Goals:
- Reveal in a novel main problem XX century - the problem of public administration, the responsibility of every cultural person for everything that happens in society.
- Show everyone's need storylines novel in revealing its main idea.
- Contribute moral education students.
During the classes.
Erase random features -
And you will see: the world is beautiful.
Know where the light is, and you will understand where the darkness is.
Let everything go slowly,
What is sacred in the world, what is sinful in it,
Through the heat of the soul, through the coolness of the mind.
A. Block “Retribution”.
1. introduction teachers.
M. A. Bulgakov, as a man of high culture, who has absorbed the best Christian traditions, who has gone through fire civil war, through the era of depersonalization and destruction of the individual in the Soviet country, deculture of the masses, spiritual impoverishment, I could not remain indifferent to this. Even if many years later, he became for us the conscience of the nation, revealed the collapse of the illusions of the common man in a bureaucratic state, showed us an example of an unbending creative spirit, moral purity and social intuition, instilled faith in the triumph of the human mind, in the victory of good, in rebirth cultural traditions and restoration of universal human values. He revealed his idea especially clearly in the novel “The Master and Margarita”.
“There are in the novel... motives that lead to Dante, Goethe. But all this is Bulgakov, and only he alone turns to us, having melted in his soul the ideological and moral quest of his great predecessors. True talent is unique. However, the higher his uniqueness, the more and deeper he drew from the culture of humanity, from the spiritual tradition and presented to our judgment a creation, aspiration to the future, as we want to see it in ourselves.”
E. Sidorov.
We already know the heroes of the novel, we have examined the events that take place in it: the distant past in Yershalaim and Moscow society in the 30s of the twentieth century.
Our goal today is to understand what unites all the chapters in the novel, what concept the author puts into the words: good, light, truth. As the lesson progresses, we will try to put this into a diagram.
2. Conversation and drawing up a diagram.
To comprehend the present, you need to turn to the past! In Bulgakov's novel, the past is in the chapters about Pontius Pilate.
What words of Yeshua caused the procurator first surprise, then indignation?
(Good man, good people. Evil people can not be)
(Pontius Pilate knows that the life around him is built on violence, so a good person simply cannot survive. He knows to himself that it is necessary to be cruel, dexterous, strong and calculating. Only thanks to such qualities he won battles and became Tiberius’ governor in Yershalaim.)
What is the truth?
(That the procurator has a headache.)
Let's figure out how these are connected to each other. To do this, let us turn to the tasks facing Pontius Pilate.
Student message. Pontius Pilate is the governor of the Roman emperor in Yershalaim. Like any enslaver, he must hold the city in his hands and control everything. Since any state apparatus is an apparatus of violence, and even more so an invader, the procurator in Judea has an unenviable role. He uses the army, spies, informers, and himself enters into secret negotiations with the people he needs. Therefore, his rule here is evil. No matter how inhumane the order in the country may be, the ruler subordinates his actions and the actions of his subordinates to it. The circumstances are such that he is simply forced to be cruel, which is contrary to his inner desires. This compulsion from the environment makes his life painful and hopelessly lonely. Only the dog shares his loneliness, so for him she is not only a beloved, but also a necessary creature.
Why is the truth a headache?
(The headache is a symbol of the split, disharmony, schism that this unusually intelligent and strong man experiences, who is forced to accept the order of government from which, albeit unconsciously, his spirit suffers. He is forced to live according to a plan that does not depend on his will, nor from his desires. Pilate’s strong mind was at odds with his conscience. The headache is a punishment for the fact that his mind, not internally agreeing, allows and supports the unjust structure of the world. The headache is a symbol of mental disharmony, discord between reason and conscience. , the desire for morality.
Prove this with examples in the text.
The procurator’s headache stops when he decides not to pass the death sentence on Yeshua, and comes when he remembers his duties to the emperor (the appearance of a bald head on which “sat a rare-toothed golden crown” pp. 404-405)
What is Yeshua guilty of?
He confused people with his speeches. He talked about faith and truth, about violence and goodness, he painted a future without violence, when a person would not need any power at all. He is more terrible than the murderer Varravan, because he is ideologically superior to everyone. Pontius understands this, he knows that the world is held on by the chains of “faith” and “violence”, it is ugly and unfair.
What is the truth according to Yeshua?
It lies in man himself, as a thinking being.
(Message about Yeshua) In his portrayal of Yeshua Ha-Nozri, Bulgakov does not follow biblical traditions; he shows his human origin, not his divine origin, which is why his name has a different sound than Jesus. His origin is questionable, he does not remember his parents, has no permanent place of residence or relatives. But he is educated. (page 398)
Bulgakov generally attaches great importance to the human in man. For him, the manifestation of humanity is intelligent and spiritualized life, that is, culture, which determines one of the main laws of earthly and cosmic life. A thinking being must determine the truth itself and feel responsible for putting it into practice.
Therefore, Yeshua is first and foremost a man. For him, carnal, physical existence is not important; he does not attach any importance to it. Value lies only in spiritual life. These are his beliefs, views, ideas, principles, which he reached with his own mind. He himself lives in harmony with his conscience and does not dissemble or hide his convictions even before death. In his time, he tries to solve the issues that face our society in our time. He is sure that man necessarily improves himself over the centuries. In this hero, Bulgakov embodies his idea of goodness as recognition of the spiritual uniqueness and personal value of any person. Yeshua sees the truth in harmony between man and the world. Every person must discover this truth for himself; the pursuit of it should become the goal of every person’s life. Therefore, the essence of his life lies in whether his thoughts will remain in others, whether he managed to convey them to someone else. And since the essence of his life is in his spiritual heritage, he himself is free to manage his life, and only he himself will cut a hair of it. His influence on others makes him dangerous to the state. The main thing in his truth is effective goodness, this is his new word.
Conclusions: Yeshua is harmful to the state, because
- good cannot rely on violence, as evil does. Goodness is the desire of one person to understand another. Hence his insight (“...you’re filled with headaches...”), sincerity, flexibility, ability to understand another, compassion, responsiveness.
- Constant self-improvement, culture.
- Good is creative work aimed at the benefit of people.
1 slide (Against the black background of the world of evil and darkness, a single light appears - Yeshua. This is the beginning of self-awareness as a person, this is good and light. Yeshua is the first man. Moral fortitude, will, firmness in defending one’s idea, the greatest selflessness are required. This is a weapon of good , since good cannot be passive. In the novel, good is omnipotent: it influences Matthew Levi, Pilate, and possibly Judas.
Idea " kind person” (that is, truly human) is a moral principle, and therefore is subjected to the most difficult tests.
Why are Ratboy and Judas “good people”?
Good is a manifestation of the human, and evil is a subhuman phenomenon. Man begins where evil ends. He is on the scale of moral values, in the zone of goodness. Human strength only comes from goodness, and other strength comes from evil.
(Slide 2. We write down conclusions in a red circle about a person. On the left we place the entry: “Sub-humans are insane: Rat-Slayer, Judas, Caiaphas.” They cannot yet bear the definition of “person”, since they are not looking for anything, do not repent of anything, are satisfied with this life, do not strive for spiritual self-improvement, do not suffer from the immorality of what is happening. From the world of Yeshua, only Pontius Pilate is capable of becoming a man, even through centuries of suffering. Therefore, we connect his name with “man” with an arrow.)
“The Master and Margarita” is a novel about the omnipotence of good, but on one condition: no matter what trials befall a person, he will in no way betray him. Every person is responsible for good. And the more responsible he is, the more cultured and educated he is, the more aware of the task facing him.
Now we can answer the question: why does Bulgakov include chapters from the life of ancient Yershalaim in his description of society in the 30s of the 20th century?
For Bulgakov, the depiction of the ancient world is necessary in order to show the awakening of consciousness, the desire for truth, for goodness, for self-improvement, from internal culture to inner freedom. This is Yeshua, this is what the procurator strives for. Pilate is still lonely and gloomy, suffering until he is freed from the heavy burden of a representative of the apparatus of violence and finds out this truth.
In addition, the depiction of the power of the procurator is an opportunity for Bulgakov to reveal the meaning of modern power, which he did not have the opportunity to openly criticize. Where good ends, evil begins and power becomes inhuman. Therefore, when depicting modern society, the author does not touch upon the state apparatus; everything becomes clear to the reader. How has society changed over the past two millennia?
“The townspeople have changed a lot, outwardly...” says Woland. But “...a much more important question is: have these townspeople changed internally?” (page 492)
Humanity has come a long way of development (we show slide 3, the sphere of possible self-improvement of a person and society), absorbed the culture of all centuries and peoples, determined for itself what is good and what is bad, and learned to understand many life issues. So attribute modern people to subhumans (babies of humanity) is impossible, therefore there is much greater demand from him, and there should be more responsibility for what is happening.
What is the evil spirit in the novel?
Woland does not force people to specifically commit evil acts, he only puts them in such conditions when elemental forces manifest themselves in them, quite consciously allowed into them by themselves. A person faces the problem of moral choice. Depending on what he chooses, the extent of his guilt and suffering is determined. Woland and his retinue are created from human shortcomings hidden in them, and reveal them where humanity recedes before them.
Rimsky suffers less than Berlioz: he is only a performer. Berlioz is not only a thinker, an ideological guide, but also an educator of the younger generation, which means that he must first of all himself understand the correctness of the ideas that he puts into practice. After all, he learned a lot from the cultural heritage of mankind. If there are any doubts about their correctness, resolve them, otherwise it threatens with bad consequences for the entire society. Therefore, he loses his head, which he cannot control.
Why does the rampant passions and elemental forces occur in the Variety Show?
This is a testing ground for passions spilling out, frank, shameless. The same bacchanalia of low passions is the philistine desire for the “sweet life”, “beautiful life”, devoid of spiritual content.
Woland's guests at the ball are sinners, the embodiment of evil, non-humans of all stripes who get what they strive for by satisfying their base egoistic passions. And the description of the ball is intruded by a reduced and vulgar assessment - “like in a bathhouse.”
“There is no charm in it and no scope either” (Woland).
How do these devilish forces arise, where do they come from?
These are dark elemental passions and drives that do not submit to the human principle, they are “from the evil one” (we show on the slide), they readily await everyone, because they live in the soul. And everyone’s task is to resist them, not to give in, to remain human.
How do the heroes of the novel see Woland?
Depending on the “beliefs” reigning in the soul. For Ivanushka, Woland is a foreign spy. For Berlioz - a White emigrant, a professor of history, a crazy foreigner. For Styopa Likhodeev - a magician, an artist. For the master - a literary character, the Devil, generated by the European cultural tradition (Mephistopheles).
What is Woland really?
This is the night sky, the primordial space, in the depths of which life arises. This means that this beginning is also responsible for man and human life. That is why it interferes with life on earth.
- Where is the place for a master in this system?
Peace is the place between good and evil. The master is well aware of what is happening in society, he cannot help but embody it on paper, but he is not a creator or a fighter. His “kindness” is not effective, therefore he has no right to be close to Yeshua, but it is not appropriate for him to be among evil. He also got what he deserved. (shown on the slide).
A person, born from an endless, eternal existence, who has gone through the most difficult path of development from a pre-human state to a highly spiritual, cultural awareness of his role on earth, is obliged to take care of the purity and perfection of society. Therefore, Margarita frees Frida from punishment. From kindness and attention to another person comes his mercy and compassion, which are human manifestations. Neither God nor the Devil are helpers in this!
Literature:
- Michael Bulgakov. Novels. M. “Contemporary”. 1988.
- V. Akimov. On the winds of time. Leningrad. "Children's literature". 1991.
The master and Bulgakov have a lot in common. Both work-
historians in the museum, both lived quite secluded lives, both
were not born in Moscow. The master is very lonely in everyday life
life, and in your literary creativity. A novel about Pilate
creates without any contact with literary world. IN
Bulgakov also felt lonely in the literary environment,
although unlike his hero's different time supported
friendly relations with many prominent figures
literature and art: V.V. Veresaev, E.I. Zamyatin,
L. A. Akhmatova, P. A. Markov, S. A. Samosudov and others.
“From the balcony a shaven man cautiously looked into the room,
dark-haired, with a pointed nose, anxious eyes and
with a tuft of hair hanging over his forehead, a man about
38". B. S. Myagkov suggests that this is a description of appearance
hero - “practically a self-portrait of the creator of the novel, and even in
and age absolute accuracy: when they began to create
these chapters, in 1929, Bulgakov was exactly 38 years old.” Further
Myagkov refers to a “reasoned opinion”, according to
for whom the favorite writer Bul-
Gakova N.V. Gogol, as evidenced by several facts:
education as a historian, portrait resemblance, motive for burning
novel, a number of thematic and stylistic coincidences
in their works. B.V. Sokolov as one of the possible
possible prototypes of the Master are named by S. S. Toplyaninova -
decorative artist Art Theater. Kind
The Master's alter ego is the figure of the wandering philosopher Yeshua Ha-Nots-
ri, created by himself, is another assumption of B.S. Myag-
kova. Possible prototypes of the Master are also called
O. Mendelshtam, and Dr. Wagner (Goethe), but, undoubtedly,
Most of all, Bulgakov invested the autobiography into the image of the Master.
physical traits.
The author of the novel about Pontius Pilate is a double of Bul-
gakovaya not only because his image reflects the psychological
gical traits and life impressions of the writer. Bulgakov
consciously draws parallels between his life and
the life of the Master. The image of the hero has a parable character, you
expressing Bulgakov’s idea of the vocation of an artist and
revealing the sable generalized type of artist. Extremely suitable
the idea of the novel “The Master and Margarita” about the higher world is attractive
the meaning of art, designed to affirm good and evil
stand evil “The very appearance of the Master is a man with a pure soul, with
pure thoughts, engulfed in creative fire, worship
nik of beauty and in need of mutual understanding, kindred
soul, - the very appearance of such an artist is certainly
expensive."
The very name of the hero contains not only a direct meaning
the words “master” (a specialist who has achieved in any field
high skill, art, mastery). It is opposed to
belongs to the word "writer".
In the 30s the writer was occupied with the most important question: worthy
can man be responsible to eternity? Otherwise
telling what his charge of spirituality is. A person who has realized himself
56 Literature
in Bulgakov's view, is accountable only to eternity. Evening-
ity is the environment of existence of this person. Berlioz and many
some others, “by whose hands, out of ignorance or indifference, your
evil is spreading on earth, they deserve obscurity.” Appeal to
philosophy of I. Kant allowed Bulgakov to begin
quests for the nature of morality and the mystery of creativity - concepts
pits, closely related to each other, since art in its
it is based on a deeply moral basis. The master has all the highest
kimi moral qualities, however, he is “malleably pro-
falls into extreme despair, and also freely ascends into
the very heights. His free personality equally perceives and
evil and good, while remaining yourself.” Weak resistance
For a creative nature, the evil spirit seems to be
the novel's story is natural. Heroes are carriers of high morals
great idea - in the writer’s works there is invariably
appear defeated in a collision with circumstances,
which evil gave birth to. Novel of a Master who does not belong to
powerful hierarchy of literary and quasi-literary
of the new world, cannot see the light. In this society to the Master
there is no place, despite all his genius. With your novel
M. Bulgakov asserts the priority of ordinary people
feelings above any social hierarchy. But in a world where the role
a person is determined exclusively by his social
situation, there are still goodness, truth, love, creativity
quality. Bulgakov firmly believed that only by relying on living
the embodiment of these humanistic concepts, humanity
can create a society of true justice, where mono-
No one will have the power of truth.
The Master's novel, like Bulgakov's own novel, sharply rejects
differs from other works of that time. He is the fruit
free labor, free thought, creative flight, without
the author’s violence against himself: “...Pilate flew towards the end, towards the end, and
I already knew that last words the novel will be: “... Fifth
procurator of Judea, horseman Pontius Pilate,” says Mas-
ter. The story of the novel about Pontius Pilate appears as if it were alive
the flow of time moving from the past to the future. And modern
mentality is like a link connecting the past with the future. From
Bulgakov's novel makes it clear that freedom of creativity is needed
to a writer like air. He cannot live and create without her.
The literary fate of the Master largely follows the literary
the literary fate of Bulgakov himself. Criticism attacks
the novel about Pontius Pilate repeats the accusations almost verbatim
niya against the “White Guard” and “Days of the Turbins”.
In “The Master and Margarita” an accurate reflection of the
installation in the country of the 30s. Through the feeling of fear that gripped
Masters, the novel conveys the atmosphere of a totalitarian political
tiki, in the conditions of which to write the truth about the autocracy of Pon-
Tias Pilate, about the tragedy of the preacher of truth and justice
It was dangerous for Yeshua to live. The refusal to publish the novel was accompanied by
in the editorial office with an ominous hint: “...Who is this... who advised the co-
make a novel like this strange topic!?” Night Confession
The master in front of Ivan Bezdomny amazes with his tragic
mom. Bulgakov was hounded by critics, sworn speakers, and he,
Naturally, he reacted painfully to this persecution. Not having
opportunities to confront their detractors publicly, “pi-
satel sought satisfaction through art, taking
as his seconds of the muses (including the patroness of the historical
ria Clio). Thus, the stage area of "Masters"
became a dueling lists.
In terms of autobiographical associations, one should indicate
that the original reason for the campaign against Bulgakov
appeared his novel “The White Guard” and the play “Days of the Turbins” and,
Firstly, main character of these works - white
officer Alexey Turbin.
Thus, not only the similarity of life-
circumstances of M. Bulgakov and the Master, but also parallelism
heroes of Bulgakov's novel and the Master's novel and their literary
no fate. The situation of bullying in which the writer found himself
in the second half of the 20s, is very reminiscent of the circumstances
things that the Master talks about. This is complete detachment
tion from literary life, and lack of means of subsistence
vania, “constant expectation of the “worst.” Articles-denunciations, gra-
the house that poured into the press had not only literary, but also
political in nature. "The joyless events have come
days. The novel was written, there was nothing more to do..." - dis-
says the Master to Ivan Bezdomny. "What-" about rare
the false and insecure was felt in literally every
line of these articles, despite their menacing and confident tone.
It seemed to me... that the authors of these articles were not talking about
they want to say, and that is what causes their rage.”
This campaign culminated in the famous letters
Bulgakov to the Soviet government (actually, to Steel-
Well). “As I published my works,
criticism of the USSR paid more and more attention to me,
than any of my works... not only never and
did not receive a single approving review anywhere, but
against, the more famous my name became in the USSR
and abroad, the more violent the press reviews became,
who finally understood the nature of frantic warfare” (late 1929).
In another letter (March 1930), M. Bulgakov writes: “I discovered
worked in the USSR press during 10 years of my work (literary)
301 reviews about me. Of these, there were 3 commendable, hostile
swear words - 298.” Remarkable final words
of this letter: “I, a playwright, ... know about both in the USSR and
abroad, - what is evident at the moment is poverty, the street and
death." Almost verbatim repetition in assessing one’s gender
the marriage between Bulgakov and the Master clearly indicates that
that the writer consciously associated the fate of the Master with
your own. In this regard, the letter to Stahl becomes
not only a biographical, but also a literary fact - for-
preparation for the novel, since the image of the Master appeared in bo-
later editions of the novel.
Bulgakov and the Master have one common tragedy - tragedy
non-recognition. The novel clearly shows the motive of responsibility and
guilt creative personality, which compromises with ob-
society and power, avoids the problem of moral choice,
artificially isolates himself in order to be able to re-
realize your creative potential. Through the mouth of Yeshua the Master
reproaches his contemporaries for cowardly cowardice when defending
their human dignity under the pressure of dictatorship and
bureaucracy. But unlike Bulgakov, the Master does not fight for
his recognition, he remains himself - the embodiment of “without-
measured strength and immeasurable, defenseless weakness of creativity.”
The Master, like Bulgakov, becomes ill: “L
then came... the stage of fear. No, not the fear of these articles..,
and fear of others who are completely unrelated to them
or to a novel with things. So, for example, I began to worry about the dark.
In a word, the stage of mental illness has arrived.”
The undoubted autobiographical associations include
The pages of the burnt novel are also disappearing.
The great love that illuminated the life of M. Bulgakov also
found reflection in the novel. It probably won't be right
identify the images of the Master and Margarita with the names of their co-
the creator of the novel and Elena Sergeepna: many autobiographies1
Margarita in the novel Master 57
The similar traits of the writer and his wife are present in the work.
NI. First of all, I would like to note the departure of Margarita (as
and Elena Sergeevna) from a wealthy, prosperous husband.
Bulgakov considers Margarita the Master's faithful companion. She
doesn't just share it difficult fate, but also complements the
fight his romantic image. Love appears to the Master
like an unexpected gift of fate, salvation from cold loneliness
quality. “Thousands of people walked along Tverskaya, but I guarantee you,
that she saw me alone and looked, not only anxiously,
and even as if painful. And it wasn’t so much her that struck me
beauty, so much extraordinary, never seen alone -
honor in her eyes!” - says the Master. And further: “She
looked at me in surprise, and I suddenly, and completely unexpectedly...
“Yes, I realized that I have loved this woman all my life!”
“Love jumped out in front of us, like it jumps out of the ground
killer in the alley, and hit us right away! So amazing
lightning strikes so hard Finnish knife!»
Appearing like a sudden insight, instantly flashed
The heroes' new love turns out to be long-lasting. There's little in her
little by little the fullness of feeling is revealed: here is tender love,
laziness, and hot passion, and unusually high spirituality -
naya connection between two people. The Master and Margarita are present in
novel in indissoluble unity. When the Master tells
Ivan the story of his life, his entire narrative is permeated
but with memories of my beloved.
In Russian and world literature the traditional motif is
which as one of the highest values of human existence
vaniya. Suffice it to recall, for example, Pushkin’s form -
lu "peace and freedom". Therefore, they are necessary to obtain
harmony. This does not mean external peace, but creative peace.
Such creative peace is what the Master should find in the last
there is a shelter.
Peace for the Master and Margarita is purification. And clean-
having labored, they can come to the world of eternal light, to the kingdom
God, into immortality. Peace is simply necessary for such a mood
given, restless and tired of life people, such as
we were the Master and Margarita: “...Oh thrice romantic
master, don’t you really want to go out with your girlfriend during the day?
under the cherry trees that are beginning to bloom, and in the evening listen
Schubert's music? Wouldn't it be nice for you to write?
by candlelight quill pen? <…>There, there! It's already waiting for you there
house and old servant, candles are already burning, and soon they will go out,
because you will immediately meet the dawn. Along this road
master, according to this,” Woland says to the hero.
The master is an “eternal wanderer.” The master is hard to tear away
from the earth, and there are many “bills” he must “pay.”
The Master's shelter in the novel is emphasized, deliberately
personal; it is oversaturated with the literary attributes of sentimentality
tally prosperous endings: here is the Venetian window, and
a wall entwined with grapes, and a stream, and a sandy path, and
the end, candles and an old devoted servant.
Return to the modern Moscow world for the Master
no: deprived of the opportunity to create, the opportunity to see people
bima, his enemies deprived him of the meaning of life in this world. In
house that the Master received as a reward for his immortal birth
man, those whom he loves, who are interested in and who will come to him
he won't be alarmed. It speaks of such a bright future
to her beloved Margarita: “Listen to the soundlessness... listen and na-
enjoy what you were not given in life - silence.<…>
This is your home, this is your eternal home. I know that in the evening
those you love, those you are interested in and who will come to you
won't alarm you. They will play for you, they will sing to you
you, you will see the light in the room when the candles are burning.”
The simultaneous Resurrection of Yeshua and the Master is a moment
when the heroes of Moscow scenes meet the heroes of the Bible -
skies, the ancient Yershalaim world in the novel merges with the co-
temporary Moscow And this connection occurs in eternity
nom other world thanks to the efforts of his master -
Volanda. It is here that Yeshua, and Pilate, and the Master, and Marga-
rita acquire a timeless and spaceless quality
eternity. Their fate becomes an absolute example and ab-
absolute value for all ages and peoples. In this last
On this stage, not only do the ancient Yershalaim-
sky, eternal otherworldly and modern Moscow pro-
the wandering layers of the novel, but also the time of the biblical image-
There is one thread with the time when work on “Ma-
ster and Margarita."
The Master releases Pilate into the world, to Yeshua, ending with
your own novel. This topic has been exhausted, and more in light of
He has nothing to do with Pilate and Yeshua. Only in the ‘otherworldly’
in the world, he finds the conditions of creative peace that he had
deprived on earth.
External peace hides inner creativity
skoe combustion. Only such peace was recognized by Bulgakov.
Margarita has only her love for the Master. Is-
erases the bitterness and painful awareness that she is
causes undeserved suffering to her husband. Master from-
finally comes from fear of life and alienation,
remains with the woman he loves, alone with his creativity
and surrounded by their heroes.
Description of the presentation Experience and mistakes in the novel by M. A. Bulgakov on slides
Within the framework of the direction, discussions are possible about the value of the spiritual and practical experience of an individual, a people, humanity as a whole, about the cost of mistakes on the path to understanding the world, gaining life experience. Literature often makes you think about the relationship between experience and mistakes: about experience that prevents mistakes, about mistakes, without which it is impossible to move forward. life path, and about irreparable, tragic mistakes. Direction characteristics
Methodological recommendations: “Experience and errors” is a direction in which a clear opposition of two polar concepts is less implied, because without errors there is and cannot be experience. A literary hero, making mistakes, analyzing them and thereby gaining experience, changes, improves, and takes the path of spiritual and moral development. By assessing the actions of the characters, the reader acquires his invaluable life experience, and literature becomes a real textbook of life, helping not to make one’s own mistakes, the price of which can be very high. Speaking about the mistakes made by heroes, it should be noted that it is incorrect decision, an ambiguous act can affect not only the life of an individual, but also have the most fatal impact on the fate of others. In literature we also encounter tragic mistakes that affect the destinies of entire nations. It is in these aspects that one can approach the analysis of this thematic area.
1. Wisdom is the daughter of experience. (Leonardo da Vinci, Italian painter, scientist) 2. Experience is a useful gift that is never used. (J. Renard) 3. Do you agree with the popular proverb “Experience is the word people use to call their mistakes”? 4. Do we really need our own experience? 5. Why do you need to analyze your mistakes? What can you learn from the mistakes of the heroes of the novel “The Master and Margarita”? 6. Is it possible to avoid mistakes by relying on the experience of others? 7. Is it boring to live without making mistakes? 8. What events and impressions in life help a person grow up and gain experience? 9. Is it possible to avoid mistakes when searching for a path in life? 10. A mistake is the next step towards experience 11. What mistakes cannot be corrected? Theme options
What we cannot avoid in this life are mistakes and misconceptions that will haunt us throughout our lives. This is a key point in the psychological attitude of every person - you will always make mistakes, you will always be mistaken and mistaken. And therefore Dear friends, you should treat this normally, not make a disaster out of it, as we were taught, but learn a very valuable and useful lesson from each such situation. Why will you always make mistakes and be misled, because no matter who you are, you don’t know everything about this world, and you will never know everything, this is the law of life, and your whole life is a process of learning. But you can significantly reduce the number of mistakes you make, you can be less mistaken, at least not make mistakes and not be mistaken in obvious situations, and for this you must learn. You can learn in this life from your own or from others’ mistakes. The first option is much more effective, the second is more promising. Human psychology Website of Maxim Vlasov
But still, the main thing that I want to draw your attention to is something else, the main thing comes down to your attitude towards all this. Many of us like to live according to concepts once accepted, holding on to them as a lifeline, and no matter what happens, not changing our minds for anything. This is it main mistake, in a mental attitude, as a result of which a person stops growing. And this also has a negative impact on the idea of oneself, of one’s mistakes, delusions and one’s abilities... We all make mistakes and are mistaken, we can all see the same situation differently, based on a number of our own ideas about reality. And this is actually normal, there is nothing scary about it, as it is usually presented. You know that Einstein was wrong about the speed of light, which he theorized. A light beam can reach a speed three times higher than the speed that he considered to be the maximum, that is, 300 thousand km/sec.
Goethe said: “Error is to truth as a dream is to awakening.” Awakening from error, a person turns to the truth with renewed vigor. L.N. Tolstoy believed that mistakes give reason. However... The mind makes mistakes: what is happening is either mutual exchange or mutual deception. The greatest mistake people make in life is when they don't try to live by doing what they enjoy best. (Malcolm Forbes) In life, everyone must make their own mistakes. (Agatha Christie)Aphorisms
The only real mistake is not correcting your past mistakes. (Confucius) If it were not for the mistakes of youth, then what would we remember in old age? If you take the wrong road, you can return; If you make a mistake with a word, nothing can be done. (Chinese last) He who does nothing never makes mistakes. (Theodore Roosevelt) Experience is the name everyone gives to their mistakes. (O. Wilde) Making a mistake and realizing it - this is wisdom. Realizing a mistake and not hiding it is honesty. (Ji Yun)
Bitter experience. Irreparable mistakes. The price of mistakes. Thesis Sometimes a person commits actions that lead to tragic consequences. And, although he eventually realizes that he made a mistake, nothing can be corrected. Often the cost of a mistake is someone's life. Experience that prevents errors. Thesis Life is the best teacher. Sometimes difficult situations arise when a person must make the right decision. Doing right choice, we gain invaluable experience – experience that will help us avoid mistakes in the future. Abstracts
Mistakes, without which it is impossible to move along the path of life. People learn from some mistakes. Thesis Is it possible to live life without making mistakes? I think not. A person walking along the path of life is not immune from a wrong step. And sometimes it is thanks to mistakes that he gains valuable life experience and learns a lot.
Van Bezdomny (aka Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev) is a character in the novel The Master and Margarita, a poet who in the epilogue becomes a professor at the Institute of History and Philosophy. In the fate of the poet Ivan Bezdomny, who by the end of the novel turned into a professor at the Institute of History and Philosophy Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev, Bulgakov says that the new people created by Bolshevism will turn out to be unviable and, naturally, will die along with the Bolshevism that gave birth to them, that nature does not tolerate not only emptiness , but also pure destruction and negation and requires creation, creativity, and true, positive creativity is possible only with the affirmation of the beginning of the national and with a sense of the religious connection of man and nation with the Creator of the Universe.” Ivan Bezdomny
When meeting with Ivan, then still Bezdomny, Woland urges the poet to first believe in the devil, hoping that by doing so I.B. will be convinced of the truth of the story of Pontius Pilate and Yeshua Ha-Nozri, and then will believe in the existence of the Savior. The poet Bezdomny found his “small homeland”, becoming Professor Ponyrev (the surname comes from the Ponyri station in the Kursk region), as if joining the origins national culture. However, the new I.B. was struck by the know-it-all bacillus. This man, raised to the surface of public life by the revolution, was first a famous poet, then a famous scientist. He expanded his knowledge, ceasing to be that virgin youth who tried to detain Woland at the Patriarch's Ponds. But I. B. believed in the reality of the devil, in the authenticity of the story of Pilate and Yeshua, while Satan and his retinue were in Moscow and while the poet himself communicated with the Master, whose behest I. B. fulfilled, refusing poetic creativity in the epilogue.
Ivan Nikolaevich Ponyrev is convinced that there is neither God nor the devil, and he himself in the past became a victim of a hypnotist. The professor's old faith revives only once a year, on the night of the spring full moon, when he sees in a dream the execution of Yeshua, perceived as a world catastrophe. He sees Yeshua and Pilate peacefully talking on a wide, flooded moonlight road, sees and recognizes the Master and Margarita. I.B. himself is not capable of true creativity, and the true creator - the Master - is forced to seek protection from Woland in his last refuge. This is how Bulgakov’s deep skepticism regarding the possibility of degeneration for the better of those who were brought into culture and social life With the October Revolution of 1917, the author of “The Master and Margarita” did not see in Soviet reality the kind of people whose appearance was predicted and on whom Prince N. S. Trubetskoy and other Eurasians hoped. Nurtured by the revolution, the nugget poets who emerged from the people, in the writer’s opinion, were too far from the feeling of “the religious connection of man and nation with the Creator of the Universe,” and the idea that they could become the creators of a new national culture turned out to be a utopia. Having “seen the light” and turned from Homeless to Ponyrev, Ivan feels such a connection only in a dream.
A series of guests who pass in front of Margarita on V. b. at the village , was not chosen randomly. The procession is opened by “Mr. Jacques and his wife,” “one of most interesting men“,” “a convinced counterfeiter, a state traitor, but a very good alchemist,” who “became famous for that. . . that he poisoned the royal mistress.” The last imaginary poisoners on V. b. at the village turn out to be Bulgakov's contemporaries. “The last two guests were coming up the stairs. “Yes, this is someone new,” said Koroviev, squinting through the glass, “oh yes, yes.” Once Azazello visited him and, over cognac, whispered advice to him on how to get rid of one person whose revelations he was extremely afraid of. And so he ordered his friend, who was dependent on him, to spray the walls of his office with poison. - What's his name? - asked Margarita. “Oh, really, I don’t know myself yet,” answered Koroviev, “I’ll have to ask Azazello.” - Who's with him? “But this is his most efficient subordinate.” Guests of Woland
During V. b. at the village Not only imaginary poisoners and murderers pass before Margarita, but also genuine villains of all times and peoples. It is interesting that if all the imaginary poisoners at the ball are men, then all the true poisoners are women. The first to speak is “Mrs. Tofana.” The next poisoner on V. b. at the village - a marquise who "poisoned her father, two brothers and two sisters over an inheritance." On V. b. at the village Margarita sees famous libertines and pimps of the past and present. Here is a Moscow dressmaker, who organized a meeting house in her workshop (Bulgakov included V. B. at the village prototype among the participants main character his play “Zoyka’s Apartment”), and Valeria Messalina, the third wife of the Roman Emperor Claudius I (10 -54), the successor of Guy Caesar Caligula (12 -41), also present at the ball.
What is on V. b. at the village A string of murderers, poisoners, executioners, libertines and procurers passes in front of Margarita, not at all by chance. Bulgakov's heroine is tormented by betrayal of her husband and, albeit subconsciously, puts her offense on a par with the greatest crimes of the past and present. The abundance of poisoners and poisoners, real and imaginary, is a reflection in Margarita’s brain of the thought of possible suicide together with the Master using poison. At the same time, their subsequent poisoning, carried out by Azazello, can be considered imaginary and not real, since almost all male poisoners in V. b. at the village - imaginary poisoners. Another explanation for this episode is the suicide of the Master and Margarita. Woland, introducing the heroine to famous villains and libertines, intensifies the torment of her conscience. But Bulgakov seems to leave an alternative possibility: V. b. at the village and all the events associated with him occur only in the sick imagination of Margarita, who is tormented by the lack of news about the Master and guilt before her husband and subconsciously thinking about suicide. Special role on V. b. at the village Frida plays, showing Margarita the version of the fate of the one who crosses the line defined by Dostoevsky in the form of the tears of an innocent child. Frida, as it were, repeats the fate of Margarita in Goethe’s “Faust” and becomes a mirror image of Margarita.
This is a collective image that Bulgakov paints. He satirically conveys to us portraits of his contemporaries. It becomes funny and bitter from the images drawn by the author. At the very beginning of the novel we see Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz, chairman of MASSOLIT (the union of writers). In fact, this person has nothing to do with real creativity. B. is completely faked by time. Under his leadership, the entire MASSOLIT becomes the same. It includes people who know how to adapt to their superiors and write not what they want, but what they need. There is no place for a true creator, so critics begin persecuting the Master. Moscow of the 20s was also a Variety Show, run by the lover of carnal entertainment Styopa Likhodeev. He is punished by Woland, just like his subordinates Rimsky and Varenukha, liars and sycophants. The chairman of the house management, Nikanor Ivanovich Bosoy, was also punished for bribery. In general, Moscow of the 20s was distinguished by many unpleasant qualities. This is a thirst for money, a desire for easy money, satisfaction of one’s carnal needs at the expense of spiritual ones, lies, servility to superiors. It was not in vain that Woland and his retinue came to this city at this time. They punish the hopeless severely, and give those who are not yet completely morally lost a chance to improve. Moscow 20s
As we remember, at the beginning of the novel, writers Berlioz and Bezdomny convince their friend that there was no Jesus and that in general all gods are fictitious. Is it necessary to prove that this was “atheism out of fear” (especially from the editor Berlioz)? And so, at the very moment when Ivan Bezdomny “one hundred percent” agreed with Berlioz, Woland appears and asks: if there is no God, then who controls human life? Ivan Bezdomny “angrily” (because he was subconsciously unsure of his words) replied: “The man himself controls.” So: no one in the “Moscow” chapters “manages” anything. Moreover, by myself. Not a single person, starting with Berlioz and Bezdomny. All of them are victims of fear, lies, cowardice, stupidity, ignorance, money-grubbing, lust, self-interest, greed, hatred, loneliness, melancholy. . . And because of all this they are ready to throw themselves into the arms of even the devil himself (which is what they do at every step...). Should I give it away? evil spirits Mikhail Bulgakov? (I. Akimov)
Likhodeev Stepan Bogdanovich is the director of the Variety Show, in which Woland, calling himself a professor of magic, plans a “performance”. Likhodeev is known as a drunkard, a slacker and a lover of women. Bosoy Nikanor Ivanovich is a man who held the position of chairman of a housing association on Sadovaya Street. A greedy thief who the day before embezzled some of the money from the partnership's cash register. Koroviev invites him to conclude an agreement to rent out a “bad” apartment to the guest performer Woland and gives a bribe. After this, the received bills turn out to be foreign currency. Following a call from Koroviev, the bribe-taker is taken to the NKVD, from where he ends up in a mental hospital. Aloisy Mogarych is an acquaintance of the Master who wrote a false denunciation against him in order to appropriate his apartment. Woland's retinue kicked him out of the apartment, and after Satan's trial, he left Moscow, ending up at Vyatka. Later he returned to the capital and took the position of financial director of Variety. Annushka is a speculator. It was she who broke the container with the purchased sunflower oil at the crossing of tram rails, which was the cause of Berlioz’s death.
The author of the novel about Pontius Pilate is Bulgakov's double not only because his image reflects the psychological traits and life impressions of the writer. Bulgakov consciously builds parallels between his life and the life of the Master. The image of the hero has a parable character, expressing Bulgakov’s idea of the extremely important calling of the artist and representing a generalized type of artist. The idea of the novel “The Master and Margarita” about the highest purpose of art, designed to affirm good and resist evil, is extremely attractive. “The very appearance of the Master - a man with a pure soul, with pure thoughts, embraced by creative fire, an admirer of beauty and in need of mutual understanding, a kindred soul - the very appearance of such an artist is certainly dear to us.” The very name of the hero contains not only the direct meaning of the word “master” (a specialist who has achieved high skill, art, mastery in any field). It is opposed to the word “writer”. To Ivan Bezdomny’s question: “Are you a writer?” The night guest replied: “I am a master,” he became stern” (112). In the 30s, the writer was occupied with the most important question: is a person worthy of being responsible to eternity? In other words, what is his charge of spirituality? A person who has realized himself, in Bulgakov’s view, is accountable only to eternity. Eternity is the environment of existence of this personality. Berlioz and many others “by whose hands, out of ignorance or indifference, evil is created on earth deserves obscurity.”1 Turning to the philosophy of I. Kant allowed Bulgakov to more directly turn to the search for the nature of morality and the mystery of creativity - concepts that are closely related to each other, since art in its deeply moral basis. The master has all the high moral qualities, experiencing only a lack, like M. Bulgakov himself, of the practical principle. He is “submissively imbued with extreme despair, and also freely ascends to the very heights. His free personality equally perceives both evil and good, while remaining himself.”2 A weak resistance to the evil principle for a creative nature seems natural to the author of the novel. Heroes - bearers of a high moral idea in the writer's works invariably find themselves defeated in a collision with circumstances that gave rise to evil. The novel of the Master, who does not belong to the powerful hierarchy of the literary and near-literary world, cannot see the light of day. There is no place for the Master in this society, despite all his genius. “With his novel, M. Bulgakov... asserts the priority of simple human feelings over any social hierarchy. "1 But in a world where a person's role is determined solely by his social position, goodness, truth, love, and creativity still exist, although they sometimes have to seek protection from " ". Bulgakov firmly believed that only by relying on the living embodiment of these humanistic concepts, humanity can create a society of true justice, where no one will have a monopoly on truth. The Master's novel, like Bulgakov's own novel, differs sharply from other works of that time. He is the fruit of free labor, free thought, creative flight, without the author’s violence against himself: “...Pilate flew towards the end, towards the end, and I already knew that the last words of the novel would be: “... The fifth procurator of Judea, arose Pontius Pilate,” says the Master (114). The story of the novel about Pontius Pilate appears as a living stream of time moving from the past to the future. And modernity is like a link connecting the past with the future. From Bulgakov’s novel it is clear that a writer needs freedom of creativity like air. He cannot live and create without her. The literary fate of the Master in many ways repeats the literary fate of Bulgakov himself. Critical attacks on the novel about Pontius Pilate almost verbatim repeat the Yankovites’ accusations against the “White Guard” and “Days of the Turbins.” The situation in the country in the 1930s was accurately reflected in The Master and Margarita. Through the feeling of fear that gripped the Master, the writer’s novel conveys the atmosphere of totalitarian politics, under which it was dangerous to write the truth about the autocracy of Pontius Pilate, about the tragedy of the preacher of truth and justice Yeshua. The refusal to print the novel was accompanied by an ominous hint from the editors: “...Who is this... who decided to write a novel on such a strange topic!?” The Master's night confession to Ivan Bezdomny in Stravinsky's book is striking in its tragedy. Bulgakov was persecuted by critics and sworn speakers, and he naturally reacted painfully to this persecution. Unable to confront his detractors publicly, “the writer sought satisfaction through art, taking muses (including the patroness of history, Clio) as his seconds. Thus, the stage area of “The Master” became a dueling arena.”1 In terms of autobiographical associations, it should be pointed out that the initial reason for the campaign against Bulgakov was his novel “The White Guard” and the play “Days of the Turbins”, and first of all the main character of these works of white officer Alexey Turbin. Thus, the similarity of the life circumstances of M. Bulgakov and the master is revealed, but also the parallelism of the heroes of Bulgakov’s novel and the novel The Master and their literary destiny . The situation of persecution in which the writer found himself in the second half of the 20th years is very reminiscent of the circumstances he talks about. This is a complete detachment from literary life, and a lack of livelihood, “a constant expectation of the “worst.” The denunciation articles that poured into the press were not only literary, but also political in nature. “These are completely bleak days. The novel was written6 there was nothing more to do...” (119), - the Master tells Ivan Bezdomny. “Something extremely false and uncertain was felt in literally every line of these articles, despite their menacing and confident tone. It seemed to me ... that the authors of these articles were not saying what they wanted to say, and that their rage was caused by precisely this” (119-120). The culmination of this campaign was Bulgakov’s famous letters to the Soviet government (actually, to Stalin). “As I published my works, criticism of the USSR paid more and more attention to me, and not one of my works ... not only never received a single approving review, but on the contrary, the more famous it became my name in the USSR and abroad, the more furious the press reviews became, finally taking on the character of frantic abuse”1 (letter 1929). In another letter (March 1930), M. Bulgakov writes: “...I discovered 301 reviews about me in the USSR press over the 10 years of my work (literary). Of these, there were 3 commendable ones, and 298 were hostile and abusive.” The final words of this letter are noteworthy: “... For me, a playwright, ... famous both in the USSR and abroad, at the moment there is poverty, the street and death.” The almost verbatim repetition in the assessment of their position by Bulgakov and the Master clearly indicates that the writer consciously associated the fate of the Master with his own. In this regard, the letter to Stalin becomes not only a biographical6 but also a literary fact - a preparation for the novel, since the image of the Master appeared in later editions of the novel. Bulgakov and the Master have one common tragedy - the tragedy of non-recognition. The novel clearly conveys the motive of responsibility and guilt of a creative person who compromises with society and power, avoids the problem of moral choice, and artificially isolates himself in order to be able to realize his creative potential. Through the mouth of Yeshua, the Master reproaches his contemporaries for cowardly cowardice in defending their human dignity under the pressure of dictatorship and bureaucracy. But unlike Bulgakov, the Master does not fight for his recognition, he remains himself - the embodiment of “immeasurable strength and immeasurable, defenseless weakness of creativity. “The Master, like Bulgakov, becomes ill: “And then came... the stage of fear. No, not fear of these articles... but fear of other things that are completely unrelated to them or to the novel. So, for example, I began to be afraid of the dark. In a word, the stage of mental illness has arrived” (120). Undoubted autobiographical associations include the pages of the burnt novel. As you know, Bulgakov burned the draft manuscripts of the first editions of the novel, which were given to him three years after they were confiscated during a search. Driven to despair, the Master “took the heavy lists of the novel and rough notebooks from the desk drawer and began to burn them.” “Breaking his nails, he tore apart the notebooks, stood them up between logs and a poker, and ruffled the sheets. ...And the novel, stubbornly resisting, still died.” It should be noted that the burning of the novel is a motif “referring to” Dead souls“And moreover - ... not only to creativity, but also to the fate of Gogol.” The great love that illuminated the life of M. Bulgakov was also reflected in the novel. It would probably be wrong to identify the images of the Master and Margarita with the names of the creator of the novel and Elena Sergeevna. They are collective. But many autobiographical features of the writer and his wife are present in the work. First of all, I would like to note the departure of Margarita (like Elena Sergeevna) from her wealthy, prosperous husband. (More on this below). Bulgakov considers literature faithful to Gogol’s fate.” The great love that illuminated the life of M. Bulgakov was also reflected in the novel. It would probably be wrong to identify the images of the Master and Margarita with the names of the creator of the novel and Elena Sergeevna. They are collective. But many autobiographical features of the writer and his wife are present in the work. First of all, I would like to note the departure of Margarita (like Elena Sergeevna) from her wealthy, prosperous husband. (More on this below). Bulgakov considers literature to be the Master’s faithful companion; it not only shares his difficult fate, but also complements his romantic image. Love appears to the Master as an unexpected gift of fate, salvation from cold loneliness. “Thousands of people were walking along Tverskaya, but I guarantee you that she saw me alone and looked not only anxiously, but even as if painfully. And I was struck not so much by her beauty as by the extraordinary, unprecedented loneliness in her eyes!” (114) - says the Master. And further: “She looked at me in surprise, and I suddenly, and completely unexpectedly, realized that I had loved this woman all my life!” (114). “Love jumped out in front of us, like a killer jumps out of the ground in an alley, and struck us both at once! That’s how lightning strikes, that’s how a Finnish knife strikes!” (115). Appearing as a sudden insight, the instantly flared up love of the heroes turns out to be long-lasting. “Little by little, the fullness of feeling is revealed in her: here is tender love, hot passion, and an unusually high spiritual connection between two lovers.” The Master and Margarita are present in the novel in inextricable unity. When the Master tells Ivan the story of his life, his entire narrative is permeated with memories of his beloved. In Russian and world literature, the motif of peace as one of the highest values is traditional. human existence. Suffice it to recall, for example, Pushkin’s formula “peace and freedom.” Therefore, they are necessary for the liberation of harmony. This does not mean external peace, but creative peace. This is the kind of creative peace that a Master should find in his final refuge. There are many nuances, shades, and associations in the novel’s solution, but “they all agree on one thing: this solution is natural, harmonious, unique and inevitable. The master will receive exactly what he has repeatedly craved.” And Woland does not embarrass him by talking about the incompleteness of the reward. Bulgakov's Margarita gains existence after death for her love, and the Master - for the feat of free creative will, the recreation of existence. The master easily crosses his threshold and goes out to the universal. True, he does this at the cost of abandoning his creativity, for which he is awarded “peace.” Moreover, in this case the Master also observes the principle of the absolute primacy of the moral position. In Woland’s scene with Levi Matvey it is said for the first time: “He did not deserve light, he deserved peace.” (290). Reward, given to the hero, not lower, but in some ways even higher than traditional light. For the peace granted to the master is creative peace. 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) ." But “Bulgakov... places the feat of creativity - his own feat - not as high as the death on the cross of Yeshua Ha-Nozri.” And if we draw a connection with other works of the writer, it is not as high as the feat “on the battlefield of the slain” in the novel “The White Guard”. Only the limited and dogmatic Levi Matthew, devoted to Yeshua, is able to enjoy the “naked light” (“but the harsh, “black and white” thinking is emphasized by the color scheme in the execution scene, when he either disappeared in complete darkness, then was suddenly illuminated by an unsteady light”), who does not have creative genius. Yeshua is aware of this and therefore asks Woland, the “spirit of denial,” to reward the Master with creative peace: “He read the Master’s work,” Matthew Levi spoke, “and asks you to take the Master with you and reward him with peace” (290). It is Woland, with his skepticism and doubt, who sees the world in all its contradictions, who can best cope with such a task. Moral ideal, embedded in the Master’s novel, is not subject to decay, and is beyond the power of otherworldly forces. Bulgakov's Yeshua, who sent Matthew Levi to earth, is not an absolute god. He himself asks for Pilate, the Master and Margarita from the one who sent him to earth so long ago: “He asks that you take the one who loved and suffered because of him too,” Levi turned pleadingly to Woland." (291). Peace for the Master and Margarita is purification. And having been cleansed, they can come to the world of eternal light, to the kingdom of God, to immortality. Peace is simply necessary for such suffering, restless and tired of life people as the Master and Margarita were: “... Oh, thrice romantic master, don’t you really want to walk with your friend under the cherry trees that are beginning to bloom during the day, and listen to Schubert’s music in the evening ? Wouldn't you really enjoy writing by candlelight with a quill pen? There, there. The house and the old servant are already waiting for you there, the candles are already burning, and soon they will go out, because you will immediately meet the dawn. Along this road, master, along this one,” Woland says to the hero (308).
K. Paustovsky had every reason to talk about the personality of his contemporary. After all, this “hatred of everything that bore even the slightest features of philistinism, savagery, falsehood” was reflected not only in the life, but also in the work of M.A. Bulgakov.
The writer, in almost every work of his work, harshly criticizes modern society. But he condemns him for his skepticism, narrow interests, and passion for money. Bulgakov is an ardent opponent of narrow, philistine views. Moreover, in the novel “The Master and Margarita” almost everyone is subjected to merciless ridicule minor characters: both the members of MASSOLIT with their mercantile views on art, and the audience at Variety, thirsting for easy money, and the inhabitants of the house on Sadovaya.
The writer considered their greed to be savagery. The thirst for easy money, material wealth, and pleasures, according to the author of “The Master and Margarita,” turns a person into an animal. The same scene in Variety proves this. The performance was attended not by spectators, but by a crowd, wild, brutalized, maddened by the generosity of foreign magicians. For this crowd, there was nothing sacred left: real human feelings like love and kindness disappeared, art disappeared - they were eclipsed by paper chervonets.
But this is all false. Bulgakov directs his satire at her as well. He contrasts the main characters of his novel, The Master and Margarita, with ordinary Muscovites.
Only their love is sincere, healing, faithful, so we do not condemn Margarita, who left her husband. Only the Master’s creation is not soulless, close to the truth, real, therefore we do not agree with Latunsky’s criticism. And how worthless the Moscow “artists” seem to us then, how unnecessary the meetings in Griboyedov’s house are, because they bring together people who do not know how to create art as inspired and enthusiastically as the Master. The fact that they are writers and poets is only stated on MASSOLIT membership cards.
The images of well-fed, self-satisfied, greedy people are disgusting to the author. Bulgakov ridicules their boring and monotonous life, the vulgar and wretched world not only in “The Master and Margarita”. Almost all of the writer’s work proves the truth of K. Paustovsky’s words.
Updated: 2018-03-08
Attention!
Thank you for your attention.
If you notice an error or typo, highlight the text and click Ctrl+Enter.
By doing so, you will provide invaluable benefits to the project and other readers.