Heart of a dog - what is Sharikovism? Essay on the topic: Sharikovism in our days in the story Heart of a Dog, Bulgakov
“...the whole horror is that he has
not a dog's, but a human's
heart. And the worst thing of all,
that exist in nature."
M. Bulgakov
When the story “ Fatal eggs“, one of the critics said: “Bulgakov wants to become a satirist of our era.” Now, on the threshold of the new millennium, we can say that he became one, although he did not intend to. After all, by the nature of his talent he is a lyricist. And the era made him a satirist. M. Bulgakov was disgusted by the bureaucratic forms of governing the country; he could not stand violence either against himself or against other people. The writer saw the main trouble of his “backward country” in lack of culture and ignorance. And he rushed into battle to defend that “reasonable, good, eternal” that the minds of the Russian intelligentsia sowed. And Bulgakov chose satire as a weapon of struggle. In 1925, the writer finished the story “ Heart of a Dog" The content of the story - an incredible fantastic story of the transformation of a dog into a man - was a witty, clever and evil satire on the social reality of the 20s.
The plot was based on the fantastic operation of the brilliant scientist Preobrazhensky with all the unexpectedly tragic consequences for him. By transplanting the testicular glands and pituitary gland of the brain into a dog for scientific purposes, the professor obtained homo sapiens , who a little later was named Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov. The “humanized” stray dog Sharik, always hungry, offended by all and sundry, revived in himself the person whose brain served as donor material for the operation. He was the drunkard and hooligan Klim Chugunkin, who accidentally died in a drunken brawl. From him Sharikov inherited both the consciousness of his “proletarian” origin with all the corresponding social mores, and the lack of spirituality that was characteristic of the philistine, uncultured environment of the Chugunkins.
But the professor does not despair, he intends to make his ward a person of high culture and morality. He hopes that with affection and his own example he can influence Sharikov. But that was not the case. Polygraph Poligrafovich desperately resists: “Everything is like at a parade... A napkin is here, a tie is here, and “excuse me,” and “please,” but for real, this is not.”
Every day Sharikov becomes more and more dangerous. Moreover, he has a patron in the person of the chairman of the house committee, Shvonder. This fighter for social justice reads Engels and writes articles for the newspaper. Shvonder took patronage over Sharikov and educates him, paralyzing the professor’s efforts. This unfortunate teacher did not teach his ward anything useful, but he managed to hammer home a very tempting idea: whoever was nothing will become a dog. For Sharikov, this is a program for action. In a very short time he received documents, and a week or two later he became a co-worker and not an ordinary person, but the head of the department for clearing the city of Moscow from stray animals. Meanwhile, his nature is what it was - a dog-criminal one. You need to see and hear, and with what emotions he talks about his activities in this “field”: “Yesterday cats were strangled and strangled.” However, Poligraf Poligrafovich is not content with cats alone. He viciously threatens his secretary, who for objective reasons cannot respond to his advances: “You’ll remember me. Tomorrow I’ll make you redundant.”
In the story, fortunately, the story of Sharik’s two transformations has a happy ending: having returned the dog to its original state, the professor, refreshed and, as never before, cheerful, goes about his business, and the “dearest dog” does his thing: lies on the rug and indulges in sweets reflections. But in life, to our great regret, the Sharikovs continued to multiply and “strangle and strangle,” but not cats, but people. Material from the site
M. Bulgakov’s merit lies in the fact that he managed to use laughter to reveal the deep and serious idea of the story: the threatening danger of “Sharikovism” and its potential prospects. After all, Sharikov and his associates are dangerous to society. The ideology and social claims of the “hegemonic” class contain the threat of lawlessness and violence. Of course, M. Bulgakov’s story is not only a satire on “Sharikovism” as aggressive ignorance, but also a warning about its likely consequences in public life. Unfortunately, Bulgakov was not heard or did not want to be heard. The Sharikovs were fruitful, multiplied, took an active part in social and political life countries.
We find examples of this in the events of the 30s-50s, when innocent and irresponsible people were persecuted, just as Sharikov once caught stray cats and dogs in his line of work. The Soviet Sharikovs demonstrated dog-like loyalty, showing anger and suspicion towards those who were high in spirit and mind. They, like Bulgakov’s Sharikov, were proud of their low origins, low education, even ignorance, defending themselves with connections, meanness, rudeness and, at every opportunity, trampling people worthy of respect into the dirt. These manifestations of Sharikovism are very tenacious.
We are now reaping the fruits of this activity. And no one can say how long this will last. In addition, “Sharikovism” has not disappeared as a phenomenon even now, perhaps it has only changed its face.
Didn't find what you were looking for? Use the search
On this page there is material on the following topics:
- Why is Sharikovism dangerous?
- essay on literature on the topic of Sharik and Sharikovism based on Bulgakov’s story The Heart of a Dog
- essay on the topic of balls and Sharikovism, heart of a dog, summary
- that Sharikov inherited from Sharikov Bulgakov
The concept of “Sharikovism” appeared in the Russian language thanks to Mikhail Bulgakov and his story “The Heart of a Dog.” A cult work both for the last century and for the present time, the work gave readers a neologism that became a reflection of the lifestyle and behavior of many morally degenerate people.
The word “Sharikovism” comes from the surname of the main character of the work, Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov. Sharikov is a creature that appeared as a result of the experiment of Professor Preobrazhensky and his assistant, Doctor Bormenthal. Previously, Sharik was an ordinary stray dog, but human organs were experimentally transplanted into him from the drunkard Klim Chugunkin. The experiment was a success, and after some time, Sharik began to turn into something resembling a person.
However, everything did not go as smoothly as Preobrazhensky dreamed. Yes, Sharikov took up the task of paws, began to look like people in appearance, learned to speak... However, at the same time, he became a direct reflection of a huge number of human vices.
Sharikov is an aggressive creature who loves to drink. He is a dependent: he does not want to work, but he wants to live well and in abundance. He is unfamiliar with moral standards: he constantly uses obscene language, does not watch his language, makes scandals, is rude, and spoils the reputation of both himself and the residents of Professor Preobrazhensky’s house. His entire nature is occupied only by following primitive instincts (eat, drink, sleep, pester women). However, Sharikov does not admit all his shortcomings. He stubbornly considers himself right in everything, so he even tries to break into power. Sharikov is helped by Shvonder, the chairman of the house committee, an equally unprincipled and narrow-minded person.
Despite the fact that the image of Sharikov in “Heart of a Dog” is depicted in an exaggerated way, everyone can recognize his friends in him. Sharikovism is not only a moral, but also a social phenomenon, and therefore it is widespread everywhere. The Sharikovs are people who are deprived moral principles, values and foundations. They are limited, stupid, selfish. The Sharikovs do not want to learn something new, but at the same time they try to grab a bigger piece and jump over their heads.
The author expresses his thoughts about balls and Sharikovism through the wise Professor Preobrazhensky. He says that the devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads. This is the essence of Sharikovism: this is a phenomenon whose driving force is slaves who came to power, but retained a slave psychology. They are afraid of their superiors, fawn over them and obediently agree with them in everything. However, towards those who are lower in status, the Sharikovs behave boorishly, cruelly and inhumanely.
The followers of Sharikovism are ineradicable. Bulgakov, with his characteristic insight, notes that people like the Sharikovs will always live. And as long as that same devastation in the minds, improper upbringing, lack of interest in self-development, black ingratitude and the desire to assert oneself continue to flourish, Sharikovism will remain a topical and acute social problem.
Bulgakov's creative path is full of drama. He entered literature with a rich life experience. After university, where he graduated in medicine, Bulgakov worked as a zemstvo doctor at the Nikolskaya hospital in Sychevsky district. In 1918-1919 he ended up in Kyiv and witnessed Petliura’s “Odyssey”.
These impressions were reflected in many of his novels, up to the novel “ White Guard"and the play "Days of the Turbins". Bulgakov did not immediately accept the revolution. After the war, Bulgakov began working in the theater and newspapers. Arriving in Moscow in the fall of 1921, Bulgakov took up journalism. Bulgakov sought to solve the most pressing problems of the time, to be more original - both in philosophical views and in satire. The result of this was sharp contradictions in his works.
One of them was “Heart of a Dog”. The plot events in the work were based on a real contradiction. Professor Preobrazhensky, a world-famous physiologist, discovered the secret of the pituitary gland - an appendage of the brain. The operation that the scientist performed on the dog, transplanting the human pituitary gland into his brain, gave unexpected results.
Sharik not only acquired a human appearance, but all the character traits and features of the nature of Klim Chugunkin, twenty-five years old, a drunkard, a thief, were inherited in his genes. Bulgakov transfers the location of “Heart of a Dog” to Moscow, to Prechistenka. Moscow is real, even naturalistic, conveyed through the perception of Sharik, a homeless mongrel dog who “knows” life from the inside, in its unsightly form. Moscow during the NEP era: with chic restaurants, “a canteen for normal meals for employees of the Central Council National Economy", where they cook cabbage soup "from stinking corned beef." Moscow, where “proletarians”, “comrades” and “gentlemen” live.
The revolution only distorted the appearance of the ancient capital: it turned its mansions, its apartment buildings inside out (like, for example, the Kalabukhovsky house, where the hero of the story lives). One of the main characters of the story, Professor Preobrazhensky, a world-famous scientist and doctor, belongs to such “densified” people who are gradually being squeezed out of life. They haven't touched him yet - fame protects him. But representatives of the house management were already visiting him, showing tireless concern for the fate of the proletariat: is it too much luxury to operate in the operating room, eat in the dining room, sleep in the bedroom; It is quite enough to connect an examination room and an office, a dining room and a bedroom. Since 1903, Preobrazhensky has lived in the Kalabukhovsky house.
Here are his observations: until April 1917, there was not a single case in which even one pair of galoshes would disappear from our front door downstairs when the common door was unlocked. Please note, there are twelve apartments here, I have a reception. One fine day in April 17th, all the galoshes disappeared, including two pairs of mine, three sticks, a coat and the doorman’s samovar. And since then the galosh stand has ceased to exist.
Why, when this whole story began, did everyone start walking up the marble stairs in dirty galoshes and felt boots? Why was the carpet removed? main staircase? Why the hell did they remove the flowers from the sites? Why does electricity, which went out twice over the course of 20 years, now neatly go out once a month?
“- “Devastation,” answers the interlocutor and assistant Dr. Bormental. “No,” Philip Philipovich objected quite confidently, “no. What is this devastation of yours?
Old woman with a stick? Yes, it doesn't exist at all. The devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads.”
Devastation, destroy... The idea of destroying the old world, of course, was born in the minds of thinking, enlightened people, long before the appearance of the chairman of the house committee, Shvonder, and his team. Along with this problem of reorganizing society, the problem of what the revolution brought into human life, the problem of forming a new Soviet man appears. The “wild” man Sharikov experiences the influence of the word.
He becomes the object of verbal attacks by Shvonder, who defends the interests of Sharikov “as a worker.” Sharikov is not at all embarrassed by the fact that he lives and feeds at the expense of Preobrazhensky. It is Sharikov, who came from the people, who “fits on” the professor’s apartment. Sharikov’s principle is simple: why work if you can take it away; If one has a lot and the other has nothing, you need to take everything and divide it. Here it is, Shvonder’s treatment of Sharikov’s primitive consciousness!
Similar work has been done on millions of people. As you know, Lenin’s slogan “Rob the loot!” was one of the most popular during the revolution. The lofty idea of equality instantly degenerated into primitive egalitarianism. The Bolshevik experiment, designed to create a “new”, improved man, is not their business, it is nature’s business. According to Bulgakov, the new soviet man is a symbiosis of a stray dog and an alcoholic.
We see how this new type gradually turns into the master of life, “recommending the dialectics of Marx and Engels for reading.” Professor Preobrazhensky's fantastic operation turned out to be as unsuccessful as the great communist experiment with history.
“Science does not yet know how to turn animals into people. So I tried, but it was unsuccessful, as you can see.
I talked and began to return to a primitive state,” Preobrazhensky admits. Bulgakov, in his story “The Heart of a Dog,” with enormous impressive power, in his favorite manner of grotesquery and humor, raised the question of the power of dark instincts in human life. Bulgakov, as a writer, has no faith that these instincts can be changed. Sharikovism is a moral phenomenon, and everyone must fight it within themselves.
Bulgakov's Heart of a Dog is a great work, where the problem of not a single generation is revealed, and at the same time it worries people even today. This story touches on the problem of Sharikovism and is universal, because it shows not only the life of Russia in the twenties, but also makes us look around us, at the society and people that surround us today. It turns out that the work is relevant, and Sharikovism as a social and moral phenomenon lives in the present time, which is what we will write about.
If you turn to storyline, then we will see the desire of Professor Preobrazhensky, who was a surgeon, to create an ideal person. Through an amazing operation, with the help of his assistant, he transplanted the pituitary gland of the human brain into the mongrel Sharik. He took the material from the recently deceased alcoholic and criminal Chugunkin. And then a miracle, the dog turned into a man whom the professor tried to raise, but nothing worked. A real tragedy began, where, with the support of the house committee Shvonder, Sharikov developed hatred for any manifestation of cultural and spiritual life. The cute dog turned into an ignorant person who began to consider himself the master of life, he became arrogant and aggressive.
Sharikovism as a phenomenon
Bulgakov respected the spiritual and cultural values of people and saw how everything was losing its power, everything was being destroyed, the meaning of these values was being lost under the influence of revolutionary changes. The writer could not turn a blind eye to all this, and raised questions that, oddly enough, are relevant not only in his era of life. All phenomena and images are relevant for our time. In revolution, the writer sees a dangerous experiment that goes against nature and this road leads only to disaster. The worst thing is that the experiment and its results cannot be predicted. We see in the work Heart of a Dog what consequences rash decisions can lead to. The author showed the appearance of numerous Sharikovs, to whom shame and ethics are alien. Now the Sharikovs and Sharikovism rule. Now selfishness, encroachment on the property of others, lack of morality, the presence of illiteracy are the norm, which is what Sharikovism consists of.
How do the Sharikovs behave? They are rowdy, swear, they have no authority, and as they rise in position, they begin to destroy even their own kind, as Sharikov does, having received the post of commissioner for the destruction of stray animals.
Bulgakov eventually corrected the mistake, showing readers what can happen when some cook becomes in power. Showing what will happen when the Sharikovs rule the country. It’s just that in life such experiments are difficult to correct, so there was disrespect, betrayal, and denunciations then, and they still exist today. And this is nothing more than another manifestation of Sharikovism.
Sharikovism today
It’s scary to realize, but Sharikovism is alive and well today. Around us we see low culture among people, rudeness. The Sharikovs are ready to take any step to become a prince. At the same time, it is difficult to notice them right away, because in appearance they are very similar to everyone else. But inside them lives an inhuman entity. Only by looking closely will we see a judge who convicted an innocent person, a mother who abandoned her child, a doctor who ended up treating a sick person, an official who cannot live without bribes. Moral decline and cruelty still exist today. This can and must be fought, and only then will the pressing issue of Sharikovism lose its power. Bulgakov’s work is like a warning for all of us, allowing us to adequately evaluate our actions. This is the only way to fight vices, thereby eliminating all the ballers and making the world a better place.
I hope such a time will come someday.
The famous story “Heart of a Dog,” written in 1926, is a vivid example of Bulgakov’s satire. She develops Gogol's traditions, organically combining two principles: the fantastic and the realistic. This characteristic feature The writer's satire is also embodied in such works as "Diaboliad" and "Fatal Eggs". All three satirical stories contain a warning from the writer addressed to his contemporaries, which was not heeded by them. Today we cannot help but be amazed by the amazing foresight of Bulgakov, who was able to sense the danger of scientific discoveries that had escaped control, and to urge people to be extremely careful when dealing with the unknown forces of nature.
At the center of the story “Heart of a Dog” is Professor Preobrazhensky’s experiment, which turned the sweet, nice dog Sharik into a short man of unattractive appearance. In this creature, which emerged as a result of scientific experiment, the makings of an eternally hungry and humiliated dog were combined with the qualities of his human donor - the alcoholic and criminal Klim Chugunkin. Such heredity makes the process of raising Sharikov very difficult. On the one hand, Professor Preobrazhensky and his assistant Dr. Bormenthal are unsuccessfully trying to instill in him the rules of good manners, develop and educate him. But from the whole system cultural events Sharikov only likes the circus, because he calls theater a counter-revolution, and does not have the slightest interest in books. On the one hand, life itself intervenes in the process of Sharikov’s upbringing. First of all, in the person of the chairman of the house committee, Shvonder, who strives as quickly as possible to turn yesterday’s Sharik into a conscious builder of socialism, stuffing him with proletarian slogans and books such as the correspondence between Engels and Kautsky. Many of Poligraf Poligrafych's statements are clearly borrowed from his benefactor Shvonder, who deliberately incites his pet against the hated professor. The chairman of the house committee cannot forget his shameful defeat in Preobrazhensky’s apartment, come to terms with the fact that the professor still occupies seven rooms and is not subject to any compaction, because the lives of influential bosses depend on his talent as a surgeon. This means that Shvonder sees Sharikov as a kind of instrument of revenge.
Showing how Sharikov’s evolution occurs, how he gradually becomes more impudent and aggressive, Bulgakov makes the reader, laughing merrily at comic situations and witty remarks, feel the terrible danger of Sharikovism, this new social phenomenon that began to emerge in the 20s. The revolutionary government encourages snitching and denunciation, releasing the basest instincts of uncultured and uneducated people. It gives them a sense of power over smart, cultured, intelligent people. The Sharikovs, who have seized power, pose a terrible threat to society. Bulgakov touches on the reasons for their appearance in his story. If Sharikov arose as a result of the scientific experience of Professor Preobrazhensky, then such people with the heart of a dog may appear as a result of that risky experiment, which in our country was called the construction of socialism, an experiment of enormous scale and very dangerous. An attempt to create a new just society, to educate a free and conscious person using revolutionary, that is, violent methods, according to the writer, was initially doomed to failure. After all, the desire to destroy “to the ground” old world with his eternal universal human moral values and to build life on a fundamentally new basis means to forcibly intervene in the natural course of things. The consequences of this intervention will be disastrous. Philip Philipovich understands this when he sadly reflects on why his brilliant scientific experiment gave birth to a real monster who began to pose a mortal danger to everyone around him. This happened because the researcher violated the laws of nature, and this should under no circumstances be done.
Bulgakov’s story “The Heart of a Dog” remains relevant even today, because the discoveries and prophecies of the great writer will help us understand the chaos and confusion of today’s life, and prevent previous mistakes, so that Sharikov’s does not become a terrible sign of the times.
