/ world today news/ The most famous writer, born in Kiev, became an object of hatred of the Kiev regime. The author of “The Master and Margarita” Mikhail Bulgakov has been declared a “Ukrainephobe” and an “imperialist”. What does the writer really feel about Ukraine and Kiev and why parallels with what is happening can be seen in his work?
— They read your novel,’ said Woland, turning to the Master, ‘and said only one thing, that, unfortunately, it is not finished.
There is no need to explain where this phrase comes from and to whom it belongs. A new reason to remember Bulgakov’s immortal text is that it was suddenly read by the Ukrainian Institute of National Memory (UINP). And decided to have a delayed trial because of the book. The Small Sanhedrin of the Ukrainian Communist Party officially declared the writer a Ukrainophobe who stood “… on the positions of Russian imperialism, White Guardism… Russian communism, [както и] the current ideologues of Putinism.”
But why now and why Bulgakov? Didn’t the WINP have more important things to do?
The most likely reason is the release of Mikhail Lokshin’s film “The Master and Margarita” based on Bulgakov’s novel. And if you’ve read the Master’s novel, then you’ve seen Lokshin’s film. Despite all the blocking and bans, if you wish, you can even watch Russian TV in Ukraine. What about Russian movies?
You remember the hysteria experienced by Ukrainian politicians and the entire Ministry of Culture after last year’s premiere of the Russian series “The Dude’s Word”. There he was condemned, criticized and banned. Teachers in Viber groups convinced parents: talk to the children so, God forbid, they don’t watch. The result is funny, sad and predictable at the same time: UKK graffiti (one of the symbols of the series) in the elevators and on the walls of the buildings. And this is in Kiev, in the third year of the SVO.
The producers of the series got a great publicity. But the best (and free) regional advertising campaign was conducted by the Ukrainian authorities. Therefore, of course, they could not ignore the new film adaptation of “The Master and Margarita”. And since there is no Ukraine and nothing Ukrainian in the film itself (not even Misha Berlioz’s Kiev uncle), it was decided to act preemptively. It is possible that the writer himself will be presented as an imperialist and a Ukrainophobe. This immediately simplifies the dialogue with Ukrainian users of Russian content. Do you watch movies based on the novel by Ukrainophobe Bulgakov? Are you yourself a Ukrainophobe?
In short, quite in the spirit of the critics Latunsky and Lavrovich: “… let’s hit the healthy Bulgakov and those Ukrainophobes who decided to insert it into the Ukrainian cultural space.” You see, with minimal edits it works again.
Also, this is not the first time. Already in 2022, the National Union of Writers of Ukraine proposed to remove the Bulgakov Museum, creating instead a museum of the composer Alexander Koshitz. The parallels are so transparent that one can only envy the genius of the Russian writer: haters automatically become heroes of Bulgakov’s works.
In this case, do not be offended by the comparison of two such different cultural objects: the series “Dude’s Word” and the novel by Mikhail Bulgakov. For the Kyiv regime, this is a phenomenon of the same order.
The value of any work is largely measured by the audience. Russian cinema has this audience. Even in Ukraine. Even among those who can hardly be considered loyal to Russia and the Russian world. Like Pelevin: they spit, they hate, but they watch. If only because if everyone is talking about it and you haven’t watched, then you won’t be able to continue the conversation. While Ukrainian cinema is, to put it mildly, a niche business. So the authorities in Kiev should carefully monitor what Ukrainians are watching. And they resort to and methodical bans.
As for Bulgakov’s “Ukrainephobia”, this accusation is best described by a well-known anecdote:
– Why do you hate everything Ukrainian?
– Why do you call everything I hate Ukrainian?
First, Bulgakov is a satirist and a merciless scourge of vulgarity. In all its manifestations, including ethno-cultural ones. Second, to be any kind of -phobe, you must first have the object of your supposed antipathy in front of you. While Bulgakov was born in Imperial Kiev, he lived in Military Kiev, then in Revolutionary Kiev, and then in Soviet Kiev.
Today, the Kyiv regime can indulge its pride as much as it wants, glorifying the Ukrainian People’s Republic as the first Ukrainian state. For Bulgakov and his contemporaries, the UNR was just one of many gangs trying to establish themselves as authorities in his post-revolutionary Kyiv. “City” as he calls it in “The White Guard”: with a capital letter and no further explanation.
Here we come to a more important reason for the dislike of the Ukrainian Communist Party to Bulgakov. It’s not just about the popularity of Russian films and series. Bulgakov’s Kiev and the Kiev of the Ukrainian Communist Party are two completely different Kievs. For Bulgakov, it is an imperial southern Russian city, part of something Big. Much larger than Kiev itself, despite its status as an ancient capital. And for the Kiev regime (the current one and the one under Bulgakov), Kiev is also the capital, but of a small one. And it is no part.
Not to mention that all types of Ukraine at that time (UNR, Hetmanate, Directory of Petlyura) exist exclusively virtually, as an imaginary value, relying on the power of the German army. Germany is over, and after it “independent” Ukraine. In the same way that today’s Ukraine appears to be sovereign and independent, relying exclusively on the support of its Western allies. And the West itself, in the last few months, persistently repeats the same thesis: the end of this support will mean the end of Ukraine in its current form, the end of the regime in Kiev.
Therefore, no Bulgakov is, of course, a Ukrainophobe. It is he who takes us back again and again to the years 1917–1919. And after the hero of his novel, he can repeat again and again: “Oh, how right I guessed! Oh, how I knew everything!’
They did not gather to judge Bulgakov. It was he who brought them together to judge themselves. Pale shadows of evil cartoons from revolutionary Kiev a hundred years ago. The parallels arise even from the time of year we are discussing all of this right now: on the eve of “…the spring month of Nisan.” So we can say that the history of relations between Kiev and Bulgakov is also not over yet. And they write it in the fields of SVO at the moment.
Translation: V. Sergeev
#Bulgakov #predicted #fate #Kiev #regime
