The Master and Margarita

Before you dive into this review, know this. I'm a native Russian, and a writer, and I have just completed a feat of rereading the novel in Russian and reading first Ginsburg and then Pevear & Volokhonsky translations, back to back, to compare. And this translation will give you the best feeling for the language, the culture, and the story. It's the bomb. Now, to the review itself. The first time I read The Master and Margarita in Russian, it was, out of all places, in Berlin. I was a teenager, and I lived in Berlin with my father and his new wife and my half-sister, because my father was a writer and a journalist and was sent by Soviet Union to Berlin to be the correspondent for a large Russian newspaper agency. I remember reading the book so vividly, that even today every detail is etched in my brain like a colorful photograph. The soft bright chair I sat in, with my back toward the window, the book in my lap, the pages rustling, and the image of Margarita, most importantly, of her knee, the knee that's been kissed over and over and how it turned blue. And the cat, the black cat that could talk. That's all I remember, plus the feeling of fascination I got. And now, over 20 years later, I have read it again, after becoming a writer myself 2 years ago, not knowing back in my teens that I would ever write, but being struck by the genius of Bulgakov. And, my, oh my, rereading it now I understood for the first time what the book was about. I sort of thought of it as a fairy tale back in my teens, I felt something underneath it, but couldn't get it. I got it now, and I cried, I cried for Bulgakov, for his imprisonment as a writer in the country that oppressed him to the last of his days, and I cried because he refused to be broken, and because he has written a masterpiece, and I was holding it in my hands, reliving it like so many people, many many years after he died. As to the story. It's not just one story, and not even two, it's four. A story of love, and of darkness, and of life and death. There are four narratives, the love between Master and Margarita, the strange visitors and Satan who come to Moscow, the story of Moscow life itself, the city, the people, and the story of Yeshua in the ancient walls of Yershalayim. Each has its own flavor, breathes its own air, and weaves into one book that tethers on that notion that no work of art can be destroyed, "manuscripts don't burn", says Satan, and that's Bulgakov's pain, him against the system that wanted to crush him, and didn't. He escaped. The irony of the book is that, in some sense, it's autobiographical, and that makes it even more tragic. But the satire! Oh, the satire! I don't know how many times I snorted coffee and tea out of my nose, because I have this habit of drinking hot drinks while reading, curled up on the couch. So many memories burst on the scene, so many authentic Russian quirks and habits and characters, the wealth of which I have nearly forgotten over my 16 years in US, and which dazzled my mind like fireworks, albeit of course, because I was reading it in Russian, and I'm about to start reading two translations in English, one by Mirra Ginsburg, and another by Richard Pevear and Larissa Volokhonsky. Because, if there was ever a book worth reading 5, 10, 20 times in a row, it is The Master and Margarita by Bulgakov, his last book written over the course of 10 years, and not quite completed... he narrated changes to his wife right up to his death. No matter. It is perfect. Read it.

"The Master and Margarita," written by Mikhail Bulgakov, is a "classic" novel that I am sad to say has sat on my shelf for many years without having been read. The novel is set against the backdrop of Soviet Russia in the 1930s. Bulgakov wrote the novel during a time of severe censorship and oppression, which is reflected in the themes of the book. The story intertwines the fate of a writer, referred to as the Master, and his lover Margarita, with a visit by the Devil to Moscow. The novel is darkly satirical and was not published until 1967, long after Bulgakov's death. It has since become one of the most significant works of Russian literature from the twentieth century. I highly recommend this novel to anyone who enjoys contemporary fiction, particularly fantasy. It blends the supernatural with reality, dark humor, and the philosophical. I would compare it to the modern works of authors such as Neil Gaiman or Susanna Clarke. While reading the novel, I was reminded of the rich and multi-layered storytelling in Clarke's "Jonathan Strange & Mr Norrell." This novel is not just a story but an experience. It challenged my perception, and there were several points that I thought Bulgakov had gone off the rails, but by the end, it all made sense. Overall, Bulgakov's writing is fantastic, and I thoroughly enjoyed myself.

I ordered this novel after learning that avant garde filmmaker Kenneth Anger recommended The Master and Margarita to rocker Mick Jagger. Mikhail Bulgakov's novel has a remarkable history: Bulgakov worked on the novel until his death in 1940, but the Soviet government suppressed Bulgakov's novel until 1966. I questioned the novel's Soviet suppression while I read it as literature. The novel has two subplots. The devil Woland and his retinue appear in Moscow; they have no apparent agenda beyond inciting bourgeois chaos. Woland's people recruit Margarita, a married woman who is romantically involved with an author she calls Master, as the hostess in their satanic ball; first Margarita and later Master are introduced to the satanic magical lifestyle. Simultaneously, Master loses hope as his novel depicting Pontius Pilate's involvement in the crucifixion of the philosopher Yeshua (Jesus) is rejected while author Bulgakov presents his depiction of the crucifixion. Master and Margarita become increasingly entangled in Woland's retinue as their satanic activities spread alarm and destruction throughout Moscow society. Then Woland and his band fade away as Moscow's police close in, leaving Moscow's government to scientifically explain the lingering chaos. Bulgakov's novel has impressive reviews that are difficult to question. I view the Woland subplot as fantasy fiction; it is interesting but IMO it is not great reading. I view the well-written and detailed Pontius Pilate depiction as Bulgakov's attempt to logically explain the Jesus crucifixion history during a Soviet non-religious era. I attribute 26 years of Soviet suppression to not publishing tales of bourgeois chaos and not publicizing the life of Jesus. Mirra Ginsburg's English readable translation makes The Master and Margarita a good read, but I don't consider this a great book.

Bulgakov is a master! I'd not read him until recommended by a very literate Russian friend. It requires a certain sense of this type of "unreal" realism to really enjoy the writing and what Bulgakov has to offer. - But he is NOT Dostoevsky, whom you may or may not consider a great Russian, but is a writer I have never found an affinity for. One particular joy was reading about him to learn his admiration for Gogol, whom I had also not read. And, going to Gogol's short stories I was launched into a world of extraordinarily powerful imagery and descriptive distortion that reveals the underlying psychic (psychological?) unconscious and sub conscious drivers of the subject's perceptions. In Gogol this is brilliantly done. In Bulgakov also with equal facility and verve. In Bulgakov we go directly to fantasy figures or personas (Have to be careful "naming" them because this makes them too literal and ruins the purpose of the characters. But: There is a token representative of Joshua bar Joseph, whom the Greeks called Jesus and the Church called the Christ. Only, he has a different name, (similar fate) so we are not sure. There is Pntious Pilate (The Representative of a certain institutional orthodoxy, but much more. There is the Devil knows who, (The Devil?) (But what is The Devil?) And then there is a list of more human-like (personifications, characters) who find themselves interacting with the "fantasy" characters in situations that reiterate or cross reference as the narrative unfolds. - This all sounds rather terse and "difficult". But the fact is Bulgakov is a great entertainer and a compelling story teller. The narrative flows like a Sherlock Homes detective story, episode by episode, and is very easy to read. I suspect several readings will bring more and more to the surface and enjoyment. A significant debate is over translation. (Isn't that almost always true about Russian into English!) I consulted another Russian friend who happens to be a translator. She recommended this version, translated by the late Mira Ginsberg as a first time read. And then to go on to more recent translations for richer access. The problem of translation stems from two issues. First this Ginsberg edition is taken from a partially censored and redacted version. The text itself was censored and edited under different literary regimes in the Soviet Union. Which raises the second issue. Bulgakov's narrative can be read as absurdist or surreal. But we have to consider the fact that some of the perceptions and ideas he wanted to convey were not "approved" under the shifting literary censorship regimes he had to live with. So we deal with some level of "hidden meaning" , often expressed idiomatically. And this is very difficult for the translator to capture, fully. Which is why it is a good idea to get this translation first, because it is very accessible, even "charming". And then go on to read another translation for the "darker" or more poignant elements. Very highly recommended

I have loved Russian/Soviet novels all my life, so I beg forgiveness for my gushing. Bulgakov is an amazing writer in his own right, author of many novels, plays, and short stories. In this novel he brings together the story of Christ's execution, a very witty tale of Satan's shenanigans in Moscow, and the contemporanious government and writer's "community. " It is fast-paced and very moving. I can't recommend it highly enough.

Satan comes to visit Moscow in the form of a stage magician named Woland. Chaos, of course, quickly ensues. On the plus side, this translation has a light, almost playful tone. It is not difficult to read in the way that some translations of Russian literature can be. On the downside, it is chaotic, jumping from character to character like a rock skipping over a pond, and if that were not enough, it bounces back and forth between Moscow under communism and Jerusalem under Rome without warning. The core theme is twofold: the unreliability of human nature and the irrational nature of extreme atheism. It is telling that the most rational character in the book is Satan. Clearly, the author does not regard Satan as any sort of heroic character, he simply sees his human characters as even more fallible and irrational than Satan himself. The book is not a Christian tract or pro-church counter to the prevailing rule of atheistic communism the writer lived under. Not at all, rather, it is a deep study in the fallibility of humanity disguised as comic satire. Oh, I suppose I ought to mention that I did not find it humorous or funny. But that may be more the result of my limitations as a reader than Bulgakov's failure as an author. Or perhaps not. With satire it is always difficult to tell.

It’s hard to know where to begin when talking about this book. It is an absolute masterpiece. In my opinion, the conversation that surrounds this book centers too much on the political controversy surrounding Bulgakov’s works in his lifetime, which are frankly irrelevant. That the book was censored by the Soviet Union until well after Bulgakov’s death is irrelevant- the book is not some takedown of communism or of the Russian government or anything like that, and in fact, as an American reading it for the first time nearly 100 years after it was written, the book feels just as applicable to this current society as the one Bulgakov was writing within, as the book is more a criticism of our refusal to look at the world in magical ways in the modern world and how we kind of think we know everything. The book is about the Devil appearing in Soviet Moscow and the chaos that ensues following his arrival. Much of the chaos that the Devil (Woland) causes is as a result of his not being recognized by the secular society he appears in. The controversy at the time would have been the assumption on the part of the story that these Christian figures are real (as well as satirization of pretty much every type of official) but to a Christian, the book would also be blasphemous, as the depiction of Christ (Yeshua) is the least mystical aspect of the book, Christ himself is a beggar whom people seem to appreciate for his charisma. Yeshua even denounces the writers of the Gospels, saying their depiction of him completely misinterprets his teachings. On top of this, you find yourself really rooting for Woland as he rampages around Moscow, turning our modern society on its head. Woland isn’t a bad guy- the spirituality of this book is very holistic, with Woland and Yeshua seeming to teach the same lesson but from opposite viewpoints- Yeshua offers forgiveness and redemption for those who side with him, whereas Woland punishes those who refuse to recognize him for what he is. Woland is the necessary foil to Yeshua, something which he himself points out in a late chapter. This edition of the book is also my favorite translation. Ginsberg captures the kinetic energy of the story like no one else, and while I can fly through this edition (I read it 10 times in a single year when I first read it, it’s really that good) other translations are a lot harder to get through. Though later translations may be “more complete” this is somewhat irrelevant, as Bulgakov died before completing the work. This version is much more streamlined than any other translation I’ve read. Nothing is missing from the story, and in fact, other translations I’ve read which include entire chapters which are not in this edition seem to drag a lot and you just spend more unnecessary time with irrelevant characters that don’t necessarily add anything to the story. This is absolutely the definitive English edition of the story, a must read for anyone into spirituality, absurdist fiction, or just an entertaining read. 10/10

This is a most fascinating book. Hypnotic, hallucinatory, at times filled with so much longing and poignancy that it brought me to tears. Bulgakov was punished for his outspoken writing and refusal to conform to the ideals of the Soviet State, and he suffered much for it. Suffering does not ensure art, let alone great art, but the experience of the Master and his beautiful, rejected novel about Pontius Pilate speak quite clearly of Bulgakov’s frustration and pain and longing for his own redemption. “Gods, gods! How sad the evening earth! How mysterious the mists over the bogs! Whoever has wandered in these mists, whoever suffered deeply before death, whoever flew over this earth burdened beyond human strength knows it. The weary one knows it. And he leaves without regret the mists of the earth, its swamps and rivers, and yields himself with an easy heart to the hands of death, knowing that it alone can bring surcease.” (p. 383) Several stories are intertwined, the namesake being the love affair between Margarita and the writer she calls, "Master," whose novel about Pontius Pilate and his inability to save a philosopher he admires greatly but whom he must condemn to death (Jesus Christ) becomes a book within the book which Margarita reads and supports obsessively as if it were a part of her own soul. The Master's book becomes blacklisted, and Bulgakov paints the Master's inability to get it published, his burning the manuscript out of grief, and his resulting depressive insanity. Excerpts from that book within a book repeat throughout the minds of several of the characters like a leitmotif of longing and proof of their spiritual connection with each other and the source of their inspiration. The main story is about the Devil and his retinue and the madness they create in Moscow, madness which turns into transformation of the soul, a fantasy of relief from unbearable longing and fear of the unknown. What is good? What is evil? Can good come from evil or evil come from what is propagandized as good and acceptable? The translator, Mirra Ginsburg, in her "Translator's Introduction", states that Bulgakov labored over this book for twelve years. I think it is a sin for a reader to finish in two short days a work of art a writer labored over for twelve long years, but I couldn't help myself. I couldn't put it down! This is a most incredible novel which I recommend to everyone. I will read it again and again.