Monthly Archives: June 2012

THE ATTITUDE OF TURKISH SOCIETY – 2012-2

Towards the Problem of Recognition of the Armenian Genocide by Turkey

Summary

Anush R.Hovhannisyan
In the last ten years, steps aimed at reconciliation between Turkey and Armenia has considerably increased. But it is obvious that real reconciliation between the two nations and between the two societies is impossible without the recognition of the Armenian Genocide.

“Denialism” is the term commonly used to characterize the positions of both the Turkish state and society towards the Armenian Genocide. Although the arguments of Turkish state denialism were widely discussed scholarly, the motivations for public denial are still less investigated. Why has Turkish society chosen simply to forget, to ignore or deny the crimes committed by their ancestors or as Taner Akcam said “wish to forget history?”

Some scholars explain it by the lack of historical consciousness in Turkey. According to them, the public sphere has been totally dominated by the imposed official state narrative and to be critical of the official text, publicly oppose and contradict it means to question the very existence of the state and Turkish identity. Society was unable to question this narrative, so ignorance, amnesia and fear became part of their survival strategy. In our article, we argue that in such collectively committed crimes as genocide and its denial there must be a kind of “solidarity” between the state and society: society must be hostile towards the target group to allow the genocide and it’s denial to occur. Whatever the motivations for this are, society cannot move forward without confronting and acknowledging the crimes of the past.

In the last years “the desire to not remember the past” or the “Armenian Genocide taboo” is losing ground; part of Turkish society wants to know what really happened in 1915 and is demanding open discussion of the Armenian Genocide. This group of historians, journalists, intellectuals and common people still comprise only a small part of Turkish society and cannot considerably influence state policy. But the process of the further democratization of Turkey could change the attitude of society towards this issue that is that the genocide will stop being viewed as rational and acceptable policy.

Lusine Hambardzumian – Muller, “Michael Arlen and his World of Novels” – 2012-2

Summary

Ruzan G. Asatryan
Lusine Hambardzumian’s book, edited by Suren Danielian, is a unique opportunity for Armenian readers to discover the real Michael Arlen, an Armenian whom we have known through the perceptions of other writers (who often blamed him for having changed his name). Thanks to this successful and valuable monograph it has become possible for us to reveal some basic parallels between the two world famous writers whom the Armenians will always be immensely proud of.

ARTASHES HARUTYUNYAN’S LITERARY-HISTORICAL AND PSYCHOLOGICAL PERCEPTIONS – 2012-2

In Memory of the Martyred Writer and Intellectual

Summary

Anahit G. Nahapetyan
Poet, writer, literary critic Artashes Harutyunyan (1873-1915) was one of the benefactors of Western Armenian literature. He developed the literary-cultural program “Tomorrow’s Literature,” which had a contained message in the perception of national literature and corresponded to European historical-comparative and psychological perceptions.

While he was alive, the writer was able to publish three modest collections of poetry. However, while modest, almost 460 of those poems have been published in the pages of about 60 Armenian and French publications; compiling these works was undertaken by the author of this article. Artashes Harutyunyan’s views, the new percepts of his writings, old and newly discovered facts about him are disclosed in the article. His well known personality is revealed on the depths of Western Armenian literary culture from the critique of psychological literary interpretation, which is an innovative phenomenon and until today insufficiently elucidated.