Kultūrinis renesansas ir tautinė tapatybė Kazio Bradūno publicistikoje

LTStraipsnyje apibūdinamos Kazio Bradūno tautinės tapatybės ir kultūrinio atsinaujinimo sampratos, atskleidžiamas šių sampratų tarpusavio ryšys. K. Bradūno kultūrinės kritikos rašinius daugiausia sudaro jo, kaip "Draugo“ kultūrinio priedo redaktoriaus, vedamieji, skelbti rubrikoje "Kertinė paraštė". Iškalbingi jo rašinių pavadinimai: "Gyvoji Lietuva, bet ne rezervatas", "Atsukime laikrodžius, bet neatsukime laiko", "Ar Leninas jau ir lietuvių literatūros klasikas?", "Okupuotos Lietuvos literatūros kritika prieš partijos "grand jury", "Atominis kultūrinės energijos uranas", "Kas integruoja, o kas meluoja". K. Bradūno kritikos rašinius galima suskirstyti į tokias temines grupes: 1) literatūros kritika; 2) dailės kritika ir dailės gyvenimo vertinimas: parodų, dailininkų kūrybos recenzijos; 3) kultūrinio gyvenimo apžvalgos ir analizė; 4) sovietų pavergtos kultūros priespaudos Lietuvoje demaskavimas. [Iš leidinio]Reikšminiai žodžiai: Tautinė tapatybė; Kultūrinis atsinaujinimas; Kultūrinė kritika; Literatūros ir dailės vertinimas; Tautinė savimonė; Sovietinė okupacija; Kūrybingumas; "Kertinė paraštė"; National identity; Cultural renewal; Cultural criticism; Assessment of literature and art; National self-awareness; Soviet occupation; Creativity; "Kertinė paraštė".

ENThis article describes the concepts of national identity and cultural renaissance of Kazys Bradūnas, revealing the mutual bond between these concepts. His cultural critique essays mostly consist of his leading articles as the editor of the "Draugas" culture supplement, appearing in the "Kertinė paraštė" editorial column. Bradūnas’ essays can be divided into the following thematic groups: 1) literary critique; 2) art critique and assessments of art life: reviews of exhibitions and artists’ works; 3) overviews and analyses of cultural life; 4) the demasking of Soviet-backed cultural oppression in Lithuania. The leading "Kertinė paraštė" column in the "Draugas" newspaper’s culture supplement was like a guiding beacon in cultural life among the diaspora community. It revealed issues in the preservation and passingon of Lithuanian heritage, the vitality of culture, cultural mediocrity, dormancy and ways of dislodging patriotic sentimentalism. The uniqueness of a culture is a consequence of creativity. The foundation for the strength of Lithuanian-ness is original cultural creative production, and nurturing the combination of patriotism and modern culture. Also, the influence of art on literature. Our assessment of culture should be based on moral and artistic principles, and the encouragement of growth in literature. Bradūnas’ culture and art critiques were akin to the weaving of a cultural fabric in society. The following key principles of his cultural critique can be distinguished, which combine cultural renewal and national identity: creativity (youthful creation, conveying the national spirit in modern forms of expression); maturity of the cultural national self-awareness (without cultural continuity, society is destined to vegetate as if it were in a reserve; conscious Lithuanian cultural work determines the vitality of the social and political nation).the principle of cultural renewal (the nation’s past must be treasured and appreciated, however it would be wrong to forsake the present in the name of the past, giving it an idol status in the present believing that it will steer the nation’s fate. A fundamental review of customs and traditions must be done. Cultural reticence poses the threat of being left behind, and being unable to communicate with young people. The present must be created, dressed in the robes of the present times, and it must be filled with today’s creative spirit. The idea of Lithuanian-ness must be supplemented with the unavoidable input of cultural creativity. The "renaissance of the cultural pulse" needs to be maintained); the accentuation of Lithuanian culture in general (to track and elevate positive cultural phenomena in occupied Lithuania. To encompass and assess the entirety of Lithuanian culture in the country and in diaspora. To maintain links between Lithuanians in the occupied homeland: the bond of one person with another is the key element to fertile creative efforts); the principle of public responsibility (the organisation of cultural life: presenting creators, organising evenings and meetings, raising problems and polemic discussions. Making the distinction between writing for the sake of writing, amateurish and dilettantish writing from real work. To raise the level of assessment of cultural life in the Lithuanian press, to base critiques on analysis rather than the retelling of impressions. To present Lithuanian works to the American public). [From the publication]