Cultural heritage, like a mighty tree with deep roots, takes root in us from childhood, shaping our world through traditions, rituals, national cuisine, music, art, and, most importantly, through literature. The literary language possesses a truly magical power: it can sadden or delight us, stir deep reflections or paint vivid pictures of the future in our imagination, and revive feelings connected to the past. Literary heritage is always with us, timeless and enduring, offering everyone who is ready to listen and reflect the opportunity to touch the treasures of world culture. However, to truly understand how works of literature reflect their time, it is essential to consider their authors. Mikhail Bulgakov and Molière, despite differences in their eras and contexts, created works that are inextricably linked to the historical conditions in which they lived and worked. By experiencing and analyzing their writings, we gain the opportunity to delve into the harsh realities of the Soviet totalitarian regime of the 20th century or to find ourselves at the French court of the 17th century under King Louis XIV, with its rich diversity of characters and intriguing events.

In the article “The Author’s Heroes: Bulgakov’s Molière, and Other Deployments of World Literature Classics,” Margarita Marinova explores the impact of the political regime on the work of the Russian classical writer Mikhail Bulgakov. As Marinova notes, “Bulgakov’s reputation as a great writer in the West rests almost exclusively upon his posthumously published magnum opus The Master and Margarita (1929–40), the brilliant novel about the Devil’s visit to Stalin’s Moscow, the fate of a talented author (a ‘Master’) in times of great social crises, and the purpose and future of art beyond the confines of the nation-state” (Marinova, 2017, p. 2). However, The Master and Margarita is not the only work by Bulgakov. Primarily a playwright, another notable work of his is Days of the Turbins, which achieved tremendous success on prominent theater stages. Yet, after the October Revolution, Soviet Russian writers were required to portray communist heroes and celebrate the victory of the October Revolution. The play Days of the Turbins did not meet these requirements and was soon banned by censorship despite its immense success. This demonstrates how Bulgakov’s works not only reflected personal experiences and creative quests but also confronted the ideological pressures of the time. His subsequent works also faced the disfavor of censors. To maintain his literary activity and express his individuality, Bulgakov began translating world classics, such as Molière, and adapting them for theatrical productions. As Marinova notes: “… ‘Bulgakovize’ it both formally and thematically. Once again, the biographical and autobiographical merge in order to bring the hero closer to the author and his time …” (Marinova, 2017. p. 14). In this context, Marinova’s statement that “not for nothing had Eikenbaum proclaimed, five years earlier, that Russian literature was replaced by [world literature], and that Russian writers had all of a sudden turned into translators or editors of translations in the decades following the revolution” (Marinova, 2017, p. 2), reflects the reality of the time. It shows how many Russian writers, apart from Bulgakov, used translations and adaptations of foreign works as a way to preserve their creative identity and find an outlet under censorship. This period in Bulgakov’s life became a kind of artificial challenge to his self-identification and cultural expression. By maintaining his commitment to literary art, he infused the adapted texts with his unique creative touch, turning them into living and unique works of art. Bulgakov used translation and interpretation as a means to express his ideas and thoughts, introducing new accents and approaches into classic works, reflecting the internal contradiction between the need to conform to political demands and the desire to preserve his artistic individuality. Personally, I do not consider myself a deep thinker and am not accustomed to analyzing works for hidden meanings. In my childhood and teenage years, I was not particularly interested in classical literature. I read The Master and Margarita only after I turned 20. The work made a profound impression on me and touched my heart. I understood that this work has several layers—the superficial one that struck me at the time, and the deeper layers reflecting the historical period in which it was written. These layers are what made The Master and Margarita such a unique work in my perception. My understanding of Bulgakov’s work and its influence on my perception of Russia’s cultural heritage reflects how personal experiences and cultural context can shape a deep understanding and attachment to literature. In Bulgakov’s works, especially in The Master and Margarita, I find reflections not only of personal emotions but also of the complex historical and cultural reality of Russia, which helps me better understand my cultural identity and its impact on my life. As Marinova aptly illustrates in her article: “… Russian author grants himself and his Masters—as he will later in the final pages of The Master and Margarita—the peace and solace found in the knowledge that great works manage to endure, and that time is measured not in terms of despots’ reigns but artistic achievement” (Marinova, 2017, p. 14). This quote beautifully demonstrates Bulgakov’s desire to preserve artistic achievements and express his ideas despite the pressures of time and ideological constraints.

Moliere was an outstanding playwright of his time, whose works such as “The Misanthrope” and “Tartuffe” not only shaped the development of French literature but also had a profound impact on theatrical art as a whole. These comedies criticized the social vices and shortcomings of their time, making Moliere a key figure in the history of literature. Mechele Leon, in the article “The Poet and the Prince: Revising Moliere and Tartuffe in the French Revolution,” demonstrates how Moliere’s works became symbols of broader political and social changes, playing a role in the French Revolution. Moliere faced significant obstacles from religious and political authorities. His plays, such as “Tartuffe,” were harshly criticized by influential Catholic circles, leading to temporary bans on their performances. He was also subjected to personal attacks from competitors and critics, even facing accusations of incest. Although Moliere had the support of King Louis XIV, as Leon notes, “Louis XIV was Moliere’s powerful ally against the onslaught of professional criticism and personal calumnies that plagued him throughout his career in Paris” (Leon, 2005, p. 6), this support was not always consistent. Leon further adds:

The defining event in the history of Molière’s association with Louis XIV was     undoubtedly his five-year battle to bring Tartuffe to the public stage. The facts are well known: Molière presented a performance of his three-act play Tartuffe, ou L’hypocrite to Louis XIV at Versailles in May 1664. Although reportedly the king was impressed by the play, he deemed it politically unwise to allow public performances of it. (Leon, 2005, p. 7)

Leon also notes that “A year later Moliere’s wife, Armande, had to petition Louis XIV to intervene against the church’s decision to deny her husband a Christian burial” (Leon, 2005, p. 7). Moliere’s influence was so significant that his works were reinterpreted during the French Revolution as symbols of the fight against hypocrisy and social injustices. As Mechele Leon points out, “An array of contradictory elements surrounded Moliere, but the paradox of his having been both powerful and persecuted acquired special resonance during the French Revolution” (Leon, 2005, p. 2), highlighting his unique position as both supported and persecuted artist. This article made me reflect on the profound impact of Moliere’s works on literature of subsequent eras and how his name and masterpieces were reinterpreted in the context of the French Revolution. I feel that our cultural heritage is akin to layers of earth, each reflecting its time and life, serving as a foundation for the new layer. Just as plants, trees, and animals, upon dying, nourish the soil and leave their mark for future generations, so too do literary genres and works not emerge from nothing and do not disappear without a trace. They always represent a continuation of something that came before, enriching and passing ideas to subsequent generations. Each layer of cultural heritage absorbs elements of the previous one, thus creating a continuous and living fabric of human experience. Moliere was not only a great playwright but also a revolutionary in the world of art, whose influence extends far beyond his time. His works, filled with satire and social criticism, not only reflected the vices of his era but also continued to inspire generations after his death.

Mikhail Bulgakov and Jean-Baptiste Moliere are two of the greatest representatives of their respective national cultural heritages, having made significant contributions to the literary character of their countries. Their works continue to influence contemporary minds and remain relevant today. What unites and separates these two great figures? Mikhail Bulgakov, like Jean-Baptiste Moliere, used satire in his works to critique society. Bulgakov directed his satire at Soviet bureaucracy, censorship, and the hypocrisy of the authorities, creating grotesque images that mocked the realities of his time. Moliere, in turn, was a master of comedies that ridiculed the vices and shortcomings of 17th-century society, particularly hypocrisy, greed, and foolishness. Both writers faced censorship and opposition. Bulgakov, working under Soviet dictatorship, frequently encountered harsh censorship; his works were banned, and he was forced to write ‘in the drawer,’ which significantly impacted his creativity. As noted by Marinova, the Soviet Union’s view of any writer who challenged the social system through their work was particularly harsh, leading to severe repercussions for those who defied its norms (Marinova, 2017). Moliere, despite the patronage of Louis XIV, also faced pressure from the church and aristocracy, especially after the publication of works like ‘Tartuffe,’ which were criticized for their satire on religious hypocrisy. According to Leon, the church’s long-standing aversion to theater made the attacks on Moliere a significant matter of ecclesiastical policy (Leon, 2005). What differences can be highlighted between these two great writers? Mikhail Bulgakov lived and worked in the USSR in the first half of the 20th century, under harsh censorship and a totalitarian regime. His works, written in the genres of magical realism and satire, reflected the complex and grim reality of his time. Jean-Baptiste Moliere worked in the 17th century at the court of Louis XIV, during the classical era and the flourishing of French theater. Being closer to the royal power, he enjoyed the patronage of the monarch, which afforded him some freedom in his work, although it did not shield him from criticism by conservative circles. Leon highlights that Moliere’s connection with Louis XIV and the royal patronage was considered an essential aspect of his artistic success (Leon, 2005). Unlike Bulgakov, Moliere was a master of comedy and farce; his plays mocked the vices and shortcomings of society in a lighter and more humorous manner. An interesting intertwining of the work of these two great writers and dramatists emerged during the period of strict censorship, when Bulgakov, in order to survive and continue creating, began translating and staging Moliere’s works in theaters. In these productions, he infused his own style, ideas, and the influences of his time, allowing him to reinterpret Moliere’s classics through the lens of Soviet reality. Marinova notes that Bulgakov’s adaptation of Moliere’s works turned the original texts into new, timely pieces, showing the enduring power of Moliere’s writing (Marinova, 2017).

Literary works do more than simply reflect the realities of their time; they deeply penetrate our consciousness, shaping our thoughts, feelings, and worldview, and encouraging us to ponder timeless and universal questions. Reading authors like Bulgakov and Molière, who belong to the golden treasury of world literature, allows us not only to gain a deeper understanding of their historical eras but also to recognize the universal truths that continue to resonate powerfully with contemporary readers across different cultures. Literary heritage nurtures in us the ability to view the world from new perspectives, making us more sensitive, empathetic, and well-informed, while creating an unbreakable bond with culture that transcends time and place. The enduring legacy of these great authors lives on in each of us, offering invaluable support, comfort, and hope. It is a treasure that no one can take away, one that continues to grow within us, endlessly inspiring and guiding us along life’s path, no matter where we are.

References

Marinova, M. (2017). The Author’s Heroes: Bulgakov’s Moliere, and Other Deployments of World Literature Classics. The Comparatist, 41(1), 197–213. https://doi.org/10.1353/com.2017.0011

Leon, M. (2005, July). The Poet and the Prince: Revising Moliere and Tartuffe in the French Revolution. French Historical Studies, 28(3), 447-. https://doi.org/10.1215/00161071-28-3-447