Historical and cultural heritage as a brand

There are places scattered around Ukraine that clearly show the scale of past catastrophes, and their influence on the present. They are often connected with famous names or significant events. Now they are mostly ruins that show the real and not the declared attitude of the state, as well as that of the majority of its citizens, towards the history of their land. Such places do not bring any profit, they are not political symbols. They are mainly in the care of a handful of enthusiasts. These are authentic, albeit neglected, buildings and remnants, which bring the past into one’s imagination. They are linked to the land and are easily understood by our fellow countrymen. However, their values have to be constantly reaffirmed. Such monuments constitute the foundations on which patriots are built. What can students from one of northern Chernihiv raions be told when there are trees growing on the walls of a church built in the late 17th century, which now lacks a roof.

The renovation of such places is still considered state business. However, many of them are situated in rural areas, making it hard to address the problem even for benevolent authorities. Moreover, maintenance costs are at least as big a deterrent as repairs. Usually, they belong to oblast or raion communal property, occasionally to a local community, and they are financed from the corresponding budget. Thus, in the best of cases, rooms with unique artifacts are not heated during the winter time and cultural institutions are not paid full wages (therefore they do their work without full commitment). It is difficult to comprehend such abandonment by the state.

However, there are other options, after all, hundred years ago artists did not beg for money from the budget. This is because of direct relations between art patrons and artists. The civic organization Plast-Art, which is well known both in Chernihiv region and around the country, has been promoting the spread of this old approach. This organization was created about 16 years ago, based on an art gallery of the same name. Its founder, the artist Borys Diedov, managed to persuade local authorities to hand over the neglected buildings of the former school, so that it could be renovated with money gathered exclusively from people. The building later held free exhibitions for both professionals and amateurs, anyone who wished to. As a result Chernihiv got its first art gallery. The main structural buildings were restored and are now used for their designated purpose. It turned out that there is absolutely no need to spend millions for dubious results.

However, the original hopes that exhibitions will become a key activity, turned out to be greatly overestimated. According to the gallery founder it is now merely a “hall of the organization.” The rest is used as a studio. The gallery is now gathering sponsors. The received finances are accumulated and used by the executor under the patrons’ control. This way the responsibility for the final result is guaranteed and middlemen are all but eliminated. Symyrenkos, Kharytonenkos, and Tereshchenkos worked this way at their time.

Let me give you another example of a project Plast-Art has implemented. At the initial stage of designing the memorial commemorating the Kruty heroes, a Kyiv-based company proposed doing the overall construction works for five million hryvnias. Eventually, the entire budget for the complex, with finishing works and exposition, was brought down to 1.5 million hryvnias. Moreover, even are completion Plast-Art takes care of the object by adding new items to the exposition, protecting it from attempts to install WWII guns next to this museum dedicated to the Ukrainian Revolution, and clearing the area of snow. Understandably, no one is raising the issue of official duties and working day norms. The principle at work here is “If you have started something, you should pursue.”

Last year the memorial dedicated to the victims of catastrophes in the village of Malorechenske, which is 25 km away from Alushta, was opened to visitors. The complex grew from the idea to set up a lighthouse-cum-church (designed by the architect Anatolii Haidamaka) named after St. Nicholas, Archbishop of Myra, who is the saint of travelers and sailors. Eventually this led to the memorial, part of which is a museum of marine catastrophes. It was created virtually from scratch by Diedov.

The Crimea’s Association of Museums and Heritage Sites recently extended a membership offer to this new museum. When asked about how they managed it, the initiators replied: “Stealing was not an option.” The construction works were financed exclusively by businessmen Oleksandr Lebediev and Viacheslav Yutkin. Now this is a branch of the Chernihiv-based NGO Plast-Art. During the summer alone, the museum received over 25,000 visitors. Its theme turned out to be close to many — in fact, to almost everyone.

There is a new idea of creating a Mykola Kostomarov Museum Complex in the village of Didivtsi, which is near Pryluky, Chernihiv oblast. This shows that this kind of approach to developing culture is gaining momentum in Ukraine. The project will be carried out by the fund “For Fair Ukraine,” founded by the VR Deputy Speaker Mykola Tomenko, and known for a number of cultural and artistic projects.

In Soviet times, a school operated in the house of Mykola Kostomarov (more precisely of the Kysil family), and the building was fairly well-maintained. When the school moved to a different place, it fell into disrepair and very soon the shell and roof were all that was left of it. The window frames were wrenched out, the squared-beam floor disappeared, and the oven with 19th-century tiles was ruined. Let us be frank: this was done not by aliens but by local residents, representatives of the industrious Ukrainian people, including those who studied in that school. One wonders what and how they studied.

In the past several years we witnessed several attempts to revive this house. In 2005, this issue was raised in Den/The Day by Professor Volodymyr Panchenko. At that time a letter to President Viktor Yushchenko was published, which was signed by Borys Oliinyk, Via­cheslav Briukhovetsky, Myroslav Popovych, Yurii Shapoval, Serhii Krymsky, and Roman Lubkivsky, and which contained a request to open a Mykola Kostomarov Museum near Pryluky. On July 26, 2006, the Cabinet of Ministers of Ukraine adopted Order No. 424-r “On Preparations for and Celebration of the 190th Anniversary of the birth of Mykola Kostomarov.” It foresaw renewing Kostomarov’s house in the village of Didivtsi, and setting up a museum there.

In 2007, Didivtsi hosted the Sixth Kostomarov Readings initiated by Yurii Pinchuk, a well-known researcher of his works. Members of the oblast council showed interest in the house and its condition. They suggested that Plast-Art develop the architectural and artistic concept for a museum complex.

The project began to take on a more practical shape last year. The local residents unanimously supported the artistic concept for a museum-heritage site proposed by Diedov. After all, this is not only about the memory of an outstanding Ukrainian scholar and public activist, but also about a cultural center, potential jobs, and putting the territory in order. There is already a first item to be displayed, namely a portrait of Kostomarov.

Tomenko, a contemporary historian and politician, lit a symbolic vigil light. He believes that this way donors and artists can take the mission to revive Ukrainian culture into their own hands, rather than depending on the state. He insists that this museum be created exclusively on donations from sponsors, who will also have to maintain it in the future, which is quite affordable. As a result, an outstanding person, epoch, and great love, will have their own museum.

There have been cases in Chernihiv oblast when, due to circumstances, large donations were used to save or restore historic buildings. Two examples include Novhorod-Siversky and Baturyn, which now attract tourists from all over Ukraine. However, the charitable activities of donors, who possess hundreds of millions of dollars are special, as they are better shielded from mood swings and political changes. True cooperation is established on the level of civil society, which does not require large objects. On the contrary, small and medium-sized objects that are devoid of pomp, omnipresent PR, and government domination are perfect. This is what makes the new proposals made by “For Fair Ukraine,” Plast-Art, and other similar NGOs interesting.

In the European Union to which we seem to strive, the historical-cultural heritage is connected with the market environment. The state supports key objects while using a variety of ways to get a variety of sponsors (including businessmen, NGOs and individual citizens). This is accomplished by reducing taxes, creating favorable legal conditions etc. Thus, the mass approach is secured and responsibility is fostered. Another widespread practice is the competitive approach to the allotment of budget money based on submitted projects.

Sponsorship is not the only possible approach. In some countries, numerous historical-cultural objects are private property, but their use is strictly regulated and violations are necessarily punished. In this case well-known names and events can be regarded as a brand that attracts customers, and contributing to local development. I don’t see a problem with this kind of commercialization, because in many cases the only alternative is the miserable existence of cultural institutions.

Let me mention but a few landmark figures in Chernihiv oblast that are able to attract the attention of potential vi­si­tors: Pavlo Polubotok, Oleksii and Kyrylo Rozumovsky, Mykola He and Hanna Zabello, Sofia Rusova, and Mykhola Mikhnovsky. However, even the existing museums would not reject additional resources. These include museums dedicated to Panteleimon Kulish (village Olenivka), Oleksandr Dovzhenko (township Sosnytsia), Maria Zankovetska (village Zanky), Kruty heroes (village Pa­miat­ne), Hryhorii Veriovka (township Berezne), Levko Revutsky (village Irzhavtsi), Pavlo Tychyna (village Pisky), and others. The question is how small and medium-sized businesses can be linked to culture, because this is another potential source for development.

Several years ago, Diedov proposed setting up a network of cafes and motels, called Chernehy, along the main highways and tourist routes in Chernihiv oblast. They could both generate profits and help take care of the historical-cultural heritage, which could be a form of promotion attracting various kinds of businesses. Local budgets would enjoy a triple benefit: fewer expenses, new jobs, and more businesses for taxation. The project has not been implemented. “I constantly battle for these projects,” said Diedov. However, the idea, in this variation or other, has potential and is awaiting implementation. I am only afraid that it can be stolen, which happens a lot in our country.

Therefore, the future of the local historical-cultural heritage largely depends on several factors. Above all, it is the interest on the part of local communities to invest their efforts, time, and money. Indeed, I believe that such programs can only be successful if they make the first step. The next thing is support from the central, raion, and oblast authorities. The central government, as well as the oblast and raion authorities could adopt a special program. Financing would be provided on a competitive basis, provided that justified projects, joint financing, and guarantees for the future are proposed. The main thing is that the state should create conditions to encourage sponsors. Of course, the project will not move without sponsors themselves, the support from NGOs, and the involvement of business.

I believe that a combination of the above components would have significant and systemic impact on the revival of many localities that have been neglected but have exceptional significance for Ukraine.