Education as an object of cultural analysis: the formation of the "Bolshevik world" in the Kherson region

Размещено на http://www.allbest.ru/

Education as an object of cultural analysis: the formation of the "Bolshevik world" in the Kherson region

Borys Dramaretsky

PhD in History, Associate Professor,

Senior Researcher, Hrushevsky Institute of Ukrainian Archeography and Source Studies of the National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Associate Professor, Kyiv National University of Culture and Arts, Kyiv

The purpose of the article is to analyse the peculiarities of the formation of the “Bolshevik world” in the education and culture of the Kherson region. The current situation in Ukraine is somewhat similar to the beginning of the 1920s when the “Bolshevik world” was formed, and the population was instilled with a Soviet worldview.

The scientific novelty consists of studying artificially created cultural and educational paradigms in Ukraine as a phenomenon of humanistic genocide by the Bolsheviks.

The research methodology consists of applying the approaches of cultural studies, pedagogy and history, and analytical, structural and problem-chronological methods to find out the purpose of the Bolshevik educational policy in the formation of a new cultural space. Conclusions. It is proved that after the seizure of power in Ukraine, the Russian Bolshevik elite began to impose the “Bolshevik world”, spreading ideologically directed Russian- language literature as a means of fighting for the masses. The author noted that the Russian language was automatically transferred to the Ukrainian educational process, the main element of which was the propaganda of communist ideals.

The school basis was labour and social education, collectivism, commune and herd thinking.

The most critical in the political world was assigned to institutions of higher education, admission to which was carried out on a social basis. Culture should also serve to popularise and instil communist ideology.

Art was defined as a form of social Marxist-Leninist ideology in the interests of the proletariat's class struggle for communism. Almost all representatives of Soviet culture were tested entirely. Only works of art that corresponded to Bolshevik dogmas were allowed, and political and ideological attitudes measured their artistic value. The population had to read “ideologically correct” literature only, not have their own opinion and work. Consequently, a certain “genetic” selection was made when people of proletarian origin loyal to the Party were needed to govern the country. In the mass consciousness, socialist culture promoted absolute faith in leaders and Communist dogmas.

Keywords: education; culture; Kherson region; Bolsheviks; military aggression; propaganda; political and ideological attitudes; society

ОСВІТА ЯК ОБ'ЄКТ КУЛЬТУРОЛОГІЧНОГО АНАЛІЗУ: ФОРМУВАННЯ «БІЛЬШОВИЦЬКОГО СВІТУ» НА ХЕРСОНЩИНІ

Драмарецький Борис Болеславович

Кандидат історичних наук, доцент,

старший науковий співробітник Інституту української археографії та джерелознавства ім. М. С. Грушевського НАН України,

доцент Київського національного університету культури і мистецтв,

Київ, Україна

Метою статті є аналіз особливостей формування «більшовицького світу» в освіті та культурі Херсонщини. Сучасна ситуація в Україні певною мірою нагадує початок 1920-х рр., коли формувався «більшовицький світ», а населенню прищеплювали радянське світобачення. Наукова новизна полягає у дослідженні штучно створеної більшовиками культурологічно-освітянської парадигми в Україні як феномену гуманістичного геноциду. Методологія дослідження полягає у застосуванні підходів культурології, педагогіки та історії, а також аналітичного, структурного та проблемно-хронологічного методів, що дозволили з'ясувати мету більшовицької освітянської політики у формуванні нового культурологічного простору. Висновки. Доведено, що після захоплення влади в Україні, російська більшовицька верхівка розпочинає нав'язувати «більшовицький світ», поширюючи ідеологічно спрямовану російськомовну літературу як засіб боротьби за маси. Наголошено, що на український навчальний процес автоматично перенесли російський, головним елементом якого була пропаганда комуністичних ідеалів. Основою школи ставала праця та соціальне виховання, розвивався колективізм, комуна та стадне мислення. Найважливіше значення у політпросвіті відводилося закладам вищої освіти, вступ до яких здійснювався за соціальною ознакою. Популяризації та насадженню комуністичної ідеології мала слугувати також культура. Мистецтво визначили формою суспільної марксистсько-ленінської ідеології в інтересах класової боротьби пролетаріату за комунізм. Майже усі представники радянської культури проходили тотальну перевірку. Дозволялися лише художні твори, що відповідали більшовицьким догматам, а їхня художня цінність вимірювалася політико-ідеологічними настановами. Населення повинно було читати лише «ідеологічно вірну» літературу, не мати власної думки та працювати. Отже, був проведений певний «генетичний» відбір, коли для управління країною потрібні були віддані партії люди пролетарського походження, а у масовій свідомості соціалістична культура сприяла абсолютній вірі вождям та комуністичним догматам.

Ключові слова: освіта; культура; Херсонщина; більшовики; військова агресія; пропаганда; політико-ідеологічні настанови; суспільство

Introduction

bolshevik world kherson region

Today our country received worldwide attention because of the military attack of Russia. A cultural front is available to support the Ukrainian Armed Forces soldiers, including cultural figures who have joined the volunteer activities and the ranks of territorial defence, artists who hold meetings, concerts, promotions, and large show projects to raise funds, popularise Ukraine in the world and promote Ukrainian values, mayors of cities who dismantle Russian monuments and so on. Noteworthy, in this direction, is the support of the temporarily occupied Kherson region. Russian Army came to “free” Kherson residents from no one knows what, destroying and robbing homes, intimidating and killing civilians. After all, the occupation authorities are convinced that this is their “native” cultural and language territory, so it absolutely does not consider the opinion of the population, and bloody imposes the “Russian World”. New monuments to Bolshevik tyrant leaders are being brought from Russia, installed in the occupied territories (for example, the Lenin monument in Henichesk), Ukrainian educational programmes are being changed to Russian ones, and teachers are being forced to refuse to teach Ukrainian language, literature, and history.

Today's Russia, the heiress of the Russian Empire and USSA, not only did not repent of the crimes committed by the communist regime of the Kremlin in Ukraine; on the contrary, over the past 20 years, it installed more than a hundred monuments to the tyrant (“Vid Stalina do Putina”, 2022), but also the nostalgia instilled with the help of Russian propagandists for the Soviet past, its “stability”, Iron Order, “greatness” and “mission” aroused among Russians the ideas of restoring the USSR or the Russian Empire. In their heads, Stalin and Tsar Nicholas II get along well. Such people are hostile to any manifestations of national consciousness, not understanding that only the occupiers can impose their own language and culture on a foreign country. Spreading the “Russian World”, the Putin regime denies the very right of Ukrainians to be a nation and have their own statehood. It is not for nothing that the Stalinist regime, which was not punished for unleashing World War II, was transformed into Putin's motto, “We Can Do It Again.”

The origins of russism should be tracked in Bolshevism. The situation of a hundred years ago is repeated almost with complete accuracy. In 1918 and 2014, when they launched a war against Ukraine, both regimes declared that there were no Russian troops, but there was an internal conflict. In 1918, the Bolsheviks plundered the Kherson region, taking food out of it, and in 1921-1923 they organised the first artificial famine, and in 2022 the russists again took out the grain and blew up grain elevators, provoking famine. It is also relevant to understand the creation by the Bolsheviks of the Soviet cultural and educational paradigm, which is the basis of the propaganda mechanism of modern Russia -- from kindergartens to higher schools -- and the rudiments of which need to be eliminated as soon as possible in Ukraine. In the current educational process, there is a Person as the highest value, and the content of education should be directed to the development of a value-based moral attitude of the individual to the social and natural world around him and himself (Mashki- na et al., 2016) however, Bolshevik education was based on completely different principles. At that time, not only political and public institutions and the media of that time instilled a Soviet worldview, but also schools, colleges, institutes and universities. They destroyed the love of their state, language, and history, and nurtured the Soviet worldview with its well-defined class approach, thinking following the herd, and Bolshevik ideology. And the imposed socialist realism in culture contributed to the erosion of national identity, formed a false historical memory and destructive Soviet system of values.

Recent research and publications analysis Research related to cultural construction in Ukraine and the formation of the Soviet education system in the early 1920s is devoted to many achievements of cultural scientists, teachers, historians, philosophers and scientists of other fields. The interest of scientists is due to the influence of Bolshevik policy on the development of cultural life (Nikitenko, 2016) and the spread of anti-Ukrainian setbacks (Idris, 2010), manifestations of Russification (Kraliuk, 2021). At the same time, during this period, the foundation of ethno-Renaissance aesthetics was being laid, which formed a new artistic style and aesthetically predicted the emergence of a new method and style of socialist realism (Lychkovakh, 2021), various associations of artists, writers, theatre figures are being created and actively developed, influential art associations are being formed to create new directions of artistic creativity, new art schools, new canvases, in which a significant contribution has been made to the spiritual treasury of domestic culture and art from innovative positions (Sheiko, 2012). Scientists note that in the 1920s, Bolshevik ideology of various forms was imposed (Kuzina, 2019), a system of Soviet political censorship was created, and information wars were waged (Seheda, 2010).

A significant amount is occupied by works on school education reform by the people's Commissariat of Education of the Ukrainian SSR (Berezivska, 2007), the formation of school education, and general education schools' activities under the totalitarian regime (Nikolina, 2013). The development of adult education in Ukraine and the creation of a network of labour schools that helped the Bolshevik party form the Soviet intelligentsia were studied by L. Sihaieva (2012).

The source base was the holdings of the State Archive of the Kherson region, the holdings of the Yurievsky Teachers' Institute, the Kherson State Pedagogical Institute, the Department of Public Education of the Kherson District Executive Committee of the Council of Workers', Peasants' and Red Army deputies, the Kherson Department of the district engineer.

Purpose of the article

The purpose of the article is to analyse the peculiarities of the formation of the “Bolshevik world” in the education and culture of Ukraine.

The research methodology involves applying an interdisciplinary approach to cultural studies, pedagogy and history. Analytical principles made it possible to find out the purpose of the Bolshevik educational policy in forming a new cultural space, and for structural and problem-chronological methods are also used to determine the structure of the spread of Bolshevik propaganda. The scientific novelty consists of studying artificially created cultural and educational paradigms in Ukraine as a phenomenon of humanistic genocide by the Bolsheviks.

Main research material

The capture of Ukraine by the Russian Bolsheviks radically changed the cultural progress of Ukrainian society since the planting of Soviet power took place not only by methods of military aggression, Red Terror and physical extermination of those who held other views but also with the help of an educational and cultural environment -- the creation of a system of “proletarian” educational institutions, theatre productions, slogans, sculptures, drawings, songs and other works of art, which were aimed at forming a new cultural space, a new social mentality.

We emphasise that the Russian political elite of the Russian Communist Party (bolsheviks) has never recognised the right of Ukrainians to self-determination, as well as the existence of an independent Ukrainian state (despite demagogic statements), and considered the borders between states a fiction that can be changed in a revolutionary way (Frolov, 2007). The idea of Ukrainian statehood was also not acceptable to V. Lenin (Nechyporenko, 2007). That is why the Ukrainian population experienced several Russian interventions from 1917 to 1921. They were conducted by various methods, from supporting local collaborators and holding congresses on establishing Soviet power to aggression. At the same time, not all military attacks were declared or called war. Launching the war against Ukraine, the Bolsheviks could declare no Russian troops, but there was an “internal conflict”.

In the Kherson region, the first attempt to establish a Bolshevik regime was in February 1917, when the provincial Congress of peasant deputies and land committees opened in the theatre building, which proclaimed the transition of power to the Soviets and adopted all Bolshevik decrees (on Peace, Land), including the decree on public education. On 28 February 1917, Congress decided to open courses of lecturers for villages in Kherson. The seemingly noble cause of bringing enlightenment to the village was actually explained by the fact that the occupation authorities needed resources that they tried to seize with weapons and by influencing the population by popularising their own ideology. It was done by creating a system of Soviet education and culture. However, at that time, Bolshevik ideas were not inherently acceptable to the overwhelming majority of the Ukrainian population.

After the Bolshevik coup in October 1917 and the establishment of Soviet power in Russia, no longer hiding its aggressive intentions, the Red Army launched an attack on Ukraine on 21 December 1917. Having captured the Kherson region, which was considered the breadbasket of the former empire, the Russian Bolsheviks appealed to the delegates of the Congress through their protege S. Ordzhonikidze, appointed by the Council of people's commissars of Russia to the extraordinary Commissar of Ukraine. The main task of the commissioner was to establish the export of bread. By Order of

S.Ordzhonikidze, the Congress ordered the peasants to take the “surplus” bread to the bulk points, and in case of non-fulfilment, it was required to take it away. So, from 18 February to 1 March 1918, about one million pounds of bread (Susorov, n.d.) were exported from the Kherson province to Soviet Russia. In addition to plundering the peasants, extortion of wealthy citizens for the needs of the Red Army began. It should be noted that the Bolshevik Party essentially opposed all those who had property, and not just against the “exploiters” and “oppressors” that it proclaimed. Lenin also considered freedom, equality, democracy, etc., nonsense.

However, the looting of the population and the outrages committed by the Bolsheviks and the Red Army caused mass resistance of the population. Members of the Soviets and socialist parties were arrested, and power passed to the Duma Commission to protect the city of Kherson. On 12 June 1918, Russia was forced to sign a preliminary peace treaty, according to which it was supposed to stop combat operations and establish diplomatic relations with Ukraine. However, V. Lenin gave a directive to

S.Ordzhonikidze not to withdraw Russian troops but to proclaim them Ukrainian to continue exporting as many resources as possible.

The second Russian intervention began in December 1918, when the Red Army attacked Ukraine without declaring war. At the same time, the head of the Foreign Ministry of Bolshevik Russia, G. Chicherin, stated that there were not their troops and that it was a struggle between the Directorate and the Independent Soviet government of Ukraine (the temporary workers and peasants government of Soviet Ukraine was created by the Decision of the Central Committee of the Communist Party of Ukraine in Kursk (Russia) on 28 November 1918, and then restored in Kharkiv -- auth.).

The Red Army entered Kherson on 31 January 1919 and by the end of March 1919, it had controlled the entire province. On 4 February 1919, the Bolsheviks created a revolutionary committee and elected a Council of workers and peasants' deputies to legitimise this aggression. In May of the same year, the illiteracy elimination commission was created in Kherson. An urban census revealed that 39% of men and 61% of women could not write or read. Therefore, on the commission's instructions, nine-day anti-illiteracy courses were opened for 150 people and then for 250. Until September, 15 schools for the illiterate were opened in the city (Tanchyk, n.d.). To ensure the implementation of the decree, teachers and the entire educated population were enrolled in the cultural Army, obliging them to comply with the orders of the people's Commissariat of Education (on the military principle). The importance of the press explained the attention of the Bolshevik leadership to increasing the level of literacy as a means of fighting for the masses. “Propaganda and terror are these two foundations that the Bolsheviks managed to form a 10-million-strong army” (Seheda, 2010, p. 90) (in Ukraine, 1.2 million people). -- auth.), thanks to which they captured new territories, and most importantly is they held them. The main Russian Chekist, Felix Dzerzhinsky, whose father worked as a math teacher at the Kherson men's Gymnasium from 1864 to 1868, did not leave this region without attention.

However, the Ukrainians did not want to build communism and give up their own property, and they did not want to work for free, content with the poor state. In the modern world, this has a name of terrorism, looting and turning the population into slaves, because communism meant Red Terror, expropriation of property and communes. It is obvious that the population of Ukraine resisted and took up arms, trying to expel the Russian invaders and their minions as soon as possible. And in the second half of 1919, the Soviet government was deposed in the Kherson region.

The third capture of the Kherson region took place in early 1920. Thus the “Soviet era” began. Bastions of the new government were cities where about 80% of the members of the Communist Party (Bolsheviks) of Ukraine lived, while the population composition was inversely proportional. And that is why, in cities, the manifestations of Ukrainephobia acquired the most severe forms (Idris, 2010). Ideologically directed Russian-language literature was distributed from the cities, the circulations of which amazed with their circulations. For example, the Red Cavalryman newspaper, which was published by the Political Department of the 1^st Cavalry army, was published in 300 thousand copies (Seheda, 2010). It is significant that in 1922 only 186 publications were printed in Ukrainian, while 491 were in Russian (Kraliuk, 2021) in the Ukrainian SSR.

Once again, the question of reforming Ukrainian Education arose. It started with the transfer of Russian “Regulations on the Unified Labour School of the Russian Soviet Federative Socialist Republic” and the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks) programme adopted at the VIII Congress of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (Bolsheviks). According to this model, a network of nine-year general education schools was created in Ukraine, providing general education. A Higher School was built above the secondary school, which provided professional training and had two types -- institutes and universities (Nikolina, 2013). It should be noted that the main thing for all educational institutions was the promotion of communist ideals. And such a system does not need individuality; on the contrary, collectivism, commune and herd thinking developed in every possible way.

In March 1920, secondary education was reduced from nine to seven years of study. The only Labour school was a seven-year-old school, divided into four and three classes. On 30 August 1920, schools received the order on “Basics of School Work”, according to which “the basis of school life should be productive work as a method of teaching; work in school should be creative, joyful, free from violence; the educational process should be based on the free development of students; homework is cancelled; punishment in school is not applied; Latin is removed from the educational process, the law of God (at the request of students, religious conversations can be arranged privately outside the school); the system of assessing students' knowledge is eliminated, instead of it, periodic registration of students' academic performance is introduced” (Berezivs- ka, 2007, p. 16). The labour school was also based on social education of children aged 8 to 15 years because the ultimate goal of social education development, according to the people's commissar of Education G. Grinko, should be to create a collective life for the entire children's population (Shpychak, 2017). But the main thing remained the maximum involvement of citizens in work at construction sites, mines, and industrial facilities. Therefore, at the same time, professional schools were created, which gave professional education based on seven-year-olds. Persons between the ages of 18 and 40 who were previously unable to obtain an education were also subject to involvement in vocational training under the decree of 1920 “On Educational Vocational and Technical Service”. An example of such “service” was the Kherson training courses for construction workers, and the builders were mostly women. So, among the 138 students who were accepted for training, there were only 6 men (“Khersonski kursy pid- hotovky”, 1930) and 132 women. Therefore, the myth created by the Bolsheviks is that “the household is mostly the wildest and hardest work performed by a woman” (Ho- hokhiia, 2004, p. 377), in fact, covered only their exploitation, which was justified from Marxist positions by the need to use a “female labour force”.

The authorities did not need literate and thinking individuals, but a labour force that did not ask “inconvenient” questions but only followed the orders of the Party. The school was supposed to prepare only for further work on Soviet construction sites. According to the Bolsheviks, even the family negatively influenced the child's upbringing because it was unable to raise a citizen of the Soviet republic (Nikolina, 2013). Such a population should read “ideologically correct” literature only, had no other views than those considered “correct” by Bolshevik leaders, and work having nothing.

The Bolshevik leadership assigned that the most important was higher education in the political world. Back in 1919, new university admission rules were introduced, according to which the main feature was the proletarian origin. Workers and peasants were not required to pass either entrance exams or even have a certificate of secondary education. It was enough just to complete three-month preparatory courses (Sihaieva, 2012). Although the Higher School remained autonomous, however, during the policy of War communism, it was subject to labour mobilisations. Thus, in Kherson, by Order of the Education People's Commissar of the Ukrainian SSR Grinko on the general labour mobilisation of professors and teachers of higher educational institutions dd. 24 May 1920: “no one has the right to abandon the duties imposed on them by the people's Commissariat of education in the field of creative work to carry out Higher School Reform” and “no other departments, but the military, have the right to keep teaching staff at work without the consent of the Education People's Commissar” (State Archive of the Kherson oblast, n.d.a). In fact, all education was reduced to political education. “Resolutely reject capitalist elements in our cultural constructions and develop socialist elements” (Riappo, 1927, p. 31). It was exactly the task set for education by the Soviet teacher, one of the founders of the public education system Jan Riappo.

Thus, the created educational system, mass distribution of Bolshevik printed publications, theatrical productions, slogans, posters, sculptures, drawings, songs and other works of art had to meet the only goal. It was popularisation or even outright planting of communist ideology. It is obvious that in a totalitarian state, art and education were evaluated only on an ideological basis. At the same time, almost without exception, all representatives of Soviet culture passed a total check of the Army of functionaries, whose opinion fluctuated along with the party line (Yakubova & Prymachenko, 2016).

It should be noted that the attention of Bolshevik ideologists was attracted not only by teachers but also by cultural workers. After all, they significantly impacted public opinion due to their emotional, and artistic images, forming patterns in their works. Some of them, believing the proclaimed communist ideals of equality and freedom, immediately declared their commitment to the revolution. They created works of art that convey revolutionary romance and faith in its ideals, the self-sacrifice of heroes, the confrontation between good and evil, and so on. For example, there was “Red Winter” by Volodymyr Sosira in 1922, “I am a Romantic” by Mykola Khvylovy in 1924, a collection of poetry “The Seventeenth Patrol” by Mykola Bazhan in 1926, and others. Another part was forced to glorify the Party and its leaders under the influence of attacks of official criticism and threats of arrest, saving their own lives.

And so that there were no deviations from the “bright path of building communism”, artists were constantly under the close control of inspection and punitive bodies. Almost all representatives of Soviet culture were completely tested. Artworks had to correspond to the ideology created by the Bolsheviks, and their artistic value was measured by political and ideological content. Artists were turned into devoted slaves of the regime (Nikitenko, 2016) through various prohibitions, censorship, intimidation and forceful pressure, up to the physical destruction of those objectionable by punitive bodies. For example, at the first All-Ukrainian Congress of the Association of revolutionary art of Ukraine, held in Kharkiv in 1926 with the participation of representatives of all branches, government institutions, leading literary organisations, The Berezil Theatre Association, the propaganda teams, the ideological platform of the organisation was approved. Art was recognised as a form of social Marxist- Leninist ideology in the interests of the proletariat's class struggle for communism; class neutrality of art was denied; a course was proclaimed to bring art closer to the life of society (Sheiko, 2012).

Therefore, Soviet education and cultural principles were formulated unambiguously: “our task is to bring the fighting power of art to the highest social tension, making art the most powerful means of political and educational work, that is, state propaganda of communism... General education -- school and after-school (including art: theatres, concerts, cinemas, exhibitions, paintings, etc.)... should be closely associated with communist propaganda” (Avtushenko, 2000, p. 118). The creative intelligentsia even formed a special group. Thus, in 1926, the population census recorded 6.1 thousand art workers in the Ukrainian SSR. They included only persons in the civil service, the rest -- numbering 32.3 thousand in the category of intellectuals, and representatives of liberal professions (Tarapon, 2012).

Ivan Bahriany expressed his attitude to the current situation in 1927 in the poem “Ave Maria”, published without any official permission: “... poets are not a category of criminals that I didn't belong to and don't want to belong to. Don't call me a poet. For the word p o e t meant that time chameleon, prostitute, speculator, adventurer, lazy one...” (Bahrianyi, n.d.). Mykola Khvylevy, in the pamphlet “Ukraine or Little Russia?”, wrote that “post-revolutionary and NEP-oriented Moscow has become a “centre of literary philistinism” based on “God-seeking”, Theosophy, pornography, and disillusionment” (Lychkovakh, 2021, p. 138).

Clubs, theatres, libraries, and folk houses became hotbeds of the “new” culture spread not in cities but in rural areas -- house-reading rooms. The “regulations on the house-reading room” were approved in July 1920 by the People's Commissariat of the Ukrainian SSR. They were entrusted with the work of spreading communist education, convincing the peasants to give up their property and join communes and state farms, and deliberately giving the state bread for extra development. An important role in the political education of adults was played by clubs, which, according to L. Trotsky, were supposed to become a tool for the re-education of employees. One of the most common means of propaganda was also the use of posters. They contained a short text, because most of the population was illiterate or semi-literate and were aimed at visual perception. Using clear symbols of the hero and enemy, they influenced the emotional perception of the viewer. “The effectiveness of visual propaganda was ensured, among other things, by using symbols borrowed from religious tradition and folk art, but in a new interpretation. The simpler and more unambiguous the image, the more effective it was” (Kuzina, 2019, p. 223).

An indicative representative of the creative intelligentsia of that period was Mykola Kulish. He headed the Oleshky Council of workers and peasants deputies, defended Kherson from the Army of the Russian General Denikin, and after the establishment of Soviet power, headed public education bodies in Oleshky. His literary career also began there. Since the mid-1920s, he had been moving to the then capital of Ukraine, Kharkiv, entering the cohort of prominent figures of Ukrainian literature (State Archive of Kherson oblast, n.d.b). M. Kulish, like most representatives of that time's Ukrainian culture, believed in the demagoguery of Bolshevik propaganda, at first actively supported the Soviet government, but quickly realised that the Bolshevik ideas of universal equality had a completely different meaning. After visiting the Kherson villages, after the artificially created famine of 1921-1923, he was shocked by the inhumane attitude of the Bolshevik leadership to human life. And under the influence of what he saw, he wrote the play “97”. And although the play became the decoration of the theatre season of 1924-1925 in Ukraine, in 1925, it was staged in New York and other cities in the United States. Two years later, on tour in Moscow, the performance of the Franko Theatre artists caused a standing ovation and the then people's commissar of education of the USSR Anatoly Lunacharsky called “97” a play, “about which the whole of Ukraine thundered because this is the first power play from peasant life” (Rudiachenko, 2019) However, the play “97” was significantly affected by censorship. Its first title was ''Famine” in the second edition, the writer was forced to postpone the events to 1923, and in the early 1930s, partially correct the text. However, this did not save M. Kulish's life. His work attracted criticism from representatives of the official authorities, and at the end of 1934, he was exiled to Solovki. On 3 November 1937, he was shot in Sandarmos along with other representatives of Ukrainian peasants, priests, scientists, teachers, and cultural figures, when the NKVD shot 1,111 prisoners in five nights from 27 October to 4 November 1937 (Aheieva, 2017).

Thus, the created system of censorship, in the future, would develop into the physical destruction of objectionable figures of culture, education, and science. In the early 1930s, the size of repression increased. Only during 1933, 100% of the leadership was replaced in regional public education departments for political reasons; in district departments, it was 90%. More than 2,000 “nationalist elements” were expelled from the system from the People's Commissariat of the education system, more than 300 scientific and editorial staff, about 4,000 teachers, 18 out of 29 directors of pedagogical universities were dismissed, and 210 teachers lost their jobs (Smolii, 2002) harassment of cultural figures is increasing. Writers also went through the appropriate “procedure” of criticism, harassment in the press, dismissal from work, prohibition of work, and then arrest, imprisonment and execution. For example, at the 1954 Congress of the Slovo Association of Ukrainian writers in New York, it was said that in 1930, 259 Ukrainian writers were published, and after 1938 only 36 of them were published. According to their “calculations, the number of 223 Ukrainian writers who disappeared in the USSR stands for: 17 were shot; 8 committed suicide; 175 were arrested, exiled to camps and removed from literature by other police measures (among them, those who may be shot and died in concentration camps); 16 were missing; 7 died of natural causes. These data are approximate because Moscow... continues to keep the secret of its massacre of Ukrainian Soviet writers of that time” (Lavrynenko, 2002, p. 13)

Conclusions

So, having seized power from Ukraine through military aggression and Red Terror, the Russian Bolshevik elite began to impose a “Bolshevik world”. Its bastions were the conquered Ukrainian cities, where the Red Army and most of the party members were located. Ideologically directed Russian-language literature also spread from the cities in huge numbers to fight for the masses. However, propaganda through printed publications almost did not work because the majority of the population did not know how to read and write. To eliminate illiteracy, a cultural army was formed (on a military basis), to which not only teachers were enrolled, but the entire educated population. For the same purpose, “proletarian” educational institutions were being created.

The author noted that the Russian language was automatically transferred to the Ukrainian educational process, the main element of which was the propaganda of communist ideals. The basis of the labour school was supposed to be work and social education, and professional schools on the basis of seven-year-olds were already prepared to work on Soviet construction sites. At the same time, collectivism, commune and herd thinking developed in all educational institutions. According to the Bolsheviks, even the family negatively influenced the upbringing of the child because they were unable to raise a citizen of the Soviet republic.

It is noted that the most important was higher education in the political world, admission to which was carried out on a social basis. “Proletarian origin” gave the right not to take entrance exams and not to have a certificate of secondary education because the authorities did not need knowledge but ideologically savvy people.

Culture should also serve to popularise and instil communist ideology. Art was defined as a form of social Marxist-Leninist ideology in the interests of the proletariat's class struggle for communism. Literary work, theatrical productions, slogans, sculpture, drawings, songs and other works of art were aimed at forming a new cultural space, a new social worldview.

It is proved that almost all representatives of Soviet culture passed a full check of the Army of functionaries, whose opinion fluctuated along with the party line, and “objectionable” figures of culture, education, and science were physically destroyed. Only works of art that corresponded to Bolshevik dogmas were allowed, and their artistic value was measured by political and ideological attitudes. The population had to read “ideologically correct” literature only, not have their own opinion and work. It was believed that the Soviet man had to follow the orders of the Party up to self-sacrifice and not ask “uncomfortable” questions. Consequently, a certain “genetic” selection was made when people of proletarian origin loyal to the Party were needed to govern the country. In the mass consciousness, socialist culture promoted absolute faith in leaders and communist dogmas. However, the perception of the new socio-cultural environment created by the Bolsheviks by society at that time requires further research.

References

Aheieva, V. (2017, November 3). 1111 zhertv Sandarmokhu: rozstril pid richnytsiu bilshovytskoi revoliutsii [1111 Victims of Sandarmokh: Execution on the Anniversary of the Bolshevik Revolution]. BBC News Ukraina. https://www.bbc.com/ukrainian/blogs-41734955 [in Ukrainian].

Avtushenko, I. (2000). Vplyv komunistychnoho totalitarnoho rezhymu na kulturnyi rozvytok Ukrainy (1920 - persha polovyna 1930-kh rr.) [The Influence of the Communist Totalitarian Regime on the Cultural Development of Ukraine (from 1920 to First Half of the 1930s)]. Ethnic History of European Nations, 5, 118-122 [in Ukrainian].

Bahrianyi, I. (n.d.). Ave Maria. Biblioteka ukrainskoi literatury. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://www.ukrlib.com.ua/books/printit.php?tid=10875 [in Ukrainian].

Berezivska, L. (2007). Rozrobka Narkomosom USRR systemy shkilnoi osvity ta yii aprobatsiia v konteksti sotsialno-ekonomichnykh ta suspilno-politychnykh determinant (1920-1924) [Development of the School Education System by the People's Commissariat of the USSR and its Approbation in the Context of Socio-Economic and Socio-Political Determinants (1920-1924)]. Educational History Review, 1, 12-29 [in Ukrainian].

Frolov, M. O. (2007). Transformatsiia pohliadiv bilshovykiv na kontseptsiiu proletarskoi derzhavy (1914-1921 rr.) [Transformation of the Bolsheviks' Views on the Concept of the Proletarian State (1914-1921)]. Scholarly Works of the Faculty of History, Zaporizhzhya National University, 1(21), 144-156 [in Ukrainian].

Hohokhiia, N. (2004). Zhinka v radianskomu sotsiokulturnomu prostori 1930-kh rr.: hendernyi aspekt ukrainskoi urbanizatsii [Women in the Soviet Socio-Cultural Space of the 1930s: The Gender Aspect of Ukrainian Urbanization]. Donetsk Bulletin of Scientific Society Named After Shevchenko, 5, 376-383 [in Ukrainian].

Idris, N. (2010). Antyukrainski nastroi u mistakh USRR za doby “ukrainizatsii” u 20 - na pochatku 30-kh rr. XX st. [Anti-Ukrainian Sentiments in the Cities of the USSR During the Era of “Ukrainization” in the 1920s - Early 1930s]. Mandrivets, 5, 36-39 [in Ukrainian].

Khersonski kursy pidhotovky budivelnykh robitnykiv “budkursy” m. Kherson [Kherson Training Courses for Construction Workers “construction courses” Kherson]. (1930). (Fund R-930, Inventory 1, File 32-170). State Archives of Kherson Oblast [in Ukrainian].

Kraliuk, P. (2021, November 7). Rusyfikatsiia proty ukrainizatsii. Ukraina u 1920-1930-kh rokakh [Russification Against Ukrainization. Ukraine in the 1920s and 1930s]. Radio Svoboda. https://www.radiosvoboda.org/a/30707046.html [in Ukrainian].

Kuzina, K. (2019). ODPU/NKVS u radianskomu plakati ta karykaturi (1930-ti - pochatok 1940-kh rr.) [ODPU/NKVD in the Soviet Poster and Caricature (1930s and Early 1940s)]. From archives of VUChK-GPU-NKVD-KGB, 1(51), 221-263. https://doi.org/10.15407/ vuchk2019.01.220 [in Ukrainian].

Lavrynenko, Yu. (Comp.). (2002). Rozstriliane vidrodzhennia: Antolohiia 1917-1933: Poeziia - proza - drama - esei [The Shot Revival: Anthology 1917-1933: Poetry - Prose - Drama - Essays]. Smoloskyp [in Ukrainian].

Lychkovakh, V. A. (2021, December 9-10). Idei etnokulturnoho renesansu Ukrainy u tvorchosti Mykoly Khvylovoho [Ideas of Ethnocultural Renaissance of Ukraine in the Works of Mykola Khvylovyi]. In 100 rokiv ukrainskoi kultury v ekzyli [100 Years of Ukrainian Culture in Exile], Proceedings of the All-Ukrainian Scientific and Practical Conference (pp. 138-141). National Academy of Managerial Staff of Culture and Arts. https://cutt.ly/jHAEcPp [in Ukrainian].

Mashkina, C. V., Usatenko, T. P., Khomych, L. O., & Shakhrai, T. O. (2016). Teoretychni zasady kulturolohichnoho pidkhodu u pidhotovtsi pedahoha do vykhovnoi diialnosti [Theoretical Bases of Culturological Approach in Preparation of the Teacher for Educational Activity] [Monograph]. Instytut pedahohichnoi osvity i osvity doroslykh [in Ukrainian].

Nechyporenko, Z. V. (2007). Rehionalni osoblyvosti polityky korenizatsii (ukrainizatsii) v USRR: suchasnyi stan ta perspektyvy vyvchennia [Regional Features of the Policy of Indigenization (Ukrainization) in the USSR: Current Status and Prospects for Study]. Scholarly Works of the Faculty of History, Zaporizhzhia National University, 1(21), 394-396 [in Ukrainian].

Nikitenko, K. (2016). Kultura i suspilstva: konflikt mizh totalitarnym i osobystym (na prykladi doby stalinizmu) [Culture and Society: the Conflict Between the Totalitarian and the Personal (on the Example of Stalinism)]. Visnyk of Lviv National Academy of Arts. Series: Culturology, 29, 12-26 [in Ukrainian].

Nikolina, I. I. (2013). Zahalnoosvitnia shkola Ukrainy 20-kh - pochatku 30-kh rr. XXst. [Secondary School of Ukraine in the 1920s - Early 1930s] [Monograph]. Merkiuri-Podillia [in Ukrainian].

Riappo, Ya. P. (1927). Narodna osvita na Ukraini za 10 rokiv revoliutsii [Public Education in Ukraine for 10 Years of Revolution]. Derzhavne vydavnytstvo Ukrainy [in Ukrainian].

Rudiachenko, O. (2019, December 7). Mykola Kulish. 1. Khvora mriia potomlenoho liudstva [Mykola Kulish. 1. Sick Dream of Tired Humanity]. Ukrinform. https://www.ukrinform. ua/rubric-culture/2831076-mikola-kulis-1-hvora-mria-potomlenogo-ludstva.html [in Ukrainian].

Seheda, S. P. (2010). Formy informatsiinykh viin 1917-1921 rr.: protystoiannia natsionalno- patriotychnoi ta bilshovytskoi viiskovoi presy v Ukraini [Forms of Information Wars of 1917-1921: Confrontation of the National-Patriotic and Bolshevik Military Press in Ukraine]. Hileya, 37, 88-95 [in Ukrainian].

Sheiko, V. M. (2012). Formuvannia obiednan khudozhnykiv Ukrainy u 20-kh rr. XX stolittia [Formation of Associations of Artists of Ukraine in the 1920s]. Culture of Ukraine, 39, 4-15 [in Ukrainian].

Shpychak, I. P. (2017, May 17). Suspilno-politychna zumovlenist stanovlennia systemy sotsvykhu v Ukraini (1920 r.) [Socio-Political Conditionality of the Formation of the Social System in Ukraine (1920)]. In Rozvytok osvity v dobu Ukrainskoi revoliutsii (1917-1921) [Development of Education in the Days of the Ukrainian Revolution (1917-1921)], Proceedings of the All- Ukrainian Scientific-Practical Seminar (pp. 51-52). V.O. Sukhomlynskyi State Scientific and Pedagogical Library of Ukraine [in Ukrainian].

Sihaieva, L. (2012). Rozvytok osvity doroslykh v Ukraini (20-30-ti roky XX st.) [Development of Adult Education in Ukraine (1920s-1930s)]. Adult Education: Theory, Experience, Prospects, 4, 257-267 [in Ukrainian].

Smolii, V. A. (Ed.). (2002). Politychnyi teror i teroryzm v Ukraini. XIX - XX st. Istorychni narysy [Political Terror and Terrorism in Ukraine. The 19^th--20^th Centuries. Historical Essays]. Naukova dumka [in Ukrainian].

State Archives of Kherson Oblast. (n.d.a). 100 rokiv Khersonskomu derzhavnomu universytetu. Dokumentalni vystavky on-line [100 Years of Kherson State University. Documentary Exhibitions on-line]. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://kherson.archives.gov.ua/ informaczijna-diyalnist/dokumentalni-vystavky-on-line/100-rokiv-hdu/ [in Ukrainian].

State Archives of Kherson Oblast. (n.d.b). Mykola Hurovych Kulish. Dokumentalni vystavky on-line [Mykola Hurovych Kulish. Documentary Exhibitions on-line]. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://kherson.archives.gov.ua/informaczijna-diyalnist/dokumentalni-vystavky-on-line/ mykola-gurovych-kulish/ [in Ukrainian].

Susorov, S. (n.d.). Stanovlennia radianskoi vlady na Pivdni Ukrainy: Malovidomi storinky [Formation of Soviet Power in the South of Ukraine: Little-Known Pages]. My City - Kherson. Retrieved April 29,2022, from http://mycity.kherson.ua/journal/konstanty11/stanovlen.html

[in Ukrainian].

Tanchyk, V. I. (n.d.). Misto istorychne. Kherson u 20 storichchi [The City is Historic. Kherson in the 20^th Century]. Kherson. Hromada. Initsiatyva. Retrieved April 29, 2022, from https://hgi.org. ua/?ch=kh3 [in Ukrainian].

Tarapon, O. (2012). Demohrafichnyi, natsionalnyi ta sotsialnyi sklad naselennia USRR-URSR 1920-1930-kh rr. u rozrizi povsiakdennoho zhyttia [Demographics, National and Social Composition of the USSR 1920s-1930s in the Context of Everyday Life]. Scientific Notes on Ukrainian History, 32, 126-137 [in Ukrainian].

Vid Stalina do Putina: nepokaranyi henotsyd provokuie novi zlochyny [From Stalin to Putin: Unpunished Genocide Provokes New Crimes]. (2022, March 15). Radio Svoboda. https://www. radiosvoboda.org/a/nepokaranyy-henotsyd-stalina-putin/31752943.html [in Ukrainian].

Yakubova, L., & Prymachenko, Ya. (2016). Vobiimakh strakhu i smerti. Bilshovytskyi teror v Ukraini [In the Arms of Fear and Death. Bolshevik Terror in Ukraine]. Klub simeinoho dozvillia [in Ukrainian].

Размещено на Allbest.ru