Monday, June 25, 2018

GALINA SEDOVA. A CHAPTER ON BULGAKOV. DCCXLII



Magic Of The Sorcerer Molière.
Posting #5.


What remains in this Prologue to Bulgakov’s novel Molière (this is the title under which he offered it to BVL), is the description of the bronze monument to Molière.
It is amazing that Bulgakov includes this too into the scene with the “intricate” song of the fountain. –

“Having taken the prisoner from under the colonnade into the garden, Ratkiller took a whip from the legionnaire standing at the foot of the bronze statue and with a slight sweep lashed the prisoner’s shoulders.”

The “bronze statue” here indicates that Yeshua’s prototype was writing plays. And indeed, N. S. Gumilev wrote six plays, among his other works.
And in the novel Molière Bulgakov writes:

“Here he is – the sly and charming Gaul, Royal comedian and playwright. Here he is, in a bronze wig and with bronze bows on his shoes. Here he is, the king of French Dramaturgy!”

And immediately, starting the next paragraph, Bulgakov adds: Ah, Madame!This is how he is addressing the imaginary midwife, pointing to the Russian poetess Marina Tsvetaeva who serves not only as the prototype of his principal heroine Margarita, but as his immense source of material contained in her precious memoirs of her contemporaries Bryusov, Bely, Balmont, Mandelstam and others, as well as a very interesting work of hers to which she gave the title My Pushkin. This work tells the story of her “acquaintanceship” with A. S. Pushkin and gives us some details of her childhood. Without Marina Tsvetaeva it is virtually impossible to imagine the novel Master and Margarita.
And how does Bulgakov reward his Psychê for her generous gifts to him? Let us open Chapter 13 of Master and Margarita: The Appearance of the Hero:

She entered the gate just once, but prior to this I experienced no less than ten heart palpitations. And then when her hour would come and the hand of the clock showed midday, [the heart] would never stop pounding until without a noise, almost silently, the shoes with black suede bows, tied by steel buckles, would come level with the window.

Bulgakov rewards Marina Tsvetaeva through Margarita by giving her Molière’s buckled shoes. And also by the words: Ah, Madame! which follow the words: “Here he is – the king of French Dramaturgy!” Bulgakov is giving another explanation why he calls Margarita a “French Queen.” In terms of Bulgakov’s creative work, Marina Tsvetaeva is a Queen. Aside from poetry and her memoirs of contemporaries, she was writing plays. So, here is the answer to Margarita’s question:

Why of Royal blood? – whispered a frightened Margarita, pressing herself to Koroviev.”

In the process of dealing with this matter, it must be noted that Bulgakov is thus confounding the researcher with all this French drivel, while providing real clues along the way from his Molière to Master and Margarita.

***


It is just one step from Margarita to master for the researcher in the packed 19th chapter of Molière: School of Dramaturgy.
Having dedicated his play School of Wives to Henrietta of England and thus taking a “clever step” Bulgakov sees it as a fateful mistake on the part of Molière.

“Having forgotten that a writer must never enter any arguments in print about his creations, Molière, driven to consternation, decided to attack his enemies.”

This is where Bulgakov takes his idea from to set the publishers, editors and critics upon master’s manuscript of Pontius Pilate, submitted by him to M. A. Berlioz.
If Molière, in Bulgakov’s opinion, made a huge mistake, entering “arguments in print about his creations,” master’s fateful mistake was to take his manuscript on Margarita’s advice to a totally antagonistic editor who, without any intent to even consider it for publication, forwarded it to an equally antagonistic group of critics – Latunsky, Ahriman, and Lavrovich – who ganged up on master, dragging him through hell in newspapers.
Strange as it may seem, M. Bulgakov, in the same 19th chapter of Molière: School of Dramaturgy, raises the subject of religion. After the astounding success of Molière’s School of Wives, a certain minor author De Vizet came up with his own play titled Critique of the School of Wives.
On close examination this play turned out to be a bunch of nonsense, and nobody wanted to stage it in a theater.

“De Vizet limited himself to printing his work and spreading it around Paris. As it turned out, this play was not so much a critique as a denunciation [sic!] plain and simple.”

In Master and Margarita the role of the denouncer is played by “the editor” [M. A. Berlioz].
As master submits his manuscript of the novel Pontius Pilate to the editor, a barrage of sheer vituperation follows, courtesy of three scumbags who use such expressions as “an enemy sortie,” warning the reader that this novel is “an attempt to sneak into print an apology of Jesus Christ.”

“One day the hero opened a newspaper and saw in it the critic Ahriman’s article Enemy Sortie, where [Ahriman] warned each and all that our hero wished to sneak into print “an apology of Jesus Christ.” … The next day, in another newspaper, under the signature of Mstislav Lavrovich, another article appeared, in which the author proposed to hit, and hit hard against Pilatism, and against that God-painting hack who fancied to sneak it into print...”

Bulgakov writes that “the works of Ahriman and Lavrovich could be considered a joke in comparison with the article written by Latunsky, titled Militant Old-Believer…

All that barrage of denunciations was an explicit call to arrest and exile master. By now, the reader already knows that the subject of discussion here is the Russian poet N. S. Gumilev. As I already wrote, in the 19th chapter of Molière Bulgakov uses the word “denunciation.” I’ve already written in my chapter Mr. Lastochkin that Gumilev enters the character of master in a big way. For instance, he was “master” in the organization he himself created, known as the “Poets’ Shop.” He was the poet who  was arrested, but rather than exiled, executed in August 1921.
Bulgakov very skillfully ties this in the 19th chapter of Molière: School of Dramaturgy with the denunciation of Molière himself. –

“De Vizet reported that the ten ancient admonitions in verse which Arnolf, intending to enter into marriage, reads to Agnes are nothing else but a distinct parody of the Lord’s Ten Commandments.”

Explaining what happened after that, Bulgakov points directly to Gumilev.
Having given ten admonitions to his wife, Arnolf “starts with the eleventh.”–

He begins – the actors were telling Molière quietly – but he does not say a single word except: Rule Eleven, so that what one remembers, dear master, is that there are precisely ten of them.”

Had anyone asked Bulgakov why he is using the word “master” here, he would undoubtedly have said that Jean-Baptiste Molière was a master of his trade.
And so, in some way, master’s story about Pontius Pilate, which he tells the poet Ivan Bezdomny in Dr. Stravinsky’s psychiatric clinic, corresponds to Molière himself fighting mediocre writers of his own time.
By the end of this “wretched year 1663,” Molière was sullied by a “formal denunciation of him to the king.” This second denunciation also corresponds to what happened to Gumilev. In my chapter Veiled Guests at Satan’s Great Ball the researcher will get my answer as to who it was.
In this chapter Bulgakov also demonstrates to the researcher how one can play with names. In De Vizet’s Critique of the School of Wives there appears a certain “Elomir.” Rearrange these letters in the Russian language, and you will get the name “Molière.”
Remarkable that right before this passage, Bulgakov poses his own puzzle to the researcher:

“Edm Burso, also a litterateur and a passionate detractor of Molière.”

An answer to this puzzle can be found in the 18th chapter of Master and Margarita: The Hapless Visitors, closing the first part of Bulgakov’s novel. My own answer is given in my extraordinary chapter The Bard (Subchapter Barbarian at the Gate).

My advice to the researcher is not to be caught in Bulgakov’s trap when he is having a good time playing with this surname:

“But you cannot really distort another person’s name from the stage: Br... Bru… Broso... and call Burso a lousy writer.”

To be continued…

***



No comments:

Post a Comment