Introduction
Mankind throughout its history has tried to explain the nature of things and events. In these attempts, people have always singled out two opposing forces: good and evil. The ratio of these forces in the human soul or in the surrounding world determined the development of events. And the people themselves embodied the forces in images close to them. This is how the world religions appeared, containing a great confrontation. In opposition to the light forces of good, various images appeared: Satan, the devil, and other dark forces.
The question of good and evil has always occupied the minds of souls seeking truth, has always prompted the inquisitive human consciousness to strive to resolve this intractable question in one sense or another. Many were interested, as they are now, in the questions: how did evil appear in the world, who was the first to initiate the appearance of evil? Is evil a necessary and integral part of human existence, and if so, how could the Good Creative Force, creating the world and man, create evil?
The problem of good and evil is an eternal theme of human cognition, and, like any eternal theme, it does not have unambiguous answers. One of the primary sources of this problem can rightfully be called the Bible, in which "good" and "evil" are identified with the images of God and the devil, acting as the absolute bearers of these moral categories of human consciousness. Good and evil, God and the devil, are in constant opposition. In essence, this struggle is waged between the lower and higher principles in man, between the mortal personality and the immortal individuality of man, between his egoistic needs and striving for the common good.
Rooted in the distant past, the struggle between good and evil has attracted the attention of many philosophers, poets, and prose writers over the course of several centuries.
Comprehension of the problem of the struggle between good and evil was also reflected in the work of Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov, who, turning to the eternal questions of being, rethinks them under the influence of historical events taking place in Russia in the first half of the 20th century.
The novel "The Master and Margarita" entered the golden fund of Russian and world culture. It is read, analyzed, admired. Bulgakov depicts good and evil - the devil and Christ - in their entirety, with the aim of exposing the real evil generated by the new system, and showing the possibility of the existence of good. For this, the writer uses the complex structure of the construction of the work.
The theme of good and evil in M. Bulgakov is the problem of people choosing the principle of life, and the purpose of mystical evil in the novel is to reward everyone in accordance with this choice. The writer's pen endowed these concepts with the duality of nature: one side is the real, "earthly" struggle of the devil and god inside any person, and the other, fantastic, helps the reader to understand the author's project, to discern the objects and phenomena of his accusatory satire, philosophical and humanistic ideas.
Creativity M.A. Bulgakov is the subject of close attention of literary critics who study his artistic world in various aspects:
B. V. Sokolov A. V. Vulis"M. Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita", B. S. MyagkovBulgakovskaya Moscow, V. I. Nemtsev"Mikhail Bulgakov: the formation of a novelist", V. V. Novikov"Mikhail Bulgakov - artist", B. M. Gasparov“From observations on the motive structure of the novel by M. A. Bulgakov “The Master and Margarita”, V. V. Khimich"The strange realism of M. Bulgakov", V. Ya. Lakshin"M. Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita", M. O. Chudakova"Biography of M. Bulgakov".
The Master and Margarita, as the critic G. A. Lesskis rightly noted, is a double novel. It consists of the Master's novel about Pontius Pilate and the novel about the Master's fate. The main protagonist of the first novel is Yeshua, whose prototype is the biblical Christ - the embodiment of good, and the second is Woland, whose prototype is Satan - the embodiment of evil. The informal structural division of the work does not cover the fact that each of these novels could not exist separately, since they are connected by a common philosophical idea, understandable only when analyzing the entire novel reality. Set in the initial three chapters in a difficult philosophical dispute between the characters, whom the author presents first on the pages of the novel, this idea is then embodied in the most interesting collisions, interweaving of real and fantastic, biblical and modern events, which turn out to be quite balanced and causally conditioned.
The originality of the novel lies in the fact that we are presented with two layers of time. One is connected with the life of Moscow in the 20s of the twentieth century, the other with the life of Jesus Christ. Bulgakov created, as it were, a "novel within a novel", and both of these novels are united by one idea - the search for truth.
Relevanceof our research is confirmed by the fact that the problems raised in the work are modern. Good and evil... The concepts are eternal and inseparable. What is good and what is evil on earth? This question runs like a leitmotif through the entire novel by M. A. Bulgakov. And as long as a person is alive, they will fight with each other. Such a struggle is presented to us by Bulgakov in the novel.
The purpose of this work- study of the peculiarities of understanding the problem of good and evil in M. Bulgakov's novel "Master Margarita".
This goal determines the solution of the following specific tasks:
trace the correlation of eternal values in the novel;
correlate the creative work of M. Bulgakov on the work with the historical era;
reveal the artistic embodiment of the problem of good and evil through the images of the heroes of the novel.
The work uses various research methods: scientific-cognitive, practical-recommendatory and analysis, interpretation to the extent that they seem to us relevant and necessary for solving the tasks set.
Object of study: novel by M. A. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita".
Subject of study:the problem of good and evil in the novel by M. A. Bulgakov.
The practical significance of the work lies in the fact that its material can be used in the development of lessons and additional classes on Russian literature at school.
Chapter 1. The history of the creation of the novel "The Master and Margarita"
The novel by Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita" was not completed and was not published during the author's lifetime. It was first published only in 1966, 26 years after Bulgakov's death, and then in an abbreviated journal version. The fact that this greatest literary work has reached the reader, we owe to the writer's wife, Elena Sergeevna Bulgakova, who managed to save the manuscript of the novel in difficult Stalinist times.
This last work of the writer, his “sunset novel”, completes the theme that is significant for Bulgakov - the artist and power, this is a novel of difficult and sad thoughts about life, where philosophy and fantasy, mysticism and penetrating lyrics, mild humor and well-aimed deep satire are combined.
The history of the creation and publication of this most famous novel by Mikhail Bulgakov, one of the most outstanding works in modern domestic and world literature, is complex and dramatic. This final work, as it were, summarizes the writer's ideas about the meaning of life, about man, about his mortality and immortality, about the struggle between good and evil principles in history and in the moral world of man. The foregoing helps to understand Bulgakov's own assessment of his offspring. “Dying, he said, his widow, Elena Sergeevna Bulgakova, recalled: “Maybe this is right. What could I write after the Master?
The creative history of The Master and Margarita, the idea of the novel and the beginning of work on it, Bulgakov attributed to 1928However, according to other sources, it is obvious that the idea of writing a book about the adventures of the devil in Moscow came to him several years earlier, in the early to mid-1920s. The first chapters were written in the spring of 1929. On May 8 of this year, Bulgakov handed over to the Nedra publishing house for publication in the almanac of the same name a fragment of the future novel - its separate independent chapter, called "Furibunda Mania", which in Latin means "violent insanity, mania of rage." This chapter, from which only fragments not destroyed by the author have come down to us, roughly corresponded in content to the fifth chapter of the printed text “It was in Griboedov”. In 1929, the main parts of the text of the first edition of the novel were created (and, possibly, a plot-completed draft version of it about the appearance and tricks of the devil in Moscow).
Probably, in the winter of 1928-1929, only separate chapters of the novel were written, which were even more politically poignant than the surviving fragments of the early edition. It is possible that the Mania Furibunda, given to Nedra and not fully extant, was already a softened version of the original text. In the first edition, the author went through several options for the titles of his work: Black Magician", "Engineer's Hoof", "Woland's Tour", "Son of Doom", "Juggler with a Hoof",but didn't stop at one. This first edition of the novel was destroyed by Bulgakov on March 18, 1930, after receiving news of the ban on the play The Cabal of Saints. The writer reported this in a letter to the government on March 28, 1930: “And personally, with my own hands, I threw a draft of a novel about the devil into the stove.” There is no exact information about the degree of plot completeness of this edition, but according to the surviving materials, it is obvious that the final compositional comparison of the two novels in the novel (“ancient” and modern), which is the genre feature of The Master and Margarita, is still missing. Written by the hero of this book - the master - "the novel about Pontius Pilate", in fact, does not exist; “just” a “strange foreigner” tells Vladimir Mironovich Berlioz and Antosha (Ivanushka) about Yeshua Ha-Notsri at Patriarch’s Ponds, and all the “New Testament” material is presented in one chapter (“The Gospel of Woland”) in the form of a lively conversation between a “foreigner” and his listeners. There are also no future main characters - the master and Margarita. So far, this is a novel about the devil, and in the interpretation of the image of the devil, Bulgakov is at first more traditional than in the final text: his Woland (or Faland) still plays the classic role of a tempter and provocateur (he, for example, teaches Ivanushka to trample on the image of Christ), but the “super task” of the writer is already clear: both Satan and Christ are necessary for the author of the novel as representatives of the absolute (albeit “opposite”) truth, opposing the moral world of the Russian public of the 1920s.
Work on the novel resumed in 1931. The idea of the work is significantly changed and deepened - Margarita appears and her companion - the Poet,who would later be called the master and take center stage. But for now, this place still belongs to Woland, and the novel itself is planned to be called: "Hoof Consultant". Bulgakov is working on one of the last chapters (“Flight of Woland”) and in the upper right corner of the sheet with the outlines of this chapter he writes: “Help, Lord, finish the novel. 1931" .
This edition, the second in a row, was continued by Bulgakov in the autumn of 1932 in Leningrad, where the writer arrived without a single draft - not only the idea, but also the text of this work was so thought out and endured by that time. Almost a year later, on August 2, 1933, he informed the writer V.V. Veresaev about the resumption of work on the novel: “I ... have been possessed by a demon. Already in Leningrad and now here, suffocating in my small rooms, I began to dirty page after page of my novel that had been destroyed three years ago. For what? Don't know. I indulge myself! Let it fall into oblivion! However, I'll probably give it up soon." However, Bulgakov no longer abandoned The Master and Margarita, and with interruptions caused by the need to write commissioned plays, dramatizations, scripts and librettos, continued his work on the novel almost to the end of his life. By November 1933, 500 pages of handwritten text had been written, divided into 37 chapters. The genre is defined by the author himself as a "fantastic novel" - this is how it is written at the top of the sheet with a list of possible titles: "The Great Chancellor", "Satan", "Here I am", "Hat with a Feather", "Black Theologian", "Foreigner's Horseshoe", "He Came", "The Coming", "The Black Magician", "The Counselor's Hoof", "The Hoof Consultant", but Bulgakov did not stop at any of them. All these variants of the title seem to still point to Woland as the main person. However, Woland is already significantly supplanted by the new hero, who becomes the author of the novel about Yeshua Ha-Nozri, and this inner novel is broken in two, and between the chapters that form it (chapters 11 and 16), the love and misadventures of the "Poet" (or "Faust" , as it is called in one of the drafts) and Margarita. By the end of 1934, this edition was rough finished. By this time, the word "master" had already been used three times in the last chapters in an appeal to the "Poet" by Woland, Azazello and Koroviev (who had already received permanent names). Over the next two years, Bulgakov makes numerous additions and compositional changes to the manuscript, including him finally crossing the lines of the master and Ivan Bezdomny.
In July 1936, the last and final chapter of this edition of the novel, The Last Flight, was created, in which the fate of the master, Margarita, Pontius Pilate was determined. The third edition of the novel was started in late 1936 - early 1937.In the first, unfinished version of this edition, brought to the fifth chapter and occupying 60 pages, Bulgakov, unlike the second edition, again moved the story of Pilate and Yeshua to the beginning of the novel, making up a single second chapter, called "The Golden Spear". In 1937, the second, also unfinished version of this edition was written, brought to the thirteenth chapter (299 pages). It is dated 1928-1937 and is entitled "Prince of Darkness". Finally, the third and only finished version of the third edition of the novel was created during the period November 1937 to spring 1938. This edition takes 6 thick notebooks; The text is divided into thirty chapters. In the second and third versions of this edition, the Yershalaim scenes were introduced into the novel in exactly the same way as in the published text, and in its third version a well-known and final name appeared - "Master and Margarita".From the end of May to June 24, 1938, this edition was retyped on a typewriter under the dictation of the author, who often changed the text along the way. The editing of this typescript by Bulgakov began on September 19, with individual chapters being rewritten.
The epilogue was written on May 14, 1939, immediately in the form that we know. At the same time, the scene of the appearance of Levi Matthew to Woland was painted with a decision about the fate of the master. When Bulgakov fell mortally ill, his wife Elena Sergeevna continued to correct under her husband's dictation, while this correction was partially entered into typescript, partially into a separate notebook. On January 15, 1940, E. S. Bulgakova wrote in her diary: “Misha, as much as she has the strength, corrects the novel, I am rewriting it,” and the episodes with Professor Kuzmin and the miraculous transfer of Styopa Likhodeev to Yalta were recorded (before that, the director of the Variety was Garasey Pedulaev , and Woland sent him to Vladikavkaz). Editing was stopped on February 13, 1940, less than four weeks before Bulgakov's death, at the phrase: "So, it means that the writers are following the coffin?", in the middle of the nineteenth chapter of the novel.
The last thoughts and words of the dying writer were directed to this work, which contained his entire creative life: “When at the end of his illness he almost lost his speech, sometimes only the ends and beginnings of words came out of him,” recalled E. S. Bulgakova. - There was a case when I was sitting next to him, as always, on a pillow on the floor, near the head of his bed, he let me know that he needed something, that he wanted something from me. I offered him medicine, drink - lemon juice, but I clearly understood that this was not the point. Then I guessed and asked: “Your things?”. He nodded with an air of yes and no. I said: "Master and Margarita?" He, terribly delighted, made a sign with his head that "yes, it is." And he squeezed out two words: "To know, to know ...".
But it was then very difficult to fulfill this dying will of Bulgakov - to print and convey to people, readers the novel he had written. One of Bulgakov's closest friends and the first biographer of Bulgakov, P. S. Popov (1892-1964), having re-read the novel after the death of its author, wrote to Elena Sergeevna: “Brilliant craftsmanship always remains brilliant craftsmanship, but now the novel is unacceptable. 50-100 years will have to pass ... ". Now - he believed - "the less they know about the novel, the better."
Fortunately, the author of these lines made a mistake in the timing, but in the next 20 years after the death of Bulgakov, we do not find in the literature any mention of the existence of this work in the writer's heritage, although From 1946 to 1966, Elena Sergeevna made six attempts to break through censorship and publish the novel.Only in the first edition of Bulgakov's book "The Life of Monsieur de Molière" (1962) did V. A. Kaverin manage to break the conspiracy of silence and mention the existence of the novel "The Master and Margarita" in the manuscript. Kaverin firmly stated that "the inexplicable indifference to the work of Mikhail Bulgakov, sometimes inspiring a deceptive hope that there are many like him and that, therefore, his absence in our literature is not a big problem, this is harmful indifference."
Four years later, the Moscow magazine (No. 11, 1966) published the novel in an abridged version. Journal version of the book with censorship omissions and distortions and abbreviations made on the initiative editorial guide"Moscow" (E.S. Bulgakova was forced to agree to all this, if only to keep her word given to the dying author, to publish this work), thus amounted to fifth edition, which was published abroad as a separate book. The response to this publisher's arbitrariness was the appearance in "samizdat" of typewritten text of all the passages released or distorted in a journal publication with an exact indication of where the missing or distorted should be inserted or replaced. The author of this "cut" edition was Elena Sergeevna herself and her friends. Such a text, which was one of the variants of the fourth (1940-1941) edition of the novel, was released in 1969 in Frankfurt am Main by the Posev publishing house. Places omitted or "edited" from the journal publication were in italics in the 1969 edition. What did such censoring and voluntaristic "editing" of the novel represent? What goals did it pursue? Now this is quite clear. 159 banknotes were made: 21 in the 1st part and 138 in the 2nd; more than 14,000 words were withdrawn (12% of the text!).
Bulgakov's text was grossly distorted, phrases from different pages were arbitrarily combined, sometimes completely meaningless sentences arose. The reasons related to the then existing literary and ideological canons are obvious: most of all, the places that describe the actions of the Roman secret police and the work of “one of the Moscow institutions”, the similarity of the ancient and modern world are removed. Further, the “inadequate” reaction of the “Soviet people” to our reality and some of their very unattractive features was weakened. The role and moral strength of Yeshua was weakened in the spirit of vulgar anti-religious propaganda. Finally, the "censor" in many cases showed a kind of "chastity": some persistent references to the nakedness of Margarita, Natasha and other women at Woland's ball were removed, the witch's rudeness of Margarita was weakened, etc. in 1973, the edition of the early 1940s was restored, followed by its textological revision, carried out by the editor of the Khudozhestvennaya Literatura publishing house (where the novel was published) A. A. Saakyants. Released after the death of E. S. Bulgakova (in 1970), this actually sixth editionThe novel was fixed for a long time as canonical by numerous reprints, and as such it was introduced into literary circulation in the 1970s-1980s. For the Kiev edition of 1989 and for the Moscow collected works of 1989-1990, the seventh and last edition of the text of the novel was made with a new reconciliation of all surviving author's materials, made by literary critic L. M. Yanovskaya. At the same time, however, it should be remembered that, as in many other cases in the history of literature, when there is no definitive author's text, the novel remains open to clarifications and new readings. And such a case with The Master and Margarita is almost classic in its way: Bulgakov died while working on finishing the text of the novel, he failed to fulfill his own textological task for this work.
There are obvious traces of a flaw in the novel even in its plot part (Woland is limping and not limping; Berlioz is called either the chairman or the secretary of the Massolite; Yeshua’s white band with a strap on his head is suddenly replaced by a turban; Margarita and Natasha’s “pre-witch status” disappear somewhere; without Aloysius appears for explanations; he and Varenukha fly first from the bedroom window, and then from the window of the stairwell; Gella is absent in the "last flight", although he leaves the "bad apartment". Moreover, this cannot be explained as "deliberately conceived"). some stylistic errors. So the history of the publication of the novel did not end there, especially since all of its early editions were published.
Chapter 2. The struggle between good and evil in the heroes of the novel
good evil roman bulgakov
The novel by M. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita" is a multidimensional and multilayered work. It combines, closely intertwined, mysticism and satire, the most unbridled fantasy and merciless realism, light irony and intense philosophy. As a rule, several semantic, figurative subsystems are distinguished in the novel: everyday, connected with Woland's stay in Moscow, lyrical, telling about the love of the Master and Margarita, and philosophical, comprehending the biblical story through the images of Pontius Pilate and Yeshua, as well as the problems of creativity based on literary material. the work of the Master. One of the main philosophical problems of the novel is the problem of the relationship between good and evil: the personification of good is Yeshua Ha-Notsri, and the embodiment of evil is Woland.
The novel "The Master and Margarita" is, as it were, a double novel, consisting of the Master's novel about Pontius Pilate and a work about the fate of the Master himself, connected with the life of Moscow in the 30s of the XX century. Both novels are united by one idea - the search for truth and the struggle for it.
.1 Image of Yeshua-Ga Nozri
Yeshua is the embodiment of a pure idea. He is a philosopher, a wanderer, a preacher of kindness, love and mercy. His goal was to make the world cleaner and kinder. Yeshua's life philosophy is this: "There are no evil people in the world, there are unhappy people." “A good man,” he addresses the procurator, and for this he is beaten by Ratslayer. But the point is not that he addresses people like that, but that he really behaves with every ordinary person as if he were the embodiment of goodness. There is virtually no portrait of Yeshua in the novel: the author indicates the age, describes the clothes, facial expression, mentions bruises and abrasions - but nothing more: “... They brought in a man of about twenty-seven. This man was dressed in an old and tattered blue tunic. 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.
To Pilate's question about his relatives, he answers: “There is no one. I am alone in the world." But this does not sound like a complaint about loneliness. Yeshua does not seek compassion, there is no feeling of inferiority or orphanhood in him.
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 Ga-Notsri is not a simple person: Woland thinks of himself with him in the heavenly hierarchy on approximately equal footing. Bulgakov's Yeshua is the bearer of the idea of a god-man. In his hero, the author sees not only a religious preacher and reformer: the image of Yeshua embodies free spiritual activity. Possessing a developed intuition, a subtle and strong intellect, Yeshua is able to guess the future, and not just a thunderstorm, which “will begin later, towards evening,” but also the fate of his teaching, which is already being incorrectly expounded by Levi.
Yeshua is inwardly free. He boldly says what he considers the truth, what he himself has come to, with his own mind. Yeshua believes that harmony will come to the tormented earth and the kingdom of eternal spring, eternal love will come. Yeshua is relaxed, the power of fear does not weigh on him.
“Among other things, I said,” said the prisoner, “that all power is violence against people and that the time will come when there will be no power of either Caesars or any other power. Man will pass into the realm of truth and justice, where no power will be needed at all. Yeshua courageously bears all the suffering inflicted on him. It burns the fire of all-forgiving love for people. He is sure that only good has the right to change the world.
Realizing that he is threatened with the death penalty, he considers it necessary to tell the Roman governor: “Your life is meager, hegemon. The trouble is that you are too closed off and completely lost faith in people.
Speaking of Yeshua, one cannot fail to mention his unusual name. If the first part - Yeshua - transparently alludes to the name of Jesus, then the "dissonance of the plebeian name" - Ha-Notsri - "so mundane" and "secularized" in comparison with the solemn church one - 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 complete - Yeshua is executed, the author seeks to assert that the victory of evil over good cannot be the result of a social and moral confrontation, this, according to Bulgakov, is not accepted by human nature itself, should not be allowed by the entire course of civilization: Yeshua remained alive, he is dead only to Levi, to Pilate's servants.
The great tragic philosophy of Yeshua's life is that truth is tested and affirmed by death. The tragedy of the hero is in his physical death, but morally he wins.
.2 Image of Pontius Pilate
The central and most dramatic character in the "gospel" chapters of the novel is the Roman procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, who had a reputation as a "ferocious monster". “In a white cloak with a bloody lining, shuffling with a cavalry gait, early in the morning of the fourteenth day of the spring month of Nisan, the procurator of Judea, Pontius Pilate, entered the covered colonnade between the two wings of the palace of Herod the Great.”
The official duties of Pontius Pilate brought him together with the accused from Gamala, Yeshua Ha-Nozri. The procurator of Judea is ill with a debilitating disease, and the vagabond is beaten by the people to whom he preached sermons. The physical suffering of each is proportional to their social position. Almighty Pilate unreasonably suffers from such headaches that he is even ready to take poison: “The thought of poison suddenly flashed temptingly in the sick head of the procurator.” And the poor Yeshua, although beaten by people in whose kindness he is convinced and to whom he carries his teaching about goodness, nevertheless, does not suffer from this at all, for physical teachings only test and strengthen his faith.
Bulgakov, in the image of Pontius Pilate, recreated a living person, with an individual character, torn apart by conflicting feelings and passions, inside of which there is a struggle between good and evil. Yeshua, initially considering all people to be kind, sees in him an unfortunate person, exhausted by a terrible disease, withdrawn into himself, lonely. Yeshua sincerely wants to help him. But endowed with power, powerful and formidable, Pilate is not free. Circumstances forced him to pass the death sentence on Yeshua. However, this was dictated to the procurator not by the cruelty attributed to him by everyone, but by cowardice - that vice that the wandering philosopher classifies as "the most difficult."
In the novel, the image of Pontius the dictator is decomposed and transformed into a suffering person. The power in his person loses the stern and faithful executor of the law, the image acquires a humanistic connotation. The dual life of Pilate is the inevitable behavior of a man squeezed in the grip of power, his post. During the trial of Yeshua, Pilate, with greater force than before, feels in himself a lack of harmony and a strange loneliness. From the very collision of Pontius Pilate with Yeshua, Bulgakov's idea that tragic circumstances are stronger than people's intentions emerges in dramatic multidimensionality. Even such rulers as the Roman procurator are not in a position to act according to their own will.
Pontius Pilate and Yeshua Ha-Nozri are discussing human nature. Yeshua believes in the presence of goodness in the world, in the predestination of historical development leading to a single truth. Pilate is convinced of the inviolability of evil, its ineradicability in man. Both are wrong. At the end of the novel, they continue their two-thousand-year dispute on the lunar road, bringing them together forever; so evil and good merged together in human life.
On the pages of the novel, Bulgakov gives us the truth about how the "people's court" is administered. Let us recall the scene of pardoning one of the criminals in honor of the feast of Holy Pascha. The author depicts not just the customs of the Jewish people. He shows how they destroy those objectionable to units by the hands of thousands, how the blood of the prophets falls on the conscience of peoples. The mob saves the real criminal from death and dooms Yeshua to it. "Crowd! Universal Killer! Means of all times and peoples. Crowd! What to take from her? The voice of the people! How not to listen? The lives of the departed "uncomfortable" people crush like stones, burn like coals. And I want to shout: “It was not! Did not have!". But it was ... And for Pontius Pilate, and for Joseph Kaifa, real people are guessed who left their mark on history.
Evil and good are not generated from above, but by people themselves, so a person is free in his choice. He is free from fate and from surrounding circumstances. And if he is free to choose, then he is fully responsible for his actions. This is, according to Bulgakov, a moral choice. The moral position of the individual is constantly in the center of Bulgakov's attention. Cowardice, combined with lies as a source of betrayal, envy, malice and other vices that a moral person is able to keep under control, is the breeding ground for despotism and unreasonable power. “He (fear) is able to turn a smart, courageous and benevolent person into a miserable rag, to weaken and defame. The only thing that can save him is inner stamina, trust in his own mind and the voice of his conscience.
2.3 Image of the Master
One of the most enigmatic figures in the novel is definitely the Master. The hero, whose name is given to the novel, appears only in the 13th chapter. In the description of appearance there is something reminiscent of the author of the novel himself: "a clean-shaven, dark-haired, pointed-nosed man of about thirty-eight." The same can be said about the whole history of the life of the master, his fate, in which one can guess a lot of personal, suffered by the author. The master survived non-recognition, persecution in the literary environment. The master, in his unexpected, sincere, bold novel about Pilate and Yeshua, expressed the author's understanding of the truth. The Master's novel, the meaning of his whole life, is not accepted by society. Moreover, it is strongly rejected by critics, even when unpublished. The master wanted to convey to people the need for faith, the need to search for the truth. But she, like him, is rejected. Society is alien to thinking about the truth, about the truth - about those higher categories, the significance of which everyone must realize for himself. People are busy satisfying petty needs, they do not struggle with their weaknesses and shortcomings, they easily succumb to temptations, which the session of black magic so eloquently speaks of. It is not surprising that in such a society a creative, thinking person is lonely, does not find understanding, feedback.
The Master's initial reaction to critical articles about himself - laughter - was replaced by surprise, and then fear. Loss of faith in yourself and, even worse, in your creation. Margarita feels the fear and confusion of her lover, but she is powerless to help him. No, he didn't get scared. Cowardice is fear multiplied by meanness. Bulgakov's hero did not compromise his conscience and honor. But fear has a destructive effect on the artist's soul.
Whatever the experiences of the Master, no matter how bitter his fate, but one thing is indisputable - the "literary society" fails to kill the talent. The proof of the aphorism “manuscripts do not burn” is the novel The Master and Margarita itself, burned by Bulgakov himself and restored by him, because what was created by a genius cannot be killed.
The master is not worthy of the light that Yeshua personifies, because he retreated from his task to serve pure, divine art, showed weakness and burned the novel, and from hopelessness he himself came to the house of sorrow. But the world of the devil has no power over him - the Master is worthy of peace, an eternal home - only there, broken by mental suffering, the Master can regain romance and unite with his romantic beloved Margarita. For the peace bestowed upon the master is creative peace. The moral ideal laid down in the Master's novel is not subject to decay, and is beyond the power of otherworldly forces.
It is peace as a counterbalance to the former turbulent life that the soul of a true artist longs for. There is no return to the modern Moscow world for the Master: by depriving him of the opportunity to create, the opportunity to see his beloved, the enemies deprived him of the meaning of life in this world. The master gets rid of fear of life and alienation, remains with his beloved woman, alone with his work and surrounded by his heroes: “You will fall asleep, putting on your greasy and eternal cap, you will fall asleep with a smile on your lips. Sleep will strengthen you, you will 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.
Chapter 3
Before us is Moscow of the late twenties - early thirties. “One day in the spring, at the hour of an unprecedentedly hot sunset, two citizens appeared in Moscow, at the Patriarch’s Ponds.” Soon these two, writers Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz and Ivan Bezdomny, had to meet with an unknown foreigner, about whose appearance there were subsequently the most contradictory eyewitness accounts. The author, however, gives us his exact portrait: “... The described person did not limp on any leg, and was neither small nor huge, but simply tall. As for his teeth, he had platinum crowns on the left side, and gold crowns on the right. He was in an expensive gray suit, in foreign shoes, matching the color of the suit. He famously twisted his gray beret over his ear, and under his arm he carried a cane with a black knob in the shape of a poodle's head. He looks to be over forty years old. The mouth is kind of crooked. Shaved smoothly. Brunette. The right eye is black, the left one is green for some reason. The eyebrows are black, but one is higher than the other. In a word, a foreigner. This is Woland - the future culprit of all the unrest in Moscow.
Who is he? If a symbol of darkness and evil, then why are wise and bright words put into his mouth? If a prophet, then why does he dress himself in black clothes and reject mercy and compassion with a cynical laugh? Everything is simple, as he himself said, everything is simple: "I am part of that force ...". Woland - Satan in a different form. His image symbolizes not evil, but his self-redemption. For the struggle of evil and good, darkness and light, lies and truth, hatred and love, cowardice and spiritual strength continues. This struggle is within each of us. And the power that always wants evil and always does good is dissolved everywhere. It is in the search for truth, in the struggle for justice, in the struggle between good and evil that Bulgakov sees the meaning of human life.
3.1 The image of Woland
Woland (translated from Hebrew as “devil”) is a representative of the “dark” force, the image of Satan artistically rethought by the author. He came to Moscow with one purpose - to find out if Moscow has changed since the day he was in it last. After all, Moscow claimed the title of the Third Rome. It proclaimed new principles of reorganization, new values, new life. And what does he see? Moscow has become something like a Grand Ball: it is inhabited for the most part by traitors, informers, sycophants, and bribe-takers.
Bulgakov gives Woland wide powers: throughout the novel he judges, decides fate, decides - life or death, carries out retribution, distributing to everyone according to their deserts: “Not according to reason, not according to the correct choice of intelligence, but according to the choice of the heart, according to faith!” . During their four-day tour in Moscow, Woland, the cat Behemoth, Koroviev, Azazello and Gella turn inside out the figures of the near-literary and near-theater environment, officials and townsfolk, defining "who is who." The purpose of the activity of the "prince of darkness" is to expose the essence of phenomena, to put on public display negative phenomena in human society. Tricks in the Variety, tricks with an empty suit signing papers, the mysterious transformation of money into dollars and other devilry - the disclosure of human vices. Tricks in the Variety - a test of Muscovites 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, mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts. Ordinary people, reminiscent of the former, the housing problem only spoiled them ... ".
Woland, personifying evil, was in this case a messenger of good. In all actions one can see either acts of just retribution (episodes with Stepa Likhodeev, Nikanor Bosy), or the desire to prove to people the existence and connection of good and evil. Woland in the artistic world of the novel is not so much the opposite of Yeshua as an addition to him. Like good and evil, Yeshua and Woland are internally interconnected and, opposing, cannot do without each other. It's like we wouldn't know what white is if there were no black, what day is if there were no night. But the dialectical unity, the complementarity of good and evil is most fully revealed in the words of Woland, addressed to Levi Matthew, who refused to wish health to the “spirit of evil and the lord of shadows”: “You spoke your words as if you do not recognize shadows, and also evil. Would you be so kind as to think about the question: what would your good do if evil did not exist, and what would the earth look like if shadows disappeared from it? Don't you want to tear off the entire globe, taking away all the trees and all living things from it because of your fantasy of enjoying the naked light?
Good and evil in life are surprisingly closely intertwined, especially in human souls. When Woland, in the scene in the Variety, tests the audience for cruelty and deprives the entertainer of his head, compassionate women demand to put his head back. And then we see the same women fighting over money. It seems that Woland punished people with evil for their evil for the sake of justice. Evil for Woland is not a goal, but a means to cope with human vices. Who can join the fight against evil, which of the heroes of the novel is worthy of "light"? This question is answered by the novel written by the Master. In the city of Yershalaim, which, like Moscow, is mired in debauchery, a man appears: Yeshua Ha-Nozri, who believed that there are no evil people and that the worst sin is cowardice. This is the person who is worthy of "light".
The clash of opposing forces is most vividly presented at the end of the novel, when Woland and his retinue leave Moscow. "Light" and "darkness" are on the same level. Woland does not rule the world, but Yeshua does not rule the world either. All Yeshua can do is ask Woland to give the Master and his beloved eternal rest. And Woland fulfills this request. Thus, we come to the conclusion that the forces of good and evil are equal in rights. They exist in the world side by side, constantly opposing, arguing with each other. And their struggle is eternal, because there is no person on Earth who has never committed a sin in his life; and there is no such person who would completely lose the ability to do good. The world is a kind of scales, on the bowls of which lie two weights: good and evil. And as long as balance is maintained, peace and humanity will exist.
For Bulgakov, the devil is not only the perpetrator of evil, it is a spiritualized being, to whom nothing human is alien. Therefore, Woland grants forgiveness to many heroes, having sufficiently punished them for their vices. Forgiveness is the most important thing a person should learn in his life.
.2 Image of Margarita
An example of the consequence of the moral commandment of love is in the novel Margarita. The image of Margarita is very dear to the author, perhaps because the features of one of the people closest to Bulgakov, Elena Sergeevna Bulgakova, are read in it.
Margarita turned out to be strikingly similar to Elena Sergeevna. Both of them lived a satisfying, prosperous life, calmly and without shocks: “Margarita Nikolaevna did not need money. Margarita Nikolaevna could buy whatever she liked. Among her husband's acquaintances there were interesting people. Margarita Nikolaevna never touched the stove. In a word... she was happy? Not one minute! What did this woman need? She needed him, the master, and not at all a Gothic mansion, and not a separate garden, and not money. She loved him..." The author does not give an external portrait of Margarita. We hear the sound of her voice, her laughter, we see her movements. Repeatedly Bulgakov describes the expression of her eyes. With all this, he wants to emphasize that it is not the appearance that is important for him, but the life of her soul. Bulgakov managed to express true, true, eternal love, which naturally clarifies the main idea of the novel. The love of Margarita and the Master is unusual, defiant, reckless - and this is just attractive. Believe in it immediately and forever. “Follow me, reader, and only me, and I will show you such love!” .
Bulgakovskaya Margarita is a symbol of femininity, fidelity, beauty, self-sacrifice in the name of love. It is in the love of a woman, and not in himself, that the Master draws strength, again returned to his apartment in the Arbat lane. “Enough,” he says to Margarita, “You shamed me. I will never again allow cowardice and will not return to this issue, be calm. I know that we are both victims of our mental illness, which, perhaps, I passed on to you ... Well, well, together we will bear it. The spiritual closeness of Margarita with the Master is so strong that the Master is not able to forget his beloved even for a minute, and Margarita sees him in a dream.
The image of Margarita vividly reflects Bulgakov's creative courage and bold challenge to stable aesthetic laws. On the one hand, the most poetic words about the Creator, about his immortality, about the beautiful “eternal home”, which will be his reward, are put into the mouth of Margarita. On the other hand, it is the Master’s beloved who flies on a broom over the boulevards and roofs of Moscow, crushes window panes, puts “sharp claws” into 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 pouring buckets of water into the drawers of his desk. Margarita, with her furious, offensive love, is opposed to the Master: “Because of you, I was shaking naked all night yesterday, I lost my nature and replaced it with a new one, for several months I sat in a dark closet and thought only about one thing - about a thunderstorm over Yershalaim, I cried out all her eyes, and now, when happiness has collapsed, are you persecuting me? Margarita herself compares her fierce love with the fierce devotion of Matthew Levi. But Levi is fanatical and therefore narrow, while Margarita's love is all-encompassing, like life. On the other hand, with her immortality, Margarita is opposed to the warrior and commander Pilate. And with his defenseless and at the same time powerful humanity - to the all-powerful Woland. Margarita fights for her happiness: in the name of saving the Master, she concludes an agreement with the devil, thereby destroying her soul. The hope that by doing so she would be able to achieve the return of her happiness made her fearless. “Ah, really, I would have pledged my soul to the devil just to find out whether he is alive or not!” Margarita became a generalized poetic image of a loving woman, a woman so inspiredly turning into a witch, violently cracking down on the enemy of the Master Latunsky: “Carefully aiming, Margarita hit on the keys of the piano, and the first plaintive howl swept through the whole apartment. An innocent instrument screamed frantically. Margarita tore and threw the strings with a hammer. The destruction that she made gave her burning pleasure ... ".
Margarita is by no means an ideal in everything. The moral choice of Margarita was determined in favor of evil. She sold her soul to the devil for love. And this fact deserves condemnation. Due to religious beliefs, she deprived herself of the chance to go to heaven. Another of her sins is participation in the ball of Satan, along with the greatest sinners, who after the ball turned into dust, returned to non-existence. “But this sin is committed in an irrational, other world, Margarita’s actions here do no harm to anyone and therefore do not require atonement.” Margarita takes on an active role and tries to fight the life circumstances that the Master refuses. And suffering gives birth to cruelty in her soul, which, however, has not taken root in her.
The motive of mercy is connected with the image of Margarita in the novel. After the Great Ball, she asks Satan for the unfortunate Frida, while she is clearly hinted at the request for the release of the Master. She says: “I asked you for Frida only because I had the imprudence to give her a firm hope. She waits, sir, she believes in my power. And if she remains deceived, I will be in a terrible position. I won't have peace for the rest of my life. It's nothing you can do! It just so happened." But this is not limited to the mercy of Margarita. Even being a witch, she does not lose the brightest human qualities. The human nature of Margarita, with her spiritual impulses, overcoming temptations and weaknesses, is revealed as strong and proud, conscientious and honest. This is 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 by sins, is capable of this. If, according to Christian dogmas, she is a sinner, then one whom the tongue does not dare to condemn, for her love is extremely selfless, only a truly earthly woman can love like that. The concepts of kindness, forgiveness, understanding, responsibility, truth and harmony are associated with love and creativity. In the name of love, Margarita performs a feat, overcoming fear and weakness, overcoming circumstances, demanding nothing for herself. It is with the image of Margarita that the true values \u200b\u200bclaimed by the author of the novel are connected: personal freedom, mercy, honesty, truth, faith, love.
Conclusion
The work of Mikhail Bulgakov is a remarkable page in the history of Russian literature of the 20th century. Thanks to him, literature became more multifaceted in thematic and genre-style terms, got rid of descriptiveness, acquired the features of deep analyticism.
The novel The Master and Margarita is rightfully one of the greatest works of Russian and world literature of the 20th century. Bulgakov wrote the novel as a historically and psychologically reliable book about his time and its people, which is probably why the novel became a unique human document of that remarkable era. And at the same time, this narrative is turned to the future, is a book for all time, which is facilitated by its highest artistry. To this day, we are convinced of the depth of the author's creative search, which is confirmed by the incessant flow of books and articles about the writer. There is a certain special magnetism in the novel, a kind of magic of the word, which captivates the reader, introduces him into a world where reality cannot be distinguished from fantasy. Magical actions and acts, statements of characters on the highest philosophical topics are masterfully woven by Bulgakov into the artistic fabric of the work.
Good and evil in the work are not two balanced phenomena that enter into open opposition, raising the issue of faith and unbelief. They are dualistic. Good for M. Bulgakov is not a characteristic of a person or an act, but a way of life, its principle, for which it is not scary to endure pain and suffering. Very important and bright is the thought of the author, uttered by the mouth of Yeshua: "All people are kind." The fact that she expresses herself in the description of the time when Pontius Pilate lived, that is, twelve thousand moons ago, when describing Moscow in the twenties and thirties, reveals the writer’s struggle and faith in eternal good, despite the accompanying evil, which also has eternity. “Have these townspeople changed internally?” - sounded the question of Satan, and although there was no answer, there is obviously a bitter "no, they are still petty, greedy, selfish and stupid." Bulgakov turns his main blow, angry, inexorable and revealing, against human vices, considering cowardice as the most serious of them, which gives rise to unscrupulousness, and pity for human nature, and the worthlessness of the existence of impersonal individualism.
The theme of good and evil in M. Bulgakov is the problem of people choosing the principle of life, and the purpose of mystical evil in the novel is to reward everyone in accordance with this choice. The main value of the work lies in the fact that Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov considers only a person capable of overcoming any evil in spite of circumstances and temptations. So what is the salvation of enduring values according to Bulgakov?
The duality of human nature, in the presence of the free will of man, is the only factor in the generation of both good and evil. In the universe there is neither good nor evil as such, but there are laws of nature and principles for the development of life. Everything that is given for human life is neither bad nor good, but becomes one or the other depending on how each of us uses the abilities and needs given to him. Whatever evil we take in the world, its creator will be none other than man himself. Therefore, we create our own destiny and choose our own path.
Incarnating from life to life in various conditions, positions and states, a person, in the end, reveals his true face, reveals either the divine or demonic aspect of his dual nature. The whole point of evolution lies precisely in the fact that everyone must show whether he represents a future god or a future devil, exposing one of the sides of his dual nature, namely that which corresponded to his aspirations either towards good or towards evil.
Through the fate of Margarita, Bulgakov presents us with the path of kindness to self-disclosure with the help of purity of heart with huge, sincere love burning in it, in which his strength is contained. The writer's Margarita is an ideal. The master is the bearer of good, because he turned out to be above the prejudices of society and lived, guided by the soul. But the writer does not forgive him fear, unbelief, weakness, that he retreated, did not continue the struggle for his idea. The image of Satan in the novel is also unusual. Evil for Woland is not a goal, but a means to cope with human vices and injustice.
The writer showed us that each person creates his own destiny, and it depends only on him whether it will be good or evil. If we do good, then evil will forever leave our souls, which means that the world will become better and kinder. Bulgakov in his novel was able to cover many problems that concern us all. The novel "The Master and Margarita" is about a person's responsibility for the good and evil that happens on earth, for his own choice of life paths leading to truth and freedom or to slavery, betrayal and inhumanity, about all-conquering love and creativity, elevating the soul to the heights of true humanity.
List of used literature
Akimov, V. M. The light of the artist, or Mikhail Bulgakov against the devil. / V. M. Akimov. - M., 1995.-160 p.
Andreev, P. G. Bezprosvete i prosvet. / P. G. Andreev. // Literary review.-1991. - No. 5.- P.56-61.
Babinsky, M. B. Studying the novel by M. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita" in the XI grade. / M. B. Babinsky. - M., 1992. - 205 p.
Bely, A. D. About the "Master and Margarita" / A. D. Bely. // Bulletin of the Russian Christian movement. -1974. -№112.- P.89-101.
Boborykin, V. G. Mikhail Bulgakov. / V. G. Boborykin. - M.: Enlightenment, 1991. - 128 p.
Bulgakov, M. A. Master and Margarita: a novel. / M. A. Bulgakov. - Minsk, 1999.-407p.
Galinskaya, I. L. Riddles of famous books. / I. L Galinskaya. - M.: Nauka, 1986.-345s.
Groznova, N. A. The work of Mikhail Bulgakov / N. A. Groznova.- M., 1991.-234p.
Kazarkin, A.P. Interpretation of a literary work: around the “Master and Margarita” by M. Bulgakov. / A. P. Kazarkin.- Kemerovo, 1988.-198 p.
Kolodin, A. B. Light shines in the darkness. / A. B. Kolodin. // Literature at school.-1994.-№1.-p.44-49.
Lakshin, V. Ya. Bulgakov's world. / V. Ya. Lakshin. // Literary review.-1989.-№10-11.-S.13-23.
Nemtsev, V. I. Mikhail Bulgakov: the formation of a novelist. / V. I. Nemtsev. - Samara, 1990.- 142 p.
Petelin, V. V. Return of the master: about M. A. Bulgakov. / V. V. Petelin. - M., 1986.-111 p.
Roschin, M.M. Master and Margarita. / M. M. Roshchin. - M., 1987.-89 p.
Russian literature of the XX century: textbook. allowance / ed. V. V. Agenosov.-M., 2000.-167p.
Sakharov, V. E. Satire of the young Bulgakov. / V. E. Sakharov. - M.: Fiction, 1998.-203p.
Skorino, L. V. Faces without carnival masks. / L. V. Skorino. // Questions of Literature. -1968.-No. 6.-S.6-13.
Sokolov, B.V. Bulgakov Encyclopedia. / B.V. Sokolov.- M., 1997.
Sokolov, B. V. Roman M. Bulgakov "Master and Margarita": essays on creative history. / B.V. Sokolov.- M., 1991.
Sokolov, B.V. Three Lives of Mikhail Bulgakov. / B. V. Sokolov. - M., 1997.
Chebotareva, V. A. Prototype of Bulgakov's Margarita. / V. A. Chebotareva. // Literature at school. -1998.- No. 2.-S. 117-118.
Chudakova, M. O. Biography of M. Bulgakov./ M. O. Chudakova.- M., 1988.
Yankovskaya, L. I. Bulgakov's creative path. / L.I. Yankovskaya.- M.: Soviet writer, 1983.- 101p.
Yanovskaya, L. M. Woland's triangle / L. M. Yanovskaya. - M., 1991. - 137p.
The famous novel "The Master and Margarita" tells us about the life of Moscow in the 30s. However, reading, you understand how relevant the work is today. "Manuscripts do not burn," and time does not spoil good literature.
The world of Bulgakov's heroes is divided into higher powers and ordinary people. In each camp there is both evil and good. These divisions are very conditional.
Woland and his retinue
The personification of evil. The power that is opposed to God. But the author seeks to show that there is a balance of good and evil in the world. And the guardian of this balance is Woland. The epigraph from Faust says that this force always wants evil, but always does good.
- so who are you, finally?
- I am part of that force that always wants evil and always does good.
"Faust" I. Goethe
The dark forces in the novel cannot be called absolute evil. They often do things that can be approved. Human vices are punished: hypocrisy, pettiness, greed, betrayal. But their methods are different from the methods of the forces of good, cruel.
Woland's retinue often causes a smile. The charming Cat Behemoth and the cheerful former regent Koroviev often delight the reader. Distributing money to everyone, which then turn into candy wrappers, punish greed, greed. But at the same time, these creatures are scary. They are indifferent to death, they have no pity, sincere compassion.
Frida
A young girl who was abused by the owner of the cafe where she worked. As a result, an unwanted child was born from a rapist. The baby resembled the horror and pain experienced by the heroine. In addition, she understood that she would not be able to feed, raise a baby. She strangles him with a handkerchief in her mouth, after which she buries him in the forest. Now Frida lives in hell. In every sense of the word. After all, hell, as you know, everyone has his own. Every day, waking up, the girl sees her fatal handkerchief on the bedside table. She burned it, drowned it, tore it, destroyed it. But all this is useless.
The woman is a regular guest at Satan's ball. Among criminals, murderers, hangmen, moral invalids. But can it be considered evil? She became a victim of violence. And the child could not have a good life. The kid would grow up as a hungry ragamuffin, humiliated by everyone, perhaps he would become a criminal.
Abaddonna
Abaddon is a demon of war, a harbinger of death. One of Woland's assistants. Perhaps the most incomprehensible character for the reader. That is why it is the most mystical. This minor character makes a strong impression. But the image is contradictory. Margarita becomes frightened in his presence, by this she incurs Woland's annoyance. The demon is impartial, always sympathetic to both sides. And perhaps no one. He is blind, like Themis, therefore, does not have a preference.
The hero has a special mission. Abaddon's "work" is to kill small, innocent children so that they do not have time to sin. Then why is he better than Frida?
Yeshua as an image of goodness in the novel
Bulgakov's evil is multifaceted. It manifests itself in the Devil and his retinue, in people. Margarita also cannot be called absolute goodness. She is just a woman. Her weakness is manifested in the fact that anger is out of control. Having received magical abilities, strength, she cruelly takes revenge on the criticism that killed the Master. The heroine's lover himself, the Master, cannot be a symbol of good either. He is also weak, sometimes seems aloof, indifferent.
It turns out that Yeshua Ha-Nozri becomes the only image of goodness. But this is absolutely good. There are no shades and edges. Some readers consider Yeshua to be weak. They think that goodness is inexpressive in a novel. But this is far from true. The strength of a hero is in his faith in people. The fact that even in the face of death he does not give up his faith, ideas, ideals. All people are good for him, and if they do bad deeds, it is because they are unhappy.
Ga-Nozri does not lie, does not dodge, even when Pontius Pilate himself desperately hints at him about a lie. Evil turned out to be more expressive because evil's hands are untied. Evil can afford to be good. But kindness is unsophisticated, it cannot be intrusive, aggressive.
Conclusion
M.A. Bulgakov subtly showed the balance of good and evil in his novel. Woland himself informs the reader that each "department" should mind its own business. However, it seems to a person that these boundaries are blurred. Evil is charming in a novel. And goodness is enduring and absolute.
The novel by M. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita" is a multidimensional and multilayered work. It combines, closely intertwined, mysticism and satire, the most unbridled fantasy and merciless realism, light irony and intense philosophy. One of the main philosophical problems of the novel is the problem of the relationship between good and evil. This theme has always occupied a leading place in Russian philosophy and literature.Bulgakov's novel clearly shows the differences between these two forces. Good and evil are personified here: Yeshua Ha-Notsri is the personification of good, and Woland is the embodiment of evil.
Yeshua is the embodiment of a pure idea. He is a philosopher, a wanderer, a preacher of kindness, love and mercy. His goal was to make the world cleaner and kinder. Yeshua's life philosophy is this: "There are no evil people in the world, there are unhappy people." “A good man,” he addresses the procurator, and for this he is beaten by Ratslayer. But the point is not that he addresses people like that, but that he really behaves with every ordinary person as if he were the embodiment of goodness.
The eternal desire of people for goodness is irresistible. Twenty centuries have passed, and the personification of goodness and love - Jesus - is alive in the souls of people. The Master, the protagonist of the novel, writes a novel about Christ and Pilate.
The master writes a novel, restoring gospel events, giving them the status of real ones. Through him, Good and Truth again come into the world and again remain unrecognized.
Woland, like Mephistopheles and Lucifer, is the embodiment of evil. It is believed that the main occupation of Satan is the tireless sowing of temptations and destruction. But, reading carefully into the novel, one can be convinced that Woland is somehow too humane for this.
It seems to me that Woland, personifying evil, was in this case a messenger of good. In all actions one can see either acts of just retribution (episodes with Stepa Likhodeev, Nikanor Bosy), or the desire to prove to people the existence and connection of good and evil.
Therefore, Woland in the artistic world of the novel is not so much the opposite of Yeshua, but an addition to him. Good and evil in life are surprisingly closely intertwined, especially in human souls. When Woland, in the scene in the Variety, tests the audience for cruelty and deprives the entertainer of his head, compassionate women demand to put his head back. And then we see the same women fighting over money. It seems that Woland punished people with evil for their evil for the sake of justice. Evil for Woland is not a goal, but a means to cope with human vices.
At first glance, the results of the novel are disappointing. Both in the novel of the master and in the novel about the master, good in the fight against evil is defeated: Yeshua is crucified, the novel is burned. The clash of the creative spirit with unrighteous reality ends in suffering and death. But Woland says: “Everything will be right. This is what the world is built on." This means that reality exists after all for the sake of goodness. World evil and suffering are something transient, they will end together with the whole drama of life.
But in the life of every person there is a moment when he must choose between good and evil. Pontius Pilate in a difficult situation shows cowardice, and he is punished by eternal torments of conscience. Hence the conclusion: no matter how good and evil are mixed up in the world, they still cannot be confused. Cowardice, betrayal - the most serious human vices.
The novel "The Master and Margarita" is a novel about a person's responsibility for the good and evil that happens on earth, for his own choice of life paths leading either to truth and freedom, or to slavery and betrayal.
The eternal confrontation between good and evil is covered in almost every book of Russian literature. The Master and Margarita is no exception. Good in this work illuminates the path of truth, and evil - on the contrary, it is able to lead a person into invisible distances.
Bulgakov was sure that it is religion, the faith of God, that helps a lost person find his true path. His characters help to understand Bulgakov's position.
As part of the "novel within a novel" that the Master wrote, his hero Yeshua appears before a ruthless judge. In this episode, there is not quite a theme of good and evil, but rather a theme of betrayal of good itself. But why? The procurator was well aware that the accused, who stood before him, did not commit criminal acts, but nevertheless ordered his execution. He is a slave of the state system, and Bulgakov displayed the same slaves in Moscow (for example, Barefoot).
Yeshua is the embodiment of kindness and sympathy, he was insightful, generous, selfless. Even the fear of death did not make him renounce his views. He believed that in a person his good beginning still prevails.
His opposition - Woland - believed, on the contrary, that evil and self-interest predominate in a person. He found in people their vices, sinful weaknesses, ridiculing them in various ways. He, along with his retinue, got rid of those who deviated from goodness, who were corrupted, ridiculing such people.
But why does Satan cause only a smile and positive emotions? The answer to the question is the epigraph to the novel, which just says that evil does eternal good. In this novel, Woland is the arbiter of fate, he stands for the balance between evil and good, trying to restore it. However, his actions still cannot be called good, because only with the help of evil does he show people his own vices.
Goodness in the novel is also the feeling between the Master and Margarita. Their love shows what a person is ready to do, how he and the world around him are changing with the help of such a force. There was an evil spirit in Moscow, a Sabbat appeared, dark magic was going on. And everything seems to have gone wrong, because this love was helped by evil spirits. However, love itself is a divine gift, which proves that love is a manifestation of kindness and self-giving.
The novel is full of not only mysteries, but also values. Bulgakov colorfully described the evil spirit, putting it in the foreground, but pure and bright love, all-consuming and all-forgiving, still prevails here. Goodness is presented in the novel as a force of creation, which nothing can pervert or destroy.
Another main idea of the author is the scene with the ball of Satan. That is, a person must go through all the horrors, the circles of hell, in order to realize one simple truth: love is the only road that will make him not only happy, but also the master of his own life. He will not become a slave, which was the procurator, he will be free in his own way.
Makievskaya Chiara
Chiara is very fond of Bulgakov's novel "The Master and Margarita". She walked through all Bulgakov's places in Moscow, was at performances based on this novel. I am glad that I have students who are anxious about our classical literature, understanding its charm and dignity. I am happy that I have thinking and reflective students.
Download:
Preview:
An essay by a student of the 11th grade Makiyevskaya Chiara on the topic “Good and Evil in the novel“ The Master and Margarita ”by M.A. Bulgakov"
In the novel "The Master and Margarita" M.A. Bulgakov raises many interesting, relevant and important problems for society. In his work, the author thinks about the role of true love in life and creativity, about courage and cowardice, about true and false life values, about faith and unbelief, and about many other eternal issues, but most of all in the novel I was interested in the problem of good and evil.
Unlike many other classical authors M.A. Bulgakov does not draw an obvious and clear line between good and evil, emphasizing the ambiguity of this problem. M.A. Bulgakov leads the reader to this idea from the very first page of the novel, namely from the epigraph presented by a quote from Faust: "I am part of that force that always wants evil and always does good."
It is this phrase that remarkably characterizes the image of one of the key characters of the novel - Woland. Woland is Bulgakov's interpretation of Satan, a true representative of evil, but is it possible to argue that Woland is the most terrible evil described on the pages of the work? From the first chapters, the reader can create just such an idea, but with each new page and each new episode, the image of Woland is revealed more and more. Basically, from the Moscow chapters, we learn that in reality Woland does not commit any cruel atrocities, he only exposes the true appearance of Muscovites, tears off their masks and demonstrates all their main vices: greed, envy, greed, hypocrisy, cruelty and selfishness. The author clearly shows this in an episode of a session of black magic in the Variety Theater, where Woland and his retinue perform a series of peculiar tricks, during which the true faces of Muscovites are revealed. Then Woland will note: “They are people like people. They love money, but it has always been ... Humanity loves money, no matter what it is made of, whether it is leather, paper, bronze or gold. Well, frivolous ... well, well ... and mercy sometimes knocks on their hearts ... ordinary people ... in general, they resemble the former ones ... the housing problem only spoiled them ... "
At the same time, Woland not only taught some heroes a lesson, but was able to teach something important, influence fate and change lives for the better. The story of the life of the poet Ivan Bezdomny immediately comes to mind. The meeting with Woland led to many troubles for Ivan, the main of which was his stay in a hospital for the mentally ill, but it is there that Ivan's fate changes tremendously, because there he meets the Master. The master became a wise teacher for Homeless, able to teach Ivan to distinguish between false and true life values and who managed to help him choose the right path in life.
It is also impossible not to note the role of evil and impure forces in the life of the Master and Margarita. Indeed, in the end, Woland helped the lovers reunite and find peace and happiness, for the Master and Margarita, Woland and his retinue truly "made good."
Another interesting fact is that good in the understanding of M.A. Bulgakov is not so clear. For example, if we recall the life path of Margarita, one cannot but pay attention to the fact that her life was not righteous, because Margarita was not a faithful wife, agreed to become a real witch, angrily and mercilessly took revenge on literary critics and accepted help from Satan himself, however, despite all these facts Margarita seems to us an exceptional and ideal woman, in whose soul there is a place for sincere love, mercy and courage. Margarita has the right outlook on life, she appreciates spirituality, and not something material and empty. On the pages of the novel among Muscovites, there may be many decent family men and restrained and intelligent people, but this is absolutely not enough to be considered a person who carries only good in himself, especially if hatred and envy are hidden behind the mask of decency and intelligence, which is why Margarita is much stronger wins over the reader than, for example, members of MASSOLIT.
The problem of the ambiguity of good and evil is also raised by the author on the Yershelayim pages of the novel. In the Yershelayim chapters, the conventionality of such concepts as "good man" and "evil man" is felt even more strongly. At first glance, it may seem that one cannot talk about the kindness of Pontius Pilate, because he could not find the courage to overcome the fear of responsibility because of his position, as a result of which Yeshua was sentenced to death. Pontius Pilate felt with all his heart that Yeshua was innocent, but he could not prevent the execution of the sentence. Because of Pontius Pilate, an innocent person died, it would seem, how can one then look for something bright in his soul? But, having repented, Pontius Pilate was able to gain forgiveness and freedom. His indifference and pangs of conscience meant the presence of light and purity in the soul, which is why Pontius Pilate was still able to climb the lunar road and follow it along with Yeshua and his dearest earthly creature - his beloved dog.
At the same time, I immediately want to turn to the image of Judas. And on his soul lies a grave sin for the death of Yeshua, the only difference is that Judas did not regret what he had done, there was no place for mercy and conscience in his heart, for the sake of money he could easily doom a person to death and continue to think about his personal life, make plans and live a calm and contented life. Indifference and cruel composure - that's what distinguishes Judas from Pontius Pilate. That is why Judas did not deserve salvation and was deprived of his life.
Thus, according to M.A. Bulgakov, one cannot divide the world into good and evil, good and bad people. Life is incredibly complicated, so you cannot judge a person without trying to understand his character, without knowing anything about his fate and past. Through the mouth of Woland in a conversation with Levi Matvey A.M. Bulgakov expressed a very important thought: “You uttered your words as if you did not recognize shadows, as well as evil. Would you be so kind to think about the question: what would your good do if evil did not exist, and how would what would the earth look like if shadows disappeared from it? After all, shadows come from objects and people. Here is the shadow from my sword. But there are shadows from trees and from living beings. Do you want to tear off the whole globe, blowing away all the trees and all living things because of your fantasy to enjoy the naked light? M.A. Bulgakov notes the importance of both evil and good in people's lives, because both light and shadow are equally important in life. Good and evil are integral parts of the life of all people as a whole, and separately - the soul of each person, but only the person himself is able to choose the path he has to follow. That is why M.A. Bulgakov does not give clear answers and does not inspire any particular point of view, in the novel "The Master and Margarita" he only shows the possible roads on the path of life, and the reader must independently draw conclusions for himself personally. That is why, after so many years, the novel "The Master and Margarita" remains just as relevant and interesting for people, because every reader is able to find and see a part of himself in it, after which he will never be able to remain indifferent to the great work of M.A. Bulgakov.