In the works "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" the contrast serves to create a disharmonic world, an irrational being. The real is opposed to the fantastic, and the person is cruel state system. In the story "Fatal Eggs", Professor Persikov's reasonable ideas collide with an absurd system in the person of Rocca, which leads to tragic consequences. It is no coincidence, therefore, that the biography of Persikov and Rocca are built on the same principle: before and after October. That is, the pre-revolutionary way of life is opposed to the Soviet one.
Before the revolution, the professor lectured in four languages, studied amphibians, introduced a measured and predictable life, but in 1919 three of his five rooms were taken from him, no one needed his research, and the windows at the institute froze through. Bulgakov gives an expressive detail: "The clock, embedded in the wall of the house at the corner of Herzen and Mokhovaya, stopped at eleven and a quarter." Time stopped, the course of life was interrupted after the revolution.
Rock until 1917 served in the famous concert ensemble of maestro Petukhov. But after October, “he left Magic Dreams and the dusty starry satin in the foyer and threw himself into the open sea of ​​war and revolution, replacing his flute with a destructive Mauser.” Bulgakov ironically and at the same time bitterly concludes that “it was a revolution that was needed” in order to fully reveal this person, who either edited a huge newspaper, wrote works on the irrigation of the Turkestan region, or held all sorts of honorary positions. Thus, Persikov's erudition and knowledge contrast with Rocca's ignorance and adventurism.
At the beginning of the work, Bulgakov writes about Persikov: “Not mediocre mediocrity sat at the microscope on the mountain of the republic. No, Professor Persikov was sitting! And a little further about Rocca: “Alas! On the mountain of the republic, the seething brain of Alexander Semenovich did not go out, in Moscow Rokk encountered Persikov's invention, and in the rooms on Tverskaya "Red Paris" Alexander Semenovich had an idea how to revive chickens in the republic with the help of Persikov's beam. Contrasting the characters and activities of Persikov and Rocca, Bulgakov illuminates the absurd social system in which people like Rokk come to power, and the professor is forced to obey orders from the Kremlin.
M.A. Bulgakov uses the technique of contrast for a deeper understanding of the character of the protagonist, in order to show his exclusivity. The professor is an adult serious person and an accomplished scientist, but at the same time, Marya Stepanovna follows him like a nanny. “Your frogs arouse an unbearable shiver of disgust in me. I will be unhappy all my life because of them, ”his wife said to Professor Persikov when she left him, and Persikov did not even try to object to her, that is, the problems of zoology are more important for him than family life. The worldview of Professor Persikov contrasts with the worldview and moral foundations of the whole society. “Persikov was too far from life - he was not interested in it ...”
“It was a very sunny August day. He interfered with the professor, so the curtains were drawn." Persikov is not like the others even in that, like everyone else, he does not rejoice at a fine summer day, but, on the contrary, treats him as something superfluous and useless. Even the love letters sent to him at the end of the presentation of one of his works were mercilessly torn apart by him.
The author considers Persikov an exceptional person and shows this to the reader, opposing the professor to all other people, not only in the moral, but also in the physical aspect: "... fell ill with pneumonia, but did not die." As you know, pneumonia is a very serious disease, from which even now, in the absence of proper treatment, people die. However, Professor Persikov survived, which speaks of his exclusivity.
Thanks to the contrast, we can catch the changes in the internal state of the protagonist: “Pankrat was horrified. It seemed to him that the professor's eyes were weeping in the twilight. It was so unusual, so scary.”
“That's right,” Pankrat answered whiningly and thought: “It would be better if you yelled at me!” So, the beam discovered by the professor changed not only his life, but also the lives of people around him.
“Go, Pankrat,” the professor uttered heavily and waved his hand, “go to bed, my dear, my dear, Pankrat.” How great is the emotional shock of Persikov, who called the night watchman "darling"! Where did his authority and severity go? The former Persikov is contrasted here with the current Persikov - dejected, downtrodden, miserable.
M.A. Bulgakov uses the technique of contrast even in small details to show all the comicality and absurdity of the life of Soviet Russia: Persikov lectures on the topic “Reptiles of the Hot Belt” in galoshes, a hat and a scarf in an audience where it is invariably 5 degrees below zero. At the same time, the situation at the institute contrasts with the external environment of life in Soviet Moscow: no matter what happens on the street, nothing changes within the walls of the institute, while outside the window the way of life of a multinational long-suffering country boils and changes.
The story contrasts the prejudices and ignorance of ordinary people and the scientific worldview. The old woman Stepanovna, who thinks that her chickens have been spoiled, is contrasted by prominent scientists who believe that this is a pestilence caused by a new unknown virus.
The contrast in "Fatal Eggs" also serves to create a comic effect. It is achieved due to incompatibility, mismatch: syntactic, semantic, stylistic, content. Persikov's surname is confused. The content of Vronsky's article about the professor does not correspond to reality. Rocca's actions are illogical. It is unreasonable, unfair behavior of the crowd in relation to Persikov. Combinations such as "a case unheard of in history", "a trio of sixteen comrades", "chicken questions", etc., are built on the principle of violation of the semantic-syntactic valence of words. And all this is a reflection of the violation of not only the laws of nature, but above all - moral and social laws.
So, gradually we are approaching the voicing of one of the most important thoughts of the work, which is expressed again through the use of contrast.
The beam opened by Persikov becomes a symbol new era in natural science and at the same time a symbol of revolutionary ideas.
No wonder it is “bright red”, the color of October and Soviet symbols. At the same time, it is by no means accidental that the names of Moscow magazines are mentioned: “Red Light”. "Red Spotlight", "Red Pepper", "Red Journal", the newspaper "Red Evening Moscow", the hotel "Red Paris". The state farm where Rocca's experiments are being carried out is called Red Luch. In this case, the red beam in the "Fatal Eggs" symbolizes the socialist revolution in Russia, forever merged with the color red, with the confrontation between red and white in the civil war.
At the same time, the revolution, which is represented in the work by a red ray, is opposed to evolution, which is implicit and can only be seen in a distorted version when the action of the ray is described. “These organisms reached growth and maturity in a few moments, only to in turn immediately give rise to a new generation. In the red band, and then in the entire disk, it became crowded, and the inevitable struggle began. The reborn rushed furiously at each other, tore to shreds and swallowed. Among the born lay the corpses of those who died in the struggle for existence. The best and strongest won. And those best ones were terrible. Firstly, they were approximately twice the volume of ordinary amoebas, and secondly, they were distinguished by some kind of special malice and agility. Their movements were swift, their pseudopods were much longer than normal, and they worked with them, without exaggeration, like octopuses with tentacles.
Persikov's assistant Ivanov calls the ray of life - monstrous, which is paradoxical - how can an invention that gives life be monstrous?
Or remember the cries of the boy with the newspapers: "The nightmarish discovery of the ray of life by Professor Persikov !!!"
Indeed, we understand that the life ray is monstrous when we learn about the consequences to which its use in unskillful hands has led.
Thus, the ray of life turns into a ray of death: the violation of the social, historical and spiritual evolution of society leads to a national tragedy.

As in the work "Fatal Eggs", M.A. Bulgakov in "The Heart of a Dog" uses the contrast technique at various levels of the text.
In Heart of a Dog, as in Fatal Eggs, the author contrasts evolution with revolution. Evolution is again implicit, it is only implied as the opposite of revolution, which, in turn, is expressed very clearly and is expressed in the intervention of Professor Preobrazhensky in the natural course of things. The good intentions of Preobrazhensky become a tragedy for him and his loved ones. After some time, he realizes that violent, unnatural intervention in the nature of a living organism leads to catastrophic results. In the story, the professor manages to correct his mistake - Sharikov again turns into good dog. But in life, such experiments are irreversible. And Bulgakov acts here as a visionary who was able to warn of the irreversibility of such violence against nature in the middle of those destructive transformations that began in our country in 1917.
The author uses a contrast technique to contrast the intelligentsia and the proletariat. And although, at the very beginning of the work, M.A. Bulgakov treats Professor Preobrazhensky ironically, he nevertheless sympathizes with him, because he understands his mistake and corrects it. The same as Shvonder and Sharikov, in the understanding of the author, will never be able to assess the scale of their activities and the level of harm they cause to the present and future. Sharikov believes that he raises his ideological level by reading the book recommended by Shvonder - Engels' correspondence with Kautsky. From the point of view of Preobrazhensky, all this is profanity, empty attempts, which in no way contribute to the mental and spiritual development of Sharikov. That is, the intelligentsia and the proletariat are also opposed by the intellectual level. Fantastic elements help to express the idea of ​​the unfulfillment of hopes for improving society in a revolutionary way. The two classes are opposed not only in portraits, powers and habits, but also in speech. One has only to recall the bright, figurative and categorical speech of Preobrazhensky and the “abbreviated” speech of Shvonder stamped with Soviet labels. Or the restrained, correct speech of Bormental and the vulgar speech of Sharikov. The speech characteristics of the heroes show the difference between people of the old upbringing and the new, who were nobody, but became everything. Sharikov, for example, who drinks, swears, blackmails and insults his "creator", the person who gives him shelter and food, holds a senior position in the department for cleaning up the city. Neither the ugly appearance nor the origin prevented him. Contrasting Preobrazhensky with those who come to replace those like him, Bulgakov makes you feel all the drama of the era that has begun in the country. In no way does he justify Preobrazhensky, who, during the devastation in the country, eats caviar and roast beef on weekdays, but, nevertheless, he considers “schwonders” and “balls” to be even worse representatives of society, if only because they get away with everything from hands. Bulgakov more than once draws the reader's attention to the preference in that era of proletarian origin. So Klim Chugunkin, a criminal and a drunkard, is easily saved from severe just punishment by his origin, and Preobrazhensky, the son of a cathedral archpriest, and Bormental, the son of a judicial investigator, cannot hope for the saving power of origin.
Bulgakov contrasts the ordinary, everyday worldview with the scientific one. From a scientific point of view, the result turned out to be phenomenal, without precedents in the whole world, but in everyday terms it seems monstrous and immoral.
In order to fully show the result and significance of the Preobrazhensky experiment, Bulgakov, using the technique of contrast, describes the changes that occur with a creature that was once a cute dog, thus contrasting the original character with the resulting one. First, Sharikov begins to swear, then smoking is added to the swearing (the dog Sharik did not like tobacco smoke); seeds; balalaika (and Sharik did not approve of music) - moreover, balalaika at any time of the day (evidence of attitude towards others); untidiness and bad taste in clothes. Sharikov's development is rapid: Philip Philipovich loses the title of deity and turns into a "dad". These qualities of Sharikov are joined by a certain morality, more precisely, immorality ("I'll take it into account, but to fight - shish with butter"), drunkenness, theft. This process of turning “from the sweetest dog into scum” is crowned by a denunciation of the professor, and then an attempt on his life.
Thanks to the contrast, the author contrasts pre-revolutionary Russia with the Soviet one. This finds expression in the following: the dog compares the cook, Count Tolstykh, with the cook from the Council of Normal Nutrition. In this very "Normal Diet" "bastards cook cabbage soup from stinky corned beef." One feels the author's longing for the outgoing culture, noble life. But the author is not only yearning for everyday life. The revolutionary government encourages squealing, denunciation, the basest and rudest human traits - we see all this in the example of Sharikov, who now and then writes denunciations against his benefactor, notices his every word, regardless of the context, understanding in his own way. The peaceful life of Professor Preobrazhensky in the Kalabukhov House before the revolution is contrasted with the life of the present.
Eternal values ​​are opposed to temporary, transient values ​​inherent in Soviet Russia. A striking sign of the revolutionary time is women, in whom it is impossible to discern women. They are deprived of femininity, walk in leather jackets, behave emphatically rudely, even speak of themselves in the masculine gender. What kind of offspring can they give, according to what canons to raise him? The author draws the reader's attention to this. The opposition of moral values ​​to temporal ones can also be traced in something else: no one is interested in duty (instead of treating those who really need it, Preobrazhensky operates on moneybags), honor (a typist is ready to marry an ugly gentleman, seduced by hearty dinners), morality (an innocent animal two times they operate, disfiguring him and exposing him to mortal danger).
With the help of contrast, Bulgakov forms a grotesque, unnatural image of the reality of Soviet Russia. It connects the global (the transformation of a dog into a human) and the petty (description of chemical composition sausages), comic (details of the "humanization" of Sharik) and tragic (the result of this very "humanization"). The grotesqueness of the world is enhanced even by the opposition of high art (the theater, Verdi's opera) to low art (circus, balalaika).
Showing the character and image of the protagonist, his experiences in connection with the consequences of the experiment, Bulgakov again resorts to the method of contrast. At the beginning of the story, Preobrazhensky appears before us as an energetic, youthful, creatively thinking person. Then we see a haggard, listless old man who sits for a long time in his office with a cigar. And although Professor Preobrazhensky still remains an omnipotent deity in the eyes of his student, in fact, the “magician” and “sorcerer” turned out to be powerless in the face of the chaos brought into his life by the accomplished experiment.
There are two opposing spaces in Heart of a Dog. One of them is Preobrazhensky's apartment on Prechistenka, a "dog's paradise" as Sharik calls it, and an ideal space for a professor. The main components of this space are comfort, harmony, spirituality, "divine warmth". The arrival of Sharik in this space was accompanied by the fact that "the darkness clicked and turned into a dazzling day, and from all sides it sparkled, shone and turned white." The second space is external - unprotected, aggressive, hostile. Its main features are blizzard, wind, street dirt; its permanent inhabitants are “a scoundrel in a dirty cap” (“a thief with a copper muzzle”, “greedy creature”), a cook from the dining room, and “the most vile scum” of all proletarians - the janitor. The outer space appears - as opposed to the inner one - as a world of absurdity and chaos. Shvonder and his "retinue" come from this world. Thus, the internal, ideal space is broken, and the main character tries to restore it (remember how reporters annoyed Professor Persikov).
With the help of contrast, the author depicts not only a representative of the intelligentsia - Preobrazhensky, but also a representative of the proletariat - Shvonder. People like him, in words, defend the noble ideas of the revolution, but in reality, having seized power, they seek to get themselves a larger piece of public property. On the discrepancy between external behavior (fighters for social justice) and internal essence (self-interest, dependence), a satirical image of these heroes, however, like everything else in the work, is built.

The story of M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs" were a reflection of Soviet reality in the first post-revolutionary years. They were topical in nature and reflected all the imperfection of the structure of society in which the writer happened to live. Moreover, in various aspects, both stories are relevant today, as people continue not to fulfill their duty, lose honor, forget about true values, and scientific discoveries and experiments become more and more dangerous and irreversible.
It is solely through the use of contrast that the author achieves this result. In the first chapter of this work, it was noted that the method of contrast is suitable for works that are written in an era of paradoxes and contrasts. Soviet Russia of that period fits this description. Now the whole world fits this description. Having entered the new millennium, humanity could not justify its expectations of something new, and therefore we are all now experiencing a crisis and disharmony of global problems.
Thus, the importance of contrast reception in literature is difficult to overestimate, because literature, like other forms of art, is in some way the engine of progress, makes humanity not only think inertly, but also act, literature encourages. And the technique of contrast helps her in this, on which most literary techniques are based, thanks to which it is possible to more accurately express the intention of the work and expose and contrast various aspects. After all, as you know, the truth is known in comparison.

By the mid-20s, after the publication of the stories "Notes on Ma nzhetah", "Devil's Game", the novel "The White Guard, the writer has already developed as a brilliant artist of the word with a sharply honed satirical pen. Thus, he approaches the creation of the stories "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" with rich literary baggage. It can be safely asserted that the publication of these stories testified that Bulgakov successfully worked in the genre of a satirical science fiction story, which was a new phenomenon in literature in those years. It was a fantasy, not divorced from life, it combined strict realism with the fantasy of a scientist. The satire itself, which became the constant companion of Bulgakov the artist, in the stories "Fatal Eggs" and "The Heart of a Dog" acquired a deep and socio-philosophical meaning.

Attention is drawn to Bulgakov's characteristic method of asking questions to himself. In this regard, the author of "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" is one of the most "questioning" Russian writers of the first half of the 20th century. The search for answers to questions about the essence of truth, truth, about the meaning of human existence, essentially permeated almost all of Bulgakov's works.

The writer posed the most acute problems of his time, partly not lost their relevance in our days. They are filled with thoughts of a humanist artist about the laws of nature, about the biological and social nature of a person as a person.

"Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" are original warning stories, the author of which warns of the danger of any scientific experiment associated with a violent attempt to change human nature, its biological appearance.

The protagonists of "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" are talented representatives of the scientific intelligentsia, scientists-inventors who tried to penetrate the "holy of holies" of human physiology with their scientific discoveries. The fates of professors Persikov, the hero of the "Fatal Eggs" and Preobrazhensky, the hero of "Heart of a Dog", develop differently. Their reaction to the results of experiments during which they encounter representatives of various social strata is inadequate. At the same time, they have a lot in common. First of all, they are honest scientists who bring their strength to the altar of science.

Bulgakov was one of the first writers who could truthfully show how unacceptable it is to use the latest achievements of science to enslave the human spirit. This idea runs like a red thread in "Fatal Eggs", where the author warns his contemporaries about a terrible experiment.

Bulgakov turned the theme of the scientist's responsibility to life in a new way in Heart of a Dog. The author warns that power should not be given to illiterate ball-bearers, who can lead it to complete degradation.

To realize the idea in both stories, Bulgakov chose a science fiction plot, where an important role is assigned to inventors. By their pathos, the stories are satirical, but at the same time they are openly accusatory. Humor was replaced by biting satire.

In the story "The Heart of a Dog" the disgusting creation of a human genius is trying to break into people by all means. An evil being does not understand that for this it is necessary to go through a long path of spiritual development. Sharikov tries to compensate for his worthlessness, illiteracy and ineptitude with natural methods. In particular, he updates his wardrobe, puts on patent leather shoes and a poisonous tie, but otherwise his suit is dirty, tasteless. The whole appearance of clothing is not able to change. It's not about his appearance, it's about his inner being. He is a man with a canine temperament and animal habits.

In the professor's house, he feels himself the master of life. There is an inevitable conflict with all the inhabitants of the apartment. Life becomes a living hell.

In Soviet times, many officials, favored by the authorities of their superiors, believed that "they have their legal right to everything."

Thus, the humanoid creature created by the professor not only takes root under the new government, but makes a dizzying leap: from a yard dog it turns into an orderly to clean up the city from stray animals.

An analysis of the stories "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" gives us reason to evaluate them rather than as a parody of the society of the future in Russia, but as a kind of warning of what could happen with the further development of the totalitarian regime, with the reckless development of technical progress that is not based on moral values.

Conclusion

Mikhail Bulgakov - one of the outstanding satirists of the 20th century, passed away, leaving behind a wonderful legacy in the form of numerous feuilletons, stories, novels, novels, plays. His satirical novels "Diaboliad", "Fatal Eggs", "Heart of a Dog" sound with particular relevance today.

Already at the very beginning of the 1920s, he prophetically looked into the future of the totalitarian system, with its anti-humanistic attitudes.

Bulgakov's work as a satirist is reflected in a variety of genres: a feuilleton and a short story, a story with a sharp plot and a wide use of fantasy elements. Light humor and harmless laughter, subtle irony and sharp satire were available to him.

Successfully continuing, developing and deepening Gogol's traditions in dealing with the theme of the "little man", but in different historical conditions, the author truthfully showed this new Bashmachkin, crushed by the bureaucratic machine of a totalitarian society. The theme of the "little man", which dominated the satirical stories of the early Bulgakov, is replaced by the problem of the Russian intelligentsia.

The novel "The White Guard" and the play "Days of the Turbins" show the tragedy of an old Russian intellectual who lost his home, realizing the inevitability of the death of the past. The stories "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" thundered in Russia as a formidable warning. "Fatal Eggs" - the first mature satirical work, was received with hostility by many contemporary critics of Bulgakov, and "Heart of a Dog" was banned from publication.

Bulgakov was an ardent champion of universal human values, a singer of genuine art that cannot be banned or destroyed.

Introduction.

Satire is a way of manifesting the comic in art, consisting in a devastating ridicule of phenomena that seem to the author to be vicious.

We have chosen a topic related to satire, because we really like satirical works that ridicule various phenomena and events.

The strength of satire depends on the effectiveness of satirical methods - sarcasm, irony, hyperbole, grotesque, allegory, parody, etc. The whole work, and individual images, situations, episodes can be satirical.
By choosing this topic work, we set the following tasks:

Systematize your knowledge about the satire of M.A. Bulgakov and about his life;

Consider the features of M.A. Bulgakov’s satire on the example of three stories: “Heart of a Dog”, “Diaboliad”, “Fatal Eggs”;

Draw conclusions on three stories and in general on the abstract.

We write work using critical literature.

With the help of "Russian literature of the XX century. Christomatia” by A.V. Baranikov, we chose information about Bulgakov. We will take information about Bulgakov, about his life and work in the “Schoolchildren's Handbook”. We will read the stories and analyze them according to the book by M.A. Bulgakov “Collected Works in 5 Volumes”.

II
. Satire in the work of M.A. Bulgakov

1. M.A. Bulgakov - prose writer, playwright

Bulgakov M.A. (1891-1940) graduated from the First Alexander Gymnasium, where children of the Russian intelligentsia of Kyiv studied. The level of teaching was high, classes were sometimes taught even by university professors.

In 1909, Bulgakov entered the medical faculty of Kyiv University. In 1914, the First World War which destroyed the hopes of him and millions of his peers for a peaceful and prosperous future. After graduating from university, Bulgakov worked in a field hospital.

In September 1916, Bulgakov was recalled from the front and sent to head the Zemstvo Nikolsk rural hospital in the Smolensk province, and in 1917 he was transferred to Vyazma.

The February revolution disrupted the usual life. After the October Revolution, he was released from military service, and he returned to Kyiv, which was soon occupied by German troops. So the future writer plunged into the maelstrom of the civil war. Bulgakov was a good doctor, and the belligerents needed his services.

In Vladikavkaz, at the end of 1919 and at the beginning of 1920, Bulgakov left the ranks of Denikin's army and began to contribute to local newspapers, giving up medicine forever. His first literary text "Tribute of Admiration" was published.

Classes in literary creativity was provoked by unwillingness to participate in the war.

Shortly before the retreat of the Whites from Vladikavkaz, Bulgakov fell ill with relapsing fever. When he recovered in the spring of 1920, the city was already occupied by units of the Red Army. Bulgakov began to cooperate in the sub-department of arts of the Revolutionary Committee. Vladikavkaz impressions served as material for the story Notes on the Cuffs.

In satirical feuilletons and essays, the object of Bulgakov's satire is not only the "scum of the NEP" - the nouveau riche Nepmen, but also that part of the population whose low cultural level the writer observed: the inhabitants of Moscow communal apartments, bazaar sales, etc. But Bulgakov also sees the sprouts of the new, signs return of life to normal.

Bulgakov made a discovery in his satirical works, which entered the system of Russian national values ​​and rightfully earned the title of Russian national writer.

Let's consider the satirical trends in some of the stories of M.A. Bulgakov.

2. The story "Deviliad".

In 1923-1925, Bulgakov wrote three satirical novels one after the other: "The Diaboliad", "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog". Bulgakov creates things that are practically not separated from modernity in the most direct, narrow sense of the word. The Diaboliad tells about the time of the just past, but perfectly memorable war communism; with a description of the same meager, hungry and cold years, "Fatal Eggs" was begun; the background of the “Heart of a Dog” is an acutely topical sign of the NEP.

The first story that came out to the reader in March 1924 was The Diaboliad, the very name of which, according to Bulgakov's contemporaries, quickly entered into oral speech, turning into a common noun.

In this work, Bulgakov depicts the bureaucracy of Soviet institutions. I.M.Nusinov, in his report on Bulgakov's work, stated: "A petty official who got lost in the Soviet state machine - the symbol of the Diaboliad." The new state organism is the “Diavoliad”, the new way of life is such a “muck,<…>»
2.1. Brief summary of the story.

This story speaks of the "little man" Korotkov. An inconspicuous employee of Spimat confuses the signature of the new boss, who bears the unusual surname Kalsoner, in an urgent business paper. His meeting with Longjohn, the manager’s striking appearance (a head sparkling with lights, electric lights flashing on the crown of the head, a voice like “at a copper basin”), as well as his ability to instantly move in space and striking transformations, completely knocks Korotkov out of the rut and deprives the ability to think rationally. The "double" of the shaved Long Johner, his brother with an "Assyrian beard and a thin voice," and Long Johner - the first who in turn catch Korotkov's eyes - these, it seems, are the culprits of the hero's madness.

But in fact, Korotkov is driven to madness and death not so much by Pantsers - doubles, that is, random absurdities of what is happening that he is not able to explain, but by a general feeling of precariousness, uncertainty and unreality of life.

A salary given out in matches and church wine; the unprecedentedly theatrical image of a formidable boss - all these particulars, not terrible each separately, merging into one terrible whole, expose Korotkov's defenselessness, his timid loneliness in the world. The fear of madness is the thought of a healthy mind, and it is this that insures the hero. In the "Diaboliad" reality is delirious, and it is easier for a person "to yield to it, having found guilty of breaking, deforming the reality of oneself." One of the constant leitmotifs of the writer's works is declared in the "Diaboliad": the mystical role of paper, clerical escheat life. If at first Bulgakov was joking, then the development of the plot is by no means a joke, because if there is no document that confirms your identity, then you are nobody.

The causal relationship is broken - what does the presence (or absence) of paper have to do with the brewing love episode, when a brunette throws herself on Korotkov's neck and asks him to marry her. Korotkov cannot do this because he does not have documents with his real name. It turns out that a piece of paper is not only able to determine human relationships, the document authorizes actions and, finally, constitutes a person. The intonation of the distraught Korotkov is grotesque: “Shoot me on the spot, but straighten out any document for me ...”. The hero is already ready to exchange life itself for the “correctness” and formality of its course. Depriving the "place" and stealing the papers - it turns out to be enough to push the hero out of life into a crazy jump, death.

2.2. Analysis of the main episodes.

In The Diaboliad, which describes an institution seemingly not at all connected with writing, Bulgakov introduces, albeit briefly, the theme of literature of literary life. Let us recall the scene when Korotkov, entangled in the labyrinths of the Alpine Rose, gets stuck in a mysterious and frightening conversation with Jan Sobiessky: “What will you please us with? Feuilleton? Essays?<…>You can't imagine how much we need them."

The episode, apparently, refers to the same Leto, in which Bulgakov served as secretary, or to the time of his work in Gudok. The autobiographical subtext from time to time, with short, bright flashes, as if “illuminating” the plot of the Diaboliad, imparts a new quality to the literary material.

The whole story is “made” of dynamic, short scenes, instant dialogues, energetic verbs, as if urging the action, which by the end is already rushing at full speed, increasing and whirling the already frantic pace. Movement, speed, speed (“rushed”, “rushed”, “struck”, “collapsed”, “failed”, etc.)

On the last pages of the Diaboliad, the hitherto quiet Korotkov suddenly has an “eagle eye”, “battle cry”, and “the courage of death”, which gives strength to the hero. And he dies, - with a phrase that instantly brought to the surface what was hidden in the depths of the consciousness of the "shy" clerk. In the final exclamation, there is a sudden surge of a previously hidden sense of dignity. Having fully expressed himself in it, Korotkov perishes, uttering his "main" thought: "Better death than disgrace." 2

Here is devilry, diabolical phantasmagoria (which, at the same time, has a domestic motivation in quite possible circumstances), here is an addiction to comic effects (in the phrase: “The starling hissed with a snake”, or “comrade de Rooney”, etc.).

2.3. Conclusion about the ideological content.

Here, for the first time, we read that same “weaved out of thin air”, word signs appear scattered, hinting at evil spirits: “witchcraft”, “brownie”, a black cat, in which Korotkov suspects a werewolf, will smell of sulfur. And even when the usual cabin of the institutional elevator rises, it pulls eeriely from the mine with “wind and dampness”.

The first Bulgakov story showed not only the stability of poetics, but also the certainty of Bulgakov's position, influenced the things written nearby in the same and a little later years.

"Diaboliad", despite the locality of the theme and the alleged "accident" of the death of the protagonist, Korotkov, who failed to return to his consciousness the lost value of the world, which crumbled into fragments before his eyes, - said the motive that will develop throughout the entire work of the writer: the motive reality that is delusional.
3. The story "Fatal eggs".

Following the "Diaboliad" appeared "Fatal Eggs". This work was published in February 1925, and in May the magazine "Red Panorama" published a magazine, abridged version of the story, up to No. 22 under the title "Ray of Life".

Unlike The Diaboliad, Bulgakov's second story was met with great attention, it was discussed both in "closed", private letters of professional writers, and in the pages of the general press. At the same time, it is curious to note that the writers rated the story very highly, while in the press the voices of critics were divided: who exclusively liked the whole story, who the end of the story was written poorly, and who considered this story funny.

The acute social nature of Bulgakov's story led to critical battles unfolding around the "Fatal Eggs". Reviews, bright, sometimes giving surprisingly deep interpretations of the writer's work, testify to the accuracy of the "hit" of Bulgakov's new work in the painful problems of the literary and social process of the mid-1920s.

The author himself, according to the testimony of the memoirist, evaluated the story modestly, despite the fact that even five years later, in 1930, "Fatal Eggs" was still a success, along with Fedin's "Cities and Years" were among the most requested books.

The story clearly traces at least three semantic layers, closely related to each other. Of course, this is a fantastic story, a utopian story, a satire story. But no less noticeable are the connections of the "Fatal Eggs" with the adventure novel, an adventure genre that is difficult to rethink.

3.1. The plot of the story

The protagonist of the work, the brilliant zoologist Persikov, who thoroughly owns his subject knowledge, opens the “red ray”, which gives an unprecedented effect of instant maturation, reproduction and increase in the size of amoebas. Before us is evolution, passing at lightning speed. Simultaneously with the opening of Professor Persikov, a chicken pestilence begins, destroying all the chickens in the country. The zoologist is called for help. Social and ideological motivations come into play, born decades ago, but firmly rooted in our days.

Here a character appears with the eloquent surname Rokk, in his hands is a paper from the Kremlin. There is a conversation between them: “I,” Persikov says, “I can’t understand this: why is such haste and a secret needed?

- ... you know that the chickens are all dead to a single one.

Well, so what of this, - yelled Persikov, - well, you want to resurrect them instantly, or what? …

I'm telling you that we need to resume production at home, because all sorts of nasty things are being written about us abroad. Yes.

Well, you know, - Rocky answered mysteriously and shook his head.

Decisiveness, personified by Doom, produces a disastrous result. Let us note that Rok himself, the culprit of countless disasters and human grief, is saved by the former, pre-revolutionary profession, which he, unlike the new one - the director of the state farm, owns.

Persikov will not be able to intervene in the experiment started by Rock, although he assumes its devastating consequences.

“You know what,” said Persikov, “you are not a zoologist? Not? It's a pity ... you would have made a very brave experimenter ... Yes ... ".

"A very brave experimenter", but not a zoologist, this speaks of Rock's ignorance of elementary things, such as how to distinguish eggs. Rokk was unable to distinguish the eggs of snakes, crocodiles and ostriches from chicken. The illiteracy of one person, who took possession of the discovery, became the cause of the catastrophe that broke out over the whole country, and the cause of the death of a brilliant scientist.

Instead of chickens, monsters hatched from eggs that ate all living things around. The snakes were about fifteen arshins and as thick as a man. There were a huge number of them. They crawled out of windows, from doors, from under the roof of the building.

Crocodiles are creatures on twisted legs, brown-green in color, with a huge sharp muzzle, with a combed tail, similar to a terrible lizard.

And ostriches are scary giant legged birds.

There was a mass destruction of all living things. It was impossible to stop these gigantic monsters. People lost their heads and, not understanding what was happening, killed the professor.

3.2. The semantic layers of the story.

But the death of a scientist also means the death of the “ray of life” he found. “No matter how simple the combination of glass with mirror beams of light was, it was not combined a second time, despite the efforts of Ivanov. Obviously, something special was needed for this, besides knowledge, which only one person in the world possessed - the late Professor Vladimir Ignatievich Persikov. Bulgakov said that there are irreplaceable people long before this idea, as already newly discovered, finally began to take root in the minds of a society that had been convinced of the opposite for a long time.

And, finally, another important semantic layer of the story: Bulgakov, with his commitment to describing contemporary events in their indispensable correlation with the “big” history, in a reduced, parodic version, seems to repeat the path (final) of the Napoleonic campaign in it. The snakes advance in the "Fatal Eggs" along the roads along which the French once went to Moscow.

The Doom experiment takes place in early August (“mature August” is in the Smolensk province), events unfold with incredible speed, in mid-August “all of Smolensk is on fire”, “artillery shells the Mozhaisk forest”, “airplane squadron near Vyazma” acted “very successfully” and, a little later: Smolensk "caught fire in all the places where they threw burning stoves and began a hopeless mass exodus."

In each story, besides the motives and themes that are steadily repeating, obviously, the most important for the writer, attention is drawn to a kind of "clamps", signals that seem to connect, fuse the created worlds of various works - into a holistic and unified artistic cosmos.

4. The story "Dog's heart".

Bulgakov's third story "Heart of a Dog" was written in January-March 1925. On March 7, Bulgakov reads the first part of The Heart of a Dog at Nikitinsky Subbotnik. March 21 - the second part of the story was read there.

The story “Heart of a Dog” came to the domestic reader more than sixty years after its creation, in the 6th book of the Znamya magazine in 1987.

The Moscow topography of the work is curious, again testifying to a certain autobiographical nature of it.

4.1. Summary of the story and analysis of episodes.

The path that Sharik follows his newly acquired divine master is drawn by Bulgakov with his characteristic accuracy: from the cooperative of the Centrokhoz to the fire brigade of Prechistina ... past Dead Lane ... to Obukhov Lane, to the mezzanine.

N.M. Pokrovsky, the brother of M.A. Bulgakov’s mother, a gynecologist and former assistant of the famous Moscow professor of gynecology V.F. Snegirev, lived on Prechistenki Street and Obukhov Lane in the mezzanine. This N.M. Pokrovsky was the prototype of the main character of the story "Heart of a Dog", Philip Filippovich Preobrazhensky.

The Faustian theme of the homunculus is taken by Bulgakov from an unexpected angle. A laboratory creature that was born as a result of an experiment - "the world's first operation on Professor Preobrazhensky."

There is an episode in the story that is worth the lengthy reasoning of the "general plan", which conveys and explains the skill of Preobrazhensky. This is a description of the operation, the climactic scene of the first part of "Heart of a Dog".

Preobrazhensky’s “teeth ... clenched, eyes acquired a sharp, prickly shine ... both became agitated, like murderers who are in a hurry ... Philip Philipovich’s face became terrible ... hissing escaped from his nose, his teeth opened to the gums”, he “looked around brutally ... growled ... roared angrily ... his face ... became like that of an inspired robber ... fell off completely, like a well-fed vampire. ... tore off one glove, throwing a cloud of sweaty powder out of it, tore the other, threw it on the floor and called ... ". Sweat, "predatory eye", tempo, passion, courage, virtuosity, risk and tension, which can be compared with the tension of a violinist or conductor - such is Philipp Philippovich in the "case", where both human essence and the highest professionalism are merged.

The newly minted "labor element" is struck by dinners with wine and "forty pairs of trousers", his ideological mentor Shvonder - "seven rooms that everyone knows how to occupy"; years research work the owner of these benefits, hundreds of operations and daily intellectual training are not visible to him.

Members of the house committee come to the professor, who have gone headlong into the round-the-clock utterance of correct and revolutionary speeches, replacing them with practical and everyday work. And these, according to the professor's sarcastic definition, "singers" act ... with the demand " labor discipline from a person who, unlike them, does not leave work for a single day - no matter what happens around.

Under the banner of social demagogy, which settles much faster and easier than the skills of creative activity, Sharikov becomes. He begins not with a problem book and grammar, but with Engels' correspondence with Kautsky, instantly "going out" to the most burning problem of "social justice" for him, understood as the task of "sharing" for everyone.

Decades ago, a shock was caused by Lenin's thought, sharpened in the formula about every cook who must learn to run the state. At first it was heard that "every cook" should do it. And only over time, attention moved to another part of the phrase: "must learn." But in order to start learning, it was necessary to realize the need to do it. Sharikov-Chugunkin, “standing at the lowest stage of development”, unable to even minimally appreciate the complexity of the subject under discussion (“Congress, the Germans ... the head swells ...”), enters into a debate with people who have spent years and years thinking about the problem , on an equal footing, without a shadow of a doubt.

The professor foresees a simple course of Sharikov's reasoning.

“- Let me know what you can say about what you read?

Sharikov shrugged.

Yes, I do not agree.

With whom? With Engels or with Kautsky?

With both, - answered Sharikov.

and further on Sharikov formulates the vulgar idea of ​​sharing equally among all, that is, he sets forth the very misunderstood idea of ​​social justice, which takes possession of the minds only at the seductive stage of division, and by no means of creation, the accumulation of what will become possible to share only much later. The professor makes an attempt, however, in vain, to clearly explain this to Sharikov.

Obviously, a sharp degradation of intellect, taking place before our eyes: no doubt, the stray mongrel is at an immeasurably higher level of development than Klim Chugunkin, who “has taken root” in her body.

In the second part - before us is no longer Sharik, but Klim Chugunkin, whose very first phrases speak of social aggression, immorality, uncleanliness and complete ignorance. It is no coincidence that the attention with which the writer fixes Sharikov's plasticity, his manner of behavior. He stands “leaning against the lintel” and “crossing his legs”, his gait is “sprawling”, when he sat down on a chair, then “at the same time, lowering his hands, hung his hands along the lapels of his jacket”, etc. According to Bulgakov, in posture, gesture, facial expressions, intonations, a person's attitude can be read no less clearly than heard in speeches and manifested in deeds. That “high bearing of spirit”, which does not allow the professor and his colleague to “poke” even a creature that does not enjoy any respect on their part, is polar opposite to Sharikov’s derogatory-familiar forms, in which it is common to clothe their relations with others. “An ordinary servant, but forsu, like a commissar” - about Zina; “Another one and a half rubles to pay for such a scoundrel. Yes, he himself ... ”- about a neighbor in the Kalabukhov house; "daddy" - in the address of Philip Philipovich and so on.

“That’s all we have, like in a parade,” Sharikov accuses his owners, “excuse me” and “merci”, but in order to really, it’s not ...”. That is, the norms of communication that are natural for the professor and his colleague, painful and burdensome for Sharikov, he considers "fake", painful for everyone.

4.2. What is the purpose of the writer's satire in the story.

“Really living” for Sharikov means nibbling sunflower seeds and spitting on the floor, swearing obscenely and molesting women, wallowing on the wards and getting drunk at dinner. Apparently, he is sincere when he declares to his educators that they "torture themselves, as under the tsarist regime." The idea of ​​the naturalness and "normality" of this, and not any other way of life does not come, and cannot come to Sharikov's head.

And in this he closes in, finds a common language with the members of the Komsomol, who are also quite sincerely convinced that a person has nothing to "live in seven rooms", have "40 pairs of pants", dine in the dining room, etc. Not necessary to one's own way of life - seems unnecessary to anyone else. From here, the threads from Bulgakov's story stretch to today's disputes about "normal needs", starting from an implicit conviction in the "sameness, similarity of human natures" and in the possibility of determining "scientifically" rational "norms of consumption". That is, in other words, it's all about the same indestructible "equalization", from which everything rising above the average level always suffers.

III
. Conclusion.

Bulgakov, in the best traditions of Russian and world literature, was characterized by pain for a person, whether he was an outstanding master or an unnoticed clerk.

The writer did not accept the literature that depicted the suffering of abstract, unreal heroes, passing by life at the same time. For Bulgakov, humanism was the ideological core of literature. And the true humanism of the master's works is especially close to us today.

Concluding the conversation about Bulgakov's satirical and fantastic works, let's make one assumption: all three stories, read as a single connected text, addressed to the same reality - Moscow in the 1920s, - in fact, "replaced" the writer's second novel. Bulgakov, talking about the polar forces acting in modern times, as if deploying a holistic human anthropology in these stories, asks the question - what is a person.

As if one and the same image passes from story to story, a human type hostile to the author, threatening social danger: “a low man on crooked legs” kills Persikov; Korotkov is driven mad by a petty tyrant Pantser with “twisted legs” and “small, like pinhead eyes”, the culprit of the country’s great grief Rokk looks at the world with “small eyes”, amazed and at the same time confidently, he has “something cheeky ” is “in short legs with flat feet”, a portrait of Sharikov is given in a similar way.

The described almost degenerative type is opposed by the hero who is finding more and more ground under his feet, looking for creative forces in himself in order to survive (and even win in the story "Heart of a Dog").

Let's add the emerging "marks" of the undisguised unity of Bulgakov's artistic world, which has already been discussed. All this, taken together, turns the three stories into a kind of "summary" of the novel, which grows out of modernity, assessed by a creative person.

The satire of M.A. Bulgakov is very closely connected with modernity. Now, in our world, you can meet the same cruel and callous people as Sharikov, the same stupid Rocca, the same Pantser, who will turn a person's head and mislead him. And at the moment there are a lot of such people. No matter how hard you try to make a human out of an animal, it will still remain the same small and vile person.

Having written a work on the satire of M.A. Bulgakov, we completed the tasks assigned to us, drew conclusions on each story and, in general, on the topic of the work, we expanded and systematized our knowledge of the work of M.A. Bulgakov.

At the end of The Excavations of Herculaneum, I began to search in the novel The Master and Margarita for a character under whose mask Lenin could be hidden. When searching, I did not consider it necessary to compare drafts and sketches with the canonical text of the novel, although such an analysis sometimes helps to unravel the author's allusions. Most of Bulgakov's hints in his political satires were correctly understood by the censors of that time and without familiarization with the "draft versions and sketches", as a result of which these satires were repeatedly considered at meetings of the Politburo of the Central Committee of the All-Union Communist Party of Bolsheviks - and were not allowed to be published or staged.
In my searches, I analyzed the texts of The Grand Chancellor and The Master and Margarita - and nothing more.
After such an introduction, I turn to the continuation of the story about my work with my favorite novel. I titled the next part of the story as follows:

MASSOLIT - NEW WORD M.A. BULGAKOV

Not prone to didacticism, I still repeat:

The novel "The Master and Margarita" was written during the years of cruel political terror, when the state diligently controlled not only the actions, but the thoughts and feelings of its citizens. The terminally ill Bulgakov knew the danger of storing the manuscripts of his last novel, and he subjected all the manuscripts of the novel to thorough self-censorship, destroyed places with extremely sharp content in them, and skillfully obscured all hints of a political nature and all his heretical thoughts, or encrypted, as we speak today.

Bulgakov mastered the language of the Menippean satire, and it is unlikely that he used the colossal power of his talent in the "sunset" novel for ridicule-shooting at small targets - most likely, he aimed at the biggest, most important culprits of the tragic events in Russia. How to find these large but carefully veiled targets? - that's the question.
In an attempt to answer this question, I undertook an independent decoding of the word coined by Bulgakov - MASSOLIT.

MASSOLIT is the abbreviated name of one of the largest Moscow literary associations. The author of "The Master and Margarita" nowhere gave the full name of the association he invented, which allows the researchers of the novel to ambiguously decipher this word - MASSOLIT.
Usually, researchers proceed from the fact that since we are talking about the Literary Association, the ending ... LIT should be related either to LITEratura or LITERATORS - and such decodings of MASSOLIT appear:
- Moscow Association of LITERATORS;
- MASS SOCIALIST LITERATURE;
- MASS LITERATURE;
- MASTER OF SOVIET LITERATURE;
- MASTER OF SOCIALIST LITERATURE, etc.

But the ending "... LIT" can also be the final component of complex words, meaning either related to stone, similar to stone (for example, monolith, paleolith), or a product of decomposition, dissolution (for example, electrolyte). In this case, the abbreviated name "MASSOLIT" can be deciphered regardless of literature and writers - for example, like this: "Mass like a stone", or like this: "Product of decomposition of masses" ...

The special atmosphere characteristic of the progressive development of technology and science, impressive inventions similar to the discoveries of Welsh's heroes, the presence of specialized terms in Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov's "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" can be correlated in the mind of an inattentive reader with the belonging of these stories to a number of scientific - fantastic works. However, these literary works also touch upon social problems characteristic of the modern era of the author, which, among other things, makes one speak of "Fatal Eggs" and "Heart of a Dog" as dystopias.

Written in 1924, "Fatal Eggs" contains the story of the professor-zoologist Persikov, who discovered the ray of life, which accelerates the growth and reproduction of all living creatures that fall within its field of action. The inventor, for further study of the beam, writes out eggs of snakes and crocodiles from abroad. At the same time, an epidemic spread in the country, killing all the chickens; in order to "revive" them, one of the state farms decided to use Persikov's equipment. And here a fatal mistake occurs: instead of chicken eggs, reptile eggs ordered by the professor get to the state farm ... A massive struggle begins in the country with giant reptiles, and only unprecedented August frosts became a salvation from them. The scientist himself (even before the victory over the mutants) was killed by an angry mob.

“... the professor began to dress in the lobby. He put on a gray summer coat and a soft hat, then, remembering the picture in the microscope, he stared at his galoshes as if seeing them for the first time. Then he put on the left and wanted to put on the right on the left, but it did not climb. “What a monstrous accident that he called me back,” said the scientist, “otherwise I would never have noticed him. But what does this promise?.. After all, this promises the devil knows what it is!.. The professor grinned, narrowed his eyes at the galoshes and took off his left and put on his right. - My God! After all, you can’t even imagine all the consequences ... - The professor contemptuously poked the left galosh, which irritated him, not wanting to fit on the right one, and went to the exit in one galosh. Immediately he lost his handkerchief and went out, slamming the heavy door. On the porch he searched for matches in his pockets for a long time, slapping his sides, found it and set off down the street with an unlit cigarette in his mouth. The scientist did not meet a single person until the very temple. There the professor, with his head thrown back, was chained to the golden helmet. The sun licked sweetly on one side. “How could I not have seen him before, what an accident?.. Pah, fool,” the professor leaned over and thought, looking at his differently shod feet, “hm ... how to be? To return to Pankrat? No, you can't wake him up. Throw it away, vile, sorry. You have to carry it in your hands. “He took off his galosh and squeamishly carried it.”

A typo in the newspaper is also comical, where Persikov's surname is printed with an error: "Pevsikov", which hints at the professor's burriness, and, consequently, at identifying him with the main Russian and Soviet "experimenter" - Vladimir Ilyich Lenin. Here it is essential to remember the fate that the author "prepared" for the leader.

In general, the story (as well as Bulgakov's work as a whole) is literally saturated with all sorts of prototypes, their presence even more strongly wraps it in a dystopian genre form, just based on the technique of parodies. In the work “On the pages of the dystopias of K. Chapek and M. Bulgakov”, S.V. Nikolsky points out the use of prototypes by the writer, except for Lenin, Abrikosov (Persikov), Trotsky (Bronsky), Stalin (Stepanov), Kamenev (Rock).

The inclusion of these parallels (a real person - a character) contains a clear indication of revolutionary events. The whole story is “painted” with red shades: raspberry eggs, the Krasny Luch state farm, the Krasny Paris hotel, the Red Evening Moscow newspaper, the Krasny Ogonyok, Red Spotlight, Red Pepper, Red Journal magazines . Even the ray of life is “painted” in the color of the revolution, and the amoebas endlessly moving and fighting each other under the microscope are the participants in the revolutionary movement themselves.

It is quite logical that at the center of this socially acute work is a tense conflict, where the mind of Professor Persikov opposes the absurdity of the head of the state farm Rocca. The reckless use of scientific discoveries can harm society. Rokk did not take this into account, which led to disaster.

The very solution to the problem associated with the mass death of chickens is absurd in nature. Attempts to artificially breed birds turned not into a chicken Renaissance, but into a reptile invasion ...

Bulgakov gave a different outcome to the story "Heart of a Dog", written in 1925. Moscow professor Filipp Filippovich Preobrazhensky, conducting research in the field of rejuvenation, performs a transplant operation on a dog human organs. The thief and alcoholic Klim Chugunkin, who died in a fight, became a donor for the homeless dog Sharik. Soon a new person appears in the professor's house, possessing both "Sharikov's" and "Klimov's" negative habits. Preobrazhensky very soon had to regret the experience, since his "ward", oversaturated with proletarian ideas, became in fact a class enemy. The scientist, together with his assistant Bormental, decides to remake Sharikov back into Sharik, who, already in his old guise, remains to live in the professor's apartment, not remembering past offenses to the owner.

Preobrazhensky, unlike Persikov, significant only as the inventor of the ray of life, is one of the main characters. The “lifelines” of the professors from the first and second stories are similar: they are of social importance, since they have an impressive scientific potential, both are the creators of phenomenal inventions, they are a “tidbit” for scandalous journalists, they are subject to pressure from the socialists, for example, through attempts separating rooms. But in the biography of Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky one can no longer find any misunderstandings with galoshes or typos. He is presented as a wise, educated, independent and, it is important to emphasize, intelligent person.

As an active defender of the rights of intellectuals, Bulgakov very vividly portrayed their confrontation with the proletarians, who live by principles in the spirit of "divide everything" or "who was nothing, will become everything." Sharikov, who adheres to the interests of the working class, is a vivid antipode of Preobrazhensky. And, it seems to me, in order to even more clearly focus on the relationship of these heroes, the writer endowed them with names and patronymics built on the same model: Philipp Filippovich and Polygraph Polygraphovich. Through this plot conflict, which is closely connected with social reality, the story's belonging to a number of anti-utopias is clearly expressed.

So, Sharikov is the “new man” that the supporters of Marxist teachings wanted to create, this is the real harbinger of the beginning of the “new era”, which the revolutionaries most expected. And here, according to anti-utopian tendencies created on the basis of a variation of the myths about the birth of Jesus and the flood, he is a parody of Christ, and therefore the Antichrist. If you look at the situation more broadly, then Preobrazhensky is God himself. This is what the model of the most undesirable future looks like, when two ideals implacably clash with each other!

Bulgakov's stories The Fatal Eggs and The Heart of a Dog contain ideal examples of a by no means ideal future. These works have a bright, expressionistic style, futurological orientation and, most importantly, social significance. Mikhail Afanasyevich, deeply indifferent to social problems, clearly showed how great the influence of the environment on objects and phenomena. The results of the discoveries of Persikov and Preobrazhensky would have been safe in themselves, but in the prevailing social conditions they are deadly...

And there is no reason to doubt the genius of the writer, who at an early stage of his work so skillfully handled anti-utopian techniques.

M.A. Bulgakov (1891-1940). Life and destiny. Writer's satire. Analysis of satirical works ("Heart of a Dog", "Fatal Eggs").

The whole life of this restless and brilliant writer was, in essence, a merciless battle with stupidity and meanness, a struggle for the sake of pure human thoughts, for the sake of what a person should be and dare not not be reasonable and noble. K.Paustovsky

Andrey Sakharov

Lesson Objectives:

show the complexity and tragedy of the life and career of M. A. Bulgakov , arouse interest in the personality and work of the writer;

reveal the diversity of the problems of Bulgakov's stories, identify the principles of combining everyday reality and fantasy in the writer's work,show the relevance of satirical works, develop the skills and abilities of analyzing a prose work , helpunderstand what Bulgakov's stories warn us about;

develop the ability of ideological-compositional and stylistic analysis of the text;

proceedto form the ability to choose the main thing in the development of action , express your thoughts clearly and consistently, argue your statements, prepare a report; to develop the ability of students to draw up main ideas in a summary.

Lesson objectives:

Educational:

1. Give a brief overview of the life and career of M.A. Bulgakov; to acquaint with the peculiarities of the fate of Bulgakov as a writer and a person, to note the diversity of the writer's work, to acquaint with the author's methods of creating satirical works; improve the skill of searching for information about the life and work of the writer; improve the skill of monologue speech.

2. Introduce the stories "Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs", understand the meaning of the works, help understand what Bulgakov's stories warn us about, evaluate the topicality of the works; to prove that the satirical works of the writer are modern and relevant.

3. In the process of working on works, develop the ability of ideological-compositional and stylistic analysis of the text, continue to form the ability to choose the main thing in the development of action, express your thoughts clearly and consistently, argue your statements; improve the ability to analyze a literary work

Developing: contribute to the formationindependent cognitive activity, development of skillscarry out reflective activities; develop the ability to correctly generalize reflexive activity; develop the ability to correctly summarize data and draw conclusions.

Educational: to cultivate love and respect, respect for the national heritage, to promote the formation of patriotic feelings,rejection of hypocrisy, cruelty, arrogance and lack of culture.

Educational Resources: Literary dictation, lecture material, slide films about the life and work of M.A. Bulgakov, stories "Heart of a Dog", "Fatal Eggs", assignments for group work. Video by V.V. BortkO "Dog's heart".

I.

Stage 1

1 . Organizing time.

II. Knowledge update .

Today we are starting to study the work of the Russian writer, playwright, theater director of the 1st floor. 20th century. Author of novels and short stories, many feuilletons, plays, dramatizations, screenplays, opera libretto (Libretto- verbal text of a theatrical musical and vocal work),

Let's get acquainted with his difficult and tragic fate).

Before we start talking about it, let's first watch a slide film,and then we'll continue talking.(No. 1 Viewing a slide - film about the writer from 00.00 - 0.40)

Goal setting.

So ... what associations did you have after what you saw? Who will be discussed? Look at the desk. You see a portrait of the writer. The date below is 1935. This is practically his last years of life. In five years, the writer will be gone ... He was only49 years old. (see epigraph), + (Class board)

So, we will talk about M.A. Bulgakov.

1. And now, acquaintance with the work and life path of M.A. Bulgakov(№2Slide film "Biography of the writer" up to.030; before 1.03; up to 1.36; until 2.09); textbook, p.118

- What biography facts made an impression on you? Name the works of the writer known to you.

(Famous works of Bulgakov: « The Master and Margarita », « %A%D%BE%D%B%D%B%D%87%D%C%D%B_%D%81%D%B%D%80%D%B%D%86%D%B », « %97%D%B%D%BF%D%B%D%81%D%BA%D%B_%D%E%D%BD%D%BE%D%B%D%BE_%D%B %D%80%D%B%D%87%D%B », « %A%D%B%D%B%D%82%D%80%D%B%D%BB%D%C%D%BD%D%B%D%B_%D%80%D%BE %D%BC%D%B%D », « %91%D%B%D%BB%D%B%D%F_%D%B%D%B%D%B%D%80%D%B%D%B%D%F_%28%D %80%D%BE%D%BC%D%B%D », « %98%D%B%D%B%D%BD_%D%92%D%B%D%81%D%B%D%BB%D%C%D%B%D%B%D%B %D%87_%28%D%BF%D%C%D%B%D%81%D%B ”,“ Notes on cuffs ”,“ Fatal eggs ”,“ Diaboliad ”).

The story (addition) of the teacher about the life and work of M.A. Bulgakov.

Bulgakov the writer and Bulgakov the man are still largely a mystery. His political views, attitude to religion are unclear…. His life consisted, as it were, of three parts, each of which is remarkable for something.

- Before 1919 he is a doctor, only occasionally trying his hand at literature.

- In the 20s Bulgakov is already a professional writer and playwright.

In the 30s Mikhail Afanasyevich -theater worker.

Hisdid not print , plays were not staged, they were not allowed to work in their beloved Moscow Art Theater.

He had a special relationship with Stalin. The leader criticized many of his works, directly alluding to anti-Soviet agitation in them. But despite this, Mikhail Afanasyevich did not experience what was called a terrible wordGulag (Main Department of Camps and Places of Detention – subdivision %D%D%B%D%80%D%BE%D%B%D%BD%D%B%D%B_%D%BA%D%BE%D%BC%D%B%D%81 %D%81%D%B%D%80%D%B%D%B%D%82_%D%B%D%BD%D%83%D%82%D%80%D%B%D %BD%D%BD%D%B%D%85_%D%B%D%B%D%BB_%D%A%D%A%D%A%D%A , %C%D%B%D%BD%D%B%D%81%D%82%D%B%D%80%D%81%D%82%D%B%D%BE_%D%B %D%BD%D%83%D%82%D%80%D%B%D%BD%D%BD%D%B%D%85_%D%B%D%B%D%BB_%D %A%D%A%D%A%D%A" who managed the places of mass forced imprisonment and detention in 1930-1956. ). And diednot on the bunk (although in those days they were taken away for much smaller sins), and in their own bed (fromnephrosclerosis inherited from the father).(No. 3 see film from 00.51).

Robbed to the skinE Removed from readers and viewers, "sealed" in his apartment with government seals, terminally ill, knowing that his days were numbered, Bulgakov remained himself: he did not lose his sense of humor and sharpness of language. So, he didn't lose his freedom.

This was M. A. Bulgakov . A doctor, journalist, prose writer, playwright, director, he was a representative of that part of the intelligentsia, which, without leaving the country in difficult years, sought to preserve itself even in the changed conditions. He had to go through an addiction to morphine (when he worked as a zemstvo doctor), a civil war (which he experienced in its two burning centers - his native city of Kyiv and in the North Caucasus), severe literary persecution and forced silence, and in these conditions he managed to create such masterpieces that are read all over the world.

Anna Akhmatova called Bulgakov succinctly and simply - a genius, and dedicatedhis memory poem(student reads):

Here I am for you, instead of grave roses,

Instead of incense smoking;

You lived so harshly and brought it to the end

Great contempt.

You drank wine, you joked like no one else

And suffocated in stuffy walls,

And you yourself let in a terrible guest

And he was alone with her.

And there is no you, and everything around is silent

About the mournful and high life,

And on your silent feast...

2. Blitz Poll

“Life and work of M.A. Bulgakov"

When and where was M.A. Bulgakov? (05/15/1891 in Kyiv)

III. stage Analytical conversation .

2. Satire writer

Teacher: Today, the focus of our attention is the satirical works of the writer.

Question: Let's Let us recall the theory of literature: what is satire and its types.

Satire - kind of comic.

Image Subject - vices.

Source - the contradiction between universal human values ​​and the reality of life.

Types of satire:

Humor is a good laugh.

Irony is a joke.

Sarcasm is a caustic, caustic mockery, the highest degree of irony.

Means of satire:

Hyperbole is an exaggeration

Grotesque - a combination of fantastic and real

Contrast - opposition

The satirical stories of M.A. Bulgakov, written in1925 ., sounded very timely, became a reflection of the mindset of a number of scientists and cultural figures who felt alarmed by the changes taking place in Russia.

Question: What worried the writer himself? This is where we will look into it.

Teacher: The stories are satirical and therefore today we will talk about what ? (O satirical skill of the writer - the successor of the best traditions of Russian satire of the 19th century in the person of N.V. Gogol, M.E. Saltykov - Shchedrin).

- What are the main problems the author poses in his works? (Eternal struggle good and evil , morality and immorality , freedom and unfreedom the issue of human responsibility for one's actions - these are all eternal, basic problems of human life.)

- What are the names of such works in which universal human problems are affected? (Such works are called philosophical )

- What is the peculiarity of the creative manner of the writer Bulgakov? (In his works - combination of real and fantasy , monstrous grotesque and real norm; the speed of the plot; flexibility of lively colloquial speech.)

Why did Bulgakov write satirical works at this particular time? To answer this question, remember how Bulgakov perceivedOctober Revolution.
(Everything that happened around, which was called the construction of socialism, was perceived by the writer as dangerous and huge experiment . Bulgakov believed that the situation that developed in the first decades after the October Revolution, tragic . People are turned into gray, homogeneous, featureless mass . Perverted concepts of eternal values. Stupidity, wretchedness, lack of spirituality, primitiveness prevail. All this causes the writer a feeling of hostility, indignation. Apparently, this contributed to the fact that in the first decades after the October Revolution, satirical works .)

So what kind of works will we talk about today? ( "Fatal Eggs" (1925), "Heart of a Dog" (1925).
In literature, Bulgakov first acted as a newspaperman, wrote feuilletons.

Until the mid 20s he is a satirist writer, the author of the stories "Diaboliad" (1923), "Fatal Eggs" (1925), "Heart of a Dog" (1925) complete the cycle of the author's satirical works.

Teacher: We have seen more than once that writers react very sensitively to the slightest changes in public life: they reflect the mindset of people, predict the course of social development, and try to warn of any alarming consequences of certain events.

Question: What event is the 1st floor. The 20th century can be considered decisive for the development of Russian art, incl. literature? ( October Revolution of 1917 ) . ( October Revolution (full official name in 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 - Great October Socialist Revolution , other names:"October Revolution" %E%D%BA%D%82%D%F%D%B%D%80%D%C%D%81%D%BA%D%B%D%F_%D%80%D%B %D%B%D%BE%D%BB%D%E%D%86%D%B%D%F" ] , "October uprising", "Bolshevik coup" ) - one of the largest political events of the 20th century, which influenced the further course of%92%D%81%D%B%D%BC%D%B%D%80%D%BD%D%B%D%F_%D%B%D%81%D%82%D%BE %D%80%D%B%D% , literature and art.

It is possible to treat this event in different ways, but it is impossible to deny that it became crucial not only for Russia, but also for other countries of the world.

After all, M.A. Bulgakov was not the first to turn to the topic of revolutionary changes in the country.

A. Blok, S. Yesenin, V. Mayakovsky, A. Fadeev, E. Zamyatin - these are just some of the names of writers who tried to comprehend what was happening, each in his own way. The intonations were different: both enthusiastic, and cautious, and glorifying, and pessimistic…

IV. Analysis of satirical works ("Heart of a Dog", "Fatal Eggs").

I could not part with the idea that I was involved in

unrighteous and terrible deeds. I had a terrible sense of powerlessness.

Andrey Sakharov

Question: Why do you think these words of Academician Sakharov were taken as an epigraph to the lesson about the stories "Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs"?

(Andrey Dmitrievich Sakharov - %A%D%A%D%A%D%A %A%D%B%D%B%D%B%D -theorist, academician%90%D%D_%D%A%D%A%D%A%D%A , was one of the founders of the first Soviet%92%D%BE%D%B%D%BE%D%80%D%BE%D%B%D%BD%D%B%D%F_%D%B%D%BE%D%BC %D%B%D%B . Laureate%D%D%BE%D%B%D%B%D%BB%D%B%D%B%D%81%D%BA%D%B%D%F_%D%BF%D%80 %D%B%D%BC%D%B%D%F_%D%BC%D%B%D%80%D%B ). The discovery of weapons of mass destruction made him, like Bulgakov's professor Preobrazhensky, think about the responsibility of a scientist and science as a whole to society, to history.

20th century - the time of all kinds of revolutions, the century of world wars and unprecedented changes in the way of life and way of thinking of billions of people. The search for truth, the search for truth has become a fundamental search for the best representatives of the intelligentsia.

AT"Notes on cuffs" M.A. Bulgakov says with bitter irony:“Only through suffering does truth come... That's right, be calm! But they don't pay money for knowing the truth, they don't give rations. Sad but true."

Being in the center of a rapid cycle of events, people and opinions, Bulgakov asks himself and his readers the eternal question of the gospelPontius Pilate : "What is truth?"

Already in the 20s, the difficult years of the 20th century, the writer tried to answer this question with his satirical works, raising in themthe following problems :

1. Merciless condemnation of the "pure" science of its priests.

2. The problem of personal responsibility of a person of culture before life.

3. The problem of human self-government.

Let's try to trace how the writer reveals theseProblems.

And first, let's recall the content of satirical works ("Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs")

Literary quiz.

The story "Heart of a Dog"

2. What song does Sharikov play on the balalaika? ("The moon shines")

3. Whom does the main character hate the most? (cats)

4. The first word that Sharikov uttered? ("Abyr" - "Fish")

5. For what purposes did Sharikov take 7 rubles from the house committee? (For the purchase of textbooks)

6. How does Sharikov explain to the bride that he has a scar on his forehead? (Wounded on

on the Kolchak fronts)

The story "Fatal eggs"

a) Abrikosov

b) Yablochkin

c) Peaches

5. What were the consequences of the unexpected frost?

1. A satirical condemnation of "pure" science and its priests, who imagined themselves to be the creators of a new life.

Teacher:

M. Bulgakov's stories "Heart of a Dog" and "Fatal Eggs" are about professors of the old school, brilliant scientists who made brilliant discoveries in a new era that they did not quite understand. Both of them came to Bulgakov's prose from Prechistenka (now Kropotkinskaya Street in Moscow). Bulgakov knew this area well and loved its inhabitants. Therefore, probably, he considered it his duty to “depict the intelligentsia as the best layer in our country”

Question: Why did the classical intellectuals from Prechistenka suddenly become the object of satire? ( But because Bulgakov's satire is a clever and sighted satire. The writer saw that the talent of a scientist, impeccable honesty, combined with loneliness can lead to tragic and unexpected consequences. This is what happens with Professor Persikov, dear to Bulgakov's heart, almost the same thing happens with Professor Preobrazhensky).

Question: What discoveries did they make?

So, "Fatal Eggs" (See the presentation "Fatal Eggs") 1-4 frame.

1 . student performance with individualh giving"Scientific discovery of Professor Vladimir Ipatievich Persikov" 5 frame.

“In the red stripe, life was in full swing. Gray amoebas, releasing their pseudopods, stretched with all their might into the red stripe and in it (as if by magic) came to life. Some force breathed into them the spirit of life. They climbed in a flock and fought with each other for a place in the beam. There was a frenzied, no other word for it, reproduction. Breaking and overturning all the laws... they budded before his eyes with lightning speed. ... In the red stripe, and then in the entire disk, it became crowded, and the inevitable struggle began. The reborn lashed out at each other furiously and tore and swallowed. Among the born lay the corpses of those who died in the struggle for existence. The best and strongest won. And those best ones were terrible."

This is the brilliant discovery of Professor Persikov , which would bring him fame, world fame, which, obviously, could somehow be used in the national economy. The professor did not think about this, because he had to make a series of experiments and experiments.

Teacher: And now the story"Dog's heart". You met this story in 9th grade. The story was filmed in1988 ( 1987 printed ). Film directorVladimir Vladimirovich Bortko ) is a Russian film director, screenwriter and producer. The film adaptation of the story brought the director recognition of the world film community - the film was awarded the Grand Prix of the Perugia Film Festival (Italy).

2. student performance with an individual task"Professor Preobrazhensky's unique operation in his pituitary transplant experience."

( Pituitary - a brain appendage in the form of a rounded formation located on the lower surface of the brain in a bone pocket called the Turkish saddle, produces hormones that affect growth, metabolism and reproductive function )».

Philip Filippovich Preobrazhensky (60 years old) - a luminary in medicine. He produces a unique experience in transplanting the pituitary gland of a deceased person (Klim Chugunkin) to a homeless dog Sharik. This operation was carried out by Prof.December 22 , aJanuary 2 recorded indiary of Dr. Bormental, this humanized dog got out of bed, which "... confidently kept on its hind legs for half an hour." And on the same day, according to the testimony of an assistant to Professor Dr. Bormental: “In my presence and Zina’s presence, a dog (if a dog, of course, can be called) cursed Professor Preobrazhensky for his mother.”

This operation of the professor is a truly scientific discovery: “He looks strange. The hair remained only on the head, on the chin and on the chest. He is otherwise bald, with loose skin. In the genital area - an emerging man. The skull is greatly enlarged. The forehead is sloping and low.

Teacher: It would seem that the scientific discoveries of Persikov and Preobrazhensky should have shocked the world scientific community and brought certain benefits to humanity. What happens in reality?

- What is same withfate of the "red ray" discovered by Professor Persikov?

Someone came to the professorAlexander Semenovich Rokk “with official paper from the Kremlin”, surprisingly reminiscent of Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov: “Little eyes looked at the whole world in amazement and at the same time confidently, there was something cheeky in short legs with flat feet.”6 frame.

The great discovery of a talented scientist led to disaster.

People flew out of the doors, howling:

Beat him! Kill!..

World Villain!

You unleashed the bastards!

…A short man, on monkey crooked legs, in a torn jacket, in a tornshirtfront strayed to the side, ahead of the others, reached Persikov and cut his head open with a terrible blow of a stick.

A man remarkably similar to Sharikov kills a brilliant scientist.8-9 frame.

Conclusion: So andHELL. Sakharov saw the consequences of his invention, after he proposed to use an electric charge inplasma placed in a magnetic field to produce a controlled thermonuclear reaction. It is not known in whose hands the scientific discovery will fall, for what purposes it will be used. So, following from the first, the second theme of the satiricaldilogy M.A. Bulgakov.

2. The theme of the personal responsibility of a person of science, culture before life, before history.

- And what happened to the real Sharikov?

The dog Sharik was smart in his own way, like a dog, observant and not even alien to the satirical gift. The life that he saw from the doorway was really aptly captured by him. He knew how to highlight the typical details in it.

And now Sharik turns into Sharikov.

What techniques does the author use?

Grotesque. Realization of the metaphor : who was nothing, he will become everything. Uses a fantasy situation. Helps to understand the absurdity of the idea.

How did the life of Preobrazhensky change with the advent of Sharikov?

The house turns into HELL . The theme of the house is cross-cutting in Bulgakov. Home is the center of human life. The Bolsheviks destroyed the house as the basis of the family, the basis of human society.

The appearance of Sharikov in the professor's house is a nightmare...(No. 6 slide film “Who killed the cat of Madame Polosukhina ...).

Teacher: When did it come "Star Hour" Sharikov?

-P retreat to service. “Yesterday they strangled cats, strangled them” - persecution of their own - characteristic all ball. Destroy their own, covering the traces of their own origin . Deceived the girl. Shame, conscience, morality are alien. There is hatred, malice . He is really dangerous ( №7 . Cm . slide-film Benefis Sharikov… ); … Cats were strangled, strangled;+ 2min.37.

Teacher : Professor Preobrazhensky, who decided to improve nature, took the liberty of competing with life by creating an informer, an alcoholic and a demagogue, who sat on his neck. The professor realized his mistake.

Conclusion: So a person, even a genius, intruding into the laws of nature, imagining himself the Creator, enduresfiasco.

In The Master and Margarita, whom we will meet later, Woland asks two Moscow writers Berlioz and Ivan Bezdomny, who claim that there is no God: “If there is no God, then, one asks, who controls human life and the whole order on earth?” To which Ivanushka replies: The man himself manages!

This is how Bulgakov poses the most real and most acute problem in the 20th century.

3. The problem of human self-government

This is the 3rd the most important topic story "Heart of a Dog".

20th century became a time of destruction, disintegration of the former thousand-year order of human life. This is the time of the destruction of the old human ties, the old ways of managing human behavior. The old type of government rested on the veneration of Christian commandments, on the authority of the king, class morality. Now the leading idea of ​​the era has become the words:“No one will give us deliverance: neither a god, nor a king, nor a hero. We will achieve liberation with our own hand."

This is where block freedom came from"no cross". Having freed himself from his former dependence, a person fell into a more difficult submission to his uterine, selfish, selfish interest. Bulgakov leads usto the conclusion : where the natural course of life is spurred on by ignorance, self-interest, nothing good can be expected there.

Question : Is it possible to entrust the management of life to the Sharikovs, Shvonders, Rokku?

Clever Professor Preobrazhensky understood this (No. 8 cm . slide film); 35.32-37.17.

But the Shvonders, Sharikovs, Rocky will never understand this truth.

Sharikovs breed quickly, and no one is going to fight them (unlike the naked reptiles). Professor Preobrazhensky talks about it(№9 . Cm . slide film Shvonder is the most important fool ... ); 38.18 – 38.51.

An interesting conversation of Professor Preobrazhensky about devastation(№10 . Cm . slide-film … Devastation… ch.3)+

Bulgakov repeatedly callsexperience Professor Preobrazhensky "crime". So, the author, developing Dostoevsky's theme "Crime and Punishment", did not believe that in an instant it was possible to make a person sinless and righteous, and leads the hero to the famous conclusion:(№11 . Cm . slide-film... Never commit a crime...). 37.50-38.17

This idea will be the main one in The Master and Margarita.

Conclusion. Perhaps,more crime - under the guise of revolutionary renewal, to commit violence over the entire course of history, over the destinies of people. Professor Preobrazhensky talks about such experiments: “They should not think that terror will help them. Terror completely paralyzes the nervous system.

Isn't it a bold story! But it was not published during the life of the author. On the faceterror over literature, culture, Bulgakov was right:terror over culture has led to paralysis, stagnation and death.

Conclusion:

In everythingtimes of satire served the ideas of humanism, enlightenment and the ideals of beauty, to which the authors of satirical works called, revealing the underside of reality by various means of humor and calling for the virtue of morality, spirituality, education, and intellectual development.

Writers - classics of the 19th century, represented byA. S. Griboedova, N.V. Gogol (poem "Dead Souls") A. S. Pushkin, M. Yu. Lermontov, I. A. Krylova in fables , and especially "biting "satire by M. E. Saltykov-Shchedrin , expressed disgust for tyranny, serfdom, capital orders with the help of satire, because satire - this is a fine line of humorous and comic, which boldly reveals the essence in an accessible and understandable form, stigmatizing social vices, gives hope and uplifts the spirit even in the most bitter moments of life, precisely because it helps to turn the usual picture of the world, turning it from tragic into unimaginably tenacious and inspiring joke.

These can rightly be attributed to the satirical works of M.A. Bulgakov, which we talked about today in the lesson.

7. Reflection.

Bulgakov did not change his views on fashion or profit. But he thought hard about everything he saw before him. And his thought ... was inclined towards the analysis of the living, not confused by dogma or prejudice, and supported by the responsibility of a witness and chronicler of great and tragic events in the life of the motherland. In all the rifts of fate, Bulgakov remained true to the laws of dignity...

V.Ya. Lakshin

Resource material for the lesson

Literary quiz based on the story "Fatal Eggs"

1. What is the main character's last name?

a) Abrikosov

b) Yablochkin

c) Peaches

2. What scientific discovery does Professor Persikov make?

a) It opens the "ray of life", under the influence of which bacteria begin to multiply wildly

b) He finds an antidote for cancer

c) He managed to clone a sheep

3. What is the difference between individuals that appeared with the help of the "ray of life"?

a) They age much more slowly

b) They have increased stamina

c) They become incredibly aggressive and destroy weaker relatives with a frenzy

4. What is happening in the USSR in the meantime?

a) A general “chicken disease” begins, and all chickens on the territory of the USSR die

b) Some fungus settles on grain crops, and cereals begin to die in huge quantities

c) Large cattle begins to die from an unknown disease

5. What happens after Professor Persikov and Rokk discharge eggs from abroad?

a) Rokk, with the help of a beam and chicken eggs discharged from abroad, restores the number of poultry

b) Snake eggs and chicken eggs get mixed up on delivery and Rokk gets snake eggs

c) The eggs prescribed by Rock are broken

6. What happens after Rokk places the reptile eggs in the chambers?

a) All cameras fail at the same time

b) Birds and frogs take off, and dogs howl, anticipating trouble

c) Having carefully examined them, Rokk understands that these are not chicken eggs

7. What happens after the reptiles hatch from their eggs?

a) The room in which they are located can be isolated, and the reptiles themselves can be killed

b) Terrible chaos begins in the country, and hordes of reptiles are approaching Moscow

c) An unknown disease begins to mow down the hatched monsters

8. What happened on the night of August 19-20?

a) Hordes of monsters attacked Moscow

b) An eighteen-degree frost suddenly hit

c) Moscow was recaptured from the monstrous reptiles

9. What were the consequences of the unexpected frost?

a) Frost destroyed all reptiles and their embryos in eggs

b) He plunged the monsters into suspended animation

c) He weakened the animals, and people partly took them out of the country, partly exterminated them

10. What happens to the magic beam technology after the disaster?

a) It is sold abroad for a lot of money

b) No one else can get the beam

c) The beam is beginning to be used for military purposes

Answers: 1-in; 2-a; 3-in; 4-a; 5 B; 6-in; 7-b; 8-b; 9-a; 10-b.

Literary dictation. “The life and fate of M.A. Bulgakov. The story "Heart of a Dog"

I. “The life and fate of M.A. Bulgakov"

When and where was Mikhail Bulgakov born? (05/15/1891 in Kyiv)

Where did you study? (Alexander Gymnasium, Faculty of Medicine, Kyiv University).

The most famous works of the writer ("Master and Margarita", "White Guard", "Running", White Guard.)

What role did women play in life? (Inspired, helped in life's difficulties, served as his ideal).

Where and when did Bulgakov die? (03/10/1940)

II. The story "Heart of a Dog"

1. In what year was the story written? (1925). Printed? (1987)

2. Remember the lines of Professor Preobrazhensky's favorite romance.

(“From Seville to Grenada…”, “To the banks of the sacred Nile…”)

3. What song does Sharikov play on the balalaika? ("The moon shines")

4. Who does the main character hate the most? (cats)

5. The first word that Sharikov uttered? ("Abyr" - "Fish")

6. How old is Professor Preobrazhensky? (60)

7. How much money did Sharikov steal from the professor? (2 chervonets)

8. For what purposes did Sharikov take 7 rubles from the house committee? (For the purchase of textbooks)

9. How does Sharikov explain to the bride that he has a scar on his forehead? (Wounded on

on the Kolchak fronts)

10. What, according to Sharikov, will the cats killed by him go to? ("To the poles").

The story "Fatal Eggs" was written by Bulgakov in 1924. Already publishing the story in abridged form in four issues of the magazine "Red Panorama" (1925), Bulgakov changed the title from "Ray of Life" to "Fatal Eggs". The story was published in full in the Nedra magazine No. 6 for 1925, in the same year it was included in the collection Diaboliad.

Literary direction and genre

The story belongs to the modernist trend in literature. Fantastic events taking place in it, Bulgakov transfers to the near future (1928). Thanks to this, the story acquires the features of a dystopia, in which the events of Soviet life and the achievements of Soviet science are comprehended satirically.

Issues

In the satirical story, the main social problem is the future of the country. Bulgakov questions the viability of the new state, still hoping that after the "invasion of reptiles", epidemics and diseases, the country can recover.

Philosophical problems are also raised: the role of chance in human life and history, personality in history.

Plot and composition

The events of the story have a clear chronological framework and the accuracy inherent in the chronicles. The beginning of events falls on April 16 (the day after Easter in 1928), and the invasion ends on the night of August 19-20 (the day after the Transfiguration). Such allusions to the resurrection (in this case, something diabolical) and the transformation of the world, its return to its former imperfect but normal state, embody Bulgakov's hope for a possible return to the former "normal" pre-revolutionary life.

The age of the professor is precisely indicated (58 years old), the year when Persikov's wife ran away from Persikov, unable to bear his frogs.

Professor of zoology Persikov, who specializes in amphibians, accidentally discovers a beam that has arisen by refraction in the lenses of a microscope, under the influence of which living organisms grow to unusual sizes and multiply intensively. Soon an epidemic of chicken disease destroys all the chickens in the country. The chairman of the Krasny Luch state farm, who wants to quickly restore chicken breeding in the republic, having secured paper from the Kremlin, temporarily takes three cameras that generate a beam from the professor.

Animals in the institute have a premonition of evil: the toads are raising a concert, chirping "ominously and warningly." When Rokk begins to illuminate the eggs with a red beam, dogs howl at the state farm and frogs tear themselves up, then the birds fly away from the surrounding groves, and the frogs disappear from the pond. They seem to be aware of a mistake that Rokk, who has received a parcel from abroad intended for Persikov, is not aware of. The eggs first hatch into two anacondas, 15 arshins long and as wide as a man. One of them swallows Rocca's fat wife Manya, after which Rocca turns gray and runs to the Dugino station with a request to send him to Moscow.

An agent of the state political administration is killed in a fight with snakes and crocodiles crawling out of the greenhouse. The reptiles threaten Smolensk, which burns in a fire from the stoves left in a panic. Animals move to Moscow, laying a huge number of eggs along the way. From Moscow, where martial law has been declared, gold reserves and works of art are hastily taken out. A cavalry army was sent to fight animals, three-quarters of which died near Mozhaisk, and gas detachments poisoned a huge number of people.

An angry mob kills Persikov and destroys his camera, and three cameras at the Krasny Luch state farm die in a fire.

The chicken pestilence, and then the invasion of reptiles, are presented in the story as a fatal disaster, the punishment of an entire country. Proof of this are the borders of the chicken pestilence. In the north and east, the sea was stopped by the sea, and in the south by the steppes. But surprising is the fact that the pestilence stopped at the border of Poland and Romania. Words about a different climate in these places hint at the true reason - a different political system, over which the diseases of the Soviet state do not have power.

The invasion of reptiles (a word that speaks and, undoubtedly, was associated by Bulgakov with the events of the revolution and the civil war) was stopped by severe frosts, which cannot be in nature at that time. This is a symbol of help from above, only God can stop the Soviet danger creeping into the country, like huge reptiles. No wonder the frost hit the night after the religious feast of the Transfiguration of the Lord (among the people of the Savior).

It was not possible to restore the cameras without Persikov, apparently because they were made at the devil's instigation.

Heroes of the story

Professor Vladimir Ipatievich Persikov- a genius focused on science. He is professor of zoology at the university and director of the Zoological Institute on Herzen Street.

The professor's appearance is unsympathetic, even repulsive or funny. Bulgakov ironically calls the head wonderful: "bald, pusher." Bulgakov pays attention to such details as a protruding lower lip, which gave the face a whimsical shade, a red nose, old-fashioned glasses, a raspy croaking voice. Persikov had a habit of twisting his index finger when explaining something.

Detachment from the outside world, as well as the faithful housekeeper Marya Stepanovna, allow the professor to survive the most difficult, hungry and cold years. But this same detachment makes him a misanthrope. Even the death of his own wife, who left Persikov 15 years ago, seems to leave him indifferent.

Peaches scares ordinary people, they talk to him “with respect and horror”, or with a smile, like with a small, albeit large, child. Persikov is dual in nature, he only partly relates to the world of people, and partly to the other world. In a word, Persikov is an almost demonic being, therefore he is far from life and is not interested in it.

Persikov loses his human form when he learns that two batches of eggs are mixed up. It becomes multi-colored, blue-white, with multi-colored eyes. On the other hand, there is something mechanical in Persikov: he acts and speaks automatically and monotonously, calling Pankrat in case of danger.

Alexander Semyonovich Rokk- Head of the exemplary state farm "Krasny Luch", located in Nikolsky, Smolensk province.

This hero has a telling surname. When Pankrat informs Persikov that Rokk came to him with paper from the Kremlin, Persikov is surprised that rock can come and bring paper from the Kremlin. Rokk is dressed old-fashioned, on his side is an old design Mauser in a yellow holster.

Rock's face makes an extremely unpleasant impression on everyone. Small eyes look amazed and confident, his face is blue-shaven.

Rokk until the age of 17 served as a flutist in the concert ensemble of maestro Petukhov, performed in the cinema "Magic Dreams" in the city of Yekaterinoslavl. The revolution showed that "this man is positively great."

Persikov immediately guesses that Rokk with eggs "hell knows what he'll do." The men in the Ending call Rocca the Antichrist, and the eggs are devilish, they even want to kill him. At the end of the story, Rock vanished to no one knows where, which once again proves his diabolical nature.

Stylistic features

There are many hidden meanings in the story. The subtext is in the title itself. The original name "Ray of Life" is ironic, because the red ray invented by the professor turns out to be just a ray of death that threatens the whole country. This name echoes the name of the state farm, where all the misfortunes began - "Red Ray". The name “Fatal Eggs” is symbolic, the egg, as the beginning and symbol of life, turns out to be fatal as a result of a mistake and turns the life (reptiles) born in it into death for people.

The egg and the chicken become the subject of ridicule of the characters and the irony of the author. The inscription "The burning of chicken corpses at Khodynka" evokes the reader's memory of the Khodynka tragedy with a huge number of victims, which happened through the fault of the authorities (this is how chickens become innocent victims for people).

People laugh at death, turning the chicken plague into a joke, a carnival. The coupletists sing a vulgar song: “Oh, mother, what will I do Without eggs? ..”, a slogan addressed to foreign capitalists appears: “Don't prey on our eggs - you have your own.” Grammar and stylistic errors neutralize the tragedy of the play "Chicken Doh" and the inscription on the egg store "Quality Guarantee". The literary work "Chicken's Children" is immediately associated with the rude "sons of bitches."

Rocca's question, asked by phone to Persikov, is also ambiguous: "Should I wash the eggs, professor?"

To create a comic effect, Bulgakov actively uses clichés and clichés of official business style, creating unimaginable names for emergency commissions (Dobrokur). Bulgakov gives his characters meaningful surnames. The head of the livestock department at the supreme commission is called Ptakha-Porosyuk (a hint at the food program).

The main techniques for creating comic in the story are irony and grotesque.