The ″Hrant Dink″ Foundation and the Hamazkayin Armenian Educational and Cultural Society organized a joint academic conference in Istanbul on October 7-8, 2016, entitled “Critical Approaches to Armenian Identity in the 21st Century: Vulnerability, Resilience, and Transformation”. The Conference was organized under the auspices of the "Calouste Gulbenkian" Foundation in Lispon and the Sweden Consulate General in Istanbul.
The Conference took place at the "Forum" Hall of "Immaculate Conception" Building of "Hrant Dink" Foundation. "Hrant Dink" Institution holds annual conferences, which raise important issues, give full coverage to the past and analyze the present. Such were the Conference of Islamized Armenians of 2013, "The Social and Economic History of Mardin and the Region" Conference of 2012, and the Conference of 2011, dedicated to Tigranakert Armenians. The agenda of the last Conference, as the event's title reminds us, was also very important, interesting and relevant.
This international conference brought together Armenian, Turkish and foreign experts, and public figures from Turkey, Lebanon, Armenia and from different places, the names of which are worth mentioning - Khachig Tölölyan, Rubina Peroomian from the United States, Hratch Tchilinkirian from London, Razmik Panossian from Lizpon, Meguerditch Meguerditchian, Vatche Papazian, Anita Toutikian from Beirut, Harutyun Marutian, Suren Danielyan from Armenia, Murat Cankara, Pınar Karakılçık, Ararat Şekeryan from Turkey. The reports presented in English, Turkish or Armenian were being simultaneously interpreted.
The conference began with "Hrant Dink" Foundation Board President Rakel Dink’s and Hamazkayin Central Executive Board Chairperson Meguerditch Meguerditchian’s opening speeches. Dink said that discussing the Armenian Identity from the point of Turkish identity is an opportunity to get rid of Armenophobia. Explaining his views on the Armenian identity Meguerditch Meguerditchian said that the one who considers and characterizes himself as ″Armenian″ is Armenian.
Then Prof. Khachig Tölölyan from the United States made the first report entitled ″The Confusion of identities in modern rhetoric". In his report, he, in general terms, defined the core of the conference. Meguerditch Meguerditchian conducted the first session of the Conference entitled "Conceptual Discussion". After Hratch Tchilinkirian’s ("What is the ″Armenian″ in Armenian identity") and Razmik Panossian’s (Homelands and Diasporas: Building a Multilocal National Identity) reports, the speakers answered questions from the audience.
The sessions were entitled "Post-Genocide Expressions", " Diaspora Identities & Spatiotemporal Dimensions", "″Armenian″ as National Identity", " Religious Limits of Armenian Identity", "Armenians in Turkey," " Identity Representations in Literature". They discussed the 4th generation’s perception of the Armenian Genocide, the relations of art and collective identity, transnational Armenian feminist dialogue, varied experiences of Armenians in Aleppo, Tbilisi, France, America, Romania, Jordan, Turkey, Bourj Hammoud, expressed in the national-religious, language mentality, socio-linguistic and literary spheres.
At the end of the Conference, a press conference was held entitled "Modern usage- future directions". The press conference was conducted by the Istanbul-Armenian intellectual Karin Karakash. The speakers of the press conference were the head of Armenian Communities Department of "Calouste Gulbenkian" Foundation, Razmik Panossian, Hamazkayin’s Central Executive Board member Vatche Papazian, Sociologist Prof. Arus Yumul and Central School principal, Silva Kuyumcuyan -Margosian. At the end of all sessions of the Conference, as well as the Press Conference, the speakers gladly answered questions from the audience.
On October 14, the video of the Conference will be posted on the following website
https://www.youtube.com/user/HrantDinkVakfi and
The reports will be published in a separate volume.
PARTICIPANTS’ FEEDBACK
Meguerditch Meguerditchian (Hamazkayin Central Executive Board Chairperson) - First of all, let me say that to the diversity of audience is very impressive. There are representatives and reporters from various Communities of the Diaspora and Armenia, and in fact, the event turns into a scientific meeting. It is the first attempt of collaboration between the Hamazkayin Society and "Hrant Dink" Foundation that, in my opinion, is very successful. If there are some imperfections, they can be everywhere.
Nevertheless, from my talks with the participants of the Conference, I came to an opinion that all of them had very good impressions and wish such initiatives be organized repeatedly even on the same topics, because within two days we could only present the situation, and couldn’t talk about what we can do, and we didn’t clarify our goals. As you see, there are difficulties with such a busy program and with presenting all of the existing materials.
Razmik Panossian ( "Calouste Gulbenkian" Foundation) - It was an interesting academic conference for a few reasons. First, it showed the different corners of the Armenian identity. We spoke about things, which it was impossible to speak about 20 years ago. Second, organizing such a conference 100 years after 1915 in Istanbul, which was one of the centers where the Armenian identity was created, is very important and symbolic.
Here we can speak about identity and future. And surely from organizational point of view it was also very interesting. Such an important institution based in the Diaspora as Hamazkayin jointly organized the Conference with "Hrant Dink" Foundation. This means the three aspects - the subject, organization and location, were very interesting.
Hratch Tchilingirian (Oxford University lecturer) –It should be said that these two days were exceptionally successful for me. I am especially contented that "Hrant Dink" Foundation and "Hamazkayin" organized this event jointly. To gather and discuss the issue of Armenian identity in Istanbul seems to be very significant and valuable in the life of Diaspora, because our Western identity was born here. That is why we not only feel contented in academic sense, but also spiritually. It is an important factor, in my opinion. The Conference not only brought together experts from various countries and universities, but also bound us to this important Armenian institution. Speaking about the second value, I would like especially to emphasize the role of the "Hrant Dink" Foundation in the diaspora. The institution is a new light in the life of Diaspora. In a very short period, it could carry out progressive and lively activities as regards its program. I consider this a huge success in our life. Why?
During the past 100 years, our Diaspora structures seem to be exhausted and dispirited for some reasons. Nevertheless, again, there in the heart of our western culture, an institution has emerged called "Hrant Dink" Institution, which is an important light in our life of Diaspora. I believe it will bring novelty at least in the Middle East and Europe.
Pınar Karakılçık (INALKO) – It was a very successful, and entirely professional Conference. No scientific conference of such level had been organized in Turkey so far bringing together so many experts. Therefore, from the point of future activities related to the Armenian studies, it was really a useful event. It combined us, and we became aware of the work of Armenologists or experts from other spheres in Turkey or elsewhere. It is very good and encouraging.
Rubina Peroomian (UCLA) – It was my first visit to Polis. I must say that deep in my heart I had some fear before my visit, but after landing here, the fear disappeared, and I felt myself at home from the very first day. It was very well organized. The topic was very important and raising this issue in Polis is especially meaningful. I am proud to be part of this important discussion. This conference gave me an opportunity to get acquainted with the few Turkish and Kurdish, mostly young intellectuals, who had the courage to come face to face with the past, massacres of Armenians and genocide issue from many different perspectives. It was important to see the discussion and the perception of the issue by the Armenian intellectuals from the Middle East, West, East, Europe and America, their different approaches, different points of view, and also the opinion of foreigners on the issue. We have been speaking and writing about demolishing the stereotypes for years. In this case, it is necessary to form the identity idea according to the present reality and geopolitical conditions. Here, in this conference, I saw the ground for discussing the human type and character.
Aras Erkiunesh ( "Hrant Dink" Foundation) – The Conference was the first step of a new beginning, organized jointly by two important institutions of the Diaspora - the "Hamazkayin" and "Calouste Gulbenkian" Foundation, and in participation of renowned academics. It was significant that after 100 years, perhaps more than 100 years, such a conference was organized in Istanbul, which was one of the Armenology centers in the past. We are happy from this point of view.
Harutyun Marutian (Institute of Archaeology and Ethnography of the Academy of Sciences of Armenia) - I listened to the reports with great interest. They were interesting, multigenre, and from different fields. I am very glad that there are young participants especially from Turkey. It means Armenian studies have future in Turkey. It is also praiseworthy. The only thing that is important for me is that the academic conferences on Armenian studies should be in Armenian. And I think that the language mentality emerges if the language speakers are able to express ideas of scientific nature and deliver them to public.
Hülya Adak ( "Sapanche" University) – The reports made during the Conference "Critical Approaches to Armenian Identity" offered us a lot of new approaches on literature, linguistics, socio-linguistics, anthropology and history. I hope "Hrant Dink" Foundation will publish those reports in a separate volume. Particularly there were issues unknown to us, for example, the reports about the Turkish dialects spoken in Bourj Hammoud, or the reports about martyrologies, the language issue based on their translations, which prompted us to think whether Genocide had a language. Did the Genocide perpetrators have a special language? Was that a chosen way? Why, for example, some martytology writings were in Turkish but written with Armenian letters? ... Those were questions, which were first laid in front of us.
Sevan Deyirmenchian
Bolis