The article is concerned with the stylistic particularities of A. Platonov’s early works (the novellas The Sluices of Epiphany [Yepifanskie shlyuzy], The Innermost Man [Sokrovenniy chelovek], and For Future Use [Vprok]), characterized by a new kind of consciousness inspired by socialist utopia. In the opinion of the critic V. Kozlov, it is during the first Soviet five-year plan that Platonov’s style emerges as uniquely recognizable thanks to, among other things, his personal experience as a land amelioration engineer — a job he took under the birth name of Klimentov. Kozlov argues that a life in utopia as personally experienced by the first Soviet social and scientific activist and administrator finds its way into the personalities of Platonov’s characters as well as his plots and inimitable language of narration. However, by the end of the five-year period, the writer had unambiguously deviated from the path of the official Soviet literature. The reason being that, while the Soviet utopia had been conceived as a social and political project, Platonov’s works demonstrate that an individual may experience their private Soviet utopia, which often dramatically, if not tragically, differs from the collective idea.

The article examines critical reviews of M. Prishvin’s novella Naked Spring [Neodetaya vesna] published in the journal Oktyabr in 1940. The scholar and literary critic L. Surovova describes an overall positive reaction to the writer’s chronicle of his trip to the Volga River: He travelled there to observe animals’ survival strategies during the seasonal flooding. The occasional negative remarks in the press invoked the harsh dispute of 1930, when the Russian Association of Proletarian Writers attacked Prishvin’s biographical novel Kashchey’s Chain [Kashcheeva tsep] and the novella Cranes’ Homeland [Zhuravlinaya rodina]. Their characters were castigated as proponents of a bourgeois ideology. The 1940 critical coverage contained, however, a rather scathing review by A. Platonov, whose strong dislike of Prishvin’s writing style was also rooted in this 1930s’ ideological dispute. Surovova suggests that this polemic arose from a clash between the two radically opposing mentalities — Prishvin’s ‘contemplative observer’ against Platonov’s ‘action-orientated’ approach — and resulted in an exchange on a critical as well as literary plane, namely, in Platonov’s novella A Great Man [Velikiy chelovek].

Batalov reviews a new collection of poems by the contemporary author and editor of the Formaslov publisher Evgenia Jen Baranova. The critic traces the principal motifs of Baranova’s lyrical poetry and considers the evolution of her work through the prism of Tsvetaeva’s concepts of ‘poets with history’ and ‘poets without history.’ He believes that, from the very outset, Baranova has sided with the latter, being mostly interested in low-key lyrical poetry with its emphasis on experiences and anxieties of the inner self rather than the outside world. In contrast to her previous collections also briefly discussed in the review, her new book Where There Is Golden, There Is White [Gde zolotoe, tam i beloe] includes poems that contemplate the poet’s attitude to reality. According to Batalov, Baranova seems to have developed a better understanding of the current period with its chronological and geographical circumstances and has the power to engage in a dialogue with time on virtually equal terms, all of which makes her new book a showcase for her impressive poetic talent and versatility.

The article seeks to revive interest in the legacy of the Silver Age playwright S. Naydyonov. Upon analysis of his plays, the authors prove that Naydyonov tried to distance himself from his literary reputation as A. Ostrovsky’s successor, bestowed on him by critics after the triumph of his first play. In his subsequent work, the dramatist searched for a new type of hero, using the transformation of space to give an insight into the psychology of his characters, and proposed conflict realization methods that relied on enhanced symbolism of objects rather than direct clashes of the opposing parties. The article shows that his experiments largely corresponded to the artistic intentions of the ‘new drama.’ Therefore, the present study of Naydyonov’s plays written in the early 1900s demonstrates that, while A. Chekhov and L. Andreev remain the undisputed pioneers of the ‘new drama’ aesthetics in Russia, its artistic paradigm was frequently adopted by second-tier writers such as Naydyonov, often without the pioneers’ direct influence.

The article examines three principal devices of L. Tolstoy’s poetics in the novel Resurrection [Voskresenie]: metaphorization, contrasts and oppositions, and repetition and rhetorical climax. Repetition of certain fragments marks a turning point in the plot, as well as a return to the true nature of things, with multiple arrangements gradually intensifying to amplify the effect. The use of such devices can be observed in the metaphorization of nature which accompanies transformations of the male and female protagonists, for example, in the description of the garden with lilac bushes and the nightingale, the ice breaking on the river, or a sweltering day on the train and in the city. The repeated images conjure up parallels between the fragments describing the characters’ falling in love and committing a sin, as well as between the scenes of train journeys — to the army and to the prison camp. The characters’ intellectual and spiritual development is expressed through tropes and repetitions of motifs and sounds, which shifts the focus from the ideological to the poetic dimension, and helps create new images that complement the narration’s ideological foundation.

Chinese scholars have been studying Goncharov for over a century. The first acquaintance with his works happened through Japanese translations published in the late 19th c. Following the May Fourth movement that promoted new culture, the first Chinese translations from the Russian original came out and scholarly interest in Goncharov was reinvigorated. The initial reception of Oblomov in China was heavily influenced by N. Dobrolyubov, who saw Goncharov’s hero as a special type of the Russian national character. While some treated Oblomov with disdain and branded him a dawdler, others argued that his character is complex and controversial. A cohort of Chinese scholars considered Oblomov in the context of world literature as yet another ‘superfluous man,’ but as early as the 1950s, many Chinese experts of Russian studies began to adopt a more forgiving attitude to this character. Since the early 21st c., literary scholars have started to analyze Oblomov in the context of Chinese philosophy. The article seeks to describe the assumptions for this type of reception.

The article by the historian and local history expert V. Korshunkov examines the Ural component of D. Mamin’s works. The writer’s pen-name (D. Sibiryak [a native of Siberia]) still causes some controversy. So far, any attempts to interpret the choice of the pseudonym have remained purely speculative. The author demonstrates that the pen-name corresponds to the old geographical delineation, almost completely obsolete during Mamin’s lifetime. Specifically, it appears that in the middle of the 19th c., the Ural region was thought to be a part of Siberia (which, in its turn, some hesitated to deem actual Russia). The locals believed that the watershed in the Urals marked the boundary between the ‘Raseya’ Russia and Siberia, effectively making East Ural a region in Siberia, with Mamin-Sibiryak’s birthplace located right by the watershed. The article cites mentions of this fact in artistic writings and memoirs of the 18th–19th cc., for example, in L. Travin’s reminiscences and works of the traveller and ethnographer V. Maksimov. The detailed historical analysis of the material helps discover new facts about Ural in the mid-19th c., as well as gain better understanding of Mamin-Sibiryak’s poetics.

It is a known fact that the relationship between I. Zilberstein and S. Makashin, two celebrated editors and publication supervisors of the renowned scholarly series ‘Literary Heritage’ [‘Literaturnoe nasledstvo’] founded in 1931, deteriorated to a bitter conflict in the years after WWII. The strife gravely impaired the operation of the project for decades. Yet neither memoirists nor researchers have so far succeeded in discovering the actual cause of the two scholars’ mutual resentment. The article features previously unpublished documents related to the history of literary studies that shed light on this conundrum and uncover new facts about the history of the ‘Literary Heritage’ publications. Zilberstein’s speaker notes for the ‘Prague meeting’ of 1958, quoted from the author’s manuscript, prove a unique treasure trove of biographical facts about the scholars at the heart of the conflict and the history of literary studies in general. Relying on documentary evidence, the article reveals that Zilberstein intentionally credited himself as the sole founder of ‘Literary Heritage,’ consigning the names of his co-founders, protectors and colleagues in the 1930s — most notably, I. Ippolit (I. Sitkovsky), to oblivion.

The review deals with R. Dubrovkin’s Russian translation of Torquato Tasso’s chivalric epic Jerusalem Delivered (Izdatelstvo Ivana Limbakha, 2020; Vodoley, 2022). This complete translation of the poem carefully considers the original’s metric and stylistic characteristics and relies on a scholarly publication of the source text. The book is founded on thorough philological research. The introduction is of interest in its own right: It discusses Tasso’s life and work, as well as the myth surrounding his personality, and tells the story of the poem’s creation and Tasso’s reception in Europe and Russia. The book is supplied with comments, a summary of the contents, a names index, and the translator’s article entitled ‘Where the dictionary stops...’ which offers an overview of the poem’s Russian translations and details the principal difficulties encountered by translators as well as the discovered solutions.

The review discusses a collection of articles produced by a team of scholars under the supervision of professor Igor Svetlov. The book focuses on alternative experiments in late 1800s — early 1900s French art, which, although they failed to grow into independent movements, succeeded in producing several interesting concepts. The study is especially concerned with the Paris-based salon of ‘Rose + Croix’ and its founder Josephin Peladan — a writer, philosopher, occultist, and an able organizer. The book considers his artistic interests and views on the connection between art and religion, the role of symbolism in artistic thought, and the relationship between the modernity of his day and the previous epochs, including the esoteric and magical traditions. The collection covers a broad variety of subjects, such as the fantastic and the demonic in Paris, the mystical components in landscape paintings of the late 1800s, illustrations in the era of decadent art, intellectualism and intuition of the regulars of Peladan’s salons, esotericism and symbolism as a bridge into otherness, the existential and the universal in 1900s’ Parisian architecture, M. Voloshin’s turn-of-the-century spiritual and aesthetic experiments, the Parisian ‘imprint’ in Kandinsky’s early works, and Paris photographed at nighttime.

Shevyryov’s complete collected non-fiction works in 7 volumes is an ambitious project with the aim to reintroduce a preeminent Slavophile ideologist to contemporary cultural discourse. Soviet scholars dismissed Shevyryov as ideologically erring, and it was not until the 1990s that his works were rediscovered by publishers and booksellers. In the last decades, Shevyryov’s legacy was revisited, sparking interest in his travelogues, among other things. The recently published fifth volume contains the new edition of Journey to White Lake St. Cyril’s Monastery [Poezdka v Kirillo-Belozerskiy monastyr], written to encourage its readers to take an interest in Russian history and its preservation.

The reviewer describes T. Poletaeva’s book, which consists of three novellas of reminiscences, as a crucial source of facts about the daily literary activities of the ‘Moscow Time’ [‘Moskovskoe vremya’] poets as well as the late Soviet era in general. Written at different points in time and published as a collection, these texts are interpreted as narrative ‘takes’ depicting the same biographical matter. The author seeks to prove that the novellas’ unique characteristics stem from a particular narrative organization, namely, the emphasis on the figure or the background against which it is portrayed. The figure in question (a recurrent character in all three novellas) is the ideologist of the ‘Moscow Time’ group and Poletaeva’s first husband A. Soprovsky, whose character is presented in much detail. The background for the narration is made up of the memoirist’s numerous ‘fellow travellers’ (the book contains their group portrait) and the locations and spaces that accommodated the events of the author’s life (so-called ‘environs’).

The review is devoted to A. Nalepin’s monograph on the reception of folklore in Russian society in the first three decades of the 20th c. With urbanization on the rise, the contrast between traditional folklore and its new urban counterpart became more prominent. A key issue discussed by the author concerns the methodology for the study of the reception of folklore in works of Russian philosophers in a period when folklore was perceived as history rather than tradition, its erstwhile functions being replaced in popular consciousness by its aesthetic and ideological functions. Of special interest is the discussion of the influence that folklore consciousness can exercise over an individual artist’s works. The author also examines the complex cultural phenomenon of latent folklorism.

The central notion in Vladimir Aristov’s book is Idem-forma, advanced by the author for the analysis of literary similarities that are not covered by the traditional comparative terms, e. g., contacts or typology. A physicist and a poet, Aristov undertakes the task of scholarly investigation in the style of an essay. The first three of twelve chapters in his book treat the problem theoretically in a broad context of the modern mind. Nine chapters deal with the cases of the ‘identity in the dissimilar,’ suggesting hypotheses of similarity in poetry, prose, and interdisciplinary affinities. The major cases are those where the similarity, no matter how much open to comparative argumentation, allows for viewing two works in a new light, or establishing a plausible typological parallel between them, as it is done for the novels by A. Platonov and W. Faulkner, M. Bulgakov and T. Mann. Idem-forma is an attempt to attract attention to those literary and artistic events that demand an attentive eye towards similar syntactic and rhythmic patterns in poetry, or plots and characters in prose which do not lie on the surface to be related or explained but are supposed to interact in the domain of world literature.