The article enriches scholarly discourse with A. Kuprin’s hitherto unstudied 1920s interviews with foreign journalists. In the publication’s introduction, N. Melnikov analyzes the genre-specific features and varieties of interviews. Interviews can, on the one hand, indicate the writer’s popularity, providing, on the other hand, a setting for the author’s self-presentation — a way to reaffirm his image with readership, promote his literary tastes, and share his ethical and political creed. Kuprin’s interviews in foreign languages are a brilliant example of the hybrid genre of the ‘interview essay,’ with a significantly reduced question-answer part. At the centre of such interviews are the interviewer and his description of the interviewee, his dwelling, and oeuvre, with infrequent inclusions of the interviewee’s direct speech. Nevertheless, such unauthorized interviews are of significant interest because they add new and curious nuances to the writer’s image, communicated from an unusual viewpoint of a perceptive and benevolent foreign interlocutor.

   An extensive review of the writers’ biographies published in the years 2024–2025 in a new dedicated series ‘The Lives of Renowned People’ [‘ZhIL,’ or ‘Zhizn izvestnykh lyudey’], a project of Elena Shubina Imprint [Redaktsiya Eleny Shubinoy] conceived as an alternative to the scholarly biographical series ‘The Lives of Remarkable People’ [‘ZhZL,’ or ‘Zhizn zamechatelnykh lyudey’]. Authored by suo jure writers, the new books have celebrities, often writers, as their main subject. As such, they are supposed to be faster-paced, smaller in volume, and avoid overwhelming their readers with too much biographical information and literary-critical analysis in contrast to ‘ZhZL’ publications. In her review of the first ‘ZhIL’-style books penned by the contemporary writers, R. Senchin, P. Basinsky, and D. Vodennikov, the critic treats them first and foremost as novelized biographies. She finds that all three are defined by the concept of distinct personal attitude. V. Vasilieva argues that each of the biographers writing about A. Tinyakov, L. Andreyev, and I. Bunin, respectively, searches the protagonist’s life story for answers to questions they had been struggling with for years, as well as for parallels with their own personality.

   The article explores the norm-setting function of the image of Paris in Marcel Proust’s novel In the Shadow of Young Girls in Flower. Throughout the novel, individualized characters undergo artistic generalization related to the covert impact of Parisian ‘societal space’ where select traditions only gain influence. A. Ruban explores the principal norm-setting paradigms in the novel. She argues that the Parisian ‘societal code’ is fluid. Its changes typically result in improvement, provided that honourable people remain faithful to the code. Shifts in the values code are essential for understanding the character of time. The narrator never strays from its aesthetic ideal; in his conception, beauty equals true valour. The article discusses categories significant for Proust’s novel: preoccupation with etiquette, theatricality, the playfield of influence, ideals of social classes, and the ‘spiritual core’ of space and time.

   The article seeks to examine Marcel Proust’s relationship with the Parisian socialite Maria Scheikévitch, who was born near Moscow, in the village of Petrovskoe-Razumovskoe, and got to play her role in the genealogy of the epic In Search of Lost Time. Guided by the principles of genetic criticism, which imply close attention to various aspects of avant-text and paratext, as well as neo-biographism, which analyzes a literary text within strictly defined circumstances of a historical context, the scholar focuses his study on the reconstruction of an ‘epistolary novel’ that ties the French novelist to one of the most stunning Parisian beauties of the day. The novel’s central image, a ‘Stabbed Dove,’ associates Proust’s short-lived infatuation with the motif of the epistemological function of suffering that defines his oeuvre. The study concludes with the emphasis that Proust viewed Maria Scheikévitch less as an epitome of the ‘Russian soul’ or an ambassador of Russian culture and more as a highly receptive reader of his novel, almost ‘a confidante in the matters of its creation.’

   With the example of The Witch of Edmonton, a play written by T. Dekker, J. Ford, and W. Rowley in 1621, the article considers the perception of the nature of evil in early modern history. This religious domestic tragedy comprises two plotlines that, while sharing common motifs, receive contrasting resolutions and show, therefore, that the Devil’s triumph is always conditional of the individual’s complicity. Unlike the witch-themed pamphlets of the day, the dramatists portray unbearable living conditions suffered by certain social groups, patriarchy, and economic leverages as the true drivers of crime. The study aims to identify how the play succeeds in combining various answers to the question about the nature of evil. To do so, the author analyzes the variance of motifs, the ambivalence of the canine familiar, and equivocation as a literary device that actualizes the motif of deception. The article demonstrates the link between the problems of the play and Hobbes’ theory of social-political determination. It also dwells on the ideas that dictate the semantic structure of Jacobean demonology: man’s identification with the Devil, original sin, the corrupted nature of humanity, the perception of difference as strange and unfamiliar, and free will.

   The article details A. Dumas’ use of antiquity-inspired motifs in his novel The Count of Monte Cristo. According to the author, those could be assigned to the following categories: a specific mention of the culture of classical antiquity (such as characters quoting Virgil, Pindar, or Horace); a situational mention (mythological contrasts and comparisons common in European culture); and allusions introduced exclusively in connection with certain characters (for example, the novelist projects the myth of Pyramus and Thisbe onto the story of Maximilien Morrel and Valentine de Villefort). Eliseyeva sets out to explain Dumas’ choice of classical characters and plots for his novel, hypothesizing that, rather than his personal favourites among classical literature, the choice was determined by the subjects and characters of classical antiquity referenced in the works of popular writers, such as Shakespeare, Byron, Goethe, etc. In other words, Dumas’ allusions to antiquity function as a universal language easily understood by educated readers and the novel’s characters alike.

   For a long time, the origin of the protagonist’s last name in M. Bulgakov’s novella A Dog’s Heart [Sobachie serdtse] has drawn literary scholars as a research subject in its own right. The article hypothesizes and proceeds to prove that Sharikov was not a derivative of a common dog’s name Sharik, but rather a reference to a poem by V. Mayakovsky, whose works appeared alongside those of Bulgakov’s in the journal Krasniy Perets. Among those lines, typically printed as subtitles for cartoons, we can find ‘Unimpressed by the ‘Bolshevik wild fantasies,’ There lived a petit-bourgeois Sharikov…’ There are distinct similarities between the two: both Mayakovsky’s and Bulgakov’s Sharikovs disturb and anger their fellow citizens. However, unlike Mayakovsky, whose ridicule of certain shortcomings stays within the censor-approved limits, Bulgakov ends up with a pamphlet that, ostensibly apolitical, subjects the Bolshevik regime to such scathing criticism that it took sixty years for the book to be published in the writer’s home country. In addition, Artemiev examines V. Kataev’s version of Bulgakov’s meeting Mayakovsky for the first time.

   In his book My Diamond Crown [Almazniy moy venets], V. Kataev claims that Ostap Bender, the protagonist of I. Ilf and E. Petrov’s iconic dilogy The Twelve Chairs [Dvenadtsat Stuliev], was inspired by an Ostap Shor. The claim remained unchallenged by scholars and most historians of literature, and regular readers accepted it as the truth. In the forty years since the first publication of Kataev’s memoirs, the figure of Ostap Shor has developed its own mythology. However, the historian and critic S. Belyakov points out that, before Kataev’s book, Shor had only been mentioned once in S. Bondarin’s reminiscences. At the same time, no proof exists of Ilf and Petrov ever meeting Shor, nor can he be spotted in any photos of the Odessa-born writers. Not a single staff writer of the newspaper Gudok, in whose editorial office Ilf and Petrov wrote their Twelve Chairs, mentions this character in their memoirs. Ostap Shor had nothing to do with the literary community of the day. The many anecdotes about Shor’s adventures were concocted after the publication of Kataev’s book, which directly inspired them. What has been verified as true facts of Shor’s life story does not allow for any parallels with Ostap Bender. Therefore, the article debunks Kataev’s story about Shor as fictional.

   In their study that draws on Tiflis-based Armenian periodicals of 1916, A. Zakaryan and S. Petoyan discuss the diverse talents of Vasily Kamensky (1884–1961): a Futurist poet, prose writer, actor, aviator, and artist. On his trip to Armenia, Kamensky lectured, mostly on Futurism, and sought admission to the Armenian literary community. He frequented the Friday gatherings of T. Nazaryan’s literary-artistic salon and lent a hand in the donations department of the Caucasus Committee of the Union of Cities. It was in Armenia that he published his poetic collection ‘Barefoot Girls’ [‘Devushki bosikom’] and the long poem ‘Tzuvamma.’ Kamensky’s poetic experiments influenced the younger generation of Armenian poets, notably Y. Charents. The fact that Kamensky and his works enjoyed deep appreciation among diverse strata of Armenian society singles him out as one of the first representatives of modern Russian literature to have left a lasting impact on the Armenian literary scene.

   This review is concerned with the collection of essays A Book of Discoveries [Kniga otkrytiy], published by Tsentr Knigi Rudomino in 2021. The reviewer focuses her analysis on several texts that appeal to her personally. She describes the discovery made by the art historian Svetlana Zagorskaya, who ensured the return of de Ribera’s and Murillo’s paintings to the Hermitage; Natalia Kharitonova’s historical-biographical study; and Vsevolod Bagno’s historical and literary critical research on Russian Lullism. The scholar also emphasizes the relevance and thoroughness of Yulia Obolenskaya’s study of the Russian playwright A. Ostrovsky. In addition to the detailed and informative essays, the book boasts exceptional visual design. The reviewer concludes that A Book of Discoveries is a landmark publication for Spanish studies in Russia and will be of interest to scholars as well as anyone who wishes to learn more about Spanish art, history, and literature, or Spanish-Russian cross-cultural influences.

   The collective monograph entitled ‘Invisible Value.’ A. V. Sukhovo-Kobylin: Theatre, Literature, Life [‘Nevidimaya velichina.’ A. V. Sukhovo-Kobylin: teatr, literatura, zhizn] is the first comprehensive study of the oeuvre of this eminent dramatist, whose works have yet to be fully appreciated. The book follows a 2017 conference ‘A. V. Sukhovo-Kobylin’s theatre: The reflection of historical catastrophes.’ The collection is divided into three sections: ‘Problems of the oeuvre,’ ‘Theatre,’ and ‘The fate of the legacy.’ The papers draw predominantly on verified archival materials. The contributors introduce new sources from the Russian State Library’s manuscript collection into scholarly discourse and re-examine and update materials from the collections of V. I. Dal State Museum of the History of Russian Literature. The monograph comprises studies by scholars from various Russian regions as well as by Belarusian, Polish, French, and Croatian contributors. The articles explore important aspects of Sukhovo-Kobylin’s playwriting and the peculiarities of theatrical productions of his plays, and feature textual critical analysis of his works. In addition, the book contains a bibliography and reference materials.

   The review discusses a collective monograph by N. Sukhov, Y. Golubinskaya, E. Kazhukalo, A. Butkevich, A. Petrova, and E. Samoy lova, with O. Evdokimova as a contributor and the project’s supervisor. For the first time, scholarly research is focused on the aesthetic origins of Leskov’s works and an aesthetic concept is suggested as the determining force behind the idea and the poetics of his prose. According to the authors, the nature of Leskov’s unique poetics can be discovered through analysis of his output in the context of philosophy and art history; intermedial analysis, which compares his writings to the holy iconographic traditions and painting; and assessment of the artistic reception of the writer’s images in 20^th-c. art. The review emphasizes the aesthetical underpinnings of Leskov’s oeuvre identified by the monograph: a tendency toward the archaic and 20^th-c. aesthetic (avant-garde art), a synthesis of arts (literature and painting), the genre quality of a dialogue (Socratic dialogue), provocativeness, and game playing.

   In her review of the collective monograph A Country Estate and a Summer House in Soviet Literature: Losses and Recoveries [Usadba i dacha v literature sovetskoy epokhi: poteri i obreteniya] (compiled by O. Bogdanova), prepared at the Russian Academy of Sciences’ Institute of World Literature and funded by grant No. 22-18-00051 issued by the Russian Science Foundation, E. Kuzmina thoroughly examines the logic of the compilation, contributors, and the book’s structure. The monograph follows extensive and innovative research. It portrays the country estate and the dacha as a spiritual and artistic space. Despite the featured diversity of scholarly methods, the book reads as a product of harmoniously concerted effort. The studies cover the characteristic topoi of usadba and dacha in detail, describe the past and the present of a Russian country estate, as well as its 20th-c. incarnations, and reconstruct the relevant and adequate biographical and cultural-historical contexts. Throughout its many transformations, the country estate lives on. It suffers and rejoices together with its inhabitants and, much like a palimpsest, preserves their memories.

   The new book by Ira Nadel was published in 2023 in Great Britain and the USA, becoming another evidence that interest in Russian cultural heritage and Russian-Western cultural ties is by no means fading. The book examines nine cases that reveal the phenomenon of ‘Russian love’ — either the love of a Western intellectual for a talented and mysterious Russian woman, which deeply influenced life and work of lovers, or love for Russian culture and language. The book by Ira Nadel is based on ego-documents, biography and source studies, and literary criticism, and is an informative and fascinating read for both a professional and a broad reading audience.

   The review concerns the Russian publication of the final three collections of poetry and prose by the French poet, art critic, and translator Yves Bonnefoy (1923–2016): The Present Hour, The Digamma, and Together Still. Bonnefoy’s regular translator Mark Grinberg (1953–2023), whose first renderings of the French poet’s works date back to the mid-1990s, remains true to himself and modestly describes his input as ‘elements of interpretation that facilitates or adds nuances to the understanding of the text.’ Meanwhile, the translator’s commentary to the reviewed edition of Bonnefoy’s last works, which coincidentally happens to be Grinberg’s last book as well, is uncharacteristically extensive. It offers more specific and often entirely new wording that clarifies the translator’s earlier interpretations of Bonnefoy’s personal myth, his poetics and vocabulary, the polemic with Heidegger, and, ultimately, the place of a 20^th-c. poet in the history of French poetry. This extensive and meaningful commentary reveals a special affinity between the author and his translator.