Sincere desire to reflect on progress is very important

“It was interesting for me,” this is how The Day’s chief editor summed up the meeting of interfaculty debate “‘Armor-Piercing Political Writing’: Ways of Formation of National Consciousness,” which was held on November 8 at Ivan Franko Lviv National University. The debate was organized by the graduates of Den’s Summer School of Journalism. It is already second event of such kind. At the first debate participants discussed articles written by Oleh Olzhych. Moderator Yuliana Lavrysh dedicated the second meeting to the article by Ivan Franko called “What is progress?”

The university’s Mirror Hall, where the meeting took place, was crowded with students of journalism and philology departments and professors who study Ivan Franko creative work. Among the guest of honor there were: university’s vice rector Marian Lozynsky, dean of the Journalism Department Mykhailo Prysiazhny, and his deputy Bohdan Tykholoz, who, in fact, presented Ivan Franko in “Armor-Piercing Political Writing,” deputy dean of the Philology Department Vasyl Budny, and director of the Institute of Ivan Franko Studies Sviatoslav Pylypchuk.

Larysa Ivshyna came to the meeting with some presents – The Day’s publications and at the beginning she jokingly complained: “When our publishing list had only one book it was easy to carry, but now when we have a whole Library series…” Then she thanked the audience: “Your sincere desire to reflect on progress, the way it was viewed over a hundred years ago by Ivan Franko, and today’s progress of Ukraine is very important because no one made you feel that way. And this foundation is very reliable.”

Expert in Franko Studies Bohdan Tykholoz, who was the first to deliver his speech, said that he prepared one written on 22 pages, but would not present it. He stated only that Franko can unite not just the western Ukraine, but also the whole country. He said that the everlasting topicality of the ideas of classics is not an evidence of their genius, but also a result of our inability to eventually implement it. “‘Armor-Piercing Political Writing’ is a good way to convey to the reader the lessons of the classics,” noted Tykholoz. He also stressed that the young people who came to the discussion are the greatest achievement of “Armor-Piercing Political Writing.”

Future journalist Solomia Bui and future philologist Ksenia Matiiuk delivered their reports on Franko’s article. Bui is convinced that the only way we can overcome the Ukrainian Ruin is by overcoming a ruin within ourselves. According to the first year student, the leading role in this process should be played by the academic community. Fifth year student Matiiuk, of course, stressed on the linguistic aspect of the problem in the country’s development, in terms of the law suggested by Kolesnichenko and Kivalov. Professor and expert in Franko studies Halyna Yatsenko said that at this meeting the Franko’s dream of the ideal model of communication “journalist-reader” took place in reality.

Then the audience began asking lots of questions, most of which were not related to the topic of the discussion. Both students and professors asked Ivshyna about nearly everything that concerns them after 21 years of Ukraine’s independence. Answering those questions The Day’s chief editor spoke about the Belavezha Accords, about presidents Leonid Kravchuk and Leonid Kuchma, about Viktor Medvechuk and the results of the elections in 1999 and the ones that took place this year, about Communist Party and Freedom Party. She also told the audience about interesting trips in Ukraine, prospects of Ukrainian journalism, about her visit to Lviv Mayor Andrii Sadovy, about exporting the Lviv-style way of life and the joint project of The Day and Lviv City Council – glossy supplement “Route No.1: Christmas in Lviv.”

At the end of the meeting Ivshyna gave the most active participants the books from The Day’s Library, kits of philosophical paintings of a free artist Anatolii Kazansky, postcards, and photo album Living History. She said: “It was interesting for me! I will look forward to next meetings of this discussion club. And it will be even more interesting to talk to you after you read all 15 books from the series of ‘Armor-Piercing Political Writing.’”

More information about the three-hour meeting of the interfaculty discussion club “‘Armor-Piercing Political Writing’: Ways of Formation of National Consciousness” in the upcoming issues of The Day.