Two Fires in the Life of Nikolai Gogol
Two acts of destruction by fire, separated by approximately twenty-three years, reveal a major transformation in Nikolai Gogol’s understanding of art. In 1829, the young Gogol collected and burned the remaining copies of his poem Hans Küchelgarten after it received harsh criticism. He then left for Germany. In 1852, Gogol, by then one of the most important writers in Russian literature, threw a large portion of the second volume of Dead Souls, on which he had worked for years, into the fire. Encyclopedia.com — Gogol, Nikolai Vasilievich
In the first case, Gogol destroyed a book that he believed had failed. In the second, he destroyed not merely a book but a work that he believed had failed to reach his own literary ideal. Therefore, the two incidents share more than a simple biographical similarity. Both acts of destruction were connected to Gogol’s authorship, his experience of failure, his pursuit of perfection, and his exceptionally severe control over his own works.
However, an important difference exists. In 1829, Gogol was still a young writer searching for a place in the literary world. In 1852, he had already established a lasting position in Russian literature through works such as The Overcoat, The Nose, The Inspector General, and Dead Souls. Consequently, the second act of destruction was not simply a repetition of the first. Rather, the young writer’s reaction to external criticism gradually developed into a deeper form of internal and moral judgment. For a broader look at his life, see Interesting Facts and the Dark Atmosphere of Nikolai Gogol’s Life.
Historical clarification: Sources confirm that Gogol traveled to Germany in 1829. However, the claim that he “took the money his mother had sent for the mortgage of the family estate and ran away” is not established with certainty in reliable biographical sources. Likewise, according to historical sources, Gogol burned the second volume of Dead Souls on the night of February 11–12, 1852, while he died on February 21, 1852. Gogol House — Memorial Museum and Research Library
1829: Hans Küchelgarten and the First Major Disappointment
When Nikolai Gogol arrived in St. Petersburg in 1828, he hoped to establish a future for himself in the literary world. He was still young and had great expectations for his literary talent. In 1829, he published his pastoral poem Hans Küchelgarten under the pseudonym V. Alov, paying for the publication himself. However, the book failed to attract the attention he had expected. The critical response was also largely negative. Encyclopedia.com
Gogol responded by collecting the unpublished copies and burning them. He then embarked on his first journey abroad, traveling to places such as Lübeck, Travemünde, and Hamburg. Gogol House
This behavior reveals the young writer’s psychological response to failure. Gogol did not merely struggle to accept criticism; by destroying the object that had been criticized, he also attempted to eliminate the failure itself.
Here, an important psychological and aesthetic mechanism emerges. For Gogol, a literary work was not an object independent of its author. The work also represented the author’s own value. Therefore, the failure of a work could signify personal failure for the young Gogol.
1852: Why Did Dead Souls Return to the Fire?
Twenty-three years later, the situation had changed completely. Nikolai Gogol was now a celebrated writer. The first volume of Dead Souls had appeared in 1842, and he had spent years working on the second volume. Wikisource
However, Gogol gradually changed his understanding of literature. Alongside the humor and social criticism of his earlier period, he developed increasingly strong religious and moral concerns.
In 1845, he had already burned the first version of the second volume. Gogol later attempted to explain this act through the idea that the work was not good enough and needed to be reborn. Thus, even the destruction of 1845 was not simply an act of anger. Gogol viewed the literary work as a moral project that had to be continually reconstructed. Gogol House
In 1852, however, a much more serious crisis emerged.
Matvey Konstantinovski and the Transformation of Literature into a Moral Problem
Religion became central to Gogol’s understanding of authorship during his final years. His relationship with the priest Matvey Konstantinovski played an important role in this process. Konstantinovski criticized Gogol’s literary work, particularly the second volume of Dead Souls. Sources provide different accounts concerning whether the priest actually demanded the destruction of the manuscript. Therefore, the categorical explanation that “Gogol burned the book solely on the priest’s orders” remains too simplistic from an academic perspective. Russia Beyond — Why Gogol burned the 2nd volume of *Dead Souls*
When we look at the broader context, we can see that Gogol had already been questioning his own works for a long time.
His Selected Passages from Correspondence with Friends, published in 1847, also received severe criticism. Even some people close to him accused the book of departing from his earlier artistic vision. Gogol House
Thus, literature ceased to be merely an aesthetic activity for Gogol. Writing began to carry a moral responsibility.
The Fundamental Connection Between the Two Acts of Destruction: Eliminating Failure
When we consider the events of 1829 and 1852 together, a clear continuity emerges.
In 1829:
Critics → sense of failure → burning the book → escape
In 1852:
Religious and aesthetic crisis → belief that the work was inadequate → burning the manuscript → withdrawal and physical decline
The most important common element between the two incidents is Gogol’s extraordinarily severe self-control over his own work.
In the first case, the judgment of the outside world played the decisive role. In the second, external criticism was largely replaced by an internal judge within Gogol himself.
Therefore, it may be more accurate to understand the 1852 fire not as a larger version of the 1829 incident but as a later stage of the same psychological and aesthetic tendency.
The Difference Between the Young Nikolai Gogol and the Later Gogol
In 1829, Nikolai Gogol was a young writer who wanted to gain recognition in the literary world. His fundamental question was:
“Will readers and critics like my work?”
By 1852, however, the question had changed:
“Does the work I have written serve humanity and spiritual salvation?”
This transformation demonstrates the development of Gogol’s literary thought.
In his early period, Gogol primarily sought literary success. In his later period, he increasingly sought moral and spiritual truth. Thus, conscience gradually replaced the critic, while religious standards increasingly replaced purely aesthetic criteria.
Ultimately, the young writer of 1829 burned a failed book, whereas the mature writer of 1852 questioned the very foundations of his art.
Dead Souls and Nikolai Gogol’s Impossible Pursuit of Perfection
The problem surrounding the second volume of Dead Souls did not arise solely from external criticism. Nikolai Gogol was also dissatisfied with the work itself. He repeatedly revised the second volume and produced different versions. In 1845, he burned the first version; he later rewrote it. In 1852, he destroyed most of the manuscript he had in his possession once again. Wikisource
This situation is important for understanding Gogol’s perfectionism.
For a perfectionist artist, a literary work is never merely a completed text. The work may always fall short of an ideal form that the artist seeks to achieve. In Gogol’s case, this tendency gradually acquired a more destructive character.
Indeed, several explanations have emerged for the destruction of the second volume of Dead Souls: religious remorse, a sense of artistic failure, anger at criticism, and the belief that the text had failed to reach its ideal form. Researchers do not generally accept any single one of these explanations as a definitive answer. Wikisource
How Should We Understand the Phrase “The Devil Played a Trick on Me”?
After burning his manuscripts, Gogol is reported to have described the incident as “the devil’s trick.” However, this statement alone does not explain the cause of the destruction.
We must consider Gogol’s religious thinking during his final years. The writer established a strong relationship between his literary works and his spiritual life. Therefore, explaining the destruction of the manuscript solely as an act of anger or a momentary impulse would be insufficient.
A more productive interpretation focuses on the conflict between literary production and religious conscience.
This conflict represents one of the central problems of Gogol’s final period.
Why Does the Act of Burning Explain How Nikolai Gogol Understood Art?
Gogol’s decision to burn his works during two different periods of his life was not merely an accidental biographical detail. The behavior reveals how intensely personal his relationship with art had become.
In the first stage, Gogol rejected the judgment imposed from outside.
In the second stage, he applied his own judgment to his own work.
From this perspective, there is a strong historical continuity between the burning of Hans Küchelgarten in 1829 and the destruction of Dead Souls in 1852. The first fire reveals the young writer’s fear of failure, whereas the second reveals a more severe form of the same tendency, now combined with religious anxiety and perfectionism.
The Final Days of Nikolai Gogol: Literature, the Body, and Willpower
After burning the manuscript, Nikolai Gogol became increasingly withdrawn. According to the chronology provided by the Gogol House, he refused food and medication. He died on February 21, 1852. Gogol House — Memorial Museum and Research Library
Therefore, the statement that he died “nine or ten days after the burning” is broadly correct in chronological terms; however, differences between the Julian and Gregorian calendars must be taken into account when discussing the dates.
The words “The ladder! The ladder!” also appear in famous biographical accounts of Gogol’s final moments. Nevertheless, such accounts of a person’s last words should not be treated as historically established statements unless documentary evidence confirms them. Memories concerning Gogol’s final days circulated in different forms within the biographical tradition that developed after his death.
References
- Gogol House – Memorial Museum and Research Library. Gogol Biography and Chronology. Gogol House
- Vinogradov, I. A. (2018). Chronicle of the Life and Work of N. V. Gogol, 1851–1852. Moscow: IMLI RAN. Gogol House
- Kulish, P. A. (2003). Notes on the Life of Nikolai Vasilyevich Gogol. Moscow: IMLI RAN. Gogol House
- Encyclopedia.com. “Gogol, Nikolai Vasilievich.” Encyclopedia.com
- Biographical and critical studies of Dead Souls. Wikisource
About the Author
