Armenia shows our place in the world

"Droshak" editor A. He is Vardanian's interlocutor
Hrant Matevosian

- We will live the time of great hopes and bitter disappointments as a nation. dream and reality are mixed together, joy and sorrow, freedom and hunger, construction and destruction, pride and patriotism. Armenian political thought is facing the challenge of overvoltage. Armenia and Armenians are looking for a way out. We have no right to fail this second exam of the twentieth century. The challenge is addressed especially to the senior guardians of our national wisdom, our intellectual selection. What path does Hrant Matevosian, witness of Hayu Tesak, see? Although lengthy, the book is worth reading in one sitting.
There were big changes, a lot changed in our part of the world, and now we are in a new situation. What is the characteristic of this day? Certificate of our progress What does Hrant Matevosian see, what does he value, what do we have and what do we not have? Can we go on the road with this resource, what should we do to have our place in the world, so that others do not show us our place?
- Yesterday, I answered your questions a little easier, because in a metaphorical sense, there was something like God, you know, Moscow was responsible for those questions, and those difficult questions were answered in the place, thank God, there were those who delivered them: it was the Cheka, the traitors, etc. Nevertheless, we considered ourselves, I considered myself one of the citizens of the empire, and I could reprimand, enmity, raise radical issues, criticize, and I hoped that there is an answer to the question, there is God, in a word. And that's how we talked. Conventionally speaking, I was talking looking back over my left shoulder. they hear, they will do something. The non-existence of God today, the foundation of the empire under my feet and my mind, on which I could make judgments, speak, criticize, that ground has gone from under our feet, and I feel something like nausea and dizziness. it's a very difficult situation here.
Well, even if I find the answer to the questions, will I be able to say: here, there is the answer to those questions, is it possible to say? Until, let's say, I sing "My Cilicia", well, so what, I discuss the questions of history, so what? And I entered this new time with difficulty. I realized with difficulty that no one would really give me the answers to my questions. It is mine, this is what happened, and I, I am responsible for my issues, I will find out for myself and decide my future course accordingly.
This is the story of the issues. If I speak briefly, if I am brief, what will I say? your valleys have been taken from you. With this word "valleys" I remembered. During an interview in Austria, I said: May God keep you long in this valley, you originated in this Danube valley, your history unfolded here, you are here, you are here. Our valleys were taken from us, the valleys, the fields were taken away, and the rest of the people were driven to the edge of these mountains. There is no nation in the world that is so densely populated and lives in such cramped conditions. This is not actually a country. It is the land, the people, the state. There is simply no land. If so many people have gathered and lived here for a short period of time in history, 100-150 years, it does not mean that that people rose from this land, and it is possible for this land to grow so many flowers, so many people live on it. He was a part of the empire, he just lived. Now separated from the empire, the reality, the brutal reality is clearly revealed. quoting the words of the ancients: "From the goat, the king of the Armenians." Indeed, as the wild goats were driven from their valleys, the rocky mountains were driven and fell, we are in that state of goats, driven from our citadel. We can boast that these mountains are our fortresses, this is no longer developed, but there is no country so tragically separated, isolated, surrounded by hostility, which also does not have wealth-lands. The characteristic is this. The real situation is this.
What are we going to do? Although every time I think about that question, I know. war is war, battles are battles, bravery is bravery, memories are memories, national spirit and future aside, but in the final analysis, this nation, the country can live on this land only through integrated (integrated) economies, trade and relations with neighboring countries. And it can even have a mission in the less developed countries around it. Let's say that they are: Eastern Anatolia-Western Armenia, Iran, Georgia, even Azerbaijan and others. Thus, it is possible to keep these 3-3.5 million people here only with the combined economy with the countries around us. The situation is becoming difficult, especially because in today's conditions, isolation from the world is impossible, absolutely impossible, psychologically, mentally or physically. It is impossible to separate from the world even by thinking. History has imposed a very bitter fate on you, yet the characters that lead you, the characters that lead the Armenian from here are not his bitter fate, strangely enough, they are the lifestyles of American, Russian, powerful countries. do you want to have a good life? In other words, you are simply buried in poverty, lack of prospects and other things. If we were to go in a different way, we could, let's say, make a closed space like other Chechens brought up in Islam. one people, one fist, and to really isolate, which is impossible, it would be very difficult again. That option is out of the question for our species. Remember only the Diaspora. Even though every time the Diaspora was given a very big role, the deception showed itself to be a deception, but still, we are a people spread across the world, half outside, half inside. we could not create Chechnya for ourselves, we could not close it.
And here it is. The characteristic is this, in fact, difficult. But everyone knows this, it is said in vain. I can't blame that the people are going out, I can't read it as an accusation. Although, I know it's a deceptive thing, sometimes the warrior in me rises up, the soldier rises up and tells me to stop. But what to do? Smash, win, then? Okay, then? What is the character leading me?
- You say that there is no land, there is no country, liberating living spaces for the continuation of the nation is a way, maybe occupying is also a way.
- Even if we do not occupy territories, not giving up Karabakh has already become a way of life. At least not giving in is a must. And that half a million refugee people that existed for you, and you did not have the foresight and strength to give them shelter in Artsakh, to make Karabakh their real homeland. Here, the interests of those half a million immigrants, this can be discussed now or then the place should have been settled. Instead, that same people should have turned into an army and said: I am not an escape station, you have land there and come to my house with your land. Is that right? You come with your land. You had property there, they will drive you out like that... For centuries, they have built equal to them, they have founded the fortress of Baku together. Armenians buried Tsitsianov's body in their cemetery. The head was sent to the Shah of Persia. Here is the village, there is the fortress. The Armenian village existed at that time. It was the natives, right? Here! their portion, their territory. I don't know, I'm not the extravagant-luxurious-rich mother of Armenia, that here, come-escape-come, tired seagulls, or what do I know, what, persecuted ones, come. No. You come with your property, you have land there, come and take control of your land, I will protect you. Refugee phenomenon is one of the world's problems. The Russians took them, why did they take them, what is this, why did they, the Russians or the Americans, create refugee status? What is this? What can I say to the narrowness of the human mind? In that case, I can think that pogroms, large migrations are specially prepared, as Shah Abbas or Sultan Suleiman did, maybe it is a way to kidnap peoples, to take peoples as their own. in one case organizing migrations, in another case inciting pogroms.
- In other words, the international status of a refugee can also have that aspect.
- It can have that too. According to the last calculation, if that people went to build middle Russia, I have to think that it was probably an organized thing, because before that they wrote in the articles that the black soil belt was deserted, the people were filled to the south.
Now they say, just look at the construction going on there. They make the country bloom. And your country... When there were opportunities, we should have been able to be a country - Israel or I don't know what - and stand up to that people. We should form an army and through them, through us, protect the right of that people on their own land.
- There was Israel's experience. There was an example of their special policy towards those who came to the country after becoming a state, but we don't learn from others, we don't learn from our history either. But let's not look out of the window and not judge, let's record our mental state, that is, by giving a name to your state of mind, let's try to characterize our current state.
- If I say briefly, I don't want to tell a story, it is already a past stage. yesterday we were the citizens of a great country, we postponed the issues again, we call it narrowness of the national mind or laziness, we did not do what we had to do in the last count. And apparently, now, having come to grips with the new conditions, the degeneration and transformations that have occurred in us in these five years, based on these conditions, we will have to judge-understand-work. We are thinking new. such an expression would not come out of my mouth at that time. Baku residents are my compatriots, you wouldn't have said that then, but now you'll say that it's a new situation. This is not a shelter, not an escape station. Please take the weapon in your hand, let's fight together for you. Come with your land. I'm not that rich. Come with your land. I do not welcome nudists into my home.
- Yes, but at least in the beginning, the complete word describing this situation should be said. From the beginning, the thing was... You wrote: the word was spoken, it is being fulfilled, the action cannot fail to follow. Or are you fulfilled in the empire? You don't want to dare to give a name today. You gave the name yesterday, what is the name today, what is the record of today's fact?
- I know the ugliness of yesterday's situation. Here was the same deprived, motionless, fearless and uninitiative Armenian man in the situation of yesterday and he could not give his name to the situation, formulate the name and make politics of the day based on the situation of the day. I'm not so in love with yesterday's situation.
- Your whole business is proof that you are not in love.
- And I constantly consciously try not to lose the panorama of that evening. That laziness, that not working. And in one of my speeches I very clearly combined the Armenian here and there. mine, with the same diligence, the same hard work and still on the edge of poverty. I would seal victory on both of their foreheads, one is a rich American, and the other is a guy from our village, who is the only one with a hole in his pants. The critical attitude towards Yerekua was and will be in me and, God forbid, there will be a sudden backward movement. It just hurts me to see how this people flows towards tomorrow. I try to judge today, my guiding figures are today, my boys love me. it will be a minister, a soldier, or a blind boy. They are blind boys in the last count, they are blind eagles. They are blind people. For the first time they face the harsh reality, for the first time they are truly alone face to face with history. I saw Rostom and others at the 8th conference of the Alliance, standing depressed and oppressed in front of the heavy issues of history. I felt such physical loneliness when my wife and I went to the Ani border. Our master was just an 18-year-old Russian boy, who, I think, didn't even have a gun. We stood under our glorious ruins. such defenselessness, such hideous defenselessness. I don't know. Let's say that the man was standing there yesterday.
My speech is interrupted and is not received. I don't want it back. Returning on Sunday is just as terrifying. It won't happen either, it really won't happen, it's atavism, what do I know, it's dead matter, I don't know. But maybe something else can bring these unfortunate people to their senses, and the good thing that was really there in the evening, that was the reality and gave something for the development of the individual, I don't know. But on the other hand, the awareness that you will have to create mechanisms to implement always makes your effort, your effort to think irrelevant. Mechanisms can either cause long periods of time, arise in long periods of time, or appear in the hands of adventurous and interested forces. In that case, you can become something of a toolkit. Part of the army formation, part of the party, part of the crowd. It's a very scary place. And on the other hand, maybe it's a big gap in our character that I'm very poor in inventing mechanisms and means of implementation and I can't, in fact, organize the work of two people, or else, just to expand this idea, five journalists, five writers, five young people can charge power to spread this idea. Even in that sense I am incapable.
- It is clear that Hrant Matevosyan will not create mechanisms. But Hrant Matevosian will speak. Let's go back to the past, if we had formulated and targeted activities then, if we were not so lazy, if we were not so secure, we would have that foundation today and we would not be in this situation. In other words, Hrant Matevosian will speak, and the creators of mechanisms will come 100 years later, 50 years later, 10 years later - they will be, I don't know. Hrant Matevosian will speak. Now where does that speech lead, what do they make of that speech, how do they manipulate it, what will they do, that is not his problem anymore, he has no right not to say his speech, he cannot not say it. He is responsible for the word, he justifies his existence by saying that word.
- Maybe there is a nagging doubt in me that I am silent. You are silent because you are not sure of the truth of your words. Doubts really wear you down at that time. In other cases, it seemed that there was no need to speak. it's time for quiet, hands-on work. That's why I'm talking about mechanisms. Later, the smart exits I mentioned were bypassed, left aside, and in retrospect you saw that it was not an exit either. That was a deception, not a way out. Let me give a crude example: how could it happen that the Soviet army and the Russian army were not removed from Europe like that? The army must have an enemy. The army is taught to gnash its teeth, to take over enemies, to take up arms against enemies, and to be constantly in the role of a striker. How can he not have an enemy, but keep an army? Remove the enemy from the army, the army has lost its spirit and becomes a dead body. Why should the fireworks stay in Germany when Germany is a friendly country? They could not take it out slowly. Let's say a couple of tanks, a hundred soldiers a year. He had destroyed the idea, the ideology, and the body would be destroyed along with the ideology. And this collapse, panic, these misfortunes, which we are talking about, should have happened exactly in this way, as it happened. In this case, after finding this truth, you can no longer blame anyone. You can't blame Gorbachev, Democrats, Reagan or anyone else. He matured slowly and it was supposed to be like this.
- The problem of national structure. Is such a thing possible? What is your idea? Because what have we had? we had a church as a nationwide structure, which today does not and cannot serve as a complete means of organizing the nation. But is such a thing possible, some kind of national structure, it is not necessarily understood as a body, some general unifying thing? Is there a need for it? Your idea. And if there is a need for such a thing, what prevents it? You see, today we are talking about the differences between an Armenian and a Diaspora Armenian: psychological, economic, social. Also, in a sense, they are different peoples. I should go to Athens, Ruben Yovsepian put it well. Aghua said, "Aren't you afraid that you will go to Greece and become an Armenian in the Diaspora, and then come back here and become an Armenian?" So, the differences are there, until here. But if there is an idea of ​​a nation-wide structure or a nation-organizing force, what are the obstacles and hindering things today? Aren't we reducing those possibilities even more? The example of the Jews is tempting. Not our version, true, but is it possible to find our version?
- It is really a tempting example, but let's not consider it only the monopoly of the Jews, because all great nations, really well-established nations have it. There is no tribe, nation that does not have its own word, but has its own economy, its economic strength. It has its own ideology, its national ideology and with it, its economy. Often we also think and formulate things in conversations: ours devote themselves to the trade of shoes, the accumulation of material goods, well-being, they do not give themselves to the world of things, they do not give themselves to the world of words. And that's why we are nobody in the field of international journalism, nobody knows our history, nobody knows our history. Here! And in such cases, you wonder if it is mental retardation or not understanding. Or, like David of Sassoon, as in the epic, David first of all threw his hand to the gold and not to the fire. Huh? But the narrator takes her hand to the fire, here, to save her. He was going to drop the gold as if. And it seems that there is a place to work with the nation in this sense.
But now what am I saying? In fact, the nation, when the fight against fascism was absolute, the fight against Germany was absolute, the nation was one of the first reals, that is, Soviet Armenia, against fascism. Propaganda was definitely important there, international solidarity was definitely important, but let's not exaggerate all of them. maybe there was propaganda and deception. Now everything is discussed, values ​​are re-evaluated, all kinds of nonsense are thrown out, but let's really take that rational core, the irrational-rational, which is really special to our nation. A danger hung over their motherland. the whole Diaspora had gathered, gave itself to its motherland to save and help Stalinist Armenia. Here! It was also a tribute to the powerful force called the Soviet Union. And it was in his time, it was the idea of ​​communism, it was violence, it was the danger of fascism. all this made the country a very noticeable thing, to which many views were attached, and Armenia was a part of it. And yet it was a tribute to strength. I am sorry to say, but spying on the entire world Armenian community during the earthquake sounds like blasphemy, but it was still a tribute, a train, a pilgrimage to the feet of Reagan and Gorbachev. To the troops! Here, Reagan turned his face to Gorbachev, and the world Armenians turned to Gorbachev. This is the truth. It is very sad. Therefore, we are a deficient nation that, without violence, we cannot realize what a huge loss Armenia, even if it was Soviet, would be, the elimination, the absence, for every Diaspora Armenian, every Armenian. Don't they know that they won't exist if we don't exist? We are not talking about connections, we are not talking about material taxes. The point is that our presence keeps them. And they would be different in our absence. In the case of not having a motherland, they would be completely different. I don't know what they were like. Apparently, I find the answer to my question more accurate during separate tests. And this awareness will go to all of us, and work will really be done. If it will be a deception, we will deceive the whole world, we will deceive the whole poetry. Starting with the holy book, the whole spoken word. They are all bugs. If we give in to this mistake now, if we do the propaganda of this deception, it will not be a very big deception compared to all the other deceptions in the world. Perhaps it is worth devoting yourself to it. And then that deception can create real values, real great values. It won't be a mistake, it won't be too far from God's truth, without that we don't know what the truth is. Nothing could be further from the truth. And giving in to the existence of a great national idea will not be far from the human, the higher, the great that they strive for, that independent spirit, nirvana, that great truth. Because if you leave your Armenian skin, if you leave your Armenian ghetto, there is no such thing, there is no such thing, which is said globally, that you should give it to him. There is nothing greater than you. There is nothing greater than the nation, the national structure, that you should give to him. Maybe there is something above? Let's say Shakespeare. Say, Shakespeare Nation. Let's say there is such a thing, but as a construction, as an abstraction, an abstraction of God, there is no other such thing. When you leave your house, will you go to the Negro ghetto, the Korean ghetto, the Japanese, the Germans? To whom? Which ghetto will you belong to, which tribe will you join?
- In other words, they have ghettos. They have their national ideologies.
- There are, they have. They tend not to accept you anyway. They tend to remain closed in themselves. And it would be right: you would return to yours, find yours, keep yours. It has been like this for 2000 years, and it will be like this for another 2000 years.
- I am forced to recall here the part from the speech of the president two days ago (this speech took place on April 27, 1994, in Yerevan), where he considers the national consensus and national ideology to be false concepts.
- That can be answered. always, even the most comprehensive ideas are not able to gather the whole nation in one and the same structure, always, from the ideologies of the most broad-minded parties, even from the inclusions of the most liberal parties, huge masses are left out, which are not devoted to anything national.
- But the meaning of what he said is that our goal, the means to implement our plans are universal, universal values ​​and ideas, which are common to everyone, and have no national particularity.
- The universal is realized through the national. You as an Armenian, as a human being, you go to the human being as a nation, you as a human being are as a nation. Your human name is Armenian, you as a nation exist as a person. Looks like we found the formula. Then there is one thing. that gray horror, that denationalist face in general, denationalization may lighten your burden as a person, but in all cases, humanity, all of them, like that child who is afraid to jump into the cold river, humanity does not want to go there. You will have to sit down with that. That grayness. Yesterday, the Russians were more afraid of our Russianization than we were of our Russianization. Who needs that grayness? Who needs it, when the world is not diverse, who needs it, when the turquoise is missing, the existing ones are excluded, and the homogenous, monotonous, monolingual grayness is spreading all over the world.
- Let's not say monolingual, let's say monotheistic. Years ago, in 1990, when I was working at "Hayk", I wanted to ask you a question. OK, what is this people, what is the so-called Armenian people, how is it different, what is in it, formed much earlier than the epic, external impulses and conditions aside, what is it? Is there a concept of "our unique species"? It is exceptional in the sense that it is different from its neighbor, it is also exceptional, and its neighbor is also exceptional in its own way. What are the cultural, ontological bases of this, how is this formulated and summarized? And again, clarifying a little more, the rejection of the national ideology, in fact, the rejection of the nation as a concept, which is a direction, an idea, what is the danger in it? Will there be an answer for that? From his position, the president of the republic universalizes values ​​and formulates a transnational ideology. He knows his own strength, he has his own levers today, he speaks easily.
- It is a superficial word spoken by an easy but determined person. Indeed, it is very difficult for us to find other formulations that are closer to the truth. Denial of nationalism is also easy. It is an escape of the mind, an escape of the mind from knowing the truth, from the national destiny. In fact, the president also relies on internationalism. It's beautiful, understandably so. And I also know his distress. I also know that even the most determined of us, the most nationalist, in difficult situations, when the direct enemy had just pushed you into a corner and was destroying you as an Armenian, you again gave yourself to the international community and looked for someone in it. Now, if it comes from the distress of the same situation, that much I understand. But this is far from the truth.
What is said about the Armenian people... you say is the words and deeds of our elders. I'm going there too, I don't know if I'm going strangely, the best things from history, literature, the work of the people for centuries that made us like this, created us cell by cell in their image and likeness. Here, we are people facing the same situation, we have met. He was the Kyrgyz, I was the Armenian. We are both writers of equal strength. We faced the same situation: what he did and what I didn't do. Why is it that I didn't, he did? Or I did, he didn't. It was the national shell that held him down, which he did, and the national body stopped me from doing these things. I write in comparisons, which requires a long work and is not the subject of our conversation. But where would "The Meek Girl" come from? It would only happen here. How would David of Sassoon differ from all other epics? Our most human of the world's most human epics. What is that thing? Your fairy tale, your people... Sometimes I also think that you are throwing completely uneducated girls and small children into a hall rich in money. See which child comes out with it. Yours seems to find another object and comes out with it in hand, the Persian comes out with another object in his hand. Or are they questions of education? I have my doubts, but no! No, nevertheless. from the beginning until now. What should I say to Christian education? But, from the beginning until now, during 1500 years, things have been lined up on one and the same land, which have repeated each other in the same way, and other nations have not done it. The Georgian next to us did not. We did it, we did it like this. How does Georgian cinema differ from yours? So why is there always a lie in their movies? The mourner is your people, their movies always end in mourning. See, I stood on a certain question. The tragedy is your people, but look at their masculine restraint, feminine restraint today. this is a line. Yours doesn't lament, yours doesn't cry like that. Yours is a little different people, a little different. It is different from the sides, it is different from the Russian, it is different from everyone. I have cited my mother's example a couple of times during public speeches. The woman who appeared there completely by chance, she is the owner of a thousand and one jobs, does not know a word of Russian, she saw someone come to the village, she opened the sleeping bag to sleep, and my mother, who seems to be the mother of the whole village herself, was going to bring this foreign person, who is either a spy for America or Turkey, or, I don't know what, she was not in the village, she actually slept on the street, to our house. My bed was given to him, he put dinner in front of him, and in the morning he made a bundle and put food. And he knows only one Russian word: "pashyol" (get lost), he said "pashyol". Only the woman of my people can do this. Do I imagine any Russian woman? There was a bit of blasphemy to our ideas, to the good, rustic Russian woman present in our minds. But it is a fact. We are different, we are kind. Our Armenian woman is like the mother of the world. Mdzuri has a wonderful view. when he will pass by the river, and how do the swimming women greet the man who suddenly comes out on top of them? Kurdish women, like Turkish women, drive around hissing like geese, and Armenian women huddled in shame. ashamed that they are naked. And the Turk, the Turkish woman drives you naked. To kill. The combination of these character traits shows your differences. And this can be done in many things. I don't know.
How many times has my artist, with his talent and stubbornness, stood on the edge of the avant-garde, so that he will turn it into Salvador Dali? The life of Salvador Dali was not more tragic than the life of my Martiros Saryan. He was supposed to do "Civil War". Sarean seems to paint a picture of the world's pampering. How many times have we stood on the verge of revealing the avant-garde and how many times have we pulled back? Where should he restrain himself and where should he be cynical? Actually, I don't have that cynicism. I don't have such things in my national character. Arshil Gorky, who was at the crossroads of art, even he withdrew when the question was about his mother, sister and others. When you compare his avant-garde and surrealism with the surrealism of others, he has that Christian restraint, he is a kind of ruling tribe of ours, not being the master of anything. Let me say something else. I will take Sholokhov's four-volume novel and four volumes from Armenian literature and write out the words according to their frequency of use. how many times does he write: cut, cut, shed blood, and how many times do you find it in your literature? In your literature of the same nodal regions, apparently, 2-3 people are either killed or not killed. Yours is different. It was a tribe of idealists, it was a nation in the midst of empires. This is his individualism. maybe the absence of his own statehood was becoming a kind of national quality that Sultan called us anarchists in his diaries, anarchists. But let's not dwell on that. The fact is that in empires, in enslaved countries, we were not serfs. From Petros, Ivan Ahegh until today, Russian serfs existed and still exist, and Turkish serfs in their country until today. Between armies, nations, states, we have kept our individuality. The nobility of the Armenian peasant as formulated by Hamo Sahian. Now, indeed, individualism is becoming a national tragedy, and we need a collective effort to stand together in front of this horror, to face this heavy test today, to be together, to become a force. Your motto should be unity, but your stubbornness is individualism and it doesn't seem to come together. But apparently these are independent judgments or maybe they are not independent? I don't know.
Armenians, or at least the so-called spirit of initiative, have been the individual, and perhaps, in comparison with the neighboring nations, there has been the least authoritarian, arrogant approach to the fallen or inferior. Oh, I don't want to make too many mistakes. On the one hand, I see those types yesterday - I remember that they said that I am keeping five people. They were born and raised in an equal, starting position, and so one of them was probably organizing a business, saying: I support five people, I support fifteen people, I employ 2,500 workers.
Let me think. Confused, you ask the most difficult questions. Really, the ideal, the thing that I tried to talk about in my literature, or in judgments outside of literature, outside of experience, I wanted to make it clear that this would be the individuality, its protection from totalitarianism, in fact, from the pressure of the ideology of totalitarianism. Man's personality was taken in shackles, and here is the result. Maybe I saw the person in the background of 70 years, in the background of those times. It would have been correct to answer your questions in writing and at length, but by giving examples from literature and quoting from myself, I will say: what did I care about? Characters of "The Humble Girl", "Tigranu", Mndzuru. And today it is the crushing one. Now, let's say, we have come to terms with that situation. and with the state of war, and in the conditions of frost, cold, hunger, drought, in this ugliness, in this hostile environment... Now, should I consider it destruction, or should I not consider man so poor, surrounded by American ideology, man is indomitable? He is an equally powerful ideological machine with his numerous films and culture. Maybe he has already charmed us with his world? Here, too, I am really afraid that I have made a mistake. But there is a huge loss going on. Shall we consider perversion? Should I say human survival, should I say flight, should I say defamation in human psychology? It is difficult for me to admit and sometimes I see that I am an old person, the new word will concern them, it will belong to them, the young generation, the writers, those for whom this is a natural state, and they do not have much biography in yesterday. Today, I was reading Levon Khechoyan's work and often congratulated him. things that I would have guessed, only guessed, are an alphabet to him. Things that I would happily invent are very common truths for him. In front of my eyes, all of this collapsed on my cherished characters, one of whom was my father, my poor village, and for that I almost became a mourner for the traditional Armenian village. Which, if I tell the truth, died early.
- You gave the name, recorded it.
- Every time it seemed to me that I was writing about today, but still my relationship was with the Middle Ages. It was with ancient characters. This collapse happened on this character. His signs were present today, there were people present today. There are people who do not understand anything about the changed world today. just consider it an animal that fell to the slaughterhouse. But there are people, and no matter how horrible it is, they don't understand all this symbolism. these symbols, this courage, this slaughter, this smell of blood, this destruction, this deprivation, this indifference... For them, this is simply completely incomprehensible. Indeed, on the head of my cherished image, from which I was trying to assimilate my god, the collapse happened, just a lightning flashed. This is it. That was my man, that man was destroyed.
- If we realize a national goal, but we do not value the individual person as a value in itself, we send hundreds to die, send hundreds of thousands out, are we not making that goal obsolete, are we not eliminating it, are we not giving it the opposite meaning? If as a nation we want to realize, to be realized, by not giving value to one individual of that nation, aren't we blocking the way to that same realization of the nation? How much is a person worth in the Armenian mind?
- The fact is that the time of suffering has burst. The disaster has exploded on the people, on the heads of each of us and, it seems, on the heads of subordinates, rulers as well. We are actually performing, not performing. And whether you like it or not, your mind comes to terms with this thought: what happened happened, and blessed is the patient. Reconciling, you say: this is also human, this is also history, this will also happen, and blessed is the one who endures, the one who gets out of these situations. And let's not put ourselves in the place of the lord, let's not put ourselves in the place of the ruler, the king, the almighty God. Let's say yes, it is an absolute truth. from the beginning, the Word is the word, but still, let's not put ourselves in the place of the almighty God, let's not put us in the place of commanders and princes, and let's not put him, the people, in the place of our flock. So, we feel sorry for him. Let's not detain him so much. The peoples are at the end of centuries of work, in which both war, and politics, and suffering, and conquests are to provide spaces for their generations, to secure geographical positions, and today they are in a slightly better condition than we are in the world. Few are not in so many national complexes.
- I don't remember who, someone said precisely. "The final result of history is geography."
- Yes, it has been said very accurately, people have done the work of centuries. Turkish state thought, military thought did it, they provided geography for themselves and they are. Can you block? Even now the disaster has hit us, we have to endure and work. The same work is placed on my grandson, it is placed on generations, it is placed on all of us. This is it. It was. History has forced us to come out from under it. I think that being Armenian would be beneficial for everyone, being Armenian would be something like security. How being English is a really beneficial thing for an Englishman. Here, really, let's think about something: being Armenian would be beneficial, I don't know how it should be done. It would have been better not to hurt each other. Now they are going, what can I say? You went to steal not only my property, but also our work that was poured on you yesterday. You are also a part of me, not only a part of your body, but how can you explain it?
- The issue of responsibility. As an Armenian person, as a civil servant, official, worker, writer-journalist, politician, doctor, makeup artist, say whatever you want, don't I prioritize my personal safety, don't I single myself out, don't I give myself the right to participate and not participate? Is this how a nation is organized, is this how we become a state?
- In the last count, there is a ruling thought, and there is a ruling group of people. It can start with philosophers and end with big organizers. And there will always be losses. You cannot take the whole river in one stream and drive away. But after organizing a thought to do all that, after bringing that thought to the consciousness of all of us, the losses will be less. And there will be returns. Another thing is that today, during the March, it is really necessary to be by your side, it is necessary to be strong, but in the process, in the long run, this is a mature thought for all of us, who are called to engage in intellectual work, to engage in organizational work. It's a mature idea. Then they, the forces that organize the nation, can put all or almost all of the national energy into circulation.
OK, what should I do? Let's say he is a sewer worker or a poor small shop owner who can barely make ends meet or is able to create a little prospective security for, let's say, six months, why would I want to rob him of all his property? A really poor citizen who does not know national consciousness, how can I get hold of him? But it is not so wrong that during the discussions of the Fund issue, the wording "National duty" was heard several times, I think, from the mouth of the Catholicos. National duty. If you are Armenian, put a price on your head. You gave such a leader to Genghis Khan, you gave it to the Arabs, you gave it to the Sultan, you paid the price of your Christianity. Here, pay your membership, confirm it in drams, really pay your price. How violent is this? Let's not assume the wings of an angel, it's not violence at all, it's a mature idea, but it will have to be worked on and a clear resolution will have to be made. Your human form, your way of being is being Armenian, it is your nationality.
- Tens of thousands of Armenians request and receive Russian citizenship. They live in Armenia, but they are foreigners. England takes care of its citizen in any country of the world, guarantees his safety. I would like it to be heard from your mouth: will our state have that responsibility towards Armenians abroad?
- If we can formulate the exceptional situation that has no precedent, the exceptional situation is our spread all over the world. Strength is always respected. They always respect strength. It is Machiavelli's words. The divine ideas were directly injected into the people under the threat of weapons. Mosesism, Alexander's ideas, Napoleon's, etc., etc. If force is really used, if we really present force. And we present: if we are not among the great nations of the world, we are not among the small ones either, neither in terms of capabilities nor in number. Nor is your nationality persecuted as such. There is nothing to be afraid of, you just have to stand up for yourself in a thousand and one ways. The Russians are lost abroad, the French are not lost, I think the Turks are not lost, they assimilate to some extent or not. There will be losses.
- We will not fill 29.8 or 50 thousand in a week, nor in 100 years. Abroad will stay. Will the Armenian state take over that responsibility?
- I thought so too. I didn't think that the colonies would break up and come and fill here. That's probably because I didn't want to touch their little well-being. If the situation in Ethiopia happened, as it happened for the Israelis in Ethiopia, the tragedy exploded, and they took control of their people, the colony there and invited them. This homeland will be something like such a guarantor. By real or fake power, so be it. And I see the colonies in the same way. But the national union will still exist, and we will still divide the functions. It is not necessary, let's say, for Armenian publishing houses to be here if we have serious paper problems here. It is not necessary that the ambassador of Armenia has necessarily left Armenia. There are different ways.
- You accept the idea of ​​a big structure and talk about its details.
- I can see the details of the big structure. here, send your children to camp here in the summer, let them come from Turkey too. There are mutual things to do. In other words, we should not be in the position of the plaintiff, and they should not be in the position of the gentlemen. that they will come here, build a house for me and write their name on the facade of my house. We also have things that they don't have. We can make up for each other's shortcomings.
- Can we? A good specialist goes to America, doesn't find a job for months, gives himself to trading, filling gas, cleaning streets. The Jew finds him and says, "Hey, you're a philosopher, a good physicist, an engineer, come here, practice your profession with me, get paid according to your worth." And the Armenian man went away from Armenianness, in a Jewish environment and manifested himself for Jewishness. But shouldn't we do this?
- We will do it, but even if we can't, let's try to keep an Armenian near a Jew. or in Argentina, let's say, someone outside the Armenian environment has a great ability to integrate, let's keep him Armenian without cutting him off from his environment.
- Let's say you can place an Armenian with a Jew and give him a job, but if you do that, he will continue the relationship as an Armenian, even with a Jew.
- It is a very smart idea and should be discussed. Look what the Jew is doing. A Jew can be the commander of two opposing armies, be against each other, and as a man fulfill both. One as a fascist, the other as an anti-fascist. Both of them can be human, neither of them is oppressed. Just by smelling each other, they understand each other, there is something of mutual tolerance, which conditions the illusion of their union.
- The example of the film about the Jewish genocide that won twelve oscars this year. He is a great director, he should have won an Oscar a long time ago, but he was delayed until he touched on that topic, and twelve Oscars at once. The screenwriter of that film is Armenian. an Armenian won an Oscar for discussing the Jewish genocide. Hay was realized in that topic. Let it be. But will it be possible for a Jew to win an Oscar for his work representing the Armenian Genocide?
- And that's why I often blurt out that we should learn courage from the Jews. And that courage comes from mental strength. they are gatherers, they gather the world's thoughts and have courage, they have the abilities of an examiner of faith. destroy everything, check: you are not a saint, check again, like unbelieving Thomas, your wound is fake. That's right, isn't it? There is a constant test of faith. That stubbornness, faith test is in them and it is a unique enviable thing, it is a unique courage. Saroyan brought us that pain, that courage, when he told us to remove fear from the eyes of Armenian children. Let's not give impudence, ignorant impudence, but knowledge and courage. An Armenian who hides his nationality is terrible, an Armenian who is afraid of himself is terrible. This will be crushed, and Saroyan has wonderful expressions. That topic has been a topic of discussion for them, for our brave guys abroad, for people, and they have strong resolutions. Do you remember what he said about Michael Arlen? "A person who denies his nationality cannot be a great artist." Because nationality is part of your truth, it is your truth. If you deny that, where are you going? What does cover up mean? It's your part, how do you negro cover your blackness? You don't cover up, you don't cover up, how do you cover up that you are Armenian?
- In other words, we are Armenians as much as the negro is black.
- Yes! It is characteristic. Yesterday, when my skin, in general, my perceptions were perfect, I was very insulting. My friend Valentin Yezhov from Muscovite used to say: Marieta Sergeevna Shaginyan is teaching us Russians Russian. I mean, why did you come to teach us Russian? Tell us about yourself. You won't find any Jew doing Russian. A Jew who writes purely on Jewish topics, Sholom Aleichem, is also a Jew, as are others who do not write on Jewish topics. The Jewish theme is simply courage.
- Okay, let's get to the most difficult part. It's our war, it's our liberation struggle, it's our right, we will defend it until the end. But what does this conflict, continuing and taking on new dimensions deprive us of, what does it cut us off from, how does it affect our species, our perspective?
- My dear Aghua, he is deprived of many things. We are just 100 years behind the world. Even after, God willing, peace comes, we will keep a hundred murderers among us. Blood eaten, crippled, etc., etc. It's an amazing thing. But it was forced, it could not be. And what are they doing with us? Even if, let's say, the people of Karabakh are Aghuans, they are Turks, not Armenians. It has been part of Azerbaijan unfairly for a hundred years, let it be part of us unfairly for a hundred years. Will there be such a big violation, will there be a provocation against the nation? it's just a kind of destruction. They destroy your kind, they curse your human kind. See what enslavement would have been, if in free conditions our boys outside did not stand up to their own kind, avoided it. Here they are ashamed to say that we are Armenians, in fact they are ashamed. How can it happen that participants of the international movement emerge from among them? It's just a shame, it's shameless. And they will just accuse you of being a ghetto, backward. Your species has cursed, your mother's womb has cursed for bringing you. Is it in Syria, where is it, the one who saved you through those deserts brought you to the world to go and renounce your kind, to condemn your kind? What is this thing? Before my eyes, deprived, deprived, deprived... But what else? Morus Hasratean, wonderful in my student years. He was a man from Sisian, a great scientist, Axel Bakuntsi, a friend of Charents, he came from those times. He saw the low ideological, supra-ideological, extra-ideological process. And while observing this process, at that time he still said that Armenians are people of the city, Turks are people of the countryside. The Turk with 10 children in the mountains, the Armenian with scientific and technical progress. These were, are. But really, that vital area, the nuazagoin, the biosphere necessary for your cell, has been completely taken away from you. This is just forced, just a necessity. That dehumanization, that thing. Karabakh cannot be given away. This is just go destroy it. The same Turk, if you yield to him, will not greet you, the Turk will laugh at you. In one case he will hate you, in another case he will laugh at you. Is laughter good or hate? And let me say that in every Turk, in every Azerbaijani, apart from politics, there is also the awareness of the fact that Karabakh is yours, not his. We are not talking about Nakhijevan yet, Nakhijevan can be disputed. It was mine yesterday, and he remembers it very well. This is simply cowardice, laziness, to say that such a problem does not exist yet. But Karabakh unconditionally puts us in front of other situations tomorrow, and then we will talk about war with Turkey as a game, and we will also talk about friendship games.
I know what a great, huge loss it was, I know why it happened. I had brothers in Azerbaijan, I really had brothers. But not on account of Karabakh. I know it is a huge loss, but Karabakh will be a much bigger loss. Then simply your nation will not be here to be a friend or an enemy. It just won't happen. Now you are at least as an enemy, but then you simply won't be. You exist for the world as a resident of Armenia. I was proud, I said at a meeting in the Union of Writers. Several writers from the Soviet Union were published abroad, the map was printed on the cover of the book, the authors were indicated by numbers: 1, 2, 3... 7... The first could be Belarusian, the second Russian, the third would be me. 1. Vasil Bykov was written on Belarus, 2. Valentin Rasputin on Russia. My 3 was not written on my small map of Armenia, where there was no place, it was written on Azerbaijan.
I gave that example and said: I am showing the place of Armenia to the world with my literature. But in fact it is not like that. Armenia shows my place. Armenia showed us our place. If there is no Armenia, there will be no one looking at us.
- There are absolutely no differences between my perceptions and yours. The alliance says the same things, defends the same values. What would you say about keeping, generalizing, spreading those values? How not to allow the distortion of those values? There is a big propaganda campaign against the alliance from outside. There is also the problem of the "Soviet" psychology of those who became confederates.
- And are there other perceptions of the national? My initial attitude, my attitude that does not change today, because at this age they are conservative in the end, this is, in my opinion, there was only going to be one party, and I wonder how it could happen that the honkas are a different party, the confederates are different. Armenian National Party. I don't understand another party. The leaders, the others... Perhaps there are differences in tactics, whatever, I have neither looked at nor read any plan to the end, except perhaps the Alliance plan, which was very well understood both in its social and national ideology. The Armenian should only be confederal. I didn't understand anything else, and I appreciated the fact that some communists were secretly confederal. It was not possible otherwise. Or maybe the behavior of the communists, the behavior of the Chekist, the betrayer, the accomplice told me something completely different, I did not understand that there is an executioner in that Armenian man and not a confederate. This naivety happened as well. This is it. But on the other hand, not to make the Federation an "idea fix", to live as a free person, so that we have as few losses as possible from the national content. Narrow partisanship never enters my head. Narrow partisanship, starting from secret meetings, secret decisions of bureaus. Maybe they are necessary, but even if they separate from me with their own faction, they will be destroyed, I am worried. I know all of them one by one, all of them are dear people to me, but when I see the three of them together, then they have gone and separated, I just shudder from those feelings. What a great distance from narrow partisanship to broad national content. The communists left that hideous great power, huge heritage, national energy aside and went for pure orthodox communism. The national heritage, the past, the future, the entire national existence were left aside. And when I see such things in the Alliance, I am simply horrified. The great national content... Nikol Aghbalian, Simon Vratsyan, others. Here is the Nikol Aghbalian-Charents connection, the Dashnakhts of the late period, when Charents was persecuted here, there they published his speeches, even if they were anti-union, strong anti-union speeches. Broad-mindedness is this. Isn't it a national content, a national value, a done deal? In the same area, something alive has moved again, it is not a dead desert. You can't be narrow-minded. I am horrified when they say that Gurken Maharu's case is forbidden in our country. You know you are forbidden. Well, very kind, then? Porn is also prohibited, yes? And you have to look at porn. Man is first deprived of one of the sources. There should be broad-minded, open-minded people, as a single national party, as forced by history and not self-created. Your nation has a mission. Another question is that they can say like a stigma that all our ugliness comes from the ugliness of Sultan Abdul Hamid, because both my culture and my nation are oppressed, each one of us is born blackened with ken, we are born in the arms of the enemy. But we have a mission imposed by history. it is our Armenianness. History has forced us to do it. Is it a good quality or a bad quality, but my name is gypsy, gypsy, this is how my journey in history goes. This is it. I am the master of my nation. Here, if you are the owner of the nation, take it, please, be generous and take it. Toumanian was not wrong when he was an ally, Toumanian was not wrong when he was not an ally. Let's leave it free. Let's consider the alliance a mistake when Tumanian is not considered an alliance. If he doesn't consider Hripsim a national temple, if he doesn't consider the outbreak of commander Andranik as his. So be it, this will be the right thing. The party needs tolerance, considering it as its own, it gives Charents the freedom to write "Elegy written in Venice" and does not seize upon him. Let no ruler stand over him and say, "Hey, it's not written like that in the canon, what are you doing?" Literature is freedom. That's one thing that's more complicated than nuclear physics.
- In other words, the party gives wide freedom to the individual to express himself inside and outside of it, considers his wealth and guarantees an atmosphere of general nationwide tolerance.
- Yes! For example, I consider the condemnation of Shahnur's case in the Diaspora disgusting, I also consider Maharu's condemnation, anti-Maharism, narrow partisanship, when they seem to deliberately narrow their possibilities, fill their great content with something else. A broad approach is needed. So, the goal should be this. Shamil writes. Leo Tolstoy, the most imperialistic Russian writer, equaling the tsar in his imperial ambitions, describes Shamil as Russia's number one enemy. eagle's view from above, Shamil is truly a high mountain, Muslim and mountain knight. And described their king. His palace and this palace. The chambers are opposed to each other. its bureaucrats and the practicalities of this. Shamil, an eagle, has made a disfigurement to his tsar. But Tolstoy's supernatural perspective on things and phenomena gave Russians something wonderful: Russian content, which is why Russian literature is called Russian literature. He enriched his nation with it. Are we saying broad-mindedness? What are we saying? Therefore, such ability and freedom are necessary in our literature in order to give greater content to the national thought. Imagine if Hripsime's architect didn't have that freedom, what would he have built? Let's take more objective things, what do I know, if there is no such freedom, how does a cow give birth, how does a woman give birth, how does she get pregnant? Natural things are needed. And I don't accept the intolerance of ANM, especially the intolerance of Levon. And so I did not understand its origin. On the other hand, I do not understand the party's intolerance. What was this thing, where did it start? And if we come to analysis, one will definitely be blamed. If we come to accurate analysis. But there is such a confession, before these freedoms, ideas, parties were going in a different direction, real life was going in a different direction. It was as if they were missing, as if they were not helping each other. And with that dough, you entered these days. And in that sense, ANM, which did not become a party, became a movement to adjust in the process, they seemed right to me. I also liked the fact that yesterday in Beirut, the confederates went to readjust their views, in a word, they were on the move. In a word, don't be stereotyped, not only traditions, but also current life and survival. But to put a thick partition between each other? So, a faction emerges, yes, personal interests of any group, with only and special hostility towards this party. Therefore, their real content may be different.
- In the beginning, the Movement reflected a great national content, but what happened later, what did they do? And now it can be seen that it was a myth, the foreign forces had planted the seeds of disintegration in the leadership and the Movement from the very beginning with their already open agents. The national content was an external manifestation.
- I can also think that it has its own content and regardless of that, it is an arrow that took its own direction, it is a shot arrow, although I don't know if it is something in itself, someone else's, foreign? How many valuable things sank and were lost, how many things could be saved. But let me also go a little further, we used the example of the German army, it should have been like this. Once they just hit me in the face, it was just a very clear formula for them. "Go to your America, I said, make a revolution." It was still early, in 89. He was a Jew, he said that revolution will not happen in America, because there is a revolution every day in America. Therefore, he said, you have been molded, you have not moved, and there will be a revolution near you.
- I am judging myself, I am sure you are in the same situation. What is happening is happening without your participation, you have nothing to influence. It is true that you enjoy universal respect, there is awareness of your value from the government, parties and people, but it is the same, your presence does not change anything. What do you live on? What is your meaning today? Your thinking, consciousness, ideas, professed values, morals should have been something guiding for the rulers, the president and they are not.
- No, let's not get romantic. There will be no such thing. Neither Pushkin for the Tsar, nor Charents for Miasnikian, to whom Maharu sent. "Gurgen, run, bring money."
- For Khanjian?
- No, not for Khanjian. The authorities don't have that. For them, in the last analysis, the writer, the intellectual is in the right place. just like classic fairy tales, the flock is always at the feet of the ruler.
- We remembered the speech of the president. This is how he thinks about national unity, national ideology, this is how you think. You are also valuable to him. What are you in this situation? What is your meaning?
- No, really, there is an awareness of redundancy. We can say that here we are filling the means with idle delusion. On the other hand, do you want to take direct action, take a sword or a goad in your hand, what do I know? You don't do one or the other. And it remains to put one's hope in God and turn to reality, to future images. There is so much unfinished work and unfinished business that you really don't want to leave this world unnoticed and you want to finish what you did, what you promised ten years ago, and go again. That question was asked again by your circle. You probably consider your circles to be yours, I also consider my circle like a fool. He gave with hostility, I don't know why. But this was not the answer to your question.
- It didn't happen, didn't it?
- Well, I'll consider myself the president, and I'll consider you Hrant Matevosian. Even father and son. Me and my father. He doesn't take my word for it. It was an illusion. In many cases, and in the most practical cases, in my opinion, there have been accurate suggestions, I have seen that no one listens to me. Everyone does their own thing. In general, people do not have the ability to listen, from my brother Hamo Matevosian to Levon Der-Petrosian and others. We were under illusions. It seems that you are Ishakian, you are going to Aroutionov... The Aroutionovs don't listen. If Vano wasn't my younger pen pal, but just my brother, he wouldn't have listened to me again. One or two, on the contrary, it would be closer to say, Zahles a year. They are doing their job. There are probably other ways to influence them. This is how my isolation arises.
But something else may have deceived that here Solzhenitsyn became the architect of reshaping Russia, yes? And Yeltsin and others listen to him. He is coming now, and under his control, Russia is being rebuilt democratically. That is a fake. Don't think so. It is not Solzhenitsyn, it is the imposition of international imperialism. Solzhenitsyn himself was a direct performer-draftsman.
- I have no illusions. But what do you mean?
- My friends interpreted my feelings in different moments in different ways. swearing, fraternal criticism, again swearing, analysis. More or less, those attitudes were in the press, both in Yerkrum and other newspapers. I will not say that they were alien to me, they were my attitudes. so tolerable for me. But, nevertheless, I have considered it most necessary not to criticize, even in the case of the most gross mistakes, but in the face of the opposition, the rulers, those deaf people, and this surprised-horrified people, to make a small, complete speech, to make a structure, to provide a corner where there is purity, which is an example of construction. is an example of building and not tearing down. And I don't want to fill the air with delirium again. Again with my delusion. Will we be able to give an example of the building? Won't my incomplete, restrained, distorted speech become part of the general delirium? Or? if delirium is imposed, be delirium too, that is, do it, be fulfilled. Fill it with your suffering, scream, complaint. Fill it, what should I do? It is an illusion, but it seems that a person of my age and merit has no right to be that crazy and fill the air with madness again.
- No poisonous criticism, no delirium. The four sides are an atmosphere of not listening, not perceiving. If not in deed, then at least in words, I will give the example of building that structure. If I say what I imagine, they will not listen, they will not be influenced, but at least I will leave what I imagine in words, we have no illusions, but I will give a name to what I see, turn it into a word, formulate it. Do your job right. Give the name. this is how I see it, I see my separate nation with its system of national values ​​and ideology, national goals, national structure. In other words, I will not give up the irrational possibility that is destined for me to change something, to build something, I will try to justify my existence as a person of Armenian origins, and then I will finish.
- Yes! Try to describe the object, describe the real situation. This zero was to do that too. Let's think so.

"Droshak", 11-24.08.1994