Murders, Myths, and Public Broadcasting
March 09, 2006
avoice.org
When 1.5 million people die, you'd think it'd be a pretty open and shut case. But PBS, the great provoker of thought, has an upcoming documentary called "The Armenian Genocide", which will be followed on some stations by a panel discussion pitting genocide historians against "so-called scholars" who claim the Armenian genocide was a myth. Today's L.A. Times carries an opinion piece by Aris Janigian, local author and second generation Armenian-American, who denounces PBS' proposed debate.
Jacoba Atlas, the senior V.P. of programming at PBS says, "We believe [the genocide] is settled history," but thinks, "it seemed like a good idea to have a panel and let people have their say." And they're committed to it. According to genocide historian Peter Balakian, PBS threatened to scrap the entire documentary if he and another genocide scholar declined to participate in the panel.
Janigian denounces PBS' idea as "perverse" and doubts whether people would tolerate a panel discussion between David Irving, a "notorious holocaust revisionist," and Elie Wiesel, following a documentary on Nazi concentration camps.
Janigian suggests the whole affair is an example of PBS "capitulation to politics." Turks, "America's so-called allies" according to Janigian, are fiercely protective of their country's reputation and even created Article 301 in their penal code, which makes it a crime to "'denigrate' Turkey by, for instance, mentioning the Armenian genocide in public." And we all saw "Midnight Express", so we know what the Turkish penal system can do to a man.
It really is startling that there could be so much debate over such an extensive crime. And yet I'm interested to hear how the deaths of over a million people could be a "myth". History becomes nebulous almost immediately after it happens, with perspectives clashing against perspectives, context colliding with subtext, all mixed together with personal agendas, sealed over by the mists of time, until reality becomes relative.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
avoice.org
When 1.5 million people die, you'd think it'd be a pretty open and shut case. But PBS, the great provoker of thought, has an upcoming documentary called "The Armenian Genocide", which will be followed on some stations by a panel discussion pitting genocide historians against "so-called scholars" who claim the Armenian genocide was a myth. Today's L.A. Times carries an opinion piece by Aris Janigian, local author and second generation Armenian-American, who denounces PBS' proposed debate.
Jacoba Atlas, the senior V.P. of programming at PBS says, "We believe [the genocide] is settled history," but thinks, "it seemed like a good idea to have a panel and let people have their say." And they're committed to it. According to genocide historian Peter Balakian, PBS threatened to scrap the entire documentary if he and another genocide scholar declined to participate in the panel.
Janigian denounces PBS' idea as "perverse" and doubts whether people would tolerate a panel discussion between David Irving, a "notorious holocaust revisionist," and Elie Wiesel, following a documentary on Nazi concentration camps.
Janigian suggests the whole affair is an example of PBS "capitulation to politics." Turks, "America's so-called allies" according to Janigian, are fiercely protective of their country's reputation and even created Article 301 in their penal code, which makes it a crime to "'denigrate' Turkey by, for instance, mentioning the Armenian genocide in public." And we all saw "Midnight Express", so we know what the Turkish penal system can do to a man.
It really is startling that there could be so much debate over such an extensive crime. And yet I'm interested to hear how the deaths of over a million people could be a "myth". History becomes nebulous almost immediately after it happens, with perspectives clashing against perspectives, context colliding with subtext, all mixed together with personal agendas, sealed over by the mists of time, until reality becomes relative.
Note: Above are excerpts from the article. The full article appears here. Clarifications and comments by me are contained in {}. Deletions are marked by [...]. The bold emphasis is mine.
posted by Vahe Balabanian at 12:34 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home