Advertisement

Subjectivity

, Volume 10, Issue 2, pp 170–189 | Cite as

Treasure/Fetish/Gift: hunting for ‘Armenian gold’ in post-genocide Turkish Kurdistan

  • Alice von BiebersteinEmail author
Original Article

Abstract

This article ethnographically attends to the widespread practice of hunting for ‘Armenian’ treasures in Eastern Turkey. It explores the double valence of shadow—as that which gives power to vision, which makes present and mediates, and as that which can overpower vision, which obscures and hides—as it manifests in treasure hunting, conceived of as a complex encounter with the Armenian history of the region. Treasures, as shadows carrying this split potential, are intimately bound up with both the Turkish nation-state project built on genocide, dispossession and denial, and with the particular position Kurds hold within this constellation. I draw on the notions of fetish and the gift to think through treasures as shadows in their double potentiality across time, as they become recognised—or not—as part of a relational matrix involving their historical makers and the present-day diggers.

Keywords

Turkey Armenian genocide Treasures Fetish Gift 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Research for this article has been made possible by the European Research Council (grant number ERC2011_stG_20101124). It has benefitted from discussions on an earlier version presented in Vilnius, Lithuania, as part of the ‘Shadowing the Scene’ conference. I would further like to thank Eirini Avramopoulou, Mantas Kvedaravicius and Marc Nichanian for their helpful comments on an earlier draft. All translations, unless otherwise noted, are mine.

References

  1. Ahıska, M. 2010. Occidentalism in Turkey: questions of modernity and national identity in turkish radio broadcasting. London: I.B. Tauris.Google Scholar
  2. Akçam, T., and Ü. Kurt. 2015. The spirit of the laws: the plunder of wealth in the Armenian Genocide. New York: Berghahn.Google Scholar
  3. Alford, C.F. 2015. Subjectivity and the intergenerational transmission of historical trauma: holocaust survivors and their children. Subjectivity 8(3): 261–282.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baghdjian, K.K. 1987. La confiscation, par le gouvernement turc, des biens arméniens– dits “abandonées”. Montréal: K. Baghdjian.Google Scholar
  5. Benjamin, W. (2007 [1969]). Illuminations, New York: Schocken Books.Google Scholar
  6. Bevan, R. 2006. The destruction of memory: architecture at war. London: Reaktion.Google Scholar
  7. Biner, Z.Ö. 2010. Acts of Defacement, Memory of Loss: ghostly Effects of the “Armenian Crisis” in Mardin. Southeastern Turkey. History & Memory 22(2): 68–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brink-Danan, M. 2012. Jewish life in 21st-century Turkey: The other side of tolerance. Bloomington, Indiana: Indiana University Press.Google Scholar
  9. Butler, J., and A. Athanasiou. 2013. Dispossession: the performative in the political. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
  10. Clark, J. 1993. Gold, Sex, and Pollution: male Illness and Myth at Mt. Kare, Papua New Guinea. American Ethnologist 20(4): 742–757.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dawdy, S.L. 2010. Clockpunk anthropology and the ruins of modernity. Current Anthropology 51(6): 761–793.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Der Matossian, B. 2011. The Taboo within the Taboo: the fate of ‘Armenian Capital’ at the end of the Ottoman Empire. European Journal of Turkish Studies (Online), Complete List 2011.Google Scholar
  13. Derrida, J. 1992. Given time: I. Chicago: Chicago University Press.Google Scholar
  14. Derrida, J. 1994. Specters of Marx: the state of the debt, the work of mourning and the New International. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  15. Desilvey, C. 2006. Observed decay: telling stories with mutably things. Journal of Material Culture 11(3): 318–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Desilvey, C., and T. Edensor. 2013. Reckoning with ruins. Progress in Human Geography 37(4): 465–485.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Edensor, T. 2005. Industrial ruins: space, aesthetics, and materiality. Oxford: Berg.Google Scholar
  18. Głuchowski, P., and M. Kowalski. 2008. Goldfieber in Treblinka. In Unbequeme Wahrheiten: Polen und sein Verhältnis zu den Juden, ed. B. Engelkind, and H. Hirsch. Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  19. Gordillo, G. 2014. Rubble: the afterlife of destruction. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gordon, A.F. 1997. Ghostly matters. Haunting and the sociological imagination. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.Google Scholar
  21. Gregory, C.A. [2015 (1982)]. Gifts and commodities, Chicago: HAU Books.Google Scholar
  22. Gross, J.T., and I.G. Gross. 2012. Golden harvest: events at the periphery of the holocaust. Oxford: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Hansen, M. B. (2007) Benjamin’s Aura. Critical Inquiry, 34336–375.Google Scholar
  24. High, M. 2013. Polluted money, polluted wealth: emerging regimes of value in the Mongolian gold rush. American Ethnologist 40(4): 676–688.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hovannisian, R.G. (ed.). 2001. Armenian Baghesh/Bitlis and Taron/Mush. Costa Mesa: Mazda Publishers.Google Scholar
  26. Kévorkian, R. H. 2007. Patrimoine monumental et ‘biens nationaux’ arméniens de Turquie: bilan d’une politique d’État. Revue arménienne, 751–62.Google Scholar
  27. Klima, A. 2002. The Funeral Casino: meditation, massacre, and exchange with the dead in Thailand. Princeton: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Mauss, M. [1990 (1950)]. Die Gabe: Form und Funktion des Austauschs in archaischen Gesellschaften, Frankfurt am Main: Suhrkamp.Google Scholar
  29. Navaro-Yashin, Y. 2012. The make-believe space: affective geography in a postwar polity. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Onaran, N. 2010. Emval-i Metruke Olayı: Osmanlı’da ve Cumhuriyette Ermeni ve Rum Mallarının Türkleştirilmesi. Istanbul: Belge Yayinlari.Google Scholar
  31. Özyürek, E. 2006. Nostalgia for the modern: state secularism and everyday politics in Turkey. Durham: Duke University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rahimi, S. 2016. Haunted metaphor, transmitted affect: the pantemporality of subjective experience. Subjectivity 9(1): 83–105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Stoler, A.L. (ed.). 2013. Imperial debris: on ruins and ruination. Durham: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Taussig, M. 1992. The nervous system. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  35. Taussig, M. 1999. Defacement: public secrecy and the labor of the negative. Stanford: Stanford University Press.Google Scholar
  36. Taussig, M. 2004. My cocaine museum. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Taussig, M. [2010 (1980)]. The devil and commodity Fetishism in South America, Chapel Hill: The University of North Carolina Press.Google Scholar
  38. To, N.M., and E. Trivelli. 2015. Affect, memory and the transmission of trauma. Subjectivity 8(4): 305–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Üngör, U.Ü., and M. Polatel. 2011. Confiscation and destruction: the young Turk Seizure of Armenian property. London: Continuum.Google Scholar
  40. Walkerdine, V., A. Olsvold, and M. Rudberg. 2013. Researching Embodiment and Intergenerational Trauma using the worlk of Davoine and Gaudilliere: history walked in the door. Subjectivity 6(3): 272–297.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Macmillan Publishers Ltd 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Wissenschaftskolleg zu BerlinBerlinGermany

Personalised recommendations