Questioning the Nature of Truth

by Laura Thu Apr 6th, 2006 at 06:25:17 PM EST

The question of the Armenian genocide in relation to Freedom of speech in Turkey was extensively discussed in Eurotrib already. As a result we all know about Orhan Pamuk and his case and the European Parliament's decision to recognize as genocide the extermination of around 1.5 million civilian Armenians in Turkey (the Ottoman Empire at the time) in 1915.

My contribution to this nearly exhausted topic will be just to bring to your attention Ararat. Ararat is a 2002 Canadian drama - Atom Egoyan's most ambitious film to date. The director skillfully recreates the scene of systematic slaughter of more than 1 million Armenian citizens of Turkey by their own government. (Moreover, words alone are not enough sometimes to make you grasp the real importance of certain facts and events. Engaging our other senses can be useful as well). I know Turkish nationalists consider the movie propaganda. But while showing the stories of so many characters, Egoyan allows the obvious topic of the movie - the genocide - to actually become a background to more abstract issues: the way history defines individuals and communities, the destructive effect of denial and the distortions created when history is turned into narrative fiction.

So, questioning the nature of truth, includes also questioning the Armenian claims, which makes the movie more realistic. And yet, no one, least of all Egoyan, puts the emphasis on historical accuracy in "Ararat." But "Ararat" is less about history than about the necessity of dialogue and debate, and also about the devastating effects of an ardent argument.

Now, some info about the main characters in Ararat. Raffi (David Alpay), a young Canadian of Armenian ancestry, is the closest we come to a guide, but he's one of many characters. Confused by unresolved issues about his father, an Armenian terrorist killed during a terrorist attack, he finds an identity and a purpose in the untold story of his cultural history. The most memorable and turning conversation between Raffi and the Armenian director in the movie is: Young man, do you know what still causes so much pain? It's not the people we lost, or the land. It's to know that we could be so hated. Who are these people, who could hate us so much? How can they still deny their hatred? And so hate us... hate us even more?

The other unique character is Raffi's art historian mother. She walls her own past behind impenetrable iciness, thus denying closure to her son and step-daughter in the deaths of their respective fathers.

One of the most memorable lines in the movie is Hitler's cynical excuse spoken at the dawn of the Holocaust. Migeru also cited the excuse in his comment on the Where is the outrage? So, Hitler used to say: "who remembers the Armenians?" to assuage worries that the "final solution" would not go unpunished. This is where the heart of ,,Ararat" lies. And here comes the question what will be the negative consequences for Turkey if it does not recognize the genocide as such. Well, the discontent of the EU political community is obvious. In addition, Turkey's denial of the Armenian genocide affects most of all Turkey itself and its people; because when atrocities are passed by without recognition and punishment then turbulence tends to emerge. And such turbulence on the other hand is a premise for similar atrocities to occur again.

Questioning the Nature of Truth | 36 comments (36 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Yes, you are correct.

There is another point to consider, also, about how long one must remember an outrage. Perhaps the worse the outrage, the longer the memory must be, but there are people in the American South who are still fighting our Civil War, and there are people in Ireland who are fighting a war that began a couple of hundred years ago, and there are some people in Iraq fighting a war that started 1000 years ago.

It seems to me that sooner or later one must forget, if not immediately forgive, simply in order to not get stuck forever. For example, few people now mourn the losses in the Peloponnesian War. Or, what about the Siege of Carthage (147 BCE), where the population was reduced from 500,000 to 55,000? Where's the outrage about them?

How long does one need to remember an outrage?

by asdf on Thu Apr 6th, 2006 at 09:58:59 PM EST

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

My Mum still hasn't forgiven the French for 1066.

Go figure.

The difference between theory and practise in practise ...

by DeAnander (de_at_daclarke_dot_org) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 01:54:48 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

I suppose she was very small?

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 08:01:37 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

ha haa DeAnader. you really made me laugh

by pavlovska (transbluency(at)mailcity.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 11:02:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

Depend how bad it was and how many people effected (and survived). And of course depend of the nation's characteristics and cultural habits. For us Serbs 1000 or 2000 years I suppose may be enough to start forgetting to pass it on our children and grandchildren. I would put ha-ha here but I am dead serious. We may temporarily forget but we do not forgive. I can tell by heart even now all the folk poems (epic) about our brave fight with Ottomans and how bad and cruel they were. I am waiting to pass it on my granddaughter who is only half Serbian, when she is mature enough. Our animosity toward Slavic Muslims comes directly from these historic events. We did not forget or forgive WWI or WWII .Not to the Germans but even more not to their helpers. These Balkan wars of our times where possible and were as bad as they were because of those times and events and revenge is feeding on them. Actually I am sure that similar situation is (would be) anywhere if politicians just want to exploit those feelings. It's easy.

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind...Albert Einstein

by vbo on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 09:21:16 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

You are a constant source of good news and optimism, you know that?

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:51:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 0)

2000 years is a long time, I think we've forgiven the Romans.

by Alex in Toulouse on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:54:04 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

Hah...yes I know!
Before these Balkan wars I was totally optimistic...and I was young...Now they say I am pessimist but I see my self as rough realist. All though I never loved to fool my self and liked to prepare my self for what is coming... Even and specially now when I live abroad. I don't like where thing are going politically in this country and all though I like living here I am now thinking of buying some property in Belgrade again (I sold my house 9 years ago).Just in case we are not welcome here any more. I can't stand any kind of maltreatment by government (I can handle on personal level) ...On the other hand my daughter is married to a "local"...I just hope things are not going to get that bad. But history tends to repeat it self and there are some "signs by the road"...

Science without religion is lame, religion without science is blind...Albert Einstein

by vbo on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:31:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 0)

At least if you have to go back to Belgrade you'll be close enough to attend ET meetups.

There has to be a silver lining, you know?

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:35:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

The Poles and Ukrainians have this sort of stuff. The most popular part of the Polish literary canon is Sienkiewicz's Trilogy whose great heroes do wonderful things like impaling evil Ukrainians en masse. We know there evil because they do evil things like killing Poles en masse - I think irony would have been lost on Sienkiewicz. WWII Polish Ukrainian relations in the kresy bear a certain similarity to some of what happened between the various Slav groups in Bosnia - massacre and counter massacre, one side working with the Germans. On the other hand Poles and Ukrainians seem to be doing a lot better in not resenting each other for this stuff. Perhaps a side benefit of the pretty thorough ethnic cleansing that separated the two groups sixty years ago. That and the fact that politicians on both sides generally want good relations. Historical animosity loses its edge when it has less use for present day politicians. Then it becomes just history and melodramatic literature.

by MarekNYC on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 01:42:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

Well, to a large extent memory of history is more about the present than the past. It gets really obvious when one talks about very distant stuff - think France and the Gauls or Charlemagne, Germany and the wars of the Germanic tribes against the Romans, or Poland's obsession with the Teutonic knights (and the somewhat less intense mirror image narrative in Germany). On the latter the notion of an alliance of Poles, eastern Slavs, and Lithuanians against the evil Teutonic Knights (aka the proto SS) was used in Communist times as a justification for the Warsaw Pact. The huge interest in the medieval history of Silesia and Pomerania was used as a narrative to reinforce the concept that the lands that had been eastern Germany were 'recovered territories', and there German inhabitants were just colonists (though they had been there for many, many centuries and most of the lands were completely German) who had simply been 'repatriated' to Germany proper, just as Poles from Poland's former eastern provinces had been 'repatriated' to Silesia et. al.

The moral is, always be suspicious of politicians who have a thing for long ago history - it generally is not an academic curiousity.

by MarekNYC on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 01:31:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 3)

I only recently worked out why the Turkish government don't want to acknowledge this: there's a long running claim by Armenia on a chunk of Turkey combined with the pride issue.

Another problem is that a lot of the documentation that would prove the case either way was lost - the complete archives of the political parties involved went missing a long time ago. This means it is possible for the Turkey to believe that it wasn't genocide in a way it mightn't be if we had copies of the memos. They can make excuses and complain about wartime propaganda rather than having to confront what the leadership of the time might have written.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 03:10:30 AM EST

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

At one point in Ararat the young protagonist, while on his discovery trip to the site of the Genocide, claims "there is no evidence left that anything happened here" or something to that effect. 90 years is a long time.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 03:50:55 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

Especially in a country that's had half a dozen coups and other such things since.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 03:58:18 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 0)

Colman, thank you for the insight on the Armenian issue. By the way, what is your forecast? Do you think that Turkey will agree some day to recognize the genocide as a result of the political pressure form EU?

by Laura on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:17:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

I don't have much insight on the issue but I'd been bothered as to why the Turkish government were set on denying it.

They don't have much choice to accept it, but it requires careful management. It's not a dead issue because it's tied up with other things.

The way it's presented in the west, the Ottoman army just went in and slaughtered lots of women and children. As far as I can tell, in reality it was far more complicated than that: forced resettlement, raids, negligent killing. It was to do with land, not racial hatred. Ethnic cleansing of troublesome nationalists rather than extermination of an inferior race.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:37:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Turkey does not deny that the killing happened, or its scale, they deny that it was "genocide". Then we get into the definition of genocide.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:39:53 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

They do dispute the extent of it, don't they? Figures for the death toll range from 200,000 to 1.5M. 800,000 to 1M is the generally accepted figure though I think some Armenian groups say 2M+. The Turkish government chooses a much lower number than most people.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:47:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

What I don't understand about Turkey's denial is that they could conveniently bundle the whole episode with the "old regime" Ottoman Empire, and given Ataturk's secular Turkey a clean slate. Ataturk's association with the Young Turks appears thin, and he was just a military officer not involved in the Genocide.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:58:58 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

I don't quite understand that either. Nationalism, that was the government of the last Caliph, a sense of grievance against the Armenian population for disloyalty. They consider themselves the successor to the Ottoman state, so the sins of that empire would tarnish the Turkish nation. I'd have to find some Turkish people to ask.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 08:04:08 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 2)

According to German Wikipedia, Atatürk, speaking in parliament in 1920, called the Armenian genocide an infamous action of the past. The entry continues that he, in a conversation with an American diplomat, assumed 800000 deaths and advocated a strict punishment of the culprits. So as you suggest, it would have been conceivable to associate these crimes with the Ottoman Empire and consider the Turkish Republic cleansed. Only later Turkish governments denied the genocide, and I tend to agree with Colman that it's the strong nationalism of Turkey that doesn't allow any tarnishing of it's past. Also denial of unpleasant truths is always easier than looking into one's own abyss and draw the consequences. Germany is in a constant process of doing the latter and still doesn't succeed / hasn't succeeded 100%.

by Wolke on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 09:17:00 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (4.00 / 3)

The term "genocide" was not invented until WWII (by Raphael Lemkin, Polish-Jewish lawyer and human-rights activist, who was attempting to get the US to recognize what the Nazis were doing).

In the immediate aftermath of WWI, the question of a war crimes tribunal came up. From Samantha Power, A Problem From Hell, p.14 :

When the war ended in 1918, the question of war guilt loomed large at the Paris peace conference. Britain, France, and Russia urged that state authorities in Germany, Austria and Turkey be held responsible for violations of the laws of war and the "laws of humanity". They began planning the century's first international war crimes tribunal, hoping to try the kaiser and his German underlings, as well as Talaat, Enver Pasha, and the other leading Turkish perpetrators.

The US dissented, declining to participate in an international tribunal. But the British hoped to press on :

In early 1919 the British, who still occupied Turkey (...), pressured the cooperative sultan to arrest a number of Turkish executioners. Of the eight Ottoman leaders who led Turkey to war againsr the Allies, five were apprehended. In April 1919 the Turks set up a tribunal in Constantinople that convicted two senior district officials for deporting Armenians and acting "against humanity and civilization".
<snip>
The court also convicted Talaat (Interior Minister) and his partners in absentia for their command responsibility in the slaughter, finding a top-down, carefully-executed plan : "The disaster visiting the Armenians was not a local or isolated event. It was the result of a premeditated decision taken by a central body..."

But the international war crimes tribunal never happened, and in the end the drive to record and document events and sentence the guilty petered out in compromise.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 08:55:44 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Your reply reminded me of a book that I read few years ago. The book is: "Problem from Hell": America and the Age of Genocide by Samantha Power. The book gives an in-depth account of all the 19th century genocides, starting with the Armenian genocide.

The point I wanted to make is that Turkey cannot avoid the guilt by relying on the fact that all the documents that can prove the Armenian genocide are missing. There are first hand accounts and official statements which prove the genocide. Samantha Power describes the genocide through the perspective of Henry Morgenthau, US ambassador in Turkey at the time. His account of the genocide is a reliable evidence that the genocide did occur,despite the fact that he could not get USA to intervene in the prevention of the exodus and the mass slaughter of million of Armenians.

by pavlovska (transbluency(at)mailcity.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:49:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Well, it's arguable whether the guilt can be placed on modern day Turkey at all. No-one there was alive at the time.

And they can avoid the question of intent if the documents aren't there.

by Colman (colman at eurotrib.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:51:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

I guess you are right, maybe I shouldn't talk about colecitve guilt, as it's been almost a century since the genocide happened. Yet, Turkey must acknowledge that it did happen.

So, is it only the documents which can prove that what happened was a genocide? Personal accounts don't matter at all?

by pavlovska (transbluency(at)mailcity.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 10:08:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 0)

See my comment above, pavlovska. You're right about Morgenthau, he was a very credible witness.

by afew (afew(a in a circle)eurotrib_dot_com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 02:40:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

I just saw your comment afew. I have completely forgotten about the name Raphael Lemkin, and I know that Samanta Power mentions him at the very beginning of the book.

The Armenian Genocide seems that it was an intro of what was about to happen when the nationalism unleashes its utmost power. The fall of empires and the formation of the nation states entailed dealing with the unwanted nationalities either with their resettling or with their extermination. The Turks tried both methods- the Greeko-Turkish exchange of population and the Armenian genocide being the most obvious examples. Both cases proved to be successful, as I know Turkey now is relatively homogenous country, maybe 2-3% minorities, or even less.

by pavlovska (transbluency(at)mailcity.com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 09:31:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Atom Egoyan is one of my favourite directors, and Ararat is a great, great film about how we construct our lives around narratives.

Egoyan's films are constructed as jigsaw puzzles of short sequences. About halfway through them you start figuring out what all the plot lines have to do with each other and how the various characters are connected to each other, but only at the very end do you get a coherent picture.

Apart from Ararat I recommend Exotica and The Sweet Hereafter. The Adjuster and Felicia's Journey I like a lot, too, but I'm a hard-core fan.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 03:48:17 AM EST

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 0)

Migeru, I agree with you about Atom Egoyan and Ararat completely! The film construction reminds me pretty much of Memento, exactly because only at the very end do you get the whole picture.
Thanks for recommending also Exotica and<i? The Sweet Hereafter</i>!

by Laura on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:29:33 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Ah, but Memento feels more like peeling layers of an onion rather than making a jigsaw puzzle.

One of the things about Egoyan's film construction is that you often cannot place the various episodes in chronological order until the very end, either. This is unlike Memento, where we know that the episodes are in reverse chronological order.

This is especially the case in Exotica, where it may take you a while to realize that you've been seeing the same character both in the past and in the present [and that is a major element of the plot that, at least to me, only becomes clear rather late in the movie].

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:35:02 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 1)

Oh, and there is a major plot element in The Sweet Hereafter that is hidden in the same (chronological) way, with no apparent connection with the rest of the film until the very end.

A society committed to the notion that government is always bad will have bad government. And it doesn't have to be that way. — Paul Krugman

by Carrie (migeru at eurotrib dot com) on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:38:03 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Questioning the Nature of Truth (none / 0)

by Laura on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 07:30:23 AM EST
[ Parent ]

affirming the nature of man (4.00 / 2)

Give man a crowd (3 people) and somehow one or two of them can't seem to resist exploiting or abusing the other(s). We are a savage and cruel species.

alohapolitics.com

by Keone Michaels on Fri Apr 7th, 2006 at 12:54:29 PM EST

Re: affirming the nature of man (none / 0)

This is why we need an absolute set of moral values and laws which aim at limitting this negative inclinations in our nature! That's the only way I see towards progress...

by Laura on Sat Apr 8th, 2006 at 11:01:42 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: affirming the nature of man (none / 1)

that is the role religion used to play in our culture

alohapolitics.com

by Keone Michaels on Sat Apr 8th, 2006 at 08:47:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: affirming the nature of man (none / 0)

But still, nowadays we need some international authority that will be monitoring the implementation of these laws, don't we? In this context do you think that ICJ, UN or whichever international body is capable of serving this purpose?

by Laura on Sun Apr 9th, 2006 at 08:42:54 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Questioning the Nature of Truth | 36 comments (36 topical, 0 editorial, 0 hidden)

Go to: [ European Tribune Homepage : Top of page : Top of comments ]

Questioning the Nature of Truth

Top Diaries

Ireland 2023 Rugby World Cup Squad selected

Integrating Ukraine Into NATO Family

Leinster's demise and Munster's hope

Southern Irish disinterest in Northern Ireland affairs

The end is Nigh?

Joe Biden. America's Interventionist Hero

The law of conservation of transness

Recent Diaries

Bi-Partisan Effort to Undermine Democracy

June 2023

Ireland 2023 Rugby World Cup Squad selected

Integrating Ukraine Into NATO Family

Southern Irish disinterest in Northern Ireland affairs

Incident Ukrainian War Display Gets Int'l Attention

German Climate Activists Group Outlawed

Leinster's demise and Munster's hope

Joe Biden. America's Interventionist Hero

Targeted Assassinations: a Bankrupt Strategy

The end is Nigh?

Hijacking Peace by Zelensky for War Escalation

UA Drone Attack On Moscow

May 2023

The law of conservation of transness

US Provoked Conflict In Europe

U.S. Will Be Ousted From Middle-East

Settler Extremism Blessed by Jerusalem Leaders