Barvinsky was highly praised in Western Ukraine by his contemporaries.
The textbook contained an appendix with works by V. Gogol, M. Petrenko, D. Mordovets and M. Kostomarov, which deepened students’ understanding of the literary process of this period. The third part of the textbook “Written Literature” covered the post-Shevchenko development of Ukrainian literature and was presented by L. Glibov, V. Storozhenko, B. Didytsky, Mark Vovchko, O. Konysky, P. Kulish, I. Naumovych, P. Leontovych, I. Sharenevych, E. Agarski, K. Klimkevych, O. Ogonovsky, F. Tsarevich, V. Shashkevych, Y. Fedkovych, S. Vorobkevych, Hanna Barvinok, P. Kuzmenko, I. Nechuy-Levytsky and others … The third part was joined (in the appendix) by the works of Tymko Padura, L. Dankevych, M. Nomys, O. Storonsky, O. Partytsky, S. Rudansky, A. Navrotsky, Pavel Ratay (P. Kulish), Pavel Svoy and brief information about authors. The appendix also contained the story “Savur-Mohyla” without indicating its authorship. In addition, at the end of the textbook, passages from the Holy Scriptures – from the “First Book of Moses” and from the “Gospel” from Matthew – were translated into Ukrainian. New at that time 123helpme.me was the position of O. Barvinsky on leaving unchanged the language of works that carried the dialectics of eastern and western Ukraine. The author-compiler decided not to interfere in the texts, motivating it by “… to present a true image of Russian literature and its development, both in Galicia and in Ukraine.” This was a step forward in comparison with the textbooks of V. Kovalsky and O. Toronsky, who sought to realize their Muscovite interests while editing the language of literary texts included in the textbooks of writers from Western and Eastern Ukraine. The elaboration of the norms of the all-Ukrainian orthography was still ahead. O. Barvinsky had a developed philological sense, understood the importance of motivated by a successful selection of works for children’s reading and education. Even from the works of prominent writers, he carefully and carefully chose the texts for the textbook. Thus, in his letter of May 15 (1869) to his brother Osip in Brzezany, he wrote: “From Mark Vovchko I submit to the reading room the whole Sister, Two Sons, and parts from the Institute. From the third I do not think to give anything, but only to remember From Nazar Stodoli I submitted 1 act, the only trouble is that I can’t submit anything dramatic from Kostomarov’s works Pereyaslav Night and Sava Chaly are bright and already ingalta titles Mystery – a comedian in the Basis for “tlusta” as he says a Pole, for a lot of vulgarity, and of Minsk value. So there is nothing more than to present Cremation of Cord in a good translation. “As early as the following year, 1870, P. Kulish received a message from Halychyna from Volodymyr, O. Barvinsky’s brother, that the textbook had been published in Lviv. In a letter to O. Barvinsky dated March 27, 1871, P. Kulish from Vienna announced: “Thank you, friend Alexander, for the reader …”. And then the writer in the same letter moves on to another topic of concern to him – the publication of the Bible in Galicia in Ukrainian. Although the compilation of a textbook on literature was an episode in the complex process of unification of Western and Eastern Ukrainians, it testified to the social importance of the work done, and this was well understood by both O. Barvinsky and P. Kulish. Almost 20 years after the publication of the textbook, P. Kulish, in response to a report on the reprint of “Russian Reader …” wrote with a feeling of excitement about the times of joint work on the textbook: “I loved reading your memories of our ancient times.how we talked to your father-in-law and Mrs. Mother in Shlyakhtyntsi under the linden trees … I and my Lady are happy to hear about your reading room, which, you say, is healthy , reveals the progress of our life. Ruschini “. The collaboration between P. Kulish and O. Barvinsky is a bright page in the history of the creation of the first textbooks on literature for high school and the development of methods of literature as a science. The work on the textbook required from the compilers extremely great intellectual and moral efforts in the tragic for the Ukrainian people circumstances of colonial dependence of both parts of Ukraine, obstacles that created in the way of information exchange the borders of the two empires. The need for a textbook on literature for high school students and grammar schools was so acute that before the publication of O. Barvinsky’s work in one of the Galician periodicals there are excerpts from it. In particular, in Pravda (literary-scientific bulletin) in 1870 (part 1) was published “A Look at Ukrainian Oral Literature” with an indication that these are “excerpts” from O. Barvinsky’s textbook. However, the surname of P. Kulish as the author of “Look …” was not named. The completed work brought O. Barvinsky great relief and a sense of duty to his people. Later, in his memoirs on the completion of the work, he wrote: “… I had a sense of full national duty and the satisfaction that in the first beginnings of teaching I had the opportunity to fill this great gap in school literature and gave our youth books, from which she could learn the new era of our literature and the living vernacular of the most prominent Ukrainian-Russian writers. “The outstanding historian and theorist of Ukrainian literary criticism I. Franko praised the pedagogical work of O. Barvinsky : “These three volumes,” he wrote, “were to serve as textbooks of Russian language and writing in the sixth, seventh, and eighth grades. Toronsky, whose editor, though not quite clearly, leaned towards Muscoviteism … Barvinsky’s reader made very significant progress, and the phonetics hidden in the writings of Ukrainians prepared the victory of phonetic spelling in the whole writing. “O. Barvinsky’s long and fruitful work was highly appreciated in Western Ukraine by his cont emporaries. Thus, in particular, the teacher and author of textbooks for the school I. Levitsky in the early twentieth century. He wrote about Barvinsky’s achievements: opportunities for national education of Ukrainian youth “. However, not all the intelligentsia of Western Ukraine welcomed O. Barvinsky’s textbooks. The difficult socio-political situation in Galician Ukrainian society in the second half. The nineteenth century also affected the evaluation of O. Barvinsky’s books by various ideologically opposed groups. So, in particular, he later mentioned the negative response to the “Reading Book” in the press of one of the Muscovites, who did not accept the language of their writing: ” … in correspondence from Zhovknya (Russian language in schools) a correspondent made a claim: “that our ambassadors, which God will give, will be more, as before, in Vienna snatched the destruction of immoral (?!) Readers Barvinsky, unlike the state law (!), which clearly remembers the languages of the regional … “. This unfounded denial of the work of O. Barvinsky testified to the level linguistic culture of the Muscovite contributor, as well as the unconsolidation of the Ukrainian people not only for political and geographical reasons, but also for internal, ideological reasons.
necessarily assessed only as bourgeois-nationalist, and one of its leaders O. Barvinsky and his work in the popular field, of course, as hostile to the Soviet people. Thus, in particular, in OR Mazurkevych’s work “Essays on the History of the Methodology of Ukrainian Literature” O. Barvinsky’s negative position on Lesia Ukrainka’s desire to edit the Lviv children’s magazine “Dzvinok” is defined as “bourgeois-nationalist”. Unambiguously negative, “from a class standpoint” without taking into account the complex socio-political conditions of existence of the Ukrainian intelligentsia in the Austro-Hungarian Empire evaluates the work of O. Barvinsky and the Soviet scientist VZ Smal. He said about the Galician teacher’s reader: “Serving the authorities, the author did his best not to include works with freedom-loving, revolutionary motives. The first part of the book, dedicated to folklore, concealed Haydamatsky’s and Opryshkivsky’s. And recruiting songs, there is no difference between songs and thoughts. In the second and third parts, which were supposed to give an idea of the written literature, the rebellious songs of Shevchenko and Fedkovych, the works of Mark Vovchko were thrown out. “Such accusations are, first of all, surprising: should the school curriculum in literature cover all the achievements of the oral vernacular and even “with revolutionary motives”? Of course, such assessments of Soviet scholars about the activities of the teacher-populist blocked the way to the ideas of O. Barvinsky and the memory of him until the late 80’s of the twentieth century. Nevertheless, the textbook on literature, despite the borders and the tragic demarcation of Ukrainians, has become a work and a phenomenon of all-Ukrainian both in its content and in the method of its conclusion. Methods and practice of studying Ukrainian literature in high school for the first time received a textbook based on the principle of historicism, taking into account the best achievements of Ukrainian literature in the Left Bank and Right Bank Ukraine. Later, improving the content of his readers, O. Barvinsky created a series of textbooks on literature for Ukrainian schools and gymnasiums in Galicia: “Excerpts from Ukrainian-Russian literature”, “Selection from Ukrainian literature”, “History of Ukrainian literature” and others. O. Barvinsky’s textbooks were used in schools and gymnasiums of Galicia, Dnieper Ukraine and abroad (USA, Canada, Brazil). It should be added that the scientific and methodological activities of O. Barvinsky were not limited to the compilation of textbooks, this important matter required him as a teacher and further steps – the development of methods for using the textbook by teachers. And he did. Almost for the first time in the methodology of Ukrainian literature O. Barvinsky created such works and published them in 1889 in the pages of the newspaper “Teacher” of the body of the Russian Pedagogical Society. The series of publications was entitled “What is the purpose of the reader in public school and how to use it.”