Subject
Reply re VN & Russian Formalism
From
Date
Body
EDITOR's NOTE. Now that I think about it, the earliest English discussion of VN and
the Formalists that I recall offhand is in Tony Tanner's CITY OF WORDS (?), now
alas, quite hard to find.
> ------------
>
> From: Grigori Utgof <utgof@tpu.ee>
>
> See also: Omri Ronen. Zaum' za predelami avangarda // Literaturnoe
> obozrenie. 1991. N 12. S. 40-43; Omri Ronen. Puti Shklovskogo v
> "Putevoditele po Berlinu" // Zvezda. 1999. N 4. S. 164-172; Charles Lock.
> Nabokov's Centenary: A V-shaped Hereafter // Litearary Research /
> Recherche litte'raire. Vol. 17. no. 33. Spring-Summer / printemps-e'te',
> 2000. P. 96-104.
>
> The last paper on Nabokov and Russian Formalism was presented in October
> 2000 in Tartu (Mikhail Lotman. K voprosu o formalizme Nabokova).
>
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, D. Barton Johnson wrote:
>
> > EDITOR's COMMENT. See end.
> >
> > lines) ------------------
> > A while ago, in private discussions between myself, Jennifer Parsons and
> > Rodney Welch, a question arose of what precisely VN's relationship with
> > the major critical movements in the first two decades of the twentieth
> > century was. Johnson's _Worlds in Regression_ gives some idea of VN's
> > attitudes
> > towards, and debt to, symbolism, as do the Onegin translations. What,
> > though, was his attitude towards the formalism of Shklovsky, Eichenbaum,
> > et al.? Roman Jakobson, who was responsible for that famous statement
> > about elephants and professors of zoology, was also one of the main
> > formalists, and the guide of the man who wrote what seems to be the
> > standard text on the subject, Victor Erlich.
> >
> > Cheers!
> > yours
> > Kiran
> >
> > http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~kiran
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > EDIOR's COMMENT. Russian scholars are now deving considerable attention
> > to VN's ties to Russian Symbolism. The most extensive work so far is by Olga
> > Skonechnaya. One of her articles is in a recent issue of NABOKV STUDIES.
> > VN's debt to the Russian Formalists has been noted. Maxim Shrayer has
> > written, in particular about VN and Shklovsky seeing "Guidebook to Berlin"
> > as being a dialogue between them.
> >
the Formalists that I recall offhand is in Tony Tanner's CITY OF WORDS (?), now
alas, quite hard to find.
> ------------
>
> From: Grigori Utgof <utgof@tpu.ee>
>
> See also: Omri Ronen. Zaum' za predelami avangarda // Literaturnoe
> obozrenie. 1991. N 12. S. 40-43; Omri Ronen. Puti Shklovskogo v
> "Putevoditele po Berlinu" // Zvezda. 1999. N 4. S. 164-172; Charles Lock.
> Nabokov's Centenary: A V-shaped Hereafter // Litearary Research /
> Recherche litte'raire. Vol. 17. no. 33. Spring-Summer / printemps-e'te',
> 2000. P. 96-104.
>
> The last paper on Nabokov and Russian Formalism was presented in October
> 2000 in Tartu (Mikhail Lotman. K voprosu o formalizme Nabokova).
>
> On Sun, 7 Jan 2001, D. Barton Johnson wrote:
>
> > EDITOR's COMMENT. See end.
> >
> > lines) ------------------
> > A while ago, in private discussions between myself, Jennifer Parsons and
> > Rodney Welch, a question arose of what precisely VN's relationship with
> > the major critical movements in the first two decades of the twentieth
> > century was. Johnson's _Worlds in Regression_ gives some idea of VN's
> > attitudes
> > towards, and debt to, symbolism, as do the Onegin translations. What,
> > though, was his attitude towards the formalism of Shklovsky, Eichenbaum,
> > et al.? Roman Jakobson, who was responsible for that famous statement
> > about elephants and professors of zoology, was also one of the main
> > formalists, and the guide of the man who wrote what seems to be the
> > standard text on the subject, Victor Erlich.
> >
> > Cheers!
> > yours
> > Kiran
> >
> > http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~kiran
> > ------------------------------------------------------
> > EDIOR's COMMENT. Russian scholars are now deving considerable attention
> > to VN's ties to Russian Symbolism. The most extensive work so far is by Olga
> > Skonechnaya. One of her articles is in a recent issue of NABOKV STUDIES.
> > VN's debt to the Russian Formalists has been noted. Maxim Shrayer has
> > written, in particular about VN and Shklovsky seeing "Guidebook to Berlin"
> > as being a dialogue between them.
> >