Tucker "Aginast the grain"

She talks about the definition of parody using Morson and Bakhtin. 1-4

Talks about the definitions of intertext and satire and how they are used by authors like Gogol and Dostoevsky and others. 1-19

Olesha's Babichev in his pince nez parodies Rodchnko and Osip Brik's art. 116

Kavelerov and Ivan parody the haves and have nots in the novel. 119

Babichev's sausage to be painted parodies the artist patron relationship in the west and the Soviet state-writer relationship. 120

Perpetual clash between verbal images and objects occur in Envy. Andrei is a lover of things (fat) and is good with objects and in life as opposed to Kavelerov who is not good at anything and "things hat him." 120

Worthless challenge to authority by Kavelerov as parody of literary conventions. 122

Ivan's ophelia challenges the soviet or avant garde's constructivist authority by echoing constructivist art like the worthlessness of Tatlin's monument. 126 All of the inventions parody revolt and even against Ivan. 127

Ivan spreads rumors like Christ parodying him. 127 he is even arrested and questioned similarly. 128

Ryan-Hayes "Contemp Russian Satire"

Satire is understood as a manner of writing, a mode rather than a genre. 1

Zoschenko innovations with skaz broke new ground in satiric characterization and pointed out the contradictions and the excesses of the NEP period. 2

One of the problems with determining Satire in the contemporary period is that the Russian and Soviet critics often conflate satire and humor and a distinction is seldom made. 3

Another problem is that the same critics tend to see it in a low status. The problem is that satire tends, unlike most other literature forms finds it objects ouside of art - society, politics, moral life of the culture. 3

Western critics often de-emphasize the didactic while the Russian used it as a standard by which to measure it. 3

One of the most prevalent ways in which satire is used is the paradying of genre conventions.4

It is also important to understand that parody and satire are not the same thing although they are also often conflated. 4

Parody is best also seen as a mode, not a genre. Parody aids satire often supporting the mockery and criticism, but doesn't have to - it is not subordinate to satire. 4

An important difference bewteeen satire and parody is that satire aims at exterior targets - politics, social mores, cultural institutions. 4

Parody refers to another artistic construct. 4

Satire aims at the exposure of or the improvement of a faulty set of parameters in life.

Parody is an aesthetic phenomenon. 5

Parody must be immatative and refer to another specific author or work and put the words or thtoughts to a new purpose. 5

According to the formalists Shklovsky and Tynanov Parody is the laying bare of the conventions of the cliches and the conventions and serves as a great evolutionary force in literature. 5

Bakhtin wrote that the parody involved two voices where the second is trying to discredit the first. It must be paired. 6

Gary Saul Morson wrote that it doesn't have to involve humor. 7

The belief that parody need be mockery, derision, or ridicule has been discredited and it need not even criticise the original by some critics. The need to modernize or reply to something is perhaps even stemming from admiration. 7 Others continue that true parody should have some sort of criticism, but sympathy or even love takes the sting out of it for the reader. 7

Satire doesn't question the moral ad ethical norms against which the target is measured. Instead, genre norms and individual texts are recast through parody so as to satirize social, political or moral aspects of contemporary culture. 8

In order to be effective, the reader must be able to decode the reference and understand with whom he is to agree. 8

Satiric tone can be gentle and mocking (Horatian) or caustic and harsh (Juvenalian).9

Livingstone "time in chevengur"

In Chevengur time has stopped. It is the end of time as the Marxist teleological end to all of humanity has reached its climax, so the inhabitants think, in Chevengur.803

She looks into Platonov's own beliefs on what time means in the philosophical sense.

In the novel most of the questions are either poorly answered by people not capable of answering well or just not answered. Zakhar is trying to figure out the answer to a number of different problems and one of these is time. 807-8

Kopyenkin too 809

Druzhbya bednyaki group is Platonov's satirization of the excesses of communists. They want the meetings to be everyday or twice a day so the important events don't float away without being given proper attention.

The chevengurians are the absolute satire where they want to do nothing in the quest for communism except stop time in the moment when they have produced commraderie. 810

They are satirized in the fact that they take the stopping of time before the eternal communism and literally stay up all night waiting for the dawn of the new day when communism will be reached. 815

Chepurnyi has a sadness for the life that he lived during time before the end of time. He is sad for all the memories that were before. 815

Borenstein "Men without Women"

Bits of introduction to the lack of women and who are the few women in Chevengur, Envy. 2-3

Fellow Travelors - popoutchiki - those that accepted the soviet union, but could not produce works that it demanded. Olesha and Babel fit this. 5 They had other problems that had to do with sexulaity and identity that were not shared by their characters in this period, though much of the confussion they felt in the period is what they felt themselves. 5

The period of War communism last 3 years longer in Russian than it did in Europe after WWi. Before the civil war there was a heady revolution of social mores that tended to promiscuity. War Communism took care of it however. 6

After the war there was another sexual revolution in the period of NEP. 7

Attempts to transform reallife according to a prepackaged plan is somehting the writers of this period did, incuding Platonov. 9

Socialist Struggle against nature as it relates to Chevengur. 16

Comradship in the period and Olesha's Kavelerov's evny of Makarov's ability to blend and build ties. K disowns any need for the group, but feels compelled by it. 31

Comradship was something that came out of being in the trech together with one's fellow man. Once the war was over and War Communism was replaced with NEP many of the men that fought on the front lines and felt that the WC was the best manifestation of the era felt betrayed by the loosening of form and the rejection of what they had experienced. 34

The period of the 1920s was hard for people. They had to work for the future knowing that communism was a long way off and that the old structures were obsolite. There was little but eachother to cling to. 37

Olesha and Platonov on the question of building a society of men without women. they and babel do it best. 39 Each of these worlds that rests on a lack of women and work is doomed to fail. Nature cannot be replaced with culture. 41

The period of NEP in the 20s was highlighted by an androgenousization of the population. Women were engaged in work that once was just for men. It is highlighted by the sheer lack of women as revolutionaries in Chevengur and by the way the doctor treats the NKVD rep that was a woman in Sobachii Serdste. 45

The marriage of Makaraov and his Vera in Envy makes fun of the new forms in the NEP period. They plan to marry years from now. 46

Rosa Luxumberg as the ideal Socialist woman dead and distant. 48

Chevengur and the prostitutes and men traveling together. 50

The literary reaction to the civil war introduced many narratives that dealt with the bonds and the horrors of comradship since the war set comrad against one another. 61

The war's culture of violence was brought back to the civilian world in NEP where rape where introduced was given in a bad light and was also this way in real world too. 68 Reference to men's love in Chevengur's of dead RLux.

Fears of homosexuality in Chevengur and need for women, but only if they are comrades. 69

private property comes into play in Chev only after the women arrive. 70

In Olesha's envy the issues of father and son that had plagued all time before were fixed as father and son were now working for the same future. The father and son alliance is not a blood tie, but one where men choose each other as father and son. 126

Kavelerov has a hard time getting along with the younger generation and has not found a father in the old gerneration. He is outside all of the new structures being forged and fails like Ivan because of this. 126

The revolution disrupts the transition from father to son in Olesha and Platonov. 133

Chevengur's Dvanov's lost father and returns to grave. 133

The soviet ideology stated that the bourgeoise family with the father at the head must be erraticated in the new world. Kavelerov has problems stemming from his lack of father and need to find a new one, yet never wanting to engage in relations that will make him a father. Even with women they must not result in fatherhood. 135-6

Babichev wants to free the family and fathers from blood ties to children and prefers to give birth to kitchens and sausages and take care of adult children that he chooses. 161

Idoltry of the feminine, yet the world is androgenous. 163

He seems to say that Olesha's world in envy is not one based on greed and and he doesn't touch the satirical elements of the story. The story is bases on male comraderie and who is a part of it and who is not. Even when women show up they are used not to pit the men against eachother as in a traditional tale, but they serve to bring the men together. Kovalerov is an exception and Ivan doesn' t get invited to the party either, but they are brought together in their attempts to play at the same games as the others. 172

Love triangles 176-183

Chevengur is haunted by the two things that it tried to live without: desire and femininity. 191

Utopia as satire. 192

He seems to build a fratriarchy with a complete disdain for sexuality in the first part of the decade, then comes back and makes his peace with it in the second and into the future in the 1930s. 193

Kopyonkin strives for both being a knight and for the love of Rlux. it is the exact opposite thing that the chevengurians live for. They have a disdain for love and don't do anything in their communist community. 203

Chevengur is not the "History of one town" that SS wrote. It has irony in Zakhar Pavlovich in the beginning and with the Chevengurians at the end and it is not the same utopian type novel that he wrote earlier in his career, though there are utopian images. The characters are too real and simple to gain the distance between reader and character that you usually get in satire. 226

The characters are too uneducated and foolish to really evaluate what they do. They just took the theory and made it real without asking if they should have made it in the first place.226

Chevingur in 2 pages: 227-228

Kopyonkin's "greed of friendship" for Dvanov is the tie that binds them together - comraderie. 230

When the men live in poverty they have comraderie and seek out each other. When the miscellaneus come and force them to get things and make their lives more stable then they have no need of eachother. 240 It cannot be called greed to not want to live in poverty, but it is interesting that the accumulation of physical things makes them less socialized.

He says that the appropriation of the community by the micellaneus women and the way of life that the men are dragged into is the same counter-revolutionary path that the leaders of NEP have been dragged into with their concessions. 241

Sinyavsky "Soviet civilization"

He looks at the revoution and as the manifestation of elemental forces. 28

The soviet union once created is based on an idea and according to them the most logical and best idea in the world - a utopia. Utopias in Russia are looked down upon since they suppose that it exists somewhere else and is something in the future. In the soviet union, they are already living the utopia and are the heirs of all history. 28

He states that Lenin put the NEP into effect in order to appease the peasants and the farm workers. When it was put into action the period of War communism that preceded it came to be a bit of a utopia. it was viewed originally that all they had to do was to have the peasants take the grain away from the aristocrats and then the peasants would feed everyone and it would make it to the factories and then they would have communist production and distribution. This was not a realistic view of how it worked out and thus a utopia. 61

In order to postpone the war with the peasants and to make War communism work it had to be ammended and the program of NEP had to be added. 62

Description of 1922: NEP is in full swing, the height of soviet democracy and freedom. Mass executions without trial, investigations and tribunals are giving way to soviet diplomacy and procefure. In this period is also soviet legalized terror. 63

NEP was Lenin's pragmatism, not a utopia. If anything it might be the anti-utopia since it was done with calculated means. 64

Lenin worked hard and everything came through him, but it was an unweildy mess. In order to fix the bureacratic-ness he needed to create new bureaucratic processes and get rid of those that were't working. 71

Summing up 72 Socialism was already in place during NEP as the limited freedoms that the consumer and seller had were regimented by the gov and tolerated it only for a short period of time. 72

The intellectuals were some of the first to be called the enemies of the state and they felt that they did not have the freedom to work as they wanted in the new system. 73

Sinyavsky uses annecdotes and literature, primarily Blok, Dostoevsky and Mayakovsky, to discuss what he saw and belived about the Soviet Union. It is an excellent look from inside, but is neither a history textbook, nor a treatise on the Soviet Union. It is more of a cultural look at the history through the eyes of an author that rambles and digresses as he explains. Insightful.

Master and Margarita 105 a product of Stalin's problems, but not confined to them. Woland plays with and tolerates the Master in the same way that Stalin tolerated Bulgakov. Had S known about M and M Bulgakov surely would have been shot. The black ball is an allegory of the concentration of villains that congregate with Stalin. 105-108

Heart of a dog as the new man. 147-151

Avins " Border Crossings"

Master and Margarita as a link to the west. Woland is from the Germany as Faust's mephistophiles. 186

Jeruselum is foreign to moscow as if the eventst that take place there could not take place in Moscow. 187

There is not much in this book that refers to NEP or satire. It works mostly with the East and West question and has a very short bit on Bulgakov.

Chapple "Soviet Satire of the 1920s"

Wants to categorize the factors that lead to Soviet satire in the 1920s and how it develped from the revolution to the introduction of Socialist Realism. v

Influence on the 1920s came from Gogol and SShchedrin. 2

Different groups of satirists - War communism, NEP and first 5 year plan. 2

The period of NEP especially did not focus in on utopias and WE is a notable exception. The felling is that the reception of WE discouraged some writers and the chaos of the revolution and the time was enough and better fodder than looking ahead.

Fellow Travelor and Emigres satirists and defined 3

The archetypes of satire were largely already in existance from the past satire. 6 There were some dos and don'ts despite the relative freedom after years of censorship from the tsar. he makes a list of the apporoprite vices in socity to satyrize. they tended to be generalized to a type rather than specificly at a person. 6

Satire from names was common as in Bulgakov. 7 physicality too. Very Gogolian

Moral standards and truth seekers are often involved. 8

Living conditions were commonly used 9

Soviet terms started to be used as early as War com. 10

Satire from Gogol's time was interested in the social question.12

The groundwork that started during War communism is what flourished during NEP13

Longer works started to replace the shorter ones. 14

Writers started concerning themselves with the contmeporry world and less with the past in NEP. 15Focus on the contemp showed that people were coming to grips with the lack of utopia that was promised and they saw it for what it was. 15

Soviet satire could not exist as the decade wore on because their must be an antagonist and there was no class antagonism then it was defunt. 16

Bulgakov as fellwo travelor and Dog's heart on the revolution. 23

Bitterness in satire started to replace the humor. 24

The revolution's effect on the people and society in satire. 25

Difference between the proregime satirists and the fellow travelors and emegres. 28 The FT claimed that the people didn't know what was happening and they rarely saw a difference. 29

They said that things did not change and that the people would not change either. 30

Connections between Gogol and Bulgakov in Chichikov. 32

Poverty remained as a symbol that not much had changed. 33

FT on War communism and deprivation 34 Proregime satirists were harder on the Whites and the old power structures. 34

Mayakovsky was a big one for satirizing the Whites and the Entente nations. 40

Satire on Communism tended to include stereotypes, not people. 40

The iron communist even started to be a caricature in a leather jacket-olesha. 42 but the zamyatin machine is also common. 43

Conclusion - Satire of the revolution was crude and Bulgakov and Zamyatin are best examples of good satire. 50

Satirists mocked those that emigrated for following their cozy exploitative ways to paris. 51

After 1924-25 the most written about theme switched from the revolution to everyday life. 59

The housing shortage was common. 60, 63 Zoschenko wrote much on this.

Bulgakov wrote from the otherside of this by exposing the rich that held on to their apts. 61

Zoikina Kvartira Bulgakov 63

Lack of money, inflation and Zoschenko. 65

Poor quality of goods. 66

Theft and Hoologanism 67

Zoschenko and bathhouses 68

Renaming of streets for Revolutionary names and soviet vocab 70

Marriage houses and Zoschenko 71

The theater as mixing of classes 71

Red Tape 71, 72,73

Employment and Red tape 74

Purges and self criticism as a way to save yourself 75

Embezzelers 76

Bureacrat 77

NEP bureaucrat 78, and Zoikina 79

NEP 82 Zosch, Mayako 83,84

Nepman and speculation 85

Philistinism as an extention of gogol or as always having been there, but simply not given enough room in War communism. He prospered in NEP because the conditions were ripe.

Englishmen and the english 87 imperialism 88, 89

capitalists 90

Toward the French 91-94

America and capitalist 95-99

Mayakovsky and America 99

Other nations 100

Religion 104

New religion of Science and Mayakov 107-111

Hooliganism as a result of nep 112

Drinking and the illiterate and the antisemite 114,115

satirizing the other literary camps 116

the proletarian poem 120

Satire of censorship 123

of Gorky 126

Overly ornate and incomprehensible theater for the masses. Meyerhold, the futurist were ridiculed by Ilf and petrov. Mayakov was spared, but not futurist. 128

Into the 1930s. 129

Government involvement in the arts and the first 5 year plan are the end of Satire 129

Union of Soviet Writers gets rid of FT. 130

Master and M 133, 134, 139-142 and religion

Ilf and P and the west and America 135, 137

Klanderud "Ilf and Petrov's poetic world"

K looks at the Soviet world at this time as a question of involvement or noninvolvement in the new society as a sort of "with us or against us"

He leads a discussion on the use of language -particularly the bureaucratic language and Soviet Newspeak - as leading to man's dehumanization and to transformation to a non-thinking automoton. I and P use this language to emasculate and parody.

the language doesn't reflect the reality as much as it replaces it. Words replace deeds once people give it undue authority. 444

I and P lay bare the cliches and the official language. Compared to Zoschenko, whose characters use the new terms incorrectly and with humor. I and P show the new forms for all their ostantatiousness, but emptyness. they apply a sort of "defamiliarization" to the words that make up the new Soviety reality. They show how the language became a part of people's lives, yet didn't make them any more meaningful and were lost on emigres. 445

I and P were pointing out the distortions in a system that they belived in at least on the idea level. 446

They took what could have been found in any Pravda and turned it upside down. They change the conent of the structure and parody the meaning in such phrases.

447

They recognize that their own sphere, writitng, has also been regimented and they play on this with Bender's "Ceremonial Set."449

They are most critical of those on the inside that cannot think for themselves - bureaucrats and other writers that used the lexical crutches of the new words. The characters in their novels end up speaking abou the revolution because of the words they are forced to use and cannot even comment on what is taking place around them - The train line.

Bender is a noninvolved person in the new society. He takes advantage of those that should be contributing to the new socity, but end up hindering it because they are slaves to the new forms. He does a good deed for socity by taking people to task for not thinking for themselves.451

3 stages of Bender's skill:

1. Recognition of the cliches that his new aquaintance represensts.

2. paraody and mimicry of the discourse and enthusiasm.

3. exploitation of the beliefs into B's own gain. 451

Bender is not meant as a positive hero, but he is the only one with the energy and initiative to make a difference as a new Soviet Man. He can be seen as rogue or as a warning against those that would succumb to linguistic dehumanization. I and P don't attack the system in this way, but only the distortions and the ideals when the system is run by lazy folk content to let the system rust. 453

Fitzpatrick "World of Ostap Bender"

Bender is the Soviet version of a confidence man. he is a sort of trickster of folklore origin subverting social comventions and authority. he makes people realize that the accepted pattern has no necissity. Everything that orders society is subjective and arbitrary. It also may have no other purpose, but to produce the thrill of freedom. 535

The classic Russian literary example is Gogol's Klestyakov from Revizor.

Shklovsky said that Bender came out of the picaresque trickster literature in Europe and America like Fielding's Tom Jones, Twian's Huck Finn. 537

B has the ability to switch personalities, get himself out of trouble using the materials at hand, win the confidence of the people looking for a return to the past. His great skill is in speaking Bolshevik with fluency in a way that threatens others because they cannot. He uses this skill to seem legitimate to gullible people.

Bender and the novels by I and P were not necessarily approved by the powers that be or the intelligentsia because they are seemingly light-minded and lack a moral stance. 537

The conman in society is a good social commentator. He must have a good hold on the bureaucratic organizations in order to inspire trust in the people he fools. B is able to manipulate the Soviet bureacracy. He knows how to get the good that are only available to the upper crust of society. He knows how good travel from the top to the bottom and how to get them and use Blat. 538

The fictional stories are influenced by the real life versions that existed and vice versa.

Revolutios are if nothing else a time when people need to reinvent themselves in a time of crisis. 539

Real frauds took many forms including: posing as an official with the Soviet language that intimidated people, Forging documents with letter-head.540 Or posing as an olf Bolshevik hero of the revolution or civil war - and other claims of official status. 542

Sometimes it involved the invention of entire government institutions with fancy acronyms, stamps, seals and paper. Inpersonating the NKVD/OGPU.

People claimed skills in order to get jobs in a field and learned on the job. Often conmen arrived in distant provincial towns, committed the act and got out of town. it was easier to get away with it in the country, but there was less money in it.

Like with Bender the connection of conmen and ethicity especially jewishness was common.

There was both overt and covert anti-semitism at the time. the official line was never so forward, but its actions towards the jews showed the opionion. Despite the dates of publication there is no conincidence of the rise in antisemitism and the novels of Bender - of Turkish origin, but read as a Jew. 546

The frauds were based on three circumstances: the need for documents in the new Soviet world, the credulousness of officials in the face of any document, the ease in which documents could be made. 540

Even honest people had to resort to this sort of thing because all their documents were destroyed in the war or to hide the fact that their family had been dekulakized.541

It was common for conment to pose as relatives of officials and important people than the actual people. 541

Bender had to pose as a journalist as did other real life conmen.

The official response to the novels is that they should not be published and there was a ban until 1956. they were seen as disrespctful toward soviet life. Bender was seen as "bold, resourceful, witty...and the people he meets are stupid." 555

Zholkovsky "' Electrician" or the complex theatrical mechanism"

Z believes that the writer should show both the general and the personal. Without the general and the historic lead up to what is in his psyche, one cannot hope to understand the personal. 47

Z uses the conflicts that arise from and support public humiliation in his works.

Also, the play within a play where the events on the stage echo the events that take place off stage. Sometimes the events on stage have nothing to do with the fighting off stage.

Light/Dark oppositions show up in several of his plays. In the Electrician they play against the opera by glinka and the tale by Pushkin.

Z had a problem with the immorality of the public, but was unappologetic in his own vices. he said "A satirist must be a morally pure man. (61)"

He wrote for an 'anti-cultural' simplicity and was able to do this by being stronger in the ownership over his own art. This ties in with the public humilatons and the conflicts he works up in his own characters. 57

Z also uses a "pride aping humility move" 60.

Milosz "The History of Polish Literature"

p. 281-321

The uprising of 1868 brought about the loss of the nobility as a class in Poland. Because the peasants were freed from their work for the nobility and the nobility was either deported, heavily taxed, and the confiscation of land for those that participated in the uprising. The autonomy of the Kingdom of Poland was gone and the Russians took over with Russian taught in all the schools. There was a mass move to the city from the country-side and the descendants of the gentry started joining civil society as either the intelligentsia or the working class. The petty gentry became leaders in the proletariat movements and in the factories. Poland was slowly becoming a capitalist country. 283

Because of the brutal treatment of people during the uprising and the violence involved bore the end of "Political Romanticism." Young people in Warsaw took up the name "positivists" from the term introduced by the French philosopher, Auguste Compte: Positivist Philosophy. Compte's work represents the height of the 19th century cult of science. In their thinking, Polish Positivists were less indebted to Compte than they were to English utilitarians, John Stewart Mill and Herbert Spencer.283

The fall of the old Republic was blamed on the the anarchy of the nobles, which contrasted with the romantic view that claimed that Poland was an innocent victim of a viscious neighbor. 284

Ronald LeBLanc "The Quest for nourishment in Sobache Serdtse"

B writing a satire of Homo Soveticus in the transformation gone awry of the dog Sharik to the quasi-man Sharikov. LeBlanc states that this is also the transformation of class. Sharik goes from a homeless dog to the comfort class. He shows that it is not just a political and social change, but one that also concerns food. B uses the gastronomic terms to describe the disgust he has with the new system. This is not new in literature and can be seen in Chekhov and Molier. The alignment of food and bodily sustinence with spiritual is well represented. B uses the same in M and M to discuss the members of the Dom Griboedov that take place in the "mushroom house" a place where minds are to be enhanced and grown, but really the house better known for the restaurant. B shows that too much concern for one's belly does not leave any room for thought or for the soul in metaphoric sense. 59

In SS he shows not how food represents the materialism, but to show the system that has produced a lack of food and rampant hunger for the people. 60 The novel opens with a defamiliarization from the pov of the dog that only wants food and shelter. He is not unlike the lower classes that are forced to root in the garbage and have no where to go. Physical demands have replaced any spiritual as a result of the War communism and NEP. The dichotomy of the social order places the wealthy at the top that can enjoy real food and the lower class on the bottom that have nothing. The typist woman is forced to eat bad soup and is on the same economic level as the dog as she is a working class person. She is made sick by the food she can afford in the cafeteria and yet she has nowhere else to go. She even succumbs to the level where she is willing to sleep with Sharikov just to get a decent meal. 62

Sharik the dog understands that when he first meets the professor that the professor is too well groomed to be eating sausage where he has bought it and had just as well give it to the dog. The people that the dog mostly comes in contact with are cooks. There are bad cooks that throw boiling water on dogs and there are good cooks that give you special food. It is the same difference for the people - there are some that are forced to cook at the terribel cafeteria and some that get to cook for the Tolstoy family. The mass population of the country of course eat like the lower end. The narrator asks if this is the nourishment she needs? What then is the saving class in the country? It is the gentry class, the one represented by the dr that is able to bring sausage to the people and help them out. However, the price of sustinece is your freedom.

The novel is as much a question of giving up one's freedom and rights for safety and food. Sharik becomes a gentle dog when he enteres the home of the dr. He even begins to take pride in the shackles, the collar and chain her wears, because the doorman and the other dogs know that in wearing these he has become a well fed, but kept dog. Giving up the spiritual side for comfort is selling out in the way of the dwindling upper class.

On the other hand when he is able to conquer his needs for food and shelter on the basic level he is freeer to look to the more civilized ways of life. He is now able to pleasure in the act of eating and gets fattened up at the drs. He eats now out of pleasure and is able to seek out other pleasures in life too. He has reached a new level of humanity. From necessity to desire. Sharik seems to live in a world where the immediate needs need to be fullfilled before the higher forms of art can be fulfilled. Dr. Bormental is similar to the dog. He was once a starving mediacal studen before the doctor brought him in and made a man and a dr out of him. All of this taken togetther sugess that the proletariaot cannot hope to find nourishment in the new Bolshevik Russia. Instead of giving food, they have taken it away, instead of giving high culture, they have put the vulgar and the philistine on the pedistal. 67

The moral center of the story is in the Dr., but this leads to some problems. He is a mad scientist, though he has fine manners and good tastes. he is also someone that has thrived in the NEP era because he questionably serves those that can afford him. The Dr serves as someone that has fed the poor dog, but also feeds off of him in a vampiric way. 68

Stephen Lovel "Bulgaokov as Soviet Culture"

The reception of culture for the works produced in the USSR after 1917 are difficult for the literary scholar. When many of the works came about in the thaws of the 1960s and 1980s the readers were not always ready for them but they were able to respond. M and M makes for a great study of this because it was released to the public later and it had such a great affect when it did surface. 28

When the work was released it was received into three different spheres of literature: It was criticized by the officials and made into a new classic in the Soviet mold, it was a classic in the intelligentsia sub-culture, and the same by the general population. 29 Twenty years after his death B's novels started to have a real, not just a proposed readership. He would read his works to friends in a sort of salon, but not to the public, however conscious of the potential readership. 29. The release of his works was gradual based on the party's hold on literature. In the 50s and 60s works by Bunin, Bulgakov and Tynianov were alloed publication.

When M and M was released it came out in the lit journal "Moskva" - a smaller publication and only the first part of the novel came out at first. It was cut for words too. The publication itself was a form of censorship - Moskva had a medium circulation and didn't sell that well in the provinces - or the copies were sent back to the publisher before the public could get them. Until the 1980s it was not released in any great numbers and far below the levels for other Soviet works and classics. 31

For those that got a hold of it it was hard to conceive, since they only knew B as a minor playwrite in the 20s and there was no criticism on his plays or short fiction. Readers had hard time dealing with the fantastic, the Christ images, the use of time and irony, levels and symbols.

Page 32 has a number of examples of the critics from the period and what they were able to write about its release. Talk also of how his biography was to be written and how much of his biography to include in the reception of his works. There was much debate about his siding with the Whites or with creating sympathy for him in the biography. The release of his official collected works was delayed under these pretexts and thus the public was given a taste a bit at a time. Thus the public was not given full access even at the time when the controls were lighted. 33

How did the intelligentsia receive it? It is difficult to discern because of the limited release and the inability of them to get ahold of a copy. However they did read each other's copies from Moskva and considered it a major event. In the 70s it was not official literature, but was not samizdat, though sort of and not dissidant lit either. The Intelligentsia viewed him as the torch bearer from Ilf and Petrov as the cult writer of the intelligentsia. They viewed his satire as not the same carefree satire as I and P and had a deeper moral componant. He was seen as the new Chekhov.

The theater reproductions give some light on how to view the reception of M and M. The theater had restricted audiences that gave them the feel of a small community that could communicate ideas between the ranks. In an attempt to keep the significance down the authorities gave the initial production no funds so they had to recycle props from other plays. This only served to underline the place the novel held in the minds of the intelligentsia - it became a part of their symbolic past, present and future. The production used the same actors in jeruselum as it did in Moskow which helped to underline the overall message of morality and power. In the 80s the audience included the general population, but the audience had not evolved with the ideas the novel was taking up in the productions. The idea the 'manuscripts don't burn' was huge in the late 70s, but by the 80s it came to be understood that it also came to mean that these great writers were largely forgotten and couldn't live out their normal lives in their times. 37

Sobache Serdtse was taken to the theaters immediately after it came out and some of the first people to interpret the novel were the theater directors in 1987. Sharikov was more menacing than humorous and played into the lives of the intelligentsia in the Soviet period. 38

The play of SS for the next few productions played into the current period and asked questions with the main idea looking back at the last 70 years and not just taking the novel as it was written. 38

The graffitti that appeared on the stairwell of B's old apt in moscow started in 1983. The grafitti numbered in the hundreds very quickly and despite being regualrly whitewashed were replaced. In the 1990s there was a slight backlash when people started questioning the religious aspects of satan and the bible being discussed so closely together.

Bulgakov "Diavolyada"

The short story opens on the 20th of September, 19921. Korotkov has been working in one post for almost a year, which is rare. He works for the matchstick factory (Главцентрбазспимате-(Главная Центральная База Спичечных Материалов). He had assumed that he might work there forever, but on this day the cashier for the factory came back in and told them there was no cash left at Спимат. Everyone got mad and started shouting, but there was simply no cash available. The cashier had a briefcase with him and a dead chicken. When he left he brandished the chicken at his co-workers to keep them off. One worker even lost a heel in the excitement and ended her day with only one shoe - a sybol of how bad things had gotten.

2: Three days later he was called in to get his pay and walked out with a stupid look on his face and a stack of matches as pay. When he got home the stupid look on his face was still there. He immediately started to action and tried to sell them to his neighbors. His neighbor was sitting on the floor crying because she had been given communion wine in pay. Korotkov thought it was ink. She told him that they don't light, but he spent all night lighting them to make sure they light. He got a small percentage to light and almost burned his eye in the bargain. He had to use the American first-aid package to heal himself as if he had been wounded in battle.

3: The next morning he decided to keep the bandage on in case. His room smelled badly of sulpher and he had a bad dream about a billiard ball on legs. He tried not to make his mistake known so the lower ranks in the company wouldn't know about the pay in kind. He then almost ran into a very short man that only came up to his waist. His head looked a lot like an egg and he was very strong and weirdly dressed. A combination of an army officer with a Ukrainian shirt. Korotkov tried to get past him, but the bald man blocked the way - he demanded memos for admittance and only accepted Korotkins after he insulted him. K took offense, but there was nothing to do and the bald man took his memo and went in the room he was blocking. K met up with a co-worker that also had an eye bandaged. Apparently, the old boss was fired and the bald man was the new boss. The new boss had written on K's memo that all women were to be issued army longjohns (кальсоны). K and the woman co-worker fled back to their offices. K sent a memo to the boss to sign for the supplies informing them of the new longjohn directive and then waited in his office so he could be seen working if the boss came around. He never did and once everyone found that he had left in a car, they all went home. The last to leave was K.

4: K took off the bandage and went to work the next day, but the train he was on ran the wrong route and broke down so he had to walk about 2 miles to work and was late. When he got in everyone that was usually sitting and talking was standing by a sheet on the wall. On the sheet of paper was written that K was fired for coming in late, misunderstanding memos and for getting in a fight, thus the eye bandage. The sheet was signed : Longjohn (Кальсонер). K could not believe that he was fired, but the first thing out of his mouth was in surprise at the last name, Longjohn. This was the problem with the memo: K thought everyone would be wearing LJs, but it was the new boss's last name. LJ also thought the matches worked fine. K went to talk to him about it. He ran into a co-worker that was to stop people going into the room. Then LJ came out and K followed him and tried to explain what had happened with his memo yesterday. LJ kept going and had the other man hold him or hug him until LJ could get away on a motorcycle. K went after him.

5: K catches up to LJ and enters the same building just after him, but it is filled with people K has a hard time staying close to him. It seems that LJ is moving at inhuman pace. K loses him and tries a number of doors on the floor only to find the people inside occupied with strange habits or blond typists. K talks to one and understood which direction to follow. He finds LJ just as LJ gets on an elevator, but for some reason LJ has grown a beard - which seems natural at first, then absurd. Maybe it was a fake beard - also strange. LJ tells him he is too late, but this voice seems to be false to K also. K states that he won't let black magic get in his way. He then gets stopped by a woman that detains him for no reason and tells him to go talk to another boss, but K is only getting more angry and runs down stairs almost hitting someone else. The other woman he almost hits crosses herself from the close call. K sees LJ from behind a glass wall, but can't get there. he then gets stuck talking to a man with a list that mistakes K for another man, Kolobhov. The list man tells him that he has been transfered and that LJ has been fired after only one day. The old man with the list wants to write in the change in pencil in K's work book, but K can't find it. He runs around trying to find it and cannot in the building. He meets a young man that just claims anyone lied about what they might be accusing him of. K thinks maybe on the tram it was stolen by a man with a false moustache. He understands that he could be arrested for not having his papers. He meets a man that tells K that it might have been Kolobkhov that stole the papers since he is working that area and that he must present papers that affirm his papers have been stolen. K must go to his work and get them, but just then the work day ends and he decides it is too late and goes home

6: Once home he finds a note from his neighbor that tells him he should take all the communion wine and so he does so. K goes inside and stares at his portrait of Cromwell for half an hour, then goes to bed in his clothes. Then he gets up in a fit and starts stomping on all of his matches. He imagined that he was stomping on LJ's head and started to cry from the agony of the situation. The cry made him feel better. Then he realized he has wine and drank a glass, but it gave him a terrible headache and he drank three glasses of water to cure it, but ended up falling asleep calling for aspirin.

7: He woke at ten and went to the housing manager, but a notice said that that man was dead and thus not taking applications. He then decided to go to work to see if his old boss was in. In his old office he found that everything and everyone had changed and at his desk was LJ. LJ claimed to be the chief clerk, K's old position and that made K lose a sort of consciousness and the world spun on the bald head of LJ. LJ explained that he allocated the positions in the office. LJ explained that everyone including K was fired. LJ explained that K was under him. K explained that he had his documents stolen, which LJ explained was maybe better. K started rambling about the days of the week and the date. LJ told hi he was going out, but that K was to meet him at LJ's. K was mistaken for Kolobkhov and K was given a note explaining that he was actually Kolobkhov and LJ's assistant. Just then the bearded LJ came in and spoke with K. Everything swam before K's eyes. K jumped up and attacked LJ and LJ called in the suited men. LJ ran in and out and K tried to follow, but his coat caught on a door handle and he sat on the floor. There was a music box sort of thing that he accidently started to play odd music. Panteleimon, the man that was LJ's assistant recently fired that had detained and hugged K walked in and left. The mad LJ came back and K ran out to get away. The bearded man ran out into the street where K was and got into a cab that was whipping his nag to get going. The cab-horse started and money in bill started flying about the place. K was going crazy and went to the police to tell them his documents had been stolen. He met a man claiming to be Jan Sobieski. He had tried to change his name, but nothing came of it. The man asked for anything from K, but he didn't understand. K tried to explain about the double LJ, but the man seemed not to be confused by it. They knew about the LJs and how they had stolen all the furniture. He had K go out and K ended up where he started. Everything seems to be changing and transforming from animate to inanimate - very hard to follow the story. K ended up in various rooms and in contact with LJ again and again K tried to attack him to get answers. LJ turned into a black cat. K was going mad now.

8: K sat in his apartment and drank three bottles of wine and got sick twice. He decided to try to avoid LJ as a cat or otherwise and just leave it and his job alone and work on getting new documents. He heard the clock strike 40 times and understood he was going insane. The story is a bit Gogolian like the diary of a madman.

9: K went to the complaints bureau and saw a bunch of typists again and one of them accosted him and said she couldn't sleep because of him and that K should take her body and soul. She tries to kiss him, but he refuses and then a man comes in and mistakes him for Kolobkhov and a womanizer. The old man accused K of taking the maiden's honor and his traveling expenses. Kolobkhv seems to be a party man. Things here turn into other things and people talk to K as if he is Kolobkhov or someone else - very confusing. K just keeps trying to tell his story about LJ and the stolen documents. The people in the office want to know if he is going to Poltava or Irkutsk. K is confused. K just wants his name back and will do anything to get it. The room goes dark and other things transform. It is said that only Dyrkin can solve things.

10:K meets a man that tries to arrest him, but K just starts talking gibberish to him about marriage and arrest and LJ. The go to Dyrkin. A young man comes into Dyrkin's office and accosts D of stealing and the young man slaps D with a briefcase. D is now nice, not mean. D asked K to hit him and so K hits him with the chandellier. D said he would tell on K and then a clock struck and so K hit the clock with the chandellier and LJ jumped out of it. Everyone went after LJ.

11: K went into the street and the people parted for him and shots were fired after him. It is started, whatever that means. K went into a building and an elevator and a boy took him up in it. K says that they have started the attack on LJ, but LJ has taken the offensive. The boy recommends going to the roof and the billiard room. K takes the attack into the billiard room. K starts throwing billiard balls at heads he sees in the windows and a machine gun starts taking out the windows. K ends up on the roof and understands he is surrounded when firemen start climbing into the building. LJ came at him on rollerskates and K knew he was finished, but wanted to go out with courage. "Better death than dishonor." He jumped and died.

Tolstoy "Albert"

Aristocrats went to a ball late at night. The women were very pretty and the band played music constantly and with great effort, however, apparently, something was not quite right. People tried to make it more lively and fun, but it still came off as being melancholic. One of the rich young men was about to leave because it wasn't fun, but just then an old man forced himself into the house and past the maid. He was wearing old clothes and they were dirty and he was bent over, but he had a gentle voice and even had urged that he would not have done any harm in the house. Although he had on really dirty clothes, he had a very kind face and a very serene look and even a nice face with a fresh expression on it. The old man smiled at the bored young man and the young man couldn't help himself but smile too.

The old man was known in the home as a musician that came from the theater and sometimes came by for the madam of the house. He was thought to be crazy. The musician smiled at the dancing and was truly pleased by it. The madam of the house even asked the musician in to dance after someone else did. Unfortunately, another dancer hit the musician in the back and the musician fell down on the ground and didn't get up. All the people laughed at first. Delyesof, the young man that was going to leave helped him up. The madam explained who is was. The musician smiled upon being helped up. The madame explained that he has had a very hard life. At this the musician got up with some effort and went into the middle of the dance hall and tried to dance again, but he was week and would have fallen if he had not been caught. When the musician was trying very hard he got a weird look on his face that was noticed by the others. The musician went to his violin and pulled it out telling the crowd that he was not hurt and that they needed music. Then the spectators started guessing at him - was he a sad case, did he have great talent, was he interesting?

2: The musician tuned the violin and set the pianist and the crowd to ready. Then he started playing well and at the exact moment when the first rays of the sun started flowing into the hall. The combination of this effect lit up every soul in the room. They all started listening to the pure and exact notes of the musician and they they were transported to a world they had never seen before as their souls were lifted up. The very body of the musician seemed to grow and the bent and broken form before the people started to move as if it were old. The old man radiated joy from every bit of his face. He was conscious of the power he was holding over the people. Once the pianist made a wrong note and this made the musician angry and he yelled, but he went back to his work. People were moved to crying during the performance and some people even tried not to move so they wouldn't expose their emotions to anyone else. Even D was moved to tears and even when he wiped them away he would get new ones and he was even transported back to his youth by the first strings of the violin. He remembered his first love for his cousin and wept for the time that would never come back again.

Albert's body shone with perspiration and his body was moving with the music and his veins bulging and he craved enjoyment. Then he stopped and his body went back to the way it was. It was bent again and his eyes didn't shine and his look was that of embarresment and he went into the other room.

3: Something had happened to all the people in the room. They all had a feeling of needing to explain what had just happened and what they felt, but they could not. They rebelled against the need to explain it all because they knew that they could not do it. Everyone was getting ready to leave, having enjoyed themselves and it being early morning. They even sent around a collection for him to thank him for his work. Albert was alone sitting satisfied with what he had done. The collection was rather large and D was chosen as the man to offer it to Albert. D was so taken by the music that he began to think of helping out Albert and making a man of him and setting him up in society. Albert asked for some wine and even then asked for some money since he was a poor man in a bad place and this is when the collection was taken up. D asked A if he would like to be set up and helped by D. The madam admitted that this was a nice gesture, but advised D not to do it. A said he wanted to play more music and would play as long as D wanted. All the other guests were making their way out of the hall to go home.

D went home with A, but as soon as they got in the carriage together D noticed the bad smell coming from A and the intoxication he was in. D started to regret his decision to do it and wondered what he had been thinking and how everything that A was saying was foolish. In the carriage A fell asleep and ended up on the floor. D got a better look at his calm and peaceful face and then he again started to remember the wonderful and magnanimous youth he had had and was at peace and no longer regretted his decision.

4: D woke and was surprised to see everything at his house that had always been that way. He was preparing to leave when he saw A laying in his dirty clothes on the divan sleeping the sleep of the damned. D told his servant to set A as well as he could in clean clothes and to borrow a violin from a friend. When he got back A was not there and the servant said that he had left taking the violin with him immediately after dinner. D got angry, but the servant said that he had only been instructed to give him clothes, not detain him. D was upset a bit. The servant explained what he did all day. He was cleaned up and given food, but didn't want to eat alone, so he ate with the staff. He drank Madeira in the morning and then played for them and made them all weep. D was pleased, but wanted A brought back. He felt very good about himself for taking the opportunity to help a man in need and didn't fall asleep for a long time. He thought that maybe A was not crazy, just an alcoholic. He had just fallen asleep after feeling very good about himself helping others when the servant and A came in. The servant said that A is wretched and that they took the violin from him.

5: A accosts D for going to be so early. A explained that he had been out doing the same thing this night as the last and now in clean clothes he looked fresh and innocent like a child. D looked into D's fresh smile and felt like having a good time and staying up with A and not being stern with him. The servant brought wine, cigarettes and the violin and then retreated to the next room. A started to tune, but D asked to just talk. A started to talk about all the nice aristocrats that he had just met at the party and about the man that knocked him down the night before. That man could also play music and A liked it. D did not like his music and wanted A to talk about his own music. Instead, A said that he thought the old music was music and the new music was music also. They started talking about the musicians that each liked. D said that someone had grown old and could play or sing like they used to. A disagreed and said that it was the fire in the musician that was most important and that they can never be old. A started to talk about another man that talked about art well, but that wasn't welcome at the Madame's house because of something. A continued to say that he himself had nothing and that he had no home or money or clothes and couldn't play at the theater anymore.

A started to play Don Juan and the hair on the back of the neck of D stood up. A decided that he had had too much to drink and couldn't play anymore that night. Despite this, A drank a whole glass off in once gulp and then D and A sat silently staring at each other. D was becoming more fond of A all the time. D asked A if he had ever been in love and A started telling the story from the beginning. A admits that he is not quit well now, but back when he was in love he had been and had a spot in the theater. A was a nobody and this love was an aristocratic lady. He got to accompany her on the violin once at her home, but it was a mistake and he should have only seen her at the theater. He later saw her again at the theater and she was there with a general and she smiled at A and he felt that even though she were there with the general that she was talking about A and smiled at him twice. A felt for the first time that he was not right in the orchestra, but that he was in the box with her. D says that it was the immagination. A disputes it and explains that he used to sleep there in the theater because he had nothing and that he went to her box and where she had sat. A explained that he felt as if he had actually been there and had kissed her hand. Then a wanted to go out again to the Madam's but they went to bed on D's decision. D asked his servant not to let A out without his permission.

6: D sees A sleeping and sees the child in his eyes and thinks he never wants to give him up. A wakes after noon and only wants something to drink. A pleads to have at least a little vodka, but D refuses and suggests coffee and breakfast. A just sits in his chair and looks out his window. Later, he can be found sitting still and looking at the stove. He refuses to play his violin and doesn't want to go to the theater or anywhere else. The look in his eyes was vacant and he looked feeble. All the next few days the same thing happened. A refused to play and wouldn't go anywhere. He only wanted something to drink. He brought out and left his violin a couple time. D tries to pacify him with books. The servant believes they are killing him. They continue to try for a fourth day. Nothing. The Servant and D talk about the waste and how this is the reward for trying to do a good dead. They rebuked him behind his back for not looking on them as saving him and for the good life they offer. At night A doesn't sleep. A stole the key to the liquor cabinet and drank all the vodka and started demanding to be let go. They let him go and D started to feel sorry for him after they had had such a nice time the first few nights.

7: A steps outside and is too drunk to feel the cold even though it is quite frosty out. He starts to recollect things from long ago and very recently. The theater and with D's servant. Everything became very muddled in his head and he walked very unsteadily and fell against things. He wandered to a large building and went inside and saw his friend Petrov who was railing against the others there that they had not appreciated him, A, while he was alive and that all he wanted was beauty. A man, D, rose up and attacked A for the bad things he did and for borrowing and not giving to mankind and living in destitution. Petrov yelled back that art demands the most of men and is the greatest thing in the world and men die trying to attain their art. A was said to have been the happiest man in the world. A tried to go up to P for saying these things, but P didn't recognize him and a policeman shooed him away. A tried to go to the Madam's, but he refused. He put his head against a wall and remembered more of P's talk. He heard many things, bells, music that told him in his head that he was the happiest man in the world. A tries to go back to the hall where P was speaking. At the hall, there was no P, but A himself was playing the violin. The violin he was holding was strange and made of glass. It only made sound when he rubbed it against his body, but he had to be careful or it would break. The sounds it made were the sweetest sounds he had ever heard and he was playing it well. Albert is obviously hallucinating and maybe in the delirium of dying. He hears bells that become the words about him being happy. The sounds annoy A and he quits playing and raises his hands to heaven. He then saw a woman that touched him and understood that what he was doing was wrong and then thought about where to go. He then understood that this was the woman that he had loved. He embraces her and they go out where there is a bright light. He was then brought into the madam's house because someone had almost tripped on him. He was unconscious and was alive and not with the woman he loved.

Zoschenko "The Lady Aristocrat"

The short story and the narrator use skaz. He is chatty and talks to the reader like they are friends. The story also comes to the point with the first sentence. The man doesn't like women that wear hats. He is also not just talking about women, but is using a very colloquial language to describe women by calling them "Baba." The language the narrator uses is very conversational in general. Mopsic for a dog is another example. The collection of things that he doesn't like in a woman are varied, but all point to a more well off woman - the sort of woman that would have the dog on her lap, the gold, the stockings and hat. This type of woman the reader understands is not what the narrator wants, but, based on the lexicon and the folksy speak, we also understand that she is above him socially.

The reader is told that the main event of the story will take place in the theater. The narrator is not the kind of man one would automatically expect at the theater. If the woman is an aristocratic woman, then, by her class, she wouldn't go to the theater with this type of man and certainly doesn't have an ideology. The narrator uses the new language and only the bits he has managed to pick up to describe their relations. These two together are opposite ends of the social spectrum. They are the result of the new society where a well brought up lady, if she is such, has to endure the likes of this proletarian because he holds the power in the new society.

They originally meet in the yard of the same apartment where the live. It was at a meeting - presumably something political or ideological in nature or even just one to iron out the building's needs. The man addresses the woman in the old style - calling her Grazhdanka, not Tovarish. He is still using the lexicon that held over for a while after the war and the man recognizes that they are not of the same class. He is also very direct with her - starts by asking where she lives - shows his lack of culture. They don't have much to say to each other and he tells her to "live." This is either insulting or just odd.

What is interesting is that he tells the reader that he saw this woman and immediately didn't like her, but started talking to her and then started seeing her "in an official capacity." This is not a love affair. He is either the worker for that building or the building's political officer. It seems that, although he says he doesn't like her, that he wants the acquaintance. He asks very banal questions because he doesn't know how to speak to this type of lady or any lady. She answers very simply - not trying to form an acquaintance. She never answers him in a way a lover would answer, but that is the way the narrator shows their relationship - as if lovers talk about the pipes in the building.

She starts answering in more detail as time goes on, but the reader gets the idea that she is simply trying to get rid of him. He says that she answers in greater detail, but all she does is use full sentences and his name and patronymic - as if trying to placate him in his position or to seem polite. It is still not a conversation. He still speaks to her months later in an official capacity.

They start talking walks for some reason together. He relates that she makes him treat her like a proper lady, her arm in his. He takes it as either a romantic walk or as an affront to his position as her equal. She is still using the forms of the old bourgeois system, so now he feels embarrassed in front of the other passersby on the street. He says that he feels embarrassed because he is being led, which he is, but it is also because he can't talk to her and doesn't know what to say - all he has is official questions about the pipes.

He said that he was being dragged through the streets, but in the next paragraph he reports that she asks him why she has to walk with him. The reader understands that he is making her do it, probably to look good on the streets in front of others and that she is forced to go because of his higher official position. Or she is not really an aristocratic lady or even someone of good breeding, but just thinks that this is what a woman of good breeding would do - like him. She gets him to take her to the theater. He is not comfortable in the theater, but she plays it up.

He is able to get a ticket with his connections and one from a friend-worker, but he has better connections than his friend Vaska the locksmith, so the seats are different. He sits in the highest balcony and she in the front. He doesn't even watch the performance, but tries to look for her. It is clear he is not there for the theater and gets bored, very bored. It doesn't seem that he watches the play at all. He realizes that he can't even look at her over the rail so he leaves and goes to the hall. Even when they meet at the intermission he has nothing to say to her but to ask about the pipes. He should at least have something to ask about the play, but he didn't watch it.

He tries to act the role of a gentleman, but he has no idea how to do it properly. He tells her that if she wants to have ONE pirozhok cake he will pay. Weird. She answers in French as if she is playing the part of an upstanding lady too. He had proposed a very Russian and proletarian pirozhok, but she takes a creme puff. He suffers not knowing how much anything costs and not having much money. He explains that she is acting very high and looking for compliments, which she might be. She might not have any experience at the theater and is acting a part poorly.

He tries to get her to stop eating so much, but she is not very lady-like and takes up a forth cake before he gets upset and yells at her. Such yelling in the theater about money matters is not very cultured. She gets scared because he swears at her. Very crude. A crowd starts gathering and laughing - also not very cultured. As it turns out he does have enough for what she had touched, but she is too ashamed to eat it after she was sworn at. He made a fool of himself and argued for nothing. Another man comes up and eats it in her stead. Also not cultured. Ones gets the impression that the theater is filled with like-minded people and not the high-brow clientele that should attend.

They go back to the opera and she watches it to the end and then to home. She tells him that he has been acting like a swine -a man without money doesn't go out with women. He reminds her that money isn't happiness, but he is sorry for having to remind her of the expression. Why? Is he reminding her that the new system doesn't have a place for the old bourgeois ways and that it would do her well to remember that or is he just using the limited ideological training he has had and when it is not called for. He again mentions that he hates aristocratic ladies, as if she actually were one.

Gutkin: The Cultural Origins of the Socialist Realist Aesthetic

When the war was over Russia was ready for a dose of normalcy. The pure revolutionaries and those that sided with the revolutionaries were prepared to reap great rewards for their efforts and the bureaucracy just installed was set for them. The average person that was not a revolutionary or an artist in the avant-garde was not prepared for anything but living a much more cosy life that was similar to the the kulaks that they ousted and the byt that they maligned. The demand for better clothes and a nice home and good food was increasing. 92

For the revolutionaries the demand for this kind of life was against what they felt they had fought for. They had expected that the new human would come about automatically with the revolution that promised it. The rise of this kind of demand was tantamount to a bourgeois counter revolution and setting back the communism that was promised. The lack of spirit for the pure communist way was just as damning as the lack of ability to live without the physical comfort. 93

The problem made it all the way up the ranks and troubled Lenin and Krupskaya. She taught that a communist should be prepared to give up the comforts of the home if the party needed it. They fought the focus on human comforts by changing the access to comforts that the party members got. They also passed directives that mandated the articles not to show many of the comforts in the newspapers from shoes to food. They were hoping to make a distiction between the old way of byt and the new way of the soviet man. The problems with food and housing shortage that was continually a problem in the soviet union was not just a result of the push for military and industry or the problems with a centrally planned economy. The problems, to what extent they actually played a role in the real life were ideological issues between the socialist ideal and the material goods of life. The idea that the material world would become no more of a bother to the communist man than the ideological world was assumed. Food and clothing and home were to be non-issues for all of mankind. 93

The avant-garde that became the movers in the LEVFRONT and futurist movements were not making just art, but they were trying to form a new way of life for the people. They felt that this byt had not only formed the way we lived in the specific, as in clothes or homes, but also presuposed a value system that was outdated and not fit for the new man. They called for the end to the bytoviks and the romantic novelists and symbolists. 94

When the civil war was over the political side of things took a break from the war styled rhetoric and game the people a respite in NEP, but the avant-gard that was grew out of this era kept on with the attack and kept using the same war-like vocabulary. 94

The Levfront took to the people to remake the minds of the people. They hoped to remove the bourgeois cozy aspects of people's apartments and living spaces and wanted to lead them to a higher life. They wanted to replace icons with Marx's picture and remove the samovars, the pianos and pillows. The were at war against the "ugly philistine aesthetic" that was against the cheap crap that most people fill their apartments with. They started creating household items that were both good and functional and not just nice looking or comfortable. 95 They wanted their items to represent the dynamic new life that the new man would lead. Art was coinciding with the everyday. 96

They were the forebearers of the socialist Realist aesthetic. They wanted to show the "reality in its revolutionary development." They were trying not to just show byt - "in its inertia and dependence on an established patterns of things, but bytie - a diametrically perceived reality which is in a state of perpetual formation, reality understood as advancement toward the commune which is not to be forgotten for a single minute. 96

They wanted to eradicate byt by restructuring it within the factory and the factory within the society which is under communism. 96 This, thus sought to put the family and art under the control of the party and the state. It became the artist's job to describe society and life correctly to show the new everyday world, and thus became closer to the new Socialist Realist view.

Russia in the Era of NEP

Rosenberg, William G. Introduction: NEP Russia as a "Transitional" Society.

The end of grain requisitioning and a fixed tax with relaxed labor regulations. 2

Had Lenin not died things would have been different, but nobody could say what Stalin would have done before the events took place.3

It was not just a breathing space in between the war and the upheaval in the 30s. It was a time when the powers that be had to come to terms with the social and cultural leftovers from before the war that didn't go away on their own. It was a time of moving forward, but trying not to lose the good from the past. 3

Famine coincided with the war and low birth rates to lessen the population by 28 million people. 5

The country was still overwhelmingly rural, but the support was largely being given to the urban areas. It was the peasant that suffered. The industry in the city collapsed. 5

The communist ideal could not be solved in the countryside. This was an urban model and thus people needed to move to the cities and the cities needed to prosper in order to give jobs to all the people. 7

The lack of funds needed to create industry in the cites meant that there needed to be a tax base, but this could not just be from the peasants again like it was during War Communism.

Clark, Katerina. The "Quiet Revolution" in Soviet Intellectual Life:

NEP is seen in the West as a normalization of things in Russia. There was greater political pluralization and the economy matched better with the western model during this time more than any other time before. 210

It was not the great time of intellectual freedom as is often thought. There was little freedom without any of the funding. Intellectual life in the Soviet Union became soviet. Poetry, art and theatre dominated during War Communism, but during the NEP prose fiction, film and architecture were given more. The intellectuals got to do more of what they wanted for longer not because of anything NEP, but because they were not the main concerns of the powers that be or the Komsomol. The shift intellectually moved to the center in part because the small groups of artists that had funding now had to get viewers to pay for their art and thus the collectives and journals shut down. 213

The break with the past in regards to many aspects of artistic and political structures were made during the NEP period, but had their roots in the February revolution, not with anything particularly Soviet. 214

The move back to the center was a reaction after war communism when many aspects of intellectualism moved away from the center as a need and as a reaction of the centralized way of life under the imperial system. During NEP they came back in. 219

The war communism literature dealt with the questions of the modernization and the urban center. During NEP this was looked at only by the lesser writers. The big names looked at what the intellectuals role in the new society would be. 221

The new intellectuals were split in 2 groups. 1 is sometimes called the professoriate or the academicians and museum curators and such. They are the intellectuals or the intelligentsia. They were largely middle class and privileged and filled with their own self worth. 222

The other side were maybe called the antiacademists. The were those that joined the LEVFRONT and were of the same class as the academics, but without the social justice. They were interested more in the high art and the revolution and tended to be of a more varied ethnic background. 223

Socialist Realism draws itself largely from the proletarian culture of the NEP period. 227

Tolstoy "Lucern"

The story takes place in Switzerland. The hotel is on the quay, which used to be crooked with an old wooden bridge. Now it has been modernized by the English and has a straight granite quay. The English walk the quay and look out of place with all the beauty, but the narrator seems to simply find energy in his surroundings and needs to find a way to let out his energy. He is in rapture of the scenery and the beauty of everything around him that is from nature and unconfined. Nature is in its highest form just moving about and spreading out and filling everything his eye can land on. Except the quay with the exact opposite. The quay is stupidity with all the confining granite and the straight lines and everything else that is done on purpose in order to make order out of the very unordered naturalness of it.

The other people at the hotel were mostly English, so they gave it a peculiar English flavor to everything there too. There was a strictness of everything and everyone acted exactly as they were expected to act and everyone was satisfied even though they didn't know anyone from anyone else. It was the absolute in social decorum acted out. Propriety reigned and no one really spoke to one another. It made the narrator feel as if he had been punished as a kid and had to sit silently in a chair while others had fun. The narrator has no strength to fight the way of the entire room because that is his type of character. He tried to fight it a bit when he first entered their society at the hotel, but he was given simply the same thoughtless answers that everyone always gets in these places when asked the same questions.

The interesting thing about these people is that they were not stupid and lived interesting lives, in fact more interesting than the life the narrator lived, but he could not understand why they would deprive themselves of the most interesting part of life - the conversations and the relationships that come up between men. How different this was than the conversations he used to have in Paris when he met with a table full of people from different countries around the world and spoke different broken versions of each other's languages. There, nobody felt inclined to act only as propriety demanded, but spoke straight from the heart. They even danced into the evenings. It was not good or graceful, but they were human. They were superficial, but at least they had a good time and the narrator wonders with all the finery what they couldn't do to make others happy.

The narrator left the dinner before it was over and went for a walk in the city to try to relieve his melancholy, but it just increased in the city because there were muddy streets without lights and no people and everything shuddered up. Then on the way back he hears the familiar sound of music coming from somewhere. It immediately makes him happy and makes him look around curiously at his surroundings and actually see what is around him. There was a group of people standing in front of a church near some trees where some other people were playing guitar and others singing. They were not playing any certain song, but only the hint at a them that sounded like a mazurka. Tolstoy describes the music they produce with the use of Ostranenie. The music makes the narrator feel different about himself in this place. It gives him inexplicable energy and a desire to do something. He finds the feeling strange, but just takes it all in. The singer was singing as if he was asking the people watching what they wanted and all they had to do was to take it in from the music. The singer was dressed poorly and ratty. It didn't take anything away from the spectacle of the singer, but did give him a pathos.

Everyone watched in silence and listened intently. The other spectators seemed to be taking in the music in the same way as the narrator. They were all one on the quay. More and more people were coming to listen and they all either approved or stood on balconies and listed in silence. The narrator became more and more enthralled with the music and the singing and he understood that the words of the songs were coming to the singer only as he sang them. There came a cook and a servant that also came to listen. The cook was enthralled, but the servant was not that impressed. The narrator started to talk to the servant and found out that this was a man that lived as a beggar and came around here a couple times a summer. The servant looked at the singer as one of his class and said that there were a lot people like him, but none of the others sang. The singer liked wine according to the servant, but so do all the other people like him.

The singer stopped singing his first song and put out his hat for money, but almost no one gave anything. The narrator gave a bit. Then the singer started singing a new song that was even better than the last. He repeated the wish for money from the crowd with a french phrase, but he got nothing but laughter from the people. They started promenading around again after they had been so still during the singing. The singer muttered something between his teeth and walked away with some people following not too far behind laughing at him. The narrator could not believe his eyes. He could not understand the crowd's reaction to the singing man and was left with the worst feeling in his heart and soul. It was oppressing him.

In the entrance the narrator meets an English family that is wearing the most expensive wears and walking out with great importance. However, they are too impressed with the night and the surroundings to even speak about it. They held everything in contempt and viewed everything as their right. The Swiss should move aside for them and make the beds and make everything just right for them as it should be. They were so content in their world that it made the narrator sick when he compared them to the singer. The singer may not have had anything, but these people had everything and didn't deserve it. This was the weight that was oppressive to the narrator's soul. The narrator felt very good about himself as he elbowed the father of the family in the stomach twice as he passed him in the hall. The narrator went out into the night again and sought out the singer and offered him to join him in a bottle of wine.

A few passersby stopped when they saw the narrator with the singer and listened to what he talked about and even followed him back to the hotel which is where the cafe was that the singer proposed. The singer was not even dismayed at going back to the hotel where he was served so poorly by the crowd and was not in the least abashed with his dress. Other people followed them back to the entrance waiting for more entertainment. The narrator and the singer were given the worst seats in the cafe near where a woman was washing dishes and the benches were only wooden. The waiter was a prick and looked down on the woman washing dishes and even gave out the impression that it was below him even to serve the narrator. The narrator passed on the ordinary wine and asked for the most expensive champagne they had. This did not put off the waiter at all. A couple of other waiters came and sat down close and just sat and watched the narrator and the singer with a haughty look. The dishwasher actually felt sorry for the N and S. The light in the room was better and the N got a better look at the S. He was almost a dwarf in stature, but was not ugly, but dark and hairy, but with a handsome mouth. He had the look of a tradesman more than that of an artist. He was not that clean either. He was 37 and only in his eyes and mouth was there the look of genius. He had been wandering for 18 years and had no family and had had his arm injured while working as a carpenter. He started singing and begging and learned his trade that way on the guitar. It was also the only luggage he had. He traveled around despite having eye, leg and voice problems every year worsening with rheumatism. Yet he was content with his life. He made the other waiters laugh with his humor, but still made the washer woman look sad and she even picked up his hat once. He didn't consider himself an artist, but only worked as a means of existence. He did not write the songs he sang, but they all came from the region in which he was born - Tyrolian. The song he sang was maybe composed by him, but he gives it no importance. He has it in his repretoir only so he has something new to give his audience.

The S seemed to be ill at ease when he drank the champagne. He understood by the taste that it was very good. This started a conversation about Italy. The N wanted to propose that in Italy the people appreciated good music and art, but the S did not agree. He said that the people there were all musicians so pleasing them is more difficult. Only because he is exotic does it mean that he gets any appreciation in Italy. The N wanted to propose that the people there are at least more generous and the scene that took place at the hotel tonight would not have happened in Italy. The S disagreed again. He replied that he had been walking and singing for 10 hours already that day and was tired. Sometimes people don't want to listen to his songs or his voice is not right. He says that the important thing is the police. There are laws that state that he should not be singing and if they want to stop him then they will and maybe even put you in Jail if they catch you a second time - he spent three months in jail once. In Italy, there are no such laws and he may sing anywhere he wants. The S said that if he could work he would, but he is a cripple and cannot. It is all a question of the right laws. The republic supports the laws that say he cannot sing. If that is so then he doesn't want a republic. The rich may do what they want, but he may not sing. What harm is he doing to anyone?

The N insisted on the S drinking, but the S said that he was just trying to get him drunk to see what he could get out of him - The N denied it and the S was a bit ambarrased and said it was a joke.

The waiters stayed there and were staring at them and to the N it seemed that they were making fun of him, which made the N angrier. A Swiss man that had previously bowed to the N now came into the room and sat near the N and put his elbows on the table - this made the N even angrier. He ultimately blew up at the Swiss and the waiter saying that he was insulted and so was the S, although the S wanted to leave and was put out by the scene. The washer woman got involved and tried to get the N calmed and the waiter out of there. The N said that he would have done something else had he been at home. He railed against the republic for having such disregard for lower people and only serving rich people.

The S wanted to leave, but the N insisted that the other rooms were not closed as the waiter said and wanted to go there. The head waiter got involved and just gave the N what he wanted and even let them sit at a table with some other English people that were seated there. The N insisted on sitting with them and having the bottle brought. The English were insulted by the two of them and they left. The N wanted more people to challenge them, but they did not. The S drank the rest of the bottle only to get away the sooner.

The S thanked the N profusely and they left together. The N thanked the S again in front of the waiters and one of them laughed. They thought he had lost his wits. The N went up to bed, but was too riled up and went outside. He saw no one, but the Swiss who turned around when he saw the N.

Tolstoy starts to lecture here:

The fate of poetry - the most important thing, but one that people give the least power when money is involved. You English people say that money is the only thing that gives them happiness - what then? How is it then that you sat out here for an hour and even came here in the first place if it wasn't for poetry? How is it that you don't even know what makes you happy? How is it that you love poetry like children, but you will not admit it or pay for it? You understand obligations incorrectly. You do nothing for a man that served you for an hour with his poetry, but you will bow to a man that does nothing for you and pleases you less.

How can you Christian people see this man begging and serving you and do nothing? There are asylums for beggars in your countries, but you cannot acknowledge them or else you would forced to feel sympathy for them. In fact all of you listened well, then jeered him instead of giving him something. You as a crowd may be made up of decent people, but individually you choose to do nothing, but humiliate him. This speaks as something that goes beyond the history books of events that take place that include wars and the acts of kings. This speaks of human civilization and progress - or the lack thereof. Is this the equality we have been fighting for? What about all the civilized people that gather here? What is their civilization come to if we have no humanity? Why does the law support the lack of progress? Why should a servant be better dressed and taken care of than a musician? How can someone that does no harm, but only tries to feed himself end up in prison?

If our laws and civilization can be called good, yet these events take place, then how can we really know the difference between right and wrong? Maybe they are better seen together in each being. There is only being that is able to judge the difference from above and he commands all of the world. Who can do the judging of the singer and the rich man. In the S there is no malice, he just sings and who knows what takes place in the hearts of the rich man? Who knows if their lives are as good and unencumbered as the lonely singer? Who, but God can understand all these contradictions and who can even call them contradictions? Even the N who was angry at the waiter disrupted instead of seeing the flow of life.

T.R.N. Edwards "Three Russian Writers and the Irrational"

Bulgakov:

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.