Cultural Anthropologists (those who listen silently, given the internal prospect of the narrator) drew attention: when the same story retells “along the chain” from man to person, the story is distorted, which is never avoided. Somewhere in the ninth to twentieth storyteller “in line” the plot will certainly lose several segments (about five), but will find a plus or minus as many new, not identical, but similar. But the meanings will radically change already at the seventh-eighteousperture storyteller. Conditionally: there was a party in the original text on the occasion of Independence Day, and there will be a derivative of a prayer for memory day. The mass event is still here, but its content has radically changed. And this despite the fact that the stories of the “along the chain” silently and carefully listen to vigilant researchers-fixers.

Now imagine what is being done with the real events that have become a story told in fiction, where no one ever believes the narrator, does not control, but at the first opportunity the readers interrupt him, bringing his prospects, experiences and memories into the work. On the seventh-eight of the novel oh, say, the revolution on granite the participants of that revolution themselves would not recognize her....

However, we simply do not have seven-eight novels about the revolution on granite. And only one of them is worthy of reader attention - “Ivan I Feba” Oksana Lucishina. Lvivovan Ivan participates in an outstanding historical event and brings from him to his real life paranoia of persecution (he can no longer remember what was there in the square and what he later faded), who was driving his wife Phoebe, who was too young for the events of the then first Maidan. In the focus of the novel is just Phoebe, the revolution here is an event that the main character does not directly worry. Actually, this is how the “retelling along the chain” of some historical event in the actual psychological prose looks like.

Our prose, when he comprehends the epoch -making events of modern history, chooses an angle for individual experience and time distorted by time (by the way, it turns out a strong and psychologically reliable prose, but not what we call “historical novel”).

[see_also ids \u003d "

This feature of the modern and relevant Ukrainian novel has long been noticed: it avoids creating panoramic paintings, and therefore panoramic novels about our national tragedies. Moreover, this is really a direct work of the novel form now, despite the fact that the need for such texts is voiced regularly, at least from the late 1980s.

There is a request for a big novel about what kind of troubles the Ukrainians passed and who we became as a result. If you are very rudely formulated, then in Ukraine there is no its “main big novel” about the Holodomor, there is no it on the explosion on the Chernobyl nuclear power plant, we do not have modern panoramic prose about Babi Yar, about Bykovna, about the “torch” operation in the Kharkiv region, about the brigade prison and Koryukovka. Complete the list yourself, be surprised at the level of thematic deficit. Say we are such optimists and prefer not to focus on tragedies, we are looking for positive program stories for outstanding novels? Well, let it, but we also have no “big Ukrainian novel” about the restoration of independence, as well as about the Maranch Maidan. (NB: The revolution of dignity and our war for independence is a separate conversation, the corps of works about them is still formed, early in such a vein about it to speak.

I swear that now you mentally began to list all the read books about the Holodomor and Chernobyl - but there are still many of them. “Maria” of Ulas Samchuk and “Zhovniti Prince” Vasily Barka, family sagas of Anatoly Dimarov, “Treye company” Vladimir Sosyura and others. What are these \? Of course, there are novels about the Holodomor, in nine cases out of ten it will be family sagas, where the Holodomor is one of the trials that has fallen to a lot of a certain kind, but the family is rallying, supporting each other, mourn together and survive and survive. Such works are written from the perspective of a chronicle, who has not survived, not a descendant, but a member of the fixer.

Sometimes it is worth taking a closer look not at the works codified canon, but for a long time and safely forgotten to understand why our Holodomorns do not have an exit to the model of a linear family saga. Pyotr Lanovenko in the very beginning of the 1980s published the novel “Non-Meding Khlib”-a condo socialist, loyal to the advice of the epic about the village of Pavlovka in the Dnipropetrovsk region. Hunger is not a dull of prohibited theme, but ideological control over it is very strong. Of course, there can be no artificial hunger, only natural reasons. Fear of death or, God forbid, there are no scenes of painful dying in the novel Lanovenko. Unless cattle die massively. People in the village work hard, but there are pests that interfere with them, from there - a barrier that needs to be overcome, and then plow for a bright future. The plot center is the love story of a girl from a rich and unconscious peasant family and a young man from ideological communists, in the potential of a new formation. It is not worth talking about her. But there is one scene in this novel. The head of the Selrada sees in the field how a woman collects spikelets. He stops her: to jail, stupid, they say, wanted. Dispers home. Her homeha is called, she has three children. The house is dark, there is no light bulb, there is no longer a bed and pillows, apparently sold, the children lie on the floor and do not move. The homajo is trembling and her pupils are so dilated that the color of the eye is not visible. Panas Stargov runs away from home. The narrative will no longer return to this scene. And he will explain this scene not by hunger, but by the behavior of the homeha: she is a prostitute, does not know how to work on earth and does not want to study. The children themselves, a loafer, freezed. Although the children are still alive in this scene, they are dumb and immobilized. They are not different from the dead.

Most national myths are based on national tragedy. The reflection of such events gives rise to an identity novel and a request for it. We are talking about the continuous process of creating meanings and symbols that will be interpreted in the same way a certain group of readers. In the potential, a big novel about the tragedy becomes a nasophage -forming work. Such works are very dynamic because the components of the national myth are also dynamic. We can see how the story about heroes Cool has been changing before our eyes over the past thirty years. If in the story of Palchuk, for example, we are talking about the arrogant death of a young man who had just been able to commit a sexual debut and feels that he has moved into adulthood; And we read this in form an erotic story as crying: we have lost the best color of the nation. It is already in the literature of this war that the deaths of heroes Cool appear as resistance, successful, because they provided at least a day without occupation, and as the experience of rebellion, which was absorbed by the descendants and realize in this war.

[see_also ids \u003d "

In panoramic novels around which national myths are being built, it matters endlessly who exactly claims to this role. Be a descendant of the tragedy. Those who are called in our literary criticism are called the post -Chernobyl generation, about the Chernobyl accident, most of them are not written for the most part.

In the incredibly strong book “I am Zvinuvach Aushviz”, the Polish report by Mikolai Greenberg talks with the children whose parents survived in Shoa (a book in Ukrainian translated by Alexander Boychenko). And his first interlocutor says that he grew up in Aushwitz and Aushwitz, although he was born in the 60s: his father was filled with his whole life. And this person says the following: “I was born very late, when my father already proved in every way that he was alive. Married, gave birth to a daughter, built a house ”(I arbitrarily retold, I do not quote). This replica “who survived in the disaster proves that he is alive,” determines the problem that I am thinking about now. We do not have large artistic works codified in the canon and recognized by classics, which have become " This does not mean that we survived, it means that we do not know how to prove it, sorry for hyperbola.

Until now, our most famous book about Chernobyl is called the document of Yuri Shcherbak, a report in essence. This is a story not of people, but a nuclear power plant. It is noteworthy, is it not true?

I want to look for answers not in prose, because I can't find them there now. Svetlana Yoveenko, poem " " " Naum Tikhiy, " “My classmates die between the Easter and the May holiday” (this is a quote from the verse of Kiev, Vika Ivchenko, the poetess-Wunderkind, her verse “The wound is not anesthetic in the heart” at the first years after Chernobyl was steadily present in the info). " Dead I live, I Negodzhezhy, brother, my, onyuyki, ONUKO " Irina Zhilenko and the piercing “funeral”, where there is, in particular, the scene, as the mother covers the sleeping boy with a blanket, and next to the counterpoint will be the scene, as the sarcophagus covered the earth. In the “trauma” Nalki Bilocark, the lush color of the trees hides mutations, from which there will someday appear to replace humanity, now “a quiet viter to summarize the hair. Hundreds of such examples, this motive is repeated in high-class poetry and conjunctural verses from some regional newspaper. " If you ask someone about the “main text” about Chernobyl, then in each first case they will call this epic poem. The main symbol is Maria Virgin, who gives her child to death, because he will buy other lives with this death. Transparent? And this topos is more specific, tangible to one of the ways to think an apocalyptic. This is a literally empty Kyiv, from where the children were taken out, these are apartments with tightly closed windows, these are braids that wash again and again, it is a hot spring, which flourished that year that year.

A poetic symbol of understanding the tragedy of those who were near and who, if not realized, then assumed the consequences of the explosion for themselves, was just this image. All the children suddenly disappeared - born and unbroken. Those who urgently evacuated. Those that were among the most vulnerable sections of the population. Those who were not allowed to be born, directing pregnant women to abort. Those who could not be born, because the consequences of the disaster affected the fertile health of contemporaries. Here is the end of the perspective, that is how. There is no one to prove that he/she is alive.

Chernobyl, Holodomor - those disasters where we should not survive. And then they should not have to tell the truth about them. It seems that our literature, just did not have enough this feeling: the right of the surviving to testify to his life. Completing the moment of a traumatic event implies the position of a descendant, who already knows the results and consequences, and now he can reconstruct the causes. So they control if not an injury, then the scorched space that it leaves after. From our first attempts to talk about Chernobyl, the position of the descendant (narrative regime, I'm talking about him) becomes impossible. Who to say? Children who should testify, disappeared, died, were not born.

And I will return to the remark in brackets at the beginning. Now they write about the war completely different. We learn to survive and testify quickly.

[votes id \u003d "