Творча біографія Дмитра Михайловича Гнатюка: історіографія проблеми

Abstract

У статті досліджено біографію видатної творчої особистості ХХ – початку ХХІ століття – Д. М. Гнатюка. Розглянуто виконавську та режисерську діяльність Майстра сцени в контексті соціокультурного та мистецького-комунікативного простору. Охарактеризовано епістолярну спадщину Д. Гнатюка, рецензії театральних критиків, матеріали періодичних видань.

В статье исследована биография выдающейся личности ХХ – начала XXI века – Д. М. Гнатюка. Рассмотрена исполнительская и режиссерская деятельность Мастера сцены, в контексте социокультурного и художественного коммуникативного пространства. Охарактеризовано эпистолярное наследие Д. Гнатюка, рецензии театральных критиков, материалы периодических изданий.

The article is devoted to the biography of the outstanding creative personality of the XX – the beginning of the XXI century – Dmytro Gnatyuk. The master and director’s activity of the Master in the context of socio-cultural and artistic-communicative space is considered. The epistolary heritage of D. Gnatyuk was described, reviews of theatrical critics, materials of periodicals. By fixing the problem into the chosen scientific discourse, the subject of the research is clearly defined – the vital and creative way of D. Gnatyuk, who, in the context of his own procedural organization, demonstrates the artist’s life realities in the projection of relevant text materials and other informative media, which forms the source base in the form of empirically accumulated works It is the material-fixed elements of a complex multi-level ontological model of a person who give the most-justified ground of coordination as an individual in the space of his psychophysical evolution, and tracking the communication of the individual in a dynamic socio-cultural dialogue. By synthesising these two aspects of analytical intelligence, we are able to fully comprehend the problem of social adaptation of a person and to identify the stimulating aspects of its creative principle, at the intersection of which a person acquires the status of a creative person whose essence is determined by the continuum as artistic achievements and psycho-physiological aspects of its evolution. Discussions caused by the problems of biography and its source base give reason to believe that the philosophical, sociological, psychological, art studies and cultural space is now in the stage of a permanent rethinking of phenomena, their essence, which, in turn, leads to the formation of new, sometimes undesirable conclusions, which are an important structuring element of history, science, and art. According to the findings of historiography, the tradition of textual and graphic fixation of the human way of life is a projection of one of the most ancient phenomena of mankind – written culture, therefore, for its study it is necessary to maintain the coordinates of a meaningful and scientifically sound approach. The tradition of studying biographical texts is characterized by the synthesis of rationalism and individualism, avoiding which one can lose logic and semantic substantiation. The key point in the study of D. Gnatyuk’s biography is the problem of the timekeeping of his life cycle with the corresponding semantic load determined by the sociocultural dynamics of objective reality. Such informative vectors of a social organization are noticeable, dissolving not only the cultural and artistic component, but also biographies of artists, their like-minded people and ascetics. In such realities, as the result of the personality reflection of a person of objective reality, an important component of a biographical study is crystallized – factual materials of personal origin, with which the conceptual moments are accentuated, the idea of important aspects of the creative process in general is deepened. The identified factual materials include: epistolary, memoirs, official documentation, and others.