Dead Souls vol. 2

[toovolatile]

I just finished reading Dead Souls and it was great.  But I'm kind of surprised at the bad reputation that the surviving fragments of vol 2 have.  A lot of amazon.com reviews I read totally trashed these chapters, even advising the reader not to bother with them.

Am I the only one that liked some of these chapters as much as vol 1?  I really was struck by Gogol's portrayal of the ideal landowner in Konstanzhoglo (sp?) and his idea that man must imitate God in the act of creation and industry.  And the encounter with Petukh the sensualist earlier in the chapter was delightful.  The lengthy history of Tentetnikov in chapter 1 probably turns some people away but I found it fascinating.  The random snippet from the end of the surviving manuscript, where Chichikov is placed under arrest, wasn't very interesting, but it helped to show where Gogol was going with the whole 2nd part.  There is a definite tension between Gogol's idea of morality and responsibility and Chichikov's likable mischief.

Any thoughts?

[lerik]

I personally havent read the second volume yet,but i watched a theatre production,which was based on both parts of the novel, that interested me a lot.All of Gogol's works are masterpieces and i am sure that you can find a lot of interesting thoughts while reading the chapters from the second volume

[tzar]

it's necessary for everyone to know that Gogol hated Russia (he was ukranian), thus such books as 'dead souls' are misrepresentative.

[lerik]

it's necessary for everyone to know that Gogol hated Russia (he was ukranian), thus such books as 'dead souls' are misrepresentative.

I am sorry,but where do you have the evidence that Gogol 'hated' Russia?! Just in case,you don't know,Gogol is considered a "Russian" writer in Ukraine,since all his works are in Russian(I think this one fact already disaproves that Gogol 'hated' Russia).
  Try reading the ending of 'Dead souls' vol.!.

[flatsharer]

I read Dead Souls a little while ago and I didn't really note where one Volume ended and the next began at the time (though thumbing through now the change is pretty clear).

I agree there is much to enjoy in the second volume.

A number of interesting characters (e.g. Kostanzhoglo and Khlobuev). I also liked finding out a little more of Chichikov's past and seeing him in more extreme situations (success and failure).  

I might be wrong but I also seem to recall that the authorial voice was particularly charming and playfull in parts of the second volume.

Though I can't deny that I felt a little frustrated and a let-down as the book just petered out.
 
But what do people expect from an unfinished work?

[lerik]

One of the reasons why Gogol burnt his second volume(according to some critics) was because he was experiencing a crisis in his faith.At some point he wanted to become a Catholic and from what I remember he wrote the second volume in Italy(but not 100% sure).When he returned to Russia,he found some that his second volume had a lot of "Catholic" ideas (and at that time Gogol decided to stay as an Orthodox),ao he decided to burn it.
Some critics say that Gogol wanted to show how Chichikov went through a lot of sufffering to become a 'normal being',the resurrection of his soul( sounds a lot like Dostoevsky's "Crime and Punishment") but then realised that he couldn't show it as well as he wanted to and burned the volume.Also he thought that the best book for showing that was the Bible.
According to the third,and most popular version,Gogol went mad in the last years of his life and that explains why he burnt the volume.