My third section proposes a threefold analysis of the major character types inside the Tragical Record of Doctor Faustus along with the Professional and Margarita. First, by looking at Faustus and Margarita, I show how their individual features as well as their relationships with the other people are proclaimed by elements of feminism, psychoanalysis, Renaissance humanism, affective geography, and role-play. Then, I help with a parallel between Woland and Mephostophilis meant to show that-in both literary works-the devils embody a necessary evil that actually reinforces divinity. Last but not least, an perception into a few of the most significant supernatural episodes of these books shall illustrate that enchanting realism and Bakhtin's theory of carnival laughter offer viewers the Faustian misconception with a twist.
Margarita and Doctor Faustus
Starting from the premise that man is created as God's representation, "in a twofold embodiment of the masculine and the womanly theory" (Sergei Bulgakov 150), one will certainly assume that both Tragical History of Doctor Faustus along with the Grasp and Margarita underline the harmonious union between male and female elements-hence Bulgakov's subject of his novel and also its dual structure; yet instead, nothing could be further from the actual ponder of masculine over female aspects in both books. On this sense, feminist critics and theoreticians bottom their method of either of these two literary works on issues of gender-segregated societies, appellatives, transgender personal information, androgyny, and linguistically codified male discourses.
Both Marlowe's Britain and Bulgakov's Stalinist Russia are worlds segregated in terms of gender. Eve Kosofsky Sedgwick points out: "man friendship, mentorship, admiring recognition, bureaucratic subordination, and heterosexual rivalry" (quoted in Chedgzoy 247) are forms of homosocial associations that pervade both Marlowe's play and Bulgakov's novel. Thus, Faustus' aspirations are foreshadowed at the beginning of the play when he fantasizes about incredible sites, colonial exploitation (attributed to men exclusively), and violent ambitions: "Ay, they are those that Faustus most needs. / O, what a world of income and joy, / Of vitality, of honour, of omnipotence" (Marlowe 52). Faustus deems knowledge the best way to gain ability. His is not really a singular view; rather, it signifies the exponent of Marlowe's epoch according to historians: during those times, this segregation stretches even to theatres where stars are not accepted and colleges where men alone are granted access. Bulgakov's work of fiction take into account a role reversal, but the circumstances are slightly similar. Margarita-the feminine Faustus of the twentieth century and therefore the person who assumes a anti-hegemonic role-is swept off her toes by the Professional, a God-like number who is not satisfied with authoring Yeshua (hence the id with the last mentioned that confers him divine specialist) but provides his artistic mission further, which acquires metaphysical connotations. The Get better at remains unnamed and thus represents a common symbol of Bulgakov's literary times. He's the exponent of "one of the major Moscow literary organizations, called Massolit" (Bulgakov 11) that seldom if includes women writers among its people. Even if this is the case, women are belittled twice: first rejected as authors or second fiercely censored by the state.
Feminists seek to rebel against such a misogynistic composition of masculinity; they find the key figures to do that in a similar female personas who are primarily submissive and oppressed. Both Margarita and Helen of Troy disrupt the authoritative discourse of masculinity. On the one hand, the second part of Bulgakov's book casts away the Professional and brings into target the stunning Margarita: "She was beautiful and sensible. (. . . ) a lot of women could have given anything to exchange their lives for the life of Margarita Nikolaevna" (Bulgakov 166). She actually is now the energetic protagonist, whereas the Expert is the unaggressive one. She is prepared to sacrifice body and heart in the name of love, acknowledging her role totally. Alternatively, Marlowe's tragedy depicts Helen as the demolisher of masculine electricity; her name Helen may be read as composed of the primary Hel (discussing hell and destruction) and the particle -en. That is why Helen's image is associated with the downfall of Troy but also of Faustus and Wittenberg here.
Furthermore, an equally significant element that results in the subversion of masculine power is love. Both Faustus and the Professional single-mindedly surrender with their mistresses, although this aspect is more apparent at Marlowe. In Bulgakov's e book, the Professional owes Margarita his salvation and recuperation, whereas in Marlowe's tragedy, the play of significances has a larger depth. Doctor Faustus and Helen take part in an androgynous role-play: he plays Semele and Paris: "I am Paris, as well as for love of thee / Rather than Troy shall Wittenberg be sack'd, / (. . . ) When he appear'd to hapless Semele" (Marlowe 106), while Helen assumes the prototype of feminine beauty but also the role of Jupiter: "Brighter art thou than flaming Jupiter" (106). One or two lines afterwards, when you are associated with Eve, Faustus becomes aware of his sin but he is also still left with an undermined masculinity: "that tempted Eve may be kept, however, not Faustus" (108).
In The Tragical Background of Doctor Faustus and The Professional and Margarita as well, even episodic character types or those of smaller importance see women only as a medium of ability, as objects somewhat than brokers. Hence Valdes' ironic observation: "Sometimes like women or unwedded maids, / Shadowing more beauty in their airy brows / Than in the white breasts of the queen of love" (Marlowe 54) or Robin's declamatory illusion: "Ay, there be folks here that contain waded as profound into / issues as other men" (73). Mephostophilis himself transforms the idea of marriage into an antisocial work because he offers Faustus a devil disguised as woman rather than a better half. Bulgakov's text describes the assembly between Azazello and Margarita which occasion the former reckons that girls are superficial beings: "expression ironically: "Difficult folk, these women!" (174). Another figure, Hella-Woland's maidservant-is analogised to Helen of Troy through her name (take note the particle Hell): she signifies the feminine part of Hell.
Twentieth century feminists fight against such patriarchal empowerment. This is the case of Helene Cixous who upholds the idea that gender relations are inscribed in the language we use. As a result, "Cixous transforms the invisibility of women back against men, who become the 'other of the other' and therefore are terminated out" (Hedges 106). Following in the same series, Luce Irigaray argues that man obliterate distinctions between them and women consequently of their notion that women symbolize their shown opposites; therefore, women's otherness is refused (Hedges 105-6).
Additionally, both protagonists of these literary works are linked by features of humanism. Doctor Faustus definitely embodies the exponent of the perfectible man of the Renaissance whose intellectual curiosity, aspiration for electricity, and nationalism are expressed rhetorically in the first person singular: "I'll keep these things () / I'll levy () / I'll make ()" (Marlowe 53). In this value, Faustus is an overreacher according to Harry Levin as he extends to out to the unconscious, to supernatural causes that may help him remedy the intellectual bases of his age group which he perceives as faulty (quoted in Mitchell 55). Although he aims to gain popularity through his capabilities and he aspires to be more when compared to a man, he's once and for all haunted by an uneasy consciousness; hence the opposition between the Good and the Bad Angels but also the Seven Deadly Sins that expose the scholar's inner imperfections. Margarita too is a agent of twentieth century humanism. She will not seek to get power through knowledge but through love. In the same way, her as an overreacher is visible in the prefer to explore new conditions and her acceptance to obey occult makes.
Marlowe's Faustus and Bulgakov's Margarita are both folk protagonists since they are considered dissidents with their times, in spite the fact that their endeavours concentrate on very distinct goals. Paul de Man represents this type of personality as the main one whose "avenue is strewn with those parts of himself that he had to abandon in the process of his own becoming" (398). Faustus symbolizes the opposition brought about by the protestant idea that every individual is in charge of his / her own salvation or damnation. Margarita denotes the opposition contrary to the rigid moral and interpersonal guidelines dictated by the communist plan. The scholar's unorthodox methods and his expanded travels reveal the ultimate results which he bargains for: knowledge, popularity, and control over other civilizations, whereas Margarita's is a more limited aim-she is not at all domineering (although she actually is appointed queen for a night) but looks for affective fulfillment. However, these central characters are brought along by "the development of all" their "individual options, so that, by being put to check on the globe, " they "might penetrate, come to learn, and dominate reality" (Lukacs quoted in Hedges 92). Faustus' and Margarita's personalities lengthen to more than their individual scope, they signify a literary a reaction to the ardent issues of these times.
Moreover, these protagonists are depicted as torn between their affective and their intellectual make-up all throughout the texts. Clearly, the combo of emotion and reason is much more stringent in Faustus' case: the oscillation between enjoying life and attaining knowledge uncovers that for the scholar, the body is more important than the spirit, as he himself puts it: "This phrase 'damnation' terrifies not him" (Marlowe 58). Nevertheless, Faustus' "existence stands not under the sign of eros, " (like Margarita's does) "but of thanatos" (Hermand quoted in Hedges 94)-since his mission leads to loss of life whereas Margarita's grants her usage of atemporal bliss.
Ultimately, the structure of Marlowe's and Bulgakov's central heroes is educated by the environment where they are simply portrayed. Garrett A. Sullivan, Jr. speaks about an affective geography (231)-for instance Faustus' analysis or the Get better at and Margarita's rented apartment-that patterns the protagonists' individuality. He further points out that the notion of geography is defined as "a conceptual composition through which social and spatial relationships are concurrently materialised and represented" (Sullivan 236). In these two literary works, there exists a cyclic sequence of broadness and enclosure. We find Faustus alone in his analysis both at the start and in the long run of the play, although he trips extensively through the twenty-four many years of the pact, while Margarita swings between the remoteness of her Master's apartment-"A totally private little apartment, plus a leading hall with a sink in it, little home windows just level with the paved walk leading from the gate" (Bulgakov 109)-Moscow's expansiveness, and the seclusion of these eternal refuge. Thus, the relationship space-identity acquires new proportions; locations become part of the characters' psychological make-up: "The axis mundi passes through [Faustus's] Wittenberg research" and the Muscovite abode; "on it lie Heaven and Hell" (Kott quoted in Sullivan 240).
Overall, Marlowe's play and Bulgakov's prose present two multidimensional people who-if carefully analysed-are more similar than different in conditions of questioning patriarchal discourses through feminist techniques, in terms of disclosing humanistic features, and in conditions of attaching psychological connotations with their setting or backdrop.
The Evil Suite
The archetype of the dichotomy good-evil permeates human being discourses as well as literary masterpieces since the starting of energy. Evil has permanently been opposed to and traditionally vanquished by good forces, whatever the culture implementing this model. Nonetheless, The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus and also the Get good at and Margarita put forth an innovative point of view: not only will evil stem from good, but it also reinforces divine laws and teaches moral lessons.
Both Christopher Marlowe and Mikhail Bulgakov deal with metaphysical issues in their works, issues that question the relationship between Heaven and Hell and God's involvement in humans' lives at the same time. In this framework, Woland's introduction in Moscow and Mephostophilis' in Faustus' analysis foreshadow the obvious religious styles whose manifold interpretations are disclosed in both of these works. Woland's quest is to point to the moral collapse of the Stalinist 1930s' Moscow through the use of satire and supernatural whereas Mephostophilis' task is more limited in scope because it identifies a single individual, Doctor Faustus. However, both demons look as God-sent messengers swinging between Heaven, globe, and Hell.
In Marlowe's tragedy but also in Bulgakov's book, "the makes of good and evil aren't in competition but coexist on more or less equal terms" (225) as Laura D. Weeks instructs us in her article "Hebraic Antecedents in The Get good at and Margarita: Woland and Company Revisited". The black magic teacher, Woland seems inseparably united with God even from the very beginning of the book, when the motto extracted from Goethe exposes this classic link: "I am part of that electricity which eternally wills evil and eternally works good" (Bulgakov 11). Exactly the same may be said about Mephostophilis who-when asked about his origins-replies: "FAU. Had not been that Lucifer an angel once? / MEPH. Yes, Faustus, and most dearly lov'd of God. (. . . ) FAU. And what exactly are you that live with Lucifer? / MEPH. Disappointed spirits that dropped with Lucifer" (Marlowe 59). Thus, Woland looks as an complex and profound personality while Mephosto is less thoughtful and much more servile.
Additionally, getting the position of God's opposites, both devils actually bolster His goodness and confirm once more they are His envoys. In Bulgakov's book, Woland claims to obtain been an incognito observer of Yeshua's trial; it is paradoxical how-by recounting this first installment to Berlioz and Ivan Homeless-Woland in truth reasserts God's existence: "'There's no dependence on any factors of view, ' the peculiar teacher replied, 'he simply existed, that's all'" (Bulgakov 18). Also, Mephostophilis reconfirms the divine specialist when he admits his roots and confesses the sin of experiencing "Conspir'd against our God with Lucifer" (my emphasis, Marlowe 59).
Moreover, both Woland and Mephostophilis have tremendous powers, yet they know they are limited in comparison to God's. For instance, when Margarita asks that Frieda be forgiven, Satan admits: "Each department must take care of its affairs. I don't refuse our choices are alternatively great, (. . . ) But there is merely no sense in doing what should be done by another - as I simply place it - division" (Bulgakov 216). Mephosto in the same way offers away his constraints when he won't notify Faustus who has created the world: "Now inform me who made the entire world. / MEPH. I am going to not" (Marlowe 69) or during all the shows when he urges the scholar to renew his connection for fear Faustus might be forgiven by God.
However, in their attempt to attest God's life, both Marlowe's and Bulgakov's demons actually want to reinstate theirs. Woland's and Mephostophilis' is a peculiar position since they seem to be to embody both good and evil. For the occasion of the Great Ball when Woland is inclined to grant Margarita a wish, the power of mercy surfaces: "'I am talking about mercy, ' Woland explained his words, () 'It sometimes creeps, quite unexpectedly and perfidiously, through the narrowest breaks. Therefore i am talking about rags. . . '" (Bulgakov 216). Mephostophilis does not refer to mercy but regret and despair when he contemplates his everlasting doom in Hell: "Think'st thou that we, who saw the facial skin of God / And tasted the eternal joys of heaven, / Am not tormented with ten thousand hells / In being depriv'd of everlasting bliss?" (Marlowe 59) or when he advises the scholar: "O Faustus, leave these frivolous needs, / Which attack a terror to my fainting heart" (ibidem). Under these circumstances, there come up questions about the ambiguous, opposites-marked personalities of Woland and Mephosto; Radha Balasubramanian further clarifies: the two literary works
complicate the matter further by focusing on the nature of the Devil, increasing questions concerning who the Devil is, and exactly how he came out being angelic. He is a wanderer, with out a name and without a home? Does indeed he also resemble God? Are they the same? Do devils are present as a comparison to God? Are they two edges of the same gold coin? (1995: 41)
Therefore, aside from the prominent feature of demonism, The Tragical History of Doctor Faustus and The Grasp and Margarita endow their devils' personas with versatile traits. The demons include "multiple valid truths" (Emerson 179), performing as coordinators and bridging the different plans of both books. By doing this, Woland and Mephosto bring about a multiplicity of perspectives and remind the audience of Mikhail Bakhtin's heteroglossia, although Marlowe's devil is less distant than Bulgakov's: "Except when he is the mouthpiece for an installment of Christ's Passion, Woland is a taciturn man. This is appropriate. He shows alternatively than explains to" (Emerson 179).
Another evenly significant aspect is related to the parallel that both authors sketch between devils and religion. Hence, the satire of the Stalinist Moscow's culture is obtained through an assessment of the Yershalaim narrative. A similar may be averred about a satire of Catholicism at Marlowe via a post-Reformation way. Whereas the parallel between Woland's visit in Moscow and Yeshua's Passions in Yershalaim suggests time condensation-"Moscow's literary time became a mythical time that can be structurally correlated with the mythical dimension in the Yershalaim chapters" (Balasubramanian, 2001: 90)-there is not any such analogy or time contraction in Marlowe's tragedy. Instead, the dramaturge details the assembly between Faustus, Mephosto, and the Pope as the sole occasion when the Pope is punished by the devil. In this way, Catholicism is downplayed as the Pope is mocked for failing to exorcize the "troublesome ghost" (Marlowe 83). Here, religious dissidence is also supported by recently emergent ideas of predestination and original sin as advocated by the Elizabethan cathedral. By opposition, the only real spiritual dispute occurs in the incipit of Bulgakov's novel between Ivan Homeless, Berlioz, and Woland.
Furthermore, there are additional thought-provoking implications that seem to be to pervade only Bulgakov's book but not Marlowe's play. For instance, certain scholars question the source and the narrator of the book at exactly the same time, attributing these otherwise to Bulgakov, the Professional, the Devil, or God (Balasubramanian, 1995: 44). It is apparent that endowing Woland with the idea of authorship can be an idea reminiscent of Bulgakov himself who has "originally prepared his book as a 'Gospel According to the Devil'" (Emerson 178). In this esteem, "Christ's storyline is defamiliarized by transposing narrative details of view from the apostles to the devil" (Balasubramanian, 1995: 44)-the habitual Religious notion is disrupted and the gospel acquires novel undertones.
In standard, good and evil are the inseparable the different parts of the human mother nature differentiated only by man's free will. There is no preeminence of evil over good, although there may be no good without evil: "Kindly consider the question: what would your good do if evil did not are present, and what would the earth look like if shadows disappeared from it?" (Bulgakov 274). By this bank account, both Woland and Mephostophilis appear as the most reliable way to obtain knowledge in both of these literary works but just as stressed allies of God.
Supernatural Encounters
At the beginning of the nineteenth century, E. T. A. Hoffmann-a leading representative of German Romanticism-uses the fantasy genre with macabre undertones in combo with realism. A hundred years later, the theoretician Mikhail Bakhtin identifies his are a Menippean satire, fundamentally satirical or mocking in aspect and seeking "to ridicule different intellectual behaviour and philosophical postures" (Cuddon 504). Both literary works herein under scrutiny sketch on the group of supernatural and on comedy to give the Faustian misconception a twist, although humour provides distinct purposes inside the Tragical Record of Doctor Faustus along with the Get better at and Margarita.
The use of humour and farce in the two books is cured in another way by critics. On the main one hands, in Marlowe's play, the comic scenes have never received that much critical consideration over time. One reason behind this aspect might be the actual fact that there surely is still ardent argument nowadays in the authorship of these comic scenes: "There is almost unanimous arrangement that the displays of clownage () and the comic views at the papal, imperial, and ducal courts" (Jump 22) aren't Marlowe's but someone else's-hence the variation long and style between your A-version (1604) and the B-version of the written text (1616). Regardless of their origins, humourous views do permeate Marlowe's play. On the other hand, Bulgakov's comedy shows have been the focus of a lot more critical interpretation because of the conviction that, in this case, Bulgakov himself is the author of these scenes. Bulgakov's fiction does not employ humour and pranks limited to the sake of comic relief but also to underscore a deeper connotation: the Stalinist Moscow's small-mindedness, gluttony, and moral degradation.
Certain commentators such as Marie-HlЁne Besnault in "Belief and Spectacle at Early Shows of Doctor Faustus" (2009) distinct humourous shows into "low-comedy" and "clowning views" (19). The ex - category arise in Vatican and at Charles'-the German Emperor's-court, have Faustus as protagonist, depict people regarding the social elite, and are further divided into sub-scenes with a larger number of character types (Besnault 19-20): dukes, attendants, cardinals, and others. By far the most relevant cases of low-comedy views centre on the moments when Faustus and Mephosto steal the Pope's food or take down the friars: "POPE. How now! Who snatch'd the meat from me? / POPE. My wines vanished too? Ye lubbers, look about" (Marlowe 82).
By opposition, the protagonists of the clowning displays are Robin, Dick, the horse-courser and their collection (in fact, most of them embodying archetypes of clowns), although the main topic of debate remains Faustus. Besides, these episodes have a less intricate course of events as well as an evenly easy spatial and temporal shape. Instances that best illustrate this case present Faustus tricking the horse-courser or Robin and Dick being altered to family pets: "For apish deeds changed with an ape. / MEPH. Therefore thou shalt: be thou transformed to a puppy, and hold him after thy back again. Away, be absent!" (Marlowe 85).
Similarly to Marlowe's low-comedy that parallels the major incidents of the play, Bulgakov's book contains buffoonery views designed to counterpoint the key plot. For example, Natasha's metamorphosis into a witch parallels Margarita's: "Completely naked, her dishevelled locks traveling in the air, she flew astride a unwanted fat hog, who was simply clutching a briefcase in his prominent hoofs, while his hind hoofs desperately threshed the environment" (Bulgakov 185). Then, there is also the correspondence between Behemoth's noble-like manners and Woland's aristocratic personality: "There was now a white bow-tie on the cat's throat, and a set of females' mother-of-pearl opera eyeglasses hung from a strap on his neck. What's more, the cat's whiskers were gilded" (Bulgakov 195).
Both Marlowe's tragedy and Bulgakov's narrative dwell on the connection between notion and disbelief when delivering supernatural occurrences. T. S. Coleridge's willing suspension of disbelief (Biographia Literaria, 1817) justifies the introduction of supernatural, relatively inexplicable activities in a literary work. Thus, despite being astonished by multiple astonishing, uncanny events, the readers of the two books are prepared to believe and acknowledge such moments as literary conventions. Berlioz's severed head as predicted by Woland, Behemoth journeying by tram with a paid solution, Faustus' invocation of Alexander the fantastic, or Wagner's summoning devils are illustrations that illustrate the abovementioned hypothesis. Unlike Bulgakov's fiction however, Marlowe's play draws on an extra element which reinforces the suspension of disbelief (ibidem), particularly the actual fact that the comic moments seem open to further editing, modifications, or adjustments based on the tastes of the audience who pieces the performance of the play onstage.
Additionally, wonderful realism informs The Tragical Record of Doctor Faustus and The Get good at and Margarita alike. INSIDE THE Penguin Dictionary of Literary Conditions and Literary Theory (1998), J. A. Cuddon enumerates some of the main element aspects which characterize this literary trend:
Some of the characteristic features of this type of fiction will be the mingling and juxtaposition of the practical and the fantastic or bizarre, competent time shifts, convoluted and even labyrinthine narratives and plots, miscellaneous use of dreams, misconceptions and fairy tales, expressionistic and even surrealistic description, arcane erudition, the factor of shock or abrupt great shock, the horrific and the inexplicable. (488)
In both literary works analysed here mysterious realism establishes a connection between the literature' reality and a mythological, faraway past. In this way, supernatural shows are bordered by easily recognisable locations and individuals that offer visitors a medication dosage of certainty. Behemoth alludes to Charles Perrault's story The Booted Kitten (1697) when he cases: "'A feline is not supposed to wear trousers, Messire, ' the kitten replied with great dignity. 'You're not heading to tell me to wear boots, too, are you?'" (Bulgakov 195). Koroviev himself hints at various titles as he strolls cross the Griboedov House: "'and a sweet awe creeps into the guts at the idea that in this house there is now ripening the near future author of a Don Quixote or a Faust, or, devil take me, a Dead Souls. Eh?'" (268).
Furthermore, humour at Marlowe and Bulgakov is not only employed for purposes of comic relief during moments charged with narrative or dramatic tension. Alternatively, it also mocks, it satirizes individual and social imperfections, being proclaimed by ironic undertones. In Bulgakov's book, the "desire for the folkloric, the demonic and the grotesque" (Jones 27) actually reveals a satire of the Stalinist world that has discarded specific reliability and understanding. In this example, the mockery seems to be aimed especially towards folks of the imaginative sphere: writers, critics, or theater employees. By comparison, in Marlowe's remarkable work readers come across entertaining episodes fraught by sinister underpinnings-for example, Robin and Dick's metamorphoses in family pets parody the degradation of the individuals nature, its reduction to primeval intuition.
Moreover, Mikhail Bakhtin's theory of carnival laughter may be applied to both Marlowe's play and Bulgakov's narrative. In the article entitled "Carnival and Humor: On Bakhtin's Misreading of Boccaccio", Adrian Stevens points out that "For Bakhtin, carnival is a manifestation of 'folk laughter'; it embodies a folk centered culture identified by its antipathy to the official and hierarchical structures of every day, noncarnival life" (1). Bakhtin is convinced that carnivals effect the many types of comic works in books by deferring daily constraints and so liberating humans and also by providing opposites collectively. In Bulgakov's and Marlowe's catalogs comic scenes unite experts and servants (Faustus and Mephosto-Wagner and his suite; Margarita-Natasha; Woland-his retinue), the righteous and the sinful (Yeshua-Woland; Pope-Mephosto; Good Angel-Bad Angel) but similarly the wise and the fool (Faustus-Benvolio; the Master-Ivan Homeless).
On the whole, the third section of my newspaper has shown how the personalities of the protagonists within the Tragical History of Doctor Faustus plus the Get good at and Margarita are shaped by components of feminism, humanism, and affective geography. Soon after, I have likened the wicked entourages in both of these works and then expose that Woland and Mephostophilis are an integrant part of goodness. Finally, by contrasting the supernatural and the comic shows in Marlowe's play and in Bulgakov's book, I have subjected the actual fact that humour may acquire deeper implications besides the visible comic alleviation at the top.
