“Ukrainian Dostoyevsky”, or The Universal Psychologizm (Psychological Approach) of the Prose of Ivan Franko: Theory and Methodology
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.31861/pytlit2018.98.283Keywords:
universal psychology, psychoanalytic method, synthesizing ability, hero, essay, leitmotif, method of free associations, edipal situation, social compensation, complex of inferiority, fictitious teleology, psychological-comparative horizonsAbstract
The article deals with the universal psychologizm of I. Franko's prose in terms of the theory and methodology.
The researches of Franko hearitage (A. Krymsky, S. Yefremov, O. Biletsky, M. Vozniak, Y. Yankovsky, I. Denysiuk, M. Ilnytsky, M. Tkachuk, Y. Melnyk, T. Hundorova, M. Hnatiuk, S. Pavlychko N. Zborovska, A. Shvets, R. Holod, B. Tycholoz, etc.) revealed on a different historical stage of the study the whole range of problems with a unified understanding of the deep psychologizm of Franko’s fiction . They made a conclusion that the creative method of Kamenyar is analytical-synthetic, multidimensional and it cannot be clearly defined. This peculiarity of I. Franko's creativity is quite natural. That is a result of difficulties to find general complex of psychological features and original artistic works during late nineteenth and early twentieth century. The concept of the interrelationship between artistic anthropology and literary methodology is connected with the problem of evolutionary consciousness of the entire culture of the twentieth century, or rather cased by the whole artistic life with its attempt to find its own form of expression.
This background caused the methodological options – the psychoanalytic method and the typological characteristic based on comparison with F. Dostoevsky’s prose. This type of research is possible to make, while analyzing I. Franko works as “Motherland” (“Bat’kivshchyna”)’, “Boa Constrictor”, “The Blackthorn in the leg” (“Teren u nozi”), “How Yura Shikmaniuk waded Cheremosh” (“Yak Yura Shykmaniuk briv Cheremosh” etc. It is possible to notice that the artistic and scientific model (for example, “From the Secrets of Poetic Creativity”) of writer’s thinking is close to the psychoanalytic ones, such as the method of free association of S. Freud, the theory of personality of A. Adler, the existential therapy of V. Frankl, the humanistic psychology of E. Fromm. The approaches, made by I. Franko are – to some extent – ahead of listed methods. In fact – according to G. F. F. Hegel, the method is a theory, reversed to practice.
We made a conclusion that the psychoanalytic method of studying I. Franko's artistic prose opens the perspective of a dialectical understanding of the synthesis of the artist's creativity, in addition to the socio-historical, poetic horizons, and psychologically-comparative measurements in a heterogeneous cultural and paradigm of the West and the East. This also applies to the comparative characteristics of the work of the Ukrainian artist with the new Chinese literature (现代 文学).
References
Adler A. Dostoevskii [Dostoevsky]. Available at: http://avidreaders.ru/download/dostoevskiy2.html?f=doc (accessed 12 November 2018). (in Russian).
Wang Xiaoyu. Ivan Franko i nova kytais′ka literatura (现代文学): psykhoanalitychnyi aspekt [Ivan Franko and new Chinese literature (现代文学): psychoanalytical aspect]. Slovo i Chas, 2016, no. 8, pp. 54–60. (in Ukrainian).
Vorok Kh. Poetyka snovydin′ u prozi Ivana Franka [Poetics of Dreams in Ivan Franko’s Prose]. PhD dissertation (Ukrainian literature). Ivan Franko National University of Lviv. Lviv, 2017. Available at: http://www.lnu.edu.ua/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/dis_vorok.pdf (accessed 12 November 2018). (in Ukrainian).
Holod R. Syntezuiucha zdatnist′ iak holovna rysa tvorchoho metodu Ivana Franka [Synthesizing Ability as a Basic Peculiarity of Ivan Franko’s Creative Method]. In: Ukraïns′ka filolohiia: shkoly, postati, problemy. Lviv, 1999, part 1, pp. 152–157. (in Ukrainian).
Hundorova T. Franko ne Kameniar. Franko i Kameniar [Franko as Non-Kamenyar (Non-Stonecutter). Franko and Kamenyar]. Kyiv, 2006, 352 p. (in Ukrainian).
Denysiuk I. Rozvytok ukraïns′koï maloï prozy XIX – poch. XX st. [The Development of Ukrainian Short Prose in the XIX – Early XX Centuries]. Lviv, 1999, 280 p. (in Ukrainian).
Yefremov S. Zi spohadiv pro Iv. Franka [From Ivan Franko's Reminiscences]. In: Spohady pro Ivana Franka. Lviv, 1997, pp. 225–228. (in Ukrainian).
Yefremov S. Istoriia ukraïns′koho pys′menstva [The History of Ukrainian Authorship]. Munich, 1989, vol. 1, 456 p. (in Ukrainian).
Zborovska N. Psykhoanaliz i literaturoznavstvo [Psychoanalysis and Literary Studies]. Kyiv, 2003, 392 p. (in Ukrainian).
Ilnytsky M. Poiedynok iz soboiu: problema dviinytstva v “Poiedynku” I. Franka ta “Dviinyku” F. Dostoievs′koho [A Duel with Oneself: the Issue of Duality in “The Duel” by I. Franko and the “Double” by F. Dostoevsky]. Slovo i Chas, 2006, no. 8, pp. 18–27. (in Ukrainian).
Y. Xu. Razlichiia v iazykovykh sredstvakh dlia oboznacheniia vkusa v russkom i kitaiskom iazykakh [Different Linguistic Means of Taste Descriptors in Russian and Chinese Languages]. Iazyk. Kul'tura. Perevod. Kommunikatsiia. Moscow, 2018, iss. 2, pp. 278–281. (in Russian).
Klochek H. Traktat Ivana Franka “Iz sekretiv poetychnoï tvorchosti” iak predtecha ukraïns′koï retseptyvnoï poetyky [The Treatise by Ivan Franko “On the Secrets of Poetic Creativity” as a Forerunner of Ukrainian Receptive Poetics]. Slovo i Chas, 2007. – № 4. – S. 39–45. (in Ukrainian).
Krymsky A. “V poti chola”. Obrazky z zhyttia robuchoho liudu. Napysav Ivan Franko [“In the Sweat of the Brow”. Patterns of Working Life. Written by Ivan Franko]. In: Tvory. Kyiv, 1972, vol. 2, pp. 307–322. (in Ukrainian).
Laszlo-Kuţiuk M. Tekst i intertekst v khudozhnii tvorchosti Ivana Franka [Text and Intertext in Ivan Franko’s Fiction]. Bukharest, 2005, 257 p. (in Ukrainian).
Pecharskii A. Psykhoanalitychna retseptsiia traktatu Ivana Franka “Iz sekretiv poetychnoï tvorchosti” [The Psychoanalytic Reception of Ivan Franko’s Treatise “On the Secrets of Poetic Creativity”]. Visnyk L′vivs′koho universytetu. Seriia filolohichna, 2013, iss. 58, pp. 22–28. (in Ukrainian).
Pecharskii A. Psykhoanalitychnyĭ aspekt ukraïns′koï beletrystyky pershoï tretyny XX storichchia [The Psychoanalytic Aspect of Ukrainian Fiction of the First Third of the XX Century]. Lviv, 2011, 466 p. (in Ukrainian).
Rozental T. Stradanie i tvorchestvo Dostoevskogo [F. Dostoevsky’s Suffering and Creative Activity]. Izhevsk, 2011, 56 p. (in Russian).
Tkachuk M. Zhanrova struktura prozy Ivana Franka (boryslavs′kyi tsykl ta romany z zhyttia intelihentsiï) [Genre Structure of Ivan Franko’s Prose (the Boryslav Cycle and the Novels from Intellectuals’ Life)]. Ternopil, 2003, 382 p. (in Ukrainian).
Wellek R., Warren A. Teoriia literatury [Theory of Literature]. Moscow, 1978, 326 p. (in Russian).
Franko I. Iz sekretiv poetychnoï tvorchosti [On the Secrets of Poetic Creativity]. In: Tvory. Kyiv, 1981, vol. 31, pp. 45–119. (in Ukrainian).
Franko I. Na dni [At the Bottom]. Tvory. Kyiv, 1978, vol. 15, pp. 110–163. (in Ukrainian).
Freud S. Dostoevskii i ottseubiistvo [Dostoevsky and Parricide]. In: Khudozhnik i fantazirovanie. Moscow, 1995, pp. 285–294. (in Russian).
Fromm E. Begstvo ot svobody. Chelovek dlia sebia [Escape from Freedom. Man for himself]. Minsk, 1998, 672 p. (in Russian).
Shvets A. Zlochyn i katarsys: Kryminal′nyi siuzhet i problemy khudozhn′oho psykholohizmu v prozi Ivana Franka [Crime and Catharsis: Criminal Plot and the Issues of Literary Psychologism in Ivan Franko’s Prose]. Lviv, 2003, 236 p. (in Ukrainian).
Yankovsky Y. Velyki znavtsi liuds′kykh dush : (Dostoievs′kyi i Franko) [Great Connoisseurs of Human Souls (Dostoevsky and Franko)]. In: Khudozhnii svit Dostoievs′koho. Kyiv, 1973, pp. 175–203. (in Ukrainian).
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2018 Wang Xiaoyu
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
