[ SECRET POST #2580 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2580 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.















Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 04 pages, 082 secrets from Secret Submission Post #369.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

Re: Irritating misinterpretations of characters in fandom and/or adaptations

[dreemyweird]

I agree. You worded it all very well.

This is why I've always thought that the descriptions (explicit or implicit) of the daily life in the 1930s USSR played such a big role in the novel. They're there to show how everything is subject to emotional and aesthetic interpetation, how this life is (emotionally) misery and vulgarity, and how it is no different in nature from all the wild biblical stuff happening in the story - it is not an alternative, not a qualitatively different lifestyle, it is just an aesthetic/emotional choice, and a bad one, too.

Yeeep. Bulgakov was the kind of guy to make his works a royal mess of tropes, techniques, and plotlines. The talented devil.

Re: Irritating misinterpretations of characters in fandom and/or adaptations

[(Anonymous)]

This is why I've always thought that the descriptions (explicit or implicit) of the daily life in the 1930s USSR played such a big role in the novel. They're there to show how everything is subject to emotional and aesthetic interpetation, how this life is (emotionally) misery and vulgarity, and how it is no different in nature from all the wild biblical stuff happening in the story

I loved Fagotto and Behemoth's little trip around Moscow, in particular. How they poked and prodded at all the little absurdities of a supposedly 'objective' existence. More than any of Woland's grand displays, it was their small acts of chaos that I think most exposed the fragility of the society around them. People do not exist passionlessly, no matter how much society might want them to, and sometimes passions explode given only the smallest of provocations. If you make your society too rigid, the smallest of disturbances can massively damage it.

And yes, Bulgakov is a talented sonuva. I only read the book recently, I think in the last couple of years, but I loved it so much.

Re: Irritating misinterpretations of characters in fandom and/or adaptations

[dreemyweird]

Imo, Bezdomny's situation was a great metaphor for that, what with him going completely bonkers over a single encounter with Woland (instead of thinking that it might be a figment of his imagination).

Also, Margarita's wrecking havoc upon the flat of Latunsky the critic.

*fannish high five*

Have you read Heart of a Dog, btw? Or his other stuff?

Re: Irritating misinterpretations of characters in fandom and/or adaptations

[(Anonymous)]

*high fives back*

I haven't read anything else by him, no. He's hard to get hold of, and I'm not the best at ordering stuff online yet.

I'll get around to it, never fear :)

Re: Irritating misinterpretations of characters in fandom and/or adaptations

[dreemyweird]

Heart of a Dog is really a piece of some rather straightforward social commentary, but it is beautifully written, makes sense, and has one of the most touching friendships I've ever encountered in literature. <3 I hope you'll enjoy it.