Abstract

This paper outlines the portrait of Shevchenko’s reader from the Dnieper Ukraine in the first half of the 19th century based on the example of two prominent figures of Kyiv (Old) “Hromada” Volodymyr Antonovych and Mykola Lysenko. The first one represented the intellectuals from the Right Bank Ukraine, the second one ‒ from the Left Bank part. Under the influence of the Ukrainian national renaissance Volodymyr Antonovych became de-Polonized. He was the first political Ukrainian who understood the significance of Shevchenko’s poetry for the formation of Ukrainian national identity (this is evidenced by his memoirs and promoting Shevchenko’s works). According to M. Starytskyi, Mykola Lysenko perceived “Kobzar” passionately. Not only did he become de-Russificated under the influence of Shevchenko’s poetry, but also made the music to “Kobzar” a matter of his life.
 The author of the paper emphasizes that Shevchenko’s works urged the intellectuals from the Right and Left Bank Ukraine, disconnected after the Truce of Andrusovo, to unite in “Hromada” movement. At the same time the Left Bank intellectuals dominated in “Hromada”. On the researcher’s opinion, this fact may be explained by the high level of education in the Cossak Hetmanate Ukraine. “Kobzar” was a cornerstone for the educational program of Ukrainian ‘narodnyks’ and this whole intellectual movement was based on it. Shevchenko’s works essentially contributed to spreading the Ukrainian idea in Galicia.
 There is an opinion, that it was the Galician people who separated the Ukrainian national identity from Russian, while in the Left Bank Ukraine both of these identities coexisted. The author of the paper believes that the intellectuals in both parts of Ukraine in 1860s-1870s had an indistinct national identity. Unlike the Galicians the intellectuals from Ukraine under Russian rule, in particular Volodymyr Antonovych, could not speak openly about Ukrainian self-sufficiency. However Shevchenko (born in the Right Bank Ukraine) was first among Ukrainian intellectuals to voice a thesis about the separation of Ukrainians from Russians, about the distinctive Ukrainian history, language and literature that differ from the Russian ones.

Highlights

  • This paper outlines the portrait of Shevchenko’s reader from the Dnieper Ukraine in the first half of the 19th century based on the example of two prominent figures of Kyiv (Old) “Hromada” Volodymyr Antonovych and Mykola Lysenko

  • Under the influence of the Ukrainian national renaissance Volodymyr Antonovych became de-Polonized. He was the first political Ukrainian who understood the significance of Shevchenko’s poetry for the formation of Ukrainian national identity

  • The author of the paper believes that the intellectuals in both parts of Ukraine in 1860s-1870s had an indistinct national identity

Read more

Summary

Introduction

This paper outlines the portrait of Shevchenko’s reader from the Dnieper Ukraine in the first half of the 19th century based on the example of two prominent figures of Kyiv (Old) “Hromada” Volodymyr Antonovych and Mykola Lysenko. ВДЯЧНІ ЧИТАЧІ ШЕВЧЕНКА З НАДДНІПРЯНСЬКОЇ УКРАЇНИ: ВОЛОДИМИР АНТОНОВИЧ І МИКОЛА ЛИСЕНКО Костомаров обґрунтував тезу про Шевченка як голос народу, селянської маси: (“Шевченко как поэт – это был сам народ, продолжавший свое поэтическое творчество” [6, 405]), маючи на увазі передусім фольклорне походження віршів “Кобзаря”. П. Куліш виступив із критикою народництва, що не знайшла відгуку в тогочасному інтелігентському середовищі як російської, так і австрійської України, передусім тому, що після асиміляції еліт лише селянство могло бути опорою українського національного руху [3, 69].

Results
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call