The article takes a close look at the principles behind the work of the contemporary novelist and scriptwriter G. Yakhina, attempting analysis that goes beyond the context of modern literature and exploring the ties with 20th-c. existential philosophy, including the categories of memory, transgressive experience, ethnic identity and the anthropological leitmotif. Yakhina’s latest novel, Train to Samarkand [Eshelon na Samarkand] receives particular attention. According to Sultanov, it is written with reliance on aforementioned concepts, namely, the narration is concentrated around a core that represents the book’s values and semantics, acknowledging that man remains the measure of all things. A suffering human being (a permanent subject in all of Yakhina’s books), regardless of his or her political stance, origins or faith, stays self-sufficient, a quality that allows Yakhina’s characters to preserve their humanity despite oppressive historical circumstances.

The article discusses the work of the St. Petersburg-based writer K. Buksha. The author proposes a careful analysis and critical reception of her prose, starting from the very first novel, published under the penname of a seventy-five-year-old Krzysztof Bakush, to her latest book Advent, an experiment with rhythmic prose. In her analysis of the writer’s work, E. Minaeva focuses on the novels The Freedom Factory [Zavod ‘Svoboda’], Opens Out [Otkryvaetsya vnutr ], and Churov and Churbanov [Churov i Churbanov], each of them featuring typical Bukshaesque characters — humble and odd, they suffer their own personal spiritual tragedy. According to the critic, Buksha strives to let the reader see the characters’ world and the changes their lives undergo over time. Along with the attention given to the fate of the characters and the twists and turns of Buksha’s recurrent plots, the article is characterised by a detailed dialogue with critics who have reviewed Buksha’s works (including judges of the National Bestseller Prize, whose shortlists featured Buksha’s novels more than once) and an invitation to form your own opinion based on the proposed critical summary.

The critic and essay writer E. Shcheglova paints a critical portrait of A. Obukh, conducting a thorough analysis of the Petersburgian writer’s creative manner, describing the themes of her short stories and their genre-specific and stylistic features, and initiating a discussion that not only concerns Obukh’s prose, but also applies to ‘new twenty-year-olds’ in general. Shcheglova is attentive and benevolent as a critic. She explores both the light, airy substance of Obukh’s prose and her drawings, which the writer uses to illustrate her slightly absurdist short stories that maintain an amazingly harmonious presence in the two worlds, the literary and artistic one, and places Obukh in the context of the typical Petersburgian style with its somber graphics and attention to architectural elements. According to Shcheglova, Obukh’s creative approach as a writer and an artist is constituted by a pronounced artistic and romantic view of life and its poetisation.

The article discusses the author problem in art and focuses on one particular aspect of Dostoevsky’s theory of creative process, namely, his view of reader/audience response, of the author’s high responsibility and their reciprocation necessary for an adequate communication. In his intricately humorous Winter Notes on Summer Impressions [Zimnie zametki o letnikh vpechatleniyakh], Dostoevsky uses comical situations of his own non-encounters with architecture, artefacts and personalities of a very closely related, ‘second home’ culture, which nevertheless remained altogether different to that of Russia, in order to describe the core principles of interaction which drive the understanding and correct appreciation of art. These principles not only stipulate the possibility of artist-recipient interactions within an act of artistic creation and its appreciation, but also enable communication between two dissimilar cultures that is based on productive cooperation rather than antagonism. Dostoevsky stresses the responsibility of both the artist and the recipient of art for accurately transmitting and perceiving meanings, and argues the importance of a sincere effort on behalf of the two in order to ensure adequate communication

The novella The Forged Coupon [Falshiviy kupon] can be considered one of the most compelling illustrations of the core principle of Tolstoy’s religious philosophy: ‘nonviolent resistance to evil.’ While Tolstoyan anthropology consistently views human nature as inherently good, the novella offers a not unambiguous view of the human soul, which can harbour evil as well. The Forged Coupon is a fascinating example of the indirect dialogue between Tolstoy and Dostoevsky. Dostoevsky’s anthropology and his idea of human nature as a struggle between good and evil appears to play a significant role in Tolstoy’s contemplations. An evil feeling is indeed engendered in the human soul, but with an important caveat that this evil feeling always interacts with external evil. Such an evil combination invariably occurs in the context of broken-off connections, when humanity’s original spiritual integrity is disrupted. In addition, Tolstoy’s later philosophy converges with Dostoevsky’s ideas about the good being a result of the irrational and mystical influence of one man’s spiritual nature on that of another, in a true manifestation of the Christian spirit.

In the mid-1880s, the French came to discover Dostoevsky’s works. Yet neither Russian nor foreign scholars have attempted to fnd out when exactly his name was frst mentioned in French fction. This article represents the frst such study. The author believes that Théodore de Banville was the frst French author who introduced Dostoevsky’s name to the poetry of the late 1880s, or can at least be credited with one of the earliest mentions of the Russian writer’s name in French verse. For authors of de Banville’s generation, Dostoevsky remained a trendy foreign writer whose opinions and manner of writing stood in stark contrast with traditional French literary, aesthetic and ethical values. De Banville’s lines about the Russian author are full of irony and mock what the poet views as Dostoevsky’s exaggerated ‘psychologism.’ The article also describes the context for Dostoevsky’s reception, drawing comparisons with other foreign authors who became known to French audiences around the same time. The study contains a comparison between G. Flaubert’s response to L. Tolstoy’s War and Peace [Voyna i mir] and de Banville’s reception of Dostoevsky.

Arkady and Boris Strugatsky’s works never stop fascinating their readers — general audiences and scholars alike. The latter tend to consider fction, including sci-f, a form of society’s social self-awareness. Among Strugatskys’ oeuvre, the novella Noon, 22nd Century [Polden, dvadtsat vtoroy vek] especially stands out. Published in the 1960s, it became a symbol of an intellectual utopia. The Noon Universe [Mir Poludnya] has since been used as a general term for a place where the authors and their readers would love to live. However, the novella took extra work before its canonical version crystallised. Its second edition, printed fve years afer the frst, had been revised and extended. This paper analyses the authors’ changes to the text and traces their connection with the social processes unfolding in that turbulent period. The era was marked by a burgeoning consumer society and the growth of an opposing movement that promoted personal development. The second trend was referred to as a revolution of subjects by the Polish psychologist K. Obuchowski.

In each historical period, starting from the mid-19th c., Russian nihilism represents an uncompromising social and aesthetic response to challenges of political and cultural reality. In order to fully appreciate the phenomenon of Russian nihilism as an inexhaustible supply of literary and philosophical ideas and social and political activism, it is necessary to identify and defne the subject of nihilistic discourse and then trace its genealogy. In their studies, the prominent Russian thinkers A. Herzen and D. Pisarev proposed their original genealogical concepts of the ‘Russian nihilist.’ Their comparative analysis reveals a number of converging points with regard to the artistic and anthropological types preceding the ‘Russian nihilist.’ However, while Pisarev insisted on a continuous, linear and inevitable process that brought about the ‘Russian nihilist,’ Herzen’s historic-philosophical views determined his theory of a more sporadic process.

The study of Turgenev-Fet relationship is fraught with gaps and inaccuracies, due to researchers’ ofen subjective approach, as well as the incompleteness of the relevant corpus of documents. At the same time, there are still enough publicly available sources that can help to correct certain assumptions about the subject. Fet’s exemplary ‘purity’ of his muse and uncompromising aesthetic beliefs combined with his rationalism in quotidian matters are the antithesis of Turgenev’s aesthetic and life choices. This contrast emphasises and confrms the possibility for a happy symbiosis of the lyrical and ideological elements in art. Such harmonious co-existence is depicted by Turgenev in the character of Nikolay Petrovich Kirsanov. The article challenges A. Uspenskaya’s concept, which named Fet as the prototype of the older Kirsanov. From ideological and aesthetic perspectives alike, the character appears to be Fet’s complete opposite, although the poet’s estate, Stepanovka, was a major inspiration for Turgenev’s portrayal of Kirsanov’s ‘farm.’ The author of the article also questions the attempts to use Turgenev’s failure to meet his own ideal of a happy life as a reason for presenting Fet’s life strategy as superior.

In January 1974, The Washington Post was about to print a series of reports on the Houston mass murders perpetrated by the pedophile serial killer Dean Corll. The newspaper announced that the sensationalist reports would be written by Truman Capote, who had already published a well-known documentary novel In Cold Blood (1966). The new project, entitled Houston Diary, promised to become yet another true-crime bestseller. Despite the newspaper’s extensive promotion and the readership’s big interest, the coverage of the trial was never published. Capote refused to proceed with the project, citing ill health, and later would avoid discussing the subject altogether. What was the real reason for the project’s termination and what happened to the writer’s archive pertaining to the ‘Houston case’? Zakharov studied the papers acquired by the New York Public Library in 2019 and found facts that shed light on Capote’s unrealised project to be styled afer In Cold Blood. The article tells of the papers’ discovery and suggests including Houston Diary in Capote’s bibliography as an unfnished work.

The article discuses little-known events of the life and literary career of Pavel Nikolaevich Medvedev (1892–1938), a member of the Bakhtin Circle. Gleaning facts from documents discovered in St. Petersburg’s archives, the critic’s own 1910s publications, reminiscences of his contemporaries and other materials with limited access, the article reconstructs the frst steps in literary criticism made by then a law student of Petersburg’s Herzen University, detailing Medvedev’s unique style and shedding light on his academic life and the circumstances of his expulsion. The authors analyse Medvedev’s editorship of Zapiski Peredvizhnogo Teatra and the role he played in the 1920s Petrograd’s/Leningrad’s literary, publishing and scholarly life. The article introduces a number of documents, including Medvedev’s student records, a 1929 autobiography, ‘Application to fll the position of an academic researcher,’ etc.

The article explores the religious subtext of Chekhov’s Ward No. 6 [Palata nomer shest] and K. Kesey’s One Flew over the Cuckoo’s Nest. Both depict a psychiatric facility that can be regarded as a model of a society oppressive to human individuality. The author analyses the portrayals of the main characters, both of whom represent the type of a saviour. One of them, doctor Ragin, fails his ‘soteriological mission,’ whereas the other, McMurphy, succeeds. McMurphy seems to share some features with Christ, and yet others — with an anthropomorphic trickster from Hindu mythology as well as a character of the French carnival theatre, a vestige of medieval festivities partially rooted in Christianity. Both Ragin and McMurphy are tragical characters, but while the former’s death does not bring about any positive change, the latter’s demise results in a spiritual transformation of those around him. The author argues that the compared books describe two different reactions to violence: passive submission to circumstances, followed by social and personal degradation, and active defance of abuse, which results in an improved ‘world order.’

The publication is concerned with little known facts of the life and literary research of Nikolay Lerner (1877–1934), a renowned Pushkin scholar, critic, literary historian and translator, who authored Pushkin’s Labours and Days [Trudy i dni Pushkina] (1910), Tales about Pushkin [Rasskazy o Pushkine] (1929), and Essays of a Pushkin Scholar [Pushkinologicheskie etyudy] (1935). The paper also details his plans to compile, comment and publish reminiscences of the prominent sociologist and journalist S. Yuzhakov (1849– 1910), entitled Notes of an Old Writer [Zapiski starogo pisatelya]. Intended for publication by Kolos, a private publishing house managed by F. Vityazev, the book never saw the light of day. On 19 March 1931, Lerner was arrested on the charges of counterrevolutionary propaganda among the literary community as well as purchasing of valuable museum items and their smuggling across the border. The charges were dropped on 29 March and his case was closed; the scholar was released from custody on 13 May of the same year. The incident was described by the historian R. Ivanov-Razumnik in a dedicated chapter of his memoir and by the philologist and commentator of Pushkin’s oeuvre Y. Oksman.

The author conducts a case study with the aim of discovering what tends to cut short the careers of promising young writers of every epoch. The paper offers a study and partial reconstruction of the life of the now obscure writer Boris P. Markov, whose works were published in the early 20th c. and whose pen-name B. Orik appears in reference books on literature, albeit misspelt due to a misprint — therefore, a ‘pseudo-pseudonym.’ Markov’s later life, already unconnected to literature, is known to the researcher, who happens to be his great-granddaughter. In order to glean information about his earlier life, S. Liutova pored over archives in Moscow, Saratov, Tambov, Veliky Novgorod,as well as Łowicz and Łodź in Poland, piecing together a comprehensive view of life in Russia at the dawn of the 20th c. The author discovers that a writer’s silence can be a form of unconscious protest. The article’s most intriguing suggestion is that the memories of Markov’s literary circle (the paper infers his connection with Acmeists) and the social context of his early journalism were intentionally suppressed by the family.

Yury Klyuchnikov is a prolifc author who has published a series of translations of French, Suf, Chinese, Indian, and English poetry into Russian. To Donne’s hundred and twenty ‘best’ poems, selected as such by the volume’s compilers, the book does little justice. The review points out the flaws of the dilettante approach adopted by  the translator and the authors of the foreword and aferword alike. The loose retellings of the poems in the book hardly merit the term ‘translations.’ Indeed, Klyuchnikov does not pretend to try to be faithful to the original. The notes and comments in the volume leave the impression of shoddy work. The aferword entitled ‘John Donne — A great English poet and spirit seer’ is authored by S. Klyuchnikov, the translator’s son. His essay reeks of unprofessionalism in the treatment of critical works and various misrepresentations. The book’s co-creators show reluctance in pondering the metaphysical complexity of Donne’s legacy and the multiple levels of meaning contained in his works, compounded by their open mistrust of professional scholars and commentators.

The review is concerned with a book that explores F. Dostoevsky’s attitude to the ‘Jewish question.’ The author of the frst eight chapters, M. Uralsky lays out his concept through an extensive corpus of already published material that has ofen remained unnoticed by Russian scholars of Dostoevsky, for example monographs and articles in English, German and Italian. Uralsky’s main objective appears to be to explain Dostoevsky’s paradoxical treatment of Jews. In the book’s fnal three chapters, their author, H. Mondry, interprets the depictions of Jews in The House of the Dead [Zapiski iz myortvogo doma], Crime and Punishment [Prestuplenie i nakazanie] and The Possessed [Besy], and also proposes a new perspective on the ‘Jewish theme’ in A Writer’s Diary [Dnevnik pisatelya]. The reviewer believes that the book will prove useful for humanities scholars who hunger for a comprehensive view of the ‘Jewish theme’ in Russian and European history and wish to learn about the historical and literary context that defned Dostoevsky’s treatment of Jews.

The review is devoted to the 2019 Vita Nova edition of K. Vaginov’s first novel Goat Song [Kozlinaya pesn] (1928). The publishers revised the conventional textual-critical concept of T. Nikolskaya and V. Erl and proposed one of their own. Although well-defined and engaging, it often comes across as questionable. Despite several criticisms, the reviewer holds an overall positive view of the book’s design (E. Posetselskaya’s illustrations) and contents. The accompanying articles — one by N. Nikolaev about the prototypes of Vaginov’s characters (importantly, about L. Pumpyansky) and another by I. Khadikov and A. Dmitrenko about the novel’s depiction of Petergof — hold unquestionable scholarly value and deserve special attention. The book is sadly missing a biographical article with a description of the writer’s life and work, otherwise a permanent feature of every publication in the publisher’s Manuscripts [Rukopisi] series. The commentary included in the book provides a satisfactory, if disputable, overview of the research published by literary scholars of Vaginov’s oeuvre in the last twenty-five years.

The review deals with V. Zuseva-Ozkan’s monograph that describes the folkloric and mythological origins of warrior maidens and their depictions in European literatures. This study focuses on the Amazons, Valkyries, Artemis, Athena, Brunhild, Jeanne D’Arc, and other female warriors. In her ground-breaking work that greatly enriches Russian gender studies, the scholar finds and examines the representations of female warriors by Russian modernist authors (V. Bryusov, A. Blok, A. Bely, N. Gumilyov, M. Tsvetaeva, and others). The scholar conducts a detailed analysis of the selected texts, drawing parallels with the authors’ other works and uncovering the sources of their inspiration. Establishing the motifs and topoi of the warrior maiden subject (the heroine wearing male clothing or armour, the virginity motif, her androgyny, etc.), the monograph examines them in the context of an individual author’s world. It is suggested, for example, that, while Blok and Bely incorporated female warriors in their mystical schemes, Tsvetaeva used the image as the embodiment of gender transgression.

The monograph co-authored by L. Zvonaryova, a Doctor of History, philologist and cultural historian, and L. Kudryavtseva, an art historian, is devoted to the life and work of the emigre artist and inventor Alexandre Alexeieff, who, having left Russia after the 1917 revolution, went on to become a landmark phenomenon on the European art scene without breaking spiritual ties with his native country. The book combines a thorough examination of his artistic legacy with a detailed account of Alexeieff’s life. Zvonaryova and Kudryavtseva collected numerous reminiscences, took a careful look at littleresearched biographical facts, and amassed an impressive corpus of documents, many of which are published for the first time. Having their book illustrated with the artist’s works, the scholars invited the reader to form their opinion of his versatile talent. Featured as the illustrator’s main invention is the pinscreen — a technology that foreshadowed digital animation. Having researched their book for seven years, the biographers succeeded in creating a profound study highly praised by experts.

The review discusses the latest book by the Russian translator of French literature V. Milchina, who chooses the form of a memoir. The author calls her memoirs memuarazmy. This curious portmanteau (a blend of memuary [memoirs] and marazm [senility]) highlights the book’s biggest merit — Milchina’s flair for distancing herself from events of the past and writing a vibrant and engaging account that appeals to everybody. Her reminiscences cover a broad range of topics, from stories about favourite books, childhood memories, and journeys to literary meccas in Russia and France to life-changing encounters that shaped the author’s professional interests and specifc translation projects. Each of the reminiscences bears the mark of its respective historic period as the author creates a generous narrative about publishing and philology in the Soviet and post-Soviet eras.