Educational component of cultural paradigm of modern ukrainian nation in the post-revolutionary emigration activities in Czechoslovak Republic (1920)

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru//

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru//

Educational component of cultural paradigm of modern ukrainian nation in the post-revolutionary emigration activities in Czechoslovak Republic (1920)

Doyar Larisa

Candidate of Historical Sciences

This article explores the problem of cultural activities of Ukrainian political emigration in the 1920s in the territory of Czechoslovakia. The author argues that for the exile members of the Ukrainian revolution, crushed by its defeat and weakened by the internal strife, only modern cultural paradigm underlying the further liberation struggle of Ukrainian people had consolidating potential. The purpose of the article is to outline the educational content in the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation, formulated by the Prague group of post-revolutionary emigration, especially by its SR wing led by M.U. Shapoval. The methodology of the study is based on the principles of historicism, comprehensiveness and objectivity. The researcher uses general scientific dialectical method, which provides factfinding and specific historical scientific methods, namely historical and typological, historical and systematic, historical and comparative methods. In the course of work the author was following the axiological and cognitive approaches. Scientific novelty of the research consists in updating the expat community's principles of national education during the interwar period, presenting the author's conception of modern cultural code and analyzing the components of the educational component of contemporary cultural activities of Ukrainian emigration. The conclusions generalize the study results and include statements about the decisive role of the Ukrainian Social Institute in implementing the national educational program outside the territorial borders of Ukraine.

Key words: Ukrainian political emigration, cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation, the Ukrainian Social Institute.

Дояр Лариса Василівна, кандидат історичних наук, доцент

Освітня складова культурної парадигми української модерної нації у діяльності постреволюційної еміграції на території Чехословацької Республіки: 20-ті роки ХХ століття

Метою статті є розкриття освітнього контенту в культурній парадигмі української модерної нації, сформульованій празькою групою постреволюційної еміграції, зокрема її есерівським крилом на чолі з М. Ю. Шаповалом. Методологія дослідження грунтується на принципах історизму, всебічності та об'єктивності. Застосовано загальнонауковий діалектичний метод, що забезпечує встановлення причинно-наслідкових зв'язків, а також спеціальні історичні наукові методи: історико-типологічний, історико-системний, історико-порівняльний. У виконанні роботи автор дотримувався принципів аксіологічного та когнітивного підходів. Наукова новизна полягає в актуалізації діаспорівських принципів організації національної освіти у міжвоєнний період, в представленні авторської концепції модерного культурного коду та аналізі компонентів освітньої складової культурної діяльності української еміграції. Висновки узагальнюють отримані результати і містять твердження про визначальну роль Українського інституту громадознавства у реалізації національної освітньої програми поза територіальними межами України.

Ключові слова: українська політична еміграція, культурна парадигма української модерної нації, Український інститут громадознавства.

Дояр Лариса Васильевна, кандидат исторических наук, доцент

Образовательная составляющая культурной парадигмы украинской модерной нации в деятельности постреволюционной эмиграции на территории Чехословацкой Республики: 20-е годы ХХ века

Целью статьи является освещение образовательного контента в культурной парадигме украинской модерной нации, сформулированной пражской группой постреволюционной эмиграции, в частности ее эсеровским крылом во главе с Н.Е. Шаповалом. Методология исследования базируется на принципах историзма, всесторонности и объективности. В работе использован общенаучный диалектический метод, позволяющий установить причинно-следственные связи, а также спецыальные исторические научные методы: историко-типологический, историко-системный и историко-сравнительный. При выполнении работы автор придерживался принцыпов аксиологического и когнитивного подходов. Научная новизна состоит в актуализации диаспоровских принципов организации национального образования в межвоенный период, в представлении авторской концепции модерного культурного кода и анализе компонентов образовательной составляющей культурной деятельности украинской эмиграции. Выводы обобщают полученные результаты и содержат утверждение об определяющей роли Украинского института обществоведения в реализации национальной программы образования вне территориальных просторов Украины.

Ключевые слова: украинская политическая эмиграция, культурная парадигма украинской модерной нации, Украинский институт обществоведения.

cultural ukrainian nation educational

After the defeat of the liberation struggle of 1917-1919 biennium Ukrainian political emigration had a geographically and ideologically scattered appearance. The representatives of various conflicting parties, supporters of irreconcilable bourgeois and socialist ideas got into the emigrant community at the same time. The situation of split was complicated by the fierce competition with the Russian political emigration, which cleverly intrigued during the inter-party disputes and personal conflicts of Ukrainian emigration figures. Subversive and terrorist activities of the Bolsheviks abroad served as a split factor. Under such conditions Ukrainian emigration desperately needed consolidating foundations, on which it could resume its political activities despite all the existing ideological differences of opinion and party programs.

In our view, only national cultural paradigm, established in late XIX - early XX century as part of the general concept of Ukrainian historic (state) nation development had a considerable and in fact the only consolidating potential. It, in particular, provided the basis for educational activities of Ukrainian emigration in Czechoslovakia in the 20's of the last century.

It should be noted that the emigrant education cultivated relevant to modern Ukraine principles of organization and operation, such as: the autonomy of institution, its democratic governance, academic freedom for scientists, lack of regulatory disciplines for students, their right to elect training courses, etc. Therefore, the study of this activity today is socially significant. The chosen by the author context of educational activities of Ukrainian diaspora, namely its compatibility with the cultural paradigm of the modern nation makes this topic scientifically relevant.

The problem of cultural activities of Ukrainian diaspora was studied by many scientists. Back in 1942 there was published a monograph by a diaspora historian S. Nariznyi [4]. In Soviet historiography it was a taboo subject, therefore, a real boom of research on the subject began only after Ukraine had gained its independence. Since then, various aspects of the topic were studied by S.V. Vidniansky, M.V. Kuhutyak, O.V. Danilenko, M.G. Palienko and others. Thus, the historian S.V. Vidniansky explored the cultural, educational and scientific activities of Ukrainian emigration in Czechoslovakia through the example of Ukrainian Free University in Prague and analyzed the factors enabling this activity, namely, the friendly attitude of the President and the Government of Czechoslovakia towards the Ukrainian emigration [1]. Such researchers as M.V. Kuhutyak [3] O.V. Danilenko [2] studied the activity of the Ukrainian public committee, which was a key player in the organization of scientific and educational activities of the Ukrainian Diaspora in the first half of the 1920s. The scientist M.G. Palienko researched archival centers of the Ukrainian emigration, in particular, Ukrainian National Museum-Archive, Ukrainian historical study room and Museum of liberation struggle of Ukraine, founded in Prague as centers of cultural and educational activities of the Ukrainian diaspora [5].

However, given the permanent urgency of the problem and the lack of generalized studies on the issues of implementation of the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation in the educational activities of the Ukrainian diaspora, we consider it appropriate to explore the issue in the given research. The purpose of our study is the aspect analysis of of the given paradigm in its educational perspective, reflected in the activity of domestic diaspora in the territory of Czechoslovakia 1920.

It should be noted that the basis of the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation is Cossack democracy, rule of people, denial of all forms of oppression (social, national, religious), the recognition of the natural right of every nation for its own forms of national and cultural life. The defining features of modern cultural code of our nation were the following our traditional values: 1) categoric denial of the utilitarian mentality inherent in Western countries - Ukrainian emigrants, respecting pragmatic "educational mind", sincerely kept faith to the "cult of the Heart" started by Gregory Skovoroda and approved by the national philosophy of the nineteenth century. (No wonder the student society in Prague bore the name of G. Skovoroda); the basis of human relations in exile, despite all the emotional clashes, insults, abuse and even hatred was mutual aid and solidarity - Ukrainian actor Karpenko, sending letters from the USA, necessarily put "dollars" into the envelope and proudly noted that he had not become "yankeefied" yet and was ready to share the last; 2) focus on the person, respect for his fine mental organization and inner beauty; Ukrainian ideology of individualism has always been devoid of Western selfishness and based solely on the recognition of human right to live under the parent traditions and laws, which provided the harmonious unity with the nature and understanding of the community; 3) respect for the Orthodox world, democratic in content and ceremony. We should note that ethnocultural positions of individualism and religion were the most "attacked" by the categorical "Kulturkampf" of the Bolsheviks, who, as the dogma of cultural development had outright antipodes to our paradigm - collectivism and militant atheism and historically justified nationalism of suffering stateless Ukrainian nation was replaced by pure class concept of internationalism.

It should be emphasized that the specific feature of the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation was its complete subordination to the political task, because the condition of its final implementation was getting by the Ukrainian people their own statehood. However, premeditated paradigmatic concept was the "body in itself" and, as evidenced by the previous pre-revolutionary experience could be carried out under conditions of statelessness. So, not surprisingly, unemployed, and therefore hungry and demoralized, Ukrainian emigration, united in the party cells, was primarily engaged in cultural affairs, which gave rather quick in the course time and tangible in space result because, unlike all other kinds of activity could be really fulfilled with a little effort. Immigrants themselves admitted that while abroad, their work was productive only in the cultural field. In our opinion, it was cultural activity that saved Ukrainian political emigration from degradation and despair.

Ideological support for practical implementation of Ukrainian cultural paradigm was the promotion of the liberation movement values, based on recognition of the fact that the national culture is the key to the success of state-building aspirations of Ukrainian people. Leader of Ukrainian Socialist in Prague M. Shapoval emphasized that there were two ways of struggle for the liberation of the nation - "armed and cultural-political" [9, p. 5]. Having entered the modern stage of its development Ukrainian nation should finally learn its own millennial experience, achievements and assure itself of rightful position in the history and finally get rid of the psychology of humiliation, neglect and ignoring of its national achievements. Therefore, we consider the statements found by the author in the emigrant archival funds about the political apathy of Diaspora's cultural work [13, p. 3; 14, p. 2] desirable, but not implemented. Statement about political apathy, in our opinion, was made for consolisation of emigrant circles within their compact living area - such territory in 1920s was Czechoslovak Republic. As to the direct diaspora education activity it is a priori could not be apolitical. One of the message Ukrainian Working University said: "Have you signed up to UWU, the first high school of extra-mural training, which gives truthful, pervert neither by Polish, nor by Moscow censorship knowledge needed for the liberation cause. You will help the big Ukrainian cause. No stranger will teach us how to build our own national freedom and no stranger will free us. We have to do everything ourselves" [10, p. 63].

The objects for practical implementation of the educational content of the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation in the territory of the First Czechoslovak Republic were schools, established in Prague and Podebrady in early 1920s. Since October 1921 in the capital of Czechoslovakia the Ukrainian Free University sterted its work, moved here from Vienna. Ukrainian High Pedagogical Dragomanov's Institute worked in Prague since 1923, and since 1924 - Ukrainian Social Institute. In 1922 Ukrainian Economic Academy was established in Podebrady. In general, the aforementioned research and educational centers demonstrated compliance with human values that coincide with the fundamental parameters of cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation, such as: democratic system, civil equality, ethnic parity, etc. Meanwhile, activities of Ukrainian universities in Czechoslovakia reflected the ambitious hopes for triumphal transfer of their institutions to the native land and the exclusive role in preserving the scientific potential of the nation and training of its qualified personnel. In addition, the educational component of the cultural paradigm reflected the latest at that time forms of educational process, which provided favorable conditions for its practical implementation.

In general, the educational component of the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation in the theoretical presentation and practice of the Ukrainian diaspora in the territory of Czechoslovakia in 1920s included the following components: 1) comprehensive nature of higher education (the latter was designed for all levels of colorful Ukrainian emigration and youth of Ukrainian society of that time in Great Ukraine); 2) integrated character of education levels (universities and academies founded by the figures of Ukrainian emigration consisted of real grammar schools, secondary education courses, etc.); 3) flexible admission rules to foreign Ukrainian universities (persons without secondary education had the right to get higher education; first they studied according to the high school program, and then became "real" students of universities and academies); 4) availability of education (availability of various forms of training (full-time, part-time), free training or regulated by price, various forms of financial assistance to students (scholarships, cooperative canteens, dormitories, etc.); 5) defining role of social sciences in the education process, which was generally consistent with the conceptual foundations of the cultural paradigm of modern nation, as in particular social sciences provided young students with the knowledge necessary for the urgent tasks of "national cause" and prepared them for building their own state; 6) applied character of education, due to the need to develop modern Ukrainian economy on the basis of its own human resources, assuming that Ukrainian engineers would not only manage the various branches of industry and agriculture, but also would be engaged in meaningful "public affairs"; 7) the opportunity for self-education, development of intestinal necessity for acquiring new knowledge and individuality through the deep self knowledge and implementation of "a goal in oneself".

The above paradigm, in a varying degree was effective in all Ukrainian foreign institutions. It is confirmed by numerous archival documents from the available funds of Ukraine. However, in the content defined by the author the above component characteristic was the most clearly reflected in the activities of the Ukrainian Social Institute, which unlike the others, was not only founded the by SR-immigrants, but was under their influence even after the death of the leader of the Prague group UPSR M. Shapoval (1882-1932). As is known, the Ukrainian Socialist Revolutionaries in Prague, acting through the Ukrainian Public Committee managed to establish a constructive dialogue with the president and the government of the then Czechoslovakia, for the money of which Ukrainian universities became a reality. As organizers, Ukrainian Socialist Revolutionaries became the founders of the educational paradigm of the nation struggling for its liberation. And, despite this, the Ukrainian Diaspora for the most part, did not show particular regard for the UPSR and personally Mikita Shapoval. Ideological beliefs of Prague SRs were in sharp confrontation with the convictions of Petliura, Skoropadsky and even Hrushevsky, who was a member of the UPSR. Given these circumstances, while studying the educational components of the cultural paradigm we refer to the positions adopted by the circle of "shapovalivtsy", especially because in Ukrainian historiography this topic remains undeveloped .

It should be noted that the Ukrainian Social Institute had branched structure and was open to any educational innovation. The specificity of the institution was its scientific orientation: unlike in universities and academies, in USI there weren't ordinary students. Academic members and "studying persons" worked there [7, p. 50]. The latter independently chose a field of study. The institute did not give them traditional diplomas and only limited to the "studies completion certificate". USI had no faculties and departments, and there were 4 divisions led by their directors [8, p. 16]. The divisions of sociology and politics, ethnology, economics and technology and legal science were included into the scientific board of the Institute. Division's departments were workshops and cabinets corresponding to the speciality. In sociology and political division it was a sociological seminar and village and city cabinet; in ethnology department - methodical and educational seminars, Belarus, Kuban cabinets and Slavonic cabinet; in economics and technology department - national economic seminar and cabinet of the economy of Ukraine; in legal science department - seminar of the Ukrainian law. Its own library and publishing house were at the researches' and studying persons' disposal. Thus, the institution demonstrated democratic approach to the organization of teaching process and created opportunities for individual development and self education of young people - studying persons tended to get knowledge, rather than diplomas, which was generally consistent with the principles of cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation.

It should be noted that in the USI there were also institutions that issued certificates, including Ukrainian high school of Social Studies and Ukrainian Working University [6, p. 73-75]. Admission procedure to the institution supposed the existence of two student's status: full students were those with secondary or higher education, free students were persons without secondary education. The former after two years of study and exams received diplomas, the latter - certificates. The Working University provided education to the "citizens without prior school training" and they received certificates, having studied "a particular course or session" [6, p. 74-75].

The Ukrainian Working University, as already noted, was the first in the country's history part-time institution. It trained all and from everywhere: students were residents of Great Ukraine, Romania, Poland, Czechoslovakia, Belgium, France, Canada, USA, Brazil, Argentina and Palestine [10, p. 34]. In UWU there were such units as: 1) faculty of social sciences; 2) graduation and teacher's courses; 3) foreign languages courses; 4) technical courses [10, p. 34]. The notice about the enrolment in the Graduation courses said that it was possible to get secondary education by paying tuition of $ 10 for a separate class, for 6th grade - $ 22 and for the final 8th grade of a real school - $ 30 [10, p. 18]. Within the Graduation courses there worked an extra course that trained personnel for teaching "writing Ukrainians" [10, p. 49]. In 1928 UWU opened technical courses, where they studied mathematics, physics, chemistry, electrical engineering, mechanics, metallurgy, mining, topography, geodesy, drawing, agriculture, commerce, harbarstvo, automobile engineering, tractors, bridges and highways, strength of materials , architecture and railways [10, p. 49].

UWU was focused on person's self perfecting and search for "a purpose in oneself". It was expected that its students would study being tremendously aware of national and cultural needs of their people and optimistically looking to the future. University's agitational poster "Higher Ukrainian Science for All" stated that "Ukrainian peasants and workers need education and science, which would help them to get better future and build their own free working state" [10, p. 34]. Since syllabus was freely elected, students were given the opportunity to harmonize their own needs, abilities and attraction to "work at the call of the soul" with the public interests. Filing a standard application in the form of a postcard with the UWU address on the back was considered an actual entry. [11, p. 16]. The text of the statement said that a prospective student may be simultaneously enrolled in the training programs of three departments (Ukrainian study, Social Science and Contemporary Politics) and that he can order the corresponding lectures. Tuition fee for Ukrainian study course was $ 30, Social Science - $ 25, Contemporary Politics and how to teach children and how to become a writing Ukrainian - $ 20 each, in addition, they had to pay $ 2 for "inclusion" [10, p. 6]. Management of UWU advised students to master all areas of study, however, did not allow any pressure on educational process. Moreover, UWU management did not require any advance payment for the sent lectures, showing their countrymen high level of confidence. However, as experience had shown, their hopes for the consciousness of students failed. Only 246 out of five hundred students of the first enrollment paid for the sent lectures [12, p. 2-3]. Over the next years, the number of students increased, but not the cash receipts from lectures - report on the activities of UWU for 1927-1931 years stated that the payments for sent lectures were coming improperly and not in full, therefore the management after several reminders cut the amount of work, and then completely stopped printing and sending lectures. It was decided that "future lectures will be made only in the form of individual lithographs and only after prior subscription, and will be sent in case of prepayment" [12, p. 3-4]. Of course, poor payment for lectures could be explained by the extreme poverty of students, but only in some cases, as the price of skilled teaching job was too low. Thus, 6-page lecture of Arcadiy Zhyvotko cost 1 CZK, accounting for 0.05 US dollar and 28-page lecture by a prominent professor of philology Leonid Bielecki cost students 4.20 CZK or 0.15 US dollar [10, p. 53].

Therefore, USI management demonstrated good awareness of global education experience, adapting the latter to the implementation of cultural paradigm in the modern development of their own nation. Ukrainian Working University, as a USI subsidiary had students from three continents and acted within the innovative for that time correspondence training, common in the United States. Thus, the activities of the Ukrainian Social Institute displayed mentioned above constituents of educational component of the cultural paradigm of modern Ukrainian nation, developed by the post-revolutionary emigration of the 1920s.

References

Vidniansky S.V. (1994) Cultural and educational and scientific activities of Ukrainian emigration in Czechoslovakia Ukrainian Free University (1921-1945). Kyyiv: Vid-vo Kyyiv. un-ty [in Ukrainian]

Danilenko A.V. (2004) Ukrainian Public Committee in Czechoslovakia (1921-1925). Kyyiv: Kyyiv. un-t [in Ukrainian]

Kuhutyak M.V. (1992) Activities Ukrainian Public Committee in Czechoslovakia. L'viv: Vid-vo L'viv un-ty [in Ukrainian]

Nariznyi S. (1942) Ukrainian emigration. Ukrainian Cultural labor migration between the two world wars. Prague [in Ukrainian]

Palienko M.G. (2008) Archived Ukrainian emigration centers (creation, operation fate documentary collections). Kyyiv: Tempora [in Ukrainian]

The Central State Archive of higher authorities and management of Ukraine. - F. 3793 "Ukrainian Institute of Sociology in Prague". - D. 1. - С. 9. "Charter Ukrainian Social Institute in Prague in 1925". - 109 p.

CSAHAM of Ukraine. - F. 3793. - D. 1. - C. 82 "Correspondence with Relief Ukrainian cultural forces 19261928 years.". - 62 p.

CSAHAM of Ukraine. - F. 3793. - D. 1. - С. 117 "Charter Ukrainian Social Institute, Ukrainian Museum- Archives, University and working Ukrainian selection rules and increasing the scientific staff USI 1928". - 37 p.

Размещено на Allbest.ru