The Key Features and Periodization of Socialist Realism in the Literary Context

The article deals with the research on various aspects of socialist realism from the perspective of belles-lettres. It analyzes the essence and key features of this phenomenon, makes a generalization of approaches to the periodization of socialist realism. In the research, we used historical-typological and sociological methods for the analysis of historical documents and criticism in order to clarify the party policy in the field of literature. The psychoanalytic method was used to study the means of the writer adaptation to the Soviet dictatorship. Anthropological and intertextual methods were used to clarify the peculiarities of the national culture and the literary codes of socialist realism. The method of reconstruction allowed us to depict the picture of the past with the help of archival documents, epistolary, memoirs, etc. It is found out that the formation of socialist realism resulted from the mixture of culture and state party dictatorship in literature and art. Socialist realism provided political manipulation of the mass consciousness and performed the regulatory function for social communication. It is proved that the theory of socialist realism was based on such categories as ideiinist (ideology), klasovist (class content), and partiinist (party-mindedness). At the same time, such categories as creative imagination, fantasy, and fiction were denied. When creating literary texts, writers used ready-made templates, cliches, and stereotypes affecting our perception. The authors of the article analyzed the influence of socialist realism on the cultural preferences of that time’s citizens. The article graphically accumulates the main approaches to the periodization of socialist realism. We analyze the research of H. Gunter, Yu. Boriev, V. Klymchuk, V. Tiupa, and characterize each period. It is revealed that the literature of socialist realism was interpreted on the behavioral (attitude to the state policy) and creative (themes, style, images) levels. In the article, the authors characterize the key features of socialist realism in the context of the structural-stylistic, worldview-universal, figurative (characterological) directions.


Introduction
Modern Ukrainian humanitaristics demonstrates an active interest in the literary and artistic process of the past, particularly in the issue of Ukrainian socialist realism (SR). The active phase of this phenomenon, when researchers tried to understand it, was mainly related to the study of artistic strategies that were used by the leading masters of the art of writing. They worked in the format of "aesthetics within the framework of socialist realism" and participated in the retranslation of the power imperative, focusing on the ideological vectors that were changing.
The literary dictionary gives the definition of the term "socialist realism", which comes down to the idea that it was a pseudo-artistic unitary method in Soviet literature (Literary Dictionary, 1997, pp. 650). This method is sometimes understood as a bitter historical failure (Baudin & Heller, 1998) something in between ideology and production (Hundorova, 2008, pp. 20); an artificial direction decreed by the Communist Party which resembles an artistic and political centaur (Kovaliv, 2009, pp. 41).
Ukrainian scholars propose a new approach to the objective study of the basic artistic method in Soviet literature. Over the last few decades, one can notice a considerable increase in the levels of systematic reading and reconstruction of Soviet discursive practices carried out in the research of different formats and aspects, such as "The Canon of the Socialist Realist Novel" by N. Bernadska, "Socialist Realism as Mass Culture" and "Socialist Realism: Between Art Nouveau and the Avant-Garde" by T. Hundorova, "Theory of Socialist Realism as a Canon of Realism-Centrism" by L. Medvediuk, "Notes on the Genesis and Typology of Socialist Realism" by D. Nalyvaiko, "The Canon and Iconostasis" by M. Pavlyshyn, etc. These critical works cover a wide range of issues and demonstrate an analytical-pragmatic approach to the study of the theoretical foundations of socialist realism: the genesis and typology, its structure and modifications, the predicates of genre and communicative field, etc.
With this in mind, representatives of the Ukrainian humanitaristics, such as L. Senyk, T. Sverbilova, and L. Skoryna study the issue of the national identity of Ukrainian literature under the conditions of totalitarianism; V. Kharkhun and U. Fedoriv determine the phenomenon of the SR-canon in the literature of the Stalinist period; I. Zakharchuk does research on the military paradigm of literature in the system of Soviet cultural markers; S. Lenska considers the strategies for the development of Ukrainian short stories in the 1940s -1960s. The issues of nationalization of the literature origin and functioning of the socialist realism canon in Soviet literature of the 1930s were studied by H. Günther (1984), etc.
Despite the numerous works devoted to the study of Ukrainian socialist realism, the issues devoted to the systematization and generalization of the accumulated critical material need attention. First of all, it concerns the periodization of socialist realism and the definition of the key features of this phenomenon in the context of literature.
The purpose of the research is to systematize research works on Ukrainian socialist realism, to determine the essence and key features of socialist realism, to generalize approaches to the periodization of this phenomenon.

Methodology
Research methods were selected in accordance with the problematics, theoretical issues, and the specifics of the issues that required a comprehensive methodological approach. The article is written with the historical-typological and sociological methods (analysis of documents to clarify the party policy in the field of literature, the ways of political regulation of aesthetic norms and reconstruction of the mechanisms which helped the subject of creativity to "fit in" with the ideological discourse), psychoanalytic method (to study individual reactions and means of the writer adaptation to the conditions of "double life" and "double speech"), typological method (to compare the texts similar in theme and manner of narration). The anthropological method was used to analyze Soviet identification practices in the literature of socialist realism. The authors of the article also applied the principles of hermeneutics and systematic approach to the comprehension of historical and literary phenomena, to the analysis of artistic and stylistic structures of literary texts provided by writers of socialist realism, and to the decoding of basic narratives. The intertextual method contributed to the understanding of national cultural codes; the method of reconstruction helped to depict the pictures of the past with the help of archival documents, epistolary, memoirs, etc.

Results
The Ukrainian literary and artistic process of the early twentieth century is a bright and heterogeneous phenomenon. On the one hand, this process is marked by the formation of multi-vector aesthetic flows, freedom of artistic expression, and large-scale experiments. On the other hand, it is marked by the dominance of political reflections in the socio-cultural sphere, attempts to create literature in the spirit of "proletarian ideology". The process demonstrating an intensive mixture of culture and politics resulted in the establishment of the state party dictatorship in literature and art, and in the formation of a single method -socialist realism.
Socialist realism as a political and aesthetic project was formed under the influence of external socio-political requirements, projected directly on the literary process. Its peculiarity was the assertion of a utopian concept of the world and a utopian worldview. Researchers such as B. Hrois (1992) and M. Zalambani (2006) consider SR an avant-garde project, where realistic means remained a tool for the realization of creative thinking in literature and art. T. Hundorova (2008) is also sure that the aesthetics and practice of socialist realism are connected with the avant-garde. Besides, she emphasizes its connections with mass literature. The opinions of the authoritative researcher resonate with the statements of L. Bulavka (2007) and Ye. Dobrenko (2011) on SR-aesthetics as a product of a single demiurge, that is of power and the masses. Instead, a Russian scholar V. Tiupa (1990) believes that Stalin's consolidation of Soviet literature was formed on the foundation of non-classical realism, which he called "alternative realism".

Socialist realism as a denial of traditional aesthetic categories
For more than five decades of the twentieth century, the interference of party and state institutions in literature was a permanent procedure, when the total ideological control remained an instrument for influencing and adjusting the creative activity of artists. The political system, ideologues of literature (and culture in general) of the Stalinist period, seeking to subordinate language to their interests, consistently and steadily implemented the task of changing the archetypes of thinking and changing the established meaning of the word.
Thus, this process resulted in the corrosion of the basic concepts and semantic levels, the analysis of which, according to H. Huseinov, makes clear "the situation of whistle-blowing, apostasy, loss of the ability to verbally evaluate or even describe the patterns of behavior by a significant part of native speakers". According to these patterns, betrayal was depicted as the highest form of loyalty and whistle-blowing as the highest form of honesty (Huseinov, 1989, pp. 68).

Figure 1. The categorial triad of socialist realism
These categories determined the parameters of the content and form of the works of art, the main meta-narratives, and poetic features. The principles of party mindedness, class content and ideology, on the one hand, made the artistic practice of an artist legitimate, they determined the aesthetic value of a work of art in Soviet society, and replaced creativity with social and cultural functionality. On the other hand, the factor of unconditional observance of party-mindedness, class content and ideology outlined the force field of individual conformism, the degree of creative people's readiness to compromise, the desire to demonstrate their devotion to power in ideological formulas. J. Guldberg saw three categories in the period of socialist realism: party-mindedness, national spirit, and typicality which were mostly reduced to critics' understanding of the ideology of the Soviet era. According to the researcher, in this perspective, it is possible to study socialist realism as an institutional practice, in particular, to observe the interpretation of works of art that belong to the Stalin period (Guldberg, 1990, pp. 150). It should be noted that the main aesthetic categoriescreative imagination, game, fantasy, fiction, conscious, and unconscious as important elements of artistic creativity go beyond the authorized rules. It is explained by the fact that the principle of socialist realism required that a writer should apply a different approach to the reflection of life. The government, which monopolized the right to form and implement a system of normative values, equally obligatory for all representatives of cultural and artistic life, continued to perform the functions of censorship and control. The artistic, individual-authorial word lost its meaning in the totalitarian conditions. It was enough for the writers to connect the artificially created word-cliche (or ideologically standardized patterns, ideologically sustained formulas) with the ready meaning for artistic verbalization of social and political reality.
This combination gave a possibility to construct new life practices. Fulfilling a social mandate, authors wrote works that would correspond to clear and specific affirmations of the state and party.
Theory of socialist realism and the idea of the "categorial triad"

Ideology
Party-mindedness Class content − legitimacy of artists' artistic practice − determination of the aesthetic value of a work of art in Soviet society − approbation of creativity on social and cultural functionality − In their creative work, they tried to convey information about ideological actions through dialogue, language, reproduction of various situations. All this could not be done without the use of a readymade set of semantic models. Therefore, to meet the expectations of the mass reader in clear and accessible language, the writers proposed certain stereotypes of perception. Optimistic and dramatically pathetic works could teach, educate, they presented pictures of a happy life, provided inspiration for new achievements, etc.
Any regime, either discursive or political, is established by its borders, which are built, to a great degree, with verbal taboos and are limited by a set of ideological conventions. The trajectory outlining the development of literature which is based on ideological and artistic-aesthetic conventions does not go beyond the established ready-made codes that correlate with the system of normative values. It is noteworthy that from many socio-cultural codes the ideologists of the new paradigm chose the most stable, clear, and suggestively established ones, the most effective and physiologically simple codes (according to S. Zymovets), which would be automatically perceived and assimilated by the broad masses at the unconscious level. In such a way, the mechanism of political mythology was formed, where the population becomes a mass when speaking the language of power (Nadtochy, 1989, pp. 116). In turn, the new readership forms the framework of folk art as a coherent aesthetic system.
Despite the fact that the freedom of creative self-realization was restricted, the system of signs contrary to the official ideology often appeared in Ukrainian literature. Among the mechanisms of writing that did not fit into regulatory requirements, there was allegory, hints, semantic inversions, and suspicious considerations. In the work of some writers, one could notice ambiguity, the use of symbols and signs. This gave the text an additional meaning related to the codes of national culture. This tendency intensified during the period of transformation and modification of the canon of socialist realism which was associated with the partial dismantling of the totalitarian system and the local liberalization of the socio-cultural sphere.
Along with the domination of socialist realism in creative practice, the possibility of different ways of artistic thinking is affirmed; the desire to update genre and style resources prevails. The established plot schemes are destroyed, the forms of the plot movement go beyond the clearly defined boundaries of the canon, the time and space framework of the text becomes blurred. Simultaneously with the ideological structure of the true, historically real depiction of reality, one can observe an artistic analysis of the inner being of man that actualizes the characteristic techniques of narrative strategies: the inner speech of the characters, reported speech, and the "stream of consciousness". In general, in this context, we consider quite symbolic the arguments of professor E. Możejko, who specializes in Slavic studies, believes that the afterlife of socialist realism is much more interesting than more than half a century of its existence (Możejko, 2001, pp. 31).

The analysis of approaches to the periodization of socialist realism
It is worth noting that Soviet literature, based on the correlation of ideological and artistic models, is a heterogeneous phenomenon and cannot be defined by a fixed formula. Therefore, we consider important the conclusions of the Ukrainian and foreign literary critics, such as H. Gunter, Yu. Boriev, V. Klymchuk, V. Tiupa, V. Papernyi (Paperny, 2011), whose research was the basis for systematization of approaches to the periodization of socialist realism (Fig. 2).

Figure 2. Approaches to the periodization of socialist realism
According to the German researcher H. Gunter, the artistic paradigm of the Soviet era with characteristic dominant-representative models is characterized by different "life phases" of the socialist realism canon: protocanon (1910-1920s), the phase of canonization (early 1930s), the use of the canon mid-30's -1953), the phase of decanonization (1953 -early 1980s) and the post-canonical stage associated with the collapse of the canon in the 80's of the twentieth century (Gunter, 2020). A Ukrainian researcher V. Klymchuk, who studies the aesthetics of totalitarianism, distinguishes the Leninist, Stalinist and Post-Stalinist periods of socialist realism that were "born" almost in the "laboratory" conditions (Klymchuk, 2001, pp. 127). The phases of mentality ("I of the consciousness",
When analyzing the functioning of the literary paradigm of the Soviet period, researchers, as a rule, distinguish two stages of its formation. The first (or early-stage -according to T. Hundorova, protocanon -according to H. Gunter, the Leninist stage -according to V. Klymchuk, "culture one"according to V. Papernyi) is associated with the formation of ideological and aesthetic system directed towards the future. This stage was going on simultaneously with the elimination of competing artistic (first of all, of the modernist plan) trends and currents. The second stage (often nominated the "Stalinist" stage, the canon of socialist realism, "culture two") is associated with the theoretical layout of normative aesthetics, its integration into all kinds of art and with the establishment of a complete monopoly of the state in literature.
Reflecting on the way socialist realism was functioning, many researchers agree on the idea that the basic characteristics of these stages / periods / phases focus on a gifted person who seeks the correction of state and ideology (Tsekov, 1994, pp. 14). For decades, the directives of the new utopian discourse, guidelines, and instructions to writers were perceived quite naturally.
The canon of socialist realism, formed in the 1930s and enshrined in the form of an array of exemplary (canonical) texts, retained its functionality until the early 1950s. During the period of global "tectonic" shifts in the socio-political plan which were chronologically outlined in the 1960s, one could observe a certain deformation of the boundaries and expansion of the textual borders in the aesthetics of socialist realism. Modification and transformation in the structure of socialist realism determined the process of its destruction in the 1980s. It was during this period that the conditions were formed for changing the stereotypes of socialist realism and updating the system of important archetypes. Creative reflections of SR-myth-making acquire noticeably different features from orthodox straightforwardness. In particular, the artistic models of the heroic past and the intonation of the struggle are pushed to the margins, the existential and nationally codified issues, the philosophical content of the texts are rehabilitated.
In the period of the first postwar decade, compared with the ominous 30's (the time when the SR-canon was formed), instability and deformation of its foundations could be noticed, as well as a certain revival of the literary process. Even under the conditions when poetic features and receptive criteria underwent total censorship, the works of art that were marked by a clear human-oriented direction appeared. In particular, this period is characterized by attracting attention to the human personality, delving into individual psychology. Such examples are the novels "They Did Not Pass" The beginning of social transformations in the late 1950s and 1960s was associated with the intensification of literary development. It is characterized by the partial dismantling of the Stalinist system and the liberalization of the cultural atmosphere. It is these phenomena that determine the return of literature, according to Ye. Chervonoivanenko, from rhetoric to artistry, they generate the emergence of trends that indicate a barely noticeable "revival" of artistic and verbal creativity.
The period of the "Khrushchev thaw" (according to H. Gunter, the "phase of decanonization" of socialist realism,) is marked by unprecedented dynamism after the 1920s. The process of de-Stalinization somewhat expanded (albeit within certain limits) the ideological framework in which writers worked, it destroyed the standards and stereotypes of thinking. Artists of mainland Ukraine and the diaspora had an opportunity to get acquainted with each other's work, to hold an aesthetic dialogue with writers of Europe and emigration. Much of the artistic heritage of repressed writers and banned classical literature, which had been removed from public discourse, returned to literature. During this period, the literary infrastructure was actively changing. Suppressed and banned works were published on the pages of new, alternative to official, journals: "Radianske Literaturoznavstvo/Soviet Literary Studies" (now "Slovo i Chas"/ "The Word and Time"); literaryartistic and socio-political journal "Prapor/The Flag" (now "Berezil"). The "white spots in Ukrainian history" were covered in the "Ukrainian Historical Journal" etc. At the same time, the process of amnesty and rehabilitation of victims of Stalinist repression, sanctioned by the authorities, took place quite selectively and incompletely, with significant stereotypes both for creative personalities and for literary works.
The revival of the literary movement became a catalyst for the "third flowering" of the senior masters of the word, who had survived a creative break, such as M. Rylskyi, P. Tychyna, V. Sosiura, M. Bazhan. That period was characterized by the development of those writers who had grown up and learned to write in the infamous thirties, looking for new themes and issues for further artistic transformation. In addition, the turn of the 50-60s of the twentieth century was characterized by the emergence of a new literary generation with organically self-sufficient artistic thinking. This generation was in opposition to the ideological prescriptions of the method of socialist realism. It should be noted that these years became the years of a real poetic boom, when one after another Lina Kostenko, D. Pavlychko, I. Drach, M. Vinhranovskyi published their poetry collections which caused a stormy reaction and unprecedented excitement. The wave of creative freedom determined the artistic rise of prose writers such as H. Tiutiunnyk, V. Drozd, V. Shevchuk, R. Ivanychuk, etc. Their value hierarchies were based on a humanistic and national moral-ethical basis.
The 1960s saw the revival of the human rights movement in Ukraine, the emergence of literary dissent with open opposition to vulgar sociologism, and ideologically sustained formulas of Soviet literature. The 1970s were characterized by unfavorable tendencies and contradictions both in social life and in the Ukrainian literary process. This period was characterized by interesting and unique artistic phenomena in literature, the rejection of simplified ideological layers. Permanent political campaigns were accompanied by the struggle against national literature and culture, by stigmatizing people of nationalism. According to historians, in 1968 two ideological resolutions of the Communist Party were adopted. They were devoted to issues of literature, history, theater, cinema, and art in general. At the same time, during 1969-1971 there were already ten of the resolutions. And all of them contained the general line of struggle against Ukrainian bourgeois nationalism. A wide list of seditious books had one thing in common. That was the scourging of the national, which was interpreted as a separation from international criteria.

Systematization of features of socialist realism
A clear marker in the discursive paradigm of literary and artistic life of Ukraine is the rhetoric of those times' criticism. It reflects the values and worldviews stated categorically and unequivocally. Each of the reviewers, fulfilling a political will and attesting to his/her own (sometimes emphasized) loyalty, resorted to exposing the counter-revolutionary activities of non-proletarian writers.
The rhetoric of the party directives and the style of official documents become decisive for literary-critical discourse. With the intensification of repression, the practice of accusing opponents of ideological bias comes to the fore. The effect of authoritarian pressure on artists was exacerbated by the use of crude tokens, sometimes abusive expressions, charged with the semantics of hatred. However, if we reject the characterization of socialist realism as an official repository of the state-run myths, which is traditionally pointed out by literary critics such as B. Hrois, T. Hundorova, H. Hunter, Ye. Dobrenko, I. Zakharchuk, K. Clark, V. Kharkhun etc., it should be noted that its nature is connected not only with ideological and political factors, but also with literary and aesthetic ones.
The literature of socialist realism was interpreted on two levels: behavioral and creative. The behavioral level meant involvement in the party politics, positions of neutrality and loyalty, flight from the political center, and self-censorship. The level of creativity meant that certain themes, problems, style, images were reflected. The canonization period of socialist realism was characterized by the dominance of the level of creativity characterized by three vectors: structural-stylistic, worldviewuniversal, and figurative (characterological) ones (Fig. 3). The use of the leading archetype of the "big family" ("a wise father", "mother"motherland, "elder brother", heroic "sons and daughters") The use of the "enemy" archetype The construction of a "new consciousness" The collision of inseparability of modalities of lifeaffirming pathos − lack of analysis of the character's inner world; − social conflict; − use of political slogans, reference to political leaders.
According to O. Filatova, in the context of the active displacement of alternative stylistic forms by the "ready" / socialist realism style the artist's freedom of creative self-realization was reduced to the freedom (although regulated by party-ideological expediency) of the genre choice. The author's freedom of choice in the ideological-figurative and motive sphere was limited by a set of ideological conventions: from normatively defined archetypal heroes / antiheroes to normatively defined social decorum of a "new life" (Filatova, 2012, pp. 283).
In the period of canonization, at the structural and stylistic level, we can distinguish such basic characteristics of socialist realism as the central plot and story, the linear event-narrative beginning, the verbalization of imitated reality. The Soviet-style of literature is enshrined in relatively stable genre-style models, associated primarily with large genre forms and antagonistic conflicts (in prose -a novel-epic, in poetry -a poem, an ode, in the dramatic genre -a tragedy). In addition, it was characterized by the stylistic codification, ritualism and mythologizing.
The study of the peculiarities demonstrating the functioning of the SR-canon, which defined the limits of creativity conformism, would be incomplete without a local understanding of this phenomenon at the stylistic level. Therefore, among the mechanisms of the stylistic organization, we will dwell on such a category of poetics as chronotope. It is known that the chronotope of the authorial picture of the writer's world can fully clarify the basic concepts (or rather, regulatory requirements) in the ideological coordinate system that formed the consciousness of the Soviet people and determined their worldview.
It is known that the task of transforming a person with a peasant type of thinking, perception of time, style of work and behavior, into a person who operates the precise segments of space and time, who is able to join the coordinated, highly organized efforts of a huge mass of people (Kara-Murza, 2002, pp. 385) correlates with the architectonics of the worldview in the style of socialist realism. It is this architectonics that determines the specificity of the temporality of the texts of socialist realism unfolding in "The Great Time" (K. Clark's statement) whose source of reality is both the past and the future.
The past which lacks the elements of struggle always has a negative connotation. Returning to the past shows regress, chaos, and devastation. In this coordinate system, the past is not replaced by the present (with clear chronological boundaries), which is perceived as a temporary stage in the Soviet construction of the "new life", but a beautiful (bright) future, with clearly defined intonations of dreams, enthusiasm, illusions. The characters' life moves in different planes, goes forward, it not only takes up less space, but is also postponed for some time, i.e. stops (Gudkova, 2008, pp. 234).
Time always moves forward within the framework of socialist realism, it is not limited by the framework of the text. Similarly, the global transformation of the "new man" cannot be limited. The mythological semantics of the artistic world, destroying the anthropological principle of subjectivity, determines the life of the hero only by the laws of absolute time. On its scale we can distinguish such types of characters: − enemies are linked to the past and try to revive it; − those who hesitate, live at the intersection of temporal coordinates and split between the past and present; − conscious Soviet heroes live at the intersection of the present and future.
In the socio-cultural paradigm of the postwar period and the next decade, a different approach prevails -it is pride in the present, associated with the great victory in the Great War (at that time the war was not a category of the past), in rebuilding the country, in peaceful life and so on. Consequently, the temporality of the text is significantly transformed: the idea of a communist future is replaced by the idea of a decently realized present. At the worldview-universal level, we can observe the monistic world view, the cult of activity, pathetic heroics and struggle, construction of a "new consciousness", collision of inseparability of modalities of life-affirming pathos. At this time, the following topics become noticeable: − negative attitude to the war and its consequences.
In the 1920s, theoretical considerations in the field of discussion touched on the issues of the leading style of new art. According to I. Kulyk, it was Impressionism that was proclaimed socialism in art. According to An. Lebid, it was symbolism, and S. Pylypenko believed it was neorealism. M. Dolenho says that later it was romanticism, which reflected the grandeur of the revolutionary era. In turn, writers-innovators, according to M. Khvylovyi, proved the legitimacy of revolutionary romanticism and, according to V. Polishchuk, constructive dynamism etc. In the 1920s there were such relevant issues as social and domestic ones; issues of education; collectivism.
In the early 1930s, some new trends became relevant in the formation of the official doctrine of socialist realism as a national art. Party ideologues, in particular A. Lunacharskyi, testified to the birth of a new realistic school in literature. Literary functionaries, based on the norm adopted at that time -class content, according to B. Kovalenko, report on the establishment of proletarian realism, according to V. Koriak -constructive realism, in I. Kulyk's opinion -revolutionary socialist realism, from the standpoint of V. Stavskyi -realism with a socialist content.
The general principles of socialist realism and the formula of this normative-legal act (V. Boriev's statement) which is based on a true historically precise depiction of reality in its revolutionary development were fixed in the Statute of the Writers' Union and were obligatory for all the participants in literary and artistic process. In the Soviet coordinate system, the main role in this process was played not so much by the author of the work of art, but by the authoritative mediators between the prescriptions of the canon and creativity, that is the literary critic and literary editor in charge of ideological censorship.
At the figurative (characterological) level, critics dealt with the text which conveyed the socialist concept of a positive hero (a new type of person) and which used the leading archetype of the "big family" ("a wise father", "mother"-motherland, "elder brother", heroic "sons and daughters"), the archetype of the "enemy". The chronotope of the paradigm of socialist realism was presented as "the time of dissolution of the present in the inverted past and transformed future" (Dobrenko, 1992, pp. 171), i.e. it represented the ontological model of being out of time in a symbolic space or in the space of illusion. While the classical chronotope is aimed at the convergence of the "friend's" and "foe's" spaces, then the SR-chronotope which represents a homogeneous model of the narrative is based on the binary opposition of the "friend" or "foe". The foe's space undoubtedly has negative connotations and serves to confirm the uniqueness of the "friend's" one.
The organization of artistic space in the figurative and semantic structure of the text has its peculiarities. It can be specific and as generalized as possible, extended to a universal macrocosm like the world revolution or building socialism / communism in general. Being combined in one register, different topos (a construction site, plant, factory, city of the future, collective-farm field, etc.) are seen as the implementation of the SR-metaphor that accompanies the process of forming a new person.
In the society where culture was identified with the integrated weapon of political control (Gunter, 2010), the SR method provided political manipulation of the mass consciousness for half a century. It served as a regulator of communication, a true, historically precise depiction of reality in its revolutionary development. Born as an instrument of class struggle, under conditions of total political pressure, socialist realism eventually led to the leveling of the metaphysical nature of creativity, the destruction of the artist's sovereignty and the possibility of a multivariate interpretation of the literary text.
To comprehend individual reactions, means of adaptation, compensatory mechanisms, to analyze what "rooted a more or less ability to resist, to protect oneself as a person with certain formed views and values" (Aheieva, 2009, pp. 16), one should pay attention to the text-forming features of the aesthetics of socialist realism during the classical period (the Stalinist era).
The text-forming features of the SR-work are clearly manifested at the figurative, characterological level. Therefore, we will dwell on the local understanding of the most significant phenomena of literature and clichés which are representative both for the period of the canon formation and for the period of its transformation.
Modeling of heroes takes place in the format of polarization on the principle of "friend" / "foe", positive / negative, which correlates with standardized stencils of political slogans. In the format of socialist realism artistic reflections on myth-making include rather wide pantheon of positive heroes, such as: a worker; a communist; a warrior; a young hero (pioneer, Komsomol member); a cultural hero, etc. As a rule, such heroes are stable, steadfast creators of the "new life" who put work in the first place.
Mythosemantics of the art world is marked by the causal dependence of characters on social circumstances. A positive hero is a creator of a new life; he is stable, steadfast and static. He is focused on his goal and full of enthusiasm. Inspired by a higher idea, he completely neglects ordinary material things and natural needs. His perception of the world can be compared with the state of inner zest. On the verge of the highest emotional and physical stress, it only makes sense in the context of subordination to a particular subject.
In the process of creating the character's disposition, writers use a strategy of idealization and documentation of his/her biography. It is necessary that the text should present a hagiographic life scheme of the main character's gradual formation (birth -childhood -formation / growth of consciousness), which means the mandatory implementation of the rite of initiation. According to K. Сlark, Stalin's political culture systematized and (mostly) depersonalized such schemes, portraying all positive heroes either as sons or as more conscious parents (their ethical and political mentors) (Clark, 2000, pp. 576).
Since the writers did not seek to portray an extraordinary character, but tried to adhere to the scheme determined by the aesthetics of socialist realism, many characters of canonized texts were not individually labeled (K. Clark's statement), sometimes they were schematic, dissolved in the collective "we", deprived of psychological plausibility. They appeared to be symbols of ideas, standard signs, or ideological formulas.
In times of modification and transformation in the structure of socialist realism, one could see the actualization of the internal enemy who did not conform with the social and public constants (sometimes, with moral and ethical ones) of the Soviet way of life: "hooligan", "bureaucrat", "swindler", "career official", "drunkard", "idler", "pseudo-scientist". The character of the enemy, which caused a critical resonance with clear political and ideological connotations and represented the category of national identity, remained invariably relevant in the artistic discourse of socialist realism.
Under the law of socialist realism, the type of a turncoat communist was almost obligatory in the artistic space of the work as a representative of the "hostile elements". Usually, it was an image of a cunning enemy who hid his hostile nature behind revolutionary phrases, who penetrated into the Soviet party apparatus and was engaged in covert sabotage. Notably, the image of the "internal party enemy" was not static: the spectral analysis of its incarnations in the literary text varied according to the political situation.
Within the framework of the canonical socialist realism the subject of reflection was the heroics of an uncompromising struggle either with unknown forces (most often -manifestations of individualism), or with obstacles of a clearly socio-political orientation. The dominant niche was occupied by numerous enemies (internal / class and external, whose destructive activities were aimed at the destruction of power / leaders / Soviet values). It was necessary for the collisions of the literary text to depict the real pictures of Soviet life, but that was expressively virtual reality. Onedimensionality, simplification of the text is noticeable in resolving conflicts, which inevitably end in the victory of political protagonists, the correction of the negative, overcoming the spontaneous things in worldviews, etc. Thus, the finale corresponds to the genre of socialist realism, because it is always filled with revolutionary-socialist pathos and confidence in the victory of revolutionary ideals.

Conclusion
Under the conditions when authors lacked freedom and there was total censorship of poetic features and receptive criteria, socialist realism provided political manipulation of the mass consciousness and acted as a regulator of social communication. The indisputable dominance of ideological discourse determined the ideological labeling of writers' artistic creativity. The bisected consciousness of the author-creator became the epistemological norm of existence and creativity in the Soviet coordinate system.
Under the pressure of ideology and autocratic power, the development of literature, artistic creativity determined the practice of "reconciliation" and "cooperation", which included overt actions and tacit compromises. The mechanisms of safe living went hand-in-hand with the mechanisms of selfjustification and self-rehabilitation. Political loyalty (pseudo-loyalty) became an indulgence of the right to creativity, and in the situation of political repression -the one to the preservation of life.
Socialist realism was a dynamic system characterized by different "phases of life": the phase of canonization (late 20's -early 1930s) and the use of the canon with different levels of ideological pressure changed into the period of decanonization (mid 30's -1953). After the collapse of the political and ideological system, socialist realism was transformed into a post-canonical stage (1953 -early 1980s). The chronotope of SR-paradigm can be represented as a moment when the present gets dissolved into the inverted past and transformed future, i.e. to be represented as the ontological model of being out of time in the symbolic space or in the space of illusion.
Traditional aesthetic categories (beautiful and ugly, creative imagination, fantasy, game, etc.) were replaced by a triad -"ideology" / "party membership" / "nationality". The Soviet categories in the style of social realism were a critical tool for evaluating a work of art and determined its aesthetic value. The artistic reflections of SR-myth-making corresponded to a clear structure of normative values that functioned at the problem-thematic, figurative, compositional, and genre-style structural levels.
At the structural and stylistic level, the central plot and story, the linear event-narrative beginning, the verbalization of imitated ("false") reality can be considered the main characteristics of socialist realism. At the worldview-universal level, the main characteristics of socialist realism are a monistic picture of the world, the cult of activity, pathetic heroism and struggle, the construction of a "new consciousness", the collision of inseparable modalities of life-affirming pathos. The figurative, characterological level of the text is marked by the socialist concept of a positive hero ("a new type of man"), by using the leading archetype of the "big family" ("a wise father", "mother"-motherland, "elder brother", heroic "sons and daughters"), by using the archetype of the "enemy".
In further research we intend to study the issue of forming the analytical tools that will help to clarify the textual markers of ideological guidelines, the elements of opposition, subordination, parallel existence, poetic forms of their expression in the works of Ukrainian writers of socialist realism.