Looking at Gogol and Tolstoy: What Makes a Writer a Realist?

Looking at Leo Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilych and Three Death, as well as Nikolai Gogol's The Nose and The Overcoat, we notice many differences between them. I will compare Leo Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilych and Three Death to Nikolai Gogol's The Nose and The Overcoat, in order to show why I consider L. Tolstoy a realist, whereas N. Gogol is not a realist.

In order to prove that Gogol is not a realist, but Tolstoy is, I will look at what both authors do with the plot, characters, language, and humor. One would expect a realistic writing to be structured in such a way that, by reading it, we can envision the identities of the characters and their ordinary lives as people who we meet in real life. There has to be a one-to-one relationship between the signified object in the book and the subject it represents in life.

The plot of Gogol's The Nose, appears to be realistic because, in the 19th century, it is possible to meet a person who is looking for something in St. Petersburg. However it is what he is looking for that is not real. Collegiate assessor Kovalev is the person who had his nose cut off, by the barber, Ivan Yakovlevitch. The reader knows that Ivan Yakovlevitch is a barber and that Kovalev is a collegiate assessor, we also know that both of them live in St. Petersburg, which makes it look realistic because both of them have a profession in life. Although, knowing their professions does not lead us anywhere because one would have to know much more about it than, simply, the title.

However, the fact that Ivan had cut off Kolvalev's nose and the nose was wearing clothes, running around on the streets of St. Petersburg trying to get away from his owner, and, actually talking, makes it very unrealistic. For example, "My dear sir, you speak in error," was [the nose's] reply. "I am just myself-myself separately."

Another reason I consider the plot unrealistic is because Gogol personifies inanimate object and gives it human qualities, for example he says that the nose "contracted its brows a little." Moreover, the main character of Gogol's The Nose, is a personified object, a nose.

Gogol describes his characters in such a way that they do not have a persona. Even though Gogol presents a description of his characters, he limits them to absurd and strange details or events in the characters' lives and does not give them a developed personality. The reader is manipulated into treating Gogol's characters as strangers about whom the reader, therefore, does not care.

Gogol uses an omniscient narrator in order to make the reader agree with all the unreal things that happen in the book. For example, "….to his astonishment, there was only a flat patch in his face where the nose should have been!" In reality, if a person would have his nose cut off, he would be in enormous pain and bleeding, and therefore, would notice it right away.

However, Gogol makes us believe that none of it happened, and the only feeling that the character had was astonishment because his nose was not there. This way, the reader, without questioning reality, simply agrees with what the narrator is telling him, assuming that this is true. One knows that such things do not happen in real life, and that, in a normal state of mind, one will immediately notice that a part of his body is missing.

In addition, I do not consider Gogol a realist because starting from the main character of this story, which is merely a nose, all of Gogol's characters have very weird descriptions. Gogol tells the reader that the main character, the nose "was clad in a gold-braided, high collared uniform, buckskin breeches, and cockaded hat."

This description is not enough when introducing the protagonist to the reader. The reason the description of the protagonist is important is because it helps the author introduce the protagonist to the reader, however, after Gogol introduces the protagonist, I still did not know him. In fact, I am in doubt about why Gogol introduces his characters, for they still end up having no personality.

For example, in the beginning, Gogol says that Kovalev was a collegiate assessor, but now Gogol says that he will call Kovalev a major, for this is what Kovalev called himself. When describing Kovalev, Gogol is content that Kovalev enjoyed walking on "….the Nevsky Prospect in an extremely clean and well-starched shirt and collar, and in whiskers…." Kovalev also says, "If even there had been something to take the nose's place! But, as it is, there's nothing there at all." One knows that nothing can appear in the place where there used to be a nose.

Gogol's characters make such statements that one would never hear in an ordinary life. I, as a reader, do not feel that I know this character. I do not know how to treat him and whether I should like him or not. This is definitely not how the characters of a realist work should be described. In order for Gogol's writing to be realistic, he would have to present more information on appearances, behaviors, personalities, feelings, and inner thoughts of the characters so that the reader could have a vivid picture of characters as human beings. All these examples show that Gogol is not a realist because of what he does with the plot.

I am inclined to believe that Gogol does not want the reader to relate, or to feel anything for his characters, moreover, he does not want the reader to judge his characters, for that reason, Gogol gives them no persona. Actually, this way the reader has no other choice, but to listen and to follow the omniscient narrator, rather than building his/her own opinion, or point of view.

Another reason I do not consider Gogol a realist is because of the way his characters are being presented and portrayed. As mentioned previously, the main character of The Nose, is an animated nose; the nose who considers himself a general, and runs around on the streets hiding from its owner. Gogol allots the nose with human qualities, so that the nose can talk, run around, dress up, and do more things that are, in essence, peculiar to human beings.

Another character, Kovalev, has no persona as well because Gogol limits it to some strange details that, Kovalev did. However, Gogol never tells the reader how he looked, how old he was, or any other aspects that the reader should know in order to create a vivid picture of what the character looked like. Basically, one can say that the reader does not know and never met this character. Therefore, the reader is uncertain about what to do with the information that Gogol provides. Even if this information is, in any way, important, the reader can not really relate it to the character because the character's values are not defined and the character is not identified in terms of an ordinary person.

Gogol also, for some reason, tells the reader that Ivan Yakovlevitch's last name was lost, which makes the reader think that he does not really know this character. Considering that Gogol greatly focuses on the last names of his characters, one can say that this character has nothing about him that Gogol would consider to be valuable for the reader to know.

Another reason, I believe Gogol is not a realist is because of the way his writing is structured. For example, in a realistic writing one will never find a sentence that is one paragraph long. However it is peculiar to Gogol's genius. For example, the sentence, "This again depressed the Collegiate Assessor….with a few sympathetic words the Collegiate Assessor's depression" (172-173), is too long and lasts for the entire paragraph. It is simply impossible to fit all ideas in one sentence; therefore, I consider it unrealistic. Gogol also has sentences that are a page long, which is merely an unrealistic way of writing.

Gogol also has proved himself as not a realist because of his comic. However, in The Nose, he is actually making fun of his humor. For example, Gogol was always known for assigning last names based on the identity of his character. The character's last name will closely resemble the characters personality, identity, or appearance, which ever one Gogol would mostly focus on.

A good example of Gogol's use of last names would be in Dead Souls, where he used such last name as Sobakevich, in order to resemble the character's clumsiness, rudeness, and negative in nature. Also, his first name was Misha, which, in English, means a bear, and; therefore, one could easily imagine this character as a caricature because this is the way he is being portrayed by Gogol. In face, Gogol is known for being comical and farcical to the extreme. This also indicates that his writing is unrealistic because his characters are reduced to caricatures.

Gogol's The Nose, shows how Gogol makes fun of that. For example, when Kovalev came to report that his nose ran away from him, he said, "It is my nose that has absconded from me." The official replied, "Gospodin Nosov?" Also, Gogol made fun of the stereotypical fact that in Russia, depending on what one's last name resembles, that is most likely going to be his/her nickname. For example, the official assumed that Kovalev is looking for a person whose last name is Nossov, or that has something to do with the nose, and that Kovalev used his nickname when he said "nose."

Gogol's The Overcoat, also shows that Gogol is not a realist. The plot of this story is realistic, but it is what Gogol does with it that is not. The main character, Akakii Akakievich gets his new overcoat stolen and dies of a heart attack. He also punishes people who took it away from him. This seems to be a realistic plot, with realistic people, in a realistic place, except for one detail; coming back as ghost, Akakii Akakievich revenges for his stolen overcoat. The ghost is actually present in the story, which makes the plot of this story unrealistic.

In fact, Gogol, himself, says that this story is unrealistic, "the story unexpectedly gains a fantastic ending" and this is the aspect that makes the entire plot unrealistic. This shows that Gogol is aware that this story was not realistic. However, he somewhat explains why it should have ended this way and why Akakii Akakievich comes back as a ghost. His explanation is so reasonable that I almost forgot that ghosts are not a part of real life, until I came back to my sense and thought that it is absurd to believe Gogol in this case.

Also, the plot is unrealistic because the ghost is not only present in the story, but it actually talks to human beings. For example, the ghost addresses the important personage, "I need your coat." Another aspect which seems to be unrealistic is the appearance of the ghost; in fact Gogol implies that the ghost's physical appearance is nothing as that of a human being. Gogol says that the ghost "showed such a fist as you never see on living men." Gogol also says that "the apparition was much too tall, wore huge mustaches." This description would only fit something or someone who is unreal. In fact, Gogol does not conceal it from the reader, but also says that the ghost "disappeared in the darkness of the night." One knows that such cannot pertain to real life.

The way Gogol went about naming the main character is very interesting and indicates Gogol's unrealistic approach of this work. Gogol said that when the mother of the main character was giving birth, she simply could not pick out a name for her son and, therefore, decided to give him the name his father has, Akakii. Basically, the main character does not have his own name; he has to have somebody else's. Also, Gogol says that he was born the 23rd of March, but besides the fact that Gogol says he is not sure about it, he does not mention what year the main character was born in. Therefore, the reader does not know how old Akakii was and the reader cannot rely on the information that Gogol provides because Gogol says that he is not sure about whether or not it is correct.

One would expect to know where the official works, but Gogol only says, "in a certain department serves a certain official." Also, Gogol mentions that from the minute the main character was born, "it was utterly impossible to give him any other [position]" because "he made a grimace, as though he foresaw that he was to be a titular councilor." Gogol does not provide any evidence for why and how this character got this job or how successful he was at it.

Another aspect that is important in order to realize that Gogol is not a realist, is that some of Gogol's characters do not even have a name. Instead, for example, one of them is referred to as "the important personage." I, as an avid reader, questioned the importance of this personage. However, Gogol, by using an omniscient narrator, avoids the reader questioning this information. I am inclined to believe that Gogol does this in order to also avoid the reader's judgment about the importance of this person, and simply agree to what he is saying.

This way the reader will not bother determining whether or not this personage should be considered important, but simply follow the statements that Gogol makes, without questioning it.

There also exists a "prominent personage," but Gogol never defines this character as well as does not have any description for him/her. In fact, the reader does not even know whether it is a male or a female, and therefore, it is almost impossible to relate to this character, moreover to care about him/her.

In addition, as a reader, I do not consider this character prominent, but I treat him/her as if he/she does not even exist. However, this is another example of Gogol's use of an omniscient narrator to avoid judgment of his characters. Although, one will never find such a description in a realistic writing; therefore, this is another indicator that points to Gogol's unrealism.

Another indication that Gogol's writing is unrealistic is that Akakii's family name was Bashmachkin. In Russian, "Bashmak" is a shoe. Gogol actually tells the reader this, "It is evident from the name that it originated in bashmack (shoe)." Gogol says that "all Bashmachkins always wore boots."

Gogol again is toying with the last names of his characters. Although, in real life, one would never rely on the last name in order to determine his/her identity or what he/she does in life. However, Gogol picks out some absurd detail of his character's life, exaggerates it, and assigns him/her a last name that closely resembles this absurd detail, so that the reader will not miss it, but will actually focus on it.

Another character who looks like a caricature is Grigorii Petrovich. Gogol shows that when Grigorii worked as a serf, he was called by his name, Grigorii. However, when he became an alcoholic, everyone started to refer to him as Petrovich. This is another stereotypical joke. Whenever one would read or tell a joke about alcoholics, the main alcoholic would almost always be Petrovich with a red nose.

This aspect presents Petrovich as a caricature. Even though Petrovich is an active character in this story, Gogol does not present a normal description of him. All the details that Gogol gives are absurd and contain nothing from an ordinary life of Petrovich. Gogol does not assign Petrovich any moral values in order for the reader to be able to determine whether or not he/she should be sympathetic towards Petrovich.

Petrovich's wife also has no persona. Here is what Gogol says about it, "unfortunately, little is known of her beyond the fact that Petrovich has a wife, who wears a cap and a dress" (6). Having this description is merely unnecessary because it does not give any idea about her as a person, but her as a caricature. In fact, I believe that if a caricaturist would draw her then this is how she would appear.

The Overcoat also shows that Gogol uses an unrealistic sentence structure. There is a sentence which last for one full paragraph. In this sentence Gogol talks about "gray Petersburg sky," "theater," "sacrifice of dinner," "some bits of gossip….anecdotes," and "[horses]" (4-5). There is no way that all of these elements could fit a grammatically correct sentence because there is idea per sentence.

Gogol's use of humor also indicates why I consider Gogol unrealistic in terms of his works. For example, the name Akakii sounds funny; therefore, the reader is manipulated into not treating this character seriously. Gogol provides no valuable description for the protagonist of this story, which is definitely not how the protagonist of a real writing should be presented and portrayed.

One way in which Gogol uses comic is the novel, is to direct the reader's interpretation of characters. Gogol's comical treatment of all these characters communicates to the reader that there is something absurd about them. Gogol also uses humor in order to reduce his characters to caricatures, with no real substance of character. I, as a reader, cannot treat a person who is presented as an alcoholic and has an appearance and the name of those from the anecdotes, seriously. Another funny element is the way Petrovich would come up with the price for his work.

He would "blurt out some outrageous price." Such outrageous that even his wife would say, "Have you lost your senses, you fool?" There is no doubt that such people, as Gogol describes in his work, exist, but these descriptions are stereotypical, caricature like, and present nothing about ones trivial concerns.

If one were to look at a caricature of a soldier or a guard, either one of them would most likely appear with a mustache, which is exactly how Gogol portrays them. Gogol does not go further with his description. This might manipulate the reader into thinking that all people who live in Russia are just like Gogol's characters and this would make Russia appear as a very farcical place. This serves as another example of why I do not consider Gogol a realist and also shows that Gogol uses comic to emphasize the appearance of his characters and makes them comical and caricature like.

I will now look at works of Leo Tolstoy in order to prove that he, unlike Nikolai Gogol, is a realist. I will first look at the plot of Tolstoy's The Death of Ivan Ilych in order to show that Tolstoy's plot is, to its full extent, realistic. The plot of The Death of Ivan Ilych involves transformation that the main character goes through when at his death door. This plot contains a huge psychological issue, to which all human beings can relate, death.

Tolstoy describes, in full detail, the stage of transformation that one may go through as well as gives a profound understanding of how one may perceive death. Being a human psychologist, Tolstoy focuses mainly on thoughts, feelings, as well as physical appearances, which makes it not only very interesting to read, but also easy to relate to. This is definitely how the plot of a realistic writing should look like.

Tolstoy beings the story by stating that Ivan Ilych died; and then progresses with the change that Ivan Ilych went through with his sickness back when he was alive. It also shows how Ivan Ilych changes towards his relatives because he is sick and they are not. For example, "It's all the same to them, but they will die too! Fools! I first, and they later, but it will be the same for them. And now they are merry…the beasts!" (127). Also Tolstoy says that "Anger choked him." It terrifies me, as reader, when I read, "Can this be dying? No, I don't want to!" (127). This is definitely an issue that one can relate to, which also aims to be realistic.

Tolstoy tells the reader the Ivan Ilych was relatively young, "died at the age of forty-five," and that he was "a member of the Court of Justice" (102). Tolstoy talks about Ivan's background, "studies with his younger brother at the School of Law," "finished his course well," he is also described as "capable, cheerful, good-natured, and social man" (103). All of these aspects point to the main character's, well developed by Tolstoy, identity. Unlike Gogol's , this information is important because it allows one to find out that Ivan Ilych was a nice, amiable, and responsible person. Therefore, the reader can relate to him and feel pity for him.

Tolstoy also mentions that Ivan's father " had three sons, of whom Ivan Ilych was the second," also says that "the eldest son was following his father's footsteps only in the other department" "the third son was a failure" (102). Ivan Ilych's father was also an official and had a position from which he could not get fired because he worked there for a long time. One is able to envision an ordinary person with many life concerns and some information on his background.

Tolstoy also shows some physical characteristics that the main character has, which indicate his transformation: "A chill came over him, his breathing ceased, and he felt only the troubling of his heart" (127). Tolstoy perfectly describes the actual pattern of Ivan's transformation, "In the beginning of my illness….quite well the next day….then followed despondency and anguish, more doctors, and I drew nearer to the abyss. My strength grew less….this is death!" (127). It is an amazingly hard task to get the reader feel for the characters, but Tolstoy is successful at it because there exists a logical pattern for all the actions of his characters and because the reader knows what the character values, what his concerns are, and what he feels and thinks.

Another aspect is how Tolstoy describes the significance of what the character wears, "In his former position it had been pleasant to wear an undress uniform made by Schmarmer" (105). Tremendous input of information, followed by a detailed images which Tolstoy deems significant for one to envision all the sides of Tolstoy's character. The fact that Tolstoy specifies who made the clothes also means much in terms of a complete image of this character.

Another character is Gerasim who was dear to Ivan Ilych because he spent time with him during Ivan's sickness and also, just what Ivan needed and lacked, felt pity for him. Tolstoy introduces this character by saying that he had a "fresh, kind, simple young face which just showed the first downy signs of beard" (133). This means that he was still a teen. Since Tolstoy also focuses greatly on the way his characters are dressed, he says that Gerasim wore "a firm light tread….heavy boots….clean Hessian apron, the sleeves of his print shirt turned over his strong bare arms" (132).

He also describes the mood in which this character was present at that time, "the joy of life that beamed from his face" (132). Tolstoy also says that Gerasim had "white teeth" (133), which makes me think that Tolstoy even goes into great details of descriptions of his characters so that the reader would have no problem imagining him. Tolstoy's description allows one to read this book as if one were watching a movie. This is how clearly Tolstoy portrays his characters.

How Ivan Ilych met his wife is also very realistic. Tolstoy says that she fell in love with him when they were dancing. He also says that Ivan Ilych "had at first no definite intention of marrying, but when the girl fell in love with him he said to himself: 'Really, why shouldn't I marry?'" (106), this means that his marriage, for him, was not much out of love, but it was more of a rational thing to do" (106). Tolstoy also shows that Ivan thought of his wife getting pregnant "unpleasant, depressing….no way of escape," (107) which is very common in an ordinary life.

Tolstoy says that "Praskovya Fedorovna came of a good family, was not bad looking, and had some little property." In fact, Tolstoy even mentions that Ivan did not marry her out of love, "marriage gave him personal satisfaction, and at the same time it was considered the right thing by the most highly placed of his associates" (107).

His wife was also "jealous without any cause, expected him to devote his whole attention to her, found fault in everything, and made coarse and ill-mannered scenes" (107). This is another example of how Tolstoy directs one to think that their marriage was not perfect, but it was real, just like everybody else's, with its good and bad sides. Tolstoy portrays this character by describing all his sides, which makes this character no different from any other human being because he is not saint at all, although the reader is predisposed towards him. This way the reader can relate to him because he is a man that one could meet in real life, no better or worse than all human beings.

Their family life was not perfect either, "….islets at which they anchored for a while and then again set out upon that ocean of veiled hostility which showed itself in their aloofness from one another" (109). In real life, almost every family came across with such a problem; therefore, the reader perfectly understands what Tolstoy is referring to. In face, Tolstoy also says that "in reality it was what is usually seen in the houses…." (114). Tolstoy also shows kitchen fights which are definitely peculiar to all families, for example, a "violent quarrel with his wife about the cakes and sweets" (116).

The development of Ivan's character continues with Tolstoy saying that Ivan enjoyed playing cards, especially loved playing the bridge game. Tolstoy also says that Ivan liked to "drink a glass of wine" (117) at supper. Through all of these elements Tolstoy shows the trivial days of Ivan Ilych's life. For the reader, it is very easy to relate to Ivan Ilych because the character is well introduced to the reader and this way the reader can decide, based on this information, whether or not he/she should like the character or not.

In great details Tolstoy shows how Ivan becomes more aggressive when he becomes sick and one can see that as he begins to feel worse, he turns into an unbearable person with whom even his wife has trouble dealing, "scenes again became frequent, and very few of those islets remained on which husband and wife could meet without an explosion" (118).

However, the reader feels pity for Ivan because Tolstoy is able to describe and make the reader feel all the suffering that Ivan, because of his sickness, goes through. I, as a reader, felt pity when I read, "but that as it may you'll never get well like that, but will always make us wretched" (123). It is one of many aspects that I consider to be very sad because Ivan turns into a scapegrace for his own family, which is, unfortunately, very common to the pitiless reality of life.

Another real factor is that once a sick person sees that the medication does not help, he/she tends to give up on curing his sickness. This is exactly what happens to Ivan, "But after a week, not feeling any improvement and having lost confidence both in the former doctor's treatment and in this one's, he became still more despondent" (122). Further into the book one sees the tremendous change that Ivan undergoes as well as the fact that he is completely different from whom he used to be in the beginning.

I believe that Tolstoy amazingly delivers and illustrates Ivan's physical change. It becomes so vivid to the reader that he/she can almost experience it together with the character. "There was no deceiving himself: something terrible, new, and more important than anything before in his life, was taking place within him on which he alone was aware"(122). This definitely cannot and does not leave the reader indifferent to this character.

Another psychological aspect which Tolstoy uses that also makes this work realistic is the way others perceive and behave regarding the sick character, as well as some frictions which occur between them. It is patently obvious that one cannot take with ease the fact that he/she will soon die; therefore, jealousy, anger, as well as many other different aspects imbue his behavior. "He hates her with his whole soul. And the thrill of hatred he feels for her makes him suffer from her touch" (139).
This happens because he does not want others to lie to him that he can be cured because he is convinced that he cannot and he wanted "someone to pity him as a sick child is pitied" and "in Gerasim's attitude towards him there was something akin to what he wished for, and so that attitude comforted him. Ivan Ilych wanted to weep, wanted to be petted and cried over...." (135).

Another reason Ivan liked Gerasim was because Gerasim made him feel better by saying that "We shall all of us die, so why should I grudge a little trouble?....he did not think his work burdensome because he was doing it for a dying man and hoping someone would do the same for him when his time came" (135). This issue also greatly concerned Ivan, "It sometimes seemed to him that people were watching him inquisitively as a man whose place might soon be vacant" (123). This is awful and also makes the reader feel pity for the protagonist. All of these aspects allow the reader to penetrate into the character's inner world and to see their thoughts and feelings, which help the reader in terms of relating and being predisposed towards these characters.

Then the reader sees how later Ivan accepts the fact the he is dying, "I am making them wretched. They are sorry, but it will be better for them when I die" (152). However, the most psychological part is when Ivan actually faces death. Everyone always wonders what dying is like, "Is it scary or not? How does it feel?" Tolstoy answers these questions, "He sought his former accustomed fear of death and did not find it. 'Where is it? What death?' There was no fear because there was no death. In place of death there was light…. joy!....Death is finished…. It is no more!" (152). The way Tolstoy describes death almost made me cry, whereas Gogol's description was a mere comedy.

Tolstoy is also a realist because of the way he uses language. Unlike Gogol's, all of his sentence follow a normal sentence structure and there is nothing awkward about them. Each sentence consists of only one idea, which also makes it easier to comprehend. Ivan's wife calls him "Jean," (128) which makes it seem as if another language was favored in their family. This is also a very realistic aspect and one can find this in many families.

Another aspect through which I identify Tolstoy as a realist is the absence of humor. Tolstoy is very serious about everything he says and he never makes jokes. An example of that is, Tolstoy, as opposed to Gogol, writes about death in terms of psychological transformation which is peculiar to all human beings, but Gogol simply mentions that one is dead and now is present in his story as a ghost. Tolstoy's approach of death is far more serious than Gogol's. Tolstoy is designated as a very serious writer, which makes the reader treat all of his words with the most appealing gravity.

One would also notice that Tolstoy greatly touches upon religion and focuses on its significance in ones life. Ivan, the main character who dies, began to question the existence of God because he deemed unfair the fact that he had to die while others were still living. Whenever the main character begins to question the existence of God or religion, one knows that something bad will happen to this character, for Tolstoy never favored people who were atheists and he emphasized it in his works.
This is totally different from Gogol's notion of religion because Gogol does not focus on it at all as if it does not exist.

This is definitely not realistic because, whether indifferent or not, one has to have some notion of existence of religion as well as of the existence of God. For example, "A lady mentioned a cure effected by a wonder-working icon. Ivan Ilych caught himself listening attentively and beginning to believe that it had occurred. This incident alarmed him 'Has my mind really weakened to such an extent?'" This shows that he had no belief in religion or in God, even though many times he said, "Oh My God!"
Tolstoy's The Deaths is another work that I will look at in order to show why I am inclined to consider Tolstoy a realist. The plot of this story is focused on three deaths which Tolstoy portrays in order to show how they are different. He discusses the death of a noblewoman, the death of a peasant, and the death of a tree.

This plot is definitely an example of a realistic plot because it deals with life and death questions, which agitate and interest all human beings. Tolstoy also allows the reader to experience what one feels when dying, which makes it psychologically easier for one to face the question of death because Tolstoy makes the known out of the unknown. Tolstoy provides a great atmosphere for the reader to feel sad from the beginning. For example, the first sentence of this book is, "It was autumn" (567), which already means that something sad is going to happen, for autumn is not a happy season, but melancholic and depressing. This automatically serves as a connection to the fact that this story will concentrate on something that is sad.

In the plot, Tolstoy also creates a real life situation by contrasting the element of dying and suffering with the flow of life around it. For example, whenever a character is suffering from being sick, "there [is] joy and youth everywhere in the sky, on the earth, and in the hearts of men" (575). The reader automatically feels this opposition because it is, just like in real life; whenever someone is suffering, life goes on around him and others are enjoying it. By doing this, Tolstoy brings out the one who is sick and dying, and, this way, the reader is likely to feel pity for him/her.

Tolstoy's great ability to describe little details of character's appearance makes it easier for the reader to relate to the character, as well as to approach this character as a regular human being, possible to meet in the ordinary life. For example, Tolstoy describes the noblewoman, to whom he mostly refers as, "the invalid" (568), with "beautiful dark eyes, which were large and brilliant" (568). When I imagine this lady, she appears as one of many people whom I meet in real life, and her appearance is very attractive, which is also important in order to predispose the reader towards this person, or to show that she is no better or worse than any human being.

Tolstoy also says that the lady had a lap dog, which is a sign of aristocracy. Tolstoy also pays a great amount of attention to the clothes, "on her head she had a white nightcap, and a blue kerchief was tied under the cap parted her light brown, extremely flat, pomaded hair, and there was something dry and deathly about the whiteness of the skin of that wide parting. Her features were delicate and handsome." Tolstoy emphasizes the fact that she appeared sick, "a hectic flush on her cheeks" (567). Tolstoy draws a clear picture of how the reader should imagine this character. In fact, this picture becomes so vivid that the reader is able to formulate an opinion of this character just by knowing his/her appearance; just like in real life when first meeting a person.

To show the character's physical suffering, Tolstoy describes her breath, for example, "A deep sigh rose from the invalid's chest and turned into a cough before it was completed. She turned away, puckered her face, and clutched her chest with both hands." "Her lips were dry and restless, her scanty eyelashes had no curl in them, and….Through her eyes were closed her face bore an expression of weariness, irritation, and habitual suffering" (567. Through this Tolstoy creates a real person who the reader can feel pity for because the reader sees and, almost experiences, this character's physical suffering which becomes almost visible to the reader.

Tolstoy also gives a description of her maid, "short dry hair escaped from under faded bonnet and her red hand in its torn glove kept pushing it back by fits and starts….[Tolstoy also mentions that she had] quick black eyes" (567). This character also gains my favor because she has a pleasant appearance, which is probably what Tolstoy meant to accomplish by portraying her the way he did.

Conclusion
I have proved that, unlike Tolstoy, Gogol is not a realist because of what he does with the plot, with the characters whom he reduces to caricatures, because of his use of comic and exaggerations, and because of the way he uses language. I have also shown how Gogol parodies the reality of Russian society through all of these aspects. Gogol also plays with reality. He makes the reader believe that his works are real because everything takes place in a real location, with most of the characters being human. However, it is what he does with them that is unreal.

There have always been people who considered Gogol's works the greatest realistic works of the period. I believe that it is because at that time, people did not have a realistic prose, but strongly wanted one. This is why they considered Gogol a realist.

However, Tolstoy was a realist because the approach of his works is very rational. I have shown that his works are great spectators of real, ordinary life concerns and that the topics that he discusses in his works are psychologically based, and are peculiar to all human beings. They also touch upon contemporary issues of Russian society such as: life and death. Another aspect which shows that Tolstoy is a realist is that his works are very serious and one will never find comic, exaggerations, or caricatures in his works because such aspects are not peculiar to Tolstoy's genius. Tolstoy also greatly focuses on religion, whereas Gogol does not come close to the notion of significance of religion in ones life.