The Armenian writers and publicists Tigran Paskevichyan and Hovhannes Yeranyan speak on the perceptions (adequate and not quite) of the Azerbaijani writer Akram Ailisli’s Stone Dreams on the Armenian society, the willingness of the public, of the time of repentance and the role of writers and literature in changing the atmosphere of hatred and the perceptions of the opposite party.

Tigran Paskevichyan – I read this book after the great resonance it received and under the influence of the already formed opinions.

Frankly speaking, I wish I had read it before. This is a so-called planned novel which aimed to shock the Azerbaijani public, to overwhelm it. As I could understand, this book was written in 2005 – 2006, right after Safarov’s crime. After Safarov’s extradition the author found courage in himself to bring the book to the audience. That is to say under the influence of certain signals this man wrote this novel and then circulated it. As for the resonance it got in Armenia, the reaction to this book in Azerbaijan was so rigorous that we were somehow even reserved, fearing to harm the writer.

Hovhannes Yeranyan – First, I read the novel in Russian, and then I read some parts of it, already translated into Armenian. I should mention that simultaneously a few translators are now translating this book into Armenian.

My first impression was to admire his courage as a citizen and an author. Quite amazing courage a writer may have… I think he should have been turned into a hero.

The power in the country, worried about the image of the country and its people, should have awarded him this title of a hero.

Not only people in the creative circles were interested in the novel. I know party leaders, MPs, and many others who would pass on the issue of People’s Friendship journal with Ailisli’s novel from hand to hand. We had quite a high degree of interest in this regard.

And we cannot say that the perception of the novel with us was inadequate.

There were even calls to invite the author to Armenia and give him a political asylum , to award him with a hero title. I think all this would be too much. 

Tigran Paskevichyan – On the other hand, there is some internal moderation.

In front of such sincerity and authentic compassion for one’s people and one’s country, a fear and some doubts are aroused: what if we become similarly sincere and unmerciful towards ourselves?

Hovhannes Yeranyan – I do not know a nation that would not have this problem of repentance. But I am disgusted and cannot stand when they say that see, Azerbaijanis wrote such a novel, when will repentance follow?

There may be such addresses to us from abroad. But when our writers say, yes, we should also repent… please show me my sin, my offense, and I will repent. We do have things to repent for and quite a lot, by the way.

- Repent before others?

Hovhannes Yeranyan – No, before ourselves. There are quite many things to repent for before our own people and such repentance will still take place. Let them accuse me for this, but I do not see any guilt that Armenians have before other nations to make us repent before them. All we have done wrong was directed against our own people – against Armenians.

Tigran Paskevichyan – I completely agree with Hovhannes that there should be simultaneous repentance. I think that it is primitive to say that if Akram Ailisli wrote this novel now our turn has come to create such a work. There are some who even go so far as to point out which issues we should repent for, for example, we should write about Khojalu, and other things…

I think that this remorse of conscience should be overcome internally, and there should be confidence that we have committed a sin. And not something like Khojalu, when at war anything could have happened.

Here is another question though – the process of the deportation of Azerbaijanis from Armenia. I was very active in the years of the Karabakh movement, and I think that if there had been anything in the attitude of the Azerbaijani people leaving Armenia that might offend my dignity as an individual or a person, I would surely address that issue and event.

Hovhannes Yeranyan – This issue is constantly raised: do literature and culture change anything? I am surely convinced that if one day tanks move forward, neither Ailisli’s book nor anything else will stop their advance. But literature changes the atmosphere.

I do not like comparisons with Orhan Pamuk’s book. That book of course does have quite significant literary charge, but it does not contain so much courage as Ailisli’s book. We are the ones in search for something about the genocide when we come across a slight hint that once 100 years ago there was an Armenian church there… And neither does it contain a distinct evaluation of the events or documentary, unlike Ailisli’s book. It is true that at the same time I do not think this is a shortcoming in Orhan Pamuk’s book, because in his book he did not pursue the goal of presenting the events documentarily.