Difficulties with revival

We are unlikely to be able to go somewhere: a few unprecedented bright and fruitful generations that have entered the cultural advance of the Ukrainian 1920s will be in history as a “shooting revival”. Have already entered. Of course, this is not self -playing. And such a name happened much later than the terror of the 1930s.

It is directly related to the anthology “shot of the Renaissance”, which was ordered by literary critic Yuri Lavrinenko at the request of the Polish editor Jerzy Gedroyts: the latter offered a common name for a book that was published in 1959 in Paris.

Lavrinenko, although invented this phrase in the late 1940s, believed that he was already abused. Instead, he wanted to talk about the revival of “cultural”, “progressive” and “Ukrainian”: this is recorded in his later articles. However, with us more than sixty years of revival, it is “shot”. Good marketing works for a long time. And creates its problems.

Advertising:

Do not think crooked: the fact of executions, as well as the greater historical reality of great terror, Sandarmokh and concomitant repression, is not deny. They are the facts and that is the reality: undoubtedly destroying, shooting, repressed. We know the dates, numbers, circumstances. Yes, not only Ukrainians and not only Ukrainian artists and scientists were eliminated, but in large quantities. Huge.

However, it is a logical accent that we put in one name – and could put others. About strength and consequences – symbolic, but quite specific – just such, not differently. As the emphasis of the name “Shooted Renaissance”, let us agree, is still specific: it is about victims, martyrologists and losses.

About the interruption of cultural development and a slide, the immobility of everything that could happen to Ukrainian culture, and instead took place “Collective 1937”. Shotness as a gap. From which then, devoid of deeper roots, will be forced to start the Sixties.

Like, and the Nobel laureate became, and it would still write that oh. And in general, everything would be different. This technique – history through if, significantly masochistic recalculation of the non -realized – is quite clear, but not only possible.

And in the context of awareness of a certain dramatic phenomenon, but specifically today – when Ukrainians have been fiercely and hardy for several years, giving up a great defense war, refusing to be both victims and those “who have come from nowhere”, “1991 mistake”.

Then the question is: And how Even more Can-and even need to look at the processes and consequences of the 1920s and 1930s?

Well, let’s say: to note and remember that the specific destruction is not necessary to have total oblivion and irrefuties in culture at the level of longer influences.

That the shooting is physical – and wider scraping – was not equal to the absence of offspring, direct and indirect. Of course, not only in official culture and science, but not only the official level lived the Union, especially after the Second World War.

For such statements, we should not even appeal to our emigration, whose representatives in Europe, the United States and Canada, in Argentina and Australia, have been lazy in the coming of Khvylovy in the next decades, and gave the leading representatives of the 1920s, and kept their archives.

There are really many examples. Oleksandr Dovzhenko was formed at that time and in that atmosphere, he was a member of Vaplite: he continued to work in the Union-and now with his romantic-vitaistic “enchanted Desna”, published in 1956, deduct “thaw” in Ukraine and the beginnings of the Ukrainian sixth.

Although the leaders of that generation had their own, no less essential ties since the 1920s: the polemical passion of journalism Ivan Dzuba was drunk with the pamphlets of Khvylovy. Vasyl Stus necessarily called Vladimir Svidzinski among his best poets.

Ivan Svitlychny himself walked and helped many to pave the way to Boris Antonenko-Davidovich’s apartment-an important prose writer from the twenties, who managed to survive and return to Kiev to become a source of living evidence and one of the centers of magnetization of unofficial cultural life.

This also applies to the translator of Grigory Kochur, who was one of the latest students of “neoclassics” – and who also returned after the camps to form a whole translation school around himself, in the range from the mentioned Svitlychny to Maxim Strykh. Is there no resignation here?

The next landmark generation, the eighties, in general grew from the Renaissance, not from the previous “loud” sixties: one of their leaders, Igor Rimaruk, writing the lines “We are not poets.

And then scientists, for example, Hrushevsky? The influence of the historian went to depth, but did not disappear. His students were destroyed, but there were many of them: since Mikhail developed a school.

Remember at least Ivan Krypiakevich. Because of this, in the 1990s, it was Hrushevsky’s historical vision that rapidly and triumphantly returned. And now these views are already creating problems with their scientific yesterday. This also applies to the populist views of literary critic Sergey Yefremov. That is, the inheritance of the 1920s can be not only an unknown treasure, but also an obstacle.

And what about Agatangel Crimean? At least one of his disciples-Omelyan Pritzak-became a scientist of world glory, who in the 1990s returned from the Diaspora to Ukraine to create the Institute of Oriental Studies.

And the linguist and a substantial intellectual Yuri Shevelyov? A faithful student of the 1920s, who absorbed the spirit of Kharkiv science at that time and the anxiety of Khvylovy.

We will not forget about the most general frame: just in that day the political and cultural forces were able to protect Ukrainian as the language of the republic. What influenced the Ukrainianization, dictionaries, the curve of the language texture itself. Despite all the later Russification processes, it was irreversible.

There is nothing to discuss: direct influences and their consequences – both in quantitative and in quality dimensions – could be several times more. Mykola Zerov School, Catherine Hrushevskaya School, Fyodor Ernst, Elena Kurilo. Prose under Slisarenko, Podmogilny, skin, criticism from the influence of Maifet, Yakubsky, Rulin. Traditions of Kulish-Kurbas Theater.

Other could write Bazhan, Yanovsky, Tychyna, Wilde. Other achievements could be in Mezhenko, Biletsky, Shamrai. This is only about the humanitarian block and its top layer. But this is only in our heads.

In reality, it happened wrong. However, the consequences of those processes should be evaluated not only by martyrologists destroyed, but also by less noticeable, but equally significant inspirations. Underground, hidden, indirect. Also dotted, but by influences.

Undoubtedly, we have already returned some of the names. Part in the process. Both those and those can be found in the Project “Unreadable Poems”, which is dedicated to 10 sort of forgotten poets and poets Ages of the Shot Renaissance. However, many of these figures have already made their influence on Ukrainian culture. Because – the whole culture is not shot.

After all, culture is not only extraordinary people: they are also their texts, ideas, styles, words. Who usually experience their own parents. The Ukrainian Renaissance happened in the 1920s, and its vibrations are noticeable to this day. We are his direct beneficiaries. And they tend not to be aware.

A column is a material that reflects the author’s point of view. The text of the column does not claim the objectivity and comprehensive coverage of the topic that rises in it. The editorial board of “Ukrainian Truth” is not responsible for the accuracy and interpretation of the information provided and plays only the role of the carrier. The point of view of the UP editorial board may not coincide with the point of view of the author of the column.