What was he punished for? Perspective assignment for the test lesson.

The most popular novel in Russia “The Master and Margarita” by Mikhail Bulgakov is presented in the Photographic Museum “Metenkov House” in the format of a photo Mystery, a photographic fantasy, as if the heroes of the novel were just here or could be... Even for those who do not know the original source, it will be It’s an interesting experience to come into contact with a great novel through photographic images of a bygone time, which left a trail of, on the one hand, “sweet old times,” and on the other, the madness of everyday life, which turned into fear in the face of an “evil genius.”

Moscow in the 1930s is represented at the exhibition by the works of outstanding photographers of that time, such as Boris IGNATOVICH, Alexander GRINBERG, Arkady SHAIKHET, Emmanuel EVZERIKHIN, Mark MARKOV-GRINBERG and Mikhail PRECHNER from the collection of the Union of Photographic Artists of Russia. Each of them occupies a worthy place in the history of Russian culture.

Bulgakov’s Moscow is a special city, well-fed, vicious, drowning in pleasures and “lite entertainment.” His symbolic spaces are a restaurant and a variety theater, his heroes are the Soviet bureaucracy, party writers, conformists and sybarites. Bulgakov does not spare any color in describing the culinary delights available in Archibald Archibaldovich’s restaurant; he is merciless towards people blinded by consumer rage at a “session of black magic”. The price of well-being is an atmosphere of envy, suspicion, denunciations and fear settled in the souls, which breaks out upon contact with the “organs”.

It would be wrong to look for illustrations for a novel in photographs or try to guess the characters. It is more important to understand how the era expresses itself through literature and photography. The photographs, as in the novel, show the same features of Moscow life: the charm of a bygone era, prosperity in everyday life, conviviality. Here are photographs with blackened out faces, which is rarely shown in museum spaces, but it is they, encrypted by time or a novelist, that act as a kind of code for the state of society, revealing the hypocrisy of ideology and the fear hovering over the country.

The action of the novel “The Master and Margarita” takes place not only in the real, but also in the fantasy world created by the writer’s imagination in the “fifth dimension”. This layer of the novel is represented at the exhibition by the works of the Sverdlovsk photographer of the 1970s Evgeny Malakhin, better known under the pseudonym OLD MAN BUKASHKIN. Behind last years the artist has become a cult figure on the Yekaterinburg art scene, his works are shown in capitals and abroad, a museum has been created at the university, and researchers are studying various aspects of his work. But before becoming the naive artist Old Man BuKashkin, Evgeny Malakhin worked with photography, and in unique technology: he literally boiled the filmed negatives, getting interesting effects from the melted emulsion.

The photographs of Evgeny Malakhin are in many ways close to the world of the novel “The Master and Margarita”. They are united by phantasmagoria, acute grotesquery, touching the themes of life and death. The photographer, like Mikhail Bulgakov, was interested and intrigued by the images of Christ and the devil. But despite the fact that most of Malakhin’s heroes are surreal, THE MAIN IDEA OF THE EXHIBITION IS THE ALL-CONQUERING POWER OF LOVE. “Who told you that there is no real, true, eternal love? “Follow me, my reader, and only me, and I will show you such love!” - with these words Bulgakov prefaced the story of the Master and Margarita; love and creativity were for him the main and only justification for life.

Photos of Old Man BuKashkin (E. Malakhin) - from the private collection of E. Polents.
Avatar photo - Alexander Grinberg/PhotoUnion, 1930s

One of the leading themes of Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita” is the theme of Good and Evil, as well as the closely related theme of justice. Both of these problems are developed in parallel in the work - in the so-called “Yershelaim chapters” dedicated to Yeshua Ha-Nozri and Pontius Pilate, as well as in the Moscow chapters describing the life of Moscow in the 30s of the 20th century.
A kind of “connecting link” between these chapters, as well as between the earthly and heavenly worlds, between the lower and the higher in the novel are Woland (that is, Satan himself) and his retinue. It is the Devil, as well as Koroviev, Azazello and Behemoth, who suddenly appear in Soviet Moscow. What is the purpose of their visit?
To explain this, Bulgakov gives in his work a portrait of contemporary Moscow. In the novel, this city appears as “hell on earth” - an insane place where all kinds of human vices are concentrated. It is in Moscow that bureaucracy flourishes on a colossal scale - let us remember the episode in the suit of Prokhor Petrovich, who himself very successfully signs papers and creates resolutions. It is in this city that all spheres of life are affected by bribery (the story of the chairman of the housing association Nikanor Ivanovich Bosy), opportunism (director of Variety Styopa Likhodeev) and debauchery (Semliarov) flourish here.
In addition, Moscow is immersed in total fear, because here people “mystically” disappear from their apartments, and the city’s residents are divided into two categories: those who write denunciations (the image of Aloysius Mogarych), and those who suffer from them (the Master) .
In general, Moscow in the 1930s, according to Bulgakov, was immersed in an atmosphere of total immorality in the broadest sense of the word. Who else should appear here if not Satan himself?
However, Woland and his retinue perform a function unusual for them: they do not tempt, but punish those who have long succumbed to temptation.
Let us remember that the epigraph to the first part of the novel, which “introduces” Satan and his servants to us, is the lines from Goethe’s poem “Faust”: “I am part of that force that always wants evil and always does good.” Following this “motto”, “dark” heroes restore justice - they perform a function that is traditionally attributed to the forces of Good. According to Bulgakov, Good and Evil, the Devil and God are two sides of the same coin, designed to perform a single function - to restore justice, to control the balance of light and evil in this world: “Everything will be right, the world is built on this.”
And if some kind of violation occurs, then the one who is stronger comes into play. The writer is of the opinion that in in this case Only Satan can restore order in Moscow.
Therefore, Woland, with the help of his servants, punishes the bribe-taker Nikonor Ivanovich Bosogo, the liar Varenukha, the slacker and libertine Styopa Likhodeev. The manager of the branch, the bartender at Variety, the mediocre poet Bezdomny, and Baron Meigel and others “get theirs.”
But Satan not only punishes “evildoers of all stripes.” He also, in accordance with his “creed,” “brings good.” After all, it is none other than Woland who saves the Master and unites him with Margarita. In addition, it is he who restores the text of the novel about Pontius Pilate (“manuscripts do not burn”). The Devil gives the Master the peace he needs so much, depriving him of the Light that he did not deserve: “There, there. The house and the old servant are already waiting for you there, the candles are already burning, and soon they will go out, because you will immediately meet the dawn.”
Thus, in my opinion, the answer to the question “What do Woland and his companions bring to the world: good or evil?” unambiguous As Bulgakov shows us, Satan returned to this world the justice he needed so much - he gave everyone what they deserved. This means, as it seems to me, that Woland and his retinue, despite their “original” purpose, bring good to the world, actively helping the forces of light.

“The novel “The Master and Margarita” fits perfectly into the list of brilliant satirical works, exposing bureaucracy, philistinism, ... "

The role of fiction in M. A. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and

Margarita"

The novel "The Master and Margarita" fits perfectly into the series

brilliant satirical works exposing

bureaucracy, philistinism, poor level of culture of citizens of the “first

in the world of a socialist state." In this series are stories

M.M. Zoshchenko, and Mayakovsky’s plays “The Bedbug” and “Bath”, and the immortal

dilogy by I. Ilf and E. Petrov about life and amazing adventures

the great schemer Ostap Bender. The everyday chapters of Bulgakov's novel stand somewhere next to the listed works.

The high existential tone of the novel is set by the chapters about Yeshua and Pontius Pilate, where there is a debate about the eternal: life and death, loyalty and betrayal, honor and cowardice. Such a hero as a master also greatly contributes to the height of the tone set by the author. The master is an intellectual, a person not only highly educated, but, most importantly, internally absolutely free. Years and decades of Soviet propaganda passed him by without affecting the high structure of his soul, without forgetting him to think independently and choose his path in life.

The writer more than once emphasized in his letters and articles that he considers the persistent portrayal of the intelligentsia as the best layer of our country to be characteristic of his work. Therefore, the master is Bulgakov’s favorite hero.

It was not easy for the satirist to live in the Soviet Union, even if his favorite heroes were intellectuals who never wanted to adapt to the proletariat. It would seem impossible for such a satirist to survive in the thirties of the last century, much less publish his works. And in these tragic years, fiction comes to Bulgakov’s aid, first scientific, as in “ Heart of a Dog" or " Fatal eggs", and then just some kind of devilish thing.

The events that take place in the novel “The Master and Margarita” are often so fantastic that we refuse to believe in them. But looking closely, we begin to understand that the tricks of Koroviev and Behemoth are not at all meaningless, they are only a continuation, bringing to the grotesque the absurdities of the surrounding life.

Many miracles and phenomena reveal the artist’s gaze in the atmosphere of repression of the thirties. An example of this is “bad apartment” No. 50, from which residents disappear one after another. So the fantastic transfer of Styopa Likhodeev to Yalta is not so fantastic, it is a punishment for his many unsightly actions. This is what the all-knowing Koroviev and Behemoth accuse the director of the Variety Show of: “They, they! – the long checkered one sang in a goat’s voice, plural Speaking of Styopa, in general they are in Lately They're terribly piggy. They get drunk, have relationships with women, using their position, don’t do a damn thing, and they can’t do anything, because they don’t understand anything about what they are entrusted with. The bosses are being bullied! – They’re driving a government-issued car in vain! - the cat also lied, chewing a mushroom.”1 Satan’s calling has always been to seduce people from the true path; he must sow evil and destruction around himself. However, for some reason we do not dislike Bulgakov’s evil spirits.

As for Woland, it is simply impossible not to respect this calm, dignified sage. Especially after reading the chapter “ Black magic and its exposure." A whole cascade of fantastic tricks performed by Koroviev and Behemoth was needed only for Woland to understand whether Muscovites had changed “internally,” that is, whether a new type of personality had really been created in the world’s first socialist state.

After the first tricks, Woland draws his conclusions and disappears. And these conclusions are very disappointing: “Well,” he responded thoughtfully, “they are people like people. They love money, but this has always been the case... Humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether leather, paper, bronze or gold. Well, they are frivolous, well... and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts... ordinary people... in general, they resemble the old ones... housing problem I just ruined them..."2. In the hearts of frivolous and greedy people, mercy only “knocks,” and even then “sometimes.”

Further performance in Variety only confirms these sorrowful reflections of Woland. The trick with a Parisian fashion store that appeared out of nowhere shows us how greedy Muscovites are for material goods, how much they love what they get for free. When many spectators had already become fabulously transformed, having exchanged their dresses for evening Parisian dresses, Fagot announced that the store was closing in a minute. It was then that the greed of the spectators manifested itself in its entirety: “The women quickly, without any fitting, grabbed the shoes. One, like a storm, burst behind the curtain, threw off her suit there and took possession of the first thing that turned up, a silk robe, in huge bouquets, and, in addition, managed to pick up two cases of perfume.”3 Blinded by greed, the lady did not even think that exchanging the suit for robe - not a very profitable deal.

The fantastic events at Variety, namely the rain of money that fell on the audience, had many consequences.

Chervonets, as we know, turned into mineral water labels, and bartender Andrei Fokich Sokov went to a foreign artist to look for the truth. He heard the truth from Woland, who was very outraged by the outrages happening in the buffet: “I, most respectable, passed by your counter yesterday and still cannot forget either the sturgeon or the feta cheese. My precious one! There is no cheese Green colour, someone deceived you. She should be white. Yes, and what about tea? After all, this is slop! I saw with my own eyes how some unkempt girl poured raw water from a bucket into your huge samovar, while the tea continued to be poured. No, my dear, that’s impossible!”4 Endowed with the extraordinary ability to know the past and future, Woland’s servants predict imminent death bartender This means that the huge money accumulated by Andrei Fokich (two hundred and forty thousand rubles and two hundred gold tens) will not be useful to him. Why did this man deceive, cheat, and cheat for decades?

What did he spend his life on? The writer does not ask these questions, but the reader is already thinking. Bulgakov's unusual, fantastic heroes made him think about the ordinary, familiar phenomena of life.

In the chapter “Flight,” fiction helps the writer show what he cannot say directly. And we see this through the eyes of Margarita.

Azazello's magic cream endowed her not only with wonderful beauty, but also with an unusual quality: she became invisible. The broom carried Margarita the Witch through the air, and together with the heroine we saw the luxurious bulk of the House of the Playwright and Writer. In this house lived the same critic Latunsky, whom Margarita considered the main culprit of all the master’s misfortunes. Together with Latunsky in luxury apartments More than eighty members of MASSOLIT lived there, and, most likely, most of them, like Latunsky, paid for honor and material benefits with betrayal or slander. The critic's huge apartment is well furnished, Bulgakov draws our attention to the piano, the mirrored wardrobe, and the luxuriously upholstered double bed. The residents of the Dramlit House have housekeepers, a doorman in a cap with gold braid is on duty at the entrance, the façade of their house is lined with black marble. I can’t help but remember the Master’s apartment, which he was so proud of: “A completely separate apartment, and also a front one, and in it there is a sink with water, ... small windows just above the sidewalk.” In this wretched apartment, the master wrote his novel about the eternal: about good and evil, about honor and betrayal, about the power and right of the intelligentsia to correct and teach those in power. And Latunsky, in his spacious office, was composing a vile slander against a novel by a master whom he, most likely, had not read.

Woland, like the heroes of fairy tales, possesses magical things.

The amazing globe that so amazed Margarita shows how cruel and merciless our world is, full of grief and suffering. “Margarita leaned towards the globe and saw that the square of the earth had expanded, was painted in many colors and turned, as it were, into a relief map.

And then she saw the ribbon of the river and some village near it.

The house, which was the size of a pea, grew and became like a matchbox. Suddenly and silently, the roof of this house flew up along with a cloud of black smoke, and the walls collapsed, so that nothing remained of the two-story box except a heap from which black smoke was pouring out. Bringing her eye even closer, Margarita saw a small female figure lying on the ground, and next to her, in a pool of blood, a small child with his arms scattered.”5 The city they hit unusual heroes Bulgakov, filled with injustice, envy, malice.

People acquired all these vices themselves, without the help of Satan. On the contrary, it seems that he himself is being struck human vices and he does not miss the opportunity to somehow appeal to human conscience. Having made sure that Muscovites are not at all superior in morally those people whom he has observed for thousands of years, Woland is no longer interested in either Moscow or its inhabitants. But the inseparable Koroviev and Behemoth spend the last day of their stay in the capital literally burning with fire everything low and vile that they encounter.

The first to be cleansed by fire is “bad apartment” No. 50, building 302 bis on Sadovaya Street. Even the extravagant behavior of the cat Behemoth, drinking kerosene, jumping on chandeliers and cornices, cannot distract us from harsh reality: a habitually planned and merciless operation carried out by the NKVD.

Bulgakov’s evil spirits are not characterized by cruelty, so the shooting that broke out in the apartment did not bring any harm to anyone.

The fire that started next also did not cause serious harm to the attackers. The whole revenge of the evil spirits consisted in the fact that in apartment No. 50 the corpse of the NKVD informant Baron Meigel incredibly appeared, who managed to sneak into Satan’s ball and was killed there.

The next place to be purified by fire is the foreign exchange store. In the chapter “The Last Adventures of Koroviev and Behemoth” there is very little fantastic, except Behemoth’s extraordinary ability to eat chocolate bars along with foil and swallow herring whole. This chapter is satirical; the main means of artistic representation here is irony, which especially hits the “foreigner” in a lilac coat and red kid gloves. This “foreigner” is most likely a high-ranking party functionary or a major government official. In “the world’s first state of workers and peasants,” only such people could afford to buy salmon in a foreign exchange store.

When customers, having listened to Fagot’s “politically harmful” speech, turn their anger away from this citizen, a miracle occurs:

“Lilac, having fallen into the tub, in pure Russian, without signs of any accent, cried out:

They are killing! Police!

Bandits are killing me! - obviously, as a result of the shock, having suddenly mastered a language unknown to him until then.”6 This store is for the elite, where they didn’t even want to let the poorly dressed Behemoth and Koroviev, they set it on fire, but nothing is said about the victims during the fire, most likely they did not have.

Evil spirits do not seek to cruelly punish or destroy people.

One cannot help but think that in this way it is very different from the government of that time, whose victims were hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people.

Dom

Griboyedov,” about which Koroviev speaks with poisonous irony:

“It’s nice to think that under this roof a whole abyss of talents is hiding and ripening.”7 In fact, this house gathered under its roof the untalented and envious people, who firmly believed that they were writers. And this confidence was given to them by a small book - a MASSOLIT membership card. Koroviev and Behemoth call themselves the names of famous writers of the 19th century “Panaev” and “Skabichevsky”, but this does not make any impression on the bored citizen, who is allowed into the restaurant only with a writer’s certificate: she does not know Russian literature of the 19th century. But she firmly understood that someone who has a certificate is a writer, and someone who does not have a certificate cannot be a writer.

The Griboyedov House, this stronghold of literary mediocrity, mysteriously catches fire as soon as they try to arrest the unusual visitors. By burning the manuscripts that are in the editorial office, the evil spirits restore justice: the opuses of the poet Ryukhin, the short story writer Poprikhin, the critic Ababkov, and the fiction writer Beskudnikov, of course, have nothing in common with genuine literature. A truly talented work, a novel by a master, is miraculously resurrected by evil spirits after being burned.

It is at this moment that Woland utters a surprisingly wise and precise phrase in its paradox: “Manuscripts do not burn.”

We see that, once in Moscow, Bulgakov’s fantastic heroes are amazed by the unrest reigning around them. They often cannot understand how deeply lies, sycophancy, and envy have penetrated the thoughts and feelings of some people. The greed of “Annushka’s plague”

strikes even the devil Azazello, so he tries to reason with this woman, who has already made a plan for selling a golden horseshoe with diamonds that does not belong to her: “You, old witch, if you ever pick up someone else’s thing, hand it over to the police, and don’t hide it in your bosom!”8 Of course, the devil’s appeal to the police here looks comical, but the writer makes us think about something very serious, about what the moral level really is Soviet people?

The evil spirit not only punishes evil, but also rescues the master from trouble, who had nowhere to wait for help. Harassed by the authorities, seriously ill, he found himself literally thrown out of life.

Only at the Stravinsky clinic does the master meet humane treatment. But for a professor of psychiatry, the master is only a seriously ill patient, and the clinic is still a madhouse, the windows of which are closed with bars, and the patients are deprived of the most important thing for a person - freedom. The master receives genuine attention and sympathy when he finds himself in the company of Woland and his servants, where he was miraculously transferred from the clinic. In this scene, Woland and his retinue look surprisingly sensitive, tactful, and friendly.

Satan and his servants are forced to stand up for the master, driven to extreme despair.

And what else can they do if in the society in which they find themselves, everything is turned upside down:

talent becomes the cause of misfortune and death of a person, and baseness, sycophancy, meanness are elevated to the rank of dignity and bring their owner success and honor. In a society where there is no one to protect the good, decent people from scoundrels and traitors, in a society in which there is no one to defend justice, this function is assumed by evil spirits. And, ultimately, no matter how paradoxical it may sound, Woland and his retinue turn out to be the only force in the novel that can really expose and punish evil.

The characters of fantasy heroes were vivid in Bulgakov. human traits. And we must admit that from the very beginning of the novel these characters do not evoke any negative feelings in us. Reading The Master and Margarita, we become more and more sympathetic to evil spirits. In the actions of Woland and Koroviev.

Behemoth, Azazello conveys something noble and knightly. They have to make an effort to understand small and empty people, they never punish the innocent, on the contrary, all their victims committed many unseemly acts, sometimes even crimes, and we perceive their punishment with a sense of satisfaction.

The faith in the triumph of justice of Bulgakov, who is terminally ill and deprived of the opportunity to communicate with the reader, is amazing. But without seeing real life no force capable of resisting as a legal machine Stalin's repressions, and the baseness and vulgarity of many people, the writer sends the devil to administer fair judgment. When you finish reading the novel, you realize that most of the scenes related to the adventures of fantasy heroes are funny only at first glance. In fact, it is hopelessly sad when, except for evil spirits, there is no one to stand up for justice and goodness.

Thus, fiction for Bulgakov is not an end in itself, but a means of satirical depiction of reality, a means of exposing the “countless monstrosities” of everyday life, the inhuman manifestations of the totalitarian regime reigning in the country. Unable to express his thoughts directly, the writer turns to fiction, which, on the one hand, seems to distance the content of the novel from reality, and, on the other hand, helps to see behind the incredible events the illogicality and cruel senselessness of much of what is happening in the country these years. Fiction allows Bulgakov's satire to penetrate into completely forbidden areas for literature; it, like a magnifying glass aimed at the shortcomings of society and human vices, makes them visible to everyone, exposes them in the eyes of readers.

1 M. Bulgakov “The Master and Margarita”, “ Theatrical novel" Voronezh, 1987. P.81

Uses the technique of satire. The author shows crooks and scoundrels of all stripes. After the revolution Soviet society found itself in spiritual and cultural self-isolation. According to the leaders of the state, high ideas were supposed to quickly re-educate people, make them honest, truthful builders of a “new society.” Facilities mass media extolled the labor feats of the Soviet people, their devotion to the party and people. But the ideal “Soviet man” existed only on paper, in reports and slogans. In reality, people lived in constant fear and intolerance of the authorities towards the opinions of others. Entire strata were discarded to praise Bolshevism world history, the rich Russian language was replaced by empty political chatter.
Woland arrives in Moscow to check whether people have really changed as much as they write about in the newspapers. The adventures of Woland and his retinue in Moscow allowed the writer to show imperfection human society, separate truth from lies. Woland begins by denying the existence of God and the devil in the Soviet state. Militant atheists Berlioz and Ivan Bezdomny look like pathetic ignoramuses in a conversation with Woland, and their disbelief is simply ridiculous. Such well-known social and human vices as greed and bribery have not disappeared. The chairman of the house committee, Nikanor Ivanovich Bosoy, takes bribes, the bartender of the variety show and the director of the restaurant of the Griboyedov House, Archibald Archibaldovich, make money by stealing at work. Bulgakov ridicules the opportunism and envy that reign among writers, the moral uncleanliness of Likhodeev and Sempleyarov. The description of an “empty place” instead of the leader Prokhor Petrovich is reminiscent of the city governor Organchik from “The History of a City” by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin.
Bulgakov's satire permeates the Moscow episodes of the novel, but the author's version is cheerful, not malicious. Bulgakov seems to be suggesting how one can overcome vice. The author is merciless only towards scoundrels, cowards, traitors, informers, such as literary critics, Aloysius Mogarych, Baron Meigel.
An unknown Annushka suddenly appears before the reader, “a dry woman with a can and a bag in her hands.” This episodic figure, inscribed in mysterious events, taking place in apartment No. 50 on Sadovaya Street, grows into an expressive image. Any character created by Bulgakov acquires a powerful generalizing effect. Annushka watches everyone, knows everything about everyone. Always ready to steal and blatantly lie, she is disgusting in her pathological greed. Her eyes flash with “absolute wolf fire” when on the stairs she finds Woland’s horseshoe, strewn with precious stones. Options for further actions flash through her head: “To my nephew? Or saw it into pieces... You can pick out pebbles... And one pebble at a time: one for Petrovka, the other for Smolensky...” Caught red-handed, she feigns innocence itself: “So this is your horseshoe? And I look, it’s lying in a napkin... I tidied it up on purpose so that no one would pick it up, otherwise you’d remember their name!”
This “simple” Soviet woman surprises investigators by declaring that she is well versed in diamonds and chervonets. Creating a type out of a character, the writer emphasized: there are a legion of such Annushkas in the country.
Bulgakov the satirist knows how to see evil and show its manifestation in the most various forms, arouse anger and disgust towards him. Bulgakov’s satire, which, according to K. Simonov, has the form of “fierce grotesque”, is a way of denying the ugly in life, as well as a form of affirming universal human values. Laughter in Bulgakov's novel has a cleansing character.

Home > Document

34. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”: art world and figurative system.

At the center of the work, in the comparison of its different layers, in their fantastic combination, is the tragedy of an individual dependent on a tyrant, and the eternal struggle between good and evil, and the eternal problem of guilt, responsibility and retribution. The tragic story of a Master, persecuted by circumstances that have a concrete embodiment in real people(Berlioz and others), is comparable to the tragedy and transformation of Yeshua, condemned to torment by the tyrant Pontius Pilate. This comparison reveals the author’s point of view on the fate of the artist, dependent on a dark, unreasonable force that sees Good as a threat to its existence. The master, the champion of Good, while remaining faithful to his calling, also accomplishes a feat, a feat of creativity. The novel about the feat of the preacher Yeshua Ha-Nozri, written by the Master, has its own problems. This is, first of all, the question that Pontius Pilate asks Yeshua: “What is truth?” By comparing the positions of these heroes, the problem of man and power is posed and resolved. What is the inner freedom of man and his lack of freedom, Good and Evil, their eternal confrontation and struggle? And the consequences of these eternal questions of existence are the same eternal questions like loyalty and betrayal, mercy and forgiveness. They are projected onto the fate of the Master, onto the relationship with the mysterious force that is trying to break him, onto the role of Woland in the Moscow episodes. Bringing together the events of two thousand years ago and episodes of Moscow life, Bulgakov argues that the main problems of human existence remain the same. These are eternal problems. Each new generation tries to resolve them in its own way, forgetting about the search for truth and responsibility. The observant Woland also notices this. The problem of personality and power is resolved by the Master and Bulgakov in the scene of the confrontation between Yeshua and Pontius Pilate. The almighty procurator of Judea is himself dependent on Rome. He is ready to help the wandering preacher and save him. but he is afraid and he approves the death sentence. He is afraid of denunciation. He is afraid of losing his power and being guilty in the eyes of the Roman Caesar, from whom there can be no mercy. And he goes against his conscience, which told him that Yeshua is innocent and needs to be saved. Later, interrogating Levi Matthew, the procurator wants to know about Yeshua’s last words and hears what he said about cowardice as the most terrible and shameful vice. Pontius Pilate committed a betrayal out of cowardice, the price for which was suffering for two thousand years, when his unforgiven soul knew no peace. At the end of the novel, we learn that Pontius Pilate was forgiven by Yeshua himself, who said that there was no execution. As the ruler of Judea, Pontius Pilate seems to be free. But he does not have internal freedom, that is, the determination to act as his conscience and sense of justice dictate, he is not free internally. Life demands a high price for inner freedom, for a clear conscience. This is the price paid for inner freedom by Yeshua, and in the Moscow situation of the 20th century, by the Master, who creates his work as his conscience and talent dictate. And each of them makes a choice between Good and Evil: what to serve, which side to take. The choice is also expensive. Levi Matthew, the tax collector, having believed in the truth preached by Yeshua, throws money on the road and rushes after the preacher. Then he is ready, at the cost of his life, to save the crucified man from torment. Margarita performs the same feat of loyalty, trying and hoping to find and free the Master. These parallels in Bulgakov's novel are intended to convince the reader of the eternity and topicality of the problems of Good and Evil, loyalty and betrayal, man and power. Associated with them are issues of responsibility and retribution for betrayal committed consciously, for selfish reasons. The massacre of Judas is carried out by the head of the secret service, Afranius, directed by the same Pilate. And if the procurator is still forgiven by Ha-Nozri, even after thousands of years, Judas is not forgiven. The theme of mercy and forgiveness is heard in many episodes of the novel. Margarita, promising to stand up for Frida, begs Woland to forgive her. And she is forgiven, because mercy is highest. And in it, mercy and forgiveness, lies the truth. The Master, who burned his novel, is also forgiven, although he was not given light, but only the peace that his suffering heart so needed. The projection of this issue is presented in the Moscow episodes. Story line Woland and his retinue was constructed by the author not only as opposing the line of Yeshua. Woland acts as a judge in the corrupt world of Moscow critics and writers, helpfully ready to hunt down anyone pointed at from above. Woland's victims are those who deserve punishment. These are not only literary dealers. These are rogue administrators, and the entire bureaucratic system, which has become the dominant force, hiding behind demagoguery about the dictatorship of the proletariat. The author treats Woland's henchmen and partly himself with a condescending and ironic attitude, showing that he and his retinue are not so terrible compared to what those in power do or those encouraged by power. Woland understands the artist and even tries to protect him. But what is the meaning of the interference of evil spirits in human affairs? For the sake of justice and punishment of the guilty? The fact is that there is no one to restore moral standards of life: no one cares about this, in reality there is no force that would fight evil. What is happening in Moscow during the action of the novel can rightly be called hell. Therefore, it is natural for Woland and his retinue to appear in it. The unnaturalness of Moscow morals is not only that the capital is dominated by bureaucrats, swindlers and crooks, mediocrity is supported in the writing community, there is a whole corporation literary critics, who defame talented books and their creators. And young, inexperienced, sometimes ignorant people are commissioned (!) to write works on a certain topic, just as Berlioz commissioned an atheistic poem for Ivan Bezdomny. Then the poet himself, like his other brothers in the workshop, admit that they wrote completely mediocre things. But Ivan Bezdomny was lucky: he met and became friends with the Master, although in the “house of sorrow” - in a psychiatric hospital, from which the Master could no longer leave. Now, using new material - the Moscow life of the Master - the problem of man and power, artist and power arises. And the situation is not much different from what it was two thousand years ago. The bosses of the writers were afraid of the Master's novel, because they recognized themselves in Pontius Pilate, understood the artist's intention and saw danger in it. That is why the Master’s fate is so sad. And again, now based on the material of the Moscow episodes, the problem of freedom and lack of freedom of the artist, the artist and the authorities, loyalty and betrayal, responsibility and retribution is solved.

35. Historical and social space in M. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”.

1) Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov (1891 - 1940)
2) Complex relations with modernity and Stalin. The leader was aware of B.'s genius, so he saved his life, but did not give him freedom.
3) Only 1 play was allowed to be staged (by Stalin personally) - “Days of the Turbins”
4) District "M. and M." written from 1929 to 1940, but published in 1966-67. The time of writing the novel historically coincides with the most severe terror (the apogee - 1937), when the state dictated not only actions, but also thoughts. Bulgavok auto-censored the text. Everything is encrypted, harsh attacks are destroyed.
5) The main idea of the district is the eternal opposition of moral and creative asceticism to the forces of evil, embodied in two time plans; in grotesquely depicted modern times (using mythological imagery) and gospel scenes.
6) 2 time layers: Jerusalem (Yershalaim) - the beginning of our era and Moscow of the 30s.
7) Almost every hero of the novel (Mosk.plast) has its own prototype. The master is sometimes compared to Gorky, and Woland to Stalin. It is explained as follows: The Master, like Gorky, ultimately entered the service of the satanic system of Woland-Stalin.
8) There are many allusions to representatives of the literary community. (The critic Latunsky, hated by Margarita, is O. Litovsky, chairman of the Main Repertoire Committee - theatrical censorship.) The literary environment is familiar to the author, he himself suffered and was not published. MASSOLIT is not exactly deciphered anywhere, it is only indicated that this is one of literary associations. This is a parody of RAPP, MAPP, etc. The following options are also offered - mass Soviet literature. And even LIT is like a stone, but all together - “mass, stone-like". (Conclusions about B.'s attitude towards literature, writers, associations and the reader)
9) The village of Peredelkino, donated to writers by Stalin in 1935 for the construction of writers' dachas, is designated under the name. Perelygino.
10) RAPP (somewhere they write that MAPP) was located in Herzen’s house. (Tverskoy Boulevard, if anyone is interested). Bulgakov replaced Herzen with Griboyedov, where he has a restaurant.
11) Bureaucratic system: what are the demands of Likhodeev from Yalta to confirm his identity?
12) Monetary transactions: currency speculation (the chairman of the housing association Bosoy “hides” currency in the ventilation - currency transactions are prohibited in the USSR), greed: white chervonets fall to the public in Variety (by the way, they had this color until 1937, when the monetary reform - help in setting the date).
13) Denunciation technique in the USSR. Especially at this time. Woland's retinue pawns Barefoot in this way, pretending to be a tenant of another apartment.
14) A sign of a totalitarian regime: undesirables and dissidents were sent to psychiatric hospitals, which were essentially prisons. In Bulgakov's works, the following people end up there: the master, Ivan the homeless, Barefoot (professor Stravinsky's clinic).
15) Satan’s Ball was written based on impressions of a reception at the American ambassador, where Bulgakov was once invited along with the political, military and literary elite.
16) Almost all of Moscow has been studied, all (or almost all) places in the novel are correlated with real ones. Only there was no Tram on the Patriarch's.
17) The newspaper campaign against the Master is the persecution of Bulgakov after the publication of his plays "Days of the Turbins", "Running", "Zoyka's Apartment" and the novel " White Guard". "Let's hit Bulgakovism!" was the title of an article in the newspaper "Working Moscow". "Hit the Pilatchina" critic Lavrovich suggests after the Master published excerpts from the novel about Pontius Pilate. (!!! He is not the only writer who was persecuted! Develop the topic) Gorky died in Gorki near Moscow, the Master - near Moscow in the Stravinsky clinic (point 17 can be skipped further only if you are very interested))) In the novel, darkness came after the death of the Master (before he found peace, the eclipse was on June 19). 1936 - the day after Gorky's death Azazello gave the Master the Falernian tsekuba wine. Almost the same name was given to one of Gorky's brainchildren - TSEKUBU (Central Commission for the Improvement of the Life of Scientists). The Master looks like Gogol - shaved, dark-haired, with sharp nose and anxious eyes. For the sake of this similarity, the Master appears for the first time in the novel without a beard. The Master’s burning of his novel is an allusion to Gogol’s burning of the second volume." Dead souls".
18) The NKVD line is exaggerated in the film adaptation, in the novel - very subtly: in a conversation with Woland, Bezdomny suggests sending Kant to Solovki.
19) Bulgakov was a reporter, knew the language of the street: in courtyard slang, the word “Annushka” meant “death,” and “to take on Annushka” meant “to intimidate with the threat of death.”
20) Muscovites: Woland’s conclusion - people are like people, they love money, they are frivolous, only the housing issue has spoiled them.
21) Idiocy (but in essence it was so) - they began to exterminate black cats in the novel. And generally speaking " Cultured people took the point of view of the investigation." This is ideology.
22) Conclusions about the importance of the Historical and social layer in the novel. Encryption (and the need for this for historical reasons). Thin image. Irony. Satire.

№ 36 Man and the world in Platonov’s prose. Prose of Andrei Platonovich Platonov (1899-1951) artistic style(understood broadly as a system of images, predilection for certain types of heroes, conflicts, prevailing pathos, and more narrowly as verbal fabric, selection of means of expression, vocabulary, etc.) - a unique, sharply individual phenomenon . In his style we often find in a single fusion opposite principles - the pathos of building a new life and - skepticism, doubt, irony, parody of the clerical style that swept the Soviet press, business and non-business communication in the 20s - and serious attitude to this style as a sign of the era. The combination of such different, oppositely directed stylistic signs is associated with the evolution of the writer’s worldview. During the years of revolution and civil war The romantic Platonov, like many young people, was captivated by the dream of a kingdom of justice - socialism. His fascination with the great Utopia is evidenced by dozens of journalistic articles, poems, and propaganda pieces written by him. Later, when the worldview and assessment of social reality changed, Platonov’s attitude towards his dreamy and active youth combined love for youthful enthusiasm and holy faith in the ideal and compassion, pain for that young man with a burning gaze who looked above life without seeing the repressions and cruelty of war communism. The propaganda rhetoric that reigned in the press, holding thousands and millions of souls captive, later outraged and aroused irony and laughter in the writer. Stories by A. Platonov of the 20-30s (“The Sandy Teacher”, “At the Dawn foggy youth", "Fro" and others) are filled with bright confidence in the possibility of man improving the world in which he lives. All his heroes are young, honest people, active folk characters who emerged from the depths of Russian life. They are full of ardent hopes and carry within them a fresh strength of feelings. They are also ascetics. Sometimes overcoming self-pity, they invest their lives and destinies in a common cause that has become their own. This is the young Maria Naryshkina, depicted in “The Sandy Teacher” (1927). Sent to the ends of the world, to the border with the merciless sands of the desert, she, together with the inhabitants of the doomed to extinction village of Khoshutovo, fights the sands, humanizes the desert, which reveals its deepest secrets. The poetic story “Fro” (1936) depicts a young woman impatiently awaiting personal happiness and pleasure. She loves her husband devotedly and misses him. She tries to distract herself from her difficult experiences by working together with other women. “...Frosya felt better in her soul: she had fun here, lived with other people - friends - and saw a big, free night, illuminated by stars and electricity. Love slept peacefully in her heart; The courier train had gone far away; on the top bunk of a hard carriage, her dear man was sleeping, surrounded by Siberia. Let him sleep and not think anything.” From difficult experiences, she gets the idea to send her husband a telegram that she is dying. The father sends a telegram, and on the seventh day Fyodor returns. Frosya tells him: “I’m afraid that you’ll stop loving me someday, and then I’ll really die...” The author comments: “They wanted to be happy immediately, now, before their future hard work gives result for personal and general happiness.” “Frosya wanted her to have children, she would raise them, they would grow up and complete the work of their father, the work of communism and science.” Thus, thinking about the essence of human happiness, Platonov seems to balance the need for personal and universal happiness. In the story “In the Beautiful and furious world "(1941) reflected the passion of Platonov and his heroes for powerful technology. Machinist Maltsev is an inspired, talented worker. He had no equal in his work, and he “bored from his talent as from loneliness.” This passion turned into a feeling for the soul of the locomotive. The old driver loves his locomotive like a living being, feels it with all his soul. And this connection with the machine gives him satisfaction and gives him a feeling of happiness. But the subtle artist-humanist Platonov constructs the situation and conflict in the work in such a way that it turns out that the same person who poetically perceives the machine is deaf to a living person, his mood, and does not appreciate the devotion of his student. The machine in his mind overshadowed the man. Only the misfortune that happened - a lightning strike and blindness - returns to him the ability to be attentive and sensitive to people. He appreciated his assistant when he began to fight for the good name of the old master, and morally supported him in difficult times. Only after going through all the trials: lonely pride, human distrust and prison, the loss of his beloved job - is he born, as it were, anew, begins to “see the whole world”, and not himself alone. And this light was returned to him by human love and selflessness. The story “Return” (“The Ivanov Family”) (1946) testifies to the writer’s quick understanding of post-war life: how to live for a person, his loved ones, his children after everything that was suffered and understood in the war. The war was perceived by Platonov as global. This is an attempt to destroy mercy, hopes for the power of goodness and humanity. Platonov found a place for his dream of universal happiness in the country of his childhood, in the soul of the boy Petrusha from “The Return.” The story does not depict war. And the main characters in it are not Alexey Alekseevich Ivanov and his wife Lyubov Vasilievna. The plot is based on the fact that the father returns from the war. His wife’s frankness in her story about hard life and tragic experiences, about loneliness, about Semyon Yevseich, who visited them, touched his pride. An outburst of the offended “I” drives him from home, from his children, not only from them, but, as he thinks, to a new, carefree life. Son Petrusha, together with his sister Nastya, created a revolution in his father’s soul. “Two children, holding hands, were still running along the road to the crossing. They both immediately fell, got up and ran forward again. The largest of them raised one free hand and, turning his face along the train towards Ivanov, waved his hand towards himself, as if calling someone to return to him. And then they fell to the ground again - Ivanov closed his eyes, not wanting to see or feel the pain of the fallen, exhausted children, and he himself felt how hot it became in his chest, as if the heart, imprisoned and languishing in him, was beating for a long time and in vain all his life and only now it broke free, filling his entire being with warmth and shudder. He suddenly learned everything he knew before, much more accurately and more effectively. Previously, he felt another life through the barrier of pride and self-interest, and now suddenly touched her with his bare heart. He once again looked from the steps of the carriage to the tail of the train at the distant children. He already knew now that these were his children, Petrushka and Nastya. They must have seen him when the carriage passed through the crossing, and Petrushka called him home to his mother, and he looked at them inattentively, thought about something else and did not recognize his children. "Who is this young Petrushka a hero who brought his father back to the family? A twelve-year-old boy during the war felt like an adult, a support for his mother. He, the little owner, has a characteristic expression in his eyes - they “looked at White light gloomy and dissatisfied, as if they saw disorder everywhere. He has neither a painful feeling of orphanhood nor childish curiosity. His early adulthood, maturity, his petty intelligence (when his parents are talking at the table by the light of a lamp, he reproaches them for burning kerosene in vain, which is running out), of course, are sad and make him a little old man. The need and hunger of the war years taught him, the “elder” in the house, to keep things in order. Prudence, constant consideration of the affairs and needs of home and family determined his character. The front-line father is amazed: “...there Petrushka, what a man he grew up - he talks like a grandfather, but probably forgot to read.” The war taught Petrushka to overcome the destructive power of grief, need, and human bitterness. He devoted himself entirely to the feat of moral creation, saving his mother and sister from the torments of loneliness and orphanhood. They were all saved by the small expediency he brought to everyday practical affairs, which did not allow them to become discouraged, complain, or concentrate on the sorrowful. Even now, in the presence of his father, Petrushka, out of habit, urges on his mother and sister, gives orders, keeps them in suspense. He suggests how best to peel potatoes, prudently tells his sister: “And Nastya should not let anyone into our yard tomorrow for water, otherwise they draw a lot of water from the well: winter is coming, then the water will drop lower, and we don’t have ropes.” Stop lowering the bucket and you won’t be chewing snow.” The boy is awake, listening to his parents argue. He is wholeheartedly on his mother's side. Platonov, as an insightful psychologist, depicts Ivanov’s pride, traits of ambition and vanity, and skills to maintain his interest. Having heard his wife’s ingenuous story about Semyon Evseevich, who lost his family, who died in Mogilev, that his heart was leaning towards the children, towards someone else’s family fire, Ivanov arrogantly and soullessly judges Lyuba. All the wife’s arguments are crushed by this proudly firm position. “- You fought, and I died here for you, my hands were shaking with grief, but I had to work with cheerfulness... Mother spoke calmly, only her heart was tormented, and Petrushka felt sorry for her mother: he knew that she had taught I tried to repair my own shoes and those of Nastya and him, so as not to pay dearly to the shoemaker, and I repaired my neighbors’ electric stoves in exchange for potatoes.” Life during the war consisted of such small, daily feats in that area that is called everyday life. There is only one result - “after all, I took care of the children, they hardly hurt me and my body was plump.” In his opinion, this result is not at all heroic, even mediocre. Intuitively, Lyuba understands that except for her son Petrushka, no one will appreciate or understand her torment. Therefore, in her attempts to justify herself to her husband, fatigue and hopelessness sound. This forces Petrushka, who heard the entire night conversation, to intervene in this parental feud... A true return to the innermost person, who lived the highest truth, occurred at that moment when Ivanov, who left the family to live (“I’m bored, Lyuba, with you, but I still want to live"), suddenly I saw children running after the train. Did Ivanov, with his iron code of insensitive pride, become a belated victim of war, the elements of bitterness? Doesn't he leave his child, with his adult experience and wisdom, without help even now, after the war? Doesn't it place a new burden of caring for his family on him? Who will have to extinguish a new outbreak of despair in an abandoned mother, brighten up the grief of orphanhood in a little sister? All for him, Petrushka. And this little sage will no longer recognize anything from his childhood fairy tale. Did Ivanov think about this? Or are these just the writer’s thoughts remaining between the lines? It was Petrushka and Nastya who brought the family together, returned spiritual vision to their father, and forced him to listen to his heart. A. Platonov's stories are unique in the spiritual appearance of his heroes. His stories are unique and vitally convincing; they breathe the truth of life and the truth about man. The humanist Platonov, who firmly believed in the good heart of man, showed how difficult a person’s path to himself is. The precision of psychological details, turns of thought and feeling also determines the unique language of A. Platonov’s prose. No. 37Platonov’s novel “Chuvungur”: tragic concept of the world, genre nature. The genre aspect of the study of A. Platonov’s works is one of the most relevant in modern Platonic studies. Moreover, the question of the genre of A. Platonov’s works “Chevengur”, “The Pit”, “Happy Moscow” remains debatable. Relevance genre analysis is also determined by the intensity of genre processes in the literature of the twentieth century. and the intensity of the study of this problem in modern literary criticism. The genre form of the large epic works of the writer “Chevengur” - complex, contradictory, polymorphic - invites researchers to very diverse interpretations and causes conceptual inconsistency. "Chevengur" is considered as a story, menippea), a philosophical novel, ideological novel, tragic utopia, folk epic, dystopia; indicate interaction in one genre structure utopian and dystopian trends. G. Gunther calls A. Platonov’s novels “metautopias,” in which utopia and dystopia enter into “an extremely fruitless dialogue” with each other. V. Kovalenko, trying on the definitions of “transutopia” and “menippea”, comes to the conclusion that these genre designations do not correspond to the essence of Plato’s works. As can be seen, when determining the genre nature of Plato’s texts, researchers use a second-level typology and indicate genre variety(philosophical novel, social novel (dystopia), allegory novel, etc.). But it is obvious that philosophical, dystopian and other aspects are not simply introduced into Platonov’s works - the novel structure itself is transformed, therefore the proposed genre designations only place meaningful accents, but do not explain the originality genre form generally. The inadequacy of existing traditional genre definitions is also evidenced by the search for new concepts and metaphorical designations: “novel-life”, “novel-universe” “Platonov’s Riddle” encourages researchers to use new methodologies with which to identify genre specifics Platonic texts. One of the current trends in modern Platonic studies (as well as in modern literary criticism) is mythocriticism. This approach is natural, since the work of A. Platonov, which became one of the most significant pages of world literature of the twentieth century, absorbed its main features and principles artistic reflection reality, in particular the poetics of mythologizing. In the works of modern researchers about Platonov, indications of mythological thinking, mythological structures of narration, mythological images and motives in his works. It must be admitted that the question of the relationship of Platonov’s work to myth arises quite naturally. Addressing this issue is determined, on the one hand, by the very logic of the consistent study of Platonov’s work, and on the other hand, by the rapidly developing worldwide scientific interest in the myth-making principle in fiction. The study of the genre of A. Platonov’s works in the aspect of mythopoetics seems very relevant, since the organizing role in Platonov’s work is played not so much by archaic myths as by mythological consciousness as a way of depiction, which led to the appearance of the genre of the novel-myth in the writer’s work. T. Bogdanovich points out the appropriateness of a genre analysis of Plato’s mythical novels, noting that in Platonov “the function of myth is aimed primarily at the formation and clarification of mutual relations and correlations between different levels and layers of the text.” However, the researcher does not go further than acknowledging the need for genre analysis and pointing out that “this aspect of the function [of myth], unfortunately, escapes the field of view of criticism.” V.V. Agenosov uses the term novel-myth in relation to Platonov’s work “Chevengur”. However, considering the myth-novel as a type of philosophical novel, V.V. Agenosov analyzes Plato’s text according to the criteria developed for a philosophical novel. Thus, the following features of “Chevengur” as a novel-myth are noted: philosophical, existential meaning, plot - movement of thought, the presence of archaic mythologies. In our opinion, the inadequate definition of the genre nature of the myth-novel - as a type of philosophical novel - became the reason that the innovative mechanisms of genre formation in Plato's "Chevengur" remained beyond the attention of the researcher.