In Russian literary studies, the opinion about the excessive objectivity, if not dryness and coldness, of Ivan Goncharov as a writer, who did not want to show his personal attitude to the events and persons described by him in any way, was fixed. The article reveals the origins of this opinion about the author of "Oblomov", proves that it originates in the criticism of the natural school. It turns out that here was Vissarion Belinsky to start the party of considering Ivan Goncharov as someone who only portrays, paints, but does not lecture anyone and does not punish, does not expose his contemporary reality became the basis for subsequent criticism of the mid-19th century, represented by the names of Nikolay Dobrolyubov, Dmitry Pisarev, Nikolai Shelgunov. The article shows the change in the attitude of criticism of "Nikolai Gogol direction" to Ivan Goncharov from positive to negative – thus, if the first novel of the writer, "A Common Story" was perceived by supporters of the natural school very warmly, even enthusiastically, the second and the most famous – "Oblomov" – was not the same and caused a lot of controversy, and the last – "The Precipice" – was in fact misunderstood and considered to be a retrograde novel written by a man with very outdated views on the social life of Russia, the one who actually sang of Russia’s serfdom past and sharply condemned revolutionary-minded youth. Based on the materials of several critical articles, it is concluded that representatives of the "real" direction attributed Ivan Goncharov to the supporters of pure art, or "art for art's sake".