Who is Who in Master?
Posting #14.
“And it’s always
battle!
We only dream of rest
Through blood and dust…”
A. Blok. On the
Kulikovo Field.
Apparently, in chapter 29 of Master and Margarita, The Fate of Master and Margarita is
Determined, M. A. Bulgakov is playing upon Blok’s poems cited in the
previous posting and before. When Matthew Levi appears on the roof of the
Rumyantsev Museum in Moscow, where Woland and Azazello are talking, an
interesting conversation takes place between Matthew Levi and Woland. Woland
asks:
[Woland to Levi Matthew:] “Now, speak concisely, without tiring me out.
Why have you come here?
[Levi Matthew to Woland:] He sent me.
[Woland to Levi Matthew:] So, what did he order you to tell me, slave?
[Levi Matthew to Woland:] I am not a slave, getting increasingly
angrier, replied Matthew Levi. – I am his
disciple…
[Levi Matthew to Woland:] He has read master’s composition and asks
you to take master with you and grant him Rest.
[Woland to Levi Matthew:] Why
don’t you take him to your place, to Light?
He hasn’t deserved Light; he
has deserved Rest, said
Levi Matthew in a sad voice.
He asks that she who loved
and suffered because of him [master] be taken too, for the first time pleadingly Matthew
Levi addressed Woland.”
Considering
that Bulgakov frequently starts sentences with the capitalized pronoun “He,” it
is difficult to say what he has in mind. But further in the text Matthew Levi
calls himself “his disciple,” written with the lowercase “h.” Even though the
person in the conversation is Yeshua, it cannot be said that Bulgakov is
writing about Christ. He merely likens the fate of N. S. Gumilev [Yeshua] with
the fate of Christ.
So,
this is why the lowercase letter “h” must be sufficient to let the researcher
understand that this is not written about Jesus Christ. It’s just that in this
excerpt Bulgakov plays up Woland’s words in chapter 23 of Master and Margarita: Satan’s Great Ball:
“To each according to his
faith.”
Which
is why Yeshua/Gumilev gets into Paradise, while master, whose prototype in this
case is the Russian poet Alexander Blok, deserves only Rest.
The
researcher must have put the two excerpts together, making the appropriate
conclusions.
Here
is M. A. Bulgakov:
“[Woland to Levi Matthew:] Why
don’t you take him [master] to your place, to Light?
He hasn’t deserved Light; he
has deserved Rest, said
Levi Matthew in a sad voice.”
And
here is A. A. Blok:
“Through
gray smoke from edge to edge
A scarlet light
Is calling, calling to an
unheard-of Paradise,
But there’s no Paradise…”
Bulgakov
rewards master (whose prototype in this case is A. Blok) with Rest, as in the
poem On the Kulikovo Field Blok
writes:
“And
it’s always battle!
We only dream of rest
Through blood and dust…”
An
amazing mastery displayed by Bulgakov!
By
the same token, it is impossible to imagine that in this scene Woland and
Matthew Levi would have one and the same prototype, unless this prototype is a
madman who talks and reasons with himself and by himself. Something like a
Biblical Prophet.
It
is also impossible to imagine in this situation Andrei Bely in the role of
master, because Andrei Bely is also simultaneously the prototype of Matthew
Levi, and it would be quite strange for him in this scene to talk about himself
as master.
But
surely if the researcher finds himself in the territory of the psychological
thriller, then, just like in the fantastical novel, it becomes possible, albeit
more complicated, because psychology is situated on a higher plane than
fantasy, because psychology is a science.
I
have already written one psychological thriller in which the Russian poet
Alexander Blok is simultaneously both master and Margarita. (See my chapter Strangers in the Night.)
I
confess that it would be very interesting for me to get inside the unknown and
find out under that angle what exactly M. A. Bulgakov had in mind joining two
or three Russian poets within a single character of his.
The
researcher ought not to forget that Bulgakov was a medical doctor, which means
that he studied psychology. I am myself interested in psychology, which I
studied in college a long time ago.
But
fairly recently my interest in psychology was reenergized by my study of
homoeopathy, because in this science mental symptoms acquire the top rank of
significance. An illness is judged as incurable once the physical symptoms are
transformed in the course of treatment into mental symptoms.
***
The
theme of anguish is also connected to the poetry of A. Blok. Already in the 2nd
chapter of Master and Margarita,
titled Pontius Pilate, it becomes
clear that the character of Yeshua in Bulgakov includes two Russian poets who
died almost together in August 1921 in the Revolutionary Petrograd. Bulgakov
shows the two of them in chapter 25: How
the Procurator Tried to Save Judas from Kyriath – in the allegory of the
two white roses drowning in a red pool of spilled wine, symbolizing blood.
It
is hard to believe that Blok was dead, and it is completely unclear why he died
at all. Bulgakov writes:
“...[Pilate’s] thoughts were rushing feverishly, short, unrelated
and extraordinary: ‘Perished!..’
[singular], then: ‘Perished!..’[plural].
And another one among them, totally absurd, was about some kind of immortality, and for some reason
this “immortality” was causing
him an unbearable anguish.”
This short passage contains a
lot of information for the researcher. The Russian word “pogib!” [perished! singular]
points to N. S. Gumilev. The Russian word “pogibli!”
[perished! plural] points to Gumilev
and Blok.
Also
pointing to these outstanding poets of the Silver Age is Bulgakov’s use of the
word “immortality,” which he repeats
twice. Not only the twice-repeated word “immortality,”
but also the word “absurd,” is used
to draw the researcher’s attention, while by using the word “anguish” Bulgakov directly points to the
poetry of Alexander Blok.
Three
pages later in the same 2nd chapter Pontius Pilate Bulgakov returns to the theme of “immortality.” After Caiaphas for the
third time in a row informs Pilate that the Synhedrion had decided to release
Varravan, “everything was over [for Pilate] and there
was nothing more to talk about.” Bulgakov writes:
“...The same inexplicable anguish that had already visited him on
the balcony had now pierced all his being. It seemed to the procurator that he
had left something unsaid with the condemned man, and, perhaps, even something
unlistened to. Pilate chased this thought away and it flew away instantly, like
it had flown in to him. It flew away, but the anguish remained unexplained,
for it could not be explained by some kind of another short thought that
flashed like lightning and went out right away: ‘Immortality, Immortality has come, immortality…’ Whose immortality
has come? This is what the procurator didn’t understand, but the thought of
this mysterious immortality made him freeze under the hot sun.”
Present
in this excerpt are the repeated idea of “anguish,” the idea of “immortality,”
and also the idea of “flashing” thoughts.
To
be continued…
***
No comments:
Post a Comment