Korovin from Master and Margarita. Dark purple knight, or the Secret of Koroviev. Kornelyuk wrote music for the film for a year

*To joke or not to joke?
Until recently, one of the "DARK PLACES" of "The Master and Margarita" was considered to be the mention of an unsuccessful joke, for which the "purple knight" - in the earthly incarnation of Koroviev-Fagot - paid the price. Recall this place from the scene of the last flight:

“In place of the one who, in tattered circus clothes, left Sparrow Hills under the name of Koroviev-Fagot, now galloping, quietly ringing with a golden rein chain, was a dark purple knight with a gloomy and never smiling face. He rested his chin on his chest, he did not look at the moon, he was not interested in the moon below him, he was thinking about something of his own, flying next to Woland.
Why has he changed so much? Margarita asked softly to the whistle of the wind at Woland.
“This knight once made an unsuccessful joke,” Woland answered, turning his face to Margarita with a quietly burning eye, “his pun, which he composed when talking about light and darkness, was not entirely good. And the knight had to joke after that a little longer and more than he expected. But tonight is such a night when scores are settled. The knight paid his bill and closed it!”

Lydia Yanovskaya, in her book Woland's Triangle and the Purple Knight (Tallinn, 1987), argued that the mention of an "unfortunate joke" is evidence of the "incompletion" of some lines of the novel. That is, the writer "forgot" to decipher his hint. The "purple knight" itself, in her opinion, is a demon depicted in Vrubel's painting "Azrael", which Bulgakov could see in the Russian Museum when visiting Leningrad in the summer of 1934. She considered a separate phrase in a notebook of 1933 to be a sketch of the future, a pun that remained unknown: "Light creates a shadow, but never, sir, the opposite happened."

Indeed, it would seem that there are enough grounds for assumptions about the “incompleteness” of the image of the dark purple knight.

Let's start with the fact that the writer put the phrase about "an unsuccessful joke" into Woland's mouth far from immediately. So, in one of the editions of the last flight - the chapter "Night", dated 29. IX. 1934, we read:

“The poet clearly saw how his hat and pince-nez fell off Koroviev, and when he caught up with the stopped Koroviev, he saw that instead of a false regent, in front of him in the naked light of the moon sat a purple knight with a sad and white face; golden spurs shone brightly on the heels of his boots, and golden reins tinkled softly. The knight, with eyes that seemed to be blind, contemplated the living star of the night.

Nobody asks Woland any questions about the transformation of Koroviev, and he, accordingly, does not comment on this transformation.

The commentary appears only in the chapter "The Last Flight" in the edition subsidized on 6.VII.1936 (Zagoryansk):

“Here the master saw a transformation. Koroviev, galloping beside him, tore off his pince-nez and threw it into the moonlit sea. His cap flew off his head, the vile little jacket and lousy trousers disappeared. The moon poured a mad light, and now he played on the golden clasps of the caftan, on the hilt, on the stars of the spurs. There was no Koroviev, not far from the master galloped, pricked the side of the horse with stars, a knight in purple. Everything about him was sad, and it even seemed to the master that the feather from the beret was hanging sadly. Not a single feature of Koroviev could be found in the face of the flying rider. His eyes frowned at the moon, the corners of his lips pulled down. And, most importantly, the speaker did not utter a single word, the more annoying jokes of the former regent were not heard.
Darkness suddenly swooped down on the moon, a hot snort hit the back of the master's head. It was Woland who caught up with the master and cut him across the face with the end of his cloak.
“He once joked unsuccessfully,” Woland whispered, “and now, he was condemned to joke when he visits the earth, although he doesn’t really want to. However, he hopes for forgiveness. I will intercede."

As we can see, in both editions it is not Margarita who draws attention to Koroviev's metamorphosis, but the master (named poet in 1934). But what is much more interesting is that Messire mentions the knight’s unsuccessful joke, but does not go into details.

However, that's not all! In the second complete handwritten version of the novel, completed in 1938, Bulgakov again refuses to hint at a joke. Moreover, he associates Koroviev with one of the darkest and creepiest characters in Bulgakov's work:

“The one who was Koroviev-Fagot, the self-styled translator of a mysterious foreigner who did not need translations, would now not be recognized by any of those with whom, to their misfortune, he met in Moscow.
On Margarita's left hand, a dark knight with a gloomy face was galloping, ringing with a golden chain. He rested his chin on his chest, he did not look at the moon, he was thinking about something, flying after his master, he, not at all prone to jokes, in his real form, he is an angel of the abyss, dark Abaddon.

In other words, Abaddonna and Koroviev unite as one character. And again Margarita does not ask questions, but Woland is silent.

It is only in the final version of the novel that the pun about light and darkness appears.

Involuntarily, you will think: maybe Bulgakov really did not decide to the end with this ill-fated joke?

** Don Quixote, but not the one
ANOTHER RESEARCHER, BORIS SOKOLOV, suggested that the roots of the "joke" should be sought in Bulgakov's staging of Don Quixote:

“The baccalaureate Sanson Carrasco, one of the main characters in Bulgakov's dramatization of the novel Don Quixote (1605-1615) by Miguel de Cervantes (1547-1616), served as a kind of prototype for the knight Fagot here, in all likelihood.
Sanson Carrasco, seeking to force Don Quixote to return home to his relatives, accepts the game he has started, pretends to be a knight of the White Moon, defeats the knight of the Sad Image in a duel and forces the defeated man to promise to return to his family. However, Don Quixote, returning home, cannot survive the collapse of his fantasy, which has become his very life, and dies. Sanson Carrasco, Knight of the White Moon, becomes the unwitting culprit in the death of the Knight of the Sorrowful Image. The duke tells Sanson after Don Quixote is wounded that "the joke has gone too far", and the dying hidalgo calls Carrasco "the best knight of all", but a "cruel knight".
Don Quixote, whose mind is clouded, expresses a bright beginning, the primacy of feelings over reason, and a learned bachelor, symbolizing rational thinking, does dirty deeds contrary to his intentions. It is possible that it was the Knight of the White Moon who was punished by Woland with centuries of forced buffoonery for the tragic joke on the Knight of the Sad Image, which ended in the death of a noble hidalgo.
(“Secrets of the Master and Margarita. Bulgakov deciphered.” - M, Eksmo, Yauza, 2005).

The assumption is not without originality. Especially if you remember the phrase from the 1934 manuscript that connected the purple knight and the "naked light of the moon":

“The knight, with eyes that seemed to be blind, contemplated the living star of the night.”

And yet it is more than doubtful. Not only because Samson Carrasco (whom Bulgakov changed into Sanson, alluding to a hereditary Parisian executioner of the late 18th - early 19th centuries) in the novel by Miguel de Cervantes does not at all resemble Fagot:

“The bachelor, although he was called Samson, was nevertheless small in stature ..., round-faced, snub-nosed, big-mouthed.”

In the end, in Bulgakov's play, the portrait of the bachelor is not given, but in character he really resembles Koroviev: Cervantes notes in Carrasco
“a mocking disposition and a penchant for fun and jokes, which properties he showed as soon as he saw Don Quixote, for that very hour he knelt before him and said:
- Your greatness, Senor Don Quixote of La Mancha! Grant me your hands, for I swear by the attire of St. Peter ... that your grace is one of the most famous knights-errant ... ".

And then Carrasco continues to mock the "most glorious knight" - in the manner of Koroviev-Fagot. Sanson Carrasco, choosing the nickname of the Knight of the White Moon, associates himself with this night luminary, which personifies otherworldly forces for Bulgakov.

However, the mention of the unsuccessful joke of the "purple knight" ( purple in the Catholic tradition - the color of mourning) we already meet in drafts dated July 6, 1936, while the first editions of Bulgakov's Don Quixote appeared in September 1938, and the final version dates from January 1939. True, in 1936 the meaning of the joke is not yet indicated:

“He joked unsuccessfully once,” Woland whispered, “and now, he was condemned to joke when he visits the earth, although he doesn’t really want to do this ...”.

If this passage had remained in this edition, the comparison of Fagot with Bachelor Carrasco would have at least some sense. But when we talk about the final version of the farewell flight chapter, such a parallel is at least ridiculous. Sanson's evil joke of dressing up and fighting, even at a stretch, cannot be called "a pun that he composed while talking about light and darkness." Carrasco does not pun in conversation, he acts. Moreover, it does not speak of either light or darkness.

But it was not in vain that the writer explained the content of the unsuccessful joke in the final edition: therefore, something is behind it ...

***Severe Dante did not despise grins...
THERE IS ANOTHER ASSUMPTION WHERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A pun. In N 5 of the journal "Literary Review" for 1991, Andrei Morgulev's article "" Comrade Dante "and" former regent "" was published, in which the author suggests that in the image of Koroviev-Fagot could be depicted ... Dante Alighieri. The author of the article writes:

“From a certain moment, the creation of the novel began to take place under the sign of Dante. Recall that the cosmology of the novel was borrowed by Bulgakov from the "Comedy" through the "mediation" of Pavel Florensky. "One of the first Moscow acquisitions of Bulgakov was, apparently, the book by P. Florensky "Imaginations in Geometry" (M., "Pomorye", 1922). The special value of this copy is in more than anywhere else Bulgakov's numerous litters .. According to the memoirs of E. S. Bulgakova, the book was carefully preserved by the owner and re-read more than once during the years of work on The Master and Margarita, and Bulgakov saw in the mathematical and philosophical interpretation that the author of the brochure gives to the journey of Dante, led by Virgil, hell, a kind of analogue to the "geometry" of the last chapters of his novel, "M. O. Chudakova writes about this."

Alexey Morgulev notes the visual similarity between Bulgakov's dark purple knight and the traditional images of the author of The Divine Comedy:

“The gloomiest and never smiling face - this is exactly how Dante appears in numerous French engravings, and this is not accidental. Describing a lifetime portrait of Dante by Giotto's hand, Carlyle notes: "I think that this is the saddest face that has ever been copied from a living person; in the full sense of the word, a tragic face that touches the heart." Giovanni Boccaccio, a younger contemporary of Dante, writes that Dante "looked invariably thoughtful and sad." Finally, J. A. Symonds describes the death mask from Dante's face as follows: "The general expression of the face is very calm, sad and serious ...".

The literary critic recalls that Alighieri belonged to the knighthood: the great-great-grandfather of the great poet Kachchagvid won the right to his family to wear a knight's sword with a golden handle.

WELL, SUPPOSE, "PURPLE KNIGHT" in the scene of the last flight really outwardly resembles the great Dante. However, how to compare Dante Alighieri with the eternal mocker and squirm Koroviev? Here is the question.

And here it is necessary to understand in essence: was he so gloomy, this “severe Dante”?

Let us turn to Osip Mandelstam's essay "A Conversation about Dante", where he sharply opposes such an interpretation of the author of the "Divine Comedy":

“As Dante became more and more beyond the reach of both the public of the next generations and the artists themselves, he was enveloped in more and more mystery ... The ignorant cult of Dante's mysticism unfolded magnificently, devoid, like the very concept of mysticism, of any concrete content. The “mysterious” Dante of French engravings appeared, consisting of a hood, an aquiline nose and something hunting on the rocks. In Russia, no one, like Blok, fell victim to this voluptuous ignorance on the part of his enthusiastic adherents who did not read Dante:

Dante's shadow with an eagle profile
About the New Life sings to me ...

Now I will show how little the fresh readers of Dante were concerned about his so-called mystery. I have before my eyes a photograph from a miniature of one of the earliest Dante's copies of the mid-14th century (collection of the Perugina Library). Beatrice shows Dante the Trinity. A bright background with peacock patterns is like a cheerful chintz heel. The Trinity in a palm mug is ruddy, red-cheeked, merchant-like. Dante Alighieri is depicted as a very daring young man, and Beatrice is a lively and chubby girl. Two absolutely everyday figurines: a healthy schoolboy is caring for a no less flourishing townswoman…
I want with all my might to refute the disgusting legend about the unconditionally dull coloration or the notorious Spenglerian brownness of Dante. To begin with, I will refer to the testimony of a contemporary illuminator. This miniature is from the same collection of the Perugina Museum. She to the first song: "I saw the beast and turned back."
Here is a description of the colors of this wonderful miniature, of a higher type than the previous one, and quite adequate to the text: “Dante's clothes are bright blue (“azzurro chiara)””.

Isn't that last detail rather curious? Of course, blue is not purple, but still ...

So, subsequent, later generations made Dante gloomy with a heavy look and a twisted mouth - even despite the fact that contemporaries noted both the sad face and the sad fate of the poet. But in the descendants it appeared in a hypertrophied form.

AND NOW BACK TO BULGAKOV. Many literary scholars note the special richness of the language of The Master and Margarita, where high, bookish vocabulary, refined style coexist with common people's vocabulary. Bulgakov's experience in journalism, of course, enriched his literary language with the vocabulary of the street, gates, jargon and argotism.

On this basis, the author of the “alternative reading” of Bulgakov’s last novel, Alfred Barkov, analyzing the stylistic features of the narration in The Master and Margarita, makes an unexpected conclusion that the narrator in the novel is none other than ... Koroviev:

“In view of the limited volume of the article, I will cite only a few facts: “Stupid Speeches”; "Taking care of a foul cat"; "The regent blew him up, didn't shout anything"; "Griboyedov beat any restaurant in Moscow with the quality of his provisions, as he wanted"; "Ivan Nikolaevich crashed and broke his knee"; "Disgusting Lane"; "Any visitor, if, of course, he was not completely stupid, having got into Griboyedov, he immediately understood ..."
This series can be continued; but it is already clear that these slang expressions themselves characterize figurative and expressive speech in their own way, testifying to the originality of this degraded character.

Of course, this conclusion can be called ridiculous. With the same success, we can identify the narrator with Pontius Pilate, since the narrator constantly inserts into the outline of his speech the phrase that has already become a catchphrase: “Oh gods, my gods, poison me, poison! ..”. For example, when describing the feast of dishes in Griboyedov's house. Or, without mentioning the poison, this is how chapter 32, "Forgiveness and Eternal Refuge" begins:

"Gods, my gods! How sad is the evening earth!

It's just that Bulgakov as a narrator is polyphonic, his tone, manner, intonations change depending on the situation being described. However, Barkov noticed exactly: Koroviev's notes are often heard in these intonations. So, the literary critic V. Lakshin writes:

“Purified of cliches and vulgarity, the swift “newspaper” speech killed the eloquent bookishness and entered as an important color into the charm of Bulgakov’s language. Lively exclamations, the words of the street and the communal apartment did not drop the dignity of the syllable "...

This is what I'm leading up to. We are all accustomed to perceiving the Divine Comedy as a monumental, majestic work, which in music is consonant with a symphony or, say, an organ chorale. In fact, such a view is to a certain extent primitive and narrow.

Let's start with the fact that Dante Alighieri is the creator of the modern literary Italian language. This statement has already become a commonplace among literary critics. But not everyone understands its true meaning. Therefore, let us turn to one of the most serious researchers of Dante, Alexei Karpovich Dzhivelegov, who noted that the language of the Comedy differs sharply from the language of all other works of Dante. Dzhivelegov writes:

“... The main difference between the verses of the “New Life” and the canzones and the verses of the “Comedy” is in the dictionary. It is immeasurably richer and immeasurably less refined. It contains a lot of folk words and phrases, a lot of simplifications that are unthinkable in a canzone, a lot, if you like, carelessness in verse and syntax. Folk sayings now and then find a place even in the last canticle, the most solemn of the three.

The same idea is developed by the translator Boris Zaitsev in the essay "Dante and his poem":

“Comedy (only later given the title Divine) was written in Italian, not in Latin, in which Dante was an innovator. If he were a medieval pedant, an imitator of the ancients, he would have written smoothly and cleanly, without colors and air, in more or less perfect Latin, which was done in Italy, both in his time and later. Dante, on the other hand, set in motion the entire arsenal of language, both learned, colloquial, and common people ... There are local dialects. There are words heard in the tavern, on the street, among the farmers.

Alas, it is lost in translation. But "Comedy" is not only a religious and philosophical work, but also a caustic political, moral satire. As the literary critic Nina Elina writes:

“In the Comedy, the transitional nature of Dante's work is clearly manifested. It is connected with the Middle Ages by an allegorical picture of a motionless afterlife, subordinate to the ideas of Catholic theology. But in resolving the huge complex of problems of theology, history, science, and especially politics and morality raised in the poem, Catholic dogmas collide with a new attitude towards people, towards the world of poetry with its cult of antiquity. Dante's interest in earthly life, in the fate of the human person, is the basis of his humanism. Abstract sins Dante gives political and social overtones. He is concerned about the fate of Italy and Florence, torn apart by civil strife, the fall of authority and corruption of the church, the clash of papal and imperial power, the ideal of the monarchy. Dante places sinners in hell at his own discretion, sometimes punishes them in a way that is not required by the church, often treats them with deep compassion and respect.

Osip Mandelstam speaks even more clearly:

“It is already difficult for us to imagine how ... the whole biblical cosmogony with its Christian appendages could be perceived by then educated people literally as a fresh newspaper, as a real special issue.
And if we approach Dante from this point of view, it turns out that in the legend he saw not so much its sacred, blinding side, but an object played up with the help of hot reporting and passionate experimentation.

CATERING IRONY, SATIRE, SARKASM, outright mockery were Dante's inalienable style.

Of course, this often applies to the paintings of Hell. So, in the eighth circle of hell, Dante meets Pope Nicholas III. The poet describes a pale stone that was full of round holes of equal width:

From every pit the sinner moved
Legs sticking out on the shin,
And his body went into the stone.

All had fire streaming over their feet;
Everyone kicked so hard that the strongest tourniquet
Would have torn, unable to cope with the jolts.

One of the sinners turned out to be a malicious pope. To present the Catholic vicar of God on earth in such an absurd form is a clear mockery. Dad kicking upside down - in those days, such a picture did not look weak ...

Or another example. In Canto 22, Dante describes how the devils drown sinners in tar with pitchforks, preventing them from sticking their heads out. The comparison follows:

So cooks make sure that their servants
Heated meat with forks in a cauldron
And they didn't let me swim on top.

Such examples are very common in the poem.

Note: this applies not only to sinners, but also to other parts of the poem - purgatory and paradise. Dante's style seemed unnecessarily "mundane", rudely prosaic even to his later researchers, who treated the great Florentine with deep reverence. So, John Addington Symonds in his study “Dante. His time, his works, his genius” writes with some bewilderment:

“The main and most noticeable shortcomings of Dante's poem are the obscurities and oddities into which he often falls. The strangeness of his images comes from realism, which does not retreat before anything that can serve to accurately convey thoughts.

Symonds, with obvious condemnation, notes Dante's love for "stretched witticisms" (!). Symonds cites, in particular, an example from the twelfth chapter of "Paradise" as "embarrassingly chosen images":

The holy millstone began to spin.

And comments:

“With these words, Dante wants to express the idea that St. Thomas Aquinas and other teachers of the church are grouped around him. To make serious and reverend fathers, enclosed in lamps of living fire, turn around is already somewhat risky in itself; but to compare their circling with the rotation of a millstone is even less appropriate.

Symonds includes among the obvious "incoherences" a comparison from the thirty-second chapter of "Paradise", where St. Bernard, showing Dante the beauty of a paradise rose, justifies the brevity of his remarks with the following explanation:

“But since the time of your vision is running out, we will stop here, like a good tailor who cuts a dress according to how much matter he has.”

An English literary critic remarks:

“It is strange to see St. Bernard on the threshold of the Beatific Vision, with a prayer to the Mother of God on his lips, talking about tailoring his dress like a good tailor, depending on the size of the matter.”

Symonds is also convinced that the folk proverbs used in the “paradise” part of the poem “And let him scratch where he has a scab” and “There is now mold where the tartar was” “are too responsive to the market and the shop to be appropriate in Dante’s” Rae".

And one more heavenly episode seems completely absurd to the researcher:

“Another comparison in “Paradise” is no less strange: Adam, ascended to the heights of heaven and showing boundless joy by shaking his shining veil, is compared to a four-legged one covered with a blanket:
Sometimes an animal covered with a blanket is so excited that the excitement is manifested in the movements of the blanket.

Indeed, Dante selects the most seemingly “inappropriate” comparisons where, according to all the canons, “high style” should triumph. For example, in the sixth chapter of Purgatory, he describes, according to Mandelstam, the hustle and bustle of "annoying Florentine souls, demanding, firstly, gossip, secondly, intercession, thirdly, gossip again ...". And then follows a detailed comparison of these souls, standing on the threshold of paradise:

“When the game of dice ends, the loser, in sad solitude, replays the game, sadly tossing the dice. Following the successful player, the whole company is tied up: who runs ahead, who pulls him from behind, who greases him from the side, reminding him of himself; but the darling of happiness goes further, listens to everyone without distinction and, with the help of handshakes, frees himself from annoying pestering ... "

Awesome! The souls of purgatory are equated with gamblers, while the church forbade gambling and considered it a grave sin ...

It is no coincidence that the attitude towards the Divine Comedy was far from always enthusiastic. Even when, in the second half of the 18th century, lectures devoted in whole or in part to Dante resumed in Italian universities, when the Comedy appeared in 37 editions (in the 17th century it was published only five times), it often provoked sharp criticism. Dzhivelegov writes:

“Voltaire, who called Shakespeare a savage, in an article about Dante, later included in the Philosophical Dictionary, brought down so many critical blows on the poet’s head, so many accusations of tastelessness, disheveledness, inability to master the word and verse, as if it was a mediocre versifier” .

BUT HAVE WE NOT DIFFERENT TOO FAR from Bulgakov's novel, having dealt with Alighieri's style in such detail? It seems not. This is necessary in order to understand the argumentation of the already mentioned literary critic Alexei Morgulev, who notes that the close attention of dantologists has long been attracted by the beginning of the thirty-fourth song of "Hell", especially the first verse: "Vexilla regis prodeunt Inferni" - "The banners of the lord of Hell are approaching." These words, referring to Dante, are pronounced by Virgil, the guide of the Florentine, sent to him by the Almighty.

But the whole point is that the first three words of this address represent the beginning of the Catholic "Hymn to the Cross", which he composed in the 6th century. Venanzo Fortunato, Bishop of Poitiers! This hymn was sung in Catholic churches on Good Friday (that is, on the day dedicated by the church to the death of Christ) and on the day of the "Exaltation of the Holy Cross." That is, Dante openly mocks the famous Catholic hymn, replacing God ... with the devil! Let us recall that the events of The Master and Margarita also end on Good Friday, and it is the erection of the cross and the crucifixion that are described in the Yershalaim chapters.

Morgulev is convinced that it is this pun by Dante Alighieri that is the purple knight’s unsuccessful joke:

“Dante was part of the foundation of the classical education that Bulgakov received at the First Kyiv Gymnasium, where he entered the first class in 1901. Already there, he could pay direct attention to this pun on the publication of "Hell", admitted to the libraries of educational institutions (translated by N. Golovanov. 2nd ed. M., 1899). There, in a note to the seditious verse, its meaning is revealed: "That is, the banners of the king of hell are approaching, - an imitation of the Catholic church hymn, which is sung on Good Friday ..." (p. 242). The son of a professor at the Theological Academy, Bulgakov could not but appreciate the risky meaning of such "imitation". Another edition of Inferno, from which the young Bulgakov could get acquainted with Dante, is the beautifully designed edition of M. O. Wolf (Leipzig, 1874), which could, for example, be in his father's library. Here, in a footnote, we read: "Literally in the original: 'The names of the king of hell are approaching.' Dante took these words from the Catholic spiritual hymn to the Savior: Vexilla regis prodeunt. By adding the word inferni to them, Dante completely changed the meaning of the verse" (p. 250 )".

In general, such a version has a right to exist, and the arguments in its favor seem quite convincing.

We could make sure that Dante has similarities not only with the gloomy horseman of the Farewell Flight, but also with the “reckless humorist” Koroviev-Fagot. By the way, in Osip Mandelstam's essay "A Conversation about Dante", the style of the great Florentine is directly compared with playing the pipe:

“The most complex constructive parts of the poem are performed on a pipe, on a bait. Quite often the pipe is sent forward.

We are talking about the “Flemish pipe”, and not about the bassoon, however, the Flemish pipe as a musical instrument, in principle, does not exist. But there is a musical juxtaposition: the bassoon - Koroviev and the pipe - Dante. And a few lines above, Mandelstam sings a homage to Dante as “the greatest conductor of European art, who for many centuries preceded the formation of an orchestra adequate to what? - the integral of the conductor's baton "... Immediately I recall the wonderful church choirmaster, who also worked as a specialist choirmaster, who arranged a rehearsal for the ensemble of the spectacular commission.

In the course of the conversation, let me point out another rather juicy parallel between the essay by Osip Emilievich and the novel by Mikhail Afanasyevich. In the fifth part of his study, Mandelstam literally gives a jazz variation of Woland's famous saying - "Manuscripts do not burn." That is, the created work cannot be destroyed, it lives forever. The chapter begins with the statement: "Of course, Dante's drafts have not come down to us." And then Mandelstam asserts: "Drafts are never destroyed." That is, they did not reach - but they still exist. Further, the author explains his idea - a draft naturally exists in an already completed work: "The safety of drafts is the law of conservation of the work's energy."

Mandelstam wrote his essay on Dante in 1933. As for Bulgakov, we have already emphasized that for him the author of The Divine Comedy was one of the most revered poets, and the poem itself formed the basis of the cosmogony of the “devil novel”. It is possible that Mandelstam's work was well known to him.

In general, everything would be fine. However, Morgulev's version has the same shortcomings as Sokolov's version of Don Quixote. First, there is not a word about light and dark in Dante's pun. Of course, with a big stretch it is possible (as the researcher did) to see in a dangerous joke a hint at the confrontation between Light and Darkness - but this is already perceived at the level of speculation and conjecture. Secondly, if we mean exactly the conversation (Bulgakov has “a pun that he composed while talking about light and darkness”), then in the poem the pun is pronounced not by Dante, but by Virgil. So the great Florentine will have to be acquitted, no matter how tempting the "evidence" may seem.

****"Knight of the Revolution"
SOME "RESEARCHERS" OFFER such original "solutions" to Koroviev's mystery that their versions balance on the verge of insanity. However, natural human curiosity forces us to get acquainted with similar works.

A hundred points ahead in this sense can be given to any researcher by the "noble Bulgakov expert" Yerzhan Urmanbaev-Gabdullin. This well-educated husband, without hesitation, proposed his elegant hypothesis: it turns out that under the mask of the "purple knight" is hiding ... the "knight of the revolution" Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky!

Here is what Yerzhan writes, interpreting chapter 32 of Bulgakov's novel "Farewell and Eternal Refuge":

“In order to destroy his favorites, it is enough for Stalin to expediency, benefit in the public consciousness, their death, for the sake of a lofty goal - building the kingdom of truth, a bright future, communism.
But there was always a reason.
For Koroviev, such an occasion was “a pun that he composed while talking about light and darkness.”
In chapter 22 you can find his unfortunate joke:
“Are you surprised that there is no light? Savings, what do you think? No-no-no! Let the first executioner that comes across ... chop off my head, if that's the case! It's just Messire doesn't like electric light, and we'll give it at the very last moment. And then, believe me, there will be no shortage of it. Even, perhaps, it would be good if there were less of it. ”
In 1925 and 1926 F.E. Dzerzhinsky, as chairman of the Supreme Council of National Economy, in almost every speech he spoke about saving public funds, called on the people to save money.
But the government itself at the same time squandered the wealth of the country right and left, including on the holiday of international solidarity of workers, celebrated on May Day.
Let's continue.
“Why has he changed so much? Margarita asked softly to the whistle of the wind at Woland.
- This knight once joked unsuccessfully, - Woland answered, turning his face with a quietly burning eye to Margarita, - his pun, which he composed, talking about light and darkness, was not entirely good. And the knight had to ask after that a little more and longer than he expected. But tonight is such a night when scores are settled. The knight paid his bill and closed it!”
(On July 20, 1926, F.E. Dzerzhinsky died under unclear circumstances, it cannot be said that he had to joke for a long time on the topic of saving, rather, the retribution happened quickly and soon).

Alas, in Urmanbaev's bold version, we again do not meet any pun about light and darkness. Apparently, recollecting himself, Yerzhan promptly finds him on one of the Internet forums:

“Koroviev was killed by Woland in 1926, unhappy with his joke that Soviet power is communism minus the electrification of the whole country. And he was so worried about saving electricity in all his speeches in 1926. Unfortunate Felix Edmundovich Dzerzhinsky ... ".

True, on the same forum, the Bulgakov expert admits:

“Regarding the Leninist formula about Soviet power, this is my joke. I just made it up.
But Dzerzhinsky, being at that time responsible for the national economy in the government of the USSR, talked about saving electricity in all his speeches, calling the officials to conscience. This is reflected in all the documents of that time.”

Such “logic” sounds at least wild: if you rely on arguments composed along the way, you can go too far. And so Urmanbaev adds:

“I am sure that in the archives of the CPSU it will be possible to find a real joke by Dzerzhinsky verbatim. Perhaps it was she who cost him his life, as his contemporaries and M.A. Bulgakov believed?

It could be anything. But with what fright Yerzhan's delirium should be shared by Bulgakov and the entire progressive public is completely incomprehensible. And the proposal “to scrape the bottom of the barrel” and find the authorship of Dzerzhinsky in relation to the pun about “minus electrification” is no longer the field of literary criticism, but of psychiatry ...

Certain features of Felix Edmundovich seem to fall under the "orientation": gloomy, never smiling, "the corners of the lips pulled down" (in one of the editions of the novel). Plus the nickname - "knight of the revolution." But no more. Of the other “arguments” in favor of the version of the “iron Felix” as the prototype of the “purple knight”, only one is curious, suggested to Yerzhan by a certain Yeremey on the same forum. This argument boils down to the fact that, according to the New French-Russian Dictionary (Nouveau Dictionnaire Francais-Russe) by V. G. Gak and K. A. Ganshina (“Russian Language-Media”, 2003), fagot in French slang means a convict and prison clothes. And Dzerzhinsky was serving his sentence in the tsarist penal servitude. But the hard labor past, alas, is not a very convincing connection between Felix and Fagot.

There are much more interesting interpretations of the word fagot. Thus, the Bulgakov scholar Irina Galinskaya writes:

“It must be borne in mind that the complex of dictionary meanings of the modern French lexeme “fagot” (“bunch of branches”) has lost its relation to a musical instrument - literally “a bunch of pipes” (“bassoon” - in French “basson”), - and among of these meanings there are phraseological units such as “etre habille comme une fagot” (“to be like a bundle of firewood”, i.e. dressing tastelessly) and “sentir le fagot” (“give away with heresy”, i.e. give away with a fire, bundles It seems to us that Bulgakov did not pass by the cognate French word “fagotin” (jester), which is related to the lexeme “fagot”.

Some literary critics also note that in French the word "fagot" means "absurdity", and in Italian - "clumsy person". That is, there is a lot of room for imagination. For both the healthy and the sick...

*****Father Vasily from the traveling circus
ANOTHER VERSION IS PROPOSED BY MIKHAIL SMOLIN in the book “Codes, Keys, Symbols in the Master and Margarita”. According to the researcher, the prototype of Koroviev could be one of the acquaintances of his parent, Afanasy Ivanovich - a certain father Vasily. Young Misha often met this man during his Kyiv apprenticeship. Then Father Vasily was about thirty years old:

“He was a very cheerful and witty man, but not from the category of “note pranksters”, not at all. His witticisms, filled with inner meaning, were often very caustic. Sometimes he made the young Bulgakov laugh with his parodies of mutual acquaintances. However, with all the lack of life experience, the young man felt some kind of anguish in this person ... But over time, the future writer began to notice that the priest's jokes became angrier and tactless, and the subjects of faith became the topic of jokes more and more often. Many people who knew the priest did not approve of such an irreverent attitude of the clergyman to sensitive issues and preferred to break off acquaintance with him ...
At the reception, where the Metropolitan himself was present, Father Vasily “soaked out” some, apparently, completely outrageous joke, which caused the already “serious” anger of his church authorities. Apparently, those who needed it were aware of the priest's dubious reputation, and this episode was the last straw. Soon after this reception, Father Vasily resigned from his rank, and, as they said, got off cheaply, because the angry authorities seriously considered the issue of anathematizing him. Unfortunately, Bulgakov’s archives did not contain information about the essence of the unsuccessful joke, it is only clear that the topic was unambiguously “divine” ”

Pop-stripped with grief washed down and sank to the bottom of society:

“He began to frequently drink alcohol and quickly found himself almost at the very social bottom. The latest information that reached Bulgakov about his future fate was brought by their mutual acquaintance, who saw the former priest performing in a traveling circus. Mikhail Afanasyevich was very sorry about this man and sincerely experienced the collisions of his fate. Subsequently, he even planned to start a play based on this story, but things did not go beyond the idea.

Indeed, Father Vasily has a considerable resemblance to Koroviev: evil jokes, and a church past, and drunkenness, and even work in a circus (a direct connection with Fagot's clown manners and attire).

However, this does not give us anything to unravel the mysterious pun. The "divine theme" is akin to a replica of Arkady Raikin's character: "something is there, in the nose" ...

****** Albigensian, to whom the light was violet
A QUITE DETAILED AND REASONED EXPLANATION of the mysterious joke of Koroviev is given by Irina Galinskaya in her work "Cryptography of the novel" The Master and Margarita "by Mikhail Bulgakov". The literary critic reasonably notes that if Bulgakov is talking about a knight and at the same time a heretic, and moreover, prone to singing, the solution to the mystery of Bassoon must be sought in the history of the heretical movement of the Albigensian knights, that is, in French Provence.

The fact that the theme of the Albigensians runs like a red thread through Bulgakov's "sunset novel" is quite obvious today. Interest in the rich Provencal medieval literature of the future writer manifested itself even in the gymnasium and student years thanks to the cultural, pedagogical and literary activities of the Privatdozent Kyiv University St. Vladimir Count Ferdinand Georgievich de La Barthe, who lectured and conducted seminars on Western European literature. De La Barthe lived and worked in Kyiv from 1903 to 1909 and enjoyed great popularity among intellectual youth. By that time, he was already known for his translation of The Song of Roland (1897), for which the count received the academic Pushkin Prize. At de La Barthe's seminars, medieval Provencal literary monuments were commented on in detail, including the famous epic poem of the 13th century, The Song of the Albigensian Crusade. Of course, they also attracted the young Misha Bulgakov. As Galinskaya reasonably reports:

“There is undoubted evidence that Bulgakov was familiar with the Song of the Albigensian Crusade. One of them, paradoxically, the writer left in the “Theatrical novel”, among the heroes of which is the actor of the Independent Theater Pyotr Bombardov. The surname is unusual for the Russian ear: apart from “Theatrical Romance”, you will not find it anywhere else in our country. And in the preface to the first volume of the academic edition of “The Song of the Albigensian Crusade” “Bombardov”, published in 1931 in Paris and available since the early 30s in the Lenin Library, we find: it is reported that the honorary adviser and collector Pierre Bombard was the owner of the manuscript of the poem in the 18th century.

Who are they, the Albigensians? This was the name given to the participants in the heretical movement in southern France in the 12th-13th centuries. The Albigensian heresy covered mainly three provinces of France - Toulouse, Provence and Languedoc. The Albigensian heresy preached and "creatively developed" the ideas of Manichaeism. Following the dictionary of Brockhaus and Efron (which Bulgakov used), Manichaeism is a religious and philosophical doctrine founded in the 3rd century A.D. Persian Suraik from Ctesiphon, nicknamed Mani or Manes, that is, "spirit". The main feature of Manichaeism is dualism, that is, the original and indestructible opposition between good and evil. At the same time, Evil was supposed to be equal in rights to Good, and, consequently, Satan was equal to the Lord.

The ideologists of the Albigensian heresy believed in the coexistence of two fundamental principles - a good deity (God of the New Testament), who created spirit and light, and an evil deity (God of the Old Testament), who created matter and darkness. Angelic souls were created by a good deity, but their fall into sin resulted in them being imprisoned by Satan in the prison of the body. That is why earthly life is a punishment and the only hell that exists. However, suffering is only temporary, for all souls will eventually be saved.

According to the teachings of the Albigensians, the entire material world is the offspring of Satan, the God of Evil, for the good God could not be the creator of the vicious world. The Church, like any other creation of this world, was considered by the Albigensians to be a satanic creation. They rejected the dogmas of the trinity of God, church sacraments, the veneration of the cross and icons, did not recognize the power of the pope, and preached apostolic (that is, churchless) Christianity.

An important component of the Albigensian heresy was the idea of ​​the struggle between Good and Evil as a struggle between Light and Darkness. The good God was the embodiment of Light, the evil God was Darkness. Accordingly, the Albigensians (followers of the teachings of the Cathars, which means “enlightened” in Greek) denied the human nature of Christ and the possibility of his torment on the cross. In their opinion, Christ is just a being created by a good God who never had a human corporality and therefore could not die on the cross. Christ is not the Son of God, but an angel of Light who came to show people the way to salvation through a complete rejection of all ties with the material world.

A part of the local nobility joined the Albigensians. In the end, the Albigensian heresy was condemned by the Ecumenical Council of 1215, and the knights who preached it were defeated along with their leader, Count Raymond VI of Toulouse. By the end of the 20s of the XIII century, the flourishing land of Provence was devastated, and the Albigensians themselves disappeared from the historical arena.

EXACTLY IN THE POETIC WORKS OF THE ALBIGENIC KNIGHTS, among whom there were many talented troubadours, we find a frequent comparison of light and darkness. This theme was constantly played up by the poets of Provence. Guillem Figueira in one of his sirvents cursed ecclesiastical Rome because papal servants stole the light from the world with crafty speeches. The fact that Catholic monks plunged the earth into deep darkness was written by another famous troubadour, Peyre Cardenal.

And in the already mentioned heroic poem “The Song of the Albigensian Crusade”, we, according to Galinskaya, meet a pun that Woland mentioned in a conversation with Margarita:

“Now - about the theme of light and darkness in the “Song of the Albigensian Crusade”. It appears already at the beginning of the poem, which tells of the Provencal troubadour Folket of Marseilles, who converted to Catholicism, became a monk, abbot, then a Toulouse bishop and papal legate, who was known during the crusades against the Albigensians as one of the most cruel inquisitors. The poem says that even at that time, when Folket was abbot, the light darkened in his monastery.
But what about that unfortunate pun for Bulgakov's knight about light and darkness, about which Margarita Woland told? We believe that we also found it in the “Song of the Albigensian Crusade” - at the end of the description of the death during the siege of Toulouse, the leader of the crusaders - the bloody Count Simon de Montfort. The latter at some point considered that the besieged city was about to be taken. “One more push and Toulouse is ours!” - he exclaimed and gave the order to reorganize the ranks of the attackers before a decisive attack. But just during the pause due to this rebuilding, the Albigensian warriors again occupied the palisades and places at the stone-throwing machines that had been abandoned. And when the crusaders went on the assault, they were met by a hail of stones and arrows. Montfort Guy's brother, who was in the front ranks at the fortress steppe, was wounded by an arrow in the side. Simon hurried to him, but did not notice that he was right under the stone-throwing machine. One of the stones hit him on the head with such force that it pierced the helmet and crushed the skull.
The death of Montfort caused a terrible despondency in the camp of the crusaders. But in the besieged Toulouse, she was met with stormy rejoicing, because the Albigenses had no enemy more hateful and dangerous than he! It is no coincidence that the author of the "Song of the Albigensian Crusade" reported:
A totz cels de la vila, car en Symos moric,
Venc aitals aventura que 1 "escurs esclarzic.
(At all in the city since Simon died,
Such happiness descended that light was created from darkness).
Unfortunately, the pun “1" escurs esclarzic” (“light was created from darkness”) cannot be adequately conveyed in Russian. In Provençal, from the point of view of the phonetic game, “1" escurs esclarzic ” sounds beautiful and very elegant. So the dark purple knight's pun about light and darkness was “not entirely good” (Woland's assessment) not at all in form, but in meaning. Indeed, according to the Albigensian dogmas, darkness is an area completely separated from light, and, therefore, light cannot be created from darkness, just as the god of light cannot be created from the prince of darkness. That is why, in terms of content, the pun "1" escurs esclarzic "could not equally suit neither the forces of light, nor the forces of darkness."

FINALLY, IF WE ACCEPT GALINSKAYA'S VERSION that Koroviev's joke is directly related to the pun of the author of The Song of the Albigensian Crusade, some other unexplained details become clear. For example, the dark purple outfit of the grim knight in the scene of the night flight of evil spirits. It turns out that the French historian of the 19th century, Napoleon Peira, who studied the struggle of Catholic Rome with the Albigensians according to the manuscripts of that time, reports in the book “History of the Albigenses” that in the manuscript containing the songs of the troubadour knight Cadenet, who was in the retinue of one of the Albigensian leaders, he found in the vignette of the capital letter the image of the author ... in a purple dress. Here's your answer. Moreover, in the draft edition of The Great Chancellor (1932 - 1934), the color of Koroviev's outfit coincides with the color of the Albigensian's dress literally, without any shades:

"...Instead of a false regent, in front of him in the naked light of the moon sat a purple knight with a sad and white face...".

Bulgakov could read the work of Peyre in the Lenin Library. A link to it is contained in the article "Albigensians" encyclopedic dictionary Brockhaus - Efron.

The gloomy appearance of the knight also becomes clear. When the Albigensian heresy was destroyed and the lands of Provence devastated, the troubadours created lamentations about the death of "the most musical, most poetic, most chivalrous people in the world." The same Peira notes that the heart of the creator of the "Song of the Albigensian Crusade" "weeps with immortal weeping." The lament of the troubadour Bernart Sikart de Marvejols is quoted by the authors of many works on the history of the Albigensian wars:

“It is with deep sadness that I write this mournful Sirventa. Oh my God! Who will express my torment! After all, deplorable thoughts plunge me into hopeless longing. I am unable to describe either my grief or anger... I am furious and always angry; I groan at night, and my groaning does not cease, even when sleep overtakes me ... ".

The dark purple knight in The Master and Margarita is just as mournful. So, Galinskaya suggests that we look for the answer to Koroviev's secret in the life and work of the Albigensian troubadour knights. In favor of this version, the author gives another interesting argument:

“In the first edition of The Master and Margarita, one of the variants of the title of the novel sounds like this: “Jongler with a hoof” ... Meanwhile, Bulgakov could not use the word “juggler” here (as he did later with the name of the hero - the word "master") not only in its direct modern meaning. In the XII-XIII centuries. jugglers (or "joglars") were called wandering singers, musicians and reciters in the South of France who performed the works of Provencal troubadours, and sometimes their own. The south of France in the 13th century, as we remember, was the arena of the crusades announced by Rome against the Albigensian heretics.

******* Mephisto is joking - Bassoon is paying
GALINSKAYA'S GUESS IS COMPLETELY FOUNDATION. True, Lydia Yanovskaya, the one who claimed that there was no solution to the mystery of the "purple knight", caustically criticized Galinskaya both in Woland's Triangle (1992) and in the collection of essays Notes on Mikhail Bulgakov (2007):

“How many spears the Bulgakov scholars broke, into what depths they dived, trying to understand what Messire was hinting at ... Even among the Albigensians of medieval Provence they tried to find some analogies and most seriously discussed whether Mikhail Bulgakov could, and why no matter what, to read poems in the long-extinct Provençal language...”.

Unfortunately, Lidia Markovna deliberately exaggerates; in fact, Galinskaya is tracing the origin of Bulgakov's interest in Albigensianism. In addition, the line of the Albigensians, and not only the Albigenses, but also the Cathars and Manichaeans - all those who preached the equal magnitude of Light and Darkness, is clearly drawn in the novel. Only a person who is absolutely not interested in the problems of The Master and Margarita can fail to notice this. Or, more precisely, not very “confused” by it. However, Yanovskaya more than once, to put it mildly, got into trouble with her critical remarks. For example, arguing that Mikhail Bulgakov did not actually speak French and could not communicate in it.

However, the conversation about Lydia Yanovskaya is ahead. In the meantime, let me turn to my own person. In 2005, while working on a book about The Master and Margarita, I quite easily guessed the riddle of the dark purple knight. No, this is not about the version of Irina Galinskaya. That is, perhaps her hypothesis has the right to exist and is even partially true. However, there is a completely indisputable clue to the "knight's secret." Mikhail Bulgakov gives the key to it at the very beginning of the novel. Even before the first chapter - in the epigraph.

I managed to find this key because I am engaged in translations from Goethe's Faust, including translating the scene in Faust's office, from which Mikhail Afanasyevich took the epigraph for his novel. The same one is about evil doing good:

“... so who are you, finally?
I am part of that force
That always wants evil and always does good.

Bulgakov personally made a literal translation of these lines, not trusting the options he had, among which is the prose translation of Goethe's Faust, made by Alexander Lukich Sokolovsky (published in 1902). But the writer did not reproduce the continuation of the passage. Meanwhile, we can easily find a “pun” about light and darkness by reading further the conversation between Faust and Mephistopheles, an excerpt from which Bulgakov borrowed from Goethe. I give it in my translation:

"FAUST
So who are you?

MEPHISTOPHELES:
Part of the power that always
He does good, wishing everyone harm.

FAUST:
And what does this riddle mean?

MEPHISTOPHELES:
I am the spirit that forever denies!
And with the right; because what lives is valuable,
That will surely perish in time;
So it would be better if nothing happened.
So, what are you accustomed to call sin,
Collapse, devastation, evil, attack -
All this is my essential part.

FAUST:
You named a part - but in general, what are you?

MEPHISTOPHELES:
I'm only stating the humble truth here.
The world of human dope is familiar to me:
You only think of yourself as a whole.
I am part of the part of that which was everything,
Part of the darkness that gave birth to light,
A proud son in the desire for space
Seeks to drive his mother from the throne.
But only in vain: after all, no matter how hard you try -
As he was with the bodies, he remained.
It comes from the bodies, and gives them shine,
And the body serves as a barrier for him;
And in the not too distant future
With the bodies of the light and the end will come.

To avoid misunderstanding, I should note that the pun in the last line (about "the end of the world") is a somewhat free translation. The original phrase sounds like this:

"So I hope it doesn't last too long,
And everything will perish along with the bodies.

But in any case, it is the reasoning of Mephistopheles in a conversation with Faust that is a pun in its classical form - "light is the offspring of darkness." In addition, darkness turns out to be eternal in the mouth of Mephistopheles, and light is corruptible, doomed to perish along with matter. Note that the meaning of Mephistopheles's joke echoes the pun of the author of the "Song of the Albigensian Crusade" (Such happiness descended that light was created from darkness). Of course, such a play on words is worthy of its author being punished by the forces of Light, and severely punished.

From this it is clear that Bulgakov connects with Goethe's Mephistopheles not only (and even not so much) Woland as Koroviev. They are indeed strikingly similar. After all, Goethe's Mephistopheles is the same mocker, gayor, a mocking liar who does not disdain to stoop to clownish antics. In the Prologue in Heaven, the Lord, referring to Mephistopheles, characterizes him in this way - Schalk, that is, a rogue, a merry fellow, a rogue, a dodger:

“Come easily; without malice God meets
You and all your accomplices.
From the spirits of those who forever deny
Rogues are less of a burden to me than others.
(My translation)

In the early versions of Bulgakov's novel, Woland also had similar features. However, in the final version of The Master and Margarita, the devil acts as a gloomy representative dark forces. If in the first chapters he still allows himself to be ironic, then by the end of the novel his appearance takes on universal outlines. Woland is constantly trying to take the position of an outside observer, while Koroviev-Fagot is an active cynical and cheerful beginning.

But what about the knighthood of Koroviev-Fagot? Mephistopheles was certainly not a knight!

Are you sure? I would not be so categorical.

In 1917 (50 years after the publication of the first translation), the scientist received one of the most honorable literary awards of that time, the Pushkin Prize, for the 12th edition of Faust (1914). Bulgakov, whose life passed under the sign of Goethe's tragedy, could not pass by such a remarkable work of his compatriot.

And now let's get to the heart of the matter. In the scene "The Witch's Kitchen" from the first part of "Faust" there is a funny dialogue between the witch and Mephistopheles. In Kholodkovsky's translation, it sounds like this:

"WITCH (dancing):
Ah, my head is spinning with joy!
Dear Satan, you are here with me again!

MEPHISTOPHELES:
Shh! Don't call me, old woman, Satan!

Witch:
How? Why? What's wrong with that?

MEPHISTOPHELES:
This word has long been in fables!
What is the point, however, of such undertakings?
There are no less evil people
Though they rejected the evil spirit.
Now my title is "Mr. Baron":
No worse than others, I am a free knight;
And that I am of noble blood -
So here's my coat of arms! Is he good?
(Makes an obscene gesture)"

So, it turns out that Mephistopheles is a “knight”! Yes, even with the coat of arms ...

True, there is no “knight” in the original. There stands Kavalier - that is, a gentleman. So Kholodkovsky somewhat sinned against the truth. However, with his light hand, Satan appeared to the Russian reader precisely in the guise of a knight. Mikhail Bulgakov also acted as such a reader.

It is curious that I revealed the secret of the “purple knight” in 2005, when no one had come close to unraveling it yet, and Lidia Yanovskaya, let me remind you, denied even the very existence of such a secret. I shared my discovery with a fairly wide circle of acquaintances, sent them extracts from the manuscript, and so on. And in 2007, I unexpectedly discovered that Tatyana Pozdnyakova had come to the same conclusion in her book Woland and Margarita! Of course, I am far from accusing the author of using my work. One way or another, not only two people, but also more can independently come to the truth. The only thing that is somewhat alarming is that Pozdnyakova, as it were, casually drops the phrase: “Developing the idea of ​​​​his place in the system of social evil, Mephistopheles, the “free knight”, says the following” ... Next comes an excerpt with a pun about light and darkness in the translation of Kholodkovsky. But the researcher does not provide links to where the definition of Mephistopheles as a free knight came from. Why did it have to be hidden?

It was not in vain that I wrote that more than two independent researchers can come to the same conclusion. And here is the proof: in the same 2007, when the book “Woland and Margarita” was published, Lydia Yanovskaya publishes the “Notes on Mikhail Bulgakov” already mentioned above, where she provides direct evidence of the validity of the Mephistopheles-Koroviev line! Lidia Markovna writes about the translation of Sokolovsky used by Bulgakov:

“The book was found ... Yu.M. Krivonosov. Worried and ready in advance not to believe me if I rejected his guess (there were, there were other “finds” that I did not accept), he asked for an examination.
I opened the book incredulously... And Bulgakov's bright, laughing eyes looked at me from its pages, streaked with his familiar pencil... Goethe began to sound in Bulgakov's reading, and new, hidden meanings and conjugations were revealed...
For example. Remember Woland's enigmatic phrase about Koroviev in the last chapter of The Master and Margarita?
Why has he changed so much? Margarita asked. “This knight once joked unsuccessfully,” Woland replied, turning his face to Margarita with a quietly burning eye, “his pun, which he composed when talking about light and darkness, was not entirely good. And the knight had to ask after that a little more and longer than he expected.
What pun is Woland talking about? Unknown.
I guessed for a long time that a separate entry in the draft notebook of The Master and Margarita has something to do with this pun: “Light gives rise to shadow, but never, sir, it happened the other way around.”
A. Margulev responded with bewilderment to this guess of mine: “With a sketch of the future, which remained unknown, a pun, she (I mean - L.Ya.) suggests (without any argument) a separate phrase in a notebook of 1933” (“LO ”, Moscow, 1991, No. 5, pp. 70-71). And then he suggested, in search of a mysterious pun, to immerse himself in Dante's Divine Comedy.
You can’t say anything, neither in 1987, when I published my guess in a magazine article (Tallinn, No. 4; the same: Woland’s Triangle, pp. 121 - 122), nor in May 1991, when A. Margulev responded to her with bewilderment, there were no arguments. The argument appeared at the end of 1991 - along with this book, found by Krivonosov and owned by Bulgakov.
Here - in the prose translation of "Faust" into Russian - the monologue of Mephistopheles is crossed out with a red Bulgakov pencil:
“... I am a part of that darkness from which light was born, a proud light, currently challenging its mother, darkness, and honor, and the possession of the universe, which, however, he will not succeed, despite all his efforts ... ".
In the margins on the left are two small letters by Bulgakov's hand: "k-v" (and a third, lower, which I cannot decipher). "K-v" - Koroviev ?!
It is important to note: "I am part of that darkness" - of course, this is by no means Koroviev's speech. The quoted Mephistopheles for Bulgakov is Woland's predecessor. More precisely - one of the faces of Woland. Mephistopheles-Woland speaks, and his remark that light is born of darkness is retorted - already beyond Goethe's tragedy, in the world of Bulgakov's novel - impudent Koroviev: "Light gives rise to darkness, but never, sir ..." Dialogue characters emerging from Goethe's text and Bulgakov's recording.
This is really a sketch of a joke about light and darkness that cost Koroviev so dearly. And yet - nothing more than a sketch. Bulgakov himself did not compose the pun ... ".

A strange, incomprehensible deafness of a textologist... After all, it is absolutely obvious that Mephistopheles is in NO WAY similar to Woland! But with Koroviev he has a distinct resemblance. To understand this, you need very little: just read Faust. At least in fragments, at least in a prose retelling ... Is it really so difficult? Instead, Lidia Markovna stubbornly continues her fantasies "on the topic."

******** Agrippa the pyrotechnician
By the way, in Goethe's tragedy, in addition to the "chivalry" of Mephistopheles, there is another "knight's thread". Goethe, creating "Faust", was impressed by the personality and work of the outstanding representative of the European Renaissance Agrippa von Nettesheim (Agrippa von Nettesheim). This German natural philosopher, a doctor who in his youth was fond of astrology, alchemy, magic, was one of the most learned people of his time, a professor at a number of universities in Europe. From his youth, Agrippa of Nettesheim established a reputation as a magician. Over the centuries, his name has acquired legends, the glory of the magician and warlock overshadowed the true appearance of the scientist. In his famous treatise “On the Secret Philosophy” (“De occulta philosophia”), Agrippa combined secret knowledge, magic and astrology into an integral system, linking philosophy with miracles and the occult.

Goethe was fascinated by the mysterious figure of his great compatriot. Even in his youth, he read one of the most remarkable works of Agrippa "On the unreliability and vanity of the sciences and arts" (1531) and later admitted that this work led his mind "in considerable confusion." Still: it is no coincidence that almost immediately after its publication it was included by the Holy Church in the list of banned books - along with the already mentioned work "On Secret Philosophy".

Many literary scholars note that the German writer and poet, following popular beliefs, reflected in the image of his Faust, in addition to the historical Faust, also the legendary Agrippa. But this is only half the truth. Agrippa became a prototype for Mephistopheles. It is no coincidence that von Nettesheim, judging by the reviews of his contemporaries and his works, struck the audience with caustic irony and murderous sarcasm. Thus, which, as we remember, in Goethe's tragedy is peculiar not to Faust, but to Mephistopheles. By the way, Agrippa condemned the "black book" of his contemporary - the real Doctor Faust (who died about 1560) as "unreasonable and impious." He himself showed great interest exclusively in "white" magic. (Recall that Bulgakov initially certifies his Woland as a "specialist in white magic").

Not only Goethe, but also Bulgakov showed great interest in the figure of Agrippa von Nettesheim. Undoubtedly, in preparing his novel, he used a pamphlet about a German scientist, which was published in 1913 and included two essays - "The Slandered Scientist" and "The Famous Adventurer of the 16th Century." The preface to it was written by Valery Bryusov (then he also deduced Agrippa as actor his mystical novel The Pillar of Fire - one of the sources of The Master and Margarita).

But the knight, where is the knight? the reader will ask. Suppose Goethe gave the features of Agrippa to Mephistopheles. Suppose Bulgakov, in the episode with the unfortunate pun about darkness and light, meant the God-fighting joke of Goethe's devil. What about chivalry? Moreover, dear reader, that the historical Agrippa at one time served in the army, for his bravery he was knighted and received the rank of captain! There were rumors that he contributed to the victories of his troops by witchcraft. However, in reality, these were just original engineering and pyrotechnic inventions. As we remember, Fagot also had a penchant for "pyrotechnics" and clearly showed them together with his friend Behemoth ...

*********Valery Bryusov in armor and jockey cap
But since we are talking about Agrippa, one cannot ignore another key to unraveling the mystery of Fagot - the events of the Silver Age, which were well known in the literary environment. We can say - have become the talk of the town.

Let's start the story about them with an episode that Andrey Bely cites in his book of memoirs about Blok (Moscow-Berlin, 1922). On one of the “Wednesdays” at Vyacheslav Ivanov’s, Bely got up and made a Masonic toast: “For the Light!”. In response, Bryusov, who was sitting nearby, “jumped up as if stung and, raising his glass, grunted:“ To the darkness!

Here's another "unfortunate pun" about light and dark! So to speak, in its purest form.

But again the question arises: “where is the knight”? To answer it, we will have to turn to the history of the difficult relationship between Andrei Bely, Valery Bryusov and Nina Petrovskaya. For those who do not know the last name: Petrovskaya is a writer, the mistress of a literary salon, the wife of the owner of the Grif publishing house, Sergei Sokolov. Bely, Bryusov and Petrovskaya were united by what is commonly called a "love triangle".

Bely met Petrovskaya in 1903. Here is how he characterizes a young girl in his memoirs The Beginning of the Century:

“Forked in everything, sick, tormented by an unhappy life, with distinct psychopathism, she was sad, tender, kind, capable of surrendering herself to the words that were heard around her, almost to the point of madness ...”.

At first, the connection was “spiritual”, but a year later it ended corny - in bed. And after a while, Bely cooled off towards Petrovskaya, carried away by Lyubov Dmitrievna Mendeleeva, the wife of Alexander Blok. Bryusov took on the role of comforter for the abandoned Nina. He certified himself to an impressionable girl as a “magician” who is knowledgeable in the occult sciences, and promised to return her unfaithful lover to her. As you might guess, everything ended with a new novel by Petrovskaya - this time with Valery Yakovlevich. Their relationship was stormy and passionate, with tantrums, where an attempt to kill a lover with a revolver was replaced by a suicide attempt ...

And a year later, Bryusov and Bely were already on the verge of a duel. Bryusov spoke unflatteringly about the famous writer Dmitry Merezhkovsky, saying that he "sold his caresses." Merezhkovsky's relationship with Elena Obraztsova, who gave money for the publication of books by Dmitry Sergeevich and his wife Zinaida Gippius, was meant. After his words about Merezhkovsky, Bryusov, according to Bely, immediately left. Bely returned home (he lived at that time just at Merezhkovsky's) and wrote a letter to Bryusov, in which he informed that he forgave the interlocutor, since that "known gossip". Insulted, Valery Yakovlevich challenged Bely to a duel. However, in the end they reconciled, having met in front of the printing house near the Manege.

YOU ASK: WHAT RELATIONSHIP does all this have to the episode with the "unfortunate pun" in Bulgakov's novel? The most immediate. The fact is that Valery Yakovlevich reflected the history of his relationship with Nina Petrovskaya and Andrei Bely in the mystical novel "The Fiery Angel" (1908), where he brought Nina in the form of the girl Renata, possessed by the devil, Bely - in the form of Count Heinrich, and himself - in image ... KNIGHT RUPRECHT! So it was the knight Ruprecht who so unsuccessfully punted on one of the Wednesdays in the house of the poet Vyacheslav Ivanov, offering a toast to darkness instead of a toast to light.

The history of Petrovskaya's throwing between the two poets and their failed duel (in the novel, the count still wounds Ruprecht) was, of course, an open secret. Bulgakov, who communicated with Bely, also knew about it.

It is possible that Bryusov and Petrovskaya were also interested in him for another reason. Nina Ivanovna and Valery Yakovlevich were, as they say now, complete drug addicts. Their morbid craving for morphine began precisely with the "Fiery Angel" period. As time passed, drugs completely destroyed Bryusov's health, and Petrovskaya, having finally shaken her psyche, exhausted by loneliness and poverty, committed suicide in Paris. Shortly before that, in her memoirs, she confessed:

“Due to congenital mental degeneration (one doctor told me: “such specimens will be born in overcultured families ...”) I was drawn to anesthesia of all kinds.”

And Bulgakov attached special importance to the doctrine of degeneration by Max Nordau and Auguste Morel in his novel ...

But it makes sense to devote a separate essay to this.

Photo - Jean Daniel Laurieu

Koroviev is a representative of Woland's retinue in Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov's novel The Master and Margarita. Despite the fact that Koroviev is only Woland's companion, the hero performs important features in the work.

Duality

Koroviev is an ambiguous image. As part of Woland's retinue, he visits Muscovites. The retinue calls the hero a strange name Fagot, for the inhabitants of Moscow - he is a man with the surname Koroviev.

In the demonic plan, Fagot Koroviev is a satellite of Satan himself. This is "a magician, regent, sorcerer, translator, or the devil knows who really is." In the real world, the character is a translator of a foreigner who suddenly appeared in Moscow. Prior to that, Koroviev, according to him, was the regent and "leader", that is, he was the conductor of the choir.

Koroviev's behavior in different worlds is also different. In Moscow, the hero constantly jokes and generally looks like a “pea jester”. The real essence of the hero is reflected only in the finale of the novel. Here Koroviev appears as a knight. He is completely different from the jester he appears in the real world. There, a tall and awkward hero with an unpleasant and comical appearance (for example, "moustache, like chicken feathers") walked in a tight checkered jacket, in the same pants. The characterization of Koroviev would not be complete without a description of his appearance and clothing. He is so associated with his jacket that some have called it "checkered".

Woland explains why such a reincarnation of the hero from a “knight” into a comical gayer takes place: Fagot was punished for an unsuccessful joke with such a buffoonish appearance. In fact, the knight had a "gloomy" look and a "never smiling face".

Characteristic

Koroviev is a very bright personality. Bassoon was a "strange subject." The appearance and behavior of the hero made it possible to call him a vile and arrogant person.

Koroviev is like a chameleon that is able to adapt to the right conditions. He can copy the behavior of another person and "adapt" to him.

Despite the fact that Koroviev plays the role of a jester in the real world, he is very smart and wise. Here you can see the image of a real, "knightly". Koroviev is closest to Woland, because he is a dutiful servant.

Devil Actions

Koroviev in The Master and Margarita performs all the dirty deeds that are connected with the affairs of Woland. Often he appears with the cat Behemoth, and the actions of this "restless" and "inseparable couple" are destructive to society.

So, the heroes are the arsonists of the house of Griboyedov and Torgsin, in which they initially arrange a comical spectacle.

When Koroviev appears in Griboyedov's house, he enters into controversy with the literary world of that time, for which unquestioning submission to power was important. He notes that "a writer is not defined by the identity, but by what he writes."

It is Koroviev who sends Berlioz to the turnstile, as a result of which the hero slips on oil and gets hit by a train. It was Fagot who gave a bribe to Bosom, as a result of which the hero was arrested. Together with Azazello, Koroviev sends Styopa Likhodeev to Yalta.

Koroviev - Bassoon

This character is the eldest of the devils subordinate to Woland and a knight, who appears to Muscovites as an interpreter with a foreign professor and a former regent of the church choir

The devil, the protagonist of many chapters in this novel, in which "black magic" is manifested in all its glory. Such visibility was, apparently, caused by Woland's lack of desire to directly ("with his own hand") perform the intended evil, punishment, or even a good deed (for example, the reunion of the Master with Margarita, although the entire "satanic company" already tried there). In such cases, the laurels of championship are transferred to Fagot, who temporarily plays the role of the "Main villain" or the "Cleaner".

Surname The surname of the hero was found in the story of F.M. Dostoevsky "The Village of Stepanchikovo and Its Inhabitants", where there is a character by the name of Korovkin, very similar to our Koroviev. His second name comes from the name of the musical instrument bassoon, invented by an Italian monk. Koroviev-Fagot has some resemblance to a bassoon - a long thin tube folded in three. Bulgakov's character is thin, tall and in imaginary servility, it seems, is ready to triple in front of his interlocutor (so that later he can calmly harm him)

The second version The surname Koroviev is modeled on the surname of a character in Alexei Konstantinovich Tolstoy's (1817-1875) novel "Ghoul" (1841) by state councilor Telyaev, who turns out to be a knight Ambrose and a vampire. It is interesting that Ambrose is the name of one of the visitors to the Griboyedov House restaurant, who praises the merits of his cuisine at the very beginning of the novel. In the finale, the visit of Behemoth and Koroviev-Fagot to this restaurant ends with a fire and the death of the Griboyedov House, and in the final scene of the last flight of Koroviev-Fagot, like A.K. Tolstoy's Telyaev, he turns into a knight.

Appearance of the regent Here is his portrait: "... a transparent citizen of a strange appearance, On a small head a jockey cap, a short checkered jacket ... a citizen a sazhen tall, but narrow in the shoulders, incredibly thin, and a physiognomy, please note, mocking"; "... his antennae are like chicken feathers, his eyes are small, ironic and half-drunk"

The appointment of the lascivious gayar Koroviev-Fagot is a devil that has arisen from the sultry Moscow air (an unprecedented heat for May at the time of its appearance is one of the traditional signs of the approach of evil spirits). Woland's henchman, only out of necessity, puts on various masks-masks: a drunken regent, a gaer, a clever swindler, a rogue translator with a famous foreigner, etc. Only in the last flight Koroviev-Fagot becomes who he really is - a gloomy demon, a knight Bassoon, no worse than his master, knowing the price of human weaknesses and virtues

The knighthood of Koroviev-Fagot has many literary incarnations. On the last flight, the buffoon Koroviev transforms into a gloomy dark purple knight with a face that never smiles. This knight "once had an unsuccessful joke ... his pun, which he composed, talking about light and darkness, was not very good. And after that the knight had to joke a little more and longer than he expected," Woland puts it to Margaret history of punishment Koroviev-Fagot

Vitsliputsli After Koroviev-Fagot "was woven out of thin air" at the Patriarch's Ponds, Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz, in a conversation with Ivan Bezdomny, mentioned "about the less well-known formidable god Vitsliputsli, who was once highly revered by the Aztecs in Mexico." It is no coincidence that Vitsliputsli is associated with Koroviev-Fagot here. This is not only the god of war, to whom the Aztecs made human sacrifices, but also, according to the German legends about Dr. Faust, the spirit of hell and the first helper of Satan. Woland acts as the first assistant in The Master and Margarita by Koroviev-Fagot.

Koroviev-Fagot is the eldest of the demons subordinate to Woland, a devil and a knight, who introduces himself to Muscovites as an interpreter with a foreign professor and a former regent of the church choir.

The second part of the name - Bassoon is considered by many to be the name of a musical instrument. They say the hero looks like a bassoon - tall, thin and narrow-shouldered. However, there is a more elegant version, I. Galinskaya believes that the name "Fagot" was associated not so much with a musical instrument as with the word "heretic": "Bulgakov combined two multilingual words in it: the Russian "bassoon" and the French "fagot", and among the meanings of the French lexeme "fagot" ("bunch of branches"), she names such phraseological unit as "sentir le fagot" ("give away with heresy", that is, give away with a fire, bundles of branches for a fire)".

The bachelor Samson Carrasco, one of the main characters in Bulgakov's dramatization of the novel "Don Quixote" (1605-1615) by Miguel de Cervantes (1547-1616), served as a kind of prototype for the knight Fagot here, in all likelihood.

Samson Carrasco by the artist Jesus Barranco and Alexander Abdulov, in the image of Bassoon.

Sanson Carrasco, seeking to force Don Quixote to return home to his relatives, accepts the game he has started, pretends to be a knight of the White Moon, defeats the knight of the Sad Image in a duel and forces the defeated man to promise to return to his family. However, Don Quixote, returning home, cannot survive the collapse of his fantasy, which has become his very life, and dies. Don Quixote, whose mind is clouded, expresses a bright beginning, the primacy of feelings over reason, and a learned bachelor, symbolizing rational thinking, does dirty deeds contrary to his intentions. It is possible that it was the Knight of the White Moon who was punished by Woland with centuries of forced buffoonery for the tragic joke on the Knight of the Sad Image, which ended in the death of a noble hidalgo.

On the last flight, the buffoon Koroviev transforms into a gloomy dark purple knight with a face that never smiles.

“In place of the one who left Sparrow Hills in tattered circus clothes under the name of Koroviev-Fagot, now galloping, quietly ringing with a golden rein chain, was a dark purple knight with a gloomy and never smiling face. He rested his chin on his chest, he did not look at the moon, he was not interested in the earth beneath him, he was thinking about something of his own, flying next to Woland.
Why has he changed so much? Margarita asked softly to the whistle of the wind at Woland.
- This knight once joked unsuccessfully, - Woland answered, turning his face to Margarita with a quietly burning eye, - his pun, which he composed, talking about light and darkness, was not entirely good. And the knight had to ask after that a little more and longer than he expected. But tonight is such a night when scores are settled. The knight paid his bill and closed it!” M.A. Bulgakov "The Master and Margarita"

Isn't this knight now standing in the niche of house number 35 on the Arbat?

He is not interested in earthly vanity, and he does not look at the sky, he thinks about his own ... This is how Bulgakov saw him, this is how the flying Margarita saw him, the same we see in our time. Eternally motionless and thoughtful, he looks into the void. Koroviev-Fagot is not in his usual clownish guise, but in his real guise. Mikhail Bulgakov undoubtedly knew about this knight and often saw him when he went to the Vakhtangov Theater for performances and during the production of his play Zoya's Apartment.

A. Abdulov as Koroviev.

A lanky man in a plaid suit Bulgakov's courtyard. st. Soviet army, 13

Koroviev and Behemoth on M. Molchanovka.

Demonov, a devil and a knight, who introduces himself to Muscovites as an interpreter for a foreign professor and a former regent of the church choir.

The surname Koroviev is modeled on the surname of a character in Alexei Konstantinovich Tolstoy's (1817-1875) novel "Ghoul" (1841) by state councilor Telyaev, who turns out to be a knight Ambrose and a vampire. Interestingly, the name of Ambrose is one of the visitors to the Griboyedov House restaurant, who praises the merits of his cuisine at the very beginning of the novel. In the finale, the visit of Behemoth and Koroviev-Fagot to this restaurant ends with a fire and the death of the Griboyedov House, and in the final scene of the last flight of Koroviev-Fagot, like A.K. Tolstoy's Telyaev, he turns into a knight.

Koroviev-Fagot is also associated with the images of the works of Fyodor Mikhailovich Dostoevsky (1821-1881). In the epilogue of The Master and Margarita, "four Korovkins" are named among those detained because of the similarity of their surnames with Koroviev-Fagot. Here one immediately recalls the story "The Village of Stepanchikovo and Its Inhabitants" (1859), where a certain Korovkin appears. The narrator's uncle, Colonel Rostanev, considers this hero one of his closest people. The colonel "suddenly spoke, for some unknown reason, about some kind of Mr. Korovkin, an extraordinary man whom he met three days ago somewhere on the high road and whom he was now waiting for to visit him with extreme impatience." For Rostanev, Korovkin "is already such a person; one word, a man of science! I hope for him like a stone mountain: a victorious man! As he says about family happiness!" And now the long-awaited Korovkin "not in a sober state of mind, sir" appears before the guests. His costume, consisting of worn-out and damaged items of clothing that once made up quite decent clothes, resembles the costume of Koroviev-Fagot.

Korovkin is similar to Bulgakov's hero and striking signs of drunkenness on his face and appearance: "He was a short, but thick gentleman, about forty, with dark hair and gray hair, cut with a comb, with a crimson round face, with small, bloodshot eyes, in a high hair tie, in fluff and hay, and severely bursting under the arm, in pantalon impossible (impossible trousers (fr.) and with a cap greasy to the point of improbability, which he kept on flying away. This gentleman was completely drunk. "

And here is a portrait of Koroviev-Fagot: "... a transparent citizen of a strange appearance. On a small head is a jockey cap, a checkered short airy ... jacket ... a citizen a sazhen tall, but narrow in the shoulders, incredibly thin, and a physiognomy, please note , mocking"; "... his mustache is like chicken feathers, his eyes are small, ironic and half drunk, and his trousers are plaid, pulled up so that dirty white socks are visible."

Here is a complete contrast of physical features - Korovkin is low, dense and broad-shouldered, while Koroviev-Fagot is tall, thin and narrow-shouldered. However, at the same time, not only the same negligence in clothes coincides, but also the manner of speech. Korovkin addresses the guests: "Atanda, sir... Recommended: a child of nature... But what do I see? There are ladies here... Why didn't you tell me, scoundrel, that you have ladies here?" looking at my uncle with a roguish smile, "nothing? don't be shy!... let's introduce ourselves to the fair sex... Pretty ladies!" and so on... The rest is not agreed... Musicians!

Don't you want to sleep? asked Mizinchikov, calmly approaching Korovkin.
- Fall asleep? Are you talking insultingly?
- Not at all. You know, it's useful from the road ...
- Never! Korovkin replied indignantly. - You think I'm drunk? - not at all ... But, by the way, where do you sleep?
- Come on, I'll walk you through.
- Where? to the shed? No, brother, you won't! I already spent the night there ... But, by the way, lead ... Why not go with a good person? .. No need for pillows; a military man doesn't need a pillow... And you, brother, make me a sofa, a sofa... Yes, listen," he added, stopping, "you, I see, are a warm fellow; compose something for me ... you understand? Romeo, so only to crush a fly ... only to crush a fly, one, that is, a glass.
- Good good! - answered Mizinchikov.
- Well... Wait, you have to say goodbye... Adieu, mesdames and mesdemoiselles... You, so to speak, have pierced... but nothing! we'll explain later... just wake me up as soon as it starts... or even five minutes before the start... don't start without me! do you hear? don't start!"

Upon waking up, Korovkin, in the words of lackey Vidoplyasov, "screamed all sorts of cries, sir. They shouted: how will they present themselves to the fair sex, sir? And then they added: 'I am not worthy of the human race!' words-s". Koroviev-Fagot says almost the same, turning to Mikhail Alexandrovich Berlioz and pretending to be a hangover regent:
“Looking for a turnstile, citizen?” the checkered type inquired in a cracked tenor, “please come here! Directly, and you will go where you need to. I would like you for an indication of a quarter liter ... to get better ... to the former regent!”.

Like Dostoevsky's hero, Koroviev-Fagot asks for a drink "to improve his health." His speech, like that of Korovkin, becomes jerky and incoherent, which is typical for a drunk. Koroviev-Fagot retains the intonation of picaresque deference inherent in Korovkin both in a conversation with Nikanor Ivanovich Bosy, and in an appeal to the ladies at a session of black magic at the Variety Theater. Koroviev's "Maestro! Cut the march!" clearly goes back to Korovkin's "Musicians! Polka!". In the scene with Berlioz's uncle Poplavsky, Koroviev-Fagot "compassionately" and "in choice words, sir" breaks the comedy of grief.

"The Village of Stepanchikovo and Its Inhabitants" is also a parody of the personality and works of Nikolai Gogol (1809-1852). For example, the narrator's uncle, Colonel Rostanev, in many ways parodies Manilov from " dead souls"(1842-1852), Foma Fomich Opiskin - Gogol himself, and Korovkin - Khlestakov from The Inspector General and Nozdryov from Dead Souls in one person, with whom Koroviev-Fagot is equally connected.

On the other hand, the image of Koroviev-Fagot is reminiscent of the nightmare "in large-checked trousers" from Alexei Turbin's dream in The White Guard. This nightmare, in turn, is genetically linked to the image of the Westernizing liberal Karamzinov from Dostoevsky's novel "Demons" (1871-1872). K.-F. - this is also a materialized trait from the conversation of Ivan Karamazov with the unclean in the novel "The Brothers Karamazov" (1879-1880).

Between Korovkin and Koroviev-Fagot there is, along with many similarities, one fundamental difference. If the hero of Dostoevsky is really a bitter drunkard and a petty rogue, capable of deceiving only the extremely simple-hearted uncle of the narrator with a game of learning, then Koroviev-Fagot is a devil that has arisen from the sultry Moscow air (an unprecedented heat for May at the time of its appearance is one of the traditional signs of the approach of an unclean strength). Woland's henchman, only out of necessity, puts on various masks-masks: a drunken regent, a gaer, a clever swindler, a rogue translator with a famous foreigner, etc. Only in the last flight Koroviev-Fagot becomes who he really is, a gloomy demon, a knight Bassoon, no worse than his master, who knows the price of human weaknesses and virtues.

What is the knight Fagot punished for?
Unfortunate pun about Light and Darkness
Centuries of forced buffoonery
Demonic prototypes of Koroviev from "The History of Man's Relations with the Devil"
"Legend of the Brutal Knight"
Continue Reading>>>