
Yerevan's Cascade Monument, housing a new contemporary art museum./L. Kohlenberg 2009
Mankind’s greatest error, the biggest deception of the past thousand years is this: to confuse poverty with stupidity.
-Orhan Pamuk, Snow
YEREVAN, Armenia – The tiny Ulikhanyan music club has only 12 tables and a tiny stage. But the place is packed to listen to the three Ulikhanyan brothers and their band on a Sunday night.
The music is all original, a jazz version of Armenian composer Komitas’s classical scores, and background for poetry by the famous Armenian poet Hovhannes Tumanyan. The playing is flawless, the compositions delightful, and the mood very light and informal: as a small child runs through the crowd, master clarinetist Martin Ulikhanyan makes his instrument follow the ebbs and flows of the child’s laughter, easily incorporating it into the composition.
“Ah,” says my friend Larisa, who brought me here, “I was just reading these poems to my daughter the other night.”
They announce they’ve made a cd of the poetry to donate to schools to help children maintain interest in Tumanyan. When we ask Mrs. Ulikhanyan, mother of this musical family and manager of the club, who paid for the cds, she says the money came out of their own pockets.
I want to buy one, but Larisa discovers they aren’t for sale, and in fact there aren’t any on the premises. That’s OK, she tells me. Martin is her clarinet teacher, and she tells me she can get one for me for free later on.
“That’s Armenian artists,” she says, laughing. “They don’t think about money at all.”
***
In November, a well-known art critic for a famous New York newspaper came to Yerevan. He was invited to give a key-note speech for the grand opening of the country’s first proper contemporary art museum, and he was supported in style: a $20,000 speaking fee, and another $5,000 in benefits – a stay at one of the country’s luxury hotels, dinners, tours and a flight from Berlin.
This reporter, not surprisingly, wrote an article about Armenia, which he knew the majority of his readers, like himself, knew very little about. It showed up, if you’d like to read the full text, on Nov. 19, 2009.
I know this, and not only because I am an artist, I live in Armenia and I worked as a temporary curator at the aformentioned contemporary art museum. Many people forwarded me this link thinking I’d be thrilled at a mention of Armenia and art, let alone contemporary art, in this prestigious paper.
Instead, I was horrified.
Beyond the somewhat mischaracterizing reporting on the Turkish-Armenian border disputes, the article hints at something deeper and more disturbing: it equates money with culture. It’s a mistake Americans coming to Armenia make all the time.
**
“You want to listen to a classical music concert?”
This was the question, asked incredulously to me by an Armenian translator I worked with when I first came to Yerevan nine years ago.
“I’m sorry,” she said, recovering quickly. “I am just not used to thinking of Americans as being interested in cultural things like this.”
You can hardly blame her for thinking that way. Americans generally don’t exactly have a reputation as being classical-music-listening-art-gallery-attending kinda folk. Unless money and/or celebrity is involved, of course. Artists in the U.S. are commonly perceived to be social slackers who either fetch too much money for their weird contemporary installations or make too little money, raising the question of why they would do art in the first place. As an American artist living in the U.S., I was constantly condescended to by those with so-called “real jobs.”
“How’s that little hobby of yours going?” was a constant refrain I heard as I struggled to make the time to paint and also earn enough money to be able to eat.
Read this well-meaning brochure created by an American arts group to try and counter that stereotype – the entire thing quotes statistics showing how much money artists and cultural groups contribute to the economy, and features quotes from mega wealthy patrons such as Microsoft co-founder Paul Allen.
From my translator’s perspective, she explained, the Americans she met generally bandied about terms like “GDP” and “economic development” rather than anything arts and culture-related.
Even art critics from famous New York newspapers, it seems, spend more time discussing the economy rather than … well, the arts.
This is how he introduces Armenia to the reader:
(The new contemporary art museum has) no endowment, no professional board, so it may very well soon fall flat on its face, as so much has in this country where widespread corruption, lethargy and years of isolation have led to an unemployment rate around 40 percent, a crumbling infrastructure and almost no middle class.
Though during his lecture, he perhaps pandered to the audience by praising the country’s fine art collection housed in the National Gallery, that’s not what he mentions in the article. Instead, he compared the $40 million dollar new contemporary art museum to the shabby building which houses the national collection:
I stopped several times into the National Gallery, an aging palace of marble, worn carpets, bare light bulbs and creaky floorboards in the middle of the city. You wouldn’t necessarily know it was a gallery from outside. The facade is covered by billboards for a bank. An unmarked entrance is shuttered by Venetian blinds. Even on Saturday and Sunday afternoons I was the only visitor in the entire place. Elderly female guards in starched white shirts, startled, glumly rose to watch me pass.
Through the gallery’s windows, bossa nova music wafted incongruously from an empty Soviet-era amusement park nearby. A panorama of half-finished apartment blocks, Hummers and luxury shops for the oligarchs, and bulky statues of Armenian heroes on horseback spread out below.
There is, in fact, very little about art at all in this story by the New York art critic, besides one passing mention of the contemporary art museum benefactors’ “mixed bag” collection. The remainder of the article is devoted to an anecdotal story representing the worst kind of ugly-American cliché, a story hauled out at cocktail parties to show how cool the story teller is for living overseas, by mocking both the poverty and the people who are living in it.
**
After reading this article, many of my expat friends and I who live in Armenia find ourselves in the funny position of becoming Armenian apologists.
“It was ridiculous,” fumed one American friend (provider of the Pamuk quote above). “Armenian artists and musicians can compete with anyone else in the world. I was offended.”
Another British friend concurred, adding “I felt like the Armenians were being personally attacked, just for living here.”
It’s a funny position because we know – much better than any parachuting journalist penning his lines while looking out the window of the luxurious Golden Tulip hotel – how frustrating it can be to live in Armenia. We know that the poverty and the lack of infrastructure and corruption can wreak havoc on the lives of everyone living here, Armenian or foreign.
But over time, we’ve learned also to admire how the arts blossoms here, despite the lack of financial support. We’ve discovered that there is a fragile, original beauty here that expresses itself through the arts. It’s often hidden in tucked away, hard-to-find locations, like the Ulikhanyan Music Club.
I’ve been leading tours to artist studios here for the past two years. We pile into funny old lada taxis and doddering marshutka vans, dodging potholes in the streets as we move into non-descript neighborhoods with crumbling buildings. It’s not till we climb the dirty staircases and duck around the exposed electric wires hanging there, into a grandmother or grandfather’s apartment that has been converted into a studio, that one sees that one sees the beauty of Armenia. Scuplture, painting, drawing, printmaking. It’s all here.
Even contemporary art concepts – from formalism to Pop Art – are present, though they were mainly filtered out until the 1980s. Many artists adopted these ideas at the risk of career suicide, such as the talented painter Karine Matsakyan, whose works make pointed critiques about feminism, capitalism and the problems of adhering too closely to folk traditions. Or abstract expressionist Artur Sarkissian, whose emotive, thick layering of paint and silkscreened imagery, reminiscent of 1960s Robert Rauschenberg, has nevertheless a distinctly unique and contemporary feel.
These artists are excited about the new contemporary art museum, as was the 20,000-strong crowd that the New York art critic was gracious enough to point out thronged the grand opening of the contemporary art museum, clogging the galleries and waiting in hour-long lines to get into the tiny galleries.
Yet it’s a cautious optimism. During the soviet era, artists could be banished from the union – as good as death during that time — for as minor an infraction as using the color green in shadows (this happened to painter Hariutunyan Galents). And they’ve learned a different kind of humiliation from the new wave of westerners, who won’t censor their work, but will belittle or ignore it. They are careful, therefore, whom they let into their studios and their music halls.
They may be poor, but they aren’t stupid.