The Invisiblest of the Invisble Cities

Suprisingly, as I read I encountered one city that seemed real, Leonia. The first until now, at least. Calvino seems to be directly mocking today´s consumerism, this need to buy and dispose rapidly.

"On the sidewalks, encased in spotless plastic bags, the remains of yesterday´s Leonia await in the garbage truck. Not only squeezed tubes of toothpaste, blown-out lightbulbs, newspapers, containers,wrappings, but also boilers, encyclopedias, pianos, porcelain dinner services." (pg. 114)

The last objects listed are those which people wouldn´t just through out, but protect and even pass down to their children. Finding this suprising, Calvino included something I wasn´t looking out for. He is using 1. Irony and 2. Mockery.

The Khan himself uses sarcasm with Polo when he doubts the existence the cities. "...So then, yours is truly a voyage through memory!" the Khan said. Now, even I don´t think they exist. Some are impossible, like Beersheba with its other 2 cities above and underneath it, but Adelma made it clear the cities are made from memory.

Marco Polo had ventured into Adelma and saw people who he knew and had died. Why would he see only people was once related to instead of anybody else? Because these cities are off the top of his head! I´m totally team Khan! This has also made me consider the cities represent something, yet I don´t know what it is, probably something related to reading and forgetting the information you once read. I feel pretty lost and I´m near the end of the book, meaning my path was not the right one.

Unraveling the Paths of Calvino

So, there´s a special path you must follow to understand Invisible Cities and I have various theories of the characteristics this path has. The key is, I believe, the conversations between Marco Polo and the Kublai Khan. The following citations seemed relevant enough to evaluate the order:


"There is one [city] of which you never speak."
 Marco Polo bowed his head.
"Venice." the Khan said.
....
"Every time I describe a city I am saying something about Venice... To distinguish other cities´ qualities, I must speak of a first city that remains implicit. For me it is Venice."
(pg. 86)

  ----------------------------------------------

"Kublai Khan had noticed that Marco Polo´s cities resembled one another, as if the passage from one to another involved not a journey but a change of elements." (pg. 43)

 ----------------------------------------------

"Now, from each city Marco described to him, the Great Khan´s mind set out on its own, and after dismantling the city piece by piece, he reconstructed it in other ways, substituting components, shifting them, inverting them." (pg. 43)

 ----------------------------------------------

"Memory´s images, once they are fixed in words, are erased," Polo said. "Perhaps I am afraid of losing Venice all at once, if I speak of it. Or perhaps, speaking of other cities, I have already lost it, little by little. " (pg. 87)


So, all the cities resemble each other and there are slight changes between them. I have inferred that the starting city of the path would be Venice, and then a city called Esmeralda. Of all the cities I read about, this one seems the most closely related to Venice because of its canals.

"In Esmeralda, city of water, a network of canals and a network of streets span and intersect each other." pg 88


I had developed this path but then realized it isn´t possible beacuse Marco Polo knew his own Venice, and nowadays, anyone whose been there knows their own Venice because they have had different experiences and have learned a variety of things.

The Body of a Woman Part 2

"Kublai Khan had noticed that Marco Polo´s cities resembled one another, as if the passage from one to another involved not a journey but a change of elements. Now, from each city Marco described to him, the Great Khan´s mind set out on its own, and after dismantling the city piece by piece, he reconstructed it in other ways, substituting components, shifting them, inverting them." (pg. 43)

Women are all, in essence, the same, but elements like personality, skin tone, hair color, or size mark a notable difference. Most of the cities portrayed are like that, and I noticed many that were close to congurent.

Eusapia, on page 109, is a beautiful city built above an identical one. One lies undergound, a hidden place where the dead live. These are almost the same city, and where the dead and alive try to become one another´s refelction. Reminds me of page 111, with the city of Beersheba. There is a tangible city, but there is also one in the heavens and one underneath. If the citizens of Beersheba are honorable, they will become one with the city in the heavens, but if they act otherwise, this will happen with the city underneath. Why so many copies of the same city? Two-faced women?

 All my thoughts about women were interrupted when the next day, we used close reading to understand the first pages of the book. This would change how I viewed the whole text then. The book was an allegory, just like Inferno!

Its Indirect Metaliterature!

 

The Body of a Woman

As I read in my chosen order, I realized 1 thing: every city, even Venice, was named like a woman! Aglaura, Dorothea, Isidora, Armilla, Chloe, etc. Then it hit me. What is these cities were mapping out a women´s body? One may need to draw a city to understand what is happening in the story on a figurative level. One of the cities mentions "two young ladies with white parasols." They could represent 2 eyes, 2 breasts,  or even 2 nostrils. After a few failed attempts, I gave up.

But, women kept appearing much more than men did, excluding the 2 main and only characters in the book. Maybe it was the fact that these stories were memories and that Marco Polo was a male. He would obviously have remembered the women he saw instead of a greasy old guy eating pork.

"In Maurilia, the traveler is invited to visit the city and, at the same time, examine some old post cards that show it as it used to be: the same identical square with a hen in the place of the bus station, a bandstand in the place of the overpass, two young ladies with white parasols in the place of the munitions factory." Pg. 30


As I read, I also came to think these women (the cities) might have been who Marco Polo slept with in distant places. The first few cities had special characteristics a woman could have, like Zirma (pg. 19), in which the same scenario repeated, or Maurilia (mentioned above) in which the woman could be missing her old self and tried to assure herself that the changes have suited her.

Women´s personalities vary so much, it is not suprising there´s a city that corresponds to a woman who exists or has existed.

Go Judge a Book by its Cover

The title: Invisible Cities. The author: Italo Calvino. The result: A story that can be read in 8 different ways but only one of them allows you to understand the storyline.

I had began reading before being aware of this, so I chose to follow the page order. After I began getting an idea of the context (which I still really don´t get), I noticed the image in the book´s cover. Seems like an overlap of images, I thought. Followed by the doubt of these pictures having any particular meaning, I used the powers of Google and found the logo of the Venezia Hotel Bauer Grunwald had been included there. Success in my search led me to continue. The article found said the hotel opened in 1880, after a marriage between the Bauer and Grunwald families. Low blow after reading that Kublai Khan lived until 1294.  

The image also had traces of stucco, commonly used in the 1500s to give texture to exteriors. Still a long time after Kublai Kahn´s reign. All this has proven that you can never judge a book by its cover. Even if you have some background from the book, a magic tool like Google (holds all the answers to life) or other sources, it is not wise to do so. 

Dawkins´s Dilemma

In class, we read part of Chapter 12 and attempted to recreate the Prisoner´s Dilemma game. I thought it was very easy, both persons would choose cooperate and would earn .3 on their grade. After sneakily planning it, Barbara surprised us all by backstabbing Pedro and earning .5, Dawkins showing us selfishness at its best (or should I say worst?). But this is also an example of morale. If both persons care for the other they will probably cooperate for the two of them to be benefitted, it´s the right thing to do isn´t it?

Well what´s right for a survival machine may not be right for a person who isn´t abusing of other´s weaknesses and strengths for personal gain. To me, it all depends on the path the replicators have walked down, a path full of feelings and selflessness and a path of selfishness and abuse of others.

A "Selfish" Gene?

"No matter how much knowledge of wisdom you acquire during your life, not one jot will be passed to your children by genetic means." (Pg 23)

I had thought this was a clear explanation of why the book was titled The Selfish Gene. A gene is learns and learns, studies and studies, but just does it for him/herself. It makes perfect sense; you work your butt off for yourself, not for other huh? You don´t have friends, you have a "pack" in case you have an issue that can be solved on their expense. 

For us its "morale," a useless idea that has sadly managed to successfully pass down through generations. The decision if the following: Worst case scenario, me walking down a street when suddenly, le wild armed guy appears. He orders me and the woman who was walking beside me to give him our things. 

Option 1: Tackle the old lady and run. She is weaker and has lived her life, I still have to live mine! 


Option 2: Use telepathy and communicate with the old lady. She knows Tae-Kwon-Do and so do I. We can use symbiosis and fight the guy off with our Hoo sin Sool.

Dawkins would probably urge me to tackle this lady, yet the morale I have learned from society tells me I must fend this guy off. We humans probably don´t have the selfish gene. I´m sorry Mr. Dawkins but most people probably have issues when deciding between letting their selfish gene rule or being rebels and letting society and it´s good ways lead the way.

Why is life so meaningless?

As I read Chapter 11 I found an idea which I believed Dawkins contradicted himself. I read that intelligence couldn't be passed genetically from a survival machine to another.

"No matter how much knowledge of wisdom you acquire during your life, not one jot will be passed to your children by genetic means." (Pg 23)

Later, I read the following (and had to Google the meaning of analogous).

"Cultural transmission is analogous to genetic transmission in that, although basically conservative, it can give rise to a form of evolution." (Pg. 189)

I now had to contradict myself. Dawkins wasn't saying culture could be transmitted, he was implying it could also cause changes! I do have doubts though, so if culture and intelligence can't be passed down, they can only from others right? After so many years of evolution, it seems logical that replicators would have learned how to pass intelligence and culture. Doesn´t it seem useless to spend so much time dedicated into learning just to unexpectedly die and lose all the your world and knowledge? Not even be able to pass it down to your successor survival machine? What a shame that life and knowledge is so meaningless.

Dawkins´s Definitions

Survival machines: "The ones [Replicators] that survived were the ones that built survival machines for them to live in." (pg. 19)

"They have come a long way, those replicators. Now they go by the name of genes, and we are ttheir survival machines." (pg. 20)

"We are survival machines, but "we" does not mean just people. It embraces all animals, plants, bacteria, and viruses." (pg. 21)

"Now, natural selection favours replicators that are good at building survival machines, genes that are skilled in the art of controlling embryonic development." (pg 24)

Basically, survival machines (humans, animals, viruses, and bacteria) were built by genes so they could live in. The genes which are most succesful controlling embryonic development have survival machines which will live more in terms of natural selection.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Replicators: "At some point a particularly remarkable molecule was formed by accident. We will call it the Replicator. It may not necessarily have been the biggest, or the most complex molecule around, but it had the extraordinary propety of being able to create copies of itself. (pg. 15)

"Actually a molecule that makes copies of itself is not as difficult to imagine as it seems at first, and it only has to arise once." (pg. 15)

"For simplicity I have given the impression that modern genes, made of DNA, are much the same as the first replicators in the primeval soup."(pg 21)

Well, these excerpts explain what a replicator is, no need of repeating what is already known.

  ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

Evolution: “Evolution is something that happens, willy-nilly, in spite of all the efforts of the replicators (and nowadays of the genes) to prevent it happening.” 

"Anyway, as we shall see, erratic copying in biological replicators can in a real sense give rise to improvement, and it was essential for the progressive evolution of lif ethat some errors were made." (pg. 16)

"Their [Replicator] modern descendants, the DNA molecules, are astonishingly faithful compared with the most high-fidelity human copying process, but they ocassionally make mistakes, and it is ultimately these mistakes that make evolution possible." (pg. 17)

Evolution happens when DNA copiers make a mistake and these mutations have positive effects on the gene, making natural selection benefit it´s survival. The more mutations in a gene pool, the higher variety in evolution and different types of replicators in it.

 

Scientific Literature?

Right after this book was assigned all I thought was "Bummer, another book only Dr. Gregory and Alberto Andrade will understand." Am I not surprised to find myself enjoying what I would define as "scientific literature!" Of course I applied this term without knowing the actual meaning of it (I later realized what I mean can be referred to as "academic publishing," or the process of placing the results of one's research into the literature), but it seemed appropriate. 

This book is unlike other scientific reports, it seems as if the author, Richard Dawkins, was narrating evolution without using many scientific terms. Instead, the document has many detailed descriptions of topics like DNA and replication that are explained in simple way. Dawkins supposes we are familiar with genetics thus he can share experiments and expect us to understand. Part of the charm of the book is the way Dawkins writes in first person, his familiar register makes the reader feel close to him, influencing how the reader understands the book.

A Happy Ending

Even though throughout Candide there are new characters in every chapter (making it hard to keep up with all of them and their experiences), they all come together for what I would say is the only actual happy part of the story (no sarcasm in it). I feel corny but I'll just spill the beans: The story's ending was comforting and happy.
 
I have to accept the story was not easy to understand, but the end has a nice morale, the world is full difficulties and people should work and toil to survive it. A maxim like this isn't forgotten, it appears even today children's fables like in The Ant and the Grasshopper. In this fragment of Aesop´s Fables the lazy grasshopper doesn't work during spring and then freezes and is hungry in winter, while the ant stores provisions for the winter, so he has enough food and shelter to endure this part of the year. In this case, the ant represents all the characters who have learned they have to work and how this will pay off. The satirical novel ends by clearly stating that you ought to work for what you want and most importantly, take nothing for granted. 

Crazy Obsession

First, Lady Cunégonde magically appears, and now her brother´s alive in Paraguay? I swear I won´t be surprised if their parents become brain-eating zombies and wake up from their tombs. I´ve given up with reading the italicized text under the chapter´s title, because a surprise like this is ruined in two sentences.I´m even startig to think the Baron´s family is stalking Candide. How is it that every time he crosses a whole ocean to reach another continent, he either meets one of the members of the family or recieves a supposed "love letter" from Lady Cunégonde? 

I do think Candide might be falling facefirst into some kind of obsession with Cunégonde, either he speaks too much about her (might be the reason why the abbé knows how to trick him and Martin into visiting her) or Martin is betraying him. A rage attack with your brother-in-law and then murdering him is taking it a bit too far when it comes to marriage ("Candide instantly drew his own [sword] and plundged it up to the hilt in the Baron´s stomach, but as he withdrew the dripping blade began to weep, and cried ´O God! What have I done! I have killed my old master, my friend, and my brother in law!´" (pg. 67)).  This is Candide´s impulsiveness alone, what if he were travelling alone? Martin, Cacambo, Pangloss, they´ve always been there to support and guide Candide. Cacambo always "kept his head" (pg. 67), but I doubt that Candide would have succesfully escaped after murdering Cunégonde´s brother. I´m almost done with the book but I think Candide is done for.

God vs. Philosophy

Unlike philosophy, which depends on the thinker, religion is always regulated by the same dogmas. Many people now find themselves being against religion because they see no sense in depending on a force they have no proof exists.

Never have religion and philosophy worked well together. Even in a satirical novel like Candide, there is clear despise between followers of both ways of education. Pangloss is hanged after he has a mild discussion with an officer of the Inquisition and tried to explain his point, just to be interrupted "when the officer nodded at his henchman" (pg. 35) and took Dr. Pangloss away. 

This makes me consider the Voltarian question "Why do bad things happen to good people?" After lamenting for his cruel fate, Candide thinks about Pangloss, Lady Cunégonde, and James the Anabaptist, all of them having suffered a cruel fate for all he knows. With no philosophical thoughts intended, many people are beginning to believe that if they oeuvre well, the worthiness of these actions will reflect upon them, as if they were lucky rnough for God to keep an eye on them.