Hlazkova 1

The Image Of A Woman-Migrant In Modern Ukrainian Literature

Introduction

According to the results of the latest research “Migration and

money transfer” conducted in 2010 by the World Bank Ukraine occupies

the 5th place among the countries with the highest rate of

emigration*. With such a high percentage of emigration from Ukraine

this issue has been widely addressed in academic research, media and

speeches of Ukrainian politicians. Ukrainian scholars, for instance,

discuss the migration processes in Ukraine mostly from economical and

legal viewpoints (Khymovych 2008, Lavrynenko 2009, Nad'on 2004).

Using gender approach to emigration researchers all over the

world have started exploring this issue differentiating the social

actors of migration according to their gender. Thus attention to

women migration and feminization of labour has been drawn in a number

of publications dedicated to women from Europe and Latin America

(Palmary 2010, Gutiérrez Rodrígues 2010, Morrison 2008).There is also

a research on the class aspect of engendered migration embracing

different countries described by George (2005). A tendency to

* * Information was published in the internet edition of the newspaper “Personal Plius” under the title “Україна емігрантів” (Ukraine of emigrannts) dated № 50 (403) 15 -21 December, 2010

Hlazkova 2

distinguish female labour migration in a separate field of studies

with its specific features has been only recently declared in Ukraine

in works by Motyl' (2008), who addressed the economical and legal

aspects of this social activity and Staryns'ka (2011), who explored

women labour migration in Ukraine from gender perspective. Another

aspect of Ukrainian female labour migration was discussed in

psychology, where Ukrainian researchers addressed the problems of

psychological adaptation for women as active social actors searching

for work in other countries (Gapon 2010 et al).

Not only researchers in social sciences, politicians and

representatives of mass media, but also modern Ukrainian writers

expand on the topic of emigration in their literary works. Various

aspects of migration received their description on pages of the most

recently published books by V. Malarek “The Natashas: inside the new

global sex trade”, Lesia Stepovychka “Shliub iz kuhlem Pil'zens'koho

pyva” (“Marriage with a glass of Pilsener”), and Orest Berezovs'kyi

“Internaimychka : dochka chy paserbytsia IEvropy?” (“Interservant: a

daughter or a stepdaughter of Europe?”).

In this research I will analyze the novel by Orest Berezovs'kyi

“Internaimychka : dochka chy paserbytsia IEvropy?” (“Interservant: a

Hlazkova 3

daughter or a stepdaughter of Europe?”) focusing on the image of a

woman-emigrant constructed by the author. The novel chosen for the

analysis is a novel with epistolary features, built on correspondence

and telephone conversations between two main characters, the author

and his wife. As two voices are present in the text – a male and a

female – I focus on two levels of a woman-migrant self- and other-

representation.

Based on a close textual reading and approaching the issue of

emigration depicted in the novel from feminist perspective I address

the gender peculiarities of labour migration of Ukrainian women and

the social evaluation of this type of emigration as it appears in the

novel. In my analysis I follow the understanding of a woman-emigrant

expressed in the article by Staryns'ka, who identifies women-migrants

as “active social actors” (Staryns'ka 2011). Exploring the phenomenon

of female labour represented by Ukrainian women Staryns'ka points out

a negative social image of women-emigrants in Ukraine and explains

this “negativity” by the prevailing patriarchal system of norms and

values existing in the Ukrainian society. In this respect my other

research question concerns gender stereotypes present in the text of

the novel and their functions in construction of the above mentioned

Hlazkova 4

image and conveying the negative attitude to female migration in

general. Taking into consideration the specific genre of this

literary text I will try to identify whether the epistolary form of

the novel is influential in constructing the literary image of a

female emigrant.

Literature review

Approaching Ukrainian literary texts from feminist perspective

is now a common practice started and developed in the critical works

of Solomiia Pavlychko (Pavlychko 2002), Oksana Kis' (Kis' 2003), Vira

Aheieva (Aheieva 2003, 2008), Iryna Zherebkina (Zherebkina ?), and

others. Oksana Kis' in her researches identifies three models of

gender identity construction for women in modern Ukraine: “berehynia”

(patroness), “Barbi”, “Business woman and feminist” (Kis' 2003) based

on the media representation of a woman. The study by Groshev (Groshev

?) explores the image of women constructed in commercials. A number

of publications are dedicated to the image of a Ukrainian woman as it

appears in literature of XIX – XX century. For instance, Filonenko

explores the concept of a woman as an individual in Ukrainian prose

of the 90s of the XX century (Filonenko ?). Kukulenko-Luk'ianets'

focuses in his work on a psychological image of a woman represented

Hlazkova 5

in Ukrainian literature (Kukulenko-Luk'ianets' ?). With the

publication of the novels by Viktor Malarek, Lesia Stepovychka, and

Orest Berezovs'kyi a new image of a woman-emigrant was introduced and

depicted. While the question of migration in general and female

labour migration in Ukraine in particular has been addressed by

Ukrainian and international researches to my knowledge there have

been no studies that explore the issue of representation of a female-

migrant in Ukrainian literary texts. I believe this research thus

will contribute both to the studies of modern Ukrainian literature,

those on women images in particular, and the young field of Ukrainian

gender studies.

Methodology

In order to answer the above stated research questions the

feminist literary criticism is used as a methodological framework of

this analysis. As Annette Kolodny outlines in her article the

feminist literary criticism initially addresses three main issues

(Kolondy 1980). The first focus point is the historiography of

literature which from feminist perspective is understood to be a

stable ideology that both excludes from its lists female writers and

underestimates the value of their literary works. In this respect the

Hlazkova 6

feminist literary critic is aimed at alternation and expansion of

“what we take as historically relevant” (Kolodny 1980) through

introduction into the traditional canvas of literature historiography

the “lost” names of women-authors and establishing connections

between those works. The second issue the feminist critic

addresses concerns the analysis of the literary text itself. As the

author of the article describes it, “we appropriate meaning from a

text according to what we need (or desire) or according to the

critical assumptions or predispositions” (Kolodny 1980), which are

defined by the society and its norms and consequently are

internalized by the readers through education. Understanding

literature as a social institute Annette Kolodny further defines

“reading” as a learned and highly institutionalized activity. Thus to

overcome the limitations of our learned

“predispositions” the feminist literary criticism introduces a

critical re-reading/reviewing of the text aimed at questioning the

claims which are generally believed to be natural.

Implementing this approach into the analysis of the novel about

a woman-emigrant written by a male author allows to analyze the

construction of the female image in its close relation to the

Hlazkova 7

existing social norms and values in a traditional Ukrainian

patriarchal society. As the genre of the novel allows this

distinction, the analysis of this literary work includes two sides of

the image of a woman-emigrant: the self-representation of the main

heroine and the other-representation of a woman-emigrant, expressed

by the “male” voice in the novel. Both levels of representation

contain the analysis of her character and the social roles ascribed

to the main heroine such as: “mother”, “wife”, “professional” and

“illegal labour emigrant”. It is taken into consideration that the

personality of the author himself may be influential in construction

of her literary image as well conveying the attitude towards the

figure of the main heroine.

According to Kolodny, the third component of a successful

literary critic from its feminist perspective derives from the

critical re-reading of the text and concerns critical review of our

“inherent biases” which participate in defining the aesthetic value

of the text. In this case attention is payed not only to the norms of

evaluation of the literary text written either by man or woman but

also to the adequacy of critical methods used while reading and

evaluating. Ascribing aesthetic value to the literary text is based

Hlazkova 8

on the reader's and writer's cultural and social background, which

was previously defined as “predispositions”. In such a way feminist

literary critic concerns not only the text, but also the readers'

approach, their cultural premises.

In this respect I find it also relevant to include into the

current study the analysis of the foreword to the novel written by

Orest Berezovskyi, as it is representative of the author's position

to the story described in the novel and can be also defined as the

writer's bias. Knowing the writer's disposition towards women-

emigrants and emigration in general can be useful in understanding

the literary image of the main heroine in his novel.

Analysis

Foreword of the author

In the address to the readers Orest Berezovs'kyi explicitly

expresses his position towards the emigration from Ukraine in

general. The (illegal) emigrants appear to be “double” victims, who

suffer first from the corrupt government in their own country and

after getting their job they are said to be nothing else but slaves

to their new, in many cases, European employers. As one of the

reasons for Ukrainians to emigrate searching for a better paid job

Hlazkova 9

Berezovs'kyi names the politics of Ukrainian government officials:

“[н]овітні далекоглядні небожителі завчасно помітили вибухову

суспільну cитуацію серед українців, а тому дозволили їм виїжджати за

межі України” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 4). Calling emigrants “potential

rebels” against the injustices of the society they live in, the

author explains why the government basically ignores the flow-out of

the workers from the country. On the one hand, there will be no

threat from emigrants who in case of staying in the country may

“unite into a monolithic nation” (“возз'єдналися у монолітну націю”)

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 4) and demand social justice for the non-

effective politics of the government which causes people to look for

the job elsewhere; on the other hand, emigrants become a stable

source of international currency flow into the country: “Отже,

теперішня ситуація з нелегалами, як неабияким джерелом іноземної

валюти, вигідна не тільки творцям новітнього работоргівельного

бізнесу, але й усій братії чиновних дармоїдів” (Berezovs'kyi 2004,

5).

At the same time, made to leave Ukraine for the reason of

economical instability emigrants get exploited abroad being payed

less money, because in the majority of cases their staying in other

Hlazkova 10

countries is illegal. The author describes the foreign employers, who

are not willing to resist the illegal immigration into their

countries, in the same negative way he refers to the Ukrainian

government: “[у] новоявлених європатриціїв спокуса насолоди від

усвідомлення себе рабовласниками і від можливості хоч у

мікромасштабаx своїх мармурових євроосель відтворити аристократичні

звичаї, а то й мати персональні гареми, є настільки великою, що їхні

руки ніяк не піднімуться за виконання власних і міжнародних законів

про обов'язкову депортацію нелегалів” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 6). He

continues picturing the attitude towards illegal immigrants in the

countries of the European Union as to a new “fashion”: “Підпільне

рабоволодіння стало особливо престижною ознакою приватного єврожиття,

а також своєрідною соціальною модою, еталоном вищості новостворюваної

єврораси над бідолашними вихідцями, точніше втікачами, із обідраної

до нитки посткомуністичної Європи” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 6).

In the foreword to the novel Berezovs'kyi refuses any

“optimistic”, positive sides to emigration from Ukraine. In his

opinion, any experience received from the exposure to the foreign

culture and life conditions can bring no good to Ukrainians as a

nation, especially when emigrants are Ukrainian women: “Хтось із

Hlazkova 11

оптимістів може зауважити, що в нелегальній еміграції наших

співвітчизників є свої позитивні сторони. Мовляв, таким чином наші

люди знайомляться з більш досконалим суспільним устроєм, втягуються у

вир ринкової економіки, визначають можливості заснування власного

бізнесу, звикають до європейських порядків у приватному житті, а ті,

хто має особливу схильність до благ і задоволень цивілізації,

засвоюють навіть, як по-сучасному застерегтися від “випадкової”

вагітності. Останнє особливо тривожить при теперішній кризовій

демографічній ситуації в Україні. А зрештою, якою вона може бути,

коли мільйони молодих жінок змушені роками перебувати за тисячі

кілометрів від своїх чоловіків” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 6).

Among the negative consequences of the emigration the author

also names the change in the attitude of the emigrants to their own

country and abandoned families. Working abroad and earning money to

support their relatives who are left back in Ukraine emigrants start

despising their own country, blaming their families for their illegal

emigrant position and as a result refuse to go back to the country

which has nothing to offer them except poverty and injustice: “В очах

тих, хто занюхав єврожиття, залишені вдома чоловіки та жінки

виглядають безперспективними невдахами, біля яких неможливо

Hlazkova 12

втриматися від повторних закордонних мандрів або й від того, що при

нагоді врешті-решт зовсім не повернутися додому. Нехтування мораллю,

вірою, подружніми і навіть батьківськими обов'язками (діти, мовляв,

потім все зрозуміють) — це ще не найбільша жертва так званих

економічних емігрантів за можливість залишитися в чужинському раю”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 7).

Though highlighting the major reasons for illegal emigration and

further difficult conditions of work abroad the author however does

not justify this choice of money making. He points out the effect

illegal emigration has on the national identity of Ukrainians,

calling it “рабська егоетнопатія”: “тобто особисте та національне

самоприниження, яке, на жаль, не встидаємося демонструвати публічно й

самогубно хизуватися цим” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 7).

As it can be concluded from the foreword to the novel the author

appears to be biased in expressing his viewpoint on emigration as a

modern tragedy of Ukrainian people caused by the governmental

politics and economical difficulties. At the same time emigrants from

Ukraine do not receive much compassion from the author, who

identifies them as “премудрі одурені” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 4) and

explicitly blames them for lack of morality, faith, neglect of their

Hlazkova 13

parental and spouse duties.

The plot of the novel

The plot of the novel develops around a family from Ternopil. As

many other families from the Western region of Ukraine this one

faces a problem of illegal emigration when the wife Halyna decides to

quit her job as a doctor in the local hospital and go to Italy in

order to earn some money. The story is a combination of the first-

person narration from the perspective of the husband Oleh and

correspondence between him and his wife. Though two voices are

present in the novel the husband's one is dominant, as along with the

actual letters he sends to his wife the reader is introduced to his

own reflections on what is written and said between him and Halyna.

There are also two adult children in the family, a daughter Mar'iana,

who is a first-year student at the university and a son Nazar, who is

about to finish the school. Oleh is a professor at the university and

as it appears in the novel earns though not much money, but still

enough to sustain a modest living of his family. This fact becomes

one of the major reasons for Halyna to go to Italy as she is not

satisfied with the living conditions of her family. Another reasons

is a possibly soon marriage of Mar'iana and the necessity to provide

Hlazkova 14

her with a separate apartment and an uncertain situation with the

education for Nazar. After going to Italy and becoming an illegal

emigrant Halyna soon announces that she is not going back home to

poverty and will do everything possible to help her family working in

Italy. Her emigration becomes a dangerous undertaking that turns out

to be a tragedy for this family in particular, and in its symbolic

meaning is represented as a tragedy of the whole nation.

Self-representation of a woman-emigrant

- Character

Since the very beginning of the novel the main heroine Halyna

characterizes herself as a strong-willed person. Throughout the text

her self-perception as a “personality” in the first place dominates

over other identities, such as “mother”, “wife”, or “professional”.

It is also worth mentioning that her personal characteristics are

mostly positive. In describing herself Halyna underlines her

persistence and ambition: “У мене є своя мета і я обов'язково маю її

досягти. Обдумую всі шляхи до неї. Поки що посиленно вчу мову (дуже

важко!). Також чемно працюю і терпеливо чекаю заробітку” ; “Заради

своєї мети я готова на все! Це моє переконання і ним я хочу

керуватися у майбутньому” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 25); “я хочу бути

Hlazkova 15

впевненою, і доб'юся цього” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 47); “Не такий у мене

характер, щоб не домогтися свого!” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 77). Even

working illegally mostly performing household service (which in

comparison to her profession as a doctor back in Ukraine can not be

called prestigious) this woman preserves a sense of dignity and

pride: “Ніяких принижень я не терплю і нікому не дозволяю, щоб мене

принижували” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 149). Halyna also ascribes to

herself such features as strength and patience: “[я] сильна і

терпелива, як ніхто, хоч туга за вами часто переважає мій розум”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 169).

As an independent woman she also points out that being an

illegal emigrant was her own choice and she accepts the

responsibility for it: “Мені тут набагато гірше, ніж вам, але я

нікому і ніколи не скаржусь, бо сама вибрала цей шлях” (Berezovs'kyi

2004, 68). Her self-representation is also characteristic of

acquisition of traditionally masculine functions of bread-winning:

“[с]аме я зайнята найголовнішою з них (проблем) — добуванням грошей

для своєї сім'ї” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 87). This masculine function

becomes internalized by Halyna and receives a form of her inner

conviction. In reference to her new position of an illegal labour

Hlazkova 16

emigrant the main heroine uses the word “duty”: “[м]ій обов' язок

перед нашою сім'єю — бути тут і стільки, скільки буде потрібно для

того, щоб нам ніколи не треба було позичати у людей гроші і щоб ми

були забезпечені всім необхідним для нормального життя” (Berezovs'kyi

2004, 101); “Я вже не раз тобі казала, що заради цього (забезпечення

гідних умов життя для родини) готова на все. Це не жертва з мого

боку, це — мій обов' язок ” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 125); “А мою допомогу

не треба у мене просити — я вам сама її віддам, бо для цього поїхала

з дому. І дякувати мені не треба, бо це мій обов'язок, котрий на

спаскудженій різними негідниками споконвічній землі моїх предківя не

можу по-людськи виконати” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 143).

However, the self-representation of this woman-emigrant is not

limited only to the so called typically masculine traits. Such

features as emotionality and frequent changes of mood, what is

considered to be a stereotypical description of women, are also

present in her character. Admiration of Italy and Rome in the

beginning of her emigrant experience as well as her determination to

earn enough money are soon replaced by lamentations on the hard

conditions of her illegal life. Some time later her letters are again

optimistic. For instance, in one of them her only goal is claimed to

Hlazkova 17

be work and money making: “Мене цікавить тільки заробіток і хоч

якийсь відпочинок у вихідні” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 133). In another

letter she complains, that she is tired of thinking only about money:

“Однак часом відчуваю, що не маю бажання і сили весь час думати про

гроші” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 51). Halyna recognizes this inconsistency

in her character and as a reason for it names her daily routine: “Я

тепер чомусь дуже розсіяна, а іноді зла і навіть ображена. Часом

шукаю не знати що, придираюсь до всіх і вся, але це через мої

повсякденні клопоти. Буває й так, що почуваюсь дуже самотньою і не

потрібною нікому” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 179); “Як бачиш, сьогодні

настрій в мене нікудишній. Але він може мінятись, як вітер у степу.

Проте стабільне одне — я завжди хочу додому. Навіть тоді, коли кажи,

що ніколи не приїду. Це може означати протилежне — збираюсь приїхати

негайно” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 202). The more Halyna stays away from

her family, the more explicit her emotions become. She feels lonely

and expresses this feeling in several letters: “[я] страждаю від

самотності на чужині, а ти (Олег) маєш усе найкраще і найдорожче біля

себе. Я знаю, що тобі важко, але мені набагато важче” (Berezovs'kyi

2004, 201). This self-awareness and inclination to self-analysis of

the main heroine of the novel is further used by her husband

Hlazkova 18

“against” her. In the responses to his wife Oleh quotes her

confessions about hard work, loneliness, and difficult psychological

conditions in order to support his attempts to make her come back

home.

- Mother

Another aspect of self-representation of the woman-emigrant

refers to her role as a mother. It is worth mentioning that there are

no explicit speculations on this side of her life in the text.

Representing herself as a bread-winner of the family Halyna

underlines that what she is doing as an illegal emigrant worker is

aimed at providing her children and family with a decent living. In

this respect she can be characterized as a good mother who cares

about her children. It is worth mentioning that whenever she talks

about children, Halyna always points out that the children are hers:

“Знаю, що тепер це ще не можливо, але дуже скоро зможу допомагати вам

грішми. Вони особливо будуть потрібні моїм дітям (бо ти, Олеже,

завжди ладен на абияке існування і тобі завжди всього досить)”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 25); “Не забувай, що я тебе (Олеже) ще люблю, як

і своїх найдорожчих дітей” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 173); “Тепер, коли я

знову тут, думаю, що зробити для того, яби майбутнє моїх дітей було

Hlazkova 19

якнайдалі від українських порядків” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 255). It

seems that adopting the traditional male role of a bread-winner,

Halyna tries to “exclude” the presence of her husband in their

family, or reduce it only to the role of an “executor” of her

instructions. Pointing out that the children are “hers” she also

gives directions to Oleh how to bring them up in general and how to

treat them in everyday situations: “Олеже, не тероризуй дітей і не

вимагай, щоб я поверталася та щоб моя мама їздила до вас щотижня!”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 31); “Олеже, не шкодуй дітям на фрукти, йогурти

та інше харчування. Не забувай їм давати гроші на проїзд. Слідкуй,

щоб у холодильнику завжди була ковбаса і голландський сир. У суботу

закуповуйся на тиждень. Не шкодуйте собі харчів. Я на все зароблю.”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 35). She also represents herself as the only

person who takes responsibility for the future of her children.

Viewing herself in charge of the whole family she becomes

overcontrolling; I would argue that giving instruction to her husband

may be interpreted as a compensation for her absence at home. Halyna

tries to underline her importance and leading role in the family,

based both on her position of a “sponsor” of the family and her

feminine features: “Мені завжди здається, що без мене вдома повний

Hlazkova 20

хаос, що ти не даєш волі дітям і що вони при тобі не мають що їсти”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 35); “Я не уявляю, що ти без мене робиш з

городами!” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 77); “Я знаю, які характери ви всі

маєте, як вам бракує мене, щоб компенсувати ваші пориви гніву та

прийняти частину ударів на себе” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 87).

- Wife

Analyzing the attitude the main heroine has towards her family

it becomes obvious that she divides her family into “her” children

and the husband and sometimes describes herself as a “uniting”

component in this family, a person who is capable to take care of

everybody and provide economical stability. She establishes a

considerable distance between herself and her spouse based on that

fact that two of them have opposite views on life and future. As it

was said before, Halyna does not give much credit to her husband as a

father of her children, even living apart from the family she still

controls every single aspect of their lives giving detailed

instructions to Oleh. In her letters to children she states that she

and her husband are different people – Halyna is not willing to

continue the life her husband leads and Oleh does not understand and

support his wife's striving for a better life. She characterizes the

Hlazkova 21

way Oleh's lives as “existence”: “[в]чися жити (Олеже), а не існувати

так, як це було донині” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 50); “[т]обі, як завжди,

досить того, що маєш! Мені тебе жаль, але, може й справді, ти по-

іншому бачиш цей шалений світ?” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 63). What

differentiates “existence” from “ real life”, in Halyna's

understanding, is money, which she would never be able to earn in

Ukraine: “[я] з дитинства мрію про таку пору, коли нарешті житиму, не

рахуючи кожну копійку” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 50).

Different viewpoints on the essence of life is not the only

stumbling stone between the couple. Being away from the family and

her husband Halyna finds herself in a position when she constantly

needs to find excuses to her late calls or inappropriate letters. Her

husbands often reminds her about the other side of illegal work,

where women become involved in prostitution in order to earn more

money. These suspicions intensify the tension between the wife and

the husband. Going abroad with a specific goal to earn more money

Halyna claims to worry only about her work and blames Oleh for

unjustified accusations of her possible unfaithfulness: “У мене тут

голова пухне, як знайти кращу, легшу, з більшим заробітком роботу і

без жодної загрози скомпрометувати себе, а на подяку отримую від тебе

Hlazkova 22

чергового “чарівного” листа з масою натяків на мої і свої

незадоволені бажання” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 84); “Запевняю тебе: я тут

нікуди не шляюсь і нікого не маю, хоч визнаю, що останнім часом важко

зрозуміти не тільки тебе, але й саму себе, а далека віддаль викликає

непорозуміння у наших взаєминах” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 176).

After becoming an emigrant and realizing her possibilities in

earning more money than her husband, she seems to sublimate the

“love” side of her personality: “[м]ені дуже приємно, що ти мене

любиш. Але ж ти не Ромео, тому не сплутуй любов з життям”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 207). As a result Oleh views this “loss” of

feminine function in his wife as a proof of her cheating.

In a letter to her daughter Halyna further defines the existing

misunderstanding between her and her husband in terms of an eternal

communication breakdown between men and women: “Як кожному чоловікові

(Олегу), йому важко зрозуміти жіночу натуру” (Berezovs'kyi 2004,

100).

-Professional vs. illegal worker

Halyna's self-perception as a professional (doctor) is mostly

defined by her attitude towards Ukraine and its difficult economical

situation. She does not see any possibilities to be recognized as a

Hlazkova 23

professional and be correspondingly payed for her work: “[в] лікарні

нічого не зароблю, навіть якщо не по шість, а по дванадцять годин

щодня буду поратися в палатах та в операційній. А в цей час бездарні

чиновники і надалі користатимуть з моєї тяжкої праці” (Berezovs'kyi

2004, 253); “Яке воно було нормальне те життя, коли заробляєш копійки

і не знаєш яку діpку ними залатати?! Я вдома, незважаючи на твої

заробітки, відчувала себе гірше від жебрачки” (Berezovs'kyi 2004,

207). Moreover, this situation concerns not only doctors in Ukraine

but representatives of other professions who have to work for a

panny-ante salary. The difference between the salaries for service

industry abroad (i.e. Italy) and for highly professional work as a

doctor at home is dramatic. It leads to the following characteristics

of Ukrainians as slaves in their own country, not even people, but

“trash” who are working almost for free: “[в]они нас усіх мають лише

за робоче бидло... Зрештою бидлом ми і є, якщо продовжуємо працювати

за один-два долари на день” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 254);

Being underestimated as a professional in her own country Halyna

also specifies the gender side of this problem. As an emigrant she

tries to prove that she is intelligent enough to organize her life

according to her needs: “[д]умаєш, мені не набридло доводити тут

Hlazkova 24

кожному макароннику, що українка — це не колишня совітка з автоматом

у руках і з десантним парашутом за плечима, а жінка, яка можу й краще

за них облаштувати своє життя? І я давно облаштувала б, якби в

Україні цінували розум і працю своїх громадян” (Berezovs'kyi 2004,

259). The last quotation is interesting as it shows Halyna's

understanding of a woman. On the one hand, she definitely does not

approve a masculine picture of the Soviet woman who is said to look

more like a soldier. She is an educated woman who realizes her

abilities in career. Unfortunately her work is not payed enough and

thus economical aspect of her profession sets limits on her personal

and professional self-realization. This leads to Halyna's change of

occupation. On the other hand, in Italy performing a job which can be

described as traditionally women's sphere: cleaning, ironing, taking

care of children, cooking, Halyna becomes a bread-winner of her

family in Ukraine. In a sense this is more of a masculine

characteristic. So I would argue, that there is a twofold way of the

main heroine's representation as a woman in general and a woman-

professional in particular. She does not want to be viewed as a

manlike woman, but at the same time she combines two extremes: in

Italy she practices a stereotypical feminine role of a “house-wife”,

Hlazkova 25

in Ukraine she tries to establish herself as an independent

emancipated woman capable of performing masculine functions as an

emigrant.

-Illegal labour emigrant

Throughout the whole novel Halyna is showed to be well aware of

her own position as an illegal emigrant. She realizes the

difficulties connected with this status: no rights to protect herself

in the foreign country; language barrier; dependence on employers,

who have power to hire a person and in case they are not satisfied

with her work, even to report on her illegal staying in the country:

“Дужe хочу притулитися до вас і поцілувати, але знаю, що попереду у

мене інше життя. У ньому мені, як нелегалці, ще багато треба

витерпіти для вашого ж добра” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 40). She knows all

the possible negative consequences of this undertaking, but justifies

her choice with a possibility to help her family. The characteristics

Halyna uses in reference to her work in Italy are also very diverse.

At one point she tries to underline that what she is doing is not

shameful, saying that her job is “чесна робота”, “чесна праця”. But

being homesick she uses such descriptions as “каторга”, “добровільна

каторга”, “робота, яку ненавиджу” etc. The negative impression of her

Hlazkova 26

new status abroad is intensified through the comparisons she uses:

“Bони (собаки) ніби відчувають, що я теж нині перебуваю на собачих

правах” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 104); “пес для них має більше значення,

ніж така людина, як я” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 122).

Other – representation of a woman-emigrant

- Character

The voice of the husband introduced into the novel is used by

the author to give the opposite perspective on the image of the main

heroine and women-emigrants in general. Introducing readers to the

man's viewpoint on the situation in this family Orest Berezovs'kyi

manages to create a highly negative image for those women who pursue

a possibility to work abroad.

In case with the main character the attention is drawn to her

duties as a mother and wife in first place. Being abroad and away

from her family she is not to able to fulfil them properly. Moreover,

every characteristic this woman possesses as a personality receives a

negative interpretation from Oleh and is claimed to be the source of

misfortunes for their family. For instance, what Halyna represents as

a wish to help her family working illegally abroad is understood by

her husband as a mere wanderthirst and desire to escape from home:

Hlazkova 27

“Здавна тебе тягне до мандрів. Адже ще до заміжжя то вербувалася у

радянські війська на Кубі, то загрожувала перебратися на роботу в

Челябінський цирк, то страхала мене тим, що не знати куди поїдеш від

мене” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 11). Whenever she points out at her strong

character or will-power, which are not typical features for a woman

in patriarchal society, the husband criticizes them and argues that

these qualities can not be good for a woman and for her family,

especially in the situation when she becomes an illegal labour

emigrant: “ти надто самовпевнена і не оцінюєш ступеня ризику своєї

нинішньої авантюри та її можливих наслідків для нашої сім'ї”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 11).

All in all Oleh does not support his wife's ambitions and

independence which she demonstrated announcing her decision to leave

the country and explains it as another caprice. As he was not able to

satisfy all the desires his wife had it resulted in the lack of

respect on her side: “Зросли також і твої особисті вимоги до

кількості і якості різних речей та послуг. Однак моя праця в

оновленому суспільстві не збільшила можливостей їх задоволення, через

що повага до неї, а отже й до мене, відповідно зменшувалась”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 22); “Не говори ніколи, що тут ти була “ніщо”, бо

Hlazkova 28

тобі не вистачало лиш на забаганки” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 91).

Analyzing the wife's decision to work abroad illegally he arrives at

a conclusion that it was dictated by her egoism: “Мої нічні

аналізування ... теж свідчать, що обгрунтованість і доцільність твого

виїзду з України і подальшого перебування за кордоном досить

сумнівні. Вони зовсім не на користь нашій сім'ї: не спрямовані на

благо дітей, не кажучи вже про мої особисті інтереси, які ніколи не

брались і не беруться до уваги” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 20); “Посилання

на євродоларові недостатки сім'ї і навіть на “гострі потреби у дітей”

не можуть надати шляхетної жертовності твоїм аж надто меркантильним і

все-таки егоїстичним планам на майбутнє” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 27).

Depreciating himself as a man Oleh also shows his wife in an

unfavourable light because she does not follow the patriarchal rules

of obedience to her husband, allows herself to take decisions by-

passing the opinion of the husband, and in general has a bad

character as a person. In his descriptions he also underlines

Halyna's emotionality as the worst feminine side of her character. At

the same time her personality still appears to be stronger than his

own. This adds to her description more inherent masculine qualities.

The woman is thus blamed for not fulfilling her traditional functions

Hlazkova 29

as a mother and a wife and as a personality receives no positive

evaluation from her husband.

-Mother

According to Oleh, woman's role as a “mother” is her main

function. From such a patriarchal perspective his wife after becoming

an emigrant can not be called a good mother because she left her

children for the sake of work abroad: “Нормальні батьки завжди

намагаються бути для дітей добрим прикладом. Однак це неможливо при

не зовсім зрозумілій для них маминій відсутності, що сприймається як

зневага до нашого шлюбного життя” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 71). This

negative depiction of Halyna as an irresponsible mother is enforced

by the parental status of Oleh who stays at home and unlikely his

wife takes care of the children: “Поки що тобі та іншим “стратегам

щасливого майбутнього” потрібно, щоб отакі дурні зі своїм твердолобим

розумінням батьківського обов'язку продовжували служити вашими

сторожовими псами при дітях, доки це вам це буде необхідно для

“європерестройки” свого життя” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 86).

The way Oleh interprets his role in the family without a woman

is on one hand depreciating of his masculine functions, and on the

other hand contributes to the image of his wife as a strong woman,

Hlazkova 30

who internalizes some masculine features. In terms of fulfilling

parental duties his self-humiliation (calling himself a “watchdog” to

her children) resonates in a way with Halyna's self-perception as a

mother, which is extremely individualized and does not include a

figure of Oleh as a father in his own right. Oleh is thought to fail

in providing his family with a worthy living, which means that he is

incapable of fulfilling his traditional gender role. Halyna who acts

as a bread-winner of the family adopts in a way the father's

functions which leads to limitation of Oleh's function in family.

As the result Halyna is depicted as a woman who has to perform both

feminine and masculine roles. From the man's perspective this gets a

highly negative assessment.

Being critical in evaluation of his wife as a “mother” after she

left home Oleh argues that his parental authority in the family had

been undermined long before Halyna went to Italy. According to his

words, Halyna had been performing the leading role in the family at

the cost of creating a negative image of the father: “Адже до твого

від'їзду у нашому домі все було організовано так, що діти сприймали

тільки твоє слово, а моє називалося криком, якому треба тільки

протидіяти і який був широко розрекламований, як першопричина наших

Hlazkova 31

негараздів” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 97); “Та ще й дітям говорила, що я

впертий, як старий осел, що бідний, як останній жебрак. І такий

агресивний, що боїшся фізичної розправи над собою, а то й вбивства..”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 32). Further this claim serves as an excuse for a

tense relationship between Oleh and the children.

Another side of mother-children relationship which is subjected

to criticism on behalf of Oleh is lack of subordination both in

relations between the children and the mother as well as between the

wife and the husband. According to Oleh children and he need first a

mother and a wife, not a friend: “Нажаль, Галю, подругою ти і так

була значно більше ніж треба. А мене мала не стільки за чоловіка,

скільки за такого друга, якого у поганому настрої або просто ні з

того, ні з сього можна було послати подалі. Надто тяжкі і

відповідальні функції мами та дружини, моя дорогенька, щоб тепер їх

виконувати на рівні подруги, та ще й заочно! Я і так від цих твоїх

дружньо-подружніх взаємин тяжко терпів і терплю донині” (Berezovs'kyi

2004, 110); “[у] такому відповідальному періоді життя дітям, особливо

дівчатам, не стільки подруга, з якою кортить поділитись кухонно-

менструальними секретами, скільки мудра мама — наставниця, порадниця

і помічниця” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 142); “[в] першу чергу будь їм

Hlazkova 32

мамою, а не подругою, та мені дружиною, а не заочним інструктором з

виховання дітей” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 111).

-Wife

As it was mentioned above in other-representation of the main

heroine her roles as a mother and a wife are interrelated and

considered to be the main functions of a woman. Based on results of

the analysis of Halyna's image as a mother it may be also concluded

that the relationship between her and the husband were rather tense

and unequal in terms of power even before her decision to go to

Italy. Halyna is depicted by Oleh as a strong personality who had

never obeyed him and established her own authoritative status in

family through undermining the status of the husband. Speculating

about the woman's role in the family in general, Oleh underlines that

a woman's contribution is greater than that of a man, but only under

condition that a woman stays at home and fulfils her traditional,

socially approved role: “Не розумію, яке в біса щасливе життя може

бути для жінок на чужині, якщо вони знехтували ним вдома, добре

знаючи, що спокій і щастя в сім'ї на 90 відсотків залежить від них, а

не від їх чоловіків” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 146). From a typically

patriarchal perspective a woman is supposed to know her place,

Hlazkova 33

perform her “natural” duties and find her happiness in their

successful performance. In one of the letters Oleh explicitly says

that such an independent behaviour of his wife is a consequence of

his liberal attitude and trust: “Я вважав ознакою доброго тону вірити

тобі як дружині і як мамі своїх дітей. Тому у ваше дитячо-жіноче

товариство намагався не втручатися і не контролювати рівень

домашнього патріархату..” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 39). He further

continues, that in his traditional understanding Halyna should have

been happy because marriage and maternity were supposed to heighten

her social status: “А я, старий дурень, був настільки самовпевненим,

що гадав ніби вже сам факт 20-річного життя зі мною в ролі коханої

дружини і матері моїх дітей робить тебе майже “першою леді” у нашому

місті” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 154).

In this respect the change of a woman's status into an “illegal

labour emigrant” Oleh characterizes as a disease that ruins Ukrainian

families: “неповернення жінки до подружнього ліжка в Україні — це ще

не найвища її жертва “заради майбутнього”. Що таке для теперішньої

жінки, зараженої доларами і євро, її чоловік, якщо вже й Україна для

неї нічого не значить?” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 228).

Women-emigrants

Hlazkova 34

The image of the main heroine performing the role of an illegal

emigrant is reinforced by the introduction into the text of the novel

small episodes depicting other female figures-emigrants. The writer

creates a network of family-friend-acquaintance connections around

the family of Halyna and Oleh which in this way or another are

related to the illegal emigration. Oleh in his letters includes

reports on female emigration taken from the news. Those episodes

carry rather a negative load as they deal mostly with prostitution or

cases when Ukrainian women-emigrants got involved into sexual

relationships with their employers in order to earn more money.

Women-emigrants are said to perform sexual service as part of their

work abroad: “Там “добродійників” є досить і вони настільки “добрі”,

що можуть навіть найбільш скромних заробітчанок за одну ніч

перетворити на справжніх “королев” своїх семизіркових борделів”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 102); “А на чужині, як не раз бачимо, українські

мами часом ладні не тільки своє грішне тіло, але й душу положити

задля євродобробуту своїх чад” (Berezovs'kyi 2004, 136); “До листа і

традиційних цукерок я долучив обіцяний тобі запис телефільму про

українських повій за кордоном і передачі про наших заробітчан”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 141); “Нині злі язики засобів масової інформації

Hlazkova 35

приписують що завгодно “пожадливим та хитрим українкам”, які на

стільки готові “на все” заради грошей, що покидають свої сім'ї і

розбивають італійські. Тому й смакує світ легенди про те, що

українська жіноча прислуга вже давно перевищила п'ятизірковий рівень”

(Berezovs'kyi 2004, 174).

Discussion

The image of a woman-emigrant as it appears in her self-

representation represents a complex combination of both feminine and

masculine traits. It is not a traditional stereotypical view on a

woman in the patriarchal society. The main heroine of the novel

acquires a new role of a woman-emigrant which implies a considerable

level of independence and social activism. Under the influence of a

difficult economical condition in Ukraine and her own wish to improve

the life of her family Halyna demonstrates her independence taking 1)

a decision to earn money abroad realizing all the difficulties and

problems related to her illegal status as a worker, and 2) she

accepts a non-typical function of a bread-winner. Declaring her

capability to make more money than her husband the woman undermines

the status of the man. On the one hand she takes over a traditional

man's sphere of sustaining family's material needs, and on the other

Hlazkova 36

hand she depreciates the same role performed by her husband. However,

it appears to be difficult to combine the performance of both gender

roles. The woman who was underestimated as a professional in her home

country suddenly finds herself performing functions of a “housewife”

abroad. This discrepancy is further aggravated by the fact that being

an emigrant and working in service industry Halyna is payed more

money than working at home as a doctor and performing the same

service at home for free. Viewing money as a means to realize herself

as a personality the woman-emigrant “is ready to do anything” to

reach her goal.

Along with perception of herself as a personality Halyna

possesses such traditional identities as “mother” and “wife”. Being

away from home and her children the woman becomes overcontrolling and

tries to compensate her absence with constant instructions to her

husband. Moreover, understanding her leading role in the family as a

“sponsor” Halyna claims her “exclusive” rights on children, not

recognizing the equal role of the father as the second parent.

As a wife the woman-emigrant seems to sublimate her sexual needs

explaining it by the necessity to earn money for the family. In the

text she also appears to be a strong personality who dominates over

Hlazkova 37

her husband.

In comparison to self-representation the way Halyna is

represented by her husband is rather negative. Being not understood

as a person, the woman is blamed for her irresponsible decision to

move away from the family and neglect her “duties”. From the

traditional patriarchal perspective in the person of Oleh a woman-

emigrant does not correspond the ideal image of a woman. Being

disobedient, self-willed and independent the woman's behaviour is

depicted as a source of all problems in the family.

Addressing her roles of a mother and wife Oleh points at

traditional understanding of power relationship in the family which

is based on subordination. In his argumentation the man operates the

typical gender stereotypes of “Three K's”, where the woman's personal

realization is possible only as a mother and housewife. Pointing at

his own loyalty, Oleh explains the unusual behaviour of his wife.

Conclusion

The analysis of the novel “Interservant: a daughter or a

stepdaughter of Europe?” revealed a complex nature of a woman-

emigrant image. A combination of masculine and feminine features

characteristic for the main heroine resulted in an imbalance of power

Hlazkova 38

relationship between the woman-emigrant and her husband.

Self-representation if the main character as a strong, wilful

and independent personality in the first place does not coincide with

the socially approved image of a woman. Through the voice of the

woman-emigrant’s husband female labour emigration from Ukraine

receives a highly negative assessment.

Both levels (self- and other representation) in the image

construction are characterized by the influence of the social norms

and values that exist in a traditional Ukrainian patriarchal society.

However, the ways they impact every level are different. In case with

self-representation the woman adopts the traditional male roles

trying to combine them with her feminine side. As a result, the

feminine functions of the woman-emigrant are moved to the secondary

position in comparison to the dominant role of a “bread-winner” in

the family.

An important role in construction of the negative image of the

woman-emigrant in the novel is given to the gender stereotypes that

are common in the Ukrainian society. Not fulfilling the expected

functions of a “mother”, who takes care of the children and a “wife”,

who has no right to leave her husband is recognized as misbehaviour.

Hlazkova 39

In this respect the image of the main heroine gets a negative

assessment on the level of other-representation.

A thorough analysis of two voices in the novel is possible due

to the genre of the novel itself which combines epistolary

characteristic and first-person narration. Introduction of the female

voice enables the analysis of self-representation of a woman-

emigrant. However, it should be noted that the personality of the

author and his own bias towards the described topic is influential

also on the level of self-representation. Being assessed from the

perspective of patriarchal system the woman-emigrant appears to be a

“negative” character. Taking into consideration the writer’s bias to

the topic of the female labour emigration I conclude that the

negative image of the main heroine constructed in the novel totally

corresponds the aim of the author implicitly declared in the

foreword: to represent the phenomenon of the female labour migration

in the most unfavourable way.

Bibliography

Aheieva, Vera. Zhenskoe prostranstvo. Feministicheskii diskurs

ukrainskogo modernizma. [Women's space. The feminist discourse of

Ukrainian modernism] Kiev: Fact, 2008.

Hlazkova 40

Akimov, Dmytro. "Arrivederci Ucraina?. Buon giorno Italia."

Myronchuk, Andrij Ed. Atlantychna Panorama. 2009. 20 February 2011.

<http://www.atp.mil.gov.ua/number/25/282.htm>.

Berezovs'kyi, Oleh. Internaimychka: dochka chy paserbytsia Ievropy.

[Interservant: a daughter of a stepdaughter of Europe] Dashchenko,

Natalia. Ternopil': Pidruchnyky i posibnyky, 2004

Davis, Kathy. Handbook of gender and women's studies. N.p.: Sage,

2006.

Filonenko, Sofia Olehivna. "Kontseptsiia osobystosti zhinky v

ukrains'kii prozi 90-h rokiv" [The conception of a woman's

personality in Ukrainian prose of the 90s] Veda: Electronic library.

2003. April, 8 2011. <http://www.lib.ua-ru.net/diss/cont/31635.html>.

George, Sheba Mariam. When women come first: gender and class in

transnational migration. Berkeley/Los Angeles/London: University of

California Press, 2005.

Groshev, I.V. "Obraz pola v reklame." [Gender image in commercials].

Pashi: scientific-psychological magazine 2 (1998): 122-135.

Gutiérrez Rodríguez, Encarnación. Migration, domestic work and affect

: a decolonial approach on value and the feminization of labor. N.p.:

Routledge, 2010.

Hlazkova 41

Hapon, Nadiia et al. "Sotsial'no-psyholohichna dopomoha z

readaptatsii zhinok u rusli dial'nosti psyholohichnyh sluzhb."

[Social psychological help on re-adaption of women within the field

of activity of psychological services] Visnyk Lvivs'koho Universytetu

13 (2010): 195-202.

Harrington, Kate. Gender and language research methodologies. N.p.:

Palgrave Macmillan, 2008

Hughes-Freeland, Felicia. Practising feminism : identity, difference,

power. N.p.: Routledge, 1996

Khymovych, O.S. "Imigratsiina aktyvnist' ukrains'kykh zhinok."

[Ukrainian women immigration activity] Visnyk Lviv Univ. Ser. Sociol.

N 2. (2008): P. 362–366.

Kis', Oksana. "Modeli konstruiuvannia gendernoi identychnosti zhinky

v suchasnii Ukraini."[Models of gender identity construction of a

woman in modern Ukraine]. Nezalezhnyi kul'turolohichnyi chasopys 27

(2003): 37-59.

Knörr, Jacqueline. Women and migration : anthropological

perspectives. Meier, Barbara.: Campus Verlag St. Martin's Press,

2000.

Kolodny, Annette. "Dancing through the minefield: some observations

Hlazkova 42

on the theory, practice and politics of a feminist literary

criticism." Feminist studies Vol. 6 (1) (Spring 1980): 1-25.

Kukulenko-Luk'ianets', I.V. "Psyholohichnyi obraz zhinky v

ukrains'kii literaturi." [The psychological image of a woman in

Ukrainian literature] The problems of the modern psychology 8 (2010):

546-554 .

Lavrynenko S.I. "Tendentsii trudovoi migratsii z Ukrainy do krain

SND." [The tendencies of labour migration from Ukraine to CIS

countries] Stratehichni Priorytety 2 (11) (2009): 185-194.

Lazar, Michelle M. Feminist critical discourse analysis : gender,

power and ideology in discourse. N.p.: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005.

Morrison, Andrew R. The international migration of women. N.p.: World

Bank, 2008

Motyl', Volodymyr. Ukrainian policy towards labour migration to the

EU: legal aspects. Migration - a challenge to the 21st century.

Maciej St. Zięba. Studies in Migration – vol. 1. Lublin: Publishing

House of Catholic University of Lublin, 2008. 103-107.

Nad'on, O. "Mizhnarodna zhinocha migratsiia: sotsial'nyi ta legal'nyi

aspekt." [International women migration: social and legal aspects]

Nad'on, O. Pravo Ukrainy. 2004. 20 February 2011.

Hlazkova 43

<http://pravoznavec.com.ua/period/chapter/2/36/1394>

Palmary, Ingrid. Gender and migration : feminist interventions. N.p.:

Zed, 2010.

Pavlychko, Solomiia. Teoriia literatury. [Literary theory] Kyiv:

Vydavnytstvo Solomii Pavlychkon "Osnovy", 2002.

Phillips, Sarah D. Women's social activism in the new Ukraine :

development and the politics of differentiation. Daphne Berdahl,

Matti Bunzl, Michael Herzfeld. USA: Indiana University Press, 2008.

Rooney, Ellen. The Cambridge companion to feminist literary theory.

N.p.: Cambridge University Press, 2006.

Staryns'ka, Tetiana. "Trudova migratsiia z Ukrainy: systematychnyi ta

teoretychnyi vymiry." [Labour migration from Ukraine: systematical

and theoretical dimensions] Bebyk V.M. Ed. Social Science. p.139. 19

February 2011.

<http://www.social-science.com.ua/jornal_content/154/d99c5718b6d5304e

3244fdab4dbf3135>

Zherebkina, Irina. "Feministskaia literaturnaia kritika." [Feminist

literary critic] www.owl.ru. Library. Woman and society. April 12,

2011. <http://www.owl.ru/library/004t.htm>