Communism, socialism and totalitarianism align on the premise that the needs of the society must take precedence over the needs of the individual, or as Adolf Hitler phrased it: “Society’s needs come before the individual needs.” In The Master and Margarita, through the historical, political and structural complexity with elements of realism, Mikhail Bulgakov establishes and examines the conflicts that arise when an individual considers himself as an entity of its own and attempts to alter a flawed aspect of the society that he exists in. Although a society consists of individuals, every member of the society does not share a common set of beliefs and values. Zoom out and view the society as a whole, it agrees on and enforces certain beliefs, rules and regulations. But zoom in, into an individual, and things starts are to get much more complex. The characters of Ivan and the Master establish depict the dissonance that exists between the individual and the society.
Throughout history, we have witnessed the notorious use of insane asylums to ostracize intellectuals who have attempted to amend a flawed aspect of the society through a form of art or simply an utterance of words in accordance with fact or reality. Ivan Nikolayevich is the first character in the novel who is labeled “insane”. After Berlioz’s death has transpired, he loses marbles and when he attempts to inform the authorities, he is labeled schizophrenic. When his unconventionally bizarre reality is questioned by others, he is forced into questioning the credibility of his own reality resulting into a split personality. Consequently, we see this split in his personality as he so ardently separates himself from the poet that he is which augments the stigmatizing effects of madness. His perceived mental illness is perhaps intentional as it becomes his shield against his insanity and provides an opportunity to the readers to align their perception with his (Bulgakov 1966). This, as a result, compels us to question our actions when we may have unthinkingly deemed an individual mad when their perceived reality was too complex to fathom. By confining and labeling such intellectuals as ‘insane’ the society is seizing their ability to influence others’ and revolutionize the flawed aspects of the society in which they co-exist in. In other words, when the government has such power and influence over its people, they are writing the stories of these poor individuals and denying them the power to create their own realities.
Similarly, due to the constant rejection of the Master as a writer, he is both mentally and physically unable to instigate an intellectual revolution. It may be tempting to argue that the Master is a coward for burning his manuscripts, however, it can also be argued that perhaps the environment that he was surviving in was too rigid to accommodate him (artist) and his art. In fact, this attack was so insidious that it took complete control over him. He articulates,
“I began to be afraid of the dark. In short, the state of mental illness came. It seemed to me, especially as I was falling asleep, that some very cold and pliant octopus was stealing with its tentacles immediately and directly towards my heart. So, I had to sleep with the light on” (121).
This petrifying grip of the “pliant octopus” on the Master’s heart (the organ that is keeping him alive) instead of his brain, which is the source of his desire to rebel against society proves how our society intentionally targets the wrong thing but knows that it will resemble a domino effect. Furthermore, this metaphorical circle of fear that the Master is describing demonstrates not only the sinister nature of false perception of insanity but also it’s hauntingly terrorizing nature which cannot exist in the presence of light. Thus, just like Ivan, the society primed the Master to become a victim of this own thoughts and actions.
When such important characters and artists of merit become victims of this utter ludicrousness, i.e. when they are written off and declared “insane”, it creates a tension between what is real and unreal resulting in an ambiguity that is insidiously perplexing. People like Galileo and Ernest Hemingway changed the course of life we live today but were initially blatantly rejected. Galileo was considered “insane” for proposing the heliocentric theory. He was not only imprisoned but was also tortured by the Roman Catholic Church for challenging the church’s stance on cosmology (Jamescungureanu 1). Ernest Hemingway was placed under surveillance by Edgar Hoover and was later confined at St. Mary’s Hospital in Rochester where he received intense electric shock treatments. In response to this, he drank heavily and become paranoid; he thought that FBI agent were omnipresent and believed that his phone and his home had been bugged by the FBI (FBI 1). And essentially, his assumption was not erroneous—even his bedside phone at St. Mary’s Hospital had been tapped. We cannot possibly measure the impact that each surveillance had on him as he was entering the phase of mental illness, but it wouldn’t be too preposterous to declare that that may have been the catalyst in his suicide. Although Ivan and the Master didn’t resort to suicide, they were prisoners of their own mind which are agonizing if not the same.
With a fascinating combination of satire, tragedy, comedy, and a sprinkle of melodrama, Bulgakov provides a psychological background of the society that he was exposed to and demonstrates the role society plays in a person’s descent into madness. The audience is forced to question their perception of reality just as the character of the Master and Ivan are forced to believe that they are “incurable” and as a result justify their reality in the insane asylum (125). Despite this, Bulgakov’s writing not only compels us to question the way in which we perceive reality but also reminds us the capacity of art to represent the unfathomable and serve as a souvenir when one refuses to conform to the patterns of this world.