1 BLOK, ALEKSANDR. “Tvorchestvo Viacheslava Ivanova” [The art of Viacheslav Ivanov]; “O sovremennom sostoianii russkogo simvolizma: Po povodu doklada V. I. Ivanova” [On the contemporary state of Russian symbolism: Concerning the lecture of V. I. Ivanov]; “Otvet Merezhkovskomu” [A reply to Merezhkovskii]; Review of Prozrachnost’: Vtoraia kniga liriki [Transparency: A second book of lyric verse]. In Sobranie sochinenii v vos’mi tomakh [Collected works in eight volumes]. Edited by V. N. Orlov, A. A. Surkov and K. I. Chukovskii. Vol. 5: Proza: 1903—1917 [Prose: 1903—1917]. Edited by D. E. Maksimov and G. A. Shabel’skaia. Moscow and Leningrad: Gosudarstvennoe izdatel’stvo khudozhestvennoi literatury, 7—18, 425—36, 442—45, 538—40, 712—13, 756—59, 772.
In Russian. Reprint of 1905.3, 1910.5, and 1904.2 with editorial notes and commentary. Also includes the text of Blok’s reply (dated November 1910, first published in 1924) to Merezhkovskii’s critique (1910.15) of Blok’s essay (1910.5). Further scattered references to Ivanov in other essays in this volume can be traced through the general index in vol. 8 (1963.5).
2 BOWRA, C. M. Introduction to Svet vechernii: Poems by Vyacheslav Ivanov. With an introduction by Sir Maurice Bowra and commentary by O. Deschartes. Edited by Dimitri Ivanov. Oxford: Clarendon Press, xiii—xxiii.
Gives a portrait of Ivanov, based on meetings in Rome in 1947 and 1948, and an account of his life and achievements as a poet-scholar (“he was a poet who was indeed a consummate scholar but used his scholarship to deepen and enrich his poetry”). Comments on Ivanov’s use of a “strict, regular form to keep his emotions in their place,” his view of poetry as a mystical activity and means of revelation, and his use of language and move toward simplicity. Contrasts him with Blok for never suffering “a like disillusion or despair,” and for his restraint and self-control. “The secret of his poetry is his transformation of warm, human feelings, notably personal love but also a deep
concern with humanity, into something less frail and less transitory through the place which he finds for them in a divinely ordained scheme.”
3 DESCHARTES, O. “Primechaniia i varianty” [Notes and variants]; “A select bibliography of V. Ivanov’s works.” In Svet vechernii: Poems by Vyacheslav Ivanov. With an introduction by Sir Maurice Bowra and commentary by O. Deschartes. Edited by Dimitri Ivanov. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 179—217, 219—22.
In Russian (notes only). An account of the history of the collection precedes the notes on individual poems. These provide information on dates of composition, original publication details, and variant readings from manuscript sources. For earlier and later versions of this material, see Deschartes, 1954.1, 1957.1 and Ivanov, 1979.8. The select bibliography of Ivanov’s works is a slightly expanded version of the bibliography in Deschartes, 1954.1.
4 IVANOV, DIMITRII, and IVANOVA, LIDIIA V. “Viacheslav Ivanov v Baku: Pis’mo v redaktsiiu” [Viacheslav Ivanov in Baku: Letter to the editor]. Novyi zhurnal (New York), no. 70: 291—92.
In Russian. Refutes the statement that Ivanov held the position of “zamnarkom” [deputy people’s commissar] in Baku, made in a letter of 1921 from Gershenzon to Khodasevich, published in Novyi zhurnal (1960.1) and also included in Mikhailovskii’s encyclopedia article (1930.10). Provides biographical data relating to Ivanov’s academic appointment in Baku, and underlines the incompatibility of his religious views, openly professed at this time, with the communist regime. Notwithstanding this letter the same errors reappear in the next Soviet literary encyclopedia (1966.12). See also Vladislavlev, 1928.7.
5 MAKOVSKII, SERGEI. Na Parnase “Serebrianogo veka” [On the Parnassus of the “Silver age”] . Munich: Izdatel’stvo Tsentral’nogo Ob"edineniia Politicheskikh Emigrantov iz SSSR (TsOPE), 18—20, 22, 24, 155, 199—200 and passim. Reprint (without the last two sections). New York: Orfei, 1986.
In Russian. Scattered references to Ivanov occur in the sections on the meetings of the Religious-Philosophical Society, on Blok, and on Gumilev. Ivanov’s metaphysical symbolism is more consistent than Belyi’s and differs from Annenskii’s “associative” symbolism. His attitude to pagan antiquity was criticized by Merezhkovskii (1904.8) and defended by Ivanov in a poetic response. Bulgakov’s theurgic view of art develops Ivanov’s ideas. Comments on the polemical discussion of symbolism in 1910 with reference to Ivanov, Blok, and Gumilev. Notes Ivanov’s doubts about Gumilev’s intellectual ability to head the poetry section of Apollon.
6 “Poet as hierophant.” Times Literary Supplement (London), no. 3174, 28 December, 1006.
An unsigned review of Svet vechernii [Vespertine light]. Finds a “number of poems, mainly pièces d’occasion, that are little more than trivia,” and praises the sonnet cycles and “Rimskii dnevnik” [Roman diary] — “perhaps Ivanov’s finest work.”
7 POLIAKOV, A. “Ivanov, Viacheslav Ivanovich.” Filosofskaia entsiklopediia [Encyclopedia of philosophy]. Edited by F. V. Konstantinov. Vol. 2. Moscow: Sovetskaia entsiklopediia, 194.
In Russian. An encyclopedia entry on Ivanov, considering his philosophical views and theory of culture. Refers to the influence of V. Solov’ev and Nietzsche. Finds proof of the inadequacy of Ivanov’s aesthetic theory in the fact that his works were only accessible to a narrow circle. Includes a short bibliography of works by and about Ivanov.
8 SLONIM, MARC. From Chekhov to the Revolution: Russian Literature, 1900—1917. Galaxy Book. New York: Oxford University Press, 186—89.
Reprint of 1953.3.
9 STEPUN, FEDOR. “Viacheslav Ivanov.” In Vstrechi: Dostoevskii. L. Tolstoi. Bunin. Zaitsev. V. Ivanov. Belyi. Leonov [Encounters: Dostoevskii. L. Tolstoi. Bunin. Zaitsev. V. Ivanov. Belyi. Leonov]. Munich: Tovarishchestvo Zarubezhnykh Pisatelei, 141—59.
Reprint of 1936.5, based on earlier versions in German (1934.4) and Italian (1933.16). The introduction to the book includes a brief account (p. 8) of Stepun’s meetings with Ivanov. See also Stepun, 1963.13, 1964.8.