A literary moment or literary movement?
J.P. Der Boghossian, founder of QAL
This month, the Queer Armenian Library, the International Armenian Literary Alliance, and Hye-Phen Magazine co-hosted a panel and a reading of Queer Armenian writers. Two events of historic significance. Certainly prior to this there have been readings of Queer Armenian writers and facilitated discussions, but two global events through Zoom with writers and attendees from Yerevan to Los Angeles was certainly historic.
These events confirm an epochal moment for Armenian literature. Never have we had a genre which we can call Queer Armenian literature. Over the past two decades dozens of writers of novels, poetry, memoirs, short stories, and essays created it. Against the odds in some cases. Many authors wrote in isolation. In other cases, Queer literary organizers published anthologies and launched digital platforms, but did so in opposition to, or without the support of, Armenian organizations. And this work builds on the pioneers of the twentieth century, from poets like Charents and Tekeyan, to fiction writer George Stambolian, and memoirist Arlene Voski Avakian.
Yet, after these two events I am hesitant to continue to call it a genre. We may have a literary movement on our hands. We generally know literary movements as the “—isms” (realism, romanticism, naturalism, etc.); and, while bookstores would call Queer Armenian literature a genre and then place it on the subgenre bookshelves of Armenian literature or LGBTQ literature, the more likely comparison may be the Harlem Renaissance or the Black Arts movement or the New York School.
Instead of a physical location (Harlem or New York), we have the vast expanse of the internet, through which writers can now connect into a larger and emerging community of writers. The themes of this potential new movement include challenging the norms of Armenian relationships, interrogating gender roles, queering ideas of intimacy, challenging nationalism and colonialism simultaneously, and providing new explorations of Armenian identity.
At the panel, Armen Ohanyan suggested the idea that minority discourse may be a better framework for Armenian identity as all Armenians find themselves as part of a minority. This minority identity could be more universal for Armenians, instead of only using language, faith, or residence (not all Armenians speak Armenian, not all Armenians are members of the Apostolic Church, and not all Armenians live in Armenia). Queer Armenian writers would be better positioned to explore this idea of Armenian identity as they are a minority within a minority. During the panel, this discussion led to the recollection of previous arguments that Armenian identity itself could be considered queer.
But more importantly, these themes are not limited to Queer authors or Armenian authors. This movement could be part of a larger movement with deeper implications for the larger SWANA and MENA regions and their corresponding diasporas.
Perhaps the idea of a Queer Armenian literary movement is an overreach, too grandiose. But despite the diversity of styles, subject matter, and mediums, a consistent thread throughout Queer Armenian writing is its audacity to imagine, to love, and to speak necessary truths.
By J.P. Der Boghossian
