000 | 01981cam a2200169 4500500 | ||
---|---|---|---|
005 | 20250125173324.0 | ||
041 | _afre | ||
042 | _adc | ||
100 | 1 | 0 |
_aGourg, Marianne _eauthor |
245 | 0 | 0 | _aGogol et Le Maître et Marguerite |
260 | _c2010. | ||
500 | _a98 | ||
520 | _aLecteur précoce de Gogol, Boulgakov n’a cessé de s’identifier à lui tant sur le plan personnel que littéraire. Il en retient d’abord l’aspect comique, puis le perçoit comme l’archétype de l’artiste maudit sur lequel il va projeter sa propre tragédie. Dans Le Maître et Marguerite, les réminiscences gogoliennes sont nombreuses : noms signifiants, réification du vivant, recours à la « figure de fiction » qui installe l’objet dans l’inexistence et instaure un lien entre Woland et Tchitchikov, frontière estompée entre les vivants et les morts, inachèvement du texte virtuellement prolongeable à l’infini. | ||
520 | _aGogol and The Master and Margarita ( in French), RLC LXXXVI, no 3, July-Sept. 2009, p. 359-370. An early reader of Gogol’s works, Bulgakov tried by all ways to imitate him as a man and a writer. Young Bulgakov mainly appreciated Gogol’s comical issues but in the 1930s, Gogol became for him the archetype of the rejected and cursed artist, a projection of his own tragedy. The Master and Margarita repeats several of Gogol’s main patterns : significant names, the use of the “figure of fiction” in order to depict Woland, which generates a link between him and Cicikov. Therefore, according to the Symbolists’ interpretation, both of them embody Evil as inexistence. As in Dead Souls, the difference between the Living and the Dead vanishes. Both texts are unachieved which virtually allows a possible continuation. | ||
786 | 0 | _nRevue de littérature comparée | 331 | 3 | 2010-02-01 | p. 359-370 | 0035-1466 | |
856 | 4 | 1 | _uhttps://shs.cairn.info/revue-de-litterature-comparee-2009-3-page-359?lang=fr&redirect-ssocas=7080 |
999 |
_c1034036 _d1034036 |