All about the work The Master and Margarita. Analysis of the work “The Master and Margarita. Two storylines

Table of contents
I. Introduction. Bulgakov and death
II. Philosophical analysis novel "The Master and Margarita"
1. The concept of chronotope. Chronotopes in the novel
2. “Evil” force in the novel
3. “The Master and Margarita” by Bulgakov and “The Divine Comedy” by Dante
4. A novel within a novel. Yeshua and Jesus. Yeshua and the Master
5. The mirror motif in the novel
6. Philosophical dialogues in the novel
7. Why the Master did not deserve light
8. The ambivalence of the novel’s ending
III. Conclusion. The meaning of the epigraph to the novel “The Master and Margarita”

Introduction. Bulgakov and death

In March 1940, in his Moscow apartment in a now defunct house on Nashchokinsky Lane (formerly Furmanova Street, 3), Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov died heavily and painfully. Three weeks before his death, blind and tormented by unbearable pain, he stopped editing his famous novel“The Master and Margarita”, the plot of which was already fully formed, but work remained on the nuances (writers and journalists call this work on the word).
In general, Bulgakov is a writer who was very closely in touch with the topic of death and was practically on friendly terms with it. There is a lot of mysticism in his works (“Fatal Eggs”, “ Theatrical novel», « dog's heart"and, of course, the pinnacle of his work - "The Master and Margarita").
The materials about his life contain a striking fact. A healthy and practically free writer predicts his end. He not only names the year, but also cites the circumstances of death, which was still about 8 years away and which was not foreshadowed at that time. “Keep in mind,” he then warned his future wife, Elena Sergeevna, “I will die very hard, give me an oath that you will not send me to the hospital, and I will die in your arms.” Thirty years later, Elena Sergeevna without hesitation brought them in one of her letters to the writer’s brother living in Paris, to whom she wrote: “I accidentally smiled - it was 1932, Misha was a little over 40 years old, he was healthy, very young... "
He had already made the same request to his first wife, Tatyana Lappa, at the time when he suffered from drug addiction in 1915. But then it was a real situation, which, fortunately, with the help of his wife, he managed to cope with, getting rid of his drug addiction forever. a seemingly incurable disease. Perhaps it was just a hoax or a practical joke, so characteristic of his works and characteristic of himself? From time to time he reminded his wife about this strange conversation, but Elena Sergeevna still did not take it seriously, although
just in case, she regularly forced him to see doctors and carry out tests. Doctors did not find any signs of illness in the writer, and studies did not reveal any abnormalities.
But still, the “appointed” (Elena Sergeevna’s word) deadline was approaching. And when it came, Bulgakov “began to speak in a light, joking tone about “ Last year, last play“, etc. But since his health was in excellent and verified condition, all these words could not be taken seriously,” a quote from the same letter.
In September 1939, after a serious stressful situation for him (a review from a writer who went on a business trip to work on a play about Stalin), Bulgakov decides to go on vacation to Leningrad. He writes a corresponding statement to the management of the Bolshoi Theater, where he worked as a consultant to the repertoire department. And on the very first day of his stay in Leningrad, walking with his wife along Nevsky Prospekt, he suddenly feels that he cannot distinguish the inscriptions on the signs. Something similar had already happened in Moscow - before his trip to Leningrad, which the writer told his sister, Elena Afanasyevna, about. I decided that it was an accident, my nerves were acting up, nervous fatigue.”
Alarmed by a repeated episode of vision loss, the writer returns to the Astoria Hotel. The search for an ophthalmologist begins urgently, and on September 12, Bulgakov is examined by Leningrad professor N.I. Andogsky. His verdict: “Visual acuity: right eye – 0.5; left – 0.8. Phenomena of presbyopia
(an anomaly in which a person cannot see small font or small objects at close range - auto.). Phenomena of inflammation of the optic nerves in both eyes with the participation of the surrounding retina: in the left - slightly, in the right - more significantly. The vessels are significantly dilated and tortuous. Glasses for classes: right + 2.75 D; left +1.75 D.”
“Your case is bad,” the professor declares after examining the patient, strongly recommending that he immediately return to Moscow and do a urine test. Bulgakov immediately remembered, and perhaps he always remembered this, that thirty-three years ago, at the beginning of September 1906, his father suddenly began to go blind, and six months later he was gone. In a month my father would have turned forty-eight years old. This was exactly the age at which the writer himself was now... Being a doctor, Bulgakov, of course, understood that visual impairment was just a symptom of the disease that brought his father to the grave and which he received, apparently, by inheritance. Now, what once seemed like a distant and not very certain future has become a real and brutal present.
Like his father, Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov lived for about six months after the appearance of these symptoms.
Mystic? Maybe.
And now let’s move directly to the last, never completed by the author (its editing was completed by Elena Sergeevna) Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita”, in which mysticism is closely intertwined with reality, the theme of good is closely intertwined with the theme of evil, and the theme of death is closely intertwined with the theme life.

Philosophical analysis of the novel “The Master and Margarita”

The concept of chronotope. Chronotopes in the novel
The novel “The Master and Margarita” is characterized by the use of such a device as a chronotope. What it is?
The word is formed from two Greek words - χρόνος, “time” and τόπος, “place”.
IN in a broad sense A chronotope is a natural connection between space-time coordinates.
A chronotope in literature is a model of spatio-temporal relations in a work, determined by the picture of the world that the author seeks to create, and the laws of the genre within which he performs his task.
In Mikhail Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita” there are three worlds: the eternal (cosmic, otherworldly); real (Moscow, modern); biblical (past, ancient, Yershalaim), and the dual nature of man is shown.
There is no specific date of events in the novel, but a number of indirect signs make it possible to determine the time of action with accuracy. Woland and his retinue appear in Moscow on a May evening on Wednesday, the eve of Easter.
The three layers in the novel are not only united by plot (the story of the Master’s life) and ideologically, by design, etc. Despite the fact that these three layers are separated in time and space, they constantly overlap one another. United by common motifs, themes, and cross-cutting images. N: There is not a single chapter in the novel where the theme of denunciation and secret investigation (very actual topic that time). It is solved in two versions: playful (open – everything related to the investigation into the case of Woland and company. For example, the attempt of the security officers to catch a cat in a “bad apartment”) and realistic (semi-closed. For example, the scene of the “interrogation” of Bezdomny (about a foreign consultant), scene in the Alexander Garden (Margarita and Azazello)).
A time interval of almost two thousand years separates the action of the novel about Jesus and the novel about the Master. Bulgakov seems to be arguing with the help of this parallel that the problems of good and evil, freedom and unfreedom of the human spirit are relevant for any era.
To be more clear, we will show several parallels among the heroes of the novel, living and acting in three different worlds x, but representing one hypostasis.

For clarity, let's put the data in a table.

And another table showing time parallels

As we see, all three worlds are interpenetrated and interconnected. This makes it possible philosophical understanding human personality, which at all times is characterized by the same weaknesses and vices, as well as sublime thoughts and feelings. And no matter what you are in earthly life, eternity equalizes everyone.

"Evil" force in the novel
The “evil” force is represented by several characters. Their choice from a huge host of demons is not accidental. They are the ones who “make” the plot and compositional structure of the novel.
So…
Woland
This is how Bulgakov calls Satan - the prince of deceivers. His epithet is “opposing.” This is the eldest son of God, the creator of the material world, prodigal son strayed from the righteous path.
Why Woland? Here Bulgakov has a clear echo of Goethe’s Faust, where Satan (aka Mephistopheles) is mentioned once under this name.
The parallel with Goethe is also indicated by the following detail: during Woland’s meeting with Berlioz and Bezdomny, when asked “Are you German?”, he answers: “Yes, perhaps a German.” On his business card, writers see the letter “W”, which in German reads as [f], and the employees of the variety show, when asked about the name of the “black magician”, answer that maybe Woland, or maybe Faland.
Hippopotamus
Demon of carnal desires (especially gluttony, gluttony and drunkenness). Bulgakov has several scenes in the novel where Behemoth indulges in these vices.
The hippopotamus can take the forms of any large animal, as well as a cat, an elephant, a dog, a fox and a wolf. Bulgakov's cat is of enormous size.
At the court of Satan, he holds the position of Chief Guardian of the Cup and leads the feasts. For Bulgakov, he is the master of the ball.

Azazello
Azazel was introduced under this name in the novel The Master and Margarita. Azazello (Italianized form of the Hebrew name).
Azazel is the lord of the desert, related to the Canaanite god of the scorching sun Asiz and the Egyptian Set. Let us remember Bulgakov: “Flying at the side of everyone, shining with the steel of his armor, was Azazello. The moon also changed his face. The absurd, ugly fang disappeared without a trace, and the crooked eye turned out to be false. Both of Azazello's eyes were the same, empty and black, and his face was white and cold. Now Azazello flew in his true form, like a demon of the waterless desert, a killer demon.”
Azazel taught men the art of wielding weapons, and women how to wear jewelry and use cosmetics. It is Azazello who gives Margarita the magic cream that made her a witch.

Gella
Vampire woman. She is an outwardly attractive red-haired and green-eyed girl, but she has an ugly scar on her neck, which indicates that Gella is a vampire.
Bulgakov took the name for the character from the article “Sorcery” Encyclopedic Dictionary Brockhaus and Efron, where it was noted that on the Greek island of Lesbos this name was called untimely dead girls who became vampires after death.

Abbadon
Angel of the Abyss, a powerful demon of death and destruction, military adviser to Hell, who received the key to the well of the Abyss. His name comes from the Hebrew "destruction".
Repeatedly mentioned in the Bible on a par with the underworld and death. He appears in the novel shortly before the start of the ball and makes a huge impression on Margarita with his glasses. But to Margarita’s request to take off his glasses, Woland responds with a categorical refusal. The second time he appears at the end of the ball to kill with his gaze the NKVD informant Baron Meigel.

Koroviev (aka Bassoon)
Perhaps the most mysterious character.
Let's remember:
“In place of the one who, in tattered circus clothes, left the Sparrow Hills under the name of Koroviev-Fagot, now galloped, quietly ringing the golden chain of the reins, a dark purple knight with the gloomiest and never smiling face. He rested his chin on his chest, he did not look at the moon, he was not interested in the earth beneath him, he was thinking about something of his own, flying next to Woland.
- Why has he changed so much? – Margarita asked quietly as the wind whistled from Woland.
“This knight once made a bad joke,” Woland answered, turning his face to Margarita with a quietly burning eye, “his pun, which he made when talking about light and darkness, was not entirely good.” And after that the knight had to joke a little more and longer than he expected. But today is the night when scores are settled. The knight paid his account and closed it!”
Until now, researchers of Bulgakov’s work have not come to unanimous opinion: Who did the writer bring to the pages of the novel?
I will give one version that interested me.
Some Bulgakov scholars believe that behind this image lies the image of the medieval poet... Dante Alighieri...
I will give a statement on this matter.
In No. 5 of the Literary Review magazine for 1991, Andrei Morgulev’s article “Comrade Dante and the Former Regent” was published. Quote: “From a certain moment, the creation of the novel began to occur under the sign of Dante.”
Alexey Morgulev notes the visual similarity between Bulgakov’s dark purple knight and the author’s traditional images “ Divine Comedy": "The gloomiest and never smiling face - this is exactly how Dante appears in numerous French engravings."
The literary critic reminds us that Alighieri belonged to the knightly class: the great-great-grandfather of the great poet Kacciagvid won for his family the right to wear a knightly sword with a golden hilt.
At the beginning of the thirty-fourth canto of the Inferno, Dante writes:
“Vexilla regis prodeunt Inferni” - “The banners of the Lord of Hell are approaching.”
These words, addressing Dante, are spoken by Virgil, the Florentine’s guide, sent to him by the Almighty himself.
But the fact is that the first three words of this address represent the beginning of the Catholic “Hymn to the Cross,” which was performed in Catholic churches on Good Friday (that is, the day dedicated by the Church to the death of Christ) and on the day of the “Exaltation of the Holy Cross.” That is, Dante openly mocks the famous Catholic hymn, replacing God... with the devil! Let us remember that the events of “The Master and Margarita” also end on Good Friday, and in the Yershalaim chapters it is the erection of the cross and the crucifixion that are described. Morgulev is convinced that this particular pun by Dante Alighieri is the purple knight’s bad joke
In addition, caustic irony, satire, sarcasm, and outright mockery have always been an integral style of Dante. And this is a roll call with Bulgakov himself, and this will be discussed in the next chapter.

“The Master and Margarita” by Bulgakov and “The Divine Comedy” by Dante
In the “Divine Comedy” the whole world is described, the forces of Light and Darkness operate there. Therefore, the work can be called universal.
Bulgakov’s novel is also universal, universal, human, but it was written in the twentieth century, bears the stamp of its time, and in it Dante’s religious motifs appear in a transformed form: with their obvious recognition, they become the object of aesthetic play, acquiring non-canonical expression and content.
In the epilogue of Bulgakov’s novel, Ivan Nikolayevich Ponyrev, who became a professor of history, has the same dream on a full moon: “a woman of exorbitant beauty appears,” leads to Ivan by the hand “a fearfully looking around, bearded man” and “leaves with her companion to the moon "
The ending of "The Master and Margarita" contains a clear parallel with the third part of Dante's poem "Paradise". The poet's guide is a woman of extraordinary beauty - his earthly beloved Beatrice, who loses her earthly essence in Paradise and becomes a symbol of the highest divine wisdom.
Bulgakov's “Beatrice” - Margarita is a woman of “exorbitant beauty.” “Exorbitant” means “excessive.” Excessive beauty is perceived as unnatural and is associated with a demonic, satanic principle. We remember that at one time Margarita miraculously changed, becoming a witch, thanks to Azazello cream.
Summarizing the above, we can state that
In “The Master and Margarita” it is easy to see the influence of the images and ideas of the “Divine Comedy”, but this influence comes down not to simple imitation, but to a dispute (aesthetic play) with the famous poem of the Renaissance.
In Bulgakov's novel the ending is, as it were, mirror image the finale of Dante's poem: the moonbeam is the radiant light of the Empyrean, Margarita (the witch) is Beatrice (an angel of unearthly purity), the Master (overgrown with a beard, fearfully looking around) is Dante (purposeful, inspired by the idea of ​​absolute knowledge). These differences and similarities are explained by the different ideas of the two works. Dante depicts the path of a person’s moral insight, and Bulgakov depicts the path of the artist’s creative feat.

A novel within a novel. Yeshua and Jesus. Yeshua and the Master
Yeshua is tall, but his height is human
by its nature. He is tall by human standards.
He is a human. There is nothing of the Son of God in him.
Mikhail Dunaev,
Soviet and Russian scientist, theologian, literary critic
In his work, Bulgakov uses the “novel within a novel” technique. The master ends up in a psychiatric clinic because of his novel about Pontius Pilate. Some Bulgakov scholars call the Master’s novel “The Gospel of Woland”, and in the image of Yeshua Ha-Nozri they see the figure of Jesus Christ.
Is it so? Let's figure it out.
Yeshua and the Master are the central characters of Bulgakov's novel. They have a lot in common: Yeshua is a wandering philosopher who does not remember his parents and has no one in the world; The master is an anonymous employee of some Moscow museum, like Yeshua, completely alone. Both tragic fates. Both have disciples: Yeshua has Matvey Levi, the Master has Ivan Ponyrev (Bezdomny).
Yeshua is the Hebrew form of the name Jesus, which means “God is my salvation,” or “Savior.” Ha-Nozri, in accordance with the common interpretation of this word, is translated as “resident of Nazareth,” that is, the city in which Jesus spent his childhood. And since the author chose a non-traditional form of the name, non-traditional from a religious point of view, the bearer of this name itself must be non-canonical.
Yeshua knows nothing other than the lonely earthly path, and at the end he will face a painful death, but not the Resurrection.
The Son of God is the highest example of humility, humbling His Divine power. He
accepted reproach and death of his own free will and in fulfillment of the will of His Heavenly Father. Yeshua does not know his father and does not carry humility within himself. He sacrificially bears his truth, but this sacrifice is nothing more than a romantic impulse of someone who has little idea of ​​his future.
person.
Christ knew what awaited Him. Yeshua is deprived of such knowledge, he innocently asks Pilate: “Would you let me go, hegemon...” - and believes that this is possible. Pilate would indeed be ready to release the poor preacher, and only the primitive provocation of Judas from Kiriath decides the outcome of the matter to the disadvantage of Yeshua. Therefore, Yeshua lacks not only willful humility, but also the feat of sacrifice.
And finally, Bulgakov’s Yeshua is 27 years old, while the biblical Jesus is 33.
Yeshua is an artistic, non-canonical “double” of Jesus Christ.
And since he is just a man, and not the son of God, he is closer in spirit to the Master, with whom, as we have already noted, he has much in common.

The mirror motif in the novel
The image of a mirror in literature is a means of expression that carries an associative load.
Of all the interior items, the mirror is the most mysterious and mystical object, which at all times has been surrounded by an aura of mysticism and mystery. Life modern man impossible to imagine without a mirror. An ordinary mirror was most likely the first magical object created by man.
The most ancient explanation of the mystical properties of mirrors belongs to Paracelsus, who considered mirrors to be a tunnel connecting the material and subtle worlds. This, according to the medieval scientist, includes hallucinations, visions, voices, strange sounds, sudden cold, and the feeling of someone’s presence - in general, everything that has a powerful influence on the human psyche.
In Rus', fortune telling became very widespread: two mirrors were pointed at each other, burning candles were placed and they carefully looked into the mirrored corridor, hoping to see their fate. Before fortune telling began, one should close the icons, remove the cross and put it under the heel, that is, completely abandon all sacred powers. Perhaps that is why there is a belief that the Devil gave people a mirror so that they would not languish alone and would have the opportunity to talk to themselves.
In M.A. Bulgakov, the mirror motif accompanies the appearance of evil spirits, a connection with other world and miracles.
At the very beginning of the novel “The Master and Margarita” on the Patriarch’s Ponds, the role of a mirror is played by the glass of houses. Let us remember the appearance of Woland:
“He fixed his gaze on the upper floors, dazzlingly reflecting in the glass the sun that was broken and leaving Mikhail Alexandrovich forever, then he turned it down, where the glass began to darken in the early evening, grinned condescendingly at something, squinted, put his hands on the knob, and his chin on his hands "
With the help of a mirror, Woland and his retinue enter Styopa Likhodeev’s apartment:
“Then Styopa turned from the apparatus and in the mirror located in the hallway, which had not been wiped for a long time by the lazy Grunya, he clearly saw some strange subject - long as a pole, and wearing pince-nez (oh, if only Ivan Nikolaevich were here! He would recognize this subject immediately). And it was reflected and immediately disappeared. Styopa, in alarm, looked deeper into the hallway, and was rocked a second time, because a huge black cat passed in the mirror and also disappeared.
And soon after that...
“...a small, but unusually broad-shouldered man, wearing a bowler hat on his head and with a fang sticking out of his mouth, came straight out of the mirror of the dressing table.”
The mirror appears in key episodes of the novel: while waiting for the evening, Margarita spends the whole day in front of the mirror; the death of the Master and Margarita is accompanied by a broken, broken reflection of the sun in the glass of houses; the fire in the “bad apartment” and the destruction of Torgsin are also associated with broken mirrors:
“The glass in the exit mirrored doors rang and fell,” “the mirror on the fireplace cracked with stars.”

Philosophical dialogues in the novel
One of the features of the genre structure of “The Master and Margarita” is philosophical dialogues that create an intense moral, philosophical, religious field, and a variety of images and ideas of the novel.
Dialogues extremely sharpen and dramatize the novel's action. When polar viewpoints on the world collide, narrative disappears and drama emerges. We no longer see the writer behind the pages of the novel; we ourselves become participants in the stage action.
Philosophical dialogues appear from the first pages of the novel. Thus, the conversation between Ivan and Berlioz with Woland is an exposition and at the same time the plot of the work. The climax is the interrogation of Yeshua by Pontius Pilate. The denouement is the meeting of Matthew Levi and Woland. These three dialogues are entirely philosophical.
At the very beginning of the novel, Berlioz talks to Ivanushka about Jesus. The conversation denies faith in God and the possibility of the birth of Christ. Woland, who joined the conversation, immediately turns the conversation into a philosophical direction: “But, let me ask you... what to do with the evidence of the existence of God, of which, as we know, there are exactly five?” Berlioz answers completely in accordance with Kant’s “pure reason”: “You must agree that in the realm of reason there can be no proof of the existence of God.”
Woland delves into the history of the issue, recalling the moral “sixth proof” of Immanuel Kant. The editor objects to his interlocutor with a smile: “Kant’s proof... is also unconvincing.” Demonstrating his scholarship, he refers to the authority of Schiller and Strauss, critics of such evidence. Between lines of dialogue, Berlioz's inner speech is introduced every now and then, fully expressing his psychological discomfort.
Ivan Nikolayevich Bezdomny, in a sharply offensive tone, gives out tirades that at first glance are not essential for a philosophical conversation, acting as a spontaneous opponent to both interlocutors: “If only I could take this Kant, he’ll be sent to Solovki for three years for such evidence!” This pushes Woland to paradoxical confessions about breakfast with Kant, about schizophrenia. He again and again turns to the question of God: “... if there is no God, then, the question arises, who controls human life and the entire order on earth?”
The homeless man does not hesitate to answer: “It’s the man himself who controls.” A long monologue follows, ironically playing out predictions about Berlioz’s death.
We have already mentioned that in addition to the usual lines of direct speech, Bulgakov introduces a new element into the dialogue - internal speech, which becomes dialogical not only from the “point of view” of the reader, but also from the hero’s horizons. Woland “reads the thoughts” of his interlocutors. Their internal remarks, not intended for dialogue, find a response in philosophical conversation.
The dialogue continues in chapter three and is already under the strong influence of the spoken story. The interlocutors agree with each other in one conviction: “... what is written in the Gospels never actually happened...”.
Next, Woland reveals himself with an unexpected philosophical question: “Isn’t there a devil either?” “And the devil... There is no devil,” Bezdomny categorically declares. Woland ends the conversation about the devil as an edification to his friends: “But I beg you before leaving, at least believe that the devil exists!.. Keep in mind that there is a seventh proof of this, and the most reliable one! And it will now be presented to you.”
In this philosophical dialogue, Bulgakov “resolved” theological and historiosophical issues reflected in the artistic and philosophical construction of the novel. His Master created a historical version of events in Yershalaim. The question of how much it corresponded to Bulgakov’s views directly depends on the development of the author’s thought in the “double novel.”

The scene of Yeshua and Pilate is the center of a moral and philosophical conflict, the culmination of both the Master’s novel and the novel of Bulgakov himself.
Yeshua confesses to Pilate his loneliness: “I am alone in the world.”
The dialogue takes on a philosophical edge when Yeshua proclaims “that the temple of the old faith will collapse and a new temple of truth will be created.” Pilate sees that he is speaking with a “philosopher,” addresses his interlocutor with this name, and formulates his main question philosophically: “What is truth?” His interlocutor surprisingly quickly finds the answer: “The truth, first of all, is that you have a headache, and it hurts so much that you are cowardly thinking about death.”
The procurator, in response to one of the prisoner’s remarks that “there are no evil people in the world,” responds with a thoughtful grin: “This is the first time I’ve heard about this..., but maybe I don’t know much about life!..”
Anger awakens in Pilate: “And it’s not for you, crazy criminal, to talk about her!” It's about the truth. “The Master and Margarita” more than once shows the moral inferiority of the one who rushes to call his opponent a madman (remember Berlioz).
As the interrogation progresses, Pilate's interlocutor becomes more adamant in defending his position. The procurator deliberately and sarcastically asks him again: “And will the kingdom of truth come?” Yeshua expresses his firm conviction: “It will come, hegemon.” wants to ask the prisoner: “Yeshua Ha-Nozri, do you believe in any gods?” “There is only one God,” answered Yeshua, “in Him I believe.”
The dispute about truth and goodness, human destiny in the world receives an unexpected continuation in the dispute about who has the ultimate power to determine them. The novel presents another irreconcilable philosophical duel. It is the semantic conclusion of the conversation between Berlioz, Bezdomny and Woland about God and the devil.
The denouement is a philosophical dialogue between Woland and Matthew Levi, in whose remarks the outcome of the earthly path of the Master and Margarita is predetermined.
Nowhere in the novel is there any mention of any “balance” of good and evil, light and shadow, light and darkness. This problem is clearly defined only in this dialogue and is not finally resolved by the author. Bulgakov scholars still cannot unambiguously interpret Levi’s phrase: “He did not deserve light, he deserved peace.” General interpretation The mythology of “peace” as the disembodied existence of the Master’s soul in those areas where the devil penetrates seems quite acceptable to us. Woland gives “peace” to the Master, Levi brings the consent of the force emitting light.
The dialogue between Woland and Levi Matvey is an organic component of the development of the artistic conflict of images of ideas and consciousness. This creates the high aesthetic quality of the style of “The Master and Margarita”, the genre definition of the type of novel that has absorbed the forms of the comic and tragic and has become philosophical.

Why the Master didn't deserve light
So, the question is: why didn’t the Master deserve the light? Let's try and figure it out.
Researchers of Bulgakov's creativity put forward a number of reasons for this. These are ethical, religious and ethical reasons. Here they are:
The master did not deserve light because it would contradict:
Christian canons;
philosophical concept of the world in the novel;
the genre nature of the novel;
aesthetic realities of the twentieth century.
From a Christian point of view, the Master of the bodily principle. He wants to share his unearthly life with his earthly sinful love - Margarita.


The master can be accused of despondency. And despondency and despair are sinful. The master refuses the truth he guessed in his novel, he admits: “I no longer have any dreams and I don’t have any inspiration either... nothing around me interests me except her... I’ve been broken, I’m bored, and I want to go to the basement... I hate him, this novel... I experienced too much because of it.”
Burning a novel is a kind of suicide, even if it is not real, but only creative, but this is also a sin, and therefore the burned novel now passes through Woland’s department.
“Light” as a reward for the Master would not correspond to the artistic and philosophical concept of the novel and would be a one-sided solution to the problem of good and evil, light and darkness, and would be a simplification of the dialectic of their connection in the novel. This dialectic lies in the fact that good and evil cannot exist separately.
"Light" would be unmotivated from the point of view of the rather unique genre of the novel. This is a menippea (a type of serious-laughing genre - both philosophical and satirical). “The Master and Margarita” is a tragic and at the same time farcical, lyrical, autobiographical novel. There is a sense of irony in relation to the main character, this is a philosophical and at the same time satirical-everyday novel, it combines the sacred and the humorous, the grotesque-fantastic and the irrefutably realistic.
Bulgakov's novel was created in accordance with the trend in art inherent in many works of the first half of the twentieth century - giving a certain secularity to biblical motifs and images. Let us remember that Bulgakov’s Yeshua is not the son of God, but an earthly wandering philosopher. And this tendency is also one of the reasons that the Master did not deserve the light.

The ambivalence of the novel's ending
We have already talked about “light and peace.”
So, the last page has been turned. The highest justice has triumphed: all accounts have been settled and paid, everyone has been rewarded according to his faith. The master, although not awarded light, is rewarded with peace, and this reward is perceived as the only possible one for the long-suffering artist.
At first glance, everything that we learn about the peace promised to the Master looks tempting and, as Margarita says, “invented” by Woland is truly wonderful. Let us remember the scene of the poisoning of the Master and Margarita:
“Ah, I understand,” said the master, looking around, “you killed us, we are dead.” Oh, how clever that is! How timely! Now I understand you.
“Oh, for mercy’s sake,” answered Azazello, “can I hear you?” After all, your friend calls you a master, because you think, how can you be dead?
- Great Woland! - Margarita began to echo him, - Great Woland! He came up with a much better idea than I did.
At first it may seem that Bulgakov gives his hero the peace and freedom he (and Bulgakov himself) desired, realizing, at least outside of earthly life, the artist’s right to special, creative happiness.
However, on the other hand, the Master’s peace is not just a departure from the storms of life tired man, this is a misfortune, a punishment for refusing to make a choice between good and evil, light and darkness.
Yes, the Master received freedom, but parallel to the motif of freedom in the novel is the motif of the attenuation (extinction) of consciousness.
The memory fades when a stream remains behind the Master and Margarita, which here plays the role of the mythological river Lethe in the kingdom of the dead, after drinking the water of which the souls of the dead forget their earthly former life. In addition, the motif of extinction, as if preparing the final chord, has already appeared twice in the final chapter: “the broken sun has gone out” (here - a harbinger and sign of death, as well as the entry into his rights of Woland, the prince of darkness); “The candles are already burning, and soon they will go out.” This motive of death - “the extinguishing of the candles” - can be considered autobiographical.
Peace in The Master and Margarita is perceived different characters differently. For the Master, peace is a reward, for the author it is a desired but hardly achievable dream, for Yeshua and Levi it ​​is something that should be talked about with sadness. It would seem that Woland should be satisfied, but there is not a word about this in the novel, since he knows that there is no charm or scope in this reward.
Bulgakov, perhaps, deliberately made the ending of his novel ambiguous and skeptical, as opposed to the solemn ending of the same “Divine Comedy”. A writer of the 20th century, unlike a writer of the Middle Ages, refuses to say anything for sure, talking about a transcendental world, ghostly, unknown. The author's artistic taste was revealed in the mysterious ending of The Master and Margarita.

Conclusion. The meaning of the epigraph to the novel “The Master and Margarita”

...So who are you, finally?
– I am part of that force that is eternal
He wants evil and always does good.
Johann Wolfgang Goethe. "Faust"
Now we have reached the epigraph. We turn to what the work begins with only at the end of our study. But it is by reading and examining the entire novel that we can explain the meaning of those words with which Bulgakov introduced his creation.
The epigraph to the novel “The Master and Margarita” is the words of Mephistopheles (the devil) - one of the characters in I. Goethe’s drama “Faust”. What is Mephistopheles talking about and what relation do his words have to the story of the Master and Margarita?
With this quote the writer precedes the appearance of Woland; he seems to warn the reader that devilry occupies one of the leading places in the novel.
Woland is the bearer of evil. But he is characterized by nobility and honesty; and sometimes, willingly or unwillingly, he commits good deeds(or actions that bring benefit). He does far less evil than his role suggests. And although by his will people die: Berlioz, Baron Meigel - their death seems natural, it is the result of what they did in this life.
At his will, houses burn, people go crazy, disappear for a while. But all those who suffered from it - negative characters(bureaucrats, people who find themselves in positions for which they are not capable, drunkards, slobs, and finally fools). True, Ivanushka Bezdomny is among them. But it’s hard to name it clearly positive character. During the meeting with Woland, he is clearly busy with his own business. The poems he writes, by his own admission, are bad.
Bulgakov shows that everyone is rewarded according to their deserts - and not only by God, but also by Satan.
And the evil deeds of the devil often turn out to be beneficial for the people who suffered from him.
Ivan Bezdomny decides never to write again. After leaving the Stravinsky clinic, Ivan becomes a professor, employee of the Institute of History and Philosophy, begins new life.

Administrator Varenukha, who had been a vampire, forever weaned himself from the habit of lying and swearing on the phone and became impeccably polite.
The chairman of the housing association, Nikanor Ivanovich Bosoy, has weaned himself from taking bribes.
Nikolai Ivanovich, whom Natasha turned into a hog, will never forget those minutes when a different life, different from the gray everyday life, touched him, he will long regret that he returned home, but all the same - he has something to remember.

Woland, addressing Levi Matthew, says: “What would your good do if evil did not exist, and what would the earth look like if the shadows disappeared from it? After all, shadows come from objects and people...” Indeed, what is good in the absence of evil?
This means that Woland is needed on earth no less than the wandering philosopher Yeshua Ha-Nozri, who preaches goodness and love. Good does not always bring good, just as evil does not always bring misfortune. Quite often the opposite happens. That is why Woland is the one who, although desiring evil, still does good. It is this idea that is expressed in the epigraph to the novel.

Introduction

Analysis of the novel “The Master and Margarita” has been the subject of study by literary scholars throughout Europe for many decades. The novel has a number of features, such as the non-standard form of a “novel within a novel”, unusual composition, rich themes and content. It is not for nothing that it was written at the end of life and creative path Mikhail Bulgakov. The writer put all his talent, knowledge and imagination into the work.

Novel genre

The work “The Master and Margarita,” the genre of which critics define as a novel, has a number of features inherent to its genre. These are several storylines, many characters, and the development of action over a long period of time. The novel is fantastic (sometimes called phantasmagorical). But the most striking feature a work is its structure of a “novel within a novel.” Two parallel worlds- masters and ancient times of Pilate and Yeshua, live here almost independently and intersect only in last chapters when Levi, a disciple and close friend of Yeshua, pays a visit to Woland. Here, two lines merge into one, and surprise the reader with their organic nature and closeness. It was the structure of a “novel within a novel” that made it possible for Bulgakov to so masterfully and fully show two such different worlds, events today and almost two thousand years ago.

Features of the composition

The composition of the novel “The Master and Margarita” and its features are determined by the author’s non-standard techniques, such as the creation of one work within the framework of another. Instead of the usual classical chain - composition - plot - climax - denouement, we see the interweaving of these stages, as well as their doubling.

The beginning of the novel: the meeting of Berlioz and Woland, their conversation. This happens in the 30s of the 20th century. Woland's story also takes the reader back to the thirties, but two thousand years ago. And here begins the second plot - the novel about Pilate and Yeshua.

Next comes the plot. These are the tricks of Voladn and his company in Moscow. This is also where the satirical line of the work comes from. The second novel is also developing in parallel. The climax of the master’s novel is the execution of Yeshua, climax story about the master, Margarita and Woland - the visit of Levi Matthew. The denouement is interesting: it combines both novels into one. Woland and his retinue take Margarita and the Master to another world to reward them with peace and quiet. Along the way they see the eternal wanderer Pontius Pilate.

“Free! He is waiting for you!" – with this phrase the master frees the procurator and ends his novel.

Main themes of the novel

Mikhail Bulgakov concluded the meaning of the novel “The Master and Margarita” in the interweaving of main themes and ideas. It’s not for nothing that the novel is called fantastic, satirical, philosophical, and love. All these themes develop in the novel, framing and emphasizing the main idea - the struggle between good and evil. Each theme is both tied to its characters and intertwined with other characters.

Satirical theme- this is Woland’s “tour”. The public, maddened by material wealth, representatives of the elite, greedy for money, the antics of Koroviev and Behemoth acutely and clearly describe the ills of the society of the writer’s contemporary society.

Love theme embodied in the master and Margarita and gives the novel tenderness and softens many poignant moments. It was probably not in vain that the writer burned the first version of the novel, where Margarita and the master were not yet present.

Theme of sympathy runs through the entire novel and shows several options for sympathy and empathy. Pilate sympathizes with the wandering philosopher Yeshua, but, confused in his duties and fearing condemnation, he “washes his hands.” Margarita has a different kind of sympathy - she wholeheartedly empathizes with the master, and Frida at the ball, and Pilate. But her sympathy is not just a feeling, it pushes her to take certain actions, she does not fold her arms and fights to save those for whom she worries. Ivan Bezdomny also sympathizes with the master, imbued with his story that “every year, when the spring full moon comes... in the evening he appears on the Patriarch’s Ponds...”, so that later at night he can see bittersweet dreams about wondrous times and events.

Theme of forgiveness goes almost next to the theme of sympathy.

Philosophical topics about the meaning and purpose of life, about good and evil, about biblical motives have been the subject of debate and study among writers for many years. This is because the features of the novel “The Master and Margarita” are in its structure and ambiguity; With each reading, more and more new questions and thoughts are revealed to the reader. This is the genius of the novel - it has not lost its relevance or poignancy for decades, and is still as interesting as it was for its first readers.

Ideas and main idea

The idea of ​​the novel is good and evil. And not only in the context of struggle, but also in the search for definition. What is really evil? Most likely, this is the most complete way to describe main idea works. The reader, accustomed to the fact that the devil is pure evil, will be sincerely surprised by the image of Woland. He does not do evil, he contemplates and punishes those who act basely. His tour in Moscow only confirms this idea. He shows the moral illnesses of society, but does not even condemn them, but only sighs sadly: “People are like people... The same as before.” A person is weak, but he has the power to confront his weaknesses and fight them.

The theme of good and evil is shown ambiguously in the image of Pontius Pilate. In his soul he opposes the execution of Yeshua, but he does not have the courage to go against the crowd. The verdict is passed on the wandering innocent philosopher by the crowd, but Pilate is destined to serve his sentence forever.

The struggle between good and evil is also the opposition of the literary community to the master. It is not enough for self-confident writers to simply refuse a writer; they need to humiliate him and prove that they are right. The master is very weak to fight, all his strength went into the novel. It is not for nothing that devastating articles for him take on the image of a certain creature that begins to appear to the master in a dark room.

General analysis of the novel

Analysis of “The Master and Margarita” implies immersion in the worlds recreated by the writer. Here you can see biblical motifs and parallels with the immortal “Faust” by Goethe. The themes of the novel develop separately, and at the same time coexist, collectively creating a web of events and questions. The author depicts several worlds, each finding their own place in the novel, in a surprisingly organic way. The journey from modern Moscow to ancient Yershalaim, the wise conversations of Woland, the talking huge cat and the flight of Margarita Nikolaevna are not at all surprising.

This novel is truly immortal thanks to the talent of the writer and the undying relevance of the themes and problems.

Work test

Mysticism, riddles, supernatural powers - everything is so frightening, but terribly alluring. This is beyond the limits of human consciousness, so people strive to grab hold of any piece of information about this hidden world. Storehouse mystical stories— novel by M.A. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita"

The mystical novel has a complicated history. The loud and familiar name “The Master and Margarita” was by no means the only and, moreover, not the first option. The birth of the first pages of the novel dates back to 1928-1929, and the final chapter was completed only 12 years later.

The legendary work has gone through several editions. It is worth noting that the first of them did not include the main characters of the final version - the Master and Margarita. By the will of fate, it was destroyed by the hands of the author. The second version of the novel gave life to the already mentioned heroes and gave Woland loyal assistants. And in the third edition, the names of these characters came to the fore, namely in the title of the novel.

The plot lines of the work were constantly changing, Bulgakov did not stop making adjustments and changing the fates of his characters until his death. The novel was published only in 1966; she was responsible for the gift to the world of this sensational work. last wife Bulgakova - Elena. The author sought to immortalize her features in the image of Margarita, and, apparently, endless gratitude to his wife became the reason for the final change of name, where the love line of the plot came to the fore.

Genre, direction

Mikhail Bulgakov is considered a mystical writer; almost every one of his works carries a mystery. The highlight of this work is the presence of a novel within a novel. The story described by Bulgakov is a mystical, modernist novel. But the novel included in it about Pontius Pilate and Yeshua, authored by the Master, does not contain a drop of mysticism.

Composition

As has already been said by the Many-Wise Litrecon, “The Master and Margarita” is a novel within a novel. This means that the plot is divided into two layers: the story that the reader discovers, and the work of the hero from this story, who introduces new characters, paints different landscapes, times and main events.

Thus, the main outline of the story is the author’s story about Soviet Moscow and the arrival of the devil, who wants to hold a ball in the city. Along the way, he observes the changes that have occurred in people, and allows his retinue to have fun, punishing Muscovites for their vices. But the path of dark forces leads them to meet Margarita, who is the mistress of the Master - the writer who created the novel about Pontius Pilate. This is the second layer of the story: Yeshua goes to trial before the procurator and receives a sentence death penalty for bold sermons about the frailty of power. This line develops in parallel with what Woland’s servants are doing in Moscow. Both plots merge when Satan shows the Master his hero - the Procurator, who is still waiting for forgiveness from Yeshua. The writer ends his torment and thereby ends his story.

The essence

The novel “The Master and Margarita” is so comprehensive that it does not allow the reader to get bored on even a single page. A huge number of plot lines, interactions and events in which you can easily get confused keep the reader attentive throughout the entire work.

Already on the first pages of the novel we are faced with the punishment of the unbelieving Berlioz, who entered into an argument with the personification of Satan. Then, as if on cue, came the revelations and disappearances of sinful people, for example, the director of the Variety Theater, Styopa Likhodeev.

The reader met the Master in a mental hospital, where he was kept with Ivan Bezdomny, who ended up there after the death of his comrade, Berlioz. There the Master talks about his novel about Pontius Pilate and Yeshua. Outside the mental hospital, the Master is looking for his beloved Margarita. In order to save her lover, she makes a deal with the devil, namely, she becomes the queen of Satan's Great Ball. Woland fulfills his promise, and the lovers are reunited. At the end of the work, there is a mixture of two novels - Bulgakov and the Master - Woland meets Matthew Levi, who gave the Master peace. On the last pages of the book, all the heroes leave, dissolving into the heavenly expanse. That's what the book is about.

The main characters and their characteristics

Perhaps the main characters are Woland, the Master and Margarita.

1. Woland's purpose in this novel - to reveal the vices of people and punish for their sins. His exposure of mere mortals does not count. Satan's main motive is to reward everyone according to his faith. By the way, he does not act alone. The king is assigned a retinue - the demon Azazello, the devil Koroviev-Fagot, everyone's favorite jester cat Behemoth (minor demon) and their muse - Gella (vampire). The retinue is responsible for the humorous component of the novel: they laugh and mock their victims.
2. Master– his name remains a mystery to the reader. Everything that Bulgakov told us about him is that in the past he was a historian, worked in a museum and, having won a large sum into the lottery, took up literature. The author deliberately does not introduce additional information about the Master in order to focus on him as a writer, the author of the novel about Pontius Pilate and, of course, the lover of the beautiful Margarita. By nature, he is an absent-minded and impressionable person, not of this world, completely ignorant of the life and customs of the people around him. He is very helpless and vulnerable, and easily falls for deception. But at the same time, he is characterized by an extraordinary mind. He is well educated, knows ancient and modern languages, and has impressive erudition in many matters. To write the book, he studied an entire library.
3. Margarita– a real muse for her Master. This is a married lady, the wife of a wealthy official, but their marriage has long become a formality. Having met a truly loved one, the woman devoted all her feelings and thoughts to him. She supported him and instilled inspiration in him and even intended to leave the hateful house with her husband and housekeeper, to exchange security and contentment for a half-starved life in a basement on the Arbat. But the Master suddenly disappeared, and the heroine began to look for him. The novel repeatedly emphasizes her selflessness and willingness to do anything for love. For most of the novel, she fights to save the Master. According to Bulgakov, Margarita is “the ideal wife of a genius.”

If you didn’t have enough description or characteristics of any hero, write about it in the comments and we’ll add it.

Themes

The novel "The Master and Margarita" is amazing in every sense. There is a place for philosophy, love and even satire in it.

• The main theme is the confrontation between good and evil. The philosophy of the struggle between these extremes and justice is visible on almost every page of the novel.
• The importance of the love theme personified by the Master and Margarita cannot be diminished. Strength, struggle for feelings, dedication - using their example, we can say that these are synonyms for the word “love”.
• On the pages of the novel there is also room for human vices, clearly shown by Woland. This is greed, hypocrisy, cowardice, ignorance, selfishness, etc. He never ceases to mock sinful people and arrange for them a kind of repentance.

If you are particularly interested in any topic that we have not covered, let us know in the comments and we will add it.

Problems

The novel raises many problems: philosophical, social and even political. We will only look at the main ones, but if you think that something is missing, write in the comments, and this “something” will appear in the article.

1. The main problem is cowardice. The author called it the main vice. Pilate did not have the courage to stand up for the innocent, the Master did not have the courage to fight for his convictions, and only Margarita plucked up the courage and rescued her beloved man from trouble. The presence of cowardice, according to Bulgakov, changed the course of world history. It also doomed the inhabitants of the USSR to vegetate under the yoke of tyranny. Many did not like living in anticipation of the black funnel, but fear defeated common sense, and the people resigned themselves. In a word, this quality interferes with living, loving and creating.
2. The problems of love are also important: its influence on a person and the essence of this feeling. Bulgakov showed that love is not a fairy tale in which everything is fine, it is a constant struggle, a willingness to do anything for the sake of a loved one. After meeting, the Master and Margarita turned their lives upside down. Margarita had to give up wealth, stability and comfort for the sake of the Master, make a deal with the devil in order to save him, and not once did she doubt her actions. For overcoming difficult trials on the way to each other, the heroes are rewarded with eternal peace.
3. The problem of faith also interweaves the entire novel; it lies in Woland’s message: “Everyone will be rewarded according to his faith.” The author makes the reader think about what he believes in and why? This gives rise to the all-encompassing problem of good and evil. It was most clearly reflected in the described appearance of Muscovites, so greedy, greedy and mercantile, who receive retribution for their vices from Satan himself.

the main idea

The main idea of ​​the novel is for the reader to define the concepts of good and evil, faith and love, courage and cowardice, vice and virtue. Bulgakov tried to show that everything is completely different from what we are used to imagining. For many people, the meanings of these key concepts are confused and distorted due to the influence of a corrupting and stultifying ideology, due to difficult life circumstances, due to a lack of intelligence and experience. For example, in Soviet society, even denunciation of family members and friends was considered a good deed, but it led to death, long-term imprisonment and destruction of a person’s life. But citizens like Magarych willingly took advantage of this opportunity to solve their “housing issue.” Or, for example, conformity and the desire to please the authorities are shameful qualities, but in the USSR and even now many people saw and see benefits in this and do not hesitate to demonstrate them. Thus, the author encourages readers to think about the true state of affairs, about the meaning, motives and consequences of their own actions. With a strict analysis, it turns out that we ourselves are responsible for those world troubles and upheavals that we do not like, that without Woland’s carrot and stick we ourselves do not want to change for the better.

The meaning of the book and the “moral of this fable” lies in the need to set priorities in life: to learn courage and true love, rebel against the obsession with the “housing issue.” If in the novel Woland came to Moscow, then in life you need to let him into your head in order to conduct a devilish audit of your capabilities, guidelines and aspirations.

Criticism

Bulgakov could hardly count on his contemporaries understanding this novel. But he understood one thing for sure - the novel would live. “The Master and Margarita” still turns the heads of more than the first generation of readers, which means it is the object of constant criticism.

V.Ya. Lakshin, for example, accuses Bulgakov of lacking religious consciousness, but praises his morality. P.V. Palievsky notes the courage of Bulgakov, who was one of the first to destroy the stereotype of respect for the devil by ridiculing him. There are many such opinions, but they only confirm the writer’s idea: “Manuscripts don’t burn!”

“The “fantastic novel” that Bulgakov created in the last twelve years of his life is recognized best work a writer in whom he, as if “a summation of what was lived,” was able to comprehend with amazing depth and with deep artistic conviction embody his understanding of the fundamental issues of existence: faith and unbelief. God and the Devil, man and his place in the universe, the human soul and its responsibility before the Supreme Judge, death, immortality and meaning human existence, love, good and evil, the course of history and man’s place in it. We can say that Bulgakov left readers a novel-testament, which not only “brings surprises”, but also constantly poses questions, the answers to which each of the readers must find in correlating the work with their own ideas about what these “eternal Problems".

The composition of the novel “The Master and Margarita”, which is rightly called a “double novel”, is very interesting - after all, “The Romance of Pontius Pilate”, created by the Master, is brilliantly “inscribed” in the novel itself, becoming an integral part of it, making this work unique in terms of genre: the opposition and unity of the two “novels” form a certain alloy of seemingly incompatible methods of creating a narrative, which can be called “Bulgakov’s style.” Here the image of the author, who occupies a central position in each of the novels, takes on special significance. significant place, but manifests itself in different ways. In the “Master’s novel” about Yeshua and Pilate, the author deliberately withdraws himself, it is as if he is not in this almost chronically accurate presentation of events, his “presence” is expressed in the author’s view of what is depicted, inherent in the epic, the expression of his moral position seems to “dissolve” in the artistic fabric works. In the “novel” itself, the author openly proclaims his presence (“Follow me, my reader!”), He is emphatically biased in the depiction of events and characters, but at the same time his author’s position cannot be understood easily, it is “hidden” in a special way buffoonery, ridicule, irony, deliberate gullibility and other artistic techniques.

The philosophical basis of the writer’s moral position are the ideas of “good will” and the “categorical imperative” as mandatory conditions for the existence of the human personality and a rationally organized society, and it is they who serve as the “touchstone” for evaluating each of the heroes and historical events, depicted in both novels, which share a common moral situation: the era of Yeshua and the era of the Master is a time of choice that each of the heroes and society as a whole must make. In this regard, the opposition of these central images is obvious.

"Yeshua, nicknamed Ha-Nozri" in the novel "The Master and Margarita" represents a person who initially carries within himself goodness and light, and this attitude towards the world is based on the moral strength that is inherent in this weak, defenseless person, who is in the power of the procurator Pilate, but stands immeasurably higher all those who seem to have power over him. There is a lot of debate about how close the image of Yeshua is to the Gospel Christ, but, despite their undoubted similarities, what distinguishes them is that Bulgakov’s heroes do not initially perceive himself as the Messiah, he is first of all a man. in his behavior and attitude towards himself. However, this happens only because in fact he is the highest power that determines everything that happens - and it is he who “decides the destinies” of the heroes, it is with him that Woland argues in a special way, according to him. -in his own way, restoring the trampled justice in the world of "Massolits", in the end, it is to him that all the thoughts of the heroes of the novel are directed, whether they realize it or not. We can say that the image of Yeshua in the novel "The Master and Margarita" is the spiritual center of the work, it is. that moral principle that ensures the possibility of the existence of the world.

Image of the Master in the novel “The Master and Margarita” is a tragic image of a man who was given the “gift of the Word” from above, who was able to feel it, fulfill the mission entrusted to him - but then found himself unable to maintain the moral height to which he was raised with your creativity. Unlike Yeshua, the bearer and embodiment of “good will,” the Master is only temporarily imbued with the idea of ​​serving good as the basis of life, but a real collision with this very “life” (the denunciation of Aloysius Magarych, the clinic of Professor Stravinsky) forces him to betray himself, then The best thing about him was to renounce not only his novel, but, in fact, everything that was connected with the idea of ​​​​transforming life. Humanly, one can understand a person who has been “finished well” (in Woland’s words) and who admits his defeat: “I hated this novel and I’m afraid... I’m nobody now... I don’t want anything more in life... I have there are no more dreams and inspirations." However, each of the people in life has his own path determined, God's Providence determines the place of each of us in this world, and therefore the Master, who renounced his novel (and therefore himself), turns out to "not deserve light, he deserves peace," which can probably heal him tormented soul in order to... but where then can he escape from the memories of his capitulation to the world of everyday life and lack of spirituality?..

The bearer of the highest justice in Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita" is Woland, Satan, who arrived with his retinue in Moscow in order to “see the Muscovites” in order to understand how “ new system“changed people who, as he knows very well, are not inclined to become better. And indeed, the “session” at which Muscovites are completely “exposed” (and not only in the literal sense of the word), Styopa Likhodeev and others, the satirically depicted images seem to convince him that “these townspeople” have not “internally” changed, so he has every reason to draw his less-than-optimistic conclusion: “... people are like people, ... ordinary people.. ". However, the story of the Master and Margarita shows Satan that in this world of “ordinary” people there is something that goes back to completely different moral categories - there is selfless, devoted love, when “He who loves must share the fate of the one he loves ".

Dedication Margaritas ready to cross the line separating Good from Evil to save a loved one is obvious, but here Bulgakov shows us not just love, but love that opposes generally accepted norms, elevating people who seem to violate these norms. After all, Margarita’s relationship with the Master is a violation of her marital fidelity, she is married, and her husband treats her wonderfully. But this “marriage without love,” which has turned into torment, turns out to be untenable when the heroine finds herself in the grip of a real feeling, sweeping aside everything that prevents people from being happy.

Probably, Margarita’s readiness to save her beloved at any cost is also caused by the fact that she feels guilty for having delayed leaving her husband for too long, the punishment for which was the loss of the Master. But, having agreed to become the queen of Satan’s ball, having gone through everything that was destined for her, at the very last moment the heroine finds herself unable to do what she went through such trials for - she asks Woland not to have her beloved returned to her, and about the unfortunate Frida, whom she promised help... Probably, here we can talk about the complete triumph of “good will”, and it is with this act that Margarita proves that, in spite of everything, she is a truly moral person, because the words are “cherished and cooked in the soul,” she could not pronounce... And no matter how she convinced herself that she was a “frivolous person,” Woland was still right: she was a “highly moral person.” It’s simply not her fault that she lives in a world where true moral values ​​are inaccessible to most people.

The image of the poet is of great importance in the novel "The Master and Margarita" Ivan Bezdomny, who later became professor Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev. This man, a gifted poet (“figurative... power... of talent”), after meeting the Master, understands his moral unpreparedness to be a servant of the Word; he is, as it were, a student of the Master who consciously deviates from the chosen path, thereby repeating his fate teachers.

The satirical “layer” of Bulgakov’s analyzed novel is very convincing; here the writer uses a wide palette visual arts- from humor to farce and grotesque, he paints a society of people busy with their petty affairs, getting comfortable in life at any cost, from flattery to denunciations and betrayal. The background is authentic moral relations For the main characters, such a “life” cannot but cause condemnation, but the writer rather feels sorry for most of his heroes rather than condemning them, although, of course, such characters as Berlioz and the critic Latunsky are portrayed very clearly.

Let's go back to image of Woland. His “activities” in Moscow became a special form of restoring justice - in any case, he punished those who could not help but be punished, and helped those who had the right to count on the help of higher powers. Bulgakov shows that Woland fulfills the will of Yeshua, being, as it were, his messenger in this world. Of course, from the point of view of Christian ethics, this is unacceptable. God and Satan are antipodes, but what if everything in this world is so mixed up that it is difficult to understand how people can be made to remember that they are, after all, creatures of God?.. In this regard, the role of in the novel Pontius Pilate, the purpose of which was to condemn Yeshua to death, who tried to save him and then was tormented by what he had done - after all, in essence, the procurator of Judea plays on earth the same role that in the universe (according to Bulgakov) is assigned to Woland: to be a judge. Pilate internally feels the impossibility of sending a “wandering philosopher” to his death, but he does it. Woland, it seems, does not experience internal experiences and hesitations, but why then does he react so emotionally to Margarita’s request?..

The obvious inconsistency of the image of Woland, his strange kinship with Yeshua and Pilate make this image tragic in many ways: his apparent omnipotence actually cannot change anything in this world, because he is not able to hasten the onset of the “kingdom of truth” - this is not from him depends... “To always want evil” - and “to always do good” - this is Woland’s lot, because this path was determined for him by the One who “hung the thread of life”...

The novel “The Master and Margarita,” which we analyzed, belongs to those works in the history of mankind that have become an integral part of its spiritual life. " Eternal problems"and momentary “truths” that disappear with the sunset, high pathos and tragedy and obvious satire and grotesque, love and betrayal, faith and its loss, Good and Evil as a state of the human soul - that’s what this novel is about. Each appeal to him - this is a new introduction to the world of enduring moral values and true culture.

The novel "The Master and Margarita" is Bulgakov's greatest work. It was assessed by the author as a kind of testament to descendants.

The novel tells about the life of Moscow in the 30s. Main character writes a novel about Pontius Pilate, but then burns it and ends up in a psychiatric hospital. At the same time, after the arrival of Woland's retinue, strange things happen in Moscow. The Master's beloved Margarita, in order to return her beloved, makes a deal with Satan, becomes a witch and goes to the ball of the dead. Woland returns the heroine her beloved Master. And the lovers go into a world of peace and tranquility.

Bulgakov compositionally wrote "a novel within a novel." The text intertwines chapters from the life of the Master, that is, Moscow, and chapters from the Master’s novel itself, telling about Yershalaim. All these parts form a single whole. Here a parallel is drawn between the two worlds; they reflect the same problems. That's why there are so many parallels and double heroes in the novel. In the time of Yeshua, people are almost no different from the people of Moscow in the 30s. They are also interested in wealth and position in society.

In his novel, Bulgakov raises various topics and problems: good and evil, freedom and choice, creativity.

Good and evil in the work are personified in the images of Woland and Yeshua. These contrasting concepts are closely intertwined with each other, and also have absolutely equal rights in the soul of every person.

Yeshua preaches kindness and care. Death did not break the hero, his soul will never be defeated.

Woland, who must do evil, only reveals the vices of the Moscow people, since they are terrible force. Satan performs acts of justice in a unique way. Here one of the main ideas of the work is embodied: a person must choose for himself whether good or evil will guide him. The novel shows goodies, which in some cases do the wrong thing. The master is not ready to fight for his creativity and burns the novel. Margarita takes revenge on the critic Latunsky. However, these people have bright goals, so they deserve forgiveness.

The problem of choice is connected with the image of Pontius Pilate and Yeshua. Pontius Pilate shows cowardice when he sends Yeshua to execution, although he understands the unusual nature of this character. Fear of responsibility is the reason for the wrong choice of the procurator, for which he later had to repent.

Bulgakov showed that creativity is not free, the artist cannot create what he wants. The government sets certain limits for creativity. This is shown in the image of MASSOLIT. The reality of the 30s is reflected here. Literature at that time was subject to enormous censorship.

The theme of love is also of great importance in the novel. Margarita is a woman capable of love, despite all difficulties. The images of the Master and Margarita can be called collective, and their love is indestructible.

“The Master and Margarita” is not the story of an individual, it is the story of all humanity. Although the story worlds in the novel are different from each other, they realize the same goal.

Option 2

The work touches on a number of diverse problems that interested the author. Bulgakov addressed the themes of freedom of creativity, moral choice and responsibility that cannot be abdicated.

The desire to cover different and complex topics prompted the writer to use a complex composition - a novel within a novel. The presence of chapters dedicated to Yeshua and Pontius Pilate also made it possible to create a contrast between Bulgakov’s contemporary Moscow and a time distant from us.

The master represents the ideal type of writer-creator. He is not appreciated by readers and the professional community, and is persecuted by literary superiors and colleagues who do not have the talent he has. In the punishments and bullying that the writer’s pursuers are subjected to at the will of Woland, the author wanted to express his rejection of the new government and, especially, its policies in the field of creativity.

Margarita is simply an image of a woman. She, at the same time, loves her Master and is capable of satanic tricks.

The devil, named Woland, is an ambiguous character. On the one hand, he creates evil, being its embodiment. On the other hand, Woland punishes only insignificant and petty people who deserve it and rewards the Master and Margarita. By entering this ambiguous image, Bulgakov apparently wanted to show the true essence of the people around him, embodied in the images of the minor characters of the novel. They turn out to be even worse than the Devil himself.

The writer also condemned cowardice, considering it the worst of human qualities. It was this quality that forced Pilate to execute Yeshua and endure punishment for this. The master who burned his novel also by this act avoided responsibility, the struggle to present his creation to people. That is why Woland rewards the Master and Margarita only with peace.

Yeshua ha-Nozri is also ambiguous. This is not the biblical Jesus who conquered death. Compared to Christ, he is depicted as emphatically pitiful. However, at the same time, he still appears as the embodiment of Good. The reason for the creation of such an image, most likely, was the gloomy and painful feeling that the reality around him gave rise to in Bulgakov.

The Master and Margarita - Analysis 3

In his novel "The Master and Margarita" the writer raises a lot of relevant and controversial issues, the answers to which can reveal the problems of society. Concept of love and moral duty, freedom of speech, blurred boundaries between good and evil, retribution for committed actions - this is not the whole list.

In the 30s, literature adhered only to the strictly assigned framework. Widespread censorship and prohibitions did not allow the writer to freely engage in creativity, and the Master was not allowed to publish the novel of his life about Pontius Pilate. A pure and creative person was forced to move in a literary society, whose members turned out to be petty materialists. The master, having found himself thrown out of the literary circle, for his sincere purity, burns the manuscript. Bulgakov condemns this act of the Master; in his opinion, the writer must fight for the truth and try to convey it to society in any way.

The problems of good and evil, as well as choice, are raised in the chapter where actors are Pilate and Yeshua. Having realized the full value of Yeshua, Pilate was afraid of responsibility and, in spite of everything, sent the righteous man to execution. The torment of conscience for such an act haunted Pilate for a long time.

Combining the “Moscow” chapters in parallel with the “Pilatov” chapters, the author draws a kind of parallel, proving that no time can change a person as much as he can change himself. The motivational component of both novels is the search for the road to gaining freedom and truth, the spiritual struggle between good and evil. Everyone has mistakes, but in order to gain freedom, you must constantly reach for the light.

In the novel, the forces of good and evil are embodied in the images of Yeshua and Woland. These two heroes in the work act absolutely in different eras, with this approach the author shows that the struggle between good and evil has been relevant at all times.

The hearts of many people are filled with evil and in the actions of the devil, who arrived in Moscow, according to the author’s plan, there is more justice than black hatred. The author proves that no one has the power to influence a person’s actions. The final decision in favor of good or evil is made by a person personally.

In the author's understanding, there are no clear distinctions between good and evil, light and darkness; these phenomena are in constant close interaction. Woland, as a representative of evil, commits it based on the laws of justice, and Yeshua, as a true righteous man, forgives people, despite the evil on their part.

Sample 4

This novel by Mikhail Afanasyevich is literally imbued with mysticism and a fantastic component. In addition, the author touches on many issues that relate to the depravity and sinfulness of man, which is revealed under certain conditions.

In this novel, Woland and his retinue reveal this. He watches very carefully every person in modern Moscow, because now communism reigns. The government promised that society would change, the level of morality and morality would increase. However, Woland is convinced that this is all false.

The reader is immersed in the events that took place in Moscow in the thirties and during the reign of Pontius Pilate. The central figures of the novel are the master and Margarita. The hero's novel was criticized, he is in despair. Subsequently, for this reason, he ends up in a psychiatric hospital.

Woland appears a little later. He is not alone, but together with his retinue. They constantly cause riots, start fires, kidnap people, and carry out supernatural acts that shock those around them. They are taught and convinced that God does not exist. Woland meets with Berlioz and Ivan. They were discussing the fact that Jesus did not exist at all as a person. They laughed, however, Woland told them the opposite.

The question of the existence of God was raised. If He does not exist, then who can control a person’s life? Ivan assumed that this was done by the man himself. However, he does not have a plan for a decent period of time, therefore, he has no control over his life. After all, a person does not know whether there will be tomorrow.

Woland later predicted the death of one and the madness of the other. After this, the intrigues of Woland and his retinue in Moscow did not end. They moved on. Later, the retinue decides to hold a performance that revealed the entire dirty and vile essence of humanity. Woland is convinced that no changes have occurred internally in the person. He tested the population of Moscow for honesty, selflessness and true joy.

The performance of the retinue can be compared to a test for basic vices, which include greed, lies, meanness, betrayal, and so on.

The test of humanity was failed. Money started falling on people. When a man appeared who asked to stop it, the heated public asked to take his head off. This was done immediately.

People realized what they had done. This was followed by requests for pardon.

Woland makes the final conclusion: people are always chasing money, but there is still some small amount of mercy in them.

Several interesting essays

• How do you understand Konenkov’s words: “A dream is always winged - it overtakes time”? Composition
• The main themes and motives of Nekrasov's lyrics essay

  The work of Nikolai Nekrasov raises various topics and questions. His talent for deep reflection made it possible to create a powerful system of philosophical beliefs expressed in his works.

• The image and characteristics of Vasilisa Egorovna Mironova in the novel The Captain's Daughter

  It would seem that the fortress is controlled by commandant Ivan Kuzmich, but only nominally. In fact, we see how the reins of government of the Belgorod fortress are secretly placed in the hands of Vasilisa Egorovna Mironova

• My friend Vasya on behalf of Valek (composition by Korolenko Children of the Dungeon)

  My name is Valik. I have been living in the city underground since early childhood due to poverty. My parents died, but I have a younger sister, whom many affectionately call Marusya. Our life is very difficult, but to be honest, we are used to it.

• Essay based on the painting by Pimenov Spor 8th grade description

  The painting “Dispute” was painted by the Russian artist Yu. Pimen in the middle of the last century. Namely in 1968. Like most of the works of this author, the painting “Dispute” shows the ordinary everyday life of the Soviet people.