He is not carried away with the fantastic in its own right, but several of his works can be placed within the fantastic realm. M and M, Sobachi Serdtse, Rokovye Yaitsa and the Dyavoliada. 138 In the Dyavoliada, 1924, he is closer to the satire of Ilf and Petrov rather than the fantasy that runs M and M. There is simply too much absurd in life after the revolution, not to expose it with satire. (This is an idea in vague form that explains why Satire worked in the NEP period - absurdity existed which made it possible, but there was also the more lax attitude towards the arts at this time that allowed for it. Later, when the party had more time to devote to the censorship of the arts it was not as possible. This is not a clear answer for how the upheaval led to more satire, but is certainly a part of it. Ryan) In M and M the fantastic plays against the "rationally organized state" and it "answers more fully the real nature of man" than the state. 139
There is also no philosophical message in Dyavoliada, simply that the devil is at the heart of the transformations and tricks - note the constant smell of sulpher. 139 However, there is no reason why the devil is involved or why Korotkov is punished. If his deeds are worthy, then so is the rest on humanity. This is similar to Woland's punishment in M and M, but it is tempered. Edwards suggests that looking into an ideological answer may be taking D too deep. If it is judged purely on entertainment it serves itself. He states that the most significant point to be made from D is that it presumes M and M later. This is apparent in the language of the streets as well as the fantastic elements - "paper money is thrown about; modern technology, often in the shape of the telephones and telegrams, is mocked, and provides a jumping-off point for the absurd; the dream plays an important role; characters' grotesque physical appearance is introduced... a crisis of identity is associated with the loss of the civil passport and possibly the most important pointers to the future are he polarization of good order and scandal and the incongruity of reason trying to grapple with the unreasonable" 140.
The question of sources for the fantastic is at hand. Edwards points to Gogol and Dostoevsky - the theme of the double is explicit and the "grotesquerie owes much to Deal Souls and to The Government Inspector" 140. He also points to the evolution of Bulgakov's art when he writes about man's need to intervene in the evolutionary process as scene in The Heart of a Dog. B "mocks the rationalism which sees the evolutionary process as the guarantee of progress" 140. He also sees B mocking "the Soviet experiment, in which a society is isolated and its course of historical development directed and accelerated" 140.
D states that science and technology is looked at with suspicion - even the tram is mocked and has a life of its own. He makes the connection between Zamyatin and Bulgakov where science when wielded by a totalitarian state is destructive to all of humanity. Man steps over his ability to control the science and technology that he creates and takes on a force against man. 141 At least in The Heart of a Dog the doctor Probrazhensky and Bormental have some humanity and are not completely taken in by their god complexes. 143 Edwards sees the socratic method in Bulgakov - he does not destroy tradition and belief, he simply questions them. B presumes a few beliefs of his own - against violence toward animals and the weak. 143
B writes against the Soviet state in his works. The bourgeois home and comforts mirror those the author had himself. 144 Sharikov is a proletarian hooligan and is morally inferior to the dog he came from. The speech he learns does not make him a man and although people live and act like animals, they are human and can be taken to account for their actions. 144 Even the slightest things are taken into account. The doctor hates Poshlost and the lack of ability to learn - Sharikov's ignorance and violence causes destruction. Edwards sees this in the small and the large scale - the ignorance of a man causes harm, but the "narrow rationalism of the purely scientific approach and also the irrationality which all too easily can destroy the 'higher' rationality of civilized life, a rationality hard-won after centuries of struggle against that element in man which seeks always to reduce him to the level of the beast" 144.
No comments:
Post a Comment