Ivan Franko’s Perception of Oleksandr Konyskyi: the Processes of Convergence, Divergence and Memorialisation
The article analyzes the reception of Oleksandr Konysky in the literary-critical and journalistic heritage of Ivan Franko. An important point in the study of the relationship between national identity and places of memory is P. Nora’s observation that through common symbols individuals become the basis of a common identity, then the bearers of collective memory no longer need special knowledge to achieve a common identity. The author gives interpretation of such concepts as “iconic figure of the transition period”, “Galicia — Ukrainian Piedmont” and the meaning of specific symbolic place — the Shevchenko Scientific Society, which Franco once drew attention to, glorifying the figure of Konysky, and which still have attractive properties, determining the processes of national identification, the cultural leader of which was Konysky. The subject of the research is tracing the inclusion of the figure of O. Konysky in the Ukrainian cultural and historical canon in the aspect of research on cultural memory and places of memory. The object of analysis is Franko’s literary criticism and journalistic work. The aim of study is to trace the formation of Ukrainophiles generation locus memoria on the example of inscribing the figure of O. Konysky in the Ukrainian cultural and historical canon. This aim involves solving the following tasks: to analyze in detail the figure of Konysky in the literary-critical discourse of Franko; identify the influence of mental and generational factors on their relationships; to find out the ways of memorializing the figure of Konysky in the reception of Franko. As a result of the analysis, using the approaches of biographical, historical-literary, empirical research methods, it was found that despite some contradictions of personal and ideological nature, Franco praised Konysky’s role in building the Ukrainian scientific and cultural space. Franko presented Konysky as an important figure of the transitional period and accentuated the key moments of his activities that had a positive impact on the development of the national idea and on the desire of Ukrainians for the autonomy.