I recently spoke out against the violent Ukrainization and displacement of Russian culture from the territory of Ukraine, which caused a lot of negative comments from readers, most of which boiled down to one: “if you don’t like it - leave”. Only a few were interested in what exactly I was calling for, what my constructive suggestion was. I am glad that there were those who were able to see an unspoken call to action behind the criticism. Now I will voice it.
The trump card of any Ukrainian government, starting from 1991, has been and remains the disastrous situation of Ukraine as a result of its oppression by the Russian Empire, and then the USSR. It is difficult to argue with this, an empire is an empire for the purpose of oppressing its subordinate territories. Ukraine, just like Poland, Finland, and the Caucasus, was such a territory for many years. It is absolutely natural that the development of Ukrainian culture, as well as its hindrance, was greatly influenced by administrative subordination to Russia and the Soviet Union, although it was not always negative.
There is significantly less good literature written in Ukrainian than in Russian. There have been few films made in Ukrainian, and most of them can only be watched out of great love for the homeland. For many years, Moscow attracted talented scientists, artists, musicians, writers, and directors. And they happily moved there, just like Nikolai Gogol did when he moved from the Poltava province to St. Petersburg at the age of 19. Would “The Government Inspector” have been written if he had stayed in his native Nezhin?
Culture consists of talents. And talent first of all seeks a soil where it will be most comfortable to grow and where it will be appreciated. The rich and developed St. Petersburg was much more attractive for a young and talented writer at that time than Poltava or Kyiv.
Thus, Silicon Valley is more attractive today for young and talented programmers than Moscow, Kyiv, Berlin, or Delhi. People from all over the world strive there, those who have ambitions and a desire to realize them. Those who have fewer ambitions or opportunities stay at home. The clear winner in this situation is the USA, while the rest of the world loses out.
For many years, Ukraine lost out by sending its talents to Moscow. And that is certainly regrettable. It would have been great if the novel “The Master and Margarita” had been written in Ukrainian, since Mikhail Bulgakov was born and raised in Kyiv before moving to Moscow at the age of 30; or if the famous “Black Square” had been created in Kyiv, where Kazimir Malevich spent his youth before moving to Moscow at the age of 25; or if, for example, Alexander Vertinsky had sung “The Lilac Negre” in Ukrainian, as he was originally from Kyiv before moving to Moscow at the age of 24.
However, none of this happened.
Ukrainian culture has lost a lot and fallen far behind, just like many other cultures, due to which Russian culture was created.
Do we want to correct this situation? Definitely. But doing it through police methods, which the current Ukrainian government is confidently taking, by banning the Russian language, books, and cinema, is only setting up those very talents against Ukrainian language and culture that should bring them up to the Russian level.
Police bans are disgusting, especially in the cultural sphere. I believe, and I’m not the only one, that the Ukrainian authorities should act differently. Here is what could be done if we wanted to hear the Ukrainian language more often, not only from politicians, TV presenters, and actors in mayonnaise commercials.
Books. In Russia, there are many awards for writers, including the Russian Booker with a grand prize of $20,000 (a small amount for such a large country, but still). In Ukraine, the Lesya Ukrainka Prize of 10,000 hryvnias ceased to exist ten years ago, and there is practically nothing else. If, for example, an annual prize for the best book in Ukrainian with a prize fund of $200,000 were to be established, I think even Vladimir Sorokin would switch to Ukrainian. Instead of spending money on fighting the “Russian chimera,” give writers an incentive to write in Ukrainian, and the problem will be solved - we will start reading them.
Schools. Instead of prohibiting teaching in Russian, we should encourage teaching in Ukrainian. Let’s pay teachers twice as much if they conduct classes and lectures in Ukrainian. Let’s award scholarships to students who defend their theses and write dissertations in Ukrainian. Not demand and force, but motivate and encourage. Some will ignore this call, but for others, it will be effective, and we will get more sincere desire to write in the national language.
Advertising. We should not ban businesses from advertising in their preferred language but incentivize them to do so in Ukrainian. For example, we could introduce tax breaks for those enterprises that advertise in Ukrainian. The choice will be up to the businesses - lose customers who don’t understand Ukrainian or pay higher taxes and advertise in the native Russian language. Businesses and their clients will decide what is more beneficial. The country will organically increase the number of Ukrainian language speakers.
Television. If Savik Shuster were to speak Ukrainian, we could celebrate the victory of the Ukrainian language on Ukrainian television. But this won’t happen until he himself wants to. You can’t force him. He, as I see it, is a respected journalist enough not to stoop to Ukrainian populism, as Saakashvili does. What can motivate Shuster, Gordon, and other serious journalists to switch to a language that is not native to them without fearing a loss in quality? I think nothing. The language is their main tool and commodity, their popularity directly depends on its quality. The only thing we can do is motivate them to teach their children Ukrainian. And for that, we must guarantee this new generation freedom of speech. If Ukraine becomes a country where any social and political issues can be openly discussed, young journalists will see it as a territory for their professional growth and will write in Ukrainian from childhood. In other words, if you want more professional Ukrainian language on television, give freedom of speech.
Banks. Forcing banks to conduct documentation in Ukrainian in regions such as Odessa, Mykolaiv, or Dnipro literally means preventing them from communicating with those who owe them money or to whom they owe money. Instead, if we want the population to switch to Ukrainian in business communication, let’s give banks that fully document only in Ukrainian, for example, state-subsidized loans. The choice will be up to the client: to go to a bank where all the paperwork is in Ukrainian and get better conditions there, or to be served where the documentation is in their native language but more expensive. I will choose the second option, but only for now. If the cost difference is significant, I will consider it and with genuine interest, I will start learning Ukrainian. I will understand why I need it. Not because there is no other way, but because I will see a real financial incentive.
Cinema. There is still not much Ukrainian cinema, and it is still of very low quality. Following the same path as with books, establishing serious state awards for good Ukrainian cinema is the first obvious solution. The second is, of course, organizing film festivals. Russia has plenty of them, in Ukraine they are significantly fewer, and the quality is substantially lower. The third is state funds for filmmakers. For the country, these are insignificant expenses, but for the Ukrainian film industry, it is huge support.
I think the idea is clear. Not to prohibit, but to encourage. Not to block Russian, but to develop Ukrainian. Not to run away from the enemy, but to become stronger ourselves. Then there will not be such rejection as the Ukrainization is currently causing.
I really hope that Ukraine will take the path described above.
Translated by ChatGPT gpt-3.5-turbo/42 on 2024-04-20 at 17:34
