False?

 “Falsehood is never in words; it is in things.” (pg. 62)

The fourth section of Invisible Cities talks about perspective. Every city in the section is seen differently depending on the beholder, or the way one looks at it, or the way it is described.

Olivia is the perfect example of how a city can change depending on its description. Marco Polo explains how in the case of this city, you describe the aspects of the city you want others to see, leaving out the obvious downsides. “If I describe to you Olivia, a city rich in products and profits, I can indicate its prosperity only by speaking of filigree palaces with fringed cushions in the seats by the mullioned windows… But from these words you realize at once how Olivia is shrouded in a cloud of soot and grease that sticks to the houses…” (pg.61) Much like any work of literature, Olivia can be described but not fully explained by a single person, because each reader will describe what he wants the next to see or only what he understood, even though the true meaning hidden in the book can be completely different.

“It is the mood of the beholder which gives the city of Zemrude its form” (pg. 66) This city, shows how every single person that reads a book, or lives a specific situation, may see it differently depending on his mood, the things that happened before that event, or the books he read before. The example Calvino gives for this city in order to explain it properly is very simple, yet effective. If you travel the city whistling, tilting you head back, it is inevitable that you see only the high areas of the city, the sunlit buildings and windows. If you walk hunched, with your hands in your pockets, and looking at the floor, you will see the sewers, the dark and less prosperous areas of the city. In reality, this city comes to show how there are two sides to everything, and what is seen depends on the beholder.

“..Aglaura imprisons your words and obliges you to repeat rather than say.” (pg. 68)

The city of Aglaura focuses is a city which is seen the same way by all its inhabitants. They have become so accustomed to its grandeur, that it no longer seems impressive. Furthermore, the inhabitants have stopped noticing the change and growth of their city, they just repeat what the previous inhabitants said about the city, causing any change in the metropolis to go by unnoticed. This phenomenon happens daily in reality. We have grown so used to seeing poor people working at the stop-lights, that it has ceased to affects us like it probably affected the first people to see them. It has become a common occurrence.  What's more, the excerpt on this city which is mentioned above, could also relate to the phenomenon which takes place in our heads every time we read a new good book. The author has stressed that as we near the ending of the book we will become “an emblem among emblems” (pg. 23) This means that we will become a part of the book, and the book will become a part of us. Every work of literature forces us to repeat rather than say. Not literally of course, we are never forced to agree with a book or begin to live by it, yet, if we like it, we invariably do.

As I continue reading the book, I have no way to know what the cities that come next will represent. I can’t even know what they will look like or what they will say. Still, I find myself trying to make predictions, or even trying to imagine what Calvino would like to write next. I have no way of predicting this, and there is no way to get it right, “’And yet I have constructed in my mind a model city from which all possible cities can be deduced…’” (pg. 69)

"You advance always with your head turned back?"

“Futures not achieved are only branches of the past: dead branches” (pg.29)

The past, and a future not lived, are ultimately the same thing, because neither of them can be recovered. As he opens the second section of Invisible Cities, Calvino seems to emphasize on the past, and all the different types of futures we could have.  At the end of the introduction to the section, the Kahn asks a question which can be formulated in two very specific ways: “Journeys to relive your past?” or “Journeys to recover your future?” (pg. 29) This question, or questions, alone portray the importance of past and future in this section of the book, which later moves on to explain cities overflowing with unfulfilled futures and past decisions.

“…through what it has become, one can look back with nostalgia at what it was.” (pg. 30) The city of Maurilla is one that changed from small town to metropolis, slowly gaining strength and power, but losing most of its grace. The previously mentioned excerpt, which is used to describe this city, can tie in perfectly with the idea of growing up. As a person changes from kid to adult, most of the personality, looks, and beliefs change as well, making the grown-up just a shadow of the kid he was. However, the loss of the child is bitter-sweet, as it is with the city of Maurilla, because it allows us to look back at what we once were, but still embrace what we have become.  The past is key in this city, it is a city of Memory, it looks back on the past while still moving forwards, just as we are forced to do every day.

The city of Fedora however, is more interesting than most I this chapter. It is the city of unfulfilled futures:  it is everything we want to be, brutally contrasted with what we actually are. Within every small glass orb in the city, lies a diagram of what the city could have been, but never became. The author explains that the city could never become anything those diagrams portrayed because as they were being invented, the city was already changing, making it impossible to create the perfect model.  Much like Fedora, as we grow, we constantly try to create a perfect version of ourselves. But as we create that version, we are changing, making the model inadequate the minute it is created.  This happens as well in literature. A book may be completely planned out before the author even begins to write, however, as soon as the author begins to write, his train of thought changes, rendering the plan useless. Furthermore, books also change every minute, a path not taken can alter the ending of a book as a missed chance can alter our future. Thus the parallelism between life and literature continues.

Zenobia is the city of forgotten desires. “…those that through the years and the changes continue to give their form to desires, and those in which desires either erase the city or are erased by it.” (pg. 35) This classification of cities contributes to the relationship between life and literature in the story, as everything in the chapter can refer to either of the two. The first category, shows the typical ideal of growing up, in which what we want remains the same as we grow older and is ultimately achieved. It can also be interpreted as a book that was written according to the author’s original plan, something that doesn’t change. The second category is more realistic. It is the group in which most of us will eventually fall. It is that scenario in which what we want is erased by who we are, or vice versa. In a book, this is one that changes as it is written. One in which the story evolves until the meaning is erased by the plot, or the plot disregarded for the meaning.

We advance looking backwards, because it is the only place we've got to look. We analyze the past and figure out the roads not taken, but in the end there is nothing we can do to change it. All we do is understand what we didn't before, and then regret not understanding sooner. 

As we continue to read the book, Calvino’s words seem to be as vague as ever. Even though I have begun to understand what the meaning of the story is, as the author promised in the closing of the first section, it is not completely clear and some cities still escape my grasp. However I believe the book is meant to be understood gradually until the reader reaches a point in which he seems to be reading Calvino’s mind instead of his words.

“… in their conversations, most of the time, they remained silent and immobile.” (pg. 39) 

Bookception

It has been stressed this year that literature has no point, it doesn’t really mean anything. Literature just is. If this is true, why is it that we find ourselves constantly looking for meaning within the pages of a book? Every piece of literature we read defines us, changes us. Every time we finish a particularly mind-blowing piece of literature, we unconsciously begin to live by what the author stated, forgetting immediately that there was no point at all to the narrative.

Life has been explained in many ways through the ages. Philosophers try to understand life, never getting anywhere, probably because there is nothing to understand. Life, like literature, just is. We live, we breed, we die. What was the point? What was the meaning? Probably it was absolutely nothing. This is why literature is the one subject which comes so close to life, it is the one subject which really understands life, because it is just as pointless.  

The brilliance of Invisible Cities is that it can be used as an allegory to life, or to literature, making them seem like they are the same thing.

“The new fact received a meaning from that emblem and also added to the emblem a new meaning.” (pg.22)

The previous excerpt from the book tells us how we will begin to understand previous pieces of the narrative and at the same time could hold an important truth on life.

In terms of literature, the phrase above is explaining how, in later chapters of the book, we will come to understand the details we have read thus far, and see them in a different way as we continue reading. In terms of life, the same meaning can be applied. As we grow older, we will learn new things and have new experiences, which will add meaning to what we have lived before and put it all in a different perspective.

As far as I know, every city in the book is mainly a small piece of our “empire”, or our world. In the book, the author is telling us about our world as he tells us about the book we are reading. I guess bookception is an accurate description for it all?