|ÐÂÁ: Âÿ÷. Èâàíîâ. Áèáëèîãðàôèÿ.||Âåðñèÿ 1.1 îò 10 àïðåëÿ 2013 ã.|
1 MIKHAILOVSKII, B. V. “Simvolizm” [Symbolism]. In Russkaia literatura XX veka: S devianostykh godov XIX veka do 1917 g. [Russian literature of the twentieth century: From the 1890s to 1917]. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe uchebno-pedagogicheskoe izdatel’stvo Narkomprosa RSFSR, 220—59.
In Russian. Includes several references to Ivanov in the context of a general review of symbolism. Outlines his system of aesthetics, drawing on his essays, and his role in the symbolist movement, and comments on his use of extended metaphors and lexis. Discusses a few individual poems and the concept of “mifotvorchestvo” [myth-creation]. Part of this essay is incorporated into 1969.7 (reprinted in 1971.1).
2 [TERAPIANO], Iu. M. “Stikhi Viacheslava Ivanova” [The poetry of Viacheslav Ivanov]. Vozrozhdenie (Paris), no. 4201, 15 September, 6.
In Russian. Review of Ivanov’s long philosophical poem Chelovek [Man] (Seriia “Russkie poety,” no. 9. Paris: Dom knigi, 1939). Although Ivanov is a great master of verse and one of the major poets of the early twentieth
century, Chelovek is disappointing. Identifies two strands in his verse: a “truly poetic” one and a “rhetorical,” uninspired one. “Rimskie sonety [Roman sonnets] belong to the first, Chelovek to the second. Apart from a few fragments and the sonnets of the third part of Chelovek, the poetry has suffered at the expense of the philosophical content.
© Ýëåêòðîííàÿ ïóáëèêàöèÿ ÐÂÁ, 2010.