Tweet
Translator of Å?afak and Pamuk: `There definitely won't be any miracles
come this April 24'
Mаry Mamyan
00:05, January 17, 2015
Hetq talks to Arpi Atabekyan, who translated Elif Å?afak's The Bastard
of Istanbul and Orhan Pamuk's My Name is Red from Turkish to Armenian.
The two Turkish writers, prosecuted for `insulting Turkishness' by
raising the issue of the 1915 Armenian Genocide today mainly reside
outside of Turkey for safety reasons.
Those Turkish writers who speak and write about the Armenian Genocide
are subjected to harsh criticism within Turkey. In your opinion, does
the actions of such intellectuals impact on Armenian-Turkish
relations, and if so, to what degree?
I'd say that there isn't much of an impact on politics, but that such
actions influence society. Politics for me is a straight line. If a
political party has adopted a line and has its own agenda, then the
opinions of a writer won't have much impact on politics.
But discussions regarding the genocide engender debate within society,
especially in the media. Such debate not only impacts the top level
intelligentsia but also average citizens who follow the media on a
daily basis.
I believe that all of this creates a disparity between the public
opinion of fifty years ago and today. Both Å?afak and Pamuk are
prominent public figures and what they say has a great impact on
Turkish society. Many in Turkey didn't even know about what happened
in 1915.
Å?afak and Pamuk frequently note that their aim is not to politicize
the issue but that they are attempting to create a cultural dialog.
How successful have they been?
I don't believe in politics. If anything is changing it's the society
and people. People must exert their influence on politicians. Thus, I
place great importance on literary works. But there is one inadequacy.
Literature is not able to envelop wide sectors of society. For
example, the level of literary recognition in Turkey is quite low.
That's to say that these literary works have a specific following.
Something must be done so that this audience conveys the works to
others, along the lines of a domino effect.
Otherwise, the audience will remain the same. And I'm not sure if this
specific audience will be able to change anything or not. The
intellectual sector in Turkey is small but strong. First, you must
understand who your audience is and then try to spread those books and
ideas.
Both writers don't reside in Turkey. On the one hand it seems that it
is easy to talk and criticize from the outside, but on the other, they
don't have the capacity to make observations from within. How
successful are they at getting their message across?
I take a critical approach to both because they are elitist writers.
Not only were they forced to leave Turkey for a time during their
court cases, but they actually like being outside. It's easy for a
writer to come and go, to observe cultures and compare them. But such
people should stay in the country and raise problems from a much
closer perspective.
To what degree have these writers succeeded in portraying
Armenian-Turkish relations?
Pamuk mainly reflected about Armenians in his book Snow. But it wasn't
a deep examination on Armenian-Turkish relations. He's talked at
greater length on the matter in his interviews. Even though he won the
Nobel Prize in Literature in 2006, it's because he talked about the
Genocide, which resulted in a scandal, that he became known in
Armenia. Scandals propel people into prominence. In Å?afak's case, I
was surprised to see that she listed the characteristics of
American-Armenians one by one. I give her credit for doing her
homework.
How are these writers perceived in Turkey?
There is great criticism surrounding Å?afak. She gets published a lot
and is seen as a commercial writer. She's criticized as an
ultra-feminist as well. But that derives from her life experience. She
often uses personal experiences in her works. I believe Turkey needs
more women with her beliefs. Women in Turkey are greatly in need of
encouragement.
Pamuk is criticized because he is regarded as a writer removed from
the people and that she represents the upper classes.
In the Bastard of Istanbul, one of the Armenian protagonists says that
Armenians need books than guns. What's your opinion?
It's a bit of an extreme comparison, but in that section she stresses
just how important education is for Armenian families. I know that
Å?afak really studied the American-Armenian community.
But the comparison isn't correct because society can chose both.
Armenians living in the United States are portrayed in the book.
Perhaps, for diaspora Armenians, literature, education and language
are more important. But if the same question is asked of young people
in Armenia, they would probably choose the gun.
We Armenians, in Armenia and the diaspora, live in completely
different conditions. Had Å?afak researched Armenia as well that
sentence might have been different.
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. What
are your expectations, if any?
It's difficult to observe the issue from a political perspective. I
cannot say what can be dome in the political arena, but I'd really
like to see much more being done culturally.
Every year, Armenians in Istanbul mark the anniversary with a
candlelight vigil. I'd like to see the event done on a more widespread
level, even in the form of a protest action. But I realize how
difficult it is for them there.
Politically, I don't think that anything will change. I expect no
change from the Turkish side. There definitely will be no miracles
come April.
http://hetq.am/eng/news/58155/translator-of-%C5%9Fafak-and-pamuk-there-definitely-wont-be-any-miracles-come-this-april-24.html
come this April 24'
Mаry Mamyan
00:05, January 17, 2015
Hetq talks to Arpi Atabekyan, who translated Elif Å?afak's The Bastard
of Istanbul and Orhan Pamuk's My Name is Red from Turkish to Armenian.
The two Turkish writers, prosecuted for `insulting Turkishness' by
raising the issue of the 1915 Armenian Genocide today mainly reside
outside of Turkey for safety reasons.
Those Turkish writers who speak and write about the Armenian Genocide
are subjected to harsh criticism within Turkey. In your opinion, does
the actions of such intellectuals impact on Armenian-Turkish
relations, and if so, to what degree?
I'd say that there isn't much of an impact on politics, but that such
actions influence society. Politics for me is a straight line. If a
political party has adopted a line and has its own agenda, then the
opinions of a writer won't have much impact on politics.
But discussions regarding the genocide engender debate within society,
especially in the media. Such debate not only impacts the top level
intelligentsia but also average citizens who follow the media on a
daily basis.
I believe that all of this creates a disparity between the public
opinion of fifty years ago and today. Both Å?afak and Pamuk are
prominent public figures and what they say has a great impact on
Turkish society. Many in Turkey didn't even know about what happened
in 1915.
Å?afak and Pamuk frequently note that their aim is not to politicize
the issue but that they are attempting to create a cultural dialog.
How successful have they been?
I don't believe in politics. If anything is changing it's the society
and people. People must exert their influence on politicians. Thus, I
place great importance on literary works. But there is one inadequacy.
Literature is not able to envelop wide sectors of society. For
example, the level of literary recognition in Turkey is quite low.
That's to say that these literary works have a specific following.
Something must be done so that this audience conveys the works to
others, along the lines of a domino effect.
Otherwise, the audience will remain the same. And I'm not sure if this
specific audience will be able to change anything or not. The
intellectual sector in Turkey is small but strong. First, you must
understand who your audience is and then try to spread those books and
ideas.
Both writers don't reside in Turkey. On the one hand it seems that it
is easy to talk and criticize from the outside, but on the other, they
don't have the capacity to make observations from within. How
successful are they at getting their message across?
I take a critical approach to both because they are elitist writers.
Not only were they forced to leave Turkey for a time during their
court cases, but they actually like being outside. It's easy for a
writer to come and go, to observe cultures and compare them. But such
people should stay in the country and raise problems from a much
closer perspective.
To what degree have these writers succeeded in portraying
Armenian-Turkish relations?
Pamuk mainly reflected about Armenians in his book Snow. But it wasn't
a deep examination on Armenian-Turkish relations. He's talked at
greater length on the matter in his interviews. Even though he won the
Nobel Prize in Literature in 2006, it's because he talked about the
Genocide, which resulted in a scandal, that he became known in
Armenia. Scandals propel people into prominence. In Å?afak's case, I
was surprised to see that she listed the characteristics of
American-Armenians one by one. I give her credit for doing her
homework.
How are these writers perceived in Turkey?
There is great criticism surrounding Å?afak. She gets published a lot
and is seen as a commercial writer. She's criticized as an
ultra-feminist as well. But that derives from her life experience. She
often uses personal experiences in her works. I believe Turkey needs
more women with her beliefs. Women in Turkey are greatly in need of
encouragement.
Pamuk is criticized because he is regarded as a writer removed from
the people and that she represents the upper classes.
In the Bastard of Istanbul, one of the Armenian protagonists says that
Armenians need books than guns. What's your opinion?
It's a bit of an extreme comparison, but in that section she stresses
just how important education is for Armenian families. I know that
Å?afak really studied the American-Armenian community.
But the comparison isn't correct because society can chose both.
Armenians living in the United States are portrayed in the book.
Perhaps, for diaspora Armenians, literature, education and language
are more important. But if the same question is asked of young people
in Armenia, they would probably choose the gun.
We Armenians, in Armenia and the diaspora, live in completely
different conditions. Had Å?afak researched Armenia as well that
sentence might have been different.
This year marks the 100th anniversary of the Armenian Genocide. What
are your expectations, if any?
It's difficult to observe the issue from a political perspective. I
cannot say what can be dome in the political arena, but I'd really
like to see much more being done culturally.
Every year, Armenians in Istanbul mark the anniversary with a
candlelight vigil. I'd like to see the event done on a more widespread
level, even in the form of a protest action. But I realize how
difficult it is for them there.
Politically, I don't think that anything will change. I expect no
change from the Turkish side. There definitely will be no miracles
come April.
http://hetq.am/eng/news/58155/translator-of-%C5%9Fafak-and-pamuk-there-definitely-wont-be-any-miracles-come-this-april-24.html