Suchergebnisse

Despite the tense geopolitical situation in interwar Eastern Europe, Ukrainian litterateurs at first elided the physical and ideological boundaries guarded by state authorities on either side of the Polish-Soviet border. Cultural leaders on the far right and far left, separated by a chasm of fear and loathing, nevertheless read andresponded to one another's works. In some cases, representatives of the two sides shared common influences, beliefs, and aesthetic ideals, and even took the risk of signalling their admiration for the theories and creative accomplishments of sworn enemies in the opposing camp, favourably invoking "foreigners" to serve opposing agendas. Amid the relative openness, fluidity, and experimentalism that characterised the first (i.e. pre-Stalinist) half of the interwar period in Ukraine, few regarded nationalism and socialism, or even Bolshevism, as mutually exclusive concepts. Rather, there were synergies and points of contact between the two. Examining the public interaction of the Communist writer Mykola Khvyl'ovyy (1893–1933) and the nationalist literary critic Dmytro Dontsov (1883–1973), I argue that the Ukrainian cultural and political ferment of the 1920s was transgressive in two senses. Firstly, it cut across the political boundaries of party membership and citizenship that divided Ukrainians into Soviet and non-Soviet, socialist and nationalist. Secondly, it defied expectations of ideological purity and loyalty at a time of growing but not yet insurmountable hostility. The result was a symbiosis of right and left-wing agitation, in both Soviet Ukraine and south-eastern Poland, for a revolutionary, anticolonial, and modernist Ukrainian literature.

During the 1920s, Ukrainian publicist Dmytro Dontsov (1883–1973) created "active nationalism," a political doctrine that later became the ideology of the radical right-wing Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists and the Ukrainian Insurgent Army. Yet, before World War I, Dontsov was a fervently internationalist social democrat. Much of his shift rightward occurred during the internecine fighting that beset Ukraine from 1914 to 1922, but he had already adumbrated key components of his mature, "integral nationalist" world view prior to this time, from a vantage point well within the mainstream of the day's social-democratic discourse. His incendiary brand of Ukrainian realpolitik used the language of an early twentieth-century Marxism that had become riddled with various "heterodoxies." Anticipating a world conflict that would favor the Germans and dismantle the Russian Empire, Dontsov advocated a pro-"Western," anti-"Muscovite" orientation for Ukrainians, and in 1913 spearheaded a controversial program for Ukraine's separation from Russia and integration into "Europe."

The time and place of the postwar struggle of the Ukrainian Insurgent Army (UPA) and the Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists (OUN) against the Soviet regime in West Ukraine contradicted two foundational myths of late Soviet society: (1) the myth of the Great Patriotic War, and (2) the myth of
the Friendship of the Peoples. This article examines how Soviet-Russian mass media dealt with these contradictions in the decades leading up to perestroika. The Soviet state attempted to excise the OUN/UPA's postwar activities from collective memory through omission until the late 1970s, when it launched a propaganda campaign to expose and demonize the OUN/UPA. The new political circumstances of the "Second Cold War" account for the timing of this campaign, but the well-worn language and arguments it employed reflected the stagnation of the Party's postwar ideology, which posited the unity and incorruptibility of the "new historical community of the
Soviet people," and accordingly denationalized the OUN/UPA's "treachery."