今天看到一個土爾其記者Kilyos寫的回應：

身為一個伊斯坦布爾的居民，我跟帕慕克擁有大致相同的家庭背景(但是沒有他那麼好)，並且跟他一樣對土爾其有大致相同的渴望。然而，我卻感到有一點苦澀，我無法完全地跟他聯結起來，以及無法茍同他在《Snow》中描述的土爾其。我是個見證了許多發生在土爾其和境內事情的記者，我冒險報導我、自由主義的歐洲人或帕慕克以及同胞們認為該報導的事情，而且因為這樣而失業了。所以，我今天看到Margaret Atwood告訴我們“帕慕克提供了所有作家竭力提供給我們的東西：真相。不是統計學上的真相，而是人類在特定地方，特定時代的經驗。”誠如所有偉大的文學一樣，你感覺到常常不是你在檢視他，而是他在檢視你。“沒有人能夠從遠處了解我們，”《Snow》中的一個角色說道，“讀者，這是個挑戰”，我開始疑惑，我們在說的是不是同一個作家。作家擁有特權來營造他愛好的氛圍；寓言、隱喻、抽象概念，都是他的工具，但是到最後，一個描繪“人類在特定的地方，特定的時代的真相”應該是會顯現的。大部分非土爾其評論帕慕克作品的人都可以看到Atwood所描述的畫面，但是我不能，我們這些大部分生活在土爾其的人也不能。我想帕慕克的作品中有弱點，他的作品好像是寫給外面的觀眾看的，不是寫給土爾其人的。呈現一個外人想看到的國家面貌，加強和鞏固非土爾其讀者對土爾其的想像可能是他想要販賣的，可能甚至是他的目的。這是我感到苦澀的原因。然而，誠如另一個傑出土爾其作者Cetin Altan今天所說的，政客會被遺忘，但是帕慕克卻會流芳百世。所以，恭喜他。


原文：
As an Istanbul resident with more or less same (but less better off) social background and with similar aspirations for Turkey with Orhan Pamuk, there is some bitterness in me. The fact that he does not fully connect with me and I do not recognize the Turkey that he is depicting in Snow for example is the reason of this bitterness. I am not a sheltered Istanbul resident; I am a journalist who have seen and witnessed a lot around Turkey and the region, took risks and became unemployed for reporting issues that are apparently dear to me, to liberal Europeans, to Orhan Pamuk and to many of my compatriots. So, when I read Margaret Atwood telling us today “Pamuk gives us what all novelists give us at their best: the truth. Not the truth of statistics, but the truth of human experience at a particular place, in a particular time.And as with all great literature, you feel at moments not that you are examining him, but that he is examining you. ”No one could understand us from so far away,” says a character in Snow. Reader, it’s a challenge”, I start wondering whether we are talking about the same author. It is the novelists’ prerogative to create the atmosphere that he fancies; allegories, metaphors, abstractions are his tools but at the end, a picture that somehow depicts “the truth of human experience at a particular place, in a particular time” should emerge. Mostly non-Turkish critics of Pamuk’s novels can see a picture as described by Ms. Atwood but not me, not many of us (except the rabid nationalists) here in Turkey. I think there lies the weakness of Pamuk’s writing; it is as if he is writing for an outside audience, and not for Turkey. Showing a face of the country that they would very much like to see, strengthening and confirming their perceptions regarding the Turkish reality of his non-Turkish readers, seem unfortunately to be his trade and even maybe his objective. That is the reason of the bitterness. But, as another eminent author of Turkey, Cetin Altan wrote today, politicians will be forgotten, but Pamuk will be remembered for centuries. So, congratulations.