Ironic Pathos of a letter in Romanticism
The article is devoted to the analysis of Ukrainian Romantic epistolary poetry heritage. The study of the national Romantic epistolary heritage gives the ground to suggest that a Romantic letter was characterized by ironic pathos. The usage of irony approaches in an epistolary text by Romantic addressees was due to the theory of romantic irony that was inspired by Socrates’ irony and developed by representatives of Jena school of Romanticism. For romantics the irony was «manifestation of spirit freedom», «specific show of romantic objectivism» «subjective artist’s own creations». (М.Palasiuk), that was due to romanticism esthetic and especially to romantic order for creative freedom. With the help of romantic irony these artists tried to save human’s personality under the conditions of pressure to grade the conditions of social reality. The means of irony that lead to «the background» transfer and «Aesop’s speech» show that the romantics seemed to isolate themselves from reality assertive and that ironic passages were only creators’ phenomena who were trying to express boundlessness of his spiritual «I» fully. The article highlights the point that on the basis of Slavic literatures the romantic irony actually did not gained the popularity as the popularity of German and other western cultures. The reasons are in dependent, colonial status of the Slavic nations of that time that were made to appeal to national sources. Under those conditions the ironic intonations were displaced with more actual for that time national and liberation rhetoric and pathos of struggle for national rights. It is pointed out, that Ukrainian tradition of
romantic irony had besides all-European also own national development sources. Here we talk about national folklore curiosity culture and about
traditions of Ukrainian Baroque in the first line about burlesque and travesty in particular of epistolary literature of the 16th – 18th centuries, which characteristic was the ironic world’s attitude.
2. Gogol, N. (2009). Polnoe sobranie sochineniy i pisem: V 17 t. [Full collection of works and letters: Volume 17]. Moskva: Izdatelstvo Moskovskoy Patriarhii. T. 10: Perepiska. 1820-1834. 392 s. [in Russian].
3. Gogol, N. (2009). Polnoe sobranie sochineniy i pisem: V 17 t. [Full collection of works and letters: Volume 17] Moskva: Izdatelstvo Moskovskoy Patriarhii. T. 11: Perepiska. 1835-1841.488 s. [in Russian].
4. Hrebinka, Ye. (1981). Tvory v 3-kh tomakh. [Works in there volumes]. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. Tom 3. 703 s. [in Ukrainian].
5. Hrybkova, Yu. Kontseptsiia romantychnoi ironii yenskoi shkoly [The concept of romantic irony of Jena school]. URL:http://doxa.onu.edu.ua/Doxa12/157-166.pdf. [in Ukrainian].
6. Kulish, P. (1984). Vybrani lysty Panteleimona Kulisha, ukrainskoiu movoiu pysani [Panteleimon Kulish’s selected letters written in Ukrainian]. Niu-York-Toronto: Ukrainska vilna akademiia nauk u ХІХ st. 326 s. [in Ukrainian].
7. Kulish, P. (Khutorianyn) (1861). Lysty z khutora. Lyst II. [Letters from steading. Letter ІІ]. Osnova. №2. S.227-232. [in Ukrainian].
8. Kulish, P. (2005). Povne zibrannia tvoriv. Lysty [Full collection of works]. Kyiv: Krytyka, 2005. T. I: 1841-1850. 648 s. [in Ukrainian].
9. Maksymovych, M. (2004). Vybrani tvory. [Selected works]. Kyiv: Lybid. 360 s. [in Ukrainian].
10. Maksimovich, M. (1857). Otvetnyie pisma M.P.Pogodinu [Responsed letters to M. P. Pohodin]. Russkaya beseda. Ch.II. S.80-104. [in Russian].
11. Maksimovich, M. (1871). Pisma o Kieve i vospominaniya o Tavride [Letters about Kyiv and memories about Tavryda]. SPb.: Tipografiya A.Transhelya. 156 s. [in Russian].
12. Maksimovich, M. (1856). Filologicheskie pisma k M.P.Pogodinu [Phylological letters to M.P.Pohodin]. Russkaya beseda. Ch.III. S.78-139 [in Russian].
13. Palasiuk, M. Ironiia v konteksti nimetskoho romantyzmu [Irony in the context of German romanticism]. URL: http: // elartu.tntu.edu.ua/ bitstream/123456789/17546/2/Conf_2016_Palasiuk_M_IIrony_ in_the_context_302-303.pdf. [in Ukrainian].
14. Pysmennyky Zakhidnoi Ukrainy 30-50-kh rokiv ХІХ stolittia [Writers of Western Ukraine]. Kyiv: Dnipro, 1965. 652 s. [in Ukrainian].
15. Polishchuk, J. Avtorstvo i hra [Authorship and play]. Synopsys: tekst, kontekst, media. 2013.№2. URL: http://nbuv.gov.ua/UJRN/stkm_ 2013_2_5. [in Ukrainian].
16. Shevchenko, T. (2003). Zibrannia tvoriv: u 6 t. [Collection of works: in 6 volumes]. Kyiv: Naukova dumka. T. 6. 632 s. [in Ukrainian].
17. Shlegel, F. (1983). Estetika. Filosofiya. Kritika: V 2-h tomah. [Ethetic. Philosophy. Critics: in 2 volumes]. Moskva: Iskusstvo. T.1. 479 s. [in Russian].
18. Shlegel, F. (1983). Estetika. Filosofiya. Kritika: V 2-h tomah. [Ethetic. Philosophy. Critics: in 2 volumes]. Moskva: Iskusstvo. T. 2. 448 s. [in Russian].