Tweet
Aznavour's Detractors: When All You Can Do Is Look for Scapegoats
Armen Arakelyan
hetq
18:10, August 17, 2012
So Charles Aznavour, our much beloved chansonnier and Armenian
goodwill ambassador to the world, participated at the opening
ceremonies of the newly restored Rabat fortress complex in Akhaltska
on August 16.
Many Armenians advised him not to take part, but the singer went and
gave a concert anyway. After all, his father was born in Akhaltska and
he received a personal invitation from Saakashvili.
Those Armenian circles who advised him to gracefully bow out point to
the fact that even though the mosque, synagogue and orthodox Christian
church at the site were renovated, the Georgian authorities overlooked
the Armenian Catholic Church that stands in ruin.
And because Turkey also donated a portion of the renovation funds,
certain Armenians declared that Aznavour shouldn't participate in the
opening of a cultural complex that openly rejects a regional Armenian
presence.
No one can deny that the Armenian Catholic Church can fall as the next
victim of Georgian state policy of assimilation and seizure of the
cultural inheritance of minorities, especially the Armenians. This
isn't the first case or the last.
But Aznavour isn't to blame.
Renovations to Rabat began back in 2007. Alarms were being raised as
early as 2010 that demolition work was being carried out in the
immediate vicinity of the Armenian Catholic Church that has
inscriptions dating to then12th century.
To verify these reports, the RA Ministry of Culture even dispatched
the Director of the Scientific Research Center for Cultural
Inheritance. He went and confirmed that the church was in real danger.
Afterwards, the lid was shut on this issue. The matter wasn't even
brought up for discussion when Catholicos Garegin II paid a six day
pontifical visit to Georgia, even though renovation work was going on
at the time. The Armenian side basically displayed inaction regarding
the fate of the church.
For Aznavour to have refused to participate, given this attitude of
the Armenian government and Church, wouldn't have been the wisest of
choices. How could he have justified his bowing out under such
circumstances? Aznavour couldn't have shouldered the burden personally
when Armenia's government shed itself of such responsibility.
Despite the methods employed by Georgia to renovate that
historical-cultural site, it perfectly symbolizes tolerance and mutual
understanding as evidenced by the fact that the spiritual values of
the three religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - coexist side
by side.
Had Aznavour refused to participate in the opening of a memorial site
with such meaning, it couldn't have been viewed as a manifestation of
narrow nationalism; something which Aznavour has always been distanced
himself from. On the contrary, even if we view his action from the
same nationalist prism, by his presence and concert, Aznavour was
simply confirming that the region, with its ethnic structure and its
historical architectural profile, has historically been Armenian. In
reality, this isn't the issue.
Rabat is a truly wonderful business venture; both from the perspective
of preserving and serving up Georgian cultural values and developing
the tourist trade on top. Even if the project contains aggressive
cultural elements, Georgia is carrying it out with a finely crafted
technology and very delicately; by aligning the beneficial with the
pleasant and the necessary. This is something that Armenia has never
been able to do.
Aznavour can't be blamed that in Armenia there isn't the desire or the
ability to carry out such extensive projects. The singer is not guilty
because we can't even preserve that which we have, and are only adept
at building places to fill our stomachs. The little we have worthy of
preserving has been swallowed up with a network of infrastructure that
is crass and laughable. We are so provincial at times that we make
`Evro' renovations to our cultural sites, and have turned them into
garbage dumps, both inside and out.
Aznavour isn't to blame that Rabat is located in neigh boring Georgia,
where his father's roots are from. Rabat painfully reminds us that
noting on such a scale has been done in Armenia during that past
twenty years. And we constantly point out that tourism is a leading
sector of the Armenian economy. Who are we kidding?
The only achievement we can look to with some sense of pride is the
aerial cable car at Tatev; but it only operates six months out of the
year.
Those who criticize Aznavour have nothing to say about all this. They
are trying to turn him into a scapegoat for all the inadequacies and
faults of the nation at large. These people want to conveniently rid
themselves of accountability and find blame with others; not
themselves.
But the, it's always been easier to find fault in others and not within oneself.
Armen Arakelyan
hetq
18:10, August 17, 2012
So Charles Aznavour, our much beloved chansonnier and Armenian
goodwill ambassador to the world, participated at the opening
ceremonies of the newly restored Rabat fortress complex in Akhaltska
on August 16.
Many Armenians advised him not to take part, but the singer went and
gave a concert anyway. After all, his father was born in Akhaltska and
he received a personal invitation from Saakashvili.
Those Armenian circles who advised him to gracefully bow out point to
the fact that even though the mosque, synagogue and orthodox Christian
church at the site were renovated, the Georgian authorities overlooked
the Armenian Catholic Church that stands in ruin.
And because Turkey also donated a portion of the renovation funds,
certain Armenians declared that Aznavour shouldn't participate in the
opening of a cultural complex that openly rejects a regional Armenian
presence.
No one can deny that the Armenian Catholic Church can fall as the next
victim of Georgian state policy of assimilation and seizure of the
cultural inheritance of minorities, especially the Armenians. This
isn't the first case or the last.
But Aznavour isn't to blame.
Renovations to Rabat began back in 2007. Alarms were being raised as
early as 2010 that demolition work was being carried out in the
immediate vicinity of the Armenian Catholic Church that has
inscriptions dating to then12th century.
To verify these reports, the RA Ministry of Culture even dispatched
the Director of the Scientific Research Center for Cultural
Inheritance. He went and confirmed that the church was in real danger.
Afterwards, the lid was shut on this issue. The matter wasn't even
brought up for discussion when Catholicos Garegin II paid a six day
pontifical visit to Georgia, even though renovation work was going on
at the time. The Armenian side basically displayed inaction regarding
the fate of the church.
For Aznavour to have refused to participate, given this attitude of
the Armenian government and Church, wouldn't have been the wisest of
choices. How could he have justified his bowing out under such
circumstances? Aznavour couldn't have shouldered the burden personally
when Armenia's government shed itself of such responsibility.
Despite the methods employed by Georgia to renovate that
historical-cultural site, it perfectly symbolizes tolerance and mutual
understanding as evidenced by the fact that the spiritual values of
the three religions - Judaism, Christianity and Islam - coexist side
by side.
Had Aznavour refused to participate in the opening of a memorial site
with such meaning, it couldn't have been viewed as a manifestation of
narrow nationalism; something which Aznavour has always been distanced
himself from. On the contrary, even if we view his action from the
same nationalist prism, by his presence and concert, Aznavour was
simply confirming that the region, with its ethnic structure and its
historical architectural profile, has historically been Armenian. In
reality, this isn't the issue.
Rabat is a truly wonderful business venture; both from the perspective
of preserving and serving up Georgian cultural values and developing
the tourist trade on top. Even if the project contains aggressive
cultural elements, Georgia is carrying it out with a finely crafted
technology and very delicately; by aligning the beneficial with the
pleasant and the necessary. This is something that Armenia has never
been able to do.
Aznavour can't be blamed that in Armenia there isn't the desire or the
ability to carry out such extensive projects. The singer is not guilty
because we can't even preserve that which we have, and are only adept
at building places to fill our stomachs. The little we have worthy of
preserving has been swallowed up with a network of infrastructure that
is crass and laughable. We are so provincial at times that we make
`Evro' renovations to our cultural sites, and have turned them into
garbage dumps, both inside and out.
Aznavour isn't to blame that Rabat is located in neigh boring Georgia,
where his father's roots are from. Rabat painfully reminds us that
noting on such a scale has been done in Armenia during that past
twenty years. And we constantly point out that tourism is a leading
sector of the Armenian economy. Who are we kidding?
The only achievement we can look to with some sense of pride is the
aerial cable car at Tatev; but it only operates six months out of the
year.
Those who criticize Aznavour have nothing to say about all this. They
are trying to turn him into a scapegoat for all the inadequacies and
faults of the nation at large. These people want to conveniently rid
themselves of accountability and find blame with others; not
themselves.
But the, it's always been easier to find fault in others and not within oneself.