The problem of good and evil in the novel “The Master and Margarita”

Good and evil... Concepts are eternal and inseparable. And as long as a person lives, they will fight each other. Good will “reveal” to a person, illuminating his path to the truth.

Not always the bearers of good and evil are different people; this struggle becomes especially tragic when it occurs in the soul of a person.

Roman M.A. Bulgakov's "The Master and Margarita" is dedicated to the struggle between good and evil. The author in one book describes the events of the twenties of our century and the events of biblical times.

Actions taking place in different times, united by one idea - the search for truth and the fight for it. Let's move to distant Yershalaim, to the palace of the procurator of Judea Pontius Pilate. “In a white cloak with a bloody likeness,” he appears before a man of about twenty-seven, whose “hands are tied behind his back, there is a bruise under his left eye, and in the corner of his mouth there is an abrasion with dried blood.” .

This man - his name was Yeshua - is accused of inciting the destruction of the Yershalaim temple. The prisoner wanted to justify himself: “ kind man! Believe me...” But he was “taught” to observe etiquette: “The rat-catcher took out a whip and... hit the arrested man on the shoulders... the bound man instantly fell to the ground, as if his legs had been cut off, choked on the air, the color ran away from his face, and his eyes became meaningless...” Kiseleva L . F. Dialogue between good and evil in the novel “The Master and Margarita.” Literary traditions in poetry. - M. Bulgakov: Interuniversity. Sat. scientific tr. - Kuyyshev, 2010. - P. 77..

It is difficult to disagree with the definition that the procurator gave himself: “a ferocious monster.” Pontius Pilate lives by his own laws: he knows that the world is divided into those who rule and those who obey them, that the formula “the slave obeys the master” is unshakable, which means he is the master of everyone and everything.

And suddenly a person appears who thinks differently: “...the temple of the old faith will collapse and a new temple of truth will be created.”

Moreover, this “tramp” dares to suggest: “Some new thoughts came to my mind, and I would be willing to share them with you, especially since you give the impression of a very smart person.”

He is not afraid to object to the procurator and does it so skillfully that Pontius Pilate is confused for some time. Yeshua has his own philosophy of life: “...there are no evil people in the world, there are unhappy people.”

The prisoner seemed interesting. The prosecutor was immediately convinced of his innocence. Of course, he is eccentric and naive, his speeches are somewhat seditious, but the “tramp” has the wonderful property of relieving the headache that so torments the procurator!

And Pontius Pilate already had a plan of action: he would declare Yeshua crazy and send him to an island in the Mediterranean Sea, where his residence is located. But this turned out to be impossible.

Judas of Cariath provided such information about the “madmen” that Caesar’s governor had no right not to execute him.

The procurator wanted and even tried to save the newly-minted “prophet”, but he resolutely did not want to give up his “truth”: “Among other things, I said that all power is violence over people and that the time will come when there will be no power either of Caesars or any other authority.

Man will move into the kingdom of truth and justice, where no power will be needed at all.” The all-powerful procurator, in the grip of fear, loses the remnants of his proud dignity: “Do you think, unfortunate one, what did you say? Or do you think I'm ready to take your place? I don’t share your thoughts!” The shameful cowardice of an intelligent and almost omnipotent ruler is revealed: out of fear of denunciation, fear of ruining his own career, Pilate goes against his convictions, the voice of humanity and conscience. And Pontius Pilate shouts so that everyone can hear: “Criminal! Criminal! Criminal!” Yeshua was executed.

Why is the procurator suffering? Why does he have a dream that he did not send a wanderer, a philosopher and a healer to execution, as if they were walking together along a lunar path and talking peacefully, and he, “the cruel procurator of Judea, cried and laughed with joy in his sleep?” The power of Pontius Pilate turned out to be imaginary. He is a coward, the faithful dog of Caesar Erastov A. V. Traditions of the philosophical novel of F. M. Dostoevsky in the prose of M. A. Bulgakov. - Nizhny Novgorod, 2011. - P. 11..

His conscience torments him. He will never have peace - he understands that Yeshua's student and follower - Levi Matthew - remained right.

He will continue the work of his Teacher. The gospel legend contains truths that, being forgotten, will certainly remind themselves of the moral degradation of society.

But how are the Yershalaim chapters connected to the main content of the novel? Large quantity both obvious and subtle parallels connect the image of Yershalaim in the twenties of the first century and Moscow in the twenties of the twentieth century.

The characters and times described in them seem to be different, but the essence is the same. Enmity, distrust of dissident people, envy reign in the world that surrounds the Master.

Woland exposes them. Woland is the author's artistically reimagined image of Satan. Satan and his assistants are doing evil. Akimov V.M. The Light of the Artist, or Mikhail Bulgakov against the Devil's Games. - M., 2010. - P. 51..

Their goal is to expose the essence of phenomena, to highlight, strengthen, and expose negative phenomena in human society to public display. Tricks in Variety, tricks with signing papers with an empty suit, the mysterious transformation of Soviet money into dollars and other devilry - this is exposure hidden vices person.

The meaning of the tricks in Variety becomes clear. Here the Muscovites are tested for greed and mercy. At the end of the performance, Woland comes to the conclusion: “Well... they are people like people. They love money, no matter what it is made of - leather, paper, bronze or gold. Well, frivolous... well, well... and mercy sometimes happens in their hearts... ordinary people... in general, they resemble the old ones... the housing problem only spoiled them...”

The eternal desire of people for good is irresistible.

Twenty centuries have passed, but the personification of goodness and love - Jesus Christ - is alive in the souls of people.

The master, the main character of the novel by M. Bulgakov, creates a novel about Christ and Pilate. Christ for him is a thinking and suffering person, affirming the dignity of selfless service to people, bringing lasting values ​​into the world.

The story of the Master and Margarita is very interesting. The master is driven by a thirst for knowledge. He is trying to penetrate into the depths of centuries in order to understand the eternal. Like Faust, Satan gives him knowledge.

There is a clear parallel between the Master and Yeshua. There is a deity in the Master, he is occupied with eternal problems. It’s not for nothing that his name is written with a capital letter, and his fate is tragic, like Yeshua’s. Master is collective image a person striving to understand the eternal laws of morality.

Margarita in the novel is the bearer of enormous poetic and inspired love, which the author called “eternal.” And the more unattractive, “boring, crooked” the lane where this love arises appears before us, the more unusual this feeling turns out to be, flashing with “lightning.” Margarita fights and, with the help of Woland, returns the Master. Together with him, under the peals of a cleansing thunderstorm, she passes into eternity.

Each generation of people solves moral problems for itself.

Some people sometimes “see the light” and look “inside” themselves. “Don’t at least deceive yourself. Fame will never come to the one who writes bad poetry...” - Ryukhin mercilessly judges himself. Others are not given the opportunity to “see the light” Bely, A.D. About “The Master and Margarita” // Bulletin of the Russian Christian Movement. -2009. -No. 112.- P.89-101..

For Berlioz, the head of Massolite, such an opportunity would no longer present itself; he died a terrible, absurd death. Having gone through suffering, Ivan Bezdomny purifies himself and rises to a higher moral level as a poet.

The theme of Pontius Pilate reflects not the plot line in the novel, but the writer’s very perception and understanding of the gospel motifs, the essence of the New Testament.

Bulgakov somehow opens this topic to us in a new way. Carefully, so as not to frighten or spoil the sense of importance of images that were not invented by himself, he tries to present us with controversial, complex, but at the same time simple images, so that we are not tormented by questions that we are not able to answer.

Pontius Pilate appears before us as a man who is tormented by his conscience because he has been given unlimited power to punish and have mercy on people. His conscience is a headache that almost never goes away. This is like a punishment for his power over people. Pontius Pilate is doomed to loneliness.

There is not a single person to whom he could tell the truth. There are no answers to the questions that are burning his brain.

He is lonely and his friend is a huge devoted dog, the silent guardian of his soul. Eternal loneliness, not only in life, but also in heaven. Eternal expectation of forgiveness. Eternal pain is the price for unbelief.

“A good man,” that’s what the “criminal” Yeshua Ha-Nozri called Pontius Pilate. “The criminal called me “Good man,” says the procurator, “Take him out of here for a minute, explain to him how to talk to me. But don’t maim.” Pontius Pilate, accustomed to the fact that “everyone in Yershalaim whispers about him that he is a ferocious monster,” is surprised. It is from this moment, from these words, that something breaks in the procurator, a reassessment of values ​​occurs. Yeshua Ha-Notsri inspired faith in him, he became the conscience of the procurator Kolodin, A. B. Light shines in the darkness // Literature at school.-2010.-No.1.-P.44-49..

Pontius Pilate could not come to terms with the death of Yeshua. For short term While communicating with him, the procurator understood a lot and now regretted that he was not immediately able to recognize a comrade in Yeshua. Pontius Pilate was overcome by a thirst for revenge, although he had to take revenge on himself. He took revenge. But I did not receive forgiveness or peace in my life.

And already there, where “... next to a heavy stone chair, on which some sparks sparkle from the moon, lies a dark, huge dog and, like its owner, looks restlessly at the moon,” the procurator receives forgiveness from Margarita’s hands .

He waited for this day for two thousand years, looking at the moon, which caused insomnia in him.

“Free! Free! He's waiting for you." “A man in a white cloak with a bloody lining rose from his chair and shouted something in a hoarse, ragged voice. Petelin, V.V. Return of the Master: about M.A. Bulgakov. - M., 2009.- P. 93..

It was impossible to make out whether he was crying or laughing or what he was shouting. It was only clear that he, too, quickly ran along the lunar path after his faithful guardian.”

This is how “...the cruel fifth procurator of Judea, horseman Pontius Pilate,” received forgiveness and peace, beware of me!” Out of fear of denunciation, fear of ruining his career, Pilate goes against his conscience.

He makes the last, pitiful attempts to save the unfortunate man, and when this fails, he tries to at least soften the reproaches of his conscience.

But no, and there cannot be a moral ransom for betrayal. And at the heart of betrayal, as is always the case, lies cowardice: “Cowardice is undoubtedly one of the most terrible vices", - Pilate hears the words of Yeshua in a dream. “No, philosopher, I object to you: this is the most terrible vice,” the author’s inner voice of Pilate intervenes.

The writer is sure that what is meaner and more terrible than open evil is the conciliation of those who understand evil, are ready to condemn it, are able to prevent it, but do not do this because of cowardice, cowardice, a habit of comfort, and fear for their career.

According to Bulgakov, cowardice is the main cause of social meanness and evil. And Pontius Pilate was punished for his meanness with terrible pangs of conscience.

Pilate suffers many restless nights because he did not go then, on the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, “to do anything to save the completely innocent, insane dreamer and doctor from execution.”

According to the writer, conscience is a person’s internal compass, his moral judgment of himself, a moral assessment of his actions.

The gospel legend contains eternal values.

It is these great criteria that can be used to assess the moral validity of any era, and M. Bulgakov, guided by these lofty truths, carries out a kind of moral test of our society already in the 20s of our century, in difficult, contradictory years, when a person as an individual did not mean anything .

The philosophical and religious concept of the novel is very complex and has not yet been fully understood. Bulgakov himself was a man far from orthodox Orthodoxy. God apparently seemed to him to be something like a universal law or an inevitable course of events.

According to his wife, he believed in Fate, Rock, but was not a Christian. When creating the image of Christ (in the novel he appears under the name Yeshua Ha - Nozri), Bulgakov was consciously guided by apocryphal sources, and rejected the gospels as false. (“Who-who,” Woland says to Berlioz, “but you should know that absolutely nothing of what is written in the Gospel ever actually happened...” Yeshua himself says the same thing).

In the Master's novel about Pontius Pilate, there is the trial, execution and burial of Yeshua, but there is no resurrection. There is no Mother of God; Yeshua himself is not a descendant of a noble Jewish family, as in the gospel - he is a poor Syrian who does not know his kinship and does not remember his parents.

No one understands Yeshua with his teaching that “there are no evil people in the world,” even his only apostle Levi Matthew.

His attempt to awaken people to their original, good nature only causes general anger. Only Woland understands Yeshua, but does not believe in the possibility of people firmly turning to good.

The devil, who is more similar to the Old Testament Satan from the book of Job, is not presented in the New Testament interpretation.

In Bulgakov's novel, Woland is the true “prince of this world.” There is not even a hint of any rivalry between him and Christ in this sense.

It personifies the power that “eternally wants evil and always does good.” This line from Goethe’s “Faust” (the German poet put his devil, Mephistopheles, into her mouth) was taken by Bulgakov as an epigraph to his novel.

And in fact, Woland in the novel punishes obvious atheists, his henchmen force rogues, deceivers and other scoundrels to pay their bills; throughout the novel they more than once carry out “righteous justice” and even “good” Bely, A.D. About the “Master” and Margarita” // Bulletin of the Russian Christian Movement. -2009. -No. 112.- P.89-101..

And yet Woland remains a devil, a demon of evil who does not want and cannot give people grace.

Hunted down, broken by unfair Soviet criticism and life's hardships, the Master finds his Savior in him. But he receives from the devil not light, not renewal, but only eternal peace in the otherworldly timeless world Skorino, L. V. Faces without carnival masks// Questions of literature. -2009.-No. 6.-P.6-13..

So, the problem of good and evil, central to the novel, is apparently solved by the author in the following way. Evil, according to Bulgakov, is not in those in power, not in the government, not in this or that social structure, but in people, as a mass person of this society. To do this, it is necessary, first of all, to establish in society the triumph of the principle of justice, that is, the inevitability of exposing and punishing unprofessionalism, dishonesty, meanness, sycophancy, and lies. However, this will not yet be the final triumph of good. So the writer’s main sympathies and hopes are not on Woland’s side. Only love and mercy can bring ultimate good into the world - it is mercy and love that Bulgakov calls for to be the basis of human relations and social structure. In order for good to finally defeat evil, people must learn to create the miracle of humanity; they need “... an act of mercy, which, in contrast to justice that is understandable and accessible to man, remains both a miracle and a mystery for man.”

Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita", on which the author worked until the last day of his life, remained in his archive and was first published in 1966-1967 in the magazine "Moscow". This novel brought the author posthumous world fame. This work was a worthy continuation of those traditions Russian literature, who asserted a direct connection of the grotesque, fantasy, the unreal with the real in a single flow of narrative.

Bulgakov wrote “The Master and Margarita” as a historically and psychologically reliable book about his time and its people, and therefore the novel became a unique human document of that remarkable era. And at the same time, this “much-meaning” narrative is directed to the future, is a book for all times, which is facilitated by its highest artistry. There is reason to assume that the author had little hope for the understanding and recognition of his novel by his contemporaries.

Bulgakov's works are distinguished by a very natural interweaving of the real and the fantastic in the narrative. Bulgakov cannot be called a science fiction writer, like, for example, the Strugatsky brothers. Ho story " Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs" will certainly be classified in the area science fiction. The novel “The Master and Margarita” is a parable, philosophical novel, which, rather, has a metaphysical beginning, is traditionally classified as fantastic. For Bulgakov, science fiction, scientific or mystical, is not an end in itself. First of all, it is important for him to comprehend the picture human life, human essence and the relationship in man and the world of the dark (from Satan) and light (Divine) principles. Everything else is just a means for revealing and more fully illuminating the concept.

The novel intertwines three layers: real, metaphysical (fantastic) and historical. In the work there is no boundary between reality and fantasy. It is erased, or better said, destroyed by the invasion real world mystical-fantastic characters: Woland and his retinue, Pontius Pilate, Yeshua and his messenger, as well as guests at Satan’s ball. Time boundaries are also erased in the novel, which, however, turn out to be literary boundaries (the Master's novel). There are, as it were, two novels in the novel. The chapters of these novels are closely related to each other. Events take place in them at different times: in the “Yershalaim” chapters Pontius Pilate argues with Yeshua, in the “Moscow” chapters Satan checks the life values ​​of Muscovites.

The most interesting and important moment is Woland’s coming to earth. Himself being the Lord of Darkness and, accordingly, the bearer of evil, he, coming into contact with representatives human race, turns out to be a Judge, restoring the truth and punishing in its name. With the help of this technique, Bulgakov reveals dark side human nature, in comparison with which Satan himself becomes the prophet of truth. The interweaving of the fantastic and the real creates a deep layer of philosophical meaning in the novel. With its help, Bulgakov rethinks in parable form global problems and overestimates dogmatic values.

Mikhail Bulgakov's attraction to the parable form of narration explains such a large-scale combination in his works of real events and fantastic-allegorical heroes and characters.

Bulgakov rethinks biblical story not only on the example of Pilate, he has a different Christ, not the God-man, but only the One who knows and bears the Truth. His image is devoid of the miraculous, unlike Woland, who in the novel is not absolute Evil, but a punishing sword of justice, paving the way to the knowledge of the Truth.

The quest for the Master is the quest of every writer, as well as any creative person. He goes through the tests of the main things in his life - romance and love - and, it seems, does not survive beyond the second, because he does not withstand the first, burning the manuscript. But for Bulgakov it is important that “manuscripts do not burn” and eternal love exists.

“Everyone gets what they have suffered,” this is how the ending of the novel can be interpreted. “Forgiven on Sunday night... the cruel fifth procurator of Judea, the horseman Pontius Pilate” leaves along the lunar path, talking with Yeshua. “Someone” released the Master “to freedom”, granting him and Margarita Heavenly, but his and Margarita’s own paradise - complete peace. Ivan Bezdomny, having become a professor of philosophy and history without a pseudonym, knows what he wants to know, suffering and doubting only on the days of the full moon. But for Bulgakov himself, the “manuscripts” still “do not burn.” This main truth for the writer has been tested by time in the example of his works.

Now the work of Mikhail Bulgakov has received well-deserved recognition and has become an integral part of our culture. However, not everything has been comprehended and mastered. Readers of his novels, stories, plays are destined to understand his creations in their own way and discover new values ​​hidden in the depths of his work.

And the dead were judged according to what was written in the books, according to their deeds...
M. Bulgakov
M. Bulgakov’s novel “The Master and Margarita” is a complex, multifaceted work. The author touches upon the fundamental problems of human existence: good and evil, life and death. In addition, the writer could not ignore the problems of his time, when human nature itself was breaking down. (The problem of human cowardice was pressing. The author considers cowardice to be one of the greatest sins in life. This position is expressed through the image of Pontius Pilate. The procurator controlled the destinies of many people. Yeshua Ha-Nozri touched the procurator with sincerity and kindness. However, Pilate did not listen to the voice of conscience, but followed the lead of the crowd and executed Yeshua. The procurator was afraid and for this he was punished. He had no peace day or night. This is what Woland said about Pilate: “He says,” Woland’s voice was heard, “he says the same thing. , that even under the moon he has no peace and that he has a bad position. This is what he always says when he is not sleeping, and when he sleeps, he sees the same thing - the lunar road and wants to go along it and talk with the prisoner Ga-Nozri, because, as he claims, he didn’t say something back then, long ago, on the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan. But, alas, for some reason he fails to take this road and no one comes to him. Then, what can you do, you have to. talk to him to himself. However, some variety is needed, and to his speech about the moon he often adds that most of all in the world he hates his immortality and unheard-of glory.” And Pontius Pilate suffers for twelve thousand moons for one moon, for that moment when he became cowardly. And only after much torment and suffering does Pilate finally receive forgiveness^
The problem of excessive self-confidence and lack of faith also deserves attention in the novel. It was for lack of faith in God that the chairman of the board of the literary association, Mikhail Aleksandrovich Berlioz, was punished. Berlioz does not believe in the power of the Almighty, does not recognize Jesus Christ and tries to force everyone to think the same way as him. Berlioz wanted to prove to Bezdomny that the main thing is not whether Jesus was good or bad, but that Jesus as a person did not exist in the world before, and all the stories about him are simply fiction. “There is not a single Eastern religion,” said Berlioz, “in which, as a rule, immaculate virgin would not have given birth to God, and the Christians, without inventing anything new, in the same way ripped off their Jesus, who in fact was never alive. This is what we need to focus on.” No one and nothing can convince Berlioz. Woland and Berlioz could not convince him. For this stubbornness, for self-confidence, Berlioz is punished - he dies under the wheels of a tram.
On the pages of the novel, Bulgakov satirically depicted Moscow residents: their way of life and customs, everyday life and worries. Woland is interested in what the inhabitants of Moscow have become. To do this, he arranges a session of black magic. And he concludes that not only greed and greed are inherent in them, mercy is also alive in them. When Georges of Bengal's head is torn off by the Hippopotamus, the women ask him to return it to the unfortunate man. And Woland concludes: “Well,” he responded thoughtfully, “they are people like people, they love money; but this has always been... humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether leather, paper, bronze or gold. Well, they are frivolous... well, well... and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts... ordinary people... in general, they resemble the old ones... the housing problem has only spoiled them...”
The novel “The Master and Margarita” is about great love, about loneliness, about the role of the intelligentsia in society, about Moscow and Muscovites. It reveals itself to the reader in an endless variety of topics and problems. And therefore the work will always be modern, interesting, new. It will be read and appreciated in all centuries and times.

BY LITERATURE

Images and problems of Bulgakov's novels "The Master and Margarita" and Sholokhov's "Quiet Don"

Kirov, 2008

1.1 HISTORY OF THE NOVEL CREATION

1.2 PLOT, COMPOSITION, GENRE OF THE NOVEL

1.3 ISSUES

1.4 IMAGE SYSTEM

1.5 WOLAND AND HIS PEOPLE

B) Koroviev-Fagot

B) Azazello

D) Hippopotamus

2. IMAGE OF MARGARITA

3. IMAGE OF THE MASTER

4. IMAGE OF YESHUA

5. IMAGE OF PONTius PILATE

2.1 HISTORY OF THE NOVEL CREATION

2.2 THE IMAGE OF G. MELIKHOV IN THE NOVEL

1. BULGAKOV’S NOVEL “THE MASTER AND MARGARITA”. PROBLEMS, SYSTEM OF IMAGES, GENRE ORIGINALITY

1. HISTORY OF THE CREATION OF THE NOVEL

In 1928-1929, during one of the most difficult periods of his life, M.A. Bulgakov almost simultaneously begins to create three works: a novel about the devil, a play called “The Cabal of the Holy One” and a comedy, which will soon be destroyed along with the novel he began. Bulgakov painfully searched for a title for his novel, repeatedly changing one for another. In the margins of his manuscripts, such variant titles as “Tour…”, “Son…”, “Juggler with a Hoof”, “He Appeared”, etc. are preserved. However, “Black Magician” is most often found. Soon new heroes are introduced: first Margarita, then the Master. The appearance of the image of Margarita in the novel, and with it the theme of great and eternal love, is associated by many researchers of Bulgakov’s work with his marriage to Elena Sergeevna Shilovskaya. By 1936, after 8 years of work on the novel, Bulgakov prepared the sixth complete draft edition. The reworking of the text continued in the future: the writer made additions, changes, changed the composition and chapter titles. In 1937, the structure of the novel was finally formed, and then the title “The Master and Margarita” appeared. The novel “The Master and Margarita” was first published in 1966-1967, in the magazine “Moscow” with large bills (more than 150 deletions of the text). In the same year, it was released in full in Paris and was soon translated into major European languages. In the writer's homeland full text The novel appeared only in 1973.

1.2 PLOT, COMPOSITION, GENRE OF THE NOVEL

M.A. Bulgakov called “The Master and Margarita” a novel, but the genre uniqueness of this work still causes controversy among literary scholars.

It is defined as a myth novel, a philosophical novel, a menippea (a genre of ancient literature; characterized by a free combination of poetry and prose, seriousness and comedy, philosophical reasoning and satirical ridicule, a predilection for fantastic situations (flying into the sky, descending into the underworld, etc. ), creating for the characters the possibility of behavior free from any conventions.).

This happens because, as noted by the author of the “Bulgakov Encyclopedia” B.V. Sokolov, in “The Master and Margarita” almost all genres existing in the world and literary trends.

As original as the genre, the composition of “The Master and Margarita” is a novel within a novel, or a double novel. These two novels (about the fate of the Master and Margarita and about Pontius Pilate) are opposed to each other and at the same time form a kind of organic unity.

Two layers of time are uniquely intertwined in the plot: biblical and contemporary to Bulgakov, that is, the 30s. 20th century and 1st century new era. Many events described in the Yershalaim chapters are repeated in a parodic, reduced form exactly 1900 years later in Moscow.

Three storylines of the Master and Margarita (philosophical - Yeshua and Pontius Pilate, love - the Master and Margarita, mystical and satirical - Woland, his retinue and Muscovites), clothed in a free, bright, sometimes bizarre form of storytelling, are closely connected with the image of Woland.

The storylines of the two novels end by intersecting at one spatio-temporal point - in eternity, where the Master and his hero Pontius Pilate meet and find forgiveness and eternal shelter.

The collisions, situations and characters of the biblical chapters, mirrored in the Moscow chapters, contribute to such a plot conclusion and help reveal the philosophical concept of the novel.

1.3 PROBLEMS OF THE NOVEL

deepest philosophical problem- the problem of the relationship between power and personality, power and the artist - is reflected in several storylines. The novel contains an atmosphere of fear and political persecution of the 1930s, which the author himself faced. Most of all, the theme of oppression, persecution of an extraordinary, talented person by the state is present in the fate of the Master. It is not for nothing that this image is largely autobiographical. However, the theme of power, its deep impact on the psychology and soul of a person, is also manifested in the story of Yeshua and Pilate. Bulgakov shows with his heroes the path of spiritual renewal and transformation. The novel, with its mysticism and fantastic episodes, challenges rationalism, philistinism, vulgarity and meanness, as well as pride and spiritual deafness. Thus, Berlioz with his smug confidence in tomorrow leads to death under the wheels of a tram. Ivan Bezdomny, on the contrary, turns out to be able to transform himself, abandoning past misconceptions. Here comes another interesting motive- motive spiritual awakening that comes with the loss of what is considered reason in a rigid society. It is in a psychiatric hospital that Ivan Bezdomny decides not to write any more of his pathetic poems. An important idea of ​​the author, affirmed by his novel, is the idea of ​​​​the immortality of art. “Manuscripts don’t burn,” says Woland. But many bright ideas live among people thanks to students who continue the work of the teacher. This is Levi Matthew. Such is Ivanushka, whom the Master instructs to write a continuation of his novel. Thus, the author declares the continuity of ideas, their inheritance. Bulgakov’s interpretation of the function of “evil forces”, the devil, is unusual. Woland and his retinue, while in Moscow, brought decency and honesty back to life, punished evil and untruth. It is Woland who brings the Master and his girlfriend to their eternal home, giving them peace. The motif of peace is also significant in Bulgakov’s novel. We must not forget about the vivid pictures of Moscow life, remarkable for their expressiveness and satirical sharpness. There is a concept of “Bulgakov’s” Moscow, which appeared thanks to the writer’s talent for noticing the details of the surrounding world and recreating them on the pages of his works.

1.4 IMAGE SYSTEM

1. Woland and his retinue

Woland is a character in the novel “The Master and Margarita”, who heads the world of otherworldly forces. Woland is the devil, Satan, “the prince of darkness,” “the spirit of evil and the lord of shadows.” Woland is largely focused on Mephistopheles, Faust, and Johann Wolfgang Goethe. The name Woland itself is taken from Goethe’s poem, where it is mentioned only once and is usually omitted in Russian translations. As amended 1929 – 1930 the name Woland was reproduced in full in Latin on his business card:²D-r Theodor Voland². In the final text, Bulgakov abandoned the Latin alphabet. Woland’s portrait is shown before the start of the Great Ball “Two eyes fixed on Margarita’s face. The right one with a golden spark at the bottom, drilling anyone to the bottom of the soul, and the left one is empty and black, kind of like a narrow eye of a needle, like an exit into a bottomless well of all darkness and shadows. Woland's face was slanted to the side, the right corner of his mouth was pulled down, and deep wrinkles were cut into his high, bald forehead, parallel to his sharp eyebrows. The skin on Woland’s face seemed to be forever burned by a tan.” True face Bulgakov hides Woland only at the very beginning of the novel in order to intrigue the reader, and then directly declares through the mouth of the Master and Woland himself that the devil has definitely arrived at the Patriarch's. As amended in 1929-1930. Woland was still such a “monkey” in many ways, possessing a number of degrading traits. However, in the final text of The Master and Margarita, Woland became different, “majestic and regal,” close to the traditions of Lord Byron, Goethe and Lermontov. Woland gives different explanations for the purposes of his stay in Moscow to different characters who come into contact with him. He tells Berlioz and Bezdomny that he has arrived to study the found manuscripts of Hebert of Avrilak. To the staff of the Variety Theater, Woland explains his visit with his intention to perform a show black magic. After the scandalous session, Satan tells the bartender Sokov that he simply wanted to “see the Muscovites en masse, and the most convenient way to do this was in the theater.” Before the start of the Great Ball at Satan's, Margarita Koroviev-Fagot informs that the purpose of the visit of Woland and his retinue to Moscow is to hold this ball, whose hostess must bear the name Margarita and be of royal blood. Woland has many faces, as befits the devil, and in conversations with different people puts on different masks. At the same time, Woland’s omniscience of Satan is completely preserved: he and his people are well aware of both the past and the future life those with whom they come into contact also know the text of the Master’s novel, which literally coincides with the “Gospel of Woland”, the same thing that was told to the unlucky writers at the Patriarchal. Woland's unconventionality lies in the fact that, being a devil, he is endowed with some obvious attributes of God. The complementarity of good and evil is most clearly revealed in Woland’s words addressed to Matthew Levi, who refused to wish health to the “spirit of evil and the lord of shadows”: “Don’t you want to rip off the entire globe, blowing away all the trees and all living things from it because of your fantasies of enjoying naked light? You are stupid." In Bulgakov, Woland literally revives the Master's burned novel; the product of artistic creativity, preserved only in the head of the creator, again turns into a tangible thing. Woland is the bearer of fate, this is due to a long tradition in Russian literature that linked fate and fate not with God, but with the devil. In Bulgakov, Woland personifies the fate that punishes Berlioz, Sokov and others who violate the norms of Christian morality. This is the first devil in world literature, punishing for non-observance of the commandments of Christ.

B) Koroviev-Fagot

This character is the eldest of the demons subordinate to Woland, a devil and a knight, who introduces himself to Muscovites as a translator for a foreign professor and former regent of a church choir. The surname Koroviev is modeled after the surname of a character in the story by A.K. Tolstoy's "Ghoul" (1841) of the state councilor Telyaev, who turns out to be a knight and a vampire. In addition, in the story by F.M. Dostoevsky’s “The Village of Stepanchikovo and Its Inhabitants” has a character named Korovkin, very similar to our hero. His second name comes from the name musical instrument bassoon, invented by an Italian monk. The Koroviev-Fagot has some similarities with the bassoon - a long thin tube folded in three. Bulgakov's character is thin, tall and in imaginary servility, it seems, ready to fold himself three times over in front of his interlocutor (in order to then calmly harm him). Here is his portrait: “...a transparent citizen of a strange appearance, On his small head there is a jockey cap, a checkered short jacket..., a citizen a fathom tall, but narrow in the shoulders, incredibly thin, and his face, please note, is mocking”; “...his mustache is like chicken feathers, his eyes are small, ironic and half-drunk.” Koroviev-Fagot is a devil who emerged from the sultry Moscow air (unprecedented heat for May at the time of his appearance is one of the traditional signs of the approach of evil spirits). Woland's henchman, only when necessary, puts on various disguises: a drunken regent, a clever swindler, a sly translator for a famous foreigner, etc. Only in the last flight does Koroviev-Fagot become who he really is - a gloomy demon, knight Fagot, no worse than his master who knows the value of human weaknesses and virtues.

B) Azazello

The name Azazello was formed by Bulgakov from the Old Testament name Azazel. That's the name negative hero the Old Testament book of Enoch, a fallen angel who taught people how to make weapons and jewelry. Bulgakov was probably attracted by the combination of seduction and murder in one character. It is for the insidious seducer that we take Azazello Margarita during their first meeting in the Alexander Garden: “This neighbor turned out to be short, fiery red, with a fang, in starched underwear, in a good-quality striped suit, in patent leather shoes and with a bowler hat on his head. “Absolutely a robber’s face!” - thought Margarita.” But Azazello’s main function in the novel is related to violence. He throws Styopa Likhodeev out of Moscow to Yalta, expels Uncle Berlioz from the Bad Apartment, and kills the traitor Baron Meigel with a revolver. Azazello also invented the cream that he gives to Margarita. The magic cream not only makes the heroine invisible and able to fly, but also gives her a new, witch-like beauty. In the epilogue of the novel, this fallen angel appears before us in a new guise: “Azazello flew at the side of everyone, shining with the steel of his armor. 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 was flying in his true form, like a demon of the waterless desert, a killer demon.”

D) Hippopotamus

This werecat and Satan's favorite jester is perhaps the funniest and most memorable of Woland's retinue. The author of “The Master and Margarita” gleaned information about Behemoth from the book by M.A. Orlov’s “The History of Relations between Man and the Devil” (1904), extracts from which are preserved in the Bulgakov archive. There, in particular, the case of a French abbess who lived in the 17th century was described. and possessed by seven devils, the fifth demon being Behemoth. This demon was depicted as a monster with an elephant head, a trunk and fangs. His hands were human-shaped, and he had a huge belly, a short ponytail and thick hind legs, like a hippopotamus, reminded him of his name. In Bulgakov, Behemoth became a huge black werewolf cat, since black cats are traditionally considered to be associated with evil spirits. This is how we see him for the first time: “... on the jeweler’s pouffe, in a cheeky pose, a third person was lounging, namely, an eerie-sized black cat with a glass of vodka in one paw and a fork, on which he had managed to pick up a pickled mushroom, in the other.” The hippopotamus in the demonological tradition is the demon of the desires of the stomach. Hence his extraordinary gluttony, especially in Torgsin, when he indiscriminately swallows everything edible. Behemoth's shootout with the detectives in apartment No. 50, his chess match with Woland, the shooting competition with Azazello - all these are purely humorous scenes, very funny and even to some extent remove the severity of the everyday, moral and philosophical problems that the novel poses to reader. In the last flight, the transformation of this merry joker is very unusual (like most of the plot devices in this science fiction novel): “The night tore off the fluffy tail from the Behemoth, tore off its fur and scattered its shreds across the swamps. He who was a cat who amused the prince of darkness now turned out to be a thin youth, a demon page, the best jester that ever existed in the world.”

Gella is a member of Woland’s retinue, a female vampire: “I recommend my maid Gella. She is efficient, understanding, and there is no service that she cannot provide.” Bulgakov took the name “Gella” from the article “Sorcery” Encyclopedic Dictionary Brockhaus and Efron, where it was noted that in Lesvos this name was called untimely dead girls who became vampires after death. The green-eyed beauty Gella moves freely through the air, thereby taking on a resemblance to a witch. Bulgakov may have borrowed the characteristic features of vampire behavior - clicking teeth and smacking his lips - from the story by A.K. Tolstoy's "Ghoul". There, a vampire girl turns her lover into a vampire with a kiss - hence, obviously, Gella’s fatal kiss for Varenukha. Gella, the only one from Woland's retinue, is absent from the scene of the last flight. Most likely, Bulgakov deliberately removed her as the youngest member of the retinue, performing only auxiliary functions both in the Variety Theater, and in the Bad Apartment, and at Satan’s Great Ball. Vampires are traditionally the lowest category of evil spirits. In addition, Gella would have no one to turn into on the last flight - when the night “exposed all the deceptions,” she could only become again dead girl.

2. Image of Margarita

One of the central characters in the novel is the image of Margarita. The very name of the heroine has a certain meaning, a special symbolic meaning. In the Russian language of the 18th century it meant “pearl”, “pearl”. The author does not give an external portrait of Margarita. We hear the sound of her voice, her laughter, we see her movements. Bulgakov repeatedly describes the expression of her eyes. With all this he wants to emphasize that what is important to him is not her appearance, but the life of her soul. B.V. Sokolov believes that “Margarita Bulgakova outwardly resembles Margarita Valois - this is evidenced by the exclamation of a fat man, a participant in St. Bartholomew’s Night, who called her “bright Queen Margot.” Margaret's ancestors were French kings. That is why it satisfies all three requirements of the tradition established by Woland when holding the “spring full moon ball, or the ball of a hundred kings.” As you know, the hostess of the ball had to be called Margarita, be a local native and have royal origin. This is mentioned more than once in the novel: the housekeeper Natasha addresses her mistress “my French queen,” Koroviev says about her: “There are things in which neither class barriers nor even borders between states are completely unknown. Let me give you a hint: one of the French queens who lived in the sixteenth century would probably be very amazed if someone told her that after many years I would lead her lovely great-great-great-great-granddaughter arm in arm in Moscow through the ballrooms.” All researchers of Bulgakov’s work believe that Margarita had several prototypes. Among them, first of all, they name her namesake, and perhaps also distant relatives, Margarita of Navarre and Margarita of Valois. The first lived half a century before Margaret of Valois and was widely known as the author of the collection “Heptameron”. Both historical Margarets, as noted in the Brockhaus and Efron dictionary, patronized writers and poets. “Bulgakov’s Margarita is forever connected with one great writer - the Master.” An interesting detail was discovered in the preparatory materials for the latest edition of Bulgakov’s novel: extracts from dictionaries concerning French queens. The wedding of Margaret of Valois ended on St. Bartholomew's Night. The third predecessor of the heroine of Bulgakov’s novel is Margarita from Goethe’s novel “Faust”. Margarita has little in common in character and fate with the heroine of Faust. Their differences are emphasized in the episode with Frida, from whom she begs forgiveness and whose fate resembles that of Goethe’s Margarita. All three Margaritas are predecessors, taking us to the French and German Middle Ages and, therefore, to the Gothic. “In The Master and Margarita” Bulgakov managed to express “real, true, eternal love”, which naturally clarifies main idea novel. The love of Margarita and the Master is unusual, defiant, reckless - and this is precisely why it is attractive. Bulgakov's Margarita is a symbol of femininity, fidelity, beauty, self-sacrifice in the name of love. The image of Margarita clearly reflects Bulgakov’s creative courage and daring challenge to stable aesthetic laws. On the one hand, the most poetic words about the Creator, about his immortality, about the beautiful “eternal home” that will be his reward are put into Margarita’s mouth. On the other hand, it is the Master’s beloved who flies on a broom over the boulevards and rooftops of Moscow, breaks window panes, puts “sharp claws” into the Behemoth’s ear and calls him a swear word, asks Woland to turn the housekeeper Natasha into a witch, takes revenge on the insignificant literary critic Latunsky by pouring buckets of water in the drawers of his desk. It is difficult to find another similar mixture of styles in world literature. Margarita became a generalized poetic image of a loving woman, a woman who so inspiredly turns into a witch, furiously dealing with the enemy of Master Latunsky: “Taking careful aim, Margarita hit the piano keys, and the first plaintive howl swept through the entire apartment. The innocent instrument screamed frantically.<...>Breathing heavily. Margarita tore and threw strings with a hammer<...>The destruction she caused gave her a burning pleasure...” Even before meeting with evil spirits, Margarita had already taken on the role of a witch and the “temporary witch’s squint,” which disappeared after taking Azazello’s wine, was not temporary at all, it appeared earlier: “What did this woman need, in whose eyes there is always some kind of sparkle? an incomprehensible light, what did this witch, squinting in one eye, need...?” Thus, Margarita is by no means an ideal in everything. Another of her sins was participating in Satan’s ball along with the greatest sinners, who after the ball turned to dust and returned to oblivion. “But this sin is committed in the irrational, otherworldly world; Margarita’s action here does not cause any harm to anyone and therefore does not require atonement.” Margarita’s character is very clearly manifested in her relationship with Woland. Margarita's human nature, with her spiritual impulses, overcoming temptations and weaknesses, is revealed as strong and proud, conscientious and honest. This is exactly how Margarita appears at the ball. “She intuitively immediately grasps the truth, as only a moral and reasonable person with a light soul, not burdened with sins. If, according to Christian dogmas, she is a sinner, then she is one whom the tongue does not dare to condemn, for her love is extremely selfless, only a truly earthly woman can love." This is exactly how Margarita appears after the ball, when the time of reckoning comes: "Black melancholy like - then immediately drove to Margarita’s heart.<...>No one, apparently, was going to offer her any reward for all her services, just as no one was holding her back.<...> Should I ask myself, as Azazello temptingly advised...? “No, no way,” she told herself.” And further: “We tested you,” Woland continued, “never ask for anything! Never and nothing, and especially among those who are stronger than you. They will offer and give everything themselves! Sit down, proud woman! At the ball, a line of villains, murderers, poisoners, mixed with libertines and pimps, passes in front of Margarita. And it is not an accidental Bulgakov’s heroine who suffers because of her betrayal of her husband and, subconsciously, puts this act on a par with the greatest crimes. “On the one hand,” writes B.V. Sokolov, - the abundance of poisoners is a reflection in the heroine’s brain of the thought of the possibility of suicide with her lover using poison. On the other hand, the fact that in the future the Master and Margarita will be poisoned by a man - Azazello, will leave the possibility of considering their poisoning (or suicide) as imaginary, since all the poisoners - men at the ball - are in fact imaginary poisoners. Woland introduces Margarita to famous villains and libertines, as if testing her love for the Master, intensifying the torment of her conscience. “At the same time, Bulgakov seems to leave an alternative possibility: Woland’s ball and all the events associated with it take place only in the sick imagination of Margarita, who is tormented by the lack of news about the Master and because of her guilt before her husband.” The last statement seems controversial, since Woland’s ball and what follows it actually seems more real than the heroine’s entire previous life. “She was worried about the memories that she was at Satan’s ball, that by some miracle the Master was returned to her, that a romance arose from the ashes, that again everything was in its place in the basement in the alley...” And even earlier: “I want my lover, the Master, to be returned to me right now, this very second,” said Margarita, and her face was distorted with a spasm.” According to B.S. Nemtsev, the character of Margarita, revealed at Satan’s ball, seems to be a continuation and development of traditions, when, in the conditions of an extremely normative state, a woman, transgressing her family duty and for the sake of her beloved, gives her soul to the devil, challenges this state - the persecutor of her beloved. “For those in power, the very possibility of someone’s lack of control stings, so it is clear to Woland that free people cannot be happy here.” He kills both Margarita and the Master, giving them “peace” and uniting the lovers forever in another life. The highest freedom is thus preserved for both.

3.Image of the Master

The first chapters of the novel are mainly devoted to minor characters, and the main character - the Master - appears only in the 13th chapter. At first he is represented by the figure of the anti-master - Ivan Bezdomny. But “those who have played their role go behind the scenes. And the figure of the Master gradually crystallizes - the creator of the novel about Christ occupies the foreground primarily with his creation. And... out of the fog emerges the personified symbol of Truth, Creativity, Goodness - Yeshua.” The fate of the Master is death and then “awakening” - resurrection for peace. The Master is an autobiographical character, but built on the basis of well-known literary examples, and not with a focus on real life circumstances. He bears little resemblance to a person from the 20s and 30s; “he can easily be transported to any century and at any time.” Bulgakov had to experience almost everything that the Master learned in his “basement” life. The master and Bulgakov have a lot in common. Both worked as historians in a museum, both lived rather secluded lives, and both were not born in Moscow. The master is very lonely and in everyday life, and in his literary creativity. He creates a novel about Pilate without any contact with the literary world. In the literary environment, Bulgakov also felt lonely, although, unlike his hero, at different times he maintained friendly relations with many prominent figures of literature and art: V.V. Veresaev, E.I. Zamyatin, A.A. Akhmatova, etc. “From the balcony, a shaved, dark-haired man, about 38 years old, with a sharp nose, anxious eyes and a tuft of hair hanging over his forehead, cautiously looked into the room.” B.S. Myagkov suggests that this description of the hero’s appearance is “practically a self-portrait of the creator of the novel, and the age is absolutely accurate: when these chapters began to be created, in 1929, Bulgakov was exactly 38 years old.” Critical attacks on the novel about Pontius Pilate almost verbatim repeat the accusations against “The White Guard” and “Days of the Turbins.” Bulgakov raised the feat of creativity so high that “the Master speaks on equal terms with the Prince of Darkness,” so high that in general “there is talk of an eternal reward (... for Berlioz, Latunsky and others there is no eternity and there will be neither hell nor heaven) " Peace for the Master and Margarita is purification. And having been cleansed, they can come into the world eternal light, to the kingdom of God, to immortality. Peace is simply necessary for people who have suffered and are tired of life, like the Master and Margarita. The master is an eternal “wanderer”. On “the night when scores are settled,” the Master appears in his real guise”: “His hair was now in the moonlight and gathered in a braid at the back, and it flew in the wind. When the wind blew the cloak off the master’s feet, Margarita saw the stars of his spurs on his boots, either extinguishing or lighting up. Like a young demon, the master flew without taking his eyes off the moon, but smiled at her as if he knew her well and loved her, and, according to the habit acquired in room No. 118, muttered something to himself.” According to V.I. Nemtsev, the description of appearance and dress indicates the period of time when the “real” Master lived - from the second quarter of the 17th century. until the beginning of the 19th century. The simultaneous resurrection of Yeshua and the Master is the moment when the heroes of the Moscow scenes meet the heroes of the biblical ones, the ancient Yershaloim world in the novel merges with the modern Moscow one. And this connection takes place in the eternal other world thanks to the efforts of his master, Woland. “It is here that Yeshua, and Pilate, and the Master, and Margarita acquire the temporary and extra-spatial quality of eternity.” In this last scene, not only do the ancient Yershaloim, eternal otherworldly and modern Moscow spatial layers of the novel merge together, but also the biblical time forms the same flow with the time when work on “The Master and Margarita” began. The Master releases Pilate into the world, to Yeshua, thereby completing his novel. Only in the other world does the Master find the conditions of creative peace that he was deprived of on earth. External peace hides internal creative fire. Only such peace was recognized by Bulgakov. Any other kind of peace, the peace of satiety, the peace achieved at the expense of others, was alien to him. The master finally gets rid of the fear of life and alienation, remains with the woman he loves, alone with his creativity and surrounded by his heroes: “You will fall asleep, having put on your greasy and eternal cap, you will fall asleep with a smile on your lips. Sleep will strengthen you, you will begin to reason wisely. And you won’t be able to drive me away. I will take care of your sleep,” Margarita said to the Master, “and the sand rustled under her bare feet.”

4. Image of Yeshua

The portrait of Yeshua is virtually absent in the novel: the author indicates his age, describes clothing, facial expression, mentions a bruise and abrasion - but nothing more: “... They brought in... a man of about twenty-seven. This man was dressed in an old and torn blue chiton. His head was covered with a white bandage with a strap around his forehead, and his hands were tied behind his back. The man had a large bruise under his left eye and an abrasion with dried blood in the corner of his mouth. The man brought in looked at the procurator with anxious curiosity.” To Pilate’s question about his relatives, he answers, “There is no one. I am alone in the world." But this does not at all sound like a complaint about loneliness... Yeshua is not looking for compassion, there is no feeling of inferiority or orphanhood in him. For him it sounds something like this: “I am alone - the whole world is in front of me” or - “I am alone in front of the whole world”, or - “I am this world.” “Yeshua is self-sufficient, absorbing the whole world into himself. In the novel, Yeshua is not given a single effective heroic gesture. He is an ordinary person: “He is not an ascetic, not a desert dweller, not a hermit, he is not surrounded by the aura of a righteous man or an ascetic. Tormenting himself with fasting and prayers. Like all people, he suffers from pain and rejoices in being freed from it.” The power of Yeshua Ha-Nozri is so great and so all-encompassing that at first many take it for weakness, even for spiritual lack of will. However, Yeshua Ha-Nozri is not an ordinary person: Woland - Satan imagines himself with him celestial hierarchy approximately equal. Bulgakov's Yeshua is the bearer of the idea of ​​the God-man. “The weakness of Yeshua’s preaching is its ideality,” rightly believes V.Ya. Lakshin - but Yeshua is stubborn, and the absolute integrity of his faith in goodness has its own strength.” The author sees in his hero not only a religious preacher and reformer - the image of Yeshua embodies free spiritual activity. Possessing developed intuition, subtle and strong intellect, Yeshua is able to guess the future, and not just the thunderstorm that “will begin later, in the evening,” but also the fate of his teaching, which is already being incorrectly stated by Levi. Yeshua is internally free. Even realizing that he is really in danger death penalty, he considers it necessary to say to the Roman governor: “Your life is meager, hegemon.” Speaking about Yeshua, one cannot fail to mention his unusual opinion. If the first part - Yeshua - transparently hints at the name of Jesus, then the “cacophony of the plebeian name” - Ha-Notsri - “so mundane” and “secular” in comparison with the solemn church - Jesus, as if called upon to confirm the authenticity of Bulgakov’s story and its independence from evangelical tradition" Despite the fact that the plot seems completed - Yeshua is executed, the author seeks to assert that the victory of evil over good cannot be the result of social and moral confrontation; this, according to Bulgakov, is not accepted by human nature itself, and the entire course of civilization should not allow it. Yeshua was alive all the time and left alive. It seems that the word “died” itself is not present in the Golgotha ​​episodes. He remained alive. He is dead only to Levi, to Pilate's servants. The great tragic philosophy of Yeshua's life is that the truth (and the choice to live in the truth) is also tested and confirmed by the choice of death. He “managed” not only his life, but also his death. Yeshua controls not only Life, but also Death.” Yeshua's "self-creation", "self-government" stood the test of death, and therefore he became immortal.

5.Image of Pontius Pilate

“Wearing a white cloak with a bloody lining and a shuffling cavalry gait, early in the morning of the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, came out into the covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great.” Bulgakov recreated the image of a living person, with an individual character, torn apart by conflicting feelings and passions. In Pontius Pilate we see a formidable ruler, before whom everything trembles. He is gloomy, lonely, the burden of life weighs him down. “We all the time feel how Pilate is overwhelmed, drowning in his passions.” “More than anything else in the world, the procurator hated the smell of rose oil... It seemed to the procurator that the cypresses and palm trees in the garden emitted a pink smell, that a pink stream was mixed with the smell of leather and the convoy.” The writer collects from individual strokes psychological portrait a man destroyed by unfreedom. Bulgakov showed that the contradictions of Pontius Pilate manifest themselves differently in each situation. Every time he reveals himself from an unexpected side. The Roman procurator is the first, albeit involuntary, enemy Christian teaching. The procurator of Judea had already betrayed his people once. “And the memory of this betrayal, the first cowardice, which Pilate’s subsequent courage in the ranks of the Roman troops could not cover, comes to life again when Pilate has to betray Yeshua, becoming cowardly for the second time in his life, subconsciously intensifying the pangs of conscience and the mental torment of the procurator.” Pilate, the bearer and personification of “the strangest vice” - cowardice, as it became clear already to the first critics, is the central character of the novel, present not only in the “Yershalaim” chapters, but invisibly in the narrative of Soviet reality, and in the history of the Master and Margaritas. Pilate fell in love, but did not save Christ, fearing for his well-being and succumbing to the devil’s obsession. He is between fear and love, duty and meanness. On the other hand, he is a major official, intelligent and strong-willed - not a nonentity, but also not a talented person, not a creator. He performs a good deed twice - a feat not with a capital F, but not in quotation marks, not of Christ and not of the devils - a feat worthy of the position of administrator - soldier, which he occupies: “In both cases, he gives the order to kill” by sending a person trace of Judas and commanded to hasten the death of Yeshua. Throughout the “historical” part of the novel “The Master and Margarita,” Pontius Pilate is shown as the bearer of practical reason. Morality in him is suppressed by the evil principle; There was apparently little good in the life of the procurator. Yeshua Ha-Nozri personifies the triumph of the moral law. It was he who awakened a good beginning in Pilate. And this goodness prompts Pilate to take a spiritual part in the fate of the wandering philosopher. V.I. Nemtsev draws our attention to very important point: “... Almighty Pilate recognized Yeshua as his equal. And I became interested in his teaching.” In the novel, the image of Pontius, the dictator, is decomposed and transformed into a suffering personality. The authorities in his person lose the stern and faithful enforcer of the law, the image acquires a humanistic connotation. However, it is quickly replaced by Woland's judgments about divine power. Pilate is led not by divine providence, but by chance (headache). Pilate's dual life is the inevitable behavior of a man squeezed in the grip of power and his post. During the trial of Yeshua, Pilate, with greater force than before, feels a lack of harmony and strange loneliness in himself.

2. SHOLOKHOV. WOMEN'S FATES IN THE NOVEL “QUIET FON”

2.1 HISTORY OF THE NOVEL CREATION

1925 Sholokhov began a work about the Cossacks during the Kornilov rebellion, called “Quiet Don” (and not “Donshchina”, according to legend). However, this plan was abandoned, but a year later the writer took up “Quiet Don” again, widely unfolding pictures of the pre-war life of the Cossacks and the events of the First World War. The first two books of the epic novel were published in 1928 in the magazine Krasnaya Nov. Almost immediately doubts arise about their authorship; a work of such magnitude required too much knowledge and experience. Sholokhov brings the manuscripts to Moscow for examination (in the 1990s, Moscow journalist L. E. Kolodny gave their description, although not strictly scientific, and comments on them). The young writer was full of energy, had a phenomenal memory, read a lot (in the 1920s, even the memoirs of white generals were available), asked Cossacks in Don farms about the “German” and civil wars, and knew the life and customs of his native Don like no one else . The release of the third book (the sixth part) was delayed due to a rather sympathetic depiction of participants in the anti-Bolshevik Verkhnedon uprising of 1919. Sholokhov turned to Gorky and with his help obtained permission from Stalin to publish this book without cuts (1932), and in 1934 he basically completed the fourth , the last one, but began to rewrite it again, probably not without tightening ideological pressure. In two latest books“Quiet Don” (the seventh part of the fourth book was published in 1937-1938, the eighth in 1940) appeared many journalistic, often didactic, clearly pro-Bolshevik declarations, often contradicting the plot and figurative structure of the epic novel. But this does not add arguments to the theory of “two authors” or “author” and “co-author”, developed by skeptics who irrevocably do not believe in Sholokhov’s authorship (among them A.I. Solzhenitsyn, I.B. Tomashevskaya). Apparently, Sholokhov himself was his own “co-author,” preserving mainly the artistic world he created in the early 1930s, and attaching an ideological orientation in a purely external way. In 1935, the already mentioned Levitskaya admired Sholokhov, finding that he had turned “from a “doubting”, wavering one - into a firm communist who knows where he is going, clearly seeing both the goal and the means to achieve it.” Undoubtedly, the writer convinced himself of this and, although in 1938 he almost fell victim to false political accusations, he found the courage to end Quiet Don with the complete collapse of his beloved hero Grigory Melekhov, crushed by a wheel. cruel story.

2.2 WOMEN'S FATES IN THE NOVEL

Aksinya was attractive; her beauty was not spoiled even by the wrinkles that appeared from a difficult life. Another heroine, Daria, delights readers with her femininity and energy. Natalya, purely outwardly, can be compared to a gray duck. The author himself often emphasizes in Aksinya - “greedy lips”, in Natalya - “ big hands”, in Daria - “thin rims of eyebrows”. The heroines of M. Sholokhov are very different, but they are united by the completeness of their perception of life. In those years women's destiny, as indeed in our time, was not easy. If a husband beat his wife, then this was considered in the order of things: earlier the father taught wisdom, and now, therefore, the husband. Here are the consequences of such an attitude of Pantelei Prokopievich towards his wife: “... in anger he reached the point of unconsciousness, and, apparently, this prematurely aged his, once beautiful, but now completely entangled in a web of wrinkles, portly wife.”

But this has always been the case in almost every family. And people perceived this as inevitable and given from above. There was a house, there was a family, there was work on the land, there were children to take care of. And no matter how difficult her lot was, she firmly knew her purpose. And this helped her survive.

But something terrible happened - the war began. And not just a war, but a fratricidal war. When yesterday's neighbors became enemies, when the father did not understand his son, and the brother killed his brother...

It was difficult for even the smart Gregory to understand what was happening. What should a woman do? How should she live?.. Husbands leave, but their wives remain.

The destinies of Aksinya and Natalya are intertwined and dependent on one another. It turns out that if one is happy, then the other is unhappy. M. Sholokhov depicted a kind of love triangle that existed at all times.

Natalya loved her husband with all her soul: “...she lived, cultivating an unconscious hope for her husband’s return, leaning on her with a broken spirit. She didn’t write anything to Gregory, but there was no one in the family who would expect a letter from him with such melancholy and pain.”

This tender and fragile woman took upon herself the full measure of suffering given by life. She wanted to do everything to save the family. And only after feeling the futility of this, he decides to commit suicide. Perhaps it was selfishness caused by jealousy that prompted her to do this. Was there such a revolution in Aksinya’s life? Perhaps it came after Tanya's death. Having lost her daughter, she didn’t know anything, didn’t think about anything... Terrible. The mother is alive, and her children are in the ground. There are no continuers of your life, it seems to have been interrupted... And at this difficult moment of her life, Aksinya found herself completely alone. And there was no one to help her... But there was one compassionate person, closeness with whom led to Aksinya’s break with Gregory. Fate was more merciful to Natalya in this regard. This heroine had truly maternal feelings, which united her with Ilyinichna, but somewhat alienated her from Daria, whose only child died.

It was said briefly about what happened to Daria’s child: “... and Daria’s child died...” And that’s all. No unnecessary feelings, emotions... By this M. Sholokhov once again emphasizes that Daria lived only for herself. Even the death of her husband saddened her for a short time; she quickly recovered. Obviously, Daria did not have deep feelings for Peter, she just got used to him. Afraid of waiting for the inevitable, lost from loneliness, she decided to commit suicide. And before merging with the waters of the Don, she shouted not to anyone, but to women, since only they could understand her: “Goodbye, little women!”

Not long before this, Natalya also passed away. After their death, Aksinya became close to Gregory's mother. It is a pity that the feelings that united these two women arose so late, literally one step before the death that awaited each of them.

Aksinya and Natalya died, thereby punishing the top of the triangle, leaving Gregory at a crossroads.

Perhaps M. Sholokhov spoke with bitterness about the fate of women. But try to portray it better - it won’t work! Reality is only real if it is true, otherwise it is not reality, but only a parody of it.

Problems of the novel “The Master and Margarita”

Literature and library science

Most of all, the theme of oppression and persecution of an extraordinary talented individual by the state is present in the fate of the Master. Margarita trashes the apartment of the critic Latunsky, who killed the Master, but rejects the offer to destroy her enemy. After the ball at Satan's, the heroine first of all asks for the suffering Frida, forgetting about her own passionate desire to return the Master. It is Woland who brings the Master and his girlfriend to their eternal home, giving them peace.

8. Problems of the novel “The Master and Margarita”

The deepest philosophical problem problemrelationships between power and personality,power and the artist is reflected in several storylines. The novel contains an atmosphere of fear and political persecution of the 1930s, which the author himself faced. Most of all, the theme of oppression, persecution of an extraordinary, talented person by the state is present in the fate of the Master. It is not for nothing that this image is largely autobiographical. However, the theme of power, its deep impact on the psychology and soul of a person, is also manifested in the story of Yeshua and Pilate. The originality of the composition of the novel lies in the fact that the story of Yeshua Ha-Nozri and Pontius Pilate based on the Gospel plot is woven into the plot fabric of the story about the fate of the Moscow inhabitants. Here Bulgakov's subtle psychologism is revealed. Pilate is the bearer of power. This determines the duality of the hero, his spiritual drama. The power vested in the procurator conflicts with the impulse of his soul, which is not devoid of a sense of justice, good and evil. Yeshua, who wholeheartedly believes in the bright beginning in man, cannot understand and accept the actions of power, its blind despotism. Faced with deaf power, the poor philosopher dies. However, Yeshua instilled doubt and repentance into Pilate’s soul, which tormented the procurator for many centuries. Thus, the idea of ​​power is connected in the novel with the problemmercy and forgiveness.

To understand these issues, the image of Margarita and the posthumous fate of the two are important. loving friend friend of heroes. For Bulgakov, mercy is higher than revenge, higher than personal interests. Margarita trashes the apartment of the critic Latunsky, who killed the Master, but rejects the offer to destroy her enemy. After the ball at Satan's, the heroine first of all asks for the suffering Frida, forgetting about her own passionate desire to return the Master.Bulgakov shows his heroes the path of spiritual renewal and transformation.The novel, with its mysticism and fantastic episodes, challenges rationalism, philistinism, vulgarity and meanness, as well as pride and spiritual deafness. Thus, Berlioz, with his smug confidence in the future, leads the writer to death under the wheels of a tram. Ivan Bezdomny, on the contrary, turns out to be able to transform himself, abandoning past misconceptions. Another interesting motive arises herespiritual awakening motive, which comes with the loss of what is considered reason in an inert society. It is in a psychiatric hospital that Ivan Bezdomny decides not to write any more of his pathetic poems. Bulgakov condemns militant atheism, which has no true moral basis. An important idea of ​​the author, affirmed by his novel, is the idea of ​​​​the immortality of art. “Manuscripts don’t burn,” says Woland. But many bright ideas live among people thanks to students who continue the work of the teacher. This is Levi Matthew. Such is Ivanushka, whom the Master instructs to “write a sequel” to his novel. Thus, the author declares the continuity of ideas, their inheritance. Bulgakov’s interpretation of the function of “evil forces”, the devil, is unusual. Woland and his retinue, while in Moscow, brought decency and honesty back to life, punished evil and untruth. It is Woland who brings the Master and his girlfriend to their “eternal home”, giving them peace. Motif of peace also significant in Bulgakov's novel. We must not forget about the vivid pictures of Moscow life, remarkable for their expressiveness and satirical sharpness. There is a concept of “Bulgakov’s Moscow”, which appeared thanks to the writer’s talent for noticing the details of the surrounding world and recreating them on the pages of his works.

Bulgakov widely covers the problem of the relationship between the Master and society and facesloneliness of a creative personality.The Master's novel, the meaning of his whole life, is not accepted by society. Moreover, it was decisively rejected by critics, even when unpublished. What did the Master want to tell people? He wanted to convey to them the need for faith, the need to seek truth. Consonant with the loneliness of the Masterloneliness of Pontius Pilate. He seems to have everything for happy life: money, power, fame... This is exactly what should encourage the people around him to communicate with him. But even when we first meet Pilate, we notice some kind of yearning in his soul. He has not yet felt lonely, but it is no coincidence that Yeshua tells him: “The truth, first of all, is that you have a headache...” Yeshua sees Conscience in him, sees concern for people (after all, the expression “headache” also has a figurative meaning) . Pilate's loneliness is not only proof that he has moved away from everyday vanity and has come closer to understanding the truth. It's also a punishment. Punishment for the fact that he neglected his Conscience and chose to fulfill the law of Yershalaim, breaking the higher law.

Margarita in the novel is the bearerhuge, poetic and inspired love, which the author called “eternal”. And the more unattractive, “boring, crooked” the lane where this love arises appears before us, the more unusual this feeling turns out to be, flashing with “lightning”. Margarita fights for the Master. Having agreed to be the queen at the Great Full Moon Ball, she, with the help of Woland, returns the Master. Together with him, under the peals of a cleansing thunderstorm, she passes into eternity.

One of the most interesting problems of the novel “The Master and Margarita” isproblem of creativity.Bulgakov vividly and expressively described the world of literary conjuncture, which represented the contemporary writer’s art of words. We can say that here too Bulgakov uses the technique of comparing types of writers. The master managed to rise above society, practically separating himself in the basement. He had practically no acquaintances in Moscow. This gave him the freedom to create what the conscience of a moral man, the pen of a free writer and the talent of a Master dictated. And sooner or later he had to show his novel to the world. And then people like Latunsky began to judge him. Did they understand that they were raising their hand against creation about the eternal? Perhaps they understood, since from time to time fear came over them, like Berlioz. It was a hidden fear that besides the power that feeds them and sets them against someone, there are higher powers. But they are used to living without asking themselves questions. The main thing is that it is satisfying. It is no coincidence that the scenes in the restaurant are so similar to the scenes of Satan's Great Ball. The ironic image of the corridors and offices of the writers' union, where the inscriptions are completely far from creativity, leaves no doubt. This is a kind of distributor of material goods, and that’s all. This has nothing to do with creativity. So the irony of Behemoth and Koroviev, who think aloud about the talents of the Griboedov house, is entirely understandable. Real writers don't need proof of who they are; just read a few pages of their work. But they pretend to be great writers. Ivan Bezdomny fits into this circle quite successfully at first. But he is endowed with a living soul, although he has an undeveloped mind. It’s just that this young man was brought up in unbelief in an era when temples and souls were being destroyed. Faced with the incomprehensible, he loses, first of all, lies and refuses to write. He is young, and the author hopes that he will still understand the truth. Ivan Popyrev became a professor, however, he did not achieve the freedom without which creativity is impossible. Did the Master acquire it? Yes and no. After all, he could not fight for his novel. That's why he deserves peace. The fate of the master, like the fate of Ivan Bezdomny, is the fate of those who tried honestly and uncompromisingly to figure out where the truth is and where the lies are, and to know the truth. It is on them that G. Bulgakov himself pins his hopes.