Category: 2022

John Altoon
Untitled, 1969
Ink and Pastel on Paper
63’ X 43’
Courtesy of the Joan and Jack Quinn Family Collection

WATERTOWN, Mass. – The Armenian Museum of America is pleased to present its largest contemporary exhibition On the Edge: Los Angeles Art 1970s – 1990s from the Joan and Jack Quinn Family Collection. This selection of work explores a period that is pivotal to understanding current practices and the West Coast mentality. Included are Lita Albuquerque, John Altoon, Jean-Michel Basquiat, Lynda Benglis, Vija Celmins, Gregory Wiley Edwards, Claire Falkenstein, Frank Gehry, David Hockney, John M. Miller, Helmut Newton, Ed Ruscha, Andy Warhol and more.

On the Edge premiered at the Bakersfield Museum of Art in 2021 and was curated by Rachel McCullah Wainwright. “The work and artists on display have come to represent a period of history that transformed art making,” said Wainwright. “Art made in Los Angeles during the late 1960s and 1970s onward is defined by a unique spirit of anti-conformity, a play of new materials, a celebration of light and the California cool ethos.” 

Part of what makes the collection so unique is its foundation in friendship between artist and collector. “Few individuals have left such an indelible mark on the artistic landscape of Southern California more than the Quinns” says Wainwright.

Newly married in the 1960s, Joan and Jack took to collecting early. “We reveled in our friendship with the artists as we brought our communities together,” notes Quinn. Jack used his skills as a prominent and influential attorney to help an array of emerging artists and their dealers navigate the worlds of law and business, while Joan found herself both muse and promoter.

The companion exhibit Discovering Takouhi: Portraits of Joan Agajanian Quinn is curated by Natalie Varbedian and Gina Grigorian and includes Armenian artists such as Dahlia Elsayed, Jean Kazanjian, Silvina Der Meguerditchian, Ara Oshagan, Zaven Sarkissian and Aram Saroyan. The distinctive works are a selection from Quinn’s unprecedented collection of portraits consisting of over 300 gifts by friends who have painted, sculpted and photographed her image in their style.

Ara Oshagan
Untitled, 2013
Archival pigment photographic print
19” x 23”
Courtesy of the Joan and Jack Quinn Family Collection (Photo: Alan Shaffer)

“We are incredibly excited to exhibit these prominent works owned by American-Armenian collector Joan Agajanian Quinn,” says AMA executive director Jason Sohigian. “We are a living museum that preserves and shares ancient and medieval artifacts and has a long tradition of also highlighting modern art in our galleries. These are certainly exhibits you will not want to miss.”

Joan is the co-host of Beverly Hills View and has been the producer and host of the Joan Quinn Profiles for over 35 years. The Los Angeles native was west coast editor of Andy Warhol’s Interview, society editor of Hearst’s Los Angeles Herald Examiner and the founding west coast editor of Condé Nast Traveler. She has been appointed to an array of city and state commissions; in 2017, she received the Ellis Island Medal of Honor.

The exhibition opens on Thursday, June 16 with a reception for Museum members at 5:00 pm and a preview for non-members at 7:00 pm. It runs from June 16 to November 30 and is generously sponsored by the JHM Charitable Foundation.

The Armenian Museum of America’s galleries are open Thursday through Sunday from 12:00 pm to 6:00 pm, and it is located at 65 Main Street, Watertown, MA.

(Photo: Alek Surenian)

There is a presupposed idea that tolerance, or at the very least, a laissez-faire “live and let live” mantra lives in tandem with American culture. Although culture can be used as a multifaceted term, I’m generally speaking about a dominant culture in juxtaposition with a “minority culture.” Some may accuse me of being contentious, but this is merely an observation from an Armenian American who has lived most of his life in a huge urban hub where many different people coexist. 

As an immigrant growing up in the US, you become hyper aware of the differences between American culture and the one from your small community and home, be it racial, ethnic or otherwise. As a child trying to blend in, you work on taming the little idiosyncrasies of your “other” culture for fear of not fitting in or offending anyone. You think that overt displays of ethnic pride are cheap acts of panhandling a need to be seen. The consequence of this realization is that you either assimilate completely and all but denounce ethnic pride or quietly celebrate it so as to not be seen “too much.” There are also some who choose the complete opposite and refuse to adopt anything from the dominant culture as a “Hail Mary” approach at not losing something deemed sacred to so many.

American culture, and by extension, most American people, tend to look down on ethnic pride (I’m aware this is a generalization and may be a controversial statement to some). We know from this country’s history that a culmination of a collective “melting pot” of immigrants, including their customs and beliefs, has morphed into an assimilated and repackaged version of what is modern American culture today. However, the United States is a very large and diverse place. While it may bring some universal things to mind when we talk of “American culture,” it may mean a lot of different things to a lot of different people. 

To be clear, I am not making some moral distinction between cultures. It is and has been a natural process that a dominant culture eventually soaks in or alters the less dominant one into its whole. But the word “tolerance,” as I see it being used today, implies an almost libertarian-like “hands off” approach. It suggests a hashing out of differences that isn’t confrontational (in a good way, I suppose). The problem, as I see it, is that it purports to value equality of differences without having to do the work to weed out, or appreciate at best, what those differences really are. It is an antithesis of friendship and brotherhood in the truest sense. I don’t mean blind allegiance. Rather, an equal give and take and more importantly, an honest mutual interest of each other’s cultures. I am fully aware that this goes both ways, and in that regard, I’m speaking to both cultures (dominant and let’s call it recessive, ethnic or immigrant, if you will). Personally, I’d rather see a modicum of interest rather than the overly-politicized and emphasized word which lacks depth and is actually a cover for any serious discussion.

Ethnic pride is something I’ve only recently appreciated in its fullest sense; specifically when it is the only thing keeping a people united, sane, and literally alive while an existential threat looms over their brethren back home. 

A reinforcement of the need to be seen and our friends to hear our story versus the indifference of the dominant force which negates this need is experienced by many Armenian-Americans today. It is something you learn to live with and repress; sort of like being in a relationship when one partner loves the other much more and cohabitation has already settled in. until solidarity is called for. When war broke out in Artsakh, many of us were expecting or at the very least hoping for solidarity from our friends. We were simultaneously shocked and disillusioned at the complete lack of a simple, “Hey what’s going on?” That being said, those few and far between who were watching and listening did not go unnoticed because their eyes and ears felt more than all the tolerance in the world.

It’s ironic that ethnic pride may seem tribal or backwards to the very same people who preach tolerance. They would say that ethnic pride suffers from bad optics and could potentially be exclusive of others. And that’s fine. I know culture has never been a static thing, and I actually agree with them in many ways. I’m just saying I much prefer an honest friendship over the faux tolerance that resembles (in spirit at least) the modern-day corporate advertisement that is at the forefront of every social progress movement.  

I rest my frustrations surrounding this topic here, but I suspect there are many quietly experiencing what I’ve described. I know this may seem a bit harsh but I don’t think I’m asking for too much if I’m calling for an honest approach in solidarity. If we are really honest, we may have to confront the fact that if those within the dominant culture who deem themselves tolerant were to come upon this writing in happenstance; it would surprise us if we were to learn they read past the words “ethnic pride.”

One of the most important roles of participants in our Armenian diaspora communities is to have an opinion on critical issues that is hopefully based on direct experience and facts. Our problem is not that we are lacking in opinions. There is an element of truth in the saying that with four Armenians in a room, you will have five viewpoints. Having a perspective ensures you are engaged and feel a sense of responsibility. The alternative is a community of ambivalence. Of course, a multitude of opinions is helpful only if there is a commitment to a consensus that will allow us to move forward. Subordinating our egos is the key variable in that case. We’ll save that challenge for a future column. When it comes to our leaders, particularly in the church, it is essential to engage directly. Opinions are best formed from experience, not rumors. This requires outreach on our part to meet and share perspectives with our leaders. Only then will they become the beneficiaries of support through dialogue, and we will develop a stronger bond. As we discussed last week, the walls that keep the relationships formal or indirect need to be taken down. The church is the Body of Christ made up of the faithful. No one primate or prelate is going to move the mountain of success without the “pull” of the laity.

Feast of Holy Ascension at the Armenian Church of the Holy Ascension, Trumbull, CT, May 26, 2022

Last week, I attended a beautiful badarak on the Feast of the Ascension at the Church of the Holy Ascension in Trumbull, CT. I have many friends there as my sister and her family have been active for many years. The parish and their pastor, Der Untzag, will always hold a special place in my heart because it is where my mother spent the last years of her life in the warmth of that community. The service was attended by over a dozen members of the clergy including the former Primate Bishop Daniel and the newly elected Primate Hayr Mesrop. I was looking forward to meeting Hayr Soorp to offer my congratulations and begin the individual commitment of supporting his leadership. To my delight, I found him to be very outgoing, humble in his approach and quite refreshing in his discussion on issues of the church. I must add that the presence of Bishop Findikyan was a class act and most worthy of our admiration. We understand the clergy are all Christian brothers but they are also subject to the emotions of human beings. My understanding is that Bishop Daniel accepted the invitation prior to the primate election. He could have found any number of excuses not to attend and avoid all those awkward questions. Let us not underestimate the humility and love required to minister at that level. I know that God has a plan for him to continue his important service to the church.

I am certain that the new primate has and will receive an incredible amount of input in the form of complaints, opinions and ideas. Processing that information into usable content will be a challenge. In a perfect state, our primate should initially focus on listening, and once he has an understanding of the needs of the diocese, he will share his vision and the programs that support it. I would like to take this opportunity to offer some essentials for the primate to consider in the interest of our beloved church.

Articulate a Unifying Vision

Too often our leaders go about their role by simply managing the institution. This is particularly true with the church where the work continues regardless of leadership changes. A new leader has a window to paint a picture of a vibrant growing church that nourishes the needs of the faithful with energy and inclusion. It is very important for leaders to visibly lead. Our people want to follow, but they need leaders with ideas that will attract their support. They need to be inspired. For the church to have a future in America, the vision must be bold and bring people to the loving sanctuary of our church. Our people need to be unified within a landscape of our Christian faith according to the incredible depth of the Apostolic Church. New ideas must be encouraged to implement outreach to gather the wandering flock of the diaspora and to rebuild the spiritual base in the Armenian home which was always the core. Our nation suffers when the center of our community is wounded.

Rebuild our Sunday Schools

We are missing a major point today. Our tolerance for the decline of our Sunday School programs is embarrassing. In this increasingly secular world, it is no guarantee, but a solid home life and a strong youth education increase the probability. We have experienced decline on both fronts. Our approach with education seems to be that while the Sunday Schools decline, we will focus on teenage programs such ACYOA, St. Nersess, Datev Institute and camps. They are excellent, but it assumes we have strong feeder programs such as Sunday Schools. Education begins with pre-school building values on communal education and familiarity with attending worship. The rebirth of our Sunday Schools must consider alternative methods to reach an increasingly geographically diverse demographic and children where one of the spouses may not be Armenian. Animation streaming programming and other internet-based learning must be a part of increasing family support and re-igniting the strength of our schools. We cannot expect a bright future if we do not expose thousands of our children to the teaching of the church early in their lives. Addressing our Sunday Schools will advance our impact in the area of outreach.

Build an Advisor Group that Understands our Challenges

The primate or prelate rarely has a shortage of individuals advising him. They may be elected such as the diocesan council, individuals who are financial benefactors or those seeking to influence the direction. All are an important part of the amazing complexity of the primate’s role. It is, however, critical that the primate have an advisory group that truly understands what we are up against and have ideas on how to navigate the challenges. I have great empathy for the primate. He is surrounded by a plethora of individuals who may be well intended, but don’t always help him do his job. This may be because they are focused on symptoms and not root causes. For example, most of our deliberations are dominated by financial discussions: not enough income, new sources of revenue or the simple implementation of fundraising ideas. Money issues are a symptom, not a cause. When I was a young board of trustees member in Indian Orchard, we had a few lean years financially. I was told by one of the elder members something I have never forgotten. He told me that if we are doing the work of God and His church, that the money will come. As we became more focused on serving the needs of the faithful and the church, the financial issues vanished. There is a direct relationship. I believe our parishes and the diocese will become healthier financially as we focus primarily on the mission of the church. Our primate needs advisors who understand this challenge and can help address youth initiatives, intermarriage integration and family spirituality to grow the church. Less focus on money and more on the mission will lead to improved finances. What parent or grandparent will not be happy to give to a church building a future for their children?

Perception is Reality | Leadership In America

There are times when we choose to avoid topics that should be aired. There are more than a few in the Eastern Diocese who will need time to reconcile with the election results. I encourage all of them to move on (as would Bishop Daniel) and embrace the leadership of the new primate. Some will say, “Why are you bringing this up?” Simply because there is no forum for this does not mean it is being considered. Some of the diocesan faithful are fearful that the Holy See may have more direct influence and perhaps reversing some of the principles of this 123-year-old American diocese. I believe that Hayr Soorp is an intelligent and thoughtful man. He is quite well aware of this perception. If he is successful in articulating a unifying vision, that risk will fade quickly as the diocese will rally around the mission, not the personalities. The Hayr Soorp has stated that often we focus on one individual for results rather than looking at our mission as a team. A team has a leader and individuals with roles that together accomplish more than the mere sum of the parts. I think he wants to build a team, and our response will be critical to whether he is successful. I pray that the Catholicos understands this dynamic in the Eastern Diocese in America and empowers the primate to create a new reality. We all have a role in building this team: the primate, the Catholicos, other clergy and the laity. Let’s all focus on this sacred mission.

We have devoted several columns to this most important topic. The most universal institution in our community is at a critical juncture in the diaspora and has a new leader in one of its dioceses. Encouraging discussion with a pure heart during the earliest days of his tenure can offer critical support to build momentum. I am hopeful that Hayr Soorp will develop a strong primate to prelate relationship with Archbishop Anoushavan to exchange ideas and to ease the pain of our divided people. When I see our spiritual fathers together, it renews my hope. Our church has too many challenges to be burdened by any division. While we wait (impatiently) for the Catholicoi to resolve their issues, important progress has been made between the Prelacy and the Diocese at the parish level. The brotherly respect of the clergy is now quite common with worship services and sacraments. It is vital to maintain these gains as new clergy rotate in the geography. During these early months of his tenure and prior to his expected elevation to bishop, take a moment to offer your prayers and support for Hayr Soorp. For those whose paths may not cross, we have social media and email to communicate. Leaders can do little without followers. I hope that we all use this window to listen, to learn and develop a vision for our church that re-establishes our growth and prosperity for the glory of God and our beloved Armenian church.

ARF-ER CC Chairman George Aghjayan (Photo: Knar Bedian)

How many Armenians are there in the world?

I have often heard or seen mentioned that there are 10 million Armenians worldwide. Recently, a few social media posts got me thinking about this figure and realistically who we can consider to be Armenian. To do so, I think it is easier to first state unequivocally those who cannot be practically considered Armenian.

The most obvious are those claiming to be Armenian but not Christian. Our nation has been defined as Christian almost from the beginning, and everyone knows Armenia was the first nation to declare Christianity as its national religion. Over the last 1,000 years of subjugation, if an Armenian converted from the Christian faith, then they were no longer considered Armenian. So, those who are Muslim, Jewish or do not believe in a God cannot possible be considered Armenian. We cannot be sure how many of these so-called non-Christian Armenians there are, but most likely they number in the millions.

But really this is not specific enough. The core of our nation has always been the Armenian Apostolic church. So, those who are Catholic, Protestant, Mormon or members of any of the many other Christian sects cannot be considered Armenian. Again, I am not sure how many such people there are, but I would guess over one million worldwide.

I think we must also consider those who were not born to two fully Armenian parents. While someone who has full Armenian parentage is clearly Armenian (assuming they meet the other criteria we have or will lay out), their non-Armenian spouse, no matter how sympathetic he or she might be to the Armenian people, clearly cannot be Armenian. After all, we are not in the business of assimilating others into our nation. Neither can the children from a mixed marriage be considered Armenian.

So now we have gotten to a core of those who can reasonably be considered Armenian – the full-blooded Armenian Apostolic. But is that enough? Isn’t more required than simply birth and religion? For example, if one does not speak pure Armenian (not corrupted by foreign words from Russian, Turkish, Persian, Arabic, etc.), can they really be considered Armenian? Even if they speak Armenian, what is the extent of their engagement in the Armenian community? Shouldn’t we expect an Armenian to participate in Armenian community life, and if they don’t, can they reasonably be considered Armenian? To be considered Armenian, you must fully embrace the language, food, culture and also contribute to the betterment of the Armenian people through the various community organizations. Again, those failing on any of these points must number in the millions.

It seems to me that those who know nothing of our rich history or geography really cannot be considered Armenian. After all, aren’t these equally as important as language and culture?

The last criteria I would use to consider someone Armenian is that they should be living in Armenia. The so-called hyphenated Armenian is a fictitious construct to which we should not succumb.

At this point, I think we can acknowledge that really there are not even one million Armenians in the world. Based on the criteria above, I am not one of them, and I am sure by now you have gotten my point.

Sometimes I sense Armenians treat their Armenianness as some sort of membership in an exclusive country club. Such pride itself is not bad, but when this pride in Armenianness leads to exclusivity, then it becomes destructive.

This past weekend, I was fortunate to attend the 50th anniversary of the AYF Junior Seminar where over 300 of our ARMENIAN youth from all backgrounds were embracing their Armenianness. No one in this world has a right to tell them they do not measure up!

Organizers and participants of the Hamazkayin Lebanon seminar, “Post-Genocide Creative Vision: Memory, Art and Demand for Restitution” pictured outside Armenian Genocide Orphans Aram Bezikian Museum May 21, 2022,

Background

On Saturday, May 21, 2022, the Hamazkayin Armenian Educational and Cultural Society in Lebanon under the patronage of the Catholicosate of Cilicia and with the financial support of the Armenian communities department of the Calouste Gulbenkian Foundation hosted a youth seminar on “Post-Genocide Creative Vision: Memory, Art and Demand for Restitution,” dedicated to the 107th commemoration of the Armenian Genocide. The one-day seminar brought together more than 130 young Lebanese-Armenians at the Bird’s Nest Orphanage in Byblos/Jbeil. 

Organizers noted the importance of this timely seminar, that “the feelings of alienation and destruction that resulted from this trauma had to be explained, new traditions had to be built, and new discourses about the ‘self’ and ‘identity’ had to be constructed. Armenians had to rebuild themselves as a nation. The collective experience – the Genocide – became one of the most significant building blocks. However, rebuilding an identity was and still is a struggle amidst global political dynamics, constant immigration waves, and ongoing threats to Armenia’s security and sovereignty that continue shaping the already multifaceted Armenian Diaspora in a more complex manner. This struggle is visible not only at the intellectual level but also through the more direct interactions of Armenians with their heritage and culture.”

For this reason, Hamazkayin’s Lebanese Regional Committee, in preparation for the commemorative programs for the 107th anniversary of the Genocide in 2022, decided to provide a critical and analytical approach to explain the evolution of the post-genocide diasporic Armenian identity and heritage. Just over a dozen speakers from different professional backgrounds were invited from Lebanon, the United States, the Czech Republic, Kuwait and Syria. Participants were representatives from various Armenian youth and student associations, schools and universities.

Opening remarks were made by Hamazkayin’s Lebanese Regional Office. Shaghig Hovsepian-Haroutiunian said that this youth seminar aims to raise awareness of the Lebanese-Armenian youth and encourage their critical thinking. In his welcoming remarks on behalf of the organizing committee, Father Barouyr Shernezian stated that the power of the Diaspora becomes significant when we succeed in organizing, consolidating, valuing and encouraging that power. Hence, the more we succeed in re-evaluating and understanding what we have done and continue to do, the more those values will be a stimulus for us to be strengthened in our unique line of Armenian identity. The opening speech of the event was made by Dr. Ara Sanjian who reflected on the first public Armenian Genocide commemorations, press releases and memorials around the world. The seminar also featured guest lecturer, Lebanese author, composer, poet, producer and orchestra leader Ghady Rahbani. Rahbani spoke in Arabic about the contribution of Armenian artists to the formation of Lebanese cultural identity. He highlighted the names of Lebanese Armenian artists who have contributed to the formation of the contemporary Lebanese cultural identity and the field of art. 

The Program 

The program was divided into four main topics: “Language and Literature”; “Music”; “Stage and Screen”; and “Diasporic Institutions and Community Life.” Each topic included a panel discussion and a short Q & A session.

“Language and Literature” was presented by lecturers Armen Urneshlian, Arda Jebejian and Anita Moutchoyan. The session was chaired by Christ Kheroian. The session began with a lecture on “Literature and Trauma” by Haigazian University lecturer and principal of the Armenian Evangelical College, Dr. Armen Urneshlian. Dr. Urneshlian briefly touched upon the expressions and ideas of the post-genocide psyche of Armenian writers and poets. He analyzed the expressions of intellectuals such as Tekeyan, Vahian, Oshakan, Tsarukian, Hamastegh and others.

The second lecture was delivered in English by Anita Moutchoyan and titled “A Comparison between First and Third Generation Diasporic Literature: From Assimilation Post-Memorial Documentation and Demand for Justice.” Moutchoyan is a lecturer at Haigazian University and the founding director of the HU Writing Center. Moutchoyan chose William Saroyan from the first generation and Peter Balakian from the third generation. Her talk primarily focused on tracing both first-generation and third-generation diasporic literary works, written in or translated to English, to highlight the role she had argued that post-memorial artistic witnessing plays in the continuous demand for justice for the Armenian cause.

The last presentation of the session was dedicated to the role of Western Armenian in the life of the Armenian community. The presentation “Western Armenian as a Symbol of Survival and Endurance” by Dr. Arda Jebejian, assistant professor at the American University of the Middle East addressed the consequences of deportation, the characteristics of the “victim Diaspora” and the attempts of the Armenians to preserve the Armenian language in their communities. 

Lecturers for the “Music” session included Dr. Sylvia Angelique Alajaji, Haig Utidjian and Zakar Keshishian. The moderator of the session was Garen Yosoulkanian.

Dr. Alajaji, who is associate professor and chair of music at Franklin & Marshall College, titled her presentation in English: “Exile on a Cassette. Notes on Music, Memory, and Refusal from the Post-Genocide Armenian Diaspora.” Dr. Alajaji discussed how in the wake of the Armenian Genocide, music opened up broader questions about how to define what it meant to be Armenian. She traced the Armenian musical cultures that emerged over a century from New York to Beirut to California. For Alajaji, these acts of preservation, creation, erasure and recovery all are part of what music means to the Armenian Diaspora.

The second lecturer on the topic was Dr. Utidjian, a conductor and musicologist. He delivered a lecture on “Armenian Sacred Music in the Aftermath of the Genocide,” where he highlighted not only our spiritual and cultural losses during the deportation and post-genocide period, but also the efforts to save the culture thereafter from the experiences of prominent individuals.

Keshishian’s lecture, “Exiled Musical Life: The Experience of Classical and Choir Music,” touched upon the role of music in the life of Diaspora Armenians on a professional and artistic level, showing its contribution not only in terms of preservation of the Armenian identity, but also as a post-genocide experience. 

The third session was dedicated to “Stage and Screen.” The lecturers of this session were Movses Hergelian, Vatche Adrouni and Hrach Tokatlian. The session was moderated by Kayane Madzounian. 

In his presentation titled “Commemoration through Colors and Shapes,” Dr. Hergelian referred to the Turkish massacres in the pre-genocide period from Ivan Aivazovsky’s experience to the post-genocide period, recalling the role of artists and the names of those whose art, according to Hergelian, could not be analyzed without considering the Genocide. Dr. Hergelian added that those artists sang with deep sorrow and expressed their rebellion and revolt through their deeds.

Adrouni, a lecturer at Haigazian University and the Northern Institute of Armenology and the founder of Shrchun Theater Group and Geghard Theater Center, titled his lecture “The Topic of Genocide on Stage.” He referred to the theatrical censorship created after the Hamidian massacres, when Armenians dominated the so-called “Turkish theater,” as well as the prohibition of Armenian-speaking performances and a number of words, and the unbridled ways of performing plays adopted by the Armenians. According to Adrouni, theater related to the Genocide has been of a political nature.

Tokatlian, a photographer and lecturer at the University of Saint Joseph in Lebanon, titled his presentation “Queries about Films Portraying the Armenian Genocide.” He presented the challenges and approaches adopted in making documentary or feature films related to the Genocide, as well as the digital picture of the works done so far.

The final session was dedicated to “Diasporic Institutions and Community Life.” The lecturers were Levon Sharoyan, Shaghig Kandaharian-Khutaverdian and Hrag Avedanian. The panel was moderated by Krikor Alozian.

Sharoyan, a lecturer at the Hamazkayin Institute of Armenology in Aleppo and a visiting lecturer at the Armenological Institute of the Great House of Cilicia, talked about  “Post-Genocide Reflections in Diasporic Printed Media.” He quoted excerpts from his analysis of the Mekhitarists’ Bazmavep and the Azadamart newspaper in Constantinople and linked the publications to certain periods of Armenian history and the Turkish nationalist movement. 

In her lecture “Post-Genocide Educational Institutions and the Development of National Identity,” Kandaharian-Khutaverdian, a lecturer at Haigazian University, discussed the role of the Armenian school in language preservation and national identity formation. She concluded that the Armenian school was not only a center of education and training, but also a guarantee of the existence of the Armenian people.

Avedanian, a researcher who is currently enrolled at the Media and Digital Literacy Academy of Beirut, titled his presentation “Constructing a Homeland: The Armenian Experience in Lebanon.” Avedanian presented the vibrant and flourishing cultural movement in post-genocide Lebanon, led by compatriot unions, churches, political parties and schools. Avedanian noted that the Diaspora, being far from the homeland, always kept its eyes on its homeland and, being inspired by it, kept its identity and flourished in a cultural homeland outside its ancestral land.

In order to enhance critical thinking and facilitate debate and discussion on post-Genocide Armenian identity, the seminar included a free discussion space called “Cultural Homeland” aiming to clarify and crystallize the series of lectures and encourage the young participants to provide a reflection and their perspective of post-Genocide Armenian identity. The facilitator of this discussion was Armen Abdalian, a political scientist and political commentator at Radio Voice of Van.

Later, the audience visited the Armenian Genocide Orphans Aram Bezikian Museum for a performance by the Hamazkayin’s Kousan Choir male ensemble led by Krikor Alozian.

At the end of the seminar, the organizers, speakers and participants had a friendly gathering where they exchanged ideas and opinions. 

Reflection

Experts representing a broad spectrum of artistic and literary disciplines discussed the creative response to the Armenian Genocide as a way of processing the pain and trauma experienced by survivors and their descendants throughout the past century. 

The Lebanese-Armenian youth learned that literature, paintings, music, plays and films not only act as catalysts for communication, but are also evidence of the long-lasting trauma affecting the psychological well-being of more than three generations of Diasporan Armenians. Decades of artistic work, cultural _expression_ and inspiration have helped shape contemporary Armenian identity and create a saturated and sometimes stringent understanding of what it means to be Armenian, often bringing a prescribed set of perspectives to bear. 

Such events are important to help the youth and students to explore how collective memory became one of the most crucial factors for identity formation in the Diaspora.