Mikhail Bulgakov's story "Heart of a Dog", written in 1925 in Moscow, is a filigree example of the sharp satirical fiction of that time. In it, the author reflected his ideas and beliefs about whether a person needs to interfere with the laws of evolution and what this can lead to. The topic touched upon by Bulgakov remains relevant in modern real life and will never cease to disturb the minds of all progressive humanity.
After publication, the story caused a lot of talk and ambiguous judgments, because it was distinguished by the vivid and memorable characters of the main characters, an extraordinary plot in which fiction was closely intertwined with reality, as well as overt, harsh criticism of Soviet power. This work was very popular among dissidents in the 60s, and after being republished in the 90s, it was generally recognized as prophetic. In the story " dog's heart"The tragedy of the Russian people is clearly visible, which is divided into two warring camps (red and white) and in this confrontation only one should win. In his story, Bulgakov reveals to the readers the essence of the new victors - the proletarian revolutionaries, and shows that they cannot create anything good and worthy.
History of creation
This story is the final part of the previously written series of satirical stories by Mikhail Bulgakov in the 1920s, such as "The Devil" and "Fatal Eggs". Bulgakov began writing the story "Heart of a Dog" in January 1925 and finished it in March of the same year, originally it was intended for publication in the magazine "Nedra", but was not censored. And all such its contents were known to Moscow lovers of literature, because Bulgakov read it in March 1925 at the Nikitsky subbotnik (literary circle), later it was rewritten by hand (the so-called samizdat) and thus distributed to the masses. In the USSR, the story "Heart of a Dog" was first published in 1987 (6th issue of the Znamya magazine).
Analysis of the work
Story line
The story of the unsuccessful experiment of Professor Preobrazhensky, who decided to turn a homeless mongrel Sharik into a man, serves as the basis for the development of the plot in the story. To do this, he transplants the pituitary gland of the alcoholic, parasite and rowdy Klim Chugunkin, the operation is successful and an absolutely “new man” is born - Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov, who, according to the author's idea, is a collective image of the new Soviet proletarian. The “new man” is distinguished by a rude, arrogant and deceitful character, a boorish demeanor, a very unpleasant, repulsive appearance, and an intelligent and well-mannered professor often has conflicts with him. Sharikov, in order to register in the professor's apartment, (to which he believes he has every right) enlists the support of a like-minded and ideological teacher, the chairman of the Shvonder House Committee, and even finds a job: he is engaged in catching stray cats. Driven to the extreme by all the antics of the newly-minted Polygraph Sharikov (the last straw was the denunciation of Preobrazhensky himself), the professor decides to return everything as it was, and turns Sharikov back into a dog.
main characters
The main characters of the story "Heart of a Dog" are typical representatives of the Moscow society of that time (thirties of the twentieth century).
One of the main characters in the center of the story is Professor Preobrazhensky, a famous scientist with a worldwide reputation, a respected man in society who adheres to democratic views. He deals with the issues of rejuvenating the human body through animal organ transplants, and seeks to help people, while not harming them. The professor is depicted as a solid and self-confident person who has a certain weight in society and is used to living in luxury and prosperity (he big house with servants, among his clients are former nobles and representatives of the highest revolutionary leadership).
Being a cultured person and possessing an independent and critical mindset, Preobrazhensky openly opposes Soviet power, calling the Bolsheviks who have come to power as "hollows" and "idlers", he is firmly convinced that it is necessary to fight the devastation not by terror and violence, but by culture, and considers that the only way to communicate with living things is weasel.
Having conducted an experiment on a stray dog \u200b\u200bSharik and turned him into a man, and even tried to instill in him elementary cultural and moral skills, Professor Preobrazhensky suffers a complete fiasco. He admits that his "new man" has turned out to be completely useless, does not serve up upbringing and learns only bad things (the main conclusion of Sharikov after working through Soviet propaganda literature is to divide everything, and doing it by the method of robbery and violence). The scientist understands that it is impossible to interfere with the laws of nature, because such experiments do not lead to anything good.
A young assistant to the professor, Dr. Bormental, a very decent and devoted person to his teacher (the professor once took part in the fate of a beggar and hungry student, and he responds with devotion and gratitude). When Sharikov reached the limit, writing a denunciation of the professor and stealing a pistol, he wanted to use it, it was Bormental who showed firmness of spirit and toughness of character, deciding to turn him back into a dog, while the professor was still hesitating.
Describing these two doctors, old and young, on the positive side, emphasizing their nobility and self-esteem, Bulgakov sees in their descriptions himself and his relatives, doctors, who would have done the same in many situations.
The absolute opposites of these two goodies people of the new time are performing: the former dog Sharik himself, who became Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov, the chairman of the house committee Shvonder and other "tenants".
Shvonder is a typical example of a member of a new society who fully and completely supports Soviet power. Hating the professor as a class enemy of the revolution and planning to get a part of the professor's living space, he uses Sharikov for this, telling him about the rights to an apartment, making him documents and pushing him to write a denunciation of Preobrazhensky. Himself, being a narrow-minded and uneducated person, Shvonder gives in and wallows in conversations with the professor, and from this he hates him even more and makes every effort to annoy him as much as possible.
Sharikov, a donor for whom a bright average representative of the Soviet thirties of the last century, an alcoholic without a definite job, a three-time convicted lumpen proletariat Klim Chugunkin, twenty-five years old, became a bright average representative of the Soviet thirties of the last century, is distinguished by a foolish and arrogant character. Like all ordinary people, he wants to break out into people, but he does not want to learn anything or put any effort into it. He likes to be an ignorant slob, fight, curse, spit on the floor and constantly run into scandals. However, without learning anything good, he absorbs the bad like a sponge: he quickly learns to write denunciations, finds work to his liking - to kill cats, the eternal enemies of the canine race. Moreover, showing how ruthlessly he deals with stray cats, the author makes it clear that Sharikov will do the same with any person who has become between him and his goal.
The gradually growing aggression, arrogance and impunity of Sharikov are specially shown by the author in order for the reader to understand how this “Sharikovism” emerging in the 20s of the last century, as a new social phenomenon of the post-revolutionary time, is terrible and dangerous. Such Sharikovs, which are found all the time in Soviet society, especially those in power, pose a real threat to society, especially to intelligent, intelligent and cultured people, whom they hate fiercely and try to destroy them in every possible way. Which, incidentally, happened later, when during the Stalinist repressions the flower of the Russian intelligentsia and the military elite was destroyed, as Bulgakov predicted.
Features of compositional construction
In the story "Heart of a Dog" several literary genres, in accordance with the plots of the storyline, it can be attributed to a fantastic adventure in the image and likeness of "The Island of Dr. Moreau" by H.G. Wells, which also describes an experiment to breed a human-animal hybrid. From this side, the story can be attributed to the actively developing genre of science fiction at that time, the outstanding representatives of which were Alexei Tolstoy and Alexander Belyaev. However, under the surface layer of science-adventure fiction, in fact, there is a sharp satirical parody, allegorically showing all the monstrosity and inconsistency of that large-scale experiment called "socialism", which the Soviet government carried out on the territory of Russia, trying to create a "new man" by terror and violence. revolutionary explosion and implantation of Marxist ideology. What will come of this, just very clearly demonstrated Bulgakov in his story.
The composition of the story consists of such traditional parts as the plot - the professor sees a homeless dog and decides to bring him home, the culmination (here several moments can be distinguished at once) - the operation, the visit of the Domkom members to the professor, the Sharikovs' denunciation of Preobrazhensky, his threats with the use of weapons, the professor's decision to turn Sharikov back into a dog, the denouement is to carry out a reverse operation, Shvonder's visit to the professor with the police, the final part is to establish peace and tranquility in the professor's apartment: the scientist goes about his business, the dog Sharik is quite happy with his dog's life.
Despite all the fantasticness and improbability of the events described in the story, the author's use of various methods of grotesque and allegory, this work, thanks to the use of descriptions of specific signs of that time (city landscapes, various locations, life and appearance of the characters), is distinguished by a unique plausibility.
The events taking place in the story are described on the eve of Christmas, and it is not for nothing that the professor is called Preobrazhensky, and his experiment is a real "anti-Christmas", a kind of "anti-creation". In a story based on allegory and fantastic fiction, the author wanted to show not only the importance of the scientist's responsibility for his experiment, but also the inability to see the consequences of his actions, the huge difference between the natural development of evolution and revolutionary interference in the course of life. The story shows a clear author's vision of the changes that took place in Russia after the revolution and the beginning of the construction of a new socialist system, all these changes for Bulgakov were nothing more than an experiment on people, large-scale, dangerous and having catastrophic consequences.
The story of M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" reflects the post-revolutionary era of the 1920s - the time of NEP. A realistic description of the Soviet reality of this time is combined with the story of the grandiose fantastic experiment of Professor F.F. Preobrazhensky. As a result of an operation on a dog with a transplant of the pituitary gland of the human brain, the professor manages to get a new creature. There was a "humanization" of the dog - the dog turns into a man. This is evidenced by the records named by the author "From the diary of Dr. Bormental." In the beginning it is just a "case history", which describes the initial data of the "patient" - the dog Sharik, the course of the operation, medical appointments. Then the patient's condition changes: his hair falls out, his voice appears, his height increases ... Gradually he turns into a person, although poorly developed, but who can talk, and then understand others. As a new tenant, the chairman of the house committee Shvonder takes him under his wing - he lays the foundations for Sharikov's world outlook (on his advice, a new person chooses a name - Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov). It is very important for Shvonder to exert a certain influence on Sharikov, because Shvonder is hostile to Professor Preobrazhensky, considering him a bourgeois. Sharikov quickly assimilates his vulgar sociological views: everything is determined by the class origin of a person. The maid Zinka is "an ordinary servant, but a force, like a commissar's." Philip Philipovich, of course, is "not a friend": "we did not study at universities, we did not live in apartments of 15 rooms with bathrooms." Sharikov quickly learned that “at the present time everyone has his own right,” but he does not want to understand that he should also have responsibilities. Therefore, he makes many claims to the professor, but is not capable of an elementary feeling of gratitude. Under the influence of Shvonder, he reads books, the content of which he does not understand, and everything that he does not understand, be it books or theater, is "counter-revolution." Reading the correspondence between Engels and Kautsky, he "disagrees" with both, his opinion is simple: "Take everything and divide it up." Shvonder wrote accusatory articles against the professor, Sharikov went further: he learned how to write denunciations. Shvonder was surprised to see that Sharikov was getting out of his influence when it came to the question of the need for documents, registration, military registration - Sharikov agreed to “register,” but categorically refuses to fight. When Sharikov had spent on drink the money taken to buy textbooks, Shvonder was finally convinced that Sharikov was a "scoundrel." And yet, the socially close Sharikov Shvonder understands better than the class alien Professor Preobrazhensky. Unlike Shvonder, the professor realized that Sharikov, in his meanness and impudence, would go much further than his "educator", showing himself to be a worthy "student".
What is the role of Shvonder in Sharikov's education? Bulgakov
The issue is resolved and closed.
Gorky would have come and with party composure would have done ... both ...
who told you? in my opinion, it gave Stalin a sadistic joy to keep someone's talent on a leash, to crush and spread rot ... Bulgakov, after all, began to be published only after his death, and then because Stalin was no longer in power ... and he did not kill him as the rest - I don’t know ... the cat also often likes to strangle the mouse, but don’t kill it to the end ... if, of course, the cat is full and in the mood to play ...
Bulgakov - "Morphine"
Mayakovsky is generally handsome, read his poems)
First, my opinion:
These 90% have a current of 10-20% who actually read the works of these authors.
The writer K.G. Paustovsky, who studied with him, gave the following portrait of the future author of The Master and Margarita: “Bulgakov was overflowing with jokes, inventions, and hoaxes. All this went freely, easily, it did not arise for any reason. This was an amazing generosity, the power of imagination, the talent of an improviser ... There was a world, and in this world there existed as one of its links - his creative youthful imagination. "
K. M. Simonov wrote: “... it is striking how inextricably linked the personality of M. A. Bulgakov with his literary work, with that stubbornness, selflessness, deep inner honesty and severity towards himself, which were characteristic of him as for a writer. Memories of him are, first of all, memories of a very whole person, for whom, under all circumstances, the main thing was the work that he does alone or together with other people - in those cases when it came to working with the theater or in the theater ... "And again:" ... the tenacity of memory, which distinguishes the memories of various people who recreate the appearance of the same person after a quarter of a century, testifies to the fact that this personality itself was large and unique, and that people, several Decades ago, those who met Bulgakov, and then realized the scale of this personality, and its attractive power, and all the spiritual significance for themselves of meetings and conversations with this extraordinary person. "
Bulgakov and Pasternak ended up at the same table. Pasternak, with a special kind of breath, read his translated verses from Georgian. After the first toast to the hostess, Pasternak announced: "I want to drink to Bulgakov!" In response to the objection of the birthday lady-hostess: “No, no! Now we will drink to Vikenty Vikentyevich, and then to Bulgakov! " - Pasternak exclaimed: “No, I want for Bulgakov! Veresaev, of course, is a very big person, but he is a legitimate phenomenon. And Bulgakov is illegal! " Recalling his meetings with the writer, V.Ya. Vilenkin, who was in charge of the Moscow Art Theater, noted: “What kind of person was Bulgakov? This can be answered immediately. Fearless - always and in everything. Vulnerable but strong. Trusting, but not forgiving any deception, no betrayal. Conscience incarnate. An incorruptible honor. Everything else in it, even a very significant one, is already secondary, depending on this main thing, which attracts to itself like a magnet.
Moscow Art Theater actress S. Pilyavskaya: “Unusually elegant, smart, with all seeing, noticing everything, with a nervous, very often changing face. Cold, even a little prim with strangers and so open, mockingly cheerful and intently attentive to friends, or just acquaintances ... ". Playwright AA Faiko: “Bulgakov was thin, flexible, all in sharp corners, light blond, with transparent gray, almost watery eyes. He moved quickly, easily, but not too freely ... he appeared in a dashingly ironed black pair, a black bow tie with a starched collar, patent, sparkling shoes, and on top of that, he also had a monocle, which he sometimes gracefully threw out of his eye socket and , having played for some time with a lace, inserted it again, but, absentmindedly, already in the other eye ... ".
On March 15, 1940, a photograph and an obituary appeared in the Literaturnaya Gazeta: “Mikhail Afanasyevich Bulgakov, a writer of very great talent and brilliant skill, has died ...” One signature, collective - “Presidium of the Union of Soviet Writers”. At the same time, the head of the SSP A. Fadeev, who was prudently absent from the funeral, sent E.S. Bulgakova an unexpectedly bold, heartfelt letter, like the printed obituary, written from the heart but not official. There were also the following lines: “... It immediately became clear to me that I was facing a man of amazing talent, internally honest and principled and very intelligent - it was interesting to talk with him, even with a seriously ill patient, as rarely happens with anyone. Both people of politics and people of literature know that he is a person who has not burdened himself either in creativity or in life with political lies, that his path was sincere, organic, and if at the beginning of his path (and sometimes even later) he is not everything saw the way it really was, then this is not surprising. It would be worse if he was fake. "
All the things that are considered in the novel are reduced to two main ideas:
1) This is Bulgakov's protest against Stalin's tyranny, a book about love and creativity.
2) About the imbalance of the forces of good and evil, evil constantly does good, and good motives become sources of evil.
Pilate main character novel, the main events take place around him, being a Jewish procurator and at the same time fulfilling the wishes of the church, he nevertheless does an act for which he will then pay with a very long and painful punishment. The forces of good in this novel take the position of an observer, this is well shown in one thing - a smile that throughout the entire novel does not leave the face of Christ. Yeshua has nothing to fear - he is immortal, but only Pilate still does not understand this. The relationship between Pilate and Yeshua is nothing more than a game in which it is Pilate who is the victim and not Yeshua. While good takes a passive position, Woland, on the contrary, merges into society and studies it. Stupid little people puppets can do nothing against him, the same Beria in the end turns out to be powerless. Two characters that can really be called human are the Master and Margarita. It is to them that Woland helps. Showing this, Bulgakov emphasizes that good and evil do not exist as such. This concept was invented by the people themselves for themselves.
Because, usually cowardly people, they are small people who, at the moment when they are not, which is not threatened, show their cruelty towards other, weaker people, while experiencing a certain pleasure and gloating. "Cowardice is the mother of cruelty" (Michel de Montaigne).
Lamp computer and black and white manitor :))))))))
The story "Heart of a Dog", written in 1925, MABulgakov never saw in print. It talked about the unpredictable consequences of scientific discoveries, about the fact that an experiment running ahead and dealing with inadequate human consciousness is dangerous. In the foreground in the story is the experiment of the genius medical scientist Preobrazhensky with all the tragic results unexpected for the professor himself and his assistant Bormental. Having transplanted human seminal glands and the pituitary gland of the brain into a dog for purely scientific purposes, Preobrazhensky, to his amazement, receives a person from a dog. Homeless Sharik, eternally hungry, offended by all and sundry, in a matter of days turns into a man. And already on his own initiative, Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov receives a human name.
His habits remain like a dog, and the professor has to deal with his education. A medical and biological experiment turns into a moral and psychological experiment.
Philip Philipovich Preobrazhensky is not only an outstanding specialist in his field. He is a man of high culture and independent mind, and he is very critical of everything that has been happening around him since March 1917. “Why, when this whole story began, everyone began to walk in dirty galoshes and felt boots on the marble stairs? .. Why did they remove the carpet from front staircase? .. Why the hell were the flowers removed from the playgrounds? " "Devastation," Bormental counters. “No,” the professor retorts. - What is your ruin? .. This is what: if instead of operating every evening, I start singing in chorus in my apartment, I will be ruined. If, entering the lavatory, I begin, excuse the expression, to urinate past the toilet and Zina and Darya Petrovna will do the same, the lavatory will begin to collapse.
Consequently, the devastation is not in the closets, but in the heads. So, when these baritones shout "beat the devastation!" - I laugh ... This means that each of them must hit himself on the back of the head! And now, when he hatches out of himself all sorts of hallucinations and starts cleaning the sheds - his direct business - the devastation will disappear by itself. " Philip Philipovich's views have a lot in common with the views of Bulgakov himself.
He is just as skeptical about the revolutionary process, which, in his opinion, gives rise to "hallucinations" that prevent people from doing their own thing. And he is just as resolutely opposed to all violence. Caress is the only way that is possible and necessary in dealing with living beings - intelligent and unreasonable. “Nothing can be done about terror ... They needlessly think that terror will help them. No, sir, no, sir, it won't help, whatever it may be: white, red, or even brown. Terror completely paralyzes the nervous system. " And this conservative professor, who categorically rejects the revolutionary theory and practice of rebuilding the world, suddenly finds himself in the role of a revolutionary.
The new system seeks to create a new man from the old "human material". Philip Philipovich, as if competing with him, goes even further: he intends to make a man, and even high culture and morality, out of a dog. "Caress, exclusively caress." And, of course, by example. The result is known. Attempts to instill in Sharikov basic cultural skills are met with persistent and growing resistance:
"... Everything is like a parade ... a napkin - there, a tie - here, yes" excuse me ", yes" please, merci ", but so that really, it is not. You torture yourself as under the tsarist regime. " Every day Sharikov becomes more impudent, more aggressive and more and more dangerous. If Sharik had been the "initial material" for Polygraph Poligrafovich's modeling, perhaps the professorial experiment would have succeeded. P
having settled in the apartment of Philip Filippovich, Sharik at first still commits some hooligan deeds. But in the end it turns into a completely well-bred domestic dog.
An amazing thing, the author sneers, is a dog collar. When Sharik was first put on and taken out for a walk on a leash, he "walked like a prisoner, burning with shame." But very soon I realized “what a collar means in life. Mad envy was read in the eyes of all the dogs he met ... Near Dead Lane, some lanky mongrel with a severed tail barked at him with a "master bastard" and a "six." “A collar is like a briefcase,” Sharik himself mentally jokes. And before the operation, he already brings almost a philosophical basis under his new, officially groveling position: “No, you can't get away from here, why lie ... I am a lordly dog, an intelligent creature, I tasted better life... And what is will? So, smoke, mirage, fiction ... Nonsense of these malicious democrats ... ”But by chance, Sharik got the human organs from a criminal. “Klim Grigorievich Chugunkin, 25 years old, single. Non-partisan, sympathetic. He was tried 3 times and acquitted: the first time due to lack of evidence, the second time the origin saved, the third time - conditionally hard labor for 15 years. A "sympathetic" person sentenced to hard labor "conditionally" - this is reality itself intrudes into Preobrazhensky's experiment.
She also invades on another line - in the person of the chairman of the house committee Shvonder. In this case, this "personnel" Bulgakov character has a special role. He even writes articles to the newspaper, reads Engels.
And in general he is fighting for a revolutionary order and social justice. The residents of the house should enjoy the same benefits. No matter how brilliant a scientist Professor Preobrazhensky may be, he has nothing to occupy seven rooms. He can dine in the bedroom, perform operations in the examination room, where he cuts rabbits. And in general it is time to equate him with Sharikov, a man of a completely proletarian type.
The professor himself manages to fight off Shvonder. But he is no longer able to fight off Sharikov. Shvonder has already taken over the patronage and is bringing him up in his own way. What happens to Sharikov in the story, as with the help of Shvonder he becomes, so to speak, a conscious participant in the revolutionary process, in 1925 looked like the worst satire on the process itself and on its participants.
Two weeks after the dog skin got off him and he began to walk on two legs, this participant already has a document proving his identity. And the document, according to Shvonder, who knows what he says, is "the most important thing in the world." A week later, another Sharikov becomes a co-employee. And not an ordinary one - the head of the department of cleaning the city of Moscow from stray animals. Meanwhile, his nature is the same as it was - canine-criminal. Just what is his message about his work "in his specialty": "Yesterday the cats were strangled."
However, Polygraph Poligrafovich is no longer content with cats ... “Well, okay,” he suddenly said angrily, “you will remember with me. Tomorrow I'll arrange a layoff for you. " This is the girl typist who, believing that he is a hero of the civil war and generally a big man, is ready to sign him. And the professor - a fig. And "to the address of the dangerous Bormental" - a revolver. The story with Sharikov ends happily: having returned the dog to its original state, the professor, refreshed and, more than ever, cheerful, goes about his direct business, the "dearest dog" - his own: he lies on the carpet by the sofa and indulges in sweet reflections.
But Bulgakov left the ending of the story open. The cycle of satirical stories and stories by Bulgakov ended with "a dog's heart". He did not write any more of those or others.
The story of M.A. Bulgakov's "Heart of a Dog" reflects the post-revolutionary era of the 1920s - the time of the NEP. A realistic description of the Soviet reality of this time is combined in the story with the narration about the grandiose fantastic experiment of Professor F.F. Preobrazhensky.
As a result of an operation on a dog with a transplant of the pituitary gland of the human brain, the professor manages to get a new creature. There was a "humanization" of the dog - the dog turns into a man. This is evidenced by the records named by the author "From the diary
Doctor Bormental. " In the beginning it is just a "case history", which describes the initial data of the "patient" - the dog Sharik, the course of the operation, medical appointments. Then the patient's condition changes: his hair falls out, a voice appears, growth increases ...
Gradually, he turns into a person, although poorly developed, but able to talk, and then understand others. As a new tenant, the chairman of the house committee Shvonder takes him under his wing - he lays the foundations for Sharikov's world outlook (on his advice, the new person chooses a name - Polygraph Poligrafovich Sharikov). For Shvonder it is very important to exert a certain influence on Sharikov - after all, Shvonder is hostile to Professor Preobrazhensky, considering him a bourgeois. Sharikov assimilates his vulgar sociological views quickly: everything is determined by the class origin of a person. The maid Zinka is "an ordinary servant, but a force, like a commissar's."
Philip Philipovich, of course, "not a friend" - "we did not study at universities, we did not live in apartments of 15 rooms with bathrooms." Sharikov quickly learned that “nowadays everyone has his own right,” but he does not want to understand that he should have responsibilities. Therefore, he makes many claims to the professor, but is not capable of an elementary feeling of gratitude. Under the influence of Shvonder, he reads books, the content of which he does not understand, and all that he does not understand, be it books or theater, is "counter-revolution." Reading the correspondence between Engels and Kautsky, he "disagrees" with both, his opinion is simple: "Take everything and divide it up."
Shvonder wrote accusatory articles against the professor - Sharikov went further: he learned to write denunciations. Shvonder was surprised to see that Sharikov was getting out of his influence when it came to the need for documents, registration, and military registration - Sharikov agreed to “register,” but flatly refuses to fight. When Sharikov had spent on drink the money taken to buy textbooks, Shvonder was finally convinced that Sharikov was a "scoundrel." And yet the socially close Sharikov is closer and more understandable to Shvonder than the class alien Professor Preobrazhensky. Unlike Shvonder, the professor realized that Sharikov, in his meanness and impudence, would go much further than his "educator", showing himself to be a worthy "student".