Any attempt to interpret Pushkin’s The Monument [ Pamyatnik ] has for a long time been frustrated by the struggle to explain what the poet meant by ‘the Alexandrian column’ ( Aleksandriyskiy stolp ), with which he contrasts the ‘the monument not built with hands’. The author proves that the researchers looking for the only correct answer (a pursuit that has kept Pushkin scholars busy for decades) have been asking the wrong question all along. It is his belief that the phrase ‘Alexandrian column’ is used in the poem without any identifiable denotation and that the image’s artistic vagueness is deliberate. The poem alludes to several historical objects from various countries and epochs, including the more contemporary rein of the Russian emperor Alexander I. However, it appears that none of those allusions have any distinguishable features for identification purposes, hence easy confusion of the Alexander column with the Lighthouse of Alexandria. A similar effect occurs from the use of the ambiguous adjective ‘Aleksandriyskiy’ (‘Alexandrian’) to describe the Alexander column, illustrating the eroding historical memory about rulers.

The article is concerned with the origin and symbolism of the name of the Belogorskaya fort in Pushkin’s The Captain’s Daughter [ Kapitanskaya dochka ]. It is a fictional name, although the story also mentions the real forts in the Orenburg Governorate. The name pattern may have come from the fort Krasnogorskaya ( The Pugachev History [ Istoriya Pugacheva ]), but other toponyms seem important too: Svyatogorskiy [ of/on a holy mountain ] monastery, Trigorskoye estate [ of/near three mountains ]. Pushkin may have also been inspired by the Ural’s limestone cliffs, but more significantly, by his long-term contemplation of ‘the white on the mountain’ (I. Surat) and a white mountain as an image of a moral ideal. Both roots in the name Belogorskaya play an important role. The first one [ bel- (white) ] reflects the sacred symbolism of the white color. The second root ( gor(a) [ mountain ]) is a play on the fort’s elevated location, which, in turn, corresponds to the significance of a mountain in Christian mythology. The name of the fortress, therefore, is evocative of the noble spirit of its defenders, as well as the enduring nature of family ties.

The author interprets the Pretender in Pushkin’s Boris Godunov as an infernal figure rather than an example of an unsophisticated yet talented and ambitious adventurer. Comparative analysis of 17th-c. Russian historical sources and the tragedy reveals that, in his depiction of the Pretender, Pushkin relied on hagiographies, chronicles, and reminiscences of people with first-hand knowledge, rather than N. Karamzin’s work. The paper examines the qualities attributed to the Pretender by other characters in the tragedy: they concern his personality, official and canonical legal status. The author stresses that the attributions are unbiased reflections on the Pretender’s actions. To this end, the researcher analyses the meaning and significance of the terms ‘rasstriga’ (‘runaway monk’), ‘samozvanets’ (‘pretender’), ‘eretic’ (‘heretic’), ‘postrel’ (‘scamp’), ‘sosud diavolskiy’ (‘vessel of evil’), and ‘vragougodnik’ (‘devil’s accomplice’) in their meanings from the 17th c. and up until Pushkin’s lifetime. Viewed from this angle, the Pushkinian character is presented as a menacing figure hell-bent on getting a Faustian bargain.

S. Lyutova and I. Dronova have put together a comprehensive description of the history and topography of the house in Ttryokhprudny Lane: known from M. Tsvetaeva’s early poems, it was her and S. Efron’s only real estate property. By introducing archived materials into the context of published literary sources that mention ‘Tsvetaeva’s house’ in Zamoskvorechye, the researchers were able to analyse the emotional images from letters and memoirs alongside the accurate descriptions of property assessors; they also discovered that Sergey Efron was the property’s registered owner, and detailed such facts from Tsvetaeva’s everyday life as the house’s type and market price, its previous owner, and the tenants during Efron’s ownership. Having thoroughly researched the documentation related to the house in Tryokhprudny Lane, they prove that the house ended up in Efron’s ownership as the dowry from the ‘rich’ Marina to her young husband in 1912: it played a crucial role in supporting the newlyweds financially.

The article discusses Tsvetaeva’s reception of L. Tolstoy’s prose, as detailed in her letters and diaries as well as literary works ( The Tale of Sonechka [ Povest o Sonechke ] etc.). According to the author, Tsvetaeva’s attitude to Tolstoy’s characters was extremely personal and highly emotionally charged (which often interfered with her ability to judge them objectively), blurring the borders between the reality of her personal life and the fictional world of Tolstoy’s novels. For example, examining Tsvetaeva’s reception of Tolstoy’s three major female characters (Natasha Rostova, Princess Maria Bolkonskaya, and Anna Karenina), Kertman points out that Tsvetaeva would respond to them differently at different points in life but would always draw parallels with her personal circumstances. Therefore, the world of Tolstoy’s characters was vitally important for Tsvetaeva and, despite the prejudice in her evaluation of his fiction and philosophy (or perhaps because of it), Tolstoy’s works make a deeply personal and emotional impression on Tsvetaeva, establishing themselves as her all-time reading favourites.

In her analysis of books by Maya Kucherskaya, Olesya Nikolaeva, and Yulia Voznesenskaya, the author investigates the history of female Christian prose from the 1990s until the present day. According to the author, it was in the 1990s, the period of crisis and transformation of the social system, that female Christian writers were more vocal, than today, on the issues of the new post-Soviet female subjectivity, drawing on folklore imagery and contrasting the folk, pagan philosophy with the Christian one, defined by an established set of rules and limitations for the principal female roles. Thus, the folklore elements in Kucherskaya’s early works are considered as an attempt to represent female subjectivity. However, the author argues that, in their current work, Kucherskaya and other representatives of the so-called female Christian prose tend to choose different, objectivizing methods to represent female characters. This new and conservative approach may have come from a wider social context, including the state-imposed ‘family values’ program.

The article deals with A. Bushkovsky’s novel Rymba that goes beyond the topics typical of Russian North prose. Rather than limiting himself to admiring nature and Russian character, the author portrays the northern Russian village of Rymba in the larger context of the country’s mentality, history, mythology, and gender politics. In the novel, myth clashes with reality, history with the present day, and an individual with the state. The critic draws a comparison between the novel and the traditions of village prose and Russian North prose. In particular, Bushkovsky’s Rymba is discussed alongside V. Rasputin’s Farewell to Matyora [ Proshchanie s Matyoroy ] and R. Senchin’s The Flood Zone [ Zona zatopleniya ]. The novel’s central question is: what keeps the Russian world afloat? Depicting the Christian faith as such a bulwark, Bushkovsky links atheism with the social and spiritual roles played by contemporary men and women. The critic argues, however, that the reliance on Christianity in the novel verges on an affectation. The book’s main symbol is a drowning hawk: it perishes despite people’s efforts to save it.

The article discusses contemporary young adult and post-adolescent literatures, which respond to the modern world with its catastrophes and challenges in a more acute manner than fiction for adults. A new literary genre, the problem young adult novel needs a comprehensive literary analysis. The age bracket of the genre, which is still open for discussion, is examined by the author in detail. While young adult fiction has a different agenda from children’s literature, it often surpasses ‘grown-up’ books in terms of issues raised and their relevance, which is especially true for the problem young adult novel, typically centred on a specific problem of modern society and featuring a teenage protagonist fighting for his/her survival. The main themes of the genre include deadly diseases, trauma, adaptation of special children in the society, suicide, abuse, murder, drugs, terrorism, and others. Little discussed and often tabooed in class or at home, these topics are raised by young adult literature, while teenagers get a chance to examine them and relive their anxieties with protagonists.

E. Konstantinova interviews V. Zubareva, a poet, literary critic, author of over twenty books, including monographs, poems and prose, as well as winner of several literary awards. The two discuss the essence of literature and the different interpretation it receives in academic research, artistic prose, and poetry, respectively. The interview particularly dwells on V. Zubareva’s new translation of  The Tale of Igor’s Campaign [ Slovo o polku Igoreve ] and the  Tale’s new concept, according to which, as Zubareva suggests, the author and the narrator are different people and the tale’s real hero is Svyatoslav, who dreams of unifying Russian princedoms, rather than Igor. A US resident of over 30 years, Zubareva also comments on the problem of modern Slavic studies abroad and shares updates on her projects, such as Russkoe Bezrubezhye [ Russian Literature Without Borders ], Orlita, and the Gostinaya literary magazine.

N. Reznichenko’s article centres on I. Bunin’s Cursed Days [ Okayannye dni ] as a chronicle of the 1917 Russian Revolution that also takes into account works by Bunin’s predecessors and contemporaries. The author argues that Cursed Days seems to be an attempted verification of history, written in the genre of a writer’s diary with an ambition to pass for a historical record. The analogy with the chronicler author is reinforced by Bunin’s quotations from Russian fundamental historical research typified by the chronicler style (V. Tatishchev, V. Klyuchevsky, S. Solovyov, and N. Kostomarov) as well as journalistic works by Russian writers and politicians who represented the major movements in 19th-c. Russian political thought. In his pursuit to recreate the post-revolutionary atmosphere, Bunin frequently intersperses his narration with contemporary journalistic publications, including Bolshevik newspapers. Bunin’s rich chronicle-like narrative not only runs alongside the artistic depictions, but effortlessly blends with them, making Cursed Days a unique combination of a historical record and a work of literature.

Russian born Boris de Schloezer (1881–1969) is mainly known as one of the first translators-cum-philosophers who contributed to spreading Leo Shestov’s ideas and to introducing the European audience to some of new musical forms invented by the Russian émigré composers and musicians. Schloezer is widely acclaimed as one of the greatest translators of Russian literature into French in the 20th c. He proposed his own way of translating Russian classics and among the authors he translated are Leo Tolstoy and Fyodor Dostoyevsky, but also the philosopher Leo Shestov. In the foreword ‘En marge d’une traduction’ to his 1960 translation of War and Peace [ Voyna i mir ] Schloezer explicated his principles of literary translation and author’s language. This text was not only a major landmark of his career as a translator but his final achievement in this matter. More than twenty years later this text was reedited in Paris in a special issue with different texts written by Schloezer and other majors French authors about Schloezer’s works. This publication makes this text accessible to the Russian readers for the very first time.

The article explores Mandelstam’s reception of Dante’s poetic legacy manifested in the former’s books from the late 1920s – early 1930s: The Fourth Prose [ Chetvyortaya proza ] (late 1929 – early 1930) and Journey to Armenia
[ Puteshestvie v Armeniyu ] (1931). In The Fourth Prose , Mandelstam turns to Dante again after a three-year break, his new book an epitome of his profound fascination with the Florentine poet. In her examination of the poetic references to the Divine Comedy in The Fourth Prose , the author points out what she believes is a deliberate inaccuracy in Mandelstam’s allusion to the  Comedy’s first line and hypothesizes on the reasons for the misquotation. Her analysis and interpretation of Dante allusions in Journey to Armenia focus on the context of such quotations: namely, the biological metaphors, in which Dante’s imagery looks natural. Also the author discusses the reasons for Dante’s image to converge with that of Lamarck in Journey to Armenia , for which purpose she considers Mandelstam’s other works from the same period.

In the centre of this research is the problem of translation, study and reception of Solzhenitsyn’s works in the People’s Republic of China. A Chinese scholar of Slavic languages and literature, the author points out that Solzhenitsyn studies in China would be understandably interrupted for political reasons only to be resumed later, due to the growing interest in the writer’s works. Starting from 1963, there have been two distinct lines of study: Solzhenitsyn’s biography and his literary legacy. The first topic mainly attracts Chinese writers, historians, cultural scholars, philosophers, and professional critics; they present the readers with biographical facts in the context of the history of Soviet labour camps, dissident movement, etc. The second topic has specialists in Russian studies and foreign literature exploring the eternal topics in Solzhenitsyn’s works as well as his innovative techniques. According to the author, contemporary Chinese literary criticism is concerned with the latter area of research, while reception of Solzhenitsyn’s works is changing from negative to positive.

The article offers an analytical review of D. Granin’s This Strange Life [ Eta strannaya zhizn ]. The author focuses on the practical application of the system devised by the protagonist, Lyubishchev, and examines the effects of time tracking on everyday life. The author focuses on various time-consuming activities: learning and education, personal needs, entertainment, and drafting of a report ‘to Time about time expenditure’. The paper highlights examples showing usability of Professor Lyubishchev’s time management system. Along with a description of the time tracking principles, the author comments on Granin’s depiction of Lyubishchev’s character, his attitude towards the protagonist, and describes Granin’s own diaries practice as productive. Therefore, the article provides a twofold vision of time: both as an object and a subject. The author comes to a conclusion that Granin’s treatment of time in his text is paradoxical.

A review of the collective monograph by researchers of the A. M. Gorky Institute of World Literature of the RAS into the origins and evolution of the biography as a genre. The first section of the book discusses composing a writer’s biography with the examples of Shakespeare and Samuel Johnson, the myth and the truth in Camões’ biography, as well as the specific features of this genre in the Latin American tradition. The second section of the monograph cov
ers the history of the genre in Russia. Here, the authors discuss a wide range of problems, from the historical and cultural context of Simeon Polotsky’s biography to attempts of the genre’s theoretical interpretation. Also considered is P. Furman’s project, a series of biographies adapted for children’s reading. The third section focuses on documents at the source of poets’ biographies, criminal proceedings of the Decembrists, and case files of our contemporaries who fell victim of the Stalin terror.

The review gives a write-up of the edition, its structure, composition and its material. The guidelines for teaching British literary Modernism, methods and concepts offered in the book are subject to a detailed analysis. The critical appraisal of its innovations, its tendency to extend and revise the canonical topics and the reading list, offer new points of view and unordinary approaches (in contrast with typical university curricula) is followed by critical
remarks targeted at its weak points – poor reasoning and certain groundless pronouncements one sometimes comes across, principles that underlie the selection of material in particular chapters and paragraphs, correctness of style and conformity with the conventions of academic discourse. It is also emphasized that the book in question is a fascinating and enriching reading that will be duly appreciated by the students as well as colleagues and all readers interested in the British literary Modernism.

The review covers K. Chekalov’s monograph on the problems of mass literature and the literary legacy of Gaston Leroux. The author chose one of the pivotal moments in the history of French literature: a transition period, which, according to Bakhtin’s law on borderlines and transitions, combines adherence to traditions as well as revision of the existing systems. This topic has so far remained unexplored by Russian scholars, just like the works of Leroux, whose role in establishing the genre of detective fiction is enormous. No research has been dedicated to his oeuvre in Russia. Only a meager share of his works has been translated into the Russian language. The choice of such a topic implies the relevance and novelty of the research. The purpose of the book is to create a solid basis for further exploration of this complex phenomenon, which determined the book’s structure, comprising six chapters and a closing summary.

The review focuses on the monograph co-written by Doctor of Philology Maria Mikhaylova and the Chinese scholar Yin Liu about Evdokia Nagrodskaya and her works. Contemporary critics dismissed her books as pulp fiction. Yet the researchers prove convincingly that Nagrodskaya’s works reveal a meaning deeper than was assumed by her contemporaries. Moreover, the transgender theme explored in Nagrodskaya’s acclaimed novel The Wrath of Dionysus
[ Gnev Dionisa ] remains highly relevant a century upon the book’s first publication. Amongst the mo nograph’s noticeable merits is a detailed overview of modern literary studies devoted to female authors of the early 20th c. Highly commendable is the excellent quality of academic analysis applied to the philoso phical problems and artistic anthropology of the novels The Wrath of Dionysus , The Bronze Door [ U bronzovoy dveri ], and Evil Spirits [ Zlye dukhi]. 

The two books by Mark Uralsky discussed in this review bring together vast amounts of information about the relationships that two leading Russian writers of their day had with Jewish figures. The topic ‘Bunin and the Jews’ is the less expected, since Bunin had very little connection with Jews before the Revolution. However, afterward — first in Odessa and then in France — he was in regular contact with a number of figures who offered him support in various ways, while he in turn provided protection to several Jews during World War II. The general outlines of Gorky’s extensive interest in Judaism and in Jewish writers are better known, but here too Uralsky makes accessible materials that were either widely scattered or not previously published. Both books suffer somewhat from a seeming haste in their preparation, resulting in minor errors and some structural awkwardness, but these factors do not seriously detract from their value.

The review contains an in-depth examination of certain articles from the collection Utopia and Eschatology in the Culture of Russian Modernism . The author refers to the first, philosophical, part of the book and offers to view it as its focus. The reviewer suggests that, despite a plethora of utopian and political motifs permeating Russian literature, culture and philosophy, the articles examine a single narrative. The latter, he believes, has historical roots in the Westernists’ and Slavophiles’ political manifestos. Therefore, the entire cultural-philosophical context of Russian Modernism is viewed as determined, pursuing only the political or social agenda. In the reviewer’s opinion, such an angle immediately places the authors of the collection within the framework of the political, post-Soviet assessment of the utopia issue. The result is that utopia is given a two-fold presentation: as interpreted by the authors of the collection, and by philosophers, writers, and cultural influencers of Russian Modernism.