Mikhail Bulgakov (1891–1940)

"Manuscripts don't burn."

I'm drawn immediately to anything featuring the Devil, and this one's no different; he and his retinue are electric. The social and political commentary is scathing and the takedown of the intelligentsia is excellent. It all holds up today, which is astonishing for a book written 80 years ago in the USSR.

Satan's Ball reminds me of the Inferno, as the writer calls to memory so many allusions to those he sees as damned. The Pontius Pilate thread is brilliant in a way I show more struggle to put into words; a Biblical story that carries none of the pomp and circumstance, none of the extraneous that has been added on by centuries or millennia of ecclesiastical veneration, is so hard to find, and it's done masterfully here.

The titular characters are the real heart of this book, which is odd as they only become relevant partway through the book; the start of the novel meanders somewhat, and is the reason I struggled with my reading pace, but as I reached Part 2 and their love came into focus, it grabbed me by the collar and refused to let me go.

“Follow me, reader! Who told you that there is no true, faithful, eternal love in this world! May the liar's vile tongue be cut out! Follow me, my reader, and me alone, and I will show you such a love!”

Four and a half stars - docked slightly due to the pacing of the first half dragging me down, but the book is enough of a masterwork to earn the 4.5. show less

I am a Bulgakov fan. I have read & loved both The Master and Margarita, as well as Heart of a Dog.

This novella was originally included as part of a larger work known as A Young Doctor's Notebook or A Country Doctor's Notebook. While today we know Bulgakov as an author, he did spend the early part of his career as a doctor. During WW1, as a doctor on the front lines, he suffered serious injuries at least twice. Suffering from chronic pain, he ended up being addicted to morphine. In 1918, he show more managed to stop his morphine use. Almost ten years later, he wrote this fictional novella, obviously semi-autobiographical & based on fighting his own demons in relation to morphine addiction.

It's a riveting read on the descent into drug addiction: the behaviors, the compromises, the urgency, the paranoia, the desperation. It's a bold, succinct cautionary tale. show less

Mikhail Bulgakov, a well-known Russian author, began his novel, The Master and Margarita, in 1928 but did not complete the manuscript until 1940. Even then, knowing it would offend censors in Stalin’s Russia, the author chose to keep the book under wraps, not wanting to run afoul of a backlash from the government. It was finally smuggled out to the West and published after the author’s death in 1966. Since then, it has been acknowledged as one of the best novels of the 20th century.

That show more accolade is well deserved. It is an enchanting book that describes what happens when Satan, in the disguise of a character named Wolan, visits Moscow with his minions in the 1930s. What follows is easily guessed, with all hell breaking loose. The story has two parallel tracks, describing the havoc caused by Satan’s appearance in Moscow along with a description of Pontius Pilate’s decision to allow the crucifixion of Jesus. Remarkably, the author is able to unify the two tales into a satisfactory whole.

While it might sound like a gloomy read, the opposite is true. Humor abounds as Bulgakov delights in the devilry taking place, which highlights the close interaction between good and evil. Religious beliefs put to the side, the reader cannot help but be amused by the chaos caused by Satan’s return to modern times, as he either seduces the story’s characters or wreaks havoc on their disbelief. The Master and Margarita remains a must-read here in a world where Satan still seems to be in charge of the discourse. show less

It'd be fun to compare this to Kafka's Metamorphosis! Prague vs. Moscow. Bulgakov's book is riotous satire. Probably most of it went flying right by me. But for a picture of Soviet urban life in 1925, this book is fresh and vivid. Perhaps the fact that the antagonist was a transformed dog gave Bulgakov license to express bold criticism that otherwise would have been too dangerous.

Grand fun and great political satire, whatever the logic behind it!