introduction - springer978-1-349-62736-3/1.pdf · introduction 1. ezhi farino,“semioticheskie...

Notes

Introduction

1. Ezhi Farino, “Semioticheskie aspekty poezii o zhivopisi,” Russian literatureVII (1979): 65–94, 89.

2. Examples abound, such as Gogol’s devices of peripheral perspective and vi-sual block, Dostoevsky’s use of the inverse perspective of icon painting, andChekhov’s Postimpressionist features. (Russian Narrative and Visual Art, eds.Paul Debreczeny and Roger Anderson [Gainesville: University Press ofFlorida, 1994]).

3. Kirill Pigarev, Russkaia literatura i izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo (Moscow: Nauka,1966) and Pigarev, Russkaia literatura i izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo. Ocherki orusskom natsional’nom peizazhe (Moscow: Nauka, 1972).

4. Gerald Janecek, The Look of Russian Literature (Princeton: Princeton Uni-versity Press, 1984).

5. Russian Literature, Modernism and the Visual Arts, eds. Catriona Kelly andStephen Lovell (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000).

6. Ibid., 5.7. Ibid., 83.8. Depictions: Slavic Studies in the Narrative and Visual Arts in Honor of William

Harkins, ed. Douglas M. Greenfield (Ann Arbor:Ardis, 2000).9. Lidia Ginzburg, O lirike (Moscow-Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1964), 346.

10. Due to the compositor’s technical difficulties, no Cyrillic text could be re-produced in this book. I therefore follow the U.S. Library of Congresstransliteration system.

11. Ginzburg, 345.12. The Central Committee Resolution and Zhdanov’s Speech on the Journals

Zvezda and Leningrad, trans. Felicity Ashbee and Irina Tidmarsh (RoyalOak, Mich.: Strathcona Publishing Co, 1978), 52–53.

13. Justin Doherty, The Acmeist Movement in Russian Poetry. Culture and the Word(Oxford: Claredon Press, 1995), 94–95.

Chapter 1

1. From the Greek ek- (“out”) and phrazein (“speak”), literally “speaking out,”i.e., digression from the main narrative. A different spelling, ekphrasis, isequally common in English texts.

246

2. In “On Linguistic Aspects of Translation” (1959), Roman Jakobson illus-trates the relationship between the two systems of signs by a reversedprocess: “Intersemiotic translation or transmutation is an interpretation ofverbal signs by means of some other language.” (Theories of Translation, eds.Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet [Chicago: University of Chicago Press,1992], 145).

3. Wallace Stevens, The Necessary Angel. Essays on Reality and the Imagination(London: Faber and Faber, 1942), 160.

4. James A.W. Heffernan, Museum of Words.The Poetics of Ekphrasis from Homerto Ashbery (Chicago & London:The University of Chicago Press, 1993), 3.

5. Ibid., 3.6. Ibid., 4.7. Ibid., 4.8. Jean H. Hagstrum, The Sister Arts.The Tradition of Literary Pictorialism and En-

glish Poetry from Dryden to Gray (Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1958), XXII.

9. Rodney Stenning Edgecombe, “A Typology of Ecphrases,” Classical andModern Literature 13, 2 (1993): 103–16, 103.

10. Ulrich Weisstein,”Literature and the Visual Arts,” Interrelations of Literature(New York:The Modern Language Association of America, 1982): 251–61,259.

11. Cf. Linda Clemente, Literary Objets d’art. Ekphrasis in Medieval French Ro-mance 1150–1210 (New York: Peter Lang, 1992); and W. J. T. Mitchell,Iconology. Image.Text (Chicago:The University of Chicago Press, 1986).

12. Cf. Murray Krieger, Ekphrasis: The Illusion of the Natural Sign (Baltimoreand London:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992), Mitchell, Edge-combe, and others.

13. N.V. Braginskaya, “Ekfrasis kak tip teksta (k probleme strukturnoi klassi-fikatsii),” Slavianskoe i balkanskoe iazykoznanie. Karpato-vostochnoslavianskieparalleli. Struktura balkanskogo teksta (Moscow: Nauka, 1977): 259–83, 264.

14. Cited in Heffernan, 192–94.15. Andrew Sprague Becker, The Shield of Achilles and the Poetics of Ekphrasis

(Lanham: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1995), 85.16. Krieger, 265.17. Becker, 57.18. Edgecombe, 106.19. Ibid., 111.20. Pinpointing the earliest occurrence of a trope, an image, or a particular

verbal formula is always a somewhat futile enterprise. Although Homerictexts are considered to be the earliest surviving literary monuments cre-ated in Europe, there are many texts predating Homer that had a great im-pact on European civilization.The Pentateuch, for instance, which becamethe cornerstone of the Judeo-Christian world and eventually infused thephilosophy, art, and the mode of life in Europe, contains several extendedecphrastic descriptions. A striking example of notional ecphrasis (i.e., the

C r o s s r o a d o f A r t s , C r o s s r o a d o f C u l t u r e s

description of an object of art yet to appear) is the divinely inspired in-structions at the end of Exodus on how to build and decorate the Ark ofthe Covenant.

21. Cf. G. E. Lessing, “Laokoon or on the Limits of Painting and Poetry.” InSelected Prose Works (London: George Bell & Sons, 1885), 3–169.

22. Cf. Hagstrum, Becker, Mitchell, Krieger.23. The Iliad of Homer, trans. Alexander Pope (New York:The Heritage Press,

1943), 359–62.24. Ibid., 362.25. Edgecombe, 104.26. Hagstrum, 21.27. Becker, 86.28. The Iliad of Homer, 358.29. Clemente, 5.30. Eleanor Winsor Leach, “Ekphrasis and the Theme of Artistic Failure in

Ovid’s Metamorphoses,” Ramus 3 (1974), 104.31. On some reversals of the Iliad in the Aeneid, see Michael Putnam,

“Daedalus, Virgil and the End of Art,” American Journal of Philology 108(1987): 173–98, 196 (footnote 38).

32. Marianne Shapiro, “Ecphrasis in Virgil and Dante,” Comparative Literature42, 2 (1990): 97–115, 112.

33. Cf. Page Dubois, History, Rhetorical Description and the Epic from Homer toSpenser (Cambridge: D.S. Brewer,Totowa, NJ: Biblio Distribution Services,1982), 4.

34. Ibid., 6.35. G. Graff, A Dictionary of Narratology (Norman, Okla., and London: Univer-

sity of Oklahoma Press, 1987), 53.36. Putnam, 186.37. Ibid., 198.38. The Poems of Catullus, trans. Guy Lee (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1990), 99.39. Ibid., 103.40. Cf. Clemente, 4 and Becker, 5.41. Dubois, 4.42. Odes of Anacreon, trans. Thomas Moore (Philadelphia: Hugh Maxwell,

1804), 53.43. Ibid., 53.44. Paul Oscar Kristeller, “The Modern System of the Arts.” In Renaissance

Thought and the Arts (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990),163–227, 169.

45. Kristeller points out how the meaning of Horace’s formula was reversedduring the Renaissance:“the ancients had compared poetry with paintingwhen they were writing about poetry, whereas the modern authors moreoften compared painting with poetry while writing about painting” (op.cit. 183).

46. Odes of Anacreon, 54.

247N o t e s

248

47. Patricia A. Rosenmeyer, The Poetics of Imitation.Anacreon and the AnacreonticTradition (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 89.

48. Odes of Anacreon, 56.49. Rae Beth Gordon, Ornament, Fantasy, and Desire in Nineteenth-Century

French Literature (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992), 149.50. Rosenmeyer, 88.51. Odes of Anacreon, 92.52. Ibid., 93.53. Ibid., 103.54. Ibid., 97.55. Ibid., 101.56. Ibid., 104.57. The Greek Anthology, trans. George Burges (London: George Bell & Sons,

1893), 389.58. Ibid., 391.59. The Greek Anthology by Lord Neaves (New York: John B.Alden, 1883), 154.60. Cf. Lord Neaves, The Greek Anthology (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co.,

1874), 135–78.61. David Barber,“A Brief for the Epigram,” Parnassus: Poetry in Review, 24, 1

(1999): 8–58, 10.62. The Greek Anthology by Lord Neaves, 154.63. Kenneth Gross, The Dream of the Moving Statue (Ithaca: Cornell University

Press, 1992), 141.64. The Greek Anthology by Lord Neaves, 130.65. Ibid., 157.66. Ibid., 157.67. The Greek Anthology, trans. Burges, 224.68. The Greek Anthology by Lord Neaves, 129.69. Ibid., 137.70. Ibid., 156.71. Hagstrum, 72.72. Jacob Burckhardt, The Greeks and Greek Civilization (New York: St. Mar-

tin’s Press, 1998), 193.73. Ibid., 197.74. Alexei Losev, Estetika Vozrozhdeniia (Moscow, 1982), 54.75. Sergei Bulgakov, Avtobiograficheskie zametki (Paris, 1991), 107.76. Hagstrum, 49.77. Ibid., 56.78. Kristeller, 184.79. Cf.The Literary Works, 1. c. Paragone:A Comparison of the Arts by Leonardo da

Vinci, ed. Irma A. Richter (London, 1949).80. Hagstrum, 101.81. Ibid., 129.82. Edmund Burke, Works (London: Bohn Library, 1876).83. Kristeller, 211–12.84. Lessing, 91.


85. Becker, 20.86. W. J.T. Mitchell, Iconology, Image,Text (Chicago:The University of Chicago

Press, 1986), 98.87. Odes Sonnets and Lyrics of John Keats (Portland, Maine: Thomas Bird

Mosher, 1922), 14.88. Heffernan, 115.89. Kristeller, 216.90. Abigail S. Rischin,“Beside the Reclining Statue: Ekphrasis, Narrative, and

Desire in Middlemarch,” Publications of the Modern Language Association ofAmerica III, 5 (1996): 1121–32, 1122.

91. The Poetical Works of Wordsworth (London: Oxford University Press, 1965),578.

92. Heffernan, 134.93. My diagram partially derives from Becker’s formal model, which contains

several levels in ecphrasis: referent, physical medium,“creator and creationof the work of art, and their relation to the medium and the referent,” andfinally “the effect of or reaction to the work of visual art” (Becker, 43).

94. Cf. Becker, 39.95. Cf. Heffernan, 108.96. W. J. T. Michell, The Picture Theory (Chicago: The University of Chicago

Press, 1994), 151–65, 180.

Chapter 2

1. “A Parisian group of men of letters, obsessed with the rhyme to such anextent that I suspected they had forgotten how to live” (Dominique Bona,Les Yeux noirs. Les vies extraordinaires des sœurs Heredia [Paris: J.-C. Lattès,1989], 16).

2. For a concise history of the almanac, see Paul Fort & Louis Mandin, His-toire de la Poésie française depuis 1850 (Paris: Flammarion, 1926).

3. Catulle Mendès, La légende du Parnasse contemporain (Brussels: AugusteBrancart, 1884), 6–7.

4. Denommé, in fact, calls the Parnassians the “leading proponents of Art forArt’s sake advocat[ing] the liberation of art from . . . didacticism” (RobertDenommé, The French Parnassian Poets [Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois University Press, 1972], 1).

5. David Scott, “Pictorialist Poetics: Aspects of Parnassian Prosodic Theoryand Practice from Sainte-Beuve to Banville.” In Lawrence Watson & Rose-mary Lloyd, eds., Patterns of Evolution in Nineteenth-Century French Poetry(Oxford:The Tallents Press, 1991), 97.

6. Mendès, 6.7. Cf. Pierre Martino, Parnasse et Symbolisme (Paris: Librairie Armand Colin,

1958).8. In his book The Genres of Parnassian Poetry:A Study of the Parnassian Minors

(Baltimore: The John Hopkins Press, 1944), Aaron Schaffer mentionsnearly 60 Parnassian poets.

249N o t e s

250

9. Charles Baudelaire, The Flowers of Evil, edited by Marthiel and JacksonMathews (New York: New Directions, 1962), XXIII.

10. Cf. Claude-Marie Senninger, ed., Baudelaire par Théophile Gautier (Paris:Klincksieck, 1986), 169.

11. Ibid., 128, 140.12. Ibid., 140.13. Jules-Marie Priou, Leconte de Lisle (Paris: Seghers, 1966), 87.14. Martino, 101.15. On the history of Baudelaire’s reception in Russia see Adrian Wanner,

Baudelaire in Russia (Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1996).16. Linda Clemente, Literary Objets d’art. Ekphrasis in Medieval French Romance

1150–1210 (New York: Peter Lang, 1992), 139.17. Pléiade—a group of French Renaissance poets formed around 1547 at the

Collège de Coqueret. Rejecting medievalism of French letters, they in-tended to make a new poetry on the model of the Greeks; criticized thescholars who still wrote in Latin and advocated the capacity of their nativetongue to express the most refined poetic thought; and proclaimed ahigher mission for the poet than a mere court entertainer.

18. Rémy Belleau, La Bergerie (Genève: Librairie Droz, 1954), 92.19. Cf.Alexandre Eckhardt, Rémy Belleau: Sa vie—sa “Bergerie” (Budapest: Li-

brairie Joseph Németh, 1917), 191–206.20. Belleau, 82.21. This and all the uncited translations further are by Noah Rubins.22. Eckhardt, 205.23. Joachim du Bellay, Oeuvres poétiques, vol. II (Paris: Edourd Cornély et Cie

Editeurs, 1910), 32.24. Ibid., 10.25. Ibid., 31.26. Ibid., 31.27. The Odes of Horace, trans. W. E. Gladstone (New York: Charles Scribner’s

Sons, 1894), 120–21.28. The Georgics of Virgil, trans. J. W. Mackail, book III (Portland, Maine:

Thomas B. Mosher, 1899), 2.29. Ibid., 3.30. Ibid., 1.31. Joachim du Bellay, Les Regrets suivis des Antiquités de Rome (Paris: Librairie

Armand Colin, 1958), 206.32. Ibid., 205.33. W. J.T. Mitchell, Iconology. Image.Text (Chicago:The University of Chicago

Press, 1986), 105.34. Jacques Delille, Les Jardins (Paris: L.G. Michaud, Librairie-Editeur, 1824),

158.35. Ibid., 56.36. “Delille was afflicted by false taste, and false taste, once it infiltrates talent,

corrupts it forever, right up to its very best parts” (Charles-Augustin


Sainte-Beuve,“Joseph Delorme.” In Poésies complètes de Sainte-Beuve [Paris:Charpentier et Cie, 1869], 3–158, 149, 151).

37. David Scott, “Pictorialist Poetics: the Nineteenth-century French Re-reading of ‘ut pictura poesis,’” Word and Image IV (1988): 364–71.

38. Auguste Barbier, Iambes et poèmes (Paris: E. Dentu, Editeur, 1883), 132.39. “Comme des souvenirs, là, de frêles colonnes” (“Like memories there frail

columns”) (Ibid., 134).40. These two poets were singled out as immediate precursors of Parnasse in

Banville’s Petit traité de la poésie française (1872), which articulated Parnass-ian poetics.

41. Martino, 9.42. Cf. M. Cermakian, “Les Années d’apprentissage de Théophile Gautier:

peintre ou poète?” In Théophile Gautier. L’Art et l’Artiste Actes du colloque in-ternational, II (Montpellier: Université Paul-Valéry, 1982), 223–30, 227.

43. C.W.Thompson, Victor Hugo and the Graphic Arts (1820–1833) (Genève-Paris: Librairie Droz, 1970), 65.

44. Victor Hugo, Oeuvres poétiques, vol. 1 (Paris: Gallimard, 1964), 1105.45. Victor Hugo, Poems in Three Volumes, volume I (Boston: Estes and Lauriat,

1890), 250.46. Hugo, of course, could never have anticipated that in May 1885 the struc-

ture would become a site of national pilgrimage, when his own bodywould lie in state under the arch in a sumptuous sarcophagus before itsfinal journey across the city to its resting place at the Panthéon.

47. A. R. James,“Littérature et arts plastiques: la ‘fraternité des arts.’” In Manueld’histoire littéraire de la France, IV (Paris: Editions sociales, 1972), 619–39,621.

48. Poésies complètes de Sainte-Beuve, 28.49. Ibid., 134.50. Ibid., 153.51. “Structuring a book of verse . . . eliminates random chance.”52. Cf. David Scott, Pictorialist Poetics: Poetry and the Visual Arts in Nineteenth-

Century France (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988),12–14.53. Cf.Victor Cousin, Cours de philosophie, professé ‘a la faculté des lettres pendant

l’année 1818: sur le fondement des idées absolues du vrai, du beau et du bien(Paris: Hachette, 1836), 95.

54. Théodore Jouffroy, Cours d’esthétique (Paris: Hachette, 1863), 283.55. Ibid., 299.56. P. S. Ballanche,“Théorie de la parole,” Oeuvres complètes. Essai sur les institu-

tions sociales (Genève: Slatkine Reprints, 1967), 179–202.57. Leconte de Lisle,“Préface des Poèmes antiques.” In Derniers poèmes (Paris:

Alphonse Lemerre, 1895), 213–21, 217–18.58. Ibid., 217.59. “Romanticism might in fact be defined by its refusal of canons: imitation

is forbidden.” (Denis Hollier, ed., A New History of French Literature [Cam-bridge, Mass & London, England: Harvard University Press, 1989], 639).

251N o t e s

252

60. Philippe Joseph Salazar,“Le Deuil de la voix: Ballanche et le Parnasse.” InPatterns of Evolution in Nineteenth-Century French Poetry, eds. Lawrence Wat-son & Rosemary Lloyd (Oxon:The Tallents Press, 1991), 3–16, 4.

61. Scott, “Pictorialist Poetics: Aspects of Parnassian Prosodic Theory andPractice from Sainte-Beuve to Banville,” 96.

62. Théophile Gautier,“Préface.” In Poésies complètes, vol. I (Paris: Charpentieret Cie, 1884), 3–6, 4–5.

63. The Works of Théophile Gautier, vol. 1 (New York: George D. Sproul, 1900), 82.64. Isaiah Berlin, The Roots of Romanticism (Princeton: Princeton University

Press, 1999), 13–14.65. Théophile Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin (Paris: Minard,

1968), 31.66. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems. In The Works of Théophile Gautier, vol.

24, trans.Agnes Lee (New York: George D. Sproul, 1903), 44.67. Charles Baudelaire,“Salon de 1846.” In Oeuvres complètes, vol. II (Paris: Gal-

limard, 1976), 415–96, 432.68. Ibid., 431.69. Charles Baudelaire, “Salon de 1859.” In Oeuvres complètes, vol. II, 607–82,

611.70. Ibid., 681.71. Ibid., 620.72. Ibid., 620 –21.73. Scott, Pictorialist Poetics: Poetry and the Visual Arts in Nineteenth-Century

France, 23.74. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed Madeleine Cottin, 34.75. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 47.76. This would become a common practice of the Pre-Raphaelites, especially

Dante Gabriel Rossetti, who offered his own poems as a key to the inter-pretation of his paintings, placing them side by side.

77. Leconte de Lisle, Poésies complètes, vol. 4 (Genève: Slatkine Reprints, 1974),82.

78. Théodore de Banville, Petit traité de poésie française (Paris: G. Charpentier,1881).

79. Ibid., 9.80. Fernand Desonay, Le Rêve hellénique chez les poètes parnassiens (Paris: Li-

brairie ancienne Honoré Champion, 1928), 38.81. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 153.82. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 147.83. Gautier, Salon de 1847 (Paris: J. Hetzel,Warnod, 1847), 198–99.84. Senninger, 153.85. Gautier,“Préface.” In Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 5–6.86. Jose-Maria de Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince (London:The Athlone

Press, 1979), 63.87. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, trans. Edward Robeson Taylor (San Fran-

cisco:William Doxey, 1898), 70.88. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol.1, 334.


89. Ibid., 17.90. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 94.91. Les Stalactites de Théodore de Banville, ed. E.-M. Souffrin (Paris: Henri Di-

dier, 1942), 223–24.92. Poésies de Théodore de Banville. Les Cariatides (1839–1842) (Paris: Alphonse

Lemerre, 1877), 12.93. Les Stalactites de Théodore de Banville, ed. E.-M. Souffrin (Paris: Henri Di-

dier, 1942), 440.94. Berlin, 98.95. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 118.96. Ibid., 119–20.97. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 180–82.98. “Paris,” Gautier. In Poésies complètes, vol.1, 110.99. Cited in Miodrag Ibrovac, José-Maria de Heredia. Sa vie, son oeuvre (Paris: Les

Presses Françaises, 1923), 440.100. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 227.101. Cited in Ibrovac, José-Maria de Heredia. Sa Vie, son oeuvre, 442.102. Poésies de Théodore de Banville. Les Cariatides (1839–1842), 10.103. Cited in Martino, 18–19.104. Gautier, Salon de 1847, 11.105. Cf. ibid., 198–200.106. Cf. Barbara Johnson.“The Dream of Stone.” In Denis Hollier, ed. A New

History of French Literature (Cambridge, Mass & London, England: HarvardUniversity Press, 1989), 743–48.

107. Leconte de Lisle, Poèmes antiques (Paris: Société d’editions “Les belles let-tres,” 1977), 173.

108. Charles Baudelaire, Les Fleurs du mal (Paris: GF-Flammarion, 1964), 48–49.109. The poems of Charles Baudelaire, trans. F. P. Sturm (London & Newcastle-

on-Tyne:The Walter Scott Publishing Co., 1905), 9.110. This was a pointedly Parnassian response to the traditional motif of unre-

quited love for the unattainable lady, cultivated in European lyric poetrysince the time of the Provençal troubadours and Petrarch.

111. Johnson, 746.112. Ibid., 745113. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 60.114. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 70.115. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.Annie Detalle. (Paris: Gallimard, 1981), 13.116. “Le démêloir.” In Les Stalactites, 224.117. “L’arbre de Judée.” In Les Stalactites, 320.118. “Melancholia.” In Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 220. In this long poem, Gautier

describes Albrecht Dürer’s engraving “Melancholia,” inspired by Biblicalimagery.The “black sun” is frequently used in the writing of Osip Man-delstam (e.g.,“Eta noch’ nepopravima,” 1916), who, however, did not nec-essarily adopt it from Gautier, but rather from the Bible and RussianSymbolist vocabulary.

119. “La chanson de Mignon.” In Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 262.

253N o t e s

254

120. “Soleil couchant.” In Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 80.121. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 74.122. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 289.123. Les Stalactites, 342.124. This term signifies an optical illusion, the impression of three-dimensional

space in interior design, and confusion of the canvas space with the spaceof the viewer in painting, resulting in his perception of the depicted ob-jects as real.

125. Gordon, 149.126. Les Cariatides, 217.127. Banville, Nouvelles odes. Funambulesques (Paris: Alphonce Lemerre, 1869),

13.128. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 80.129. Gautier might have borrowed this particular pun from Hugo’s “Sara la

baigneuse” (Les Orientales):“Je pourrais folâtrer nue, / Sous la nue.”130. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 176, 178.131. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 166132. Oeuvres de Leconte de Lisle. Poèmes antiques (Paris: Les Belles Lettres, 1977),

132–33.133. This statue of the Greek goddess of love furnished subject matter for many

nineteenth-century poets. Dating from around 100 B.C.E., it was found bya Greek peasant on the island of Milo in 1820 and became property of theMarquis de Rivière, who subsequently presented it to Louis XVIII. TheFrench King placed his treasure in the Louvre in 1821, where it has at-tracted millions of admirers ever since.

134. Desonay, 311.135. Cf. Bona, 33–34.136. Desonay, 396.137. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince, 33.138. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 5.139. Desonay, 43.140. Les Stalactites, 223.141. Salazar, 4.142. Ibid., 13.143. Peter Whyte, “La Référence artistique comme procédé littéraire dans

quelques romans et contes de Gautier.” In Théophile Gautier. L’Art etl’Artiste.Actes du colloque international, vol. II (Montpelier: Université Paul-Valéry, 1982), 281–95 (291–92).

144. “ . . . architecture, the alphabet of olden times, sung by the poet . . .”145. For details, see Scott, Pictorialist Poetics: Poetry and the Visual Arts in Nine-

teenth-Century France, 29.146. Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 45.147. Ibid., 48.148. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 63.149. Gautier was not the only one from artistic circles of the period to admire

Appollonie-Aglaé Sabatier. She also inspired the sculptor Auguste


Clésinger, who created a marvelous marble bust of her in 1847 (presentlydisplayed in the Musée d’Orsay, Paris).

150. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. by Madeleine Cottin, 86–87.151. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 97.152. Gordon, 105.153. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 138–39.154. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 136–37.155. Gordon, 113.156. Marc Eigeldinger, “L’Inscription de l’oeuvre plastique dans les récits de

Gautier.” In Théophile Gautier. L’Art et l’Artiste.Actes du colloque international,vol. II, 298–309, 306.

157. Scott, Pictorialist Poetics: Poetry and the Visual Arts in Nineteenth-CenturyFrance, 96–97.

158. Scott, “Pictorialist Poetics: Aspects of Parnassian Prosodic Theory andPractice from Sainte-Beuve to Banville,” 89.

159. James, 630–31.160. Ibid., 631.161. Peter Collier & Robert Lethbridge, eds., Artisitic Relations Literature and the

Visual Arts in Nineteenth-Century France (New Haven and London: YaleUniversity Press, 1994), 10.

162. Henry F. Majewski, “Reading Melancholy: French Romantic Interpreta-tions of Dürer’s Engravings,” Nineteenth-Century French Studies, vol. 25, # 1& 2, Fall-Winter 1996–97: 13–29, 13.

163. Based in the Russian Orthodox tradition, Losev makes a similar conclu-sion when he contrasts pseudo-religious Renaissance paintings with me-dieval icons: “Renaissance Madonnas had long ceased to be icons andbecome secular portraits, and moreover, portraits of a certain kind of ladiesclose to the painter in one way or another” (Losev, 112).

164. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. I, 219–20.165. Majewski, 21.166. Majewski, 26–27.167. Les Cariatides, 210.168. Incidentally, using women of questionable virtue as models for religious

characters was not that uncommon in post-Renaissance Italy. In his biog-raphy of Caravaggio, Desmond Seward writes that for his canvas “St.Catherine of Alexandria,” the artist engaged “a famous prostitute, FillideMelandroni, who came from Siena, no mere streetwalker but a lady at thevery top of her profession.” The same prostitute posed for Caravaggio’s“Conversation of the Magdalene,” while another prostitute, Lena, modeledfor his “Madonna di Loreto.” Seward concludes this peculiar historical sur-vey with the statement that, at the time,“professional female models werealways prostitutes” (Desmond Seward, Caravaggio: A Passionate Life [NewYork:William Morrow and Company, Inc., 1998], 50, 83).

169. Dürer’s work also served as subject matter for minor Parnassians, e. g.,“De-vant la Mélencolia d’Albert Dürer” by H. Cazalis (Le Parnasse contemporain,I [1866]: 283).

255N o t e s

256

170. As Simon Delaty indicates in his article “Gustave Moreau et José-Maria deHeredia: Affinités esthétiques” (Patterns of Evolution in Nineteenth-CenturyFrench Poetry, 136–52, 137), between 1869 and 1894 Heredia and Moreauexchanged 22 letters, and Moreau also received six sonnets from his cor-respondent.

171. Ibid., 143.172. Jean Selz, Gustave Moreau (New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1979), 46.173. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince, 34.174. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 9.175. Ibrovac, 345.176. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince, 38.177. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 16.178. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed. by W. N. Ince, 42.179. Ibid., 27.180. Detalle, 255.181. Souffrin, 385.182. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince, 67.183. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 75.184. Cited in Delaty, 146.185. Souffrin, 243.186. Jean Charles Davillier, Recherches sur l’orfèvrerie en Espagne au Moyen Age et

à la Renaissance (Paris:A. Quantin, 1879).187. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cottin, 202.188. Denise Brahimi, “A propos de l’Esbekieh ou du bon usage des places

arabes,” Bulletin de la Société Théophile Gautier. L’Orient de Théophile Gautier,vol. II (Le port-Marly:Yvelines, 1990), 295–301, 295.

Chapter 3

1. Seamus Heaney,“A Hyperborean.” The New Yorker (Jan. 18 1999): 56.2. Cf. Nikolai Gumilev,“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism.” In Nikolai

Gumilev on Russian Poetry, trans. David Lapeza (Ann Arbor: Ardis, 1977),21–24.

3. Justin Doherty, The Acmeist Movement in Russian Poetry. Culture and the Word(Oxford: Claredon Press, 1995), 86.

4. Drawing on Nietzsche and the symbolists’ own interpretations of Greekmythology, the Acmeists also associated Dionysus with the spirit of musicand Apollo with the visual arts.Thus, Mandelstam addressed Beethoven asDionysus in his 1914 ode to the composer.

5. Mikhail Kuzmin,“O prekrasnoi iasnosti,” Apollon 14 (1910): 5–9, 7.6. World of Art (Mir iskusstva)—a Russian modernist journal published in

Saint Petersburg between 1899 and 1904 by a group of young artists andcritics (Alexander Benois, Leon Bakst, Evgeny Lansere, Sergei Diagilev,Dmitry Filosofov, and others). In the spirit of modernism, the journalsought to advance a conception of the unity of various arts.A literary-crit-


ical section was introduced in 1900.The journal was not intended to pro-mote art nouveau exclusively, but also introduced the reader to great worksof art from all epochs and styles. World of Art sponsored art shows that wonthe acclaim of the Saint Petersburg intellectual elite. One exhibition fo-cusing on forgotten eighteenth-century Russian painters like Rokotovand Borovikovsky was a particular success.

7. L’Art moderne—an influential Belgian art magazine that began to promotethe “new art” or art nouveau style as early as 1884.

8. The Studio—a British artistic journal, the inaugural issue of which cameout in 1893 and contained eleven drawings by Aubrey Beardsley, makinghim an overnight sensation and contributing to the general success of artnouveau. Subsequent issues contained posters, drawings, and articles onmodernist artists and developments in the decorative arts.

9. Die Jugend—a periodical featuring art nouveau graphics, which first ap-peared in Munich in 1896. Circulation rapidly rose nationwide to 200,000per week, and the magazine gave the new art another name, Jugendstil.Every week different artists, including Peter Behrens, Otto Eckmann, andHans Christiansen, designed the cover and the typeface for the title.

10. Cf. S.A.Tokarev, ed., Mify narodov mira, vol. 1 (Moscow: Sovetskaia entsik-lopediia, 1980), 304. Remarkably, in her books Isis Unveiled (1877) and TheSecret Doctrine (1888), the founder of Theosophy, Madame Blavatsky, spokeof Hyperboreans as one of the races that inhabited the earth before humanbeings.

11. Nikolai Gumilev,“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism,” 23–24.12. Osip Mandelstam,“The Morning of Acmeism.” In Osip Mandelstam, The

Complete Critical Prose and Letters, trans. Jane Gary Harris and ConstanceLink (Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1979), 61–65, 65.

13. Cf. Nikita Struve,“Bog Akhmatovoi,” Pravoslavie i kul’tura (Moscow, 1992),243–45, 244.

14. A number of literary, philosophical, and religious trends, contemporaneouswith Acmeism, made re-discovery of the “roots” of words and the signifi-cance of their original meaning a part of their program. Philosopher PavelFlorensky, Futurist poets Velimir Khlebnikov and Alexei Kruchenykh, anda heretic sect imiabozhtsy, which originated in 1910 in the Russian monas-teries in Greece, all believed in the power of words to have a direct impacton the world.

15. Elaine Rusinko,“Adamism and Acmeist Primitivism,” Slavic and East Eu-ropean Journal 32, 1 (1988): 84–97, 86.

16. Valery Briusov, Dalekie i blizkie (Moscow: Skorpion, 1912), 144.17. Cf. Renato Poggioli,“The Neoparnassians.” In Poggioli, The Poets of Rus-

sia 1890–1930 (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1960), 212–37.18. Evelyn Bristol,“Acmeists and the Parnassian Heritage.” In Jane Gary Har-

ris, ed., American Contributions to the Tenth International Congress of Slavists(Columbus, Ohio: Slavica, 1988), 71–81.

19. Cf. ibid., 75, 80.

257N o t e s

258

20. Simon Karlinsky,“Nikolai Gumilev and Théophile Gautier.” In Boris Gas-parov, Robert P. Hughs, and Irina Paperno, eds., Cultural Mythologies ofRussian Modernism: From the Golden Age to the Silver Age (Berkeley: Univer-sity of California Press, 1992), 327–36, 329.

21. Ibid., 329.22. Karlinsky himself admits that “Gautier had no interest in romantic mysti-

cism,” 329.23. Barry P. Scherr, “Gumilev and Parnassianism.” In Lev Loseff & Barry

Scherr, eds., A Sense of Place Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets (Columbus, Ohio:Slavica Publishers, 1993), 242–60, 243.

24. Ibid., 256.25. Gumilev must have also been inspired by the cycle “Les Conquérants”

from Heredia’s Les Trophées, in which the French poet glorifies the firstSpanish conquerors of the American continent.

26. Cf. Louis Allain,“U istokov poetiki N. S. Gumileva. Frantsuzskaia i zapad-noevropeiskaia poeziia.” In M. D. El’zon & N. A. Groznova, eds., NikolaiGumilev. Issledovaniia i materialy. Bibliografiia (Saint Petersburg: Nauka,1994), 235–50.

27. V. V. Weidlé, “Peterburgskaia poetika.” In Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii vchetyrekh tomakh (Washington: Victor Kamkin, Inc., 1962) vol. IV, V-XXXVI, IX.

28. Elaine Rusinko, “Acmeism, Post-symbolism, and Henri Bergson,” SlavicReview 41, 3 (1982): 494–510, 494.

29. Konstantin Mochulsky, “Klassitsizm v russkoi poezii,” Sovremennye zapiski11 (1922): 368–79, 379.

30. Victor Terras,“Classical Motives in the Poetry of Osip Mandelstam,” Slavicand East European Journal 10, 3 (1966): 251–67, 253.

31. Clarence Brown,Mandelstam (Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1973),137.

32. Ibid., 137.33. Gumilev,“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism,” 24.34. Some of these “parallels,” however, spring from Gumilev’s conscious dis-

tortion of Gautier’s image in order to express implicitly certain Acmeistprecepts concerning art. Jean Bonamour also feels that, “a devoted ‘Par-nassian’ . . . through Gautier, Gumilev shows a great deal about himself andabout his poetry” (“Remarques sur Gumilev, critique de la poésiefrançaise.” In Sheelagh Duffin Graham, ed., Nikolaj Gumilev 1886–1986Papers from the Gumilev Centenary Symposium [Oakland,CA:Berkeley SlavicSpecialties, 1987], 69–76, 70.

35. Nikolai Gumilev, “Teofil’ Got’e.” In Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. IV(Washington:Victor Kamkin, 1968), 386–94, 387.

36. Ibid., 387, 394.37. Léna Szilárd, Russkaia literatura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka (1890–1917),

vol. I (Budapest:Tankönyvkiadó, 1983), 484–85.38. Terras,“Classical Motives,” 255.


39. Osip Mandelstam,“On the Nature of the Word.” In The Complete CriticalProse and Letters, 117–32, 120–21.

40. Terras,“Classical Motives,” 253–54.41. S.V. Poliakova, Osip Mandelstam: Nabliudeniia, interpretatsii, neopublikovannoe

i zabytoe (Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1992), 9.42. Gumilev,“The Life of Verse.” In Nikolai Gumilev on Russian Poetry, 11–20,

15.43. Sergei Gorodetsky, “Nekotorye techeniia v sovremennoi russkoi litera-

ture.” In Poeticheskie techeniia v russkoi literature kontsa XIX—nachala XX veka(Moscow:Vysshaia shkola, 1988), 90–96, 96.

44. Gorodetsky did not perceive his statements as contradictory, however, be-cause he distinguished between Gautier and Parnasse.

45. Detalle writes that Parnassian doctrine encouraged exchange between dif-ferent artists and contribution to common themes. Practically every poetassociated with Parnasse faced the need to define his aesthetics in a waycompatible with group ideals (Detalle, 9).

46. Kuzmin,“O prekrasnoi iasnosti,” 7, 10.47. Gumilev,“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism,” 23.48. Gumilev,“The Life of Verse,” 14.49. “Nekotorye techeniia,” 96.50. Ibid., 91.51. Mandelstam,“The Morning of Acmeism,” 62.52. Ibid., 62.53. Ibid., 63.54. Osip Mandelstam, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh (Moscow: Khudozh-

estvennaia literatura, 1990).55. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, trans. Burton Raffel & Alla

Burago (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1873), 46.56. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. I, 111.57. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 189.58. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 45.59. Mandelstam, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh, 66.60. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 47.61. Mandelstam, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh, 79.62. Ibid., 80.63. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 48.64. “V prokhlade sladostnoi fontanov.” In Aleksandr Pushkin, Sochineniia v

trekh tomakh, vol. I (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1985), 431.65. This and all the uncited translations further are by Noah Rubins.66. Gumilev,“The Life of Verse,” 13.67. Gumilev,“The Reader.” In Nikolai Gumilev on Russian Poetry, 25–30, 29.68. Gumilev,“The Anatomy of a Poem.” In Nikolai Gumilev on Russian Poetry,

31–33, 32.69. Mandelstam,“On the Nature of the Word,” 130.70. Rech, 89 (April 2, 1912): 3.

259N o t e s

260

71. Doherty, 131.72. For another evaluation of the ostensible contradiction between Acmeist

biological poetics and their insistence on craftsmanship, see Doherty,133–38.

73. William Hardy, A Guide to Art Nouveau Style (North Dighton: JG Press,1986), 8.

74. Cf. I. Koretskaia, Nad stranitsami russkoi poezii i prozy nachala veka (Moscow:RADIKS, 1995).

75. Mandelstam,“The Morning of Acmeism,” 63.76. Mandelstam, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh, 83–84.77. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 52–53.78. Mandelstam,“The Morning of Acmeism,” 62.79. Ibid., 63.80. Gumilev,“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism,” 24.81. Cf. Théophile Gautier, Les Grotesques (Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1969),

1–39.82. Whyte, 290.83. Souffrin, 361.84. Gumilev,“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism,” 24.85. François Villon,“Ballade (of the Ladies of Bygone days).” In The Complete

Works of François Villon, trans. Anthony Bonner (New York: David McKayCompany, 1960), 39.

86. Michael Basker, “Gumilev, Annensky and Tsarskoe Selo.” In The Sense ofPlace, 215–41, 232.

87. Cf. Georgy Ivanov, Sobranie sochinenii v trekh tomakh, vol. I (Moscow: So-glasie, 1994), 596.

88. Villon, “Another Ballade (in Old French).” In The Complete Works ofFrançois Villon, 43.

89. Brown, 151.90. Mandelstam, “François Villon,” In Mandelstam.The Complete Critical Prose

and Letters, 53–60, 53.91. Robert Sabatier, Histoire de la poésie française. La poésie du Moyen Age (Paris:

Albin Michel, 1975), 351.92. Cf. O. I. Fedotov, “Sonet Serebrianogo veka.” In Fedotov, ed., Sonet Sere-

brianogo veka Russkii sonet kontsa XIX–nachala XX veka (Moscow: Pravda,1990), 5–34, 21.

93. Cf.O.Fedotov,“Sonet v tvorchestve Anny Akhmatovoi.” In Problemy tvorch-estva i biografii A.A.Akhmatovoi (Odessa, 1989), 17–20.

94. Gumilev refers to the sonnet as the most valuable precious stone in hispoem “Beatrice” from Pearls :“Muzy, v sonete-bril’iante / Strannuiu tainuotmet’te / Spoite mne pesniu o Dante / I Gabriele Rosetti” (Muses, takethis diamond-edged sonnet / And engrave a strange secret upon it. / Singme a song about Dante, / Sing also of Gabriel Rossetti).

95. Russian symbolism—a literary movement that arose under the influenceof French symbolism. Founding symbolist publications include a collection


of Dmitry Merezhkovsky’s poetry called Symbols (1892) and an essaypenned by the same author, entitled “On the Causes for the Decline andon New Currents in Contemporary Russian Literature” (1893), whichcame to be regarded as the school’s manifesto. Russian symbolists are usu-ally divided into two waves: the “older” symbolists,Valery Briusov, Kon-stantin Balmont, Fedor Sologub, and Zinaida Hippius; and the “younger”symbolists, Andrei Bely, Alexander Blok, and Viacheslav Ivanov. The twogroups were also commonly known as the “First Generation” and the“Second Generation” symbolist poets.

96. Music is often present in the verse of French romantics through allusionsto musical genres or composers (e.g., Hugo’s “Chanson,” Sainte-Beuve’s “Ily faudrait de la musique de Gluck,” etc.)

97. Janecek, 25.98. Ibid., 65.99. Andrei Bely, “Budem iskat’ melodii (Predislovie k sborniku ‘Posle ra-

zluki’).” In Bely, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy (Moscow-Leningrad, 1966),546–50, 549.

100. Cf. Konstantin Mochulsky, Aleksandr Blok (Paris:YMCA-PRESS, 1948),39.

101. Aleksandr Blok,“Intelligentsiia i Revoliutsiia.” In Blok, Sobranie sochinenii,vol. IV (Leningrad: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1982), 229–39, 239.

102. Efim Etkind, “Demokratiia, opoiasannaia burei (O muzykal’no-poetich-eskom stroenii poemy A. Bloka ‘Dvenadtsat’).” In Blok i muzyka(Leningrad: Sovetskii kompozitor, 1972), 58–84, 58.

103. Igor Glebov (B. V. Asaf ’ev), “Videnie mira v dukhe muzyki (poeziia A.Bloka).” In Blok i muzyka (Leningrad: Sovetskii kompozitor, 1972), 8–57,14, 50.

104. Sam Driver, “Acmeism,” Slavic and East European Journal 12, 2 (1968):141–56, 144.

105. Mandelstam,“On the Nature of the Word,” 128.106. “Peterburgskaia poetika,” XIII.107. “Epic poetry . . . strongly involves the referential function of the language;

the lyric, oriented toward the first person, is intimately linked with theemotive function.” (“Linguistics and Poetics,” Roman Jakobson, Languagein Literature [Cambridge, London:The Belknap Press of Harvard Univer-sity Press, 1987], 62–94, 70).

108. Allain, 238–39.109. Cf. Gorodetsky,“Muzyka i arkhitektura v poezii,” 3.110. This and the two articles to be discussed are reprinted in the fourth vol-

ume of Gumilev’s Complete Works (Original publications: “Vystavkanovogo russkogo iskusstva v Parizhe,” Vesy 11 [1907]: 87–88;“Dva salona,”Vesy 5 [1908]: 103–05;“Po povodu ‘Salona’ Makovskogo,” Zhurnal teatra lit-eraturno-khudozhestvennogo obshchestva 6 [1909]: 17).

111. Roerich found his inspiration in the North and Asia, while Gauguin’s par-adise was persistently tropical.

261N o t e s

262

112. The ambition to penetrate different cultures or “yearning . . . for theabyssal strata of time, thirst for the virgin soil of time” (Mandelstam,“TheWord and Culture.” In Mandestam:The Complete Critical Prose and Letters,112–16, 113) underlies many Acmeist works.

Chapter 4

1. I have borrowed these terms from Byzantine historiography and adaptedthem to this literary application. Iconoclasm usually refers to the move-ment that arose in Byzantium around the eighth-ninth centuries, whichcalled for the prohibition of anthropomorphic depictions of the HolyTrinity and saints. Iconoclasts often destroyed icons that were part of tra-ditional decoration in Eastern churches, on the grounds that worship ofsuch images could lead to idolatry and overemphasis of the human aspectof Jesus.The iconoclastic controversy stimulated Byzantine artists to strivefor spiritual revelation in religious art rather than for naturalistic represen-tation. During the Reformation, iconoclasm became a fact of life in theWest, when many Catholic churches were stripped bare of anthropomor-phic images of God and saints.

In this chapter, the term “iconographic” applies to literary narratives thatattempt to preserve the visual image through careful verbal description.The term “iconoclastic,” on the other hand, applies to texts that replacesuch an account with an exposition of an object’s nonmaterial content, asperceived by the writer (focusing on some symbolic, spiritual, theological,or social message).

2. Silver Age—another name for modernism, a period in Russian culture thatextends roughly between the early 1890s and 1917.The Silver Age is setin juxtaposition to the Golden Age, which corresponds to the time ofPushkin, the first third of the nineteenth century.

3. Grigory Kaganov, Images of Space: St. Petersburg in the Visual and Verbal Arts,trans. Sidney Monas (Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997), 51.

4. Nikolai Karamzin, “Darovaniia.” In Karamzin, Polnoe sobranie sochinenii(Moscow-Leningrad, 1966), 213–27, 219.

5. This and all the uncited translations further are by Noah Rubins.6. Ibid., 219.7. Kaganov, 51.8. Karamzin, 219. It is noteworthy that among the poets whom Karamzin ex-

tolled as models was Delille, the author of the descriptive long poem LesJardins (cf. chapter II).

9. Konstantin Batiushkov, “Progulka v Akademiiu Khudozhestv.” InBatiushkov, Sochinenia (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1955),327–44, 337.

10. Ibid., 330.11. Mikhail Otradin, introduction to Peterburg v russkoi poezii XVIII–nachalo

XX veka (Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Leningradskogo Universiteta, 1988),5–32, 9).


12. Pushkin’s famous line from “Unto Myself I Reared a Monument” (Iapamiatnik sebe vozdvig nerukotvornyi, 1936), which invites a compari-son between his nonmaterial monument—his poetic legacy—and theAlexander Column (“Not Alexander’s shaft is lofty as my pillar”) (ThePoems, Prose and Plays of Alexander Pushkin, ed. Avrahm Yarmolinsky[New York:The Modern Library, 1936], 88), are a direct response to thisfashion.

13. Stikhotvoreniia grafa D. I. Khvostova, vol. 7 (Saint Petersburg, 1834), 218.14. Translation by Sidney Monas in Kaganov, Images of Space, 100.15. H.W.Tjalsma,“The Petersburg Modernists and the Tradition.” In George

Ivask, ed., Acmeists and Others:An Anthology (Munich:Whilhelm Fink Ver-lag, 1973), 7–24, 9.

16. Alexander Pushkin, Sochineniia v trekh tomakh, vol. 2, 172–84 (Moscow:Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1986), 173–74.

17. Alexander Pushkin, “The Bronze Horseman,” trans. Oliver Elton. In ThePoems, Prose and Plays of Alexander Pushkin, 95–108, 96.

18. Michael Wachtel, The Development of Russian Verse (Cambridge: CambridgeUniversity Press, 1998), 181.

19. Alexander Pushkin, “The Postmaster.” In The Poems, Prose and Plays ofAlexander Pushkin, 514–29, 517.

20. “Poor Liza” (Bednaia Liza, 1792), a paradigmatic story for Russian Senti-mentalism, in which Karamzin portrays the tragic love between a girl ofhumble origin and an aristocratic young man. Ending with the suicide ofthe girl, presented as an innocent victim of the rift between different so-cial classes, the story set a tone for many writers to follow.As in many otherworks, Pushkin reverses the hackneyed motif in “The Postmaster.”

21. Leo Tolstoy, Anna Karenina, ed. George Gibian (New York:W.W. Norton,1970), 427, 431.

22. Ibid., 259.23. Ibid., 630.24. Karamzin, 219.25. Tolstoy, 630.26. Ibid., 634.27. “Mikhailov’s portrait of Anna is the most successful artistic creation in the

novel, which is itself a portrait, in words, of the heroine.” (Amy Mandelker,“A Painted Lady: Ekphrasis in Anna Karenina,” Comparative Literature 43(1991): 1–19, 8). Mandelker deals further with ecphrasis in Tolstoy in herbook Framing Anna Karenina:Tolstoy, the Woman Question, and the VictorianNovel (Columbus, Ohio, 1993).

28. Afanasy Fet, “Dva pis’ma o znachenii drevnikh iazykov,” Literaturnaia bib-lioteka, vol. 5, book 1 (1867), 56.

29. Cf. S. A. Kibalnik, Venok russkim kamenam. Antologicheskie stikhotvoreniiarusskikh poetov (Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 1993), 3–8.

30. B. Ia. Bukhshtab, A. A. Fet Ocherk zhizni i tvorchestva (Leningrad: Nauka,1990), 72.

31. A.A. Fet, Stikhotvoreniia (Moscow-Leningrad: Sovetsky pisatel’, 1963), 253.

263N o t e s

264

32. As a youth, Maykov first decided to devote his life entirely to painting,which he later abandoned for poetry only when his eyes began to deteri-orate and after his verse received a flattering reception from famous criticVissarion Belinsky.

33. Apollon Maykov,“The Marble Faun,” trans. F. P. Marchant. In Anthology ofRussian Literature from the Earliest Period to the Present Time, ed. Leo Wiener,Part II (New York: Benjamin Blom, 1902), 344.

34. Serialized in 1859–62 in Morskoi sbornik, Grigorovich’s unfinished travel-ogue came out in a unified edition in 1873.

35. Cf. D.V. Grigorovich, Korabl’ ‘Retvizan.’ In: Grigorovich, Sochineniia, vol. 3(Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1988), 7–160, 114–24.

36. Murza is also an honorific form of address in many Turkic languages, in-dicating advanced age, a position of respect, or a formidable education inthe bearer.

37. G. R. Derzhavin, Stikhotvoreniia (Petrozavodsk: Kareliia, 1984), 57.38. In a noteworthy recent study, David Herman challenged Jakobson’s con-

clusions about the vengeful statue in the Stone Guest. Herman makes aninteresting case for Pushkin’s intention to demonstrate the power of thepoetic gift, able to give life to inert, dead matter. If we regard Pushkin’sDon Juan as a poet (a virtuoso of love and a skillful and passionate impro-viser in words), then his spontaneous invitation addressed to the Com-mander’s statue is also a kind of poetic act, provoking the statue’sanimation.According to Herman, Don Juan’s eventual defeat does not re-sult from any moral retribution through the agency of the Commander’ssculptural representation, but from the tragic nature of art itself. Often theartist becomes a sacrifice to his creation:“ . . . the Don Juan play enacts themetaphysical drama of poetry as Pushkin sees it: in his creativity, the poetinexorably conjures to life entities that cannot help but hamper his mobil-ity” (David Herman,“Don Juan and Don Alejandro:The Seductions of Artin Pushkin’s Stone Guest,” Comparative Literature, vol. 51, no. 1 [1999]:3–23).

39. Roman Jakobson, “The Statue in Pushkin’s Poetic Mythology.” In Jakob-son, Selected Writings, vol. 5 (New York: Mouton Publishers, 1979), 241,243–44.

40. Valery Briusov was convinced that “the chasing of Evgeny by the BronzeHorseman is depicted not so much as a madman’s delirium as a real fact”(Briusov,“Mednyi Vsadnik.” In Briusov, Sobranie sochinenii, vol. 7 [Moscow,1975], 30).

41. Gross stresses in The Dream of the Moving Statue that this cancellation bothmetaphorically destroys the statue and postpones that destruction: “thedream of the statue’s animation includes and puts off the statue’s destruc-tion by iconoclasts. . . . the fiction of animation might also be said to re-cuperate the violence of image-breaking by translating it to a less literallevel” (Gross, 59).

42. Pushkin, Sochineniia v trekh tomakh, vol. 1, 118.


43. Ibid., 211.44. Herzensergiessungen eines kunstliebenden Klosterbruders was first published in

Berlin in 1797; the 1799 posthumous edition was partially edited by Jo-hann Ludwig Tieck. For a complete English text see Mary Hurst Schu-bert’s translation (University Park: Penn State University, 1971).

45. Nikolai Gogol, “Poslednii den’ Pompei (Kartina Briullova).” In N. Gogol,Polnoe sobranie sochinenii (Saint Petersburg & Moscow, 1883), 106–09, 108.

46. Vasily Gippius traces the origins of the portrait motif to early Christianand pre-Christian myths: “The motif of a portrait that is irresistibly life-like or that actually comes to life is a favorite of the Romantics, perhapsbecause it affords a ready way of emphasizing the irrational ‘magic’ of art,which creates new realities. It goes back to the hagiographic theme oficons coming to life; it even has a pre-Christian past in legends about stat-ues coming to life; and ultimately it has roots in myth, in the belief thatpart of a person’s life passes over into any representation of him.” (VasilyGippius, Gogol, ed. and trans. Robert A. Maguire, [Ann Arbor: Ardis,1981], 51).

47. Nikolai Gogol, “The Portrait.” In Gogol, St. John’s Eve and Other Stories,trans. Isabel F. Hapgood (Freeport, NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1886),203–315, 216.

48. Gippius, 52.49. Jakobson,“The Statue in Pushkin’s Poetic Mythology,” 277.50. Gogol,“The Portrait,” 208.51. Ibid., 218.52. Ibid., 223–24.53. Ibid., 219.54. Ibid., 273.55. A number of leading scholars have pointed to a variety of dramatic strate-

gies Dostoevsky employs in his novels (cf.Vladimir Nabokov Lectures onRussian Literature, Mikhail Bakhtin Problemy poetiki Dostoevskogo, GeorgeSteiner Tolstoy or Dostoevsky, Victor Terras A Karamazov Companion). In anutshell, this means emphasis on action, not description, which plays suchan important role in the novels of Dostoevsky’s antipode,Tolstoy, and othernineteenth-century novelists.

56. George Steiner, Tolstoy or Dostoevsky (New Haven & London:Yale Univer-sity Press, 1996), 292.

57. Olga Meerson,“Ivolgin and Holbein: Non-Christ Risen vs. Christ Non-Risen,” Slavic and East European Journal 39, 2 (1995): 200–13, 208.

58. Ibid., 210.59. Henrietta Mondry,“How ‘Straight’ Is Venus of Milo? Regendering Statues

and Women’s Bodies in Gleb Uspensky’s ‘Vypriamila,’” Slavic and East Eu-ropean Journal 41, 3 (1997): 415–30, 424.

60. Vsevolod Garshin, Sochineniia (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura,1983), 384.

61. Ibid., 385.

265N o t e s

266

62. In his introduction to the exhibition “Poetry in Motion II” (New YorkPublic Library, 1995).

63. The reference here is to Pushkin’s 1827 poem “Poet,” which portrays thepoet as a run-of-the-mill man, immersed in mundane affairs until he setshimself to composing. But as soon as the poet hears Apollo’s call, he nolonger abides by society’s rules, and escapes into the wilderness.

64. Valery Briusov, “Sviashchennaia zhertva.” In Briusov, Sobranie sochinenii,vol. 6, 94–99, 95, 96.

65. Simon Karlinsky adduces more proof of Gautier’s fame in Russia beforethe Acmeist pro-Parnassian campaign: three of Diagilev’s ballets russes, “LePavillon d’Armide,” “Giselle,” and “Le Spectre de la rose,” were based onthe poet’s contes. (“Nikolai Gumilev and Théophile Gautier,” CulturalMythologies of Russian Modernism [Berkeley: University of California Press,1992], 327–36, 331).

66. Valery Briusov, Stikhotvoreniia (Moscow: Sovetskaia Rossiia, 1990), 5.67. Ibid., 25.68. Théophile Gautier,“Arria Marcella.” In Little French Masterpieces:Théophile

Gautier, trans. George Burnham Ives (New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons,1903), 105–72, 106.

69. Valery Briusov, Stikhotvoreniia, 103–104.70. Modern Russian Poetry, ed. Vladimir Markov and Merrill Sparks (Indi-

anapolis:The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc., 1967), 35.71. Briusov, Stikhotvoreniia, 216.72. Pathetic fallacy is a phrase coined by John Ruskin in 1856 to signify the

ascription of human feelings to inanimate objects.73. Gautier, Emaux et camées, ed. Madeleine Cotin, 71.74. Gautier, Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems, 80–81.75. The Acmeists’ appreciation for Balmont was far from unanimous. Mandel-

stam, for one, spoke disdainfully of him. However, Balmont’s popularity inearly twentieth-century Russia and, consequently, his influence onyounger poets, was enormous. Certain aspects of his verse to be discussedhere did in fact resonate with Acmeist pictorialism, even in Mandelstam’sown poetic techniques.

76. Konstantin Balmont, Izbrannoe (Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura,1980), 134.

77. “In Praise of the Sonnet.” K.D. Balmont, Stikhotvoreniia (Leningrad: Sovet-skii pisatel’, 1969), 177.

78. Cf. Koretskaia, 213.79. K.D. Balmont, Stikhotvoreniia, 209.80. Koretskaia, 213–14.81. K.D. Balmont, Stikhotvoreniia, 131–32.82. Adrian Wanner, “Aleksandr Blok’s Sculptural Myth,” Slavic and East Euro-

pean Journal 40, 2 (1996): 236–50, 236–37.83. Ibid., 242.84. For details see David Herman’s aforementioned article.


85. Cf. Blok,“Balaganchik,” Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 537–50.86. Ibid., 100.87. Aleksandr Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v 8-mi tomakh, vol. 5 (Moscow-

Leningrad, 1962), 42.88. Cf. Aleksandr Blok, “Kraski i slova.” In Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh

tomakh, vol. 2, 7–12, 8.89. Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 175–76.90. E. A. Borisova, G. Yu. Sternin, Russkii modern (Moscow: Sovetskii khu-

dozhnik, 1990), 350.91. Tatiana Novikova, Izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo v rannem tvorchestve Aleksandra

Bloka (Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, 1993).92. In a more recent article, Novikova traces the Pre-Raphaelite influence on

several poets of the Russian Silver Age (“‘Prekrasnaia Dama’ v kultureSerebrianogo veka,” Vestnik Moskovskogo universiteta, no. 1 (1998): 90–100.

93. Alexander Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v 8-mi tomakh, vol. 5, 42.94. Ibid., 112.95. The Pre-Raphaelite Brotherhood, an English movement active between

1848 and 1910, counted among its most famous members Dante GabrielRossetti,William Holman Hunt, and John Everett Millais. Pre-Raphaelitesfrequently drew their inspiration from literary sources, notably English ro-mantic poetry.Their extravagant, quaint art, featuring ethereal damsels de-picted in natural settings with a touch of religious symbolism, isparticularly in tune with Blok’s early verse.

96. Blok, Sobranie sochinenii v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 36.97. Ibid., 43.98. While the Pre-Raphaelite sensibility can be definitively identified in these

verses about the Beautiful Lady, one should not minimize other similar in-fluences, ranging from medieval Provençal lyrics to the love poems of ro-manticism, all of which are equally perceptible in Blok’s cycle.

99. V. E. Bagno, “Zarubezhnaia arkhitektura v russkoi poezii kontsaXIX–nachala XX veka.” In M. P. Alekseev & R. Iu. Danilevskii, eds.,Russkaia arkhitektura i zarubezhnoe iskusstvo (Sbornik issledovanii i materialov)(Leningrad: Nauka, 1986), 156–88, 157.

100. Andrei Bely, “Emblematika smysla.” In Bely, Kritika, Estetika TeoriaiaSimvolizma, vol. 1 (Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1994), 54–143, 142–43.

Chapter 5

1. “Time is nothing but a lie: it escapes; / Only he who creates exists.”2. Viacheslav Ivanov,“O poezii Innokentiia Annenskogo.” In Ivanov, Sobranie

sochinenii, vol. II (Brussels: Foyer Oriental Chrétien, 1974), 574–86, 574.3. Sam Driver. “Acmeism.” Slavic and East European Journal 12, 2 (1968):

141–56, 146.4. Cf. Lidia Ginzburg, O lirike (Moscow-Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1964),

357.

267N o t e s

268

5. Innokenty Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii (Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’,1990), 87.

6. Ibid., 91.7. “The Bow and the Strings.” In Innokenty Annensky, The Cypress Chest,

trans. R. H. Morrison (Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1982), 8.8. Ibid., 12.9. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 126–27.

10. Annensky, The Cypress Chest, 60.11. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 87.12. Annensky, The Cypress Chest, 8.13. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 111.14. The Cypress Chest, 38–39.15. Janet Tucker, Innokentij Annenskij and the Acmeist Doctrine (Columbus: Slav-

ica Publishers, 1986), 53, 65.16. Koretskaia, for instance, writes about Annensky’s “anti-hierarchical poetics

“ (I. Koretskaia, Nad stranitsami russkoi poezii i prozy nachala veka [Moscow:RADIKS], 1995, 138).

17. This poem probably served as a subtext to Blok’s “The Stranger” (1907):“the sleepy butlers” in Blok echo the “sad butlers” in Annensky,“the air isclose, warm, stifling” evokes “the same din and strangling fumes,”“the drearsuburban skies” appears connected to “drear hangover,” “the mysterious,bitter potion” to “murk of wine,”“the sleepy waiters stand about” to “thatsame ficus looms.” Of course, the connection is much more obvious whenthe aforementioned phrases are compared in the original: lakei sonnye—grustnye lakei, goriachii vozdukh dik i glukh—tot zhe gam i tot zhe chad,skuka zagorodnykh dach—skuki peregar, vlaga terpkaia i tainstvennaia—mut’ vina, lakei sonnye torchat—te zhe fikusy torchat.

18. Innokenty Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 66.19. This and all the uncited translations further are by Noah Rubins.20. Taktovik—a meter, particularly common in Russian folklore, with an un-

even number (1–3) of unstressed syllables between stressed syllables.21. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 66.22. Nancy Pollok,“Annensky’s ‘Trefoil in the Park’ (Witness to Whiteness).” In

A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets, edited by Lev Loseff & BarryScherr, 171–90. (Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, 1993), 178.

23. Innokenty Annensky, Knigi otrazhenii (Moscow: Nauka, 1979), 20.24. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 121.25. Annensky, The Cypress Chest, 53.26. Vsevolod Setchkarev, Studies in the Life and Work of Innokentij Annenskij

(The Hague: Mouton & Co, 1963), 75.27. Annensky, The Cypress Chest, 54.28. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 122.29. Annensky, The Cypress Chest, 54.30. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 122.31. Ezhi Farino, “Semioticheskie aspekty poezii o zhivopisi,” Russian literature

VII (1979): 65–94, 69.


32. Pollok, 173.33. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 121–22.34. Annensky, The Cypress Chest, 54.35. Cf.Tucker, 39.36. Innokenty Annensky, “Pushkin i Tsarskoe Selo.” In Annensky, Knigi

otrazhenii, 304–21, 305.37. Setchkarev, meanwhile, sees the beautiful dancers in Annensky’s poem as

the fingers playing across the keyboard (Setcharev, 73).38. Cf.Tucker, 30.39. Annensky, Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii, 81.40. Annensky,“Second Pianoforte Sonnet,” trans.Victor Terras. The Silver Age:

Russian Literature and Culture 1881–1921, vol. 1 (1998): 87.41. Setchkarev, 73.42. Innokenty Annensky,“On Contemporary Lyrism.” In The Russian Symbol-

ists:An Anthology of Critical and Theoretical Writings, ed. and trans. Ronald E.Peterson (Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1986), 127–42, 129.

43. Evgeny Lann, Pisatel’skaia sud’ba Maksimiliana Voloshina (Moscow, 1927), 8.44. Mikhail Kuzmin, “Retsenziia na knigu Voloshina Stikhotvoreniia

1900–1910,” Apollon, no. 7 (1910).45. Viacheslav Ivanov, “Retsenziia na knigu Voloshina Stikhotvoreniia

1900–1910,” Apollon, no. 7 (1910).46. I explored the Parnassian sources of Voloshin’s verse in the article “Vliianie

frantsuzskoi poezii XIX veka na rannee tvorchestvo MaksimilianaVoloshina,” Russkaia literatura 4 (1993), 192–99 (as Maria Lialina).

47. Cf. E.V. Zavadskaya,“Poetika kimmeriiskogo peizazha v akvareliakh M.A.Voloshina (Otzvuki kul’tury Vostoka).” In Voloshinskie chteniia (Moscow:Gosudarstvennaia biblioteka imeni Lenina, 1981), 49–57.

48. Cf. Michael Sullivan, An Introduction to Chinese Art (Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 1961).

49. Cf.A.V. Lavrov,“O poeticheskom tvorchestve Maksimiliana Voloshina.” InM.Voloshin, Izbrannye proizvedeniia (Moscow, 1988), 12.

50. Cynthia Marsh, M.A.Voloshin:Artist-Poet;A Study of the Synaesthetic Aspectsof his Poetry (Birmingham: Dept. of Russian Language and Literature, Uni-versity of Birmingham, 1983), 46.

51. Maksimilian Voloshin, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy, vol. 1 (Paris:YMCA-PRESS,1982), 21.

52. Jean H. Hagstrum, The Sister Arts.The Tradition of Literary Pictorialism and En-glish Poetry from Dryden to Gray (Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1958), xxii.

53. A crown of sonnets is a complex sequence of 15 interlocking sonnets.54. Cf. Barry P. Scherr, “Maksimilian Voloshin and the Search for Form(s),”

Slavic and East European Journal 35, 4 (1991): 518–36.55. Voloshin, 24.56. Incidentally, Voloshin studied art at Whistler’s studio after he moved to

Paris in 1901. (cf. I.T. Kupriianov, Sud’ba poeta (Kiev, 1978), 52).57. Voloshin, 151.

269N o t e s

270

58. Princess Taiah—the mother of Egyptian Pharaoh Amenhotep IV and themother-in-law of Nefertiti.Voloshin saw a replica of the sculptural portraitof the ancient Egyptian beauty in the Guimet Museum in Paris in 1904,and was struck by her resemblance to Sabashnikova.

59. Lidia Ginzburg, O lirike (Moscow-Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1964), 345.60. The Onegin stanza—a poetic form invented by Pushkin for his master-

piece novel in verse, Eugene Onegin, this stanza is similar to sonnet, as it hasfourteen lines, but is distinguished by a unique rhyme scheme (AbAbC-CddEffEgg).

61. Voloshin, 37–38.62. Ibid., 11.63. Voloshin’s 1905 cycle of poems on the Rouen Cathedral is not ecphrastic

in the strictest sense and, therefore, not considered here.Voloshin’s portrayalof the legendary cathedral in various times of day and from different an-gles is obviously inspired by Claude Monet’s series of paintings, and hissketchy style is reminiscent of the impressionistic manner. However, exceptfor occasional brief references to the cathedral’s arches, stained glass win-dows, or steps,Voloshin avoids any verbal tracing of the concrete architec-tural structure. Moreover, the Rouen Cathedral is dematerialized, servingas a symbol of the Christian path to resurrection and eternity, and theseven poems of the cycle correspond to the seven stations in Jesus’Way tothe Cross.

64. Irina Odoevtseva, Na beregakh Nevy. In Irina Odoevtseva, Izbrannoe(Moscow: Soglasie, 1998), 193–566, 304.

65. John E. Malmstad & Gennady Shmakov, “Kuzmin’s ‘The Trout Breakingthrough the Ice.’” In Russian Modernism. Culture and the Avant-Garde,1900–1930, eds. George Gibian & H.W.Tjalsma (Ithaca: Cornell Univer-sity Press, 1976), 132–64, 132.

66. Cf. T. V. Tsiv’ian, “K analizu tsikla Kuzmina ‘Fudzii v bliudechke.” InMikhail Kuzmin i russkaia kul’tura XX veka Tezisy i materialy konferentsii15–17 maia 1990 g. (Leningrad: Sovet po istorii mirovoi kul’tury ANSSSR, 1990), 43–46.

67. M. A. Kuzmin, Sobranie stikhov, II (Munich: Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1977),210–11.

68. Mikhail Kuzmin, “Landscape of Gaugin, # 2.” In Modern Russian Poetry,eds.Vladimir Markov and Merrill Sparks (Indianapolis:The Bobbs-MerrillCompany, 1966), 217–19.

69. Mikhail Kuzmin, Stikhotvoreniia (Saint-Petersburg:Akademicheskii proekt,1996), 491.

70. This and all the uncited translations further are by Noah Rubins.71. Cited from: Mikhail Kuzmin, Stikhotvoreniia, 760.72. Ibid., 67.73. Cf. A.V. Mikhailov, “O Liudvige Tike, avtore ‘Stranstvii Frantsa Shtern-

bal’da.’” In L.Tik, Stranstviia Frantsa Shternbal’da (Moscow, 1987), 328.74. Kuzmin, Stikhotvoreniia, 423.


75. Modern Russian Poetry, 215–17.76. Kuzmin, “Iz zapisok Tivurtiia Pentslia.” In Mikhail Kuzmin, Izbrannye

proizvedeniia (Lenigrad: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990), 481–89,483–84.

77. I.A. Doronchenkov,“‘ . . . Krasavitsa, kak polotno Briullova,’” Russkaia lit-eratura 4 (1993): 158–76, 169.

78. Kuzmin, Stikhotvoreniia,532.79. Modern Russian Poetry, 231.80. Doronchenkov, 165.81. Vsevolod Kniazev, Stikhi. Posmertnoe izdanie (Saint-Petersburg, 1914), 71.82. Anna Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1 (Moscow: Pravda,

1990), 340.83. Anna Akhmarova,“Poem without a Hero.” In The Complete Poems of Anna

Akhmatova, trans. Judith Hemschemeyer, vol. II (Somerville: Zephyr Press,1990), 397–479, 455.

84. N. A. Bogomolov, “‘Liubov’—vsegdashniaia moia vera.’” In MikhailKuzmin, Stikhotvoreniia (Saint-Petersburg: Akademicheskii proekt, 1996),5–52, 15.

85. N.V. Zlydneva,“Motif volny v russkoi grafike nachala XX veka i poetich-eskii mir M. A. Kuzmina.” In Mikhail Kuzmin i russkaia kul’tura XX veka.Tezisy i materialy konferentsii 15–17 maia 1990 g. (Leningrad: Sovet po is-torii mirovoi kul’tury AN SSSR, 1990), 57–60.

86. “Serenada,” Kuzmin, Stikhotvoreniia, 75.87. Zlydneva, 60.

Chapter 6

1. N. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh, vol. 1 (Washington:Vic-tor Kamkin, Inc., 1962), 3.

(I am a conquistador in a steel cuirasse, / Gaily chasing a star through thedark, / I file past cliff and deep crevasse / To repose in a ravishing park).

2. Gumilev was shot along with many other intellectuals who were active inthe senator V. N.Tagantsev’s group, charged with the conspiracy to over-throw the Bolshevik rule in Petrograd.

3. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh, vol. 1, 221.4. Ibid., 249.5. Ibid., 257.6. This and all the uncited translations further are by Noah Rubins.7. Louis Allain. “U istokov poetiki N. S. Gumileva. Frantsuzskaia i zapadno-

evropeiskaia poeziia.” In Nikolai Gumilev. Issledovaniia i materialy Bibli-ografiia, edited by M. D. El’zon & N. A. Groznova, 235–50. SaintPetersburg: Nauka, 1994, 247.

8. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 1, 218.9. Justin Doherty,“Acmeist Perceptions of Italy.” In Literary Tradition and Prac-

tice in Russian Culture. Papers from an International Conference on the Occasion

271N o t e s

272

of the Seventieth Birthday of Y. M. Lotman, eds.Valentina Polukhina, Joe An-drew and Robert Reid (Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1993), 108–109.

10. Blok, vol. 2, 318.11. Ibid., 325.12. Ibid., 320.13. Ibid., 315.14. Ibid., 318.15. Gerald Pirog, Aleksandr Blok’s Ital’ianskie stikhi. Confrontation and Disillu-

sionment (Columbus: Slavica, 1983), 123–24.16. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 1, 214.17. Another sign of Gumilev’s active interest in the Near East is his petition

for a transfer to the Mesopotamian front, while he was serving in the Rus-sian army in Europe; nothing came out of his request.

18. Cf. Roman Timenchik, “Nikolai Gumilev i Vostok,” Pamir, no. 3 (1987):123–36.

19. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 1, 45.20. Two Centuries of Russian Verse, ed. Avrahm Yarmolinsky, trans. Babette

Deutsch (New York: Random House, 1966), 144.21. Eds. Hugh Honour and Roy Fleming, The Visual Arts: A History (New

York: Harry N.Abrams, Inc., 1991), 467.22. Ibid., 467.23. Cf. Basil Gray, Persian Painting (Geneva: Editions d’Art Albert Skira S. A.,

1995), 58, 159.24. Ibid., 467.25. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 1, 46.26. Two Centuries of Russian Verse, 145.27. Cf. G. P. Struve,“N. S. Gumilev,““Zhizn’ i lichnost’.” In Gumilev, Sobranie

sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh, vol. 1,VII-XLIV, XXV.28. Tin-Tun-Ling had been brought to France by the Bishop of Macao to

compile a French-Chinese dictionary.After the bishop’s sudden demise, hisprotégé was left without any support in a country whose language hecould barely speak. By chance,Tin-Tun-Ling met one of Gautier’s friends,who introduced him to the writer. First Gautier devised ways to raisemoney to send the stranded Chinese home, but this project met with thevehement opposition of Tin-Tun-Ling himself, who was afraid to returnlest his fellow countrymen behead him. To offer him the position as hisdaughter’s language instructor seemed then to Gautier an easy solution toa complicated situation. Soon Tin-Tun-Ling became a close friend of theGautiers and a frequent guest at their dinner table.

29. Cf. Mathilde Camacho, Judith Gautier: Sa vie et son oeuvre (Paris: LibrairieE. Droz, 1939), 30–32.

30. Although married to Catulle Mendès by the time of publication, Judithchose neither her married nor her maiden name to adorn the cover of herfirst book, but signed as Judith Walter, a translation into German of “Gau-tier,”“the lord of the woods.”


31. Rémy Gourmont, Judith Gautier (Paris: Bibliothèque nationale d’èditions,1904), 12.

32. Camacho, 49.33. The first, 1918, edition contained only ten poems. “Serdtse radostno, serdtse

krylato” (“The Heart Is Glad, the Heart Is Winged”) was included only insubsequent editions.

34. Gautier divided her book into seven cycles: “Lovers,” “The Moon,” “Au-tumn,”“Travelers,”“Wine,”“War,” and “Poets.”

35. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 2, 109.36. John Glad and Daniel Weissbort, eds., Twentieth-Century Russian Poetry

(Iowa City: University of Iowa Press, 1992), 74–75.37. Judith Walter, Le Livre de jade (Paris:Alphonse Lemerre, 1867), 113–14.This

text is left here without an English translation, which would not differ sig-nificantly from the translation of Gumilev’s “Porcelain Pavilion” above.

38. Eds.Wu-chi Liu and Irving Yucheng Lo, Sunflower Splendor.Three ThousandYears of Chinese Poetry (Garden City, NY:Anchor Books, 1975), 553.

39. Théophile Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. II (Paris: Charpentier, 1885), 238.40. Henri David, “Théophile Gautier: Le Pavillon sur l’eau. Sources et traite-

ment,” Modern Philology, vol. XIII, no. 11 (March 1916): 151–72, 154–57.41. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh, vol. 2, 114.42. Stéphane Mallarmé, “Epilogue,” Parnasse contemporain, vol. 1 (1866): 170.

Reprinted by Slatkine Reprints, Geneva, 1971.43. Kuzmin, Sobranie stikhov II, 35.44. Modern Russian Poetry. Edited by Vladimir Markov and Merrill Sparks. (In-

dianapolis:The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1966), 221.45. On the discussion of couplets in Chinese verse see Stephen Owen’s Traditional

Chinese Poetry and Poetics:Omen of the World (Madison:The University of Wis-consin Press, 1985), 91–96. As Earl Sampson indicates in Nikolay Gumilev(Boston:Twayne Publishers, 1979), Gumilev had an “active interest in Orien-tal poetry” (32), collected anthologies and studies of Oriental verse, and wastherefore surely aware of the poetic possibilities of the Chinese couplet.

46. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh, vol. 2, 110–11.47. Two Centuries of Russian Verse, ed. Avrahm Yarmolinsky, trans. Babette

Deutsch, (New York: Random House, 1966), 143.48. Pushkin,Alexander. Sochineniia v trekh tomakh. Vol. I. (Moscow: Khudozh-

estvennaialiteratura, 1985), 102.

49. Ibid., 522.50. Two Centuries of Russian Verse, 34.51. Brett Cooke, Pushkin and the Creative Process (Gainesville: University Press

of Florida, 1998), 21.52. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 2, (Washington:Victor

Kamkin, Inc., 1962), 4.53. Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomak, vol. 1, (Washington:Victor

Kamkin, Inc., 1962), 236.

273N o t e s

274

54. Ibid., 233–34.55. Translation in:Wendy Rosslyn,“Remodelling the Statues at Tsarskoe Selo:

Akhmatova’s Approach to the Poetic Tradition.” In A Sense of Place.TsarskoeSelo and Its Poets (Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1993), 147–170, 159.

56. Ibid., 159.57. Cf. James A. W. Heffernan, Museum of Words.The Poetics of Ekphrasis from

Homer to Ashbery (Chicago & London: The University of Chicago Press,1993), 107–124 and W. J.T. Mitchell, Picture Theory (Chicago & London:The University of Chicago Press, 1994), 151–81.

58. Newell F. Ford, ed., The Poetical Works of Shelley (Boston: Houghton Mif-flin Company, 1975), 379–80.

59. Mitchell, Picture Theory, 172.60. Heffernan, 109.61. Anthony Parton, “‘Goncharova and Larionov’—Gumilev’s Pantum to

Art.” In Nikolaj Gumilev 1886–1986 Papers from the Gumilev CentenarySymposium, ed. S. D. Graham (Oakland, CA: Berkeley Slavic Specialties,1987), 225–42 (231).

62. Ibid., 227.63. “Be lace, stone.”64. Osip Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1 (Moscow: Khudozh-

estvennaia literatura, 1990), 67–68.65. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, trans. Burton Raffel and Alla

Burago (Albany: State University of New York Press, 1973), 33.66. Anna Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1 (Moscow: Pravda,

1990), 33.67. “Deception I.” In The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, 2 vols., ed.

Roberta Reeder, trans. Judith Hemschemeyer (Somerville: Zephyr Press,1990),Vol. 1, 231.

68. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 34.69. “Deception II,” ibid., 233.70. Cf. Omri Ronen, “Leksicheskii povtor, podtekst i smysl v poetike Osipa

Mandelshtama.” In Slavic Poetics: Essays in Honor of Kiril Taranovsky, eds.Roman Jakobson, C. H.Van Schooneveld, and Dean S.Worth (Paris: Mou-ton, 1973), 367–87.

71. Sharon Leiter, Akhmatova’s Petersburg (Philadelphia: University of Pennsyl-vannia Press, 1983), 149.

72. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 34.73. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 69.74. R. D. B.Thomson, “Mandel’stam’s Kamen’: The Evolution of an Image,”

Russian Literature XXX (1991): 501–530, 505.75. The Works of Théophile Gautier, vol. 24 (New York: George D. Sproul, 1903),

182.76. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 47.77. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 79.


78. Nikita Struve, Osip Mandelshtam (London: Overseas Publications Inter-change Ltd, 1990), 189.

79. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 93.80. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 67.81. Amy Singleton Adams, “‘Turned to Stone’: Statues and the Dynamics of

Resistance in Akhmatova’s Poetry,” Russian Language Journal, LII, Nos.171–73 (1998): 81–98 (82).

82. Ronen,“Leksicheskii povtor, podtekst i smysl v poetike Osipa Mandelsh-tama,” 368.

83. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 83.84. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 52.85. Robert Tracy, “Mandelstam: The Poet As Builder.” In Osip Mandelstam,

Stone (London: Collins Harvill, 1991), 3–41, 31.86. Cf. L. G. Kikhnei, Filosofsko-esteticheskie printsipy akmeizma I khudozhestven-

naia praktika Osipa Mandelshtama (Moscow: Dialog-MGU, 1997), 131.87. Ironically, whether Mandelstam was aware of this or not, the dome of

Hagia Sophia presented its Byzantine architects with a major challenge.After the inauguration of the temple by Emperor Justinian in 557, the en-tire dome collapsed. It was subsequently restored on a smaller scale, toavoid the enormous pressure on the outer walls, and the temple was inau-gurated for the second time in 563.

88. Cf. Efim Etkind,“‘Rassudochnaia propast’ O mandelshtamovskoi ‘Fedre.’”In: “Otdai menia,Voronezh . . .”Tret’i mezhdunarodnye mandelshtamovskie cht-eniia (Voronezh: Izdatelstvo Voronezhskogo universiteta, 1995), 43–59, 46.

89. The relevance of Nerval’s poem for this Mandelstam’s text was indicatedby Nikita Struve, op. cit. p. 290, footnote 22.

90. This connection was pointed out by Peter Steiner in his article “Mandel’s-tam’s ‘Notre Dame’” (Russian Literature,V-3 [July 1977], 239–56, 243).

91. Gérard de Nerval, Oeuvres complètes, vol. 1 (Paris: Gallimard, 1989), 338.92. Selected Writings of Gérard de Nerval, trans. Geoffrey Wagner (New York:

Grove Press, 1957), 197.93. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 83.94. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 52–53.95. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 284.96. Omri Ronen, “Osip Mandelshtam,” Literaturnoe obozrenie 1 (1991):

3–18, 9.97. J.-K. Hyusmans, La Cathédrale (Paris, 1902), 166–67.98. Théophile Gautier, Travels in Russia, Part One, ed. and trans. F. C. de

Sumichrast (New York: George D. Sproul, 1902), 110.99. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 88.

100. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 58.101. Robert Tracy. “Mandelstam: The Poet As Builder.” In Osip Mandelstam.

Stone, 3–41 (London: Collins Harvill, 1991), 29.102. Ibid., 29.

275N o t e s

276

103. Nils Åke Nilsson, Osip Mandel’stam: Five poems (Stockholm: Almqvist &Wiksell International, 1974), 12.

104. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 94.105. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 68.106. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 284.107. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 47.108. Jan M. Meijer, “Pictures in Mandelstam’s Oeuvre.” In Dutch Contributions

to the Eighth International Congress of Slavists, ed. Jan M. Meijer (Amsterdam:John Benjamins B.V., 1979), 329–37 (332).

109. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 298.110. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 166.111. Victor Zhirmunsky,“Symbolism’s Successors.” In The Noise of Change: Rus-

sian Literature and the Critics (1891–1917), ed. and trans. Stanley Rabi-nowitz (Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1966), 235.

112. Lubok—“a form of popular print illustration introduced into Russia fromthe West early in the 17th century.The original technique used was that ofthe woodblock print, often with hand coloring, but this was replaced byhand-colored copperplate etchings and other techniques from the middleof the 18th century. . . .The lubok illustration was frequently accompaniedby a text: this was carved on a script on the same woodblock or copper-plate below the picture.Texts included folk songs as well as folktales andother popular tales.” (Victor Terras, ed., Handbook of Russian Literature (NewHaven & London:Yale University Press, 1985), 267).

113. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 89.114. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 60.115. Aleksandr Flaker, “Puteshestvie v stranu zhivopisi (Mandelshtam o

frantsuzskoi zhivopisi),” Wiener Slawistischer Almanach 14 (1984): 167–78,171–72.

116. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 295.117. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 157.118. Clarence Brown.Mandelstam (Cambridge:Harvard University Press, 1973),

166.119. In his “Silentium” (1833),Tiutchev admonishes his reader to keep silence,

for “once uttered, a thought becomes a lie.”120. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 71.121. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 37.122. Mandelstam,“O prirode slova.” In Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh,

vol. 2, 172–87, 176.123. Victor Terras, “Modernism in Russian Poetry. Some Observations.” In O

RUS! Studia litteraria slavica in honorem Hugh McLean, eds. Simon Karlinsky,James L. Rice and Barry P. Scherr (Oakland, CA: Berkely Slavic Special-ties), 380–87.

124. On painting as pars pro toto within the European avant garde system of thearts, see: A. A. Hansen-Löve, “Intermedialität und Intertextualität,” Dialogder Texte Wiener Slawistischer Almanach 11 (1983): 291–360, 293.


125. Mandelstam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 76.126. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 44.127. Brown, 164.128. Jose-Maria de Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince (London:The Athlone

Press, 1979), 102.129. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 151.130. Brown, 164.131. Zhirmunsky, 235.132. Vasily Gippius, “Anna Akhmatova ‘Vecher.’” In Eds. R. D.Timenchik and

K. M. Polivanov Anna Akhmatova: Desiatye gody (Moscow: MPI, 1989), 80.133. Joanna Piotrowiak, “The Symbolic Function of Concrete Objects in the

Poetry of Anna Akhmatova (1910–1925) and Maria Pawlikowska-Jas-norzewska (1922–1937),” Russian Literature XVIII (1985): 299–310, 299.

134. Valerian Chudovsky, “Po povodu stikhov Anny Akhmatovoi,” Apollon 5(1912): 45–50.

135. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 28.136. The Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova. Edited by Roberta Reeder, trans-

lated by Judith Hemschemeyer. vol. 1. (Somerville: Zephyr Press, 1990), 221.137. Cf.Yoko Chiba,“Japonisme: East-West Renaissance in the Late 19th Cen-

tury, Mosaic 31: 2 (1998): 1–20.138. Cf. Chiba; Elwood Hartman, “Japonisme and Nineteenth-Century French

Literature,” Comparative Literature Studies, 18:2 (1981): 141–66.139. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 33–34.140. “This Morning Is Drunk with Spring Sun,” The Complete Works of Anna

Akhmatova, vol. 1, 231.141. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 9.142. “The smell of blue grapes is sweet,” The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova,

vol. 1, 265.143. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 23–24.144. “Two Poems,” The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 1, 279.145. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 35.146. “I Finally Wrote down the Words,” The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova,

vol. 1, 237.147. Andrey Bely, St. Petersburg, trans. John Cournos (New York: Grove Press,

Inc., 1959), 43–44.148. This kimono is on display in the Musée des Arts de la Mode on Rue de Riv-

oli in Paris.149. For a detailed discussion, cf. Chiba.150. Hartman, 151.151. William Leonard Schwartz, The Imaginative Interpretation of the Far East in

Modern French Literature 1800–1925 (Paris: Librairie ancienne HonoréChampion, 1927), 38.

152. The Parnassians’ interest in Japonisme naturally goes hand in hand withtheir love for chinoiserie, upon which we have already touched in the sec-tion on Gumilev. Besides the texts mentioned there, the following works

277N o t e s

278

further propelled the fashion for Orientalism in the Parnassian milieu:Gautier’s “Chinoiserie” and “Sonnet” (from Poésies diverses, 1833–38),Heredia’s “L’Ecran” (1868), Banville’s “La Ville enchanté” (from Odes fu-nambulesques, 1869), Mallarmé’s “Epilogue” (included in the 1866 issue ofParnasse contemporain), Claudius Popelin’s sonnet “Chinoiserie” (1875), aswell as Gautier’s accounts of Asian exhibits at the expositions universelles of1851, 1855, and 1867, and his essays on various aspects of Chinese culturefor La Presse and Moniteur.

153. Aleksis Rannit, “Anna Akhmatova Considered in a Context of Art Nou-veau.” In Anna Akhmatova, Works, vol. 2 (Munich: Inter-Language Liter-ary Association, 1968), 5–38.

154. Wendy Rosslyn, “The Function of Architectural Imagery in Akhmatova’sPoetry,” Irish Slavonic StudiesVI (1985): 19–34, 29.

155. W. J. T. The Picture Theory (Chicago: The University of Chicago Press,1994), 168.

156. In the original, the titles of Pushkin’s and Akhmatova’s poems are identical.157. Pushkin, Sochineniia v trekh tomakh, vol. 1, 478.158. Alexander Pushkin, Collected Narrative and Lyrical Poetry, trans.Walter Arndt

(Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1984), 99.159. Rosslyn, “Remodelling the Statues at Tsarskoe Selo: Akhmatova’s Ap-

proach to the Poetic Tradition,” 156.160. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 92.161. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 1, 417–19.162. Amy Singleton Adams, “‘TURNED TO STONE’: Statues and the Dy-

namics of Resistance in Akhmatova’s Poetry,” Russian Language Journal, vol.LII, nos. 171–73 (1998): 81–98, 83.

163. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 12–13.164. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 2, 505–05.165. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 1, 305.166. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 47.167. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 6.168. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 2, 489.169. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 22.170. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 1, 247.171. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 2, 14.172. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 2, 501.173. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 136.174. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 1, 515.175. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 79.176. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova, vol. 1, 389.177. Dark-skinned people possessed a mysterious aura for Russians, especially

during the romantic period, which explains the special place in culturalmythology occupied by Peter the Great’s Abyssinian courtier, IbragimGannibal, Pushkin’s great grandfather.


178. Wendy Rosslyn,“Painters and Painting in the Poetry of Anna Akhmatova.The Relations between the Poetry and Painting.” In Anna Akhmatova1889–1989, ed. Sonia I. Ketchian (Oakland, CA: Berkeley Slavic Special-ties, 1993), 170–85, 173.

179. Gautier, Poésies complètes, vol. 1, 207.180. “No, I feel, I know, I will never again be as happy as I am here, on the

banks of the Neva” (Irina Odoevtseva, Na beregakh Nevy. In Irina Odoevt-seva, Izbrannoe (Moscow: Soglasie, 1998), 566).

181. Ella Bobrov, Irina Odoevtseva: Poet, Novelist, Memoirist. A Literary Portrait(Oakvill, ON: Mosaic Press, 1996), 6.

182. V. Strugatsky,“Vozvrashchenie k beregam Nevy,” Smena (April 14, 1987).183. Irina Odoevtseva, Zlataia tsep’ (Paris: Rifma, 1975), 65.184. Modern Russian Poetry, eds.Vladimir Markov & Merrill Sparks (New York:

Bobbs-Merrill, 1966–67), 451.185. See generally Gross.186. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 26.187. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova,Vol. 1, 215.188. Cf. Sonia Ketchian, The Poetry of Anna Akhmatova:A Conquest of Time and

Space (Munich:Verlag Otto Sagner, 1986), 78.189. Akhmatova, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 116.190. The Complete Works of Anna Akhmatova,Vol. 1, 473.191. Ketchian, 99.192. Irina Odoevtseva, Zlataia tsep’ (Paris: Rifma, 1975), 29.193. Odes, Sonnets and Lyrics of John Keats (Portland, Maine: Thomas Bird

Mosher, 1922), 13.194. Cf. H. W. Tjalsma, “Count Komarovsky. A Minor Poet of the Petersburg

Style.” In V.A. Komarovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i proza, 7–18 (Munich:WilheimFink Verlag, 1979), 8.

195. V. A. Komarovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i proza (Munich: Wilheim Fink Verlag,1979), 63.

196. Ibid., 58.197. “i belykh statui strashen belyi vzgliad” (“and the glance of white statues is

fearsome”), Komarovsky, 101.198. Georgy Ivanov,“Peterburgskie zimy.” In Georgy Ivanov, Sobranie sochinenii

v trekh tomakh, vol. 3 (Moscow: Soglasie, 1994), 5–220, 122.199. H.W.Tjalsma, “Count Vasily Komarovsky: A Minor Master of the Peters-

burg Style.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets (Columbus, Ohio:Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1993), 237–47 (246).

200. Cf. Lev Loseff, “The Toy Town Ruined.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Seloand Its Poets, 35–50.

201. Pavel Muratov, Obrazy Italii (Leipzig: Grzhebin, 1924).202. D. P. Sviatopolk-Mirsky, “Pamiati gr.V. A. Komarovskogo.” Reprinted in

V. A. Komarovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i proza (Munich: Wilheim Fink Verlag,1979), 24.

279N o t e s

280

203. Tjalsma, 246.204. Komarovsky, 119.205. Timenchik, 124.206. Thomas Venclova, “The Exemplary Resident of Tsarskoe Selo and the

Great Pupil of the Lycée: Some Observations on the Poetics of CountVasily Alekseevich Komarovsky.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and ItsPoets, 261–75, 273.

207. Komarovsky, 118.208. Odes, Sonnets and Lyrics of John Keats, 13.209. Iris Origio, Images and Shadows: Part of a Life (Boston: David R. Godine,

1999), 153.210. Vladimir Markov,“Georgy Ivanov: Nihilist as Light-Bearer.” In Eds. Simon

Karlinsky & Alfred Appel, Jr. The Bitter Air of Exile: Russian Writers in theWest 1922–1972 (Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of CaliforniaPress, 1977), 139–63, 139.

211. Yury Terapiano,“O poezii Georgiia Ivanova,” Literaturnyi sovremennik (Mu-nich, 1954): 240–45, 240.

212. Irina Agushi, “The Poetry of Georgij Ivanov,” Harvard Slavic Studies V(1970): 109–58, 122.

213. Cf. Konstantin Mochulsky’s words about the collection:“ . . . before Roses,G. Ivanov was a delicate master who wrote ‘fine,’‘charming’ verse. In Roses,he became a poet.” (Sovremennye zapiski, no. 46 [Paris, 1931], 502).

214. Evgeny Vitkovsky, “Zhizn’, kotoraia mne snilas’.” In Georgy Ivanov, So-branie Sochinenii v trekh tomakh, vol. 1 (Moscow: Soglasie, 1994), 5–40, 22.

215. Brown, 157.216. Gleb Struve, Russkaia literatura v izgnanii (Paris:YMCA-Press, 1984), 321.217. Nikolai Gumilev,“Pis’mo o russkoi poezii,” Apollon 1:27 (1916).218. Vadim Krejd, Peterburgskii period Georgiia Ivanova (Tenafly, N.J.: Hermitage,

1989).219. Ivanov, Sobraniia sochinenii v trekh tomakh, vol. 1, 43.220. Krejd, 153.221. Ivanov, 100.222. Mandelshtam, Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh, vol. 1, 68.223. Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam, 33.224. Ivanov, 55.225. Ibid., 65.226. Ibid., 176.227. See analysis of the translation in Krejd, 81–82.228. Charles Coran, “A Watteau.” Parnasse contemporain, II (1869–71): 75–77

[Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1971].

229. In 1937, Ivanov published another collection of poems under the sametitle, in which he used the image of the island of ideal love as a metaphorfor his forsaken Russia.These poems have little in common with the play-ful art of Watteau or with Ivanov’s early style. Pessimism and bitter melan-choly underlie this verse of unfulfilled dreams and unrealized happiness.


230. Murray Roston, Changing Perspectives in Literature and the Visual Arts1650–1820 (Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990), 108.

231. Ivanov, 106.232. Ibid., 102.233. A theory popular with some Slavophile intellectuals of the fin de siècle

traced the Russians’ destructive urge to long centuries of domination byTatar hordes,when the presumably placid Slavs mixed with their Turkic in-vaders and became contaminated by their militancy and brutality.

234. W. J.T. Mitchell, Iconology. Image.Text (Chicago:The University of ChicagoPress, 1986), 89.

235. Ivanov, 115.236. Cf.W. N. Ince, Introduction. In Heredia, Les Trophées (London:The Athlone

Press, 1979), 5.237. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince, 33.238. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 5.239. Ince, 109.240. Heredia, Les Trophées, ed.W. N. Ince, 106.241. Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia, 158.242. Georgy Ivanov, Sobranie stikhotvorenii, eds.Vsevolod Setchkarev and Mar-

garet Dalton (Würzburg: Jal-Verlag, 1975), 68.243. Ivanov, 80.244. Ibid., 84.245. Ibid., 72.246. Ibid., 161.247. Ibid., 169.248. Ivanov, Sobranie stikhotvorenii, eds.Vsevolod Setchkarev and Margaret Dal-

ton, 115.

Conclusions

1. Alexander Pushkin, “The Bronze Horseman,” trans. Oliver Elton. In ThePoems, Prose and Plays of Alexander Pushkin, 95–108, 95.

2. “Poetic Influence . . . always proceeds by a misreading of the prior poet, anact of creative correction that is actually and necessarily a misinterpreta-tion.” (Harold Bloom, The Anxiety of Influence [New York: Oxford Univer-sity Press, 1973], 30).

281N o t e s

Bibliography

Works on Literature and the Visual Arts

Artistic Relations: Literature and the Visual Arts in Nineteenth-Century France. Edited byPeter Collier & Robert Lethbridge. New Haven and London:Yale UniversityPress, 1994.

Bagno,V. E.“Zarubezhnaia arkhitektura v russkoi poezii kontsa XIX–nachala XXveka.” In Russkaia arkhitektura i zarubezhnoe iskusstvo. Sbornik issledovanii i materi-alov. Edited by M. P. Alekseev and R. Iu. Danilevskii, 156–88. Leningrad:Nauka, 1986.

Becker,Andrew Sprague. The Shield of Achilles and the Poetics of Ekphrasis. Lanham:Rowman & Littlefield Publishers, Inc., 1995.

Braginskaia, N.V.“Ekfrasis kak tip teksta (k probleme strukturnoi klassifikatsii).” InSlavianskoe i balkanskoe iazykoznanie. Karpato-vostochnoslavianskie paralleli. Struk-tura balkanskogo teksta, 259–83. Moscow: Nauka, 1977.

Clemente, Linda. Literary Objets d’art. Ekphrasis in Medieval French Romance 1150-1210. New York: Peter Lang, 1992. Depictions: Slavic Studies in the Narrative and Vi-sual Arts in Honor of William Harkins. Ed. Douglas M. Greenfield. Ann Arbor:Ardis, 2000.

Dubois, Page. History, Rhetorical Description and the Epic from Homer to Spenser. Cam-bridge: D. S. Brewer and Totowas, NJ: Biblio Distribution Services, 1982.

Edgecombe, Rodney Stenning. “A Typology of Ecphrases.” Classical and ModernLiterature 13, 2 (1993): 103–116.

Farino, Ezhi. “Semioticheskie aspekty poezii o zhivopisi.” Russian Literature VII(1979): 65–94.

Gordon, Rae Beth. Ornament, Fantasy, and Desire in Nineteenth-Century French Lit-erature. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1992.

Gross, Kenneth. The Dream of the Moving Statue. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1992.

Hagstrum, Jean H. The Sister Arts.The Tradition of Literary Pictorialism and English Po-etry from Dryden to Gray. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press, 1958.

Hansen-Löve, A. A. “Intermedialität und Intertextualität.” Dialog der Texte WienerSlawistischer Almanach 11 (1983): 291–360.

Hartman, Elwood. “Japonisme and Nineteenth-Century French Literature.” Com-parative Literature Studies 18:2 (1981): 141–66.

Heffernan, James A.W. Museum of Words.The Poetics of Ekphrasis from Homer to Ash-bery. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press, 1993.

284

James, A. R.“Littérature et arts plastiques: la ‘fraternité des arts.’” In Manuel d’his-toire littéraire de la France, IV, 619–39. Paris: Editions sociales, 1972.

Janecek, Gerald. The Look of Russian Literature. Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress, 1984.

Kaganov, Grigory. Images of Space: St. Petersburg in the Visual and Verbal Arts. Trans-lated by Sidney Monas. Stanford: Stanford University Press, 1997.

Krieger, Murray. Ekphrasis:The Illusion of the Natural Sign. Baltimore and London:The Johns Hopkins University Press, 1992.

Kristeller, Paul Oscar.“The Modern System of the Arts.” In Renaissance Thought andthe Arts, 163–227. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.

Leach, Eleanor Winsor. “Ekphrasis and the Theme of Artistic Failure in Ovid’sMetamorphoses.” Ramus 3 (1974).

Lessing, G. E.“Laokoon or on the Limits of Painting and Poetry.” In Selected ProseWorks, 3–169. London: George Bell & Sons, 1885.

The Literary Works, 1. c. Paragone:A Comparison of the Arts by Leonardo da Vinci. Editedby Irma A. Richter. London, 1949.

Mandelker,Amy.“A Painted Lady: Ekphrasis in Anna Karenina.” Comparative Liter-ature 43 (1991): 1–19

———. Framing Anna Karenina:Tolstoy, the Woman Question, and the Victorian Novel.Columbus, Ohio, 1993.

Mitchell,W. J.T. Iconology. Image.Text. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press,1986.———. The Picture Theory. Chicago:The University of Chicago Press, 1994.Pigarev, Kirill. Russkaia literatura i izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo. Moscow: Nauka, 1966.———. Russkaia literatura i izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo. Ocherki o russkom natsional’nom

peizazhe. Moscow: Nauka, 1972.Putnam, Michael.“Daedalus,Virgil and the End of Art.” American Journal of Philol-

ogy 108 (1987): 173–98.Rischin, Abigail S. “Beside the Reclining Statue: Ekphrasis, Narrative, and Desire

in Middlemarch.” Publications of the Modern Language Association of America III, 5(1996): 1121–32.

Roston, Murray. Changing Perspectives in Literature and the Visual Arts 1650–1820.Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1990.

Russian Literature, Modernism and the Visual Arts. Edited by Catriona Kelly andStephen Lovell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2000.

Russian Narrative and Visual Art:Varieties of Seeing. Edited by Paul Debreczeny andRoger Anderson Gainesville: University Press of Florida, 1994).

Shapiro, Marianne. “Ecphrasis in Virgil and Dante.” Comparative Literature 42, 2(1990): 97–115.

Weisstein, Ulrich.“Literature and the Visual Arts.” In Interrelations of Literature, 251-61. New York:The Modern Language Association of America, 1982.

Literary Texts by Parnassians

Baudelaire, Charles. The Flowers of Evil. Edited by Marthiel and Jackson Mathews.New York: New Directions, 1962.


———. Les Fleurs du mal Paris: GF Flammarion, 1964.Banville, Théodore de. Nouvelles odes: Funambulesques. Paris: Alphonce Lemerre,

1869.Gautier,Théophile. Enamels & Cameos and Other Poems. In The Works of Théophile

Gautier, translated by Agnes Lee,Vol. 24. New York: George D. Sproul, 1903.———. Poésies complètes, 2 vol. Paris: Charpentier, 1885.———. Travels in Russia. Part One.Translated and edited by F. C. de Sumichrast.

New York: George D. Sproul, 1902.———. Emaux et camées. Edited by Madeleine Cottin. Paris: Minard, 1968.Heredia, Jose Maria de. Les Trophées. Edited by Annie Detalle. Paris: Gallimard,

1981.———. Les Trophées. Edited by W. N. Ince. London:The Athlone Press, 1979.Lisle, Leconte de. Poèmes antiques. Paris: Société d’’editions “Les belles lettres,” 1977.———. Poésies complètes, 4 vols. Genève: Slatkine Reprints, 1974.Little French Masterpieces: Théophile Gautier. Translated by George Burnham Ives.

New York: G. P. Putnam’s Sons, 1903.Parnasse contemporain, vol. 1 (1866). Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1971.———. vol. 2 (1869–71). Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1971.Poésies de Théodore de Banville. Les Cariatides (1839–1842). Paris:Alphonse Lemerre,

1877.The Poems of Charles Baudelaire.Translated by F. P. Sturm. London & Newcastle-on-

Tyne:The Walter Scott Publishing Co., 1905.Sainte-Beuve, Charles-Augustin. “Joseph Delorme.” In Poésies complètes de Sainte-

Beuve, 3–158. Paris: Charpentier et Cie, 1869.Sonnets of José-Maria de Heredia. Translated by Edward Robeson Taylor. San Fran-

cisco:William Doxey, 1898.Les Stalactites de Théodore de Banville. Edited by E.-M. Souffrin. Paris: Henri Didier,

1942.The Works of Théophile Gautier, vol. 1. New York: George D. Sproul, 1900.

Art and Literary Criticism by Parnassians

Banville,Théodore de. Petit traité de poésie française. Paris: G. Charpentier, 1881.Baudelaire, Charles. “Salon de 1846.” In Oeuvres complètes, vol. II, 415–96. Paris:

Gallimard, 1976.———. Baudelaire, Charles.“Salon de 1859.” In Oeuvres complètes, vol. II, 607–82.

Paris: Gallimard, 1976.Gautier,Théophile. “Préface.” In Poésies complètes. Vol. I, 3–6. Paris: Charpentier et

Cie, 1884.———. Salon de 1847. Paris: J. Hetzel,Warnod, 1847.———. Les Grotesques. Geneva: Slatkine Reprints, 1969.Lisle, Leconte de.“Préface des Poèmes antiques.” In Derniers poèmes, 213–21. Paris:

Alphonse Lemerre, 1895.Mendès, Catulle. La légende du Parnasse contemporain. Brussels: Augueste Brancart,

1884.

285B i b l i o g r a p h y

286

Non-Parnassian French Literary Texts

Barbier,Auguste. Iambes et poèmes. Paris: E. Dentu, Editeur, 1883.Bellay, Joachim du. Oeuvres poétiques.Vol. II. Paris: Edourd Cornély et Cie Editeurs,

1910.———.Les regrets suivis des Antiquités de Rome. Paris: Librairie Armand Colin, 1958.Belleau, Rémy. La Bergerie. Genève: Librairie Droz, 1954.The Complete Works of François Villon. Translated by Anthony Bonner. New

York:David McKay Company, 1960.Delille, Jacques. Les Jardins. Paris: L.G. Michaud, Librairie-Editeur, 1824.Hugo,Victor. Poems in Three Volumes.Vol. I. Boston: Estes and Lauriat, 1890.———. Oeuvres poétiques.Vol. 1 (Paris: Gallimard, 1964).Hyusmans, J.-K. La Cathédrale. Paris, 1902.Selected Writings of Gérard de Nerval. Translated by Geoffrey Wagner. New York:

Grove Press, 1957.Walter, Judith. Le Livre de jade. Paris:Alphonse Lemerre, 1867.

Literary Texts by Acmeists

The Complete Poems of Anna Akhmatova. Edited by Roberta Reeder, translated byJudith Hemschemeyer. 2 vols. Somerville: Zephyr Press, 1990.

Complete Poetry of Osip Emilevich Mandelstam. Translated by Burton Raffel & AllaBurago.Albany: State University of New York Press, 1873.

Gumilev, Nikolai. Sobranie sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh, 4 vols.Washington:VictorKamkin, Inc., 1962.

Ivanov, Georgy. Sobranie sochinenii v trekh tomakh,Vol. I. Moscow: Soglasie, 1994.———. Sobranie stikhotvorenii. Edited by Vsevolod Setchkarev and Margaret Dal-

ton.Würzburg: Jal-Verlag, 1975.Komarovsky,V.A. Stikhotvoreniia i proza. Munich:Wilheim Fink Verlag, 1979.Mandelstam, Osip. Sochineniia v dvukh tomakh. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia liter-

atura, 1990.Odoevtseva, Irina. Izbrannoe. Moscow: Soglasie, 1998.———. Odoevtseva, Irina. Zlataia tsep’. Paris: Rifma, 1975.

Acmeist Manifestoes, Articles, and Art Criticism

Gorodetsky, Sergei.“Nekotorye techeniia v sovremennoi russkoi literature.” In Po-eticheskie techeniia v russkoi literature kontsa XIX—nachala XX veka, 90–96.Moscow:Vysshaia shkola, 1988.

———. Rech 89 (April 2, 1912): 3.Gumilev, Nikolai.“Acmeism and the Legacy of Symbolism.” In Nikolai Gumilev on

Russian Poetry. Translated by David Lapeza 21–24.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1977.———. “Teofil’ Got’e.” In Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii. Vol. IV, 386–94.Washing-

ton:Victor Kamkin, 1968.———. “The Life of Verse.” In Nikolai Gumilev on Russian Poetry. Translated by

David Lapeza, 11–20.


———. “The Reader.” In Nikolai Gumilev on Russian Poetry, Translated by DavidLapeza, 25–30.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1977.

———. “The Anatomy of a Poem.” In Nikolai Gumilev on Russian Poetry. Trans-lated by David Lapeza, 31–33.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1977.

———.“Vystavka novogo russkogo iskusstva v Parizhe.” Vesy 11 (1907): 87–88.———.“Dva salona.” Vesy 5 (1908): 103–05.———. “Po povodu ‘Salona’ Makovskogo.” Zhurnal teatra literaturno-khudozh-

estvennogo obshchestva 6 (1909): 17.———.“Pis’mo a russkoi poezii.” Apollon, 1:27 (1916).Kuzmin, Mikhail.“O prekrasnoi iasnosti.” Apollon, no. 14 (1910): 5–9.Mandelstam, Osip.“The Morning of Acmeism.” In The Complete Critical Prose and

Letters. Translated by Jane Gary Harris and Constance Link, 61–65.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1979.

———.“On the Nature of the Word.” In The Complete Critical Prose and Letters.Trans-lated by Jane Gary Harris and Constance Link, 117–32.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1979.

———. “François Villon.” In The Complete Critical Prose and Letters. Translated byJane Gary Harris and Constance Link, 53–60.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1979.

———.“The Word and Culture.” In The Complete Critical Prose and Letters. Trans-lated by Jane Gary Harris and Constance Link, 112–16.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1979.

Modern Russian Poetry. Edited by Vladimir Markov and Merrill Sparks. Indianapo-lis:The Bobbs-Merrill Company, 1966.

Non-Acmeist Russian Literary Texts

Annensky, Innokenty. The Cypress Chest.Translated by R. H. Morrison.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1982.

———. Stikhotvoreniia i tragedii. Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1990.———. Knigi otrazhenii. Moscow: Nauka, 1979.———. “On Contemporary Lyrism.” In The Russian Symbolists: An Anthology of

Critical and Theoretical Writings. Edited and translated by Ronald E. Peterson,127–142.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1986.

Anthology of Russian Literature from the Earliest Period to the Present Time. Edited byLeo Wiener. Part II. New York: Benjamin Blom, 1902.

Balmont, Konstantin. Izbrannoe. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1980.———. Stikhotvoreniia. Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1969.Batiushkov, Konstantin. Sochinenia. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1955.Bely,Andrei.“Budem iskat’ melodii (Predislovie k sborniku ‘Posle razluki’).” In An-

drei Bely, Stikhotvoreniia i poemy, 546–50. Moscow-Leningrad, 1966.———.“Emblematika smysla.” In Andrei Bely, Kritika, Estetika,Teoriia Simvolizma,

Vol. 1, 54–143. Moscow: Iskusstvo, 1994.———.St. Petersburg.Translated by John Cournos.New York:Grove Press, Inc., 1959.Blok, Aleksandr. “Intelligentsiia i Revoliutsiia.” In Aleksandr Blok, Sobranie sochi-

nenii.Vol. IV, 229–39. Leningrad: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1982.———. Sobranie sochinenii v 8-mi tomakh. Moscow-Leningrad, 1962.Briusov,Valery. Sobranie sochinenii. Moscow, 1975.———. Stikhotvoreniia. Moscow: Sovetskaia Rossiia, 1990.


288

Derzhavin, G. R., Stikhotvoreniia. Petrozavodsk: Kareliia, 1984.Fet,Afanasy.“Dva pis’ma o znachenii drevnikh iazykov.” Literaturnaia biblioteka.Vol.

5, Book 1 (1867).———. Stikhotvoreniia. Moscow-Leningrad: Sovetsky pisatel’, 1963.Garshin,Vsevolod. Sochineniia. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1983.Gogol, Nikolai. “Poslednii den’ Pompei (Kartina Briullova).” In N. Gogol, Polnoe

sobranie sochinenii, 106–09. Saint Petersburg and Moscow, 1883.———. St. John’s Eve and Other Stories. Translated by Isabel F. Hapgood. Freeport,

NY: Books for Libraries Press, 1886.Grigorovich, D.V. Korabl’ ‘Retvizan.’ In Dmitry Grigorovich. Sochineniia. Vol. 3, 7-

160. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1988.Karamzin, Nikolai. Polnoe sobranie sochinenii. Moscow-Leningrad, 1966.Kniazev,Vsevolod. Stikhi Posmertnoe izdanie. Saint Petersburg, 1914.Kuzmin, Mikhail. Stikhotvoreniia. Saint Petersburg:Akademicheskii proekt, 1996.———. Izbrannye proizvedeniia. Lenigrad: Khudozhestvennaia literatura, 1990.———. Sobranie stikhov II. Munich:Wilhelm Fink Verlag, 1977.Odoevtseva, Irina. Izbrannoe. Moscow: Soglasie, 1998.Pushkin,Alexander. Sochineniia v trekh tomakh.Vol. I. Moscow: Khudozhestvennaia

literatura, 1985.———. Collected Narrative and Lyrical Poetry. Translated by Walter Arndt. Ann

Arbor:Ardis, 1984.The Poems, Prose and Plays of Alexander Pushkin. Edited by Avrahm Yarmolinsky.New

York:The Modern Library, 1936.Stikhotvoreniia grafa D. I. Khvostova.Vol. 7. Saint Petersburg, 1834.Two Centuries of Russian Verse. Edited by Avrahm Yarmolinsky, translated by Babette

Deutsch. New York: Random House, 1966.Tolstoy,Leo.Anna Karenina. Edited by George Gibian.New York:W.W.Norton,1970.Twentieth-Century Russian Poetry. Edited by John Glad and Daniel Weissbort. Iowa

City: University of Iowa Press, 1992.Voloshin, Maksimilian. Stikhotvoreniia i poemy.Vol. 1. Paris:YMCA-PRESS, 1982.

Parnasse and Related Phenomena: Secondary Sources

Baudelaire par Théophile Gautier, edited by Claude-Marie Senninger. Paris: Klinck-sieck, 1986.

Brahimi, Denise. “A propos de l’Esbekieh ou du bon usage des places arabes.” InBulletin de la Société Théophile Gautier. L’Orient de Théophile Gautier. Vol. II,295–301. Le port-Marly:Yvelines, 1990.

Cermakian, M. “Les années d’apprentissage de Théophile Gautier: peintre oupoète?” In Théophile Gautier. L’Art et l’Artiste: Actes du colloque international II,223–30. Montpellier: Université Paul-Valéry, 1982.

David, Henri. “Théophile Gautier: Le Pavillon sur l’eau. Sources et traitement.”Modern Philology, vol. XIII, no. 11 (March 1916): 151–72.

Delaty, Simon. “Gustave Moreau et José-Maria de Heredia: Affinités esthétiques.”In Patterns of Evolution in Nineteenth-Century French Poetry. Edited by LawrenceWatson & Rosemary Lloyd, 136–52. Oxon:The Tallents Press, 1991.


Denommé, Robert. The French Parnassian Poets. Carbondale and Edwardsville:Southern Illinois University Press, 1972.

Desonay, Fernand. Le Rêve hellénique chez les poètes parnassiens. Paris: Librairie anci-enne Honoré Champion, 1928.

Eigeldinger, Marc. “L’Inscription de l’oeuvre plastique dans les récits de Gautier.”In Théophile Gautier. L’Art et l’Artiste Actes du colloque international. Vol. II,298–309. Montpelier: Université Paul-Valéry, 1982.

Fort Paul & Louis Mandin. Histoire de la poésie française depuis 1850. Paris: Flam-marion, 1926.

Ibrovac, Miodrag. José-Maria de Heredia: Sa vie, son oeuvre. Paris: Les PressesFrançaises, 1923.

Johnson, Barbara. “The Dream of Stone.” In A New History of French Literature.Edited by Denis Hollier, 743–48. Cambridge, Mass. & London, England: Har-vard University Press, 1989.

Martino, Pierre. Parnasse et Symbolisme. Paris: Librairie Armand Colin, 1958.A New History of French Literature. Edited by Denis Hollier. Cambridge, Mass. &

London, England: Harvard University Press, 1989.Priou, Jules-Marie. Leconte de Lisle. Paris: Seghers, 1966.Salazar, Philippe Joseph.“Le Deuil de la voix: Ballanche et le Parnasse.” In Patterns

of Evolution in Nineteenth-Century French Poetry. Edited by Lawrence Watson &Rosemary Lloyd, 3–16. Oxford:The Tallents Press, 1991.

Schaffer,Aaron.The Genres of Parnassian Poetry:A Study of the Parnassian Minors. Bal-timore:The John Hopkins Press, 1944.

Schwartz, William Leonard. The Imaginative Interpretation of the Far East in ModernFrench Literature 1800–1925. Paris: Librairie ancienne Honoré Champion, 1927.

Scott, David.“Pictorialist Poetics:Aspects of Parnassian Prosodic Theory and Prac-tice from Sainte-Beuve to Banville.” In Patterns of Evolution in Nineteenth-Cen-tury French Poetry. Edited by Lawrence Watson & Rosemary Lloyd, 85–99.Oxford:The Tallents Press, 1991.

———.“Pictorialist poetics: the nineteenth-century French re-reading of ‘ut pic-tura poesis.’” Word and Image IV (1988): 364–71.

———. Pictorialist Poetics:Poetry and the Visual Arts in Nineteenth-Century France.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1988.

Thompson, C.W. Victor Hugo and the Graphic Arts (1820–1833). Genève-Paris: Li-brairie Droz, 1970.

Wanner,Adrian. Baudelaire in Russia. Gainesville: University of Florida Press, 1996.Whyte, Peter. “La Référence artistique comme procédé littéraire dans quelques

romans et contes de Gautier.” In Théophile Gautier. L’Art et l’Artiste. Actes ducolloque international. Vol. II., 281–95. Montpelier: Université Paul-Valéry,1982.

Acmeism and Related Phenomena: Secondary Sources

Adams, Amy Singleton. “‘Turned to Stone’: Statues and the Dynamics of Resis-tance in Akhmatova’s Poetry.” Russian Language Journal. LII, nos. 171–73 (1998):81–98.


290

Agushi, Irina.“The Poetry of Georgij Ivanov.” Harvard Slavic Studies.V (1970): 109-58.

Allain, Louis. “U istokov poetiki N. S. Gumileva. Frantsuzskaia i zapadno-evropeiskaia poeziia.” In Nikolai Gumilev. Issledovaniia i materialy. Bibliografiia.Edited by M. D. El’zon & N. A. Groznova, 235–50. Saint Petersburg: Nauka,1994.

Anna Akhmatova: Desiatye gody. Edited by R. D. Timenchik and K. M. Polivanov.Moscow: MPI, 1989.

Basker, Michael. “Gumilev, Annensky and Tsarskoe Selo.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets. Edited by Lev Loseff & Barry Scherr, 215–41.Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, 1993.

Bobrov, Ella. Irina Odoevtseva: Poet, Novelist, Memoirist. A Literary Portrait. Oakvill,ON: Mosaic Press, 1996.

Bogomolov, N. A. “‘Liubov’—vsegdashniaia moia vera.’” In Mikhail Kuzmin.Stikhotvoreniia, 5–52. Saint-Petersburg:Akademicheskii proekt, 1996.

Bonamour, Jean.“Remarques sur Gumilev, critique de la poésie française.” In Niko-laj Gumilev 1886–1986 Papers from the Gumilev Centenary Symposium. Edited bySheelagh Duffin Graham, 69–76. Oakland, CA: Berkeley Slavic Specialties,1987.

Bristol, Evelyn. “Acmeists and the Parnassian Heritage.” In American Contributionsto the Tenth International Congress of Slavists. Edited by Jane Gary Harris, 71–81.Columbus, Ohio: Slavica, 1988.

Briusov,Valery. Dalekie i blizkie. Moscow: Skorpion, 1912.Brown, Clarence. Mandelstam. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1973.Chudovky, Valerian. “Po povodu stikhov Anny Akhmatovoi.” Apollon, 5 (1912):

45–50.Doherty, Justin. The Acmeist Movement in Russian Poetry. Culture and the Word. Ox-

ford: Claredon Press, 1995.———. “Acmeist Perceptions of Italy.” In Literary Tradition and Practice in Russian

Culture. Papers from an International Conference on the Occasion of the SeventiethBirthday of Y. M. Lotman. Edited by Valentina Polukhina, Joe Andrew, andRobert Reid, 108–109.Amsterdam: Rodopi, 1993.

Doronchenkov, I.A.“‘ . . . Krasavitsa, kak polotno Briullova.’” Russkaia literaturaa 4(1993): 158–76.

Driver, Sam.“Acmeism.” Slavic and East European Journal 12, 2 (1968): 141–56.Etkind, Efim. “‘Rassudochnaia propast.’ O mandelshtamovskoi ‘Fedre.’” In “Otdai

menia, Voronezh . . .” Tret’i mezhdunarodnye mandelshtamovskie chteniia, 43-59.Voronezh: Izdatelstvo Voronezhskogo universiteta, 1995

Fedotov, O. “Sonet v tvorchestve Anny Akhmatovoi.” In Problemy tvorchestva I bi-ografii A.A.Akhmatovoi, 17–20. Odessa, 1989.

Flaker, Aleksandr. “Puteshestvie v stranu zhivopisi (Mandelshtam o frantsuzskoizhivopisi).” Wiener Slawistischer Almanach, 14 (1984): 167–78.

Ivanov,Viacheslav. “O poezii Innokentiia Annenskogo.” In Sobranie sochinenii. Vol.II, 574–86. Brussels: Foyer Oriental Chrétien, 1974.

———.“Retsenzii na knigu Voloshina Stikhotvoreniia 1900–1910.” Apollon 7 (1900).


Karlinsky, Simon.“Nikolai Gumilev and Théophile Gautier.” In Cultural Mytholo-gies of Russian Modernism. From the Golden Age to the Silver Age. Edited by BorisGasparov, Robert P. Hughs, and Irina Paperno, 327–36. Berkeley: University ofCalifornia Press, 1992.

Ketchian, Sonia. The Poetry of Anna Akhmatova:A Conquest of Time and Space. Mu-nich:Verlag Otto Sagner, 1986.

Kikhnei, L. G. Filosofsko-esteticheskie printsipy akmeizma i khudozhestvennaia praktikaOsipa Mandelshtama. Moscow: Dialog-MGU, 1997.

Krejd,Vadim. Peterburgskii period Georgiia Ivanova. Tenafly, N.J.: Hermitage, 1989.Kuzmin, Mikhail. “Retsenziia na knigu Voloshina Stikhotvoreniia 1900–1910.”

Apollon 7 (1900).Lann, Evgeny. Pisatel’skaia sud’ba Maksimiliana Voloshina (Moscow, 1922).Leiter, Sharon. Akhmatova’s Petersburg. Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania

Press, 1983.Loseff, Lev.“The Toy Town Ruined.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets,

35–50. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1993.Malmstad, John E. & Gennady Shmakov.“Kuzmin’s ‘The Trout Breaking through

the Ice.’” In Russian Modernism Culture and the Avant-Garde, 1900–1930. Editedby George Gibian & H.W.Tjalsma, 132–64. Ithaca: Cornell University Press,1976.

Markov,Vladimir. “Georgy Ivanov: Nihilist as Light-Bearer.” In The Bitter Air ofExile: Russian Writers in the West 1922–1972. Edited by Simon Karlinsky andAlfred Appel, Jr., 139–63. Berkeley, Los Angeles, London: University of Califor-nia Press, 1977.

Meijer, Jan M. “Pictures in Mandelstam’s Oeuvre.” In Dutch Contributions to theEighth International Congress of Slavists. Edited by Jan M. Meijer, 329–37. Ams-terdam: John Benjamins B.V., 1979.

Mochulsky, Konstantin. “Klassitsizm v russkoi poezii.” Sovremennye zapiski 11(1922): 368–79.

———. Aleksandr Blok. Paris:YMCA-PRESS, 1948.Nilsson, Nils Åke. Osip Mandel’stam:Five poems. Stockholm:Almqvist & Wiksell In-

ternational, 1974.Parton,Anthony.“‘Goncharova and Larionov’—Gumilev’s Pantum to Art.” In Niko-

laj Gumilev 1886–1986. Papers from the Gumilev Centenary Symposium, 225–42.Edited by S. D. Graham. Oakland, CA: Berkeley Slavic Specialties, 1987.

Piotrowiak, Joanna.“The Symbolic Function of Concrete Objects in the Poetry ofAnna Akhmatova (1910–1925) and Maria Pawlikowska-Jasnorzewska(1922–1937).” Russian Literature XVIII (1985): 299–310.

Poggioli, Renato. The Poets of Russia 1890–1930. Cambridge: Harvard UniversityPress, 1960.

Poliakova, S.V. Osip Mandelshtam Nabliudeniia, interpretatsii, neopublikovannoe I zaby-toe. Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1992.

Rannit, Aleksis. “Anna Akhmatova Considered in a Context of Art Nouveau.” InAnna Akhmatova. Works.Vol. 2, 5–38. Munich: Inter-Language Literary Associ-ation, 1968.


292

Ronen, Omri. “Leksicheskii povtor, podtekst i smysl v poetike Osipa Mandelsh-tama.” In Slavic Poetics: Essays in Honor of Kiril Taranovsky, Edited by RomanJakobson, C. H.Van Schooneveld, and Dean S.Worth, 367–87. Paris: Mouton,1973.

———.“Osip Mandelshtam.” Literaturnoe obozrenie. 1 (1991): 3–18.Rosslyn,Wendy.“Remodelling the Statues at Tsarskoe Selo:Akhmatova’s Approach

to the Poetic Tradition.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets, 147–170.Columbus: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1993.

———. “The Function of Architectural Imagery in Akhmatova’s Poetry.” IrishSlavonic StudiesVI (1985): 19–34.

———. “Painters and Painting in the Poetry of Anna Akhmatova.The Relationsbetween the Poetry and Painting.” In Anna Akhmatova 1889–1989. Edited bySonia I. Ketchian, 170–85. Oakland, CA: Berkeley Slavic Specialties, 1993.

Rusinko, Elaine. “Adamism and Acmeist Primitivism.” Slavic and East EuropeanJournal, no. 32, 1 (1988): 84–97.

———. “Acmeism, Post-symbolism, and Henri Bergson.” Slavic Review 41, 3(1982): 494–510.

Sampson, Earl. Nikolay Gumilev. Boston:Twayne Publishers, 1979.Scherr, Barry P.“Gumilev and Parnassianism.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and

Its Poets. Edited by Lev Loseff and Barry Scherr, 242–60. Columbus, Ohio: Slav-ica Publishers, 1993.

Steiner, Peter. “Mandel’stam’s ‘Notre Dame.’” Russian Literature V-3 (July 1977):239- 56.

Strugatsky,V.“Vozvrashchenie k beregam Nevy.” Smena (April 14, 1987).Struve, Nikita.“Bog Akhmatovoi.” In Pravoslavie i kul’tura, 243–45. Moscow, 1992.———. Osip Mandelshtam. London: Overseas Publications Interchange Ltd, 1990.Struve, G. P. “N. S. Gumilev, ““Zhizn’ i lichnost’.” In Nikolai Gumilev, Sobranie

sochinenii v chetyrekh tomakh.Vol. 1,VII-XLIV.Washington:Victor Kamkin, Inc.,1962.

Sviatopolk-Mirsky, D. P. “Pamiati gr.V. A. Komarovskogo.” Reprinted in V. A. Ko-marovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i proza. Munich:Wilheim Fink Verlag, 1979.

Szilárd, Léna. Russkaia literatura kontsa XIX-nachala XX veka (1890–1917). Vol. I.Budapest:Tankönyvkiadó, 1983.

Terapiano,Yury.“O poezii Georgiia Ivanova.” Literaturnyi sovremennik, 240–45. Mu-nich, 1954.

Terras,Victor.“Classical Motives in the Poetry of Osip Mandelstam.” Slavic and EastEuropean Journal 10, 3 (1966): 251–67.

Timenchik, Roman.“Nikolai Gumilev i Vostok.” Pamir 3 (1987): 123–36.Tjalsma, H.W.“The Petersburg Modernists and the Tradition.” In Acmeists and Oth-

ers: An Anthology. Edited by George Ivask, 7–24. Munich:Whilhelm Fink Ver-lag, 1973.

———.“Count Komarovsky. A Minor Poet of the Petersburg Style.” In V. A. Ko-marovsky, Stikhotvoreniia i proza,7–18. Munich:Wilheim Fink Verlag, 1979.

Thomson, R. D. B. “Mandel’stam’s Kamen’: The Evolution of an Image.” RussianLiterature. XXX (1991): 501–530.


Tracy, Robert. “Mandelstam: The Poet As Builder.” In Osip Mandelstam, Stone,3–41. London: Collins Harvill, 1991.

Tsiv’ian,T.V.“K analizu tsikla Kuzmina ‘Fudzii v bliudechke.” In Mikhail Kuzmin Irusskaia kul’tura XX veka.Tezisy i materialy konferentsii 15–17 maia 1990 g, 43-46. Leningrad: Sovet po istorii mirovoi kul’tury AN SSSR, 1990.

Tucker, Janet. Innokentij Annenskij and the Acmeist Doctrine. Columbus: Slavica Pub-lishers, 1986.

Venclova,Thomas.“The Exemplary Resident of Tsarskoe Selo and the Great Pupilof the Lycée: Some Observations on the Poetics of Count Vasily AlekseevichKomarovsky.” In A Sense of Place.Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets, 261–75. Columbus,Ohio: Slavica Publishers, Inc., 1993.

Vitkovsky, Evgeny.“Zhizn’, kotoraia mne snilas’.” In Georgy Ivanov. Sobranie Sochi-nenii v trekh tomakh.Vol. 1, 5–40. Moscow: Soglasie, 1994.

Weidlé, V. V. “Peterburgskaia poetika.” In Nikolai Gumilev, Sobranie sochinenii vchetyrekh tomakh, vol. IV,V-XXXVI. Washington:Victor Kamkin, Inc., 1962.

Zhirmunsky,Victor.“Symbolism’s Successors.” In The Noise of Change: Russian Lit-erature and the Critics (1891–1917). Edited and translated by Stanley Rabi-nowitz.Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1966.

N.V. Zlydneva.“Motif volny v russkoi grafike nachala XX veka i poeticheskii mirM.A. Kuzmina.” In Mikhail Kuzmin i russkaia kul’tura XX veka.Tezisy i materialykonferentsii 15–17 maia 1990 g., 57–60. Leningrad: Sovet po istorii mirovoi kul’-tury AN SSSR, 1990.

Related Works

Ballanche, P. S. “Théorie de la parole.” In Oeuvres complètes. Essai sur les institutionssociales, 179–202. Genève: Slatkine Reprints, 1967.

Barber, David. “A Brief for the Epigram.” Parnassus: Poetry in Review 24, no. 1(1999): 8–58.

Berlin, Isaiah. The Roots of Romanticism. Princeton: Princeton University Press,1999.

Bloom, Harold. The Anxiety of Influence. New York: Oxford University Press, 1973.Bona, Dominique. Les Yeux noirs. Les vies extraordinaires des soeurs Heredia. Paris: J.-

C. Lattès, 1989.Borisova, E.A. and G.Yu. Sternin. Russkii modern. Moscow: Sovetskii khudozhnik,

1990.Bulgakov, Sergei. Avtobiograficheskie zametki. Paris, 1991.Bukhshtab, B. Ia. A.A. Fet Ocherk zhizni i tvorchestva. Leningrad: Nauka, 1990.Burckhardt, Jacob. The Greeks and Greek Civilization. New York: St. Martin’s Press,

1998.Burke, Edmund. Works. London: Bohn Library, 1876.Camacho, Mathilde. Judith Gautier: Sa vie et son oeuvre. Paris: Librairie E. Droz, 1939.The Central Committee Resolution and Zhdanov’s Speech on the Journals Zvezda and

Leningrad. Translated by Felicity Ashbee and Irina Tidmarsh. Royal Oak, Mich.:Strathcona Publishing Co, 1978.


294

Chiba,Yoko.“Japonisme: East-West Renaissance in the Late 19th Century.” Mosaic31, 2 (1998): 1–20.

Cooke, Brett. Pushkin and the Creative Process. Gainesville: University Press ofFlorida, 1998.

Cousin,Victor.Cours de philosophie, professé ‘a la faculté des lettres pendant l’année 1818:sur le fondement des idées absolues du vrai, du beau et du bien. Paris: Hachette, 1836.

Davillier, Jean Charles. Recherches sur l’orfèvrerie en Espagne au Moyen Age et à la Re-naissance. Paris:A. Quantin, 1879.

Eckhardt,Alexandre. Rémy Belleau: Sa vie—sa “Bergerie.” Budapest: Librairie JosephNémeth, 1917.

Etkind, Efim. “Demokratiia, opoiasannaia burei (O muzykal’no-poeticheskomstroenii poemy A. Bloka ‘Dvenadtsat’).” In Blok i muzyka, 58–84. Leningrad:Sovetskii kompozitor, 1972.

Fedotov, O. I. “Sonet Serebrianogo veka.” In Sonet Serebrianogo veka. Russkii sonetkontsa XIX–nachala XX veka,edited by O. I.Fedotov,5–34.Moscow:Pravda,1990.

The Georgics of Virgil. Translated into English by J.W. Mackail, book III. Portland,Maine:Thomas B. Mosher, 1899.

Ginzburg, Lidia. O lirike. Moscow-Leningrad: Sovetskii pisatel’, 1964.Glebov, Igor (B.V.Asaf ’ev).“Videnie mira v dukhe muzyki (poeziia A. Bloka).” In

Blok i muzyka, 8–57. Leningrad: Sovetskii kompozitor, 1972.Gourmont, Rémy. Judith Gautier. Paris: Bibliothèque nationale d’èditions, 1904.Graff, G. A Dictionary of Narratology. Norman, OK and London: University of Ok-

lahoma Press, 1987.The Greek Anthology. Translated into English by George Burges. London: George

Bell & Sons, 1893.The Greek Anthology by Lord Neaves. New York: John B.Alden, 1883.Handbook of Russian Literature. Edited by Victor Terras. New Haven & London:Yale

University Press, 1985.Hardy,William. A Guide to Art Nouveau Style. North Dighton, MA: JG Press, 1986.Herman, David.“Don Juan and Don Alejandro:The Seductions of Art in Pushkin’s

Stone Guest.” Comparative Literature, vol. 51, no. 1 (1999): 3–23.The Iliad of Homer.Translated into English by Alexander Pope. New York:The Her-

itage Press, 1943.Jakobson, Roman.“On Linguistic Aspects of Translation.” In Theories of Translation.

Edited by Rainer Schulte and John Biguenet. Chicago: University of ChicagoPress, 1992.

———. “Linguistics and Poetics.” In Roman Jakobson, Language in Literature,62–94. Cambridge, London: The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press,1987.

———.“The Statue in Pushkin’s Poetic Mythology.” In Roman Jakobson. SelectedWritings.Vol. 5. New York: Mouton Publishers, 1979.

Gippius, Vasily. Gogol. Edited and translated by Robert A. Maguire. Ann Arbor:Ardis, 1981.

Gray, Basil. Persian Painting. Geneva: Editions d’Art Albert Skira S.A., 1995.Jouffroy,Théodore. Cours d’esthétique. Paris: Hachette, 1863.


Kibalnik, S. A. Venok russkim kamenam. Antologicheskie stikhotvoreniia russkikh poetov.Saint Petersburg: Nauka, 1993.

Koretskaia, I. Nad stranitsami russkoi poezii i prozy nachala veka. Moscow: RADIKS,1995.

Kupriianov, I.T., Sud’ba poeta. Kiev, 1978.Lavrov,A.V.“O poeticheskom tvorchestve Maksimiliana Voloshina.” In M.Voloshin,

Izbrannye proizvedeniia. Moscow, 1988.Lialina, Maria.“Vliianie frantsuzskoi poezii XIX veka na rannee tvorchestvo Mak-

similiana Voloshina.” Russkaia literatura 4 (1993): 192–99.Lord Neaves. The Greek Anthology. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott & Co., 1874.Losev,Alexei. Estetika Vozrozhdeniia. Moscow, 1982.Majewski,Henry F. “Reading Melancholy: French Romantic Interpretations of

Dürer’s Engravings.” Nineteenth-Century French Studies. Vol. 25, no. 1 & 2 (Fall-Winter 1996–97): 13–29.

Marsh, Cynthia. M.A.Voloshin: Artist-Poet; A Study of the Synaesthetic Aspects of HisPoetry. Birmingham: Dept. of Russian Language and Literature, University ofBirmingham, 1983.

Meerson, Olga. “Ivolgin and Holbein: Non-Christ Risen vs. Christ Non-Risen.”Slavic and East European Journal. 39, 2 (1995): 200–13.

Mify narodov mira. Vol. 1, edited by Tokarev, S. A. Moscow: Sovetskaia entsiklope-diia, 1980.

Mikhailov, A.V. “O Liudvige Tike, avtore ‘Stranstvii Frantsa Shternbal’da.’” In L.Tik. Stranstviia Frantsa Shternbal’da. Moscow, 1987.

Mondry, Henrietta. “How ‘Straight’ Is Venus of Milo? Regendering Statues andWomen’s Bodies in Gleb Uspensky’s ‘Vypriamila.’”Slavic and East European Jour-nal 41, 3 (1997): 415–30.

Muratov, Pavel. Obrazy Italii. Leipzig: Grzhebin, 1924.Novikova, Tatiana. Izobrazitel’noe iskusstvo v rannem tvorchestve Aleksandra Bloka.

Moscow: Izdatel’stvo Moskovskogo Universiteta, 1993.———. “‘Prekrasnaia Dama’ v kulture Serebrianogo veka.” Vestnik Moskovskogo

universiteta 1 (1998): 90–100.Odes of Anacreon. Translated into English by Thomas Moore. Philadelphia: Hugh

Maxwell, 1804.The Odes of Horace. Translated into English by W. E. Gladstone. New York: Charles

Scribner’s Sons, 1894.Odes, Sonnets and Lyrics of John Keats. Portland, Maine:Thomas Bird Mosher, 1922.Origio, Iris. Images and Shadows: Part of a Life. Boston: David R. Godine, 1999.Owen, Stephen. Traditional Chinese Poetry and Poetics: Omen of the World. Madison:

The University of Wisconsin Press, 1985.Peterburg v russkoi poezii XVIII–nachalo XX veka. Leningrad: Izdatel’stvo Leningrad-

skogo Universiteta, 1988.Pirog, Gerald. Aleksandr Blok’s Ital’ianskie stikhi. Confrontation and Disillusionment,

123–24. Columbus: Slavica, 1983.The Poems of Catullus. Translated into English by Guy Lee. Oxford: Claredon Press,

1990.


296

The Poetical Works of Shelley. Edited by Newell F. Ford. Boston: Houghton MifflinCompany, 1975.

The Poetical Works of Wordsworth. London: Oxford University Press, 1965.Pollok, Nancy.“Annensky’s ‘Trefoil in the Park’ (Witness to Whiteness).” In A Sense

of Place. Tsarskoe Selo and Its Poets. Edited by Lev Loseff and Barry Scherr,171–90. Columbus, Ohio: Slavica Publishers, 1993.

Rosenmeyer, Patricia A. The Poetics of Imitation.Anacreon and the Anacreontic Tradition.Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1992.

Sabatier, Robert. Histoire de la poésie française. La poésie du Moyen Age. Paris: AlbinMichel, 1975.

Scherr, Barry P.“Maksimilian Voloshin and the Search for Form(s).” Slavic and EastEuropean Journal 35, 4 (1991): 518–36.

Selz, Jean. Gustave Moreau. New York: Crown Publishers, Inc., 1979.Setchkarev,Vsevolod. Studies in the Life and Work of Innokentij Annenskij.The Hague:

Mouton & Co, 1963.Seward, Desmond. Caravaggio: A Passionate Life. New York: William Morrow and

Company, Inc., 1998.Steiner, George. The Death of Tragedy. New Haven:Yale University Press, 1996.———. Tolstoy or Dostoevsky. New Haven & London:Yale University Press, 1996.Stevens,Wallace. The Necessary Angel. Essays on Reality and the Imagination. London:

Faber and Faber, 1942.Struve, Gleb. Russkaia literatura v izgnanii. Paris:YMCA-Press, 1984.Sullivan, Michael. An Introduction to Chinese Art. Berkeley: University of California

Press, 1961.Sunflower Splendor.Three Thousand Years of Chinese Poetry. Edited by Wu-chi Liu and

Irving Yucheng Lo. Garden City, NY:Anchor Books, 1975.Terras,Victor.“Modernism in Russian Poetry. Some Observations.” In O RUS! Stu-

dia litteraria slavica in honorem Hugh McLean. Edited by Simon Karlinsky, JamesL. Rice, and Barry P. Scherr, 380–87. Oakland, CA: Berkely Slavic Specialties.

The Visual Arts:A History. Edited by Hugh Honour and Roy Fleming. New York:Harry N.Abrams, Inc., 1991.

Wachtel, Michael. The Development of Russian Verse. Cambridge: Cambridge Uni-versity Press, 1998.

Wanner,Adrian.“Aleksandr Blok’s Sculptural Myth.” Slavic and East European Jour-nal 40, 2 (1996): 236–50.

Zavadskaya, E.V. “Poetika kimmeriiskogo peizazha v akvareliakh M. A.Voloshina(Otzvuki kul’tury Vostoka).” In Voloshinskie chteniia, 49–57. Moscow: Gosu-darstvennaia biblioteka imeni Lenina, 1981.


Index

academism (also academic) 32, 34, 49,55

Adamism 88, 187, 194, 257Adamovich, Georgy 85–86Aeschylus 16, 48Agrippina the Elder 220Akhmatova,Anna 2, 3, 5–6, 85–87, 89,

104, 168–69, 171, 190–92, 205–06,209–13, 217–23, 260, 271, 274–75,278

Altman, Natan 3Anacreon (also Anacreontic) 1, 16–17,

21, 35, 41, 56, 63, 79–81, 119, 123,247–48

Angelico, Fra 139, 172Annensky, Innokenty 6, 147–53,

155–56, 170, 191, 222, 240, 242,260, 267–68

Apollon 86–87, 95, 147, 157, 220Appolinaire, Guillaume 1, 6art nouveau 4, 87, 99, 142, 208–09,

257, 260, 278L’Artiste 52, 57, 59, 87, 95, 231–32L’Art moderne 257Ashbery, John 274Asselino, Charles 33Astruc, Zacharie 208

Bakh, R.R. 154Bakst, Leon 87, 108, 169, 256Ballanche, Pierre-Simon 47–48,

251–52Balmont, Konstantin 100, 137–39, 161,

261, 266

Balzac, Honoré de 54Banville,Théodore 6, 33–34, 52–53,

56, 59, 63–64, 68–70, 75–76,79–81, 89, 94, 98–99, 103, 182,191, 231, 249, 251–55, 278

Barbier,Auguste 42, 251Batiushkov, Konstantin 111–112, 262Baudelaire, Charles 33–34, 49–51, 60,

81, 92, 102, 130, 139, 178, 221,231, 250, 252–53

Beardsley,Aubrey 257Beaumont, George 26–27Beethoven, Ludwig van 59, 256Behrens, Peter 257Belinsky,Vissarion 264Bellay, Joachim du 36–39, 250Belleau, Rémy 35–36, 250Bely,Andrei 105–06, 138, 144, 207,

224, 261, 267Benois,Alexander 169, 232, 256Béranger, Pierre Jean de 33Bergson, Henri 258Blavatsky, Elena 257Blok,Alexander 106, 139–43, 150,

173–74, 223, 261, 266–69, 272Boileau, Nicolas 52Borges, Jorge Luis 85Borghèse, Pauline 71Borisov-Musatov, Boris 142Borovikovsky,Vladimir 232, 257Botticelli, Sandro 139, 202Bouchardon, Edme 79Boucher, François 163, 231Boulanger, Louis 43

298

Breughel, Jan 34Briullov, Karl 114, 124–25, 167–69,

213, 265, 271Briusov,Valery 88, 99, 129–33, 136–37,

170, 257, 261, 264–65Bukharsky,Andrei 118Bulgakov, Sergei 23Burckhardt, Jacob 22Burke, Edmund 24, 248

Callot, Jacques 103Canova,Antonio 32, 71–72, 186–87Caravaggio, Michelangelo Merisi da 255Carpaccio,Vittore 167Catullus, Gaius Valerius 14–15, 247Caze, Louis La 231Chaadaev, Petr 114Chardin, Jean Baptiste 163Chassériau,Théodore 54–55, 63Chateaubriand, François René 49Chaucer, Geoffrey 13Chénier,André 46, 49Chekhov,Anton 245Chicherin, Georgy 165Chodowiecki, Daniel Nikolaus 165–66Christiansen, Hans 257Christophe, Ernest 52Chukovsky, Kornei 227Clarism 89, 163Clésinger,Auguste 50, 255Clotilde-Marie-Thérèse 72Coello, Claudio 139Coleridge, Samuel Taylor 98Collins, Charles 143color-symphony 46, 70–71, 137, 161Coran, Charles 231, 280Corot, Camille 49, 51Corregio 42, 65Cousin,Victor 46–47, 52, 251

Dada 1Dante,Alighieri 13David, Jacques Louis 32, 46Delacroix, Eugène 49–50, 55, 71, 139,

163

Delille, Jacques 39–41, 250, 262Delvig,Anton 114, 118Derzhavin, Gavriil 118, 120–22, 190Diagilev, Sergei 256, 266Dostoevsky, Fedor 2, 4, 126–27, 245,

265Dryden, John 269Dürer,Albrecht 75–76, 103, 253, 255

El Greco 139Eckmann, Otto 257Euripides 16

Fabergé, Karl 100Felix, Elisa 192Fet,Afanasy 118–19, 263Filosofov, Dmitry 256Florensky, Pavel 257François I 158Fromentin, Eugène 52

Gainsborough,Thomas 231Gannibal, Ibragim 278Garshin,Vsevolod 3, 128–29, 265Gaugin, Paul 108, 164, 208, 261, 270Gautier,Théophile 4, 6, 33–34, 36,

43–44, 46, 48–63, 65, 68–76,81–82, 89–93, 97–98, 102–103,101–108, 120, 129, 131, 133, 136,139, 177–78, 181, 190–91, 193–96,198, 208, 213, 221, 228, 231,250–56, 258–60, 266, 272–76, 278

Gautier, Judith 177–80, 183, 272–73Gesamtkunstwerk 115Giorgione 202, 223–24Giotto 103Giperborei 87Gippius,Vasily 85, 205, 265Goethe, Johann Wolfgang von 118,

139Gogol, Nikolai 117, 124–25, 151, 223,

245, 265Goncharov, Ivan 120, 224Goncharova, Natalia 2, 139, 171, 174,

188, 274


Goncourt brothers 231Gorky, Maxim 223Gorodetsky, Sergei 85–86, 88, 95–96,

99, 107, 223, 258, 261Goya i Lucientes, Francisco José de 43Gray,Thomas 269Greuze, Jean Baptiste 163Grigorovich, Dmitry 120, 264Grisi, Ernesta 62Guardi, Francesco 167Guild of Poets 86–87, 95, 104, 157,

214, 226–27Guimet, Emile 207, 208Gumilev, Nikolai 5–6, 85–96, 98–99,

103–104, 107–108, 131, 157,171–72, 174–77, 179–88, 191, 203,214–15, 219, 223–24, 227, 256–60,271–74, 280

Hafiz 98Haussoullier,William 81Heaney, Seamus 85Hébert, Emile 51Hébert, Ernest 721Hegel, Georg Wilhelm Friedrich 109Henley,William Ernest 208Henri II 158Heredia, Jose Maria de 6, 33, 36, 43,

54–55, 59, 62–63, 66–68, 76–81,89, 91, 94, 137, 157, 177, 190, 204,208, 236–38, 244, 249, 252–54,256, 258, 278, 281

Heredia, Don Pedro de 81Hermogenes 15Hervey-Saint-Denys, Marquis d’ 178Hesiod 151Hippius, Zinaida 261Holbein, Hans 126Hollander, John 8Homer 1, 7, 10–13, 20, 38, 48, 59, 161,

244, 246–47, 274Horace 16, 37, 247, 250Hughs,Arthur 143Hugo,Victor 33, 42–44, 50, 52, 75, 83,

118, 120, 194, 251, 254, 261

Hulme,Thomas Ernest 91Hunt,William Holman 267Hyusmans, J.-K. 194, 196, 199, 275

iconicity (also iconic) 7–8Ingres, Jean Auguste Dominique 55,

213Ivanov,Alexander 222Ivanov, Georgy 6, 85–86, 91, 103–104,

214–15, 219, 226–29, 231–32, 234,236, 238–40, 242, 260–61, 280–81

Ivanov,Viacheslav 147–48, 157, 189,223, 267, 269

Janin, Jules 52Japonisme 207–09Jouffroy,Théodore 47, 52, 251Joyce, James 207Die Jugend 257Jugendstil 257Justinian 275

Kalergis, Marie 70–71Karamzin, Nikolai 110–111, 115, 117,

263Keats, John 8, 10, 26, 219, 225, 249,

280Kellers 158Khlebnikov,Velimir 257Khvostov, Dmitry 112, 263Kipling, Rudyard 208Klodt, Petr 141Kniazev,Vsevolod 168, 271Komarovsky,Vasily 6, 85, 104, 107,

219–26, 240, 242, 280Kozlovsky, Mikhail 118, 234Kramskoy, Ivan 222Kruchenykh,Alexei 257Kutuzov, Mikhail 238Kuzmin, Mikhail 6, 86, 89, 93, 95–96,

104, 147–48, 157, 163–67, 169–70,182, 191, 223, 269–71, 273

Lamartine,Alphonce de 32–33Lann, Evgeny 156

299I n d e x

300

Lansere, Evgeny 256Larionov, Mikhail 171, 188, 274Leopold II 208Lermontov, Mikhail 132, 224Lessing, Gotthold Ephraim 10, 22,

24–27, 39, 41, 47, 248Levitsky, Dmitry 120–22Li Po (also Li Tai Peh and Li Tai Po)

180–81Lisle, Leconte de 6, 33–34, 43, 48, 52,

60, 63, 66–67, 69, 88–91, 93, 107,131, 157, 160, 171, 221, 250–54

Longi, Pietro 167Lorraine, Claude 231Losev,Alexei 23Louis XVIII 254Lozinsky, Mikhail 85–87lubok 200, 276Lysippus 21

Makovsky, Sergei 86Malevich, Kazimir 2Mallarmé, Stéphane 46, 70, 157, 182,

191, 273, 278Mandelstam, Osip 3, 5–6, 85–89, 91,

93–96, 99–101, 103–104, 106, 137,144, 186, 189–200–05, 219,223–24, 228, 244, 253, 256–62,266, 274, 276

Mandelstam, Nadezhda 189Manet, Edouard 213Marcel,Alexandre 208Marilhat, Prosper 82Martin, John 43Martino, Pierre 33Mathilde, Princess 82Maykov,Apollon 118–20, 264Mendès, Catulle 31–33, 208, 249, 272Ménard, Louis 66, 94Merezhkovsky, Dmitry 261Michelangelo Buonarroti 42, 139Michelet, Jules 75Millais, John Everett 267Milton, John 45Miron 81

mimesis (also mimetic) 25, 48, 106,110, 120, 122

mis-en-abîme 8, 15, 76, 117Modolo, Bartolo 153Monet, Claude 270Monferrand,Auguste 198Moreau, Gustave 49, 67, 76–81, 256Mozart,Wolfgang Amadeus 167Mucha,Alphonce 99Muravyov, Mikhail 118Murillo, Bartolomé Estéban 120, 139

Nabokov,Vladimir 189, 265Napoleon 32, 158, 238, 243Narbut,Vladimir 85, 104Neaves, Lord 18, 248Nedobrovo, Nikolai 210Nefertiti 270Nerval, Gérard de 75, 194, 275Nesterov, Mikhail 142–43Nietzsche, Friedrich 86, 256Nossis 21

Odoevtseva, Irina 6, 85–86, 163,214–15, 217–18, 220, 227, 242, 270

Onegin stanza 162, 270Orcagna,Arcagnolo 163organicism (also organic) 98, 99–101Orlovsky, Boris 238Ostroumova-Lebedeva,A. 169Ostrovsky,Alexander 3Ouan-Tie 183Ovid 13, 247

paragone 24–25, 161Parnasse contemporain 31, 33–34, 87, 90,

182, 231, 255Parnasse satirique 31Perry, Matthew 207Peter the Great 196–97, 214, 222, 243,

278Petrarch, Francesco 38, 45, 160, 253Philostrates the Elder 16Piast,Vladimir 85pictorialism (also pictorialist) 7–8


Piranesi, Giovanni Battista 43Planudes, Maximus 18Plato 151Pléiade 35–36, 45, 62Poiret, Paul 208Poitiers, Diane de 158, 160Polotsky, Simeon 2Popelin, Claudius 81, 278Posidippus 21Pound, Ezra 91Poussin, Nicolas 40Pre-Raphaelites 142–44, 208, 252,

267Prieur, Barthélemy 158Pushkin,Alexander 20, 98, 112,

114–115, 117–18, 122–23, 129,140, 153–55, 161–62, 184, 209,211, 221–22, 243, 251, 262–66,269, 273, 278, 281

Quarenghi, Giacomo 222

recusatio 16–17, 41, 66Rabelais, François 92Raphael Santi 42, 59, 76, 123Rastrelli, Francesco Bartholomeo 222Rembrandt, Harmenszoon van Rijn

34, 63, 103Remusat,Abel 181Ribera, José 139Ricard, Louis-Xavier de 31Rivière, Marquis de 254Roerich, Nikolai 108, 261Rokotov, Fedor 213, 257Ronsard, Pierre de 38Rossetti, Dante Gabriel 252, 260, 267Rossi, Carlo 222Rousseau, Henri 108Rubens, Peter Paul 55Rublev,Andrei 171, 185–86Ruskin, John 266

Sabashnikova, Margarita 162Sabatier, Appolonie-Aglaé 71–72,

254

Sainte-Beuve, Charles-Augustin 33,36, 41–42, 44–46, 52, 70, 83, 249,251–52, 255, 261

Saint-Saëns, Camille 208Salon 32, 49, 51, 54, 77, 82Sand, George 33Schelling, Friedrich Wilhelm Joseph

von 98Schopenhauer,Arthur 105, 118Scott,Walter 49Serov,Valentin 161Shakespeare,William 45, 92Shelley, Percy Bysshe 187Sidney, Philip Sir 13, 109Simonides of Ceos 7, 19Siniavsky,Andrei 2Sologub, Fedor 261Solovyov,Vladimir 4, 193, 209Somov, Konstantin 169Sophocles 48Spencer, Edmund 13Staël, Madame de 46Stevens,Wallace 7The Studio 257Sudeikin, Sergei 165Suvorov,Alexander 234, 236Sviatopolk-Mirsky, D. P. 223Swinburne,Algernon Charles 208

tableau évocatif 70, 73Taiah 162, 270taktovik 150, 268Tang dynasty 178Tang-Jo-Su 181Tarkovsky,Andrei 223Theosophy 257Tieck, Johann Ludwig 265, 270Tiffany, Louis Comfort 99Tintoretto 163, 224–25Tin-Tun-Ling 178, 272Titian 42, 163Tiutchev, Fedor 96–97, 202–03, 276Tolly, Barclay de 238Tolstoy, Leo 3–4, 115–118, 224, 263,

265

301I n d e x

302

topos (also topoi) 8, 15, 28, 94, 117,155, 173, 181, 188

Toulouse-Lautrec 208Tour, George de la 63transposition d’art (also transposition,

transpose) 70, 73–74, 83, 114, 118,170, 175, 200, 225, 231, 242

Trezini, Domenico 222trompe l’oeil 64–66Turgenev, Ivan 2, 167Turner, Joseph Mallord William 229

Uspensky, Gleb 3, 127, 265ut pictura poesis 16, 251

Valdes, Juan 120Vasnetsov,Vasily 142–43Velasquez, Diego Rodríguez de Silva y

34, 139Vereshchagin,Vasily 128Verharen, Emile 147Verlaine, Paul 232Veronese 68, 76, 163Viau,Théophile de 31Viazemsky, Petr 114Villon, François 92, 101–104, 260Vinci, Leonardo da 24–25, 42, 139,

161, 187

Virgil 10, 13–14, 37–39, 250Voloshin, Maximilian 6, 107, 147–48,

156–58, 160–63, 170–71, 270Voronikhin,Andrei 197Vostokov,Alexander 118Vrubel, Mikhail 100, 132, 142–43,

169

Wackenroder,Wilhelm Heinrich 124Wagner, Richard 115, 156Waley,Arthur 177Walter, Judith 272–73Wang Wei 157Watteau,Antoine 64, 231–32, 280wen-jen hua 157–58Whistler, James Abbot McNeil 71,

161, 208, 269Wilde, Oscar 208Winckelmann, Johann Joachim 22, 32World of Art 87, 170, 213, 256Wordsworth,William 8, 26–27, 97, 249

Yeats,William Butler 208

Zakharov,Adrian 196Zenkevich, Mikhail 85Zhdanov,Andrei 5Zhukovsky,Vasily 114


introduction - springer978-1-349-62736-3/1.pdf · introduction 1. ezhi farino,“semioticheskie...

Documents