True and false creativity.

Introduction

The novel “The Master and Margarita” raises many problems, the relevance of which does not fade with time. Creativity in the novel “The Master and Margarita” is one of these themes. The way it is revealed is interesting for readers and critics. Mikhail Bulgakov depicts the concept of creativity using the example of three people: the critic and editor Berlioz, the free poet Ivan Bezdomny and a real creator - a master. These people are completely different, their destinies and lifestyles differ no less than their attitude to what they do.

Creativity in Berlioz's understanding

The theme of creativity in the novel “The Master and Margarita” rises from the first pages.

The first chapter of the novel begins with the appearance of Berlioz. Considering that in the same chapter “the chairman of the board of one of the Moscow literary associations and the editor of a thick art magazine” dies unexpectedly and completely stupidly, it may seem that his character is insignificant. In fact, this is absolutely not the case. The image of Berlioz embodies all the bureaucracy and belittling of the role of creativity and the creator, which both Bulgakov himself and his master had to endure.

For the first time, the reader sees Berlioz in a conversation with Bezdomny, on the Patriarch's Ponds. Mikhail Bulgakov portrays the editor as a man confident in himself and his knowledge. He talks about Jesus, denying his existence, giving examples and enjoying the effect it has on the young poet. As for creativity, for Berlioz this is work that consists of narcissism and complete tyranny. Describing the chairman of Massolit, Bulgakov resorts to the subtlest irony. Just look at the phrase “Mikhail Alexandrovich climbed into the jungle, which only a very educated person can climb into without risking breaking your neck.” Berlioz boasts of his education and erudition as if it were a valuable treasure, replacing true knowledge with excerpts and quotes from books he read, the essence of which remained “behind the scenes” for him.

In addition to the image of the “writing brethren,” Mikhali Bulgakov also introduces the image of the young poet Ambrose. Describing him as “ruddy-lipped” and “lush-cheeked,” the writer is ironic at the purely physical, base nature of the pseudo-poet.

Creativity for Ivan Bezdomny

Ivan Ponyrev, writing under the sonorous pseudonym Bezdomny, embodies the image of modern youth of the Bulgakov period. He is full of zeal and desire to create, but blindly following the criteria and requirements of Berlioz and “thick magazines” turns him not into a free artist, but into an experimental mouse running in the wheel of criticism.

The problem of creativity in the novel, using the example of Homeless, is the crossroads on which the poet stands. As a result, already in the hospital, he realizes that his poems are “monstrous”, and he made a mistake in choosing the path. Mikhail Bulgakov does not blame him for the mistake he made, and does not use irony. Perhaps the master could have followed this path if his inner fire had not turned out to be stronger than conventions and traditions.

Having reached the realization of the fallacy of his desire for fame, Ivan completely changes as a person. He realizes the depth of creativity and spirituality. He is not destined to become a poet, but he is able to subtly feel the very essence of creativity and the subtle spiritual world. The refusal of the Massolitovsky ticket is reminiscent of the disdain for money of Levi Matthew, a disciple and friend of Yeshua.

Creativity and master

Of course, the problem of creativity is most fully revealed in the novel “The Master and Margarita” through the example of the master. He cannot be called a writer, he is truly a master. For him, creativity is not a way of self-affirmation at the expense of others, as in the case of Berlioz, and not an opportunity to lead a bohemian lifestyle, as for Ponyrev-Bezdomny at first. It’s not for nothing that the chapter in which the master appears is called “The Appearance of a Hero.” He is truly a true hero and creator. The master does not write a novel, he lives it so much that the rejection of the novel and devastating articles wound him to the very heart, and resentment and bitterness materialize into “an octopus with very long and cold tentacles,” which he begins to see everywhere “as soon as the lights go out.” . The master writes a novel, and it’s as if he lives it. When Margarita appears, love and creativity are woven into one ball. They walk side by side, for Margarita, love for the master extends to his novel, which once again confirms that the master puts his soul and heart into his work.

Margarita helps him, imbued with his creativity because it is the master. When the novel is over, “joyless days have come” for this couple, they are devastated and confused. But their love does not fade away and will save them.

conclusions

Mikhail Bulgakov masterfully reveals the theme of creativity in the novel. It shows it from the point of view of three people. For Berlioz, Massolit is just a way of self-expression and satisfaction of his mundane desires. As long as the magazine is run by such an editor, there is no place for real artists in it. The writer knows what he is writing about. He had to deal with such would-be editors more than once. His great novel will also not be immediately understood and published thanks to the people who hold the reins of organizations, the essence of which they see only as a way to satisfy their own interests, but not as a service to creativity.

Ivan Bezdomny treats his gift with reverence, he dreams of the laurels of a poet, but gets entangled in the intricacies of the real and the false, exchanging his talent for “poems to order” and, in the end, realizes that his poems are “monstrous” and he would rather write them will not be.

In the example of the master, the severity of the problem of creativity reaches its apogee. He writes not because he wants to become an author, he writes because he cannot help but write. The novel lives its own life, and the master puts all his strength and energy into it. He doesn't remember his name or the name of his ex-wife, but he knows every line of the novel by heart. Even burned, this work continues to live its own life until Woland resurrects it from the ashes, just as when the novel “The Master and Margarita” itself rose from the ashes.

Work test

M.A. Bulgakov “The Master and Margarita”

The problem of creativity in the novel by M.A. Bulgakov

"Master and Margarita"

The novel “The Master and Margarita” was published after the death of the author, and it was released without cuts in our country only in 1973. It is known that M.A. Bulgakov dictated the last insertions into the novel to his wife in February 1940, three weeks before his death. The author himself defined the genre as a “fantastic novel.”

And for several decades now, controversy surrounding this unusual work has not subsided. The novel amazed everyone with its form. She fascinated and distracted. The Gospel story with Yeshua has confused all the cards. Some kind of veil hangs between the insignificant reality, which provides food for an anecdote, and the majestic otherness, where the moonbeam, slanting into the sky, leads.

This last work by Bulgakov inherits from other novels, in particular “The White Guard,” questions about light and peace, the theme of home, the connection between a private person and history, the connection between heaven and earth and the theme of creativity. The problem of creativity is one of the cross-cutting ones in The Master and Margarita. Despite the importance of other problems, we will try to highlight this one as one of the important ones.

The novel opens with an epigraph from Goethe's Faust. This epigraph seems to hint at an eternal plot, and it also gives a hint at the origin of this plot from literature. As if pushing aside the theme of peace and home, history and fate, which are central to The White Guard, the theme of art enters the novel The Master and Margarita.

At the end of May, Woland arrives in Moscow with his “audit”. At the same time, at sunset on Wednesday, a few days before Orthodox Easter, two people were walking on the boulevards near the Patriarch’s Ponds - Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz, chairman of the writers’ organization Massolit, and the poet Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev, writing under the pseudonym Ivan Bezdomny.

A homeless man wrote a poem about Christ - of course, anti-religious. He did this by order of Berlioz, who also holds the post of editor. The poem did not turn out quite the way its editor would have liked it to be. Jesus, as depicted by the national poet, turned out “well, completely alive.” An interesting detail: one hero, a master who will appear later, writes a novel about Pontius Pilate and Yeshua (one of the names of Christ), the other - about Christ. While they are separated from each other by millions of miles, separating culture and propaganda. But Jesus still appears to Ivan Bezdomny “as if alive.” Apparently, both the master, Woland (who speaks about this bluntly), and Ivan Bezdomny, who did not subordinate his pen to Berlioz, agree that the hero of the poem existed.

Moscow, its inhabitants - authors and consumers of mass culture. One of them is Mikhail Berlioz, chairman of the board of MASSOLIT, which stands for “mass literature and literature for the masses.” Unhappy Berlioz dies under the wheels of a tram due to the evil will of not only the devil, but also Annushka, who spilled oil on the tram rails; she is part of that “mass” for which the tireless Berlioz forges his art.

The hero whose name the novel is named appears only somewhere in the middle of the first part. In the description of his appearance, something suddenly flashes that resembles the author of the novel himself: “shaven, dark-haired, with a sharp nose... a man about thirty-eight years old.” The same can be said about the entire history of the master’s life, his fate, in which a lot of personal things, suffered by the author, can be discerned.

The master writes a novel “not about that at all” and goes out with him into the near-literary world. The novel was not published, but disparaging articles appeared. Tormented by fear, the master burns his novel. Following the denunciation of Aloysius Mogarych, the master was arrested for possession of illegal literature, and when he was released, he himself came to a psychiatric hospital. “Oh, how I guessed right!” - says the master when Ivan Bezdomny tells him in the ward about the incident at the Patriarch's Ponds. Here he mentions the name of Woland, who did not manage to introduce himself as Woland only to Stepan Likhodeev. The events of the novel within the novel, connected with the life of a master in Moscow and the extraordinary adventures of the “evil spirits” in this city, are also the creations of a master who already knows everything about his fate. Three figures stand too close: Bulgakov, Yeshua, the master. It is not easy to separate the hero from the author himself.

For Bulgakov, a master is more than a writer. Bulgakov's master serves a certain higher spiritual task, in contrast to the idle life near art that writers lead at the tables of Griboyedov or in the corridors of MASSOLIT. The master is not vain, he is internally independent. Like Yeshua, the master responds to the suffering of others. But Bulgakov’s hero does not share the idea of ​​forgiveness. He bears little resemblance to a passion-bearer, a Christian, or a righteous man.

The master has experienced lack of recognition and persecution in the literary community; he cannot come to terms with and forgive his enemies. No, he didn't chicken out. This is where you understand very well the difference between cowardice and fear. Cowardice is fear multiplied by meanness. Bulgakov's hero did not compromise his conscience and honor. But fear has a destructive effect on the artist’s soul.

The Gospel story artistically covers the master. In the chapters about Yeshua, he receives freedom, artistic freedom. Art in its perfection seems to kill pain. This is the master's escape to wonderland. Execution scenes, Pilate's palace, a white cloak with a bloody lining - the colors are dazzling. This is how you look at Karl Bryullov’s painting “The Last Day of Pompeii”: you admire the beauty of the bodies, the light and darkness, retreating with the consciousness that the city is perishing. In the scenes of suffering on the cross and execution there is luxury and there is no simplicity befitting the moment.

Can we say that this is a game of pure art? No. This is the master's flight, which precedes his true removal from the novel. Fairy tale? In the fairy tale, blood is shed, but we are not afraid. But a fairy tale is different from a fairy tale. What Bulgakov paints is Moscow in the thirties, the “tour” of Mr. Woland and the company that the master invented - a bitter reality. Here is a mixture of a fairy tale and a non-fairy tale, a mixture. The master is trying to escape in the game. What the characters in “The White Guard” saw in their dreams or in moments of revelation alone with themselves is here brought to the square. In the theater at the end of the performance, Yeshua, along with other actors, comes out to bow to the audience. The director also mistakes Yeshua for an actor.

The writing of the novel, the legend of the novel, the loss of the novel and its restoration occupy the minds of the heroes of the novel and its creator.

Having learned about the death of Berlioz, the master does not regret him, he only regrets that such a fate did not befall the Brass and others. The element of vengeance dominates, although mercy, as Woland says, creeps out of all the cracks. The devil here is not even a devil, but like a fallen angel, who again felt the angel in himself, hiding behind a black cloak, settling scores with the true devil, with the one who hid the Stravinsky master in the clinic, who put Berlioz at the head of MASSOLIT. Two poets end up in a madhouse; the poet Ryukhin is angrily jealous of Pushkin. Self-confident, all-powerful leaders of mass culture (Likhodeev, Latunsky, Roman, Berlioz) get theirs. This is no longer the Last Judgment, but a funny judgment, the judgment of art over life, the retribution of art. The idea of ​​MASSOLIT fails. This happens at a black magic session, where the crowd sees art for the masses, and at the end of the session, like the theater managers, they find themselves undressed.

The gap between the masses and the master is obvious. Annushka is indifferent both to the master’s creations and to the creations created under the wing of Berlioz.

But there is a certain bridge along which both the master’s novel and art itself are able to reunite with the viewer and reader. This bridge is Ivan Bezdomny and his fate.

During the moments of the lunar flood, Ivan Ponyrev sleeps in his room with a happy face, But his happiness is guarded by a sharp syringe

“Art is immortal,” Bulgakov argued in “The White Guard.” Yes, art is immortal, the master agrees, yes, “manuscripts don’t burn.” And the master leaves. He does not end up “into the light”; Yeshua comes up with a special fate for him, rewarding him with “peace”, which the master knew so little in his life.

How terrible this care is, and how mercilessly it is paid for! Bulgakov's hand punishes the master's offenders, but it does not spare the master himself. What awaits him on the other side of life? There is a cruel phrase in the novel: “It never happens that everything will be as it was.” This applies to the master. He has nothing else to write about. Bulgakov finishes his novel with a dying hand and seems to doubt the regenerative power of art. He believes in Ivanushka and fears for him. He sees in his fate a repetition of the master's fate. As in the scene on Sparrow Hills, at the end of the novel the reader is overcome with grief and pain. The novel again becomes sensitive to pain, muffled by the elements of laughter and the play of art. Suffering does not burn in fire, just as manuscripts do not burn.

Bulgakov's novel is a novel by a master who understood and felt too well another master, his hero - his fate, his writer's loneliness.

Approximate plan (if necessary, but the text does not quite follow the plan; plan from the manual for teachers, for group oral work on the novel).

· MASSOLIT and its members.

· Techniques for satirical depiction of writers and their activities (chapters 5 – 6).

· MASSOLIT and RAPP.

· What determines the behavior of Styopa Likhodeev, Rimsky, Varenukha, Georges Bengalsky?

· What does art, talent, inspiration have to do with it?

But Bulgakov refuted this idea and revealed to us in his novel one of the most important truths of humanity: consigning good to oblivion inevitably brings evil to life; they, like light and shadow, are inseparable. In the novel "The Master and Margarita" the two main forces of good and evil, which, according to Bulgakov, should be in balance on Earth, are embodied in the images of Yeshua Ha-Notsri from Yershalaim, and Woland, Satan in the human...

Pilate and Yeshua were also not invented, he was “guessed.” This is confirmed by Woland, who was personally present at the events described in the manuscript. So, the Master writes in his basement on Arbat. Margarita helps him, supports him, does not let him stop. Their whole life is contained in the yet unfinished novel; they exist for its sake. The manuscript belongs to Margarita no less than to the Master, compiling...

And in some ways more valuable than light. In the novel, it is sharply contrasted with the peace of Judas from Kariaf and Aloysius Mogarych, doomed due to the death and suffering of people. The reality of the first part and the fantasy of the second. The novel “The Master and Margarita” is clearly divided into two parts. The connection between them and the line between them is not only chronological. Part one of the novel is realistic, despite the obvious fantasy...

Lyrics: “Song of the Falcon”, Song of the Petrel”, “Legend of Danko”) 2. Artistic embodiment of the categories of freedom and unfreedom in M.A. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”. 2.1 Freedom and unfreedom in the life and work of M .A. Bulgakova “It’s not a matter of the road we choose; ...

The novel “The Master and Margarita” was written over twelve years. This work became the final one in the life and work of Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov. It reveals the writer's views on Good and Evil, Light and Darkness, Love and Hate. And also the idea of ​​the true value of true art, true creativity runs through the entire book.

At the very beginning of the novel, Bulgakov introduces us to two heroes, representatives of the “writing fraternity,” one of whom is the chairman of the board of one of the largest Moscow literary associations, the editor of a “thick art magazine,” and the other is a poet published in this magazine. From the very first pages of the work, Bulgakov does not hide his irony in relation to Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz: “... and as Mikhail Alexandrovich climbed into the jungle, into which only a very educated person can climb without risking breaking his neck, the poet recognized more and more interesting and useful..." There is a “one-sided” education of this person; the accumulated information has not expanded his horizons in any way. This is still acceptable in everyday life, but in the sphere of literature... And such is the leader, such is the organization, and we can immediately imagine the level of the magazine of which Berlioz is the editor, and of MASSOLIT as a whole. It is not for nothing that in the future these people will be the main persecutors of the genius who wrote a highly artistic masterpiece dedicated to Pontius Pilate.

Thus, from the very first pages of the novel, Bulgakov slowly leads us to one of the main conflicts of the work: the problem of true and false creativity. For the author, this problem was especially painful, and it is no coincidence that many literary scholars guess Bulgakov himself under the mask of the Master. To reveal the theme of creativity, the author shows us members of MASSOLIT, pathetic graphomaniacs who only care about filling their stomachs. The chapter “There was an affair in Griboyedov” is terrifying with the power of its satire and topicality!.. A large place in it is devoted to the description of the restaurant located on the ground floor of the MASSOLIT building: “... Moscow old-timers remember the famous Griboyedov! What about boiled portioned pike perch!... And sterlet, sterlet in a silver saucepan, sterlet in pieces, arranged with crayfish tails and fresh caviar? What about cocotte eggs with champignon puree in cups?” Here it is, the main attraction of the “temple of culture”!... The image of the “ruddy-lipped giant, golden-haired, puffy-cheeked” Ambrose the poet is extremely symbolic. One can consider him the living embodiment of the entire literary society of Moscow. And such people should dominate the minds of entire generations! And Bulgakov’s satire is no longer funny to us; it makes us scared and bitter.

But then the Master appears on the pages of the work. This is a true creator, a true artist. And, unfortunately, it is quite natural that he cannot survive in such a society. The master writes a novel about the fifth procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, and the wandering philosopher Yeshua Ha-Nozri, about fear, cowardice and the terrible death of an innocent person that follows, about the terrible pangs of conscience and eternal damnation... This work is published, but Massolitsky mediocrity cannot appreciate him according to his dignity. These hacks, favored by power, are only capable of attacking the genius with the whole flock, like jackals. They drive the Master into a corner, beat him down with their unfounded criticism, and drive him crazy. This is the fate of a true artist! But apparently not all of the Master’s persecutors were so mediocre that they could not appreciate the real masterpiece: “It seemed to me - and I could not get rid of it - that the authors of these articles were not saying what they wanted to say, and that their rage was caused by exactly this." The fear of losing their warm, familiar place prevents them from telling the truth.

Reflecting on the fate of the Master, we begin to wonder why he was not worthy of light? Why didn’t Yeshua, about whom he wrote a novel, take the writer to live with him? Yeshua and the Master are clear counterparts in the novel, both of them carry their own truth, their own philosophy. But Ha-Notsri did not renounce his way of thinking, went to the end and, having gone through inhuman suffering on the cross, was ascended to heaven. The master, faced with life’s difficulties, misunderstanding and persecution, abandoned his brainchild. He could not carry his “cross”, he did not go to the end. Therefore, he turned out to be worthy only of peace.

The master is trying to burn his already hated novel. But “manuscripts don’t burn”! And this phrase very clearly expresses Bulgakov’s position in relation to creativity. He talks about the enormous responsibility that falls on the shoulders of anyone who is going to bring something new into the world through the written word. After all, lies, stupidity, cruelty, dishonesty, outright hackwork are punished sooner or later. There are higher powers that see everything and will reward everyone according to their deeds. The embodiment of such power in Bulgakov is Woland and his retinue. The author’s favorite technique, “diabolism,” helps restore justice. At the end of the novel, Griboedov, this breeding ground for mediocrity and envious people, burns to death. The building is engulfed in a cleansing fire, in which all the lies and hackwork written by MASSOLIT representatives disappear. Naturally, a new building will be built in which all the same vices of the “pseudo-creators” will find refuge, but for some time the world will become a little cleaner, true talents will have a little time to breathe easy. Then it will all start again, but there is the eternal Woland and his retinue...

True creativity has received its reward. The master and his beloved deserve peace. All the trials are behind them, they are leaving Moscow and this cruel time is forever. “Someone was releasing the master, just as he himself had just released the hero he had created.” Indeed, what could a true artist need more than freedom? Talent cannot unfold in all its fullness within the stifling and throat-squeezing framework of the political system. Creativity should not be limited by the fear of being rejected or misunderstood. A writer, an artist of words, must have the right to his own worldview and understanding of the world. Bulgakov thought so. I think so too.

The theme of art in M. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita” // Zar. lyt. in navch. closing - 2001. - No. 4. - P. 56-60.

The theme of creativity worried Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov throughout his life. Deep thoughts about the fate of the artist and his purpose, the desire to comprehend the fullness of the writer’s responsibility to the people and humanity never left Mikhail Afanasyevich, and in the last years of his life they became especially painful.

Bulgakov had to live and create in an unusually harsh time. The revolution and civil war, which brought death and physical suffering, attempts to build a new state, which turned into chaos, devastation and brutal repression, resonated with incredible pain in the soul of the humanist artist and were reflected in his immortal creations. However, the most terrible thing that the era of terror brought was the spiritual decay of the individual, which, according to the writer, could only be stopped by the great power of art, because the creator is like God: he creates the world and man in it with the Word.

It is difficult to read the tablets of the future, but the best writers and thinkers of the first third of the 20th century, not indifferent to the fate of the Fatherland, foresaw the coming misfortunes. Mikhail Bulgakov dreamed of a humane and harmonious society in which the field of artistic creativity would be devoid of ideological pressure.

The “disgusting world” of false art

From the first pages of the novel “The Master and Margarita” the reader finds himself in the author’s contemporary “world of literature” and meets a great variety of characters: Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev, Mikhail Aleksandrovich Berlioz, Zheldybin, Beskudnikov, Dvubratsky, Nepremenova, Poprikhin, Ababkov, Glukharev, Deniskin, Lavrovich , Ariman, Latunsky, Ryukhin and others. The first in the gallery of characters are Berlioz, editor of a Moscow magazine, chairman of MASSOLIT, and Ponyrev, a young poet. Mikhail Alexandrovich, a well-fed, neat citizen in huge glasses, had a conversation with Ivan Nikolaevich about Jesus Christ on a hot spring day on the Patriarch's Ponds. Like most writers of his time, Ivan Bezdomny received an order from an editor to create an anti-religious poem. Bezdomny fulfilled the order, but Berlioz remained very unhappy. pleased with my student's essay. Ivan had to convince the mass reader that Jesus was a figment of human imagination, a fairy tale for the ignorant, and from the poet’s pen a “completely alive” Jesus appeared, although endowed with all the negative qualities.

The history of the creation of the “grief poem” leads the reader to a huge moral problem of the 20th century - mass nihilism, general disbelief in either God or the devil.

The chairman of MASSOLIT, in a dispute with Ivan, mobilized all his knowledge of a “very educated person.” Referring to Philo of Alexandria and Josephus, Berlioz tried to prove to the poet that Jesus Christ never existed. Even Tacitus' story in the Annals about the execution of Jesus is, according to the editor, a gross forgery. “We are atheists,” Berlioz proudly declares to Woland who suddenly appears. “There is no devil!” - Ivan Bezdomny picks up. “What do you have, no matter what you miss, there’s nothing!” Woland sums up. Writers with enviable tenacity prove to Satan that “... human life and the whole order on earth in general” is controlled by man. For them there is no miracle, no event where unforeseen conditions converge in such a way as to produce sudden - happy or unhappy - consequences. (“Berlioz’s life developed in such a way that he was not accustomed to extraordinary phenomena”), Berlioz and others like him turned art into a handmaiden of ideology. The creative process, in the understanding of Mikhail Alexandrovich, is not an amazing discovery coming from the depths of the soul and inspired by duty and conscience, but a rationalistic act, subordinated to a certain ideology. The chairman of MASSOLIT turned into an “engineer of human souls.”

The monstrous invention of art ideologists - socialist realism - gave birth to an order plan, which strictly stipulates the nature of the future work.

Rejecting religion as a set of unprovable postulates and harmful feelings, the Berliozians surprisingly quickly eradicated from the people faith in a higher power that holds everything in its power, “beneficially” influencing morality. The people are transformed into a faceless mass - the “population”. M. Bulgakov shows that rudeness, immorality, cynicism and depravity become a consequence of the loss of faith.

It should be noted that editor Berlioz, as a product of the era of lies and nihilism, is only outwardly confident and invulnerable. Somewhere in the depths of his consciousness there lives a guess that God and the devil still exist. This is evidenced by the following facts:

1. In words, not believing in anything, Berlioz mentally remembers the devil: “Perhaps it’s time to throw everything to hell and to Kislovodsk...”.

2. An incomprehensible fear that suddenly gripped the writer.

3. “Living eyes, full of thought and suffering” on Berlioz’s dead face.

If there were no God, no devil, and therefore no retribution for lies, if man himself controlled his life, then where would fear come from? Hypothetically, Berlioz could think like this: perhaps somewhere in the beyond world there exists a kingdom of Light and Darkness, but here on earth there is no evidence of this. Out loud, the atheist apologist stubbornly insisted: “... in the realm of reason there can be no proof of the existence of God.”

The guilt of Berlioz and others like him before the people is enormous, and it is not surprising that the editor was so severely punished. Naturally, an apple tree will grow from an apple seed, a nut tree sprout will appear from a nut, and emptiness will appear from a lie (that is, spiritual emptiness). This simple truth is confirmed by Woland's words. At the end of the Great Ball, Satan pronounces the verdict: “... everyone will be given according to his faith.” Berlioz, the main ideologist of emptiness, for the spiritual corruption of the people, for the web of lies, receives a worthy reward - non-existence, he turns into nothing.

Numerous writers and rank-and-file members of MASSOLIT have also not gone far from Berlioz. The muse has not visited MASSOLIT's monastery for a long time - the Griboedov House. The hierarchy of the House of Writers excluded any thoughts about creativity. “Fish and dacha section”, “Housing issue”, “Perelygino”, restaurant - all these colorful corners beckoned with extraordinary force. The distribution of dachas in the village of Perelygino took on the character of frantic battles, giving rise to hatred and envy. Griboyedov’s house becomes a symbol of self-interest: “Yesterday I spent two hours hanging out at Griboyedov’s.” - "So how is it?" - “I got to Yalta for a month.” - "Well done!".

The shuttle dance of the writers in Griboedov’s restaurant is reminiscent of Satan’s ball: “The faces covered with perspiration seemed to glow, it seemed as if the painted horses on the ceiling came to life, the lamps seemed to turn up the light, and suddenly, as if breaking free from a chain, both halls danced, and behind them The veranda also danced.”

Contempt is evoked by these false writers who have forgotten their purpose, who, in the pursuit of portioned pike perch, have lost (if they had any) their talent.

Scary dreams of Ivan Bezdomny

From the faceless mass of artisans, the poet Ivan Ponyrev stands out from the arts. All that is known about the origin of the hero is that his uncle lives in the Russian outback. When meeting Ivan, the master asked: “What’s your last name?” “Homeless,” came the answer. And this is not a random pseudonym, not a tribute to the literary fashion of those years. This is the tragic attitude of a hero who has neither a material home with a warm hearth and family comfort, nor a spiritual refuge. Ivan does not believe in anything, he has no one to love and no one to lay his head on. Ivan is the fruit of an era of unbelief. His conscious years were spent in a society where churches were destroyed, where religion was declared “the opium of the people,” where everything around was poisoned by the poison of lies and suspicion (Ivan mistakes Woland for a spy; “Hello, pest!” - this is how the poet greets Doctor Stravinsky) .

The reader will have to decide for himself how Ivan ends up in MASSOLIT. In this organization he is considered a talented poet, his portrait and poems were published in the Literary Gazette. However, Bezdomny’s works are far from true creativity. M. Bulgakov repeatedly emphasizes the underdevelopment of Ivan’s mind (the master calls him a “virgin”, “ignorant” person), his habit of going with the flow. But, despite this, the soul of the writer is alive, open and trusting. He blindly surrenders to the power of the dogmatist Berlioz and becomes his obedient student. But the author of “The Master and Margarita” does not justify Homeless in the least; he is not a stupid child who is deceived by unscrupulous adults. Ivan Bezdomny bears the high title of poet, but in reality he turns out to be only a successful writer who does not think about serious problems. Ivan does not have solid ground under his feet; he is not a leading link, but a follower.

But despite this, Ivan Bezdomny is one of M. Bulgakov’s favorite heroes, his hope for the revival of the human spirit. Ivan is young - he is twenty-three years old, and he has a chance for rebirth. The meeting with Woland and the death of Berlioz under the wheels of a tram served as a powerful impetus for the search for the truth. Ivan Bezdomny’s running after Woland’s retinue becomes symbolic: this is the path from an intuitive premonition of the truth (after all, he turned out to have Christ alive!) to the knowledge of real truth, goodness and beauty.

The very first thing Ivan gets rid of is lies. Finding himself in a psychiatric clinic, he begins to tell the truth. The homeless man characterizes his fellow writer, the poet Alexander Ryukhin, this way: “A typical kulak in his psychology... and, moreover, a kulak carefully masquerading as a proletarian. Look at his Lenten physiognomy and compare it with those sonorous poems that he composed for the first day!.. “Soar!” yes, “unwind!”... and you look inside him - what is he thinking there... you will gasp!”

On the way from the clinic, where Ryukhin leaves Ivan, Alexander thinks about his life. He is thirty-two years old, no one knows him, but that is not the poet’s trouble. Ryukhin's tragedy is that he knows what kind of poetry he is. But thoughts about creativity as the highest goal leading to truth never occupied Alexander. Poetry for him is the most accessible way to achieve fame. Hatred and envy take possession of Ryukhin at the sight of the monument to Pushkin. Pushkin’s fame, the writer concludes, is nothing more than luck and simple luck. The ignorant Ryukhin cannot understand the depth of the works of the national poet, evaluate his civic position: “This White Guard shot, shot at him and crushed his thigh and ensured immortality...”. The vain Ryukhin sees only the external side of glory, he has no desire to serve his people, and therefore his lot is loneliness and obscurity.

Having rejected the lie, Ivan Bezdomny goes to the end - he refuses to write (he decides not to write any more “monstrous” poems). Ivan’s meeting with the master only strengthens this decision and becomes a kind of initiation into the secrets of creativity, the life-giving spirit of truth revealed to the master penetrates Ivan’s soul, and Ivan is transformed. Behind the negative external changes (Ivan turned pale and haggard) there are deep internal changes: eyes that look “somewhere into the distance, above the surrounding world, then inside the young man himself.”

The homeless man began to have visions: “...he saw a strange, incomprehensible, non-existent city...” - ancient Yershalaim. The hero saw Pontius Pilate, Bald Mountain... The tragedy at the Patriarch's Ponds no longer interested him. “Now I’m interested in something else... - I want to write something else. While I was lying here, you know, I understood a lot,” Ivan says goodbye to the master. “Write a sequel about it,” the teacher bequeathed to Ivan.

In order to write a sequel, you need knowledge, courage and inner freedom. Ivan gained knowledge - he became an employee of the Institute of History and Philosophy, a professor. But Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev never found spiritual freedom and fearlessness, without which true creativity is unthinkable. The professor’s life drama is that “he knows and understands everything,” but he is unable to isolate himself from society (as the master went into the basement on the Arbat).

And only during the spring full moon does Ivan Nikolaevich “...do not have to fight...with himself.” “Punctured memory” forces him to take the same path again and again in the hope of finding freedom and fearlessness. The professor dreams of the same dream: a terrible executioner “stabs with a spear into the heart of Gestas, tied to a post and who has lost his mind.” The fate of Ponyrev is somewhat similar to the bitter fate of the robber Gestas. The totalitarian system does not know regalia and ranks; it deals equally with those it dislikes. And the executioner is a symbol of the cruelty of society. The system does not release Ivan; it always has “a syringe in alcohol and an ampoule with a thick tea-colored liquid” ready.

After the injection, Ivan Nikolaevich’s dream changes. He sees Yeshua and Pilate, the master and Margarita. Pontius Pilate begs Yeshua: “...tell me it (the execution) didn’t happen!..” “I swear,” the companion answers.” Master Ivan Nikolaevich “greedily asks:

So, then, this is the end?

That’s the end of it, my student,” replies number one hundred and eighteen, and the woman comes up to Ivan and says:

Of course, with this. It’s all over and it’s all ending... And I’ll kiss you on the forehead, and everything will be as it should be.”

This is how the great romance of Mercy, Faith and Goodness ends. The teacher and his girlfriend came to Ivan Nikolaevich, granting him freedom, and now he sleeps peacefully, despite the “fury” of the moon, personifying a sick society.

Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov believed in the victory of the human spirit, so the reader closes the book with the hope that Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev will finish and publish the master’s novel.

The Master's Riddle

Mikhail Bulgakov contrasted the world of literary conjuncture, which covers up its inner squalor with the lofty word “art,” with the image of the master, the main character of the novel “The Master and Margarita.” But the master appears on stage only in the eleventh chapter. The author shrouds the image of his hero in a halo of mystery: in the ward of the Stravinsky clinic, where Ivan Bezdomny was taken, a mysterious visitor appears under the cover of darkness. He “shook his finger at Ivan and whispered: “Shh!” In addition, the guest did not enter through the front door, but through the balcony. The appearance of a mysterious hero stimulates the reader's thoughts to intensive work and co-creation.

The writer first outlines the outline of the master’s image. The hospital setting surrounding the hero is intended to emphasize the tragedy of an individual erased from society. Stravinsky's clinic becomes the only refuge for the master among the crazy world with its cruel laws.

The image of the master has given rise to numerous versions in literary studies about the prototypes of the hero. Some researchers believe that the prototype of the master was the fate of the author of “The Master and Margarita”; others include Jesus Christ, N.V. Gogol, G.S. Skovoroda, M. Gorky, S.S. Topleninov among the prototypes of the hero.

A literary hero can have several prototypes, so it is absolutely fair to draw parallels between the destinies of the master and the above-mentioned creators. However, first of all, the image of a master is a generalized image of an artist who is called upon to live and create in the difficult conditions of a totalitarian society.

M. Bulgakov draws the image of the artist using various means, among which portraits, descriptions of the situation, and nature stand out.

P.G. Pustovoit in the book “I.S. Turgenev - Artist of the Word” notes that “a literary portrait is a three-dimensional concept. It includes not only the internal traits of the hero, which constitute the essence of a person’s character, but also external, complementary ones, embodying both the typical and characteristic, individual. Character traits usually appear in the appearance, facial features, clothing, behavior and speech of the heroes.”

The portrait of the main character of “The Master and Margarita” consists of direct characteristics (the author’s speech) and indirect ones (the hero’s self-disclosure, dialogues, description of the environment, lifestyle). M. Bulgakov gives a very brief, just a few lines, description of the master’s appearance. First of all, the author draws the master’s face, then his clothes: “...shaven, dark-haired, with a sharp nose, anxious eyes and a tuft of hair hanging over his forehead, a man of about thirty-eight years old... the man who came was dressed in sick clothes. He was wearing underwear, shoes on his bare feet, and a brown robe was thrown over his shoulders” (I, pp. 459-460). Such repeated psychological details of the hero’s portrait, such as “very restless”, “cautiously looking eyes”, interspersed in the narrative, carry a huge semantic load. The appearance of the main character of the novel by M. Bulgakov leads readers to the idea that its owner is a creative person who, by the will of fate, finds himself in a house of sorrow.

The rich inner world of the image is revealed with the help of various forms of psychologism. From all the wealth of psychological means, M. Bulgakov singles out the forms of dialogue and confession, which make it possible to most fully illuminate the facets of the master’s character.

The core of the character of Bulgakov’s hero is faith in the inner strength of man, because it is no coincidence that Ivan Bezdomny “trusted” his guest. The master takes the poet's confession to heart. The main character of The Master and Margarita turns out to be the only person who listened to Ivan’s confession from beginning to end. The “grateful listener” “didn’t label Ivan crazy” and encouraged him to tell a more detailed story. The master opens the young man’s eyes to the events that have taken place and helps him understand the most difficult situation. Communication with the master becomes for Bezdomny the key to spiritual rebirth and further internal development.

The master pays with frankness for Ivan’s sincere story. The artist told his fellow sufferer the story of his life; the master’s measured speech, smoothly turning into improperly direct speech, makes it possible for the hero to freely express himself and fully reveal the inner features of the image.

The master is a talented, intelligent person, a polyglot. He leads a lonely life, “having no relatives anywhere and almost no acquaintances in Moscow.” The writer highlights this character trait of the master not by chance. It is intended to emphasize the philosophical mindset of the hero.

The master worked in the Moscow museum, making translations from foreign languages. But such a life weighed heavily on the hero. He is a historian by education, and a creator by vocation. Having won one hundred thousand rubles, the master gets the opportunity to change his life. He quits his service, changes his place of residence and devotes himself entirely to his favorite work.

From the “damned hole” - a room on Myasnitskaya Street - the hero moves to an alley near Arbat, where he rents two basement rooms. With reverence turning into delight, the artist describes to Ivan the simple interior of his new home: “a completely separate apartment, and also a front one, and in it there is a sink with water.” From the windows of the apartment the master could admire the lilac, linden and maple trees. This combination of interior and landscape details helps M. Bulgakov emphasize the priority of spiritual values ​​in the life of the hero, who is ready to spend all his savings on books.

At one point, the master faces a moral choice: to serve the present or the future. Having chosen the first, he will have to obey the laws of his society. But Bulgakov's hero, as a true creator, chooses the second. Therefore, in a basement on the Arbat, far from the bustle, a great truth is born, eh. the master becomes a creator, an artist. In solitude, the hero’s thoughts develop, mature and take on the images of Yeshua Ha-Nozri, Pontius Pilate, Matthew Levi, Judas, Afranius, and Mark the Rat-Slayer. The master “restores the truth about the teachings, life and death of Yeshua” and dreams of conveying his discoveries to the sick consciousness of humanity.

“Having taken the path of creativity, the master embarks on the path of spiritual evolution, which will lead the hero to moral and creative freedom. The artist’s word is called upon, with great difficulty, to pave the way for truth in the dense forest of human life. The powerful word of the creator must charge the hearts and souls of the weak with spiritual energy and nourish the strong.

In the novel “The Master and Margarita,” M. Bulgakov develops the previously formulated principle of creativity: “what you see, write, and what you don’t see, you shouldn’t write.” According to the writer, the creator must be endowed with the gift of spiritual and moral vision. Renouncing the vain, the main character of Bulgakov’s novel plunges into philosophical reflection. His soul sees people, life circumstances, objects in their true light. An impartial voice of conscience is heard in the artist’s soul, building a saving bridge between the creator and humanity. The soul of the creator, prompted by conscience and duty, creates an amazing novel, and the word of truth, seen by it, should become a font of rebirth for human souls.

Looking ahead, it should be noted that the story of the master’s novel shows that the word of the creator is imperishable: The slander of low people cannot drown it out, it does not die in fire and time has no power over it.

Art and creativity become the meaning of a master’s life. He feels like a creator who came into the world for a high purpose, just as spring comes, awakening nature from its winter sleep.

Spring, which has come into its own, has brought with it bright colors and the amazing smell of lilac. The artist’s sensitive soul responded to the renewal of nature - the novel, like a bird, “flew towards the end.”

One wonderful spring day, the master went for a walk and met his fate.

The heroes could not pass by each other. Margarita (that was the name of the stranger) was unusually beautiful, but that was not what attracted the artist. Her eyes, which contained an abyss of loneliness, made the hero realize that the stranger is the only one who can understand his most intimate thoughts and feelings, because she is part of his soul. The master “completely unexpectedly” decided for himself that “all his life he had loved this woman!”

The brilliant master was at the pinnacle of happiness: he had found a soul mate and completed his creation. Schiller said: “A genius must be naive, otherwise it is not a genius.” And Bulgakov’s hero, on the wings of happiness, flew to people with his novel, naively believing that they needed his discoveries. People rejected the novel about Pontius Pilate and Yeshua Ha-Nozri, and this made the master deeply unhappy.

However, the artist did not lose faith in the power of art, in the fact that its fruits can make people’s lives cleaner and kinder. He fought for his novel, he did everything possible to publish it. But the master’s efforts were dashed against the wall of hatred that the ideologists of false art erected between the novel and the world. They are unable to create spiritual values ​​and appreciate the contribution of others to the treasury of culture. The master, who entered into a tragic conflict with opportunists from MASSOLIT, was attacked by critics Latunsky, Ariman, Lavrovich with a number of dirty articles. They did not forgive the hero for refusing to create according to the laws of false art, according to which inspiration is replaced by order, fantasy by lies. The master creates his own humanistic laws based on love for man, faith and mercy.

The “golden age” of the master’s life was replaced by “joyless autumn days.” The feeling of happiness was replaced by melancholy and gloomy forebodings. M. Bulgakov reproduces the process of the hero’s spiritual experiences with medical precision. At first, the slander made the master laugh. Then, as the flow of lies increased, the hero’s attitude changed: surprise appeared, and then fear came. The threat of physical destruction loomed over the master. This gave the hero the opportunity to realize the true scale of the total system of violence, that is, as M. Bulgakov writes, to understand other things that are completely unrelated to the articles and the novel. But it was not physical death that frightened the master. He was gripped by fear for humanity, which found itself on the edge of the abyss. Mental illness sets in - a consequence of absolute misunderstanding and rejection of the artist’s work.

Nature no longer pleases the master's eye. His inflamed brain identifies the nature and system of violence: it seems to the hero “that the autumn darkness will squeeze out the glass and pour into the room,” and the “cold” octopus, personifying the totalitarian state, will approach the very heart. But the worst thing was that there was no girlfriend next to the master. Out of loneliness, he tries to “run to someone, at least to... the developer upstairs.”

In this state, the master consigns the manuscript to fire. If the novel is not needed by society, then, according to the creator, it should be destroyed. But then a miracle happens. Margarita appears - the master’s hope, his dream, his star. She snatches the remains of the manuscript from the fire and convinces the author that the work was not written in vain.

In turn, the novel saves Margarita - it helps her reject lies. “I don’t want to lie anymore,” says the heroine. The energy of the novel fills the master's girlfriend with determination. She is ready to go with the master to the end, because “he who loves must share the fate of the one he loves.” The heroine leaves into the night, promising to return in the morning. Her image leaves in the memory of the beloved an unquenchable streak of light, symbolizing the beginning of a new life.

But fate decreed otherwise. The master was arrested. They released him after three months, mistaking him for insane. The artist returned to his house, but Aloysius Mogarych had already settled in, and he had written a denunciation against the master. Darkness and cold become the main motives of the artist’s confession. Behind him were difficult months of imprisonment, as evidenced by the bright details of the master’s suit - torn buttons. Blizzard snow, like an accomplice of the system, covered the lilac bushes, hiding traces of the hero’s happy moment in life. Ahead, the master saw nothing but the dim lights lit by Mogarych in his rooms. Therefore, the main character of “The Master and Margarita” goes to the clinic of Professor Stravinsky, where he meets Ivan Bezdomny. This is how the master’s confession ends intriguingly, revealing the secret of patient number one hundred and eighteen.

The reader's next meeting with the master occurs in chapter twenty-four - "Extracting the Master." Margarita, who agreed to play the role of queen at Satan’s ball in the hope of saving her lover, receives her lover as a reward. Woland “extracts” the hero from the clinic, and he appears before his friend “in his hospital attire”: a robe, shoes and the usual black cap. “His unshaven face twitched with a grimace, he glanced madly and fearfully at the candlelight, and the moonlight boiled around him.”

The devil invites Margarita to fulfill any of their wishes. Woland would have paid dearly for the master's smallest request. However, the artist does not ask for anything. He retains his spiritual freedom, and Satan is forced to return the heroes to the basement on Arbat. But, as the master said, “it never happens that everything becomes as it was.” Yeshua, having read the master’s novel, through Matthew Levi, asks the devil to take the author with him, rewarding him with peace.

The heroes, having gone through the path of spiritual evolution, become absolutely free. In the finale of M. Bulgakov's novel, the master and his girlfriend fly to their eternal home. They change externally. The creator of the novel likened the appearance of the master to the ancient sages. “His hair was now white in the moonlight and gathered into a braid at the back, and it flew in the wind.”

The novel “The Master and Margarita” raises many problems that are also relevant for modern society. Among them there are themes of good and evil, love and hate and, of course, creativity. The theme of art runs through all the pages of the work, revealed through the example of three characters: the editor Berlioz, the poet Bezdomny and the Master himself.

The analysis of the topic should begin with an insignificant, at first glance, character - the critic and editor of Berlioz's magazine. The reader can conclude that Berlioz is an unimportant figure in the novel, because he dies at the very beginning of the work. However, this assumption is incorrect. The editor of the art magazine Berlioz is the embodiment of bureaucracy. This person does not deserve to be called a real creator and artist, because creativity for Berlioz is only one of the ways of self-expression.

At first glance, Berlioz appears to be an intelligent man with a wide range of knowledge. However, all his knowledge is buried in quotes and aphorisms from books, the essence of which remained unrevealed to him.

Creativity for Berlioz is an opportunity to satisfy his needs. The character is far from true art, and his whole job is to belittle the value and greatness of the works of real artists. As long as Berlioz is the editor of the magazine, not a single genuine work of art worthy of being called a masterpiece will appear in this magazine.

The image of the poet Ivan Bezdomny is collective. The author embodied in the character all the youth of Bulkakov’s time. He is full of vitality, ambition and zeal for real creativity. The homeless man has many amazing ideas, but editors like Berlioz turn him into a “slave.” The poet writes according to the criteria and requirements put forward by Berlioz, and moves further and further away from free creativity and grandiose and unique ideas.

However, Homeless soon realizes that he is making a mistake. Works written according to clear rules and requirements become “monstrous” in his eyes. As soon as the poet realizes this, he immediately changes. Ivan comes to realize the depth of creativity and spirituality. And even if he is not capable of becoming a great poet, he can feel the essence hidden in creativity and art.

Of course, the theme of creativity is revealed in its entirety through the example of the life of the main character of the novel - the Master. For this hero, creativity is much more than self-affirmation or fame. The master writes a novel as if he lives it. He is completely immersed in work, forgetting about the world around him. The work is so dear to the hero that its cruel criticism and rejection cause burning resentment and leave a serious wound on the heart. The master cannot stand the pain, so he is ready to throw the manuscripts into the fire, which he does. But “manuscripts don’t burn.” The works of great Masters live an eternal life.

Only the work of the Master in the novel can be considered true. For this he receives eternal peace. A true artist needs nothing else so much as freedom. In freedom of speech, ideas and worldview.