Ideological interpretations of nietzsche’s philosophical views in the ukrainian cultural context (the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th centuries)

The current state of the Ukrainian reception of Nietzsche is only at its dawn. This is evidenced by the lack of the relevant studies of the leading dominants of his philosophy. Nietzsche's controversial heritage is almost unreachable for the Ukrainian-speaking reader. It is certainly not difficult to come by his works in the original or translations in the widely spread languages (mostly in Russian and more so in English). One of the main points of Nietzscheanism perception should be the use of common terminology by the Ukrainian researchers. However, what does the “Ukrainian Nietzscheanism” mean? Firstly, it is the reception of Nietzsche's philosophy in different spheres of the Ukrainian cultural being. The important thing is not just adequate reflection of these ideas but major coefficients of perception and realisation of these ideas: the objection, debate, methods of broadcasting, the level of discussion and understanding, finally, the prerequisites for the emergence of this discourse in Ukraine. Let us consider why the situation is as it is, and how Nietzsche has been seen by Ukrainian humanities.

If we need to select a starting point for reception of Nietzsche in Ukraine, I would choose an article by Kyiv based philosopher Ihor Bychko. This particular article was written in the 90ties, and still was one of the first, quite late, researches of the subject. The reason for that was the fact that Nietzsche studies were illegal in the Soviet Union, presented as a part of Nazi ideology. Bychko's article was titled Nietzsche in Ukraine [Бичко1994], it drew almost radical parallels but understood their methodological supporting character. The author depicts Nietzsche as a figure of the German culture who embraced over 200 years of tradition of Western European Age of Enlightenment and offered anti-rationalistic, anti-mechanistic, existential program. Bychko focuses on the proximity of the Ukrainian and German mentalities, though he mentions its relativity. So what does it entail?

Formation of the western spiritual life is determined by the rationalist and classified coordinates, which are engraved in the naturalistic program of the Enlightenment. Instead, Ukrainian culture has long been leaning towards Hellenistic-Byzantine paradigm, focusing on dialectical, existential, irrational and mystical motives, aimed at the “inner” person. This is simply a scheme, but the real story is always more complicated. Thus, similar motifs were used by Augustine, Oxford and Chartres schools, and later - by Luther and Pascal. Western influence could be felt in Ukraine too, appearing in the principles of the educational process of Kyiv-Mohyla Academy. However, Germany (especially in the Middle Ages) experienced a particular situation: Areopagitica translated by Eriugena caught attention of Meister Eckhart, his work was picked up by the Rhine mystics and later by Jakob Bцhme and Angelus Silesius. Later German romanticism intensified interest in the internal life of the individual. Therefore, the features of `areopagitic' neoplatonism became Bychko's founding analogy (but not identity) between the German and Ukrainian mentality. The main feature of this mentality is apophatic with its denial of positive parameters of being and focuses on a personal way of the world's perception. For example, German-Ukrainian slavist and philosopher Dmytro Chyzhevsky showed common motifs in the works of the German mystics and pre-Ukrainian 18th century philosopher Hryhoriy Skovoroda, whose mystical-existential mood can be seen in the works of mythological romanticism Ukrainian writers, such as Shevchenko and Gogol.

In continuation of Bychko's thoughts, I would stress that Nietzsche also used mythological thinking as opposed to scientific and dialectical. Nevertheless apophatic is not a neglectful denial but a kind of dialectical interconversion: negation and affirmation, something and nothing. Active nihilism is interpreted in a similar way: Nietzsche's revaluation of values is not a total reduction of being to nothingness, but getting rid of obstacles to affirmation of life. Conventionalism of the proposed interpretation is reflected in the Ukrainian perception of Nietzsche, which became noticeable in the early 20th century. We are dealing rather with transformed forms of Nietzscheanism than with precise reflection of his doctrine. But the exact reconstruction would be less attractive. In addition, there were different degrees of response in German, Russian and Polish Nietzsche- anism. The basis of this reception was the modern rise of Ukrainian nationalism (as it was the case with many other Eastern European groups).

Thus, Ukrainian cultural figures, who directly or indirectly accepted the concept of interrelation of power and dependency in human society and differences between values of the powerful and the dependent, focused on the use of Nietzsche's ideas in the cultural, historical, social and political perspectives. Let us see how this was happening by looking at some of the examples of the “Ukrainian Nietzscheanism”.

Literary and artistic vision

Ukrainian researcher Solomiya Pavlychko [Павличко1999] considers the “Ukrainian Nietzscheanism” as one of the central points in frames of the Ukrainian modernism at the end of the 19th - beginning of the 20th century. Nietzsche was declared to be one of the main inspirers of the arising movement, which spread philosophy of pessimism, decadence and moral criticism. This was strengthened by the increase in the number of translations, although the Ukrainian language was not powerful enough, as it was illegal to publish in Ukrainian. Generally, Ukrainian language was banned from the public use. Knowledge of Nietzsche's ideas tended to be trivial and unacceptable to the Democrat Populists, which was the major political position of most Ukrainian intelligentsia [ibid. 46-47]. One of the critics of the Literary and Scientific Journal, Yuriy Kmit (1901), considered works of Nietzsche a madness, extreme individualism and violation of common sense, anarchy in science, philosophy, ethics, religion [Кміт1901]. Indeed, Nietzsche was the inspirer of the anti-populist theories. Nevertheless, one can see a distinctive paradox: Nietzsche's philosophy became an inspiration to conflicting philosophical and socio-political trends and movements, even those to which he was in opposition.

Hardly the first Ukrainian follower of Nietzsche was the 19th century modernist writer Olha Kobylyanska. Her interest in Nietzsche was ahead of similar trends in the Russian literature. She grew up in Austro-Hungarian Empire with the German spirit and wrote her stories in German. She later created the image of a strong aristocratic heroine, who preferred to belong to the great and free people. This applies to the central ideology of her psychological work Tsarivna (Princess), but it is also a clear antithesis to Nietzsche's anti-feminism. As Nietzsche said: “When going to a woman take the whip!”

Critics had various ratings of Tsarivna, given Kobylyanska's reference to the German thinker. According to another writer of that time and her friend Lesya Ukrainka, Kobylyanska's works show striving for the ideal of the superman[Гундорова2009: 157-158]. While critic Osyp Makovey saw Nietzsche's “good influence”, because he taught her to look at people from a higher point of view [Маковей1963]. Orientalist and writer Ahatanhel Krymsky was surprised that the author, while defending women's rights, admired the philosopher who was famous for his anti-feministic aphorisms [Кримський1963]. Critic Serhiy Yefremov believed that Kobylyanska's heroes neglected their community duties [Єфремов1995: 428-429]. Amazingly, Soviet literary criticism that never mentioned Nietzsche without its ritual cursing, acknowledged his influence on Kobylyanska, but it was considered to be brief [Павлишин2008: 78-80].

An icon of Ukrainian early Socialist movement and also poet and philosopher Ivan Franko showed his disrespect to Nietzsche. He reproached Kobylyanska for being taken with decadent modernism [ibid. 67-68]. Franko considered many of modernist famous figures unrelevant, as they did not propose efficient (for him as a left oriented writer) solutions for social stigma. In fact, his thoughts carry a conflict between two understandings of modernization - according to Auguste Comte on the one hand, and Nietzsche on the other [Грицак2005]. After all, Franko's opinion of Nietzsche as “correct” and Kobylyanska's as “false” became dominant in the Ukrainian humanities for many years (1920-90) [Лубківська1995; Луців1975]. His thoughts are that she copies single phrases from Nietzsche's works only to increase her vocabulary. On the other hand, he talks about her lack of understanding of the depth of Nietzsche's symbols and presentation of the German thinker's concept through the prism of her own outlook.

It is assumed with a great deal of probability that Kobylyanska knew well Thus Spoke Zarathustra,since she introduces a lot of quotes in her novel Vin i Vona (Him and Her), where the refrain is repeated: “A man is something that must be overcome”. She knew Twilight of the Idols (quotes in Tsarivna echoed criticism of the European culture and religion). However, she gets to know his works more after 1895, when Kobylyanska reads The Men and Works by Georg Brandes with a chapter on Nietzsche and Untimely Meditations. Among Nietzsche's motifs in Kobylyanska's works, we can mention a superman, imperative of victory over self, the image of the Noon as a symbol of blossoming of the human potential, the “higher man” and the “man of the crowd” and so on. At the same time, the writer ridicules direct perception of Nietzscheanism. One can see controversy with Nietzsche in her works: it concerns the concept of resentment (ressentiment) as anger, combined with envy. In Tsarivna she rehabilitates ressentiment - insult, anger and pain often become a heroine's desire for revenge, which the author approves of. Kobylyanska's Nietzscheanism shows she was a part of the European intellectual space, it signifies human hopes and unrest, while declaring pessimistic image of reality [Павлишин2008: 84-85, 95, 133-135, 142].

Lesya Ukrainka commented on her attitude to Nietzsche as negative [Павличко1999: 48]. Nevertheless, contemporary literary critic Solemea Pavlychko sees lack of Lesya Ukrainka's perfect understanding of Nietzsche's philosophy, represented in the kitsch image. Lesya Ukrainka called him the singer of amoralism and destroyer of values. Despite her negative attitude, traces of Nietzsche's aesthetic individualism can be felt in her anti-Christian critique Oderzhyma (The Possessed), V Katakombah (In the Catacombs) and his Dionysys concept echoes in Lisova Pisnya (Forest Song) and Orgiyi (Orgies) [Гундорова2009: 156].

Critical modernist manifestation

In the early 20th century, Nietzsche's popularity has grown in Western Ukraine, but his ideas were not studied thoroughly. We have to remember that what we know today as Ukraine was divided between Russian and Austro-Hungarian Empires. Nietzsche is rather seen as the creator of the superman than a messenger of basic human instincts. The display of polar populist social and aesthetic values and shallow ideas was scattered throughout the Ukrainian literature's first two decades. One can see a conflict between the individual, creative personality and the society in many works. For young modernists Nietzsche was a weapon against populism and ethnographic primitivism [Tarnawsky 1991]. In the article Moloda Muza (Young Muse) published in the early 20th century [Луцький1907] Ostap Lutsky, a representative of the Lviv literary group with the same name (1906-1909), outlines the problem of the coming cultural crisis [Павличко1999: 127-128]. Bohdan Lepky, another member of the Young Muse also called for uniting Nietzsche, Ibsen and Maeterlinck with the traditions of the native culture.

Later on, the cultural principles of the Kyiv magazine Ukrainska Khata (Ukrainian Home) (1909-1914), were based on the idea that only an individual can change and guide the entire audience by a personal action or art. Thus, the nation needed leaders in consolidation and the elaboration of the political theory. However, here once again we have the above-mentioned paradoxical reception of the Nietzscheanism because Nietzsche's ideas were anti-nationalist.

The Ukrainian acquaintance with Nietzsche comes from the secondary sources: popular articles, essays, analytical commentaries, where his philosophy is not properly systematized. Artistic movement titled Young Poland (Mloda Polska covering roughly the years between 1890 and 1918) that was influential in Western parts of Ukraine can boast a deeper knowledge of the German philosopher, but even here, his ideas often remain not “well-read”. Many believed that Nietzsche influenced his era not so much by his philosophical ideas as by his style [Яковенко2006: 56, 69]. Interesting fact: Ukrainian prose writer and political activist Vasyl Stefanyk took an active part in the life of Young Poland and in 1900, he acted as a mediator between Nietzsche's sister and the publisher Naumann to obtain permission for a Polish translation of Thus Spoke Zarathustra[Сте- фаник1954: 43-45].

Nietzsche's name appears a lot on the pages of the so-called national-antidemocratic Ukrayinska Khata (Ukrainian Home) magazine. Critic and politician Mykyta Sriblyan- sky (Shapoval) refers to the concept of transformation of Nietzsche's values, directing it against the mass culture forms. Nietzsche's philosophy gave the members of Ukrayinska Khata the ability to interpret ideas. Therefore Sriblyansky suggests the ideal of a modern man without recourse to the past, creating an allusion to the concept of the superman with the attributes of individual freedom, renunciation of the mass humanity, destruction of the old values, with the idea of the cultural excellence [Бабич2002].

A vivid example of Nietzscheanism can be found in the works of another most important literary critic Mykola Yevshan (Fedyushka). In his critique, one can see the concept of creation of a new culture that is associated with the problem of the individual creative personality, which he perceived through the prism of Nietzsche's strong-willed superman. With this in mind, he criticizes lyrical prose, naturalism and emotional nature of literature [Євшан1998]. While analyzing the works of the writer and “national symbol” Taras Shevchenko, he focuses on the spontaneous, anti-intellectual features which are typical for Nietzsche. Yevshan associates ability to comprehend one's own prophecy, see the tragedy of being and manifest the love for your own fate (amor fati) with the type of a new creator.

Ideological manifestations

Later on Ukrainian writer and soon after an outstanding politician Volodymyr Vynnychenko showed a more active and nihilistic approach to Nietzscheanism [Панченко2000]. This applies first of all to his literary work, which was considered by his contemporary to be immoral and individualistic. Symbiosis of Nietzscheanism and socialism was condemned by the so-called Ukrainophiles (we could describe them today as ethnographic party) and the democrats of all sorts (such as critic Serhiy Yefremov or journalist and army general Symon Petlyura), in particular the novel Chesnist z soboyu (Honesty with oneself) (1910).

In 1913 Pavlo Khrystyuk's article V. Vynnychenko and F. Nietzsche[Христюк1919] appears. The author insists that Vynnychenko perceives Nietzsche's thoughts “directly and roughly” because the Ukrainian culture of the time had not yet formed a deep understanding of the modern tradition of philosophizing. In his reception of Nietzsche, Vynnychenko sometimes fails to define new problems. It seems that Vynnychenko adopted some of Nietzsche's thoughts and tried only to paraphrase them with the help of his heroes, rather than realize them in the artistic types. Therefore, Vynnychenko's Nie- tzscheanism mostly resulted in caricature depiction of the heroes. Perhaps Nietzsche remained to be only a detonator in this reception, which allowed explosion of completely other forces.

Let us move on from the theory of socialist individualism to the conservative ideology, where Nietzsche's influence becomes more radical in comparison to modernist criticism. This can be seen in the views of Vyacheslav Lypynsky whose writing was crucial for Ukrainian pre-war conservatists. One of his main views was a denial of egalitarianism. As a defender of the so-called “ploughman's ideology”, Lypynsky reveals its dominants in feeling the difference and hierarchy. Moreover, this ideology needs its leaders [Липинський1998a: 123]. This type of a leader had clear signs of a nobleman (spiritual aristocrat) and showed brave chivalry nature. Lypynsky's conservative views include criticism of democracy, deprived of authority. The image of a strong man shows similarity with Nietzsche's ideal of power [Липинський1998b: 201].

Direct references to Nietzsche as the mastermind can be found in the works of the founder of the Ukrainian integral nationalism, Dmytro Dontsov. He sets his position as the principal anti-intellectualism. While making a distinction between nationalism and populism, he assimilates them to aggression and passivity, faith and knowledge, dogmatism and relativity. Comparing provincial nationalism and ideology, Dontsov sets off humanity, tolerance, solidarity, mutual love and uses plenty of Nietzsche's terms like “plebs”. Lesya Ukrainka becomes an example of the strong-willed outlook with a philosophy of action, cruelty, rights of the strong [Донцов2006: 73].

Although Dontsov did not develop a philosophical system, his thoughts were directed at identifying the core of decline, elimination of which would allow the Ukrainian nation to stay afloat in the global political turbulence of life. Dontsov was mostly attracted to Nietzsche's ideal of a superman with the will to power, and this ideal guided Dontsov in developing his ideal of the strong man who would be united in the “will to live” and the “will to power”. Nietzsche's concept of morality and his ethical philosophy helped Dontsov in defining “immorality” as the basis “of the current nationalism”.

In the 1920s Ukrainian writers-immigrants of the Prague school sometimes managed to transform such nationalist spirit, and at the same time avoid populism and direct attention to the cultural issues. Their ideological guidelines met the challenges of the tragic reality (historical and that of civilization). Members of the Prague school did not oppose themselves to the non-individual crowd (unlike members of the Ukrainian Khata). They cultivated intellectual inspiration. Thus, through Dontsov's outlook but beyond his romantic and dogmatic passionarity, writer Yevgen Malanyuk adopts Nietzsche's aesthetic judgments. He complements the militant Dionysianism with prudent Apollonianism, while shifting the accents towards the arts [Маланюкn. d.].

At the time, Ukraine saw the introduction of the literary and artistic trends that corresponded to both elements. The first - represented by the futurism of Mykhayl' Semenko, who personified the type of the strong-willed “iron man” with a nihilistic art platform. Echoes of the image of the superman (leader of the masses) from the position of national-communism are depicted in the works of another writer - Mykola Khvyliovyj. While Nietzsche's love of life is riddled with motives of saving the European culture from low- lying pseudo-values, Khvyliovyj accumulates this same problem into taking care of his homeland [Ємельянова2008: 158].

The second one is intellectual neoclassicism with slow rhythms, pauses, silence. For example, Maxym Rylskyj reinterprets Nietzsche as a thinker who turns into an inner companion, not a persistent destroyer. In his collection of poems Synya Dalechin' (Blue Remoteness) (1922), the poet dedicated a sonnet to the philosopher. It is full of shining apollonian colors [Рильськийn. d.]. This was a distinctive feature of the intellectual prose of those times. Valerian Pidmohyl'nyi's heroes tend to have a desire to theorize, and the mention of Nietzsche has added value [Pidmohyl'nyi 2006]. Like Nietzsche, Pidmohyl'nyi is skeptical about the achievements of the civilization that has made people more sophisticated, but still left a lot of the animal nature [Ємельянова2008: 159].

Many Nietzsche's motifs can be found in Victor Domontovych's novels. His heroes' opinions about their exclusivity, the self-search, affirmation of anti-moralism can be interpreted as a transformation of Nietzsche's motto “become the one who you are” [Белімова2003].

In the Soviet Ukraine any researches of Nietzscheanism became increasingly dangerous, even those of the ideological views. This can be evidenced by Petro Demchuk's study on the analysis of Nietzsche's works and those of his followers [Демчук1929; 1930]. In the article The philosophy offascism (on the Philosophy of Life by Leopold Ziegler), he traced the origins of Nietzscheanism. Probably this was one of the grounds to blame him of uncritical approach to the understanding of the theory and practice correlation. In 1937 he was taken to the concentration camp and shot as a “representative of the Ukrainian national-fascism”. Therefore, while mentioning Nietzsche's name in the Soviet ideological system one had to use a number of “tags”: reactionary idealistic movement, apologia of social inequality, exploitation of a man by a man, preaching war and vandalism, zoological hatred of the working masses, etc. [Куличенко1982].

Summaries