To see the other types of publications on this topic, follow the link: Bulgakov.
Journal articles on the topic 'Bulgakov'
Create a spot-on reference in APA, MLA, Chicago, Harvard, and other styles
Consult the top 50 journal articles for your research on the topic 'Bulgakov.'
Next to every source in the list of references, there is an 'Add to bibliography' button. Press on it, and we will generate automatically the bibliographic reference to the chosen work in the citation style you need: APA, MLA, Harvard, Chicago, Vancouver, etc.
You can also download the full text of the academic publication as pdf and read online its abstract whenever available in the metadata.
Browse journal articles on a wide variety of disciplines and organise your bibliography correctly.
1
Zayas, V., F. Mainardi, F. Maggioni, and G. Zanchin. "Sympathy for Pontius Pilate. Hemicrania in M. A. Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita." Cephalalgia 27, no. 1 (January 2007): 63–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-2982.2006.01232.x.
Full textAbstract:
The aim of this study was to explore the description of the migraine attack of Pontius Pilate (a character in the novel The Master and Margarita by M. A. Bulgakov). Some of its features are analysed in light of current migraine literature. It is hypothesized that, at least in part, this description is based on the personal experience of the novel's author. We studied and analysed the text of the novel, other works by Bulgakov, his biography, including his medical training and practice, and the recently published diaries of Bulgakov and his wife E. S. Bulgakova. The novel contains a comprehensive description of a migraine attack. It includes a prodrome/aura of osmophobia. Olfactory perception during or shortly before the migraine attack is altered to the point where neutral or even pleasant odours become unbearable. Bulgakov's extensive history of migraines is seen in his diary, the diary of his wife, letters and other literary works. This is one of the most detailed and extensive depictions of a migraine attack in literature, with osmophobia described with great emphasis. It is likely that Pilate's migraine is described based on the personal history of the novel's author.
2
Richmond, Steven. ""And Who Are the Judges?": Mikhail Bulgakov Versus Soviet Censorship, 1926-1936." Russian History 33, no. 1 (2006): 83–107. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/187633106x00050.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractMikhail Bulgakov is renowned for his challenge to the dry literary canons of the Soviet regime through his fantstical works of colorful content and unorthodox form, such as Sobach'e serd'tse (Heart of a Dog) and Master i Margarita. But Bulgakov is much mort than an exotic exception to Soviet puritanicalness. His works also include the highly practical and realistic, such as the tragic war-time works "Zapiski iungo vracha" (Notes of a Young Doctor) and Belaia gvardiia (The White Guad). Bulgakov's literary challenge to Soviet censorship also took direct forms. including two works that brazenly satire and examine the utterly taboo subjest of state censorship: the play, Bagrovyi ostrov (The Crimson Island) and Teaal'nyi roman (Theatrical Novel). Bulgakov's challenge to power also extendel to the epistolary, in the form of letters he sent to the Soviet government (and were read by Stalin) that contain attacks against the Soviet censorship bureau. In this real-life drama of Bulgakov versus Soviet censorship, we witness the icredible creativity and bravery of the artist, as well as discover his original and informative theory about how Soviet censorship operated. Let us begin our examina tion of this drama with the censorship bureau itself, how it first functioned and how it came to focus its sights on Bulgakov.
3
Yablokov, Evgeny A. "A book review: M.A. Bulgakov: Annotated bibliographic index. Vol. 2, 1941–1985. Rus. state library of arts; M.V. Mishurovskaya, I.S. Efimova, O.V. Golubeva (comps.); M.V. Mishurovskaya (ed.); A.V. Akimenko (bibliography ed.). Moscow, RGBI, 2021, 816 р." Sibirskiy filologicheskiy zhurnal, no. 1 (2023): 327–31. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/18137083/82/24.
Full textAbstract:
The review presents the second volume of the Bibliographic Index publications on the works of M. Bulgakov of 1941–1985, compiled by the working group of the Russian State Art Library. These two volumes are the first complete set of Russian-language studies of Bulgakov. A brief annotation to each bibliographic unit (about four thousand of them) should be recognized as a significant benefit of this book. The second volume of the Index covers Bulgakov’s “boom” of the 1960s, when the forgotten and never-before-published works were revealed to the reading public, and, primarily, the novel “Master and Margarita.” At that time, numerous memoirs about Bulgakov, the first philological articles about his work, and the first books about him began to appear. It was a period of early academic research on Bulgakov. Therefore, the material of the second volume differs significantly from the first but is no less interesting. The sources are divided into domestic and foreign: the first part includes the texts written by Bulgakov and about him, published in the USSR from 1941 to 1985. The second part of the Index includes the Russian-language editions published in other countries.
4
McCracken, Kyle. "A Reformed Engagement with Bulgakov’s Doctrine of Wisdom." Journal of Reformed Theology 16, no. 3 (July 19, 2022): 214–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.1163/15697312-bja10032.
Full textAbstract:
Abstract This article engages Sergei Bulgakov’s doctrine of divine wisdom with key reference to the work Sophia the Wisdom of God. It is proposed that Bulgakov viewed the life of the Orthodox Church as a form of living wisely within the world. Following a general overview of his doctrine of Sophia, it is shown that Bulgakov viewed Mariology and Eucharist as key indicators of the life of wisdom within the world. The article closes with a Reformed reflection.
5
Petrenko, Alexander Philippovich, Svetlana Anatolyevna Petrenko, and Irina Borisovna Fedotova. "Influence of N. Gogol’s and M. Saltykov-Shchedrin’s Satire on Michail Bulgakov’s Prose." International Journal of Applied Linguistics and English Literature 6, no. 1 (November 19, 2016): 20. http://dx.doi.org/10.7575/aiac.ijalel.v.6n.1p.20.
Full textAbstract:
The article is concerned with the study of literary relationships between the satire of the famous 20th-century Russian writer M. Bulgakov and the works by the Russian classics of the 19th century – N.V. Gogol and M.Y. Saltykov-Shchedrin. The article describes Gogol’s and Saltykov-Shchedrin’s influence on Bulgakov’s satirical poetics, especially in the period of his development as a writer. Special attention is given to the device of grotesque and the motives of mechanicalness and lifelessness, forming the artistic worlds of the writers under study. The authors note that the technical progress and the rapid development of mechanized production in the 20th century, combined with the satirical motive of primitivism, characteristic of Russian literature, left an imprint on the nature of Bulgakov’s grotesque. The writers at issue are united by such common feature of the satirical poetics as turning to fantasy, hyperbole, ‘strange and queer things’. The article shows the way Bulgakov perceived and embodied the principles of Gogol’s and Shchedrin’s world perception through the comic mixing of absurd, ghostly and real. Bulgakov’s way of seeing the world is characterized as ‘delirious reality’. At the same time, Bulgakov, as well as his literary teachers in the sphere of satire, showed oddness and divergence as regularity, while the comicality of fantasy in his works finally turns into the drama of reality.Keywords: satire, laughter, grotesque, mysticism, fantasy, zoomorphic metaphors
6
Ermakova, Liia L. "“Uncreated Firmament”: Vyach. Ivanov and S. Bulgakov (about a Poem)." Studia Litterarum 7, no. 1 (2022): 338–55. http://dx.doi.org/10.22455/2500-4247-2022-7-1-338-355.
Full textAbstract:
Russian symbolist Vyacheslav Ivanov and religious philosopher Sergius Bulgakov were connected by formal relations and friendship in 1905–1918. In 1914 Ivanov published the poem “Mother” (“Te glyby chto nezhno zasypali grob...”), with a dedication to Bulgakov. The article discusses this poem and its draft version, which allows to trace the movement of the poet’s creative thought. The biographical context is the death of Bulgakov’s mother — he described his intimate experience in the “Unfading Light” (“Svet Nevecherniy”). Special attention is paid to the symbols and motifs typical to Ivanov’s poetics: the firmament, the sun-heart and the motive of transparency. An idea, common both for Ivanov and Bulgakov, is that of some preworld feminine principle that appears in their texts under different names: as Sophia, the Soul of the World, Great Mother, Mother Earth. They are also united by the special attitude towards death which is understood in a Christian way — as a birth into a new life and just a step on the path of resurrection. The intertextual connections of the poem with the philosophical and theological works by Bulgakov may be considered as a result of mutual influence and their reliance on common sources.
7
Khachaturian, Liubov’ V. "The “Non-Euclidean Geometry” of the Manuscript: Mikhail Bulgakov’s Digital Archive." Vestnik Tomskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta, no. 460 (2020): 55–60. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/15617793/460/6.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the problem of access to archival sources, many of which are currently closed for research due to a number of reasons, including epidemiological ones. The author sees the solution to the problem in creating special unified electronic archives, in which all information about manuscripts is placed on the Internet site or portal, regardless of where they are located geographically. In the author’s opinion, electronic resources of the “second generation” meet the most complete tasks of scientific research: digital archives that allow not only quickly selecting sources, but also working with an electronic copy of the document identical to the original. Regardless of the scientific qualification of the researcher and the state of the original, any Internet user gets direct access to the electronic copy: they can study it, clarify it, quote it in their works and distribute links to the source. On the material of the “Autograph. The 20th-Century. Digital Archive of Russian Literature” portal, the author describes the process of creating a digital archive as a research work that is located at the junction of two Humanities disciplines: source studies and textual studies. In the course of the research, the author turns to the new materials of the portal – the digital archive of Mikhail Bulgakov. The author gives a detailed description of the history of the writer’s archival collections in various organizations (Institute of World Literature, RAS; Russian State Library; Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts), as well as a description of research works of the past decade on Bulgakov’s artistic heritage. During the writer’s lifetime, the archive was kept by Bulgakov himself, then by his widow, Elena Bulgakova, with a full understanding of the value that the collection as a whole represents. As a result, a huge, interconnected and actually commented complex of manuscripts, albums, correspondence, and visual materials was created. Then the archive was divided into two unequal parts (the Bulgakov-prose writer archive and the Bulgakov-playwright archive) and transferred to two different repositories: the Pushkin House (Fund 369) and the Lenin State library (Fund 562). The Bulgakov collection of the Pushkin House is “adjacent” to the Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts funds, which reflect the history of the text based on the materials of organizations (Glavrepertkom, archival funds of theaters, magazines and publishing houses). The author further describes the materials from the Mikhail Bulgakov Fund at the Institute of World Literature, RAS, presented on the “ Autograph. The 20th-Century” portal. The author cites unpublished (or published with notes) sources from the least studied part of the archive – the collection of theater albums. Comparing the theater album devoted to the stage history of the play The Days of the Turbins (The White Guard, The Brothers Turbins) and the text of Theatrical Novel (A Dead Man’s Memoir), the author infers that the album is a kind of a autodocumentary source of the novel, clarifying many controversial points in its interpretation. The genre nature of this type of album requires a separate study. In conclusion, the author emphasizes that the ideal material for such research can be the digital archive of Mikhail Bulgakov.
8
Chudnovsky, M. A. "The journalistic activity of M. A. Bulgakov in Rabochy newspaper. Bulgakov as a newspaper reporter." Science and School, no. 2 (April 30, 2024): 73–82. http://dx.doi.org/10.31862/1819-463x-2024-2-73-82.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the journalistic activity of M. A. Bulgakov in Rabochy newspaper as a newspaper reporter in the period from March 1 to September 1922. The author explores the initial period of M. A. Bulgakov’s journalistic activity in the Bolshevik press before collaborating with Gudok and The Day Before newspapers. In his article, the author focuses on the fact that the beginning of Bulgakov’s journalistic activity in Soviet periodicals was associated with the genre of newspaper reporting. The author’s research is based on the fundamental works of the main biographers of the writer and dissertations on similar topics, Bulgakov’s diary entries and personal studies of the original files of Rabochy newspaper from the period of 1922.
9
Khisamutdinov, A. A., and N. V. Khisamutdinova. "The writer’s uncle Pyotr Bulgakov in Vladivostok, Tokyo, and San-Francisco." Voprosy literatury, no. 3 (June 14, 2023): 159–69. http://dx.doi.org/10.31425/0042-8795-2023-3-159-169.
Full textAbstract:
The article compares two printed versions of the short story ‘The Power of the Devil’ [‘Vlast lukavogo’], written by the priest P. Bulgakov. The first publication of the story took place in China in 1907; the second edition was given the title ‘Greed’ [‘Zhadnost’] and printed in Europe in 1923. The later edition was thoroughly revised: technical inaccuracies were corrected, several scenes cut short, expressive means added, and more profound conclusions drawn. These changes may indicate that the revision was in part supervised by the priest’s nephew Mikhail Bulgakov, later a renowned writer. Pyotr Bulgakov taught theology at the Oriental Institute in Vladivostok, then the Japanese and Russian languages in Japan, where he served as priest for the Russian embassy; he also studied the influence of Christian philosophy on East and Southeast Asia, published papers on Japanese studies, and produced translations. The article touches on his relationship with M. Bulgakov’s family.
10
Gallaher, Brandon. "The ‘Sophiological’ Origins of Vladimir Lossky's Apophaticism." Scottish Journal of Theology 66, no. 3 (July 16, 2013): 278–98. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930613000136.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractVladimir Lossky (1903–58) and Sergii Bulgakov (1871–1944) are normally taken as polar opposites in modern Orthodox theology. Lossky's theology is portrayed as being based on a close exegesis of the Greek Fathers with an emphasis on theosis, the Trinity and the apophatic way of mystical union with God. Bulgakov's ‘sophiology’, in contrast, if it is remembered at all, is said to be a theology which wished to ‘go beyond the Fathers’, was based on German Idealism and the quasi-pantheist and gnostic idea of ‘sophia’ which is a form of the ‘Eternal Feminine’ of Romanticism. In short, Lossky's theological approach is what people normally think of when they speak of Orthodox theology: a form of ‘neo-patristic synthesis’ (Georges Florovsky). Bulgakov's theological approach is said to be typical of the exotic dead end of the inter-war émigré ‘Paris School’ (Alexander Schmemann) or ‘Russian Religious Renaissance’ (Nicolas Zernov). Lossky, we are reminded, was instrumental in the 1935 condemnation, by Metropolitan Sergii Stragorodskii of the Moscow Patriarchate, of Bulgakov's theology as ‘alien’ to the Orthodox Christian faith. Counter to this widely held ‘standard narrative’ of contemporary Orthodox theology, the article argues that the origins of Vladimir Lossky's apophaticism, which he characterised as ‘antinomic theology’, are found within the theological methodology of the sophiology of Sergii Bulgakov: ‘antinomism’. By antinomism is understood that with any theological truth one has two equally necessary affirmations (thesis and antithesis) which are nevertheless logically contradictory. In the face of their conflict, we are forced to hold both thesis and antithesis together through faith. A detailed discussion of Lossky's apophaticism is followed by its comparison to Bulgakov's ‘sophiological antinomism’. Lossky at first appears to be masking the influence of Bulgakov and even goes so far as to read his own form of theological antinomism into the Fathers. Nevertheless, he may well have been consciously appropriating the ‘positive intuitions’ of Bulgakov's thought in order to ‘Orthodoxise’ a thinker he believed was in error but still regarded as the greatest Orthodox theologian of the twentieth century. Despite major differences between the two thinkers (e.g. differing understandings of reason, the use of philosophy and the uncreated/created distinction), it is suggested that Lossky and Bulgakov have more in common than normally is believed to be the case. A critical knowledge of Bulgakov's sophiology is said to be the ‘skeleton key’ for modern Orthodox theology which can help unlock its past, present and future.
11
Fefilov, Alexander. "“Philosophy of the Name” by S. Bulgakov (Cogytological Interpretation)." Vestnik Volgogradskogo gosudarstvennogo universiteta. Serija 2. Jazykoznanije, no. 6 (March 2021): 190–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.15688/jvolsu2.2020.6.15.
Full textAbstract:
The paper focuses on the interpretation of the basic linguophilosophical views of S.N. Bulgakov set out in his work Philosophy of the Name (1920, 1953). Philosopher and theologian S.N. Bulgakov expresses opinions on the essence of a word from the point of view of cogitology. The author interprets S.N. Bulgakov's explanations of such integrative terms as "word-thought", "logos" and "sound word". S.N. Bulgakov declares that a word is equated to an enlightened logos as a unity of words and thoughts, words and deeds, words and things. According to the philosopher, the meaning of a word is an idea embodied in the sound form of a word. In speech, the word-meaning turns into a word-thought. A thought comes true due to a speech-word. Language as a means of expression exists in its complete form long before the act of its designation. A thing is revealed in its name. The article also reveals the views of S.N. Bulgakov on words from the root, verbs-linker and pronouns that do not have their own content. The author believes that the results of the analysis in the article can enrich our ideas about language as an instrument of naming, designation and expression (cognitive aspect), and as a means of speech activity (communicative aspect).
12
Sokolov, Boris V. "Book review: Bavin, S.P., & Mishurovskaya, M.V. (Eds.). (2017). M.A. Bulgakov. Annotated Bibliographic Index. Vol. I. 1919-1940 (A.V. Akimenko, Bibliogr. Ed., M.V. Mishurovskaya, E.I. Alekseenkova, I.S. Efimova, Yu.G. Slizun, Comp.). Moscow: RGBI Publ. 704 p.; Bavin, S.P., & Mishurovskaya, M.V. (Eds.). (2021). M.A. Bulgakov. Annotated Bibliographic Index. Vol. II. 1941-1985 (A.V. Akimenko, Bibliogr. Ed., M.V. Mishurovskaya, E.I. Alekseenkova, I.S. Efimova, Yu.G. Slizun, Comp.). Moscow: RGBI Publ. 816 p." RUDN Journal of Studies in Literature and Journalism 26, no. 4 (December 29, 2021): 786–90. http://dx.doi.org/10.22363/2312-9220-2021-26-4-786-790.
Full textAbstract:
Two volumes of the annotated bibliographic index cover works in Russian devoted to the life and work of M.A. Bulgakov and published in 1919-1985. In the 1st volume, ending by 1940, there are 3820 titles, in the 2nd - 4061 titles. Each volume contains indexes of names, titles, performances based on Bulgakovs plays, and a list of viewed periodicals.
13
Antipina, Julia. "Molecularity and ‘Sobornost’ on the way to church unity: archpriest Sergey Bulgakov’s theological controversy on the question of eucharistic communion with the non-orthodox." St. Tikhons' University Review 106 (April 28, 2023): 44–65. http://dx.doi.org/10.15382/sturi2023106.44-65.
Full textAbstract:
The article examines the theological content of the controversy that unfolded between the leaders of the Fellowship of St. Alban and St. Sergius in connection with the proposal of Archpriest Sergiy Bulgakov on the "partial intercommunion" – the Eucharistic communion of Anglicans and Orthodox, members of the Fellowship of St. Alban and St. Sergius. The Fellowship was founded at the second Anglo-Orthodox Congress in St. Albans in 1928. Bulgakov put forward a proposal for communion at one of the annual conferences of the Fellowship in 1933, i.e. after five years of its existence. According to Bulgakov, partial intercommunion could not replace the whole reunion of churches, but could serve as its beginning. Bulgakov's proposal for communion caused a heated discussion that lasted for three years. Opinions were divided on both the Anglican and Orthodox sides. The discussion was preserved on the pages of the Journal of the Fellowship and in the confidential correspondence of the members of the Executive Committee and the Paris Group, which was conducted in English. The main exponents of the opposite positions were Archpriest Sergey Bulgakov and Archpriest George Florovsky. At the heart of these disagreements was a different idea of the nature of the Church. Both sides assumed that the Church is one and catholic ("sobornaya"), but they understood the content of these concepts differently. In Florovsky's understanding, "sobornost" should have a dogmatic basis, while Bulgakov believed that "sobornost" has a mysterious-charismatic basis. In practical terms, the discussion turned around two possible ways of the ecumenical movement and their combination: the "diplomatic" method of reunification and the "molecular" action. The translation of several documents from the correspondence of the members of the Executive Committee of the Fellowship and the Paris Group is published as an appendix for the first time: a confidential note by A.F. Dobbie-Bateman to the members of the Executive Committee, letters from A.V. Kartashev and Archpriest George Florovsky, as well as a letter from N. Zernov, which outlines the discussion of Bulgakov's project at a meeting of the Brotherhood of Saint Sophia on October 29, 1933 in Paris.
14
Luo, Mingxi. "A Preliminary Study of the Intellectual Image in Bulgakov's Works - Exemplified by Heart of a Dog." Communications in Humanities Research 25, no. 1 (January 3, 2024): 273–77. http://dx.doi.org/10.54254/2753-7064/25/20231997.
Full textAbstract:
Mikhail Bulgakov is one of the renowned Soviet writers of the 20th century, whose works are noted for their imaginative and highly satirical nature. The intellectual image serves as one of the main character categories in the authors works. Bulgakov casts on these characters the ideology and social atmosphere of Soviet society in the early 20th century. Heart of a Dog is a milestone in Bulgakov's novel writing. The purpose of this essay is to take Professor Preobrazhensky as an example, to analyze the common points of the author's image of intellectuals who are extravagant, conservative, and obstinate, and to further analyze the tragic destiny of these intellectuals from the aspects of scientific ethics and personal worship.
15
Kisel, Maria. "Feuilletons Don't Burn: Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita and the Imagined “Soviet Reader“." Slavic Review 68, no. 3 (2009): 582–600. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0037677900019756.
Full textAbstract:
Maria Kisel argues that Mikhail Bulgakov's The Master and Margarita can be read as a persuasive novel, intended to educate Soviet readers who, like the character Ivan Bezdomnyi, are ignorant of history and culture beyond their insulated Soviet reality. Kisel demonstrates how Bulgakov's novel coopts the form and themes of the Soviet satirical feuilleton to explain the virtues of the prerevolutionary cultural realm rooted in the western European intellectual tradition. To render his own cultural perspective accessible, Bulgakov revisits his early feuilletons written for the newspaper Gudok, a category of writings he claimed to disdain. The Master and Margarita demonstrates a complex relationship with the imagined “Soviet reader,“ who is both an object of ridicule and a desired interlocutor. Examining the connection between the Master and Ivan as analogous to the teacher and disciple dynamic between Bulgakov and his own “Soviet readers,” this article offers a new interpretation of this well-loved and much-discussed masterpiece.
16
Tyutelova, Larisa. "The poetics of the farce as the basis of the integrity of the artistic world of M.A. Bulgakov (review of the monograph Golovchiner V.E., Vesnina T.L. “The comic in M. Bulgakov’s plays of the 1920s.”)." Semiotic studies 1, no. 4 (April 1, 2022): 114–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.18287/2782-2966-2021-1-4-114-116.
Full textAbstract:
The review is devoted to the monograph by V.E. Golovchiner and T.L. Vesnina Comic in M. Bulgakovs plays of the 1920s. The author comes to the conclusion that the book reveals the role of farcical poetics in the artistic world of M.A. Bulgakov and proves the effectiveness of working with farcical poetics in the studies of Russian drama of the 1920s.
17
Jang, Hye Zin. "A Study on Religious Philosophy and Aesthetics in Sergei Bulgakov's Sophiology." Institute for Russian and Altaic Studies Chungbuk University 26 (February 28, 2023): 109–40. http://dx.doi.org/10.24958/rh.2023.26.109.
Full textAbstract:
This study examines Bulgakov's socialist ideology and how it was influenced by Sophia's theory of Solovyov. Chapter 1 analyzes the differences between socialism and Christianity through Bulgakov's early writings. Chapter 2 examines aspects of Bulgakov's Sophia Theory that were developed from Solovyov's Sophia Theory. The study seeks to understand Sophia and Gnosticism, the flow of Sophia's divinity and humanity, and the differences and trends in Sophia's theory in Russian religious philosophy. While Solovyov tried to prove the basic concept of Sophia's theory with reason, Bulgarkov analyzed the problem of the fourth person by dividing it into the problem of hypostasis and hypostatized. This problem of personification originates from the duality of Sophia's theory. While Solovyov focused on the divine Sophia, Bulgakov defined Sophia as a middle ground between the divine and human beings in the form of 'creatures'. The problem of duality and person in Sophia's theory is further examined in Chapter 3 through the problem of the image and name of the divine. The study posits that God manifests as divine energy from the word God itself. Before examining the concept of name worship, the study briefly reviews the meaning of icon and compares the correlation between the meaning of icon and name worship as the original image of God.
18
Yablokov, Evgeny. "(«We must run. Everyone is running.» (M.A. Bulgakov and N.A. Teffi))." Actographe 1, no. 4 (November 30, 2020): 29–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.24249/2490-9459-4-1-29-54.
Full textAbstract:
«We must run. Everyone is running.» (M.A. Bulgakov and N.A. Teffi) The subject is new in literary criticism, the question of the influence of Teffi's works on Bulgakov's work has not yet been raised. The article analyzes Teffi's stories and feuilletons of 1918–1919, the period of the writer's stay in Kiev and Odessa, as well as her memoirs in 1931; and there are parallels between Teffi's image of Kiev in 1918 and Bulgakov's novel The White Guard. Special attention should be paid to the “running” motif, relevant in Teffi's work in the late 1910s, and which is developed in Bulgakov's play The Flight. Moreover, this play was influenced by the theme of Constantinople in Teffi's journalism during the first months of her exile. In connection with the insect motives of the play The Flight, we find the discourse of the “cockroach” in a certain number of works by Teffi, notably in Potapovna. For the writer, one of the important problems is the essence of the concept of “human”, a problem then developed by Bulgakov in Heart of a Dog, which is a variant of the “humanoid” creature that appeared in the work of Teffi in the late 1900s.
19
Andrews, Edna, and Yana Lowry. "Music as Text in the Works of Bulgakov." Recherches sémiotiques 35, no. 1 (August 20, 2018): 41–61. http://dx.doi.org/10.7202/1050986ar.
Full textAbstract:
The present article is a modest introduction to a larger theme that analyzes the use of music as text in the plays, short stories and novels of Mixail Bulgakov. The important contribution of Juri Lotman’s theoretical work on artistic space, the semiosphere, and the role of incorporating “texts within texts” (текст в тексте) is fundamental to our explication of the process of understanding Bulgakov’s use of music as text in a variety of its manifestations, resulting in an integrated and full-bodied textual structure that generates meanings critical to the works in which it is embedded. This analysis will focus on defining what “music as text” is for Bulgakov and specifically consider the use of music in the play, Zoya’s Apartment (Зойкина квартира).
20
A. Sablon Leiva, Eduard. "THE CONCEPT OF KENOSIS IN THEOLOGICAL THOUGHT OF V. N. LOSSKY AND ARCHPRIEST SERGII BULGAKOV: A COMPARATIVE CRITICAL ANALYSIS." Educational Discourse: collection of scientific papers, no. 23(5) (July 1, 2020): 101–8. http://dx.doi.org/10.33930/ed.2019.5007.23(5)-9.
Full textAbstract:
It has been found that the discrepancies between V. N. Lossky’s and archpriest Sergii Bulgakov’s views on kenosis are explained by the fact that these thinkers built their teachings on different methodological foundations, using different sources and tools. For Lossky, kenosis was temporal in nature and was limited to the histological dimension, while for Bulgakov kenosis meant an eternal intrathroic metaphysical reality that manifested itself much earlier and on a much larger scale. If Bulgakov insisted that the Incarnation was determined by ontological necessity (ontological altruism), then Lossky, by contrast, was of the opinion that it was caused by the need to solve the human problem of sin and became possible only due to the free act of the Divine will.
21
Trajanov, Kirche. "Creatio Ex Nihilo through the Prism of Father Sergei Bulgakov’s Sophiology." Philotheos 22, no. 1 (2022): 50–62. http://dx.doi.org/10.5840/philotheos20222214.
Full textAbstract:
Father Sergei Bulgakov (1871–1944), directly influenced by Vladimir Solovyov and especially by Father Pavel Florensky, developed his sophiological concept which takes a central place in his doctrine of Trinity and God's economy. The main failure of the Russian sophiology is that the question of God's Wisdom is not Christologically founded in the spirit of the New Testament and patristic teaching. Bulgakov neglects the theology of God's uncreated energies. He thinks that it does not sufficiently explain the creation of the world as well as the relationship between God and the world. According to him, the creation of the world and its unity with God can be explained only through a mediator who acts as an “ontological bridge” between the Creator and the creation. Bulgakov, using the ontological mediation paradigms that are characteristic for certain ancient philosophical systems, especially Neo-Platonism, develops his doctrine of Sophia. She is immanent to both the nature of God and the creation. This attitude leads Bulgakov to the position of pantheism. In order to avoid this danger, he modifies his teaching introducing two models of Sophia: “Divine Sophia” and “Created Sophia”. Unlike the patristic theology, Bulgakov’s sophiological essentialism does not tend the antinomy of apophatic-kataphatic theology, and thereby he puts into question the ontological difference between the Creator and the creation. It is a failed attempt to interpret the dogma of the creation of the world ex nihilo, through categories and concepts that are alien to the church tradition.
22
Ilchenko, Sergey Nikolayevich. "«The White Guard» on TV: fascinated by masscult mythology." Journal of Flm Arts and Film Studies 6, no. 1 (March 15, 2014): 60–67. http://dx.doi.org/10.17816/vgik6160-67.
Full textAbstract:
The article analyzes the television adaptation of the famous novel by Mikhail Bulgakov, shown on Russian television in 2012. The author juxtaposes the TV-series with the renowned Soviet film Days of the Turbins, premiered in 1976. The analysis is carried out in the context of the history of a theatre version of the novel The White guard, staged in the Moscow Academic Art Theatre in the 1920s, that is Days of the Turbins, highly appreciated by Stalin. Traditionally, both theatre and cinema directors were drawn to the play adapted by Mikhail Bulgakov after his novel. Anyhow, there is a certain subject and semantic difference between these two works. The author analyzes the structure of the TV version, its style, elaboration of on-screen characters, based on the literary source and previous interpretation of the play Days of the Turbins. However, the author argues, that ideological and figurative interference into the original, adaptation to the stereotypes of mass culture significantly distort the perception of Bulgakovs works, largely obliged to the writerss mood and emotions experienced in the years of Revolution and Civil war. Concluding, the author pinpoints both - complexity unit of Bulgakovs text adaptation towards contemporary TV, and misjudgements of the TV-series makers in the way of conception and realization.
23
Givens, John. "Bulgakov Anniversary." Russian Studies in Literature 47, no. 2 (April 2011): 3–6. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/rsl1061-1975470200.
Full text
24
Frank, Margot K., and Nadine Natov. "Mikhail Bulgakov." World Literature Today 60, no. 1 (1986): 134. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/40141313.
Full text
25
Beaujour, Elizabeth Klosty, and Nadine Natov. "Mikhail Bulgakov." Slavic and East European Journal 30, no. 3 (1986): 450. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/307907.
Full text
26
Haber, Edythe C., and Nadine Natov. "Mikhail Bulgakov." Russian Review 45, no. 1 (January 1986): 59. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/129412.
Full text
27
Hryschko, Myroslav Feodosijeviè. "Bulgakov's sophiology as philosopheme: non-ontology and ontogenesis." Trans/Form/Ação 33, no. 1 (2010): 203–24. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/s0101-31732010000100010.
Full textAbstract:
The text examines Sergej Nikolajeviè Bulgakov's description of the philosopheme as thoroughly "immanent" (viz., the immanence of man qua being, such that ontology in Bulgakov becomes a conceptual analogue for immanence) and the corollary that such immanence necessarily excludes the problematic of the "creation of the world." Because of this resolute immanence and the notion that the creation of the world in the form of creatio ex nihilo requires a non-immanent or non-ontological thought and concept, the problematic for Bulgakov is approached only by a theologeme. Appropriating this argument as material for a cursory philosopheme, the text attempts to transform Bulgakov's theologeme into a philosopheme through an elision of God and dogma that overdetermines the theologeme. This philosopheme (nascent within Bulgakov's work itself, in both his hesitation to the overdetermination of immanence and the commitment to the problem of creation) would be a thoroughly non-ontological philosopheme, one that allows for the treatment of the problematic of "creation" or singular ontogenesis, yet with the corollary that this philosopheme must rely on an "ontological zero" Such a philosopheme qua ontologically empty formula nevertheless remains ontologically significant insofar as it is to evince the limit of ontology, in the ontological zero's non-relationality to ontology.
28
Penskaya, Elena N. "Mikhail Bulgakov and Aleksandr Sukhovo-Kobylin. Textology of a Theater Album." Imagologiya i komparativistika, no. 14 (2020): 219–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.17223/24099554/14/11.
Full textAbstract:
Personal collections of documents related to the performances of SukhovoKobylin’s and Bulgakov’s own plays have never been compared. Bulgakov practically never mentions Sukhovo-Kobylin in his texts. However, the “meeting” of the two playwrights took place in the space of the theatrical album. Unlike the literary album that has been studied many times, there are no special studies about the typology of the theatrical album and its cultural semantics. The textological study of album “autocollections” as drama companions contributes to the acquisition of semantic “keys” not only to certain texts, but also to those meta-links that they form as well as to the compilation of mobile text transcriptions. The album laboratories of the two playwrights make this similarity clear. The theatrical albums by Sukhovo-Kobylin (a blue blotter with envelopes of versions of plays that are part of the “Pictures of the Past” trilogy, held in the Russian State Archive of Literature and Arts) and Bulgakov (eight albums in the Handwritten Section of the IRLI) reveal two layers. One is an “encyclopedia” of theatrical history of plays, posters, reviews, accompanied by the author’s notes, and a detailed “dossier of censorship ordeals”. The other layer is newspaper clippings with author’s marginalities, marks that simulate a vocabulary universe and the library of plots reflecting newspaper reality and later turned into works. Thus, it is known that Sukhovo-Kobylin was one of the characters in V. Chernoyarov’s feuilleton “The National Team”, published in the magazine “Novyy Zritel” in 1926 and pasted into Bulgakov’s album related to the play The Days of the Turbins at the Moscow Art Theater in 1926. The specified album is an auto-documentary source of Theatrical Novel. The metamorphoses of the texts in the album, accompanied by the author’s notes, marginalities, typologically bring together the theatrical albums of Sukhovo-Kobylin and Bulgakov. They are related semiotically and visually to the scenario of a conventional play, the director’s staged copy, or the exhibition plan of the exposition. The playwrights quite obviously collect the dossier, the “data bank”, fixing the junctions, the path from the manuscript to the publication and the scene (especially in Bulgakov’s case), as if they were making up a biography of their own text. Bulgakov appreciates the author’s recipes and technical guidelines for making an author, formulated in feuilletons of the 1920s. By coincidence, Sukhovo-Kobylin got into this feuilleton environment.
29
Shaun Coyle, Justin. "Heterodox Hegels: heresiology in de Lubac and Bulgakov." Scottish Journal of Theology 73, no. 1 (February 2020): 31–42. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s003693061900070x.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThis paper considers two twentieth-century heresiological critiques of G. W. F. Hegel. That Henri de Lubac and Sergius Bulgakov should both worry at Hegel's ‘heresy’ is hardly surprising. More surprising, however, is how and that each charges Hegel with a different heresy. Though de Lubac's heresiological critique has proven more influential, I commend Bulgakov's. The paper concludes by querying the very strategy of assaying philosophers like Hegel heresiologically.
30
Khachaturian, Liubov’ Valerievna. "M. A. BULGAKOV IN SEARCH OF A REVOLUTIONARY PLAY: A STAGE CHRONICLE OF THE DAYS OF THE TURBINS." Russkaya literatura 3 (2021): 249–52. http://dx.doi.org/10.31860/0131-6095-2021-3-249-252.
Full textAbstract:
The article explores the genre specifi city of Mikhail Bulgakov’s theatrical albums from the collection of the Institute of Russian Literature. Using the materials of Bulgakov’s fi rst theatrical album (1925–1927), the stage history of the play The Days of the Turbins and the further development of the plot of the Theatrical Novel (Notes of the Deceased) are clarifi ed. The materials of the albums are compared with Bulgakov diary entries of 1923–1924 (My Diary / Under the Heel).
31
Shchekaleva, O. V. "The anthropology of creativity in the context of S.N. Bulgakov’s sophiology." Solov’evskie issledovaniya, no. 4 (December 15, 2019): 140–53. http://dx.doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2019.4.140-153.
Full textAbstract:
This paper deals with Bulgakov’s doctrine on the human being and creative work. The reason why it is possible to interpret and understand Bulgakov’s conception of creativity in the light of anthropology is justified in the paper. It is indicated that many researchers of Bulgakov's philosophy did not make an explicit connection between anthropology and creativity and did not raise the question why man is capable of creativity. Anthropology and the concept of creativity are reconstructed using Bulgakov's texts. The role of Sofia in the creative process and her role in human life as a whole are determined. The change of the ontological status of man as a result of the original sin is analyzed. The specificity of Bulgakov's understanding of the creative act and its influence on man is revealed. The impact of creativity on a person is analyzed in the paper. It is proposed to consider artistic creation separately from self-creation, as it is fundamentally different from artistic creativity. It is emphasized that according to Bulgakov, self-creation can lead a person to salvation and even to Holiness. It is argued that self-creation as the implementation of one's own idea-norm is the true meaning of human life. Attention is drawn to the tragedy of creativity, which every person-creator experiences. In conclusion, it is pointed out that in the future the concept of Bulgakov's creativity can be ap-plied to the evaluation of works of art. The article concludes that, according to Bulgakov's philosophy, the main characteristics of a person that make him capable of creativity are his freedom, genius and talent. This way the importance of creative activity, both for an individual and for the whole world, is proved and the eschatological role of creativity is indicated.
32
Darenskaya, V. N. "Solovyov’s Sophiology as the Main Factor of f. Sergiy Bulgakov’s “spiritual birth”." Solov’evskie issledovaniya, no. 2 (June 30, 2023): 111–25. http://dx.doi.org/10.17588/2076-9210.2023.2.111-125.
Full textAbstract:
The analysis of the influence of V. Solovyov’s sophiology on the spiritual path of S.N. Bulgakov and his formation as a philosopher and theologian is proposed. The experience of the “revelation of Sophia”, developed by the thinker into a philosophical and theological concept under the direct influence of the philosophy of V. Solovyov, is considered as the main factor of the spiritual evolution of Fr. Sergius. Using the method of existential analysis, the key events of S.N. Bulgakov’s spiritual path are revealed, which became the basis of his conceptual constructions. As a result of the analysis, it was found that based on their own experience of cognition of Sophia as a special dimension of created being, connecting it with the Creator, S.N. Bulgakov demonstrates the continuity of the development of Russian philosophy from V. Solovyov to the thinkers of the Silver Age. This allows us to speak about the key role of the revelation of Sophia of the Wisdom of God as one of the main elements of the Russian philosophical tradition of the XIX–XX centuries. It is shown that, according to this philosophical interpretation, sophiology conveys an important spiritual experience of human perception of the essence of the created world, not damaged by Original sin. It is noted that this aspect of spiritual experience has not been previously investigated within the framework of academic theology, which led S.N. Bulgakov to conflict with traditional academic theology, allowed S.N. Bulgakov to overcome the materialistic understanding of history. Based on the analysis of a number of modern approaches, the sophiology of Fr. Sergius is interpreted as a valuable theologumen for the modern Christian consciousness, which is the response of the Russian Orthodox mind to the dehumanization of the world, to the secular picture of the world that has developed within the framework of Modern science. An example of the “spiritual birth” of fr. Sergiy Bulgakov is considered as a vivid example of the influence of Vladimir Solovyov’s legacy, his spiritual experience and philosophical doctrine on the subsequent history of Russian philosophy.
33
Kang, Su Kyung. "M.A. Bulgakov and the “Kiev text”: Based on the “Kiev-gorod” and “The White Guard”." Institute for Russian and Altaic Studies Chungbuk University 25 (August 31, 2022): 29–51. http://dx.doi.org/10.24958/rh.2022.25.29.
Full textAbstract:
The article is devoted to the problem of “Kiev text”. The author analyses two works of M.A. Bulgakov, created and completed after visiting to his hometown of Kyiv in 1923, the sketch “Kiev-gorod” and the novel “The White Guard”. To this end, at first, we examined the research history and research trends of “Kiev text” in Russian literature , and revealed the characteristics of “Kiev text”.
We also saw that in “Kiev-gorod” and “The White Guard” the figure of Kyiv is depicted in ‘history’ as the image of falling Babylon, in the memory of the lyrical self and in Alexei’s dream as the image of the heavenly Jerusalem.
As such, the myth of the confrontation between these two cities is the basis of Bulgakov's “Kiev text”. Meanwhile, Bulgakov's ‘city’, which contains an eternal ‘culture’ that is not destroyed by any ‘history’, is unique in that it has myth and eternity.
In this way, this paper ultimately tried to find the literary meaning of the Bulgakov ‘s “Kiev text”, and to read the most famous “Kiev text” of the 20th century, “The White Guard” and its documentary version, “Kiev-gorod”, from a new perspective.
34
Anwar, Aditya Ilhami, and Thera Widyastuti. "Refleksi Kehidupan Mikhail Bulgakov di Apartemen Komunal Soviet dalam Novela Manusia Berjiwa Anjing dan Telur Fatal." MOZAIK HUMANIORA 21, no. 1 (January 10, 2022): 1–12. http://dx.doi.org/10.20473/mozaik.v21i1.21076.
Full textAbstract:
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk mengeksplorasi pandangan dunia Mikhail Bulgakov tentang apartemen komunal. Mikhail Bulgakov melalui kedua novelanya yang berjudul Собачье Сердце (Manusia Berjiwa Anjing) dan Роковые Яйца (Telur Fatal) mengkritisi kebijakan perumahan yang dilakukan oleh pemerintah Soviet. Ia sering menampilkan kekurangan yang ada di apartemen komunal di dalam kedua novela tersebut. Permasalahan dalam penelitian ini adalah bagaimana penggambaran tentang apartemen komunal yang ada di dalam novela lahir dari pandangan duniaBulgakov dan bagaimana Bulgakov menggambarkan apartemen komunal dalam novela yang dibuatnya. Penelitian ini bersifat kualitatif deskriptif. Teori strukturalisme genetik Lucien Goldmann digunakan untuk menganalisis pandangan dunia Bulgakov. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa pandangan dunia Bulgakov memengaruhi penggambarannya tentang apartemen komunal yang ada di dalam kedua novela. Apartemen komunal digambarkan oleh Bulgakov sebagai tempat tinggal yang tidak nyaman, banyak aturan, dan tidak aman.
35
Guo, Cong, and Alexander Valerianovich Chistyakov. "On the status of research of M. A. Bulgakov’s works in China." Litera, no. 6 (June 2020): 82–91. http://dx.doi.org/10.25136/2409-8698.2020.6.33181.
Full textAbstract:
Since the very beginning of research of M. A. Bulgakov’s works in China, has not received due recognition; however, the interest of literary historians to studying and interpretation of his immortal classic has seen recent increase. The subject of this article is the studying of Bulgakov’s satiric literature in China. The object is Bulgakov’s satiric literature and characters of his works. At first, study of Bulgakov’s works in China was limited just by “obtaining information”. The author meticulously examines such aspects demonstrated Bulgakov’s texts, as aesthetics, ethnocultural tradition, figures, practical importance. The author divides the works of M. A. Bulgakov into chronological periods, as well as underlines recent transformation in the views pertinent to his oeuvres within the Chinese literary studies. It is concluded that the analysis of Bulgakov’s novels at the three aforementioned stages of Chinese literary studies demonstrates the transition from the “stage of acceptance” to the “stage of comprehensive analysis” in multifaceted and multidimensional articulation, which testifies to the fact that literary research of M. A. Bulgakov’s novels continues to surge.
36
Ilin, Ivan Yu. "Towards Religious Metaphysics: Overcoming Nietzschean Nihilism in Sergei Bulgakov’s Philosophy." Voprosy Filosofii, no. 10 (2021): 130–37. http://dx.doi.org/10.21146/0042-8744-2021-10-130-137.
Full textAbstract:
Friedrich Nietzsche’s philosophical views had a serious impact on the Russian thought of the Silver Age. In this article I show that one of those influenced by the German thinker was Sergei Bulgakov, despite the fact that in his writings he practically did not consider the philosophy of Nietzsche by itself. Unlike a number of other contemporaries who were greatly impressed by the works of Nietzsche, Bulgakov did not take his philosophy in a complementary way, but took it critically. The article puts forward and substantiates the thesis about the key importance of the figure of Nietzsche for Bulgakov in 1900–1910. Nietzschean philosophy in many ways becomes for the Russian thinker the “negative” basis, criticism of which allows Bulgakov to formulate in many respects the provisions of his own, religiously tinged idealistic metaphysics. Bulgakov treats Nietzsche exclusively as an anti-Christian and atheist. Subsequently, when Bulgakov proceeds to build his religious-metaphysical system, references to Nietzsche disappear: his ideas lose their ontological significance and polemical relevance for Bulgakov
37
May, Richard. "Between God and the world: a critical appraisal of the sophiology of Sergius Bulgakov." Scottish Journal of Theology 74, no. 1 (February 2021): 67–84. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/s0036930621000065.
Full textAbstract:
AbstractThe sophiology of Sergius Bulgakov has exerted a significant amount of influence over Anglophone theology over the last decade. Theological figures as significant as Rowan Williams, John Milbank and Paul Fiddes, to name but a few, have positively engaged with and utilised Bulgakov's sophiology within their own theological contributions. Thus, for many, Bulgakov's sophiology has proven to be a fecund source of theological inspiration, especially when articulating the relationship between God and the world. However, historically, Bulgakov's sophiology has been criticised by many Orthodox theologians, who argue that Bulgakov's proposals are theologically flawed and challenge traditional orthodox readings of Christian doctrine. Despite the controversy surrounding Bulgakov's use of Sophia, very few comprehensive, critical studies of Bulgakov's sophiology, spanning its historical development, exist. This article seeks to fill this void at a time when Bulgakov's sophiology is enthusiastically adopted by many without an accompanying critical lens.
38
Molodiakov, Vassili E. "“They Both had their own Pontius Pilate:” Leonid Dolgopolov and Miron Petrovsky Discussing on Bulgakov and Mayakovsky." Literary Fact, no. 23 (2022): 243–49. http://dx.doi.org/10.22455/2541-8297-2022-23-243-249.
Full textAbstract:
Russian Modernism scholar Leonid Konstantinovich Dolgolopov (1928–1995) in the late 1980s and early 1990s wrote several research articles on life and works of Vladimir Mayakovsky whom he considered one of the greatest Russian poets of the 20th century. Dolgopolov also highly appreciated works of Mikhail Bulgakov; he wrote no papers on him but closely watched other scholars’ research, especially during “Bulgakov’s boom” of the Perestroika years. Dolgopolov carefully read the article about Bulgakov vs. Mayakovsky confrontation by a literary critic and scholar Miron Semenovich Petrovsky (1932–2020) published in influential magazine “Literaturnoe obozreniye” (“Literary Review”) in 1987, June. Petrovsky sent him a copy inscribed “as a sign of agreement and disagreement.” Dolgopolov made detailed marginalia and wrote separated notes on this subject which are published here for the first time (originals in the present author’s collection). Dolgopolov criticised Petrovsky’s approach to the subject which was important to him and briefly outlined his own view. Dolgopolov was interested in the both Bulgakov and Mayakovsky not as much as participants of the literary process, belonging to different camps and polemicizing with each other, but as examples of a collision between the great artist and the political power. Tragic destiny of the Poet / Prophet endowed with a higher mission and dying while completing it was a major subject of Dolgopolov’s late research and literary work.
39
Ramonas, Arvydas. "Paskutinio teismo, pragaro ir rojaus samprata Sergejaus Bulgakovo kūryboje." Res Humanitariae 30 (December 29, 2022): 158–76. http://dx.doi.org/10.15181/rh.v30i0.2458.
Full textAbstract:
The article presents theological thoughts on eschatological themes of Sergei Bulgakov, one of the most prominent theologians and priests in the Russian Orthodox Church in the late 19th and early 20th century. These themes touch on theological concepts of God’s last judgment, heaven and hell. Bulgakov interprets God’s last judgment in a very modern way, as a confrontation of the truth with its own primordial image in the idea of God. To the extent that the ‘final’ life of the person who has lived it differs from the best version of what it could have been if God’s will had been followed, so does the pain of unrealised happiness. The outcome of such a confrontation with truth is either heaven or hell. For Bulgakov, hell is not infinitely eternal. He believes that at the very end, when time and space no longer exist, those in hell can still experience God’s mercy. Hell is a lost God, heaven is a found God. Such thoughts are made all the more dramatic by the fact that Bulgakov’s work took place at a difficult political, economic and cultural time, both in Russia and in Europe, with the Bolshevik October Revolution, the First World War, and the Second World War. The influence of these processes on theology is also a focus of the article.
40
Kultysheva, Olga M., and Konstantin V. Migunov. "The Image of the Artist and the Conflict “the Artist and Power” In M.A. Bulgakov's Play “The Cabal of the Saints”." Nizhnevartovsk Philological Bulletin 9, no. 1 (May 27, 2024): 33–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.36906/2500-1795/24-1/04.
Full textAbstract:
This article examines the image of the artist and the conflict “artist and power” in the work of M.A. Bulgakov “The Cabal of the Saints”, as well as in the plays “Alexander Pushkin” and “Crimson Island”. This study talks about the confrontation between the artist and the government as a traditional conflict for Russian literature on the example of the works of G.R. Derzhavin, A.S. Pushkin, M.Y. Lermontov and N.A. Nekrasov. The author reveals the creative motivation of the writer, which caused M.A. Bulgakov's appeal to the above-mentioned conflict, in connection with the historical realities and facts of the author's life. Based on a comparative analysis of the works of the authors of the XVIII and XIX centuries, as well as the plays of M.A. Bulgakov, the authors conclude that, as a rule, the image of the artist in the studied plays is associated with the conflict “artist and power” and is revealed through it. Writers addressed the conflict “artist and power” long before M.A. Bulgakov. This confrontation is most often found in works from the time of Romanticism, in which the poet is confronted with a soulless crowd or greedy powerful. In turn, feeling the pressure of censorship bodies that impede the freedom of creative expression, M.A. Bulgakov turns to the above-mentioned conflict, which is vital for him, and rethinks it. Based on this statement, the authors of the article analyzed and compared the works “Crimson Island”, “Alexander Pushkin” and “Cabal of saints”, thereby identifying the features of the artist, manifested through the prism of the conflict “artist and power”. The scientific works of both recognized researchers in the field of literary studies and literary history, as well as young scientists, were used as a theoretical basis for this article.
41
Raczyński-Rożek, Maciej. "The Angelology of Sergius Bulgakov." Polonia Sacra 26, no. 1 (July 20, 2022): 37–58. http://dx.doi.org/10.15633/ps.26102.
Full textAbstract:
Contemporary angelology is primarily an apologetic response to the negation of the existence of the angelic reality by liberal Protestantism. Bulgakov’s teaching about angels, on the other hand, arose as an indispensable part of the theological system. The orthodox author defines angels as created ideas of reality. As with Plato, every thing has its own idea, so with Bulgakov it has its own angel. The angels are therefore closely related to the earthly world and are its guardians, leading the world to the realization of the meaning given to it. Angels are also closely related to God because it is their nature to be filled with divine life. Thus, they constitute “Jacob’s ladder” — the reality that connects the world with God.
42
Лабынцев, Юрий Андреевич, and Лариса Леонидовна Щавинская. "ПРОФЕССОР КИЕВСКОЙ ДУХОВНОЙ АКАДЕМИИ А. И. БУЛГАКОВ (1859–1907)." Традиции и современность, no. 25 (December 30, 2020): 98–113. http://dx.doi.org/10.33876/2687-119x/2020-25/98-113.
Full textAbstract:
Аннотация. В статье на основе различных литературных и архивных материалов рассказывается о жизни, научной и просветительской работе Афанасия Ивановича Булгакова – отца известного русского писателя М. А. Булгакова. Особое внимание уделено полемической и проповеднической деятельности А. И. Булгакова – православного ученого богослова, в том числе рассчитанной на самые широкие слои населения Российской империи, включая простонародные. В приложении публикуется рукописная автобиография А. И. Булгакова. Ключевые слова: православие, А. И. Булгаков, М. А. Булгаков, Киевская духовная академия, богословие. Abstract. The article is based on various literary and archival materials and tells about the life, scientific and educational work of Afanasy Ivanovich Bulgakov, the father of the famous Russian writer M.A. Bulgakov. Special attention is paid to the polemical and preaching activities of the Orthodox scholar theologian A.I. Bulgakov. Its activities were designed for the broadest segments of the population of the Russian Empire, including the common people. The Application contains a handwritten autobiography of A.I. Bulgakov. Key words: Orthodoxy, A.I. Bulgakov, M.A. Bulgakov, Kiev Theological Academy, theology
43
Rosenshield, Gary. "The Master and Margarita and the Poetics of Aporia: A Polemical Article." Slavic Review 56, no. 2 (1997): 187–211. http://dx.doi.org/10.2307/2500782.
Full textAbstract:
Despite some early critical reservations, Bulgakov’s The Master and Margarita has become one of the icons of postrevolutionary Russian literature. The bibliography of scholarly commentary on the work—mostly adulatory, and in some cases even hagiographical—is vast. Bulgakov has become, especially for western critics, the epitome of the artistmartyr. Persecuted by the Soviet writing establishment, he was able, through his long suppressed satiric masterpiece, The Master and Margarita (published for the first time in 1966-67), to survive and turn the tables—aesthetically and morally speaking—on his former oppressors. Life is short, art is long; or as Woland expressed it, manuscripts do not burn.Indeed, there is ample justification for such a hagiographical approach. By 1928, when Bulgakov was drafting the first plans for The Master and Margarita, his literary prospects were already growing dim. In the 1930s, no longer able to publish original fiction, he survived by adapting works for the theater and by translating.
44
Sisto, Walter N. "The Beginning of the End: Bulgakov and the Ascension." Irish Theological Quarterly 83, no. 2 (February 22, 2018): 164–79. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0021140018757886.
Full textAbstract:
This paper analyzes Sergius N. Bulgakov’s unique interpretation of the Ascension of Jesus Christ. Drawing from the Orthodox liturgy and the New Testament, Bulgakov argues that the Ascension of Jesus Christ into heaven is the beginning of the end times. It is a foretaste of the general Resurrection, but also it reveals that humankind and God are inextricably linked through the created Sophia. The created Sophia allows for human nature to encounter the power and glory of God and survive.
45
Бирюков, Дмитрий Сергеевич. "Two Thinkers Discussing Palamism: Fr. Sergius Bulgakov’s Sophiological Palamism and Fr. Georges Florovsky’s Neo-Palamism (the 1920s)." Вопросы богословия, no. 1(3) (June 15, 2020): 13–43. http://dx.doi.org/10.31802/2658-7491-2020-1-3-13-43.
Full textAbstract:
Настоящая статья развивает предшествующие исследования автора, посвящённые путям рецепции паламизма в русской мысли начала - первой половины XX в. Здесь реконструируется исторический и интеллектуальный контекст рецепции паламизма у С. Н. Булгакова и Г. В. Флоровского, и показывается, как формировалось понимание паламизма Флоровским в контексте его полемического отталкивания от софиологии Булгакова. Выделяется два этапа в обращении Г. В. Флоровским к паламитскому богословию: в 1920-х и в 1950-х гг. В данной статье рассматривается первый из этих этапов, связанный с общением Г. В. Флоровского с С. Н. Булгаковым в 1920-х гг. В этой связи рассматривается софиологическая проблематика у С. Н. Булгакова и выделяется допаламитский (1910-е) и паламитский (1920-е) этапы в софиологии последнего. В своём фундаментальном труде «Свет Невечерний» (1917) Булгаков упоминает о Софии как о «четверной ипостаси» в Боге. Желая смягчить это учение, в статье «Ипостась и ипостасность» (1924) Булгаков вводит понятие «ипостасности», как относящееся к Софии, и привлекает паламитское различение сущности и энергий, соотнося Софию с божественной энергией, наделяя таким образом энергию «ипостасностью». Этот ход содержит пантеистические тенденции. Также, Булгаков предлагает «формулы паламизма», предполагающие, что божественность энергий Божества иная, чем сущности. Автор реконструирует интеллектуальный контекст этих формул и показывает их зависимость от трактовки паламизма П. А. Флоренским и С. В. Троицким (при том, что они были по разные стороны баррикад в имяславских спорах). Далее автор обращается к переписке Г. В. Флоровского с С. Н. Булгаковым 1926 г. и анализирует отражённую в ней полемику Флоровского с булгаковским софиологическим паламизмом. Автор показывает, что в ходе этой полемики Флоровский, желая элиминировать тенденцию Булгакова к гипостазированию энергии, говорит об энергии как об акциденции. Затем автор обращается к программному сочинению Флоровского «Тварь и тварность» (1928) и показывает, что в нем предлагается новое прочтение паламизма по сравнению с трактовкой паламизма у Булгакова (и Флоренского). В отличие от других исследователей, автор находит в этом сочинении прямую полемику с «Ипостасью и ипостасностью» Булгакова, касающуюся темы ипостасности энергии. Кроме того, Флоровский здесь пересматривает представление об энергии как акциденции и настаивает, что энергии - это тот же Бог, что и божественная сущность. Автор видит в этом новое для своего времени прочтение паламизма и первый шаг неопаламитского движения XX в. This article develops previous studies of the author on the ways of reception of Palamism in the Russian thought of the early 20th century. Here he reconstructs the historical and intellectual context of reception of Palamism in Sergius Bulgakov and Georges Florovsky, and shows how Florovsky’s understanding of Palamism was formed in the context of his polemical repulsion from Bulgakov’s Sophiology. The author distinguishes two stages in Florovsky’s appeal to Palamite theology: in the 1920s and the 1950s. In this article, the first of them is considered. This stage was due to the fact of the communication between Florovsky and Bulgakov in the 1920s. In this regard, the author considers Bulgakov’s Sophiology, and highlights Pre-Palamite (1910s) and Palamite (1920s) stages in it. In his fundamental work “The Unfading Light” (1917), Bulgakov mentions Sophia as the “fourth hypostasis” in the Godhead. In order to soften this teaching, in his article “Hypostasis and Hypostaticity” (1924) Bulgakov introduces the concept of “hypostaticity” as referring to Sofia, and introduces the Palamite distinction between essence and energies, taking Sofia as a divine energeia, thus endowing an energeia with “hypostaticity”. This step contains pantheistic tendencies. Also, Bulgakov offers the “formulas of Palamism”, suggesting that the divinity of the energies is different from one of the essence. The author reconstructs the intellectual context of these formulas and shows their dependence on the interpretation of Palamism by Pavel Florensky and Sergius Troitsky (despite the fact that they were opponents in the Name-Glorifying dispute). Next, he turns to the correspondence of Georgy Florovsky with Sergei Bulgakov in 1926, and analyzes Florovsky’s polemics with Bulgakov’s sophiological Palamism reflected in it. It is shown that in the course of this polemic, Florovsky, wishing to eliminate Bulgakov’s tendency to the hypostatizing of energeia, speaks of energeia as an accident. Then the author turns to Florovsky’s essay “Creation and Createdness” (1928) and shows that it offers a new reading of Palamism in comparison with Bulgakov’s (and Florensky’s) interpretation of it. Unlike previous researchers, the author sees in this work a direct polemic with Bulgakov’s “Hypostasis and Hypostaticity” concerning the theme of hypostaticity of energeia. In addition, Florovsky here revises and rejects the idea of energeia as an accident and insists that energeia is the same divine as the substance of the Godhead. The author conceives this as a new reading of Palamism for that time and the first step of the Neo-Palamite movement in the 20th century.
46
Alexeeva, Ekaterina. "Les idées de W. Humboldt dans l’oeuvre du philosophe religieux russe de la première moitié du XXème siècle S. Bulgakov." Cahiers du Centre de Linguistique et des Sciences du Langage, no. 33 (November 19, 2012): 5–16. http://dx.doi.org/10.26034/la.cdclsl.2012.811.
Full textAbstract:
Le but de cet article est d’étudier la présence des idées de W. von Humboldt dans les ouvrages de Sergej Bulgakov, philosophe religieux russe de la première moitié du XXème siècle. Dans son livre La Philosophie du nom (Filosofija imeni) il lui consacre un chapitre «Le langage d’après Humboldt ».D’après Bulgakov, c’est chez cet auteur qu’il trouve les idées implicites les plus fondamentales sur la genèse de la parole et du langage, le lien entre la forme et le contenu. La question essentielle qui intéresse Bulgakov est de savoir comment se passe le processus d’établissement du lien entre le nom et la chose.De l’autre côté, Bulgakov intervient en tant que continuateur des idées des Pères de l’Église orientale : Denys l’Aréopagite, Saint Grégoirede Nysse. Bulgakov, comme ses précurseurs néoplatoniciens, insiste sur la nécessité de comprendre la capacité humaine de parler comme expression divine.
47
Filiukhina, Svetlana. "Two Bulgakov Novels." Russian Studies in Literature 47, no. 2 (April 2011): 72–87. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/rsl1061-1975470203.
Full text
48
Doyle, Peter. "Bulgakov and Cervantes." Modern Language Review 100, no. 5 (2005): 246–54. http://dx.doi.org/10.1353/mlr.2005.0024.
Full text
49
SLESINSKI, Robert. "Bulgakov on Sophia." Journal of Eastern Christian Studies 59, no. 3 (December 31, 2007): 131–45. http://dx.doi.org/10.2143/jecs.59.3.2030866.
Full text
50
Chudakova, Marietta. "Pasternak and Bulgakov." Russian Social Science Review 37, no. 3 (May 1996): 77–96. http://dx.doi.org/10.2753/rss1061-1428370377.
Full text