Semiotization of the past in the Lermontov studies of B.M. Eikhenbaum in the 1930s – early 1940s

Cite item


The research is based on the concept of the historical process as a semiotic system, formulated by B.A. Uspenskii. The article aims to analyse within the framework of this concept the historical and literary works of B.M. Eikhenbaum of the 1930s – 1940s, dedicated to the meeting of Lermontov and Belinsky in the prison. Some of the papers discussed here have not been previously studied. The fact that Eikhenbaum frequently referred to that episode and mentioned it in different papers let us assume that it was significant not only from the literary and historical point of view, but it also contained unique significance for the researcher. The article extends the observations made by E.A. Toddes regarding the implicit projection of contemporary events into the historical past that helped Eikhenbaum to overcome prescriptions of the Soviet ideology and literary criticism. The evolution of the history concept in papers of Eikhenbaum was analyzed and the elements of the language, resembling the contemporary epoch, were demonstrated. As a result, the author comes to the conclusion that the historic past of the Lermontov studies, carried out by Eikheinbaum, is the double coded semiotic system simultaneously, expressing the literary and historical facts, as well as following the official discourse and containing the unofficial or individual discourse regarding the contemporaneity.Key words: Eikheinbaum, Lermontov, Belinsky, formalism, Soviet literary criticism, history of literature, history, modernity, semiotic system.

About the authors

Kristina V. Sarycheva

Vladimir Dahl State Literary Museum, Moscow

Author for correspondence.

PhD in Russian Literature, Head of Research Department in Vladimir Dahl State Literary Museum

Russian Federation, 1/17, Trubnukovsky Lane, Moscow, 121069, Russian Federation


  1. Any, C. (1990), Boгis Еikhеnbaum’s Unfinishеd Work on Tolstoy: A Dialogue with Soviet History, PМLA [Publications of the Modern Language Associations], vol. l05, no. 2 (Мarсh), p. 223–233.
  2. Any, C. (1994), Boris Еikhenbaum. Vоiсes of a Russian Formalist, Stanford Univеrsity Prеss, Stanford.
  3. Belinkov, A.V. (1965), Yurii Tynyanov, Sovetskii pisatel', Moscow, USSR.
  4. Gasparov, M.L. (1990), Scientific and Artistic Qualities in Tynyanov’s Works, Tynyanovskii sbornik. Chetvertye Tynyanovskie chteniya, Zinatne, Riga, pp. 12–20.
  5. Druzhinin, P. (2012), “One Absolutely Gnawed Bone”: The History of A. L Dymshits' defense of his doctoral dissertation, New Literary Observer, no. 115 (3), pp. 124–147.
  6. Izgoev, N. (1937), Again about Lermontov, Izvestiya, no. 65, March 16, p. 3.
  7. E. Dobrenko, G. Tikhanova (ed.) (2011), The History of Russian Literary Criticism: Soviet and Post-Soviet Epochs, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Moscow, Russia.
  8. Karpov, L. (1937), Again about Lermontov: the Letter from Leningrad, Literaturnaya gazeta, 1937, no. 19, April 10, p. 2.
  9. Curtis, J. (2004), Boris Еikhеnbaum: His Family, His Country, and His Country's Litеraturе, Translated by D. Baskin, ed. L. Murzenkov, Akademicheskii proekt, St.-Petersburg, Russia.
  10. Levchenko, Ya. (2012), Other Knowledge. Russian Formalists in Search of his Biography, NIU VSHE, Moscow, Russia.
  11. Sergievsky, I. (1941), Literary Heritage. M.Yu. Lermontov, Academy of Science of USSR. Institute of Russian Literature (Pushkin Houes Dom), Eikhenbaum (ed.), Izd-vo AN SSSR, Moscow, vol. 43/44, part I.
  12. L'vov, V.S. (2014), Literary Criticism of Russian Formalist School (Yu.N. Tynyanov, B.V. Shklovskii, B.M. Eikhenbaum), Specialization 10.01.10 – Journalism. Dissertation for the degree of Candidate of Philology, Moscow, Russia.
  13. Orlova, E.I. (2012), Boris Eikhenbaum as a Literary Critic. Three Notes on the Theme, Voprosy literatury, no. 2, pp. 30–46.
  14. Satin, N.M. (1895), From the memoirs, Pochin: Sb. O-va lyubitelei ros. slovesnosti na 1895 god, Rus. t-vo pechat. i izd. dela, Moscow, pp. 232—250.
  15. Serman, I.B. (1985), B.M. Eikhenbaum and an Issue of History, Revue des etudes slaves, vol. 51, f. 1, pp. 73–82.
  16. Toddes, E.A. (2019), Selected Works on Russian Literature and Philology, Novoe literaturnoe obozrenie, Moscow, Russia.
  17. Chudakova, M.O. (1984), Fictionalization or Awarness of the Genre, Literaturnaya gazeta, no. 50.
  18. Chudakova, M.O. (1986), Social Practice, Philological Reflection and Literature in the Scientific Biography of Eikhenbaum and Tynyanov, Tynyanovskii sbornik: Vtorye Tynyanovskie chteniya, Riga, pp. 103–131.
  19. Panchenko, O. (1984), Eikhenbaum B., Tynyanov Yu., Shklovskii V. From the Correspondence of Yu. Tynyanov and B. Eikhenbaum with V. Shklovskii, Voprosy literatury, no. 12, pp. 185–218.
  20. Eikhenbaum, B.M. (1924), M.Yu. Lermontov. Experience of historical and literary assessment, Gos. Izdatel'stvo, Moscow.
  21. Uspenskii, B.A. (1996), Selected works, vol. 1, Shkola “Yazyki russkoi kul’tury”.
  22. Eikhenbaum, B.M. (1939), Hate Because of Love [About Lermontov], Leningradskaya pravda, 15 oktyabrya, p. 3.
  23. Eikhenbaum, B.M. (1935), The Main Problems of Studying Lermontov, Literaturnaya ucheba, no. 6, pp. 21–41.
  24. Eikhenbaum, B.M. (1969), On Poetry, Sovetskii pisatel', Leningrad.
  25. Eikhenbaum, B.M. (1937), The Letter to the Editorial Office of the gazette “Izvestiya”, Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts, F. 1527, Op. 1, Ed. khr. 289, P. 5.
  26. Eikhenbaum, B.M. (1939–1941), Discussion of Belinsky and Lermontov. Manuscript of the Presentation. Typescript of the article, March 15 1939—April 1941, Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts, F. 1527, Op. 1, Ed. khr. 115, 27 pp.

Copyright (c) 2021 Sarycheva K.V.

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

This website uses cookies

You consent to our cookies if you continue to use our website.

About Cookies