Master and Margarita

OK, first off, I'm really not trying to be pretentious here, choosing Pushkin, Bulgakov, and a massive tome on Chinese history. I'm not continuously reading daunting stuff like this. Secondly, I'm not really in the midst of reading this particular book. I only pulled it down off the shelf because I rented the television version of Master and Margarita directed by Vladimir Bortko. I also promise not to attempt any deep analyses of he work, not because I'm demonstrating any restraint, but just because I don't think I'm up to it.

The story is about a visit by the Devil to Stalinist-era Moscow. While Master and Margarita is filled with enough allusions to Russian literature, Soviet history, Russian Orthodox theology, and other references to encourage extensive analysis, it is still an entertaining book without having to stop every page and ponder its deeper meaning. (Unless you want to.) It contains any number of memorable passages, and evocative descriptions of the Moscow of the twenties and thirties.

Which brings me to the subject of the Russian TV series. I pulled down the book just to compare my memories of it to what I saw on the DVD. The television scenes were extremely faithful to Bulgakov's words. In fact, I was pleased that I was able to notice a minor change, replacing the bicycle act in the Varieté scene with a balancing act. The same scene added a detail, putting a poster exhorting "Complete the Five Year Plan in Four Years" behind the stage, something I don't believe is anywhere in the book.

Inevitably, even in over eight hours, some things were missing. While the music was effective, I heard none of the musical references made by Bulgakov. Also missing was the scene with the little boy during Margarita's flight over Moscow. I'm sure those who have read the book more often could cite other missing parts.

Despite that, the DVD is worth a look. One note, based on the comments of one person I know who already complained: The subtitles on the DVD are only available through your DVD player controls, and not through the title menu. It would certainly be difficult to follow for someone who doesn't speak Russian, otherwise.

Eugene Onegin

My friend, Tom, has been bugging me for over a year to set up a blog somewhere. The problem was to come up with the appropriate hook. Tom explained his theory of blogging to me.

It's not hard to come up with a set of things you want to talk about. The problem is to frame it in some subject that

a.) gives you an excuse to post regularly, and
b.) creates at least the illusion of some sort of fresh ideas.

In Tom's case, he chose to post about where he had lunch each day. Since this usually has something to do with where he is, who he's talking to, and what he's generally doing, this then gives him the excuse to talk further about technology, travel, his soccer officiating, and any other topic that seems important. And more importantly, the reader begins to realize that Tom actually has some pretty interesting lunches.

My lunches are usually pretty boring, and that's why I've decided to describe books I'm reading at any moment. I don't dive into this lightly, which is perhaps why it has taken me over a year since I agreed that maybe starting a blog would be a good idea. (Well, that, and general laziness.) Whether or not we are what we eat, surely much more is revealed by what we read.

And that brings me to the first book, Alexander Pushkin's Eugene Onegin (Евгений Онегин). I first read through this when studying Russian in college, and I'm perennially picking it up now and again, if only in attempt to prevent my Russian knowledge to disappear completely.

In one of my favorite moments, Tatyana is completely cured of her crush on Onegin, not because he just murdered her sister's fiancé in a duel, but because she sees his books. Looking at his collection of simpering 18th century English poetry (which Nabokov points out would have been in terrible translations), she realizes what a shallow and selfish person he is.

Что ж он? Ужели поражнье,
Ничтожный призак, иль еще
Москвич в Гарольдовом плаще,
Чужих причуд истолкованье,
Слов модных полный лексикон?..
Уж не пародия ли он?

In Nabokov's translation:
who's he then? Can it be—an imitation?
an insignificant phantasm, or else
a Muscovite in Harold's mantle,
a glossary of other people's megrims,
a complete lexicon of words in vogue?
Might he not be, in fact, a parody?

Of course, in part, I think that Pushkin was demonstrating how intelligent and perceptive Tatyana is, and not suggesting that everyone can be judged by their libraries. But I also suspect that he meant any educated person to feel a pang at the insinuation that we are "a complete lexicon of words in vogue". Similarly, when Onegin is first introduced, Pushkin satirizes the facile nature in which he spouts epigrams, or memorizes historical anecdotes, but shows no real interest in knowledge at all.

And isn't every blog, or for that matter, any literary effort, in danger of falling into that?

I don't know. I suspect it's time for lunch.