Podcasts about vahakn dadrian

Interview (in Armenian) with the editor of the California Courier Harut Sassounian. Topics include the skulls of five Armenian women victims of the Armenian Genocide and kept in Paris in a museum, the Global Armenian Summit held in Yerevan, the neglected grave of Vahakn Dadrian and the French Parliament's resolution condemning Azerbaijan and urging the government to recognize Artsakh as an independent republic. - Հարցազրոյց California Courier թերթի խմբագիր Պարոն Յարութ Սասունեանի հետ: Հարցազրոյցի գլխաւոր նիւթերն են՝ Ֆրանսայի Մարդու Թանգարանին մէջ 5 գանկերու գոյութիւնը, որոնք կը պատկանին Հայոց Ցեղասպանութեան կին զոհերու, Վահագն Տատրեանի շիրիմի լքուած ու խեղճ վիճակը, «Համահայկական գագաթաժողով» և Ֆրանսայի Խորհրդարանի որոշումը ի նպաստ Արցախի:

From village boy, to student activist, to prisoner of conscience, to economist turned historian and sociologist, Dr. Taner Akçam has lived many lives. In conversation with Salpi Ghazarian, Director of the USC Institute of Armenian Studies, Dr. Akçam chronicles his unique journey to becoming a leading scholar in Armenian Genocide studies. To learn more about the USC Institute of Armenian Studies, visit http://armenian.usc.edu. References: Akcam, Taner. Killing Orders: Talat Pasha's Telegrams and the Armenian Genocide. Palgrave, 2018. Akçam Taner, and Kurt Ümit. The Spirit of the Laws: the Plunder of Wealth in the Armenian Genocide. Berghahn Books, 2018. The Young Turks' Crime Against Humanity: The Armenian Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in the Ottoman Empire. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012. Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials, with Vahakn Dadrian. New York: Berghahn Books, 2011. A Shameful Act: Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility. New York: Metropolitan Books, November 2006. From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide. London: Zed Books, 2004.

He’s a boy from a village near Ardahan, a “revolutionary”, then a “terrorist” in the words of the Turkish government, and now an academic -- Dr. Taner Akçam is a leading historian of the Armenian Genocide. After escaping a Turkish prison, and settling in Germany, he began his research on political violence in the late Ottoman Empire and early Republic of Turkey. In 2008, Dr. Akçam was appointed Chair in Armenian Genocide Studies at Clark University. To learn more about the USC Institute of Armenian Studies, visit http://armenian.usc.edu. References: Akcam, Taner. Killing Orders: Talat Pasha's Telegrams and the Armenian Genocide. Palgrave, 2018. Akçam Taner, and Kurt Ümit. The Spirit of the Laws: the Plunder of Wealth in the Armenian Genocide. Berghahn Books, 2018. The Young Turks' Crime Against Humanity: The Armenian Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in the Ottoman Empire. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2012. Judgment at Istanbul: The Armenian Genocide Trials, with Vahakn Dadrian. New York: Berghahn Books, 2011. A Shameful Act: Armenian Genocide and the Question of Turkish Responsibility. New York: Metropolitan Books, November 2006. From Empire to Republic: Turkish Nationalism and the Armenian Genocide. London: Zed Books, 2004.

with Lerna Ekmekçioğluhosted by Chris GratienThe World War I period irrevocably changed the life of Ottoman Armenians and ultimately heralded the end of Christian communities throughout most of Anatolia. However, following the Ottoman defeat in the war, the brief Armistice period witnessed efforts by Armenians in Istanbul to reconstitute their community in the capital. In this episode, Lerna Ekmekçioğlu explores these efforts and in particular activities to locate and gather Armenian orphans and widows dislocated by war and genocide. Lerna Ekmekçioğlu is Assistant Professor of History at MIT. Her research focuses on the intersections of minority identity and gender in the modern Middle East. (see faculty page)Chris Gratien is a doctoral candidate at Georgetown University researching the social and environmental history of the Ottoman Empire and the modern Middle East. (see academia.edu)Episode No. 161Release date: 27 June 2014Location: Beyoğlu, IstanbulEditing and Production by Chris GratienBibliography courtesy of Lerna EkmekçioğluCitation: "Reconstituting the Stuff of the Nation: Armenians of Istanbul during the Armistice Period," Lerna Ekmekçioğlu and Chris Gratien, Ottoman History Podcast, No. 161 (27 June 2014) http://www.ottomanhistorypodcast.com/2014/06/armenian-widows-orphans-istanbul.html.SELECT BIBLIOGRAPHYLerna Ekmekcioglu, “A Climate for Abduction, A Climate for Redemption: The Politics of Inclusion during and after the Armenian Genocide.” Comparative Studies in Society and History 55, no. 3 (2013): 522–53.Uğur Ümit Üngör, “Orphans, Converts, and Prostitutes: Social Consequences of War and Persecution in the Ottoman Empire, 1914–1923,” War in History 19, 2 (2012): 173–92.Taner Akçam, The Young Turks’ Crime against Humanity: The Armenian Genocide and Ethnic Cleansing in the Ottoman Empire (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2012), 287–339.Victoria Rowe, “Armenian Women Refugees at the End of Empire: Strategies of Survival,” in Panikos Panayi and Pipa Virdee, eds., Refugees and the End of Empire: Imperial Collapse and Forced Migration in the Twentieth Century (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2011), 164.Keith David Watenpaugh, “The League of Nations’ Rescue of Armenian Genocide Survivors and the Making of Modern Humanitarianism, 1920–1927,” American Historical Review 115, 5 (2010): 1315–39, here 1315.Matthias Bjørnlund, “‘A Fate Worse than Dying:’ Sexual Violence during the Armenian Genocide,” in Dagmar Herzog, ed., Brutality and Desire: War and Sexuality in Europe’s Twentieth Century (New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2009), 16–58. Vahé Tachjian, “Gender, Nationalism, Exclusion: The Reintegration Process of Female Survivors of the Armenian Genocide,” Nations and Nationalism 15, 1 (2009): 60–80Vahé Tachjian, “Recovering Women and Children Enslaved by Palestinian Bedouins,” in Raymond Kévorkian and Vahé Tachjian, eds., The Armenian General Benevolent Union, One Hundred Years of History (Cairo: AGBU, 2006).Katharine Derderian, “Common Fate, Different Experience: Gender-Specific Aspects of the Armenian Genocide, 1915–1917,” Holocaust and Genocide Studies 19, 1 (May 2005): 1–25. Vahakn Dadrian, “Children as Victims of Genocide: The Armenian Case,” Journal of Genocide Research 5 (2003): 421–38. Vahram Shemmassian, “The League of Nations and the Reclamation of Armenian Genocide Survivors,” in Richard Hovannisian, ed., Looking Backward, Moving Forward: Confronting the Armenian Genocide (New Brunswick, N.J.: Transaction Publishers, 2003), 94.Ara Sarafian, “The Absorption of Armenian Women and Children into Muslim Households as a Structural Component of the Armenian Genocide,” in Omer Bartov and Phyllis Mack, eds., In God’s Name: Genocide and Religion in the Twentieth Century (New York: Berghahn Books, 2001), 209–21.Isabel Kaprielian-Churchill “Armenian Refugee Women: The Picture Brides 1920–1930,” Journal of American Ethnic History 12, 3 (1993): 3–29. Eliz Sanasarian, “Gender Distinction in the Genocidal Process: A Preliminary Study of the Armenian Case,” Holocaust and Genocide Studies 4, 4 (1989): 449–61.

Hitler famously said about the Armenian genocide “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” For much of the last 75 years, few people did in fact speak of it.  When they did, the discussion largely revolved around the question of whether the killing deserved the label of genocide.  Scholarly analysis did exist.  But, in the public mind, it was largely swallowed up in a bitter debate about how to label, remember and interpret these events.  Tuning out the vitriolic rhetoric, many of my students thought about Armenia only in the context of the lessons Hitler apparently drew from it. This has gradually begun to change as historians and social scientists such as Taner Akça and Vahakn Dadrian have turned their attention to Armenia.  The book that forms the subject of today’s interview–A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire (Oxford University Press, 2011), edited by Ronald Suny, Fatma Müge Göçek, and Norman Naimark– is an outstanding example of this new scholarship.  All three have a deep and long-lasting engagement with the subject and have played an important role in creating a dispassionate dialogue about the genocide. A Question of Genocide forms one of the important outcomes of this dialogue.  Its essays are  models of careful analysis and research.  Rather than attempting to present a complete narrative of events, they engage specific locations, questions or subjects.  They demand careful attention and reflection.   But, put together, they offer an excellent synopsis of the state of research and opinion on the period and subject. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler famously said about the Armenian genocide “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” For much of the last 75 years, few people did in fact speak of it.  When they did, the discussion largely revolved around the question of whether the killing deserved the label of genocide.  Scholarly analysis did exist.  But, in the public mind, it was largely swallowed up in a bitter debate about how to label, remember and interpret these events.  Tuning out the vitriolic rhetoric, many of my students thought about Armenia only in the context of the lessons Hitler apparently drew from it. This has gradually begun to change as historians and social scientists such as Taner Akça and Vahakn Dadrian have turned their attention to Armenia.  The book that forms the subject of today’s interview–A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire (Oxford University Press, 2011), edited by Ronald Suny, Fatma Müge Göçek, and Norman Naimark– is an outstanding example of this new scholarship.  All three have a deep and long-lasting engagement with the subject and have played an important role in creating a dispassionate dialogue about the genocide. A Question of Genocide forms one of the important outcomes of this dialogue.  Its essays are  models of careful analysis and research.  Rather than attempting to present a complete narrative of events, they engage specific locations, questions or subjects.  They demand careful attention and reflection.   But, put together, they offer an excellent synopsis of the state of research and opinion on the period and subject. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler famously said about the Armenian genocide “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” For much of the last 75 years, few people did in fact speak of it.  When they did, the discussion largely revolved around the question of whether the killing deserved the label of genocide.  Scholarly analysis did exist.  But, in the public mind, it was largely swallowed up in a bitter debate about how to label, remember and interpret these events.  Tuning out the vitriolic rhetoric, many of my students thought about Armenia only in the context of the lessons Hitler apparently drew from it. This has gradually begun to change as historians and social scientists such as Taner Akça and Vahakn Dadrian have turned their attention to Armenia.  The book that forms the subject of today’s interview–A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire (Oxford University Press, 2011), edited by Ronald Suny, Fatma Müge Göçek, and Norman Naimark– is an outstanding example of this new scholarship.  All three have a deep and long-lasting engagement with the subject and have played an important role in creating a dispassionate dialogue about the genocide. A Question of Genocide forms one of the important outcomes of this dialogue.  Its essays are  models of careful analysis and research.  Rather than attempting to present a complete narrative of events, they engage specific locations, questions or subjects.  They demand careful attention and reflection.   But, put together, they offer an excellent synopsis of the state of research and opinion on the period and subject. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler famously said about the Armenian genocide “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” For much of the last 75 years, few people did in fact speak of it.  When they did, the discussion largely revolved around the question of whether the killing deserved the label of genocide.  Scholarly analysis did exist.  But, in the public mind, it was largely swallowed up in a bitter debate about how to label, remember and interpret these events.  Tuning out the vitriolic rhetoric, many of my students thought about Armenia only in the context of the lessons Hitler apparently drew from it. This has gradually begun to change as historians and social scientists such as Taner Akça and Vahakn Dadrian have turned their attention to Armenia.  The book that forms the subject of today’s interview–A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire (Oxford University Press, 2011), edited by Ronald Suny, Fatma Müge Göçek, and Norman Naimark– is an outstanding example of this new scholarship.  All three have a deep and long-lasting engagement with the subject and have played an important role in creating a dispassionate dialogue about the genocide. A Question of Genocide forms one of the important outcomes of this dialogue.  Its essays are  models of careful analysis and research.  Rather than attempting to present a complete narrative of events, they engage specific locations, questions or subjects.  They demand careful attention and reflection.   But, put together, they offer an excellent synopsis of the state of research and opinion on the period and subject. Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices

Hitler famously said about the Armenian genocide “Who, after all, speaks today of the annihilation of the Armenians?” For much of the last 75 years, few people did in fact speak of it.  When they did, the discussion largely revolved around the question of whether the killing deserved the label of genocide.  Scholarly analysis did exist.  But, in the public mind, it was largely swallowed up in a bitter debate about how to label, remember and interpret these events.  Tuning out the vitriolic rhetoric, many of my students thought about Armenia only in the context of the lessons Hitler apparently drew from it. This has gradually begun to change as historians and social scientists such as Taner Akça and Vahakn Dadrian have turned their attention to Armenia.  The book that forms the subject of today's interview–A Question of Genocide: Armenians and Turks at the End of the Ottoman Empire (Oxford University Press, 2011), edited by Ronald Suny, Fatma Müge Göçek, and Norman Naimark– is an outstanding example of this new scholarship.  All three have a deep and long-lasting engagement with the subject and have played an important role in creating a dispassionate dialogue about the genocide. A Question of Genocide forms one of the important outcomes of this dialogue.  Its essays are  models of careful analysis and research.  Rather than attempting to present a complete narrative of events, they engage specific locations, questions or subjects.  They demand careful attention and reflection.   But, put together, they offer an excellent synopsis of the state of research and opinion on the period and subject.