The history of creation and analysis of the story "Heart of a Dog" by MA Bulgakov The history of creation and literary fate of the work
Composition
Bulgakov's story " dog's heart", Which has the subtitle" A Monstrous Story ", was not published during the writer's lifetime. It was first published in 1968. ("Student". London. NN 9, 10; "Edge". Frankfurt. N 69). In the USSR, it was published in the Znamya magazine (No. 6) only in 1987. The manuscript bears the author's date: January-March 1925. The story was intended for the magazine "Nedra", where the "Devil's Day" and " Fatal eggs».
The plot of "Heart of a Dog", like the story "Fatal Eggs", goes back to the work of the great English science fiction writer Herbert Wells (1866-1946) - to the novel "The Island of Dr. Moreau". The book tells how a maniac professor in his laboratory on a desert island is engaged in the creation of unusual "hybrids", transforming people into animals by surgery.
The title "Heart of a Dog" is taken from the tavern couplet, placed in the book by A. V. Laifert "Balagany" (1922):
For the second pie -
Frog legs stuffing
With onions, with peppers
Yes with a dog's heart.
The name can be related to the past life of Klim Chugunkin, who made a living playing the balalaika in taverns.
On March 7, 1925, the author read the first part of the story for the first time at the literary meeting of Nikitinskiye Subbotniks, and on March 21, the second part. The meeting was attended by M. Ya. Schneider, who later wrote about his impressions: “This is the first literary work who dares to be himself. The time has come for the realization of the attitude to what happened ”(to the October Revolution of 1917). An OGPU agent present there reported to his superiors somewhat differently: “Such things, read in the most brilliant literary circle, are much more dangerous than the useless and harmless speeches of 101st class writers at meetings of the All-Russian Union of Poets. The whole thing is written in hostile, breathing endless contempt for Sovstroy, and denies all of its achievements. The second and last part of Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" aroused strong indignation of the two communist writers who were there and the general admiration of all the others. If similarly grossly disguised (for all this "humanization" is only an emphatically noticeable, careless make-up) attacks appear on the book market of the USSR, then the White Guard abroad, exhausted no less than us from book hunger, and even more from fruitless searches for an original, biting plot , it remains only to envy the exceptional conditions for counter-revolutionary authors in our country. "
Of course, such statements by "competent" employees could not pass without leaving a trace, and the story was banned.
However, people experienced in literature accepted the story and praised it. Vikentiy Veresaev wrote to the poet Maximilian Voloshin in April 1925: “I was very pleased to read your review of M. Bulgakov, his humorous things - pearls promising from him an artist of the first rank. But the censorship cuts him mercilessly. Recently they stabbed the wonderful thing "Heart of a Dog", and he is completely discouraged. " On May 7, 1926, as part of a campaign sanctioned by the Central Committee to combat “changeover”, Bulgakov's apartment was searched and the manuscript of the writer's diary and two copies of the typewritten “Heart of a Dog” were confiscated. Only more than three years later, what was confiscated during the search was returned to the author thanks to the assistance of Maxim Gorky.
"Heart of a Dog" was supposed to be staged at the Moscow Art Theater. On March 2, 1926, Bulgakov entered into an agreement with the theater, which, due to the censorship ban on the work, was terminated on April 19, 1927.
In "Heart of a Dog" there are characteristic signs of the time from December 1924 to March 1925. In the epilogue of the story, the March fog is mentioned, from which Sharik, who had regained his canine hypostasis, suffered from headaches. The program of the Moscow circuses, which Preobrazhensky studies so carefully, checking if there are any numbers with the participation of cats (“Solomonovsky has ... four of some kind ... Yussems and a dead center man ... Nikitin has ... elephants and the limit of human dexterity »), Exactly corresponds to the programs of the beginning of 1925. It was then that the tour of the trapeze artists "Four Yussems" and the equilibrist Eton, whose number was called "The Man at the Dead Center", took place.
The story begins with an image of Moscow seen through the eyes of Sharik, a wandering dog, useless to anyone, “knowing” life far from its best side. The picture of the city is realistic, even naturalistic: chic restaurants, where "the usual dish is mushrooms, pican sauce", and a canteen of "normal food for employees of the Central Council of National Economy", in which cabbage soup is cooked from "stinking corned beef". Here live "comrades", "gentlemen", "proletarians".
Everything shows an unsightly underside: there is devastation all around, streets, houses, people are distorted in a terrible grimace. At home, like people, they live their own independent life (Kalabukhov house). An ominous landscape is of considerable importance in the plot of the story: "A blizzard in the gateway roars a waste to me", "a dry blizzard witch thundered its gates", "a blizzard flapped from a gun overhead."
One of the main characters of the story - Professor Preobrazhensky- the world-famous scientist, doctor, clever girl, absolutely sure that "devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads", reflects on what is happening like this: after all, there was a Kalabukhov house before the revolution, and no one stole galoshes, and there were carpets in the front , and the staircase was clean, in flowers, but other people came and “in April 1917, one fine day, all the galoshes, 3 sticks, a coat and a samovar at the doorman’s were gone,” and it was then that devastation began.
The idea of transforming the world is old and noble, supported and developed by the best minds in history, but this is an idea of transformation, not destruction. From the very first pages of the story, the reader is immersed in an atmosphere of destruction, devastation, in a world where everything is built according to the law: "Who was nothing, he will become everything." These "nobody" live in the Kalabukhov house, it is thanks to them that "devastation" occurs. They are not doing business, they are singing. In this world, universal norms and laws of behavior cease to operate.
The name Preobrazhensky is not accidental. Philip Philipovich is not just a doctor, he is a "magician", "wizard", "sorcerer", a reformer who is trying to find a way to "improve the human race." But his experiment leads to unexpected results. The unhappy dog Sharik becomes a citizen of Sharikov. The process of influence begins with a word carried by Shvonder. In his opinion, Sharikov is a "proletarian", a "worker", which the professor cannot understand. "Why are you a hard worker?" he wonders. And the logic of the "proletarians" is as follows: "Yes, you know - not a NEPman." Sharikov is unaware that everything that Professor Preobrazhensky has acquired through his own labor, he is not embarrassed that he lives and feeds on the professor: after all, why work if you can take it away. As you know, Lenin's slogan "Rob the loot!" The noble idea of "equality and brotherhood" has degenerated into primitive egalitarianism and outright robbery. Both Sharikov and Shvonder are people artificially bred, only in different ways. The operation to transplant the pituitary gland within a week "humanized" the dog, the "operation" to "humanize" Shvonder took longer, but the result was essentially the same. These "people" have only external human characteristics, insufficient for the definition of "man" to be applicable to them. Millions of Shvonders were taught: to become a “new man”, the master of life, you don’t need to work hard and make any special efforts, it is enough that you are a “proletarian” - which means you have the right to be the “master of life”. Sharikov's conviction of his class superiority causes an outburst of indignation among Preobrazhensky and Bormental: “You are at the lowest stage of development; in the presence of two people with a university education, you allow yourself to give some advice of a cosmic scale and cosmic stupidity about how to divide everything. .. "
With the appearance of Sharikov, devastation begins in the professor's apartment, it takes on catastrophic proportions, and instead of doing business, operating, Preobrazhensky is forced to accept Shvonder, listen to threats, defend himself, write countless papers in order to legitimize the existence of Polygraph Poligrafovich. The life of the whole house has been disrupted, “the people are pounding all day long” to watch the “talking dog”. People have no other business, but without their business there is no life. This author's thought is very important. The Bolshevik revolutionaries are only doing what they are not doing their job: they lead, not knowing how to lead, destroy what they did not create, they rework everything, rebuild. The experiment of the Bolsheviks to create a "new" is the central problem of the story. Professor Preobrazhensky does not like the Bolsheviks, but he also wants to "improve the human race" with his surgical methods. And here is the conclusion made by the professor: Sharikov is violence against nature! “Explain to me, please, why it is necessary to artificially fabricate Spinoz, when any woman can safely give birth to him at any time. After all, Madame Lomonosov gave birth to this famous one in Kholmogory! My discovery, the devil would have eaten it, is worth exactly one broken penny ... Theoretically, this is interesting. Well, practically what? Who is in front of you now? “Preobrazhensky pointed in the direction of the examination room, where Sharikov was sleeping.” What could have come out of Klim Chugunkin, a drunkard with three convictions, who died in a pub from a stab in the heart? The answer is simple - Klim Chugunkin. Another thing is terrible: an "advanced" proletarian, for whom a state post has been prepared, becomes a "cross" between a criminal and a dog. But Sharikov would go far, because people like him are comfortable. The Sharikovs are ready to obey and subordinate. And the power of the proletariat is the basis of the proletarian ideology. It is impossible to change overnight what has developed over the centuries. The collapse of such experiments is inevitable, because it is impossible to "humanize" what has ceased to be human, having lost the spiritual and moral foundation on which the relationship between society and the individual is built. This is why the experiment in humanizing the dog has failed as well as the tragic communist "experiment." Time has shown how right M. Bulgakov was in his insights.
Other compositions on this work
"Reasonable and moral always coincide." L. N. Tolstoy. (Based on one of the works of Russian literature - M, A Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") "The Great Experiment" in the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" "Sharikovshchina" as a social and moral phenomenon (based on the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") “I don’t want, and I can’t believe that evil is the natural state of man” (F. M. Dostoevsky) (on the example of M. Bulgakov’s story “Heart of a Dog”) The author and his heroes in the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" Bulgakov - "politically harmful author" (review) Bulgakov and his novel "Heart of a Dog" What is Professor Preobrazhensky's fault? (based on the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") Mikhail Bulgakov's view of the revolution (based on the story "Heart of a Dog") Shvonder's visit to Professor Preobrazhensky (analysis of an episode from chapter 6 of Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") The comic and tragic in the works of M. A. Bulgakov (on the example of the story "Heart of a Dog") M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" Monologue of Preobrazhensky as one of the elements of his portrait characteristics (based on the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") Moral problematics of M. A. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog". The moral problematics of the story by M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" Moral problems of the works of the 20th century (for 1-2 works of Russian and native literature) The image of an antihero and the means of its creation in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century The image of an antihero and the means of its creation in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century. (M.A.Bulgakov. "Heart of a Dog.") The image of Moscow in the novel by M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" The image of Professor Preobrazhensky (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") The image of the Russian intellectual (based on the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") The image of Sharikov in Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Features of the development of the conflict in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century. (M.A.Bulgakov. "Heart of a Dog.") Why Professor Preobrazhensky was mistaken (story of MA Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") Why Bulgakov's satirical story "Heart of a Dog" was not published immediately after writing Why is Professor Preobrazhensky's experiment unsuccessful? (based on the story of M. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") Comic techniques and their role in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century. (M.A.Bulgakov. "Heart of a Dog.") Problems and artistic originality of M. A. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Professor Preobrazhensky and Shvonder (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Reasoning over the pages of the story "Heart of a Dog" The real and the surreal in the works of M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" and "The Master and Margarita" Review of Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog". Fatal experiments (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") The role of satire in M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" The role of science fiction in Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" SATIR (Based on the story "Heart of a Dog") The originality of the satire by Mikhail Bulgakov ("Heart of a Dog") The meaning of Sharik's two transformations in M. A. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" The meaning of Sharik's two transformations in M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" The meaning of the title of the story by M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" The meaning of Sharik's transformations (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog"). Soviet power in the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog". The theme of revolution, civil war and the fate of the Russian intelligentsia in Russian literature (Pasternak, Bulgakov) Fantastic and real in the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" Features of the revolutionary era in the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" Features of the revolutionary era in M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Sharikov and Sharik (based on Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Sharikov and Sharikovism (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Sharikov and Sharikovism (based on Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Sharikov and Sharikovshchina (based on the story of MA Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog"). Sharikovism is a social phenomenon "The devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads", - The main idea of M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Analysis of the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" The image of Professor Preobrazhensky Relevance of M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Statement of moral problems in M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" The meaning of the title of the story "Heart of a Dog" Fatal experiments Creation of a new man from the old "human material" (based on the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") The bad news is that people don't think about social justice (based on the story "Heart of a Dog") Conflict in the story "Heart of a Dog" Heart of a Dog, Image of Sharikov in M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" The results of the Shvonder education of Sharikov (Analysis of the episode "From the diary of Dr. Bormental" according to the news of MA Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") Comic techniques and their role in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century Sharikov and sharikovshchina Shvonder's visit to Professor Preobrazhensky. (Analysis of the episode from chapter 6 of Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog".) Biblical motives in the story "Heart of a Dog" The meaning of Sharik's two transformations in Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Unnatural experiment of professor Preobrazhensky Fiction dystopia and satire in the story "Heart of a Dog" Heart of a Dog, The Image of an Antihero and the Means of Its Creation in One of the Works of Russian Literature of the 20th Century "Heart of a Dog", The image of an antihero and the means of its creation in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century. (M. A. Bulgakov. "Heart of a Dog.") "Heart of a Dog", Life with a Heart of a Dog (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Soviet Russia and the "new man" through the eyes of Mikhail Bulgakov (based on the story "Heart of a Dog") Why can the experiment of professor Preobrazhensky be called unsuccessful? Features of the revolutionary era in Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Great experiment "Reasonable and moral always coincide." Leo Tolstoy. ("Dog's heart") The vitality of "Sharikovshchina" as a social and moral phenomenon "Shvonder is the most important fool" (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") The author's position and methods of depicting heroes in Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" The central character of the story by M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" Sharikov is the hero of the story by M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" Genre originality of the story "Heart of a Dog" by MA Bulgakov "The devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads" "Heart of a Dog", Bulgakov and his novel "Heart of a Dog" Features of the development of the conflict in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century The image of the city in one of the works of Russian literature of the XX century. Two works based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs" The tragedy of the Russian people in Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" Satire as a means of ridicule the distorted reality (Based on the story of M. A. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog") "A real writer is the same as an ancient prophet: he sees more clearly than ordinary people" (based on Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Sharikov - characteristic of a literary hero Satire in Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" The topic of the danger of "revolutionary" transformation of nature Heart of a Dog, Satire (based on the story "Heart of a Dog") Heart of a Dog, Sharikov and Sharikovism (based on M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog") Creativity M.A.Bulgakov The relationship between Sharikov and Preobrazhensky Composing novellas by M. Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs" The role of the author in the story "Heart of a Dog" Mayakovsky's "Bedbug" and Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" in the Context of Time Dispute between Dr. Bormental and Professor Preobrazhensky A Christmas story on Prechistenka (the main themes of M. Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog")The story, written in 1925, recreates the contemporary reality of the writer - the Soviet reality of the early 1920s. However, the picture reproduced in the smallest detail (with an exact indication of the salary of the "typist of the IX category" - four and a half ducats - and the mention that firefighters, "as you know, eat porridge") does not at all become a documentary portrait of the era. The combination of a fantastic assumption (the transformation of a dog into a human) with many specific details (up to the chemical composition of the "Special Krakow" sausage), the interweaving of comic details of Sharik's "humanization" with the tragic consequences of this experiment form a grotesque image of reality.
The protagonist of the story, Professor Preobrazhensky, bears a sacred name indicating his role as an omnipotent deity, a “priest” (as Sharik will perceive him), capable of transforming the world and man. Even the ordinary procedure of bandaging Sharik's scalded side in Preobrazhensky's house becomes comparable to death and resurrection (and involuntarily recalls the parable of the resurrection of Lazarus from the Gospel): “And then he finally fell on his side and died. When he was resurrected, his head was slightly dizzy and his stomach felt a little nauseous, but his side seemed to be missing, the side was sweetly silent. "
However, the event full of mystical significance is presented in a halo of depressing, prosaic details. Sharik's "transformation" is just another stage in the professor's scientific research, the main goal of which is to rejuvenate a person by transplanting the sex glands. In the narrative structure of Dog's Heart, the miraculous Transfiguration of the Lord becomes synonymous with ordinary surgery.
The parodic-ironic transformation of the gospel motive is clearly manifested at the level of the stylistic organization of the text. Professor Preobrazhensky is an omnipotent "priest", "magician" and "sorcerer", but these definitions fall into the following context in Bulgakov:
The one who entered very respectfully and embarrassedly bowed to Philip Filippitch.
Hee hee! You are a magician and a sorcerer, professor, ”he said in confusion.
Take off your pants, darling, - ordered Philip Filippovich and got up.
"Jesus Christ," thought the dog, "that's a fruit!"
On the fruit's head, completely green hair grew, and on the back of the head it was cast in a rusty tobacco color ...
In the neighborhood of "hee-hee", "pants" and green-haired "fruit", Transformation turns into profanation, and "priestly" secrets - into a scientifically disguised fraud.
However, the range of sacred meanings is not limited to the "speaking" surname of the protagonist of the story. The apartment of Professor Preobrazhensky is located on Prechistenka - thus with the help of the toponym in the associative semantic row the image of the Most Pure Mother of God is introduced. Through Sharikov's fault, a "flood" will occur in the same apartment - a parody version of the local "great flood" (in pursuit of the cat, the former dog turned the tap in the bathroom). The first word uttered by Sharik after turning into a person - "abyrvalg" - is a store sign read from right to left "Glavryba" and in a retrospective analysis of biblical allusions can serve as an ironic allusion to the laws of Semitic writing. Equally ironic and parodic is the combination in the narrative of a quotation from an opera aria (Professor Preobrazhensky hums the same fragment from Verdi's opera Aida - “To the Sacred Banks of the Nile ...”) and an announcement on the door: “I forbid eating sunflower seeds in the apartment ... F. Preobrazhensky ". (Besides, music theme culture and priestly power is interrupted with the appearance of Sharikov by the motives of the songs "Oh, apple" and "The month is shining," which came from the world of "proletarian devastation", which Preobrazhensky is trying to resist.) of real life throws a grotesque reflection on the picture consecrated by the priestly service and introduces sharply satirical tones into it.
Gospel motives are directly expressed in the arrangement of the characters. The miraculous transformations performed by Professor Preobrazhensky are recorded by his student, Dr. Bormental, who acts in the story as an “evangelist” (Levi Matthew will play the same role under Yeshua in the novel “The Master and Margarita”). - in a contradictory combination of sincere devotion to the teacher and his complete misunderstanding.
Dr. Bormental's notes are filled with sincere admiration for the teacher's discovery; Sharik's documentary "case history" is now and then interrupted by the enthusiastic exclamations of the "chronicler": "The amazing experience of Professor Preobrazhensky has revealed one of the mysteries of the human brain! From now on, the mysterious function of the pituitary gland - the cerebral appendage - has been clarified! .. The surgeon's scalpel brought to life a new human unit. Prof. Preobrazhensky, you are a creator !! (Blot)". (Let's pay attention to the next stylistic failure in the narration - a significant neighborhood of the "creator" and the blots).
However, the faithful “evangelist” disciple actually acts as an unreliable storyteller - a storyteller who inadequately interprets the words and actions of the teacher, creating a distorted picture of what is happening. His explanations and comments contradict the "correct" interpretation - supported by the authority of the participant in the event or the author himself. So, for example, Sharik's amazing ability to read from right to left in Bormental's diary gets the following explanation: “Sharik read! I read it !!! ... I read it from the end. And I even know where the solution to this riddle is: in the cross of the optic nerves of the dog! " but true reason, as the reader remembers from the very beginning of the story, it was much more prosaic and was covered in something completely different: “to run up to Sharik's store ... it was more convenient to run up from the tail of the word“ fish ”, because at the beginning of the word there was a policeman”. The ominous tone of Professor Preobrazhensky when his student tries to start a conversation about Sharik's future and his transformation into a "very high mental personality" generally remains without an intelligible comment: "Something strange is being done with Philip ... The old man has invented something."
Professor Preobrazhensky still remains in the eyes of his student an omnipotent deity - while the "magician" and "sorcerer" was powerless in the face of the chaos introduced into his life by a miracle. Professor Preobrazhensky is the type of Bulgakov's hero who will then pass through the entire work of the writer: endowed with a powerful creative (transforming) force, he can simultaneously be weak and vulnerable. Bulgakov's hero is always forced to confront the world around him - hostile, aggressive, absurd. In Heart of a Dog, this world is personified in the person of Shvonder and members of the House Committee. The "ascetics" of the new faith are presented in a sharply grotesque light. One of the members of the house committee - "a peachy youth in a leather jacket" - bears the surname Vyazemskaya (let's pay attention to the literary origin of the surname and the emphasized change in the usual grammatical gender), turns out to be a woman, but in Bulgakov's description the grotesque context of identification is invariably restored: "This is indescribable! - exclaimed the young man who turned out to be a woman "; "I, as the head of the cultural department of the house ..." The presenter, "Philip Philipovich corrected her."
The inexplicable metamorphoses taking place with the representatives of the new government may, however, be fraught with danger. As soon as Sharik turned into Polygraph Sharikov and became involved in the powers that be - “take up the post” of the head of the sub-department for cleaning Moscow from stray animals, his stay in Preobrazhensky's apartment became a mortal threat both for the professor himself (on whom a denunciation had already been written), and for all the inhabitants of his house. The grotesque transformations that responsible Soviet officials are subject to in Bulgakov's world (and in the works of Bulgakov in the 1930s these metamorphoses will become truly fantastic) give the new power and its representatives an infernal-demonic character, making them not so much a social or political force as a metaphysical force, which Bulgakov's hero is forced to resist.
Another important feature of Bulgakov's poetics is clearly manifested in "Heart of a Dog" - division artistic space into two (ideally, impenetrable for each other) subspaces. One of them is Preobrazhensky's apartment on Prechistenka, "dog paradise" in Sharik's terminology and an ideal (even idyllic) space for a professor. The most important components of this space are comfort, harmony, spirituality, “divine warmth”. Sharik's arrival in this space was accompanied by the fact that "the darkness clicked and turned into a dazzling day, and from all sides it sparkled, shone and turned white." Of the "topographic" features of this space, two main ones should be distinguished: outwardly, it is strictly limited, localized and is just an apartment, internally, it is spacious, huge and, moreover, capable of unlimited expansion (to a large extent, due to the huge mirrors).
The second space - external - open, aggressive, hostile. Its initial signs are a blizzard, wind, street dirt; its permanent inhabitants are "a scoundrel in a dirty cap" ("a thief with a copper muzzle", "a greedy creature"), a cook from a dining room, and "the most disgusting scum" of all proletarians - a janitor. The outer space appears - as opposed to the inner one - as a world of absurdity and chaos. Shvonder and his "entourage" come from this world - to recapture part of the professor's "personal" space and to compact his seven-room apartment by "expropriating" the examination room. Only the door of the apartment separates these two spaces from each other - and therefore the only desire of Professor Preobrazhensky is to get “such a piece of paper, in the presence of which neither Shvonder nor anyone else could even come to the door of my apartment. The final piece of paper ... Armor. " Sealing, complete isolation is the only way to protect your own, "true" space from the invasion of someone else's, "imaginary". (Note that the side of the door that is facing outward also turns out to be in the grip of an absurd reality. A ball trying to read the door plate with the professor's name is horrified to discover that the continuation of the three guessed letters - p-r-o - can become "l" , and then the inscription will turn into the hated word “proletarian.” Only the presence of “pot-bellied two-sided rubbish” - the saving letter “f” - turns the almost begun nightmare into a wonderful reality of a luxurious apartment on Prechistenka).
The coexistence of two opposing spaces in artistic world Bulgakov also defines the structure of the end-to-end, invariant Bulgakov plot: the destruction of the inner, ideal space - and the hero's attempts to restore the lost paradise. In "Heart of a Dog" the destruction of harmonious existence is accompanied by a parody flood, obsessive visits by "werewolves" from the art world - Vyazemskaya (a member of the house committee) and Vasnetsova (Sharikov's bride), absurd projects of redevelopment of the professor's apartment. Restoring the destroyed harmony - even at the cost of a crime (“The crime has ripened and fell like a stone ...”) is the only goal of Professor Preobrazhensky and the main vector of the plot's movement. Thus, the story reinterprets the traditional complex of guilt of the intelligentsia towards the people. Preobrazhensky and Bormental defend their "right to rights" in the new world - although they are not relieved of their responsibility for experimenting with human nature.
What is the book "Heart of a Dog" about? The ironic story of Bulgakov tells of the failed experiment of Professor Preobrazhensky. What is it? In search of an answer to the question of how to "rejuvenate" humanity. Does the hero manage to find the answer he is looking for? No. But he arrives at a result that has a higher level of significance for society than the intended experiment.
Bulgakov from Kiev decided to become a singer of Moscow, its houses and streets. This is how the Moscow chronicles were born. The story was written in Prechistinskiye lanes by order of the Nedra magazine, which is well acquainted with the work of the writer. The chronology of the writing of the work fits into three months of 1925.
As a doctor, Mikhail Alexandrovich continued the dynasty of his family, describing in detail in the book the operation to "rejuvenate" a person. Moreover, the well-known Moscow doctor N.M. Pokrovsky, the uncle of the author of the story, became the prototype of Professor Preobrazhensky.
The first reading of the typewritten material took place at a meeting of the Nikitsky Subbotniks, which immediately became known to the country's leadership. In May 1926, the Bulgakovs were searched, the result of which was not long in coming: the manuscript was seized. The plan to publish his work with the writer did not come true. The Soviet reader saw the book only in 1987.
Main problems
It was not in vain that the book disturbed the vigilant guardians of thought. Bulgakov managed to gracefully and subtly, but still quite clearly reflect the topical issues - the challenges of the new time. The problems in the story "Heart of a Dog", which the author touches on, do not leave the readers indifferent. The writer discusses the ethics of science, the moral responsibility of the scientist for his experiments, the possibility of the disastrous consequences of scientific adventurism and ignorance. A technical breakthrough could turn into a moral decline.
The problem of scientific progress is acutely felt at the moment of its powerlessness in the face of the transformation of the consciousness of a new person. The professor coped with his body, but he could not control the spirit, so Preobrazhensky had to part with ambitions and correct his mistake - to stop competing with the universe and return the dog's heart to the owner. Artificial people could not justify their proud title and become full-fledged members of society. In addition, endless rejuvenation could jeopardize the very idea of progress, because if new generations do not naturally replace old ones, then the development of the world will stop.
Are attempts to change the mentality of the country for the better completely fruitless? The Soviet government tried to eradicate the prejudices of the past centuries - this is the process behind the metaphor of Sharikov's creation. Here he is, a proletarian, a new Soviet citizen, his creation is possible. However, the problem of upbringing arises before its creators: they cannot calm down their creation and teach it to be cultured, educated and moral with a full set of revolutionary consciousness, class hatred and blind faith in the correctness and infallibility of the party. Why? This is impossible: either a pipe or a jug.
Human defenselessness in the whirlwind of events related to the construction of a socialist society, hatred of violence and hypocrisy, the absence and suppression of the remaining human dignity in all its manifestations - all these are slaps in the face with which the author branded his era, and all because it does not put individuality in a penny ... Collectivization has affected not only the countryside, but also souls. It became more and more difficult to remain a person, because the public presented more and more rights to her. General equating and equalizing did not make people happier, but turned them into the ranks of meaningless biorobots, where the grayest and most talentless of them set the tone. Rudeness and stupidity have become the norm in society, have replaced revolutionary consciousness, and in the image of Sharikov we see a sentence to a new type of Soviet man. From the domination of the Shvonders and others like them, the problems of trampling on the intelligentsia and the intelligentsia, the power of dark instincts in the life of an individual, total rude interference in the natural course of things ...
There are no answers to some of the questions posed in the work to this day.
What is the meaning of the book?
People have been looking for answers to the questions for a long time: What is a person? What is its social purpose? What role does everyone play in creating the environment that would be "comfortable" for those living on planet Earth? What are the “paths” to this “comfortable community”? Is it possible for a consensus between people of different social origins, adhering to opposite views on certain issues of life, occupying alternative "steps" in intellectual and cultural development? And, of course, it is important to understand the simple truth that society develops thanks to unexpected discoveries in a particular branch of science. But can these “discoveries” always be called progressive? Bulgakov answers all these questions with his characteristic irony.
A person is a person, and personal development implies independence, which is denied to a Soviet citizen. The social purpose of people is to skillfully do their job and not interfere with others. However, Bulgakov's "conscious" heroes only chant slogans, but do not work for the benefit of translating them into reality. Each of us, for the sake of comfort, should tolerate dissent and not interfere with people professing it. And again in the USSR everything is exactly the opposite: Preobrazhensky's talent is forced to fight to defend his right to help patients, and his point of view is blatantly condemned and persecuted by some nonentities. They can live in peace if everyone does their own thing, but there is no equality in nature and cannot be, because from the very birth we are all different from each other. It is impossible to support him artificially, since Shvonder cannot begin to operate brilliantly, and the professor cannot play the balalaika. Imposed, not real equality will only harm people, prevent them from adequately assessing their place in the world and taking it with dignity.
Humanity needs discoveries, this is understandable. But you shouldn't reinvent the wheel - try to reproduce a person artificially, for example. If the natural method is still possible, why does it need an analogue, and even so laborious? There are many other, more significant threats before people, to which it is worth turning the full power of scientific intelligence.
Main Topics
The story is multifaceted. The author touches upon important topics characteristic not only of the era of the early twentieth century, but also “eternal”: good and evil, science and morality, morality, human destiny, attitude towards animals, building a new state, homeland, sincere human relations. I would especially like to highlight the theme of the responsibility of the creator for his creation. The struggle between ambitions and adherence to principles in the professor ended with the victory of humanism over pride. He resigned himself to his error, admitted defeat, and used the experience to correct his mistakes. This is what every creator should do.
Also relevant in the work is the theme of individual freedom and those boundaries that society, like the state, is not entitled to cross. Bulgakov insists that a full-fledged person is one who has free will and beliefs. Only he can develop the idea of socialism without caricatured forms and ramifications that disfigure the concept. The crowd is blind and always driven by primitive stimuli. But the personality is capable of self-control and self-development, it must be given the will to work and live for the good of society, and not turn it against it by vain attempts at forcible merger.
Satire and humor
The book opens with a monologue of a stray dog, addressed to the "citizens" and giving precise characteristics to Muscovites and the city itself. The population "through the eyes" of a dog is heterogeneous (which is true!): Citizens - comrades - gentlemen. "Citizens" buy goods in the cooperative of Tsentrokhoz, and "gentlemen" - in Okhotny Ryad. Why do rich people need a rotten horse? You can get this "poison" only in Mosselprom.
You can “recognize” a person by the eyes: some have “dryness in their souls”, some are aggressive, and who are “lackeys”. The last one is the nastiest. If you are afraid, you should be "banged". The most disgusting "scum" - wipers: rowing "human cleaning".
But the cook is an important subject. Nutrition is a serious indicator of the state of society. So, the lordly chef of the Counts Tolstoy is a real person, and the chefs from the Council of Normal Nutrition do things that even a dog does not want. If I became chairman, then I actively steal. Ham, tangerines, wines - these are “former Eliseev brothers”. The doorman is worse than cats. He lets a stray dog pass by currying favor with the professor.
The education system “presupposes” Muscovites “educated” and “uneducated”. Why learn to read? "So the meat smells a mile away." But if you have at least some brains, you will learn to read and write without courses, like, for example, a stray dog. The beginning of Sharikov's education was an electrician's shop, where the tramp "tasted" the insulated wire.
Irony, humor, and satire are often used in conjunction with tropes: similes, metaphors, and impersonations. A special satirical technique can be considered the way of the initial presentation of characters according to preliminary descriptive characteristics: "mysterious gentleman", "rich eccentric" - Professor Preobrazhensky "; "Handsome-bitten", "bitten" - Dr. Bormental; "Someone", "fruit" - a visitor. Sharikov's inability to communicate with tenants, to formulate his requirements, gives rise to humorous situations and questions.
If we talk about the state of the press, then through the mouth of Fedor Fedorovich, the writer talks about the case when, as a result of reading Soviet newspapers before lunch, patients lost weight. An interesting assessment by the professor of the existing system through the "hanger" and "galosh rack": until 1917, the front doors were not closed, since dirty shoes and outerwear were left below. After March, all galoshes disappeared.
Main idea
In his book M.A. Bulgakov warned that violence is a crime. All life on earth has a right to exist. This is an unwritten law of nature that must be followed in order to avoid a point of no return. It is necessary to preserve the purity of the soul and thoughts for life, so as not to indulge in internal aggression, not to spill it out. Therefore, the violent interference of a professor in the natural course of things is condemned by the writer, therefore it leads to such monstrous consequences.
The civil war hardened society, made it marginal, boorish and vulgar at its core. Here they are, the fruits of violent interference in the life of the country. All of Russia in the 1920s is a rude and ignorant Sharikov, who does not at all strive for work. His tasks are less lofty and more selfish. Bulgakov warned his contemporaries against such a development of events, ridiculing the vices of a new type of people and showing their inconsistency.
The main characters and their characteristics
- The central figure of the book is Professor Preobrazhensky. Wears gold-rimmed glasses. Lives in a rich seven-room apartment. He is lonely. He devotes all his time to work. Philip Philipovich conducts a reception at home, sometimes he also operates here. Patients call him "magician", "sorcerer". "He does", often accompanying his actions by singing excerpts from operas. Loves theater. I am convinced that everyone should strive to become an expert in their field. The professor is an excellent speaker. His judgments are lined up in a clear logical chain. He says about himself that he is a man of observation, facts. Leading a discussion, he gets carried away, gets excited, sometimes goes to shout if the problem hurts him to the quick. The attitude towards the new order is manifested in his statements about terror, paralyzing nervous system a person, about newspapers, about the devastation in the country. Caring for animals: "hungry, poor fellow." In relation to living beings, he preaches only affection and the impossibility of any violence. Suggestion of humane truths is the only way to influence all living things. An interesting detail in the interior of the professor's apartment is a huge owl sitting on the wall, a symbol of wisdom, so necessary not only for a world-famous scientist, but also for every person. At the end of the "experiment", he finds the courage to admit that the experiment rejuvenation failed.
- Young, handsome Ivan Arnoldovich Bormental - assistant professor, who fell in love with him, sheltered him as a promising young man. Philip Philipovich hoped that a talented scientist would graduate from the doctor in the future. During the operation, in the hands of Ivan Arnoldovich, literally everything flickers. A doctor is not just scrupulous about his duties. The doctor's diary as a strict medical report-observation of the patient's condition reflects the whole gamut of his feelings and experiences for the result of the "experiment".
- Shvonder is the chairman of the house committee. All his actions resemble the convulsions of a puppet, which is controlled by someone invisible. The speech is confusing, the same words are repeated, which sometimes causes a condescending smile from the readers. Shvonder doesn't even have a name. He sees his task in fulfilling the will of the new government, without thinking whether this is good or bad. For the sake of achieving his goal, he is capable of any step. Vindictive, he distorts the facts, slanders many people.
- Sharikov is a creature, something, the result of an "experiment". A sloping and low forehead indicates the level of its development. Uses all swear words in his vocabulary. An attempt to teach him good manners, to instill a taste for beauty was not crowned with success: he drinks, steals, mocks women, cynically offends people, strangles cats, "performs bestial acts." As they say, nature rests on it, because you can't go against it.
The main motives of Bulgakov's work
The versatility of Bulgakov's work is striking. It is as if you are traveling through the works, meeting familiar motives. Love, greed, totalitarianism, morality - these are just parts of one whole, "wandering" from book to book and creating a single thread.
- In Notes on Cuffs and in Heart of a Dog, there is a belief in human kindness. This motive is also central to The Master and Margarita.
- The fate of the story "The Devil" is clearly traced little man, an ordinary screw of a bureaucratic machine. This motive is typical for other works of the author. The system suppresses them in people best qualities And the scary thing is that over time it becomes the norm for the people. In the novel The Master and Margarita, writers whose creations did not correspond to the ruling ideology were kept in a psychiatric hospital. Professor Preobrazhensky talked about his observations, when he gave patients to read the newspaper "Pravda" before dinner, they lost weight. It was impossible to find anything in the periodicals that would contribute to broadening one's horizons and allowing one to look at events from opposite angles.
- Selfishness is what the majority is guided by negative characters Bulgakov's books. For example, Sharikov from Dog's Heart. And how many troubles could have been avoided, provided that the "red ray" would have been used for its intended purpose, and not for selfish purposes (the story "Fatal Eggs")? The foundations of these works are experiments that run counter to nature. It is noteworthy that Bulgakov identified the experiment with the construction of socialism in the Soviet Union, which is dangerous for society as a whole.
- The main motive of the writer's work is the motive of his home. The cosiness in Philip Philipovich's apartment ("a lamp under a silk lampshade") resembles the atmosphere of the Turbins' house. Home - family, homeland, Russia, about which the writer had a heartache. With all his creativity, he wished the homeland well-being and prosperity.
Bulgakov's novella Heart of a Dog, subtitled A Monstrous Story, was not published during the writer's lifetime. It was first published in 1968. ("Student". London. Nos. 9, 10; "Borders". Frankfurt. No. 69). In the USSR, it was published in the Znamya magazine (No. 6) only in 1987. The manuscript bears the author's date: January-March 1925. The story was intended for the Nedra magazine, where Diavoliada and Fatal Eggs were previously published.
The plot of "Heart of a Dog", like the story "Fatal Eggs", goes back to the work of the great English science fiction writer Herbert Wells (1866-1946) - to the novel "The Island of Dr. Moreau". The book tells how a maniac professor in his laboratory on a desert island is engaged in the creation of unusual "hybrids", transforming people into animals by surgery.
The title "Heart of a Dog" is taken from the tavern couplet, placed in the book by A. V. Laifert "Balagany" (1922):
For the second pie -
Frog legs stuffing
With onions, with peppers
Yes with a dog's heart.
The name can be related to the past life of Klim Chugunkin, who made a living playing the balalaika in taverns.
On March 7, 1925, the author read the first part of the story for the first time at the literary meeting of "Nikitinskiye Subbotniks", and on March 21 - the second part. The meeting was attended by M. Ya. Schneider, who later wrote about his impressions: “This is the first literary work that dares to be oneself. The time has come to realize the attitude to what happened” (to the October Revolution of 1917). An OGPU agent who was present there also reported to his superiors a little differently: “Such things read in the most brilliant literary circle are much more dangerous than the useless and harmless speeches of 101st class writers at meetings of the All-Russian Union of Poets.<...>The whole thing is written in hostile, breathing endless contempt for the Soviet Union.<...>and denies all his achievements.<...>The second and last part of Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" aroused strong indignation of the two communist writers who were there and the general admiration of all the others.<...>If similarly grossly disguised (for all this "humanization" is only an emphatically noticeable, careless make-up) attacks appear on the book market of the USSR, then the White Guard abroad, exhausted no less than us from book hunger, and even more from fruitless searches for an original, biting plot , it remains only to envy the exceptional conditions for the counter-revolutionary authors in our country. "
Of course, such statements by "competent" employees could not pass without leaving a trace, and the story was banned.
However, people experienced in literature accepted the story and praised it. Vikenty Veresaev in April 1925 wrote to the poet Maximilian Voloshin: “I was very pleased to read your review of M. Bulgakov<...>his humorous things are pearls that promise him an artist of the first rank. But the censorship cuts him mercilessly. Recently they stabbed the wonderful thing "Heart of a Dog", and he is completely discouraged. "On May 7, 1926, as part of a campaign sanctioned by the Central Committee to combat" changeover ", Bulgakov's apartment was searched and confiscated the manuscript of the writer's diary and two copies of the typewritten" Heart of a Dog "Only more than three years later, what was confiscated during the search was returned to the author thanks to the assistance of Maxim Gorky.
"Heart of a Dog" was supposed to be staged at the Moscow Art Theater. On March 2, 1926, Bulgakov entered into an agreement with the theater, which, due to the censorship ban on the work, was terminated on April 19, 1927.
In "Heart of a Dog" there are characteristic signs of the time from December 1924 to March 1925. In the epilogue of the story, the March fog is mentioned, from which Sharik, who had regained his canine hypostasis, suffered from headaches. The program of the Moscow circuses, which Preobrazhensky studies so carefully, checking if there are any numbers with the participation of cats ("Solomonovsky has ... four of some ... Yussems and a dead center man ... Nikitin has ... elephants and the limit of human dexterity "), exactly corresponds to the programs of the beginning of 1925. It was then that the tour of the trapeze artists "Four Yussems" and the equilibrist Eton, whose number was called "The Man at the Dead Center", took place.
The story begins with an image of Moscow seen through the eyes of Sharik, a wandering dog, useless to anyone, "knowing" life far from its best side. The picture of the city is realistic, even naturalistic: chic restaurants, where "the usual dish is mushrooms, pican sauce", and a canteen "for normal food for employees of the Central Council of National Economy", in which cabbage soup is cooked from "stinking corned beef". Here live "comrades", "gentlemen", "proletarians".
Everything shows an unsightly underside: there is devastation all around, streets, houses, people are distorted in a terrible grimace. At home, like people, they live their own independent life (Kalabukhov house). An ominous landscape is of considerable importance in the plot of the story: "A blizzard in the gateway roars a waste to me", "a dry blizzard witch thundered its gates", "a blizzard flapped from a gun overhead."
One of the main characters of the story - Professor Preobrazhensky - a world-famous scientist, doctor, clever girl, absolutely sure that "devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads", reflects on what is happening like this: after all, there was a Kalabukhov house before the revolution, and no one he stole galoshes, and there were carpets in the front door, and the staircase was clean, in flowers, but other people came and "in April 1917, one fine day, all the galoshes disappeared<...>3 sticks, a coat and a samovar at the doorman's ", and then the devastation began.
The idea of transforming the world is old and noble, supported and developed by the best minds in history, but this is an idea of transformation, not destruction. From the very first pages of the story, the reader is immersed in an atmosphere of destruction, devastation, in a world where everything is built according to the law: "Who was nothing, he will become everything." These "nobody" live in the Kalabukhov house, it is thanks to them that "devastation" occurs. They are not doing business, they are singing. In this world, universal norms and laws of behavior cease to operate.
The name Preobrazhensky is not accidental. Philip Philipovich is not just a doctor, he is a "magician", "wizard", "sorcerer", a reformer who is trying to find a way to "improve the human race." But his experiment leads to unexpected results. The unhappy dog Sharik becomes a citizen of Sharikov. The process of influence begins with a word carried by Shvonder. In his opinion, Sharikov is a "proletarian", a "worker", which the professor cannot understand. "Why are you a hard worker?" he wonders. And the logic of the "proletarians" is as follows: "Yes, you know - not a NEPman." Sharikov is unaware that everything that Professor Preobrazhensky has acquired through his own labor, he is not embarrassed that he lives and feeds on the professor: after all, why work if you can take it away. As you know, Lenin's dozung "Steal the loot!" The noble idea of "equality and brotherhood" has degenerated into primitive egalitarianism and outright robbery. Both Sharikov and Shvonder are people artificially bred, only in different ways. The pituitary transplant operation within a week "humanized" the dog, the "operation" to "humanize" Shvonder took longer, but the result was essentially the same. These "people" have only external human characteristics, insufficient for the definition of "man" to be applicable to them. Millions of Shvonders were taught: to become a "new man", the master of life, you do not need to work hard and make any special efforts, it is enough that you are a "proletarian" - which means you have the right to be the "master of life." Sharikov's conviction of his class superiority provokes an outburst of indignation among Preobrazhensky and Bormental: “You are at the lowest stage of development<...>in the presence of two people with a university education, you allow yourself to give some advice of a cosmic scale and cosmic nonsense about how to divide everything ... "
With the appearance of Sharikov, devastation begins in the professor's apartment, it takes on catastrophic proportions, and instead of doing business, operating, Preobrazhensky is forced to accept Shvonder, listen to threats, defend himself, write countless papers in order to legitimize the existence of Polygraph Poligrafovich. The life of the whole house is disrupted, "people are pounding all day long" to watch the "talking dog". People have no other business, but without their business there is no life. This author's thought is very important. Bolypevic revolutionaries only do what they do not do their job: they lead, not being able to lead, destroy what they have not created, rework everything, rebuild everything. The experiment of the Bolsheviks to create a "new" is the central problem of the story. Professor Preobrazhensky does not like the Bolsheviks, but he also wants to "improve the human race" with his surgical methods. And here is the conclusion made by the professor: Sharikov is violence against nature! "Explain to me, please, why it is necessary to artificially fabricate Spinoz, when any woman can safely give birth to him at any time. After all, Madame Lomonosov gave birth to this famous one of hers in Kholmogory!"<...>My discovery, the devil would eat it,<...>there is exactly one broken penny ...<...>In theory, this is interesting.<...>Well, practically what? Who is in front of you now? - Preobrazhensky pointed in the direction of the examination room, where Sharikov rested. "What could have come out of Klim Chugunkin, a drunkard with three convictions, who died in a pub from a stab in the heart? The answer is simple - Klim Chugunkin. Another thing is terrible: an" advanced "proletarian, for whom the state post is prepared, it becomes a "cross between" a criminal and a dog. But Sharikov would go far, because people like him are convenient. The Sharikovs are ready to obey and subordinate. And the power of the proletariat is the basis of the proletarian ideology. The collapse of such experiments is inevitable, because it is impossible to "humanize" what has ceased to be human, having lost the spiritual and moral foundation on which the relationship between society and the individual is built. That is why the experiment with humanizing a dog failed just like the tragic communist one. " experiment. "Time has shown how right M. Bulgakov was in his insights.
"Heart of a Dog" was written in early 1925. It was supposed to be published in the almanac "Nedra", but censorship forbade publication. The story was completed in March, and Bulgakov read it at the literary meeting of the Nikitsky Subbotniks. The Moscow public became interested in the work. It was distributed in samizdat. It was first published in London and Frankfurt in 1968, in the Znamya magazine No. 6 in 1987.
In the 20s. medical experiments on the rejuvenation of the human body were very popular. Bulgakov, as a doctor, was familiar with these natural science experiments. The prototype of Professor Preobrazhensky was Bulgakov's uncle, N.M. Pokrovsky, a gynecologist. He lived on Prechistenka, where the events of the story unfold.
Genre features
The satirical story "Heart of a Dog" combines a variety of genre elements. The plot of the story is reminiscent of fantastic adventure literature in the tradition of H. Wells. The subtitle of the story "The Monstrous Story" testifies to the parodic coloring of the fantastic plot.
The science adventure genre is the outer cover for satirical overtones and topical metaphors.
The story is close to dystopias thanks to its social satire. This is a warning about the consequences of a historical experiment that must be stopped, everything must be returned to normal.
Problematic
The most important problem of the story is social: it is the comprehension of the events of the revolution, which made it possible to rule the world for ball and shvonders. Another problem is the awareness of the limits of human capabilities. Preobrazhensky, imagining himself to be a god (he is literally worshiped by his family), goes against nature, turning a dog into a man. Realizing that "any woman can give birth at any time" to Spinoza, Preobrazhensky repents of his experiment, which saves his life. He understands the fallacy of eugenics, the science of improving the human race.
The problem of the danger of invasion of human nature and social processes is raised.
Plot and composition
The sci-fi plot describes how Professor Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky decides to experiment with transplanting the pituitary gland and ovaries of the "semi-proletarian" Klim Chugunkin to a dog. As a result of this experiment, the monstrous Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov appeared, the embodiment and quintessence of the victorious class of the proletariat. The existence of Sharikov caused many problems for Philip Philipovich's household, and, in the end, threatened the normal life and freedom of the professor. Then Preobrazhensky decided on the opposite experiment, transplanting the pituitary gland of the dog to Sharikov.
The ending of the story is open: this time Preobrazhensky was able to prove to the new proletarian authorities that he was not involved in the “murder” of Polygraph Poligrafovich, but how long will his already far from quiet life last?
The story consists of 9 parts and an epilogue. The first part is written on behalf of the dog Sharik, who suffers from the cold and wounds on his scalded side in the harsh Petersburg winter. In the second part, the dog becomes an observer of everything that happens in Preobrazhensky's apartment: the reception of patients in the "obscene apartment", the confrontation of the professor with the new house management headed by Shvonder, the fearless confession of Philip Philipovich that he does not like the proletariat. For the dog, Preobrazhensky turns into a semblance of a deity.
The third part tells about the ordinary life of Philip Philipovich: breakfast, conversations about politics and devastation. This part is polyphonic, the voices of both the professor and the "bitten one" (Bormental's assistant from the glasses of the Sharik who snatched him), and Sharik himself, talking about his lucky ticket and about Preobrazhensky as a magician from a dog's tale, sound in it.
In the fourth part, Sharik meets the rest of the inhabitants of the house: the cook Daria and the servant Zina, whom the men treat very gallantly, and Sharik mentally calls Zina Zinka, and quarrels with Daria Petrovna, she calls him a street pickpocket and threatens with a poker. In the middle of the fourth part, Sharik's narration is cut off because he is undergoing an operation.
The operation is described in detail, Philip Philipovich is terrible, he is called a robber, like a murderer who cuts, rips out, destroys. At the end of the operation, he is compared to a well-fed vampire. This is the author's point of view, it is a continuation of Sharik's thoughts.
The fifth, central and culminating chapter is the diary of Dr. Bormental. It begins in a strictly scientific style, which gradually turns into conversational, with emotionally charged words. The case history ends with Bormental's conclusion that "we have a new organism in front of us, and we must observe it first."
The next chapters 6-9 are the story of Sharikov's short life. He learns the world, destroying it and living the probable fate of the murdered Klim Chugunkin. Already in Chapter 7, the professor has an idea to decide on a new operation. Sharikov's behavior becomes unbearable: hooliganism, drunkenness, theft, molesting women. The last straw was Shvonder's denunciation from Sharikov's words to all the inhabitants of the apartment.
The epilogue, which describes the events 10 days after Bormental's fight with Sharikov, shows Sharikov almost turning into a dog again. The next episode is the reasoning of the dog Sharik in March (about 2 months have passed) about how lucky he was.
Metaphorical implications
At the professor speaking surname... He transforms the dog into a "new man". This happens between December 23 and January 7, between Catholic and Orthodox Christmas. It turns out that the transformation takes place in some kind of temporary void between the same date in different styles. Polygraph (multi-writing) - the embodiment of the devil, "replicated" person.
Apartment on Prechistenka (from the definition of the Mother of God) of 7 rooms (7 days of creation). She is the embodiment of divine order in the midst of the surrounding chaos and devastation. A star looks out of the apartment window from the darkness (chaos), observing a monstrous transformation. The professor is called a deity and a priest. He is a priest.
Heroes of the story
Professor Preobrazhensky- a scientist, a value of world importance. At the same time, he is a successful doctor. But his merits do not prevent the new government from frightening the professor with sealing, prescribing Sharikov and threatening with arrest. The professor has an unsuitable origin - his father is a cathedral archpriest.
Preobrazhensky is quick-tempered, but kind. He sheltered Bormental in the department when he was a half-starved student. He is a noble man, not going to leave a colleague in the event of a disaster.
Dr. Ivan Arnoldovich Bormental- the son of a forensic investigator from Vilno. He is the first student of the Preobrazhensky school, who loves his teacher and is devoted to him.
Ball appears as a completely reasonable, reasoning creature. He even jokes: "A collar is like a briefcase." But Sharik is the very creature in whose consciousness a crazy thought appears to rise "from rags to riches": "I am a master's dog, an intelligent creature." However, he almost never sins against the truth. Unlike Sharikov, he is grateful to Preobrazhensky. And the professor operates with a firm hand, mercilessly kills Sharik, and after killing, he regrets: "It is a pity for the dog, he was affectionate, but cunning."
Have Sharikova nothing remains of Sharik, except for hatred for cats, love for the kitchen. His portrait is described in detail first by Bormenthal in his diary: he is a man of small stature with a small head. Subsequently, the reader learns that the hero's appearance is unsympathetic, the hair is hard, the forehead is low, and the face is unshaven.
His jacket and striped trousers are ripped and dirty, a poisonous heavenly tie and lacquered boots with white leggings complete the suit. Sharikov is dressed in accordance with his own notions of chic. Like Klim Chugunkin, whose pituitary gland was transplanted to him, Sharikov plays the balalaika professionally. From Klim he got his love for vodka.
Sharikov chooses the name and patronymic according to the calendar, the surname is "hereditary".
The main character trait of Sharikov is arrogance and ingratitude. He behaves like a savage, and says about normal behavior: "You torture yourself, as under the tsarist regime."
Sharikov receives a "proletarian education" from Shvonder. Bormental calls Sharikov a man with a dog's heart, but Preobrazhensky corrects him: Sharikov has just a human heart, but the worst possible person.
Sharikov is even making a career in his own understanding: he enters the post of head of the sub-department of cleaning Moscow from stray animals and is going to sign with the typist.
Stylistic features
The story is full of aphorisms expressed different heroes: "Do not read Soviet newspapers before lunchtime", "Devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads", "You can’t tear anyone up! One can act on a person or an animal only by suggestion ”(Preobrazhensky),“ Happiness is not in galoshes, ”“ And what is will? So, smoke, mirage, fiction, delirium of these unfortunate democrats ... "(Sharik)," A document is the most important thing in the world "(Shvonder)," I am not a master, gentlemen, everything is in Paris "(Sharikov).
There are certain symbols for Professor Preobrazhensky normal life, which in themselves do not provide this life, but testify to it: a galosh rack in the front door, carpets on the stairs, steam heating, electricity.
Society of the 1920s characterized in the story with the help of irony, parody, grotesque.