The Ambivalence of Folklore and National Identity in Ukrainian Cinema of the Soviet Thaw Era

Abstract

Aim. This paper focuses on the work of American historian Joshua First, who explores Ukrainian cinema from the second half of the 20th century. The main goal is to highlight First’s methodological innovations, particularly his interpretation of cinema as a tool for the politics of looking and identity. The study also examines his introduction of the terms «folkloric regime» and «ethnographic regime» to explain the tension between official ideology and the visual representation of national identity.

Methods. The analysis is based on a close reading of First’s monograph and the key sources he engages with (including Benjamin, Adorno, Bourdieu, Thompson, Mignolo, Anzaldúa, Golubev, among others). A multidisciplinary approach is used, combining historical, cultural, philosophical, and visual analysis. A central method involves comparing Soviet films from the Stalinist and post-Stalinist periods, such as those by Pyryev, Savchenko, Parajanov, Osika, and Illienko, and examining visual images in museified spaces like open-air museums and ethnographic landscapes.

Results. First identifies two distinct modes of representing the national: the folkloric regime, used to exoticize and idealize local cultures under Soviet ideology, and the ethnographic regime, which seeks to visually reclaim authenticity. Through an analysis of Carpathophilia as both a cultural and political phenomenon, First shows how Ukrainian cinema – especially in films like Shadows of Forgotten Ancestors – became a space for decolonial expression. The study pays particular attention to the dynamics of gaze, space, authenticity, and the symbolic recognition of the Other in Soviet visual narratives.

Conclusions. Joshua First’s research offers a fresh rethinking of Ukrainian Soviet cinema and visual culture. His innovative terminology and analytical tools reveal deeper layers of political, cultural, and identity-based struggle within the visual sphere. The work contributes significantly to decolonial approaches in the humanities, opening new perspectives on local experience, transgression, representation, and memory. It is relevant not only to film historians but also to scholars of culture, identity, and postcolonial Eastern Europe.