To this day, the ideas of A. Veselovsky’s Historical Poetics [Istoricheskaya poetika] have been confined to philological discourse. V. Shklovsky’s quip that ‘Aleksandr Veselovsky had no pupils, only admirers’ still rings true. The article represents the first attempt at analysing the metaplot of Eugene Onegin, Pushkin’s novel in verse, through the application of Veselovsky’s comparative method. The study seeks to resolve the problem of imitation, which occupied the mind of the novel’s creator, from the viewpoints of the author and his artistic doppelganger the poet. In this regard, a resolution of the dilemma ‘one’s own — someone else’s’ is reached by means of Veselovsky’s comparative approach, which owes its recent revival in scholarly discourse to works by I. Shaytanov. Assimilation of ‘someone else’s’ is explained in the context of Veselovsky’s concept of ‘crosscurrent’ discovered by the scholar during his study of Pushkin’s ideas on the subject. In her examination of ‘imitativeness,’ the author is guided by Pushkin’s understanding of it, as later embraced by Veselovsky; i. e., rather than as a mechanical act, it is viewed as an act of creation, whose purpose it is to reveal the uniqueness of a specific national culture.

The history of the Russo-Polish political relationship, from the Congress of Vienna settlement of 1815, which granted Russia a major part of the Duchy of Warsaw, to the failed Polish Uprising of 1830–1831, provides a context for the discussion of Pushkin’s view of the so-called Polish question. Pushkin argued that the two Slavic states, Russia and Poland, had been permanently at odds, and that their conflict should be seen as a familial dispute of two Slavic nations, in which Europe should not meddle. A historian Pushkin believed that Poland should accept Russia’s sovereignty and become absorbed by its neighbour; otherwise, it would pose a constant threat to Russia’s very existence and safety. He embraced the idea as early as the late 1810s under the influence of ideas promoted by Russian patriots and exemplified by writings of the Arzamas Society and the Union of Salvation members, the latter being an early secret society behind the Decembrist revolt. In this regard, we can also talk about N. Karamzin’s influence on Pushkin. Karamzin was known to have doggedly criticised the decision of the Emperor Alexander I to grant Poland a constitution and political autonomy.

The article analyses the artistic evolution of contemporary writer R. Senchin — from one of his most successful novels The Yoltyshevs [Yoltyshevy] (2009) to later works such as The Runway [Polosa] (2012), a novella, and novels The Flood Zone [Zona zatopleniya] (2015) and Rain in Paris [Dozhd v Parizhe] (2018). It is suggested that each of the works in question are written in response to a 20th-c. classic: The Runway brings back memories of Shukshin’s short stories, The Flood Zone invokes Rasputin’s Farewell to Matyora [Proshchanie s Matyoroy], and Rain in Paris — Vampilov’s Duck Hunting [Utinaya okhota]. The critics primarily focus on the plots that are typical of classical Russian literature, e. g., the fate of a ‘small man’ or an eccentric (chudik). Drawing from the traditions of the ‘village’ and ‘urban’ prose, Senchin creates a modern version of the two. The authors consider Senchin a proponent of objective emotionality, one of the few modern successors of the classical tradition, and argue that his characters are true heroes of our time.

The article offers a quick historical overview of the English translations of Varlam Shalamov’s Kolyma Stories [Kolymskie rasskazy]. The first translation of a big selection of stories was made by J. Glad: the selected tales were published by W.W. Norton & Company in two volumes (Kolyma Stories in 1980 and Graphite in 1981), to be printed as a single volume in 1994 under the title Kolyma Stories. A new and superior edition appeared in the years 2018 and 2020 — the two-volume Kolyma Stories translated by D. Rayfield; his complete translation is based on the authorial text published in Russia by Shalamov’s literary estate executor I. Sirotinskaya. This ensures that the cycle’s compositional integrity is intact. Agreeing with the opinion expressed by A. Osipova in her review ‘The Forced Conversion of Varlam Shalamov’ in The Los Angeles Review of Books, we recognise Rayfield’s achievements in conveying Shalamov’s terse style and masterful use of detail, including details as symbols or signs — the cornerstone of Shalamov’s writings. Also analysed are the theses in A. Valles’ Introduction to the second volume, which suggest the importance of a philological reading of Shalamov’s works.

Ethical literary criticism is a method of criticism that explores the didactic function of literature from the ethical viewpoint, and seeks to analyse and interpret literature from this perspective. The theory of ethical literary criticism describes natural selection as a theoretical prerequisite and philosophical foundation of ‘ethical selection.’ Teaching is seen as a method of ethical selection, whereas literature — as an instrument of enlightenment of humans, where a didactic effect is achieved through moral examples, models and guidance. The authors believe that the method of ethical literary criticism will benefit not only from a history of its own development, but also a detailed description of the arguments voiced by its opponents. The article examines one of the key themes in the theory of ethical literary criticism — the ethical choice, its theoretical premises and examples found both in world literature and in the Chinese literary tradition.

The article proposes a method for characterisation of an author’s idiostyle that relies on the estimated usage frequency of transition words or phrases (TW). The whole of Russian scientific idiostyle can be treated as a combination of usage frequencies of transition words that defines scientific texts in Russian. It is typical of Russian scientific idiostyle to feature high usage frequency of TW that denote the cause-and-effect relationship and summarise and specify information, whereas TW for describing comparison, location and certain aspects of time relationship are used infrequently.

In 1974, John Fowles creates a prose retelling of Marie de France’s medieval lai of Eliduc and includes it in his collection The Ebony Tower. The translation is prefaced with ‘A Personal Note,’ where Fowles reminisces about his student days in Oxford, where he was studying Old French, medieval literature and the lais of Marie de France. The article is concerned with identifying the reason for Fowles to choose this particular text for translation. To this end, the authors conduct a comparative analysis of the original and the translation. The alterations of the lai show that Fowles selected this text for his collection due to plot similarities with his own books. The article proceeds to explore the significance of bigamy, the core plot of the lai, for Fowles’ works. The scholars suggest that, via his translation, Fowles starts a simultaneous conversation with medieval literature and his own earlier output. The naivety and simplicity of Eliduc, rendered by Fowles with kind but undisguised irony, stand in stark contrast to overwrought and confusing postmodernist writings, and as such draw attention to the complexity and uncertainty of human life.

Examined in the article is an obscure feuilleton called ‘An immature critic’ [‘Nevzrosliy kritik’] (1914), penned by Anton Krayniy (Z. Gippius) with Korney Chukovsky in mind. The article sets out to identify the role of gender inversion in the feuilleton’s intended purpose and unique genre characteristics. Having analysed the semantics of two variants of the title and subtitle (‘A study in inverted commas’ [‘Etyud v kavychkakh’]), critical techniques and quotation strategies, the scholar finds that Gippius’ metacritical piece is a spoof. A female critic (in a male disguise) expounds on the ‘feminine soul’ of a male critic, employing his own techniques and making a witty use of a female stereotype according to Weininger (‘a prostitute’). It appears that the feuilleton’s initial title implied not just an individual characteristic of Chukovsky’s, but ‘journalistic prostitution’ in general and critical feuilletons in particular — a genre practised by Gippius as well. The final choice of the title stresses the distinction of Krayniy’s journalistic (‘masculine’) criticism from the aesthetic (‘feminine,’ ‘immature’) criticism espoused by Chukovsky.

The article examines the evolution of B. Eichenbaum’s attitude to Acmeism. The author is particularly interested in Eichenbaum’s early years as a writer and literary critic, especially in his articles that appeared in the Russkaya Molva newspaper in 1912–1913, which have only recently attracted scholarly attention. One of such articles is reprinted here for the first time. Eichenbaum’s publications are interpreted in the context of his works and hitherto unstudied content of Russkaya Molva. The negative treatment of the newspaper by Soviet historians of journalism and literature was predetermined by Lenin’s scathing criticism of the periodical. In reality, however, Orlova’s analysis proves that the newspaper had every right to call itself progressive and politically unbiased. In his polemic with Acmeists, likely guided by B. Sadovskoy, Eichenbaum sides with the latter’s assessment of the poetic movement. He contrasts Acmeists’ output with that of the French poet F. Jammes. Over time, however, Eichenbaum revises his attitude towards Acmeist poetry, especially Akhmatova’s, and later Gumilyov’s, works.

The article discusses the professional ties and personal friendship between V. Korolenko and V. Bonch-Bruevich, examining their correspondence dating back to 1892. Upon Korolenko’s death, Bonch-Bruevich, later to become director of the State Literary Museum, continues his correspondence with Korolenko’s daughter Sofia, discussing primarily, but not solely, the writer’s archive. Even though the family decided to entrust Korolenko’s archive to the Lenin Library, which boasted more appropriate preservation facilities than the Literary Museum, Bonch-Bruevich and Sofia Korolenko would exchange letters for many more years, enjoying each other’s trust and friendship. Bonch-Bruevich would support Korolenko’s family. After Bonch-Bruevich passed away, followed by Sofia two years later, the correspondence between the Literary Museum and the Korolenko Museum in Poltava continued until 1960; the letters were written by Evgeny Balabanovich, director of Chekhov Museum affiliated with the State Literary Museum, and his counterpart in Poltava, Lyubov Geishor, who ran the Korolenko Museum. The earliest letter quoted in the article dates from 1892, while the latest discovered epistle comes from 1960.

The article methodically analyses several versions of M. Shkapskaya’s poem ‘To have children with the Fair Lady…’ [‘Detey ot prekrasnoy damy…’], dedicated to A. Blok, and examines the changes made by Shkapskaya as she was revising the draft. It is a well-known fact that, in 1920, a year before his death, it was Blok who helped Shkapskaya establish a literary career. Having read a typewritten copy of her collection of poems entitled Mater Dolorosa, he supplied a favourable review, which, along with personal recommendations of M. Kuzmin, M. Lozinsky and N. Gumilyov, ensured Shkapskaya’s membership in the Petrograd Union of Poets, despite the fact that none of her work had been published at the time. The article lists several lesser-known facts about Blok’s life (for example, that he personally knew and corresponded with Shkapskaya, who was also a friend and correspondent of his mother’s, A. Kublitskaya-Piottukh), and includes the complete text of Shkapskaya’s comical ‘opera’ Blok Aleksandr, sent to Blok in a letter dated 16 January 1921; the text is supplied with notes. Also included is another of her ‘operas,’ Shkapsky Orest.

The article by S. Belyakov, a historian, literary critic and author of several non-fiction books, mostly deals with the ‘Moscow period’ in the life of Georgy Efron, the son of M. Tsvetaeva. According to Belyakov, Georgy was a bookish boy in every sense of the word: his opinions, knowledge about life, and preferences and interests were largely defined by what he had read. Mur (his nickname) fascinates not only as the poet’s son but also as a young erudite and intellectual, immortalised by the diary he left behind, which contains precious descriptions of daily life in the 1930s — 1940s. In his examination of the books and periodicals in the scope of Georgy’s reading interests (from European classics to Mickey Mouse comic books, and from Silver Age poetry to latest Soviet novels), Belyakov discovers that Efron’s reading and his comments on it alone help to reconstruct many aspects of his personality, while the numerous quotes from Georgy’s diary allow for appreciation of his erudition, critical treatment of reality, and writing style.

The review considers the festschrift celebrating the 70th birthday of the scholar M. Andreev. His colleagues and followers have co-authored a summary of his scholarship that showcases the body of knowledge of the contemporary humanities, where Andreev’s achievements feature prominently. The division of the monograph into sections entitled ‘The Theatre and the Theatrical,’ ‘Italy and Italian Studies,’ ‘Translation and Translators: Practice and Theory,’ and ‘The Poetics of Text’ is inspired by the academic interests of the renowned scholar — the book’s dedicatee, with whom every contributor engages, directly or indirectly, in an intellectual dialogue. The festschrift shows exceptional thematic diversity and richness, and covers purely theoretical as well as practical aspects of scholarly research. For example, the section on translation contains both theoretical studies and actual translations — in poetry and prose, from the Italian, English and French languages — supplied with detailed notes.

The review examines L. Panova’s monograph ‘Going Italian, going Russian’: Dante and Petrarch in the Silver Age discourse from the Symbolists to Mandelstam [‘Italianyas, ruseya’: Dante i Petrarka v khudozhestvennom diskurse Serebryanogo veka ot simvolistov do Mandelshtama] which explores Dante’s and Petrarch’s reception in the Russian literature of the 1900s — 1930s. The review discusses the structure of Panova’s book, its choice of material for analysis, and merits, as well as findings that are seen as particularly astonishing and ingenious, if contentious at times. Panova undertakes a project that is enormous and important, considering the profound and diverse nature of Dante’s influence on modernist literature in Russia and Europe alike. This book, therefore, will appeal to scholars of Russian literature and all readers interested in Silver Age poetry, as well as to comparativist philologists, as the study focuses on a ‘Russian’ Dante and Petrarch.

The Russian translation of W. H. Auden’s The Dyer’s Hand [Ruka krasilshchika] is the first complete translation into Russian of the original collection of essays written by Auden at different points in his life. Although diverse in their topics, the essays can be grouped together in thematic chapters — such is the order of their reading as advised by the author. Auden shares his views of world literature, citing various works and analysing the poetics of the selected authors. The review particularly details Auden’s radically changing philosophical views — from Freudism to Marxism to religion. The reviewer dwells on the suggestion made previously by some critics that Auden’s ultimate belief was in the Word as such, the Absolute of language — that is to say, poetry — which, however, failed to achieve the poet’s intended goal of changing the world. The Dyer’s Hand is full of highly interesting statements. The book can be considered the crowning glory of the poet as a thinker.

The reviewer considers A. Livergant’s biography of P. G. Wodehouse a highly relevant book that succeeds in describing Wodehouse’s optimism and dedication to writing as a source of irrepressible enthusiasm for life even in the darkest of times. The biographer focuses on a carefully reconstructed story of Wodehouse’s radio broadcasts made from a Berlin-based studio as a turning point in the writer’s career that nearly ruined his reputation. This particular incident in the life of Wodehouse enables the author to start a conversation about confounding circumstances that often interfered with people’s lives in that tragic period and questions that do not yield to a simple answer. Livergant discusses various Russian translations of the writer’s novels and helps to form an idea about a ‘Russian’ Wodehouse. He includes a number of his own translations, completing the image of Wodehouse — the book’s protagonist with recognisable qualities of Jeeves and Wooster, and specifying his own standpoint as a biographer.

The second edition of the book, much enlarged, is focused on the practical use of the idea of the incomplete as the important feature in the contemporary artistic mind. The book is made of four parts, each one divided into sections or chapters written by different authors whose names are mentioned only on the reverse of the title-page. This principle (not very convenient for the reader) insists on the fact the genre of the book is a monograph and not a random collection. With this claim in view one could expect more order and thoughtful organisation when every article would be complimentary to others, whereas now they are more independent and occasional in the treatment of the incomplete. The typology proposed in the theoretical chapters and the major idea brought forth by the theoreticians are not much on the demand in creative practice. As the ruling principle for the incomplete/ unfinished in the artistic mind, the idea of wholeness was advanced, not violated by the fact of incompleteness, but taking a new shape worth a collective research.