Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" was written in 1925, and was first published only in 1968, and even then in the far abroad. Domestic readers saw it only in 1987. For such a short time (from the first edition to the present day), the text has taken root in quotations (in fairness, it should be noted that in many respects the film by Vladimir Bortko should be thanked for this). The image of Polygraph Poligrafovich contained all the shortcomings of the representatives of the lower social class, and in his relationships with others, the author demonstrated the fate of his contemporary Russia (then, of course, the Soviet Union). What is the difference between Sharikov and Shvonder, Preobrazhensky and Bormental, and why did his name manage to become a household name?
Let us recall the plot of the story: Professor Preobrazhensky, as part of an experiment to "improve the human breed", transplants the pituitary gland and testes of the deceased alcoholic Klim Chugunkin with the help of Bormental's assistant to the outbred dog Sharik. As a result of a unique operation, the animal evolves in a few days into a disgusting creature that inherited some of the dog's habits, and the character and mentality of a donor person. The head of the house administration Shvonder is trying to educate a representative of the proletariat from a new tenant, which bears monstrous results: the former dog becomes a citizen Sharikov Polygraph Poligrafovich and demands that his rights be respected as he represents them. As a result, after the appearance of a tangible threat from his brainchild, Preobrazhensky reverses the experiment and brings an ordinary dog \u200b\u200bback to life.
Comparison
Obviously, one of the main differences between Sharikov and other characters is his artificial origin. It appeared as a result of an experiment, but as a result of an experiment it was destroyed (after all, a dog cannot be considered a human being). This creature lives by instincts and habits inherited from two donors, and has no experience of its own.
It is interesting to consider what is the difference between Sharikov and Shvonder. They are considered to be negative characters and opposed to positive ones - Bormental and Preobrazhensky. However, in reality, the head of the house management, despite the attitude of the professor, is just a means to strengthen the same monsters in society as the newly-minted citizen. Shvonder is the personification of the new government, arrogant and incompetent, and they have the same function - to empower them. Whom? Such are the ball, which have arisen from nowhere and can only destroy.
Shvonder and Sharikov
Professor Preobrazhensky resigns himself to the presence of Shvonder, although he successfully confronts him on the issue of the rooms of the apartment. The position of an intellectual is "do what you want, just do not interfere with work." Of course, he does not approve of the new order, notices the devastation and its sources, but he is not afraid and not too worried, despite the stolen galoshes. Sharikov instills fear in him, and far from being irrational. In this image, a new full-fledged citizen of a young country is seen - a lumpen, living by instincts, uneducated, aggressive, not feeling and bearing no responsibility, in a word - “boor and pig”.
Household comrades Unlike Sharikov, Shvonder and his colleagues are ideological people, although their ideas are rather pitiful. They act according to the letter of the new laws and in the spirit of the new time, they do not call for physical violence and prefer agitation. Sharikov, on the other hand, recognizes only the effect of force, moreover directed mutually: a dog's nature, when threatened by Bormental, "tucked his tail", but finds an opportunity to surreptitiously "gnaw galoshes" to the owners. For him, communist ideas are a means of obtaining material wealth and nothing more.
Preobrazhensky and Sharikov What is the difference between Sharikov and Preobrazhensky with Bormental? The latter are highly educated, intelligent, cultured people, specialists in their field. The hybrid that emerged as a result of the experiment is a slacker who has "picked up" newspaper headlines and clichés, capable only of destroying cats, and even then thanks to the canine instincts that have not yet been eliminated. Scientists try not to educate, but to train their creation, explaining to him the elementary rules of behavior. However, this does not help Sharikov to become more cultured: he even chooses plebeian entertainment and food.
Preobrazhensky and Bormental We see how the power of professional authority and honest money (Preobrazhensky) is giving way and will completely yield to the power of denunciation and revolver (Sharikov). The surgeon realizes that he is losing his influence, and he has to resort to violence and even symbolic murder, a crime, although Chugunkin has long been dead, and Sharik the dog remains alive and even happy.
In addition to the obvious belonging to different social groups and origin (Polygraph Poligrafovich is still a former dog), the difference between these images is manifested in the much less caricature and collective nature of Preobrazhensky and Bormental. It is believed that the prototypes of Philip Filippovich were several prominent scientists of the time, including Ivan Pavlov. Sharikov, however, cannot have a prototype - this is the image of a hero of the new era, which Bulgakov only saw. Of course, there have been marginals at all times, but marginals with power and weapons are a sign of Russia, in which the Shvonders defeated the Transfiguration.
Shvonder is one of the heroes of MA Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog"; representative of the proletariat, chairman of the house committee. The author describes the hero with undisguised irony and sarcasm. He and his associates are shown as vivid representatives of the “devastation” that Professor Preobrazhensky so criticizes. Little is said about Shvonder's appearance, only modest clothes and "a quarter of an arshin a shock of thick curly black hair."
The chairman of the house committee clearly feels hatred for class enemies in the person of Preobrazhensky and Bormental.
He and his comrades want to expropriate one room from the apartment, with obvious disapproval of the professor and his way of life.
“… The general meeting, having considered your question, has come to the conclusion that on the whole you occupy excessive space. Completely excessive. You live alone in seven rooms. "
Shvonder is a great champion of bureaucracy. For him, the availability of an appropriate document is vital.
“It's rather strange, professor, - Shvonder took offense, - how do you call these documents idiotic? I cannot afford to stay in the house of an undocumented tenant, and not yet taken on a military
Police registration. What if there is a war with imperialist predators? ”
The conflict between Shvonder and Professor Preobrazhensky is a conflict between the intelligentsia and the lumpen - the proletarians. Shvonder and others like him stand up for the rights and freedoms of the working class, but in reality they only sow lack of culture, devastation and blind adherence to senseless laws. They pose as hard workers, but in reality they are just idlers. What is the "evening singing" so indignant professor.
Shvonder is interested in Sharikov from a practical point of view, for him he is just another tenant. Shvonder is closely engaged in his "education" - he instills in him the idea of \u200b\u200ba proletarian origin, the need for documents and registration, finds him a job by vocation, gives the idea to write a denunciation to the professor.
Essays on topics:
- Bormental Ivan Arnoldovich - one of the main characters in the story of MA Bulgakov "Heart of a Dog". Dr. Bormental - assistant, assistant ...
- The creativity of A.S. Pushkin predetermined the development of Russian literature, laid the foundations of the modern Russian language. The composition of the story "Shot" is interesting and not easy thanks to ...
- The most interesting place in IV Gogol's poem “Dead Souls” is the chapters dedicated to five landowners: Manilov, Korobochka, Nozdrev, Sobakevich ...
The subject of the work
At one time, the satirical story of M. Bulgakov caused a lot of talk. In Heart of a Dog the heroes of the work are bright and memorable; the plot is fantasy mixed with reality and subtext, in which a sharp criticism of Soviet power is openly read. Therefore, the essay was very popular in the 60s among dissidents, and in the 90s, after its official publication, it was completely recognized as prophetic.
The theme of the tragedy of the Russian people is clearly visible in this work, in "Heart of a Dog" the main characters enter into an irreconcilable conflict with each other and will never understand each other. And, although the proletarians won in this confrontation, Bulgakov in the novel reveals to us the whole essence of revolutionaries and their type of a new person in the person of Sharikov, leading us to the idea that they will not create or do anything good.
There are only three main characters in "Heart of a Dog", and the narrative is mainly conducted from Bormental's diary and through the dog's monologue.
Characteristics of the main characters
Sharikov
A character that appeared as a result of the operation from Sharik the mongrel. The transplant of the pituitary gland and genital glands of the drunkard and rowdy Klim Chugunkin turned the cute and friendly dog \u200b\u200binto Polygraph Polygraph, a parasite and a bully.
Sharikov embodies all the negative features of the new society: he spits on the floor, throws cigarette butts, does not know how to use the restroom and constantly swears. But even this is not the worst thing - Sharikov quickly learned to write denunciations and found a calling in killing his eternal enemies, cats. And while he deals only with cats, the author makes it clear that he will do the same with people who will stand in his way.
Bulgakov saw this base strength of the people and a threat to the entire society in the rudeness and closeness with which the new revolutionary government decides questions.
Professor Preobrazhensky
An experimenter using innovative developments in solving the problem of rejuvenation through organ transplant. He is a renowned world scientist, a respected surgeon, whose “speaking” surname gives him the right to experiment with nature.
I got used to living on a grand scale - a servant, a house of seven rooms, gorgeous dinners. His patients are former noblemen and senior revolutionary officials who patronize him.
Preobrazhensky is a solid, successful and self-confident person. The professor is an opponent of any terror and Soviet power, he calls them "idlers and idlers." He considers affection to be the only way to communicate with living beings and denies the new power precisely for radical methods and violence. His opinion: if people are accustomed to culture, then the devastation will disappear.
The rejuvenation operation gave an unexpected result - the dog turned into a man. But the man came out completely useless, not amenable to education and absorbing the worst. Philip Philipovich concludes that nature is not a field for experiments and he should not have interfered with its laws.
Dr. Bormental
Ivan Arnoldovich is completely and completely devoted to his teacher. At one time, Preobrazhensky took an active part in the fate of a half-starved student - he enrolled in the department, and then took him as an assistant.
The young doctor tried in every possible way to culturally develop Sharikov, and then completely moved to the professor, since it became more and more difficult to cope with a new person.
The apotheosis was the denunciation that Sharikov wrote against the professor. At the climax, when Sharikov took out a revolver and was ready to use it, it was Bromental who showed firmness and toughness, while Preobrazhensky hesitated, not daring to kill his creation.
The positive characterization of the heroes of "Heart of a Dog" underlines how important honor and dignity are for the author. Bulgakov described himself and his relatives in many aspects of both doctors, and in many respects would have acted the same way as they did.
Shvonder
The newly elected chairman of the house committee, who hates the professor as a class enemy. This is a schematic hero, without deep reasoning.
Shvonder fully adores the new revolutionary power and its laws, and in Sharikov he sees not a person, but a new useful unit of society - he can buy textbooks and magazines, participate in meetings.
Sh. Can be called Sharikov's ideological mentor, he tells him about the rights in Preobrazhensky's apartment and teaches him to write denunciations. The chairman of the house committee, because of his narrow-mindedness and ignorance, always disguises himself and gives up in conversations with the professor, but this hates him even more.
Other heroes
The list of characters in the story would not be complete without two au pair - Zina and Darya Petrovna. They recognize the superiority of the professor, and, like Bormental, are completely devoted to him and agree to commit a crime for the sake of their beloved master. They proved this at the time of the second operation to transform Sharikov into a dog, when they were on the side of the doctors and exactly followed all their instructions.
You got acquainted with the characteristics of the heroes of Bulgakov's Heart of a Dog, a fantastic satire that anticipated the collapse of Soviet power immediately after its appearance - the author back in 1925 showed the whole essence of those revolutionaries and what they are capable of.
Product test
Evgeny IvanovIn fact, the only positive hero of the book. He is the only one in the book who did not give a damn about Sharikov and who tried to make the world a better place. Not selfish. Not a careerist. Not a thief. Egalitarian. And just a person who thinks not only about the belly. Yes, he is not educated, but sincere. Yes, he is gray, but not angry. Yes, he is ridiculous from the point of view of cynics, but he is sincere in his senselessness. Yes, he is a Jew, but we already know who considers belonging to the Jewish nation a disadvantage.
After all, the most important thing is why today's creatures who imagine themselves to be intellectuals love Preobrazhensky - not for his qualifications or work. And for his proud declaration that he does not like the proletariat. Oh, what a fine fellow! He does not love! Hurray, long live Preobrazhensky!
And the scene with the phone call already looks quite dirty.
Representatives of the local council come to him. They say that you need to think a little and about the common people. The professor immediately calls his "roof", and, of course, the "roof" is otmazin him in the best style of crooks and thieves.
The most negative character of the book is undoubtedly Professor Preobrazhensky. All his thoughts are about the "crunch of a French roll". If you take away his high-profile titles in the bottom line, he is pretty nasty. Petty, gold-loving, egocentric, vain, vicious, arrogant. They talk about such shit about a man. There is not a single case in the book that a professor would lend a helping hand to anyone.
But who is Shvonder, what is his origin?
Shvonder's father, and he himself, most likely lived within the Pale of Settlement, which actually existed until 1915, and he, as a Jewish person, was subject to the Prohibition on farming, restrictions on admission to gymnasiums and universities, a semi-official attitude towards Jews as citizens with limited rights.
That is, before the revolution, Shvonder had no right to live not only in the Kalabukhov house, but in general in the city, even in the basement, under the feet of Preobrazhensky.
Most likely Shvonder did not participate in the revolutionary movement, and he began his Bolshevik career after 1917. It is possible that before the revolution he was an artisan or a salesman. The revolution gave him the opportunity to leave his place and come to Moscow. It was the collapse of the old order that gave Shvonder the opportunity to become a full citizen, and it would be strange if he loved the "old regime". In Professor Preobrazhensky, he saw and felt his personal enemy, and this is quite natural: the son of a bishop, i.e. one of his persecutors, who easily received a medical education, completely inaccessible to such as Shvonder, openly declaring that he “does not like the proletariat” - that is, all those who do not have 7 rooms and servants. Of course, for "kitchen intellectuals" Professor Preobrazhensky, unlike Shvonder, is so white-fluffy-positive)))) After all, he has a maid, eight rooms, carpets, books, a respected name and worldly philosophy. And great connections - can brush away Shvonder like an annoying fly with one phone call.
And what about Shvonder? The hard worker Shvonder will wipe out and go on to lead his circle of choral singing, after work, of course .... After all, Shvonder is a simple hard worker - an employee who works in a hungry city for food rations: distribute magazines to help the children of Germany, provide a cultural life for drunken proletarians, seal the tenants, settle those women with children who huddle in the barracks, and even make sure that they The parquet was not burnt ... Does the rich Preobrazhensky want to buy magazines? Doesn't want to get thickened, he has cronies, one lives in seven rooms and demands an eighth? And at least turn yourself inside out, Shvonder, these are your problems.
You can call Shvonder a bureaucrat or bureaucrat as much as you like, but some of his actions speak for themselves:
FIRST Attempts to "condense" the professor. Is this good or bad? The professor has 7 living rooms that do not belong to him - he only lives in them (after all, he does not say that he wants to BUY the eighth room, he wants it to be allocated to him). I think if you are the chairman of the house committee, and you need to accommodate a mother with two children (for example) who live in a barrack in winter, then the professor’s servant could make room or the professor could do abortions and “raise” impotent members not at home, and in the hospital ...
SECOND Unlike the professor, he is concerned about Sharikov's fate as a MAN, and not as a result of an amusing experiment. Yes, he gives him the wrong literature! - But Preobrazhensky did not do that either;
THE THIRD Jew and Bolshevik Shvonder, and not the Russian aristocrat from medicine Preobrazhensky, demanded that Sharikov formalize his documents as a MAN and gave him a job. Those. did everything to make Sharikov a member of society. For Preobrazhensky, Sharikov remained just the result of an experiment. He received his 15 minutes of fame, after which he scored on Sharikov's education, finding an excuse that the matter was in bad heredity.
While Shvonder ... Though clumsy, clumsy, but consciously, he tried to make Sharikov a useful member of society.
And if you look at the bottom line - even succeeded .. Sharikov began to WORK, made any kind of career, but even tried to arrange a personal life .. But Preobrazhensky first upset Sharikov's impending marriage, told his bride about the past of his "patient", and then in general, as a person, he killed. I suspect that because of the seven rooms ...
P.S. In pursuit ... Preobrazhensky is old, there are no wife-children and is not even mentioned - that is. an old bachelor, but with him, like a devoted dog, looks with loving eyes, the young doctor Bormental ... Dumbly like that)))
Characteristics of the literary hero Shvonder is a proletarian, "the new head of the house committee elected at a meeting of the housing association." The author presents him as a man “whose head was a quarter of an arshin with a shock of thick curly hair”. Despite his active participation in the plot, this character does not receive detailed characteristics. He is presented schematically in the story. Sh. Is not a person, he is a “public person”, one of the “comrades”. The author focuses on his hatred of class enemies, that is
To Professor Preobrazhensky and Doctor Bormenthal. During his visit in Chapter Six, he speaks to the professor with "calm gloating." And when Philip Philipovich involuntarily lost his temper, "blue joy poured over Shvonder's face."
In the philosophy of Sh. The cornerstone is a document, a piece of paper. "A document is the most important thing in the world." - he says to Professor Preobrazhensky and is very indignant when Preobrazhensky, in a temper, calls them idiotic. “It's rather strange, professor, - Shvonder was offended, - how do you call these documents idiotic? I cannot allow an undocumented tenant to stay in the house, and not yet registered with the police. What if there is a war with imperialist predators? ” This is the whole of Sh., This is the morality of the proletariat, worshiping power, believing only in the force of laws, regulations, documents, aggressive and non-judgmental. He is not hurt by the blatant stupidity and absurdity of Sharikov's identity card, which is a professor, the luminaries of world science, an educated, subtle person cannot but recognize as delusional. He does not care about the scale of the discovery made by Professor Preobrazhensky, he does not understand that Philip Philipovich performed a miracle, creating a man like a creator. Sharikov for him is just another tenant, a unit of society that interests him only from a practical point of view. “Well, it's not difficult. Write your certificate, citizen professor. That so, they say, and so, the bearer of this is really Sharikov Polygraph Poligrafovich, um ... born in your, they say, apartment. " The confrontation between Professor Preobrazhensky and the House Committee - Shvonder reflects the main conflict of the story, the conflict between two opposing socio-ethical classes.
(No ratings yet)
Essay on literature on the topic: Shvonder (Bulgakov's Heart of a Dog)
Other compositions:
- Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" is a fantastic work based on real historical ground - post-revolutionary Moscow. The work reveals the horror of what is happening to the country after the seizure of power by the Bolsheviks. Bulgakov brings us two groups of Muscovites. These are hereditary intellectuals, residents of Prechistenka. Go to Read More ......
- Professor Preobrazhensky Characteristics of the literary hero Professor Preobrazhensky Filipp Filippovich is one of the main characters of the work. A genius doctor and a talented scientist. It was FF who decided to conduct an experiment on a stray dog, replacing his heart with a human one. So instead of a kind and affectionate dog Read More ......
- The work of MA Bulgakov is the largest phenomenon of Russian fiction of the 20th century. Its main theme can be considered the theme of "the tragedy of the Russian people." The writer was a contemporary of all the tragic events that took place in Russia in the first half of the 20th century. At the heart of the story Read More ......
- Heart of a Dog Winter 1924/25 Moscow. Professor Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky discovered a way to rejuvenate the body by transplanting the endocrine glands of animals into humans. In his seven-room apartment in a large house on Prechistenka, he receives patients. The house is being “compacted”: into the apartments Read More ......
- The fate of Bulgakov's literary heritage is a historical plot of rare drama, the mournful fate of high art seeking fair recognition. Quite recently Bulgakov was well known and close to a relatively small circle of literary scholars, theater connoisseurs of the 1930s, who remember the success of the Moscow Art Theater production of Days of the Turbins, and to individual Read More ......
- Professor Preobrazhensky still does not abandon the thought of making a person out of Sharikov. He hopes for evolution, gradual development. But there is no development and there will not be if the person himself does not strive for it. In fact, the professor's whole life turns into a continuous nightmare. In the house Read More ......
- The famous story "Heart of a Dog", written in 1926, is a vivid example of Bulgakov's satire. She develops Gogol's traditions, organically combining two principles - the fantastic and the realistic. This characteristic feature of the writer's satire is embodied in such works as "The Devil" and Read More ......
- MA Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog" reflects the post-revolutionary era of the 1920s - the time of NEP. A realistic description of the Soviet reality of this time is combined with the story of the grandiose fantastic experiment of Professor F.F.Preobrazhensky. As a result of surgery on a dog with a pituitary transplant Read More ......
