<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.0.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Orhan Pamuk&#8217;s (political) suitcase</title>
	<link>http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/orhan-pamuks-political-suitcase.html</link>
	<description>A writer neither here nor there</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 24 Jul 2008 16:24:44 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>by: kathryn</title>
		<link>http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/orhan-pamuks-political-suitcase.html#comment-677</link>
		<pubDate>Sun, 10 Dec 2006 13:28:54 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/orhan-pamuks-political-suitcase.html#comment-677</guid>
					<description>Thanks, Dean!</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Thanks, Dean!
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
	<item>
		<title>by: Dean</title>
		<link>http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/orhan-pamuks-political-suitcase.html#comment-667</link>
		<pubDate>Sat, 09 Dec 2006 21:18:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://www.kathrynkoromilas.com/orhan-pamuks-political-suitcase.html#comment-667</guid>
					<description>Great post Kathryn. I thought his speech was a scorcher. I think you're right about the politics, and it's not very helpful to ignore that. I think Pamuk made a conscious decision -- for obvious reasons (his award was already labelled by some as political) -- to avoid overtly political matters in order to make his message more penetrating. The plight of writers in Turkey, on the one hand, and the meaning of literature generally, on the other, are highlighted. And you're right about the link between the familiar and the political. By bringing the focus down to a single, intimate point, Pamuk has given us all pause. Regardless of where we live, we can take something away from his speech that we may have forgotten about otherwise.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Great post Kathryn. I thought his speech was a scorcher. I think you&#8217;re right about the politics, and it&#8217;s not very helpful to ignore that. I think Pamuk made a conscious decision &#8212; for obvious reasons (his award was already labelled by some as political) &#8212; to avoid overtly political matters in order to make his message more penetrating. The plight of writers in Turkey, on the one hand, and the meaning of literature generally, on the other, are highlighted. And you&#8217;re right about the link between the familiar and the political. By bringing the focus down to a single, intimate point, Pamuk has given us all pause. Regardless of where we live, we can take something away from his speech that we may have forgotten about otherwise.
</p>
]]></content:encoded>
				</item>
</channel>
</rss>
