The history of the text of the novel by M.A. Bulgakov's "The Master and Margarita" (concept, genre, characters)
The novel "The Master and Margarita" is the most famous and popular work of M. Bulgakov, on which he worked until his last hour. The novel was created in the 30s. The first revision dates back to 1931. We can say that by 1937 the main work on the novel was completed. And the writer did not manage to "polish" it to the end. Several versions of the text are still stored in the archives, and in this connection there are disputes about what should be considered the final version of the novel.
The fate of the novel is similar to the fate of many works of the Soviet era. Its publication was out of the question. Its furious accusatory power destroyed the foundations of what the Bolsheviks were striving for - the formation of Soviet totalitarian thinking. Bulgakov read individual chapters of the novel to his friends.
The novel was first published 25 years after it was written in the Moscow magazine. The controversy about his uniqueness immediately flares up, which, however, quickly dies down. Only during the period of publicity, in the 80s, the novel receives a third life.
In the circle of researchers of Bulgakov's creative heritage, disputes about the genre of "The Master and Margarita" do not subside. It is not in vain that the writer clarifies that his work is a myth-novel. The very concept of "myth" carries in itself a broad generalization, an appeal to folk traditions that combine the signs of real life, and phantasmagoria, unusualness, fantasticness. Thus, a person finds himself in an extreme atmosphere, finds himself in a world of extremes. And this atmosphere reveals the laws of existence and laws established in the bureaucratic world. All the best and worst sides of society and the individual are exposed.
The genre of the novel allows you to take a wide layer of reality and examine it with magnification. The author gives the reader the opportunity to see the entire social hierarchy, a complex system, thoroughly imbued with the spirit of bureaucracy. Those who remained faithful to the principles of humanity, sincerity, remained faithful to the ideals of high morality, are immediately swept aside as something alien, alien. That is why the Master and Ivan Homeless end up in a psychiatric clinic.
The compositional features of the novel also largely contribute to the disclosure of the main ideas. In the text, two storylines, two novels coexist completely equally. The first is a story about extraordinary events taking place in Moscow. They are associated with the adventures of members of Woland's retinue. The second is the events of the novel created by the Master. The chapters of the Master's roman are organically intertwined with the general course of events taking place in Moscow.
The events in Moscow date back to 1929 and 1936. The author combines the realities of these two years. The events of the Master's novel place the reader two thousand years ago. These two storylines are very different from each other, not only completely different historical details, but also the manner of writing. Mischievous, perky, roguish chapters about the adventures of Koroviev and Behemoth are intertwined with chapters, sustained in a strict style, almost dry, clear, rhythmic.
It is very important to notice that these two lines intersect. The chapters about Pontius Pilate begin with the same words as the chapters about the fate of the Master and Margarita end. But this is not the main thing. There is a certain connection between them, roll calls.
They are most noticeably manifested in the correspondence between heroes. The master is similar to Yeshua, Ivan Homeless - to Matthew Levi, Aloysius - to Judas. The author also gives a broader picture: the guests at Woland's ball (executioners, informers, slanderers, traitors, murderers) are very similar to many petty and honest-loving residents of modern Moscow (Styopa Likhodeev, Varenukha, Nikanor Bosoy, Andrei Fomich - barman , other). And even the cities - Moscow and Yershalaim - are similar to each other. They are brought together by descriptions of weather conditions and landscapes. All these coincidences serve to unfold the narrative plane and give a broader layer of life. Times and customs have changed, but people have remained the same. And a peculiar picture of the Last Judgment is given in comparison of two times.
It is not by chance that Bulgakov uses this artistic technique. Through the mouth of Woland, who saw modern people at the Variety Theater, the author says: "Well, they are frivolous ... well, well ... and mercy sometimes knocks at their hearts ... ordinary people ... in general, they resemble the old ... the housing issue only spoiled them." People do not change, only one environment is changeable, fashion, at home. And the vicissitudes that ruled over man from time immemorial are the same, and absolutely nothing has changed.
The novel has an incredibly great moral potential, an extraordinary power of generalization.
One of the main themes is the theme of good and evil. The writer affirms a positive life ideal. He says that people are not perfect. But, despite their sometimes frank cynicism, cruelty, ambition, unscrupulousness, a good beginning turns out to be stronger in them. This is what ensures the victory of good over evil, light over darkness. According to Bulgakov, this is a great, secret and the only possible law of life.
Thus, the novel introduces philosophical questions of love and hatred, loyalty and friendship (the case of the executed Yeshua is continued by his faithful disciple Matthew Levi), justice and mercy (Margaret's request for Frida), betrayal (Pontius Pilate understood that, while approving the sentence, he commits a betrayal, and therefore afterwards he finds no rest), questions of power (connected with the images of Berlioz and, in a conventional sense, with Pontius Pilate and Yeshua. Yeshua argued that “the time will come and there will be no power of the Caesars and no power at all. ”And he was accused of calling for the overthrow of the power of Emperor Tiberius).
One of the leading themes in the novel is love. This is love for people, mercy, and love as a manifestation of affection and tenderness. Here, the author's idea that good feelings are inherent in any person is very important, but not everyone is able to develop them. So it is precisely that person, according to Bulgakov, who is worthy of love, in whose soul a flame of goodness, a spark of morality, has lit up.
The theme of love, high morality imperceptibly penetrates into the novel from the very beginning. Woland, who arrived in Moscow, intervenes in the conversation between Berlioz and Ivan Bezdomny. Outwardly, it is about the existence of God and the devil. But in reality this is a conversation about light and darkness, about good and evil. The fact is that Bulgakov perceives God not as a really existing gray-bearded old man who created everything around him, but as a kind of higher law, a manifestation of the highest morality. It is from here that the author's ideas about a certain general law of good originate. Bulgakov believes that people obey this law to varying degrees, but his ultimate trouble is an invariable given. The idea of enduring values, of the good originally inherent in a person, is proved in the novel with the help of the image of Pontius Pilate. For twelve thousand moons he sat waiting for forgiveness, peace. This is his payback for pettiness, fear, cowardice. Ivan Homeless also strives for the bright ideal of true life. He firmly understands the difference between true art and that petty bargaining from which the life of MASSOLIT is woven.
The theme of the intelligentsia is connected with his image, as well as with the image of the Master. This theme is vividly revealed in the play "Days of the Turbines" (Persikov), "Heart of a Dog". In The Master and Margarita Bulgakov brings together all the problems posed.
The hero-intellectual Berlioz heads the organization MASSOLIT, a respectable organization in Moscow. It depends on him who will be published in the magazine. The meeting with Homeless was quite significant for Berlioz. Ivan had to write a poem about Christ. In some critical works, researchers asked the question: "Why did Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov execute Mikhail Alexandrovich?" Obviously, for the fact that when he instructed Ivan to write a poem, Berlioz saw that he had a great influence on Homeless. Ivan is naive, and therefore it cost nothing for Berlioz to direct his thoughts in the direction that he needed. He understood that Ivan's life would pass, but his work would remain. That is why Bulgakov presents a strict account to Berlioz.
The young poet Ivan Homeless, ironically, finds himself in a madhouse. He meets with the Master and understands the true value of art. After that, he stops writing poetry.
The master is a creative intellectual. He has no name and no surname. What is important for Bulgakov is what he writes, his gift for artistic speech. It is not for nothing that the author places his hero in a mean environment: a small basement, without any special amenities. The Master has no personal benefit. But he still could not have done anything if he did not have Margarita.
Margarita is the only character who does not have a double in the novel. This is a heroine, extremely attractive to the author. He emphasizes her uniqueness, spiritual wealth and strength. She sacrifices everything for the sake of her beloved Master. And therefore, she, vindictive and domineering, destroys almost to the ground the apartment of the critic Latunsky, who spoke so unflatteringly about the Master's novel. Margarita is incredibly faithful to the principles of honor and dignity, and therefore, instead of asking Woland to return her beloved, she asks for Frida, whom she accidentally gave hope.
In the novel's finale, both the Master and Margarita deserve peace, not light. Obviously, this is due to the concept of creativity in the Roma. On the one hand, the Master has found what the writer lacks the most - peace. Peace gives the true creator the opportunity to escape into the world of his own fantasies, into the world where he can freely create. Material from the site
On the other hand, this peace was given to the Master as a punishment for his weakness. He showed cowardice, stepped back from his brainchild, left it unfinished.
In the image of the Master, they often see much autobiographical, but they always notice the difference: Bulgakov never deviated from his novel, as the Master did. So, the heroes find peace. The Master still has his muse - Margarita. Perhaps this was what Bulgakov himself was striving for.
Plan
- Arrival in Moscow of Satan and his retinue: Azazello, the merry cat Behemoth, Koroyev-Fagot, the charming witch Gella. Meeting of Berlioz and Ivan Bezdomny with Boland.
- The second storyline is events from the Master's novel. Pontius Pilate talks to the arrested Yeshua Ha-Notsri, a wandering philosopher. He cannot save his life, go against the power of Kaifa. Yeshua is executed.
- Death of Berlioz under the wheels of a tram. The homeless man incessantly pursues his retinue.
- The suite settles in apartment no. 50, building 302-bis on Sadovaya Street. Disappearance of Styopa Likhodeev, director of the Variety Theater, and the chairman of the Barefoot House. Barefoot is arrested, and Likhodeev is in Yalta.
- On the same evening, on the stage of the Variety, Woland and his retinue give a wonderful performance, which ends with a grandiose scandal.
- Ivan Homeless in a psychiatric hospital meets with the Master. The master tells him his story: about the novel about Pontius Pilate, about Margaret.
- Margarita meets with Azazello, who gives her an ointment. Having smeared, Margarita turns into a witch and flies away from home. She must hold an annual ball with Satan.
- The most terrible sinners come to the ball - traitors, murderers, executioners. After the ball in gratitude, Woland fulfills Margarita's wish and returns the Master to her.
- Yeshua's work is continued by his disciple Matthew Levi.
- At the end of the novel, Margarita and the Master leave with Bo-land and receive peace. And Moscow for a long time cannot come to its senses from the strange and incredible events that have taken place this week.
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use search
On this page material on topics:
- in what era was the book the master and margarita written
- Bulgakov's thesis plan master and margarita
- a short message about the novel "the master and margarita"
- analysis of the main events in the master and margarita
The Master and Margarita is Bulgakov's legendary work, a novel that became his ticket to immortality. He thought, planned and wrote the novel for 12 years, and he underwent many changes, which are difficult to imagine now, because the book has acquired an amazing compositional unity. Alas, Mikhail Afanasyevich did not have time to finish the work of his whole life, no final amendments were made. He himself assessed his offspring as the main message to humanity, as a testament to descendants. What did Bulgakov want to tell us?
The novel reveals to us the world of Moscow in the 1930s. The master, together with his beloved Margarita, writes a brilliant novel about Pontius Pilate. He is not allowed to publish, and the author himself is overwhelmed by an overwhelming mountain of criticism. In a fit of despair, the hero burns his novel and ends up in a psychiatric hospital, leaving Margarita alone. In parallel with this, Woland, the devil, arrives in Moscow, along with his retinue. They wreak havoc in the city, such as sessions of black magic, performances at the Variety and Griboyedov, etc. The heroine, meanwhile, is looking for a way to get her Master back; subsequently makes a deal with Satan, becomes a witch and is present at the ball with the dead. Woland is delighted with Margarita's love and devotion and decides to return her beloved. A novel about Pontius Pilate also rises from the ashes. And the reunited couple retires into a world of peace and tranquility.
The text contains chapters from the Master's novel itself, telling about the events in the Yershalaim world. This is the story of the wandering philosopher Ha-Nozri, the interrogation of Yeshua by Pilate, the subsequent execution of the latter. The inserted chapters are of direct importance to the novel, since understanding them is the key to uncovering the author's idea. All parts form a single whole, closely intertwined with each other.
Topics and problems
Bulgakov on the pages of the work reflected his thoughts about creativity. He understood that the artist is not free, he cannot create only at the behest of his soul. Society fetters him, ascribes a certain framework to him. Literature in the 30s was subjected to the strictest censorship, books were often written under the order of the authorities, a reflection of which we will see in MASSOLIT. The master could not get permission to publish his novel about Pontius Pilate and spoke of his stay among the literary society of that time as a living hell. The hero, inspired and talented, could not understand his members, corrupt and absorbed in petty material concerns, and they, in turn, could not understand him. Therefore, the Master found himself outside this bohemian circle with the work of his entire life that was not approved for publication.
The second aspect of the problem of creativity in the novel is the responsibility of the author for his work, his destiny. The master, disappointed and finally desperate, burns the manuscript. A writer, according to Bulgakov, must seek the truth through his creativity, it must benefit society and act for the good. The hero, on the other hand, acted faint-heartedly.
The issue of choice is reflected in the chapters on Pilate and Yeshua. Pontius Pilate, realizing the strangeness and value of such a person as Yeshua, sends him to execution. Cowardice is the worst vice. The procurator was afraid of responsibility, afraid of punishment. This fear absolutely drowned out in him both sympathy for the preacher, and the voice of reason, which speaks of the uniqueness and purity of Yeshua's intentions, and conscience. The latter tormented him for the rest of his life, as well as after death. Only at the end of the novel was Pilate allowed to talk to Him and free himself.
Composition
Bulgakov in the novel used such a compositional technique as a novel in a novel. The "Moscow" chapters are combined with the "Pilat" chapters, that is, with the work of the Master himself. The author draws a parallel between them, showing that it is not time that changes a person, but only he is able to change himself. Constant work on oneself is a titanic work, which Pilate could not cope with, for which he was doomed to eternal mental suffering. The motives of both novels are the search for freedom, truth, the struggle between good and evil in the soul. Everyone can make mistakes, but a person must constantly reach for the light; only this can make him truly free.
Main characters: characteristics
- Yeshua Ha-Nozri (Jesus Christ) is a wandering philosopher who believes that all people are good in themselves and that the time will come when truth will be the main human value, and the institutions of power will no longer be needed. He preached, so he was accused of attempting to assassinate Caesar's power and was put to death. Before his death, the hero forgives his executioners; dies without betraying his convictions, dies for people, atoning for their sins, for which he was awarded the Light. Yeshua appears before us as a real person of flesh and blood, capable of feeling both fear and pain; it is not shrouded in an aura of mysticism.
- Pontius Pilate is the procurator of Judea, indeed historical personality... In the Bible, he judged Christ. Using his example, the author reveals the topic of choice and responsibility for their actions. Interrogating the prisoner, the hero realizes that he is innocent, even feels personal sympathy for him. He invites the preacher to lie to save his life, but Yeshua is not bowed down and is not going to give up his words. The official is hindered by his cowardice to defend the accused; he is afraid of losing power. This does not allow him to act according to his conscience, as his heart tells him. The procurator condemns Yeshua to death, and himself to mental torment, which, of course, is in many ways worse than physical torment. At the end of the novel, the master frees his hero, and he, together with the wandering philosopher, rises up the beam of light.
- The master is a creator who wrote a novel about Pontius Pilate and Yeshua. This hero embodied the image of an ideal writer living by his own creativity, seeking neither fame, nor awards, nor money. He won a large sum in the lottery and decided to devote himself to creativity - and this is how his only, but, of course, ingenious work was born. At the same time, he met love - Margarita, which became his support and support. Unable to withstand criticism from the highest literary Moscow society, the Master burns the manuscript, he is forcibly placed in a psychiatric clinic. Then he was freed from there by Margarita with the help of Woland, who was very interested in the novel. After death, the hero deserves peace. It is peace, not light, like Yeshua, because the writer betrayed his beliefs and denied his creation.
- Margarita is the beloved of the creator, ready for anything for him, even to attend the ball of Satan. Before meeting the main character, she was married to a wealthy person, whom, however, she did not love. She found her happiness only with the Master, whom she herself named after reading the first chapters of his future novel. She became his muse, inspiring to continue to create. The theme of loyalty and devotion is associated with the heroine. The woman is faithful to both her Master and his work: she cruelly deals with the critic Latunsky, who slandered them, thanks to her, the author himself returns from the psychiatric clinic and his seemingly irrevocably lost novel about Pilate. For her love and willingness to follow her chosen one to the end, Margarita was awarded Woland. Satan gave her peace and unity with the Master, what the heroine most desired.
The image of Woland
In many ways, this hero is like Goethe's Mephistopheles. His very name is taken from his poem, the scene of Walpurgis Night, where the devil was once called that name. The image of Woland in the novel "The Master and Margarita" is very ambiguous: he is the embodiment of evil, and at the same time, a defender of justice and a preacher of genuine moral values... Against the background of cruelty, greed and depravity of ordinary Muscovites, the hero looks rather like a positive character. He, seeing this historical paradox (he has something to compare with), concludes that people as people, the most ordinary, the same, only the housing issue has spoiled them.
The devil's punishment overtakes only those who deserve it. Thus, his retribution is highly selective and fair. Bribery, inept scribblers who care only about their material well-being, catering workers who steal and sell expired products, insensitive relatives fighting for an inheritance after the death of a loved one - these are those whom Woland punishes. It is not he who pushes them to sin, only exposes the vices of society. This is how the author, using satirical and phantasmagoric techniques, describes the customs and customs of Muscovites in the 1930s.
The master is a truly talented writer who was not given the opportunity to realize himself; the novel was simply "strangled" by Massolite officials. He was not like his fellow writers; he lived his work, giving him all of himself, and sincerely worrying about the fate of his work. The master kept a pure heart and soul, for which he was awarded Woland. The destroyed manuscript was recovered and returned to its author. For her boundless love, Margaret was forgiven for her weaknesses by the devil, to whom Satan even granted the right to ask him to fulfill her one desire.
Bulgakov expressed his attitude to Woland in the epigraph: “I am a part of the power that always wants evil and always does good” (Goethe’s “Faust”). Indeed, possessing unlimited possibilities, the hero punishes human vices, but this can be considered an instruction on the true path. He is a mirror in which everyone can see their sins and change. His most devilish feature is the corrosive irony with which he treats everything earthly. By his example, we are convinced that it is possible to maintain our beliefs along with self-control and not go crazy only with the help of humor. You can't take life too close to heart, because what seems to us an unshakable stronghold so easily crumbles at the slightest criticism. Woland is indifferent to everything, this separates him from people.
good and evil
Good and evil are inseparable; when people stop doing good, evil immediately arises in its place. It is the absence of light, the shadow that replaces it. In Bulgakov's novel, two opposing forces are embodied in the images of Woland and Yeshua. The author, in order to show that the participation of these abstract categories in life is always relevant and occupies important positions, Yeshua places in the most distant era from us, on the pages of the Master's novel, and Woland - in modern times. Yeshua preaches, tells people about his ideas and understanding of the world, its creation. Later, for the open expression of thoughts, he will be judged by the procurator of Judea. His death is not a triumph of evil over good, but rather a betrayal of good, because Pilate was unable to do the right thing, which means he opened the door to evil. Ha-Nozri dies unbroken and not defeated, his soul retains the light in itself, opposed to the darkness of the cowardly act of Pontius Pilate.
The devil, called to do evil, arrives in Moscow and sees that the hearts of people are filled with darkness without him. He can only denounce and mock them; by virtue of his dark nature, Woland cannot create judgment in any other way. But he is not pushing people to sin, he is not forcing evil in them to overcome good. According to Bulgakov, the devil is not absolute darkness, he commits acts of justice, which is very difficult to consider a bad deed. This is one of Bulgakov's main ideas embodied in The Master and Margarita - nothing, except the person himself, can force him to act one way or another, the choice of good or evil lies with him.
You can also talk about the relativity of good and evil. And good people do wrong, cowardly, selfishly. So the Master surrenders and burns his novel, and Margarita cruelly takes revenge on the critic Latunsky. However, kindness does not lie in making mistakes, but in a constant craving for the light and correcting them. Therefore, forgiveness and peace await a couple in love.
The meaning of the novel
There are many interpretations of the meanings of this work. Of course, one cannot speak unambiguously. In the center of the novel is the eternal struggle between good and evil. In the author's understanding, these two components are on equal terms in nature and in human hearts. This explains the appearance of Woland, as the concentration of evil by definition, and Yeshua, who believed in natural human kindness. Light and darkness are closely intertwined, constantly interact with each other, and it is no longer possible to draw clear boundaries. Woland punishes people according to the laws of justice, and Yeshua forgives them in spite of them. This is the balance.
The struggle takes place not only directly for human souls. The need for a person to reach for the light runs like a red thread throughout the entire story. Real freedom can only be obtained through this. It is very important to understand that the heroes, shackled by everyday petty passions, the author always punishes, either as Pilate - with eternal pangs of conscience, or as Moscow inhabitants - through the tricks of the devil. Others he exalts; Gives peace to Margarita and the Master; Yeshua deserves the Light for his dedication and faithfulness to his beliefs and words.
Also this novel is about love. Margarita appears as an ideal woman who is able to love until the very end, despite all the obstacles and difficulties. The master and his beloved are collective images of a man devoted to his work and a woman faithful to his feelings.
Creativity theme
The master lives in the capital of the 1930s. During this period, socialism is being built, new orders are being established, moral and ethical norms are sharply rebooted. Here is born and new literature, with which on the pages of the novel we get to know through Berlioz, Ivan Bezdomny, members of Massolit. The path of the protagonist is difficult and thorny, like that of Bulgakov himself, but he retains a pure heart, kindness, honesty, the ability to love and writes a novel about Pontius Pilate, containing all those important problems that every person of the current or future generation must solve for himself ... It is based on a moral law that is hidden within every person; and only he, and not the fear of God's retribution, is able to determine the actions of people. The spiritual world of the Master is subtle and beautiful, because he is a true artist.
However, true creativity is persecuted and often becomes recognized only after the death of the author. The repressions against an independent artist in the USSR are striking in their cruelty: from ideological persecution to the actual recognition of a person as insane. So they gagged many of Bulgakov's friends, and he himself had a hard time. Freedom of speech turned into imprisonment, if not even a death penalty, as in Judea. This parallel with the Ancient World underlines the backwardness and primitive savagery of the "new" society. The well-forgotten old became the basis of art policy.
Bulgakov's two worlds
The worlds of Yeshua and the Master are more closely connected than it seems at first glance. In both layers of the narrative, the same problems are touched upon: freedom and responsibility, conscience and loyalty to one's convictions, understanding of good and evil. No wonder there are so many heroes of doubles, parallels and antitheses here.
The Master and Margarita violates the urgent canon of the novel. This story is not about the fate of individuals or their groups, it is about all of humanity, its fate. Therefore, the author connects two epochs that are most distant from each other. People in the days of Yeshua and Pilate do not differ much from the people of Moscow, contemporaries of the Master. They are also concerned with personal problems, power and money. Master in Moscow, Yeshua in Judea. Both carry the truth to the masses, for this both suffer; the first is persecuted by critics, crushed by society and doomed to end his life in a psychiatric hospital, the second is subjected to a more terrible punishment - a demonstrative execution.
The chapters devoted to Pilate differ sharply from the chapters in Moscow. The style of the inserted text is distinguished by evenness, monotony, and only in the chapter of the execution does it turn into a sublime tragedy. The description of Moscow is full of grotesque, phantasmagoric scenes, satire and mockery of its inhabitants, lyrical moments dedicated to the Master and Margarita, which, of course, determines the presence of various narrative styles. The vocabulary also varies: it can be low and primitive, filled with even swearing and jargon, or it can be sublime and poetic, filled with colorful metaphors.
Although both narratives differ significantly from each other, when reading the novel, a sense of integrity remains, so the thread that connects the past with the present is so strong in Bulgakov.
Interesting? Keep it on your wall!The article presents an attempt to address the author's concept of the novel by M. A. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita" and propose a new way of analyzing it based on research artwork in the context of the Christian cultural tradition.
Article text:
The need for this study is determined by the fact that, today, regarding the assessment of the content of this novel, two opposite points of view are most popular, but none of them reflects the truth and does not stand up to criticism.
The first point of view is widespread in civil society, it is supported by most literary studies, as well as school textbooks. Within the framework of this approach, the Master, Woland and Margarita are positively assessed, it is believed that, each in his own way, defend the Truth in a totalitarian state. It also seems that the author of the novel is at one with them. Most researchers agree that in the image of the Master Bulgakov showed himself, therefore, this image should be perceived only in a positive light. "Margarita ... remains ... the ideal of eternal, enduring love," writes BV Sokolov. IF Belza thinks the same: “The main feature of Bulgakov's Margarita is the feeling of lofty, all-consuming love. Such nobility, integrity and strength of feeling of a Russian woman gave rise to many captivating images of Russian literature. " "The image of Margarita continues the glorious galaxy of Russian women depicted by ... Pushkin, Turgenev, Tolstoy," notes V.V. Petelin. Within the framework of this approach, Woland is assessed not as a bearer of active evil, but as a guarantor of justice, a righteous judge who does not tempt anyone, does not plant vices, does not actively assert untruth, but only punishes people who have independently chosen the path of evil and wickedness. V. Lakshin, in particular, drew attention to this: “In the beautiful and human truth of Yeshua, there was no place for the punishment of evil, for the idea of retribution. It is difficult for Bulgakov to come to terms with this, and that is why he so much needs Woland, removed from his usual element of destruction and evil and, as it were, having received a punishing sword in his hands from the forces of good. " With this interpretation, it turns out that Yeshua and Woland are nothing more than two peculiar hypostases of the Highest principle: "in the novel" The Master and Margarita "Woland and Yeshua are the personification of Bulgakov's understanding of two essential principles that determined the existence of the world and man." The very image of Yeshua in Bulgakov's novel, according to I. Vinogradov, is "an extremely accurate reading of this legend, its meaning is a reading, in some ways much deeper and more faithful than its Gospel presentation."
With this interpretation, it turns out that Bulgakov surpassed even the Apostles and wrote a more accurate Gospel and finally (!) Created the true image of the biblical Christ, and also showed the true relationship between good and evil in the world.
The second point of view is popular in the church environment: "On the whole, the verdict handed down to the novel by the Christian community sounds harsh: the cult of evil spirits, Satanism." The image of Yeshua does not correspond to the gospel, therefore, false and blasphemous. The novel about Pilate is the gospel of Satan. Bulgakov himself is at the same time with Woland, which means that he, if not a Satanist, then certainly an anti-Christian: “The worldview of the author of The Master and Margarita turned out to be very eclectic. But the main thing - its anti-Christian orientation - is beyond doubt. It was not for nothing that Bulgakov so carefully disguised the true content, the deep meaning of his novel, entertaining the reader's attention with secondary details. And the novel itself is dangerous, for "the dark mysticism of the work, against will and consciousness, penetrates into the soul of a person." Then it turns out that it is dangerous not only to read, but also to take this book in your hands, and it is not even worth keeping at home, especially since there is nothing for it to do in school curriculum... Let's assume, for a moment, that this is the case. Then Bulgakov is a villain, breathing hatred for all living things. After all, even dying, Bulgakov asked his wife to bring the novel, and after she promised that she would rewrite it and publish it without fail, he said (and at this time he practically could not speak): "To know ... to know." Andrei Kuraev writes quite rightly: “If we assume that through Woland Bulgakov expressed precisely his thoughts about Christ and the Gospel, then the conclusion will have to be too dire. If the great Russian writer made Satan in a positive and creative way in his novel, then Russian Literature is over. "
It is absolutely impossible to admit that Bulgakov was a servant of darkness, and the point is not only in the axiom approved by Pushkin that genius and villainy are incompatible. His biography testifies to the faith of the writer. If in his youth Bulgakov really "reeled from the Church", like many contemporaries-intellectuals, then the result of his religious path is beyond doubt. He returned to God. In the diary of the writer’s wife E. S. Bulgakova a few days before his death there is an entry: “March 6, 1940 I was very affectionate, kissed me and myself many times and baptized me and myself - but it’s wrong, my hands don’t obey ...” (8, 714 ).
We have to admit that none of the considered (opposing each other) popular points of view reflects the truth. And, despite the large number of studies devoted to the novel, its content remains a mystery to this day. As priest Andrei Deryagin wittily noted, “the situation with the perception of the novel is similar to the importation of potatoes to Russia under Peter I: the product is wonderful, but due to the fact that no one knew what to do with it and what part of it was edible, people were poisoned and died whole villages ".
Thus, the main problem is the clarification of the author's position. And this is not an easy task. It is complicated by the versatility of the content of the novel, the presence of several storytellers-narrators with different levels of attitude to reality, as well as purely subjective reasons - the deliberately predetermined interpretation of its storyline, imposed by association central images a novel with real life (or literary) prototypes. In addition, Bulgakov's images are multidimensional and do not lend themselves to straightening and unambiguous assessment.
Confirmation of the initial thesis is the analysis of the main structural elements of the novel (title, epigraph, system of division into chapters, chronotope).
Creating a parody of the building of anti-Christian culture so actively erected in Russia, Bulgakov posed a twofold task. First, to show that the active social transformations carried out in the USSR do not make people better in essence, they do not eradicate their spiritual and moral imperfections, on the contrary, they lead them further and further away from the Christian ideal. And, secondly, to discover who is the main inspirer and architect of this building and thereby expose the forces of evil, always disguised in the forces of light.
It is this disguise of evil that the epigraph hints at: “... so who are you, finally? "I am a part of the power that always wants evil and always does good." Goethe. Faust. It is important that these words are an auto-characteristic of Mephistopheles himself - a liar and the father of lies. And their true meaning is not clear without taking into account the context of their understanding in Christian culture. And in the Christian understanding, not Satan does good, but God for the sake of salvation human soul allows the devil to act on a person (and then only to a certain extent) and himself turns all his intrigues to good. Consequently, the Christian reader, to whom Bulgakov's novel was addressed, upon seeing this "visiting card" (epigraph), will immediately feel the catch and will read the entire text of the novel "on the watch" - spiritually awake and sober (and not relaxingly enjoying, like it is customary, for example, to absorb mass literature), realizing that if it is on behalf of Mephistopheles, then one cannot expect the truth from this speech, and any positive statement here can be obtained, rather, according to the principle: from the opposite. And not only the epigraph, but also the title of the novel was supposed to warn about this.
Usually “being the equivalent of a text, the title states its main themes and their tragic solution. But in this case, the name does not reflect the completeness of the content of the text, it is not completely identical to the text, in which, in addition to love themes and creativity, the problem is also central of good and evil... This prompted the author to preface the text not only with a title, but also with an epigraph that declares one more theme of the novel and another, and also the central character, Woland. "
Indeed, in this case, the appearance of the final title "The Master and Margarita" is not justified by logic. Bulgakov worked on the novel for twelve years and changed the title four times. The changes were as follows: The Black Magician (1928-29), The Engineer's Hoof (1929-30), The Grand Chancellor (1932-36), The Prince of Darkness (1937). All previous options show that central character the novel is Woland. The final name appears only in 1938, and the dynamics of the previous changes does not lead to it in any way. As Deacon Andrei Kuraev noted, the reason is "perhaps in the order of self-censoring mitigating edits." Bulgakov really wanted to see his novel published. He was well aware of the requirements of the censorship and the tastes of the censors. And in order to "wade" through the censorship, he rewrote the novel. Therefore, although it is customary in literary studies to rely on the final text, in this case attention to the early editions is absolutely necessary.
Not only the epigraph and title, but also the structure of the novel itself testifies to the author's intention. The novel has thirty-two chapters and an epilogue - thirty-three in total. The symbolic number is the age of Christ. This means that the number of chapters and the distribution of their content have a kind of Christian logic. A particularly significant number in the Christian tradition is twelve. And the twelfth chapter of the novel, which tells about the representation of Woland's gang in the Variety, is called "Black magic and its exposure." But within the framework of the presentation, the "exposure" of black magic did not happen. But this word itself, taken out in the title of the chapter, occurs ten times in it. A. Barkov rightly remarked - "too often not to pay attention to him." It is possible that this is an indication of the main idea of the novel - the exposure of the wiles of Satan, which is carried out not separately in the twelfth chapter, but in the whole novel.
In addition to thirty-three and twelve, the most important number in the Christian tradition is the number three, denoting the Holy Trinity. And the third chapter of the novel - "The Seventh Proof" - is devoted precisely to the proof of the existence of God (in the Christian understanding of the Holy Trinity) and precisely from the opposite: through the assertion of the existence of the devil. The meaning of this proof is as follows: if there is evil, then there is good, if there is a devil, there is also God.
The world of action of the novel is a world in which the church has been trampled upon, the Cathedral of Christ the Savior has been blown up. And, as you know, a holy place is never empty. And instead of the Divine Liturgy, a Black Mass is now celebrated in Moscow at Satan's ball. But there are still people who know how to protect themselves from an evil spirit. There are several such moments in the novel. For example, when, having killed the lovers, Azazello, along with their souls, leaves the Master's apartment. On the street, Azazello suddenly loses his composure and is frightened. From what? What kind of terrible weapon did they want to use against him? It was just an old cook. She decided to cross herself. But as soon as she, “groaning, wanted to raise her hand for the sign of the cross”, “Azazello shouted loudly from the saddle:“ I will cut off my hand! ”.
“The evil spirit was alarmed and - the old woman was frightened inappropriately. As a result, the sign of the Cross never touched the souls of the Master and Margarita at the hour of their death. The cook's fear is understandable. But the behavior of the all-powerful Azazello is incomprehensible. If the cross is so terrible for spiritual darkness, then, of course, not because a preacher of non-violence was crucified on it. This means that Christ really is the Son of God, who became the Son of Mary, Crucified and Risen three days ...
The impulse of the cook is not the only case in the novel when the reality of created being did not buckle under the "engineer's hoof" (the name of the drafts of 1928 - 1929). Let's list just a few more situations when the darkness was forced to retreat. For example, the human participation of women in the Variety, who stood up for the beheaded master of ceremonies: "for God's sake, do not torment him." Or the sign of the cross of the barman, driving away the demonic "beret".
It turns out that Woland's version of the Gospel "works" only when people have accepted it into their hearts. If the combination of the evil will of the “murderer from the beginning” and the heart's desire of a person did not happen, then completely different laws operate. Then it turns out that even a trickle of love is capable of eroding the ice block of “Woland's” Moscow. Even a mechanical “fanning” oneself with a cross can protect oneself from satanic tricks. "
But these are only special cases of victory over the dark force. Will there be a general victory? Will all darkness ever disappear from the world? Or will it always be as Woland asserted, suggesting that light, supposedly, cannot live without darkness, and good without evil? In the context of the Bible, evil will be finally defeated before the end of the world - the Second Coming of Christ. This is described in the Apocalypse. And what is stated in the novel The Master and Margarita?
In many of Bulgakov's works, the Revelation of John the Theologian plays an important plot-forming role. This was noted by B. M. Gasparov: "For the novel" White Guard»The apocalypse is, in essence, the main metaplot. At the very beginning of the novel, the priest predicts future trials and quotes the Apocalypse as confirmation of his words (Chapter 1). An extensive quote from the Apocalypse is one of the episodes in the final chapter of the novel. Petliura is consistently described in the novel as the Antichrist. He appears on the scene after leaving prison cell no. 666 (the motive for the release of the Antichrist from bonds and the "beastly number"). Characterized by the variability and elusiveness of his appearance: there are many conflicting versions of who he is and how he looks (cf. a similar technique in the description of Woland in The Master and Margarita). His coming is preceded by "signs" (ch. 5, see below). The army of the Antichrist conquers the City (the mythologized name of Kiev in the novel, in which, as later in Moscow, The Master and Margarita, associations with Jerusalem and Rome merged), kills the martyrs who are trying to fight the Antichrist and his army alone, and leaves their corpses to lie on the streets of the City (death of Nai Tours). At the end of the novel, the murder of a Jew takes place, described as the execution of Christ, and immediately after this, Petliura's army disappears without a trace, "as if it never happened" (Ch. 20); thus, the disappearance of the Antichrist is associated with the appearance of Christ. "
And in The Master and Margarita, the disappearance of Woland's gang from Moscow is associated with the coming appearance of Christ and the upcoming Easter. This Orthodox Easter is not mentioned anywhere in the novel, but, as Deacon Andrei Kuraev justly noted, it is invisibly present in the chronotope of the novel.
It is here - in the chronotope - that the author's direct position is manifested. The novel begins on Wednesday evening and ends on the night before Sunday. It is repeatedly noted that at this time Moscow is flooded with the light of the spring full moon. What are these time coordinates? This is the Orthodox formula for Easter. In the epilogue, there is a direct indication of this: “Every year, as soon as spring comes festive full moon…". This means that the events of the novel develop during the Holy Days, when, during the time of Christ, evil temporarily triumphed in Jerusalem. It also temporarily triumphs these days in Moscow: Woland plays his performance and arranges a terrible ball - anti-liturgy with anti-communion with blood, that is, a black mass. But everything ends - on Easter night, on the most wonderful night of the year, when the whole world seems to freeze in anticipation of the Easter Transfiguration.
And Woland can no longer remain in Moscow when Holy Easter comes: “Messire! Saturday. The sun is going down. It's time". The Master and Margarita disappear with him. Easter night is coming, when the Divine Light will shine and drive away all the darkness. This is the main spiritual meaning of the novel. It ends with the motive of the upcoming Easter - the Resurrection of Christ, which means faith in the victory of the forces of light and the revival of Russia.
So, the study of the poetics of the novel by MA Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita" in the context of the Christian cultural tradition (which included an analysis of the meaning of the name, epigraph and structure of the novel, as well as the chronotope) allowed us to approach the main mystery - the author's intention of the writer. It is safe to say that the author set himself several tasks. First, he wanted to show that active social transformations and the new atheistic ideology of communism did not make people better in essence, did not eradicate their spiritual and moral shortcomings. And secondly, to discover who is the main inspirer, the architect of this building and thereby expose the forces of evil, always disguised as forces of light.
Bulgakov, with his final novel, wanted to warn his contemporaries not only about the negative aspects of authoritarian power and engaged art, but also about the danger of spiritual and, after it, moral blinding of humanity, which is becoming less and less able to distinguish between truth and falsehood due to the loss of traditional cultural values and religious orientations. ...
Literature:
- See, for example, Russian literature of the twentieth century. Grade 11. Textbook. Ed. V.V. Agenosov. Part 1. - M., 2002.
- Sokolov B. V. Roman M. Bulgakova "Master and Margarita". Essays creative history... - M .: "Science", 1991. - P. 39.
- Belza IF Genealogy of "The Master and Margarita". In the collection "Context-78", ed. "Science", chapter "Bright Queen Margot". Cit. by: http://m-bulgakov.narod.ru/master-94.htm
- Petelin V.V. Mikhail Bulgakov. Life. Personality. Creation. - M .: "Moscow worker", 1989. - P. 479.
- Lakshin V. Journal Ways. - M. 1990 .-- S. 242.
- Dunaev M.M. Orthodoxy and Russian Literature. In 6 parts. - M., 1996-2000. Part 6. - S. 246.
- Literature questions. 1968. - No. 6. - P. 68. Cit. Quoted from: M. M. Dunaev. Orthodoxy and Russian Literature. In 6 parts. - M., 1996-2000. Part 6. - S. 247.
- Paphnutiy (Zhukov), priest. In defense of the "defendant" novel // http://www.upm.orthodoxy.ru/library/P/Pafnuti_Bulgakov.htm
- Dunaev M.M. Orthodoxy and Russian Literature. In 6 parts. - M., 1996-2000. Part 6. - S. 251.
10. Ibid.
11. Bulgakov MA Collected works in 8 volumes. T.8. Biography in documents. - SPb., 2002. - P. 714. Further footnotes to this edition are given in the text, indicating the volume and page in brackets (1, 489).
- The Master and Margarita: For Christ or Against? Deacon Andrey Kuraev. - M .: Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, 2004. - pp. 129–130.
13. Expression of IS Shmelev in the essay "At the Elder Barnabas" about himself in his youth.
14. Andrey (Deryagin), priest. Experience of reading "The Master and Margarita" // http://www.upm.orthodoxy.ru/library
15. EM Three dreams of Ivan // Bulletin of the RKhD. - Paris, 1976. - No. 3-4. - S. 230. Cit. according to the publication: "The Master and Margarita": for Christ or against? Deacon Andrey Kuraev. - M .: Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, 2004. - P. 139.
16. This is the satire of the Moscow chapters.
- These themes are affirmed by the semantics and structure of the name "Master and Margarita": The title "Master and Margarita" reminds us of the famous in world literature "Romeo and Juliet", "Tristana and Isolde", "Daphnis and Chloe", it (name) was created according to the same model and activates the "He and she" scheme. Such a traditional name immediately “warns” the reader that there will be heroes-lovers in the center, that the love line in this work is central ... Moreover, the theme of love, and this is also warned by the title, is connected here with another theme - the theme of creativity. For Bulgakov, the first part of the model “He and she” - the Master (“He”), incorporates the range of ideas that exists in our unconscious reader's perception and is associated with the hero-lover (Romeo), and at the same time is broader in content. It's all about the uncommonness of the "name": Master (in the text this word is written with a small letter) is an "nameless name", a generalization name, meaning "creator, the highest degree of professional in his field." The master is the very first word, he opens the work as a whole, and it opens with the theme of creativity. However, the following is very important: the name expresses the essence of the personality (P.A.Florensky), but the master does not have a name, and this means a disorder, later - a tragedy of personality, which is confirmed by the text of the novel (according to V. Kryuchkov. See footnote below) ...
18. Kryuchkov Vladimir. The title "The Master and Margarita" as an equivalent to the text of the novel by M.A. Bulgakov // http://lit.1september.ru
- The Master and Margarita: For Christ or Against? Deacon Andrey Kuraev. - M .: Publishing Council of the Russian Orthodox Church, 2004. - P. 10.
20. By the way, the Master appears for the first time in the thirteenth (in the sense of an infernal number) chapter, which is not his positive characteristic, rather, on the contrary, hints that he is the thirteenth apostle (like Judas, into whom the devil entered), and the nature of his inspiration is not clean. After all, the story he wrote completely coincides with the story of Woland. This means that the Master received revelations for the novel, as well as money (found lottery ticket in dirty laundry) from Satan. See below for details.
21. Barkov Alfred. Mikhail Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita": an alternative reading. Chapter XXIX // http://m-bulgakov.narod.ru/master-94.htm
22. Mikhail (Pershin), deacon. "The Master and Margarita": through the eyes of an "eyewitness" // http://www.sobranie.org/archives/0/9.shtml
→ 1The authors of the article turn to the question of the author's concept of Bulgakov's novel The Master and Margarita. The main idea of the work constantly eludes the reader, thanks to the imagery of writing the novel, strange memorable characters. The plot action takes place in two time intervals: the era of the life of Jesus Christ and the period of the Soviet Union. It is interesting to observe how the author draws parallels between completely different historical epochs, based on a mystical-philosophical idea. This work shows the predetermination of fate, draws attention to the fact that consciousness and reason do not give people free will, demonstrates the fact that the border between true evil and good is established not by man, but by something from above. It is possible to designate the following system of characters in terms of power and possession of the ability to independently determine the path of life. Three tiers: the highest - Woland and Yeshua; medium - the Master and Margarita; the lowest is all of Moscow.
literature
imagery
mystical-philosophical idea
1. Bulgakov M.A. The Master and Margarita. - M .: Eksmo, 2006.
2. Gavryushin N.K. Lithostroton, or Master without Margarita // Symbol. - 1990. - No. 23. - P. 17–25.
3. Zhestkova E.A. Extracurricular work on literary reading as a means of developing the readers' interests of younger schoolchildren / E.A. Zhestkova, E.V. Tsutskova // Contemporary problems science and education. - 2014. - No. 6. - P. 1330.
4. Zhestkova E.A. The world of childhood in the creative mind and artistic practice of V.I. Dahl // Philological Sciences. Questions of theory and practice. - 2014. - No. 4–3 (34). - S. 70–74.
5. Zhestkova E.A. N.M. Karamzin and A.K. Tolstoy: on artistic comprehension of the historical era of Ivan the Terrible // Bulletin of St. Petersburg state university technology and design. Series 2: Art Criticism. Philological sciences. - 2013. - No. 4. - P. 51–54.
6. Zhestkova E.A. The era of Ivan the Terrible in the image of N.M. Karamzin and A.K. Tolstoy // World of Science, Culture, Education. - 2011. - No. 6. - P. 290.
Nowadays, almost a century after the publication of the novel by Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita", many assumptions and theories have appeared that explain the author's intention of this work. Initially, the novel was written before the fifteenth chapter, but was destroyed by the author himself in 1930, and in 1932 it was started anew. Mikhail Bulgakov was finishing the work, being bedridden by a fatal disease, dictating the last lines to his wife, Elena Sergeevna. 1939 - the date of the end of the writing of the novel.
"The Master and Margarita" is a work in which M.A. Bulgakov about modernity, about the importance of man in the world, about power. This is a novel, surprisingly intertwining caustic satire, a subtle psychological analysis of man and a philosophical understanding of existence. The author comprehends the foundations of the society that existed in our country in the thirties, tries to understand the complex, contradictory era, its processes. The novel raises global, universal human issues.
Critics interpret the book differently. There are those who see the encrypted political subtext, the author's protest against the Stalinist tyranny. Nikolai Dobryukha in his article for a not little-known newspaper noted: “I was surprised to find a direct connection between the title of the novel“ The Master and Margarita ”and the way Stalin was called in Moscow at that time! It is difficult to say who was the first to name the leader "Master". It is possible that with his novel Bulgakov wanted to show the Master-Stalin what (according to his ideas) a real Master should be ... "Others talk about the author's apology for darkness, about admiring the devil and about surrender to pure evil:" ... it should be noted that all the abominations that the devil did were very ingenious. The author showed him as a master, as a teacher, and in relations with Margarita as a kind and caring mentor. "
Indeed, M.A. Bulgakov is considered a "mystical writer", since he himself called himself that way, but this mysticism did not darken the author's mind: "The main features of creativity: ... black and mystical colors (I am a mystical writer)."
The main idea of "The Master and Margarita" constantly eludes the reader, thanks to the imagery of the writing of the novel, strange memorable characters. Most people, when reading this work, first of all pay attention to the love story, completely oblivious to other implications. But it is worth noting that a writer of this magnitude would not have spent fifteen years of his life telling only a love story, or, as mentioned earlier, describing political tyranny.
The idea of the book is revealed to the reader gradually, so we will analyze it in several stages.
The plot action takes place in two time intervals: the era of the life of Jesus Christ and the period of the Soviet Union. At the same time, life in the years of the twentieth century is presented both in reality and in the eternal other world. It is interesting to observe how the author draws parallels between completely different historical epochs, based on a mystical-philosophical idea. The chapters about Pilate begin with the same words as the chapters about the Master and Margarita end. But this is not the most important thing. There is a certain overlap between the eras, a connection that is noticeable with a more in-depth study of the work. Throughout the narrative of the novel, M.A. Bulgakov several times focuses on this idea. Woland tells the story of Pilate to Berlioz, and the Master says that his novel was written about Pontius Pilate. The novel ends with a story about how Pilate was freed by the Master and about his forgiveness from Yeshua. The final words of the work are also about Pilate. It turns out that the central figure of the novel and the object under the close supervision of the author is he. Let's consider such an important figure in Mikhail Bulgakov's novel.
Pontius Pilate is an official in the Roman service. Quite an ordinary person, suffering from hemicrania and heavy forebodings. Pilate has a negative attitude towards the Jews from the Sanhedrin, towards the Roman legionaries, and generally has no warm feelings for any person. He is attached only to his dog Bango. Yeshua, initially, only irritates him, but then genuine curiosity appears. He even has a desire to appoint this person as his doctor. But because of his altruistic love for people, Yeshua is dying, which he predicted for himself in advance. Pilate did not want him dead and to the last resisted the decision, which he eventually made. Deprived of the only person in this world who did not disgust him, Pontius Pilate remains alone with unwanted immortality, from which only the Master was able to bring him out: “Thoughts rushed short, incoherent and extraordinary:“ Died! .. ”, then:“ Perished! ! .. "And some absolutely ridiculous among them about some kind of immortality, and immortality for some reason caused unbearable melancholy." It was such a person that Mikhail Bulgakov made one of the center of his thoughts.
Let's pay attention to the relationship between Pilate and Yeshua. They are nothing more than a game in which the desire of both of them is hidden for the due and unavoidable. Their main difference is that Yeshua is full of awareness of his mission, he is aware of his divine essence, while Pontius Pilate only feels something inevitable, follows his predetermined fate, without a clear awareness of his actions. Pilate was chosen as a puppet in order to carry out some higher will. If we consider the New Testament, then this is the will of God - the Father, in the work of M.A. Bulgakov is the will of Yeshua, commanding the chosen victim: "Well, it’s all over," the arrested man said, glancing benevolently at Pilate, "and I am extremely happy about that." It was Pontius Pilate who became the victim of this story, since he was chosen to play the role of a murderer and a villain, having no corresponding thoughts in his head. Already here, at this conflict point of the novel, we can notice the differentiation of human characters into absolute people, able to control themselves and others (Yeshua), and people-puppets (Pilate), who do not know what they are doing and under whose authority they are. The first are independent, not under anyone's authority, the second - without realizing it themselves, are led by the first. You can see that such puppet people live in Moscow: Nikanor Bossoy, Varenukha, Georges Bengalsky and others, who constantly perform what the main players order - Yeshua and Woland. Only the last two are masters of themselves, others, and even have a loyal retinue. For example, answering Berlioz's question, Woland notes precisely his importance as a person: “-… but this is the question that worries me: if there is no God, then the question is, who controls human life and all the daily routine on earth? "The man himself controls."
It is worth paying attention to one more character in the plot of the novel "The Master and Margarita". With Yeshua there is a disciple Levi-Matthew. According to Bulgakov's book, in this character you can see a somewhat transformed image of the Apostle Matthew, who was a tax collector and a disciple of the Savior. He is devoted to Yeshua Ha-Notsri, loves him, tries to ease the suffering on the cross. However, having analyzed his image more deeply, one can notice that Levi-Matthew is cruel, and he treats Yeshua's teachings with such fanaticism that he even allows himself to distort him. After the crucifixion of Ga-Nortsi, he decided to rebel against God himself, which is contrary to the teachings of the mentor. For this character, his own understanding of the teachings of Yeshua is above all, rather than the true meaning inherent in him. Yeshua spoke of him like this: “He walks, walks alone with a goat's parchment and writes continuously. I once looked into this parchment and was horrified. Absolutely nothing of what is written there, I did not say. " Levi with genuine courage interpreted what the teacher said, not understanding the most important thing. Woland, referring to Berlioz, said: "Exactly nothing of what is written in the Gospels actually never happened," referring precisely to the interpretation of reality by Levi.
Let's pay attention to another hero of the novel - the restaurant pirate Archibald Archibaldovich. Mikhail Bulgakov often focuses on his supernatural flair, with which he is able to recognize any of his guests, including Woland's retinue. In this person there is an instinct similar to an animal, warning more about danger or benefit than about the meaning of everything that happens around. But there is no reason in him, therefore the restaurant "Griboyedov" perishes at the conclusion of the work.
Let's take a closer look at Woland's personality. This hero of the novel is endowed with special strength, "the spirit of evil and the lord of shadows", the powerful "prince of darkness." He arrived in Moscow as a "professor of black magic." Woland studies people, tries to show their essence in various ways. He looked at the inhabitants of Moscow in a variety theater, and concludes that they "are ordinary people, in general, they resemble the old ones, the housing issue only spoiled them." Having given the "great ball", he brings confusion to the life of Muscovites. Woland as the owner of superhuman powers, a representative of darkness is non-standard. He does not create evil as such, but rather restores some kind of justice by his own, not humane, but especially effective methods. He brings to clean water and in his own way punishes voluptuous people, informers, vile and selfish people, bribe-takers. Woland is a kind of evil, without which there is no good, a character who maintains the balance of the sides: "... what would your good do if there were no evil, and what would the earth look like if shadows disappeared from it?" ... But, at times, Woland can be condescending to human weaknesses: “They are people like people. They love money, but it has always been. Humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether it is leather, paper, bronze or gold. Well, they are frivolous ... well, well ... and sometimes mercy knocks at their hearts. " The power vested in the superman Woland uses wisely and carefully.
The Master and Margarita are the only heroes of the novel who can be called people because they are deeply aware of the life situation. They represent the structure of the world around them and its rulers. The Master is tolerant of people-puppets, but Margarita hates them with all her heart. The Master sets himself the goal of life - to free Pilate from bad memories, Margarita - to do everything for the Master to live in peace and the joy of creativity. Where did the Master want to let Pilate go? He realizes his innocence, realizes that he only carried out the order. The Master receives the same absolution from Yeshua, but he is not taken into the light. This is due to the fact that his position as a person is median in relation to good and evil. By releasing Pontius Pilate's sins, the Master commits an act of non-retribution for the misdeeds of all villains and criminals. This position is ethically flawed, since most puppet people attribute their wrongdoings to the Devil, and righteous deeds to God. Man himself, on this basis, is only a toy of higher powers. As Woland noted: "Sometimes the best way to destroy a person is to let him choose his own destiny." For this, there are certain forces from above.
This is how the main author's idea of the novel appears to us. This work shows the predetermination of fate, draws attention to the fact that consciousness and reason do not give people free will, demonstrates the fact that the border between true evil and good is established not by man, but by something from above. It is possible to designate the following system of characters in terms of power and possession of the ability to independently determine the path of life. Three tiers:
1) the highest - Woland and Yeshua;
2) medium - the Master and Margarita;
3) the lowest - all of Moscow M.A. Bulgakov's puppet people.
The middle is that stage of the realization of fate, where a person is able to freely dispose of himself, but does not have the right to dispose of the lives of others. Closer to the end of the novel, Professor Ponyrev, the spiritual disciple of the Master and the ideological heir and successor, can also be attributed to the middle tier. At the beginning of the work, Ivanushka appeared before the reader as a person who does not think about moral and philosophical questions, he believes that he sees the line between what is good and what is bad. This immediacy evaporates only when Woland appears and the tragic events taking place in front of Ponyrev. He begins to live a conscious life, which has left an indelible imprint on the bright and at the same time tragic story, which he witnessed. "He knows that in his youth he became a victim of criminal hypnotists, he was treated after that and was cured." By the end of the novel, he himself becomes a Master. Mikhail Bulgakov shows how Ivanushka Ponyrev becomes an intellectual, accumulating knowledge, developing intellectually and changing his inner world, assimilating the cultural traditions of mankind, getting rid of the spell of "criminal hypnotists", "black magic". Ivanushka Bezdomny is the only hero of the novel undergoing drastic changes: the ideological and moral basis of the personality is changing, character is evolving, and there is a constant philosophical search.
If you take an unbiased look at the work, then the content of the novel is not a love story between the Master and Margarita, but rather a story about the embodiment of demonic forces in man. The master appears only in the thirteenth chapter, Margarita - even later, in connection with the needs of Woland. What was Wolanda's goal before visiting Moscow? Arrange a "great ball" here, but not for ordinary dances. As noted by N.K. Gavryushin, who studied this novel: the “great ball” and all preparations for it constitute nothing more than satanic anti-liturgy, “black mass”.
Evil in The Master and Margarita is more primary and older than good. The author does not try to attract the reader with the dark side, he only shows the world in harmony with the combination of these two concepts, draws attention to the equality of the statuses of good and evil.
Summing up, I would like to say that the author's idea of the work of M.A. Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita is unique for each reader. They will still think a lot about the novel, write a lot. The plot of the book and the message are very contradictory, the reader will not agree with every idea, but in any case, he will not remain indifferent. It can be noted that the storyline of love plays an important role in the general idea of the novel, but the main idea conveyed by the author to us is precisely the confrontation between good and evil, power and obedience. The mystical atmosphere of the book entices, and the development plot lines makes you wonder which tier, from the ones presented earlier, you yourself belong to. "The Master and Margarita" is a novel of not one era or two, it is a novel that passes through time, outside of epochs and outside of culture.
Bibliographic reference
Gubanikhina E.V., Zhestkova E.A. TO THE PROBLEM OF THE AUTHOR'S CONCEPT IN THE ROMAN BY M.A. BULGAKOVA "MASTER AND MARGARITA" // International Journal of Experimental Education. - 2016. - No. 2-1. - S. 129-132;URL: http://expeducation.ru/ru/article/view?id=9447 (date accessed: 02/06/2020). We bring to your attention the journals published by the "Academy of Natural Sciences"
The history of the text of the novel by M.A. Bulgakov's "The Master and Margarita" (concept, genre, characters)
The history of the creation of the novel
Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov's novel The Master and Margarita was not completed and was not published during the author's lifetime. It was first published only in 1966, 26 years after Bulgakov's death, and then in an abridged magazine version. By the fact that it is the greatest literary work reached the reader, we owe the writer's wife Elena Sergeevna Bulgakova, who managed to preserve the manuscript of the novel during the difficult Stalinist times.
The time of the beginning of work on "The Master and Margarita" Bulgakov dated in different manuscripts either 1928 or 1929. In the first edition, the novel had variants of the titles "Black Magician", "Engineer's Hoof", "Juggler with a Hoof", "Son V." "Tour". The first edition of "The Master and Margarita" was destroyed by the author on March 18, 1930 after receiving news of the ban on the play "Cabal of the Sanctified". Bulgakov said this in a letter to the government: "And personally, with my own hands, I threw a draft of a novel about the devil into the stove ..."
Work on The Master and Margarita resumed in 1931. Rough sketches were made for the novel, and Margarita and her unnamed companion, the future Master, already appeared here, and Woland acquired his own exuberant retinue. The second edition, created before 1936, had the subtitle "Fantastic Novel" and variants of the titles "The Grand Chancellor", "Satan", "Here I Am", "Black Magician", "The Hoof of the Consultant."
The third edition, launched in the second half of 1936, was originally called "The Prince of Darkness", but already in 1937 the now well-known title "The Master and Margarita" appeared. In May - June 1938, the full text was reprinted for the first time. The author's editing continued almost until the writer's death, Bulgakov stopped it with Margarita's phrase: “So this is, therefore, the writers are following the coffin?” ...
Bulgakov wrote The Master and Margarita for over 10 years in total. Simultaneously with the writing of the novel, work was going on on plays, staging, librettos, but this novel was a book he could not part with - a novel-destiny, a novel-testament. The novel absorbed almost all of Bulgakov's works: Moscow life, captured in the essays "On the Eve", satirical fantasy and mysticism, tested in the novels of the 20s, motives of knightly honor and troubled conscience in the novel "The White Guard", a dramatic theme of fate persecuted artist, deployed in "Moliere", a play about Pushkin and "Theatrical novel" ... In addition, the picture of the life of an unfamiliar eastern city captured in "Run" prepared a description of Yershalaim. And the very way of moving back in time - to the first century of the history of Christianity and forward - to the utopian dream of "peace" reminded of the plot of "Ivan Vasilyevich".
From the history of the creation of the novel, we see that it was conceived and created as a "novel about the devil." Some researchers see in him an apology for the devil, admiration for dark power, surrender to the world of evil. Indeed, Bulgakov called himself a "mystical writer", but this mysticism did not darken the mind and did not intimidate the reader ...
The novel opens with new facets to each subsequent generation of readers. Let us recall at least "sturgeon of the second freshness", and a sad thought comes to mind that forever in Russia everything of second freshness, everything except literature. Bulgakov proved this brilliantly, "- that's how, in a few words, Boris Sokolov, a well-known researcher of Bulgakov's work, was able to show what contribution the writer made to Russian and world literature... Prominent creative minds recognize the novel "The Master and Margarita" as one of the greatest creations of the twentieth century. Not everyone is capable of comprehending "The Master and Margarita" in the ideological and philosophical vein suggested by the author. Of course, in order to understand, to understand all the details of the novel, a person must have a high cultural background and historical awareness on many issues, but the phenomenon of perception of the work is that the "Master and Margarita" is re-read by young people as well.
The fact is, it is likely that young people are attracted by the fantastic nature of a work with an element of a fairy tale, and even if a teenager is not able to understand complex truths and the deep meaning of the work, he perceives what can make imagination and fantasy work. Bulgakov, anticipating his death, realized "The Master and Margarita" as "the last sunset romance", as a testament, as his message to humanity (what is most surprising, he wrote this work "on the table", for himself, not at all sure of the prospect of publishing a masterpiece ). One of the most enigmatic figures in The Master and Margarita is undoubtedly the Master - a historian turned writer. The author himself called him a hero, but introduced the reader to him only in the 13th chapter. Many researchers do not consider the Master to be the main character of the novel. Another mystery is the prototype of the Master.
There are many versions about this. The master is in many ways an autobiographical hero. His age at the time of the novel ("a man of about thirty-eight" appears in the hospital before Ivan Bezdomny) is exactly Bulgakov's age in May 1929. The newspaper campaign against the Master and his novel about Pontius Pilate resembles the newspaper campaign against Bulgakov in connection with story " Fatal eggs", with the plays" Days of the Turbins "," Run "," Zoykina's Apartment "," Crimson Island "and the novel" The White Guard. " , did not become a "frightened servant", an opportunist, and continued to serve real art. So the Master created his masterpiece about Pontius Pilate, "guessed" the truth, devoted his life to art - the only Moscow cultural figure did not write to order, “what is possible.” At the same time, the Master has many other, most unexpected prototypes. His portrait: “shaved, dark-haired, with a pointed nose, anxious eyes and a lock of hair hanging over his forehead” reveals an undeniable resemblance to Nikolai Gogol. I must say that Bulgakov considered him his main teacher. And the Master, like Gogol, was a historian by education and burned the manuscript of his novel. In addition, a number of stylistic parallels with Gogol are noticeable in the novel. And, of course, it is impossible not to draw parallels between Maste rum and Yeshua Ha-Nozri created by him. Yeshua is the bearer of universal human truth, and the Master is the only person in Moscow who has chosen the right creative and life path... They are united by asceticism, messianism, for which there is no time frame. But the Master is unworthy of the light that personifies Yeshua, because he abandoned his task of serving pure, divine art, showed weakness and burned the novel, and out of despair he himself came to the house of sorrow. But the world of the devil has no power over him either - the Master deserves peace, an eternal home.
Only there, the Master, broken by mental suffering, can find his romance again and unite with his romantic beloved Margarita, who sets off with him on her final journey. She made a deal with the devil to save the Master and is therefore worthy of forgiveness. The Master's love for Margarita is in many ways unearthly, eternal love. The master is indifferent to joys family life... He does not remember the name of his wife, does not seek to have children, and when he was married and worked as a historian in a museum, then, by his own admission, he lived "alone, having no relatives and almost no acquaintances in Moscow." The master realized his literary vocation, quit his service and sat down in the Arbat basement for a novel about Pontius Pilate. And next to him was Margarita relentlessly ... Her main prototype was the third wife of the writer E.S. Bulgakov. In literary terms, Margaret goes back to Margaret "Fausta" by JV Goethe. The motive of mercy is associated with the image of Margarita in the novel. She asks after the great ball from Satan for the unfortunate Frida, while she is clearly hinted at the request for the release of the Master. She says: "I asked you for Frida only because I had the imprudence to give her firm hope. She is waiting, Messire, she believes in my power. And if she remains deceived, I will find myself in a terrible situation. I will not have rest all my life. It can't be helped! It just so happened. " But this is not limited to the mercy of Margarita in the novel. Even as a witch, she does not lose the brightest human qualities. Dostoevsky's thought, expressed in the novel The Brothers Karamazov, about a child's teardrop as the highest measure of good and evil, is illustrated by the episode when Margarita, destroying Dramlit's house, sees a frightened four-year-old boy in one of the rooms and stops the destruction. Margarita is a symbol of that eternal femininity, about which the mystical choir sings in the finale of Goethe's "Faust": Everything fleeting is a Symbol, a comparison. The goal is endless. Here in achievement. Here is the commandment. Completing the analysis of works from the point of view of the artistic embodiment of the categories of freedom and non-freedom in them, we can say with confidence that M.A. Bulgakov and Ch.T. Aitmatov, continuing the best traditions of Russian classical literature, raising the most pressing issues of our time, proved the importance of a person's presence of freedom, the need to strive for it, inferiority, scarcity of life without freedom, considered the presence of this category as a guarantor of the existence of human civilization in general.
Eternal femininity draws us to her. (Translation by B. Pasternak) Faust and Margarita are reunited in heaven, in the light. The eternal love of Goethe's Gretchen helps her lover to find a reward - the traditional light that blinds him, and therefore she should become his guide in the world of light. Bulgakov's Margarita also, with her eternal love, helps the Master - the new Faust - to find what he deserves. But the reward for the hero here is not light, but peace, and in the kingdom of peace, in the last shelter with Woland, or, more precisely, on the border of two worlds - light and darkness - Margarita becomes a guide and guardian of her beloved: "You will fall asleep, putting on your greasy and eternal cap, you will fall asleep with a smile on your lips. Sleep will strengthen you, you will begin to reason wisely. But you will not be able to drive me away. I will take care of your sleep. " So Margarita spoke, walking with the Master in the direction of their eternal home, and it seemed to the Master that Margarita's words were flowing in the same way as the stream left behind was flowing and whispering, and the Master's memory, restless, pricked with needles, began to fade. " S. Bulgakova wrote down under the dictation of the terminally ill author of “The Master and Margarita.” The motive of mercy and love in the image of Margarita is resolved differently than in Goethe's poem, where the nature of Satan surrendered to the power of love ... he did not take her prick. Mercy overcame ", and Faust was released into the light. In Bulgakov's work, Margarita shows mercy to Frida, and not Woland himself. Love does not affect the nature of Satan, since in fact the fate of the genius Master was predetermined by Woland in advance. Satan's plan coincides with that, what he asks to reward Master Yeshua, and Margarita here is a part of this reward.
It is known that Bulgakov worked on the novel The Master and Margarita, the main book of his life, for 12 years. Initially, the writer conceived a novel about the devil, but perhaps by 1930 the idea had changed. The fact is that this year Bulgakov burned his "Gospel Novel", but the work was subsequently revived, how can you not believe Messire Woland that "manuscripts do not burn." It is said that there are 8 editions with different titles: "Satan", "Prince of Darkness", "Black Magician", "Engineer with a Hoof". The names changed, the idea also changed, no one today would even think that the novel "The Master and Margarita" is about evil spirits. Then what about, judging by the title. And if we consider that the idea is always hidden in the title of a work, then this is a novel about an artist and about love. Let's try to prove it. It is quite obvious that the Master is one of the main characters of the work. Then why did the author not give him either a first name or a surname, and also, at first glance, a strange name, where is it from? The answer is not complicated: there is no doubt that Bulgakov was familiar with the most famous and influential critical book in the mid-1920s by Leon Trotsky, Literature and Revolution. In his article, Trotsky quotes Blok's words: “The Bolsheviks do not interfere with writing poetry, but they interfere with the feeling of being a master. A master is one who feels the core of all his creativity and keeps the rhythm in himself. " Leon Trotsky agreed on one thing with Blok that "the Bolsheviks make it difficult to feel like masters of the revolution's fellow travelers." "These people do not carry, in the opinion of the critic, a core in themselves, which means that their stories and stories, novels and short stories are not real mastery, but just sketches, sketches, pen tests." So Bulgakov did not agree with either Blok or Trotsky, he was deeply convinced that his book is a phenomenon of finished skill, and not sketches and sketches, which means that he is a real master, since “he feels the core of his work and holds the rhythm in itself. "
Unlike Blok, the Bolsheviks prevented Bulgakov from writing, but they could not prevent him from feeling himself a great writer, not like anyone else. Therefore, the character of the work is very similar to the author himself, that is, in a sense, the novel is autobiographical, although, of course, an absolute equal sign cannot be put between the author and his hero. Yes, and this name - Master, in our opinion, presupposes a certain generalization, which is always characteristic of a work of art.
Bulgakov wrote about himself and people like him, who worked “on the desk”, not hoping to see their brainchild printed, who aspired to remain himself and wrote about what was important and interesting to him. So, both of them are writers, both created a “gospel novel”, and on one and the other the blows fell almost immediately, and what kind of labels they didn’t stick to them: the Masters were called “a militant Old Believer”, and Bulgakov was called a “White Guard” and “ anti-Soviet ”. Probably, they had nothing else to do when they decided to part with their brainchild, to throw the manuscripts into the fire, thereby dedicating it to the spirit of non-existence. One can also notice purely external similarities between the master and Bulgakov himself. It is in the features of the figure and in the beloved (the main character) headdress, a small yarmolk cap with the letter "M".
Interesting fact, but the famous scene of the first meeting between the Master and Margarita was "written off" by the author from life itself: he had the same meeting, he also had the famous black coat, on which "disgusting, disturbing yellow flowers" were clearly visible, probably there was loneliness in life in the eyes of a woman and a man. Both the Master's novel and Bulgakov's novel were revived, the authors understood that they would not see their work in print, but, obviously, both believed that someday their book would definitely come to the reader. So, we have proved that this is a novel about an artist for whom creativity is the main business of his life, but in the title next to the word Master is the name Margarita. There is no need to prove that the work is also about love. But where did this name come from? We can only guess. It seems that the clue is contained in the epigraph, the famous phrase from "Faust" by Goethe: "I am part of the power that always wants evil and always does good." The epigraph tells us that Bulgakov was very familiar with this greatest work world literature, as well as with the famous opera by C. Gounod. Musical associations with the works of Charles Gounod, Bach, and some other composers form the background of the novel. This suggests to us that the author took the name Margarita from Goethe, because there the main character the name is exactly the same. And, probably, as in the Master there is a lot from Bulgakov himself, so in Margarita there is a lot from the woman who was next to the writer in the most terrible, most difficult years of his life. It is clear that we are talking about the wife of Mikhail Bulgakov, Elena Sergeevna. I recall the famous phrase from the novel: “Follow me, reader! Who told you that there is no real true eternal love in the world? ... Follow me, my reader ... And I will show you such love. " And indeed, it was only by love that the Master was alive: it was Margarita, wishing to support her beloved person, who took the chapter from his novel to the newspaper, and it was published, it was she who supported the Master when he was crucified, accused of all mortal sins, called a "militant Old Believer" when he was made unambiguously clear that neither he nor his novel was needed by anyone. And the request to revive the work of the Master is also expressed to Woland by Margarita. So the author himself lived exclusively with the love of Elena Sergeevna and it was she who bequeathed to her before his death to keep the manuscript of his book. It is well known that it was not easy to do: you could pay with your own head. And it was she, the writer's widow, who managed to get her husband's novel to be published in the Moscow magazine in 1966, albeit with huge bills. The conclusion suggests itself that love ultimately triumphed, because all the actions of Elena Sergeevna Bulgakova are evidence of her great love for her husband, for his work, respect for his memory. Is everything so good in the novel? Others will say "Yes!" But why do they forget that this happens in the "fifth dimension", and not on earth, not among people. Them, wonderful people, kind, with a wonderful soul, there is no place among other people. And this, in our opinion, is an expression of the fact that the novel is pessimistic.
However, the fact that, leaving for another world, the Master leaves behind a student of Ivan Nikolayevich Ponyrev, a professor of history, a man “who knows everything and understands everything,” testifies that the novel is at the same time optimistic. By this, Bulgakov showed that such a piece phenomenon as mastery is subject to creative continuity. And most importantly, the novel expresses the belief that one day everyone will receive light, since these are the hopelessness and darkness in which we live, not real, but something else, eternal, where everything insignificant, petty, evil is overcome.
In the image of the Master, we recognize Bulgakov himself, and o the prototype of Margarita was the writer's beloved woman - his wife Elena Sergeevna. It is no coincidence that the theme of love is one of the main, basic themes of the novel. Bulgakov writes about the highest and most beautiful human feeling - about love, about the senselessness of resistance to it. The Master and Margarita are madly in love with each other. The Master's failures bring excruciating suffering not only to him, but also to Margarita. To save his beloved from suffering, the Master decides to leave home, believing that this will make Margarita's life easier. But his departure not only does not diminish Margarita's suffering, but, on the contrary, increases them several times. The departure of the Master was the hardest blow for her. She makes a deal with Satan, becomes a witch, and Woland returns her beloved. Bulgakov says that it is impossible to resist love. True love cannot be prevented by any obstacles.
On the pages of the novel, Bulgakov presents many problems. For example, the problem of human cowardice. The author considers cowardice to be the greatest sin in life. This is shown through the image of Pontius Pilate. Pontius Pilate was the procurator in Yershalaim. He controlled the fate of many people. One of those he tried is Yeshua Ha-Nozri. The procurator was touched by the sincerity and kindness of this young man... Pontius Pilate was well aware that Yeshua had not done anything for which he needed to be executed. However, Pilate did not obey his "inner" voice, the voice of conscience, but followed the lead of the crowd and executed Yeshua Ha-Nozri. Pontius Pilate got cold feet and for this he was punished with immortality. There was no rest for him, day or night. This is what Woland says about Pontius Pilate: “He says,” Woland's voice rang out, “the same thing, he says that he has no rest even with the moon, and that he has a bad position. So he always says when he is awake, and when he sleeps, he sees the same thing - the lunar road and wants to walk along it and talk with the prisoner Ha-Notsri, because, as he claims, he did not say something then, long ago, on the fourteenth of the spring month of Nisan. alas, for some reason he can't get out on this road and no one comes to him. Then, what can you do, he has to talk to himself. However, some variety is needed, and he often adds to his speech about the moon, that more than anything in the world he hates his immortality and unheard-of glory. "And Pontius Pilate suffers twelve thousand moons in one moon, for the moment when he got cold feet. It was only after long torment and suffering that Pilate was finally forgiven.
The theme of excessive self-confidence, self-righteousness, and unbelief deserves attention in the novel. It was for disbelief in God that the chairman of the board of the literary association, Mikhail Aleksandrovich Berlioz, was punished. Berlioz does not believe in the power of the Almighty, does not recognize Jesus Christ and tries to force everyone to think like him. Berlioz wanted to prove to the poet that the main thing is not what Jesus was like: good or bad, but that Jesus before that as a person did not exist in the world, and all the stories about him are just fiction. "There is not a single Eastern religion," Berlioz said, "in which, as a rule, a virgin virgin would not have given birth to God, and Christians, without inventing anything new, in the same way tore off their Jesus, which in fact never existed in alive. This is what needs to be emphasized. " Berlioz can not be persuaded by anyone and nothing. No matter how convincing the arguments about the existence of Christ may be, he stands his ground. Nor could Woland convince Berlioz.
No matter how much Woland said about the existence of God, Berlioz did not want to change his views and stubbornly stood his ground. For this stubbornness, for self-confidence, Woland decides to punish Berlioz and predicts his death under the wheels of a tram. On the pages of the novel, Bulgakov satirically depicted Moscow residents: their life and customs, daily life and worries. Woland arrives to see what the inhabitants of Moscow have become. For this, he arranges a session of black magic. And literally throws money at people, puts them in expensive clothes. But not only greed and greed are inherent in them, inhabiting the capital. Mercy is also alive in them. Suffice it to recall the episode that happened at that unusual session when the Behemoth, the host of the Bengal program, rips his head off his shoulders. Seeing the leader without a head, Muscovites immediately ask Woland to return his head to Bengalsky. This is how Woland's words can characterize the inhabitants of Moscow of that time. "Well," he replied thoughtfully, "they are people like people, they love money; but it has always been ... mankind loves money, no matter what it is made of. whether made of leather, paper, bronze or gold ... Well, they are frivolous ... well, well ... and mercy sometimes knocks at their hearts ... ordinary people ... in general, they resemble the former ... the question only spoiled them ... "
The novel is very extensive in its scope and it is, of course, impossible to cover everything. "The Master and Margarita" is a novel about great love, about good and evil, about loneliness in a crowd, about repressions, about the role of the intelligentsia in society, about Moscow and Muscovites. You can talk endlessly about the novel, and still you cannot say everything with words. I really love this novel for the amazing goodness that it radiates, for the shock that you experience when reading it. It seems to me that "The Master and Margarita" is an immortal work. It will be read and appreciated in all ages and times. It is a rare combination of mind, soul and talent.
During the life of Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov, the novel "The Master and Margarita" was not completed and was not published. It is known that on May 8, 1929, Bulgakov handed over to the Nedra publishing house the Furibunda manuscript under the pseudonym K. Tugai. This is the earliest known date of work on The Master and Margarita (the manuscript was never published). Bulgakov destroyed the first edition of the novel on March 18, 1930 after receiving news of the ban on the play "Cabal of the holy man". Mikhail Afanasyevich announced this in a letter to the government on March 28, 1930: “And personally, with my own hands, I threw a draft of a novel about the devil into the stove…”. Work on "The Master and Margarita" was resumed in 1931. And on August 2, 1933. Bulgakov told his friend the writer V. Veresaev: “A demon has possessed me…. Already in Leningrad and now here, suffocating in my little rooms, I began to smudge page after page of my newly destroyed novel three years ago. What for? Do not know. I am amuse myself! Let it fall into oblivion! However, I will probably give it up soon. " However, Bulgakov no longer gave up "The Master and Margarita" and, with interruptions caused by the need to write plays, dramatizations and scripts to earn money, continued to work on the novel almost until the end of his life.
In May - June 1938, the fabulously completed text of The Master and Margarita was reprinted for the first time. The author's editing of the typescript began on September 19, 1938 and continued with interruptions almost until the writer's death. Bulgakov stopped it on February 13, 1940, less than four weeks before his death, at the phrase of Margarita: "So this is, therefore, the writers are following the coffin?" (The writer died on March 10). During his lifetime, the writer completed the novel on a plot basis, but many inconsistencies and contradictions remained in the drafts, which he did not have time to correct. So, for example, in chapter 13 it is stated that the Master is clean-shaven, and in chapter 24 he appears before us with a beard, and quite long, since it is not shaved, but only trimmed. The biography of Aloisy Mogarych was crossed out by Bulgakov, and a new version of it was only roughly outlined. Therefore, in some editions of The Master and Margarita it is omitted, while in others, with the aim of greater plot completion, the crossed out text is restored.