Tweet
IF THE IDEA OF FREEDOM WAS TOTAL
http://www.lragir.am/src/index.php?id=socie ty&pid=14902
11:43:37 - 12/08/2009
Interview By Siranuysh Papyan
Nazaret Karoyan - an art critic and curator, president of AICA
Armenia. The framework of the thematic studies includes questions
relating to the institutional system of the Armenian modern art,
its expression in the social-political context, as well as questions
relating to its communication with Europe.
- What are the civil stances of the intelligentsia today? What is
the intelligentsia for you?
- First of all, I would like to say that your project is very
interesting to look for intellectuals or people supposed to be
intellectuals. But I see some illness in all this. The cultural,
economic and political problems are so many in the country that
the public sets hopes only on the intelligentsia. There seem to be
attempts to save the situation with the help of them. While, the
intellectuals are present only due to their examining and analyzing
work, which are published in different formats.
- Does the public wait for their word?
- In this case, what is the aim of your attempts to find
intellectuals? But the problem you posed does not consist in this. I
think you want to find out whether there are people with this fame. My
answer will probably be strict: I do not think there are, because in
general the intellectual work was rarely respected in the Armenian
reality. During the Soviet times, there was an administrative stance to
have intelligentsia. Those who lived in those years will remember that
the intelligentsia was participating in the elections with ordinary
people. After the collapse of the Soviet, we returned to our natural
situation, a situation where we do not need intellectuals.
- You say we do not need, but at the last election, artists and
intellectuals became members of the elders' council. The ruling party
needed their intellectual force.
- First of all, I have to say that I do not equalize those artists
and intellectuals. When we demand civil stances from our artists, I
think sometimes we overestimate their possibilities. The grounds for
such perception are our superficial ideas about their activities. The
artists, of course, do intellectual work, but they are engaged in many
other things too, which are determined by material, technological
and institutional circle. These circumstances narrow the circle of
freedom of the artists. As to their presence in this or the other camp,
I think the intelligentsia is a separate pole. If they are not a pole,
they are not intellectuals. And when the intellectuals do not shape
their special behavior, they cannot be citizens either.
To join this or that camp means to equalize the civil appearance
with the political one. Civil and political appearances may coincide
sometimes, but in case of intellectuals, they coincide very often. An
intellectual has to be open towards discussions worrying the public.
The intellectual is not the person, who says I am always with the
government. The intelligentsia formed during the Soviet times is
not real intelligentsia not because it has never been engaged in
intellectual work, or cannot think, but because it has always been
with the ruling regime becoming the adversary of the changes that may
happen to change the situation. While, in the European reality the
intelligentsia is not with the government, but is its alternative. If
the government governs in territories, the intellectual governs
in time.
As to the intellectuals become elders' with the Republican ticket,
they have never been the nomenclature intellectuals of the Soviet
times. Maybe just the opposite, they even participated in the
national movements of the '60 and '70. But the Soviet regime had the
characteristic of passing its ideas to its opponents too. But today,
we live in a different situation, where the private capital reigns,
where the party called "Republican" may include in its rows not only
neutral people, but also the opposite, those who have anti-Republican
(monarchic) stances.
- After March 1, many say that it became clear how many from the
intellectuals have civil stances. Do you agree with this opinion?
- Intellectuals have to be able to express their opinions openly
not only in connection with astonishing events, such as the March 1
massacre, but as well as in connection with other important events. In
order to be able to give their assessments after different analyzes
we need analyzing centers, institutions.
Fundamental practice examination lacks. So the number of intellectuals
having civil stances depends on the privately financed study
centers. There should be created possibilities for independent
activities for the intellectuals and only after we may demand results
from them. We may criticize the intellectuals, but before, we have
to criticize the public for its attitude towards the intellectuals
work and for the fact that we do not have intellectuals.
http://www.lragir.am/src/index.php?id=socie ty&pid=14902
11:43:37 - 12/08/2009
Interview By Siranuysh Papyan
Nazaret Karoyan - an art critic and curator, president of AICA
Armenia. The framework of the thematic studies includes questions
relating to the institutional system of the Armenian modern art,
its expression in the social-political context, as well as questions
relating to its communication with Europe.
- What are the civil stances of the intelligentsia today? What is
the intelligentsia for you?
- First of all, I would like to say that your project is very
interesting to look for intellectuals or people supposed to be
intellectuals. But I see some illness in all this. The cultural,
economic and political problems are so many in the country that
the public sets hopes only on the intelligentsia. There seem to be
attempts to save the situation with the help of them. While, the
intellectuals are present only due to their examining and analyzing
work, which are published in different formats.
- Does the public wait for their word?
- In this case, what is the aim of your attempts to find
intellectuals? But the problem you posed does not consist in this. I
think you want to find out whether there are people with this fame. My
answer will probably be strict: I do not think there are, because in
general the intellectual work was rarely respected in the Armenian
reality. During the Soviet times, there was an administrative stance to
have intelligentsia. Those who lived in those years will remember that
the intelligentsia was participating in the elections with ordinary
people. After the collapse of the Soviet, we returned to our natural
situation, a situation where we do not need intellectuals.
- You say we do not need, but at the last election, artists and
intellectuals became members of the elders' council. The ruling party
needed their intellectual force.
- First of all, I have to say that I do not equalize those artists
and intellectuals. When we demand civil stances from our artists, I
think sometimes we overestimate their possibilities. The grounds for
such perception are our superficial ideas about their activities. The
artists, of course, do intellectual work, but they are engaged in many
other things too, which are determined by material, technological
and institutional circle. These circumstances narrow the circle of
freedom of the artists. As to their presence in this or the other camp,
I think the intelligentsia is a separate pole. If they are not a pole,
they are not intellectuals. And when the intellectuals do not shape
their special behavior, they cannot be citizens either.
To join this or that camp means to equalize the civil appearance
with the political one. Civil and political appearances may coincide
sometimes, but in case of intellectuals, they coincide very often. An
intellectual has to be open towards discussions worrying the public.
The intellectual is not the person, who says I am always with the
government. The intelligentsia formed during the Soviet times is
not real intelligentsia not because it has never been engaged in
intellectual work, or cannot think, but because it has always been
with the ruling regime becoming the adversary of the changes that may
happen to change the situation. While, in the European reality the
intelligentsia is not with the government, but is its alternative. If
the government governs in territories, the intellectual governs
in time.
As to the intellectuals become elders' with the Republican ticket,
they have never been the nomenclature intellectuals of the Soviet
times. Maybe just the opposite, they even participated in the
national movements of the '60 and '70. But the Soviet regime had the
characteristic of passing its ideas to its opponents too. But today,
we live in a different situation, where the private capital reigns,
where the party called "Republican" may include in its rows not only
neutral people, but also the opposite, those who have anti-Republican
(monarchic) stances.
- After March 1, many say that it became clear how many from the
intellectuals have civil stances. Do you agree with this opinion?
- Intellectuals have to be able to express their opinions openly
not only in connection with astonishing events, such as the March 1
massacre, but as well as in connection with other important events. In
order to be able to give their assessments after different analyzes
we need analyzing centers, institutions.
Fundamental practice examination lacks. So the number of intellectuals
having civil stances depends on the privately financed study
centers. There should be created possibilities for independent
activities for the intellectuals and only after we may demand results
from them. We may criticize the intellectuals, but before, we have
to criticize the public for its attitude towards the intellectuals
work and for the fact that we do not have intellectuals.