am just allowing myself to enjoy this third read. I may get bogged down yet. I will certainly remain frustrated and humble and chagrined before my lack of understanding of so much, whether of art or architecture or history or places or ..... But when and where do I "care" and why? I would enjoy something that helped understanding of the political subplot, especially since Turkey's significance on the global geopolitical map appears likely to certainly not decrease in the years ahead and I understand so little of it now. We all know it is politics that bends the ear of the Nobel committee. At times this feels as coded as John of Patmos writing Revelations. Or as some describe being applicable to literature written in countries where the public face must conceal the private face.
Mod
21st Century Literature
Books mentioned in this topic
Istanbul: Memories and the City (other topics)A Strangeness in My Mind (other topics)
