I recently forced myself through the "Black Book"by Turkish writer Orhan Pamuk . I found the story pointless and rambling. I did not find anything particularly intelligent, interesting, or surprising in it. Can anyone who actually likes this writer tell me what it is about him that makes him deserve that Nobel Prize?
I haven't read the nove or studied its reviews or even read excerpts of it so I can't personally say one way or the other. But that is also one possibility that might explain it if in truth your evaluation of it is correct. I know I have read authors that are praised to high heaven and I have come away with the same question-why? I think that as in all the arts receiving a good review entails a certain degree of luck and having the right connections. Mark Twain's short story "Luck" provides an entertaining example of how luck can function to give a person a tremendous reputation. of course he takes it to the extreme but there is a germ of truth there. It's similar to a boxing match where the announcers praise every little thing that one boxer does but ignore the other. If one boxer jabs its all admiration. The other bother lands a combo and total silence. Unfortunately that BS can be practiced in all areas of life. Not saying that it does with this author. Just saying that it is a possibility to consider when one comes across highly praised mediocre or substandard work that is touted as a paragon.
