Similarities between “The Nose” and “The Overcoat”:

While the premise, tone, and ultimate conclusion of these two pieces may be
different, they produce the same effect: a critique, whether humorous or tragic, of
nineteenth-century Russia’s urban clerical hierarchy and its cruelty, falsity, vanity,
and dumb pomposity. Collegiate Assessor Kovalyov, with his pretentious title of
“Major,” is intimidated by his nose’s position of State Councilor and its “gold-
braided, high-collared uniform, buckskin breeches, and cockaded hat”—as if
the nose’s apparent bureaucratic rank could somehow override the fact that it is,
after all, his nose. The “prominent personage” of “The Overcoat,” with all his
false, petty pretenses to importance and the deference his inferiors pointlessly
show him, recalls Kovaleyv’s repeated name-dropping of the prominent
personages he is acquainted with, which he does no less than four times in the
story. Both Bashmatchkin and Kovalyov must traverse the endlessly convoluted
and tortuous maze of Russia’s bureaucratic hierarchy, the needless complication of
which results in the former’s death and the latter’s amusing fluster. What is the
point of all these titular councilors, actual privy councilors, secretaries and clerks
and the rest of them? Isn’t all this hierarchy, these imperial civil service rankings
and titles, these systems of deference and superiority and inferiority, a petty and
needless human construction that causes more suffering than expedition? I would
have believed that Gogol’s primary goal is to create stories mocking the regulated
positions one can hold in society, as if a title can determine a human’s inner worth.
Gogol also mocks materialism and vanity, and even logic.  Gogol phrases it best:
“There is nothing more irritable than departments, regiments, courts of
justice, and, in a word, every branch of public service.”

Gogol, through both fantasy and realism creates satirical stories out of absurdities.
In “The Nose”, it is pure fantasy that a nose could walk off a person’s face and the
same is true of having a ghost of Akaky. Through the missions of Kovalyov and
Akaky in retrieving their missing items, a nose and a cloak respectively, Gogol
satirizes Russian society with a particular emphasis on class and rank. “The
Overcoat” clearly demonstrates provincial bureaucracy as well as the frivolity of
material wealth. There is no real reason for Akaky to be so taunted by those of
higher rank. “The Nose” also addresses issues of social class and social climbing in
the story. As a collegiate assessor, Kovalyov is himself a minor official intent on
advancing his career and takes great pride in his status as a bureaucrat, he even
insists on being called Major. Soon after his nose is restored, Kovalyov applies for
promotion to a higher-level position. Kovalyov is clearly on a mission to not only
find his nose but achieve rank. In a funny moment of the story, his anxiety about
his social standing is further demonstrated through his interaction with the nose at
the cathedral; because the nose is dressed in the garb of a higher-level government
administrator, Kovalyov is unsure of how to address him. Here Gogol is clearly
using humor to satirize the Russian class system. In “The Overcoat” he uses
sympathy for Akaky.

These two stories, though written with different styles, tones, and lessons, have a
crucial element in common: they both portray aspects of the human condition at its
most exaggerated. “The Nose,” shows us the potential vanity and arrogance of
human beings. The reactions of Ivan and the “Major” to finding the missing nose
were both ridiculous but understandable: Ivan’s first reaction was to get rid of it
fearing the police, while the Major, after having found the nose, contemplated the
different ways to discipline his rogue nasal apparatus.
In “The Overcoat” the character is pitied, rather than arrogant, and the item that he
loses is an overcoat rather than a nose, the first item being only worth its monetary
value, while the second item is essentially irreplaceable. Despite the seeming
disparity in the loss of a of these two items, the reader sympathizes so much more
with the loss of the coat solely because of its owners tragic toil and demise. Both of
these stories portray pieces of the essence of human nature and therefore it is very
easy for me to accept that they were both written by Gogol.