About
Content
Store
Forum

Rebirth of Reason
War
People
Archives
Objectivism

Post to this threadMark all messages in this thread as readMark all messages in this thread as unreadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page


Post 0

Wednesday, March 10, 2010 - 7:22pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Review on Amazon.com:

An Unvarnished and Unedited Look at Early 19th Century Russia
This is one of the most readable of the historical travelogues I've encountered. The prose is fresh, and the attitude contemporary. It comes with a Forward by Daniel Boorstin and an Introduction by George F. Kennan.

The descriptions of entering the country, St. Petersburg, roads and traveling on them (treatment of horses, skill and attitude of drivers), the portraits of the overly polite short fused aristocracy and the many interesting conversations are very good. There are great descriptions of countryside, the architecture, the market at Nijni, the plight of the peasants, and the continual plague of insects. There are ruminations on Russian history and comparisons of Russian and French culture, ethics and well being.

The best, though is the author's take on the effects of the autocracy, and how the despotic attitude trickles down. For all his refined manners, the czar meets out swift, frequent and severe punishment. (Siberia and/or torture) and through his auspices, aristocrats and officials feel entitled to perform acts of great cruelty as well. Because those who are not being punished live in fear that they will be, Custine calls the Czar the jailer of !/3 of the world.

One drawback of this book is that Custine repeats his analysis on the trickle down effects of the czar's power over and over again. The book is long, and about 200 pages are devoted to this very well thought out but overstated thesis. Another drawback for me was that while he did not stay long in Moscow, I would have liked more description of it.

Post 1

Wednesday, March 10, 2010 - 8:55pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Speaking of Samizdat I am almost finished watching the 2005 miniseries adaptation of The Master and Margarita. I read the novel in the 1990's. I keep thinking of Rand's hatred of the "mystic spirit" of Russia, but I think the book is wonderful and cultured. What am I missing?

(Edited by Ted Keer on 3/10, 9:02pm)


Post 2

Thursday, March 11, 2010 - 7:14amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
>>>I keep thinking of Rand's hatred of the "mystic spirit" of Russia, but I think the book is wonderful and cultured. What am I missing?<<<

Nothing. Ayn Rand told you about "mystic spirit", and Bulgakov made you feel it.

Anyone writing about Russia sooner or later gets to this phenomena. Even if they don't touch religion. Russians tend to bring mysticism (or some surreal feeling) into their everyday life, just as Americans tend to bring pragmatism into their religion.



(Edited by Maria Feht on 3/11, 8:19pm)


Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 6, No Sanction: 0
Post 3

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 8:15amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
It's one of examples when words are inadequate to describe the complex concept. Whatever you imagine saying "mystic spirit", it is different than what I imagine saying the same thing.

That what the art is for - to describe the concepts which don't fit into simple words.


PS That's why I don't believe in "modern art" where every artist invents their own language - art serves to convey the message through generations when languages and even some concepts will be forgotten.

Post 4

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 9:00amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I would not at all describe Master and Margarita as mystical. Yes, it is magical. There is an hilarious talking cat, the Devil doing magic tricks, predicting a man's death, producing cigarettes from his pocket and hosting a Devils' Ball. The heroine becomes a witch and flies on a broom. We witness Jesus' interrogation by Pontius Pilate and Pilate talking to Jesus in a dream after Jesus' execution. But this is all fantasy, set in parodical contrast with atheistic and "scientific" Stalinist Russia. There is no supposition that, for example, by acts of self-denial, faith, prayer and the purposeful choice of unhappiness the meek characters will achieve union with the cosmic oneness and be relieved of the suffering of the physical universe.

The sense of life is positive. Margarita is closer to Dominique than any other heroine I can think of. The book, and the miniseries I have jujst finished enjoying is a fantasy and a satire, not a mystical work.

It occurs to me that Solaris much better reflects what I think Rand meant by mysticism.

Post 5

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:01amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
I think you are wrong: Master and Margarita is mystical, almost oriental. They do not fight the oppression, they do not run from it, they die and find their liberation in death. Other people who could do the same but didn't - feel sorry to continue their lives. Hardly a positive message!

Despite all the magical things this book is very close to Russian reality, or to true perception of reality.

Many Russians were and still are so disgusted with real life that they prefer to live in their fantasy world. It creates a surreal feeling when you try to deal with them as if you entered a mad house, even when everything looks normal. If you didn't feel it reading the book - the translation was bad.

Sharp contrast with Americans who are involved in messy business of improving life here and now.

If you have 2 minutes look up the video in my profile - the famous Russian poem by M. Lermontov. It contains the same message of never subscribing to real life as in M&M.
___________

Solaris is more about dr. Freud than mysticism (IMHO). It mostly about exploring the unknown (including our brains). Unknown exists, only our perception of it can be mystical (or not).
(Edited by Maria Feht on 3/12, 10:30am)


Post 6

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:26amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Translation does not change the plot or theme of a book. It merely effects the rendition of the style.

Master and Margarita is not a great work, just a good one. I doubt I will reread it. It is full of many different elements which are not integrated into a necessary plot scheme. So it is rather hard for me to argue on its behalf.

But is a fantasy and a satire, and it succeeds as such. The satire of the posturing and socially ambitious government and literary officials is quite good. The manoeuvering to get the apartment where the tenants keep dying and disappearing is hilarious. Behemoth is a Satanic trickster, and reminds me of Francisco.

You say that the heroes choose death to avoid oppression. But Margaita is not concerned with the fate of the masses any more than Kira is iun We the Living. Both women are concerned with their man and both women seduce the devil in order to save their loves. Also, Azazel poisons Margarita and the Master (in order to grant them a form of immortality) they do not choose death. They were happy with each other in their basement, living a private life. Paradoxically the fault is Bulgakov's for not having a better plot development, not his characters for their choices.

Yes, the book is magical and hence to that extent irrational; But the magic is "realistic" in that it deals with concrete, perceivable, describable "realistic" effects such as turning a literary critic into a pig, a Ball where the dead such as Caligula come back to life and dance, and a talking cat who engages in random acts of violence. This is very different from a mystical story where things are inscrutable, there is no way to tell the difference between dreams and reality, and one is encouraged to renounce what one values. Compare the terrible mystical movies Jacob's Ladder and What Dreams May Come which are all about dreams and the renunciation of worldly values.

In a mystical novel Margarita would have convinced the Master to renounce writing andd to destroy his manuscript in order to become a "higher" kind of writer, she would not have saved it. Margarita is a passionate valuer who renounces nothing.

Post 7

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:35amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here is part one where the Devil, (described as an Englishman) walking thru a rich Moscow neighborhood, overhears two secondary characters, a literary official telling a poet that he should not portray Christ so realistically since Jesus never existed. (The first 2 1/2 minutes are credits.)



Post 8

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:40amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Here Margarita accepts Azazel the demon's offer on behalf of Satan to make her a witch. Mystical? I would say magical and joyous. What is the sense of life here? (Note that the "realistic" scenes are filmede in sepia tones while the magical ones are in full color.)



(Sorry, no subtitles.)

Post 9

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 10:47amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
>>>Note that the "realistic" scenes are filmed in sepia tones while the magical ones are in full color.<<

Yes, because the world of fantasy is more important than real life. It's not a coincidence that so many events in this book are happening in mental institution.


(Edited by Maria Feht on 3/12, 11:07am)


Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Sanction: 11, No Sanction: 0
Post 10

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 11:06amSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
>>They were happy with each other in their basement, living a private life. Paradoxically the fault is Bulgakov's for not having a better plot development, not his characters for their choices.<<

What choices? Bulgakov was perfectly correct. No private life in Stalinist Russia was possible. You want to be true to yourself - you die. Or you run! They didn't run.

Quote from my brother's book:

"Try to imagine someone writing an absurd farce, and performing it on stage as though it were serious. You are required to attend each daily performance, whether you like it or not. Worse, the spectators are applauding, and seem to be satisfied. Your neighbor chastises you to be quiet when you start to laugh or protest, even if you do it softly. Comparing life with the stage is trite, I know, but there is no better analogy.

Farce! This word gives you all the nuances of Soviet life. There is reportedly a torture called "music box," where the victim is forced to hear the same melody over and over again. Even the most resistant very soon become hysterical. The Chinese water torture has the same effect. Tell me how to escape the slogans, newspapers, trade union meetings, May 1st demonstrations, subbotniks (forced voluntary "labor donations"), literally endless wait to get an apartment, thousands of other queues and lines. Tell me how to find the strength to keep from spending your life arguing with fools. Every day is the same; even if you have no ambitions to succeed as a Soviet citizen, even if you choose to live your life as a pauper."





Post 11

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 12:31pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Maria, would you call The Lord of the Rings mystical?

Post 12

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 12:39pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
No! that's pure fantasy created to entertain teenagers and to make a load of money. Never-ever Tolkien left the real world.


So..., are you planning to read Marquis de Custine? :-)



(Edited by Maria Feht on 3/12, 12:50pm)


Post 13

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 1:18pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Lord of the Rings was most certainly not written "for teenagers" nor to make tons of money. The ugly and self-parodic movies thereof are not worth comment.

Neither was Kira in We The Living a revolutionary. Her goal was neither to fight nor to flee but to live with Leo for which she was willing both to stay in Russia and to sleep with Andre. She was shot, Leo was corrupted and Andre killed himself. Margarita won her man.

I am sorry to hijack your thread. If I ever come across Custine's book I will look at it, but I do not like the genre as such. I see the book is for sale for as low as a nickel, used.



Post 14

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 2:27pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
>I am sorry to hijack your thread. If I ever come across Custine's book I will look at it, but I do not like the genre as such. I see the book is for sale for as low as a nickel, used.<<

Well, nobody seemed to be interested anyway. It's a huge book and it was re-typed on typewriter, imagine the effort, and now nobody cares. I myself didn't read it for a long-long time.

>>>Margarita won her man.<<<

In her dreams. Bulgakov mentions many times the mental illness. Can anybody stay sane in a mad world?


Post 15

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 2:56pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The coming of the Devil to Moscow is portrayed as real. The Master and Bezdomniy are incarcerated by the authorities, who are blind, because they insist on the truth, that Satan is real and is the one wreaking havoc in Moscow. Margarita is not incarcerated in an insane asylum. All the magic event to which she is witness are "real" within the universe of the novel. Wikipedia:

The novel alternates among three settings. The first is 1930s Moscow, which is visited by Satan in the guise of Woland or Voland (Воланд), a mysterious gentleman "magician" of uncertain origin, who arrives with a retinue that includes the grotesquely dressed "ex-choirmaster" valet Koroviev (Fagotto) (Фагот, the name means "bassoon" in Russian and some other languages), a mischievous, gun-happy, fast-talking black cat Behemoth (Бегемот, a subversive Puss in Boots, the name referring at once to the Biblical monster and the Russian word for Hippopotamus), the fanged hitman Azazello (Азазелло, hinting of Azazel), the pale-faced Abadonna (Абадонна, a reference to Abaddon) with a death-inflicting stare, and the witch Hella (Гелла). The havoc wreaked by this group targets the literary elite, along with its trade union, MASSOLIT (a Soviet-style abbreviation for "Moscow Association of Writers", Московская ассоциация литераторов, but possibly interpretable as "Literature for the Masses"; one translation of the book also mentions that this could be a play on words in Russian, which could be translated into English as something like "LOTSALIT"), its privileged HQ Griboyedov's House, corrupt social-climbers and their women (wives and mistresses alike) – bureaucrats and profiteers – and, more generally, skeptical unbelievers in the human spirit.

The opening sequence of the book presents a direct confrontation between the unbelieving head of the literary bureaucracy, Berlioz (Берлиоз), and an urbane foreign gentleman who defends belief and reveals his prophetic powers (Woland). This is witnessed by a young and enthusiastically modern poet, Ivan Ponyrev, who writes his poems under the alias Bezdomniy (Иван Бездомный – the name means "Homeless"). His futile attempt to chase and capture the "gang" and warn of their evil and mysterious nature lands Ivan in a lunatic asylum. Here we are introduced to The Master, an embittered author, the petty-minded rejection of whose historical novel about Pontius Pilate and Christ has led him to such despair that he burns his manuscript and turns his back on the "real" world, including his devoted lover, Margarita (Маргарита). Major episodes in the first part of the novel include Satan's magic show at the Variety Theatre, satirizing the vanity, greed and gullibility of the new rich; and the capture and occupation of Berlioz's apartment by Woland and his gang.

Part 2 introduces Margarita, the Master's mistress, who refuses to despair of her lover or his work. She is invited to the Devil's Walpurgis Night midnight ball, then made an offer by Satan (Woland), and accepts it, becoming a witch with supernatural powers. This coincides with the night of Good Friday, linking all three elements of the book together, since the Master's novel also deals with this same spring full moon when Christ's fate is sealed by Pontius Pilate and he is crucified in Jerusalem.

The second setting is the Jerusalem of Pontius Pilate, described by Woland talking to Berlioz and echoed in the pages of the Master's rejected novel, which concerns Pontius Pilate's meeting with Yeshua Ha-Nozri (Иешуа га-Ноцри, Jesus the Nazarene), his recognition of an affinity with and spiritual need for him, and his reluctant but resigned and passive handing over of him to those who wanted to kill him.

The third setting is the one to which Margarita provides a bridge. Learning to fly and control her unleashed passions (not without exacting violent retribution on the literary bureaucrats who condemned her beloved to despair), and taking her enthusiastic maid Natasha with her, she enters naked into the world of the night, flies over the deep forests and rivers of Mother Russia; bathes, and, cleansed, returns to Moscow as the anointed hostess for Satan's great Spring Ball. Standing by his side, she welcomes the dark celebrities of human history as they pour up from the opened maw of Hell.

She survives this ordeal without breaking, and for her pains and her integrity she is rewarded: Satan offers to grant Margarita her deepest wish. She chooses to liberate the Master and live in poverty and love with him. However, neither Woland nor Yeshua thinks this is a kind of life for good people, and the couple leaves Moscow with the Devil, as its cupolas and windows burn in the setting sun of Easter Saturday. The Master and Margarita leave and as a reward for not having lost their faith they are granted "peace" but are denied "light", i.e. salvation.




Post 16

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 3:07pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
The subject of Custine's writing is of some interest to me, but I simply have too many other books on my bedstand. I have read In The Uttermost East and some other Western European descriptions of Siberia. I am linguistically interested in the languages of the indigenous Siberians.

Тож Шануйме Рідне Слово
Од Велика Аж До Мала
Вшытко Інше Зме Стратили
Лем Бесіда Нам Остала


Post 17

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 3:38pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
In this book you can pick and choose what's real and what's not. Was Moscow really visited by Satan, or did they simply all went mad because of unending arrests? Remember the truckload of Soviet people singing patriotic songs going straight to insane asylum. Or: in one of the last chapters Master asks Margarita: Are you sure we met Satan yesterday? When the answer is Yes, he continues: "Now we are both insane - husband and wife. Oh, well!"

>> I am linguistically interested in the languages of the indigenous Siberians.<<<

Indigenous Siberians are related to American Indians, I know very little about them and their languages.
Ermak Timofeevich, the conqueror of Siberia, did a very thorough job in exterminating the native population. Vodka did the rest.

Post 18

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 4:01pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
Okay, if you insist, but he was free and had his manuscript, which had been burnt.

In any case, the book is a fantasy, not a work of mysticism, if you understand my distinction

---.

Only the Yenisei Ostyaks or speakers of the Ket language on the Yenisei are directly related to North American Indians by language, in this case the Athabaskans and Navajo. The Nivkh, Chukchi-Kamchatkans, Yukaghirs, and the Yakuts, Mongols, and the Permyaks, Mordvin and Mari and the Chuvash and other Finno-Ugric and Altaic speakers are actually closer to the Eskimos in the east and the Indo-Europeans in the west, Culturally the more primitive Eastern Siberians are similar to the Indians and are related by blood.

I enjoy these two websites:

Вавилонская Башня

Nostratica

(Edited by Ted Keer on 3/12, 7:00pm)


Post 19

Friday, March 12, 2010 - 5:28pmSanction this postReply
Bookmark
Link
Edit
This conversation is becoming insane :-)

>>Okay, if you insist, but he was free and had his manuscript, which had been burnt.<<

The established fact is that Master burned his manuscript, Margarita was too late. Everything else is insanity: in my experience (and probably yours too) once you burn something - it stays burnt. Unless you want to believe in some paranormal forces which are capable of turning things around. And who is more insane - you who want to believe it - or the world around you which went mad.

>>>In any case, the book is a fantasy, not a work of mysticism, if you understand my distinction<<<

If you skip Jesus Christ chapters (many people do). But they occupy big portion of the book. I think Bulgakov was leaning toward mysticism.

Many people of his generation were mentally ill: because of Gulag experience, or when they saw everyone around them vanished there.

From Bulgakov's biography:

Bulgakov was married three times: with Tatiana Nikolaevna Lappa (1913), Liubov Evgenevna Belozerskaia (1924), and Elena Sergeevna Shilovskaya (1932), who gave invaluable support to the author when he wrote The Master and Margarita and had his fits of paranoia.



Post to this threadPage 0Page 1Forward one pageLast Page
[an error occurred while processing this directive]