Talk:My Name Is Red

Novels High‑importance

	Novels portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.NovelsWikipedia:WikiProject NovelsTemplate:WikiProject Novelsnovel articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Turkey High‑importance

	Turkey portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Turkey, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Turkey and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TurkeyWikipedia:WikiProject TurkeyTemplate:WikiProject TurkeyTurkey articles
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

Guild of Copy Editors

This article was copy edited by Baffle_gab1978, a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, on 17th August 2010.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles

Comments

Sorry for removing the bit about the sentence order in English vs. Turkish, but there was no citation -- and the insinuation that the translator might not actually even be aware of the difference is just too outrageous (and insulting) to be credible - especially given that the English translation won the International IMPAC Dublin Literary Award.

It's a bit off topic, but IMO (and not knowing anything about Turkish) a translation must largely be judged on its own merits - it is common for a novel to take a different form when translated to a different language. Moreso when that language is quite dissimilar. If the particular translation is to be discussed in the article, I think the discussion should at least make it clear what the alleged problems was with the translation and who "some readers" are, other than the wikipedian editing the article. -- Oarih 02:44, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the jolt, which is quite fair.

I originally added the comment about the translation, though it was afterwards edited, making it less NPOV. I have restored my original version, but omitting the suggestion that Goknar might have been unaware of the word order problem, and added a request for a citation.

If you compare this translation with one of Maureen Freely's translations from Pamuk (e.g. Snow) you will see what I meant.

The novel deserves its success, and therefore I'm glad the translation won that prize, but, as a translation, it didn't deserve to. Yes, that's POV, I admit. I'll look for a citation myself now. Andrew Dalby 08:36, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By an astonishing coincidence (I swear I didn't know this was going to happen) I received today my subscription copy of The Linguist, containing an article (by Maureen Freely, whom I don't know) about the translation of Orhan Pamuk, mentioning (though naming no names) the difficulty experienced by bilingual translators of Turkish origin in converting from Turkish to English word order. I now have my citation, therefore.

The words from the Freely interview are as follows: "When Orhan later had trouble with his translators, he asked Maureen if she would be willing to give it a go ... She was also very aware of the problems that bilingual Turks can have when putting something into English. 'They favour Turkish structures, which are very cumbersome in English,' she says. 'It makes my head ache.'" Andrew Dalby revised 11:59, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have now checked the IMPAC prize citation. Actually, the award went to the original novel, not the translation -- this is an international prize for which novels in any language can compete. The translator was there to pick up the prize, but no mention of the quality of the translation appears in the citation. Andrew Dalby 11:53, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, that was quick! Thanks for the sincere and insightful response. It's funny, because I do find the language in My Name is Red to be a bit heavy in places, but at this point (I'm only partway through) I sort of enjoy that for its exoticism; I've read Haruki Murakami in English and Japanese and although the English translations are excellent, I'm occasionally annoyed by just how strong an American voice is present in some of the translations. Translation seems a very imprecise art, the evaluation of which is (beyond a certain point) highly subjective. -- Oarih 12:34, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How right you are. And the novel has of course had excellent reviews in English, which means that some people must have had no great difficulty with the language. If you wanted to add a sentence expressing a contrasting view, referencing one of those many reviews, I'd be happy, of course. Andrew Dalby 14:14, 22 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Someone else has now looked in and inserted some POV. One doesn't want to start a revert war. I've asked the lateest editor to add a precise reference. Andrew Dalby 08:08, 27 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I added a reference to the 'praise' section on the publisher's website. The reviewer actually writes

Erdag Goknar deserves praise for the cool, smooth English in which he has rendered Pamuk's finespun sentences, passionate art appreciations, sly pedantic debates, [and] eerie urban scenes.

I looked over the IMPAC site again and while the award may not be given only to books that are translated into English, it's pretty reasonable to assume that most, if not all, of the jury judged the novel by its English translation. Orhan Pamuk may indeed prefer Freely's translations, but if there's anything like a consensus on Goknar's translation, it seems to me that it is positive. -- Oarih 10:09, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Thanks for your input. Andrew Dalby 11:51, 28 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It would be a pity if the translation section couldn't be expanded a bit -- or perhaps there could be a link to a new article specifically about the difficulties involved in translating from Turkish to English? I suppose that would be a pretty specialized article, but it's certainly something that interests me now having red My Name is Red. -- Oarih 13:41, 29 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Edits on 13 October

Thanks for the information about international awards. I provisionally removed two details:

including the IMPAC award issued for the English translation

because the IMPAC prize citation does not mention the English translation (but if some other related document does mention it, please cite it)

(a fourth of the prize money was awarded to the translator)

because, unless this information is published somewhere, it counts as "original research", and Wikipedia has to be very careful about that, especially with living persons. If a printed or Web reference can be cited for this information, again, please cite it! I have at the same time added to the article some details from John Updike's favourable review, as cited above. Andrew Dalby 12:32, 13 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

--

Hi, I'm not sure if I'm adding Talk Comments correctly, but here goes!

There is no "original research" here.

BBC article published 3 years ago: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/entertainment/3040031.stm mentions the amount awarded to the translator--since the translator received money too, the award can be seen to be issued for the English language edition.

In addition, the FAQ for the IMPAC prize mentions the exact monetary split than any translator gets: http://www.impacdublinaward.ie/awardfaq.htm

Do you want to revert those changes?

Noted. Thanks very much for your input. Unless you go ahead and do it first, I'll work those details in again later today. Andrew Dalby 08:22, 14 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Orhan Pamuk My Name Is Red.png

Image:Orhan Pamuk My Name Is Red.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 19:21, 2 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Copyedit needed

I've placed a {{copyedit}} tag on this article because parts of it are almost indecipherable, and others are just poorly worded. The passage that made me give up my attempt to copyedit the article was the following:

"The novel opens with master Elegant Effendi having been murdered but his (Kitab al-Ruh) ranks among the best books on the subject of the Islamic understanding of life after death according to the Qur'an, soul lingering in the after-life and Elegant Effendi reflecting on the after-life. Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya’s Book of the Soul the Sunna, and the doctrine of the Salaf and the Four Imams, proposing that the dead hear the living and know of them."

Both sentences are ungrammatical and, well, confusing to say the least. The next paragraph is more grammatical, but less encyclopedic in tone. Someone familiar with this novel please copyedit this article. - dcljr (talk) 07:43, 9 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've copy-edited this to my best ability, although I haven't read the book, which is not required for copy-editing. I've removed most of the POV and peacock text and worked on the grammar and wikilinks. It needs more references, especially in the 'outline' and 'reception' sections. Cheers, Baffle gab1978 (talk) 23:58, 17 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:My Name Is Red/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

I've rated this Top as the winner of the International IMPAC Dublin Literary Award, the French Prix du meilleur livre étranger, and Italian Premio Grinzane Cavour awards.--Ibis3 21:30, 24 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 01:41, 1 January 2012 (UTC). Substituted at 00:41, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on My Name Is Red. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 20:25, 7 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]