Magic Of The Sorcerer Molière.
Posting #9.
“…eager to hypnotize
not by their subjects,
as much as by the mode of
their transmission…”
N. S. Gumilev.
In
the 3rd chapter of the novel Molière,
Bulgakov comes to the conclusion that Molière’s father recognizes that “theater must exist... But he [Molière’s father] would put
it this way: Theater exists for
Jean-Baptiste Poquelin, and by no means the other way round.”
In
the very first chapter of Master and Margarita
Bulgakov closed it with the help of the “strange professor” (Woland) with a
triple insistence (in the Christian manner):
“Bear in mind that Jesus
existed!”
Hearing
Berlioz’s objections, Woland repeats his assertion a second time:
“No need for any points of
view. It’s just that he existed, and nothing more is to be said.”
And
for a third time:
“And no proof at all is required, replied the professor and
started talking in a low voice, his accent for some reason gone. – It’s all simple!”
This
is how the Russian Orthodox Christians believe. There is a reason why Bulgakov
gives these words to Woland’s prototype V. V. Mayakovsky who had his grievances
against God, but firmly believed in Christ.
Thus,
the following conclusion follows: The world exists for Christ, rather than
Christ exists for the world. But every person who seeks Christ, finds Him.
In
the 5th chapter of Bulgakov’s Molière,
Ad Maiorem Dei Gloriam, I was mostly interested in its closing part, where
Bulgakov describes Molière’s appearance already at the age of 20.
The
6th chapter An Unlikely
Adventure describes turbulent times for France. The nation was shaken by
external wars and domestic squabbles, and that was going on for many years, as
Bulgakov writes. He is writing these words as his own country had been caught
in troubles of her own. The Russo-Japanese War of 1904-1905 precipitated a
series of tragic events for Russia, resulting in an attempt at a revolution in
1905 through Russia’s unfortunate involvement in World War I, followed by the
1917 series of revolutions, and the Civil War.
The
story of the failed conspiracy of Marquis de Cinq-Mars against Cardinal
Richelieu, in the 17th-century France, resulting in the
conspirators’ execution goes somewhat in parallel with the alleged conspiracy
involving the poet N. S. Gumilev and also resulting in the conspirators’ execution,
although the level of guilt in these two cases is disproportionately
distributed. Whereas the Marquis was explicitly guilty, N. S. Gumilev was a
completely innocent victim, later absolved of all wrongdoing.
The
story of the betrayal leading to the arrest and execution of Gumilev is covered
in my chapter originally titled Veiled
Guests at Satan’s Great Ball: The Green Lady, and the veil in this case is
incredibly thick. (The current chapter title is The Guests at Satan’s Great Ball.)
The
7th chapter of Molière: The Illustrious
Gang, already in its title contains the theme of Master and Margarita. As the researcher already knows, the original
“gang” is indeed “illustrious” or, as I call it, “magnificent.” There are four
Russian poets in this gang. Two of them, coming out of the Golden Age of
Russian Literature, are virtually unrecognizable, namely A. S. Pushkin and M.
Yu. Lermontov.
The
7th chapter of Molière: The Illustrious
Gang, gives an answer to one of Bulgakovian puzzles, which I had not been
able to solve yet. Are you ready for that?
Two
other Russian poets, belonging to the Silver Age of Russian Literature, the
Revolutionary, stepping on all toes and heels without exception V. V.
Mayakovsky and the poet of the people S. A. Yesenin.
In
other words, a “Magnificent Four”
Russian Style!
The
reader may ask what these four Russian poets have to do with Molière? There is
only one answer: the theater. All
four of them wrote plays, and – wow! – what plays they were!
So,
where does the word “gang” come from in Master
and Margarita? This question cannot be answered without Bulgakov’s novel Molière.
The
word “gang” appears already on the first page of the Epilogue of Master and Margarita. –
“Educated people took the side of the investigation: It was the
work of a gang of hypnotizers and ventriloquists who had a marvelous command of
the art.”
Hidden
in this excerpt is Bulgakov’s puzzle. What kind
of hypnotizers is he talking about?
Researchers
say that Bulgakov was allegedly making visits to hypnotizers. It shows me one
thing only: that like an experienced sleuth, Bulgakov was covering his tracks,
while leading researchers on a false track.
And
I would say that Bulgakov’s effort was very successful. Bulgakov is a serious
writer who has become one on the strength of one thought, one desire: to write
a novel about Satan. Only, as the reader knows already, this devil took
upon himself the Divine function of vengeance for one of their own: the
magnificent third from the Russian troika of the Silver Age: the Russian poet
N. S. Gumilev, one of master’s three prototypes, also including Blok and Bely.
Calling
himself “the last Russian poet,” V. V. Mayakovsky proved both by his life and
by his poetry that he was the only one qualifying for this role. Even though
Bulgakov makes the character of Woland even more interesting, adding to it some
features of Andrei Bely.
And
so, the word “gang” is indeed present in the Epilogue of Master and Margarita. Although I have already answered the question
about the meaning of “hypnotizers” in another chapter. (The Bard. Genesis. M. A. Berlioz.)
For
the benefit of the reader of my blog, I often repeat the main earmarks of my
work. The word “hypnotizers” is used by the Russian poet N. Gumilev to
characterize poets. And Bulgakov knew that of course, as he chose Russian poets
as heroes of his works. He read all Russian literary magazines where poets
published their poetry and also articles of literary criticism. The articles of
N. S. Gumilev are out of this world in this regard.
On
the second try, Bulgakov draws attention to Koroviev, singling him out among
the members of the “gang”:
“The investigators of this case and experienced psychiatrists
determined that the members of the criminal [sic!] gang, or
perhaps one of them (the suspicion mostly fell on Koroviev) happened to be
hypnotizers of a so far unencountered power of suggestion toward all those whom
they met on their way...”
As
an example of this power of suggestion,
Bulgakov writes:
“Naturally, there was no cat on the chandelier, no one even thought
of having a shootout, they were shooting at an empty spot, while Koroviev who
had made them think that there was a cat doing mischief on the chandelier,
could freely position himself behind the backs of the shooters, making faces
and enjoying his enormous, but put to criminal use talent of suggestion.”
Here of course Bulgakov
extols the poetry and prose of A. S. Pushkin. Whatever this great man is
writing about, the reader vividly imagines a living picture of what is going on
in the book.
To
be continued…
***
No comments:
Post a Comment