Open Access
“Imaginary Lines”: Sources of St. John of the Cross by D.S. Merezhkovsky
Author(s) -
Maria Ignatieva
Publication year - 2021
Publication title -
studia litterarum
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.1
H-Index - 3
eISSN - 2541-8564
pISSN - 2500-4247
DOI - 10.22455/2500-4247-2021-6-4-224-245
Subject(s) - trilogy , biography , theme (computing) , literature , reflexive pronoun , order (exchange) , philosophy , art history , art , history , sociology , computer science , finance , economics , operating system
St. John of the Cross is the second part of the trilogy by D.S. Merezhkovsky dedicated to the saints of the Carmelite order. This trilogy is Merezhkovsky’s last work and is the only novelistic description of the life and views of John of the Cross (1542–1591) in the Russian language. The article analyzes the features of the sources that the writer used in preparing his biography: French editions of St. John’s works, the biography of father Bruno (1929), and the monograph by Jean Barusi (1924) as well as the ways of working with these sources. The article provides a complete list of sources that appear in the notes and footnotes to the novel and analyzes those publications that the author actually worked with. Of particular importance is the source referenced by Merezhkovsky himself — the author’s “apocryph,” which provided him with a deeper insight into the life and work of John of the Cross. The article analyzes some of these “apocryphal” ideas (in particular, the figure of the Materefather, the idea of divine matrimony, and “the abyss of contradictions”) and shows the ways of dealing with sources when constructing these apocryphs: association of ideas, hyperbolization, decontextualization, etc. The article argues that Merezhkovsky’s approach was literary in its essence: on the one hand, there is his “captivation by the words and reflections” (N.A. Berdyaev), on the other hand, there is ecstasy as both the theme and the technique of this biography. The study allows to better understand the late Merezhkovsky, and also to correct important author’s statements about the personality and the views of John of the Cross.