: 115-124
Lviv Polytechnic National University, Department of Design and Fundamentals of Architecture

Thіs article is an attempt to highlight the factors of formation in art of the method and style of total socialrealism as a method of substitution. The basic factors are the contradictions of the consciousness of the Russian ethnos, which are due to the inability of semantic essential distinction of the main oppositional categories of existence. The historical organicity of the Russian mentality in the socialist and communist forms of existence has revealed, as well as the historical organicity of the method of substitutions in the construction of antagonistic models of worldview. This method of substitution will become basic in the style of socialist realism. Certain figurative and semantic inversions of archetypal structures of human consciousness and the environment of the period of Soviet totalitarianism are revealed and characterized: eschatological dimension of Eternity / time category of bright future; the truth / the untruth; sacred (theological) / profane; relative / absolute; spiritual / material; the hero / the anti-hero; destruction of the past / future; existence in spirit / existence in political ideology. These substitutions led to the development of certain unified iconographic schemes in art and, in particular, in architecture: residential complexes (communities), giant pedestal buildings (sculpture building), a step-increasing volume of public buildings like to the temple. Forcible change of the picture of the world generates hyper-reality, where is desired seems real. The violent change of consciousness of nations in the Soviet Union, built on the principles of antagonistic dual models of worldview with their moral and semantic indistinguishability, could not give rise to projects of utopias as projects of evolution. The inversion of archetypal structures in socialist utopia is essentially anti-utopian.


Alʹorova Z. 2008. The limits of the visible. Formation of visual art. Kharkiv : KHDAK.
Berdyaev N. 1955. The origins and meaning of Russian communism. Paryzh : UMSA - PRESS, Boroday YU, 1981. Ethnic contacts and the environment. Pryroda No. 9. S. 83-84.
Bondar-Tereshchenko I. 2009. In the mirror of the 1910-30s, Kyyiv : Tempora.
Hevryk T. 1990. Lost architectural monuments of Kyiv. Pam'yatky Ukrayiny No. 1-3, 64 s.
De Lanʹyi ZH. 2019. Whip and Russians: customs and organization of Russia, perekl. z frants. P. Tarashchuk navchalʹna knyha-Bohdan, Ternopilʹ.
Ykonnykov A. 2001. ХХth century architecture. Utopias and reality, Moskva : Prohress-Tradytsyya. Tom. I.
Kosiv V. 2019. Ukrainian identity in graphic design 1945-1989. Kyyiv : Rodovid.
Lysyuk N. 2002. Evolution and aberration of the concept of archetype. Problemy ukrayinsʹkoho terminolohichnoho slovnykarstva v mystetstvoznavstvi y etnolohiyi: naukovyy zbirnyk pam'yati Mykoly Trokhymenka. Kyyiv : T. 1 Ant. S. 116-123.
Revzyn H. 2002. Essays on the philosophy of architectural form. Moskva : O H Y.
Rohotchenko O. 2007. Sotsialistychnyy realizm i totalitaryzm, Kyyiv : Feniks.
Stepun F. 2000. Dukh, lytso y stylʹ russkoy kulʹtury. Stepun F. Sochynenyya. Moskva : ROSSPÉN.
Petrova O. 2004. Social realism in the typological system of styles. Paradigm shift or concept replacement.
Petrova O. Mystetstvoznavchi refleksiyi. Istoriya, teoriya ta krytyka obrazotvorchoho mystetstva 70-kh rokiv ХХ st-poch. ХХI st. : zb. st.. Kyyiv : KM Akademiya. S. 34-36.
Uspenskyy P. 2010. New model of the universe. Moskva : Hrand-Fayr.
Shpenhler O. 1993. Sunset of Europe. Essays on the morphology of world history. 1. Gestalt and reality, Per. snem., vstup. st. y prymech. K. A. Svasʹyana, Moskva : Myslʹ.
Yunh K. 2004. Soul and myth. Six archetypes. Mynsk : Kharvest.