Published on: 2026-09-05
Source: Moscow Government – Правительства Москвы –
An important disclaimer is at the bottom of this article.
This novella has long been dissected into quotes — “Heart of a Dog” is loved no less than the cult novel “The Master and Margarita.” The work is read in Russian schools, studied abroad, and researched by Bulgakov scholars from various countries. “A monstrous story” — this is how the author himself initially subtitled the novella. Last year, Mikhail Bulgakov’s “Heart of a Dog” turned 100 years old.
In honor of the anniversary, the theater “Nikita Mikhalkov’s ‘Workshop 12′” presents his own interpretation on stage. Director Sergey Gazarov spoke about working on the play, consultations with doctors, and his personal attitude towards the writer.
The premiere will take place on September 17. Tickets can be purchased at the service “Mosbilet”.
How far progress has come
In 1925, rejuvenation was a topic of intense discussion in scientific circles. Experimental branches of medicine were rapidly developing in the young USSR. The Institute of Experimental Biology played an important role in these processes: within its walls, biologist Nikolai Koltsov and surgeon Alexei Zamkov conducted experiments aimed at combating aging.
In France, a surgeon of Russian descent, Sergey Voronov, published the work “Rejuvenation by Grafting”: the publication became a staple book for many doctors, and the author a figure of global stature whose methods were widely popular. He was precisely the prototype for Professor Preobrazhensky in “Heart of a Dog,” who practiced radical rejuvenation methods.
Layers of meaning
The scientific layer of the story is far from the only one. Mikhail Bulgakov believed that attempts to forcibly construct a new person from the outset are doomed: character, beliefs, and habits are built over years. “With kindness. The only possible way when dealing with a living being. Terror cannot do anything to an animal, no matter what stage of development it is at,” emphasized Filipp Filippovich.
In Bulgakov’s “Heart of a Dog,” he examines with medical precision the nature of man, the role of morality, and personal responsibility. For him, humanity is defined not by formal characteristics, but by moral compass and creative labor. After all, as Professor Preobrazhensky noted, “to speak is not yet to be a human.”
100 years of “Heart of a Dog.” What exhibits related to the story are kept in the Mikhail Bulgakov Museum“The Not-So-Good Apartment,” a house on Bolshaya Pirogovskaya: Moscow addresses of Mikhail Bulgakov
In a new interpretation — on stage
Sergey Gazarov began working on the play more than three years ago. He set the task not just to translate the text of the story into dialogues and actions, but also to preserve important authorial meanings and intonations. The roles will be played by Viktor Rakov, Sergey Gazarov, Fyodor Lavrov, Danila Dzygar, Sergey Stepanchanko, Tatyana Tashkova, Sergey Batalov, and others.
We talked with Sergey Gazarov about the upcoming premiere, the Bulgakov era, doctors, and conceptual stage solutions.
— Why did you choose this particular work by Mikhail Bulgakov? What draws you to The Heart of a Dog?
— Firstly, this is a great work by a great master of literature who is always interesting. Every line he wrote is meaningful. I think he did not set out to write something extravagant for the current moment — it was important for him to understand human nature, to reach the very depths. This can be traced in all his works: “The Days of the Turbins,” “The Master and Margarita,” “The Fatal Eggs.”
The key idea that concerns me about Mikhail Bulgakov I would put like this: no matter how times, eras, and life’s vicissitudes change, one thing remains constant — the human being. The passion for the new and the unknown, the desire to prolong youth, stirred people both in Ancient Egypt and in the Soviet Union. And Bulgakov reflects on how far a person can go in their explorations and what the consequences might be. Is a person ready to take responsibility for their actions? After all, sometimes the price of an experiment is very high.
The novella “Heart of a Dog” was written in 1925, but it remains relevant to this day and makes one reflect on many things. However, Bulgakov’s genius also lies in the fact that he masterfully weaves humor and subtle irony into every work.
— Why do you think Bulgakov chose this topic?
— At that time, it was a very fashionable trend. Despite the revolution and the First World War, which affected everyone, people thought about beauty. For example, what color to dye their hair, how to look better, and so on. In “Heart of a Dog,” there is a scene about the Soviet cosmetic institution “Zhirkost,” which, you see, is doing shoddy work: a patient who came to Professor Preobrazhensky with complaints ended up with green hair. It is now especially interesting to study that era and compare it with contemporary processes.
— Tell us about working with the literary material. How difficult or, on the contrary, easy was it to adapt the novella into a play?
“This is a very difficult task. It is always a pity that the author did not leave us a play in addition to the novella or novel, because the differences between these literary forms are colossal. When we read a novella, we see how many descriptions and philosophical digressions it contains, which are hard to portray on stage. A play, however, focuses on actions and conflict.”
In total, I worked on this for three and a half years. At first, I commissioned the play from established playwrights, but it all came down to reproducing descriptions in dialogues. For example, a scene was needed where the professor looks at his watch, but on our stage there was a meaningless dialogue lasting several minutes: “It’s evening.” — “What time is it?” — “Eight.” — “I thought it was seven.” And it turned out to be some kind of farce.
So I realized: I need to write it myself, because I know exactly what I want to emphasize in this story, what to focus on, and what to bring to the forefront. I locked myself away for four months and wrote the play, trying not to correct Bulgakov’s text or add to it, but to adapt it for the stage as carefully as possible.
For me, the most important thing in “Heart of a Dog” is its appeal to the human being. This is what has always concerned artists: if they skillfully and talentfully depicted the depth of gaze, kindness, beauty on their canvases, masterpieces were created that are now admired by millions. And I, too, set myself the task of understanding the human being.
– Have you consulted with doctors, other specialists? If so, how did your interaction take place?
— We not only consulted, but also invited a very serious specialist to participate. Igor Petrovich taught us how to properly hold the scalpel, maintain the right tone of conversation, and explained the logistics of the actions of doctors and medical staff. We all grew very fond of him. I learned a lot of new things for myself.
For example, the operating surgeon doesn’t talk to the nurse at all: he extends his hand, and she, watching the process, knows which instrument to hand over. That is why I believe the role of consultants is very important for working both on a film and on a play — otherwise, it could turn out like a joke.
— What unique stylistic elements did you bring to the performance?
— Our production has many visual elements related to artificial intelligence and neural generation. We even used shadow theater because Bulgakov is phantasmagoria. I think he did not conceive of mundane twists.
In our play, we want to express the essence of philosophy, not to show a dog on stage. For me, the worst thing would be if someone said: “Oh, how well the actor played the dog! Believably.” We make a special emphasis on the music — it’s all classical. Who can better convey the different states of the human soul than Dmitri Shostakovich? I was pondering some episode, listening to the music and realized: this is a complete match.
From the studio — to the theater on Povarskaya
The history of the “Workshop 12” Theater of Nikita Mikhalkov began in 1940 — at that time, it was a theatrical troupe at the Mosfilm studio. Five years later, the group received the official name “Theater-Studio of the Film Actor.” Prominent film figures Grigoriy Alexandrov and Sergey Yutkevich took the lead. In the following decades, Sergey Gerasimov, Ivan Pyryev, Mikhail Romm, Anatoly Efros, Sergey Bondarchuk, Georgiy Vitsin, and Lyudmila Gurchenko worked on this stage. More than 700 actors passed through the troupe.
A new stage in the theater’s life began in 2017, when actor and director Nikita Mikhalkov took the position of artistic director. A landmark event was the play “12,” created for Mikhalkov’s anniversary based on a script he co-wrote with the Presnyakov brothers. The production marked a shift in the theater’s development vector: now the focus is on pressing issues of contemporary reality.
The theater stage also hosts productions based on the works of classic authors — Nikolai Ostrovsky, Mikhail Lermontov, Anton Chekhov, and Ivan Bunin. Among the directors are Nikita Mikhalkov, Sergey Gazarov, Denis Rekalo, and the acting troupe includes Anna Mikhalkova, Viktor Rakov, Danila Dzygar, Sergey Batalov, and many others.
In the theater named “Workshop ’12’ of Nikita Mikhalkov,” directorial experimentation is combined with a thoughtful consideration of literary material and the historical era. The main thing is that the theater does not impose ready-made conclusions: it leaves them to the viewer, merely prompting reflection and inspiring a return to the exploration of life itself.
Get information about plays, concerts, exhibitions, and other interesting events on the official “Mosbilet” channels in messengers “Max” and “Telegram”.
Please note; This information is unprocessed content obtained directly from the information source. It is an accurate report of what the source claims and does not necessarily reflect the position of MIL-OSI or its clients.