Creotini Life

The Aesthetic Utopia

of Russian Modernism

EDITED BY

Irina Paperno and

Joan Delaney Grossman

STANFORD UNIVERSITY PRESS

Stanford, California 1994
 Contents

Contributors IX

Introduction
IRINA PAPERNO

One The Meaning of Art: Symbolist Theories 13

IRINA PAPERNO

Two The Symbolist Meaning of Love:

Theory and Practice 24
OLGA MATICH

Three Creating the Living Work of Art:

The Symbolist Pygmalion and
His Antecedents 51
IRENE MASING-DELIC

Four Andrei Bely and the Argonauts'

Mythmaking
ALEXANDER LAVROV
Vlll Contents

Five Valery Briusov and Nina Petrovskaia:

Clashing Models of Life in Art 122
JOAN DELANEY GROSSMAN

Six Viacheslav Ivanov: From Aesthetic

Theory to Biographical Practice
MICHAEL WACHTEL

Seven The Legacy of the Symbolist Aesthetic

Utopia: From Futurism to Socialist Realism 167
IRINA GUTKIN

Appendix: The Russian Texts 1 99

Notes 231

Index
 Introduction

IRINA PAPERNO

T his study takes its departure from one of the "accursed

questions" in modern Russian culture-the relations of
art and life. A cornerstone of romantic aesthetics, an issue of
ideological importance for the mid-nineteenth-century positiv-
ist realists and their contemporaries, the problem was central to
the creators of_Jym~olism~the __fil_Ovement (189o's-191_o's) t_ha_t
launched modernism in Russia.
_,----F~Ilowin-g-;~ma~li-~i~~~ th-;-SYmbolists aspired to merge the{·
antitheses of art and life into a unity. Art was proclaimed to\
be a force capable of, and destined for, the " · life" \
1
-1.!!!.f!.rI.l!§t!J.!!L.zff.i'c.n!,}, while "lif(,,,_,..as_yie\Veda_s _ · b' ect r
••jg~~ i\i't li'$i:t'i ilil In this sense, art _ into real:
e
I alllte turnCinto air; they became one. For the artist no:
1

separation existed between the "man" and the "poet," betweeni

personal life (zhizn') and artistic (creative) activity (tvorchestvo).i
In a retrospective glance at the movement, the Symbolistsi
younger contemporary Vladislav Khodasevich described thi~
concern as central to Symbolism: I
Symbolism did not want to be merely an artistic school, a literary move-
ment. It continually strove to become a life-creating method, and in this
 2 IRINA PAPERNO

was its most profound, perhaps unembodiable truth. Its entire history
was in essence spent in yearning after that truth. It was a series of at-
tempts, at times truly heroic, to find a fusion of life and art, as it were,
the philosopher's stone of art.I

The principle of fusing art and life as practiced by Russian

Symbolists is generally known as zhiznetvorchestvo.2 The word
itself is untranslatable. In Russian, it leaves room for multiple
interpretations: tvorchestvo refers to artistic creation; when com-
bined with the word zhizn' ("life"), it suggests both the creation
of life and a synthesis of the two elements-creat10n and life.3
Zhiznetvorchestvo has been associated with highly publicized
episodes from the artists' private lives that acquired the status
of s~J&:~.~@ural events, such as the love relatiQns involv-
ing Andrei Bely, Alexander Blok, and Liubov' Dmitrievna Blok 4
and the relations between Bely, Valery Briusov, and Nina Petrov-
skaia. All these episodes were self-conscious in a way suggesting
deliberate aesthetic organization of behavior. In semiotic terms,
the artist's<. life was treated as a text:-CoiiS-tfUCled and "read" by a
method similar to that used in art.5 Contemp~rary cri!i~_mo,g!}'...
use the collcept zhiznetvorchestvo to mean aeS.tfietic-O":fganization
--ofbefiiVlOi:oTlllsVieWIS prOihpted by theas8oc1ahon of the Rus::'
0J /Zo f (!. si-;,-;:, phenomenon· with the aestheticism of Eurof?eari Decadence:-
!;,.S~.~as __atti~~~-~!~~f!.far.lll§. .of.b~".f.?!~~·~J;!i~'tRtiifiW~
..be€ame..a,~xmtm1 1 • In the Russian context, this interpretation 0
zhiznetvorchestvo can be traced to Khodasevich, who, in the essay
"The End of Renata" ("Konets Renaty," i928), derived his much
quoted formulations of the Symbolist "method" from his reflec-
tions on the story of Petrovskaia, described as an "artist" who
~o ~:~r~ate.d:_)>oem'.~_()lj_t_()f her own life and _as ''~!!"-~.~~ti_i:n~.
11 Decartence "7

,,VIP A ~ Looking. back at the Russian "Decadents and Symbolists" of

"'i::'M.J.:i.~~.,the igoo's, Khodasevich attempted to outline the mechanism by
D1;.<""tfJ'.l•·which a merger of art and life was effected:
They attempted to transform art into real life and real life into art.
!he even~~fe were never -~~p~e~i!~~~d solely life's
/'J 2<g ~; ins!ead.:__ because of the lack_ of cl~ity anc!_t.!_1$ __ins~<!Rility of th!_
boundary lines thatO~reafltY -fOfthese people, the events of life
·-------------- -----·------------.·--- -
 Introduction 3

immediately became__ a part of the internal world, a piece of creation.

-------------- - -----------------------------------.-
Conversely, something written by any member of_ the circle became rea1,
~OiltRIOr ·att-1n ·this manner, both life and iiteiatUTe"\VeTe
c-;~~~.--;;-i(·~·ere~--b}r}Oint, sometimes hostile, but still united, forces
of all who found themselves in this extraordinary life,_ in this "symbolist
...dimension." This was, it seems, a true 1nstanCeO"f· ~off~~ti~e--~~~tio~)i:-·-

According to Khodasevich, the Symbolists did not find "the

philosopher's stone of art." "The history of the Symbolists,"
wrote Khod~sevich, "turned into ~~-~-~~?El __ ~f rui_n_e~ _lives"; at
the same time, part of their creative energy, having "IeaKed''"lnto
the sphere of life, failed to become fully embodied.9 For Kho-
d·a--s-ev.ich, Nina P_etr~vska. i_a'..~~~~~~~!~~Y_---~-~-~if.~_,.~~d_...-_ a__w
_ · o_.E.I_..~!1:-f C:: o
whos~RP.Y-.li.fo_endedin.su.icidei_ilufil8),
-- -··-·- --. - - -- -- ·-· ---- --- ---- stands . - as - a trag_ic
---- . fu1cfo
!)<: lo
~)'lll_goJ_g_Ll!tL?.ge,_ ic:?
M Ill.
Is the case of zhiznetvorchestvo closed? f'i. 1

That the principle of fusing art and life left a powerful imprint
on the Russian culture, reaching from the turn of the century
into the 192o's and 193o's and from literature into "real life,"
is undeniable. It is the purpose of this study to reevaluate it by
_s~lw:~me of its crucial manifestations in the context of the
'((~ ~fv1!ff1'"'1P~,!y~-~i;ll lll2!iernism. Viewed in this per-
.: : ·· ·
~~L rate:org;imzatmnJ1[tlebav10r appears as a part of
what we call a Russian "aesthetic utopia.~;-----------~-----
-,Sum_I!1_i!!!Luf> a~-aC-ra}'~?_f_I_ll_tel[~~~and_<Ii:.tis~c _tre_~cls_~ )
de_veloped in Western Eur()pean_ cultures, and in Russi~. at the 11

.. ~~~.D- ...Q(_-th~ -z~tu~y arld las.ted into th~ ig~o's, the ~~~~~p~~~~~ \
..:E!.2s!~-~~~m" s_~ggests a certain generalize_d n_ew '_'conscious~~~~." l
~~-'E"f1_t_a!i!Y·= holding that the acc~P.t~d model ·of reaiity;or th~
~g_r.Jd its~Jf, _i_s up f{)~ ~~~_rr~ng~~.~9-t· _T_J:ij_~--!l!~n_tality drew its
strength from a charac_t_ei:-i_stic feeli_Q.: . ---·-;----·------·-..at·

-~·~~~~
t ne '
~t -~,i·~-
.,
···
•'.
or . o o ern1sm has
--
~:'\• i
ag'a1 St positivis_~--~~~- 1
- ; - - - " ' - - - ''" 1 '

been regtiently_ deScribed as 'a !ia

realism (or__ll_"!l.11:.al~ll!), Ind_e_ed,a major dynamic force behind /
modernist movements across Europe·
was·a-reject-i.oll Ofthe··pos1~-1
UVlstK- ffiOd~O"f-·coB:nitio·n· ·rnat relied oii" the surface reality of. j
empi_~~~i ~f~c-ts, subje~l tO~ fealistic represeritation. Th~n Of l
 . ob"ectivel . exist.},~.~.f~t was ~.~s...t~.~.·~&... ~\!.. ·.·
.·• e e-,, _1_0,~ofT] .h s~~yc~~~~
\) r1 ac 1n tneous,
., 1 ·'.~rai~:;>'1~~ t~e
1
as iil Bergson1an creative evo utIOil, OJ:',.\
f!:..<1.!!l~ of thsJatter, Nietzsche cred"'man to se -creation,
.!!~h£t!f proces7;~th~7e~:-K;~ti;~~~·p1;~;dth-ci;f;Ilhi~-~O~
~·~~IAN'ceptualizing consciousness. _:'.\y()werful trend in modernism w~
~~~ljnspired b~Eistr_ust of''.11ature"(asit was modeled_bypos'.: ·
l>~l·1'1V~\...!ivistic s~i"ll~l:!ll.".s~-~h.Q shared in this dis~rust ques~ioned t~
: }-validity _ancl __value of life that was allowed to _run its "natural"
~ c.ours_~.:...T~_~s.-~~~.~~~~e ~.1:1.S~'!in.ed a seiji' th~1t1 "ijiliQ'.;· ~Ji~~ntii@'. ~
~ Jlli~i:I:~! 0
' g5li~iWMi~li¥i;.ii.~~ ..
There are varieties o~odern1sm, each ar1s1ng from the spe-
cifics of a national context. Russia had a long-lasting tradition of
apocalyptic thinking, which was closely intertwined with a tradi-
1§~~-~~~P~~~~~~-~~~-s~~~~! ~t~pi~-~·1s·~ I~ t~e~ond part of ,
----the ninetee~~.11-culture wen t row@. a period
--Qf positivistjuealis~ ~~·reality" (material reality
or sensual experience) and "action" (social activism, mostly of a
socialist bend), a movemenl""riiat ~~tured in the i86o's, in the
era of large-scale social and cultural change accompanying the
so-called Great Reforms. Although realism. construed itself as a
E..~-~_ical_.:rej~~tion of the pa~t, of rom-;irtici~m, id~alism, and t11:~~­
Christi~n --~el_ig!gQ., itself..i. it can be argued that romantic (ideal-
istic and mystical) consciousness remained a tangible-though
denied-presence in the consciousness of the realist.II

The spirit of Russian modernism evolved in this context,

propelled by established patterns ..The writings of modernist~
abound iµ d.eclarations _of_ w:ar ..on "realism." Positivism was re-
~Jf,\.1. in:i@*Wio'"l},e~m"~llif~s~TJ'l!f~w- ~~f.-.
-.~~~ese ~~eM'fffaVi'"tl1'en ~
many cr1ucs and 1ntellectual h1stor1ans. Yet a case can be made
for continuity concomitant with the clearly marked, "apocalyp-
tic" ruptures. The idealism and mysticism of Russian modernists
rested on a solid positivistic substratum.
Mechanisms of contin~ity can be illustrated with a case of
 Introduction 5

"recycled" metaphors. The radical "realists" of the t86o's drew 1

the metaphors of reformaiiontrom llie Ctirtstian tradition and . l )g60
adapted them for the use within the foritext of positivism. The k
central word of the day was ·~e":. iiwf (~>r woman)'Y.!to_!i~ '. C://fi. ~ N'f
sha\<,.,n off "the old Adam." 'rlicie metapfi<l'rs were codified in JllE'VJ/<~
Nikolai .~~lll&v~ social utopia, a novel entitl,ed 1-£'!'1:'.Jkftl. .
..,IJl,/{yp.er From the Tales out the New People (Chlo delat ? lfrass'/(f';zov
o nS:vyfi: li1uliakh, 1863), in which the conception of the transfor-
mation, or "transfiguration," of man was carefully encoded in
the language of science and social theory.
Prompted by the apocalyptic sense of living at the great dividej
characteristic for the turn of the century, Russian modernists /jO'U·
(along with Western European modernists) ~ted;:i· the
.~e".'.J:e~.m.:n~. metaphors of renewal. They resorted,
the metaphors of""ilij TffW"ian~~and "the new woma ," which
am:tO l
were "contaminated" by their previous use. 12
The pattern of cultural development that accounted for the
mixing of historical styles also revealed itself in the ways Russian
culture, at various stages in its development, assimilated Western
European influence. Western cultural paradigms were freely (but
not necessarily consciously) rearranged to fit into a new context;
they were alloyed with ideas and images specifically Russian.~ I
modernismP,jc;,j·,~@l!lfhSim A£i~L')'itll i\lS,Ji~W r. Ill
_sian l
_,5.~Jt;"i?lJ~.~\,~~ssf..!ij~t~1tn~~tb';!..*l,;J,.;:?.!?~D.,cacle_11_c"-t leo T" ,
.e?C:•.s_~~? s:_~.EY-~-~·· e -~ __ ~!?J~.a.~~~~~-~~~~ et1c1s~. ~1_t_ -~~-~i~. ~-on-_ i IS r1 .;
~-c~~-i:is. ~n the ~n~l an~lysis, the "new man" of Russian moder~.!~m.J
was an amalg3.ll1 of the Pauline "new man," Chernyshevski~-~- l
'~~~~- m~-~·" and Nie_tzsC:hean superman.

,'.)!Jock

~kol
l}~_e-~-'-~_--~-~_·.n_.,_-~ ~.,l'l,·r"~~,~~-~-
,_ ._T_h.· e. _ _ troops or _ tviouermsm
. ' _;.. ..
_ -
· ·_°-·~_,~~~-
13-ca
__

dorov (1 8?-1903). Botll ·

,Rus,si!n.
. -- ' -. . . . .
;

~y-. ~_·b_-~-_-1_\_~ _.":_-_:; _.

ced to . the ideas of _. (£}·
,;..
.
·,~''"':,.,1.,."",,._"'i>~'~~~-

. t"'!?.~R:~~~i , .P•? I:Jers,.Sladillli S_olov:ev (~~§3-19oo)ap,,,_ -- ,, .

v and Fedorov de- FEDo'-'- L
r#. 1

.,..:Sclm;"e . ....., efic 'id.er."within iii~-fram~_i_vork Qf_Q!fu:

1ianity and in close associati~- --:i.tll. J.lu;•. apo.i;:aly)],..li& i e; L _
~worked in a c~n~which concept~ of Q_i-thodox th \ ·
:t; <>t"lri\):oexisted wit · osit1V1$lJmentaiity: ·A strikin~ha_t
' "iliey"Share is a type ~--0f>ia'nism that FedorovcaIIe_a-,ft?'lec-
~
 6 IRINA PAPERNO

-~-,co11~~rn with advancing g:Jherent plans of action that

• ~O~dend()W human thought with objeC:tive reallty sendthe and
( ~orJ:<lfZ,-nh 9D tile road to ihe practical realization of Christian
ideals.
···-~~lll:Jl\:e was eagerly acknowledged by the Symbol-
ists, who accepted him, along with Nietzsche, as a major prophet
. of the new apocalyptic times. Fedorov's influence, though un---
. deniable, is hard to pinpoi~t'.-Tllougli liis works reriiaiileif~
published until 1907, he was-known to such people as Dostoevsky,
Tolstoy, and Solov'ev through personal contacts and correspon-
dence;,i'(the early stages in the development of Symbolism his
ideas spread by word of mouth. 14 He is a powerful presence in
--~----. - - -------~
- - · - - .. 1 ____ -
the writings of Solov'ev, the Symbolists,arialffi'Pos\:Symbolists.
ffiot:o ~~;;O!! • ..·. - . - eato . · · - : . - · ----.,.---;::
vit;r r'~~ anifaestinect"to c:§~e mhimse t_ e n_~w man t e
/{o{Vlr; t-1 wo.r.JLf /.;"'Apostle Paul). He clearly associated divine and aes-
thetic creation: "Man is not rrie~l)C.i\.Ptod1m Wil~
( l<i ~M~ • .or- ·· The final act of divi.ne.creation was the
Ml<lS- (.oM u aii.art~''._1 s_T e wor 1s a so meant to e re-crea 00
rM•
7
egu ate " by human re-~~~~: thi~-oew -;;o~ld -;;;~l<l
'DIV/ N, ·' rom e forces of "bi pature" (most i~p;;;~-
,.. ,1 :, e . ;\t . .... IS C tpea rm~r9cre-.
~';.J..11> "'" --~n.emor7;;;1~ ···
· -~aifl!iir Ih-e-~~9.$.."'<:~~..~.1!-~!~J.,~?~..E?~n~~!,.9~~rjsJj_ ~-a~
· - •

\ \ sEi_v~IJg_,f?!_ p~rson_al i~~o.i:-tali_~y ~n~ .f?r_ th,e tot~l :r,:~~urrection

·. l of the past generations here on earth. Resurrection . achieved
d -..
4 1{ft"\i:~h5lQ. of sJ;ie ., ._·- .
f d~hberate,y_-me_rge.
,_ . -~ o -·· . - . e orov''"
, -- 'r1sttan y_st1c1sm ~1 os1ttv1sm: "The
fpf,1.(lm-f d~ctrine of resurrect - n 1s true p(;SitiviSffi',~ f}o_s1_ . _ : reratlOfi
N,:,t, ~ I to action ... the sort of p9sitivign thaLelimina.tes ~;;y possibiiity
1JE.Ji:.::t#~ ~f a~nosticism~ !.·.:.::__~~ ~~y~hi,1:1~.... ~~~~ ..c_~-~n_?~.~-~e .known." 16 His
IV· ) I' i philosophy_ ~known as the "philosophy of the coinmon cause") is
1
'- - ' ' ,;-''project" aimed at translormiifgttre-!'ll.iSltiigWorld inro..:rwrr--
" •~!.Q~~-hI~~ w';;\lf{~i..i~~ijiit !!°2~~'.'rtality, thi'ill'l§ll "
· - · 'i:h~~~2i_i~orts_ of ..hu!.1Jan._beings.equipped with a power~
Tu1 crea.tiYe. Jqn:ec~cas:µitlu:fil~..Qf religi.2!4:.tsfence; iinCI arc rn
w•Ji;wiw
. this H'ii1 ir1i1•~•1 m6liTir f.e& 1ica1
JpMij.Ol~Oife, The notmn ·.~ med'.~ted by rhetoric?oper!-
) ions. fn Js terms, with word (slovo, or Logos) turned
fp.("'-\/(j• ->/\To /\1Af { V1>J1r, c:;s-,-:.:;~n,.- (Nf't>A
D/OrCoNrfG...lb<:) t;: R.~Li~l<>54 (<or-IT(l.ll fl. />1AfEe11< 'E. '1
1\.-1<:; .~r ~~~ /
 .'

A contemporary, Evgeny ru ets oy wrote: 'ECi"ifta-red-ituSs1an

have always expected the transfiguration of life from ideas and
from artistic creations. In this spirit such antipodes as Pisarev,
with his utilitarian view of art, and Dostoevs~~~~~~.~~.-~~()_g~~~,
'beauty will sa_ve theworld,'. .come together." In this Trubetskoy
'$;;;;,-the ~~~;,ing of the aesthetic program of Fedorov, Solov'ev,
and the Symbolists.22 (Solov'ev's theories on art and love are
treated in more detail below in Chapters 1 and 2.)

,
. The destiny

f'(toJETo r-i.'\f~;;,t>'O tJA ~~_e'f!/! ~k(r'(-t.·-tr /NDtVlt'l';/,;.i)~

.fAR...f'Cr::., E_..f'lA.o /<.t':Lt<Ji'.~·1 J:.-:)l'f-':'
ND fl£.)V-(l1'1 !'-- D1<r
0 f Pte..4Pt/f~~-
 8 IRINA PAPERNO

of human beings is, in Zinaida Gippius's words, "to create life

collectively." Gippius described how, in refusing to accept mar-
) riage as "the first, natural, and the ffiost practical solution," a -----..,
/ member of the Symbolist generation "began to 'cogitate' upon
the 'question of sex.' " 23 Art was to play a special, if not the lead-
ing, role in this project. Many a Symbolist author hastened to
make a statement to that effect. Viacheslav Ivanov proclaimed
that artistic creation is not the creation of images ("icons") but
the creatioq of life itself (ne ikonotvorc~vo. a zhiznetvorchestvo).24
6C.c.I \" " · · · " '
\ el .~, Equally important
were the definitions of life, worded to ::t ·- ormula zhiznetvor-
. ~estvo. ·;pre jtsel~ ~ 11reation," Wfj.!t~ "It is life, that is,
VIDA .!fa::o ovement forwar , ~he growtC of ever newer eVents-only life
""Wt - itself-is creation," echoed ili£pi~':- She_opj>osed this notion _to
that of ql!.otidi<!n l_ife. (byt), which is nothing but "crystallization"
' of dead matter.27 " • .l~ ·ve
" ' e t
't)~ ~ I Ill t e .
V/b{//'' . nee a~-~-u__ its u11.c.ti£11_<:>L.a..lifr.::giving force, it,
\':c·i'i ~\A '"" "'.!~l ~~'P-P.~_'l_T_<gi __a!'_.i11_ciel'.eI1cl.e.1JtoJ!10l()gic!!!~~ Art serves
lltTE. tlife to the point--where-it totally.dissoiYe.:Li!!._l_jfe because it be,
0 tS.lb(llf. ollles.J:ife_i~This idea found its exp.r.es.sio. n in the metaphor
N,,. vii> A f "the artist as alion," which became _a building block of
the Symbolis !':'Y!h of the artist. Reflecting on wliat the future
. •· -nllglifllri;g (in . -soon after the revolution of 19,;s , .ely
chose to express t IS .ii:lea in terms of the Marxist the_ory of_s<J_cia
revolution: --...
Art is a temporary measure: it is a tactical device in man's struggle with \
fatum. just as for the liquidation of class society a sort of dictatorship of J

the class (proletariat) is necessary, it is necessary to proclaim the dead 1 /

orm [of art] as a banner 1.·n.. .the.·. b.r.ogati.on of. nonex.ist·e·.nt,.·dea.d, f.atal:I//
~ife ... ·.But pe~!.-~!~~<?! ?ur I_ife,.subject to[atum, sho~~d
It;.

be. blowh , /
i~. ~~.d.1sappear, cease to be? Then the new art wou.ld.·.~er§S~~
· :~"htT ~e~. ~~(~ . ----- ~/
J.. ""'F,.ryt::t·1"·-A(~~~~t-~e re~olu~ion of ~g17,
under_ rh~-d~ctat~p-~~~
pro1_etanat~'1)ymbohst theones were re~1_t<1J~the"-focial de-
velopments ~tuaHrenct[:~w era. Alexander
 Introduction 9
BoGDANo
Bogdanov advanced his "universal organizati~~aj_glfW~!'.:_~. I) f
:.'ie_c_h~u~CJ_~ l!roll1 ch~(}'e:~-t~cton,_'.'bl)i~de_r''.), created_l1l1cl9" ~~ t>o ~O \,
t/le direct m1luence of Feoorov. It is the proletarian culture in a 1
prol~ta~iari-sfate, ~!aimed Bogdanov, that is uniquely equipped
for the global [re]organization of life, in all its aspects, from eco-
nomic relations to bodily functions_ And the problem of mortality
can be finally brought to resolution.'0 The theoreticians of "the
- .----l;cft FFBRI of at( (Levyi front iskusstv, or Lef), which included
1
m-em-. hers o.f the prerevolutionary Futurist avant-garde~- di- s-o' !\
,lied the.Symholistnotion of "life-creation" (zhiznetvorcbe.mill}_into \,,
_"life-building'.' (zhiznestnienie), a concept with social an<l.tectl~ iMo~lFf
cal cont?-<?t~t~?-~~·. Categories of Solov'evian aesthetic utopianism tt01J'?
were integrated into the theory of socialist realism. In the years
following the revolution, utopian visions of transforming the
world through aesthetic creation informed social and techno-
logical utopianism, including the utopian projects of the state.''
It is no accident that commentators as diverse as the emigre
Symbolist Fedor Stepun, the repentant revolutionary Nikolai
Valentinov, and Nadezhda Mandelshtam came to see Symbolist
"life-creation" as contr_iJ>_µ\i_l!g_to an atmospher;t6;i;;Ji(!Wl:ZJJfle
·tot~lit~~;~-;;-zo-;.troJl;,,1'2§..ed 1.>iSi~ILn-" · -

This volume attempts to provide a comprehensive, but not

an exhaustive, treatment of the modernist aesthetic utopia. Each
essay takes up a specific dimension of the phenomenon and em-
ploys a specific set of techniques and approaches.
In Chapter 1, Irina Paperno offers a close look at the evolution
of the theme of art and life in the theoretical writings of Vladi-
mir Solov'ev and the Symbolists (Bely, Ivanov, and Briusov). She
1-.eJ!lonstra~s _t_h_at Symbg_li_st cheq_ries are organized-hr a set of
--~~r; derive_Q_ [rom_Chrisdan_ theology, Unfolding the logi!:
of these metaphors, she traces t!ie f._;slon of positivi-smwith.111ys-
-~t~~ -andthe-idiOSyncratlc cO_lj).Qj~~!lO_fi _ Q~f_-Nietzscheanism with-
Orth~dox clil"istkDiiL"-- - -
In Chapter 2, Olga Matich examines a series of Symbolist (and
post-Symbolist) attempts to reconceptualize sexual love, in theory
(beginning with Solov'ev) and in practice. Experimenting with
 10 IRINA PAPERNO

human relations, character, and body, the Symbolists focused on

a search for creative alternatives to biological procreation, seek-
ing to break the cycle of birth and death by creating an immortal
~anclr<JEynous human being. Matich's analysis ·suggests that-de:
bates on sexuality and gender in early-twentieth-century Russia
undertook a meta(?hysical and e12ist~mologi_c,a.J,.E!Jl.".r th.~n i1
social, cause. They articulated concern with such issu~~ ~s the
~~iifitlleSis of m_a~ter an_d sp}Ei_t~ trans_ience, and the creation of
.Unity ou-i of difference .or division. --- ----

lf - - In Ch.apter 3, Irene Masing-Delic offers a different cross-

- (_ 1>..;.f:;;... . section of the material: she traces the motif of Pygmalion and
~.-'- ' (,
\
Galatea in Russian literature, from romanticism, through real-
ism, to Symbolism. Her analysis shows how life-creation, an aes-
-~h~~~~rinciple,_~~~ ~-~-~<_?_de~ ___in _-the-·artiSric ·-re~~;=ki·~gS--~f t~
myth, The motif reveals the- relationship of continuity between
;eafiiffi~O!._r)_Q_ m9~.~rnis!!J_:.- . -
In Chapter 4, Alexander Lavrov undertakes the investigation
of yet another aspect of the phenomenon. Zhiznetvorchestvo was
mediated by an institution of sorts-the circle of the "Argonauts"
centered around Andrei Bely, with its peculiar "social structure,"
rituals, and private mythology. Lavrov has reconstructed the life
of the circle on the basis of archival materials that to this day
remain largely unpublished.
In Chapter 5, Joan Delaney Grossman reevaluates one of the
central "life texts" of Russian Symbolism, the Petrovskaia-Bely-
Briusov relationship. She reveals another source of Symbolist
life-creation-the writings of Stanislaw Przybyszewski. Focus-
ing on episodes from Briusov's life text rather than his writ-
ings, Grossman brings to light an alternative stance in Sym-
bolist aesthetics. What emerges dramatically in his relationship
with Petrovskaia as analyzed by Grossman is Briusov's principled
oppos~!!~.!.1..-!Q..~topian thinking. His position construes an alter-
nattV;: to the Solov'evian mystical brand of Symbolism practiced
by Gippius, Dmitry Merezhkovsky, Bely, Blok, and Ivanov.
In Chapter 6, Michael Wachtel explores the life and work of
Viacheslav Ivanov. He shows Ivanov ~~_cl..ing a "formu~· for the
fusio~_and life_;!s_he_;ip_Erop_riated the herit'!g:e_ofthe_Q~_r-
 Introduction 11

~omantics. In the course of translating Novalis's poetry into

Russian, Ivanov "translated'' German romanticism into Russian
Symbolism and theory into biographical practice. Wach~ows
how.~_'P12?!~~1:1.~~raterl:_~·real-life" experience,_ inc!u~in_~ that 5'~--­
Ivanov's recorde~-~.r-~~!!1~~-n~..~!~)o!1~·
In conclusion, in Chapter 7, Irina Gutkin traces the transfor-
mations of the conception of life-creation in the post-Symbolist
era, from Futurism to early Soviet culture to high Stalinism, re-
vealing the-e-0ntinuous-4evelQ_p_ment and complex modifications
of the idea. ""jr· -
Throughout the volume we advance two arguments concern-
ing the historical evolution of the Russian literary and cultural
tradition: that modernism, ostensibly reacting against positiv-
ism and realiso";-;-~~r:;;ally ..~ssi~ilatt:<l"Some oftne fundameniaf
principles ~f i~ ;~~h~-;;my;-an-d ih·a"t ihere is an essential con ti- ·
,!!!!!U'_ b~t~t;en ~.9Slefii~.~f.;:t_e.~_lfie.tfC~ _o~ig.in.ating <:t.t the-~_urii ·of the. ·
J&Il_tµ_ry_a!ld S_oviet c.ultqr~ jp_the 192c;>'s_ and 193o's ..
In emulation of the Symbolist principle of "collective cre-
ation," this project was undertaken by a group of authors who
worked in close collaboration. Besides those whose essays ap-
pear in this volume, the group included several members who
provided creative energy that was not embodied in texts but con-
tributed substantially to the "common cause." They are Boris
Gasparov, Robert P. Hughes, and Olga Raevsky-Hughes.
 one

The Meaning of Art:

Symbolist Theories

IRINA PAPERNO

ymbolist theo'.:!.<:.~~~~~<:.~~:_d_by_the ideas of Vladi-

~
S mir Solov'e~in. whose works aesthetics i_s interwoven_ with
--·- ------- ----· .. -- -----·- ' -

Solov 'ev posits the notion of dualism as the foundation of his

system. For him, th~}~1_C?!!~J,~.5.?.~P~?.~~.?! a~~~K'.?nistic entities-
heavenly and earthly, material and spiritual, ideal and real-and
antagonistic realms-"inward reality" (the inner world of the
individual) and "outward" (objective) reality. The destiny of man
..is-t.he consolida_tion qij_~t_"~PJ!1P!~~JP!:!l.1!_~~. p~netrauo~~=OTilleSe""
antithetical entities and realm~:,~.,Art (or...._beauty), along with love,
~s as a tn~jm: vehicle of synthesis. ---
_,.. ~ - .. ' ·-·-·-----
"'

. ,... ·solov'ev con~i~lentIY deScribeSili ·n terms of

t,~ ical metapho{i~'f~.S,~[~~t o· , os chenie) and trans-
11 uratioq reobrazhenie). ~fte,..fhe two complementary /
mec amsms of the aesthetic process: lhs.m~l~_rialization.of:;pir_i!.. Pflo 'l--
.Li.!1g_!'_n?tig9) ~rid the spiriu~ali~ation of_ matter (tran~.tiQP.l-2 I< ~.IJ~. 111si
In "Beauty in Nature" ("Krasota v prirode," 188~ ~ dr- I (t-c > -
scribed as "the transfig~'!\.~9.li.of
' ..
"'"·~--
matter tl:Jrnugl:U.he mci'i:n.~!lsm, ;-:~.?
'
• '· •
.... ' ..(
of another, non material
_.,,, -- , __ ._
__
element - ...
in it." 3 The main example is the
-·~--,-~,----
 14 IRINA PAPERNO

transformation of coal into a diamond. In their material ingre-

dients, their chemical elements, the two substances are identical.
Therefore, the beauty of the diamond does not lie in its material
nature; it is produced by the refraction of light in the crystalline
structure of the gem. Beauty is produced neither by the ma-
terial body of the diamond nor by the light refracted in it, but
by the "distinct and inseparable [nesliiannyi i nerazdel'nyi] union
of the substance and light." 4 The "task" of art, claimed Solov'ev
in "The General Meaning o! Art" ("Obshchii smysl iskusstva,"
1890) ~<c-~i:a_11sfo!._1J1.<!_tiop_ of__ p_h_ysi~a.! life into its spiritu_<!).
counterpart, which ... is capable of internally transfiguring,
.w,iJ:itu11Ji~Ji.ig matter or _truly becoming embodied in it." 5 Art is
essentially a synthesis of the material and the spiritual."
The most important implication of the aesthetic process is
that, through participation in the spiritual achieved in art, the
physical world becomes a party to the immortality characterizing
the spiritual world: "with the immediate and indivisible union
in beauty of...s12iritual content and seQSQry exvression, ,with their
complete mutual penetration, the_m~terial phenomen,011, which_
in reality has become beautifutiil~r)~JQ ~~y;:;c;~;;;i!y ha~ em-
. bodled·itt·it:relf the idea;·must.becon{e as per,m;m_ent and il)ll)10_r~
ta! as the idea itself.'' 6 In this Solov'ev saw the difference between
his aeSth~ti~~dRornantic, Hegelian aesthetics:
)old.;0,\..fccording to Hegelian aesthetics, beauty is the embodiment of the uni-
- versal and eternal idea in particular and transient phenomena; more- ~
::f=. over, ~r. .~~.~~.!l-t.~ansient and disappear like individual waves in the
Hf"6El flo~ _c>f t11:e_!!1?_~erial proce~s. only for a moment reflecting the radiance of
the eternal idea. But this is possible only with an impersonal, indifferent
'relati~~~hipbet;e·e·".·~4s~~~}.,~.P-~_i_.. "-.c!£!~.and a. ·.-~~~t~~i~l-.p.h.e_~()m_en~.o,
For real and pe~fectl3~~ri~p,~e~~1~g c9mplete so1!.9il:~~ty_ ~!!2 ~&
jnterpenet_r<1.~i()Il
of thCse·two eleme11t~~must necessarily make one of
them privy to the immortality of the other.'

Of no less importance is the quality of "reality" given to the

ideal. In "Beauty in Nature" Solov'ev argues that the embodi-
ment of beauty "is no less real and considerably more significant
(in a cosmogonical sense) than those material elements in which
it is embodied." 8 From this it follows that art is a force capable of
 The Meaning of Art 15

bringing about the real transformation of the world. Opposing

the Platonic notion of beay!y.as-a.'.'.s_ha.dow" of the_ idea, acc~"d
~by "id~~1;;;;~·· romantic._a,';'sth,~~i!=_~,..h_t;_<il,iliuid:.lhat-b~ry·.. mu.:t
""'lead"io"a real improve,;,er:t ..ofJ~' 9 Georgy Chulkov quoted
'this deftfiiiiOn -in his "On Mystical Anarchism" ("O misticheskom
anarkhizme," 1906), in which he presented art as a force capable
of bringing about social transformation.10
In propagating this idea, with its obvious mystical overtones,
Solov'ev found an ally in the positivist Nikolai Chernyshevsky,
whose The Aesthetic Rel.ations of Ar(t,o ~e,r;Ji.IJ. (Esteticheskie otnoshe- \'.---
niia iskusstva k deistvitel'nosti), when it appeared in 1853, became
j!. manifesto of thS,_~_p~~!~!;.:,~t~ju.Rll.SSia~:~
In 1894 Solov'ev reviewed the new edition of Chernyshevsky's ~M.<i Nii<
treatise. In his treatise. Chernyshevsky reversed the romantic /1(1'<:'-lb('•
hierarchy in which art, as pertaining to the sphere of the ideal,O'i:,•; i 1/: ,_,
was superior to life. He proclaimed ~~~lity_ superi?r _t9 .!~!,}~~ (~/~ c:.·.,;_ t·lV; ·
real life superior to art. A philosophical category traditionally'.;:... "·; •.
"'"iSSOCiated with art, the beautiful, was to be found not in art but) :- .~ , ._ >.--::-(·
in real life: "The beautiful.i,s.!.ife" (prekrasnoe est' zhizn').,A~'or,d,__
ing to Solov'ev, with this idea Chernyshevsky became the. first
. aesthetician to affirm "ille'rea\TiY-on>e;.:.;y,;;,, . ·-
. - ff appears that in Solo~·e~'s-i:liTiikiiig positivist "realism'.' (a be-
lief in the reality of the material world) was compounded with
_ "- mystical "re · elief · b' . bo;,'Tf.(,.•; il
- /~·-;;,tilesrs~· .. ~'?:!I~~""' c1s his ~~Itfu:ti.:J.heoL¥_100k ri;:c:t.x;ic,
... _t7t1!~()l.qg _______·_ e o___ . '_ its_111'!in 1110el. Solov'ev's b.;i [.(¥)',;;U
/ 7 "-11otion of the "inseparable unity" and "total mutual penetration"
\ ( of the spiritual and the material principles in art is an applica- ,
tion of the Christological doctrine in aesthetics. The theological DoVTf:.•f'lt
formulas that define the relations. . between the two natures of1,,~R./YTvlo"'­
Christ (the inseparable union of the divine and the human; two ti IC A
natures united yet distinct and autonomous) are recognizable in
his aesthetic formulations, _l:I~ _re Iks .Of.l .. t~~ ,<;:hr.i~ to Iogi£~l.!1<l_~i~ n 'R;,
of the transformation of.the Hesh through the incarnation of
,r- ,the immutable and impassible Log~e means of~~ei:rl'IB,.
impa.~~.ibili_t_y_~1l).12 ·

Indeed, Solov'ev's aesthetic works complement his theologi-

TEol'.O Gt f' C l'.1 ST A,
 16 IRINA PAPERNO

cal treatise Ji"!!!1;~1!$.~.~~Q~.~'!!'!.'!J!:f!.~!J.Chteniia ovechestve,

_ 1877-81). ""[~~ tlu:ol'.'~ieal c~~~~~t ,2'f '',$9d!.e,l~!!.f~~'!J.t ,j'} ~~
... !iffiadi'ist sense, refers to the umon of Go a lillfnin Christ..
Solov 'ev use;-:;g;;d~;~;;;;;;-;;;-:;;;;·;.;;.i~e~sal p-;;-radig.;, ~f synthe-
sis. While in Readings on Godmanhood Solov'ev argued that man's
striving for the reconciliation of opposites in the unity of God
and, n is the ultim.att s _in his ae:s_:-,
-~~~-~~ti.!..,.~~:~~~~~~-~!-~at ·-aes~ euc· actiVity,_~ __ 9.I.~~~ µ_~~!~1:18..
-~!:!" spirit1ial and the 1Ilat_:ri~}~e~...!~.P1'.!La._paj~r:.r21~-
~n t.t1at s_a,~-~--P!Q~.ess. MOrCover, at the present stage in history,
art is a ;re .urement of th~'"fu;;:;;;:·~t;;~· . lrf "The Cen:
~''f'· . eantng· o ·;{ · b e (deistvitel'noe
iskusstvo) ~:'.!'1!' ,palpable representation ~ect o~. phe-
nomenon from the point of view..of its u.ltirnate..state...or..in. th,e
light of the future..w.PJ:IC'
" From this point of vieW Solov'ev, in his "First Speech on Dos-
toevsky" ("Pervaia rech' o Dostoevskom," 1881), evaluated differ-
ent aesthetic systems: -yhile "pure" .\i.<:!.c;.'!listic:)_!'.~t._(~~ing o_f.~he
past) "lifted man above the earth," contemporary realism returns
man-io e;!rth;·inspirlng him.with IOve·arid compassion fofthls ·
;;;orld. This, ho;;;e:;,er, should lead not to total immersion in the·
-· ·= ·'re;),\ii.'ioJ:~;.;,va"ii.:;~g(\b{~;;;_;,rld. The art of the future,
· · rt. efi ured in"' a~9_e
w.or . an ,ac - 1eve recon 11a .- . 9 ;
~?ti::~~b~~~?e~-: , - ~-~n n- ~ arc~•;.-;
...··· ~~~
e•' arP"'

SO!ov'ev's philosophy of art~ _a~ we as 1s r et6r1cal strate-

,.. gi:S! _;;~~.a_cl<!Ptecj l;iy the .Symbolists; his ideas and images are
...ech.ru:!,\ iu.J!le .writmg_~ g_f Qw_it,ry Mere~h,k?_vs~r....Zinaida ~l!>pi~
AP-lt-\/it>A. j\. ndre·i······~el. l'?. Via·c·~h·
.. viv.a.nov··· Valer·y·· .B. r.ius.o. y.•..Fe..dor Sologub,
f£1JI and '?.\her~ .. It. wa. .elx .. ho, ~a.king S9_lo_v'<:xa:~ a s.t~!:!ii!&..1>oint,
worked out . a comp ex (th<;mgh by no mean~. ~onsi~l!"1t) _th_eory
'nn.i.f.ciru>" >rt.onrl J;~ 15
,@_..";M~~~--;
In constructing the aesthetics of Symbolism, Bely follows
---~,----- ..
_jEL'( , ~~'.~....~!Ee~".!:U:'--2.LSr~~tirig metapl}orsfrom theological c?n-.".
All-'Tt' j; A cepts and .~P.£!~~'._l_g_~~.!:.!!.Ll'?.!!~-~th,t;\i£.P!2£1S.~hfentral t? ~.~!{s.
(,Cl t.lf 11 ~- .'.'.:.~theti~t:is_!_h,sis" · . · · " '
~" Vii-. IOOfv@ K4ir2· He argues t at aritsuc creation mev1ta y ta e on
a religious qua:lity.1 6 In arguing this point Bely adopted Solov'ev's
 The Meaning of Art

ci urn screa r e
tas o 1s , t eurg1c art 1s crea\JQ!U!!J _e, au .. ('!!1!'1 in NCVC
~'111, ..~~ !':!E~Lof. _t_~e .hn_~g~ _of t~e
"new man," th.at '.~·.¢?if Ei-ti,"o ~··· t'. r/
...lllil8'.'_ In
Bely's "Symbolism as World Understandmg ( S1mvo- c. • • · ' · •
'Tt'r.'i'i'kak miroponimanie," 1903) the word "theurgy" refers to i'>~:-f Fkk.'A:
'') I
~Ii IT the "indwelling of God in the human personalit(' 19 Although ·,
E•f these ideas focused on the metaphor of the artist as "the new (lcMf ~·!
rA man," with its obvious New Testament connotations, the Pauline (....; 1... 1 ;;
'f.5rXIA)
phraseology and Solov'ev's religious aestheticism are not the only ( •. It<~-" l?
A1~tl4j sources of Bely's theory. In Bely's "new man" the New Testament , ; • . . , 1.•
symbolism merged with Nietzschean images, primarily with the 1~':.,) ' ' ·•
1

doctrine of the superman. Bely claimed, "Nietzsche's doctrine

of the individual is an aesthetics"; Nietzsche's superman ("the
contemporary new man") is "an artistic image of personality." 20
But, at the same time, Jl~Q~iKtl~~;!i.W~~{f,\aj?~~.s
--•.•.ij~t~n,i"°' m9<,l\'J;[11ze~.S,~!st1~n\¥;
rn his famous. lilli!l Rr..~1,'.!.se:_t_£J:~e!!iz:0~efTt<'g~dJU'll~~ETZ'SCJH:
claimed that the aesthetic view of the world implied attribut-
ing "a kind of divinity" to the world process, with God viewed
as "the supreme artist." Yet this view involved a conception of
-......~-~~?~n ~!~~~.!!~!~H~~ act, with God, the "supreme
art1st7n;;ealizing himself indifferently in whatever he does or un-
does." Moreover, Nietzsche emphasized that his purely aesthetic
interpretation and justification of the world put his doctrine "at foloV£11 • ~
the opposite pole from Christian doctrine, a doctrine entirely fEJ•",(. 4 \,
moral in purport."21 To Russians, particularly to Solov'ev and tt:ifOFii..:bci
Nikolai Fedorov, who were obviously fascinated wjtb Nietzsche, f~ A.. N tE."r1
suCh'TfisiSte'itce ori-lh'(;-;~tI:Christian nature of his doc;ne was
unacceptable. Solov'ev, in "Literature or truth" ("Slovesnost' ili
istina"), an essay in Sunday letters (Voskresnye pis'ma, i897-98),
reproached Nietzsche for substituting "philology" for religion
in his approach to life. In Nietzsche's insistence on seeing life
as a purely aesthetic phenomenon (i.e., as a text), .Splo.1".e~
a view ofli.f!',.~Ievoid. '?f._a_py 111ystical component,-4he-U:iu.wJ,!.b..
.ef-"'sl1perphilology" over-true "~uper~anhood:''_22_ "I.:he la~t"rh_<:..,
_c:9nsicjere.Q~t_t'!i.'!a_ble only.within. lhe framework of_<:;hristi!!-Jiit:i;
Striving to resol~e the contradiction between aeslh~lici~~ arid
 18 IRINA PAPERNO

Christian doctrine9and Ivanov too reinterpreted Nietzsche

along the lines suggested to them by Solov'ev's critique: 1-1i<'tz-
scJ1~~_:!! ~es!._4~.tj_~i~.~.-~h~Y ~g_as Christian mysticism.. Bely saw no
contradiction between "philological" and religious approaches
to life in Nietzscheanism; he read literally Nietzsche's metaphor
"God as supreme artist," and understood the Nietzschean con-
~ept .of aesthetic cre~tion in !if~ as
mys.ticii,T;).!'!tvH)Ce~.i.nTo-ifie
creation of the wod<i. In Bely's synthetic system, Nietzschean and
Christian concepts are interchangeable: Nietzsche's superman is
the Pauline new man.
Following Fedorov and Solov'ev, Bely included the issue of
~.2!\~L\!!!1!!2!!ality_in his view of art. In the article "Art"
("Iskusstvo," i903) he elaborates: when applied to life, art ex-
tends life into eternity; in this way art becomes the creation of
personal immortality." Bely and other Symbolists saw immor-
tality as one of the most important components in the thinking
of their predecessors. According to Bely, Nietzsche in Zarathus-
tra offered a practical strategy for the "bodily transfiguration
of man"-a step toward physical immortality ("Friedrich Nietz-
Mf\S E /<./\ sche" ["Fridrikh Nitsshe," i907 ]).24 :lliaches)av..Iva_":()~~w "the
(Sff a '}pr-Obk-m<>~~m>er death" as the focu&ofSo!Qv'~v_'.~gc:>Cfp'1n­
f'> C 0 ? /~a concept that Ivanov described in Nietzschean terms as
Ni\cei<~LJ- the "true supermanhood" (istinnoe sverkhchelovechestvo). 25
(fT!J~.I An essential part of the theory of life-creation is establishing
ff:l R{:<~ . Symbo · the historical succession of creative styles.
Inhi' mbolism"("Sim~~~pub-
nyt) Bely describes the re ation of the poet's
creative consciousness to "nature" (the outward world) from the
point of view of different artistic systems. He acknowledges two
CD
/WlTURC: z#rtistic methods in the art of_the past. I~-~~firs~-~~':_e_n1, t~e
VI> (v EL artist re-creates th,e formSOf visible.~",~ure (th,e~I w~rld")c
('MIND o w,hic,h ,'le.l111?:r~tand~. a_s ~rue_ i~.~~-~s,or sy111!:>.<?ls, of ilie_'.'.true'.'.
fttAL ~) world. The metaphor of this art1suc strategy is the Sun (or the
~a,.,:50 1 or.si:i;'g.;'d, Helios), who illuminates the images of this world to re-!
Mo~
1
veal them with u timate clarity. Bely calls this method" · · "
and na111, s .O.~lh as .its representat_ive. In the secon system,
the artist der1v s · is i~~~~s-not-fTOm lhe e~Or-;;~~ldb{it fr~~I
-------··--------- -····-·----·~"-- -·-----'"--·-~--··-··-·- .. -~--.~ .. --_.......__ ~ _,,.../
 The Meaning of Art
19 ®
internal reality, or his owQwhich reveals_tl_i_e::~~'!".'.'_~ R.£ Mi// A
!h" ~esult is a world of fantastic i1TI~g"-s ~ak"!l.~1!!.llI.".<lrt~ lr:";P-.
IJ H
;l) imagination... This method is "fantastic row,anticism," exempli- f\ (. ····1 J...
:V fled by MdtO_fr::.·Ha\i1ng createt1 R1S HC'mn _'!.?~ .. ~~: _~~~1s:_ma~ 'iJ.:IA/ A-
~KAN - discover that !.'1.~_e_J<_~<:!:t.1'.!1-\V<>,rld_Jll.at'!re) is actually cre~tecT1r_i__l_!i_: c'k:iMANTI
{"1D ill?.'!K"-11:!:1:!! lik<;_ne~s oj_hi~ ~o.r\d (that is._ of ar_t).1:~is is. according_ Ill 0 FANT
oA!.J/)to Bel the strate of reahsuc romant1c1sm, or r manunsm of A~N'I C'q --~
rr&Ht&" exemplified by Gogol. The metaphor of this type o cre-
. ..
ath<' · Orpheus, who draws the ghost into the world of reality.
T hird ethod, propagated by Bely as the st~~te_gy of Symbol-
®
-~~:_. ase~"?~_·a--:2'-~~~~~i~-~.~~~~-. The imape8WhidiiS"a
.::.f.'il.lj/ · · t artists conscious s r ce1v s e bod1ment that
mari.1 estatton, tilt e real WOr an t .i.i's ec_ -·~,,::., ,, ~ '.~C
e IM..6e''' J

D_!___ ~~--~<:_ty_~r_t_~~ ~~~~- --~!~~~-~e~2~Y~~-~~-c;:.,1.~:w~r_, _ s~-~~-- ..:~t:~' ·; ~

1
i:.Gt: //\
"c ive with ~he outward (~';>~.':!iveL.~~:.~~ji~_i.s fused with th<:. 1//1".~1;
-~-!.lY .. L J1,1.lLCiciiiilii~.Jk!y_sme!!1£'1.()!:_()f t~-~~- ~ype of_cr_~~t~'.'~ H WJbQ
is "~JWorq becoJ&@nti" ~n,d, by implicatio~'. Christ; Bely uses i: ,'..;.'..,
nit CK(!llmJ \lt) e'scn not 1lT!ly-the':!esttrehc process but also
the artist himself. The artist is a true incarnated Logos, the Word
made flesh. The act of incarnation overcomeSthe--separattO'ii~.be-""
, ~~;:·~.?-~.~:·-and··;~~~--:~·_)-~.i-~~. -~t-~~~~~i~.1.~~· -~~-~~~?~ in' _rn~ ~ce·of AP.ns-r A
o
incar_nat,!011. ~Ile poet.illrn$!f cran1w his humap Pal'IVi ·gr]jj(a·~ SVA
AJTr:-f. _6.~.:.!.r.~-~~u:.~: "t~c: arll~.t shou ____. __ ~~?pl~~ w.~s ?~n arttstlc f()_~~: NA/VA.e 2t
r, ri his naturi!L'.L.§.boµld !ll~rge 'ollith. his art;. his.life should become
rMa1, artistic. He himself is 'the word made flesh.' " 26 B \
if){ ln·~rder. t~ .fully und~rs·~;;;d .B...;l;:-~. . ~-i-;w, we turn now to n f!.. ( V \
6
1
/ A earlier Symbolist attempt to deal with the relations between arts· 0 v/~
7
and life as that attempt evolved historically, Briusov's art le • f , -
--------- 0 ,}):.Jfyol:JJ
~T£R!Ai.!'The Sacred Sacrifice" ("Sviashchennaia zhertva," 1905).27 Ac· <o NN!A ":
cording to Briusov, the task of Symbolism is to merge life and "7f,r1, o '
art. This synthesis can be achieved by further developing the ( P · 10 )
aesthetic principles of realism, which came to replace romantic
aesthetics. ~~~t!~~~.}i.111~.t_e_d__~~~ .-~P~~r~.-_of_~~~ ~() t~!:. _'.~-~~!1.!~:
_ful" an.~:l_"s"1.l/!ill11','.' i\.saresult, only.mme .e.lements of thep9sYs.
life could be turned intQ. poetry. !l-e.alism ext.ended the r~al[Jl pf
the beauiirl11 by including the wh()le "'()f.lci i11. all of its !11~nifc;s;
t~tio~,, Realism opened all of life for inc. lusion in the sphere ,of.
 ., q_
::;~
" .::>
t:, U/
:::r 20 I R I N A P A P E R N 0
... "C
~~
~ )!! ~rt, thus erasing the borders b_et\Veen _the _poe,t's a_rt._<!!.!~U~~-
" -z""' ln_Bi:iusov's view, the real.isl an~ th~ Symbolist b_()th_''tlllb~~S!t'
.~ ;; S life in art. But while the realist turns the. external world into art,
-c::. €. i., the 'Syrrioolist cr~atesby ewliodyi9_g his i99_~~-~~~ike realist8
~~.:i.
,'t recogJJ.i~!'
.\\'e life itself a_s tbe ouly. thing.thatis . .ta.bi:ju9!!~!<'.C!
.
.:> ~ .g in art. But while they were 1-0uking fa~ it [life] outsid.e. q_f them-,
~~lve_s, -~~.Jµr:µ otir: .gtl.~_e_ ilJlV"'ard." T}!_~s. the artist in his entirety
is turn.,\!, ,into art•. From Jbis _it follows that the goal uf !h_e artist
:.~!~_Ill'!~<! his life_ int<> an '!rt t~;;;: ;'~'bi-Pi!1i~~llfu i,~~ .
V/D 4 _ ). D<><>ks but bis life," 28 -

S,£"'.! ~ - i!l'lfb&e1 coAnecuoA\etween Bely's theory and Briusov's article is

'- " obvious. Both Briusov and Bely view Symbolism as a synthesis
of the romantic and a different, "objective" artistic method. But
"objectivity," which Briusov describes as the method of realism,
Bely attributes to "classicism." Both authors use Solov'ev's meta-
phor <d; 0ip,car'li!li~for the description of the artistic process.
But while "lJ'i-iti_SOV~-~ Who would not subscribe to the Solov'evian
-~.'l~~ist-~~~(~~i~~;·_ig-;;~r~~ .the, ~ystical connotations of the con--
cept and uses the term purely as a metaphor for the concrete
expression of an idea, Bely restores its original theologi~a[ and.
--~ystical signific~_nce; his metaphors are "real."
,-·\j, /1 • I These ideas, metaphors, and strategies of reasoning are shared
\1 f1 /VO, another major proponent of Symbolist aesthetics, Viacheslav
~/~",?.!!_.~The notion oyrJiii tr~'ll!llNfi~ 8,Mal~ informs the
tfiemat1cs of much 0 11s eai!{poetry.l Ozzov1 / \?eobrazhen1e
Vselennoi" ("Call forth/the Transfiguration of the Universe"),
_JyanQy_orders:tne:artlsi-il:i'hls~~pr{)gi'iii\iiDa~ic' poe;;j: ''.£re;.
ativity" ("Tvorchestvo," in the collection Kormchie zvezdy, 1903).
Similarly, I vanov's poetry repeatedly uses Solov'ev's image of
the transformation of coal into a diamond. It appears in "Dia-
mond" ("Almaz," in the collection Prozrachnost', 1904), "Dispute"
("Spor," in Cor Anuns, 19n), "Language" ("lazyk," 1927, in Svet
vechernii)."' Like Bely, Ivanov employs the th_<;ologic_al c_ons_e_pt of
,_~t:!~arnation as~~. ~~~t~E.!!~!~~°*~-:~·r!~Ji££_ie"~!:m·How;ver, Ivanov
focuses not on the nature of the relation between "man" and
"poet" but on the nature of the poetic word (a question that also
interested Bely). 3° For the Symbolists, argues Ivanov in his "Tes-
---.. ~"--·-·"-'" .. , - '
 The Meaning of Art 21
,,, 51i-1B~)l/<;"10
laments of Symbolism" ("Zavety simvolizma," 1910), the poetic
~(1_1~ <;sseri!~tty different from the gerierallinguistk sign:·;! f(lL/Wfi.f:.
l§_ "a srmb:<!'; t~at.i~! j,t 111u.~t..be understood .as was the word in Co Mo vi E°'
~~~'1.l i?.J!•ScJi.ev<11. realism-rs, lo togh iyp, s;~iM,c;ilJ..21,.V~L€tJT('
1
.. " e r_. ' . th~t-~~ ~'-~~r~:~s; Tlfe prototypi"l~r such a word. istlie '~~~·':"':'.;:t J ()A
1v1ne Logos. n Ivanov s1fr.'ms, the symbol is not a de e kr:~~:"< Q
(or idol) of r;:ality'hutl'iS' ''ri •• ...... "·.:ct;;\fur . to fl£ .··,i;11tf1
~become flesh." Jn-ihi~-·;;;;:;se, Symbo 1st poetry, w 1c <>perates [flllT~ <\
ht!'.£¥.~ ~Y~~o.1~ .. ls·-~;-~·--a~~~h~(rsttivcl ro ~~~-g-e -~_lrh···,·-·rea1~-~~~~~9 ~ ~'< "' v·cJ
2_ecome reality_it~\if· ');~Ji <'Y LVr/J .
According to Ivanov, in this hes tfie mrferlnce between Sym-

".~·h·eurg.i.e..•.• ·a.·~~). ·a·.n. d·.· r.om..a. ~~. ic·i·s· m..·· W1\A!.e ro-
ma~~u~.~~··;;·~e.~1'~.e~.s~.-~.v~.ISJ~ o~·n~.s~.~~f~t~-h~.~~~/·~JJ~, S~}?~:'
b.. o.lis.m.
·.. ··(a.. relig.ious,.·. .
·.
\~ri conctuS'ion toTese arguments,
.• - ,, '· ' 'I:
which are 'ase on realizing t e metaphor "word become flesh,"
Ivanov affirms that poetry (Symbolist poetry) is by its very nature
. .'.':I1 ar~ th.\l.L!§.
........ruro:auiem1iliiJi-V~1Iuf~sqv~·'~~~1-n~ _niE~~ ~;~:._ f\ li-r c- . _

~~,:~~J}r~:~~;_,~~~..ih.: a161 :sf:is" !'!:~. i~°.'!:°.1'!.~~sh:~1'!.?:.<l~ ~ ~ ':1~ ~'

.~ .
I now return to the Symbolists' theories to clarify the logic of
their reasoning .
. ~!~~"..~~nSy~bolism adopted t~sW.iwaruic~ o l tonic no-
10n of th dualism' f "th1s·world' arittct<dle other wor ,
ensei!d~~e ..lia 1ty. f_n,al. a!lCl.!i'!<;.al,.Res_h '!~-fsoul:matt'e"".r"'..'-an-_d"'.
!P!E~.t1 .~uman _~pd di".i~~?_.<?1:!.~-~~ ~nd _in~!;E?_o,~j-~_c:_ti_ye_~.~~ subjec-
_tiy~. object an.ct id.~a)., Kant posited the basic polarity as thaiof
the world of the object and the world of human consciousness,
in which the objects are known. From this followed the roman-
tic separation between art and life, ~~-C!U-~~-n. ~-s ~.. :!:~~<2£..
''.the ideal"_ and _thus &up.erior to life. In the_ romantic _c?ntext,
. a!t~-~p~~.,~-!.-~i~~<~;~ing_,!~~ -~~P~rall~~,.bei:;~-e-n art and ·l_ife an_d··_
between the two worlds involved the following conceptual opera-
~jjqn:. "lif~;;-_;;~s proclaimed to be consubstantial with arE realitr V/'D l'I
, ~ o!?f.P»¥.i~...~!J1~.,~~i!.\.1!;..g{"O~~i:;;:~}ll.i· Life then bee am."-'! •( 0 f.'1 v
leg1umate object of creat•¥e-adivU¥.. .asp"liere of apphcauon of ;:>(Jflc
- aestr1efiC..p. . -.=1·nCipfes. However, in the course of this projecllOil",--; D~
-..,,_ .... ·· ·· · ·· 1:nv111
I
MAJ' <1,U;;.1.Y
c~·~•vf!.
, /
fAlt-JC1!Ji'".f,
 22 IRINA PAPERNO

"residue" remained. Whole spheres of "life"-"the empirically

low" (such as physiological processes and trivial details of daily
existence) were excluded from art; they were regarded as ma-
terial suitable neither for artistic creation nor for ·aesthetization
in real-life creation. And, in a mystical key, not the whole of the
earthly life could inherit "life eternal."
MAitSMt; R~ss~~ Sr~~o!i~.t~-s~w theirattempts to merge ~rt and life ~s
?'S. a revival of romant1c1sm.1'towever; they operated m the culture
i:li.ai ha<l-passecCihiougTi and responded to the experience of
Tobl>A 1\--'i-ealism. Realism'waswor[eo Into their aesthetics.
v, A
l/)ffl L · 5¥m!?~2,2i!;SJ!..t!1!.f!~.•!:}o~!![.£.>l!lsidence !J_s1ween the
f f:.'C/:. l t":!?-Pl~!1~~ <>.r \hie. t\\'P .\\'p~l~§; While romanticism saw the other
~u world as the "true" world, Symbolism adopted the realistic notion
/llvNtio D·t> of the ultimate "truth," or reality, and superior aesthetic value
913J~/"~ t'-
of this world and of life. In their view Chernyshevsky'sfamous
,viontc t ~ thesis "the beautiful is life;Ti'lnpfied iiial-reai'ili'e-in-iis-entfreiy
(or'.R1i::i1•; ~ ]'§1)1((bei:ol.iiea:~~main ofthe beautiful and, th~-;~[.;~.:, ~ sphere -
H; l'i'J N" of artistic creation. Lite as a whole, witlfoiifany «residue," can be
(T ' fran'slor~ed int,;~~t. In a-mystic.al.key, tho~l)ole of "this wo~jg:_
· can be transformed into "the world beyond." 32 Thus, roman-
--lic--strivi-~g-"fOi=Jensezts was replacid--Wiill' the desire· to ,_brlrig-th_e:
~-]enseits irltOthis, "re;C"-WOfld.__- --- - ·-"'--m --~--~~ ----rn·---H -

(-"~\'.,:
~
;;:J
(' ":.f/('tJ.··
-------~~ii~itil!!I-~~~~~~--~··
o . or o ov ev, w o a1 e oun-
·~
- ,_,_f ,, . · a ons o ym o 1st aes etics, the OOtions of transfiguratlon
J t'"Ql.i'.C;"' a~~ ;;;;;~;:;-;.iio;;:-·;-;-5;:(r;;:;·(a.;'J;;;:;(1.i;;;:;:p;:;;~Td.e~J:i.~-i_ii_~!oT ·
(A/!1';\ the aestnctic"process:rtis'f01Towers~-the ·symbolists, privilege
incarnation over transfiguration because, by making the spiri-
 The Meaning of Art 23

Merging theology and aesthetics, the Symbolists appeared to

have reconciled the world's tragic dichotomies; moreover, they
resolved the conflict between the secular and the religious that
had plagued Russian culture throughout its modern history.
Viewed in this context, "life-creation" in daily life means much
more than organizing life aesthetically, as if it were a literary
text. By projecting principles used to construct verbal texts into
life the Symbolists realized the metaphor "the incarnation of the
Word." Thus, ironically, aestheticization of life is an expression
of the yearning for ''reality.':!?J:JJ.!~"'§A~·i9l~1~~·:?.~-J~~Jtf$:,fr~(~~
J.lt¥+i!~..JR~~!~~..~~:•. ~s ~.i,er2~~~~t2f. !l:!!;,.,~lf~-~~~~.....~.--~~~~·
1rTt -~~-
.:, " · · · '(Bely, using Dostoevsky's phrase). 5 ' 3 -
. . "In this," he added,"i"ies'iiie meanmg
o a 1m1r o ovev s views on art." 36 ~~':~~l.~~ts.J!Ll!n.
aesthetic organization of personal life had far-reaching_rnysti- ..
, cal 1mphcat1?_!1s,..Tr:insforrn~c,l _through-ar.t, life w;ts capahle.<>f -
becoming "l~fr~--~~~-rn_ql;.· Aestheticization of life was a way to,
'achieve deification and to gain the kingdom of heaven, includ-
ing the "realistic" kingdom of heaven on earth: the social utopia
and Fedorovian personal immortality in the flesh. Vi.s;.~~.c!.,in
t_~i~-~~ht, "life-creation" appears as a manifestat~or:i~ of_l!t9pi;.p~-
.. ism in~pfre<l bjiihe atinospliere of apocalypti~ forebodings ancL.
-~-;-;~-;,at;y!ne:~m;d~~<.!Ll!1.Y~~i~j~gu1nd pnsiiiv;sw in
turn-of-the:Century culture .
.,._._---~· - >,. . ,.D•
 Notes

Paperno: Introduction
i. V. Khodasevich, "Konets Renaty," in his Nekropol' (Paris, 1976),
p. 8.
2. The word zhiznetvorchestvo appears in Viacheslav Ivanov's "Zavety
simvolizma," in his Borozdy i mezhi (Moscow, 1916), p. 139; and in Andrei
Bely's Vospominaniia o A. A. Bloke (1922-23) (Munich, 1969), p. 275. Bely
also uses the phrases zhiznennoe tvorchestvo and tvorchestvo zhizni; see, e.g.,
Andrei Bely, "Teatr i sovremennaia drama," in idem, Arabeski (Moscow,
(.~_g_~j) pp.
22, 35. The term zhiznetvorchestvo is widely~~
~mbolism.
3. I am indebted to Michael Wachtel for the analysis of the meaning
of the concept and its possible English equivalents. Wachtel commented
that another ambiguous aspect concerns the very notion of "life," which
means "human existence," "living matter," and "the individual life of
the artist."
4. On the story of the relations between Blok, Liubov' Blok, and Bely
see V. N. Orlov, "Istoriia odnoi druzhby-vrazhdy," in his Puti i sud'by
(Moscow and Leningrad, 1963); for information in English, see Avril
Pyman's The Life of Aleksandr Blok (Oxford, 1979). See also the following
documents: Andrei Bely, Vospominaniia ob A. A. Bloke (Munich, 1969);
 Notes to Pages 2-6

V. N. Orlov, ed., Aleksandr Blok and Andrei Bely. Perepiska (Moscow, 1940);
Aleksandr Blok, "Pis'ma k zhene," in Literaturnoe nasledstvo, vol. 89 (Mos-
cow, 1978); L. D. Blok, I by/', i nebylitsy o Bloke i o sebe (Bremen, 1979). In
the words of Khodasevich, "the story of this love play~ imJ?.2!~
mlr in the literary life of the e.poch. in the lives ~[.@~$PPJ~.1 i.Q~.l_uQ:..
ing those who have ~at ~C::~-~~!!~gJ.yjn.y9J_~U:. and, in the long run,
in the whole history of Symbolism." See V. Khodasevich, "Andrei Bely.
Cherty iz zhizni," Vozrozhdenie, February 13, 1934.
5. See Z. G. Mints, "Poniatie teksta i simvolistskaia estetika," in Ma-
terialy vsesoiuznogo simpoziuma po vtorichnym modeliruiushchim sistemam,
vol. 1, no. 5 (Tartu, 1974), pp. 134-41.
6. Lidiia Ginzburg described zhiznetvorchestvo as "deliberate construc-
tion of artistic images and aesthetica~rganized plots in life." See her
0 psikhologicheskoi proze (Leningrad, 1977), p. 27; English translation;
Lydia Ginzburg, On Psychological Prose (Princeton, N.J., I99I), p. 20. For
a recent example, see Svetlana Boym, Death in Quotation Marks: Cultural
Myths of the Modern Poet (Cambridge, Mass., Ig9I), where zhiznetvorchestvo
is defined as "imaginative self-stylization'~_(p. 5).
7. Khoda~onetstreflaty;;--pp: 9 and I3.
8. Ibid., pp. IO-II. On this issue see also V. Khodasevich, "O simvo-
Iizme," in his /zbrannaia prow (New York, I982).
9. Khodasevich, "Konets Renaty," p. 8.
IO. See Malcolm Bradbury and James Mcfarlane, "The Name and
Nature of Modernism," in Malcolm Bradbury and James Mcfarlane,
eds., Modernism: 1890-1930 (Middlesex, Eng., 1976), pp. 19-55, for the
discussion of the concept.
I I. See Irina Paperno, Chernyshevsky and the Age of Realism: A Study
in the Semiotics of Behavior (Stanford, Calif., I988), p. 7.
12. Olga Matich was the first to appreciate and reveal the importance
of the heritage of the I86o's for Russian Symbolists. See her "Dialectics
of Cultural Return: Zinaida Gippius's Personal Myth" (I987), in Boris
Gasparov, Robert P. Hughes, and Irina Paperno, eds., Cultural Mytholo-
gies of Russian Modernism: From the Golden Age to the Silver Age (Berkeley,
Calif., I992), pp. 53-60, and her essay in the present volume.
I3· John Malmstad, Preface, in John Malmstad, ed., Andrey Bely:
Spirit of Symbolism (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), p. 9.
I4· The first volume of Fedorov's Filosofiia obshchego dela appeared in
1907 (marked I906) in Vernyi, in a limited edition (volume 2 was pub-
lished in I9I3 in Moscow); accounts of Fedorov's philosophy appeared
in 1904 in Vesy, /storicheskii vestnik, and Russkii arkhiv. On Fedorov see
 Notes to Pages 6-g

the pioneering work by S. Grechishkin and A. Lavrov, "Andrei Bely i

N. F. Fedorov," in Tvorchestvo A. A. Bloka i russkaia kul'tura dvadtsatogo
veka. Blolwvskii sbornik III (Tartu, 1979), and comprehensive studies by
Michael Hagemeister, Nilw/,aj Fedorov (Munich, 1989), and S. Semenova,
Nikolai Fedorov: Tvorchestvo zhiz.ni (Moscow, 1990).
15. Fedorov, Filosofiia, 2: 239. 16. Ibid., 1: 2.
17. Ibid., p. 421. 18. Ibid.,2:041-42.
19. The concept "theurgy" is borrowed from patristic and Neopla-
tonic sources, where it is used to mean "divine action." Solov'ev (and,
following him, other Symbolists) freely reinterpreted and expanded the
concept.
20. " ... realizatsiia chelovekom bozhestvennogo nachala vo vsei em-
piricheskoi, prirodnoi deistvitel'nosti." Vladimir Solov'ev, Kritika otvle-
chennykh nachal, in his Sobranie sochinenii (St. Petersburg, 1911-14), 2:
352.
21. See Vladimir Solov'ev, "Tri rechi v pamiat' Dostoevskogo. Per-
vaia rech"', in his Sobranie sochinenii, 3: 189; and idem, "Obshchii smysl
iskusstva," ibid., 6: 80-81.
22. Evgeny Trubetskoy, "Svet Favorskii i preobrazhenie uma," Rus-
skaia mysl', no. 5 (1914): 27. A concrete attempt to read the Symbolist
theory of art as a program of political action was undertaken by Georgy
Chulkov in his theory of "mystical anarchism," initially supported by
Ivanov. See Georgy Chulkov, 0 misticheskom anarkhizme (St. Petersburg,
1906), with an introduction by Viacheslav Ivanov.
23. Zinaida Gippius, Literaturnyi dnevnik 1899-1907 (Munich, 1970),
pp. 48 and 191. The original reads: "tvorit' zhizn' vmeste," "pervyi,
samyi estestvennyi i prakticheskii zhiteiskii vykhod," "nachinaet 'myslit''
o 'voprose pola.' "
24. Ivanov, "Zavety simvolizma," p. 139. .<;::---\
25. "lskusstvo est' tvorchestvo zhizni." Andr~'Pesn' zhizni," in
his Arabeski, p. 43//911) , .•--
26. "Zhizn' i ~st' tvorchestvo." Andrei Bely, "Teatr i sovremennaia
drama," in his Arabeski, p. 20.
27. Gippius, Literaturnyi dnevnik, p. 288.
28. Fedor Sologub, "lskusstvo nashikh dnei," Russkaia mysl', no. 12
(1915): 62.
29. Andrei Bely, "Teatr i sovremennaia drama," in his Arabeski, p. 21.(/ g J7)
30. Irene Masing-Delic reviewed the ideas on immortality in Russian
and early Soviet fiction in her Overcoming Death: The Myth of Immortality
in Twentieth-Century Russian Literature (Stanford, Calif., 1992).
234 Notes to Pages 9-16

31. See Richard Stites, Revolutionary Dreams: Utopian Vision and Ex-
~-----------
terimen_fEllff.~"(1'!.Jl!:f!.!>U:S~i<:iYJ:._~_~vol_ution (Oxford, 1989). Stites sees a clear
connection between the prerevoIUiiOilary artistic avant-garde and the
utopianism of the Bolshevik Revolution and Bolshevik state (p. 6); he
sets a limit for the utopian period at about 1932, when Stalin (and
totalitarianism) took over. Boris Groys views Stalinism and totalitarian
art as a stage in the development of the avant-garde culture. See Boris
Groys, "Stalinism kak esteticheskii fenomen," Sintaksis, no. 17 (1987):
gS-110, and his The Total Art of Stalinism: Avant-Garde, Aesthetic Dictator-
ship, and Beyond (Princeton, NJ., 1992). The author of the essay on
Russian modernism ("Modernism in Russia 1893-1917") in the com-
prehensive guide on modernism, Bradbury and McFarlane's Modernism:
1890-1930, claimed, "we know for certain that [modernism in Russia]
ended in 1917" (p. 134). This statement is an anachronism.
32. See Fedor Stepun, Vstrechi (New York, 1968), pp. 144 and 151;
Nikolai Valentinov, Dva godas simvolistami (Stanford, Calif., 1969), p. 127
(quoted in Irina Gutkin's essay in this volume); N. Ia. Mandelshtam,
Vtoraia kniga (Paris, 1972), pp. 449-58.

One I Paperno: The Meaning of Art

i. Vladimir Solov'ev, Sobranie sochinenii (St. Petersburg, 1911-14),

6: 76.
2. See ibid., p. 82. 3. Ibid., p. 41.
4. Ibid., p. 40. 5. Ibid., p. 84.
6. Ibid., p. 82. 7. Ibid.
8. Ibid., p. 43. 9. Ibid., p. 33.
io. On Chulkov, see also note 22 for the Introduction.
11. Vladimir Solov'ev, "Pervyi shag k polozhitel'noi estetike," in his
Sobranie sochinenii, 7: 75; on this issue see James West, Russian Symbolism:
A Sti:dy of Vyacheslav Ivanov and the Russian Symbolist Aesthetics (London,
1970), p. 37·
12. On Christological doctrine, see Jaroslav Pelikan, The Christian
Tradition. A History of the Development of Doctrine, vol. 1 (Chicago, 1971),
P· 233.
13. Solov'ev, Sobranie sochinenii, 6: 85.
14. Ibid., 3: 189-90.
15. Aspects of Bely's theory of zhiz.netvorchestvo were reviewed by
Maria Carlson, in chap. 2 ("The Silver Dove") of John E. Malmstad,
ed., Andrey Bely: Spirit of Symbolism (Ithaca, N.Y., 1987), pp. 60-95, and
 Notes to Pages 16-20 235

by L. K. Chursina, in "K probleme 'zhiznetvorchestva' v literaturno-

esteticheskikh iskaniiakh nachala XX veka (Bely i Prishvin)," Russkaia
literatura, no. 4 (1988): 186-99.
16. See Andrei Bely, "Problema kul'tury," Simvolizm (Moscow, 1910),
p. IO.
17. Andrei Bely, "Bal'mont," in his Lug zelenyi (Moscow, 1910), p. 230;
see also his article teurgii," in which Bely used the word to
mean divine acti d (Novyi put',
no. 9 [1903]: 102)'.·
18. Bely develops the theme of the deification of man in "Liniia,
krug, spiral' simvolizma," Trudy i dni, no. 4-5 (1912): 20; on this issue see
Robert A. Maguire and John E. Malmstad, "Petersburg," in Malmstad,
Bely, p. 100.
19. Andrei Bely, Arabeski (Moscow, 1911), p. 236.
20. Andrei Bely, "Fridrikh Nitsshe," in his Arabeski, pp. 66, 68, 65.
21. Friedrich Nietzsche, "The Birth of Tragedy" and "The Genealogy of
Morals" (New York, 1956), pp. 9-10.
22. Solov'ev, Sobranie sochinenii, 10: 29. See the interpretation of
Nietzsche's aestheticism by a present-day scholar who argues, "Nietzsche
looks at the world in general as if it were a sort of artwork; in particular,
he looks at it as if it were a literary text." Alexander Nehamas, Nietzsche:
Life as Literature (Cambridge, Mass., 1985), p. 3.
23. Bely, Arabeski, p. 217.
24. Bely, Arabeski, p. 90.
25. Viacheslav Ivanov, "O Vladimire Solov'eve," in his Borozdy i mezhi
(Moscow, 1916), pp. 111-12.
26. Bely, Lug ulenyi, p. 28.
27. Dolgopolov claims that Briusov's "Sviashchennaia zhertva" was
written "s ogliadkoi na Belogo" ("having Bely in mind") and that it
had "a magic significance" for Briusov. See L. Dolgopolov, A. Belyi i
ego roman "Peterburg" (Leningrad, 1988), pp. 20-21. A revealing com-
ment on Briusov's attitude is found in Valentinov's book: "Reading Bely,
Briusov would write on the margins: 'Every word is unclear. What is
a creative transfiguration of reality?'" Nikolai Valentinov, Dva goda s
simvolistami (Stanford, Calif., 1969), p. 132.
28. Valery Briusov, Sobranie sochinenii v semi tomakh (Moscow, 1973-
75), 6: 97, 99·
29. For this information I am indebted to Michael Wachtel.
30. On Bely's philosophy of language and its theological sources see
Steven Casserly, "Bely's Theory of Symbolism as a Formal !conics of
 Notes to Pages 21-23

~ning" and "Bely the Thinker," in Malmstad, Bely, pp. 285-335; the
further development of theological metaphors in discussions of poetic
language is traced in Irina Paperno, "O prirode poeticheskogo slova.
Bogoslovskie istochniki spora Mandelshtama s simvolizmom," Litera-
turnoe obozrenie, no. 1 (1991): 29-36; English translation in Christianity
and the Eastern Slavs, vol. 2: Robert P. Hughes and Irina Paperno, eds.,
Russian Culture in Modern Times (Berkeley, Calif., forthcoming), and
Steven Casserly, "Icon and Logos: The Role of Orthodox Theology
in Modern Language Theory and Literary Criticism," in Hughes and
Paperno, Russian Culture.
31. Ivanov, Borouly i mezhi, p. 139.
32. Victor Zhirmunsky, in Nemetskii romantizm i sovremennaia mistika
(German Romanticism and Contemporary Mysticism) (Petrograd, 1914),
points out the importance of the heritage of realism for Symbolism,
which he treats as neoromanticism. In Zhirmunsky's words..,J.b$.. _ ~~ of
positivism and. nat~ralism that separates the last romantics from the
sY~~?iiSlS ~~~~i~h~d ~Y,_~b_olislJl· Tue-:-e>c:pe.rience br0~ihl·~i;~·ut7._a~,,,,
~~!1~:.~eCf to-"lhe establishment of "su~h m_ys_~i<:~.s'!1 ..~.~­
.;ct:;p;;;;ribedcifi~ation of any earthly matter.·: (p. 190).
·33. ~~tieB;''-in-apfllication.tu.aesthe1i<;:_~i meta-
__p_Qy~i-'s~ .. and-sociaL programs, was .u:.ed..by many .. Symbolis.ts.. , See, for
example, Gippius's "Khleb zhizni" (1901). According to Pachmuss, Gip-
' pius,_-.,_.-.,,
.
shared Bely's idea that the meaning
- ' .............. ,.~.•. ,,.,~-~· ~- ...

-·
.,,.. - --·
of ai:t' , lies
'

the word into flesh. See Between Paris arul St. Petersburg: Selected Diaries
---~.'' ~.-... . ' "
in the incarnation
... "' -~·--·--"~-- -~-
.. ,,,,- ,,..,~ --·~~ .....
of

of Zinaida Hippius, ed. and trans. Temira Pachmuss (Urbana, Ill., 1975),
p. 5. According to Gippius, Merezhkovsky focused his thoughts "on the
incarnation of Christianity, on the Christianization of the earthly flesh
of the world, on bringing heaven down to the earth." Zinaida Gippius,
Dmitry Merezhkovsky (Paris, 1951), p. 99. Sologub echoes Bely's metaphor
in Fedor Sologub, "Iskusstvo nashikh dnei," Russkaia mysl', no. 12 (1915):
35-62.
34. Metaphors derived from the Christological doctrine informed
discussions of "the man and poet" issue in Pushkin studies; see Irina
Paperno, "Pushkin v zhizni cheloveka Serebrianogo veka," in Boris Gas-
parov, Robert P. Hughes, and Irina Paperno, eds., Cultural Mythologies of
Russian Modernism: From the Col.den Age to the Silver Age (Berkeley, Calif.,
1992), pp. 19-51.
35. Andrei Bely, "Teatr i sovremennaia drama" in his Arabeski, p. 21.
36. Andrei Bely, "Realiora," Vesy, no. 5. (1908): 59. Following Solo-
v'ev, the Symbolists used the word "realism" in the meaning ascribed to
 Notes to Pages 25-27 237

it in the Platonic theory of universals (as opposed to nominalism). Thus,

many polemical arguments concerning "realism" rested on a rhetorical
operation of substituting the word with its homonym. An illustration can
be found in Nikolai Berdiaev's article "Decadence and Mystical Real-
ism" ("Dekadentstvo i misticheskii realism," Ru.sskaia mys/', no. 6 [1907]: )
t 14-23). Berdiaev argues that the "mys1t~. realism" pro.p.ag_ated by _the \ .• _ ..
Symbolists is opposed both to positivistic "~1-urarrslic' rea'.fiSiJi'H"'anCl tO -, ,
modernist "decadent aesthetism." Nineteenth-century realism and clas-
sicism, he states, are "pseudo-realisms," whereas the true, or "real,"
realism is Symbolism. It is quite clear from the context that by "realism"
in the "real" sense ,Berdiaev means.J~ -IIJ,ysti~al ,doctrine of the ohjecti-:i'"'
fication of the._lA'.ord, or idea, expressed in the theological conc~p.t of the
,incarnati~~f the Word. In appHCatiori to art, ·"realism" me·a'~s art that
~~eates {not-~efteCtS) life.

Two/Marich: Symbolist Meaning of Love

1. The most undisguised, radical expression of the antiprocreative
bias of nineteenth-century utopian culture was Fedorov's project of res-
urrecting the dead, which proscribed the reproductive impulse. The
wheel of history and laws of nature were to be reversed; "progress"
would be defined by the act of giving new birth to one's fathers, who
would then live forever, instead of to children, who were destined to
die. For a discussin of the antiprocreative tendency in Russian utopian-
ism, see Olga Matich, "The Merezhkovskys' Third Testament and the
Russian Utopian Tradition," in Christianity and the Eastern Slavs, vol. 2:
Robert P. Hughes and Irina Paperno, eds., Russian Culture in Modern
Times (Berkeley, Calif., forthcoming).
2. In the words of Fedor Stepun, lvanov's life practice was a unique
combination of Slavophilism and Westernization, paganism and Chris-
tianity, philosophy and poetry, philology and music, ancient studies and
journalism. Fedor Stepun, "Viacheslav Ivanov," in his Vstrechi (Munich,
1962), p. 141.
3. Evgeny Trubetskoy described Solov'ev's "The Meaning of Love"
as an "erotic utopia"; see V. Zenkovsky, "Utopizm russkoi mysli," Novyi
zhurnal, 42 (1955): 233.
4. Vladimir Solov'ev, "Smysl liubvi," in his Sobranie sochinenii (St.
Petersburg, 1911-14), 7: 40.
5. Evgeny Trubetskoy, "Vladimir Solov'ev i ego delo," in Sbornik per-
vyi. 0 Vladimire Solov'eve (Moscow, 1911), p. 84. In the same collection,