We all came out Gogol's overcoat
The authorship is erroneously attributed to F. M. Dostoevsky, who once uttered this phrase in a conversation with the French writer E. de Vogue. The latter understood it as the writer’s own passions and cited it in his book “Russian Novel” (1886).
But in reality, these words belong, as proved by the Soviet literary critic S. A. Reiser (see: Questions of Literature. 1968. No. 2) to the French critic Eugene Vogüe, who published an article about Dostoevsky in “Rftvue des deux Mondes” (1885. No. 1) . In it, he spoke about the origins of the work of this Russian writer.
In its present form, this expression came into circulation after Eugene Vogüe’s book “Modern Russian Writers. Tolstoy - Turgenev - Dostoevsky" (Moscow, 1887).
Used: to characterize the humanistic traditions of classical Russian literature.

Encyclopedic Dictionary winged words and expressions. - M.: “Locked-Press”. Vadim Serov. 2003.

See what “We all came out of Gogol’s overcoat” is in other dictionaries:

This term has other meanings, see Vogüe (meanings). Eugène Melchior vicomte de Vogüé ... Wikipedia

France- (France) French Republic, physical geographical characteristics of France, history of the French Republic, Symbols of France, state and political structure of France, armed forces and the French police, French activities in NATO,... ... Investor Encyclopedia

I. INTRODUCTION II. RUSSIAN ORAL POETRY A. Periodization of the history of oral poetry B. Development of ancient oral poetry 1. The most ancient origins of oral poetry. Oral poetry creativity ancient Rus' from the 10th to the middle of the 16th century. 2.Oral poetry from the middle of the 16th century to the end... ... Literary encyclopedia

- (1809 1852) one of greatest writers Russian literature, whose influence determines its modern character and reaches to the present moment. He was born on March 19, 1809 in the town of Sorochintsy (on the border of Poltava and Mirgorod districts) and... ... Large biographical encyclopedia

The request for "Gogol" is redirected here; see also other meanings. Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol Photo portrait of N. V. Gogol from the group daguerreotype by S. L. Le ... Wikipedia

Gogol, Nikolai Vasilievich The request “Gogol” is redirected here; see also other meanings. Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol Birth name: Nikolai Vasilievich Yanovsky ... Wikipedia

The request for "Gogol" is redirected here. See also other meanings. Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol Birth name: Nikolai Vasilievich Yanovsky Nicknames: V. Alov; P. Glechik; N.G.; OOO; Pasichnik Rudy Panko; Rudy Panko; G. Yanov; N. N.; ***... ...Wikipedia

The request for "Gogol" is redirected here. See also other meanings. Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol Birth name: Nikolai Vasilievich Yanovsky Nicknames: V. Alov; P. Glechik; N.G.; OOO; Pasichnik Rudy Panko; Rudy Panko; G. Yanov; N. N.; ***... ...Wikipedia

The request for "Gogol" is redirected here. See also other meanings. Nikolai Vasilievich Gogol Birth name: Nikolai Vasilievich Yanovsky Nicknames: V. Alov; P. Glechik; N.G.; OOO; Pasichnik Rudy Panko; Rudy Panko; G. Yanov; N. N.; ***... ...Wikipedia

Books

• Sentimental stories, Mikhail Mikhailovich Zoshchenko. For most readers, Mikhail Zoshchenko (1894-1958), both during his lifetime and today, is the “king of laughter”, the author of “The Bath” and “The Aristocrat”. Meanwhile, in the 1920s, a book appeared...
• Sentimental stories, Mikhail Mikhailovich Zoshchenko. For most readers, Mikhail Zoshchenko (1894-1958), both during his lifetime and today, is the “king of laughter”, the author of “Bathhouse” and “Aristocrat”. Meanwhile, in the 1920s, a book appeared introducing...

What have you read from Gogol? What are your favorite Russian books in general?

I read so much that it’s impossible to count everything. I love Gogol very much, especially “The Nose” and “The Overcoat”. " Dead souls", of course, a masterpiece. And all Tolstoy, Dostoevsky, Chekhov, Bulgakov. I read them more than once - I re-read them again and again. Recently I was lucky enough to write the preface to the new edition of Crime and Punishment in Turkish.

Also, of course, Pushkin: he is also very important for us, because he was in Erzurum in 1829 and published wonderful book- “Journey to Arzrum.” His poems are also excellent.

I heard that Pushkin is not so popular abroad, although in Russia he is called “the sun of Russian poetry.”

No, no, Pushkin is also important for us. In our minds, he is a symbol of the Russian soul, and it can be understood through “ Captain's daughter"and his other works.

I completely agree. You manifest yourself in a variety of fields: in music, in cinema, in literature, in politics. But I didn’t find any political thoughts in “My Brother’s Story.” In Russian literature, the political views of the author are often easily read, but this is not the case in your novel.

I also have books with political overtones. More precisely, works with political thoughts. But I'm not a politician. I became famous and could influence millions of people, especially the young citizens of my country. Political parties wanted to benefit from this, so they pushed me into it, begged me. I was a member of the party, in general I am leftist political views. Many leftists, democrats, in general modern people They grew up listening to my music and books, which is why they asked me to go into politics. But I didn't like it. I was in parliament and still receive offers, for example, to participate in presidential elections or join some party, but this is not my thing. Politics and art are two different things. As an artist you have to dig into your heart, but in politics you have to hide yourself and say only what you need to say. I couldn't put this puzzle together.

This is somewhat different from the situation in Russian literature, when many writers thought that they should promote political change and write precisely with the goal of changing the current situation in their homeland.

Yes, but we have general feeling- responsibility. They tell you: you are famous, you have followers, why don’t you do something? This is a classic question, rooted in the events of 1968. Gabriel García Márquez was also asked: why are you participating in political life? Just one day someone knocks on your door and asks for something. Of course, when there is a famine in Turkey, a brutal regime comes to power and a military coup occurs. We have to continue even now: for example, one of the Turkish presidential candidates [interview was conducted in early June, before the end of the presidential race in Turkey- approx. ed.] is in prison. How can you remain silent about this? There is a lot of turmoil in Turkey right now, a lot of upheaval, so we have to explain our ideas. Russian writers asked the same question in the 19th century: how can we save the country? Which way? In whom to believe: in the people, in their soul, in Orthodoxy? Who will save us?

Is there a special image of Russia in Turkish literature?

Each country has its own level of awareness and different ideas about other countries. The narrowest of them is the tourist's view. I looked at the country for a week and said: yeah, this is how it is. The media also gives a very narrow view. There are also many stereotypes and clichés about different states. Russia? Vodka. America? Cowboys! We need to go beyond these boundaries, and the role of literature is also important in this. She can describe the country and folk spirit much better than other media. For example, I read and watched a lot documentaries about the Second World War. But when I read Günther Grass, I felt the German soul. It’s the same with Russian literature: it helps you delve deeper into a topic. However, there is other literature that only exacerbates stereotypes, a kind of tourist, exotic literature. For example, if you are an Indian writer (especially in the West), write about poverty and cruelty. If you are from Africa, write about hunger; from Russia, write about communism. No, we are all human, and societies are similar everywhere. I was in Thailand and saw the same films that were in Istanbul, in Paris, in New York. Society is changing, but we still retain old ideas. Although now Russia is best friend Turkey, my only friend. During times Cold War they didn’t like her, and now everyone around them says: Russia is our only friend.

Why? Because of business?

Because of politics. Russian authorities help Turkey, they are in good relations. Türkiye is moving closer to Russia against America.

And for ordinary people? Do politics influence their opinion of the country?

No, it seems to me that everyone in the media praises Russia and Putin, so now the situation is like this. In any case, there is nothing wrong with this.

In the novel "Happiness" main character Uncle oppresses. It seems to me that this is something very patriarchal, when a woman is defenseless due to the closeness of the family. Where is the line between tradition and cruelty? Are you more of a traditionalist or a humanist?

There is only one answer to this question. I defend women's rights, especially in eastern Turkey. Our country is connected with many other civilizations, and if the northeastern part is drawn to Russian and Georgian culture, then our southeast is Arabic. This is a completely different culture, Mesopotamian. In my opinion, Turkey needs to move from East to West, from land to sea, from male dominance to women's liberation. I believe in a bright future for Turkey and this explains many of my ideas.

Tradition is magic word. Everyone thinks that traditions are good thing, but there are also many bad traditions that we need to get rid of. I heard this joke. One person says to another: “I am proud of my traditions.” The second one asks him: “What are your traditions?” - “Cannibalism!” Of course, this is just a joke. But there really are a lot of bad things, including ignorance, incredible pressure on women in Islamic culture. We need to fight this. In Judaism, religion is received from the mother, and when a woman gives birth, there is no doubt about the child's religious identity. But Islam comes from the father, so you need to be sure of paternity, which means locking the woman in a cage.

It seemed to me that you are a person with pro-Western views on politics and human rights. At the same time, the influence of Eastern culture is noticeable in your books: when I read “The Story of My Brother,” I saw parallels with the novel “The White Castle” by Orhan Pamuk. He also writes about brothers and sisters, about similar people and about those who try to understand themselves and others.

At the beginning of the twentieth century, one famous Turkish philosopher said: “We are people who are running on a ship to the West, but this ship is moving to the East.” There is a struggle between these two cultures because we are all very closely connected, and this connection means that you can cross the line, you cannot just freeze. We are everything at once, we have elements of everything. Our culture is very rich, but also very difficult to understand. In one Turkey you can find many Turkeys at once.

This phrase, first found in the French literary critic Eugene de Vogüe (I indicate the source so that you are not mistaken: the phrase does not belong to Dostoevsky!), reflects the significance of this short story in world literature.

It sounds pompous, but it is here that the main problem, which has worried people for many centuries. This problem " little man» . Of course, she is not alone, there are both moral and ethical problems here, but still in the foreground, as we would say today, is the average person. The "little man" problem

Theses, which I formulated in the form of questions and answers, so that it is more convenient for you to place them in your essay materials.

• Who is Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin, main character stories? A minor official in the office, engaged in copying documents, inconspicuous, quiet, not attracting any attention to himself. His colleagues mocked him, and the hero only said in response: “Why are you offending me?”, and behind these words one could hear: “I am your brother” (as Gogol writes).

• What does he have in life? Nothing. He lives in a small apartment, eats poorly, and all his interests boil down to copying papers.

• How does he himself feel about this? Akaki is not at all bothered by this. He didn’t know any other life, had nothing, and the hero is happy. Gogol does not hide the spiritual poverty of the hero’s interests and life.

• What shook the usual course of life of the little official? The overcoat was worn out into trash. Akaki stopped drinking tea in the evenings, wore a dressing gown so as not to wear out other clothes at home, walked on tiptoe so that the soles of his shoes would not wear out, and finally the money for a new overcoat was saved up. The new overcoat became the meaning of life.

• How did the hero’s life change after purchasing a new overcoat? He was noticed, Akaki was even invited to an evening with his superiors. But horror! When he returned, the overcoat was pulled off his shoulders. Akakiy tried to turn to the boss for help, but he kicked him out. The hero caught a cold, fell ill and died. The reader understands that Akaki died not from illness, but from grief.

Like this sad story. What did Gogol want to tell his readers? What is idea stories?

• The author condemns a social system in which a person is visible only when he holds a post.

The ending of the story

As you understand, “The Overcoat” is not an easy story. Its main mystery remains - the ending. At the end, Gogol talks about a ghost pulling off greatcoats, coats and fur coats from people. He calmed down only when he did the same with the boss, who rudely threw Akaki out into the street.

Why does Gogol need to introduce such fantastic story? Here literary scholars disagree. I don’t think it’s necessary to present all points of view; I’ll tell you about the one that, in my opinion, follows from the entire work of the great writer.

Earlier I said that for Gogol the main thing in a person was the soul, that he always looked beyond the social both in society and in man.

The ghost tearing off the overcoats from passers-by, powerful and terrible, is the soul of Akaki, who did not find goodness and justice in the world and escaped from the shackles..

This version belongs to the great Russian writer V. Nabokov.

Attention, Unified State Examination! The material on “The Overcoat” is an excellent illustration for texts with the problem of goodness, justice, mercy (the attitude of people around the hero and the system itself), on the other hand, an illustration for texts about the spiritual misery of a person focused on one material goal.

The material was prepared by Karelina Larisa Vladislavovna, teacher of the Russian language of the highest category, honorary worker of general education of the Russian Federation

This phrase appeared in a series of articles French critic Eugène Vogüe's "Modern Russian Writers", published in the Parisian "Two Monthly Review" ("Revue des Deux Mondes") in 1885, and then included in Vogüe's book "The Russian Novel" (1886). In 1877–1882 de Vogüe lived in St. Petersburg as secretary of the French embassy and was closely acquainted with many Russian writers.

Already at the beginning of the first of the magazine articles (“F. M. Dostoevsky”) Vogüe notices - still on his own: “... between 1840 and 1850, all three [i.e. e. Turgenev, Tolstoy and Dostoevsky] came from Gogol, the creator of realism.” In the same article the formula appeared:

We all came out of Gogol’s “The Overcoat,” Russian writers rightly say.

The more I read Russians, the more I see the truth of the words that one of them, closely associated with literary history of the last forty years: “We all came out of Gogol’s “Overcoat”” (my italics - K.D.).

In the first Russian translation of Vogüe’s book (1887), this phrase is conveyed through indirect speech: “Russian writers rightly say that they all “came out of Gogol’s “Overcoat”.” But already in 1891, in the biography of Dostoevsky, written by E. A. Solovyov for Pavlenkov’s series, the canonical text appears: “We all came out of Gogol’s Overcoat,” and here the phrase is unconditionally attributed to Dostoevsky.
S. Reiser believed that this was a “summary formula” created by Vogüe himself as a result of conversations with various Russian writers (“Questions of Literature”, 1968, No. 2). S. Bocharov and Y. Mann were inclined to believe that Dostoevsky was the author, by the way, pointing out that Dostoevsky entered literature exactly 40 years before the publication of Vogüe’s book “The Russian Novel” (“Questions of Literature”, 1988, No. 6).
However, in the reliable statements of Dostoevsky there is nothing similar to this idea. And in his Pushkin speech (1880), he, in fact, derives contemporary Russian literature from Pushkin.

Russian émigré critic Vladimir Veidle suggested that the phrase about the overcoat was uttered by Dmitry Grigorovich, “one of Vogüe’s Russian informants” (“Heritage of Russia”, 1968). Grigorovich entered literature at the same time as Dostoevsky, 40 years before the publication of de Vogüe’s articles, and also under the strong influence of Gogol.

Whoever the “Russian informant Vogüe” was, the word “we” in this phrase could only refer to representatives of “ natural school"of the 1840s, to which Tolstoy - one of the main characters of the Russian Novel - did not belong.

Those who wrote about the authorship of the saying did not think about its form. Meanwhile, before the translation of Vogüe’s book, the phrase “We came from...” was not found in Russian with the meaning: “We came from the school (or: we belong to the school, direction) of such and such.”
But it is precisely this turnover that we find in classic work French literature, and in a form very close to the Vogüe formula. In Flaubert's novel Madame Bovary (1856) we read:
He [Larivière] belonged to the great surgical school that emerged from Bichat's apron (sortie du tablier de Bichat).

This refers to the surgical apron of the famous anatomist and surgeon Marie François Bichat (1771–1802). Following Flaubert, this definition is invariably cited in France when we're talking about about the French surgical school, and often about French medicine in general.
To the translators of Madame Bovary, the phrase “sortie du tablier de Bichat” seemed so unusual that they simply threw out the “apron”. In the first (anonymous) Russian translation (1858): “Larivière belonged to the great surgical school of Bichat.” Translated by A. Chebotarevskaya, edited by Vyach. Ivanova (1911): “Larivière was one of the luminaries of the glorious surgical school of Bichat.” In the “canonical” Soviet translation by N. M. Lyubimov (1956): “Larivière belonged to the surgical school of the great Biche.” English and German translators did exactly the same with Bisha’s apron.

Possible with high degree confidence to assert that the formula “come out of (a certain article of clothing)” in the sense of “belong to the school of such and such” was created by Flaubert and two decades later used by de Vogüe in relation to Gogol. It is quite possible that one of the Russian writers told him something similar, but the verbal formulation of this thought was born in French.
In the 1970s, the phrase “get out of Stalin’s overcoat” appeared in emigration journalism. Since the late 1980s, he began to master the Russian press. Here are two typical examples:
“As they say, we all came out of Stalin’s overcoat. Moreover, many of us continue to look at life from under Lenin’s cap” (V. Nemirovsky, “Red, Green, White...”, in the magazine “Chelovek”, 1992, No. 3).

“...In the 80s, according to Kostikov and other apprentices of perestroika, (...) society came out of Stalin’s overcoat and elegantly wrapped itself in Gorbachev’s suit” (Valeria Novodvorskaya, “Thinking Reed Vyacheslav Kostikov”, in the magazine “Capital”, 1995, no. 6).
However, “overcoat”, “coat”, etc. have long been no longer necessary in this formula - you can come out of anything, at least from a square:
“We all came out of Malevich’s square” (interview with artist Georgy Khabarov in the newspaper “Top Secret”, October 7, 2003).

To the question The meaning of the words: “We all came out of Gogol’s overcoat?” given by the author Sag the best answer is In other words, we are all servile and downtrodden spiritually, we are all “little” people. Such as Gogol's main character of "The Overcoat" - Akaki Akakievich Bashmachkin.

Reply from Caucasian[guru]
The phrase “We all came out of Gogol’s “Overcoat”,” which has already become sacramental, although no less apocryphal, is attributed either to I. S. Turgenev or to F. M. Dostoevsky.
This phrase was recorded by the French writer Melchior de Vogüe (aka Vogue).
In "The Overcoat" Gogol shows how a person puts his whole soul without reserve into a thing - an overcoat. This side of the hero of the story, deserving not only compassion, but also censure, was noted by Apollo Grigoriev, who wrote that in the image of Bashmachkin “the poet outlined the last facet of the shallowness of God’s creation to the extent that a thing, and the most insignificant thing, becomes a source for a person boundless joy and destroying grief, to the point that the overcoat becomes a tragic fatum in the life of a being created in the image and likeness of the Eternal..."
Catchphrase“We all came out of Gogol’s “Overcoat,” which also applies to the imperial-liberal-Soviet model of the Russian Federation. “Leave me alone, why are you hurting me? “- asked the little imperial official, calling for social justice.
Used to characterize the humanistic traditions of classical Russian literature.
This is what they say about a stupid, narrow-minded, “empty” person, sometimes evil, irrepressible.

Reply from Tatyana Ryzhkova[guru]
Out of naivety in my youth, I believed that this expression meant the degree of Gogol’s talent as a prose writer. In other words, a list of wordsmiths who wrote good, modern prose, began with Gogol. Because Pushkin in this regard was, of course, weaker than Gogol. And she was offended for Lermontov. Because for me, he was still the first outstanding writer.
Well, it turns out I was wrong...

Reply from Kati Orlova[guru]
This phrase is used to characterize the humanistic traditions of classical Russian literature. After all main idea“Overcoat” is the biblical commandment “love your neighbor,” even such a small person as Bashmachkin.

Reply from ensilage[guru]
We all dress second-hand...

Reply from Albina Ivanova[guru]
In general, this is what Vissarion Belinsky joked. He meant "Russian mentality". In general, Belinsky did not like Gogol. Especially, I didn’t respect “Dead Souls”! What a nit!

Reply from GALINA[guru]
“We all came out of Gogol’s The Overcoat. These words are attributed to F. Dostoevsky.
Why everything? Because most people are just like that - small people with empty dreams.
If someone dreams of a new overcoat, and someone dreams of an island in the Mediterranean Sea, these are all phenomena of the same order. He described this back in XIX century N. V. Gogol.
The overcoat is the object embodiment human passions to things, the destructive craving for a dead object is a dream not worthy of being one. The official Bashmachkin, having achieved this dream, happy with the happiness of his little worthless soul, he loses his goal in life.
But on the very first evening, street thieves take off his precious overcoat. And for Bashmachkin, life is over! He dies of grief.
The ideals of the little man do not correspond to the ideals of humanism and Christianity.