Search

This work is the first to introduce handwritten drafts of the letters of A.S. Suvorin (1834–1912), owner and publisher of the “Novoye vremya” newspaper, to D.S. Merezhkovsky. The letters, which remained in the newspaper’s archive, cover the period from 1901 to 1911 and can explain the reasons for Suvorin’s interest in the young writer. Merezhkovsky was one of the objects of his passion for talented people, which was recalled by contemporaries and which explains his relationship, in particular, with Anton Chekhov. Suvorin’s letters to Merezhkovsky express his views as a critic, publisher, and theater owner, exhibiting an awareness of circumstances, business sense, and broad knowledge. Appearing as a representative of the “old” literature, he showed a keen perception of the aspirations of the “new” one. Suvorin attempted to hold Merezhkovsky back from an ill-timed publication of his letter to “Novoye vremya” about L. Tolstoy (1901). He also made detailed comments about the drama “Paul I” and reacted sharply to Merezhkovsky’s quoting of his words in the article “Nationalism and Religion” (1911). Attempts to patronize Merezhkovsky and support his endeavors concluded in a conflict with him towards the end of Suvorin’s life. The publication of handwritten drafts of Suvorin’s letters fills certain gaps in the notions about his contacts with the Merezhkovskys. Suvorin’s correspondence also illuminates his personal features and helps to restore the details of the literary life in the first decade of the 20th century.

The article deals with the masculine personas in the poetry of female authors Z.N. Gippius and M.Ye. Levberg. The article examines possible reasons for adopting a masculine mask, and the desire to acquire subjectivity appears to be the most likely among them. This subjectivity within the frame of the masculine gender order of Modernism could be attained only through the appropriation of the male voice. The article discusses critical reception of such appropriation. The article discusses critical reception of such appropriation and establishes the influence of Gippius on Levberg’s poetry. In view of exetremely low fame of this author, the article provides her biography and introduces previously unpublished texts. The article examines principles of constructing the masculine lyrical persona by Levberg; which turns out to be the mask of a warrior, or, more specifically, of a knight (which is not tipycal for Z. Gippius). The author draws parallels with Levberg’s theatre plays. She concludes that, as is in Gippius’ case, the artistic work of Levberg is based on the transgression of the gender order with the aim of constructing her authorship and the respectable position in the aesthetic discourse. The author of the article demonstrates that the masculine persona of both female writers is not so much a “mask,” a temporary role, but a reflection of their life position, their urge to destroy the dominating gender order and to acquire aesthetic subjectivity.