Suchergebnisse

This study focuses on the prosecution of genocide-denial in Belgium and on the current deadlock of this political question. A political science approach is used to shed light on this issue which makes often the headlines. The study is based on the analysis of parliamentary documents and on several interviews with the key actors of this issue. This approach enables an analytic understanding of this question. The research topic is all the more meaningful because it concerns dialectics between the present and the past and it puts into questions the place of history in politics.

This thesis focuses on fiction films and documentaries produced in Turkey about the Armenian genocide and its traces in Turkish society - by Turkish, Kurdish and Armenian filmmakers - in order to research the memory of this 'founding crime'. It starts from a conceptualization of collective memory and its relation to belonging to the national identity. The first research observation is the fact that all the films on the Armenian genocide in Turkey were made from the 2000s onwards. Although more than a century has passed since the massacres of 1915-16 against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, it is only 20 years since the law of silence surrounding this genocide began to be broken in Turkish society. Moreover, in a denialist country, only two of the fourteen films analyzed in this research are defenders of the denialist theses. In order to find a coherent answer to this paradox and to address the question of the meaning that such representations can have today, we have divided the thesis into two main parts.The first part of the thesis, divided into two main chapters, aims to explain the absence of films on the subject - neither denialist nor for recognition - before the 2000s. For this, we propose a historical reading, parallel between the history of denialism in Turkey and that of cinema, which are contemporary. By studying the different stages of denialism and the changes in the cinematic field, we examine here the effect of the 'memory turn' (which first emerged on a global scale) on these productions and on the awakening of memory in Turkey, in a period marked by a change in the regime of historicity.The second part of the research, divided into three chapters, is devoted to the study of these new actors of memory – filmmakers –, their positioning in the cinematic field and their approach to Armenian genocide. To this end, we met almost all of them in order to conduct semi-directive interviews. We then analyze in detail the fourteen films on the subject, studying their memory production and their politics ...

This thesis focuses on fiction films and documentaries produced in Turkey about the Armenian genocide and its traces in Turkish society - by Turkish, Kurdish and Armenian filmmakers - in order to research the memory of this 'founding crime'. It starts from a conceptualization of collective memory and its relation to belonging to the national identity. The first research observation is the fact that all the films on the Armenian genocide in Turkey were made from the 2000s onwards. Although more than a century has passed since the massacres of 1915-16 against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, it is only 20 years since the law of silence surrounding this genocide began to be broken in Turkish society. Moreover, in a denialist country, only two of the fourteen films analyzed in this research are defenders of the denialist theses. In order to find a coherent answer to this paradox and to address the question of the meaning that such representations can have today, we have divided the thesis into two main parts.The first part of the thesis, divided into two main chapters, aims to explain the absence of films on the subject - neither denialist nor for recognition - before the 2000s. For this, we propose a historical reading, parallel between the history of denialism in Turkey and that of cinema, which are contemporary. By studying the different stages of denialism and the changes in the cinematic field, we examine here the effect of the 'memory turn' (which first emerged on a global scale) on these productions and on the awakening of memory in Turkey, in a period marked by a change in the regime of historicity.The second part of the research, divided into three chapters, is devoted to the study of these new actors of memory – filmmakers –, their positioning in the cinematic field and their approach to Armenian genocide. To this end, we met almost all of them in order to conduct semi-directive interviews. We then analyze in detail the fourteen films on the subject, studying their memory production and their politics ...

This thesis focuses on fiction films and documentaries produced in Turkey about the Armenian genocide and its traces in Turkish society - by Turkish, Kurdish and Armenian filmmakers - in order to research the memory of this 'founding crime'. It starts from a conceptualization of collective memory and its relation to belonging to the national identity. The first research observation is the fact that all the films on the Armenian genocide in Turkey were made from the 2000s onwards. Although more than a century has passed since the massacres of 1915-16 against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, it is only 20 years since the law of silence surrounding this genocide began to be broken in Turkish society. Moreover, in a denialist country, only two of the fourteen films analyzed in this research are defenders of the denialist theses. In order to find a coherent answer to this paradox and to address the question of the meaning that such representations can have today, we have divided the thesis into two main parts.The first part of the thesis, divided into two main chapters, aims to explain the absence of films on the subject - neither denialist nor for recognition - before the 2000s. For this, we propose a historical reading, parallel between the history of denialism in Turkey and that of cinema, which are contemporary. By studying the different stages of denialism and the changes in the cinematic field, we examine here the effect of the 'memory turn' (which first emerged on a global scale) on these productions and on the awakening of memory in Turkey, in a period marked by a change in the regime of historicity.The second part of the research, divided into three chapters, is devoted to the study of these new actors of memory – filmmakers –, their positioning in the cinematic field and their approach to Armenian genocide. To this end, we met almost all of them in order to conduct semi-directive interviews. We then analyze in detail the fourteen films on the subject, studying their memory production and their politics ...

This thesis focuses on fiction films and documentaries produced in Turkey about the Armenian genocide and its traces in Turkish society - by Turkish, Kurdish and Armenian filmmakers - in order to research the memory of this 'founding crime'. It starts from a conceptualization of collective memory and its relation to belonging to the national identity. The first research observation is the fact that all the films on the Armenian genocide in Turkey were made from the 2000s onwards. Although more than a century has passed since the massacres of 1915-16 against the Armenians of the Ottoman Empire, it is only 20 years since the law of silence surrounding this genocide began to be broken in Turkish society. Moreover, in a denialist country, only two of the fourteen films analyzed in this research are defenders of the denialist theses. In order to find a coherent answer to this paradox and to address the question of the meaning that such representations can have today, we have divided the thesis into two main parts.The first part of the thesis, divided into two main chapters, aims to explain the absence of films on the subject - neither denialist nor for recognition - before the 2000s. For this, we propose a historical reading, parallel between the history of denialism in Turkey and that of cinema, which are contemporary. By studying the different stages of denialism and the changes in the cinematic field, we examine here the effect of the 'memory turn' (which first emerged on a global scale) on these productions and on the awakening of memory in Turkey, in a period marked by a change in the regime of historicity.The second part of the research, divided into three chapters, is devoted to the study of these new actors of memory – filmmakers –, their positioning in the cinematic field and their approach to Armenian genocide. To this end, we met almost all of them in order to conduct semi-directive interviews. We then analyze in detail the fourteen films on the subject, studying their memory production and their politics ...

April 24 is the day that the Armenian genocide is commemorated worldwide. It is now recognized as the first major genocide of the twentieth century. Often said that was also the first modern genocide in the sense that the omnipotence of the State, in a mixture of fury and calculation, has been serving the destruction of part of its own population. Experts speak of interior and exterior genocide genocide. Both can coexist course, as in the case of the Armenians, present both in Turkey and in the territory of the present Republic of Armenia, which was at that time part of the Russian Empire. But the Young Turk government that triggered the massacre of Armenians has never recognized the genocide and his successors continued to deny its reality for a century. Adapted from the source document.

With regard to the 1994 genocide in Rwanda, this paper raises questions as to how the horror could have been avoided & whether the humanitarians were in a position to help avoid it. The author describes how the ultimate horror, which no one dared think or believe -- the genocide -- was long in preparation. The absolute humanitarian urgency arises when all that makes us human is drained or driven from us. The diabolic preparation to systematically eliminate all those who are different should have given enough warning to all those who had the power to stop what was about to happen. Humanitarian action can be effective only if in parallel there is greater room for freedom, tolerance, & social justice. The task here is not humanitarian but primarily political. The humanitarian actors of the 21st century ought to find strategies to denounce the states that plan & commit the violence & the states that do not stop the perpetrators. Adapted from the source document.

Focusing on genocide & how it is handled in international law, this article explores the different implications of the idea Hannah Arendt put forward in The Human Condition (1958): that there are certain crimes that can be neither punished nor forgiven. The article points up ambiguities inherent in Arendt's thought & in the very question of genocide, particularly the need for a humane answer to an evil that may be as inhumane as it is banal. It finds that any attempt to mete out justice in the face of a crime like genocide must establish, even artificially build, a link between the act & its legal consequences. Adapted from the source document.

The facts are indisputable: from April 1915 to July 1916, between 1,200,000 & 1,500,000 Armenians -- two-thirds of the Armenian population of the Ottoman Empire -- were killed on the orders of the party in power, the Committee of Union & Progress. This massacre -- planned, organized & executed by State forces -- incontestably constitutes genocide, according to the definition used by the United Nations. But over 90 years after the event, Turkey, successor to the Ottoman Empire, continues to deny the truth. The official version minimizes the number of victims, alleges that the few massacres that took place were not premeditated & even accuses the Armenians themselves of perpetrating genocide against the Turks! This version is taught in schools & universities, peddled by the media & defended across the political spectrum. But as long as it continues its state-sponsored negationism, Turkey cannot be considered a truly modern nation. Adapted from the source document.