Tweet
DID THE ARMENIAN WRITERS CONFERENCE WALK THE TALK?
By admin
http://massispost.com/archives/9082
Updated: July 26, 2013
By Lucine Kasbarian
"Armenian writers who, as a result of bitter fate, create in foreign
languages are not foreigners, but faithful and dedicated ambassadors
of their Armenian blood and spirit in non-Armenian surroundings."
- Sarkis Guiragossian, Aztag daily newspaper, 2005
There are several schools of thought about how to behave in a foreign
country. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do," is one such advisory.
But - and I'm really thinking of Armenia-Diaspora relations, what
about a self-identifying Roman whose family has been in exile for
several generations? What if this individual often visited Rome and
participated in its culture with an eye on solidarity with its people?
And what if Rome was in economic and political turmoil, and the people
were leaving in droves? Could one then afford to merely "do as the
Romans do?"
Such questions arose in my mind during my recent 40-day stay in
Armenia and Artsakh, which concluded in my participation in the
Fifth Conference of Writers of Armenian Origin Composing in Foreign
Languages. The Conference took place from July 11 to 15, 2013 at the
Writer's House in Tsaghgatsor, 40 km northeast of Yerevan.
Sponsored by the Diaspora Ministry, the Armenian Writer's Union (AWU),
and the Armenian General Benevolent Union (AGBU), the Conference
hosted about 40 writers from Armenia, Artsakh, Canada, England,
France, Hungary, Iran, Kuwait, Lebanon, the Netherlands, Poland,
Russia, Sweden, Syria, Turkey, and the USA.
A Golden Opportunity An often-heard comment from Diasporan repatriates
to Armenia is that its positives are not trumpeted frequently enough
in the global Armenian news media. While the majority of Diaspora
Armenians who write about Armenia's problems are not covert operatives
who want to see this country fail but a compassionate community who
wish to see Armenia succeed, it would still serve us to indulge in some
well-deserved praise. As an example, the Tsaghgatsor conference is
an outstanding concept that has been made into a reality. Where else
do we have writers of Armenian descent gathering with the potential
to testify, network, brainstorm, cross-pollinate ideas and sow the
seeds for future collaborations?
Not to be confused with the Pan-Armenian Media Conference, this
Conference mainly involves writers of literary fiction and poetry,
with some non-fiction writers thrown in for good measure. The
Pan-Armenian Conference is a much larger affair, comprising print,
broadcast and online news media editors and contributors from our
global Armenian nation.
Unable to establish contact with the organizers while in the USA,
I visited the Diaspora Ministry while in Yerevan to register for
the Writer's Conference. Even then, bringing copies of the books
I'd written, I did not know if I'd be accepted. This is because in
prior years one did not apply for participation but was selected for
inclusion, and often through recommendations from the AWU. As far as
I know, this practice is still in effect, but really should not be.
Though I had, in previous years, inquired about attending the Diaspora
Ministry's media conferences and receiving its e-newsletters,
my requests had inexplicably gone unanswered. One Diasporan
editor-colleague suggested that I not hold my breath for an invite
to conferences sponsored by the Diaspora Ministry. He had observed
that many writers reporting about the more "unflattering" aspects of
the Armenian reality were simply excluded from such gatherings. To
my advantage, no one at the Ministry office appeared to check into
my suitability before accepting me into the Conference. Thus, this
article is the result of my opportunity to bear witness to what
happens at such gatherings.
Establishing a Global Dialogue The use of headphones at various
Diaspora conferences has been very important because it enables
non-Armenian speaking attendees to receive simultaneous translations
of the proceedings and thus contribute to the discourse. The absence
of headphones at the Conference was alarming, especially as the
stated purpose of the Conference was to spotlight those who write in
foreign languages.
Not surprisingly, several attendees expressed to me that they felt
like outsiders at the Conference, as no official provision was made to
consistently translate. And, as several presenters were not given an
opportunity to have their speeches or works verbally translated for
the benefit of those present, some delegates told me that they felt
like unwanted step-children invited under false pretenses, since they
were unable to participate in whatever minimal dialogue there was -
figuratively put into a corner as if punished or trivialized for not
knowing the Lingua Franca.
As it turns out, history was repeating itself. An article retrieved
from the Armenian Mirror-Spectator of November 2011 reported that
no formal translation services were provided at the Conference of
Armenian Writers in Foreign Languages, held in October of that year.
If this Conference is to continue, it is crucial that official
translators be provided.
Half the Conference participants hailed from Armenia and Artsakh. The
proceedings, held in the Eastern Armenian dialect, seemed to serve the
native Armenians first, and then, to a lesser degree, those Diasporans
who spoke Armenian. Writers in the latter category were generally
limited to either a 5-minute presentation on a stated theme or a brief
description of their new work. How could they not help but feel as
if the defacto purpose of the Conference was not to spotlight their
poetic artistry and perceptions but to be "talked at" and prohibited
from participating in a meaningful way? An opportunity for genuine
intellectual discussion was missed. If this Conference is to continue
(and the next one is scheduled for 2015 on the subject of the Armenian
Genocide), the above aspects must dramatically change. Perhaps one new
approach could feature the creation of subgroups within a conference,
wherein more participants can express their views.
A Forum to Present Ideas The main themes and activities of
the Conference centered around "Globalization and National
Identity" in which participants read works or observations on
the topic of globalization (in the multicultural sense rather
than the economic). The Conference included a session on William
Saroyan. Essays, remembrances and poems about the author and playwright
were read aloud. There was also a session on new books, in which
participants introduced their new works.
Well-known academics in Armenia steered the Conference, including three
long-time fixtures on the literary front in Armenia. Each has published
large bodies of work and dedicated himself to the field of literature.
What was astounding, however, was how each comported himself at the
Conference. These men acted like commissars whose objectives were to
attempt to control public opinion or its natural expression. Some took
45 minutes to speak while allowing others only 5 minutes, commanding
some to ampopeh! (abbreviate!). They would verbally interrupt and
angrily contradict other writers with whom they disagreed. They gave
their favorite persons - some of them not even conference delegates
- more time to present their work. They acted as arbiters of which
presentations were worthy of translation. And if a session ran long, it
was usually a Diasporan delegate asked to relinquish his time to talk.
There were other local participants who were surprisingly discourteous
to delegates. The rule of thumb seemed to be, "unless you are
presenting your own speech or paper, you should feel free to hold
loud and lengthy side conversations with others, work on your laptop,
take phone calls or launch your Facebook page." If a conference abroad
were conducted this way, it would be the object of ridicule.
Upon witnessing these behaviors, I decided to use my allocated 5
minutes not to talk about Globalization and National Identity in
the literal sense, but in what our dispersion could help us achieve
in the long term. I discussed what I'd like to see happen at future
conferences.
This included a desire to see the future participation of the Armenian
Journalists Union, the Yerevan Press Club, Diasporan newspaper editors
and contributors, Armenian and Diasporan publishers, booksellers,
librarians and translators so that we may interact and grow into a
massive, persuasive literary force in our respective communities and
the world. I wished to see some of our best books being published
in Armenia today - in the Armenian language as well as in foreign
languages - be presented at future Conferences so that we can find
ways to introduce and sell them in the Diaspora. I asked to hear from
our best editors and translators - both from Armenia and the Diaspora
-discussing our best contemporary writers as well as those famous
works that have yet to be translated into foreign languages but deserve
to be, and how we can make that a reality. I asked that we encourage
young generations of writers to participate in these conferences and
for specialists to be invited to talk about developments in the craft
and business of writing, or even how one can become a "literary agent"
who can represent global Armenian writers to foreign publishers so
that the world can know of our great talents.
And I asked that we think about the creation of a global Armenian
writers society that can provide lectures and job banks and even
develop a national agenda around what sorts of articles or novels
could be useful to the Armenian people and nation in the foreign
press at any given time.
While my remarks generated comments of support from some delegates,
the organizers themselves were visibly riled, sought to marginalize
the remarks, and did not permit me to translate my own words from
the Armenian into the English.
A few Diasporan delegates later approached me to tell me that some
of the issues I raised had come up at previous Conferences. Some
returnees from previous Conferences told me that hackneyed speeches
they could not bear to hear repeated had brought about notable apathy
at the Conference. Others told me that since they brought up similar
issues at previous Conferences to no avail, they now simply tried to
benefit from the valuable networking opportunities such a Conference
provides. Sure enough, when delegates had a chance to interact with
one another during free periods, many profoundly collegial, sincere
and abiding connections were made.
Later, a senior Armenian-American writer offered his views to me. He
said that by speaking out at the Conference, I was only giving
organizers further reason to be defensive and protective over their
respective turfs. He suggested that we "work within the system" to
help the society evolve, a comment I often heard this summer from
Diasporan repatriates working for NGOs. Since the senior writer in
question received literary medals from the Diaspora Ministry and AWU
(one at the fourth conference, and one at this fifth conference),
I wondered if that is why he was willing to go along with the status
quo. If so, is this not a short-sighted action that helps keep the
corrupt in power?
Propaganda Ministry?
On the last day of the Conference, the delegates were shown a
promotional video extolling the achievements of the Diaspora (or
should I say, Propaganda?) Ministry. By then, I had concluded that the
purpose of the Conference was not to give us space to think and share,
but to tell us what to think. A conference participant approached
the lectern during the closing session to say that an opportunity
was not provided for delegates to dialogue during the presentations
or offer feedback at the close of the Conference. She had also hoped
that delegates would get an idea of what the AWU's objectives and
goals were, in general and surrounding this Conference.
Instead of being asked to listen throughout the Conference, she said
that delegates could have discussed issues and talked about what
the AWU and the Diaspora Ministry could do - such as promoting and
funding Armenian literature abroad - instead of asking delegates to
listen to praise about the Ministry and established writers about
whom we already knew so much. In response to this delegate, who was,
of course, told to keep her comments short, an organizer took all
the time he needed to rebut the delegate's comments, even though his
response did not address her concerns. As he raised his voice to her,
he said she was not raised with manners in her country of origin and
was told to put her complaints in writing.
To dispel any notions that there may have been a unilateral "us and
them" attitude among delegates, let me add that a local delegate later
told me that she and other members of the Writer's Union had, in the
past, raised the same sorts of concerns to the leadership. Learning of
their discontent sowed seeds of hope within me. Imagine if like-minded
Armenian and Diasporan writers independently and routinely met with
an eye, not just to foster mutual understanding, but also to cultivate
literary (and dare I say nation-building) initiatives?
When, on the last day of the Conference, our group met with Diaspora
Minister Hranush Hakobyan, a Conference organizer announced that we
had had a "significant discussion" about Globalization and the National
Identity. When that discussion occurred is beyond my comprehension. I
did notice, however, that for his presentation to the Minister,
he had English and Russian translators.
Hakobyan, in her words of welcome to the delegates, made five
requests of the conventioneers. These were quite mystifying,
since writers in the Diaspora have been pursuing these avenues
for some time with apparently little involvement from the Armenian
government, and moreover, with the hope that Armenia would pursue
the same initiatives. She asked that writers of the Diaspora collect
genocide survivor stories to publish for 2015; write about Hai Tahd
in non-Armenian media; educate non-Armenian writers through networking
about Hai Tahd; influence Turkish journalists, especially those writing
truthfully about Armenian issues; and insist on our rightful demands
as the Diaspora as well as a global nation.
Being late for our meeting with Minister Hakobyan, we observed
her excusing herself in order to officiate at a large gathering
of Diasporan youth participating in the "Ari Tun" ("Come Home";
http://aritun.am/en/ ) program in which they spend two weeks developing
bonds with Armenia. Initially asked to view a video about what the
Diaspora Ministry was doing to resettle Syrian-Armenians into Armenia,
the writers were instead ushered in to join a large celebratory
gathering for the "Ari Tun" participants.
The event was attended by a slew of journalists and filmed for national
television. At this time, Minister Hakobyan took the opportunity
to bestow the William Saroyan Literary Medal upon two Diasporan
writers from the Conference for "contributing to the dissemination
of Armenian culture in the Diaspora and making great contributions
to the strengthening of relations between Armenia and the Diaspora
and relations within Diaspora Armenian communities."
I believe that any Diasporan writer who makes the effort to attend
such a Conference does so with a spirit of enthusiasm and cooperation.
Judging by how attentive Diasporan delegates were, I can safely say
that they demonstrated a respectful attitude toward their fellow
participants and hosts. However, the behaviors of the Conference
leadership and some local writers made it difficult to maintain a
respectful atmosphere. Preventing dialogue, shouting people down and
interrupting with demeaning comments do not engender a spirit of mutual
trust or cooperation. It was as if the hosts insisted on having the
upper hand instead of seeing Armenia and the Diaspora as two parts of
a fully functioning body. In the end, though many great efforts were
put into the initiative, the Conference was largely self-defeating
and wasteful. If future Conferences had a more comprehensive and
clearly stated purpose, along with better organization, they could
be extremely successful.
I wish to express profound gratitude to Herminč Navasardyan of the
Armenian Writer's Union and Greta Mnatsakanyan of the Diaspora
Ministry for meeting their many obligations with dedication and
gracious efficiency. They demonstrated sincere affection for the
Conference delegates and hopefully felt the return of camaraderie
they so generously offered.
By admin
http://massispost.com/archives/9082
Updated: July 26, 2013
By Lucine Kasbarian
"Armenian writers who, as a result of bitter fate, create in foreign
languages are not foreigners, but faithful and dedicated ambassadors
of their Armenian blood and spirit in non-Armenian surroundings."
- Sarkis Guiragossian, Aztag daily newspaper, 2005
There are several schools of thought about how to behave in a foreign
country. "When in Rome, do as the Romans do," is one such advisory.
But - and I'm really thinking of Armenia-Diaspora relations, what
about a self-identifying Roman whose family has been in exile for
several generations? What if this individual often visited Rome and
participated in its culture with an eye on solidarity with its people?
And what if Rome was in economic and political turmoil, and the people
were leaving in droves? Could one then afford to merely "do as the
Romans do?"
Such questions arose in my mind during my recent 40-day stay in
Armenia and Artsakh, which concluded in my participation in the
Fifth Conference of Writers of Armenian Origin Composing in Foreign
Languages. The Conference took place from July 11 to 15, 2013 at the
Writer's House in Tsaghgatsor, 40 km northeast of Yerevan.
Sponsored by the Diaspora Ministry, the Armenian Writer's Union (AWU),
and the Armenian General Benevolent Union (AGBU), the Conference
hosted about 40 writers from Armenia, Artsakh, Canada, England,
France, Hungary, Iran, Kuwait, Lebanon, the Netherlands, Poland,
Russia, Sweden, Syria, Turkey, and the USA.
A Golden Opportunity An often-heard comment from Diasporan repatriates
to Armenia is that its positives are not trumpeted frequently enough
in the global Armenian news media. While the majority of Diaspora
Armenians who write about Armenia's problems are not covert operatives
who want to see this country fail but a compassionate community who
wish to see Armenia succeed, it would still serve us to indulge in some
well-deserved praise. As an example, the Tsaghgatsor conference is
an outstanding concept that has been made into a reality. Where else
do we have writers of Armenian descent gathering with the potential
to testify, network, brainstorm, cross-pollinate ideas and sow the
seeds for future collaborations?
Not to be confused with the Pan-Armenian Media Conference, this
Conference mainly involves writers of literary fiction and poetry,
with some non-fiction writers thrown in for good measure. The
Pan-Armenian Conference is a much larger affair, comprising print,
broadcast and online news media editors and contributors from our
global Armenian nation.
Unable to establish contact with the organizers while in the USA,
I visited the Diaspora Ministry while in Yerevan to register for
the Writer's Conference. Even then, bringing copies of the books
I'd written, I did not know if I'd be accepted. This is because in
prior years one did not apply for participation but was selected for
inclusion, and often through recommendations from the AWU. As far as
I know, this practice is still in effect, but really should not be.
Though I had, in previous years, inquired about attending the Diaspora
Ministry's media conferences and receiving its e-newsletters,
my requests had inexplicably gone unanswered. One Diasporan
editor-colleague suggested that I not hold my breath for an invite
to conferences sponsored by the Diaspora Ministry. He had observed
that many writers reporting about the more "unflattering" aspects of
the Armenian reality were simply excluded from such gatherings. To
my advantage, no one at the Ministry office appeared to check into
my suitability before accepting me into the Conference. Thus, this
article is the result of my opportunity to bear witness to what
happens at such gatherings.
Establishing a Global Dialogue The use of headphones at various
Diaspora conferences has been very important because it enables
non-Armenian speaking attendees to receive simultaneous translations
of the proceedings and thus contribute to the discourse. The absence
of headphones at the Conference was alarming, especially as the
stated purpose of the Conference was to spotlight those who write in
foreign languages.
Not surprisingly, several attendees expressed to me that they felt
like outsiders at the Conference, as no official provision was made to
consistently translate. And, as several presenters were not given an
opportunity to have their speeches or works verbally translated for
the benefit of those present, some delegates told me that they felt
like unwanted step-children invited under false pretenses, since they
were unable to participate in whatever minimal dialogue there was -
figuratively put into a corner as if punished or trivialized for not
knowing the Lingua Franca.
As it turns out, history was repeating itself. An article retrieved
from the Armenian Mirror-Spectator of November 2011 reported that
no formal translation services were provided at the Conference of
Armenian Writers in Foreign Languages, held in October of that year.
If this Conference is to continue, it is crucial that official
translators be provided.
Half the Conference participants hailed from Armenia and Artsakh. The
proceedings, held in the Eastern Armenian dialect, seemed to serve the
native Armenians first, and then, to a lesser degree, those Diasporans
who spoke Armenian. Writers in the latter category were generally
limited to either a 5-minute presentation on a stated theme or a brief
description of their new work. How could they not help but feel as
if the defacto purpose of the Conference was not to spotlight their
poetic artistry and perceptions but to be "talked at" and prohibited
from participating in a meaningful way? An opportunity for genuine
intellectual discussion was missed. If this Conference is to continue
(and the next one is scheduled for 2015 on the subject of the Armenian
Genocide), the above aspects must dramatically change. Perhaps one new
approach could feature the creation of subgroups within a conference,
wherein more participants can express their views.
A Forum to Present Ideas The main themes and activities of
the Conference centered around "Globalization and National
Identity" in which participants read works or observations on
the topic of globalization (in the multicultural sense rather
than the economic). The Conference included a session on William
Saroyan. Essays, remembrances and poems about the author and playwright
were read aloud. There was also a session on new books, in which
participants introduced their new works.
Well-known academics in Armenia steered the Conference, including three
long-time fixtures on the literary front in Armenia. Each has published
large bodies of work and dedicated himself to the field of literature.
What was astounding, however, was how each comported himself at the
Conference. These men acted like commissars whose objectives were to
attempt to control public opinion or its natural expression. Some took
45 minutes to speak while allowing others only 5 minutes, commanding
some to ampopeh! (abbreviate!). They would verbally interrupt and
angrily contradict other writers with whom they disagreed. They gave
their favorite persons - some of them not even conference delegates
- more time to present their work. They acted as arbiters of which
presentations were worthy of translation. And if a session ran long, it
was usually a Diasporan delegate asked to relinquish his time to talk.
There were other local participants who were surprisingly discourteous
to delegates. The rule of thumb seemed to be, "unless you are
presenting your own speech or paper, you should feel free to hold
loud and lengthy side conversations with others, work on your laptop,
take phone calls or launch your Facebook page." If a conference abroad
were conducted this way, it would be the object of ridicule.
Upon witnessing these behaviors, I decided to use my allocated 5
minutes not to talk about Globalization and National Identity in
the literal sense, but in what our dispersion could help us achieve
in the long term. I discussed what I'd like to see happen at future
conferences.
This included a desire to see the future participation of the Armenian
Journalists Union, the Yerevan Press Club, Diasporan newspaper editors
and contributors, Armenian and Diasporan publishers, booksellers,
librarians and translators so that we may interact and grow into a
massive, persuasive literary force in our respective communities and
the world. I wished to see some of our best books being published
in Armenia today - in the Armenian language as well as in foreign
languages - be presented at future Conferences so that we can find
ways to introduce and sell them in the Diaspora. I asked to hear from
our best editors and translators - both from Armenia and the Diaspora
-discussing our best contemporary writers as well as those famous
works that have yet to be translated into foreign languages but deserve
to be, and how we can make that a reality. I asked that we encourage
young generations of writers to participate in these conferences and
for specialists to be invited to talk about developments in the craft
and business of writing, or even how one can become a "literary agent"
who can represent global Armenian writers to foreign publishers so
that the world can know of our great talents.
And I asked that we think about the creation of a global Armenian
writers society that can provide lectures and job banks and even
develop a national agenda around what sorts of articles or novels
could be useful to the Armenian people and nation in the foreign
press at any given time.
While my remarks generated comments of support from some delegates,
the organizers themselves were visibly riled, sought to marginalize
the remarks, and did not permit me to translate my own words from
the Armenian into the English.
A few Diasporan delegates later approached me to tell me that some
of the issues I raised had come up at previous Conferences. Some
returnees from previous Conferences told me that hackneyed speeches
they could not bear to hear repeated had brought about notable apathy
at the Conference. Others told me that since they brought up similar
issues at previous Conferences to no avail, they now simply tried to
benefit from the valuable networking opportunities such a Conference
provides. Sure enough, when delegates had a chance to interact with
one another during free periods, many profoundly collegial, sincere
and abiding connections were made.
Later, a senior Armenian-American writer offered his views to me. He
said that by speaking out at the Conference, I was only giving
organizers further reason to be defensive and protective over their
respective turfs. He suggested that we "work within the system" to
help the society evolve, a comment I often heard this summer from
Diasporan repatriates working for NGOs. Since the senior writer in
question received literary medals from the Diaspora Ministry and AWU
(one at the fourth conference, and one at this fifth conference),
I wondered if that is why he was willing to go along with the status
quo. If so, is this not a short-sighted action that helps keep the
corrupt in power?
Propaganda Ministry?
On the last day of the Conference, the delegates were shown a
promotional video extolling the achievements of the Diaspora (or
should I say, Propaganda?) Ministry. By then, I had concluded that the
purpose of the Conference was not to give us space to think and share,
but to tell us what to think. A conference participant approached
the lectern during the closing session to say that an opportunity
was not provided for delegates to dialogue during the presentations
or offer feedback at the close of the Conference. She had also hoped
that delegates would get an idea of what the AWU's objectives and
goals were, in general and surrounding this Conference.
Instead of being asked to listen throughout the Conference, she said
that delegates could have discussed issues and talked about what
the AWU and the Diaspora Ministry could do - such as promoting and
funding Armenian literature abroad - instead of asking delegates to
listen to praise about the Ministry and established writers about
whom we already knew so much. In response to this delegate, who was,
of course, told to keep her comments short, an organizer took all
the time he needed to rebut the delegate's comments, even though his
response did not address her concerns. As he raised his voice to her,
he said she was not raised with manners in her country of origin and
was told to put her complaints in writing.
To dispel any notions that there may have been a unilateral "us and
them" attitude among delegates, let me add that a local delegate later
told me that she and other members of the Writer's Union had, in the
past, raised the same sorts of concerns to the leadership. Learning of
their discontent sowed seeds of hope within me. Imagine if like-minded
Armenian and Diasporan writers independently and routinely met with
an eye, not just to foster mutual understanding, but also to cultivate
literary (and dare I say nation-building) initiatives?
When, on the last day of the Conference, our group met with Diaspora
Minister Hranush Hakobyan, a Conference organizer announced that we
had had a "significant discussion" about Globalization and the National
Identity. When that discussion occurred is beyond my comprehension. I
did notice, however, that for his presentation to the Minister,
he had English and Russian translators.
Hakobyan, in her words of welcome to the delegates, made five
requests of the conventioneers. These were quite mystifying,
since writers in the Diaspora have been pursuing these avenues
for some time with apparently little involvement from the Armenian
government, and moreover, with the hope that Armenia would pursue
the same initiatives. She asked that writers of the Diaspora collect
genocide survivor stories to publish for 2015; write about Hai Tahd
in non-Armenian media; educate non-Armenian writers through networking
about Hai Tahd; influence Turkish journalists, especially those writing
truthfully about Armenian issues; and insist on our rightful demands
as the Diaspora as well as a global nation.
Being late for our meeting with Minister Hakobyan, we observed
her excusing herself in order to officiate at a large gathering
of Diasporan youth participating in the "Ari Tun" ("Come Home";
http://aritun.am/en/ ) program in which they spend two weeks developing
bonds with Armenia. Initially asked to view a video about what the
Diaspora Ministry was doing to resettle Syrian-Armenians into Armenia,
the writers were instead ushered in to join a large celebratory
gathering for the "Ari Tun" participants.
The event was attended by a slew of journalists and filmed for national
television. At this time, Minister Hakobyan took the opportunity
to bestow the William Saroyan Literary Medal upon two Diasporan
writers from the Conference for "contributing to the dissemination
of Armenian culture in the Diaspora and making great contributions
to the strengthening of relations between Armenia and the Diaspora
and relations within Diaspora Armenian communities."
I believe that any Diasporan writer who makes the effort to attend
such a Conference does so with a spirit of enthusiasm and cooperation.
Judging by how attentive Diasporan delegates were, I can safely say
that they demonstrated a respectful attitude toward their fellow
participants and hosts. However, the behaviors of the Conference
leadership and some local writers made it difficult to maintain a
respectful atmosphere. Preventing dialogue, shouting people down and
interrupting with demeaning comments do not engender a spirit of mutual
trust or cooperation. It was as if the hosts insisted on having the
upper hand instead of seeing Armenia and the Diaspora as two parts of
a fully functioning body. In the end, though many great efforts were
put into the initiative, the Conference was largely self-defeating
and wasteful. If future Conferences had a more comprehensive and
clearly stated purpose, along with better organization, they could
be extremely successful.
I wish to express profound gratitude to Herminč Navasardyan of the
Armenian Writer's Union and Greta Mnatsakanyan of the Diaspora
Ministry for meeting their many obligations with dedication and
gracious efficiency. They demonstrated sincere affection for the
Conference delegates and hopefully felt the return of camaraderie
they so generously offered.