Talk:Alexander Dukhnovych

Alexander Duchnovich

His famous statement was Ia rusyn byl, ies'm i budu (I Was, Am, and Will Be a Rusyn) and it is clear that he considered himself as a Rusyn, so his name should be changed to Rusyn version ( Aleksander Duchnovič )

You should also bear in mind that:

a) Ruthenian and Rusyn are two different things, see below

b) he did not consider Rusyns to be a separate people

c) Ukrainians consider him his national poet too. Ivan Franko considered himself a Rusyn too and believed Dukhnovych to be one of his greatest compatriots.

d) majority of Rusyns living in Ukraine consider themselves Ukrainian, just like Hutsuls, Boykos, Lemkys. He is their national poet and they have the right to have his name in their native language - Ukrainian.

Noone objects to some considering him Rusyn, but please be considerate of Ukrainian Rusyns, who consider him Ukrainian.--Hillock65 13:25, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting, but:

a) I agree, but he writen in Ruthenian, not Rusyn and Ukrainian.

If that is the case, please mention in the text Ruthenian, but not Rusyn or Ukrainian.--Hillock65 15:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It is mentioned in text that he was writing in Ruthenian. He

refused to use Ukrainian language so that he used Russian and Ruthenian languages. Conqueror100

b) Duchnovic considered Rusyns to be separate people from Ukrainian with more ties with Russians.

There were no Rysyns at that time, the majority considered themselves Ruthenians and later became Ukrainians and Dukhnovych indeed believed Ruthenians to be one people with Russians. He was not the only one, there were others as well. --Hillock65 15:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I do not agree with this opinion. Do you understand the term Ruthenian? Conqueror100

c) Ukrainians can consider him as national poet and Hungarians think

Moric August Benovsky was Hungarian. Some nations think about people too subjective despite Duchnovic statements and writings to Slovak newspapers that time.

d) Firstly, Ukrainian goverment do not recognise Rusyns as separate east Slavic nation ( in recent time Czechoslovakia during comunist era did the same ) so they consider themselves Ukrainian. About Lemkos, why do you think that they consider themseves Ukrainians? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Conqueror100 (talk • contribs) 14:21, 18 March 2007 (UTC).

That is not true. Rusyns are recognized in Ukraine, in the last census of 2001 10,000 people called themselves Rusyns. It is mentioned in the census. It is, however, less than 1% of the population in Zakarpattya oblast of Ukraine.--Hillock65 15:30, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

It is true. It is only written that only 10,100 people stated that they were Rusyns, but Ukrainian goverment don not recognise it.

Do you understand the difference? Conqueror100

The Ukrainian governement doesn't recognise Rusyns as being a separate nation. During the census, people that wrote, that they were Rusyns were counted as beeing Ukrainians, but, in the resulting statistics, it was written that 10100 people have written that they are Rusyns, which is a subgroup of the Ukrainian nation. So they weren't counted as a separate group, just like Ukrainians, there were only some numbers (highly falsificated according to rusyn organisations that have more members than the numbers given!)given but not counted. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Rusyn (talk • contribs) 19:55, August 29, 2007 (UTC)

Alexander or Oleksandr?

Dear Riurik, you asked me to give some links where you can see that the name of Duchnovich was Alexander(aleksander), here they are:[1],[2],[3](a.d are initials of Alexander Duchnovich),[4](chose Великы Русины on left side, then go down: you will see the article named:о. Александер Духновіч) Regards--Rusyn 10:43, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Rusyns do not have patronyms, I think it'll be wise to remove the "vasiliovitch"...--Rusyn 15:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Again, he is not exclusively Rusyn - Ukrainians of Transcarpathia believe him to be Ukrainian as well. Also, he himself believed Rusyns to be part of the Russian nation. And in his later publications in the Russian language he does use his Patronimic.--Hillock65 16:53, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean by Ukrainians of Transcarpathia? Before WW2, there weren't any ukrainians in transcarpathia. The belonging of Rusyns to the Ukrainian nation, is an invention of ukrainophile groups leaded by Voloshyn around 1930.(Before 1945, this idea wasn't really popular). This theory was took by Stalin in order to annex a strategic zone.(carpatho-ruthenia) He just qualified this annextion as a part of ukrainian unification. Nowdays the ukrainian state doesn't recognise rusyns and does a lot of pressure on rusyn organisations. During the last population census (in 1991),rusyns weren't counted separately: a number of 10100 people was given to show that Ukraine recognise all minorities. In reality there are about 1 million Rusyns in Ukraine. Rusyn organisations estimate that approximately 50000 people declared themselves as rusyn during the census. The rest were influenced by a 60 year anti-rusyn propaganda, didn't dare to declare their nationality or simplely didn't know that it was possible to declare themselves as Rusyns. Duchnovych believed rusyns to be part of the russian nation, but he never said that rusyns are ukrainians or that he is ukrainian himself... --Rusyn 17:19, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Rusyn or Ukrainian?

Duchnovich is obviously a rusyn poet and writer.He was born in rusyn populated region of Slovakia, and has written many rusyn patriotic poems : Ya rusyn byv jesm i budu, podkarpatskiji rusyny.... In Ukraine, rusyns are still not recoginised as a nation, so, there, Duchnovich is considered as ukrainian; maybe because of that the information on this page about the nationality of Duchnovich is false... --Rusyn 11:05, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

You should also note that Dukhnovych didn't believe Rusyns to be a separate nation either. He had always been a Moscowphile (Rusophile) himself and believed Rusyns to be nothing but a part of a greater Russian nation. Near the end of his life he didn't even write in Rusyn language but in proper Russian language and in Iazychie, a peculiar mixture of Slavic languages. So, his contribution to Rusyn language is minuscule if at all. As far as the nationality of Rusyns, it is still a highly controversial question as even the majority of people in Zakarpattia believe themselves to be part of the Ukrainian nation as Hutsuls and others. The article should remain neutral because views on Dukhnovych are different, and it should accurately reflect Dukhnovych's negligible and virtually non-existent contribution to a Rusyn culture which he indeed didn't believe to be a separate entity at all.--Hillock65 15:31, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Declaring Dukhnovich as beeing a ukrainian poet (he is recognised as national poet among rusyns)isn't neutral, but pro-ukrainian. Rusyns aren't ukrainians (see the upper disscution). Duchnovich didn't contribute much for rusyn language, but he did for rusyn culture... And he didn't contribute to ukrainian language anyway...--Rusyn 17:25, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

There seems to be too much emotion in this discussion but too few facts. First of all, let's deal with facts. And the fact is that the major part of the present day Ukrainian nation at one or another point in their history called themselves Rusyns (Ruthenians). Among them, notably is the classic of Ukrainian literature Ivan Franko, who also thought very highly of his fellow Rusyn Dobriansky. Secondly, even according to your figures (which need to be verified) the overwhelming majority of people in Transcarpathia believe themselves to be Ukrainians. Why and how is beyond the scope of this discussion. Thirdly, you seem to contradict yourself with assertion that there were no Ukrainians in Transcarpathia before 1945, and then you mention "Voloshyn around 1930". He was the leader of Carpatho-Ukraine state, that incidentally had the same state symbols and the state language that the present day Ukraine. And all that was before 1945! I think we need to be respectful of other people - if you are using the argument of "artifitiality" of Ukrainians in Transcarpathia be prepared lest the same argument should be used against Rusyns themselves. Needless to say, it is counterproductive and leads nowhere. Let's agree to differ: you have every right to consider him Rusyn, that's fine. But also be considerate of other 950,000 Rusyns (according to your figures), who believe themselves to be part of the Ukrainian nation and as such have every right to consider Dukhnovych their national Ukrainian poet as well. --Hillock65 20:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

When I talk about Rusyns, I mean Carpatho-Rusyns. In fact, as you said, before WWI, many slavs from Austro-Hungaria considered themselves as Rusyns. After the war many of them adopted the Ukrainian nationality, the only group that kept their historic entonym were Carpatho-Rusyns. From this time, the word Rusyn is often used to talk about Carpatho-Rusyns. Ivan Franko used to call himself Rusyn, but he wasn't Carpatho-Rusyn. Dukhnovich and Dobriansky called themselves Rusyns and were Carpatho Rusyns.

And who says he wasn't a Rusyn?! Then call yourself Carpatho-Rusyn and leave Ukrainians and Rusyns alone.--Hillock65 04:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Before 1946, ukrainophile groups weren't really popular in Transcarpathia. Of course, there was an independent Carpatho-Ukrainian state established, but it wasn't suported by the majority of the population. The ukrainisation of carpatho-rusyns is artificial, as I already said. In Ukraine, Rusyn children (that are now called Ukrainians, because of the ukrainisation between 1945 and nowdays...) are not taught anything about Dukhnovich at school, and as a result of that, Dukhnovich (in the past, a hero of the Carpatho-Rusyns) is considered as much inferior to poets from Ukraine. Dukhnovich called himself as Carpatho-Rusyn, so why should we say he's Ukrainian. Regards, Rusyn 18:50, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

What you are exhibiting is intolerance and prejudice even if it comes from someone, who considers himself a Rusyn. The majority of people in Zakarpattia consider thmselves Rusyn and Ukriainian - and that is a fact. You have no right to tell them that they are not what they believe to be. That's their business, not yours. You have to learn to respect other people, even if you disagree with them. And what evidence do you give of Duknovych being considered much inferior to poets from Ukraine? That is outrageously inaccurate. Ivan Franko considered him one of the best Ukrainian poets. If you want to call him Carpatho-Rusyn, be my guest, for all I care you call call him Russian poet and writer too (which he was by the way). The fact is millions of Ukrainians and Rusyns in the past centuries and now consider him Ukrainian. They are the majority. Whether you like it or not you will have to get used to it and respect it, just as Ukrainians respect some Carpatho-Rusyn calling him their poet as well. Exhibiting intolerance and prejudice is not the way to prove a point.--Hillock65 04:40, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• Very dubious that he was a Ukrainian. Could you prove from his text this? Russianname 16:52, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Please take a note of the reputable sources and read the text carefully. It is not claimed that he was Ukrainian, his heritage is equally shared among Ukrainian and Rusyn nations. --Hillock65 17:23, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

May I add some information that might help. My father and grandfather are from Haidosh, near Uzhorod. My grandfather was a Rusyn and a Ukrainian. He spoke of this author and Voloshyn in his memoirs often. Ill get those details as soon as I can. But, one must realize, as in almost all identity politics, that a person can identify as many things at once and change their identifications too. Rusyns had always been Rusyns, but they were constantly ruled by many empires and never truly solidified their identity. Although all Rusyns are very similar, some are Ukrainian, some are Rusyn, some are Hutsuls, some are all at once. My grandfather said, " the mountains, like the sea, create islands"... and what he meant was, each village was its own island, and had its own identification. To be Rusyn was to be nobody and somebody, "a land with no name" he called it...."Rusyn in the valley...looking at the stars..." There is no debate here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.19.69.105 (talk) 03:02, 17 November 2018 (UTC)

Moving and renaming pages

A page has been renamed again without any consultation or warning. This is very uncivil and disrecpectful to other editors. Doing major changes without discussion will lead nowhere and is very counterproductive. If you disagree with something there are ways to settle a dispute, including discussion and other means. Please be considerate of other users.--Hillock65 04:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

NPOV: Rusyn vs Ruthenian

Please note that the two are not identical. In the article about Rusyns it states that they are:

a modern ethnic group that speaks the Rusyn language and are descended from the minority of Ruthenians who did not adopt a Ukrainian national identity in the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries. Because an overwhelming majority of Ruthenians within Ukraine itself have adopted a Ukrainian identity, most modern self-declared Rusyns live outside Ukraine.

Therefore renaming every Ruthenian into Rusyn is a flagrant violation of the NPOV policy. Ruthenian is a neutral term that was common both for Ukrainians and those, who consider themselves Rusyn, erasing it and pushing a nationalist propaganda is changing the spirit of the article and contradicts with well known facts.--Hillock65 13:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

I have to put the tag NPOV until this issue is resolved.--Hillock65 13:49, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

National Category

Duchnovich never said that he was Ukrainian. He sayed he was Ruthenian/Rusyn (cf: "Ya rusyn Byw jesm i budu" I was, am and will be a Rusyn"). The fact that he didn't say that Rusyns were a separate nation is another problem. But saying that Dukhnovich is Ukrainian is an insult to the man that Rusyns believe to be their national hero. I think we should put that he was Ruthenian in the nationality lign, it will avoid future problems on this subject. Rusyn 19:55, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

That's very clever, except Rusyn is modern nationality that didn't exist at the time of his life. He was Ruthenian, an ethnicity from which Ukrainian and Rusyns came. If you hate Ukrainians that much you can mention that he was Ruthenian, but Rusyn in English is quite different. Ruthenian is what he was, you should have done it first instead of just erasing mentioning of Ukrainians. Hatred of others should be an insult to Rusyns rather than what others consider Dukhnovych to be.--Hillock65 20:04, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

He never denied it - his Ukrainianness if you will - either, did he? Notice, I am not disputing the claim of Rusyn identity. I merely include that he is also of Ukrainian nationality. Also, how is it an insult for Dukhnovych to be called a Ukrainian? What is the insult? In sum, reverting back the nationality subject line in the infobox is not going to settle anything. Unless there is good evidence to the contrary, it seems that the appropriate solution is to include both nationalities.--Riurik^(discuss) 20:08, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Maybe we should put: Ruthenian (Rusyn or Ukrainian), so it's more neutral?Rusyn 16:41, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

That's fine with me. Although I'm not too familiar as to the "proper" historical periods for each ethnicity. Also if - to my understanding - both Rusyns and Ukrainians are descendants of Ruthenians the nationality box should use "and" rather than "or."--Riurik^(discuss) 22:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

• • • Please give sources that he claimed he was Ukrainian. --Russianname 16:37, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

He didn't claim that he was Ukrainian, but he was called Ukrainian by other people, notably by Ivan Franko. He belongs to Ukrainian nation just as much as he belongs to Rusyns. So, when he wrote "Ya rusyn Byw jesm i budu", he didn't mean modern Rusyns but Ruthenians, where both Ukrainian and Rusyn nations have their roots. So, if you object to his nationality being mentioned as Ukrainian, fine, I will remove it, but I will also remove the Rusyn nation, because it is a modern outcome of the Ruthenian people. --Hillock65 17:22, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Rusyn and Ukrainian categories are appropriate and acceptable criteria and belong in the article. Dukhnovych has a solid literary place in Ukrainian literature (as well as in other literary traditions). I think the argument for his Ukrainian nationality is much stronger than the argument against.--Riurik^(discuss) 19:16, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• • • I do not care about your philosophies. Just give sources that Dukhnovich ever called himself a Ukrainian. Then if you will not provide sources, the article will be totally disputable. The answer is known: Dukhnovich NEVER called himself a Ukrainianm he did not use Ukrainian language and he was aware of his Russian (Great Russian) ancestry (from prince Cherkassky, a Russian emigre to Hungary).--Russianname 08:52, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Dear Riurik, why do you think Dukhnovich has a strong place in the Ukrainian litterature? Has he ever written something in Ukrainian or about Ukrainians? Personally I don't know such cases. But I know that he critiscised the Galician Ukrainophiles and the Ukrainophile movement (indeed he thought that all East-Slavs are part of the Great Russian Nation (at the end of his life, however, he became to believe in the fact that Carpatho-Rusyns are a separate nation)). So yes, he refused to call himself Ukrainian... And Franko never had the right to decide the nationality of an other person, so saying that Dukhnovich was Ukrainian only because of what Franko said doesn't have any sense. If Kotljarevsky said that Shakespeare was Zulu, it would not make Shakespeare beeing Zulu! If we say that Dukhnovich is Ukrainian too, we can very easily write on the Shevchenko's page, that he was russian and ukrainian. Yes, Ya Rusyn byl means I was a Ruthenian, but in the Carpathian Rus, from where Aleksander Dukhnovich is originated, the ruthenians became Rusyns. (In fact they have never changed there entonym, Rusyn and Ruthenian are both said "Русин" or "Руснак" in the loсal language, the only change was in the English linguistic terminology, even if in some UN documents we find more easily Ruthenians, when talking about Carpatho-Rusyns...). I think we should write that he is RUSYN, like he claimed it, and use the rusyn transliteration of his name: ALEKSANDER DUCHNOVIČ or (if one doesn't want to use diacritics) ALEKSANDER DUKHNOVICH. Writing that he is ukrainian and using ukrainian transliteration is even worse that writing that Shevchenko is russian (Shevchenko, at least, has written more in russian, than in ukrainian, and he has never used the word UKRAJINCI, using instead KOZAKY...). Dukhnovich was the weakner of Carpatho-Rusyns, I think we should respect him and don't start ukrainian nationalistic action on his page (like changing his nationality to ukrainian or to change his surname: he was called and baptised as ALEKSANDER not Oleksandr...). Rusyn 20:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Rusyn, my opinion is based on the general understanding of the Ukrainian literature. I do not claim to be a scholar, or an expert, but from what I can discern there is a sound case for having Dukhnov(i/y)ch under the Ukrainian category (see Pivovarov, N. "Dukhnovych, Oleksandr Vasil'ovych." Modern Encyclopedia of Russian and Soviet Literature. Ed. by Harry B. Weber. Gulf Breeze, FL.: Academic International Press. 6 (1982): 91).

I also do not deny his rightful place as a Rusyn national. You write: I think we should write that he is RUSYN, like he claimed it.. Do we not write so now? The current version of the entry lists him - Rusyn.

Additionally, I am in no position to change anyone's nationality whether on wikipedia or elsewhere. Let's be aware of that. I am bound just like you are by the guidelines laid out on Wikipedia, with some I agree, with some I disagree, but in the end I too have to live with them, whether I like them or not (so do the imperialist Russians and nationalist Poles).

So on the question of names, the most commonly used one in the English language is what wikipedia wants its editors to use; in this case, it happens to be Oleksandr Dukhnovych. If you don't agree and want the page renamed, there are procedures and ways to do so (RFCs, dispute resolutions, et cetera). If anyone is to blame for nationality or name changes, it seems to be User:Jimbo Wales.--Riurik^(discuss) 01:41, 30 August 2007 (UTC)