Science, Nature, and Morality Theme Analysis

Heart of a Dog focuses on the impossible result of a fictional scientific experiment, but Bulgakov uses this experiment to emphasize science’s very real limits and ethical implications. Through the absurd premise that a doctor could transform a dog into a human being, he mocks the idea that people could or should totally conquer nature through science. But he also demonstrates that science does give people an immense power over the world—a power that can be used equally for good or for evil. Sometimes scientists can decide how to use this power, and sometimes they simply ignore the ethical implications of their work (like Professor Philip Philippovich Preobrazhensky with his rejuvenation patients at first). But often, they simply can’t know whether they will do good or evil, change the world, or create a monster. Philip’s failed experiment on Sharik suggests that, when human beings arrogantly try to dominate nature, they often do create monsters. Because scientists must take moral responsibility for their work, Bulgakov suggests, they ought to adapt to nature, rather than trying to change it.

Bulgakov frequently emphasizes science’s sheer power, which can be both creative and destructive. After all, science is just the sum of human knowledge about how the world works and how we can manipulate it, and medicine is the same for the human body. Therefore, it’s no surprise that surgeons like Philip have a sometimes unfathomable life-or-death power over living beings. Bulgakov points this out by mixing the language of medicine with the language of violence. During the operation, Philip is “positively terrifying.” He “slashes” Sharik up and “roar[s]” to his assistant, Dr. Bormenthal, and they are “as frantic as hurrying murderers.” Bulgakov shows how there’s a fine line between surgery and dismemberment, or healing and maiming. Philip doesn’t even expect Sharik to survive the surgery. Accordingly, it’s no wonder that Sharik is terrified every time Philip leads him into the exam room: he knows that science can kill him. But science’s great dangers don’t nullify its equally great power to heal and create. For instance, Philip mainly performs rejuvenation procedures on his patients—he transplants animal organs into them in the hopes of reversing aging and improving their sexual health. Later, when he transplants human organs into Sharik, he’s astonished to see Sharik transform into a man. In response to this transformation, Bormenthal goes on to praise Philip’s godlike creative power in his journal: “The surgeon’s scalpel has brought into being a new human entity. Professor Preobrazhensky, you are a creator.” This shows that science’s power to create and its power to destroy are inseparable. Science is neither inherently good nor inherently evil; rather, whether it does good or evil depends on the situation.

Having shown that science can accomplish either good or evil, Bulgakov next shows how scientists unintentionally do evil when they try to outsmart nature. Bormenthal and Philip often disagree about whether science’s purpose is to learn about the world or to change it: Bormenthal is excited about everything Philip has learned about the brain through his experiment on Sharik, while Philip focuses on the consequences of his discovery, not the new knowledge he’s producing. But in a way, both are right: Philip does make an astonishing discovery—that the pituitary gland determines human personality and identity. (This is science fiction—it’s not actually true.) But this discovery also has important consequences. Once he realizes that his creation, Sharikov, is a liar, thief, and scoundrel, Philip starts to feel a nagging sense of moral responsibility. He realizes that he intended to do good, but ended up doing harm instead. Specifically, he violated the natural order of the world by trying to change the inherent essence of things. He gave a dog a human’s essence (pituitary gland), and he interfered with the natural process of human evolution. Similarly, while Philip’s rejuvenation treatments appear to make patients younger, they’re also clearly destructive, as they disrupt normal development. One of Philip’s patients faces a physical developmental issue (he suddenly gets green hair and loses control over his knees) while another appears to be failing in his moral development (he brags about using his new youthful appearance to seduce an underage girl). Reflecting on his experiments, Philip realizes that it’s dangerous to interfere with natural development. He admits that “it might be possible to […] turn a dog into a highly advanced human.” But, he asks, what’s the point? “The human race takes care of this by itself,” he argues, by reproducing and evolving over time. There’s no need for scientists to get in the way.

Like Philip, Bulgakov was a trained doctor who both understood how humans are constrained by our biology and fought those constraints to the extent he could. In the real world, of course, rejuvenation and inter-species transformations aren’t possible. But while fictional characters like Philip and Sharik don’t face the same natural limits as real people, they still face consequences when they try too hard to surpass those limits. Like many other science fiction writers, Bulgakov uses the manipulation of nature in literature to warn his readers about trying to transcend nature, including human nature, in the real world.