Romanticism and Neo-Romanticism in a Comparative Light
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.15407/uhj2022.06.159Keywords:
historiography, intellectual history, historical writing, Fin de Siècle, romanticism, neoromanticism, modernismAbstract
The aim of the essay. Comparing classical/old romanticism and neo-romanticism as stylistic trends, as well as presenting their role in the history of science and intellectual history of the 19–20th centuries.
The methodology. The strategies of comparison and typology focused on identifying similarities and differences between the two thinking styles serve as the methodology basis.
The scientific novelty. Romanticism and neo-romanticism are considered as “primary” and “secondary” styles representing the classical science era and the era of its modernist reformatting respectively. The study highlights the ambiguity of the chronological localization of both romanticism and neo-romanticism. Romanticism and neo-romanticism are represented in their combination with other stylistic trends. The analysis includes the cognitive situation that developed in the cultural epoch Fin de Siècle (1890–1914/1920), in particular, its contribution to the emergence of neo-romanticism. It is noted that neo-romanticism was based on the irrational construction of the world of the past based on the dichotomy of spirit and matter. The paper clarifies the difference between the temporal ideas of the romantics and the neo-romantics. Emphasis is made on the belief that neo-romanticism initiated the “rediscovery” of the world of national, political, social, and cultural life making it attractive to “stateless” or “offended” nations.
Conclusions. It is argued that the similarity between classical romanticism and neo-romanticism was dictated by genetic interrelationships generating the effect of imitation and repetition within another cultural epoch. The study shows several significant differences in neo-romanticism, including: intellectual and cognitive relativism that facilitated flexible borrowing and adoption of other conceptualizations, strategies, and patterns; modernist renewal of both generic elements and borrowed ideas; amazing stylistic openness and plasticity; partial, selective return to idealism and irrationalism combined with analytical procedures and logical-rational guidelines.
References
Aheieva, V. (2000). Mykola Khvylovy and Expressionism. Journal of Ukrainian Studies, 25, (1–2), 45–59.
Bahan, O. (2012). V oboroni ukrainskoi tsyvilizatsii. In O.Bahan (ed.), Dontsov D. Vybrani tvory, 2, 5–15. Drohobych; Lviv. [in Ukrainian].
Bilas, L. (1961). Ideolohiia yak istoriia i yak poeziia (Z pryvodu dvokh novykh prats O. Ohloblyna). Suchasnist, 7, 44–62. [in Ukrainian].
Bilas, L. R. (1980). Krakiv, Zheneva i filiiatsiia “Krychevskoho”: Do rodovidnoi myslennia V.Lypynskoho. In L.Bilas (ed.), Lypynskyi V. Tvory, 2, XVII–XCVIII. Filadelfiia. [in Ukrainian].
Bilas, L. R. (1985). The Intellectual Development of V.Lypyns’kyj: His World View and Political Activity before World War I. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 9(3-4), 263–286.
Boiko, Yu. (1965–1966). Ukrainskyi romantyzm Tsentralnoi i Skhidnoi Ukrainy u yoho stosunku do zakhidnoevropeiskoi romanyky. Naukovi zapysky UVU: Filosofichnyi fakultet, 8, 61–78. [in Ukrainian].
Burrow, J. (2008). A History of Histories. Epics, Chronicles, Romances and Inquiries from Herodotus and Thucydides to the Twentieth Century. New York: Published in the U. S. by Alfred A. Knopf, a division of Random House, Inc.
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2005). Do kharakterolohii slovian. Ukraintsi. In V.Lisovyi (ed.), Chyzhevskyi D. Filosofski tvory, 2, 36–42. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Chyzhevskyi, D. (2005). Narysy z istorii filosofii na Ukraini. In V.Lisovyi (ed.), Chyzhevskyi D. Filosofski tvory, 1, 3–162. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Dmitriev, A. N. (2004). Marksizm bez proletariata: Georg Lukach i rannyaya Frankfurtskaya shkola (1920–1930-e gg.). S.-Peterburg; Moskva. [in Russian].
Franko, I. (1982). Lysenkove sviato v Avstrii. In Ye.P.Kyryliuk (ed.), Franko I. Zibrannia tvoriv, 35, 85–90. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Gertsen, A. I. (1985). Diletantizm v nauke. Statya vtoraya. Diletanty-romantiki. In A. I. Volodin, Z. V. Smirnova (eds.), Gertsen A. I. Sochineniya, 1, 98–113. Moskva. [in Russian].
Hrushevskyi, M. (2007). V simdesiati rokovyny kyrylo-metodiivskoi spravy. In P.Sokhan (ed.), Hrushevskyi M. Tvory, 4, I, 51–55. Lviv. [in Ukrainian].
Hrushevskyi, M. (2015). “Istoriograf Maloj Rossii”. In H.Papakin (ed.), Hrushevskyi M. Tvory, 10, II, 87–180. Lviv. [in Ukrainian].
Ionin, L. (1996). Zimmel: zhizn i filosofiya. In S.Ya.Levit (ed.), Zimmel G. Izbrannoe, 2, 550–568. Moskva. [in Russian].
Kaube, Yu. (2016). Maks Veber: zhizn na rubezhe epox (I. V. Kushnaryova, I. M. Chubarov, eds.). (K. G. Timofeeva, transl.). Moskva. [in Russian].
Kazin, A. L. (1980). Neoromanticheskaya filosofiya khudozhestvennoj kultury (K kharakteristike mirovozzreniya russkogo simvolizma). Voprosy filosofii, 7, 143–154. [in Russian].
Kostiuk, H. (1980). Volodymyr Vynnychenko ta yoho doba. Doslidzhennia, krytyka, polemika. Niu-York. [in Ukrainian].
Kovalchuk, O. O. (2011). Ukrainske istorychne dzhereloznavstvo doby romantyzmu. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Kozak, S. (2004). Ukrainska zmova i mesianizm. Kyrylo-Mefodiivske bratstvo. Iv.-Frankivsk. [in Ukrainian].
Kravchenko, V. V. (1999). Peredmova. D. I. Bahalii v svitli i tini “Avtobiohrafii”. In V. V. Kravchenko (comp.), Bahalii D. I. Vybrani pratsi, 1, 9–56. Kharkiv. [in Ukrainian].
Lavdzhoj, A. (2001). Velikaya tsep bytiya: Istoriya idei. (V.Sofronov-Antomoni, transl.). Moskva. [in Russian].
Lindheim, R., Luckyj, G.S.N. (1996). Introduction. In R. Lindheim, G. S. N. Luckyj (eds.), Towards an Intellectual History of Ukraine: An Anthology of Ukrainian Thought from 1710 to 1995, 3–52. Toronto; Buffalo; London: University of Toronto Press. doi: https://doi.org/10.3138/9781442664760
Lukov, V. A. (2009). Frantsuzskij neoromantizm. Moskva. [in Russian].
Lypynskyi, V. (1995). Lysty do brativ-khliborobiv pro ideiu i orhanizatsiiu ukrainskoho monarkhizmu. In Ya.Pelenskyi (ed.), Lypynskyi V. Povne zibrannia tvoriv, arkhiv, studii, 6, 1, I–XLVIII, 1–470. Kyiv: Filadelfiia. [in Ukrainian].
Maksymovych, M. (1994). Pro znachennia ta pokhodzhennia slova (V.Nedashkivskyi, transl.) Filosofska i sotsiolohichna dumka, 1-2, 193–200. [in Ukrainian].
Mangejm, K. (2000). Ocherki sotsiologii znaniya: Problema pokolenij – sostyazatelnost – ekonomicheskie ambitsii (L. V. Skvortsov, ed.). Moskva. [in Russian].
Mankhejm, K. (2010). Sotsiologicheskaya teoriya kultury v ee poznavaemosti. In S.Ya.Levit (comp.), Mankhejm K. Izbrannoe: Diagnoz nashego vremeni, 377–536. Moskva. [in Russian].
Mejneke, F. (2004). Vozniknovenie istorizma. (V. A. Brun-Tsekhova, transl.). Moskva. [in Russian].
Petrov, V. (2013). Kulish-khutorianyn (Teoriia khutorianstva i Baivshchanskyj epizod 1853–1854). In V.Briukhovetskyi (comp.), Petrov V. Rozvidky, 1, 208–239. Kyiv. [in Ukrainian].
Rubinshtejn, N. L. (2008). Russkaya istoriografiya. Sankt-Peterburg. [in Russian].
Rudnytskyi, L. (2003). Fenomen nimetskoho romantyzmu: kontury i oriientyry. In L.Rudnytskyi, O.Feshovets (comps.). Myslyteli nimetskoho romantyzmu, 9–18. Iv.-Frankivsk. [in Ukrainian].
Saunders, D. (1985). The Ukrainian Impact on Russian Culture 1750–1850. Edmonton: University of Alberta. Canadian Institute of Ukrainian Studies.
Saveleva, I. M., Poletaev, A. V. (2003). Istoriya i intuitsiya: nasledie romantikov. Preprint WP6/2003/06. Moskva. [in Russian].
Shlegel, F. (1983). Fragmenty. In Yu. N. Popov (comp.), Shlegel F. Estetika. Filosofiya. Kritika, 1, 290–316. Moskva. [in Russian].
Sinkevych, Ye. H. (2010). Krakivska istorychna shkola v polskii istoriohrafii. Mykolaiv. [in Ukrainian].
Skrynnyk, M. (1991). Ideine pidgruntia ukrainskoho romantyzmu. Zapysky NTSh, 222, 201–215. [in Ukrainian].
Sonders, D. (2001). Mykola Kostomarov i tvorennia ukrainskoi etnichnoi identychnosti. Kyivska starovyna, 5, 21–33. [in Ukrainian].
Tarnavsky, M. (1991). Modernism in Ukrainian Prose. Harvard Ukrainian Studies, 15(3-4), 263–272.
Tarnavskyi, O. (1965). Podorozh poza vidome. Suchasnist, 12, 42–69. [in Ukrainian].
Trelch, E. (1994). Istorizm i ego problemy. Logicheskaya problema filosofii istorii (L. T. Milskaya, ed.). Moskva. [in Russian].
Vengerov, S. A. (2004). Etapy neoromanticheskogo dvizheniya. In S. A. Vengerov (ed.), Russkaya literatura XX veka, 7–38. Moskva. [in Russian].
Zashkilniak, L. (1993). Neoromantyzm u polskii istoriohrafii pochatku XX st. (Do pytannia pro sotsialnu funktsiiu istorii). Problemy slovianoznavstva: Mizhvidomchyi naukovyi zbirnyk, 45, 36–42. [in Ukrainian].
Zashkilniak, L. O., Krykun, M. H. (2002). Istoriia Polshchi: Vid naidavnishykh chasiv do nashykh dniv. Lviv. [in Ukrainian].
Zenkovskij, V. V. (1991). Istoriya russkoj filosofii, 2. Leningrad. [in Russian].
