Jorge Luis Borges and Orhan Pamuk may have garnered literary attention in different parts of the world,

but the authors writings have ostracized the two renowned authors from their national traditions in similar fashions. The correspondence between Pamuk and Borges arise out of the analogous political environments in Argentina and Turkey that the authors were immersed in while writing their works, which American political theorist Frederic Jameson might describe as third-world. In his essay, Third-World Literature in the Era of Multinational Capitalism, Jameson argues that third-world works of literature are to be read as national allegories (Third-World, 69). A national allegory is defined as the story of an individual, which represents the embattled situation of the public third-world culture and society at large (Third-World, 69). Jameson posits that national allegories are a conscious and overt aid in connecting the identity of people to the development of their respective nation. (Third-World, 80). Hence, the reason Pamuk and Borges are ostracized by their traditional communities because the form of their prominent literary works do not fit the mold of thirdworld Turkish and Argentinian literature, but rather serve to further literary tradition. Although Turkey and Argentina are on different continents, they were in a similar political state during the 20th century. Out of the Ottoman Empires remains in post-WWI, the Turkish Republic was created and underwent its Cultural Revolution, casting aside its Ottoman past in favor of a starkly secular, Westernized tradition and culture. Politically, the power invested in the authoritative Ottoman Sultanate and Caliphate was dethroned and dispersed into a democratic body, which underwent many political coups, which Pamuk lived through. In a similar vein, Argentina transformed twice between capitalist, Unitarist government to a Pernian led communist, Justicialist regime in 1946 and 1973, both of which Borges lived through. Both nations were arguably in third-world conditions according to Jamesons standards.

Although both authors acknowledged their third-world political environment, the authors and their literary form did not serve to identify with that environment. Pamuk initially wrote national allegories with Cevdet Bey & Sons and with The Silent House, addressing topics like a secular Turkish identity. However, those were only his first two works. His most prominent works that pushed him into the literary spotlight are the postmodern works that criticize the national tradition and subvert the core of Turkish political tradition like The White Castle and My Name Is Red. Likewise, Borges was heavily involved in speaking out against Pern after being demoted from his library job in 1946. However, his renowned surrealist work such as The Aleph or Ficciones are not critically known for their political message. In fact, Borges did more to further literary modernity than he did for Argentinian national identity as he rejected the politics and poetics of cultural identity that held sway in Latin America for so long (Man Without A Life, Gonzalez). Hence, critics wonder if Borges was conscious separating the two spheres of third-world politics and literature. In Clive Jamess Cultural Amnesia, he wonders if Borges was even aware that his work was being written in a third-world context, believing that Borges was clueless (Borges Bad Politics, James). Given this disregard for national tradition in their postmodern writing, both writers have earned a subtle contempt from their nations populace. Both authors had the ability to use their writing as a vehicle for creating a literary tradition of national identity. However, both authors chose to advance literary modernity by disregarding their political environment with Borgess surrealist work and Pamuks postmodern literary form. In producing a body of literary work that is not considered third-world, the authors have subverted and ignored their national tradition as opposed to upholstering it in a time when their nations populace were looking for a body of work to identify behind. However, it is this same literary that distinguished these authors.

Citations/Reference Links Man Without a Life by Roberto Gonzalez http://www.nytimes.com/books/97/08/31/reviews/970831.31gonz01.html Borges Bad Politics by Clive James http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/clives_lives/2007/02/jorge_luis_borges. html For some research on Borgess life, I visited and used the following sites: o http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jorge_Luis_Borges#Political_opinions o http://www.ucema.edu.ar/conferencias/download/2011/06.01CPii.pdf o http://lareviewofbooks.org/essay/borges-politics-and-the-postcolonial# o http://www.egs.edu/library/jorge-luis-borges/biography/