Ravished Armenia (1919): Bearing Witness in the Age of Mechanical Reproduction

Abstract

The challenges raised by genocides and by the multiple forms of testimony which narrate, translate, process, represent, and bring them, so to speak, into the present, are considerable.² Given these difficulties, a return to the writings of Walter Benjamin proves useful insofar as these contain tools vital for the construction of a nonlinear thought-process, one which is awake and aware of its own fragmented, de-systematized reflection.³ In this article we set out to establish a dialogue between two of his most important works — “The work of art in the age of mechanical reproduction” (1939) (Benjamin, 1973/1939: 211–244) and “Theses on the philosophy of history” (1940) (Benjamin, 1973/1940: 245–255) — by considering a truly extraordinary film. Although barely known, if not entirely forgotten, this film nevertheless carries within it the seeds — avant la lettre — of the Benjaminian concept of a “cinematic history,” of the cinema as a potential mode of “historical awakening”.⁴ A film which can be seen as both a simulacrum and a revelation.

I wish to express my warm thanks to Eduardo Kozanlian for the interview he kindly agreed to give me, as well as for the trust and great generosity he has shown me. My thanks also go to Hayk Demoyan (Director of the Armenian Genocide Museum-Institute in Yerevan) for the on-going discussions shared with him. I am grateful to Vincent Fontana for his careful re-reading of my text, and to Jonathan Hensher for his translation of this paper initially written in French.