Tuesday, February 24, 2009

www.hutsul-project.com website up and running

This is a belated announcement; our Hutsul Project site has been up and running for sometime. Please visit: www.hutsul-project.com


Anonymous said...

I originally posted this blog to your article about Rusyns (2007) & am afraid that you may not notice it. Because your new article is related to the Rusyn question (Hutsuls)& you seem to have developed a serious interest in this area, I thought that I'd replicate my comments below. I'm very much interested in your response.

Your analogy of those who insist on the Ukrainianes of the rusyns as somehow akin to the insistence of some Russians as to the little russianness of the Ukrainians might at first glance seem to be plausible, but with just a little bit of historical study, one finds it severely naive & unsatisfying. To site just one concrete example in the 20th century of the absurdity of this point of view, one need only look to the proclamation of the Carpatho-Ukrainian Republic in 1939spearheaded & supported by the majority of the "rusyns" in Transcarpathia. There is much to indicate that the Rusyn ethnos is an integral part of the Ukrainian nation (see Kuzio: Rusyns in Ukraine: Sorting out Fact from Fiction). Kuzio does a good job of dispelling the misconception that a majority of the inhabitants of this region identify themselves as rusyns. Certainly, if you're as interested in the Rusyn question as you indicate, you are aware that your own ancestors in Pidhaitsy at one time also identified themselves as Rusyns & not as Ukrainians?

Yosyf said...

The emergence and extinction of nations are in a constant dynamic flux, rather than stasis. Just as Ukrainians did not exist during Kiyevan Rus, but now do, in a millennium it is quite possible if not probable that there will be very few, if any, individuals identifying as such. The Rusyns might have supported the existence of a Ukrainian state, as it represented the best available option 1939. Furthermore, even if the majority of Rusyns saw themselves as part of the larger Ukrainian ethnic group in the 20th century, the situation may have changed since that time, and their identification as a unique ethnic group must be respected.

Since ethnic identification is completely subjective and a fabrication that exists as a consequence of human migration patterns, cultural development, and unfortunately cruelty and aggression, it is better to appreciate what we have chosen to accept as our own, without depriving others of the right to find happiness and meaning in their existence.

Anonymous said...

It is my observation that the vast majority of the inhabitants of the
Trans-Carpathian region do identify themselves as Ukrainians. The latest most accurate census information (Ukrainian census 2001)indicates that a whopping 10,200 inhabitants of this region out of a total of 1,258,300 identified themsleves as "Rusyns". Not really a substantial amount in the 21st century to constitute a new nationality? Also, it would be interesting to see how many of these 10,200 would also be able to identify themselves as Ukrainians too, or perhaps Rusyn-Ukrainians (see the Kuzio article I allude to above). I don't think that anything substantial has occured in this region in recent times to effect the national orientation of its inhabitants, other than the unnecessary and devisive meddling of outside interests, originating either from Russian "think tanks" or from Canadian institutions of higher learning. It is one thing to appreciate a region's local ethnicity, history, traditions and dialect(s), and another thing to advocate the separation of this region, as has currently been attempted by outside meddlers directed from Moscow.
If there is anything in the Transcarpathian situation that has changed since 1939 that warrants the creation of a fourth east slavic nationality, I'm all ears.