Thursday, July 20, 2017

GALINA SEDOVA. A CHAPTER ON BULGAKOV. CCCLXXV



A Swallow’s Nest of Luminaries.
God-Fearing Lecher.
Posting #3.


You are the tsar: so live alone!

A. S. Pushkin. To The Poet. 1830.


Moving now to A. F. Sokov, it may be noteworthy to remember that he wanted to see Woland in particular, and nobody else. As the reader may also remember, Bulgakov portrays him as a religious, God-fearing man.
Because I already know who the prototype of Andrei Fokich Sokov is, I suggest this time a different angle, under which we will be looking at this personage.
Having learned who has come to visit him this time, Woland starts pressing the buffet vendor on account of his rotten food, which he offers to his clients, and of the tea diluted by faucet water.
As for the buffet vendor, he has come to complain about the money he had received during the séance of black magic, which had turned itself into shredded paper.
Opening his package, which is supposed to show the shredded paper to Woland, Sokov is flabbergasted, seeing that the bad paper had turned back into money inside the no-good apartment #50.
Bulgakov uses this trick in Master and Margarita, describing the restaurant at the Griboyedov House of Writers. In my chapter A Dress Rehearsal for Master and Margarita, I suggested already that Bulgakov uses the allegory of food to talk about the creative work of his contemporary writers. This is what we are dealing with in the 18th chapter of Master and Margarita, The Hapless Visitors. Referring to “green feta cheese,” Bulgakov shows that the poet in question was not a fountain of originality, but that he heavily borrowed from both his predecessors and his contemporaries not only their ideas, but also quite likely their whole sentences and phrases.
The tea diluted by water in the samovar also points to Bulgakov’s low opinion of this particular poet, in the sense that his poetry was shallow. Bulgakov clearly shows that A. S. Pushkin, V. V. Mayakovsky, and S. A. Yesenin are also of a low opinion of this man, both as a poet and as a person. Considering that Begemot is not present during the conversation with Andrei Fokich, it is most likely that Lermontov is the poet from whom this one has borrowed the most.
As I already wrote on several occasions before, M. Yu. Lermontov had a tremendous influence on the subsequent generations of Russian poets, including those of the 20th century.
Thus the transformation of the real money into shredded paper in Master and Margarita can be explained just as easily as the transformation of the shredded paper back into genuine money, that is the authentic banknotes, in the presence of those same poets whom A. F. Sokov had robbed, as he was composing his own verses.
The same explanation goes for the suggestion made to Sokov to sit down on a low taburet stool, from which the buffet vendor falls down, due to the broken fourth leg, which signifies his faulty poetry. It also explains the explicit mockery of his literary comrades, when Andrei Fokich Sokov, in the process of falling down upsets the nearby taburet and spills its wine all over himself.
It is perfectly clear that in the character of A. F. Sokov, Bulgakov exposes a dissimulator, passing himself not for what he is, but for someone else.
Here again, Bulgakov receives help in the person of a Russian poetess who used to know the poet in question very well, in fact, so well that she had written a whole article about him. This was the article which Bulgakov used extensively in Master and Margarita. It was this article that helped me solve several puzzles in Bulgakov’s novel.
For instance, the hilarious scene with the Backenbarter in the 21st chapter of Master and Margarita, The Flight, in which both Margarita and the Backenbarter are for some reason naked.
And also, why is Bulgakov so persistent in calling the buffet vendor A. F. Sokov a “tiny little man”?
As in the case of V. V. Mayakovsky and S. A. Yesenin, Bulgakov breaks down the person of this poet into two characters in Master and Margarita. Apart from the buffet vendor in the first part of the novel, in its last 18th chapter The Hapless Visitors, Bulgakov also puts this poet in the second part of Master and Margarita.
But who is this poet? – as the reader can ask, paraphrasing a line from M. Yu. Lermontov. And who is that Russian poetess who wrote the stern article about her fellow poet, titled My Reply to Osip Mandelstam.
My reader has already met this poetess in my chapter Margarita Beyond Good and Evil. She is the one who serves as the enigmatic Margarita’s prototype, the famous Russian poetess of the 20th century Marina Tsvetaeva. She continues to answer the unanswered questions in the novel Master and Margarita in her prosaic works and articles.
The very first page of Marina Tsvetaeva’s article My Reply to Osip Mandelstam contains an answer to a question. Why is Margarita naked?
And why does Bulgakov occasionally clothe his heroine now in a robe, now in a cloak?

“The poet’s prose. At last the poet has started speaking in our language… in which we all speak.”

And here it comes:

“Here now you are naked [sic!] before me. Outside the enchantments, Orpheus without his lyre… The poet in prose is a sovereign stripped of the purple, deigning (or forced to) appear among us as a man.”

A naked Margarita is sitting on a windowsill and looking at the moon, in the 20th chapter of Master and Margarita, Azazello’s Cream, because Bulgakov introduces her in his novel not as a poetess, but as master’s “secret wife.” Bulgakov’s Marina Tsvetaeva is “outside the enchantments,” as he depicts her not the way she was, that is, not as a poetess, but the way she wanted to be, and as she wrote about it in her prose.
To be specific, she was writing about her desire to “serve” in love. Margarita “serves” master. His book becomes her “life.” When in chapter 24, The Extraction of Master, the naked Margarita felt herself deceived and decided to take her leave, Bulgakov writes that at that moment Woland, without saying a word, took off his worn-out and soiled robe, while Koroviev threw it over Margarita’s shoulders.
As Bulgakov explains to the reader, Margarita wrapped herself [in the robe] as though searching for a wrapper or a cloak. Her nakedness suddenly started to embarrass her.”
Here Bulgakov confuses the reader, as he cannot really explain what is going on without giving away where all of this is coming from.
Also, do pay attention to the fact that it is A. S. Pushkin (Koroviev) who covers Margarita’s nakedness with the robe.
Which brings us back to the chapter The Flight, that is, to the scene between Margarita and the Backenbarter, both of them naked, however, the Backenbarter has a top hat on his head. In that river scene they are both out of character, “outside the enchantments,” so to speak, for the reason that they are naked. As for the top hat, according to Bulgakov, it shows A. S. Pushkin’s integrity not only as a poet and a writer, but also as a man. I am drawing the reader’s attention to it, because, having met Margarita’s resistance, Backenbarter immediately stops his advances, which is of considerable significance later in this chapter.
Here Bulgakov follows Marina Tsvetaeva herself, who in her article asks Osip Mandelstam the following question:

“Will you be able to be a tsar even without the purple [and a poet even without the verses]?”

Marina Tsvetaeva takes this from Pushkin’s 1830 poem To The Poet, this line in particular:

You are the tsar: so live alone!

Margarita proved to all that she could remain a poetess, as she carried herself with dignity, which earned her respect from her comrades in the quill.
And now Marina Tsvetaeva’s second question to Osip Mandelstam:

“Is poet (royalty) – an inalienability, is poet in you –essence?”

Marina Tsvetaeva proved that she contains that poet essence in her. She also contains royalty, as Bulgakov makes her a “queen.”

“Shall I bow to you, naked?” –Tsvetaeva continues her interrogation of Osip Mandelstam.

All guests at Satan’s Great Ball bow to Queen Margarita…


To be continued…

No comments:

Post a Comment