Theatre Historiography Research Articles

Maria Shevtsova, Rediscovering Stanislavsky

Valuable for scholars, practitioners and students, Shevtsova’s volume re-evaluates the Konstantin Stanislavsky’s practice, providing significant insights into his work based on assiduous analysis. Her work also offers challenges to the reader on issues of theatre historiography and practice, exploring Stanislavsky’s current scholarly context and his ongoing legacy.

La configuración de las élites políticas urbanas gallegas en el primer franquismo (1936-1951)

Este trabajo muestra que la configuración de la élite política urbana de la dictadura franquista en siete ciudades españolas parte del uso de hombres sin un pasado político. Gracias al estudio de la continuidad y la discontinuidad de esas élites locales, en la larga duración, la idea historiográfica sobre el mantenimiento de un sistema político continuador del caciquismo restauracionista, o de simple recuperación de la cultura política de la derecha española tradicional, en vista de los resultados obtenidos, puede ser discutida. El objetivo del trabajo es abrir un campo de debate sobre posiciones teóricas bien asentadas en la academia española.

Intellectual lives, performance and persona: The making of a people’s historian

The most important aspect of British historian Raphael Samuel (1934-1996) was his entire way of being a historian. Samuel, a former youth member of the Communist Party of Great Britain, is best known as a founder of the first British New Left (1956-62), the driving force behind the first History Workshop movement (1963-79), which pioneered a distinctive 'history-from-below', and as the author of Theatres of Memory (1994), an idiosyncratic exploration of the past in contemporary culture. Despite all this, he did not advance an especially ground-breaking historical argument or historiographical theory. He set his sights elsewhere, on the democratisation of history making. To achieve this end, he created a distinctive persona as a people's historian through which he projected a radical transformation of what it meant to study history. Yet posterity was both condescending and neglectful, and until recently the full …

Bringing a Master Narrative to Its Knees: The Power of Historical Data on Theatre Patrons

Abstract For the ‘Rotterdam Project’, a large amount of historical data on patrons of Rotterdam’s main theatres during the ‘long’ 19th century (1773–1914) was collected, digitally registered and statistically analysed. The data was gathered from the theatre archives of the city of Rotterdam and included data on such specifics as ticket sales, repertoire and featured performers. The database holds prosopography information on over 16,000 patrons and almost 15,000 registered ticket sales to these patrons. This dataset (https://doi.org/10.21943/auas.7381127) can be used to make comparisons to the datasets of similarly sized cities in other countries during the same period and for broader research on 19th-century cultural history. So far, the data has been mainly applied to empirically test the master narrative of theatre historiography on the social composition of theatre audiences. The analyses based on the data show that this narrative must, for the most part, be rejected.

Reusing Props at the National Theatre, London: Considering Theatre Materiality in a Historiographical Context

Over the last years, the National Theatre, London (NT) has presented props and costumes in its restaurant, the Green Room, and in its bar, the Propstore, thereby shedding a different light on theatre objects. It also widely advertises the option of hiring costumes and props from its Hire department. These practices challenge theatre studies to reconsider the usage of theatre objects and their manifold stage lives not only as stories of (in)animation, but as what I call potentials of reusage. Presenting theatre objects in unusual locations like a restaurant emphasizes that these objects are built or manipulated in theatre workshops, thereby shedding light on the craftsmanship that is foundational to every production. The labour of the workshops, as well as different backstage operations, has been ignored by theatre historiography. Analysing the NT's different staging of props invites us to look into the hidden histories of theatre materiality.

Adding the Dots and crossing the Ts: A historiographical overview of African theatre history

The historiography of Africa has often needed an update or review because it is no news how African history was constructed; a product of colonial and anthropological records. Due to this, attention was not paid to occurrences, especially the arts which were of no interest to either the colonial administration or the Anthropology researcher. It took combined efforts of the then Organization of African Unity (O.A.U.) and the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) to deconstruct the misconceptions created through an eight-volume of a General History of Africa between 1964 and 1999. These attempts by African historians to correct the damage exclusion and distortion of facts about Africa and Africans is laudable, however, a gap still remains. The historiography of African theatre which has its foundation in Africa’s oral traditions is minimal. A continent of such diverse artistic performances needs a huge representation of both indigenous and external theatrical traditions in Theatre History. Using the desk review approach, ideological criticism and content analysis, this paper argues that the lack of expertise in decoding indigenous language and expressions and fear of misrepresentation are the sources of the minimal presence of African Theatre Historiography.

How to Dismantle a [Theatric] Bomb: Broadway Flops, Broadway Money, and Musical Theater Historiography

The Broadway musical, balancing as it does artistic expression and commerce, is regularly said to reflect its sociocultural surroundings. Its historiography, however, tends for the most part to emphasize art over commerce, and exceptional productions over all else. Broadway histories tend to prioritize the most artistically valued musicals; occasional lip service, too, is paid to extraordinary commercial successes on the one hand, and lesser productions by creators who are collectively deemed great artists on the other. However, such a historiography provides less a reflection of reality than an idealized and thus somewhat warped portrait of the ways the commercial theater, its gatekeepers, and its chroniclers prioritize certain works and artists over others. Using as examples Ain’t Supposed to Die a Natural Death (1971), Merrily We Roll Along (1981), Carrie (1988), and Spider-Man: Turn Off the Dark (2011), I will suggest that a money-minded approach to the study of musicals may help paint a clearer picture of what kinds of shows have been collectively deemed successful enough to remember, and what gets dismissed as worthy of forgetting.

Scenographing Resistance

In 1942 Vilhelm Moberg’s (1898–1973) highly successful historical novel Ride This Night! (1941) was adapted for the theatre and premiered at several Swedish theatres as well as being distributed as a film. While Sweden maintained what was termed a neutral position during World War II, Moberg’s novel, together with its various performances, facilitated a mood of resistance against Nazism. In recognition of this, the focus of my article is the much-celebrated first performance of Ride This Night at the City Theatre (Stadsteatern) in Gothenburg on 14 October 1942. To explore this performance as theatrical memory of World War II, I draw on recent scenography theory emphasizing the holistic role of material and affective relations between bodies, objects and environments. By doing so, the article contributes an historical case study to the international field of critical scenography, and challenges the ways in which previous Swedish art and theatre historiography has theoretically understood and explored the powers of scenographic traits of past performance.

Political Influence on Theatre Historiography

The article discusses the question of the memory of Jewish history and culture in Lithuania in regard to the cultural and political debates that are actually taking place in Lithuanian society. Historical facts, concerning Jewish cultural life in Lithuania before the Second World War, were eliminated from the research field conducted by historiographers during the Soviet and the early post Soviet times. The article argues that this was due to political aspirations of the country; they play the crucial role in defining what type of memories the society would carry on and defend. In regard to the research done by sociologists Maurice Halbwachs, Jan and Aleida Assmanns notions of collective memory, functional and stored memory are discussed. Examples of the recent media persecutions of cultural personas such as Rūta Vanagaitė and Marius Ivaškevičius are discussed in order to illustrate the memory war that is still taking place in the actual Lithuanian society.

Memory, narrative, and conflict in writing the past

In this paper I will analyze the distinctive features of the twentieth century historiography with regards to its most salient events. By doing so, I will provide an interpretation of the struggles which underlay the production of historical knowledge at the end of the century. In contrast to various theories of historiography which assert that autonomy from collective memory is a methodological assumption of the historian, I will argue that historiography is always interwoven with the political and ethical challenges of the historian’s time. In this regard, this paper´s theses are inspired by Walter Benjamin’s ideas concerning historiography, as well as by the interpretations of this ideas provided by other historians and philosophers, such as Enzo Traverso, Dominick LaCapra or Michael Löwy. Their ideas will serve as a framework for understanding the challenges historians face when narrating contemporary history.

An Institutional Theory of Modernity: Johann Gustav Droysen

The article analyzes several crucial aspects of Johann Gustav Droysen"s theory of historiography (as presented in the collection of his lectures published under the title Historik ). The significance and reception of Droysen"s legacy in contemporary historiography are examined primarily in the American and Russian contexts. The fundamental features of Droysen"s theory of historiography are then identified with emphasis on: validation of the autonomy of history as a science; radical constructivism; moderate relativism; presentism; and the extension of the subject matter of hermeneutics to existential and anthropological issues. The main part of the article is devoted to Droysen"s institutional theory and maintains that Historik provides more than a theory and methodology of historiography by also advancing an original institutional theory which serves as a direct link between Hegel"s philosophy and current social and political concepts. Droysen"s position on Hegel"s philosophy is considered, and the derivation of “the ethical world,” Droysen"s the principal category for institutional analysisis traced back to Hegel. Droysen"s theory of the state, which identifies it as the only source of legitimate violence and a mechanism for neutralizing conflicts in civil society and distinguishes between the notions of “power” and “violence,” is treated in detail. Three main aspects of Droysen"s institutional theory are discussed. First, there is an analysis of his formal theoretical understanding of the concept of an “institution” as it compares to the basic modern philosophical and theoretical definitions of that concept. Then, the main substantive features of his institutional theory are examined. These include the three types of institutions (natural, ideal and practical), and the distinction between them will later play a prominent role in modern social theory and sociology. Finally, Droysen"s account of the institutional dynamics of modernity is explicated as a taut equilibrium between the puruist of stability by institutions and the disruption of their stability by normative reflection and criticism.

Introduction to the Special Section

Introduction to the Special Section Emily Sahakian (bio), Christiana Molldrem Harkulich (bio), and Lisa Jackson-Schebetta (bio) How do we constitute, characterize, or categorize “hemispheric historiography” in the field of theatre history? How do we do theatre historiography hemispherically? How do we write and teach histories of hemispheric theatre and performance? The term “hemispheric” involves a seeming contradiction: On the one hand, it implies a geographic and spatial demarcation (the Americas or the Western hemisphere) and, on the other, it involves crossing borders and nations, defying the constraints of place. Hemispheric is an idea and practice associated more with performance studies than with theatre history, and Diana Taylor and others locate it explicitly in performance.1 The Hemispheric Institute of Performance and Politics, for which Taylor is founding director, delineates the area of study through its emphasis on social justice, collaboration, connection, archive, and the bridging of multiple languages and locales, in both theory and practice.2 Though work in the field of hemispheric performance studies, including the contributions of the Hemispheric Institute, generally focuses on the Americas, a geographical-spatial scope is not the most important delineating factor, as Jill Lane has argued. She conceptualizes the hemispheric “as a set of connected practices in deep time,” issuing “a call to historians to ask not what or where, but “when America is.”3 Lane’s provocation prompted us, as editors, to ask not only when the hemispheric is but, specifically, how it is in relation to theatre history. The hemispheric, Lane persuasively agues, exists across multiple temporalities and engages deeply with the histories and legacies of (neo)colonialism and neoliberalism. [End Page 117] We additionally took our cue from Wai Chee Dimock, who challenged us to think of the hemispheric as a vector, “a way to re—think the contours of the planet, looking East and West as well as North and South.”4 In issuing our call to theatre historians, we wanted to decenter US theatre and to invite authors to make interventions across areas of study and geographic realms. Via the “hemispheric,” we sought to expand lines of inquiry into theatre historiography, in dialogue with kindred work on “performance in the borderlands.” As Ramón Rivera-Servera and Harvey Young point out, “the performances of and about the border iterate both disciplinary and transgressive forces that map out the conflicted terrain of the historical traumas of colonization as well as the present violence of forceful neoliberal adjustments and uneven developments.”5 The discussion that the essays featured here frame and open plays out not only across borders, temporalities, areas, and disciplines, but also via exchange, cocreation, multidirectionality, and deep, multilayered, intimate historical experiences and legacies. The second term, “historiography,” that is, the study of and problems associated with the writing of (theatre) history, signaled our focus on methodology, process, and conscientious reflection. “To practice theater historiography,” write Henry Bial and Scott Magelssen, “means to look beyond the record of ‘what happened’ to analyze how and why such records are constructed.”6 We invited authors to consider how hemispheric historiography, as a method, demands that we rethink (1) how we select and conceive of our objects and sites of theatre history study; (2) how we think about chronologies and temporalities; (3) how we engage with archives, repertoires, and other evidence; and (4) which knowledges we value, and how we ascribe and define that value. Authors responded to our call with experiments and manifestations. Their contributions remind us of the ways in which a hemispheric historiographical methodology requires capacious intellectual and affective labor: sharing authority, intervening in past and present trauma, and sharing process. The authors’ work, collected here, exposes how the hemispheric invites us to do, teach, and write theatre history differently. Across and between the five essays, we witness the dismantling of nation-based narratives, innovative uses of archives, intimate connections between writers and historical agents, the prioritization of collaborative knowledge creation, the centering of indigenous cosmologies, and multidirectional, interdisciplinary explorations. These works remind us that employing the hemispheric as method, to quote Patricia Ybarra’s opening essay, is “not an additive operation, but an epistemological one that questions the definition of performance” and of history. In “Gestures...

Theatre and Cartographies of Power: Repositioning the Latina/O Americas ed. by Jimmy A. Noriega and Analola Santana

Reviewed by: Theatre and Cartographies of Power: Repositioning the Latina/O Americas ed. by Jimmy A. Noriega and Analola Santana Eric Mayer-García THEATRE AND CARTOGRAPHIES OF POWER: REPOSITIONING THE LATINA/O AMERICAS. Edited by Jimmy A. Noriega and Analola Santana. Theater in the Americas series. Carbondale: Southern Illinois University Press, 2018; pp. 320. Editors Jimmy A. Noriega and Analola Santana's recent volume of critical essays forges a truly hemispheric discourse on theatre historiography. This transformative achievement is made possible through colossal efforts in networking and translation to bring a number of key interventions to bear on our field from over thirty national, transnational, and regional perspectives. The most persuasive intervention ties them all together: the editors frame the dominance of Western and Eurocentric lenses in our field in terms of "cartographies of power," a form of ideological subjugation through mapping and its concomitant imaginaries. They challenge us to acknowledge the ways cartographies of power—beginning with early colonial accounts written by Columbus or Bernal Díaz and continuing through the United States' economic, political, and military aggression—have shaped histories and conceptions of performance throughout the Americas. All the while, binaries such as Old/New, Anglo/Latin, and North/South continue to dictate the way theatre is categorized, written, taught, and disseminated from the North. Noriega and Santana reference Uruguayan avant-garde artist Joaquín Torres-García's América Invertida (1943), an ink rendering of South America that places the South Pole at the top of the map, as an inspiration for the volume and for reorienting the reader's cartographic bearings. Retooling theory from Doreen Massey, Lawrence Grossberg, and others, the concept of cartographies of power forms the basis for the questions posed to each contributor, who probe for whom and by whom theatre histories of the hemispheric Americas have been mapped, and how scholars and artists can (re)position the Americas to allow for agency, diversity, and visibility in theatrical imaginaries and artistic works. Contributors confront and subvert cartographies of power through a variety of genres such as historiography, performance theory, testimony, memoir, and aesthetic philosophy. The collection's five sections speak to one another and give coherence to its many contributions, whose varying lengths, genres, and styles violate the norms of theatre scholarship and make the volume anything but monotonous. Noriega and Santana position their work as a much-needed continuation of the conversation started by Diana Taylor and Juan Villegas's Negotiating Performance: Gender, Sexuality, and Theatricality in Latin/o America (1994). There is a great balance among the contributors, who include established rainmakers of Latinx and Latin American performance criticism, emerging leaders in the field, and some of the most important artists of the last thirty years. That more than a few of the contributors have published monographs on related topics in the last five years speaks to their stake in the volume's intervention and the level of their expertise. To take this book as establishing a new Latinx or Latin American canon would be to misread the project's aims. The volume features a guardian at the door, literally on the cover, to thwart such a colonizing reading. The book's first contributor, Mexican performance artist Violeta Luna, offers a performance titled Transient Corporalities, commissioned for the volume and presented through a series of photographs by Zen Cohen. In the first photograph, "Aztekali," Luna performs a fierce Aztec-Hindu goddess as a bricolage of coded references, misogynist rhetoric, mass-produced textiles, and incongruent fragments of displaced colonial gazes. The resulting opacity creates mayhem for dominant cartographic frames and critically reworks histories of gender, race, nation, and globalization. Fellow contributor Jorge Dubatti's definition of theatricality as engendered by the capacity "to organize the gaze of the other, to produce a political optics or a politics of the gaze" (35) resonates with Luna's theory in practice, as she stares back at a gaze that is preoccupied with the discovery of a new Latin American Otherness—a gaze she cites [End Page 540] and constructs through co-opted colonialist imagery. Her refusal to deliver such a fiction is legible in the irony of each photo. Luna's subversive play...

Street Theatre and the Production of Postindustrial Space: Working Memories by David Calder

Reviewed by: Street Theatre and the Production of Postindustrial Space: Working Memories by David Calder Sunita Nigam STREET THEATRE AND THE PRODUCTION OF POSTINDUSTRIAL SPACE: WORKING MEMORIES. By David Calder. Manchester: Manchester University Press, 2019; pp. 216. In France, towns and cities hollowed out by industrialization have used street theatre, or theatre that converts existing spaces into spaces of performance, to transform former factories into cultural centers, commemorate industrial heritage, reanimate urban spaces, generate jobs, and reinvigorate local economies. In Street Theatre and the Production of Postindustrial Space: Working Memories, David Calder demonstrates how street theatre companies across France concern themselves with the relationship between their theatrical labor and the industrial labor they are replacing. Calder’s argument is that contemporary French street theatre works to make sense of and participate in urban and economic change. He studies examples of street theatre that illuminate what he calls the “after but not over” of the postindustrial, or the persistence of industrial effects, practices, and logics in a so-called postindustrial age (19). By meditating on the palimpsestic histories of labor that characterize places, Calder reveals street theatre to be a powerful force for thinking through relationships between past and present forms of work. In the introduction, Calder introduces the concept of “working memory,” which he uses to describe the ways in which a site, through its aesthetics, practices, and narratives, evokes the histories of the labor that has occurred within it. In its embodied and aesthetic animations of localities, street theatre can strengthen, fabricate, or erase the interconnectedness of these labor histories. While working memory is not a nationally specific concept, Calder contends that, in France, its privileged artistic form is street theatre. Across five densely detailed case studies, he deploys performance analysis and theatre historiography to examine how contemporary French street theatre, although sometimes involved in anti-establishment critique, can also work in collaboration with developers or municipal governments to rebrand rural and urban places for tourism and investment. Chapter 1, “Theatre in Ruins: Street and Theatre at the End of Fordism,” documents the rise of street theatre in France through the 1970s and ’80s. This period marked the collapse of Fordism and the end of post–World War II economic growth, but it was also imbued with the spirit of radical transformation epitomized by the events of May 1968. In this chapter, Calder takes up two performances: 1) Théâtre de l’Unité’s 2CV Théâtre (1977–97), which converted a post–WWII 2CV car (a symbol, Calder highlights, of French postwar modernization, rural development, and mass accessibility to an elite experience) into a tiny theatre with only two auditorium seats; and 2) Générik Vapeur’s Bivouac (1988–present), in which blue-painted men herd empty oil drums in a charivari-like procession through public spaces in an “explosion of music and noise” (43). These performances engage in different ways with the byproducts of industry. While Bivouac presents a critique of the negligence involved in the global disposal of poisonous industrial waste, 2CV Théâtre attempts to make sense of reconfigured relations between the elite and the masses in the aftermath of Fordist-Taylorist modernity. These performances show that the industrial past is not yet over—through the persistence of its byproducts, waste, and ruins, it continues to pollute the present. The following chapters examine street theatre companies that, willingly or not, have become embedded in ongoing redevelopment projects. In chapter 2, “Reincorporation: Putting the Countryside Back to Work,” Calder examines how the logic of the creative city, which uses art and culture (often following the departure of heavy industry) to stimulate local economies, encroaches onto the countryside as well. He considers the conversion of a former leather camera case wholesaler named Photosacs, which operated from 1961 to 1987 in the small town of Corbigny, into a street theatre production center and arts venue called La Trans-verse in 2011. Metalovoice, one of the companies that has visited the venue, is shown to reincorporate into its performances the industrial labors of La Transverse’s former factory workers. Similarly, in Au travail (At Work / To Work), performers paste massive sketches of former Photosacs employees onto the facade...

On Being a Twenty-First-Century Theatre Historian

This series of provocations on the changing work of theatre historians opens with a contribution by David Wiles, who recounts a meeting of IFTR's Theatre Historiography Working Group in London in 2018. Wiles's reflection is followed by responses from scholars working in or on different regions, including perspectives by Oscar Tantoco Serquiña, Jr (Philippines), Lorena Verzero (Latin America) and Promona Sengupta (India).

WHAT REMAINS AFTER POSTMODERNISM?

ABSTRACTTor Egil F⊘rland's book Values, Objectivity, and Explanation in Historiography surveys a series of topics that theories of historiography have to face in the aftermath of postmodernism. The book challenges the appropriateness of the association of anti‐objectivism in historiography with left‐wing politics and, by defending objectivist perspectives on historical research, takes a strong stance against cultural relativism and theories of situated truth. F⊘rland also analyzes the implications of dilemmas about ontological and methodological individualism for historical research and proposes an interesting application of the views of Margaret Gilbert to the problem of the explanation of contradictory beliefs of historical figures. The book has been published at a very appropriate moment, and it will help open questions and dilemmas that have received insufficient attention in the past due to the domination of postmodernist perspectives.

Experiencia, símbolo y comunicación: un modelo transversal para el estudio del pensamiento histórico

En este artículo se propone la definición de un modelo heurístico para el análisis transversal del pensamiento histórico, entendido éste como un conjunto de prácticas cognitivas y discursos públicos que dotan de sentido a las relaciones de las sociedades humanas con los tiempos históricos. Se parte de la premisa de que, para entender en su complejidad los procesos intelectuales de significación de los mundos históricos, es necesario combinar en un solo campo de análisis los problemas concernientes a la experiencia, la representación, la conceptualización y la argumentación de la historia, así como aquellas cuestiones referentes a su comunicación y sus usos sociales. A tal fin, se conceptualizarán cinco dimensiones analizables del pensamiento histórico (experiencial, representacional, teórico-argumentativa, conceptual y performativa), revisando las teorías historiográficas elaboradas sobre cada una de ellas, definiendo sus relaciones mutuas y sus especificidades y, finalmente, diseñando una batería de preguntas para analizarlas en conjunto.

How to Write a History Textbook: The Willard–Willson Debate over History Education in the Common School Era

The essay reinterprets the 1845–1847 pamphlet war between Emma Willard and Marcius Willson, authors of popular history schoolbooks. Willson publicly attacked the accuracy and literary quality of history schoolbooks by eight leading authors, with particular attention to Willard's, just as he was publishing his first school history. Willard and Willson practiced different kinds of history authorship that reflected their different backgrounds, intellectual milieus, and professional circumstances. This essay questions conventional readings of the debate and argues that their subsequent exchange over plagiarism, style, and sourcing illuminated important issues in the purposes of history education, the challenges of growing markets, and new theories of historiography. The debate showed that schoolbooks were not simply derivative “guardians of tradition,” but that they could be portals for new disciplinary theories in an age without a robust professional research infrastructure to test and filter them.

Theatre/Performance Historiography: Time, Space, Matter ed. Rosemarie K. Bank and Michal Kobialka, and: Theatre History and Historiography: Ethics, Evidence and Truth ed. by Claire Cochrane and Jo Robinson

Theatre/Performance Historiography: Time, Space, Matter ed. Rosemarie K. Bank and Michal Kobialka, and: Theatre History and Historiography: Ethics, Evidence and Truth ed. by Claire Cochrane and Jo Robinson

Вітаїстична модель міста в українській художній прозі 1920-х років.

The article explores the theme of urbanism in Ukrainian modernist prose of the 1920s. The artistic model of the city as a cultural and aesthetic space in the context of Oswald Spengler's historiographical theory of the Twilight of Europe is analyzed. Modernist writers – A. Lyubchenko, M. Khvylovy, G. Shkurupiy, O. Dovzhenko, Y. Yanovsky and others, expressing their philosophical paradigm of culture / civilization, express their own original ideas and social wisdom in the artistic understanding of a particular national being. They believed that the city was gradually forming a new type of human worldview, adequate to a rationally organized economy. Such an opinion is read in the figurative and philosophical structures of the metatext of Ukrainian prose writers. Considering the national mentality, the Ukrainian community, following the historical necessity, chooses the path of civilization to the history of human life. In modernist prose, Ukraine's social progress is linked to the city. The vision of the national world implied a certain ideal state. It is a full-fledged social structure that brings together two types of being – rural and urban. The Ukrainian future is modeled as a harmonious and complete integrity, as a natural and civilizational edema combining spirituality and technological achievements. It is established that faith, romantic pathos, optimism, vitaism determine the spirit, orientation, emotional coloring of the theme of Ukraine in the works of writers of the national revival period. They found a way to combine European rationality with living Ukrainian spirituality, in which the image of the Motherland is creatively modeled.