English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Olena Haleta, A WRITER OR A CREATOR OF THE TEXTUAL WORLD: ANTHOLOGY AS A MIRROR OF THE POST-WWII UKRAINIAN LITERATURE, “PORÓWNANIA” 2 (23), 1 E-mail: olena_haleta@yahoo.com Porównania_23.indd 47 2019-03-18 11:27:47 48 OLENA HALETA, A WRITER OR A CREATOR OF THE TEXTUAL WORLD... 2018 VOL. XXIII, P. 47-62. ISSN 1733-165X. After the II World War, literary anthology has become one of the most important means of representing Ukrainian literature, and it has changed depending on the definition and redefinition of the writer’s status. In the meantime, in the Soviet literature under the supervision of the Academy of Sciences, there appear multi-volume editions constructing the figure of the writer as a participant in the socialist reorganization of reality, emigration anthologies develop the myth of the writer as the creator of the textual world, becoming a new “common place” for the entire cultural community. Literary anthologies published after the collapse of the USSR (whose number has grown manyfold) reflect all the problems of transforming the identity of the author from the prophet to the player in an uncertain reality, as well as various models of mythologizing creativity from romanticism to postmodernism. In this context, the change in the genre of anthology becomes especially noticeable; it gradually moves from the collection to the project. On the one hand, commercialization of literature in market conditions and the transformation of the writer into a “producer” of textual goods are visible. On the other hand, next to the classic writer who, in a manner recognized by readers, represents aesthetic values, there emerges the figure of a writer as a public intellectual who undertakes the challenge of creating new meanings and new forms of expression on current issues. Since the 19th century, anthologies have played an important role in the history of Ukrainian literature and in the general process of the formation of the national cultural community. All while the national literary tradition and canon were being established, Ukrainian literature was deprived of powerful culture-creative mechanisms, in particular the national system of education and periodicals as an essential prerequisite for the development of literary criticism. In the Ukrainian tradition, however, the anthology as an “important niche of the literary sphere” (Pavlyshyn 84) differs in its structure and functions from the textbook or chrestomathy. If this latter is a part of a canon-oriented curriculum, then the anthology serves as a means of rapid reaction to cultural and literary changes, and is not limited by educational needs. While textbooks and readers work on the principle of repetition for the approval of canonical lists of names and works, anthologies present the actual literature in accordance with the understanding of the status and role of the writer. Such representations are implicitly manifested in different compilation strategies reflecting the “author’s myths” in various reader communities. Not only classical collections but also those less noticeable at the time of its release often become signals of changes in the collective imagination and cultural formations. Anthology as a genre: constructing cultural identity. Anthologies remained aside the strong interests of literary theorists for a long time both in Ukraine and abroad. Several researchers addressed this topic no sooner than the 1990s, although first attempts to consider collective editions as a special kind of creativity appeared in writings by the formalists. In 1928 Viktor Shklovsky wrote: “now a journal can exist only as a specific literary form. It should repose not only on the captivation of individual parts, but on the captivation of their connection as well” (Shklovsky 114, 116). In turn, Yury Tynyanov qualified journals as literary phenomena (Tynyanov 1977a, 147) stressing that “journals and almanacs existed in the past, but only nowPorównania_23.indd 48 2019-03-18 11:27:47 49 PORÓWNANIA NR 2 (23), 2018 adays they are perceived as peculiar “literary works”, “literary facts”” (Tynyanov 1977b, 257). To analyse “secondary” cultural phenomena Claude Lévi-Strauss proposed the term “bricolage”, indicating that elements previously included in other integrities change their function in the newly created whole (Lévi-Strauss 16-22). According to Gerard Genette, terminologically an anthology should be considered as solid “literature in the second degree” whose fragments are not only marked by an individual authorship, but are also linked by contextual (the order of text fragments in an anthology), architextual (intra-genre), metatextual (expressed through prefaces, postfaces, biographic sketches, interpretations and self-interpretations) connections (see Genette). Based on the metonymic principle, such a fragmentary text refers a reader to a certain whole featured by the literature of its part. On the other hand, nowadays the concept of a collection becomes the most effective theoretical tool used to analyse literary anthologies. It has a long history dating back to the works of the 19th century authors (Honore de Balzac (Sánchez, 177), Johann Wolfgang von Goethe (Sánchez, 257; Iampolski, 90-91; see also Goethe; Schellenberg)). Subsequently, the concept had been developed and established by Walter Benjamin (see Benjamin), Jean Baudrillard (Baudrillard, 85-106), Werner Muensterbergers (see Muensterbergers), Krzysztof Pomian (see Pomian 1996a, 1996b), Susan Stewart (see Stewart), Susan Pearce (see Pearce), Boris Groys (see Groys, 1997a, 1997b), Paul van der Grijp (see Grijp), John Elsner and Roger Cardinal (see Elsner and Cardinal), and Yvette Sánchez (see Sánchez) until it turned into one of the key cultural concepts in James Clifford’s works (Clifford, 203-271). Each collection falls in line with a certain plot and envisages the perception, i.e. the ability to comprehend and evaluate, classify and contextualize. Factuality is obvious, though it is not the only one and hardly the formal feature of such collections. Their value depends not only on the completeness but on the way this or that phenomenon is represented, their potential to respond to new inquiries of the receptive community and the persuasiveness in creating new and complex narratives about its own cultural identity. Aleida Assmann was the first who applied the idea of collecting to literature. She considered the shift from a text to a collection as a sign indicating the transition from structuralism to literary anthropology (Assmann, Gomille, Rippl 7-20). Finally, researchers such as Helga Essmann (see Essmann), William Germano (see Germano), Barbara Korte (see Korte), Jeffrey R. Di Leo (see Di Leo), Anne Ferry (see Ferry), Barbara Benedict (see Benedict) and Anders Olsson (see Olsson) focus their attention on the anthologies as a kind of a collection which not only reflects but sorts literature and serves as a means of both a compiler’s creative expression and a creation of a collective cultural identity. Anthology as a literary form opens new perspectives for research and formulates new inquiries; it not only reflects the past but forms the ways of interpreting the present and vision of the future. The German Porównania_23.indd 49 2019-03-18 11:27:47 50 OLENA HALETA, A WRITER OR A CREATOR OF THE TEXTUAL WORLD... researcher, Henrike Schmidt, calls the anthology a performative and intertextual genre that provides self-understanding of literature; in other words, a genre that tells and explains readers what literature is in general and what the uniqueness of each national literature is in particular (see Schmidt). An anthology becomes a literary project which involves restructuring of the initial material and a certain policy in its processing. The policy is expressed through a specific hierarchy of values, selection, definition of the field and rules of the game itself, as well as rules for its valuation (see Haleta 59-118). Ukrainian modern tradition: from the integrity of literature to the diversity of authors. If the classical approach considers an anthology as a mechanism for establishing a literary canon, that is, the selection and hierarchisation of available authors and works, the broader understanding of the genre as a mechanism for generating images of literature allows us to suggests that anthologies also define the reader’s ideas about the borders of literature and the nature/status of the authorship itself. By using the first Ukrainian anthologies as an example, it is possible to observe interesting attempts to reconcile the idea of the integrity of literature and the idea of the uniqueness of a writer, and in general to determine the role of individual authors in the formation of literature. In the first proto-anthological publication of the new Ukrainian literature, “Lastovka: Works in Little Russian Language” (1841) edited by Yevhen Hrebinka (see Hrebinka) the collective and author’s works are not separated. Along with multi-genre authored texts here are “some Little Russian folk songs, proverbs, sayings, poems and fairy tales”. In the first anthology of modern Ukrainian literature entitled “Rus’ Antology” (1881) there are no authored selections (see Antolohia ruska). The poems by the same author are scattered over the publication, the author’s name is given only below but not before the corresponding texts. Accordingly, the works are presented achronologically according to the compiler’s design (furthermore, the compiler’s name is not specified in the publication). Only on the content page works are grouped per the authors names, the list of which is given in the alphabetical order (in the list we can see that Shevchenko’s works are placed on the 1st, 16th, 36th, 49th, 56th, 66th, 99th, 110th, 133rd, 157th and 167th pages). Both publications are ruled by the idea of representing a certain whole, i.e. national literature, differenciated from other national literatures. Changes in the structure of