Author Yuri Andrukhovych on Ukrainian dissident art in Soviet times

In Soviet times, being a pro-Ukrainian artist was dangerous. The Soviet secret police were particularly brutal in Ukraine, given that it was a country with a long history of resistance to Russian rule. Still, new generations of artists remained committed to their culture in the face of widespread Russification.
Among them was Yuri Andrukhovych, who, in 1985, co-founded the Bu-Ba-Bu literary performance group. Today, Andrukhovych is one of Ukraine's most famous and celebrated authors. But his career started as part of a bold underground movement that quickly grew into a cultural phenomenon, signaling the country's push toward independence. Bu-Ba-Bu's rejection of censorship and societal taboos resonated deeply with the Ukrainian population, which was eager to embrace the ideals of creative expression.
In an interview with the Kyiv Independent, Andrukhovych opened up about the origins of Bu-Ba-Bu, the struggle of Ukrainian cultural movements in the face of Soviet censorship, and the profound sense of pride he feels as he witnesses Ukrainian culture thrive despite the adversity brought on by Russia's war today.
This interview has been edited for length and clarity.
The Kyiv Independent: April marks a special month for the history of Ukrainian culture — it's the 40-year anniversary of the founding of Bu-Ba-Bu. For our foreign audience, could you just tell us a little bit about what it was and your part in founding it?
Yuri Andrukhovych: Yes, it will be on April 17 — we have a precise date. I couldn't participate in that very first meeting which took place in Lviv, though. It was a meeting between my two friends, the poets Viktor Neborak and Oleksandr Irvanets. I was supposed to join them, but I fell ill the day before. The year was 1985, and we didn't know it yet, but it would turn out to be a very significant year in history.
Bu-Ba-Bu is, of course, an abbreviation of three different notions. The first 'Bu' comes from 'burlesque,' and the second from 'buffoonery.' In between them is 'Ba,' which comes from the word 'balagan.' It is actually an old Hebrew world that means something akin to chaos or disorder.
Later, the term took on a special meaning, particularly in the cultural spaces of Eastern and Central Eastern Europe. "Balagan" came to describe a kind of small, wandering theater — a nomadic circus. It was a form of cheap, simple entertainment for ordinary people. Marketplaces in cities and towns across Central Europe often featured them.
We incorporated these three notions into our aesthetic program, but we never set out with a manifesto or a proclamation to change Ukrainian poetry or literature. We simply began by reading, writing, and sharing our poems — mostly with each other.
Ukraine's longstanding aspirations for independence and freedom were seen (by the Soviet authorities) as the most dangerous tendencies in the former Soviet Union.
So, there were three of us, young and full of energy. I was the oldest in our trio at 25. My friends (Neborak and Irvanets) were both 24. With everything ahead of us, we set out to create our own kind of circus in poetry. We wrote poems that could be both a show and a performance. Our goal was to blend live performance with poetry that was deep, clever, and witty.
The Kyiv Independent: Could you talk about the public perception of your performances? Was there a hunger among the Ukrainian public for such poetry at the time?
Yuri Andrukhovych: Yes, everything came gradually, slowly. In 1985, there was still a difficult situation regarding censorship, with various obstacles imposed by the system to hinder artistic and literary initiatives. For the first two years (of Bu-Ba-Bu), our activities remained mostly private — built on friendships, personal connections, and informal gatherings.
Our first decision was to meet regularly. These meetings weren't limited to Lviv, where Viktor Neborak lived then and still does today. We also gathered in Kyiv and Ivano-Frankivsk, the latter of which is my city. In many ways, our activities revolved around traveling and visiting one another.
Along the way, we organized small gatherings — let's call them informal readings — held in intimate circles, often in artists' workshops or friends' apartments. These gatherings usually included the three of us, along with five to seven others.
Our first real public performance took place in December 1987. By then, we had already existed for two and a half years before making our debut presentation in Kyiv. The venue was Molody Theater.
A significant change in its administration had just taken place. Sometime earlier, the theater had invited the renowned Ukrainian director and dissident Les Taniuk. After escaping the KGB in Soviet Ukraine, he spent several years in Moscow. Then, in 1987, he was invited back to Kyiv to take over as director and administrator of Molody Theater.
Les Taniuk was just brilliant. He completely reorganized the theater. He introduced an entirely new program. At the same time, he also launched several parallel initiatives. One of these was a series of literary readings. Our Bu-Ba-Bu event was actually the second in this series. The very first event was dedicated to the authors of the Executed Renaissance (a generation of artists that perished in the Stalinist purges in the 1930's).
It was a bold and risky topic for that time. But it resonated deeply — people in Kyiv quickly realized there was a place where previously banned texts could be performed. A stage was open to anyone talented enough to bring something fresh and of high literary quality.
I look back on that evening with great happiness. It's astonishing to remember a time without the internet or social networks. We had no advertising, nothing on TV or radio. At best, maybe a tiny mention, three or four sentences buried on the last page of a newspaper. Yet, word spread. Somehow, people found out. The space filled up completely. More and more people kept arriving, but there were no seats left. It was an incredibly promising start.
The Kyiv Independent: You mentioned censorship and how certain material was considered risky. Many foreigners tend to associate this with the earlier years of — Stalin, the Great Purges. But can you talk about how, even in the later years of the Soviet Union, being a Ukrainian artist was still risky? What was it like to embrace the Ukrainian language and culture at a time when Russification was the norm?
Yuri Andrukhovych: When it comes to censorship in Ukraine, our Soviet Republic was a unique case. In the late Soviet period — the 1970s and 1980s, well after the Stalinist era — Ukraine still endured what felt like a softer version of Stalinism. In many ways, the situation here was much worse than in other parts of the Soviet Union.
There was more openness in the three Baltic republics, in Georgia, and, of course, in Moscow. Many Ukrainian artists and poets in the 1970s fled to Moscow, where it was less dangerous than staying in Ukraine. It was there they could escape the reach of the KGB, losing their trail in the vast sprawl of the city.
Ukraine's longstanding aspirations for independence and freedom were seen (by the Soviet authorities) as the most dangerous tendencies in the former Soviet Union. The Ukrainian Republic was under very specific control.
The previous generations of Ukrainian poets, known collectively as the Sixtiers and the Seventiers, faced tremendous challenges.
Over the course of two nights (during the New Year's celebration), for example, the Ukrainian KGB launched a massive operation. Many people were arrested, and the Ukrainian cultural sphere faced continued severe attacks over the following weeks.
This led to numerous trials, and by the mid-80s, when our generation began, most of the people from 1972 — let's call them the "people of 1972" — were still political prisoners. They were either in labor camps or prisons. The most significant figure from that group was, of course, Vasyl Stus, who was killed in a Russian penal colony in September 1985.
Looking back, we can say with certainty that the situation in Ukraine at the time was a form of neo-Stalinism — a continuation of the same longstanding oppressive policies.
Read also: 10 authors shaping contemporary Ukrainian literature
The Kyiv Independent: Since 2014, there has been much talk about . What is the most rewarding aspect for you about this comment moment in Ukrainian culture?
Yuri Andrukhovych: For me as a writer, the most significant changes have, of course, been in the publishing world and literary life. Since 2014, we've seen the rise of so many new publishing houses. There are also numerous new literary festivals and public readings. And, most importantly, we've witnessed a new wave of Ukrainian readers.
But it's not just literature and publishing. There has been a rebirth of contemporary Ukrainian theater, and, of course, our visual arts have flourished as well. In fact, I'd argue that our visual arts were already unique and impressive even before 2014.
In my opinion, they represented a kind of avant-garde in contemporary Ukrainian art. These artists were creating brilliant projects using very modern forms of expression. They worked actively with installations and video art.
Before 2014, whenever I was in Europe, I would always find exhibitions or spaces showcasing new Ukrainian art. I felt incredibly proud to come from a country with such remarkable contemporary art. Since then, this diversity and richness have continued to thrive.
And, of course, we can't overlook film and cinematography. I particularly see success in Ukrainian documentary films. But we also have feature films that are truly outstanding.
The most important thing is that people now want to experience this — attending theaters, paying to watch Ukrainian films, all of which is a very positive sign.
The Kyiv Independent: I'd like to conclude by discussing your poetry collection, 'Set Change,' which was recently . This is a significant achievement, not only for you but also for Ukrainian literature in translation.
Could you talk about this collection? As I understand, it features poetry written early in your career, before you started to focus more on writing prose.
Yuri Andrukhovych: Yes, this collection consists of selected poems from my three first collections. The poems were written in the 1980s, and it also includes two cycles, 'India' and 'Letters from Ukraine.' It's a mix of work I wrote from around 1980 to 1990.
This period represents the active stage of my poetic career. After 1990, I wrote more poems, but those were composed between 1999 and 2004. Some of the poems from that time, from my collection 'Songs for a Dead Rooster,' had been published earlier in English translation by Lost Horse Press.
The idea for this new collection came from my American translators, Ostap Kin and John Hennessy. They suggested putting together the collection and I think they did an excellent job.
I was involved every step of the way, reviewing each batch of new translations. I paid close attention to each line, thinking carefully about how they had translated it. We had many interesting and productive discussions through our email exchanges — I'm looking forward to holding the hard copy in my hands.
Read also: Wondering where to start with Dostoevsky? Try his Ukrainian contemporaries instead
Hey there, it's Kate Tsurkan, thanks for reading my latest interview. Yuri Andrukhovych is one of the greatest living voices in Ukrainian literature and this was my second time interviewing him. I hope more and more people across the world will learn about his work and his contributions not only to Ukraine but to world literature. If you like reading this sort of material, please consider supporting us by becoming a paid member of the Kyiv Independent today.
We've been working hard to bring you independent, locally-sourced news from Ukraine. Consider supporting the Kyiv Independent.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Business Insider

2 hours ago

• Business Insider

The status symbol items CMOs sported at this year's Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity

Happy Saturday! A 51-year-old woman says she's in the best shape of her life after ditching cardio and getting into strength training. Here's how she did it. On the agenda: A dietitian explains why eating dessert can help you lose more weight and keep it off. A heated debate about location sharing is dividing generations. Creatine is a longevity wonder supplement — and it's not just for gym bros. The new American dream? Buying and renting out vacation homes in Italy. But first: Bonjour de Cannes! This week's dispatch The status symbols CMOs are into More than 15,000 marketing leaders and creatives descended on the French Riviera for this year's Cannes Lions International Festival of Creativity in France. And while the thousands of chief marketing officers traded industry secrets and attended panels and networking events, I spent my time on the lookout for the status symbols they were wearing. You know … the important reporting we all want to know about. Right? Right. After spending six days with this group, I noticed two beloved items over and over again. One wasn't a shocker, while the other was a nice surprise. The first status symbol I noticed as soon as I touched down at the airport in Nice, before trekking the 45 minutes to Cannes, was that most of the marketers had Away luggage. It's not a new hot item, but it's easy to see why the brand is beloved by these busy professionals. They have a sleek, minimalist design. They're quite light, around 7.5 pounds, making it easy to head to Cannes or any other locale, and they have wheels that turn 360 degrees. Another travel item I saw time and again throughout my week in sunny Cannes was Celine sunglasses. The French designer's accessory is the ultimate "if you know, you know" product, as they're not deemed trendy. Instead, because of their quality — premium acetate and gold hardware — the sunnies were a favorite among marketers. During my panel at The FQ Lounge, Jennifer Wilson, the CMO of Lowe's, had also noticed the trend and said she had to pick up a pair, which range in price from $300 to more than $500, before she left France. Just desserts You don't have to cut out sweet treats to eat healthier. Having dessert or other favorite foods can actually help dieters reach weight-loss goals, Tara Schmidt, lead dietitian for the Mayo Clinic diet, told BI. The key is moderation. "Allowing for a balanced way of including your favorite foods, a planned indulgence, really helps people feel less deprived," Schmidt said. See her tips for indulging healthier. Do you want to share your location with me? You're likely to get a different answer depending on who you ask. Sharing your location with friends and family has become a heated debate among generations. BI spoke to people from all age groups to find out why. Gen Z is generally chill about it, with some citing convenience as a reason. Gen X is indifferent, seeing the pros and cons. Millennials, on the other hand, are more divided, with some saying they outright hated it or felt no need for it. To share or not to share. The creatine craze is more than just hype Researchers typically have a healthy mistrust of supplements, but creatine is the rare exception. Evidence is piling up about its positive effects on your body, brain, and longevity. Gym bros love creatine because it helps build muscle, but it's not just for bulking up. Early research suggests it can support hormonal health for both women and men. New research suggests creatine can help with brain performance, too. Plus, it's relatively inexpensive. Il (nuovo) sogno americano The new American dream includes buying and managing property outside your main residence. Italy, which boasts Mediterranean charm, a slower pace of life, and plenty of inexpensive real estate, is a prime target for American buyers. Plus, homeowners can personally enjoy their investments when they're not renting them out. It's a way of combining passive income with a familiar place to stay on vacation. Three Americans shared what it's like. What we're watching this weekend "A Minecraft Movie": One of the biggest movies of the year is now on Max. Travel to the world of Minecraft with Jack Black and Jason Momoa. "Love Me": Kristen Stewart and Steven Yeun prove love is possible even after humanity's extinction in this unique love story, now available on Amazon Prime. "The Gilded Age": Season 3 of the acclaimed show set in 1880s New York City, starring Carrie Coon and Cynthia Nixon, returns on Max. What to shop Work out in style: Whether you're spending weekends on the pickleball court or out running errands, these super cute exercise dresses will keep you comfy and supported. Made-to-measure suits: Our men's style editor knows a thing or two about looking sharp. He tested Suitsupply's custom, made-to-measure suits and got the best fit he's ever experienced. Here's what it's like to order from them, and what to keep in mind. Cloud Couch dupe: We tested a modular sofa from Sundays that's just like Restoration Hardware's famous Cloud Couch, but way less expensive. If you're looking for a comfy couch to sink into, we can't recommend this one enough. More of this week's top reads: I was diagnosed with stage 4 colon cancer at 31 despite being fit and healthy. Doctors brushed off my concerns as pregnancy symptoms. Jason Isaacs reveals the " very low price" the "White Lotus" cast was paid per episode. I spent every summer in Greece as a kid. Here are seven places you should visit that aren't Mykonos or Athens. We moved to rural Oregon to save money. It's been great, but small-town life has its downsides. Ten items from your summer wardrobe to get rid of, according to stylists and designers. I spent a night in a brand-new luxury hotel in Seattle. I wasn't familiar with the chain, but now I'll book it worldwide. McDonald's was ranked the biggest restaurant chain in the US. Here are the other chains that topped the list.

Elle

21 hours ago

• Elle

Selena Gomez and Hailey Bieber Quietly Unfollowed Each Other—and Fans Noticed

THE RUNDOWN Selena Gomez and Hailey Bieber have quietly unfollowed each other on Instagram. Fans noticed the move yesterday, although there is no clear public incident that provoked it. The unfollows do not appear to be a glitch, though. As of this morning, the two stars are not following each other: Gomez and Bieber have long been pitted against each other because of their shared history with Justin Bieber, Hailey's now-husband. Gomez and Justin ended their relationship just months before Justin started dating and ultimately got engaged to Hailey in July 2018. While she, Hailey, and Justin have very much moved on in their love lives, some fans remain fascinated with Gomez and Hailey's history. Gomez and Hailey first followed each other on Instagram in March 2023. The move was intended to put an end to ongoing TikTok and social media discourse about their history and the harassment of Hailey. Gomez wrote in an Instagram Story to fans at the time, 'Hailey Bieber reached out to me and let me know that she has been receiving death threats and such hateful negativity. This isn't what I stand for. No one should have to experience hate or bullying. I've always advocated for kindness and really want this all to stop. ♥️' Hailey added in her own Instagram Story: Gomez and Hailey's unfollows don't necessarily mean there's drama between the pair, who have made headlines for their periodic support of each other on Instagram over the last few years. Hailey liked Gomez's post announcing her engagement to Benny Blanco. Most recently, Gomez liked Sephora's May 2025 Instagram about Hailey's brand, Rhode, joining its lineup. Gomez and Hailey were photographed together once at the Academy Museum Gala in October 2022, but they haven't been snapped together since. While they've been cordial online, there's no compelling social media evidence that they're real-life friends. The unfollow may simply reflect that. Neither star has commented on the move.

The Hill

a day ago

• The Hill

Putin gifts Trump an authoritarian kitsch portrait

If a picture is worth a thousand words, then how much are paintings worth? Surely much more, as they also reveal the artist's intentions and the subject's self-image. A case in point is the painting of President Trump that Vladimir Putin asked Steve Witkoff to give him in April. According to the New York real estate developer-turned-diplomatic globetrotter, it was 'a beautiful portrait,' and Trump was 'clearly touched by it.' The artist is 69-year-old Nikas Safronov, celebrated as a People's Artist of the Russian Federation, Honored Artist of Russia, Academician of the Russian Academy of Fine Arts, Professor of Ulyanovsk State University, honorary citizen of Ulyanovsk and honorary citizen of Baku. Portraits are his specialty. A Russian source says he's known as the 'genius of kitsch,' a 'Russian Casanova' and 'our Salvador Dali.' I don't know about the Casanova bit, but the first and third descriptions apply — only with the qualification that Safronov is an exceedingly poor Dali. Perhaps I'm being too insensitive to Russian artistic tastes, but Safronov's work most closely resembles the kind of paintings one encounters for sale in subway stations or parks: hyper-realistic celebrities with oversized heads and eyes, set against familiar backgrounds with easily recognizable monuments. Like a bad Dali, Safronov is a master of kitsch. This says a lot about both Putin the giver and Trump the receiver. Putin's love of pomp and taste for palatial dwellings suggest he has a soft spot for kitsch. Trump is no less enamored of bad taste, as the interiors of his apartments demonstrate. Putin, in gifting Safronov's portrait, presumably knew that Trump would appreciate it. He knew just how to play him — an unsurprising conclusion given how Putin has played Trump with respect to resolving the Russian war against Ukraine. Let's take a closer look at the portrait itself. It depicts a huge Trump immediately after the failed assassination attempt in Butler, Penn. The top of his right ear is bloodied, a streak of blood extends toward his mouth and his right fist is raised in defiance; his left hand, holding a MAGA cap, is at his side; his eyes peer into the distance. The peering bit is standard for portraits of dictators: whether Mao, Stalin or Hitler, they all look into the joyous future only they can see. But it's the background that makes the portrait an example par excellence of kitsch. For it depicts the Statue of Liberty, right arm raised a la Trump, parts of the New York and New Jersey skyline, and an enormous American flag. The question that an observer might be tempted to ask: So, where exactly is Trump standing in this image? Safronov, the honorary citizen of distant Ulyanovsk and Baku, may be forgiven for his ignorance of New York and New Jersey geography, but Trump could only have been found in this position while standing on the Staten Island ferry as it sails across New York harbor. But why, then, would he be bloodied if he's on a ferry? It is in the nature of kitsch to overdo symbolism and combine things that cannot be combined. But the really weird thing about the painting is the American flag, which, as we all know, consists of 50 stars. Safronov's consists of 45. Is that a sign of innumeracy, or an instance of poetic license? Worse, the flag is depicted backwards: the stars are usually in the upper left-hand corner; in Safronov's version they are in the lower left-hand corner and the flag is pointing downward. Is Safronov sending Trump a political message about America's decline? And has Trump noticed that, through oversight or intent, he and his country have been dissed? Safronov told CNN that 'It was important to me to show the blood, the scar and his bravery during the attempt on his life. He didn't break down or become afraid, but raised his arm to show he is one with America and will bring back what it deserves.' And what, pray tell, does America deserve? Safronov seems to suggest it is Trump. The important point is that the portrait that appeals so much to Trump and Putin is standard authoritarian kitsch. Why dictators have a thing for ridiculous poses in unlikely settings is a topic for another column. But both Trump and Putin fit that mold — which may say something about the uncertain state of democracy in America and its complete absence from Russia. Alexander J. Motyl is a professor of political science at Rutgers University-Newark. A specialist on Ukraine, Russia and the USSR, and on nationalism, revolutions, empires and theory, he is the author of 10 books of nonfiction, as well as 'Imperial Ends: The Decay, Collapse, and Revival of Empires' and 'Why Empires Reemerge: Imperial Collapse and Imperial Revival in Comparative Perspective.'