The present article intends to “read” and analyze the sculptural formulations of the period when Hakob Gurdjian, a foreigner who had just conquered the shores of France, had been greatly touched by the French artistic thought, gradually becoming part of the context of French art. Appearing in exhibitions that covered a wide range of important and public influences, Gurdjian also made his theoretical contribution to the understanding of the French sculptural atmosphere. The presented French-language manuscript, titled “My Reflections on the Sculpture” authored by Hakob Gurdjian, was of great importance, as it revealed from what point of view and with what kind of inclusion he saw the sculpture and how he perceived the material, the form, and its embodiment.

During wars, cultural heritage is particularly vulnerable to deliberate attacks and acts of intolerance, as starkly demonstrated during the 44-day war initiated by Azerbaijan in 2020, the blockade of the Lachin Corridor, and the complete depopulation of Artsakh due to military operations in 2023. In armed conflicts, the use of monuments and their surrounding cultural landscapes for military purposes – such as shelters, ammunition depots, combat bases, observation posts, command centers, or deployment hubs for armed forces –poses a significant threat to heritage protection. During and after the 2020 war, numerous churches, community cultural centers, and educational institutions in Artsakh were repurposed by Azerbaijan for military use. This repurposing undermined the primary cultural, spiritual, historical, educational, and aesthetic functions of these heritage sites. By altering their roles to serve military purposes – effectively turning them into “military objects” – their spiritual and cultural significance is disrupted. Moreover, this transformation violates the protections afforded by the Hague and Geneva Conventions, as well as international humanitarian law, which safeguard cultural heritage as a civilian asset. Converting heritage sites for military purposes compromises their inviolability, making them more susceptible to damage or destruction. Despite the norms of international humanitarian law, incidents of damage and destruction to Artsakh's monuments due to their military use by Azerbaijan have not ceased. On the contrary, they continue to escalate, further endangering the cultural heritage of the region and, by extension, the world.

The article is devoted to the epistemological views of the Armenian philosopher, thinker Sh. Perperyan, in particular, the problem of truth in the context of axiological analysis. The article discusses issues related to forms of cognition, peculiarities of worldview, essence, nature, types of truth and a number of other epistemological problems. The article analyzes the axiological, epistemological ideas of Perperyan. An attempt is made to reveal the relationship between humans and truth, the process of evaluating the truth. Issues related to the problem of truth such as the existence of truth, the possibility of achieving it, the causes and the importance of striving for truth are discussed through comparative analysis.

Sergei Parajanov once said that he was born not on January 9, 1924, as is generally accepted, but rather in November 1923. He said that his father, overjoyed to have finally had a son, spent several weeks partying and drinking before deciding to go and record the birth of his son at the civil registry office. Consequently, according to this true or invented story, Parajanov’s centenary coincides with the centenary of Armenian cinema, which was celebrated in Yerevan in November 2023, and to which this article was written. In the Western world, presenting Parajanov as an “Armenian filmmaker” is not always self-evident, since he is rather characterized as of Armenian “origin”, or Armenian “decent”, and even sometimes as a “Georgian”, “Russian”, or “Soviet” artist. Parajanov’s work can be comprehended within a global Paradox, which consists in freely and unexpectedly crossing the conventional borders and limits, including semantic definitions. This principle theoretically and visually focuses on Parajanov’s masterpiece The Color of Pomegranates, which is arguably the best film of the Armenfilm studio. It was also described by some critics as a “non-film”, since it disrupts the very essence of cinema: the movement. Thus, the terms “Armenian” and “filmmaker” are simultaneously exact and problematic. Hence, Parajanov’s paradox can be defined as his unique ability to stand on both sides of the borders (or the definitions) at the same time. The article investigates this fundamental paradox regarding Sergei Parajanov’s Armenian identity.

The Armenian writer, critic, linguist, journalist and public figure Arshak Chopanian’s (1872–1954) role in the creative life of Komitas is exceptional, and significant is his contribution to the formation of Komitas studies. Komitas and A. Chopanian‘s acquaintance took place in Paris in July 1901 and lasted through Komitas’ death. A. Chopanian did not only highly appreciate Komitas’s talent and the work he did, but also attached importance to creating favorable conditions for his activity and took a lot of practical steps to that end. In Anahit, the literary, artistic and public magazine founded by him in Paris in 1898, as well as in other periodicals of the time, such as Byuzandion (Constantinople), Hayastani kochnak [Armenia’s Bell] (New York), etc., A. Chopanian placed articles, in which he commended Komitas’ activity, thereby making his works known to broader public. On the pages of Anahit, A. Chopanian, on the one hand, presented the full-fledged panorama of Komitas’ concert activities that unfolded in Paris and Geneva, published materials assessing Komitas’ oeuvre, authored by various musicians, as well as memoirs, and, on the other, Komitas’ own studies in musicology and a piece of his literary legacy – his autobiography. A. Chopanian’s Komitassiana had had also applied significance. Several important issues raised by A. Chopanian – in particular, the issue of burying Komitas in Armenia, and that of publishing his musical legacy – were brought to life in the near future.

Davit Evereklyan, one of the key figures in the Armenian diaspora theatre, began his journey in the theatre in 1943 in Lebanon. He founded several theatre companies, including “Lebanese-Armenian,” “Petros Adamyan,” “Germanic,” and “Beirut-Armenian Backstage Artists.” As a director and actor, he brought to life characters from both Armenian and foreign playwrights in numerous productions. Evereklyan’s prolific theatrical career in Lebanon was interrupted by political instability, prompting his move to Montreal with his family. There, he revitalised his theatrical environment by collaborating with the “Armenian” and “Constantinople-Armenian Union” theatre companies.

This article examines the artistic interactions between Armenian filmmaker Sergey Parajanov (1924–1990) and Georgian photographer Yuri Mechitov (b. 1950), focusing on their collaborative experiments in photography and collage during the late 1970s–1980s. While Parajanov is internationally recognized for his films, particularly The Color of Pomegranates, this study highlights his creative partnership with Mechitov, whose portraits and documentary photographs reveal new aspects of the director’s artistic persona. Drawing on interviews, memoirs, and photographic archives, the paper analyzes how Parajanov staged his image before Mechitov’s camera, turning everyday gestures into visual allegories. Special attention is given to how Mechitov’s photographs became sources for Parajanov’s collages, where single images were transformed into layered works of visual poetry. The discussion shows how Mechitov’s documentary practice intersected with Parajanov’s surrealist sensibilities, creates a corpus that transcends the boundaries between cinema, photography, and visual art. By examining these collages, the article shows that Parajanov emerges as a versatile artist whose creative range extended beyond cinema to include collage, photography, painting, and other forms of expression. The study presents only one example of these facets, underscoring the multidimensional nature of his artistic identity.

Hmayak Hakobyan (1871–1939), as a representative of Armenian realist painting at the turn of the 19th–20th centuries, devoted a special place in his oeuvre to the subgenre of the self-portrait. The artist’s six self-portraits (painting and drawing), preserved in the collections of the National Gallery of Armenia, serve as a unique key for revealing the stylistic characteristics of his works and the impact of the dramatic events of the period on his inner world. This article aims to study Hakobyan’s self-portraits through chronological and comparative analysis, highlighting his application of the principles of academic realism and his progression from the depiction of external likeness to psychological self-examination. For Hmayak Hakobyan, the self-portrait is a means of deeply analyzing his own image and revealing his worldview through art, even serving as a kind of diary that reflects human psychological states and stages of life. The artist’s self-portraits represent not only his personal journey but also his emotional world and creative explorations. The painter remains consistently faithful to the artistic principles of classical realism, employing a restrained yet harmonious palette of brown, chestnut, black, white, and gray tones. His self-portraits are executed with high technical skill, perfect masterly, and adherence to academic principles, characteristic of realist painting. They clearly convey the artist’s mood, inner world, and way of thinking. Drawing on the traditions of Russian realism (Repin) and European masters (Rembrandt), the painter elevated the self-portrait from a mere image to a philosophical exploration of the human soul. This approach brought a new depth and vitality to Armenian realism. Hakobyan’s art is free from Dürer’s symbolism, yet it is imbued with a pursuit of self-observation and physical precision.