1 BAKHTIN, M. M. Problemy tvorchestva Dostoevskogo [Issues in Dostoevskii’s literary art]. Leningrad: Priboi, 14—17.
In Russian. Ivanov was the first person to sense the structural peculiarity of Dostoevskii’s novels. He correctly recognized the definition of the identity of the self in the light of the other as the main problem faced by Dostoevskii’s heroes and the central theme of his novels. He failed, however, to see how this principle of Dostoevskii’s worldview formed his artistic vision and method.
His characterization of Dostoevskii’s novels as novel-tragedies, elaborated in the essay “Dostoevskii i roman-tragediia” [Dostoevskii and the novel-tragedy] (1911), is incorrect and ignores the formal, polyphonic dimension of Dostoevskii’s novels. Revised: 1963.2. For English translations see 1973.1 and 1984.1. On Bakhtin and Ivanov, see Seduro, 1957.7.; Bakhtin, 1979.2; Clark and Holquist, 1984.4; Crone, 1988.13; Kotrelev, 1988.35; Igeta, 1989.26; Jackson, 1989.29; Szilard, 1989.55; Salma, 1992.23; Grabar, 1993.27; Iovanovich, 1993.28; Szilard, 1993.52; Terras, 1993.53.
2 KHODASEVICH, VLADISLAV. “Zdravnitsa: Iz moskovskikh vospominanii” [The sanatorium: From memoirs of Moscow]. Vozrozhdenie (Paris), no. 1381, 14 March, 3—4.
In Russian. Describes Khodasevich’s three-month stay in the summer of 1920 at the sanatorium where Ivanov and Gershenzon wrote Perepiska iz dvukh uglov [A correspondence from two corners]. Contrasts Gershenzon’s ordered end of the room with Ivanov’s chaotic corner, piled high with books and cigarette stubs. Reprinted: 1954.2.
3 PIAST, V. “Pervye ‘sredy’” [The first “Wednesdays”] ; “Eshche o ‘sredakh’” [More about the “Wednesdays”] ; “Bashennyi teatr” [The theatre at the tower]. In Vstrechi [Encounters]. Moscow: Federatsiia, 44—62, 85—102, 166—80.
In Russian. Chapters 4, 6, and 11 of Piast’s memoirs are concerned with Ivanov in detail. The book also contains several other references to Ivanov. In “The first ‘Wednesdays’” Piast describes his early impressions of Ivanov’s poetry, his first meeting with Ivanov in August 1905, his visit with Ern to the first Wednesday gathering in September 1905, and the regular visitors at the tower during the winter of 1905—1906. Cites Ivanov’s three sonnets dedicated to V. N. Ivanovskii as characteristic of Ivanov. Describes his embarrassed reading at one gathering of Kamenskii’s “Chetyre” [Four]. Raises the issue of the circle’s alienation from the sociopolitical events of 1905. In “More about the ‘Wednesdays’” Piast evokes the impact of Gorodetskii at one of these gatherings, praised by Ivanov and hailed as the “new god” of Russian poetry. Recounts the visit and search of police agents at the end of the year in December (see 1906.10). “The theatre at the tower” describes Meierkhol’d’s production of Calderón’s comedy Poklonenie krestu [Worship of the cross] in 1910, listing the roles allocated to different members of Ivanov’s family and literary entourage, and giving details of the production and of the banquet which followed, enlivened by a speech by M. Rostovtsev. See also Znosko-Borovskii, 1910.19.
4 POZNER, VLADIMIR. “Viatcheslav Ivanov.” In Panorama de la littérature russe contemporaine. Préface de Paul Hazard. Paris: Editions Kra, 184—89.
In French. Provides an impressionistic outline of Ivanov’s development as a writer. Cor Ardens (“énorme travail, et combien respectable”) is organized
like a dissertation and would benefit from a glossary. Signals a danger in Ivanov’s bookish use of Greek mythology, which he fails to bring alive. “Son seul tort est peut-être d’avoir tout aimé et tout accepté, d’avoir associé, avec trop de facilité et parfois à coups de sophismes, des éléments disparates et de valeur inégale. V. Ivanov a trop de compréhension et point d’intransigeance.” Other scattered references to Ivanov may be traced through the index.
5 SAIANOV, V. Ocherki po istorii russkoi poezii XX veka [Essays on the history of Russian poetry of the twentieth century]. Rabochaia Litstudiia “Rezets.” Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo “Krasnaia gazeta,” passim.
In Russian. Includes several references to Ivanov’s theory of symbolism and contributions to Vesy. Cites various contemporary views of his verse (Briusov, Bal’mont, Blok, Gumilev).
6 VOLKOV, NIKOLAI. Meierkhol’d. Vol. 1: 1874—1908. Moscow and Leningrad: Academia, 217—20, 289.
In Russian. Quotes Berdiaev’s description of Ivanov’s Wednesday gatherings, lists the regular visitors, and outlines Ivanov’s plan for the creation of new mystical theatre, “Fakely” [Torches]. Describes the morning gathering organized on 3 January 1906 to mark Meierhkhol’d’s arrival in St. Petersburg and to publicize his ideas on the theatre. Ivanov read a lecture on the theatre of Dionysus, Chulkov spoke on the idea of mystical anarchism in relation to the new drama, and Meierkhol’d read “O tekhnike novogo teatra” [On the technique of the new theatre]. Refers briefly to Meierkhol’d’s later involvement with the theatre at the tower.