CC BY
2174
PHILOLOGY / <<ШУШМУМ~^®и©Ма1>#&(1Щ),2Ш9
положение также наблюдается в управлении словом, выполняющим роль существительного в предложении. В любом случае, несмотря на использование в немецком языке подчинённого члена в дативе, он рассматривается как глагольное сочетание, ставшее реальным с актантом объекта и переводится на узбекский язык в виде объектного сочетания, сформированного падежом жуналиш, одновременно подчинённый член выражает объект.
Из материалов и примеров, собранных и рассмотренных нами, следовало, что только считанное количество глаголов, означающих психическое состояние, образует сочетание посредством предлога nach. Кроме глагола sehnen можно назвать также глаголов seufzen, erfreuen и verrecken. Своеобразие этих глаголов в том, сочетания с предлогом nach, образованные посредством их, становятся реальными не актантом объекта, а актантом причины. Более того, слова в его составе выражают не номинативное, а метафорическое значение. Классема сочетания имеет выражение «шахс» (личность) или «нарса» (вещь). Подчинённый член сочетания выбирается из почти абстрактных глаголов, и действие, обозначаемое глаголом, направляется абстрактному значению понятия, следовавшему из сочетания. Например, Du hast sieben Jahre nach mir geseufzt. В данном предложении сочетанием, управляемым глаголом seufzen посредством предлога nach, является nach mir geseufzt. Mir, являясь подчиненным членом этого сочетания, одновременно является подчинённым членом
сочетания с определением. Его определение со значением «таъсир» (действие) подвергся эллипсису. Он даёт абстрактное понятие. Поэтому классема сочетания с предлогом nach и находящегося под управлением глагола состояния, сохранилась как классема, имеющая выражение действия. Состояние, передаваемое глаголом в предложении, направлено абстрактному понятию, передаваемому подчинённым членом. Это следует из значения предлога nach. Подчинённый член считается актантом причины глагола seufzen. Сочетание имеет метафорическое выражение. При переводе подобных сочетаний на узбекский язык, сначала восстанавливается эллиптический член, передавая его в падеже чщиш, затем формируется альтернатива сочетания на узбекском языке. Здесь Менинг дастимдан оу урдинг (Ты горевал из-за меня). Несмотря на то, что объектное сочетание немецкого языка сохранилось также и в узбекском языке и подчиненный член остался в роли состояния причины, здесь оно передаётся в виде объектного сочетания.
Литература
1. A. Busch / Oliver Stenschke. Germanistische Linguistik. Günter Narr Verlag, Tübingen 2007.
2. Съедин В.Н. Предлоги немецкого языка. М.: 1963;
3. Каткова Е.В. и Фромзель Л. Грамматика немецкого языка. Предлоги. Л.: 1971.
4. Sommerfeld K.E., Starke G. Einführung in die Grammatik der deutschen Gegenwartssprache. Max Niemeyer Verlag, Tübingen. 1992.
Atamanchuk Viktoriia
Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv Department of Ukrainian Literature History, Theory of Literature and Literary Art, Institute of Philology
DOI: 10.24411/2520-6990-2019-10125 THE PROBLEM OF CONSCIOUSNESS REFLECTION IN I. KOSTETSKII'S DRAMATURGY
Abstract
The paper is aimed to define I. Kostetskii's aesthetical conception realized in dramatic works The Twins Will Meet Again and The Performance About a Great Man. Aesthetical peculiarities of author's plays embodied in artistic experiments are analyzed in the article. Philosophical aspects in coordination with literary implications are determined. Philosophical aspects are shown as necessary components for understanding the plays' aesthetical paradigm, concentrated on the problem of consciousness transformations depicted in literary works. In correlation with the problem of consciousness representation other problems and component parts in dramas are examined. Accordingly, the conflicts, the development of action, the images in I. Kostetskii's plays are analyzed.
Key words: a play, a drama, conflict, action, hero, consciousness, absurd.
I. Kostecki's literary works represent the realization of innovative strategies in artistic creation. The researchers of writer's multi-vector creativity have paid attention to its various aspects. Yu. Kovaliv1,
F. Batsevich2 studied the problems of marvelous representation in I. Kostecki's prose and dramas. The prose of a writer have been investigated by Yu. Marinenko3,
1 Kovaliv, Yuri. Eksperymentalni odyvnennya I. Kostetskoho [I. Kostetskii's Experimental Studies]. Literary Studies, 2010. Issue 29, 191-201.
2 Batsevich, Floriy. Pryyomy odyvnennya dramatychnoho
tvoru (na materiali pyesy Ihorya Kostetskoho «Blyznyata shche zustrinutsya») [Means of Marvelous Representation in Dramatic Works (based on Igor Kostetskii's play "The Twins Will Meet Again")]. Studia Ucrainica Varsoviensia, 2017, no 5, 15-25.
3 Marinenko, Yuri. Prorocho-apostolska tema v ukrayinskiy emihrantskiy prozi 40-kh rokiv XX stolittya [The Prophetic-apostolic Theme in the Ukrainian Emigrant Prose of the 40s of the Twentieth Century]. Scientific Papers. Peter-Mohyla Black Sea State University, Kyiv-Mohyla Academy Complex. Philology. Literature Studies, 2013, Vol. 224, Issue. 212, 5458.
«c@yl@qyiym-j®yrmal»#6îi©),2@i9 / philology
75
O. Poliukhovych4, O. Solovey5. Genre and stylistic peculiarities of the writer's literary have been analyzed by O. Brovko6, M. Bagry7, L. Zaleska Onyshkevych8, O. Lyubenko9, V. Mukan10, S. Pavlychko11, I. Yurova12, M. R. Stech13.
I. Kostetskii's drama reveals an original artistic comprehension. The dramatic achievements of the writer were accompanied by his deepening of the theoretical foundations, which gave the greatest clarity and expressiveness to his literary works. In the article Try masky (The Three Masks) I. Kostetskii 14 examines various aspects of the mask usage in Ukrainian drama and scenic art. The concept of mask seems to be extremely important writer's plays.
I. Kostetskii defines his drama Blyznyata shche zustrinutsya (The Twins Will Meet Again) (1947) as a play in masks. The artistic representation of a show in masks contributes to the visualization of the absurd aesthetics in the literary work. The phenomenon of masking, and especially in the context of the whole play extrapolation, creates the multidimensional possibilities for expressing rhizomorphic artistic projections.
The prologue in the drama acquires the significance of the unifying principle in the literary work, as it is associated with the person of the ballroom manager, revealing the non-obvious phenomena of the theatrical sphere and their probable perception, which simultaneously reflect the processes occurring at the inferior levels of the personal and collective consciousness, and determine the course of the dramatic action in the play. The prologue emphasizes the recognizable signs of age, which express the widespread world-view saturation and outlook distortions embodied with the aesthetics of the absurd. The head of the ball outlines one of the key problems of the day: the theatre, having exhausted all possible and imaginary changes of forms, faced the fact of lack of meaning. At the same time, in the subtext, the playwright clearly points to the historical reality, recalling the "era of totalitarianism".
From the very beginning, the writer combines different planes paradoxically breaking the boundaries between reality and its artistic reflection I. Kostetskii play
as a literary fact is included in the inner artistic space of the play itself, and the author becomes its hero mediated through the master of the ball's perception. The playwright paradoxically and ironically perceives the role of the author-hero of the literary work, which appears indirectly in the play, in order to self-destruction, thereby creating the conditions for further self-development of dramatic action.
The ironic discourse of the prologue is manifested in the reproduction of complex correlations between the author and his own literary work, including the image of the creator as the hero of his own play, who plays a minor role in it; showing the mutual separation of the artistic creation and the artist, which determines the further self-motion of the literary work and its transformation by other rules, in other contexts and conditions; reproduction of the conditionally real communication of the author with the actors engaged in the dramatization of his play, which is in fact a fragment of the artistic structure of the play; reflection of accentuated criticism of the author and his literary work by conditionally real actors; deliberate demonstration of the inconsistent pieces of the play.
The chosen place and time of the play (ball-masquerade takes place on the eve of the New Year at the time of occupation) implicate threatening meanings, which the playwright ironically emphasizes by pointing the ball manager to the alleged neutrality of the depicted situation. The first scene begins with a brief introduction, which at the same time reproduces both the tension and the carelessness of the atmosphere. I. Kostetskii forms a dramatic unit according to the principles of the absurd aesthetics combining the parts of different actors dialogues, in which the allusions of reality alternate with heterogeneous sentences. Henceforth, the excerpts of the five couples conversations will accompany the further development of the action, reflecting the various reactions (fear, hope, exaltation etc.) of the actors in the course of events.
The writer creates an artistic simulation in which the preconditions are accumulated (play in a play, cos-
4 Poliukhovych, Olga. "Plynna" identychnist u prozi Ihorya Kostetskoho ["Liquid" Identity in Ihor Kostetsky's fiction]. Scientific Notes of NaUKMA, 2013, Vol. 150: Philological Sciences, 64-69.
5 Solovey, Oleg. Mala proza Ihorya Kostetskoho: etychnyy aspect [Igor Kostetskii's Prose: Ethical Aspect]. Actual Problems of Ukrainian Literature and Folklore. 2015, no. 23, 4059.
6 Brovko, Olena. Zhanrovo-strukturnyy element novely u prozi Pavla Malyara ta Ihorya Kostetskoho [Genre-structural Element of a Novel in the Prose by Pavel Malyar and Igor Kostetskii]. Scientific notes by Volodymyr Hnatiyk National Pedagogical University. Literary Studies, 2010, Issue 30, 168-176.
7 Bagry, Marianna. Stylovi osoblyvosti tvorchosti Ihorya Kostetskoho [Stylistic Features of Igor Kostetskii's Creativity] . (Phd thesis, Volodymyr Hnatiyk National Pedagogical University, 2013).
8 Zaleska Onyshkevych, Larysa. Blyznyata shche zustrinutsya. Antolohiya dramaturhiyi ukrayinskoyi diaspory [The Twins Will Meet Again. Anthology of Drama of the Ukrainian Diaspora]. K., Lviv: Time, 1997.
9 Lyubenko, Olena. Eksperyment v ukrayinskiy dramaturhiyi:
fenomen I. Kostetskoho [The Experiment in Ukrainian
Drama: the Phenomenon of I. Kostetskii]. Word and time. 2005, No. 6, 32-41.
10 Mukan,Volodymyr. Poetyka absurdu v ukrayinskiy dramaturhiyi pershoyi polovyny XX stolittya (na materiali tvoriv Mykoly Kulisha ta Ihorya Kostetskoho) [Poetics of the Absurd in the Ukrainian Drama of the First Half of the Twentieth Century (based on the literary works of Mykola Kulish and Igor Kostetskii)]. (Phd diss., Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2015).
11 Pavlychko, Solomiya. Nihilistychnyy modernizm I. Kostetskoho [The Nihilistic Modernism of I. Kostetskii]. Pavlychko, S. Theory of Literature. Kyiv: Publishing House of Solomiya Pavlychko "Fundamentals", 2002, 336-380.
12 Yurova, Inna. Tvorcha osobystist Ihorya Kostetskoho u literaturnomu dyskursi IIpolovyny XX st. [The creative personality of Igor Kostetskii in the literary discourse of the second half of the twentieth century]. (Phd thesis, Karazin National University of Kharkiv, 2007).
13 Stech, Marko Robert. Misteriya stylyu [The Mystery of Style]. Criticism. 2001, no 1-2 (39-40), 20-22.
14 Kostetskii, Igor. Try masky [The Three Masks]. The Theatre, 1948, no.1, 13-16.
76
PHILOLOGY / <<€®yL®qUQUM~J®U©MaL>>#6Il©)),2(0]9
tume ball, etc.), which contribute to the multiple complication of interactions and relationships between the various manifestations of the real and virtual spheres. At the same time, the various virtual representations only appear to be real or are presented as a reality for those actors who are involved in it.
The versatility of artistic reflection lies in the structure of the play, which consists of a prologue, three scenes and two interludes. The playwright intersects the reproduction of dramatic action fragments with interludes, which represent detailed comments of the ball organizer, which simultaneously resides both in the play space and beyond. This manager is endowed with important functions in the I. Kostetskii's literary work, since he has the prerogative of evaluative judgments, mostly ironic, and interventions in a dramatic action.
The prologue and interludes perform the role of an interpretation of the text by text, providing a kind of correction, prediction and definition of the actors' play in the interpreted drama, thus creating the effect of marvelous representation through the mixing the perception of different levels. At the same time, the playwright emphasizes some chaotic explanations of the ball organizer, which also enhances the effect of marvelous representation, as the hero makes comments that he himself refutes, resort to deliberate flaws, expresses provocative statements, asks provocative questions, induces actors to interactions, expresses excessive subjective assessments that add distinct semantic nuances to the perception of the literary work and the performance. The provocative assertion of the manager about one actor, playing both twins, modifies the meaning and perception of the entire play, in a certain way, projecting out of stage realities for a scenic dimension.
The development of the dramatic action in three scenes is realized through the formation and gradual disclosure to the heroes of the literary work of the intrigue based on the twins' existence and their substitution, which the ball manager revealed to the spectators in the prologue. The playwright breaks the weird Colonel's story about his twin sons of different age from different mothers, placing the first part in the first scene before the replacement of the brothers, and the second part - in the third scene, after all the vicissitudes and clarifications, thereby ultimately combining all the intricate and bizarre scene components into a single structure.
The dialogue between Teresa and Colonel demonstrates different levels of ideological and social degradation that took place in the twentieth century on the eve (during, as a result) of World Wars. The absurdity of the depiction is achieved by showing the non-alternative moral features deformation, by the cynicism affirmation, which are shown as common phenomena. The Colonel just opposes the various approaches to the extermination of mankind, caused by various forms of struggle (of empires or states), defining their advantages and disadvantages. He acts as an apologist for non-emotional, adversarial destruction, and he is reluctant to destruction, dictated by emotions or ideas. Moreover, the hero uses the paronomasia as a way to identify the destruction for the sake of an idea with the idea of destruction.
The development of the action in the first scene is based on the principle of a continuous variable flow, the organizing center of which is the image of Svyatoslav
Togobochnyi. The dialogue of Teresa and Colonel ends with a story about Svyatoslav; after the end of the story the hero appears who speaks first with his father, then with Teresa; between these conversations the playwright inserts fragmented dialogues of five pairs, in each of them Svyatoslav is mentioned.
The dialogue between Teresa and Svyatoslav focuses on the discrepancies that have formed the foundation for the dramatic action. The dialogue has an asymmetric construction, since the communication of heroes takes place at different levels of emotional, intellectual and ideological inclusion. The first part of it is based on the expression of Teresa's exalted feelings, caused by the image of Svyatoslav and the ideas that are associated with him, and the Svyatoslav's mechanical iterations; in the second part of the dialogue Svyatoslav proclaims the theses, which testify the arbitrariness of the heroine's interpretations and refute them. The dialogue of heroes leads to the main intrigue of the literary work, as a radical change in the views of Svyatoslav caused Teresa's suspicion of substitution, expressed in the demand to remove the mask. The phenomenon of disguise becomes multidimensional, since the disclosure of certain parameters does not determine the disclosure of the whole phenomenon. Therefore, Svyatoslav's removal of the mask promotes further deepening of discrepancies.
If in the dialogue between Svyatoslav Togo-bochny and Teresa there are obvious contradictions, but their reasons remain unclear, then in a conversation with Petro Togobochnyy Svyatoslav Togobochny tells in detail about the substitution and its motives. The writer emphasizes the artificiality and contrition of the substitution under the conditions of occupation, since its main engines are the similarity of the hero with the stranger, whom he uses for the ideological control of his bride, and the consent of the twin to a weird role, which is motivated by his curiosity. Svyatoslav Togobochny totally denies the ideas of his twin opponent, but takes part in manipulation; the hero, crossing the ethical canons, emphasizes his achievements. I. Kostetskii manifests the absurd discourse of the play, reflecting the semantic gaps that are created due to inconsistencies with the historical context and intra-situ-ational inappropriateness.
The playwright strengthens and develops the main intrigue of the literary work through its correlation with a conditionally similar phenomenon, focusing on the image of Svyatoslav. The intrigue of the play, the preconditions of which are fixed in the title of the literary work and are defined in the prologue, is based on the existence of the Svyatoslav's unknown twin brother. At the same time, the Colonel points to a mental split as the biggest problem of his son. The phenomenon of bifurcation in the literary work is motivated by the dependence on ideas, which is critically pointed out by the Colonel, and Teresa indirectly expresses it, admiring the retelling Svyatoslav's main ideological postulates. The concept of duality is noticeably manifested in the new interpretation of hero's ideas, which becomes a denial of previous statements.
The playwright depicts two reflections of one situation in reception of four heroes Svyatoslav Togobochny and Petro Togobochny and Svyatoslav
<<C®yL®qUQUM~J®U©MaL>>#6(Il©)),2(0]9 / PHILOLOGY
Tuteshny and Petro Tuteshny, who simmetrically reflect their own opposites, emphasizing various manifestations of the absurd in their dialogues.
The forms of artistic embodiment are conditioned by the conceptual absurdity of a play that covers various aspects of perception, expression and evaluation. The playwright encodes the absurdity of the outer peripetias, since the ruthless underground Svyatoslav Tuteshny agrees to substitute his twin opponent Svyatoslav Togobochny with the aim of testing his bride's ideological strength, but accidentally passes him an explosive device, in searches of which he is engaged at the ball-masquerade. The actors' clumsy throwing of a jacket with the explosive device as a result of the manager's intervention in the course of dramatic action gains an expressive absurd significance.
An absurdity is expressed in the inner conflicts of Teresa under the influence of opposing ideological demands that she associates with the image of Svyatoslav, and her own feelings, which she rationalizes, by notion-ally examining their intensity with all possible painful trials, the apotheosis of which is the heroine's refusal from herself for the sake of catering the object of his love and the execution of any criminal, unnatural, immoral requirements, designed by her. The absurdity of depiction is compounded by Teresa's attempts to justify the right to renounce her own will, through her efforts to show her strong feelings by demonstration of her readiness for any moral deformation and corresponding actions, through the efforts of the heroine to please the various Svyatoslavs, whom she perceives for one person, although they embody incompatible ideas.
Colonel proclaims the theses, which form the ideological basis for the artistic structure of the play. The hero determines the incompatibility of twins' ideas as a result of the world-view split, affirms their opposition as a guarantee of their future encounter as a way to achieve the state of impersonal destruction represented by the Colonel himself. The playwright discredits the very essence of ideas, since it focuses on hypertrophied ambiguities and contradictions.
The consciousness of the actors becomes an area for ideological experiments, in which the playwright singles out various aspects. The Colonel justifies nonemotional destruction, while one of the twins becomes a supporter of a fanatical struggle for national liberation, the other promotes utopian resistance in the context of national genocide, Teresa generally refuses to ideological self-determination, adapting herself to one or another twin. Both Colonel and Teresa paradoxically combine the opposite ideas of the twins owing to the accents on other planes of the depiction: the Colonel accompanies the emergence of different ideas of twins with the emergence of a single fear of death, for Teresa, the ideas become relative and interchangeable as a result of her focusing on the identity of the ideas bearers.
To the literary work Diystvo pro velyku lyudynu (The Performance About a Great Man) (1948), I. Kostetskii gives a definition of mystery. The playwright emphasizes the autonomy of an artistic work, which has a certain logic of development, which determines certain intrinsic characteristics of the play. Heroes with certain notifications define the play as a tragedy or point to the conditional, imaginary, tragic features that, as well as the author's definition, emphasize
77
the corresponding tone in the interpretation of the reproduced mental and emotional structures combined with bizarre and eclectic ideological transformations. It seems to be convincing to define the literary work The Performance About a Great Man as a drama, since the reflected vicissitudes cover the various states of consciousness, forming the multiple reflections, multiplied by the dazzling variations of heroes' perception with expressive ironic complications.
I. Kostetskii's literary work The Performance About a Great Man continues the experiments of a writer with the absurd aesthetics artistic embodiment. The absurd in the playwright's literary work is a reflection of the global ideological crisis caused by the Second World War.
The absurd in the drama performs not only an artistic but also an important content function, as it reproduces the loss of global meaning throughout the world. Heroes of drama express the negative experience identified by the global disappointment and loss of those significant moral foundations that outline the limits that humanity should not overdo, in order not to lose human appearance.
The playwright constructs dialogues, in which, through the accumulation of chaotic and simple replicas of heroes, which sometimes seem to be quite surrealistic, an important semantic implication is observed, which correlates with the reflection of the crisis phenomena in mass consciousness. The absurd aesthetics used by the writer confirms the deformation and reversal of values through a combination of the opposite in content phenomena and signs: Pork's Ear identifies his affiliation to the criminals who seek the truth. Bednar-skii's absolute despondency in the possibilities of further civilization development reflects an existential hopelessness in which mankind appeared after the World War. At the same time, the playwright depicts a false exaltation as another aspect of disbelief.
I. Kostetskii achieves the effect of the ironic depiction, showing the exaltation and self-glorification of Bednarskii and his team, who oppose themselves to faceless masses. Inspirational glorification of the post worker, unsuccessfully performed by heroes, becomes a paradoxical confirmation of human deprivation, because through the clownish form the hero's narrow-mindedness is demonstrated. Bednarskii associates similar constraints in with the absence of any civilization perspective. In Bednarskii's replicas, the playwright emphasizes the hypertrophied generalizations made by the hero. The characteristic that he gives to the post worker has an exaggerated social and historical projection. For Bednarskii and his team, buffoonery is the way of protesting to averageness.
The playwright uses the technique of scene advance and further refinement, which creates preconditions for the dramatic action deployment. Maximus' behavior and his whole life largely confirm Bednarskii's estimates. At the same time, the hero performs weird actions, which hint to some kind of self-affirmation secret plans, leading him to the house of Martin. The writer emphasizes the moral depression in the marriage of Martin and Thaisa, caused by various forms of heroes' psychological impotence. Martin subjugated his life to the creation of utopian projects, and Thaisa - a joyless coexistence with him. An important part in their relationship is based on the memories about the illusion
PHILOLOGY / <<€®yL®qUQUM~J®U©MaL>>#6Il©)),2(0]9
78.
of their youth, which turned into negative fantasies in the present. Maximus' bizarre appearance in the reincarnated form become a peculiar reverberation heroes fancies. Reincarnation plays an important role as a way of representing of visible and hidden sense. It is the reincarnation that the playwright shows indirectly - first as Maximus' speculations about changes in appearance in combination with weird reflections on various topics, then - through Taisa's perception.
Among the topics which Maximus contemplates, the theme of madness is specifically outlined, since the hero tries to determine the limits of this state, and carries out ambiguous generalizations that he projects on his wife reaction. The reasoning of the hero is determined by his intention to leave the habitual life and probable interpretations of his actions consequences. I. Kostetskii constructs the image of Maximus through his self-expression and, emphasizing the incompatibility of the apparent (implicit) and hidden meaning. The hero creates his own conception of his existence visibility, in which he treats masking, theatricalization, insanity as certain states, techniques and stages that enable the realization of his own plans, hiding of their real meaning, blurring it for identification.
Maximus changes the existential paradigm: secretly leaves his wife, causing the hero's associations only with the everyday realities on which she is concentrated, and gets into the apartment of Martin and Thaisa, who concentrate on their own illusions aimed at their ideals of social or personal nature, that cause heroes' negative emotions and corresponding destructive states of consciousness due to the impossibility of their embodiment. The internal destruction that Martin and Thaisa perceive as the reverse side of their illusions, becomes the way of the heroes' existence, because in this way they maintain an ephemeral connection with their ruined illusions.
The writer introduces certain time spans in the play as attributes of the certain semantic categories implementation: his heroes proclaim the twelfth hour as the sign of the tragedy, and the first hour the sign of a comedy, thereby emphasizing the asymmetry of their correlations. Disproportionality is also manifested in the definition of phenomena, since Bednarskii specifies the time of the play of the tragedy, but the concept itself is considered in the context of the buffoonery. Maximus' journey comprised in the boundaries from the first to twelfth hour testifies the relativity and variability of the hero's states of mind.
The playwright reflects the dramatic changes that occur with heroes as facts, but repeatedly changes their essence through a variety of semantic layers, which give grounds for different interpretations and their inexplicable combinations, which enhances the effect of unexpected transformations. Maximus' image coincides with Taisa's image of a prince, the writer emphasizes coincidences that are symbolic in the context of further development of action. In the future, Maximus turns into a charismatic editor who becomes a new social ideologue.
The playwright blurs the boundaries and shows the relativity of influences in the formation of certain social phenomena and personal transformations. Maximus becomes a paradoxical embodiment of those qualities in the absence of which he was accused by Bednarskii. In the final episode of a play Bednarskii emphasizes his
exclusive role in the Maximus transformations into a great person; he shoots at him, perceiving him as a rival in the manifestations of majesty.
Maximus becomes Thaisa's successful implementation of ideological plans, but the idea of creating a president, to whom Maximus transmutes, belongs to Valentina, who demonstrates the intentions of formation current reality for the heroes. Taisa performs ambiguous functions in the drama: on the one hand, she changes the unsuccessful Martin to Maximus, whom she gives his projects, directs and leads him to fame, on the other - she has never existed at all.
I. Kostetskii uses original forms of masks, which gives relativity and abstraction to the depiction, which expresses the people's reactions, which resonate in different ways with Maximus' speech. The speech of the hero and its perception by masks from the people has a controversial character, as he stands against the war and simultaneously calls for war. During the development of dramatic action, the playwright introduces expressions of masks from the people three times, representing variations of the initial statements and evaluations. The masking phenomenon is used by the playwright as essential structural components of the play (in the case when masks and the phenomenon of masking play the role of distinguishing the visible and hidden content that determines the plot design of the literary work) and as important attributes of artistic embodiment (the heroes themselves point out to the affectedness of events, situations, in performance of which they are involved, considered masking as a means of expressing distinct qualities etc.).
The playwright mixes events from different planes - reflected, fancied, non-existent and their various combinations. Taisa repeats the replies to Martin, overestimates her relationships with her husband and the ineffectiveness of his activities already in the role of Maximus' wife, although she is not, and in general, Taisa does not exist.
The writer uses the first sideshow in which the girl and the moon act, to understand the theme of war and peace on another level - through the intensification of abstract generalizations.
The action of the second day focuses around the Maximus' clandestine. The hero's speech, in which he expresses his own beliefs, discredits his supposed majesty and reduces it to quirky materiality. The purpose of his seclusion is mental work, which, as the hero believes, is aimed at the formation of rescue ideological supports that create counterbalances to global destruction. At the same time, Maximus appeals to personal selfishness, which the hero considers to be the driving force for the preservation of the world.
The action of the play unfolds due to the simultaneous elevation and devaluation of the idea of human majesty. In the context of revealing Maximus' self-delusions about his own grandeur, the author shows the artificiality of his transformations and the substitution with the appropriation of Martin's achievements; Maximus hasn't performed these actions according to his own will, but under the influence of other heroes of uncertain reality (Thaisa, who does not exist, Bednarskii, who proclaimed the end of his the existence of other heroes), the dependence of Maximus-President (Valentyna reveals her bizzare ambitions regarding the creation of the president, while Maximus appears as her
«c®yl®quium-j®urmal»#6ii©),2@i9 / phil
creation, as a part of a weird story about her own life,), the salvation of Maximus for the sake of the humanity and the subsequent return of the hero to his existential beginnings that acquire an emphasized ironic significance.
The hero as a hermit creates one of the important facets in the image of a great man, which uniquely consolidates all heroes through the expression of their own attitude to the notion of grandeur and conditioned and mediated actions. Valentyna's deeds, which are aimed at returning Maximus' political status and protecting the hero from the conspirators, give her a central position in this action.
The conspiracy and its assessments are ambiguous, as the heroes declare mutually contestable statements in different contexts. The playwright shows the struggle and confrontation of the rebels. Valentyna identifies Tormokro as a representative of the conspirators, who causes her serious anxiety. Valentyna herself also represents the conspirators.
Maximus supports the idea of universal justice, but stands against state-building. Valentyna proclaims a plan for conspirators, reminiscent of communist slogans to Maximus: to establish universal justice and freedom, to gain control over all spheres, "to replace a state" ("zaminyty soboyu derzhavu")15. The only argument to Maximus' returning to politics is the substitution of a hero and his ideas exploitation by his opponents.
The heroes use the time and the state of their own lives for the certain theatrical effects, which are the result of the construction of quirky realities, in which they move in order to form abstract embodiments and relationships. Valentyna defines specific signs of time that express the relativity and rhizomorphism of any reproduced phenomena and vary depending on the actions of heroes and situations created.
I. Kostetskii uses complex plot vicissitudes, the il-logicalness, the relativity, the distinction of which forms a peculiar sense combinations. Mimi, renamed Arivan, confesses to Maximus in love and she is the only link that unites him with the world; Taisa dies; Valentyna proclaims the intention to return Maximus to the public life for the effective realization of his majesty. At the same time, the playwright uses some detective elements to complicate the dramatic action, so that the heterogeneous development of the action takes place in different directions, which, however, are regulated by the deployment of the action about the great man.
In the accumulation of absurd dialogues the writer places the statements of the heroes that are adequate to the social and historical realities. In this way, the playwright demonstrates the semantic exhaustion and at the same time emphasizes the diverse possibilities for finding ideological alternatives, the confirmation of which the author encodes in the development of dramatic action, as behind the determined and visible peripetias and meanings lie other ones.
Valentyna changes places of Maximus and heroes who call themselves criminals, driving them to the rock, that contributes to their further transformation
LOGY 79
into virtuous citizens in others' perception. The playwright shows the reverse side of the human consciousness control, showing the whole mechanism of manipulation to participants of psychological experiments. Valentyna makes an object for their worship of herself, manipulates by ideological slogans, forcing the heroes to remain on the rock and perish with a sense of false dignity. At the same time, Valentyna offers to the heroes a theatrical way to save from the theatrical reality. Maximus continues his abandoned function of an ideologue leader already in the new conditions, in a different state of consciousness and another status.
The second sideshow, the action of which takes place in the court, is formed by absurd situations with a special emphasis on trifles, pseudo professionalism, a surprisingly motivated verdict. The masks of the heroes symbolically point to the concealment of real content. The playwright emphasizes the programmed absurdity of a dramatic situation. Of the two heroes in the sideshow a writer defines as a liar. Instead, the first phrase of a judge, who performs the role of another participant, sets the tone of the entire sideshow, by placing its course within falsehood.
The third day of the play is associated with the disclosure of hidden meanings and senses in the direct projection on the action of a great man.
Maximus in the spirit of great achievements affirms the idea of the final destructive tendencies overcoming. In a conversation with Valentyna, he states: "The officers overcame after the end of the war. We with you again removed it. Forever" ("Ofitsernya bula nazverkh vyyshla pislya zakinchennya viyny. My z to-boyu znov yiyi usunuly. Nazavzhdy")16. The hero expresses reasoning about the destruction of the ruinous phenomena, which, in his opinion, led to their total nonexistence because of the total absence of struggle. In this way, Maximus decrypts the phrase "We are criminals" ("My zlochyntsi")17 repeated by different heroes. In Maximus' rhetoric, I. Kostetskii emphasizes allusions to Soviet reality, as evidenced by the hero's absurd appeals to the non-conflict conception and supposedly created by him "all-human society" ("vselyudske suspilstvo")18. A significant feature of the literary work is the emphasis on abstract forms, which outline the Soviet totalitarianism, the fascist totalitarianism remains outside the artistic expression.
The playwright perceives the constant ambivalence of Maximus' estimates, the lack of a definite hero's position. The hero either condemns and continues to carry out his actions, or submits contradictory and mutually exclusive interpretations of certain phenomena and situations. Such a split manifests itself in Martin's imprisonment and Maximus' own social transformation activity.
Maximus affirms the loss of meaning because of the conflict absence after the war instigators. elimination. Valentyna, who acts as a moderator of the action, confirms Maximus' idea of non-conflict as a lack of movement. I. Kostetskii unexpectedly changes the semantic emphasis when Maximus identifies Valentina as a great person. Instead, Valentyna considers only an integral image of Maximus himself, in which cretinism is
15 Kostetkii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom. [The Theatre
in Front of Your Threshold]. Munich: On the Mount, 1963,
214.
16 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 221.
17 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 217.
18 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 223.
80
PHILOLOGY / «C®yL®qyiUm-J®UrMaL»#6Il©),2@19
emphasized as the reverse side of his majesty. In this way, she also points to the Maximus' inner split, revealing the mutually exclusive opposites in the personality characteristics of the hero, coexisting due to the alternation denial.
Maximus explains the reasons for his actions by a sense of social expediency: he took Martin's achievements, threw him into jail, took his wife away, took advantage of the opportunities for a social revolution, since the circumstances were favorable to such acts. Self-determination of Maximus, according to which he appears as a puppet, whose actions are determined by various influences, is repeatedly confirmed in the process of action development. I. Kostetskii ironically depicts the independence of Maximus, which allowed him to transcend the moral canons, as his great achievement. Maximus' pseudo majesty, proclaimed by Valentyna, is based on fantasies about his special role: "You did not perform your deeds on your own accord. You were called" ("Na tvoyi dila ty pishov ne z vlas-noyi voli. Ty buv poklykanyy")19.
Maximus separates the various images of the generated reality creators. Maximus and Valentyna are different projections of each other and two creators with different functions, different social ratings, which testifies the existence of the conflict, and, accordingly, the movement. In this way, the playwright paradoxically refutes and refines previous arguments and statements of heroes.
At the same time, it emphasizes the relativity of depiction, which is traced through accents on theatricality, affectedness, heroes' acting and the whole reflected situation.
The action near the monument has a symbolic meaning: masks are displayed again and evaluations of Maximus' acts are presented, which are the variations of previous statements of masks. The masks conceal the abstract content, or even its absence, disguised in external expressions, and in particular the masking phenomenon is clarified with Valentyna's statements about lambs and pigs.
Maximus rises above the action, trying to find the source of danger in masks, but the bearer of which appears to be Bednarskii. Finding out the motives of Bed-narskii is to ironically determine the conditional roles of the heroes in correlation with the action of a great man. Bernarskii, who, like his supporters, called himself the last great man, shot at the Maximus' chin, who accidentally found himself in the status of a great man, and Bednarskii gave the first impetus to his reincarnation. At the same time, the playwright, through the accumulation of absurd explanations, reveals certain logically motivated reasons, which also look bizarre among solid absurdity. Valentyna reveals the reasons for Bernarskii's disappearance and, consequently, his shot at Maximus, by the collusion with the officers whom Maximus has overcome.
If during the action development in the play the abstract depiction of the place, time of action, significant uncertainty of ideological and social realities is preserved, then the concretization takes place in the final episodes of the literary work. The war took place
after the transformation of Maximus from a post worker to a great man; during the war, a great man, apparently, was hiding on a rock; after the war, a great man became a president owing to certain criminal acts.
Maximus' retrospections, specified by Bednar-skii's indications to certain details, revealed to the president the missing fragments of a coherent picture, resembled delusions, in which he united all the landmarks passed by the hero together. His main desire, which determined the deployment of all events associated with the activities of a great person, was defined by an effort to move beyond the primitive routine. Instead, he finds himself in complete exterior dependence, receiving false grandeur in exchange for himself. The buffoonery scenes used by the playwright, evidently, testifies the hero's feeling of helplessness.
The writer makes Maximus' ideas sound absurd and reflects their utopian alternative. Valentyna proclaims this idea: "He thinks that the world can be forbidden to be scandalous" ("Vin hadaye, shcho svitovi mozhna zaboronyty buty paskudnym")20. Zvenybudlo offers a different way of universal improvement: "To overcome the beastliness it is necessary to start with oneself' ("Podoluvaty paskudstvo vart pochynaty iz sebe")21. At the same time, attention is focused on the important feature of the alternative approach, which is a kind of broadcast of the idea to the masses through the example of the president himself.
The continuation of the discussion between Valentyna and Zvenybudlo reduces to reasoning about happiness, which they try to identify through the desire or its realization. In the end, Zvenybudlo proclaims the truth ("happiness is only pure conscience" ("shchastya to vsoho tilky chyste sumlinnya")22, which leads to the activation of Maximus and the implementation of his appropriate actions. In this way, the basis for the Maximus' return to his original state is formed and accordingly the rehabilitation and exaltation of Martin is performed.
In the final epasode, the playwright uses the technique of changing the plot and mixes the reality of the play with the scenic reality, when heroes simultaneously perform the functions of their roles performers. The heroes show the mechanism of constructing a positive solution, so the destruction of Taisa is canceled, and her existence is questioned. Performed scenes, according to Valentyna, have become a demonstration of the principle of "cleansing passions with the help of fear and compassion" ("ochyshchennya prystrastey za dopomohoyu strakhu y spochuttya")23. Valentyna suggests to define the reflected action as a tragedy, but without the death of the heroes. During the course of action, heroes consistently pointed to tragic times, reflecting some critical moments.
Mixing of time and space planes happens in different ways for different heroes. For the woman to whom Maximus returns, nothing has changed at all except for some details. She lived on the usual day of her family life, while Maximus endured all the vicissitudes and transformations during the prewar, military, postwar time. A peculiar relationship between the reality of
19 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatrpered tvoyim porohom, 226.
20 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 223.
21 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 243.
22 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 246.
23 Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom, 248.
«c@yl®quium-j®urmal»#6ii©),2@i9 / philology
woman and the reality of Maximus indicates the announcement of the president abdication, references to newly built buildings and information about the four hermits.
The epilogue, which Zvenybudlo proclaims, concentrates ideas that become ambiguous summarizing of certain reflections and considerations, covering various planes of depiction . Zvenybudlo declares polemical assertions: it is better to live in memories than to repeat everything from the very beginning; conflict is a sign of happiness; it's better not to listen to someone's tales etc. At the same time, he explains the importance of iterations in the play, which comply the role of structural elements in the construction of transverse values by means of semantic interference.
I. Kostetskii uses an absurd as a way of displaying distinctions that are quaintly connected together. The writer artificially creates causal coherences between unconnected or conditionally related phenomena, which ensures the formation of a specific artistic integrity with heterogeneous features that are not subject to linear interpretation, but require the determination of semantic variety and artistic correlations.
The drama The Performance About A Great Man represents the artistic construction of the compulsive states of consciousness of the actors that determined the formation of specific artistic realities of the work, their interactions, interconversions, inter-objections, which formed various content parameters and their respective artistic reflections.
In the I. Kostetskii's dramas, various processes that occur in the minds of heroes and reflect external and internal transformations are displayed. The playwright performed mixing of different planes and spheres in dramatic reflection, creating multi-valued semantic combinations.
Bibliography
Bagry, Marianna. Stylovi osoblyvosti tvorchosti Ihorya Kostetskoho [ Stylistic Features of Igor Kostetskii's Creativity], (Phd thesis, Vo-lodymyr Hnatiyk National Pedagogical University, 2013).
Batsevich, Floriy. Pryyomy odyvnennya dramatychnoho tvoru (na materiali pyesy Ihorya Kostetskoho «Blyznyata shche zustrinutsya») [Means of Marvelous Representation in Dramatic Works (based on Igor Kostetskii's play "The Twins Will Meet Again")]. Studia Ucrainica Varsoviensia, 2017, no 5, 15-25.
Brovko, Olena. Zhanrovo-strukturnyy element novely u prozi Pavla Malyarv ta Ihorya Kostetskoho [Genre-structural Element of a Novel in the Prose by Pavlo Malyar and Igor Kostetskii]. Scientific notes by Volodymyr Hnatiyk National Pedagogical University. Literary Studies, 2010, Issue 30, 168-176.
81
Kovaliv, Yuri. Eksperymentalni odyvnennya I. Kostetskoho [I. Kostetskii's Experimental Studies]. Literary Studies, 2010. Issue 29, 191-201.
Kostetskii, Igor. Teatr pered tvoyim porohom-nennya I. Kostetskoho [The Theatre in Front of Your Threshold]. Munich: On the Mount, 1963.
Kostetskii, Igor. Try masky [The Three masks]. The Theatre, 1948, no.1, 13-16.
Zaleska Onyshkevych, Larysa. Blyznyata shche zustrinutsya. Antolohiya dramaturhiyi ukrayinskoyi di-aspory [The Twins Will Meet Again. Anthology of Drama of the Ukrainian Diaspora]. K., Lviv: Time, 1997.
Lyubenko, Olena. Eksperyment v ukrayinskiy dramaturhiyi: fenomen I. Kostetskoho [The Experiment in Ukrainian Drama: the Phenomenon of I. Kostetskii]. Word and time. 2005, No. 6, 32-41.
Marinenko, Yuri. Prorocho-apostolska tema v ukrayinskiy emihrantskiy prozi 40-kh rokiv XX stolit-tya [The Prophetic-apostolic Theme in the Ukrainian Emigrant Prose of the 40s of the Twentieth Century]. Scientific Papers. Peter-Mohyla Black Sea State University, Kyiv-Mohyla Academy Complex. Philology. Literature Studies, 2013, Vol. 224, Issue. 212, 54-58.
Mukan,Volodymyr. Poetyka absurdu v ukrayinskiy dramaturhiyi pershoyi polovyny XX stolit-tya (na materiali tvoriv Mykoly Kulisha ta Ihorya Kostetskoho) [Poetics of the Absurd in the Ukrainian Drama of the First Half of the Twentieth Century (based on the literary works of Mykola Kulish and Igor Kostetskii)]. (Phd diss., Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, 2015).
Pavlychko, Solomiya. Nihilistychnyy modernizm I. Kostetskoho [The Nihilistic Modernism of I. Kostetskii]. Pavlychko, S. Theory of Literature. Kyiv: Publishing House of Solomiya Pavlychko "Fundamentals", 2002, 336-380.
Poliukhovych, Olga. "Plynna" identychnist u prozi Ihorya Kostetskoho ["Liquid" Identity in Ihor Kostetsky's fiction]. Scientific Notes of NaUKMA, 2013, Vol. 150: Philological Sciences, 64-69.
Solovey, Oleg. Mala proza Ihorya Kostetskoho: etychnyy aspect [Igor Kostecki's Prose: Ethical Aspect]. Actual Problems of Ukrainian Literature and Folklore. 2015, no. 23, 40-59.
Stech, Marko Robert. Misteriya stylyu [Mystery of style]. Criticism. 2001, no 1-2 (39-40), 20-22.
Yurova, Inna. Tvorcha osobystist Ihorya Kostetskoho u literaturnomu dyskursi II polovyny XX st. [The creative personality of Igor Kostetskii in the literary discourse of the second half of the twentieth century]. (Phd thesis, Karazin National University of Kharkiv, 2007).
