GALINA SEDOVA’S BULGAKOV. VII.

Galina Sedova’s Bulgakov.

 The Spy Novel Continues.

Stepa Likhodeev.

Stepa Likhodeev, Director of the Variety Theater, experiences a striking encounter with the supernatural in Bulgakov’s novel… But that part of it belongs to the fantastic dimension. Now, what about the spy novel, which we are presently reconstructing? Clearly, Berlioz being dead, Likhodeev was the last man occupying the apartment #50, needed by the gang for their spy business, and he was also the man whose signature was needed, and obtained, by the gang, for their cover story. In other words, he was a man whose direct function had been accomplished, and who now had to be taken out of the way…

What we have learned upfront is that Stepa Likhodeev was the man who signed the infamous contract with Woland, authorizing that most unconventional séance of black magic at Likhodeev’s theater.

Indeed, Stepa has to answer some questions in a hurry, but instead of showing up at Finance Director Rimsky’s office in Moscow, as promised, he unexpectedly turns up in the resort city of Yalta, on Black Sea. At his urgent request, Yalta police contact Rimsky in Moscow by telegraph, and a frantic exchange of telegrams ensues, trying to establish not just the identity of the lost and paperless man, but also the seemingly impossible discrepancy of Stepa Likhodeev being in two far-apart places at almost the same time.

Such a discrepancy can be easily explained by the involvement of the demonic force, but our insistence on separating the reality from the fantasy requires a more solid investigation. We need to examine the witnesses. Granted, Stepa is in no shape to serve as a credible witness, but then we have Rimsky, and he is a much more reliable source…

 

Stepa Likhodeev thought he was among his own crowd, people he could trust. Bulgakov names only one of them: “author of sketches Khustov.” Also involved were a certain “woman” and, also nameless, an “actor with a gramophone.”

During their two-year stay in Moscow [see the fantastic novel about this], Azazello with Koroviev and Begemot naturally recruited some people. Stepa Likhodeev is important because of the time discrepancy, of which we learn from a conversation between finance director Rimsky and Varenukha. Let us together trace this discrepancy. Mind you, Rimsky is a dry unemotional man [making an unimpeachable witness for us], and here he is, talking to himself:

“But maybe it wasn’t Stepa talking to him on the phone? From his own apartment? No, that was Stepa! Doesn’t he [Rimsky] know Stepa’s voice?”

…Aren’t we hearing doubt in this train of thought? And now, again:

“…And even if today it wasn’t Stepa talking, then what about just last night when it was Stepa himself who came out of his own office into this exact [Rimsky’s] office with this stupid Agreement [contract], and kept annoying the finance director with his flippancy…”

…Now, if we read carefully through the confused monologue of the finance director Rimsky, it becomes all too clear that he himself admits the possibility that it wasn’t Likhodeev calling him on the phone in the morning…

“…Even if he flew out last night [to Yalta], he couldn’t possibly have arrived there by noon today… Or could he?”

And yet again, if Rimsky admits that Stepa left for Yalta the night before, then “this morning” he could not possibly have talked to him out of his Moscow apartment.

Observe how, in this monologue of Rimsky, Bulgakov plays with his reader, deliberately confusing him by the questions, substituting some words by others [agreement instead of contract, etc.].

The problem with Stepa is that he remembers too little. He does not even remember signing the contract. We may conclude from this that in contrast to Rimsky, Stepa is a miserable witness, who may have been not just drunk, but pumped with narcotics.

Naturally, whatever is of importance to us in this matter, comes to us from Rimsky:

(1). Stepa did sign the contract with Woland.

(2). It was possible that he could have left Moscow for Yalta the night before.

(3). It may not have been Stepa’s voice on the phone this morning.

(4). If he indeed left Moscow the night before, he could well have found himself in Yalta’s police precinct at 12:30 pm on the following day.

Thus, Stepa’s story becomes fairly simple. He was not only made drunk, but also drugged, and brought by two persons (most probably, by a man and a woman) to Yalta, where he was abandoned by them on the beach, half-dressed, and where he woke up next morning, and started sending out cables to his own Variety Theater from the police precinct from 12:30 pm on.

 

(This is by no means the end of Stepa Likhodeev’s story: he is far too important a character to be dispensed with so easily.)