In reading Gogol, I am curious to know the reason behind using the nose as the object lost by Kovalev, not the mouth, an ear, etc. Perhaps because it is one of the most noticeable features on the face and without it would be ’surreal’, but the purpose of a nose can affix itself with more than just existing as a respiratory aid. In relations to culture a nose can determine ones heritage (to an extent), symbolically the nose coincides with attitude and ego, both which I find very relevant to the story. I thought it served Kovalev right to lose his nose, not only does the central object on his face become an outstretched pancake but his egotistical attitude becomes distressed and he becomes very self aware of his akward physical appearance. Although the loss of his mouth would have been equally surreal and comical, I have an even more difficult time imagining that, as an object itself,walking down the street as a higher class employed citizen.
What I think to be intriguing is once the object of the nose is removed from its body it is surreal, just as a nose itself, but when attached to its proper place it is realist. why is this intriguing? because its a nose! It seems so simplistic but I suppose that is what makes it surreal.
In both ‘the overcoat’ and ‘the nose’ I was in hopes that there would be an obvious moral to the story, a happy ending, or even proper revenge on whoever deserves it, but both short stories ended (for me) in disappointment. If anything the moral of the story was that we are selfish and desire petty object that are of no true necessity and if we lose those commodities we turn into agitated beings that may die because we cannot live without that desire or if it is returned to our posession we learn no moral lesson of being happy with what we have already. Sounds quite dismal but reality.
Essentially through the satirical, comical shorts stories of Gogol’s ‘overcoat’ and ‘the nose’, his stories represent reality through the surreal.
-Jessica Hay
0 Responses to “Reality in Surreal?”