The politics of memory and commemoration: Armenian diasporic reflections on 2015

Abstract

The centenary year of the Armenian genocide witnessed an escalation in cultural production and both political and academic focus. This paper looks at some of the sites and spaces, physical and discursive, in which the centenary was marked. In particular, it seeks to assess how the centenary has challenged and possibly altered the context within which we approach the genocide and its continuing legacies. The paper is positioned in the diasporic space-while recognizing that this is fluid and embodies transnational sites between "homelands" in the fonn of Armenia and Turkey, and "host states" where diaspora communities have resided (at least) since the genocide, in effect their homes. This paper attempts to pick out some of the themes apparent in the discourse and in the activities during 2015, from the perspective of Armenian diasporan actors, and is based on the author's observations and participation in centenary events in the USA, Lebanon, Turkey, Switzerland, and the UK, as well as interviews with participants and organizers.

Diaspora Identity and a New Generation: Armenian Diaspora Youth on the Genocide and the Karabakh War

“…For diasporas, the past is widely seen as defining their present as many of them trace their dispersion and sense of collective identity to traumatic events and narratives of loss. For the Armenian diaspora, the genocide of 1915 is widely recognized as the defining and foundational narrative (Kasbarian 2018;Laycock 2016) that explains its coming into being, as well as its trajectory in time and space. And yet, remembrance of the chosen trauma is a past of an "ahistorical kind" (Redclift 2017) as it becomes reworked for the present and can gain new meanings (Soysal 2000).…”

“…For example, Pattie (1999, 85) documented concern among the older generation of the Armenian diaspora about the "loss" of diasporic youth to "different cultural worlds," whereby the youth become selective, future-oriented, and lacking "cultural heirs" in the community. Kasbarian (2018) similarly came across anxiety among Armenian diaspora leaders about the weakening role of the genocide as defining diasporic identity, particularly for younger generations. Brinkerhoff (2012) observed that by moving beyond physical communities and structures into digital spaces, diasporic youth may more freely debate, challenge, and renegotiate key identity narratives, and as a result develop new ties rather than nourish old ones (also see Hiller and Franz 2004).…”

Remembering the Past in Diasporic Spaces: Kurdish Reflections on Genocide Memorialization for Anfal

“…Sossie Kasbarian has demonstrated that the memory of genocide has been an essential component of Armenian diasporic identity, to the extent that "generations have grown up with their parents', grandparents', and great grandparents' personal accounts of loss, displacement, and of starting over-the memory of the genocide is transmitted intergenerationally." 39 Similarly, Bahar Baser has shown that second-generation Kurds in Germany and Sweden inherited conflict dynamics and traumas from their parents, as their diasporic identity has been shaped by what their parents experienced in Turkey. 40 As suggested by Thomas Lacroix and Elena Fiddian-Qasmiyeh, the issue of memory circulation needs to be addressed not only across diasporic spaces, but also across generations.…”

The cultural politics of commemoration: Media and remembrance of the Russian revolutions of 1917

“…In today’s transnationally connected global media environment, it is vital to consider the role of both old and new media in commemoration, in forgetting, as well as in the commemoration of the very moments of forgetting. Different types of societies have been seen to respond to the challenges of divisive memory in different ways (Kasbarian, 2017: 2). This being the case, the variety of remembrances of 1917 produced by affiliates of Russia’s neo-authoritarian regime; by civil society actors in recent post-revolution Ukraine; and by international media outlets provides useful points of comparison.…”