«Cкотский бунт. Письмо малороссийского помещика к своему петербургскому приятелю» М. Костомарова як літературна містифікація

Abstract

У статті йдеться про містифікацію як різновид літературної гри в українській романтичній традиції. Зазначається, що саме гра створювала умови для дистанціонування від недосконалого світу, а ігрова поведінка давала можливість зберегти себе в умовах жорсткої цензури й постійних політичних репресивних заходів. У контексті теорії літературної гри аналізується нарис «Скотский бунт. Письмо малороссийского помещика к своему петербургскому приятелю» М.Костомарова. In the article, it is referred to mystification as a type of literary game in Ukrainian romantic tradition. The author mentions that Ukrainian Romantic Period is marked with the emergence of a great number of writerly mystifications, pseudonyms, masks and codes. The artists-romanticists’ game behavior also brought about a special attitude to the letter, which was often used for purposes other than intended. Therefore, while at first sight it was an unremarkable, «marginal» form, it often contained significant ideas. Game views on the world, peculiar to Romantic Period, also marked romantic epistolary works and it manifested in the emergence of the original letters-mystifications, whose authors presented themselves to the public wearing masks and often declaring spiteful and even inappropriate ideas. The author points out that it was the game that opened the way to the distancing from the imperfect world. The game behavior made it possible to save yourself in the conditions of strict censorship and continuous political punitive measures. M. Kostomarov’s essay «The Farm Animals’ Revolt. Little Russian Landlord’s Letter to his St. Petersburg’s Friend» is analysed in the scope of the literary game theory. The author proves that this mystification played a conspiratorial role. M.Kostomarov realized that his phantasmagoria was critical and disrupting. That is why he referred to its author as I.Bohucharov (this was one of M.Kostomarov’s pseudonyms). In the paper, it is mentioned that in the essay the author presented severe criticism of the nihilistic, authoritarian and inhuman tendencies of the Russian revolutionary movement taking place in 1870s. Using the allegorical images of social «animals», the author showed an inevitable degradation of those days’ revolutionary practice and government administration, because they ignored mental, ethical and humanistic rules of people’s life.