Mikhail Bulgakov is not just a talented satirist, but also a deep philosopher and a subtle mystic. The author lived during the 1920s, a difficult time period for Russia and so everything he saw and had experienced was evidently embodied through his works. In most of Bulgakov’s writings, tragedy is expressed through comical remarks and situations. In The Heart of a Dog , Bulgakov creates a grotesque image of modernity by using satire through irony and metaphors. The novel begins with a street dog unexpectedly finding itself in the large house of a scientist, Preobrazhensky, who planned to conduct a unique experiment: the transformation of a dog into a human-hearted creature known as ‘Polygraph Polygraphovich Sharikov’. The bad inclinations and most importantly, the influence of a malicious man of the revolutionary times who was hiding behind the new Soviet rituals, makes the life in the Professor Preobrazhensky’s house unbearable for everyone in it. There were no limits to Sharikov’s shamelessness, which lead to his decision to revert the creature back to its former state as a dog.The amusing and fantastic plot of the novel is painted with juicy satirical tones, filled with powerful imagery and symbolic motifs. They often destroy conservative ideas of the past. Thus, the motif of the dog’s fidelity and devotion is transformed into a motif of ingratitude, bordering on arrogance. The portrayal of the chairman, Swonder, grows into a symbol of worthlessness, pseudo-revolutionary demagogy and unscrupulousness.Bulgakov uses three main objects to describe satire throughout his novel. First, he ironically criticizes the work of the Soviet regime,represented by the main chairman of the house committee, Shvonder. He was described as a man who “stood on his head a quarter of a yard of a dump of dense curly hair” (Bulgakov 76). Members of the house committee are also satirically presented by the author. The house committee includes the head of the cultural department of the house, Comrade Vyazemsky, who was not favored by Bulgakov. Shvonder is disappointed with the fact that Professor Preobrazhensky’s apartment consists of seven rooms as his intentions are to have everyone possessing similar apartments. “The social system, in which all who were ‘nobody’, social lower classes, became ‘all’?” reflects Preobrazhensky’s view on dystopia that reflects the general mood of the Soviet’s troubled times: repression and the abuse of power against the people.The second object of satire is undoubtedly Sharik, the end-product of the experiment done by Professor Preobrazhensky. The street dog has turned into a terrible human being that personifies the proletariat. Bulgakov ironically describes the appearance of the newborn creature as: “a man of small stature and unsympathetic appearance. The hair on his head grew stiff, as if bushes on the uprooted field, and his face was covered with unshaven fluff. The forehead was striking with its small height. Almost directly above the black tassels of scattered eyebrows began a thick head brush”. (Bulgakov 89). The lastobject of satire is not only represented through the Soviet government but through the proletariat too. Bulgakov is bitter about the protagonist, Professor Preobrazhensky, a intellectual who viewed himself as a God; a creator who decided to change the laws of nature and create a new livings. The author judges him by referring to priests, shown from the quote, “The dog got up on his hind legs and created a namaz before Philip Philipovich” (Bulgakov 92). Professor Preobrazhensky still refuses to abandon the idea of ??making a new man from Sharikov. He hopes for progressive evolution and gradual development. Yet, there are no traces of development and there will continue not to be if the person does not aspire to be like him. In fact, the whole life of the professor slowly collapses into a living nightmare. Sharikov comes home under the heavy influence of alcohol; pestering women, breaking and crushing everything around to ruin the peace in the house. He became a thunderstorm not only to the inhabitants of the apartment but also to the residents of the whole building.The Heart of a Dog is a response to Bulgakov’s cultural and socio-historical situation in Russia during the 1920s. The scientific experiment depicted in the story resembles the proletarian revolution and its harrowing results. Results that did not take long. Bulgakov, from the example of the Preobrazhensky’s house, showed changes that occurred throughout the country. The author’s bewilderment sounds bitter but is indeed very accurate: “But I ask: why, when did this whole story begin, did everyone start walking in dirty galoshes and felt boots along the marble staircase? Why do you still put a soldier to them, so that someone does not steal them? Why did they remove the carpet from the front staircase?” (Bulgakov 54). Professor Preobrazhensky exclaims prophetically, “Preobrazhensky’s house is gone and with him, and all of Russia” (Bulgakov 55). Bulgakov tries to warn his readers that antagonistic people often stand for unshakable truths. It is clear by the end of the novel that Sharikov does not have a good reputation. At the same time, the characters know how to use their origins, inventing their own merits, cringing, and looking for patrons who consider themselves to be the masters of life. Bulgakov manages to ridicule, warn, and most importantly suggest that one should look deep into their true character more often.