Les Taniuk’s book about Marian Krushelnytsky
Les Taniuk is nominated to receive the Shevchenko prize for his book Marian Krushelnytsky: School of Figurative Transformation Commanded by Les Kurbas.
The Kharkiv Interregional Department of the National Union of Theater Workers of Ukraine submitted this monograph to the Competition Committee for consideration.
Everybody who sincerely believes that a writer is responsible for everything and gives hope to each of us will understand that not anyone can reproduce the complexity of the controversial character of the European-level artist and look inside his artistic world.
Marian, Marianchyk, our Krush – this is how Marian Krushelnytsky, a remarkable Ukrainian actor and director and one of Les Kurbas’ students, was called by his supporters and followers.
Taniuk dared to write about the life of his great teacher – a prominent actor, director, philosopher and skeptic, a person of great self-irony and romantic soul whose creative efforts, as a powerful bell, were sounding the alarm, so that we would not become “dumber” from the constant reminders about the arrests, oppressions, and bans and would not get used to the horrors of the “bird cutter” of the time. While describing the creative efforts and the ups and downs of Krushelnytsky’s life, Taniuk found new forms and means to reproduce the unreal reality of the time.
Without ostentatious splendor the author communicates to the reader what depressed, insulted, and at the same time stimulated the opposition and the continued efforts of the master’s creative expression. His cup overflowed, but at the same time, there was a hope, sometimes illusory, of overcoming the alienation that leads to loneliness.
Taniuk, as a theater person, does not forget about his priceless debt before the teacher. In addition to conveying his anxiety, love for a really dear person, he also managed to trace the path of the artist to the spiritual top, the peak of his development by showing the contradiction between the two Krushelnytskys, the sufferings of his last years, and the constant conflict of desires and possibilities.
As a publicist and a writer, Taniuk made an unusual attempt to present Krushelnytsky’s life as a certain theatrical performance, as a stage universe: in some marvelous way the book is perceived as a drama work.
I will briefly introduce the content of the work to the reader. The account will be brief, because I strongly believe that this work cannot be omitted — it should be read.
As any dramatic work, the story starts with the Prologue (1897–24), followed by Act I (1924–33), Act II (1934–52), Act III (1953–63), and finally, Epilogue: “Marian Krushelnytsky’s school” and “Marian Krushelnytsky’s bestiary.” The concluding parts are “The Krushelnytsky we did not know” (his letters) and “Ringing down the curtain” (the roles and stagings by the master).
Taniuk has researched and inventoried 135 roles Krushelnytsky played in different theaters in 1913–56 and presents his 62 stagings dated 1919–62. Four of them are the performances in the Experimental Studio in the Creative Youth’s Club in 1961–62 (Kyiv, October Palace of Culture), which were banned and the Club was closed. Krushelnytsky was the artistic director of the studio, A. Petrytsky its art director, A. Horska and L. Semykina were among the artists, Taniuk was the producer, and the forbidden plays were by Mykola Kulish, Bertolt Brecht, Ivan Drach, and Taniuk. What names! What figures!
The author offers to the reader a chance to understand and perceive in the deepest way everything that Krushelnytsky advocated, and Taniuk himself followed the protagonist. It is important for him that the contemporary readers would recognize themselves, their own illusions and ups and downs in the mirror of the book. While revealing the art of his hero, Taniuk himself comes through as a talented and original artist. Sincerity, passion, and imagery give one hope that young contemporaries will develop interest in Ukrainian culture that was hushed up in times when living with crazy people, a person could become crazy himself, and will come to love Ukrainian classics, which, according to Krushelnytsky, was cut and truncated.
Art is always something new. When you are floating in waters of Taniuk’s language lake, it seems that even fish speaks Ukrainian, because water has memory.
Taniuk’s work Marian Krushelnytsky, which is nominated for the Shevchenko prize, represents thorough fundamental research, extensive artistic canvas, and a significant and generous contribution to Ukrainian culture. Taniuk’s work about Krushelnytsky is indeed presented as a School of Figurative Transformation, commanded by Kurbas (which is the other title of the book). It is a book for everybody who is interested not only in the sources of Krushelnytsky’s acting, but also in the general history of the Ukrainian theater. Taniuk, the writer of immense creative burn, is worthy following the covenant of the master: "The artist must go looking forward!"
P.S. Let me express my wishes and assumptions: if the author could reformat work to make it a monograph in line with the strict scholarly canons, so he could be worthy of receiving an honorary doctorate degree (Honoris Causa), without the defense of any thesis.
Liudmyla Stelmakh is a journalist and vice president of the Mykhailo and Yaroslav Stelmakh Fund.
