Rupen Janbazian is the editor of Torontohye Monthly. He is the former editor of The Armenian Weekly and the former director of public relations of the Tufenkian Foundation. Born and raised in Toronto, he is currently based in Yerevan.
excellent work Cristopher. 50 years of Krikor Beledian is a reference book to all those who are interested in the Armenian post genocide litterature. Thank you very much Christopher Atamian.
Thank you for this interview. Beledian’s tome is a seminal work and a big boon for English students venturing into Armenian letters. However Mr. Atamian’s answer gives the impression that he was the initiator of this project. As I knew otherwise, I put the question to the then chair of Armenian Department at Columbia, Dr. Nanor Kebranian. Here is the answer I received:
“The interviewer queries as to why Beledian’s work and why now? The answer to that is that in 2009, as mentioned above, I approached Atamian with a request to translate the work from the French into English. with a subvention from the Fesjian Fund at Columbia University so as to have English-language material available for my non-Armenophone students taking a course I was offering on Armenian literature and culture. This was in, other words, a commissioned work. And not, as Atamian’s response seems to suggest, an act of beneficent voluntarism on the part of the translator. And it was initiated by a young scholar long familiar with the work of Beledian the author, the critic, and the person; as his reader, translator (from Armenian), student, and subsequently peer; attempting to mainstream Armenian studies into a broader sphere of intellectual engagement, Armenian and otherwise. I’m glad the work has seen the light of day and is, indeed, becoming mainstreamed in some small sense with this review in an Armenian diaspora forum. Perhaps worthwhile noting, for those few (really very few) concerned (even dedicated) to such matters is the generational timeframe involved in the realisation not just of a work, but, more importantly, of ideas and of expertise. It was one thing to have my students read as-yet-unpublished sections of the work in English; it was another, trying to contextualise Beledian’s extraordinary thematically framed literary history both methodologically and substantively to a group of mainly undergraduates who were hardly cognisant of Armenians, certainly, but also of the tremendous range of concepts and issues concerning statelessness, displacement, and diasporicity.”
Dear Raffi and Nanor:
Perhaps the issue was context in my quote. Nanor is quite right in asserting that she originally asked me to translate the work–I never said or implied the contrary–she is duly thanked in the book. I never claimed to have initiated the project–but rather answered the question of why it was important to have translated it now in a general sense. My thanks do indeed go out to Nanor and Columbia or providing the original idea and the funds to translate the work.
Why not publish some of the most insightful scholarly passages from Beledian’s text, to give us a taste of this eminent scholar?
excellent work Cristopher. 50 years of Krikor Beledian is a reference book to all those who are interested in the Armenian post genocide litterature. Thank you very much Christopher Atamian.
Thank you for this interview. Beledian’s tome is a seminal work and a big boon for English students venturing into Armenian letters. However Mr. Atamian’s answer gives the impression that he was the initiator of this project. As I knew otherwise, I put the question to the then chair of Armenian Department at Columbia, Dr. Nanor Kebranian. Here is the answer I received:
“The interviewer queries as to why Beledian’s work and why now? The answer to that is that in 2009, as mentioned above, I approached Atamian with a request to translate the work from the French into English. with a subvention from the Fesjian Fund at Columbia University so as to have English-language material available for my non-Armenophone students taking a course I was offering on Armenian literature and culture. This was in, other words, a commissioned work. And not, as Atamian’s response seems to suggest, an act of beneficent voluntarism on the part of the translator. And it was initiated by a young scholar long familiar with the work of Beledian the author, the critic, and the person; as his reader, translator (from Armenian), student, and subsequently peer; attempting to mainstream Armenian studies into a broader sphere of intellectual engagement, Armenian and otherwise. I’m glad the work has seen the light of day and is, indeed, becoming mainstreamed in some small sense with this review in an Armenian diaspora forum. Perhaps worthwhile noting, for those few (really very few) concerned (even dedicated) to such matters is the generational timeframe involved in the realisation not just of a work, but, more importantly, of ideas and of expertise. It was one thing to have my students read as-yet-unpublished sections of the work in English; it was another, trying to contextualise Beledian’s extraordinary thematically framed literary history both methodologically and substantively to a group of mainly undergraduates who were hardly cognisant of Armenians, certainly, but also of the tremendous range of concepts and issues concerning statelessness, displacement, and diasporicity.”
Dear Raffi and Nanor:
Perhaps the issue was context in my quote. Nanor is quite right in asserting that she originally asked me to translate the work–I never said or implied the contrary–she is duly thanked in the book. I never claimed to have initiated the project–but rather answered the question of why it was important to have translated it now in a general sense. My thanks do indeed go out to Nanor and Columbia or providing the original idea and the funds to translate the work.
Why not publish some of the most insightful scholarly passages from Beledian’s text, to give us a taste of this eminent scholar?