1 BLOK, ALEKSANDR, and BELYI, ANDREI. Perepiska [Correspondence]. Edited, with an introductory article and commentaries, by V. N. Orlov. Gosudarstvennyi literaturnyi muzei. Letopisi, kniga no. 7. Moscow: Izdanie Gosudarstvennogo literaturnogo muzeia, passim. Reprint. Munich: Wilhelm Fink, Slavische Propyläen, 69, 1969.
In Russian. Numerous references to Ivanov (indexed) occur in the introductory essay by Orlov (see 1940.3), in the correspondence of Blok and Belyi from 1905 to 1919, and in the accompanying notes by Orlov. For a later, annotated edition of Blok’s letters to Belyi, see 1963.5.
2 KHLEBNIKOV, VELIMIR. Neizdannye proizvedeniia [Unpublished works]. Edited by N. Khardzhiev and T. Grits. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 197—201, 285—88, 354—57, 425, 453—54, 467—69.
In Russian. Publishes the texts of several works by Khlebnikov related to Ivanov with accompanying notes. These include the poem “Peredo mnoi varilsia var…” [Before me boiled pitch…] (pp. 197—201) and the prose poem “Zverinets” [The menagerie] (pp. 285—88 with a note on pp. 453—54 on the letter to Ivanov with which it was sent). The letters are dated 31 March 1908 and 10 June 1909 (pp. 354—57 and notes 467—69). The first letter mentions the idea of a universal Slavonic language underlying Russian and requests Ivanov’s opinion of his verse in this connection. The second letter, written in the style of a prose poem, conveys his sense of dying, and describes his recent visit to the zoo and perception of animals linked with Buddhism and Islam, turning into metrical feet in poetry. The notes to “Peredo mnoi varilsia var…” include the short text “Fragmenty o familiiakh” [Fragments on surnames] (p. 425), an unfinished fragment attributed to the end of 1912, dealing with Ivanov’s tragedy “Tantal” [Tantalus], and a story by Kuzmin. “Tantal” is described as reflecting a break with “incorrect unhappiness” in favor of “correct unhappiness,” interpreted as Russia’s rejection of Europe for the happiness of future generations. For further items on Khlebnikov and Ivanov, see Aseev, 1920.1; Rayfield, 1966.15; Stepanov, 1975.14; Al’tman, 1985.1; Parnis, 1986.37, 1990.49, 1992.18, 1992.19, 1993.43; Duganov, 1990.17.
3 ORLOV, VL. “Istoriia odnoi ‘druzhby-vrazhdy’” [The history of a “friendship-enmity”] . In Perepiska [Correspondence], by Aleksandr Blok and Andrei
Belyi. Edited, with an introductory article and commentaries, by V. N. Orlov. Gosudarstvennyi literaturnyi muzei. Letopisi, kniga no. 7. Moscow: Izdanie Gosudarstvennogo literaturnogo muzeia, v—lxiv. Reprint. Munich: Wilhelm Fink, Slavische Propyläen, 69, 1969.
In Russian. Orlov’s introductory essay to the correspondence of Blok and Belyi contains several references to Ivanov, listed in the index. Covers topics such as Blok’s relations with various journals (including Zolotoe runo), literary circles, and publishing houses connected with Ivanov; his polemics with Ivanov and Chulkov over mystical anarchism in 1906 and 1907; the debate surrounding symbolism in 1910, with comments on Ivanov’s essay “Zavety simvolizma” [The precepts of symbolism] (1910) and Blok’s response (1910.5). Reprinted with minor changes: 1963.10; 1971.10. For the text of the correspondence, see 1940.1.
4 PELLEGRINI, ALESSANDRO. “Incontro con Venceslao Ivanov.” Corrente, 15 April, 2, 5.
In Italian. First came to know of Ivanov through his work on Dostoevskii, the German translation of “Tantal” [Tantalus], Perepiska iz dvukh uglov [A correspondence from two corners] and Curtius’s comments (1932.3) on this work. Was advised to visit Ivanov by Charles Du Bos. Gives a vivid depiction of his visit to Ivanov at Pavia. Evokes Ivanov’s meeting with “a great philosopher” (Croce in April 1931). Describes him as a fifteenth-century humanist. Reprinted with an additional final section: 1947.2. For later accounts of Ivanov’s meeting with Croce, see Gallarati-Scotti, 1960.5; Angelini, 1966.1; Ivanova, 1990.28. See also Pellegrini, 1934.13.