The meaning of the mystical finale of N.V. Gogol's "The Overcoat" is that justice, which Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin could not find during his lifetime, still triumphed after the hero's death. Bashmachkin's ghost rips off the greatcoats from noble and wealthy people. But a special place in the final is occupied by a meeting with "one significant person" who, after the service, decided "to stop by a lady I know, Karolina Ivanovna." But on the way, a strange incident happens to him. Suddenly, the official felt that someone had grabbed him hard by the collar, that someone turned out to be the late Akaki Akakievich. He says in a terrible voice: “Finally I caught you by the collar! I need your overcoat! "
Gogol believes that in the life of every person, even the most insignificant, there are moments when he becomes a person in the highest sense of the word. Taking away the overcoat from officials, Bashmachkin becomes a real hero in his own eyes and in the eyes of the "humiliated and insulted". Only now is Akaki Akakievich able to stand up for himself.
Gogol uses fiction in the last episode of his "Overcoat" to show the injustice of the world, its inhumanity. And only the intervention of an otherworldly force can change this state of affairs.
It should be noted that the last meeting between Akaki Akakievich and the official became significant for the “significant” person. Gogol writes that this incident "made a strong impression on him." The official became much less likely to say to his subordinates, "How dare you, do you understand who is in front of you?" If he uttered such words, then after he listens to the person standing in front of him.
Gogol in his story shows all the inhumanity of human society. He encourages to look at the "little man" with understanding and pity. The conflict between the "little man" and society leads to an uprising of the uncomplaining and humble, even after death.
Thus, in The Overcoat, Gogol turns to a new type of hero for him - the “little man”. The author seeks to show all the hardships of the life of an ordinary person who cannot find support anywhere and in anyone. He can not even answer the offenders, because he is too weak. In the real world, everything cannot change and justice prevail, so Gogol introduces fiction into the narrative.
The value of the overcoat image in the story of the same name by N.V. Gogol
In "The Overcoat" the social and moral motive of other, earlier stories by Gogol developed. It consists in the thought of the riches of the human spirit, not destroyed, but only deeply hidden in the very depths of the existence of humans, distorted by a bad society. Gogol was guided by the idea that these values \u200b\u200bof the spirit, hammered by vulgarity, can, and, therefore, must rise and flourish, even if in some uncertain circumstances. This theme in "The Overcoat" was expressed especially sharply.
Basically, the story of N.V. Gogol is the figure of the humiliated, deprived of the joys of life, Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin. In revealing the character of this hero, the image of an overcoat performs an important function. An overcoat is not just an object. This is the goal for which Bashmachkin is ready for self-restraint, for cutting funds, which are already very limited. And receiving a new overcoat from Petrovich is a holiday for him, "a most solemn day."
The purchase of an overcoat is preceded by a description of the life of Akaki Akakievich. It shows the tragedy of the "little man" in a big city. The story depicts his struggle for existence, deprivation, the inability to meet the needs of life, including the acquisition of a new overcoat. Bashmachkin's routine work in the department cannot provide the smallest and most necessary. Therefore, the overcoat personifies for this hero what he aspires to. But, besides, it shows how little this person needs.
In his story, Gogol depicts how the most modest, most insignificant smile of fate leads to the fact that in the half-dead Akaki Akakievich the human begins to stir and awaken. He does not yet have an overcoat, but only a dream about it. But something has already changed in Bashmachkin, because there is some event ahead of him. Moreover, this is an event that brings joy. For once, something happens for him, while for years this hero existed not for himself, but for meaningless labor that absorbed his being. For the sake of the overcoat, Bashmachkin makes sacrifices. It is not so difficult for Akaky Akakievich to carry them, because he “ate spiritually, carrying in his thoughts the eternal idea of \u200b\u200ba future greatcoat”. It is very curious that this hero has an idea, and even an eternal one! Gogol remarks: "Since then, as if he got married ...". And then the author describes the state of Bashmachkin: “He became somehow more alive, even more firm in character ... Doubt and indecision disappeared by itself from his face and actions ... Fire sometimes showed in his eyes, even the most daring and courageous thoughts flashed in his head: whether to put, for sure, a marten on the collar. "
The boldness of the thought of the renewing Akaki Akakievich does not go further than the marten on the collar; but that doesn't make you laugh. The marten is not available to Akaki Akakievich's funds; dreaming about her means dreaming about something peculiar to "significant persons", with whom Akaky Akakievich had never even thought of equating himself before. But something else draws attention to itself. Just dreams of an unfortunate overcoat on a calico lining changed Akaki Akakievich so dramatically. What would have happened to him and to all the downtrodden, humiliated and devastated, if they were given an existence worthy of a man, given a purpose, scope, a dream?
Finally, the greatcoat is ready, and Akaki Akakievich stepped one step further along the path of the resurrection of a man in it. Let "I didn't buy martens, because it was definitely expensive, but instead of it they chose the best cat that was found in the shop." Yet the event took place. And in Akaki Akakievich we see something new again: he "even laughed", comparing the old hood with the new greatcoat, "he dined merrily and after dinner he didn’t write anything, no papers, but he was just a little bit in bed. And emotions, and fun, and sybarism, and life without writing papers - all this was not previously with Akaki Akakievich. Even some playful ideas stirred in the soul of this hero: on the way to visit, he saw a playful picture in the shop window, "shook his head and grinned." And on the way back, having drunk champagne as a guest, Akaky Akakievich "even ran up suddenly, for some unknown reason, after some lady who, like lightning, passed by and whose every part of her body was filled with extraordinary movement."
Of course, Akaky Akakievich remains with all this Akaky Akakievich, and the outbursts of something new will die out in him. But they are, and it is they that will lead to the denouement of the story. We see the turning point when Akaki Akakievich is robbed, humiliated, destroyed. Moreover, he is on the edge of the coffin, delirious. And here it turns out that really unexpected things lurked in this hero. He knows who his killer is, and little remains of his timid obedience. Death frees a person in Bashmachkin.
Akaki Akakievich, who had experienced fear all his life and died most of all from the fear instilled in him by a significant person, now, after death, began to instill fear in others. He frightens many people, including those who wear beaver overcoats, raccoon and bear fur coats, that is, significant persons. All the indignation of this hero against the life he lived was manifested after his death. And the key here is the image of the overcoat, the acquisition of which made it possible to see the human principle in Bashmachkin. The overcoat was the reason for the whole protest of the little man against the existing order of life. We can say that the story has life before and after the purchase of an overcoat. In the story, the overcoat is of great importance. It personifies, on the one hand, a materially necessary object and, on the other, an object that allows a person killed by reality to be revived to life.
The meaning of the mystical finale of N.V. Gogol's "The Overcoat" is that justice, which Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin could not find during his lifetime, still triumphed after the hero's death. Bashmachkin's ghost rips off the greatcoats from noble and wealthy people. But a special place in the final is occupied by a meeting with "one significant person" who, after the service, decided "to stop by a lady I know, Karolina Ivanovna." But on the way, a strange incident happens to him. Suddenly, the official felt that someone had grabbed him hard by the collar, that someone turned out to be the late Akaki Akakievich. He says in a terrible voice: “Finally I caught you by the collar! I need your overcoat! "
Gogol believes that in the life of every person, even the most insignificant, there are moments when he becomes a person in the highest sense of the word. Taking away the overcoat from officials, Bashmachkin becomes a real hero in his own eyes and in the eyes of the "humiliated and insulted". Only now is Akaki Akakievich able to stand up for himself.
Gogol uses fiction in the last episode of his "Overcoat" to show the injustice of the world, its inhumanity. And only the intervention of an otherworldly force can change this state of affairs.
It should be noted that the last meeting between Akaki Akakievich and the official became significant for the “significant” person. Gogol writes that this incident "made a strong impression on him." The official became much less likely to say to his subordinates, "How dare you, do you understand who is in front of you?" If he uttered such words, then after he listens to the person standing in front of him.
Gogol in his story shows all the inhumanity of human society. He encourages to look at the "little man" with understanding and pity. The conflict between the "little man" and society leads to an uprising of the uncomplaining and humble, even after death.
Thus, in The Overcoat, Gogol turns to a new type of hero for him - the “little man”. The author seeks to show all the hardships of the life of an ordinary person who cannot find support anywhere and in anyone. He can not even answer the offenders, because he is too weak. In the real world, everything cannot change and justice prevail, so Gogol introduces fiction into the narrative.
What does “live” mean for the main character of the poem M.Yu. Lermontov "Mtsyri"?
What does it mean for Mtsyri to live? It is not to see the gloomy walls of the monastery, but the bright colors of nature. This is not to languish in stuffy cells, but to breathe in the night freshness of the forests. This is not to bow down before the altar, but to experience the joy of meeting the storm, the thunderstorm of obstacles. Not only in thoughts, but also in feelings Mtsyri is hostile, alien to monks. Their ideal is peace, self-denial, for the sake of serving a contrived goal, rejection of the joys of earthly life in the name of eternal happiness "in the holy transcendental land." Mtsyri denies this with all his being. Not peace, but anxieties and battles - this is the meaning of human existence. Not self-denial and voluntary bondage, but the bliss of freedom — that is the highest happiness.
For the protagonist of Lermontov's poem, to live is to finally find his homeland, the place that he remembers from childhood. It is no coincidence that Mtsyri says that the whole life in the monastery in which he lived is nothing, and three days spent at large is a whole life for him. Living for Mtsyri is not only finding your homeland, but also finding real freedom. The original tragedy lies in this quest. Caucasus (a symbol of that very ideal) remains unattainable for the hero
Explain what Dan's hero did during the game on Majdanek and express your point of view. (Sergei Lukyanenko "Someone else's pain").
The problem of "someone else's pain" today in the world is more relevant than ever: there are wars, blood is shed. There should not be "someone else's pain", a person has no right to remain indifferent to someone else's grief, because he is a MAN.
The story of S. Lukyanenko (fantasy) takes place in the "future". At first glance, this future seems happy, because people have learned not to suffer - to "turn off pain", to cancel death, to restore a person.
People play strange games: they hunt each other, kill, and they are not afraid, because it is worth turning on the "recovery" program - and a person appears in his original form safe and sound. Electronic, computer games have replaced real life, weaned a person to suffer, sympathize, empathize ... The time of universal fun has come, there is no reason for despondency.
But this seems so only at first glance. The main character Dan is not like everyone else. During the game on Majdanek (and this is a former German concentration camp), he broke loose, left the role. He threw himself on the SS men with his bare hands. And the game was called "The Armed Uprising". Everyone went crazy ... Dan turned out to be a man, not a robot. He remembered what SS men were ...
Thus, the author raises one more urgent problem in the story: the problem memory. Will the people of the future forget the fascist camps, the grief, the suffering of the ruined people? Will Majdanek only play and have fun?
In the "future" the game has become synonymous with life ... The beloved girl asks a wild question for us, the present:
Dan, why didn't you shoot me?
Indeed, there is nothing to be afraid of: the regeneration system will work. They play because there is nothing else to do.
“Pretend you're driving cars that don't need to be controlled for a long time? Sitting in a laboratory, trying to teach a person to see not only in infrared, but also in ultraviolet rays? Or wait in line to colonize another planet? There the Game will become a reality ...
I dont know. But how did it start, the Game?
She shrugged. Since then, as people have gained immortality, probably. Play is life. What is the main feature of life? The desire to kill. What is the main feature of the Game? The desire to kill. In the staging - on Pearl Harbor, where water boils and ships sink again, and bombers led by suicide bombers fall on the Kursk Bulge, where tanks are sintered with earth and blood into one solid black lump; in Hiroshima, where the flame of an atomic explosion breaks out again and again ...
But once upon a time it was not a game! They couldn't play, dying for real! Something else was leading them into battle! They didn't throw themselves on the barbed wire of concentration camps because it was very interesting! And after all, Dan felt, almost felt this unknown, incomprehensible, when, in the beautiful staging of Majdanek, he looked at the well-fed, well-fed SS men who beat up children ... He rushed forward not because he wanted to ruin the game, to be original. He just couldn't help it. He almost understood! And they do not want or can no longer understand. The Game has lasted too long. "
He was killed by the evening of the second day. The house was stormed by marines, green berets, Tang samurai and an SS brigade from the Death's Head Division. They died, resurrected, went into battle again. And he fired, knowing that he had already been removed from the memory of the regenerating system ...
And yet Dan won - he stopped playing.
Ne quid falsi audeat, ne quid veri non audeat historia.
M.T. Cicero
(May history be afraid of any lie, may it not be afraid of any truth.
M. T. Cicero)
Gogol uses fiction in the story "The Overcoat" at the very end, when, after the death of Akaki Akakievich, a ghost appears at the Kalinkin bridge and rips off his overcoats from passers-by. The same ghost almost scared the "significant person" to death when it grabbed the general by the collar and demanded the general's overcoat for itself because the "significant person" did not help find Bashmachkin's overcoat.
The fantastic ending of "The Overcoat" can have at least three different interpretations. The first interpretation is quite real: the same robbers, who took off Akaki Akakievich's overcoat at night, continue their trade - deftly ripping off overcoats from passers-by at the Kalinkin Bridge. It was just such a night robber, tall and with a mustache, menacingly asked the frail servant: "What do you want?" - and, showing a huge fist to intimidate, calmly walked to the Obukhov bridge. The second interpretation of the ending is mystical, since it is associated with a ghost. Some of Akaky Akakievich's colleagues admitted that the recently deceased titular councilor was in the ghost operating near the Kalinkin bridge. But this ghost threatens the fleeing passers-by with a finger and quite realistically sneezes from the strong tobacco of the worker. The savory sneeze of the ghost again raises serious doubts: was it a ghost, can a ghost sneeze? The third interpretation of the ending is psychological: a "significant person", tormented by the reproaches of conscience, is morally ready for retaliation, which overtakes him at the right moment. Having amused himself at a party with two glasses of champagne, he rode along a deserted street late in the evening. A strong wind played with the collar of his greatcoat: it threw it over his head, then raised it like a sail. And so through the winter gloom and blizzard "I felt a" significant face "that someone had grabbed him very tightly by the collar. Turning around, he noticed a man of short stature, in an old shabby uniform, and not without horror recognized him as Akaki Akakievich. (...) The poor "significant person" almost died. (...) He even took off his greatcoat as soon as possible and shouted to the coachman in a voice that was not his own: "I went home with all my might!" Thus, the "significant person" himself gave up his general's overcoat. It is remarkable that the coachman driving the sleigh did not react in any way to the attack of the ghost, he simply did not notice anything.
To the question: "Which of the three interpretations of the ending is correct?" - one should probably answer: "All three are equally possible, and the author does not specifically clarify the final at all." In his works, Gogol often uses innuendo as an artistic device, take at least the endless litigation about honor and dignity in the "Tale of how Ivan Ivanovich quarreled with Ivan Nikiforovich", or the "silent scene" in "The Inspector General", or dal the bird-three in "Dead Souls", etc. It is noteworthy that the author-narrator himself does not identify the ghost with Akaki Akakievich, but all the time he makes a reservation that he is transmitting urban rumors.
As has been noted more than once, in the story “The Overcoat”, Gogol combined the motives that Pushkin had used before him in two of his works about the “little man”: "Friend of life"; the madman's threats to the Bronze Horseman - Bashmachkin's explanation with a "significant face", who saw "riot" (riot) in the insistence of the titular councilor. But is there really a rebellion in Gogol's story? Was it by chance or not that there appeared in the "Overcoat" a mention of the Falconet monument, whose horse had its tail cut off, so there is a danger that the Bronze Horseman will fall?
Of the three above interpretations of the finale, only the third - psychological - is important for the ideological content of the story. How did the collision of Akaki Akakievich with the "significant person" in the finale of the story ended?
Some literary scholars see in the finale a rebellion-protest of the "little man" against an unjust society. Akaki Akakievich is painted by a man who, during his lifetime, obediently carries his heavy cross. However, it was important for Gogol to show that determination and courage awaken in the frightened Bashmachkin. True, these qualities appear in the hero after the resurrection - the ghost quickly dealt with the culprit of his misfortunes, taking his greatcoat from the general and scaring him half to death. It is obvious that Gogol, being a realist artist, could not depict in reality the indignation and resistance of the humble Bashmachkin, this would contradict the logic of life and the character of the hero. But as a humanist writer, Gogol wants to believe that self-esteem and decisiveness are hidden in the depths of the soul of the "little man." Thus, the theme of retribution is revealed in the finale.
Other literary scholars believe that Akaki Akakievich, quiet and submissive during his lifetime, is not capable of rebellion even after death. Retribution comes to the "significant person", but not from outside, but from his own soul. After all, the general soon after Bashmachkin's "scolding" felt regret: the "significant person" was constantly thinking about the poor titular adviser and a week later sent to Akaky Akakievich to find out "what he was and how and what could really be done to help him." But repentance was belated: the little official died. Therefore, although the ghost grabbed the general by the collar, the latter, in essence, gave the overcoat himself to atone for his guilt. Thus, Gogol transfers the final clash of Akaky Akakievich with a "significant person" from the social to the moral sphere. Such an interpretation is consonant with the writer's firm conviction that a person's moral transformation is possible.
So, the fantastic ending of "The Overcoat" helps to reveal the idea of \u200b\u200bthe story: the unjust structure of society destroys ordinary ("little") citizens and corrupts people in power, who, in turn, receive inevitable, at least moral, retribution for unjust deeds. Moreover, Gogol, being an opponent of "riots" and "revenge," considered the moral retribution no less heavy than the physical.
Makar Devushkin, the hero of Dostoevsky's novel Poor People, mentioned earlier, did not like not only Akaki Akakievich himself, but also the ending of the story. Dostoevsky's hero argues as follows: “And the best thing would be not to leave him to die, poor fellow, but to make sure that his greatcoat was found, so that the general (...) would ask him again in his office, raise him in rank and give him a good salary salaries, so that, you see, how it would have been: evil would have been punished, but virtue would have triumphed, and the clerks and comrades would have been left with nothing. For example, I would do so ... ". In other words, the petty official Makar Devushkin wanted the story with the greatcoat to have a happy ending in all respects.
Gogol ended the story in a different way - with a semi-real, semi-fantastic meeting of a "significant person" with the ghost of Akaki Akakievich. Thanks to the innuendo of the finale, the content of the entire work deepens: “Had Gogol been severely punished, it would have been a boring, moralizing tale. Forcing to be reborn - it would be a lie. If he hadn't clicked it, we would have left the book with a displeased feeling. Gogol brilliantly chose the fantastic form of the moment when vulgarity for a moment saw its light ”(IF Annensky). Thus, the moral law at the end of the story triumphs, but this ending is completely different from the trivial happy end that Makar Devushkin invented.
The meaning of the mystical finale of N. V. Gogol's story "The Overcoat" is that justice, which Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin could not find during his lifetime, still triumphed after the hero's death. Bashmachkin's ghost rips off the greatcoats from noble and wealthy people. But a special place in the final is occupied by a meeting with “one significant person”, who after the service decided “to stop by a lady I know, Karolina Ivanovna”. But on the way, a strange incident happens to him. Suddenly, the official felt that someone had grabbed him hard by the collar, that someone turned out to be the late Akaki Akakievich. He says in a terrible voice: “Finally I caught you by the collar! I need your overcoat! "
Gogol believes that in the life of every person, even the most insignificant, there are moments when he becomes a person in the highest sense of the word. Taking away the overcoat from officials, Bashmachkin becomes a real hero in his own eyes and in the eyes of the “humiliated and insulted”. Only now is Akaki Akakievich able to stand up for himself.
Gogol resorts to fantasy in the last episode of his "Overcoat" to show the injustice of the world, its inhumanity. And only the intervention of an otherworldly force can change this state of affairs.
It should be noted that the last meeting between Akaki Akakievich and the official became significant for the “significant” person. Gogol writes that this incident "made a strong impression on him." The official began to say much less often to his subordinates, “How dare you, do you understand who is in front of you?”. If he uttered such words, then after he listens to the person standing in front of him.
Gogol in his story shows the whole inhumanity of human society. He calls to look at the “little man” with understanding and pity. The conflict between the “little man” and society leads to an uprising of the uncomplaining and humble, even after death.
Thus, in The Overcoat, Gogol turns to a new type of hero for him - the “little man”. The author seeks to show all the hardships of the life of an ordinary person who cannot find support anywhere and in anyone. He can not even answer the offenders, because he is too weak. In the real world, everything cannot change and justice prevail, so Gogol introduces fantasy into the narrative.
An essay on literature on the topic: What is the meaning of the mystical finale of N. V. Gogol's story "The Overcoat"
Other compositions:
- Someone shouted to the doorman: “Drive! Ours does not like the ragged rabble! ” And the door slammed shut. N.A.Nekrasov. Reflections at the front entrance By the beginning of the 1840s, Nikolai Gogol wrote a number of stories on the themes of St. Petersburg life. The Petersburg cycle opens with Nevsky Prospekt. Petersburg Read More ......
- Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol's story "The Overcoat" played a major role in the development of Russian literature. “We all came out of Gogol’s Overcoat,” said FM Dostoevsky, assessing its importance for many generations of Russian writers. The story in "The Overcoat" is in the first person. We notice Read More ......
- About N. V. Gogol's story “The Overcoat” The “Petersburg stories” included the following stories: “Nevsky Prospekt” “Portrait”, “Notes of a Madman”, and after - “The Nose” and “The Overcoat”. In the story "The Overcoat" Petersburg appears as a city of officials, exclusively businesslike, in which nature is hostile to man. Read More ...
- The story was a favorite genre of N. V. Gogol. He created three cycles of stories, and each of them became a fundamentally important phenomenon in the history of Russian literature. “Evenings on a Farm near Dikanka”, “Mirgorod” and the so-called Petersburg stories are familiar and loved by more than one Read More ......
- Realism and romanticism in the works of G. Gogol. G. Gogol's style is special, it consists in combining the real and the romantic, even mystical. In his stories "Mirgorod", "Evenings on a farm near Dikanka" we see a vivid, realistic image of the village, Cossack life, and together with Read More ......
- G. Gogol's story "The Overcoat" is included in a cycle of stories that are called "Petersburg". All of them are united first of all by the image of the city - one of the most beautiful, most exquisite and almost incredible. He, absolutely real, concrete, tangible, suddenly turns into a mirage, into a ghost town. I Read More ......
- Nikolai Gogol's story "The Overcoat" is part of a cycle of stories that are called "Petersburg". All of them are united, first of all, by the image of the city - one of the most beautiful, bizarre and almost incredible. He, absolutely real, concrete, tangible, sometimes suddenly turns into a mirage, Read More ......
- Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol's story "The Overcoat" played a major role in the development of Russian literature. She tells the reader about the fate of the so-called "little man". This topic is revealed at the beginning of the work. Even the name of Akaki Akakievich itself can be perceived as a result of the rewriting. Took Read More ......