Ukrainian Literature and Culture in German-Speaking Countries

Maria Ivanytska: Literature, translation, and cultural and literary studies play an important role in this war because they disseminate certain information and can therefore be instruments of information warfare or intercultural understanding, propaganda and / or manipulation. This applies, in particular, to literature about other countries, including fiction, publications in the humanities, and translations. These works, together with their para and metatexts, create a certain image of the foreign country in question.

When we talk about the Russian war of aggression against , we start to see how certain cultural and especially literary activities have been preparing the ground for this war for years. Russia's propagandists constructed myths about Ukrainian nationalism and the infallibility of Russian politics, among other things. In doing so, they created this idea among their own population of a bipolar world. They also conveyed narratives of this kind to other countries through their information channels. According to these myths,  alone saved the world from fascism and today stands as the sole defender of democracy, the Orthodox faith, and traditional family values. There is also countless evidence of how the Ukrainian idea of independence was portrayed as nationalistic in commentaries on translations of Ukrainian literature in the GDR era or in literary texts of the time.
The reception of Russian and Ukrainian literature in Germany has been shaped by ideology since the 19th century. I examine this by analyzing translations, including prefaces and epilogues, and I also look at reviews and academic texts on these literatures.

My analysis of over 100 volumes of translated and literary works1 has proven how dominant the ideological influence was in the transfer of literature. Here, too, the narratives that Russia uses today as arguments for war were already being spread. These include claims such as:

Claudia Dathe: Literature and translation play an important role in the war, both for Ukrainian society and for societies outside the war. In Ukrainian society, literature, especially poetry, but also other forms of artistic expression, are an important means of resistance right now, of visualizing community, and they’re also a real source of consolation in these violent and very insecure times. Meanwhile, literature (in translation) offers people outside of Ukraine the opportunity to face what is happening, and to perceive the news and analysis we hear in the media in a differentiated way, beyond the immediate aspects of war-torn Ukrainian society.

Maria Ivanytska: This development can be explained primarily in political terms: On the one hand, the  was a huge state with powerful military and later also nuclear resources. A number of European countries were therefore afraid of dealing with the Soviet Union. But abroad, the Soviet Union was usually identified as Russia: All the decisions were made in Moscow, and the Russian language, which was spoken throughout the Soviet Union, marked the boundaries of the Russian cultural world. Russia played the role of the center and the other Soviet republics the role of Russia's colonies. You can read about this in the works of Ewa Thompson, Roman Szporluk, Ola Hnatiuk, and others.7 In this way, other countries' fear of the Soviet Union was actually a fear of Russia. Meanwhile, there was this narrative gradually developing in the Soviet Union that it was, above all, the Russian people who had suffered the most in the Second World War and that it was the Russian people alone who had defeated fascism. This can be seen, for example, in Stalin's speech in the Kremlin on May 24, 1945. I would like to quote a few words from this speech: "I propose a toast above all to the well-being of the Russian people, because theirs is the most outstanding nation among all the nations belonging to the Soviet Union. I propose a toast to the well-being of the Russian people, because in this war they have earned wide recognition as the leading force of the Soviet Union among all the peoples of our country. I raise a toast to the well-being of the Russian people, not only because they are the leading people, but also because they have a clear mind, a steadfast character, and patience."8    It also follows that responsibility for the Second World War, which became the focus of public discourse in Germany in the post-war period, was understood as a responsibility towards Russia. And when the first signs of a cultural exchange between the Soviet Union and the Federal Republic of Germany emerged in the 1970s, the Federal Republic agreed to many of these narratives in the hope of gaining a close and collaborative partnership with Russia – as the leading power of the USSR – by establishing positive cultural and then economic ties.
 
I would like to refer to a case study to illustrate how this worked in Germany. It concerns an anthology of Ukrainian literature, which the exiled Ukrainian literary scholar and translator Anna-Halja Horbatsch was commissioned to translate in West Germany in 1970. The project was to be financed by the Institute for Foreign Relations (ifa) in Stuttgart. Inspired by the thawing of Cold War relations, this commission was the first expression of interest on the part of the German book market to introduce other republics of the USSR to the German reading public. Several publishers had previously rejected translations of Ukrainian literature. In her memoirs, Horbatsch writes about a condition imposed by the ifa that the anthology should under no circumstances emphasize the originality of Ukrainian literature. Any impression that the publication supported separatist efforts within the Soviet Union was to be avoided at all costs.9 Such wishes and fears on the part of both the ifa and the publishers make it clear how dependent literary relations were on Russian politics and how cautious Germany was in relation to the USSR. They also testify to the reluctance of German institutions to change their stereotype about Ukraine's affiliation with the Russian cultural sphere.

I would like to quote another statement made by Horbatsch in the 1970s concerning the book market in West Germany at that time:
 

   
Unfortunately, Horbatsch’s statement continued to apply in the following decades.

Unfortunately, Horbatsch’s statement continued to apply in the following decades.

Maria Ivanytska: As I explained in my answer to the last question, Germany mostly oriented itself towards Russian literature and science. This can partly be explained by the fact that German intellectuals were familiar with the Russian imperial perspective because of Russia’s active self-portrayal and took this perspective for granted. Another reason for this stance was Germany's own imperial past. The theory of small literatures and nations11 is of relevance here; Russian and German literatures belong to the 'large' literatures, and Ukrainian literature to the 'small' ones. According to Kundera, a small nation perceives its own existence as an eternal struggle between existence and non-existence, whereas for a large nation, existence is a self-evident phenomenon. According to him, large nations also take on the active role of the subject, or think they are taking on this role, while small nations feel like "objects of history".12  This view and way of writing history prevailed and still prevails in both Germany and Russia. This is why the two countries maintained interstate and intercultural communication on an equal footing, even if it was not always about mutual understanding.

And my explanation for why a lot of German literature was and is translated in Ukraine is the fact that Ukraine felt and still feels part of the European cultural sphere. This feeling of belonging to Central Europe aroused interest in European literature and the transfer of this literature into Ukraine. Many Ukrainian writers and poets, who also often worked as translators, had an excellent command of German and translated hundreds of German-language authors into Ukrainian.

Claudia Dathe: Many people remain attached to this national thinking in their concepts, ideas, and projects – as this question about the “interest in Ukrainian culture” also shows. The only way we can ensure that Ukrainian artists, creatives, and cultural representatives are involved in a stable and sustainable way is by moving beyond the paradigm of the national. In the future, it will be important to integrate actors from Ukraine, including their perspectives and experiences, into European discussion spaces and debates. At the same time, we need to move away from this national paradigm of “we in Germany” versus “you in Ukraine”, which is also an unconscious perpetuation of the paradigm of exclusion.

This article is part of a series of articles based on the conference German Narratives on Russia's War in Ukraine. The conference took place as part of the Volkswagen Foundation's War in Ukraine theme week from February 22 to 24, 2023 at Herrenhausen Palace in Hanover. The organizers: Dr. Cornelia Ilbrig (Lower Saxony Academy of Sciences and Humanities in Göttingen), Dr. Jana-Katharina Mende (Martin Luther University Halle-Wittenberg) and Prof. Dr. Monika Wolting (University of Wrocław). Both the conference and the translation of this article were made possible by the Volkswagen Foundation.

The questions are taken from a round table discussion held on 23 February 2023 on the role of Ukrainian culture and literature in times of war.

The questions were asked by Cornelia Ilbrig.

English translation: William Connor