|ÐÂÁ: Âÿ÷. Èâàíîâ. Áèáëèîãðàôèÿ.||Âåðñèÿ 1.1 îò 10 àïðåëÿ 2013 ã.|
1 BELYI, ANDREI. Sirin uchenogo varvarstva: Po povodu knigi V. Ivanova “Rodnoe i vselenskoe” [The Sirin of scholarly barbarity: On Viacheslav Ivanov’s book “Matters native and universal]. Berlin: Skify, 24 pp.
Reprint of 1918.1, incorporating several passages from 1916.2. For responses, see Kogan, 1922.11 and Anichkov, 1923.1.
2 BELYI, ANDREI. “Viacheslav Ivanov.” In Poeziia slova [Poetry of the word]. Petersburg: Epokha, 20—105. Reprint. Chicago: Russian Language Specialties (Russian Study Series, 51), 1965.
Reprint of 1916.2 in a book consisting of three chapters (the first is on Pushkin, Tiutchev, and Baratynskii, the second on Ivanov, and the third on Blok). The numbering of the sections has been changed, and a few minor variations introduced.
3 BELYI, ANDREI. “Vospominaniia o A. A. Bloke” [Reminiscences of A. A. Blok]. Epopeia (Moscow and Berlin), no. 1: 123—273; no. 2: 105—299; no. 3: 125—310. Reprint. Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, Slavische Propyläen, 47, 1969.
In Russian. Includes several passing references to Ivanov. The most substantial sections on Ivanov deal with Belyi’s early meetings with Ivanov and the Wednesday gatherings at the tower during 1905—1906 (chapter 5, Epopeia, no. 2: 288—93), and with the two writers’ polemical debate over the nature of symbolism (chapter 7, Epopeia, no. 3: 251—60). For the final section of these memoirs, see Belyi, 1923.2.
4 BELYI, A. “Vospominaniia ob Aleksandre Aleksandroviche Bloke” [Reminiscences of Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Blok]. Zapiski mechtatelei (St. Petersburg), no. 6: 7—122. Reprint of journal. Letchworth, Herts.: Bradda Books (Rarity Reprint, 22). Introduction by J. D. Elsworth, 1971.
In Russian. The reminiscences include a few scattered references to Ivanov (pp. 70—71 and passim) and an interesting characterization of his influential role after arriving in St. Petersburg, building bridges between different groupings, and yet poisoning the purity of the atmosphere in symbolist circles. Reprinted: 1964.1; 1980.11. See also Belyi, 1922.3, 1923.2 and Kniazhnin, 1922.9.
5 CHULKOV, GEORGII. “Poet” [The poet]. In Nashi sputniki: 1912—22 [Our companions: 1912—1922]. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo N. V. Vasil’eva, 65—70.
Reprint of 1911.6 with minor adaptations.
6 ERENBURG, IL’IA. “Viacheslav Ivanovich Ivanov.” Portrety russkikh poetov [Portraits of Russian poets]. Berlin: Argonavty, 92—95.
In Russian. The essay, dated 1920, introduces a selection of five poems
by Ivanov (pp. 96—101). Provides an impressionistic characterization of Ivanov in Moscow in 1918. Dwells on the liturgical aspect of his poetry; all his archaisms are justified and reflect the wealth of the past. Finds that the poet has overcome the tension between Christian teachings and his “serpent-like wisdom” through “simple love.” Reprinted (essay only): 1923.4. For a German translation by Johannes von Guenther see Erenburg, 1946.3.
7 FLOROVSKII, GEORGII V. “V mire iskanii i bluzhdanii” [In the world of searches and wanderings]. Russkaia mysl’ (Prague), no. 4 (April): 129—46.
In Russian. The first part of this article, dated March 1922 and entitled “Znamenatel’nyi spor” [A significant debate] (pp. 129—40), outlines the religious and philosophical aspects of the ideological debate in Perepiska iz dvukh uglov [A correspondence from two corners] (1921) that are most characteristic of the present age. The work is a “human document” of prime importance; Ivanov and Gershenzon are divided not so much by their views as by the fact that they are different psychological types, holding different approaches to life. Their argument is not over culture but God. Ivanov overcomes the usual antinomies of dualistic philosophical thought by basing his system on three elements, God, the world, and man. His worldview leads to the understanding of the Christian church as the only source of salvation for a redeemed humanity.
8 GORODETSKII, SERGEI. “Vospominaniia ob Aleksandre Bloke” [Reminiscences of Aleksandr Blok]. Pechat’ i revoliutsiia (Moscow), no. 1: 75—88. Reprint. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1970.
In Russian. Includes a few pages on Ivanov’s “Wednesdays” at the tower to which Gorodetskii was first introduced by Piast. Lists the various participants, describes the atmosphere, set by Ivanov, and the topics of discussion, including poetry readings by Ivanov and Blok. Considers the relation of the gatherings to the revolution and social thought of the time. Describes Blok’s first reading of his long poem “Vozmezdie” [Retribution] several years later, and his response to Ivanov’s furious condemnation of the poem as a heretical betrayal of the ideals of symbolism. Reprinted: 1980.11; 1984.12.
9 KNIAZHNIN, V. N. Aleksandr Aleksandrovich Blok. Biograficheskaia biblioteka. Petrograd: Kolos, 88—94.
In Russian. Describes with warm nostalgia the gatherings at the tower, from night to dawn, until 1912. Gives a portrait of the host, Ivanov, emphasizing the unique combination of talents that led to his role as the main ideologue of the symbolist movement. Defends Ivanov from Belyi’s charge (1922.4) of poisoning the atmosphere, arguing that although Ivanov, like all his contemporaries, had his failings and weaknesses, he alone succeeded in overcoming them. Blok’s relations with him, as with many others, moved from initial
closeness to coolness. Mentions Ivanov’s links with V. Solov’ev, including the resemblance of their handwriting.
10 KOGAN, P. S. “III. Mechtateli: ‘Zapiski mechtatelei’, I—V” [III. Dreamers: “Notes of dreamers,” I—V]. P’echat’ i revoliutsiia (Moscow), no. 2 (April — June): 157—63 (p. 160). Reprint. Nendeln, Liechtenstein: Kraus Reprint, 1970.
In Russian. Considers Belyi, Ivanov, Remizov, and Zamiatin, the “dreamers” who have contributed to the journal Zapiski mechtatelei. Like Belyi, Ivanov is detached from the current situation. Quotes from his essay “Kruchi” [Steep slopes] and from his poem “Chelovek — edin” [Man is alone], both published in the first issue of the journal (1919). Revised: 1924.1.
11 KOGAN, P. S. Review of Sirin uchenogo varvarstva: Po povodu knigi V. Ivanova “Rodnoe i vselenskoe” [The Sirin of scholarly barbarity: On Viacheslav Ivanov’s book “Matters native and universal”] , by Andrei Belyi. Pechat’ i revoliutsiia (Moscow), no. 8 (November — December): 208—09.
In Russian. Finds Belyi’s polemical tract on Ivanov (1922.1) indigestible as a result of its difficult language and mixture of styles. Focuses on Belyi’s attack on Ivanov’s failure to view the revolution positively in the light of his earlier view of drama as a popular collective art form, and on his view of the First World War as a “universal cause.” Finds that Belyi’s acceptance of the revolution is as irresponsible as Ivanov’s rejection: both writers are out of touch with the true march of history.
12 LEVITAN, I. Review of Perepiska iz dvukh uglov [A correspondence from two corners]. Novaia russkaia kniga (Berlin), no. 5 (May): 5—7.
In Russian. Considers the two friends’ debate on the philosophy of culture in relation to the current historical situation, and finds that their disagreement is relative rather than absolute. They share a strong respect for the individual personality, a common desire to overcome the present crisis, and a positive, life-affirming acceptance of existence.
13 LUNDBERG, EVG. “K krizisu kul’tury: ‘Perepiska iz dvukh uglov.’ K-vo ‘Ogon’ki,’ 1922 g. Berlin” [On the crisis of culture: “A correspondence from two corners.” ‘Ogon’ki’, 1922. Berlin]. Nakanune: Literaturnoe prilozhenie (Berlin), no. 7, 11 June (Prilozhenie k Nakanune, 62), 10—11.
In Russian. A positive review of Gershenzon’s and Ivanov’s Perepiska iz dvukh uglov [A correspondence from two corners] (1922), “a fragrant book, rare in its inner and outer charm,” which cannot be understood without a knowledge of “contemporary Russia, in its dark everyday existence and bright, intense spirit.” Characterizes the two writers’ different relations to existence in historical time and culture. See also Gershenzon, 1988.24.
14 MIRSKI, D. S. “The Literature of Bolshevik Russia.” The London Mercury 5, no. 27: 276—85.
Includes a brief section on Ivanov’s metaphysical interpretation of Bolshevism in the light of Ahriman and Lucifer, related to the views of Dostoevskii, and embodied in the postrevolutionary poetry of Voloshin. Singles out for praise Gippius’s Petersburg diary and Ivanov’s “sober, austere, nearly ascetic” “Zimnie sonety” [Winter sonnets], described as “two works by two of our greatest writers, directly inspired by life in Sovdepia.” Reprinted: 1989.47.
© Ýëåêòðîííàÿ ïóáëèêàöèÿ ÐÂÁ, 2010.