- Mr. Matevosyan, years ago, your interview was published in one of the Moscow magazines, which was received in Armenia with bewilderment and alarm. There you, referring to 1915 ehernini, you said that it is enough to talk about it, it is enough to sprinkle salt on old wounds. Years later, as if taking advantage of this and developing your thesis in a very unique way, Anar called the Armenian people "masochists". Knowing you and your work, I am more than convinced that it was a painful misunderstanding...
- I understand what it is about. My interlocutor was Alla Marchenko, the interview was published in "Voprosy Literature" magazine. I said there that I feel physical pain every time the mountain is mentioned, that I get sick at the mention of it. The final text of the interview didn't agree with me, and that's why there are some unfortunate omissions. I own the past of my people, including the people. I wanted to say the following: you either have to write brilliantly or not at all. I know only a few well-established, high-art works of art from 1915. about the hill. It is Franz Werfel's "40 Days of Mount Musa", Armenian-American writer Levon-Zaven Surmelyan's novel "I appeal to you, ladies and gentlemen" and Gurgen Maharu's "Burning Igestans". Perhaps those are the best jobs. Moreover, if Werfel and Syurmelyan were contemplatives in a sense, because the herd was an object of description for them, then the same cannot be said about Maharu. He seemed to show the herd from within, because she was a subject of the herd. It is equivalent to describing the disease of your body, your gangrene. In the novel, the author is both the small and defenseless being burning in the heath and the eagle soaring over those bloody events.
- But how to reconcile that opinion with the accusations confirmed in literary studies, according to which there are many mistakes in Maharu's novel, including those of a political nature? The writer is even accused of pro-Turkish approach...
- I agree, there are inaccuracies in the novel, and they are explained by the partisan approach, the world view of the writer. Putting aside the many existing views, he stuck to only one that was closest to his heart. And all the vast documentary material at his disposal subjugated that point of view. As for Maharu's pro-Turkish position, it is a very complicated issue, it cannot be simplified. Let's try to understand him. Banish by birth, he had the moral right to tell us. be it good or bad, you gassed the Turks, and this is what happened as a result. My birthplace was destroyed, my hearth was destroyed, I was exiled from my ancestral home, my relatives and friends were killed and tortured...
- The situation is amazingly repeated. And today we hear again. so what, is that what you wanted? If it weren't for you, we would live in peace and solidarity with the Azerbaijanis... I agree, those people have lost a lot, seen a lot of deprivation, they need to understand too. However, there is also another truth: Karabakh was a tuber that had to be opened sooner or later...
- Some western Armenian political figures, Ormanyan, Otyan and others, were in favor of reforms, their goal was for Armenians to gain autonomy within the Ottoman Empire. They cooperated with their Turkish sympathizers and cherished hopes for a peaceful, political solution to the Armenian question. However, to claim that the uprising was the result of provocations by Armenians, that the massacre of Armenians in Sumgait, Kirovabad and Baku, the blockade of Armenia and Artsakh can be explained as a natural reaction of Azerbaijanis, is at least immoral and absurd. It is an explanation imposed by the Turks. It's like a murderer excusing himself by saying that it was the victim's fault because he didn't behave well.
- A few years ago, it was said that after "Sumgait" you can't create, that you haven't written a single line after that. Many of our writers were in a similar situation. However, today the people need the words of a writer more than ever. Many have returned to literary work, active activities. What would you say in that regard, does the depressive state still continue?
- Yes, it continues. And sometimes it seems to me that it will never pass. However, literature did not begin with me and will not end with me. The uprising destroyed Tumanyan, but the same uprising gave life to Charents. Charents began to create his masterpieces, began to write the artistic chronicle of his era during the terrible years of the Holocaust. So, I have high hopes for our young creators, who look with open eyes at the cruelties and barbarisms committed against their compatriots and relatives...
- Meanwhile, special hopes were attached to you, because your reputation is particularly high. Don't take it as a reproach, but I involuntarily reminded Aitmatov. he did not miss the opportunity to approach the microphone. he explained, clarified, interpreted, taught, gave advice...
- It is not difficult to explain either. The point is that the rights to my television appearances were assigned to Aitmatov. In other words, he was speaking for me, Vasili Bykov, Nodar Dumbadze, Oles Gonchar, Justinas Marcinkiavičius, in short, on behalf of our multi-ethnic brotherhood of pen pals. Aitmatov was, on the one hand, a child of empire, and on the other, a staunch supporter of decentralization. And finally, he was one of the devotees of reconstruction, Gorbachev's right-hand man and lifer of ideas.
And in general, I was never on equal terms with Chingiz Aitmatov. It was easier for him to talk about the friendship of peoples, because the heroes of his books were Kazakhs and Kyrgyz, and these peoples are very, very close to each other in terms of ethnicity and ethnography. And now imagine my situation, if I didn't have to find edges of contact between Armenians and Azerbaijanis, reflect their friendship. Meanwhile, that friendship was very fake, sticky and often led to sad incidents and failures. Moreover, I was firmly convinced that all Azerbaijanis, big and small, were sharpening a knife on us.
- As a result, the pain of the Armenian people remained unexpressed, enclosed in itself and foreign and incomprehensible to other peoples of the world. Anyway, how did you take the collapse of the empire?
- The empire collapsed, collapsed on all of us, that collapse passed through all of us and, whatever we say, it caused us great pain. And I ask myself and others whether it was impossible to avoid those great losses, those countless and countless erased destinies.
- But the empire had to collapse sooner or later anyway. In my opinion, there is nothing to regret.
- Today, we settle our scores with the empire, but that empire fed and clothed us all, we smiled, laughed, we were satisfied with life, we were the master and master of our lives. We used to make fun of our self-righteous leaders, we encountered political and domestic hypocrisy, hypocrisy, phariseeism everywhere, but still we lived for better or for worse. And I say, long live our yesterday's life with all its omissions and distortions. By the way, our only achievement today is the truth. Although that single achievement can be questioned if desired. We paid very dearly for it: chaos, destruction, hunger and deprivation, the dead, hostages, refugees are all around us... Armenia is dying, Georgia is in the fire of civil war, Azerbaijan is gassed, and is turning on itself and others and... universal bewilderment, depression, a sense of hopelessness... It may seem absurd, an anomaly to you, but long live yesterday's empire. Russia has its own interests and mission in the Caucasus. You can say what you want, but the fact remains. For two hundred years, people here did not bite each other's throats.
- But why didn't you talk about it earlier, in the initial stage of reconstruction or in the first period of the Karabakh movement?
- I was against the collapse of the empire, because I realized that the wind of change could sweep away my small people. I opposed Gorbachev's reconstruction because I foresaw the inevitable, irreversible consequences that this "perestroika" was fraught with. But agree that it would be a great audacity and impurity to announce at the rally that raising the issue of self-determination of Karabakh is very, very dangerous and premature. It's not just me, no one would dare to say. I used to own an empire. I owned twenty-two million square kilometers of space. And today Sevan and Zangezur are threatened in the most real way. Before, I could allow myself to interfere in the internal affairs of Russia, with my novels and short stories I could criticize and express my displeasure, and I was taken into account, no one told me, who are you, who teaches us how to live? Do not curse your Armenia. And today they tell me that at every step.
- How do you imagine our current social situation?
- May God protect us. What kind of social condition can we talk about?
- Can we get closer to Turkey?
- As they say, everything is in God's hands. Sometimes it seems to me that it is possible, but when I listen to Ozal's or Demirel's anti-Armenian speeches, it becomes clear to me that we Armenians have nothing to do in Turkey. And I turn to Russia again. Let it be a ruined Russia, the Russia of Cossacks, alcoholics, drug addicts, syphilitics, but once something like salvation came from there, and it gives me hope.
- But Levon Ter-Petrosyan himself, referring to Turkey, said that there are no eternal enemies and friends...
- At one time, I treated the rally speeches of Levon Ter-Petrosyan, Vano Siradeghyan and others as a child's game. They reminded me of those boys who have an interesting book at home and, after reading a few pages, rush to tell their friends what they learned and then run home to continue reading. And I expected that this is where the higher intelligence would appear in the form of some mighty widow and force the square to be cleared. But he never came. Logic never prevailed, and the theater of the absurd continues to this day.
- Your attitude towards the leadership of the republic.
- Our existence rests on the trinity of "country-people-state". By country I mean the area with its natural resources: land, forests, lakes, rivers. I am not talking about "sea to sea" Armenia, but it is necessary to have a critical mass of the country. We don't have that country, that is, we don't have the necessary amount of critical mass that can turn into quality. And there is no need to mention the example of Luxembourg. they are incompatible categories. The absence of earth destroys the trinity. Let's try together to answer the question of what our government can do in the current situation. Let's say we have a supply of food that will last us two months. With proper management, that is, proper distribution of that food, it can be enough not for two months, but for half a year. So, if we look deeply, the fault in our present difficulties and deprivations is not so much the government, which is unable to manage the economy of the republic, but the fact that we are cut off from all contexts, both union and global. Before, we lived and did not live badly because we were fed and supplied by the giant state. We represented that state, we spoke on its behalf, we didn't feel orphaned and helpless, on the contrary, we felt strong and confident, because behind us stood a powerful country that was ready to protect us and our interests. Our shepherds went to different republics to do seasonal work, scientists were sent to Moscow for research work and to improve their scientific qualifications, people sought protection and justice from the injustices of the local authorities in Moscow. You can say the last words about the Soviet period, describe the life of our people during that period in the blackest colors - that is your job, it is your right, but do not forget that many top values of Armenian culture, art and literature were created in those years. And now we have found ourselves in a completely unnatural situation, all spheres of our life are threatened: both social, economic, political, and cultural... Our gene pool is in danger, as well as this small piece of territory called Armenia. I am concerned and troubled by many questions, questions that I would like to address to our government, our president, Levon Ter-Petrosyan. I will ask them those questions, only when I have the answers myself.
- Mr. Matevosyan, how can you explain that you have never given a speech in the parliament? Correct me if I'm wrong.
- No, you are not wrong. I made a mistake by agreeing to become a deputy. I just had an outdated idea of the nature of Parliament's work. In fact, it turned out that this work requires a lot of energy and a lot of effort, unrelenting dedication. I understand those people who had not shown themselves in any field before, could not find their place in life, but in the parliament they were able to discover their gifts, they were able to rediscover themselves. But I was more or less able to express myself in literature, I had my permanent occupation, a certain range of interests. So I shouldn't have minded none of my business. I repeat, it seemed to me that the Parliament would meet three times a year for two hours to unanimously approve all decrees and resolutions. And since my imaginary model of the parliament did not at all coincide with the real one, then I will be happy to interrupt my parliamentary activity and return to literary work.
- Which of the Russian writers could you consider your friend?
- For a long time it seemed to me that we would become friends with Valentin Rasputin, but our closeness never turned into a real friendship. I can't consider myself a friend of Viktor Astafev either, whose works I value very highly. Sometimes I even feel like I wrote his works. Perhaps the word "friendship" would be more appropriate for the relationship between me and Andrey Bitov.
- And the last question. What awaits us in the near future?
- You know, I have never assumed the position of a forecaster, I have never considered myself omniscient. The only thing I can say with certainty is that I believe unconditionally in my people, I believe that they will find the true path, find in themselves enough vital and moral strength to overcome the current difficulties and come out with honor from all the harsh trials that fall on their heads.
The conversation was moderated by Gurgen KARAPETYAN
"Friday", 30.10.1992