Along the path of a sonnet - Հնչեակ - Félix Arvers' loves - 2/5 -

At a time in Paris, in early to mid 1800's, when the literary and the artistic elite apparently did not seem to have a care in the world, and could afford the time to entertain themselves speculating as to who the married woman, Felix Arvers had a love crush, was. Here they are the possibilities. Attached is my translation. The original is attached below. Vahe H. Apelian

A depiction of a Parisian literary salon

With Arver's death in 1850 - even earlier - a dozen of the plays, as well as poems he wrote, were all forgotten, except for the familiar sonnet, whose artistic charm and especially the identification of the mysterious woman became the object of universal interest and acquired a new momentum, both in and outside France.

The sonnet received special attention, especialy in literary clubs, which were known as «literary salons», among which was notable the one whose meetings took place in a hall of the royal library, known as Arsénal. It was run by  Charles Nodier, who was a prolific academic, writer and a noted intellectual of his time. The best writers of the day, irrespective of their gender,  met there regularly. In a warm and cordial atmosphere, high-quality literary discussions took place.

During the height of his literary fame, during the first years of  1830’s, Arvers regularly participated in this literary salon, where Marie Nodier, Charles Nodier's twenty-year-old daughter who had a broad literary interests, also participated. She would soon marry and become Mrs. Marie – Mennessier Nodier (1811−1893), a poet, novelist, and a musician/

It is in the notebook of this young woman that Arvers wrote and inscribed his sonnet, labeling it as "translated from Italian". In 1933, that same sonnet, titled «Un secret – A secret». was included in the collection of his poems. 

The speculations centered on the following four married women.

A. Madame Victor Hugo, the spouse of the author of the famous book «Les Miserables» (The poor ones). Her name was Adèle and rhymed  to the words words fidèle and d'elle at the end of the 12th and 13th lines. But,  no source would explain when and where Arvers could have met Mrs. Hugo, in order to give birth to the "unnecessary and arbitrary" love referenced in the second line of the sonnet.. On top of all that, Mrs. Hugo, seemed to have been miserable in her love life and  had  her own «secret" and was having a fiery extramarital affair in 1830 with one of her husband's friends, Saite-Beuve, a relationship that continued well past 1836, against her husband's reprimands. All these hardly made Mrs. Hugo "available" to a third party, which was Felix Arvers.

B. At the end of the century, Adolphe Plisson, a politician and a writer, motivated by his own interest, visited Cézy, where he met a 95-year-old woman named Tissier, who knew Arvers well, with whom he also received his education.

- He was a very happy child, - testifies the old woman.

Plisson asked her if she had ever heard from a friend a poem beginning with the words "Mon âme a son secret, ma vie a son mystère"...

To which the old woman replied, «no», putting a closure to that possibility. .

- No, he would say happier things - and that's how he runs out of his "acquaintances".

C. The third circulated name was that of  Marie Dorval (1798−1849) who was abandoned by her father at the age of six, and a few years later she lost her mother as well. At the age of 16, she married for the first time with an actor. They had two children.  She became a sought-after actress on provincial stages. After four years of mariage, she divorced her husband but kept her husband's family name, Dorval. In the same year, 1818, she moved to Paris, where she continued to make a name for herself on local  stages with known celebrities. The following year, she entered into an open relationship with musician until 1828 and bore three children. The following year she married  someone else,  both agreeing that they would be free to have their extramarital affairs. She got to know the great actors, playwrights and other artists of the day. Through these acquaintances, she got in touch with the poet and playwright Alfred de Vigny, who was seperated from his wife. She also became intimate with Victor Hugo, whose wife was dating Sainte-Beuve. And a year later, in 1833, Marie Dorval, while maintaining ties with her two male lovers, had a passionate homosexual relationship with the famous writer and novelist Georges Sand, while continuing to act with the known stage actors.

Marie Dorval tumultous life  happened when Arvers was at the height of his fame as an actor and playwright, making it possible that he met and got to know Marie Dorval. 

D. The more plausible is considered Marie Nodier. Charles Gline, who was the first to write a detailed biography of Felix Arvers, tended to point out Marie Nodier, as the subject of Anvers' love crush.. He wrote tht "a reliable and trustworthy friend testified to me the revelation of Hetzel, the publisher of Arvers, that the poet personally admitted to him that he had Marie Notien in mind when composing his poem."

Poet Edouard Grenier confirms this information, and Adolphe Racot, a famous modern biographer, says that he personally saw the sonnet recorded in the notebook of Marie Nodier. and concluded that she "knew everything" and in order to spare her husband a possible bout of jealousy, she invented the version of the translation.

***

Juliette Récamier (1777−1849) founded the most famous and long-lived Parisian literary salon, where the greatest writers and artists of her time met. Going beyond the boundaries of an ordinary salon, it became a real cradle of literature, where the greatest masterpieces of the time were created.

****

Բնագիրը՝ Հնչեակի մը հետքերով (2)

         Առվերի մահով՝ 1850-ին,− թող որ աւելի կանուխ ալ,− մոռացութեան տրուեցան անոր տասնեակ մը թատերախաղերը, ինչպէս նաեւ բանաստեղծութիւնները՝ բացի  ծանօթ հնչեակէն, որուն գեղարուեստական հմայքն ու մանաւանդ բովանդակած առեղծուածը նոր թափով ու տարողութեամբ առարկայ դարձան համընդհանուր հետաքրքրութեան՝ ի Ֆրանսա թէ Ֆրանսայէն դուրս:

         Այս ծիրէն ներս յատուկ ուշադրութեան արժանացաւ գրական այն շրջանակը, որուն հաւաքատեղին արքայական գրադարանի՝ Arsénal անուամբ ծանօթ  մէկ սրահակն էր, որ մատենադարանապետ Charles Nodier-ն ՝ իր ժամանակի բազմաբեղուն ակադեմական, գրող ու մտաւորական,  վերածած էր, ինչպէս օրին կը կոչէին՝  «գրական salon»-ի մը, ուր շաբաթական կանոնաւոր պարբերութեամբ կը հանդիպէին օրուան լաւագոյն գրողները՝ առանց սեռի խտրութեան: Այստեղ, ջերմիկ ու կիրթ մթնոլորտի մէջ,  տեղի կ’ունենային անտիպ ու տպագրեալ երկերու բարձրորակ քննարկումներ, գրական-գեղարուեստական բնոյթի ասուլիսներ, խորհրդակցութիւններ, մտքերու փոխանա-կումներ, այլեւ նորանոր  ծանօթութիւններ ու մտերմիկ զրոյցներ:        →

         Այս հաւաքոյթներուն կանոնաւոր կը մասնակցէր Առվեր եւս  իր փայլուն օրերուն՝  երեսունականներու առաջին տարիներուն:   Այնտեղ մնայուն ներկայութիւն  էր նաեւ  գրական  շատ լայն հետաքրքրութիւններ ունեցող Մարի Նոտիէն՝ Շառլի քսանամեայ  դուստրը, որ շուտով պիտի  ամուսնանար ու  դառնար   տիկին Marie Mennessier-Nodier (1811−1893). տեսնել աւելի անդին:

         Ահա այս դեռատի կնոջ յուշատետրին մէջ է որ Առվեր գրած ու մակագրած է իր հնչեակը՝ զայն,− ինչպէս կ’ըսուի,− «իտալերէնէ թարգմանեալ[1]» պիտակելով, իսկ այդ նոյն հնչեակը Un secret“գաղտնիք մը” խորագիրով մտած է իր քերթուածներու հատորին մէջ՝ 1833-ին:

                                                                            *   *   *

         Սիրային այս գաղտնիքը մեկնաբանողները  կը կազմեն չորս տարբեր խումբեր:

         ա. Անոնք, որ  անոր ետին կը տեսնեն տիկին Վիկտոր Հիւգոն, որ կը կոչուէր Adèle: Իբրեւ թէ իր հնչեակին 12-րդ եւ 13-րդ տողերուն ծայրը գտնուող fidèle եւ  d’elle բառերու վերջայանգերը այդպէս ալ ծածուկ կ’ոգեկոչեն այդ կնոջ անունն ու յիշատակը: Որեւէ աղբիւր չի լուսաբաներ, թէ Առվեր ե՛րբ եւ ո՛ւր կրնար հանդիպիլ տիկին Հիւգոյին, որպէսզի ծնէր  այն «անանց ու յեղակարծ» սէրը, որուն կ’ակնարկուի հնչեակի երկրորդ տողին մէջ:  Ի վերայ այսր ամենայնի  տիկին Հիւգոն ունեցած է «ի՛ր գաղտնիքը»՝ 1830-ին արտաամուսնական կրակոտ  կապեր հաստատած ըլլալով իր ամուսինին բարեկամներէն  Saite-Beuve-ի[2] հետ, կապ, որ  աւելի ուշ քան 1836-ը կը շարունակուէր անտեղիտալիօրէն՝ նոյնիսկ հակառակ ամուսնոյն կշտամբանքներուն: Այս բոլորը դժուար թէ տիկին Հիւգոն «տրամադրելի» դարձնէին երրորդի մը, որ Առվերն էր:

         բ. Ուրիշներ հնչեակի հերոսուհին փնտռած են Առվերի մանկութեան մէկ ընկերուհիին մէջ, որ բանաստեղծը  վաղ պատանութեանը ճանչցած էր հօրը ծննդավայրին՝ Cézy-ի մէջ,  այնպիսի տարիքի մը, ուր ո՛չ կրնար  ամուսնանալ, ոչ՛ սիրահետել: Թող որ մանկամարդուհին շատ կանուխ կը մեռնի, եւ Առվեր  հետագային պիտի թաղուէր անոր շիրիմին շատ մօտ:

Դարու վերջերուն Adolphe Plisson, քաղաքական գործիչ եւ գրող, սեփական հետաքրքրութենէ  մղուած՝ կ’այցելէ Cézy, ուր կը ծանօթանայ 95-ամեայ պառաւի մը՝ Tissier անուանեալ, որ լաւ ճանչցած է Առվերը, որուն հետ ալ ստացած է իր կրթութիւնը: 

         − Շատ ուրախ մանչ մըն էր,− կը վկայէ պառաւը:

         Plisson հարց կու տայ անոր, թէ արդեօք որեւէ ատեն լսա՞ծ է ընկերոջ բերնէն «Mon  âme a  son secret, ma vie a son mystère» բառերով սկսող բանաստեղծութիւն մը...

         Որուն պառաւը կը փութայ պատասխանել.

         − Ո՛չ, աւելի ուրախ բաներ կ’արտասանէր,− ու այդպէս ալ կը սպառէ իր  «ծանօթութիւններու» դիպաշարը:

         գ. Շատ աւելի կը հոլովուի անունը Marie Dorval-ի մը (1798−1849):

         Ան վեց տարեկանին   կը լքուի հօրմէն,  իսկ քանի մը տարի ետք կը կորսնցնէ մայրն ալ: 16  տարեկանին կը կնքէ առաջին ամուսնութիւնը դերասանի մը հետ, որմէ կ’ունենայ երկու զաւակ, այնուհետեւ կը դառնայ գաւառական բեմերու փնտռուած դերասանուհին: Չորս տարի ետք կ’ամուսնալուծուի՝ պահելով ամուսինին մականունը՝ Տորվալ: Նոյն տարին՝ 1818-ին  կ’անցնի Փարիզ, ուր նոյն յաջողութեամբ հանդէս կու գայ տեղւոյն անուանի բեմերուն վրայ, միւս կողմէ՝ կը սկսի ազատ կենակցիլ երաժշտագէտի մը հետ, որմէ երեք աղջիկ կ’ունենայ մինչեւ 1828: Յաջորդ տարի ուրիշի մը հետ կը կնքէ երկրորդ  պաշտօնական ամուսնութիւն մը՝ երկուստեք համաձայնելով «որ ազատ պիտի ըլլային ունենալու իրենց արտաամուսնական պզտիկ սիրավէպերը»: Ան կը ծանօթանայ օրուան մեծգոյն դերասաններուն, թատերագիրներուն ու այլ արուեստագէտներու: Այս ծանօթութեանց ծիրէն ներս կը կապուի բանաստեղծ եւ թատերագիր Alfred de Vigny-ի հետ, որ գժտուած էր կնոջմէն. այս «պզտիկ սիրավէպին» վրայ շուտով  կու գայ աւելնալու Վիկտոր Հիւգոն եւս,  որուն կինը նոյն տարիներուն կ’արածէր  Sainte-Beuve-ի հետ: Իսկ տարի մը անց՝ 1833-ին Մարի Տորվալ, պահելով հանդերձ  կապերը իր երկու  արու տարփածուներուն հետ,  միասեռական   բուռն կապերով կը յարաբերի  հռչակաւոր գրագէտ ու վիպասանուհի Ժորժ Սանտին հետ՝ առանց որեւէ վնաս հասցնելու իր արուեստին, որ զինք կը տանի մինչեւ Odéon-ի եւ Comédie Française-ի բեմերը, ուր պիտի խաղայ այդ տարիներուն համբաւ շահած  մեծագոյն թատերախաղերուն մէջ եւ դերասաններուն հետ:

         Այս բոլորը տեղի կ’ունենային Առվերի ամենափայլուն ու խենթ տարիներուն, եւ ամէն բան կը թելադրէ, որ ան՝ իբրեւ դերասան ու թատերագիր,  հանդիպած ու մօտէն ճանչցած ըլլայ Մարի Տորվալը. սակայն...  հնչեակի տիպարին հետ ոչ մէկ հասարակաց գիծ ունի  Տորվալ. ասոնք երկու էապէս հակադիր ու  բոլորովին անհամատեղելի  էակներ են, որոնք ամէն ինչով կը բացառեն  ու կը վանեն զիրար:

                                                                   *   *   *

         դ. Charles Gline, որ առաջինը մանրամասն գրած է Առվերի կենսագրութիւնը, հակում ունէր մատնացոյց ընելու Մարի Նոտիէն (նկարը աջին). «Վստահելի ու արժանահաւատ բարեկամ մը ինծի վկայած է Առվերի հրատարակիչ Hetzel-ի մէկ յայտնութիւնը, թէ բանաստեղծը անձամբ իրեն խոստովանած է, որ իր հնչեակը շարադրելու առթիւ ի մտի ունէր Մարի Նոտիէն»:   →

         Բանաստեղծ Edouard Grenier իր կողմէ կը հաստատէ այս տեղեկութիւնը, իսկ Adolphe Racot,− ժամանակակից հռչակաւոր  կենսագիր մը,− կը պատմէ, թէ ինք անձամբ  Մարի Նոտիէի յուշատետրին մէջ տեսած է այդ հնչեակը. եւ կ’եզրակացնէ, որ Մարի Նոտիէ «ամէն բան  լաւ գիտէր» եւ հաւանական նախանձ մը խնայելու համար ամուսինին՝ հնարած էր  թարգմանութեան  վարկածը: 

         

Յաւելուած             

← Juliette Récamier (1777−1849) հիմնած է  փարիզեան գրական ամենահռչակաւոր  ու երկարակեաց salon-ը, ուր հանդիպած են  իր ժամանակի մեծագոյն գրողներն ու արուեստագէտները: Սովորական salon-ի մը սահմաններէն դուրս գալով՝ ան  հանդիսացաւ  գրականութեան իսկական կաճառ մը, ուր ձեւաւորուեցան ժամանակի մեծագոյն գլուխ-գործոցները:

armenag@gmail.com                                     Արմենակ Եղիայեան

 

 

 

 

---

[1] Այլազան ու սեւեռուն փնտռտուքներ եղան՝ երեւան հանելու համար  իտալական  հաւանական բնագիր մը. սակայն ոչ մէկ արդիւնքի յանգեցան նման  որոնումները:

[2] Ֆրանսացի անուանի քննադատ եւ գրող (1804−1869):

No, they did not see it that way.

Vahe H Apelian

 

The title of my blog is a posthumous response to a question my late uncle Dr. Antranig Chalabian had raised wondering whether, “the present-day Soviet rulers of glasnost and perestroika (openness and restructuring) be able to see the important role a greater and stronger Armenia can play in the political network of religious minded peoples on the southern borders of their empire? (read Russian Empire)"  «It remains to be seen», he had concluded.

Obviously Russia did not see it that way.

The quote is from his booklet titled «Emperors, Tsars, and Commissars», he had written in 1988.  (See the linke below). It was the era of Gorbachev's glasnost and perestroika (openness and restructuring). The booklet had dealt with the disastrous politicies of the Byzantine Emperors who instead of supporting their co-religionist Orthodox Armenians, the keepers of the Byzantine Empire's Eastern gate, they waged a fierce theological war against it, whose reprecussions were obviously political, to the detriment of both.

 Then came the Russian Tsars who pursued a policy of Armenia without Armenians, which also proved to be disastrous for their southern border.

 And finally «came Russia’s commissars, following the Bolshevik Revolution of October 1917, and a portion of the short-lived independent Armenian state in Transcaucasi came under Soviet rule, in November 1920.»

Dr. Chalabian supported Soviet Armenia from get go. He wrote that “As long as Turks are Turks and they are living in Turkey, Armenians inhabiting the southern boarders of the Soviet Union have no choice but to seek Russian protection, irrespective of the kind of government which rules that country. This is a political affinity and has nothing to do with ideologies. Only deranged Armenian politicos  and pollical adventurers can think otherwise.»

But lately, apparaently he remained concered and wrote:  «Has the attitude of the Soviets (read Russians ) towards Armenia and the Armenians changed during the past sixty-eight years? Do they see a role for a greater and stronger Armenia in an area which is inhabited by fanatically religious and basically anti-atheist Muslims? I am not so sure. The Soviets do not seem to be moving -or inclined to move – in that direction and are obviously heading  towards the same pitfalls as their predecessors. They have kept Armenia small and weak, thus strengthening their potential enemies in the south. Even the Armenian district of Mountainous Karabagh, once inhabited 93 percent by Armenians, is under Azerbaijan’s rule.»

«As a student of history», he wrote, «it is my deep conviction that the creation of a greater and stronger Armenia by the Soviet Union (other world powers have no access in its borders), with the acquisition of at least some of our lands, will serve the best interests of that country (read Russia)». Because he wrote that Soviet Union ( read Russia ) is vulnerable on two fronts: from within because of demographic shift in favor of Muslims and from the south because of increasing Muslims' demography and their political and military prowess. 

It may be that it may not have even been in the wildest imagination of the political Russian mindset that a day would could come and they would concede their southern border in Caucasus to Turkish Azerbaijan front and thus strengthen the Turkic world way more than it ever was. Surely, let alone Dr. Chalabian to have imagined that a day would come when the Russians would sacrifice  the Soviet Nagorno Karabakh Oblast on the political altar. 

But they did, and in my view they laid the historical ground work that will alter the very character of what Russia was, as white, Orthodox Russians' fiefdom and treating its southern frontier as such. «The journey of of 1000 miles, starts with a single step» says a Chinese saying. The Russians took that very first step by giving up and leaving the Soviet Nagorno-Karabagh Oblast and overseeing it depopulated of its native Armenian inhabitants almost to the last Armenian man and woman, for immediate expedient gains but long term loss. 

And in the process, Russia necessitated Armenia diversity its politics and state relations. 

Link: The Commisars

https://vhapelian.blogspot.com/2022/01/emperors-tsars-and-commissars.html

 

 

 

Hamo (Ohanjanian) - The ideologue

Recently Mike Babayan (Մայքլ Բաբայան), an expert on the First Republic of Armenia - author of 455 pages long "Commemorative Book of Independence: Statesmen of the Republic of Armenia 1918-1920" - posted a picture of Hamo Ohanjanian's tombstone in Egypt, which is inscribed with the following: "HE LIVED AS HE PREACHED" (ԱՊՐԵՑԱՒ ԻՆՉՊԷ ՔԱՐՈԶԵՑ). He was an uncompromising ARF socialist. I was reminded of my translation of an excerpt from a chapter of Antranig Zarougian's  book, “The Greats and the Others” (Մեծերը եւ Միւսները, 1992). The chapter's original title is 'Hamo Ohanjanian and Vahan Papazian'.(See below) Vahe H Apelian

"In the middle of the Second World War, at the height of German military successes, Hamo Ohanjanian came to the center stage of Armenian life--out of seclusion in the country of the sphinxes. His long-time friend Avedik Isahakian had written a bitter and an emotional letter to him from Armenia asking how it was allowed Dro join the Germans and invade the Soviet Union, which meant invading Armenia. Ohanjanian responded publicly in an article that took an entire page –-whether he had written it or someone else had done it on his behalf does not matter for he had signed his name in the ARF organ "Houssaper" saying that he and his party unequivocally condemn Dro’s conduct and actions and that they irreversibly stood with the Allies, meaning with Armenia.

It was simple and clear but nonetheless just an article, a pubic affirmation. Yet one would not have faulted a person who thought it did not appear to reflect the real mindset and the ongoing actions. But it would soon be proven that whatever Hamo Ohanjanian said in his response to Avedik Isahakian was altogether honest and expressed the real conviction of the ARF Bureau.

Late one night in Aleppo a circular arrived for an out of the ordinary meeting compelling the recipients to attend it. Because of the war the Central Committee (Gomideh) had reduced its membership to a minimum (five members) and there was a special provision that a decision by three would be regarded unanimous. Although there was no war in Syria, the country was experiencing a heightened state of alert. German and Italian spies abounded; new groups were coming ashore from the sea and from the air, and there were Armenians among them. British and French agents were ceaselessly apprehending Arab nationalists whose overt sentiments were pro-German.

Under these circumstances it was a total surprise to me when I found Hamo Ohanjanian in Adour's house. It was the first time we had met, although it seemed to me that I had seen him many times before. He was so much the man as in the photographs. His arms were resting on the armchair, he was holding his head high much like in his photographs. He retained the same composure throughout the meeting. Only once did he change his posture when he excused himself to go to the bathroom. He had convened the meeting in the name of the Bureau. He immediately made a point that there would be no minutes recorded to my relief, as I was the recording secretary.

The British were planning to evacuate Egypt out of concern that they would not be able to withstand the assault of Rommel’s army, whose front forces were approaching Alexandria. It was thought that after taking Egypt the German forces would succeed in entering Palestine, Syria and Lebanon where the British, after putting a show resistance, would pull to Cyprus to ready them for a counter-attack later on.

For over an hour we heard similar military and political analysis after which Ohanjanian turned to the main topic. He revealed the British would have a plane at the disposal of the Bureau, which was centered in Egypt, to evacuate its members and transport their archives as the British retreated. Given that the ties between the Bureau and regional bodies might be disrupted under such circumstances, decisions had to be taken to keep communication lines open. He pulled a piece of paper from his pocket and read the following words: 1) Comrades (ungerner), 2) Dear Comrades and 3) Precious Comrades.

If the circulars from Bureau read "Comrades", the outlined directives should be followed irrespective of regional considerations because the Bureau would have regarded it in the best interest of the people at large. Should the circular read "Dear Comrades", it would mean that the Bureau was not convinced of the best course of action so it was up to the regional committees to act accordingly. Should the circular read "Precious Comrades" the directives in the circular should be ignored.

Hamo Ohanjanian

After he communicated to us this latest development, he invited us to ask questions. But we remained silent and no one asked any question. We were dumbfounded. The decisions taken appeared so out of place and unexpected. We had lived the past three years of the war in relative calm and relative passivity, far away from the happenings. The bloody battles were news we watched with interest. In fact, the community was experiencing such an economic upturn that there appeared a revived interest in literature. The “Nayiri” literary periodical was established for Armenian writers in the Middle East irrespective of their political affiliation. Whatever Ohanjanian conveyed to us sounded pretentious and totally contrary to our party.

It was Herartian who objected by saying: "You seem to forget that our party is based on the principle of decentralization. How could the Bureau dictate to us a course of conduct when our by-laws stipulate that each regional committee act according to the dictates of the region?"

Ohanjaniana replied: "The Bureau has made a note to that affect. Since we are in wartime the by-laws have been suspended."

Dzaroukian: "Decentralization is the core of our party’s structure and can only be suspended by an all-party assembly. Would it not have been prudent for some of the members of the Bureau to have departed with the British and taken the archives while the rest of the leadership stayed put? Much as in France's case where there is a Free France under the leadership of De Gaule and an occupied France under Marshal Petain.

Ohanjian's rebuttal was fast and swift: "Young Comrade, an occupied Bureau cannot function under the heel of Hitler."

The meeting ended at dawn. It was decided to invite group leaders for a consultative meeting the same evening. During the meeting we asked Ohanjanian to gauge the feelings of party members. He had nothing to report or to say to them, he said. He would listen rather than tell them anything.

It should be noted that, whether unfounded or not, the overall feeling in the party was pro-German.  After the German occupation of Greece and Crete, it was natural to expect the next blow would be against Turkey. It’s a mob mentality that gives a feeling of euphoria. Few were prepared to analyze an insignificant event that would tell volumes about German and Turkish relations. Upon Hitler's orders, the remains of Tala'at Pasha, which had been buried in Germany for the previous twenty years, were taken to Istanbul. Surely that did not sound as a hostile act but signaled a growing friendship. It was only after the war that we came to realize relations between Germany and Turkey had been contrary to our understanding. Not only Germany had no intention to attack Turkey, it was Turkey that had been waiting for the opportune time to attack Caucasus.

Ohanjanian said a few words and encouraged attendees to openly express themselves. He heard the same pro-German tune from all. Dasnabedian asked: "Should tomorrow Dro reach Yerevan with the German forces and appeal to us from there, what would be our response?"

"Let me ask that question to you," said Ohanjanian, "what would you do?"

"We? We would applaud and dance from here," said Dasnabedian.

For the very first time Ohanjanian’s voice quivered when he snapped almost in fury: "Should he do that, he will no longer be my comrade and you will not be an ARFer with your dance."

From left and right the same sentiments could be heard. The German military successes had dazzled our comrades. No one had any doubt that Germany will emerge the winner of the war. I should admit that the members of the leading bodies did not think differently. It was only Ohanjanian who remained steadfast on his belief that final victory belonged to the Allied forces. He then adjourned the meeting.

There was such an emphatic tone in his voice that I remember his closing words almost verbatim. "Comrades, do not be deceived by appearances. The German victory means a return of mankind to the Middle Ages. The wheel of time does not go backward. It would be impossible to envision Hitler ruling the world. Do not believe in transient victories. The racist mentality of Germans cannot stop the wheel of progress. Believe in the final victory of freedom and socialism."

He stirred emotions but could not convince the attendees. The belief that Turkey was next had overwhelmed the comrades.

My last meeting with Ohanjanian was brief. It lasted half-an-hour. He had requested that we present our opinion on paper. I presented a summary of our views and gave it to him after reading it out loud.

“Our committee does not support Bureau’s decision to depart with the British for the following reasons:

A.  Where can the British take the Bureau? Probably to London or even may be to India. Presumably under German occupation, how can we follow directives from the Bureau that surely will not be in favor of the Germans? If we were to follow its directives we would undermine our security here. If we do not follow the directives of the Bureau, the British would have no reason to hold on to the Bureau.

B.  We recommend that the Bureau stay in Egypt even though some comrades may be obliged to leave."

Ohanjanian took the paper and looked at it for a long time. It appeared he re-read it.  He looked at each of us, one by one, and then said in a low voice: "Alas, it appears that for forty years we have struggled in vain to secure a victory for socialism. It appears I have not known my comrades.”

Soon after the meeting the wheel of fortune suddenly changed in the opposite direction. Not only did the British not leave Egypt, but also they started to pursue German and Italian forces from one end of Northern Africa to the other. At the same time, after the heroic Battle of Stalingrad, the Soviet forces resorted to counter attack. The rest is history.

From all these I retain the unadulterated picture of Hamo Ohanjanian and his unwavering belief. Of all the political personalities I have met no one else who has stood without blemish as he has. To enjoy success and to retain a belief in victory is not an impressive achievement. Real courage and greatness lie in retaining one’s beliefs and not be swayed by the currents."

ԲՆԱԳԻՐԸ

Վերջերս Հայաստանի Առաջին Հանրապետության մասնագետ Մայքլ Բաբայանը)՝ 455 էջանոց « ՀՈՒՇԱՄԱՏՅԱՆ ԱՆԿԱԽՈՒԹՅԱՆ Հայաստանի Հանրապետության 1918-1920 թթ. Պետական Գործիչմերը» գրքի հեղինակ, տեղադրել է Եգիպտոսում Համո Օհանջանյանի տապանաքարի նկարը, որուն վրայ արձանագրուած է » (ԱՊՐԵՑԱՒ ԻՆՉՊԷ ՔԱՐՈԶԵՑ). Անզիջում դաշնակցական սոցիալիստ էր։ Հիշեցի Անդրանիկ Ծարուկեանի «Մեծերը և մյուսները» (Պէյրութ, 1932) գրքի մի հատվածի իմ թարգմանությունը։ Գլխի բնօրինակ անվանումն է «Համօ Օհանջանեան և Վահան Փափազյան (Կոմս)»: Վահէ Հ Աբէլեան

Super Tuesday: Will the next president own a dog?

Vaahe Apelian

All the presidents I know, other than President Trump, owned a dog. After all, as President Truman famously said, if a president looks for a friend in Washingtonn D.C., he better have a dog. 

The dogs the U.S. presidents own are no less known than their masters.  Reporters scrutinize the type of the dog the president's family owns and measure their relationship in an effort to find out about the president's character.  When President Johnson lifted his beagle by its ears in front of reporters and photographers, he made headline news and set off a nationwide barrage of protests from animal lovers. 

But for reporters, LBJ's treatment of his dog seemed to reinforce his character. President Lyndon B. Johnson was the second tallest president. He measured 6 ft 31/2 inches, short by a half an inch from the tallest, President Lincoln. It is said that LBJ had a tendency to stand close to someone and overpower him with his height. He had also a large ego. He had his wife's and his daughters' initials after his, LBJ.

President George W. Bush and First Lady Laura Bush owned a Scottish terrier. According to Wikipedia "Barney (dog) Bush was a Scottish Terrier. Barney had his own official web page which redirected to an extension of the White House website". President Bush seemed to dote on his dog. He would be seen carrying Barney on the White House lawn heading towards the attending helicopter. Barney seemed to have free access to the oval office.

After his retirement from public life, George W. Bush exhibited a latent talent in the painting of portraits. Some found George W. Bush's latent artistic talent remarkable. Others claimed that Bush officially established himself as an artist. He exhibited his paintings of some of the world leaders he shared the world stage, such as Tony Blair, Hamid Karzai, and famously Putin, whom he portrayed with clenched jaws, intensely focused blue eyes imparting an air of determination and being in charge. 

George w. Bush explained his painting of Putin's portrait as follows: "As you know, our dear dog Barney, who had a special place in my heart — Putin dissed him and said ‘You really call that a dog?' "  A year later, President Bush went to visit Putin at his dacha outside Moscow. Putin showed him his dog, a "huge hound" much bigger than Barney. Then, quoting Bush, "Putin kind of looks at me and he says 'Bigger, stronger and faster than Barney.' " The comment left President George W. Bush dumbstruck. (Adam Taylor, April 4, 2014, The Washington Post).

Obamas owned Bo and Sunny. They were Spanish Water Dogs, When Bo died, President Obama said:  "For more than a decade, Bo was a constant, gentle presence in our lives—happy to see us on our good days, our bad days, and every day in between. He tolerated all the fuss that came with being in the White House, had a big bark but no bite.” I make no political infernal noting that Bo had big bark, but no bite !

After President Obama, came president Trump. President Trump is the only president I know who did not own a dog. In fact it is reported Trump having said that "he would feel 'a little phony' having a dog. During his presidency, Trump’s statement in favor of President Putin surely must have raised the concerns of republicans who made a note of Putin’s remarks about Barney and surely  shared the sentiments of the influential Bush family. After all, they may have reasoned, Trump  did not own a dog to have an appreciation of the adversary. No wonder that Bushes and his repulican allies did not support Trump at the 2020 presidential election Trump lost.

The Bidens came to the White House with two German Shepherd dogs, named Champ and Major. German Shepherd dogs are no poodles but I am not sure how they measure against the dog Putin owned and bragged about to George w. Bush, dismissing Bush's dog as a "no dog". One thing was appeared to be certain, that Biden’s administration would have a more aggressive stand towards Russia and it did, rightfully or wrongly, it sure did.

Yesterday was the Super Tuesday. The incumbent Joe Biden and the ex-president Trump, carried the electoral votes of the 16 states that voted. Barring the unexpected, they will be the presidential contenders. The incumbent Joe Biden owns German shepherds.  Ex-president Trump seems to have an aversion for dogs, owns neither a poodle nor a hound dog. As to Putin, it is not likely that he has given up on his “huge hound”.