Full text - PDF

UDC 130.2:[7.035.7:7.045](4)

DOI: https://doi.org/10.17721/UCS.2018.1(2).03

N. Y. Kryvda, Doctor of Philosophical Science, Professor

Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv

60, Volodymyrska Street, Kyiv, 01033, Ukraine


The article deals with the cultural and philosophical analysis of national identity concept in the context of the "tradition invention". During the formation of collective identity, there is a reason to believe that the "invention" of the corresponding time of tradition is one of the main ways of overcoming stereotypes and practices that are considered obsolete and do not correspond to the functions assigned to them – society consolidation. Ideas, symbols and "places of memory", that receive new meaningful content, contribute to the destruction of those social models that were supported by the old tradition, destroying it itself. In this context, the notion of commemoration becomes important, which appears an effective toolfor the formation of a collective identity and a means of preserving historical memory. The main goal of the article is to identify the fundamentals of national identity in its close relationship with tradition and informal memory, as well as to formulate the notion of commemoration as an effective instrument for the formation of collective identity. Futhermore, alongside with the need for a civilization definition, an important role in the process of "inventing the tradition" and the design of collective memory is widely declared as a desire to "break up" with the Soviet totalitarian past. The Soviet legacy is deeply rooted in Ukrainian socio-cultural and political life, and the inherent manipulative strategies, values and practices are an effective means of competition of political elites in the struggle for their own capital. The mechanical return to the intellectual constructs of the pre-Soviet period is not in last place, since they were based on "objective signs" of ethnic identification, which, in a multi-ethnic Ukrainian society, lacked sufficient symbolic capital to consolidate society. The analyzed researches testify to the fact that taking rejection of ethnic or communist myths should be accompanied by the creation of a constructive program of the Ukrainian future.

Key words: identity, collective memory, historical memory, commemoration, consolidation, tradition, culture.


  1. 1.       Arnautova, Y. E. (2003). Меmoria: "totalniy socialniy fenomen i obiekt issledovania [Memoria: "total social phenomenon" and the object of research].

    Retrieved from http://ec-dejavu.ru/m/Memory_medieval.html. (In Russian).

    2.       Achkasov, V. A. (2005). Rol polytycheskykh i intelektualnyh elyt postkomunystycheskyh hosudarstv v proysvodstve "polytyki pamyaty" [The role of political and intellectual elites of post-communist states in the production of "politics of memory"]. In Symbolic Politics, Vol. 1, 126-148.

    3.       Bauman, Z. (2005). The Individualized Society. Moscow, Logos (In Russian).

    4.       Bourdieu, P (2007). Sociology of Social Space. Moscow, Institute of Experimental Sociology (In Russian).

    5.       Hryniv, O. (2008). Ukrainska natsiolohia: mizh dvoma svitovymy viinamy. Istorychni narysy [Ukrainian Nationalism: between two World Wars. Historical Essays]. Lviv, Svit.

    6.       Hrytsai, E. (2001). Ukraina: natsionalnaia identichnost v zerkale Drugogo [Ukraine: National identity in the Mirror of the Other]. Vilnius, EHU.

    7.       Kravchenko, V. (2011). Ponevolennia istorieu: Radanska Ukraina v suchasnii istoriografii [Conviction of History: Soviet Ukraine in Modern Historiography]. Kyiv, Krytyka.

    8.       Lanhevishe, D. (2008). Natsia, nacionalizm, nacionalna derzhava v Nimechchyni i v Evropi [Nation, nationalism, national state in Germany and in Europe]. Kyiv, K.I.S.

    9.       Makoly, M. (2011). Istoricheskaya pamyat i obshchestvo sohrazdan [Historical memory and society of fellow citizens]. Pro et contra, 1‒2(51), 134‒149.

    10.   Megill, A. (2007). Istoricheskaia Epistemologia [Historical Epistemology]. Moscow, Kanon. Osnovni zasady ta shliahy formuvannia spilnoi identychnosti gromadian

    11.   Ukrainy (2017) Informaciino-analitychni materialy do Kruglogo stolu 12 kvitnia 2017 roku [The Main principles and ways of formation of the common identity of Ukrainian citizens. Information and analytical materials for the Round Table]. April 12. Kyiv, Tsentr Rosumkova.

    12.   Plamenats, D. (2000). Dva typy nazionalismy [Two types of nationalism]. In Anthology. Kyiv, Smoloskyp.

    13.   Romanovskaia, E. V. (2015). Identychnost i komemoratsia [Identity and commemoration]. Vlast', 1, 81‒84.

    14.   Romanovskaia, E. V. (2014). Kommemorativnye praktiky i istorycheskoe soznanye [Commemorative practices and historical consciousness]. Lypetsk, Pershyna.

    15.   Smith, E. (1994). Natsionalna identychnist [National identity]. Retrieved from http://litopys.org.ua/smith/smi.htm.

    16.   Fushe, M. (1990). The European Republic. Historical and geographical outlines. Essay. Moscow, International relationships (In Russian).

    17.   Huntington, S. (2004). Who are we? The challenges to America’s national identity. Moscow, AST (In Russian).

    18.   Huntington, S. Stolknovenie zyvylysazyi [Clash of Civilizations]. Retrieved from https://www.e-reading.club/book.php?book=61484.

    19.   Shatskiy, E. (1990). Utopia and Tradition. Moscow, Progress (In Russian)

    20.   Shtompka, P. (1996). Sociology of social change. Moscow, Aspect-press (In Russian).

    21.   Eley, G. (1996). Becoming national. Oxford, Oxford univ. press.

    22.   Hobsbawm, E. J. (1997). On history. London, New Press.

    23.   Hobsbawm, E. (1983). The Invention of Tradition. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press.

    24.   Nora, P. (1994). Between memory and history: Les lieux de memoire. New York, Oxford, Oxford univ. press.

    25.   Shils, E. (1981). Tradition. Chicago, Univ. of Chicago press.

    © N. Y. Kdryva 2018