вышла книга: M. Wachtel, Ph. Gleissner. V. Ivanov und Seine deutschsprachigen Verleger. Peter Lang, 2019. 376 SS.
1 DESCHARTES, O. “Être et Mémoire selon Vyatcheslav Ivanov: Commentaires au bas de quelques poésies du recueil Svet vechernii.“ Oxford Slavonic Papers 7: 83—98.
In French. The essay, dated 1956, forms a sequel to Deschartes’s earlier article (1954.1), and explores the philosophical ideas underlying Ivanov’s verse. It follows the publication in the same issue of sixteen poems (pp. 64—82) from the third section of Svet vechernii [Vespertine light] (1962), currently in preparation. These include five poems dedicated to Vera (“Ee docheri” [To her daughter]) and several poems written around the time of the First World War and the revolution. Expounds Ivanov’s understanding of realism based on faith, of self-knowledge achieved through recognition of God as the Other, and of the key role of memory in history and culture. Includes biographical information, together with an analysis of Ivanov’s intellectual and spiritual development, illustrated with reference to his essays and various poems (quoted in French translation). For related essays on Ivanov’s biography and literary work, see Deschartes, 1932.4, 1933.5, 1954.1, 1962.3 and Ivanov, 1971.3.
2 GOR’KII, A. M. “Viachesl[av] I[vanovich] Ivanov.” In Arkhiv A. M. Gor’kogo [The archive of A. M. Gor’kii]. Vol. 6: Khudozhestvennye proizvedeniia: Plany. Nabroski. Zametki o literature i iazyke [Literary works: Plans. Drafts. Notes on literature and language]. Moscow: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 210—11, 255—56.
In Russian. A brief memoir and impressionistic portrait of Ivanov in the
form of notes, evidently written in 1925 at the time of their meeting in Sorrento. Finds Ivanov’s compliments excessive and insincere, describes him as wordy, old before his time, and convinced that he is “the pillar and foundation of truth.” Relates his sceptical view of Russia’s achievements, his theory of “anthromonism,” his distortion of Nietzsche, and mechanical habit of faith. Records Ivanov asking him if he would be capable of writing a story or novel, and for a subject. Reprinted: 1959.2. See also Bialik, 1959.1; Koretskaia, 1989.32.
3 HARKINS, WILLIAM E. “Ivanov, Vyacheslav Ivanovich.” In Dictionary of Russian Literature. London: Allen & Unwin, 161—62.
A brief entry on Ivanov.
4 HOLTHUSEN, JOHANNES. Studien zur Ästhetik und Poetik des russischen Symbolismus. Göttingen: Vandenhoeck & Ruprecht, 31—33, 36—38, 40—53.
In German. The first part of this work deals with symbolist aesthetics and poetics and contains discussion of Ivanov’s theory of symbolism and myth, as expounded in several essays including “O granitsakh iskusstva” [On the boundaries of art] (1914), “Mysli o simvolizme” [Thoughts on symbolism] (1912), and “Zavety simvolizma” [The precepts of symbolism] (1910). Relates Ivanov’s ideas to the views of Belyi, Blok (1910.5), Briusov (1910.6), and Jung.
5 KARASIK, Z. M. “M. Gor’kii i satiricheskie zhurnaly ‘Zhupel’ i ‘Adskaia pochta’” [M. Gor’kii and the satirical journals Zhupel and Adskaia pochta]. In M. Gor’kii v epokhu revoliutsii 1905—1907 godov: Materialy, vospominaniia, issledovaniia [M. Gor’kii at the time of the revolution of 1905—1907: Materials, memoirs, studies]. Edited by S. S. Elizarov, S. S. Zimina, and V. Ia. Orlov. Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Akademii nauk SSSR, 357—87.
In Russian. Includes brief details of a meeting attended by Gor’kii, Andreeva, Meierkhol’d, and Ivanov at the tower on 3 January 1906 to discuss the possible foundation of a new theatre, linked with the artists grouped around the journal Zhupel and the writers associated with Fakely (pp. 378, 381—83). See also Koretskaia, 1989.32.
6 POGGIOLI, RENATO. “A Correspondence from Opposite Corners.” In The Phoenix and the Spider: A Book of Essays about some Russian Writers and their View of the Self. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 208—28.
Reprint of 1950.2 with minor stylistic changes and fewer notes.
7 SEDURO, VLADIMIR. “Vyacheslav Ivanovich Ivanov (1866—1949): An approach to modern scholarship.” In Dostoyevski in Russian Literary Criticism: 1846—1956. Columbia Slavic Studies. New York: Columbia University Press, 57—63. Reprint. New York: Octagon, 1969 and 1981.
Analyzes Ivanov’s interpretation of Dostoevskii in his essay of 1911,
“Dostoevskii i roman-tragediia” [Dostoevskii and the novel-tragedy] (1911), later incorporated into the German book (1932) and English book (1952). Presents Ivanov’ s view of Dostoevskii in the light of his theory of symbolism. Relates his idea of polyphony in Dostoevskii’s novels to Bakhtin’s later work (1929.1). Paraphrases Ivanov’s view of the three causes of the central catastrophic action in Dostoevskii’s novels. Closes with the assertion that “despite the nature of his conclusions, in his methodology of combining formalistic, philosophical, and biographical analysis, Vyacheslav Ivanov was a pioneer of modern Dostoyevski scholarship.” Other references to Ivanov can be traced through the index and indicate his influence on the work of later critics of the Soviet period, such as Grossman, Alekseev, Popov, Bakhtin, Askol’dov, and Chulkov.