We continue to publish the dialogue that goes on between the readers of Den/The Day and Rossiyskaya gazeta. We remind that following a special issue, “What kind of Russia do we love?” published by Rossiyskaya gazeta, Russian intellectuals have offered their views in “What kind of Ukraine do I love?”. Our contributors and experts have pursued an interesting and constructive conversation. It is an example for politicians from both countries.
I was very pleased that the topic initiated by the newspaper Den, “What kind of Russia do we love?” has stirred up responses in the Russian media, especially in such an authoritative publication as Rossiyskaya gazeta. Seeing a publication entitled “What kind of Ukraine do I love?” in the same newspaper was even more pleasant. After the constant flow of negative information that we see in Russian media about Ukraine and Ukrainians, with nearly every Russian film featuring a negative character with Ukrainian surname or called khokhol, it was a revelation to read such a publication comprising opinions about Ukraine expressed by people of various categories.
It appears that there is some positive in this dialogue, as we can see opinions of Russian intellectuals which coincide with our thoughts, intentions, and desires. I am sure that neither Ukrainian, nor Russian intelligent people (those who are intelligent in the full meaning of the word), would like to be foes, especially taking into consideration our long common history, business relations, and blood ties which intertwine many families.
It is also important to remember that the Ukrainian media does not always depict Russian realities in an adequate manner. I will give you an example: from the information found in our media Gleb Pavlovsky seems to be a man with a very negative attitude towards Ukrainians. After reading his thoughts in Rossiyskaya gazeta, I understood that it is not at all so. One can easily agree with many of Gleb Pavlovsky’s thoughts found in the material “What kind of Ukraine do I love?”. Especially in what refers to the problem of provincial character of our elites. In the same way, one can agree with the opinion of Oleksandr Tsipko who speaks with understanding about Ukraine’s search of roots of its own national identity after acquiring independence, which proves that the process of leaving the culture of “single empire” is natural for the states which used to be part of it. He reasonably asserts that both sides should have an honest attitude to the process of decay of a huge empire.
I am also pleased to read the lines indicating that Russians understand the specific cultural and mental features of our people, understanding that Ukrainians have the right for national self-identification and to take pride in their national achievements, and to be treated with respect by representatives of the Russian ethnos. However, it was quite unpleasant to read opinions that “Russian citizens are humiliated in Ukraine by being forced to speak a broken Galician dialect,” that leaving the guardianship of the Russian culture restricts the development of the Ukrainian one, that natural and technical sciences cannot be developed in Ukrainian, that Sevastopol is a city of only Russian fame.
At the same time, the materials published in both newspapers suggest that we should seek more common topics for conversations, which would assist in improving the perception of one another. We should encourage respect to each other as nations that are sovereign in terms of culture, traditions, language, and history.
I am aware of the attitude which exists in contemporary Russia towards Ukraine’s western oblasts (I am representative of the Ukrainian West). But hardly any Russian knows that the renowned printer Ivan Fedorov, whom they regard as theirs exclusively, found shelter in western Ukraine, in the estate of the renowned Prince Vasyl-Kostiantyn Ostrozky. They ignore his stay in the Ostroh Academy, whose legacy our university inherited, where he experienced the most fruitful period of his creative activity. That the Ostroh Academy was the first to print the famous Ostroh Bible, on which our presidents now take oath. It also printed the equally famous first Greek-Slavic alphabet, the first Cyrillic polygraphy index of old-printed texts, Short Collection of Essential Things For Better Understanding of the New Testament by Tymofii Mykhailovych, and other outstanding works.
Prince Andrey Kurbsky found himself in Western Ukraine after he was turned out of Moscow. His correspondence with Prince Vasyl-Kostiantyn Ostrozky is immensely interesting. Ostrozky and one of his sons became the managers of Kurbsky’s estates, in accordance with his testament. Not less interesting is the story of Russian Afanasiy, who was prisoner of Prince Ostrozky, but received an education at the Ostroh Academy, and later founded the renowned Mezhyrychi Monastery in the Kyiv region.
There are many more stories about talented Russians who were able to work and made their names precisely in western Ukraine.
I think, that for Russians it would be no less interesting to learn that the building of the contemporary Ostroh Academy used to house the Count Bludov School, launched in the 19th by Countess Bludova. The activity of Countess Bludova in Ukraine enables us to believe that Russian intelligentsia of that period, later destroyed by Soviet repressions, as well as the Ukrainian intelligentsia consisted of upright people who were able to comprehend the special values of every Slavic nation, culture, and language. Suffice it to say that the Russian Countess ordered a two-week church service for the Ukrainian genius, Taras Hryhorovych Shevchenko, when the Shevchenko Days were being celebrated. The school itself also held Shevchenko’s Days for two weeks, during which the students did not have classes, readings of Shevchenko’s poems were held and performances based on his works were arranged. Hardly any historian knows that same Countess Bludova established one of the most powerful centers of the Brotherhood of Saints Cyril and Methodius within the Ostroh Academy.
We are obliged to seek and understand these kinds of moments of our common history, because the past of eastern Ukraine is so closely intertwined with Russian history, and that of western Ukraine – with the history of Poland, that without finding those common points it will be impossible to understand each other fully. And the dialogue, launched by Den’s editor in chief Larysa Ivshyna, which has met the response of Rossiyskaya gazeta Vladislav Fronin, in which Ukrainian and Russian intelligentsia take part, will help us understand one another better, to treat each other with mutual respect, and without biases. Furthermore, assisted by these newspapers, we can move from the verbal dialogue to joint actions. As the rector of the Ostroh Academy, the first higher educational establishment in Eastern Europe, I am appealing to the rectors of Russian universities who have strong historical bases and developed historical schools to establish contacts and begin joint research in the above-mentioned domain.
I am also grateful to Russian journalists for drawing attention to the fate of Dasha from Odesa. When families face such tragedy, their nationality is of no relevance. Here kindness has its effect. I am pleased to say that the Ostroh Academy is ready to respond, and we will send the money that we will be able to raise to Dasha. The only thing we need is to know the number of bank account in Ukraine, where money should be sent.
EDITOR’S NOTE
Below are the details of the bank account for those willing to help Dasha
Settlement account: 30301810738006003804 in Savings Bank of the Russian Federation
Correspondence account: 30101810400000000225 в OPERU Moscow GTU Bank of Russia
BIC code 044525225 PIN 7707083893 ЗКПО 02751791 KPP 775003011
Designation: personal account
No. 42607.810.7.3804.0300420
Recepient — Ladunkina Liudmyla Mykolaivna
The order to this account can be made only from your bank account.
