On the Multidimensionality of Akaki Akakievich, or Why There Is No Image of a “Little Man” in Russian Literature

The article revises the concept of the “little man” — both in relation to the character of Gogol’s short novel “The Overcoat” Akaki Akakievich, and in relation to other characters of the crowning works of Russian literature. Gogol’s character, as has long been noted, does not merely have a passive role, he is significantly different from what was conveyed by the Marxist cliché — “typical characters in typical circumstances,” which denotes the so-called “critical” realism. The article emphasizes the atypical features of Akaki Akakievich, indicating his multidimensionality, irreducibility to a “type.” The romantic plot line in Gogol’s depiction of his character has already been noted, as well as the hagiographic tradition, while the tradition of “foolishness for Christ” in relation to this character has not essentially been considered. The article polemically rejects the most recent attempts to condemn this character, which stem from the literalist and legalistic attitudes of applying criteria alien to fiction. The interpretation of the essence of the character is connected with the receptive activity of researchers: in one case, he serves as a kind of one-dimensional “illustration” of sociological ideas about the “proper” position of a writer in relation to historical Russia (in this case, the multidimensionality of a person’s depiction is reduced to the representation of a “type”), in another case, a legalistic “measure” that is clearly not implied by Gogol, is applied to him. In both cases, there is no genuine understanding. Not only Akaki Akakievich, but also other characters of the crowning works of Russian literature resist the researchers’ desire to “objectify” them. The concept of the “little man” does not define the main concept in Russian literature, it not only obscures the meaning of its works, but also leads researchers down a false path in their interpretation, presenting the secondary and marginal as the main and essential. The main vector of Russian classics is not “humanistic”, but Christian. While complicated by the paraphrastic connection of Orthodox tradition with European culture, at its heart, Russian classics are still successors to the specifically Orthodox tradition, within which there can be no “little man”, for it is Christocentric.