Negative Capability: Embracing Uncertainty and Celebrating the Mysterious.
In a letter to his brothers, George and Thomas, found in Letters of John Keats to His Family and Friends and dated December 21, 1817, Keats uses the phrase that has come to be the single most emblematic phrase of his entire surviving correspondence, even though he only makes mention of it once: “Negative Capability” — the willingness to embrace uncertainty, live with mystery, and make peace with ambiguity. Triggered by Keats’s disagreement with English poet and philosopher Coleridge, whose quest for definitive answers over beauty laid the foundations for modern-day reductionism, the concept is a beautiful articulation of a familiar sentiment — that life is about living the questions, that the unknown is what drives science, that the most beautiful experience we can have is the mysterious.
Negative Capability made easy through the appeal of images!
What is this man doing with Keats’s concept? How do you relate to “negative capability”? In other words, do you deem it a useful concept to bear in mind in your life? Why (not)?
Negative capability explained in words!
“The wise man questions the wisdom of others because he questions his own, the foolish man, because it is different from his own.” —Leo Stein, American art collector and critic
In an 1817 letter to a friend, the poet John Keats describes one of the qualities that makes writers like Shakespeare so great: negative capability. Keats defines this trait as “…when a man is capable of being in uncertainties, mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact and reason.” In other words, this is the ability to sublimate one’s own individual assumptions about the world and write about uncertain (or potentially polarizing) topics in such a way that the author’s own views remain unknown. It is also the recognition that there are often grey areas in life which cannot be resolved through rational means. This requires an extraordinary degree of objectivity, and it’s much harder than it seems. To enter into the mind of other people (or things) and speak from their point of view is an essential goal for writers.Often some of the most engaging literary works are those where there is no clear side taken on contentious issues (such as the free will versus predestination dichotomy in Shakespeare’s Hamlet or Sophocles’ Oedipus Rex). But the question is, how can writers break free from their own personal perceptions and approach subjects from a more objective point of view?
1. Read writers who are good at negative capability: Keats, Shakespeare, and Sophocles. But there are plenty of other notable authors, such as Emily Dickenson, William Wordsworth, Anne Rice, Walt Whitman, and John Updike.
2. Learn to view situations from other people’s perspectives. Imagine not what you would do if you were facing their circumstances, but rather think about what they would do and why.
3. Step into the unknown. Force yourself to write about subjects or situations you are uncomfortable with (or know little about).
4. Write in a new genre. Tell a familiar tale in a different format. Different literary conventions require different sensibilities, and this can lead to breakthroughs in our perceptions of subjects.
One of the joys of reading is having the opportunity to experience situations from someone else’s perspective. To do this convincingly, writers must learn to put aside their own ideas about the world and imagine alternative possibilities. This is terra incognita for many people, but by embracing this approach, you may discover new avenues of creative potential, and this is exactly what KEATS teachers US! He would have been a great creative writing instructor, wouldn’t he?
La Belle Dame Sans Merci
Different painters were inspired by this poem. Look at their works of art. In the light of the analysis of the poem and your reading of it, which painting do you like best? Why? Try to substantiate your choice with references to the poem itself.
John William Waterhouse
Frank Dicksee
Frank Cadogan Cowper
Arthur Hughes
Ode on a Grecian Urn
Look at the following videos to learn more about this great, yet difficult, ode.
The BBC webpage has an interesting section dedicated to The Romantics, worth browsing it: you can see the original manuscript too, if you are interested.
I highly suggest you listen to/watch the following lectures on the ode, so that you expose yoruself to different ways of analysing a poem, to different expressions to explain the same concepts. It is good listening comprehension and a good way to expand your vocabulary and hone your listening skill. Which lecture do you like best? Why? As a student, which teacher/lecturer of these would appeal to you the most? Substantiate your choice. We will discuss this point in class together.
Do you agree that art takes its truth from life and then returns it to life as beauty as is suggested in the poem? The poet seems to suggest that only the dead are immortal how are they immortalized?
This is a detailed analysis that I prepared some time ago for other students of mine. I decided to post it here because some of you may find it useful.
BBC Omnibus, 1995 – To commemorate the bicentenary of sublime English poet John Keats, Andrew Motion (now Poet Laureate) recreates the final, futile voyage from England to Italy
If you go to Rome, do not miss the Keats-Shelley house. It is a great place to visit, especially for people like you, who had the chance to study English literature.
Xheni Mullahi 5^H
My favorite picture is the one by Frank Cadogan Cowper. I think it shows perfectly the consuming of love, because the knight is “fallen” in the river and the lady seems fairy and at the same time impassive as like the Belle Dame in Keats.
The colours are bright and sharped .
This image reminds me another painting, the one by John Everett Millais called “Ofelia”
http://i1.ytimg.com/vi/I2M7U8eCeHA/maxresdefault.jpg
I think this two painting are similar!
NEGATIVE CAPABILITY
John Keats is the first one to introduce the concept in poetry of “negative capability “. In a nutshell this is the ability of the poet to deny himself and also identify himself with something or someone else; to put aside his ego and accept a new point of view. Through this Keats could live his short life enjoying every moment and emotion. Even we, we can learn from the teachings of Keats, how to take advantage of this possibility that he offers us. In my opinion it would be beneficial to use the “negative capability” within our social life. If we tried to put ourselves in the shoes of the people that we face every day, there would be no prejudices nor any form of racism , no one would suffer for being discriminated, nor should FIGHT to be treated equally to others (because it would be something natural).
According to me the man in the video is not misusing the concept of “negative capability”. Obviously this is reinterpreted and applied in the economic field, partly losing the meaning it had for Keats. But I agree with the idea that an entrepreneur, to succeed, must think as the future consumers to meet their needs and sell better products or services.
LA BELLE DAME SANS MERCI
The painting that I like the most is that of Frank Dicksee. It represents the scene of the ballad exactly as I imagined it in my mind. The lady has long red hair and she is wearing on her head a garland of white flowers (“I made a garland for her head”). Although the knight is still doning his armour, he took off his helmet and opens his arms helpless, ready to abandon himself to the love of the fairy’s child. In my opinion, it is no coincidence that the artist has chosen to seat the woman on the horse, so that she can dominates the knight while he is looking at her enchanted. (In addition he respects the scene described by Keats “I set her on my pacing steed”)
I like the fact that you can even see the face of the knight, because he assumes a more important role in the painting. The colors are light and soft, giving the idea of the dream before the nightmare.
LA BELLE DAME SANS MERCI
I really like the second painting, the one made by Frank Dicksee, because it seems to me the closest to the poem. In according to what John Keats wrote, they are in the meadow, there is the lake and she looks beautiful: she has long flowing hair, she is on his horseback and she wears the garland, the bracelets and the belt of flowers he made for her (“I made a garland for her head, and bracelets too, and fragrant zone […]). Moreover she is bending towards him, perhaps to kiss him, and we see that she has him in her will: namely he is pale, staggering and submissive; indeed he is intimated by her disarming beauty, just as in the ballad. Furthermore I love the canvas because of the atmosphere the painter created: he represented the sunset with its characteristic light and colours and so the scene seems real and not just imagined; in the bargain I think he wanted to give the observer a message: we are always attract by beauty, but we should pay more attention because it could mislead us.
The painting I like the most is the Frank Dicksee one. I think it shows very well the fact that the knight is obsessively in love with the lady to the point of being ill. In fact he is pale, which this is a word that Keats uses frequently in this poem, and he hangs on the horse’s rein, almost falling asleep like he will do at the end of the poem. The fairy is represented as beautiful but has something that makes who watches the painting a little anxious because she is leaning on the horse to hypnotize the knight with her fairy song. It seems as if she wants to make him see her better because she loves him just as long as he admires her beauty. The landscape is like the poem one, there are some hills and they are in a meadow, but the season is not: there are flowers that are the not lilies nor roses, which are mentioned in the poem, but other flowers that are the symbol of spring instead of fall. The light is the typical sunset one and shines on the scene, to emphasize the fact that the knight is going to be bilked by the “femme fatale”.
I must admit that every painting is pretty beautiful and it is difficult to choose just one of them because every single one portrays one aspect of the poem it is inspired from: for example Arthur Hughes decided to draw the spirits of a princess and of a king which tries to warn the knight about the power of hypnotizing of the wicked lady; or Frank Dicksee, who preferred portraying the impact the faery had on the knight, who has a pale face.
However I chose the first one made by Waterhouse because this painting reproduces the feelings both of the lady and of the knight: by seeing this scene the spectator perceives the full perdition of the man, who cannot reject the lady’s eyes fixed on his ones. The knight abandons his body, he is no more able to control himself and decides to leave the present, his capabilities, his mind in order to become property of the lady. But in this painting the woman is not represented as a wicked child’s faery, in her eyes there is something deep and passionate which reveal her love for the knight, true love as she says to him in the poem. The expression of the knight conveys his disorientation, his fear caused by the impossibility of controlling his feelings and his heart, his mind is blurred with passion and pleasure given by the attitude of the lady.
There are even lilies on the landscape, symbols of death which in the poem are a foreboding of an imminent end for the knight.
To my mind, Negative Capability is at the same something magic and something which our desire to have always some more. Magic because it is the right moment when mind and body melt their links, and mind tries to escape, in order to penetrate in the other’s private feelings. We have to reset it, if we want to understand what the other is feeling. We can’t possibly understand something we can’t feel, it’s a matter of fact. Just for the time we need, we must deny our personality, we have to doubt of what we take for granted. I know, it seems something irrational and even stupid, but you can’t relate rationally with the material inconsistency of the world of feelings, thoughts and imagination. Paradoxically, the man in the video finds a rational use of this irrational way: a seller can use it to understand the customer and discover what to do to convince him.
I said something which show our desire of overreach , because this theory proves that we want always something more, in this case to know what feels a person who is completely different from us, even if we think we know him.
LA BELLE DAME SANS-MERCI
The paint I appreciated the most is the Franck Dicksee’s one. I immediately chose it because it evokes me the same fairy and epic atmosphere the ballad transmitted me the first time I read it. It is the one that better represents the idea I had of the characters: pale, disoriented and under the effect of the spell the knight; beautiful, temptress and at the same time cruel the lady. I also liked the use of the light: it marks the knight and the lady, who stand out compared to the landscape, which reflects the ambiguity of the situation:it is bright and full of life foreground, darker and colder in the background. The only thing I don’t like of the painting is inelastic position of the knight, but I think that the author did it on purpose, to enforce the idea that the knight is hypnotized.
NEGATIVE CAPABILITY
The concept of Negative Capability is the ability to contemplate the world without the desire of giving a unique answer. The poet does not have – and should not have – the arrogance to think that he is able to find out the truth in every single thing, but he has the role of accompany the reader in that travel which is called life, in order to give him knowledge and support through poetry. The poet sympathies with the reader, because there are certain moments in life, when you feel very close to a specific person, due to the feelings and the emotions that join you to that person, therefore the poet puts down in word his emotions, then the reader will capture the deep meaning of the poet’s words and will learn something more about himself. According to my opinion and to my personal experience, the poet has the role of means between the reader and his self-knowing, in fact the poet does not express openly his personal point of view, but he lets the reader extract it. That is way the poet knows for sure that there could not be a unique answer, because everyone gives his own answer. That is my own interpretation of the Negative Capability and we can see it at work every day, for example when we watch television or when we listen to the radio. Often we listen to music just because we are used to do it, because it is a constant presence in our life, but when we linger on the words of the lyrics, a new world encloses to us. What I mean is, that sometimes, we listen to songs in a superficial way; we understand the words, but not their meaning. It is happened to me, when I was younger, to sing along the song, knowing the lyrics by heart. But then I listen to some songs after a long time and they has gained a new meaning, they are deeper. I reached the conclusion, that maybe I grew able to understand what the singer want to say and I reflect my feelings in those of the song. Maybe because I have became more mature and I have made more “experience” of what life is. This is my idea of Negative Capability in my daily life!
Sara Pavan
LA BELLE DAME SANS MERCI
I like the most the picture of Frank Dicksee, first of all because it is a wonderful work of art. I think that the use of colours and the light are amazing. Then I like it, because I think that it represent at best Keats’s poet “La belle dame sans merci”, which is a poet about rough love. It tell the story of a valiant knight, who fall in love with a wonderful woman. In this poet the woman have a sort of negative connotation, because she has the role of tempter. Nowadays we would have called her a “femme fatal”. She managed to bewitch the unaware knight with her hypnotizing eyes. In this painting the woman is riding the horse, while the knight is on his foot. That means that the knight is under the power of the woman, who keep the contact with him with her eyes. The work is very realistic and represent the scene as I saw it in my mind when I first read the poet.
Sara Pavan
I think the first painting is the one which best represents the poem, since it looks like the knight is trying to leave, whereas she is trying to hold him back in a firm but still subtle way. She looks at him in a seductive way and the miserable knight is entrapped by her beauty and looks totally submitted to the lady, who is in control of everything and aware of her power.
I totally agree with the man of the video, since being able to put yourself in someone else’s shoes and therefore “deny” yourself is one of the basis of economy: in order to be sure to sell a product and make the most out of it, you have to be able to understand what the customer is most willing to buy, what he really wants. That is , for example, what Google(as an example) is doing: whenever we use it, it records the web pages we visit and then suggests us to try pages and products we might like, based on our interests. It might appear as a violation of our privacy but, in fact, that’s just one of the consequences we must pay in order to have better services. Using Negative Capability as a mean to make profit, to me, is not necessarily something negative but something we do everyday, even if we don’t realize it. Whenever we do something, we expect to receive something back, be it a friend’s gratitude or our own satisfaction. And Negative Capability is the one that enables us to do that and to better understand other people’s minds, so that we can better understand the world we live in and try to get the best out of it.
Dear John,
I’m so far from you. I would like to hug and kiss you again. I wish life was less hard with us. How can you finds those words which penetrate my bosom and go through my soul? I can’t describe all those emotions I feel when I think about you. Our love is like a hurricane. We are so far and so close at the same time, my desire to hold you close to me is everyday stronger. I can’t stand anymore having you only for few moments, during which my heart is broken at the idea of leaving you again! We’ve never enjoyed a lovely spring together yet. We’ve been through bad times which made our relationship hard to live, but only being together we can overcome this pain that strikes us. No one on this earth could ever appease this deep love we feel, that binds us together now and forever. I wish I could have you here, hold you close to me and tell you how I feel when I’m with you. You’ve ravished my heart and taken me over. The distance between us will never be able to erase all the memories. You an I, two bodies, one heart, one soul
kiss.
Your love
The video that I liked the most is definitely the second. The video itself is very well done because the filming of the lecturer is interspersed with slides where the main steps are highlighted. This technique makes the explanation clearer, especially for anyone that is not a mother tongue speaker. The lecture is clear and quite essential. The teacher is quite likeable because of the pink tie and the painted background. Of the first video I appreciated its brevity, and the fact that I was able to understand almost everything at the first listening. It looks like an university professor with a lot of experience and this gives me confidence. With regard to the third video, it was a bit complicated to follow, probably because the lecturer is American and it was filmed during a real lesson, and was not a video made on purpose; but the professor seemed very approachable.
So in conclusion, I think that the best video is the second, because there have been used techniques that make it all clear, but I think that if I had to follow a live lecture I’d rather have a teacher like the one in the third video (maybe English!)
These three videos explains very well Keat’s poem “Ode on a Grecian Urn”. The one that I like less is the first video, in which the man explains the themes of the five stanzas in a clearly way, especially the end. However, in my opinion, he did not develop so much the poem; he reads it to us, giving only the essencial information about Keat’s work. Maybe he has to be deeper in the analysis, creating a sort of interaction with the audience and make us feel more involved.
The second video is the one that best explains “Ode on a Grecian Urn”, thanks even to the use of slides, which show the links between the words in a single stanza. I find it extremely clear in order to understand some passages, that maybe I wouldn’t have found by myself. Even the use of very few images, make the listener felt involved on the lessions. As a student, if I have to choose one of these three videos, in order to understand better the poem, I would choose this one, even by the fact that seems a documentary based on Keat’s work.
But the third one is the most engaging one of the three videos, because is the only one, in which there is a sort of comunication between the man who explains the ode and the public. This is also favored by the use of questions during the analysis and the resulting moment of personal reflection about what he affirmed. It is the kind of analysis that creates a link between the audience and the work itself, because we feel part of the narration, as if we were one of the protagonists. Moreover I prefer most this last video, because the language he used during the riview is easy to understand and even by the way he is teaching us: it seems not a professor, but a common student, who wants to help us.
For these reasons I prefer the third video, even if the second one clearify excellently the “Ode on a Grecian Urn”.
The lectures I liked the most were the second and the third. I liked the second one because the way the speaker was talking was very catching: his tone of voice, the way he moved the hands. Especially I liked the last part of it when he talks about the last verse of the poem “beauty is truth, truth is beauty” because in my opinion he gave a very clever interpretation: he states that who says those words is the vase, because just for it the two things (beauty and truth) can be the same. For human beings beauty and truth are not the same because beauty is always changing and the only truth for us is dying. The urn is meant to contain ashes of dead people, so it contains the only truth, but then on it we can find even the beauty that will never fade: in this way beauty and truth become the same thing. Another aspect that I liked of the second lecture was the projection of the images of the poem that was very useful because it highlighted the key words that helped you to understand better the poem.
In the third lecture I liked the way the professor addressed to his student, how he explained the meaning of the poem as if he was talking about the simplest thing on the world, as if he was talking to some friends of him, even if he didn’t managed to explain everything.
Generally speaking I can say that as a person that really wants to learn something from Keats I would find the second lecture very useful; but as a student I have to say that I found the third one more appealing, as I said before, because of the way the man was communicating with the audience: as a teacher you have to understand that most of the time more than a half of the people that are watching you (students) do not really care about what you’re talking about, so you have to work out a method in order to make the lesson as ‘easy’ as possible. In this case the teacher tried to use a sort of ‘negative capability’: I. e. he tried to ‘negate’ himself as a teacher and become a student, speak as a student. At least this was my impression. In the first two video the two men didn’t need to do it.
The “lesson” I liked the most was the second one because I found it the more complete and the more clear out of the three. I think the video was also structured very well because of the images of the ode that appears while he reads the poem, since I found that this helped me following what he was saying. I didn’t find the first video really helpfull because more than a lesson I would describe it as a lecture that can be fine for those who don’t want to analyze the poem deeply but they just want to know what the poem is dealing with. Regarding the last video, I liked the way the teacher tries to involve his students making references with Hercules or their experiences but I found his lesson a little bit superficial and incomplete; in fact he doesn’t analyze the entire ode but just few parts of it.
The video I liked the most is the second because the lecture explains very clearly and he is easy to understand.
In my opinion he points out the steps that are necessary to understand the ode.
For example he explains that what we are and what the urn is, are two completely different things; the urn can have at the same time beauty and truth but cannot have life, because it is frozen in time, on the contrary we are in life and so we cannot understand the truth and the beauty as one unit.
I also like the first lecture but I think he presents the Ode’s theme in a too fast and essential way, that cannot enable a person who has never read the poem to completely understand it.
Sincerely I do not like the third teacher because of his attitude, though, between the three, is the one that has discussed in more detail the Ode.
Personally speaking, the second lecture was the best. It was very easy to follow his explanation, even for someone who didn’t read the poem. He described perfectly the urn as if it were right in front of him. He also tried to interpret Keats’s intent to “freeze” the moment when the two lovers are about to kiss. He says many times that imagination and senses are very important in this poem, since the action is still. We should use our imagination to guess how the people represented in the urnwill move. I must say I was very involved in this lesson, contrary to the other two. The first was too short and lacking of details. It could’ve been useful just for a review, but not for a full explanation. In the third, instead, I didn’t find a contact with the speaker. I guess it was a registered school lesson, where the teacher explained the poem to his students. To me, it was meant just for students who had the book under their eyes, because he made several references to it.
I like the second video because the professor speaks properly and clearly. He is very directly like a journalist.
The other professors are dispersive, their language is not difficult but they pay attention to superficial things that are not necessary to understand the poem. The first one does not make the analysis of the poem, he only talks about the story and the last one talks about museums and the poet’s feelings linked to the Urn.
The second professor refers to the stanzas and to the most important passages, and it is very important to us to focus on the themes and the purpose of the poem. He starts the analysis and gives to “students” a sort of guidelines.
I must cofess that I didn’t really like any of the three speakers. However out of the three speakers that one that I liked the most is the second one. I really appreciated the fact that he looked directly into the camera while he was speaking. That made the speech more involving. Then I liked the fact that he supported his speech with slides showing us paintings and imageslinked to the subject he was dealing with. Thirdly I quite liked his voice. It was clear and very easy to understand. Finally the speech was well organised.
The teacher that I like the most was the one of the second video because I like the way he structured the video. I find very useful the fact that in the video he decided to put a slide with the text of the poem because in this way it was easier to understand which lines he was referring to. Moreover I would like to choose the second teacher because he highlights the themes and the meaning of the poem while he was explaining it, whereas the teacher of the last video is too focused on analyzing each line that he does not explain properly the themes of the poem. However I appreciate the way the teacher of the third video tries to explain the deep meaning of the expressions used by Keats, by referring to situation of common life. Moreover I found very involving the second teacher due to his tone of voice, the fact that he was always watching directly in the camera and the way he speaks: not too fast and with simple phrases. Finally I want to add that I would never choose the teacher of the first video because it seems to me that he does not explain many basic things like if the interlocutor has to know already a few features of that poem. Moreover I do not like the fact that he did not put a slide with the text of the poem in his video and by this very reason it was difficult to understand which part of the poem he was explaining. Furthermore I do not like that while he was explaining the poem he did not look the interlocutor instead he look some texts that he had got.
After having read the poem, I prefer the teacher of the first video because it is useful to refresh my memory about the ode in a little time. But, if I hadn’t read the poem, it would have been useless since he doesn’t focus on the lines, he does few links with them. The first teacher does a summary, and to understand him you need to know the poem by yourself. If I had to study the poem and understand it on my own, then I would see the second video. the first reason of this choice is the whole video, which is not home made but presents an useful visual analysis and a man who is not gorgeous but at least knows how to speak to public (he speaks slowly and doesn’t give anything for sure, he explains all). The teacher of the third video focuses a lot on the habit which gave life to the poem (Keats went to a museum and saw a plenty of urns and so on), but he’s not so convincing as the second one.
The teacher that I like the most was the one of the second video because I like the way the video is structured. It is supported by the text and images that illustrate better the concepts.
The teacher use a simple language and he focus the attention on the concept of Keats’ irony. He explains the different view of an artwork, in particular those of Keats and Shakespeare: for Keats art is dead, stagnant, you can’t have ecstasy, beauty and life at the same time, instead for Shakespeare it is immortal as long as people have ears to hear and eyes to see.
I really like the body language of the man and his way of speaking through different emphases of the most important things.
On the contrary the professor of the third video spoke more but he focus the attention only on images.
In this video the teacher explains the topic in a very simple way and he use a lot of examples to compare the described situation with the reality.
In the first video is emphasized the immortality of the urn and the concept of beauty and truth but in this lection the man doesn’t involve the spectator.
Out of the three lectures on “Ode on a Grecian Urn”, I preferred the second one, as I found it to be well structured and easy to follow due to the quality of the filming in itself. I also found it very helpful to see the section of the poem the lecturer was explaining, whereas the other two lectures simply paraphrased, or read the poem and then explained it, making it difficult to follow.
I appreciated the third lecturer for his approachability and his “carefree” way of explaining, which is quite refreshing, as sometimes lecturers use a very “pompous” language, making it hard for students to follow. Unfortunately, in my opinion, the poor quality of the filming heavily impacted the overall quality of the lecture.
The first video, is the one I consider to be the less effective and understandable; the lecturer is very lineal in his explanation of the poem, although I find him to be very detached and unapproachable and I think it is important for students to feel like they can relate to the lecturer, as it makes it more enjoyable to follow the explanation.
THREE VIDEOS
After seeing three different presentations of the poem by John Keats, “Ode on a Grecian Urn”, I can say that none of the three professors explained well enough the work proposed. All three teachers were not clear and did not explain the rhetorical figures good enough. The first lesson is very short and unclear, are totally absent explanations of the verses and the language is not easy at all. The logical thread of the speech is difficult and can not be attended by a student who for the first time deal with the text of Keats. In the third video the teacher talk about the things that have little to do with the poem in question. He makes many references to different aspects and also tries to interact with the audience. Which is obviously important to keep the situation under control and keep the students focused on the topic of the lesson. But unfortunately few aspects have been explained and this does not allow me understand the poem.
If I had to choose just one of three classes offered, I think I would choose the second video. I liked this professor’s voice and gestures that I think are important. He makes important emphases, what make not his monologue too monotonous. Also are important the images that he projects, that can help us understand the poem. There is the text of the poem where the main steps are highlighted, unfortunately not all steps are described. The language he uses is quite clear and can be followed by paying attention.
Semenyuk Iryna 5F