Without the Maidan. Yaroslav Hrytsak, Volodymyr Kulyk, Alexander J. Motyl, Yuri Shapoval
Mykhailo Minakov. Submitting to an East-European Fate
Mykola Riabchuk. The End of the Second Republic
Olha Plakhotnik, Maria Mayerchyk. Radical Femen and the New Women’s Activism in Ukraine
Stephen Velychenko. Capitalism, Poverty and Russification
Stanislav Kulchytskyi. Polish Testimonies about the Ukrainian Genocide
Andrii Portnov, Tetiana Portnova. Victors and Victims Will Never Agree
Mykola Haliv. In the Name of Truth
Maria Pyskir. The Falsification of History
Valentyna Shandra. Legitimization, Mythmaking and its Monuments
Vadym Adadurov. Alien Among Their Own
Tomasz Stryjek. National Cultures Mirrored by Neighbors
Tetiana Dzyadevych. Desire to Understand
Maria Rewakowicz. Language as a Protagonist in Contemporary Ukrainian Literature
Viacheslav Levytskyi. PhD Candidate Island and its Circumnavigation
Mykola Soroka. Modernism, Emigration, and All That Jazz
Michael S. Flier. The Years and Time of a Strict Philologist
Horace Lunt. Memo on Shevelov’s Memoires
Viktor Marynchak, Inna Zakharova. The Fortunate Marlene Rakhlin
Mikhail Heifets. On the Edge of the Possible
The November-December, 2010 issue opens with a series of short essays by Krytyka editorial board members. In “Without the Maidan,” Yaroslav Hrytsak, Volodymyr Kulyk, Alexander J. Motyl and Yuri Shapoval recapitulate the year’s political events and focus on the challenges facing Ukrainian society. Further perspective on
this is provided in Mykola Riabchuk’s “The End of the Second Republic” and Mykhailo Minakov’s “Submitting to an East-European Fate.”
In “Radical Femen and the New Women’s Activism in Ukraine,” Olha Plakhotnik, a sociologist from Kharkiv and Maria Mayerchyk, a socioanthropologist from Kyiv, continue their discussion about the socio-political environment in “Post-Orange” Ukraine and try to ascertain whether the controversial and exhibitionistic actions of the new women’s movement fit within the framework of feminist discourse. This is followed by University of Toronto’s Stephen Velychenko writing on “Capitalism, Poverty and Russification,” a review of Naomi Klein’s Shock Doctrine: the Rise of Disaster Capitalism (2007), in which he applies Klein’s theses to the realities of post-Soviet Ukrainian society.
In “Polish Testimonies about the Ukrainian Genocide,” Professor Stanislav Kulchytskyi (Institute of Ukrainian History, National Academy of Sciences) discusses the close to 450 annotated documents from Polish and Soviet secret service, military and diplomatic corps archives relating to the famine in Ukraine in a collection edited by Jagellonian University’s Jan Jacek Bruski.
In their article, “Victors and Victims Will Never Agree,” historians Andrii Portnov (Kyiv) and Tetiana Portnova (Dnipropetrovsk) highlight the discourse and ideological collisions between two disparate groups of World War II veterans in Ukraine today–those who fought in the ranks of the Red Army and those who fought with the UPA (Ukrainian Insurgent Army), and examine the status of each of these groups in the country today.
The rubric “Discussions” includes two letters from the Ukrainian diaspora in North America, one from Mykola Haliv (“In the Name of Truth”), the other from Maria Pyskir (“The Falsification of History”) which take up the debate (see Krytyka Nos. 3–4, 2010) surrounding the recent comemmoration of the life and work of Stepan Bandera and the activities and ideological legacy of OUN-UPA (Organization of Ukrainian Nationalists – Ukrainian Insurgent Army) in Ukraine. Both correspondents take issue with the theses put forth on these issues by historians Timothy Snyder and John-Paul Himka.
Valentyna Shandra of the Institute of Ukrainian History, National Academy of Sciences, examines in her “Legitimization, Mythmaking and its Monuments,” the ways in which the Russian Empire in the course of the 19th and 20th centuries applied cultural politics and used monuments to Ukrainian historical figures (Prince Volodymyr, Bohdan Khmelnytskyi, the Cossack leaders Iskra and Kochubej, Princess Olha and others) to establish its legitimacy on territories acquired from the Polish-Lithuanian Commonwealth.
In “Alien Among Their Own” Vadym Adadurov of the Ukrainian Catholic University of Lviv discusses the larger issue of national memory and places of memory through the more specific issue of the widespread neglect in Ukraine of various castles of the Medieval and Early Modern periods whose “foreign” or gentry origins serve to eliminate them from Ukrainian history. In “National Cultures Mirrored by Neighbors,” Professor Tomasz Stryjek of the Polish Academy of Sciences reviews Danuta Sosnowska’s Inna Galicja [Another Galicia] which is devoted to a reconsideration of the nation-building processes in Galicia in the 1830s and 1840s and which shows it not as a region of their peaceful co-existence, but as a highly contested and traumatic period and place. Tetiana Dzyadevych of the Kyiv Mohyla Academy continues this discussion of “the Other,” and of post-colonial approaches to Slavic cultures, in her “Desire to Understand,” a review of Alexander Fiut’s Spotkania z Innym [Meetings with the Other].
In “Language as a Protagonist in Contemporary Ukrainian Literature,” the poet and critic Maria Rewakowicz takes a post-colonial approach to the work of several Ukrainian prose writers, both the “nativists” (Viacheslav Medvid’ and Ievhen Pashkovskii) and the “cosmopolitans” (most prominently, Yuri Andrukhovych) and argues that despite various “ideological” declarations by the former (i.e., their occasional neo-populist, isolationist and anti-democratic positions) both groups share a common post-modernist discourse.
In “PhD Candidate Island and its Circumnavigation” Viacheslav Levytskyi reviews Volodymyr Dibrova’s True Histories and places it within the context of the “Kyiv ironic school.” In his study of “Modernism, Emigration, and All That Jazz,” Mykola Soroka, a historian of Ukrainian culture at the University of Alberta, examines the ideological and aesthetic causes of the generally negative attitude of the Ukrainian diaspora in the interwar and postwar periods towards modern art, and particularly popular music, and especially jazz.
The issue concludes with a memoir and two obituaries. Harvard Ukrainian Research Institute Director Michael S. Flier writes “The Years and Time of a Strict Philologist” in memory of Horace G. Lunt (1918–2010). The obituary is accompanied by Horace Lunt’s “Memo on Shevelov’s Memoires” which is his response to George Y. Shevelov’s 1995 essay on his relations with Roman Jakobson (and Horace Lunt). The circumstances surrounding this essay are discussed by Krytyka editor-in chief George G. Grabowicz in his “The Underside of a Heroic Age.” In “On the Edge of the Possible,” Mikhail Heifets of Jerusalem, a former Soviet prisoner of conscience, describes his GULAG contacts with the poet and fellow-prisoner Vasyl Stus on the occasion of the bilingual, Ukrainian-Russian edition of Stus’s collection of poetry, Palimpsests, and the death this year of the Kharkiv poet and dissident Marlene Rakhlin (1925–2010). Her memory is also honored by Viktor Marynchak and Inna Zakharova in “The Fortunate Marlene Rakhlin”.