While efforts for dialogue between Armenian and Turkish civil society have increased in recent years, Turkish movie audiences still seem to struggle in controlling their anger on the Armenian topic – as evidenced by the hostility toward Armenian-Canadian director Atom Egoyan’s 2002 film ‘Ararat.’ Hollywood, however, treated the topic as early as 1919
Get ready for troubled history, as well as unresolved political, social and cultural turmoil between Turkey and Armenia to make further news this week as Armenian-Canadian director Atom Egoyan’s latest film, “Chloe,” is one this week’s new releases.
Egoyan’s name in Turkey is synonymous with 2002’s “Ararat,” his controversial take on the events of 1915 in eastern Anatolia. And even though “Chloe” is an erotic-thriller with no relation whatsoever to history, Egoyan’s name is nearly always mentioned with “Ararat” and his identity as an Armenian in the Turkish media.
On Monday, the Friends of Hrant Dink, a non-profit organization founded by friends and followers of the Turkish-Armenian newspaper editor Dink, who was murdered in a hate crime in 2007, will gather to watch the court hearing of the murder case. Although three years have passed since Dink was murdered, the investigation, so far, has been inconclusive.
“We are two sick nations, Turks and Armenians in our relations. Who is going to heal us? The remedy for Armenians is Turks, the remedy for Turks is Armenians. Our medicine is dialogue.” Hrant Dink
The troubled history between Turkish and Armenian communities goes back to 1915 when the Ottoman Empire forcibly deported the Armenians of eastern Anatolia. The global tensions have been the norm for decades with answers to certain questions raising unresolved debates around the world.
What really happened in eastern Anatolia in 1915? How are we to define what happened to the Armenians: forced resettlement, massacre or genocide? Why is the issue unresolved after 95 years? What was chronicled by those who experienced the events of the period? Can an “official opinion” on the issue be defined as the “Turkish thesis”? Why are Turks so sensitive about the issue?
Efforts at reconciliation and peace by Turkish-Armenian dialogue groups have increased in the recent years following the historic meeting between Presidents Abdullah Gül and Serge Sarkisian two years ago. Turkish and Armenian civil society groups, as well as artists, have been sending messages of peace for some time now. Istanbul-based groups Kardeş Türküler and the Sayad Nova Chorus have taken the stage in Yerevan. And recently, world-renowned Turkish-Armenian musician Arto Tunçboyacıyan, rock singer Yaşar Kurt, and the Armenian Navy Band sang for “Against Hatred and Animosity” in New York.
Eight decades before ‘Ararat’
While music seems to be the unifying force, cinema continues to be more problematic in dealing with the Armenian-Turkish conflict. “Ararat” might be the poster-film of the conflict as it was directed by an award-winning, Oscar-nominated director with global fame, but the earliest depiction of the 1915 events in cinema goes back to 1919.
The Hollywood production “Ravished Armenia” was based on the memoirs of an Armenian woman, Aurora Mardiganian, who had survived to tell her account of the events.
While there are no copies left except a restored 24-minute segment, an article in the New York Times describes that in the first half, Armenia is shown “ as it was before Turkish and German devastation, and led up to the deportation of priests and thousands of families into the desert.”
Adapted from a novel by Hrachya Kochar, the 1977 movie “Nahapet” by Armenian director Henrik Malyan tells the story of a man who tries to rebuild his life after losing his wife, his daughter, and his village in 1915. The film was screened in Cannes in 1978 and later broadcast in BBC to positive reviews.
Another film on a similar topic was directed in 1991 by French-Armenian director Henri Verneuil. “Mayrig” (Mother) starred Claudia Cardinale and Omar Sharif as members of an Armenian family that emigrated to France after 1915. The film was such a success that it was later turned into a TV series, and a sequel, “588 rue paradis,” was filmed.
Undoubtedly the most popular film about this dark part of modern history, however, is Egoyan’s “Ararat.”
Taking Mount Ararat as a symbol for the collective historical consciousness of the Armenians, Egoyan tries incorporating different points of view and collective psyche into his film through setting the plot as a film-within-a-film.
Charles Aznavour plays Canadian-Armenian director Edward Saroyan who is filming a film about the siege of Van, which kick-started the deportation decision for the Armenians.
During the filming of the fictional film in “Ararat,” Armenian and Turkish actors, as well as the director, are led to confront history they thought they knew. The film’s fragmented, confusing structure, according to Egoyan, “reflects the Armenian psyche.” An edited version of the film was broadcast on one Turkish TV channel, Kanal Türk, years after its release.
Egoyan’s name has been a source of hatred by many in Turkey who haven’t seen a single film by the acclaimed director, yet alone “Ararat.” That’s why his latest “Chloe” is mentioned without so much as a sentence about the film, but only serves to draw spite for a film he shot eight years ago.
It’s best to remember what Dink said in an interview: “We are two sick nations, Turks and Armenians in our relations. Who is going to heal us? The remedy for Armenians is Turks, the remedy for Turks is Armenians. Our medicine is dialogue.”
EMRAH GÜLER ISTANBUL – Hürriyet Daily News
Links:
An interview with Atom Egoyan about Chloe in Slant Magazine
Mount Ararat History and Facts
Articles about Chloe in Turkish
BÜYÜK HATA (CHLOE) by CÜNEYT CEBENOYAN – Birgün
“Kanadalı yönetmen Atom Egoyan’ın Tapınma’dan sonraki çalışması Büyük Hata, San Sebastian Film Festivali’nin açılış filmiydi” - Hürriyet
Stewartlar… Ve Chloe ARZU DEDEOĞLU Milliyet
Atom Egoyan’dan heyecanlı bir uzun metraj… MSN Aktif Sinema
However, it was his last three films, making Yusuf’s trilogy, that put him on the radar for many movie buffs in Turkey. The bizarre name of the first one, “Yumurta” (Egg), raised our interest. Then, we learned that the subsequent two films in the trilogy would make up a shopping list, “Süt” (Milk) and “Bal” (Honey).
“Süt” similarly featured a young man’s struggle to find his place in the changing face of rural and urban lives and traditional roles of masculinity. Melih Selçuk played a younger Yusuf in the movie, which was more of a coming-of-age story, telling the story of how Yusuf parts from his town and his mother. Yusuf’s problematic relationship with his mother had a heightened effect with Başak Köklükaya’s haunting performance as the mother and a more confident Kaplanoğlu behind the camera. The film won the FIPRESCI prize in last year’s Istanbul International Film Festival and was nominated for the Golden Lion in Venice.
Kaplanoğlu said he didn’t want to make a surreal film and doesn’t like his films to be interpreted through symbolism. Unfortunately for him, the film with minimal dialogue is abundant with symbols and metaphors. Even the titles “Egg” and “Milk” are enough to open discussions on symbolism. On another note on symbolism, Yusuf’s father’s name is Yakup. That’s Joseph and Jacob in Turkish. Biblical Jospeh was Jacob’s son and he was blessed with interpreting dreams. The references might not be on a grand scale but they’re still there.
Despite the abysmal economy, Turkish cinema is sizzling hot here and abroad. With some 80 films made in Turkey this year alone, the country’s independent films are sweeping top prizes in the world’s biggest festivals. But would-be ticket buyers are expressing disappointment that independent films are hard to find – even if they are filling seats.
