Tweet
LIKE A STOPPED WATCH
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview-lraho s15284.html
13:58:23 - 23/09/2009
Interview with literature critic Siranuysh Davoyan
In your opinion what is government and what are the mechanisms of
its formation and its functions?
If we connect the power only with the state, say, the state as
government or a model of it, this is another thing but if we connect
the government with power this is a completely different thing and
maybe observed in all fields. In other words, government is always
mistaken with power but in reality, government is an absolutely
different thing. For me, government is more related to the state. It is
an expression of the state or state thinking. Force is more particular
to the culture and is expressed in it. In other words, you may have
the feeling that a certain person is a strong artist or a strong
intellectual, but there is a second question too whether art is a
way to govern and we have to answer both yes and no. Yes because if
art expresses the public thinking and brings the model of the state
so it is a governmental lever if not, it is just force. The state
and the government is a way of thinking which is not particular to
modern times but it is model exhausted in the Middle Ages. In Armenia,
I have to state with sorrow we are still in the Middle Ages and on the
peak of the pyramid, we have the king. Even if we dwell on democracy,
we are out of the modern model from the point of governance.
Well, which is the reason why the governmental model remained that
old one?
In order to answer this question I would like to proceed from
culture. My main question is to view all through culture. Very
concretely, I will say that in 10th century, something broke down in
culture and it lost its continuance. We shaped something from antic
culture and passed it to the Middle Ages. Then, something again broke
down but it did not continue. Every time instead of trying to restore
what breaks down but we enter in that broken model like a stopped
watch which goes round without end.
We have to think about overcoming that break. We have to learn the
causes of that break. Sometimes I even think that we avoid thinking,
inventing new worlds and models. Something is wrong with our composing
energy. We always repeat everyone is bad, everyone came to kill us
and we inside have no problem, everything is great while the enemies
are bad they came and killed us.
Who should make attempts to overcome that break? Who should think in
this direction?
If I answer concretely and short, I will say that everyone should
think because even if we take separate persons we see that this
break exists in each of us and it is noticeable in all the levels of
relations. There is the external side too- our external communication,
but do we communicate inside? And how we can restore it is very
difficult to say because it is rooted inside us. You know, let it
not sound strange but I think it is very important for us to read our
culture. These problems were dwelt on in literature too in the last
200 years. Our writers always find difficulties in writing about men
because the state shadows always the men.
What will we get by recovering the break?
We will form a society. On the other hand we will not be closed in
ourselves and we will not have the complex of living in ourselves
and we will not be terrorized with the thought of communicating with
extern. By communicating, we will perceive ourselves as unique but
not exclusive type. This perception will take us in our place in the
world making us participants of changes.
Is the fact that we are unable to resist world's challenges determined
by this break?
Yes, if you cannot speak, you cannot tell yourself, your culture,
how you can be a participant. Diplomacy is not only economic
relations. Being a participant means first of all cultural
participation. If we do not realize our culture today, we do not
realize the danger how can we present ourselves anywhere.
In your opinion, how can the public reclaim its rights?
First, we have to shape a society because the society is a type of
thinking too. Unfortunately, we do not have this type of thinking. And
society is a territory where everyone has right to speak and can
speak. What we have is not a society in reality because either we do
not speak or do not want to speak or we are not let speak. Everyone
has to be in their places and speak from there. For example, as an
intellectual, I am not in my place and I do not speak from my place,
a political figure does not speak from their place and we come out
to have many professions and we come out to be able to speak about
everything. It is another thing when you are forbidden to speak as
a person.
Society first of all is a possibility to participate. How can I be a
participant of something when I cannot speak? This is a more serious
problem and I do not think it is a problem of the government or a
group of people. The government today is the expresser of it, because
it is obvious that in international issues our voice is not heard.
People should be educated to understand that before belonging to the
state they are persons. When they realize of being persons having
rights they will decide by themselves to belong or not to belong to
something. Europe did not open its borders accidentally. Now there are
no borders and there is possibility to communicate freely. Caucasus
and Russia cannot solve this problem yet. I would like to be able
to take from the world, but I would like also to be able to give
something to the world, to give thought to humanity.
http://www.lragir.am/engsrc/interview-lraho s15284.html
13:58:23 - 23/09/2009
Interview with literature critic Siranuysh Davoyan
In your opinion what is government and what are the mechanisms of
its formation and its functions?
If we connect the power only with the state, say, the state as
government or a model of it, this is another thing but if we connect
the government with power this is a completely different thing and
maybe observed in all fields. In other words, government is always
mistaken with power but in reality, government is an absolutely
different thing. For me, government is more related to the state. It is
an expression of the state or state thinking. Force is more particular
to the culture and is expressed in it. In other words, you may have
the feeling that a certain person is a strong artist or a strong
intellectual, but there is a second question too whether art is a
way to govern and we have to answer both yes and no. Yes because if
art expresses the public thinking and brings the model of the state
so it is a governmental lever if not, it is just force. The state
and the government is a way of thinking which is not particular to
modern times but it is model exhausted in the Middle Ages. In Armenia,
I have to state with sorrow we are still in the Middle Ages and on the
peak of the pyramid, we have the king. Even if we dwell on democracy,
we are out of the modern model from the point of governance.
Well, which is the reason why the governmental model remained that
old one?
In order to answer this question I would like to proceed from
culture. My main question is to view all through culture. Very
concretely, I will say that in 10th century, something broke down in
culture and it lost its continuance. We shaped something from antic
culture and passed it to the Middle Ages. Then, something again broke
down but it did not continue. Every time instead of trying to restore
what breaks down but we enter in that broken model like a stopped
watch which goes round without end.
We have to think about overcoming that break. We have to learn the
causes of that break. Sometimes I even think that we avoid thinking,
inventing new worlds and models. Something is wrong with our composing
energy. We always repeat everyone is bad, everyone came to kill us
and we inside have no problem, everything is great while the enemies
are bad they came and killed us.
Who should make attempts to overcome that break? Who should think in
this direction?
If I answer concretely and short, I will say that everyone should
think because even if we take separate persons we see that this
break exists in each of us and it is noticeable in all the levels of
relations. There is the external side too- our external communication,
but do we communicate inside? And how we can restore it is very
difficult to say because it is rooted inside us. You know, let it
not sound strange but I think it is very important for us to read our
culture. These problems were dwelt on in literature too in the last
200 years. Our writers always find difficulties in writing about men
because the state shadows always the men.
What will we get by recovering the break?
We will form a society. On the other hand we will not be closed in
ourselves and we will not have the complex of living in ourselves
and we will not be terrorized with the thought of communicating with
extern. By communicating, we will perceive ourselves as unique but
not exclusive type. This perception will take us in our place in the
world making us participants of changes.
Is the fact that we are unable to resist world's challenges determined
by this break?
Yes, if you cannot speak, you cannot tell yourself, your culture,
how you can be a participant. Diplomacy is not only economic
relations. Being a participant means first of all cultural
participation. If we do not realize our culture today, we do not
realize the danger how can we present ourselves anywhere.
In your opinion, how can the public reclaim its rights?
First, we have to shape a society because the society is a type of
thinking too. Unfortunately, we do not have this type of thinking. And
society is a territory where everyone has right to speak and can
speak. What we have is not a society in reality because either we do
not speak or do not want to speak or we are not let speak. Everyone
has to be in their places and speak from there. For example, as an
intellectual, I am not in my place and I do not speak from my place,
a political figure does not speak from their place and we come out
to have many professions and we come out to be able to speak about
everything. It is another thing when you are forbidden to speak as
a person.
Society first of all is a possibility to participate. How can I be a
participant of something when I cannot speak? This is a more serious
problem and I do not think it is a problem of the government or a
group of people. The government today is the expresser of it, because
it is obvious that in international issues our voice is not heard.
People should be educated to understand that before belonging to the
state they are persons. When they realize of being persons having
rights they will decide by themselves to belong or not to belong to
something. Europe did not open its borders accidentally. Now there are
no borders and there is possibility to communicate freely. Caucasus
and Russia cannot solve this problem yet. I would like to be able
to take from the world, but I would like also to be able to give
something to the world, to give thought to humanity.