ĐÂÁ: Â˙÷. Čâŕíîâ. Áčáëčîăđŕôč˙. Âĺđńč˙ 1.1 îň 10 ŕďđĺë˙ 2013 ă.

1969

1 ALIANSKII, S. “Znakomstvo s Viacheslavom Ivanovym” [Meeting Viacheslav Ivanov]. In Vstrechi s Aleksandrom Blokom [Meetings with Aleksandr Blok]. Moscow: Detskaia literatura, 54—59.

Reprint of 1967.1.

2 DESCHARTES, O. “Ivanov, Vyacheslav Ivanovich.” In Encyclopaedia of World Literature in the 20th Century. Edited by Wolfgang Bernard Fleischmann. An enlarged and updated edition of the Herder Lexicon der Weltliteratur im 20. Jahrhundert. Vol. 2. New York: Frederick Ungar, 162—63.

An English translation of 1960.4 with a slightly modified and updated bibliography.

3 DOLGOPOLOV, L. K. “Poeziia russkogo simvolizma” [The poetry of the Russian symbolists]. In Istoriia russkoi poezii [The history of Russian poetry]. Akademiia nauk SSSR, Institut russkoi literatury (Pushkinskii dom). Edited by B. P. Gorodetskii. Vol. 2. Leningrad: Nauka, 253—329.

In Russian. Short sections on Ivanov and several miscellaneous references (indexed) are included in this survey. The problem of the individual’s loss of identity is seen as the key to Ivanov’s theoretical writings illustrated by his verse (pp. 273—74). The cycle on the 1905 revolution “Godina gneva” [The time of wrath] is regarded as a turning point in his development. Defines the central problem of his art as the attempt to reconcile the eternal with the everyday, an issue discussed in the preface to Nezhnaia taina [Tender mystery]. Ivanov’s chief legacy is his verse; the lyrics of Svet vechernii [Vespertine light] occasionally achieve “depth and strength of artistic generalisation” but as a whole bear the “stamp of rationalism,” of problems set and solved rather than of “spontaneous lyrical outpouring” (pp. 285—86).

4 EIKHENBAUM, B. “Anna Akhmatova: Opyt analiza” [Anna Akhmatova: An essay in analysis]. In O poezii [On poetry]. Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 75—147.

Reprint of 1923.3.

151

5 MANDEL’sHTAM, OSIP. Sobranie sochinenii v trekh tomakh [Collected works in three volumes]. Edited by G. P. Struve and B. A. Filippov. Vol. 3: Ocherki. Pis’ma [Essays. Letters]. Introductory essays by Iurii Ivask, Nikita Struve, and Boris Filippov. New York: Inter-Language Literary Associates, 28, 31.

In Russian. Includes two further essays by Mandel’shtam with brief references to Ivanov. “O sovremennoi poezii” [On contemporary poetry], a review of the 1916 Almanakh muz [Anthology of the muses], comments on the “presyshchennost’” [satiety] of Ivanov’s verse (“Everything is known in advance”). “Pis’mo o russkoi poezii” [A letter about Russian poetry] (first published in 1922) mentions the scant remains of Ivanov’s “cosmic” poetry. Reprinted: 1987.17. See also Mandel’shtam, 1966.8. For an English translation, see Mandelstam, 1979.10.

6 MASHBITS-VEROV, I. “Tvorchestvo Viacheslava Ivanova” [The art of Viacheslav Ivanov]. In Russkii simvolizm i put’ Aleksandra Bloka [Russian symbolism and the path of Aleksandr Blok]. Kuibyshev: Kuibyshevskoe knizhnoe izdatel’stvo, 141—53.

In Russian. The chapter on Ivanov provides a general overview of his literary development up until the time of his emigration. Considers responses to the difficulty of his verse in early critical reviews, and his extension of the theurgic teachings of V. Solov’ev into the field of classical antiquity. Cites several poems from the early collections to illustrate the argument. Finds that Ivanov’s poetry improves when he moves away from mysticism, but that only a few poems such as “Osen’” [Autumn] in Cor Ardens escape this dominant influence. Considers his response to the revolution through an analysis of his essay “Kruchi” [Steep slopes] (1919) and the tragedy Prometei [Prometheus] (1919). Lenin’s warning about the sophistry of would-be adepts to the new revolutionary ideology who have not in fact shed their previous convictions applies to Ivanov. Quotes from Gor’kii’s portrait of Ivanov (1957.2) and concludes that “after betraying Russia” the poet found his “‘motherland’ under the aegis of the Roman pope.” For an earlier summary, see Mashbits-Verov, 1960.10.

7 MIKHAILOVSKII, B. V. “Iz istorii russkogo simvolizma (1900-e gody)” [On the history of Russian symbolism (the 1900s)]. In Izbrannye stati o literature i iskusstve [Selected articles on literature and art]. Edited by A. G. Sokolov. Compiled by I. V. Koretskaia. Moscow: n.p., 389—447.

In Russian. Sections of the essay consider Ivanov’s symbolist aesthetics from an ideological point of view. Cites poems illustrating his complex syntax, style, use of myth, and metaphor. Although the essay is dated 1964—1965 and is described as “published for the first time,” a large part of its contents is taken from 1939.1. Reprinted with minor changes: 1971.1.

152

8 OVSIANNIKOV, M. F., ed. Istoriia estetìki: Pamiatniki mirovoi esteticheskoi mysli [A history of aesthetics: Monuments of world aesthetics], 5 vols. Vol. 4: First tome, Russkaia estetika XIX veka [Nineteenth-century Russian aesthetics]. Akademiia khudozhestv SSSR, Nauchno-issledovatel’skii institut teorii i istorii izobrazitel’nykh iskusstv. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 587—90, 602—608.

In Russian. The section on symbolism (compiled and introduced by Z. V. Landa) consists of a brief introduction, followed by selected extracts from the writings on aesthetics of Bal’mont, Belyi, and Ivanov. Excerpts from the following essays by Ivanov are quoted: “O granitsakh iskusstva” [On the boundaries of art] (1914), “Zavety simvolizma” [The precepts of symbolism] (1910), “Mysli o simvolizme” [Thoughts on symbolism] (1912), “Predchuvstviia i predvestiia” [Premonitions and forebodings] (1906), “Simvolizm esteticheskikh nachal” [The symbolism of aesthetic principles] (1905 as “O niskhozhdenii”), and “Esteticheskaia norma teatra” [The aesthetic norm of the theatre] (1916).

9 PLEBE, ARMANDO. “Significato e funzione del simbolo nel simbolismo russo.” Conoscenza religiosa (Florence), no. 4: 456—66.

In Italian. Relates the concept of the symbol and “sobornost’ “ [communality] developed by the Russian symbolists and Ivanov to the aesthetics of Kant. Contrasts the metaphysical aspect of this concept with the ideas of Mallarmé, Rimbaud, Empson, Jaspers, and the Russian formalists.

10 POŹNIAK, TELESFOR. “Wiaczesław Iwanow i Dostojewski” [Viacheslav Ivanov and Dostoevskii]. In Dostojewski w kręgu symbolistów rosyjskich [Dostoevskii in the circle of the Russian symbolists]. Wrocław: Zakład Narodowy im. Ossolińskich-Wydawnictwo, 94—125.

In Polish. A part of this general study on the symbolists’ image of Dostoevskii is devoted to Ivanov, followed by sections on Belyi, Blok, and their successors. Comments on the links between Dostoevskii’s idea of beauty saving the world and Ivanov’s concept of Eros. Argues that Dostoevskii enabled Ivanov to transform Nietzsche’s Dionysus into a god of suffering and resurrection. Discusses various poems from Kormchie zvezdy [Pilot stars], Prozrachnost’ [Transparency], and Cor Ardens, as well as extracts from Mladenchestvo [Infancy], Prometei [Prometheus], and Ivanov’s essays on Dostoevskii.

11 TARANOVSKII, K. F. “Tri zametki o poezii Mandel’shtama” [Three comments on the poetry of Mandel’shtam]. International Journal of Slavic Linguistics and Poetics (The Hague) 12: 165—70.

In Russian. The first section “Post scriptum k stat’e o pchelakh i osakh” [Postscriptum to the essay on bees and wasps] supplements Taranovskii’s earlier essay of 1967.8. Refers to three additional subtexts reflected in the poems

153

analyzed. Finds a subtext for Ivanov’s image of a “necklace of starry tears” in a poem by V. S. Pecherin (pp. 166—67). Incorporated into the fuller version of 1976.18.

12 VON GUENTHER, JOHANNES. Ein Leben in Ostwind: Zwischen Petersburg und München. Erinnerungen. Munich: Biederstein Verlag, 118—28, 201—15, and passim.

In German. The memoirs include sections on Ivanov and on life at the tower (indexed). Describes the atmosphere of the Wednesday gatherings, the topics discussed, the key role of the hostess, Zinov’eva-Annibal, and the various visitors. Continues with the period of Cor Ardens, emphasizing the esoteric tendencies prevalent in Ivanov’s thinking at this time. Comments on Kuzmin, Somov, Nuvel, Khlebnikov, Bakst, and Meierkhol’d with reference to their theatrical activities. Notes Ivanov’s knowledge of Faust and his links with Stefan George. See also Woloschin, 1954.4.

© Ýëĺęňđîííŕ˙ ďóáëčęŕöč˙ — ĐÂÁ, 2010.
ĐÂÁ