Reader discussion: Dead Souls

Public reader discussion about Dead Souls by Nikolai Vasilevich Gogol.

As a new reader of literary fiction, what is suppose to be captured by the term 'Gogol-esque'? (context inside)

By turns_bridge2564

I was listening to an English major talk about Dostoevsky’s “The Double,” and they kept saying “gogolesque.” I know that’s obviously meant to point to Gogol, but since I haven’t read him yet, I’m not really sure what specific style or weird little traits they were trying to get at. I’m a big Dostoevsky fan, though, so I’m pretty curious how Gogol supposedly influenced “The Double.” Thanks!

Did anybody here enjoy Dead Souls by Gogol

By SamReads

This is my first time reading Gogol (Dead Souls in particular) and I’m honestly not having a great time. I’m not really into most of the characters at all—Plyushkin is the only one that pops into my head—and I can’t say I care much about the plot either. There are a few moments early on where some of the places and how Gogol talks to the reader are kind of enjoyable, but after that it’s mostly just not landing for me. I’m about 300 pages in, and I’m supposed to start the second book soon, but I really hate stopping halfway through and moving on… I know it’s a classic and I get that Gogol’s life while working on it was pretty brutal right up until the end. Still, I feel like when I open the book I’m basically staring at blank pages. So for anyone who actually likes it: what did you enjoy about it? Am I missing something?

From what you’ve read, is anybody truly beyond redemption? How is such a redemption achieved?

By KateReads91

Slight spoilers for Demons and Crime and Punishment. I’m asking this because I’ve been reading Dostoevsky’s Demons (I’m basically finishing it today), and it feels like a big theme in his books is redemption. Like, in Crime and Punishment, Rodion kind of resets himself through hard labor as a way to make up for the murder. But then at the other end, Chichikov from Dead Souls feels like he might be too far gone—he keeps saying he’ll do better, but it’s always just talk, and once things loosen up he slips back into his bad habits. Does anyone else see it that way?

Dead Souls - Criticism

By nebulatower

The Pevear bit that hooked me is the “inverted realism” line—like the words basically build the whole world of Dead Souls, not just describe it. I’m not sure I fully buy it, though. Is he saying Gogol’s just having fun with language? What made me think of it was how Chichikov reacts to stuff—especially in chapter 5 when he’s pretty thrilled about that gross nickname, and then later on with his whole obsession with what happens “in the future.” For example, in chapter 11 the narrator basically acts like the poem/novel only exists because Chichikov had that thought first. And in chapter 5, when he gets away from Nozdryov, he’s thinking about not getting killed and how that would’ve wrecked his chances to leave anything behind—no posterity, no honest name, nothing. At first these feel a little like logic tricks, but I kind of like what they do: they make you feel that the “real” world is tied up with the story being told, and also that the world we’re in could’ve been totally different if certain events hadn’t happened. Like, you can mourn all the versions that never get made, but at the same time it’s kind of exciting that language can create the ones that actually do exist. I haven’t read the Nabokov essay yet, but I really want to—so if anyone has, I’m curious how you connect his ideas to Dead Souls. Also, if there are other essays/books about Dead Souls (or general writing theory) that you like, I’d love suggestions.