A Forgotten Detail in the Cultural Landscape: Ukrainian Version of Russian Formalism? National Identity, Avant-garde and Ideology in Literary Discussions in Soviet Ukraine (1920s–1930s) (original) (raw)
Related papers
RESPECTUS PHILOLOGICUS, 2017
The 1920s in the Soviet Ukraine are characterised by significant variability of views on the meaning, social significance and mechanism of art and literature, however, all this theoretical and practical variety was limited by political restriction imposed by official communist ideology. Avant-garde groups and movements enriched modernist discussions by drawing attention to the fact that the revolution in arts and literature was of the same nature as political and social revolution. Numerous Soviet writers, poets, artists, philologists, etc. (including Ukrainian writers with their own national agenda) took part in these discussions; many of them were members of different literary movements, groups and organisations – and of course they had a different aesthetic orientation. One of the most important topics of Soviet theoretical discussions in the 1920s was the dualism of " form " and " content " in literature and art. Such discussions were held in Soviet Ukraine as well. Even though we cannot speak about " Ukrainian formalism " as an organised and disciplined aesthetic school, it is important to determine the " Ukrainian version " of correlation between universalist ideas of Russian formalism, internationalist Soviet ideology (in relation to the culture), and forming Ukrainian cultural identity.
Journal of History Culture and Art Research, 2019
Romanticism is one of the most interesting phenomena in the history of the spiritual culture of mankind. The emergence of Romanticism in the late 18th-early 19th centuries is called "the romantic revolution in the art culture" by most researchers. The purpose of the study is to determine the socio-cultural prerequisites for the emergence of Romanticism as a global cultural movement. The basic philosophical traits of Romanticism and the theoretical concept of romantic art formed in the circle of German aesthetes are considered. The specificity of Ukrainian Romanticism is defined. The article proves that it is inextricably intertwined with the upholding of the Ukrainian national idea. The research is based on aesthetic-cultural, historical, comparative methods, and the method of system analysis. In terms of style, Romanticism is not only an artistic style but also a broad direction. It is based on the principle of freedom. Human personality with its individuality and uniqueness becomes the highest value. People are considered capable of creating new worlds and inspiring reality. A characteristic feature of the movement is the principle of universalism which combines art, philosophy, and science. Slavic Romanticism in many aspects is similar to Western European, but at the same time, it has pronounced national character and originality. The formation of the Romanticism in Ukraine has contributed to the awakening of national consciousness, the affirmation of cultural traditions, language, and literature. Ukrainian Romanticism is closely linked to the national liberation movement which has defined the themes and motives of this direction. The article systematizes the worldview of European and Ukrainian Romanticism, clarifies the key problems of romantic ethics and aesthetics. An attempt to reveal the conformity of nationally oriented ideas of Ukrainian Romanticism with the modern worldview and the idea of national consciousness of the Ukrainian society was made.
Mykola Khvyl'ovyy and the making of Soviet Ukrainian literature
Connexe, 2019
The October Revolution brought about a radical shift in the cultural sphere. A new generation of artists and writers was formed. Their orientation towards the future and critical attitude to the past initiated a new chapter of revolutionary and proletarian culture. In Soviet Ukraine, this new artistic cohort in addition embraced national sentiments advancing a culture that was both Soviet and Ukrainian. This article examines the artistic and ideological development of Mykola Khvyl'ovyy (1893-1933), a writer and publicist who championed the ideological struggle for the autonomous project of a Soviet Ukrainian literature to be developed independently from Russian patterns. In this article, Khvyl'ovyy's ideas as presented in his early prose and pamphlets, written during the so-called Literary Discussion of 1925-1928, are used to outline the writer's vision of Soviet Ukrainian culture. These ideas are examined against the backdrop of the political developments of the decade characterised by the gradual toughening of the political and ideological climate Union-wide. It is argued that, during the 1920s, an autonomous cultural project in Soviet Ukraine was developed on a par with the centrally endorsed canon of all-Soviet culture implemented in every Soviet republic as a by-product of the korenizatsiya (indigenisation) campaign introduced in 1923. By the early 1930s, the all-Soviet canon gained prominence, whereas the project of an autonomous Soviet Ukrainian culture vanished together with its main representatives, who, in most cases, were physically annihilated. Khvyl'ovyy's suicide in May 1933 symbolically drew a line under the 1920s decade of transition, with its relative ideological and political tolerance as well as its artistic experimentation. Résumé La révolution d'Octobre provoque un changement culturel radical qui voit la formation d'une nouvelle génération d'artistes et d'écrivains. Avides d'avenir et critiques envers le passé, ils ont ouvert un nouveau chapitre de la culture révolutionnaire et prolétarienne. En Ukraine soviétique, cette nouvelle cohorte artistique a également intégré les sentiments nationaux afin d'aller vers une culture à la fois soviétique et ukrainienne. Cet article s'attache au développement artistique et idéologique de Mykola Khvylovy (1893-1933), un écrivain qui était à l'avant-garde de la lutte pour une littérature ukrainienne soviétique indépendante des modèles russes. Il s'est exprimé à ce sujet lors de la « Discussion littéraire » de 1925-1928, dans sa prose comme dans ses premiers pamphlets, et il faut situer ses prises de position dans le contexte politique d'un durcissement idéologique progressif dans toute l'Union soviétique au long des années 1920. Nous avançons l'hypothèse suivante : un projet culturel autonome avait alors été développé en Ukraine soviétique en parallèle à celui qui était promu de façon centralisée en URSS. Ce modèle culturel général devait être décliné dans chaque république soviétique en application de la campagne de korenizatsïa (indigénisation) introduite en 1923. Au début des années 1930, ce modèle culturel pan-soviétique a pris le dessus alors que le projet d'une culture ukrainienne soviétique autonome disparaissait avec ses principaux représentants. Dans la plupart des cas, ils ont été physiquement éliminés. En mai 1933, le suicide de Khvylovy a symboliquement tourné la page des années 1920, une décennie de transition, ouverte à l'expérimentation artistique et à un relatif pluralisme idéologique et politique.
The Struggle Against Naturalism: Soviet Art from the 1920s to the 1950s
En 1936, en Union soviétique, des critiques anonymes lancèrent une campagne répressive « contre le naturalisme et le formalisme ». Il devint alors impossible, pour plusieurs artistes, d’exposer leur travail et de participer à des concours artistiques. Les artistes «formalistes » étaient facilement identifiables, car ils étaient représentatifs du modernisme européen, tels le suprématiste Kasimir Malevitch et le réaliste analytique Pavel Filonov. La définition du naturalisme, par contre, était beaucoup moins précise. Perçu comme une reproduction presque photographique de la réalité, le naturalisme était pratiqué par les membres de l’Association des artistes de la Russie révolutionnaire. Dans cet article, nous étudions l’histoire de la notion de naturalisme en Union soviétique durant les années 1920–1950 et démontrons son importance pour la définition du réalisme socialiste.