Wednesday, December 11, 2019
Due Monday, December 16th - "We all came out of Gogol's overcoat...One day you will understand."
Directions: Please read "The Overcoat" by Nikolai Gogol. Comment on the story using 2-3 direct quotations from the text in your response. Think about the line Ashoke quoted from Dostoevsky, "We all came out of Gogol's overcoat. One day you will understand." Given what you understand of the short story, below, what do you think Lahiri meant in using this quotation as an allusion? What clues do you see in the stories? How does it show a correlation between name and self? What does that mean for Gogol Ganguli and his change of name? How does it add a richness to your understanding of Lahiri's work? I look forward to your responses.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Nikolai Gogol reminds me of Oscar Wilde in that they both use absurdity to criticize the social culture and hierarchy. The name Akakiy Akakievitch in itself is completely absurd and yet it determines his social status for the rest of his life. When he was being christened, “he wept and made a grimace, as though he foresaw that he was to be a titular councillor,” which is essentially a government worker with a title that holds no real authority. At work, he was not even acknowledged because of his insignificance as a person. While the name Gogol is not exactly absurd, it is unusual in the American culture and it makes Gogol feel lowly about himself. He does not see how he is supposed to fit in with his American friends, find a girlfriend, and get a professional job with the name Gogol. His decision to change his name to Nikhil is his way of hiding his true self and his Indian heritage. Akakiy Akakievitch used his new overcoat to be recognized in a society that only cares about outward appearances. When he went to the sub-chief’s party, his coworkers “received him with a shout, and all thronged at once into the ante-room, and there took another look at his cloak. . . . Then, of course, they all dropped him and his cloak, and returned, as was proper, to the tables set out for whist.” Akakiy was so excited to finally be accepted by his coworkers, but it did not last long. Gogol’s “overcoat” is listening to heavy metal music, doing drugs and trash-talking, and he does these things because he wants to be as American as possible and as little Indian as possible. For Gogol, coming out of his overcoat would be to first realize that it is futile to try to ignore a large part of his identity, and then reflect outwardly who he is on the inside. Now that I have read “The Overcoat,” I understand what Jhumpa Lahiri is alluding to in “The Namesake,” as well as in the title itself.
ReplyDeleteAt a young age, Gogol appreciated his name. From the amazement that his name was written on the spines of books or posters at the airport, Gogol refused to accept that his ‘good name’ was Nikhil, and that he was to be called such at school and in the world beyond his family. Such is the case with Akakiy Akakievitch, who sees no harm is continuing to wear his ‘cape,’ even though the clock was old and worn. Even after going to Petrovitch and finding out that his cloak was impossible to mend, Akakiy Akakievitch went to his tailor a second time and “was still for mending it; but Petrovitch would not hear of it” (Gogol). There is something very comforting in the known, and change was not something Akakiy Akakievitch was a proponent of. His cloak was a major component of his personality, something Akakiy Akakievitch was ridiculed for, but as time passed, he wished to rid himself of. His pensive thoughts about the style of the cloak spoke to his choice of a new character, who Akakiy Akakievitch would become, and how he was to be viewed by the rest of the world. However, his new makeover failed to actually metamorphose his personality, and at the party, Akakiy Akakievitch “halted very awkwardly in the middle of the room, wondering what he ought to do” (Gogol). The robbing of his fancy new cloak proved that Akakiy’s façade was clearly false, and could be obviously torn away. Nikhil was the cloak behind which Gogol cowered. Drugs, harsh music and the rejection of his family values didn’t change Gogol, nor did changing his name to what it would have been. Gogol was to have a day of reckoning, to which Nikhil was to be ripped off, and nothing within would have changed. For Akakiy, the new cloak meant death, for he had embraced what he was not, and had chased materialistic possessions as a source of happiness, and lost his contentless he had once had. Opportunity does this: a new beginning could be had, where one can blend in, be popular and be happy, but people don’t really change.
ReplyDeleteThe most interesting part of “The Overcoat” was the pursuit of the new overcoat. When Akaky is saving up in order to buy the overcoat, his mood changes. It is described as “From that time forth his existence seemed to become, in some way, fuller, as if he were married.” A similar change in mood comes over Gogol when he decides he will change his name. He is at his most passionate when he is complaining about his name. These complaints are to Gogol what saving money is to Akaky. Both actions give purpose to the characters. However, once these characters achieve their goals their short lived passion runs out. While Akaky eventually dies as a result of a sickness that he receives after his coat is stolen, Gogol becomes to lose his identity when he sheds his old name. In both instances the character loses his identity when his goal is achieved. This may seem like a depressing message, but a more optimistic view of this could be that every goal we achieve changes who we are, and that the journey is often sweeter than the reward. I believe that reading “The Overcoat” exposed this meaning behind Gogol’s change in name. Without “the Overcoat” Lahiri’s message seems to be more about the relationship between one’s personality and name. However, “The Overcoat” showed me the connection between the end goal and one’s identity. “The Overcoat” spoke more to one’s purpose and change in identity, while “Gogol” related more to the characteristics that we associate with our attributes.
ReplyDeleteAkakiy is shown to be different from his colleagues and most men of his age group. Despite his positive qualities, he is mocked for his exterior, his overcoat according to this quote, “You must know that Akakiy Akakievitch's cloak served as an object of ridicule to the officials: they even refused it the noble name of cloak, and called it a cape” He shares parallels with Gogol, where students ridicule him for an external quality like his name. Gogol tried to escape this mistreatment by acting out in other ways like “Americanizing” himself by doing drugs with his friends and abandoning traditional Indian values. He finally gods as far as to change his name to Nikhil. The same way, Akakievitch tries to get a new coat made, “Two or three months more of hunger and Akakiy Akakievitch had accumulated about eighty rubles” needed to purchase the coat. For both, this yields great results for the short term. In Akakiy’s case, his coat is eventually stolen and he shown to be that same timid mistreated man again. The quote can be connected to this scenario. When Gogol’s father quoted Dostoyevsky, saying “we all come from Gogol’s overcoat” he means that all have the same interior qualities no matter how hard they try to change the outside to appease others. Akakyiy’s true qualities shine through from this quotation: “[…] relate at times some bits of gossip which a Russian man can never, under any circumstances, refrain from, and, when there is nothing else to talk of, repeat eternal anecdotes about the commandant to whom they had sent word that the tails of the horses on the Falconet Monument had been cut off, when all strive to divert themselves, Akakiy Akakievitch indulged in no kind of diversion.” In the same way, Gogol is inquisitive and smart, and he does not need to appease American society for the sake of a name because, eventually, their opinions will not matter in the future.
ReplyDeleteThe allusion to Gogol’s work says more about Lahiri’s character development that relate to the work as a whole. When I was reading along, I could see why Gogol’s father enjoyed the book and felt that my father, too, would read this type of literature and try to quote some inspiring part of it to me as an urge to reform my “teenage angst.” No matter, I love him for that, the family dynamics in Lahiri’s short stories hold true for me at certain points and I enjoy the cultural representation.
This was such a bizarrely delightful piece, especially due to the way it’s told. As opposed to telling the story from a character’s perspective or having a neutral voice, Gogol chooses to tell the story as if it is a myth passed down by generations of Russians before him. He makes the audience aware of himself as the narrator in the beginning lines, which start off by saying “In the department of—but it is better not to mention the department. There is nothing more irritable than departments, regiments, courts of justice, and, in a word, every branch of public service… Therefore, in order to avoid all unpleasantness, it will be better to describe the department in question only as a certain department.” Gogol writes as if it is a stream of consciousness, changing his mind about what he has to say within four words of the start of the story. I really liked that, especially since it makes his writing seem much more like a campfire tale than a serious work of fiction. The story itself, while it was rather enjoyable for the first three quarters, had a pretty devastating end. Akakiy, who I pity so tremendously for his lack of relationships or social connections, just wanted to have a coat to stay warm. The poor guy spends countless hours trying to save up for a nice overcoat so that he won’t get sick in the cold, and the second he finally achieves his prize it’s literally wrestled away from him. I thought this might be related to the overarching message of Gogol’s story, which may be that working too hard can have serious consequences on your life, and that despite the benefits of working there are also plenty of downfalls, which include the absence of free time and rest. This is what leads Akakiy to his death since he is unable to get better after developing an illness. He spent so much time devoted to gaining this one thing that he was blinded to the more important things in his life that could make him happy. It was spooky to me reading about his fate, which is to wander around the streets of Russia as an apparition that steals coats. It was also rather saddening, since according to Gogol “St. Petersburg was left without Akakiy Akakievitch, as though he had never lived there. A being disappeared who was protected by none, dear to none, interesting to none… who… went to his grave without having done one unusual deed, but to whom… appeared a bright visitant in the form of a cloak, which momentarily cheered his poor life, and upon whom, thereafter, an intolerable misfortune descended, just as it descends upon the mighty of this world!”
ReplyDeleteIn the story, “the Overcoat” seems to have different meanings. Other then its actual means of protecting a person from the harsh weather, which is in the story, it’s also a symbol of status and belonging. In the beginning, Akakiy Akakievitch was a nobody. His coworkers would bother him, “jogged his hand and prevented his attending to his work, he would exclaim, “Leave me alone! Why do you insult me?’” They had no respect for Akakiy Akakievitch. But after he saved up all his savings to purchase a new cloak/ overcoat, people started to treat him with more respect. “Since he was a rather simple-minded and ingenious person, he could not help feeling glad at the praises showered on his overcoat.” People praised Akakiy Akakievitch for his overcoat, and since he has never received this type of attention, he doesn’t know how to act. Not only does the cloak brings Akakiy Akakievitch respect, but it also gives him a sense of purpose and belonging. This is similar to Gogol’s situation. Gogol always struggled to fit in. People bullied him for his strange name. Gogol’s decision to Americanize his name is like Akakiy Akakievitch’s decision to purchase the overcoat. They were able to fit in with their society. Gogol didn’t want people to make fun of him for having a Russian name even though he’s Indian, so he changed his name. And it’s so strange to think that some significant people in his life, like his girlfriend, don’t even know him by Gogol.
ReplyDeleteI thought that “The Overcoat” by Nikolai Gogol was one that was quite sad but very truthful as well.It reminded me of the novel 1984 because of its bleak, poor and strictly routine life. Even though the story took many drastic turns and what I believe to be multiple different meanings, I can definitely relate the meaning behind Akaky’s new overcoat to Gogol taking on a new name. Akaky used to be completely fine with his overcoat even with all of the harsh ridicule that he received from his coworkers and the narrator even states that, But Akakiy Akakievitch answered not a word, any more than if there had been no one there besides himself. It even had no effect upon his work”. The only thing that really pushed him to seek out a new overcoat was the harsh winters in Russia which is something that he could not escape. This reminded me of how Gogol used to be completely fine with his name and even went through his whole elementary through high school academic career with the name Gogol even though he probably was ridiculed by his peers on many different occasions. It wasn't really until he fully matured as an adult and questioned his path in life that he finally became really sick of the ridicule and ‘weirdness’ of his name that made him want to change it. It was his emotions and thoughts in his mind that made him want to change his name and his thoughts and mind is something that he could not escape just as Akaky couldn't escape the cold. I might be stretching the truth; I don’t know if this is just how I interpreted it.
ReplyDeleteFurthermore I believe that Akaky’s reaction to having to buy a new overcoat (something that is usually routine as our old clothing becomes too small or weathered) can also be related to Gogol’s big decision in deciding to change his name. The narrator exclaims, “At the word “new,” all grew dark before Akakiy Akakievitch's eyes, and everything in the room began to whirl round. For him, buying a new overcoat is a big deal and in Gogol's story changing your name is a really, really big deal too. They both hold the same level of importance. It is also interesting because even though Akaky gets his new cloak his joy and glory in all of it is only lived for a very short time. I believe that this can be related to the way that Gogol’s joy in being called Nikihil is quite a short moment in his life for he is stunned after hearing his father’s explanation.
In “The Overcoat”, Akaky’s mundane life seems to be uplifted by his goal of getting a new coat. When he is saving his Rubles to buy a new overcoat, he seems as if he has been given a new purpose in life. He deprived himself of a lot of the things he enjoyed to save his rubles, most notably dinner. “He even got used to being hungry in the evening, but he made up for it by treating himself, so to say, in spirit, by bearing ever in mind the idea of his future cloak” (Gogol 8). This section of the story reminds me of Gogol’s goal of changing his name. Both characters are presented with a problem, and both characters seek purpose in the solution to that problem. Akaky finds that his old coat is not suitable for St. Petersburg winters, the solution to that problem is to cut back on luxuries and some basic needs to afford a new coat, this gives Akaky purpose. Gogol’s problem is that he thinks his name sounds silly, and his solution is to change it. In “The Overcoat”, Akaky uses his coat as his new identity, because he felt purpose in getting this coat, he makes it an important part of who he is. The compliments Akakiy receives regarding his coat make him very happy, “Akakiy Akakievitch, although somewhat confused, was frank-hearted, and could not refrain from rejoicing when he saw how they praised his cloak” (Gogol 10). He begins to associate himself with the coat and wants to use it as a new identity. The same goes for Gogol in changing his name back to Nikhil. Gogol is hiding behind the name Nikhil because he wants people to view him as an American, he wants his identity to be an American, and he thinks to go by “Nick”, will cement the idea in people’s minds that he is American. I think that this is the Allusion that Jhumpa Lahiri intended when referencing the overcoat.
ReplyDeleteAkakiy treated this overcoat as if it were another person. Throughout the story, it alludes to Akakiy talking to himself as if another person existed. Before he got the chance to repair the coat, Gogol tells us of Akakiy liking “to argue with himself, sensibly and frankly, as with a reasonable friend with whom one can discuss private and personal matters” (7). When getting it replaced, he felt as if “his existence seemed to become, in some way, fuller, as if he were married, or as if some other man lived in him” (8). It even brought him into the higher, nicer part of society as one of his coworkers hosted a party in the rich part of St. Petersburg, and Akakiy stopped acting like himself. By putting on the coat, he was transported to the “official's quarter of the city, the streets became more lively, more populous, and more brilliantly illuminated… Akakiy Akakievitch gazed upon all this as upon a novel sight. He had not been in the streets during the evening for years” (10). His new coat allowed him to see things he wouldn’t have seen with his old cape. This coat was a part of him. Akakiy himself “came from the overcoat”, as Ashoke would say. Without his overcoat, Akakiy became a mess. He had lost a part of himself, which is why he was so disheveled. He gets sickly without its warmth. He is completely lost. It is then ironic that the ghost they see stealing coats is of Akakiy since that is all he had wanted.
ReplyDeleteWhen entering the party, Akakiy was in an entirely new element. He reminded me of Ashoke; both were in entirely new places thanks to the opportunities arisen from specific circumstances. Akakiy was at the party because of his cloak, and Ashoke went to America and had a son once he was saved from the train crash. Like Gogol, Ashoke’s son, and Akakiy, both had two names. Akakiy’s family name was Bashmachkin, meaning “shoe”. While this is in no way as regal as the names given to Indian children, there is a possible comparison. Then, Gogol’s pet name was supposed to be Nikhil, something that was never used, like Bashmachkin. In the end, Gogol did come out of the overcoat, both in namesake and in Lahiri’s choice of themes and subject matter.
This short story was quite moving. There is a certain character to Gogol’s voice that comes off as fiercely moral and indignant towards society. Within the piece he highlights the cruelties within the complex social hierarchies of his time. The way I interpreted the story was that life is a constant game of social tricks, illusions meant to show power and status, but what really matters in the end is being true to yourself and the ones you love, if you’re lucky enough to have them. Throughout the piece he specifies the types of cloaks each person wears, whether they be in the street, alone in impoverished dwellings, or socializing amongst the Russian elite. It is incredibly depressing how even though Akakiy Akakievitch is quite content with his simple life, his peers torment him over it. Seemingly a symbol of his socioeconomic status, Gogol describes that his cloak had, “become thin as gauze: the cloth was worn to such a degree that he could see through it, and the lining had fallen into pieces. You must know that Akakiy Akakievitch's cloak served as an object of ridicule to the officials: they even refused it the noble name of cloak, and called it a cape.” The piece is thoroughly heart-wrenching, for when he gains a new cloak, he feels joy beyond anything he had ever felt before. However, after having it snatched away in an instant, this joy burns out, and he dies shortly after. The piece begins to conclude with Akakievitch’s ghost, for “he dragged, without regard to rank or calling, every one's cloak from his shoulders, be it cat-skin, beaver, fox, bear, sable; in a word, every sort of fur and skin which men adopted for their covering.” I interpreted this to mean that no matter what your social status may be, death comes for all. To me this relates to “The Namesake” because it shows how Gogol is quite intelligent and sociable, yet separated from the world around him due to his name. By changing his name, he is donning a new “overcoat” of sorts, but how this new disguise will fare for him will be interesting to see.
ReplyDeleteI found this short story to be quite saddening. Partly because some of it was super relatable to me, and partly because the events that took place were truly horrifying. For example, from the start it is evident how Akaky's peers view him, evidenced by quotes such as "No respect was shown him in the department. The janitor not only did not rise from his seat when he passed, but never even glanced at him, as if only a fly had flown through the reception-room." This quote/simile shows the reader that Akaky is as irrelevant as a bug to them. There are a couple other quotes that I personally can say that I can relate to: "No one could ever say that he had seen him at any sort of an evening party," and "All this—the noise, talk, and throng of people—was rather wonderful to Akaky Akakievich. He simply did not know where he stood, or where to put his hands, his feet, and his whole body." I will be the first person to admit that I am not a huge fan of huge social gatherings/large events with lots of other people, so reading these lines definitely connected me to Akaky's character a bit. What annoys me the most about the events of this story is how even though Akaky seems perfectly fine with the life that he has, the caste system of sorts warrants that all those above him have to make fun of his low ranking, social awkwardness, and the simplicity of his lifestyle. When talking to him they say things such as "Do you know to whom you speak? Do you realize who stands before you? Do you realize it? Do you realize it? I ask you!" A quote that describes this well is "As for his rank—for with us the rank must be stated first of all—he was what is called a perpetual titular councilor, over which, as is well known, some writers make merry and crack their jokes, as they have the praiseworthy custom of attacking those who cannot bite back." Unfortunately, this theme of the powerful picking on the weak is a recurring theme not just in literature, but all around the world in real life. Reading about it over and over again definitely does not make it any easier for me to hear.
ReplyDeleteAfter reading “The Overcoat” I understand why Ashoke likes Gogol so much. Even after being translated into English the craftsmanship of the story is still beautiful. I loved how real he made the world of Akakiy. From the way he explained Akakiy’s name (the power of names seems to be a reoccurring theme recently) to the fact the department in which Akakiy works. In either case, a significant amount of work could have been avoided if Gogol had just chosen a regular name for his character or if he simply told the reader where Akakiy worked, but by including these little details much is added to the meaning of the story. I find the issue of where Akakiy works particularly paradoxical, for, in the story, we are told that the narrator chooses not to disclose Akakiy’s department because the narrator does not wish for any officials to be offended. This occurs in the exposition, the purpose of which is to expose the details about the character and the world that they live in. It is interesting then, that in choosing not to relay facts about Akakiy’s world Gogol portrays the society of the story, a society that values uniformity and despises dissent. I felt so badly for Akakiy; he is this obscure official walking around being cold with a weird name eating cabbage water for dinner and being made fun of. I was heartened when Akakiy was given a purpose through the need to buy a new coat. He became so determined and passionate, but then I realized that this too is incredibly sad. I think it is Gogol’s prerogative to comment on the state of society in that the best copy clerk, one who has never made a mistake and is undoubtedly excellent at his craft, can't afford a coat capable of keeping him warm. It is also interesting to me how Gogol focuses on two individuals who are excellent in terms of their profession. Akakiy is obviously gifted but another character, Petrovitch, is worth noting as well. Petrovitch is capable of creating a beautiful coat from scratch, a feat few others can accomplish. Petrovitch like Akakiy obviously cares about his work. He takes pride in the coat he made Akakiy, so much so that he runs outside to watch Akaiky wear it. It seems to me that Gogol wishes to comment on the state of society with these two individuals for both are ridiculed despite the fact that they work well. On a final note, I like the idea that Akakiy is a coat-stealing ghost. The notion is obviously absurd, yet because Gogol crafted his world in such a realistic way it seems that there could be a ghost haunting St. Petersburg.
ReplyDeleteMy understanding of The Overcoat in relation to The Namesake is that part of what forms Akakiy’s identity is his name, as he is a copyist whose name is quite literally a copy of his father’s. His naming is declared fate by his mother and the description of baby Akakiy having “wept and made a grimace.,” suggests name itself to have done something to the man rather than his inconspicuous life being something of a coincidence. Somehow, the quirk of Akakiy’s name has consigned him to mediocrity. His whole identity is based around copying, which is somewhat pathetic to be honest. But, hey, at least he’s content with life. The overcoat, however, gives him something more to life. It also sort of kill him too, which i'm not sure what that means. The most straightforward connection is that both Akakiy and Gogol are at least in part defined their names, although it happens to Gogol far less literally. I feel that Gogol, seems to be less affected by his than he thinks, though. His life does not seemed ruined. He is bullied yes, but he is not friendless. He seems to be successful enough too. For him his name is more about the lack of connection he has to it cultural or otherwise. His name seems trivial to his life, opposite to the meaning of Akakiy’s to his. The real connection for me is the titular overcoat and the name Nikhil. They both become defined by the change in their lives. Rather than the same person with a different appearance/name, they become different people entirely, consciously or not.
ReplyDeleteLahiri’s purpose of the allusion of “The Overcoat” in “Gogol” is to demonstrate that everyone struggles at one point or another but it is how one faces these struggles that matters. Throughout the entirety of “The Overcoat” all Akakiy Akakievitch wants to do is fix his old cloak, buy his new cloak, protect his new cloak, and find his new cloak. Everything seems to come back to his cloak regardless of what he is doing. To Akakiy, his cloak is more than just an ordinary cloak, but rather his one in only friend. Despite being “baggy and ugly” he values it just the same unlike his coworkers who use his cloak “as an object of ridicule” refusing to call it “ the noble name of cloak” referring to it as a cape instead. In most cases, if someone is being made fun of or bullied regarding a certain item, they tend to want nothing to do with it however Akakiy refused to give in to the pressures. Instead, he dedicated his life to his cloak and obtaining enough money to be able to purchase a new one. He didn’t have many friends, but he did have the joy of being “in some way, fuller, as if he were married… bec[oming] more lively”. Akakiy’s cloak eventually lead to his downfall but life is not about how it ends but rather how you enjoy your life. This is why Lahiri included the allusion of “The Overcoat” in “Gogol” because the joy Gogol brought his family is more than any pain or experience they had ever encountered.
ReplyDelete"The Overcoat" is a short story by a Russian author Nikolai Gogol, published in 1842. It recounts the story of the life and death of titular councillor Akaky Akakievich. Akaky does enjoy his repetitive and bland life as a titular councillor. When his old coat is worn out, he is heartbroken that it is beyond salvage. Soon, he becomes fascinated by the idea of a new coat that he even feel his life is more complete. Akaky puts all of his savings and every penny he could save into this new coat to the point of fervor. He even “[walks] as lightly as he could, and as cautiously, upon the stones, almost upon tiptoe, in order not to wear his heels down in too short a time.” When he received his coat, Akaky feels that it is “probably the most glorious day in Akakiy Akakievitch's life.” He gains attention from his co-workers and is even invited to a dinner party because of his new coat. Unfortunately, he is robbed of his new coat one night and lost his faith in life. In the end, Akaky dies of severe fever when he was robbed of the coat and exact revenge upon others.
ReplyDeleteLahiri, the author of the Namesake, meant that Ashoke can understand his son’s fervor pursue of American culture while hoping that he won’t forget his culture and origin. Ashoke named his son Gogol as a representation of the unchangeable part of his origin: Bengali culture. When Gogol begins to pursue the American culture in his teenage years, he despises his name and becomes ashamed of it since it embodies a part of him. Growing further apart from his parents, Gogol even decided to change his name to Nikhil in order to sound more American. This change signals Gogol’s change of mindset and identity. Gogol hopes to rewrite his immutable imprint of Bengali culture. His fascination and pursuit of American culture is similar to Akaky’s longing for his new coat. Ashoke, on the other hand, hopes that Gogol will not forget his cultures in India. Ashoke uses the famous quote from Dostoevsky, "We all came out of Gogol's overcoat,” when he gives a birthday present to his son. Ashoke hopes that Gogol will not be crushed like Akaky without his new coat when his American identity is lost.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteWhile we may live lives with little purpose to others it is the happiness each moment brings us that matters in the end. The only worth of people in his eyes are their social status and he used this as a guide for how to treat people.Others look at us and judge us from where we are placed in society, how much we have accomplished, and what we own, but we have the power to look at our own self from the inside. Akakiy found his self worth working towards a goal and succeeding to bring meaning into his life, even though it did not matter to anyone else how hard he worked. When are lives end our legacies eventually will, no matter how many people we knew or what kind of influence we had, but we exist to make ourselves happy in the moment. “A being who bore meekly the jibes of the department, and went to his grave without having done one unusual deed, but to whom, nevertheless, at the close of his life appeared a bright visitant in the form of a cloak, which momentarily cheered his poor life, and upon whom, thereafter, an intolerable misfortune descended, just as it descends upon the mighty of this world.” (Gogol) While our happiness can leave as quickly as it comes, it matters that it existed and it will exist again.
ReplyDeleteGogol is embarrassed by his name and thinks it is too childish to be signed on official documents like his college diploma, but this mindset was before he learned the meaning behind his name. In our society we are judged and we judge others based off of what they look like and their status and our name is the first indicator of both of these. The prominent personage does things for others not out of empathy or good morals, but instead to further his own image. His insecurities and arrogance cause him to look for ways to add more power and prestige to his life. “If he chanced to be amongst his equals he was still a very nice kind of man, a very good fellow in many respects, and not stupid; but the very moment that he found himself in the society of people but one rank lower than himself he became silent;” (Gogol)
At first, I was very confused by the quote “We all came out of Gogol's overcoat. One day you will understand.” I still am, slightly.
ReplyDeleteI think that Akakiy Akakievich is a very lonely person - he reminds me a lot of Winston from 1984, extremely focused on one part of his life, having a set way of being. All he cares about is his overcoat - what condition it’s in, where it is. He never cares about himself- how he looks in it, if it keeps him warm, if it’s in style. Akakiy is so focused on making sure that this small part of his life is secure, and in doing so forgets to pay attention to more important things, such as his health and happiness.
This was such an important novel/short story at the time it was published in Russia that it had a large influence on the writings of other Russian writers. This takes to quote to a literal level, saying that all writers “came out of Gogol's overcoat,” were inspired by the piece and aspired to accomplish something just as great with their own pieces.
Livia
DeleteApart from its very sad ending, this story was very interesting. Akaky Akakievich Bashmachkin was a poor man with a strong passion for his job to the point where his job brought meaning to his lonely life. This story would’ve been very short if Akaky’s coat were to still keep him warm but since the coat didn’t fulfill this basic need, his desire for a new fancier one overcame his passion for his work. This new apparel changed him, he no longer paid no mind to his appearance as he became “conscious every second of the time, that he had a new overcoat on his shoulders; and several times he laughed with internal satisfaction". The coat began to change him and bring him to another social status. Now, he was interacting with his coworkers and was beginning to be noticed. After his coat was stolen, Akaky became dissatisfied with his life as he went back down the social ladder. After experiencing what it's like at the top, Akaky began to associate his worth and life meaning with his coat to the point in which it led to his demise. Both Jhumpa Lahiri and Nikhil Gogol develop characters that start off with a sense of pure contentment with their lives. Gogol’s happiness was from his name while Akaky’s derived from his passion for his job. This pure content soon diminishes as each character begin to derail with what makes them happy. Akaky becomes materialistic while Gogol is greatly influenced by American culture to the point in which his namesake becomes a burden. Both characters seem to lose a part of their identity when they begin to conform to societal standards.
ReplyDeleteIn The Overcoat by Nikolai Gogol, the main character Akakiy Akakievitch cape and overcoat become representative in the process of building his identity, much like Gogol’s names in The Namesake. When Akakiy hears that his cape cannot be fixed and that he needs a new one, “The word “new” made Akakiy's eyes cloud over and everything in the room began to swim round.” He saves up for a new overcoat to stay warm in the cold weather, but also to change the way the world views him. With a new coat that Akakiy believes will elevate his status in society and also increase his sense of belonging. The story has a tragic end in which Akakiy’s coat is stolen from him, and his old cloak is unable to withstand the cold. With a different name and coat, Nick and Akakiy were able to feel as though they fit in with society, however Akakiy did not know how to act with the attention he was getting, and Nick felt as though a part of him was missing. An identity is created by the things that make each person different, not about what these characters do to make themselves similar to everyone else in their world. When Gogol’s father tells him that “We all come out of Gogol’s overcoat” he means that many will try to change themselves in order to fit in. However, changing one’s self from their true identity will end in defeat, as it did in The Overcoat.
ReplyDeleteFor my previous blog post about Gogol I actually read a summary of “The Overcoat” and connected the two stories, so this blog post may seem a little redundant. To me Akaky’s new and old overcoat are representative of two things: our inherited background, and our public image. Just as Akaky’s life as a government clerk is dull and worn, so is his coat. When presented to his tailor, it is deemed as “impossible to mend” Similarly, if we were to view Lahiri’s story in light of my analogy, Gogol’s inherited background is rejected by American society the way Akaky’s old overcoat is by the tailor. Both Akaky and Gogol are eager to change their outward appearances to fit into their respective societies. Beyond my analogy, both Jhumpa Lahiri and Nikolai Gogol assert that conforming to your surroundings at the cost of your own identity comes at a cost. This is reflected by Gogol racing to repatriate himself after his father’s death, and Akaky being beaten to near death on the streets.
ReplyDeleteAs a brief side-note: Some quick research led me to a different interpretation of the quote, “We all came from Gogol’s overcoat.” The story itself and Nikolai’s other work have been acclaimed as very influential works in terms of Russian literature at the time, so in another sense, many following Russian authors and their work stem from Gogol’s overcoat.