So was trading the Master for Pilate the plan all along?

bump cause relevance

>but is Wolands interference a mere side effect? after all it is only Behemoth and Koroviev who do all his dirty work. if the ultimate aim is to free Pilate and Homeless, these side diversions seem superficial.

I don't think that was his ultimate aim, or at least not his only one. Punishing Moscow was just as important as freeing Pilate. The chapters dealing with that are full of satire - in a communist society, where the good of the group should take precedence over the individual, selfishness, greed and vanity are rife, and each time people allow these urges to take over - at the Variety Theatre for example, where everyone gladly takes the free clothes or money from the mysterious strangers, foreigners in a society supposedly mistrustful of them - it comes back to bite them.

Behemoth and Koroviev do most of the dirty work, true, but ultimately they are agents of Woland's will, freeing him to sit back and observe.

Mathew specifically requests Woland to give the lover's peace, though they are not granted the light. The ending implies they will be happy together.

do you think the criticisms of the new rich and state funded "entertainment" were founded as a strictly conservative stance from Bulgakov?

the state was already corrupt and ripe for Bulgakov to parody. the mere mention of anything foreign set all hairs on end.I do not think Woland was trying the morality of the city, he was just shaking things up a bit. because angels can not pass judgement

I don't know if Bulgakov was being conservative, per se, (Though he wrote a play sympathising with the anti-Bolshevik White Army so he was probably not a communist) but he certainly had plenty of reason to hate the Bolshevik regime, especially Stalin.

He wrote a letter to Stalin begging to be allowed to leave the country and make a living as a writer. Stalin, who ironically happened to be a fan, gave him a job he hated directing at a theatre instead, and none of his work saw the light of day until long after his death.

The book is majorly a polemic on historicity of Christ. It was written in a time when there was a polemic in philosophical/historical university circles of SU. The two sides were (both were atheistic, for obvious reasons) those who believed that Christ never existed at all and those, influenced by Tolstoy, who believed "Jesus was real, but not a God, just a nice guy with nothing supernatural going on". The book that Master writes is about the latter Jesus. And the point Bulgakov makes is that that book (and the thought behind such Jesus) is the work of a devil, literally. It's Woland who gives Master an idea, there are a lot of subtle occurences that point to the notion that it was Wolands plan all along. Master is a Faustian character, who fell for the devil's trickery. And the 'peace' he and Margarita recieved in the end may not be peace at all.

Also the Homeless is not a metaphor. He is an archetype of an uneducated subservient bum who managed to get into professorship only due to his party allegiences. The books ends with us learning that he suffers nightmares every year during recently cancelled Orthodox celebration (I forgot its name), because, while being an atheist philosopher, he knows that the devil is real, and ergo is Christ.

>Orthodox celebration (I forgot its name)
It's Easter.

I don't believe punishing Moscow was in his plans. That was solid Bulgakov taking potshots at the society that shunned him. I also severely doubt the Master and Margarita will be granted peace they for sure will be tortured for their forseable future
thank you for this illuminating piece of backstory
when does the Master get the idea from Woland? i disagree that the Master is Faustian, because there is never a deal made. Margarita for sure just dives in head fast (say what you will of that) but retains some morals. It is like Woland, in covering up Judas' death is eternally condemned in picking up the pieces, which sporadically pop up in some heads.
hmmm. fun for thought does this imply christ is reborn every so often and satan is tasked with tracking him down and setting the right path?

I don't know about your interpretation here. It's been years since I read it though.

Doesn't Satan argue with Matthew Levi and only then concede whatever it is that is wanted from him. He had other intentions for the master but is told he will get 'rest' or peace? Satan pretty clearly interferes in that opening scene where his conversation alone affects the outcome of the character's lives and deaths

How do you reconcile this interpretation with the manuscripts are never truly destroyed element and that fact that the master is probably as close to a Bulgakov insert that we get?

Woland/Satan never argues with Matthew. Matthew is simply a messenger voicing orders from a greater power that remains nameless. Matthew also admits that the Master and Margarita will not be given access to heaven but instead will be confined to purgatory

>i disagree that the Master is Faustian
M&M is very cryptic book. It is backed up by the very beginning of the book when Woland mentions that he's in Moscow to check up on manuscripts of Gerbert of Aurillac, who was a prototype for a Faust. Now these manuscripts are obviously Masters work, and Master himself is something like a Faust. There's no deal that Master accepts though, it's true.

>when does the Master get the idea from Woland?
Through dreams. A series of coinidences, like winning a lottery, Margarita coming into his life, his neighbour or whatever betraying him, all this was a conspiracy to put him to work.

>does this imply christ is reborn every so often and satan is tasked with tracking him down and setting the right path
Christ was reborn once, but Woland decieves people from time to time.

>fact that the master is probably as close to a Bulgakov insert that we get
Who said so? Bulgakov put some of his character into Master, but that doesn't imply he condones everything he did or something. Master is not a bad man anyway, he is tricked into doing what he did.

>How do you reconcile this interpretation with the manuscripts are never truly destroyed element
As for 'manuscripts don't burn'. I don't remember exactly, but wasn't it Master who threw the work into fire and later Woland claims that it's nothing and 'they don't burn' and gives him the manuscript back? It just states that the book is Woland's work and in the end it doesn't matter what Master thinks and does.

Bulgakov literally thought of it as some kind of testament, as he died with "Let them know" on his lips handing the book to his wife.

There are literal bulgakoveds who study all that shit. Like tolkienists, but arguably even more autistic.

then there have to be people that are born to know the truth of things, Bulgakov could be self inserting here.

Also I completely forgot: Woland is what Mephistophel is called once in Faust. That's the most obvious connection.

>then there have to be people that are born to know the truth of things
I don't follow

>Bulgakov could be self inserting here
He could, but why would he blatantly write himself into the story?

I remember it being an antagonistic conversation, as though Woland was criticizing Matthew. I could be mistaken. But if that is the case, I'm not sure. My impression from back then was that Woland was not doing everything he did by the order of a higher power but that when that order came down, he had to oblige it.

There's just an obvious parallel between a Soviet writer and a writer character whose manuscript is burned. The Master's professional failings versus the success of those other writers. I am very skeptical of the idea that the account described both in the story and which is written by the Master is the work of Woland.

the way that it is portrayed, the story that Woland tells fits seamlesly with the one that the Master wrote, meaning that the truth of Judas' murder and subsequent follow up is something the masses are not allowed to know and so Woland has to go cleaning this bit up whenever it appears.

In the early versions of the book Master didn't exist in the story at all. A bit later Bulgakov would call Woland Grand Master. Only much later human Master was written into a story. Just an interesting fact.

Again, in earlier veriosns when Woland talks with Ivan in the beginning, Ivan asks him if he (Woland) knew so much why didn't he write the gospel or something. Woland with barely veiled sarcasm answers that he hadn't even thought of that before.

Master knows about Woland (his meeting with Ivan in the psychiatric ward), even before he was supposed to meet W. (W. even lies that he doesn't know Master about it later when he talks about him with Margarita at the ball). The only way he could've known anything about W. or the Jerusalem story at all is only if his mind had been being fucked with by W. (or God himself I guess, but what's the point then?). And remember that even W. acknowledges that everything M. wrote is true.

In orhtodox understanding devil doesn't have any creative power. That's why he uses M. to throw that story into the world.

We see the Pilate story thrice in the book. First - is the direct Woland quote. Second - Ivan's dream. And the third - Master's manuscript, the same manuscript Master had burned earlier and W. instantly brings back whole (without supposedly ever meeting M. by the way, obviously he is a liar). And the characteristics of all three episodes is the same, as if thought up by one person.

>the truth of Judas' murder and subsequent follow up is something the masses are not allowed to know and so Woland has to go cleaning this bit up whenever it appears
Why not allowed though? Why does he have to clean it up? Why does he then bring back the manuscript?

I mean it has to be covered up right, the guy who betrayed God's only son has to be wracked with guilt and 86 himself. He can't be murdered by Woland's hand thereby making it an easy choice to reject him. Woland giving back the manuscripts didn't even matter because none of that was real anyway. The story being in the Masters head was burden enough, which is why he is placed into purgatory with Margarita.

The whole story is Faustian. Even epigraph to the novel is a quote from Faust. Who's Mephisto? Obviously, Woland is. Who's Faust then? Well, Master is, who else could it be in the story? The open question is what's the devil's catch, what's the trickery. There should be something connecting Woland and Master. What else could it be if not the manuscript. Woland gives Master the conditions (the money, the flat), he gives him the talent, he dictates him the manuscript. For what purpose? For profanation of the gospel and Christ. What's the Master's profit? One may say Maragrita, but whatever, maybe there's nothing in it for him at all. But anyway as with all devil's presents Margarita is probably a blessing in disguise. She was a coquette, a hoe and vindictive and literally pledged allegiance to Satan.

exactly Woland gets nothing out of the deal, the real story is the salvation of Homeless. One could view it that Woland finally felt bad for Pilate and needed someone to replace him. but that theory is weak af. I believe the whole of the thing was done by God's bidding as a sort of way to level things out

>thereby making it an easy choice to reject him
I don't understand. To reject whom? By who?

>none of that was real anyway
Then why is there a need to clear up shit at all? Much more blasphemous things are said every day, and in the story itself Ivan says worse things. And why did Woland, Ivan and Master have the same vision?

>exactly Woland gets nothing out of the deal
I was talking about the Master. The Master essentially got nothing out of it. But Woland did. At least he planned to. The profanation. He wanted to reduce the gospel to some sympathetic wacko getting accidentally killed and remove himself (the devil) and God from the story. The greatest trick the Devil ever pulled was convincing the world he didn't exist.

>the salvation of Homeless
What kind of salvation is that? Being a propaganda bot and having nightmares doesn't sound like a salvation to me.

if the world by and large was allowed to know that Woland had a hand in the execution of Judas then he would be exposed. that is what he is covering up. I think we agree on this but are just tripping each other up. And Homeless' salvation lies in the fact that he was aimless and a vessel for others bidding. By the end he is freed to live a life of his choosing, albeit one guided unknowingly from higher powers.
And Woland loves making himself known. He can choose any form he likes, and goes all David Bowie with it. He caricatures himself in an outlandish way when in reality he is more like a tired old man. The devil wants us to know he exists, he needs us to know he exists because without him you are left with just God the absentee landlord

Really? In what way does this rendition of Christ's story undermine Him or profane Him? Is it simply by not being the standard account?

I'm not sold on where you're taking the analysis. Yes...it's Faustian and yes Woland is clearly the devil of it and the Master is Faust himself. If we have to take it as a direct parallel of the traditional agreement then yes, there needs to be some explicit trick but past that I don't think you're making strong points. The trick may simply have been preventing Master and Margarita from attaining paradise. Let's keep in mind that the Master's manuscript is rejected and that he has no success as a writer which does not seem to go well with what you're saying. Woland has him write it only for nothing to happen with it besides messing with one man? The devils were interested in messing with as many as they could. But that's neither here nor there, I guess. My reading of the story is that this account was more of 'what actually happened', Pilate being some kind of proof of that at the end of the novel and the appearance of Matthew Levi as well. Does Matthew Levi take the manuscript? I cannot remember.

I am not the user pushing the Faustian stuff. If anything I reject it. Margarita's experience is the only thing that comes close to what Goethe was writing about and even that is a satire because she goes wild for it, being the vacant imbecile she is.
BUT I digress. The "real" story of the death of Judas would have to acknowledge Satan's existence and role as kind of "morals janitor". In the book, prior to his execution, Judas was fine, not plagued with any guilt whatsoever. If that person was brought before Pilate, and Pilate could avenge himself on him, then Pilate's soul would be at ease. The Master has to be some sort of spiritual ancestor of Pilate, he shares his burden, gifted with profane knowledge. Pilate was freed and the Master and Margarita takes his place. This I get from the conversation between Woland and Matthew when Woland asks something along the lines of "don't you want them in heaven?" and Matthew replies like "nah dude he is all yours". The manuscripts I believe were never real at all, just a trick

>In what way does this rendition of Christ's story undermine Him or profane Him?
Because he is not God in it? Because he doesn't wield any power? Because he is fearful of Pilate? Because he tries to play with him instead of being the Truth itself? Because he's more of a tolstoyan than a christian? Because he's just some guy?

>Master's manuscript is rejected
I'm not 100% sure, but I recall that it was some other thing that was rejected, not the Jerusalem manuscript or was it the same one, but just not finished, because
>appearance of Matthew Levi as well. Does Matthew Levi take the manuscript?
He kinda does, It's Gods intervention. And that's why
>write it only for nothing to happen with it besides messing with one man.

As for the Pilate, my memory fails me, but I think he goes to roughly the same place as the Master, for neither of them did actually resist the devil.

Really? Then why does he have an incredible effect on Pilate with his presence alone? Curing him of his migraines and practically making a man who shouldn't have thought about him a second after he left continue to contemplate his existence.

I definitely did not see it the way your described.

There's a difference between making an impression, and making an impression of a messiah / God in flesh. Biblical Jesus did the latter.

Pilate was shook. I think you're underestimating the effect Yeshua had. It was fairly clear to me that even in that version he was not just some man but at the very least a supernatural entity which could set anything at ease.

Is there a preferred English translation?

Have you read it in Russian? I don't know, in Russian Ieshuas behaviour is somewhat pathetic even.

I didn't know they made a Russian version just kidding. No, I haven't.

He gives off an air of a very humble man who is willing to be insulted and spit upon because it means very little to him in the version I read. Somewhat absent minded and pure in that he isn't overly concerned about living or dying or defending himself. Pathetic would be begging to live.

Yeah, he seems very human. Hippyish one may say. Christ is more ... kingly I guess.

>not philosophy
>not highbrow politics
saged, this is /lit you faggot not book-club

The appearance of Matthew Levi outside the Pilate story-with-a-story near the end of the book strongly suggests that Jesus wasn't just a man who got crucified despite what the Pilate story seems to indicate up to that point.

>I also severely doubt the Master and Margarita will be granted peace they for sure will be tortured for their forseable future

Mathew specifically orders Woland to give them peace. That's an order from God, he can't ignore it.

I always thought he looked like Bowie too

You going to apologize for this, OP?

Of course. That's what I am saying. Pilate's story is a lie sung by Satan through the Master. Real Matthew is sent by God in the end to Woland.

It is never said what that peace means. Spending an eternity with a witch secluded in a house with stained windows, listening to Schubert, unable to do anything may be akin to torture in its own way. At least it isn't a very pretty picture.

Maybe old Bowie. He got the heterochromia right. Lacks multicoloroured teeth and deep voice though.

What the fuck, Hiro, is actually talking about books on Veeky Forums considered spam now? Fuck off.