What is the meaning of the mystical ending of the story by N.V. Gogol's "The Overcoat"? The ideological meaning of the fantastic ending of Gogol's story The Overcoat

Ne quid falsi audeat, ne quid veri non audeat historia.
M.T. Cicero

(Let history be afraid of any lie, let it not be afraid of any truth.
M. T. Cicero)

Gogol uses science 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 tears off the overcoats from passers-by. The same ghost almost scared the “significant person” to death when he grabbed the general by the collar and demanded the general’s overcoat for himself 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 realistic: the same robbers who took off Akaki Akakievich’s overcoat at night continue their trade - they deftly rip off overcoats from passers-by at the Kalinkin Bridge. It was this night robber, tall and with a mustache, who menacingly asked the frail guard: “What do you want?” - and, showing a huge fist to intimidate, he calmly walked towards the Obukhov Bridge. The second interpretation of the ending is mystical, as it is associated with a ghost. One of Akaki Akakievich’s colleagues recognized the recently deceased titular councilor as the ghost operating at the Kalinkin Bridge. But this ghost shakes its finger at fleeing passers-by and quite realistically sneezes from the guard’s strong tobacco. The delicious sneezing of a 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 remorse, is morally ready for retribution, which overtakes him at the right moment. Having cheered up with two glasses of champagne, he drove along a deserted street late in the evening. A strong wind played with the collar of his overcoat: it either threw it over his head, or raised it like a sail. And then, through the winter darkness and blizzard, he felt a “significant person” that someone grabbed him very tightly by the collar. Turning around, he noticed a short man in an old, worn uniform, and not without horror recognized him as Akaki Akakievich. (...) The poor “significant person” almost died. (...) He himself even quickly threw his overcoat off his shoulders and shouted to the coachman in a voice that was not his own: “Go home at full speed!” 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 ghost’s attack, 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 deliberately does not clarify the ending at all.” Gogol in his works often uses understatement as an artistic device, take, for example, the endless legal battle about honor and dignity in “The Tale of How Ivan Ivanovich and Ivan Nikiforovich Quarreled,” or the “silent scene” in “The Inspector General,” or rushing into the incomprehensible gave a bird or three in “Dead Souls”, etc. It is noteworthy that the author-narrator himself does not identify the ghost with Akaki Akakievich, but always stipulates that he is passing on city rumors.

As has been noted more than once, Gogol in the story “The Overcoat” combined motifs that Pushkin had used before him in two of his works about the “little man”: the tragic loss of his beloved daughter in the life of a stationmaster - the loss of Akaki Akakievich’s overcoat, which in the hero’s dreams was compared to "friend of life"; the madman Evgeniy's threats to the Bronze Horseman - an explanation by Bashmachkin with a “significant face”, who saw “riot” (rebellion) in the insistence of the titular adviser. But is there really a rebellion in Gogol's story? Was it by accident or not that a mention appeared in “The Overcoat” about the Falconet Monument, whose horse’s tail was cut off, so there is a danger that the Bronze Horseman will fall?

Of the three interpretations of the ending given above, only the third - psychological - is important for the ideological content of the story. How did Akaki Akakievich’s clash with the “significant person” end at the end of the story?

Some literary scholars see the finale as a rebellion-protest of the “little man” against an unjust society. Akaki Akakievich is depicted as a man who, during his lifetime, dutifully bears his heavy cross. However, it was important for Gogol to show that determination and courage awaken in the intimidated Bashmachkin. True, these qualities appear in the hero after the resurrection - the ghost quickly dealt with the culprit of his misfortunes, taking away the general’s overcoat 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, being a humanist writer, Gogol wants to believe that self-esteem and determination lie deep in 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 life, is not capable of rebellion even after death. Retribution comes to a “significant person,” but not from the outside, but from his own soul. After all, the general, soon after “scolding” Bashmachkin, felt regret: the “significant person” was constantly thinking about the poor titular adviser and a week later he sent to Akaki Akakievich to find out “what he is and how and whether it is really possible to help him.” But repentance was late: the little official died. Therefore, although the ghost grabbed the general by the collar, the latter, in essence, himself gave up his overcoat to atone for his guilt. Thus, Gogol transfers Akaki Akakievich’s final confrontation with a “significant person” from the social to the moral realm. This interpretation is consonant with the writer’s firm conviction that moral regeneration of a person is possible.

So, the fantastic ending of “The Overcoat” helps to reveal the idea of the 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 unrighteous deeds. Moreover, Gogol, being an opponent of “rebellions” and “revenge,” considered moral retribution no less difficult than physical.

The previously mentioned hero of Dostoevsky’s novel “Poor People,” Makar Devushkin, did not like not only Akaki Akakievich himself, but also the ending of the story. Dostoevsky’s hero reasons like this: “And the best thing would be not to leave him to die, poor fellow, but to make sure that his overcoat is found, so that that general (...) would ask him back to his office, raise him to rank and give him a good salary salaries, so, you see, how it would be: evil would be punished, and virtue would triumph, and the clerk comrades would all be left with nothing. For example, I would do this..." In other words, the petty official Makar Devushkin wanted the story with the overcoat to have a happy ending in all respects.

Gogol ended the story in a different way - with a half-real, half-fantastic meeting of a “significant person” with the ghost of Akaki Akakievich. Thanks to the understatement of the ending, the content of the entire work deepens: “If Gogol had punished a “significant person” seriously, it would have turned out to be a boring, moralizing tale. Force him to be reborn - it would be a lie. If he had not clicked it, we would have left the book with a dissatisfied feeling. Gogol superbly chose the fantastic form of the moment when vulgarity became clear for a moment” (I.F. Annensky). Thus, the moral law triumphs at the end of the story, but this ending is completely different from the trivial happy ending that Makar Devushkin came up with.

The meaning of the mystical ending of N.V. Gogol’s story “The Overcoat” is that justice, which Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin could not find during his lifetime, nevertheless triumphed after the death of the hero. The ghost of Bashmachkin tears off the greatcoats of noble and rich people. But a special place in the finale is occupied by a meeting with “one significant person” who, after the service, decided “to call on a lady he knew, Karolina Ivanovna.” But on the way, a strange incident happens to him. Suddenly, the official felt that someone grabbed him tightly 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! It’s your overcoat that I need!”
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 overcoats from officials, Bashmachkin becomes a real hero in his own eyes and in the eyes of the “humiliated and insulted.” Only now Akaki Akakievich is able to stand up for himself.
Gogol resorts to fantasy in the last episode of his “The 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, it would be after he listened to the person standing in front of him.
Gogol in his story shows all the 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 resigned and humble, even after death.
Thus, in “The Overcoat” Gogol turns to a new type of hero for him - the “little man”. The author strives to show all the hardships of the life of an ordinary person who cannot find support anywhere or in anyone. He cannot even respond to the offenders because he is too weak. In the real world, everything cannot change and justice cannot prevail, so Gogol introduces fantasy into the story.

Essay on literature on the topic: What is the meaning of the mystical ending of N. V. Gogol’s story “The Overcoat”

Other writings:

Someone shouted to the doorman: “Drive! Ours doesn’t like ragged rabble!” And the door slammed. N. A. Nekrasov. Reflections at the front entrance By the beginning of the 1840s, N.V. Gogol wrote a number of stories on themes of St. Petersburg life. The St. Petersburg cycle opens with Nevsky Prospekt. St. Petersburg Read More ......
Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol’s story “The Overcoat” played a big role in the development of Russian literature. “We all came out of Gogol’s “The Overcoat,” said F. M. Dostoevsky, assessing its significance for many generations of Russian writers. The story in “The Overcoat” is told in the first person. We notice Read More......
About N.V. Gogol’s story “The Overcoat” The “Petersburg Tales” included the following stories: “Nevsky Prospect”, “Portrait”, “Notes of a Madman”, and after that “The Nose” and “The Overcoat”. In the story “The Overcoat,” Petersburg appears as a city of officials, exclusively business, in which nature is hostile to man. In the article Read More......
The story was N.V. Gogol's favorite genre. 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 St. 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 the mystical. In his stories “Mirgorod”, “Evenings on a farm near Dikanka” we see a bright, realistic image of the village, Cossack life and Read More ......
G. Gogol’s story “The Overcoat” is part of a series of stories that are called “Petersburg” stories. All of them are united, first of all, by the image of the city - one of the most beautiful, most refined and almost incredible. It, absolutely real, concrete, tangible, suddenly turns into a mirage, into a ghost town. I Read More......
N.V. Gogol’s story “The Overcoat” is part of a cycle of stories that are called “Petersburg” stories. 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 big role in the development of Russian literature. It tells the reader about the fate of the so-called “little man”. This theme is revealed at the beginning of the work. Even the name of Akaki Akakievich itself can be perceived as the result of rewriting. We took Read More......

What is the meaning of the mystical ending of N. V. Gogol’s story “The 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 overcoats from officials, Bashmachkin becomes a real hero in his own eyes and in the eyes of the “humiliated and insulted.” Only now Akaki Akakievich is able to stand up for himself.

Gogol resorts to fantasy in the last episode of his “The 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, it would be after he listened to the person standing in front of him.

Gogol in his story shows all the 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 resigned and humble, even after death.

Thus, in “The Overcoat” Gogol turns to a new type of hero for him - the “little man”. The author strives to show all the hardships of the life of an ordinary person who cannot find support anywhere or in anyone. He cannot even respond to the offenders because he is too weak. In the real world, everything cannot change and justice cannot prevail, so Gogol introduces fantasy into the story.

The meaning of the image of an overcoat in the story of the same name by N.V. Gogol

In “The Overcoat,” the social and moral motive of Gogol’s other, earlier stories unfolded. It lies in the thought of the riches of the human spirit, not destroyed, but only deeply hidden in the very depths of the existence of people, distorted by bad society. Gogol was guided by the idea that these values of the spirit, clogged with vulgarity, can, and therefore should, resurrect and flourish, albeit in some uncertain circumstances. This theme was expressed especially acutely in The Overcoat.

The main story of N.V. Gogol is the figure of the humiliated Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin, deprived of the joys of life. 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 a goal for which Bashmachkin is ready to self-restraint, to cut 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 a “little man” in a big city. The story depicts his struggle for existence, deprivation, and the inability to satisfy the needs of life, which include the acquisition of a new overcoat. Bashmachkin's routine work in the department cannot provide the smallest and most necessary. Therefore, the overcoat represents for this hero what he strives for. But, in addition, it shows how little this person needs.

Gogol depicts in his story how the most modest, most insignificant smile of fate leads to the fact that humanity begins to stir and awaken in the half-dead Akaki Akakievich. He doesn’t have an overcoat yet, but only has 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, whereas for years this hero existed not for himself, but for the meaningless work that consumed his existence. For the sake of his overcoat, Bashmachkin makes sacrifices. It is not so difficult for Akaki Akakievich to carry them, because he “nourished spiritually, carrying in his thoughts the eternal idea of the future overcoat.” It is very interesting that this hero has an idea, and an eternal one at that! Gogol notes: “From now on, it’s as if he got married...”. And then the author describes Bashmachkin’s state: “He somehow became more lively, even firmer in character... Doubt and indecision disappeared from his face and from his actions by itself... Fire sometimes appeared in his eyes, the most daring and courageous thoughts even flashed in his head: Should I really put a marten on my collar?

The courage of the renewing Akaki Akakievich’s thoughts does not go further than a marten on his collar; but it doesn't make me laugh. The marten is beyond the means of Akaki Akakievich; dreaming about it means dreaming about something characteristic of “significant persons” with whom it had never occurred to Akaki Akakievich to compare himself. But something completely different attracts attention. Just dreams of an unfortunate overcoat with a calico lining changed Akaki Akakievich so dramatically. What would happen to him and to all the downtrodden, humiliated and devastated if they were given an existence worthy of a person, given a goal, a scope, a dream?

Finally, the overcoat is ready, and Akaki Akakievich took another step forward along the path of resurrecting the man in it. Let “I didn’t buy a marten, because it was definitely too expensive, but instead they chose the best cat they could find in the store.” Still, the event happened. And in Akaky Akakievich we again see something new: he “even laughed”, comparing the old hood with the new overcoat, “he had lunch cheerfully and after dinner he didn’t write anything, no papers, but just sat on the bed for a little while.” Emotions, fun, sybaritism, and life without writing papers - Akaki Akakievich had never had all this before. Even some playful ideas stirred in the soul of this hero: on the way to visit, he saw a playful picture in the window of a store, “shook his head and grinned.” And on the way back, after drinking champagne at a party, Akakiy Akakievich “suddenly even ran up, no one knows why, after some lady who passed by like lightning and every part of her body was filled with extraordinary movement.”

Of course, Akaki Akakievich remains Akaki Akakievich despite all this, and the flashes of something new die out in him. But they exist, and it is they who will lead to the denouement of the story. We see the turning point when Akaki Akakievich was robbed, humiliated, and destroyed. Moreover, he is on the edge of the grave, delirious. And here it turns out that there were truly unexpected things hidden in this hero. He knows who his killer is, and little remains of his timid submission. Death frees a person in Bashmachkina.

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 his death, he himself began to instill fear in others. He scares a lot of people, including those who wear beaver, raccoon and bear coats, that is, significant people. All the indignation of this hero against the life he lived manifested itself after his death. And the key here is the image of the overcoat, the acquisition of which made it possible to see the human element in Bashmachkin. The overcoat was the reason for the whole protest of the little man against the existing order of life to manifest itself. We can say that the story contains life before and after the purchase of the 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 one to be revived to life by a person killed by reality.

The meaning of the mystical ending of the story by N.V. Gogol's "The Overcoat" is that justice, which Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin could not find during his lifetime, nevertheless triumphed after the death of the hero. The ghost of Bashmachkin tears off the greatcoats of noble and rich people. But a special place in the finale is occupied by a meeting with “one significant person” who, after the service, decided to “stop by a lady he knew, Karolina Ivanovna.” But on the way, a strange incident happens to him. Suddenly, the official felt that someone grabbed him tightly 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! It’s your overcoat that I need!”
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 overcoats from officials, Bashmachkin becomes a real hero in his own eyes and in the eyes of the “humiliated and insulted.” Only now Akaki Akakievich is able to stand up for himself.
Gogol resorts to fantasy in the last episode of his “The 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, it would be after he listened to the person standing in front of him.
Gogol in his story shows all the 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 resigned and humble, even after death.
Thus, in “The Overcoat” Gogol turns to a new type of hero for him - the “little man”. The author strives to show all the hardships of the life of an ordinary person who cannot find support anywhere or in anyone. He cannot even respond to the offenders because he is too weak. In the real world, everything cannot change and justice cannot prevail, so Gogol introduces fantasy into the story.

What does it mean to “live” for the main character of the poem M.Yu. Lermontov "Mtsyri"?

What does it mean for Mtsyri to live? It’s not seeing the gloomy walls of a 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 a storm, a thunderstorm, and obstacles. Not only in thoughts, but also in feelings, Mtsyri is hostile, alien to the monks. Their ideal is peace, self-denial, for the sake of serving a far-fetched goal, renunciation of the joys of earthly existence in the name of eternal happiness “in the holy land beyond the clouds.” Mtsyri denies this with all his being. Not peace, but anxiety and battle - this is the meaning of human existence. Not self-denial and voluntary bondage, but the bliss of freedom - that is the highest happiness.

To live for the main character of Lermontov's poem is to finally find his homeland, the place that he remembers from childhood. It is no coincidence that Mtsyri says that his whole life in the monastery in which he lived is nothing, and three days spent in freedom is a whole life for him. For Mtsyri, living is not only about finding your native land, but also about finding true freedom. The original tragedy lies in these searches. The Caucasus (the symbol of that very ideal) remains unattainable for the hero

Give an explanation for the actions of the hero Dan during the game on Majdanek and express your point of view. (Sergei Lukyanenko “Alien Pain”).

The problem of “other people's pain” Today in the world it is more relevant than ever: wars are going on, blood is being shed. There shouldn’t be “other people’s pain”; a person has no right to remain indifferent to someone else’s grief, because he is a HUMAN.

The action of the story by 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 of it, because as soon as they turn on the “restoration” program, a person appears in his original form, safe and sound. Electronic and computer games have replaced real life, weaned people from suffering, sympathizing, empathizing... The time has come for general fun, there is no reason for despondency.

But it seems so only at first glance. The main character Dan is not like everyone else. During the game at Majdanek (which is a former German concentration camp), he lost his temper and went out of character. He rushed at the SS men with his bare hands. And the game was called “Armed Uprising.” Everyone was stunned... Dan turned out to be a man, not a robot. He remembered what the SS men were...

Thus, the author raises another pressing problem in the story: the problem memory. Will the people of the future forget the fascist camps, the grief, the suffering of the murdered people? Will they really only play and have fun at Majdanek?

In the “future” the game has become synonymous with life... The girl I love asks a wild question for us today:

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.

“Pretending to control machines that have not needed driving 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 the next planet? There the Game will become reality...

I don't know. But where did it start, the Game?

She shrugged. Since people gained immortality, probably. Game 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 dramatization - on Pearl Harbor, where the water boils and once again ships sink, and bombers led by suicide bombers fall on the Kursk Bulge, where tanks bake with the earth and blood into one solid black lump; in Hiroshima, where the flames of an atomic explosion flare up again and again...

But once upon a time, for the first time, it was not a game! They couldn't play while dying for real! Something else was driving them into battle! They threw themselves onto the barbed wire of concentration camps not because it was very interesting! And Dan felt, almost felt this unknown, incomprehensible, when in the wonderful staging of Majdanek he looked at well-fed, well-fed SS men beating children... He rushed forward not because he wanted to ruin the game, to be original. He simply could not do otherwise. He almost got it! But they don’t want to or can no longer understand. The Game lasted too long."

He was killed by the evening of the second day. The house was stormed by Marines, Green Berets, Tang Dynasty samurai and an SS brigade from the Death's Head Division. They died, were resurrected, and went into battle again. And he shot, knowing that he had already been removed from the memory of the regenerating system...
And yet Dan won - he stopped the game.