This outstanding book was difficult to put down, and even more
difficult to stop thinking about. Its topic was burdensome, sad,
terribly unrelenting and tragic. Samantha Power's thorough research,
well documented bibliography, and clean articulate writing style made
the reading of such a depressing topic interesting and compelling. This
book took me about a month of careful reading to complete and I highly
recommend it.
What disturbs me more than the topic of Ms. Power's
book, however, is the lengthy and jumbled review below entitled
"Scholarship from Hell." The reviewer is engaging in sophistry designed
to discredit Ms. Power and mislead. Beginning with the phrase
"Armenian Relocation" the reviewer spirals into ten, inarticulate,
horribly written and confusing paragraphs whose sole intent is to
misdirect and mislead. Notice the use of the phrase "Ottoman-Armenian
Conflict" giving the impression of moral equivalence and balance. In
paragraph three, he then attempts to discredit Ms. Power - and
subsequently her book - by claiming she did not utilize "objective
sources" and as having "...a lack of sufficient grounding in history to
tackle a subject as sensitive and controversial as the Ottoman-Armenian
conflict." There is nothing controversial or sensitive about the
Armenian Genocide, and the careful construction of this babble,
undermines Ms Power and devalues the awesome bulwark of research she has
undertaken and produced, and is intended to mislead the reader by
throwing as much junk at the wall as possible and hoping that some of it
sticks. Despite the fact that Ms. Power's work is almost seven hundred
pages long (with a bibliography as long as a short novel), the reviewer
claims that she fails to refer to "objective scholars" in reference to
the Armenian Genocide.
References used by Ms Power include
numerous newspaper and magazine articles published in 1915 when
supposedly this "sensitive" and "controversial" "Ottoman-Armenian
conflict" was at its height. The New York Times had very little doubt
about what was occurring in Anatolia since in 1915 alone the Times
published almost two hundred detailed articles - including dates,
numbers of casualties, villages destroyed etc - about the slaughter of
innocent Armenian men, women and children by the Ottoman Army.
Ms
Power also references Henry Morgenthau the United States Ambassador to
Turkey during World War One. It is almost comical to read the lame
attempt by the reviewer at discrediting an ambassador of the United
States, and the ridiculous suggestion that if you really want to
understand Ambassador Morgenthau's memoirs and his "interpretation" of
the "controversy regarding the Ottoman-Armenian conflict" that a book by
some offbeat writer gives more information than Morgenthau's own words.
Apparently his idea of an objective source does not include the
memoirs of a U.S. Ambassador - nor the army of diplomats British, French
and American - who were strewn all over Anatolia and who wrote
voluminous accounts of the well organized genocide.
Other
trustworthy objective references made by Ms Power include memoirs
written by American and European missionaries, references to memoirs
written by Ambassador Viscount Bryce (British Ambassador to the US), the
renowned British historian Christopher Walker, Teddy Roosevelt, Woodrow
Wilson, Winston Churchill, Arnold Toynbee, etc. This is a stellar
bibliography. In stark contrast the reviewer offers no contemporary
sources for his claim that the Armenian Genocide is controversial,
sensitive or can be categorized as merely a "conflict." .
In
addition the reviewer says nothing about all the other Genocides covered
in the book and whether or not Ms. Power did a trustworthy job of
covering them. Thus, presumably, Ms. Power had the "historical
grounding" and sophistication to get everything else regarding all the
other genocides in these seven hundred pages correct and properly
documented except for the Armenian Genocide. Of course this begs the
question, if she was sufficiently ungrounded to the point of getting the
Armenian Genocide incorrect why should I believe anything that she has
to say about the other genocides. And conversely, if her documentation
is trustworthy about all the other genocides why should I not believe
that she got everything correct and properly documented regarding the
Armenian genocide?
The point is Ms. Power got everything
correct. Genocide scholars, Holocaust scholars and professors from
around the world have hailed her book as a monumental benchmark. The
goal of the reviewer is to put forth a carefully worded babbling denial
that actually does more than simply deny, and does more than simply
babble. The reviewer also seeks to blame the victim, and also shroud the
events of 1915-1922 behind a scrim of supposed controversy where there
is no controversy. The reviewer's goal is not even to re-write history,
but rather to paint a situation that seems so hopelessly confused that
one would need a doctorate to figure it out. The Armenian Genocide is
neither "controversial" nor is it confusing, nor is it a "sensitive"
issue (though I am sure it is a sensitive issue if your grandfather was
one of the perpetrators of the crime) nor does one need a doctorate to
understand it. The Armenian Genocide was a carefully planned genocide
by Talat Pasha and Enver Pasha who used a well-trained Ottoman Army, to
murder 1.5 million innocent men, women and children. It had nothing to
do with World War One (except to the extent that the War was used as a
cover,) it had nothing to do with the Russians, it had nothing to do
with "relocation," it was all about hate, power, envy and jealousy - the
Armenians were a peaceful people who had lived on their ancestral lands
for 2,500 years. In "A Scholarship from Hell" the reviewer's careful
rambling use of words attempts to sow confusion where none exists, and
bring into question the credibility of Ms Power and her research
methods, thus rendering anything she has to say irrelevant.
Ms.
Power has written an awesome, trustworthy account of Genocide in the
20th century. It is a heavy, time-consuming read, but it is also one of
the best non-fiction books I have read in the last five years.