THE DIVERSITY IN THE CRITICAL ESSAY GENRE IN WESTERN UKRAINIAN PERIODICALS OF 1920 – 1930s

The paper deals with genre varieties of a literary critical essay (reviews, feature articles, essays, portraits, series of essays), which functioned in the periodicals of Western Ukraine in the 20-1930s of the XX century. The authors have shown how, through the interpenetration of components of different genres of literary criticism, basic style features of the leading critics of the denoted time and region, primarily Ye. Yu. Pelenskyi, M. Rudnytskyi, M. Kovalskyi, L. Nyhrytskyi, S. Hordynskyi – were formed. Specific examples demonstrate the dominant criteria for critical assessments and perceptions.

(interesting attempts by Meriyam (H. Luzhnytskyi) differ from numerous popular dramas with outdated techniques we have many. In his two operettas, he managed to combine modern means with an interesting plot and a good comedy. Among younger generation of playwrights Halan ("Cargo"), I. Krushelnytskyi ("On the Rocks") and B. Homzyn ("Blood Calls", 1933) could be mentioned. The observer draws the readers' attention to experiments in art: "M. Rudnytskyi was the first to suggest a rather rare in our country genre of short story with an erotic plot and of a light French type ("Possibilities and Adventures"). Stepan Levinskyi went even farther ("From the Japanese House", 1933, "East andWest", 1934). He leaves Maupassant's lightness to follow in the footsteps of Kuprin-Artsibashev. Eroticism here becomes vivid, overshadowing everything else) Offering an example of Stepan Tudor's experimental quest ("Moloshne Bozhevillia", 1930), Pelenskyi emphasizes: "Позитивне тут хіба намагання до мелодійности мови. Засіб простий і один: накопичення слів, де є звук "літ" [...]. Робили це вже багато раніше і то багато краще футуристи Семенко і Шкурупій [Пеленський 1935: 47-48]. (The only positive thing here is the desire for melodious language. The means is simple and the only one: piling up words with the sound "lit" .... This was done much earlier and much better by the futurists Semenko and Shkurupiy) The reference to the experience of the writers of Naddnipryanshchyna (the Dnieper Ukraine) is not accidental. The critic, when reviewing the literature of Western Ukraine of 1930 tries to put it into the all-Ukrainian context, and in a certain way, also into the European one.
Pelenskyi's review, both in its meaning, structure, level of generalizations, and accuracy of evaluation can be referred to a succinct monograph. Therefore, the genre modification can be defined as an essay-monograph of a review character.
The reviews presented on the pages of Western Ukrainian editions were mostly in line with the canons of the genre and were structured by the authors' desire to examine the development of certain trends in the literary process within a clear chronological framework against a social, and historical-literary background.
Among the genre diversity of the critical essay, a special place was given to discussion speeches. It is in this that the situational and discursive nature of literary criticism, which for all its vivid individual features still remains a collective affair, was expressively manifested. Truth manifests itself in confrontation. Disputes, discussions, polemics, regardless of their sharpness and passion, remain a necessary condition of the normal literary process, conditioned by the nature of the artistic world.
Rudnytskyi made high demands on the aesthetic form and psychology of characters, S. Dolenho believed that ideas and even political convictions, if they are organically woven into the fabric of a work of fiction, must necessarily be accentuated.
Or, are all these three above-mentioned combined components necessary for work of art evaluation?
We recognize as qualitative that work, which in consequence causes heroic ethical experience in the recipient, which directly or indirectly finds its creative ratio with the national idea in the psyche of the reader or the recipient in general. The aesthetic moment, then, in connection with the heroic conception of life continued in the work! ... This criterion can be weighty only when the degree of the aesthetic experiences and life ideology of the recipient is such that he will not accept the hostile social ideas of the work, and will not be demobilized by them, but the aesthetic and heroic elements of the work will strengthen his love to his national-social idea) That is, we see that the dialogueness of evaluative judgments operates in the form of an internal monologue, addressed to a specific addressee (its potential reader) and at the same time influenced by the presence of ideological opponents, who will not read such a text. The educational and didactic function dominates in such speeches. The critic addressed his predictions and wishes for the future not only to writers, but also to readers. "Інколи порівняти те, що створило мистецтво укр. на сьогоднішній день із тим, що могло воно створити і чого вимагає сучасна хвиля відродження нації -побачимо дуже мало плюсів, а багато витраченого надаремно часу, енерґії й сил [...]. Хочеться вірити, -і на се маємо право -що діждемося того Мойсея, якого так болюче прагнув у "Плузі" Павло Тичина (не комуніст)" [ibid]. "Перекладаємо оту книжку тому, що у рідній мові не маємо досі кращої короткої монографії про Мазепу. Мета авторів познайомити чужину із одною сторінкою нашої бувальщини сходиться з потребою нашого загалу пригадати собі цю бувальщину" [Рудницький 1991: 7]. and "overly rural means". Borshak and Martel's Mazepa is not without his flaws. We can question more than one phrase, "передавану як 'історичні слова' Мазепи, не один 'факт', виведений на підставі документів та справоздання попередніх істориків. Діло не в тому, чи погоджуємося більше або менше з портретом Мазепи на тлі тодішньої доби, що ввижається нам завсіди як кожна історична доба крізь призму наших майбутніх ідеалів. Важне те, що автори не лякаються ясних, сміливих висновків, хоча не мають наміру йти за модним у слов'янських краях "патріотичним" навчанням історії" [ibid: 15] The desire for a holistic comprehension of literary and social life and the need for a rapid and at the same time regular response to current events and phenomena forced critics to turn to critical cycles. The peculiarity of such texts is the multi-genre nature of their components. The open structure of these cycles allows to write "mixes", freely moving from problem to problem. However, such a literary-critical cycle, for all its openness, is still a holistic creation, because it is characterized by conceptuality, a common systemic principle, a formal connection between the individual components, stylistic unity, unifying cross-cutting compositional details. An example of such a literary-critical discourse can be M. Rudnytskyi's cycle in the journal "Svit" (The World). During 1926During -1929, the author published 19 literary-critical essays, in which he outlined various aspects of the psychology of creativity, reflected on the problems of adequate perception and full understanding of artistic works by contemporaries, relations between writers, and near-literary events. Much attention was paid to the author-reader-critic communication system, the contacts between writers and the press; also, he touched upon the moral and ethical aspects of literary creativity.
Mykhailo Rudnytskyi chose the most convenient genre, the essay, because it allowed him, on the one hand, to get as close to the reader as possible and create the illusion of a sincere conversation, and, on the other hand, to express his own views on the issues raised without the risk of being accused of authoritarian imposition of his opinion. On two occasions the critic used the genre of open-ended writing. In 1927 his speech "Who do you write for?" took the form of a speech, and in 1929 his letter to the young author of "Chy maju talant?" (Do I Have Talent) was presented in the form of a parting word.
A somewhat different structure had the critical cycles of K.K. and L. Nyhrytsky, published in the "Literary and Scientific Supplement to "Novyi Chas" ( To summarize, we can argue that the phrase "literary-critical essay" cannot have a strict terminological status, because it does not outline the semantic-structural formation and the nature of literary-critical activity. As a term it can name one of the types of criticism, that covers (summarizes) a number of clearly structured literary-critical genres (varieties of the genre).